I blame the Spawn Larva macro mechanic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamshank
It encourages massing and discourages teching.
It's programming the zerg player psychology to think that
if you can't mass a unit, it's not worth producing.
Printable View
I blame the Spawn Larva macro mechanic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamshank
It encourages massing and discourages teching.
It's programming the zerg player psychology to think that
if you can't mass a unit, it's not worth producing.
How exacly are they strong againts vikings???? BC's are the LEAST effective and seen unit in sc2...my strongest evedince is that in all the replays in youtube,every unit in the poll has been a turning tide except the bc's...And who the hell voted Mothership??? You all need a single of them to win the battle,not 5000 minerals and 4000 gas and 25 minutes to get the 'critical mass' of BC's and try to win ,hope that the enemy doesnt have mass vikings/corruptors/rays, but by the time you get the BC's he always DOES...Quote:
Originally Posted by newcomplex
If you'd read the thread, you'd know that I voted for the MS (and why).
Thor for sure. Slow attack, movement, turn time, build time, its just worthless to build him.
fairly fast attack,normal movement,build time as a collosus-75,good vs air,500 dmg to a structure over 6 seconds...yeah very worthless...Quote:
Originally Posted by SlickR
The Thor dies way too quickly and of course there's no way to micro this thing. I'll use it sometimes in TvT though to break a mass siege tanks but then again going bc would a better choice.
On the other hand, the carrier + MS are the most useful.