|
Long distance maps make fast units more useful. I don't believe that statement can be debated.
If we look at Zerg we can see that Zerg has the zergling and the mutalisk that are both fast units (even off creep in the case of the zergling). We all know that Zerg gets to control the towers in TvZ because of Terran's lesser mobility. On a large map like Tal'Darim, Zerg has full vision because of creep, towers, and overlords. When the Terran player tries to move out, the Zerg player will easily cut off reinforcements and just start making tons of units and spine crawlers to defend the push. Meanwhile, the Zerg player can counterattack with impunity because the Terran army is gone.
If Terran waits to get 200/200, then Zerg expands several times and then has enough money to do whatever he wants. Whenever I see a pro Zerg player lose a game on Tal'Darim it's always because they have poor scouting and decision making.
For Protoss, the long rush distance allows them to cheat and build less gateway units. They can get templar faster, a deathball faster, or get DTs safer. The problem for the other two races (Zerg and Terran are both weak to Protoss on Tal'Darim) is that they have to play Protoss like a 4 gate is coming. You can't cheat Protoss on any map because Protoss can warp units in anywhere on the map. As soon as Zergs and Terrans start trying to cut corners on their build orders like Protoss does, they'll get smacked with a 4 gate.
The game is just not balanced for these large maps. In the short term, sensor tower range should be proportional to map size. On a large map sensor towers become less effective, which is terrible because you need them more on those maps. Additionally, static defense becomes less effective (static defense is most useful to delay pushes until you can reinforce) because units can't back up the static early enough. If the game isn't rebalanced for these large maps, then we're probably not going to see many pro Terran players doing well in tournaments.
|
On March 25 2011 00:46 Alpina wrote: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?
It's my own experience - and that of practically every terran player i know. Go around and ask terran players if their win rate is higher in short or long matches and you'll see.
It's nothing new nor it is any kind of imbalance. It's just the reason why terrans tend to try to end things quickly. Because the longer you drag it out, the less you chances of winning are. A terran winning a 60 minute macro fest against a zerg does not disprove this.
|
On March 25 2011 00:48 Lurk wrote:
When i started playing terran in sc2 i used sensor towers a lot. I still used them when i was in high diamond. However, i started to realize that almost never they actually did me any good. Since the opponent can see the exact radius of the tower, he will never fly through it if he wants to drop you, he'll just maneuver around it. Also, very rarely does a zerg or protoss actually attempt to drop - most of the time you're harassed by phoenix or mutas, in which case sensor towers don't do you any good because they're too fast anyway.
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.
I totally disagree, putting them in position so they cover the sides of your bases to the edge of the map (so they CAN'T be avoided) would help. I find it hard to believe that you wouldn't want early warning of muta raids, or prisms. I agree you still have to make missile turrets, but being able to maneuver your marines early will always help. Another thing I'd like to point out is terrans range upgrade for missile turrets and pf's, also the +2 armor for buildings at the engineering bay . I have seen this used once in gsl. (granted, I haven't watched every match but of the ones I have seen)
Like I said in the earlier post, some adaptations need to be made for larger maps by terran. But I feel that terrans aren't using a lot of the options they have available. The fact is that 3 sensor towers can give terran vision of almost half the map, even on these huge gsl maps. How you think that is not worth it, and doesn't give you an advantage to dealing with harass and mobility is a mystery to me.
|
On March 25 2011 01:04 Reborn8u wrote:Like I said in the earlier post, some adaptations need to be made for larger maps by terran. But I feel that terrans aren't using a lot of the options they have available. The fact is that 3 sensor towers can give terran vision of almost half the map, even on these huge gsl maps. How you think that is not worth it, and doesn't give you an advantage to dealing with harass and mobility is a mystery to me.
First, sensor towers don't provide vision. They cannot tell you if it's an overlord or a muta or a zergling. Also, the enemy can see that you can see him, which is also a big deal and can be abused.
Second, sensor towers are not exactly cheap and can be sniped easily (as everyone can see where they are).
And lastly, even though you can see the enemy units a few seconds earlier, you still have to have units ready to fend them off. If you don't have marines, thors or missile turrets ready near your mineral line, you will not fend off muta harass, no matter if you have a sensor tower or not.
There is a reason they're not used very often. And it's not that terrans haven't "discovered" them yet.
|
On March 25 2011 01:03 Lurk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2011 00:46 Alpina wrote: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? It's my own experience - and that of practically every terran player i know. Go around and ask terran players if their win rate is higher in short or long matches and you'll see. It's nothing new nor it is any kind of imbalance. It's just the reason why terrans tend to try to end things quickly. Because the longer you drag it out, the less you chances of winning are. A terran winning a 60 minute macro fest against a zerg does not disprove this.
Terran players do not have much experience on large maps, because whole year everyone was playing on small maps, that's why it is harder for them to play and win on large maps. But that absolutelly does not mean that odds of winning are against terran. Maybe odds winning on steppes for terran is 60%, and on Tal darim altar it is 50% - you may never know.
It is just much easier for terran to win on small maps but that does not mean they are at disadvantage on large maps.
|
France12904 Posts
On March 25 2011 01:20 Alpina wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2011 01:03 Lurk wrote:On March 25 2011 00:46 Alpina wrote: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? It's my own experience - and that of practically every terran player i know. Go around and ask terran players if their win rate is higher in short or long matches and you'll see. It's nothing new nor it is any kind of imbalance. It's just the reason why terrans tend to try to end things quickly. Because the longer you drag it out, the less you chances of winning are. A terran winning a 60 minute macro fest against a zerg does not disprove this. Terran players do not have much experience on large maps, because whole year everyone was playing on small maps, that's why it is harder for them to play and win on large maps. But that absolutelly does not mean that odds of winning are against terran. Maybe odds winning on steppes for terran is 60%, and on Tal darim altar it is 50% - you may never know. It is just much easier for terran to win on small maps but that does not mean they are at disadvantage on large maps.
You can't be serious.
On larger maps in TvP/TvZ it's much much harder to win, a medivac speed buff (reverse the nerf basically) is probably needed but dunno if it's all T need on these maps.
|
On March 25 2011 01:14 Lurk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2011 01:04 Reborn8u wrote:Like I said in the earlier post, some adaptations need to be made for larger maps by terran. But I feel that terrans aren't using a lot of the options they have available. The fact is that 3 sensor towers can give terran vision of almost half the map, even on these huge gsl maps. How you think that is not worth it, and doesn't give you an advantage to dealing with harass and mobility is a mystery to me. First, sensor towers don't provide vision. They cannot tell you if it's an overlord or a muta or a zergling. Also, the enemy can see that you can see him, which is also a big deal and can be abused. Second, sensor towers are not exactly cheap and can be sniped easily (as everyone can see where they are). And lastly, even though you can see the enemy units a few seconds earlier, you still have to have units ready to fend them off. If you don't have marines, thors or missile turrets ready near your mineral line, you will not fend off muta harass, no matter if you have a sensor tower or not. There is a reason they're not used very often. And it's not that terrans haven't "discovered" them yet.
Ya the whole sensor tower debate is kind of silly. Sensor towers don't make your units any faster, they just make your reaction time faster. And honestly the whole mechanic where the opponent can SEE the radius of your sensor tower is absolutely ridiculous. Logically it makes no sense. An observer / raven / overseer can see cloaked units because of whatever scientific mechanic (radar, psionic pulses, zergy spider senses, I don't know) but what scientific mechanic allows the player to see a LARGE WHITE CIRCLE INDICATING THE EXACT RANGE OF AN UNDISCOVERED SENSORTOWER...........................
|
I cant imagine IMmvp switching race. Maps like Tal'Darim altar are pretty bad for Terran. The game is not balanced for these new huge maps since P has the warp gate advantage they are quite strong as they still get a choice of builds they can use no matter the map size. TvZ is quite bad as well on big maps, not so much because of the size but because of the easy amount of expansions the Z can easily get the gas they need to get the critical mass of mutas. You can ask any T player if theyd prefer a medium sized map like xel naga or Tal'darim and you prolly wont be to shocked on which they pick.
|
On March 24 2011 11:24 spbelky wrote:
As some previous posters said, Phoenix or Muta can give a Protoss or Zerg complete air + map control, meaning things such as banshees/medivacs for transportation are completely out of the question. Also previously mentioned, Terran units are SLOW, unbelievably slow. Aside from the Reaper or Hellion, every Terran ground unit is 2.25 speed or slower. (I hope everyone that doesn't play Terran understands how slow 2.25 actually is)
So what about the Reaper or Hellion? Well, they both succeed at killing two things, workers, and light units. Sooo. workers, and Zerglings/Zealots. Luckily for us though, Zerglings on creep rape hellions, and Zealots are always accompanied by stalkers or sentries. So we have mobile units that are good at harassing workers, but suck at pretty much everything else.
This brings us back to the original problem, Terran doesn't have any mobile forces that are actually good in combat, so to deal with long travel distances on larger maps, Terran pretty much just has to deal with being slow, there is no real alternative.
To compare, Zerg typical ground units OFF CREEP / ON CREEP (assuming full upgrades)
Zergling - 4.7 / 6.1
Roach - 3.0 / 3.9 (often times I hear zerg complain about how ungodly slow roaches are without speed upgrade. Well, an unupgraded roach is 2.25, which is exactly what marine/marauder/tanks are... think about that one)
Hydra - 2.25 / 3.375 (again I often hear complaints about how slow Hydras are off creep. They are the SAME speed as marine/marauder/tanks)
Infestor - 2.5
Ultralisk - 2.95 / 3.835
Baneling - 2.95 / 3.835
Every single zerg unit is faster than any Terran ground unit (excluding reaper/hellion), and the "omg slow" zerg units (unupgraded roach/hydra/infestor) are still just as fast if not faster than every Terran unit. Luckily when we do actually engage, we have stim to compensate, but we can't exactly stim our way across the map when we need to travel. Remember, these speeds are not relative to how they impact actual engagements, but how the impact travel time (because I would argue Zerg units NEED to be this fast in order to engage properly).
Now for the Protoss, Protoss is closer to Terran than Zerg, but there are still quite a few units that are both good in combat AND fast.
Zealot - 2.75*
Stalker - 2.95*
Sentry - 2.25
High Templar - 1.88 (sadface)
Dark Templar - 2.81*
Archon - 2.81*
Immortal - 2.25
Colossus - 2.25
So 4 of the 8 Protoss ground units are faster than the typical Terran ground unit, and now just for good measure I'll list all the Terran ground units because I can
Hellion - 4.25
Reaper - 3.83
Marine - 2.25
Marauder - 2.25
Ghost - 2.25
Tank - 2.25
Thor - 1.88
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Now that we've clearly established that Terran units on average are slower than both Protoss and Zerg (remember, we're still talking about speed in terms of transportation), let's talk about other means of transportation. As previously mentioned in this post and others, on larger maps both Protoss and Zerg tend to favor getting units like Muta and Phoenix to negate medivacs AND maintain air control, so we'll take medivacs mobility out of the picture (for now). What other modes of transportation does each race have if they don't want to hoof it on ground?
Zerg - Their units are already blazing fast, especially on creep, but when they need an alternative, there is always the underused NYDUS worm! The Nydus Worm (or worms) can transport an entire army across the map in seconds.
Protoss - Warp Gate units can be warped in anywhere the Protoss can supply a power field with a pylon OR Warp Prism. Also, the very underused Mothership Recall. Often an underused ability because the Mothership itself is so slow, and Protoss love keep their mothership with their army, but if separated the Mothership can warp in the Protoss army to its location from anywhere on the map.
Terran - ... umm...
uhhh...
...
OK then.
So now let's bring up the medivac, because I know a lot of you want to argue that it is viable despite the mutas and phoenix on the map. If the Terran loads up units in to a medivac(s) (whether it be 8 marines, or 16 medivacs with his entire army) he risks losing every single unit if intercepted by phoenix / mutas in the wrong place.
Similarly, it's not like Zergs don't have overlord upgrades or Protoss don't have Warp Prisms. I'm not going to argue that Overlords or Warp Prisms compare to medivacs as UNITS, because the medivac is clearly the winner (imo), but in terms of TRANSPORTATION only, which is what this thread is about (i think?), I think the "dropship" option is about even across the three races, right?
I hate to do this, but not exactly... Speeds - Remember this is all about transportation speed.
Warp Prism - 2.5 (3.375 upgraded)
Medivac - 2.5
Overlord - 1.88 (poor ovies)
I'm running out of steam to keep writing, and I actually wrote this hours ago but forgot to submit, damnit.
Don't forget that the speed is depend on the size of the units. For example, although hydra and marauders have the same speed 2.25, marauders will always catching up to hydra because hydra has bigger pixel graphic (can't explain why, but that how it work, alot of people state that), or although marauder and stalker has .7 speed different(more than a zealot charge) it always seems like marauder can barely keep up with the stalkers.
But that bring up to the problem. Tank is not true 2.25 speed, and THORS is not true 1.88 speed lolz.
|
On March 25 2011 02:05 canikizu wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 11:24 spbelky wrote:
As some previous posters said, Phoenix or Muta can give a Protoss or Zerg complete air + map control, meaning things such as banshees/medivacs for transportation are completely out of the question. Also previously mentioned, Terran units are SLOW, unbelievably slow. Aside from the Reaper or Hellion, every Terran ground unit is 2.25 speed or slower. (I hope everyone that doesn't play Terran understands how slow 2.25 actually is)
So what about the Reaper or Hellion? Well, they both succeed at killing two things, workers, and light units. Sooo. workers, and Zerglings/Zealots. Luckily for us though, Zerglings on creep rape hellions, and Zealots are always accompanied by stalkers or sentries. So we have mobile units that are good at harassing workers, but suck at pretty much everything else.
This brings us back to the original problem, Terran doesn't have any mobile forces that are actually good in combat, so to deal with long travel distances on larger maps, Terran pretty much just has to deal with being slow, there is no real alternative.
To compare, Zerg typical ground units OFF CREEP / ON CREEP (assuming full upgrades)
Zergling - 4.7 / 6.1
Roach - 3.0 / 3.9 (often times I hear zerg complain about how ungodly slow roaches are without speed upgrade. Well, an unupgraded roach is 2.25, which is exactly what marine/marauder/tanks are... think about that one)
Hydra - 2.25 / 3.375 (again I often hear complaints about how slow Hydras are off creep. They are the SAME speed as marine/marauder/tanks)
Infestor - 2.5
Ultralisk - 2.95 / 3.835
Baneling - 2.95 / 3.835
Every single zerg unit is faster than any Terran ground unit (excluding reaper/hellion), and the "omg slow" zerg units (unupgraded roach/hydra/infestor) are still just as fast if not faster than every Terran unit. Luckily when we do actually engage, we have stim to compensate, but we can't exactly stim our way across the map when we need to travel. Remember, these speeds are not relative to how they impact actual engagements, but how the impact travel time (because I would argue Zerg units NEED to be this fast in order to engage properly).
Now for the Protoss, Protoss is closer to Terran than Zerg, but there are still quite a few units that are both good in combat AND fast.
Zealot - 2.75*
Stalker - 2.95*
Sentry - 2.25
High Templar - 1.88 (sadface)
Dark Templar - 2.81*
Archon - 2.81*
Immortal - 2.25
Colossus - 2.25
So 4 of the 8 Protoss ground units are faster than the typical Terran ground unit, and now just for good measure I'll list all the Terran ground units because I can
Hellion - 4.25
Reaper - 3.83
Marine - 2.25
Marauder - 2.25
Ghost - 2.25
Tank - 2.25
Thor - 1.88
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Now that we've clearly established that Terran units on average are slower than both Protoss and Zerg (remember, we're still talking about speed in terms of transportation), let's talk about other means of transportation. As previously mentioned in this post and others, on larger maps both Protoss and Zerg tend to favor getting units like Muta and Phoenix to negate medivacs AND maintain air control, so we'll take medivacs mobility out of the picture (for now). What other modes of transportation does each race have if they don't want to hoof it on ground?
Zerg - Their units are already blazing fast, especially on creep, but when they need an alternative, there is always the underused NYDUS worm! The Nydus Worm (or worms) can transport an entire army across the map in seconds.
Protoss - Warp Gate units can be warped in anywhere the Protoss can supply a power field with a pylon OR Warp Prism. Also, the very underused Mothership Recall. Often an underused ability because the Mothership itself is so slow, and Protoss love keep their mothership with their army, but if separated the Mothership can warp in the Protoss army to its location from anywhere on the map.
Terran - ... umm...
uhhh...
...
OK then.
So now let's bring up the medivac, because I know a lot of you want to argue that it is viable despite the mutas and phoenix on the map. If the Terran loads up units in to a medivac(s) (whether it be 8 marines, or 16 medivacs with his entire army) he risks losing every single unit if intercepted by phoenix / mutas in the wrong place.
Similarly, it's not like Zergs don't have overlord upgrades or Protoss don't have Warp Prisms. I'm not going to argue that Overlords or Warp Prisms compare to medivacs as UNITS, because the medivac is clearly the winner (imo), but in terms of TRANSPORTATION only, which is what this thread is about (i think?), I think the "dropship" option is about even across the three races, right?
I hate to do this, but not exactly... Speeds - Remember this is all about transportation speed.
Warp Prism - 2.5 (3.375 upgraded)
Medivac - 2.5
Overlord - 1.88 (poor ovies)
I'm running out of steam to keep writing, and I actually wrote this hours ago but forgot to submit, damnit. Don't forget that the speed is depend on the size of the units. For example, although hydra and marauders have the same speed 2.25, marauders will always catching up to hydra because hydra has bigger pixel graphic (can't explain why, but that how it work, alot of people state that), or although marauder and stalker has .7 speed different(more than a zealot charge) it always seems like marauder can barely keep up with the stalkers. But that bring up to the problem. Tank is not true 2.25 speed, and THORS is not true 1.88 speed lolz.
Pretty sure you're wrong about that.... the marauders are keeping up because they have concussive grenades.... Tanks go step for step with infantry, because they're all 2.25. Thors are slower and fall behind while moving. If I had to guess, I'd say they're slower by somewhere in the region of 0.37 ish, maybe, I don't know.
|
On March 24 2011 11:24 spbelky wrote:
As some previous posters said, Phoenix or Muta can give a Protoss or Zerg complete air + map control, meaning things such as banshees/medivacs for transportation are completely out of the question. Also previously mentioned, Terran units are SLOW, unbelievably slow. Aside from the Reaper or Hellion, every Terran ground unit is 2.25 speed or slower. (I hope everyone that doesn't play Terran understands how slow 2.25 actually is)
So what about the Reaper or Hellion? Well, they both succeed at killing two things, workers, and light units. Sooo. workers, and Zerglings/Zealots. Luckily for us though, Zerglings on creep rape hellions, and Zealots are always accompanied by stalkers or sentries. So we have mobile units that are good at harassing workers, but suck at pretty much everything else.
This brings us back to the original problem, Terran doesn't have any mobile forces that are actually good in combat, so to deal with long travel distances on larger maps, Terran pretty much just has to deal with being slow, there is no real alternative. [Excerpted]
I'm going to have to disagree with your first point. As the size inbetween two bases increases the area surrounding a base increases as the square of the walking distance. That means that if the opponent has lots of air wandering around on your side of the map (if they're on their own side of the map they aren't exercising map control) they have MORE area to patrol. Alternatively the amount of area you have to defend is going to stay roughly the same because you're going to keep your defenses local to your base.
For this reason I believe it will be easier to sneak a drop in on large maps. The amount of area they have to defend will remain constant (just as the amount of defended area you have to deal with remains constant) so they should have roughly the same amount of defenses regardless of map size.
As for the point about large maps I (terran) got owned vs a zerg the other day on Taldarim but I think it was mostly because I didn't play the map correctly. I believe it will be an adjustment but I don't think larger maps will completely kill terran, I think we just need to adjust. Mobile units (hellions and drops) will become more valuable. PF's and sensor towers will also become more powerful. Good scouting will be essential as you've got lots more room to sneak a hidden expansion in.
|
On March 25 2011 01:20 Alpina wrote:Show nested quote +On March 25 2011 01:03 Lurk wrote:On March 25 2011 00:46 Alpina wrote: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? It's my own experience - and that of practically every terran player i know. Go around and ask terran players if their win rate is higher in short or long matches and you'll see. It's nothing new nor it is any kind of imbalance. It's just the reason why terrans tend to try to end things quickly. Because the longer you drag it out, the less you chances of winning are. A terran winning a 60 minute macro fest against a zerg does not disprove this. Terran players do not have much experience on large maps, because whole year everyone was playing on small maps, that's why it is harder for them to play and win on large maps. But that absolutelly does not mean that odds of winning are against terran. Maybe odds winning on steppes for terran is 60%, and on Tal darim altar it is 50% - you may never know. It is just much easier for terran to win on small maps but that does not mean they are at disadvantage on large maps.
Zerg and Protoss players do not have experience playing larger maps either...
|
Being able to reinforce with only gateway units isn't that much of a bonus, since they are tier 1 and KA has been removed...
|
On March 25 2011 03:29 tehemperorer wrote:
Being able to reinforce with only gateway units isn't that much of a bonus, since they are tier 1 and KA has been removed...
Are you mentally disturbed or just joking?
Zlots are one of the best tanks ingame, and 3/3 chargelots screws anything super hard. 150hp super strong unit at 100 minerals and 5sec warp time is riducilous.
Blink stalkers are good, and sentrys provides FF that own pretty much any ground Z unit.....
You just being stupid
|
When i read about MVP thinking about race change, i started to seriously consider to switching protoss myself.
I just hate the idea, that terran is so disfavored in large maps due to high immobility.
|
It fees the problem vs protoss is having units warped in behind you (especially DT's). Vs zerg it's more a matter of you;re slow, even if you scan the other guy you dont time to siege (even if you do you will have the worst positioning ever usually) and then they have abilites like nydus (that zeros distances in practise) creep AND drops. I honestly dont reckon faster medevacs would fix this. Nevertheless its not so bad on terminus re but tal'darim altar is a nightmare.
Everyone says "terran has to pressure". Well you cant. Not on large maps. Since I was master league before this patch (without 2rax or cheesing) and now I'm losing to diamonds the answer I suppose is to start learning protoss.
|
I think Zerg should lend Terran their Nydus worm. They aren't using it that much after all. 
|
Game is not balanced around big maps, this is the issue.
|
Guys im currently watching White-Ra stream against QXC and i cant help to get annoyed.
Lategame. 4v4base and qxc harassing one of the aside expos, and the only thing White-Ra needs to do is to just warp in 10 stalkers in 4 sec hAhahaha. Lategame nullifies every TvP harass it seems.
|
infinity21
Canada6683 Posts
On March 25 2011 06:18 Veasel wrote:Guys im currently watching White-Ra stream against QXC and i cant help to get annoyed. Lategame. 4v4base and qxc harassing one of the aside expos, and the only thing White-Ra needs to do is to just warp in 10 stalkers in 4 sec hAhahaha. Lategame nullifies every TvP harass it seems.
Well Terran is supposed to drop multiple locations at once to circumvent that. You drop one location, bait protoss to warp in a lot of units there, then do a massive drop on his gateways or something like that. Of course, smart Ps will overmake warp gates so that this effect is minimized.
Really, the only way to beat protoss in mid/late game is to out-multitask them and set up well timed drops.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
