Overlapping unit roles?

Paragon, I thought you said you aren't saying any unit is useless even if you say not the whole unit you still are saying it becomes useless in SOME way.

We also do understand what you are saying Paragon do you think we don't just because we aren't totally agreeing with you?

And still I fail to see how that is negative if the unit still does have some use. Either it has use in the game or it doesn't Paragon. Like you said even if something out performs it one way it STILL has its uses.

I want to know why it is such a bad thing other than another unit might out perform it in one aspect. In my opinion that is not big enough of a reason for it to cause a problem for the Terran.


Then at points it seems like your arugement contradicts itself, first you say you dont think any unit is useless but then you say you think overalapping roles will make a unit useless with players when you just said they aren't useless.

 

All of what you are saying Paragon is very hypothetical. I could definitely see possible situations where I would, for example, want Banshees over BC's with Torpedos. Say my enemy is zerg and he is attacking with hydrolisks. If he has no detectors nearby I would definitely want Banshees. Now lets say he has detectors, with only 100hp banshees would be nearly worthless against a hyrodlisk army. I would rather have BC's with Torpedos and try to be in range of as few hydros as possible. Or if my opponent has mixed air and ground, the Banshees lack of anit air abilities may make me prefer to send BC's to attack ground and not have to put as many resourses in AA protection for the banshees.

The point I am trying to make is that there are many many situations where one unit would be much better than the other and situatations where there is very little difference. I agree that if in a majority of situations one unit was much better than the other in their shared role there would be a problem. However, unless Blizzard royally screws the balancing that doesn't seem to be the case. If the air to ground AoE capabilities of the banshee far overpower the BC's then it is more likely poor balancing and not that the units have shared roles.

Tanks may be more mobile and cheaper, thus more expendable, and Thors may be considerably more powerful and have air defenses. The are both siege units but in different situations one may be preferable. Knowing which to use when would be part of strategy. As long as one isn't nealry universally better there isn't a problem. If one is nearly universally better then you would have a good point; however I don't think that is yet the case.

 

You know, I was thinking about this problem, and I used to consider it major. I then changed my mind, here's why:

Thor and the siege tank seem to have similar roles, but the siege tank is an effective unit killer, thor is mainly suited for cracking turtle shells.

Viking and Predator seem to have similar roles, but the viking is much more suited for taking out capital ships, where as the predator is good vs small units.

The battle cruiser and the banshee, however, DO overlap. The banshee is a mid game ship, and is arguably just as effective as the battle cruisers' plasma torpedoes. Why then, would anyone want to get the cruiser? In my opinion, the banshee should be totally redesigned, and the massive AOE death should be saved for LATE GAME where it belongs.

 

thats why plasma torpedo should be anti air too. hahah.

after researching plasma torpedo, there is a button to choose from. either to lunch the AOE attack of the plasma torpedo on air or on ground.

the visual and gameplay usefulness of it will be awesome.

give the predator the cloak and banshee no cloak. ^^

 

Ok this is getting a little silly, but i'll try to explain.

Thor = 700 hp, Siege tank 150hp, do you see where im going? No? Ok then.

Say a feelow terran you're fighting has tanks sieged, moving your own siege tanks would just mean you lost your siege tanks because they get 2 shotted before they can siege.

Send in a thor, to take all the hits, blast his tanks with artilery strike and move in the rest of your force fast, you dont have to wait for tanks to siege up and fire 4-5 times to clear the entrace.

Same vs protoss, or any turle, choke point, send in the thor, blast the entrance for 3-4 sec, send in the rest of the army, Siege tank = units, Thor = Meanshield, choke point cracker, the siege tank IS the choke point unit, the Thor is the choke point CRACKER mkay?

The Battlecruiser Plasma torpedos is so the battlecruiser will not be overrun by small units such as:
Marines,hyras,stalkers,cobras etc.

They are also there for killing armies such as:
Immortals,Zealots,tanks,vikings etc.

The Battlecruiser is the Spearhead of your army, PT are there so you dont kill just one unit with the yamato cannon. Its an option.

Banshee = raider, kill the detectors send them in. Its a tactical unit, you have to wait for the right time.

Battlecruiser with PT, you have it when you need it, you start the fight regardless whether or not the enemy has detectors and you blast away.

I really dont see how they overlap other than the fact that they all deal damage.

 

^ well said. owerup:

battlecruisers are actually USEFUL now. 8)

and hell i like it

 

I said it's a POSSIBILITY. You know this word I assume. I didn't say ANYTHING was useless. I said it was POSSIBLE for a unit or ability to become useless due to overlap. Read my last post again.

No, you don't understand because you are saying "so you saying..." which isn't what I'm saying

Read my example again more closely. I clearly state hypothetical examples where units can no longer justify the mineral/gas/time expenditure to get them

Remy hates valkyries. Remy says that valkyries are useless because wraiths are better AA. Now, valkyries are ONLY AA so since Remy thinks that wraiths are better at AA he will get wraiths for AA instead of valkyries. This makes valkyries useless to him because wraiths outperform valkyries in AA. Now, what if the valkyries also had another ability but this ability was not worth the cost of the valkyrie. Remy would probably not get the valkyrie just for one ability that isn't useful enough to justify that mineral and gas expenditure as well as the spots they take on starport queues and the supply they take.

Again, no unit IS useless. Some have the POSSIBILITY to become useless due to every reason I have given thus far. Read my last post again. Carefully.

Of course it is hypothetical. 90% of this forum is hypothetical because the game isn't out. Your situations are hypothetical as well. To address your situation, hydras can take out BCs you know and you will have significantly less BCs that you would have banshees. Given the greater number of attacks coming from all those banshees, hydras may not be alive long enough to deal out much damage while they may be able to just move out of the way of plasma torpedoes which, being an ability, cannot be cast as much as an attack.

And you can't just trust they will do it right. Look at the valkyrie, look at the ultralisk, look at the scout. These are just a few units that are rarely used my most people.
Plus look at WC3. Especially in TFT their balancing tactic seemed to be "f**k it, lets just add some more heroes and play around with their stats"

 

personally i think the thor is a gimmick, only added to please the fans

 

My point is paragon, you said that overlapping roles is a bad thing because it COULD make it useless. I know you are just saying its possiblity. But then again, if a unit is not useless, why is there even a possiblity? And I just assumed when you said not useless, you meant not useless, not "not useless but a possiblity it can be."

Then I am saying that possiblity is not large enough of a issue to cause problems for the Terran race as a whole.

Yet, you go back and say no I'm wrong because "I am not fully understanding you, and all your details." Which is apparent in most of your previous posts

That is not a good enough reason, again you leave out the actual detail of WHAT im actually saying which is whole point.

I still what to hear what makes it such a big problem if it doesn't make a unit useless, etc,etc. The possiblity of becoming useless is still the same reason of "a unit being useless" No I dont mean that techinally, I mean for the sake of the arguement.

Again we are running in circles, you say I dont understand and then I have to explain myself again.

 

this is getting confusing lol

 

Well, if Paragon would answer with straight answers and not all these hypothecials and variables in his statements and arguements it wouldn't be as confusing.

I'll simplify things

Does the Overlapping cause problem enough to break Terrans and make them unplayable YES OR NO?

Does Overlapping make any unit useless YES OR NO?, (I don't want to hear something like"no, but its a possibility")

You have yet to clarify your stance on this Paragon, i want either a yes or no answer.

You state things in a manner that no matter what points or evidence I bring up you can simply say "you dont understand" or "im right and your wrong" so please clarify with JUST yes or no answers for those 2 questions.

Furthermore you keep trying to validiate your contradictions by saying stuff like "oh I forgot to tell you this detail" or "oh now I think this" etc.

 

He's like a girl Never giving a straight answer, its kinda cool to play games,

 

This is a stupid question. I never said the entire terran race would be unplayable. Do you honestly think I'm just going to let slip that you are trying to put even more words in my mouth by getting me to answer some yes or no questions. I'm trying to have an actual discussion here, not play into your little game.
Here is my favorite example so I will use it yet again

This example perfectly outlines the root of the problem I see with giving TOO MANY units overlapping abilities. Does this make terran unplayable or broken? No, it makes it dumb to get one ability. And sure, someone could say "but they can just balance that." Actually, I think someone did say that. And yes, they could. But you know what one of the techniques for the initial balancing is? Removal of spells or units.

The game isn't out. How the f**k would you, me, or anyone else aside from Blizzard (and they don't even really know because it isn't finished and it isn't balanced yet) know if something IS or ISN'T useless. All you know right now are possibilities. Your lame attempt at entrapment is pathetic.

I already told you my stance. You just don't want to accept it as my stance. Read my example given earlier in this post and what I wrote after it again.

You asked me a question that is unrelated to what I've been saying and a question that I've already said cannot be answered by yes or no. How can I not believe that you don't understand what I'm saying when you do this? I've tried to explain it over and over again as clearly as possible. Break apart my argument. Examine each piece and develop a counter argument for each piece. That's how it works.

I never forgot to tell you any details. I continue to tell you exactly what I said before because you continually lack any understanding of what I've been saying the entire time.

 

paragon I see your point in this and I agree as far as units in SC2 are concerned they are overlapping on some roles. I don't understand why people keep asking you your stance as you clearly have stated in your first post. I will not quote it nor will I repeat it. No need. Just to say I agree. The units are beginning to overlap roles. nuff said since it's my opinion. I don't need to justify it to anyone. And paragon you don't need to either as you yourself said this thread is about opinion. Also paragon has not said anything about a unit being useless. He has said that the units role will be overlapped and the unit with the stronger version of the ability/role will make that part of the other unit's role/ability less useful. Not useless. There is no reason to rip paragon's head off as the martyr in this conversation as he has brought a valid point and opinion.

 

Multiple banshees making the plasma torpedos a useless skill is quite simply laughable.

Plasma torpedos is just a add-on,its an option for the battlecruiser if he's facing multiple enemies on the ground. You forget the main role of the Battlecruiser is its main attack.

Also, "overlapping" (its not really like that) is actually good, this way you can have units with different roles stack their attacks to create a even bigger threat to the enemy.

 

@ DKutrovsky - from your post it doesn't seem like you've even read my posts because you haven't said why you think what I said previously is wrong you just kinda threw something out that there that I already gave counterexamples for.
Why would I talk about the main role of the battlecruiser when I'm only talking about the overlapping roles of units. The only mention of any of the other roles what that they existed which made none of the units useless. My point was clearly stated in my example that if the attack damage of multiple banshees overpowers the damage dealt by plasma torpedoes, why would you bother getting plasma torpedoes when you can just use banshees to do the same thing much more cost effectively.

I for one would rather have banshees dealing out ground AoE damage if they are more cost effective than plasma torpedoes because if I did get battlecruisers I could give them all yamato instead of plasma torpedoes. Could you get plasma torpedoes? Sure. Would a skilled player get it when it isn't the most cost effective way? I doubt it.

 

i think plasma torpedoes are effective against ground base units like turrets and canons, while the banshees attack is also effective the problem is they die quickly.

so battlecruiser will be useless against swarm etc without plasma torpedoes. while the banshee is vulnerable without cloaks. banshees bombers will be use mostly for stealth attacks while the battlecruiser with plasma torpedoes can TANK any ground battle while dealing massive damage against enemies ground unitrs.

 

I did read them paragon.

But what you're saying is, if one unit attacks for more why use the other unit?

Or if this unit does this better(which is not really the case) why use this unit's ability.

Well, multiple banshee will eventually do more damage than a single battlecruiser's plasma torpedos. But they may not be what you need. They can only attack ground targets and only units who cant defend themselves against air.

A battlecruiser can still devastate ground with plasma torpedos, survive a bunch of damage and kill air units.
I dont see how that can be as you put it, a useless skill. They both have similarities, but they are used differently.

I mean seriously,its like saying why use reapers when marines have more hp and damage?

You're narrowing it down too much with the overlapping claim.

Banshees have AoE thats used in certain situations, and plasma torpedos are used in different situations. Do you agree on this claim?

 

@zeratul11 - if you have 18 banshees focus firing on a cannon, it really doesn't matter that much if banshees only have 100 HP, the cannon will die in one salvo and get off like a shot.

@DKutrovsky - if you have battlecruisers then get banshees for ground AoE and give all your battlecruisers yamato. That gives you AA from the battlecruisers, ground AoE from the banshees, and the most powerful surgical strike ability in the game: yamato. Diversifies your forces far better than just having battlecruisers with half plasma torpedoes and half yamato. However, I personally would use vikings (or predators if they turn out to be better for AA) for AA to protect banshees. Added bonus with vikings being that they can become ground if their AA role is no longer needed. Why someone wouldn't have a mixed army is beyond me.

As for your marine/reaper example:
Reapers jump up cliffs. Marines don't.
Reapers throw explosive charges. Marines don't.
That argument of yours is actually a logical fallacy which I forget the name of. But the gist of it is "make up some ridiculous example that isn't true"
So seriously, it's not like saying that at all.

 

I'm not trying to trap you paragon, I don't know where you get that idea, I just want you to clarify your stance on your arguements.

Anyway, my original point was I think the possiblity is not great enough for overlapping units to be a problem even with all the evidence and points you presented. It would only be a problem if it broke the Terran or was a large issue THAT is why i was asking you those question paragon so I could get a idea of how great you think this possiblity is.

The fact is it is purely speculation and opinion, nobody here is right or wrong.

And, I feel bad that you think I'm trying to trap you paragon, I'm only trying to get you to be more clear by asking your stance on certain issues with simply answers if getting you to do is considered a trap I greatly misjudged your character.