Overlapping unit roles?

I remember those fallacies, learned about them my first semester of school

Anywhoo, yeah, 18 banshees is cool, but say you're playing vs a protoss, and he comes with a few phoenix fighters, GG banshees.

Or maybe you're using Battlecruisers vs zerg, where the yamato may just be useless, biggest unit being a mutalisk or a hydra, but you still need some BC beef, here comes the plasma torpedos.

You prefer to have vikings/predators/banshees, other people might prefer battlecruisers with plasma torpedos.

Do you agree that banshees and plasma torpedos have different ways of attacking and are used in different ways and in different situations vs different enemies?


Edit: and paragon, you're comparing a main attack with a optional spell, so idk, it doesnt seem very comparable to be considered overlapping. One has cloak and the main attack is AoE the other has beef and can shoot air and if they choose they can have plasma torpedos.

Maybe Yamato is the main add-on the plasma torpedos are simply there if you think you'll need them.

 

Also Paragon please don't call me pathetic or stupid, or any other member for that matter. I just asked yes or no questions so I could better understand what you are saying and you say I'm trying to trap you and that I'm stupid and pathetic....

Sorry if I came off a bit rude in my previous post, but I was frustrated and your argument wasn't making sense to me so I know I have said again and again but I just wanted a clarification.

 

oh no, the battlecruisers are useless again. d@mn spamming of small tier 1 and 2 units. we are going back to starcraft 1 on how it is supposed to play, basic units ONLY. lame!

but i will not lose hope. bc ftw!

 

I think the plasma torpedos are there because the battlecruiser is capital ship and he should be able to do everything, and that includes ground AoE.

Can it do what the banshee can? Partly, as it has only one blast, but that may be useful depending on the situation. And it still has its other contributions, those mixed with PT maybe what you need.

 

Ask more pertinent questions.

Or you could just like... get out of the way. Banshees are pretty fast. And while battlecruisers would not die from phoenixes, they would take more damage since they are slower and would be in range of the overload for longer. Especially if the player staggered the overload and followed the battlecruisers.

I yamato zerg defenses

And if banshees are more cost effective/efficient at dealing ground AoE damage, I'll win.

No... IF banshee AoE is more cost effective/efficient at dealing ground AoE damage then it's simply better at it.

I'm not comparing the units as a whole, I'm comparing their overlapping role not their overall role. Also, the plasma torpedoes being an ability makes it that much worse than the base attack of the banshee.

It's one or the other. They've said you can't have both on a battlecruiser. They may change this, they may not.

Since you seem so adamant in bringing up the fact that the battlecruiser can "tank" better. I'll flip my hypothetical around as either could happen. However, this one is not as strong since I think it is less likely to happen due to various factors such as the battlecruiser being higher tech, the almost 0 chance that the plasma torpedoes will be as powerful as I describe in this example, etc.

Lets say the Battlecruiser's plasma torpedoes is far better than the banshee's ground AoE attack and that the battlecruisers can cast this over and over in somewhat quick succession (quick enough to still be more powerful than the banshee attack). Then there would be little point in getting banshees once you are able to get battlecruisers. banshees would disappear from late game in much the same way most units in WC3 disappear from late game. Remember that in starcraft even marines, zerglings, and zealots were effective in late game

I wasn't calling you pathetic or stupid... I was calling your questions stupid and pathetic. There is a BIG difference.

 

Paragon, I'm still not sure I understand what you're getting at. I mean, no one is denying that units have overlapping roles, and that one will invariably be better than another in that role. But these are awfully specific roles we're talking about, here. So what if the Banshee and Battlecruiser both have ground AoE?

According to the second-to-last bit of your previous post, you say that the problem with this is that if Battlecruisers are better at AoE than Banshees are, then Banshees will be completely useless in the late-game. I say, ridiculous. If my opponent is attacking with half a million marines, I don't care how much more effective Battlecruisers are at AoE, Banshees have cloak, and can spread out more. The logical choice is Banshees.
Likewise, if Banshees are are crazily more effective than Battlecruisers, that doesn't mean the Battlecruisers ability will go unused. Against heavily guarded settlements, you could opt to pair Battlecruisers up with the Nomads NanoRepair ability. Because the Battlecruiser is only one unit, this would be a far more effective combination than if the Nomad were paired with what would be 3-4 Banshees as the equivalent.

Bottom line is, with the sheer number of abilities and differences they have on top of their few similarities, I don't see it possible how anything could disappear from the majority of late-games. Banshees are smaller, faster, can spread out much more for the same amount of money, don't rely on energy, etc. Battlecruisers are much more convenient to repair, much more armoured, easier to micro, and provide a nice distraction from what could be your "real" attack.

Every situation requires analysis that will change your approach. Does your assault require stealth? Well, you probably won't get it with the big, lumbering Battlecruiser. Are you defending your base from an all-out, well-balanced, detector-equipped Hydralisk/Mutalisk attack? Well, once Hydras are out of the way, Battlecruiser can help with AA, while Banshees can not.
Got a narrow chokepoint leading into your base? Well, if your opponent likes massing smaller, faster units, then a Battlecruiser won't do so well. After the initial Proton Torpedo burst that incinerates the 5-10% at the front of the line, it's rate of fire may not be fast enough to deal with the 90% that are pouring in. Opponent likes using Thors? The AoE attack of the Banshee becomes a pretty weak move when confronted with a single, heavily armoured unit. A Battlecruisers powerful laser could take care of the Thor, on top of cleaning up any repairing SCVs that happen to be repairing with a single Proton Torpedo shot.

It just seems as though most of the units in the game, at this point, all have SOMETHING about them that keep them interesting. So while some roles may overlap, it's all situational, and the truly skilled players will realize when it's time to use one and when it's time to use another. There are simply too many little variables in play in SC2 to allow a unit to just be up and forgotten.

 

First you say that battlecruisers will be good against heavily armored settlements and then you say that if a situation requires stealth (i.e. the settlement is heavily armored) then the banshee is the one to use.
In the case of the thor, battlecruisers with yamato would be FAR more effective than plasma torpedoes with it's normal attack killing the SCVs

Truely skilled players in starcraft have realized that ultralisks are not worth the cost, scouts are not worth the cost, etc...
And you are making definites about something that can not be made definite. You say that there will always be a situation for a unit when you do not know if this is true. I am saying that it is possible for a unit to outperform another when they have a role that overlaps and that it is possible for this possibility to lead to a unit or ability not being used

 

http://youtube.com/watch?v=-hJfTDBgX8I&mode=related&search=

You'll note that the turning point of the above game is when the Zerg player (I understand he's some sort of professional, or something. I'm assuming he's skilled.) builds Ultralisks, and uses them with startling efficiency in conjunction with Dark Swarm. So apparently, he thought they were, in fact, worth the cost, if merely for the fact that they use a Melee attack. You'll find several other Zerg victories on Youtube that are attributed to Ultralisks.

And yes, hitting a Thor with Yamato Cannon would be far more effective than a simple laser. Then again, dropping a Nuke on it's head would be even more effective, but that's pretty irrelevant, isn't it?

On a side note, a settlement being heavily armoured is definitely not the only time that stealth would be a positive trait. To assume that the two are synonymous is a little Bizarre.

 

So forget ultralisks. The rest of the argument still stands

Hitting it with yamato rather than hitting it with plasma torpedoes isn't irrelevant because blizzard has said you can only have one or the other on a battlecruiser. I have never said the battlecruiser would be useless, i said with a banshee being able to deal ground AoE damage better than the plasma torpedoes, the battlecruiser is much better off getting yamato rather than plasma torpedoes.

So you want to go in with your cloaked banshees, take out their command center, and leave. They'll just build another one. And chances are they will have some sort of detectors or defenses or something hindering your banshees so neither would be really effective at this. Which is why there are ghosts if you can find one small place where there isn't detection and you can call down a nuke.

 

So basically what bugs you is that plasma torpedos are going to be obsolete because of banshees.

Again i dont think they will be. Im 100% sure there will be strategies where you will mass up some battlecruisers. Not using supply/money for banshees will mean more battlecruisers and you'll still have some AoE.

Like i said, the BC is a capitol ship, its needs to be able to support all battle environments. including
AoE.

You think you wont use it, i think i'll use quite often.

 

The thing is, that paragon says banshees > plasma torpedos, but doesnt want to see it as banshees vs battlecruisers with plasma torpedos.

 

why do u just quote people paragon ?


Anyways If you look @ terran from SC2, spider mines /firebats/siege tanks were the special anti-ground. In fact, siege tanks were so stinkin good that it's usually all you need.

Anti Air specialist came from goliaths, valkyries, and possible cloaked wraiths.

BC/Marines fell into the do-it-all jack of all trades type of unit.

Now nearly 1/2 the terran units(especially mechs) are siege-bombardment specializing...kinda takes away the tactics when all the units do the same thing.

 

All units have the same thing in common they kill other units.

With terrans currently thats where the overlapping stops. Cmon people dont act like retards, and grasping on the smallest of things like "these 2 units have ground AoE, omg, overlapping".

They have different ways of delivering that AoE.

 

um... thats the first time i've EVER just quoted someone in a post and done nothing else.

der... no, no that isn't where it stops

so wait... in DKutrovsky land when two things have something that is the same those things actually DON'T have something the same (definition of overlap). Well f**k i guess ven diagrams are useless.

Rockets and... smaller rockets?



To sum up this argument.
I'm saying that there is overlap and that I personally think the overlap is creating a problem because it is occurring too much which can lend itself to even more problems.
You're saying I'm completely wrong and there is no overlap.

 

The way you're saying they overlap is that it makes one of them useless.

I say they dont overlap in general, and that they both have different uses, they both do ground AoE but are used differently.

Rockets and smaller rockets...very smart, and thats what i mean by silly comments.

Delivered as in the way the unit moves around the battlefield(cloak, speed, damage,tech tree,hit points)...

Rockets and smaller rockets...

 

So why would someone tech to plasma torpedoes if the banshee attack ends up doing better damage for cheaper? You wouldn't need something more expensive doing what the banshees would be doing.

 

Banshees will most certainly die faster,and basically waste resources in a flat out battle, they are good for raiding mostly.

Also plasma torpedos deliver damage faster from what i can tell from the video.
And banshees are more vulnerable to ground to air units, and air to air units, as well as AoE such as phoenix and whatever the zerg has. Do you think this is a good enough reason?

 

Banshee's aren't necessarily cheaper... It's probably not that each BC you upgrade costs minerals. It's probably more likely that you purchase the upgrade once and then chose which BC to implement it with. In that case, it would probably be more cost effective to just choose plasma torpeoes for a few existing BC, in the event that you already have some or will need them anyways, rather than construct a new fleet of banshees, wasting resources and time.

Not only that, but there are absolutely situations when AoE air to ground damage is needed, as well as extreme toughness. In these situations, the BC would be the logical choice, rather than the relatively fragile banshee.

 

To jump back into the thread one more time, you would tech to plasma torpedoes because you get different shit with them, that could be useful. For instance, along with those torpedoes, you get a pretty strong AA attack, which you wouldn't get with Banshees. That's why. Simple enough?

Bottom line is, if you want Ground AoE with Cloak, get Banshees. If you want Ground AoE with Anti-Air capabilities, get Cruisers. (Amongst other examples.)