|
On January 05 2013 14:48 naastyOne wrote: You know what make SC2 TvT very dynamic and SC:BW a boring siege-line on siege line? The relativly weaker tanks.
Bio is a non-starter in BW TvT because Vultures wreck bio.
|
I'm still interested on what Blizzard is doing with the Thor. I'm not too crazed about it's new current abilities, but I feel like some of your arguments for the Warhound can be implemented onto the Thor. Maybe? I'm not sure. Haven't used the Thor too much myself (and I certainly don't mech enough)...
|
Viking ground mode gets haywire missile, with the combined plating they are pretty good tanks, but still have this small issue against +armored ground damage. They can't kite like the Warhound could because of their speed/range . They should make the missile only be useable while it doesn't move though. With that you would have a tank and anti air as well. The hellbat is a great tank, but you lack the anti air with them. And unlike bw, airplay is actually viable most of the time. (Best solution for me would be to remove the armored tag from the assault mode, so viking hp is indirectly buffed on the ground)
|
Mech doesn't need the tankiness...it needs to be cheaper. 300/200, 150/125, 100 + the money you spend on air support and production buildings is extremely expensive. The cost from BW is almost doubled and tripled.
|
No we didn't make a mistake. SC2 does not need a reskinned marauder it needs positional play.
Terran is just in such a bad state currently that it feels like it.
|
On January 05 2013 14:48 naastyOne wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 13:23 IndyO wrote:On January 05 2013 12:34 iKill wrote:On January 05 2013 10:39 rysecake wrote: no it wasn't a mistake.
the core of terran mech must be centered around the siege tank. not a marauder in a gundam suit. And here's the fucking problem. Whenever Blizzard tries to introduce a terran unit, there is a united cry of despair from the BW community: "BUT HOW DOES IT SUPPORT MY TANKS?" The tanks are not the fucking core unit of terran. You don't NEED to have it in your army. So tank mech doesn't work, so fucking what? There are other styles of mech that are just as positional thanks to the general slow speed of mechanical / air units. If the tank isn't the best unit on the board, let it stay that way and play without it. This serious fucking tank boner we've got as a community needs to stop, and it needs to stop NOW. Not apart of the BW community but even I can see the value in tanks. Other units are so easily turned into a death ball style play that we already see. Looks at how match ups play where the tank doesn't exist and compare it to TvT, which is incredibly positional. What other styles are just as positional as tanks that offer as much? Tanks can not only be caught out of position. If Tanks are caugh unsieged it's bad, but even then you have to siege them up in a good position and spread, you cant clump them all up to much, but you cant leave a single siege tank all out on its own. No other unit offers positional play in such or as many ways, that a single unit is strong but only when its in such an area. Yes positional play can exist without it, but not on the same level. It's not just mech players are after, its how it plays. And even if you get positional play, another part of what has made Mech dynamics is the idea of an army that can't be beat head to head. You have to engage around it or fight a timer for a higher tech to beat it (using your own skills to buy time). Tanks also encourage this as you can force sieges and slow there push dramatically. Without siege tanks there is less options you have to slow them down, or they are weaker. Mech is fun as it is getting an unbeatable army and crushing your opponent with it. It's that kind of feeling that mech players want as well, and even past SC2 games have shown that it can be fun to watch when executed properly Oh, so you say that deathball is bad, but a slow, unbeatable deathball is actually good, right? You know what make SC2 TvT very dynamic and SC:BW a boring siege-line on siege line? The relativly weaker tanks. Now, curiously, the SC tank and marine are pretty similar to SC2 tank and marine, the reactors, UI and pathing making all the difference. In SC:BW you only needed a few scouts for warning, and you could move your siege tank deathball pretty much without problem. In SC2, doe to pathing, and tightly package marines can actually move in and rape siege tanks before they do a lot of damage.
None of those are why marines aren't feasible in a longer TvT game in Brood War. You can't use them because tanks more powerful and cost less supply, because of mines, and because marauders don't exist in Brood War.
|
On January 05 2013 16:55 SC2John wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 15:47 Xequecal wrote: The Warhound is almost impossible to balance, unfortunately, without completely changing it into a different unit that doesn't resemble the Warhound at all.
First off, the Warhound has to require a tech lab. You cannot give Terran a reactorable Factory unit that is good against armored, or allin rushes of Marines/Warhound/all your workers are simply impossible for Protoss to beat. Why do you think Marauders need a tech lab, have the worst cost/build time ratio in the game, and have concussive shells as a seperate upgrade? It's because if you could reactor them out, Protoss could never ever win a game against early game allins with all your SCVs.
Even if they require a tech lab I'm still skeptical if the allin rushes would be realistically defeatable. Siege Tanks in tank mode are expensive and horrible, but the fact that they have 7 range and deterred Stalker kiting enabled a build (1/1/1) that completely dominated Protoss from the top level of competition down for like a year. Now you want to give Terran a unit that's good against stalkers/immortals naturally? With a tech lab requirement, Photon Overcharge might enable Protoss to hold such rushes but that's by no means assured. Without that requirement, there's no way Protoss can ever survive.
After that, once you make everything in mech require tech labs, the viability of mech becomes very questionable. You simply need far too many resources wasted on production structures to get units out in a timely manner. I'm not sure you can say that protoss early-game would be too hard. With the improved MsC, they are kicking ass in the first 10:00 of the game. 1/1/1s are laughable now unless you manage to get like 20 probe kills off with harassment. I'm not saying that the warhound itself has to come back, but some form of it in that role could be useful for mech. And I believe I'm correct in that they required a tech lab before anyway (maybe). An armory requirement wouldn't be too bad. Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 15:39 IndyO wrote:Maybe after a tank buff I would see if the problem still exists as much. A mobile unit to support tanks could definitely exist, but all iterations of the Warhound seems to go against it. And at what point does it no longer become tweaking and a completely redesigned unit? If Blizzard did bring one in, using the Warhound model even holds issues due to the stigma it has. Companies will relaunch products under a different name or campaign if there is stigma on there old one, and I think Blizzard would have to do the same. @Indyo Because your post is too long to really cite specifically, I'll just address it in a general manner: Quite honestly, if they were to be made somewhat like goliaths...well, if they were to BE goliaths with some kind of additional anti-mech ability, they would work well without becoming too versatile or overpowered. Essentially, I think that some kind of tweak with the warhound could have gone well rather than simply removing it from the game. As for the role overlap with the marauder and how it plays, it may be that they play fairly similarly. However, in conjunction with completely different units, I would argue that they feel rather differently. Honestly, the richness of strategy in SC2 has come to resemble how you build your composition and skew your opponent's (i.e. the colossus->viking->HT->ghost circle), and some form of the warhound would add a certain richness to terran armies. The biggest issue is that for the Warhound to be good against what it needs to be, it would easily overshadow the tank as it becomes a very general unit, compared to the tank which is already not that great. You could of course buff the tank, but then we wouldn't be needing the Warhound to move out onto the map in the first place. And what about the Thor? We also still have the original Helion, Hellbat and Widow mine around. Not to mention Terran air units still exist, things like landed vikings could easily fill this role. I would have said that the Colossi > Viking > HT > Ghost circle is one of the least interesting examples of strategy, simply because it's so predictable. He builds colossi, I build vikings. He has HT, I make ghost. It's very straightforward mostly as you don't feel like your adding to your composition your just responding to what they have. I'd say that things like using Ultralisk to soak up damage while your hydralisk are left alive at the back is a much more interesting example of strategy. Your thinking strategically with how to use your units, you'renot just using a pre-recorded response to pump out a counter. Still, in the sense that you have to dance around the numbers and force switches etc it can be interesting. But with such a generally good unit, that also can be ready for air, when will it be bad to make them? Is there a bad time to make Warhounds? And even then, what will counter them? Will you even bother? Because in ZvT if Terran adds Marauders against Ling / Bling / Muta.... The zerg player doesn't really respond. He just has to micro better. Marauders just do stuff, there isn't a strategical response as far as units go, just in how you should engage. And the units you are working with would generally feel the same. You have the Hellbat which is another unit that plays similar to bio. You have the tank to give positional play, but your unit still moves like bio (Just like in marine tank). But even worse is the interactions the Warhound has are still similar. The units it wants to deal with are even the same you would make marauders for if you could fit them into mech (which you can't due to stim / different upgrades / no medivacs / less factories) TL;DR Problem can be solved without having to bring back the unit with existing units, since to keep the heavy positional play Tanks are pretty crucial. Pre-recorded responses to composition are less interesting that thinking strategically how you can use your units with each other. If the Warhound hits air and is a good general ground unit, if there ever going to be a bad time to make them, since they respond to everything. Having a unit exist just to solve a single problem in a single matchup as already said by MasterCynical is excessive when we have existing units that can do it. Mostly though it's just tanks are too weak as is and adding a new unit to counter what protoss has to beat them just seems to compound the problem. On January 05 2013 14:37 MasterCynical wrote:On January 05 2013 14:26 Mahanaim wrote: The Warhound is definitely a unit that had some potential at least, which Artosis said a long time ago. I think he would have grown to hate the unit. He did despise marauders after all. If you read his blog on his reaction to the whole destiny/warhound being cut episode, he was just ecstatic that TvP was vastly different in Hots. He just wanted a change not caring if it would be a good change or not. Agree with this, actually having change was just more important to him than what it was. If mech ended up being just a mechanical bio I doubt he would have enjoyed it. Edit:Oh, so you say that deathball is bad, but a slow, unbeatable deathball is actually good, right? Yes, because a regular deathball just clashes head onto into another. Its all about winning that engagement there. With the unstoppable deathball, yes a single engagement would lose you the game, but you have the entire build up of the game to prepare for it and delay it. It makes the game more than a "army vs army", it almost gives it an objective. Delay the army the enemy is making while you get out an alternative force you usually couldn't get out in time to deal with it. And it still has the option to be caught out of position, which encourages the oppposing player to attack into you and to try and find winning engagements, like in TvT Bio vs Mech where the terran will stim in then run back, forcing both players to be active with there units.
You know what make SC2 TvT very dynamic and SC:BW a boring siege-line on siege line? The relativly weaker tanks.
Now, curiously, the SC tank and marine are pretty similar to SC2 tank and marine, the reactors, UI and pathing making all the difference.
In SC:BW you only needed a few scouts for warning, and you could move your siege tank deathball pretty much without problem.
In SC2, doe to pathing, and tightly package marines can actually move in and rape siege tanks before they do a lot of damage.
While true that weaker tanks help, it's not the only thing, don't forget things like the marauder helping, even things like the Medivac help out as a single unit doesn't just kill the unit that heals the Marines and Marauders. But your point on SC2 pathing is actually pro bio. Yes they clump up, but the current damage / area was designed for it. It's harder to just move your "Unstoppable Deathball" without problem, which is if anything a good thing as it gives the enemy more ways to delay / potentially catch it out of position so it is requires more skill from the mech player, not the mention that SC2 is generally a faster paced game, map vision is already a commodity. And like you said you can run in with tightly packed units. As is, we already see Marines & Marauders stim and run into tanks while splitting to minimize the damage, beating them. You fascinate me in that you type a lot and say very little. Colossi/viking/HT/ghost circle is really interesting and requires each player to respond to the other's composition with a little tweaking. Another example would be the muta->thor->roach->tank->zergling/ultra circle in ZvT against mech. Both are beautiful in their own ways. I think it'd totally be fine to make warhounds paperweights with just a good anti-mech ability. There's no reason why they should break siege lines any better than marines, nor is there any reason to make them super powerful. They don't have to be good at everything. (Deep down, I know that specializing every unit by giving it a tag of (+30 damage vs. massive) and such is terrible). But SC2 has somehow been balanced thus far like that, so I don't see a reason not to just give warhounds a super niche role. The counter can be splash and gateway units, just like bio. As long as the fill the gap in mech. Marine/tank is the most stable composition in the entire game for being both positional and fairly mobile. Why would you oppose making mech as stable as and dynamic as marine/tank? I know you want to think that it will be exactly the same, but you still have the positional aspects of mines, hellion harass, banshee harass, and a fairly safe mobile midgame army. Extending the midgame makes the lategame more interesting, and forcing the warhound into a midgame role denies any chance that it will ever be as good as the thor, which, in turn, forces a transition (and in SC, we love transitions).
Sorry if that's the case, I'm used to having to provide reasoning and examples for my arguements, I'll be shorter. I guess we just disagree. I remember back at the start of SC2 there was a lot of discussion as to whether those type of interactions were as good as dynamic ones like the example I gave. They do have a place, but I personally think there is more room for strategy else where.
Still doesn't answer about making such a hugely specialized for 1 playstyle in a matchup. Other units may have niche roles but none exist soley for that. How do you ensure the anti mech ability won't break siegelines? They don't have to be good against everything, but your making a very general unit that can hit both air and ground. And with a counter like splash and zealots (since it beats stalkers with +armoured) it will play more like the marauder aswell. Also where is the cyclical strategy? Zealots and Colossi (I presume since Hellbats & mines) should already be built. You aren't forcing anything from them, and they "force" you to build this unit simply because you have no alternative.
I don't oppose making it as stable or dynamic as marine / tank. I oppose them playing the same. Which while you think I'm sure of, all of what you listed sounds like Bio. Mines will be utilized by Bio. The way they harass will be different you have that, but that isn't about how they play. I have no reason not to think making a mobile bio like unit alongside the hellbat / tank wouldn't lead to a similar experience. And the idea of a different playstyle would be to have a positional midgame, not a mobile one. We already have the option for that. A longer mid game does make the lategame more interesting though, that is true. But I don't see Terran players giving up there mobility that the Hellbat gives.
I stand by changing existing units over re-adding the Warhound, it was rejected by the community for good reason. I guess the best part of bringing back the Warhound is that you may get more play styles, as a mobile version of mech could be interesting to have alongside a positional one. But with how tanks are at the moment, there is no reason to make your deathball have to be sieged when the mobile one is just as good. Again, the solution is already present.
|
As a random in the beta, I really enjoy terran now. Hellbat with blue flame with def upgrade are awesome for tanking damage and very good against light. The combined def air/mech upgrade make all air units transition from mech or bio really viable. Mines help mapcontrol and defending new base or battle position. Thor are no longer feedback, reaper can be usefull sometimes, new medivac are really nice.
The power of Terran should not be make only factory unit amove and win, the fact that you can use some ghost emp or marauder slow or air unit with Mech is very interesting. Maybe we need to up terran a bit but I would prefer to add some nerf on some boring unit like colossus, infestor.
Edit : maybe make tank 160hp instead of 150 to nerf immo attack on it.
|
Mech wouldn't have a problem if tanks did way more damage. If they did, they would control areas alot better. But i know what people will say: But ZZEERRGGG will be murdered if they did more damage!!!!!! QQQQQQ. Well the simple fix for zerg is, move viper tech down to lair. If zerg see's tanks, make vipers and blinding cloud and or pull the tanks (Im sure people have seen how bloody effective that is by now). You know, i wish blizzard would stop being such pussy's and try a big chance like this.
|
Removing the original warhound (the Anti-Air mech warrior) was definitely a mistake. Reason: mech needs a good anti air unit, the thor just doesn't cut it. Removing the newer anti-mech warrior was definitely not a mistake. The design of this unit was just boring, everything automated, very massable and also a 1-a unit. Any unit that is easily massable is a bad unit design.
Imagine the awesome dynamic of mech vs air toss, with a decent anti-air ground unit. Currently void rays, tempests and immortals are incentive enough for a terran to avoid mech all together. Giving the terrans a good AA mech would at the very least give mech an answer to sky toss.
Have you ever tried to fight void rays with thors? To win a battle cost for cost you need the toss to clump up heavily. And even then, your supply is so tied up in the thors that a tech switch would annihilate the remaining thors.
So in conclusion: this game could benefit incredibly with a good AA ground mech warrior.
|
On January 05 2013 19:18 Chloroplaste wrote: As a random in the beta, I really enjoy terran now. Hellbat with blue flame with def upgrade are awesome for tanking damage and very good against light. The combined def air/mech upgrade make all air units transition from mech or bio really viable. Mines help mapcontrol and defending new base or battle position. Thor are no longer feedback, reaper can be usefull sometimes, new medivac are really nice.
The power of Terran should not be make only factory unit amove and win, the fact that you can use some ghost emp or marauder slow or air unit with Mech is very interesting. Maybe we need to up terran a bit but I would prefer to add some nerf on some boring unit like colossus, infestor.
Edit : maybe make tank 160hp instead of 150 to nerf immo attack on it. Siege Tanks already have 160 hp...
|
i do not think that we should be whining about balance to much. people probably think that broodwar was amazing and perfect. and that may be true but do you guys realize how long it took for broodwar to be a bit balanced? it took blizzard 5 years to end game breaking gltiches and balance issues. instead of whining so much about balance you should realize that this is a BETA. and beta's are meant to be for things like bugs and balance issues. i believe that if the ones with beta keys just play the game and send balance feedback to blizzard(which should be possible considering this is a beta) then in the end it should all turn out fine right? i believe if we all have some faith in blizzard HOTS could turn out to be a great game. and it has issues yes but didnt WOL have those too (and still has some). removing the warhound may have been a mistake. me (as protoss player) found it to be an interesting unit. but in the end it fulfilled the wrong role. it served as a mid game cheap and cost effective thor which was not supposed to be that way. they should at least consider giving the warhound a different role. before i end this post and people saying that mech isn't viable against protoss. back in broodwar bio would get raped by protoss just as mech now gets destroyed by protoss. people back then were fine with it so why whine now.
the things i have stated here may not be 100% true. people who think different feel free to correct me .
have a nice time on ladder SCguineapig.
|
On January 05 2013 09:40 SC2John wrote:
[i]Introduction: With the recent buffs for MsC, reapers, and the inherent buffs to protoss early game, the terran early game is becoming harder and harder to pull off, especially for meching players. In addition, although the midgame of mech has improved greatly with widow mines and hellbats, the mech army still has trouble moving out on the map at any point before 160 supply without the danger of engaging cost-inefficiently. In addition, most players playing mech complain that a single mistake (i.e. a misplaced tank, getting caught unsieged, not having mines in place in time, etc) will cost you the game with no chance to claw your way back with micro or clever tactics. While mech players are still having success with gas openings that kill a lot of workers or slow, creeping mech compositions, there is no room for error or allowance for success, particularly in the early and mid-game. Quite honestly, a lot of what mech needs is a mid-tier all-purpose unit to counter the really tricky units like immortals, blink stalkers, or archons and allow mech to secure map control more safely.
A mech army should always have trouble moving out before 160 Supply,that's just the way it is if you go for a beefy lategame army. Protoss going for a strong composition will also start moving out at 150 160 Supply.
A single misplaced tank will not lose you the game. If it does it is a really high level game since both players seemed to have the same mechanics so that the loss of one unit actually makes the difference. If that's the case, well, you made a mistake and paid for it. "Getting caught unsieged" means that you messed up big time. Having no idea of where your opponents army is, is a single mistake but it is probably the biggest you can make when moving out with a mech army. Same goes for the Mines in place.
So you cannot make errors in the early game to get to a powerful army? That is unfair? You should never play Protoss.
Also I see so many Terrans complain about Immortals. I don't get that at all. Once Terran got enough Tanks, infinite Immortals won't kill them. Plus, just getting Ghosts for EMP and Nukes is sooooooo good in mech. I know it is a lot of gas but it is so worth it.
|
Perhaps the mistake is not the Warhound but the Marauder, Blizzard introduced this mobile Anti Armour unit into the game at a cost of 25 gas, its fast( when stimmed), has a lot of hitpoints for the cost can be healed easy and can kite.
Simply fact is there is no room in the game for the Warhound.
|
I never understood why the Warhound was removed cuz its an A-Move unit, what about Colossi, Ultralisk and so on? I mean every race other than terran has strong A-Move units. Sure the Warhound was kinda imba but they could have balanced it, also i think the haywire misle should be a manual action so it needs micro. I think it would be good if there is another option for tvp other than bio play. And if we don't get viable tank-mech they should give us back a reworked Warhound. But hey I'm just a bad Diamond Terran who is sick of losing all the time cuz i dont have 100 times better multitasking and micro than my opponent.
|
A single target anti-armored-air Warhound instead of an anti-everything-on-the-ground-but-strangely-can't-shoot-up Warhound would be nice.
Problem is that Blizz used the Thor as a bandaid of sorts to fill that role with HIP mode. This means that HIP needs to be removed or reworked for the Warhound to come back. The question is, what will happen to the Thor then? You can't have both the current HIP and Warhounds, and I'm pretty sure no one wants a Thor with energy again.
|
In the end, Goliath is still better than the Thor and Warhound.
|
On January 05 2013 19:24 Typhoon1789 wrote: Mech wouldn't have a problem if tanks did way more damage. If they did, they would control areas alot better. But i know what people will say: But ZZEERRGGG will be murdered if they did more damage!!!!!! QQQQQQ. Well the simple fix for zerg is, move viper tech down to lair. If zerg see's tanks, make vipers and blinding cloud and or pull the tanks (Im sure people have seen how bloody effective that is by now). You know, i wish blizzard would stop being such pussy's and try a big chance like this.
And then PvZ would be broken forever. You have to consider the implications elsewhere.
|
I think making vikings a light unit can help mech more than reviving the warhound...
the biggest changes I can think: TvT - Viking vs Viking fights are going to last 2x more. Thors are going to destroy vikings.
TvZ - Fungal is going to deal less damage.
TvP - Vikings are going to take less damage from stalkers. Phoenix are going to destroy Vikings but since Vikings have a 9 range they can stay near the main army for protection. Vikings are going to destroy Void-rays Vikings are going to take only 20 damage from Immortals if you land then.
there is probably more, but I can't see it now.
|
No. Nerf immortal shields, Tempest Hp and Void Ray DPS and mech will become viable. There is no need for another unit.
|
|
|
|