Everything is in the title : Delete PF and give a static ground building to terran
We have one. It’s called bunker. Even with 4 CC and 3 PF we have a disproportionate advantage towards P/Z in the Mule/Scan/Static Defense. Just imagine the side-effects of your proposal.
We have the most powerful SD in the game combined with the legal maphack that is Scan and STowers that cover 50% of the map.
Much better than Zerg creep. It’s not decent to mention Protoss that has the worst of both races in map awareness and static defence (extremely expensive due to terran whine).
10 Likes
Goba the sneaky spy . . .
5 Likes
Why you use “we”, you are not terran bronze player. And no, bunker isnt a static defense.
2 Likes
bunker is also very space inefficient
requires to fill with units that are effective only when clumped up
bunker hp is nothing really with lots of arty options either.
marine, marauder are so-so in the bunker, +1 range while taking up 9 spaces is just too huge. Vs ground youre better off with more tanks than with bunkers.
PF gun, if made as a separate turret, would be nothing special. Its AoE would be nerfed immediately 
Or it would do friendly fire …
7 gun range is nothing special, gets outranged by anything. 2x2 size turret is much better than 3x3 bunker that on its own does nothing.
ghost lacks stimpack, so it is useless comparatively, lacks range vs BW.
if bunkers were resized to 2x2, it would be something, but in general the bunkers go down fast and also, you cant have supply sitting around in a bunker because you are not going on the offense then and not expanding. And since the resources run out so fast in this LoTV since some update, defending when you should attack because of almost exponential zerg growth … yea. Defense wont do with supply when your opponent is not forced into this.
1 Like
Bunkers are trash, even a sieged liberator on top of the base it’s more efficient and defends better, or a tank.
6 Likes
Its kinda obvious since tank or liberator is much more expensive.
Not that much more expensive, bunker cost 100 minerals, and the troops to fill it also have a cost, if you fill it with marines the total cost will be 500 minerals and other combinations also go up to the 300 minerals.Also you must add the cost of the worker while its under construction, its time spent building instead of mining.And a liberator cost150/150 with just 3 supply.
Bunker with 4 marines is 300 minerals, and even with 6 marines is 400. But if bunker is fully loaded it is really debatable if it is more or less effective than Tank or Liberator and often depends on the circumstances.
7 Likes
It’s time that we terrans show some spine and sense of responsability and not throw tantrums of entitlement. We have the best means of defense and the cheapest one too, considering what DPS/cost have our poor Protoss brothers in SD.
I want to illuminate our brothers too that a SensorTower is also an excellent mean of defense. A country called Italy that happens to be in Europe and resembles a boot in geographical terms has a saying: "Uomo avisato mezzo salvato"
Try in google translate, if you will ask gently i will translate for you…
5 Likes
“The best defence is a good offence” which i don’t know which everyday material looking alike country said it first.
No one ever won a war by hiding behind defences, the major counter to a good defence is siege. You are stuck in your own little space while your enemy freely expands and drains you from resources.
Terrans do have good defences but a) they are expensive b) requires supply to be kept at the base.
By all means they are not bad but is not like a huge advantage.
1 Like
Not always. Those last 3000 years the miltary strategy has evolved and that axiom: “The best defence is a good offence” does not necessarily holds for every scenario. There are countries that due to specific reasons depend in a extremely defensive posture alternated with counterattacks latter on.
In SC2 terms it translates with an extremely good defense (not overdoing the SD) causing very good trades and once the extra resources (due to good trades) allow the creation of a critical mass, pass on offensive.
SC2 has players that are defensive (Stats/Showtime) and agerssive like Parting/Dear.
There is a difference with being defensive and throwing your self to defences.
And as you said defence might follow with a counter attack.
SD shuts down skirmishes at best not a whole branch of someones forces.
1 Like
Totally agree with you. In SC2 the most difficult thing in SD is when to stop. They should be as powerful as to give some precious time to bring reiforcements. Common error in Low-Leagues is that they overdo it, typical error in Super high Leagues (M1-GM) is the arrogance of players that overvalue their micro and do not build defenses (or build defenses badly).
We have a lot of pros that in the late game have 2000-3000 minerals and lose 1000 minerals because they refuse to throw 300-400 mineral defenses.
1 Like
On that point tho, please keep in mind that the best “SD” in the game is your army after all.
Zerg do not usually bother to build static defences due to their extremely fast moving armies/no structure inferference/good map coverage witch leads to better reactions times.
Protoss on the other hand can warp units in or recall armies to bolster those defences. I don’t thing is due to terran whine but mostly to the fact that if you combine strong SD with instant army presence is kinda getting out of hand.
If terrans lose their strong “SD” they are left with nothing against backstabs/skirmishes.
Bio might be somewhat fast but good lack trying to move that behemoth of an army if you play mech. Even if you see it coming with towers from a mile away.
Deep down I do believe that how one is supposed to play terran is to beef up at the max with SD all expansions including bunkers and utilise heavy hitting units like thors/tanks/BC to run small skirmishes and make favourable trades until you run the enemy dry of resources, or something similar to that.
Might sound stupid but meh Im lowlie after all what do I know.
1 Like
Instead, we should be able to man stations (by marines) in the CC/OC giving said structure defensive capability.
Yea but you have bunkers…, they say.
Bunkers melt pretty fast. You know it, I know it, we all know it. Even devs know it because they designed that measly structure that way. In fact, the only value bunkers have is in dismantling them to reclaim minerals. That is it; cut and dry.
So I suggest as I said above, allow marines (4 or 6?) to enter the CC/OC to man the guns, so to speak, to give a more effective defensive mechanic; attacking both air and ground units, with an effective range of 8.
GLHF
1 Like
bunkers are unjustifiably big with negligible range increase, meaning that it is very easy for the attacker to stay out of range even if there is filled bunker wall.
Mengi coop bunker with 2x2 size, 6 places, + 2 range might sound like op, but what matters is the garrison.
otherwise give bunker some 7 + range weapon that does damage lol. Not 6 damage that doesnt get upgraded … or an upgrade you pay for. If its good, you could pay some minerals for it.
It s a really important subject
The main problem of TvZ is the difficulty for Terran to fight in different places on the map. A solution could be to make the cargo space upgrade free (maybe after building armory for example) and give to the mighty hellbat a longer flame shape when loaded - this could be very usefull to control ramps and strategic choke points. Actually if there s a runby of speed zerglings, they are free to run without damaging the bunker (with not so many loss).
The stimpack activation could be on autocast for casual gamers so.
This is simple, adress to Terran game style and really focus on the main problem on TvZ i.e, help terran to avoid zergs of spread their mucus too far (not too fast… but too far)
Also, for casual players, the PF could be changed to avoid multi PF…
It s necessary to improve bunker cause they are no compensation for banelings speed upgrade too (while marines gets stimpack).
LMAO, Terrans want to cannonrush now.
2 Likes
Bronze , bronze , bronze proposal.