| Forum Index > Closed |
|
stevarius
United States1394 Posts
On May 04 2012 16:43 MrRicewife wrote: So basically Blizzard is saying l2p lol Blizzard is calling Terrans, who can't win, bad players. I just don't see why asymmetrical balance has to mean that Protoss has a late game advantage(which that post basically confirmed to an extent). I've always been under the assumption that every race has its different mechanics and unit roles, not strengths and weaknesses based on the duration of the game. | ||
|
Azzur
Australia6255 Posts
On May 04 2012 16:56 OutOfMyMind_pro wrote: Right. Sure I'm no pro but my judgement says that a Raven is better than 30 scans. Now since the pros prefer 30 scans over a Raven its clearly the better thing. Likewise everything else,you know? So, what I'm hearing is that OutofMyMind's judgement > pro's judgement. The irony! | ||
|
sc14s
United States5052 Posts
On May 04 2012 13:47 Treva wrote: Always nice for them to post about their stances on the game. However what I don't understand is why they are currently testing a small buff for Protoss that helps them scout a little quicker in the mid-game which in turn helps them react to potential aggression during a part of the game Terran has the upper hand but have not given Terran anything to help them in the late game where Protoss have the upper hand. I think its a fair change (its a pain in the ass to play toss vs T that hides scouting from you) but in return T i think needs some small changes to help them out aswell (in the late game obviously) I couldn't say for certain what would be good to do, perhaps reverting the upgrade costs on at the forge to make it harder to get that maxed out fully upgraded deathball seems like one possibility as well perhaps another idea that would work is ghost emp range buff since P aoe is a tad strong against T bio.. but atm thats all i can think of for balancing until hots comes out making mech much more viable and changing the meta. | ||
|
Jarree
Finland1004 Posts
On May 04 2012 17:08 Jimmeh wrote: ThorZain basically got it nerfed after killing MC and a few other Protoss with a really nice Thor timing push. Blizzard's official explanation was they "wanted to create an interesting dynamic by adding the possibility of feedback". Yes, never ever seeing another Thor certainly is an "interesting dynamic". | ||
|
sluggaslamoo
Australia4494 Posts
On May 04 2012 13:42 MattBarry wrote: You know, I'm no expert on BW. I played it for a decade casually with no knowledge of a pro-scene. But from what I've read, isn't there a ticking time bomb where Terran has to do damage before Hive in TvZ. What exactly is the difference? Nope, that's only if you do bio. Also with Zerg that's ok because you only need to trade armies to do "damage", because more army means less drones, and it stops Zerg from over-expanding, that's why T/P often opts for early game aggression. Currently Terran opts for 2 base 5 rax aggression and then follows up with spidermines get 3rd, transition to pure mech + valkyries get 4th and 5th base. Zerg then transitions to mass Hydras + Queens + Overlord Speed/Drop + Defilers, at that point its actually in favor of Terran but its still anyone's game. So as for a ticking time bomb, there's no such thing in any matchup. In BW all races can win at any stage of the game much easier than in SC2 where in some scenarios being the weaker race feels utterly hopeless, like lategame TvP. | ||
|
mell0w
United States102 Posts
On May 04 2012 17:11 Jarree wrote: Blizzard's official explanation was they "wanted to create an interesting dynamic by adding the possibility of feedback". Yes, never ever seeing another Thor certainly is an "interesting dynamic". They should really take another look at Thors then. Making them a T3 unit with no energy might be the answer the match-up is looking for. | ||
|
necrimanci
70 Posts
On May 04 2012 15:35 Shmantalope wrote: The problem is that this post is implying, as many Terrans have felt, that they MUST do damage midgame or the Protoss will have the advantage. Yet shouldn't all timing attacks and cheeses be defendable if the Protoss prepares properly? Otherwise the attack/cheese would be an uncounterable and imbalanced attack and Terrans would only do it. Thus, as Blizzard states in their other recent balance post update, "Call to Action: Balance Testing (live custom map)", "Protoss players at the pro level currently have all the tools they need to counter various early- to mid-game threats. However, in order to see them utilize the correct tools in various scenarios, we’re decreasing the build time of observers." Thus if Terran needs to do damage, but Protoss can defend it playing a standard, defensive macro style what is the Terran supposed to do? In TvZ there are plenty of macro styles, even though people are acting like its the same situation when its clearly not; hell, practically half the TvZ games at pro level are fast 3 CC builds that lead to sick back and forth macro games where the first push is generally near max. My problem is why can't TvP have back and forth macro game with both players making attacks and counter-attacks, with neither side being afraid to enter the lategame, instead of the Terran being forced into doing 1-2 base all-ins to kill or cripple the Protoss before they reach the lategame and basically 100% deciding the game on the outcome of this attack. Cheese/all-ins/timings should be to exploit weaknesses in your opponents play and punish them for playing too greedy, not your only option to enter the lategame on even footing. P can defend whatever they want with sentries (lol tier 1.5 stasis) + zealots at the entrance and few stalkers in the back, so how about we leave the game as it is, and change the shitty, turtly maps instead? Perhaps for something that makes drops or cliffwalking or sieging up expansion easier? Or leave space at the back of the base for drops? Nah, lets demand a change in the game itself to fuck things up :3 also, i know you're trying analogy through comparison, but zerg operates in a different way, so lets not bring up tvz in here ;3 | ||
|
goldenwitch
United States338 Posts
On May 04 2012 17:07 chestnutcc wrote: Yesssss... coming from a much better source than me, I heavily support this. Could you elaborate on your style? I open 1 rax fe and follow it up with either a combat shields timing, a stim timing, or a +1 timing depending on what the toss is doing. None of these timings are all in by any means, and I more or less cautiously poke the toss to make sure they make sentries and not collossi. While I'm doing this, I'm flying up to medivacs. Once I have 2 medivacs I throw a scan at my toss opponent. If they already have 2 collossi, I drop a second port. If they are just heading towards collossi, I switch to viking production and move out on the map to make sure they can't take a third AND ensure that my drops have a shorter flight distance. If they are going twilight tech, I move out and poke them constantly. The terran players I talk to seem to have the most trouble with the last one. That's unfortunate as I feel that's the weakest way for toss to play on most maps. If toss moves out with just templar, you can kill them with just micro. MKP consistently does this. As I'm moving out, I start my third CC in the base. The whole goal of these shenanigans is to make sure that my toss opponent can't drop their nexus at the third. The longer I can delay that nexus from going down, the more of a lead I will have in the late game. Once I'm on 6 gas I transition into mass ghost. All of my gas at this point goes to ghosts, so ideally I've already dealt with collossi OR have a substantial amount of vikings floating around. I make up to 20 ghosts. Ghosts are better DPS than marines against upgraded zealots. As you have more income, particularly gas income, it becomes a reasonable proposition to replace your marines with ghosts. When you get into the late game from this position, everything has to be micro'd perfectly. One little slip-up and you will die. However, there is nothing more satisfying than seeing your toss opponent spend all their effort to get into the late game, just to get emp'd 20 times and die. | ||
|
architecture
United States643 Posts
I don't know what's wrong. | ||
|
Osteriet
Denmark149 Posts
On May 04 2012 17:11 Jarree wrote: Blizzard's official explanation was they "wanted to create an interesting dynamic by adding the possibility of feedback". Yes, never ever seeing another Thor certainly is an "interesting dynamic". haha! Yeah that sure is interesting. How dynamic. Just like the reaper nerf. That sure was a nice opener that just got tweaked a little tiny bit to be more balanced. Gave some nice micro and positioning battles between reapers and lings, but hell no, kill it with patches! | ||
|
pdd
Australia9933 Posts
On May 04 2012 17:11 sc14s wrote: I think its a fair change (its a pain in the ass to play toss vs T that hides scouting from you) but in return T i think needs some small changes to help them out aswell (in the late game obviously) I couldn't say for certain what would be good to do, perhaps reverting the upgrade costs on at the forge to make it harder to get that maxed out fully upgraded deathball seems like one possibility as well perhaps another idea that would work is ghost emp range buff since P aoe is a tad strong against T bio.. but atm thats all i can think of for balancing until hots comes out making mech much more viable and changing the meta. There are actually a lot of possibilities if you think about it. Blizzard introduced a WHOLE new upgrade to deal with mutalisks (and this was when Protosses had learnt to deal with it). They can make late game upgrades available at the Fusion Core to help make Terran stronger late game if they wanted to. The problem with Terran is buffing them too much messes up early game balance as well. Perhaps if they made a Ghost EMP range upgrade at the Fusion Core would really help them or adding an upgrade for Thors to deal splash damage. Directly just reverting the EMP upgrade would most likely make TvP too Terran favored in the midgame again, you have to specifically target a late game so that it can't be abused early game against both races (P and Z). Other possibilities could include buffing Ravens (cheaper cost, cheaper spells, more survivability) and Battlecruisers (cheaper cost, faster build time, faster movement speed, etc). This might help out late game TvZ as well (although not as necessary). The options are there and will definitely make the game more dynamic (where we get to see more diverse units). It's just that Blizzard have decided to confine those units to 4v4 games. | ||
|
Gijian
United States273 Posts
| ||
|
[Silverflame]
Germany640 Posts
| ||
|
Jimmeh
United Kingdom908 Posts
On May 04 2012 17:16 goldenwitch wrote: I open 1 rax fe and follow it up with either a combat shields timing, a stim timing, or a +1 timing depending on what the toss is doing. None of these timings are all in by any means, and I more or less cautiously poke the toss to make sure they make sentries and not collossi. *snip* You just described pretty much every TvP ever. Nothing really special. (Also, 867 points last season is not "high" master by any mark.) | ||
|
LF9
United States537 Posts
On May 04 2012 13:47 laharl23 wrote: You don't get the point do you? Terran is supposed to DO DAMAGE in the mid game for it to be equal, blizzard is basically saying if both races just sat there and maxed to 200/200 then yea protoss will have an advantage, so terran has to do mid-game pushes like drops/multiple attacks to get an advantage in the late game. Which is what every single terran does anyway so what they are saying is not really that ground-breaking. They are not saying that when it hits late game=protoss just wins, people are just reading it wrong. People are missing the most obvious fucking thing; Protoss has to turtle, or at least play defensively in one sense or another, until the beginning of lategame. If both players sat on one or two bases and maxed, yea, Protoss would have an advantage. It could also be said that if Zerg and Terran both sat on two bases, Terran has the advantage. Midgame strength is the most important of all, and i'd take some extra midgame power over endgame IN A HEARTBEAT. Why? Map control, obviously. He who is stronger in the midgame controls the map and thus has better economy and production in the lategame. If you're taking a 3rd and 4th while the other guy is on 2 bases teching, you SHOULD be sitting pretty by the time his tech is done and he wants to take a 3rd (or 4th). Deny it, and with superior production and economy, you are more equipped to replace lost units and thus more able to actually keep attacking and dropping to keep them curled up into a high tech 2 base fetal position. The matchup is fine, if you discount some of the issues with all ins Terran can throw at Protoss before the 30 supply mark. Terran is easily twice as mobile as Protoss, and has FAR more midgame power, able to dictate the flow of the game from the time Stim finishes, as well as both use aggression AND drops to keep Protoss playing defensively (which means they AREN'T taking another base) while Terran safely expands. VERY safely, in fact. Terran CCs don't get cancels forced like Nexus and Hatcheries do, because they float. Build them somewhere safe, morph orbital, use abilities until the coast is clear and land. It's such a big advantage that it ABSOLUTELY would warrant Protoss being flat out stronger in the lategame, which I don't really believe is the case at all. If Protoss makes it to the lategame, they absolutely need game changing units and abilities like storm to turn things back in their favor, because PvT is about staying alive and finally breaking out of the shell explosively and hope you can hit them hard enough that you can take another base before T is back to hit you again. If both P and T arrive at max supply, max tech, and VERY IMPORTANTLY equal bases at the same time, then the Terran player obviously did something very wrong. That's just how the game works. Deal with it. Zergs don't cry that they have to constantly be a base ahead of Protoss or Terran. Then again, they have infestor/broodlord, but that's another discussion. Either way, Terran has every bit the mobility of the Zerg and arguably MORE harass potential. All it takes is a decent, solid push and ONE moderately successful drop to apply enough pressure for Terran to get ahead of Protoss in map control, map presence, and in many cases, bases. tldr; Zerg doesn't cry about being put in the position of the being reacting, having to be constantly a base ahead of the other races. Likewise, Terran need to quit bitching about TvP, because they are more mobile AND can expand far more safely, meaning their role is to pressure and drop and use mobility and power to get map control and occupy P while expanding. Arguing equal base, equal supply scenarios is apples and oranges. | ||
|
Endrew
Poland73 Posts
| ||
|
aZealot
New Zealand5447 Posts
It's probably already negatively affected the game too much with all the whining (from every race) that has gone before. | ||
|
SC_Ghost
United Kingdom64 Posts
| ||
|
Pinstripes
17 Posts
| ||
|
Micket
United Kingdom2163 Posts
On May 04 2012 16:49 GhostOwl wrote: Yeah this. In Broodwar, Terrans had the strongest late game. If Protoss let Terrans get 3+ bases with fully upgraded army, Protoss army was fucked in a straight-up late game fight. Unless you pulled off some miracle storms and stasis Now that the roles are reversed, you guys can't handle it? It's not even as unfair as BW was, because Terran had incredibly strong late game in TvP BW, but they also had timing pushes mid-game as well, and cost-efficient harrassment options thru vultures.... If only Terran in sc2 had something like stasis or recall, or carriers. If sc2 Terran had recall, we would be kinda ok. But alas, Terran don't. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
Replay Cast
Road to EWC
Replay Cast
SC Evo League
Road to EWC
Afreeca Starleague
BeSt vs Soulkey
Road to EWC
Wardi Open
SOOP
NightMare vs Wayne
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
