|
On September 30 2010 10:28 Surrealz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2010 10:27 Sc1pio wrote:On September 30 2010 10:22 Surrealz wrote:On September 30 2010 10:21 Sc1pio wrote:
Before the final battle, you had every single one of your units in a ball, which literally asks a terran player to emp your entire army. If you used more effective spacing of your units, the EMPs would have been less effective, and your unit count advantage would have fully expressed itself. I literally typed that like 8 times. Nice reply, read the OP before you post next time I see it once in the OP, and only in passing between you blaming EMP, terran 1a, etc. for the loss. Moreover, to bring in a BW analogy, a lot of lower level terrans had trouble with protoss seeing as they needed very good tank placement, mine placement, etc. and all protoss had to do was move his army in when he thought he had an advantage. The moral of the story is, this hurdle is another obstacle you have to overcome in your play, and you'll improve more rapidly versus your opponent seeing as you can attribute something outside of balance to your loss (the spreading of your army, or at least I think you attribute some of this to it), and you'll grow as a player, whereas the terran will run into a wall when E-T-1a doesn't work anymore. Take this is a learning experience. This is quite true, but while I do like learning about these things, I also agree that the better player should win, and its frustrating playing against these allins on 1base. Mules are really, really annoying.
The game won't change based on the existence of this blog. You, however, can adapt and learn in spite of what you perceive as balance problems. If these problems do get fixed, you'll still have the skills you learn, while 1 base terrans everywhere will have to learn a new style to even compete at the same level.
To give full disclosure, I'm T, ~1100, but I hate 1basing seeing as I played BW and borrowed the majority of my terran style from what I learned playing that game.
|
On September 30 2010 10:29 Katkishka wrote:
Hey guys I can spam really hard and claim that I have massive APM and use that as a reason to complain/call imba when i lose!
Its part of the function. Its not the only reason I claimed he was bad, it was the culmination of his mistakes in relation to mine. Have fun on the ban list for being a total idiot and posting nonsense.
|
losing to a guy with 50 apm means you're flat out terrible, not that terran is "imba"
|
On September 30 2010 10:30 iamho wrote:
losing to a guy with 50 apm means you're flat out terrible, not that terran is "imba"
Nice post. Another useless reply. Thanks for reading the first paragraph and then stopping. I know, reading is hard for people like you. Ban.
User was warned for this post
|
I dont know what everyone else is trying to prove but even my little brother can press Stim, A move then emp random locations with a ridiculous 10 range. you also shouldnt bring up apm in sc2 it means so little.
|
On September 30 2010 10:32 Entertaining wrote:
I dont know what everyone else is trying to prove but even my little brother can press Stim, A move then emp random locations with a ridiculous 10 range. you also shouldnt bring up apm in sc2 it means so little.
APM is still a valid statistic when you are doubling your opponent's APM. Also, 40 is just way too low to do anything but macro inside of your little 1base fortress as terran
And yea I agree, terran micro is just obnoxiously easy. I really dislike how easy it is to maneuver.
|
I didn't read your post beyond a certain point, but i just want to badger you. Don't throw up a rage thread and berate everyone that finds your blog immature or awful. Besides, pvt is considered relatively balanced. I don't like your attitude, and i'm only replying because i made the mistake of coming to this blog and because i thought it was about the rage that i get from players just like you, simply because of the race i play.
|
On September 30 2010 10:29 Surrealz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 30 2010 10:27 Dfgj wrote:On September 30 2010 10:21 Surrealz wrote:On September 30 2010 10:17 DaBears57 wrote:On September 30 2010 10:12 Surrealz wrote:On September 30 2010 10:10 whitelynx wrote:
You did not play better if you lost.
Get that in your brain. Useless post, thanks. If the game was perfectly balanced this logic would hold, but it doesn't. Stay away from my blog. Thanks So its the game's fault you lost? Yes. Because EMP>Storm, and MM > Chargelots/Stalkers/Sentries, by a large margin. That is stupid. Thanks, another ban It's a lot harder to emp every ht in a P ball (and you should be massing the suckers as much as possible) than it is to drop an emp in the middle, the side, or the general vicinity of a bioball. You can very easily pre-target FBs when engaging (you saw where his army was, yes?), so T has to be absolutely precise with that 1 range or lose all his ghosts. I don't think emp breaks storm, what it does it let T not get 1at'd by P (which, ironically, is exactly what you complained about him doing in the earlygame). I had 1 templar dude. Like I said, if he attacked like a minute later I would have won because of the 6+ templars I would have had. Unfortunatly protoss tier3 takes a year to make, meanwhile terran tier1/tier2 gives tier3 a run for its money. Stupid mechanic, stupid matchup. Ghosts are a lame unit.
1 templar doesn't really constitute t3, because stim will dodge the single storm. Essentially, you spent 400/550 to be able to cast one storm, and didn't manage to get it off. Pardon the obvious, but that's bad. If you had more hts on the way, then you chose an awful time to engage. If you didn't choose the engagement timing (sorry I can't watch the rep at work, I'll get back to you on it), then T had the timing to break you when you didn't have your tech running.
Ghosts are excellent units (sadly, most Ts on the ladder either don't use them or use them badly), but you can't really complain about ghost vs ht - you can reinforce hts with storm much faster than he can reinforce ghosts, and when he cut medivacs to push you early, this matters a huge amount. Furthermore, emp'd hts are not useless vT (archons are amazing), while a feedback'd ghost is down for good.
This is glossing over the entire fact that you scouted 1 base bio/ghost and went HTs, which are not only slower to come out than colossi, but at huge risk in small numbers from ghosts.
EDIT: Don't get me wrong, I agree that T 1base is a little too good. But even in BW if you expanded, rushed tech and then got 1 ht out you'd get roflstomped by something like 3fac by T. Either you mass units, or get the tech out in time to make a difference, you got caught in the middle.
|
You're confusing balance with difficulty. Just because a race can be more difficult to play doesn't mean its imbalanced. Also, the difference between someone with 50 and 100 apm is not really significant since both are enough to play sufficiently but not high enough to multitask extremely well. Furthermore, its commonly acknowledged that protoss lategame is stronger than terran lategame.
|
Man I seriously hate to be harsh but in the actual combat your CURRENT apm were pretty much even (120-160 x 120-160) and in the very-end his was a little higher, u can even say ur better macroer, but if your point of view is apm alone, you have to read current and not average, since his was pretty much at 20 in the begining ....
|
On September 30 2010 10:34 [Agony]x90 wrote:
I didn't read your post beyond a certain point, but i just want to badger you. Don't throw up a rage thread and berate everyone that finds your blog immature or awful. Besides, pvt is considered relatively balanced. I don't like your attitude, and i'm only replying because i made the mistake of coming to this blog and because i thought it was about the rage that i get from players just like you, simply because of the race i play.
This. You make a thread, which invites people to comment on you, and then when they do you berate them, tell them they're an idiot and are going to get banned, when they definitely aren't trolling.
First, a couple of points wrong with your posts:
1.APM =/= skill. don't have the replay(reinstalling as of now) but differences can easily be attributed to spamming constantly, or him just having good "mental checklist." Remember day9's story of his friend constantly defeating korean pros whilst only having like 75 apm or so?
2. Average of 5 extra food? That's not much man. Micro will make the difference in those battles. It's like even if I, as zerg, have superior ling number and food supply, early reapers will still pwn me with sufficient micro, or lack of thereof from me.
3.It seems to me he was going for an (almost) all in, correct? You had expanded, and he was running low on minerals now, no? He had made no scvs after the first fight, and if you had known this(could have realized that he had no more scvs building or command center), just started to defend.
4.The tier three you chose (HT's) are incrediably micro dependant and if you know he has ghosts(which you had an observer) you SHOULD'VE spread out those forces. You admitted so as well. Basically, when he EMPED your HT's, you have no tier three units(as ht's are now useless.) Everyone knows how deadly infantry pushes, especially with ghost, are against toss. You NEED to have good micro.
Overall, it WAS the final push that killed you. But keep in mind that was an all in, and while contemplating this should remember this key fact:
1.If you were doing an attack and lost, you still could've won(expansion)
2. If he was doing an attack and lost, he lost.
|
A food count differential of 17 at that phase of the game is not something huge. You're saying all these things as if they are something monumental when they really aren't. And lashing out at other posters when they post criticisms that are rather valid and obvious to some extent? You're just a sore loser.
|
Bear with me here. First, you didn't say "u2" when he GL HF you.
I took a bunch of notes while looking at your replay, so I'll just post them here:
early twilight council (8:45) idle
1st battle 10:08
terran: 13 marauders 6 marines = 32 pop (+1 weapons)
protoss: 7 zealot 1 immortal 3 stalkers 7 sentries = 38 pop
end of battle 10:50
terran: 1 marauder 1 marine 2 ghosts: 7 pop
protoss: 2 immortal 1 zealot 1 stalker 4 sentries = 20 pop
2nd battle 14:32
terran: 12 marauder 18 marine 3 ghosts: 48 pop (+1 weapons/+1 armor)
protoss: 15 zealot 2 immortal 3 stalker 5 sentries 1 high templar: 56 pop
end of battle 14:51
terran: 6 marauder 11 marine 2 ghosts: 37 pop
protoss: 0
if you built robo bay at 10:50 (600 min 260 gas at the time) you could have had colossus out around 13:00, even earlier with chrono boost
at 12:00, still 4 gate versus his 5 rax. you knew he was 1 base all-in. (1/1 ugprades to your 0/0)
terran macro > protoss macro. from end of first battle to start of second battle, your army grew 36 pop, terran army grew 41 pop. this is the direct result of terran beating you with 5 rax over your 4 gate.
around 12:40, after your nat was saturated, your income is constantly around 400 more than terran
around 12:50, chrono boosted eco even when you saw his mm+ghost ball with your obs. STILL 4 GATE
around 13:20, your income is DOUBLED terran. STILL 4 GATE (3 gates on CD and almost 500 minerals)
during battle 2, you chose to fight him head on, even though you had the advantage of being able to surround. talking about your two ramps between the nat. facing head on is bad news. wide open spaces = bad.
ur main army go up right ramp, produced units come down base ramp.
you knew his minerals was exhausting. this was last ditch effort. should've played it safe and held off on facing his army until you produced more.
|
one should remember that even in BW, a P needed to be one base ahead and have about 25+ food count advantage to be on even terms with Terran
|
But I have 140 apm as Terran and still lose sometimes to my 70-80apm Protoss friend (1100-1200 Diamond).
Top Euro protoss players: Socke has 110 apm and is better than Naniwa who has 220 apm. So....
|
United States11637 Posts
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
