EPTTvP Lategame comment from Blizzard - Page 50
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
durr
United States148 Posts
| ||
|
mlspmatt
Canada404 Posts
On May 06 2012 03:33 n0btozz wrote: Just as upsetting as it is that they admit that Terran is stronger then Protoss in the first 20 minutes, or doesn't that count because you play Terran? Terran is very strong earlier on, all that Blizzard is saying, Terran has the advantage early on and not using that advantage is just bad play and allows Protoss to later on have an advantage. That is pretty much it. If you believe balance = winrate, and it's fine that one race has a big advantage early and another late, then that's fine. Good Job Blizzard. However, if you believe (like I do) that balance = each race has relatively equal chance to win the game regardless of timing, then what blizzard is doing = creating imbalanced MU's that suck for both the spectator and players alike. TvP is a terrible MU. Protoss either 2 base all in or turtle until they have the death ball and Terran is forced to take risks in the midgame that they'd rather not take because the MU is designed poorly. It's Blizzrds game, and they can do whatever they want. But for those of us who'd like to see SC2 some day be the game BW was, this is not going in that direction. | ||
|
Thrombozyt
Germany1269 Posts
On May 06 2012 03:33 n0btozz wrote: Just as upsetting as it is that they admit that Terran is stronger then Protoss in the first 20 minutes, or doesn't that count because you play Terran? Terran is very strong earlier on, all that Blizzard is saying, Terran has the advantage early on and not using that advantage is just bad play and allows Protoss to later on have an advantage. That is pretty much it. Yes, terran has the advantage in the period between the completion of stim and medivacs before significant splash comes out. With this advantage the terran can prance around the map enjoying his drugs. He can also hope, that the protoss makes a severe mistake (like sleeping while you stim up the ramp OR not having any kind of defense in his main to combat drops). If the protoss does not make a mistake that you can exploit, then you have to go into the late game and pray for a toss mistake there. Proof of concept: If there is an attack that breaks a knowing opponent that is turteling up, then it's imba and will get nerfed. There is no such attack, because else protoss tears would flow and fast expand builds would not be favored, as terrans would set up for this attack every game. There have been multiple posts on why it is just fail to use this advantage to take two extra bases, because the deathball still rolls you. If you scout your terran opponent taking 2 more bases and not massing to attack, you as toss gleefully take a third and roll the terran 5-10 minutes later. | ||
|
Daimai
Sweden762 Posts
Both have an equal chance to win but there are different playstyles. If you dont like playing offensively (WHILE MACROING) then perhaps terran is not the right race for you. EDIT: Also I think that people DEMANDING that terran should stand a chance in late game with mainly T1 units while protoss has all kinds of T3 is just wrong in itself. I have said it once, and I will say it again: MECH WITH GHOSTS IS INSANELY GOOD IN THE LATE GAME. try it | ||
|
ETisME
12530 Posts
On May 04 2012 13:48 Talack wrote: I really really hate blizzards stance on this. They are basically saying that they expect you to kill the protoss before late game. I hate to break it to you blizzard devs, but terran cannot get the sort of advantage you think we need without killing the protoss. I have played (and watched in the GSL) TvP alot on the ladder, and I have crippled a protoss almost before. I've denied a third base for a good 10 minutes and come at them with 50+ food advantage and still been unable to finish them. They eventually do get enough of their t3 units that you cannot attack anymore without a full 200/200 army. You cannot trade evenly with them after a certain point. Maybe I'm exagerating but I feel that anyone who is happy with TvP comming down to a "kill them or cripple them mid-game because you are not able to later on" is INCREDIBLY bad design. Just absolutely horrible. We don't want to be doing all-ins. We don't want to be unable to reinforce and fight because we killed the wall of zealots/stalkers but all the archons or collosus are alive so that next round of warp ins kills us. Protoss are doing very well vs us. In the early game, in the mid game and especially the late game. Please for the love of god just stop telling us to do hard-timings that are intended to kill the protoss. It's just not what the community wants and without the community you've got no game. Stop being lazy and come up with REAL solutions besides telling us to all-in or get lucky >< Not true, they are saying you should get an advantage in mid game where your strength lies and carry it into the macro game with a stronger lead Just think PvZ, do you want zerg to get to the ultra 200/200 deathball before you even get to 150 food? | ||
|
sluggaslamoo
Australia4494 Posts
I don't really care about winrates or "balance in a vacuum", Heads or Tails is perfectly balanced, that doesn't make it a good competitive game. On May 06 2012 03:53 ETisME wrote: Not true, they are saying you should get an advantage in mid game where your strength lies and carry it into the macro game with a stronger lead Just think PvZ, do you want zerg to get to the ultra 200/200 deathball before you even get to 150 food? In BW there was a saying "you only try to finish the game early because you are too scared to take it to the late game". SC2 is this weird game where each race has specific timings where they "have to do damage" or else. This is an unnecessary factor in the game, and its entirely possible to design a game where that is not necessary. | ||
OneOther
United States10774 Posts
On May 04 2012 13:55 laharl23 wrote: My god they aren't saying that you have to end the game with a 1-2 base all in, they are saying because terran is very mobile with drops/bio and toss kind of just has to sit in their base during the early/mid game that terran has to get an advantage and take it into the late game. One gsl protosses start doing well and all of a sudden pvt is out of control, but people forget about the last 5 tvt finals we had before that -.- balance whines never end well, people only read what they want to see and completely miss the point of what blizzard is trying to say. This is accurate. I am not sure how people equate mid-game advantage = one/two base all-in. If you sit on your ass doing nothing and letting the Protoss tech to colossus/templar, you deserve to lose. Reminds me of when al the Protoss players back in BW complained about PvZ imbalance against ultra/ling. Then players like Bisu showed you can't let the Zerg take 4 gases and drone-up. Same concept, no? This is what makes the game fun for me. At different points of the game, different races are "forced" to take the initative and be aggressive. I am glad it's difficult for both sides to just turtle and go into late game. My two cents. | ||
|
Dreadwolf
Canada220 Posts
I do think something need to be donne, but it need to be very very very small to be acceptable without fliping it again to what it was before. If late game terran = late game protoss, then midgame protoss need to be equal to terran and that prob mean a nerf to medvac, but can we do that and not screw tvz? Bio vs protoss is doable until you get your first medvac, when medvac are out you need aoe because the superrior dps + heal mean no unit with single target can compete with mmm. And nerfing medvac would fuck TvZ up im sure. So buffing something on the protoss side? earlier and cheaper charge? I dont know. | ||
|
mlspmatt
Canada404 Posts
On May 06 2012 04:02 OneOther wrote: This is accurate. I am not sure how people equate mid-game advantage = one/two base all-in. If you sit on your ass doing nothing and letting the Protoss tech to colossus/templar, you deserve to lose. Reminds me of when al the Protoss players back in BW complained about PvZ imbalance against ultra/ling. Then players like Bisu showed you can't let the Zerg take 4 gases and drone-up. Same concept, no? This is what makes the game fun for me. At different points of the game, different races are "forced" to take the initative and be aggressive. I am glad it's difficult for both sides to just turtle and go into late game. My two cents. No it's not the same concept. Under your scenerio the Zerg is taking a risk leaving them vulnerable now but stronger later. That's a choice determined by the player and it's up to the Protoss to scout this and respond correctley. What Blizzard is doing in SC2 is TELLING Terran: You have the advantage in the mid game, you have no choice BUT to use it or you will likely lose in the late game. And TELLING Protoss, you MUST survive the Terran midgame attack and wait until your advantage late game. Blizzard is dictating the play style, not the players. All we are asking is that Blizzard attempt to equalize the game from early through late game and let the players determine how they want to play. | ||
|
CptBeefheart
United States45 Posts
Unless you want zealots starting with charge, Terrans need to stop QQing about balance differences at different tech levels. | ||
|
Twistacles
Canada1327 Posts
On May 06 2012 03:38 durr wrote: I'm honestly getting tired of terrans calling an imbalance in tvp because their tier 1 mm and their tier 3 medivac cant stand up to a protoss tier 1 zealot/sentry and tier 3 colossi/archon/ht. In pvt right now (as a protoss) i have to defend against drops, early aggression while being dropped (dropping main while attacking the natural), and trying to expand while holding off all of these attacks. it would actually be imbalanced if i defended the terran all game and then was on an even foot with them late game. it wouldn;t be fare if a terran could push while expanding and dropping constantly and then when a 200/200 fight comes they can fight evenly. its just like in pvz, If i let the zerg maco without taking damage they win 9/10 times. But since i can do these timing attackes to make their macro harder to pull off i can actually make the late game easier for me because they are now crippled. If a protoss hold off all of your drops and can hold off your early attacks, shouldn't he/she be rewarded in the lategame? + i really think mech hasn't been explored in pvt enough. a 200/200 mech v protoss is actually really hard to deal with and when the terrans say (well mech sucks because its not mobile enough and the protoss will drop in my base) well if the toss is dropping you need to hold it off like the protoss have had to hold off your drops for so long now. except its not even hard to hold off the aggression since you know its coming every game as there is no other option for terran to beat you. your 3 armor zealots at 10 minutes hold off drops quite well | ||
|
mlspmatt
Canada404 Posts
On May 06 2012 04:10 CptBeefheart wrote: The comments from blizz say that terran is significantly stronger early game compared to protoss. In order for them to give terrans what they are asking for (stronger late game units) they would also have to give protoss stronger early game units. Unless you want zealots starting with charge, Terrans need to stop QQing about balance differences at different tech levels. YES. This is exactley what Terrans are saying. Reighn in Terrans mid game and give them a viable late game. A game where the player determines how he wants to play, aggressive style or macro style. Right now Blizzard is dictating how the races should be played. | ||
|
darthfoley
United States8004 Posts
On May 05 2012 20:29 freetgy wrote: thats not true, if there is a so called comeback race in this game, then it is terran. As proven time and time again. Not in TvP. Terran has no AOE units to "save" them some time from the after-engagement push. Example, you win an engagement vs protoss on your side of the map, toss might have the time to warp in 2 HT's with enough energy and some zealots. The remaining (presumably less than 100% health) units you had when you won the engagement lose their worth in terms of really dealing damage. (Protoss can just warp in wherever on the map to defend extra bases etc) I think it comes down to the warp gate mechanic. Terran doesn't usually have enough time do get a full production cycle through before the protoss presses the advantage, while toss (with good macro) can warp in 12-15 units or even more depending on how many gates/bases they are on. Edit: Yes, this is the case in TvZ also, however protoss units are infinetly more powerful and can sustain more damage, giving their "zerg-like" capabilities late game a lot more power than a zerg. Zergs also have to rally their units, whereas Protoss can use all 22 WG's in one place rather than rallying from 5. | ||
|
sluggaslamoo
Australia4494 Posts
On May 06 2012 04:02 OneOther wrote: This is accurate. I am not sure how people equate mid-game advantage = one/two base all-in. If you sit on your ass doing nothing and letting the Protoss tech to colossus/templar, you deserve to lose. Reminds me of when al the Protoss players back in BW complained about PvZ imbalance against ultra/ling. Then players like Bisu showed you can't let the Zerg take 4 gases and drone-up. Same concept, no? This is what makes the game fun for me. At different points of the game, different races are "forced" to take the initative and be aggressive. I am glad it's difficult for both sides to just turtle and go into late game. My two cents. I disagree, I don't think its the same concept in fact the reverse ended up happening, which is why I think everyone has a right to be afraid. Modern PvZ revolves around gaining large economic advantages with good defense and is as turtly as ever. Harass involves doing economic damage via aggression, rather than killing drones, this doesn't apply to TvP because Protoss doesn't have the concept of having to balance workers and army. When the Bisu build came out, it was outdated within 1 or 2 years by an even turtlier style, where you still get a really fast 3rd on 15 supply, defend against everything using simcity which includes walling off your 4th expo using your 3rd base, which allows you to mass drone off 4 bases and 5 hatches. Protoss players are now opting for longer games where they can abuse storms and lategame strength and using lots of feigned aggression to force sunkens and army. Protoss vs Zerg maxed out armies ends up trading pretty even, Toss would usually come out on top with good storms and lots of archons, however Zerg also has way better production capability and much better eco. With SC2 TvP its not even close, Protoss has the production advantage and firepower advantage, and economically they are on par because of the 3 base saturation rule. Eventually there will come a point where Protoss learns how to defend against everything Terran can do. Only problem is feigned aggression doesn't stop Protoss from making or losing probes. Also Terran can't do storm drops and doesn't have reavers. On May 06 2012 04:18 mlspmatt wrote: YES. This is exactley what Terrans are saying. Reighn in Terrans mid game and give them a viable late game. A game where the player determines how he wants to play, aggressive style or macro style. Right now Blizzard is dictating how the races should be played. Exactly I'm sure a lot of Terrans would be willing to trade some early-game firepower for late-game firepower. I'd like to see marauders go, for a mech unit that en-masse can stand up to the toss deathball. However there is the problem of warpgates and forcefields which is why toss early game sucks so much in the first place. | ||
|
SupLilSon
Malaysia4123 Posts
On May 06 2012 04:02 OneOther wrote: This is accurate. I am not sure how people equate mid-game advantage = one/two base all-in. If you sit on your ass doing nothing and letting the Protoss tech to colossus/templar, you deserve to lose. So why can Z/P sit on their ass and do nothing and that is completely fine? Bad game design is bad, stop trying to rationalize it. A better player should always want to extend the game longer, as to accrue more advantages and rely on stronger mechanics. For Terran this concept common to almost any strategy game has been snatched away. | ||
|
n0btozz
Iceland115 Posts
On May 06 2012 03:45 mlspmatt wrote: If you believe balance = winrate, and it's fine that one race has a big advantage early and another late, then that's fine. Good Job Blizzard. However, if you believe (like I do) that balance = each race has relatively equal chance to win the game regardless of timing, then what blizzard is doing = creating imbalanced MU's that suck for both the spectator and players alike. TvP is a terrible MU. Protoss either 2 base all in or turtle until they have the death ball and Terran is forced to take risks in the midgame that they'd rather not take because the MU is designed poorly. It's Blizzrds game, and they can do whatever they want. But for those of us who'd like to see SC2 some day be the game BW was, this is not going in that direction. Homeboy, there is a simple truth here. With 3 races, there is no way to balance them so they are equally strong through every phase of the game with every tactic out there. Some will be a bit stronger early on, some will be a bit stronger around 8-9 minutes and some will have bit more options at the 20 minute mark. Small variables throughout the game are what makes it fun. It's the same with broodwar and every other game. Blizzard admit that there is a small difference in strength depending on wether it´s early/mid/late game. If protoss get's to macro up for 20 minutes vs Terran, yes Protoss will most likely win. But so will zerg, and I don't see you complaining about that. Why is that? Because you know to move out and pressure the zerg before the 20 minute mark, that is your strength and you don't just allow zerg to macro up as he likes. The same with Protoss, Protoss doesn't just allow zerg to macro up for 20 minutes or Zerg would win every game. This whine from Terran is pretty funny considering that it is by far the most successful race in the game's history, behind it comes Zerg. Terran is having a hard time in late-game vs protoss right now, big whoop. Protoss has had a hard time vs Terran in the early/mid game for a long time now, is that fair? The game has phases and the imbalance in late-game isn't even that great, mauroders, marines and other units still own the hell out of everything and I believe Terran just needs to look at it's late-game options better and start to use the all powerful ghosts even more etc. | ||
|
stfouri
Finland272 Posts
Even against zerg, you have to take mapcontrol or there is no way you are gonna enter lategame. And so many people call that good? Only race that has zero pro's that people actually follow, cause none of them actually can show lategame macro styles. All terrans go early pushes or midgame pushes and enter lategame in a winning position or they just lose. Jinro showed some nice macro style when he had his run, but then again when you figure your random terran is going for pretty fast 4 bases even bronzie can stop him on his tracks fast. See what happened to Jinro. | ||
|
Shiori
3815 Posts
On May 06 2012 04:56 SupLilSon wrote: So why can Z/P sit on their ass and do nothing and that is completely fine? Bad game design is bad, stop trying to rationalize it. A better player should always want to extend the game longer, as to accrue more advantages and rely on stronger mechanics. For Terran this concept common to almost any strategy game has been snatched away. They can't. I'm getting sick of you ruining every single thread with your mindless QQ. Protoss can't tech without taking the proper precautions to be safe against Terran pressures. Like it or not, these pressures win a LOT of games at the pro level, and so Protoss players need to account for them. Secondly, I don't see MKP losing to terrible players in TvP very often, but by the way you make it sound, anyone who knows to 1-a should be able to beat him. Come back to reality. You lose games because you play bad, not because Protoss is OP. If you're mad about TvP in the lower leagues, then pick a different game, because this game is about eSports, not about random Plat kids who think they're micro champs. | ||
|
Mordanis
United States893 Posts
On May 06 2012 04:20 darthfoley wrote: Not in TvP. Terran has no AOE units to "save" them some time from the after-engagement push. Example, you win an engagement vs protoss on your side of the map, toss might have the time to warp in 2 HT's with enough energy and some zealots. The remaining (presumably less than 100% health) units you had when you won the engagement lose their worth in terms of really dealing damage. (Protoss can just warp in wherever on the map to defend extra bases etc) I think it comes down to the warp gate mechanic. Terran doesn't usually have enough time do get a full production cycle through before the protoss presses the advantage, while toss (with good macro) can warp in 12-15 units or even more depending on how many gates/bases they are on. Edit: Yes, this is the case in TvZ also, however protoss units are infinetly more powerful and can sustain more damage, giving their "zerg-like" capabilities late game a lot more power than a zerg. Zergs also have to rally their units, whereas Protoss can use all 22 WG's in one place rather than rallying from 5. If a P has 22 WGs, and T only wins an engagement by a little bit, P was way ahead of T. 22x15=3300 minerals, plus at least 2200 mins in bank (for the actual zealots) for a total of 5500 mins. If the army size is equal, and toss has 5500 mins dedicated solely to one big resupply, P was clearly way in the lead. I know the 22 WG was an exaggeration, but whenever toss is able to remake a bunch of reinforcements, and the battle is pretty even, P was definitely ahead. | ||
|
Goozen
Israel701 Posts
| ||
| ||
