|
Let me first say that I have always hated the widow mine. As a Terran scrub on ladder, I never could control the mines to do as I wanted. When even Bomber could not control the mines well, what hope is there for the rest of us?
Well, that's what makes the mines great. In the right hands, mines can do terrible, terrible damage. In the wrong hands, it'll still do terrible, terrible (friendly-fire) damage. And for most of us, it will be somewhere in between.
Widow mines differentiate the best from the very good Terrans.
This is also true for the opposing side. Mines can do very little damage if handled correctly. Even without detection, the top players are able to spot the slight animation before a mine fires - and protect their mutalisks or oracles. Even when the mines do fire, their splits are on point - well defended mine drops usually kill only 1 or 2 sacrificial probes. Lings can drag mine hits into the enemy lines.
Widow mines, again, differentiate the best from the very good non-Terrans.
So, why the hate? Why are mines so universally condemned by both Terrans as unreliable, friendly-fire monsters and non-Terrans as game-ending eviscerator of mineral lines?
Precisely because it raises the skill-ceiling for all parties involved. And our egos can't handle it. So my dear fellow whiners, let's take a hard look at the hate for widow mines and reflect on how it can influence the health of the scene.
Here's my humble opinion. Anything that creates more opportunities for the top-most players to shine; anything that makes us plebs wide-eyed in admiration for feats of skill and talent; anything that makes us groan or cheer in a roller-coaster of emotions - deserves love (even if its begrudging) , not hate.
|
Players can also show their skills in ways that don't involve instantly losing the game to a moment of inattention. SC2 has long had a problem with game-ending moments, and widow mines are part of it. Mind you they (and disruptors) are probably among the more benign game-ending things that the game has had, but that doesn't make them a 'great' unit. It's far from the worst unit though.
|
**** the widow mine.
It's an awful unit, that exists to suddenly end games out the blue, almost cannot be cost-inefficient, and is just immensely frustrating to play against. Playing against a Terran using mines you just always accept the risk you may suddenly lose to 4 mines under a tank or some other nonsense.
It wouldn't be such an issue were it not for them also being so cheap, reactorable, and available pretty much the whole game.
The fact that the balance team wants to buff them is concerning, to say the least.
|
On May 18 2020 05:32 ZigguratOfUr wrote:
Players can also show their skills in ways that don't involve instantly losing the game to a moment of inattention. SC2 has long had a problem with game-ending moments, and widow mines are part of it. Mind you they (and disruptors) are probably among the more benign game-ending things that the game has had, but that doesn't make them a 'great' unit. It's far from the worst unit though.
Moment of inattention vs storms? Moment of inattention vs banes? Moment of inattention vs tanks?
We have accepted these to be standards for skill and talent. Why not mines?
On May 18 2020 05:44 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:
**** the widow mine.
It's an awful unit, that exists to suddenly end games out the blue, almost cannot be cost-inefficient, and is just immensely frustrating to play against. Playing against a Terran using mines you just always accept the risk you may suddenly lose to 4 mines under a tank or some other nonsense.
It wouldn't be such an issue were it not for them also being so cheap, reactorable [pentarp: as in able to produce in mass], and available pretty much the whole game.
The fact that the balance team wants to buff them is concerning, to say the least.
Banelings also fit the criteria for why you think mines are such an issue.
|
mines are great and almost always create exciting gameplay. some of the best games in sc2 involve tvz bio mines. they just do what tanks cant and that is be cost effective vs lings and zealots. there are tons of units that end games super fast, thats just how sc has always been.
|
I think units like the widow mine or the disruptor have been added to emulate the feeling sc1 Reavers have.
The game design decisions in sc2 factor in the esport side and sc1 reavers often were hype moments because of the uncertainty of the damage.
|
You are funny Pentarp. Next tell us why there is nothing wrong with swarmhosts please.
User was warned for this post.
|
On May 18 2020 05:45 Pentarp wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2020 05:32 ZigguratOfUr wrote:
Players can also show their skills in ways that don't involve instantly losing the game to a moment of inattention. SC2 has long had a problem with game-ending moments, and widow mines are part of it. Mind you they (and disruptors) are probably among the more benign game-ending things that the game has had, but that doesn't make them a 'great' unit. It's far from the worst unit though. Moment of inattention vs storms? Moment of inattention vs banes? Moment of inattention vs tanks? We have accepted these to be standards for skill and talent. Why not mines? Show nested quote +On May 18 2020 05:44 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:
**** the widow mine.
It's an awful unit, that exists to suddenly end games out the blue, almost cannot be cost-inefficient, and is just immensely frustrating to play against. Playing against a Terran using mines you just always accept the risk you may suddenly lose to 4 mines under a tank or some other nonsense.
It wouldn't be such an issue were it not for them also being so cheap, reactorable [pentarp: as in able to produce in mass], and available pretty much the whole game.
The fact that the balance team wants to buff them is concerning, to say the least. Banelings also fit the criteria for why you think mines are such an issue.
The word also was important there.
Banes are often cost ineffective, rarely kill things from cloak (and require good map awareness to do so) and have much less ability to launch sudden death out of nowhere. Banes normally have to run into your army to kill it, which makes the instalose potential rather less sharp, especially if you have a it of vision around the map (they also can't kill air units, which have a tendancy to clump).
|
On May 18 2020 05:57 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2020 05:45 Pentarp wrote:On May 18 2020 05:32 ZigguratOfUr wrote:
Players can also show their skills in ways that don't involve instantly losing the game to a moment of inattention. SC2 has long had a problem with game-ending moments, and widow mines are part of it. Mind you they (and disruptors) are probably among the more benign game-ending things that the game has had, but that doesn't make them a 'great' unit. It's far from the worst unit though. Moment of inattention vs storms? Moment of inattention vs banes? Moment of inattention vs tanks? We have accepted these to be standards for skill and talent. Why not mines? On May 18 2020 05:44 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:
**** the widow mine.
It's an awful unit, that exists to suddenly end games out the blue, almost cannot be cost-inefficient, and is just immensely frustrating to play against. Playing against a Terran using mines you just always accept the risk you may suddenly lose to 4 mines under a tank or some other nonsense.
It wouldn't be such an issue were it not for them also being so cheap, reactorable [pentarp: as in able to produce in mass], and available pretty much the whole game.
The fact that the balance team wants to buff them is concerning, to say the least. Banelings also fit the criteria for why you think mines are such an issue. The word also was important there. Banes are often cost ineffective, rarely kill things from cloak (and require good map awareness to do so) and have much less ability to launch sudden death out of nowhere. Banes normally have to run into your army to kill it, which makes the instalose potential rather less sharp, especially if you have a it of vision around the map (they also can't kill air units, which have a tendancy to clump).
Excuse me for bringing this up, but the damage banelings can do for their supply can be equally silly to that if WMs. The mines seems to have been introduced as an equalizer for a gameplay style I have problems with.
Watching Maru play like a god against banelings in the gsl and finally getting some insane WM hits to seal the game made Terran look OP, but nobody else has that combination of micro, multi tasking, awareness and macro. I still would have liked to balanced TvZ around better baneling counters and just remove the mines. Helbats, cyclones and helions are better designed units which can do their job imo.
|
On May 18 2020 05:51 naughtDE wrote:
You are funny Pentarp. Next tell us why there is nothing wrong with swarmhosts please.
Wait what you are actually comparing a unit that can be very cost effective but can also do extreme friendly fire damage to a swarmhost that 99% of the times gets value and is far far more reliable?
|
On May 18 2020 06:16 Slydie wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2020 05:57 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:On May 18 2020 05:45 Pentarp wrote:On May 18 2020 05:32 ZigguratOfUr wrote:
Players can also show their skills in ways that don't involve instantly losing the game to a moment of inattention. SC2 has long had a problem with game-ending moments, and widow mines are part of it. Mind you they (and disruptors) are probably among the more benign game-ending things that the game has had, but that doesn't make them a 'great' unit. It's far from the worst unit though. Moment of inattention vs storms? Moment of inattention vs banes? Moment of inattention vs tanks? We have accepted these to be standards for skill and talent. Why not mines? On May 18 2020 05:44 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:
**** the widow mine.
It's an awful unit, that exists to suddenly end games out the blue, almost cannot be cost-inefficient, and is just immensely frustrating to play against. Playing against a Terran using mines you just always accept the risk you may suddenly lose to 4 mines under a tank or some other nonsense.
It wouldn't be such an issue were it not for them also being so cheap, reactorable [pentarp: as in able to produce in mass], and available pretty much the whole game.
The fact that the balance team wants to buff them is concerning, to say the least. Banelings also fit the criteria for why you think mines are such an issue. The word also was important there. Banes are often cost ineffective, rarely kill things from cloak (and require good map awareness to do so) and have much less ability to launch sudden death out of nowhere. Banes normally have to run into your army to kill it, which makes the instalose potential rather less sharp, especially if you have a it of vision around the map (they also can't kill air units, which have a tendancy to clump). Excuse me for bringing this up, but the damage banelings can do for their supply can be equally silly to that if WMs. The mines seems to have been introduced as an equalizer for a gameplay style I have problems with. Watching Maru play like a god against banelings in the gsl and finally getting some insane WM hits to seal the game made Terran look OP, but nobody else has that combination of micro, multi tasking, awareness and macro. I still would have liked to balanced TvZ around better baneling counters and just remove the mines. Helbats, cyclones and helions are better designed units which can do their job imo.
While I appreciate the support, I have to disagree that hellbats/hellions and cyclones are better designed to counter banelings. A change/buff to those units would result in a flat increase to the power of Terrans throughout the skill curve. They are essentially a-move units (except cyclones but barely).
Widow mines' power level scales with the skill level of both players in a game.
Mines do a much better job of differentiating the skill level of the Terran compared to a Hellbat. Mines punish a lack of control. A poorly controlled Hellbat will be ineffective, but not punishing. On the opposing side, unlike hellbats, mines can be dragged into Terran armies. This also helps showcase the skill level of a non-Terran.
|
Mines are great because the alternative is tanks. Mines produce faster, more exciting, and more dynamic games than tanks do. Multiprong is more entertaining than deathballs.
|
On May 18 2020 07:05 Pentarp wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2020 06:16 Slydie wrote:On May 18 2020 05:57 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:On May 18 2020 05:45 Pentarp wrote:On May 18 2020 05:32 ZigguratOfUr wrote:
Players can also show their skills in ways that don't involve instantly losing the game to a moment of inattention. SC2 has long had a problem with game-ending moments, and widow mines are part of it. Mind you they (and disruptors) are probably among the more benign game-ending things that the game has had, but that doesn't make them a 'great' unit. It's far from the worst unit though. Moment of inattention vs storms? Moment of inattention vs banes? Moment of inattention vs tanks? We have accepted these to be standards for skill and talent. Why not mines? On May 18 2020 05:44 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:
**** the widow mine.
It's an awful unit, that exists to suddenly end games out the blue, almost cannot be cost-inefficient, and is just immensely frustrating to play against. Playing against a Terran using mines you just always accept the risk you may suddenly lose to 4 mines under a tank or some other nonsense.
It wouldn't be such an issue were it not for them also being so cheap, reactorable [pentarp: as in able to produce in mass], and available pretty much the whole game.
The fact that the balance team wants to buff them is concerning, to say the least. Banelings also fit the criteria for why you think mines are such an issue. The word also was important there. Banes are often cost ineffective, rarely kill things from cloak (and require good map awareness to do so) and have much less ability to launch sudden death out of nowhere. Banes normally have to run into your army to kill it, which makes the instalose potential rather less sharp, especially if you have a it of vision around the map (they also can't kill air units, which have a tendancy to clump). Excuse me for bringing this up, but the damage banelings can do for their supply can be equally silly to that if WMs. The mines seems to have been introduced as an equalizer for a gameplay style I have problems with. Watching Maru play like a god against banelings in the gsl and finally getting some insane WM hits to seal the game made Terran look OP, but nobody else has that combination of micro, multi tasking, awareness and macro. I still would have liked to balanced TvZ around better baneling counters and just remove the mines. Helbats, cyclones and helions are better designed units which can do their job imo. While I appreciate the support, I have to disagree that hellbats/hellions and cyclones are better designed to counter banelings. A change/buff to those units would result in a flat increase to the power of Terrans throughout the skill curve. They are essentially a-move units (except cyclones but barely). Widow mines' power level scales with the skill level of both players in a game.Mines do a much better job of differentiating the skill level of the Terran compared to a Hellbat. Mines punish a lack of control. A poorly controlled Hellbat will be ineffective, but not punishing. On the opposing side, unlike hellbats, mines can be dragged into Terran armies. This also helps showcase the skill level of a non-Terran.
I agree so much not to the underlined phrase.
While storm and banes require good positioning and engagement, mines can be randomely burrowed and we'll see what happens.
This is especially true for random mines in the middle of the map. No micro or map awareness required from the mine user, but the other one is looking away at the wrong half second and can lose 10+ supply.
|
**** the widow mine.
It's an awful unit, that exists to suddenly end games out the blue, almost cannot be cost-inefficient, and is just immensely frustrating to play against. Playing against a Terran using mines you just always accept the risk you may suddenly lose to 4 mines under a tank or some other nonsense.
It wouldn't be such an issue were it not for them also being so cheap, restorable, and available pretty much the whole game.
The fact that the balance team wants to buff them is concerning, to say the least.
I think this is correct. But what Blizzard chose because Terran's splash ability is so low. With a relatively weak tank, this is Blizzard's thinking. These criticisms have remained since the beta and will continue. They don't balance the way we'd like.
I think the mine is too random to be reliable, so it has to be high DPS to compensate. I think its a poorly designed unit in the over all concept of Terran.
|
United Kingdom20326 Posts
Widow mine is my most hated unit design of any race. I hope it gets the HOTS Swarmhost treatment.
|
i wish they would redesign mines to have something like concussive shell slowdown instead of just mass damage so they have more of a zone control role instead of "everything either dies or doesn't". then maybe buff banshees against protoss or something so terrans have stable harassment. T should be able to harass, but mine drops are stupid, and it's a bad interaction for casual players
if mines had slowdown they could potentially synergize with defensive bio/siege play in a way that punishes a player who a-moves into microed defensive units, but doesn't erase 15 units at once based on RNG
|
On May 18 2020 05:26 Pentarp wrote:
Here's my humble opinion. Anything that creates more opportunities for the top-most players to shine; anything that makes us plebs wide-eyed in admiration for feats of skill and talent; anything that makes us groan or cheer in a roller-coaster of emotions - deserves love (even if its begrudging) , not hate.
The concept of widow-mine is far from creating anything but chaos, being it doing friendly fire or killing 30 lings/banelings. Its just a disaster of a unit, which definitely doesnt promote skill but randomness and chaos. It can end the game in 1 second of non-observation and in lower leagues it kills mineral lines with no skill whatsoever. Its just a horrible unit in every way possible. Even more horrible than disruptors, which is enough said. You burrow 2-3 mines around the map in any phase of the game and just go back to macro. Then suddenly you hear Boom! Headshot! and your opponent has 10-15 supply less units without you doing any action to cause it.
On May 18 2020 05:32 ZigguratOfUr wrote:
Players can also show their skills in ways that don't involve instantly losing the game to a moment of inattention. SC2 has long had a problem with game-ending moments, and widow mines are part of it. Mind you they (and disruptors) are probably among the more benign game-ending things that the game has had, but that doesn't make them a 'great' unit. It's far from the worst unit though.
Yeah, exactly this, although I still think WM is by far the worst unit in SC2. Disruptor is a "good" second place.
|
On May 18 2020 08:05 AbouSV wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2020 07:05 Pentarp wrote:On May 18 2020 06:16 Slydie wrote:On May 18 2020 05:57 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:On May 18 2020 05:45 Pentarp wrote:On May 18 2020 05:32 ZigguratOfUr wrote:
Players can also show their skills in ways that don't involve instantly losing the game to a moment of inattention. SC2 has long had a problem with game-ending moments, and widow mines are part of it. Mind you they (and disruptors) are probably among the more benign game-ending things that the game has had, but that doesn't make them a 'great' unit. It's far from the worst unit though. Moment of inattention vs storms? Moment of inattention vs banes? Moment of inattention vs tanks? We have accepted these to be standards for skill and talent. Why not mines? On May 18 2020 05:44 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:
**** the widow mine.
It's an awful unit, that exists to suddenly end games out the blue, almost cannot be cost-inefficient, and is just immensely frustrating to play against. Playing against a Terran using mines you just always accept the risk you may suddenly lose to 4 mines under a tank or some other nonsense.
It wouldn't be such an issue were it not for them also being so cheap, reactorable [pentarp: as in able to produce in mass], and available pretty much the whole game.
The fact that the balance team wants to buff them is concerning, to say the least. Banelings also fit the criteria for why you think mines are such an issue. The word also was important there. Banes are often cost ineffective, rarely kill things from cloak (and require good map awareness to do so) and have much less ability to launch sudden death out of nowhere. Banes normally have to run into your army to kill it, which makes the instalose potential rather less sharp, especially if you have a it of vision around the map (they also can't kill air units, which have a tendancy to clump). Excuse me for bringing this up, but the damage banelings can do for their supply can be equally silly to that if WMs. The mines seems to have been introduced as an equalizer for a gameplay style I have problems with. Watching Maru play like a god against banelings in the gsl and finally getting some insane WM hits to seal the game made Terran look OP, but nobody else has that combination of micro, multi tasking, awareness and macro. I still would have liked to balanced TvZ around better baneling counters and just remove the mines. Helbats, cyclones and helions are better designed units which can do their job imo. While I appreciate the support, I have to disagree that hellbats/hellions and cyclones are better designed to counter banelings. A change/buff to those units would result in a flat increase to the power of Terrans throughout the skill curve. They are essentially a-move units (except cyclones but barely). Widow mines' power level scales with the skill level of both players in a game.Mines do a much better job of differentiating the skill level of the Terran compared to a Hellbat. Mines punish a lack of control. A poorly controlled Hellbat will be ineffective, but not punishing. On the opposing side, unlike hellbats, mines can be dragged into Terran armies. This also helps showcase the skill level of a non-Terran. I agree so much not to the underlined phrase. While storm and banes require good positioning and engagement, mines can be randomely burrowed and we'll see what happens. This is especially true for random mines in the middle of the map. No micro or map awareness required from the mine user, but the other one is looking away at the wrong half second and can lose 10+ supply.
That is what will differentiate the skill level of the opponents. Good opponents will send small lings or observers to sweep the map before getting hit by a random mine. And mines are never really random, they are placed where the Terran expects units to path through. And the supply and resource cost of spreading out mines are not insignificant at the professional level.
On May 18 2020 08:56 brickrd wrote:
i wish they would redesign mines to have something like concussive shell slowdown instead of just mass damage so they have more of a zone control role instead of "everything either dies or doesn't". then maybe buff banshees against protoss or something so terrans have stable harassment. T should be able to harass, but mine drops are stupid, and it's a bad interaction for casual players
if mines had slowdown they could potentially synergize with defensive bio/siege play in a way that punishes a player who a-moves into microed defensive units, but doesn't erase 15 units at once based on RNG
Ravens got the same treatment. They were turned into a support unit. As a result, Terrans lost tremendous late-game power. Buffing banshees will be the same as buffing hellbats - a flat increase to power level. And I cannot imagine how banshees can be changed to be relevant vs ling/bane/muta.
On May 18 2020 09:14 Starcloud wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2020 05:26 Pentarp wrote:
Here's my humble opinion. Anything that creates more opportunities for the top-most players to shine; anything that makes us plebs wide-eyed in admiration for feats of skill and talent; anything that makes us groan or cheer in a roller-coaster of emotions - deserves love (even if its begrudging) , not hate. The concept of widow-mine is far from creating anything but chaos, being it doing friendly fire or killing 30 lings/banelings. Its just a disaster of a unit, which definitely doesnt promote skill but randomness and chaos. It can end the game in 1 second of non-observation and in lower leagues it kills mineral lines with no skill whatsoever. Its just a horrible unit in every way possible. Even more horrible than disruptors, which is enough said. You burrow 2-3 mines around the map in any phase of the game and just go back to macro. Then suddenly you hear Boom! Headshot! and your opponent has 10-15 supply less units without you doing any action to cause it. Show nested quote +On May 18 2020 05:32 ZigguratOfUr wrote:
Players can also show their skills in ways that don't involve instantly losing the game to a moment of inattention. SC2 has long had a problem with game-ending moments, and widow mines are part of it. Mind you they (and disruptors) are probably among the more benign game-ending things that the game has had, but that doesn't make them a 'great' unit. It's far from the worst unit though. Yeah, exactly this, although I still think WM is by far the worst unit in SC2. Disruptor is a "good" second place.
The most fun SC2 games to watch are chaotic. At lower levels, players can adapt and make static defenses against mines until their control/awareness is good enough to cut them. Again, a lot of the complaints seem to be from ladder heroes who find mines frustrating - which is exactly the point I'm making.
Mines ARE frustrating. But so are banelings, creep, storms, disruptors, doom-drops and pretty much everything about SC2.
But Widow Mines are the kind of frustrating that separates the wheat from the chaff.
|
On May 18 2020 09:37 Pentarp wrote:Ravens got the same treatment. They were turned into a support unit. As a result, Terrans lost tremendous late-game power. Buffing banshees will be the same as buffing hellbats - a flat increase to power level. And I cannot imagine how banshees can be changed to be relevant vs ling/bane/muta.
??? you don't seem to follow the meta very closely. almost everyone, including terrans, agrees that lategame mass ravens were terrible for the game and totally broken if the game ever reached that phase. new ravens are critical in TvT and also key in TvP in certain games. it's a clear improvement
banshees are a harassment opener in TvZ. they are already used against zerg by top terrans, and they hit long before mutas are built. so i don't know what you mean by "banshees being relevant against ling bane muta". mines are good against LBM but terran doesn't require mines to fight that composition anymore, maybe you're thinking of HotS TvZ where it was just bio mine medivac in every game. and i don't think you understand what i mean about mines - i'm not saying take away damage, i'm saying give them less damage but add something different as well
buffing banshees is simply an idea for alternative harassment against protoss. i didn't say anything specific, and maybe there's a better solution. but the fact is mines are a bad interaction because they're random and not fun. i don't understand people like you who respond to vague ideas with "no, that would never work." changes have to be tested before even pro players know exactly what will happen. pros have been wrong about balance changes before, so how can you claim you know exactly what would happen based on a vague idea?
|
On May 18 2020 10:07 brickrd wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2020 09:37 Pentarp wrote:Ravens got the same treatment. They were turned into a support unit. As a result, Terrans lost tremendous late-game power. Buffing banshees will be the same as buffing hellbats - a flat increase to power level. And I cannot imagine how banshees can be changed to be relevant vs ling/bane/muta. ??? you don't seem to follow the meta very closely. almost everyone, including terrans, agrees that lategame mass ravens were terrible for the game and totally broken if the game ever reached that phase. new ravens are critical in TvT and also key in TvP in certain games. it's a clear improvement banshees are a harassment opener in TvZ. they are already used against zerg by top terrans, and they hit long before mutas are built. so i don't know what you mean by "banshees being relevant against ling bane muta". mines are good against LBM but terran doesn't require mines to fight that composition anymore, maybe you're thinking of HotS TvZ where it was just bio mine medivac in every game. and i don't think you understand what i mean about mines - i'm not saying take away damage, i'm saying give them less damage but add something different as well buffing banshees is simply an idea for alternative harassment against protoss. i didn't say anything specific, and maybe there's a better solution. but the fact is mines are a bad interaction because they're random and not fun. i don't understand people like you who respond to vague ideas with "no, that would never work." changes have to be tested before even pro players know exactly what will happen. pros have been wrong about balance changes before, so how can you claim you know exactly what would happen based on a vague idea?
I agree that mass raven was not good for the game. But nerfing the raven without any other changes neutered late-game Terran for a very long time.
Mines are still relevant vs LBM, especially before transitioning into libs and ghosts. And as to why I did not understand your comment about changes to the mine, it's because you didn't make it very clear. Your initial comment was vague, but then complain about my vague reply. Damage is also very important. EMP is not as feared as storms because they lack the killing power.
Thing is, mines are not completely random. Top-level Terrans use stop-fire, unburrow-reburrow, or target-fire to control how the mines land. Top-level non-Terrans split, bait-out shots, drag shots, etc. Of course there is randomness to it, especially at lower skill level. But it is not a complete roll of the dice.
As for the banshees vs LBM; it's an opener and not a composition. Banshees get traded out by the time mutas hit the field because mutas make them irrelevant.
If mines are causing so much problem at lower levels, that won't change because Blizzard wants to make it easier for professional Terrans to access the full potential of mines. At lower levels, it is easy to have the extra resources and time to research the upgrade and make your life hell regardless.
I sense that the frustration around requiring proper map-control, unit-control and detection is the reason why there is so much hate for the Widow Mines.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
