TvP Lategame comment from Blizzard - Page 29

Kajarn

United States126 Posts

May 04 2012 16:11 GMT

#561

Oh this comment and thread makes me laugh as everyone jumps to the negative conclusion.

If Terran has the advantage in the Mid-Game to harass and be the aggressor because MMM is so amazing you have two options:

Use that advantage to all-in and win

OR

Use that advantage to get more bases cause your army is stronger at that point the the game!

Guess what, both of these things have already been done!

You can get a really fast 3rd CC as Terran and get away with it!
OR
You can choose a 2 base all-in!

CrtBalorda

Slovenia704 Posts

May 04 2012 16:12 GMT

#562

I hated what I read. I think each race should have equal chance of winning at all points in the game, cuz that makes the game way more interesting then for terrans to have to atack in mid game every time to win. And even though that blizz think T should get an advantage in the mid game for late game, the longer the game goes, the more irelivant that is.

God I hated that statement, though I think everyone, just needs to go bitch to blizzard about thair game design and they will at least try to fix it.

Jesus, this kind of balance just sucks.

keadlash

2 Posts

May 04 2012 16:13 GMT

#563

User was warned for this post

Dontkillme

Korea (South)806 Posts

May 04 2012 16:16 GMT

#564

Oh so Blizzard is saying that Terran should end the game at the mid game? So 1 base or 2 base all ins all game longs? WTF. If all Terrans continue to do this, toss will figure out a way to defend our advantageous 2 base or 1 base all ins.... really thoughtful Blizzard.

nOondn

564 Posts

May 04 2012 16:16 GMT

#565

On May 05 2012 01:00 casualman wrote:
I really don't see the problem with TvP lategame. It's not as if the balance is incredibly bad. Solid control with Bio will still overrun protoss deathballs, provided you maintain decent viking and ghost counts. It's just that the army requires a lot of babysitting.

Yes,We win the battle but we can't do any damage to the protoss afterward ,Becuase of Their warp in mechanic + chono + Zealot / Ht .Then it'll keep repeat this situation until Terran lose the game.

Sorkoas

549 Posts

May 04 2012 16:17 GMT

#566

On May 05 2012 01:13 keadlash wrote:
http://www.memecreator.com/static/images/memes/112532.jpg

Like most memes I don't really get this. But if people start complaining here about the strongest ground unit in the game I suggest they just go watch Squirtle's games in this GSL and then comment after.

Fencar

United States2694 Posts

May 04 2012 16:17 GMT

#567

On May 05 2012 01:13 keadlash wrote:
[image loading]

That's not acceptable on Teamliquid.net for future reference.

Fencar

United States2694 Posts

May 04 2012 16:19 GMT

#568

On May 05 2012 01:11 Kajarn wrote:
Oh this comment and thread makes me laugh as everyone jumps to the negative conclusion.

If Terran has the advantage in the Mid-Game to harass and be the aggressor because MMM is so amazing you have two options:

Use that advantage to all-in and win

OR

Use that advantage to get more bases cause your army is stronger at that point the the game!

Guess what, both of these things have already been done!

You can get a really fast 3rd CC as Terran and get away with it!
OR
You can choose a 2 base all-in!

So terran's options are:

1base all-in
2base all-in
3+ base macro game

I don't see anything wrong with these.

sieksdekciw

240 Posts

May 04 2012 16:21 GMT

#569

On May 05 2012 00:44 R3DT1D3 wrote:
In other words, Terran has to learn how to be super aggressive and win or get a large advantage before lategame. Meanwhile in Protoss-ville, all you have to do is defend properly. Yeah sounds pretty balanced. Let's just pretending pressuring and harassing without overdoing it and keeping up with upgrades is as easy for Terran as it is to sit in your base and use sentries/HT to deny pressure.

Also, lets keep pretending toss army requires as much control as the terran army and lets pretend that toss usually just a moved and sprinkles itty bitty storms everywhere. Totally as hard as plit stutter emp focus viking on collosus, repeat.

Kinda reminds me of american schools and their diversity programs. If you are terran (asian), everybody expects from you to be a friggin genius, and thus admission (win) is super hard, cause the university(blizz) has raised the bar so high (nerfed the race so much) that only godlike asians can enter (mvp and mkp).

Then we have the white male(zerg) that have it a lot easier than the asian dudes but still not as easy as the african boy(any toss) that can barely speak properly (can only a move) but the uni still accepts him.

How fair is this situation to the asians (terrans). You have to bust your ass (be active on the map), study hard (harrass wisely and effectively), know the shit out of calculus (micro like a god) and then you might still lose admission (lose a game) against the black kid that only vaguely grasps what a triangle is.

I dont think thats very fair.

QNdie

Poland210 Posts

May 04 2012 16:22 GMT

#570

I have to agree that TvP is annoying to watch, but from my experience it is really tense and fun to play. T has a clear advantage early game which forces P into a defensive position. I think multi-dropping and micro intensive battles in the midgame against a toss whose tech has not yet kicked in is really, really fun. It is very APM intensive however, which sort of is the only imbalance I can find. T needs tons of presence everywhere and good multi-tasking to pull apart a P opponent. P also needs to micro/forcefield/position well, but you can prepare and expect certain things so it is a little easier. Sometimes if a T gains an advantage because a drop kills ie. a Templar Archives or a Robotics Bay, P has it rough in the late game. I think the matchup overall is one of the most balanced atm, but has a completely different dynamic than other matchups. It's like a timebomb, if you let it go on too long, BOOM, you're dead.

zzfangel

Australia2 Posts

May 04 2012 16:22 GMT

#571

Blizzard should try to change some thing like this in PTR.
- Colossus do some(20-50%) splash damage on his own unit.
- Storm do 1.5-2x damage on his own unit.

It's doesn't effect much at pro level but it just slower reinforcement due to have to focus on micro.

Psychobabas

2531 Posts

May 04 2012 16:23 GMT

#572

On May 05 2012 01:19 Fencer710 wrote:

Show nested quote +

So terran's options are:

1base all-in
2base all-in
3+ base macro game

I don't see anything wrong with these.

Assuming both players of similar skill, if the Terran picks the 3+ base macro game, he will lose 9/10.

Thrombozyt

Germany1269 Posts

May 04 2012 16:24 GMT

#573

That was 3 months ago, then protoss learned to keep the templar back. Initially they were in the front because they wanted to have storms initiate the battle. Then they realized that it's OK to let colossus/gateway initiate and then when the colossi are gone, hover in with their HT and storm to win.

Psychobabas

2531 Posts

May 04 2012 16:28 GMT

#574

On May 05 2012 01:24 Thrombozyt wrote:

Show nested quote +

Also it used to be the case that Protoss always went colossus first then added ht. Now they do HT, become super defensive. Use feedback for drops, Terran cant attack due to storms. Then Protoss switches to Colossus that come out with 3/0/3 upgrades ready, vikings do fuck all against them, and if the Terran commited too much on Ghost production he gets roflstomped. It's basically that.

klops

United States674 Posts

May 04 2012 16:30 GMT

#575

On May 05 2012 01:19 Fencer710 wrote:

Show nested quote +

So terran's options are:

1base all-in
2base all-in
3+ base macro game

I don't see anything wrong with these.

option #3 is rarely an option.

Ccx55

Sweden62 Posts

May 04 2012 16:33 GMT

#576

On May 05 2012 00:34 mcc wrote:

Show nested quote +

On May 04 2012 23:35 Ccx55 wrote:

On May 04 2012 23:26 mcc wrote:

On May 04 2012 23:11 Ccx55 wrote:

On May 04 2012 22:29 mcc wrote:

On May 04 2012 22:22 Ccx55 wrote:

On May 04 2012 21:52 mcc wrote:

On May 04 2012 21:17 Ccx55 wrote:
Well, here we go again with another stupid opinion from Blizzard based off of nothing.
They're saying that they intentionally want the terran to concentrate on mid-game and protoss on late-game.

So what if the protoss wants to push mid-game? Or what if the terran wants to go mass expand? They can go f*ck themselves, then? Is that your opinion on the matter, Blizzard?

Sorry for my language, I'm just really frustrated about how Blizzard is steering this game. I say this as a Zerg player, too.

And your opinion is based on something ? And what if terrans want to build broodlords, stupid Blizzard preventing them from that ?

??? Sorry, did you just get off elementary school?
What you've just said is completely irrelevant.

I said that Blizzard intentionally gave terran the late-game disadvantage. How the hell is that, in ANY way, me asking for Blizzard to give terran brood lords? Your logic is completely flawed.

And my opinion is based on Blizzard's slow and incompetent problem-"solving".

Nice of you in your righteous anger to miss the point.

You said : "So what if the protoss wants to push mid-game? Or what if the terran wants to go mass expand?". This implies that you want nothing to constraint what the races can do and I took it to the absurd, but logical conclusion. The point is that there are things Blizzard decided that races should not be able to do, otherwise there is no point of having 3 races. The races should not just be different in the units they can build, but also how you are playing them in different phases of the game. They are also not saying that they gave terran lategame disadvantage. They said that if terrans do not play correctly in the midgame they will have disadvantage in the lategame. That is completely different from what you are attributing them.

Mass expand is a strategy. Brood lord is a unit. Your logic is so obviously flawed, it's difficult to see if you're being sarcastic. Are you suggesting that the only way to make protoss diversified from terran is to weaken them from early-mid pushes? Maybe for Blizzard, considering they don't seem to have any logic on the team at all.

Reduce the tank minimum range, remove the overkill of viking rockets, decrease the build time of reactors etc. would diversify and buff terran's late game.
Decrease warp gate cooldown, give cannons 7 range, decrease the research time of charge, increase sentry energy regenration etc. would diversify and buff protoss' mid game.
To make up for it, give the zerg bonuses like cheaper spine crawlers or faster roaches.

See? There are countless ways of fixing the problem. Not only the ones I suggested.
The worst possible thing in any strategy game is to limit the player's opportunities and strategies. Somewhat limited works, but not so drastically like TvP.

The first Supreme Commander is a prime example of a proper strategy game with fairly diverse factions.

So ? Not all strategies should be viable. 5 nexus before gate is not viable and I would say it is a good thing ?

This of course has nothing to do with your rant against the Blizzard statement. They were talking balance, you are talking general game design. Are you saying they should completely rework WoL in a minor patch before HoTS ? Because all your proposed changes seem like an easy fix only in your head.

Game design != balance
Balance = game design
Yes, I speak game design. I speak specifically about balance within game design. They are not separate, balance is only a sub-category.

And I'm not talking about specific strategies, as you should be well aware of. I get the feeling you're starting to desperately scramble for counter-arguments, seeing as how there aren't many left.
An "early game" strategy from protoss such as zealot rush or 4gate is definitely not viable vs a terran who wants to put pressure on.
A "mid game" strategy such as 3 gate robo or zealot-archon will not work either vs a 3rax or 2rax pressure. The only hope you have is for the terran to make mistakes.
A "late game" strategy such as 1-gate expand is much more viable, and the protoss cannot lose if the first attack is defended succesfully.

See, don't see the strategies as individual "5 nexus FE", but rather as mid, early or late strategies. One race should not have the advantage over any other race in this sense. A race does not have to gain advantage in order to be diverse. Blizzard should understand this. I'm not calling this an easy fix. I'm saying it was stupid of Blizzard to construct the game like this in the first place without much thought process behind it.

I know that balance is part of game design, but you are not talking balance. Balance (as used in this thread) is very specific issue of winrates. At the broadest it is an issue of winrates in different phases of the game. You are talking about diversity, this does not necessarily have anything to do with balancing the game and until you prove otherwise I see no reason to think it does.

So my two questions remain.

1) How is what you talking about in any way related to the Blizzard statement ? In your last sentence you even directly say that you actually have nothing to say to the statement in the OP, you are just in general venting your frustration with SC2 design.

2) Why is this statement of yours "One race should not have the advantage over any other race in this sense." true ? Other than you saying so and how is it related to balance ? It might, but I doubt you have any compelling arguments on the latter and only vague instinctive ones on the former.

You've gotten the idea of "balance" wrong. You say balance has only to do with winrates, which is completely false. Consider a scenario for once, where you pit 100 terrans vs 100 protoss. all protoss players opt for late-game play, and 50 terrans opt for 3rax or some other early pressure. If all the terrans with 3rax win, and all the others lose, the win rate will be exactly 50%. Does this mean the game is balanced? Absolutely not. It means protoss have no chance versus early pressure, and terrans have no chance versus late game protoss. See? Win rate percentage is only partly relevant to balance, it is not a representation of balance as a whole. Oh, and, don't put words into my mouth. I said Blizzard are stupid for constructing SC2 in such an imbalanced way in the first place, and that has everything to do with the first statement.

I love how you ask me a question, then directly afterwards you state "this might be true, but I doubt you can explain it well"(paraphrased). So you agree that I might be correct, but you believe I cannot explain it well enough? Then why are you arguing about a topic we both agree on?

And please don't tell me you believe certain races should have clear advantages over others. That's like giving Protoss an aimbot hack and terran a speed hack, in counter strike terms. If I want to play macro, I'm practically forced to either play defensive protoss or play a very agressive terran. If I want neither, I will be absolutely crushed by my opponent in most cases. How is this not unfair and limiting my playstyle?

Fencar

United States2694 Posts

May 04 2012 16:39 GMT

#577

On May 05 2012 01:23 Psychobabas wrote:

Show nested quote +

Assuming both players of similar skill, if the Terran picks the 3+ base macro game, he will lose 9/10.

...If he doesn't get more than just MMM.

NHL Fever

Canada104 Posts

May 04 2012 16:39 GMT

#578

That is possible if the p screws up fairly badly by running his templar into open field, not paying attention and walking collosus into vikings etc. But if equally skilled p and t play right now (diamond or higher), generally p wins. Just watch GSL these days to see plenty of evidence of this. T wins by using rushes or all-ins. Very rare to see them win if both players get to max army. For example watch recent games on entombed valey. I have recently several example of where terran will repeatedly kill fourth base (12/6 oclock base) and keep their own throughout, and lose. Supernova and Taeja just got owned in Bo3's without winning a single map, by playing relatively standard (exlucing that one thor build).

MVP vs naniwa went like this:
Game1: Naniwa goes for 3 colloses timing and accidentally rallies his stalkers directly into MVP's army and loses them. MVP then all-ins with everything, never takes third base and wins.
Game2: MVP does 3-rax all-in with a ton of scv's and wins.
Game3: Standard openings into 2 base clash (roughly equal supply armies) naniwa wins.
Game4:MVP does 2-rax proxy with bunker all-in and wins.

The May 3rd games were fairly standard apart from one fail thor build. No terran victories. In one game in fact they base traded and terran kept command center and all 5 rax, toss lost everything and had to remake nexus, and still won.

I'm not saying there are not a whole bunch of different factors, and obviously much more can be said about all those games than one-line summaries, but this is pattern and situation in PvT right now. General conclusion from the last month or so of watching and playing games is: All-in or at least early rush toss, or lose.

Solid game design manes the advantages come with army composition, reactions, upgrades etc. Minutes into the game should not factor in.

raf3776

United States1904 Posts

May 04 2012 16:41 GMT

#579

Isnt it just like how zerg and protoss arent that good early game while terran are?

United States2586 Posts

May 04 2012 16:42 GMT

#580

On May 05 2012 01:16 nOondn wrote:

Show nested quote +

Yes,We win the battle but we can't do any damage to the protoss afterward ,Becuase of Their warp in mechanic + chono + Zealot / Ht .Then it'll keep repeat this situation until Terran lose the game.

That's boldly assuming the Protoss is on an even economy to the Terran, or even ahead.

Prev 1 27 28 29 30 31 112 Next

Please or register to reply.

TvP Lategame comment from Blizzard - Page 29

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming