|
On May 16 2012 05:01 Solo Terran wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2012 04:28 Talack wrote:Won a series of heavy macro related PvTs last night. Couple notes (And I'm sure everyone will hate on it) 1) You need to be aggressive with expansions. Very very challenging due to protoss timing attacks/all-ins etc etc... 2) No matter how many barracks you make, you will be out-produced. It's just a fact, you can't keep up after large battle. So you need to have frequent battles to keep their army count low to keep their confidence in pushing out at a minimum. 3) You Can't lose units, especially medivacs. They are incredibly crucial. You need those starports open for quick viking production if needed. You need those barracks ready to pump ghosts out. 4) Marauders are only good for like 10-12 of them. The rest should be pure marine/ghost. This is a huge improvement in most battles. It makes it so you can be easily easily crushed in a fight from storms. 1 Storm taking out a ball of marines is basically the game for you right there. Heavy heavy on the marines. 5) PFs at expos. If you can afford it, make 2-3 PFs per base, you NEED this economy, make additional orbitals for quick mules if you need it. Basically from your 4th and on, always PFs, if you want to be extra safe PFs at your 3rd but you should be good with an orbital and map control. 6) Scan your army ALOT for observers, don't drop mules so much as use them for scans. 7) Never aim to kill the protoss with an attack, it just doesn't work with warp gates. What you have to do is kill the army and then take a base or kill a base. You need to starve them out, you just simply cannot kill a protoss but they will absolutley roll you and all your expos easily with one battle won. You need to keep this in mind for all engagements. (Probably best advice I can give that I've learned, quite simply without amazing micro you cannot survive with enough units to beat the warp ins and new tech) Basically your goal is to starve the protoss to a point where they cannot have 15 high templars and 3-4 collosus ontop of a legion of zealots. You attack them, try to deal economic damage or at least take their army down to a point where you can win or break even again in a remax. Try your best to never engage if you can't win, you just need to lose one battle to lose the entire game, they can afford to lose 2-6 major battles before you can kill them. You have to accept their race is better with more money but you can outmaneuver them and try to pray off the weaknesses that came with a huge deathball. You don't "need" to deal damage to win, but what you have to do is not allow them free-reign without any sort of response. If they're nto pushing out, scan and take an expo. Up your production then, figure out what they're going for, grab some counter (example if they are going collosus, grab 4-6 vikings and attack) and go to break their army down into smaller pieces. I won't lie. This is insanely hard for T to do. Insanely hard compared to the "survive and win a battle" that protoss is doing, but it's possible to do without MKP style micro. If you got that kind of micro/macro, then you shouldn't be reading this at all i guess  Thanks for the advice man! Hopefully I won't rage as much following this advice. There have been times where I DESTROYED a Protoss deathball with superior micro and after the battle I still had like 30 marines and 8 marauders plus medivacs. But I made the mistake of trying to stim my already injured bio into his natural to end the game. But he just warped in like 20 chargelots and had a random HT at his base he didnt use in the engagement and my bio foce instantly got wrecked. And even though I won the 200/200 engagement decisively I went on the lose the game because he was just able to macro up another deathball and run me over with reinforcing warp ins. It's pretty bullshit that is Terran loses 1 engagement the game is instantly over but if Protoss loses an engagement they can just warp in to instantly defend. This is why Warp gate is the real problem in TvP. I have no problem with Protoss having a better late game army since that is the way they are designed but warp gate it total fucking bullshit.
It's insanely easy to think "now is the time" in PvT, you'll win an engagement with like 30 supply left over and you think "ok now we kill him" becaues well that's what happens in TvZ and TvT and used to happen in PvT tbh. You need to just take out his ability to remax, becuase you're going to "have" to fight 2-3 200/200 or something close to that battles before you're going to win. Once you're able to build your strategies/macro/micro all that jazz around this philosphy you'll be able to at least do better in macro-orientated matchups.
|
On May 16 2012 04:16 Drowsy wrote:
I'm still mystified this discussion continues on for so long. The matchup has been close to 50/50 at the pro level for the past several months; an outsider reading this thread would assume its like 70/30 in favor of protoss with all the whining. Terrans literally just want to have an advantage at all stages of the game and are completely blind to the outrageous advantage they have before like 16 minutes in standard games. If people insist on nerfing protoss late game, they better do something about the ridiculous leverage in the early and midgame afforded to terran players by medivacs and banshee openers.
Yeah, I really don't get it. I'd rather all this rage was put into finding solutions to "the problem" - if there really is a problem, and I'm not convinced there is one, yet. But, if there is, rest assured that Korean Terrans will find a solution and it will filter through. The last thing the game needs is more knee-jerk patches - Blizzard have been way too aggressive with these in the past. The constant tinkering with the game needs to stop and the game be left alone to develop at the hands of players and map-makers.
Also, as I've stated before, all the QQ about WG is flat out mistaken. It considers WG in isolation without thinking that it exists in a relationship with the game's other macro-mechanics and racial features. Fundamentally alter one aspect of a core feature of the game will mean changes to other core features which will mean not only a virtual reset of the game strategically but another long period of QQ from all and sundry as these changes take effect. >_<
Finally, it seems to me that some Terran players simply should not be playing Terran as their play styles (turtly and/or passive) are probably more suited to Protoss, or even Zerg, than Terran. If you can't beat them, join them. 
|
On May 16 2012 05:06 StriderDoom wrote:
it has been so long since a protoss has won any major tournaments...
terran is still winning, the numbers show nearly 50\50 results in pvt
I just can't believe all this QQ
this is such an incredibly ignorant statement I can't believe how often it gets made.
the complaints are about a specific part of the game (lategame). mvp winning (for example) with 3 all ins... really doesn't change anything about the fact that if the midgame aggression gets deflected terran is most likely fucked.
terran still wins but the ways that they can win are limited. and completely possible to defend. toss will play a little less greedy, scout a little more (hey faster obs), die less in midgame and the advantage in late game will become more apparent.
I understand terran is stronger in the midgame, but protoss is MUCH stronger in the lategame. if you can't see that you're blind.
in tvp there are no transition options. it is literally that simple.
|
On May 16 2012 05:41 aZealot wrote:
Yeah, I really don't get it. I'd rather all this rage was put into finding solutions to "the problem" - if there really is a problem.
Warp gate in TvP is the problem. Late game TvP Protoss is supposed to have a stonger army which is fine and I agree with that. But having a stronger army and be able to reincforce pushes instantly? How is this fair? Add on top of that that the Terran army requires more micro than the Protoss Deathball its pretty rediculous. Terran may have a slight advantage in the mid game But it is certainly is not as big as the advantage Protoss has in the late game. Not even close.
|
On May 16 2012 06:06 Solo Terran wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2012 05:41 aZealot wrote:
Yeah, I really don't get it. I'd rather all this rage was put into finding solutions to "the problem" - if there really is a problem.
Warp gate in TvP is the problem. Late game TvP Protoss is supposed to have a stonger army which is fine and I agree with that. But having a stronger army and be able to reincforce pushes instantly? How is this fair? Terran may have a slight advantage in the mid game But it is certainly is not as big as the advantage Protoss has in the late game.
i'm not going to argue for the WG, it's a digression and a different discussion entirely (although, I think it is a rather cool mechanism; I originally hated it as I, mistakenly, thought it made my beloved Protoss from SC1 weak). I am pointing out, however, that the production capabilities given by WG and the ability to reinforce at a point is a central racial feature of Protoss which helps Protoss (throughout the game) deal with Zerg and Terran armies who benefit by similar racial features like larvae inject and reactored units. Without WG, Protoss would not be able to defend strong early/midgame pushes and be unable to successfully attack at these times, either. (Sneak attacks from hidden pylons etc would also not be viable.)
If you remove WG, you'd have to redesign similar racial features of Zerg and Terran and/or reduce the build times of Gateway units to compensate. For example, Gateway build time of the Z is 38 seconds but 28 seconds from a WG. Are you going to keep it at 38 seconds? If so, this would alter Protoss openings and make a 1 Gate FE impossible vs a 2 rax (you wouldn't have enough units when the marines and marauders show up). If you make it through, your army will be comparatively smaller at all points of the game. What if we reduce it to 28 seconds? Suddenly, 2 gate Zealot rushes vs Z become very powerful throwing that MU into chaos. Hell, even against T (before the Marauder with Conc comes out) you could suddenly have a strong Z+S+S+S (assuming Stalker build time is also reduced) poke which could cause a lot of damage in the early game. Buffing gateway units to compensate (a mistaken idea as gw units, with the exception of the stalker, are good enough) would only aggravate the power of these early pushes, given lower build times. Or, given standard (i.e. current) build times, would make them OP when the Protoss made it to the midgame/lategame and had macro-ed up a large gw force with ups.
See what I mean? Whether WG is good or bad design, at this point in the development of the game, is immaterial.
Edit/ As to problems with the current match-up, I'm not good enough to comment or give advice to Terrans.
|
On May 16 2012 06:20 aZealot wrote:
i'm not going to argue for the WG, it's a digression and a different discussion entirely (although, I think it is a rather cool mechanism; I originally hated it as I, mistakenly, thought it made my beloved Protoss from SC1 weak). I am pointing out, however, that the production capabilities given by WG and the ability to reinforce at a point is a central racial feature of Protoss which helps Protoss (throughout the game) deal with Zerg and Terran armies who benefit by similar racial features like larvae inject and reactored units. Without WG, Protoss would not be able to defend strong early/midgame pushes and be unable to successfully attack at these times, either. (Sneak attacks from hidden pylons etc would also not be viable.)
If you remove WG, you'd have to redesign similar racial features of Zerg and Terran and/or reduce the build times of Gateway units to compensate. For example, Gateway build time of the Z is 38 seconds but 28 seconds from a WG. Are you going to keep it at 38 seconds? If so, this would alter Protoss openings and make a 1 Gate FE impossible vs a 2 rax (you wouldn't have enough units when the marines and marauders show up). If you make it through, your army will be comparatively smaller at all points of the game. What if we reduce it to 28 seconds? Suddenly, 2 gate Zealot rushes vs Z become very powerful throwing that MU into chaos. Hell, even against T (before the Marauder with Conc comes out) you could suddenly have a strong Z+S+S+S (assuming Stalker build time is also reduced) poke which could cause a lot of damage in the early game.
See what I mean? Whether WG is good or bad design, at this point in the development of the game, is immaterial.
Edit/ I'll PM you later as to why I think WG is cool. IMO, its a nifty mechanism yet to be developed fully by Protoss players.
I don't think Blizzard should just take out warp gate and call it a day. I don't even think they should take it out of WoL. However why should they have to make the same mistake twice with HoTS? They already have to rebalance the game so its a good oppurtunity to rebalance the game around non warp gate. I think that an upgrade similar to warp gate that allows protoss players to make units maybe 5-10 seconds faster than their current time is a decent idea. Giving them recall from the Nexus is a decent idea (which is already being done). And don't forget that Protoss players have Chronoboost, most Protoss players just chrono upgrades and forget it ever exists. If you want to have a timing attack dedicate chrono to your gateways. Maybe increase the max nexus energy to allow more to be used, maybe have an upgrade that causes chrono used on gateways to severely shorten build times of units. Hell maybe buff gateway units a bit. We also don't know how the new Protoss units will work. The Oracle sounds like a good unit and we have no idea how the Tempest will work.
|
On May 16 2012 06:06 Solo Terran wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2012 05:41 aZealot wrote:
Yeah, I really don't get it. I'd rather all this rage was put into finding solutions to "the problem" - if there really is a problem.
Terran may have a slight advantage in the mid game But it is certainly is not as big as the advantage Protoss has in the late game. Not even close.
This is just straight up bullshit and you know it. How can you reconcile this statement with this?
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/y02dOh.png)
Acceptable margins in every single month for the ENTIRE YEAR, and the only ones that were borderline were terran favored. If that protoss lategame advantage was really so much stronger than the terran early game advantage, shouldn't this graph look a lot different over the past few months? The PvT metagame has changed relatively little when it comes to late game compositions and tactics. Do you really expect your half-witted idea of just removing wg tech from the game own't drastically shift this graph in terran's favor? Do you REALLY believe blizzard can adjust protoss lategame without correspondingly adjusting terran early and mid game?
The numbers just simply don't match the popular perception of pvt, and if anything I would argue terran's early game advantage and horse-shit like proxy raxes and marine/scv allins are a more pressing imbalance than a supposed protoss lategame advantage.
|
You may be right about that one. 3 rax scv all in's do win a suprising amount of time. Too bad they among, the 1-1-1, the 2-2-2 and some kind of doom drop is the only way pro terran players ever win games at the highest level. Show me some games against top Protoss players like Hero, Squirtle, Genius, Naniwa and Parting where a Terran wins a macro game that isn't some kind of 2 base all in tank push or doom drop. Then if there are any, compare that to how many macro games they have won versus pro Terrans. Exactly.
|
On May 16 2012 06:30 Solo Terran wrote:
I don't think Blizzard should just take out warp gate and call it a day. I don't even think they should take it out of WoL. However why should they have to make the same mistake twice with HoTS? They already have to rebalance the game so its a good oppurtunity to rebalance the game around non warp gate. I think that an upgrade similar to warp gate that allows protoss players to make units maybe 5-10 seconds faster than their current time is a decent idea. Giving them recall from the Nexus is a decent idea (which is already being done). And don't forget that Protoss players have Chronoboost, most Protoss players just chrono upgrades and forget it ever exists. If you want to have a timing attack dedicate chrono to your gateways. Maybe increase the max nexus energy to allow more to be used, maybe have an upgrade that causes chrono used on gateways to severely shorten build times of units. Hell maybe buff gateway units a bit. We also don't know how the new Protoss units will work. The Oracle sounds like a good unit and we have no idea how the Tempest will work.
Some nice ideas there, but I guess my point was that all of this will require another period of work and balancing and re-strategizing the Protoss game from the ground up. That would be hard for Protoss players, especially the pros, and once the changes affected Z and T, those pros would be similarly affected. This is why I don't think a fundamental redesign of the game will happen - it does not make sense for Blizzard from a financial and organizational point of view. It would also be exhausting for casual players and spectators having to learn a new set of skills and information, not to mention the new spate of QQ (similar to 2010 - 2011) this will likely bring about. It makes more sense to build on what you have, however flawed it may be, perhaps tweak things slightly, and see where you go from there - as will most likely be the case in HOTS.
You are right about Protoss players not utilising CB properly but that may come in time. Keeping on track of WG cooldowns is a core skill of a good Protoss player as a missed cycle of production effectively puts you behind in army size at all points in the game. You see this most clearly in mirror PvP games with mirror builds. But it holds true for the other match-ups too. This is why I think keeping Nexus energy on 100 is fine as it forces good Protoss to choose between upgrades, units and economy.
I have to say that as a P player I am underwhelmed by the changes in HOTS. I don't like the cutesy Oracle, a long range air siege unit looks another addition to the deathball, and I don't like Nexus recall either (I think it makes it easy for Protoss to go out on the map and play a get-out-of-jail free card if and when they make a mistake. Unless it is suitably designed, I think it will reward sloppy play. Good Protoss need to know how and when they can get onto the map and do stuff safely.)
Anyway, I'm off back to bed (home sick with cold today). I hope you find a solution to your late game trouble vs Protoss, dude.
GLHF.
|
If you look at the actual playing skill of the top players Terran have much more skilled players compared to Protoss. Blizzard can not adjust that so instead they make Protoss OP late game to make their overall win percentage better. Guess what? If the game was actually balanced at high level Protoss should not win more than about 30% in TvP given how much better the top Terran players are compared to the top Protoss players.
|
On May 16 2012 06:48 Solo Terran wrote:
You may be right about that one. 3 rax scv all in's do win a suprising amount of time. Too bad they among, the 1-1-1, the 2-2-2 and some kind of doom drop is the only way pro terran players ever win games at the highest level. Show me some games against top Protoss players like Hero, Squirtle, Genius, Naniwa and Parting where a Terran wins a macro game that isn't some kind of 2 base all in tank push or doom drop. Then if there are any, compare that to how many macro games they have won versus pro Terrans. Exactly.
Okay, I do agree. Terrans will not really win macro games against top tier protoss, but let's not all pretend they don't have a multitude of other ways to win and some very solid early and mid-game advantages they can capitalize on.
Terrans are unhappy with how they're being forced to play tvp in order to win, but this should NOT be interpreted as protoss being insanely strong and terran being really weak, or even that the matchup is favored toward one race either way. And often this is exactly what people are doing in this thread.
On May 16 2012 06:57 MockHamill wrote:
If you look at the actual playing skill of the top players Terran have much more skilled players compared to Protoss. Blizzard can not adjust that so instead they make Protoss OP late game to make their overall win percentage better. Guess what? If the game was actually balanced at high level Protoss should not win more than about 30% given how much better the top Terran players are compared to the top Protoss players.
lol
|
Look my only problem is that when the game gets to the late game I cannot lose any engagement I can't even break even on any engagement, I have to outright win every engagement versus a better army. If you even tie protoss and both armies are obliterated you can kiss your expansions good bye unless you have like 4 PF's defending your expansions. And then Protoss gets a macro edge and you just lose the game.
It's just dumb, if protoss gets any advantage they can push that advantage to no end with warp gate and over power you since you have to wait for your units to be made and walk over to defend. Starcraft should be back and forth. Like in TvZ you constantly see armies get traded and then you'll see one player take out one expansion and then the other player counter attacks and it constantly goes back and forth until whichever player played better and made better decisions wins. In PvT its like you trade armies but the game is already over. There is no back and forth, lost one engagement the game is over GG nice A move and Storm spam and then the Protoss player actually believes he did something that was difficult to do.
|
|
|
I mentioned this in another thread, but I wish they would revert the snipe change and make it so it does less damage to massive units. It wouldn't absolutely fix everything, but at least it gives the option of allowing ghosts to snipe zealots again instead of relying on more of a marine heavy composition that gets demolished by storm/colossus.
|
On May 16 2012 07:56 ritzia1 wrote:
I mentioned this in another thread, but I wish they would revert the snipe change and make it so it does less damage to massive units. It wouldn't absolutely fix everything, but at least it gives the option of allowing ghosts to snipe zealots again instead of relying on more of a marine heavy composition that gets demolished by storm/colossus.
Ghosts already CAN snipe Zealots. >.>
Still going to maintain that nerfing damage from FB to massive units would severely increase the usefulness of T3 Terran units.
|
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?
There's no ticking time bomb. T has a good chance of winning late game. Sk terran or mech switch are both good strategies. It all depends on who plays better than their opponent.
Which is how sc2 should work.
Not 'toss is able to macro up a deathball of 200/200' (regardless of what terran did early or mid game) and (most likely) wins.
|
As long as Terran is aggressive in the early-mid game, Protoss won't have the advantage; that's the message I'm picking up. While it makes sense and is, in a sense, "balanced," I still would like to see that in TvP, players have the option to play emphasize their macro and still have a fair late-game.
|
On May 04 2012 14:02 AeroEffect wrote:
I think TvP is pretty balanced. If everyone stops trying to be so greedy and play the game how it should be played, then terran should have no problems preventing the protoss from teching and getting weird unit compositions to attack move and win with. I never have any problems tvp simply because I dont 1 rax expand, 15 cc, or do that lame 10 minute 2 base medivac timing anymore because they can picked apart pretty easily. all you need to do is just play the game as a terran knowing how to push your advanatages and play with them accordingly. Im not saying 3 rax every gmae but if you see a protoss 4 gating, why not build 3 rax instead of building a cc and complaining about toss being imba when they break your nat/ramp?
I don't saying that Protoss is overpowered is the point the OP was trying to make. What he was upset about is the fact that Blizzard has explicitly stated that the focus of TvP should be aggression in early-mid game, not macro into late game. Terran players would rather have the option to play macro as well, just as most Protoss players would like more aggressive options before AoE units are available.
|
On May 16 2012 09:42 monKeygee wrote:
As long as Terran is aggressive in the early-mid game, Protoss won't have the advantage; that's the message I'm picking up. While it makes sense and is, in a sense, "balanced," I still would like to see that in TvP, players have the option to play emphasize their macro and still have a fair late-game.
I've played high master terrans that don't really attack me at all, and they just get to late game with mass orbital/ low scv count, defensive planetaries, and 20 ghosts/ 15+ vikings/ a +3+3 bio army and then just roll me late game esp on maps like Daybreak where you can't attack if they have defensive planetaries. As long as they don't take hits from mass colossus which is easy if you have upgraded vikings, and 20 ghosts with cloak, you can very easily handle any maxxed protoss composition with sufficient micro.
this whole "terrans cant handle protoss late game fundamentally" is a myth created by <high master terrans to help their bruised ego's deal with the fact they got outplayed in a long game.
|
On May 16 2012 10:14 xOny wrote:Show nested quote +On May 16 2012 09:42 monKeygee wrote:
As long as Terran is aggressive in the early-mid game, Protoss won't have the advantage; that's the message I'm picking up. While it makes sense and is, in a sense, "balanced," I still would like to see that in TvP, players have the option to play emphasize their macro and still have a fair late-game. I've played high master terrans that don't really attack me at all, and they just get to late game with mass orbital/ low scv count, defensive planetaries, and 20 ghosts/ 15+ vikings/ a +3+3 bio army and then just roll me late game esp on maps like Daybreak where you can't attack if they have defensive planetaries. As long as they don't take hits from mass colossus which is easy if you have upgraded vikings, and 20 ghosts with cloak, you can very easily handle any maxxed protoss composition with sufficient micro. this whole "terrans cant handle protoss late game fundamentally" is a myth created by <high master terrans to help their bruised ego's deal with the fact they got outplayed in a long game.
Except every professional player including Protoss players and Flash himself disagree you with about late game PvT, and suggest that it is grossly imbalanced in the favor of Protoss which it is. The only one with the buised ego is you, because you can't accept that people qualified to make opinions all agree that it's imbalanced. It must hurt your ego so much, because Protoss also requires significantly lower APM too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
