Starcraft 2 Terran Concerns

Starcraft 2 Terran Concerns

Part 1 : Terran vs Zerg

a. How is Terran going to able to defend against stacked muta harrasment?
In SC 1 Terran used Marins and Medics but Medics are removed to Starport tier.
Add that to unlimited unit selection making the stacking even more effective.
The extra hp upgrade does not help much since Zerg can retreat once the Marins stims och come back later. BC with Missile Barrage owns the hell out of them as do Thors, but these units are at the end of the tech tree?

Also, on island maps there is no longer Valkyries to deal with the Mutas giving Terran less map contral. So Terran is forced to mass (more) BC with Missile Barrage since Thors can not be transportered (or has that changed?)? Also since Science Vessels are out there is no longer irradicate so Swarm Guardians needs to be fighted by Vikings , BC or Thors and massed stacked mutas by BC and Thors.

Mass Ghosts could possible be a option agianst Mutas but they are expensive and in some extend less flexible?

b.Defence agianst Zerglings. Since the Firebat has been taken out and the Medics move to starport, how is Terran able to defend and safely expand without first building a Factory to produce Hellions? Terrans are dependent on a tier 2 unit to counter a tier 1 unit. And Medivacs instead of Medics meens that Marines lose a natural meat shield.

Part 2: The siege tank
The seige tanks is totally useless agianst Protoss. Stalkers can blink right to the tanks deadzone and Immortals owns them as well. Even Zealots has got charge etc. On the other hand, Terrans has got Maruaders instead. They seems to be good agianst armored units and used in groups with Marins they can be effective. Thors seems to be usefull as a support unit as well since they doesnot have deadzone not that much reduced damage agianst
Immortals since its attack counts as four shots.

In Terran vs Terrans the tanks is still usefull and can be used when sieging bases vs other races to take down static defences / buildings but thats about it. It may also parital usefull agianst Zerg. However if I had the choiche to choose between Tank and Thor I would choose the Thor or possible Banshees.

Part 3 : Spidermines
A futher weakening of the Siege Tank is that they cost more, eats more supply and change to spider mines. With Vulcture removed and Spider Mines moved to Nighthawk mines are less spammable since mines cost more to lay down. In SC1 you got three mines+a anit infantry unit / scouting unit for 75 minerals. Also since Spider mines are at later tier, mines therefore are avable much later giving Terrans less scouting abilety as well as less abilety to defend agianst Dark Templars.

Part 4: The lack of Wraith, is it realy a problem? The Viking seems to be better than the Wraith in taking down Carriers/BC. However, the Wraith has cloak and could provide air to ground attack as well. The Wraiths role has been spitted into two specialts units and both units seem better at its roles even thought Vikings lacks cloak. I even think that Banshees are better than Tanks!

Part 5: Prediction of expansion units
I predics the Terran are going to get the Predator taken into the game agiand as well as Firebats in the first expansion to cover part 1. I also predict that in the second expansion BC are getting the Plasmo Torpeados specialization back and perhaps Science Vessles will make a comback and possible the Cobra will be taken into the game agian?

 

- Mutalisks will get their asses kicked early game by your marines just as well as in sc:bw. They have more hp then back in sc:bw and the mutalisks have to be properly upgraded first to pose a threat, which takes a lot of time.
- Marauders own the hell out of just zerglings.
- The siege tank has been buffed up since sc:bw, and if you used no protection there, you would also get owned by every unit that gets close. A single zergling pais could let tanks shoot at each other and have them killed. Artillery is artillery, if you want to use the tanks at short range, then choose not to deploy them to siege mode.
- There already are topics about this, so I will not respond to this, although you have a point.
- It has been confirmed quite some time ago that you will be able to buy sc:bw units in the wings of liberty campaign. And yes, there will probably also be unique units. Anyways, welcome to the forum, enjoy your stay. Be sure to leave a message at the introduction board!

 

Part 1.

a) Medivacs come at the same stage as Mutalisks. You'd easily have enough Medivacs to support your Marines by the time your opponent has massed Mutalisks to such a degree that having unlimited selection becomes beneficial to them.

Stacking, though still possibly, has also become much harder to achieve and maintain in StarCraft2.

Valkyries were seldom used, at best.

b) Bunkers, Marines and Marauders are more than enough to fend off Zerglings. Marines are able to be produced practically twice as quickly as before, making them harder to be overrun, while Marauders can slow them down and screw with their pathing.

Supply Depots can also be used to block chokes, and more effectively than they could in StarCraft1.

Part 2.

I think you're forgetting the sheer range of the Siege Tank, and that they're seldom deployed on their own, as when deployed on their own, not only do all those units have all those abilities you named, but any unit can simply get within its dead zone, making the Tank utterly useless.

Stalkers are extremely fragile, and Blinking them into the midst of everything so they can attack the Siege Tanks would instantly result in death, especially seeing as they'd be stuck there, and unable to escape.

Zealots, although they have Charge, are not able to Charge straight from in front of your front line, to behind it. Charge doesn't work radially. If there's an obstruction, it has to circumnavigate it, which adds to the distance it needs to travel.

Immortals are there to withhold Siege Tank fire, not to down them as soon as they attack. Again, they'd have to get through your Marines, etc, which would make mince meat of the Immortal's shields.

Part 3.

Siege Tanks are also a lot more powerful than in StarCraft1, so their increase in cost is justified.

The Reaper, which comes at the same stage the Vulture did, is perfect for scouting, and is perhaps even better than the Vulture.

Terran still have a greater number of viable ways to defend against Dark Templar rushes than the other races do, despite Spider Mines being moved to a later tier.

Once the Terran player acquires Nighthawks, which are only a tier later than the Vulture was, they'll have a much greater supply of Mines and will be able to deploy them much easier.

Part 5.

It's unlikely that any team will acquire scrapped units in the expansion, especially seeing as their roles have been replaced, Predators with Missile Barrage, Firebats with Hellions, Plasma Torpedoes with Hellions, Science Vessels with Nighthawks and the Cobra with Marauders, and on top of that, many of those units were deemed to not work, such as the Predator, in particular.

 

"Part 1 : Terran vs Zerg"

"a. How is Terran going to able to defend against stacked muta harrasment?
In SC 1 Terran used Marins and Medics but Medics are removed to Starport tier.
Add that to unlimited unit selection making the stacking even more effective.
The extra hp upgrade does not help much since Zerg can retreat once the Marins stims och come back later. BC with Missile Barrage owns the hell out of them as do Thors, but these units are at the end of the tech tree?"

Aye.

As far as I can tell, you have to use Vikings. They're not optimize to kill mutalisks, but they deal 20 damage a hit to them (and take back 9). Compare to the Wraith, which used to return only 10 damage.

"Also, on island maps there is no longer Valkyries to deal with the Mutas giving Terran less map contral. So Terran is forced to mass (more) BC with Missile Barrage since Thors can not be transportered (or has that changed?)?"

Yes. This is probably the biggest issue with not having the Predator. Seems like you have to use Vikings again.

"Also since Science Vessels are out there is no longer irradicate so Swarm Guardians needs to be fighted by Vikings , BC or Thors and massed stacked mutas by BC and Thors."

That's not a big deal. Vikings will pwn swarm guardians (they deal the same high damage as Wraiths did to them, and swarm guardians can't fight back). Thors are probably not a great option vs swarm guardians, actually, as their GtA is weaker than the swarm guardian's AtG (especially for cost). The exact ratio depends on how much swarm guardians stack.

"Mass Ghosts could possible be a option agianst Mutas but they are expensive and in some extend less flexible?"

Seems like a pretty expensive option.

"b.Defence agianst Zerglings. Since the Firebat has been taken out and the Medics move to starport, how is Terran able to defend and safely expand without first building a Factory to produce Hellions? Terrans are dependent on a tier 2 unit to counter a tier 1 unit. And Medivacs instead of Medics meens that Marines lose a natural meat shield."

When the marauder -- same tier as the firebat -- first came out, it had an AoE slow effect. They could slow down a bunch of zerglings letting allied marines kill them more effectively. Marauders seem to have lost the AoE slow however. I don't know what Blizzard has done to make up for that.

"Part 2: The siege tank
The seige tanks is totally useless agianst Protoss. Stalkers can blink right to the tanks deadzone and Immortals owns them as well."

I've played StarCraft II at BlizzCon so I know this strategy doesn't work very well. I believe the siege tank has a greater sight range than the stalker's Blink. This is as effective as using Psi Storm to kill grouped siege tanks ... which is to say it isn't. The stalker will get instantly killed (unless they really heavily outnumber the tanks) before it can blink. Stalkers take the full 100 damage from a tank and can't even survive two blasts.

Immortals own them, which means the terran player can't just rely on a group of tanks and not even babysit them. IMO, that's a good thing.

When I first started playing StarCraft online, in the very first game, I was terran vs my protoss friend. I put five seige tanks (some decent number like that) at the edge of my base and stopped paying attention to them. Not only did they kill each and every group of ground units my opponents sent, they even killed his high templar. (Siege tank sight = 10, psi storm range = 9.) The difference is small enough a noob (like us starting players) wouldn't notice. Moral of the story? Range is good. Range is good vs special abilities. Range with overwhelming force may be too good.

I started playing Command & Conquer III yesterday, and there's a similar unit called the Mammoth Tank. It's really more like a super-thor than a super siege tanks (loads and loads and loads of hit points, decent but not exceptional range). In the last mission, I simply left two mammoth tanks to defend my base and after seeing them beat off a few attacks with little damage I ceased bothering to oversee base defense. Didn't lose either of them. IMO, that's not a good thing.

"Even Zealots has got charge etc. On the other hand, Terrans has got Maruaders instead. They seems to be good agianst armored units and used in groups with Marins they can be effective. Thors seems to be usefull as a support unit as well since they doesnot have deadzone not that much reduced damage agianst Immortals since its attack counts as four shots."

Yes, a change in how you use units is in order. People might only use siege tanks as defenders and as building killers. That helps curb their overuse.

"In Terran vs Terrans the tanks is still usefull and can be used when sieging bases vs other races to take down static defences / buildings but thats about it. It may also parital usefull agianst Zerg. However if I had the choiche to choose between Tank and Thor I would choose the Thor or possible Banshees."

Banshees are very good, but you need a large bunch (lots of resources) to get a group that can deal overwhelming damage, and they don't deal splash, either. They have their place, but they don't completely overlap with siege tanks. (Also, missile turrets murder them, I believe.)

"Part 3 : Spidermines
A futher weakening of the Siege Tank is that they cost more, eats more supply and change to spider mines. With Vulcture removed and Spider Mines moved to Nighthawk mines are less spammable since mines cost more to lay down. In SC1 you got three mines+a anit infantry unit / scouting unit for 75 minerals. Also since Spider mines are at later tier, mines therefore are avable much later giving Terrans less scouting abilety as well as less abilety to defend agianst Dark Templars."

Bah. Pay attention to things at the same tier as the old spider mine and you won't feel so bad about them.

"Part 4: The lack of Wraith, is it realy a problem? The Viking seems to be better than the Wraith in taking down Carriers/BC. However, the Wraith has cloak and could provide air to ground attack as well. The Wraiths role has been spitted into two specialts units and both units seem better at its roles even thought Vikings lacks cloak. I even think that Banshees are better than Tanks!"

It's not a problem, IMO. They haven't really been split into two; rather, a hybrid (heh) of the goliath and Wraith was formed, then that was split into two, giving us the Viking and Banshee.

"Part 5: Prediction of expansion units
I predics the Terran are going to get the Predator taken into the game agiand as well as Firebats in the first expansion to cover part 1. I also predict that in the second expansion BC are getting the Plasmo Torpeados specialization back and perhaps Science Vessles will make a comback and possible the Cobra will be taken into the game agian?"

Predator coming back? I can see that in an expansion. Its Intercept ability didn't work before, so I presume if the Predator comes back, it'll have a different ability, and maybe a new name.

I don't see the firebat coming back. I predict the marauder's AoE slow will return instead.

I don't predict BCs getting plasma torpedoes back. There's already three variants of the BC in the multiplayer game, and Blizzard doesn't like overwhelming players with options. If Plasma Torpedo comes back, then I suspect one BC ability will vanish to make way for it.

Why would science vessels make a come back when there's already the Nighthawk? If you're talking about old abilities, they might never come back, or they might be put on a different unit. (For instance the ghost use to have EMP.)

I can see the cobra coming back, I guess. It's a cheaper GtA option than the thor and a potentially interesting GtG anti-armored unit. (Apparently it's ability to shoot and move simultaneously was overpowered, but that could be taken away.)

 

Firstly, the costs and build times are not the same.

Secondly, the movement and response times of units is going to be very different with the move upto 3D and the inclusion of game physics.

You can't expect existing strategies to be directly transferrable. They just won't be. It's a different game.

Yes, you'll be able to do a muta harass, but the new dynamics of mutalisks will mean they are probably not as agile as they are in sc1, so the tactic may not be that effective with decent terran micro.

 

I have to interrupt your constant flow of correct arguments there, since you obviously forgot something. No flaming here, just making something clear.

You seem very focussed on competetive play, Jasmine. But if you are, then why do you forget that Blizzard people said in multiple posts that they were thinking about having different animations for units an buildings in multiplayer? There are now 2 death animations for every building and even some units. -sometimes even 3, but they will choose the best one- A slow but cool looking one for campaign and a fast less distracting one for multiplayer. It is very likely that this will also apply to movement animations after the beta, so stuff like muta harassing will be very likely to be present in multiplayer.

 

I dont under stand why bragesjo is complaining. is this a troll or just some one not very up to date on there info?

a thor can out range guardians so why would muta be messing with thors?

Wraiths? what the heck? how many pro games have u seen wraiths even being used let-alone it be the reason for winning? Wraiths were a soft air unit that hit well ATA attack but SUCKED on there ground attack just as the scout did.

yeah and the viking does 20dmg (10x2) with 125 hp 125 min and 100 gas
the wraith is 120 HP and 20 dmg. 150 min and 100 gas

LAWL, i would still go with the viking, less mins who cares about gas its endless in SC2 and the viking has 5 more HP. lol and why are u question if we need the wraith? the viking also does 8 more dmg vs large air units in air from. IDK if thats 8+ per shot or 8+ after both shots are calculated.

I'm glad the viking is here if your pussing zerg do you think the zerg player is gonna have the time to micro around 10!! range from a thor AND vikings? thats crazy and hard enough to deal with. lets also not for get getting to a thor aint even that hard. so its a matter of choice while terrans might have to play a bit more defensive with thors playing base body guard/Door knocker its not very hard to get there roll confused.

as for terrans vs zerglings really you need to do research man. The reaper dose extra dmg vs light armored units(zergling is light armored). So if the enemy doesnt wanna wise up and make roaches which is also counterable with marauders or tanks or (reaper mines if the enemy is not microing) then there going to lose.

terrans have and infantry for everything right not. so if your talking small combat i would go with terrans cause there just prepared for alot more then protoss or zerg.(at least it seems that way on paper)

HERE is a footage of marines and reapers owning face at 2:50 time in the video
they beat out mutas, hydras, and zerglings, (WHAT?!?!?!?! CLASSIC ZERG LOST?!?!......yes they did.........)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dul3e3UfNo


as for your statement on tanks i'm sad to see you put that. i'm wondering if your the only SC player in the world that didnt see Battle report 1?? you can beat a protoss player without tanks... (yes its possible...)

Edit: and your statement on the use of vultures truly baffles me. DO u know how long its going to take to get to DT's in sc2? hell i dont even think its worth trying to rush them if a player is scouting you well enough. You'll have so much time to get detection its really not funny. you can go engineering bay and cut to a PF with turrents and your miners will be super fine or just get a OC and scan the map when u need it. seriously and the hellion is a better replacement for the vulture with its splash. as for the mines i'm glad there on the night hawk Its going to be 100% easier getting mines in places they need to be for only 25 energy(not sure on the energy) thats silly as hell. the coast it took you to mass vultures if u massed that many nigh hawks you could fly behind the enemys minerals lay mines and then Deploy Auto Turret and before the enemy can even get men there they will be torn apart by mines on top of taking dmg from the Auto Turret.

 

Not a problem. First off, the most impressive ability that Marines have is the ability to hit air units at all. Out of the 3 races, the Terrans are the only one to have their cheapest and most cost-effective unit have AA capabilities.

Second, Vikings cost the same but easily outmatch the poor Mutas.

Vikings are the primary AA for the Terrans, period. They can outfight every air unit in the game.

Marines+Marauders slaughter them just fine. Slowing down Zerglings cripples their ability to move effectively. Keep in mind that you could put Marauders in a Bunker while the Marines stay outside and run circles around the Zerglings.

The Zealots charge is only useful for chasing moving targets while in close combat, which the Siege Tanks should never be in anyways. Stalkers get killed in two shots and even their Blink doesn't allow them to bypass the range entirely, not to mention they have to be able to see where the Tanks are to begin with.

Except that the Nighthawk is a detector, meaning that it can spot Dark Templars in advance,m then dump mines on them. You also left out the part where the Mines are FREE, they only cost energy.

 

*buzer sound*
A Viking is not capable of taking on any other air unit. It gets easily destroyed by carriers, battlecruisers, corruptors and with proper micro even by mutalisks, since they can keep circling around the poor Viking.

 

Fo®Saken when people who went to blizzcon came back they said terrans had the more over powered air at that time. Vikings could kill mutas, the Phoenix has more hp and can beat out the viking but BCs were the un stoappable power house juggernauts there. Non of the AA units in the game at that time were strong enough to beat out BCs. The people who went said the new BC attack was TOO effective at targeting down units and killing them.

A muta cant single a viking, not even in small groups. It has to be Large groups since thats the only way mutas can stack dmg fast enough to take out alot of vikings.

if i remeber correctly they said a viking was able to kill 1 muta and be on the next before dying.

the muta only does 9 dmg compared to 20 from the viking thats 6 hits, 7 if you count in armor.

its 14 hits for a muta. 15 if you count in armor. What are you talking about??? and anything can kill a carrier there not good anymore.

 

I find that hard to believe. It's designed to destroy carriers and BCs. It does 36 damage to BCs (30 with armor taken into account), just under half the damage the BC does back. The viking is a lot cheaper (less than 1/3rd the cost and supply). Cost for cost, it owns battlecruisers. Also, battlecruisers own carriers 1:1, so I can hardly see vikings losing to carriers.

Corruptors are the same "class" as vikings (eg designed to destroy capital ships). It's a bit difficult (and perhaps unfair) to compare them head to head. Neither will be at full strength.

Vikings do double the damage of mutalisks (more, even) but mutalisks have their bouncing splash. We don't know if mutas can "out-micro" vikings; I've yet to see videos of vikings vs mutalisks. Furthermore, mutalisks seem like the zerg equivalent to phoenixes and predators, which means they're supposed to kill tactical fighters like vikings anyway.

 

Out of the 3 races terran seem to be the strongest so I Don"t know what your talking about and btw the seige tank is so much better because now it dosen"t have to stay in seige mode to be strong anymore.

 

Was this meant to reply to me or the poster above me?

If it was at me: when I talk about dynamics, and it being a different game, I'm comparing sc1 and sc2. In addition to what I said, unit speeds will be different, attack ranges will be different, unit acceleration and separation behaviour and turning speed will be all be different. All these things affect the way a unit performs, and something like a muta harass in sc2 won't work exactly as it does in sc1. I doubt it will be as effective as it is in sc1

Animations aren't relevant to this -- they don't affect the game mechanics. The attack speed and movement speed and all other important variables are not dependent upon the choice of animation.

 

On the topic of mutalisk movements;

In Q&A 43 Blizzard said they would make it possible for mutalisks to stack. At BlizzCon 2008 they didnt' stack so well, but this may change.

In Q&A 47 Blizzard said mutalisks will be able to attack on the move.

As a result, mutalisk harassing may become much more (too?) effective as the game coding progresses.

 

To Jasmine: Yes they are. The animations affect the speed of most moves, since the animation has to be finished first befor a new move can start. That is how it is programmed. For example, if you remove or shorten an attack animation in the warcraft 3 editor, you can increase the attack speed. In short: the mechanics are mostly affected by the animations when these are changed for multiplayer the game will be more like sc:bw. You are right that it will still be different, -especially the ranges- but what I said still makes a great difference.

 

well the vikings range is 6. its not like the Valkyrie so it wont sit there for ever and keep firing. onces its finished it it will be me movable. i dont really see the vikings attack taking that long.

 

I have to wonder about animations "slowing" things down. I recall seeing a thread on teamliquid where people complained about that.

In Warcraft III, you can directly alter the cooldown of an attack. If you speed up the animation, it just means the unit looks idle a bit longer between attacks. At least that's how I see it. (StarCraft II uses Warcraft III's cooldown system. The listed cooldown for the spore crawler is 0.8608 while the spore colony had a cooldown of 15 (I think that makes it obvious the newer cooldown system is being used).

 

ok. So I might be wrong on that. I always thought the attack animations were shoe-horned to the attack times, and movement animations shoe-horned to fit with movement speed.

That's how I'd have designed it anyway.

 

even if you were wrong look at the viking. How long do you think its going to take to fire 2 missiles that you fire at the same time. The viking isnt like the Valkyrie its attack animation isnt going to be so harsh on the unit itself

 

You can change the speed of everything in the editor, export it to other maps and upload it as a sc:bw style map pack or something if for some reason the boxed version lacks these changes in multiplayer games. I am pretty sure people would like it. Tower defence also strated out small.