|
On August 26 2013 11:34 Scarecrow wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2013 10:45 larse wrote:
The main problem is TvP.
MMMVG since 2010. Yeah! So what? TvP was tank vulture goliath vessel forever in BW and the mu was awesome. You don`t need varied compositions to enjoy the game. Terrible OP, the list isn`t even accurate and mixes up builds, compositions and harras options. Describing PvT as deathball with late prism option is retardedly simplistic
Okie dokie. Why don't you mention why I am wrong? I don't mind if people tell me WHY I am "retardedly simplistic" (because some people on this thread and other ones have refuted some of my points), but saying such thing without elaboration doesn't say much about me.
Next, I think you have misunderstood what I meant by deathball. That's the primary Protoss's option against Terran. If there is any other option that Protoss can pull, let me know!
Finally, you want to talk about BW? Well, guess what? At least, Terran had to change up their tech against different races and not rely on the same composition.
|
On August 26 2013 11:48 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2013 11:46 Plansix wrote:On August 26 2013 11:43 BronzeKnee wrote:On August 26 2013 11:39 Plansix wrote:On August 26 2013 11:35 BronzeKnee wrote:On August 26 2013 11:34 Scarecrow wrote:On August 26 2013 10:45 larse wrote:
The main problem is TvP.
MMMVG since 2010. Yeah! You don`t need varied compositions to enjoy the game. Yes, but variety is also pleasing. And there is no reason Mech can't work. There is no reason carriers can be viable. But you don't see people making threads about it. A single unit not being viable is no where equal to an entire style of play not being viable. And there was plenty of threads about the Carrier. And if Terran could actually go Mech, the Carrier would see more use. Sorry, I mean, skytoss and how it being viable is super important for the long term viability of SC2 as an Esport. Deep, super important issues. And yeah, we would all like Terrans to be able to mech. I want to go zealot immortal every game, people keep building marines. Big difference there. Skytoss or any air only composition should not be viable. Terrain makes the game interesting, air units are the epitome of A-move units, and air only battles are boring and predictable with very little micro involved. Air units should be used to support ground armies, and that is best for both players and spectators. That is where the Carrier could shine. But Blizzard decide to make another long range massive air unit built from the Stargate requiring a Fleet Beacon that essentially does the job better than the Carrier, when they could have just buffed the Carrier...
But I just want to build air units out of the starport. Why can't I? You just want to build units out of the factory, like tons of siege tanks. Why can't I demand to build only air units and have it be viable? They should make the air units viable and interesting to mirco.
You see how these discussions are slightly silly. It is just people demanding to play in a specific fashion that they would find interesting. I can just as easily demand to play skytoss or no colossi protoss without stalkers and demand it be viable because I feel it would be more exciting that the current way the game is played. It doesn't mean I am right.
On August 26 2013 11:49 hansonslee wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2013 11:34 Scarecrow wrote:On August 26 2013 10:45 larse wrote:
The main problem is TvP.
MMMVG since 2010. Yeah! So what? TvP was tank vulture goliath vessel forever in BW and the mu was awesome. You don`t need varied compositions to enjoy the game. Terrible OP, the list isn`t even accurate and mixes up builds, compositions and harras options. Describing PvT as deathball with late prism option is retardedly simplistic Okie dokie. Why don't you mention why I am wrong? I don't mind if people tell me WHY I am "retardedly simplistic" (because some people on this thread and other ones have refuted some of my points), but saying such thing without elaboration doesn't say much about me. Finally, I think you have misunderstood what I meant by deathball. That's the primary Protoss's option against Terran. If there is any other option that Protoss can pull, let me know!
He means the term "death ball" is overly simplistic, since it is normally made up of every protoss ground unit and high templar scattered around the map in defensive positions. You could also say that MMM is a deathball, because they all travel together and fit on one screen.
|
On August 26 2013 09:38 HeeroFX wrote:
Terran has the most options nearly all the units gel together really well. Bio/mech Pure mech, pure bio. It works Terran have many harrass options. They are weak in a death ball vs death ball situation (unless mech.) The problem with Terran is you can't remax as fast as zerg or protoss. I don't really see a flaw in the design of the race of Terran, if anything it is the most developed. It is funny to see a post like this after bomber 4-0 Jaedong. As far as mirror match ups go TvT is probably the best simply because nearly all styles can be used in it. A person going pure bio can beat a pure mech player and so on. Sure you see a lot of bio from the pros but that is because Bio is just the best option and the strongest because you can deal with just about everything with bio. Mech is harder but technically would be the strongest.
I dunno why people are trying to think this is a balance QQ, it's not. I'm Terran and I'm totally bored of TvZ lately, just endless rallies of marines and mines for the most part, and the zerg either stops it or doesn't. So much so that I sometimes even cheer for the zerg player to beat it, and considering my long hatred of everything zerg, this is crazy. I just don't like the matchup at the moment, even though terran totally dominates it at the top level, It's really boring. I highly disagree with the point about mech being technically stronger, it's not the case, zerg totally dominates mech, it has so many hard counters for mech it's just not funny. Mech imo is actually FAR stronger vs protoss than vs zerg, although I dunno how strong it actually is since no one uses it apart from a couple of Euro pros.
TvT is indeed a beautiful matchup, and it shows the potential of the terran race with how many interesting units they can make, openings etc, but we're not exactly seeing the same interesting stuff in other matchups. TvP is bland, but i could accept it if tvz was more interesting.
|
On August 26 2013 11:54 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2013 11:48 BronzeKnee wrote:On August 26 2013 11:46 Plansix wrote:On August 26 2013 11:43 BronzeKnee wrote:On August 26 2013 11:39 Plansix wrote:On August 26 2013 11:35 BronzeKnee wrote:On August 26 2013 11:34 Scarecrow wrote:On August 26 2013 10:45 larse wrote:
The main problem is TvP.
MMMVG since 2010. Yeah! You don`t need varied compositions to enjoy the game. Yes, but variety is also pleasing. And there is no reason Mech can't work. There is no reason carriers can be viable. But you don't see people making threads about it. A single unit not being viable is no where equal to an entire style of play not being viable. And there was plenty of threads about the Carrier. And if Terran could actually go Mech, the Carrier would see more use. Sorry, I mean, skytoss and how it being viable is super important for the long term viability of SC2 as an Esport. Deep, super important issues. And yeah, we would all like Terrans to be able to mech. I want to go zealot immortal every game, people keep building marines. Big difference there. Skytoss or any air only composition should not be viable. Terrain makes the game interesting, air units are the epitome of A-move units, and air only battles are boring and predictable with very little micro involved. Air units should be used to support ground armies, and that is best for both players and spectators. That is where the Carrier could shine. But Blizzard decide to make another long range massive air unit built from the Stargate requiring a Fleet Beacon that essentially does the job better than the Carrier, when they could have just buffed the Carrier... But I just want to build air units out of the starport. Why can't I? You just want to build units out of the factory, like tons of siege tanks. Why can't I demand to build only air units and have it be viable? They should make the air units viable and interesting to mirco. You see how these discussions are slightly silly. It is just people demanding to play in a specific fashion that they would find interesting. I can just as easily demand to play skytoss or no colossi protoss without stalkers and demand it be viable because I feel it would be more exciting that the current way the game is played. It doesn't mean I am right.
You're missing the point here and splitting hairs. Mech isn't some silly idea that a few people are trying to make work. Heck, Blizzard was trying to make it work!
Furthermore, you're misunderstanding the game design that Blizzard created when developing Terran. Just look at the how the upgrades are structured. Protoss ground units share upgrades. Terran has a different set of upgrades for Bio and Mech. They've also made well rounded units for both tech trees, that can handle a variety of situations. This is unlike the other races. If you only build Robotics units, you'll lack a cheap quick harass unit (Hellions) and anti-air (Thors) that Mech provides. In theory, Mech can cover all the bases, and you don't need Bio, and vice versa. Which is why in WOL people floated their Barracks if they went Mech or their Factory if they went Bio.
Blizzard intentionally designed the game like this. But then they didn't make it work.
It is well established that Siege Tanks in combination with Thors, Hellbats and Medivacs offers a completely different form of play than Marines in combination with Marauders, Medivacs, Mines/Vikings and Ghost do. Neither one is inherently better than the other in terms of game design. However one currently works well, while one does not. So, the problem isn't just that Factory only units aren't viable, it is that Barracks only units are viable.
And thus, I could just as easily reverse your argument against you, as it is just people demanding to play in a specific fashion that they would find interesting. I can just as easily demand that Bio should be the only form of play and demand other forms be not viable because I feel it is more exciting now than the way the game could be played. It doesn't mean I am right either. But that line of logic does mean I am correct.
|
On August 26 2013 11:56 AxionSteel wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2013 09:38 HeeroFX wrote:
Terran has the most options nearly all the units gel together really well. Bio/mech Pure mech, pure bio. It works Terran have many harrass options. They are weak in a death ball vs death ball situation (unless mech.) The problem with Terran is you can't remax as fast as zerg or protoss. I don't really see a flaw in the design of the race of Terran, if anything it is the most developed. It is funny to see a post like this after bomber 4-0 Jaedong. As far as mirror match ups go TvT is probably the best simply because nearly all styles can be used in it. A person going pure bio can beat a pure mech player and so on. Sure you see a lot of bio from the pros but that is because Bio is just the best option and the strongest because you can deal with just about everything with bio. Mech is harder but technically would be the strongest. I dunno why people are trying to think this is a balance QQ, it's not. I'm Terran and I'm totally bored of TvZ lately, just endless rallies of marines and mines for the most part, and the zerg either stops it or doesn't. So much so that I sometimes even cheer for the zerg player to beat it, and considering my long hatred of everything zerg, this is crazy. I just don't like the matchup at the moment, even though terran totally dominates it at the top level, It's really boring. I highly disagree with the point about mech being technically stronger, it's not the case, zerg totally dominates mech, it has so many hard counters for mech it's just not funny. Mech imo is actually FAR stronger vs protoss than vs zerg, although I dunno how strong it actually is since no one uses it apart from a couple of Euro pros. TvT is indeed a beautiful matchup, and it shows the potential of the terran race with how many interesting units they can make, openings etc, but we're not exactly seeing the same interesting stuff in other matchups. TvP is bland, but i could accept it if tvz was more interesting.
Couldn't agree more with this post. I have never played Zerg (only Terran and Protoss) but I was actually cheering for the Zerg players at the WCS Finals (Scarlett and JD), not because I am a fan of the players (well I guess to some extent I am) but mainly because I wanted to see Marine/Mine lose. Almost every TvZ I watch is Marine/Mine, almost no exceptions, it's just as bad as MMMVG only in TvP. Watching the same compositions clash every game with the only difference being slightly different results is just silly. It makes me feel like SC2 is not really a strategy game since the strategy is pre-determined before every match (MMMVG vs P, Marine/Mine vs. Z) and it's basically just a test of how well you can execute that strategy.
Innovation was doing the exact same build almost every game for months (in TvZ), where is the "strategy" part in that? It's just execution, no strategic thinking involved at all.
|
On August 26 2013 11:54 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2013 11:48 BronzeKnee wrote:On August 26 2013 11:46 Plansix wrote:On August 26 2013 11:43 BronzeKnee wrote:On August 26 2013 11:39 Plansix wrote:On August 26 2013 11:35 BronzeKnee wrote:On August 26 2013 11:34 Scarecrow wrote:On August 26 2013 10:45 larse wrote:
The main problem is TvP.
MMMVG since 2010. Yeah! You don`t need varied compositions to enjoy the game. Yes, but variety is also pleasing. And there is no reason Mech can't work. There is no reason carriers can be viable. But you don't see people making threads about it. A single unit not being viable is no where equal to an entire style of play not being viable. And there was plenty of threads about the Carrier. And if Terran could actually go Mech, the Carrier would see more use. Sorry, I mean, skytoss and how it being viable is super important for the long term viability of SC2 as an Esport. Deep, super important issues. And yeah, we would all like Terrans to be able to mech. I want to go zealot immortal every game, people keep building marines. Big difference there. Skytoss or any air only composition should not be viable. Terrain makes the game interesting, air units are the epitome of A-move units, and air only battles are boring and predictable with very little micro involved. Air units should be used to support ground armies, and that is best for both players and spectators. That is where the Carrier could shine. But Blizzard decide to make another long range massive air unit built from the Stargate requiring a Fleet Beacon that essentially does the job better than the Carrier, when they could have just buffed the Carrier... But I just want to build air units out of the starport. Why can't I? You just want to build units out of the factory, like tons of siege tanks. Why can't I demand to build only air units and have it be viable? They should make the air units viable and interesting to mirco. You see how these discussions are slightly silly. It is just people demanding to play in a specific fashion that they would find interesting. I can just as easily demand to play skytoss or no colossi protoss without stalkers and demand it be viable because I feel it would be more exciting that the current way the game is played. It doesn't mean I am right. Show nested quote +On August 26 2013 11:49 hansonslee wrote:On August 26 2013 11:34 Scarecrow wrote:On August 26 2013 10:45 larse wrote:
The main problem is TvP.
MMMVG since 2010. Yeah! So what? TvP was tank vulture goliath vessel forever in BW and the mu was awesome. You don`t need varied compositions to enjoy the game. Terrible OP, the list isn`t even accurate and mixes up builds, compositions and harras options. Describing PvT as deathball with late prism option is retardedly simplistic Okie dokie. Why don't you mention why I am wrong? I don't mind if people tell me WHY I am "retardedly simplistic" (because some people on this thread and other ones have refuted some of my points), but saying such thing without elaboration doesn't say much about me. Finally, I think you have misunderstood what I meant by deathball. That's the primary Protoss's option against Terran. If there is any other option that Protoss can pull, let me know! He means the term "death ball" is overly simplistic, since it is normally made up of every protoss ground unit and high templar scattered around the map in defensive positions. You could also say that MMM is a deathball, because they all travel together and fit on one screen.
Ah, okay. My bad on that part.
Yes, you're right that Blizzard can't simply just change the design just because we demand it. However, I will stretch this topic a bit. If we look at LoL or DoTA, we see different picks (although we do see recurring heroes/champions). These different picks do provide a different flavor to the overall game. The only difference we can see in every SC2 game based on the match-up is how well the player uses the units but not the composition itself. If you are a devoted hardcore SC2 fan, then that game would be interesting to you. However, if you are at least somewhat of a casual observer like I am, it gets really boring because you can already predict what the players will be go for.
I am not asking for Blizzard to make one composition replace the other. I am arguing for Blizzard to look at the bigger picture. The team refuses to change Bio or other Terran tools because they say how that Bio keeps the game fun. Yes, it does keep the pace of the game intense. At the same time, pure reliance on bio makes the game extremely stale because it's easily expected.
|
I have to agree with the OP, and I think its really starting to affect the image of terran players. When all they really do is spam marine/marauder in all match-ups, its harder and harder to appreciate the nuances in the gameplay, and I say this as a terran player.
WOL terran was first overpowered but then underpowered, but it felt always appreciated as a race that had the best match-ups from a viewer POV. With HOTS they improved the other mirrors, PvZ has a crapload of variety yet terran match-ups stayed the same or in the case of TvZ became a pretty miserable viewing experience where its the same conga line every single game.
Who will be around 3 years from now to watch marine spam? I certainly hope we don't have to wait until LOTV to change things.
|
United States4883 Posts
On August 26 2013 11:56 AxionSteel wrote:
I dunno why people are trying to think this is a balance QQ, it's not. I'm Terran and I'm totally bored of TvZ lately, just endless rallies of marines and mines for the most part, and the zerg either stops it or doesn't. So much so that I sometimes even cheer for the zerg player to beat it, and considering my long hatred of everything zerg, this is crazy. I just don't like the matchup at the moment, even though terran totally dominates it at the top level, It's really boring. I highly disagree with the point about mech being technically stronger, it's not the case, zerg totally dominates mech, it has so many hard counters for mech it's just not funny. Mech imo is actually FAR stronger vs protoss than vs zerg, although I dunno how strong it actually is since no one uses it apart from a couple of Euro pros.
The biggest issue for mech, both in TvP and TvZ is that it's on a timer. If you cannot kill your opponent or get WAY ahead at some point early in the game, you cannot win the lategame. And that's the opposite of how mech SHOULD play. Not to mention that mech is only powerful in the lategame, which again contradicts the whole nature of how mech was designed in SC2.
On August 26 2013 12:02 BronzeKnee wrote:
Blizzard intentionally designed the game like this. But then they didn't make it work.
It is well established that Siege Tanks in combination with Thors, Hellbats and Medivacs offers a completely different form of play than Marines in combination with Marauders, Medivacs, Mines/Vikings and Ghost do. Neither one is inherently better than the other in terms of game design. However one currently works well, while one does not. So, the problem isn't just that Factory only units aren't viable, it is that Barracks only units are viable.
Wat?
Marine/marauder is WAY the hell better in terms of game design (although we can all admit that the marauder is redundant). The problem is NOT that factory units aren't viable option because bio is so good; it's that if bio weren't as good, terran as a race would suck balls. Mech is terribly designed in SC2, that's a fact.
However, again, I definitely agree that bio is too strong for its own good. I honestly think that the old hellbats were good for the game and steered things in a mech direction. Granted, they were perhaps too powerful, but the way Blizzard hastily patched them was ugly and killed a lot of the progress we had made in the HotS meta. Not happy about that one. Mech needs a good, multi-purpose unit (like the marine) in order to make mech more viable. Interestingly, the original hellbat and the warhound filled this role, but both had absolutely terrible stats and perhaps boring mechanics. As much as people hated the warhound, I think Blizzard was actually taking a step in the right direction at the time.
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
Why is this thread still open?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
