The absence of asymmetric army power and different economies in SC2 has led some to believe that true "mech" play cannot exist. However, the game between Reality and Hydra reveals that not only can army power CAN vastly differ, but also that economies can differ in banking power. This sort of turtling mech/air game is old news, but I want to frame it in the context of how this is SC2 "mech".
BW mech had two properties: higher power/food and lower mining rate. The lower mining rate compensated for the power of the army, and led to a slow but steady accumulation of a stronger army. In SC2, most of the core mech units are NOT directly more efficient, since it would make bio too strong. So in SC2, accumulating them does not directly lead to a superior army.
But there is something that can be accumulated: and that's energy. Energy units, especially BC/Raven, make it so that an army that has accumulated a lot of energy is far stronger than an energyless army. The weakness of this army is of course time, position, and economy. Without proper positioning, this army cannot accumulate enough energy, and without enough energy, this army does not trade efficiently enough to overcome the larger bank of the opponent.
On Star Station, this style is viable because Terran can sprawl across 4-5 bases while only defending 2 points of attack. With such strong positions, Terran can buy the time to accumulate enough energy to overcome multiple banks worth of armies. There is potential for this style to be engaging, but as of right now, there are some huge pitfalls:
1. 3 bases is not enough for terran mech. Many maps are designed so only 3 bases can easily be protected. But core mech units are not versatile enough to defend more than a few points. It can be OK though if mech is not viable on all maps.
2. Since it's not always viable, the gameflow is not very well designed. Half the game is spent turtling with inefficient units trying to control 4-5 bases. The next 20 minutes is spent accumulating energy on efficient units and drying up the rest of the resources on the map. Unfortunately these 45m games would probably hurt the viewership.
--- Mech in this general sense already exists. Certainly the constraints of the game restrict the fluidity and viability of the gameplay. But looking forward into LotV, it is hard to imagine that there is much more to add to the basic 3 base gameplay we have seen for the last 4 years. But, there may be more room to streamline and improve on mech.
On January 06 2014 18:05 cptjibberjabber wrote: for those of us who haven't played BW, how was it stronger? how was it countered?
The main difference wasn't actually related to Tanks, but more that Vultures were insanely good. 75 minerals, better vs non-light units and 3 spider Mines - that's super superior to Hellions.
On January 06 2014 18:05 cptjibberjabber wrote: for those of us who haven't played BW, how was it stronger? how was it countered?
The main difference wasn't actually related to Tanks, but more that Vultures were insanely good. 75 minerals, better vs non-light units and 3 spider Mines - that's super superior to Hellions.
On top of requiring less restriction of a tech path tree, and just transitioning so much better into a late game composition!
That's a pretty interesting perspective I hadn't thought of before; would be curious to hear more thoughts on this. Caster units play too great a role in SC2.
Interesting OP. Mech play in BW never relied on energy units though unless you want to count the science vessel (if it emps against arbiters). I guess you can say that energy "enables" mech play but I don't think positioning is as vital though.
On January 06 2014 18:05 cptjibberjabber wrote: for those of us who haven't played BW, how was it stronger? how was it countered?
The main difference wasn't actually related to Tanks, but more that Vultures were insanely good. 75 minerals, better vs non-light units and 3 spider Mines - that's super superior to Hellions.
To counter mech play, usually the protoss would throw units at it and try to engage whenever the terran tries to move forward or if he notices a weak spot/gap in the terran's defense etc... Recalling into the terran's main base to abuse the immobility of mech play using arbiters (terrans would lay mines in their main+turrets to counter this late game) was also pretty common.
For zerg, I believe it was considered more difficult to deal with late game mech especially if you go in with an on par or bad eco however, a zergling+ultra+defiler combo was used. If you are able to make enough air units(mutas or guardians) and can take out the goliaths and split against the science vessel's irradiate, then you can generally push back and win the engagement with the meching player retreating and losing tanks and such. Once the meching player loses his army, the protoss/zerg player takes a big lead and in some cases(likely a lot), it's hard to come back once you've lost a decent chunk of your mech army.
On January 06 2014 18:26 Incognoto wrote: That's a pretty interesting perspective I hadn't thought of before; would be curious to hear more thoughts on this. Caster units play too great a role in SC2.
I thought this was known back when Infestors were getting spammed like mad in each ZvX game lol. I agree though, casters play a big role in SCII instead of being more of support. Not sure of the reason, maybe costs and efficiency (in terms of infestors at least).
On January 06 2014 18:44 BigFan wrote: Interesting OP. Mech play in BW never relied on energy units though unless you want to count the science vessel (if it emps against arbiters). I guess you can say that energy "enables" mech play but I don't think positioning is as vital though.
On January 06 2014 18:05 cptjibberjabber wrote: for those of us who haven't played BW, how was it stronger? how was it countered?
The main difference wasn't actually related to Tanks, but more that Vultures were insanely good. 75 minerals, better vs non-light units and 3 spider Mines - that's super superior to Hellions.
To counter mech play, usually the protoss would throw units at it and try to engage whenever the terran tries to move forward or if he notices a weak spot/gap in the terran's defense etc... Recalling into the terran's main base to abuse the immobility of mech play using arbiters (terrans would lay mines in their main+turrets to counter this late game) was also pretty common.
For zerg, I believe it was considered more difficult to deal with late game mech especially if you go in with an on par or bad eco however, a zergling+ultra+defiler combo was used. If you are able to make enough air units(mutas or guardians) and can take out the goliaths and split against the science vessel's irradiate, then you can generally push back and win the engagement with the meching player retreating and losing tanks and such. Once the meching player loses his army, the protoss/zerg player takes a big lead and in some cases(likely a lot), it's hard to come back once you've lost a decent chunk of your mech army.
On January 06 2014 18:26 Incognoto wrote: That's a pretty interesting perspective I hadn't thought of before; would be curious to hear more thoughts on this. Caster units play too great a role in SC2.
I thought this was known back when Infestors were getting spammed like mad in each ZvX game lol. I agree though, casters play a big role in SCII instead of being more of support. Not sure of the reason, maybe costs and efficiency (in terms of infestors at least).
caster units play a big role in SC2, because they are easy to use. Was a completely different story in BW, where you had to have enormous apm to make use of a lot of casters.
I dislike this turtle to max energy Raven stuff. It takes way to long and it is not very fun to spectate IMO. Many people that say they hate mech are thinking of this mech to air turtle.
Air and energy units are something SC2 does not do to good IMO. There is no huge skill required to use casters like in BW so the "wow" factor is not there, particularly when the casters are massed (GREAT FUNGAL!!) and air units tend to be countered by other air units and this air vs air battle looks super underwhelming IMO. Again, BW was an example where a lot of the time, the main counter to an air army came from the ground, creating a more interesting "dance" between the two.
The natural "flow" should be expand and defend to build a mech army (Hellion Tank mines and some anti air..depending on scouting). Once near or on 200/200 you should have enough power to move out and start the "strangling" process.
So give me buffs to mech and nerfs to the Raven please!
On January 06 2014 18:44 BigFan wrote: Interesting OP. Mech play in BW never relied on energy units though unless you want to count the science vessel (if it emps against arbiters). I guess you can say that energy "enables" mech play but I don't think positioning is as vital though.
On January 06 2014 18:09 Hider wrote:
On January 06 2014 18:05 cptjibberjabber wrote: for those of us who haven't played BW, how was it stronger? how was it countered?
The main difference wasn't actually related to Tanks, but more that Vultures were insanely good. 75 minerals, better vs non-light units and 3 spider Mines - that's super superior to Hellions.
To counter mech play, usually the protoss would throw units at it and try to engage whenever the terran tries to move forward or if he notices a weak spot/gap in the terran's defense etc... Recalling into the terran's main base to abuse the immobility of mech play using arbiters (terrans would lay mines in their main+turrets to counter this late game) was also pretty common.
For zerg, I believe it was considered more difficult to deal with late game mech especially if you go in with an on par or bad eco however, a zergling+ultra+defiler combo was used. If you are able to make enough air units(mutas or guardians) and can take out the goliaths and split against the science vessel's irradiate, then you can generally push back and win the engagement with the meching player retreating and losing tanks and such. Once the meching player loses his army, the protoss/zerg player takes a big lead and in some cases(likely a lot), it's hard to come back once you've lost a decent chunk of your mech army.
On January 06 2014 18:26 Incognoto wrote: That's a pretty interesting perspective I hadn't thought of before; would be curious to hear more thoughts on this. Caster units play too great a role in SC2.
I thought this was known back when Infestors were getting spammed like mad in each ZvX game lol. I agree though, casters play a big role in SCII instead of being more of support. Not sure of the reason, maybe costs and efficiency (in terms of infestors at least).
caster units play a big role in SC2, because they are easy to use. Was a completely different story in BW, where you had to have enormous apm to make use of a lot of casters.
well that but on their own, they can only be used for x tasks as well. I usually go templars in BW PvZ and if I don't have as much as a single unit with them, I usually can't save any of them. In SCII, if I have infestors for ex, I can usually FG then lay down ITs for defense to escape. I guess my point is that SCII casters have several useful spells so massing a casters is better than it was in BW(much much easier to cast as well).
caster units play a big role in SC2, because they are easy to use. Was a completely different story in BW, where you had to have enormous apm to make use of a lot of casters.
Infestors, mothership (cores), sentries, ravens, vipers, ghosts, to a lesser extent mines*, etc. these play such a huge role in fights in general that non-energy units are cannon-fodder, or units to be used when the other person has messed up his spell casting. i know fights could be turned around with spellcasters in broodwar, but i'm not sure they accounted for almost all the damage. i've neverp layed broodwar but i've heard of things like "dragoon micro", "vulture micro", "lurker micro", "muta micro". do stalkers, hellions, lings, roaches/hydra, muta, marines play as big a role as the aforementioned spell casters? they can all be micro'd, but the profit in doing so is inferior to the profit gained from casting spells efficiently. it's one of the reasons i turned my back on sc2 come to think of it, i really like micro'ing units and moving them around and such, but i'm not a fan of spell-casting. i've always shied away from infestors and whanot and i enjoyed ling/baneling wars in ZvZ quite a lot.
*i put mines in there because, while they don't use "energy" they still use an ability to do damage rather than using an attack
Worth to mention though, we had a turtle to mass caster style back in WOL with the winfestor BL and, although very late and at the price of 40 euros, Blizzard fixed it and heavily discouraged massing infestors. We have reason to believe that should the energy mech become the dominant style of mech it will also be fixed, hopefully not at the same price.
On January 06 2014 19:18 Sapphire.lux wrote: I dislike this turtle to max energy Raven stuff. It takes way to long and it is not very fun to spectate IMO. Many people that say they hate mech are thinking of this mech to air turtle.
Air and energy units are something SC2 does not do to good IMO. There is no huge skill required to use casters like in BW so the "wow" factor is not there, particularly when the casters are massed (GREAT FUNGAL!!) and air units tend to be countered by other air units and this air vs air battle looks super underwhelming IMO. Again, BW was an example where a lot of the time, the main counter to an air army came from the ground, creating a more interesting "dance" between the two.
The natural "flow" should be expand and defend to build a mech army (Hellion Tank mines and some anti air..depending on scouting). Once near or on 200/200 you should have enough power to move out and start the "strangling" process.
So give me buffs to mech and nerfs to the Raven please!
But BW wasn't like that actually. Terran mech could do 1base, 2base or 3 base timing attacks. This made mech a lot more aggressive.
The reason they could do this in BW and not in Sc2 comes down to the following differences;
- Sc2 Zerg has way too much larva which makes them "OP" in midgame
- Protoss has hard-counters in the mid-game to mech.
- Hellions suck balls unlike Vultures. This meant that BW mech reinforced better and was better in smaller numbers than Sc2-mech.
- Alot has been said about assymetrical economies in BW, but it is worth nothing that it didn't really have a signifcant impact in the midgame. It was first post-16 minute mark that both zerg and protoss obtained an eco-lead against a meching terran player. So the terran player was; A) incentivized to pressure before protoss and zergs got their huge eco lead B) they actually had the power to pressure (unlike in SC2 for reasons described above).
Well in BW caster units are also vital, especially in late game, Science Vessels with Irradiate and EMP vs Defilers with Dark Swarm and Plague vs High Templars with Storm and Arbiters with Recall and Stasis.
And this game Hydra vs Reality reminded me of BW TvZs on 1on1 maps like Destination (Like this one 50 minutes long Nada vs Effort from BlizzCon).
I think you're overthinking it OP. The reason SC2 mech has to turtle is because siege tanks are not as powerful as they were intended to be (they were previously severely nerfed in wings of liberty due to steppes of war/terrible map pool before the game really developed).
If tanks are ever changed to be able to hold their ground, we'll see SC2 mech play being "enabled" without being forced to turtle so much.
As for mech + ravens, the only reason you are forced into this style is because the only counter to swarmhosts or brood/corruptor is the raven. Mech alone cannot fight swarmhosts without PDD. Mech alone also cannot fight brood/corruptor or skytoss because mech has no good anti-air (vikings/ravens are required).
On January 06 2014 19:18 Sapphire.lux wrote: I dislike this turtle to max energy Raven stuff. It takes way to long and it is not very fun to spectate IMO. Many people that say they hate mech are thinking of this mech to air turtle.
Air and energy units are something SC2 does not do to good IMO. There is no huge skill required to use casters like in BW so the "wow" factor is not there, particularly when the casters are massed (GREAT FUNGAL!!) and air units tend to be countered by other air units and this air vs air battle looks super underwhelming IMO. Again, BW was an example where a lot of the time, the main counter to an air army came from the ground, creating a more interesting "dance" between the two.
The natural "flow" should be expand and defend to build a mech army (Hellion Tank mines and some anti air..depending on scouting). Once near or on 200/200 you should have enough power to move out and start the "strangling" process.
So give me buffs to mech and nerfs to the Raven please!
But BW wasn't like that actually. Terran mech could do 1base, 2base or 3 base timing attacks. This made mech a lot more aggressive.
The reason they could do this in BW and not in Sc2 comes down to the following differences;
- Sc2 Zerg has way too much larva which makes them "OP" in midgame
- Protoss has hard-counters in the mid-game to mech.
- Hellions suck balls unlike Vultures. This meant that BW mech reinforced better and was better in smaller numbers than Sc2-mech.
- Alot has been said about assymetrical economies in BW, but it is worth nothing that it didn't really have a signifcant impact in the midgame. It was first post-16 minute mark that both zerg and protoss obtained an eco-lead against a meching terran player. So the terran player was; A) incentivized to pressure before protoss and zergs got their huge eco lead B) they actually had the power to pressure (unlike in SC2 for reasons described above).
I agree with you there. I was describing a 2/2 timing in TvZ, used by MVP. It was at near 200/200 sure, but i think that with the appropriate buffs, you could give mech faster timings. You can't redo the economy system of SC2, but you can control it in game through harass and "pushes". This is what kept Zerg in check during WOL 2010/2011 only for the Queen patch to ruin everything.
Through harass, cost efficiency and toning down the ridiculous hard counters like the Immortal, i think you can give mech some aggressive potential. It's all a matter of is Blizzard wiling to do it.
You can't redo the economy system of SC2, but you can control it in game through harass and "pushes". This is what kept Zerg in check during WOL 2010/2011 only for the Queen patch to ruin everything.
Im not sure there is any "simple" way too buff harass without breaking the game in some other way. Further, harass buffs only "works" temporarily untill the opponent adjusts. The reason for that its just a matter of strategy/tactics to position your units correctly in order to minimize the damage taken from harass if there is no real army threat from the mech'ing opponent.
For instance in BW, the protoss always had to fear that the terran would attack you. Against an attack it was a neccesity that you had your main army out on the map as you needed to delay the Siege Tank pressure untill Carriers/Arbiters were up. But this actually meant that the protoss also were exposed to Vulture harass/dropships if the terran didn't decide to make a timing attack. So just the threat of an actual timing-attack opened up the opporunty for harass-based play.
If we look at mech-harass in TvZ and TvP in Sc2, it is so easily prevented by static defense/warp-tech that it really isn't viable. In TvP BW, Vultures dealt full damage to shileds which meant they could take down cannons by them selves and there were no warp-tech. That's a gigantic difference relative to Sc2 (which also has blink stalkers).
I spent countless hours thinking about how to fix these issues in the next expansion pack (cus you can't make simple patches to fix it), and alot alot of changes are needed.
*Positional Play was the emphasis due to siege tanks are powerful even in small numbers it doesnt require critical mass to be effective but that doesnt mean its unbeatable. * vultures are the main support unit for BW and vultures are like marines of sc2 it is not impossible to counter but is also very skill rewarding means. The better micro and decision making the more powerful the vulture becomes. But if you just amove them .Protoss and zerg just wipe mass numbers of it so easily. * vultures mines prevented tank lines from getting a-moved * vultures can be used as harrassment like hellions
Summary of what i know of mech BW: Support unit is cheap, versatile and skill rewarding. Siege Tanks Dont suck. That doesnt mean you won't get massacred easily if you get caught unsieged unlike how powerful toss deathball is in sc2. Mech is fun to play. Also to face in BW.
sc2 mech: tanks suck too many hard counters that would be fine if sc2 wasn't deathball like if you don't do that you get easily snowballed and when you normally don't turtle you are practically all-inning A well established tankline during BW wouldnt be easily be broken. In the case of sc2 tanklines getting amoved is a common thing. Since mech requires a "critical" mass to be powerful which leads to deathballing. Sc2 mech relies on ravens too much. And from what i see ravens are worthless if they you can't stall time as a meching player for them to get enough energy and amassed amount of ravens. And if you do they can get very overpowered at times. Too gas heavy for it to be effective. And its not even worth the cost for its effectiveness in the game.
Not necessarily right but this is what i know about sc2 mech and BW mech.
*Positional Play was the emphasis due to siege tanks are powerful even in small numbers it doesnt require critical mass to be effective but that doesnt mean its unbeatable. * vultures are the main support unit for BW and vultures are like marines of sc2 it is not impossible to counter but is also very skill rewarding means. The better micro and decision making the more powerful the vulture becomes. But if you just amove them .Protoss and zerg just wipe mass numbers of it so easily. * vultures mines prevented tank lines from getting a-moved * vultures can be used as harrassment like hellions
Summary of what i know of mech BW: Support unit is cheap, versatile and skill rewarding. Siege Tanks Dont suck. That doesnt mean you won't get massacred easily if you get caught unsieged unlike how powerful toss deathball is in sc2. Mech is fun to play. Also to face in BW.
sc2 mech: tanks suck too many hard counters that would be fine if sc2 wasn't deathball like if you don't do that you get easily snowballed and when you normally don't turtle you are practically all-inning A well established tankline during BW wouldnt be easily be broken. In the case of sc2 tanklines getting amoved is a common thing. Since mech requires a "critical" mass to be powerful which leads to deathballing. Sc2 mech relies on ravens too much. And from what i see ravens are worthless if they you can't stall time as a meching player for them to get enough energy and amassed amount of ravens. And if you do they can get very overpowered at times. Too gas heavy for it to be effective. And its not even worth the cost for its effectiveness in the game.
Not necessarily right but this is what i know about sc2 mech and BW mech.
You can also add that in BW, Mech had the goliath, which was a really good anti-air unit also doing ok on the ground, and could be massed relatively easily. In Sc2, we have the thor, who his now okay-ish anti-air attack, but terrible mobility/production
EPT
