| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
jamvng
Canada244 Posts
Not to mention that we are all probably biased towards our own race. Let Blizzard to the ultimate judging on what race is imbalanced and what to fix, since they can look into all of it in an objective perspective. Make posts that are objective, don't QQ at other players just because you think everything they are saying is wrong, instead write posts that explain your own thoughts clearly and contribute to discussion. | ||
|
Acritter
Syria7637 Posts
| ||
|
DonKey_
Liechtenstein1356 Posts
On October 31 2010 03:11 TeamSoliduss wrote: I didn't say that. Willing or not, he plays a race that has been notoriously overpowered for months; He shouldn't bitch that it's "harder" but that it's now more or less "even". It's like if in a gunfight you bitched that your opponent got a gun instead of the slingshot he's been using the entire time... soo FruitDealer can complain because Zerg was "UP" but BoxeR can't because Terran was "OP" I used quotes because I think a lot of people will disagree with that, me included. | ||
|
TheGreatHegemon
61 Posts
On October 31 2010 03:11 TeamSoliduss wrote: I didn't say that. Willing or not, he plays a race that has been notoriously overpowered for months; He shouldn't bitch that it's "harder" but that it's now more or less "even". It's like if in a gunfight you bitched that your opponent got a gun instead of the slingshot he's been using the entire time... Terran being that OP was never that notoriously accepted. 5 rax reaper presented a challenge, but that was nerfed a while ago. | ||
|
Shikyo
Finland33997 Posts
On October 31 2010 03:06 DonKey_ wrote: ? what ? are you trying to say BoxeR is one of those FOTM players who switches to whatever race is strongest presently? If so you must have missed the game called Starcraft:Brood War. BoxeR did not pick terran because they were "op" ( which is your opinion and not shared by everyone) at the time, he picked them because he was known as The Emperor of Terran. Boxer player Protoss, then switched to Terran after Reavers got nerfed. | ||
|
Friend23
Poland270 Posts
| ||
|
Assirra
Belgium4169 Posts
On October 31 2010 03:19 TheGreatHegemon wrote: Terran being that OP was never that notoriously accepted. 5 rax reaper presented a challenge, but that was nerfed a while ago. So a zerg challange = good but a terran challenge = bad? I am not saying anything about imbalance here but that logic is so flawed it makes me laugh. And yes, it was accepted by even terran that they were OP atleast early game. | ||
|
avilo
United States4100 Posts
On October 31 2010 02:42 Shikyo wrote: Boxer starts talking about balance? =/ That sounds.... unlike him, to be honest. Was he complaining about Terran being UP back in 2000 or whatever? Nah, he took the race that was considered UP and made them seem OP. I also don't agree with Boxer here, he really should give it some more time before judging balance. There's still the most Terrans in the top 8 of the GSL and they still win the most tournaments. Unlike 95% of people in this thread, boxer knows what he's talking about. | ||
|
1Eris1
United States5797 Posts
Suppose someone gets to late game vs zerg and uses battlecruisers. Okay so the zerg makes corrupters and beats the battlecruisers. But wait, now the zerg has a bunch of useless corrupters, where as the terran can transition into mech. Is this viable? Hell if I know, I never see BC's vs zerg because some people say there pointless and everyone rolls MMM. If people would actually experiment...nearly all of zergs abilities were tested/etc during the 2 month UP period, are you telling me terran has really gone through all of their units in sub 2 weeks? | ||
|
klauz619
453 Posts
On October 31 2010 03:39 1Eris1 wrote: Great, now this is a fruitdealer vs boxer flame thread. Just wait a few weeks guys and actually try something new. Suppose someone gets to late game vs zerg and uses battlecruisers. Okay so the zerg makes corrupters and beats the battlecruisers. But wait, now the zerg has a bunch of useless corrupters, where as the terran can transition into mech. Is this viable? Hell if I know, I never see BC's vs zerg because some people say there pointless and everyone rolls MMM. If people would actually experiment...nearly all of zergs abilities were tested/etc during the 2 month UP period, are you telling me terran has really gone through all of their units in sub 2 weeks? He can turn them into broodlords you know. And terran doesn't have the luxury of having 50 larva a minute on 5 base as well as having perfect tech switches near instantly. | ||
|
1Eris1
United States5797 Posts
On October 31 2010 03:47 klauz619 wrote: He can turn them into broodlords you know. And terran doesn't have the luxury of having 50 larva a minute on 5 base as well as having perfect tech switches near instantly. Yes, and then you make vikings. Perhaps instead of this constant ling/bane/muta vs MMM/mech throwing our armies at each other crap we could try something new. And yes, 50 larva with perfect macro.. By late game you should have plenty of production facilities. Zerg might be able to get the units at a quicker time, but overall equal production facility cost will lead to more units then hatcheries. | ||
|
DonKey_
Liechtenstein1356 Posts
On October 31 2010 03:39 1Eris1 wrote: Great, now this is a fruitdealer vs boxer flame thread. Just wait a few weeks guys and actually try something new. Suppose someone gets to late game vs zerg and uses battlecruisers. Okay so the zerg makes corrupters and beats the battlecruisers. But wait, now the zerg has a bunch of useless corrupters, where as the terran can transition into mech. Is this viable? Hell if I know, I never see BC's vs zerg because some people say there pointless and everyone rolls MMM. If people would actually experiment...nearly all of zergs abilities were tested/etc during the 2 month UP period, are you telling me terran has really gone through all of their units in sub 2 weeks? There's a reason why people say it's pointless and never use BC's they do not work; do you really think in a game like SC2 people have not experimented with BCs. In fact I can point you to a game in the GSL, NesTea vs KangJiYoung Round of 64 ALL he did those 2 games was BC rush; I guarantee you that people have been experimenting with BC's it's just it has not had any success. | ||
|
Endorsed
Netherlands1221 Posts
And yes, 50 larva with perfect macro.. By late game you should have plenty of production facilities. Zerg might be able to get the units at a quicker time, but overall equal production facility cost will lead to more units then hatcheries. Yeah, on 5 base a terran definitely has 50 baracks. I think the inject larva mechanic is great and all, but it seems so broken really late game. A 200/200 bio composition is not like that will destroy muta/ling/bling/infestor. It's probably equal but the zerg can instantly remake. (Mech has become quite usless because of roach+1) Yes, and then you make vikings. Perhaps instead of this constant ling/bane/muta vs MMM/mech throwing our armies at each other crap we could try something new. And then you tech switch back to mutas and the terran has useless vikings. | ||
|
1Eris1
United States5797 Posts
On October 31 2010 03:56 Endorsed wrote: Yeah, on 5 base a terran definitely has 50 baracks. I think the inject larva mechanic is great and all, but it seems so broken really late game. A 200/200 bio composition is not like that will destroy muta/ling/bling/infestor. It's probably equal but the zerg can instantly remake. (Mech has become quite usless because of roach+1) And then you tech switch back to mutas and the terran has useless vikings. Did I say 50 barracks? 2 barracks do pretty good vs 1 hatchery+a queen. The zerg will get units out first, but then the barracks will out pump the hatchery. And mech's useless now? Okay And no, in equal numbers vikings beat mutalisks unless you get up to absurd counts of mutalisks. And even then, with equal upgrades vikings will beat them again | ||
|
1Eris1
United States5797 Posts
On October 31 2010 03:55 DonKey_ wrote: There's a reason why people say it's pointless and never use BC's they do not work; do you really think in a game like SC2 people have not experimented with BCs. In fact I can point you to a game in the GSL, NesTea vs KangJiYoung Round of 64 ALL he did those 2 games was BC rush; I guarantee you that people have been experimenting with BC's it's just it has not had any success. BC rush =/= using BC's. That was just an example. I don't think BC's are great against zerg but I have never seen them in any late game match, except I think a match between Dimaga and Jinro about 2 months back. My point is you have to experiment with units. If you experimented with them a month ago, fine, but things have changed since a month ago. | ||
|
valaki
Hungary2476 Posts
 | ||
|
Reaper9
United States1724 Posts
| ||
|
aTnClouD
Italy2428 Posts
On October 31 2010 03:56 Endorsed wrote: Yeah, on 5 base a terran definitely has 50 baracks. I think the inject larva mechanic is great and all, but it seems so broken really late game. A 200/200 bio composition is not like that will destroy muta/ling/bling/infestor. It's probably equal but the zerg can instantly remake. (Mech has become quite usless because of roach+1) And then you tech switch back to mutas and the terran has useless vikings. It all depends on the tank count, fight position and unit management. A 200 200 terran army can very well destroy a 200 200 zerg army without losses (it's a very unlikely situation but late game terran army is definitely stronger most of the times). I agree on the fact inject larva is too strong late game, hatcheries should have a 10 larva cap instead of 19. | ||
|
MforWW
United States157 Posts
And I agree that if anything protoss might be underpowered. That or maybe just all the protoss players suck. | ||
|
StarcraftMan
Canada507 Posts
On October 31 2010 00:30 raf3776 wrote: Like nada said you need to be equal bases against zerg to have a chance, which makes sense. two terran bases= to 4 zerg bases doesn't sound like it would make the most sense. ROFL. Zerg hatcheries are cheaper than CCs. Blizzard intended Zerg players to have a lead in macro to stay competitive with the other races. There is something broken with SC2 if Terran has to match Zerg bases all the time to stay competitive - SC2 is the same as BW. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
Replay Cast
WardiTV Weekly
PiGosaur Cup
The PondCast
Replay Cast
CrankTV Team League
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
CrankTV Team League
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
