|
It is common conception that terran can play in two different styles, like bio, or mech.
But does it apply to other races as well? If so, what kind of army compositions would that be?
I can think for the protoss something like zeal-archon-templar as a core units in one style, and something like blink-stalkers-disruptors-immortals in another style.
And for the zerg it is like ling-bane-infestor in one style, roach-hydra-lurker in another.
But is it even right? And if it is not, then can we think of something that can be considered as two or more different play-styles for each race besides terrans? Or having like multiple play-styles exclusive only to terran?
|
First thing would be to define 'style'. I don't link style to unit composition perse. It could also indicate macro, cheese, aggressive, many drops, timings etc etc. So regardless of unit composition.
|
On March 22 2019 20:40 Uni1987 wrote: First thing would be to define 'style'. I don't link style to unit composition perse. It could also indicate macro, cheese, aggressive, many drops, timings etc etc. So regardless of unit composition.
That's true. So yeah, we can make a strict distinguishment between the terms of the "style" and the "army composition". But still, this doesn't answer the original question. Like what army composition could be in various play styles? Can you think of any?
|
United Kingdom20149 Posts
Air based compositions are cool and separate from usual stuff because of requiring different upgrades
|
For zerg roach hydra and ling muta. Or more generell roach and ling based compositions. For Protoss maybe archon immortal and blinkstalker distruptor in pvp. But its hard to say which compositions are as different as bio and mech are to each other.
|
Protoss really has 1 option is to DEATHBALL till death thanks to its brilliant design! In Starcraft 2, Protoss units' health remain almost the same whilst the other 2 races have their units with either higher hit point or higher DPS compared to Starcraft 1. Therefore, the race has to rely execlusively on AOE like Collosus, Storm, Purification Nova and somehow it fits amazingly well with BALL style. Boring!
|
Czech Republic12115 Posts
Well, IMO Terran - bio/aggressive mech/turtle mech/skyterran Protoss - aggressive(cheesy)/reactive/turtle Zerg - aggressive/reactive
I dare to say you can't turtle nowadays with Zerg, but maybe I'm doing it wrong
Reactive - you wait with the army composition for what you scout or what you think will be the best counter. While you can say bio is reactive, it does only result in the marine/marauder ratio while other races have it more difficult, IMO.
Aggressive - means you take the initiative and you try to finish the game. e.g. you can't play defensive bio, you have to be out there, do drops, clear creep etc. IMO Bio is the perfect example of this.
Turtle - you're hidden behind walls and slowly expanding your deathball w/e it is until you can go through the map unbeaten.
Not sure if mech can be played somehow reactive, I feel it's either shitton of turrets, tanks and walls or the speed version of mech. Not sure, I am not following Terrans that much.
|
On March 22 2019 21:46 deacon.frost wrote:Well, IMO Terran - bio/aggressive mech/turtle mech/skyterran Protoss - aggressive(cheesy)/reactive/turtle Zerg - aggressive/reactive I dare to say you can't turtle nowadays with Zerg, but maybe I'm doing it wrong Reactive - you wait with the army composition for what you scout or what you think will be the best counter. While you can say bio is reactive, it does only result in the marine/marauder ratio while other races have it more difficult, IMO. Aggressive - means you take the initiative and you try to finish the game. e.g. you can't play defensive bio, you have to be out there, do drops, clear creep etc. IMO Bio is the perfect example of this. Turtle - you're hidden behind walls and slowly expanding your deathball w/e it is until you can go through the map unbeaten. Not sure if mech can be played somehow reactive, I feel it's either shitton of turrets, tanks and walls or the speed version of mech. Not sure, I am not following Terrans that much.
Mech involves a degree of reactivity.
for example, even if youre playing turtle mech - if a zerg cheeses, or all in, you will probably die if you dont build cyclones
siege tanks are usually phased out of production thanks to BL/corruptor compositions but if they are still making a hydra or roach (lol) based army then you need a good tank number.
against high ultra counts you need to add in more liberators unless your ghost control is godly
you need to monitor hellbat numbers as well. if zerg decides to start flooding with ling/bane youll need more hellbats, mines, and maybe more tanks
Also if you decide to augment your mech with more air units than ghosts (like gumiho often likes to do) then you need to know when to know when to go viking heavy vs liberator heavy, add some ravens if they go heavy on corruptors, etc
stuff like that
|
For the most part, there isn't a ton of variation with Protoss because of how important the splash damage units usually are. However, at least before the nydus change, Rotterdam had that neat air/gateway PvZ style that was somewhat of a Protoss mech equivalent. That style isn't really seen in pro play, but it certainly looked perfectly reasonable to use on ladder.
Sadly the nydus change basically caused that style to be easily hard-countered and Rotterdam had started to move away from it. Maybe the new change to nydus will let him bring it back
|
Bio vs Mech Terran definitely feels like a different race.
|
On March 22 2019 23:47 Brutaxilos wrote: Bio vs Mech Terran definitely feels like a different race. Exactly the reason of starting this thread.
|
Canada8747 Posts
In Hots playing swarm host was also a totally different thing from playing every other type of zerg even BL infestor.
|
|
the question you're asking goes to an interesting cultural phenomenon in the SC scene where terrans, at some point, decided that bio vs mech has a special "fourth race" quality which other races lack, which if you ask me is very very debatable. as far as i've seen the only credible argument they have is about upgrades. the upgrades are different for ground units. which is like... ok? but i don't think it proves we have to recognize them as a unique racial dynamic.
the other argument you hear is that biomech isn't viable, therefore bio and mech are different. still highly debatable. everyone defines biomech differently, but it seems like when a lot of people say "biomech" they mean having like 9 thors and 50 marines running around different parts of the map, or doing an upgrade switch in the midgame. in my opinion the rational, intended design is for factory units to either supplement bio in small numbers or be massed in large numbers, and nothing in between.
you don't want too many 6 or 7 mana spells in an average MTG deck. similarly, it's not rational to overbalance slow, expensive mech units into a bio comp because of how critical mass works for bigger units. that's why you see moderate, sensible amounts of mines, tanks, thors, etc being built situationally and incorporated into bio. to me that IS biomech, and i don't see how it's not. if "mech" is "pure mech" with no bio, then wouldn't "pure bio" be just marine marauder medivac with not a single factory unit? there's no such thing anymore!
so long story short, if you ask me, the "fourth race" narrative is something mech terrans use to advance the idea that the game is only balanced if mech is balanced, which most people agree is a hilarious joke. most top terrans who play both bio and mech just use whatever works better for them and don't worry about what "counts" as what "style." it's only people who are hardcore into mech and mech only who even give a shit. and we all know who the highest level player of that variety is :D
there's turtle zerg, turtle protoss and turtle terran. there are still zergs who love to play HOTS styte muta ling, there are still protoss who do soul trains and even win. so there's nothing special or important about mech to me. it's a way of playing. building a nexus on 19 vs 20 is a different style. everything you can do in this game is stylistic. SC is pure style!
|
For every race there are already atleast 2 styles and the super early allin cheese style
1. Agressive, harass timing push oriented 2. Macro, tech oriented 3. Cheeses
Zerg For zerg the Normal way to play is Macro style that includes goin to 70 plus drones and hive later broodlords often and a fast 4th base But zerg can go another way mostly played with roach ravager that would be an agressive 3 base push out of 50-60 drones mb combined with a nydus. And another way would be the cheeses / allins like 2 base link nydus, 2 base early roach / ravager allin, proxy hatch.
Protoss For Protoss both styles are viable, seeing players like SOS / Hero that use strange timings / allins, 2 base, 3 base pushes with lots of harass , micro focused play. So the crazy agressive way to play the race but to be really good you have to mix in macro plays otherwise you become to predictive.
The other way is playing defensive 4 base with tech and lots of chronos on workers, Meaning using your blink stalkers for defense in PvT for example and goin an really early 3rd base. Vs Zerg this would include a 4 base play with double robo immortal for example and goin the way to skytoss.
Terran Vs protoss Terran uses mostly the crazy agressive / 2 base allin or 3 bases with boys pulled timing pushes etc. But in TvZ we see most games a fast 3rd base fast upgrades and 4 base play.
Unit composition its only terran that has this 2 distinctive unit compositions mech and bio. Protoss uses nearly in every MU Chargelots and add too it HT for storm and or Collossi.
Zerg can make lots of unit compositions. Agressive compostions would be roach ravager, roach hydra, and a late aggressive hydra bane. Defensive compostions would be hydra lurker (ZvP) and also hydra bane (ZvP) (can be used for defense and offense). Defensive composition in ZvT are ling bane hydra / ling bane muta, while roach ravager is an agressive composition usually used for timings before terran goes up to 4 bases.
|
If you're talking about the Protoss/Zerg equivalent to bio vs mech, the closest is probably the contrast between ling/bane and roach based comps. It's probably not a coincidence that they rely on different upgrades, just like bio vs mech.
Unlike Terran, they share armor upgrades, which makes switching a little easier and probably why we see more of them. They also share the same production building (hatch).
Protoss has the best ground upgrades in that they cover all units, so they don't have to worry about that sort of thing.
|
|
|
|