Lately, I've been wondering what are the different choices for teching for each race are. I mean, in SC1... Zerg: goes muta stack / mass lurker Terran: goes for M&M with wraiths / mass tanks+ vultures Protoss: mass dragoons with arbiter / high templar However, in SC2, the majority of the builds in official matches are : Zerg: zerg speed boost, plus roach 'n banelings Terran: mass bio + occasional Hellions Protoss: zealot + stalker + collosus I mean, I'm not complaining or anything (worried, that's all), but I would prefer different options for tech which the enemy needs to guess, and not one single main and most powerful build that every knows. I want twists in competitions where the enemy can pick different build-ups, and not only have the same battles over and over again with the same units, because that would eventually get boring. Any comments?
You're on about strategies, not tactics And your list is extremely slim. I mean you didn't even consider the opposing race, which is basically what decides the whole thing. Get a table with the mathcups and see for yourself that the strategies were rather varied in SC, and the same thing can be expected in SC2. Finally, this is pretty much identical with the other thread you posted in.
@Kuvasz, It's not identical, and tactics and strategies are interchangeable to some people. Relax. You don't have to hop on every person who posts.
My post doesn't sound offensive even after a second read :? Good thing you added 'to some people'... to some people cake and pie are interchangeable, though if you cared enough you'd learn the difference, and the same goes for tactics and strategy I think Neon or mc2 made a lengthy post about the differences some time ago.
True, but my main point is about Starcraft 2, and not Starcraft 1. I also didn't want to create a wall of text that is pointless to this thread. Yes, but that is irrelevant to this topic, which is on SC2 ( It said it was SC2, but after the 2nd reply, it kinda drifted off course). Also, that topic was about a single strategy (BTW thanks for telling me about the strategy word), and I separated each race's options into 2 main paths.
So you want different strats? I'll give you one for the Zerg, turtle an then mass broodlords with a few curruptors and mutas. Go Zerg!!! And if you get enough brood lords it would be raining lings!!! LOL.
I accept with information:in SC2, the majority of the builds in official matches are : Zerg: zerg speed boost, plus roach 'n banelings Terran: mass bio + occasional Hellions Protoss: zealot + stalker + collosus
Here's mine: Abuse how Photon Charge gives a raw advantage to the Protoss and create Tempest to assault Zerg bases from afar. And some motherships/immortals at their position to help. And use High Templar's psi storm for quick defense. And 'Phase' cannons.
I think making Brood lord evolve from the mutaslisk will benefit the zerg race very well, because they could tech straight to a better air force and massing mutalisks will not be such a waste. Right now their air is really weak in the beginning, yet very powerful only in the last moments of the game. So, they could opt for air or ground armies. For Protoss, their stalkers and collosus are VERY flimsy against marduarers, and when the immortals finally come out, terrans have already massed up 20+ maudarers. I suggest increasing the effectiveness of immortals against them, like making their double shots count as one shot so that immortals can block most of the damage. Terrans? Nothing, really.
I'm looking forward to using inject larvae to do murdering tech switchs, bugging people with infestors using nidus worms do defend 3-4 bases supported by queens... More specifically, i'm interested on how inject larvae and roaches will change zerg early to mid game, and the strategy changes that t3 lurkers with siege range will mean. Ultras, lurkers and Brood lords look strong, but t2 seems a bit lackluster.
I'm interested in SP strategies. In some of SC1 (and BW) missions you could force gameplay to your hand by not playing a map the way it was intended to - and therefore finish the map in like 3 minutes without killing a single unit. I hope they've tried to make this harder to do. Edit: Concerning the OP: Isn't it normal that we've seen mostly the same builds? (I'm assuming that what we've seen is mostly Battle Reports) The BRs were chosen for their length and the use / or disuse of certain units. Therefore odds are on that we get to see the same units and tactics being used again and again. Simply because they don't want to show us anything else at this moment. I think you can only make a valid point on SC2 tactics and strategies once we've entered the beta.
Humph, but still I think that the brood lord should mutate from the mutas and the immortals should be more effective against the mardaurers, for reasons which I already stated. The worm seems like a really fun thing to try out though. Very useful as well.
Just use immortals vs marauders. Problem solved ^ The marauders high damge will be stemed because of the hardened shields. No need to change another unit if another one will sufice.
That doesn't really work. Marauders do 12 (x2 damage) vs armored units. Against immortals, they deal 10 (x2 damage). That's a reduction of only 1/6th. Marauders are designed to counter immortals. (IMO, they shouldn't do so. Use marines instead.)
I think for me SC2 like SC1 will need some planing as well as in game strategies. What I mean is you have to have a game plan before you start the game. And 3 plans, if your enemy race is random. But also you'd need to be flexable so you could operate a plan B and C etc if things got hairy in game. So for me SC 2 would be a lot of pre game planing and a lot of mid game strategising of tactics, continiously evaluationg what is working and what is not. That is for multiplayer. And I think single player would be more trial error I think. As all the SP missions would play out the same each time I would assume.
