EPTIf Terran gets weakened again I might go random.
Random BoxeR?
RoxeR?
I'm hoping next week's patch nerfs Terran now.
Boxer: might go random if Terran gets nerfed again. - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Kagami-sama
460 Posts
Random BoxeR? RoxeR? I'm hoping next week's patch nerfs Terran now. | ||
|
shynee
Canada180 Posts
On October 30 2010 07:56 bokeevboke wrote: There are 4 terrans in top 8 right now, why people still say that terran is weak. Maybe its because it used to be easy and now its hard to play against other races? Zerg pros addressed the issues with their race publicly and now Boxer is doing the same with Terran. As for the GSL, if you watch every TvZ game where T won (and skill was generally the same, or the T was better), you will notice that the game was basically won on a 1 or 2 base marine/tank or marine/marauder timing attack. The problem with this strategy is that there is no deviation. You have to attack and hurt zerg for macroing up. Having this small window is Boxer's concern. It limits Terran too much as they do not have the capacity to battle in the mid to late games. Its not "fun" anymore. Half the units Terran used to use are not as viable. The same is true against protoss due to the cost effectiveness of colos and HT storms. Terrans need to execute a timing attack with stim marines and marauders to slow protoss down. Essentially Terran is stuck with these bio units which lose effectiveness as the game progresses, but must stick to these units because there isn't any "better" option. Terran are taking advantage of their greatest strength... their early game, because thats the only opportunity to either win the game or damage the opponent enough in order to stay even in the mid/late game. If a good Zerg can shut down the Terran early timing push (Idra's specialty), then they have the advantage over Terran. At the end of the day, you can say that the game in balanced, as Terran is strong early, and Zerg/Protoss is strong late. But the early window is only the first 10-12 minutes and sufficient defense will stop it. Honestly, I would give up the early strength any day for most cost effective and durable late game strategies that deviate away from pure Terran Bio. I believe Blizzard is looking into the late game problem against Protoss as we speak. | ||
|
PartyBiscuit
Canada4525 Posts
| ||
|
.Aar
2177 Posts
On October 30 2010 06:09 YMCApylons wrote:A: Objectively, he's a better player than me right now. Based on skills, he should continue to use the ID, haha. BOXER APPROVES OF FOXER. +reputation points | ||
|
blade55555
United States17423 Posts
On October 30 2010 10:49 shynee wrote: Do you think Boxer, being the super competitive player he is, would want to win tournaments easily? Do you think he would want his fans and critics to think he won because he played the OP race? No.. he just wants true balance, and since all Zerg pros addressed the issues with their race publicly, he is doing the same with Terran. As for the GSL, if you watch every TvZ game where T won (and skill was generally the same, or the T was better), you will notice that the game was basically won on a 1 or 2 base marine/tank or marine/marauder timing attack. The problem with this strategy is that there is no deviation. You have to attack and hurt zerg for macroing up. Having this small window is Boxer's concern. It limits Terran too much as they do not have the capacity to battle in the mid to late games. Its not "fun" anymore. Half the units Terran used to use are not as viable. The same is true against protoss due to the cost effectiveness of colos and HT storms. Terrans need to execute a timing attack with stim marines and marauders to slow protoss down. Essentially Terran is stuck with these bio units which are not effective as the game progresses. Terran are taking advantage of their greatest strength... their early game, because thats the only opportunity to either win the game or damage the opponent enough in order to stay even in the mid/late game. If a good Zerg can shut down the Terran early timing push, then they have the advantage over Terran. At the end of the day, you can say that the game in balanced, as Terran is strong early, and Zerg/Protoss is strong late. But the early window is only the first 10-12 minutes and sufficient defense will stop it. Honestly, I would give up the early strength any day for most cost effective and durable late game strategies that deviate away from Terran Bio. I believe Blizzard is looking into the late game problem against protoss right now as we speak. Um Wrong. on the part of you saying every game that T won was him doing a 1 or 2 base timing attack. Nada did a 3 (had a fourth being made) base attack against his zerg opponent and obliterated him. I also recall Nada not doing that much damage to the zergs economy early either. I can't remember his game on xelnaga caverns but terran can compete with a zerg without having to do an all in 1 or 2 base attack. Also in the MVP games I am pretty sure he got more then 2 bases (correct me if im' wrong of course) and should have won game 2 just never scouted broodlords so he lost because of that unit not because he did no economic damage (zerg was on 3 base, terran was on 3 base with his third being a gold). So my point was Terrans can compete just most do not know how because they are used to winning on 2 base and are baffled when they lose because they never take a third until its too late (boxer vs fruitdealer is a good example of this). I don't know about tvp so I wont' comment on that ^^. | ||
|
shynee
Canada180 Posts
On October 30 2010 10:57 blade55555 wrote: Um Wrong. on the part of you saying every game that T won was him doing a 1 or 2 base timing attack. Nada did a 3 (had a fourth being made) base attack against his zerg opponent and obliterated him. I also recall Nada not doing that much damage to the zergs economy early either. I can't remember his game on xelnaga caverns but terran can compete with a zerg without having to do an all in 1 or 2 base attack. Also in the MVP games I am pretty sure he got more then 2 bases (correct me if im' wrong of course) and should have won game 2 just never scouted broodlords so he lost because of that unit not because he did no economic damage (zerg was on 3 base, terran was on 3 base with his third being a gold). So my point was Terrans can compete just most do not know how because they are used to winning on 2 base and are baffled when they lose because they never take a third until its too late (boxer vs fruitdealer is a good example of this). I don't know about tvp so I wont' comment on that ^^. Read my post again very carefully. Nada and the Zerg player were on completely different skill levels. And the attack was basically a 2 base timing push. The third base was shut down by mass mutas numerous times, and the fourth wasn't even operational when he decided to push. This was essentially 2 base timing attack, maybe 2.5 base. Bottom line is that the skill level difference was massive. He mass up those units solely on the income from 2 bases. As for MVP, the game he won was also basically on 2 base. Hell, he won mainly from marine and marauders with tanks. He slowed zerg down enough to take the game. Obviously if you slow Zerg down and are winning the game, you take a third. But he basically won the game on 2 bases. | ||
|
EleanorRIgby
Canada3923 Posts
 make hunter seeker missile not totally useless plz | ||
|
Choirdrunk
Canada131 Posts
Even big OgsZenio supporters were like "OgsZenio played really well!" (which he definitely did) but no one I talked with claims Zenio was the better player in the series. Also, please try and remember, Boxer isn't IdrA or Artosis. He hasn't been whining about balance for 8 years straight. If he's complaining, it's not because he plays terran. It's because he thinks there is a problem. So, even if you disagree with him, know that he's speaking with a reservation and well of knowledge that is uncharacteristic for even a pro-gamer. | ||
|
cArn-
Korea (South)824 Posts
On October 30 2010 10:48 blade55555 wrote: And what was the point of that? Terran isn't weak lol. Isn't that obvious ? First, yes, Terran is weak in its actual state, this is not rocket science to understand that, as much as it wasn't either to get that zerg was lacking some patches ago (or probably more like P and T being stronger, cause they never really lacked) Second, the point of that is that starting with such a large majority of terrans, it makes a bit of sense to have 4 terrans in the last 8 | ||
|
CreamCorn
33 Posts
| ||
|
Boundless
Canada588 Posts
On October 30 2010 11:07 EleanorRIgby wrote: wow so much top terrans have switched or are thinking of switching make hunter seeker missile not totally useless plz It's definitely not useless. It's very, very, very effective against mutalisks and banelings. In fact, I've seen very high level Terrans win games against Zerg by only using Marines and Ravens. That seems really weak against Banes at face value, but consider this: The Banelings are now engaging you OFF the creep (since you have Ravens to control creep), so you can HSM them very very easily. Plus, the Ravens can make PDD's that defend the Marines from muta attacks while they are fighting roach/ling/hydra etc on the ground. | ||
|
shynee
Canada180 Posts
On October 30 2010 11:10 Choirdrunk wrote: A perfect illustration of what Boxer is talking about can be found in the most exciting set the GSL has produced in any season: ImMvP vs. OgsZenio. Even big OgsZenio supporters were like "OgsZenio played really well!" (which he definitely did) but no one I talked with claims Zenio was the better player in the series. Also, please try and remember, Boxer isn't IdrA or Artosis. He hasn't been whining about balance for 8 years straight. If he's complaining, it's not because he plays terran. It's because he thinks there is a problem. So, even if you disagree with him, know that he's speaking with a reservation and well of knowledge that is uncharacteristic for even a pro-gamer. Exactly. He has too much love and respect for the game to be whining as other progamers have in the past. Also, he has a higher game IQ and better game sense than most. Being the ultra competitive player he is, he wouldn't drop to such lows as "whining" in order to receive a Terran buff from blizzard. The entire SC2 world has the spotlight on him and he is using his celebrity status as a way to shed light on the current state of the game in order to improve it. | ||
|
wussleeQ
United States3130 Posts
On October 30 2010 11:21 CreamCorn wrote: How strange, the guy who rose to the top in the time when everyone felt Terran was UP (SC: BW), feels that Terran is UP right now to the point of not even playing the race. He actually first played toss up until the point where they balanced things out and then he made the move to T. | ||
|
RogerChillingworth
3055 Posts
On October 30 2010 11:07 EleanorRIgby wrote: wow so much top terrans have switched or are thinking of switching make hunter seeker missile not totally useless plz Why do people keep talking about this. David Kim addressed it in a blizzcon q & a and it makes sense. They don't want to buff seeker missile. It doesn't need a buff, it shouldn't get a buff, the game would be worse with it buffed. A lot fewer zergs switched when they were getting pounded in the ass in phase two and the first three months of release. Now, a week into the patch, Terrans feel like the game is unwinnable versus zerg. Everyone gets the short end of the stick at some point; ergo the ebs and flows of a good RTS. (Just to think, now, how many Terrans said to zergs "well (*fart*) use drops or something, gee i dno stop complaining" fart fart). See how it feels for a little bit. It might inspire creative play; new builds, an alternate way of dealing with the problem. Anything can happen. The future is yours. Run, Forrest, run. | ||
|
emythrel
United Kingdom2599 Posts
Toss have both HT's and Collosi, which do massive area damage and ruin bio. And both are seen in most games that make it past the early game. These units are weak if not backed up, but you can easily push ur opponent back with storms while you retreat. Hell carriers are pretty cool too... and can hit multiple targets at once with the fighters. Zerg have Ultras which are just awesome, not in an OP way... just love them lol. And again you will nearly always see them in late game. Some times you will even see the dreaded Broodlords, which are great if backed up by mutas/corruptors. Again bloodlords can attack multiple targets in a round about sense. Terran on the other hand have Thors. Now Thors are great, but they are slow, can't walk up cliffs to run away..... and weak without backup. That basically the only high teir option for T's since cattlebruisers are slow, have a single target attack and basically only used if you have already got your critical mass of Vikings/Medivacs. Terran obviously have alot of stuff they can do in early game, but after that you have to have a larger army and often better micro than your opponent. This is true at all levels of the game. in lower leagues T's get ripped apart in the late game simply because MMM etc get mauled by 1a Zerg or Toss. Basically if you 1a a terran army and a toss 1a's their army, the terran will often lose because of the aoe attacks from HT's and Collosi. Add in micro to the equation, then T's can win these battles.... but its bloody hard work, and if you have tanks in your mix you don't really have many retreat options and stop/shoot micro will eventually leave the tanks exposed. I am a scrub, i am well aware of that, but i spend alot of time watching pro replays and these are my conclusions, i watch the battles and everything going on around them and see the same thing as everyone else. My views agree with many high level terrans, that mid-late game is horrible against P/Z unless you go into it with a big lead or simply out skill your opponent... hell sometimes you can't even win when you do out skill them lol. I don't think that T's are UP at all, I just think they need some more viable late game options. BC's got nerfed, so we see less and less of them (even though the nerf wasn't that bad lol). Reapers got nerfed..... now you see like 1 per game, used simply as a scout. Tanks got nerfed and now just don't do the same damage that Collosi/HT's can. Its worse against Toss than Zerg, which is why at blizzcon they were going to be tackling TvP in the next balance patch.... because T are losing the battle! So when T's say they need to fix something with TvP.. guess what blizz agree! | ||
|
NATO
United States459 Posts
| ||
|
bokeevboke
Singapore1674 Posts
On October 30 2010 11:10 Choirdrunk wrote: A perfect illustration of what Boxer is talking about can be found in the most exciting set the GSL has produced in any season: ImMvP vs. OgsZenio. Even big OgsZenio supporters were like "OgsZenio played really well!" (which he definitely did) but no one I talked with claims Zenio was the better player in the series. Also, please try and remember, Boxer isn't IdrA or Artosis. He hasn't been whining about balance for 8 years straight. If he's complaining, it's not because he plays terran. It's because he thinks there is a problem. So, even if you disagree with him, know that he's speaking with a reservation and well of knowledge that is uncharacteristic for even a pro-gamer. I don't particularly remember him saying that zergs were UP before patches, so I think he complains because he plays terran. Which means he is biased. | ||
|
dras
Kazakhstan376 Posts
| ||
|
dRaW
Canada5744 Posts
| ||
|
andeh
United States904 Posts
too bad you cant downgrade patches for him to see what high level tvz was | ||
| ||
