EPT[D/H]Is it possible to win macro games in TvP? - Page 13
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
Angel_
United States1617 Posts
| ||
|
YyapSsap
New Zealand1511 Posts
On February 26 2012 07:13 Angel_ wrote: How does anyone feel about moving towards more reactor hellions in the late game (cutting down on your marine numbers) as protoss are moving towards mass mass chargelots lately? Even if he warps in a bunch of stalkers, he shouldn't still have ENOUGH stalkers to really really terrify you from just one warp-in, and you'll still have an okay maurader count. thoughts? Behind on upgrades.. | ||
|
Angel_
United States1617 Posts
Incorporate upgrades as you know you're going to be adding them later? | ||
monk
United States8476 Posts
| ||
|
Angel_
United States1617 Posts
On February 26 2012 08:35 NrGmonk wrote: Pretty common misconception that bfh are that good vs chargelots. i don't think they're that that good, but if you can get them behind your units and in range, i think they'd be an option worth at least looking at, or possible to deal with units streaming in? i don't know. | ||
|
Emperor_Earth
United States824 Posts
On February 26 2012 07:17 Angel_ wrote: Incorporate upgrades as you know you're going to be adding them later? Yes. Let's compare Terran getting: Infantry, Air, AND Mech upgrades to Toss just getting infantry. This makes sense... oh wait. On February 26 2012 08:49 Angel_ wrote: i don't think they're that that good, but if you can get them behind your units and in range, i think they'd be an option worth at least looking at, or possible to deal with units streaming in? i don't know. Sadly, no. BFH blow TvP outside of probe kills which they lost 50% of their ability with that nerf. | ||
|
halpimcat
215 Posts
On February 25 2012 20:53 MockHamill wrote: This is the flawed gameplay you get when trying to balance the game around a few top Terran players. Most of the top 10 players in the world are Terran. In order to get more GSL wins for Zerg and Protoss Blizzard nerfs Terran into the ground even thought the top Terran players simply played better than the top Zerg/Protoss players. Terran is required to do so much more than Protoss and Zerg in order to win. And for the more normal players, ie the 98% below Master, Terran is close to unplayable late game in a straight up macro game. Should average players be forced to cheese or switch races if they cannot afford the 100+ APM required to play Terran at even a basic level. I have played every major RTS since Dune II and I love macro games. But Starcraft II in its current state is just depressing if you are an average APM player and happen to like Terran. Tvp was even more impossible in brood war in non pro levels | ||
|
fiveohfive
Australia81 Posts
- Does it really make sense to balance the game around 1 - 5 Terrans? How about the fact they are just simply better? - Every realised those "top" Terrans are collecting the majority of their wins early - mid game against Protoss? That 50% win rate Terran has currently revolves around if the Terran all-in build is successful or not. Do you really think it's fair the Protoss should have such a large advantage late-game? You don't really see many late-game wins AT ALL! (I'm sure there will be some idiot here that will paste a link where a Terran wins late-game lol) One thing people don't realise is that like 98% of other Terrans who aren't the top 5 in the world are getting HAMMERED against Protoss at THEIR OWN LEVEL. I couldn't give a shit if it's a Gold Terran vs a Gold Protoss, the fact is they should be around the same skill level. Go watch a T v P at gold level and you would think the Protoss is a freaking master just because of their late-game 1A OP AOE deathball (To add to that a fucking instant reinforcement of wrap-ins!). It's quite obvious many Terrans are just fed up with the bullshit, many are actually just switching off into other games. There are also those who are trying out other races but just cbf learning another race and eventually switch off into other games also! I can tell you right now, those players at the top peak of SC2 wouldn't mean jack shit if we didn't have such a large player base below them. So people also need to consider that player base whilst looking at those Professional players. Of course there will be more weight in decisions when looking at the Pro level..... but Pro players aren't the ONLY thing to consider when balancing the game. However, if you think the above isn't enough to get those to realise WTF is going on in the T v P MU. Go watch 20 T v P matches on GSL in the past couple of months and record down just how many of those Terrans won in the lategame. If you don't think that the onus is on Terran to not let Protoss get a 3rd and get a Deathball is a disadvantage....... Honestly, you're just a retard. Whining seems to get people what they want. Protoss complains about EMP, Blizzard nerfs that by 50%..... Zerg complains about Snipe and Blizzard nerfs that into oblivion. NOW, there are some of those who are wanting nukes to cost supply! A Terran could be playing a relatively decent game against Protoss where he is clearly ahead and just because he momentarily gets into a bad position his whole bio force gets hit by storm followed by Toss 1 A syndrome into his base with instant reinforcement! So I couldn't give a shit if you think this is a whine, the fact is T v P late-game is just a joke. People cried out loud for the BFH nerf. It's the exact same concept with a fucking storm drop on your mineral line lol..... but no, don't nerf that. @ halpimcat, why bullshit? Did you even play BW? | ||
|
greggy
United Kingdom1483 Posts
On February 25 2012 20:53 MockHamill wrote: This is the flawed gameplay you get when trying to balance the game around a few top Terran players. Most of the top 10 players in the world are Terran. In order to get more GSL wins for Zerg and Protoss Blizzard nerfs Terran into the ground even thought the top Terran players simply played better than the top Zerg/Protoss players. Terran is required to do so much more than Protoss and Zerg in order to win. And for the more normal players, ie the 98% below Master, Terran is close to unplayable late game in a straight up macro game. Should average players be forced to cheese or switch races if they cannot afford the 100+ APM required to play Terran at even a basic level. I have played every major RTS since Dune II and I love macro games. But Starcraft II in its current state is just depressing if you are an average APM player and happen to like Terran. Yes, I always knew terran players were more talented, thanks for confirming that. OT: I remember saying this about a year ago or so - one cannot simply make pure mmmg/v (all t1/t2) and expect to beat 200/200 of t3. It's just not how the game works. | ||
|
Emperor_Earth
United States824 Posts
On February 26 2012 10:54 fiveohfive wrote: Everyone seems to have this misconception about "The game HAS to be balanced at the peak level of SC2." I find this so god damn frustrating; - Does it really make sense to balance the game around 1 - 5 Terrans? How about the fact they are just simply better? - Every realised those "top" Terrans are collecting the majority of their wins early - mid game against Protoss? That 50% win rate Terran has currently revolves around if the Terran all-in build is successful or not. Do you really think it's fair the Protoss should have such a large advantage late-game? You don't really see many late-game wins AT ALL! (I'm sure there will be some idiot here that will paste a link where a Terran wins late-game lol) One thing people don't realise is that like 98% of other Terrans who aren't the top 5 in the world are getting HAMMERED against Protoss at THEIR OWN LEVEL. I couldn't give a shit if it's a Gold Terran vs a Gold Protoss, the fact is they should be around the same skill level. Go watch a T v P at gold level and you would think the Protoss is a freaking master just because of their late-game 1A OP AOE deathball (To add to that a fucking instant reinforcement of wrap-ins!). It's quite obvious many Terrans are just fed up with the bullshit, many are actually just switching off into other games. There are also those who are trying out other races but just cbf learning another race and eventually switch off into other games also! I can tell you right now, those players at the top peak of SC2 wouldn't mean jack shit if we didn't have such a large player base below them. So people also need to consider that player base whilst looking at those Professional players. Of course there will be more weight in decisions when looking at the Pro level..... but Pro players aren't the ONLY thing to consider when balancing the game. However, if you think the above isn't enough to get those to realise WTF is going on in the T v P MU. Go watch 20 T v P matches on GSL in the past couple of months and record down just how many of those Terrans won in the lategame. If you don't think that the onus is on Terran to not let Protoss get a 3rd and get a Deathball is a disadvantage....... Honestly, you're just a retard. Whining seems to get people what they want. Protoss complains about EMP, Blizzard nerfs that by 50%..... Zerg complains about Snipe and Blizzard nerfs that into oblivion. NOW, there are some of those who are wanting nukes to cost supply! A Terran could be playing a relatively decent game against Protoss where he is clearly ahead and just because he momentarily gets into a bad position his whole bio force gets hit by storm followed by Toss 1 A syndrome into his base with instant reinforcement! So I couldn't give a shit if you think this is a whine, the fact is T v P late-game is just a joke. People cried out loud for the BFH nerf. It's the exact same concept with a fucking storm drop on your mineral line lol..... but no, don't nerf that. @ halpimcat, why bullshit? Did you even play BW? I remember Affix making the same argument in Blizzard's WoW. He said that if you balance around the top, then you can always tell everyone else to get better to play a balanced game, whereas if you balance for the mass, there's simply no recourse which will discourage development of gameplay. If you haven't heard this pov before, what do you think? | ||
|
willyallthewei
United States265 Posts
On February 25 2012 16:03 mothergoose729 wrote: Sorry, but your wrong. You can't attack the front at all, your army is never large enough. What you can do is drop and be annoying. Pick off some probes, kill some zealots who are out of position, that kind of thing. I have played games before where I macroed essentially perfectly for the first 11 minutes, and never was I in a position to stem and a move into the natural. It just doesn't happen. I think you should show Parting how to play protoss, because he clearly has no idea after being owned by Marine kings medivac timing  | ||
|
Lewan72
United States381 Posts
| ||
|
Lewan72
United States381 Posts
On February 26 2012 11:19 Emperor_Earth wrote: I remember Affix making the same argument in Blizzard's WoW. He said that if you balance around the top, then you can always tell everyone else to get better to play a balanced game, whereas if you balance for the mass, there's simply no recourse which will discourage development of gameplay. If you haven't heard this pov before, what do you think? no YOU have the misconception. We're not saying everything has to be 50-50winrates at the top level, but it has to be balanced. There is a difference (some genius creates a new build no one knows how to counter yet). I agree Blizzard is fucking stupid in their nerfs but your way overeacting. You are also really ignorant. "Toss 1A syndrome" haha you fucking noobie every race requires micro, no one can 1A to win unless they just have way more units than the other. TvP lategame favors protoss right now, I agree with that. To say that it is unplayable is really ignorant. "BFH to kill probes is the same as storm drop" do I really have to argue this? In a nutshell, storm drops require more investment and tech. You complain about people whining yet your whining yourself. Noob. User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
thurst0n
United States611 Posts
On February 19 2012 16:40 phiinix wrote: In general, yes you can macro on par with protoss. In my opinion the keys to winning are exploiting timings and good army control, with a keen eye for expansion timings. Always remember that bio balls work really well in smaller numbers and don't scale that well against protoss aoe entering the mid-late game, so even if you think a drop will be denied and you won't do damage, it's still a good idea. Pick small fights when you can, and trade armies in the early game if you can. (once tech lab ups are done) If you're interested in picking up a style and general tvp knowledge(1 rax gas fe) that I've been using you can pm me and we can talk about it, I'd rather not plug it everywhere. This. Specifically "bio works well in smaller numbers" It amazes me how fast stimmed mauraders and a few marines can take out expansions or tech/production. Doing more drops is always good imo, and sooo annoying when terrans do that. Unfortunately hts have storm and feedback which make it really good vs mech and bio. And immortals just tear apart mech. HOnestly thought threads like this kinda upset me because we all know the "metagame" is still evolving so.. I'm sure things will change, and dont' forget toss has gotten a lot of help from patches recently. Ravens are reallly good for their supply late game. I'm wondering if terrans will start tech switching to mech will small groups of upgraded bio to keep the protoss spread out. | ||
|
Murlox
France1699 Posts
On February 26 2012 12:24 Lewan72 wrote: I may sound harsh but you really are stupid. You are losing because of bad macro, engagements,and decision making. Quit blaming your loses on balance and start blaming them on your mistakes. It sounds arrogant and ignorant :-( I realize it will be very hard for the winning side to admit there's a matchup problem, a flaw in the balance, because that diminishes their owned perceived skill level in favor of their race. It's not them being so good/smart, it's the matchup being rigged (sort of). However the sucking argument is moot : that's what league are for. People of same level play against each other. I'm gold (got the game one month ago, played in beta though), and I'm not trying to beat Diamond Protoss, I'm just trying to have a somewhat even ratio versus Protoss in GOLD, or in SILVER league. You speak about macro, engagements and decision making. I really wish those were a deciding factors in this matchup, at my level. I'd find it perfectly honest to lose to a good protoss, who had great decisions (only one colossus to bait vikings), cute moves (psi storm drops on scvs, spread DT harass to force scans, hell, even illusion void-rays), and overall good macro/micro. In other words, I'd find it perfectly honest to lose to a player that has been more active than I was, that went and took his advantage. Outplayed, gg wp. I really feel, and regret, that these elements are not enough of a factor, though. I really feel that a P is not punished for passive play. In fact it looks like it's quite the opposite, I mean, even floating in mid-game doesn't look that bad with warp-in mechanics. Then people come in and say Terran players are imprisoned in only one army composition, and that the food density of that army is so low compared to Protoss, it's only natural they lose to a direct encounter. This makes a lot of sense. However, do not think that even a Gold player as myself have not tried everything he can in terms of army composition (I had, untill recently, a near 0% win against P). I've tried mech, I've tried biomech, I've tried bio, I've tried sky. Sky Terran is now my go-to build because it works. But this is off-topic because it's designed to kill the P fast, and not reach late game. Back to topic, the thing is, nothing else than bio have proven to last long enough to actually reach late-game with some sort of even base count. So, of course, we end up with an army which is way less dense than the P one, however this is not the problem but only the consequence of the main problem of bio-ball seemingly being the only reasonable build for T. I read everywhere Terran is about positioning, while in fact it seems to me that's it currently more about avoiding any sort of confrontation while hiding into your base, and hope that your drops will do sufficient damage. I really wish that there was no blink, and/or siege tanks were more potent versus P, so that first the Terran could hold his ground and make some crawl attack, and second the P would have to use the great warp-ins mechanics they got to actually flank the Terran entrenchment, instead of simply reinforcing from behind into more and more 1-a. I personally hate the current TvP meta, where it feels more like a FPS than a RTS. Sorry, this came out as a rant even though that wasn't my intention. | ||
|
TRaFFiC
Canada1448 Posts
Firstly, they require less apm overall as they have all their units in 1 ball and just warp in to a pylon close to their army. Terran has to constantly be shift clicking new marines into their army and maneuvering 1-2 medivac hit squads arounds. The second reason protoss has the advantage is a bit more controversial. Build selection. 6-8 Gate all ins can show up any time. Scanning the main is good, but no guarantee to scout everything. Then there's the twilight + gateway tech route, colossus, storm, etc. Each protoss style requires Terran to play a specific way (i.e. storm needs ghosts, colossus needs vikings, 6 gate needs 3 bunkers and early stim etc) whereas every one of these protoss styles counters marine/marauder. Cloacked banshees can never guarantee a win more than 50% of the time so it's a pretty terrible build imo. | ||
|
Willzzz
United Kingdom774 Posts
| ||
|
Murlox
France1699 Posts
On February 26 2012 18:54 Willzzz wrote: Look if you guys need advice about TvP just post some replays and ask for feedback. Whining about how it is "easier" to play protoss isn't going to help you improve. I agree with you however this is not a topic about straight improving your TvP, this is more about "is it possible (and if yes, how) to win a late-game TvP". Most of the posts sound like a rant, I do feel this is because the Terrans are a bit clueless as to how to achieve this goal - win a late-game TvP. You are certainly right in that improving won't hurt anyone, in the same time you can admit that it sounds a bit strange that only one side has to "improve", in order to not beat but at least compete equally with late game Protoss. Because that's, at least my personal, issue : it's not like my games are close versus Protoss of my league. I would be perfectly fine with that, because by all means I have tons of room for improvement. Problem is the games are not close at all, it's more like roflstomp (if I don't kill them before 15, that is). I guess what I'm looking after here is not to be told to improve in order to reach a ~50% win versus opponent of my level (which btw is admitting there's a problem in the matchup, if one side has to improve to be able to reach that stabilized ratio - but enough with me crying), but more if there is a build, that works, that will let a Terran be on equal foot with a Protoss, on the late game. I don't have GSL Terran micro/macro/game sense/experience, so I wonder if the bio-ball is the correct answer for me. However I do not know of anything different that could lead me into a somewhat fair late-game position versus Protoss (of my level, again). | ||
|
mothergoose729
United States666 Posts
On February 26 2012 18:54 Willzzz wrote: Look if you guys need advice about TvP just post some replays and ask for feedback. Whining about how it is "easier" to play protoss isn't going to help you improve. Maybe this was lost at one point, but I would still like some good advice on how to play and improve. Its difficult to hear "macro better, engage better, drop more" ect. "Don't make bad decisions, scout better, react to what you see" ect. That doesn't really help anybody unless that person is specific and provide examples. This thread turned into a big balance discussion, which I guess I invited, but when I started it I wanted an honest answer, can terran win late game tvp? If yes, then how? If not then what builds should I be doing instead? | ||
|
antiRW
United Kingdom117 Posts
On February 27 2012 09:35 mothergoose729 wrote: Maybe this was lost at one point, but I would still like some good advice on how to play and improve. Its difficult to hear "macro better, engage better, drop more" ect. "Don't make bad decisions, scout better, react to what you see" ect. That doesn't really help anybody unless that person is specific and provide examples. This thread turned into a big balance discussion, which I guess I invited, but when I started it I wanted an honest answer, can terran win late game tvp? If yes, then how? If not then what builds should I be doing instead? I think changing the question slightly might provide some clues to the answer. "What are the chances of terran winning a late gaming tvp, depending on the situation when going into late game?" As for example demonstrated by the recent thread about winrates vs. game length at MLGs, TvP seems terran-favored in the early and mid game - say pre 15ish minutes - and protoss-favoured in the late game. This seems to leave three options: 1. Try to end the game before the late game, 2. invent/find a new way of playing terran that overcomes the apparent late game weakness, or 3. try to use the apparent early and mid game strength to get yourself in an advantageous position when going into the late game to compensate for the apparent disadvantages. As an answer to your question, I think you should be aiming for 3. What exactly you want to do depends on your target ofc, i.e. whether you want to get ahead economically, technologically or in army size or ... Edit: I realize that you already said in your original post that you were aiming for an advantageous position. What might be missing is a clear goal that you are aiming for and that will ultimately allow you to win the game. As a protoss for example in a macro game my goal would be go to 3-4 bases with 1-2 robos and 3-5 colossi, HT/storm tech, 2/2+ and a good number of gates -> massive push and hope to win the game with a good engagement/lots of aoe and fast reinforcements. | ||
| ||
