EPTi get shit talk from people even after i lose saying "play a real race" =/
i been terran my whole life =(
Is SC2 Boring To Watch? - Page 17
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
GiantEnemyCrab
Canada503 Posts
i get shit talk from people even after i lose saying "play a real race" =/ i been terran my whole life =( | ||
|
love1another
United States1844 Posts
On August 30 2010 10:25 GiantEnemyCrab wrote: idk what people expect from terran always whining i get shit talk from people even after i lose saying "play a real race" =/ i been terran my whole life =( Seriously. I was like born terran. Weren't we all? | ||
|
Gnaix
United States438 Posts
On August 29 2010 04:42 Eiserne wrote: It's logical reasoning. Big money encourages plays that win. Innovative is unreliable. So Bisu's corsair dt was not innovative when he used it to win against zerg? | ||
|
love1another
United States1844 Posts
On August 30 2010 10:34 Gnaix wrote: So Bisu's corsair dt was not innovative when he used it to win against zerg? It won games. That's the key thing! Using builds that depend on luck is not a good way to win money over a long period of time. | ||
|
nicoaldo
Argentina939 Posts
Players find builds that work and give you the win if you play better than your opponent, period (if you ever listened to Day9, who has a shitload of knowledge and experience in the subject you would know what i´m talking about). Games are still great because of all the little individual plays/micro battles and adaptations they have, and there were also very intense games in the MLG (Like Last Shadow vs Slush), i remember seeing cheese from TT1 for example, and amazing micro battles in the semi´s and finals PvPs... some games were great, some weren´t.. game is still pretty new, if you don´t like the important tourneys because players take it seriously just don´t watch them. | ||
ArvickHero
10387 Posts
On August 30 2010 10:54 nicoaldo wrote: I can´t see why the OP is complaining about a lack of creativity when the last 300 professional PvTs in SC1 are mostly goons and zealots with arbiters vs tanks, vultures and sci vessels; ZvTs are 2 or 3 hat muta into lurker/ling .. etc. At least those are fun to watch and those army compositions have a fun dynamic to them. MMM ball is essentially a moving blob of death when stimmed. | ||
|
remag
Germany354 Posts
| ||
|
BearEatBeets
Canada10 Posts
| ||
|
Jyvblamo
Canada13788 Posts
| ||
|
ROOTdrewbie
Canada1392 Posts
was so fun to be there, maybe the stream wasn't amazing though i dno? | ||
|
Ndugu
United States1078 Posts
It doesn't need to be imba or for Terran to be technically OP for MMM to make it shitty. | ||
|
Subversion
South Africa3627 Posts
| ||
|
7mk
Germany10157 Posts
On August 30 2010 09:28 Ndugu wrote: Phoenixes and Vikings are about on par one to one, however Vikings cost slightly less, so for cost Vikings win or its even. However, in order to fight the Vikings, a Phoenix must fly over the MMM ball, whereas, due to their 10 range, the Vikings should ALWAYS be safe from getting shot from GTA units. Since both vikings and phoenixes are balanced so as to SUCK versus ground to air units, this puts phoenixs in a HORRIBLE position against Vikings. Hence, in late-game, a Terran can spawn marauders without fear since they will ALWAYS maintain aerial superiority. If Protoss could counter Vikings for cost with Phoenixes, vying for aerial superiority would be a part of the matchup, much like it is in TvT. Much cooler and more interesting late-game. Sadly, Marauder/Vikings makes PvT late-game boring as hell and anyone who wants to debate that hasn't watched a high-level PvT that lasted past the mid-game. I disagree but this is not the thread for balance discussions anyways. On August 30 2010 07:23 Graven wrote: Of course. The reason you're seeing all these new Terran pros is because the race is OP. You honestly think guys like Silver and Drewbie (no offense) are in the same league as players like Idra, Cool, etc. It's so obvious, it's silly that it even needs to be debated. It's something that needs time to fix though -- I've been saying it since the Beta, but Blizzard needs a balanced game for SC2 to succeed as an esport, but it doesn't yet appear as bad as it actually is. We have to wait until really good players start using Terran, turning the game into a joke. "new Terran pros" like.... Drewbie? What? Have you been around for SC1? Btw. I completely forgot to say that I thought this was a very well organised tournament with high production value. It was a smooth watching experience and when the matches were great it was a lot of fun. The matches werent always that great (PvP..) but thats just bad luck. I still have some issues with husky and HD's commentary but still, thumbs up for this tourney. | ||
|
SichuanPanda
Canada1542 Posts
| ||
|
0mgVitaminE
United States1278 Posts
On August 30 2010 10:54 nicoaldo wrote: I can´t see why the OP is complaining about a lack of creativity when the last 300 professional PvTs in SC1 are mostly goons and zealots with arbiters vs tanks, vultures and sci vessels; ZvTs are 2 or 3 hat muta into lurker/ling .. etc. Players find builds that work and give you the win if you play better than your opponent, period (if you ever listened to Day9, who has a shitload of knowledge and experience in the subject you would know what i´m talking about). At least these compositions take skill to control, and different builds leading to them have different timings. Both protoss and terran in bw have a ton of builds to lead to the mid game, and late game is fun to watch with arbiters, sv's and general control of the armies. | ||
|
SichuanPanda
Canada1542 Posts
On August 31 2010 02:35 0mgVitaminE wrote: At least these compositions take skill to control, and different builds leading to them have different timings. Both protoss and terran in bw have a ton of builds to lead to the mid game, and late game is fun to watch with arbiters, sv's and general control of the armies. Exactly Vitamin, exactly. In Brood War army compositions could be made viable through unit control, and while the LATE GAME may have revolved around very specific compositions getting to that point was more or less up to the players. In SC2 this is simply not the case - when a battle occurs between Player A and Player B, and Player A has the 'right composition' to beat B's - there is no amount of unit control, micro, positioning, or strategy B can do to win, Player A's army will steamroll through with a simply A-move. | ||
|
RoarMan
Canada745 Posts
On August 31 2010 02:48 SichuanPanda wrote: Exactly Vitamin, exactly. In Brood War army compositions could be made viable through unit control, and while the LATE GAME may have revolved around very specific compositions getting to that point was more or less up to the players. In SC2 this is simply not the case - when a battle occurs between Player A and Player B, and Player A has the 'right composition' to beat B's - there is no amount of unit control, micro, positioning, or strategy B can do to win, Player A's army will steamroll through with a simply A-move. Agreed, it's really sad to see the concepts of "Terrible Terrible Damage" (Units overall doing tons of damage, especially in Lower Tiers) and little to no unit microing ( A lot of "Micro" oriented spells though; Graviton Beam lol, Neural when people actually attempt to use them, people feeling gosu with Force Field) take over the game really. It's all about unit composition now, and some very basic and common sense practices like flanking. BW was a great game because there was a lot of control required to engage in a battle ( Reavers, Lurkers, Marine and Medic control, Dragoon control, Siege Tanks, etc) but in Sc2 it's just all 1a and so we lose all this awe and shock we had around manual control. It's not like there's absolutely no control but the difference between BW and Sc2 is just so drastic  | ||
Jonray
United States37 Posts
I hate to ring the "the game is pretty new" bell, but ... well ... it is. A year from now I bet we'll be laughing at someone who tries an MM ball because changes will have been applied to the game, players will have worked out other responses, and in general the game we'll be playing then won't be the same as this one. | ||
|
EppE
United States221 Posts
| ||
|
ZaaaaaM
Netherlands1828 Posts
On August 30 2010 10:37 love1another wrote: It won games. That's the key thing! Using builds that depend on luck is not a good way to win money over a long period of time. And since when does innovation require luck? | ||
| ||
