|
If people are honestly suggesting Thor/Raven/Viking/Ghost then it's further proving prior points about the tank simply not being a real threat.
One again, for the sake of mech being actually viable and for the health of this game as an esport, I submit that someone should do a formal writeup on the tank before beta ends.
On December 19 2012 06:51 Lyyna wrote:Show nested quote + But yet despite that, Protoss has multiple ways of not only beating but CRUSHING mech armies in straight up engagements that there's no real need to ever explore the old BW strategies.
I mech'd for nearly the whole WOL duration, and i mech on HOTS too, and i have to say : NO. If a protoss army with equal supply/ressources is able to crush you in a direct fight, you're doing it wrong. It may be your positionning, it may be your composition, it may be your spellcasters usage, but if the protoss can 1A into your army, except if he has 30 carriers (in which case you should have 25 BCs and 10 ravens anyway) , it's not "mech" fault, it's the player fault. As we often say in my school, "the problem is between the keyboard and the chair". It applies perfectly to TvP mech. I was able to make mech works in WoL, at least at the high master lvl. and when i say "work", it means "able to handle early game allins/pressure, find ways to be able to win in midgame or stay in good shap, and how to basically autowin lategame". And after basically 1.5 year of refining mech play in WoL, i still didn't found anything i couldnt beat with good scouting/composition/positionning. And well, i don't see why it wouldnt be possible to repeat this in HoTs. The only problem is people mindsets, which is too much focused on "try the obvious (super economical or harassing opening, often unsafe, into massing tanks midgame, into massing vikings lategame) stuff, see it fail, say it doesn't work without looking for any solution at all".
The issue is Lyyna that you got so used to playing mech that outplaying people became normal for you. You're simply just a good player making a bad-subpar strategy work, and a lot of the time you don't even go pure mech.
Of course that's my personal opinion, and solely from my analysis of your replays, but I submit that you're not doing anything special with mech other than being better than the other guy, and you may be 100% unable to realize this similar to a physical trainer wearing a weighted vest for a week and actually feeling awkward when it's removed. As such all prior points still stand.
On December 19 2012 06:58 Mirosuu wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 06:51 Lyyna wrote: But yet despite that, Protoss has multiple ways of not only beating but CRUSHING mech armies in straight up engagements that there's no real need to ever explore the old BW strategies.
I mech'd for nearly the whole WOL duration, and i mech on HOTS too, and i have to say : NO. If a protoss army with equal supply/ressources is able to crush you in a direct fight, you're doing it wrong. It may be your positionning, it may be your composition, it may be your spellcasters usage, but if the protoss can 1A into your army, except if he has 30 carriers (in which case you should have 25 BCs and 10 ravens anyway) , it's not "mech" fault, it's the player fault. As we often say in my school, "the problem is between the keyboard and the chair". It applies perfectly to TvP mech. I was able to make mech works in WoL, at least at the high master lvl. and when i say "work", it means "able to handle early game allins/pressure, find ways to be able to win in midgame or stay in good shap, and how to basically autowin lategame". And after basically 1.5 year of refining mech play in WoL, i still didn't found anything i couldnt beat with good scouting/composition/positionning. And well, i don't see why it wouldnt be possible to repeat this in HoTs. The only problem is people mindsets, which is too much focused on "try the obvious (super economical or harassing opening, often unsafe, into massing tanks midgame, into massing vikings lategame) stuff, see it fail, say it doesn't work without looking for any solution at all". Thank you for not just automatically turning your post into a "oh my god the sky is falling. What ever do we do!?" post about mech. We can always improve.
Yes we can always improve, but how is this relevant to 50% of the Terran race being nearly nonviable? Having to improve more than the other guy to reach the same spot isn't exactly fair. It's not that we're a pessimistic bunch and we can't see the bright side; we've done our share of extensive testing, theory-crafting, and want this to succeed as much as the next person. However perhaps when even people like Idra are saying mech is bad then the sky might actually be falling.
Food for thought.
|
On December 19 2012 09:23 Rife wrote:Show nested quote +On December 18 2012 11:22 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: Guys let it go, they specifically nerfed tanks so >16 won't be auto-win That's why HOTS mech's burst damage has been spread out over three units: 1. Siege tank (50s/3s, 13 min AOE, rng 13) 2. Thor (30x2/1.28s, rng 7) 3. Widow mine. (160 dmg/40s, 40AOE, rng 5) The problem with that is you need to say "HEY TOSS DUDE, COME OVER HERE PLEASE AND A-MOVE INTO MY ARMY". All of your mech damage is tied up in extremely slow units. Also 2 of the 3 are HARD countered by voidrays at the moment. All the protoss has to do is attack where your army isn't and they win. Any good protoss will do this once you're on 4 bases and your mech army is up: - Attack your weakest base or whichever base your army is furthest from - You move in to defend but you won't get there in time as you're moving accross half the map - The toss does damage and retreats before you arrive - Toss moves to the base furthest away from your mech army and does the same thing - Toss can either choose to hit you while you're moving and unseiged or keep harassing bases - You can keep chasing tossball around and losing bases/econ or you can spread out and wait for tossball to engage you in a battle you CANNOT win. - Toss can expand freely because he knows you can't move out - Either way you lose. ^ that scenario just gets worse and worse with the more bases you have and the bigger the map is. Any TvP that gets to the point where tossball and mech army are both up ends in a loss unless your opponent plays extremely poorly. Balance has to change in a way that allows the meta to shift for TvP mech. Mech/tank is the most immobile army in the game. That mobility loss needs to be compensated by mech/tank also being the strongest army in straight up fights. Well positioned tanks with AA cover needs to be able to hold ground against superior numbers or defending bases will always be an unwinnable scenario vs mobile armies that can avoid fighting all together. If at any point tossball can fight straight up vs mech without it being a HUGE mistake for tossball then mech won't be viable. Toss can remax much faster and steamroll what very little forces remain. The goal for toss in TvP vs mech SHOULD be to catch a mech army unsieged and make them pay for it. Not what it currently is; which is just a-move into mech army regardless of positioning, remax faster and then win. It was mentioned above; Mech trading equally = mech loss. That's pathetic.
Im not saying you're wrong--I actually believe with you.
But wasn't that the same in BW? Where Mech was slow, Toss was mobile and constantly attacked where ever mech wasn't located? Between Carriers, Arbiters, Shuttles, and Speedlots it was easy for Protoss to just go around mech/ignore mines. Saying mech can't work because Protoss can simply go around Mech when that's exactly what people miss?
The problem right now is that the best mech play comes from Zerg (Infestor=tanks, creep=mines, broods=more tanks?)
If you want to play the race that grabs three bases, turtles, then uses long range units to slow down pushes as you spread 0 supply vision granting units across the map you don't play Terran mech, you play standard zerg.
|
On December 19 2012 06:51 Lyyna wrote:Show nested quote + But yet despite that, Protoss has multiple ways of not only beating but CRUSHING mech armies in straight up engagements that there's no real need to ever explore the old BW strategies.
I mech'd for nearly the whole WOL duration, and i mech on HOTS too, and i have to say : NO. If a protoss army with equal supply/ressources is able to crush you in a direct fight, you're doing it wrong. It may be your positionning, it may be your composition, it may be your spellcasters usage, but if the protoss can 1A into your army, except if he has 30 carriers (in which case you should have 25 BCs and 10 ravens anyway) , it's not "mech" fault, it's the player fault. As we often say in my school, "the problem is between the keyboard and the chair". It applies perfectly to TvP mech. I was able to make mech works in WoL, at least at the high master lvl. and when i say "work", it means "able to handle early game allins/pressure, find ways to be able to win in midgame or stay in good shap, and how to basically autowin lategame". And after basically 1.5 year of refining mech play in WoL, i still didn't found anything i couldnt beat with good scouting/composition/positionning. And well, i don't see why it wouldnt be possible to repeat this in HoTs. The only problem is people mindsets, which is too much focused on "try the obvious (super economical or harassing opening, often unsafe, into massing tanks midgame, into massing vikings lategame) stuff, see it fail, say it doesn't work without looking for any solution at all".
<3 !
|
On December 19 2012 05:24 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 02:07 iS.Axslav wrote: Uh you guys do realize the protoss army was close to twice the army value there right? if he wasn't so far behind he would have held that without a problem. 2 thors + 4 tanks + 7 hellions + 6 marines + raven = 2300 minerals + 1100 gas 23 zealots + 6 archons + 4 immortals + 4 stalkers + sentry + mothership core = 4700 minerals + 1550 gas (think he made archons from dts not sure) That would be fine logic except you forgot: Terran is 2/1, pre-sieged, on his half of the map, with the addition of every single one of his mining SCVS blocking. Protoss is 0/0/0, walking up a tight choke, into a supply depot ramp, into a bunker, into a PDD, into siege tank fire, with 1A and zero micro, and had already lost 10+ probes from hellion harrass. This should not be possible.
I played plenty of bw and with anything but the tiniest choke possible a speedlot/shuttle+reaver/dragoon/templar army would easily take down a mech army of 1/2 its size. Upgrades also play a much more minor role with mech play. We're used to watching mech hold positions very well in pro bw b/c both players would keep relatively even armies (or the protoss would break part of a position with a superior army but back away when terran reinforcements arrived).
|
On December 18 2012 15:00 ZjiublingZ wrote:
vs Protoss, this whole dynamic is so messed up. If they drop you it's good, if they flank you it's good, if they split their army and hit multiple fronts it's good, if they catch you off guard or out of position it's really, really good. But they don't HAVE to do this. Unlike vs most Zerg armies or Bio armies, your army actually isn't really stronger straight up (okay, it might be a little bit if you have the perfect composition to counter theirs and are in perfect position, but that isn't realistic with their more mobile and faster tech switching army). So while there are all these threats that Mech faces from the mobile armies, they can't actually afford to put any significant amount of supply into Widow Mines to protect themselves from these threats - or they will just lose the straight up engagement. And unlike vs the T/Z armies where these threats aren't there and thus Widow Mines aren't as useful - Swarm Host/Brood Lord armies and Mech armies - you aren't actually more mobile than the Protoss army.
This. TvP mech gives up mobility for an army that still cannot trade effectively with a far more mobile tossball. Even if you can trade evenly, you still lose to faster remaxing and loss of map control.
In order for mech to beat a tossball you need to SEVERELY decimate a toss army while taking minimal losses. Then you need to push while toss is remaxxing and still not take many loses. If you screw up at any point you lose the game.
You also need to rely on toss not switching to air and toss not harassing you much at all. The whole game comes down down to you playing near perfectly and your toss opponent having no clue as to WTF they're doing. This isn't balanced or viable.
Lynna says it's viable high masters. I think Lynna would be high GM if he spent 1.5 years playing Bio or if mech was more popular. High masters/gm mech is so rare that people just don't practice against it, they don't know how to effectively scout it or react to it and therefore don't play particularly well when facing it.
|
WoL suffers from a lack of imagination compared to brood war, this thread proves it. people thought there was only 1 way to mech vs zerg in WoL (thors, tanks, hellions, etc... and a massive push at either 150/200 or 200/200) but go watch how baby just beat symbol in code A. He's a smart man.
think outside of the box people!
|
On December 19 2012 10:02 iS.Axslav wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 05:24 avilo wrote:On December 19 2012 02:07 iS.Axslav wrote: Uh you guys do realize the protoss army was close to twice the army value there right? if he wasn't so far behind he would have held that without a problem. 2 thors + 4 tanks + 7 hellions + 6 marines + raven = 2300 minerals + 1100 gas 23 zealots + 6 archons + 4 immortals + 4 stalkers + sentry + mothership core = 4700 minerals + 1550 gas (think he made archons from dts not sure) That would be fine logic except you forgot: Terran is 2/1, pre-sieged, on his half of the map, with the addition of every single one of his mining SCVS blocking. Protoss is 0/0/0, walking up a tight choke, into a supply depot ramp, into a bunker, into a PDD, into siege tank fire, with 1A and zero micro, and had already lost 10+ probes from hellion harrass. This should not be possible. I played plenty of bw and with anything but the tiniest choke possible a speedlot/shuttle+reaver/dragoon/templar army would easily take down a mech army of 1/2 its size. Upgrades also play a much more minor role with mech play. We're used to watching mech hold positions very well in pro bw b/c both players would keep relatively even armies (or the protoss would break part of a position with a superior army but back away when terran reinforcements arrived).
Axslav, people don't want to hear how mech actually worked in BW. People prefer the concept of the mechanized army that can trade super efficiently. The harsh, brutal reality of mech play is to much for the normal player to take.
|
On December 19 2012 09:47 Thieving Magpie wrote:
Im not saying you're wrong--I actually believe with you.
But wasn't that the same in BW? Where Mech was slow, Toss was mobile and constantly attacked where ever mech wasn't located? Between Carriers, Arbiters, Shuttles, and Speedlots it was easy for Protoss to just go around mech/ignore mines. Saying mech can't work because Protoss can simply go around Mech when that's exactly what people miss?
I'm trying to say that mech at the tossball point in the game requires 4 bases and not long after that will require 5 bases and a maxxed mech army can only viably defend 3 of those bases. Then the problem is that you're going to take losses and as time ticks away you're going to have to expand again and even further stretch your mech resources which further opens you up for more losses. A tossball doesn't have this problem; 3 base or 5 base toss does the same thing to defend; bring the tossball to where it's needed ASAP and leave out scouts to see the incoming attack.
Terran mech hinges on controlling as much space as possible with as few weak points as possible because it lacks the mobility to be a reactionary army. My issue is that with the current power of mech forces, it seems like you always need to control more space to defend bases than your army will ever allow.
It's like: Space that can be viably controlled with mech army: X Bases required to produce and reinforce said army: X+1
|
On December 19 2012 10:11 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 10:02 iS.Axslav wrote:On December 19 2012 05:24 avilo wrote:On December 19 2012 02:07 iS.Axslav wrote: Uh you guys do realize the protoss army was close to twice the army value there right? if he wasn't so far behind he would have held that without a problem. 2 thors + 4 tanks + 7 hellions + 6 marines + raven = 2300 minerals + 1100 gas 23 zealots + 6 archons + 4 immortals + 4 stalkers + sentry + mothership core = 4700 minerals + 1550 gas (think he made archons from dts not sure) That would be fine logic except you forgot: Terran is 2/1, pre-sieged, on his half of the map, with the addition of every single one of his mining SCVS blocking. Protoss is 0/0/0, walking up a tight choke, into a supply depot ramp, into a bunker, into a PDD, into siege tank fire, with 1A and zero micro, and had already lost 10+ probes from hellion harrass. This should not be possible. I played plenty of bw and with anything but the tiniest choke possible a speedlot/shuttle+reaver/dragoon/templar army would easily take down a mech army of 1/2 its size. Upgrades also play a much more minor role with mech play. We're used to watching mech hold positions very well in pro bw b/c both players would keep relatively even armies (or the protoss would break part of a position with a superior army but back away when terran reinforcements arrived). Axslav, people don't want to hear how mech actually worked in BW. People prefer the concept of the mechanized army that can trade super efficiently. The harsh, brutal reality of mech play is to much for the normal player to take.
Except it is not really true. A properly set up mech army with mines and stuff would trade well with that protoss army. Sure there was a lot of opportunities for the protoss and terran to utilize micro to make the trade more favorable though.
In Sc2 there are many situations where a protoss army can just a-move through a much bigger terran mech army. That almost never happened in BW.
Go play some TvP mech and use it in your show "Rules of Engagement". I for sure would watch that episode cos I wanna hear more pro players opinions and analysis of TvP mech.
|
OK. I tested mech vs Protoss in unit tester everyday since early 2012 and jumped right into HOTS unit tester after HOTS beta. Here is the result.
If Protoss goes for colossus/immortal/archon + stalker, then 10+ tank/thor/hellbat will kill Protoss. This is true in the case of 120 - 140 army supply. However, if Protoss replace stalker with zealot, terran loses, even terran has like 20+ hellbats. This is true in the case of 120 - 140 army supply.
If terran replaces all hellbats with WM, the result is worse (Protoss with or without detection), even before WM nerf today.
So, in other words, mech doesn't work.
|
On December 19 2012 08:10 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 08:00 Insoleet wrote: spectators don't want deathballs, they want positional or multifront games.... if terrans mech is only a new deathball in hots.... well I prefer that mech don't even work. In fairness (and I'm not really disagreeing with you here) what people miss is non-compact play. Terran deathballs were in Broodwar also--the ball simply took up 3-5 screens and had missile turrets included, but it was about the same. It wasn't like you had 1-2 tanks here, 1-2 tanks there, etc... It was still a "ball" just so massive and wide ranging that Protoss could actually engage different parts of the ball forcing the "line" to be pushed forward (or give other portions of the line a chance to advance). The ball was responsive, alive, and not concentrated into a central point. What's wanted, I feel, is the effect of "small maps" but on "large ones" where the army is not something you simply circumvent but the map is so large that your able to have enough resources to actually fuel large scale warfare. (as opposed to the 1base play of the Open Seasons) That really isnt a "ball" but rather an army made up of lots of platoons and the whole problem of the SC2 deathball is that "50% or more of your units can shoot at 50% or more of the enemys units at any given time during the few seconds of battle". This is too much efficiency for the sake of convenience (1-control group plus "perfect" (the simplest straight towards the target with no collision / eveasion among your own units) movement in clumps) and it is boring as hell. In a ZvZ and on creep there are times when you cant even discern which units belong to which player ... especially when the Infestors start lobbing out their beach balls en masse.
Pros will have no problem with a "less streamlined control method" and "harder to control units" and casuals will find it easier if they are allowed to control only a few units at one time. Thus the BW control method and pathing (minus the bugs and with a few more directions than 8) would be far superior to the current SC2 movement and clumping system. Sadly Blizzard is too arrogant to make this change and doesnt even see the point.
The "efficiency" of the SC2 movement and unit selection certainly makes positional play with static units and defensive positions rather impossible, but Blizzard even makes it worse by including more "nifty movement tricks" like Blink and cliffjump/-walk and even the "pull enemies to you" spell from Vipers to REALLY make it clear that they want a fast paced ACTION game rather than a slower STRATEGY game. Funnily enough BW games have about the same length or even less compared to SC2 ...
On December 19 2012 13:41 larse wrote: OK. I tested mech vs Protoss in unit tester everyday since early 2012 and jumped right into HOTS unit tester after HOTS beta. Here is the result.
If Protoss goes for colossus/immortal/archon + stalker, then 10+ tank/thor/hellbat will kill Protoss. This is true in the case of 120 - 140 army supply. However, if Protoss replace stalker with zealot, terran loses, even terran has like 20+ hellbats. This is true in the case of 120 - 140 army supply.
If terran replaces all hellbats with WM, the result is worse (Protoss with or without detection), even before WM nerf today.
So, in other words, mech doesn't work. Even though the thread is about "TvP mech" it should be clear that mech in general is dull and just a "differently colored deathball". Thus the whole concept doesnt work as it should and something is wrong in general. Proving that "it works in TvX" doesnt really matter, because its the playstyle which should be made to work and not just the units used in the same old deathball style we all (well many of us) loathe with a passion.
On December 19 2012 10:11 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 10:02 iS.Axslav wrote:On December 19 2012 05:24 avilo wrote:On December 19 2012 02:07 iS.Axslav wrote: Uh you guys do realize the protoss army was close to twice the army value there right? if he wasn't so far behind he would have held that without a problem. 2 thors + 4 tanks + 7 hellions + 6 marines + raven = 2300 minerals + 1100 gas 23 zealots + 6 archons + 4 immortals + 4 stalkers + sentry + mothership core = 4700 minerals + 1550 gas (think he made archons from dts not sure) That would be fine logic except you forgot: Terran is 2/1, pre-sieged, on his half of the map, with the addition of every single one of his mining SCVS blocking. Protoss is 0/0/0, walking up a tight choke, into a supply depot ramp, into a bunker, into a PDD, into siege tank fire, with 1A and zero micro, and had already lost 10+ probes from hellion harrass. This should not be possible. I played plenty of bw and with anything but the tiniest choke possible a speedlot/shuttle+reaver/dragoon/templar army would easily take down a mech army of 1/2 its size. Upgrades also play a much more minor role with mech play. We're used to watching mech hold positions very well in pro bw b/c both players would keep relatively even armies (or the protoss would break part of a position with a superior army but back away when terran reinforcements arrived). Axslav, people don't want to hear how mech actually worked in BW. People prefer the concept of the mechanized army that can trade super efficiently. The harsh, brutal reality of mech play is to much for the normal player to take. Speak for yourself, but I want to hear it.
|
On December 19 2012 04:51 p1cKLes wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 04:31 Rabiator wrote:On December 19 2012 04:03 p1cKLes wrote:On December 19 2012 03:50 GinDo wrote: The problem is that tanks just have 2 many weaknesses for a 3 food unit. There expensive, slow, have a min range, and a setup time, and have a little more hp then a maruader. Not to mention the dmg nerf Agreed. I think it all boils down to one unit, the tank. I think you are running into the wrong direction here ... because the tank WITH its many weaknesses is one of the best designed (=most interesting) units of the game. Thats why we go on about it so much. Most of the other SC2 units only have advantages and not really any weaknesses; the worst "weakness" is maybe the Immortals sluggishness, but thats about it. So the point rather should be that there are too few units with interesting weaknesses in the game and that Blizzard simply tries to make the game more more MORE dynamic by streamlining everything for a smooth ride while just keeping the tank (and the Carrier) for the old BW enthusiasts to keep them quiet, but with not a lot of intention of actually trying to make them work (because that would interfere with their slick and smooth super units abilities and general game mechanics) ... which is why they didnt change anything yet to make these two units more viable (the microing change to the Carrier only marginally improves them). In BW the core ranged Infantry unit of the Zerg ... the Hydralisk ... dealt explosive damage, thus 100% damage to large units, 75% to medium sized units and only 50% to small ones. Look at the Hydralisk and the Roach in SC2 ... flat damage against everything. Boring and too flexible IMO and thus too good. The Terran Marine of BW had flat damage, BUT it was weak due to the relative weakness of the individual unit and only gained power when it was paired with a decent number of Medics and grouped up in bigger numbers ... which was NOT EASY (but that was kinda the point that it wasnt supposed to be easy to control). Handling any number of units in SC2 is no problem and they even put a button to select all combat units into the game. How far can this game go down the wrong way? http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/Zerg_Unit_Statistics---- Dear Blizzard, please balance the POWER of a unit with sufficient DRAWBACKS to make them interesting and the handling of a unit can be one of those drawbacks for massed units! I know you wont change the right things, but here goes anyways ... A pessimist who likes being proved wrong. While I do agree, the OP is asking the question is mech still viable? Specifically in TvP. I think the heart of the problem is the Tank closely followed by the Immortal. What the solution looks like, I'm not necessarily saying. Whether it's creating a unique weaknesses to the Immortal or buffing the tank somehow, I'm not sure. The are probably numerous ways to address this. If we are looking at the bigger picture and questioning the overall design, then I tend to agree with your answer. I think there are numerous people including QXC and OneGroup who are very much of the same opinion. Asking for "viable in TvX" is kinda stupid, because you might be overlooking the general things which make things not viable. For SC2 this would be the total focus on mobility, because Blizzard rather wants an ACTION game with loads of units moving here and there in an instant and/or cool way. Thus they invented Blink, Forcefield, Fungal, burrowed movement, cliffwalking/-jumping and now finally the Vipers "drag 'em" spell. Sadly this mobility directly counters the immobility of sieged Tanks and makes them basically unviable in any matchup except TvT.
If you look at the whole game instead of a single matchup you might also notice that Siege Tanks are NOT affected by the Reactor while most of the important units of the enemy are. Thus they are not viable for many more reasons than their pure combat stats and we have been told so many times by commentators when they have said that "he cant lose this army" or "he has to make it work with this mech army" ...
Thus the necessary changes apply to more than the TvP matchup ...
On December 19 2012 08:43 Vindicare605 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 08:25 pure.Wasted wrote:On December 19 2012 08:10 Thieving Magpie wrote:On December 19 2012 08:00 Insoleet wrote: spectators don't want deathballs, they want positional or multifront games.... if terrans mech is only a new deathball in hots.... well I prefer that mech don't even work. In fairness (and I'm not really disagreeing with you here) what people miss is non-compact play. Terran deathballs were in Broodwar also--the ball simply took up 3-5 screens and had missile turrets included, but it was about the same. It wasn't like you had 1-2 tanks here, 1-2 tanks there, etc... It was still a "ball" just so massive and wide ranging that Protoss could actually engage different parts of the ball forcing the "line" to be pushed forward (or give other portions of the line a chance to advance). The ball was responsive, alive, and not concentrated into a central point. What's wanted, I feel, is the effect of "small maps" but on "large ones" where the army is not something you simply circumvent but the map is so large that your able to have enough resources to actually fuel large scale warfare. (as opposed to the 1base play of the Open Seasons) Great point. Does the supply cap limit players in this capacity? If it was raised to 300 or 400 and armies couldn't possibly fit on the same screen, would that help? The supply cap by itself isn't really the limiting factor, it's the fact that you need so many more harvesters in SC2 than you did in SC1 so that the 200 supply cap, combined with the higher average supply for units, combined with the need for many more harvesters makes for much smaller armies. Armies in BW werent as big as those in SC2 ... at least the parts of the armies that were actively engaging each other. That is the key difference ...
|
On December 19 2012 10:10 RanDomFox wrote: think outside of the box people! Such phrases are just as overused, and inherently stupid, as telling we have to 'adapt', and 'evolve our strategies'. Also using better 'positioning' is a fans favourite. Lets turn WoL back to how it was at release, and then tell the toss to think outside the box.
Anyway most people are thinking outside the mech box, so they switched back to bio.
|
Widow mine cannot be used defensively with tank line.
It needs to be used like speedling, to run in and surround all expensive tech units (stalker immortal colo), after zealots have engaged hellions.
|
Apparently someone from Blizzard wrote that they are still testing things on PTR. Not sure how 2 supply siege tank solves any issues but maybe they'll come up with something more reasonable.
|
On December 19 2012 19:25 pmp10 wrote: Apparently someone from Blizzard wrote that they are still testing things on PTR. Not sure how 2 supply siege tank solves any issues but maybe they'll come up with something more reasonable.
What are they testing? Where did you read something like this? And why would you think it's somehow connetced to mech TvP?
|
Anyways, you can watch how mech "doesn't" work here..
http://cs.twitch.tv/ogssupernova/b/349347081
Go to 1:37..
edit: Sure, there are lots of "but, but, but the protoss didn't do this, or this".. But you get the basic idea, how it looks like when someone good messes with mech TvP.
|
On December 19 2012 22:47 Everlong wrote:Anyways, you can watch how mech "doesn't" work here.. http://cs.twitch.tv/ogssupernova/b/349347081Go to 1:37.. edit: Sure, there are lots of "but, but, but the protoss didn't do this, or this".. But you get the basic idea, how it looks like when someone good messes with mech TvP.
lmao over your failed attempt at irony. SO many flaws in your attempt to disvalidate the fact that mech sucks that I won't even bother to list them. Get some self-respect dude.
|
On December 19 2012 22:59 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On December 19 2012 22:47 Everlong wrote:Anyways, you can watch how mech "doesn't" work here.. http://cs.twitch.tv/ogssupernova/b/349347081Go to 1:37.. edit: Sure, there are lots of "but, but, but the protoss didn't do this, or this".. But you get the basic idea, how it looks like when someone good messes with mech TvP. lmao over your failed attempt at irony. SO many flaws in your attempt to disvalidate the fact that mech sucks that I won't even bother to list them. Get some self-respect dude.
What the fuck are you talking about? I guess you falls into the category "but, but, but..." lol.. :DD
Seriously, do you have anything to say? Or you just jump on the bandwagon trying to look cool and fancy..
edit: And yes, proceed to analyse the whole game and point out what exactly happened and why mech doesn't work.. :D In case you don't understeand, I posted this game to open eyes to people who think game is lost when first Tempest arrives or 2-3 Immortals are build.
|
I can win vs Bronze playing mech too.
|
|
|
|