EPT[H][D] Terran and long distance maps - Page 3
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
Blackk
South Africa226 Posts
| ||
|
QueueQueue
Canada1000 Posts
While MVP is definitely a talented, respected Terran player; even top tier players can fall victim to shortsighted, hasty opinions on balance (as we see happen time and time again). I don't think we should take his statement as a huge indicator about the current state of balance as even he hasn't had extensive periods of time to evaluate the required changes that need to be made on the newer map sets. While it's definitely something that we should keep a watchful eye on, we mustn't be hasty in our conclusions. =) | ||
|
ALPINA
3791 Posts
Keep in mind that the larger map is, the harder is for zerg to spread creep and usually fights are happening off creep. Medivac harass on large maps is also more stronger. | ||
|
Griffith`
714 Posts
| ||
|
SuPerFlyTNT
United States145 Posts
On March 24 2011 04:08 GinDo wrote: Didn't you watch BW? Marine Medic Tank. Nothing has changed. The only thing more mobile then this was SK Terran which sucks because Ravens can only hold 1 HSM even with full energy bar. And HSM is 125 energy which is a crap ton. Further more compared to Sci Vessels Ravens are Ubber Slow. I'm going to focus on mobility in TvZ, because I play it most and I also find that the mobility is less an issue for me personally in TvP because I go heavy rax/drops. I am in the 2000's diamond. I find this is an issue for me too. More recently I've tried doing massive tank spreads and crawling on a larger scale, it works to a point but, it only really seems to work if I'm way ahead of my opponent already. Maybe its the nature of the game, but the late game seems to be decided by the mid-game for me, and the immobility will be key here: (note this all has to do with my playstyle as well) If in the midgame, I am able to harass to great effect - Med drops primarily - then once the number of Mutas/Infestors gets high enough to start denying it nearly completely, I'll generally have been able to safely expand, get some PF's up around the map, get ahead, and just out-mass produce the and move agressively across the map, contain, and win. Heres a replay. http://replayfu.com/r/sS7hWk My problem is that, even if I macro well and keep up with the Zerg, if my harass isn't affective, and I am not well ahead in the late game, it feels impossible to deal with Zerg's mobility. Heres another couple replays where I felt like I was playing pretty well for the most part. Definitely more issues in the game than the mobility alone, but still, these each have some major examples of mobility-based sadfaces. http://replayfu.com/r/BBfrqt http://replayfu.com/r/sS7hWk http://replayfu.com/r/s9CPWm - this third one has I think only one good example, the baneling bust on my third, the whole game was played pretty poorly by me but, my point here is the mobility of popping in, destroying a whole mining base, and out in like 5 seconds, where even though I was nearby - very nearby - I couldn't move into position to stop it. Once late game pushes start across open maps, you get set up, you're out on the map, and Zerg can relatively easily bust your tertiary expo's and move back to defend before you move far. The necessity of Siege Tanks, and their incredible immobility, makes me feel stuck in the late game. Where on Tal'darim Altar for instance (see one of the above replays), when I have my big Tank/Marine spread out on the map, and I see him heading for one of my couple mining bases left, even with its PF and turrets, I just say to myself..... ssssssssssiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigggghhhhh. In one of the replays I decide to try to get quickly into his base while he's out of position, but notice the incredibly small distance I have to travel versus him, and then how he's back before I'm even really set up . (Granted in this specific instance I also failed miserably against banes - sadface) Also, the only reason I added that quote was to clarify, its not HSM its SM, its just called Seeker Missle. I don't think we should create acronyms that are wrong. Also, I took a break in the middle of writing this so if it was poorly put together - apologies. To clarify - I feel like this is an issue too. | ||
|
Antisocialmunky
United States5912 Posts
On March 24 2011 05:46 PredY wrote: i don't think the issue is too big i mean we could see a few small changes in the future (faster medivacs - yes, they nerfed their speed before because of small maps, faster siege mode, perhaps even some kind of raven buff - i'd love to see seeker missile buff, faster projectile or less mana) but i think it's ok. Just practise and find new ways, like hellions usuage during the mid and lategame since they are superfast etc. We can dream right? I don't think its the fact that tanks siege/unsiege slow. Its just that Terran has passive no map like Creep Speed or warp in. Maybe auto turrets if those things are supposed to be the new spider mine but you need so many ravens to pull it off. They only gave Terran the Sensor Tower which isn't so useful yet. At any rate, the way I see it is that map control for Terran comes at the price of your maxed army. Its not just throwing a down pylon or expanding creep. Terran gets multiple map-hax but can't effectively take advantage of it. I dunno, maybe people will start abusing MulEconomy(tm) more for the free supply. | ||
|
Noocta
France12578 Posts
Also, the only reason I added that quote was to clarify, its not HSM its SM, its just called Seeker Missle. I don't think we should create acronyms that are wrong. There were called Hunter Seeker Missile during Beta, and since noone really use them, everyone forget they change the name. =d | ||
|
Deltablazy
Canada580 Posts
| ||
|
BitterStriFe
United States89 Posts
| ||
|
ALPINA
3791 Posts
On March 24 2011 23:36 Deltablazy wrote: The answer is obvious. More reaper/hellion based play and hope you can win before mid-end of mid-game. Or just veto all the large maps. This is going to be a painful season for Terran. Are you serious? Better watch how really good terrans play, times changes, 1 base allins no longer wins you are game. | ||
|
BitterStriFe
United States89 Posts
| ||
|
b0urne420
Canada112 Posts
| ||
|
Lurk
Germany359 Posts
On March 24 2011 23:40 Alpina wrote: Are you serious? Better watch how really good terrans play, times changes, 1 base allins no longer wins you are game. 1 base allins are/were so popular because the longer a game lasts, the less chances the terran has. Our lategame yet remains to be fixed. I'm not saying that terran can't win lategame or on large maps, but terrans certainly don't have near 50% win rate in 20min+ games. Give me a fighting chance in real lategame macro scenarios and i will gladly give it a try. I play about 50:50 of my games with early aggression/allin style and macro lategame style. And while i got about 70% win rate with the former, i only got about 40% with the latter. | ||
|
BitterStriFe
United States89 Posts
On March 25 2011 00:01 b0urne420 wrote: blizzard failed to realize that their god awful maps were the cause of terran imbalance/abusiveness. they honestly shouldnt have nerfed terran mechanics until after they saw how they played in larger maps. Well put, we didn't get to see how Zerg and Protoss would be effected on larger maps, turns out they have a large advantage and T doesn't. They then proceed to nerf T and there you go. | ||
|
ALPINA
3791 Posts
On March 25 2011 00:13 Lurk wrote: 1 base allins are/were so popular because the longer a game lasts, the less chances the terran has. Our lategame yet remains to be fixed. I'm not saying that terran can't win lategame or on large maps, but terrans certainly don't have near 50% win rate in 20min+ games. Give me a fighting chance in real lategame macro scenarios and i will gladly give it a try. I play about 50:50 of my games with early aggression/allin style and macro lategame style. And while i got about 70% win rate with the former, i only got about 40% with the latter. Explain me then why I recently saw players like Idra, ret, July, Zenio, moonglade dieing in straight up long macro games? Fast 3 base terran is extremely strong with huge production capabilites. By the way macro game =/= turtling until 200/200. Good terrans do not allow zerg to get huge amounts or resources + larva. | ||
|
Anomalist0032
United States47 Posts
I mean, terran are still taking games off of p/z (SuperNova got 2nd in code A) And the larger maps are still so new. Everyone is far too quick to jump on the bandwagon of imbalance. I mean, remember in season 2 when alot of people were saying "protoss is broken and imbalanced" and then with very few changes a protoss dominated season 3. While i agree that with the current meta game, terran are having problems, I feel like the answer isnt crying imbalance, its attempting to find solutions to the problem, and if there are honestly none you know blizzard will fix it. Lets not act like the wow community and just whine till we get our way. We are thinkers, lets try and think our way through problems and find our own solutions. pss. if im not mistaken wasnt bw terran thought to be really really up for a long while until people figured out how to make up for their problems? Edit: spelling and a fixed a few syntax errors | ||
|
Lurk
Germany359 Posts
On March 25 2011 00:28 Alpina wrote: Explain me then why I recently saw players like Idra, ret, July, Zenio, moonglade dieing in straight up long macro games? Fast 3 base terran is extremely strong with huge production capabilites. By the way macro game =/= turtling until 200/200. Good terrans do not allow zerg to get huge amounts or resources + larva. Did you even read my post ? Of course terran CAN win in long macro games and on large maps, but the odds are stacked against it. The same way that zerg CAN win on close pos metalopolis and steppes of war but is not likely to. | ||
|
Reborn8u
United States1761 Posts
It some ways it matters more for toss, because terrans have sensor towers and PF's to help control bases they take beyond their natural. Zerg has creep and very fast units. Every unit in terrans arsenal is good for some kind of harass (except bc's). What mechanic does protoss have to assist in taking later bases? We gotta do it the old fashioned way, lots of cannons and please don't say hurp derp just warp in. WTF is warping in 6 units to save a base, while it's getting crushed by an army or dropped by 2 medevacs worth of mm, going to do? Die, that's what. Honestly, I can count the number of sensor towers I've seen in GSL on 1 hand. Those things are amazing, but no one is using them. Terran has banshees, hellions, drops, sensor towers, all of these things can mitigate mobility. I'm not saying it isn't a challenge to adapt to larger maps, but all the people acting like protoss gets some huge advantage over terran because of map size are just wrong. As for the harass, protoss has 3 good harass units, prisms, DT's, and phoenix. All of which can be dealt with by the same thing, well placed missle turrets and that other thing terrans never make, sensor towers. I'm sorry if I come off like an ass, but seriously a sensor tower is like a build-able xel naga watch tower. They should be used almost every game, especially on large maps. | ||
|
ALPINA
3791 Posts
On March 25 2011 00:32 Lurk wrote: Did you even read my post ? Of course terran CAN win in long macro games and on large maps, but the odds are stacked against it. The same way that zerg CAN win on close pos metalopolis and steppes of war but is not likely to. Thing is you have no proof that odds are against terran. Terrans are winning in straight up macro games vs. zerg, why do you thing zerg has advantage here? Is it just from your own experience? | ||
|
Lurk
Germany359 Posts
So i stopped using sensor towers other than in TvT, simply because they're not worth their cost in the other matchups. Getting 2-3 missile turrets instead is a better investment almost every time. | ||
| ||
