On September 20 2015 00:57 DilemaH wrote: I don't like the liberator with a bio comp, but after watching some streams, I've gone to like bio/lib vs toss. If bio/lib and bio/tank become equally as strong, that would be really cool to watch
Yea I think bio mine lib style is spot on. Good to watch and lib provided solid support while not having as much tangible ground shielding process
Blizzard's focus lately has been to increase viewership for the eSports side of Starcraft. A lot of LOTV is geared towards that, and quite honestly, it's a blast to watch. But staying focused here:
The only place you really don't see tank usage is in TvP. I actually really enjoy watching Meditank play, but I know it's a bit absurd for a lot of individuals, and I'd be more than willing to trade some damage upgrades and remove the ability to actively drop it. But doing so requires some careful consideration on all fronts.
A Maelstrom-like upgrade would be a powerful upgrade against Ultralisks, which tanks are already pretty good against. We already see a lot of Siege play in TvZ matchups, so this upgrade only makes them stronger where a buff may not necessarily be due. I do think it would work very well against Protoss though, especially to counter the high HP units like the Adept, Immortal, and even Colossi. Right now the Siege tank is just *not* competitive in TvP play whatsoever.
A Shield-damage upgrade would have a much different effect on the overall state of the game. Sure, it doesn't touch TvZ and TvT play where the Siege Tank isn't that much of an issue, but I'd be curious to see what the AoE damage effects would be against Protoss if a +Shield damage effect were introduced. Part of the reason why tanks are so effective in TvZ and TvT play is because the enemy units used against them are typically very tightly packed together (Marines, Marauders, Roaches, and Hydralisks), and the total splash damage is incredible. But hey, if that's what it takes, I'd be interested to see it.
Even with LOTV's flaws, it's a lot more fun to watch than WoL/HOTS.
In TvT tanks are fine. They deal with pretty much anything that terran has on the ground. However, mobility and air deals well with heavy siege tanks comps.
In TvZ they're fine too. They kill everything zerg has on the ground decently. However, vipers, mutalisks and ravagers deal nicely with heavy tanks comps.
In TvP they're terrible. Tempest make them ridiculously weak. Stalkers and adepts can blink into them. Immortals and archons laugh at the damage they do. Zealots charge in and kill a HUGE amount of tanks in a second.
So my idea would be to give the tank an initial target damage increase. Tanks would deal the same AoE, but deal +15 damage flat on the primary target (directly added to the shot, not an additional instance reduced by armor). So yeah, that would be 50 + 15 vs armored damage on the target, with a 35 +15 vs armored splash damage. That would make the tank a little stronger but not that much in TvT, where bio already needs a buff to work against mech. In TvZ, meh that wouldn't change much since it's really the splash that is important, that would just make tanks a little better against ultra, which is nice. And in TvP : that would be really good, since protoss units are so beefy.
Maybe make this an upgrade if it's too strong right off the bat. And ofc remove the stupid tank drop.
I actually find tanks to be the most useless in TvZ now, at least for anyone who is playing the Ravager meta. Can't even wall off and be safe in some cases now.
I still believe the tank should be the highest range unit in the game, considering they cannot move. Tempests/Ravagers kind of blow my mind from a design perspective.
On September 18 2015 10:22 jinjin5000 wrote: TvT Probably where tank shines and features the the most. Tank's anti-armor damage is unparalleled here as it provides way to outgun and destroy most terran anti-armor units- combined with overall fragility of terran units, makes it great addition to most terran compositions in zone-control.
However, most tank match-ups in sc2 has always been about air control and TvT lotv places this importance even further with existance of liberators being able to snipe out tanks from up to 15 range. Today's patch should address this problem indirectly with AA-buff with cyclones.
A complaint is that the medivac pick-up removes a bit of tense siege crawling and positioning of the match-up, although I do think pick-up and dropping it unsieged would be fair compromise
Overall, Tank have a solid role in this match-up
Do you mean it's unparalleled for its ability to destroy armored units? Some anti-armor units are specifically anti-tank, and tanks are more generally anti-armor.
tankdrops are just stupid imo. from a design perspective tanks should be a longranged, slow, heavy hitting AoE unit for the bio army. but since they were completely overshadowed by the WM blizz had to do something in LotV to make tankplay viable again....and they chose the worst thing. instead of focusing more on their strength and weaknesses (= buff damage, nerf attack rate or longer siege/unsiege time) they made it super mobile with the medivac siegedrops. its so horrible designwise.
especially in TvZ for the Z player this forces mutas literally every single game to deal with it (thats another problem though since basically everything T opens these days forces mutas and lies in the weakness of AA of Z not the OPness of T stuff).
what i dont get is people saying ravagers counter tanks now. tanks will almost never be even hit since there is enough time to pick the tank up in a medivac and safe it + ravagers are really expensive.
but yeah mostly its the first paragraph i wrote. remove tankdrop, buff tank damage and nerf something else like longer siege and unsiegetime.
I REALLY don't get why so many people hate the concept of dropping sieged tanks. We're happy blizzard disassembled the Protoss deathball, but we think terran should have an even simpler- and more powerful- deathball?
Blizzard took a unit which performs best when you aren't controlling it, and gave an option to increase its effectiveness by interacting with it. I think its a wonderful idea.
On September 18 2015 10:22 jinjin5000 wrote: TvT Probably where tank shines and features the the most. Tank's anti-armor damage is unparalleled here as it provides way to outgun and destroy most terran anti-armor units- combined with overall fragility of terran units, makes it great addition to most terran compositions in zone-control.
However, most tank match-ups in sc2 has always been about air control and TvT lotv places this importance even further with existance of liberators being able to snipe out tanks from up to 15 range. Today's patch should address this problem indirectly with AA-buff with cyclones.
A complaint is that the medivac pick-up removes a bit of tense siege crawling and positioning of the match-up, although I do think pick-up and dropping it unsieged would be fair compromise
Overall, Tank have a solid role in this match-up
Do you mean it's unparalleled for its ability to destroy armored units? Some anti-armor units are specifically anti-tank, and tanks are more generally anti-armor.
isn't that exactly what i said?
On September 20 2015 17:14 Decendos wrote: tankdrops are just stupid imo. from a design perspective tanks should be a longranged, slow, heavy hitting AoE unit for the bio army. but since they were completely overshadowed by the WM blizz had to do something in LotV to make tankplay viable again....and they chose the worst thing. instead of focusing more on their strength and weaknesses (= buff damage, nerf attack rate or longer siege/unsiege time) they made it super mobile with the medivac siegedrops. its so horrible designwise.
especially in TvZ for the Z player this forces mutas literally every single game to deal with it (thats another problem though since basically everything T opens these days forces mutas and lies in the weakness of AA of Z not the OPness of T stuff).
what i dont get is people saying ravagers counter tanks now. tanks will almost never be even hit since there is enough time to pick the tank up in a medivac and safe it + ravagers are really expensive.
but yeah mostly its the first paragraph i wrote. remove tankdrop, buff tank damage and nerf something else like longer siege and unsiegetime.
Ravager composition does very well against mech composition- It si true that you can use medivac to dodge the shots but in midst of battle where it is often ravager/roach/lurker vs hellbat/tank/liberator midgame, it is bit unrealistic to expect that, not to mention that the loss of damage from dodging the shots often does more damage as you miss out on initial tank vollies in beginning of the battle.
On September 20 2015 17:14 Decendos wrote: tankdrops are just stupid imo. from a design perspective tanks should be a longranged, slow, heavy hitting AoE unit for the bio army. but since they were completely overshadowed by the WM blizz had to do something in LotV to make tankplay viable again....and they chose the worst thing. instead of focusing more on their strength and weaknesses (= buff damage, nerf attack rate or longer siege/unsiege time) they made it super mobile with the medivac siegedrops. its so horrible designwise.
especially in TvZ for the Z player this forces mutas literally every single game to deal with it (thats another problem though since basically everything T opens these days forces mutas and lies in the weakness of AA of Z not the OPness of T stuff).
what i dont get is people saying ravagers counter tanks now. tanks will almost never be even hit since there is enough time to pick the tank up in a medivac and safe it + ravagers are really expensive.
but yeah mostly its the first paragraph i wrote. remove tankdrop, buff tank damage and nerf something else like longer siege and unsiegetime.
Ravager composition does very well against mech composition- It si true that you can use medivac to dodge the shots but in midst of battle where it is often ravager/roach/lurker vs hellbat/tank/liberator midgame, it is bit unrealistic to expect that, not to mention that the loss of damage from dodging the shots often does more damage as you miss out on initial tank vollies in beginning of the battle.
well since tanks shoot instantly you wont miss out on the first volley and saving your tanks is always worth to miss out the 2nd volley, especially since tanks and ravagers have the same range + with 3 ravagers needed to get in range with clumping etc. normaly 1 tanks damages 3 ravagers and its fine if you safe it afterwards.
in your comp this would be the main focus on the T side: set up liberators and afterwards just micro tanks while having your hellbats sit like 4-6 range away from tanks so the protect them from roach hydra.
on the Z side my focus would be to corrosive bile on liberators or tanks depending on whats safer to do while trying to kite the hellbats with roach hydra.
the micro tank drops force is good, i just think its not the right thing for tanks since their immobility is THE major weakness they should have. maybe let them be picked up in siege mode but be unsieged afterwards so micro in battles is still viable but they arent those "you can never touch me early game" units that also let T scout everything + be safe vs all ins. thats just too much imo.
On September 20 2015 17:14 Decendos wrote: tankdrops are just stupid imo. from a design perspective tanks should be a longranged, slow, heavy hitting AoE unit for the bio army. but since they were completely overshadowed by the WM blizz had to do something in LotV to make tankplay viable again....and they chose the worst thing. instead of focusing more on their strength and weaknesses (= buff damage, nerf attack rate or longer siege/unsiege time) they made it super mobile with the medivac siegedrops. its so horrible designwise.
especially in TvZ for the Z player this forces mutas literally every single game to deal with it (thats another problem though since basically everything T opens these days forces mutas and lies in the weakness of AA of Z not the OPness of T stuff).
what i dont get is people saying ravagers counter tanks now. tanks will almost never be even hit since there is enough time to pick the tank up in a medivac and safe it + ravagers are really expensive.
but yeah mostly its the first paragraph i wrote. remove tankdrop, buff tank damage and nerf something else like longer siege and unsiegetime.
Ravager composition does very well against mech composition- It si true that you can use medivac to dodge the shots but in midst of battle where it is often ravager/roach/lurker vs hellbat/tank/liberator midgame, it is bit unrealistic to expect that, not to mention that the loss of damage from dodging the shots often does more damage as you miss out on initial tank vollies in beginning of the battle.
well since tanks shoot instantly you wont miss out on the first volley and saving your tanks is always worth to miss out the 2nd volley, especially since tanks and ravagers have the same range + with 3 ravagers needed to get in range with clumping etc. normaly 1 tanks damages 3 ravagers and its fine if you safe it afterwards.
in your comp this would be the main focus on the T side: set up liberators and afterwards just micro tanks while having your hellbats sit like 4-6 range away from tanks so the protect them from roach hydra.
on the Z side my focus would be to corrosive bile on liberators or tanks depending on whats safer to do while trying to kite the hellbats with roach hydra.
the micro tank drops force is good, i just think its not the right thing for tanks since their immobility is THE major weakness they should have. maybe let them be picked up in siege mode but be unsieged afterwards so micro in battles is still viable but they arent those "you can never touch me early game" units that also let T scout everything + be safe vs all ins. thats just too much imo.
Thats pretty much how it is. You are right, but the 13 range bile does offer more room than before, and skilled zergs can use that to hit tanks before it does much to the ravagers. I find it bit strong tbh. I thought it was fair at 9 range myself as I've seen mech and zerg army trade well on both sides depending on either sides positioning/unit usage midgame.
i think the patch removing mm showed that at least part of the problem with tanks is that its just too easy to make a huge amount of low-tech units very fast
i dont even care about wether or not we have mm or not, id just love for the games pacing to return to where it was in the non-mm patch
On September 20 2015 17:41 Draddition wrote: I REALLY don't get why so many people hate the concept of dropping sieged tanks. We're happy blizzard disassembled the Protoss deathball, but we think terran should have an even simpler- and more powerful- deathball?
Blizzard took a unit which performs best when you aren't controlling it, and gave an option to increase its effectiveness by interacting with it. I think its a wonderful idea.
Because they approached the issue in a completely fucked up way. Tanks issue is that they suck hard in small numbers and obliterated anything on the ground when you have 20+ clumped.
Basically you either death ball with tanks or die.
What we wanted is tanks to be more powerful in small numbers and weaker in larger numbers to achieve this we proposed: 1- Higher damage vs single target by adding malestorm upgrade from the campaign (value can be balanced later). 2- Higher cooldown (from 2.8 to 3.2 for example) 3- removal of overkill prevention to allow players to control tanks shot to use them in the most efficient way instead of siege and look somewhere else.
What Blizzard did is making the unit into fucking annoying fly. The damage is not significant as it was with the reaver case. There is 0 micro from the opponent to try to minimize the damage due to no projectile attack. It is just pure retardedness
What tanks need is some sort of redesign so they are better at controlling a zone in small numbers but worst overall at fighting in large numbers.
Firstly I think the base damage needs to be increased from 35 to 44, but upgrades should only increase base damage by 1. Why did I chose 44 with +1 instead of say 40 with +2 or 45 with +1/+2? Because the siege tank is vulnerable early game, that's where it needs the most help, so it makes sense to bump up the base damage while cutting back a bit of the scaling. Secondly 44 +1 makes it so that siege tanks can't 1 shot stimmed marines since +3 armor on marines will cancel that out. This is a critical part because otherwise the TvT MU completely flips to mech vs mech, which we don't want.
I agree with the malestrom upgrade introduction, but the numbers should be such that a marauder can't be killed from a direct shot + the aoe damage of other tanks, otherwise, again the MU risks becoming pure mech vs mech. But I think a siege tank doing in the range of 80-90 direct damage to a target would be pretty good.
Also, people need to stop fighting the idea that reintroducing overkill is dumbing down the game, quite the opposite it introduces the need for more micro from the side that has relatively little use for it and allows more ways for better players to outplay each other and distinguish themselves.
I don't really like tanks drops. Its takes away the identity of the siege tank. I don't care for tanks being mobile. I find deciding when and where to siege your tanks to be more interesting. I also like how your opponent and catch tanks unsieged or out of position and how they can force you to siege to slow down a push. What I want from tanks is that when in siege mode, whatever it shoots at gets hurt. Its just doesn't do that outside of marines and lings. However, I wouldn't be opposed to having the siege tank left in the game but having the picked up tanks revert to tank mode.
This makes siege tanks in large numbers unstoppable for enemy ground since you cannot trick them(i.e. split units to force an attack), only overwhelm them in numbers they cannot cope with or flying units.
' People way overestimate the effect of overkill. You are presenting it in some type of way like you could outmicro a large siege tank deathball in BW with a smaller army. But that's not true. A siege tank deathball in BW was ridicilous and unbeatable.
The major difference between BW and Sc2 when it comes to mech is that Siege tanks indeed were stronger, however the opponent had better tools to break it down without fighting straight up. E.g. arbiter recall, shuttle drops (warp prism would be a ton better if vikings were replaced with goliaths) and overlord drops.
And shouldn't a mass of siege tanks be unbeatable if they are sieged in position? Its ridiculous to think that people want to engage a ground-dominating force with ground troops. If someone has that much gas and supply in tanks, and you are losing air dominance, then you are just losing.
The problem with this statement is that it's really difficult for Zerg in HotS to get air dominance vs T. A meching terran can easily get a massive tank ball + air dominance in TvZ if he does it right.
In LotV with the new vipers thats a different story, but then again T also has a lot of new stuff to work against that.
On September 20 2015 04:27 Hider wrote:
The major difference between BW and Sc2 when it comes to mech is that Siege tanks indeed were stronger, however the opponent had better tools to break it down without fighting straight up. E.g. arbiter recall, shuttle drops (warp prism would be a ton better if vikings were replaced with goliaths) and overlord drops.
Assuming overkill protection would be removed, the other races would automatically have those as well. Since unit pathing isn't screwed in SC2, things like outmaneuvering tank lines is actually possible. Zerglings, burrow, drops, warp ins, blinding cloud, phoenix pick up, even mothership cloak(there's gotta be a reason this unit is still in the game) are all tools to work against siege tanklines.
On September 20 2015 17:41 Draddition wrote: I REALLY don't get why so many people hate the concept of dropping sieged tanks. We're happy blizzard disassembled the Protoss deathball, but we think terran should have an even simpler- and more powerful- deathball?
Blizzard took a unit which performs best when you aren't controlling it, and gave an option to increase its effectiveness by interacting with it. I think its a wonderful idea.
First off: Siege tanklines are only a deathball becasue they don't do overkill damage. A terran can siege them and they get almost always 100% of their effectiveness. Thats why they can feel like a deathball even though because of their attackspeed thats not always a case.
Again assuming overkill protection would be removed, this wouldn't be the case anymore. When, in what way(concave etc), and for how long you siege becomes important and a huge part of moving siegetanks. Right now it's just "Enemy is close? Welp, better press siege on all of my tanks!" and then leapfrogging them to the enemy so the enemy can never approach you without eating tankshots.
Also, the new unit interaction idea is great. But it's poorly executed. They did not give Terran a reason to interact with their tanks, they just gave them the opportunity. Essentially they are just as effective as before(which can lead to what you call deathballs in this context), but now they can also be abused in lower numbers and for harrassment option.
So you end up with a unit just that can be massed and added to a deathball-esque scenario, but can also be very strong and abusive in lower numbers. Thats not what unit interaction should be about and imho not what siege tanks should be about. It's as if they took the old swarmhost and just added flying, super-fast killing locusts to it.
Siege Tank Drop harass is not viable because it can shoot 1-2 times and does not killl anything. Queens and spores almost defend it on their own. What actually is cute, is that you can use Siegetanks against zerg again becauuse Medevac can saven them now. I like it more than the widowmine.
Whats Wrong:
TvT: DoomDrops became DOOMier... Positioning does not matter. Stimm your marhauders, and drop your tanks, boom you can break siegelines.
On September 20 2015 22:34 KT_Elwood wrote: Siege Tank Drop harass is not viable because it can shoot 1-2 times and does not killl anything. Queens and spores almost defend it on their own.
In the current LotV Map pool you can hit really early with sieged tank drops and be really annoying, the very least you can do is force out a massive amount of units that isn't really going to do anything since you have tanks at home as well.
Also, if you're at a stage where you can comfortably drop with multiple medivacs, getting a bunch marine/marauder in there is going to do a lot.
I'm just around master level in LotV but I faced enough Terrans able to abuse the s out of this.
On September 19 2015 03:17 Qwyn wrote: I just had to post after watching TOP's stream for a good while today:
Mass siege tank pick-ups in TvT look so freaking ridiculous. They are so silly. I for one would not be upset if this feature did not make it to release.
New things usually look silly first but you will get used to it. There is no rule which forbids certain units in an rts game. Imagine it would be a new lotv unit which wasnt in an earlier expansion. Imagine its called reaver instead of tank.