|
United States6752 Posts
On December 22 2012 04:26 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2012 04:16 Thieving Magpie wrote:On December 22 2012 03:41 Big J wrote:On December 22 2012 03:36 Thieving Magpie wrote:On December 22 2012 03:30 Big J wrote:On December 22 2012 03:14 avilo wrote:On December 22 2012 02:56 Big J wrote: Stopped reading after avilo - "mines that cost supply cannot be balanced to be good" - wrote that they were getting reasonable in the lategame. Everything I believed in is in shambles... Time to rethink my life. Well, the last drilling claw upgrade that was added started to allow them to pay themselves off slightly more often. It's still debatable if they're good lategame haha. But you know of course, anytime Terran gets anything that's looking to be remotely viable lategame it's AXED immediately, we can't have Terrans winning past the 15 minute mark, can we? At least not on fair terms, they have to work for it through 10 range fungals. The mine itself still has the same design flaw that it's had since the beginning of the beta - it's supply inefficient, and easy to handle by high calibre players. It can either be really strong vs noobs, or extremely weak vs pros. As the game gets more figured out, a 2 supply mine is going to end up sucking, and Terran gets none the better for it in the expansion. But yeh, i said when they first started the beta that it was ridiculous to have a mine be any supply cost, it should have been live tested at 0 supply, and 2 supply, with other changes. It never was for some reason, which i mostly think is because they refused to have something so similar to the brood war spider mine, a tried and tested unit for over 12 years. We all know this isn't brood war, and nor should it be. But come on. You have to be a fool to not live test a 0 supply version of the mine that adds depth to SC2. -_- The spider mine was on a really crappy unit and in the game from the get-go. If you wanted mines, you had to go for vultures, which weren't all that useful (in later stages of the game) after putting down mines - at least compared to something like a hellion. I think 0 supply units have been proven to be very problematic in WoL by the IT. And that is still limited to 8/infestor. Imagine any ~200/200 stalematesituation and then tell me that the ability to add mines (if built straight by the factory) wouldn't be extremly problematic. And if not built from the factory, which unit to put it on? It would have to be a kind of crappy unit, to balance out the mine-ability - something that isn't in the game currently, as any unit is being designed to work without mines. Also, the current rocket-launcher design makes any form of 0supply completly impossible Also, from someone who I see telling opponents to "get out" if he reaches mass Air armies on his stream, I don't really accept comments like "we can't have Terrans winning past the 15 minute mark, can we". The transition into mass hightier T might be questionable in WoL. But it's being adressed with Raven, Upgrade, Thor changes. I don't really want to join in this argument your having about the Mine--but the Vulture did not ever stop being useful throughout the entire game no matter how long. The only thing they did bad at was killing buildings, the rest of the time they were amazing. I'm not a BW specialist, but from what I have seen, they were mostly used to put down mines and then sacrifice them trying to take out as many workers as you could. But might be wrong. Still don't see a unit on which to put a mine. "sacrifice" worker kills had a much larger effect on the game in BW than it does in SC2. Being that it takes so much effort to build, rally, then order units to mine. Even causing them to run away for a bit reduced mining time by a lot since simply box selecting them and right clicking on a mineral node would cause 12 to clump in front of a mineral as they waited for their turn to start mining as if there were no other mineral patches in the line. It was also the main form of scouting, map awareness, and was able to snipe templars, fake attacks, and keep tab of unit movement across the map. Vultures were a pretty big deal for terran play in BW. Yeah. And now imagine a hellion, which does all of those things better +mines. Or a reaper that can hide mines in your base. Point is, that you would have to tune down any unit you put mines on. The vulture? Not so much. It's straigth up worse than similar sc2 units.
Hellions have a higher potential to deal damage to worker lines than vultures but due to moving shot the ability to do hit and runs "safely" leans heavily in favor of Vultures. Mostly because vultures don't have to stop moving to deal damage unlike Hellions. (Think Phoenix moving shot but no need for lift and only costs 75 mins)
The lack of splash means that Vultures can't kill workers in clumps--but Vultures deal 20 damage to workers without upgrades (vs the 14 Hellions do without upgrades)
they're different, not better, not worse, just different.
|
TvZ Mech is a fucking joke right now. Zerg opens mutas, terran has to go thors, then he makes swarmhosts, thors die, terran needs to make tanks, then zerg goes hive, uses the spire and makes broodlords, once again the tanks are useless, you need to mass viking. Oh you make vikings? 10 range fungal sup. Even if you somehow someway survive all that then he switches to something else like ultras, guess what, vikings useless now. These techswitches are ridiculous, combined with the fact that against swarmhosts you just need to sit there behind tanks and can never move out makes it literally impossible to win. Free units are pretty good.
|
On December 22 2012 04:36 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2012 04:30 Plansix wrote:On December 22 2012 04:23 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 03:28 -Kyo- wrote:On December 22 2012 03:22 avilo wrote:On December 22 2012 03:21 Plansix wrote:On December 22 2012 03:14 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 03:07 -Kyo- wrote: You really need to stop posting these Avilo. Really, all you're doing is making yourself out to be a worse and worse player when I know you're at least pretty good, though your actual knowledge of the game seems to be quite far off.
I agree with the problem of consistency for sure, but attempting to say that mines are not good in TvP is just a complete lie to the community through your "popularity". If anyone actually plays beta they can tell you right now how FAVORED TvP is for TERRAN. I can say on the basis of quite a few pros, theognis, drewbie and others I have asked during games all think medivacs and mines are simply too strong right now. To say otherwise is just emotional QQ after losing when you played worse than another player.
Honestly, I wish either you'd stop making threads like this when you literally just don't know what you're talking about with balance or you'd just quit like I guess you're attempting to instigate in your thread? Quite depressing to see these so constantly. Wow impressive. You managed to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the problems Avilo adressed. Please dont make these post again, because you have simplified understand of Starcraft 2. Well he is top 100 GM and in the Complexity Academy, so I am going to assume is his kinda good as SC2 and knows what he is talking about. Much like the Zerg QQ of early SC2, I think some people are annoyed with the Terran QQ of 2012. Thread is not about me, don't let kyo try to derail it. Thread is about widow mine efficiency. To which I replied I disagree(about mines), and many others pro players do as well. Every time I've played you in HotS you've never once utilized widow mines correctly as other players such as Morrow have. In fact, I still have not seen another play Mech as well as he has and that was nearly a month ago :/ So the point I'm making here is: If you actually know how to use the unit correctly, and at the right timings it's incredibly good. I do suggest, similarly, that mines shouldn't have a supply cost. Honestly, I think they should just use BW mines... @_@ Edit: I think you're missing my point. I only called you out specifically because.. again... the information you bring to the community is incredibly skewed. Essentially, your argument is valid, but not sound. @_@ + Show Spoiler +http://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/ here is some simple logical reasoning you can reference if you'd like to understand the above Morrow didn't (when he played hots) use widow mines except for early games gimmicks. Also Kyo have you even read the most recent patch notes? He is a GM Protoss player who stream says “Playing HotS” and is in the Complexity Academy, so we can safely assume he has read the patch notes. One might say he is better at the game than any of us. I am just shocked that one could think mines are OP against toss in the current state. I think anyone but Kyo acknowledged that they are useless vs toss. Especially when he references to Morrow (who barely used mines btw), who played HOTS pre-widow mine nerfs. Doesn't make a lot of sense to refer to prenerfs as a "proof" that mines are usefull.
Okay, lets calm down on the over exaggerations so we are all on the same page. I simply said morrow was using mech the best of the players I've seen/played against, that's all.
Now, if you'd like to know why I think the mines are too strong, along with many other people, it's quite simple. It's just how the unit itself operates. Unlike in BW this current mine attacks both ground and air. This mine also is untargetable once it attacks(there is absolutely no reason for assured damage), the unit is not disposed of once it activates, the unit will not splash other mines that activate at the same time(they are on route to hitting), and most importantly the 'real' cost effectiveness of the unit; this last one being the biggest issue I see with the mine.
Surely, I agree with the notion that with the mines now not hitting observers automatically that this has been remedied quite a bit, but the problem still exists. The problem is this: Once the unit has activated once (Now you need 2 mines to kill, lets just say a stalker, for the sake of an example) it has paid for itself, more or less; however, upon the next trade for units it is at a 100% or even MORE than 100% cost trade efficiency. Now, scale this to something like immortals, or colossus... in the event you're able to scan and constantly snipe observers if the game goes into ground vs ground armies(which is incredibly reasonable if you're going mech this should be your ideal goal in holding new positions so you cannot be rushed into) you're trading so effectively that it doesn't even matter what happens to the number of mines you create at that point. If you're trading 2 mines for an immortal(an example..) during combat the mines have done much more than what your initial payment of them was as compared to the immortal protoss paid for. This is because of the TIME factor it buys you, let alone the economic trade. You're trading a unit that can be produced out of mass factory(which you'll have if you're going mech) versus a single, or perhaps at most 3, robotics facilities of a protoss player. Obviously remaxing on mines and putting them back into their placements is much, much faster than protoss building up their main, bulky army units. Because of this, I believe there is an issue with how strong the mine can be assuming you have it correctly placed in your mech lines.
You can scale this higher, I think, if you continue to apply the same goal I mentioned above. That is to say, you can continually place a few mines around the map, and attempt to pick off observers even if the game goes much longer and the toss gets air. The same logic applies: once you trade a few mines for even just damage on something like a carrier it has paid for itself because it has reduced the overall effectiveness of a much pricier unit that takes a much longer duration to build and mass up.
And this is all just economics and time factors of the game. If you'd like, we could talk about the effectiveness of mines+medivacs and also their ability to hit workers which is a whole other tangent
edit 1 since I forgot this mention this: I played morrow quite a bit and he used mines every game all the way through until the late game. Yes, pre-nerf, but you're missing out on he whole other side of the coin about strategic locationing+detection denial with them and the effectiveness this can have even with the current patch we have.
|
On December 22 2012 05:06 -Kyo- wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2012 04:36 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 04:30 Plansix wrote:On December 22 2012 04:23 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 03:28 -Kyo- wrote:On December 22 2012 03:22 avilo wrote:On December 22 2012 03:21 Plansix wrote:On December 22 2012 03:14 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 03:07 -Kyo- wrote: You really need to stop posting these Avilo. Really, all you're doing is making yourself out to be a worse and worse player when I know you're at least pretty good, though your actual knowledge of the game seems to be quite far off.
I agree with the problem of consistency for sure, but attempting to say that mines are not good in TvP is just a complete lie to the community through your "popularity". If anyone actually plays beta they can tell you right now how FAVORED TvP is for TERRAN. I can say on the basis of quite a few pros, theognis, drewbie and others I have asked during games all think medivacs and mines are simply too strong right now. To say otherwise is just emotional QQ after losing when you played worse than another player.
Honestly, I wish either you'd stop making threads like this when you literally just don't know what you're talking about with balance or you'd just quit like I guess you're attempting to instigate in your thread? Quite depressing to see these so constantly. Wow impressive. You managed to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the problems Avilo adressed. Please dont make these post again, because you have simplified understand of Starcraft 2. Well he is top 100 GM and in the Complexity Academy, so I am going to assume is his kinda good as SC2 and knows what he is talking about. Much like the Zerg QQ of early SC2, I think some people are annoyed with the Terran QQ of 2012. Thread is not about me, don't let kyo try to derail it. Thread is about widow mine efficiency. To which I replied I disagree(about mines), and many others pro players do as well. Every time I've played you in HotS you've never once utilized widow mines correctly as other players such as Morrow have. In fact, I still have not seen another play Mech as well as he has and that was nearly a month ago :/ So the point I'm making here is: If you actually know how to use the unit correctly, and at the right timings it's incredibly good. I do suggest, similarly, that mines shouldn't have a supply cost. Honestly, I think they should just use BW mines... @_@ Edit: I think you're missing my point. I only called you out specifically because.. again... the information you bring to the community is incredibly skewed. Essentially, your argument is valid, but not sound. @_@ + Show Spoiler +http://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/ here is some simple logical reasoning you can reference if you'd like to understand the above Morrow didn't (when he played hots) use widow mines except for early games gimmicks. Also Kyo have you even read the most recent patch notes? He is a GM Protoss player who stream says “Playing HotS” and is in the Complexity Academy, so we can safely assume he has read the patch notes. One might say he is better at the game than any of us. I am just shocked that one could think mines are OP against toss in the current state. I think anyone but Kyo acknowledged that they are useless vs toss. Especially when he references to Morrow (who barely used mines btw), who played HOTS pre-widow mine nerfs. Doesn't make a lot of sense to refer to prenerfs as a "proof" that mines are usefull. Okay, lets calm down on the over exaggerations so we are all on the same page. I simply said morrow was using mech the best of the players I've seen/played against, that's all.
That's pretty subjective. Lots of people are testing/playing mech in the beta, and people play it slightly different. Should prob not start the arguments "he plays mech better than the other guy." I think regardless of how people are playing mech, the mine in tvp is pretty sad right now, and mech tvp in general is pretty bad.
|
United Arab Emirates439 Posts
On December 22 2012 04:55 Aquila- wrote: TvZ Mech is a fucking joke right now. Zerg opens mutas, terran has to go thors, then he makes swarmhosts, thors die, terran needs to make tanks, then zerg goes hive, uses the spire and makes broodlords, once again the tanks are useless, you need to mass viking. Oh you make vikings? 10 range fungal sup. Even if you somehow someway survive all that then he switches to something else like ultras, guess what, vikings useless now. These techswitches are ridiculous, combined with the fact that against swarmhosts you just need to sit there behind tanks and can never move out makes it literally impossible to win. Free units are pretty good.
I think TvZ Mech is awesome right now, so much better than it was in WoL. I think you are playing it wrong! Don't go for more than 2 Thors AT MOST, until you see the Zerg commit to Mutalisks, a ton. Use Widow Mines + Turrets to defend from them. If the Zerg makes a ton of Mutalisks then this is always a free win for Mech with a good timing push, especially now with Widow Mines. If he is going Swarm Host > Brood Lord you should have map control and a stronger economy then him, and as long as you don't over-react to one Tech (too many Tanks/Banshees or too many Thors/Vikings) then you should be good with a better economy.
In general if you are having trouble with Tech Switches I think Widow Mines are the best as serving as a buffer for this. Having ~16 Widow Mines in a separate control group, using them to flank BL's or Swarm Hosts, or to buffer against Roaches/Lings, to deny expansions and secure expansions you normally wouldn't be able to defend, or to protect from runby's when you move out with your army.
What level do you play at? I could send you a replay if you are Masters or below.
|
On December 22 2012 05:11 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2012 05:06 -Kyo- wrote:On December 22 2012 04:36 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 04:30 Plansix wrote:On December 22 2012 04:23 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 03:28 -Kyo- wrote:On December 22 2012 03:22 avilo wrote:On December 22 2012 03:21 Plansix wrote:On December 22 2012 03:14 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 03:07 -Kyo- wrote: You really need to stop posting these Avilo. Really, all you're doing is making yourself out to be a worse and worse player when I know you're at least pretty good, though your actual knowledge of the game seems to be quite far off.
I agree with the problem of consistency for sure, but attempting to say that mines are not good in TvP is just a complete lie to the community through your "popularity". If anyone actually plays beta they can tell you right now how FAVORED TvP is for TERRAN. I can say on the basis of quite a few pros, theognis, drewbie and others I have asked during games all think medivacs and mines are simply too strong right now. To say otherwise is just emotional QQ after losing when you played worse than another player.
Honestly, I wish either you'd stop making threads like this when you literally just don't know what you're talking about with balance or you'd just quit like I guess you're attempting to instigate in your thread? Quite depressing to see these so constantly. Wow impressive. You managed to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the problems Avilo adressed. Please dont make these post again, because you have simplified understand of Starcraft 2. Well he is top 100 GM and in the Complexity Academy, so I am going to assume is his kinda good as SC2 and knows what he is talking about. Much like the Zerg QQ of early SC2, I think some people are annoyed with the Terran QQ of 2012. Thread is not about me, don't let kyo try to derail it. Thread is about widow mine efficiency. To which I replied I disagree(about mines), and many others pro players do as well. Every time I've played you in HotS you've never once utilized widow mines correctly as other players such as Morrow have. In fact, I still have not seen another play Mech as well as he has and that was nearly a month ago :/ So the point I'm making here is: If you actually know how to use the unit correctly, and at the right timings it's incredibly good. I do suggest, similarly, that mines shouldn't have a supply cost. Honestly, I think they should just use BW mines... @_@ Edit: I think you're missing my point. I only called you out specifically because.. again... the information you bring to the community is incredibly skewed. Essentially, your argument is valid, but not sound. @_@ + Show Spoiler +http://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/ here is some simple logical reasoning you can reference if you'd like to understand the above Morrow didn't (when he played hots) use widow mines except for early games gimmicks. Also Kyo have you even read the most recent patch notes? He is a GM Protoss player who stream says “Playing HotS” and is in the Complexity Academy, so we can safely assume he has read the patch notes. One might say he is better at the game than any of us. I am just shocked that one could think mines are OP against toss in the current state. I think anyone but Kyo acknowledged that they are useless vs toss. Especially when he references to Morrow (who barely used mines btw), who played HOTS pre-widow mine nerfs. Doesn't make a lot of sense to refer to prenerfs as a "proof" that mines are usefull. Okay, lets calm down on the over exaggerations so we are all on the same page. I simply said morrow was using mech the best of the players I've seen/played against, that's all. That's pretty subjective. Lots of people are testing/playing mech in the beta, and people play it slightly different. Should prob not start the arguments "he plays mech better than the other guy." I think regardless of how people are playing mech, the mine in tvp is pretty sad right now, and mech tvp in general is pretty bad.
Player skill, results, and who they can beat are objective. Saying I like his style more than how someone else plays would be subjective. That was not the start of my argument anyway, I was clarifying the apparent misunderstanding from earlier. I really can't help you understand more than that...But, it was a good way to circumnavigate everything I said while throwing in your: obviously it's just "bad" qualifier statement.
If you'd like an instance of using mines correctly to fortify a position while taking into account map geography, spawn locations, and expansions on maps here is one of a number of games I've played against Dragon on HotS: http://drop.sc/286636 (our chatting is obviously a joke lol) and also, this was last patch so omg the mines do like so much more damage! p.s: now you know my beta account if you didn't before avilo! :D
|
United Arab Emirates439 Posts
On December 22 2012 05:06 -Kyo- wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2012 04:36 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 04:30 Plansix wrote:On December 22 2012 04:23 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 03:28 -Kyo- wrote:On December 22 2012 03:22 avilo wrote:On December 22 2012 03:21 Plansix wrote:On December 22 2012 03:14 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 03:07 -Kyo- wrote: You really need to stop posting these Avilo. Really, all you're doing is making yourself out to be a worse and worse player when I know you're at least pretty good, though your actual knowledge of the game seems to be quite far off.
I agree with the problem of consistency for sure, but attempting to say that mines are not good in TvP is just a complete lie to the community through your "popularity". If anyone actually plays beta they can tell you right now how FAVORED TvP is for TERRAN. I can say on the basis of quite a few pros, theognis, drewbie and others I have asked during games all think medivacs and mines are simply too strong right now. To say otherwise is just emotional QQ after losing when you played worse than another player.
Honestly, I wish either you'd stop making threads like this when you literally just don't know what you're talking about with balance or you'd just quit like I guess you're attempting to instigate in your thread? Quite depressing to see these so constantly. Wow impressive. You managed to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the problems Avilo adressed. Please dont make these post again, because you have simplified understand of Starcraft 2. Well he is top 100 GM and in the Complexity Academy, so I am going to assume is his kinda good as SC2 and knows what he is talking about. Much like the Zerg QQ of early SC2, I think some people are annoyed with the Terran QQ of 2012. Thread is not about me, don't let kyo try to derail it. Thread is about widow mine efficiency. To which I replied I disagree(about mines), and many others pro players do as well. Every time I've played you in HotS you've never once utilized widow mines correctly as other players such as Morrow have. In fact, I still have not seen another play Mech as well as he has and that was nearly a month ago :/ So the point I'm making here is: If you actually know how to use the unit correctly, and at the right timings it's incredibly good. I do suggest, similarly, that mines shouldn't have a supply cost. Honestly, I think they should just use BW mines... @_@ Edit: I think you're missing my point. I only called you out specifically because.. again... the information you bring to the community is incredibly skewed. Essentially, your argument is valid, but not sound. @_@ + Show Spoiler +http://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/ here is some simple logical reasoning you can reference if you'd like to understand the above Morrow didn't (when he played hots) use widow mines except for early games gimmicks. Also Kyo have you even read the most recent patch notes? He is a GM Protoss player who stream says “Playing HotS” and is in the Complexity Academy, so we can safely assume he has read the patch notes. One might say he is better at the game than any of us. I am just shocked that one could think mines are OP against toss in the current state. I think anyone but Kyo acknowledged that they are useless vs toss. Especially when he references to Morrow (who barely used mines btw), who played HOTS pre-widow mine nerfs. Doesn't make a lot of sense to refer to prenerfs as a "proof" that mines are usefull. Okay, lets calm down on the over exaggerations so we are all on the same page. I simply said morrow was using mech the best of the players I've seen/played against, that's all. Now, if you'd like to know why I think the mines are too strong, along with many other people, it's quite simple. It's just how the unit itself operates. Unlike in BW this current mine attacks both ground and air. This mine also is untargetable once it attacks(there is absolutely no reason for assured damage), the unit is not disposed of once it activates, the unit will not splash other mines that activate at the same time(they are on route to hitting), and most importantly the 'real' cost effectiveness of the unit; this last one being the biggest issue I see with the mine. Surely, I agree with the notion that with the mines now not hitting observers automatically that this has been remedied quite a bit, but the problem still exists. The problem is this: Once the unit has activated once (Now you need 2 mines to kill, lets just say a stalker, for the sake of an example) it has paid for itself, more or less; however, upon the next trade for units it is at a 100% or even MORE than 100% cost trade efficiency. Now, scale this to something like immortals, or colossus... in the event you're able to scan and constantly snipe observers if the game goes into ground vs ground armies(which is incredibly reasonable if you're going mech this should be your ideal goal in holding new positions so you cannot be rushed into) you're trading so effectively that it doesn't even matter what happens to the number of mines you create at that point. If you're trading 2 mines for an immortal(an example..) during combat the mines have done much more than what your initial payment of them was as compared to the immortal protoss paid for. This is because of the TIME factor it buys you, let alone the economic trade. You're trading a unit that can be produced out of mass factory(which you'll have if you're going mech) versus a single, or perhaps at most 3, robotics facilities of a protoss player. Obviously remaxing on mines and putting them back into their placements is much, much faster than protoss building up their main, bulky army units. Because of this, I believe there is an issue with how strong the mine can be assuming you have it correctly placed in your mech lines. You can scale this higher, I think, if you continue to apply the same goal I mentioned above. That is to say, you can continually place a few mines around the map, and attempt to pick off observers even if the game goes much longer and the toss gets air. The same logic applies: once you trade a few mines for even just damage on something like a carrier it has paid for itself because it has reduced the overall effectiveness of a much pricier unit that takes a much longer duration to build and mass up. And this is all just economics and time factors of the game. If you'd like, we could talk about the effectiveness of mines+medivacs and also their ability to hit workers which is a whole other tangent edit 1 since I forgot this mention this: I played morrow quite a bit and he used mines every game all the way through until the late game. Yes, pre-nerf, but you're missing out on he whole other side of the coin about strategic locationing+detection denial with them and the effectiveness this can have even with the current patch we have.
Of course Morrow was the best Mech player you played against, he was probably the best player on the Beta period. Not to mention he played the beta exclusively. Once again, that doesn't mean his style of Mech was solid or what people should be using right now. Case and point: he gave it up because he didn't think it was good. Now you are facing Mech players who aren't using the same style for months like Morrow did, because they are experimenting with new styles, trying to find something that is solid.
Your examples are cherry picked and it's hard to discuss a unit this way: 2 Widow Mines killing 1 Stalker and then getting cleaned up afterward is a bad trade for a Mech player. They are even resource investments (slightly more minerals for Widow Mine and more supply), but it is two 40 second build time units out of a 150 gas production facility, vs 32 second build time from a 150 mineral production building, and in Mech vs P Protoss should have economy lead anyways. But of course if they aren't cleaned up it's a good trade. 2 Widow Mines cannot kill an Immortal anymore either (4 Widow Mines can kill 2 Clumped up Immortals if that's what is confusing you).
Widow Mines are such a positional unit, they become so much better if they are in good position defensively or if they flank their opponent really well, and they can also be absolutely worthless if the opponent catches them out of position or protects their army from being flanked. The same concept goes for harass, they are hard to defend but technically you can take no damage but denied mining time from them if you have very good control.
If you want to upload a replay of a game where you felt like shows that Widow Mines were clearly too strong and there wasn't anything you could do (outside of play considerably better than your opponent mayb), then that would be a reasonable discussion point. Talking about situations where they can be cost efficient is too abstract to lead to a fair discussion (same goes for talking about situations where they can be cost innefficent).
|
On December 22 2012 05:47 ZjiublingZ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2012 05:06 -Kyo- wrote:On December 22 2012 04:36 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 04:30 Plansix wrote:On December 22 2012 04:23 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 03:28 -Kyo- wrote:On December 22 2012 03:22 avilo wrote:On December 22 2012 03:21 Plansix wrote:On December 22 2012 03:14 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 03:07 -Kyo- wrote: You really need to stop posting these Avilo. Really, all you're doing is making yourself out to be a worse and worse player when I know you're at least pretty good, though your actual knowledge of the game seems to be quite far off.
I agree with the problem of consistency for sure, but attempting to say that mines are not good in TvP is just a complete lie to the community through your "popularity". If anyone actually plays beta they can tell you right now how FAVORED TvP is for TERRAN. I can say on the basis of quite a few pros, theognis, drewbie and others I have asked during games all think medivacs and mines are simply too strong right now. To say otherwise is just emotional QQ after losing when you played worse than another player.
Honestly, I wish either you'd stop making threads like this when you literally just don't know what you're talking about with balance or you'd just quit like I guess you're attempting to instigate in your thread? Quite depressing to see these so constantly. Wow impressive. You managed to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the problems Avilo adressed. Please dont make these post again, because you have simplified understand of Starcraft 2. Well he is top 100 GM and in the Complexity Academy, so I am going to assume is his kinda good as SC2 and knows what he is talking about. Much like the Zerg QQ of early SC2, I think some people are annoyed with the Terran QQ of 2012. Thread is not about me, don't let kyo try to derail it. Thread is about widow mine efficiency. To which I replied I disagree(about mines), and many others pro players do as well. Every time I've played you in HotS you've never once utilized widow mines correctly as other players such as Morrow have. In fact, I still have not seen another play Mech as well as he has and that was nearly a month ago :/ So the point I'm making here is: If you actually know how to use the unit correctly, and at the right timings it's incredibly good. I do suggest, similarly, that mines shouldn't have a supply cost. Honestly, I think they should just use BW mines... @_@ Edit: I think you're missing my point. I only called you out specifically because.. again... the information you bring to the community is incredibly skewed. Essentially, your argument is valid, but not sound. @_@ + Show Spoiler +http://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/ here is some simple logical reasoning you can reference if you'd like to understand the above Morrow didn't (when he played hots) use widow mines except for early games gimmicks. Also Kyo have you even read the most recent patch notes? He is a GM Protoss player who stream says “Playing HotS” and is in the Complexity Academy, so we can safely assume he has read the patch notes. One might say he is better at the game than any of us. I am just shocked that one could think mines are OP against toss in the current state. I think anyone but Kyo acknowledged that they are useless vs toss. Especially when he references to Morrow (who barely used mines btw), who played HOTS pre-widow mine nerfs. Doesn't make a lot of sense to refer to prenerfs as a "proof" that mines are usefull. Okay, lets calm down on the over exaggerations so we are all on the same page. I simply said morrow was using mech the best of the players I've seen/played against, that's all. Now, if you'd like to know why I think the mines are too strong, along with many other people, it's quite simple. It's just how the unit itself operates. Unlike in BW this current mine attacks both ground and air. This mine also is untargetable once it attacks(there is absolutely no reason for assured damage), the unit is not disposed of once it activates, the unit will not splash other mines that activate at the same time(they are on route to hitting), and most importantly the 'real' cost effectiveness of the unit; this last one being the biggest issue I see with the mine. Surely, I agree with the notion that with the mines now not hitting observers automatically that this has been remedied quite a bit, but the problem still exists. The problem is this: Once the unit has activated once (Now you need 2 mines to kill, lets just say a stalker, for the sake of an example) it has paid for itself, more or less; however, upon the next trade for units it is at a 100% or even MORE than 100% cost trade efficiency. Now, scale this to something like immortals, or colossus... in the event you're able to scan and constantly snipe observers if the game goes into ground vs ground armies(which is incredibly reasonable if you're going mech this should be your ideal goal in holding new positions so you cannot be rushed into) you're trading so effectively that it doesn't even matter what happens to the number of mines you create at that point. If you're trading 2 mines for an immortal(an example..) during combat the mines have done much more than what your initial payment of them was as compared to the immortal protoss paid for. This is because of the TIME factor it buys you, let alone the economic trade. You're trading a unit that can be produced out of mass factory(which you'll have if you're going mech) versus a single, or perhaps at most 3, robotics facilities of a protoss player. Obviously remaxing on mines and putting them back into their placements is much, much faster than protoss building up their main, bulky army units. Because of this, I believe there is an issue with how strong the mine can be assuming you have it correctly placed in your mech lines. You can scale this higher, I think, if you continue to apply the same goal I mentioned above. That is to say, you can continually place a few mines around the map, and attempt to pick off observers even if the game goes much longer and the toss gets air. The same logic applies: once you trade a few mines for even just damage on something like a carrier it has paid for itself because it has reduced the overall effectiveness of a much pricier unit that takes a much longer duration to build and mass up. And this is all just economics and time factors of the game. If you'd like, we could talk about the effectiveness of mines+medivacs and also their ability to hit workers which is a whole other tangent edit 1 since I forgot this mention this: I played morrow quite a bit and he used mines every game all the way through until the late game. Yes, pre-nerf, but you're missing out on he whole other side of the coin about strategic locationing+detection denial with them and the effectiveness this can have even with the current patch we have. Of course Morrow was the best Mech player you played against, he was probably the best player on the Beta period. Not to mention he played the beta exclusively. Once again, that doesn't mean his style of Mech was solid or what people should be using right now. Case and point: he gave it up because he didn't think it was good. Now you are facing Mech players who aren't using the same style for months like Morrow did, because they are experimenting with new styles, trying to find something that is solid. Your examples are cherry picked and it's hard to discuss a unit this way: 2 Widow Mines killing 1 Stalker and then getting cleaned up afterward is a bad trade for a Mech player. They are even resource investments (slightly more minerals for Widow Mine and more supply), but it is two 40 second build time units out of a 150 gas production facility, vs 32 second build time from a 150 mineral production building, and in Mech vs P Protoss should have economy lead anyways. But of course if they aren't cleaned up it's a good trade. 2 Widow Mines cannot kill an Immortal anymore either (4 Widow Mines can kill 2 Clumped up Immortals if that's what is confusing you). Widow Mines are such a positional unit, they become so much better if they are in good position defensively or if they flank their opponent really well, and they can also be absolutely worthless if the opponent catches them out of position or protects their army from being flanked. The same concept goes for harass, they are hard to defend but technically you can take no damage but denied mining time from them if you have very good control. If you want to upload a replay of a game where you felt like shows that Widow Mines were clearly too strong and there wasn't anything you could do (outside of play considerably better than your opponent mayb), then that would be a reasonable discussion point. Talking about situations where they can be cost efficient is too abstract to lead to a fair discussion (same goes for talking about situations where they can be cost innefficent).
I assume you typed all of this before noticing my new post. I included a replay. And again, these are just EXAMPLES. Of course they're not going to be applicable to all cases, but the point was that well placed widow mines in addition to a player continuing to deny detection allows for a much higher potential of good trades if you include the factors I mentioned.
|
The easy solution to me is to make them much cheaper and have them suicide when they go off. They still cost 2 supply so you won't go overboard making them but making them cheap means you're not crippling your main army if you decide to make four of them to defend harass. By making the cost supply based instead of resource based, you encourage the Terran player not to make too many of them.
My suggested cost is 25 minerals. The hidden cost of buying an extra supply depot adds additional mineral cost to the deal. Same damage as this patch (takes two to kill a stalker). Yes, it's like Spider Mines without a vulture. But unlike Spider mines, these have a substantial supply cost built in.
|
On December 22 2012 05:56 -Kyo- wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2012 05:47 ZjiublingZ wrote:On December 22 2012 05:06 -Kyo- wrote:On December 22 2012 04:36 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 04:30 Plansix wrote:On December 22 2012 04:23 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 03:28 -Kyo- wrote:On December 22 2012 03:22 avilo wrote:On December 22 2012 03:21 Plansix wrote:On December 22 2012 03:14 Hider wrote: [quote]
Wow impressive. You managed to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the problems Avilo adressed. Please dont make these post again, because you have simplified understand of Starcraft 2. Well he is top 100 GM and in the Complexity Academy, so I am going to assume is his kinda good as SC2 and knows what he is talking about. Much like the Zerg QQ of early SC2, I think some people are annoyed with the Terran QQ of 2012. Thread is not about me, don't let kyo try to derail it. Thread is about widow mine efficiency. To which I replied I disagree(about mines), and many others pro players do as well. Every time I've played you in HotS you've never once utilized widow mines correctly as other players such as Morrow have. In fact, I still have not seen another play Mech as well as he has and that was nearly a month ago :/ So the point I'm making here is: If you actually know how to use the unit correctly, and at the right timings it's incredibly good. I do suggest, similarly, that mines shouldn't have a supply cost. Honestly, I think they should just use BW mines... @_@ Edit: I think you're missing my point. I only called you out specifically because.. again... the information you bring to the community is incredibly skewed. Essentially, your argument is valid, but not sound. @_@ + Show Spoiler +http://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/ here is some simple logical reasoning you can reference if you'd like to understand the above Morrow didn't (when he played hots) use widow mines except for early games gimmicks. Also Kyo have you even read the most recent patch notes? He is a GM Protoss player who stream says “Playing HotS” and is in the Complexity Academy, so we can safely assume he has read the patch notes. One might say he is better at the game than any of us. I am just shocked that one could think mines are OP against toss in the current state. I think anyone but Kyo acknowledged that they are useless vs toss. Especially when he references to Morrow (who barely used mines btw), who played HOTS pre-widow mine nerfs. Doesn't make a lot of sense to refer to prenerfs as a "proof" that mines are usefull. Okay, lets calm down on the over exaggerations so we are all on the same page. I simply said morrow was using mech the best of the players I've seen/played against, that's all. Now, if you'd like to know why I think the mines are too strong, along with many other people, it's quite simple. It's just how the unit itself operates. Unlike in BW this current mine attacks both ground and air. This mine also is untargetable once it attacks(there is absolutely no reason for assured damage), the unit is not disposed of once it activates, the unit will not splash other mines that activate at the same time(they are on route to hitting), and most importantly the 'real' cost effectiveness of the unit; this last one being the biggest issue I see with the mine. Surely, I agree with the notion that with the mines now not hitting observers automatically that this has been remedied quite a bit, but the problem still exists. The problem is this: Once the unit has activated once (Now you need 2 mines to kill, lets just say a stalker, for the sake of an example) it has paid for itself, more or less; however, upon the next trade for units it is at a 100% or even MORE than 100% cost trade efficiency. Now, scale this to something like immortals, or colossus... in the event you're able to scan and constantly snipe observers if the game goes into ground vs ground armies(which is incredibly reasonable if you're going mech this should be your ideal goal in holding new positions so you cannot be rushed into) you're trading so effectively that it doesn't even matter what happens to the number of mines you create at that point. If you're trading 2 mines for an immortal(an example..) during combat the mines have done much more than what your initial payment of them was as compared to the immortal protoss paid for. This is because of the TIME factor it buys you, let alone the economic trade. You're trading a unit that can be produced out of mass factory(which you'll have if you're going mech) versus a single, or perhaps at most 3, robotics facilities of a protoss player. Obviously remaxing on mines and putting them back into their placements is much, much faster than protoss building up their main, bulky army units. Because of this, I believe there is an issue with how strong the mine can be assuming you have it correctly placed in your mech lines. You can scale this higher, I think, if you continue to apply the same goal I mentioned above. That is to say, you can continually place a few mines around the map, and attempt to pick off observers even if the game goes much longer and the toss gets air. The same logic applies: once you trade a few mines for even just damage on something like a carrier it has paid for itself because it has reduced the overall effectiveness of a much pricier unit that takes a much longer duration to build and mass up. And this is all just economics and time factors of the game. If you'd like, we could talk about the effectiveness of mines+medivacs and also their ability to hit workers which is a whole other tangent edit 1 since I forgot this mention this: I played morrow quite a bit and he used mines every game all the way through until the late game. Yes, pre-nerf, but you're missing out on he whole other side of the coin about strategic locationing+detection denial with them and the effectiveness this can have even with the current patch we have. Of course Morrow was the best Mech player you played against, he was probably the best player on the Beta period. Not to mention he played the beta exclusively. Once again, that doesn't mean his style of Mech was solid or what people should be using right now. Case and point: he gave it up because he didn't think it was good. Now you are facing Mech players who aren't using the same style for months like Morrow did, because they are experimenting with new styles, trying to find something that is solid. Your examples are cherry picked and it's hard to discuss a unit this way: 2 Widow Mines killing 1 Stalker and then getting cleaned up afterward is a bad trade for a Mech player. They are even resource investments (slightly more minerals for Widow Mine and more supply), but it is two 40 second build time units out of a 150 gas production facility, vs 32 second build time from a 150 mineral production building, and in Mech vs P Protoss should have economy lead anyways. But of course if they aren't cleaned up it's a good trade. 2 Widow Mines cannot kill an Immortal anymore either (4 Widow Mines can kill 2 Clumped up Immortals if that's what is confusing you). Widow Mines are such a positional unit, they become so much better if they are in good position defensively or if they flank their opponent really well, and they can also be absolutely worthless if the opponent catches them out of position or protects their army from being flanked. The same concept goes for harass, they are hard to defend but technically you can take no damage but denied mining time from them if you have very good control. If you want to upload a replay of a game where you felt like shows that Widow Mines were clearly too strong and there wasn't anything you could do (outside of play considerably better than your opponent mayb), then that would be a reasonable discussion point. Talking about situations where they can be cost efficient is too abstract to lead to a fair discussion (same goes for talking about situations where they can be cost innefficent). I assume you typed all of this before noticing my new post. I included a replay. And again, these are just EXAMPLES. Of course they're not going to be applicable to all cases, but the point was that well placed widow mines in addition to a player continuing to deny detection allows for a much higher potential of good trades if you include the factors I mentioned. How can you deny detection to a Protoss that has cloaked detection? Can't you just keep one with your army or a scout group of stalkers or voids?
|
On December 22 2012 07:03 aksfjh wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2012 05:56 -Kyo- wrote:On December 22 2012 05:47 ZjiublingZ wrote:On December 22 2012 05:06 -Kyo- wrote:On December 22 2012 04:36 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 04:30 Plansix wrote:On December 22 2012 04:23 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 03:28 -Kyo- wrote:On December 22 2012 03:22 avilo wrote:On December 22 2012 03:21 Plansix wrote: [quote]
Well he is top 100 GM and in the Complexity Academy, so I am going to assume is his kinda good as SC2 and knows what he is talking about. Much like the Zerg QQ of early SC2, I think some people are annoyed with the Terran QQ of 2012. Thread is not about me, don't let kyo try to derail it. Thread is about widow mine efficiency. To which I replied I disagree(about mines), and many others pro players do as well. Every time I've played you in HotS you've never once utilized widow mines correctly as other players such as Morrow have. In fact, I still have not seen another play Mech as well as he has and that was nearly a month ago :/ So the point I'm making here is: If you actually know how to use the unit correctly, and at the right timings it's incredibly good. I do suggest, similarly, that mines shouldn't have a supply cost. Honestly, I think they should just use BW mines... @_@ Edit: I think you're missing my point. I only called you out specifically because.. again... the information you bring to the community is incredibly skewed. Essentially, your argument is valid, but not sound. @_@ + Show Spoiler +http://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/ here is some simple logical reasoning you can reference if you'd like to understand the above Morrow didn't (when he played hots) use widow mines except for early games gimmicks. Also Kyo have you even read the most recent patch notes? He is a GM Protoss player who stream says “Playing HotS” and is in the Complexity Academy, so we can safely assume he has read the patch notes. One might say he is better at the game than any of us. I am just shocked that one could think mines are OP against toss in the current state. I think anyone but Kyo acknowledged that they are useless vs toss. Especially when he references to Morrow (who barely used mines btw), who played HOTS pre-widow mine nerfs. Doesn't make a lot of sense to refer to prenerfs as a "proof" that mines are usefull. Okay, lets calm down on the over exaggerations so we are all on the same page. I simply said morrow was using mech the best of the players I've seen/played against, that's all. Now, if you'd like to know why I think the mines are too strong, along with many other people, it's quite simple. It's just how the unit itself operates. Unlike in BW this current mine attacks both ground and air. This mine also is untargetable once it attacks(there is absolutely no reason for assured damage), the unit is not disposed of once it activates, the unit will not splash other mines that activate at the same time(they are on route to hitting), and most importantly the 'real' cost effectiveness of the unit; this last one being the biggest issue I see with the mine. Surely, I agree with the notion that with the mines now not hitting observers automatically that this has been remedied quite a bit, but the problem still exists. The problem is this: Once the unit has activated once (Now you need 2 mines to kill, lets just say a stalker, for the sake of an example) it has paid for itself, more or less; however, upon the next trade for units it is at a 100% or even MORE than 100% cost trade efficiency. Now, scale this to something like immortals, or colossus... in the event you're able to scan and constantly snipe observers if the game goes into ground vs ground armies(which is incredibly reasonable if you're going mech this should be your ideal goal in holding new positions so you cannot be rushed into) you're trading so effectively that it doesn't even matter what happens to the number of mines you create at that point. If you're trading 2 mines for an immortal(an example..) during combat the mines have done much more than what your initial payment of them was as compared to the immortal protoss paid for. This is because of the TIME factor it buys you, let alone the economic trade. You're trading a unit that can be produced out of mass factory(which you'll have if you're going mech) versus a single, or perhaps at most 3, robotics facilities of a protoss player. Obviously remaxing on mines and putting them back into their placements is much, much faster than protoss building up their main, bulky army units. Because of this, I believe there is an issue with how strong the mine can be assuming you have it correctly placed in your mech lines. You can scale this higher, I think, if you continue to apply the same goal I mentioned above. That is to say, you can continually place a few mines around the map, and attempt to pick off observers even if the game goes much longer and the toss gets air. The same logic applies: once you trade a few mines for even just damage on something like a carrier it has paid for itself because it has reduced the overall effectiveness of a much pricier unit that takes a much longer duration to build and mass up. And this is all just economics and time factors of the game. If you'd like, we could talk about the effectiveness of mines+medivacs and also their ability to hit workers which is a whole other tangent edit 1 since I forgot this mention this: I played morrow quite a bit and he used mines every game all the way through until the late game. Yes, pre-nerf, but you're missing out on he whole other side of the coin about strategic locationing+detection denial with them and the effectiveness this can have even with the current patch we have. Of course Morrow was the best Mech player you played against, he was probably the best player on the Beta period. Not to mention he played the beta exclusively. Once again, that doesn't mean his style of Mech was solid or what people should be using right now. Case and point: he gave it up because he didn't think it was good. Now you are facing Mech players who aren't using the same style for months like Morrow did, because they are experimenting with new styles, trying to find something that is solid. Your examples are cherry picked and it's hard to discuss a unit this way: 2 Widow Mines killing 1 Stalker and then getting cleaned up afterward is a bad trade for a Mech player. They are even resource investments (slightly more minerals for Widow Mine and more supply), but it is two 40 second build time units out of a 150 gas production facility, vs 32 second build time from a 150 mineral production building, and in Mech vs P Protoss should have economy lead anyways. But of course if they aren't cleaned up it's a good trade. 2 Widow Mines cannot kill an Immortal anymore either (4 Widow Mines can kill 2 Clumped up Immortals if that's what is confusing you). Widow Mines are such a positional unit, they become so much better if they are in good position defensively or if they flank their opponent really well, and they can also be absolutely worthless if the opponent catches them out of position or protects their army from being flanked. The same concept goes for harass, they are hard to defend but technically you can take no damage but denied mining time from them if you have very good control. If you want to upload a replay of a game where you felt like shows that Widow Mines were clearly too strong and there wasn't anything you could do (outside of play considerably better than your opponent mayb), then that would be a reasonable discussion point. Talking about situations where they can be cost efficient is too abstract to lead to a fair discussion (same goes for talking about situations where they can be cost innefficent). I assume you typed all of this before noticing my new post. I included a replay. And again, these are just EXAMPLES. Of course they're not going to be applicable to all cases, but the point was that well placed widow mines in addition to a player continuing to deny detection allows for a much higher potential of good trades if you include the factors I mentioned. How can you deny detection to a Protoss that has cloaked detection? Can't you just keep one with your army or a scout group of stalkers or voids?
Watch the replay for an example of a very easy way to do this with ground vs ground armies.
|
On December 22 2012 05:06 -Kyo- wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2012 04:36 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 04:30 Plansix wrote:On December 22 2012 04:23 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 03:28 -Kyo- wrote:On December 22 2012 03:22 avilo wrote:On December 22 2012 03:21 Plansix wrote:On December 22 2012 03:14 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 03:07 -Kyo- wrote: You really need to stop posting these Avilo. Really, all you're doing is making yourself out to be a worse and worse player when I know you're at least pretty good, though your actual knowledge of the game seems to be quite far off.
I agree with the problem of consistency for sure, but attempting to say that mines are not good in TvP is just a complete lie to the community through your "popularity". If anyone actually plays beta they can tell you right now how FAVORED TvP is for TERRAN. I can say on the basis of quite a few pros, theognis, drewbie and others I have asked during games all think medivacs and mines are simply too strong right now. To say otherwise is just emotional QQ after losing when you played worse than another player.
Honestly, I wish either you'd stop making threads like this when you literally just don't know what you're talking about with balance or you'd just quit like I guess you're attempting to instigate in your thread? Quite depressing to see these so constantly. Wow impressive. You managed to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the problems Avilo adressed. Please dont make these post again, because you have simplified understand of Starcraft 2. Well he is top 100 GM and in the Complexity Academy, so I am going to assume is his kinda good as SC2 and knows what he is talking about. Much like the Zerg QQ of early SC2, I think some people are annoyed with the Terran QQ of 2012. Thread is not about me, don't let kyo try to derail it. Thread is about widow mine efficiency. To which I replied I disagree(about mines), and many others pro players do as well. Every time I've played you in HotS you've never once utilized widow mines correctly as other players such as Morrow have. In fact, I still have not seen another play Mech as well as he has and that was nearly a month ago :/ So the point I'm making here is: If you actually know how to use the unit correctly, and at the right timings it's incredibly good. I do suggest, similarly, that mines shouldn't have a supply cost. Honestly, I think they should just use BW mines... @_@ Edit: I think you're missing my point. I only called you out specifically because.. again... the information you bring to the community is incredibly skewed. Essentially, your argument is valid, but not sound. @_@ + Show Spoiler +http://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/ here is some simple logical reasoning you can reference if you'd like to understand the above Morrow didn't (when he played hots) use widow mines except for early games gimmicks. Also Kyo have you even read the most recent patch notes? He is a GM Protoss player who stream says “Playing HotS” and is in the Complexity Academy, so we can safely assume he has read the patch notes. One might say he is better at the game than any of us. I am just shocked that one could think mines are OP against toss in the current state. I think anyone but Kyo acknowledged that they are useless vs toss. Especially when he references to Morrow (who barely used mines btw), who played HOTS pre-widow mine nerfs. Doesn't make a lot of sense to refer to prenerfs as a "proof" that mines are usefull. Okay, lets calm down on the over exaggerations so we are all on the same page. I simply said morrow was using mech the best of the players I've seen/played against, that's all. Now, if you'd like to know why I think the mines are too strong, along with many other people, it's quite simple. It's just how the unit itself operates. Unlike in BW this current mine attacks both ground and air. This mine also is untargetable once it attacks(there is absolutely no reason for assured damage), the unit is not disposed of once it activates, the unit will not splash other mines that activate at the same time(they are on route to hitting), and most importantly the 'real' cost effectiveness of the unit; this last one being the biggest issue I see with the mine. Surely, I agree with the notion that with the mines now not hitting observers automatically that this has been remedied quite a bit, but the problem still exists. The problem is this: Once the unit has activated once (Now you need 2 mines to kill, lets just say a stalker, for the sake of an example) it has paid for itself, more or less; however, upon the next trade for units it is at a 100% or even MORE than 100% cost trade efficiency. Now, scale this to something like immortals, or colossus... in the event you're able to scan and constantly snipe observers if the game goes into ground vs ground armies(which is incredibly reasonable if you're going mech this should be your ideal goal in holding new positions so you cannot be rushed into) you're trading so effectively that it doesn't even matter what happens to the number of mines you create at that point. If you're trading 2 mines for an immortal(an example..) during combat the mines have done much more than what your initial payment of them was as compared to the immortal protoss paid for. This is because of the TIME factor it buys you, let alone the economic trade. You're trading a unit that can be produced out of mass factory(which you'll have if you're going mech) versus a single, or perhaps at most 3, robotics facilities of a protoss player. Obviously remaxing on mines and putting them back into their placements is much, much faster than protoss building up their main, bulky army units. Because of this, I believe there is an issue with how strong the mine can be assuming you have it correctly placed in your mech lines. You can scale this higher, I think, if you continue to apply the same goal I mentioned above. That is to say, you can continually place a few mines around the map, and attempt to pick off observers even if the game goes much longer and the toss gets air. The same logic applies: once you trade a few mines for even just damage on something like a carrier it has paid for itself because it has reduced the overall effectiveness of a much pricier unit that takes a much longer duration to build and mass up. And this is all just economics and time factors of the game. If you'd like, we could talk about the effectiveness of mines+medivacs and also their ability to hit workers which is a whole other tangent edit 1 since I forgot this mention this: I played morrow quite a bit and he used mines every game all the way through until the late game. Yes, pre-nerf, but you're missing out on he whole other side of the coin about strategic locationing+detection denial with them and the effectiveness this can have even with the current patch we have.
That is the issue. There are different ways to balance them, but if you want one-shot mines, they need to be more expensive. If you look at Scourge, they weren't as ridiculously cheap as Widow Mines (25/75 to 75/25), they only did 110 damage, without any splash (IIRC), and suicided themselves. If you want one-shot mines, they either need to suicide (which I don't think is for the best) or need to be more expensive than units that they one-shot.
I'd rather have them be AOE type units. Siege tanks don't cut it. And if you want burst damage, just focus fire with Stimmed Marines. Now, this obviously makes them weaker against Protoss, but so what? Do you realize what sort of ridiculous type of ability it would have to be to be an effective AOE against Protoss?
I'd save trend towards decreasing direct damage, but buffing AOE damage.This focuses more on positional play and utilizing threats, rather than derpy "I hope it doesn't one-shot my really expensive unit."
|
On December 22 2012 05:17 ZjiublingZ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2012 04:55 Aquila- wrote: TvZ Mech is a fucking joke right now. Zerg opens mutas, terran has to go thors, then he makes swarmhosts, thors die, terran needs to make tanks, then zerg goes hive, uses the spire and makes broodlords, once again the tanks are useless, you need to mass viking. Oh you make vikings? 10 range fungal sup. Even if you somehow someway survive all that then he switches to something else like ultras, guess what, vikings useless now. These techswitches are ridiculous, combined with the fact that against swarmhosts you just need to sit there behind tanks and can never move out makes it literally impossible to win. Free units are pretty good. I think TvZ Mech is awesome right now, so much better than it was in WoL. I think you are playing it wrong! Don't go for more than 2 Thors AT MOST, until you see the Zerg commit to Mutalisks, a ton. Use Widow Mines + Turrets to defend from them. If the Zerg makes a ton of Mutalisks then this is always a free win for Mech with a good timing push, especially now with Widow Mines. If he is going Swarm Host > Brood Lord you should have map control and a stronger economy then him, and as long as you don't over-react to one Tech (too many Tanks/Banshees or too many Thors/Vikings) then you should be good with a better economy. In general if you are having trouble with Tech Switches I think Widow Mines are the best as serving as a buffer for this. Having ~16 Widow Mines in a separate control group, using them to flank BL's or Swarm Hosts, or to buffer against Roaches/Lings, to deny expansions and secure expansions you normally wouldn't be able to defend, or to protect from runby's when you move out with your army. What level do you play at? I could send you a replay if you are Masters or below.
No thanks play against a decent Zerg at high master and you will see ...
|
United Arab Emirates439 Posts
I encourage everyone to watch the replay -Kyo- posted, a game between him and Dragon (http://drop.sc/286636) if you respond to me or him about this game in question!
@-Kyo-
I don't see any of the attributes you talk about in that replay that make the Widow Mine seem too strong. If anything, it was an example of how a Mech player can finish a Protoss they have a HUGE economic advantage on, when the Protoss makes nothing but Immortals/Archons/Chargelots (what most assume to be the anti-Mech composition).
Prior to getting a huge lead against you in income, the first ~20 minutes of the game, he uses a total of 3 Widow Mines.
They kill:
1 Stalker poking early on (which wouldn't happen now post patch).
1 Hallucination
And then Dragon kills your third (the first time), and get's a huge lead against you. Primarily because you make 2 Colossus and Storm + 4 Templar, but only 5 Immortals, against 15 Tanks. You just have a bad composition against his nearly maxed out Mech push, and he is able to push you around and kill your third.
But you end up repelling his attack, where he has a big army supply advantage against you, after getting some more Immortals and catching some of his units out of position at what was your third. He is down 2000 resources lost at this point, but ahead overall because of better economy.
From there, with Dragon's huge economic lead (doubling your mineral income at some points, tripling it at others), he goes to Tank Widow Mine with Raven/5Viking to deny your Observers. He secures a 4th, denies your "normal third" again (Mech has a good advantage in those close positions in denying that normal third). You get up a third eventually south of your main, and are able to mine a bit again. Your income is still half or 1/3 of his at this point. He is in a sieged up location at his 4th with Widow Mines as well, and with Immortal/Archon you are able to attack into this position, trade efficiently with his army, tanking Widow Mines and wiping out nearly all of his Tanks. After this attack into his very solid position, and you just tanking Widow Mine shots, you have now increased your resource lost advantage by another 1k resources, to give you a 3k resource lost lead. You have traded very efficiently by simply ignoring his mines. Unfortunately for you, you simply do not have a good enough income to make an air transition to something like Tempests or even Carriers to deal with his very small air force (5 unupgraded Vikings and a Raven) to deal with his denying detection tactic. And so you cannot push into him, he sits on his economic lead, and eventually just overpowers your Immortal/Archon composition.
I have no idea how you think this game shows Widow Mines are too strong. You as a Protoss, vs a Mech player, are way down in income. Surely you realize this isn't a normal situation for a Protoss vs Mech? Still you are able to trade cost efficiently vs this composition, by simply ignoring Widow Mines. If anything, this shows how pathetic Mech vs Protoss would be without Widow Mines. And shows us that Widow Mines are a good way of forcing Protoss from creating a pure anti-ground composition with no anti-air, a composition that in WoL is very, very strong against Mech. Can you imagine if you had defended his push that originally denied your third, before he used Widow Mines really at all, and you hadn't fallen behind so far in Income? You could have continued to trade efficiently and been in a very good position against Dragon.
|
United Kingdom14464 Posts
I think now at least they are in a position to have the mine be 1 supply and for it to be reasonable. But in general, yeah, I'm not happy with them nerfing the widow mine, cause it such and awesome unit.
|
I like the mine in its current form, although I admit that perhaps they could be 1 supply, keeping everything else as it is. There are some players who are even using the mine well even in its current state HTOMario, Dragon etc.
|
@ZjiublingZ the whole point of that replay was to show after he secures the 4th that in those spots I cannot attack into him at all because of continued denial of observers with vikings, raven and scans. I'm not sure what you were looking for in that game but I'll help you by noting that I lost at least 10++ observers in that game while microing the large majority of them in fights(just look at our FPVs or apm @_@;; ). All the while, he secures a gold base and splits the map diagonally into a very favorable map arrangement.
To say there are things I could have done better is one thing, but there are plenty of things Dragon could have done differently as well, so this doesn't really prove anything. Therefore, I assume you're completely pushing what I'm saying while trying to justify a conclusion you've already predetermined while simply adding "well if this happened" or "it's possible to do this" and neglecting the examples I'm providing.
So tl;dr the whole point of the replay was to show you can strategically place mines and tanks in certain geographical locations while denying detection = very strong. This goes back to my very original argument: If mines are used correctly, and during the right times they're incredibly good.
I gave you an example of this.
|
United Arab Emirates439 Posts
the whole point of that replay was to show after he secures the 4th that in those spots I cannot attack into him at all because of continued denial of observers with vikings, raven and scans.
How can you say this, when in my post I very clearly stated that you increased your resource lost lead by doing just that. You attacked into a field of Widow Mines and Siege Tanks, and traded very cost efficiently, by simply ignoring the Widow Mines. If you had simply not had such a economical disadvantage to Dragon's prior, game deciding push, which involved no mines (and prior to that, Mines had ~0 effect on the game at all).
It has nothing to do with me saying "oh you could have done something better so your game is invalid". I am saying that you were WAY behind in the game before Widow Mines even played a role in the game, before Dragon made more than 3 of them in fact (and those 3 weren't even cost efficient...). You still traded cost efficiently vs his army by simply walking over the Mines, and if you had even been on even income you could have dealt with his anti-detection Raven/Viking hit squad very, very easily. Once again, if you had just not gotten so far behind in economy from a timing push that was in no way effected by Widow Mines, you would have easily had the income to make some anti-air.
This is like a Terran Bio player showing how, when behind in economy significantly to a Protoss player, they can't afford to make both Anti-Colossus and Anti-Templar tech, and then concluding that one of those things are too strong. Are they strong? Yes. Are they too strong? This game certainly doesn't show it.
Unless your argument is that a Mech player should consistently have an income advantage against a Protoss? I won't even touch that one though :D
|
As I posted in the Tvp Mech viablity thread...
If you buff tanks up to 70 dmg right now, then the major problem we will see is mass PF+Tank, which will result in ultra turtley games and thats the last thing anybody wants even if you suddenly can use your "mech" units.
I think the following changes could make it possible.
Remove PF
Buff tank dmg to 70 per shot and allow overkill
Change viking so that when it is in ground form it has an AA attack(but weaker)
Change immortal so that hardened shields are an activated mechanic rather than permanent.
As long as Blizz makes it so Terran actually has more difference in play then im not to worried about the new units. If I can play a nice positional mech game vs toss and a and insane micro fest with bio vs Z, I will be very happy even tho we only got the widow mine new. The two differances of the MU will be very satisfying and interesting.
However,
If I am still forced to go bio vs toss, marine tank vs Z, and marine tank vs T with only one new unit. Yea thats going to suck.
|
On December 22 2012 07:08 -Kyo- wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2012 07:03 aksfjh wrote:On December 22 2012 05:56 -Kyo- wrote:On December 22 2012 05:47 ZjiublingZ wrote:On December 22 2012 05:06 -Kyo- wrote:On December 22 2012 04:36 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 04:30 Plansix wrote:On December 22 2012 04:23 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 03:28 -Kyo- wrote:On December 22 2012 03:22 avilo wrote: [quote]
Thread is not about me, don't let kyo try to derail it. Thread is about widow mine efficiency. To which I replied I disagree(about mines), and many others pro players do as well. Every time I've played you in HotS you've never once utilized widow mines correctly as other players such as Morrow have. In fact, I still have not seen another play Mech as well as he has and that was nearly a month ago :/ So the point I'm making here is: If you actually know how to use the unit correctly, and at the right timings it's incredibly good. I do suggest, similarly, that mines shouldn't have a supply cost. Honestly, I think they should just use BW mines... @_@ Edit: I think you're missing my point. I only called you out specifically because.. again... the information you bring to the community is incredibly skewed. Essentially, your argument is valid, but not sound. @_@ + Show Spoiler +http://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/ here is some simple logical reasoning you can reference if you'd like to understand the above Morrow didn't (when he played hots) use widow mines except for early games gimmicks. Also Kyo have you even read the most recent patch notes? He is a GM Protoss player who stream says “Playing HotS” and is in the Complexity Academy, so we can safely assume he has read the patch notes. One might say he is better at the game than any of us. I am just shocked that one could think mines are OP against toss in the current state. I think anyone but Kyo acknowledged that they are useless vs toss. Especially when he references to Morrow (who barely used mines btw), who played HOTS pre-widow mine nerfs. Doesn't make a lot of sense to refer to prenerfs as a "proof" that mines are usefull. Okay, lets calm down on the over exaggerations so we are all on the same page. I simply said morrow was using mech the best of the players I've seen/played against, that's all. Now, if you'd like to know why I think the mines are too strong, along with many other people, it's quite simple. It's just how the unit itself operates. Unlike in BW this current mine attacks both ground and air. This mine also is untargetable once it attacks(there is absolutely no reason for assured damage), the unit is not disposed of once it activates, the unit will not splash other mines that activate at the same time(they are on route to hitting), and most importantly the 'real' cost effectiveness of the unit; this last one being the biggest issue I see with the mine. Surely, I agree with the notion that with the mines now not hitting observers automatically that this has been remedied quite a bit, but the problem still exists. The problem is this: Once the unit has activated once (Now you need 2 mines to kill, lets just say a stalker, for the sake of an example) it has paid for itself, more or less; however, upon the next trade for units it is at a 100% or even MORE than 100% cost trade efficiency. Now, scale this to something like immortals, or colossus... in the event you're able to scan and constantly snipe observers if the game goes into ground vs ground armies(which is incredibly reasonable if you're going mech this should be your ideal goal in holding new positions so you cannot be rushed into) you're trading so effectively that it doesn't even matter what happens to the number of mines you create at that point. If you're trading 2 mines for an immortal(an example..) during combat the mines have done much more than what your initial payment of them was as compared to the immortal protoss paid for. This is because of the TIME factor it buys you, let alone the economic trade. You're trading a unit that can be produced out of mass factory(which you'll have if you're going mech) versus a single, or perhaps at most 3, robotics facilities of a protoss player. Obviously remaxing on mines and putting them back into their placements is much, much faster than protoss building up their main, bulky army units. Because of this, I believe there is an issue with how strong the mine can be assuming you have it correctly placed in your mech lines. You can scale this higher, I think, if you continue to apply the same goal I mentioned above. That is to say, you can continually place a few mines around the map, and attempt to pick off observers even if the game goes much longer and the toss gets air. The same logic applies: once you trade a few mines for even just damage on something like a carrier it has paid for itself because it has reduced the overall effectiveness of a much pricier unit that takes a much longer duration to build and mass up. And this is all just economics and time factors of the game. If you'd like, we could talk about the effectiveness of mines+medivacs and also their ability to hit workers which is a whole other tangent edit 1 since I forgot this mention this: I played morrow quite a bit and he used mines every game all the way through until the late game. Yes, pre-nerf, but you're missing out on he whole other side of the coin about strategic locationing+detection denial with them and the effectiveness this can have even with the current patch we have. Of course Morrow was the best Mech player you played against, he was probably the best player on the Beta period. Not to mention he played the beta exclusively. Once again, that doesn't mean his style of Mech was solid or what people should be using right now. Case and point: he gave it up because he didn't think it was good. Now you are facing Mech players who aren't using the same style for months like Morrow did, because they are experimenting with new styles, trying to find something that is solid. Your examples are cherry picked and it's hard to discuss a unit this way: 2 Widow Mines killing 1 Stalker and then getting cleaned up afterward is a bad trade for a Mech player. They are even resource investments (slightly more minerals for Widow Mine and more supply), but it is two 40 second build time units out of a 150 gas production facility, vs 32 second build time from a 150 mineral production building, and in Mech vs P Protoss should have economy lead anyways. But of course if they aren't cleaned up it's a good trade. 2 Widow Mines cannot kill an Immortal anymore either (4 Widow Mines can kill 2 Clumped up Immortals if that's what is confusing you). Widow Mines are such a positional unit, they become so much better if they are in good position defensively or if they flank their opponent really well, and they can also be absolutely worthless if the opponent catches them out of position or protects their army from being flanked. The same concept goes for harass, they are hard to defend but technically you can take no damage but denied mining time from them if you have very good control. If you want to upload a replay of a game where you felt like shows that Widow Mines were clearly too strong and there wasn't anything you could do (outside of play considerably better than your opponent mayb), then that would be a reasonable discussion point. Talking about situations where they can be cost efficient is too abstract to lead to a fair discussion (same goes for talking about situations where they can be cost innefficent). I assume you typed all of this before noticing my new post. I included a replay. And again, these are just EXAMPLES. Of course they're not going to be applicable to all cases, but the point was that well placed widow mines in addition to a player continuing to deny detection allows for a much higher potential of good trades if you include the factors I mentioned. How can you deny detection to a Protoss that has cloaked detection? Can't you just keep one with your army or a scout group of stalkers or voids? Watch the replay for an example of a very easy way to do this with ground vs ground armies.
watched replay, horrible upgrades, weird engagements, only warpprism held u in the game, anything else pretty much sucked from your pov
hilarious, u r the only 1 i ve seen cry about widowmine, like ever ~_~
|
|
|
|