|
On May 30 2010 16:32 Floophead_III wrote:
I don't know why this thread is even open... TvP is one of the most balanced matchups right now, and is incredibly exciting, dynamic, and enjoyable to watch and play. Protoss definitely has the macro advantage and very strong units/mobility. Terran has great synergy and defensive power with tanks/EMP/PF. It's not terribly different from BW, but there's more options for playstyle (bio/biomech/ghostmech/skymech).
Protoss can make use of every branch of the tech tree, even carriers/mothership. This is my worst matchup and I've always found TvP difficult, but with the tank fix and immortal build time nerf I think it reached a state of balance.
In short: quitcherbitchin.
I agree with you saying it's balanced. I personally think everyone whining is doing just that. whining.
However, I cannot agree with you saying every branch can be used. Carriers and mothership just suck way too much to be usable. They are both ridiculously expensive. The mothership is a slow, fat arbiter that simply just sucks because it is too vulnerable to EMP and vikings and is pretty much a giant waste of resources.
I've used carriers like...once in an actual 1v1 ladder game. It was void ray into carrier and it was pretty decent awesome. However, it only worked because the Terran was going very marauder heavy and skimped on the marines and didn't start pumping vikings until it was too late. Carriers simply get neutralized way too easily. If Vikings don't kill them fast enough, stimmed marines can easily destroy your interceptors faster than you can rebuild them. It's a shown fact that dps is increased in SC2. AI has also improved. Marines can effectively almost focus fire individual interceptors by default due to the AI and wipe out your interceptors ridiculously fast. Carriers are not very viable unless you get lucky.
@Silverforce: To counter a very early marauder push you have to scout it and pump enough immortals or have good force field micro. Without that you will die.
@Fatlip: I watched the replay and I play Protoss and was consistently at the highest ladder level (plat pre-patch 13 and diamond now). PvT is harder for P. Almost no doubt about it. But that does not mean imbalance. Look at BW. In the D-C (iccup) range of BW PvT, that matchup was significantly harder for T than it was for P. Yet there was no real imba issues with it (although there is a lot of whining about it). D-C range of iccup is easily top tier diamond level play (just fyi if you never played iccup). The fact of the matter is, below the progamer level, certain matchups will always be harder for particular races due to the amount of micro/macro/mechanics required to play that matchup. This does not, however, suggest imbalance in any way shape or form.
|
I agree with you saying it's balanced. I personally think everyone whining is doing just that. whining.
However, I cannot agree with you saying every branch can be used. Carriers and mothership just suck way too much to be usable. They are both ridiculously expensive. The mothership is a slow, fat arbiter that simply just sucks because it is too vulnerable to EMP and vikings and is pretty much a giant waste of resources.
@Fatlip: I watched the replay and I play Protoss and was consistently at the highest ladder level (plat pre-patch 13 and diamond now). PvT is harder for P. Almost no doubt about it. But that does not mean imbalance. Look at BW. In the D-C (iccup) range of BW PvT, that matchup was significantly harder for T than it was for P. Yet there was no real imba issues with it (although there is a lot of whining about it). D-C range of iccup is easily top tier diamond level play (just fyi if you never played iccup). The fact of the matter is, below the progamer level, certain matchups will always be harder for particular races due to the amount of micro/macro/mechanics required to play that matchup. This does not, however, suggest imbalance in any way shape or form
This is true, but your leaving out the huge factor between BW and sc2. Protoss air. High end PvT's (at least when i played competitivly) Was usualy Goon/reaver drop P, Turtle slowpush/expand T. P had to hold his own, limit the expansions from T (Mech didnt have a mineral dump other than vultures, because goons straight owned rines). sc2=marine mineral dump) The P HAD to get the resources and limit T's gas, so he could arb recall/statis Or go carriers for the win. Sc2, there is no arb.(mothership is so bad) and carriers arnt nearly as viable, even moreso with the marines being the new mineral dump. That truley does say "hey, its PvT from BW...now your Goons suck, and his teir 1.5 will rape close to all ground...oh yeah your Air sucks too. LoL.) I know im nerd raging, at 3 in the morn. But i truely beleive its justified.
|
On May 30 2010 16:37 Ryuu314 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2010 16:32 Floophead_III wrote:
I don't know why this thread is even open... TvP is one of the most balanced matchups right now, and is incredibly exciting, dynamic, and enjoyable to watch and play. Protoss definitely has the macro advantage and very strong units/mobility. Terran has great synergy and defensive power with tanks/EMP/PF. It's not terribly different from BW, but there's more options for playstyle (bio/biomech/ghostmech/skymech).
Protoss can make use of every branch of the tech tree, even carriers/mothership. This is my worst matchup and I've always found TvP difficult, but with the tank fix and immortal build time nerf I think it reached a state of balance.
In short: quitcherbitchin. I agree with you saying it's balanced. I personally think everyone whining is doing just that. whining. However, I cannot agree with you saying every branch can be used. Carriers and mothership just suck way too much to be usable. They are both ridiculously expensive. The mothership is a slow, fat arbiter that simply just sucks because it is too vulnerable to EMP and vikings and is pretty much a giant waste of resources.
Carriers are a good unit to make when fighting ghostmech. I have not seen them used vs bio armies, but if it's like BW then interceptors will die to marines quickly. Motherships have their uses. People don't play lategame very often on US server but motherships do serve a great defensive role (recall army back after attacking to deal with a counterattack), or as a means to split up an army in an engagement (also pretty much required vs ghostmech since 200/200 ghostmech is unbeatable on the ground). We'll see motherships used a lot in the future, trust me on it.
|
If a PvT MU is harder for the P, doesn't that mean there's an inherent imbalance?
Similar to statements like, "P can win, but only if they play much better". If one player has to be a lot better than the other to win, it clearly shows an imbalance with the MU.
As for early Marauder push, you scout T, he has a barrack with tech lab going down and a refinery. You kinda assume a reaper rush so u get a stalker. After this early period, there's no more scouting option for awhile as the T is walled off. Plus, that first 2 marauders gets to your base b4 the robo is even finished building. You either a stalker out, and was getting your cybernetics or a stalker and a zealot. 1 stalker die horribly to 1 marauder. The zealot has no chance with conc shell research while the marau was heading to your base. It's just so tough, as it happens when as P, you kinda have your pants down not knowing what to expect since u can't scout it and happens too early for any counter options. I like the sentry FF ramp idea to hold them off tho.
|
On May 30 2010 17:11 SilverforceX wrote:
If a PvT MU is harder for the P, doesn't that mean there's an inherent imbalance?
Similar to statements like, "P can win, but only if they play much better". If one player has to be a lot better than the other to win, it clearly shows an imbalance with the MU.
As for early Marauder push, you scout T, he has a barrack with tech lab going down and a refinery. You kinda assume a reaper rush so u get a stalker. After this early period, there's no more scouting option for awhile as the T is walled off. Plus, that first 2 marauders gets to your base b4 the robo is even finished building. You either a stalker out, and was getting your cybernetics or a stalker and a zealot. 1 stalker die horribly to 1 marauder. The zealot has no chance with conc shell research while the marau was heading to your base. It's just so tough, as it happens when as P, you kinda have your pants down not knowing what to expect since u can't scout it and happens too early for any counter options. I like the sentry FF ramp idea to hold them off tho.
You're an idiot. 1 stalker will beat 1 marauder since you have ramp advantage and can get at least 1 free hit.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
Actually i JUST tested that on unit tester map. With stalker on top of ramp and getting in 1 shot first.
Guess what happened? Stalker kills marauder, but not b4 marauder shoots his shell and both unit KO each other. I did it 5 times, all 5 times, double KO.
With no ramp advantage, Marauder wins everytime.
If they early rush with 1 marauder, you got 1 stalker out. But their 2nd marauder is on its way quicker than your 2nd stalker finishes and further reinforcement. 
|
On May 30 2010 17:13 Floophead_III wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2010 17:11 SilverforceX wrote:
If a PvT MU is harder for the P, doesn't that mean there's an inherent imbalance?
Similar to statements like, "P can win, but only if they play much better". If one player has to be a lot better than the other to win, it clearly shows an imbalance with the MU.
As for early Marauder push, you scout T, he has a barrack with tech lab going down and a refinery. You kinda assume a reaper rush so u get a stalker. After this early period, there's no more scouting option for awhile as the T is walled off. Plus, that first 2 marauders gets to your base b4 the robo is even finished building. You either a stalker out, and was getting your cybernetics or a stalker and a zealot. 1 stalker die horribly to 1 marauder. The zealot has no chance with conc shell research while the marau was heading to your base. It's just so tough, as it happens when as P, you kinda have your pants down not knowing what to expect since u can't scout it and happens too early for any counter options. I like the sentry FF ramp idea to hold them off tho. You're an idiot. 1 stalker will beat 1 marauder since you have ramp advantage and can get at least 1 free hit.
Silverforce is right unfortunately, 1 stalker v. 1 marauder will result in either both units dying (or so close to death one more shot will finish them) or marauder will win. Concussive shells are really strong and I still think they should revert to the first nerf...but that's besides the point of this thread.
Doesn't ghostmech include a lot of marines as your mineral dump though? I can't think of any current Terran build besides some sort of marauder early game all-in that doesn't include a large enough number of marines to destroy interceptors. I know there are variants where hellions with pre-igniter is used as the mineral dump instead, but I find that heavy marine variants are more common. Against those, carriers are pretty useless.Also, because of the MULE, Terran will have so many minerals it's not ridiculous to say that Terran can produce both hellions and marines as their mineral dump. Regarding the mothership, I still think it sucks because as a defensive unit it's just ridiculously expensive. I would rather just build another expo and have spare 400 gas. Admittedly I have not used/seen mothership play much (if at all) so I'll give it a (very very very small) benefit of doubt.
@Fatlip: I agree that Protoss air, which played a HUGE role in BW PvT has been enormously gimped. However, goons were never that strong against marines in BW, it was the fact that storm and reavers raped marines almost instantaneously, coupled with the fact that vultures were amazingly strong against zealots and had 3 mini-nukes resulted in vultures being the mineral sink. Marines are much more powerful now with the extra default 5 hp and the extra 10 on top of that with the upgrade. However, storm is also much easier to use and colossi shred marines pretty well also. It's a tough matchup, that's to be sure, but I would not go so far to say it's imba.
|
On May 27 2010 23:19 Inori wrote:
I somewhat agree with topic starter and I also think that these replay requests are useless, because you can always find a flaw in players game and say "see, that's why you lost, terrans are okay!!" unless said player is like top pro level, which he's not. Problem is, terrans also do these mistakes and still come out with easy wins, but everybody will skip that little fact.
It's funny how my stats are like 65-70% vs Prot and Zerg and 20% vs Terran. Must be terran skills yo.
And yes I've played Terran a lot of times in 2v2 and 1v1 customs (both against diamond level players), I own my main race with said strats even without knowing BOs well.
uh hurrr durrr ok.
i have the exact opposite stats, doesn't mean shit.
|
It seems to me that it's very possible for protoss to beat terran at higher levels, but protoss has to outplay terran by a much higher margin than terran has to outplay protoss - there is much less room for error.
|
well something i find pretty annoying is the terran trying to argue that the game is balanced by just saying that there are no terrans winning major tournaments.
for the fact i´d like to recommend an interview with idra which could provide a fairly simple answer to that topic. just google, i think it was on fraggster.
to put it short, he just said, that there just aren´t any good terran players, just like in bw.
where terran was just not popular outside of korea.
the players kept their respective races, protoss and zerg, throughout the change from bw to sc2. thus only a few good terran players are playing sc2.
and btw. bratok owned hasu fairly easy. and tlo´s terran vs nony was just beyond good.
i dont take any responsibility for this statement cause it´s not my opinion for I´m not a scene-junkie like most of you might be.
but it´s still to consider.
another fact is, that most high-level terrans won´t play neither 1/1/1 nor tanks.
and the problem right now really is that the protoss can win, but only with the terran just playing total one-dimensional.
if terrans start using their medivacs. no protoss nexus will be safe anymore cause you need 10times more defense than vs. the goodold vulture drop.
i mean just a raven can stop photon canons and stalkers from shooting, thus defending your nexus will be a huge task itself.
|
On May 30 2010 19:19 gdroxor wrote:
It seems to me that it's very possible for protoss to beat terran at higher levels, but protoss has to outplay terran by a much higher margin than terran has to outplay protoss - there is much less room for error.
If the terran goes mech, and the protoss catches him unsieged, then the game will be over. One little error and terran is dead.
Is bio really that strong people? I switched to mech because bio was so weak in my opinion.. Storms, collossae and mass forcefields just destroy bio. If terran goes bio and the protoss does a nice voidray rush, then he will be dead if he doesn't go gretorps' ghostbuild. A medivac drop can be prevented if you use observers.
|
Depends if P army was full of stalkers or not. If its stalker heavy, siege tanks non siege does stupid high dps and will easily clean house vs stalkers.
|
Note: this is not a personal attack, just something i noticed, which is that even terrans which start by stating that the matchup is balanced, end up saying something that implies that it is infact imbalanced.
On May 30 2010 14:33 Ryuu314 wrote:
Personally, I feel that there is no imbalance, but apparently a lot of people do and they are discussing it.
On May 30 2010 16:37 Ryuu314 wrote:
PvT is harder for P. Almost no doubt about it. But that does not mean imbalance.
(Wasn't it also harder for zerg and terran before the patches?)
On May 30 2010 14:50 aznhockeyboy16 wrote:
I'm not saying the game is completely balanced,
[...]
Just take a note from the top players, there is no such thing as imbalance. And if there is, it will be fixed.
And regarding how blizzard balances, because someone was saying blizz only looked to statistics, there was a blizzard worker that posted on battle.net saying that it's not true they only look at statistics, and that all the developers play, some on semi-pro levels, that they're in contact with many pro players and read forums and fansites. So it's not only statistics, which is good, because they have limited use.
|
wow i never heard such a ridiculous statement.
as if blizzard would favor a race on purpose -.-
|
On May 30 2010 21:32 ensis wrote:
wow i never heard such a ridiculous statement.
as if blizzard would favor a race on purpose -.-
You obviously never heard of the ghostcrawler plays warrior argument from wow I had hoped it would stay in the wow-community
|
On May 30 2010 17:13 Floophead_III wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2010 17:11 SilverforceX wrote:
If a PvT MU is harder for the P, doesn't that mean there's an inherent imbalance?
Similar to statements like, "P can win, but only if they play much better". If one player has to be a lot better than the other to win, it clearly shows an imbalance with the MU.
As for early Marauder push, you scout T, he has a barrack with tech lab going down and a refinery. You kinda assume a reaper rush so u get a stalker. After this early period, there's no more scouting option for awhile as the T is walled off. Plus, that first 2 marauders gets to your base b4 the robo is even finished building. You either a stalker out, and was getting your cybernetics or a stalker and a zealot. 1 stalker die horribly to 1 marauder. The zealot has no chance with conc shell research while the marau was heading to your base. It's just so tough, as it happens when as P, you kinda have your pants down not knowing what to expect since u can't scout it and happens too early for any counter options. I like the sentry FF ramp idea to hold them off tho. You're an idiot. 1 stalker will beat 1 marauder since you have ramp advantage and can get at least 1 free hit.
don't call people idiots for being wrong about something like that, particularly when you're inclined to be just as wrong. it makes you seem like, well.... an idiot
|
On May 30 2010 21:32 ensis wrote:
wow i never heard such a ridiculous statement.
as if blizzard would favor a race on purpose -.-
What statement?
Personally, I think that marauder rushing is the scariest thing a terran can do to me. Having concussive shells almost by default with those close to non existant research time and costs, it makes the defense really really tough. The problem is that you dont really have a good answer to it as protoss. Zealots do not work at all obviously, sentries aren't useful either because they don't get time to charge energy. Therefore, even if you have two gateways up, the most powerful defense is ... probes.
Other than that I've been pretty successful with NonY's 2gate 1 stargate build. It gives you an early scout to be prepared and containes your opponent long enough for you to get your natural going. From this point on you can react to every army composition and just outproduce your enemy.
Also I think that robo tech is really not woth it in PvT. The colossus is easily countered with vikings or tanks and the immortal is a bad unit all together.
So, the best army composition for the protoss is a big army of gateway units supported by air and templar later on.
And if the terran decides to turtle hardcore, then you have to crap on efficiency and just get a lot of stuff.
|
From the most recent PvT pro level replays:
almost every terran go marauders early with at least 2 rax. Protoss unit of choice in this situation -> probes, zealot, and sentry.
Stalkers are so bad vs. marauders, so they aren't used. Zealots can take a beating from those marauders, it takes a lot of micro and luck but if you can use force field to get a couple of hits off you can survive.
But this leaves me with a dilemma.. I want to know whether to zealot/sentry or get a stalker first to kill scout (also in case of reapers)
Any thoughts? Thanks all. I am platinum so i need all the advice i can get.
|
On May 31 2010 00:36 wxwx wrote:
From the most recent PvT pro level replays:
almost every terran go marauders early with at least 2 rax. Protoss unit of choice in this situation -> probes, zealot, and sentry.
Stalkers are so bad vs. marauders, so they aren't used. Zealots can take a beating from those marauders, it takes a lot of micro and luck but if you can use force field to get a couple of hits off you can survive.
But this leaves me with a dilemma.. I want to know whether to zealot/sentry or get a stalker first to kill scout (also in case of reapers)
Any thoughts? Thanks all. I am platinum so i need all the advice i can get.
Use a Sentry to kill the scout.
|
On May 30 2010 17:11 SilverforceX wrote:
If a PvT MU is harder for the P, doesn't that mean there's an inherent imbalance?
Similar to statements like, "P can win, but only if they play much better". If one player has to be a lot better than the other to win, it clearly shows an imbalance with the MU.
As for early Marauder push, you scout T, he has a barrack with tech lab going down and a refinery. You kinda assume a reaper rush so u get a stalker. After this early period, there's no more scouting option for awhile as the T is walled off. Plus, that first 2 marauders gets to your base b4 the robo is even finished building. You either a stalker out, and was getting your cybernetics or a stalker and a zealot. 1 stalker die horribly to 1 marauder. The zealot has no chance with conc shell research while the marau was heading to your base. It's just so tough, as it happens when as P, you kinda have your pants down not knowing what to expect since u can't scout it and happens too early for any counter options. I like the sentry FF ramp idea to hold them off tho.
For the love of God people, these imbalances WILL EXIST.
SUCK IT UP.
They were even present in BW and the game did perfectly fine. Try to eliminate this imbalance and you're crossing the line of homogenization of the races.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
