All right. This has to be written here on TL by somebody otherwise i can't in good conscience say i did everything in my power to not let SC2 die.
I'm hoping TL staff can see this thread as what it is - a needed criticizing of the most recent SC2 patch and perhaps also criticizing a lot of incompetency when it's come to SC2 multiplayer balance patching.
We all waited over a year for not only a patch for mech viability, but a patch to many other things. The problem is this patch has made the game objectively worse again and not addressed the problems it was supposed to.
Swarmhosts are taking over the game again in many instances, and the impetus for me making this thread is playing a bio game where even swarmhosts started to take over the game.
Mech is not viable with the swarmhost in the game in almost any capacity. Protoss is not viable with swarmhosts in the game in their current state. Free units should not be promoted at all in SC2 and this patch has killed mech with a single unit.
Previously, in Heart of the Swarm, you could deal with swarmhosts because the locusts did NOT FLY DIRECTLY INTO YOUR BASE and also swarmhosts did not move at the speed of light.
On the current patch swarmhosts are as cheap as a marauder for some reason and are un-catchable. If you opt for mech, and the Zerg sees, he'll simply make 10 swarmhosts that provide FREE MONEY every 30 seconds. This is not RTS gameplay - it's objectively bad for the game and we don't need a year to see the game become 100% bio play again for Terran because of this unit.
With that said, raven auto-turret is a similar issue, as are carriers. These all basically give "free units" aka interceptors, locusts...most P games that get to carriers are a stomp by the Protoss side because there's not really any unit from any race that can beat carriers cost for cost.
It's understandable to want units to be viable, but not to the point that they ruin the game and make it frustrating to play.
As a player that opts for mech most of my games, it's infuriating right now on the current patch that we waited for for years, to have almost 99% of my games be versus someone massing swarmhosts every game into whatever they want because they have 5k/5k+ banked from free money.
I honestly think if something this blatantly broken is not addressed it's going to continue negatively affecting the game. Starcraft 2 is supposed to have multiple viable strategies, and this is pushing Terran to go only back to bio every game and 16 marine drop. You get punished for even trying mech right now, or you're forced to play a 50 min game and pray you get to 30 ravens to fight versus the swarmhost free locusts.
For waiting a year, and for blizzard to put out a patch that was supposed to "make mech viable" this patch and swarmhosts are basically a slap in the face to a lot of people that play the game after all this time hoping for some competency or blizzard listening to feedback when it comes to patching.
I'm hoping other people that play mech a lot can get this thread to get some traction so blizzard can address swarmhosts. The swarmhost is now more absurd than it was in Heart of the Swarm.
Back then locusts could not fly into your base, and swarmhosts were slow.
Please discuss this. I'm hoping people will understand SC2 is a strategy game and is not meant to be a 16 marine drop every single game with the spectators and viewers knowing exactly what will happen before the game ever even begins.
I agree that it doesn't make sense to do the SH buff in the same patch that was supposed to make mech viable but your whiny tone will probably make a lot of people dismiss your post.
You forgot to mention that the recent BC ability change is completely garbage. Teleport functions do not belong in RTS. I agree with swarm hosts, they are terrible for the game in their current state.
I agree that it doesn't make sense to do the SH buff in the same patch that was supposed to make mech viable
''Making mech viable'' doesn't mean ''making mech unbeatable'', Zerg needs a relatively cheap counter to mech in the mid game = SwarmHosts.
Swarm hosts are an unbeatable hard counter to mech. The moment zerg finds out you are meching(no later than 4 minutes into a game), they just make 6-12 swarm hosts to buy themselves enough time to bank enough money to remax infinitely(slight exaggeration here). It literally makes Mech not viable in tvz unless you are playing vs someone who doesn't know what swarm hosts are.
How about everyone debates the issue that may or may not need to be fixed? Bashing his character doesn't change the way the game is being played. You can dislike him and agree with him or vice/versa. I am not very good, but from watching grandmasters play I do believe the speed of the swarmhost is the major issue here.
Also to add...i don't think a lot of people even know about this issue yet because there haven't been many tournaments on the current patch, and most Terrans still go bio for the majority of their games.
I get that not everyone wants every game to be mech 100% either...but imagine if banelings were given another 50 extra HP on top of what they were already given. Bio would be unplayable because of 1 unit. That's kind of analogous to the situation here.
If you opt for mech, the guy just starts making swarmhosts and collects free cash for 20 minutes.
On January 04 2017 12:52 avilo wrote: Also to add...i don't think a lot of people even know about this issue yet because there haven't been many tournaments on the current patch, and most Terrans still go bio for the majority of their games.
I get that not everyone wants every game to be mech 100% either...but imagine if banelings were given another 50 extra HP on top of what they were already given. Bio would be unplayable because of 1 unit. That's kind of analogous to the situation here.
If you opt for mech, the guy just starts making swarmhosts and collects free cash for 20 minutes.
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.
On January 04 2017 13:01 jamella wrote: So much focus is taken away from the actual point at issue, only because the author is avilo. Sad to see.
QFT. People just rant and make snarky comments just because its Avilo. "git gud" " you are not korean" etc, its sad to see.
The swarmhost is a difficult unit to balance, makeing it too expensive and no one will use it, make it too cheap and people mass it. Perhaps, since its so difficult to balance, maybe remove it like they did with the warhound (wink wink wink). Its not like zerg cant defeat mech at all since LOTV.
On January 04 2017 12:52 avilo wrote: Also to add...i don't think a lot of people even know about this issue yet because there haven't been many tournaments on the current patch, and most Terrans still go bio for the majority of their games.
I get that not everyone wants every game to be mech 100% either...but imagine if banelings were given another 50 extra HP on top of what they were already given. Bio would be unplayable because of 1 unit. That's kind of analogous to the situation here.
If you opt for mech, the guy just starts making swarmhosts and collects free cash for 20 minutes.
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.
The mech that inno is currently doing focus on one unit: Cyclone monobattle. But sure that's great. Tons of interesting micro relation with Zerg units too.
I've been saying since the patch that SH are currently too powerful. However since they're a weird unit that won't see much use for a while in pro play - they probably won't be nerfed for a long time. Gotta encourage those pros to abuse the imba!
So far I haven't seen them used super abusively just yet, looking forward to seeing some "broken" builds of it though.
Not much to add to the mech discussion. A super slow style that involves camping kinda goes against the fast paced nature of the game. I'm fine with it being just an alternative style that can be played aggressively through the midgame but falls off at some point if your only plan is to camp.
it true... When i try to play Bio Zerg go SH and gangbang my base with locust And if i play vs toss they just Immo Archon Disruptor and I die cost of lategame carriere who are hard to kill
On January 04 2017 13:30 Zacrophage wrote: it true... When i try to play Bio Zerg go SH and gangbang my base with locust And if i play vs toss they just Immo Archon Disruptor and I die cost of lategame carriere who are hard to kill
SC begin to be dead since LOTV (for me)
Let's be honest, this game is already dead and not only for you.
This game is too frustrating and not fun for most players at this point. I doubt it will change anytime soon.
I don't think anybody would disagree that swarmhosts are a little too strong this patch, but like, that was the point, no?
They have been virtually unusable units for over a year, so blizzard made them significantly cheaper and even said in the patch notes that they were ready to up the resource costs if they seemed overpowered. The primary purpose of the change was to encourage their use to see if from a game design perspective, they were doing as intended.
Having played with them a couple dozen times, I have had a lot of fun with them and think they have become a cool versatile unit. are they too strong against mech? yes. But that's something that can be addressed with a minor price increase, not a huge post about them being ridiculously overpowered with the sort of toxic language that brings all the deadgame people, like the posters above me, out of the woods.
On January 04 2017 13:15 PiGStarcraft wrote: I've been saying since the patch that SH are currently too powerful. However since they're a weird unit that won't see much use for a while in pro play - they probably won't be nerfed for a long time. Gotta encourage those pros to abuse the imba!
So far I haven't seen them used super abusively just yet, looking forward to seeing some "broken" builds of it though.
Not much to add to the mech discussion. A super slow style that involves camping kinda goes against the fast paced nature of the game. I'm fine with it being just an alternative style that can be played aggressively through the midgame but falls off at some point if your only plan is to camp.
On January 04 2017 13:30 Zacrophage wrote: it true... When i try to play Bio Zerg go SH and gangbang my base with locust And if i play vs toss they just Immo Archon Disruptor and I die cost of lategame carriere who are hard to kill
SC begin to be dead since LOTV (for me)
Let's be honest, this game is already dead and not only for you.
This game is too frustrating and not fun for most players at this point. I doubt it will change anytime soon.
I mouseovered your profile and even that I know this is bait post there is a simple answer...
I found hard time beliving that every protoss goes that comp vs you and every zerg goes SH when you play BIO...
Also if your plan is to spam 1v1 ladder which involves a lot of blood pressure and adrenalin, which is natural habit of your body because of how the game is build... than no wonder u got flustrated, either you have some problems elsewhere or you cannot accept the fact that you dont want to play the game where you need to use your brain cells and accept the fact that your not good.
On January 04 2017 13:30 Zacrophage wrote: it true... When i try to play Bio Zerg go SH and gangbang my base with locust And if i play vs toss they just Immo Archon Disruptor and I die cost of lategame carriere who are hard to kill
SC begin to be dead since LOTV (for me)
Let's be honest, this game is already dead and not only for you.
This game is too frustrating and not fun for most players at this point. I doubt it will change anytime soon.
I mouseovered your profile and even that I know this is bait post there is a simple answer...
I found hard time beliving that every protoss goes that comp vs you and every zerg goes SH when you play BIO...
Also if your plan is to spam 1v1 ladder which involves a lot of blood pressure and adrenalin, which is natural habit of your body because of how the game is build... than no wonder u got flustrated, either you have some problems elsewhere or you cannot accept the fact that you dont want to play the game where you need to use your brain cells and accept the fact that your not good.
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.
The problem i have with reading your balance posts is that u always play same, and same style, and when it doesn't work- you just flame about it everywhere. Your statement that when Terrans playing mech are forced to 30 minute turtle camping game is obviously biased and idiotic. The truth is that even if Zerg wouldn't make SH any time- you will still turtle into 30 minute camping game. That's how you play. For god sake even if u play Zerg you still turtle into 30 minute camp.
Swarmhost definitely need tuning, and Blizzard admitted this in the first place when they were buffing them. I think that, they are still uncommon on tournaments and ladder as PiG stated, that's why they don't have too much data to make their move. But it will definitely come so stop crying.
The other problem with your statements is, that you are so biased about your own abusive gameplay that u lost your view on the whiole picture that this game represents. Must I remind you, that there are other races in this game than Terran? All your proposals are about nerfing what beats you, and buffing what can give you freewin. Mech is very strong vs Zerg nowadays. Just watch some Innovation or Gumiho, or TY. Mobile and active mech benefits from latest changes. I really hope that your cancer-turtle style will not be viable, as it is abusive, boring and shitty to watch. Sorry dude.
My god, you whine about everything that Zerg have to counter you and in the same time you abuse things like broken Ravens. I watch your streams from time to time, and the the most funny thing is, you are turtling from the start, being passive till u have 120 supply, and u dare to rage about Zerg having 5 bases...My god. Just tone your "twitch persona" and maybe you will see that you're wrong.
Everyone I used to play with quit in the last few months, viewrship for streams and tourneys is lower than ever, big tournaments end, korean and foreign pros quit the game in droves while criticising the design team, e-sports organisations are pulling out of the game, but if you ask people involved with the game, lotv is god's gift to sc2 and it's all damn league's and dota's fault!
When you know Avilo manage to get banned from battle net...
Still spamming here : "Make mech stronger", whatever PvT winrate is 37-41% thanks to the good tank... Terran is crushing everything on korea.
But well, as avilo keep insulting the players that beat him (even if there are known pro players), say "they're imba", or hacking when they're Terran.
Avilo achieves nothing in his career, why people are listenning him ? He is not objective, not a good player, and even if he spams mech all day, he is far from being a good mech player...
After, nerf vipers, nerf broodlord, now nerf SH. The only use of the unit is to counter tanks, but well, nothing should counter tanks according to avilo...
And the bias rhetoric : "They make free units, there are OP", while the attack of SH are the units. Do you count the bullets of your marines, do they cost money ? No, all country of the world would kill to have some bullets free rifle, but you have it
And nobody complains about it, because it's the game mecanics, but suddently a unit use this mecanism a bit differently : "It's OP, free units", while you are actually complaing about the range of the unit, not free units...
Of course, as the goal is getting the unit nerfed, not being constructive, well whatever, yell : "Nerf free units are OP".
So why not make tanks missile cost money ? It cost 50 000-80 000 $ per unit in reality, so must cost money no ?
The tanks is currently an anti-play units, it creates a 13 range no man's land, while the unit comes so early, nothing stop a mech player from massing tanks (the deathball mecanic).
Never heard a mech player, especially avilo, making propositions to make mech play more interesting and less turtle, it's just about nerfing all the counters of the tanks to create an invincible mech deathball.
And it's not surprising, when you see his stream : it's never his fault, never his mistakes, it's just the other "hacking", or "imbalance race", he should win all the games even vs pro gamers,so his propositions are always here to allow him to win all games.
Swarm hosts are strong based of how they operate. Making them cost more resources won't cut it, nerf the unit stats instead if you want a change. You'd literally have to double the cost if you wanted to make an impact without nerfing unit stats.
SHs can be powerful if terran just turtles for 20 mins, but zergs can't use them if terrans play an aggressive style with cyclones/hellions like Innovation. They are not OP, they are just strong against a certain type of play. Moreover, I don't really know how SHs can be powerful against BIO play, since zergs have to keep churning out units to defend their 4th base, so they can't really invest on SHs, since they don't help dealing against drops, adn they don't help in direct engagements unlike the old HotS SHs. So the problem we should ask is not 'why is SH so OP?', instead it should be 'why is this game so fast'
On January 04 2017 12:56 Parcelleus wrote: When some GM Korean SC2 players talk, I listen. Otherwise, yeah bye.
This is always the excuse that randoms give to ignore advice on game design by top level players. There's always someone better who has insight that the original poster lacks and therefore they should be disregarded.
Half of all Korean pros lost their jobs just a couple of months ago when proleague ended. SC2 is in crisis mode and Blizzard knows it. Avilo's attempts to make the game better and more sustainable in the long-term should be met with critical dialogue, not outright dismissal.
The only thing that Avilo wants to sustain is getting free wins with abusing unbeatable units in gmae of starcraft. That's why he whines only about things that can counter them, and never about obviously broken units that he uses.
I saw Swarm Hosts used in OSC, ladder streams and other small tournaments. Some of them did better than others, but none of them were clearly OP and easily winning the game like people are saying in here.. Some guys just completely destroyed SH. I've been trying to use them myself and I get completely destroyed by Terrans using the new mobility of mech thanks to the cyclone.
So even if they were too strong - I don't think it's as bad as some people make it out in here due to many factors.
That being said, I still agree with avilo's statement that this patch did not fix many issues it was supposed to fix. But for different reasons. In any case, SH can go die in a fire because even if it is not OP, the playstyle it promotes is utterly boring.
I don't understand why blizzard even bothered with the swarmhost again. I think Zerg has enough units and more than enough means to fight mech. Just cut the damn unit.
Innovations cyclone mech is pretty allin and loses if he doesn't win the game after a certain amount of time.
I will say that on ladder swarmhosts do feel a tad overpowered when you consider the micro required / cost. I think they are cool interesting units, but feel maybe an increase in supply cost might keep zergs from just only cranking them. Personally, I believe zerg is the easiest it has ever been to play (not to be confused with overpowered).
On another note, I truly dislike Avilo's take on the game. Trust that even after they nerf the SH, he will find something else to complain about. He knows it is why people watch him play games. Either that or he truly suffers from the Dunning-Kruger effect.
I say it again. There is no rule which limits or restricts what belongs into an rts. This behavior causes stagnation. You stop the improvement or development of a genre!
Second it might cost no resources, but it isnt free! It costs dps and time. Some might laugh now, but these are very important things in sc2 and decide the outcome of a match.
After locusts have died, zerg sits on worthless 30 supply for the next 30-40s. He has not enough army supply to stop the next pressure (zerg needs 3/2 or twice as much supply).
On January 04 2017 17:25 cmdspinner1 wrote: I don't understand why blizzard even bothered with the swarmhost again. I think Zerg has enough units and more than enough means to fight mech. Just cut the damn unit.
Innovations cyclone mech is pretty allin and loses if he doesn't win the game after a certain amount of time.
Exept he never looses with this push XD. It's the same situation as it is with 3 racks reapers vs Zerg- The build is definitely imba, but everybody will say that's Byun perfect micro...LOL. Ofc he's got perfect micro, but still the build is OP as games vs Dark at Blizzcone final showed. As I concider Dark to be the best Zerg player. And by the way- soon after they changed Cyclones, it was already known that Cyclone/hellion-hellbat was wrecking Zerg at specific timing attack and Zerg can do shit about it. Blizzard did nothing about that, and i still hope that they will. Maybe after more feedback from tournaments.
On January 04 2017 17:25 cmdspinner1 wrote: I don't understand why blizzard even bothered with the swarmhost again. I think Zerg has enough units and more than enough means to fight mech. Just cut the damn unit.
Innovations cyclone mech is pretty allin and loses if he doesn't win the game after a certain amount of time.
Exept he never looses with this push XD. It's the same situation as it is with 3 racks reapers vs Zerg- The build is definitely imba, but everybody will say that's Byun perfect micro...LOL. Ofc he's got perfect micro, but still the build is OP as games vs Dark at Blizzcone final showed. As I concider Dark to be the best Zerg player. And by the way- soon after they changed Cyclones, it was already known that Cyclone/hellion-hellbat was wrecking Zerg at specific timing attack and Zerg can do shit about it. Blizzard did nothing about that, and i still hope that they will. Maybe after more feedback from tournaments.
I agree that innos cyclone allin is very strong but counterable with roach ravager which byul showed yesterday (I think it was byul). Perhaps the cyclone needs to be changed slightly. But that wasn't my point, i meant that innos cyclone timing is more gimmicky than a real mech alternative
On January 04 2017 12:56 Parcelleus wrote: When some GM Korean SC2 players talk, I listen. Otherwise, yeah bye.
This is always the excuse that randoms give to ignore advice on game design by top level players. There's always someone better who has insight that the original poster lacks and therefore they should be disregarded.
Half of all Korean pros lost their jobs just a couple of months ago when proleague ended. SC2 is in crisis mode and Blizzard knows it. Avilo's attempts to make the game better and more sustainable in the long-term should be met with critical dialogue, not outright dismissal.
Yep, i honestly think that has been a part of the problem all these years. It takes a korean SC2 progamer to use/abuse something in a tournament, or be vocal about it, then blizzard lead balance devs will listen.
If it's a random "foreigner" then it's obviously inconsequential and should be ignored because "we know better" -blizzard
It's probably why they've dismissed everything from everyone in the community about 8 armor ultra, invulnerable nydus worm, queen range increase, etc for so long. They don't see those things as an issue because it's not used every single game in every single GSL tourney game or something really crazy like that.
On January 04 2017 17:10 hiroshOne wrote: The only thing that Avilo wants to sustain is getting free wins with abusing unbeatable units in gmae of starcraft. That's why he whines only about things that can counter them, and never about obviously broken units that he uses.
Yes, that's obviously my goal...considering i've called out OP Terran non-sense in the past such as mass liberators, mass ravens during HOTS, and i was banned from the battle.net forums for criticizing 3 rax reaper because the most recent tourney had been won by 3 rax mass reaper (which is still in the game). The game devs apparently did not like me calling out 3 rax reaper for being ridiculously bad for the game in TvT/TvZ and undermining the latest tournament winner's win off of it.
Most of the times i've posted about stuff on TL it's usually about blatantly obvious things that were ridiculously broken. Look through my post history - calling out broodlord/infestor to be fixed, took a year later. Calling out swarmhosts to be fixed, took a year later. Etc, etc. I have consistently been right over the years about literally everything balance-wise and game design wise that has infiltrated it's way into SC2.
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.
I mean, i would have thought SC2 players like you would have realized by now that maybe you were wrong the entire time and i have over 18 yrs of experience playing RTS games and probably know what i'm talking about lol.
On January 04 2017 17:48 MLuneth wrote: I know avilo only mentioned carriers in passing but don't bcs deal with them really well through yamato?
I mentioned them because they are basically a super unit that has no counter currently when you get enough of them. They counter their counters like corruptors and vikings once even a tiny bit of splash like storm or archons are added in.
The thing you said about BCS dealing with them is true to an extent, but leads to really terrible gameplay where the Terran is sitting there trying to turtle to 15 BCS, and the Protoss is already just sitting there accumulating carriers into high templar and then switching to mass tempest if he sees the BCS. It then just becomes this ridiculous no skill game where neither player is trading units - you just both have 1 final battle of mass air essentially. But the fact the BC is the only counter to carriers is a metagame problem in itself because it causes the above situation.
Surely the easy fix is to make their broodlings cost money? Like a reaver? Maybe 5 minerals per wave or something. That way you have to actively use them and can't use them to win the game once the map is mined out due to the enemy having nothing to do to beat them.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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".
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.
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.
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.
Overall the main issue with Mech VS Zerg is that blizz buffed the wrong stuff.
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.
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.
Its not very likely that Blizzard will do any changes soon since the new season have started(GSL this morning eu time). I dont know when this season 1 ends but im guessing sometime in March. So you will probably first see balance test map changes in mid February.
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.
i "subscribe to"//"agree with" this perspective. thx 4 posting. i m 2 lazy 2 type it
On January 04 2017 12:52 avilo wrote: Also to add...i don't think a lot of people even know about this issue yet because there haven't been many tournaments on the current patch, and most Terrans still go bio for the majority of their games.
I get that not everyone wants every game to be mech 100% either...but imagine if banelings were given another 50 extra HP on top of what they were already given. Bio would be unplayable because of 1 unit. That's kind of analogous to the situation here.
If you opt for mech, the guy just starts making swarmhosts and collects free cash for 20 minutes.
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.
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.
avilo, if you give your opponent all the time they need to get the perfect counter to your army, because you do NOTHING than turtling and get maxed with upgraded tanks, thors and mass ravens, ... it has nothing to do with game imbalance - if you do lose.
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...
The problem is greater than this, it's the lack of oversight and RTS-centered philosophy behind this game. 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.
I also wish mech was viable, but I honestly think bio vs Z is better for the game because it provides more exciting games which is good for viewership in pro leagues. TvZ has always been the most fun for spectators
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.
Yes, I'd be interested to see this, and I think if done right would make both mech and bio players happy - revert the changes causing bases to mine out faster and make it advantageous to have workers spread across more bases. It'd require a major rebalance of many things though and I doubt they're willing to go through that again just for mech.
On January 07 2017 18:46 c0sm0naut wrote: blizzard wants you to play bio
I'd say, Blizzard prefers the game to be more dynamic. Camping isn't really fun to watch, to play, or play against.
Mech is still viable, not the BW mech because BW was a different game. But factory and starport units can win games with almost no bio support, which is mech for me. And as a zerg player I must scout now because there are very different styles the terran can play now, unlike the pre-patch.
I guess Blizzard wants some diversity for terran, but not camping as it isn't dynamic.
wahhh, why doesn't my race have one unbeatable composition that I can go for in every single game in every single matchup? wahhhhhhhhmbulance....broodwar never had this problem
On January 04 2017 12:52 avilo wrote: Also to add...i don't think a lot of people even know about this issue yet because there haven't been many tournaments on the current patch, and most Terrans still go bio for the majority of their games.
I get that not everyone wants every game to be mech 100% either...but imagine if banelings were given another 50 extra HP on top of what they were already given. Bio would be unplayable because of 1 unit. That's kind of analogous to the situation here.
If you opt for mech, the guy just starts making swarmhosts and collects free cash for 20 minutes.
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.
The mech that inno is currently doing focus on one unit: Cyclone monobattle. But sure that's great. Tons of interesting micro relation with Zerg units too.
Inno is a just meta abuser. Plain & simple. His style will only work when there's something OP to be exploited or when blizzard chooses to randomly break things. Pre-nerf hellbats, widow mine splash & fast burrow buff, SCV pulls, and now cyclones.
In terms of pure micro, Maru is still a better player.
On January 04 2017 12:52 avilo wrote: Also to add...i don't think a lot of people even know about this issue yet because there haven't been many tournaments on the current patch, and most Terrans still go bio for the majority of their games.
I get that not everyone wants every game to be mech 100% either...but imagine if banelings were given another 50 extra HP on top of what they were already given. Bio would be unplayable because of 1 unit. That's kind of analogous to the situation here.
If you opt for mech, the guy just starts making swarmhosts and collects free cash for 20 minutes.
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.
The mech that inno is currently doing focus on one unit: Cyclone monobattle. But sure that's great. Tons of interesting micro relation with Zerg units too.
Inno is a just meta abuser. Plain & simple. His style will only work when there's something OP to be exploited or when blizzard chooses to randomly break things. Pre-nerf hellbats, widow mine splash & fast burrow buff, SCV pulls, and now cyclones.
In terms of pure micro, Maru is still a better player.
If micro is the thing that decides who is a better player then in that scenario you have a case. (I do agree with you on the point that Inno is usually at his best when he has a strong meta to take advantage because of his great mechanics)
Honestly, find an answer or stop complaining, because David Kim probably doesn't have the sense or reason to find an elegant change to the situation, mech has always had problems with hard counter units since WoL and (don't get me wrong I wish the unit was removed from the game) Host's have been David's pet project since HOTS, he obviously loves them despite being either OP or UP and nothing in between.
This whole epic journey to have mech be viable has ruined what little remained of this game, now on top of dealing with crazy fast bio we have to deal with tank camp fests, mass Raven/Planetary, Cyclone/Hellbat which is boring and tedious to play against (much like mech is in general) has made SC2 even more boring and frustrating to play because now most ZvT is just 30 + minute mech games.
Sucks that instead of patching everything to be better, they started patching everything to make the worst to watch/worst to play against style in the game viable. I'm not going to clown on Avilo because he is making good points and Hosts probably are a bit OP against stationary units (emerging trend for mech since David is clueless) but at this point they should just fire Kim, wait 6 + months for the meta to stabilize, then come back with someone fresh and new with a new vision and direction for the game.
.....Because this "vision and direction" we have going on is fucking pathetic for what is supposed to be the crown jewel of the RTS genre, Activision obviously thought that RTS and SC2 wasn't dead enough already on it's own so they wanted to expedite it. I gave up this game several master league promotions and several thousand ladder games later for Heroes of the Storm because the people in charge of that game actually fine tune the game and make it better with each patch, it's literally the opposite for SC2, every patch the game just becomes more cluster fucked.
We NEED someone else in charge of balance and design, it's been said for years now but look at the stream numbers and tournaments? Pretty much in their death throes and it's already dead to the Koreans.
Good points in OP & i agree that FREE Units do not belong in an RTS GAME (pls Change swarm host) but Dustin Browder thought it would be "Zergy" omg i hate Dustin Browder
On January 08 2017 03:00 WhosQuany wrote: Good points in OP & i agree that FREE Units do not belong in an RTS GAME (pls Change swarm host) but Dustin Browder thought it would be "Zergy" omg i hate Dustin Browder
Wasn't Dustin Browder out of the SC2 division before HOTS went live?
And even if he did create the Host, David and his team still implemented it, changed it multiple times to no real avail on it's balance, and refused to scrap it over what, 2 - 3 years now? Even if it was Dustin's fault at some point, that ship has long since sailed and captain Kim has been steering this ship.
Dustin does a great job with HOTS at least, can't say the same for David.
Avilo is higher ranked then he ever was since the new patch, this thread is a joke.
Mech is viable atm, at the very least up untill top gm level.
But most mech players won't be satisfied until Zerg playees can absolutely do nothing to interrupt a mech player until they get their maxed out army to just faceroll Zerg players.
Well, can you post a replay pack of your attempts at overcoming swarmhosts with mech? Before people learned how to overcome lotv ultras they thought they were unbeatable too. Instead of saying they're too strong, let's find ways to deal with it.
On January 08 2017 03:30 mCon.Hephaistas wrote: Avilo is higher ranked then he ever was since the new patch, this thread is a joke.
Mech is viable atm, at the very least up untill top gm level.
But most mech players won't be satisfied until Zerg playees can absolutely do nothing to interrupt a mech player until they get their maxed out army to just faceroll Zerg players.
Besides the ad hominem there, I do think his point has merit. I'm not a very active or high level player, but the problem that Avilo is bringing up is that a single unit does away with an entire body of strategies for a race. He doesn't want to be forced into playing a single strategy every game versus Zerg, and therefore he wants to have a multitude of opportunities. The current meta allows for a single unit to dominate an entire strategy, which prevents Terrans from having a multitude of possible strategies to use. Having the option of using different strategies is very important because it mixes up games and keeps viewing/playing a fresh experience. None of that presupposes what you're saying, nor does he claim he wants to be able to faceroll Zergs with a maxed army. It's ok if there is a composition and general strategy to counter a meching Terran, that is an integral part of a healthy game. However, massing one unit prevent mech by stalling is hardly a healthy matchup state.
With all that said its very possible that Avilo is overshooting how important this buff is. It could be that mech needs to be reimagined as a strategy and that the composition as well as the playstyle need to be reconceived to get around this issue. Regardless I don't think you can just brush off his post as him wanting to win every game with an obviously imba strat.
On January 07 2017 11:07 avilo wrote: No mention of swarmhosts in the community update from today. Sad. And incompetent.
the people in Blizzard's management infrastructure are too smart and conscientious to allow incompetent people to get promoted and stay long term in important positions.
On January 08 2017 03:30 mCon.Hephaistas wrote: Avilo is higher ranked then he ever was since the new patch, this thread is a joke.
Mech is viable atm, at the very least up untill top gm level.
But most mech players won't be satisfied until Zerg playees can absolutely do nothing to interrupt a mech player until they get their maxed out army to just faceroll Zerg players.
Besides the ad hominem there, I do think his point has merit. I'm not a very active or high level player, but the problem that Avilo is bringing up is that a single unit does away with an entire body of strategies for a race. He doesn't want to be forced into playing a single strategy every game versus Zerg, and therefore he wants to have a multitude of opportunities. The current meta allows for a single unit to dominate an entire strategy, which prevents Terrans from having a multitude of possible strategies to use. Having the option of using different strategies is very important because it mixes up games and keeps viewing/playing a fresh experience. None of that presupposes what you're saying, nor does he claim he wants to be able to faceroll Zergs with a maxed army. It's ok if there is a composition and general strategy to counter a meching Terran, that is an integral part of a healthy game. However, massing one unit prevent mech by stalling is hardly a healthy matchup state.
With all that said its very possible that Avilo is overshooting how important this buff is. It could be that mech needs to be reimagined as a strategy and that the composition as well as the playstyle need to be reconceived to get around this issue. Regardless I don't think you can just brush off his post as him wanting to win every game with an obviously imba strat.
He does play mech though, and is winning vs better opponents now.
So I don't see how SH make mech not playable at all
Swarmhosts have a nice role pressuring a turtling Terran in midgame, specially now that Tanks got that massive buff. The way to deal with them its just chasing them around the map in the massive window between each locust wave so I see no problem honestly.
I'm getting the feeling that all the people hating on avilo and his playstyle haven't even watched his stream. People are talking about "turtle mech" and "camping", of course that leads to boring games and shouldn't be encouraged (btw Z and P do have the option to play like that already).
But avilo is actually very active on the map, especially with banshees and hellions. The problem with the swarmhost has nothing to do with the way you play, whether it is turtling or being aggressive. You will always have locusts flying into your base, killing multiple buildings every time.
And there is NO WAY to catch them.
They are actually faster than banshees with the speed upgrade. It gets even worse with nydus.
On January 08 2017 04:22 jamella wrote: I'm getting the feeling that all the people hating on avilo and his playstyle haven't even watched his stream. People are talking about "turtle mech" and "camping", of course that leads to boring games and shouldn't be encouraged (btw Z and P do have the option to play like that already).
But avilo is actually very active on the map, especially with banshees and hellions. The problem with the swarmhost has nothing to do with the way you play, whether it is turtling or being aggressive. You will always have locusts flying into your base, killing multiple buildings every time.
And there is NO WAY to catch them.
They are actually faster than banshees with the speed upgrade. It gets even worse with nydus.
One solution people proposed back at the end of HOTS that you may remember was designing Locusts so that they have no auto-attack - - in other words, they will just sit on the ground doing nothing unless the player controls them, like Cyclone AA gun, for example.
They are actually faster than banshees with the speed upgrade. It gets even worse with nydus.
According to liquipedia
Swarm host speed:4.13
Banshee upgrade increases the movement speed of Banshees from 3.85 to 5.25.
And btw: hellion speed:5.95
Back your facts before throwing them in a balance thread please
Swarmhosts: 4.13 Swarmhosts on creep: 4.13 x 1.30 = 5.369 Banshee with speed: 5.25 < 5.369
So off creep you need speed banshees, there is nothing else. On Creep you just chase them a little with hit and run and then run into AA. And btw: Why are you mentioning Hellions? They do not kill SH. Not at all.
Complete your facts before throwing them into a balance thread please.
I didnt mention on creep speed because I assume there is no creep near the Terran base where SHs are located to harras the terran and I mentioned hellions since they are the "map presence" unit of mech playstyle
On January 08 2017 09:42 Argonauta wrote: I didnt mention on creep speed because I assume there is no creep near the Terran base where SHs are located to harras the terran and I mentioned hellions since they are the "map presence" unit of mech playstyle
Well most of the time they do have creep outside the edges of your main, Daybreak is a good example. If not, you just use a nydus instead so they can teleport.
Happened to watch 2 avilo's game in a row against SH on OG yesterday.
I was not impressed by the opening (reaper into banshee hellion) was not impressed by map control and SH defense either. But most of all passivity is what kills him. There are other ways to play mech.
years ago on state of the game, incontrol and idra mocked and ridiculed avilo because he rightfully pointed out how stupid the queen range patch was and how it was going to ruin the game. incontrol and idra thought they were so good and so much smarter than avilo. turns out as usual they had no idea wtf they were talking about. idra was especially bad, he had a way worse attitude and an inflated ego, despite having no actual results to back up his shit talking.
so what ended up happening? the queen range patch ended up ruining the game. gglord winfestor ruined everything. it was so bad foreign zerg (and zerg ONLY) were beating top tier korean terrans. and idra who had whined how weak zerg were, STILL COULDNT WIN ANYTHING. LOL. What a joke. avilo was a genius and idra/incontrol looked like idiots. are all these avilo haters in this thread idra fans who cant stand the thought that idra got embarrassed all those years ago and finally forced off EG for his terrible attitude toward other people (telling them to die of cancer)? avilo gonna look like a genius again.
On January 08 2017 10:59 Argonauta wrote: You are talking like nydus doesnt cost any money and its instant but maybe you are confused because you are describing BC teleport, not nydus play.
Besides.... Are you telling that there is creep outsides the edges of the Terran main base in Daybreak? I just WTFed hard there
Well since the SH itself is ridiculously cheap it doesn't really matter. It takes 50 seconds to get up and running on only lair tech.
Yes that terran player is lacking map presence since he is lettng the creep go that far still I dont know what that anything to do? I mean congrats to that particular zerg player in that particular match to push the creep that well but obviously it is not the norm at all. Im not going to bother to answer th other stuff tho, just an advice, try to learn about dinamics of sc2
On January 08 2017 12:01 Argonauta wrote: Yes that terran player is lacking map presence since he is lettng the creep go that far still I dont know what that anything to do? I mean congrats to that particular zerg player in that particular match to push the creep that well but obviously it is not the norm at all. Im not going to bother to answer th other stuff tho, just an advice, try to learn about dinamics of sc2
Ok thank you so much for the advice, I will try to learn more about the dynamics of sc2.
It's quite rare to see zergs fight mech with SH at the pro level. avilo's salty because he faces Golden all the time on ladder who goes SH because he knows how salty it makes avilo.
It's quite rare to see terrans fight with mech at the pro level, probably since the pros know how broken the SH is. Golden is using SH because he knows that avilo plays mech, which indeed is salty.
On January 08 2017 12:53 jamella wrote: It's quite rare to see terrans fight with mech at the pro level, probably since the pros know how broken the SH is. Golden is using SH because he knows that avilo plays mech, which indeed is salty.
How quippy of you! Come to think of it, I've never seen SH used to counter mech at the pro level. It's pretty much always roach/hydra/viper into tech switches. Try again.
On January 07 2017 18:46 c0sm0naut wrote: blizzard wants you to play bio
I'd say, Blizzard prefers the game to be more dynamic. Camping isn't really fun to watch, to play, or play against.
Mech is still viable, not the BW mech because BW was a different game. But factory and starport units can win games with almost no bio support, which is mech for me. And as a zerg player I must scout now because there are very different styles the terran can play now, unlike the pre-patch.
I guess Blizzard wants some diversity for terran, but not camping as it isn't dynamic.
blizzard wants us to play bio because: 1. mech is extremely boring to watch, its not like broodwar like you said 2. bio is exciting, it feels like an RTS, mech feels like tower defense, its actually so low skill and boring. even if innovation told me mech is very skilled, i would still think that mech is low skill game play that should not be encourage. i play only terran and i mech 100% tvt, and i have this opinion 3. they didnt balance the game around people building only factory units, they wanted mixed compositions like you say 4. making a map pool that makes mech more playable makes sstuff like bio tank and mines + bio way too strong. i really feel like we hve the best map designers in the world, hands down, and they have come up with a lot of elegant solutions for these problem (due to protoss facing the same problems with very spread bases) like intelligent destructible rock placement and making sure 3rds are reasonably defensible by an army that is covering your natural as well
ultimately when i hear mech whine, it sounds to me like a player who wants to just max and death push, because thats always what it is. thats the way mech is in this game. avilo thinks that swarm host are broken, and they might be, but if it wasnt SH, it owuld be something else. mech playerz are all thesame, and ive been guilty of this at times, they just want to build workers and upgraded mech units, cross the map with a deathball. not esports imo, just ladder
On January 08 2017 12:53 jamella wrote: It's quite rare to see terrans fight with mech at the pro level, probably since the pros know how broken the SH is. Golden is using SH because he knows that avilo plays mech, which indeed is salty.
How quippy of you! Come to think of it, I've never seen SH used to counter mech at the pro level. It's pretty much always roach/hydra/viper into tech switches. Try again.
"Always". You make it sound as if going mech is a regular thing among pros, 99% of the games are still bio. Yes, innovation and byun both experimented with the cyclone and "mech" in the beginning of 3.8 and managed to win a few games, mostly because the opponent were caught off guard. Feel free to link any recent pro games where your statement is true.
On January 07 2017 18:46 c0sm0naut wrote: blizzard wants you to play bio
I'd say, Blizzard prefers the game to be more dynamic. Camping isn't really fun to watch, to play, or play against.
Mech is still viable, not the BW mech because BW was a different game. But factory and starport units can win games with almost no bio support, which is mech for me. And as a zerg player I must scout now because there are very different styles the terran can play now, unlike the pre-patch.
I guess Blizzard wants some diversity for terran, but not camping as it isn't dynamic.
blizzard wants us to play bio because: 1. mech is extremely boring to watch, its not like broodwar like you said 2. bio is exciting, it feels like an RTS, mech feels like tower defense, its actually so low skill and boring. even if innovation told me mech is very skilled, i would still think that mech is low skill game play that should not be encourage. i play only terran and i mech 100% tvt, and i have this opinion 3. they didnt balance the game around people building only factory units, they wanted mixed compositions like you say 4. making a map pool that makes mech more playable makes sstuff like bio tank and mines + bio way too strong. i really feel like we hve the best map designers in the world, hands down, and they have come up with a lot of elegant solutions for these problem (due to protoss facing the same problems with very spread bases) like intelligent destructible rock placement and making sure 3rds are reasonably defensible by an army that is covering your natural as well
ultimately when i hear mech whine, it sounds to me like a player who wants to just max and death push, because thats always what it is. thats the way mech is in this game. avilo thinks that swarm host are broken, and they might be, but if it wasnt SH, it owuld be something else. mech playerz are all thesame, and ive been guilty of this at times, they just want to build workers and upgraded mech units, cross the map with a deathball. not esports imo, just ladder
If Blizzard wanted to make the game more dynamic, wouldn't an alternative to the 2/1/1 be something to consider?
Camping isn't really fun to watch, to play, or play against. But if you're playing Zerg it's perfectly fine. It's always up to the Terran to be attacking and if you dont, you're camping or turtling. Even if the Zerg didn't attack either, it's the Terran that's being accused of being defensive and boring. If the terran doesn't manage to cripple the Zerg within the first minutes of the game, it's an auto-loss, since the Zerg "mech" is so much better than the Terrans.
Just to remind you, back in Brood War mech was the standard in most matchups and it worked very similar to SC2. You "Camp", "Turtle", "Build workers", "Upgrade mech units" until they had the "Deathball" and started pushing across the map. During this era, the viewership was in the millions and produced far more exciting and entertaining games compared to the current state of SC2.
Isn't it more fun to see longer, versatile and strategical games where more skill can be applied rather than seeing two medivacs with marines fly towards the Zerg at the five minute mark in every single game? If what you want to see is byun microing indivudual marines with a medivac in order to win a game, then maybe a MOBA is more suitable for you? Starcraft is a game of strategy after all.
Don't get me wrong, micro can be very exciting. But when the entire game comes down to if you can perfectly micro your medivacs in three different locations or you're dead, is very bad for the game, especially for less hardcore players in the lower leagues. A solid macro game with good mechanics should be far more rewarding.
On January 09 2017 05:25 jamella wrote: Don't get me wrong, micro can be very exciting. But when the entire game comes down to if you can perfectly micro your medivacs in three different locations or you're dead, is very bad for the game, especially for less hardcore players in the lower leagues. A solid macro game with good mechanics should be far more rewarding.
Well, i always hear this argument from Terran players : "I can't win because i don't have god like micro, i don't have 400 APM".
But when you watch their replays : well, they don't know the basics of macro, do plently of bad decisions, they micro while the other have +30 supply and it's already over.
But never put themself in question, never try to improve their macro, but yell : "My race is so hard, need 400 APM to beat noob Z/P" while it's not why they have lost.
On January 08 2017 12:53 jamella wrote: It's quite rare to see terrans fight with mech at the pro level, probably since the pros know how broken the SH is. Golden is using SH because he knows that avilo plays mech, which indeed is salty.
How quippy of you! Come to think of it, I've never seen SH used to counter mech at the pro level. It's pretty much always roach/hydra/viper into tech switches. Try again.
"Always". You make it sound as if going mech is a regular thing among pros, 99% of the games are still bio. Yes, innovation and byun both experimented with the cyclone and "mech" in the beginning of 3.8 and managed to win a few games, mostly because the opponent were caught off guard. Feel free to link any recent pro games where your statement is true.
On January 07 2017 18:46 c0sm0naut wrote: blizzard wants you to play bio
I'd say, Blizzard prefers the game to be more dynamic. Camping isn't really fun to watch, to play, or play against.
Mech is still viable, not the BW mech because BW was a different game. But factory and starport units can win games with almost no bio support, which is mech for me. And as a zerg player I must scout now because there are very different styles the terran can play now, unlike the pre-patch.
I guess Blizzard wants some diversity for terran, but not camping as it isn't dynamic.
blizzard wants us to play bio because: 1. mech is extremely boring to watch, its not like broodwar like you said 2. bio is exciting, it feels like an RTS, mech feels like tower defense, its actually so low skill and boring. even if innovation told me mech is very skilled, i would still think that mech is low skill game play that should not be encourage. i play only terran and i mech 100% tvt, and i have this opinion 3. they didnt balance the game around people building only factory units, they wanted mixed compositions like you say 4. making a map pool that makes mech more playable makes sstuff like bio tank and mines + bio way too strong. i really feel like we hve the best map designers in the world, hands down, and they have come up with a lot of elegant solutions for these problem (due to protoss facing the same problems with very spread bases) like intelligent destructible rock placement and making sure 3rds are reasonably defensible by an army that is covering your natural as well
ultimately when i hear mech whine, it sounds to me like a player who wants to just max and death push, because thats always what it is. thats the way mech is in this game. avilo thinks that swarm host are broken, and they might be, but if it wasnt SH, it owuld be something else. mech playerz are all thesame, and ive been guilty of this at times, they just want to build workers and upgraded mech units, cross the map with a deathball. not esports imo, just ladder
If Blizzard wanted to make the game more dynamic, wouldn't an alternative to the 2/1/1 be something to consider?
Camping isn't really fun to watch, to play, or play against. But if you're playing Zerg it's perfectly fine. It's always up to the Terran to be attacking and if you dont, you're camping or turtling. Even if the Zerg didn't attack either, it's the Terran that's being accused of being defensive and boring. If the terran doesn't manage to cripple the Zerg within the first minutes of the game, it's an auto-loss, since the Zerg "mech" is so much better than the Terrans.
Just to remind you, back in Brood War mech was the standard in most matchups and it worked very similar to SC2. You "Camp", "Turtle", "Build workers", "Upgrade mech units" until they had the "Deathball" and started pushing across the map. During this era, the viewership was in the millions and produced far more exciting and entertaining games compared to the current state of SC2.
Isn't it more fun to see longer, versatile and strategical games where more skill can be applied rather than seeing two medivacs with marines fly towards the Zerg at the five minute mark in every single game? If what you want to see is byun microing indivudual marines with a medivac in order to win a game, then maybe a MOBA is more suitable for you? Starcraft is a game of strategy after all.
Don't get me wrong, micro can be very exciting. But when the entire game comes down to if you can perfectly micro your medivacs in three different locations or you're dead, is very bad for the game, especially for less hardcore players in the lower leagues. A solid macro game with good mechanics should be far more rewarding.
I'm not sure what you're trying to educate me about. I made a simple and accurate point: At the pro level, the strategy avilo complains about is nonexistent. avilo runs into it and finds it onerous specifically because of Golden trolling him on ladder. Ergo, there is no issue to address, this is much ado about nothing. It's not like the SH just got buffed or something. We've had a long time to observe mech ZvT balance. If SH were so imbalanced against mech, you'd see Zerg go SH every time at the pro level, but that doesn't happen now, does it? Also your "99% of ZvTs terran chooses bio" is false if not outright disingenuous. ByuN doesn't go mech, but I'd say Inno and Gumiho, for instance, go mech about 20% and 40% of the time in ZvT, respectively.
Always same retarded argument "in BW that, in BW this"...Newsflash- sc2 is totally different game. Why do u even bother comparing this two?
Second thing is that concidering how Blizzard buffed Terran and Toss harras through all this years - Zerg has no fucking choice and must be defensive. If not- u loose the game. This race has no comeback mechanism like Terrans have with mules. If Zerg looses for example one mineral line- its gg. Terran looses one mineral line- he drops mules, remakes scv and in the same time his unit production doesn't even slow down.
So if u want to criticize I will say it again. As Zerg i would prefer being more active in early game and early mid but instead i muststay defensive because 2 medivacks with stimmed marines or one oack of BF hellions can kill me straight. That's unfortunate but that's how it works
They are actually faster than banshees with the speed upgrade. It gets even worse with nydus.
According to liquipedia
Swarm host speed:4.13
Banshee upgrade increases the movement speed of Banshees from 3.85 to 5.25.
And btw: hellion speed:5.95
Back your facts before throwing them in a balance thread please
Swarmhosts: 4.13 Swarmhosts on creep: 4.13 x 1.30 = 5.369 Banshee with speed: 5.25 < 5.369
So off creep you need speed banshees, there is nothing else. On Creep you just chase them a little with hit and run and then run into AA. And btw: Why are you mentioning Hellions? They do not kill SH. Not at all.
Complete your facts before throwing them into a balance thread please.
please... banshees flying over obstacles and cliffs - swarm hosts can not
Same can be said about bio. Can't be catched, moves with speed of light and gets healed up for free, which is similar effect as free units. But I guess on tier 1 core units thats no issue to think of :p
On January 09 2017 10:09 LSN wrote: Same can be said about bio. Can't be catched, moves with speed of light and gets healed up for free, which is similar effect as free units. But I guess on tier 1 core units thats no issue to think of :p
Maybe in some years people are getting there.
Oh pls... The problem with swarmhosts is that if you use it correctly the unit is never in danger to interact (aka die) with other units. I don't see how that's good gameplay, especially because locusts fly now. I don't know if it is op, but it's ridiculous and shouldn't be in the game.
On January 08 2017 03:30 mCon.Hephaistas wrote: Avilo is higher ranked then he ever was since the new patch, this thread is a joke.
Mech is viable atm, at the very least up untill top gm level.
But most mech players won't be satisfied until Zerg playees can absolutely do nothing to interrupt a mech player until they get their maxed out army to just faceroll Zerg players.
Besides the ad hominem there, I do think his point has merit. I'm not a very active or high level player, but the problem that Avilo is bringing up is that a single unit does away with an entire body of strategies for a race. He doesn't want to be forced into playing a single strategy every game versus Zerg, and therefore he wants to have a multitude of opportunities. The current meta allows for a single unit to dominate an entire strategy, which prevents Terrans from having a multitude of possible strategies to use. Having the option of using different strategies is very important because it mixes up games and keeps viewing/playing a fresh experience. None of that presupposes what you're saying, nor does he claim he wants to be able to faceroll Zergs with a maxed army. It's ok if there is a composition and general strategy to counter a meching Terran, that is an integral part of a healthy game. However, massing one unit prevent mech by stalling is hardly a healthy matchup state.
With all that said its very possible that Avilo is overshooting how important this buff is. It could be that mech needs to be reimagined as a strategy and that the composition as well as the playstyle need to be reconceived to get around this issue. Regardless I don't think you can just brush off his post as him wanting to win every game with an obviously imba strat.
This is so true, and i would go you one further and say that ANYBODY who dismisses ANY post off the back ONLY that the author be a person they dislike should be banned, we do not discriminate based on color ethnicity or personal preference on teamliquid.
Avilos points stand by their merits and in this case are so valid i would give a warning to anyone who mentions "Avilo" as if that constitutes a knockdown argument, dismissing someone based on personal preference is bigotry if the points made by the author are valid.
What would you do if someone like Behring breivik won the nobel peace prize by making isis peacefully surrender, or if mahatma gandhi started a nuclear war, would you still hate breivik and love gandhi, or would the facts change your mind?
On January 09 2017 10:09 LSN wrote: Same can be said about bio. Can't be catched, moves with speed of light and gets healed up for free, which is similar effect as free units. But I guess on tier 1 core units thats no issue to think of :p
Maybe in some years people are getting there.
Oh pls... The problem with swarmhosts is that if you use it correctly the unit is never in danger to interact (aka die) with other units. I don't see how that's good gameplay, especially because locusts fly now. I don't know if it is op, but it's ridiculous and shouldn't be in the game.
I would argue that many units need to be used correctly.
Although, a good zerg should be able to keep their SH alive fairly easy.
Now I don't think going heavy SH is op. In fact I would argue it is too weak. The trick is to get just enough SH. Too much and you risk losing a big investment and a paperweight for some seconds on CD. Too little and it only causes an annoyance to terran.
I think 6 SH can one shot an addon, but not sure about a cc/oc/pf.
What I don't understand about Avilo's play is that he never builds a bunker with a marine or two near any expansions. It's a glaring weakness to his play. The bunker is only there to buy time; it will likely get destroyed along with the marine, but it is precious time Avilo needs because his fucking reaction time blows monkey junks. Instead, he chooses to make pointless threads and waste time whining.
On January 08 2017 03:30 mCon.Hephaistas wrote: Avilo is higher ranked then he ever was since the new patch, this thread is a joke.
Mech is viable atm, at the very least up untill top gm level.
But most mech players won't be satisfied until Zerg playees can absolutely do nothing to interrupt a mech player until they get their maxed out army to just faceroll Zerg players.
Besides the ad hominem there, I do think his point has merit. I'm not a very active or high level player, but the problem that Avilo is bringing up is that a single unit does away with an entire body of strategies for a race. He doesn't want to be forced into playing a single strategy every game versus Zerg, and therefore he wants to have a multitude of opportunities. The current meta allows for a single unit to dominate an entire strategy, which prevents Terrans from having a multitude of possible strategies to use. Having the option of using different strategies is very important because it mixes up games and keeps viewing/playing a fresh experience. None of that presupposes what you're saying, nor does he claim he wants to be able to faceroll Zergs with a maxed army. It's ok if there is a composition and general strategy to counter a meching Terran, that is an integral part of a healthy game. However, massing one unit prevent mech by stalling is hardly a healthy matchup state.
With all that said its very possible that Avilo is overshooting how important this buff is. It could be that mech needs to be reimagined as a strategy and that the composition as well as the playstyle need to be reconceived to get around this issue. Regardless I don't think you can just brush off his post as him wanting to win every game with an obviously imba strat.
This is so true, and i would go you one further and say that ANYBODY who dismisses ANY post off the back ONLY that the author be a person they dislike should be banned, we do not discriminate based on color ethnicity or personal preference on teamliquid.
Avilos points stand by their merits and in this case are so valid i would give a warning to anyone who mentions "Avilo" as if that constitutes a knockdown argument, dismissing someone based on personal preference is bigotry if the points made by the author are valid.
What would you do if someone like Behring breivik won the nobel peace prize by making isis peacefully surrender, or if mahatma gandhi started a nuclear war, would you still hate breivik and love gandhi, or would the facts change your mind?
On January 08 2017 03:30 mCon.Hephaistas wrote: Avilo is higher ranked then he ever was since the new patch, this thread is a joke.
Mech is viable atm, at the very least up untill top gm level.
But most mech players won't be satisfied until Zerg playees can absolutely do nothing to interrupt a mech player until they get their maxed out army to just faceroll Zerg players.
Besides the ad hominem there, I do think his point has merit. I'm not a very active or high level player, but the problem that Avilo is bringing up is that a single unit does away with an entire body of strategies for a race. He doesn't want to be forced into playing a single strategy every game versus Zerg, and therefore he wants to have a multitude of opportunities. The current meta allows for a single unit to dominate an entire strategy, which prevents Terrans from having a multitude of possible strategies to use. Having the option of using different strategies is very important because it mixes up games and keeps viewing/playing a fresh experience. None of that presupposes what you're saying, nor does he claim he wants to be able to faceroll Zergs with a maxed army. It's ok if there is a composition and general strategy to counter a meching Terran, that is an integral part of a healthy game. However, massing one unit prevent mech by stalling is hardly a healthy matchup state.
With all that said its very possible that Avilo is overshooting how important this buff is. It could be that mech needs to be reimagined as a strategy and that the composition as well as the playstyle need to be reconceived to get around this issue. Regardless I don't think you can just brush off his post as him wanting to win every game with an obviously imba strat.
This is so true, and i would go you one further and say that ANYBODY who dismisses ANY post off the back ONLY that the author be a person they dislike should be banned, we do not discriminate based on color ethnicity or personal preference on teamliquid.
Avilos points stand by their merits and in this case are so valid i would give a warning to anyone who mentions "Avilo" as if that constitutes a knockdown argument, dismissing someone based on personal preference is bigotry if the points made by the author are valid.
What would you do if someone like Behring breivik won the nobel peace prize by making isis peacefully surrender, or if mahatma gandhi started a nuclear war, would you still hate breivik and love gandhi, or would the facts change your mind?
Yes. But avilo does exactly this to other people.
which is exactly why many of us dismiss his posts.
I don't even understand why units like the Swarm Host are in the game. Who wanted this? An even better question is who enjoys using it or defending against it? Ever since they added it there has been an overwhelmingly negative feedback from pros and regular players alike. I just don't understand why Blizzard decided to remove perfectly good units from BW to add wonky stuff like Swarm Hosts, Widow Mines, Disruptors, Adepts etc.
It's like their goal with each expansion is to make the game less fun and more unplayable for your regular joe. Who benefits from this? Not even the pros seem to like it.
On January 09 2017 11:12 Ganseng wrote: a bit of theorycraft here...
don't widow mines deflect swarmhosts? 2 mines per SH are cheaper resource wise (but not supply wise) and have same reload time
zerg starts bombarding your base with locusts - meet them with mines. should work theoretically
but from the experience i've had practically swarmhosts are extremely frustrating to deal with indeed
That actually works really well but you have to know where the locusts are hitting in advance. On some maps there are just to many spots where the locusts could fly in.
On January 09 2017 10:09 LSN wrote: Same can be said about bio. Can't be catched, moves with speed of light and gets healed up for free, which is similar effect as free units. But I guess on tier 1 core units thats no issue to think of :p
Maybe in some years people are getting there.
Oh pls... The problem with swarmhosts is that if you use it correctly the unit is never in danger to interact (aka die) with other units. I don't see how that's good gameplay, especially because locusts fly now. I don't know if it is op, but it's ridiculous and shouldn't be in the game.
I would argue that many units need to be used correctly.
Although, a good zerg should be able to keep their SH alive fairly easy.
Now I don't think going heavy SH is op. In fact I would argue it is too weak. The trick is to get just enough SH. Too much and you risk losing a big investment and a paperweight for some seconds on CD. Too little and it only causes an annoyance to terran.
I think 6 SH can one shot an addon, but not sure about a cc/oc/pf.
What I don't understand about Avilo's play is that he never builds a bunker with a marine or two near any expansions. It's a glaring weakness to his play. The bunker is only there to buy time; it will likely get destroyed along with the marine, but it is precious time Avilo needs because his fucking reaction time blows monkey junks. Instead, he chooses to make pointless threads and waste time whining.
I don't care about avilo bashing tbh, it gets old fast (even though i dislike his streaming personality a lot)
The point is that swarmhosts aren't really in danger to get traded, why do we want such a unit in the game? It's frustrating to play against and almost free guaranteed damage done. The only thing you potentially lose is the locusts (without doing damage) and therefore cooldown. The SH was a stupid unit when it was first introduced and it's still a ridiculous unit right now. I can understand when people lose hope in blizzard looking at such a unit tbh.
On January 09 2017 10:09 LSN wrote: Same can be said about bio. Can't be catched, moves with speed of light and gets healed up for free, which is similar effect as free units. But I guess on tier 1 core units thats no issue to think of :p
Maybe in some years people are getting there.
Oh pls... The problem with swarmhosts is that if you use it correctly the unit is never in danger to interact (aka die) with other units. I don't see how that's good gameplay, especially because locusts fly now. I don't know if it is op, but it's ridiculous and shouldn't be in the game.
I would argue that many units need to be used correctly.
Although, a good zerg should be able to keep their SH alive fairly easy.
Now I don't think going heavy SH is op. In fact I would argue it is too weak. The trick is to get just enough SH. Too much and you risk losing a big investment and a paperweight for some seconds on CD. Too little and it only causes an annoyance to terran.
I think 6 SH can one shot an addon, but not sure about a cc/oc/pf.
What I don't understand about Avilo's play is that he never builds a bunker with a marine or two near any expansions. It's a glaring weakness to his play. The bunker is only there to buy time; it will likely get destroyed along with the marine, but it is precious time Avilo needs because his fucking reaction time blows monkey junks. Instead, he chooses to make pointless threads and waste time whining.
I don't care about avilo bashing tbh, it gets old fast (even though i dislike his streaming personality a lot)
The point is that swarmhosts aren't really in danger to get traded, why do we want such a unit in the game? It's frustrating to play against and almost free guaranteed damage done. The only thing you potentially lose is the locusts (without doing damage) and therefore cooldown. The SH was a stupid unit when it was first introduced and it's still a ridiculous unit right now. I can understand when people lose hope in blizzard looking at such a unit tbh.
I agree SH are low risk, but that also means low reward. And I would argue it needs protection to trade safely, like a burrowed infestor or two. Just having a banshee and raven can defend against a SH harass. Gas investment in a pack of SH and two infestors is steep, and makes it difficult to transition to anything. The SH is meant to buy time only. It is piss poor useless en masse.
About your design, I'm not against an SHesque unit. But I agree it is a difficult type of unit to balance. So far, BL and SH have caused numerous problems, but that was due to the role of SH pre patch.
When SH was purely siege, they were used similar to BL, but didn't have the same vulnerability to air. And I don't think its good design to have two very similar types of units used for siege.
BL and SH used to overlap in roles, and also had very similar types of attacks. Blizzard realized that SH as a siege is impossible to balance. So they turned it into a harass unit. We will see how the 'free unit' design will work in the role of a harassment unit.
On January 09 2017 10:09 LSN wrote: Same can be said about bio. Can't be catched, moves with speed of light and gets healed up for free, which is similar effect as free units. But I guess on tier 1 core units thats no issue to think of :p
Maybe in some years people are getting there.
Oh pls... The problem with swarmhosts is that if you use it correctly the unit is never in danger to interact (aka die) with other units. I don't see how that's good gameplay, especially because locusts fly now. I don't know if it is op, but it's ridiculous and shouldn't be in the game.
I would argue that many units need to be used correctly.
Although, a good zerg should be able to keep their SH alive fairly easy.
Now I don't think going heavy SH is op. In fact I would argue it is too weak. The trick is to get just enough SH. Too much and you risk losing a big investment and a paperweight for some seconds on CD. Too little and it only causes an annoyance to terran.
I think 6 SH can one shot an addon, but not sure about a cc/oc/pf.
What I don't understand about Avilo's play is that he never builds a bunker with a marine or two near any expansions. It's a glaring weakness to his play. The bunker is only there to buy time; it will likely get destroyed along with the marine, but it is precious time Avilo needs because his fucking reaction time blows monkey junks. Instead, he chooses to make pointless threads and waste time whining.
I don't care about avilo bashing tbh, it gets old fast (even though i dislike his streaming personality a lot)
The point is that swarmhosts aren't really in danger to get traded, why do we want such a unit in the game? It's frustrating to play against and almost free guaranteed damage done. The only thing you potentially lose is the locusts (without doing damage) and therefore cooldown. The SH was a stupid unit when it was first introduced and it's still a ridiculous unit right now. I can understand when people lose hope in blizzard looking at such a unit tbh.
I agree SH are low risk, but that also means low reward. And I would argue it needs protection to trade safely, like a burrowed infestor or two. Just having a banshee and raven can defend against a SH harass. Gas investment in a pack of SH and two infestors is steep, and makes it difficult to transition to anything. The SH is meant to buy time only. It is piss poor useless en masse.
About your design, I'm not against an SHesque unit. But I agree it is a difficult type of unit to balance. So far, BL and SH have caused numerous problems, but that was due to the role of SH pre patch.
When SH was purely siege, they were used similar to BL, but didn't have the same vulnerability to air. And I don't think its good design to have two very similar types of units used for siege.
BL and SH used to overlap in roles, and also had very similar types of attacks. Blizzard realized that SH as a siege is impossible to balance. So they turned it into a harass unit. We will see how the 'free unit' design will work in the role of a harassment unit.
No, we won't see, because all pro-level terrans will keep going 16 marine drop 90% of the time and cyclone all-in sometimes, because nothing else is viable.
BL and SH used to overlap in roles, and also had very similar types of attacks. Blizzard realized that SH as a siege is impossible to balance. So they turned it into a harass unit. We will see how the 'free unit' design will work in the role of a harassment unit.
They overlay roles in the same sense than liberator and tank overlap roles and also both tanks and liberators had very similar types of attacks, yet there is room in the game for a bit to overlap to give a sense of variety (besides BL are T3 units and SH are T2 which means can be used earlier but not as effective as BL).
On January 09 2017 10:09 LSN wrote: Same can be said about bio. Can't be catched, moves with speed of light and gets healed up for free, which is similar effect as free units. But I guess on tier 1 core units thats no issue to think of :p
Maybe in some years people are getting there.
Oh pls... The problem with swarmhosts is that if you use it correctly the unit is never in danger to interact (aka die) with other units. I don't see how that's good gameplay, especially because locusts fly now. I don't know if it is op, but it's ridiculous and shouldn't be in the game.
I would argue that many units need to be used correctly.
Although, a good zerg should be able to keep their SH alive fairly easy.
Now I don't think going heavy SH is op. In fact I would argue it is too weak. The trick is to get just enough SH. Too much and you risk losing a big investment and a paperweight for some seconds on CD. Too little and it only causes an annoyance to terran.
I think 6 SH can one shot an addon, but not sure about a cc/oc/pf.
What I don't understand about Avilo's play is that he never builds a bunker with a marine or two near any expansions. It's a glaring weakness to his play. The bunker is only there to buy time; it will likely get destroyed along with the marine, but it is precious time Avilo needs because his fucking reaction time blows monkey junks. Instead, he chooses to make pointless threads and waste time whining.
I don't care about avilo bashing tbh, it gets old fast (even though i dislike his streaming personality a lot)
The point is that swarmhosts aren't really in danger to get traded, why do we want such a unit in the game? It's frustrating to play against and almost free guaranteed damage done. The only thing you potentially lose is the locusts (without doing damage) and therefore cooldown. The SH was a stupid unit when it was first introduced and it's still a ridiculous unit right now. I can understand when people lose hope in blizzard looking at such a unit tbh.
I agree SH are low risk, but that also means low reward. And I would argue it needs protection to trade safely, like a burrowed infestor or two. Just having a banshee and raven can defend against a SH harass. Gas investment in a pack of SH and two infestors is steep, and makes it difficult to transition to anything. The SH is meant to buy time only. It is piss poor useless en masse.
About your design, I'm not against an SHesque unit. But I agree it is a difficult type of unit to balance. So far, BL and SH have caused numerous problems, but that was due to the role of SH pre patch.
When SH was purely siege, they were used similar to BL, but didn't have the same vulnerability to air. And I don't think its good design to have two very similar types of units used for siege.
BL and SH used to overlap in roles, and also had very similar types of attacks. Blizzard realized that SH as a siege is impossible to balance. So they turned it into a harass unit. We will see how the 'free unit' design will work in the role of a harassment unit.
I don't know about low reward, locusts have insanse dps and the ability to fly makes them very potent to snipe important structures. SHesque units have the problem that "free units" block pathing and tank while doing damage and therefore make it so that the main unit is pretty safe (ofc range is the biggest issue here though). I don't see why we want something like that in an rts game. It prevents meaningful unit interactions.
I disagree that swarmhosts completely nullify mech. I think if you're able to survive the first few swarms and reach critical mass, a mech army becomes very formidable and can trample anything in its way.
On January 10 2017 06:31 SCC-Faust wrote: I disagree that swarmhosts completely nullify mech. I think if you're able to survive the first few swarms and reach critical mass, a mech army becomes very formidable and can trample anything in its way.
They're mostly the bane of anyone who just sits back in their base, trying to build up an unstoppable army. Suddenly you have to have more map presence than a single raven, and have to actually scout and react.
On January 10 2017 06:31 SCC-Faust wrote: I disagree that swarmhosts completely nullify mech. I think if you're able to survive the first few swarms and reach critical mass, a mech army becomes very formidable and can trample anything in its way.
They're mostly the bane of anyone who just sits back in their base, trying to build up an unstoppable army. Suddenly you have to have more map presence than a single raven, and have to actually scout and react.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but that seems like a huge restraint on player style. Why would blizzard put in a unit that is anti-fun? What if my idea of fun is sitting in my base and making a big army?
On January 10 2017 06:31 SCC-Faust wrote: I disagree that swarmhosts completely nullify mech. I think if you're able to survive the first few swarms and reach critical mass, a mech army becomes very formidable and can trample anything in its way.
They're mostly the bane of anyone who just sits back in their base, trying to build up an unstoppable army. Suddenly you have to have more map presence than a single raven, and have to actually scout and react.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but that seems like a huge restraint on player style. Why would blizzard put in a unit that is anti-fun? What if my idea of fun is sitting in my base and making a big army?
That's fair, and also to be fair, I was taking a dig at how most mech-style tends to be played, which is grossly unfair.
And while that playstyle might be your favored mode, it seems quite clear that blizzard disagrees:
- Harassment based play tends to be extremely encouraged (mutas are extremely fast, hellions in original mode seem solely designed to murder workers, there are places where tanks can siege up and fire upon a mineral line, widowmines one-shot workers, dropships have speed boost to get them into harass positions faster)
All of these things are added to the game to specifically allow you to wear down your opponent to the point where they're so exhausted and you have so many more units than they do, that they can try to roll out with their 'perfect army' to be rolled over by you.
If all you want to do is build things in your base and be left alone, then any and every one of those units is "anti-fun."
Gotta love how there's some clueless people in this thread that keep spewing out the "if you turtle SH do this etc"
Swarmhosts FORCE you to sit in base and turtle because you'll take free damage otherwise, and if you push out you get engulfed by free units or mass muta/corruptor etc.
The people right now that know about this strat and imbalance currently will make at least 10 swarmhosts and they have a free money generator the entire game to remax 4-5 times on whatever they want to while you're constantly losing buildings, and gas units, etc. for free every 30 seconds.
Something needs to be addressed with this unit. I'm also pretty sure this is why every korean Terran stopped going mech after the one series of innovation vs dark with the double reactor cheese...people realized if you see mech you just open 2 base muta into mass swarmhost and basically get an auto-win.
On January 10 2017 08:38 avilo wrote: Gotta love how there's some clueless people in this thread that keep spewing out the "if you turtle SH do this etc"
Swarmhosts FORCE you to sit in base and turtle because you'll take free damage otherwise, and if you push out you get engulfed by free units or mass muta/corruptor etc.
The people right now that know about this strat and imbalance currently will make at least 10 swarmhosts and they have a free money generator the entire game to remax 4-5 times on whatever they want to while you're constantly losing buildings, and gas units, etc. for free every 30 seconds.
Something needs to be addressed with this unit. I'm also pretty sure this is why every korean Terran stopped going mech after the one series of innovation vs dark with the double reactor cheese...people realized if you see mech you just open 2 base muta into mass swarmhost and basically get an auto-win.
I agree, I don't even like mech, I don't enjoy playing it or watching it being played even by the pros, but honestly, it makes no sense for David to do all of these radical changes in the game just to make mech viable at all and then have yet another unit that pretty much hard counters mech, the other one being the Viper which looks like it exists only to counter tanks.
Think about the Viper, it's bad vs anything that moves, but great vs stationary things, instead of just being half good against things that move and half good against stationary, it's totally linear in it's application. The Swarm Host is the same but worse because it just further encourages turtling.
I wish they made the Swarm Host deal with end game aerial armies to discourage mass sky compositions or removed all together, it doesn't really fill any void in Zerg's arsenal. If it was removed and mech was too strong tanks could always be slightly toned down or whatever.
On January 10 2017 08:38 avilo wrote: Gotta love how there's some clueless people in this thread that keep spewing out the "if you turtle SH do this etc"
Swarmhosts FORCE you to sit in base and turtle because you'll take free damage otherwise, and if you push out you get engulfed by free units or mass muta/corruptor etc.
The people right now that know about this strat and imbalance currently will make at least 10 swarmhosts and they have a free money generator the entire game to remax 4-5 times on whatever they want to while you're constantly losing buildings, and gas units, etc. for free every 30 seconds.
Something needs to be addressed with this unit. I'm also pretty sure this is why every korean Terran stopped going mech after the one series of innovation vs dark with the double reactor cheese...people realized if you see mech you just open 2 base muta into mass swarmhost and basically get an auto-win.
if you let a zerg get to 10 swarmhosts freely then you deserve to die a slow painful death. swarmhosts are not the go to build - unless its a map / player specific reason.
On January 10 2017 06:31 SCC-Faust wrote: I disagree that swarmhosts completely nullify mech. I think if you're able to survive the first few swarms and reach critical mass, a mech army becomes very formidable and can trample anything in its way.
They're mostly the bane of anyone who just sits back in their base, trying to build up an unstoppable army. Suddenly you have to have more map presence than a single raven, and have to actually scout and react.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but that seems like a huge restraint on player style. Why would blizzard put in a unit that is anti-fun? What if my idea of fun is sitting in my base and making a big army?
Because if its viable to sit in your base and get an ultimate army in a matchup it pretty much ruins the gameplay and makes it boring to watch
On January 10 2017 08:38 avilo wrote: Gotta love how there's some clueless people in this thread that keep spewing out the "if you turtle SH do this etc"
Swarmhosts FORCE you to sit in base and turtle because you'll take free damage otherwise, and if you push out you get engulfed by free units or mass muta/corruptor etc.
The people right now that know about this strat and imbalance currently will make at least 10 swarmhosts and they have a free money generator the entire game to remax 4-5 times on whatever they want to while you're constantly losing buildings, and gas units, etc. for free every 30 seconds.
Something needs to be addressed with this unit. I'm also pretty sure this is why every korean Terran stopped going mech after the one series of innovation vs dark with the double reactor cheese...people realized if you see mech you just open 2 base muta into mass swarmhost and basically get an auto-win.
TY/Gumiho still play mech most games (TY is 6.9k on KR; gumiho ~6.5kish) and innovation occasionaly does (he has a 7k account on kr) in tvz so it still seems pretty viable at least against zerg
On January 10 2017 08:38 avilo wrote: Gotta love how there's some clueless people in this thread that keep spewing out the "if you turtle SH do this etc"
Swarmhosts FORCE you to sit in base and turtle because you'll take free damage otherwise, and if you push out you get engulfed by free units or mass muta/corruptor etc.
The people right now that know about this strat and imbalance currently will make at least 10 swarmhosts and they have a free money generator the entire game to remax 4-5 times on whatever they want to while you're constantly losing buildings, and gas units, etc. for free every 30 seconds.
Something needs to be addressed with this unit. I'm also pretty sure this is why every korean Terran stopped going mech after the one series of innovation vs dark with the double reactor cheese...people realized if you see mech you just open 2 base muta into mass swarmhost and basically get an auto-win.
Gotta love how you try to use SH to justify your cancerous mech build.
It is not that SH forces you to go mech, it's always the other way round.
Turtle mech is just as cancerous of SH build, if not more.
So is this going to be addressed any time soon or are we never going to see mech games? Every Z right now knows you go 2 base muta -> make 20 swarmhosts you now have a free income generator and can make any army you want.
This needs to be fixed fast. Been over a month now this shit has been in the game.
On January 10 2017 08:38 avilo wrote: Gotta love how there's some clueless people in this thread that keep spewing out the "if you turtle SH do this etc"
Swarmhosts FORCE you to sit in base and turtle because you'll take free damage otherwise, and if you push out you get engulfed by free units or mass muta/corruptor etc.
The people right now that know about this strat and imbalance currently will make at least 10 swarmhosts and they have a free money generator the entire game to remax 4-5 times on whatever they want to while you're constantly losing buildings, and gas units, etc. for free every 30 seconds.
Something needs to be addressed with this unit. I'm also pretty sure this is why every korean Terran stopped going mech after the one series of innovation vs dark with the double reactor cheese...people realized if you see mech you just open 2 base muta into mass swarmhost and basically get an auto-win.
if you let a zerg get to 10 swarmhosts freely then you deserve to die a slow painful death. swarmhosts are not the go to build - unless its a map / player specific reason.
Dunno what league you are in but master/gm/pro your opponent will go 2 base muta every single game meaning you cannot move out onto the map which forces thors -> 20 swarmhost -> you now autolose vs someone that has a free money generation machine or you are forced to survive and turtle into 20 ravens which won't work if they abuse swarmhost properly.
On January 10 2017 08:38 avilo wrote: Gotta love how there's some clueless people in this thread that keep spewing out the "if you turtle SH do this etc"
Swarmhosts FORCE you to sit in base and turtle because you'll take free damage otherwise, and if you push out you get engulfed by free units or mass muta/corruptor etc.
The people right now that know about this strat and imbalance currently will make at least 10 swarmhosts and they have a free money generator the entire game to remax 4-5 times on whatever they want to while you're constantly losing buildings, and gas units, etc. for free every 30 seconds.
Something needs to be addressed with this unit. I'm also pretty sure this is why every korean Terran stopped going mech after the one series of innovation vs dark with the double reactor cheese...people realized if you see mech you just open 2 base muta into mass swarmhost and basically get an auto-win.
if you let a zerg get to 10 swarmhosts freely then you deserve to die a slow painful death. swarmhosts are not the go to build - unless its a map / player specific reason.
5 sh are enough to start the snowball effect, like every player above diamond would know. Easy to get inbetween, since they are so super cheap.
I do not understand why Blizzard wait to take action on Swarm Hosts.
It is such an obvious issue even most Zerg players I talk to online admits that the unit is OP vs mech.
What what the point of trying to make mech more viable if you leave it in a state like this?
And it is not even a complicated issue to solve. Just increase the cost of Swarm Hosts. Zerg does not even need the unit, they have plenty of ways to beat mech without it.
On January 14 2017 12:26 avilo wrote: So is this going to be addressed any time soon or are we never going to see mech games? Every Z right now knows you go 2 base muta -> make 20 swarmhosts you now have a free income generator and can make any army you want.
This needs to be fixed fast. Been over a month now this shit has been in the game.
Terran is in a great spot right now,this is a learn to play issue
On January 14 2017 12:26 avilo wrote: So is this going to be addressed any time soon or are we never going to see mech games? Every Z right now knows you go 2 base muta -> make 20 swarmhosts you now have a free income generator and can make any army you want.
This needs to be fixed fast. Been over a month now this shit has been in the game.
Terran is in a great spot right now,this is a learn to play issue
This does not make sense. There are no successful high level mech players in TvZ.
If you talk about bio that is obviously not relevant since no one uses Swarm Hosts against bio.
On January 14 2017 12:26 avilo wrote: So is this going to be addressed any time soon or are we never going to see mech games? Every Z right now knows you go 2 base muta -> make 20 swarmhosts you now have a free income generator and can make any army you want.
This needs to be fixed fast. Been over a month now this shit has been in the game.
Terran is in a great spot right now,this is a learn to play issue
This does not make sense. There are no successful high level mech players in TvZ.
If you talk about bio that is obviously not relevant since no one uses Swarm Hosts against bio.
Scarlett just says above that TY, Gumiho, and Innovation are using mech at the highest level.
Let's be honest, Avilo isn't a real progamer, he is not an high tiers GM.
When he face players that are objectivly better than him, and lose : Does he say : Well i'm lost vs one of the best player of the game, it's not a shame at all ?
No, he can get beaten by Golden, and say : Well I've lost because mech is weak /Zerg OP. And immediatly make a threat on TL/Battle net (where he manage to get banned for spamming topic) : "Buff mech /nerf the counter of mech"
The best part of this thread is how every mech advocate, together with the OP, straight up ignored the only post of a progamer in their mutual wank off circlejerk.
On January 10 2017 08:38 avilo wrote: Gotta love how there's some clueless people in this thread that keep spewing out the "if you turtle SH do this etc"
Swarmhosts FORCE you to sit in base and turtle because you'll take free damage otherwise, and if you push out you get engulfed by free units or mass muta/corruptor etc.
The people right now that know about this strat and imbalance currently will make at least 10 swarmhosts and they have a free money generator the entire game to remax 4-5 times on whatever they want to while you're constantly losing buildings, and gas units, etc. for free every 30 seconds.
Something needs to be addressed with this unit. I'm also pretty sure this is why every korean Terran stopped going mech after the one series of innovation vs dark with the double reactor cheese...people realized if you see mech you just open 2 base muta into mass swarmhost and basically get an auto-win.
if you let a zerg get to 10 swarmhosts freely then you deserve to die a slow painful death. swarmhosts are not the go to build - unless its a map / player specific reason.
Dunno what league you are in but master/gm/pro your opponent will go 2 base muta every single game meaning you cannot move out onto the map which forces thors -> 20 swarmhost -> you now autolose vs someone that has a free money generation machine or you are forced to survive and turtle into 20 ravens which won't work if they abuse swarmhost properly.
Yea and why respond to Scarlette, who proves your wrong ... you clearly deserve every ban you get. If the game really was so black and white as you try make it to seem, we wouldn't be here in 2017 talking about sc2.
On January 14 2017 12:26 avilo wrote: So is this going to be addressed any time soon or are we never going to see mech games? Every Z right now knows you go 2 base muta -> make 20 swarmhosts you now have a free income generator and can make any army you want.
This needs to be fixed fast. Been over a month now this shit has been in the game.
Terran is in a great spot right now,this is a learn to play issue
This does not make sense. There are no successful high level mech players in TvZ.
If you talk about bio that is obviously not relevant since no one uses Swarm Hosts against bio.
Scarlett just says above that TY, Gumiho, and Innovation are using mech at the highest level.
Let's be honest, Avilo isn't a real progamer, he is not an high tiers GM.
When he face players that are objectivly better than him, and lose : Does he say : Well i'm lost vs one of the best player of the game, it's not a shame at all ?
No, he can get beaten by Golden, and say : Well I've lost because mech is weak /Zerg OP. And immediatly make a threat on TL/Battle net (where he manage to get banned for spamming topic) : "Buff mech /nerf the counter of mech"
Yep, it's always the same with him "I didn't lose cause I'm not top tier, no goddamnit I'm avilo! I can't lose! It must be the game! Blizzard fix your shit!"
I always have the same question when I see an avilo thread
That is "If you hate the balance so much and they're clearly not going to listen now if they haven't for so long, why don't you just quit?" Seriously, is it an ego thing or is it because he might actually have to get good at something other than conning deluded fanboys out of their money when they sub and donate to him by saying the games "Broken"?
I mean I've seen him post some intelligent stuff on occasion, rare occasions granted but he clearly has a brain and all and a genuine love for the game it seems but goddamn I wonder does he ever wonder why everyone outside his circlejerk of a twitch channel hates him? Why no one ever takes him seriously even when he makes a good post? Why he's a running joke for the community who just love to watch our little puppet dance? It's crap like this,
On January 14 2017 12:26 avilo wrote: So is this going to be addressed any time soon or are we never going to see mech games? Every Z right now knows you go 2 base muta -> make 20 swarmhosts you now have a free income generator and can make any army you want.
This needs to be fixed fast. Been over a month now this shit has been in the game.
Terran is in a great spot right now,this is a learn to play issue
This does not make sense. There are no successful high level mech players in TvZ.
If you talk about bio that is obviously not relevant since no one uses Swarm Hosts against bio.
Its relevant because this is a learn to play issue, the OP is unable to adapt his play to the opponent at hand.
The whole premise of this thread is ludicrous. Avilo demanding buffs for his turtly mech style so that he can rack up a couple more ladder points, is somehow saving Starcraft? For some reason this guy just doesn't get it that Starcraft doesn't need mech or any other boring turtly play styles. He's never been as interested in becoming a better player and actually playing in tournaments and succeeding, than he is interested in bitching, whining and deflecting from the fact he simply doesn't have what it takes to make it in this game.
Why do you guys even giving him attention.. that's what I don't get... If he get's used to pointlessly cry about everything he dislikes and loosing to.. than he will never move out from that room...
TLDR: Leave competent ppl do their just since your opinion are mostly even more incompetent than theirs...
Once a year you say something that makes sense (if i exclude calling me and my mom with words), but than you overthrow it with these ridiculous balance changes, ideas and than you are suprised noone gives a f about you and noone takes you seriously.
On January 14 2017 20:57 PharaphobiaSC wrote: Why do you guys even giving him attention.. that's what I don't get... If he get's used to pointlessly cry about everything he dislikes and loosing to.. than he will never move out from that room...
TLDR: Leave competent ppl do their just since your opinion are mostly even more incompetent than theirs...
Once a year you say something that makes sense (if i exclude calling me and my mom with words), but than you overthrow it with these ridiculous balance changes, ideas and than you are suprised noone gives a f about you and noone takes you seriously.
I suppose you are talking about avilo. His complaint about the swarmhost isn't ridiculous. Most people don't play mech and thus don't know what they are talking about, but people who do know that he is right.
One of the main points of the 3.8 patch was to make mech more viable.
Since the patch mech has actually become less viable then before the patch in TvZ. The reason for this is the Swarm Host price reduction.
Swarm Hosts forces the mech player to turle. Before the Swarm Host price reduction the mech player could try to take out the Zerg player before Hive, since Vipers hard counter mech. Swarm Hosts have made it so that mech can not even attack in the midgame (except if you do a cyclone all-in and your opponent forgets to scout).
How many pro level tournament games have you seen lately with mech in TvZ that was not a cyclone/hellbat all-in? I can not remember a single one.
Even Blizzard acknowledged that the Swarm Host price reduction was to much. They did it in order to make the unit more popular and evaluate its role. Problem is that they get no pro level data since pro level player have already adapted to dirt cheap Swarm Hosts by never using mech against Zerg.
On January 14 2017 23:58 MockHamill wrote: Forgot Avilo and focus on the issue.
One of the main points of the 3.8 patch was to make mech more viable.
Since the patch mech has actually become less viable then before the patch in TvZ. The reason for this is the Swarm Host price reduction.
Swarm Hosts forces the mech player to turle. Before the Swarm Host price reduction the mech player could try to take out the Zerg player before Hive, since Vipers hard counter mech. Swarm Hosts have made it so that mech can not even attack in the midgame (except if you do a cyclone all-in and your opponent forgets to scout).
How many pro level tournament games have you seen lately with mech in TvZ that was not a cyclone/hellbat all-in? I can not remember a single one.
Even Blizzard acknowledged that the Swarm Host price reduction was to much. They did it in order to make the unit more popular and evaluate its role. Problem is that they get no pro level data since pro level player have already adapted to dirt cheap Swarm Hosts by never using mech against Zerg.
On January 14 2017 23:58 MockHamill wrote: Forgot Avilo and focus on the issue.
One of the main points of the 3.8 patch was to make mech more viable.
Since the patch mech has actually become less viable then before the patch in TvZ. The reason for this is the Swarm Host price reduction.
Swarm Hosts forces the mech player to turle. Before the Swarm Host price reduction the mech player could try to take out the Zerg player before Hive, since Vipers hard counter mech. Swarm Hosts have made it so that mech can not even attack in the midgame (except if you do a cyclone all-in and your opponent forgets to scout).
How many pro level tournament games have you seen lately with mech in TvZ that was not a cyclone/hellbat all-in? I can not remember a single one.
Even Blizzard acknowledged that the Swarm Host price reduction was to much. They did it in order to make the unit more popular and evaluate its role. Problem is that they get no pro level data since pro level player have already adapted to dirt cheap Swarm Hosts by never using mech against Zerg.
Vipers hard counter mech? A unit 'hard counters' an entire play style?
I see Avilo win a ton of games on his stream against Zergs that have Vipers. Sometimes he loses too, but shouldn't he lose all the time since Vipers hard counter his entire race and play style? You really don't seem to understand what a 'hard counter' is. What you are referring to is a 'strong unit, perhaps even a soft counter', but you call it 'hard counter' to make your argument more striking, but all you're actually doing is making yourself as laughable as Avilo with all the hyperbole nonsense.
On January 14 2017 23:58 MockHamill wrote: Forgot Avilo and focus on the issue.
One of the main points of the 3.8 patch was to make mech more viable.
Since the patch mech has actually become less viable then before the patch in TvZ. The reason for this is the Swarm Host price reduction.
Swarm Hosts forces the mech player to turle. Before the Swarm Host price reduction the mech player could try to take out the Zerg player before Hive, since Vipers hard counter mech. Swarm Hosts have made it so that mech can not even attack in the midgame (except if you do a cyclone all-in and your opponent forgets to scout).
How many pro level tournament games have you seen lately with mech in TvZ that was not a cyclone/hellbat all-in? I can not remember a single one.
Even Blizzard acknowledged that the Swarm Host price reduction was to much. They did it in order to make the unit more popular and evaluate its role. Problem is that they get no pro level data since pro level player have already adapted to dirt cheap Swarm Hosts by never using mech against Zerg.
Well Patch 3.8 made Terran the strongest race of the game (but not surprising when you give one race 10 buffs, the other barely 3, then revert some buffs).
It's funny how Innovation who was invisible all this time, suddently become best player of the world in less than 2 months, just after the patch realeased.
Zest eliminated from code A by Keen and Bunny ?! Lost vs semper ? PvT dropped from 50% to 40% after the patch.
The game was more balanced before the patch, but of course you guys discuss about nerfing Z...
What's about reverting patch 3.8 so ? You even admit mech was better before the patch.
On January 14 2017 20:57 PharaphobiaSC wrote: Why do you guys even giving him attention.. that's what I don't get... If he get's used to pointlessly cry about everything he dislikes and loosing to.. than he will never move out from that room...
Because it's hilarious, mostly. This thread is the companion book to watching Golden troll him on stream.
On January 14 2017 20:57 PharaphobiaSC wrote: Why do you guys even giving him attention.. that's what I don't get... If he get's used to pointlessly cry about everything he dislikes and loosing to.. than he will never move out from that room...
Because it's hilarious, mostly. This thread is the companion book to watching Golden troll him on stream.
Avilo build his "character" on whining and complaining, that's the only reason he has some following on his stream. Even if Blizzard would buff mech to the point of it being overpowered, he would still keep complaining since this is his source of "revenue" from his stream. Imagine ad Avilo stream where he just plays, without balance whine and out of his usual character, he would probably get 0 views, since there are much more talented / entertaining players streaming at the same time. So listening to him about balance his a bit misleading in my opinion.
As a diamond meching terran, I'm not really allowed to talk about 'balance', but damn I got every right to say IT'S NOT FUCKING FUN. Swarm Hosts are so infuriating to deal with I'd rather not play untill they're changed. There's nothing exciting or fun in dealing with swarm hosts. And it's weird too, because there's so many good ways to fix that. Change their price or their speed, or maybe nerf their hp so we can chase them with hellions or banshees etc etc. Things that would still make turtle mech unviable, but would at least make the unit create interesting interactions. CURRENTLY THERE'S NO INTERESTING INTERACTION WITH SWARM HOSTS. Imagine if SHs were light for example. It would create a cat-and-mouse with hellions. Now that's an interesting interaction right there.
On January 15 2017 02:20 ihatevideogames wrote: As a diamond meching terran, I'm not really allowed to talk about 'balance', but damn I got every right to say IT'S NOT FUCKING FUN. Swarm Hosts are so infuriating to deal with I'd rather not play untill they're changed. There's nothing exciting or fun in dealing with swarm hosts. And it's weird too, because there's so many good ways to fix that. Change their price or their speed, or maybe nerf their hp so we can chase them with hellions or banshees etc etc. Things that would still make turtle mech unviable, but would at least make the unit create interesting interactions. CURRENTLY THERE'S NO INTERESTING INTERACTION WITH SWARM HOSTS. Imagine if SHs were light for example. It would create a cat-and-mouse with hellions. Now that's an interesting interaction right there.
Have you tried playing bio mate? You'll never see swarmhosts
On January 15 2017 02:20 ihatevideogames wrote: As a diamond meching terran, I'm not really allowed to talk about 'balance', but damn I got every right to say IT'S NOT FUCKING FUN. Swarm Hosts are so infuriating to deal with I'd rather not play untill they're changed. There's nothing exciting or fun in dealing with swarm hosts. And it's weird too, because there's so many good ways to fix that. Change their price or their speed, or maybe nerf their hp so we can chase them with hellions or banshees etc etc. Things that would still make turtle mech unviable, but would at least make the unit create interesting interactions. CURRENTLY THERE'S NO INTERESTING INTERACTION WITH SWARM HOSTS. Imagine if SHs were light for example. It would create a cat-and-mouse with hellions. Now that's an interesting interaction right there.
Have you tried playing bio mate? You'll never see swarmhosts
Bingo. If Mech is so shit it's a simple solution. DON'T PLAY MECH!
But like I said earlier in the case of avilo, that would mean he'd have to stop conning fanboys who actually believe his bullshit and actually admit to himself he sucks. Could never happen.
On January 15 2017 02:20 ihatevideogames wrote: As a diamond meching terran, I'm not really allowed to talk about 'balance', but damn I got every right to say IT'S NOT FUCKING FUN. Swarm Hosts are so infuriating to deal with I'd rather not play untill they're changed. There's nothing exciting or fun in dealing with swarm hosts. And it's weird too, because there's so many good ways to fix that. Change their price or their speed, or maybe nerf their hp so we can chase them with hellions or banshees etc etc. Things that would still make turtle mech unviable, but would at least make the unit create interesting interactions. CURRENTLY THERE'S NO INTERESTING INTERACTION WITH SWARM HOSTS. Imagine if SHs were light for example. It would create a cat-and-mouse with hellions. Now that's an interesting interaction right there.
Have you tried playing bio mate? You'll never see swarmhosts
I don't like bio, although I've been succesful with it every time I tried it. Something about going 2-1-1 every single game and winning by out-mutlitasking isn't appealing to me. I prefer a more positional game.
3.8 was supossed to be the patch that made more things other than bio viable, but the opposite ended up happening. Watching pros go bio/lib for a year already turned me off most tournaments. The cyclone/hellbat all-ins are just that, all-ins.
Ok, so mech isn't fun for you. You don't want to see swarmhosts but bio isn't fun for you. Well, you got no right to complain then.
You know what? There's nothing exciting or fun in dealing with mech as you want it. (I play both T and Z.) Or to quote you; IT'S NOT FUCKING FUN. MECH AS YOU WANT IT DOES NOT PROVIDE INTERESTING INTERACTIONS. The various styles of bio is fun, it's interesting. Mech is so boring, I nearly fell asleep playing with it, even when I win. But I recognise that I have chosen to play the races and styles I enjoy, rather than demanding that pure barracks or some bullshit is more viable and fun.
Ultimately, there is no reason why the concept of "avilo mech and their proponents" which seems to currently mean " I can make the arbitrary units based on their production building to force the strategy of defending forever until I can attack with an invincible army and win the game all the time" should ever exist. Mech exists since HotS and plenty have fun playing and winning with them. Plenty of pros (ie not Avilo), have won games with factory units as a core units since HotS using a variety of strategies.
mech in BW is OP but it's okay since the game is too hard for humans. it simply won't work in SC2 because the UI is just too smooth. stop whining about mech because noone wants it
Mech is not OP in BW. Mech in BW is a totally different beast to SC2. In SC2 the army can move together, providing no opportunities to pick off units, tanks have no overkill, with the effect that a supply capped mech army is more effective than in bw against pure ground and the economt and bases to defend to build up a mech force is totally different. Also the mech style expoused in this SC2 thread is totally different from the mech that is played in BW. In BW, it is accepted that there has to be powerful spells or units which directly counter mech play. Avilo mech proponents argues that these counters should not exist.
On January 15 2017 02:20 ihatevideogames wrote: As a diamond meching terran, I'm not really allowed to talk about 'balance', but damn I got every right to say IT'S NOT FUCKING FUN. Swarm Hosts are so infuriating to deal with I'd rather not play untill they're changed. There's nothing exciting or fun in dealing with swarm hosts. And it's weird too, because there's so many good ways to fix that. Change their price or their speed, or maybe nerf their hp so we can chase them with hellions or banshees etc etc. Things that would still make turtle mech unviable, but would at least make the unit create interesting interactions. CURRENTLY THERE'S NO INTERESTING INTERACTION WITH SWARM HOSTS. Imagine if SHs were light for example. It would create a cat-and-mouse with hellions. Now that's an interesting interaction right there.
Have you tried playing bio mate? You'll never see swarmhosts
How the hell is this a valid argument or even a healthy statement to make in relation to the gameplay of SC2? No one wants to see mech every game, but throughout the game's lifetime it has always been the opposite extreme like it currently is:
You go bio and now 16 marine drop almost 95% of your games and you will see the same exact game a pro level every single game.
Strategic diversity is pretty important for a game of Starcraft2's nature.
On January 15 2017 08:03 Dangermousecatdog wrote: Mech is not OP in BW. Mech in BW is a totally different beast to SC2. In SC2 the army can move together, providing no opportunities to pick off units, tanks have no overkill, with the effect that a supply capped mech army is more effective than in bw against pure ground and the economt and bases to defend to build up a mech force is totally different. Also the mech style expoused in this SC2 thread is totally different from the mech that is played in BW. In BW, it is accepted that there has to be powerful spells or units which directly counter mech play. Avilo mech proponents argues that these counters should not exist.
Only an idiot or someone that wants SC2 to fail would want there to be no counters to a strategy. There should be viable counter options to everything in the game.
Which is exactly what this thread is about. Swarmhosts currently have no counter play if you opt for mech. They are over the top and do not belong in the game because they generate free income every 30 seconds.
Mech was better off before the ridiculous swarmhost buffs, and now it's near impossible to play if your opponent knows about swarmhosts being absurdly broken atm.
On January 10 2017 06:31 SCC-Faust wrote: I disagree that swarmhosts completely nullify mech. I think if you're able to survive the first few swarms and reach critical mass, a mech army becomes very formidable and can trample anything in its way.
They're mostly the bane of anyone who just sits back in their base, trying to build up an unstoppable army. Suddenly you have to have more map presence than a single raven, and have to actually scout and react.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but that seems like a huge restraint on player style. Why would blizzard put in a unit that is anti-fun? What if my idea of fun is sitting in my base and making a big army?
Because if its viable to sit in your base and get an ultimate army in a matchup it pretty much ruins the gameplay and makes it boring to watch
On January 10 2017 08:38 avilo wrote: Gotta love how there's some clueless people in this thread that keep spewing out the "if you turtle SH do this etc"
Swarmhosts FORCE you to sit in base and turtle because you'll take free damage otherwise, and if you push out you get engulfed by free units or mass muta/corruptor etc.
The people right now that know about this strat and imbalance currently will make at least 10 swarmhosts and they have a free money generator the entire game to remax 4-5 times on whatever they want to while you're constantly losing buildings, and gas units, etc. for free every 30 seconds.
Something needs to be addressed with this unit. I'm also pretty sure this is why every korean Terran stopped going mech after the one series of innovation vs dark with the double reactor cheese...people realized if you see mech you just open 2 base muta into mass swarmhost and basically get an auto-win.
TY/Gumiho still play mech most games (TY is 6.9k on KR; gumiho ~6.5kish) and innovation occasionaly does (he has a 7k account on kr) in tvz so it still seems pretty viable at least against zerg
On January 15 2017 08:03 Dangermousecatdog wrote: Mech is not OP in BW. Mech in BW is a totally different beast to SC2. In SC2 the army can move together, providing no opportunities to pick off units, tanks have no overkill, with the effect that a supply capped mech army is more effective than in bw against pure ground and the economt and bases to defend to build up a mech force is totally different. Also the mech style expoused in this SC2 thread is totally different from the mech that is played in BW. In BW, it is accepted that there has to be powerful spells or units which directly counter mech play. Avilo mech proponents argues that these counters should not exist.
Only an idiot or someone that wants SC2 to fail would want there to be no counters to a strategy. There should be viable counter options to everything in the game.
Which is exactly what this thread is about. Swarmhosts currently have no counter play if you opt for mech. They are over the top and do not belong in the game because they generate free income every 30 seconds.
Mech was better off before the ridiculous swarmhost buffs, and now it's near impossible to play if your opponent knows about swarmhosts being absurdly broken atm.
"I opt to run around with no armor in Dark Souls all the time and I still die in one hit. WHY? NAMCO FIX YOUR SHIT!"
Do you have any self awareness whatsoever or are you just so far into your "Savior of SC2" con man routine that you've lost all grasp on reality?
On January 15 2017 08:03 Dangermousecatdog wrote: Mech is not OP in BW. Mech in BW is a totally different beast to SC2. In SC2 the army can move together, providing no opportunities to pick off units, tanks have no overkill, with the effect that a supply capped mech army is more effective than in bw against pure ground and the economt and bases to defend to build up a mech force is totally different. Also the mech style expoused in this SC2 thread is totally different from the mech that is played in BW. In BW, it is accepted that there has to be powerful spells or units which directly counter mech play. Avilo mech proponents argues that these counters should not exist.
Only an idiot or someone that wants SC2 to fail would want there to be no counters to a strategy. There should be viable counter options to everything in the game.
Which is exactly what this thread is about. Swarmhosts currently have no counter play if you opt for mech. They are over the top and do not belong in the game because they generate free income every 30 seconds.
Mech was better off before the ridiculous swarmhost buffs, and now it's near impossible to play if your opponent knows about swarmhosts being absurdly broken atm.
"I opt to run around with no armor in Dark Souls all the time and I still die in one hit. WHY? NAMCO FIX YOUR SHIT!"
Do you have any self awareness whatsoever or are you just so far into your "Savior of SC2" con man routine that you've lost all grasp on reality?
Honestly, just don't even bother with these guys. He'll come back and say that mech needs to be viable (and not only viable, but give you a distinct and utter advantage so you'd have to make a huge mistake to lose to someone else) in every single situation - be it against its direct counter (and to the note above that everything needs counters - SH do have a counter, mobility & widow mines)
A good analogy would be to say, i built an army of things that can't shoot up, we need to nerf things that are in the sky so I can compete.
I also like that Scarlett gets completely ignored after providing her valuable insight (several high level kr players do play mech on ladder), and the thread gets bumped to ask when "will blizz fix plz" - as if this were the blizzard forums, and they wanted to take their development notes from threads like this.
On January 15 2017 02:20 ihatevideogames wrote: Imagine if SHs were light for example. It would create a cat-and-mouse with hellions. Now that's an interesting interaction right there.
This is a really good idea. Would make it possible to actually counter the unit with mech while still not promoting turtle mech.
Hey avilo I've got an idea man. Have you considered that asking for changes is the opposite of what you should do to get change? I mean if i was working at blizzard, no matter how professional I was I would still deliberately do the opposite of whatever you suggest. Maybe you should suggest buffing swarmhosts instead?
On January 15 2017 20:33 FvRGg wrote: Hey avilo I've got an idea man. Have you considered that asking for changes is the opposite of what you should do to get change? I mean if i was working at blizzard, no matter how professional I was I would still deliberately do the opposite of whatever you suggest. Maybe you should suggest buffing swarmhosts instead?
Have you been reading my old avilo posts? Get out of my head!
On January 15 2017 02:20 ihatevideogames wrote: As a diamond meching terran, I'm not really allowed to talk about 'balance', but damn I got every right to say IT'S NOT FUCKING FUN. Swarm Hosts are so infuriating to deal with I'd rather not play untill they're changed. There's nothing exciting or fun in dealing with swarm hosts. And it's weird too, because there's so many good ways to fix that. Change their price or their speed, or maybe nerf their hp so we can chase them with hellions or banshees etc etc. Things that would still make turtle mech unviable, but would at least make the unit create interesting interactions. CURRENTLY THERE'S NO INTERESTING INTERACTION WITH SWARM HOSTS. Imagine if SHs were light for example. It would create a cat-and-mouse with hellions. Now that's an interesting interaction right there.
Mate this is how most Zerg players feel playing vs mech in SC2.
while i can agree with avilo that swarm host is a dumb unit, your loses to swarm hosts are your own noob fault for playing the way you do, i think solar said it best on the first page
I'm hoping people will understand SC2 is a strategy game and is not meant to be a 16 marine drop every single game with the spectators and viewers knowing exactly what will happen before the game ever even begins.
Rofl.
As a player who opts for mass Dark Archon and Scouts, I think that the strength of Scourge is too great. BW is a strategy game and is not meant to be Forge Fast Expand every single game. I mean, the fact that my build isn't viable at all and that Forge Fast Expand is optimized for the current meta isn't important because I really just want to play Scout and Dark Archon and nothing anyone will say will change my mind about it. Blizzard, please fix this! I hope that I can piggyback off of avilo's post so that this gets some traction. We've been waiting for a patch to Brood War for 14 years now!
I'm hoping people will understand SC2 is a strategy game and is not meant to be a 16 marine drop every single game with the spectators and viewers knowing exactly what will happen before the game ever even begins.
Rofl.
As a player who opts for mass Dark Archon and Scouts, I think that the strength of Scourge is too great. BW is a strategy game and is not meant to be Forge Fast Expand every single game. I mean, the fact that my build isn't viable at all and that Forge Fast Expand is optimized for the current meta isn't important because I really just want to play Scout and Dark Archon and nothing anyone will say will change my mind about it. Blizzard, please fix this! I hope that I can piggyback off of avilo's post so that this gets some traction. We've been waiting for a patch to Brood War for 14 years now!
Exactly. Just because something can be done, doesn't mean it needs to be unbeatable in any situation. That's my main issue with this balance complaint: it's sitting around saying, "i've chosen a strong mix of units, why can the enemy build units that beat them?"
Mech absolutely shreds most zerg armies: muta ling vanishes before it, they can't even get close. Hydra Roach get stomped by the extra damage to armored, and they're just too expensive to be able to counter.
Zerg gets pushed into a unit that has no attack on its own, and has to spawn additional units to hopefully fly into the enemy base to wreck their infrastructure.
I could make the same complaint as a Z player. I'm choosing to play Muta Ling every game. Widow mines are horribly imba and make it too difficult for me to attack. They get unlimited mines that they fire out every 29 seconds (free unit, who has ever heard of a mine that doesn't actually get destroyed when it blows itself up??).
But that's part of the game. Zerg should have something that allows them to hold out vs. a mech army.
Edit: removed something that was unnecessarily snarky
On January 15 2017 02:20 ihatevideogames wrote: As a diamond meching terran, I'm not really allowed to talk about 'balance', but damn I got every right to say IT'S NOT FUCKING FUN. Swarm Hosts are so infuriating to deal with I'd rather not play untill they're changed. There's nothing exciting or fun in dealing with swarm hosts. And it's weird too, because there's so many good ways to fix that. Change their price or their speed, or maybe nerf their hp so we can chase them with hellions or banshees etc etc. Things that would still make turtle mech unviable, but would at least make the unit create interesting interactions. CURRENTLY THERE'S NO INTERESTING INTERACTION WITH SWARM HOSTS. Imagine if SHs were light for example. It would create a cat-and-mouse with hellions. Now that's an interesting interaction right there.
Zerg says probably the same about mech (at least i do)!
Swarmhost can't be the core of zergs army, because it has a long attack cooldown and locust dies fast (to aoe damage especially air). For 30-40s zerg has a weaker army (no locusts). In this time period it is difficult to stop any attack.
Locusts clump up and have no air to air attack. 1-2 thors + turrets should be able to kill locusts in the air.
You can play defensive and built up a strong army. If you die before you reach that point, it is not the fault of the game. Humans are clever! They find a weakness in your play and punish you. Play against AI, if you like to turtle and to build up a sim city.
Swarmhost has weaknesses. It is immobile, has a long attack cooldown and no air to air attack. Use them to your advantage: Drop wm, helbat or thor. Thor destroys buildings fast. Snipe expansions or tech buildings with them. Do hellion runbys. Put a widowmine behind zergs mineral line. Banshee harass. Tank pushes are possible, but very difficult to pull off, because the cooldown is not long enough (requires special composition and micro, map position or a multi pronged attack).
On February 03 2017 09:23 Argonauta wrote: The Comunity has spoken. SH are fine. Blizz has listen to us. SH are going to remain unchanged until the end of times.
This thread is sealed.
I don't know if I agree with this entirely, I feel like SH are more like "balanced" against Terran in the sense that they are crap vs. bio so win rates won't be skewed too much in Zerg's favor to point out a unit imbalance, at the moment it seems like both Vipers and Swarm Hosts exist to beat down mech, where a more soft counter approach for the Viper would be ideal, the Host needs a redesign entirely to fit the role that Zerg needs, which is combating massing aerial armies (skytoss imba lol jk..) and not opposing mech which we have a variety of roles for.
Swarm Host
- Remove locust ground attack and movement entirely - Make locust aerial unit only that costs minerals, just like carriers - Make them suck vs easy to micro fast air units and powerful vs. massed up air deathballs - Make Swarm Hosts cost 150/150 and 3 supply, this way they are costly and don't invalidate air units entirely by being easily massed
This way you effectively remove end game Sky army nonsense and you remove the cancer against mech units that is the Host in it's current form, hopefully mass Tempest and mass Carrier is super bad against the Swarm Hosts and nobody builds them therefore nobody builds Hosts therefore we can just remove all of those shitty units from the game in one fell swoop.
On February 03 2017 09:23 Argonauta wrote: The Comunity has spoken. SH are fine. Blizz has listen to us. SH are going to remain unchanged until the end of times.
This thread is sealed.
I don't know if I agree with this entirely, I feel like SH are more like "balanced" against Terran in the sense that they are crap vs. bio so win rates won't be skewed too much in Zerg's favor to point out a unit imbalance, at the moment it seems like both Vipers and Swarm Hosts exist to beat down mech, where a more soft counter approach for the Viper would be ideal, the Host needs a redesign entirely to fit the role that Zerg needs, which is combating massing aerial armies (skytoss imba lol jk..) and not opposing mech which we have a variety of roles for.
Swarm Host
- Remove locust ground attack and movement entirely - Make locust aerial unit only that costs minerals, just like carriers - Make them suck vs easy to micro fast air units and powerful vs. massed up air deathballs - Make Swarm Hosts cost 150/150 and 3 supply, this way they are costly and don't invalidate air units entirely by being easily massed
This way you effectively remove end game Sky army nonsense and you remove the cancer against mech units that is the Host in it's current form, hopefully mass Tempest and mass Carrier is super bad against the Swarm Hosts and nobody builds them therefore nobody builds Hosts therefore we can just remove all of those shitty units from the game in one fell swoop.
You'd remove Sky armies as an option for Terran and Protoss, but Zerg players could still make Mutas and Broodlords. If your version of Swarmhosts were any good, they'd likely make broodlords godlike since it generally takes air to counter them.
On January 10 2017 06:31 SCC-Faust wrote: I disagree that swarmhosts completely nullify mech. I think if you're able to survive the first few swarms and reach critical mass, a mech army becomes very formidable and can trample anything in its way.
They're mostly the bane of anyone who just sits back in their base, trying to build up an unstoppable army. Suddenly you have to have more map presence than a single raven, and have to actually scout and react.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but that seems like a huge restraint on player style. Why would blizzard put in a unit that is anti-fun? What if my idea of fun is sitting in my base and making a big army?
Because if its viable to sit in your base and get an ultimate army in a matchup it pretty much ruins the gameplay and makes it boring to watch
On January 10 2017 08:38 avilo wrote: Gotta love how there's some clueless people in this thread that keep spewing out the "if you turtle SH do this etc"
Swarmhosts FORCE you to sit in base and turtle because you'll take free damage otherwise, and if you push out you get engulfed by free units or mass muta/corruptor etc.
The people right now that know about this strat and imbalance currently will make at least 10 swarmhosts and they have a free money generator the entire game to remax 4-5 times on whatever they want to while you're constantly losing buildings, and gas units, etc. for free every 30 seconds.
Something needs to be addressed with this unit. I'm also pretty sure this is why every korean Terran stopped going mech after the one series of innovation vs dark with the double reactor cheese...people realized if you see mech you just open 2 base muta into mass swarmhost and basically get an auto-win.
TY/Gumiho still play mech most games (TY is 6.9k on KR; gumiho ~6.5kish) and innovation occasionaly does (he has a 7k account on kr) in tvz so it still seems pretty viable at least against zerg
Thanks Scarlett! Great to get the view of a code-S player.
Do people use SH against those players when they mech? Do you?
On January 04 2017 11:08 avilo wrote: All right. This has to be written here on TL by somebody otherwise i can't in good conscience say i did everything in my power to not let SC2 die.
Possibly one of the things that has hurt SC2 the most has been the influence of popular players whining and getting the community to follow them in whining. I can't think of a single day in SC2's entire history where there wasn't some self-entitled person demanding Blizzard change a unit or set of units.
Community has agreed this isnt an issue, please post this on the blizzard forums if you want the game changed. Blizzard do not have any representation on these forums
If you are having issues with Swarmhosts please post some examples of your games where you are losing to them on a persistent basis, a high level player may be able to offer some advice on tactics
On February 03 2017 09:23 Argonauta wrote: The Comunity has spoken. SH are fine. Blizz has listen to us. SH are going to remain unchanged until the end of times.
This thread is sealed.
Where has the community spoken that swarmhosts are fine? The only time swarmhosts seem to be used is vs. mech, so a very niche unit. Zerg has more than enough options already vs. mech so i do not see the point of the current swarmhost. If anything zerg needs help vs late game sky compositions. I don't know if the swarmhost is entirely broken vs. mech but it's at least unnecessary especially since it's only used vs. mech. I don't think the discussion about swarmhost can be sealed.
On February 03 2017 17:10 Topdoller wrote: Community has agreed this isnt an issue, please post this on the blizzard forums if you want the game changed. Blizzard do not have any representation on these forums
If you are having issues with Swarmhosts please post some examples of your games where you are losing to them on a persistent basis, a high level player may be able to offer some advice on tactics
Uh...most of the community that plays mech will tell you the swarmhost is a problem from firsthand experience. They'd equally tell you the raven is but that it's the only counter-measure you have versus swarmhosts.
I mean, does every single mech player need to get together and show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost vs mech for the community to come to agree that it's an issue?
Current swarmhost was put on the same patch as "mech viability" and it absolutely crushes mech and forces the game to a stall. Get 50 ravens or autolose to swarmhosts is not a fun nor really healthy gameplay for people that wanna play mech.
And saying "then don't play mech" is even more unhealthy because Terran should have more strategic options than only bio.
Ive never understood that "sh give free money" part. No they dont? They cant attack by themselfs, so the locust is their attack. The locust dont stay for very long, so the dmg output is limited. Lets say, a locust would deal 50 dmg in their lifespan, then the sh would basicly have an attack worth of 50 dmg, just not as direct damage, its indirect damage, because the sh itself dont attack.
Same goes for the raven. the auto turrect acts just like the locust. Or the carrier. The carrier itself dont attack, but the interceptors do. The difference here is, that the interceptors cost money, but if they arent killed, they last forever, unlike auto turrets or locust.
So where does the sh give you free money? Its just a unit with indirect attack. Its not called mule or something. If your opponent plays sh, try to predict, where he will fly in with locust and disturb him. And the "every 30 seconds" is completely bullshit. To be correct, its 43 seconds. Thats alsmost a 50% increase from "every 30 seconds", but i see what youre trying here. Wanna convince people with numbers more dramatic than they really are.
1) They do not cost enough resources. This means you can get to many Swarm Hosts to early, before the mech player can get enough units to counter the Swarm Hosts.
2) The counterplay against Swarm Hosts is weak. Swarm Hosts are both very mobile, have high hitpoints and are cheap. If they were light you can at least use hellions to chase them down. This would be good for the game since it would encourage aggressive mech - being out on the map with hellions - instead of turtle mech.
If Zerg needs to be compensated for a Swarm Host nerf I suggest nerfing the Raven.
I kind of agree with Avilo on this. I really think Swarm Hosts are just a mistake of a unit. I mean, Z already has lurkers, and ravagers, AND broodlords, AND infestors (with Infested Terran Spam). There are plenty of immobile siege options for zerg as it is, and they're all more interesting than Swarm Hosts. Swarm hosts to not promote interesting or high-level gameplay, and I genuinely believe they should be removed from the game.
The closest analogy the Swarm Host has in Sc2 is the broodlord, which is more expensive in terms of supply, build time, minerals, and gas, AND more immobile and more vulnerable. The Brood Lord clearly has a better cost-benefit tradeoff.
With all that said, I don't think mech would be especially viable with or without the Swarm Host. Mech still needs reliable and consistent anti-air to be workable against zerg, and even then It will be a style that is very map-dependent. That isn't a bad thing, but the idea that the Swarm Host is the only thing standing between Terran and high-level consistent mech viability seems wrong to me.
The only Terran I see going mech at the pro level with any consistency at all is TY, and his builds that transition into mech generally rely on getting damage done with a widow mine drop, a hellbat drop, liberator harass, or early banshees. If he doesn't get -ahead- in the game, then he usually is unable to make mech work against high-level zerg players. Again, if mech is just a style that can only be played based on the outcome of a certain opener, then that is fine and not necessarily bad for the game. But it makes mech seem even more situational, so complaining about the swarm host preventing mech's viability obscures perhaps more deep-set problems with mech, or with slow, siege, control-centered play-styles in general.
Now this is just my opinion from personal anecdotal experience but I feel like rushing the Raven in TvZ is almost a free win against Zergs who open swarmhost. And then you can mech and it is almost unstoppable. It is funny how different players come up with different conclusions, but together we all enjoy the same game.
On February 03 2017 19:34 SCC-Faust wrote: Now this is just my opinion from personal anecdotal experience but I feel like rushing the Raven in TvZ is almost a free win against Zergs who open swarmhost. And then you can mech and it is almost unstoppable. It is funny how different players come up with different conclusions, but together we all enjoy the same game.
Do you use the Raven to turret harass the Zerg mineral line or do you save up energy for pdd? In what way do you use the Raven to defeat Swarm Hosts?
I really doubt massing Ravens would work against a good Swarm Hosts player. And even if it did it is bad gameplay, which is why I think both Swarm Hosts and Ravens should be nerfed.
The last thing this game needs is mass Swarm Hosts vs mass Ravens. Which is why I support making Swarm Hosts light so that aggressive hellion use is the counterplay, instead of turtle mech.
The very idea to have an "anti turtle" unit is stupid by design.
That's not how you prevent turtle : you prevent turtle by giving zerg some late game way to deal with air deathball, meaning that if your economy is much worse than the zerg's and that you rush straight into ravens/BCs, you're gonna die. Having a cheap, fast unit that summons minions for free without commiting is idiotic.
Raven vs swarmhost never was an interesting dynamic, and i'd like for blizz to acknowledge the issue.
It's obvious by now that Activision-Blizzard doesn't want mech to be viable. A mech that's used just as much as bio hurts their marketing presentation of the game, that being koreans microing marines.
It ain't happening, just wait for another RTS to come out and maybe that will have positional gameplay.
On February 03 2017 21:34 ihatevideogames wrote: It's obvious by now that Activision-Blizzard doesn't want mech to be viable. A mech that's used just as much as bio hurts their marketing presentation of the game, that being koreans microing marines.
It ain't happening, just wait for another RTS to come out and maybe that will have positional gameplay.
Don't be paranoid. Blizzard made a real effort to make mech viable with the 3.8 patch. If they just correct a single mistake, the Swarm Hosts price reduction, mech will be viable or at least close to viable in TvZ.
Mech is OP without taking into account the swarmhost ability to get extreme cost effieciency. (which is very much needed).
Try playing vs mech without the SH and you will lose most of the time, unless you get perfect counters in the early game and managaze to run roach hydra viper off 80 drones in the most cost efficienct way possible. In which case you may have a shot.
Which is far harder to pull off then throw down a couple of factories and start pumping the insanely cost efficient cyclone and then tanks later on.
Also @ MockHamill.
Terran needs better anti air you say? You've got Thors, which are insane vs mutas, and you have raven/bc/viking/ghost (potentially). Using mech to secure 4-5 bases and not having to fear at all that you will die anytime soon if swarmhost were nerfed would make it super easy to get up to this unbeatable army composition. Which is exactly what avilo wants. Camp till unbeatable deathball. Terran anti-air is very good.
You all must understand that by saying "mech viable vs Zerg" they mean "mech 100% winrate vs Zerg". Then you will realize that there is no point discussing with them. Problem solved.
On February 03 2017 23:57 hiroshOne wrote: You all must understand that by saying "mech viable vs Zerg" they mean "mech 100% winrate vs Zerg". Then you will realize that there is no point discussing with them. Problem solved.
No. Viable means 45-55% winrate on pro level when a pro player plays against another pro player of similiar skill in a tournament setting. It also mean that the playstyle should be used consistently in that setting, not once every 40 games.
On February 03 2017 23:57 hiroshOne wrote: You all must understand that by saying "mech viable vs Zerg" they mean "mech 100% winrate vs Zerg". Then you will realize that there is no point discussing with them. Problem solved.
I was just thinking... "No point in discussing. Problem solved" and still being in every single thread that is dedicated to mech? I don't know... Apparently either there is a problem with something or someone else, or just talking whithout thinking has become a normal thing.
Why do i have to be repetitive? Why there is no progress in this discussion?
Its a non-issue. Mech is viable. However, mech players advocating the SH nerf are turtle tank based mech players. This specific style is not viable against all builds (at a high level), and blizzard wants it to stay that way. Turtle mech, just like HotS Swarmhost style, is frustrating to play against and makes boring and long games.
Someone mentioned 2 base muta into 20 Swarmhosts on 2 bases. Takes a looooong time. Harass, take 4 bases, whatever, you shouldn't die to this against an even opponent unless you decide to turtle.
On February 04 2017 00:35 Superbanana wrote: Why do i have to be repetitive? Why there is no progress in this discussion?
Its a non-issue. Mech is viable. However, mech players advocating the SH nerf are turtle tank based mech players. This specific style is not viable against all builds (at a high level), and blizzard wants it to stay that way. Turtle mech, just like HotS Swarmhost style, is frustrating to play against and makes boring and long games.
Someone mentioned 2 base muta into 20 Swarmhosts on 2 bases. Takes a looooong time. Harass, take 4 bases, whatever, you shouldn't die to this against an even opponent unless you decide to turtle.
That's just your opinion to be honest.
And no, mech is not viable. Sure, it's 'viable' for me in Diamond vs opponents who have no idea how to deal with it, but that's not a good indicator.
As someone else said, when we see mech used in the proscene as much as bio or at least something more than a cyclone all-in every 50 games, then it's gonna be considered so. Untill then, it remains unviable and the reason why has been so painfully obvious for so long, that's it's almost certain it's not being fixed on purpose.
On February 03 2017 23:57 hiroshOne wrote: You all must understand that by saying "mech viable vs Zerg" they mean "mech 100% winrate vs Zerg". Then you will realize that there is no point discussing with them. Problem solved.
No. Viable means 45-55% winrate on pro level when a pro player plays against another pro player of similiar skill in a tournament setting. It also mean that the playstyle should be used consistently in that setting, not once every 40 games.
TY or Innovation win with mech with that percentage. Just because avilo cant win with mech against zerg, doesnt mean, that mech is unplayable. he has a under50% winquote against protoss and zerg. only his tvt is good, because he does mass ravens every game. if blizz would nerf the auto turret, he maybe wouldnt even be in gm. so avilo is not a good reference, if youre talking about mech play!
How do you convince the actual progamers who play T (byun, innovation, maru, TY, etc. ...) to consistently play mech in tournaments? Switching completely gameplay (from bio to mech) requires a lot of training, and I don't really see a reason to do it, if both styles are fairly balanced (around 50% winrates) and you already play bio successfully.
IMHO is really fine if mech stays as an alternative playstyle which we see once every N games, maybe map dependent, or to catch an opponent off guard, I don't think it's really necessary to be possible to *only* play mech in high level tournaments.
On February 04 2017 00:57 ihatevideogames wrote: And no, mech is not viable. Sure, it's 'viable' for me in Diamond vs opponents who have no idea how to deal with it, but that's not a good indicator.
Sure it's 'viable' for Maru and INnoVation at 7k mmr vs opponents who have no idea how to deal with it, but that's not a good indicator.
On February 03 2017 23:57 hiroshOne wrote: You all must understand that by saying "mech viable vs Zerg" they mean "mech 100% winrate vs Zerg". Then you will realize that there is no point discussing with them. Problem solved.
No. Viable means 45-55% winrate on pro level when a pro player plays against another pro player of similiar skill in a tournament setting. It also mean that the playstyle should be used consistently in that setting, not once every 40 games.
And how well do you think non-pros would do against mech if it were that viable on the professional level?
On February 03 2017 23:57 hiroshOne wrote: You all must understand that by saying "mech viable vs Zerg" they mean "mech 100% winrate vs Zerg". Then you will realize that there is no point discussing with them. Problem solved.
No. Viable means 45-55% winrate on pro level when a pro player plays against another pro player of similiar skill in a tournament setting. It also mean that the playstyle should be used consistently in that setting, not once every 40 games.
And how well do you think non-pros would do against mech if it were that viable on the professional level?
Just as well as they do vs bio - which is viable on the professional level.
On February 03 2017 23:57 hiroshOne wrote: You all must understand that by saying "mech viable vs Zerg" they mean "mech 100% winrate vs Zerg". Then you will realize that there is no point discussing with them. Problem solved.
No. Viable means 45-55% winrate on pro level when a pro player plays against another pro player of similiar skill in a tournament setting. It also mean that the playstyle should be used consistently in that setting, not once every 40 games.
And how well do you think non-pros would do against mech if it were that viable on the professional level?
What kind of question is that? You can apply this to any build/ strat/ composition out there. "If this build is viable at pro level, how well do non-pros do against this build/ strat/ composition?"
On February 03 2017 23:57 hiroshOne wrote: You all must understand that by saying "mech viable vs Zerg" they mean "mech 100% winrate vs Zerg". Then you will realize that there is no point discussing with them. Problem solved.
No. Viable means 45-55% winrate on pro level when a pro player plays against another pro player of similiar skill in a tournament setting. It also mean that the playstyle should be used consistently in that setting, not once every 40 games.
And how well do you think non-pros would do against mech if it were that viable on the professional level?
What kind of question is that? You can apply this to any build/ strat/ composition out there. "If this build is viable at pro level, how well do non-pros do against this build/ strat/ composition?"
Do all compositions and strategies scale at the exact same rate based on player skill? Are there not some strategies that have a significant chunk of their power built into the units rather than micro?
Suppose: Strategy A is weak at a low skill level but extremely good at a high skill level because the units scale extremely well with micro. Strategy B is strong at a low skill level but only decent at a high skill level because the units don't scale amazingly with micro.
If at a professional level, Strategy A = Strategy B, then below the professional level, Strategy B > Strategy A. Depending on the coefficient to the scaling, Strategy B could be insanely strong below the professional level.
On February 03 2017 23:57 hiroshOne wrote: You all must understand that by saying "mech viable vs Zerg" they mean "mech 100% winrate vs Zerg". Then you will realize that there is no point discussing with them. Problem solved.
No. Viable means 45-55% winrate on pro level when a pro player plays against another pro player of similiar skill in a tournament setting. It also mean that the playstyle should be used consistently in that setting, not once every 40 games.
And how well do you think non-pros would do against mech if it were that viable on the professional level?
What kind of question is that? You can apply this to any build/ strat/ composition out there. "If this build is viable at pro level, how well do non-pros do against this build/ strat/ composition?"
Do all compositions and strategies scale at the exact same rate based on player skill? Are there not some strategies that have a significant chunk of their power built into the units rather than micro?
Suppose: Strategy A is weak at a low skill level but extremely good at a high skill level because the units scale extremely well with micro. Strategy B is strong at a low skill level but only decent at a high skill level because the units don't scale amazingly with micro.
If at a professional level, Strategy A = Strategy B, then below the professional level, Strategy B > Strategy A. Depending on the coefficient to the scaling, Strategy B could be insanely strong below the professional level.
I see what you are trying to say, but you are just theorycrafting here. You have no statistics, no numbers, nothing. Just a really simple example: On high level people know how to split. Why are banelings not an issue then? The lower the league the worse the splitting is. Just an example.
On February 03 2017 23:57 hiroshOne wrote: You all must understand that by saying "mech viable vs Zerg" they mean "mech 100% winrate vs Zerg". Then you will realize that there is no point discussing with them. Problem solved.
No. Viable means 45-55% winrate on pro level when a pro player plays against another pro player of similiar skill in a tournament setting. It also mean that the playstyle should be used consistently in that setting, not once every 40 games.
And how well do you think non-pros would do against mech if it were that viable on the professional level?
What kind of question is that? You can apply this to any build/ strat/ composition out there. "If this build is viable at pro level, how well do non-pros do against this build/ strat/ composition?"
Do all compositions and strategies scale at the exact same rate based on player skill? Are there not some strategies that have a significant chunk of their power built into the units rather than micro?
Suppose: Strategy A is weak at a low skill level but extremely good at a high skill level because the units scale extremely well with micro. Strategy B is strong at a low skill level but only decent at a high skill level because the units don't scale amazingly with micro.
If at a professional level, Strategy A = Strategy B, then below the professional level, Strategy B > Strategy A. Depending on the coefficient to the scaling, Strategy B could be insanely strong below the professional level.
I see what you are trying to say, but you are just theorycrafting here. You have no statistics, no numbers, nothing. Just a really simple example: On high level people know how to split. Why are banelings not an issue then? The lower the league the worse the splitting is. Just an example.
It is impossible to have statistics or numbers to back up a general idea like the effects of mech being viable and used regularly at the professional level. You can math out the impact of things like the liberator damage nerf and how it impacts certain unit interactions then guess as to what that means for balance, but how do you even begin to math out something that would likely require massive game play changes? That's not even considering that it is functionally impossible to accurately measure skill.
As for banelings, I'm not sure why you bring them up since they are exactly the sort of thing I'm talking about. Banelings are strong at lower levels because players aren't gods at splitting and focus fire, but weaker at higher level against players who are. Banelings benefit from micro, but not as much as the bio against which it fights. So when Blizzard attempted to make Banelings better against the best players by buffing their health via the upgrade, they made them even stronger against worse players who already struggled against them. If Blizzard had made banelings = bio at the professional level, then they'd have been absolutely unstoppable below that level.
On February 03 2017 09:23 Argonauta wrote: The Comunity has spoken. SH are fine. Blizz has listen to us. SH are going to remain unchanged until the end of times.
This thread is sealed.
I don't know if I agree with this entirely, I feel like SH are more like "balanced" against Terran in the sense that they are crap vs. bio so win rates won't be skewed too much in Zerg's favor to point out a unit imbalance, at the moment it seems like both Vipers and Swarm Hosts exist to beat down mech, where a more soft counter approach for the Viper would be ideal, the Host needs a redesign entirely to fit the role that Zerg needs, which is combating massing aerial armies (skytoss imba lol jk..) and not opposing mech which we have a variety of roles for.
Swarm Host
- Remove locust ground attack and movement entirely - Make locust aerial unit only that costs minerals, just like carriers - Make them suck vs easy to micro fast air units and powerful vs. massed up air deathballs - Make Swarm Hosts cost 150/150 and 3 supply, this way they are costly and don't invalidate air units entirely by being easily massed
This way you effectively remove end game Sky army nonsense and you remove the cancer against mech units that is the Host in it's current form, hopefully mass Tempest and mass Carrier is super bad against the Swarm Hosts and nobody builds them therefore nobody builds Hosts therefore we can just remove all of those shitty units from the game in one fell swoop.
You'd remove Sky armies as an option for Terran and Protoss, but Zerg players could still make Mutas and Broodlords. If your version of Swarmhosts were any good, they'd likely make broodlords godlike since it generally takes air to counter them.
Nerf them all in my opinion, I know it's foolish to say because it will never happen but Mutalisk regeneration was one of the dumbest buffs ever given out, requiring Protoss and Terran alike to have dedicated hard counters to it just added on to a problem that is already so prevalent in this game (hard counters galore).
All aerial units should be toned down or the races who have shitty anti air options needs them buffed, mass Sky armies are just going to kill whatever is even left of this player base if mech becoming the new meta and Swarm Host abuse doesn't do it first.
By the way, Ravens are total bullshit and so is mech, I understand Terrans want for diversity, but the way the balance team has shaped this up, mech is even more cancerous and not fun to play against then before, same thing for mech players going against Swarm Hosts, screw the balance, it's just flat out not fun unless your Avilo and your into mass turtle doom mech.
On February 04 2017 00:57 ihatevideogames wrote: And no, mech is not viable. Sure, it's 'viable' for me in Diamond vs opponents who have no idea how to deal with it, but that's not a good indicator.
Sure it's 'viable' for Maru and INnoVation at 7k mmr vs opponents who have no idea how to deal with it, but that's not a good indicator.
Top of Korean ladder have no idea? How can you say that? Are you saying that the people players that avilo match with have more idea? Are you saying that you have more idea? Top Korean zergs haven't realised that sh is op vs mech, which is why Maru and innovation can win?
I think we kindof have to assume that the top of Korean ladder are the ones that knows best how to play the game, vs any composition. If you want to claim otherwise, I think you need very strong arguments.
On February 03 2017 23:57 hiroshOne wrote: You all must understand that by saying "mech viable vs Zerg" they mean "mech 100% winrate vs Zerg". Then you will realize that there is no point discussing with them. Problem solved.
No. Viable means 45-55% winrate on pro level when a pro player plays against another pro player of similiar skill in a tournament setting. It also mean that the playstyle should be used consistently in that setting, not once every 40 games.
And how well do you think non-pros would do against mech if it were that viable on the professional level?
What kind of question is that? You can apply this to any build/ strat/ composition out there. "If this build is viable at pro level, how well do non-pros do against this build/ strat/ composition?"
Do all compositions and strategies scale at the exact same rate based on player skill? Are there not some strategies that have a significant chunk of their power built into the units rather than micro?
Suppose: Strategy A is weak at a low skill level but extremely good at a high skill level because the units scale extremely well with micro. Strategy B is strong at a low skill level but only decent at a high skill level because the units don't scale amazingly with micro.
If at a professional level, Strategy A = Strategy B, then below the professional level, Strategy B > Strategy A. Depending on the coefficient to the scaling, Strategy B could be insanely strong below the professional level.
I see what you are trying to say, but you are just theorycrafting here. You have no statistics, no numbers, nothing. Just a really simple example: On high level people know how to split. Why are banelings not an issue then? The lower the league the worse the splitting is. Just an example.
It is impossible to have statistics or numbers to back up a general idea like the effects of mech being viable and used regularly at the professional level. You can math out the impact of things like the liberator damage nerf and how it impacts certain unit interactions then guess as to what that means for balance, but how do you even begin to math out something that would likely require massive game play changes? That's not even considering that it is functionally impossible to accurately measure skill.
As for banelings, I'm not sure why you bring them up since they are exactly the sort of thing I'm talking about. Banelings are strong at lower levels because players aren't gods at splitting and focus fire, but weaker at higher level against players who are. Banelings benefit from micro, but not as much as the bio against which it fights. So when Blizzard attempted to make Banelings better against the best players by buffing their health via the upgrade, they made them even stronger against worse players who already struggled against them. If Blizzard had made banelings = bio at the professional level, then they'd have been absolutely unstoppable below that level.
If your thoughts are just ideas then I consider them as your own opinion on this matter. Fine by me. But you haven't answered my question yet.
On February 03 2017 23:57 hiroshOne wrote: You all must understand that by saying "mech viable vs Zerg" they mean "mech 100% winrate vs Zerg". Then you will realize that there is no point discussing with them. Problem solved.
No. Viable means 45-55% winrate on pro level when a pro player plays against another pro player of similiar skill in a tournament setting. It also mean that the playstyle should be used consistently in that setting, not once every 40 games.
And how well do you think non-pros would do against mech if it were that viable on the professional level?
What kind of question is that? You can apply this to any build/ strat/ composition out there. "If this build is viable at pro level, how well do non-pros do against this build/ strat/ composition?"
Do all compositions and strategies scale at the exact same rate based on player skill? Are there not some strategies that have a significant chunk of their power built into the units rather than micro?
Suppose: Strategy A is weak at a low skill level but extremely good at a high skill level because the units scale extremely well with micro. Strategy B is strong at a low skill level but only decent at a high skill level because the units don't scale amazingly with micro.
If at a professional level, Strategy A = Strategy B, then below the professional level, Strategy B > Strategy A. Depending on the coefficient to the scaling, Strategy B could be insanely strong below the professional level.
I see what you are trying to say, but you are just theorycrafting here. You have no statistics, no numbers, nothing. Just a really simple example: On high level people know how to split. Why are banelings not an issue then? The lower the league the worse the splitting is. Just an example.
It is impossible to have statistics or numbers to back up a general idea like the effects of mech being viable and used regularly at the professional level. You can math out the impact of things like the liberator damage nerf and how it impacts certain unit interactions then guess as to what that means for balance, but how do you even begin to math out something that would likely require massive game play changes? That's not even considering that it is functionally impossible to accurately measure skill.
As for banelings, I'm not sure why you bring them up since they are exactly the sort of thing I'm talking about. Banelings are strong at lower levels because players aren't gods at splitting and focus fire, but weaker at higher level against players who are. Banelings benefit from micro, but not as much as the bio against which it fights. So when Blizzard attempted to make Banelings better against the best players by buffing their health via the upgrade, they made them even stronger against worse players who already struggled against them. If Blizzard had made banelings = bio at the professional level, then they'd have been absolutely unstoppable below that level.
If your thoughts are just ideas then I consider them as your own opinion on this matter. Fine by me. But you haven't answered my question yet.
Was that the question about banelings? The unit that was buffed because pros handled then them almost immediately saw it reverted because it was too strong everywhere else?
On February 03 2017 23:57 hiroshOne wrote: You all must understand that by saying "mech viable vs Zerg" they mean "mech 100% winrate vs Zerg". Then you will realize that there is no point discussing with them. Problem solved.
No. Viable means 45-55% winrate on pro level when a pro player plays against another pro player of similiar skill in a tournament setting. It also mean that the playstyle should be used consistently in that setting, not once every 40 games.
And how well do you think non-pros would do against mech if it were that viable on the professional level?
What kind of question is that? You can apply this to any build/ strat/ composition out there. "If this build is viable at pro level, how well do non-pros do against this build/ strat/ composition?"
Do all compositions and strategies scale at the exact same rate based on player skill? Are there not some strategies that have a significant chunk of their power built into the units rather than micro?
Suppose: Strategy A is weak at a low skill level but extremely good at a high skill level because the units scale extremely well with micro. Strategy B is strong at a low skill level but only decent at a high skill level because the units don't scale amazingly with micro.
If at a professional level, Strategy A = Strategy B, then below the professional level, Strategy B > Strategy A. Depending on the coefficient to the scaling, Strategy B could be insanely strong below the professional level.
I see what you are trying to say, but you are just theorycrafting here. You have no statistics, no numbers, nothing. Just a really simple example: On high level people know how to split. Why are banelings not an issue then? The lower the league the worse the splitting is. Just an example.
It is impossible to have statistics or numbers to back up a general idea like the effects of mech being viable and used regularly at the professional level. You can math out the impact of things like the liberator damage nerf and how it impacts certain unit interactions then guess as to what that means for balance, but how do you even begin to math out something that would likely require massive game play changes? That's not even considering that it is functionally impossible to accurately measure skill.
As for banelings, I'm not sure why you bring them up since they are exactly the sort of thing I'm talking about. Banelings are strong at lower levels because players aren't gods at splitting and focus fire, but weaker at higher level against players who are. Banelings benefit from micro, but not as much as the bio against which it fights. So when Blizzard attempted to make Banelings better against the best players by buffing their health via the upgrade, they made them even stronger against worse players who already struggled against them. If Blizzard had made banelings = bio at the professional level, then they'd have been absolutely unstoppable below that level.
If your thoughts are just ideas then I consider them as your own opinion on this matter. Fine by me. But you haven't answered my question yet.
Was that the question about banelings? The unit that was buffed because pros handled then them almost immediately saw it reverted because it was too strong everywhere else?
1. Did you even read my post? There is only one question. 2. The baneling buff has been reverted bcuz it was too strong everywhere else? Where did you get that from? Blizzard does not balance things just becuz the lower casual layer is complaining.
On February 04 2017 00:57 ihatevideogames wrote: And no, mech is not viable. Sure, it's 'viable' for me in Diamond vs opponents who have no idea how to deal with it, but that's not a good indicator.
Sure it's 'viable' for Maru and INnoVation at 7k mmr vs opponents who have no idea how to deal with it, but that's not a good indicator.
Top of Korean ladder have no idea? How can you say that? Are you saying that the people players that avilo match with have more idea? Are you saying that you have more idea? Top Korean zergs haven't realised that sh is op vs mech, which is why Maru and innovation can win?
I think we kindof have to assume that the top of Korean ladder are the ones that knows best how to play the game, vs any composition. If you want to claim otherwise, I think you need very strong arguments.
On February 04 2017 00:57 ihatevideogames wrote: And no, mech is not viable. Sure, it's 'viable' for me in Diamond vs opponents who have no idea how to deal with it, but that's not a good indicator.
Sure it's 'viable' for Maru and INnoVation at 7k mmr vs opponents who have no idea how to deal with it, but that's not a good indicator.
Top of Korean ladder have no idea? How can you say that? Are you saying that the people players that avilo match with have more idea? Are you saying that you have more idea? Top Korean zergs haven't realised that sh is op vs mech, which is why Maru and innovation can win?
I think we kindof have to assume that the top of Korean ladder are the ones that knows best how to play the game, vs any composition. If you want to claim otherwise, I think you need very strong arguments.
He is being sarcastic and mocking ihatevideogames
Oh... Sorry. I can't even tell anymore in this thread. I should probably stop posting.
One thing that has to be taken into account is that mech isn't about mechanics, it's about strategy. Bio gives a terran player the ability to force the opponent into similar mechanical prowesses.
Mech is very different, because it relies much more on positionning, hard counters and composition. That's you'll often see mech build at the pro level look either extremely powerfull, either completely terrible. That's also why some terrans suck playing mech and why some zerg players have no idea how to play against it. But that's also why a very reactive and adaptative zerg player will completely crush mech if it's not viable : because he'll be able to build the right composition, take the right positions against what he's facing, and destroy it.
In that sense, looking too much at what top terrans are doing is kind of silly when talking about mech. Because what i explained also applies to pro players. Overall, what we can see is that mech isn't really played in the pro scene when you look at all the pros, and that's why blizz should look at the SH.
On February 04 2017 22:06 JackONeill wrote: One thing that has to be taken into account is that mech isn't about mechanics, it's about strategy. Bio gives a terran player the ability to force the opponent into similar mechanical prowesses.
Mech is very different, because it relies much more on positionning, hard counters and composition. That's you'll often see mech build at the pro level look either extremely powerfull, either completely terrible. That's also why some terrans suck playing mech and why some zerg players have no idea how to play against it. But that's also why a very reactive and adaptative zerg player will completely crush mech if it's not viable : because he'll be able to build the right composition, take the right positions against what he's facing, and destroy it.
In that sense, looking too much at what top terrans are doing is kind of silly when talking about mech. Because what i explained also applies to pro players. Overall, what we can see is that mech isn't really played in the pro scene when you look at all the pros, and that's why blizz should look at the SH.
SH are also not really played at the pro scene, what's your point?
Do we also need to nerf everything else to make SH a viable playstyle?
On February 04 2017 22:06 JackONeill wrote: One thing that has to be taken into account is that mech isn't about mechanics, it's about strategy. Bio gives a terran player the ability to force the opponent into similar mechanical prowesses.
Mech is very different, because it relies much more on positionning, hard counters and composition. That's you'll often see mech build at the pro level look either extremely powerfull, either completely terrible. That's also why some terrans suck playing mech and why some zerg players have no idea how to play against it. But that's also why a very reactive and adaptative zerg player will completely crush mech if it's not viable : because he'll be able to build the right composition, take the right positions against what he's facing, and destroy it.
In that sense, looking too much at what top terrans are doing is kind of silly when talking about mech. Because what i explained also applies to pro players. Overall, what we can see is that mech isn't really played in the pro scene when you look at all the pros, and that's why blizz should look at the SH.
SH are also not really played at the pro scene, what's your point?
Do we also need to nerf everything else to make SH a viable playstyle?
Thors and Battlecruisers are not really played at the pro scene, what's your point?
Do we also need to nerf everything else to make them a viable playstye?
See how retarded your argument sounds? Mech refers to a playstyle that relies on positioning, not a single unit. When a whole playstyle is shut down because of a single unit, then yes, that unit should be looked into.
On February 04 2017 22:06 JackONeill wrote: One thing that has to be taken into account is that mech isn't about mechanics, it's about strategy. Bio gives a terran player the ability to force the opponent into similar mechanical prowesses.
Mech is very different, because it relies much more on positionning, hard counters and composition. That's you'll often see mech build at the pro level look either extremely powerfull, either completely terrible. That's also why some terrans suck playing mech and why some zerg players have no idea how to play against it. But that's also why a very reactive and adaptative zerg player will completely crush mech if it's not viable : because he'll be able to build the right composition, take the right positions against what he's facing, and destroy it.
In that sense, looking too much at what top terrans are doing is kind of silly when talking about mech. Because what i explained also applies to pro players. Overall, what we can see is that mech isn't really played in the pro scene when you look at all the pros, and that's why blizz should look at the SH.
SH are also not really played at the pro scene, what's your point?
Do we also need to nerf everything else to make SH a viable playstyle?
Thors and Battlecruisers are not really played at the pro scene, what's your point?
Do we also need to nerf everything else to make them a viable playstye?
See how retarded your argument sounds? Mech refers to a playstyle that relies on positioning, not a single unit. When a whole playstyle is shut down because of a single unit, then yes, that unit should be looked into.
Applying that very same logic, why cant a Zerg player play SH against a Bio player. Bio slaughters this unit so hard its not viable. Therefor bio needs to be nerferd to allow Zergs to build SH if we apply your logic to that particular situation. I am sure there are many Zerg players who want to build SH and Lurkers against Terran but cant because they know its an auto lose
The game is all about counters, just because you want to build 2 units all day long and nothing else, why should the game changed because of a few players with limited skillset ?
On February 03 2017 17:10 Topdoller wrote: Community has agreed this isnt an issue, please post this on the blizzard forums if you want the game changed. Blizzard do not have any representation on these forums
If you are having issues with Swarmhosts please post some examples of your games where you are losing to them on a persistent basis, a high level player may be able to offer some advice on tactics
Uh...most of the community that plays mech will tell you the swarmhost is a problem from firsthand experience. They'd equally tell you the raven is but that it's the only counter-measure you have versus swarmhosts.
I mean, does every single mech player need to get together and show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost vs mech for the community to come to agree that it's an issue?
Current swarmhost was put on the same patch as "mech viability" and it absolutely crushes mech and forces the game to a stall. Get 50 ravens or autolose to swarmhosts is not a fun nor really healthy gameplay for people that wanna play mech.
And saying "then don't play mech" is even more unhealthy because Terran should have more strategic options than only bio.
It's crazy how people can demand evidence when you continue to make threads about the same topic for years, right? I mean, let's be real, it can't be YOUR fault that YOUR Mech play isn't working; it's that Mech is just straight up bad. Wouldn't it be great if we could go back in time, when you could wall Python diagonally with Depots and Turrets, have a 3-Turret-thick ring around your main and the 5th base you spend the better half of 30 minutes turtle-crawling to? Man, those were the days.
In other news, in order to make broad generalizations about the viability of a strategy, and then scoff at the thought of producing "some examples of your games where you are losing to them" because you find it laughable that "every single mech player need to get together to show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost," you've essentially proven that you have no intention of proving anything. You took a reasonable request from someone who wanted to find out more about your standpoint, you exaggerated it to the point of hyperbole, phrased it as a rhetorical question, and then without blinking kept spitting the same exact narrative that you've been pushing for 10 pages. Come the fuck on.
It's the blind leading the blind. You're begging the question while simultaneously providing proof by assertion. Onus probandi.
On February 04 2017 22:06 JackONeill wrote: One thing that has to be taken into account is that mech isn't about mechanics, it's about strategy. Bio gives a terran player the ability to force the opponent into similar mechanical prowesses.
Mech is very different, because it relies much more on positionning, hard counters and composition. That's you'll often see mech build at the pro level look either extremely powerfull, either completely terrible. That's also why some terrans suck playing mech and why some zerg players have no idea how to play against it. But that's also why a very reactive and adaptative zerg player will completely crush mech if it's not viable : because he'll be able to build the right composition, take the right positions against what he's facing, and destroy it.
In that sense, looking too much at what top terrans are doing is kind of silly when talking about mech. Because what i explained also applies to pro players. Overall, what we can see is that mech isn't really played in the pro scene when you look at all the pros, and that's why blizz should look at the SH.
SH are also not really played at the pro scene, what's your point?
Do we also need to nerf everything else to make SH a viable playstyle?
Thors and Battlecruisers are not really played at the pro scene, what's your point?
Do we also need to nerf everything else to make them a viable playstye?
See how retarded your argument sounds? Mech refers to a playstyle that relies on positioning, not a single unit. When a whole playstyle is shut down because of a single unit, then yes, that unit should be looked into.
Applying that very same logic, why cant a Zerg player play SH against a Bio player. Bio slaughters this unit so hard its not viable. Therefor bio needs to be nerferd to allow Zergs to build SH if we apply your logic to that particular situation. I am sure there are many Zerg players who want to build SH and Lurkers against Terran but cant because they know its an auto lose
The game is all about counters, just because you want to build 2 units all day long and nothing else, why should the game changed because of a few players with limited skillset ?
Its different because in your Zerg example, Bio is a playstyle that can shut down one unit. I don't think it would be fair for one unit (swarmhost) having the ability to shut down a whole playstyle. There is a reason the Liberator lost its ability to deal bonus damage to light, it opened more possiblities for Zerg to go mutas which were down right impossible had the Liberator kept its bonus damage.
On February 04 2017 22:06 JackONeill wrote: One thing that has to be taken into account is that mech isn't about mechanics, it's about strategy. Bio gives a terran player the ability to force the opponent into similar mechanical prowesses.
Mech is very different, because it relies much more on positionning, hard counters and composition. That's you'll often see mech build at the pro level look either extremely powerfull, either completely terrible. That's also why some terrans suck playing mech and why some zerg players have no idea how to play against it. But that's also why a very reactive and adaptative zerg player will completely crush mech if it's not viable : because he'll be able to build the right composition, take the right positions against what he's facing, and destroy it.
In that sense, looking too much at what top terrans are doing is kind of silly when talking about mech. Because what i explained also applies to pro players. Overall, what we can see is that mech isn't really played in the pro scene when you look at all the pros, and that's why blizz should look at the SH.
SH are also not really played at the pro scene, what's your point?
Do we also need to nerf everything else to make SH a viable playstyle?
Thors and Battlecruisers are not really played at the pro scene, what's your point?
Do we also need to nerf everything else to make them a viable playstye?
See how retarded your argument sounds? Mech refers to a playstyle that relies on positioning, not a single unit. When a whole playstyle is shut down because of a single unit, then yes, that unit should be looked into.
Applying that very same logic, why cant a Zerg player play SH against a Bio player. Bio slaughters this unit so hard its not viable. Therefor bio needs to be nerferd to allow Zergs to build SH if we apply your logic to that particular situation. I am sure there are many Zerg players who want to build SH and Lurkers against Terran but cant because they know its an auto lose
The game is all about counters, just because you want to build 2 units all day long and nothing else, why should the game changed because of a few players with limited skillset ?
Its different because in your Zerg example, Bio is a playstyle that can shut down one unit. I don't think it would be fair for one unit (swarmhost) having the ability to shut down a whole playstyle. There is a reason the Liberator lost its ability to deal bonus damage to light, it opened more possiblities for Zerg to go mutas which were down right impossible had the Liberator kept its bonus damage.
Muta is also just one unit, people still played ling bane before the liberator nerf.
It's just dumb to ask for a unit nerf just because it's strong vs a certain style, especially if that unit is never even played in any other scenario.
A redesign for that unit could be a possibility though.
But I just think people exgagerate a lot about mech not being viable, top Koreans are not gonna play it because it requires playing totally different from playing bio(a style they have been playing for years and is still strong), why would they switch and risk losing money.
And Scarlett says top Koreans do play mech on ladder, and if they can then people over here certainly can do the same, just don't expect the HoTS turtle mech style to work.
On February 03 2017 17:10 Topdoller wrote: Community has agreed this isnt an issue, please post this on the blizzard forums if you want the game changed. Blizzard do not have any representation on these forums
If you are having issues with Swarmhosts please post some examples of your games where you are losing to them on a persistent basis, a high level player may be able to offer some advice on tactics
Uh...most of the community that plays mech will tell you the swarmhost is a problem from firsthand experience. They'd equally tell you the raven is but that it's the only counter-measure you have versus swarmhosts.
I mean, does every single mech player need to get together and show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost vs mech for the community to come to agree that it's an issue?
Current swarmhost was put on the same patch as "mech viability" and it absolutely crushes mech and forces the game to a stall. Get 50 ravens or autolose to swarmhosts is not a fun nor really healthy gameplay for people that wanna play mech.
And saying "then don't play mech" is even more unhealthy because Terran should have more strategic options than only bio.
It's crazy how people can demand evidence when you continue to make threads about the same topic for years, right? I mean, let's be real, it can't be YOUR fault that YOUR Mech play isn't working; it's that Mech is just straight up bad. Wouldn't it be great if we could go back in time, when you could wall Python diagonally with Depots and Turrets, have a 3-Turret-thick ring around your main and the 5th base you spend the better half of 30 minutes turtle-crawling to? Man, those were the days.
In other news, in order to make broad generalizations about the viability of a strategy, and then scoff at the thought of producing "some examples of your games where you are losing to them" because you find it laughable that "every single mech player need to get together to show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost," you've essentially proven that you have no intention of proving anything. You took a reasonable request from someone who wanted to find out more about your standpoint, you exaggerated it to the point of hyperbole, phrased it as a rhetorical question, and then without blinking kept spitting the same exact narrative that you've been pushing for 10 pages. Come the fuck on.
It's the blind leading the blind. You're begging the question while simultaneously providing proof by assertion. Onus probandi.
Do not. Argue. With. The Con Man. He has to make posts like this saying the game is broken to keep getting the money from deluded people he's conned into believing his bullshit.
On February 03 2017 17:10 Topdoller wrote: Community has agreed this isnt an issue, please post this on the blizzard forums if you want the game changed. Blizzard do not have any representation on these forums
If you are having issues with Swarmhosts please post some examples of your games where you are losing to them on a persistent basis, a high level player may be able to offer some advice on tactics
Uh...most of the community that plays mech will tell you the swarmhost is a problem from firsthand experience. They'd equally tell you the raven is but that it's the only counter-measure you have versus swarmhosts.
I mean, does every single mech player need to get together and show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost vs mech for the community to come to agree that it's an issue?
Current swarmhost was put on the same patch as "mech viability" and it absolutely crushes mech and forces the game to a stall. Get 50 ravens or autolose to swarmhosts is not a fun nor really healthy gameplay for people that wanna play mech.
And saying "then don't play mech" is even more unhealthy because Terran should have more strategic options than only bio.
It's crazy how people can demand evidence when you continue to make threads about the same topic for years, right? I mean, let's be real, it can't be YOUR fault that YOUR Mech play isn't working; it's that Mech is just straight up bad. Wouldn't it be great if we could go back in time, when you could wall Python diagonally with Depots and Turrets, have a 3-Turret-thick ring around your main and the 5th base you spend the better half of 30 minutes turtle-crawling to? Man, those were the days.
In other news, in order to make broad generalizations about the viability of a strategy, and then scoff at the thought of producing "some examples of your games where you are losing to them" because you find it laughable that "every single mech player need to get together to show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost," you've essentially proven that you have no intention of proving anything. You took a reasonable request from someone who wanted to find out more about your standpoint, you exaggerated it to the point of hyperbole, phrased it as a rhetorical question, and then without blinking kept spitting the same exact narrative that you've been pushing for 10 pages. Come the fuck on.
It's the blind leading the blind. You're begging the question while simultaneously providing proof by assertion. Onus probandi.
Do not. Argue. With. The Con Man. He has to make posts like this saying the game is broken to keep getting the money from deluded people he's conned into believing his bullshit.
So, where's the proof that SH are not a problem?
Not to start a flame war, but in all seriousness you are doing the exact same thing that you say avilo is doing: neither of you is trying to establish their point by providing solid evidence (e.g. a collection of replays which show imbalance or lack of imbalance on the highest level). It's all theory crafting and rhetoric.
If you just happen to like SHs, that's alright. But keep the rhetoric to yourself. You're just sidetracking the issue.
On February 03 2017 17:10 Topdoller wrote: Community has agreed this isnt an issue, please post this on the blizzard forums if you want the game changed. Blizzard do not have any representation on these forums
If you are having issues with Swarmhosts please post some examples of your games where you are losing to them on a persistent basis, a high level player may be able to offer some advice on tactics
Uh...most of the community that plays mech will tell you the swarmhost is a problem from firsthand experience. They'd equally tell you the raven is but that it's the only counter-measure you have versus swarmhosts.
I mean, does every single mech player need to get together and show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost vs mech for the community to come to agree that it's an issue?
Current swarmhost was put on the same patch as "mech viability" and it absolutely crushes mech and forces the game to a stall. Get 50 ravens or autolose to swarmhosts is not a fun nor really healthy gameplay for people that wanna play mech.
And saying "then don't play mech" is even more unhealthy because Terran should have more strategic options than only bio.
It's crazy how people can demand evidence when you continue to make threads about the same topic for years, right? I mean, let's be real, it can't be YOUR fault that YOUR Mech play isn't working; it's that Mech is just straight up bad. Wouldn't it be great if we could go back in time, when you could wall Python diagonally with Depots and Turrets, have a 3-Turret-thick ring around your main and the 5th base you spend the better half of 30 minutes turtle-crawling to? Man, those were the days.
In other news, in order to make broad generalizations about the viability of a strategy, and then scoff at the thought of producing "some examples of your games where you are losing to them" because you find it laughable that "every single mech player need to get together to show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost," you've essentially proven that you have no intention of proving anything. You took a reasonable request from someone who wanted to find out more about your standpoint, you exaggerated it to the point of hyperbole, phrased it as a rhetorical question, and then without blinking kept spitting the same exact narrative that you've been pushing for 10 pages. Come the fuck on.
It's the blind leading the blind. You're begging the question while simultaneously providing proof by assertion. Onus probandi.
Do not. Argue. With. The Con Man. He has to make posts like this saying the game is broken to keep getting the money from deluded people he's conned into believing his bullshit.
So, where's the proof that SH are not a problem?
Not to start a flame war, but in all seriousness you are doing the exact same thing that you say avilo is doing: neither of you is trying to establish their point by providing solid evidence (e.g. a collection of replays which show imbalance or lack of imbalance on the highest level). It's all theory crafting and rhetoric.
If you just happen to like SHs, that's alright. But keep the rhetoric to yourself. You're just sidetracking the issue.
The onus of proof is on the person making the accusation, in this case the Great Con Man.
And even if it were not, it's pointless because the Great Con Man doesn't listen to reason, he simply tries to talk over people and repeats the lie in order to keep swindling deluded fanboys out of their money rather than actually having to get good at the game.
On February 03 2017 17:10 Topdoller wrote: Community has agreed this isnt an issue, please post this on the blizzard forums if you want the game changed. Blizzard do not have any representation on these forums
If you are having issues with Swarmhosts please post some examples of your games where you are losing to them on a persistent basis, a high level player may be able to offer some advice on tactics
Uh...most of the community that plays mech will tell you the swarmhost is a problem from firsthand experience. They'd equally tell you the raven is but that it's the only counter-measure you have versus swarmhosts.
I mean, does every single mech player need to get together and show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost vs mech for the community to come to agree that it's an issue?
Current swarmhost was put on the same patch as "mech viability" and it absolutely crushes mech and forces the game to a stall. Get 50 ravens or autolose to swarmhosts is not a fun nor really healthy gameplay for people that wanna play mech.
And saying "then don't play mech" is even more unhealthy because Terran should have more strategic options than only bio.
It's crazy how people can demand evidence when you continue to make threads about the same topic for years, right? I mean, let's be real, it can't be YOUR fault that YOUR Mech play isn't working; it's that Mech is just straight up bad. Wouldn't it be great if we could go back in time, when you could wall Python diagonally with Depots and Turrets, have a 3-Turret-thick ring around your main and the 5th base you spend the better half of 30 minutes turtle-crawling to? Man, those were the days.
In other news, in order to make broad generalizations about the viability of a strategy, and then scoff at the thought of producing "some examples of your games where you are losing to them" because you find it laughable that "every single mech player need to get together to show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost," you've essentially proven that you have no intention of proving anything. You took a reasonable request from someone who wanted to find out more about your standpoint, you exaggerated it to the point of hyperbole, phrased it as a rhetorical question, and then without blinking kept spitting the same exact narrative that you've been pushing for 10 pages. Come the fuck on.
It's the blind leading the blind. You're begging the question while simultaneously providing proof by assertion. Onus probandi.
Do not. Argue. With. The Con Man. He has to make posts like this saying the game is broken to keep getting the money from deluded people he's conned into believing his bullshit.
So, where's the proof that SH are not a problem?
Not to start a flame war, but in all seriousness you are doing the exact same thing that you say avilo is doing: neither of you is trying to establish their point by providing solid evidence (e.g. a collection of replays which show imbalance or lack of imbalance on the highest level). It's all theory crafting and rhetoric.
If you just happen to like SHs, that's alright. But keep the rhetoric to yourself. You're just sidetracking the issue.
It's up to avilo to prove they are broken, not to everyone else that they are not broken. I mean... You can't have random masters (or even, gasp, low GM!) players claiming that unit X is broken, and then expect everyone to believe that until someone goes through all the trouble to prove otherwise, according to whatever standard you deem to be necessary. Doesn't make any sense. We would have every unit in the game considered broken in no time. But sure. Let's talk about evidence for SHs not being OP. For me, the most telling piece of information is this:
If SHs were indeed a problem, we'd hear about it from the best players.
We have a code-S player posting in this thread, that is regularly playing the very best terrans in the world on the KR ladder, as well as in tournaments. I'm trusting her posts over a lower level player with known bias towards mech.
If there are indeed several top level players (including non-terrans) saying similar things, then that will be by far your strongest argument for SH being OP, and you should push that. I will reconsider myself at that point. Yes, I will reconsider if there is good evidence for the other side of an argument. But if this observation isn't shared by top players, and all we have is avilo and his followers, then, imo, there is little reason for us to take it seriously. Indeed, maybe you should reconsider your position yourself at that point.
On February 06 2017 00:59 MockHamill wrote: Well it would be interesting hearing from some top 10 Korean Terrans if they think Swarm Hosts are balanced against mech.
If they say it is fine I will change my opinion.
Until then I will trust the experiene of almost every mech Terran player I have talked to about this issue.
So you're fine just discounting Scarlett's experience? She clearly says that it's not uncommon or 'not viable.'
On January 10 2017 06:31 SCC-Faust wrote: I disagree that swarmhosts completely nullify mech. I think if you're able to survive the first few swarms and reach critical mass, a mech army becomes very formidable and can trample anything in its way.
They're mostly the bane of anyone who just sits back in their base, trying to build up an unstoppable army. Suddenly you have to have more map presence than a single raven, and have to actually scout and react.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but that seems like a huge restraint on player style. Why would blizzard put in a unit that is anti-fun? What if my idea of fun is sitting in my base and making a big army?
Because if its viable to sit in your base and get an ultimate army in a matchup it pretty much ruins the gameplay and makes it boring to watch
On January 10 2017 08:38 avilo wrote: Gotta love how there's some clueless people in this thread that keep spewing out the "if you turtle SH do this etc"
Swarmhosts FORCE you to sit in base and turtle because you'll take free damage otherwise, and if you push out you get engulfed by free units or mass muta/corruptor etc.
The people right now that know about this strat and imbalance currently will make at least 10 swarmhosts and they have a free money generator the entire game to remax 4-5 times on whatever they want to while you're constantly losing buildings, and gas units, etc. for free every 30 seconds.
Something needs to be addressed with this unit. I'm also pretty sure this is why every korean Terran stopped going mech after the one series of innovation vs dark with the double reactor cheese...people realized if you see mech you just open 2 base muta into mass swarmhost and basically get an auto-win.
TY/Gumiho still play mech most games (TY is 6.9k on KR; gumiho ~6.5kish) and innovation occasionaly does (he has a 7k account on kr) in tvz so it still seems pretty viable at least against zerg
On February 06 2017 00:59 MockHamill wrote: Well it would be interesting hearing from some top 10 Korean Terrans if they think Swarm Hosts are balanced against mech.
If they say it is fine I will change my opinion.
Until then I will trust the experiene of almost every mech Terran player I have talked to about this issue.
So you're fine just discounting Scarlett's experience? She clearly says that it's not uncommon or 'not viable.'
On January 10 2017 06:31 SCC-Faust wrote: I disagree that swarmhosts completely nullify mech. I think if you're able to survive the first few swarms and reach critical mass, a mech army becomes very formidable and can trample anything in its way.
They're mostly the bane of anyone who just sits back in their base, trying to build up an unstoppable army. Suddenly you have to have more map presence than a single raven, and have to actually scout and react.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but that seems like a huge restraint on player style. Why would blizzard put in a unit that is anti-fun? What if my idea of fun is sitting in my base and making a big army?
Because if its viable to sit in your base and get an ultimate army in a matchup it pretty much ruins the gameplay and makes it boring to watch
On January 10 2017 08:38 avilo wrote: Gotta love how there's some clueless people in this thread that keep spewing out the "if you turtle SH do this etc"
Swarmhosts FORCE you to sit in base and turtle because you'll take free damage otherwise, and if you push out you get engulfed by free units or mass muta/corruptor etc.
The people right now that know about this strat and imbalance currently will make at least 10 swarmhosts and they have a free money generator the entire game to remax 4-5 times on whatever they want to while you're constantly losing buildings, and gas units, etc. for free every 30 seconds.
Something needs to be addressed with this unit. I'm also pretty sure this is why every korean Terran stopped going mech after the one series of innovation vs dark with the double reactor cheese...people realized if you see mech you just open 2 base muta into mass swarmhost and basically get an auto-win.
TY/Gumiho still play mech most games (TY is 6.9k on KR; gumiho ~6.5kish) and innovation occasionaly does (he has a 7k account on kr) in tvz so it still seems pretty viable at least against zerg
Yes I am perfectly fine discounting Scarlett's experience. She is a good player but she is not a top 10 Korean Terran player with extensive knowledge on how to play mech. If Innovation or Maru says Swarm Hosts are balanced against mech I will believe them.
So far almost everyone that says Swarm Hosts are fine are Zerg players. Almost no Terran mech player think Swarm Hosts are balanced.
On February 03 2017 17:10 Topdoller wrote: Community has agreed this isnt an issue, please post this on the blizzard forums if you want the game changed. Blizzard do not have any representation on these forums
If you are having issues with Swarmhosts please post some examples of your games where you are losing to them on a persistent basis, a high level player may be able to offer some advice on tactics
Uh...most of the community that plays mech will tell you the swarmhost is a problem from firsthand experience. They'd equally tell you the raven is but that it's the only counter-measure you have versus swarmhosts.
I mean, does every single mech player need to get together and show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost vs mech for the community to come to agree that it's an issue?
Current swarmhost was put on the same patch as "mech viability" and it absolutely crushes mech and forces the game to a stall. Get 50 ravens or autolose to swarmhosts is not a fun nor really healthy gameplay for people that wanna play mech.
And saying "then don't play mech" is even more unhealthy because Terran should have more strategic options than only bio.
It's crazy how people can demand evidence when you continue to make threads about the same topic for years, right? I mean, let's be real, it can't be YOUR fault that YOUR Mech play isn't working; it's that Mech is just straight up bad. Wouldn't it be great if we could go back in time, when you could wall Python diagonally with Depots and Turrets, have a 3-Turret-thick ring around your main and the 5th base you spend the better half of 30 minutes turtle-crawling to? Man, those were the days.
In other news, in order to make broad generalizations about the viability of a strategy, and then scoff at the thought of producing "some examples of your games where you are losing to them" because you find it laughable that "every single mech player need to get together to show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost," you've essentially proven that you have no intention of proving anything. You took a reasonable request from someone who wanted to find out more about your standpoint, you exaggerated it to the point of hyperbole, phrased it as a rhetorical question, and then without blinking kept spitting the same exact narrative that you've been pushing for 10 pages. Come the fuck on.
It's the blind leading the blind. You're begging the question while simultaneously providing proof by assertion. Onus probandi.
Do not. Argue. With. The Con Man. He has to make posts like this saying the game is broken to keep getting the money from deluded people he's conned into believing his bullshit.
So, where's the proof that SH are not a problem?
Not to start a flame war, but in all seriousness you are doing the exact same thing that you say avilo is doing: neither of you is trying to establish their point by providing solid evidence (e.g. a collection of replays which show imbalance or lack of imbalance on the highest level). It's all theory crafting and rhetoric.
If you just happen to like SHs, that's alright. But keep the rhetoric to yourself. You're just sidetracking the issue.
It's up to avilo to prove they are broken, not to everyone else that they are not broken. I mean... You can't have random masters (or even, gasp, low GM!) players claiming that unit X is broken, and then expect everyone to believe that until someone goes through all the trouble to prove otherwise, according to whatever standard you deem to be necessary. Doesn't make any sense. We would have every unit in the game considered broken in no time. But sure. Let's talk about evidence for SHs not being OP. For me, the most telling piece of information is this:
If SHs were indeed a problem, we'd hear about it from the best players.
We have a code-S player posting in this thread, that is regularly playing the very best terrans in the world on the KR ladder, as well as in tournaments. I'm trusting her posts over a lower level player with known bias towards mech.
If there are indeed several top level players (including non-terrans) saying similar things, then that will be by far your strongest argument for SH being OP, and you should push that. I will reconsider myself at that point. Yes, I will reconsider if there is good evidence for the other side of an argument. But if this observation isn't shared by top players, and all we have is avilo and his followers, then, imo, there is little reason for us to take it seriously. Indeed, maybe you should reconsider your position yourself at that point.
You're actually not providing evidence but instead the conjecture that
Pros don't say SH builds in mech TvZ are problematic, therefore it's not an issue.
This is only a good argument if the meta at the pro level atm includes SH builds (or mech TvZ for that matter). If the meta does not include SH builds, we simply do not know if it's because they have not been discovered or because they're not viable. (Then again, I don't even watch a lot of SC2 anymore, so you can easily prove me wrong on this )
Put this aside for a bit, though. Let's assume that SH builds are not overpowered but balanced vs mech. Do you think it's a good state of play if one (ground) unit trades with a whole set of other (ground) units? I don't think so and it should be discussed.
On February 03 2017 17:10 Topdoller wrote: Community has agreed this isnt an issue, please post this on the blizzard forums if you want the game changed. Blizzard do not have any representation on these forums
If you are having issues with Swarmhosts please post some examples of your games where you are losing to them on a persistent basis, a high level player may be able to offer some advice on tactics
Uh...most of the community that plays mech will tell you the swarmhost is a problem from firsthand experience. They'd equally tell you the raven is but that it's the only counter-measure you have versus swarmhosts.
I mean, does every single mech player need to get together and show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost vs mech for the community to come to agree that it's an issue?
Current swarmhost was put on the same patch as "mech viability" and it absolutely crushes mech and forces the game to a stall. Get 50 ravens or autolose to swarmhosts is not a fun nor really healthy gameplay for people that wanna play mech.
And saying "then don't play mech" is even more unhealthy because Terran should have more strategic options than only bio.
It's crazy how people can demand evidence when you continue to make threads about the same topic for years, right? I mean, let's be real, it can't be YOUR fault that YOUR Mech play isn't working; it's that Mech is just straight up bad. Wouldn't it be great if we could go back in time, when you could wall Python diagonally with Depots and Turrets, have a 3-Turret-thick ring around your main and the 5th base you spend the better half of 30 minutes turtle-crawling to? Man, those were the days.
In other news, in order to make broad generalizations about the viability of a strategy, and then scoff at the thought of producing "some examples of your games where you are losing to them" because you find it laughable that "every single mech player need to get together to show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost," you've essentially proven that you have no intention of proving anything. You took a reasonable request from someone who wanted to find out more about your standpoint, you exaggerated it to the point of hyperbole, phrased it as a rhetorical question, and then without blinking kept spitting the same exact narrative that you've been pushing for 10 pages. Come the fuck on.
It's the blind leading the blind. You're begging the question while simultaneously providing proof by assertion. Onus probandi.
Do not. Argue. With. The Con Man. He has to make posts like this saying the game is broken to keep getting the money from deluded people he's conned into believing his bullshit.
So, where's the proof that SH are not a problem?
Not to start a flame war, but in all seriousness you are doing the exact same thing that you say avilo is doing: neither of you is trying to establish their point by providing solid evidence (e.g. a collection of replays which show imbalance or lack of imbalance on the highest level). It's all theory crafting and rhetoric.
If you just happen to like SHs, that's alright. But keep the rhetoric to yourself. You're just sidetracking the issue.
It's up to avilo to prove they are broken, not to everyone else that they are not broken. I mean... You can't have random masters (or even, gasp, low GM!) players claiming that unit X is broken, and then expect everyone to believe that until someone goes through all the trouble to prove otherwise, according to whatever standard you deem to be necessary. Doesn't make any sense. We would have every unit in the game considered broken in no time. But sure. Let's talk about evidence for SHs not being OP. For me, the most telling piece of information is this:
If SHs were indeed a problem, we'd hear about it from the best players.
We have a code-S player posting in this thread, that is regularly playing the very best terrans in the world on the KR ladder, as well as in tournaments. I'm trusting her posts over a lower level player with known bias towards mech.
If there are indeed several top level players (including non-terrans) saying similar things, then that will be by far your strongest argument for SH being OP, and you should push that. I will reconsider myself at that point. Yes, I will reconsider if there is good evidence for the other side of an argument. But if this observation isn't shared by top players, and all we have is avilo and his followers, then, imo, there is little reason for us to take it seriously. Indeed, maybe you should reconsider your position yourself at that point.
You're actually not providing evidence but instead the conjecture that
Pros don't say SH builds in mech TvZ are problematic, therefore it's not an issue.
This is only a good argument if the meta at the pro level atm includes SH builds (or mech TvZ for that matter). If the meta does not include SH builds, we simply do not know if it's because they have not been discovered or because they're not viable. (Then again, I don't even watch a lot of SC2 anymore, so you can easily prove me wrong on this )
Put this aside for a bit, though. Let's assume that SH builds are not overpowered but balanced vs mech. Do you think it's a good state of play if one (ground) unit trades with a whole set of other (ground) units? I don't think so and it should be discussed.
Are you saying that avilo has discovered that SHs are OP vs mech, but the top zergs inno, TY and Maru play mech against haven't discovered that? I find that very hard to believe.
Let me break it down a bit, i know its, to some extent, theorycrafting, but please discuss. I'll talk about some builds. Those are viable. Turtle mech usually means a tech lab on first factory to get a tank and push with a strong army. This gives up map control and invites zerg to kill you slowly with swarmhosts.
Current terran mech always includes some pressure on early game and has a mobile army mid game. Opening can consist on hellions, hellion banshee, hellion cyclone, hellion banshee cyclone. You can get cloak or blue flame. Basically, you do some pressure with this to transition into a mobile hellbat(hellion) cyclone army that secures map control.
Zerg anwers with roach ravager, otherwise, just die. The zerg can make some lings and pressure too on the early game before the mech ball becomes opressive. A Bane speed timing might be viable too. You don't go swarmhosts here, terran will kill all your stuff while locust is on cooldown. On top of that, terran has map control, so to harass with swarmhosts you really need a nydus and its not free.
At any point this hellbat cyclone (possible banshee, a few harass liberators, a raven) vs roach ravager can swing to one side.
Late game terran can achieve that terrifying hellion cyclone tank thor mech deathball, but zerg has the tools to deal with it. Vipers, broodlords or swarmhosts (hydras can be included mid game). However, its low count swarmhost with a roach ravager ball. more scary that a mass SH transition after both sides lose the army in a big fight is the dreadful muta switch, possible if the terran lost all the thors, but terran can still survive with 3 tech lab factory thor production.
Surely some tweaks can be done once we can figure out if this sort of mech is strong or weak, but the swamhost is not the problem. What is actually not viable vs swarmhosts is sitting back on two bases with some tanks to get a late third while the zerg just chills to infestation pit + nydus. Terran must dispute map control and force zerg to expend precious gas on ravagers (or something else).
So as i said, im pretty sure turtle mech is not viable, but other mech playstyles do not allow zerg to make a critical mass of swarmhosts + nydus unpunished, unless the swarmhosts are just the final blow. Those styles exist, they got buffed recently, try that before claiming mech is not viable.
On February 06 2017 10:18 Superbanana wrote: Let me break it down a bit, i know its, to some extent, theorycrafting, but please discuss. I'll talk about some builds. Those are viable. Turtle mech usually means a tech lab on first factory to get a tank and push with a strong army. This gives up map control and invites zerg to kill you slowly with swarmhosts.
Current terran mech always includes some pressure on early game and has a mobile army mid game. Opening can consist on hellions, hellion banshee, hellion cyclone, hellion banshee cyclone. You can get cloak or blue flame. Basically, you do some pressure with this to transition into a mobile hellbat(hellion) cyclone army that secures map control.
Zerg anwers with roach ravager, otherwise, just die. The zerg can make some lings and pressure too on the early game before the mech ball becomes opressive. A Bane speed timing might be viable too. You don't go swarmhosts here, terran will kill all your stuff while locust is on cooldown. On top of that, terran has map control, so to harass with swarmhosts you really need a nydus and its not free.
At any point this hellbat cyclone (possible banshee, a few harass liberators, a raven) vs roach ravager can swing to one side.
Late game terran can achieve that terrifying hellion cyclone tank thor mech deathball, but zerg has the tools to deal with it. Vipers, broodlords or swarmhosts (hydras can be included mid game). However, its low count swarmhost with a roach ravager ball. more scary that a mass SH transition after both sides lose the army in a big fight is the dreadful muta switch, possible if the terran lost all the thors, but terran can still survive with 3 tech lab factory thor production.
Surely some tweaks can be done once we can figure out if this sort of mech is strong or weak, but the swamhost is not the problem. What is actually not viable vs swarmhosts is sitting back on two bases with some tanks to get a late third while the zerg just chills to infestation pit + nydus. Terran must dispute map control and force zerg to expend precious gas on ravagers (or something else).
So as i said, im pretty sure turtle mech is not viable, but other mech playstyles do not allow zerg to make a critical mass of swarmhosts + nydus unpunished, unless the swarmhosts are just the final blow. Those styles exist, they got buffed recently, try that before claiming mech is not viable.
That's quite wrong. You go from "early mid game with cyclone hellion vs roach ravagers" to "mech deathball versus viper". You completely skipped the mid game here.
Whether it's hellion/banshee or hellion cyclone, at some point the terran player will need tanks to survive and will have to surrender map control. If you don't, zerg player just goes hydras and obliterates hellion/cyclones, hellion/banshees (the "mobile early mech comps").
The moment zerg player gains the map control, he can build few swarm hosts and start harassing. From there, there's two scenarii : - either the terran player turtles up on 3 bases and reaches for a 4rth while trying to defend locust waves ; - either the terran player goes for a very macro style where you basically try to produce a huge amount of tanks/cyclones/hellions, with banshees and/or liberators, while being very agressive economically (basically, you try to overpower the zerg because evey SH is 4 supply and he'll only have a tiny ball of roaches/ravagers/hydra with it)
The problem is that the first option leads to a very boring game, and quite frankly doesn't work against a smart zerg. You'll just fight a 200/200 SH army, with creep all over the map and an insane economy/tech. That's mainly that each SH you build is a potential for an unlimited amount of locusts : you don't have to pay anything to fight, you can just drone up and build static defense to fend off harass. And when you see him try to push out, you'll activate 1/3 of you SH at a time, while you prepare for a huge high tech remax with the money you didn't use on units.
And the issue with the second option is that the SH is so hilariously cheap (less than a viking) that the game often "ends" very early : if you outproduced the zerg and contained him on 3-4 bases, and keep him rebuilding drones and army, while a few SHs try to shoo away your units, you're still gonna take a long time to kill him. Actually i've had some very fun games on cactus valley, where you have a lot of room to run arnoud with mech ground units against SH, but of course most maps don't allow that. Most maps have very little wiggle space and you can't push with all your army in one place with mech vs SHs.
A very, very easy way to solve the SH issue would be to have locusts wave cost 15 min or so, and revert the swoop range to 4. And the SH cost wouldn't even matter anymore. This would prevent zergs from both going SHs, spamm static defense to prevent the mech player from harassing, and in any case have the cash to replenish lost drones. And then, as a mech player, you could try to out macro, out produce and actually deal damage when forcing zerg to pop locusts when he doesn't want to. Also, adding thors to your army would help you push through locust waves, meaning that 200/200 of SHs with mass spine/spores wouldn't be a thing anymore.
On February 06 2017 10:18 Superbanana wrote: Let me break it down a bit, i know its, to some extent, theorycrafting, but please discuss. I'll talk about some builds. Those are viable. Turtle mech usually means a tech lab on first factory to get a tank and push with a strong army. This gives up map control and invites zerg to kill you slowly with swarmhosts.
Current terran mech always includes some pressure on early game and has a mobile army mid game. Opening can consist on hellions, hellion banshee, hellion cyclone, hellion banshee cyclone. You can get cloak or blue flame. Basically, you do some pressure with this to transition into a mobile hellbat(hellion) cyclone army that secures map control.
Zerg anwers with roach ravager, otherwise, just die. The zerg can make some lings and pressure too on the early game before the mech ball becomes opressive. A Bane speed timing might be viable too. You don't go swarmhosts here, terran will kill all your stuff while locust is on cooldown. On top of that, terran has map control, so to harass with swarmhosts you really need a nydus and its not free.
At any point this hellbat cyclone (possible banshee, a few harass liberators, a raven) vs roach ravager can swing to one side.
Late game terran can achieve that terrifying hellion cyclone tank thor mech deathball, but zerg has the tools to deal with it. Vipers, broodlords or swarmhosts (hydras can be included mid game). However, its low count swarmhost with a roach ravager ball. more scary that a mass SH transition after both sides lose the army in a big fight is the dreadful muta switch, possible if the terran lost all the thors, but terran can still survive with 3 tech lab factory thor production.
Surely some tweaks can be done once we can figure out if this sort of mech is strong or weak, but the swamhost is not the problem. What is actually not viable vs swarmhosts is sitting back on two bases with some tanks to get a late third while the zerg just chills to infestation pit + nydus. Terran must dispute map control and force zerg to expend precious gas on ravagers (or something else).
So as i said, im pretty sure turtle mech is not viable, but other mech playstyles do not allow zerg to make a critical mass of swarmhosts + nydus unpunished, unless the swarmhosts are just the final blow. Those styles exist, they got buffed recently, try that before claiming mech is not viable.
That's quite wrong. You go from "early mid game with cyclone hellion vs roach ravagers" to "mech deathball versus viper". You completely skipped the mid game here.
Whether it's hellion/banshee or hellion cyclone, at some point the terran player will need tanks to survive and will have to surrender map control. If you don't, zerg player just goes hydras and obliterates hellion/cyclones, hellion/banshees (the "mobile early mech comps").
The moment zerg player gains the map control, he can build few swarm hosts and start harassing. From there, there's two scenarii : - either the terran player turtles up on 3 bases and reaches for a 4rth while trying to defend locust waves ; - either the terran player goes for a very macro style where you basically try to produce a huge amount of tanks/cyclones/hellions, with banshees and/or liberators, while being very agressive economically (basically, you try to overpower the zerg because evey SH is 4 supply and he'll only have a tiny ball of roaches/ravagers/hydra with it)
The problem is that the first option leads to a very boring game, and quite frankly doesn't work against a smart zerg. You'll just fight a 200/200 SH army, with creep all over the map and an insane economy/tech. That's mainly that each SH you build is a potential for an unlimited amount of locusts : you don't have to pay anything to fight, you can just drone up and build static defense to fend off harass. And when you see him try to push out, you'll activate 1/3 of you SH at a time, while you prepare for a huge high tech remax with the money you didn't use on units.
And the issue with the second option is that the SH is so hilariously cheap (less than a viking) that the game often "ends" very early : if you outproduced the zerg and contained him on 3-4 bases, and keep him rebuilding drones and army, while a few SHs try to shoo away your units, you're still gonna take a long time to kill him. Actually i've had some very fun games on cactus valley, where you have a lot of room to run arnoud with mech ground units against SH, but of course most maps don't allow that. Most maps have very little wiggle space and you can't push with all your army in one place with mech vs SHs.
A very, very easy way to solve the SH issue would be to have locusts wave cost 15 min or so, and revert the swoop range to 4. And the SH cost wouldn't even matter anymore. This would prevent zergs from both going SHs, spamm static defense to prevent the mech player from harassing, and in any case have the cash to replenish lost drones. And then, as a mech player, you could try to out macro, out produce and actually deal damage when forcing zerg to pop locusts when he doesn't want to. Also, adding thors to your army would help you push through locust waves, meaning that 200/200 of SHs with mass spine/spores wouldn't be a thing anymore.
You misunderstood. Obviously, terran transitions to the tank thor hellbat cyclone army gradually during the mid game, while zerg gets hydras before hive. I did not describe each stage, since the post was long and im not even talking about a specific opener or composition. Just showing some options besides turtle mech that are not shut down by swarmhosts by forcing zerg to spend gas in other stuff and not giving zerg the necessary time and map control to harass freely with a good number of SH. The fact you added some tanks doesn't mean you cannot push, in fact, you should.
But you are right when you say that if zerg secures map control, getting some SH is a bit cheap. Also right that the first option usually means a slow death.
Due to the second option, maybe some tweaks are welcome, but its not that bad for terran. Zerg will need locusts to defend since a pre-hive zerg that spent gas and supply on SH will not be able to get a good engage otherwise (unless the terran is careless with tank positioning). This minimizes the damage of locust harass.
I don't know if your proposal is good or if it will convince top zergs to not ever make SH again, they are already rare. It does drastically nerf mass SH while not punishing small numbers too much.
On February 06 2017 10:18 Superbanana wrote: Let me break it down a bit, i know its, to some extent, theorycrafting, but please discuss. I'll talk about some builds. Those are viable. Turtle mech usually means a tech lab on first factory to get a tank and push with a strong army. This gives up map control and invites zerg to kill you slowly with swarmhosts.
Current terran mech always includes some pressure on early game and has a mobile army mid game. Opening can consist on hellions, hellion banshee, hellion cyclone, hellion banshee cyclone. You can get cloak or blue flame. Basically, you do some pressure with this to transition into a mobile hellbat(hellion) cyclone army that secures map control.
Zerg anwers with roach ravager, otherwise, just die. The zerg can make some lings and pressure too on the early game before the mech ball becomes opressive. A Bane speed timing might be viable too. You don't go swarmhosts here, terran will kill all your stuff while locust is on cooldown. On top of that, terran has map control, so to harass with swarmhosts you really need a nydus and its not free.
At any point this hellbat cyclone (possible banshee, a few harass liberators, a raven) vs roach ravager can swing to one side.
Late game terran can achieve that terrifying hellion cyclone tank thor mech deathball, but zerg has the tools to deal with it. Vipers, broodlords or swarmhosts (hydras can be included mid game). However, its low count swarmhost with a roach ravager ball. more scary that a mass SH transition after both sides lose the army in a big fight is the dreadful muta switch, possible if the terran lost all the thors, but terran can still survive with 3 tech lab factory thor production.
Surely some tweaks can be done once we can figure out if this sort of mech is strong or weak, but the swamhost is not the problem. What is actually not viable vs swarmhosts is sitting back on two bases with some tanks to get a late third while the zerg just chills to infestation pit + nydus. Terran must dispute map control and force zerg to expend precious gas on ravagers (or something else).
So as i said, im pretty sure turtle mech is not viable, but other mech playstyles do not allow zerg to make a critical mass of swarmhosts + nydus unpunished, unless the swarmhosts are just the final blow. Those styles exist, they got buffed recently, try that before claiming mech is not viable.
That's quite wrong. You go from "early mid game with cyclone hellion vs roach ravagers" to "mech deathball versus viper". You completely skipped the mid game here.
Whether it's hellion/banshee or hellion cyclone, at some point the terran player will need tanks to survive and will have to surrender map control. If you don't, zerg player just goes hydras and obliterates hellion/cyclones, hellion/banshees (the "mobile early mech comps").
The moment zerg player gains the map control, he can build few swarm hosts and start harassing. From there, there's two scenarii : - either the terran player turtles up on 3 bases and reaches for a 4rth while trying to defend locust waves ; - either the terran player goes for a very macro style where you basically try to produce a huge amount of tanks/cyclones/hellions, with banshees and/or liberators, while being very agressive economically (basically, you try to overpower the zerg because evey SH is 4 supply and he'll only have a tiny ball of roaches/ravagers/hydra with it)
The problem is that the first option leads to a very boring game, and quite frankly doesn't work against a smart zerg. You'll just fight a 200/200 SH army, with creep all over the map and an insane economy/tech. That's mainly that each SH you build is a potential for an unlimited amount of locusts : you don't have to pay anything to fight, you can just drone up and build static defense to fend off harass. And when you see him try to push out, you'll activate 1/3 of you SH at a time, while you prepare for a huge high tech remax with the money you didn't use on units.
And the issue with the second option is that the SH is so hilariously cheap (less than a viking) that the game often "ends" very early : if you outproduced the zerg and contained him on 3-4 bases, and keep him rebuilding drones and army, while a few SHs try to shoo away your units, you're still gonna take a long time to kill him. Actually i've had some very fun games on cactus valley, where you have a lot of room to run arnoud with mech ground units against SH, but of course most maps don't allow that. Most maps have very little wiggle space and you can't push with all your army in one place with mech vs SHs.
A very, very easy way to solve the SH issue would be to have locusts wave cost 15 min or so, and revert the swoop range to 4. And the SH cost wouldn't even matter anymore. This would prevent zergs from both going SHs, spamm static defense to prevent the mech player from harassing, and in any case have the cash to replenish lost drones. And then, as a mech player, you could try to out macro, out produce and actually deal damage when forcing zerg to pop locusts when he doesn't want to. Also, adding thors to your army would help you push through locust waves, meaning that 200/200 of SHs with mass spine/spores wouldn't be a thing anymore.
Haha wow, you are just as delusional as Avilo himself if you actually think that suggestion for the SH is reasonable.
On February 03 2017 17:10 Topdoller wrote: Community has agreed this isnt an issue, please post this on the blizzard forums if you want the game changed. Blizzard do not have any representation on these forums
If you are having issues with Swarmhosts please post some examples of your games where you are losing to them on a persistent basis, a high level player may be able to offer some advice on tactics
Uh...most of the community that plays mech will tell you the swarmhost is a problem from firsthand experience. They'd equally tell you the raven is but that it's the only counter-measure you have versus swarmhosts.
I mean, does every single mech player need to get together and show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost vs mech for the community to come to agree that it's an issue?
Current swarmhost was put on the same patch as "mech viability" and it absolutely crushes mech and forces the game to a stall. Get 50 ravens or autolose to swarmhosts is not a fun nor really healthy gameplay for people that wanna play mech.
And saying "then don't play mech" is even more unhealthy because Terran should have more strategic options than only bio.
It's crazy how people can demand evidence when you continue to make threads about the same topic for years, right? I mean, let's be real, it can't be YOUR fault that YOUR Mech play isn't working; it's that Mech is just straight up bad. Wouldn't it be great if we could go back in time, when you could wall Python diagonally with Depots and Turrets, have a 3-Turret-thick ring around your main and the 5th base you spend the better half of 30 minutes turtle-crawling to? Man, those were the days.
In other news, in order to make broad generalizations about the viability of a strategy, and then scoff at the thought of producing "some examples of your games where you are losing to them" because you find it laughable that "every single mech player need to get together to show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost," you've essentially proven that you have no intention of proving anything. You took a reasonable request from someone who wanted to find out more about your standpoint, you exaggerated it to the point of hyperbole, phrased it as a rhetorical question, and then without blinking kept spitting the same exact narrative that you've been pushing for 10 pages. Come the fuck on.
It's the blind leading the blind. You're begging the question while simultaneously providing proof by assertion. Onus probandi.
Do not. Argue. With. The Con Man. He has to make posts like this saying the game is broken to keep getting the money from deluded people he's conned into believing his bullshit.
So, where's the proof that SH are not a problem?
Not to start a flame war, but in all seriousness you are doing the exact same thing that you say avilo is doing: neither of you is trying to establish their point by providing solid evidence (e.g. a collection of replays which show imbalance or lack of imbalance on the highest level). It's all theory crafting and rhetoric.
If you just happen to like SHs, that's alright. But keep the rhetoric to yourself. You're just sidetracking the issue.
It's up to avilo to prove they are broken, not to everyone else that they are not broken. I mean... You can't have random masters (or even, gasp, low GM!) players claiming that unit X is broken, and then expect everyone to believe that until someone goes through all the trouble to prove otherwise, according to whatever standard you deem to be necessary. Doesn't make any sense. We would have every unit in the game considered broken in no time. But sure. Let's talk about evidence for SHs not being OP. For me, the most telling piece of information is this:
If SHs were indeed a problem, we'd hear about it from the best players.
We have a code-S player posting in this thread, that is regularly playing the very best terrans in the world on the KR ladder, as well as in tournaments. I'm trusting her posts over a lower level player with known bias towards mech.
If there are indeed several top level players (including non-terrans) saying similar things, then that will be by far your strongest argument for SH being OP, and you should push that. I will reconsider myself at that point. Yes, I will reconsider if there is good evidence for the other side of an argument. But if this observation isn't shared by top players, and all we have is avilo and his followers, then, imo, there is little reason for us to take it seriously. Indeed, maybe you should reconsider your position yourself at that point.
You're actually not providing evidence but instead the conjecture that
Pros don't say SH builds in mech TvZ are problematic, therefore it's not an issue.
This is only a good argument if the meta at the pro level atm includes SH builds (or mech TvZ for that matter). If the meta does not include SH builds, we simply do not know if it's because they have not been discovered or because they're not viable. (Then again, I don't even watch a lot of SC2 anymore, so you can easily prove me wrong on this )
Put this aside for a bit, though. Let's assume that SH builds are not overpowered but balanced vs mech. Do you think it's a good state of play if one (ground) unit trades with a whole set of other (ground) units? I don't think so and it should be discussed.
Are you saying that avilo has discovered that SHs are OP vs mech, but the top zergs inno, TY and Maru play mech against haven't discovered that? I find that very hard to believe.
No, I'm just saying that SH builds might not be a stable part of the meta yet. I mean, you have to get to the mid game first before you can transition into mass SH, right? So, you need another composition (Roach + Ravager + Ling) to defend in the early game which lets you transition safely into mass SH.
What I'm saying is that a safe SH transition build like that might not have been mapped out yet (just like Broodlord + Infestor wasn't until late WoL). And therefore you don't see mass SH vs full mech in pro games.
It doesn't preclude however that a Broodlord + Infestor situation might turn up once a build has been figured out (in this case only in TvZ and only vs mech, though) This is what I think Avilo is trying to point out.
On February 03 2017 17:10 Topdoller wrote: Community has agreed this isnt an issue, please post this on the blizzard forums if you want the game changed. Blizzard do not have any representation on these forums
If you are having issues with Swarmhosts please post some examples of your games where you are losing to them on a persistent basis, a high level player may be able to offer some advice on tactics
Uh...most of the community that plays mech will tell you the swarmhost is a problem from firsthand experience. They'd equally tell you the raven is but that it's the only counter-measure you have versus swarmhosts.
I mean, does every single mech player need to get together and show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost vs mech for the community to come to agree that it's an issue?
Current swarmhost was put on the same patch as "mech viability" and it absolutely crushes mech and forces the game to a stall. Get 50 ravens or autolose to swarmhosts is not a fun nor really healthy gameplay for people that wanna play mech.
And saying "then don't play mech" is even more unhealthy because Terran should have more strategic options than only bio.
It's crazy how people can demand evidence when you continue to make threads about the same topic for years, right? I mean, let's be real, it can't be YOUR fault that YOUR Mech play isn't working; it's that Mech is just straight up bad. Wouldn't it be great if we could go back in time, when you could wall Python diagonally with Depots and Turrets, have a 3-Turret-thick ring around your main and the 5th base you spend the better half of 30 minutes turtle-crawling to? Man, those were the days.
In other news, in order to make broad generalizations about the viability of a strategy, and then scoff at the thought of producing "some examples of your games where you are losing to them" because you find it laughable that "every single mech player need to get together to show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost," you've essentially proven that you have no intention of proving anything. You took a reasonable request from someone who wanted to find out more about your standpoint, you exaggerated it to the point of hyperbole, phrased it as a rhetorical question, and then without blinking kept spitting the same exact narrative that you've been pushing for 10 pages. Come the fuck on.
It's the blind leading the blind. You're begging the question while simultaneously providing proof by assertion. Onus probandi.
Do not. Argue. With. The Con Man. He has to make posts like this saying the game is broken to keep getting the money from deluded people he's conned into believing his bullshit.
So, where's the proof that SH are not a problem?
Not to start a flame war, but in all seriousness you are doing the exact same thing that you say avilo is doing: neither of you is trying to establish their point by providing solid evidence (e.g. a collection of replays which show imbalance or lack of imbalance on the highest level). It's all theory crafting and rhetoric.
If you just happen to like SHs, that's alright. But keep the rhetoric to yourself. You're just sidetracking the issue.
It's up to avilo to prove they are broken, not to everyone else that they are not broken. I mean... You can't have random masters (or even, gasp, low GM!) players claiming that unit X is broken, and then expect everyone to believe that until someone goes through all the trouble to prove otherwise, according to whatever standard you deem to be necessary. Doesn't make any sense. We would have every unit in the game considered broken in no time. But sure. Let's talk about evidence for SHs not being OP. For me, the most telling piece of information is this:
If SHs were indeed a problem, we'd hear about it from the best players.
We have a code-S player posting in this thread, that is regularly playing the very best terrans in the world on the KR ladder, as well as in tournaments. I'm trusting her posts over a lower level player with known bias towards mech.
If there are indeed several top level players (including non-terrans) saying similar things, then that will be by far your strongest argument for SH being OP, and you should push that. I will reconsider myself at that point. Yes, I will reconsider if there is good evidence for the other side of an argument. But if this observation isn't shared by top players, and all we have is avilo and his followers, then, imo, there is little reason for us to take it seriously. Indeed, maybe you should reconsider your position yourself at that point.
You're actually not providing evidence but instead the conjecture that
Pros don't say SH builds in mech TvZ are problematic, therefore it's not an issue.
This is only a good argument if the meta at the pro level atm includes SH builds (or mech TvZ for that matter). If the meta does not include SH builds, we simply do not know if it's because they have not been discovered or because they're not viable. (Then again, I don't even watch a lot of SC2 anymore, so you can easily prove me wrong on this )
Put this aside for a bit, though. Let's assume that SH builds are not overpowered but balanced vs mech. Do you think it's a good state of play if one (ground) unit trades with a whole set of other (ground) units? I don't think so and it should be discussed.
Are you saying that avilo has discovered that SHs are OP vs mech, but the top zergs inno, TY and Maru play mech against haven't discovered that? I find that very hard to believe.
No, I'm just saying that SH builds might not be a stable part of the meta yet. I mean, you have to get to the mid game first before you can transition into mass SH, right? So, you need another composition (Roach + Ravager + Ling) to defend in the early game which lets you transition safely into mass SH.
What I'm saying is that a safe SH transition build like that might not have been mapped out yet (just like Broodlord + Infestor wasn't until late WoL). And therefore you don't see mass SH vs full mech in pro games.
It doesn't preclude however that a Broodlord + Infestor situation might turn up once a build has been figured out (in this case only in TvZ and only vs mech, though) This is what I think Avilo is trying to point out.
So you say that the SH meta hasn't stabilized. Then how can you claim that it is broken?
Based on avilos theorycrafting? Despite there not being any signs in top KR ladder?
From what I understand, the Master and GM ZvT meta doesn't include much Swarm Host usage because SH are not powerful against the mech or bio used at that level, in large part because of their inactivity for long periods of time which is bad for engaging with an attacking opponent, and turtle mech is rarely used because most high level players don't find it powerful nor do they find it fun which avoids SH entirely because a a good Zerg player is almost never going to make them in an interactive game. Catz and Snute frequently tried to be creative with SH in the past, but no other players use them much since the first week or two of 3.8. If SH are so powerful against an incredibly small percentage of players utilizing a hyper specific style of play which happens to do poorly when another player counters that style with this fringe unit, then, in my opinion, the responsibility of dealing with the fringe unit (SH) should be with those players. It should be up to them to adapt just like every other player around them is constantly adapting to and evolving the meta every month, week, and day they play, especially if those players are are at the top of the ladder or professionals.
I used to go for my own poorly done 7 Roach rushes exclusively in ZvP because I liked the build, but when I was hard countered by proxy Void Rays I wouldn't complain. I understood that my build was bad and in order to win more ZvP I needed to be more aware of my enemy and more flexible in my own play instead of ranting for months about the silliest proxy Void Ray build ever that countered my own dumb build and demanding without evidence or good reasoning that Void Rays be removed or heavily nerfed. If I did that, people would have called me a madman, dismiss everything I say, and boo me out of every forum and stream I've ever been on, and for good reason.
Mech units are proven to be viable (look at Innovation and Gumiho, among other players as many here have noted). What isn't proven to be viable is this hyper specific, feels bad to play against, mech turtle Terran strategy which the majority of players want to be phased out of the game by weakening Terran mech units or by giving niche counters against them, not made stronger by eliminating threats to this style of play. A game design comparison is Blue Control in Magic: the Gathering, a deck that aims to deny your opponents cards from being played (in a way that forces their opponent to waste resources) until you have a win condition, a similar strategy that turtle mech players in SC2 go for (controlling the map, denying all of the opponent's units from attacking, preventing them from playing the game the intended, interactive way until you have a way to win in the late game), and is a deck archetype that has slowly been phased out of the game. It isn't fun to watch, it isn't fun to play against, and the overall state of MtG has directly improved (been made more fun for players old and new of all skill levels) because of this specific strategy becoming weaker due to less cards fitting into this deck and more ways to play the game which don't fit into this strategy. Players who enjoy that deck archetype go out of their way to invent new but unpopular ways to play their strategy, play in another format (akin to a previous expansion), get better with their deck to stay competitive, and/or sit content having fun with their niche decks and understanding why the state of the game is the way it is and why their deck is niche.
For all of those same reasons, Turtle Terran (and any turtle strategy) should be niche or seen in lower leagues because the players dislike it and it goes against the design of the game. Having a soft counter in Swarm Hosts (which I do believe is a soft counter) is not an imbalance for the game, it seems like an imbalance for you specifically, just like a silly proxy Void Ray build was an affliction to my ZvP winrate, but nobody else sees it as a problem. SH are also effective in the rare games of ZvZ and ZvP in which one player locks themselves into their base with static defense and keeps their army in base instead of attacking or harassing, something that will deter most Zerg strategies except for SH. But, again, from what I know this is a rare occurrence for most players, and lesser Zerg players won't even think to use SH in this situation.
And to the op directly: Your playstyle is fun for you and your fans, but it is not fun for the majority of players nor is it good for the health of the game as a whole for it to be powerful, and Swarm Hosts are one small way of keeping this playstyle in check so the state of the game remains good for everyone from both an in-game player perspective as well as an out-of-game viewer perspective. Hopefully I have made it clear why these things are important to consider when talking about balance and this type of strategy in SC2.
On February 03 2017 17:10 Topdoller wrote: Community has agreed this isnt an issue, please post this on the blizzard forums if you want the game changed. Blizzard do not have any representation on these forums
If you are having issues with Swarmhosts please post some examples of your games where you are losing to them on a persistent basis, a high level player may be able to offer some advice on tactics
Uh...most of the community that plays mech will tell you the swarmhost is a problem from firsthand experience. They'd equally tell you the raven is but that it's the only counter-measure you have versus swarmhosts.
I mean, does every single mech player need to get together and show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost vs mech for the community to come to agree that it's an issue?
Current swarmhost was put on the same patch as "mech viability" and it absolutely crushes mech and forces the game to a stall. Get 50 ravens or autolose to swarmhosts is not a fun nor really healthy gameplay for people that wanna play mech.
And saying "then don't play mech" is even more unhealthy because Terran should have more strategic options than only bio.
It's crazy how people can demand evidence when you continue to make threads about the same topic for years, right? I mean, let's be real, it can't be YOUR fault that YOUR Mech play isn't working; it's that Mech is just straight up bad. Wouldn't it be great if we could go back in time, when you could wall Python diagonally with Depots and Turrets, have a 3-Turret-thick ring around your main and the 5th base you spend the better half of 30 minutes turtle-crawling to? Man, those were the days.
In other news, in order to make broad generalizations about the viability of a strategy, and then scoff at the thought of producing "some examples of your games where you are losing to them" because you find it laughable that "every single mech player need to get together to show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost," you've essentially proven that you have no intention of proving anything. You took a reasonable request from someone who wanted to find out more about your standpoint, you exaggerated it to the point of hyperbole, phrased it as a rhetorical question, and then without blinking kept spitting the same exact narrative that you've been pushing for 10 pages. Come the fuck on.
It's the blind leading the blind. You're begging the question while simultaneously providing proof by assertion. Onus probandi.
Do not. Argue. With. The Con Man. He has to make posts like this saying the game is broken to keep getting the money from deluded people he's conned into believing his bullshit.
So, where's the proof that SH are not a problem?
Not to start a flame war, but in all seriousness you are doing the exact same thing that you say avilo is doing: neither of you is trying to establish their point by providing solid evidence (e.g. a collection of replays which show imbalance or lack of imbalance on the highest level). It's all theory crafting and rhetoric.
If you just happen to like SHs, that's alright. But keep the rhetoric to yourself. You're just sidetracking the issue.
It's up to avilo to prove they are broken, not to everyone else that they are not broken. I mean... You can't have random masters (or even, gasp, low GM!) players claiming that unit X is broken, and then expect everyone to believe that until someone goes through all the trouble to prove otherwise, according to whatever standard you deem to be necessary. Doesn't make any sense. We would have every unit in the game considered broken in no time. But sure. Let's talk about evidence for SHs not being OP. For me, the most telling piece of information is this:
If SHs were indeed a problem, we'd hear about it from the best players.
We have a code-S player posting in this thread, that is regularly playing the very best terrans in the world on the KR ladder, as well as in tournaments. I'm trusting her posts over a lower level player with known bias towards mech.
If there are indeed several top level players (including non-terrans) saying similar things, then that will be by far your strongest argument for SH being OP, and you should push that. I will reconsider myself at that point. Yes, I will reconsider if there is good evidence for the other side of an argument. But if this observation isn't shared by top players, and all we have is avilo and his followers, then, imo, there is little reason for us to take it seriously. Indeed, maybe you should reconsider your position yourself at that point.
You're actually not providing evidence but instead the conjecture that
Pros don't say SH builds in mech TvZ are problematic, therefore it's not an issue.
This is only a good argument if the meta at the pro level atm includes SH builds (or mech TvZ for that matter). If the meta does not include SH builds, we simply do not know if it's because they have not been discovered or because they're not viable. (Then again, I don't even watch a lot of SC2 anymore, so you can easily prove me wrong on this )
Put this aside for a bit, though. Let's assume that SH builds are not overpowered but balanced vs mech. Do you think it's a good state of play if one (ground) unit trades with a whole set of other (ground) units? I don't think so and it should be discussed.
Are you saying that avilo has discovered that SHs are OP vs mech, but the top zergs inno, TY and Maru play mech against haven't discovered that? I find that very hard to believe.
No, I'm just saying that SH builds might not be a stable part of the meta yet. I mean, you have to get to the mid game first before you can transition into mass SH, right? So, you need another composition (Roach + Ravager + Ling) to defend in the early game which lets you transition safely into mass SH.
What I'm saying is that a safe SH transition build like that might not have been mapped out yet (just like Broodlord + Infestor wasn't until late WoL). And therefore you don't see mass SH vs full mech in pro games.
It doesn't preclude however that a Broodlord + Infestor situation might turn up once a build has been figured out (in this case only in TvZ and only vs mech, though) This is what I think Avilo is trying to point out.
So you say that the SH meta hasn't stabilized. Then how can you claim that it is broken?
Based on avilos theorycrafting? Despite there not being any signs in top KR ladder?
Because in the event that a zerg can freely mass SHs against mech and plays on the same level, then one unit beats a whole set of units cost-for-cost (maybe even supply wise). I consider this to be broken. IMO the root of the problem here is bad design, but that's another thread.
It's a fallacy to say that there is no problem with a certain playstyle, because we never see it in pro matches. The same thing happened with Broodlord + Infestor: it took a while until this build stabilized but when it did the whole game was in a downward spiral.
Uh...most of the community that plays mech will tell you the swarmhost is a problem from firsthand experience. They'd equally tell you the raven is but that it's the only counter-measure you have versus swarmhosts.
I mean, does every single mech player need to get together and show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost vs mech for the community to come to agree that it's an issue?
Current swarmhost was put on the same patch as "mech viability" and it absolutely crushes mech and forces the game to a stall. Get 50 ravens or autolose to swarmhosts is not a fun nor really healthy gameplay for people that wanna play mech.
And saying "then don't play mech" is even more unhealthy because Terran should have more strategic options than only bio.
It's crazy how people can demand evidence when you continue to make threads about the same topic for years, right? I mean, let's be real, it can't be YOUR fault that YOUR Mech play isn't working; it's that Mech is just straight up bad. Wouldn't it be great if we could go back in time, when you could wall Python diagonally with Depots and Turrets, have a 3-Turret-thick ring around your main and the 5th base you spend the better half of 30 minutes turtle-crawling to? Man, those were the days.
In other news, in order to make broad generalizations about the viability of a strategy, and then scoff at the thought of producing "some examples of your games where you are losing to them" because you find it laughable that "every single mech player need to get together to show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost," you've essentially proven that you have no intention of proving anything. You took a reasonable request from someone who wanted to find out more about your standpoint, you exaggerated it to the point of hyperbole, phrased it as a rhetorical question, and then without blinking kept spitting the same exact narrative that you've been pushing for 10 pages. Come the fuck on.
It's the blind leading the blind. You're begging the question while simultaneously providing proof by assertion. Onus probandi.
Do not. Argue. With. The Con Man. He has to make posts like this saying the game is broken to keep getting the money from deluded people he's conned into believing his bullshit.
So, where's the proof that SH are not a problem?
Not to start a flame war, but in all seriousness you are doing the exact same thing that you say avilo is doing: neither of you is trying to establish their point by providing solid evidence (e.g. a collection of replays which show imbalance or lack of imbalance on the highest level). It's all theory crafting and rhetoric.
If you just happen to like SHs, that's alright. But keep the rhetoric to yourself. You're just sidetracking the issue.
It's up to avilo to prove they are broken, not to everyone else that they are not broken. I mean... You can't have random masters (or even, gasp, low GM!) players claiming that unit X is broken, and then expect everyone to believe that until someone goes through all the trouble to prove otherwise, according to whatever standard you deem to be necessary. Doesn't make any sense. We would have every unit in the game considered broken in no time. But sure. Let's talk about evidence for SHs not being OP. For me, the most telling piece of information is this:
If SHs were indeed a problem, we'd hear about it from the best players.
We have a code-S player posting in this thread, that is regularly playing the very best terrans in the world on the KR ladder, as well as in tournaments. I'm trusting her posts over a lower level player with known bias towards mech.
If there are indeed several top level players (including non-terrans) saying similar things, then that will be by far your strongest argument for SH being OP, and you should push that. I will reconsider myself at that point. Yes, I will reconsider if there is good evidence for the other side of an argument. But if this observation isn't shared by top players, and all we have is avilo and his followers, then, imo, there is little reason for us to take it seriously. Indeed, maybe you should reconsider your position yourself at that point.
You're actually not providing evidence but instead the conjecture that
Pros don't say SH builds in mech TvZ are problematic, therefore it's not an issue.
This is only a good argument if the meta at the pro level atm includes SH builds (or mech TvZ for that matter). If the meta does not include SH builds, we simply do not know if it's because they have not been discovered or because they're not viable. (Then again, I don't even watch a lot of SC2 anymore, so you can easily prove me wrong on this )
Put this aside for a bit, though. Let's assume that SH builds are not overpowered but balanced vs mech. Do you think it's a good state of play if one (ground) unit trades with a whole set of other (ground) units? I don't think so and it should be discussed.
Are you saying that avilo has discovered that SHs are OP vs mech, but the top zergs inno, TY and Maru play mech against haven't discovered that? I find that very hard to believe.
No, I'm just saying that SH builds might not be a stable part of the meta yet. I mean, you have to get to the mid game first before you can transition into mass SH, right? So, you need another composition (Roach + Ravager + Ling) to defend in the early game which lets you transition safely into mass SH.
What I'm saying is that a safe SH transition build like that might not have been mapped out yet (just like Broodlord + Infestor wasn't until late WoL). And therefore you don't see mass SH vs full mech in pro games.
It doesn't preclude however that a Broodlord + Infestor situation might turn up once a build has been figured out (in this case only in TvZ and only vs mech, though) This is what I think Avilo is trying to point out.
So you say that the SH meta hasn't stabilized. Then how can you claim that it is broken?
Based on avilos theorycrafting? Despite there not being any signs in top KR ladder?
Because in the event that a zerg can freely mass SHs against mech and plays on the same level, then one unit beats a whole set of units cost-for-cost (maybe even supply wise). I consider this to be broken. IMO the root of the problem here is bad design, but that's another thread.
It's a fallacy to say that there is no problem with a certain playstyle, because we never see it in pro matches. The same thing happened with Broodlord + Infestor: it took a while until this build stabilized but when it did the whole game was in a downward spiral.
You're assuming that SH will be the equivalent to BL+Infestor. We don't know just yet if SH can force a stale meta in the TvZ matchup.
Keep in mind, the BL+Infestor wasn't OP. It was just the best composition that zerg can use against everything the terran can use. It wasn't OP, but it did create a very stale and boring meta. However, it was the job of the zerg to get to BL+Infestor, and terran was always tasked with defeating the zerg if they got there.
SH aren't as restrictive. SH's only issue is that it is incredibly effective against mech terran. Otherwise, we can all agree no zerg goes SH if terran is going bio.
On February 05 2017 05:07 Jealous wrote: [quote] It's crazy how people can demand evidence when you continue to make threads about the same topic for years, right? I mean, let's be real, it can't be YOUR fault that YOUR Mech play isn't working; it's that Mech is just straight up bad. Wouldn't it be great if we could go back in time, when you could wall Python diagonally with Depots and Turrets, have a 3-Turret-thick ring around your main and the 5th base you spend the better half of 30 minutes turtle-crawling to? Man, those were the days.
In other news, in order to make broad generalizations about the viability of a strategy, and then scoff at the thought of producing "some examples of your games where you are losing to them" because you find it laughable that "every single mech player need to get together to show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost," you've essentially proven that you have no intention of proving anything. You took a reasonable request from someone who wanted to find out more about your standpoint, you exaggerated it to the point of hyperbole, phrased it as a rhetorical question, and then without blinking kept spitting the same exact narrative that you've been pushing for 10 pages. Come the fuck on.
It's the blind leading the blind. You're begging the question while simultaneously providing proof by assertion. Onus probandi.
Do not. Argue. With. The Con Man. He has to make posts like this saying the game is broken to keep getting the money from deluded people he's conned into believing his bullshit.
So, where's the proof that SH are not a problem?
Not to start a flame war, but in all seriousness you are doing the exact same thing that you say avilo is doing: neither of you is trying to establish their point by providing solid evidence (e.g. a collection of replays which show imbalance or lack of imbalance on the highest level). It's all theory crafting and rhetoric.
If you just happen to like SHs, that's alright. But keep the rhetoric to yourself. You're just sidetracking the issue.
It's up to avilo to prove they are broken, not to everyone else that they are not broken. I mean... You can't have random masters (or even, gasp, low GM!) players claiming that unit X is broken, and then expect everyone to believe that until someone goes through all the trouble to prove otherwise, according to whatever standard you deem to be necessary. Doesn't make any sense. We would have every unit in the game considered broken in no time. But sure. Let's talk about evidence for SHs not being OP. For me, the most telling piece of information is this:
If SHs were indeed a problem, we'd hear about it from the best players.
We have a code-S player posting in this thread, that is regularly playing the very best terrans in the world on the KR ladder, as well as in tournaments. I'm trusting her posts over a lower level player with known bias towards mech.
If there are indeed several top level players (including non-terrans) saying similar things, then that will be by far your strongest argument for SH being OP, and you should push that. I will reconsider myself at that point. Yes, I will reconsider if there is good evidence for the other side of an argument. But if this observation isn't shared by top players, and all we have is avilo and his followers, then, imo, there is little reason for us to take it seriously. Indeed, maybe you should reconsider your position yourself at that point.
You're actually not providing evidence but instead the conjecture that
Pros don't say SH builds in mech TvZ are problematic, therefore it's not an issue.
This is only a good argument if the meta at the pro level atm includes SH builds (or mech TvZ for that matter). If the meta does not include SH builds, we simply do not know if it's because they have not been discovered or because they're not viable. (Then again, I don't even watch a lot of SC2 anymore, so you can easily prove me wrong on this )
Put this aside for a bit, though. Let's assume that SH builds are not overpowered but balanced vs mech. Do you think it's a good state of play if one (ground) unit trades with a whole set of other (ground) units? I don't think so and it should be discussed.
Are you saying that avilo has discovered that SHs are OP vs mech, but the top zergs inno, TY and Maru play mech against haven't discovered that? I find that very hard to believe.
No, I'm just saying that SH builds might not be a stable part of the meta yet. I mean, you have to get to the mid game first before you can transition into mass SH, right? So, you need another composition (Roach + Ravager + Ling) to defend in the early game which lets you transition safely into mass SH.
What I'm saying is that a safe SH transition build like that might not have been mapped out yet (just like Broodlord + Infestor wasn't until late WoL). And therefore you don't see mass SH vs full mech in pro games.
It doesn't preclude however that a Broodlord + Infestor situation might turn up once a build has been figured out (in this case only in TvZ and only vs mech, though) This is what I think Avilo is trying to point out.
So you say that the SH meta hasn't stabilized. Then how can you claim that it is broken?
Based on avilos theorycrafting? Despite there not being any signs in top KR ladder?
Because in the event that a zerg can freely mass SHs against mech and plays on the same level, then one unit beats a whole set of units cost-for-cost (maybe even supply wise). I consider this to be broken. IMO the root of the problem here is bad design, but that's another thread.
It's a fallacy to say that there is no problem with a certain playstyle, because we never see it in pro matches. The same thing happened with Broodlord + Infestor: it took a while until this build stabilized but when it did the whole game was in a downward spiral.
You're assuming that SH will be the equivalent to BL+Infestor. We don't know just yet if SH can force a stale meta in the TvZ matchup.
Keep in mind, the BL+Infestor wasn't OP. It was just the best composition that zerg can use against everything the terran can use. It wasn't OP, but it did create a very stale and boring meta. However, it was the job of the zerg to get to BL+Infestor, and terran was always tasked with defeating the zerg if they got there.
SH aren't as restrictive. SH's only issue is that it is incredibly effective against mech terran. Otherwise, we can all agree no zerg goes SH if terran is going bio.
So BL Infestor was just the best composition Zergs had? Oh there's no doubt that this was the case, but you are saying it like there is nothing more to it. Could you beat BL Inf? Yes, you could, but ending the game before that phase in the game was everyones goal. I wonder why?
On February 05 2017 12:29 showstealer1829 wrote: [quote]
Do not. Argue. With. The Con Man. He has to make posts like this saying the game is broken to keep getting the money from deluded people he's conned into believing his bullshit.
So, where's the proof that SH are not a problem?
Not to start a flame war, but in all seriousness you are doing the exact same thing that you say avilo is doing: neither of you is trying to establish their point by providing solid evidence (e.g. a collection of replays which show imbalance or lack of imbalance on the highest level). It's all theory crafting and rhetoric.
If you just happen to like SHs, that's alright. But keep the rhetoric to yourself. You're just sidetracking the issue.
It's up to avilo to prove they are broken, not to everyone else that they are not broken. I mean... You can't have random masters (or even, gasp, low GM!) players claiming that unit X is broken, and then expect everyone to believe that until someone goes through all the trouble to prove otherwise, according to whatever standard you deem to be necessary. Doesn't make any sense. We would have every unit in the game considered broken in no time. But sure. Let's talk about evidence for SHs not being OP. For me, the most telling piece of information is this:
If SHs were indeed a problem, we'd hear about it from the best players.
We have a code-S player posting in this thread, that is regularly playing the very best terrans in the world on the KR ladder, as well as in tournaments. I'm trusting her posts over a lower level player with known bias towards mech.
If there are indeed several top level players (including non-terrans) saying similar things, then that will be by far your strongest argument for SH being OP, and you should push that. I will reconsider myself at that point. Yes, I will reconsider if there is good evidence for the other side of an argument. But if this observation isn't shared by top players, and all we have is avilo and his followers, then, imo, there is little reason for us to take it seriously. Indeed, maybe you should reconsider your position yourself at that point.
You're actually not providing evidence but instead the conjecture that
Pros don't say SH builds in mech TvZ are problematic, therefore it's not an issue.
This is only a good argument if the meta at the pro level atm includes SH builds (or mech TvZ for that matter). If the meta does not include SH builds, we simply do not know if it's because they have not been discovered or because they're not viable. (Then again, I don't even watch a lot of SC2 anymore, so you can easily prove me wrong on this )
Put this aside for a bit, though. Let's assume that SH builds are not overpowered but balanced vs mech. Do you think it's a good state of play if one (ground) unit trades with a whole set of other (ground) units? I don't think so and it should be discussed.
Are you saying that avilo has discovered that SHs are OP vs mech, but the top zergs inno, TY and Maru play mech against haven't discovered that? I find that very hard to believe.
No, I'm just saying that SH builds might not be a stable part of the meta yet. I mean, you have to get to the mid game first before you can transition into mass SH, right? So, you need another composition (Roach + Ravager + Ling) to defend in the early game which lets you transition safely into mass SH.
What I'm saying is that a safe SH transition build like that might not have been mapped out yet (just like Broodlord + Infestor wasn't until late WoL). And therefore you don't see mass SH vs full mech in pro games.
It doesn't preclude however that a Broodlord + Infestor situation might turn up once a build has been figured out (in this case only in TvZ and only vs mech, though) This is what I think Avilo is trying to point out.
So you say that the SH meta hasn't stabilized. Then how can you claim that it is broken?
Based on avilos theorycrafting? Despite there not being any signs in top KR ladder?
Because in the event that a zerg can freely mass SHs against mech and plays on the same level, then one unit beats a whole set of units cost-for-cost (maybe even supply wise). I consider this to be broken. IMO the root of the problem here is bad design, but that's another thread.
It's a fallacy to say that there is no problem with a certain playstyle, because we never see it in pro matches. The same thing happened with Broodlord + Infestor: it took a while until this build stabilized but when it did the whole game was in a downward spiral.
You're assuming that SH will be the equivalent to BL+Infestor. We don't know just yet if SH can force a stale meta in the TvZ matchup.
Keep in mind, the BL+Infestor wasn't OP. It was just the best composition that zerg can use against everything the terran can use. It wasn't OP, but it did create a very stale and boring meta. However, it was the job of the zerg to get to BL+Infestor, and terran was always tasked with defeating the zerg if they got there.
SH aren't as restrictive. SH's only issue is that it is incredibly effective against mech terran. Otherwise, we can all agree no zerg goes SH if terran is going bio.
So BL Infestor was just the best composition Zergs had? Oh there's no doubt that this was the case, but you are saying it like there is nothing more to it. Could you beat BL Inf? Yes, you could, but ending the game before that phase in the game was everyones goal. I wonder why?
To large degree, because most find it really boring to play endless turtle games.
On February 05 2017 12:29 showstealer1829 wrote: [quote]
Do not. Argue. With. The Con Man. He has to make posts like this saying the game is broken to keep getting the money from deluded people he's conned into believing his bullshit.
So, where's the proof that SH are not a problem?
Not to start a flame war, but in all seriousness you are doing the exact same thing that you say avilo is doing: neither of you is trying to establish their point by providing solid evidence (e.g. a collection of replays which show imbalance or lack of imbalance on the highest level). It's all theory crafting and rhetoric.
If you just happen to like SHs, that's alright. But keep the rhetoric to yourself. You're just sidetracking the issue.
It's up to avilo to prove they are broken, not to everyone else that they are not broken. I mean... You can't have random masters (or even, gasp, low GM!) players claiming that unit X is broken, and then expect everyone to believe that until someone goes through all the trouble to prove otherwise, according to whatever standard you deem to be necessary. Doesn't make any sense. We would have every unit in the game considered broken in no time. But sure. Let's talk about evidence for SHs not being OP. For me, the most telling piece of information is this:
If SHs were indeed a problem, we'd hear about it from the best players.
We have a code-S player posting in this thread, that is regularly playing the very best terrans in the world on the KR ladder, as well as in tournaments. I'm trusting her posts over a lower level player with known bias towards mech.
If there are indeed several top level players (including non-terrans) saying similar things, then that will be by far your strongest argument for SH being OP, and you should push that. I will reconsider myself at that point. Yes, I will reconsider if there is good evidence for the other side of an argument. But if this observation isn't shared by top players, and all we have is avilo and his followers, then, imo, there is little reason for us to take it seriously. Indeed, maybe you should reconsider your position yourself at that point.
You're actually not providing evidence but instead the conjecture that
Pros don't say SH builds in mech TvZ are problematic, therefore it's not an issue.
This is only a good argument if the meta at the pro level atm includes SH builds (or mech TvZ for that matter). If the meta does not include SH builds, we simply do not know if it's because they have not been discovered or because they're not viable. (Then again, I don't even watch a lot of SC2 anymore, so you can easily prove me wrong on this )
Put this aside for a bit, though. Let's assume that SH builds are not overpowered but balanced vs mech. Do you think it's a good state of play if one (ground) unit trades with a whole set of other (ground) units? I don't think so and it should be discussed.
Are you saying that avilo has discovered that SHs are OP vs mech, but the top zergs inno, TY and Maru play mech against haven't discovered that? I find that very hard to believe.
No, I'm just saying that SH builds might not be a stable part of the meta yet. I mean, you have to get to the mid game first before you can transition into mass SH, right? So, you need another composition (Roach + Ravager + Ling) to defend in the early game which lets you transition safely into mass SH.
What I'm saying is that a safe SH transition build like that might not have been mapped out yet (just like Broodlord + Infestor wasn't until late WoL). And therefore you don't see mass SH vs full mech in pro games.
It doesn't preclude however that a Broodlord + Infestor situation might turn up once a build has been figured out (in this case only in TvZ and only vs mech, though) This is what I think Avilo is trying to point out.
So you say that the SH meta hasn't stabilized. Then how can you claim that it is broken?
Based on avilos theorycrafting? Despite there not being any signs in top KR ladder?
Because in the event that a zerg can freely mass SHs against mech and plays on the same level, then one unit beats a whole set of units cost-for-cost (maybe even supply wise). I consider this to be broken. IMO the root of the problem here is bad design, but that's another thread.
It's a fallacy to say that there is no problem with a certain playstyle, because we never see it in pro matches. The same thing happened with Broodlord + Infestor: it took a while until this build stabilized but when it did the whole game was in a downward spiral.
You're assuming that SH will be the equivalent to BL+Infestor. We don't know just yet if SH can force a stale meta in the TvZ matchup.
Keep in mind, the BL+Infestor wasn't OP. It was just the best composition that zerg can use against everything the terran can use. It wasn't OP, but it did create a very stale and boring meta. However, it was the job of the zerg to get to BL+Infestor, and terran was always tasked with defeating the zerg if they got there.
SH aren't as restrictive. SH's only issue is that it is incredibly effective against mech terran. Otherwise, we can all agree no zerg goes SH if terran is going bio.
So BL Infestor was just the best composition Zergs had? Oh there's no doubt that this was the case, but you are saying it like there is nothing more to it. Could you beat BL Inf? Yes, you could, but ending the game before that phase in the game was everyones goal. I wonder why?
I'm not approving or saying it was fun or right or good. The BL Infestor was a giant sore in the meta. It created horribly stale games that were predictable to some degree.
However, my comment was direct to Turb0Sw4g. He suggested that the SH will create a similar situation to the BL infestor. I posited that would likely not happen. BL infestor was the best composition for Zerg. No one will argue it, and that's why the meta became stale.
SH is not a unit used in a 'best composition' scenario. In fact, SH will likely become the 'niche' unit used in only a handful of scenarios. SH will not create a stale meta, because it is not a great option if the terran goes bio.
With that being said, I am not against testing changes to the SH, IF, it proves to be warranted. Unfortunately, we don't have enough pro games to make that judgment.
Sure we have a lot of anecdotal evidence that suggests the SH needs to be nerfed, but the source of evidence still requires something more concrete.
As I said before, the problem is that zerg has no other viable option against a mech terran. The SH is the only unit that can put a dent in the fortification of a mech terran.
As I said before, the problem is that zerg has no other viable option against a mech terran. The SH is the only unit that can put a dent in the fortification of a mech terran.
I don't think that's true. Zerg has so many options that are really strong vs mech.
Just to name some :
- Viper counter's literally every mech unit, except for widow mines. - Invincible nydus is very powerful to punish slow mech units. We even saw them back in hots, when they could get denied by a worker pull as a part of an anit-mech strategy. - 7 armor ultralisks are very powerful vs. ground based mech compositions, especially in combination with blinding clouds. - Zerg has much higher mobility than mech and can easily punish a mech player that's out of position.
There are a lot of very strong unit compositions for zerg combined with vipers.
On February 03 2017 17:10 Topdoller wrote: Community has agreed this isnt an issue, please post this on the blizzard forums if you want the game changed. Blizzard do not have any representation on these forums
If you are having issues with Swarmhosts please post some examples of your games where you are losing to them on a persistent basis, a high level player may be able to offer some advice on tactics
Uh...most of the community that plays mech will tell you the swarmhost is a problem from firsthand experience. They'd equally tell you the raven is but that it's the only counter-measure you have versus swarmhosts.
I mean, does every single mech player need to get together and show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost vs mech for the community to come to agree that it's an issue?
Current swarmhost was put on the same patch as "mech viability" and it absolutely crushes mech and forces the game to a stall. Get 50 ravens or autolose to swarmhosts is not a fun nor really healthy gameplay for people that wanna play mech.
And saying "then don't play mech" is even more unhealthy because Terran should have more strategic options than only bio.
It's crazy how people can demand evidence when you continue to make threads about the same topic for years, right? I mean, let's be real, it can't be YOUR fault that YOUR Mech play isn't working; it's that Mech is just straight up bad. Wouldn't it be great if we could go back in time, when you could wall Python diagonally with Depots and Turrets, have a 3-Turret-thick ring around your main and the 5th base you spend the better half of 30 minutes turtle-crawling to? Man, those were the days.
In other news, in order to make broad generalizations about the viability of a strategy, and then scoff at the thought of producing "some examples of your games where you are losing to them" because you find it laughable that "every single mech player need to get together to show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost," you've essentially proven that you have no intention of proving anything. You took a reasonable request from someone who wanted to find out more about your standpoint, you exaggerated it to the point of hyperbole, phrased it as a rhetorical question, and then without blinking kept spitting the same exact narrative that you've been pushing for 10 pages. Come the fuck on.
It's the blind leading the blind. You're begging the question while simultaneously providing proof by assertion. Onus probandi.
Do not. Argue. With. The Con Man. He has to make posts like this saying the game is broken to keep getting the money from deluded people he's conned into believing his bullshit.
So, where's the proof that SH are not a problem?
Not to start a flame war, but in all seriousness you are doing the exact same thing that you say avilo is doing: neither of you is trying to establish their point by providing solid evidence (e.g. a collection of replays which show imbalance or lack of imbalance on the highest level). It's all theory crafting and rhetoric.
If you just happen to like SHs, that's alright. But keep the rhetoric to yourself. You're just sidetracking the issue.
It's up to avilo to prove they are broken, not to everyone else that they are not broken. I mean... You can't have random masters (or even, gasp, low GM!) players claiming that unit X is broken, and then expect everyone to believe that until someone goes through all the trouble to prove otherwise, according to whatever standard you deem to be necessary. Doesn't make any sense. We would have every unit in the game considered broken in no time. But sure. Let's talk about evidence for SHs not being OP. For me, the most telling piece of information is this:
If SHs were indeed a problem, we'd hear about it from the best players.
We have a code-S player posting in this thread, that is regularly playing the very best terrans in the world on the KR ladder, as well as in tournaments. I'm trusting her posts over a lower level player with known bias towards mech.
If there are indeed several top level players (including non-terrans) saying similar things, then that will be by far your strongest argument for SH being OP, and you should push that. I will reconsider myself at that point. Yes, I will reconsider if there is good evidence for the other side of an argument. But if this observation isn't shared by top players, and all we have is avilo and his followers, then, imo, there is little reason for us to take it seriously. Indeed, maybe you should reconsider your position yourself at that point.
You don't hear top players talking about it, because the top player know mech is still inferior versus Zerg. Swarmhost are not OP if you play Bio; which 95% continue to do. Why would a pro waste his/her time explaining obvious problems with a unit that nullifies an entire mech when they don't play mech? It's a moot point because it doesn't apply to their playstyle. Unless the Terran goes immediately into sky Terran, ground mech is broken versus swarmhosts.
I'm low gm/ high masters and I played a Zerg the other day who lost two of his 4 bases and was on the verge of losing the game. He was essentially mining out his main and expansion for the remaining part of the game. He made 30, NO IM NOT KIDDING, 30 swarm hosts and kept sending a never-ending wave of locust and pushed me across the map while he re-expanded and won the game. Remember, 30 swarmhosts would only cost 2.2k gas is essentially nothing in the meta game. Any other unit, muta, hydra, roach, broodlord, infestor etc he would have lost with my army supply. Is that fair? Please tell me what beats this aside from making the vastly more expensive unit, the Raven, which costs 125 gas more. I'm all ears. And don't say "don't let them get there" because this is a tier two unit which essentially costs as much as a marauder.
On February 03 2017 17:10 Topdoller wrote: Community has agreed this isnt an issue, please post this on the blizzard forums if you want the game changed. Blizzard do not have any representation on these forums
If you are having issues with Swarmhosts please post some examples of your games where you are losing to them on a persistent basis, a high level player may be able to offer some advice on tactics
Uh...most of the community that plays mech will tell you the swarmhost is a problem from firsthand experience. They'd equally tell you the raven is but that it's the only counter-measure you have versus swarmhosts.
I mean, does every single mech player need to get together and show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost vs mech for the community to come to agree that it's an issue?
Current swarmhost was put on the same patch as "mech viability" and it absolutely crushes mech and forces the game to a stall. Get 50 ravens or autolose to swarmhosts is not a fun nor really healthy gameplay for people that wanna play mech.
And saying "then don't play mech" is even more unhealthy because Terran should have more strategic options than only bio.
It's crazy how people can demand evidence when you continue to make threads about the same topic for years, right? I mean, let's be real, it can't be YOUR fault that YOUR Mech play isn't working; it's that Mech is just straight up bad. Wouldn't it be great if we could go back in time, when you could wall Python diagonally with Depots and Turrets, have a 3-Turret-thick ring around your main and the 5th base you spend the better half of 30 minutes turtle-crawling to? Man, those were the days.
In other news, in order to make broad generalizations about the viability of a strategy, and then scoff at the thought of producing "some examples of your games where you are losing to them" because you find it laughable that "every single mech player need to get together to show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost," you've essentially proven that you have no intention of proving anything. You took a reasonable request from someone who wanted to find out more about your standpoint, you exaggerated it to the point of hyperbole, phrased it as a rhetorical question, and then without blinking kept spitting the same exact narrative that you've been pushing for 10 pages. Come the fuck on.
It's the blind leading the blind. You're begging the question while simultaneously providing proof by assertion. Onus probandi.
Do not. Argue. With. The Con Man. He has to make posts like this saying the game is broken to keep getting the money from deluded people he's conned into believing his bullshit.
So, where's the proof that SH are not a problem?
Not to start a flame war, but in all seriousness you are doing the exact same thing that you say avilo is doing: neither of you is trying to establish their point by providing solid evidence (e.g. a collection of replays which show imbalance or lack of imbalance on the highest level). It's all theory crafting and rhetoric.
If you just happen to like SHs, that's alright. But keep the rhetoric to yourself. You're just sidetracking the issue.
It's up to avilo to prove they are broken, not to everyone else that they are not broken. I mean... You can't have random masters (or even, gasp, low GM!) players claiming that unit X is broken, and then expect everyone to believe that until someone goes through all the trouble to prove otherwise, according to whatever standard you deem to be necessary. Doesn't make any sense. We would have every unit in the game considered broken in no time. But sure. Let's talk about evidence for SHs not being OP. For me, the most telling piece of information is this:
If SHs were indeed a problem, we'd hear about it from the best players.
We have a code-S player posting in this thread, that is regularly playing the very best terrans in the world on the KR ladder, as well as in tournaments. I'm trusting her posts over a lower level player with known bias towards mech.
If there are indeed several top level players (including non-terrans) saying similar things, then that will be by far your strongest argument for SH being OP, and you should push that. I will reconsider myself at that point. Yes, I will reconsider if there is good evidence for the other side of an argument. But if this observation isn't shared by top players, and all we have is avilo and his followers, then, imo, there is little reason for us to take it seriously. Indeed, maybe you should reconsider your position yourself at that point.
You don't hear top players talking about it, because the top player know mech is still inferior versus Zerg. Swarmhost are not OP if you play Bio; which 95% continue to do. Why would a pro waste his/her time explaining obvious problems with a unit that nullifies an entire mech when they don't play mech? It's a moot point because it doesn't apply to their playstyle. Unless the Terran goes immediately into sky Terran, ground mech is broken versus swarmhosts.
I'm low gm/ high masters and I played a Zerg the other day who lost two of his 4 bases and was on the verge of losing the game. He was essentially mining out his main and expansion for the remaining part of the game. He made 30, NO IM NOT KIDDING, 30 swarm hosts and kept sending a never-ending wave of locust and pushed me across the map while he re-expanded and won the game. Remember, 30 swarmhosts would only cost 2.2k gas is essentially nothing in the meta game. Any other unit, muta, hydra, roach, broodlord, infestor etc he would have lost with my army supply. Is that fair?
Well, it sounds to me like the Zerg player was capable of winning with anything and it just so happened to be Swarm Hosts instead of Roaches or Hydralisks or another type of army. "He was mining from his and expansion for the rest of the game. ... Except when he re-expanded and won" sounds like you're just upset at losing that match and feel justified about your feelings towards Zerg because there's a thread complaining about SH. If you upload the replay for people to watch, I'm sure it'd help a lot more than just saying you don't like a game you lost that supposedly should have won.
If SHs were indeed a problem, we'd hear about it from the best players.
We have a code-S player posting in this thread, that is regularly playing the very best terrans in the world on the KR ladder, as well as in tournaments. I'm trusting her posts over a lower level player with known bias towards mech.
^ I mean, while I do think that Swarm Hosts are really good against mech, this is kind of a compelling argument, and to the person above me, not all play styles are equally viable and trying to make them so is just not feasible. Roach Hydra used to be doable vs. Terran but they learned how to out bio it until it's doable (debatable I admit but it USED to be doable) but just not viable vs bio compared to mech, but if Roach/Hydra was further buffed to be completely viable like LBM is, ZvP would be broken, not sure how the same principle doesn't apply to mech. Bio kinda sucked in BW where mech was the more the standard of play, in my opinion it's just the same thing but reversed for SC2.
I still think Swarm Hosts would better serve the Overmind if they were turned into an anti mass sky army unit that could effectively take down Skyterran/Skytoss, not in an OP fashion, just one that a massing sky army player might actually have to fear.
I also have to ask, does anyone here besides a handful of Terran players actually WANT mech to be viable? Mech sucks to watch and play against, I'm fine with tanks being buffed or redesigned into working better with bio but tank turtle mech into Ravens is just trash.
On February 05 2017 21:31 Turb0Sw4g wrote: [quote]
So, where's the proof that SH are not a problem?
Not to start a flame war, but in all seriousness you are doing the exact same thing that you say avilo is doing: neither of you is trying to establish their point by providing solid evidence (e.g. a collection of replays which show imbalance or lack of imbalance on the highest level). It's all theory crafting and rhetoric.
If you just happen to like SHs, that's alright. But keep the rhetoric to yourself. You're just sidetracking the issue.
It's up to avilo to prove they are broken, not to everyone else that they are not broken. I mean... You can't have random masters (or even, gasp, low GM!) players claiming that unit X is broken, and then expect everyone to believe that until someone goes through all the trouble to prove otherwise, according to whatever standard you deem to be necessary. Doesn't make any sense. We would have every unit in the game considered broken in no time. But sure. Let's talk about evidence for SHs not being OP. For me, the most telling piece of information is this:
If SHs were indeed a problem, we'd hear about it from the best players.
We have a code-S player posting in this thread, that is regularly playing the very best terrans in the world on the KR ladder, as well as in tournaments. I'm trusting her posts over a lower level player with known bias towards mech.
If there are indeed several top level players (including non-terrans) saying similar things, then that will be by far your strongest argument for SH being OP, and you should push that. I will reconsider myself at that point. Yes, I will reconsider if there is good evidence for the other side of an argument. But if this observation isn't shared by top players, and all we have is avilo and his followers, then, imo, there is little reason for us to take it seriously. Indeed, maybe you should reconsider your position yourself at that point.
You're actually not providing evidence but instead the conjecture that
Pros don't say SH builds in mech TvZ are problematic, therefore it's not an issue.
This is only a good argument if the meta at the pro level atm includes SH builds (or mech TvZ for that matter). If the meta does not include SH builds, we simply do not know if it's because they have not been discovered or because they're not viable. (Then again, I don't even watch a lot of SC2 anymore, so you can easily prove me wrong on this )
Put this aside for a bit, though. Let's assume that SH builds are not overpowered but balanced vs mech. Do you think it's a good state of play if one (ground) unit trades with a whole set of other (ground) units? I don't think so and it should be discussed.
Are you saying that avilo has discovered that SHs are OP vs mech, but the top zergs inno, TY and Maru play mech against haven't discovered that? I find that very hard to believe.
No, I'm just saying that SH builds might not be a stable part of the meta yet. I mean, you have to get to the mid game first before you can transition into mass SH, right? So, you need another composition (Roach + Ravager + Ling) to defend in the early game which lets you transition safely into mass SH.
What I'm saying is that a safe SH transition build like that might not have been mapped out yet (just like Broodlord + Infestor wasn't until late WoL). And therefore you don't see mass SH vs full mech in pro games.
It doesn't preclude however that a Broodlord + Infestor situation might turn up once a build has been figured out (in this case only in TvZ and only vs mech, though) This is what I think Avilo is trying to point out.
So you say that the SH meta hasn't stabilized. Then how can you claim that it is broken?
Based on avilos theorycrafting? Despite there not being any signs in top KR ladder?
Because in the event that a zerg can freely mass SHs against mech and plays on the same level, then one unit beats a whole set of units cost-for-cost (maybe even supply wise). I consider this to be broken. IMO the root of the problem here is bad design, but that's another thread.
It's a fallacy to say that there is no problem with a certain playstyle, because we never see it in pro matches. The same thing happened with Broodlord + Infestor: it took a while until this build stabilized but when it did the whole game was in a downward spiral.
You're assuming that SH will be the equivalent to BL+Infestor. We don't know just yet if SH can force a stale meta in the TvZ matchup.
Keep in mind, the BL+Infestor wasn't OP. It was just the best composition that zerg can use against everything the terran can use. It wasn't OP, but it did create a very stale and boring meta. However, it was the job of the zerg to get to BL+Infestor, and terran was always tasked with defeating the zerg if they got there.
SH aren't as restrictive. SH's only issue is that it is incredibly effective against mech terran. Otherwise, we can all agree no zerg goes SH if terran is going bio.
So BL Infestor was just the best composition Zergs had? Oh there's no doubt that this was the case, but you are saying it like there is nothing more to it. Could you beat BL Inf? Yes, you could, but ending the game before that phase in the game was everyones goal. I wonder why?
However, my comment was direct to Turb0Sw4g. He suggested that the SH will create a similar situation to the BL infestor. I posited that would likely not happen. BL infestor was the best composition for Zerg. No one will argue it, and that's why the meta became stale.
SH is not a unit used in a 'best composition' scenario. In fact, SH will likely become the 'niche' unit used in only a handful of scenarios. SH will not create a stale meta, because it is not a great option if the terran goes bio.
I agree, but I was specifically talking about mech TvZ.
On February 03 2017 17:10 Topdoller wrote: Community has agreed this isnt an issue, please post this on the blizzard forums if you want the game changed. Blizzard do not have any representation on these forums
If you are having issues with Swarmhosts please post some examples of your games where you are losing to them on a persistent basis, a high level player may be able to offer some advice on tactics
Uh...most of the community that plays mech will tell you the swarmhost is a problem from firsthand experience. They'd equally tell you the raven is but that it's the only counter-measure you have versus swarmhosts.
I mean, does every single mech player need to get together and show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost vs mech for the community to come to agree that it's an issue?
Current swarmhost was put on the same patch as "mech viability" and it absolutely crushes mech and forces the game to a stall. Get 50 ravens or autolose to swarmhosts is not a fun nor really healthy gameplay for people that wanna play mech.
And saying "then don't play mech" is even more unhealthy because Terran should have more strategic options than only bio.
It's crazy how people can demand evidence when you continue to make threads about the same topic for years, right? I mean, let's be real, it can't be YOUR fault that YOUR Mech play isn't working; it's that Mech is just straight up bad. Wouldn't it be great if we could go back in time, when you could wall Python diagonally with Depots and Turrets, have a 3-Turret-thick ring around your main and the 5th base you spend the better half of 30 minutes turtle-crawling to? Man, those were the days.
In other news, in order to make broad generalizations about the viability of a strategy, and then scoff at the thought of producing "some examples of your games where you are losing to them" because you find it laughable that "every single mech player need to get together to show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost," you've essentially proven that you have no intention of proving anything. You took a reasonable request from someone who wanted to find out more about your standpoint, you exaggerated it to the point of hyperbole, phrased it as a rhetorical question, and then without blinking kept spitting the same exact narrative that you've been pushing for 10 pages. Come the fuck on.
It's the blind leading the blind. You're begging the question while simultaneously providing proof by assertion. Onus probandi.
Do not. Argue. With. The Con Man. He has to make posts like this saying the game is broken to keep getting the money from deluded people he's conned into believing his bullshit.
So, where's the proof that SH are not a problem?
Not to start a flame war, but in all seriousness you are doing the exact same thing that you say avilo is doing: neither of you is trying to establish their point by providing solid evidence (e.g. a collection of replays which show imbalance or lack of imbalance on the highest level). It's all theory crafting and rhetoric.
If you just happen to like SHs, that's alright. But keep the rhetoric to yourself. You're just sidetracking the issue.
It's up to avilo to prove they are broken, not to everyone else that they are not broken. I mean... You can't have random masters (or even, gasp, low GM!) players claiming that unit X is broken, and then expect everyone to believe that until someone goes through all the trouble to prove otherwise, according to whatever standard you deem to be necessary. Doesn't make any sense. We would have every unit in the game considered broken in no time. But sure. Let's talk about evidence for SHs not being OP. For me, the most telling piece of information is this:
If SHs were indeed a problem, we'd hear about it from the best players.
We have a code-S player posting in this thread, that is regularly playing the very best terrans in the world on the KR ladder, as well as in tournaments. I'm trusting her posts over a lower level player with known bias towards mech.
If there are indeed several top level players (including non-terrans) saying similar things, then that will be by far your strongest argument for SH being OP, and you should push that. I will reconsider myself at that point. Yes, I will reconsider if there is good evidence for the other side of an argument. But if this observation isn't shared by top players, and all we have is avilo and his followers, then, imo, there is little reason for us to take it seriously. Indeed, maybe you should reconsider your position yourself at that point.
You don't hear top players talking about it, because the top player know mech is still inferior versus Zerg. Swarmhost are not OP if you play Bio; which 95% continue to do. Why would a pro waste his/her time explaining obvious problems with a unit that nullifies an entire mech when they don't play mech? It's a moot point because it doesn't apply to their playstyle. Unless the Terran goes immediately into sky Terran, ground mech is broken versus swarmhosts.
I'm low gm/ high masters and I played a Zerg the other day who lost two of his 4 bases and was on the verge of losing the game. He was essentially mining out his main and expansion for the remaining part of the game. He made 30, NO IM NOT KIDDING, 30 swarm hosts and kept sending a never-ending wave of locust and pushed me across the map while he re-expanded and won the game. Remember, 30 swarmhosts would only cost 2.2k gas is essentially nothing in the meta game. Any other unit, muta, hydra, roach, broodlord, infestor etc he would have lost with my army supply. Is that fair? Please tell me what beats this aside from making the vastly more expensive unit, the Raven, which costs 125 gas more. I'm all ears. And don't say "don't let them get there" because this is a tier two unit which essentially costs as much as a marauder.
I'm no good at starcraft, so I can't give you advice. I suggest you look at how TY, Innovation and Gumiho (I think?) deals with this at the top of KR ladder. That should work at your level as well. I think they stream sometimes, right? Scarlett said that they play Mech a lot in TvZ. Maybe you can try to find some vods? And I'm pretty sure there has been a few streamed tournament games with TvZ mech from koreans. Don't remember who it was... Maybe have a look at those? Or try asking in the strategy section?
Sorry for telling you what to do, but when you lose a game, I think it's healthier to look at how better players deal with it, rather than hit the forums and complain that it isn't fair. I think that goes for both gold players like me and master/low GM like you.
If a large fraction of the very top players struggle for a long time, then I'm happy to start talking about balance. But I don't see that right now. If I just missed that conversation, please link and I'll reconsider.
On February 03 2017 17:10 Topdoller wrote: Community has agreed this isnt an issue, please post this on the blizzard forums if you want the game changed. Blizzard do not have any representation on these forums
If you are having issues with Swarmhosts please post some examples of your games where you are losing to them on a persistent basis, a high level player may be able to offer some advice on tactics
Uh...most of the community that plays mech will tell you the swarmhost is a problem from firsthand experience. They'd equally tell you the raven is but that it's the only counter-measure you have versus swarmhosts.
I mean, does every single mech player need to get together and show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost vs mech for the community to come to agree that it's an issue?
Current swarmhost was put on the same patch as "mech viability" and it absolutely crushes mech and forces the game to a stall. Get 50 ravens or autolose to swarmhosts is not a fun nor really healthy gameplay for people that wanna play mech.
And saying "then don't play mech" is even more unhealthy because Terran should have more strategic options than only bio.
It's crazy how people can demand evidence when you continue to make threads about the same topic for years, right? I mean, let's be real, it can't be YOUR fault that YOUR Mech play isn't working; it's that Mech is just straight up bad. Wouldn't it be great if we could go back in time, when you could wall Python diagonally with Depots and Turrets, have a 3-Turret-thick ring around your main and the 5th base you spend the better half of 30 minutes turtle-crawling to? Man, those were the days.
In other news, in order to make broad generalizations about the viability of a strategy, and then scoff at the thought of producing "some examples of your games where you are losing to them" because you find it laughable that "every single mech player need to get together to show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost," you've essentially proven that you have no intention of proving anything. You took a reasonable request from someone who wanted to find out more about your standpoint, you exaggerated it to the point of hyperbole, phrased it as a rhetorical question, and then without blinking kept spitting the same exact narrative that you've been pushing for 10 pages. Come the fuck on.
It's the blind leading the blind. You're begging the question while simultaneously providing proof by assertion. Onus probandi.
Do not. Argue. With. The Con Man. He has to make posts like this saying the game is broken to keep getting the money from deluded people he's conned into believing his bullshit.
So, where's the proof that SH are not a problem?
Not to start a flame war, but in all seriousness you are doing the exact same thing that you say avilo is doing: neither of you is trying to establish their point by providing solid evidence (e.g. a collection of replays which show imbalance or lack of imbalance on the highest level). It's all theory crafting and rhetoric.
If you just happen to like SHs, that's alright. But keep the rhetoric to yourself. You're just sidetracking the issue.
It's up to avilo to prove they are broken, not to everyone else that they are not broken. I mean... You can't have random masters (or even, gasp, low GM!) players claiming that unit X is broken, and then expect everyone to believe that until someone goes through all the trouble to prove otherwise, according to whatever standard you deem to be necessary. Doesn't make any sense. We would have every unit in the game considered broken in no time. But sure. Let's talk about evidence for SHs not being OP. For me, the most telling piece of information is this:
If SHs were indeed a problem, we'd hear about it from the best players.
We have a code-S player posting in this thread, that is regularly playing the very best terrans in the world on the KR ladder, as well as in tournaments. I'm trusting her posts over a lower level player with known bias towards mech.
If there are indeed several top level players (including non-terrans) saying similar things, then that will be by far your strongest argument for SH being OP, and you should push that. I will reconsider myself at that point. Yes, I will reconsider if there is good evidence for the other side of an argument. But if this observation isn't shared by top players, and all we have is avilo and his followers, then, imo, there is little reason for us to take it seriously. Indeed, maybe you should reconsider your position yourself at that point.
You don't hear top players talking about it, because the top player know mech is still inferior versus Zerg. Swarmhost are not OP if you play Bio; which 95% continue to do. Why would a pro waste his/her time explaining obvious problems with a unit that nullifies an entire mech when they don't play mech? It's a moot point because it doesn't apply to their playstyle. Unless the Terran goes immediately into sky Terran, ground mech is broken versus swarmhosts.
I'm low gm/ high masters and I played a Zerg the other day who lost two of his 4 bases and was on the verge of losing the game. He was essentially mining out his main and expansion for the remaining part of the game. He made 30, NO IM NOT KIDDING, 30 swarm hosts and kept sending a never-ending wave of locust and pushed me across the map while he re-expanded and won the game. Remember, 30 swarmhosts would only cost 2.2k gas is essentially nothing in the meta game. Any other unit, muta, hydra, roach, broodlord, infestor etc he would have lost with my army supply. Is that fair? Please tell me what beats this aside from making the vastly more expensive unit, the Raven, which costs 125 gas more. I'm all ears. And don't say "don't let them get there" because this is a tier two unit which essentially costs as much as a marauder.
Can you post a replay? I have a hard time picturing a Zerg being able to dump 90 supplies worth into Swarm Host after losing 2 bases and come out ahead. How many bases were you on? Let's see what went wrong for you and right for the Zerg that game.
On February 03 2017 17:10 Topdoller wrote: Community has agreed this isnt an issue, please post this on the blizzard forums if you want the game changed. Blizzard do not have any representation on these forums
If you are having issues with Swarmhosts please post some examples of your games where you are losing to them on a persistent basis, a high level player may be able to offer some advice on tactics
Uh...most of the community that plays mech will tell you the swarmhost is a problem from firsthand experience. They'd equally tell you the raven is but that it's the only counter-measure you have versus swarmhosts.
I mean, does every single mech player need to get together and show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost vs mech for the community to come to agree that it's an issue?
Current swarmhost was put on the same patch as "mech viability" and it absolutely crushes mech and forces the game to a stall. Get 50 ravens or autolose to swarmhosts is not a fun nor really healthy gameplay for people that wanna play mech.
And saying "then don't play mech" is even more unhealthy because Terran should have more strategic options than only bio.
It's crazy how people can demand evidence when you continue to make threads about the same topic for years, right? I mean, let's be real, it can't be YOUR fault that YOUR Mech play isn't working; it's that Mech is just straight up bad. Wouldn't it be great if we could go back in time, when you could wall Python diagonally with Depots and Turrets, have a 3-Turret-thick ring around your main and the 5th base you spend the better half of 30 minutes turtle-crawling to? Man, those were the days.
In other news, in order to make broad generalizations about the viability of a strategy, and then scoff at the thought of producing "some examples of your games where you are losing to them" because you find it laughable that "every single mech player need to get together to show our 100+ games of Zerg going mass swarmhost," you've essentially proven that you have no intention of proving anything. You took a reasonable request from someone who wanted to find out more about your standpoint, you exaggerated it to the point of hyperbole, phrased it as a rhetorical question, and then without blinking kept spitting the same exact narrative that you've been pushing for 10 pages. Come the fuck on.
It's the blind leading the blind. You're begging the question while simultaneously providing proof by assertion. Onus probandi.
Do not. Argue. With. The Con Man. He has to make posts like this saying the game is broken to keep getting the money from deluded people he's conned into believing his bullshit.
So, where's the proof that SH are not a problem?
Not to start a flame war, but in all seriousness you are doing the exact same thing that you say avilo is doing: neither of you is trying to establish their point by providing solid evidence (e.g. a collection of replays which show imbalance or lack of imbalance on the highest level). It's all theory crafting and rhetoric.
If you just happen to like SHs, that's alright. But keep the rhetoric to yourself. You're just sidetracking the issue.
It's up to avilo to prove they are broken, not to everyone else that they are not broken. I mean... You can't have random masters (or even, gasp, low GM!) players claiming that unit X is broken, and then expect everyone to believe that until someone goes through all the trouble to prove otherwise, according to whatever standard you deem to be necessary. Doesn't make any sense. We would have every unit in the game considered broken in no time. But sure. Let's talk about evidence for SHs not being OP. For me, the most telling piece of information is this:
If SHs were indeed a problem, we'd hear about it from the best players.
We have a code-S player posting in this thread, that is regularly playing the very best terrans in the world on the KR ladder, as well as in tournaments. I'm trusting her posts over a lower level player with known bias towards mech.
If there are indeed several top level players (including non-terrans) saying similar things, then that will be by far your strongest argument for SH being OP, and you should push that. I will reconsider myself at that point. Yes, I will reconsider if there is good evidence for the other side of an argument. But if this observation isn't shared by top players, and all we have is avilo and his followers, then, imo, there is little reason for us to take it seriously. Indeed, maybe you should reconsider your position yourself at that point.
You don't hear top players talking about it, because the top player know mech is still inferior versus Zerg. Swarmhost are not OP if you play Bio; which 95% continue to do. Why would a pro waste his/her time explaining obvious problems with a unit that nullifies an entire mech when they don't play mech? It's a moot point because it doesn't apply to their playstyle. Unless the Terran goes immediately into sky Terran, ground mech is broken versus swarmhosts.
I'm low gm/ high masters and I played a Zerg the other day who lost two of his 4 bases and was on the verge of losing the game. He was essentially mining out his main and expansion for the remaining part of the game. He made 30, NO IM NOT KIDDING, 30 swarm hosts and kept sending a never-ending wave of locust and pushed me across the map while he re-expanded and won the game. Remember, 30 swarmhosts would only cost 2.2k gas is essentially nothing in the meta game. Any other unit, muta, hydra, roach, broodlord, infestor etc he would have lost with my army supply. Is that fair? Please tell me what beats this aside from making the vastly more expensive unit, the Raven, which costs 125 gas more. I'm all ears. And don't say "don't let them get there" because this is a tier two unit which essentially costs as much as a marauder.
We heard the same back in the days with mutalisks ...
On January 04 2017 12:52 avilo wrote: Also to add...i don't think a lot of people even know about this issue yet because there haven't been many tournaments on the current patch, and most Terrans still go bio for the majority of their games.
I get that not everyone wants every game to be mech 100% either...but imagine if banelings were given another 50 extra HP on top of what they were already given. Bio would be unplayable because of 1 unit. That's kind of analogous to the situation here.
If you opt for mech, the guy just starts making swarmhosts and collects free cash for 20 minutes.
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's a timing. Not a viable macro style if you don't do significant damage early on. I'm zerg and I despise mech with all my soul, but fuck I'll defend terrans' right to have their mech games.
If "mech" is based around finishing the game in 10 minutes then it just becomes the PvZ immortal-sentry all-in from HotS that was literally just either "oh does the guy have enough defense? no? well, GG" or "Well, the zerg has enough units, GG"
Swarmhosts are still not addressed by the developers. It's been months, it's really about time TL start an initiative here along with the community to get this stuff addressed.
On March 17 2017 14:28 FoxDog wrote: yeah atleast make them require hive for the flying ability, atm you get boxed in on 3 base and then z takes bases while you die slowly
its just swarmhosts and carriers, both which received mad buffs in the "mech patch 3.8" just revert those buffs and the game would be fine imo.
Yeah. But in the same time reverse Blinding Cloud nerf. Because with SH back to "dead unit" state, Zerg would have nothing to break lines of buffed tanks and thors.
On March 17 2017 14:28 FoxDog wrote: yeah atleast make them require hive for the flying ability, atm you get boxed in on 3 base and then z takes bases while you die slowly
its just swarmhosts and carriers, both which received mad buffs in the "mech patch 3.8" just revert those buffs and the game would be fine imo.
Yeah. But in the same time reverse Blinding Cloud nerf. Because with SH back to "dead unit" state, Zerg would have nothing to break lines of buffed tanks and thors.
That's what they want. If they don't win 1337% of their games they'll never be satisfied
On March 17 2017 14:28 FoxDog wrote: yeah atleast make them require hive for the flying ability, atm you get boxed in on 3 base and then z takes bases while you die slowly
its just swarmhosts and carriers, both which received mad buffs in the "mech patch 3.8" just revert those buffs and the game would be fine imo.
Yeah. But in the same time reverse Blinding Cloud nerf. Because with SH back to "dead unit" state, Zerg would have nothing to break lines of buffed tanks and thors.
say WHAT? it wouldnt be dead it would just require ~100 more seconds, if you had any idea how underpowered mech is against the swarmhosts you would say not only shouldnt they be able to fly, but the swarmhost cost should be increased as well as they are nigh uncatchable with their new speed buff
are you serious you think zerg cant win without the super powerful new swarmhost? even after hydra corruptor and queen buffs?
On March 17 2017 14:28 FoxDog wrote: yeah atleast make them require hive for the flying ability, atm you get boxed in on 3 base and then z takes bases while you die slowly
its just swarmhosts and carriers, both which received mad buffs in the "mech patch 3.8" just revert those buffs and the game would be fine imo.
Yeah. But in the same time reverse Blinding Cloud nerf. Because with SH back to "dead unit" state, Zerg would have nothing to break lines of buffed tanks and thors.
say WHAT? it wouldnt be dead it would just require ~100 more seconds, if you had any idea how underpowered mech is against the swarmhosts you would say not only shouldnt they be able to fly, but the swarmhost cost should be increased as well as they are nigh uncatchable with their new speed buff
are you serious you think zerg cant win without the super powerful new swarmhost? even after hydra corruptor and queen buffs?
On March 17 2017 14:55 showstealer1829 wrote: That's what they want. If they don't win 1337% of their games they'll never be satisfied
On March 17 2017 14:28 FoxDog wrote: yeah atleast make them require hive for the flying ability, atm you get boxed in on 3 base and then z takes bases while you die slowly
its just swarmhosts and carriers, both which received mad buffs in the "mech patch 3.8" just revert those buffs and the game would be fine imo.
Yeah. But in the same time reverse Blinding Cloud nerf. Because with SH back to "dead unit" state, Zerg would have nothing to break lines of buffed tanks and thors.
say WHAT? it wouldnt be dead it would just require ~100 more seconds, if you had any idea how underpowered mech is against the swarmhosts you would say not only shouldnt they be able to fly, but the swarmhost cost should be increased as well as they are nigh uncatchable with their new speed buff
are you serious you think zerg cant win without the super powerful new swarmhost? even after hydra corruptor and queen buffs?
You're right. I don't recognize how overpowered SH vs mech are. The only thing i recognize is that mech players are biased more than ISIS extremists about destroying infidels.
On March 17 2017 14:28 FoxDog wrote: yeah atleast make them require hive for the flying ability, atm you get boxed in on 3 base and then z takes bases while you die slowly
its just swarmhosts and carriers, both which received mad buffs in the "mech patch 3.8" just revert those buffs and the game would be fine imo.
Yeah. But in the same time reverse Blinding Cloud nerf. Because with SH back to "dead unit" state, Zerg would have nothing to break lines of buffed tanks and thors.
say WHAT? it wouldnt be dead it would just require ~100 more seconds, if you had any idea how underpowered mech is against the swarmhosts you would say not only shouldnt they be able to fly, but the swarmhost cost should be increased as well as they are nigh uncatchable with their new speed buff
are you serious you think zerg cant win without the super powerful new swarmhost? even after hydra corruptor and queen buffs?
"If you had ANY idea how underpowered Zerglings are against Banelings-" Oh wait. Hmm. Some units have counters in a strategy game like StarCraft, it's just mech players who don't want that to exist for them and complain nonstop despite the pages upon pages of reasoning as to why mech and SHs are the way they are and why that's good for the game and is not a serious issue that needs to be addresses this very second.
On March 17 2017 14:28 FoxDog wrote: yeah atleast make them require hive for the flying ability, atm you get boxed in on 3 base and then z takes bases while you die slowly
its just swarmhosts and carriers, both which received mad buffs in the "mech patch 3.8" just revert those buffs and the game would be fine imo.
Yeah. But in the same time reverse Blinding Cloud nerf. Because with SH back to "dead unit" state, Zerg would have nothing to break lines of buffed tanks and thors.
say WHAT? it wouldnt be dead it would just require ~100 more seconds, if you had any idea how underpowered mech is against the swarmhosts you would say not only shouldnt they be able to fly, but the swarmhost cost should be increased as well as they are nigh uncatchable with their new speed buff
are you serious you think zerg cant win without the super powerful new swarmhost? even after hydra corruptor and queen buffs?
You're right. I don't recognize how overpowered SH vs mech are. The only thing i recognize is that mech players are biased more than ISIS extremists about destroying infidels.
On March 17 2017 14:28 FoxDog wrote: yeah atleast make them require hive for the flying ability, atm you get boxed in on 3 base and then z takes bases while you die slowly
its just swarmhosts and carriers, both which received mad buffs in the "mech patch 3.8" just revert those buffs and the game would be fine imo.
Yeah. But in the same time reverse Blinding Cloud nerf. Because with SH back to "dead unit" state, Zerg would have nothing to break lines of buffed tanks and thors.
say WHAT? it wouldnt be dead it would just require ~100 more seconds, if you had any idea how underpowered mech is against the swarmhosts you would say not only shouldnt they be able to fly, but the swarmhost cost should be increased as well as they are nigh uncatchable with their new speed buff
are you serious you think zerg cant win without the super powerful new swarmhost? even after hydra corruptor and queen buffs?
"If you had ANY idea how underpowered Zerglings are against Banelings-" Oh wait. Hmm. Some units have counters in a strategy game like StarCraft, it's just mech players who don't want that to exist for them and complain nonstop despite the pages upon pages of reasoning as to why mech and SHs are the way they are and why that's good for the game and is not a serious issue that needs to be addresses this very second.
A counter should have a counter as well. How do you best play vs SH? Apparently you know the answer. Enlighten us.
On March 17 2017 14:28 FoxDog wrote: yeah atleast make them require hive for the flying ability, atm you get boxed in on 3 base and then z takes bases while you die slowly
its just swarmhosts and carriers, both which received mad buffs in the "mech patch 3.8" just revert those buffs and the game would be fine imo.
Yeah. But in the same time reverse Blinding Cloud nerf. Because with SH back to "dead unit" state, Zerg would have nothing to break lines of buffed tanks and thors.
say WHAT? it wouldnt be dead it would just require ~100 more seconds, if you had any idea how underpowered mech is against the swarmhosts you would say not only shouldnt they be able to fly, but the swarmhost cost should be increased as well as they are nigh uncatchable with their new speed buff
are you serious you think zerg cant win without the super powerful new swarmhost? even after hydra corruptor and queen buffs?
You're right. I don't recognize how overpowered SH vs mech are. The only thing i recognize is that mech players are biased more than ISIS extremists about destroying infidels.
On March 17 2017 14:28 FoxDog wrote: yeah atleast make them require hive for the flying ability, atm you get boxed in on 3 base and then z takes bases while you die slowly
its just swarmhosts and carriers, both which received mad buffs in the "mech patch 3.8" just revert those buffs and the game would be fine imo.
Yeah. But in the same time reverse Blinding Cloud nerf. Because with SH back to "dead unit" state, Zerg would have nothing to break lines of buffed tanks and thors.
say WHAT? it wouldnt be dead it would just require ~100 more seconds, if you had any idea how underpowered mech is against the swarmhosts you would say not only shouldnt they be able to fly, but the swarmhost cost should be increased as well as they are nigh uncatchable with their new speed buff
are you serious you think zerg cant win without the super powerful new swarmhost? even after hydra corruptor and queen buffs?
"If you had ANY idea how underpowered Zerglings are against Banelings-" Oh wait. Hmm. Some units have counters in a strategy game like StarCraft, it's just mech players who don't want that to exist for them and complain nonstop despite the pages upon pages of reasoning as to why mech and SHs are the way they are and why that's good for the game and is not a serious issue that needs to be addresses this very second.
A counter should have a counter as well. How do you best play vs SH? Apparently you know the answer. Enlighten us.
I've seen people have success with some hellbats in front of their siege line to basically gun down the locusts as they land in. then the SH army is worthless for another 40+ seconds.
at 100/75 & 3 supply, SHs are not a cheap unit, and they're useless when they can't spawn their locusts.
And to the response: "Well then the SH runs around to where your army isn't, and throws a bunch of locusts into your base" - Yep - that's part of the unit's strength: [relative] mobility. Not as mobile as lings or mutas or anything like that, but more mobile than BLs.
Part of the mech army's weakness is its [relative] immobility. Dropships full of bio units will always be faster than a siege tank line setting up and settling in to siege a base. It's part of the trade off.
What do you consider to be a regular counter to mech? Let's play TheoryCraft right now - if SH were removed tomorrow, what would the most appropriate answer to mech be?
From my perspective, it seems like mech units are extremely powerful in a straight up fight, and the only way to really defeat them would be to attempt to harass them to death - so my response would probably be something like a flock of mutas, to hopefully keep the T pinned back and take over the rest of the map, and then [hopefully] demolish an army with banelings and re-max on a ton of lings to try to flood back in faster than they can replace anything.
My issue with that is that a few widow mines can effectively shut down a lot of that harassment (since many mech players tend to get to 2 bases, taking a late 3rd, and then pushing with a max army).
I'm quite interested to hear what you think the response should be, though?
On March 17 2017 14:28 FoxDog wrote: yeah atleast make them require hive for the flying ability, atm you get boxed in on 3 base and then z takes bases while you die slowly
its just swarmhosts and carriers, both which received mad buffs in the "mech patch 3.8" just revert those buffs and the game would be fine imo.
Yeah. But in the same time reverse Blinding Cloud nerf. Because with SH back to "dead unit" state, Zerg would have nothing to break lines of buffed tanks and thors.
say WHAT? it wouldnt be dead it would just require ~100 more seconds, if you had any idea how underpowered mech is against the swarmhosts you would say not only shouldnt they be able to fly, but the swarmhost cost should be increased as well as they are nigh uncatchable with their new speed buff
are you serious you think zerg cant win without the super powerful new swarmhost? even after hydra corruptor and queen buffs?
You're right. I don't recognize how overpowered SH vs mech are. The only thing i recognize is that mech players are biased more than ISIS extremists about destroying infidels.
User was warned for this post
Seriously, your attitude...
On March 18 2017 04:25 blunderfulguy wrote:
On March 17 2017 14:59 FoxDog wrote:
On March 17 2017 14:51 hiroshOne wrote:
On March 17 2017 14:28 FoxDog wrote: yeah atleast make them require hive for the flying ability, atm you get boxed in on 3 base and then z takes bases while you die slowly
its just swarmhosts and carriers, both which received mad buffs in the "mech patch 3.8" just revert those buffs and the game would be fine imo.
Yeah. But in the same time reverse Blinding Cloud nerf. Because with SH back to "dead unit" state, Zerg would have nothing to break lines of buffed tanks and thors.
say WHAT? it wouldnt be dead it would just require ~100 more seconds, if you had any idea how underpowered mech is against the swarmhosts you would say not only shouldnt they be able to fly, but the swarmhost cost should be increased as well as they are nigh uncatchable with their new speed buff
are you serious you think zerg cant win without the super powerful new swarmhost? even after hydra corruptor and queen buffs?
"If you had ANY idea how underpowered Zerglings are against Banelings-" Oh wait. Hmm. Some units have counters in a strategy game like StarCraft, it's just mech players who don't want that to exist for them and complain nonstop despite the pages upon pages of reasoning as to why mech and SHs are the way they are and why that's good for the game and is not a serious issue that needs to be addresses this very second.
A counter should have a counter as well. How do you best play vs SH? Apparently you know the answer. Enlighten us.
What do you consider to be a regular counter to mech? Let's play TheoryCraft right now - if SH were removed tomorrow, what would the most appropriate answer to mech be?
We don't need to theorycraft for that. Koreans often play without swarmhost and seem to do ok with roach hydra viper -> broodlord. Maybe mech would be slightly to strong if SH were removed but some numbers can always be adjusted.
On March 17 2017 14:28 FoxDog wrote: yeah atleast make them require hive for the flying ability, atm you get boxed in on 3 base and then z takes bases while you die slowly
its just swarmhosts and carriers, both which received mad buffs in the "mech patch 3.8" just revert those buffs and the game would be fine imo.
Yeah. But in the same time reverse Blinding Cloud nerf. Because with SH back to "dead unit" state, Zerg would have nothing to break lines of buffed tanks and thors.
say WHAT? it wouldnt be dead it would just require ~100 more seconds, if you had any idea how underpowered mech is against the swarmhosts you would say not only shouldnt they be able to fly, but the swarmhost cost should be increased as well as they are nigh uncatchable with their new speed buff
are you serious you think zerg cant win without the super powerful new swarmhost? even after hydra corruptor and queen buffs?
You're right. I don't recognize how overpowered SH vs mech are. The only thing i recognize is that mech players are biased more than ISIS extremists about destroying infidels.
User was warned for this post
Seriously, your attitude...
On March 18 2017 04:25 blunderfulguy wrote:
On March 17 2017 14:59 FoxDog wrote:
On March 17 2017 14:51 hiroshOne wrote:
On March 17 2017 14:28 FoxDog wrote: yeah atleast make them require hive for the flying ability, atm you get boxed in on 3 base and then z takes bases while you die slowly
its just swarmhosts and carriers, both which received mad buffs in the "mech patch 3.8" just revert those buffs and the game would be fine imo.
Yeah. But in the same time reverse Blinding Cloud nerf. Because with SH back to "dead unit" state, Zerg would have nothing to break lines of buffed tanks and thors.
say WHAT? it wouldnt be dead it would just require ~100 more seconds, if you had any idea how underpowered mech is against the swarmhosts you would say not only shouldnt they be able to fly, but the swarmhost cost should be increased as well as they are nigh uncatchable with their new speed buff
are you serious you think zerg cant win without the super powerful new swarmhost? even after hydra corruptor and queen buffs?
"If you had ANY idea how underpowered Zerglings are against Banelings-" Oh wait. Hmm. Some units have counters in a strategy game like StarCraft, it's just mech players who don't want that to exist for them and complain nonstop despite the pages upon pages of reasoning as to why mech and SHs are the way they are and why that's good for the game and is not a serious issue that needs to be addresses this very second.
A counter should have a counter as well. How do you best play vs SH? Apparently you know the answer. Enlighten us.
What do you consider to be a regular counter to mech? Let's play TheoryCraft right now - if SH were removed tomorrow, what would the most appropriate answer to mech be?
We don't need to theorycraft for that. Koreans often play without swarmhost and seem to do ok with roach hydra viper -> broodlord. Maybe mech would be slightly to strong if SH were removed but some numbers can always be adjusted.
So how does "Koreans often play without swarm hosts" fit with the narrative in this thread that swarm hosts are OP?
On March 17 2017 14:28 FoxDog wrote: yeah atleast make them require hive for the flying ability, atm you get boxed in on 3 base and then z takes bases while you die slowly
its just swarmhosts and carriers, both which received mad buffs in the "mech patch 3.8" just revert those buffs and the game would be fine imo.
Yeah. But in the same time reverse Blinding Cloud nerf. Because with SH back to "dead unit" state, Zerg would have nothing to break lines of buffed tanks and thors.
say WHAT? it wouldnt be dead it would just require ~100 more seconds, if you had any idea how underpowered mech is against the swarmhosts you would say not only shouldnt they be able to fly, but the swarmhost cost should be increased as well as they are nigh uncatchable with their new speed buff
are you serious you think zerg cant win without the super powerful new swarmhost? even after hydra corruptor and queen buffs?
You're right. I don't recognize how overpowered SH vs mech are. The only thing i recognize is that mech players are biased more than ISIS extremists about destroying infidels.
User was warned for this post
This right here is why i say we need a league lock for posting about balance, you dont even make an attempt to support your opinion with facts
instead you simply attack the person writing to deflect something you found so undeniable you couldnt refute it whatsoever, i refuse to believe someone who writes this nonsense has any nuance to discuss anything and would not qualify for even the lowest tiers of discussion were there any requirements that forced accountability.
On March 17 2017 14:28 FoxDog wrote: yeah atleast make them require hive for the flying ability, atm you get boxed in on 3 base and then z takes bases while you die slowly
its just swarmhosts and carriers, both which received mad buffs in the "mech patch 3.8" just revert those buffs and the game would be fine imo.
Yeah. But in the same time reverse Blinding Cloud nerf. Because with SH back to "dead unit" state, Zerg would have nothing to break lines of buffed tanks and thors.
say WHAT? it wouldnt be dead it would just require ~100 more seconds, if you had any idea how underpowered mech is against the swarmhosts you would say not only shouldnt they be able to fly, but the swarmhost cost should be increased as well as they are nigh uncatchable with their new speed buff
are you serious you think zerg cant win without the super powerful new swarmhost? even after hydra corruptor and queen buffs?
You're right. I don't recognize how overpowered SH vs mech are. The only thing i recognize is that mech players are biased more than ISIS extremists about destroying infidels.
User was warned for this post
This right here is why i say we need a league lock for posting about balance, you dont even make an attempt to support your opinion with facts
instead you simply attack the person writing to deflect something you found so undeniable you couldnt refute it whatsoever, i refuse to believe someone who writes this nonsense has any nuance to discuss anything and would not qualify for even the lowest tiers of discussion were there any requirements that forced accountability.
This whole topic as many others about "mech not being viable" is my proof that I'm right. You people are stubborn as hell in your demands to make mech turtle style unbeatable. Every counter other race have-must be nerfed or removed. If Blizzard removed SH as you all want, they would have to tone down mech units overall. Then you would cry about Hydras and Roaches too strong and to remove Vipers. It's endless circle of salt and tears. You will never be satisfied until mech will be autowin composition. And that sickens me because from my point of view Mech is pretty much viable. But not as 4th race. Every race have to mix army compositions depending on situation. Terran should not be "special case". To be honest I'm glad that Blizzard is not willing to design game basing on your statements. It would be really dead then.
On March 17 2017 14:28 FoxDog wrote: yeah atleast make them require hive for the flying ability, atm you get boxed in on 3 base and then z takes bases while you die slowly
its just swarmhosts and carriers, both which received mad buffs in the "mech patch 3.8" just revert those buffs and the game would be fine imo.
Yeah. But in the same time reverse Blinding Cloud nerf. Because with SH back to "dead unit" state, Zerg would have nothing to break lines of buffed tanks and thors.
say WHAT? it wouldnt be dead it would just require ~100 more seconds, if you had any idea how underpowered mech is against the swarmhosts you would say not only shouldnt they be able to fly, but the swarmhost cost should be increased as well as they are nigh uncatchable with their new speed buff
are you serious you think zerg cant win without the super powerful new swarmhost? even after hydra corruptor and queen buffs?
You're right. I don't recognize how overpowered SH vs mech are. The only thing i recognize is that mech players are biased more than ISIS extremists about destroying infidels.
User was warned for this post
This right here is why i say we need a league lock for posting about balance, you dont even make an attempt to support your opinion with facts
instead you simply attack the person writing to deflect something you found so undeniable you couldnt refute it whatsoever, i refuse to believe someone who writes this nonsense has any nuance to discuss anything and would not qualify for even the lowest tiers of discussion were there any requirements that forced accountability.
This whole topic as many others about "mech not being viable" is my proof that I'm right. You people are stubborn as hell in your demands to make mech turtle style unbeatable. Every counter other race have-must be nerfed or removed. If Blizzard removed SH as you all want, they would have to tone down mech units overall. Then you would cry about Hydras and Roaches too strong and to remove Vipers. It's endless circle of salt and tears. You will never be satisfied until mech will be autowin composition. And that sickens me because from my point of view Mech is pretty much viable. But not as 4th race. Every race have to mix army compositions depending on situation. Terran should not be "special case". To be honest I'm glad that Blizzard is not willing to design game basing on your statements. It would be really dead then.
Maybe you are the stubborn one. It has been said countless times in these threads that Mech players want it to be more aggressive so they can push out, not more turtly. Also turtling is a viable tactic in RTS games (ofc it shouldn´t be like the disaster during the Swarmhost/Raven era) so you just have to deal with it. There are 4 core strategies that always should work in RTS games: - Rushing (focusing on early attacks and harass) - Turtling (focusing on economy and strong defense) - Guerilla (sneaky attacks that can catch the opponent off guard) - Steamroll (Teching early to high tech Units) All these strategies interact with each other. If the opponent turtles you rush. If the opponent goes for guerilla tactics you turtle etc, etc. All these styles should have counters for a healthy game.
We DO NOT WANT an unbeatable composition. We just want Mech to be a healthy option because it´s part of the Terran race. Fyi terran´s are Humans. And Humans do use Mechanical warfare even in real life. This doesn´t make it a 4th race.
For example: During the redesign Blizz said they want the Thor to be the main Anti-air Unit. How is this supposed to work with a Unit that is big, slow with a long production time and high cost? A main AA Unit has to be responsive not so slow to produce that the opponent can outnumber you with the air Units you want to counter before you have enough to shoot them down.
Another problem with this threads is when they see "Mech" they immediately think of avilo as if he would be the only Mech player. They only see his playstyle and think that´s all what Mech should be: Never attack. Ofc this is NOT what Mech should be. Yes it is more defensive and takes a bit time to ramp up and that´s totally fine. But there should be a time in the match where the meching player can and should push out, like a wall thats get closer and closer but still not uncounterable.
Please guys do yourself a favor and get out of this mindset "You just want an A-move comp, turtle forever" etc. And please stop thinking of only avilo when you think about Mech. You could even go so far and blame him that people are so against Mech because of his playstyle. There are so many better Mech players like: - Goody Very strong game sense. While he is defensive he is also capable of being aggressive and pushes out when he sees the opportunity, like when he succesfully repeled an attack. - HTOMario Very, very strong macro and also quite good micro if needed.
Im sure there are more but just stop hating on us that just want Mech a little bit better and thinking everyone wants to be an avilo. Instead of constantly jumping on the hate train you should discuss how we, or Blizz, could make it better without mech becoming an unbeatable style. Because, and i can only repeat this, that´s not what we want.
On March 18 2017 18:51 Tresher wrote: Another problem with this threads is when they see "Mech" they immediately think of avilo as if he would be the only Mech player. They only see his playstyle and think that´s all what Mech should be: Never attack. Ofc this is NOT what Mech should be. Yes it is more defensive and takes a bit time to ramp up and that´s totally fine. But there should be a time in the match where the meching player can and should push out, like a wall thats get closer and closer but still not uncounterable.
Please guys do yourself a favor and get out of this mindset "You just want an A-move comp, turtle forever" etc. And please stop thinking of only avilo when you think about Mech. You could even go so far and blame him that people are so against Mech because of his playstyle.
I can definitely get behind this point 100%.
I'm zerg and i really don't mind playing vs mech. Dare I say that i even enjoyed it in the older expansions. Well the 1h+ games i can do without, but otherwise i really would like a mix of mech and bio. Even in the SH era in hots most games finished decently quick (at my level) and there were really not many games that i didn't enjoy playing. I even argued that blizzard should get mech viable at a certain point.
However...
As the discussion has been lately, with avilo and his followers leading the demands for mech, as you say, I found myself increasingly arguing that the mech people are a bunch of whiny entitled biased crybabies. I still really don't mind playing vs mech but the posts some make here on TL in favour of mech...
So yeah, avilo presents himself, even in this thread, as the champion of mech, and of healthy StarCraft 2 gameplay in general, but for me he really has the opposite effect. For the sensible mech players, maybe first step is to distance yourself from avilo (as you do in your post). Then i think you'll have an easier time reaching a wider demographic. Otherwise, as you say, people will project the entire avilo fanboy stereotype on you.
On March 17 2017 14:28 FoxDog wrote: yeah atleast make them require hive for the flying ability, atm you get boxed in on 3 base and then z takes bases while you die slowly
its just swarmhosts and carriers, both which received mad buffs in the "mech patch 3.8" just revert those buffs and the game would be fine imo.
Yeah. But in the same time reverse Blinding Cloud nerf. Because with SH back to "dead unit" state, Zerg would have nothing to break lines of buffed tanks and thors.
say WHAT? it wouldnt be dead it would just require ~100 more seconds, if you had any idea how underpowered mech is against the swarmhosts you would say not only shouldnt they be able to fly, but the swarmhost cost should be increased as well as they are nigh uncatchable with their new speed buff
are you serious you think zerg cant win without the super powerful new swarmhost? even after hydra corruptor and queen buffs?
You're right. I don't recognize how overpowered SH vs mech are. The only thing i recognize is that mech players are biased more than ISIS extremists about destroying infidels.
User was warned for this post
Seriously, your attitude...
On March 18 2017 04:25 blunderfulguy wrote:
On March 17 2017 14:59 FoxDog wrote:
On March 17 2017 14:51 hiroshOne wrote:
On March 17 2017 14:28 FoxDog wrote: yeah atleast make them require hive for the flying ability, atm you get boxed in on 3 base and then z takes bases while you die slowly
its just swarmhosts and carriers, both which received mad buffs in the "mech patch 3.8" just revert those buffs and the game would be fine imo.
Yeah. But in the same time reverse Blinding Cloud nerf. Because with SH back to "dead unit" state, Zerg would have nothing to break lines of buffed tanks and thors.
say WHAT? it wouldnt be dead it would just require ~100 more seconds, if you had any idea how underpowered mech is against the swarmhosts you would say not only shouldnt they be able to fly, but the swarmhost cost should be increased as well as they are nigh uncatchable with their new speed buff
are you serious you think zerg cant win without the super powerful new swarmhost? even after hydra corruptor and queen buffs?
"If you had ANY idea how underpowered Zerglings are against Banelings-" Oh wait. Hmm. Some units have counters in a strategy game like StarCraft, it's just mech players who don't want that to exist for them and complain nonstop despite the pages upon pages of reasoning as to why mech and SHs are the way they are and why that's good for the game and is not a serious issue that needs to be addresses this very second.
A counter should have a counter as well. How do you best play vs SH? Apparently you know the answer. Enlighten us.
What do you consider to be a regular counter to mech? Let's play TheoryCraft right now - if SH were removed tomorrow, what would the most appropriate answer to mech be?
We don't need to theorycraft for that. Koreans often play without swarmhost and seem to do ok with roach hydra viper -> broodlord. Maybe mech would be slightly to strong if SH were removed but some numbers can always be adjusted.
So how does "Koreans often play without swarm hosts" fit with the narrative in this thread that swarm hosts are OP?
I'm not sure why they are so reluctant to use swarmhosts. Maybe they just don't have much practice with them and want to stick to strategies they feel more comfortable with. Or maybe there are some timings that can kill a Zerg going for Swarmhosts.
Discussing with people that are on a crusade against mech (often because they're butthurt loosing to it on ladder) is like discussing with an SJW. You can say anything you want, they won't listen to your arguments and will just mindlessly repeat "but you're a white male you can't talk about that"/"but you're a mech player you can't talk about that".
More seriously, mech is really weak right now because hydras and corrus are very good units against mech. Hydras aren't that much of an issue because they still die in two tank shots with +2, but that means you're forced into going relatively fast upgrades. But the Corruptor buff is quite extreme against mech : not only does it really buffs BL/corruptors army, but it also means that a mech player using air units support can't really go out on the map without a full air transition, because corruptors will just stroll through, ignore what AA you can get, kill all your ravens/liberators/banshees, and get out. All of this much faster.
And meanwhile, SH/abducts are still very oppressive issues mech faces that haven't been adressed at all.
Everything zerg has seems designed so that the mech player can't go out on the map : - can't really fight an hydra concave without +2 - can't fight locust waves without lots of AA/lots of ravens/an overwhelming amount of tanks hellbats that means you're pretty much allin - can't get out on the map and face abducts - can't really push with a ground force supported by few air units since corruptors will just swoop in and kill off your air support
So we're back to the HOTS meta where as a mech player the best and only reliable strategy is to do nothing but mass ravens, with extremely few options to move out and fight on the map with a mech army. If you compare it to mech vs protoss, probably the only matchup where mech is truly viable right now, there's no protoss unit that really prevents the mech player from moving out. At any point in the game, you can move out and take a fight without knowing you're gonna get crushed if you don't have 20 turrets around yourself. The only exception is mass phenixes straight into skytoss which can be punished by pushing out with few SCVs and thors.
On March 18 2017 21:32 JackONeill wrote: Discussing with people that are on a crusade against mech (often because they're butthurt loosing to it on ladder)
So...mech is viable in your view. Good to know. Thanks for clarifying.
On March 18 2017 21:32 JackONeill wrote: Discussing with people that are on a crusade against mech (often because they're butthurt loosing to it on ladder) is like discussing with an SJW. You can say anything you want, they won't listen to your arguments and will just mindlessly repeat "but you're a white male you can't talk about that"/"but you're a mech player you can't talk about that".
More seriously, mech is really weak right now because hydras and corrus are very good units against mech. Hydras aren't that much of an issue because they still die in two tank shots with +2, but that means you're forced into going relatively fast upgrades. But the Corruptor buff is quite extreme against mech : not only does it really buffs BL/corruptors army, but it also means that a mech player using air units support can't really go out on the map without a full air transition, because corruptors will just stroll through, ignore what AA you can get, kill all your ravens/liberators/banshees, and get out. All of this much faster.
And meanwhile, SH/abducts are still very oppressive issues mech faces that haven't been adressed at all.
Everything zerg has seems designed so that the mech player can't go out on the map : - can't really fight an hydra concave without +2 - can't fight locust waves without lots of AA/lots of ravens/an overwhelming amount of tanks hellbats that means you're pretty much allin - can't get out on the map and face abducts - can't really push with a ground force supported by few air units since corruptors will just swoop in and kill off your air support
So we're back to the HOTS meta where as a mech player the best and only reliable strategy is to do nothing but mass ravens, with extremely few options to move out and fight on the map with a mech army. If you compare it to mech vs protoss, probably the only matchup where mech is truly viable right now, there's no protoss unit that really prevents the mech player from moving out. At any point in the game, you can move out and take a fight without knowing you're gonna get crushed if you don't have 20 turrets around yourself. The only exception is mass phenixes straight into skytoss which can be punished by pushing out with few SCVs and thors.
You're like Zerg can produce SH, vipers and corruptors, Broodlords on pool tech...
If Zerg gets this units easily it's just because you camp at home, let him do whatever he wants.
Are you aware than balance discussion are meant to produce a MU where each player have 50% of winning ?
All i see from you is asking mech to have 100% winrate with removing all the mech counters.
And you're asking why everyone dislike mech players ?
On March 18 2017 21:32 JackONeill wrote: Discussing with people that are on a crusade against mech (often because they're butthurt loosing to it on ladder)
So...mech is viable in your view. Good to know. Thanks for clarifying.
Adorable but silly. If you think that because you're loosing to it on the ladder it's viable, ask platinium players to come up and say masters level full lings play is viable. And to anticipate your next argument "yeah but korean terrans are winning with mech", take a look at the entirety of pro play (and not some cheese based meta played only korea), how bio is still 95% of terran games everywhere on the pro scene, and you'll find that mech is extremely rarely played (because it's not really viable). So nice try... but nope.
On March 18 2017 21:32 JackONeill wrote: Discussing with people that are on a crusade against mech (often because they're butthurt loosing to it on ladder) is like discussing with an SJW. You can say anything you want, they won't listen to your arguments and will just mindlessly repeat "but you're a white male you can't talk about that"/"but you're a mech player you can't talk about that".
More seriously, mech is really weak right now because hydras and corrus are very good units against mech. Hydras aren't that much of an issue because they still die in two tank shots with +2, but that means you're forced into going relatively fast upgrades. But the Corruptor buff is quite extreme against mech : not only does it really buffs BL/corruptors army, but it also means that a mech player using air units support can't really go out on the map without a full air transition, because corruptors will just stroll through, ignore what AA you can get, kill all your ravens/liberators/banshees, and get out. All of this much faster.
And meanwhile, SH/abducts are still very oppressive issues mech faces that haven't been adressed at all.
Everything zerg has seems designed so that the mech player can't go out on the map : - can't really fight an hydra concave without +2 - can't fight locust waves without lots of AA/lots of ravens/an overwhelming amount of tanks hellbats that means you're pretty much allin - can't get out on the map and face abducts - can't really push with a ground force supported by few air units since corruptors will just swoop in and kill off your air support
So we're back to the HOTS meta where as a mech player the best and only reliable strategy is to do nothing but mass ravens, with extremely few options to move out and fight on the map with a mech army. If you compare it to mech vs protoss, probably the only matchup where mech is truly viable right now, there's no protoss unit that really prevents the mech player from moving out. At any point in the game, you can move out and take a fight without knowing you're gonna get crushed if you don't have 20 turrets around yourself. The only exception is mass phenixes straight into skytoss which can be punished by pushing out with few SCVs and thors.
You're like Zerg can produce SH, vipers and corruptors, Broodlords on pool tech...
If Zerg gets this units easily it's just because you camp at home, let him do whatever he wants.
Are you aware than balance discussion are meant to produce a MU where each player have 50% of winning ?
All i see from you is asking mech to have 100% winrate with removing all the mech counters.
And you're asking why everyone dislike mech players ?
So you're arguing that "if he gets there it's normal he wins because you turtled" and that mech players turtling is a horrible thing, but zerg turtle and never gets out on the map it's perfectly fine he auto-wins if the opponent never attacked?
Holy cow, the logic. "If i turtle and auto win it's fine, but if the opponent does it with mech it's an outrage !".
By the way thanks for proving my point man. "And you're asking why everyone dislike mech players ?" => not arguing the point, arguing how the other guy is terrible for playing a style.
On March 19 2017 00:12 Tyrhanius wrote: Zerg can't turtle, they need one more base than the other, and there is no strong static defense nor high range units like tanks.
It's just they CAN'T ATTACK Terran before SH/Hive tech, else they would lose all their units without killing nothing.
But if you want to propose a change to allow zerg to attack a PF + tank line on pre lair tech do it.
Zerg can't turtle. That has to be the funniest thing i've read since "MSC defense takes skill".
On March 19 2017 00:13 Cascade wrote: So let me get this straight. If i want to buff mech I'm ISIS. If i don't, I'm a SJW. Did I get that right?
Nah, it's more "if you argue the point, you're discussing, but if you try his intentions based on what you're imagining is his "hidden point/bias" is, you're wasting everybody's time".
On March 19 2017 00:12 Tyrhanius wrote: Zerg can't turtle, they need one more base than the other, and there is no strong static defense nor high range units like tanks.
It's just they CAN'T ATTACK Terran before SH/Hive tech, else they would lose all their units without killing nothing.
But if you want to propose a change to allow zerg to attack a PF + tank line on pre lair tech do it.
Zerg can't turtle. That has to be the funniest thing i've read since "MSC defense takes skill".
As funny as mech players are objective, skilled and don't spam forum with "buff me" every 3 days.
You just hear to cry, but you try to make it "sophisticated".
Zerg can't break a sieged tank line without SH/vipers/broodlords, and of course you ask for nerf of these units.
I'm surprised you don't ask tanks shoot up, it will solve all "the mech problem".
Why instead of spamming everyday forum of your mech whine, don't you create your own balance test map where you put the change you want ?
Everyone could see if your solution for mech are good or not then, and it's much more constructive than annoying everyone with your daily mech whine.
So, you're blaming mech players for advocating for buffs and design changes to make the style they like viable very frequently... but you're in the front line each and everytime to say so to spend countless hours discrediting them.
Either you have a lot of time to waste, either you are clicking on threads you don't want to read a lot.
And once again, i think i won't tire of repeating it, but your entire argument is "you're a mech player you want to turtle and nerf the anti turtle options". Which has never been my point, because : - the SH isn't an anti turtle option against mech, it especially forces more turtle. (see Ryung vs Leenock at GSL, I think) - the viper isn't an anti turtle unit, it forces the mech player to hide behind turrets in fear of abducts. Which is the definition of mech turtle. - and the BL, the only unit that really doesn't force any turtle play from the mech player, and by an incredible coincidence, it's one of the units i'd like to get buffed.
On January 30 2017 07:13 JackONeill wrote:the broodlord needs to be buffed so that if the terran player stays on a ground army for too long, zerg can punish it with superior economy by taking the fight to the air (buff back to 11 range so that thors have a little more trouble fighting them).
So please, now please explain on what is based your constant ranting but "he's a mech players so i'm gonna invent what i think his point is and fight it".
On March 19 2017 01:53 Tyrhanius wrote: So zerg must wait lair, infest pit, hive, spire, great spire to counter tanks ?
In reality you want to make a pre-broodlords tanks/thor/hellbats timing where Zerg can't counter them...
you know that if the winrates aren't 50/50 there will be patches so your fear that Zerg won't be able to counter mech pushes is unfounded. But yes, mech players want to be able to push in the midgame. Roach hydra viper should work fine against earlier pushes and when the mech army reaches 200+ supply you can switch to broodlords or pull the mech army apart with multiprong.
One thing I don't get, and perhaps there is a reason and I just don't know so please enlighten me: why do Terran players feel entitled to playing pure Mech?
What other race tries to play with units purely off of 1 building/tech tree for the entire game? When was this ever an option?
Don't bring up BW mech because it's simply not relevant. I can understand why people would want to play BW mech in SC2, but that's a fallacious premise to base your arguments upon.
What I see from what Mech players want is a strategy that encompasses all of the following:
1. Can safely skip bio, or get a handful of bio at most, and progress to more expensive units. 2. Can safely expand despite having a low amount of these expensive T2 units. 3. Also has the option of being aggressive during this time. 4. Can therefore theoretically win at any stage of the game, or at least gain an insurmountable advantage "if used properly." 5. Not be countered by units that are on equal or higher tech tree, nor be overwhelmed by the inevitably larger amount of lower tier units. 6. Have an answer to to everything in the game.
Did I get it right?
Now, I know I said not to bring up BW Mech, but I will just for parallel's sake. Mech is really good in BW right? It is the absolute standard in TvT minus some early-game Wraith shenanigans, mid/late-game drops, and super-late-game air mass. It is the absolute standard in TvP minus the first few marines you make to secure an expansion and/or push your enemy, and two semi-all-in mid-game builds. It comes to fruition in the lategame of modern TvZ after an early- and mid- game heavy Bio.
So, the question is, why do mech players in SC2 think that their mech can work like BW mech, but EVEN BETTER? You can't go straight to mech in BW TvZ in most situations because frankly, you can't get enough mech units to beat Zerg mass. You have to transition from bio, do a super-all-in to do damage, or do strange confusing builds that start with 2 factory goliath into bio and then back to mech. So why is it that SC2 players seem to think that their mech units should give them the luxury of countering Zerg at every stage of the game, when that was never the case and probably should never be the case?
Mech players I think are missing one crucial thing: that this is a strategy game. Your strategy can't be "I always go mech," and you expect your opponent not to react. You make a move in chess, opponent makes a counter-move that puts your piece in danger, and you just ignore that fact and continue to jeopardize units despite being countered? That seems smart, let's just change the rules of chess real quick to accommodate you, potentially to the detriment of all other players.
On March 19 2017 02:31 Jealous wrote: One thing I don't get, and perhaps there is a reason and I just don't know so please enlighten me: why do Terran players feel entitled to playing pure Mech?
Well, when the question is if mech should be viable I think the biggest question we should ask ourselves is "would it be good for the game?" This doesn't have anything to do with entitlement a lot of people just think that the answer to this question is "yes". Protoss players want to have chargelot templar viable in tvp. Why? Because it would be good for the game. Zerg players want to have Ling bane muta viable in zvt. Why? Because it's good for the game.
You are free to disagree that mech would be good for the game but keep in mind that the "mech" people want to have viable is aggressive timing-based mech play. Do you really think that would be bad for the game?
On March 19 2017 01:53 Tyrhanius wrote: So zerg must wait lair, infest pit, hive, spire, great spire to counter tanks ?
In reality you want to make a pre-broodlords tanks/thor/hellbats timing where Zerg can't counter them...
you know that if the winrates aren't 50/50 there will be patches so your fear that Zerg won't be able to counter mech pushes is unfounded. But yes, mech players want to be able to push in the midgame. Roach hydra viper should work fine against earlier pushes and when the mech army reaches 200+ supply you can switch to broodlords or pull the mech army apart with multiprong.
But they can push on mid game, never heard about Innovation/Gumiho/ryung ?
The dude just wants to push and never get beaten, so nerf SH/vipers (so roach/hydra vipers won't work), and the only unit that could counter would be a unit that is so long to reach that zerg can't get them on time.
And of course, broodlords is hard countered by ravens...
You know if avilo/JackOeneill and Co suggestions are made on the game, most Zerg will just stop playing...
On March 19 2017 01:53 Tyrhanius wrote: So zerg must wait lair, infest pit, hive, spire, great spire to counter tanks ?
In reality you want to make a pre-broodlords tanks/thor/hellbats timing where Zerg can't counter them...
you know that if the winrates aren't 50/50 there will be patches so your fear that Zerg won't be able to counter mech pushes is unfounded. But yes, mech players want to be able to push in the midgame. Roach hydra viper should work fine against earlier pushes and when the mech army reaches 200+ supply you can switch to broodlords or pull the mech army apart with multiprong.
But they can push on mid game, never heard about Innovation/Gumiho/ryung ?
The dude just wants to push and never get beaten, so nerf SH/vipers (so roach/hydra vipers won't work), and the only unit that could counter would be a unit that is so long to reach that zerg can't get them on time.
And of course, broodlords is hard countered by ravens...
You know if avilo/JackOeneill and Co suggestions are made on the game, most Zerg will just stop playing...
Well not all players that want mech to be viable share avilo's view. Mech seems ok in tvz but I'm unsure what's the possible counterplay to Swarmhosts.
On March 19 2017 02:31 Jealous wrote: One thing I don't get, and perhaps there is a reason and I just don't know so please enlighten me: why do Terran players feel entitled to playing pure Mech?
Well, when the question is if mech should be viable I think the biggest question we should ask ourselves is "would it be good for the game?" This doesn't have anything to do with entitlement a lot of people just think that the answer to this question is "yes". Protoss players want to have chargelot templar viable in tvp. Why? Because it would be good for the game. Zerg players want to have Ling bane muta viable in zvt. Why? Because it's good for the game.
You are free to disagree that mech would be good for the game but keep in mind that the "mech" people want to have viable is aggressive timing-based mech play. Do you really think that would be bad for the game?
I think that it shouldn't be a universal strategy equally applied to all match-ups. I don't think that the mech that they want vs. Zerg makes sense or is good for the game. What I would like to see in TvZ and in what mech players are asking for in TvZ is the ability to transition well in the late-game, or have the flexibility to do tricky strategies such as "fake mech" or "fake bio" so on and so forth.
On March 19 2017 02:31 Jealous wrote: One thing I don't get, and perhaps there is a reason and I just don't know so please enlighten me: why do Terran players feel entitled to playing pure Mech?
What other race tries to play with units purely off of 1 building/tech tree for the entire game? When was this ever an option?
Don't bring up BW mech because it's simply not relevant. I can understand why people would want to play BW mech in SC2, but that's a fallacious premise to base your arguments upon.
What I see from what Mech players want is a strategy that encompasses all of the following:
1. Can safely skip bio, or get a handful of bio at most, and progress to more expensive units. 2. Can safely expand despite having a low amount of these expensive T2 units. 3. Also has the option of being aggressive during this time. 4. Can therefore theoretically win at any stage of the game, or at least gain an insurmountable advantage "if used properly." 5. Not be countered by units that are on equal or higher tech tree, nor be overwhelmed by the inevitably larger amount of lower tier units. 6. Have an answer to to everything in the game.
Did I get it right?
Now, I know I said not to bring up BW Mech, but I will just for parallel's sake. Mech is really good in BW right? It is the absolute standard in TvT minus some early-game Wraith shenanigans, mid/late-game drops, and super-late-game air mass. It is the absolute standard in TvP minus the first few marines you make to secure an expansion and/or push your enemy, and two semi-all-in mid-game builds. It comes to fruition in the lategame of modern TvZ after an early- and mid- game heavy Bio.
So, the question is, why do mech players in SC2 think that their mech can work like BW mech, but EVEN BETTER? You can't go straight to mech in BW TvZ in most situations because frankly, you can't get enough mech units to beat Zerg mass. You have to transition from bio, do a super-all-in to do damage, or do strange confusing builds that start with 2 factory goliath into bio and then back to mech. So why is it that SC2 players seem to think that their mech units should give them the luxury of countering Zerg at every stage of the game, when that was never the case and probably should never be the case?
Mech players I think are missing one crucial thing: that this is a strategy game. Your strategy can't be "I always go mech," and you expect your opponent not to react. You make a move in chess, opponent makes a counter-move that puts your piece in danger, and you just ignore that fact and continue to jeopardize units despite being countered? That seems smart, let's just change the rules of chess real quick to accommodate you, potentially to the detriment of all other players.
This is really just the truth laid out in a non offensive way, completely agree, mech players seem obsessed with the idea that mech must be 100% viable at all stages of the game in all match ups and it must have no weaknesses until Hive tech. Meanwhile mech players don't want to just have an impenetrable defense, they also want the option of being extremely aggressive on demand if they want.
Very unreasonable and impossible to balance imo, as you said, even in BW where mech was very standard, most players outside of Flash couldn't just sit there, grab a third with minimal factory units and macro up unmolested. I don't see Protoss players able to go pure Robotics, they can go pure Skytoss but that's imbalanced and everyone knows it so that will be patched. I don't see Zerg able to make Roach/Hydra work vs bio, should that entire end of the spectrum be buffed merely so Zerg can have a bit more variety?
As I Zerg player I'd say no, just like I say no to anyone advocating that every comp must be as viable as then next, in BW there were standard ways to play, bio sucked outside of specific situations and mech was generally better, it's the opposite in SC2, stop listening to Avilo, he won't stop complaining about turtle mech not being unstoppable until he can start taking games off of Dark with 1/3 his apm and mechanics.
On March 19 2017 02:31 Jealous wrote: One thing I don't get, and perhaps there is a reason and I just don't know so please enlighten me: why do Terran players feel entitled to playing pure Mech?
What other race tries to play with units purely off of 1 building/tech tree for the entire game? When was this ever an option?
Don't bring up BW mech because it's simply not relevant. I can understand why people would want to play BW mech in SC2, but that's a fallacious premise to base your arguments upon.
What I see from what Mech players want is a strategy that encompasses all of the following:
1. Can safely skip bio, or get a handful of bio at most, and progress to more expensive units. 2. Can safely expand despite having a low amount of these expensive T2 units. 3. Also has the option of being aggressive during this time. 4. Can therefore theoretically win at any stage of the game, or at least gain an insurmountable advantage "if used properly." 5. Not be countered by units that are on equal or higher tech tree, nor be overwhelmed by the inevitably larger amount of lower tier units. 6. Have an answer to to everything in the game.
Did I get it right?
Now, I know I said not to bring up BW Mech, but I will just for parallel's sake. Mech is really good in BW right? It is the absolute standard in TvT minus some early-game Wraith shenanigans, mid/late-game drops, and super-late-game air mass. It is the absolute standard in TvP minus the first few marines you make to secure an expansion and/or push your enemy, and two semi-all-in mid-game builds. It comes to fruition in the lategame of modern TvZ after an early- and mid- game heavy Bio.
So, the question is, why do mech players in SC2 think that their mech can work like BW mech, but EVEN BETTER? You can't go straight to mech in BW TvZ in most situations because frankly, you can't get enough mech units to beat Zerg mass. You have to transition from bio, do a super-all-in to do damage, or do strange confusing builds that start with 2 factory goliath into bio and then back to mech. So why is it that SC2 players seem to think that their mech units should give them the luxury of countering Zerg at every stage of the game, when that was never the case and probably should never be the case?
Mech players I think are missing one crucial thing: that this is a strategy game. Your strategy can't be "I always go mech," and you expect your opponent not to react. You make a move in chess, opponent makes a counter-move that puts your piece in danger, and you just ignore that fact and continue to jeopardize units despite being countered? That seems smart, let's just change the rules of chess real quick to accommodate you, potentially to the detriment of all other players.
I feel like this is a legitimate interrogation :
Because of how terran tech works, if you go bio, you're gonna dump a lot of ressources into stim/production/medivacs/shield/concussive/bio upgrades. And you're forced to do so, because going for marines only with shields to support something else is crap, for instance. Some units work well without investing much in them : for exemple, banelings with speed only can be a very good adition to a zerg ranged build. They'll do less damage than with melee upgrades, but they'll still mainly do their job. Bio units are the complete opposite, you have to go for the "whole package". With how the upgrades work (bio vs mech), how bio requires both tech lab and ebay upgrades, plus medivacs, you only have little cash to add other units to the mix. With terran, if you want to go bio, every other units in the terran tech tree is only there to support bio. Liberators, vikings, tanks, mines, they're all there to complement bio and you can't cut into the "getting bio up" budget. This means that bio can only afford certain units, and that only certain units will ever be used with bio. You won't ever see efficient bio/cyclone play, because the marauder does a better job at it. Units used with bio are mainly units that do their job without heavy investment (mines/liberators), and that provide AoE damage or prevent ennemy AoE damage dealers to wreck bio (tanks/vikings). Seeing only bio all the time means a lot of units won't be used. And bio is also the reason why we've seen 2 medivacs full of marines builds for a long long time : because bio doesn't allow a lot of diversity.
Mech isn't "getting everything out of a single prod building". It's just "not playing with stim". To use some units that don't synergize well with bio, and see what works against what. Mech players are often people that don't really like to do the same stuff every game. If you were forced to go roach-based comps every single game against terran or you'd die, you'd get tired of it really quickly, because you wouldn't be able to play with other units too.
Also, another problem is that with mech you can't switch back into bio. If there's a way for your opponent to "counter" mech, that means you can't go mech in the matchup. And if you can't go mech in a matchup, that means going bio, and probably the same composition (MMMM or MMMtanks) every single game. If you want to see a matchup where mech is fun and fine, look at TvP. It's very fun to play mech because turtling is very bad. With the exception of skytoss or going for mass BCs, you won't gain anything from turtling because both protoss and terran have very effective way to break your turtle or to counter what late game units you're rushing. Also, in this matchup mech has the option to be agressive most of the time.
I think that what most mech players want isn't necessarly to go straight into late game units, or be able to produce everything from the factory. They just want mech play to be viable in every matchup, and be dynamic. For instance, the cyclone-based mech composition in TvP really isn't late-game orientated. If, instead for going into bio, mech players could go for cyclone/hellions for the early/mid game, into tanks/thors of the mid/late game, into skyterran for the very late game, most people would be glad. Because you'd have a non stim playstyle that also has different dynamic "stages" in most matchups.
Before this discussion gets out of hand (as always ), I think everybody needs to take a step back and think about what Mech means in Starcraft.
No, Mech is not about building factory based compositions even though that is what the name implies. It's fundamentally about that kind of high speed chess which especially BW TvT is known for. Incidentally this playstyle is enabled by mech units in BW because of the power of Siege Tanks and Spider Mines. But, what matters is the playstyle itself: little drop play, minimal harassment and instead straight up battle lines trying to outposition your opponent until you gain the upper hand.
So, if you really want to discuss Mech you have to think about why this playstyle is impossible, not why or whether factory unit compositions are not viable. The simple reason is this: SC2 provides too many mechanisms for terrain evasion like warp-in, turbovacs and invincible nydus. Locust waves also evade terrain, but let's not backtrack to the SH discussion.
What I specifically want to point out is that without making terrain more controllable — using whatever unit composition or by nerfing whatever terrain evasion mechanism — Mech cannot and will not be viable. Bio will always be better simply because it doesn not require the same degree of terrain control as Mech. SC2 simply does not support the Mech playstyle.
i handle swarmhosts with my mech game and i watch other mechers handle swarmhosts just fine. of course the claim is always that it takes 10x as much skill to battle the Swarmhosts.. so that winning against them is some kind of miracle.
i don't think Blizz is going to balance LotV at every level of play. it'll just be balanced at the top level. Terran is my favourite race. I play that race the most and yet its my lowest rank out of 4 races namely, Zerg, Protoss, Terran and Random. i still have fun any way.
i don't think its up to Blizzard to balance the game at 5,000 different play levels. and i'm just happy to the play the game because i don't hold any big identity with what my ladder rank is. so its a bit lower at Terran..whatever man.
i think at 125-APM//Diamond Zerg is easier to play than 125-APM//Diamond Terran and i'm fine with it. the game is still fun. even my evaluation might be wrong. however, at lower levels and low APMs 1 race is always slightly easier than another race. i don't care and i don't think the Blizzard team should be prioritizing this stuff.
if Masters and GMs who are below pro level and have never won a damn thing are experiencing imbalance i don't think its important either. They represent a very small population of players. same with me. i'm experiencing imbalance at my level. and it just doesn't matter.
Part of playing below top level in a diverse 3-race game is imbalance.
DISCLAIMER : i use 125 apm to describe my level of reaction time and speed of action in a very broad and vague sense to give a general idea of how quickly i'm doing stuff.
Seems to me most terrans have gotten quite good at neutralizing locusts with hellbats. As long as they protect their siege line from locust flanks, it's rather hard to take on the mech ball. It usually takes about two remaxes on roach/ravager while slowly withdrawing towards home base to burn away the hellbats before the tank line is engagable in an efficient way (unless you're lucky and manage to sneak around the mech ball and get a locust swarm off at the separated tanks).
Tbh I didn't think swarm hosts were that much of a problem anymore. Or at least neutralized to the point where the game is settled through a series of trades where SH-hellbat/tanks interplay decides the outcome.
On March 19 2017 02:31 Jealous wrote: One thing I don't get, and perhaps there is a reason and I just don't know so please enlighten me: why do Terran players feel entitled to playing pure Mech?
What other race tries to play with units purely off of 1 building/tech tree for the entire game? When was this ever an option?
Don't bring up BW mech because it's simply not relevant. I can understand why people would want to play BW mech in SC2, but that's a fallacious premise to base your arguments upon.
What I see from what Mech players want is a strategy that encompasses all of the following:
1. Can safely skip bio, or get a handful of bio at most, and progress to more expensive units. 2. Can safely expand despite having a low amount of these expensive T2 units. 3. Also has the option of being aggressive during this time. 4. Can therefore theoretically win at any stage of the game, or at least gain an insurmountable advantage "if used properly." 5. Not be countered by units that are on equal or higher tech tree, nor be overwhelmed by the inevitably larger amount of lower tier units. 6. Have an answer to to everything in the game.
Did I get it right?
Now, I know I said not to bring up BW Mech, but I will just for parallel's sake. Mech is really good in BW right? It is the absolute standard in TvT minus some early-game Wraith shenanigans, mid/late-game drops, and super-late-game air mass. It is the absolute standard in TvP minus the first few marines you make to secure an expansion and/or push your enemy, and two semi-all-in mid-game builds. It comes to fruition in the lategame of modern TvZ after an early- and mid- game heavy Bio.
So, the question is, why do mech players in SC2 think that their mech can work like BW mech, but EVEN BETTER? You can't go straight to mech in BW TvZ in most situations because frankly, you can't get enough mech units to beat Zerg mass. You have to transition from bio, do a super-all-in to do damage, or do strange confusing builds that start with 2 factory goliath into bio and then back to mech. So why is it that SC2 players seem to think that their mech units should give them the luxury of countering Zerg at every stage of the game, when that was never the case and probably should never be the case?
Mech players I think are missing one crucial thing: that this is a strategy game. Your strategy can't be "I always go mech," and you expect your opponent not to react. You make a move in chess, opponent makes a counter-move that puts your piece in danger, and you just ignore that fact and continue to jeopardize units despite being countered? That seems smart, let's just change the rules of chess real quick to accommodate you, potentially to the detriment of all other players.
Besides what others said take this into consideration.
A rax can produce 4 units, 1 an only early game unit, other a lategame unit only used in very narrow scenarios, the other 2 units on the other hand are the only ones that are "core units".
Factories can produce 7 units, 7! these units have all kinds of roles, harass, AoE to to air, ground or both, meath shields, countering melee units, bonus vs armored, bonus vs light, even bonush vs shield. Yet all of those are barely used in many scenarios (we can see entire tournaments without a hellbat, cyclone or thor being built at all).
The starport is used in all scenarios and are, save the very rare sky terran build, always support units (wich is good, because mass air strats are fucking awful).
How come 2 units, 2 fucking units, out of a building, can harness the whole game design so much? They are good in all MUs, at all stages in the game and in every ocasion.
No zerg or toss units have this, no unit has so much power over the whole overview of the game, roaches lose value over time very fast, zerglings are always good but mostly as minerals dumps for speed, stalkers are good on ocasions and bad on others. A terran can have mass bio with 3-3 in the lategame and except for super expensive AoE units, they can chew through everything else.
The question then isn't why mech should be viable, considering mech encompases many units and comps, the question is:
"Is it really good design only 2 units (cuz reapers are made early game and mech uses ghosts too), ONLY 2 FUCKING DAMN UNITS can totally dominate every terran MU in all scenarios?"
On March 19 2017 02:31 Jealous wrote: One thing I don't get, and perhaps there is a reason and I just don't know so please enlighten me: why do Terran players feel entitled to playing pure Mech?
What other race tries to play with units purely off of 1 building/tech tree for the entire game? When was this ever an option?
Don't bring up BW mech because it's simply not relevant. I can understand why people would want to play BW mech in SC2, but that's a fallacious premise to base your arguments upon.
What I see from what Mech players want is a strategy that encompasses all of the following:
1. Can safely skip bio, or get a handful of bio at most, and progress to more expensive units. 2. Can safely expand despite having a low amount of these expensive T2 units. 3. Also has the option of being aggressive during this time. 4. Can therefore theoretically win at any stage of the game, or at least gain an insurmountable advantage "if used properly." 5. Not be countered by units that are on equal or higher tech tree, nor be overwhelmed by the inevitably larger amount of lower tier units. 6. Have an answer to to everything in the game.
Did I get it right?
Now, I know I said not to bring up BW Mech, but I will just for parallel's sake. Mech is really good in BW right? It is the absolute standard in TvT minus some early-game Wraith shenanigans, mid/late-game drops, and super-late-game air mass. It is the absolute standard in TvP minus the first few marines you make to secure an expansion and/or push your enemy, and two semi-all-in mid-game builds. It comes to fruition in the lategame of modern TvZ after an early- and mid- game heavy Bio.
So, the question is, why do mech players in SC2 think that their mech can work like BW mech, but EVEN BETTER? You can't go straight to mech in BW TvZ in most situations because frankly, you can't get enough mech units to beat Zerg mass. You have to transition from bio, do a super-all-in to do damage, or do strange confusing builds that start with 2 factory goliath into bio and then back to mech. So why is it that SC2 players seem to think that their mech units should give them the luxury of countering Zerg at every stage of the game, when that was never the case and probably should never be the case?
Mech players I think are missing one crucial thing: that this is a strategy game. Your strategy can't be "I always go mech," and you expect your opponent not to react. You make a move in chess, opponent makes a counter-move that puts your piece in danger, and you just ignore that fact and continue to jeopardize units despite being countered? That seems smart, let's just change the rules of chess real quick to accommodate you, potentially to the detriment of all other players.
Besides what others said take this into consideration.
A rax can produce 4 units, 1 an only early game unit, other a lategame unit only used in very narrow scenarios, the other 2 units on the other hand are the only ones that are "core units".
Factories can produce 7 units, 7! these units have all kinds of roles, harass, AoE to to air, ground or both, meath shields, countering melee units, bonus vs armored, bonus vs light, even bonush vs shield. Yet all of those are barely used in many scenarios (we can see entire tournaments without a hellbat, cyclone or thor being built at all).
The starport is used in all scenarios and are, save the very rare sky terran build, always support units (wich is good, because mass air strats are fucking awful).
How come 2 units, 2 fucking units, out of a building, can harness the whole game design so much? They are good in all MUs, at all stages in the game and in every ocasion.
No zerg or toss units have this, no unit has so much power over the whole overview of the game, roaches lose value over time very fast, zerglings are always good but mostly as minerals dumps for speed, stalkers are good on ocasions and bad on others. A terran can have mass bio with 3-3 in the lategame and except for super expensive AoE units, they can chew through everything else.
The question then isn't why mech should be viable, considering mech encompases many units and comps, the question is:
"Is it really good design only 2 units (cuz reapers are made early game and mech uses ghosts too), ONLY 2 FUCKING DAMN UNITS can totally dominate every terran MU in all scenarios?"
Think about it, really do.
Don't understand your point. Marines and Marauders are trash without medivacs, widow mines and liberators.
On March 19 2017 02:31 Jealous wrote: One thing I don't get, and perhaps there is a reason and I just don't know so please enlighten me: why do Terran players feel entitled to playing pure Mech?
What other race tries to play with units purely off of 1 building/tech tree for the entire game? When was this ever an option?
Don't bring up BW mech because it's simply not relevant. I can understand why people would want to play BW mech in SC2, but that's a fallacious premise to base your arguments upon.
What I see from what Mech players want is a strategy that encompasses all of the following:
1. Can safely skip bio, or get a handful of bio at most, and progress to more expensive units. 2. Can safely expand despite having a low amount of these expensive T2 units. 3. Also has the option of being aggressive during this time. 4. Can therefore theoretically win at any stage of the game, or at least gain an insurmountable advantage "if used properly." 5. Not be countered by units that are on equal or higher tech tree, nor be overwhelmed by the inevitably larger amount of lower tier units. 6. Have an answer to to everything in the game.
Did I get it right?
Now, I know I said not to bring up BW Mech, but I will just for parallel's sake. Mech is really good in BW right? It is the absolute standard in TvT minus some early-game Wraith shenanigans, mid/late-game drops, and super-late-game air mass. It is the absolute standard in TvP minus the first few marines you make to secure an expansion and/or push your enemy, and two semi-all-in mid-game builds. It comes to fruition in the lategame of modern TvZ after an early- and mid- game heavy Bio.
So, the question is, why do mech players in SC2 think that their mech can work like BW mech, but EVEN BETTER? You can't go straight to mech in BW TvZ in most situations because frankly, you can't get enough mech units to beat Zerg mass. You have to transition from bio, do a super-all-in to do damage, or do strange confusing builds that start with 2 factory goliath into bio and then back to mech. So why is it that SC2 players seem to think that their mech units should give them the luxury of countering Zerg at every stage of the game, when that was never the case and probably should never be the case?
Mech players I think are missing one crucial thing: that this is a strategy game. Your strategy can't be "I always go mech," and you expect your opponent not to react. You make a move in chess, opponent makes a counter-move that puts your piece in danger, and you just ignore that fact and continue to jeopardize units despite being countered? That seems smart, let's just change the rules of chess real quick to accommodate you, potentially to the detriment of all other players.
Besides what others said take this into consideration.
A rax can produce 4 units, 1 an only early game unit, other a lategame unit only used in very narrow scenarios, the other 2 units on the other hand are the only ones that are "core units".
Factories can produce 7 units, 7! these units have all kinds of roles, harass, AoE to to air, ground or both, meath shields, countering melee units, bonus vs armored, bonus vs light, even bonush vs shield. Yet all of those are barely used in many scenarios (we can see entire tournaments without a hellbat, cyclone or thor being built at all).
The starport is used in all scenarios and are, save the very rare sky terran build, always support units (wich is good, because mass air strats are fucking awful).
How come 2 units, 2 fucking units, out of a building, can harness the whole game design so much? They are good in all MUs, at all stages in the game and in every ocasion.
No zerg or toss units have this, no unit has so much power over the whole overview of the game, roaches lose value over time very fast, zerglings are always good but mostly as minerals dumps for speed, stalkers are good on ocasions and bad on others. A terran can have mass bio with 3-3 in the lategame and except for super expensive AoE units, they can chew through everything else.
The question then isn't why mech should be viable, considering mech encompases many units and comps, the question is:
"Is it really good design only 2 units (cuz reapers are made early game and mech uses ghosts too), ONLY 2 FUCKING DAMN UNITS can totally dominate every terran MU in all scenarios?"
Think about it, really do.
Don't understand your point. Marines and Marauders are trash without medivacs, widow mines and liberators.
Well medivacs, yes of course, the other maybe and maybe not. These units are good in certain MUs and in certain situations (you won't use WM in TvT or libs vs a roach ravager zerg) like most good units are.
The thing is people say "using only factory units (wich is a big falacy anyway because you still use rax units for early game and ghost for late game and of course starport units are a must) but are completely ok with only 2 units dominating the game (I didn't add medivacs because is commmon to get for mech in some scenarios, TvT needs them alot for hellbat dropping for example).
Yes its not so much as it was in HotS, where you will see players just massing bio, or losing all the support units and win with the mass bio remaining.
On March 19 2017 02:31 Jealous wrote: One thing I don't get, and perhaps there is a reason and I just don't know so please enlighten me: why do Terran players feel entitled to playing pure Mech?
What other race tries to play with units purely off of 1 building/tech tree for the entire game? When was this ever an option?
Don't bring up BW mech because it's simply not relevant. I can understand why people would want to play BW mech in SC2, but that's a fallacious premise to base your arguments upon.
What I see from what Mech players want is a strategy that encompasses all of the following:
1. Can safely skip bio, or get a handful of bio at most, and progress to more expensive units. 2. Can safely expand despite having a low amount of these expensive T2 units. 3. Also has the option of being aggressive during this time. 4. Can therefore theoretically win at any stage of the game, or at least gain an insurmountable advantage "if used properly." 5. Not be countered by units that are on equal or higher tech tree, nor be overwhelmed by the inevitably larger amount of lower tier units. 6. Have an answer to to everything in the game.
Did I get it right?
Now, I know I said not to bring up BW Mech, but I will just for parallel's sake. Mech is really good in BW right? It is the absolute standard in TvT minus some early-game Wraith shenanigans, mid/late-game drops, and super-late-game air mass. It is the absolute standard in TvP minus the first few marines you make to secure an expansion and/or push your enemy, and two semi-all-in mid-game builds. It comes to fruition in the lategame of modern TvZ after an early- and mid- game heavy Bio.
So, the question is, why do mech players in SC2 think that their mech can work like BW mech, but EVEN BETTER? You can't go straight to mech in BW TvZ in most situations because frankly, you can't get enough mech units to beat Zerg mass. You have to transition from bio, do a super-all-in to do damage, or do strange confusing builds that start with 2 factory goliath into bio and then back to mech. So why is it that SC2 players seem to think that their mech units should give them the luxury of countering Zerg at every stage of the game, when that was never the case and probably should never be the case?
Mech players I think are missing one crucial thing: that this is a strategy game. Your strategy can't be "I always go mech," and you expect your opponent not to react. You make a move in chess, opponent makes a counter-move that puts your piece in danger, and you just ignore that fact and continue to jeopardize units despite being countered? That seems smart, let's just change the rules of chess real quick to accommodate you, potentially to the detriment of all other players.
Besides what others said take this into consideration.
A rax can produce 4 units, 1 an only early game unit, other a lategame unit only used in very narrow scenarios, the other 2 units on the other hand are the only ones that are "core units".
Factories can produce 7 units, 7! these units have all kinds of roles, harass, AoE to to air, ground or both, meath shields, countering melee units, bonus vs armored, bonus vs light, even bonush vs shield. Yet all of those are barely used in many scenarios (we can see entire tournaments without a hellbat, cyclone or thor being built at all).
The starport is used in all scenarios and are, save the very rare sky terran build, always support units (wich is good, because mass air strats are fucking awful).
How come 2 units, 2 fucking units, out of a building, can harness the whole game design so much? They are good in all MUs, at all stages in the game and in every ocasion.
No zerg or toss units have this, no unit has so much power over the whole overview of the game, roaches lose value over time very fast, zerglings are always good but mostly as minerals dumps for speed, stalkers are good on ocasions and bad on others. A terran can have mass bio with 3-3 in the lategame and except for super expensive AoE units, they can chew through everything else.
The question then isn't why mech should be viable, considering mech encompases many units and comps, the question is:
"Is it really good design only 2 units (cuz reapers are made early game and mech uses ghosts too), ONLY 2 FUCKING DAMN UNITS can totally dominate every terran MU in all scenarios?"
Think about it, really do.
Don't understand your point. Marines and Marauders are trash without medivacs, widow mines and liberators.
Well medivacs, yes of course, the other maybe and maybe not. These units are good in certain MUs and in certain situations (you won't use WM in TvT or libs vs a roach ravager zerg) like most good units are.
The thing is people say "using only factory units (wich is a big falacy anyway because you still use rax units for early game and ghost for late game and of course starport units are a must) but are completely ok with only 2 units dominating the game (I didn't add medivacs because is commmon to get for mech in some scenarios, TvT needs them alot for hellbat dropping for example).
Yes its not so much as it was in HotS, where you will see players just massing bio, or losing all the support units and win with the mass bio remaining.
Honestly a lot of the complaint as to why marines are so strong (and this has been a complaint that is a recurring river throughout the history of sc2) has to do with unit pathing and clumping. Marines, a small unit that is [moderately] quick clump together very nicely into tiny balls of damage output.
Sure, they then open themselves up to splash damage and whatnot, but they just pull themselves together in a way that BW marines never could. this allows for them to be incredibly versatile units.
But i do think everyone has said their piece; some people want mech to be stronger (and seem to be arguing what some other posters are: that they really want a 100% win-rate until brood lords come out); others want it to remain the same (hellbats do seem to be doing a great job at just murdering locusts when in the right position).
I'm not sure what additional action the people who necro this thread again and again really want us to take, since obviously blizzard seems to think that mech is in a usable state.
Blizzard seems to want to encourage [read: force] everyone to build large swaths of units. So that you see a little bit of everything in as many games as possible. We all know that this is largely unrealistic, but that seems to be what they want. And if you try to use only one building, they want to discourage that.
I hope people realize if they made mech viable and toned down some of the OP anti-mech things like swarmhost/viper/carrier as well as in general giving mech a better anti-air unit...we'd see games where mech Terrans can macro off 5+ fact aka going up to around 7-10 factories for aggro all over the map.
The reason mech is near unplayable atm (unless you call turtle to mass ravens "mech") is because it's impossible to go past 5 factories and still have a chance to win the game past the 10 min mark.
If you go past 5 fact, Z/P and even T will just start amassing any amount of air units and you're screwed because there is no readily available factory AA unit that you can mass produce from 10 facts and play a macro game off of.
I've posted many times in the past the reason when mech is always viable it's TURTLE MECH that is viable is because there's no factory AA meaning even if you wanna attack it's never cost efficient and will cost you the game because you'll probably clear a hatchery/nexus at best and your entire army will get cleaned up by 3 carriers or broodlords.
Honestly mech can be made viable if they:
1) Give mech anti-air that trades vs carrier/tempest/BC/lib 2) Tone down/remove swarmhosts and carrier+air units in general 3) Stop nerfing mech units every patch and buffing anti-mech units every patch
Same thing from you again and again and again and again, still ignoring all of the points brought up in this and several other threads about Factory-based strategies. You can't just demand buffs to cover all of your bases for every possible situation that you could ever be in when using a single strategy and small set of units on ladder. You demand that Mech function solely off of Factories and yet Bio doesn't solely use Barracks units in any stage of the game after a few minutes, and Terran armies and core army units in general are not designed to be effective against everything without proper supporting units (such as Marauders, Widow Mines, Siege Tanks, Medivacs, Vikings, and Ravens for Terran).
I suppose I'll also remind everyone that giving several buffs to the units that you want to use every game while nerfing multiple units you don't like from a highly subjective point of view without providing suggestions to keep the other races and playstyles balanced is not how game design works.
I've noticed that you like to use the argument of "If you do X and your opponent does Y then you're screwed because Z therefore I'm clearly justified in my demands", which is actually an argument that is used against demands to remove counters in a strategy game and is where much of the strategy itself comes from. It's also part of the meta in many games, RTS or otherwise. If you don't want Air units to exist just like how you don't want Swarm Hosts to exist just like how you don't want Brood Lords to exist because they are capable of winning against your strategy when you don't prepare for them, then you are either not understanding the game properly or you simply don't want to have to ever use more than one single strategy when playing or react to what you anticipate your opponent is doing.
I would suggest that you not play strategy games because you don't seem to want to be strategic whatsoever, your own personal time and energy would be better spent playing another game, perhaps another game in an entirely different genre. That's really what it comes down to, I think. However, if you really only want to make Factories and Mechanical units in StarCraft and refuse to try something different, either a different strategy, other army compositions, or a different game, then I would recommend 2v2 ladder, Co-op or the Arcade instead of 1v1 ladder. The type of gameplay you're asking for is much more possible with much less stress in those game modes, and as for other games you might be better off with Company of Heroes, a Dawn of War game, or a possibly single player Action RPG, something in which you can get the satisfaction you're chasing and get rewarded by a game that was designed to reward something you want to do without being stressed that the game you're playing and a very large percentage of its community have been trying to step away from what you want for several years.
Oh, and how many times to have to say what the word viable means? Mech is viable. There is evidence that it is viable. I have provided evidence on multiple occasions in multiple threads, as have several other people, and you yourself do on your own stream when you win matches but pretend you don't, which seems odd but I digress.
The thing is Swarm Hosts are not even needed vs mech. Swarm Hosts just creates a completly unnecessary balance problem.
Zerg would be perfectly fine vs mech even if Swarm Hosts were not in the game.
In the mid game Zerg has a large production, and mobility advantage over mech. In the late game they have the same mobility and production advantage but got Vipers which are really strong vs all mech compositions.
The only situation where mech is too strong vs Zerg if you manage to get up to 20+Ravens. Which is why I suggest nerfing auto turrets and increasing the supply of Ravens.
So, is there a plan by blizzard to acknowledge that this is still a huge issue in the current game?
Every game right now is "turtle into 40 raven" or you autolose to the new OP hydra+swarmhost in TvZ.
For anyone commenting "don't play mech" then don't bother posting in this thread, swarmhosts currently have no counter when going for mech, and they do not belong in SC2 in their current form.
If anyone is actually of the opinion "then don't go mech" then ok "don't play SC2." This game is supposed to have many ways to play, not just be forced to play the predetermined 16 marine drop way every single game.
Can we get someone that actually has some pull with blizzard to get them to address swarmhosts before this goes on for the next months?
On March 24 2017 09:53 avilo wrote: So, is there a plan by blizzard to acknowledge that this is still a huge issue in the current game?
Every game right now is "turtle into 40 raven" or you autolose to the new OP hydra+swarmhost in TvZ.
For anyone commenting "don't play mech" then don't bother posting in this thread, swarmhosts currently have no counter when going for mech, and they do not belong in SC2 in their current form.
If anyone is actually of the opinion "then don't go mech" then ok "don't play SC2." This game is supposed to have many ways to play, not just be forced to play the predetermined 16 marine drop way every single game.
Can we get someone that actually has some pull with blizzard to get them to address swarmhosts before this goes on for the next months?
You're still doing all of the things people have been telling you are pointless for months/years and ignoring the evidence everyone else brought to the table, why do you keep bumping this thread without contributing anything new? Did you lose to a Zerg on ladder again and are too upset not to rant on forums or what's the deal? Find a new outlet or something, dude.
I'd suggest writing a blog somewhere other than the TL General Forums.
On March 24 2017 09:53 avilo wrote: So, is there a plan by blizzard to acknowledge that this is still a huge issue in the current game?
Every game right now is "turtle into 40 raven" or you autolose to the new OP hydra+swarmhost in TvZ.
For anyone commenting "don't play mech" then don't bother posting in this thread, swarmhosts currently have no counter when going for mech, and they do not belong in SC2 in their current form.
If anyone is actually of the opinion "then don't go mech" then ok "don't play SC2." This game is supposed to have many ways to play, not just be forced to play the predetermined 16 marine drop way every single game.
Can we get someone that actually has some pull with blizzard to get them to address swarmhosts before this goes on for the next months?
No one cares about your opinion Avilo, no one really cares about mine either, the balance team work towards balancing the game at the highest level 1st and foremost. Watch Inno's stream for how to play T optimally (he does many different builds, some incorporating mech) - GL and HF.
On March 24 2017 09:53 avilo wrote: So, is there a plan by blizzard to acknowledge that this is still a huge issue in the current game?
Every game right now is "turtle into 40 raven" or you autolose to the new OP hydra+swarmhost in TvZ.
For anyone commenting "don't play mech" then don't bother posting in this thread, swarmhosts currently have no counter when going for mech, and they do not belong in SC2 in their current form.
If anyone is actually of the opinion "then don't go mech" then ok "don't play SC2." This game is supposed to have many ways to play, not just be forced to play the predetermined 16 marine drop way every single game.
Can we get someone that actually has some pull with blizzard to get them to address swarmhosts before this goes on for the next months?
No one cares about your opinion Avilo, no one really cares about mine either, the balance team work towards balancing the game at the highest level 1st and foremost. Watch Inno's stream for how to play T optimally (he does many different builds, some incorporating mech) - GL and HF.
That is totally not true either. Since LotV release the team has stated many times that the central focus is to make the game fun for all players and balance later, even if pros have to face imbalance sometimes.
On March 24 2017 09:53 avilo wrote: So, is there a plan by blizzard to acknowledge that this is still a huge issue in the current game?
Every game right now is "turtle into 40 raven" or you autolose to the new OP hydra+swarmhost in TvZ.
For anyone commenting "don't play mech" then don't bother posting in this thread, swarmhosts currently have no counter when going for mech, and they do not belong in SC2 in their current form.
If anyone is actually of the opinion "then don't go mech" then ok "don't play SC2." This game is supposed to have many ways to play, not just be forced to play the predetermined 16 marine drop way every single game.
Can we get someone that actually has some pull with blizzard to get them to address swarmhosts before this goes on for the next months?
i watched you complain for 15 minutes in game about all tthe Swarmhosts and Hydralisks your opponent built... then you added that he must be hacking because of how he moves his Hydralisks as well. I noted plenty of Broodlords and Corruptors during the game.. but hey let's not confuse the story.
you then went on to win the game though.,, claiming no one else could've pulled out the win!
you hit the Trifecta in 1 game : OP Hydras, OP Swarmhosts, Hacking and you won... AGAINST ALL ODDS.
thx for the comedy show man.
as a Terran player i'm basically satisified with the way the game is right now. i experiment with a wide variety of play styles and i'm having fun. i don't want some big shake up in the game. if Blizzard wants to nerf Terran air a bit and buff Terran ground i'd like that. Other than that i don't want to see anything major.
I really don't know what to do vs hydra/swarmhosts. Even if i deal a lot of dmg with some timing or harass, i can't follow it up with something that can keep up with the constant locust waves. The swarmhosts run into me, spawn locusts and just run away and i can't catch them or counter them in any way.
counter attacks get easily shut down by hydras, because tanks don't deal good dmg to them and locusts just "doomdrop" on top of the tanks, so they kill themselves before attacking the hydras. Since locusts don't cost money, zerg also can bank up enough ressources to transition into a lot of broodlords or other expensive units.
On May 04 2017 23:06 StraKo wrote: I really don't know what to do vs hydra/swarmhosts. Even if i deal a lot of dmg with some timing or harass, i can't follow it up with something that can keep up with the constant locust waves. The swarmhosts run into me, spawn locusts and just run away and i can't catch them or counter them in any way.
counter attacks get easily shut down by hydras, because tanks don't deal good dmg to them and locusts just "doomdrop" on top of the tanks, so they kill themselves before attacking the hydras. Since locusts don't cost money, zerg also can bank up enough ressources to transition into a lot of broodlords or other expensive units.
Unfortunately there is no in-game solution to this that works consistently or we would have found it by now.
All we can do is to wait for Blizzard to do something about the Swarm Hosts.
75 gas Swarm Hosts with their current stats is just broken.
i'm down for swarm hosts being nerfed not because i think mech needs to be viable (it doesn't) but because their usage isn't fun or interesting. the new design didn't "fix" them in terms of being cool units. right now they're literally just something zerg players do because it works well against mech and playing a 40 minute game against mech is even less fun than playing swarm hosts
who wants a unit with one attack on an extremely long cooldown? swarm hosts need another redesign or to be removed. if they're going to stay in the game they should be a support unit that accompanies the army. if we're keeping locusts then they should be fast-spawning and extremely weak, so they can be used to tank for the main army or maybe for minor harass (roll back the speed buff as well so they can be a more traditional harass unit and not a horrendous gimmick)
playing against swarm hosts is ridiculous and not fun either - either you scout that swarm hosts are coming or suddenly your base is being torn apart by locusts and you're in panic mode. it's the same kind of "whoops, suddenly you're dying" mechanic that makes people hate playing against cannon rushes
Have you tried using Stim Marines or Widow Mines in Medivacs, Cyclones, landing Vikings, or even using Reapers? I've seen a handful of players be successful with them in chasing down the Swarm Hosts and Hydralisks and making room to set up more forward Siege Tanks and Widow Mines. I've also seen success with constructing Sensory Towers on the farthest sides of the Terran player's area of control to better see when Swarm Hosts or their Locusts are approaching and using Ravens' Turrets and either Banshees or Marines to defend them and afterward briefly counter attacking with Reapers and Cyclones while the Swarm Hosts are on cooldown.
Various combinations of these seem to do well against a Zerg going for Swarm Hosts and Hydralisks or even Ling Bane Hydra Lurker, Vikings are pretty decent versus Roaches as long as they have some other units like a smattering of Marines and Widow Mines or Tanks, and just a couple of Thors can do incredibly well if they are going for Mutalisks, so you can cover just about anything they'll be making alongside the Swarm Hosts. Cyclones, Hellions, Marines, and Reapers are all good at removing Creep, especially with a Raven, which in my experience makes using Swarm Hosts much less powerful.
Although, all of these involve moving out of your base and engaging with your opponent, so if you don't want to do that until you have Battlecruisers or Ghosts and such then I'm not sure how to help.
On May 05 2017 01:27 brickrd wrote: playing against swarm hosts is ridiculous and not fun either
Funny, because a massive portion of the player base has been saying the same thing about turtle playstyles (especially Mech) since, oh, 2010 or so if my memory serves me well, which Swarm Hosts are meant to keep in check.
On May 05 2017 01:27 brickrd wrote: playing against swarm hosts is ridiculous and not fun either
Funny, because a massive portion of the player base has been saying the same thing about turtle playstyles (especially Mech) since, oh, 2010 or so if my memory serves me well, which Swarm Hosts are meant to keep in check.
thats literally exactly what i said in my post - "zergs only use sh because playing against mech is less fun". which is my whole point. the only "good" thing about it is that it's better than something bad. they're still both bad
EPT
), I think everybody needs to take a step back and think about what Mech means in Starcraft.
