|
On August 27 2011 06:54 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2011 00:00 Squigly wrote:
From what i found, T is really fucking hard to play against a competent Z until your good, well masterish good. As you have to multitask, a lot. 1 bad unsiege and you get fucked. These sort of things are mistakes which high level players dont seem to really make. Sure theres the odd mistake but no mass unsiege by accident etc. Trust me, that happens even in diamond.
When people say T is the hardest to play, in diamond i would definitely agree as it seems to require so much more apm its mindboggling. You can chill on like 50 apm as zerg and do fine in diamond. Just not possible with T. However once your comfortable with your 130+ apm it probably just seems normal.
Well and now I would argue, that you did well as Zerg, because Zerg is the race that requires the highest overall knowledge of the game. there is no safe build, so you have to know whats coming, without seeing it. Ofc a high level player will do well with Zerg on low skill level, because he will have that ability. Also I want to argue, that I, as a Zerg player, have beaten a lot of Masters Zs with T too, because you can simply do anything, and as long as the zerg doesn't get what you do, he loses, and talking about hard micro... The onyl hard terran micro I know about is using snipe effecticly and maybe real good hellion kiting. Stimmed marines are just a clicking excercise to kite and spread in my eyes and real good terrans like MVP are way above this kind of gameplay. They win because they have this zerglike spidersenses, instead of doing the average masterleague pushes, that are just excercises until you find zergs that have brutal good gamesense.
Hmm thats actually a decent point. As zerg if u have a good game sense your a good way to doing well.
On the micro thing, lol, i cant tell if thats a troll or you actually have no idea. First off tank micro is actually quite taxing. Focus firing tanks, siege micro itself isnt that easy. Then theres marines, you seem to think kiting and splitting dont count as micro? really?
You actually summed up my point pretty well. People like MvP obviously have a great time as Terran as they can do all the 'basics' in their sleep as you need to be able to. Its like being able to larva inject, if you cant do it as Z you just lose. The thing is terran 'basics' are waaay harder, and many master level players dont have them down. (yes thats 3 a in waaay, boom)
This is why TvZ is very hard to paly at low levels (Dia and below). The balance for the MU assumes that you can do all this, which to be fair pros can, so thats cool. It however screws lower leagues.
But its just the way the game is made. Its not balanced for diamond as that would be retarded, its balanced for Pros for good reason. So while i may believe TvZ is imba in plat-diamond, meh, who cares.
|
On August 26 2011 21:53 sleepingdog wrote:For the statistics I suggest looking here: ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/uaVuw.png) http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=252090People that follow the scene for a longer time don't question the fact that terran has always been the most succesful race - I don't even know why you would try to argue about that. Furthermore, you claimed - without any factual evidence - that zerg/protoss could just a-move and win, while terrans had to "outplay". Therefore I provided the example that terran a-move can also be very effective, if you EMP the whole protoss-ball beforehand. Every race has compositions that are able to win fights with pure a-moves if the opponent doesn't respond correctly. Overall, you just QQ that your race gets a little worse without providing any usuful input for discussion at all. We are supposed to discuss the individual changes here, not whine because we just don't like them.
I'm actually surprised to see the win rates so close together. Considering there are always some statistical errors to account for, it's pretty balanced.
It seems to me that TvP is the most balanced (with around 50% in the last months) while ZvT is terran-favored and ZvP is zerg-favored. I do think that the rax nerf and hellion nerf will probably bring down T win rate vs Z to balance that a bit. Infester nerf and immortal range will help P vs Z to even that battlefield a bit.
However, since both protoss get buffed a tiny bit and terran gets nerfed a tiny bit, this may throw the otherwise more-or-less balanced TvP matchup into P favor. We'll need to see though, it's much too early to speculate on that.
|
On August 27 2011 07:12 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2011 21:29 sleepingdog wrote:On August 26 2011 21:19 rmAmnesiac wrote:
so i'm supposed to reply politely with arguments vs someone who thinks he can just say terran have dominated since september simply because he's doesn't like losing to them? the fact that terran have dominated for a year has very little to do if I do or do not like losing to them On August 26 2011 20:40 rmAmnesiac wrote:On August 26 2011 03:57 sleepingdog wrote:On August 26 2011 03:51 rmAmnesiac wrote:On August 26 2011 03:48 ImmortalTofu wrote:On August 26 2011 03:45 rmAmnesiac wrote:On August 26 2011 03:41 ImmortalTofu wrote:On August 26 2011 03:38 rmAmnesiac wrote:On August 26 2011 03:35 ImmortalTofu wrote:
Amnesiac, all I want is 1 or two games where 5 seconds would have lost Terran the game. That's ALL I'm asking for. Masters/Diamond/Gold, it makes no difference, only the pros understand the game at the highest level possible atm, and the highest level is what matters when balancing...
xTrim, I was referring to Amnesiac (sorry for the mistake) when I said you thought T was unplayable.
I agree, the change is kinda bogus, and it makes T more susceptible to cheese, but I've always thought them the most cheese-proof race anyway... I don't know, I dont' think the change should go through, but I don't think its as big of a deal as some make it out to me. Sorry for the misunderstanding. i never said it would lose games i said it would make a difference sometimes significant, sometimes not, like all these changes. and that i think they are totally unfair on all terran bar korean pros. believe it or not, that's not actually the majority of people playing this race yet that's all blizzard cares about. Ok that makes more sense thank you. No I agree its not the greatest change, but you say it will make T unplayable... I see nothing to support that though, will maybe a combined 20 seconds in the fist 10 minutes of the game really end Terran's life? Ghosts and Medivac drops, the core of your latergame haven't been touched, and a drop 20 seconds later doesnt matter, its really timing as in where their army is that does matter! not unplayable no but for a race which already requires a higher level of skill to play at the same level at masters for example, it makes it a damn site unattractive race to play. Hm... ok that is much better reasoned. APM is irrelevant to skill, but i WOULD like to point out sjow. The guy has 100 apm, less than half most pros, and still does well in every event he enters... Now again, APM doesn't really matter, and you're talking about masters not pro, but I see SOME level of connection here, and I say that it doesn't require THAT much more skill... Are you suggesting that Protoss players and Zerg players suck and win because of their race? I'm just asking, I don't actually play terran at any reasonable level, so I don't really know. How does it take more skill at masters/dia level?? terran has been underepresented at masters lamost indefinitely for the past 8 months. they are the only race who can't sti back and win on pure macro and mostly a move compisitions? to stay level vs toss or zerg they have to harrass constantly and outmultitask them? Did I read your posts just right, do you REALLY complain about terrans being....underrepresented? Well, yeah, in average masters maybe, because most of them are in grandmaster, herpderp I've said this multiple times today: once terrans drop below 50-60% in GSL we can talk about them being even with the other races (still another step for being weaker) Terran has dominated continuosly since release, not despite but because of the fact that you CAN use multi-pronged attacks/harass/etc. thanks for proving my point. not everyone who plays this game have the time to practise 5 plus hours a day and on a semi-pro/pro level of play. i reached masters as a random palyer and chose the race i enjoyed most. why should i have to outplay opponents to stay level with my opponents at this level simply because i don't play this game on gm, or pro level? how is that balanced? Your claim that you have to outplay your opponents just to stay level is a completely biased QQ that has been proven wrong multiple times Terrans can cast 2-3 EMPs, stim and roflstomp protoss easily. Using HTs is much harder than using ghosts. Using marauders that have slow is also really not that challenging, etc. And using drops is much easier than defending against them. This is just the same as toss a-move with forcefields and storm... Terran has to be played differently, more active - but it's definitely not harder. (Yes I offrace occasionally as terran, but my understanding of TvZ is nonexistent...) I'm not sure what game you have been playing, but when it reaches lategame you can never "just stim and roflstomp." If you do that you autolose to collosus+archon deathball with templars.
lol people, relax please
I only responded to a guy who claimed that terran has to - I quote - "outplay zerg/protoss just to stay even". He claimed that zerg/protoss could rely on a-move while terran had to multitask/micro constantly. This was the exact statement
terran has been underepresented at masters lamost indefinitely for the past 8 months. they are the only race who can't sti back and win on pure macro and mostly a move compisitions? to stay level vs toss or zerg they have to harrass constantly and outmultitask them?
I never said (or wanted to say) that terran can rely on a-move in lategame vs skilled opponents. What I said was, that terran can just as easily stomp zergs/toss (who makes crucial mistakes) with macro and a-move as zerg/toss can to terran. Please don't read/quote my statement out of context, as it was solely meant as a response to the opinion quoted above.
On August 27 2011 17:58 Lurk wrote:
However, since both protoss get buffed a tiny bit and terran gets nerfed a tiny bit, this may throw the otherwise more-or-less balanced TvP matchup into P favor. We'll need to see though, it's much too early to speculate on that.
Fair point, nevertheless from all matchups I think that TvP will be affected the least. The 5 second baracks nerf will hardly make protoss cheese more effective, and protoss early game pressure was never a real threat for terran. Stuff like 2 bas 6 gate won't be harder to hold with +5 seconds. Ingame timing even.
The +1 immortal change could turn out to make immortals more useful vs pure bio, nevertheless the hardened shield gets countered by the exact same spell that terrans have to use vs templars anyways. I don't see how +1 immortals could be a bigger threat than some templars with storms that the terran player failed to EMP.
Sadly, it will make tanks/thors even less viable than they are now. But I don't think this will make bio considerably worse.
The +1 immortals will have a much bigger impact in PvZ vs roach.
The blink-nerf makes the blink-all-in vs no gas expands much weaker, which is somewhat of a terran buff in that regard. I'm thinking especially of the blink-behind-bunkers on Tal Darim.
|
On August 27 2011 08:21 Squigly wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2011 06:54 Big J wrote:On August 27 2011 00:00 Squigly wrote:
From what i found, T is really fucking hard to play against a competent Z until your good, well masterish good. As you have to multitask, a lot. 1 bad unsiege and you get fucked. These sort of things are mistakes which high level players dont seem to really make. Sure theres the odd mistake but no mass unsiege by accident etc. Trust me, that happens even in diamond.
When people say T is the hardest to play, in diamond i would definitely agree as it seems to require so much more apm its mindboggling. You can chill on like 50 apm as zerg and do fine in diamond. Just not possible with T. However once your comfortable with your 130+ apm it probably just seems normal.
Well and now I would argue, that you did well as Zerg, because Zerg is the race that requires the highest overall knowledge of the game. there is no safe build, so you have to know whats coming, without seeing it. Ofc a high level player will do well with Zerg on low skill level, because he will have that ability. Also I want to argue, that I, as a Zerg player, have beaten a lot of Masters Zs with T too, because you can simply do anything, and as long as the zerg doesn't get what you do, he loses, and talking about hard micro... The onyl hard terran micro I know about is using snipe effecticly and maybe real good hellion kiting. Stimmed marines are just a clicking excercise to kite and spread in my eyes and real good terrans like MVP are way above this kind of gameplay. They win because they have this zerglike spidersenses, instead of doing the average masterleague pushes, that are just excercises until you find zergs that have brutal good gamesense. Hmm thats actually a decent point. As zerg if u have a good game sense your a good way to doing well. On the micro thing, lol, i cant tell if thats a troll or you actually have no idea. First off tank micro is actually quite taxing. Focus firing tanks, siege micro itself isnt that easy. Then theres marines, you seem to think kiting and splitting dont count as micro? really? You actually summed up my point pretty well. People like MvP obviously have a great time as Terran as they can do all the 'basics' in their sleep as you need to be able to. Its like being able to larva inject, if you cant do it as Z you just lose. The thing is terran 'basics' are waaay harder, and many master level players dont have them down. (yes thats 3 a in waaay, boom) This is why TvZ is very hard to paly at low levels (Dia and below). The balance for the MU assumes that you can do all this, which to be fair pros can, so thats cool. It however screws lower leagues. But its just the way the game is made. Its not balanced for diamond as that would be retarded, its balanced for Pros for good reason. So while i may believe TvZ is imba in plat-diamond, meh, who cares.
Well, I don't want to argue about gamebalance in low leagues (everything under high master in my eyes), but I wouldn't say that it is terribly off...
I agree that banelings against unmicroed marines is just a rofl-thing, but zerg macro, scouting and constant decision making isn't easy either and I think a ton of people that just get started with starcraft, have a way harder time using a race that can't attack from a safe distance, has no artillery most of the time and uses a unique training system, rather then THE RTS "que a bunch of stuff on the right building"-system, than with P or T which seem quite "standard".
Also I want to add, that you are using an argument, zergs have been using (I guess the infestor buff and low level builds like spanishiwas has changed that a bit): "you have to be better than your opponents to be able to beat them, because they can simply do anything, but you have to react in the one right way to survive"
|
On August 27 2011 19:09 sleepingdog wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2011 07:12 avilo wrote:On August 26 2011 21:29 sleepingdog wrote:On August 26 2011 21:19 rmAmnesiac wrote:
so i'm supposed to reply politely with arguments vs someone who thinks he can just say terran have dominated since september simply because he's doesn't like losing to them? the fact that terran have dominated for a year has very little to do if I do or do not like losing to them On August 26 2011 20:40 rmAmnesiac wrote:On August 26 2011 03:57 sleepingdog wrote:On August 26 2011 03:51 rmAmnesiac wrote:On August 26 2011 03:48 ImmortalTofu wrote:On August 26 2011 03:45 rmAmnesiac wrote:On August 26 2011 03:41 ImmortalTofu wrote:On August 26 2011 03:38 rmAmnesiac wrote:
[quote]
i never said it would lose games i said it would make a difference sometimes significant, sometimes not, like all these changes. and that i think they are totally unfair on all terran bar korean pros. believe it or not, that's not actually the majority of people playing this race yet that's all blizzard cares about. Ok that makes more sense thank you. No I agree its not the greatest change, but you say it will make T unplayable... I see nothing to support that though, will maybe a combined 20 seconds in the fist 10 minutes of the game really end Terran's life? Ghosts and Medivac drops, the core of your latergame haven't been touched, and a drop 20 seconds later doesnt matter, its really timing as in where their army is that does matter! not unplayable no but for a race which already requires a higher level of skill to play at the same level at masters for example, it makes it a damn site unattractive race to play. Hm... ok that is much better reasoned. APM is irrelevant to skill, but i WOULD like to point out sjow. The guy has 100 apm, less than half most pros, and still does well in every event he enters... Now again, APM doesn't really matter, and you're talking about masters not pro, but I see SOME level of connection here, and I say that it doesn't require THAT much more skill... Are you suggesting that Protoss players and Zerg players suck and win because of their race? I'm just asking, I don't actually play terran at any reasonable level, so I don't really know. How does it take more skill at masters/dia level?? terran has been underepresented at masters lamost indefinitely for the past 8 months. they are the only race who can't sti back and win on pure macro and mostly a move compisitions? to stay level vs toss or zerg they have to harrass constantly and outmultitask them? Did I read your posts just right, do you REALLY complain about terrans being....underrepresented? Well, yeah, in average masters maybe, because most of them are in grandmaster, herpderp I've said this multiple times today: once terrans drop below 50-60% in GSL we can talk about them being even with the other races (still another step for being weaker) Terran has dominated continuosly since release, not despite but because of the fact that you CAN use multi-pronged attacks/harass/etc. thanks for proving my point. not everyone who plays this game have the time to practise 5 plus hours a day and on a semi-pro/pro level of play. i reached masters as a random palyer and chose the race i enjoyed most. why should i have to outplay opponents to stay level with my opponents at this level simply because i don't play this game on gm, or pro level? how is that balanced? Your claim that you have to outplay your opponents just to stay level is a completely biased QQ that has been proven wrong multiple times Terrans can cast 2-3 EMPs, stim and roflstomp protoss easily. Using HTs is much harder than using ghosts. Using marauders that have slow is also really not that challenging, etc. And using drops is much easier than defending against them. This is just the same as toss a-move with forcefields and storm... Terran has to be played differently, more active - but it's definitely not harder. (Yes I offrace occasionally as terran, but my understanding of TvZ is nonexistent...) I'm not sure what game you have been playing, but when it reaches lategame you can never "just stim and roflstomp." If you do that you autolose to collosus+archon deathball with templars. lol people, relax please I only responded to a guy who claimed that terran has to - I quote - "outplay zerg/protoss just to stay even". He claimed that zerg/protoss could rely on a-move while terran had to multitask/micro constantly. This was the exact statement Show nested quote +terran has been underepresented at masters lamost indefinitely for the past 8 months. they are the only race who can't sti back and win on pure macro and mostly a move compisitions? to stay level vs toss or zerg they have to harrass constantly and outmultitask them? I never said (or wanted to say) that terran can rely on a-move in lategame vs skilled opponents. What I said was, that terran can just as easily stomp zergs/toss (who makes crucial mistakes) with macro and a-move as zerg/toss can to terran. Please don't read/quote my statement out of context, as it was solely meant as a response to the opinion quoted above. Show nested quote +On August 27 2011 17:58 Lurk wrote:
However, since both protoss get buffed a tiny bit and terran gets nerfed a tiny bit, this may throw the otherwise more-or-less balanced TvP matchup into P favor. We'll need to see though, it's much too early to speculate on that. Fair point, nevertheless from all matchups I think that TvP will be affected the least. The 5 second baracks nerf will hardly make protoss cheese more effective, and protoss early game pressure was never a real threat for terran. Stuff like 2 bas 6 gate won't be harder to hold with +5 seconds. Ingame timing even. The +1 immortal change could turn out to make immortals more useful vs pure bio, nevertheless the hardened shield gets countered by the exact same spell that terrans have to use vs templars anyways. I don't see how +1 immortals could be a bigger threat than some templars with storms that the terran player failed to EMP. Sadly, it will make tanks/thors even less viable than they are now. But I don't think this will make bio considerably worse. The +1 immortals will have a much bigger impact in PvZ vs roach. The blink-nerf makes the blink-all-in vs no gas expands much weaker, which is somewhat of a terran buff in that regard. I'm thinking especially of the blink-behind-bunkers on Tal Darim.
Actually what that guy's saying is pretty true, you DO have to do econ dmg vs both Zerg and Protoss to stand a chance in lategame. And yes Terran needs the most multitasking, and Terran benefits the most from it. If you haven't understood that by now, you don't know this game at all.
|
On August 27 2011 20:10 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2011 08:21 Squigly wrote:On August 27 2011 06:54 Big J wrote:On August 27 2011 00:00 Squigly wrote:
From what i found, T is really fucking hard to play against a competent Z until your good, well masterish good. As you have to multitask, a lot. 1 bad unsiege and you get fucked. These sort of things are mistakes which high level players dont seem to really make. Sure theres the odd mistake but no mass unsiege by accident etc. Trust me, that happens even in diamond.
When people say T is the hardest to play, in diamond i would definitely agree as it seems to require so much more apm its mindboggling. You can chill on like 50 apm as zerg and do fine in diamond. Just not possible with T. However once your comfortable with your 130+ apm it probably just seems normal.
Well and now I would argue, that you did well as Zerg, because Zerg is the race that requires the highest overall knowledge of the game. there is no safe build, so you have to know whats coming, without seeing it. Ofc a high level player will do well with Zerg on low skill level, because he will have that ability. Also I want to argue, that I, as a Zerg player, have beaten a lot of Masters Zs with T too, because you can simply do anything, and as long as the zerg doesn't get what you do, he loses, and talking about hard micro... The onyl hard terran micro I know about is using snipe effecticly and maybe real good hellion kiting. Stimmed marines are just a clicking excercise to kite and spread in my eyes and real good terrans like MVP are way above this kind of gameplay. They win because they have this zerglike spidersenses, instead of doing the average masterleague pushes, that are just excercises until you find zergs that have brutal good gamesense. Hmm thats actually a decent point. As zerg if u have a good game sense your a good way to doing well. On the micro thing, lol, i cant tell if thats a troll or you actually have no idea. First off tank micro is actually quite taxing. Focus firing tanks, siege micro itself isnt that easy. Then theres marines, you seem to think kiting and splitting dont count as micro? really? You actually summed up my point pretty well. People like MvP obviously have a great time as Terran as they can do all the 'basics' in their sleep as you need to be able to. Its like being able to larva inject, if you cant do it as Z you just lose. The thing is terran 'basics' are waaay harder, and many master level players dont have them down. (yes thats 3 a in waaay, boom) This is why TvZ is very hard to paly at low levels (Dia and below). The balance for the MU assumes that you can do all this, which to be fair pros can, so thats cool. It however screws lower leagues. But its just the way the game is made. Its not balanced for diamond as that would be retarded, its balanced for Pros for good reason. So while i may believe TvZ is imba in plat-diamond, meh, who cares. Well, I don't want to argue about gamebalance in low leagues (everything under high master in my eyes), but I wouldn't say that it is terribly off... I agree that banelings against unmicroed marines is just a rofl-thing, but zerg macro, scouting and constant decision making isn't easy either and I think a ton of people that just get started with starcraft, have a way harder time using a race that can't attack from a safe distance, has no artillery most of the time and uses a unique training system, rather then THE RTS "que a bunch of stuff on the right building"-system, than with P or T which seem quite "standard". Also I want to add, that you are using an argument, zergs have been using (I guess the infestor buff and low level builds like spanishiwas has changed that a bit): "you have to be better than your opponents to be able to beat them, because they can simply do anything, but you have to react in the one right way to survive"
I agree that gamebalance is a non issue for lower league players such as myself, at low leagues I would argue that terran is a lot easier than zerg or protoss, specially since you can just open 3rax every matchup and start sending waves of marines to you oppponent, forcing zerg to make lings/banes instead of drones then you can just sit back behind your wall and macro up. I can't tell you how many games terrans just scan my base, my nat, my third, my front all the time to see what I'm doing, yeah yeah I know the classic crap "oh but he wasted 250 min with that scan" but the thing is at low levels where the macro is not good that hardly makes a difference compared to the knowledge he gets when he sees my spire just popping up so he can start making turrets. Meanwhile I have to send ovies that may or may not see anything usefull because marines will shoot them down, send a ling to hes ramp just to get blasted by a tank, oh and the infamous PFs at third and fourth bases that make them impenetrable to attacks while the terran only has to scan to know where to drop my main.
Basic stuff is hard for all races and at low levels the easiest to start learning is terran, while the most powerful is toss once you pass the 5 min mark. This is not true at pro levels of play where dropping comes coupled with marine/tank pushes through the middle, where a hellion opening has to do damage or else the zerg will just outmacro you, but at low levels all you have to do is make marines non stop and eventually you'll win more than you loose, just look at TLO's 6 rax all in, if unscouted or scouted late the zerg will NOT have defense in time unless he opened up 3spine 4queen blindly but at higher levels where scouting is mastered this will flat out loose.
And the quote "you have to be better than your opponents to be able to beat them, because they can simply do anything, but you have to react in the one right way to survive" applies to every race just as you can do 1/1/1 or mass banshee or BFH harrass or mech or even a BC rush so can I do a bane bust, roach rush, muta rush to harrass, double expand to macro up, mass ling infestor, etc. The difference is at low levels a scan gets you that intel easier than an ovie gets me mine.
|
sleepingdog wrote:
The +1 immortal change could turn out to make immortals more useful vs pure bio, nevertheless the hardened shield gets countered by the exact same spell that terrans have to use vs templars anyways. I don't see how +1 immortals could be a bigger threat than some templars with storms that the terran player failed to EMP.
Sadly, it will make tanks/thors even less viable than they are now. But I don't think this will make bio considerably worse.
The +1 immortals will have a much bigger impact in PvZ vs roach.
I think 2 zealots and a sentry is still better than an immortal in most cases vs bio. I don't add my robo that early (vs bio!) to make an immortal shine in small fights.
In mid-late game stimmed units burn down his shields too fast, so I rather get upgrades for my zeals than immortals.
In PvZ the cost- and supplyefficiency of immortals vs roaches is great, but you only have a limited production capacity for them to really counter roaches with them. So I'm not sure if you will build more of them, but anytime you've allready built one now, they will be more usefull if the +1 range goes live.
|
On August 27 2011 23:02 Ada wrote:Show nested quote +
sleepingdog wrote:
The +1 immortal change could turn out to make immortals more useful vs pure bio, nevertheless the hardened shield gets countered by the exact same spell that terrans have to use vs templars anyways. I don't see how +1 immortals could be a bigger threat than some templars with storms that the terran player failed to EMP.
Sadly, it will make tanks/thors even less viable than they are now. But I don't think this will make bio considerably worse.
The +1 immortals will have a much bigger impact in PvZ vs roach.
I think 2 zealots and a sentry is still better than an immortal in most cases vs bio. I don't add my robo that early (vs bio!) to make an immortal shine in small fights. In mid-late game stimmed units burn down his shields too fast, so I rather get upgrades for my zeals than immortals. In PvZ the cost- and supplyefficiency of immortals vs roaches is great, but you only have a limited production capacity for them to really counter roaches with them. So I'm not sure if you will build more of them, but anytime you've allready built one now, they will be more usefull if the +1 range goes live.
From my limited viewpoint as a terran player, the poor range was actually the main reason that immortals weren't used as often. They wouldn't work well when the protoss had stalkers, as they'd easily get stuck behind them. Also, their low range enabled them to be sniped rather easily. Don't make the mistake of thinking "+1 range is rather insignicant", remember what happened to roaches as they got +1 range.
Immortals are really great if you can keep them alive a long time, especially after they have tanked some damage. And that keeping alive has now become a lot easier with that additional range. Hide them behind a wall to zealots and there won't be much that can touch them.
|
+1 range immortals completely and utterly changes P v T. People will be spamming immortals till the cows come home because of how hard they dominate bio. Yay for another 1 A unit for protoss.
I'm going to call it right now, it'll just be zealot sentry immortal/observers then charge/HTs later from every protoss from now on.
|
On August 28 2011 04:43 link0 wrote:
+1 range immortals completely and utterly changes P v T. People will be spamming immortals till the cows come home because of how hard they dominate bio. Yay for another 1 A unit for protoss.
I'm going to call it right now, it'll just be zealot sentry immortal/observers then charge/HTs later from every protoss from now on.
That does sound like a pretty solid composition to be sure, although it will likely suffer from lack of anti-air. Banshee play and drops will be very strong against it.
What isn't a 1 A unit, if the Immortal is? Even with the extra range, every Immortal stills needs to be individually controlled to focus on armored targets and maximize damage.
|
Stalkers, phoenix, sentry, all need micro is what hes saying. Stalkers dont need it, but blink is awesome. VR need focus fire. Immortals just kinda a move into bio
|
On August 28 2011 05:42 Squigly wrote:
Stalkers, phoenix, sentry, all need micro is what hes saying. Stalkers dont need it, but blink is awesome. VR need focus fire. Immortals just kinda a move into bio
If you a-move immortals into bio you're wasting them away as the usual marine:marauder ratio inevitably will have a larger ratio of immortal shots land on marines... And we all know how much damage that deals. MM is a thousand times more a-move than immortals are, thats for sure 
|
On August 28 2011 05:45 Thraundil wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 05:42 Squigly wrote:
Stalkers, phoenix, sentry, all need micro is what hes saying. Stalkers dont need it, but blink is awesome. VR need focus fire. Immortals just kinda a move into bio If you a-move immortals into bio you're wasting them away as the usual marine:marauder ratio inevitably will have a larger ratio of immortal shots land on marines... And we all know how much damage that deals. MM is a thousand times more a-move than immortals are, thats for sure
Prepare to be mobbed by thousands of terrans telling why your're stupid. Id say they about even though, Immortal needs like 3 clicks of focus fire, bio needs concaving, kiting stim etc.
Actually lol in hindsight id say immortals are more a move lol, but your point is taken.
|
On August 28 2011 05:59 Squigly wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 05:45 Thraundil wrote:On August 28 2011 05:42 Squigly wrote:
Stalkers, phoenix, sentry, all need micro is what hes saying. Stalkers dont need it, but blink is awesome. VR need focus fire. Immortals just kinda a move into bio If you a-move immortals into bio you're wasting them away as the usual marine:marauder ratio inevitably will have a larger ratio of immortal shots land on marines... And we all know how much damage that deals. MM is a thousand times more a-move than immortals are, thats for sure Prepare to be mobbed by thousands of terrans telling why your're stupid. Id say they about even though, Immortal needs like 3 clicks of focus fire, bio needs concaving, kiting stim etc. Actually lol in hindsight id say immortals are more a move lol, but your point is taken.
Well I am obviously trying to provoke the terrans but saying that "oh no mass immortal a-move omg" is... well I have no word for it. Zealot/sentry/immortal? yo BFH/ghost/banshee. Then you can talk about a-move.
|
On August 28 2011 06:23 Thraundil wrote:Show nested quote +On August 28 2011 05:59 Squigly wrote:On August 28 2011 05:45 Thraundil wrote:On August 28 2011 05:42 Squigly wrote:
Stalkers, phoenix, sentry, all need micro is what hes saying. Stalkers dont need it, but blink is awesome. VR need focus fire. Immortals just kinda a move into bio If you a-move immortals into bio you're wasting them away as the usual marine:marauder ratio inevitably will have a larger ratio of immortal shots land on marines... And we all know how much damage that deals. MM is a thousand times more a-move than immortals are, thats for sure Prepare to be mobbed by thousands of terrans telling why your're stupid. Id say they about even though, Immortal needs like 3 clicks of focus fire, bio needs concaving, kiting stim etc. Actually lol in hindsight id say immortals are more a move lol, but your point is taken. Well I am obviously trying to provoke the terrans but saying that "oh no mass immortal a-move omg" is... well I have no word for it. Zealot/sentry/immortal? yo BFH/ghost/banshee. Then you can talk about a-move.
I think ghosts might be the least a moveable unit in the game. HT you can make into archons which a move. Infestorrs actually take the cake thinking about it.
|
The Infestor Fungal nerf was I think foreseen by pretty much everyone. However I don't think that slight damage nerf will affect gameplay that much. I still think Zergs will end up using them just as often as they did in the past.
The damage decrease itself doesn't change much, and only in rare cases does it require the Zerg to spend an extra fungal or two. The real benefit coming out of it is the decreased DPS. It may allow Medivacs to help potentially lost marines in the past patch.
However the change in Fungal doesn't affect the main issue with it as much - Chain Fungals and Locking down units in place.
In a game where Micro is an inherent trait of the game and is often rewarded to the player that has better control, Fungals do not fit into that category. If the effect of Fungal was rather an Ensnare like ability, then it would still make sense. For comparisons sake, it's as if the units were surrounded by forcefields while a weaker variation of Storms was dropped on them at the same time. It's a neat little package all put into one spell, it's a little too convenient.
I don't even want to talk about Infested Terrans yet.
There's something wrong when a race Masses a unit that was meant to be a Support aide. I was disappointed to see that Blizzard decided to solve it in this manner. The issue with Infestors is not simply in its abilities, but also of Tier 2 Zerg tech. I would have liked to see Zerg getting some buffs to Hydras and perhaps other units so that they have more options.
|
Could we stop that stupid discussion please ? Almost every unit improves by better micro. Terran units do. Protoss units do, even Zerg ones. If you just a-move them you're wasting potential no matter which race you play.
You might want to focus fire armored units with immortals, but so you might want your marauders and tanks to do so. Quite the same as you might want to kite marines with stalkers, the same way you can kite zealots with marauders.
Don't ever assume that your opponent is just a-moving you. And even if he does, if he beat you that way, he just had more stuff than you so he could afford it.
|
On August 25 2011 21:43 rpgalon wrote:
PvP is going from a micro-rush intensive matchup
to a macro-turtle intensive matchup
Sounds like ZvZ
|
I find it kinda "offensive" the whole Protoss A-Move thing. These people are nothing but trolls specially when Protoss whole survival is based on proper use of casts.
No other race has to cast so much just to stay alive in battles as toss does.
So please stop these trolls.
Now as far as the changes go i am split.
It seems to me that all these buffs and nerfs are based arounf two thing.
-One been the terran early bunker rushing the oposition in the natural (as we see in MLG Raleigh) against P and Z.
-Two been that they once again want to change the dynamics of pvp aka blink.
They chosed to nerf the blink to change pvp. But they could not do this without changing terran bunker rush/proxy. So they nerf rax and buff immortal to even it out and compensate for nerf of blink. At the end it kills the dynamic of pvp cos whats gonna happen just like it has happend before again and again and again. One tech will become the standard for pvp.
As far as the helion nerf i laugh cos its just plain imba specially vs zerg.
|
On August 25 2011 20:13 Teiwaz wrote:
Overall I like the patch notes, still I'm waiting for EMP to require research.
I'm not fully convinced that PvP will just be Robo vs. Robo, I can see some fine and viable Phoenix builds evolving - especially with Blink research time reduced.
Fuck that would fucking suck.
On August 28 2011 07:20 Lurk wrote:
Could we stop that stupid discussion please ? Almost every unit improves by better micro. Terran units do. Protoss units do, even Zerg ones. If you just a-move them you're wasting potential no matter which race you play.
You might want to focus fire armored units with immortals, but so you might want your marauders and tanks to do so. Quite the same as you might want to kite marines with stalkers, the same way you can kite zealots with marauders.
Don't ever assume that your opponent is just a-moving you. And even if he does, if he beat you that way, he just had more stuff than you so he could afford it.
There is a strong consensus that Colossus and Chargelots is mostly A moving in TvP. HT and Sentries obviously require "smart micro" and strategery, but not really "fast micro" like what is demanding from a bio based Terran in response. In PvZ the Protoss typically displays the most beutiful micro in the game (hi huk!) while Zerg players spawn larva (), but in PvT Protoss players hate this because there's less skill difference between top Protosses and mediocre Protosses.
EDIT: I think the Blue flame Nerf is mostly aimed at Diamond Zergs having trouble against BFH. Sim City/Queens + Spawn Larva means Hellions kill a maximum of 15 drones with a drop. I got this number from personal experience on the Masters NA ladder and from Pro games. On 2 bases thats 1 round of larva spawn. Many times I will kill 15 drones and still be behind in workers (albeit barely). If Zergs can produce so many drones at a time, killing them just as fast sounds about right. Not that I think this nerf is a huge problem, cause BFH did a shit ton of damage, but I think players should recognize how much Terran needs all the "OP" things they have. Besides, once mutas come out, Zerg gains map control for the rest of the game, and these harassment units are capable of killing a mineral line, the CC and still make it back home in time to clean up the tanks post bling swarm. So I got no pity for zergs, frankly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
