Edit: Now de-spoiler-ized, if you haven't watched Ro16 matches. If you haven't watched Ro32, well, I can't help you. Stop reading.
OP's note: Please don't start a balance flame war. I just thought the most interesting part of the interview was Boxer's constant comments about Terran's weakness, so I put that as the title. There's a lot more in the interview than just race balance, but you really can't get around it - Boxer thinks Terran is UP, and he doesn't care who knows it. Let's keep it cool in here. It's just a translation of what Boxer said.
Update 2010.10.30:Read this. Boxer deserves respect. Update 2010.10.30: BurningSera claims mistranslation here. Judge for yourself. My response here. Update 2010.10.30: Boxer is definitely not a QQer. Anyone who thinks otherwise should watch this game. It's the #1 game in the OSL hall of fame, and CholeraSC titled it "Never Surrender". If you don't know what OSL is or who CholeraSC is...you have a lot to learn before saying anything about Boxer.
After taking down his last opponent, Boxer has entered the Ro16. After the match, he took questioned from the Korean media, and said that taking on Loner meant avoiding TvZ which was what he was most afraid of. He also said that he had watched Loner's play at Blizzcon, and understood Loner's tactics. When asked about Fake Boxer, he generously admitted that Fake Boxer was probably stronger than him at the moment.
Q: How do you feel about entering the Ro16?
A: My Ro16 opponent is Loner, my previous record against Chinese players is poor, so I must change that impression, and my minimum goal is to be a S-class player. I hope I can accomplish both goals.
I only have two days to practice, so I've got to hurry back to practice. I'm happy I can avoid the problematic TvP.
Q: You used some pretty unorthodox (cheesy) tactics.
A: In the first game I didn't want to reveal my strategy, so I canceled tech and improvised. The second game I was following a set game plan. TvP requires my full strength, so I just put my head down and executed.
In previous interviews I didn't mention who I was practicing with, because I didn't want people to find the replays. I was actually practicing with sSKS. This time he gave me lots of practice looks, and at Blizzcon, Huk helped me practice.
Q: Because of Blizzcon, do you have stamina problems?
A: After coming back to Seoul, there were some issues with the time lag, and I lost my practice notebook. I've been to the US before, and it was the same kind of discomfort. After coming back I didn't sleep much, just concentrating on practice, but I had less than one day of practice.
Q: You had a showmatch against Fruitdealer.
A: Even though it was a showmatch, there were a lot of spectators, more than GSL, so I was quite nervous. Even though I tried my best, but I still lost. Fruitdealer is a good player, I hope to play him again after I have plenty of practice.
Q: Recently people have said TvZ is hard.
A: I'm probably the one who has said it most! We've got to wait for the next patch, but for now we just try our best. I had this momentary thought in my head, that if I was eliminated I would switch races. Actually I want to go random. In internal battles, for a time, I was random.
Q: So you'll be random in future tournaments?
A: If Terran gets weakened again I might go random.
Q: Your Ro16 opponent is the Chinese player "Little Terran Emperor" Loner.
A: At Blizzcon I saw his TvP. But he lost 0-4, making me think that Protoss might be "bugged" (OP). I've played him on battle.net, so I know his style.
Q: Every one says you're the strongest TvT,
A: Well, Terran against anyone else is hard, I hope my opponents are all Terran, haha.
Q: Under the circumstances, you will probably meet Nada in Ro8.
A: If we meet, that will be interesting, and it will be a hot topic, and because we will both be S-class, we can show-off our full skills without pressure.
Q: Today the crowd was pretty fired-up.
A: At Blizzcon there were more people, but I feel even more nervous at GSL. Probably because I didn't prepare well for today.
Q: The player who has the Boxer ID has said he has permission to switch ID.
A: Objectively, he's a better player than me right now. Based on skills, he should continue to use the ID, haha.
Great interview, I'm really surprised that Boxer keeps mentioning how weak Terran is. Hopefully he will remain Terran and be awesome. Cannot wait for Boxer vs NaDa.
On October 30 2010 06:13 holy_war wrote: Great interview, I'm really surprised that Boxer keeps mentioning how weak Terran is. Hopefully he will remain Terran and be awesome. Cannot wait for Boxer vs NaDa.
It's because right now, Z>T, due to late game macro + larva inject. And TvP is in no better shape, because once protoss hits 5 collosus and gets storms + energy upgrade, it's almost impossible to win versus any competent protoss.
Scratch that, didnt feel like having a balance discussion in the end.
Good interview, random players are always nice
(Since the guy under actually caught me before my edit, my biggest point is probably the fact that I nevre understood how Zergs could be considered underpowered. Sure they require higher skill to play then the other races (imo), but in the end, the ability to produce double the units that a normal hatchery could make seems pretty odd to me (imagine if you could buy a upgrade for htaches doubling your larva production for 150 gold in SCBW, zerg would become so damn overpowered, and even though its not the same games, theres still something there imo.)
I agree with Turpin in that Zerg is definitely not UP at the moment, with the game roughly about even in TvZ, but what Boxer is effectively claiming is that Zerg has an advantage over Terran, which is definitely ridiculous.
On October 30 2010 06:13 holy_war wrote: Great interview, I'm really surprised that Boxer keeps mentioning how weak Terran is. Hopefully he will remain Terran and be awesome. Cannot wait for Boxer vs NaDa.
It's because right now, Z>T, due to late game macro + larva inject. And TvP is in no better shape, because once protoss hits 5 collosus and gets storms + energy upgrade, it's almost impossible to win versus any competent protoss.
Its because you don't know how to play the match up. Its all you do is complain balance in all your posts its really pathetic go watch MVP/Nada/Loner's tvz so you can find out how to play thank you.
As for Boxer's comment he's been complaining about Terran balance even before the first patch (by first I mean right before Roach buff). So I'm kinda taking his comments with a grain of salt about it but would be pretty cool to see him play random ^^
On October 30 2010 06:37 TurpinOS wrote: Scratch that, didnt feel like having a balance discussion in the end.
Good interview, random players are always nice
(Since the guy under actually caught me before my edit, my biggest point is probably the fact that I nevre understood how Zergs could be considered underpowered. Sure they require higher skill to play then the other races (imo), but in the end, the ability to produce double the units that a normal hatchery could make seems pretty odd to me (imagine if you could buy a upgrade for htaches doubling your larva production for 150 gold in SCBW, zerg would become so damn overpowered, and even though its not the same games, theres still something there imo.)
Im not saying that your wrong, and that zvt does not favor zerg, I personally feel like it does,, I feel queens are really really powerful, however.. Terrans have reactors, and mules, can you imagine being able to make 2x rines out of rax in SC1, or even 2x vultures, imagine how op terran would be if you had mules!. Protoss have warp gate mechanics.... Comparing back to SC1 in this case is kind of just blatant bias unless you do it for each race
Going random is a strange move especially when you are going to play in GSL every season. You need to pick a race, right?
But Boxer knows whats best for him, i wouldn't mind seeing him as a Zerg or Protoss, but since i loved him in Broodwar as a terran, he should just stick to it!
I hope for a balanced game, but if he somehow ends up switching, I want to see him as a protoss. Both in SC:BW, and even now in SC2, there's no real bonjwa level toss players. Bisu had all signs, but still off the mark, and in SC2, I had a lot of hopes from Tester and then Sang-Ho, but both are inconsistent. May be Genius can become a real star?
Boxer is a genius and a huge perfectionist. I can understand it's really hard to perfect your play when you feel like you're already behind before you start.
He might be right too. It's perhaps a bit early to jump to conclusions yet though.
I'll admit there is a mid-late-game hole in Terran at the moment that Zerg can almost always win by exploiting, but I do not think that it is necessarily because of underpowered-ness in Terran. I don't want to get into an out-right balance discussion/debate but I feel that now that Terran doesn't have the same level of early-game pressure they once had against Zerg. Terrans have yet to find another way to successfully damage the Zerg enough in their macro. However, trying to buff Terran early game will just bring back the same problems as before where only the highest level Zergs can hold off a successfully executed reaper harass, and even then maybe not.
On October 30 2010 07:53 Antisocialmunky wrote: TvZ got better with more macro oriented builds but TvP just got so unbelievably boring after the tank nerf :-\
Though to be honest, I think he is kinda pouting because he can't Bunker Kong like he used to.
Are you serious? Was the sitting with 12 tanks in the middle of the map so entertaining?
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?
Mad props to BoxeR, I think it's hard to argue that BoxeR > FoxeR right now. He did strike me as a little whiny about T balance, but then again who wouldn't be when they play for money?
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?
It's pretty obvious. Regardless of their showing at this GSL, there are concerns that in the future terran will be underpowered based on certain properties of their race.
Is it really that hard to critically think about these kinds of things?
On October 30 2010 07:53 Antisocialmunky wrote: TvZ got better with more macro oriented builds but TvP just got so unbelievably boring after the tank nerf :-\
Though to be honest, I think he is kinda pouting because he can't Bunker Kong like he used to.
Are you serious? Was the sitting with 12 tanks in the middle of the map so entertaining?
I dunno, is playing with A-Move MMM blob exciting? Atleast mech had positional consideration. I wish TLO stuck with T since he did all sorts of fun things :D
On October 30 2010 07:55 SichuanPanda wrote: I'll admit there is a mid-late-game hole in Terran at the moment that Zerg can almost always win by exploiting, but I do not think that it is necessarily because of underpowered-ness in Terran. I don't want to get into an out-right balance discussion/debate but I feel that now that Terran doesn't have the same level of early-game pressure they once had against Zerg. Terrans have yet to find another way to successfully damage the Zerg enough in their macro. However, trying to buff Terran early game will just bring back the same problems as before where only the highest level Zergs can hold off a successfully executed reaper harass, and even then maybe not.
Actually I think its not that big of an issue if you see the replays in my guide linked in my signature.
And there are 4 terrans in top 8 partly because of TvT and ZvZ match ups that occurred. In other words, if Idra and Zenio played 2 terrans, most of I am not sure if any terran besides Nada could have a chance. Z looks certainly stronger than T in that match up right now.
On October 30 2010 07:18 Grettin wrote: Going random is a strange move especially when you are going to play in GSL every season. You need to pick a race, right?
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?
Two of the terrans are legends, and the patch just hit. So it's all a bit of a mess. I think we'll have to see what develops.
I highly doubt Boxer would ever switch from Terran. Z totally doesn't suit his style, esp when Macro is his biggest flaw. Protoss might be okay for him, but it still doesn't seem to allow the same level of creativity as T.
I think he was being tongue-in-cheek when he said he would switch to random. He knows Blizzard will not nerf Terran further, although they may nerf some things and buff other things.
Very humble about Clare's nick stealage. BoxeR is such a nice guy.
Terran lol at all the Zergs crying imbalance then patch comes out and buffs the Zerg slightly and now THEY cry imbalance. what a bunch of cry babies :D yay my turn!
If GSL allows random, it would be *awesome* if one of the well-respected players goes with that. They would instantly gain so many fans from the style, the commentators would have something to talk about right from the start of each match, it would be great!
Saying that, BoxeR is not going to change. He's said before that he thinks Blizzard's balance patches are strongly affected by the pros, and he's trying to influence them in favor of terran.
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?
Guess you missed a very important information about that
29 Terran 20 Protoss 15 Zerg
Ro64 representation (roughly), so yeah, your point is not relevant at all.
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?
Guess you missed a very important information about that
29 Terran 20 Protoss 15 Zerg
Ro64 representation (roughly), so yeah, your point is not relevant at all.
And what was the point of that? Terran isn't weak lol.
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?
Guess you missed a very important information about that
29 Terran 20 Protoss 15 Zerg
Ro64 representation (roughly), so yeah, your point is not relevant at all.
And most zergs lost to ZvZ. How many TvZ did actually terran won ?
Like you said, that's pointless, skill, training, etc are factors in there to judge balance from GSL results.
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.
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.
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?
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 ^^.
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?
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 ^^.
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.
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.
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?
Guess you missed a very important information about that
29 Terran 20 Protoss 15 Zerg
Ro64 representation (roughly), so yeah, your point is not relevant at all.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
i think the big difference between T late game and Z/P are the higher tier units.
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!
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.
Boxer and Nada both are playing pretty epic for their brief time commencing SC2. I am hoping that one of them can make the finals, it would be amazing :D
- Foxer should still switch to Foxer cause it avoids confusion.
- He said "might switch to random" which makes it seem about as likely as Idra playing Terran.
- TvZ just got overhauled (while ZvT is the same with less to worry about initially). That makes it difficult now for sure but let's wait until people start figuring out the new TvZ tactics before screaming imbalance.
- Foxer and Nada seem to both have some extremely solid TvZ (and two completely different styles). Maybe there's something there, let's see what happens in later rounds.
On October 30 2010 06:13 holy_war wrote: Great interview, I'm really surprised that Boxer keeps mentioning how weak Terran is. Hopefully he will remain Terran and be awesome. Cannot wait for Boxer vs NaDa.
It's because right now, Z>T, due to late game macro + larva inject. And TvP is in no better shape, because once protoss hits 5 collosus and gets storms + energy upgrade, it's almost impossible to win versus any competent protoss.
you do realize T>P (alot) early game right?
so in every game T has been OP
but not every game gets to late game so P does not get OP every game.
People seem to be blowing the whole OP/UP thing out of proportion. It's been what, less then two weeks since the patch? Give it time people. When a change is made to a unit it not only makes that unit different, but it completely effects the strategies revolving around that unit.
Imo, blizzard should not have released a patch like this before a huge tournament because it was obviously it would really throw players off. At the same time though it's way to early to pass judgment, because no one had time to test builds and the like.
I think we should wait until GSL3 before we start deciding what is OP/UP. It was obvious zerg was going to do good in this tournament simply because the patch caught people off guard. But as you can see, it's not a 6 zerg, 1 terran, 1 toss situation, it's actually pretty good. (Yes Toss is behind, but I would contribute that to the best toss in the world not being in the tournament and the two top 3 toss that were in the tournament having to play eachother in the ro.16)
As we can see, new builds are already popping up from terran players to comba zerg. It might be rough for a little while longer, but I think it will balance out by the 3rd GSL. If not, then we can start calling OP/UP
I don't really want to get into balance arguments but the main point was that Terran used to have a very strong early game which would set you up for a lategame advantage. Now that Terran lost that early advantage with the rax nerf, and the reaper speed nerf as well as Zerg getting an earlygame buff with roaches it is difficult to obtain that early advantage.
On October 30 2010 06:13 holy_war wrote: Great interview, I'm really surprised that Boxer keeps mentioning how weak Terran is. Hopefully he will remain Terran and be awesome. Cannot wait for Boxer vs NaDa.
It's because right now, Z>T, due to late game macro + larva inject. And TvP is in no better shape, because once protoss hits 5 collosus and gets storms + energy upgrade, it's almost impossible to win versus any competent protoss.
you do realize T>P (alot) early game right?
so in every game T has been OP
but not every game gets to late game so P does not get OP every game.
Well if you're playing as P you best hope you can drag the match into late game.
the most surprising thing for me in this article is Boxer mentioning Huk by name as someone who helped him practice. looks like Huk will be off to a good start (especially with the OGS connections) when he arrives in Korea next month
on topic though, it would be cool to see how Boxer handles random. since his macro is lacking compared to his micro, I wonder how well he'll perform when he rolls zerg
The fake Boxer Won vs FruitDealer while the Real boxer didn't. The fake one is also higher ranked in the same division as Boxer, and they met a lot in the ladder.
So i don't think that when Boxer thinks that Fake boxer is better, he was joking but he is serious.
I can't imagine seeing BoxeR playing anything else other than Terran. The emperor of the Terran race betrays his followers? That will be a sad day indeed.
On October 30 2010 13:20 We Are Here wrote: i dont even think boxers even that good, back in his prime he was good for his time but not anymore
Apparently RO8 in the GSL is not that good. Damn. Maybe it will be proven he sucks if he loses to the also not so good nada.
hmmm i dont think nada is at cools level, but i think he will beat boxer
Edit: boxer is doing good now, but what i mean is when the really good players start emerging boxer will fall off the radar, probably faster than the other good players of this time. he can only compete when the skill level is (relatively) low
On October 30 2010 13:20 We Are Here wrote: i dont even think boxers even that good, back in his prime he was good for his time but not anymore
Apparently RO8 in the GSL is not that good. Damn. Maybe it will be proven he sucks if he loses to the also not so good nada.
hmmm i dont think nada is at cools level, but i think he will beat boxer
Edit: boxer is doing good now, but what i mean is when the really good players start emerging boxer will fall off the radar, probably faster than the other good players of this time. he can only compete when the skill level is (relatively) low
on what do you base this? he wasnt even close to losing a single match so far. on that one showmatch or on some month old replays?
On October 30 2010 13:20 We Are Here wrote: i dont even think boxers even that good, back in his prime he was good for his time but not anymore
Apparently RO8 in the GSL is not that good. Damn. Maybe it will be proven he sucks if he loses to the also not so good nada.
hmmm i dont think nada is at cools level, but i think he will beat boxer
Edit: boxer is doing good now, but what i mean is when the really good players start emerging boxer will fall off the radar, probably faster than the other good players of this time. he can only compete when the skill level is (relatively) low
I am going to disagree with you on almost everything you said.
I would love to see a Nada vs Fruitdealer as both are very strong players and I don't think fruitdealer would be able to beat Nada like he did Boxer. Boxer stayed on 2 base and got a third way too late both games and Nada seems to know to take a third faster then most terrans do and he's a good macro player.
I also think Boxer will stay at top level play for a long time as long as he keeps playing and doesn't quit I doubt he'll fall behind. This isn't bw so macro should not hurt Boxer too much at least not like in bw. We'll see though only time will answer this question.
I think if Nada and Fruitdealer played it would have been amazing and I really wish it could have happened but hopefully they get a showmatch or something so we can really know who's better of the two
On October 30 2010 14:05 ArvickHero wrote: hey all three of those got knocked out, and no foreigner in the Ro8 hmmmm
Has nothing to do with the fact that they're foreigners... FruitDealer is out as well, but he won the last one... doesn't prove anything. There is a smaller pool of foreigners for the GSL, c'mon, it's in Korea... of course it will be that way.
Anyway, to try and stay on thread topic a bit-
Complaining that Terran is underpowered now? Oh c'mon... we go from everyone screaming "Terran OP!" to this in one patch? The game is more balanced now than it has ever been. Minor tweaks needed, but it's good.
Boxer is good, no doubt about it, but he's not a Tier 1 SC2 player yet... Maybe not even Tier 2. I'd put my vote on just about any Top 100 player over Boxer, honestly. He just needs more practice.
Give it a few months and my opinion will probably be different, favoring Boxer more.
People keep saying that Terran players just simply don't adapt with the new patch, but forget that Zerg players also don't adapt with the new patch yet. When Zerg players get their timing right, they'll crush Terran too. It's just simply the snowball effect.
I kinda think Boxer is right. At the moment, there isn't much what Terrans can do to gain advantage over Zerg, because imo most Zerg players have "evolved" to deflect any kind of early pressure with minimal resources and drone hard. After that point, Zerg are unstoppable with their ability to techswitch instantly to anything.
Zerg players are fairly comfortable dealing with MMM aswell, I kinda feel like Mech needs to be explored more against Zerg.
I think right now Nada can beat any Zerg tho, that guy has sick macro man!
I think more terrans need to use ghosts vs protoss, this requires much more micro for the toss which is very hard to do while macroing since you can't just select your warpgates and have units constantly training, you actually have to go to to a pylon and "z-click, s-click, t-click" etc etc to spawn units.
Boxer is good, no doubt about it, but he's not a Tier 1 SC2 player yet... Maybe not even Tier 2. I'd put my vote on just about any Top 100 player over Boxer, honestly. He just needs more practice.
I guess all those "Tier 1" and "Tier 2" SC2 players no longer in the GSL didn't get the memo and forgot to sign up.
For the record, he's undefeated in the GSL and just made the BlizzCon runner-up look like a noob.
im baffled by the responses saying that BoxeR isnt even that good. hes a great player and is up there in GSL2 rightfully so. im not a fanboy and havent heard of him until recently because i had never played or got into sc until sc2 came out. boxer is only noting that unless terrans do heavy rax play with timing pushes. it is pretty much banking on your opponent to make a mistake for any variation of mech play or late game play to win. terrans have the best early game and as the game progresses just get overrun by both zerg and toss. i very highly doubt BoxeR would ever follow through with this as he is someone who continues sc because of his large fan base and ending his terran play this late wouldnt be his style. on the contrary after watching NaDa recently, i think terran play might heavily evolve. ive never seen a terran macro and expand that hard before. in all this time of sc2, its the first variation of terran play ive seen and it looks like it may drastically improve mid game transitions i'll agree that reapers were OP at the start but since being triple nerfed have been taken out of the game aside from being a weak scout that is easily picked off. and although Terrans are not very UP right now, it is getting pretty frustrating having every patch have nerfed terrans the most. and it kind of needs to stop the nerfs is what BoxeR was getting at. especially when buffing other races. you can see that almost every zerg at the time of the patch was laughing and feeling bad for terrans because they knew the patch went overboard on changing ZvT
I think that the big problem was that Zerg was UP compared to the other races.
This meant that the Z players had to play harder in order to compete vs T and P. So, they explored more parts of their races, and Z learned to deflect early harass with relative success.
Then came the latest patch. What happens? Now Z who has been working so hard to learn to survive vs early game anything has a little less to worry about. They have to cover less based, but their "defend with as little resource loss" skills have carried over. Now Z has learned the best ways to defend vs early game pressure but now with slower early game pressure (zealot time nerf, supply before rax, etc...) Z can now has a more consistent macro + defense pattern than before (where they had to worry about stupidly fast 2 gates and reaper rushes).
Now T and P have to adapt to not being able to bust in so early. Z changed their tactics very little... went from prepare for cheese -> scouted no cheese plays. T and P have to change the way they play all together as parts of their games were removed.
Z has been practicing this style of play since the game came out... T and P are just evolving. Now that Z, T, and P are relatively equal (T needs a small late game buff) Z has their strat ironed out and T and P are still trying to figure stuff out.
In time, T and P will learn a more optimal way of play, just currently we haven't seen is as there's been too little time.
I think Z is just a little more refined and evolved play as Z had to play that way due to being UP, T and P are catching up but really wont take long for them to figure out the new way to play, the new timings, and everything will be A OK once again.
Do terran really have the best early game? Up to what stage is classed as "early" these days. personally i'm finding it ridiculously hard to put any kind of pressure out at all without compromising myself utterly economically.
On October 30 2010 13:54 blade55555 wrote: I also think Boxer will stay at top level play for a long time as long as he keeps playing and doesn't quit I doubt he'll fall behind. This isn't bw so macro should not hurt Boxer too much at least not like in bw. We'll see though only time will answer this question.
I don't know if this is true or not, but I was thinking the same thing.
SC2 makes macroing easier than BW, I don't know if anyone doubts this. So Boxer might find taking his third a little easier than he did in BW. With multiple building select, smart-cast on MULEs, its just much easier to be macroing hard as Terran.
But micro is still micro. Smart-cast and large control-groups are nice, but as Boxer showed in Ro16, with that awesome SCV ramp-block, you still need individual unit control. Think about Nada's marine spread against banelings. Virtually all BW-pros re-assign their army control groups on-the-fly, depending on what they need at the moment. Boxer is clearly a master at BW-micro.
And Terran micro is going to develop much more. Right now, Boxer is basically going Tank-Viking with extra mins in marines. But after future patches, I'd expect Boxer to come up with some creative uses for Ghosts and Ravens.
So the transition from SC:BW to SC2 might be helping Boxer more than most pros.
Finally, Boxer is by nature more of a creative player than a flawless macro perfectionist, and because the SC2 meta-game hasn't been mapped out like BW, there's still a lot of room for Boxer to wreak havoc with unconventional play. He's not going to be shut down by standard play, because standard play hasn't had time to develop and adapt to all the new things Boxer (and people like him) will throw at it. And every patch will give Boxer a little more room. My guess is Boxer has at least a year or two of "imba!" patches to exploit, and then another year as the metagame is mapped out.
But, I still think Nada > Boxer in SC2 circa 2010, because Nada >> Boxer in BW, circa 2009. There's just nothing quite like perfect SC:BW macro. There's just no comparison between something like Steppes of War or Metalopolis and the utterly massive maps of ICCUP BW. Put Nada in SC2, and he starts out-expanding zerg 30% of the time. FWIW.
Terran was a joke when he picked it up in BW. I find it hard to believe/fathom his complaints about terran in SC2 when they are much better off and completely capable of winning any given game in any MU.
Imo...Terran need to use more units other then just the bio ball. Ravens need to be used much more often...I really think once raven become popular they will be considered OP...the unit is amazing
On October 30 2010 15:55 HomicidaL wrote: Imo...Terran need to use more units other then just the bio ball. Ravens need to be used much more often...I really think once raven become popular they will be considered OP...the unit is amazing
I don't think anyone gets the point WE HAVE TO USE IT OTHERWISE THE ZERG AND PROTOSS WILL EXPAND AND MASS UP and beat us quicker.
Basically as Terran you must delay and stop the inevitable of you losing by pressuring the zerg and protoss and keeping them in check. Note what Nada did was every time the zerg expanded, nada had already expanded making sure he was on even footing with his zerg enemy and also kept harassing him with drops, timing attacks and what not to ensure that he could not mass up and beat him.
You need to these drops or timing attacks to ensure that their macro does not get out of hand. If you leave a protoss or zerg for 15 minutes, their clump > your clump.
Boxer is not saying that Terran is Underpowered but he is saying that the way that the terran has to play is a problem because games will have to either end in 15 minutes or lower or the Terran will simply lose.
On October 30 2010 15:55 HomicidaL wrote: Imo...Terran need to use more units other then just the bio ball. Ravens need to be used much more often...I really think once raven become popular they will be considered OP...the unit is amazing
Against zerg, a raven costs as much gas as a thor and is only good against mutalisks(PDD). Since thors are already used to counter mutalisks it's a hard sell. You can't really use them to harass because fast zerg air will kill them, and hunter seeker has such short range, high cost, and low damage it's not useful at all.
Against protoss, they would only be able to come out late game, at which point they will be fedbacked and have all your 200 gas units made completely useless :/
I think the real key to terran victory is the planetary fortress. I've never seen a battle at a fortress that terran didn't win handily. Somehow that has to be used offensively.
Didn't Nada feel the same way? I don't think that these are completely unfounded. It's no different than when all the Z's were complaining. They had good reason. Now things are reversed, so you expect them not to follow?
On October 30 2010 13:20 We Are Here wrote: i dont even think boxers even that good, back in his prime he was good for his time but not anymore
HERESY
yeah lets just ban everyone who disagrees or has a different opinion than you of "good"
It has nothing to do with opinions, you don't question the emperor or talk down on him.
Aaaand, this is exactly what he's talking about.
Maybe boxer should learn to adapt like all the zergs did when their race was [is] the weakest and most mechanically difficult to succeed with.
The difference is in BW, boxer played terran even though it was considered "the weakest race" at the time by everyone cuz he saw something in them. I'm protoss and never thought terran was weak, but if boxer says they are to the point that he'll consider switching, I believe him.
On October 30 2010 16:18 Inori wrote: As much as I like Boxers play, seeing so much whining about balance and, rofl, T balance from him makes me a sad sad panda.
If anything, I'd expect him to make T seem stronger than ever, not this.
Disappointed.
Clearly, he can just change the entire paradigm of the game overnight. Unless you have some solid evidence and analysis to show he's wrong, I'm going to take the progamer's knowledge over yours any day.
On October 30 2010 16:35 n0xi3 wrote: TvZ is rough.. but i kind of hope he sticks with Terran. He is a fantastic player and would love to see him keep to his guns.
When he plays NaDa I expect GOMtv to explode.
This is true. I'm going to attempt to connect to the stream, but I already know that I'm going to see "Simultaneous connection limit reached".
On October 30 2010 16:18 Inori wrote: As much as I like Boxers play, seeing so much whining about balance and, rofl, T balance from him makes me a sad sad panda.
If anything, I'd expect him to make T seem stronger than ever, not this.
Disappointed.
Clearly, he can just change the entire paradigm of the game overnight. Unless you have some solid evidence and analysis to show he's wrong, I'm going to take the progamer's knowledge over yours any day.
This.
Everyone seems to be scoffing at Nada and Boxer's small complaints about Terran. They each have 10+ years of pro gaming experience, maybe give them the benefit of the doubt here, maybe they have some insight in the way the games play out that you guys can't see.
I wouldn't dismiss their opinions so quickly. Especially considering how Boxer made Loner look like a chump.
Just consider that maybe he knows more about starcraft than you do, I mean, hes the Emperor.
I agree, TvZ is terribly hard. TvP is ''balanced'' But it's more a race against the clock. Early game the advantage lies with terran but late game you basically auto-lose when protoss have amulet and storm.(Unless you got into the late game with a huge advantage)
On October 30 2010 14:41 Insanious wrote: I think that the big problem was that Zerg was UP compared to the other races.
This meant that the Z players had to play harder in order to compete vs T and P. So, they explored more parts of their races, and Z learned to deflect early harass with relative success.
Then came the latest patch. What happens? Now Z who has been working so hard to learn to survive vs early game anything has a little less to worry about. They have to cover less based, but their "defend with as little resource loss" skills have carried over. Now Z has learned the best ways to defend vs early game pressure but now with slower early game pressure (zealot time nerf, supply before rax, etc...) Z can now has a more consistent macro + defense pattern than before (where they had to worry about stupidly fast 2 gates and reaper rushes).
Now T and P have to adapt to not being able to bust in so early. Z changed their tactics very little... went from prepare for cheese -> scouted no cheese plays. T and P have to change the way they play all together as parts of their games were removed.
Z has been practicing this style of play since the game came out... T and P are just evolving. Now that Z, T, and P are relatively equal (T needs a small late game buff) Z has their strat ironed out and T and P are still trying to figure stuff out.
In time, T and P will learn a more optimal way of play, just currently we haven't seen is as there's been too little time.
I think Z is just a little more refined and evolved play as Z had to play that way due to being UP, T and P are catching up but really wont take long for them to figure out the new way to play, the new timings, and everything will be A OK once again.
This is spot on mister. This is the reason why Zerg gets so much QQ from T and P.
Wether they are correct or not, I'm a bit dissapointed about their complaining about racial imbalance. I'd prefer a "sure it's hard but I'll overcome" attitude to a "this is nigh impossible I might switch" attitude, especially from Starcraft legends such as them. GSL records also suggest that it is at the very least possible for T's to win against P or Z, tho it may not be a straight up statistic since players have to be taken into account I'm doubting it's THAT impossible to do.
I have still no clue how he can be whining. It really doesnt fit him at all... FIGURE IT OUT...
I _HATE_ this imba discussion. People who come with claims and indictions on wordplay from pros and commentators and "your own experiece" - seriously fuck off! You have no clue what's happening at the highest level and I'm inclined to say that everyday there are new ways of playing the game that changes the meta game even without the balance changes. The Terran arsenal is far from weak, and the lategame is far from weak. People just need to understand and learn how to transition better when there is a need for it. Terran has the cheapest and fastest upgrades to get in the game, they can pretty much throw out any type of unit (diversity) without having major transition issues.
The only problem as I see it that people just go MMM and then whine about how hard it is to transition out of - and that's NOT the bloody races fault.
I really just hope BoxeR can shut the fuck up (I love him!) and rock the GSL like he has without the crying! Makes him look so much better. Don't kill your own image man!
(If there are issues, then they will eventually be solved).
On October 30 2010 16:16 pieisamazing wrote: Maybe boxer should learn to adapt like all the zergs did when their race was [is] the weakest and most mechanically difficult to succeed with.
First and foremost, Boxer and Nada are two of the best BW players ever and have more insight than any other player in the GSL right now. Yes, Boxer's APM may be slower because of his age, but don't doubt his insight into SC2 as he single handedly changed the way Terran played in BW - something that no other BW player has even come close to accomplishing.
No disrespect to the people in this thread that disagree with Boxer, but unless you reached the level of understanding that Boxer had for BW, what Boxer is saying about SC2 imbalance has a deeper level of understanding that we will probably never understand.
Also, as Kaisr stated, Boxer took the most "useless" and "weakest" race in BW at the beginning of his era and showed the naysayers how to win with it. Nobody in the GSL has ever accomplished that, not to mention anybody in all of the TL forums. So when the "Emperor" makes a point of balance issues, I think we should pay a little more attention to what he has to say.
Ugh, people hoping to have Blizzard do some of the work for them.
I just hope this is an idle threat by The Emperor to get Blizzards attention that they are getting a little patch-happy. Which I think is 100% accurate.
On October 30 2010 16:16 pieisamazing wrote: Maybe boxer should learn to adapt like all the zergs did when their race was [is] the weakest and most mechanically difficult to succeed with.
First and foremost, Boxer and Nada are two of the best BW players ever and have more insight than any other player in the GSL right now. Yes, Boxer's APM may be slower because of his age, but don't doubt his insight into SC2 as he single handedly changed the way Terran played in BW - something that no other BW player has even come close to accomplishing.
No disrespect to the people in this thread that disagree with Boxer, but unless you reached the level of understanding that Boxer had for BW, what Boxer is saying about SC2 imbalance has a deeper level of understanding that we will probably never understand.
Also, as Kaisr stated, Boxer took the most "useless" and "weakest" race in BW at the beginning of his era and showed the naysayers how to win with it. Nobody in the GSL has ever accomplished that, not to mention anybody in all of the TL forums. So when the "Emperor" makes a point of balance issues, I think we should pay a little more attention to what he has to say.
Paying attention is one thing - but jumping the bandwagon SO FAST is so sad I can't belive it. I love BoxeR, but when people think that he has the deepest insight in the game atm they're way off. He hasnt even played the game long enough to see what has happend during the course of patches. The crying he's doing is very similar to how Fruitdealer was crying and the small changes that were made to reaper build time and bunker build time had absolutly NOTHING to do with how zergs started to just handle 5RR _BEFORE_ the range buff to roaches.
BoxeR was also the person mind you that play Toss to begin with and changed race because the bloody shuttle got a speed nerf, clearly he can jump the train if he sees other potentials - and this is why I get so confused. How can people not see potential in the Terran race?
blue hellion expand is v strong vs zerg as long as you keep scouting and spot the spire relatively fast. Don't bother harassing with predictable, easily spottable(overlords) early-mid game drops. Instead, focus on getting your expansion up and running on par with the zerg and out macro them.
rule of thumb should be that each time a t or p expands, a z must have another xpo to keep ahead. 1 base T is always stronger than 2 base Z until full saturation (at which point youve already lost, you shouldnt let them fully saturate.)
On October 30 2010 16:16 pieisamazing wrote: Maybe boxer should learn to adapt like all the zergs did when their race was [is] the weakest and most mechanically difficult to succeed with.
First and foremost, Boxer and Nada are two of the best BW players ever and have more insight than any other player in the GSL right now. Yes, Boxer's APM may be slower because of his age, but don't doubt his insight into SC2 as he single handedly changed the way Terran played in BW - something that no other BW player has even come close to accomplishing.
No disrespect to the people in this thread that disagree with Boxer, but unless you reached the level of understanding that Boxer had for BW, what Boxer is saying about SC2 imbalance has a deeper level of understanding that we will probably never understand.
Also, as Kaisr stated, Boxer took the most "useless" and "weakest" race in BW at the beginning of his era and showed the naysayers how to win with it. Nobody in the GSL has ever accomplished that, not to mention anybody in all of the TL forums. So when the "Emperor" makes a point of balance issues, I think we should pay a little more attention to what he has to say.
Paying attention is one thing - but jumping the bandwagon SO FAST is so sad I can't belive it. I love BoxeR, but when people think that he has the deepest insight in the game atm they're way off. He hasnt even played the game long enough to see what has happend during the course of patches. The crying he's doing is very similar to how Fruitdealer was crying and the small changes that were made to reaper build time and bunker build time had absolutly NOTHING to do with how zergs started to just handle 5RR _BEFORE_ the range buff to roaches.
BoxeR was also the person mind you that play Toss to begin with and changed race because the bloody shuttle got a speed nerf, clearly he can jump the train if he sees other potentials - and this is why I get so confused. How can people not see potential in the Terran race?
T_T
Clearly you do not know why Boxer change his race to terran its because of the reaver ai going nuts and not being accurate as it's use to be that's what made him switch as you were saying that shuttle speed are nerf ??? you can just freaking upgrade it from a Robotics bay for god sake . What in the world are you talking about ?
On October 30 2010 17:27 Kyuki wrote: How can people not see potential in the Terran race?
Good grief. Are you saying that you can see the potential of the Terran race better than Boxer? The same Boxer who saw the potential of the Terran race in BW?
So if Boxer claims there are issues with the Terran race in SC2, cool your head, relax, and take some time to think about Boxer's meaning because there may be a deeper meaning to Boxer's words than you or I realize at first sight.
On October 30 2010 17:27 Kyuki wrote: How can people not see potential in the Terran race?
Good grief. Are you saying that you can see the potential of the Terran race better than Boxer? The same Boxer who saw the potential of the Terran race in BW?
So if Boxer claims there are issues with the Terran race in SC2, cool your head, relax, and take some time to think about Boxer's meaning because there may be a deeper meaning to Boxer's words than you or I realize at first sight.
There can also be simple QQ meaning. Why you are so sure that he said that so serious? I guess he just lost many games (as everyone else) and said this. If he has SO deep understanding of the game why he does not say specifically what's wrong?
On October 30 2010 17:27 Kyuki wrote: How can people not see potential in the Terran race?
Good grief. Are you saying that you can see the potential of the Terran race better than Boxer? The same Boxer who saw the potential of the Terran race in BW?
So if Boxer claims there are issues with the Terran race in SC2, cool your head, relax, and take some time to think about Boxer's meaning because there may be a deeper meaning to Boxer's words than you or I realize at first sight.
There can also be simple QQ meaning. Why you are so sure that he said that so serious? I guess he just lost many games (as everyone else) and said this. If he has SO deep understanding of the game why he does not say specifically what's wrong?
im pretty sure he already give that information to david kim
come on boxer... QQing really? Wasn't he the one who revolutionized terran race when everyone said it was underpowered? About time you do the same in sc2 rather than complain.
Sigh, 1 toss in the top 8, 3 in the top 16(GSL), quickly falling off in the ladder rankings, and all I hear is terrans crying, it just shows how much a couple top players can completely change the discussion. Artosis and tasteless have downplayed the poor showing of Protoss in GSL (its actually worse than zerg's in GSL 1) where they couldn't commentate a Zerg match in GSL 1 without mentioning the UPedness of zerg. Im not even saying we should all hop on a Protoss UP bandwagon, but we should at least start trying to be objective and not just make arguments from authority all the time.
On October 30 2010 18:15 AyJay wrote: come on boxer... QQing really? Wasn't he the one who revolutionized terran race when everyone said it was underpowered? About time you do the same in sc2 rather than complain.
LOL, I agree with AyJay. The "Emperor" QQing? ROFL
On October 30 2010 16:16 pieisamazing wrote: Maybe boxer should learn to adapt like all the zergs did when their race was [is] the weakest and most mechanically difficult to succeed with.
First and foremost, Boxer and Nada are two of the best BW players ever and have more insight than any other player in the GSL right now. Yes, Boxer's APM may be slower because of his age, but don't doubt his insight into SC2 as he single handedly changed the way Terran played in BW - something that no other BW player has even come close to accomplishing.
No disrespect to the people in this thread that disagree with Boxer, but unless you reached the level of understanding that Boxer had for BW, what Boxer is saying about SC2 imbalance has a deeper level of understanding that we will probably never understand.
Also, as Kaisr stated, Boxer took the most "useless" and "weakest" race in BW at the beginning of his era and showed the naysayers how to win with it. Nobody in the GSL has ever accomplished that, not to mention anybody in all of the TL forums. So when the "Emperor" makes a point of balance issues, I think we should pay a little more attention to what he has to say.
Paying attention is one thing - but jumping the bandwagon SO FAST is so sad I can't belive it. I love BoxeR, but when people think that he has the deepest insight in the game atm they're way off. He hasnt even played the game long enough to see what has happend during the course of patches. The crying he's doing is very similar to how Fruitdealer was crying and the small changes that were made to reaper build time and bunker build time had absolutly NOTHING to do with how zergs started to just handle 5RR _BEFORE_ the range buff to roaches.
BoxeR was also the person mind you that play Toss to begin with and changed race because the bloody shuttle got a speed nerf, clearly he can jump the train if he sees other potentials - and this is why I get so confused. How can people not see potential in the Terran race?
T_T
Clearly you do not know why Boxer change his race to terran its because of the reaver ai going nuts and not being accurate as it's use to be that's what made him switch as you were saying that shuttle speed are nerf ??? you can just freaking upgrade it from a Robotics bay for god sake . What in the world are you talking about ?
I dont know why I typed that... You're right ofc. Regardless he changed his race due to a balance change that didnt "fit" his style. That was then, this is now and it should be different.
On October 30 2010 17:27 Kyuki wrote: How can people not see potential in the Terran race?
Good grief. Are you saying that you can see the potential of the Terran race better than Boxer? The same Boxer who saw the potential of the Terran race in BW?
So if Boxer claims there are issues with the Terran race in SC2, cool your head, relax, and take some time to think about Boxer's meaning because there may be a deeper meaning to Boxer's words than you or I realize at first sight.
Oh god, so annoying... No I'm not saying I can see the potential better than boxer, I think he should/and sees it himself which makes me ANNOYED to death when he QQs.
I'm also tired of people who can't see the bias in a Player opinion even if it's qualified. This opinion is changing all the time depending on who says what.
Tester says Terran is OP (when Toss had sick badass VRs) due to their versitality and how they could stop pretty much anything so easily - people jumped the wagon. BoxeR think terran is weak - everyone jumps the wagon. Fruiddealer/IdrA says Zerg is weak - everyone screams and agrees!
The changes in the patches to what people have expressed their opinions of are so damn small amd of you look back at most of the patches, alot of changes that were made was not what the higher level players were complaining about in the first place, and the obvious broken things have been pretty much fixed. Now when things are changing in the meta game constantly there will always be players that express their displeasment when they have not found a good way to deal with it yet.
I'm NOT saying there could not be issues that could use tweaking, I'm sure there are - I'm just saying that it's sad to hear a top player QQ when history of metagame changes speaks for itself imho. People have always screamed imba too fast.
On October 30 2010 18:53 Kyuki wrote: Tester says Terran is OP (when Toss had sick badass VRs) due to their versitality and how they could stop pretty much anything so easily - people jumped the wagon. BoxeR think terran is weak - everyone jumps the wagon. Fruiddealer/IdrA says Zerg is weak - everyone screams and agrees!
There is a difference between Boxer, Tester, Fruitdealer, and Idra. One of them was one of the greatest BW players ever, and the others were mere footnotes in BW.
And? Regardless of how much of a upper hand in understanding and ease in transition you have when you go from BW to SC2, it's still a three month old game and is not the same.
Just because you're Not a legend from another game doesnt mean you dont know what you're talking about. Obviously there are more than 1 person with knowledge and weight behind their words, which was my point.
On October 30 2010 14:41 Insanious wrote: I think that the big problem was that Zerg was UP compared to the other races.
This meant that the Z players had to play harder in order to compete vs T and P. So, they explored more parts of their races, and Z learned to deflect early harass with relative success.
Then came the latest patch. What happens? Now Z who has been working so hard to learn to survive vs early game anything has a little less to worry about. They have to cover less based, but their "defend with as little resource loss" skills have carried over. Now Z has learned the best ways to defend vs early game pressure but now with slower early game pressure (zealot time nerf, supply before rax, etc...) Z can now has a more consistent macro + defense pattern than before (where they had to worry about stupidly fast 2 gates and reaper rushes).
Now T and P have to adapt to not being able to bust in so early. Z changed their tactics very little... went from prepare for cheese -> scouted no cheese plays. T and P have to change the way they play all together as parts of their games were removed.
Z has been practicing this style of play since the game came out... T and P are just evolving. Now that Z, T, and P are relatively equal (T needs a small late game buff) Z has their strat ironed out and T and P are still trying to figure stuff out.
In time, T and P will learn a more optimal way of play, just currently we haven't seen is as there's been too little time.
I think Z is just a little more refined and evolved play as Z had to play that way due to being UP, T and P are catching up but really wont take long for them to figure out the new way to play, the new timings, and everything will be A OK once again.
This is spot on mister. This is the reason why Zerg gets so much QQ from T and P.
Agree with this 100%. Terrans will figure it all out and everything will be peachy.
Listen to Gretorp on SotG, he had a really, really interesting view on this.
im a 1.5k diamond Terran and it doesnt take a pro skilled player to see the flaws in SC2 terran although i do admit, sometimes early game terran can be quite strong, but once late game, its all the way downhill for us, it doesnt cost much to play safer early game for protoss or zerg, a couple of well placed spines completely shuts down helion harass, couple of sentrys on ramp delays MM push till your immortal/collusus gets out
protoss late game multiple collusus, high templar storm, obliterates MMM, while chargelots/immortals easily breaks siege tanks, so it is impossible to play without MMM, warpgate ability to instantly teleport x units
zerg late game macro, is just too strong at the moment, its hard for a terran to push out, because once he does, he is fully committed, and if terran loses a battle, terran will be hugely down on supply, while zerg can instantly 200/200
On October 30 2010 18:53 Kyuki wrote: Tester says Terran is OP (when Toss had sick badass VRs) due to their versitality and how they could stop pretty much anything so easily - people jumped the wagon. BoxeR think terran is weak - everyone jumps the wagon. Fruiddealer/IdrA says Zerg is weak - everyone screams and agrees!
There is a difference between Boxer, Tester, Fruitdealer, and Idra. One of them was one of the greatest BW players ever, and the others were mere footnotes in BW.
The other 2 were footnotes, idra wasn't even known as being a top level player.
He loses everytime against koreans and is hated by koreans because of his bad manners, as we can see with the Zenio bitchslapping idra from his booth.
whats better than the op tho is how so many zergs come to this thread saying that hes wrong and that the match is balanced. this is the equivalent of someone in middle school who took an econ class telling ben bernanke that hes wrong. the facts are that top level terrans and pros are realizing that t is under powered and switching. just look at tlo and now boxer. not much more to say on the matter. kind of funny how we don't see top level players switching TO terran.
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.
i hope you are actually kidding, zerg was never UP, it just took some early game micro and roach play to shut down harass
Terran is hard? Wait... it's not like marines went 2 supply. + Show Spoiler +
Trolling... yes I know TvP is problematic at the moment... I'm random so I feel it too. But, really... the way Terran works I'm pretty sure terran will never be "the UP race"
Going random is always interesting, but I have a feeling Terran won't be nerfed again unless it's inadvertently with Heart of the Swarm. Boxer is such a powerful voice I think him threatening to go random will register with Blizzard, even if it's just one facet of their considerations. What else can you say?
On October 30 2010 14:41 Insanious wrote: I think that the big problem was that Zerg was UP compared to the other races.
This meant that the Z players had to play harder in order to compete vs T and P. So, they explored more parts of their races, and Z learned to deflect early harass with relative success.
Then came the latest patch. What happens? Now Z who has been working so hard to learn to survive vs early game anything has a little less to worry about. They have to cover less based, but their "defend with as little resource loss" skills have carried over. Now Z has learned the best ways to defend vs early game pressure but now with slower early game pressure (zealot time nerf, supply before rax, etc...) Z can now has a more consistent macro + defense pattern than before (where they had to worry about stupidly fast 2 gates and reaper rushes).
Now T and P have to adapt to not being able to bust in so early. Z changed their tactics very little... went from prepare for cheese -> scouted no cheese plays. T and P have to change the way they play all together as parts of their games were removed.
Z has been practicing this style of play since the game came out... T and P are just evolving. Now that Z, T, and P are relatively equal (T needs a small late game buff) Z has their strat ironed out and T and P are still trying to figure stuff out.
In time, T and P will learn a more optimal way of play, just currently we haven't seen is as there's been too little time.
I think Z is just a little more refined and evolved play as Z had to play that way due to being UP, T and P are catching up but really wont take long for them to figure out the new way to play, the new timings, and everything will be A OK once again.
I'm not gonna say zerg is OP, since it's way to early imo to say these statements.
However your arguement that zerg players played more/explored more... These pros are playing like 10-16 hours a day...
Anyway the problem is, small changes effect the game so much. Zerg was never weak aslong as terran left them alone for the first minutes. They had it a lot easier late game, could tech switch like madman, had 3 gamebreaking units(blings,mutas,ultras[this one not as much since nerf/fix]), which basically work against every combo terran has(and throw in infestors and it's painful), except the raven/marine which is starting to show up now.
Now we have the early game harass totally out the window, these weaknesses are shown quite clearly, where terran is getting their asses handed to them. I personally think siege tanks going back to 50 for all would be a decent enough start(and perhaps enough), since the reason for the nerf is pretty much out the window. It's not a *big* buff in a sense(atleast not as big as it sounds), mainly just a buff to their splash, which might be enough to make mech more viable in TvZ(and added bonus TvP again).
The problem that annoys me a bit is that everyone thinks because terran are strong early game(vs toss), it's fair the other races are strong late game... It's really not, they should make all races equally strong early game and late game(while not making them all the same *cough* sd before rax).
Edit: Forgot to say, blizzard should still hold their hands for *at least* a month, pref patch the game just after xmas if nothing has changed from what we're seeing now. Rapid patching doesn't really allow for great testing being done.
On October 30 2010 14:41 Insanious wrote: I think that the big problem was that Zerg was UP compared to the other races.
This meant that the Z players had to play harder in order to compete vs T and P. So, they explored more parts of their races, and Z learned to deflect early harass with relative success.
Then came the latest patch. What happens? Now Z who has been working so hard to learn to survive vs early game anything has a little less to worry about. They have to cover less based, but their "defend with as little resource loss" skills have carried over. Now Z has learned the best ways to defend vs early game pressure but now with slower early game pressure (zealot time nerf, supply before rax, etc...) Z can now has a more consistent macro + defense pattern than before (where they had to worry about stupidly fast 2 gates and reaper rushes).
Now T and P have to adapt to not being able to bust in so early. Z changed their tactics very little... went from prepare for cheese -> scouted no cheese plays. T and P have to change the way they play all together as parts of their games were removed.
Z has been practicing this style of play since the game came out... T and P are just evolving. Now that Z, T, and P are relatively equal (T needs a small late game buff) Z has their strat ironed out and T and P are still trying to figure stuff out.
In time, T and P will learn a more optimal way of play, just currently we haven't seen is as there's been too little time.
I think Z is just a little more refined and evolved play as Z had to play that way due to being UP, T and P are catching up but really wont take long for them to figure out the new way to play, the new timings, and everything will be A OK once again.
I'm not gonna say zerg is OP, since it's way to early imo to say these statements.
However your arguement that zerg players played more/explored more... These pros are playing like 10-16 hours a day...
Anyway the problem is, small changes effect the game so much. Zerg was never weak aslong as terran left them alone for the first minutes. They had it a lot easier late game, could tech switch like madman, had 3 gamebreaking units(blings,mutas,ultras[this one not as much since nerf/fix]), which basically work against every combo terran has(and throw in infestors and it's painful), except the raven/marine which is starting to show up now.
Now we have the early game harass totally out the window, these weaknesses are shown quite clearly, where terran is getting their asses handed to them. I personally think siege tanks going back to 50 for all would be a decent enough start(and perhaps enough), since the reason for the nerf is pretty much out the window. It's not a *big* buff in a sense(atleast not as big as it sounds), mainly just a buff to their splash, which might be enough to make mech more viable in TvZ(and added bonus TvP again).
The problem that annoys me a bit is that everyone thinks because terran are strong early game(vs toss), it's fair the other races are strong late game... It's really not, they should make all races equally strong early game and late game(while not making them all the same *cough* sd before rax).
Edit: Forgot to say, blizzard should still hold their hands for *at least* a month, pref patch the game just after xmas if nothing has changed from what we're seeing now. Rapid patching doesn't really allow for great testing being done.
Interesting post, I agree terrans could use some lategame help, especially against protoss. But I don't see how this could be fixed without imbalancing terran early game again, since the way terran tech tree works they can have their lategame units in the early game and have the capability to hide whatever they are teching to.
I wouldn't say terran early game harass has gone out the window, bio is still extremely cost effective until the zerg has infestors out and banshee harass is still annoying as ever. Hellion drops and such are also still useful. Any terran that claims their early harass is "useless" is doing it wrong, or are up against superior players.
I am curious as to how blizzard will handle the terran lategame issue though.
Yes Terran vs. Protoss is almost a joke right now. Terran gets no advantage from being a little bit stronger early game since force fielding your ramp let you bypass early game. Mid and late game is hugely in Protoss favor.
Either you go MMM which auto-lose vs. Storm without perfect micro. Or you go Mech which is better vs. Storm but can’t be used on larger maps due to lack of mobility.
I am actually thinking of switching races or maybe take a break from the game until the next patch is out.
Haha I liked his last sentence. It would be cool if Boxer was passed around to the best terrans like a title. He should just go by SlayerS until he shows he's the man again.
I know this is sort of not related to the thread, but what about EMP? I can't tell you the amount of times I was in a PvT and the Terran just EMP'd my entire army and even with storm just tore through everything.
Tbh I think it's pretty standard that pro-gamers of their respective race complain about it - more interesting how many people around here "fall for it".
The more valuable input definitely comes from pro-gamers who "off-race" like fruitdealer, who, interestingly, thinks protoss needs help vs terran and not the other way round.
Also GSL 2 hasn't provided much prove towards anything, eg. in the last TvP fakeboxer rolled over sangho (just outplayed, not a prove for P being imba either).
There are also a lot of people here that arent even able to understand the full sentence: "If Terran gets weakened again I might go random"
Reading through the answers blows my mind, makes me want to go berserk. I dont intend to list all the logic-, factuality-, coherency-, and what ever more, lacking statements done here.
Some of the posts are really resonable and some defenitely bring me to the point to doubt the value of freedom of speech.
See how humble and humorous Boxer is, and dont try to make him look like some other creeps. Openly complaining is not always QQing. And the most off us are not even remotely capable of make the distinction. So show some respect to a mature and full of charakter person as BoxeR.
Dont forget, the data used are mostly pre patch 1.1.2. Also, if anyone here thinks, he has more insight than David Kim, aka "Dayvie", I would recommend a psychologist.
Good interview. Maybe it is not ok to complain about balance issues but i'd take this kind of complain (also TLO turning to Zerg) any day instead of BM shit and insults thrown left and right.
Every body will be biased towards their race but people actually think Boxer does not have enough knowledge to analyze the game? An ex BW legend will see the potential of the game and will analyze it 1000X better then any ex W3 or on the fringe BW player. Some are willing to give Check, FD, Idra, InControl etc the benefit of a doubt but not Boxer? FFS.
I'd like people to stop taking balance discussions so personal...
On October 30 2010 21:27 MockHamill wrote: Yes Terran vs. Protoss is almost a joke right now. Terran gets no advantage from being a little bit stronger early game since force fielding your ramp let you bypass early game. Mid and late game is hugely in Protoss favor.
Either you go MMM which auto-lose vs. Storm without perfect micro. Or you go Mech which is better vs. Storm but can’t be used on larger maps due to lack of mobility.
I am actually thinking of switching races or maybe take a break from the game until the next patch is out.
are you serious? You HAVE to have PERFECT storms or sentry forcefields to deal with MMM, while MMM can just attack move to the win. Protoss may be strong lategame, but to survive the earlygame is absolute hell, and any small mistake you make is deadly. Look at the game yesterday, Fake boxer vs Sangho.. Sangho was forcefielding his ramp, but missed it by ONE second, and instantly 5 marauders in his base and GG.. If thats so easy to do, a former SC1 progamer wouldnt ever make such a mistake. Theorycrafting doesnt work.
Stop theorycrafting, because it is pointless. Everything in this game counters something, if you are saying storm counters everything terran does.. how about getting ONE unit that can take out 40 templars with a single 125 energy.. a Ghost! There you go, storms all useless. GG. Cant Feedback it because feedback range is horrible compared to EMP. See how theorycrafting works?
I love how many terrans are QQing now because they simply need to do more than attack-move off 2base to win everygame now. Look at top terrans, like Nada, Fake boxer and even real Boxer, they are still looking insanely dominant in ALL their games, because they play it like SC1, not this "oh im gonna put everything I have into one timing push with mass marauder, and if it fails Im leaving" like we see so often with SC2 terrans.
Switch races to protoss plz, you wont win many games high up on the ladder without absolutely flawless execution. If Protoss was so unbelievably strong, we'd see more than 1 protoss in the GSL round of 8, instead of 5 terrans.
On October 30 2010 06:40 5unrise wrote: I agree with Turpin in that Zerg is definitely not UP at the moment, with the game roughly about even in TvZ, but what Boxer is effectively claiming is that Zerg has an advantage over Terran, which is definitely ridiculous.
Pretty sure Boxer made comments about how he admired Nada for influencing David Kim into buffing zerg at Blizzcon. This is most likely just that same mind set, its probably going to become the standard for every pro gamer to always claim imbalance against their respective race, its good for them from a business stand point.
I really don't see how Terran can be UP right now, their still doing fine in tournaments ( they have the most representation still ) despite having to adjust their play-style to a pretty large patch so quickly. I'm around 1650 diamond ( I know not great ) and as a Zerg player, I've always felt its very hard to beat late game Terran as their 200/200 army simply destroys a 200/200 Zerg army unless your more than 50% t3 units ( which is unlikely in the first engagement ). This whole concept of being able to re-max instantly is comical really, any Terran who defeats my army just rolls into my base, rapes a hatch or two and then picks off any units as they begin to rally in. Ultras take 70 something seconds to hatch? Broodlords even longer, so unless his army is weak to roaches and lings I don't see that really helping much and even still its about 30-40 sec to hatch and regather forces which is plenty of time for him to destroy my econ and win the game. Siege tanks still feel utterly broken, they just negate any kind of ground force period after about 6 of them except maybe ultras in the right position if the T doesn't have a mass of thor or mauraders ( big ifs ). This whole concept of not being able to attack a siege tank entrenched position to me is incredibly stupid because once you have 6 or more your always siege tank entrenched and you just slowly move up a few at a time and slow push into your opponents base, forcing them to just suicide their army into your siege tank death line and winning nearly 3 to 1 in the battle. I'm sure toss doesn't have nearly as big of an issue against tanks though and I'm not here saying theres nothing wrong with PvT as I have no idea, but ZvT feels very hard to me even still. If the Terran stays on equal footing with you macro wise(yes this is possible contrary to popular belief) and masses a strong army its very hard to stop once he pushes out as Zerg. Even reducing his force by 50% with a maxed army to me is a "good" exchange and I still probably wont have enough time (30-40 sec) to get lings and roaches out before he pushes into my first mining base, and there is simply no way to rebuild ultralisk or broodlords in time ( 70 sec ). This is all assuming I have time to save up like 3k mineral and 2k gas before the engagement as well, which is unlikely against a good player.
On October 30 2010 21:27 MockHamill wrote: Yes Terran vs. Protoss is almost a joke right now. Terran gets no advantage from being a little bit stronger early game since force fielding your ramp let you bypass early game. Mid and late game is hugely in Protoss favor.
Either you go MMM which auto-lose vs. Storm without perfect micro. Or you go Mech which is better vs. Storm but can’t be used on larger maps due to lack of mobility.
I am actually thinking of switching races or maybe take a break from the game until the next patch is out.
Sorry to say, but complaints like these are hilarious.
So your options are MMM or mech? Ever occur to you to mix those units together? Or use some higher tech units? QQ about storm? no ghosts from the terran?
honestly why do you even post that garbage? So you cant 1a anymore to victory, its time to now learn to play for real.
As much as I admire Boxer's play and creativity, especially in Brood War, why is he so focused on balance? He doesn't seem to take player skill or build order into account, he just instantly blames it on the races. It's like the pros have learned how much sway they can have over the balance over a game still in its balancing stages and are trying to get as much of an upper hand as possible.
On October 30 2010 21:27 MockHamill wrote: Yes Terran vs. Protoss is almost a joke right now. Terran gets no advantage from being a little bit stronger early game since force fielding your ramp let you bypass early game. Mid and late game is hugely in Protoss favor.
Either you go MMM which auto-lose vs. Storm without perfect micro. Or you go Mech which is better vs. Storm but can’t be used on larger maps due to lack of mobility.
I am actually thinking of switching races or maybe take a break from the game until the next patch is out.
Sorry to say, but complaints like these are hilarious.
So your options are MMM or mech? Ever occur to you to mix those units together? Or use some higher tech units? QQ about storm? no ghosts from the terran?
honestly why do you even post that garbage? So you cant 1a anymore to victory, its time to now learn to play for real.
I think you're missing the even more 'interesting' point that he suggests P 1-base until t3.
Let's face it, the only way Terran players can win right now is if they exceed the skill level of Zerg players by a healthy margin, or win in the early game. (Yay, Zerg players use to say the same thing!)
I play terran and i dont think there is a problem. I think everyone needs to calm down. Everytime some pro says he might change his race everyone panics and starts going crazy.
Most people probably dont really think that terran is weak now, they just repeat what the pros are saying instead of having their own opinion. Same happened when IdrA or Fruitdealer complained. Everyone went crazy. But guess what, Fruitdealer won when zerg was UP, and now he lost when they supposedly are OP. What does that tell you?
Balance is really good atm, and i am sure Boxer is overreacting aswell, maybe he even knows he is. It's as if people want the game not to be balanced, cause everytime some pro mentions balance everyone goes apeshit, but when that same person says that everything is fairly balanced, nobody even mentions it. Strange.
On October 30 2010 21:27 MockHamill wrote: Yes Terran vs. Protoss is almost a joke right now. Terran gets no advantage from being a little bit stronger early game since force fielding your ramp let you bypass early game. Mid and late game is hugely in Protoss favor.
Either you go MMM which auto-lose vs. Storm without perfect micro. Or you go Mech which is better vs. Storm but can’t be used on larger maps due to lack of mobility.
I am actually thinking of switching races or maybe take a break from the game until the next patch is out.
are you serious? You HAVE to have PERFECT storms or sentry forcefields to deal with MMM, while MMM can just attack move to the win. Protoss may be strong lategame, but to survive the earlygame is absolute hell, and any small mistake you make is deadly. Look at the game yesterday, Fake boxer vs Sangho.. Sangho was forcefielding his ramp, but missed it by ONE second, and instantly 5 marauders in his base and GG.. If thats so easy to do, a former SC1 progamer wouldnt ever make such a mistake. Theorycrafting doesnt work.
Stop theorycrafting, because it is pointless. Everything in this game counters something, if you are saying storm counters everything terran does.. how about getting ONE unit that can take out 40 templars with a single 125 energy.. a Ghost! There you go, storms all useless. GG. Cant Feedback it because feedback range is horrible compared to EMP. See how theorycrafting works?
I love how many terrans are QQing now because they simply need to do more than attack-move off 2base to win everygame now. Look at top terrans, like Nada, Fake boxer and even real Boxer, they are still looking insanely dominant in ALL their games, because they play it like SC1, not this "oh im gonna put everything I have into one timing push with mass marauder, and if it fails Im leaving" like we see so often with SC2 terrans.
Switch races to protoss plz, you wont win many games high up on the ladder without absolutely flawless execution. If Protoss was so unbelievably strong, we'd see more than 1 protoss in the GSL round of 8, instead of 5 terrans.
rofl he was greedy and wanted to get away with just some sentreis thrown in there, that's entirely his fault and has nothing to do with the "oh he did a small mistake so lost". If you don't want to die to stupid stuff, make units, how hard is that, protoss players always want to get away with some sentries randomly thrown in there. Must be hard to follow RTS basics like having stuff eh
Trying to make it sound like protoss late game against terran requires that much micro and execution is extremely hilarious too
But anyway I doubt boxer will ever go random, if he does that'll be only to practise and figure out which race he wants to play in the end.
The memories of some people on this board go beyond the shortest of short term. If i came to this board a month ago 90% of the balance discussions would go "zerg is UP" "no zergs are bad and should l2p" "even the top players are complaining that zerg is UP look!" "they should just spend more time practicing and finding more creative ways to use infestors! infestors are OP but noone uses them".
Here we are a month later, we have the EXACT same argument, the only difference being that the races are reversed, and both sides have seamlessly transitioned to the other side of the argument, while still being convinced they're completely right.. does no-one else see how bizzare this is?
I have a huge respect for Boxer so if he say something is wrong is probably that.
But i see that 99% of players suffer a disease. Is lazyness and winning about stuff. They just want the ez race. Everyone is searching for ez race nobody wants to "waste" time to find more stuff instead just want to cry about imba and OP stuff. Ya there something that are probably more stronger than others. I hope this game turn a shit of only macro and that unit counter that unit just because everything is perfect balance... I think the old players in bw will understand what i say or dont because is just stupid and bad english.
On October 30 2010 23:52 NikonTC wrote: The memories of some people on this board go beyond the shortest of short term. If i came to this board a month ago 90% of the balance discussions would go "zerg is UP" "no zergs are bad and should l2p" "even the top players are complaining that zerg is UP look!" "they should just spend more time practicing and finding more creative ways to use infestors! infestors are OP but noone uses them".
Here we are a month later, we have the EXACT same argument, the only difference being that the races are reversed, and both sides have seamlessly transitioned to the other side of the argument, while still being convinced they're completely right.. does no-one else see how bizzare this is?
This is true to some extent but currently: a) we are 2 weeks (?) after patch so we haven't seen the full effect of the changes b) we are in a situation where Zerg can use old strategies but a lot of Terran cheese was taken out so those Terrans relying on it need to adjust their game. This can take more than 2 weeks. c) We have Terrans doing well at a high level (Foxer, Nada schooling Zerg opponents), the ones we have seen go down were often trying to use the nerfed strategies instead of adjusting as the successful ones have done.
On the other hand the Zerg complaints were consistent for months and it was a problem since the late beta (when thors got massively better and roaches got beaten into the ground).
Let's see how this plays out for a little. My experience both in playing and in viewing pro games is that Terrans with good macro and who know how to pressure a Zerg are doing fine. Those who relied on 1 base all in strategies or even just turtling until a 2 base push that instantly wins the game and have not adapted are having a lot of trouble for rather obvious reasons. Now Terran is required to scout and actually know Zerg timings rather than just have a build order and execute it properly. Don't get me wrong, Terrans still dictate the pace of the game but now they have to be more careful in doing so.
Quite frankly I take any talk from a pro player about balance with a grain of salt, because they get paid to win, so of course want their race buffed so they can win more. thats just good business.
On October 30 2010 20:39 jHERO wrote: im a 1.5k diamond Terran and it doesnt take a pro skilled player to see the flaws in SC2 terran although i do admit, sometimes early game terran can be quite strong, but once late game, its all the way downhill for us, it doesnt cost much to play safer early game for protoss or zerg, a couple of well placed spines completely shuts down helion harass, couple of sentrys on ramp delays MM push till your immortal/collusus gets out
protoss late game multiple collusus, high templar storm, obliterates MMM, while chargelots/immortals easily breaks siege tanks, so it is impossible to play without MMM, warpgate ability to instantly teleport x units
zerg late game macro, is just too strong at the moment, its hard for a terran to push out, because once he does, he is fully committed, and if terran loses a battle, terran will be hugely down on supply, while zerg can instantly 200/200
'Instantly 200' implies that the Zerg has the actual minerals and gas to do so. You can't just remake a 200/200 army after losing your previous 200/200 army unless you've stockpiled minerals/gas
On October 31 2010 00:24 mols0n wrote: This is how i see the balance issues right now
Early game(strongest to weakest)
Terran Protoss Zerg
Midgame
Protoss Terran Zerg
Lategame Zerg Protoss
Big Gap
Terran
Once the other races learn to macro more bases faster itll be more balanced. 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.
First and foremost, Boxer and Nada are two of the best BW players ever and have more insight than any other player in the GSL right now. Yes, Boxer's APM may be slower because of his age, but don't doubt his insight into SC2 as he single handedly changed the way Terran played in BW - something that no other BW player has even come close to accomplishing.
Really? Oov? Flash in later stages? Exactly what justifies this claim that those 2 have the best insight into SC2 now? Their influence in BW gives them some credibility, but doesnt automatically propel them to demi-god-status in a game they too are relatively new to.
No disrespect to the people in this thread that disagree with Boxer, but unless you reached the level of understanding that Boxer had for BW, what Boxer is saying about SC2 imbalance has a deeper level of understanding that we will probably never understand.
Also, as Kaisr stated, Boxer took the most "useless" and "weakest" race in BW at the beginning of his era and showed the naysayers how to win with it. Nobody in the GSL has ever accomplished that, not to mention anybody in all of the TL forums. So when the "Emperor" makes a point of balance issues, I think we should pay a little more attention to what he has to say.
Nobody in the GSL accomplished that huh? Because when Fruitdealer one the GSL with Z, they were already the OP beast? The Emperor does have the right to voice his opinions about imbalances he perceives to be there, however if he's to act out his role as influential "Emperor" I think we can all agree a QQ'ing tone isnt the best one to take on.
gotta love the zerg players bitching on boxer while all their Z heroes are like 10x times more whinny and sad, look on fruitdealer claiming to change race few days before winning gsl, idra or dimaga are whining from the very beginning of beta, boxer said something so its probably true (btw nada also claimed in interview that nerfs to T and buffing zerg in recent patch is too much) this two are probably most accomplishd progamers in history of starcraft (atm also top players in sc2) and what they say has alot more weight than analysis .from bronze players so dont come here with spreedsheet and tell how much they suck and zergs are more skilled.
On October 31 2010 00:38 zomgad wrote: gotta love the zerg players bitching on boxer while all their Z heroes are like 10x times more whinny and sad, look on fruitdealer claiming to change race few days before winning gsl, idra or dimaga are whining from the very beginning of beta, boxer said something so its probably true (btw nada also claimed in interview that nerfs to T and buffing zerg in recent patch is too much) this two are probably most accomplishd progamers in history of starcraft (atm also top players in sc2) and what they say has alot more weight than analysis .from bronze players so dont come here with spreedsheet and tell how much they suck and zergs are more skilled.
I love the, boxer said something so it's true argument. Btw, those "zerg players" have been playing SC2 a lot longer then boxer. SC1 =/= SC2
two terran bases= to 4 zerg bases doesn't sound like it would make the most sense.
Mutas are the reason terran can't just expand blindly and be completely safe like zerg.
Expansions take 110 seconds to build, and take 3 minutes to pay for themselves, so the 4 base advantage doesn't start showing for a while, but terran only has a short amount of time to just go straight to the main base and destroy the zerg. 5base terran will still lose to 5 base zerg. Zerg has 10 larvas per minute per hatchery, and can pop up a 150 supply army in one minute if minerals allow him to (with 4-5 bases, yes its very easy). Terran cannot, unless he makes 40 factories or something.
Once ultras are available the game is over pretty much. As you can see from the GSL.
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.
HSM forces banelings/mutas to retreat briefly while the zerg player selects the missile target and micro's them away from the pack?
and you're a raven (200 gas) down because it doesn't have energy left.
HSM is very similar to neural parasite at the moment, it's such an extreme niche spell that isn't even worth the research cost.
there is very little imbalance in the game right now that cant be overcome with sheer skill and improving ones own game. wasnt there just a post about this by a MOD? (rhetorical.)
regarding boxer- he just wants it easier to win tournaments. however, he said if terran is nerfed again he will switch, not if terran stays the same.
the game is pretty balanced right now. maybe a tweak here or a tweak there in a little while after the dust settles from this patch but it is nothing like it was before. then again, boxer and nada are both S class after switching over somewhat late from broodwar. nexgenius is on another level as protoss and the zergs are coming around playing solid mechanical play that they had to pick up fast during previous patches to contend. i dont see the big deal right now. there are no glaring imbalances. its sad that there are still so many 45 apm terrans high on the ladder but that will change as the game evolves over the next year. i have a feeling many of those 45 apm terrans are in this thread complaining.
anyone who followed broodwar for years (probably very few in this thread) will know that there are race fluctuations naturally even without the game being patched. this is sometimes due to maps, sometimes due to top players emerging that are skillwise just better than the others and push the envelope forward even more. you really cant complain with 4 terrans in the final 8. sure there were more terrans to start but you would then need to break down every individual matchup along the way and maybe there were a bunch of terrans that just got systematically dismantled and no balance discussions would even effect those games.
look for solutions. zergs problems were, originally, far different than terrans so called problems now. also, you are listening to boxer who is known for terrible late game macro by today's bw/sc2 progaming standards. of course he wants super uber harass early game, thats how he made his name.
people underestimate the importance of confidence and composure when playing in these tournaments.
clyde can win fruitdealer 99 times out of a hundred in practice games, but if he bottles it when under pressure then fruitdealer will win regardless of any subtle imbalances in the game.
the imbalance is subtle, atm you can't say zerg is OP against terran because noone can predict how the general strategies will evolve over the next few weeks.
wow, there are 4 terrans in quarters and one toss, there was no toss in semis last season. and a terran is complaining? i mean, he´s still "new" to the game, though he is a great player. but at any means. terran is not the one that should complain. what i find pretty strange, is that zergs say, protoss is sooooo strong and terrans say protoss is soooooo strong. but suprisingly protoss isnt doing well at all in gsl, also not in ladder, be it korean, global, or especially not in europe (17 toss out of top 100 is not op compared to over 40 terrans last time i checked)
I think the game is pretty close to balanced at this point, which means if Terran gets nerfed again they'll be UP. I don't think there's anything that controversial about the statement
On October 31 2010 00:38 zomgad wrote: gotta love the zerg players bitching on boxer while all their Z heroes are like 10x times more whinny and sad, look on fruitdealer claiming to change race few days before winning gsl, idra or dimaga are whining from the very beginning of beta, boxer said something so its probably true (btw nada also claimed in interview that nerfs to T and buffing zerg in recent patch is too much) this two are probably most accomplishd progamers in history of starcraft (atm also top players in sc2) and what they say has alot more weight than analysis .from bronze players so dont come here with spreedsheet and tell how much they suck and zergs are more skilled.
I love the, boxer said something so it's true argument. Btw, those "zerg players" have been playing SC2 a lot longer then boxer. SC1 =/= SC2
1st its not only boxer saying that, 2nd yes being an accomplished bw progamer makes u good in sc2, look at loner hes playing from the very beginning of beta and still Boxer outplayed him in every aspect (micro/macro/build wise) in recent gsl matches, also mvp showed us probably best tvz matches ever and no maka or ensnare playing alot longer than him came even close to this what we have seen in mvp vs zenio. im sure that if flash and jeadong switched to sc2 they would be best within 2 months.
Yeah playing random is always useful when starting the game; helps u understand several things from all races. But of course is not that easy to master all of them so he might wanna stick to Terran once again cuz HEs THE EMPEROR.
How far our opinion of the Emperor has fallen in Sc2 it seems... I do admit that right now it is too early to actually be totally sure of how well people can play, but in most of the streams I have watched, Terran really need to find some way to counter 15+ banelings right. Their land army dissapears in a instant to that. The collossus also melts the bio of Terran too. Of course spreading the army out like Nada does is a brilliant way of playing (relying a bit on the fact the opponent doesn't rush the Terran while positioning), but it does seem tough for Terran right now to expand beyond two base based on the other race's map control.
On October 30 2010 11:10 Choirdrunk wrote: 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.
<3. Love the way you put that and completely agree. If BoxeR is saying something is broken, something is broken. Hail Lim.
On October 30 2010 11:10 Choirdrunk wrote: 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.
<3. Love the way you put that and completely agree. If BoxeR is saying something is broken, something is broken. Hail Lim.
Late game TvZ is unwinnable when both players are equally skilled and the Terran player doesn't have an advantage. It's not even imbalance, it's broken. Instant tech switches + 7 production facility's equal 1 hatchery....
what i find pretty strange, is that zergs say, protoss is sooooo strong and terrans say protoss is soooooo strong. but suprisingly protoss isnt doing well at all in gsl, also not in ladder, be it korean, global, or especially not in europe (17 toss out of top 100 is not op compared to over 40 terrans last time i checked)
That's because in general protoss players just sucked lol, look at Broodwar.
On October 30 2010 11:10 Choirdrunk wrote: 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.
<3. Love the way you put that and completely agree. If BoxeR is saying something is broken, something is broken. Hail Lim.
Yup, Boxer is the arbiter of starcraft, he speaks truly and objectively with no personal bias! Oh wait, hes in the round of 8 with 87 K on the line, yaaaaaa I kinda dont think hes completely capable of being objective ATM.
On October 30 2010 11:10 Choirdrunk wrote: 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.
<3. Love the way you put that and completely agree. If BoxeR is saying something is broken, something is broken. Hail Lim.
Late game TvZ is unwinnable when both players are equally skilled and the Terran player doesn't have an advantage. It's not even imbalance, it's broken. Instant tech switches + 7 production facility's every hatchery....
what i find pretty strange, is that zergs say, protoss is sooooo strong and terrans say protoss is soooooo strong. but suprisingly protoss isnt doing well at all in gsl, also not in ladder, be it korean, global, or especially not in europe (17 toss out of top 100 is not op compared to over 40 terrans last time i checked)
That's because in general protoss players just sucked lol, look at Broodwar.
Lot more terrans are mechanical newbs than protoss in diamond right now.
Also, look at broodwar? What are you talking about?
Oh another 2010 join date making claims about BroodWar, that explains it. <Insert claim about being here since the beginning just never registering and being A+ ICCUP>
On October 30 2010 11:10 Choirdrunk wrote: 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.
<3. Love the way you put that and completely agree. If BoxeR is saying something is broken, something is broken. Hail Lim.
Late game TvZ is unwinnable when both players are equally skilled and the Terran player doesn't have an advantage. It's not even imbalance, it's broken. Instant tech switches + 7 production facility's equal 1 hatchery....
what i find pretty strange, is that zergs say, protoss is sooooo strong and terrans say protoss is soooooo strong. but suprisingly protoss isnt doing well at all in gsl, also not in ladder, be it korean, global, or especially not in europe (17 toss out of top 100 is not op compared to over 40 terrans last time i checked)
That's because in general protoss players just sucked lol, look at Broodwar.
damn, i thought all you l2p brains would have died out. yes, you are right, the most famous players in korea were terrans, nada, boxer, and some zergs, i.e. july. bisu did well, but he also never really could touch flash or jaedong, but also there were a lot more terrans and zergs than protoss as far as i know. but in europe things looked totally different. there protoss was the dominant race, be it by winning tournament,. tsl for example, or just by mass of players. also sc2 is a new game. and many new players be it ex-b-teamers that none ever heard about or wc3 pros are attending tournaments. there are strong protoss players inside and outside of korea. inca genious tester, you cannot say, that those are bad in any way. well, i hope terran will get nerfed to the ground, just that people like you finally get a feeling for this matter. dont get too full of yourself.
Lot more terrans are mechanical newbs than protoss in diamond right now.
Also, look at broodwar? What are you talking about?
Protoss is easiest to get good at(see Idra in the MLG DC interview, I dont really agree) I face alot of protoss who just camp on 3 bases with 80 APM wich I can't break and as soon as they have storm+Amulet it's basically GG. Because warpgate's + amulet HT's give the terran no timings to atack anymore. 1800 diamond terran btw.
well, i hope terran will get nerfed to the ground, just that people like you finally get a feeling for this matter. dont get too full of yourself.
Yeah it's not like late game TvP/TvZ are broken, Luckily terran has an advantage early/mid game wich makes tvp fairly balanced(still stupid balance). I just hate how this game has become a race against the clock.
Lot more terrans are mechanical newbs than protoss in diamond right now.
Also, look at broodwar? What are you talking about?
Protoss is easiest to get good at(see Idra in the MLG DC interview, I dont really agree) I face alot of protoss who just camp on 3 bases with 80 APM wich I can't break and as soon as they have storm+Amulet it's basically GG. Because warpgate's + amulet HT's give the terran no timings to atack anymore. 1800 diamond terran btw.
1800 diamond terran that cant break a protoss at an point before or after they "Camp" on three bases.
1800 diamond terran that cant break a protoss at an point before or after they "Camp" on three bases.
I can but usually it's because of mistakes the protoss player makes. I mean take Foxer vs Sangho for example. The only reason foxer won game 2 is because of a screw up from Sangho.
protoss is a good race but its also really easy too lose with it, there is no good scouting options until robo so very often you just straight up have too guess a strategy and if its the wrong one you lose, i think this is why we see so few protoss left in gsl but if they are played right (guess correct strategy) they are indeed very strong.
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.
On October 31 2010 02:41 TeamSoliduss wrote: TvZ ? Hard ?
I don't know what kind of crack he's on but saying TvZ is hard because zerg just got made a little bit less underpowered is quite funny.
I think it's a little inappropriate to say the most influential man in e-sports is on crack. Criticize him if you must but, don't take a shot at him while you are doing it.
On October 31 2010 02:41 TeamSoliduss wrote: TvZ ? Hard ?
I don't know what kind of crack he's on but saying TvZ is hard because zerg just got made a little bit less underpowered is quite funny.
In one of the recent streams Day9 said that the problem isn't in the fact that Zerg was buffed a bit but that Terran now has less openings (or none) with which he can pressure the Zerg early on and stop him from getting a macro advantage and from there on it's an uphill battle. Which is true, Terran needs to pressure Zerg early in some way just as much as Zerg needs an extra base from the get go. It's not the Zerg buff that's the issue here, it's the supply depot-rax change.
It's difficult to say if that makes them UP in the matchup (most likely they just need to find new ways to deal with things) but it is true that top Terrans who are currently participating in the GSL (Boxer included) were pushed into a position where they need to radically change their gameplay against Zerg with little time to practice and even less time to experiment.
On the other hand Zerg players have the benefit of keeping the same gamestyle they had before but not having to worry about early pressure.
So yeah, Terrans are struggling vs Zerg, it's just not clear if it's balance or they need to time to modify their gameplay.
Sounds to me like he's mainly concerned with Terran's inability to play a macro game, and always having to catch his opponent off guard. I share his concerns and I think something needs to be done, so terran isn't so cheese -> timing push reliant.
Ok so Boxer would like to play random but right now believes that T is still so OP it would be silly not to use the strongest race? So when Blizzard nerfs T so the game becomes balanced he will switch?
Terrans are struggling atm because they had a free ride for months and didn't really need to match zergs in terms of skills, the number of pro/very good players obliterated by pretty much every joe shmuck a-moving his bioball is proof enough of that.
Crying that your race has been nerfed and a match suddenly became "hard" because the opposing race is no longer total shit is just ridiculous.
FruitDealer at least had a valid point. Even while riding the imba train I cannot begin to count the number of times Terrans came up with "definitive proof" that "terran is underpowered and needs to be buffed even more" because they found some obscure replay of a zerg miraculously pulling a win vs a terran...
Overall that attitude is pretty pathetic and quite noobish in my opinion, pro player or not.
On October 31 2010 02:57 TeamSoliduss wrote: FruitDealer at least had a valid point. Even while riding the imba train I cannot begin to count the number of times Terrans came up with "definitive proof" that "terran is underpowered and needs to be buffed even more" because they found some obscure replay of a zerg miraculously pulling a win vs a terran...
Overall that attitude is pretty pathetic and quite noobish in my opinion, pro player or not.
I don't understand how is FruitDealer's whining more "valid" than BoxeR's?
On October 31 2010 02:57 TeamSoliduss wrote: FruitDealer at least had a valid point. Even while riding the imba train I cannot begin to count the number of times Terrans came up with "definitive proof" that "terran is underpowered and needs to be buffed even more" because they found some obscure replay of a zerg miraculously pulling a win vs a terran...
Overall that attitude is pretty pathetic and quite noobish in my opinion, pro player or not.
So FruitDealer's "valid" point about BroodLords being UP is correct? Ok, I am just going to stop now...
On October 31 2010 03:00 DonKey_ wrote: I don't understand how is FruitDealer's whining more "valid" than BoxeR's?
Because one of them played a notoriously and admittedly overpowered race and the other didn't ?
On October 31 2010 03:01 ckw wrote: So FruitDealer's "valid" point about BroodLords being UP is correct? Ok, I am just going to stop now...
Clearly an absurdly expensive Tier 3/3.5 unit really represented how zerg were "overpowered" for having a valid powerful unit at the SUPER LATE GAME stage while terrans "only" had the upper hand for... the rest of the match ?
On October 31 2010 03:00 DonKey_ wrote: I don't understand how is FruitDealer's whining more "valid" than BoxeR's?
Because one of them played a notoriously and admittedly overpowered race and the other didn't ?
? 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.
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...
On October 31 2010 02:37 cilinder007 wrote: why is this turning into a PvT balance thread ???
Well right now I think that is the matchup that needs the most tweaking.
TvZ has gotten surprisingly balanced if you ask me ... Terran need to apply some pressure while macroing to avoid the Zerg macroing freely. Zerg as to defend said pressure with as little as possible to macro better ... "working as intended" I believe. Let's let the Terrans adapt to the new style and see how things go. I am not upset to see the 1 basing 40 APM Terrans get roflstomped out of Diamond when they realize they can't play the game past their 1 base build order.
ZvP has always been pretty good.
TvP on the other hand has the big problem of a massive imbalance one way early and the other way late (this is according to Blizzard). This creates the illusion of balance if you look at win rates but is not in fact a good way to leave the matchup and Blizzard said they were looking into it.
As for the GSL results they seem pretty even right now. I think Protoss had fewer good players to start with and a few lost to better players last round (SangHo and Inca). The PvT games that were balanced skill-wise have been interesting and close so it doesn't seem to be too badly imbalanced overall. The brackets in this GSL were also a little unfortunate as they have created a ton of mirror matches between the best players of each race (Idra vs Zenio, Boxer vs Nada, Inca vs Genius are the most prominent). This should get better once the players get known and GOM can seed accordingly.
Gosh guys...there's no point in arguing about this. Whoever the pro is, if he complains about imbalance, it's his right to do so. There's no point in saying that he is completely and utterly wrong by saying a race is imbalanced, because you have no grounds in saying that either. It's all subjective and all based on opinion and personal experience. One pro might say Terran is imbalanced, and one pro might say Zerg is imbalanced. You can't really judge who's right or wrong, because they are probably BOTH better than you since they practice 10x times more than you. You can add to discussion by putting out points/arguments to support either view, but you shouldn't just judge the pro by saying he sucks and should l2p (he's a pro, way better than you are). He has the right to voice his opinions on the balance.
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.
I really wish he would back up his points. I'm sure that his opinions are valid, it's just that it's really hard to understand if he doesn't give anything beyond "Terran is underpowered". I hope he gets interviewed again so he can give his view on the matchups.
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.
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.
On October 31 2010 03:00 DonKey_ wrote: I don't understand how is FruitDealer's whining more "valid" than BoxeR's?
Because one of them played a notoriously and admittedly overpowered race and the other didn't ?
? 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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
So then the Zerg switches to hydra and eats the vikings. Indeed replenishing the army for the Terran late game when both are at 200/200 is nearly impossible.
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.
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.
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.
MforWW, does The EMPEROR look like a 40 amp terran? ._. And don't go random sarcasm bashing on Protoss to prove your point, that's kind of a low blow. Everyone's taking this out of context again. Yea, the main idea in the past was that Zerg need 1 extra base to stay in the game. Often I see it becomes a 4 vs 2 base most of the time, and Terran's 3rd always denied over and over. It's a pretty rocky road.
On October 31 2010 04:09 Reaper9 wrote: So then the Zerg switches to hydra and eats the vikings. Indeed replenishing the army for the Terran late game when both are at 200/200 is nearly impossible.
And then the terran switches to helions/tanks whatever. blah. You seem to be assuming the zerg has unlimited minerals and gas. If you let him sit there with 5+ bases with a 200 army then you deserve to lose.
Most of the time the Terran does move out, but late game it's nearly impossible to take every single outer base out, and the Zerg will just start demolishing the tech and roll over the Terran's base. Edit- I do play random and I love all the races but I always feel it's the Protoss and Zerg always sharply criticizing Terran players, and then when they themselves comment their their race needs work by patching, most people are in agreement.
And as Donkey said, experimenting with the stronger tech means getting to the later game. Most of the time from what I have seen, Terran have the hardest time getting to late game. Also most of the stronger tech are hard countered fast, and Terran has no chance to switch their tech in time.
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.
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.
How does a BC rush =/= using BC's? also I used that as an example to show that Terrans are experimenting and the results have not been good at all.
In a game like SC2 it's naive to say that races are not experimenting with other units and builds, However the reason you actualy do not see these builds and units being used is not because players are stubborn, its because these builds and units are unsuccessful.
How does a BC rush =/= using BC's? also I used that as an example to show that Terrans are experimenting and the results have not been good at all.
In a game like SC2 it's naive to say that races are not experimenting with other units and builds, However the reason you actualy do not see these builds and units being used is not because players are stubborn, its because these builds and units are unsuccessful.
Okay the context was off. I said late game BC's, not BC rushing. And the point still stands. I've yet to see solid raven play, something I feel could be very powerful vs ling/bane/muta for example.
so many clueless people in this thread the guy who made starcraft what it is today is saying that terran is a little too weak and you disagree with arguments like terrans need to get better at this game? or that terrans suck compared to the 2 other races? you think you understand starcraft as a game better than boxer? ur fucked up rofl
On October 31 2010 04:15 Reaper9 wrote: Most of the time the Terran does move out, but late game it's nearly impossible to take every single outer base out, and the Zerg will just start demolishing the tech and roll over the Terran's base. Edit- I do play random and I love all the races but I always feel it's the Protoss and Zerg always sharply criticizing Terran players, and then when they themselves comment their their race needs work by patching, most people are in agreement.
And as Donkey said, experimenting with the stronger tech means getting to the later game. Most of the time from what I have seen, Terran have the hardest time getting to late game. Also most of the stronger tech are hard countered fast, and Terran has no chance to switch their tech in time.
I only criticize because they are claiming UP after 2 weeks. All I'm saying is give it time. If zerg dominates in GSL 3 then I'll gladly admit they're OP.
On October 31 2010 04:22 OutlaW- wrote: so many clueless people in this thread the guy who made starcraft what it is today is saying that terran is a little too weak and you disagree with arguments like terrans need to get better at this game? or that terrans suck compared to the 2 other races? you think you understand starcraft as a game better than boxer? ur fucked up rofl
Yup, that's what I was saying. Boxer understands SC2 and RTS games from a professional viewpoint at a level that we will never reach. If the father of BW Pro Gaming says there is a balance issue in SC2, we should respect his opinion and really take some time to think about what those balance issues are.
On October 31 2010 04:15 Reaper9 wrote: Most of the time the Terran does move out, but late game it's nearly impossible to take every single outer base out, and the Zerg will just start demolishing the tech and roll over the Terran's base. Edit- I do play random and I love all the races but I always feel it's the Protoss and Zerg always sharply criticizing Terran players, and then when they themselves comment their their race needs work by patching, most people are in agreement.
And as Donkey said, experimenting with the stronger tech means getting to the later game. Most of the time from what I have seen, Terran have the hardest time getting to late game. Also most of the stronger tech are hard countered fast, and Terran has no chance to switch their tech in time.
I only criticize because they are claiming UP after 2 weeks. All I'm saying is give it time. If zerg dominates in GSL 3 then I'll gladly admit they're OP.
Who cares about you ? Really.
Pro's are also biased, not like everybody else, because they get money for this. I believe banelings are retarded, because fungul > micro. But hey who am i to speak about OP.
Every pro is going to say their race is UP. They realize they have insanely passionate fanboys who will vouch for everything they say (see IdrA calling Terran OP). So they abuse that power into getting their race buffed.
As for the recent Terran nerfs... they simply weren't needed. It just took FruitDealer winning GSL 1 for Zergs to realize they were playing wrong the whole time.
How does a BC rush =/= using BC's? also I used that as an example to show that Terrans are experimenting and the results have not been good at all.
In a game like SC2 it's naive to say that races are not experimenting with other units and builds, However the reason you actualy do not see these builds and units being used is not because players are stubborn, its because these builds and units are unsuccessful.
Okay the context was off. I said late game BC's, not BC rushing. And the point still stands. I've yet to see solid raven play, something I feel could be very powerful vs ling/bane/muta for example.
Hey if that's what you meant put it in your post. All I'm saying is there is a reason Terrans play MMM; It works the best given the alternatives, and about raven play people know about; there's a whole thread about it, but it does not have the type of success that MMM does that's why people do not use it.
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.
Zerg hatchery = 300 mineral + drone lost (50) mineral + lost mining time from that one drone until a new drone comes out to replace it. So it's extremely close to 400 minerals
I really lost all respect for Boxer at this point. We know that T is actually OP instead of UP because the last 2 patches wasn't that impacting. Yes even the supply before rax nerf actually just makes T play a more macro-orientated opening and he will be ahead. The roach range increase affected ZvP a lot more than ZvT, and Roaches are still crushed by tanks/banshees/marauders. The other nerf was the tank nerf but then again, it still kills lings in the same number of hits as before and after patch. The only REAL nerf was the reaper delay. Well that's okay because Terran still has a million other openings to choose from mid-game. Basically, the last two patches didn't do much.
Now, we know Boxer is a paid progamer and he plays T. He is in a position where his fans will dislike him if he abandons the T race. Thats why he can't really switch races. (Notice how he said random instead of Z or P?) Therefore, the best thing for his CAREER is to complain and whine until Terran can get buffed. I don't blame him for choosing his career over the balance of the game. But still, that's somewhat selfish in my eyes. This is coming from a man who "did" so much for the e-sports community. One sign of BW dying and he quickly jumps ship.
On October 31 2010 04:39 lastmotion wrote: Zerg hatchery = 300 mineral + drone lost (50) mineral + lost mining time from that one drone until a new drone comes out to replace it. So it's extremely close to 400 minerals
You realize the SC2 hatchery to CC model is similar to BW? In BW, a Zerg player has to have more hatcheries than a Terran player for both sides to stay even. If Terran has to match the number of Zerg hatcheries at the same time with the number of CCs in SC2 to stay even, then SC2 is broken. ROFL.
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.
Zerg hatchery = 300 mineral + drone lost (50) mineral + lost mining time from that one drone until a new drone comes out to replace it. So it's extremely close to 400 minerals
I really lost all respect for Boxer at this point. We know that T is actually OP instead of UP because the last 2 patches wasn't that impacting. Yes even the supply before rax nerf actually just makes T play a more macro-orientated opening and he will be ahead. The roach range increase affected ZvP a lot more than ZvT, and Roaches are still crushed by tanks/banshees/marauders. The other nerf was the tank nerf but then again, it still kills lings in the same number of hits as before and after patch. The only REAL nerf was the reaper delay. Well that's okay because Terran still has a million other openings to choose from mid-game. Basically, the last two patches didn't do much.
Now, we know Boxer is a paid progamer and he plays T. He is in a position where his fans will dislike him if he abandons the T race. Thats why he can't really switch races. (Notice how he said random instead of Z or P?) Therefore, the best thing for his CAREER is to complain and whine until Terran can get buffed. I don't blame him for choosing his career over the balance of the game. But still, that's somewhat selfish in my eyes. This is coming from a man who "did" so much for the e-sports community. One sign of BW dying and he quickly jumps ship.
Boxer, you've died in my heart a long time ago =/
What do mean "we know" who is "we" cause I'm definitely not a part of it and I know I'm not the only one who feels that way. I've never felt Zerg was underpowered or that Terran was Overpowered, so it's not a good idea trying to characterize that as EVERYONE'S opinion from pre patch.
blizzard keep saying that zerg can come back instantly with 200/200 which is why we have shitty cost inefficient units. however, anyone who play in the real game will know how hard to play TvZ. terran 2 bases can still easily beat 4/5 bases zerg, and you know how well a terran can turtle. terran units are OVER cost efficient. anyone who doesnt think MM+medivac need a fix is just fcking lying to himself. and after i said my last sentence, i am well awared of that i kinda 'insulted' my beloved BoxeR, i fcking went to read the original source. and guess what people???
FFS, OP did some misleading translational and you people fight for it 14pages??? do you honestly believe that BoxeR is a QQ-er?? so, for TL's sake, here you goes: (in my experience, people, whenever you read translation from one language translate to another, you need to beware that there might be some translation mistake.so no offense to OP really.)
OP misleading vesion:
Q: Recently people have said TvZ is hard.
A: I'm probably the one who has said it most! We've got to wait for the next patch, but for now we just try our best. I had this momentary thought in my head, that if I was eliminated I would switch races. Actually I want to go random. In internal battles, for a time, I was random.
now anyone who can read chinese will realise that....OP innocently made some slightly off-translation...or?
what Pro-gamer BoxeR actually meant: (i use the translation from OP as much as i can, since the creditential of this news is still belonged to him)
Q: Terran is having a hard time in TvZ recently. A: lol I'm probably the one who has said it the most! (BoxeR actually laughed) I am just gonna try my best until (they give some fix in) the future patch/es. I did have a momentary thought in my head, if i get eliminated (this time), i might consider to switch race. I am actually prefer 'Random' the most. I was playing Random some time during the alpha (i believe him meant 'internal testing' aka alpha, not beta, unless the original source used internal testing = beta).
People, BoxeR talked like a pro. ^^
I urge that anyone who can read chinese have a go of the original source.
Dear Mod:
please beware of this kind of unnecessary confusion thread in future.(i know nothing you can really do but maybe some mods who know chinese can give an extra hand to keep an eye on threads like this).
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.
Zerg hatchery = 300 mineral + drone lost (50) mineral + lost mining time from that one drone until a new drone comes out to replace it. So it's extremely close to 400 minerals
I really lost all respect for Boxer at this point. We know that T is actually OP instead of UP because the last 2 patches wasn't that impacting. Yes even the supply before rax nerf actually just makes T play a more macro-orientated opening and he will be ahead. The roach range increase affected ZvP a lot more than ZvT, and Roaches are still crushed by tanks/banshees/marauders. The other nerf was the tank nerf but then again, it still kills lings in the same number of hits as before and after patch. The only REAL nerf was the reaper delay. Well that's okay because Terran still has a million other openings to choose from mid-game. Basically, the last two patches didn't do much.
Now, we know Boxer is a paid progamer and he plays T. He is in a position where his fans will dislike him if he abandons the T race. Thats why he can't really switch races. (Notice how he said random instead of Z or P?) Therefore, the best thing for his CAREER is to complain and whine until Terran can get buffed. I don't blame him for choosing his career over the balance of the game. But still, that's somewhat selfish in my eyes. This is coming from a man who "did" so much for the e-sports community. One sign of BW dying and he quickly jumps ship.
Boxer, you've died in my heart a long time ago =/
Says the Bronze level Zerg...
Honestly for Zergs to say that what Terrans complain about is wrong is completely retarded. You can't make counter statement to things you don't know anything about because you don't play Terran, and you sit there and theory craft bullshit that doesn't work more than half the time. Also saying that every Terran should just be like these pros and space out their Marines and army perfectly to minimize Baneling damage is another stupid comment, how do you expect even a higher level Diamond player to do the same stuff that a pro has to do to compensate for something that shouldn't be.
@BurningSera, sounds good to me , thank you for the translation (note to self: I am Mandarin Chinese, please freaking translate myself next time.) So let's all cool down now XD, Op might want to change his title a bit :O
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.
Zerg hatchery = 300 mineral + drone lost (50) mineral + lost mining time from that one drone until a new drone comes out to replace it. So it's extremely close to 400 minerals
I really lost all respect for Boxer at this point. We know that T is actually OP instead of UP because the last 2 patches wasn't that impacting. Yes even the supply before rax nerf actually just makes T play a more macro-orientated opening and he will be ahead. The roach range increase affected ZvP a lot more than ZvT, and Roaches are still crushed by tanks/banshees/marauders. The other nerf was the tank nerf but then again, it still kills lings in the same number of hits as before and after patch. The only REAL nerf was the reaper delay. Well that's okay because Terran still has a million other openings to choose from mid-game. Basically, the last two patches didn't do much.
Now, we know Boxer is a paid progamer and he plays T. He is in a position where his fans will dislike him if he abandons the T race. Thats why he can't really switch races. (Notice how he said random instead of Z or P?) Therefore, the best thing for his CAREER is to complain and whine until Terran can get buffed. I don't blame him for choosing his career over the balance of the game. But still, that's somewhat selfish in my eyes. This is coming from a man who "did" so much for the e-sports community. One sign of BW dying and he quickly jumps ship.
Boxer, you've died in my heart a long time ago =/
I honestly really couldn't have said it better myself. I loved Boxer when I watched him when I first got into Starcraft. Boxer may have been the top Broodwar player at one time, but it remains to be seen if he is the top Sc2 player. Even if he was the top Sc2 player, he still can't dictate balance. He can say Terran is Up all he wants, but its not really going to change anything. Good luck Boxer.
Edit: Oh SHIZ. He's not claiming UP or OP, he's just saying that its hard for HIM against Z, and that he'll carry on as normal, unless a magical patch comes along and fixes it(or I think that the metagame will allow Ts to once again dominate Zs....the metagame shifts alot...Remember the fact that Zergs finally learned how to deal with reapers RIGHT BEFORE the reaper nerf.)
Yep BurningSea's alternate translation is correct. A smack to my own forehead, Boxer isn't complaining, he's just saying he's testing out other races as well, and he enjoys doing it. My own Chinese is intact I see.
On October 31 2010 04:59 TLOBrian wrote: I honestly really couldn't have said it better myself. I loved Boxer when I watched him when I first got into Starcraft. Boxer may have been the top Broodwar player at one time, but it remains to be seen if he is the top Sc2 player. Even if he was the top Sc2 player, he still can't dictate balance. He can say Terran is Up all he wants, but its not really going to change anything. Good luck Boxer.
Read the post a few posts above yours. Someone cleared up the misleading translation.
On October 31 2010 04:39 lastmotion wrote: Zerg hatchery = 300 mineral + drone lost (50) mineral + lost mining time from that one drone until a new drone comes out to replace it. So it's extremely close to 400 minerals
You realize the SC2 hatchery to CC model is similar to BW? In BW, a Zerg player has to have more hatcheries than a Terran player for both sides to stay even. If Terran has to match the number of Zerg hatcheries at the same time with the number of CCs in SC2 to stay even, then SC2 is broken. ROFL.
I've never said T has to match Z in the number of hatcheries. In your last quote, you tried to make hatchery sound much cheaper and I just pointed out that it's actually quite similar to CC in price.
You can't compare BW's Hatchery -> CC to SC2's because SC2 has the larva inject mechanic which kills the incentive to build more hatchery for more production.
That being said, Zerg SHOULD have more & faster production because they produce fragile units and need more of smaller units to engage, but this is not even the case because of REACTOR. Terran, a race where it builds powerful cost efficient units in smaller numbers actually becomes a race that produces powerful cost efficient units in large numbers like Z because of reactors.
And I love how you capitalize "rofl" whenever someone makes a point that doesn't agree to your views. It shows how narrow-minded you are, and will not take other peoples' views into consideration
That being said, Zerg SHOULD have more & faster production because they produce fragile units and need more of smaller units to engage, but this is not even the case because of REACTOR. Terran, a race where it builds powerful cost efficient units in smaller numbers actually becomes a race that produces powerful cost efficient units in large numbers like Z because of reactors.
Too bad banelings eat those powerfull cost efficient units Yeah yeah, tanks vs banelings. But tank marine is so fragile. Make 1 mistake and it's GG.
A: I'm probably the one who has said it most! We've got to wait for the next patch, but for now we just try our best. I had this momentary thought in my head, that if I was eliminated I would switch races. Actually I want to go random. In internal battles, for a time, I was random.
Q: Terran is having a hard time in TvZ (recently). A: lol I'm probably the one who has said it the most! (BoxeR actually laughed) I am just gonna try my best until (they give some fix in) the future patch/es. I did have a momentary thought in my head, if i get eliminated (this time), i might consider to switch race. I am actually prefer 'Random' the most. I was playing Random some time during the alpha (i believe him meant 'internal testing' aka alpha, not beta, unless the original source used internal testing = beta).
I honestly don't see the difference between the two translations. (I am the OP, btw.) I was translating fast, but I think 95% of the meaning is there. If I double the word-count, as you did, I could capture the last 5%, but I didn't think at the time that it would blow-up into a 15-page thread. Such is the peril of the sc2 forums. It's as if people didn't even read what I wrote at the top of the OP.
That being said, Zerg SHOULD have more & faster production because they produce fragile units and need more of smaller units to engage, but this is not even the case because of REACTOR. Terran, a race where it builds powerful cost efficient units in smaller numbers actually becomes a race that produces powerful cost efficient units in large numbers like Z because of reactors.
Too bad banelings eat those powerfull cost efficient units Yeah yeah, tanks vs banelings. But tank marine is so fragile. Make 1 mistake and it's GG.
On October 31 2010 05:17 YMCApylons wrote: I honestly don't see the difference between the two translations. (I am the OP, btw.) I was translating fast, but I think 95% of the meaning is there. If I double the word-count, as you did, I could capture the last 5%, but I didn't think at the time that it would blow-up into a 15-page thread. Such is the peril of the sc2 forums. It's as if people didn't even read what I wrote at the top of the OP.
in all honesty, your translation maybe still capture 95% of the original sourse(i honestly doubt that the korean to chinese capture 100% what boxer said but thats another story, i just figure that the korean to chinese translator must be quite careful when choosing his words tho), but i believe my version gave a slightly better impression of what BoxeR said. and we all love BoxeR, dont we all?
and i did some fix of my post^^ sorry for some of my words to you. chill, bro. we love starcraft and thats why we are here in TL. you distribution is very much appreciated. some long translation you did there, good job.
On October 31 2010 04:54 BurningSera wrote: blizzard keep saying that zerg can come back instantly with 200/200 which is why we have shitty cost inefficient units. however, anyone who play in the real game will know how hard to play TvZ. terran 2 bases can still easily beat 4/5 bases zerg, and you know how well a terran can turtle. terran units are OVER cost efficient. anyone who doesnt think MM+medivac need a fix is just fcking lying to himself. and after i said my last sentence, i am well awared of that i kinda 'insulted' my beloved BoxeR, i fcking went to read the original source. and guess what people???
FFS, OP did some misleading translational and you people fight for it 14pages??? do you honestly believe that BoxeR is a QQ-er?? so, for TL's sake, here you goes: (in my experience, people, whenever you read translation from one language translate to another, you need to beware that there might be some translation mistake.so no offense to OP really.)
A: I'm probably the one who has said it most! We've got to wait for the next patch, but for now we just try our best. I had this momentary thought in my head, that if I was eliminated I would switch races. Actually I want to go random. In internal battles, for a time, I was random.
Q: Terran is having a hard time in TvZ recently. A: lol I'm probably the one who has said it the most! (BoxeR actually laughed) I am just gonna try my best until (they give some fix in) the future patch/es. I did have a momentary thought in my head, if i get eliminated (this time), i might consider to switch race. I am actually prefer 'Random' the most. I was playing Random some time during the alpha (i believe him meant 'internal testing' aka alpha, not beta, unless the original source used internal testing = beta).
People, BoxeR talked like a pro. ^^
I urge that anyone who can read chinese have a go of the original source.
Dear Mod:
please beware of this kind of unnecessary confusion thread in future.(i know nothing you can really do but maybe some mods who know chinese can give an extra hand to keep an eye on threads like this).
The OP is mostly right with his translation, except "In internal battles" should be "during beta test"
That being said, Zerg SHOULD have more & faster production because they produce fragile units and need more of smaller units to engage, but this is not even the case because of REACTOR. Terran, a race where it builds powerful cost efficient units in smaller numbers actually becomes a race that produces powerful cost efficient units in large numbers like Z because of reactors.
Too bad banelings eat those powerfull cost efficient units Yeah yeah, tanks vs banelings. But tank marine is so fragile. Make 1 mistake and it's GG.
This goes the other way around...
Yeah true, wich I find kinda silly. But banelings vs marines is definitely harder for the marine user.
On October 31 2010 04:54 BurningSera wrote: blizzard keep saying that zerg can come back instantly with 200/200 which is why we have shitty cost inefficient units. however, anyone who play in the real game will know how hard to play TvZ. terran 2 bases can still easily beat 4/5 bases zerg, and you know how well a terran can turtle. terran units are OVER cost efficient. anyone who doesnt think MM+medivac need a fix is just fcking lying to himself. and after i said my last sentence, i am well awared of that i kinda 'insulted' my beloved BoxeR, i fcking went to read the original source. and guess what people???
FFS, OP did some misleading translational and you people fight for it 14pages??? do you honestly believe that BoxeR is a QQ-er?? so, for TL's sake, here you goes: (in my experience, people, whenever you read translation from one language translate to another, you need to beware that there might be some translation mistake.so no offense to OP really.)
OP misleading vesion:
Q: Recently people have said TvZ is hard.
A: I'm probably the one who has said it most! We've got to wait for the next patch, but for now we just try our best. I had this momentary thought in my head, that if I was eliminated I would switch races. Actually I want to go random. In internal battles, for a time, I was random.
now anyone who can read chinese will realise that....OP innocently made some slightly off-translation...or?
what Pro-gamer BoxeR actually meant: (i use the translation from OP as much as i can, since the creditential of this news is still belonged to him)
Q: Terran is having a hard time in TvZ recently. A: lol I'm probably the one who has said it the most! (BoxeR actually laughed) I am just gonna try my best until (they give some fix in) the future patch/es. I did have a momentary thought in my head, if i get eliminated (this time), i might consider to switch race. I am actually prefer 'Random' the most. I was playing Random some time during the alpha (i believe him meant 'internal testing' aka alpha, not beta, unless the original source used internal testing = beta).
People, BoxeR talked like a pro. ^^
I urge that anyone who can read chinese have a go of the original source.
Dear Mod:
please beware of this kind of unnecessary confusion thread in future.(i know nothing you can really do but maybe some mods who know chinese can give an extra hand to keep an eye on threads like this).
The OP is mostly right with his translation, except "In internal battles" should be "during beta test"
FYI, Boxer has also publicly stated he is not happy with the recent nerfs to Terran in another interview:
Boxer said: "I am slightly displeased with the multiple Terran nerfs (including recent ones). Blizzard has tendency to balance for team games and number of players (of each race). Also Zerg has won recently so I don't understand why Zerg is receiving a buff."
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.
Zerg hatchery = 300 mineral + drone lost (50) mineral + lost mining time from that one drone until a new drone comes out to replace it. So it's extremely close to 400 minerals
I really lost all respect for Boxer at this point. We know that T is actually OP instead of UP because the last 2 patches wasn't that impacting. Yes even the supply before rax nerf actually just makes T play a more macro-orientated opening and he will be ahead. The roach range increase affected ZvP a lot more than ZvT, and Roaches are still crushed by tanks/banshees/marauders. The other nerf was the tank nerf but then again, it still kills lings in the same number of hits as before and after patch. The only REAL nerf was the reaper delay. Well that's okay because Terran still has a million other openings to choose from mid-game. Basically, the last two patches didn't do much.
Now, we know Boxer is a paid progamer and he plays T. He is in a position where his fans will dislike him if he abandons the T race. Thats why he can't really switch races. (Notice how he said random instead of Z or P?) Therefore, the best thing for his CAREER is to complain and whine until Terran can get buffed. I don't blame him for choosing his career over the balance of the game. But still, that's somewhat selfish in my eyes. This is coming from a man who "did" so much for the e-sports community. One sign of BW dying and he quickly jumps ship.
Boxer, you've died in my heart a long time ago =/
Your ignorance and condescending manner are so aggravating to me. I genuinely feel anger after reading your post, because there is so much wrong with you as a person.
On October 31 2010 05:52 apmspam wrote: yea, terran has been nerfed into nothing, the seige tank is cost-ineffective. I agree with boxer, but ive already switched to zerg myself, following the likes the TLO, kawaiirice
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.
Zerg hatchery = 300 mineral + drone lost (50) mineral + lost mining time from that one drone until a new drone comes out to replace it. So it's extremely close to 400 minerals
I really lost all respect for Boxer at this point. We know that T is actually OP instead of UP because the last 2 patches wasn't that impacting. Yes even the supply before rax nerf actually just makes T play a more macro-orientated opening and he will be ahead. The roach range increase affected ZvP a lot more than ZvT, and Roaches are still crushed by tanks/banshees/marauders. The other nerf was the tank nerf but then again, it still kills lings in the same number of hits as before and after patch. The only REAL nerf was the reaper delay. Well that's okay because Terran still has a million other openings to choose from mid-game. Basically, the last two patches didn't do much.
Now, we know Boxer is a paid progamer and he plays T. He is in a position where his fans will dislike him if he abandons the T race. Thats why he can't really switch races. (Notice how he said random instead of Z or P?) Therefore, the best thing for his CAREER is to complain and whine until Terran can get buffed. I don't blame him for choosing his career over the balance of the game. But still, that's somewhat selfish in my eyes. This is coming from a man who "did" so much for the e-sports community. One sign of BW dying and he quickly jumps ship.
Boxer, you've died in my heart a long time ago =/
Your ignorance and condescending manner are so aggravating to me. I genuinely feel anger after reading your post, because there is so much wrong with you as a person.
Awesome, you attack my character than my content. If my post has things you disagree with, feel free to point them out rather than using ad hominem attacks. So people who do not agree with your views are "wrong as a person?" I feel like its incredibly ironic for you to say something like that, because of how much assumption + anger you display in your post. In my eyes, the person that has so much wrong is you
EDIT: I just dug up some of your posts and you're clearly delusional because you assumed T was underpowered and Z was the "strongest race" LOL. That explains why Z dominated the tournaments right? (except GSL because Fruitdealer showed us Skill can overcome balance sometimes)
On August 07 2010 00:13 HalfAmazing wrote: Not only is the matchup not imbalanced, once zerg reaches mass ultra stage, terran is forced to turtle. Idra's just throwing sand in your eyes, blinding you to the reality of zerg actually STILL being overpowered. The only thing that's changed is that zerg no longer has the midgame advantage with roaches. What do you see in reps where t beats z? Succesful one or two base timing push after zerg powered too hard, or turtling terran having waves and waves of zerg goo thrown at him unsuccesfully.
Don't be fooled by his idiotic "I'm a zerg superstar motherfucker, and I win in spite of terran being broken." Plenty of other zergs like dimaga and sen don't struggle at all vs. terran. Idra's schtick is just pathetic.
This post where you derail a world-class foreign player just shows how hateful and biased you are. How were you not banned from a post like this? wow
That being said, Zerg SHOULD have more & faster production because they produce fragile units and need more of smaller units to engage, but this is not even the case because of REACTOR. Terran, a race where it builds powerful cost efficient units in smaller numbers actually becomes a race that produces powerful cost efficient units in large numbers like Z because of reactors.
Too bad banelings eat those powerfull cost efficient units Yeah yeah, tanks vs banelings. But tank marine is so fragile. Make 1 mistake and it's GG.
This goes the other way around...
Yeah true, wich I find kinda silly. But banelings vs marines is definitely harder for the marine user.
Add in the ever present tanks (and baneling death on a missclick) mutas and thors (muta death on a missclick) and it becomes fragile for both sides.
Roach play is much more steady and less prone to a missclick but then marauders come out and you need the mutas and ... see where I 'm going with this ? :p
On October 31 2010 05:49 oxxo wrote: T late game is very weak and always has been. The early game harass was masking the fact that T has a very poor mid-late -> late game.
Then they need to tweak the late game Terran (but for god's sake don't buff the thor). The fact is the changes to the early game were still necessary.
That being said, Zerg SHOULD have more & faster production because they produce fragile units and need more of smaller units to engage, but this is not even the case because of REACTOR. Terran, a race where it builds powerful cost efficient units in smaller numbers actually becomes a race that produces powerful cost efficient units in large numbers like Z because of reactors.
Too bad banelings eat those powerfull cost efficient units Yeah yeah, tanks vs banelings. But tank marine is so fragile. Make 1 mistake and it's GG.
This goes the other way around...
Yeah true, wich I find kinda silly. But banelings vs marines is definitely harder for the marine user.
Add in the ever present tanks (and baneling death on a missclick) mutas and thors (muta death on a missclick) and it becomes fragile for both sides.
Roach play is much more steady and less prone to a missclick but then marauders come out and you need the mutas and ... see where I 'm going with this ? :p
Tanks attack very slowly and are cost ineffective.
Tanks hurt your own troops for 50% damage.
Banelings killed still explode at a 2.20 area for full damage, which is fun cause the marine gets auto gibbed and marauders all lose nearly half their health for every one baneling closeby that you kill with tanks, though you usually just end up getting overrun by a huge margin by muta/ling anyway.
I don't see why boxer should be ashamed of his balance comments. Remember the fruitdealer QQ post, his (and idra's) constant threat to switch to terran, their constant QQing....now compare the difference of "class", it's far from the non stop QQ we had to endure for 2 months and that pollued every threads. (even if the zergs were right to say they were UP) Now boxer just says he dosen't want terran to be nerfed any more, and I think everyone can agree on this one.
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.
Zerg hatchery = 300 mineral + drone lost (50) mineral + lost mining time from that one drone until a new drone comes out to replace it. So it's extremely close to 400 minerals
I really lost all respect for Boxer at this point. We know that T is actually OP instead of UP because the last 2 patches wasn't that impacting. Yes even the supply before rax nerf actually just makes T play a more macro-orientated opening and he will be ahead. The roach range increase affected ZvP a lot more than ZvT, and Roaches are still crushed by tanks/banshees/marauders. The other nerf was the tank nerf but then again, it still kills lings in the same number of hits as before and after patch. The only REAL nerf was the reaper delay. Well that's okay because Terran still has a million other openings to choose from mid-game. Basically, the last two patches didn't do much.
Now, we know Boxer is a paid progamer and he plays T. He is in a position where his fans will dislike him if he abandons the T race. Thats why he can't really switch races. (Notice how he said random instead of Z or P?) Therefore, the best thing for his CAREER is to complain and whine until Terran can get buffed. I don't blame him for choosing his career over the balance of the game. But still, that's somewhat selfish in my eyes. This is coming from a man who "did" so much for the e-sports community. One sign of BW dying and he quickly jumps ship.
Boxer, you've died in my heart a long time ago =/
Your ignorance and condescending manner are so aggravating to me. I genuinely feel anger after reading your post, because there is so much wrong with you as a person.
Awesome, you attack my character than my content. If my post has things you disagree with, feel free to point them out rather than using ad hominem attacks. So people who do not agree with your views are "wrong as a person?" I feel like its incredibly ironic for you to say something like that, because of how much assumption + anger you display in your post. In my eyes, the person that has so much wrong is you
EDIT: I just dug up some of your posts and you're clearly delusional because you assumed T was underpowered and Z was the "strongest race" LOL. That explains why Z dominated the tournaments right? (except GSL because Fruitdealer showed us Skill can overcome balance sometimes)
On August 07 2010 00:13 HalfAmazing wrote: Not only is the matchup not imbalanced, once zerg reaches mass ultra stage, terran is forced to turtle. Idra's just throwing sand in your eyes, blinding you to the reality of zerg actually STILL being overpowered. The only thing that's changed is that zerg no longer has the midgame advantage with roaches. What do you see in reps where t beats z? Succesful one or two base timing push after zerg powered too hard, or turtling terran having waves and waves of zerg goo thrown at him unsuccesfully.
Don't be fooled by his idiotic "I'm a zerg superstar motherfucker, and I win in spite of terran being broken." Plenty of other zergs like dimaga and sen don't struggle at all vs. terran. Idra's schtick is just pathetic.
This post where you derail a world-class foreign player just shows how hateful and biased you are. How were you not banned from a post like this? wow
Derail a world class player? What the fuck are you talking about? You just said "I JUST LOST ALL RESPECT FOR THE GREATEST PLAYER OF ALL TIME" when your opinion on Boxer, BW or SC II is completely irrelevant. How good of a player are you? Link me to your sc2ranks.com profile please because you can't possibly have a clue.
Now people are talking about Terran lategame needing help, while Ghost-Raven-MMM is really strong vs Protoss(P might still have a slight adv), and mass Thor-type build are cost-effective vs anything Z has and 200/200 army with about 10 Thors can't realistically be defeated anywhere near cost-efficiently. I just think that Ts are less comfortable with lategame because before they could finish their games early.
On August 07 2010 00:13 HalfAmazing wrote: Not only is the matchup not imbalanced, once zerg reaches mass ultra stage, terran is forced to turtle. Idra's just throwing sand in your eyes, blinding you to the reality of zerg actually STILL being overpowered. The only thing that's changed is that zerg no longer has the midgame advantage with roaches. What do you see in reps where t beats z? Succesful one or two base timing push after zerg powered too hard, or turtling terran having waves and waves of zerg goo thrown at him unsuccesfully.
Don't be fooled by his idiotic "I'm a zerg superstar motherfucker, and I win in spite of terran being broken." Plenty of other zergs like dimaga and sen don't struggle at all vs. terran. Idra's schtick is just pathetic.
This post where you derail a world-class foreign player just shows how hateful and biased you are. How were you not banned from a post like this? wow
Quite the opposite my friend.
So sad to see fanboys flaiming and taking every single balance discussion like a personal insult. Why the need to be offensive towards people playing the other races? Is this a WOW thing or something? Wiling to go as far as saying things like "i lost all respect for Boxer" for what? For pointing out what he thinks is wrong?
Boxers word bears 10 times more weight then that of any other player at this time. If you can not respect that then, flame away.
I just want to come in here and say: I find it hilarious about all the terrans complaining about balance now. These were the same people saying "Zerg isn't imba, just use Nydus Canal more! Then several patches that helped zerg a lot come, and all of the sudden these ones telling the zergs to stop "qqing" are now qqing themselves. Funny.
On October 31 2010 07:16 Comeh wrote: I just want to come in here and say: I find it hilarious about all the terrans complaining about balance now. These were the same people saying "Zerg isn't imba, just use Nydus Canal more! Then several patches that helped zerg a lot come, and all of the sudden these ones telling the zergs to stop "qqing" are now qqing themselves. Funny.
Only problem is the Zerg got buffed, and the Terran got nerfed respectively. Had they kept Terran at that previous level, it would not be a problem.
On October 31 2010 07:21 Reaper9 wrote: Only problem is the Zerg got buffed, and the Terran got nerfed respectively. Had they kept Terran at that previous level, it would not be a problem.
^^^ QFT
The gap widened further when Blizzard buffed Zerg AND nerfed Terran in the same patch. They should have just buffed Zerg, left Terran alone, and observed the new balance changes rather than acting so drastically. Now there are balance issues again and Blizzard will probably have to undo some of their last patch changes.
I understand some of boxers thinking, although im not sure terran is underpowered as such. The real imbalance in tvz match up is the level of micro and tactical thinking needed to optimize terran play compare to zerg. Terran have to constantly harass to stay in the game, zerg just sit back and macro. Terran army micro is just in a different universe compared to zergs a-move for every unit then spam back to 200/200 army in 20 sec, its just mindless. Yes zerg have to put more apm into macro than terran but it doesnt make up for the ez-mode zerg gets for everything else. Blizz needs increase the micro requirements for zerg and the matchup will be fairer.
On October 31 2010 07:36 ironside wrote: I understand some of boxers thinking, although im not sure terran is underpowered as such. The real imbalance in tvz match up is the level of micro and tactical thinking needed to optimize terran play compare to zerg. Terran have to constantly harass to stay in the game, zerg just sit back and macro. Terran army micro is just in a different universe compared to zergs a-move for every unit then spam back to 200/200 army in 20 sec, its just mindless. Yes zerg have to put more apm into macro than terran but it doesnt make up for the ez-mode zerg gets for everything else. Blizz needs increase the micro requirements for zerg and the matchup will be fairer.
Play zerg and you'll realize zerg has alot more to do then just macro an army and sit back all game.
On October 31 2010 07:00 Shikyo wrote: Now people are talking about Terran lategame needing help, while Ghost-Raven-MMM is really strong vs Protoss(P might still have a slight adv), and mass Thor-type build are cost-effective vs anything Z has and 200/200 army with about 10 Thors can't realistically be defeated anywhere near cost-efficiently. I just think that Ts are less comfortable with lategame because before they could finish their games early.
It's not a matter of T's being comfortable in late game. A lot of T's would LOVE to be able to play a late game macro game.
You can't though. That's why you see T's doing their best to win early. Because if the game goes past 15 minutes it's virtually impossibe to win versus templar free storm warp ins and larva inject.
Do you and other people really think that top tier Terrans are "not comfortable" late game vs P/Z? I truly wish that were the case..
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.
Zerg hatchery = 300 mineral + drone lost (50) mineral + lost mining time from that one drone until a new drone comes out to replace it. So it's extremely close to 400 minerals
I really lost all respect for Boxer at this point. We know that T is actually OP instead of UP because the last 2 patches wasn't that impacting. Yes even the supply before rax nerf actually just makes T play a more macro-orientated opening and he will be ahead. The roach range increase affected ZvP a lot more than ZvT, and Roaches are still crushed by tanks/banshees/marauders. The other nerf was the tank nerf but then again, it still kills lings in the same number of hits as before and after patch. The only REAL nerf was the reaper delay. Well that's okay because Terran still has a million other openings to choose from mid-game. Basically, the last two patches didn't do much.
Now, we know Boxer is a paid progamer and he plays T. He is in a position where his fans will dislike him if he abandons the T race. Thats why he can't really switch races. (Notice how he said random instead of Z or P?) Therefore, the best thing for his CAREER is to complain and whine until Terran can get buffed. I don't blame him for choosing his career over the balance of the game. But still, that's somewhat selfish in my eyes. This is coming from a man who "did" so much for the e-sports community. One sign of BW dying and he quickly jumps ship.
Boxer, you've died in my heart a long time ago =/
Your ignorance and condescending manner are so aggravating to me. I genuinely feel anger after reading your post, because there is so much wrong with you as a person.
Awesome, you attack my character than my content. If my post has things you disagree with, feel free to point them out rather than using ad hominem attacks. So people who do not agree with your views are "wrong as a person?" I feel like its incredibly ironic for you to say something like that, because of how much assumption + anger you display in your post. In my eyes, the person that has so much wrong is you
EDIT: I just dug up some of your posts and you're clearly delusional because you assumed T was underpowered and Z was the "strongest race" LOL. That explains why Z dominated the tournaments right? (except GSL because Fruitdealer showed us Skill can overcome balance sometimes)
On August 07 2010 00:13 HalfAmazing wrote: Not only is the matchup not imbalanced, once zerg reaches mass ultra stage, terran is forced to turtle. Idra's just throwing sand in your eyes, blinding you to the reality of zerg actually STILL being overpowered. The only thing that's changed is that zerg no longer has the midgame advantage with roaches. What do you see in reps where t beats z? Succesful one or two base timing push after zerg powered too hard, or turtling terran having waves and waves of zerg goo thrown at him unsuccesfully.
Don't be fooled by his idiotic "I'm a zerg superstar motherfucker, and I win in spite of terran being broken." Plenty of other zergs like dimaga and sen don't struggle at all vs. terran. Idra's schtick is just pathetic.
This post where you derail a world-class foreign player just shows how hateful and biased you are. How were you not banned from a post like this? wow
Derail a world class player? What the fuck are you talking about? You just said "I JUST LOST ALL RESPECT FOR THE GREATEST PLAYER OF ALL TIME" when your opinion on Boxer, BW or SC II is completely irrelevant. How good of a player are you? Link me to your sc2ranks.com profile please because you can't possibly have a clue.
Yes I said I lost respect for Boxer but I didn't label him as a biased deceiving pathetic guy riding on his stardom to complain like you clearly did for Idra. The word "pathetic" does not even exist in my post about Boxer, and I see "idiotic" and "pathetic" where you described Idra. How does how good of a player I am have anything to do with how badly you insulted a world-class player, and what kind of douche you are?
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.
Zerg hatchery = 300 mineral + drone lost (50) mineral + lost mining time from that one drone until a new drone comes out to replace it. So it's extremely close to 400 minerals
I really lost all respect for Boxer at this point. We know that T is actually OP instead of UP because the last 2 patches wasn't that impacting. Yes even the supply before rax nerf actually just makes T play a more macro-orientated opening and he will be ahead. The roach range increase affected ZvP a lot more than ZvT, and Roaches are still crushed by tanks/banshees/marauders. The other nerf was the tank nerf but then again, it still kills lings in the same number of hits as before and after patch. The only REAL nerf was the reaper delay. Well that's okay because Terran still has a million other openings to choose from mid-game. Basically, the last two patches didn't do much.
Now, we know Boxer is a paid progamer and he plays T. He is in a position where his fans will dislike him if he abandons the T race. Thats why he can't really switch races. (Notice how he said random instead of Z or P?) Therefore, the best thing for his CAREER is to complain and whine until Terran can get buffed. I don't blame him for choosing his career over the balance of the game. But still, that's somewhat selfish in my eyes. This is coming from a man who "did" so much for the e-sports community. One sign of BW dying and he quickly jumps ship.
Boxer, you've died in my heart a long time ago =/
ya i agree with the guy who says this is bs. this is just your paranoid thoughts about the situation, and shows quite a bit about your character as a person. you automatically assume the worst and make tons of assumptions.
The gap widened further when Blizzard buffed Zerg AND nerfed Terran in the same patch. They should have just buffed Zerg, left Terran alone, and observed the new balance changes rather than acting so drastically. Now there are balance issues again and Blizzard will probably have to undo some of their last patch changes.
Not to pick on you specifically, but I think this post gives a great perspective of the last two patches. I distinctly remember the previous patch (1.1.1.numbers) where the only changes that were done were the ones posted in the situation report months ago. Everyone screamed that this wasn't enough, it didn't change things drastically enough, blah blah. Now look at what we have, and even Boxer is mentioning this? Boxer saying something small like "Oh I might go random whatever" is essentially equal to all of the zerg players screaming imbalance since retail.
As a zerg player, I agree that when I see Terran, I smile. The only time I really lose is when I get bunkered and don't scout, and that's usually my problem anyway.
On October 31 2010 08:31 BluFenix wrote: As a zerg player, I agree that when I see Terran, I smile. The only time I really lose is when I get bunkered and don't scout, and that's usually my problem anyway.
To be fair, what exactly are the reasons for that?
I'm absolutely confident facing Terrans (as P), for instance, but that's more due to having played a lot of the MU comparatively and being very familiar with the very standard straight-up play of most ladder terrans. But watching some of the high-level Terrans multitask rather than 1a makes me want to hide under my bed.
On October 31 2010 07:00 Shikyo wrote: Now people are talking about Terran lategame needing help, while Ghost-Raven-MMM is really strong vs Protoss(P might still have a slight adv), and mass Thor-type build are cost-effective vs anything Z has and 200/200 army with about 10 Thors can't realistically be defeated anywhere near cost-efficiently. I just think that Ts are less comfortable with lategame because before they could finish their games early.
It's not a matter of T's being comfortable in late game. A lot of T's would LOVE to be able to play a late game macro game.
You can't though. That's why you see T's doing their best to win early. Because if the game goes past 15 minutes it's virtually impossibe to win versus templar free storm warp ins and larva inject.
Do you and other people really think that top tier Terrans are "not comfortable" late game vs P/Z? I truly wish that were the case..
But you can though just because you don't know how doesn't mean its not possible. Lots of players have done it, Drewbie does it good, MVP does it good, Nada does it good I mean i'm sorry you can't but thats your problem not balance.
Seriously the last 10+ posts of yours are how terran sucks and needs a buff lol.
if terran gets another nerf ima change or just stop playing this game i sound like a QQ noob but seriously in the start of this game i had so much fun choosing bettwen like 5-7 different type of builds now its just marine and marauder for protoss and thor and marines for zerg and tanks and viking for terran idc terran is becoming the new zerg
To be fair, what exactly are the reasons for that?
I'm absolutely confident facing Terrans (as P), for instance, but that's more due to having played a lot of the MU comparatively and being very familiar with the very standard straight-up play of most ladder terrans. But watching some of the high-level Terrans multitask rather than 1a makes me want to hide under my bed.
Mostly because of lack of early reaper pressure and no one really doing hellion harrass early. I typically fear banshees, but usually get another queen for creap spread anyway.
On October 31 2010 05:52 apmspam wrote: yea, terran has been nerfed into nothing, the seige tank is cost-ineffective. I agree with boxer, but ive already switched to zerg myself, following the likes the TLO, kawaiirice
You mean all the players who used to have a free ride with terran painfully realized they weren't as good as their OP race lead them to believe ?
Funny how certain players are always hyped no matter what happens, even when their race switch ends up in them getting completely steamrolled by players they used to beat by 1a-ing their bioball heh ?
As much as I hate the guy you gotta give IdrA or Fruit points for sticking to their guns while the others hop on the bandwagon.
Yeah yeah of course I'm sure they can all offer dozens of fanboy-proof arguments to defend their "sudden change of heart".
On October 31 2010 08:46 GiantEnemyCrab wrote: if terran gets another nerf ima change or just stop playing this game i sound like a QQ noob but seriously in the start of this game i had so much fun choosing bettwen like 5-7 different type of builds now its just marine and marauder for protoss and thor and marines for zerg and tanks and viking for terran idc terran is becoming the new zerg
See I can agree with you here. If terran does get nerfed again that would be dumb. Terran definitely does not need more nerfs. If there is another nerf to terrans then I can agree with people complaining about terran nerfs.
On October 31 2010 08:46 GiantEnemyCrab wrote: if terran gets another nerf ima change or just stop playing this game i sound like a QQ noob but seriously in the start of this game i had so much fun choosing bettwen like 5-7 different type of builds now its just marine and marauder for protoss and thor and marines for zerg and tanks and viking for terran idc terran is becoming the new zerg
See I can agree with you here. If terran does get nerfed again that would be dumb. Terran definitely does not need more nerfs. If there is another nerf to terrans then I can agree with people complaining about terran nerfs.
There will be another Terran nerf. Possibly an increase in price for stimpack.
What's wrong with advocating for the race that you play? Boxer is representing the interest of the race he is associated with just like the president of the United States representing the interest of the Americans. Some of the responses here are so idiotic that I can only excuse those behaviors as regular internet trolling.
One thing I will point out however is that there is no sign of Terran being OP at this time and need any type of additional nerfing whatsoever. So if Blizzard nerfs Terran again in the near future, they better have a very very good reason to back it up.
On October 31 2010 09:13 dukethegold wrote: One thing I will point out however is that there is no sign of Terran being OP at this time and need any type of additional nerfing whatsoever. So if Blizzard nerfs Terran again in the near future, they better have a very very good reason to back it up.
Funny how terrans were already spewing that BEFORE the patch.
According to you guys terran wouldn't be overpowered even if thors had 50 range and 30k HP...
On October 31 2010 09:13 dukethegold wrote: One thing I will point out however is that there is no sign of Terran being OP at this time and need any type of additional nerfing whatsoever. So if Blizzard nerfs Terran again in the near future, they better have a very very good reason to back it up.
Funny how terrans were already spewing that BEFORE the patch.
According to you guys terran wouldn't be overpowered even if thors had 50 range and 30k HP...
On October 31 2010 09:18 dukethegold wrote: You are trolling, putting words into our mouths.
Not really, did you miss out the hundreds of posts on all imaginable forums the past few months saying that "it was perfectly balanced and zergs should l2p instead of complaining" ?
Then as soon as the nerbat cracks the artificial skill level (an egos) of an ENORMOUS segment of the Terran populace, you see posts pop all over the damn place about how "terran is too nerfed and other races are imbalanced".
What should the Protoss say then ? They're the one who have been getting it the hardest and guess what, they actually had to IMPROVE. Just laddering for a few hours will confirm that currently there are 4 main types of players, random joes aside :
- Very good protoss players. You'll find that most people having protoss as their main race have a skill level far superior to a vast majority of T and Z alike. (I play Z so forget I'm sharpening my ego)
- Reformed FOTM terrans trying to play zerg and failing miserably because they have zero clue about how to really play besides turtling and 1a-ing. Most of them can't do much more than ling/bling or 1 base roach spam.
- People who sticked with terran and are actually trying to improve, even if the matches have become more difficult.
- People who sticked with zerg all along, had to get better than most terrans to overcome their previously overpowered units and who are now steamrolling most of them, just as terrans did before except this time it isn't an imbalance issue, it's a skill level issue.
Of course, lots of QQ ensues from the Ts. "Like wtf I can't just turtle up and 1a to win anymore ? WTFF!!!!!!"
On October 31 2010 05:52 apmspam wrote: yea, terran has been nerfed into nothing, the seige tank is cost-ineffective. I agree with boxer, but ive already switched to zerg myself, following the likes the TLO, kawaiirice
You mean all the players who used to have a free ride with terran painfully realized they weren't as good as their OP race lead them to believe ?
This is all it is. They finally aren't grossly OP and now think they are UP because they are playing people 1000 pts better then them.
On October 31 2010 05:52 apmspam wrote: yea, terran has been nerfed into nothing, the seige tank is cost-ineffective. I agree with boxer, but ive already switched to zerg myself, following the likes the TLO, kawaiirice
You mean all the players who used to have a free ride with terran painfully realized they weren't as good as their OP race lead them to believe ?
This is all it is. They finally aren't grossly OP and now think they are UP because they are playing people 1000 pts better then them.
ahhahahahaha i love how ppl that dont play terran thinks they must play so much better to win must be the hundreds of threads they read here that leads them to believe their P/Z is UP
these players are blinded by their own ignorance, while facts are facts, terran is at a disadvantage whether in macro or units late game, and cannot compete evenly against P/Z, while the early game advantage terrans get is not worth the late game disadvantages
On October 31 2010 05:52 apmspam wrote: yea, terran has been nerfed into nothing, the seige tank is cost-ineffective. I agree with boxer, but ive already switched to zerg myself, following the likes the TLO, kawaiirice
You mean all the players who used to have a free ride with terran painfully realized they weren't as good as their OP race lead them to believe ?
Funny how certain players are always hyped no matter what happens, even when their race switch ends up in them getting completely steamrolled by players they used to beat by 1a-ing their bioball heh ?
As much as I hate the guy you gotta give IdrA or Fruit points for sticking to their guns while the others hop on the bandwagon.
Yeah yeah of course I'm sure they can all offer dozens of fanboy-proof arguments to defend their "sudden change of heart".
Just because you have to inject larva every 1 minute doesnt mean you have right to call all terran wins before patch "free ride". Suddenly game changed from 1a bioball to 1a banelings with uncounterable mutalisks.
I think the game is FAR more balanced now than it was at release. That being said, I do feel that Terrans have to far out micro a zerg during late game conflicts involving banelings. But, there is no Terran equivalent for the APM necessary for good muta harass. Hellion run-bys and banshees require attention for 30-40 seconds where as muta harass does typically less actual damage if the Terran prepares for it and takes many minutes of constant attention.
Still, I feel that Terrans are having a rough time trying to deal with the baneling which is a VERY easy unit to use after getting the speed upgrade. If players like Boxer keep complaining over the next week or so, I'm willing to consider Terran a little UP
On October 31 2010 05:52 apmspam wrote: yea, terran has been nerfed into nothing, the seige tank is cost-ineffective. I agree with boxer, but ive already switched to zerg myself, following the likes the TLO, kawaiirice
You mean all the players who used to have a free ride with terran painfully realized they weren't as good as their OP race lead them to believe ?
Funny how certain players are always hyped no matter what happens, even when their race switch ends up in them getting completely steamrolled by players they used to beat by 1a-ing their bioball heh ?
As much as I hate the guy you gotta give IdrA or Fruit points for sticking to their guns while the others hop on the bandwagon.
Yeah yeah of course I'm sure they can all offer dozens of fanboy-proof arguments to defend their "sudden change of heart".
Just because you have to inject larva every 1 minute doesnt mean you have right to call all terran wins before patch "free ride". Suddenly game changed from 1a bioball to 1a banelings with uncounterable mutalisks.
Mutalisks are not uncounterable. Players are just showing really BAD anti muta micro. The huge reluctance of Terrans to build a few more turrets and to TERRIBLE stim timing of some of the GSL contenders make Mutas look OP. Give it a little more time, and some Terran will show everyone how to defend mutas. IF mutas are OP, all that would need to change is to lower the turret cost by a tiny bit
Just wanted to throw in my two cents : I have heard a lot of debating , and pseudo-debating , going on , and some statistics , also contrived stats as well . HOWEVER , I do not recall anyone bringing map balance into the equation . E.g When contrasting these win losses in the GSL between these various pro's , it may be a little helpful; to also note and graph what maps they are playing on , as maps add alot of balance to the game . So map features can add , take balance from the game . That is ti say instead of altering units , map features can also be employed or removed . Just a thought
On October 31 2010 11:37 Beef Noodles wrote: I think the game is FAR more balanced now than it was at release. That being said, I do feel that Terrans have to far out micro a zerg during late game conflicts involving banelings. But, there is no Terran equivalent for the APM necessary for good muta harass. Hellion run-bys and banshees require attention for 30-40 seconds where as muta harass does typically less actual damage if the Terran prepares for it and takes many minutes of constant attention.
Still, I feel that Terrans are having a rough time trying to deal with the baneling which is a VERY easy unit to use after getting the speed upgrade. If players like Boxer keep complaining over the next week or so, I'm willing to consider Terran a little UP
One of the better written posts On another note , Its good to see some actually critically thinking , and not getting sucked into flame wars
Alot of other good posts to , but dont have time to respond to them all
On October 31 2010 05:52 apmspam wrote: yea, terran has been nerfed into nothing, the seige tank is cost-ineffective. I agree with boxer, but ive already switched to zerg myself, following the likes the TLO, kawaiirice
You mean all the players who used to have a free ride with terran painfully realized they weren't as good as their OP race lead them to believe ?
Funny how certain players are always hyped no matter what happens, even when their race switch ends up in them getting completely steamrolled by players they used to beat by 1a-ing their bioball heh ?
As much as I hate the guy you gotta give IdrA or Fruit points for sticking to their guns while the others hop on the bandwagon.
Yeah yeah of course I'm sure they can all offer dozens of fanboy-proof arguments to defend their "sudden change of heart".
Just because you have to inject larva every 1 minute doesnt mean you have right to call all terran wins before patch "free ride". Suddenly game changed from 1a bioball to 1a banelings with uncounterable mutalisks.
Mutalisks are not uncounterable. Players are just showing really BAD anti muta micro. The huge reluctance of Terrans to build a few more turrets and to TERRIBLE stim timing of some of the GSL contenders make Mutas look OP. Give it a little more time, and some Terran will show everyone how to defend mutas. IF mutas are OP, all that would need to change is to lower the turret cost by a tiny bit
Nice try. You cant lower turret cost because they are also detectors.
And most important: Zerg almost never have to build spore crawlers why should terran be dependant on immobile anti air defense ? By your logic how should terran move his army out of base ?
[QUOTE]In one of the recent streams Day9 said that the problem isn't in the fact that Zerg was buffed a bit but that Terran now has less openings (or none) with which he can pressure the Zerg early on and stop him from getting a macro advantage and from there on it's an uphill battle. Which is true, Terran needs to pressure Zerg early in some way just as much as Zerg needs an extra base from the get go. It's not the Zerg buff that's the issue here, it's the supply depot-rax change.
It's difficult to say if that makes them UP in the matchup (most likely they just need to find new ways to deal with things) but it is true that top Terrans who are currently participating in the GSL (Boxer included) were pushed into a position where they need to radically change their gameplay against Zerg with little time to practice and even less time to experiment.
On the other hand Zerg players have the benefit of keeping the same gamestyle they had before but not having to worry about early pressure.
So yeah, Terrans are struggling vs Zerg, it's just not clear if it's balance or they need to time to modify their gameplay.[quote]
I really like the logic in this post as well . So i guess i had to throw in my four cents .
Edit . Tried to clean this posts up . and screwed the quotes all up , and I cannot remember his handle to give him credit .
On October 31 2010 00:24 mols0n wrote: This is how i see the balance issues right now
Early game(strongest to weakest)
Terran Protoss Zerg
Midgame
Protoss Terran Zerg
Lategame Zerg Protoss
Big Gap
Terran
Once the other races learn to macro more bases faster itll be more balanced. 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.
This is grossly wrong. Zerg race was built to expand easily. Cost of drone: 50 Cost of Hatchery: 300 Cost of Queen: 150 Cost of expansion: 500
Now with that you get the ability to ramp up your drone production... a LOT and you also get all the production facilities you need. But for a Terran... You have to put down 400 on the CC, and then 150 on the OC, and then you have to put down buildings so you can ramp up your production. That can cost anywhere from 450/300 to 450/150 Total cost of expansion: 1000/150.
On October 31 2010 00:24 mols0n wrote: This is how i see the balance issues right now
Early game(strongest to weakest)
Terran Protoss Zerg
Midgame
Protoss Terran Zerg
Lategame Zerg Protoss
Big Gap
Terran
Once the other races learn to macro more bases faster itll be more balanced. 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.
This is grossly wrong. Zerg race was built to expand easily. Cost of drone: 50 Cost of Hatchery: 300 Cost of Queen: 150 Cost of expansion: 500
Now with that you get the ability to ramp up your drone production... a LOT and you also get all the production facilities you need. But for a Terran... You have to put down 400 on the CC, and then 150 on the OC, and then you have to put down buildings so you can ramp up your production. That can cost anywhere from 450/300 to 450/150 Total cost of expansion: 1000/150.
there is an intelligent thought behind your comparison, but you dont account for the fact that a hatchery can either make workers or warriors or supply. this makes the comparison alot more complicated.
to keep it simple and general I would just state that zerg has the possibility to get the most efficient economy going and has the possibility to get the fastest army production going. but never both at the same time.
and I am pretty sure that the terrans will find new ways to put on good pressure to account for that. there are a few very good examples in the GSL. in the leenok vs nada games or fake vs fruitdealer.
Iam pretty sure that alot of terrans will slowly drop in their winning rates because of the recent changes, but the only reason behind this is the fact that they had a too easy matchup for a long time.
I dont know what to think of boxers statement. well if it shows something, then the fact that he really loves to win
and I would actually looooove to see boxer playing random. if it is possible for him to do that in tournaments then it would definitely fit him stylewise to play all the races.
Boxer is Boxer. He can play whatever race he wants, using his pinky toes, and I would be happy to watch him play. That being said, I doubt he's gonna change his race to be honest, he's known as a Terran user, fans want to see him play Terran, I suspect him to continue on playing Terran. I'm sure he can work his way around nerfs, he IS Boxer after all.
On October 31 2010 05:52 apmspam wrote: yea, terran has been nerfed into nothing, the seige tank is cost-ineffective. I agree with boxer, but ive already switched to zerg myself, following the likes the TLO, kawaiirice
You mean all the players who used to have a free ride with terran painfully realized they weren't as good as their OP race lead them to believe ?
Funny how certain players are always hyped no matter what happens, even when their race switch ends up in them getting completely steamrolled by players they used to beat by 1a-ing their bioball heh ?
As much as I hate the guy you gotta give IdrA or Fruit points for sticking to their guns while the others hop on the bandwagon.
Yeah yeah of course I'm sure they can all offer dozens of fanboy-proof arguments to defend their "sudden change of heart".
Just because you have to inject larva every 1 minute doesnt mean you have right to call all terran wins before patch "free ride". Suddenly game changed from 1a bioball to 1a banelings with uncounterable mutalisks.
Mutalisks are not uncounterable. Players are just showing really BAD anti muta micro. The huge reluctance of Terrans to build a few more turrets and to TERRIBLE stim timing of some of the GSL contenders make Mutas look OP. Give it a little more time, and some Terran will show everyone how to defend mutas. IF mutas are OP, all that would need to change is to lower the turret cost by a tiny bit
Nice try. You cant lower turret cost because they are also detectors.
And most important: Zerg almost never have to build spore crawlers why should terran be dependant on immobile anti air defense ? By your logic how should terran move his army out of base ?
Zerg never build spore crawlers because queens do a better job and serve other functions. Compare that to how a single repaired missile turret can hold off the inital wave of 7 mutas with ease. The missile turret out DPSes the spore crawler easily.
On October 31 2010 05:52 apmspam wrote: yea, terran has been nerfed into nothing, the seige tank is cost-ineffective. I agree with boxer, but ive already switched to zerg myself, following the likes the TLO, kawaiirice
You mean all the players who used to have a free ride with terran painfully realized they weren't as good as their OP race lead them to believe ?
Funny how certain players are always hyped no matter what happens, even when their race switch ends up in them getting completely steamrolled by players they used to beat by 1a-ing their bioball heh ?
As much as I hate the guy you gotta give IdrA or Fruit points for sticking to their guns while the others hop on the bandwagon.
Yeah yeah of course I'm sure they can all offer dozens of fanboy-proof arguments to defend their "sudden change of heart".
Just because you have to inject larva every 1 minute doesnt mean you have right to call all terran wins before patch "free ride". Suddenly game changed from 1a bioball to 1a banelings with uncounterable mutalisks.
Mutalisks are not uncounterable. Players are just showing really BAD anti muta micro. The huge reluctance of Terrans to build a few more turrets and to TERRIBLE stim timing of some of the GSL contenders make Mutas look OP. Give it a little more time, and some Terran will show everyone how to defend mutas. IF mutas are OP, all that would need to change is to lower the turret cost by a tiny bit
Nice try. You cant lower turret cost because they are also detectors.
And most important: Zerg almost never have to build spore crawlers why should terran be dependant on immobile anti air defense ? By your logic how should terran move his army out of base ?
Zerg never build spore crawlers because queens do a better job and serve other functions. Compare that to how a single repaired missile turret can hold off the inital wave of 7 mutas with ease. The missile turret out DPSes the spore crawler easily.
This.
Also Zerg often relies on spine crawlers which cost a drone whereas Terran just makes an essentially free bunker.
Terran has cheap and amazingly effective turrets as well as a t1 unit which counters mutas very well and a t2.5 (comes out at Zerg tier 2) that demolishes them in the thor. The turrets for Terrans are great but they have other options. When Z puts spore crawlers up its because there is no other solution. It costs us a drone and minerals, we aren't going to do it unless it is absolutely necessary.
I had a Terran today tell me that scvs being targettable while building was horrible. The fact is as Zerg I instantly lose the drone.
On October 31 2010 13:01 MrProphylactic wrote: In one of the recent streams Day9 said that the problem isn't in the fact that Zerg was buffed a bit but that Terran now has less openings (or none) with which he can pressure the Zerg early on and stop him from getting a macro advantage and from there on it's an uphill battle. Which is true, Terran needs to pressure Zerg early in some way just as much as Zerg needs an extra base from the get go. It's not the Zerg buff that's the issue here, it's the supply depot-rax change.
Good insight by Day 9 into the balance issues,
On the other hand Zerg players have the benefit of keeping the same gamestyle they had before but not having to worry about early pressure.
Yup. There is no early pressure from T now and when they get to mid-game, it practically becomes an auto-win for Zerg
On October 31 2010 05:52 apmspam wrote: yea, terran has been nerfed into nothing, the seige tank is cost-ineffective. I agree with boxer, but ive already switched to zerg myself, following the likes the TLO, kawaiirice
You mean all the players who used to have a free ride with terran painfully realized they weren't as good as their OP race lead them to believe ?
Funny how certain players are always hyped no matter what happens, even when their race switch ends up in them getting completely steamrolled by players they used to beat by 1a-ing their bioball heh ?
As much as I hate the guy you gotta give IdrA or Fruit points for sticking to their guns while the others hop on the bandwagon.
Yeah yeah of course I'm sure they can all offer dozens of fanboy-proof arguments to defend their "sudden change of heart".
Just because you have to inject larva every 1 minute doesnt mean you have right to call all terran wins before patch "free ride". Suddenly game changed from 1a bioball to 1a banelings with uncounterable mutalisks.
Mutalisks are not uncounterable. Players are just showing really BAD anti muta micro. The huge reluctance of Terrans to build a few more turrets and to TERRIBLE stim timing of some of the GSL contenders make Mutas look OP. Give it a little more time, and some Terran will show everyone how to defend mutas. IF mutas are OP, all that would need to change is to lower the turret cost by a tiny bit
Nice try. You cant lower turret cost because they are also detectors.
And most important: Zerg almost never have to build spore crawlers why should terran be dependant on immobile anti air defense ? By your logic how should terran move his army out of base ?
Zerg never build spore crawlers because queens do a better job and serve other functions. Compare that to how a single repaired missile turret can hold off the inital wave of 7 mutas with ease. The missile turret out DPSes the spore crawler easily.
In large numbers mutalisks one-shot turrets or atleast kill them too fast before you can even try to repair them.
On October 31 2010 05:52 apmspam wrote: yea, terran has been nerfed into nothing, the seige tank is cost-ineffective. I agree with boxer, but ive already switched to zerg myself, following the likes the TLO, kawaiirice
You mean all the players who used to have a free ride with terran painfully realized they weren't as good as their OP race lead them to believe ?
Funny how certain players are always hyped no matter what happens, even when their race switch ends up in them getting completely steamrolled by players they used to beat by 1a-ing their bioball heh ?
As much as I hate the guy you gotta give IdrA or Fruit points for sticking to their guns while the others hop on the bandwagon.
Yeah yeah of course I'm sure they can all offer dozens of fanboy-proof arguments to defend their "sudden change of heart".
Just because you have to inject larva every 1 minute doesnt mean you have right to call all terran wins before patch "free ride". Suddenly game changed from 1a bioball to 1a banelings with uncounterable mutalisks.
Mutalisks are not uncounterable. Players are just showing really BAD anti muta micro. The huge reluctance of Terrans to build a few more turrets and to TERRIBLE stim timing of some of the GSL contenders make Mutas look OP. Give it a little more time, and some Terran will show everyone how to defend mutas. IF mutas are OP, all that would need to change is to lower the turret cost by a tiny bit
Nice try. You cant lower turret cost because they are also detectors.
And most important: Zerg almost never have to build spore crawlers why should terran be dependant on immobile anti air defense ? By your logic how should terran move his army out of base ?
Zerg never build spore crawlers because queens do a better job and serve other functions. Compare that to how a single repaired missile turret can hold off the inital wave of 7 mutas with ease. The missile turret out DPSes the spore crawler easily.
This.
Also Zerg often relies on spine crawlers which cost a drone whereas Terran just makes an essentially free bunker.
Terran has cheap and amazingly effective turrets as well as a t1 unit which counters mutas very well and a t2.5 (comes out at Zerg tier 2) that demolishes them in the thor. The turrets for Terrans are great but they have other options. When Z puts spore crawlers up its because there is no other solution. It costs us a drone and minerals, we aren't going to do it unless it is absolutely necessary.
I had a Terran today tell me that scvs being targettable while building was horrible. The fact is as Zerg I instantly lose the drone.
Thors doesnt counter mutalisks that well because of magic box and countering mutas with marines is like paper against rock when is raining a LOT(banelings).
Yes scvs being targettable is worse then loosing drone. Why ? Because you might loose drone but enemy cant stop building process. But when you kill scv it stops building process and delay your whole plan.
On October 31 2010 13:01 MrProphylactic wrote: In one of the recent streams Day9 said that the problem isn't in the fact that Zerg was buffed a bit but that Terran now has less openings (or none) with which he can pressure the Zerg early on and stop him from getting a macro advantage and from there on it's an uphill battle. Which is true, Terran needs to pressure Zerg early in some way just as much as Zerg needs an extra base from the get go. It's not the Zerg buff that's the issue here, it's the supply depot-rax change.
On the other hand Zerg players have the benefit of keeping the same gamestyle they had before but not having to worry about early pressure.
Yup. There is no early pressure from T now and when they get to mid-game, it practically becomes an auto-win for Zerg
Problem is that all terrans early pressure methods are kind of cheesy, as they rely on zerg not corresponding correctly. Sure terran has some different ways of harassing, which for a long time has made it difficult for zerg to react accordingly, but lately the zerg has learned to deal with the harass, and combined with patch changes, therefore has an advantage in this MU? I really dont think that any stable openings can be explored by terran in this MU, and in the future this MU will get any worse, as zergs will make fewer and fewer mistakes.
On October 31 2010 05:52 apmspam wrote: yea, terran has been nerfed into nothing, the seige tank is cost-ineffective. I agree with boxer, but ive already switched to zerg myself, following the likes the TLO, kawaiirice
You mean all the players who used to have a free ride with terran painfully realized they weren't as good as their OP race lead them to believe ?
Funny how certain players are always hyped no matter what happens, even when their race switch ends up in them getting completely steamrolled by players they used to beat by 1a-ing their bioball heh ?
As much as I hate the guy you gotta give IdrA or Fruit points for sticking to their guns while the others hop on the bandwagon.
Yeah yeah of course I'm sure they can all offer dozens of fanboy-proof arguments to defend their "sudden change of heart".
Just because you have to inject larva every 1 minute doesnt mean you have right to call all terran wins before patch "free ride". Suddenly game changed from 1a bioball to 1a banelings with uncounterable mutalisks.
Mutalisks are not uncounterable. Players are just showing really BAD anti muta micro. The huge reluctance of Terrans to build a few more turrets and to TERRIBLE stim timing of some of the GSL contenders make Mutas look OP. Give it a little more time, and some Terran will show everyone how to defend mutas. IF mutas are OP, all that would need to change is to lower the turret cost by a tiny bit
Nice try. You cant lower turret cost because they are also detectors.
And most important: Zerg almost never have to build spore crawlers why should terran be dependant on immobile anti air defense ? By your logic how should terran move his army out of base ?
Zerg never build spore crawlers because queens do a better job and serve other functions. Compare that to how a single repaired missile turret can hold off the inital wave of 7 mutas with ease. The missile turret out DPSes the spore crawler easily.
In large numbers mutalisks one-shot turrets or atleast kill them too fast before you can even try to repair them.
I admit, your right in this regard. I don't play Terran so I don't know what Terran can do now that early harass is much less effective.
But compared to the previous patch, Zerg's journey to actually start attacking by getting to tier 2 isn't a horrible journey for survival while Terran happily techs up and kills you with 2 cloaked banshees.
1 strategy that still works pretty well for Terran though, is delaying expo with a ebay at the natural. Terran then 1 rax FE-ed and followed up with a marine tank timing push before baneling speed was up.
On October 31 2010 05:52 apmspam wrote: yea, terran has been nerfed into nothing, the seige tank is cost-ineffective. I agree with boxer, but ive already switched to zerg myself, following the likes the TLO, kawaiirice
You mean all the players who used to have a free ride with terran painfully realized they weren't as good as their OP race lead them to believe ?
Funny how certain players are always hyped no matter what happens, even when their race switch ends up in them getting completely steamrolled by players they used to beat by 1a-ing their bioball heh ?
As much as I hate the guy you gotta give IdrA or Fruit points for sticking to their guns while the others hop on the bandwagon.
Yeah yeah of course I'm sure they can all offer dozens of fanboy-proof arguments to defend their "sudden change of heart".
Just because you have to inject larva every 1 minute doesnt mean you have right to call all terran wins before patch "free ride". Suddenly game changed from 1a bioball to 1a banelings with uncounterable mutalisks.
Mutalisks are not uncounterable. Players are just showing really BAD anti muta micro. The huge reluctance of Terrans to build a few more turrets and to TERRIBLE stim timing of some of the GSL contenders make Mutas look OP. Give it a little more time, and some Terran will show everyone how to defend mutas. IF mutas are OP, all that would need to change is to lower the turret cost by a tiny bit
Nice try. You cant lower turret cost because they are also detectors.
And most important: Zerg almost never have to build spore crawlers why should terran be dependant on immobile anti air defense ? By your logic how should terran move his army out of base ?
Zerg never build spore crawlers because queens do a better job and serve other functions. Compare that to how a single repaired missile turret can hold off the inital wave of 7 mutas with ease. The missile turret out DPSes the spore crawler easily.
This.
Also Zerg often relies on spine crawlers which cost a drone whereas Terran just makes an essentially free bunker.
Terran has cheap and amazingly effective turrets as well as a t1 unit which counters mutas very well and a t2.5 (comes out at Zerg tier 2) that demolishes them in the thor. The turrets for Terrans are great but they have other options. When Z puts spore crawlers up its because there is no other solution. It costs us a drone and minerals, we aren't going to do it unless it is absolutely necessary.
I had a Terran today tell me that scvs being targettable while building was horrible. The fact is as Zerg I instantly lose the drone.
So much wrong with this analysis. It ranges from just not understanding terran to being intellectually dishonest about the advantages and disadvantages of the races. Let me go point by point.
1. Spine crawlers suck, bunkers are awesome.
First, I'm tired of all this "but the bunker is free!" crap ... not only from zerg but from gold level terrans. If you spend time making a bunker, that's time a guy isn't mining. This is called an "opportunity cost" and that's not recoupable. It's probably around 50 minerals. Also, if you buy a bunker, the 100 minerals you spend is less valuable to you later, on assuming you salvage. The notion of net present value or the "time value of money" can be used here but, for people who have no idea what a financial concept is, suffice to say that SC2 is a game of limited resources. If I make X, I can't make Y (whether Y be a unit or a number of units). Y at 5 minutes is more valuable than Y at 8 minutes. For example, just for the sake of simplicity, assume Y = 2 SCVs. Even if I make them later, I still lose all 3 minutes of mining time. I can't get that back from salvage. Third, STOP ASSUMING WE CAN SALVAGE THE BUNKER. Just because we can, theoretically, salvage it doesn't mean we can always salvage it. I'd use examples but if you don't understand the difference between a theoretical opportunity and a probabilistic opportunity, I fear for our species.
Even if you fail to consider/understand the ramifications of point 1 & 2, point 3 tells us that, if we ignore the concept of time, the cost of a bunker is:
100 x *probability of salvage
Oh, also, a bunker is useless without units ... this increases the cost. The "cost" of the units used for the bunker is complicated mathematically, because it's predicated on in game events, but it's neither 0 nor the total cost of the units. So, basically, terran gets to spend 100 minerals on an empty box and have idiots think the cost is 0. Go go good team. I'd much rather have access to a photon cannon equivalent. A bunker is nowhere close to free. It's true cost is disguised in a way that seems to confuse a simple minded player.
2. Thors counter mutas very well.
This is actually a true statement ... if the zerg is terrible. Magic box "micro" is barely a step above 1a. I don't think Boxer is matching up against a bunch of silver leaguers.
3. Zerg needs these advantages because they lose their drone.
lkdjsflkdsajflkasjdflsdafjlsfajdf. The fact that zerg loses its drone is compensated for in the cheaper buildings, faster expansions and no need for a dozen production buildings. Blizzard did not overlook the fact that each race has a different opportunity cost for basic building (i.e., protoss being cheapest, zerg being most expensive). In fact, one could even say, the entire game is built around the relative capacities of the initial units. That being said, the terran who complained about the scv thing is an idiot.
I see a lot of little things that terran players can do better, like keeping 1-2 SCVs along with the army to repair any mech units while they are idle. In fact I've seen a number of games on youtube where 1 SCV with the army would have made a game changing difference, especially since it's zero management(SCVs repair without telling them to).
I also see many cases where the terran army is one big blob of units, usually with frantic micro during fights, where a different approach would be more optimal(i.e. 2 pronged attack, diversion, feint etc). I'm no pro player but I am great at observing and planning.
Overall I haven't been disappointed by any of the three races(<3 warp prism), only by the game engine and often times sluggish controls. That and the single player campaign was total bullshit shortness.
Boxer never said anything about imbalance in sc1. I agree fullheartedly with him, even though I don't have problem against zerg when I play a FE build. However, certain maps make FE a flawed build (shakuras,blistering , any map with a wide natural because roach mass is effective)
I honestly think putting roach range back to the fair range would possibly fix the entire current imbalance. If boxer and nada say Z is imbalanced its true no doubts they don't make excuses unless its realistic.
On October 31 2010 13:01 MrProphylactic wrote: On the other hand Zerg players have the benefit of keeping the same gamestyle they had before but not having to worry about early pressure.
Yup. There is no early pressure from T now and when they get to mid-game, it practically becomes an auto-win for Zerg
-.- I guess if it makes you feel better about losing to Z's, keep thinking that they're getting these free 'auto-wins' instead of simply outplaying you. ZvT is nowhere near broken and far better than it was a couple of months ago.
On October 31 2010 05:52 apmspam wrote: yea, terran has been nerfed into nothing, the seige tank is cost-ineffective. I agree with boxer, but ive already switched to zerg myself, following the likes the TLO, kawaiirice
You mean all the players who used to have a free ride with terran painfully realized they weren't as good as their OP race lead them to believe ?
Funny how certain players are always hyped no matter what happens, even when their race switch ends up in them getting completely steamrolled by players they used to beat by 1a-ing their bioball heh ?
As much as I hate the guy you gotta give IdrA or Fruit points for sticking to their guns while the others hop on the bandwagon.
Yeah yeah of course I'm sure they can all offer dozens of fanboy-proof arguments to defend their "sudden change of heart".
Just because you have to inject larva every 1 minute doesnt mean you have right to call all terran wins before patch "free ride". Suddenly game changed from 1a bioball to 1a banelings with uncounterable mutalisks.
Agree. Terran has to constantly check every 17 seconds for worker production too, if they want to they can queue 2 and check every 34 second compared to zerg 40 second, you can't queue too many because that will sacrifice your economy. You can argue that Terran has easier way to check (press 5 and see if your cc is building scv or not), but the point is, if you remember that you have to do it, you can do it. It doesn't matter if Terran has to click 5 S S, or Zerg has to click on the queen and V the lair. If you don't remember it, don't QQ, blame it on yourself. I'm tired of diamond Zerg who have only 60 apm and constantly QQ about everything.
On October 31 2010 05:52 apmspam wrote: yea, terran has been nerfed into nothing, the seige tank is cost-ineffective. I agree with boxer, but ive already switched to zerg myself, following the likes the TLO, kawaiirice
You mean all the players who used to have a free ride with terran painfully realized they weren't as good as their OP race lead them to believe ?
Funny how certain players are always hyped no matter what happens, even when their race switch ends up in them getting completely steamrolled by players they used to beat by 1a-ing their bioball heh ?
As much as I hate the guy you gotta give IdrA or Fruit points for sticking to their guns while the others hop on the bandwagon.
Yeah yeah of course I'm sure they can all offer dozens of fanboy-proof arguments to defend their "sudden change of heart".
Just because you have to inject larva every 1 minute doesnt mean you have right to call all terran wins before patch "free ride". Suddenly game changed from 1a bioball to 1a banelings with uncounterable mutalisks.
Agree. Terran has to constantly check every 17 seconds for worker production too, if they want to they can queue 2 and check every 34 second compared to zerg 40 second, you can't queue too many because that will sacrifice your economy. You can argue that Terran has easier way to check (press 5 and see if your cc is building scv or not), but the point is, if you remember that you have to do it, you can do it. It doesn't matter if Terran has to click 5 S S, or Zerg has to click on the queen and V the lair. If you don't remember it, don't QQ, blame it on yourself. I'm tired of diamond Zerg who have only 60 apm and constantly QQ about everything.
I agree, I can't see how players find the larva mechanic hard. To me it's just like making scv's constantly. It's just something you do, wich you wont forgot. Ok, in a fight I might botch is sometimes.
the biggest problem is that zerg has now free expo and terran has almost no way to punish it, all zerg needs to do is make expo, 2 spine crawlers, couple of roaches and then mass mutas contain terran on 2 bases and just write gg, its just insane that such a fast unit can harass non-stop, its not dangerous for zerg to harass with mutas at all tho, they can even fight toe to toe with marines and even thors (especially muta baneling a-move style), its really annoying losing 99% games this way, lets sum it up, zerg is broken atm What boxer/nada say should be taken as dogma !
On October 31 2010 18:16 nukestrikeOWNZ wrote: the biggest problem is that zerg has now free expo and terran has almost no way to punish it, all zerg needs to do is make expo, 2 spine crawlers, couple of roaches and then mass mutas contain terran on 2 bases and just write gg,
Sadly, that is the standard Zerg strat because there is no risk for Zerg to FE.
On October 31 2010 05:52 apmspam wrote: yea, terran has been nerfed into nothing, the seige tank is cost-ineffective. I agree with boxer, but ive already switched to zerg myself, following the likes the TLO, kawaiirice
You mean all the players who used to have a free ride with terran painfully realized they weren't as good as their OP race lead them to believe ?
Funny how certain players are always hyped no matter what happens, even when their race switch ends up in them getting completely steamrolled by players they used to beat by 1a-ing their bioball heh ?
As much as I hate the guy you gotta give IdrA or Fruit points for sticking to their guns while the others hop on the bandwagon.
Yeah yeah of course I'm sure they can all offer dozens of fanboy-proof arguments to defend their "sudden change of heart".
Just because you have to inject larva every 1 minute doesnt mean you have right to call all terran wins before patch "free ride". Suddenly game changed from 1a bioball to 1a banelings with uncounterable mutalisks.
Mutalisks are not uncounterable. Players are just showing really BAD anti muta micro. The huge reluctance of Terrans to build a few more turrets and to TERRIBLE stim timing of some of the GSL contenders make Mutas look OP. Give it a little more time, and some Terran will show everyone how to defend mutas. IF mutas are OP, all that would need to change is to lower the turret cost by a tiny bit
Nice try. You cant lower turret cost because they are also detectors.
And most important: Zerg almost never have to build spore crawlers why should terran be dependant on immobile anti air defense ? By your logic how should terran move his army out of base ?
You ever even watched a pro BW TvZ? Jesus... When people come with suggestions as to what might be wrong with the approach there is always someone who puts on the designer hat and says "It shouldnt be that way!"
Just fucking deal with it and _MAKE IT WORK_.
BoxeR changed his bloody race in BW because of how the reaver got nerfed btw. Scarabs could suddenly miss which implemented randomness to the terrible terrible damage the reaver dealt. At this time the Terran dropship got a movement buff and BoxeR changed his race and applied his awesomeness to Terran instead. Nothing wrong with this since back then it had to do with style and his own values, but this time he QQs and I think it sucks... It does not fit his image at all, and it hurts the community when top players do this QQing - the swinging in opinions are fucking horrible :s Do it behind the scene only imo, and if there is something wrong then the communication you have with blizzard will help the games development into beeing more balanced without having the community go into rage everytime..
I've been wondering why Terrans doesnt just do more 15CC and move out with a huge tank/marine army before mutas gets to big or banelingspeed is done. And as soon as Terrans incorporate more Ravens into their play, their lategame will be much stronger. Scout during depot and you will have time to wall off with a late rax if it's some early cheese coming. a 14/15 hatch can't stop a 15 CC.
Zerg 14 can 14hatch then suddenly burst 10larvas worth of zerglings/roaches and run over you instead of droning.
You can't do the same because your weakass earlygame marines pop out every 25 seconds per barracks(you'll have what? 2 rax and if you're lucky a non-addon factory at this stage?) not counting the 25/50 second addon count.
On October 31 2010 19:24 klauz619 wrote: You can't 15 CC safely in SC2.
Zerg 14 can 14hatch then suddenly burst 10larvas worth of zerglings/roaches and run over you instead of droning.
You can't do the same because your weakass earlygame marines pop out every 25 seconds per barracks(you'll have what? 2 rax and if you're lucky a non-addon factory at this stage?) not counting the 25/50 second addon count.
yep its broken, every zerg knows it but some wont admit it
You can't buff Terran lategame because Terran doesn't have a lategame. Even the BC, their hardest to get unit, is far quicker and cheaper to get than broodlords/ultras/carriers etc. Everything else is unlocked so fast you can do ~7 minute timing pushes with them. Pushes which most certainly cannot be allowed to be any stronger.
Terran teching speed needs to be drastically nerfed, then you can buff their later units.
On October 31 2010 19:53 Yaotzin wrote: You can't buff Terran lategame because Terran doesn't have a lategame. Even the BC, their hardest to get unit, is far quicker and cheaper to get than broodlords/ultras/carriers etc. Everything else is unlocked so fast you can do ~7 minute timing pushes with them. Pushes which most certainly cannot be allowed to be any stronger.
Terran teching speed needs to be drastically nerfed, then you can buff their later units.
It wouldn't be bad to increase armory/fusion core time if it meant thors weren't an oversized slow marine and BCs aren't completely useless.
You have to lower armory upgrades to compensate though.
On October 31 2010 19:24 klauz619 wrote: You can't 15 CC safely in SC2.
Zerg 14 can 14hatch then suddenly burst 10larvas worth of zerglings/roaches and run over you instead of droning.
You can't do the same because your weakass earlygame marines pop out every 25 seconds per barracks(you'll have what? 2 rax and if you're lucky a non-addon factory at this stage?) not counting the 25/50 second addon count.
pretty sure Day9 was flamed and bashed when he did "macro oriented TvP". People posted on forums "oh my god he's losing his mind" "colossus is a must to defend rax push"
Few weeks later most protoss user start to sneak expand and pros like nexgenius do 1 gate into expand.
On October 31 2010 19:53 Yaotzin wrote: You can't buff Terran lategame because Terran doesn't have a lategame. Even the BC, their hardest to get unit, is far quicker and cheaper to get than broodlords/ultras/carriers etc. Everything else is unlocked so fast you can do ~7 minute timing pushes with them. Pushes which most certainly cannot be allowed to be any stronger.
Terran teching speed needs to be drastically nerfed, then you can buff their later units.
It wouldn't be bad to increase armory/fusion core time if it meant thors weren't an oversized slow marine and BCs aren't completely useless.
You have to lower armory upgrades to compensate though.
It's not just armory/fusion core tho. Addon swapping, the cheapness of the tech lab, and the lack of more buildings like the fusion core (unit unlockers, there basically just to slow down tech), results in hyperspeed Terran teching. This forces all the units to be similar in strength, because there's no compensating factor to tech rushing for Terran (Z&P has time [spire, dark shrine being the worst offenders], and of course huge costs).
eta: incidentally this is also what caused the "Terran has too many early game options" problem. Imagine if Protoss could rush you with any of their entire friggin tech tree within 7 minutes? But of course they can't because it takes an eternity and 2 arms and a leg to get half their units out.
On October 31 2010 19:53 Yaotzin wrote: You can't buff Terran lategame because Terran doesn't have a lategame. Even the BC, their hardest to get unit, is far quicker and cheaper to get than broodlords/ultras/carriers etc. Everything else is unlocked so fast you can do ~7 minute timing pushes with them. Pushes which most certainly cannot be allowed to be any stronger.
Terran teching speed needs to be drastically nerfed, then you can buff their later units.
It wouldn't be bad to increase armory/fusion core time if it meant thors weren't an oversized slow marine and BCs aren't completely useless.
You have to lower armory upgrades to compensate though.
It's not just armory/fusion core tho. Addon swapping, the cheapness of the tech lab, and the lack of more buildings like the fusion core (unit unlockers, there basically just to slow down tech), results in hyperspeed Terran teching. This forces all the units to be similar in strength, because there's no compensating factor to tech rushing for Terran (Z&P has time [spire, dark shrine being the worst offenders], and of course huge costs).
Terrans tech fast thanks to labs and early build tech.
Their unit production speed is complete garbage though, they can't spam units so fast like protoss/zerg.
Make addons longer/more expensive and you will see 4 gating protoss have a 40 supply army vs terran's 15-20 with standard build.
On October 31 2010 19:24 klauz619 wrote: You can't 15 CC safely in SC2.
Zerg 14 can 14hatch then suddenly burst 10larvas worth of zerglings/roaches and run over you instead of droning.
You can't do the same because your weakass earlygame marines pop out every 25 seconds per barracks(you'll have what? 2 rax and if you're lucky a non-addon factory at this stage?) not counting the 25/50 second addon count.
pretty sure Day9 was flamed and bashed when he did "macro oriented TvP". People posted on forums "oh my god he's losing his mind" "colossus is a must to defend rax push"
Few weeks later most protoss user start to sneak expand and pros like nexgenius do 1 gate into expand.
Yea, it's really fun to observe. I'm doing 15 CC into standard Marine/Tank Push into 3- or 4-base Thor Lategame vs. 1900-2100 Zergs every game and I'm winning roughly 40-50% I would say Postpatch. Sometimes I lose to early aggression, but I would always say it's my own fault and not a BO-loss. Bunkers are damn strong against early aggression, the only BO I never won against with 15 CC against hatch before pool is 2-base baneling all-in (I think 3 hatch, not sure) without lair. That's HARD to stop, because he has so much gas and so many banelings before you have more than 1 or 2 tanks, but I think it's not impossible if you scout it early. But I don't fear mass speedling/roach with 15CC at all. 1-base baneling is also just as easy to deal with as with a normal 12 Rax build.
But actually I haven't played that much yet, so my games are no reliable data, especially as I suck. But 15 CC is far from being useless against Zerg.
On October 31 2010 19:24 klauz619 wrote: You can't 15 CC safely in SC2.
Zerg 14 can 14hatch then suddenly burst 10larvas worth of zerglings/roaches and run over you instead of droning.
You can't do the same because your weakass earlygame marines pop out every 25 seconds per barracks(you'll have what? 2 rax and if you're lucky a non-addon factory at this stage?) not counting the 25/50 second addon count.
Can you atleast try to argue a point? It's not like you suddenly have a roachwarren and zerglings and queens while the command center is making. Your barracks will complete just after the spawningpool and you wont have enough initial lings to kill the terran, you need the extra larvae and you need to wait for roachwarren. You think Terran has absolutly nothing at home at the point when the roaches flood in? Remember that if you have already hatched you will be starved for money to even bust out those roaches and terran proceedes to add raxes while he pump marines bunkers up and techs.
I dont see why it shouldnt work on pretty much all maps vs 14hatch. Reason why I think 15 CC would be even stronger than a 1 rax expand for example is because you will expload faster and have a stronger and maybe even earlier timing push.
On October 31 2010 19:53 Yaotzin wrote: You can't buff Terran lategame because Terran doesn't have a lategame. Even the BC, their hardest to get unit, is far quicker and cheaper to get than broodlords/ultras/carriers etc. Everything else is unlocked so fast you can do ~7 minute timing pushes with them. Pushes which most certainly cannot be allowed to be any stronger.
Terran teching speed needs to be drastically nerfed, then you can buff their later units.
It wouldn't be bad to increase armory/fusion core time if it meant thors weren't an oversized slow marine and BCs aren't completely useless.
You have to lower armory upgrades to compensate though.
It's not just armory/fusion core tho. Addon swapping, the cheapness of the tech lab, and the lack of more buildings like the fusion core (unit unlockers, there basically just to slow down tech), results in hyperspeed Terran teching. This forces all the units to be similar in strength, because there's no compensating factor to tech rushing for Terran (Z&P has time [spire, dark shrine being the worst offenders], and of course huge costs).
Terrans tech fast thanks to labs and early build tech.
Their unit production speed is complete garbage though, they can't spam units so fast like protoss/zerg.
Make addons longer/more expensive and you will see 4 gating protoss have a 40 supply army vs terran's 15-20 with standard build.
Not sure how it would affect the usual bio openings? A bit yeah, but they only make 1-2 tech labs anyway. If it's an issue give something else to compensate. It has to be done so they can have a normal tech progression into strong units. There's no other way to make something like BCs good, because in the current system Terran would just rush to them and never look back. The only reason people don't rush straight to carriers/ultras etc and make them constantly is because they cost so friggin much to get to.
On October 31 2010 19:24 klauz619 wrote: You can't 15 CC safely in SC2.
Zerg 14 can 14hatch then suddenly burst 10larvas worth of zerglings/roaches and run over you instead of droning.
You can't do the same because your weakass earlygame marines pop out every 25 seconds per barracks(you'll have what? 2 rax and if you're lucky a non-addon factory at this stage?) not counting the 25/50 second addon count.
Can you atleas try to argue a point. It's not like you suddenly have a roachwarren and zerglings and queens while the command center is making. Your barracks will complete just after the spawningpool and you wont have enough initial lings to kill the terran, you need the extra larvae and you need to wait for roachwarren. You think Terran has absolutly nothing at home at the point when the roaches flood in? Remember that if you have already hatched you will be starved for money to even bust out those roaches and terran proceedes to add raxes while he pump marines bunkers up and techs.
I dont see why it shouldnt work on pretty much all maps vs 14hatch. Reason why I think 15 CC would be even stronger than a 1 rax expand for example is because you will expload faster and have a stronger and maybe even earlier timing push.
14 hatch vs 14 cc pool + rax finishes. 1 rax makes a tech lab - 25 seconds, roach warren is making, queens are being made, droning as usual. Marauder 1 pops out , roach warren is finished. Terran makes 2nd barracks, queen is larva spawning 2 hatcheries. Marauder 2 and 3 pop out as spawn larva effect is over. 10-14 larvas are now being made into roaches, will reach terran base in 1 minute. 2nd rax is making reactor. 1 minute has passed, reactor finished, 3 marines pop out from rax1. 10-14 larva worth of roaches/lings in front of terran base against a 2marauder/3marine army.
The good thing about zerg is they can just spam units in bursts much faster than either races as long as money permits it. Which is why lategame zerg, not counting auto-win ultralisk vs terran army, can just replenish their entire army within a minute, while terran cannot.
On October 31 2010 19:24 klauz619 wrote: You can't 15 CC safely in SC2.
Zerg 14 can 14hatch then suddenly burst 10larvas worth of zerglings/roaches and run over you instead of droning.
You can't do the same because your weakass earlygame marines pop out every 25 seconds per barracks(you'll have what? 2 rax and if you're lucky a non-addon factory at this stage?) not counting the 25/50 second addon count.
Can you atleas try to argue a point. It's not like you suddenly have a roachwarren and zerglings and queens while the command center is making. Your barracks will complete just after the spawningpool and you wont have enough initial lings to kill the terran, you need the extra larvae and you need to wait for roachwarren. You think Terran has absolutly nothing at home at the point when the roaches flood in? Remember that if you have already hatched you will be starved for money to even bust out those roaches and terran proceedes to add raxes while he pump marines bunkers up and techs.
I dont see why it shouldnt work on pretty much all maps vs 14hatch. Reason why I think 15 CC would be even stronger than a 1 rax expand for example is because you will expload faster and have a stronger and maybe even earlier timing push.
14 hatch vs 14 cc pool + rax finishes. 1 rax makes a tech lab - 25 seconds, roach warren is making, queens are being made, droning as usual. Marauder 1 pops out , roach warren is finished. Terran makes 2nd barracks, queen is larva spawning 2 hatcheries. Marauder 2 and 3 pop out as spawn larva effect is over. 10-14 larvas are now being made into roaches, will reach terran base in 1 minute. 2nd rax is making reactor. 1 minute has passed, reactor finished, 3 marines pop out from rax1. 10-14 larva worth of roaches/lings in front of terran base against a 2marauder/3marine army.
The good thing about zerg is they can just spam units in bursts much faster than either races as long as money permits it. Which is why lategame zerg, not counting auto-win ultralisk vs terran army, can just replenish their entire army within a minute, while terran cannot.
10-14 Larva of roaches is around 750-1000 mins and 250-350 gas worth of roaches. I really don't see how it's possible to have that many resources so early. Discussing openings is fine, but please don't use absurd numbers to justify any conclusions.
A more likely situation is one that factors in both queens costs, no droning and around 100-150 gas.
On October 31 2010 19:24 klauz619 wrote: You can't 15 CC safely in SC2.
Zerg 14 can 14hatch then suddenly burst 10larvas worth of zerglings/roaches and run over you instead of droning.
You can't do the same because your weakass earlygame marines pop out every 25 seconds per barracks(you'll have what? 2 rax and if you're lucky a non-addon factory at this stage?) not counting the 25/50 second addon count.
Can you atleas try to argue a point. It's not like you suddenly have a roachwarren and zerglings and queens while the command center is making. Your barracks will complete just after the spawningpool and you wont have enough initial lings to kill the terran, you need the extra larvae and you need to wait for roachwarren. You think Terran has absolutly nothing at home at the point when the roaches flood in? Remember that if you have already hatched you will be starved for money to even bust out those roaches and terran proceedes to add raxes while he pump marines bunkers up and techs.
I dont see why it shouldnt work on pretty much all maps vs 14hatch. Reason why I think 15 CC would be even stronger than a 1 rax expand for example is because you will expload faster and have a stronger and maybe even earlier timing push.
14 hatch vs 14 cc pool + rax finishes. 1 rax makes a tech lab - 25 seconds, roach warren is making, queens are being made, droning as usual. Marauder 1 pops out , roach warren is finished. Terran makes 2nd barracks, queen is larva spawning 2 hatcheries. Marauder 2 and 3 pop out as spawn larva effect is over. 10-14 larvas are now being made into roaches, will reach terran base in 1 minute. 2nd rax is making reactor. 1 minute has passed, reactor finished, 3 marines pop out from rax1. 10-14 larva worth of roaches/lings in front of terran base against a 2marauder/3marine army.
The good thing about zerg is they can just spam units in bursts much faster than either races as long as money permits it. Which is why lategame zerg, not counting auto-win ultralisk vs terran army, can just replenish their entire army within a minute, while terran cannot.
Throw an ebay before zerg FEs and delay the hatch. Now zerg can make a max of 7 units at one go.
Put those 2 marauders in a well placed bunker and they can hold off a lot of roaches. Once your army is big enough just salvage and get back those bunkers. If the zerg doesn't do enough damage with these 7 roaches he's gonna be pretty far behind econ wise.
On October 31 2010 19:24 klauz619 wrote: You can't 15 CC safely in SC2.
Zerg 14 can 14hatch then suddenly burst 10larvas worth of zerglings/roaches and run over you instead of droning.
You can't do the same because your weakass earlygame marines pop out every 25 seconds per barracks(you'll have what? 2 rax and if you're lucky a non-addon factory at this stage?) not counting the 25/50 second addon count.
Can you atleas try to argue a point. It's not like you suddenly have a roachwarren and zerglings and queens while the command center is making. Your barracks will complete just after the spawningpool and you wont have enough initial lings to kill the terran, you need the extra larvae and you need to wait for roachwarren. You think Terran has absolutly nothing at home at the point when the roaches flood in? Remember that if you have already hatched you will be starved for money to even bust out those roaches and terran proceedes to add raxes while he pump marines bunkers up and techs.
I dont see why it shouldnt work on pretty much all maps vs 14hatch. Reason why I think 15 CC would be even stronger than a 1 rax expand for example is because you will expload faster and have a stronger and maybe even earlier timing push.
14 hatch vs 14 cc pool + rax finishes. 1 rax makes a tech lab - 25 seconds, roach warren is making, queens are being made, droning as usual. Marauder 1 pops out , roach warren is finished. Terran makes 2nd barracks, queen is larva spawning 2 hatcheries. Marauder 2 and 3 pop out as spawn larva effect is over. 10-14 larvas are now being made into roaches, will reach terran base in 1 minute. 2nd rax is making reactor. 1 minute has passed, reactor finished, 3 marines pop out from rax1. 10-14 larva worth of roaches/lings in front of terran base against a 2marauder/3marine army.
The good thing about zerg is they can just spam units in bursts much faster than either races as long as money permits it. Which is why lategame zerg, not counting auto-win ultralisk vs terran army, can just replenish their entire army within a minute, while terran cannot.
10-14 Larva of roaches is around 750-1000 mins and 250-350 gas worth of roaches. I really don't see how it's possible to have that many resources so early. Discussing openings is fine, but please don't use absurd numbers to justify any conclusions.
A more likely situation is one that factors in both queens costs, no droning and around 100-150 gas.
A half assed saturated 2 basing zerg has over 1000mineral income 1600 when fully saturated, 1 geyser is 100gas a minute.
while the roach warren is building(like 50 seconds) you are not really making anything other than a few drones, when that warren is finished building you can spike 1000/200+ resources into roaches.
Put those 2 marauders in a well placed bunker and they can hold off a lot of roaches.
7-12 roaches can gib a nat bunker in 2 volleys, they're not very good if not placed in a choke or have siege support.
On October 31 2010 19:24 klauz619 wrote: You can't 15 CC safely in SC2.
Zerg 14 can 14hatch then suddenly burst 10larvas worth of zerglings/roaches and run over you instead of droning.
You can't do the same because your weakass earlygame marines pop out every 25 seconds per barracks(you'll have what? 2 rax and if you're lucky a non-addon factory at this stage?) not counting the 25/50 second addon count.
Can you atleas try to argue a point. It's not like you suddenly have a roachwarren and zerglings and queens while the command center is making. Your barracks will complete just after the spawningpool and you wont have enough initial lings to kill the terran, you need the extra larvae and you need to wait for roachwarren. You think Terran has absolutly nothing at home at the point when the roaches flood in? Remember that if you have already hatched you will be starved for money to even bust out those roaches and terran proceedes to add raxes while he pump marines bunkers up and techs.
I dont see why it shouldnt work on pretty much all maps vs 14hatch. Reason why I think 15 CC would be even stronger than a 1 rax expand for example is because you will expload faster and have a stronger and maybe even earlier timing push.
14 hatch vs 14 cc pool + rax finishes. 1 rax makes a tech lab - 25 seconds, roach warren is making, queens are being made, droning as usual. Marauder 1 pops out , roach warren is finished. Terran makes 2nd barracks, queen is larva spawning 2 hatcheries. Marauder 2 and 3 pop out as spawn larva effect is over. 10-14 larvas are now being made into roaches, will reach terran base in 1 minute. 2nd rax is making reactor. 1 minute has passed, reactor finished, 3 marines pop out from rax1. 10-14 larva worth of roaches/lings in front of terran base against a 2marauder/3marine army.
The good thing about zerg is they can just spam units in bursts much faster than either races as long as money permits it. Which is why lategame zerg, not counting auto-win ultralisk vs terran army, can just replenish their entire army within a minute, while terran cannot.
You are assuming that a fast expanding terran rushes to get marauders and reactors. You cant get the gas to support that while also adding raxes which means you WILL be low on units. Don't make silly assumptions...
Just make rines, and add raxes, and bunkers, scout, respond and you're fine. If you see the roaches coming, just add more bunkers repair + profit. A zerg with no income will die within the next 5 mins.
And for the love of god - you wont get 10-14 larvaes worth of roaches at that point with a grand total of 12 drones both mining gas and minerals, because sorry to say, you cant make both drones and units from those larvae you think you've saved up to kill the Terran.
I mean Toss can 15Nexus and add cannons as seen fit. I'm not saying it cant be broken but if you devote to all roach you're very very all in - just add cannons and pull probes. The same logic should be able to be applied to Terran, but with marines and bunkers.
On October 31 2010 19:24 klauz619 wrote: You can't 15 CC safely in SC2.
Zerg 14 can 14hatch then suddenly burst 10larvas worth of zerglings/roaches and run over you instead of droning.
You can't do the same because your weakass earlygame marines pop out every 25 seconds per barracks(you'll have what? 2 rax and if you're lucky a non-addon factory at this stage?) not counting the 25/50 second addon count.
Can you atleas try to argue a point. It's not like you suddenly have a roachwarren and zerglings and queens while the command center is making. Your barracks will complete just after the spawningpool and you wont have enough initial lings to kill the terran, you need the extra larvae and you need to wait for roachwarren. You think Terran has absolutly nothing at home at the point when the roaches flood in? Remember that if you have already hatched you will be starved for money to even bust out those roaches and terran proceedes to add raxes while he pump marines bunkers up and techs.
I dont see why it shouldnt work on pretty much all maps vs 14hatch. Reason why I think 15 CC would be even stronger than a 1 rax expand for example is because you will expload faster and have a stronger and maybe even earlier timing push.
14 hatch vs 14 cc pool + rax finishes. 1 rax makes a tech lab - 25 seconds, roach warren is making, queens are being made, droning as usual. Marauder 1 pops out , roach warren is finished. Terran makes 2nd barracks, queen is larva spawning 2 hatcheries. Marauder 2 and 3 pop out as spawn larva effect is over. 10-14 larvas are now being made into roaches, will reach terran base in 1 minute. 2nd rax is making reactor. 1 minute has passed, reactor finished, 3 marines pop out from rax1. 10-14 larva worth of roaches/lings in front of terran base against a 2marauder/3marine army.
The good thing about zerg is they can just spam units in bursts much faster than either races as long as money permits it. Which is why lategame zerg, not counting auto-win ultralisk vs terran army, can just replenish their entire army within a minute, while terran cannot.
10-14 Larva of roaches is around 750-1000 mins and 250-350 gas worth of roaches. I really don't see how it's possible to have that many resources so early. Discussing openings is fine, but please don't use absurd numbers to justify any conclusions.
A more likely situation is one that factors in both queens costs, no droning and around 100-150 gas.
A half assed saturated 2 basing zerg has over 1000mineral income 1600 when fully saturated, 1 geyser is 100gas a minute.
while the roach warren is building(like 50 seconds) you are not really making anything other than a few drones, when that warren is finished building you can spike 1000/200+ resources into roaches.
Put those 2 marauders in a well placed bunker and they can hold off a lot of roaches.
7-12 roaches can gib a nat bunker in 2 volleys, they're not very good if not placed in a choke or have siege support.
If you're making up numbers at least put in some fake replays so it's not completely obvious you're making that stuff up as long as nobody is watching it. But your way to go 15 CC says everything about you. There is no worse way to go 15 CC than going TECH LAB + REACTOR after CC. What the hell, you will lose your just finished natural against 6 zerglings man. A proper way to do 15 CC is 15 CC -> 2 Rax -> immediate Bunker -> 2-3 gas, depending on what the zerg is doing you can go for another rax or factories, it's pretty dynamic after that. Bunkered marines are really good against roaches btw, you just need to be careful to repair early enough. Gas is pretty much a no go until you have 5-6 marines with 1 or 2 bunkers if there is a chance that zerg wants to put early aggression.
There is no way anyone should respond to this in a serious way without you giving us a replay. But your way to go 15 CC just made me lol, thanks for that.
I think this thread is the epitome of the sc2 forums state
Why? 1. BoxeR 2.BoxeR says he is having a hard time playing TvZ and if he doesn´t find a solution or a patch doesn´t come out he might switch to random 3.BoxeR gets bashed for 19 pages by people with no merits or any value whatsoever in the world of e-sports - Shit like: " Yeah he was good in BW but knows shit of SC2"+ Show Spoiler +
ro8 in GSL2, has probably the best TvT we´ve seen so far
" I´ve lost all respect, he just QQs. zerg imba and shit" + Show Spoiler +
fact; BoxeR has nothing more in his life than e-sports, he is 30+ has no education, would literally have nothing else he can do. Also he has made more comebacks in his career than anyone, started big proteams & Airforce Ace, promoted for e-sports more than anyone you could name. Then you start thinking how much shit he must´ve gone through doing all this while keeping always his cool and natural appearance. He still shows pretty much no ego and keeps his feet to the ground...always, always thankful for his fans. What would he be if he had QQ´d even once in his career ?
TL mods and banlings are great and SC2 forums cause them a ton of work but still it starts to resemble 4chan more than TL. The reason why I think TL is the best e-community ever is not only due to mod staff but also to the common poster. Here (SC2) people post like they have more merits and knowledge than actual progamers. I hope people would realize that even if you are anonymous in the internet you can still keep some humility or atleast pretend you have some. The arrogance is infuriating.
You generalize this thread way to much, though I agree with some of what you're saying.
I personally respect BoxeR more than any other progamer besides Jaedong, but I get frustrated and annoyed when he outright QQs in official interviews. I've said why I feel that way already, and I just can't belive how people can bow down and think that everything he says would be law when it comes to a game that is 3 months old. Sure he has feelings and ideas and frustration, like all players, but he shouldnt cry about it in interviews.
On October 31 2010 Kyuki wrote: You generalize this thread way to much, though I agree with some of what you're saying.
I personally respect BoxeR more than any other progamer besides Jaedong, but I get frustrated and annoyed when he outright QQs in official interviews. I've said why I feel that way already, and I just can't belive how people can bow down and think that everything he says would be law when it comes to a game that is 3 months old. Sure he has feelings and ideas and frustration, like all players, but he shouldnt cry about it in interviews.
Meh.
Your not getting frustrated becouse hes QQing in a offical interview, your getting frustrated becouse you play Zerg and think your better then you actually are. Wonder what u posted in Dimaga's Threads and on idra's Rants about Terran prepatch.
IMO the metagame as of now is roughly even. We have just seen the fake BoxeR beat Fruit dealer in the GSL. FRUIT DEALER is by no means a bad zerg. Just because your previous strategies do not work with the current patch, it does not mean the game is imbalanced or that Terran is UP. It means only that you have to change your playstyle to suit the patch. We saw a LOT of aggressiveness out of fake boxer which has won him many a game in the GSL, I think this patch is going to force terran to be more aggressive and inspire less turtling as it has previously been hated for.
The imbalance of TvZ is evident to anyone with half a braincell, that includes Blizzard developers... Zerg users at this point should be outlining ways to fix the imbalance, not deluding themselves and trying in vain to deceive others in threads like this. The changes will be coming sooner than you think.
On October 31 2010 22:19 GQz wrote: IMO the metagame as of now is roughly even. We have just seen the fake BoxeR beat Fruit dealer in the GSL. FRUIT DEALER is by no means a bad zerg. Just because your previous strategies do not work with the current patch, it does not mean the game is imbalanced or that Terran is UP. It means only that you have to change your playstyle to suit the patch. We saw a LOT of aggressiveness out of fake boxer which has won him many a game in the GSL, I think this patch is going to force terran to be more aggressive and inspire less turtling as it has previously been hated for.
GQz, you may very well be right in your conclusion, but the rationale is so bad. Don't use a singular pro game as evidence of balance.
If we did, then patches 1.1 and, definitely, 1.2 shouldn't have happened since a zerg won the most prestigious and competitive SC2 tournament so far before 1.2 even went into effect. (Btw, I'm saying this is a BAD way to argue. I am not suggesting that FD's win negated all the zerg QQ ... much of which, even as a terran, I believed to be justified).
Instead, focus on different parts of the game or units. IMO, the supply depot change coupled with terran immobility provide a degree of difficulty for terrans that ensure when two equally skilled competitors meet (at the top level ... at a level like, gold, I believe zerg is more complicated) the zerg has an advantage. Not that the zerg will win every time, just that he has an advantage that is not attributable to his analysis, strategic or tactical awareness, apm or other "skill".
As a 1500 diamond random player who is fairly consistent across all 3 races, I have seen the rise and fall of the terran OP zerg UP debate, and now the tables are reversing. Honestly I think boxer is justified in his comments, note he said 'if terran are nerfed AGAIN' meaning he is not completely dissatisfied with their current stance in the game, but any further nerfs will tip the scales towards the P/Z side of things. I completely agree with him. Zerg has become much easier to play due to their roach buff and the removal of many strategies they had to account for against terrans. Now many terrans are left scratching their head at what to do; truth is many terrans thought they were better than they truly were, because lets face it: massing rax and kiting mmm isn't the toughest thing to do. Now that a lot of their early pressure openings are gone, they're choking to think of new things to do.
It has become much more difficult for terran to defeat zerg, but this is all relative: prior to the patching, rolling over an equally-skilled (key word: skill, as in, apm/game sense etc) zerg was a breeze. Now I believe it is a fairly balanced match-up.
The biggest imbalance in the game as far as I can see is the tvp mu. P just crushes T at high levels in games that go beyond 10 minutes. Note that when I say biggest imbalance, I don't mean its grossly imba: generally the better player in tvp will emerge victorious.
Over-all I'd estimate that the game is in a pretty good state of balance, the most imba situations being 55-45 when both players are of equal skill. Honestly, this is a pretty good state for an RTS that's only been out for 3 months.
Problem is, with the high publicity of SC2 and the huge influx of gamers who have had little experience with BW 1 year beyond its release, they are having to learn the lessons that all of the BW vets learned long-ago: When you lose, 99% of the time it's not the game's fault, it's your own. With all of the babying that the game does for you (mbs, unlimited unit selection, almost 2x income rate per base relative to bw), it's easy to become lazy and 1a move your army and just expect to win...any bw vet can tell you through many many agonizing losses that you need meticulous control over your army and good decision making if you hope to succeed.
On October 31 2010 Kyuki wrote: You generalize this thread way to much, though I agree with some of what you're saying.
I personally respect BoxeR more than any other progamer besides Jaedong, but I get frustrated and annoyed when he outright QQs in official interviews. I've said why I feel that way already, and I just can't belive how people can bow down and think that everything he says would be law when it comes to a game that is 3 months old. Sure he has feelings and ideas and frustration, like all players, but he shouldnt cry about it in interviews.
Meh.
Your not getting frustrated becouse hes QQing in a offical interview, your getting frustrated becouse you play Zerg and think your better then you actually are. Wonder what u posted in Dimaga's Threads and on idra's Rants about Terran prepatch.
Everything boxer says should be law...
You shouldnt be worth my time, but you should really try to read the posts you jump on before you go there. You should actually look up my posts in those threads (atleast dimagas) and then bite your tounge!
Punk.. Edit: Stupid of me to resort to name calling. I apologize about that.
Terrans are just too used to turtling up. A vast majority of the complaints from terrans (in this thread alone) is that "you have no viable early strategy".
Even with the patch Terran units are still incredibly cost effective. Don't bother denying it when 5 marines & 1 medivac can down 5 mutas for 1/3 of the cost and 3 marauders can take on 10 roaches if micro'ed correctly.
A simple way to force a Zerg into submission is to
1) open with 5-6 marines, forcing the zerg to make zerglings since he wont' have the money to make roaches by then. 2) Meanwhile, pump out 4 hellions while building a starport. Hellion drop the back of the zerg base and fry 10 drones, pushing the zerg to make roaches. 3) While the drop is happening, make 4 vikings and as soon as the drop is foiled/pushed back go 2-shot overlords.
He won't have nearly enough money nor time to tech to mutas, you'll just have to push with a few marauders & hellions to secure a win.
It sounds easier said than done but should you pull it correctly you'll win 9 games out of 10, especially against a fast expanding zerg since you'll force him to spend all his cash on units a) useless for the next wave and b) not drones !
On October 31 2010 21:53 HwangjaeTerran wrote: I think this thread is the epitome of the sc2 forums state
Why? 1. BoxeR 2.BoxeR says he is having a hard time playing TvZ and if he doesn´t find a solution or a patch doesn´t come out he might switch to random 3.BoxeR gets bashed for 19 pages by people with no merits or any value whatsoever in the world of e-sports - Shit like: " Yeah he was good in BW but knows shit of SC2"+ Show Spoiler +
ro8 in GSL2, has probably the best TvT we´ve seen so far
" I´ve lost all respect, he just QQs. zerg imba and shit" + Show Spoiler +
fact; BoxeR has nothing more in his life than e-sports, he is 30+ has no education, would literally have nothing else he can do. Also he has made more comebacks in his career than anyone, started big proteams & Airforce Ace, promoted for e-sports more than anyone you could name. Then you start thinking how much shit he must´ve gone through doing all this while keeping always his cool and natural appearance. He still shows pretty much no ego and keeps his feet to the ground...always, always thankful for his fans. What would he be if he had QQ´d even once in his career ?
TL mods and banlings are great and SC2 forums cause them a ton of work but still it starts to resemble 4chan more than TL. The reason why I think TL is the best e-community ever is not only due to mod staff but also to the common poster. Here (SC2) people post like they have more merits and knowledge than actual progamers. I hope people would realize that even if you are anonymous in the internet you can still keep some humility or atleast pretend you have some. The arrogance is infuriating.
first of all i agree with what your are saying 100%, but i have to point out that no one should be immune to critizism, not even BoxeR, NaDa ect
but ofc if you gonna critize someone(that are that good) it should be well thought out and not as you put it "4chan trolling"
On October 31 2010 21:53 HwangjaeTerran wrote: I think this thread is the epitome of the sc2 forums state
Why? 1. BoxeR 2.BoxeR says he is having a hard time playing TvZ and if he doesn´t find a solution or a patch doesn´t come out he might switch to random 3.BoxeR gets bashed for 19 pages by people with no merits or any value whatsoever in the world of e-sports - Shit like: " Yeah he was good in BW but knows shit of SC2"+ Show Spoiler +
ro8 in GSL2, has probably the best TvT we´ve seen so far
" I´ve lost all respect, he just QQs. zerg imba and shit" + Show Spoiler +
fact; BoxeR has nothing more in his life than e-sports, he is 30+ has no education, would literally have nothing else he can do. Also he has made more comebacks in his career than anyone, started big proteams & Airforce Ace, promoted for e-sports more than anyone you could name. Then you start thinking how much shit he must´ve gone through doing all this while keeping always his cool and natural appearance. He still shows pretty much no ego and keeps his feet to the ground...always, always thankful for his fans. What would he be if he had QQ´d even once in his career ?
TL mods and banlings are great and SC2 forums cause them a ton of work but still it starts to resemble 4chan more than TL. The reason why I think TL is the best e-community ever is not only due to mod staff but also to the common poster. Here (SC2) people post like they have more merits and knowledge than actual progamers. I hope people would realize that even if you are anonymous in the internet you can still keep some humility or atleast pretend you have some. The arrogance is infuriating.
Sure Boxer is having trouble with other races, but is this the reason to tell blizzard they can't balance the game? I remember in other interview said something like "I don't like direction blizzard balancing goes because they want to balance team games"
First of all, I don't care if your emperor, Fruitdealer, Idra or someone else - you SHOULD NEVER say Blizzard doesn't know how to balance game because first of all your just playing 1v1 and only one race and you don't know what the hell is going on outside that. On top of that Blizzard has the numbers for their balance - you do not.
Finally, I really don't like people attitude to balancing game in team games. If team games reaches the point where 90% of people doing mass reaper/mass speedling in team games and have over 70% success rate actions need to be taken. We all play starcraft competitively, but let's not forget there are many other people who want to enjoy the game beyond 1v1.
On November 01 2010 01:05 AyJay wrote:We all play starcraft competitively, but let's not forget there are many other people who want to enjoy the game beyond 1v1.
There are such things as priorities, though.
There is nothing unreasonable in the sentiment that 1v1 mustn't suffer due to attempts to balance team games. Since 1v1 and team games happen to share the same units and mechanics, obviously the balancing needs of 1v1 should take absolute precedence over team games.
There's also the fact that team games are largely unexplored because they aren't taken seriously enough and played competitively at a sufficiently high level. Most of problems that people experience in team games aren't due to any sort of imbalance, but due to players not exploiting all the dynamics and possibilities that team games have.
-
To make this more on topic: I resent the BoxeR bashing comments as much as most people do, but IMO players should refrain from publicly commenting balance issues and pressuring Blizzard into changing things sooner than it becomes obvious that the changes are needed.
Let's be honest here, people play this game for money - they will welcome any changes that benefit the race they play, and frown upon any changes that don't. Perfect game balance isn't their ultimate goal (and there's no reason why it should be). Their ultimate goal is to be more successful, and if part of that depends on the game balance and balance changes, they will want the changes to be made in their favor.
On the other hand, perfect game balance is Blizzard's goal. As far as game design is concerned, I find it a lot more logical to put faith in actual game developers.
I can't be sure, but it really seems to me that to solution to TvZ is to keep up with them in economy. Put up an early expansion while the zerg army is too small to attack you (bunker or whatever if need be)... in other words play it like BW. For some reason in SC2 every terran wants to 1-base vs zerg on 2 bases and can't figure out why they're losing.
Look at Nada's recent TvZ, he just wouldn't let Z get an econ advantage. He overpowered the zerg by keeping up in supply (which means terran has the advantage).
The anti-Boxer sentiment really confuses me though, I can't figure out where that's coming from. Remember the last guy to complain about how broken his race is and how he's going to have to switch? It was Fruitdealer, and he won the GSL and everyone is a huge fan of his. Somehow Boxer isn't allowed to comment on balance though?
My guess is that Boxer's introduction to the SC2 fans was via losses to Idra and Fruitdealer, while Fruitdealer's debut was nothing but stomping his opponents. So I'm guessing people see the complaints as coming from a low-tier player who doesn't really know the game or something (a laughable concept).
I suppose that people also let you get away with complaints when it's clear to everyone a race is underpowered. When there are 2 zergs in the top 16, you can get away with calling zerg weak. When there are 4 terrans in the top 8, maybe not so much.
On October 31 2010 21:53 HwangjaeTerran wrote: I think this thread is the epitome of the sc2 forums state
Why? 1. BoxeR 2.BoxeR says he is having a hard time playing TvZ and if he doesn´t find a solution or a patch doesn´t come out he might switch to random 3.BoxeR gets bashed for 19 pages by people with no merits or any value whatsoever in the world of e-sports - Shit like: " Yeah he was good in BW but knows shit of SC2"+ Show Spoiler +
ro8 in GSL2, has probably the best TvT we´ve seen so far
" I´ve lost all respect, he just QQs. zerg imba and shit" + Show Spoiler +
fact; BoxeR has nothing more in his life than e-sports, he is 30+ has no education, would literally have nothing else he can do. Also he has made more comebacks in his career than anyone, started big proteams & Airforce Ace, promoted for e-sports more than anyone you could name. Then you start thinking how much shit he must´ve gone through doing all this while keeping always his cool and natural appearance. He still shows pretty much no ego and keeps his feet to the ground...always, always thankful for his fans. What would he be if he had QQ´d even once in his career ?
TL mods and banlings are great and SC2 forums cause them a ton of work but still it starts to resemble 4chan more than TL. The reason why I think TL is the best e-community ever is not only due to mod staff but also to the common poster. Here (SC2) people post like they have more merits and knowledge than actual progamers. I hope people would realize that even if you are anonymous in the internet you can still keep some humility or atleast pretend you have some. The arrogance is infuriating.
Sure Boxer is having trouble with other races, but is this the reason to tell blizzard they can't balance the game? I remember in other interview said something like "I don't like direction blizzard balancing goes because they want to balance team games"
First of all, I don't care if your emperor, Fruitdealer, Idra or someone else - you SHOULD NEVER say Blizzard doesn't know how to balance game because first of all your just playing 1v1 and only one race and you don't know what the hell is going on outside that. On top of that Blizzard has the numbers for their balance - you do not.
Finally, I really don't like people attitude to balancing game in team games. If team games reaches the point where 90% of people doing mass reaper/mass speedling in team games and have over 70% success rate actions need to be taken. We all play starcraft competitively, but let's not forget there are many other people who want to enjoy the game beyond 1v1.
If you try to balance a game around too many modes you end up with WoW PvP : a complete failure of balance.
Not gonna say anything about whether Progamers should be involved in balancing of game. I am not qualified for that. But I do wanna point out that the latest VoidRay nerf was based on MakaPrime's findings. He played Protoss and submitted replay with clear explanation of why VRs OP.
It kinda makes me sad, he is top terran player and cares only about his race. I remember him shamelessly crushing a zerg in GSL 1 with 5 rax reaper, which everyone agreed to be OP (on release version of SC2). He didn't submit replay that time eventhough imbalance was pretty obvious. I lost any kind of respect for him.
Terrans are not losing very hard against P or Z. And balance is debatable. But look, protoss players don't cry eventhough they suffer alot more from roach buff than Terrans. Imbalance of TvZ was very evident and IdrA/Dimaga had solid argument to whine. Its to early to say Z>T now, terrans have so many undiscovered potential.
On October 31 2010 21:53 HwangjaeTerran wrote: I think this thread is the epitome of the sc2 forums state
Why? 1. BoxeR 2.BoxeR says he is having a hard time playing TvZ and if he doesn´t find a solution or a patch doesn´t come out he might switch to random 3.BoxeR gets bashed for 19 pages by people with no merits or any value whatsoever in the world of e-sports - Shit like: " Yeah he was good in BW but knows shit of SC2"+ Show Spoiler +
ro8 in GSL2, has probably the best TvT we´ve seen so far
" I´ve lost all respect, he just QQs. zerg imba and shit" + Show Spoiler +
fact; BoxeR has nothing more in his life than e-sports, he is 30+ has no education, would literally have nothing else he can do. Also he has made more comebacks in his career than anyone, started big proteams & Airforce Ace, promoted for e-sports more than anyone you could name. Then you start thinking how much shit he must´ve gone through doing all this while keeping always his cool and natural appearance. He still shows pretty much no ego and keeps his feet to the ground...always, always thankful for his fans. What would he be if he had QQ´d even once in his career ?
TL mods and banlings are great and SC2 forums cause them a ton of work but still it starts to resemble 4chan more than TL. The reason why I think TL is the best e-community ever is not only due to mod staff but also to the common poster. Here (SC2) people post like they have more merits and knowledge than actual progamers. I hope people would realize that even if you are anonymous in the internet you can still keep some humility or atleast pretend you have some. The arrogance is infuriating.
Sure Boxer is having trouble with other races, but is this the reason to tell blizzard they can't balance the game? I remember in other interview said something like "I don't like direction blizzard balancing goes because they want to balance team games"
First of all, I don't care if your emperor, Fruitdealer, Idra or someone else - you SHOULD NEVER say Blizzard doesn't know how to balance game because first of all your just playing 1v1 and only one race and you don't know what the hell is going on outside that. On top of that Blizzard has the numbers for their balance - you do not.
Finally, I really don't like people attitude to balancing game in team games. If team games reaches the point where 90% of people doing mass reaper/mass speedling in team games and have over 70% success rate actions need to be taken. We all play starcraft competitively, but let's not forget there are many other people who want to enjoy the game beyond 1v1.
You know how Blizz had time to sink into executing facebook integration, but not putting together chat channels? I'd say that's evidence of skewed priorities, to say the least. Same goes for their attitude towards teamgames. Until proven otherwise, blizz is doing some pretty insane things in the name of 2v2 balance. Care to argue that the reaper nerfs were justified?
And please don't disrespect Fruitdealer, Idra or the Empreror. It's safe to say they all know a great deal about the game and could very well understand the game better than the developers. That's why Blizzard asks for progamer input. You've got a lot of nerve saying shit like that.
Terrans are not losing very hard against P or Z. And balance is debatable. But look, protoss players don't cry eventhough they suffer alot more from roach buff than Terrans. Imbalance of TvZ was very evident and IdrA/Dimaga had solid argument to whine. Its to early to say Z>T now, terrans have so many undiscovered potential.
yea;
its been barely a month since the last patch? just gotta let it ride out a bit no? man i hope im not way off on that.
roaches do scare me more now as a terran but i mean; we gotta be honest, zergs needed that buff. its not a matter of want; it was a need.
Terrans are not losing very hard against P or Z. And balance is debatable. But look, protoss players don't cry eventhough they suffer alot more from roach buff than Terrans. Imbalance of TvZ was very evident and IdrA/Dimaga had solid argument to whine. Its to early to say Z>T now, terrans have so many undiscovered potential.
yea;
its been barely a month since the last patch? just gotta let it ride out a bit no? man i hope im not way off on that.
roaches do scare me more now as a terran but i mean; we gotta be honest, zergs needed that buff. its not a matter of want; it was a need.
Lol. No. Terran were only ahead in the respect of harassment. Zerg hate harassment because it's detremental to the type of game zerg like to play... zerg like a game where they don't get harassed and they can beat their opponent by having a superior economy. Zerg were being beaten down in the most frustrating way possible and that's why they were complaining. Honestly though, look at the average points for players in diamond league: http://sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all Protoss: 942 Terran: 939 Zerg: + Show Spoiler +
1023
It was like this before patch too, but the difference was half that.
Blizzard's balance is pretty shoddy this time round. Reapers were a very good answer to banelings, but now there is only a small timing window in which they can be used. It's not very fun, having a unit that is only usable to get a FE in response to a FE and are worthless once mutas are out. The change was horrible, plain horrible, and any imbalances in team games stem from the fact that allied bases aren't located together and the ramps are not standard 1v1 width.
On November 01 2010 02:20 TERRANLOL wrote: Honestly though, look at the average points for players in diamond league: http://sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all Protoss: 942 Terran: 939 Zerg: 1023
It was like this before patch too, but the difference was half that.
It never occured to you that it could have been due to zerg players having to improve & adapt faster than other races ?
Zerg players were already struggling like crazy, playing a completely blind game against Terrans "lol hellion+marauders 1a win" or Protoss that could essentially "lol void ray rush 1a win".
I played Terran before and switched to Zerg during the imba days to see if their arguments were valid... And they were ! It was practically unplayable against any half-assed terran, if not downright impossible against competent terran players.
While most of the Ts remained more or less on the same skill level (the matchup having been so easy), a vast number of zerg players drastically improved in a very short timeframe. Zs actually HAD to learn from their mistakes while Terrans (Protoss on a minor scale) didn't really need to because there was little if no punishment at all for making mistakes.
This specifically affected pro-gaming level as well as evidenced by the number of games where "favorite" terran players are now getting STEAMROLLED by players they used to think were of equal skill level while in reality they were quite higher.
Now that the patch has more or less balanced things out (And it doesn't affect ZvT that much either, the most to suffer from it are protoss), most of the terran players are fighting Zerg & Protoss opponents that easily have twice their skill level.
On November 01 2010 02:20 TERRANLOL wrote: Honestly though, look at the average points for players in diamond league: http://sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all Protoss: 942 Terran: 939 Zerg: 1023
It was like this before patch too, but the difference was half that.
It never occured to you that it could have been due to zerg players having to improve & adapt faster than other races ?
Zerg players were already struggling like crazy, playing a completely blind game against Terrans "lol hellion+marauders 1a win" or Protoss that could essentially "lol void ray rush 1a win".
I played Terran before and switched to Zerg during the imba days to see if their arguments were valid... And they were ! It was practically unplayable against any half-assed terran, if not downright impossible against competent terran players.
While most of the Ts remained more or less on the same skill level (the matchup having been so easy), a vast number of zerg players drastically improved in a very short timeframe. Zs actually HAD to learn from their mistakes while Terrans (Protoss on a minor scale) didn't really need to because there was little if no punishment at all for making mistakes.
This specifically affected pro-gaming level as well as evidenced by the number of games where "favorite" terran players are now getting STEAMROLLED by players they used to think were of equal skill level while in reality they were quite higher.
Now that the patch has more or less balanced things out (And it doesn't affect ZvT that much either, the most to suffer from it are protoss), most of the terran players are fighting Zerg & Protoss opponents that easily have twice their skill level.
Strange, I'm playing zerg now and I find it about 10x easier than Terran. I found protoss the easiest to play, but capping my skill level - I'm not into playing perfect games even if it's easier to do than the other races. I think most zerg QQing don't understand their most basic mechanic that makes their race powerful - larvae, which is why I always hear weird things like they can't defend against reaper rushes, and hellions 1a to victory (build units - any units!). I arbitrarily choose Terran and Zerg now on the ladder, and when I choose Terran and my opponent is zerg I beat them most of them time. You know why? They didn't build any units. The funny thing is, they should have twice the economy as me if they're being that greedy, yet half the time they just aren't spending their money. It makes me wonder how they got ranked so high (1600 diamond) if they don't have the basics down.
On October 31 2010 21:53 HwangjaeTerran wrote: I think this thread is the epitome of the sc2 forums state
Why? 1. BoxeR 2.BoxeR says he is having a hard time playing TvZ and if he doesn´t find a solution or a patch doesn´t come out he might switch to random 3.BoxeR gets bashed for 19 pages by people with no merits or any value whatsoever in the world of e-sports - Shit like: " Yeah he was good in BW but knows shit of SC2"+ Show Spoiler +
ro8 in GSL2, has probably the best TvT we´ve seen so far
" I´ve lost all respect, he just QQs. zerg imba and shit" + Show Spoiler +
fact; BoxeR has nothing more in his life than e-sports, he is 30+ has no education, would literally have nothing else he can do. Also he has made more comebacks in his career than anyone, started big proteams & Airforce Ace, promoted for e-sports more than anyone you could name. Then you start thinking how much shit he must´ve gone through doing all this while keeping always his cool and natural appearance. He still shows pretty much no ego and keeps his feet to the ground...always, always thankful for his fans. What would he be if he had QQ´d even once in his career ?
TL mods and banlings are great and SC2 forums cause them a ton of work but still it starts to resemble 4chan more than TL. The reason why I think TL is the best e-community ever is not only due to mod staff but also to the common poster. Here (SC2) people post like they have more merits and knowledge than actual progamers. I hope people would realize that even if you are anonymous in the internet you can still keep some humility or atleast pretend you have some. The arrogance is infuriating.
Sure Boxer is having trouble with other races, but is this the reason to tell blizzard they can't balance the game? I remember in other interview said something like "I don't like direction blizzard balancing goes because they want to balance team games"
First of all, I don't care if your emperor, Fruitdealer, Idra or someone else - you SHOULD NEVER say Blizzard doesn't know how to balance game because first of all your just playing 1v1 and only one race and you don't know what the hell is going on outside that. On top of that Blizzard has the numbers for their balance - you do not.
Finally, I really don't like people attitude to balancing game in team games. If team games reaches the point where 90% of people doing mass reaper/mass speedling in team games and have over 70% success rate actions need to be taken. We all play starcraft competitively, but let's not forget there are many other people who want to enjoy the game beyond 1v1.
You know how Blizz had time to sink into executing facebook integration, but not putting together chat channels? I'd say that's evidence of skewed priorities, to say the least. Same goes for their attitude towards teamgames. Until proven otherwise, blizz is doing some pretty insane things in the name of 2v2 balance. Care to argue that the reaper nerfs were justified?
And please don't disrespect Fruitdealer, Idra or the Empreror. It's safe to say they all know a great deal about the game and could very well understand the game better than the developers. That's why Blizzard asks for progamer input. You've got a lot of nerve saying shit like that.
I'm not disrespecting those guys, but their attitude isn't justified. Yes Blizzard asks progamers about their opinion on game, but they also stated that most of the times that opinion can be biased.
Facebook implementation - you think it takes a lot more coding than chat channels?
Reapers - they aren't dead, I've seen them in use (although mass reaper is pretty dead). Sure they took huge hit and Blizzard agrees on that, but at the same time Terran had a lot of openings already. Protoss Carriers aren't seen in many pro games, but does that mean they are broken? Probably not. Good players will find strategies with tools they have, bad players will keep asking for buffs.
On October 31 2010 20:10 klauz619 wrote: Terrans tech fast thanks to labs and early build tech.
Their unit production speed is complete garbage though, they can't spam units so fast like protoss/zerg.
Make addons longer/more expensive and you will see 4 gating protoss have a 40 supply army vs terran's 15-20 with standard build.
What most players fail to realize is that Terran cannot MASS tech faster than the other races, because if you don't have enough tech labs to swap when going mass late units, you have to build another tech lab. Thus, Terran players have to build a Starport AND then another tech lab if they run out of tech labs to swap with. Compare this to Protoss who build ONE fleet beacon which applies to ALL subsequent stargates built - the same for Zerg with the Greater Spire.
I think something is broken if it's there in the tech tree and is never an option in most games.
The reaper in SC2 suffers from an immense problem - they have a time bomb ticking down on them. I agree, they were too strong early because of how they pigeonholed zerg into making only one thing early, but now not only are they useless in combat, their role is getting superseded by hellion drops which when done correctly don't lose you any gas.
The Carrier/BC/BL too. It all depends on the style of games, but unless at very high level, most games are short. Even tournaments don't showcase t3 units much. It's just hard to get an accurate statement on how good they are (they probably aren't) because there just isn't enough data on them. BCs weren't all that good even before the nerf because who actually got to make a handful of them? Just a gimmicky PDD+repair abuse rush unit. 2 base carriers were great fun to watch and are always viable. I wonder when we will see such a style of game happen again.
A lot of people say t3 shouldn't be autowin, like what T is saying about autoloss ultra pops. I really disagree on where the problem lies. The problem is that you are forced into combating such a dominant style of Z play that contains you and demands a specific composition to beat such that if ultras hit you simply lose. It's not a RACIAL imbalance, it's a GAMEFLOW imbalance. It would be fun to see t3 vs t3 after maybe 15-20 mins.
TLDR - I shouldn't have to choose only scissors to beat paper, I should be able to try fire, razor blades, teeth and claws...so that the game can progress further down the tech tree.
On October 31 2010 21:53 HwangjaeTerran wrote: I think this thread is the epitome of the sc2 forums state
Why? 1. BoxeR 2.BoxeR says he is having a hard time playing TvZ and if he doesn´t find a solution or a patch doesn´t come out he might switch to random 3.BoxeR gets bashed for 19 pages by people with no merits or any value whatsoever in the world of e-sports - Shit like: " Yeah he was good in BW but knows shit of SC2"+ Show Spoiler +
ro8 in GSL2, has probably the best TvT we´ve seen so far
" I´ve lost all respect, he just QQs. zerg imba and shit" + Show Spoiler +
fact; BoxeR has nothing more in his life than e-sports, he is 30+ has no education, would literally have nothing else he can do. Also he has made more comebacks in his career than anyone, started big proteams & Airforce Ace, promoted for e-sports more than anyone you could name. Then you start thinking how much shit he must´ve gone through doing all this while keeping always his cool and natural appearance. He still shows pretty much no ego and keeps his feet to the ground...always, always thankful for his fans. What would he be if he had QQ´d even once in his career ?
TL mods and banlings are great and SC2 forums cause them a ton of work but still it starts to resemble 4chan more than TL. The reason why I think TL is the best e-community ever is not only due to mod staff but also to the common poster. Here (SC2) people post like they have more merits and knowledge than actual progamers. I hope people would realize that even if you are anonymous in the internet you can still keep some humility or atleast pretend you have some. The arrogance is infuriating.
^^^ QFT
I would further add that for a 31 year old player with a slower APM compared to the other top pros, Boxer has to have better insight into SC2 to stay competitive with the younger & faster players. Thus, Boxer probably understands SC2 better than some of the other top pros and if he says there are balance issues, then there are balance issues.
On October 31 2010 Kyuki wrote: You generalize this thread way to much, though I agree with some of what you're saying.
I personally respect BoxeR more than any other progamer besides Jaedong, but I get frustrated and annoyed when he outright QQs in official interviews. I've said why I feel that way already, and I just can't belive how people can bow down and think that everything he says would be law when it comes to a game that is 3 months old. Sure he has feelings and ideas and frustration, like all players, but he shouldnt cry about it in interviews.
Meh.
Your not getting frustrated becouse hes QQing in a offical interview, your getting frustrated becouse you play Zerg and think your better then you actually are. Wonder what u posted in Dimaga's Threads and on idra's Rants about Terran prepatch.
Everything boxer says should be law...
LOL, Kyuki thinks he understands SC2 better than Boxer
On October 31 2010 20:10 klauz619 wrote: Terrans tech fast thanks to labs and early build tech.
Their unit production speed is complete garbage though, they can't spam units so fast like protoss/zerg.
Make addons longer/more expensive and you will see 4 gating protoss have a 40 supply army vs terran's 15-20 with standard build.
What most players fail to realize is that Terran cannot MASS tech faster than the other races, because if you don't have enough tech labs to swap when going mass late units, you have to build another tech lab. Thus, Terran players have to build a Starport AND then another tech lab if they run out of tech labs to swap with. Compare this to Protoss who build ONE fleet beacon which applies to ALL subsequent stargates built - the same for Zerg with the Greater Spire.
I get what you are trying to say but Protoss is a bad example. Fleet beacon is more like a fusion core, Templar archives is more like ghost academy (harder to get so not exact) and robo support bay is more like an armory. Obviously there are other differences between those buildings but Protoss are mostly in the same boat when it comes to increasing production capability. Warp gate mechanics change the dynamic a whole lot but in regards to structures you need to build they are similar.
Zerg has that awesome tech switching ability because of their hatcheries but upgrading a spire to a greater spire is more similar to building a fusion core or a fleet beacon than building the spire in the first place.
On November 01 2010 03:32 TeamSoliduss wrote: Now that the patch has more or less balanced things out (And it doesn't affect ZvT that much either, the most to suffer from it are protoss), most of the terran players are fighting Zerg & Protoss opponents that easily have twice their skill level.
ROFL. Are you saying the zerg players in GSL2 are twice the skill level of Nada in BW?
Name one zerg player in GSL2 that was twice the skill level of Nada in BW please or you just lost all credibility.
On October 31 2010 Kyuki wrote: You generalize this thread way to much, though I agree with some of what you're saying.
I personally respect BoxeR more than any other progamer besides Jaedong, but I get frustrated and annoyed when he outright QQs in official interviews. I've said why I feel that way already, and I just can't belive how people can bow down and think that everything he says would be law when it comes to a game that is 3 months old. Sure he has feelings and ideas and frustration, like all players, but he shouldnt cry about it in interviews.
Meh.
Your not getting frustrated becouse hes QQing in a offical interview, your getting frustrated becouse you play Zerg and think your better then you actually are. Wonder what u posted in Dimaga's Threads and on idra's Rants about Terran prepatch.
Everything boxer says should be law...
LOL, Kyuki thinks he understands SC2 better than Boxer
Just to add one thing, most people are saying that boxer is still new to sc2. But you forget that we discovered like one month ago that he not only plays the manofoneway account, but the slayers account too. He has more games played that most other pros on the kor ladder. At the very least he is not "inexperienced". edit : http://sc2ranks.com/kr/1531836/ManofOneway 900 games http://sc2ranks.com/kr/81719/SlayerS 1650 games
On November 01 2010 02:20 TERRANLOL wrote: Honestly though, look at the average points for players in diamond league: http://sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all Protoss: 942 Terran: 939 Zerg: 1023
It was like this before patch too, but the difference was half that.
It never occured to you that it could have been due to zerg players having to improve & adapt faster than other races ?
Maybe its the gamebalance that makes bad zergs beat better P/T users? seriously i didnt saw any improvement of any NA/EU Zerg, they play the same shit since beta and P/T were the 2 races that always improved and found new builds/timings. Zergs used 1hatch Queen builds (roach rush...) and started to FE during beta, then they started to mix bling busts and now they FE only. Yes they improved a lot, when sunkens were stronger they didnt build any lings and rushed to mutas, now they build at least sometimes a fighting unit while pumping drones like crazy.
On November 01 2010 04:48 StarcraftMan wrote: ROFL. Are you saying the zerg players in GSL2 are twice the skill level of Nada in BW?
Name one zerg player in GSL2 that was twice the skill level of Nada in BW please or you just lost all credibility.
Seems to me that the guy losing all credibility is the one comparing DIFFERENT GAMES.
Also, where did I say it applied to ALL PLAYERS ? Learn to read before trying to be a smartass.
On November 01 2010 05:03 AmstAff wrote: Maybe its the gamebalance that makes bad zergs beat better P/T users? seriously i didnt saw any improvement of any NA/EU Zerg, they play the same shit since beta and P/T were the 2 races that always improved and found new builds/timings.
Lol, yeah right. So when a notoriously overpowered race beats zergs it's because "you're all better players anyways" and when the nerfbat cracks your pseudo-skill in half it instantly becomes "imbalanced omg" ?
If you were such "awesome players" you'd still be winning by a considerable margin. Guess it's time to crash back to reality.
Seems to me some egos were hurt pretty badly by that patch.
On November 01 2010 01:31 bokeevboke wrote: Not gonna say anything about whether Progamers should be involved in balancing of game. I am not qualified for that. But I do wanna point out that the latest VoidRay nerf was based on MakaPrime's findings. He played Protoss and submitted replay with clear explanation of why VRs OP.
It kinda makes me sad, he is top terran player and cares only about his race. I remember him shamelessly crushing a zerg in GSL 1 with 5 rax reaper, which everyone agreed to be OP (on release version of SC2). He didn't submit replay that time eventhough imbalance was pretty obvious. I lost any kind of respect for him.
Terrans are not losing very hard against P or Z. And balance is debatable. But look, protoss players don't cry eventhough they suffer alot more from roach buff than Terrans. Imbalance of TvZ was very evident and IdrA/Dimaga had solid argument to whine. Its to early to say Z>T now, terrans have so many undiscovered potential.
I don't know. It is up to Blizzard to decide in the end what's imbalanced and needs to be changed. The higher we get in terms of skill the smaller the margin of error gets and here we find ourself with players who play hours upon hours against each other. In the state we are now I expect progamers to be frustrated. The same thing happens in Brood War but the focus there is mainly on maps. You still hear progamers complaining about maps and then there are players who somehow overcome map imbalance with ease.
With SC2 now you have this extra layer of a potential imbalance and because these players play and know that they play on the highest level it's no surprise to me that they complain about balance(changes).
Boxer's strongest point is his understanding of strategy. That is also the reason why he's already a top player. He knows how to practice and how to see the game behind the game, because he's been a progamer for 10 years! Instead of going "blabla he's just QQing" I for myself think "Well go on, try random then. Maybe it works out for the better?". I just dont get the sentiment that a player has to stick to "his" race for ever and ever. There might be a possibility that Boxer could be a better Protoss then Terran. iloveoov was a Zerg player and then switched to Terran when he went pro (thanks to Boxer finding him) only to revolutionise timing and macro later on.
I'm not saying Boxer is right or wrong. All I'm saying is I do understand when players get frustrated. But in the end it's Blizzard who makes the game.
On November 01 2010 05:21 StarcraftMan wrote: Good grief. You realize that the top SC2 players right now are practically ALL FROM BW? Again, you lose more credibility!
You couldn't answer my question because there is no Zerg player in GSL2 that is TWICE the skill level of Nada.
Again, learn to read. I never said it applied to everyone but to a decent amount of zerg players.
Not my problem if your feelings get hurt and you suffer nerd collapse the instant someone says something that could (not even actually does!) be mean to your e-idol.
Just because a lot of people are not categorized as "pro" by an ultra-minority of fanboys doesn't mean they don't have a clue about balance nor that their opinions are "less valid". Your argument that "they come from BW haha" is no more valid than the rest of your comments since these guys basically play 24/7/365. If you try long enough you can make a monkey play mozart, and no that's not an insult.
Trying to have the game balanced just by following the observations of people who play for money will result in the game becoming the most broken clusterfuck ever created. "pros" do NOT want the game to be balanced in any way. Well maybe the players do but the companies financing them and their handlers have zero interest in seeing a game played fair and square where each player is at 50-50 chance to win.
E-sports also have absolutely no chance of succeeding in the western world with people with your attitude around; it will only give more fodder to the media to portray professional gamers/those who gravitate around pro-gaming to be socially inapt insane nerds going off the d-band if you even mention the name of their cyber-idol the wrong way.
On November 01 2010 05:03 AmstAff wrote: Maybe its the gamebalance that makes bad zergs beat better P/T users? seriously i didnt saw any improvement of any NA/EU Zerg, they play the same shit since beta and P/T were the 2 races that always improved and found new builds/timings.
Lol, yeah right. So when a notoriously overpowered race beats zergs it's because "you're all better players anyways" and when the nerfbat cracks your pseudo-skill in half it instantly becomes "imbalanced omg" ?
If you were such "awesome players" you'd still be winning by a considerable margin. Guess it's time to crash back to reality.
Seems to me some egos were hurt pretty badly by that patch.
yes my ego got hurt badly, cause my winrate is still the same :D I always said that Terran is stronger than P or Z in the early game, but the longer the game goes the weaker Terran gets. I always said that the reason why so many T's are 1 base all-inning, is because everything with more bases becomes way harder for the Terran then for the Zerg. Why trying to get a macro game, if you will be behind anyway or will need way more skill than your opponent? No one said "we are better players", but its exactly what you are saying right now.
On November 01 2010 05:46 Kachna wrote: I dont really understand what do you mean by companies having "zero interest" of game being balanced. I usually criticize Blizzard a lot but they are atleast doing something to balance their games. Maybe you just meant they dont want to balance but they kinda have to.
Not blizzard............
Companies/Handlers shelling money to finance "pro gaming teams" have no interest to see the game balanced. The world being what it is, that money leverage can very well be exploited for players to bitch about "balance issues" meant solely to give them an advantage.
Less balance = more wins for player XYZ = more money for both the player and the company backing him up.
And if people think it can't happen you don't need to look that far back in history to see that gaming is no less crooked than other sports.
The best way to balance a game is when the pros give feedback to an objective moderator (i.e. Blizzard, in an ideal world), who balances the game. The problem is, and has always been, the general community. Every RTS game's balance turns to shit as soon as the developers start listening to general consensus. The worst possible thing a developer can do for game balance is listen to the non-pro community. I have seen so many games ruined this way.
Boxer's comment is completely in-line and acceptable. He wasn't even whining, he was just stating his opinion to an interviewer. At least he doesn't come on here, make posts/threads intentionally trying to involve the community (idrA/Artosis style) and turn them into an angry mob to force Blizzard to make bad changes out of fear of bad PR. That's how we get patches like 1.1.2.
There's nothing wrong with pros making statements about game balance as long as they do it rationally and don't try to get their sheep to go to war for them over it. That's when it gets really frustrating.
On November 01 2010 05:51 iEchoic wrote: The best way to balance a game is when the pros give feedback to an objective moderator (i.e. Blizzard, in an ideal world), who balances the game. The problem is, and has always been, the community. Every RTS game's balance turns to shit as soon as the developers start listening to general consensus and the community.
Boxer's comment is completely in-line and acceptable. He wasn't even whining, he was just stating his opinion to an interviewer. At least he doesn't come on here, make posts/threads intentionally trying to involve the community (idrA/Artosis style) and turn the community into an angry mob to force Blizzard to make bad changes out of fear of bad PR. That's how we get patches like 1.1.2.
now you will get the hate of all Zergs, cause everyone should now that IdrA and Artosis would never whine and are pro's and if they say Zerg is UP, ZERG IS UP! Who cares this noob called boxer, if you have the opinions of idra and artosis^^ I respect artosis for his work, but seriously he isn't interested in gamebalance (at least not as long as he still dreams to be a progamer).
You guys need to remember that these guys do this for a living.
I don't think, if we're honest here, that we could say that they'd even WANT a perfectly balanced game. Every single person who plays this game competitively is slightly race-biased. Everybody would like their race to have a little bit of an edge.
Hell, if you were playing for 85,000 dollars, wouldn't you like your race to be a little better than the others?
Not to say that's Boxer's intention here, but everyone is susceptible to getting frustrated with a matchup and blaming it on balance, especially when a game is this young and balance is so much up in the air.
This is just a single interview, maybe he was feeling frustrated and pissed off about his ZvT games as of late or something. Let's not all jump to conclusions.
On November 01 2010 09:51 checo wrote: If boxer says Terran is UP, Terran is UP... this is the man that bring SCBW Terran to be the dominat race whan it was consideret UP...
Exactly, he turned an UP Terran race into a viable race, when everybody else at the time thought Terran in BW was UP. Boxer would be the last Pro-Player to QQ over something minor but he recognizes there are significant balance issues in SC2 now.
On November 01 2010 09:11 Subversion wrote: You guys need to remember that these guys do this for a living.
I don't think, if we're honest here, that we could say that they'd even WANT a perfectly balanced game. Every single person who plays this game competitively is slightly race-biased. Everybody would like their race to have a little bit of an edge.
Hell, if you were playing for 85,000 dollars, wouldn't you like your race to be a little better than the others?
Not to say that's Boxer's intention here, but everyone is susceptible to getting frustrated with a matchup and blaming it on balance, especially when a game is this young and balance is so much up in the air.
This is just a single interview, maybe he was feeling frustrated and pissed off about his ZvT games as of late or something. Let's not all jump to conclusions.
THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I"VE BEEN SAYING. Boxer has reasons to say the stuff he's been saying. His career is on the line. Of course he wants people to think T isn't OP so that they would stop nerfing his race (that is directly connected to his job)
On November 01 2010 09:11 Subversion wrote: You guys need to remember that these guys do this for a living.
I don't think, if we're honest here, that we could say that they'd even WANT a perfectly balanced game. Every single person who plays this game competitively is slightly race-biased. Everybody would like their race to have a little bit of an edge.
Hell, if you were playing for 85,000 dollars, wouldn't you like your race to be a little better than the others?
Not to say that's Boxer's intention here, but everyone is susceptible to getting frustrated with a matchup and blaming it on balance, especially when a game is this young and balance is so much up in the air.
This is just a single interview, maybe he was feeling frustrated and pissed off about his ZvT games as of late or something. Let's not all jump to conclusions.
THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I"VE BEEN SAYING. Boxer has reasons to say the stuff he's been saying. His career is on the line. Of course he wants people to think T isn't OP so that they would stop nerfing his race (that is directly connected to his job)
Yeah except boxer has tons of money and probably doesn't need to work anymore, he just wants to do it for the prestige and because he loves the game.
And never mind the obvious TvZ imbalanced season 2 has shown (mvpvZenio, zerg having twice the wins and equaling terran in RO8 even if only like 15 of them were registered, invincible FE, etc).
On November 01 2010 16:00 klauz619 wrote: Yeah except boxer has tons of money and probably doesn't need to work anymore, he just wants to do it for the prestige and because he loves the game.
And never mind the obvious TvZ imbalanced season 2 has shown (mvpvZenio, zerg having twice the wins and equaling terran in RO8 even if only like 15 of them were registered, invincible FE, etc).
If gaming provided one with the possibility to stop working for good, it would be known.
Stop dreaming. He may have some in the bank but certainly not enough to live off for the rest of his life.
On November 01 2010 16:00 klauz619 wrote: Yeah except boxer has tons of money and probably doesn't need to work anymore, he just wants to do it for the prestige and because he loves the game.
And never mind the obvious TvZ imbalanced season 2 has shown (mvpvZenio, zerg having twice the wins and equaling terran in RO8 even if only like 15 of them were registered, invincible FE, etc).
If gaming provided one with the possibility to stop working for good, it would be known.
Stop dreaming. He may have some in the bank but certainly not enough to live off for the rest of his life.
He is one of the highest-paid professional gamers, with annual earnings that exceed $300,000 US Dollars and endorsement contracts that bring in an additional $90,000 per year.
From wiki. If true, he should be golden in Korea. Fo' life.
I fail to see how "terran is so weak lategame they are underpowered"... Hopetorture and FauxeR just Dominated. HopeTorture in particular, made NEXGenius look like a newb, even tho he had mass collosus/voidrays/etc.. He still couldnt stop the nexus sniping marauders which kills a nexus in 2 seconds, or the mass marauders even raping mass collosus..
Where is this terran lategame weakness? Cause I'd like to know.. and im sure all the GSL protoss players would like to know also, so they would stop getting dominated by terrans who attack-move marauders for 50 minutes.
On November 01 2010 05:51 iEchoic wrote: The best way to balance a game is when the pros give feedback to an objective moderator (i.e. Blizzard, in an ideal world), who balances the game. The problem is, and has always been, the general community. Every RTS game's balance turns to shit as soon as the developers start listening to general consensus. The worst possible thing a developer can do for game balance is listen to the non-pro community. I have seen so many games ruined this way.
No, they have to take into account many sources of information, which they do. The views of pros have their own problems, no least of which is they have a vested interest in claiming their race is weak.
There's nothing wrong with pros making statements about game balance as long as they do it rationally and don't try to get their sheep to go to war for them over it. That's when it gets really frustrating.
True. However BoxeR is obviously wrong, and there's nothing wrong with pointing that out either. The "shutup boxer is amazing you're just a noob" thing is asinine because pros disagree with each other all the time, so clearly many of them are full of it. In fact they usually disagree with each other as much as the general community does, so chances are everyones full of shit.
True. However BoxeR is obviously wrong, and there's nothing wrong with pointing that out either.
Obviously. There's no doubt about it.
The "shutup boxer is amazing you're just a noob" thing is asinine because pros disagree with each other all the time, so clearly many of them are full of it. In fact they usually disagree with each other as much as the general community does, so chances are everyones full of shit.
"BoxeR is obviously wrong" is way more asinine and down right wrong and biased then saying he's opinion should not be disputed. Compared to what some other progamers say in regards to balance Boxer is a saint.
And might i remind you that Nada stated: "terran now has to be on equal bases with Zerg to stand a chance in the mid, late game" , Nexgenius: "Protoss is the strongest race", TLO: "Zerg is slightly favored in ZvT" Jinro: "TvP is broken". These people do not have an "idra" type of reputation to just whine, so do not put all progamers in the same category.
Like Blizzard stated at Blizzcon, even if the win % is 50%50%, the fact that one race can only realistically win in the first 10-15minutes it is bad and imbalanced.
True. However BoxeR is obviously wrong, and there's nothing wrong with pointing that out either.
Obviously. There's no doubt about it.
Yes. Terran is over-represented in tournaments at every stage. What more do you want?
And might i remind you that Nada stated: "terran now has to be on equal bases with Zerg to stand a chance in the mid, late game" , Nexgenius: "Protoss is the strongest race", TLO: "Zerg is slightly favored in ZvT" Jinro: "TvP is broken". These people do not have an "idra" type of reputation to just whine, so do not put all progamers in the same category.
I haven't really commented on ZvT, maybe they're right on that, probably too early to say though. On TvP the statistics say those players are wrong. Do you have some reason to think the statistics are misleading?
Like Blizzard stated at Blizzcon, even if the win % is 50%50%, the fact that one race can only realistically win in the first 10-15minutes it is bad and imbalanced.
Yes, it is. But at least for now, Terran is succeeding in winning in that 10-15 minutes very,very well. Terran are flawed, and in a way that might make them weak in the long term, but for now they are anything but.
On November 01 2010 23:21 Gudeldar wrote: Yep, Terran is UP and Protoss is OP that is why there are no Terran left in the GSL.
Oh wait...
Well if we're gonna use the GSL to show us balance issues, then Zerg was the best race last season, pre patch. I dont think these single tournaments are a very good indicator of balance. Especially when you got Nada, Foxer, Boxer and IntoTheRainbow playing Terran, who do you have for protoss? NEXgenious? Inca?
Or you could just look at Blizzcon, where a protoss won, and argue that protoss is the best race.
It all depends on how good the players are, and it rarely comes down to balance, so we shouldnt be using the GSL for anything besides entertainment, or maybe analysis of a few games, but not statistics imo.
On November 01 2010 23:21 Gudeldar wrote: Yep, Terran is UP and Protoss is OP that is why there are no Terran left in the GSL.
Oh wait...
Yes let's use the top 4 of tournaments to decide balance changes. Great idea.
Brood War: Hmm this Flash and Jaedong are dominating all the time. Time to buff Zealot health to 200/200.
Well if the tourny results dont back up terran being UP, and the ladder stats dont point to terran being UP, then maybe they should just STFU and play the game, until there is any actual evidence for terran being UP.
On November 01 2010 23:21 Gudeldar wrote: Yep, Terran is UP and Protoss is OP that is why there are no Terran left in the GSL.
Oh wait...
Yes let's use the top 4 of tournaments to decide balance changes. Great idea.
Er, yes? If one race is never getting there (It was almost all Terran before, now there are some Zerg too, but still next to no Protoss) then there's a serious issue. It means that once that race starts hitting the top top players of the other races, they lose. That's a problem.
Brood War: Hmm this Flash and Jaedong are dominating all the time. Time to buff Zealot health to 200/200.
There are a bunch of different Terrans continually appearing in the top 4, though. It's rare for even 1 Protoss, and it's usually one of just ~3 names when it is.
And Protoss is pretty obviously the weakest in pro-BW anyway.
And might i remind you that Nada stated: "terran now has to be on equal bases with Zerg to stand a chance in the mid, late game" , Nexgenius: "Protoss is the strongest race", TLO: "Zerg is slightly favored in ZvT" Jinro: "TvP is broken". These people do not have an "idra" type of reputation to just whine, so do not put all progamers in the same category.
I haven't really commented on ZvT, maybe they're right on that, probably too early to say though. On TvP the statistics say those players are wrong. Do you have some reason to think the statistics are misleading?
Like Blizzard stated at Blizzcon, even if the win % is 50%50%, the fact that one race can only realistically win in the first 10-15minutes it is bad and imbalanced.
Yes, it is. But at least for now, Terran is succeeding in winning in that 10-15 minutes very,very well. Terran are flawed, and in a way that might make them weak in the long term, but for now they are anything but.
Well that is all there is to it IMHO. If Terran wins a lot in the first 15 mins then something has to be done, hence the Blizzcon stimpack reference. For the mid/late game Terran needs a lot of help though. Making Terrans able to use different units and not just Marauder X100.
It is kinda funny how zerg won GSL1 being generally accepted as an UP race. Now people complain about terran being UP and it looks like one of them has excelent chances of winning GSL2.
On November 01 2010 23:56 Sapphire.lux wrote: Well that is all there is to it IMHO. If Terran wins a lot in the first 15 mins then something has to be done, hence the Blizzcon stimpack reference. For the mid/late game Terran needs a lot of help though. Making Terrans able to use different units and not just Marauder X100.
Yes I totally agree. Their lategame is borked because they can tech too fast. There's not much cost to unlocking their "lategame" units, so they have to be kinda bleh or rushes to them would be too strong. Sadly they probably need something of a redesign which only an expansion can really provide. Or a really brave patch :0
All I'm saying is that, right now, that 12-15ish minute window where Terran is stronger, is beating the shit out of Protoss. It's all well and good having a great lategame but Protoss simply cannot get there against the top Terrans, not often enough to win with any consistency anyway. And for that reason moans of "Terran is too weak" are seriously grating. They're demolishing Protoss!
It's sounds like he's just trying to throw his reputation around to prevent T from getting nerfed again more than actually complaining about imbalance. I think giving T a slightly stronger late game would be good though, perhaps with a small nerf to early game stim.
He's not wrong. T early game strength was hiding the fact T mid->late is poor. Also why are people discounting Boxer yet they took Idra seriously when he was complaining about Zerg? Oh because they are sheep and only listen to what they want to?
really hope he sticks to 1 race (would honestly love it if he played P), I just fear he won't be able to display his full potential if he goes random : \
On November 02 2010 01:57 oxxo wrote: He's not wrong. T early game strength was hiding the fact T mid->late is poor. Also why are people discounting Boxer yet they took Idra seriously when he was complaining about Zerg? Oh because they are sheep and only listen to what they want to?
Boxer has FAR more credibility than idra.
Because all the evidence in the world pointed towards Zerg being severely underpowered pre-1.12, the complaints of Idra were just a drop in the ocean of that.
On the other hand, there's not really anything pointing toward Terran being underpowered right now. They're still winning more tournaments than the other 2 races combined and still having more players in the top 4 of the GSL than the other 2 races combined.
It's not that Idra has more credibility than Boxer, it's that complaining about your race being weak when its results on the pro level are horrendously bad carries more weight than saying it when you're playing what continues to be the most succesful race in the game.
Did boxer even say specifically what he thought was imbalanced? I don't think saying " this matchup is imba" and then having no reason/proof is credible. Be it Boxer or IdrA
Like Blizzard stated at Blizzcon, even if the win % is 50%50%, the fact that one race can only realistically win in the first 10-15minutes it is bad and imbalanced.
Yes, it is. But at least for now, Terran is succeeding in winning in that 10-15 minutes very,very well. Terran are flawed, and in a way that might make them weak in the long term, but for now they are anything but.
People are digging way too much in to BoxeR's quotes and IMO are abusing his credibility to get their "buff Terran!" argument sealed. It's not like he said "Terran is trash, I'm switching to Protoss because it's OP".
This is gonna sound cliché and simplistic, but perhaps Terran have been used to have it so easy in early game that they still have to figure out late game? Early tournaments were all about Terran cheesing/mass reapering/marauder-building-sniping tactics. They didn't have to bother with macroing because they could so often end the game in 9minutes.
For example, Terrans suddenly stopped making tanks and reapers altogether as if the units were removed from the game. Reaper speed now require a Factory? That's Blizzard telling you to do mid-game harass with them. Send 6-7 reapers into an exposed base instead of solely relying on marauder drops. Believe it or not they still drop buildings incredibly fast. While this certainly cannot replace pre 1.1.2 marauder drops on all maps, players could at LEAST give this kind of stuff a try before making QQ posts on forums.
gates+robotics comp can be more successful at 1A than MMM, ok. HTs can own MMM pretty hard if T doesn't bring ghost support, ok.
But these posts saying "We are in late game and he has like 15 Colossi, 10 HTs and 70 Stalkers wtf am I supposed to do?" are getting ridiculous. He's turtling on 2 bases? If you failed a 1base all-in, it's your bad. Stalkers+Immortals+Colossi balls of death? Ever thought of Siege Tanks + EMP+Marauders? If he isn't making HTs what prevents you from getting 2-3 Ravens to nullify his stalkers? If he is making both HTs and Colossi, how the hell did you allow that to happen?
People have to play the adaptation game. Zerg had to adapt when MorroW changed the metagame into 5rax reapers. They had started to figure it out when Blizzard nerfed reapers again in 1.1.2... but well.
On November 02 2010 01:57 oxxo wrote: He's not wrong. T early game strength was hiding the fact T mid->late is poor.
I agree.
This. I can't believe there are still people denying that. Just look at the games, not simply results. Most of the Terran wins are either straight in early game or later, but after securing huge early game advantage.
Terran early game was rightfully nerfed (the supply before barrack is piece of shit change though), but the late game needs some buffing.
now you will get the hate of all Zergs, cause everyone should now that IdrA and Artosis would never whine and are pro's and if they say Zerg is UP, ZERG IS UP! Who cares this noob called boxer, if you have the opinions of idra and artosis^^
This is a really good point. For awhile, a number of people on these boards would take IdrA's opinion on the state of the game as gospel and point to it as proof: "See? The game is imbalanced; even the pros say so!!!"
But the flip side of the coin is that IdrA and Artosis did catch some flak from the community for being so vocal about the imbalance and coming off as "whiny." I don't see why BoxeR wouldn't/shouldn't take the same flak if he becomes that vocal about it.
Right now, though, these answers are part of an interview. It's not like BoxeR volunteered his opinion about balance with the ulterior motive of getting his race buffed -- he was solicited for his honest opinion and he gave it.
now you will get the hate of all Zergs, cause everyone should now that IdrA and Artosis would never whine and are pro's and if they say Zerg is UP, ZERG IS UP! Who cares this noob called boxer, if you have the opinions of idra and artosis^^
This is a really good point. For awhile, a number of people on these boards would take IdrA's opinion on the state of the game as gospel and point to it as proof: "See? The game is imbalanced; even the pros say so!!!"
But the flip side of the coin is that IdrA and Artosis did catch some flak from the community for being so vocal about the imbalance and coming off as "whiny." I don't see why BoxeR wouldn't/shouldn't take the same flak if he becomes that vocal about it.
Right now, though, these answers are part of an interview. It's not like BoxeR volunteered his opinion about balance with the ulterior motive of getting his race buffed -- he was solicited for his honest opinion and he gave it.
because both Idra and Artosis played Terran in SC1 and always complained about Protoss being stronger than Terran even though at the Pro-Scene, Terran's always dominated Protoss
Idra/Artosis are known for their BM/whining, Boxer is not.
He stated his opinion once and hasn't been consistently whining about it, so he definitely should not take the same flak they have.
I'd say Boxer is a much higher authority on balance than Idra/Artosis and I'm sure most people would agree, especially given Idra's/Artosis' track record concerning complaints about imbalance//BM
Also, I'm a little confused as to what he's talking about. Correct me if I'm wrong (I haven't watched much of GSL 2 since I have to watch it in Korean/mute) but hasn't he been crushing everyone? Maybe he hasn't faced a strong P or Z yet but wtf I don't remember seeing a game that he came close to losing.
For someone as successful and secure with his play as BoxeR to suggest T feels weak should be taken more seriously than at least "QQ LOL" comments. I play P btw, so I'm not defending T just for the fun of it.
On November 02 2010 01:57 oxxo wrote: He's not wrong. T early game strength was hiding the fact T mid->late is poor. Also why are people discounting Boxer yet they took Idra seriously when he was complaining about Zerg? Oh because they are sheep and only listen to what they want to?
Boxer has FAR more credibility than idra.
Wrong. T late game is not weak or flawed. It's balanced. Like you said, T's early game is too powerful.
Let's assume what you said IS true for a second. Even if it was, T's dominant early game sets the economy/control for late game. T's OP early game will do incredible damage early on and cripple his opponent, the opponent can't do anything late game.
So, either way, there's a huge problem with T at the moment.
On November 02 2010 06:05 NewteN wrote: It's just flat out ignorant to call BoxeR a QQer.
Also, I'm a little confused as to what he's talking about. Correct me if I'm wrong (I haven't watched much of GSL 2 since I have to watch it in Korean/mute) but hasn't he been crushing everyone? Maybe he hasn't faced a strong P or Z yet but wtf I don't remember seeing a game that he came close to losing.
For someone as successful and secure with his play as BoxeR to suggest T feels weak should be taken more seriously than at least "QQ LOL" comments. I play P btw, so I'm not defending T just for the fun of it.
Calling Boxer a QQer is just as stupid as all the comments that are like "Boxer is God no one may disagree with him, case closed".
I don't know why we're even discussing it. Blizzard is obviously gonna see a complete screwover in their statistics and fix it - I refuse to believe zerg will go untouched in the next patch. Boxer's words should obviously weigh heavily, but it does not take a genius to see that Terran must outskill Zerg as hard as Z had to outskill T pre-tank nerf.
I love Boxer, and I am a great fan, but Fakeboxer WTFpwning today, and also Hopetorture winning against NEXGenius quite convincingly (even though in an ugly fashion) might make the real Boxer look a bit bad. The game definitely has never been as balanced as it is right now, and I am not really sure in what direction the next balance patch will go, but I wouldnt be suprised by anything
On November 02 2010 01:57 oxxo wrote: He's not wrong. T early game strength was hiding the fact T mid->late is poor. Also why are people discounting Boxer yet they took Idra seriously when he was complaining about Zerg? Oh because they are sheep and only listen to what they want to?
Boxer has FAR more credibility than idra.
Wrong. T late game is not weak or flawed. It's balanced. Like you said, T's early game is too powerful.
Wrong again. T's late game is weak AND flawed. If T early game was balanced, it'd be brutally apparent too.
now you will get the hate of all Zergs, cause everyone should now that IdrA and Artosis would never whine and are pro's and if they say Zerg is UP, ZERG IS UP! Who cares this noob called boxer, if you have the opinions of idra and artosis^^
This is a really good point. For awhile, a number of people on these boards would take IdrA's opinion on the state of the game as gospel and point to it as proof: "See? The game is imbalanced; even the pros say so!!!"
But the flip side of the coin is that IdrA and Artosis did catch some flak from the community for being so vocal about the imbalance and coming off as "whiny." I don't see why BoxeR wouldn't/shouldn't take the same flak if he becomes that vocal about it.
Right now, though, these answers are part of an interview. It's not like BoxeR volunteered his opinion about balance with the ulterior motive of getting his race buffed -- he was solicited for his honest opinion and he gave it.
because both Idra and Artosis played Terran in SC1 and always complained about Protoss being stronger than Terran even though at the Pro-Scene, Terran's always dominated Protoss
Idra/Artosis are known for their BM/whining, Boxer is not.
He stated his opinion once and hasn't been consistently whining about it, so he definitely should not take the same flak they have.
I'd say Boxer is a much higher authority on balance than Idra/Artosis and I'm sure most people would agree, especially given Idra's/Artosis' track record concerning complaints about imbalance//BM
I think the main difference is that Boxer is not lobbying vocally for changes or even going so far as to suggest balance fixes (like IdrA did). He's just being frank with the interviewer.
At this point, I agree it's premature to label Boxer a QQer -- he's allowed to have an opinion.
Though, I wouldn't say that any pro player should really be considered an "authority" on balance unless they play random as their main race. It's really asking a lot of a person, even a player of Boxer's caliber, to remove ego from the equation without a doubt and look at the balance situation completely objectively. People should really take opinions of players with a grain of salt -- there have been too many significant balance changes to SC2 already. Blizzard needs to slow down.
Personally, I think Boxer's play in SC2 so far has been absolutely brilliant and just what the Terran community needs right now -- it would be a downright shame for him to switch to any other race.
On October 30 2010 06:09 YMCApylons wrote: Anyone who thinks otherwise should watch this game. It's the #1 game in the OSL hall of fame, and CholeraSC titled it "Never Surrender". If you don't know what OSL is or who CholeraSC is...you have a lot to learn before saying anything about Boxer.
Tangent: I'm someone new to Starcraft 1/2, who was frequently ridiculed for saying that it would be nice if the units (all units) in SC2 had a bit more HP so we'd see some great micro battles and give the players a bit more of a chance to react. I said this as an ex War 3 player. I don't want to make SC into Warcraft by any means but I thought at the time it would make for better battles, I only said maybe 5 or 10% across the board. Well having seen that video, I now feel even more pissed off at the SC elitists who see the words "War 3" and just instantly dissmis what people say. It seems to me that the SC1 units most definitely are overall tougher, not as tough as War 3 but definitely stronger than SC2.. It makes for more interesting battles, instead of a giant mash up ball from SC2 where everything is dead in 15 seconds.
On October 30 2010 21:27 MockHamill wrote: Yes Terran vs. Protoss is almost a joke right now. Terran gets no advantage from being a little bit stronger early game since force fielding your ramp let you bypass early game. Mid and late game is hugely in Protoss favor.
Either you go MMM which auto-lose vs. Storm without perfect micro. Or you go Mech which is better vs. Storm but can’t be used on larger maps due to lack of mobility.
I am actually thinking of switching races or maybe take a break from the game until the next patch is out.
What does this 'QQing' even mean and what is wrong with it? I have been part of the SC BW community for years but then the beta came out and suddenly everyone is talking about QQ. How did this happen?
On November 02 2010 10:42 Xtar wrote: What does this 'QQing' even mean and what is wrong with it? I have been part of the SC BW community for years but then the beta came out and suddenly everyone is talking about QQ. How did this happen?
QQ looks like 2 eyes with tears
it came from WC3 though I believe, where alt-qq would auto leave the game.
but Fakeboxer WTFpwning today, and also Hopetorture winning against NEXGenius quite convincingly (even though in an ugly fashion) might make the real Boxer look a bit bad. The game definitely has never been as balanced as it is right now, and I am not really sure in what direction the next balance patch will go, but I wouldnt be suprised by anything
I agree. As a terran player myself, I think the latest patch made things a lot more balanced.
The patch hasn't been out in a while, the patch should be given another month or two before being judged.
As for the topic relating to Boxer, I don't really know what to say. It really depends what he means by that and what he wants changed. I don't think he's QQing but at the same time I do not think the balance of the game should be judged yet(give the patch another month or so before judging).
On November 02 2010 14:09 Abstrkt wrote: Bozer is a bitch. He has a shitty attitude and is just as whiny as any other player. T is not UP and probably is still the best race.
Lol, if you think Boxer's a bitch, what do you call Idra, Artosis, Dimaga, and every other Zerg player on TL?
now you will get the hate of all Zergs, cause everyone should now that IdrA and Artosis would never whine and are pro's and if they say Zerg is UP, ZERG IS UP! Who cares this noob called boxer, if you have the opinions of idra and artosis^^
This is a really good point. For awhile, a number of people on these boards would take IdrA's opinion on the state of the game as gospel and point to it as proof: "See? The game is imbalanced; even the pros say so!!!"
But the flip side of the coin is that IdrA and Artosis did catch some flak from the community for being so vocal about the imbalance and coming off as "whiny." I don't see why BoxeR wouldn't/shouldn't take the same flak if he becomes that vocal about it.
Right now, though, these answers are part of an interview. It's not like BoxeR volunteered his opinion about balance with the ulterior motive of getting his race buffed -- he was solicited for his honest opinion and he gave it.
Finally other people confirm what I have been feeling for some time now! The two major vocal flagships of the western community were both zerg. I think this influenced the general opinion ALOT. Though I really respect Idra as a gamer, and Artosis as a caster, they are both sooo biased. Artosis should be a shoutcaster first, and a gamer second.
Day[9] for example, never ever lets something out concerning balance. He actually motivates creative thinking and diverse play rather then stating X IS OP. I still can not honostly believe for example that the state of the game is currently "good" if zerg can go a BLIND hatchery first, and ALWAYS get away with it.
There should be more flagships be vocal about all the races and hopefully Blizzard will start buffing things, instead of nerfing the crap out of everything else.
@fluxx Day9 is also casting noobgames almost every day thats something i dont approve either Not having an opinion about balance or not talking about it is pretty bad. It has nothing to do with neutrality its just that it feels like he is so deep in blizzards ass sometimes :/ I think Tasteless and Artosis are clearly a bit ahead there.
Btw i still think day9 is awesome!! Just a small critic.
On November 02 2010 02:36 Phrencys wrote: This is gonna sound cliché and simplistic, but perhaps Terran have been used to have it so easy in early game that they still have to figure out late game? Early tournaments were all about Terran cheesing/mass reapering/marauder-building-sniping tactics. They didn't have to bother with macroing because they could so often end the game in 9minutes.
For example, Terrans suddenly stopped making tanks and reapers altogether as if the units were removed from the game. Reaper speed now require a Factory? That's Blizzard telling you to do mid-game harass with them. Send 6-7 reapers into an exposed base instead of solely relying on marauder drops. Believe it or not they still drop buildings incredibly fast. While this certainly cannot replace pre 1.1.2 marauder drops on all maps, players could at LEAST give this kind of stuff a try before making QQ posts on forums.
Too compliXated, itz.
A turtler's brain is already almost melting when he thinks "he's pro" for microing a banshee, you're expecting them to use more than 2 or 3 1a strats ? LOL.
On November 02 2010 02:59 Toxigen wrote: Right now, though, these answers are part of an interview. It's not like BoxeR volunteered his opinion about balance with the ulterior motive of getting his race buffed -- he was solicited for his honest opinion and he gave it.
Because we all know people are totally honest when their salary is involved xD
Can someone explain to me this "Terran sucks in lategame" theory?? Has any evidence at all point to this? It seems every terran has completely dominated protoss in GSL.. Maybe vs Z, sure once a Z gets 5+ bases its hard for terran, but as far as TvP is concerned, I dont understand this statement.
If we are theorycrafting how "Ohh protoss has collosus and storms".. What about Terran getting units other than marauders?? I know I would much rather have mass tanks and vikings over collosus and storms. Tanks still do insane damage, and vikings can take out collosus fast while dodging storms. Then we get into BCs vs Carriers.. BCs easily win there.
Im just curious; if any of you played any high level (diamond 1000+ at least) FFA games that actually get to the "lategame" (ie 200/200 armies with 3-3 upgrades)... 9 times out of 10, Terrans will win in the end with BCs/thors/marines/tanks, it can take out every protoss army with little effort.
Anyways, not saying terran is overpowered (just marauders obviously still much needed nerf).. I'd say TvP is about 99% perfect balance besides marauders, but im still flabbergasted with this whole "Terran sucks lategame" argument.. Can anyone show me ANY sort of proof??
now you will get the hate of all Zergs, cause everyone should now that IdrA and Artosis would never whine and are pro's and if they say Zerg is UP, ZERG IS UP! Who cares this noob called boxer, if you have the opinions of idra and artosis^^
This is a really good point. For awhile, a number of people on these boards would take IdrA's opinion on the state of the game as gospel and point to it as proof: "See? The game is imbalanced; even the pros say so!!!"
But the flip side of the coin is that IdrA and Artosis did catch some flak from the community for being so vocal about the imbalance and coming off as "whiny." I don't see why BoxeR wouldn't/shouldn't take the same flak if he becomes that vocal about it.
Right now, though, these answers are part of an interview. It's not like BoxeR volunteered his opinion about balance with the ulterior motive of getting his race buffed -- he was solicited for his honest opinion and he gave it.
Finally other people confirm what I have been feeling for some time now! The two major vocal flagships of the western community were both zerg. I think this influenced the general opinion ALOT. Though I really respect Idra as a gamer, and Artosis as a caster, they are both sooo biased. Artosis should be a shoutcaster first, and a gamer second.
Day[9] for example, never ever lets something out concerning balance. He actually motivates creative thinking and diverse play rather then stating X IS OP. I still can not honostly believe for example that the state of the game is currently "good" if zerg can go a BLIND hatchery first, and ALWAYS get away with it.
There should be more flagships be vocal about all the races and hopefully Blizzard will start buffing things, instead of nerfing the crap out of everything else.
Eeeeuh, the day9 himself had 2whole daily's about how to deal with reapers. He was so close to saying it was unbalanced but prolly doesnt want to influence the ppl.
On November 02 2010 21:26 Skyze wrote: Can someone explain to me this "Terran sucks in lategame" theory?? Has any evidence at all point to this? It seems every terran has completely dominated protoss in GSL.. Maybe vs Z, sure once a Z gets 5+ bases its hard for terran, but as far as TvP is concerned, I dont understand this statement.
If we are theorycrafting how "Ohh protoss has collosus and storms".. What about Terran getting units other than marauders?? I know I would much rather have mass tanks and vikings over collosus and storms. Tanks still do insane damage, and vikings can take out collosus fast while dodging storms. Then we get into BCs vs Carriers.. BCs easily win there.
Im just curious; if any of you played any high level (diamond 1000+ at least) FFA games that actually get to the "lategame" (ie 200/200 armies with 3-3 upgrades)... 9 times out of 10, Terrans will win in the end with BCs/thors/marines/tanks, it can take out every protoss army with little effort.
Anyways, not saying terran is overpowered (just marauders obviously still much needed nerf).. I'd say TvP is about 99% perfect balance besides marauders, but im still flabbergasted with this whole "Terran sucks lategame" argument.. Can anyone show me ANY sort of proof??
mmm.... ffa isn't ranked...
I think people are talking about the macro advantage that P and Z have over terran, as well as terran's relative inability to tech switch late game.
On November 02 2010 21:26 Skyze wrote: Can someone explain to me this "Terran sucks in lategame" theory?? Has any evidence at all point to this? It seems every terran has completely dominated protoss in GSL.. Maybe vs Z, sure once a Z gets 5+ bases its hard for terran, but as far as TvP is concerned, I dont understand this statement.
If we are theorycrafting how "Ohh protoss has collosus and storms".. What about Terran getting units other than marauders?? I know I would much rather have mass tanks and vikings over collosus and storms. Tanks still do insane damage, and vikings can take out collosus fast while dodging storms. Then we get into BCs vs Carriers.. BCs easily win there.
Im just curious; if any of you played any high level (diamond 1000+ at least) FFA games that actually get to the "lategame" (ie 200/200 armies with 3-3 upgrades)... 9 times out of 10, Terrans will win in the end with BCs/thors/marines/tanks, it can take out every protoss army with little effort.
Anyways, not saying terran is overpowered (just marauders obviously still much needed nerf).. I'd say TvP is about 99% perfect balance besides marauders, but im still flabbergasted with this whole "Terran sucks lategame" argument.. Can anyone show me ANY sort of proof??
Its not about unit composition. Overall race mechanics, warping units and that single probe can build whole fucking base in 2 minutes. While terran destroys the protoss main which is already mined out. Protoss can easily rebuild his base and army in seconds. Assuming P already has tech (Speedlots and HTs) its gg for terran. HT and Speedlots are great at small numbers and harrassing naturals.
Oh, and terran can't surprise protoss. If you make surprise attack by BCs, protoss will just warp in some stalkers, thats it.
Boxer said in his interview after beating nada that he is a "crying terran". Some word in Korean for it. So he cries about it just to cry about it. Terran is still a tad OP compared to Zerg and Protoss. The only natural thing we are seing after slight nerfs are the shitty people abusing their insane OPness earlier to grab ranks etc getting bumped down to where they belong. And worst off all even those ranks will be inflated.
On November 02 2010 22:53 Sqq wrote: Boxer said in his interview after beating nada that he is a "crying terran". Some word in Korean for it. So he cries about it just to cry about it. Terran is still a tad OP compared to Zerg and Protoss. The only natural thing we are seing after slight nerfs are the shitty people abusing their insane OPness earlier to grab ranks etc getting bumped down to where they belong. And worst off all even those ranks will be inflated.
You seem completely unbiased. Since the buffs to zerg I've settled at a rating where I've been winning all TvPs without effort and losing all TvZs bar a few. T wasn't "insanely" OP after the tank nerf - we just had one gimmicky strategy that took some players up a bit. I for one never used the 5 rax reaper strategy, but I've taken a gigantic hit in TvZ regardless.
On November 02 2010 01:57 oxxo wrote: He's not wrong. T early game strength was hiding the fact T mid->late is poor. Also why are people discounting Boxer yet they took Idra seriously when he was complaining about Zerg? Oh because they are sheep and only listen to what they want to?
Boxer has FAR more credibility than idra.
Wrong. T late game is not weak or flawed. It's balanced. Like you said, T's early game is too powerful.
Wrong again. T's late game is weak AND flawed. If T early game was balanced, it'd be brutally apparent too.
I love how you didn't include my words in that quote that started with "Even if it was..." because it was a counter-argument that would kill your argument
But then again, you also believe T's late game is weak so it's obvious you won't listen to reason and common sense
On November 03 2010 11:14 Mobius wrote: i bet this guy will make the weakest race the most powerful.. he seems like that kinda guy
Well, if Foxer's play is any sign of how to play Z, the only way T can beat Z is early game. Going to mid game or late game is an auto loss for T against Z.
On November 03 2010 11:14 Mobius wrote: i bet this guy will make the weakest race the most powerful.. he seems like that kinda guy
Well, if Foxer's play is any sign of how to play Z, the only way T can beat Z is early game. Going to mid game or late game is an auto loss for T against Z.
A retarded deduction. Just because foxer won early doesn't mean it's impossible to win late. Do you seriously not understand that?
don't forget that Z players have been practicing their mechanics pre 1.1. this gave Z players more practice defending harrass and having a stronger economy based play. as T harrass was nerfed, the stronger macro-based Z players are taking over the matchups. you need to account for this when noting the lowered T win rate. it's time for T players to go back to the beginning and work on basics and mechanics.
On November 03 2010 11:14 Mobius wrote: i bet this guy will make the weakest race the most powerful.. he seems like that kinda guy
Well, if Foxer's play is any sign of how to play Z, the only way T can beat Z is early game. Going to mid game or late game is an auto loss for T against Z.
A retarded deduction. Just because foxer won early doesn't mean it's impossible to win late. Do you seriously not understand that?
Just because an overwhelming fraction of Terran victories occurred before 10 minutes (that is winning or dealing such a huge and crippling hit that T just rides it smoothly to victory), doesn't mean that T needs to win early and has troubles late?
I don't understand this thread. Boxer, a complete legend, voices his opinion that Terran is on the verge of being UP and the TL community screams "WHINER!!" but FruitDealer says it just a few months ago and TL community screams "PREACH IT BROTHER!!"
Makes no sense. Honestly I feel like the game is fairly balanced at the moment; maybe leaning a tad towards Zerg/Terran and against Toss.
On November 03 2010 11:14 Mobius wrote: i bet this guy will make the weakest race the most powerful.. he seems like that kinda guy
Well, if Foxer's play is any sign of how to play Z, the only way T can beat Z is early game. Going to mid game or late game is an auto loss for T against Z.
A retarded deduction. Just because foxer won early doesn't mean it's impossible to win late. Do you seriously not understand that?
Just because an overwhelming fraction of Terran victories occurred before 10 minutes (that is winning or dealing such a huge and crippling hit that T just rides it smoothly to victory), doesn't mean that T needs to win early and has troubles late?
Why would terran being strong early game conclusively prove anything except that terran is strong early game?
Zerg/Terran seems to be balanced against each other. The guy who makes the least mistakes wins. Protoss seems to get tweaked a bit, I believe a small change like observers coming out starports and robo bays could already be a big change.
results dont lie. and terrans still own. terrans still win the most tourneys. 3 terrans in the semi finals of the gsl. stop qqing plz. just because boxer cant handle tvz doesnt mean its imbalance. its just his weak mu. remember when terran own other races with ease? atleast terran have to try now to win.
On November 06 2010 01:18 Protoss_Carrier wrote: just because terran early game is incredibly strong doesn't mean its late game is weak.
terrans earlygame isn't too strong anymore. You have no possibility to kill a Zerg in the earlygame if he scouts your timing. This isn't bad. No. Its good. Now Blizzard has to fix the endgame. SC2 should be like that: The players who makes most mistakes loses. Not the player who has the stronger race. And right now Zerg is too strong in the lategame.
On November 05 2010 23:57 Tenks wrote: I don't understand this thread. Boxer, a complete legend, voices his opinion that Terran is on the verge of being UP and the TL community screams "WHINER!!" but FruitDealer says it just a few months ago and TL community screams "PREACH IT BROTHER!!"
Makes no sense. Honestly I feel like the game is fairly balanced at the moment; maybe leaning a tad towards Zerg/Terran and against Toss.
Because while Terrans are complaining about being UP, the GSL top 4 is STILL 3/4 Terran. When Z was complaining about being UP, they had won something like 3 tournaments out of 50 since release and GSL had 1 Z in top 8. Also, BoxeR just doesn't have a very good understanding of TvZ in SC2.
If you look at recent results, it's at least much more even with Terrans still winning the most.
I think a really good change which would balance a lot things, would be hatchery with 400 mineral, (giving 9 supply). And another would be no spawning pool before overlord
Why ?
1) the overlord give a really good advantage to scoot opponent. Its clear that zerg has map control
2) hatch 300 means zerg can expand easier which help a lot early game. (not talking about inject larva and making drone)
3) speedzergling are way too fast and cost effective. Not to mention also that zerg on creep (but even without creep for speedgling/badling and muta) has a really high speed advantage.
4) Ability to tech switch
5) Very strong late game units that they can pop out of the same larva of the begining, while terran need to build a lot of factory/starport and with the tech lab will only be able to produce them 1 by 1.
Now we can take the words of idra "you don't respect yourself if you play terran" and put "zerg" instead of terran.
Take a look of the terran : marines are quite useless in small number, and when you got them in mass, they got slaughtered by colossus / templars / ultralisks / badling etc... (unless you have exceptionnal micro like Foxer)
The reaper takes insane amount of time to build which makes the terran that build only one to have to make ANOTHER barrack (each time you build 1 reaper you can see your mineral go to 300~400 quite fast).
For terran :
- reduce reaper build time as it was and give them 10 hp more. - make maraudeurs faster and unable to stim - reduce battlecruiser buildingtime and/or add them +1 dommage.
Well whatever its clear that terran is now quite underpowered.
On November 06 2010 01:39 Tonyoh wrote: I think a really good change which would balance a lot things, would be hatchery with 400 mineral, (giving 9 supply). And another would be no spawning pool before overlord
Why ?
1) the overlord give a really good advantage to scoot opponent. Its clear that zerg has map control
2) hatch 300 means zerg can expand easier which help a lot early game. (not talking about inject larva and making drone)
3) speedzergling are way too fast and cost effective. Not to mention also that zerg on creep (but even without creep for speedgling/badling and muta) has a really high speed advantage.
4) Ability to tech switch
5) Very strong late game units that they can pop out of the same larva of the begining, while terran need to build a lot of factory/starport and with the tech lab will only be able to produce them 1 by 1.
Now we can take the words of idra "you don't respect yourself if you play terran" and put "zerg" instead of terran.
Take a look of the terran : marines are quite useless in small number, and when you got them in mass, they got slaughtered by colossus / templars / ultralisks / badling etc... (unless you have exceptionnal micro like Foxer)
The reaper takes insane amount of time to build which makes the terran that build only one to have to make ANOTHER barrack (each time you build 1 reaper you can see your mineral go to 300~400 quite fast).
For terran :
- reduce reaper build time as it was and give them 10 hp more. - make maraudeurs faster and unable to stim - reduce battlecruiser buildingtime and/or add them +1 dommage.
Well whatever its clear that terran is now quite underpowered.
Complaining in this manner is exactly why community feedback is often ignored by Blizzard.
but he played like an absolute fool today in the GSL semi-finals. If at first your proxy barracks opening doesn't work, try try again...4 times?
Don't get me wrong, BoxeR is a great player. His TvT and TvP is amazingly fun to watch, and his style works so well in those matchups. He's either trying to hard to be original in TvZ or he is just totally ignorant of the idea that you can't force your playstyle against every race because you're BoxeR.
BoxeR is a great player, but he needs to be willing to experiment and alter his style in order to succeed.
On November 06 2010 01:39 Tonyoh wrote: I think a really good change which would balance a lot things, would be hatchery with 400 mineral, (giving 9 supply). And another would be no spawning pool before overlord
Why ?
1) the overlord give a really good advantage to scoot opponent. Its clear that zerg has map control
2) hatch 300 means zerg can expand easier which help a lot early game. (not talking about inject larva and making drone)
3) speedzergling are way too fast and cost effective. Not to mention also that zerg on creep (but even without creep for speedgling/badling and muta) has a really high speed advantage.
4) Ability to tech switch
5) Very strong late game units that they can pop out of the same larva of the begining, while terran need to build a lot of factory/starport and with the tech lab will only be able to produce them 1 by 1.
Now we can take the words of idra "you don't respect yourself if you play terran" and put "zerg" instead of terran.
Take a look of the terran : marines are quite useless in small number, and when you got them in mass, they got slaughtered by colossus / templars / ultralisks / badling etc... (unless you have exceptionnal micro like Foxer)
The reaper takes insane amount of time to build which makes the terran that build only one to have to make ANOTHER barrack (each time you build 1 reaper you can see your mineral go to 300~400 quite fast).
For terran :
- reduce reaper build time as it was and give them 10 hp more. - make maraudeurs faster and unable to stim - reduce battlecruiser buildingtime and/or add them +1 dommage.
Well whatever its clear that terran is now quite underpowered.
Thank god you don't work for Blizzard. "Hmm... T early game is too strong and late game too weak and Z early game is too weak while late game too strong. Let's make horrible suggestions like making Z even weaker early game and Terran early game even stronger. Oh and I'll insert some Terran UP whining too even though I'm a bronze-level player, since that's the new fad."
On November 06 2010 01:39 Tonyoh wrote: I think a really good change which would balance a lot things, would be hatchery with 400 mineral, (giving 9 supply). And another would be no spawning pool before overlord
Why ?
1) the overlord give a really good advantage to scoot opponent. Its clear that zerg has map control
2) hatch 300 means zerg can expand easier which help a lot early game. (not talking about inject larva and making drone)
3) speedzergling are way too fast and cost effective. Not to mention also that zerg on creep (but even without creep for speedgling/badling and muta) has a really high speed advantage.
4) Ability to tech switch
5) Very strong late game units that they can pop out of the same larva of the begining, while terran need to build a lot of factory/starport and with the tech lab will only be able to produce them 1 by 1.
Now we can take the words of idra "you don't respect yourself if you play terran" and put "zerg" instead of terran.
Take a look of the terran : marines are quite useless in small number, and when you got them in mass, they got slaughtered by colossus / templars / ultralisks / badling etc... (unless you have exceptionnal micro like Foxer)
The reaper takes insane amount of time to build which makes the terran that build only one to have to make ANOTHER barrack (each time you build 1 reaper you can see your mineral go to 300~400 quite fast).
For terran :
- reduce reaper build time as it was and give them 10 hp more. - make maraudeurs faster and unable to stim - reduce battlecruiser buildingtime and/or add them +1 dommage.
Well whatever its clear that terran is now quite underpowered.
Complaining in this manner is exactly why community feedback is often ignored by Blizzard.
but he played like an absolute fool today in the GSL semi-finals. If at first your proxy barracks opening doesn't work, try try again...4 times?
Don't get me wrong, BoxeR is a great player. His TvT and TvP is amazingly fun to watch, and his style works so well in those matchups. He's either trying to hard to be original in TvZ or he is just totally ignorant of the idea that you can't force your playstyle against every race because you're BoxeR.
BoxeR is a great player, but he needs to be willing to experiment and alter his style in order to succeed.
His proxy was an epic fail because at that point he had probably just given up on woinning and was just doing whatever he could to try to win ONE game.
On November 06 2010 01:39 Tonyoh wrote: I think a really good change which would balance a lot things, would be hatchery with 400 mineral, (giving 9 supply). And another would be no spawning pool before overlord
On November 06 2010 01:18 Protoss_Carrier wrote: just because terran early game is incredibly strong doesn't mean its late game is weak.
terrans earlygame isn't too strong anymore. You have no possibility to kill a Zerg in the earlygame if he scouts your timing. This isn't bad. No. Its good. Now Blizzard has to fix the endgame. SC2 should be like that: The players who makes most mistakes loses. Not the player who has the stronger race. And right now Zerg is too strong in the lategame.
Yup, agree with this. Late game for Terran vs Zerg is not balanced well - it's practially an auto victory for Zerg. Blizzard nees to address this.
On November 06 2010 01:18 Protoss_Carrier wrote: just because terran early game is incredibly strong doesn't mean its late game is weak.
terrans earlygame isn't too strong anymore. You have no possibility to kill a Zerg in the earlygame if he scouts your timing. This isn't bad. No. Its good. Now Blizzard has to fix the endgame. SC2 should be like that: The players who makes most mistakes loses. Not the player who has the stronger race. And right now Zerg is too strong in the lategame.
Yup, agree with this. Late game for Terran vs Zerg is not balanced well - it's practially an auto victory for Zerg. Blizzard nees to address this.
Yeah, you can basically just quit once the zerg has his 3rd base saturated. You really need to do damage before then. You can't win late game against a zerg on equal terms. That's just stupid. Same with protoss. Ofcourse against protoss you still have this early game advantage so that makes it ''balanced''. Still stupid tho.
On November 06 2010 01:39 Tonyoh wrote: I think a really good change which would balance a lot things, would be hatchery with 400 mineral, (giving 9 supply). And another would be no spawning pool before overlord
Why ?
1) the overlord give a really good advantage to scoot opponent. Its clear that zerg has map control
2) hatch 300 means zerg can expand easier which help a lot early game. (not talking about inject larva and making drone)
3) speedzergling are way too fast and cost effective. Not to mention also that zerg on creep (but even without creep for speedgling/badling and muta) has a really high speed advantage.
4) Ability to tech switch
5) Very strong late game units that they can pop out of the same larva of the begining, while terran need to build a lot of factory/starport and with the tech lab will only be able to produce them 1 by 1.
Now we can take the words of idra "you don't respect yourself if you play terran" and put "zerg" instead of terran.
Take a look of the terran : marines are quite useless in small number, and when you got them in mass, they got slaughtered by colossus / templars / ultralisks / badling etc... (unless you have exceptionnal micro like Foxer)
The reaper takes insane amount of time to build which makes the terran that build only one to have to make ANOTHER barrack (each time you build 1 reaper you can see your mineral go to 300~400 quite fast).
For terran :
- reduce reaper build time as it was and give them 10 hp more. - make maraudeurs faster and unable to stim - reduce battlecruiser buildingtime and/or add them +1 dommage.
Well whatever its clear that terran is now quite underpowered.
Thank god you don't work for Blizzard. "Hmm... T early game is too strong and late game too weak and Z early game is too weak while late game too strong. Let's make horrible suggestions like making Z even weaker early game and Terran early game even stronger. Oh and I'll insert some Terran UP whining too even though I'm a bronze-level player, since that's the new fad."
No thats the new trick. He bufs up terran so hard they cant possible lose in early game so they dont need to worry about late game
you terrans that are qqing dont seem to follow the trend. now a days i seen terran just mass marine and a really fast expo with a very strong timing attack with tank marines. which is really freaken strong to hold off. its not just mass harrass anymore. please watch foxer and some other good terrans plz.
On November 06 2010 03:03 Looky wrote: you terrans that are qqing dont seem to follow the trend. now a days i seen terran just mass marine and a really fast expo with a very strong timing attack with tank marines. which is really freaken strong to hold off. its not just mass harrass anymore. please watch foxer and some other good terrans plz.
The reason why foxer's style works for him is because he has over 400 apm, thats not a very common thing.
On November 06 2010 03:03 Looky wrote: you terrans that are qqing dont seem to follow the trend. now a days i seen terran just mass marine and a really fast expo with a very strong timing attack with tank marines. which is really freaken strong to hold off. its not just mass harrass anymore. please watch foxer and some other good terrans plz.
The reason why foxer's style works for him is because he has over 400 apm, thats not a very common thing.
Not too long after SC2 released everyone complained that the skill roof for SC2 was waaaay too low, compared to BW. I know nothing about Foxer's style but if you are right and it needs 400 apm to work, well then... What are we complaining about? It's obviously a viable way to play, and attainable if this guy can do it. Thats what made BW great right? SC2 looks like it has a few tricks up it's sleeve after all.
The patch in gsl didnt hit till after round of 64 in GSL, so saying there are alot of terrans in GSL is retarded. Boxer says Zerg is OP and I believe him, the last patch was ridiculous not only in boosting zerg, but in nerfing terrans.
On November 06 2010 03:03 Looky wrote: you terrans that are qqing dont seem to follow the trend. now a days i seen terran just mass marine and a really fast expo with a very strong timing attack with tank marines. which is really freaken strong to hold off. its not just mass harrass anymore. please watch foxer and some other good terrans plz.
The reason why foxer's style works for him is because he has over 400 apm, thats not a very common thing.
Not too long after SC2 released everyone complained that the skill roof for SC2 was waaaay too low, compared to BW. I know nothing about Foxer's style but if you are right and it needs 400 apm to work, well then... What are we complaining about? It's obviously a viable way to play, and attainable if this guy can do it. Thats what made BW great right? SC2 looks like it has a few tricks up it's sleeve after all.
People need to stop hating on Boxer's proxy raxes. He's not proxy raxing because he's stupid, he's proxy raxing because he knows there's no way to beat a macro-oriented zerg player in the lategame. It's his only option.
Foxer will be doing a lot of the same cheesy early stuff or he will lose (he will lose anyway).
It's easy to use Foxer as a model of how TvZ is played, but Foxer basically lost the series. Kyrix just gave him the win in game 5. Had Kyrix not macroed like a plat player, we'd all be talking about how stupid Foxer's strategies were. Think about it for a second: Foxer massively outplayed Kyrix in the series and still basically lost. Stop using Foxer v Kyrix as an example of how TvZ should be played.
Everyone is complaining about zerg and t being OP or UP but no one is mentioning Protoss that much
Are we Protoss so less in numbers and just willing to adapt to the changes or I missed all the P whining ?
Honestly everyone can complain what they want but in the end they still have to adapt rather than complain. You can't expect everything to be the same when a balance patch comes out. Rather you need to be willing to adapt and learn which most players hasn't had enough time for it yet. The game is still evolving and with 2 expansions and tons of patches why are people complaining about that every thing should be like this or that when clearly Blizzard is the only one with statistics which the players don't have.
I just want to say (not commenting about UP/OP), but saying "oh, 3 Ts still made the final 4 and only 1 Z like last season"...is pretty dumb.
If you want to use GSL results at all, then we already see the huge win % of Zs over T, the main reason we ended up with what we have is because 1) Kyrix barely lost to Foxer, 2) ITR's bracket was a coinflip and may have been Genius entering the final 4, 3) Nada/Boxer bracket was the only guaranteed Terran, and 4) the great Zergs were all in Bracket A or Bracket D, and DOUBLE ZvZ in a round of 16, followed by ANOTHER ZVZ to end off the round of 8 knocked out 3 zergs.
Tl;DR don't comment about the final 4 results and compare them to last season, the road of how they got there is completely different from when Terran was OP last season.
On November 06 2010 03:03 Looky wrote: you terrans that are qqing dont seem to follow the trend. now a days i seen terran just mass marine and a really fast expo with a very strong timing attack with tank marines. which is really freaken strong to hold off. its not just mass harrass anymore. please watch foxer and some other good terrans plz.
nvm banelings, GG.
On November 06 2010 05:34 iEchoic wrote: People need to stop hating on Boxer's proxy raxes. He's not proxy raxing because he's stupid, he's proxy raxing because he knows there's no way to beat a macro-oriented zerg player in the lategame. It's his only option.
Foxer will be doing a lot of the same cheesy early stuff or he will lose (he will lose anyway).
It's easy to use Foxer as a model of how TvZ is played, but Foxer basically lost the series. Kyrix just gave him the win in game 5. Had Kyrix not macroed like a plat player, we'd all be talking about how stupid Foxer's strategies were. Think about it for a second: Foxer massively outplayed Kyrix in the series and still basically lost. Stop using Foxer v Kyrix as an example of how TvZ should be played.
This is so true that it's actually sad.
When people say Boxer fucked up, they need to realize what happens when a good player fights a good opponent. GOOD OPPONENTS HAVE A WAY OF MAKING YOU LOOK SILLY!
ITR vs Fruit Dealer in GSL #1. People were bitching at ITR when he was playing it as perfectly as he could. Tank dropping on LT, stopped, medivac dropping, stopped. Boxer looking foolish has to do with Nestea playing properly and blocking him, on top of having superior macro mechanics due to his race.
On November 06 2010 06:42 Dalavita wrote: This is so true that it's actually sad.
When people say Boxer fucked up, they need to realize what happens when a good player fights a good opponent. GOOD OPPONENTS HAVE A WAY OF MAKING YOU LOOK SILLY!
ITR vs Fruit Dealer in GSL #1. People were bitching at ITR when he was playing it as perfectly as he could. Tank dropping on LT, stopped, medivac dropping, stopped. Boxer looking foolish has to do with Nestea playing properly and blocking him, on top of having superior macro mechanics due to his race.
I am so tired of this fallacious argument.
Zerg has the worst economy of the 3 races for the first 10 minutes of the game, and their income is only slightly better beyond that unless T or P chooses to 1-base all game long.
Terrans constantly going all-in vs Zerg has to do so much more to do with Zerg early game being weak than it does with Zerg late-game macro mechanics being unstoppable.
Boxer has said multiple times that TvZ is his worst match-up. He took a shot at his best opportunity, early game. It didn't work. This is how you survive your weak match-ups in tourney play, you try to cheese your way through and hope it sticks.
On November 06 2010 06:42 Dalavita wrote: This is so true that it's actually sad.
When people say Boxer fucked up, they need to realize what happens when a good player fights a good opponent. GOOD OPPONENTS HAVE A WAY OF MAKING YOU LOOK SILLY!
ITR vs Fruit Dealer in GSL #1. People were bitching at ITR when he was playing it as perfectly as he could. Tank dropping on LT, stopped, medivac dropping, stopped. Boxer looking foolish has to do with Nestea playing properly and blocking him, on top of having superior macro mechanics due to his race.
I am so tired of this fallacious argument.
Zerg has the worst economy of the 3 races for the first 10 minutes of the game, and their income is only slightly better beyond that unless T or P chooses to 1-base all game long.
Terrans constantly going all-in vs Zerg has to do so much more to do with Zerg early game being weak than it does with Zerg late-game macro mechanics being unstoppable.
Boxer has said multiple times that TvZ is his worst match-up. He took a shot at his best opportunity, early game. It didn't work. This is how you survive your weak match-ups in tourney play, you try to cheese your way through and hope it sticks.
A truth can be offending, it remains a truth.
Balancing Zerg macro mechanics can't be done straightly, because any nerfs to inject larva will make all the 4warpgate push an all the other all-in strats too strong. The only way is to give a real superior T3 force with kill for free units (better HSM) to Terran (and Protoss too, but this might already be the case with colossi + HT) like in BW.
On November 06 2010 06:42 Dalavita wrote: This is so true that it's actually sad.
When people say Boxer fucked up, they need to realize what happens when a good player fights a good opponent. GOOD OPPONENTS HAVE A WAY OF MAKING YOU LOOK SILLY!
ITR vs Fruit Dealer in GSL #1. People were bitching at ITR when he was playing it as perfectly as he could. Tank dropping on LT, stopped, medivac dropping, stopped. Boxer looking foolish has to do with Nestea playing properly and blocking him, on top of having superior macro mechanics due to his race.
I am so tired of this fallacious argument.
Zerg has the worst economy of the 3 races for the first 10 minutes of the game, and their income is only slightly better beyond that unless T or P chooses to 1-base all game long.
Terrans constantly going all-in vs Zerg has to do so much more to do with Zerg early game being weak than it does with Zerg late-game macro mechanics being unstoppable.
Boxer has said multiple times that TvZ is his worst match-up. He took a shot at his best opportunity, early game. It didn't work. This is how you survive your weak match-ups in tourney play, you try to cheese your way through and hope it sticks.
Zerg has the worst economy for the first 10 minutes and their income is only slightly better endgame? WHAT?
Surely you jest sir.
Also, macro isn't just income. It's about being able to tech switch and mass produce units and expand.
On November 06 2010 06:42 Dalavita wrote: This is so true that it's actually sad.
When people say Boxer fucked up, they need to realize what happens when a good player fights a good opponent. GOOD OPPONENTS HAVE A WAY OF MAKING YOU LOOK SILLY!
ITR vs Fruit Dealer in GSL #1. People were bitching at ITR when he was playing it as perfectly as he could. Tank dropping on LT, stopped, medivac dropping, stopped. Boxer looking foolish has to do with Nestea playing properly and blocking him, on top of having superior macro mechanics due to his race.
I am so tired of this fallacious argument.
Zerg has the worst economy of the 3 races for the first 10 minutes of the game, and their income is only slightly better beyond that unless T or P chooses to 1-base all game long.
Terrans constantly going all-in vs Zerg has to do so much more to do with Zerg early game being weak than it does with Zerg late-game macro mechanics being unstoppable.
Boxer has said multiple times that TvZ is his worst match-up. He took a shot at his best opportunity, early game. It didn't work. This is how you survive your weak match-ups in tourney play, you try to cheese your way through and hope it sticks.
Zerg has the worst economy for the first 10 minutes and their income is only slightly better endgame? WHAT?
Surely you jest sir.
Also, macro isn't just income. It's about being able to tech switch and mass produce units and expand.
Watch the income tabs next time you get a hold of a pro rep and watch that what he is saying is entirely true. 2 base terran vs 3 base have near equal income thanks to mules.
Late game army rebuilding is the only way for zerg to take advantage of their macro advantage. If they are able to stockpile thousands of mins/gas and still trade armies with you, you have been outplayed. =/
On November 06 2010 05:26 Bull-Demon wrote: Hey another one post wonder complaining about terran being weak. Gsl 3 out 4 are terran. What are you complaining about?
Did Zerg players stop whining when FruitDealer won the first GSL? No? Then why do Zerg players point at this GSL for balance evidence?
On November 06 2010 05:26 Bull-Demon wrote: Hey another one post wonder complaining about terran being weak. Gsl 3 out 4 are terran. What are you complaining about?
Did Zerg players stop whining when FruitDealer won the first GSL? No? Then why do Zerg players point at this GSL for balance evidence?
I referred to it to point to the terran's LACK of evidence. There is almost absolutely no evidence in favor of the claim that terran gets rolled by zerg except a bunch of theorycraft and hyperbole. Look at the post patch tournament results thread and tell me terran is broken. Get some perspective ffs.
First of all i had faith i even bet money on Boxer! I was cheering for him until the end.
But you have to realise there is nothing that can excuse Boxer here. He played horrible, i think he is the worst terran i have ever seen in GSL playing vs zerg. -The drop where the mutas could attack the tanks and the Thors were isolated out of tank range to get owned by roaches.. -The weird cheese attemps where even tho his opponent goes hatch first he gets owned almost by drones only -The Tank/Marine pushes where he didnt clear the creep and engaged unsieged and on creep. -His marine splits vs banelings. Where marines did actually 0 damage total.
He has to improve at so many things and i think its awful that he dares to whine about zerg while he is so obviously bad at this matchup.
On November 06 2010 05:34 iEchoic wrote: People need to stop hating on Boxer's proxy raxes. He's not proxy raxing because he's stupid, he's proxy raxing because he knows there's no way to beat a macro-oriented zerg player in the lategame. It's his only option.
how do you know that its even imba and not just the skill gap. eg. if boxer plays JD in bw theres no way he would win late game, so z>t late game in bw? who knows, it might just be the skill gap give it some time geez
Although we've seen some exciting TvZ games in the GSL (Kyrix vs Foxer final game comes to mind), generally the games are rather predictable and boring. I don't appreciate the current gameplay at all. I don't like watching it, and I don't like playing it. The onus is on terran to win early, or zerg wins by default. This is not well balanced or fun. More and more zergs are figuring out that they can harass with mutas long enough to get a ridiculous amount of banelings. This either contains terran allowing zerg to take the entire map, or forces terran to try and figure out exactly when he has a slight edge in terms of army composition for a push. If he chooses correctly he can win, if he micros perfectly. Then there's dealing with zerg simply not engaging but attacking your main with mutas while getting even more banelings, randomly burrowed banelings in pairs forcing you to get a raven or have your marines blown up, tech switches, etc, etc. It's just... not right.
On November 02 2010 21:26 Skyze wrote: Can someone explain to me this "Terran sucks in lategame" theory?? Has any evidence at all point to this? It seems every terran has completely dominated protoss in GSL.. Maybe vs Z, sure once a Z gets 5+ bases its hard for terran, but as far as TvP is concerned, I dont understand this statement.
If we are theorycrafting how "Ohh protoss has collosus and storms".. What about Terran getting units other than marauders?? I know I would much rather have mass tanks and vikings over collosus and storms. Tanks still do insane damage, and vikings can take out collosus fast while dodging storms. Then we get into BCs vs Carriers.. BCs easily win there.
Im just curious; if any of you played any high level (diamond 1000+ at least) FFA games that actually get to the "lategame" (ie 200/200 armies with 3-3 upgrades)... 9 times out of 10, Terrans will win in the end with BCs/thors/marines/tanks, it can take out every protoss army with little effort.
Anyways, not saying terran is overpowered (just marauders obviously still much needed nerf).. I'd say TvP is about 99% perfect balance besides marauders, but im still flabbergasted with this whole "Terran sucks lategame" argument.. Can anyone show me ANY sort of proof??
Uh, first of all the Terrans who won, won before late game. Ie. before win storm came out. Second, did you seriously just try to make a balance claim off FFA?
On November 06 2010 06:42 Dalavita wrote: This is so true that it's actually sad.
When people say Boxer fucked up, they need to realize what happens when a good player fights a good opponent. GOOD OPPONENTS HAVE A WAY OF MAKING YOU LOOK SILLY!
ITR vs Fruit Dealer in GSL #1. People were bitching at ITR when he was playing it as perfectly as he could. Tank dropping on LT, stopped, medivac dropping, stopped. Boxer looking foolish has to do with Nestea playing properly and blocking him, on top of having superior macro mechanics due to his race.
I am so tired of this fallacious argument.
Zerg has the worst economy of the 3 races for the first 10 minutes of the game, and their income is only slightly better beyond that unless T or P chooses to 1-base all game long.
Terrans constantly going all-in vs Zerg has to do so much more to do with Zerg early game being weak than it does with Zerg late-game macro mechanics being unstoppable.
Boxer has said multiple times that TvZ is his worst match-up. He took a shot at his best opportunity, early game. It didn't work. This is how you survive your weak match-ups in tourney play, you try to cheese your way through and hope it sticks.
Zerg has the worst economy for the first 10 minutes and their income is only slightly better endgame? WHAT?
Surely you jest sir.
Also, macro isn't just income. It's about being able to tech switch and mass produce units and expand.
Watch the income tabs next time you get a hold of a pro rep and watch that what he is saying is entirely true. 2 base terran vs 3 base have near equal income thanks to mules.
Late game army rebuilding is the only way for zerg to take advantage of their macro advantage. If they are able to stockpile thousands of mins/gas and still trade armies with you, you have been outplayed. =/
Actually you're wrong and you're literally making stuff up. A mule gives bonus mining equal to 5 workers. On two bases, you have two orbitals, which is bonus workers at a given moment. Zerg on 3 bases should be saturated with a total of 90 workers, while terran has two bases with 60, and if you count mules as +10 he'll have 70.
Terrans also have to use scan, so having two mules all the time doesn't actually occur. Finally, a Zerg can saturate a base far more quickly than a Terran.
On November 06 2010 06:42 Dalavita wrote: This is so true that it's actually sad.
When people say Boxer fucked up, they need to realize what happens when a good player fights a good opponent. GOOD OPPONENTS HAVE A WAY OF MAKING YOU LOOK SILLY!
ITR vs Fruit Dealer in GSL #1. People were bitching at ITR when he was playing it as perfectly as he could. Tank dropping on LT, stopped, medivac dropping, stopped. Boxer looking foolish has to do with Nestea playing properly and blocking him, on top of having superior macro mechanics due to his race.
I am so tired of this fallacious argument.
Zerg has the worst economy of the 3 races for the first 10 minutes of the game, and their income is only slightly better beyond that unless T or P chooses to 1-base all game long.
Terrans constantly going all-in vs Zerg has to do so much more to do with Zerg early game being weak than it does with Zerg late-game macro mechanics being unstoppable.
Boxer has said multiple times that TvZ is his worst match-up. He took a shot at his best opportunity, early game. It didn't work. This is how you survive your weak match-ups in tourney play, you try to cheese your way through and hope it sticks.
Zerg has the worst economy for the first 10 minutes and their income is only slightly better endgame? WHAT?
Surely you jest sir.
Also, macro isn't just income. It's about being able to tech switch and mass produce units and expand.
Watch the income tabs next time you get a hold of a pro rep and watch that what he is saying is entirely true. 2 base terran vs 3 base have near equal income thanks to mules.
Late game army rebuilding is the only way for zerg to take advantage of their macro advantage. If they are able to stockpile thousands of mins/gas and still trade armies with you, you have been outplayed. =/
Actually you're wrong and you're literally making stuff up. A mule gives bonus mining equal to 5 workers. On two bases, you have two orbitals, which is bonus workers at a given moment. Zerg on 3 bases should be saturated with a total of 90 workers, while terran has two bases with 60, and if you count mules as +10 he'll have 70.
Terrans also have to use scan, so having two mules all the time doesn't actually occur. Finally, a Zerg can saturate a base far more quickly than a Terran.
How often do you actually see a zerg saturated on every base? At MOST they have 2 drones/patch and 3 on each geyser. You can't think about balance in a sterile perfect world where every base is perfectly saturated. In reality, if a terran is a base behind zerg, their income is roughly equal. (I play terran myself).
On November 06 2010 06:42 Dalavita wrote: This is so true that it's actually sad.
When people say Boxer fucked up, they need to realize what happens when a good player fights a good opponent. GOOD OPPONENTS HAVE A WAY OF MAKING YOU LOOK SILLY!
ITR vs Fruit Dealer in GSL #1. People were bitching at ITR when he was playing it as perfectly as he could. Tank dropping on LT, stopped, medivac dropping, stopped. Boxer looking foolish has to do with Nestea playing properly and blocking him, on top of having superior macro mechanics due to his race.
I am so tired of this fallacious argument.
Zerg has the worst economy of the 3 races for the first 10 minutes of the game, and their income is only slightly better beyond that unless T or P chooses to 1-base all game long.
Terrans constantly going all-in vs Zerg has to do so much more to do with Zerg early game being weak than it does with Zerg late-game macro mechanics being unstoppable.
Boxer has said multiple times that TvZ is his worst match-up. He took a shot at his best opportunity, early game. It didn't work. This is how you survive your weak match-ups in tourney play, you try to cheese your way through and hope it sticks.
Zerg has the worst economy for the first 10 minutes and their income is only slightly better endgame? WHAT?
Surely you jest sir.
Also, macro isn't just income. It's about being able to tech switch and mass produce units and expand.
Watch the income tabs next time you get a hold of a pro rep and watch that what he is saying is entirely true. 2 base terran vs 3 base have near equal income thanks to mules.
Late game army rebuilding is the only way for zerg to take advantage of their macro advantage. If they are able to stockpile thousands of mins/gas and still trade armies with you, you have been outplayed. =/
Actually you're wrong and you're literally making stuff up. A mule gives bonus mining equal to 5 workers. On two bases, you have two orbitals, which is bonus workers at a given moment. Zerg on 3 bases should be saturated with a total of 90 workers, while terran has two bases with 60, and if you count mules as +10 he'll have 70.
Terrans also have to use scan, so having two mules all the time doesn't actually occur. Finally, a Zerg can saturate a base far more quickly than a Terran.
Don't theorycraft, actually watch some games like I suggested. Zerg doesn't magically get free drones, they have to pay for them just like every other race. Obviously if the zerg is able to fully saturate THREE bases while the terran only has two, then of course of the incomes won't match up. Zerg has to take more bases to spread their drones around more. Most pro games don't have the zerg players with 20-30 more drones. They have more bases, more spread out drones to match the additional income mules provide above two base saturation for terran.
On November 06 2010 06:42 Dalavita wrote: This is so true that it's actually sad.
When people say Boxer fucked up, they need to realize what happens when a good player fights a good opponent. GOOD OPPONENTS HAVE A WAY OF MAKING YOU LOOK SILLY!
ITR vs Fruit Dealer in GSL #1. People were bitching at ITR when he was playing it as perfectly as he could. Tank dropping on LT, stopped, medivac dropping, stopped. Boxer looking foolish has to do with Nestea playing properly and blocking him, on top of having superior macro mechanics due to his race.
I am so tired of this fallacious argument.
Zerg has the worst economy of the 3 races for the first 10 minutes of the game, and their income is only slightly better beyond that unless T or P chooses to 1-base all game long.
Terrans constantly going all-in vs Zerg has to do so much more to do with Zerg early game being weak than it does with Zerg late-game macro mechanics being unstoppable.
Boxer has said multiple times that TvZ is his worst match-up. He took a shot at his best opportunity, early game. It didn't work. This is how you survive your weak match-ups in tourney play, you try to cheese your way through and hope it sticks.
Zerg has the worst economy for the first 10 minutes and their income is only slightly better endgame? WHAT?
Surely you jest sir.
Also, macro isn't just income. It's about being able to tech switch and mass produce units and expand.
Watch the income tabs next time you get a hold of a pro rep and watch that what he is saying is entirely true. 2 base terran vs 3 base have near equal income thanks to mules.
Sadly, there are some Zerg players that are so biased, it is borderline pathetic.
Even if the mineral income is the same as you claim, you ignore the advantage of 6 gas refineries (3 hatcheries) to 4 gas refineries (2 CCs).
On November 06 2010 06:42 Dalavita wrote: This is so true that it's actually sad.
When people say Boxer fucked up, they need to realize what happens when a good player fights a good opponent. GOOD OPPONENTS HAVE A WAY OF MAKING YOU LOOK SILLY!
ITR vs Fruit Dealer in GSL #1. People were bitching at ITR when he was playing it as perfectly as he could. Tank dropping on LT, stopped, medivac dropping, stopped. Boxer looking foolish has to do with Nestea playing properly and blocking him, on top of having superior macro mechanics due to his race.
I am so tired of this fallacious argument.
Zerg has the worst economy of the 3 races for the first 10 minutes of the game, and their income is only slightly better beyond that unless T or P chooses to 1-base all game long.
Terrans constantly going all-in vs Zerg has to do so much more to do with Zerg early game being weak than it does with Zerg late-game macro mechanics being unstoppable.
Boxer has said multiple times that TvZ is his worst match-up. He took a shot at his best opportunity, early game. It didn't work. This is how you survive your weak match-ups in tourney play, you try to cheese your way through and hope it sticks.
Zerg has the worst economy for the first 10 minutes and their income is only slightly better endgame? WHAT?
Surely you jest sir.
Also, macro isn't just income. It's about being able to tech switch and mass produce units and expand.
Watch the income tabs next time you get a hold of a pro rep and watch that what he is saying is entirely true. 2 base terran vs 3 base have near equal income thanks to mules.
Late game army rebuilding is the only way for zerg to take advantage of their macro advantage. If they are able to stockpile thousands of mins/gas and still trade armies with you, you have been outplayed. =/
Actually you're wrong and you're literally making stuff up. A mule gives bonus mining equal to 5 workers. On two bases, you have two orbitals, which is bonus workers at a given moment. Zerg on 3 bases should be saturated with a total of 90 workers, while terran has two bases with 60, and if you count mules as +10 he'll have 70.
Terrans also have to use scan, so having two mules all the time doesn't actually occur. Finally, a Zerg can saturate a base far more quickly than a Terran.
90 WORKERS?
are you new to this game?
really i am not sure if any good zerg has ever made 90 drones. that is ridiculous
On November 06 2010 03:03 Looky wrote: you terrans that are qqing dont seem to follow the trend. now a days i seen terran just mass marine and a really fast expo with a very strong timing attack with tank marines. which is really freaken strong to hold off. its not just mass harrass anymore. please watch foxer and some other good terrans plz.
On November 06 2010 05:34 iEchoic wrote: People need to stop hating on Boxer's proxy raxes. He's not proxy raxing because he's stupid, he's proxy raxing because he knows there's no way to beat a macro-oriented zerg player in the lategame. It's his only option.
Foxer will be doing a lot of the same cheesy early stuff or he will lose (he will lose anyway).
It's easy to use Foxer as a model of how TvZ is played, but Foxer basically lost the series. Kyrix just gave him the win in game 5. Had Kyrix not macroed like a plat player, we'd all be talking about how stupid Foxer's strategies were. Think about it for a second: Foxer massively outplayed Kyrix in the series and still basically lost. Stop using Foxer v Kyrix as an example of how TvZ should be played.
This is so true that it's actually sad.
When people say Boxer fucked up, they need to realize what happens when a good player fights a good opponent. GOOD OPPONENTS HAVE A WAY OF MAKING YOU LOOK SILLY!
ITR vs Fruit Dealer in GSL #1. People were bitching at ITR when he was playing it as perfectly as he could. Tank dropping on LT, stopped, medivac dropping, stopped. Boxer looking foolish has to do with Nestea playing properly and blocking him, on top of having superior macro mechanics due to his race.
Are you kidding? ITR played like trash in the season 1 finals. Any good Z/T player at the time will tell you this.
On November 06 2010 09:49 TheDna wrote: First of all i had faith i even bet money on Boxer! I was cheering for him until the end.
But you have to realise there is nothing that can excuse Boxer here. He played horrible, i think he is the worst terran i have ever seen in GSL playing vs zerg. -The drop where the mutas could attack the tanks and the Thors were isolated out of tank range to get owned by roaches.. -The weird cheese attemps where even tho his opponent goes hatch first he gets owned almost by drones only -The Tank/Marine pushes where he didnt clear the creep and engaged unsieged and on creep. -His marine splits vs banelings. Where marines did actually 0 damage total.
He has to improve at so many things and i think its awful that he dares to whine about zerg while he is so obviously bad at this matchup.
It's been mentioned over and over by me and other players, as well as boxer himself, and others - you have to do a 2 base timing, or gimmicky strat to kill Zerg. A management game is basically unwinnable.
Stop saying "weird cheese attempts." They aren't weird at all. He did his best to take out a Zerg in a series by throwing those in because going to late game is Zerg autowin.
Of course it is boxer and you can claim he was a "unorthodox" cheesey player in SC1 and say that's why he did his 2 rax, but it's just not the case.
Just to say it AGAIN...when you see these top pro Terran's doing these all-in two base gimicky strats and "timings" it's because they themselves also know that Zerg wins late game, so why go for a management when you're guaranteed a loss, when you can go for a gimmick that has the only chance of winning.
On November 06 2010 09:49 TheDna wrote: First of all i had faith i even bet money on Boxer! I was cheering for him until the end.
But you have to realise there is nothing that can excuse Boxer here. He played horrible, i think he is the worst terran i have ever seen in GSL playing vs zerg. -The drop where the mutas could attack the tanks and the Thors were isolated out of tank range to get owned by roaches.. -The weird cheese attemps where even tho his opponent goes hatch first he gets owned almost by drones only -The Tank/Marine pushes where he didnt clear the creep and engaged unsieged and on creep. -His marine splits vs banelings. Where marines did actually 0 damage total.
He has to improve at so many things and i think its awful that he dares to whine about zerg while he is so obviously bad at this matchup.
It's been mentioned over and over by me and other players, as well as boxer himself, and others - you have to do a 2 base timing, or gimmicky strat to kill Zerg. A management game is basically unwinnable.
Stop saying "weird cheese attempts." They aren't weird at all. He did his best to take out a Zerg in a series by throwing those in because going to late game is Zerg autowin.
Of course it is boxer and you can claim he was a "unorthodox" cheesey player in SC1 and say that's why he did his 2 rax, but it's just not the case.
Just to say it AGAIN...when you see these top pro Terran's doing these all-in two base gimicky strats and "timings" it's because they themselves also know that Zerg wins late game, so why go for a management when you're guaranteed a loss, when you can go for a gimmick that has the only chance of winning.
Ah pretty sure Nada would disagree with you. Terran can play zerg late game just MOST don't know how like you, Boxer, and other "top" terrans very interesting. Who do you consider top? You? Boxer is the only top terran player who decided to do a gimicky all in strategy. I didn't see Fake boxer do it, didn't see Nada do it, don't see Drewbie/QXC do it. I mean wow so 1 top terran does it means your right! No just learn to play your race rather then complain imba in every single post you make on these forums.
On November 06 2010 14:02 avilo wrote: It's been mentioned over and over by me and other players, as well as boxer himself, and others - you have to do a 2 base timing, or gimmicky strat to kill Zerg. A management game is basically unwinnable.
Yup, this is probably why Boxer went for "cheese." He didn't have any other option.
On November 06 2010 14:02 avilo wrote: Stop saying "weird cheese attempts." They aren't weird at all. He did his best to take out a Zerg in a series by throwing those in because going to late game is Zerg autowin.
^^^
QFT. Why don't the biased Zerg players get this? Of course they don't get it and will never get it - they don't want Zerg to be nerfed, LOL.
On November 06 2010 14:02 avilo wrote: Just to say it AGAIN...when you see these top pro Terran's doing these all-in two base gimicky strats and "timings" it's because they themselves also know that Zerg wins late game, so why go for a management when you're guaranteed a loss, when you can go for a gimmick that has the only chance of winning.
Avilo, you will never convince the biased Zerg players. They will never admit it publically because they know that admitting it publically can lead to a nerf for Zerg in the next patch. Sadly, while they won't admit it publically, they know that what you say is 100% true.
Boxer is the only top terran player who decided to do a gimicky all in strategy. I didn't see Fake boxer do it,
What Foxer does is very gimmicky. It's definitely not safe and solid play. I mean all marines versus banelings? If the Zerg gets any infestors you're completely screwed. Now I wouldn't say all of his builds were "all-in" but certainly some of them were definitely close to it. Especially that game when he brought scvs on the push, if he didn't do major economy damage he was going to lose, he didn't and he indeed lost.
If it wasnt safe and solid Moskau, we would see it fail against the zerg he played against, but it is. Even if the zerg gets infestors the key is not letting your mariens ever get into a ball, he basically makes everything its own seperate platoon unit. And Im sure that foxers play is good enough that he can focus infestors and all that.
On November 06 2010 06:42 Dalavita wrote: This is so true that it's actually sad.
When people say Boxer fucked up, they need to realize what happens when a good player fights a good opponent. GOOD OPPONENTS HAVE A WAY OF MAKING YOU LOOK SILLY!
ITR vs Fruit Dealer in GSL #1. People were bitching at ITR when he was playing it as perfectly as he could. Tank dropping on LT, stopped, medivac dropping, stopped. Boxer looking foolish has to do with Nestea playing properly and blocking him, on top of having superior macro mechanics due to his race.
I am so tired of this fallacious argument.
Zerg has the worst economy of the 3 races for the first 10 minutes of the game, and their income is only slightly better beyond that unless T or P chooses to 1-base all game long.
Terrans constantly going all-in vs Zerg has to do so much more to do with Zerg early game being weak than it does with Zerg late-game macro mechanics being unstoppable.
Boxer has said multiple times that TvZ is his worst match-up. He took a shot at his best opportunity, early game. It didn't work. This is how you survive your weak match-ups in tourney play, you try to cheese your way through and hope it sticks.
I am so tired of biased opinions. Zerg's economy worst for 10 minutes into the game? The fact that Zerg can blindly go 14 hatch makes Zerg economy insanely strong. A good recent example is game2 of Boxer against Nestea. Boxer kills an insane amount of drones. Nestea just defends with Queens, and poof ends up with 65 drones the moment the hellions are destroyed. The mule is imba fairytale has been shattered some time ago.
Zerg has better unit macro abilities, better worker macro abilities, a macro ability that can actually attack, and a mobile scouting dropship for 100 minerals. Try to compare this to the static scouting for Terran from 350 minerals for a mule.
The reason Boxer went proxy rax, was because he tried a normal game and lost decisively. Tried a fast expo build and lost decisively. Then he tried to do a proxy because the other strategies obviously did not work.
Zerg needs to FE to be on same page with the other race. same as it was in BW.
to be honest, people that are arguing against foxers play and saying it's gimmicky and thats the only way you can win is ridiculous
first off, foxer stated in an interview that he likes to go marines just to SHOW that marines can counter banelings.
It's not like that is the only way he will play TvZ, I'm sure he can have stronger TvZ against the infestor play nestea will most likely do anyway.
Honestly though, try and play a macro TvZ, and practice. I understand that zerg has an advantage at the moment because people still need to adapt, but really, get with it.
If it wasnt safe and solid Moskau, we would see it fail against the zerg he played against, but it is. Even if the zerg gets infestors the key is not letting your mariens ever get into a ball, he basically makes everything its own seperate platoon unit. And Im sure that foxers play is good enough that he can focus infestors and all that.
Just because he's winning with it for now does not mean it's safe and solid. New strategies can catch opponents off guard and they don't always know how to respond. Personally I don't think this strategy will work forever, and that it's merely a gimmick for now until someone figures out a good response. There are plenty of unsafe builds that people can pull off and be very successful with.
On November 06 2010 09:49 TheDna wrote: First of all i had faith i even bet money on Boxer! I was cheering for him until the end.
But you have to realise there is nothing that can excuse Boxer here. He played horrible, i think he is the worst terran i have ever seen in GSL playing vs zerg. -The drop where the mutas could attack the tanks and the Thors were isolated out of tank range to get owned by roaches.. -The weird cheese attemps where even tho his opponent goes hatch first he gets owned almost by drones only -The Tank/Marine pushes where he didnt clear the creep and engaged unsieged and on creep. -His marine splits vs banelings. Where marines did actually 0 damage total.
He has to improve at so many things and i think its awful that he dares to whine about zerg while he is so obviously bad at this matchup.
It's been mentioned over and over by me and other players, as well as boxer himself, and others - you have to do a 2 base timing, or gimmicky strat to kill Zerg. A management game is basically unwinnable.
Stop saying "weird cheese attempts." They aren't weird at all. He did his best to take out a Zerg in a series by throwing those in because going to late game is Zerg autowin.
Of course it is boxer and you can claim he was a "unorthodox" cheesey player in SC1 and say that's why he did his 2 rax, but it's just not the case.
Lol this is so wrong. Nada is not plaanning to play long macro games in tvz, and which the terran players defensively, and let the zerg gets a strong economy, because then he would lose basically all tvz. In beta when tanks gave 60 dmg alot of terrans tried this turtling style, and some succes doing it. But while the ultra got buffed and tanks nerfed, it become impossible to do.
Just to say it AGAIN...when you see these top pro Terran's doing these all-in two base gimicky strats and "timings" it's because they themselves also know that Zerg wins late game, so why go for a management when you're guaranteed a loss, when you can go for a gimmick that has the only chance of winning.
Ah pretty sure Nada would disagree with you. Terran can play zerg late game just MOST don't know how like you, Boxer, and other "top" terrans very interesting. Who do you consider top? You? Boxer is the only top terran player who decided to do a gimicky all in strategy. I didn't see Fake boxer do it, didn't see Nada do it, don't see Drewbie/QXC do it. I mean wow so 1 top terran does it means your right! No just learn to play your race rather then complain imba in every single post you make on these forums.
Who would have thought a month ago that it would be Terran's jumping the UP train? ^^ In general in these discussions there is WAY to much talk of auto-loss and such. When Morrow's 5raxreaper first came out it was said to be completely unblockable, nothing you can do against it, always at a disadvantage etc. Even before the patch zergs figured it out and managed to deal with it. People are resourcefull, and Starcraft (2) is a complex game. Stop saying shit is autolose because people didnt figure it out in the few weeks after a patch, and especially when "people" is a very small sample.
On November 06 2010 19:11 Promises wrote: Who would have thought a month ago that it would be Terran's jumping the UP train? ^^ In general in these discussions there is WAY to much talk of auto-loss and such. When Morrow's 5raxreaper first came out it was said to be completely unblockable, nothing you can do against it, always at a disadvantage etc. Even before the patch zergs figured it out and managed to deal with it. People are resourcefull, and Starcraft (2) is a complex game. Stop saying shit is autolose because people didnt figure it out in the few weeks after a patch, and especially when "people" is a very small sample.
What's wrong with you ? Zerg players didn't figure out how to beat siege tanks, BC and reapers, Blizzard nerfed them into oblivion like they nerfed HSM during BETA.
Bring back HSM and BC beta style, tanks with 60 core dmg and reapers as they were before the senseless nerfs, and you will see who is going to complain.
On November 06 2010 06:42 Dalavita wrote: This is so true that it's actually sad.
When people say Boxer fucked up, they need to realize what happens when a good player fights a good opponent. GOOD OPPONENTS HAVE A WAY OF MAKING YOU LOOK SILLY!
ITR vs Fruit Dealer in GSL #1. People were bitching at ITR when he was playing it as perfectly as he could. Tank dropping on LT, stopped, medivac dropping, stopped. Boxer looking foolish has to do with Nestea playing properly and blocking him, on top of having superior macro mechanics due to his race.
I am so tired of this fallacious argument.
Zerg has the worst economy of the 3 races for the first 10 minutes of the game, and their income is only slightly better beyond that unless T or P chooses to 1-base all game long.
Terrans constantly going all-in vs Zerg has to do so much more to do with Zerg early game being weak than it does with Zerg late-game macro mechanics being unstoppable.
Boxer has said multiple times that TvZ is his worst match-up. He took a shot at his best opportunity, early game. It didn't work. This is how you survive your weak match-ups in tourney play, you try to cheese your way through and hope it sticks.
Zerg has the worst economy for the first 10 minutes and their income is only slightly better endgame? WHAT?
Surely you jest sir.
Also, macro isn't just income. It's about being able to tech switch and mass produce units and expand.
Watch the income tabs next time you get a hold of a pro rep and watch that what he is saying is entirely true. 2 base terran vs 3 base have near equal income thanks to mules.
Late game army rebuilding is the only way for zerg to take advantage of their macro advantage. If they are able to stockpile thousands of mins/gas and still trade armies with you, you have been outplayed. =/
Actually you're wrong and you're literally making stuff up. A mule gives bonus mining equal to 5 workers. On two bases, you have two orbitals, which is bonus workers at a given moment. Zerg on 3 bases should be saturated with a total of 90 workers, while terran has two bases with 60, and if you count mules as +10 he'll have 70.
Terrans also have to use scan, so having two mules all the time doesn't actually occur. Finally, a Zerg can saturate a base far more quickly than a Terran.
Who has 90 workers at 10 mins? let alone 70? If you let a zerg macro that hard you did something wrong.
I hope he doesn´t go random, hopefully the state of TvZ isn´t that bad. Of course it would be great to have a high level random but BoxeR... no, I´d rather keep him as the Terran icon. Well coming patches will tell.
On November 06 2010 06:42 Dalavita wrote: This is so true that it's actually sad.
When people say Boxer fucked up, they need to realize what happens when a good player fights a good opponent. GOOD OPPONENTS HAVE A WAY OF MAKING YOU LOOK SILLY!
ITR vs Fruit Dealer in GSL #1. People were bitching at ITR when he was playing it as perfectly as he could. Tank dropping on LT, stopped, medivac dropping, stopped. Boxer looking foolish has to do with Nestea playing properly and blocking him, on top of having superior macro mechanics due to his race.
I am so tired of this fallacious argument.
Zerg has the worst economy of the 3 races for the first 10 minutes of the game, and their income is only slightly better beyond that unless T or P chooses to 1-base all game long.
Terrans constantly going all-in vs Zerg has to do so much more to do with Zerg early game being weak than it does with Zerg late-game macro mechanics being unstoppable.
Boxer has said multiple times that TvZ is his worst match-up. He took a shot at his best opportunity, early game. It didn't work. This is how you survive your weak match-ups in tourney play, you try to cheese your way through and hope it sticks.
Zerg has the worst economy for the first 10 minutes and their income is only slightly better endgame? WHAT?
Surely you jest sir.
Also, macro isn't just income. It's about being able to tech switch and mass produce units and expand.
Watch the income tabs next time you get a hold of a pro rep and watch that what he is saying is entirely true. 2 base terran vs 3 base have near equal income thanks to mules.
Sadly, there are some Zerg players that are so biased, it is borderline pathetic.
Even if the mineral income is the same as you claim, you ignore the advantage of 6 gas refineries (3 hatcheries) to 4 gas refineries (2 CCs).
Who ignored anything? Again, watch the income tabs of pro games, thats all I'm asking. For the most part terran mine minerals at higher rate than zerg while zerg has more gas. Its been this way since beta, it didn't make zerg OP then, it certaintly doens't make them OP now. It works because zerg requires almost pure gas units to counter MMM.
I'm personally sick of reading about this imaginary "12 minute mark" where terran suddenly sucks and protoss suddenly dominates. A lot of protosses are experimenting with fast expand builds and tech heavy builds and many (if not most) of the terrans I see on ladder are sticking to their hard-and-fast 1 base-- be it three rax, 2/1/1, 1/1/1 tech build-- or hard-and-fast low tech + expansions plays.
What I'm saying is it's the popular play styles that are creating this imaginary threshold, not the game. The one base timing attacks I speak of always occur between 9-11 minute. They are all in, so when they fail, of course the terran should lose after the 12 minute mark! It's not some magic number.
I think the problem is a lack of creativity in the tvp mindset. Very few players approach the game like a gretorp does-- going for fast ghosts to nullify sentries and thereby make the collossus/stalker/sentry ball CONSIDERABLY weaker or possible making the zealot/ht/sentry combo INSTANTLY WORTHLESS. Most of them simply want to spam the A and D keys, tech to medivacs and run their opponents over.
And when that doesn't work, they blame the game instead of this imaginary bind to only be able to create a handful of unit types.
The only thing to take away from this 12 minute idea is this: mauraders get weaker in larger numbers and against well-positioned tier 3 compositions. Possible solution: Stop massing ONLY mauraders throughout the entire game perhaps?
I've just gotta say, this is quite possibly the most hilarious thread on the entirety of TL.
I mean, wow. Don't get me wrong, plenty of Zerg have thrown out the QQ without the most solid data behind it [myself included], but Terrans are still dominating the tournament scene completely. There is rock-solid EVIDENCE of that in this very thread. Boxer's TvZ is obviously some of the worst in the entire pro scene atm. And lastly, Foxer has started to demonstrate the massive potential of the Marine with great micro behind it.
Are there people that really want Terran to return to their complete and utter insanity at launch?
On November 06 2010 23:21 JTWStephens wrote: I've just gotta say, this is quite possibly the most hilarious thread on the entirety of TL.
I mean, wow. Don't get me wrong, plenty of Zerg have thrown out the QQ without neccesarily the most solid basis behind it [myself included], but Terrans are still dominating the tournament scene completely. There is rock-solid EVIDENCE of that in this very thread. Boxer's TvZ is obviously some of the worst in the entire pro scene atm. And lastly, Foxer has started to demonstrate the completely insane potential of the Marine with great micro behind it.
Are there people that really want Terran to return to their complete and utter insanity at launch?
Actually, if you compared the overall Zerg player base (20-25%) and their ratio at the top diamond/at the GSL, you would realize that they are totally over-represented. If you looked at the average point of a Diamond Zerg player in BNet, you would realize that it is 200 points higher than Protoss/Terran. If you looked at the win ratio of Zerg at GSL, you would realize that it is the race with by far the highest one, along with being the only one with a +++50% win ratio in every single MU.
So basically, you're just pretending to have rock-solid evidence of a lie. You can keep on lying and pretend that a new Zerg bonjwa is born each time one of you wins the GSL if you like... But this rethoric wouldn't stand very long. Foxer strat is a failure against early infestor, and he is going to be massacred in the final. Everybody knows that, including you.
And another would be no spawning pool before overlord
Zerg starts with an Overlord. Maybe you don't know enough about the game to suggest balance changes?
Maybe you didn't read the whole post saying they shouldnt have an overlord at the start, which is an advantage over the two others race.
Terran golden age is over. Realize that, now it's a poor race which sucks hard, especially against zerg at any moment of the game.
What really changed with terran? Can you no longer cheese? (Which is dumb anyway) Do roaches kill you? (Mauraders are still better than roaches) Terran just need to start playing a more macro game than trying to end it within the 1st 10 minutes. A contain works against zerg, staying equal in bases works against zerg, drops still work. I don't see how TvZ was changed that much that the entire world cries and says terran sucks against zerg now.
On November 06 2010 23:21 JTWStephens wrote: I've just gotta say, this is quite possibly the most hilarious thread on the entirety of TL.
I mean, wow. Don't get me wrong, plenty of Zerg have thrown out the QQ without neccesarily the most solid basis behind it [myself included], but Terrans are still dominating the tournament scene completely. There is rock-solid EVIDENCE of that in this very thread. Boxer's TvZ is obviously some of the worst in the entire pro scene atm. And lastly, Foxer has started to demonstrate the completely insane potential of the Marine with great micro behind it.
Are there people that really want Terran to return to their complete and utter insanity at launch?
Actually, if you compared the overall Zerg player base (20-25%) and their ratio at the top diamond/at the GSL, you would realize that they are totally over-represented. If you looked at the average point of a Diamond Zerg player in BNet, you would realize that it is 200 points higher than Protoss/Terran. If you looked at the win ratio of Zerg at GSL, you would realize that it is the race with by far the highest one, along with being the only one with a +++50% win ratio in every single MU.
Since we're just making stuff up at this point, the moon is also made of cheese and I totally did not fuck your mother last night.
On November 06 2010 23:36 TeWy wrote: So basically, you're just pretending to have rock-solid evidence of a lie.
Is your post an ironic attempt to show how amazing and awesome lying can be?
On November 06 2010 23:36 TeWy wrote: You can keep on lying and pretend that a new Zerg bonjwa is born each time one of you wins the GSL if you like... But this rethoric wouldn't stand very long. Foxer strat is a failure against early infestor, and he is going to be massacred in the final. Everybody knows that, including you.
Spoilers: Foxer is going to spread his Marines with his outstanding micro and minimize/completely invalidate fungal's AOE - the only truly useful Infestor ability.
At first I was taking your reply seriously, but it's pretty obvious you're just trolling or a bronze terran with the blinders still on.
And another would be no spawning pool before overlord
Zerg starts with an Overlord. Maybe you don't know enough about the game to suggest balance changes?
Maybe you didn't read the whole post saying they shouldnt have an overlord at the start, which is an advantage over the two others race.
Terran golden age is over. Realize that, now it's a poor race which sucks hard, especially against zerg at any moment of the game.
What really changed with terran? Can you no longer cheese? (Which is dumb anyway) Do roaches kill you? (Mauraders are still better than roaches) Terran just need to start playing a more macro game than trying to end it within the 1st 10 minutes. A contain works against zerg, staying equal in bases works against zerg, drops still work. I don't see how TvZ was changed that much that the entire world cries and says terran sucks against zerg now.
The ability to cheese is not dumb, and terran now can't make the same as pool6. Roach + speedling actually are completly owning marauders.Now to finish, its easier for a zerg to expand than it is for the terran.
So you don't see how TvZ was changed that much ? - reaper overnerf (pretty useless unit now) - bunker build time increase. while making the bunker you will loose 150 mineral (100+ 50 the time the scv building doesnt mine.), which is a barrack. - supply before barrack - slow marines with 45 hp at the very early stage of the game. They should allow to build reactor and at the same time build marine. Also, the reactor cost insane amount of gaz. - etc...
Now in 3vs3, I see almost no terran and A LOT of zerg players, because they understood that their speed + their expand ability make them too good.
Also, the speed from zerglings completely anilhate the micro you could make with marines, and you have it way before stimpack (which, by the way, damage your marines)
On November 06 2010 23:36 TeWy wrote: [Actually, if you compared the overall Zerg player base (20-25%) and their ratio at the top diamond/at the GSL, you would realize that they are totally over-represented. If you looked at the average point of a Diamond Zerg player in BNet, you would realize that it is 200 points higher than Protoss/Terran.
If you looked at the win ratio of Zerg at GSL, you would realize that it is the race with by far the highest one, along with being the only one with a +++50% win ratio in every single MU.
Those are sad, sad, statistics. If those statistics aren't proof of Zerg OP, then I don't know what else proves Zerg OP.
Blizzard needs to address this balance issue by the next patch and rebalance Zerg.
On November 06 2010 23:36 TeWy wrote: [Actually, if you compared the overall Zerg player base (20-25%) and their ratio at the top diamond/at the GSL, you would realize that they are totally over-represented. If you looked at the average point of a Diamond Zerg player in BNet, you would realize that it is 200 points higher than Protoss/Terran.
If you looked at the win ratio of Zerg at GSL, you would realize that it is the race with by far the highest one, along with being the only one with a +++50% win ratio in every single MU.
Those are sad, sad, statistics. If those statistics aren't proof of Zerg OP, then I don't know what else proves Zerg OP.
Blizzard needs to address this balance issue by the next patch and rebalance Zerg.
lol what those statistics are sooo made up. And how does it make sense that top top zerg players out of the few that were there are high in the ladder = over-represented? I mean lol sorry you can't just 1A and win anymore with terran but that and your post are ridiculous. I don't know why I bother to try talking common sense to people but just wow....
If you guys think zerg is sooo easy to play switch to them and while you guys are getting pounded game after game maybe you won't be as ignorant as you are now.
On November 06 2010 23:36 TeWy wrote: [Actually, if you compared the overall Zerg player base (20-25%) and their ratio at the top diamond/at the GSL, you would realize that they are totally over-represented. If you looked at the average point of a Diamond Zerg player in BNet, you would realize that it is 200 points higher than Protoss/Terran.
If you looked at the win ratio of Zerg at GSL, you would realize that it is the race with by far the highest one, along with being the only one with a +++50% win ratio in every single MU.
Those are sad, sad, statistics. If those statistics aren't proof of Zerg OP, then I don't know what else proves Zerg OP.
Blizzard needs to address this balance issue by the next patch and rebalance Zerg.
So the fact that terran still has more tournament wins after patch means nothing? The fact that terran is still the most represented in the top 200 means nothing?
And mashing statistics from previous patches with statistics from this patch is extemely misleading. I seriously doubt zerg is only 20% of the playerbase after all the scrub FOTM switchers made their change.
What's insane about the stats you T pull off is how for months you denied how having 50% of the top 200, much bigger representation in all tournament joined with a huge margin in said tounies won were valid stats showing an imbalance. New terrans super stars were born there and there while other races pros were always people like idra or tester. It took weeks for top Ts to aknowledge a 'small imbalance'' in the TvZ early game when every single build a T would want to do would be viable, 40 apm terrans beating 200 apm zergs with easy to place drops etc etc. Z players had to play superior just to have a chance to get into mid-game.
It seems to me like the T whining now are the same who told Z to use ''mobility'' and ''nyduses''
Now we have 3/4 T in the semi-finals and Ts are speaking of Boxer as a glimmer of hope in this M-U ? I mean comon, leave it a rest for now, if Z from now on win 50% of the tournies like you did for an other couple weeks and we can bring back the subject to the table. Right now it making T looks ridiculous, theoricrafting about Futur issues making the M-U unplayable while right now things for terrans ARE working isnt a good idea IMO, right now Foxer is ripping apart zergs, and we see more and more marine plays working on the ladder. If he want to go random than fine, why not ? We might be able to see a proxy hatch in a pro match someday.
On November 06 2010 19:11 Promises wrote: Who would have thought a month ago that it would be Terran's jumping the UP train? ^^ In general in these discussions there is WAY to much talk of auto-loss and such. When Morrow's 5raxreaper first came out it was said to be completely unblockable, nothing you can do against it, always at a disadvantage etc. Even before the patch zergs figured it out and managed to deal with it. People are resourcefull, and Starcraft (2) is a complex game. Stop saying shit is autolose because people didnt figure it out in the few weeks after a patch, and especially when "people" is a very small sample.
What's wrong with you ? Zerg players didn't figure out how to beat siege tanks, BC and reapers, Blizzard nerfed them into oblivion like they nerfed HSM during BETA.
Bring back HSM and BC beta style, tanks with 60 core dmg and reapers as they were before the senseless nerfs, and you will see who is going to complain.
Stop trying to make this out to be some cold war. I didnt say Zergs figured out how to beat Tanks and BCs, they did figure out to beat reapers. A lot of things that were said to be nigh impossible to counter were figured out. Your second comment makes no sense whatsoever so I'll refrain from commenting on it more. Just stop bitching so much and wait a few weeks to see how it all plays out. If after considerable time still no1 figured out how to overcome their huge underpoweredness (which will finally result in some T's in high tournament spots (oh wait)) then perhaps some change is in order. Getting all misty-eyed the second you dont immediatly know how to counter something contributes nothing.
On November 06 2010 23:36 TeWy wrote: [Actually, if you compared the overall Zerg player base (20-25%) and their ratio at the top diamond/at the GSL, you would realize that they are totally over-represented. If you looked at the average point of a Diamond Zerg player in BNet, you would realize that it is 200 points higher than Protoss/Terran.
If you looked at the win ratio of Zerg at GSL, you would realize that it is the race with by far the highest one, along with being the only one with a +++50% win ratio in every single MU.
Those are sad, sad, statistics. If those statistics aren't proof of Zerg OP, then I don't know what else proves Zerg OP.
Blizzard needs to address this balance issue by the next patch and rebalance Zerg.
I do not think GSL reflects everything, do you? Checking top 200 stats and diamond level MU win percentages, everything seems pretty much normal according to blizzard.. And if u must consider GSL, take 3 terrans 1 zerg to semi finals.. So terran needs help hm? Blizzard professionally patches the game considering several things, not as easy as we think..
And if one race must cry, they are the protoss' if GSL is the thing to be considered..
The problem is the Roach. People are going to say that 1 range doesn't make a difference, but that range buff made Roaches 50% more effective because you no longer have useless Roaches if you over-Roach. It seems like every Roach can reach their target now, and they're getting much better concaves. Since they're so good now, Zerg can freely macro and shut down any early aggression without much deterrence. They then enter the midgame with unrivaled economy and can continue to spam their cost effective Roaches. Letting bad Zergs spam Roach all day is ruining ZvT and ZvP and ZvZ. Blizzard needs to stop this Marauder-esque balancing mentality. Overtly broken units is making the metagame stale. GtG needs more cost effective counters for every race.
The game is balanced, just not in the right way. Basically every chance has an equal chance to win a game. Terran has to win in the 1st 15 minutes, zerg/protoss basically have to hold on till the 15 minute part. PvZ is at least pretty solid. They should rework certain units, but actual nerfing/buffing isn't really needed that much
On November 07 2010 04:26 1Eris1 wrote: The game is balanced, just not in the right way. Basically every chance has an equal chance to win a game. Terran has to win in the 1st 15 minutes, zerg/protoss basically have to hold on till the 15 minute part. PvZ is at least pretty solid. They should rework certain units, but actual nerfing/buffing isn't really needed that much
That was true a while ago. Now that reapers has been nerfed, that the roach has been buffed and that Zergs (high lvl diamond, I don't care about the rest) have figured out how to scout and defeat all the timing pushes... I'm afraid this is not the case anymore. Holding the games until the 15 minutes part is nothing hard for Zerg now.
i may be a little biast but honestly its nice to see terran whine for a change. lol
anyhow back on topic. if the emporer says there is a problem there is a problem. all u T complaining is a little over the top though.
i know this isnt suppose to be a balance thread but here is my 2 cents. havent had the chance to do much 1v1 lately been busy... but i honestly think the supply before rax and reaper nerf was a little much... just the roach range and reaper speed after factory would have been enough. this whole supply depot before rax is very strange.
edit:
i keep seeing ppl say that terran is too underpowered late game. i donno about u guys but ive always thought terran is WAY better late game then zerg. 200/200 army swaps crush zerg. im thinking what u guys meen to say is being stuck on MMM to long in order to survive punishes u too much for a late game tech swap into thors tanks vickings. getting their is the problem, u were too used to punishing zerg early game and getting such a big lead u could tech easier.
i guess what im trying to say is even if there is an unbalance maybe try getting those tier 2.5 out a little earlier and sit on ur 3rd base fortress till ur mech army can crush zerg. all this pushing with mmm syndrome 1a isnt getting u anywhere.
besides mech is funner! ps i dont care to hear terran complaints about getting their and that zerg has this and zerg has that.... thors tanks and vickings crush everything nuff said.
also everyone complaining about roachs? really? finally zerg have a decent staple unit that isnt melee. range 4 should have been done a long time ago. there are TONS of counters too roach. how would terran like having marauders with 3 range? give me a break... on top of that 2 supply roach fills supply super fast and makes them not very good late game. IF roachs are the problem then maybe they need their cost adjusted or less hp's. range at 3 is so limiting it retarded. makes them cannon fodder who cant break walls. im so disappointed with the roach in general. they have been changed by blizzard so many times since beta it makes me think they dont know what the units roll is. maybe 100/25 cost would be a little better.. ive always thought 70 for 2 supply was retarded. it makes the unit way to good early game and crap late game. its a staple unit isnt it?
On November 07 2010 04:38 TeWy wrote: That was true a while ago. Now that reapers has been nerfed, that the roach has been buffed and that Zergs (high lvl diamond, I don't care about the rest) have figured out how to scout and defeat all the timing pushes... I'm afraid this is not the case anymore. Holding the games until the 15 minutes part is nothing hard for Zerg now.
^^^ QFT. Zerg players got what they wanted in the last patch with the reaper nerf and roach buff. It's quite easy for them to hold until mid game and after mid game, it's an auto-win for Zerg.
i play random and i always think i have no self respect when i get zerg just like it was with terran before the nerf
muta baneling with roach or zerglings is fucked up vs terran and in zvz or zvp you only need roaches now they only cost 75 min and 25 gas für 145 hp 16 damage and 1 armor making them a ridiculously overpowered unit
the reaper is now so bad its just sad to watch them ingame
ps: zergs got so boring too watch lately i didn't see any nydus worms since the patch
well the only problem was that terran got some little nerfs and zerg got some buffs. But at the same time because of the gsl winner or maybe due to those nerf buffs, zerg became way more confident, at the same time most terrans are having problems dealing with those little nerfs, that ruined their timings. Before the patch you never saw a zerg only going for 2 or 4 lings, putting one before your base and then only pumping drones. It worked that way before the patch (played random and did it that way as zerg and had no difficulties against terrans) And the terran just can't keep up with the worker production. If he moves out, the zerg sees the composition and conters either with lings or roaches. Also Mutas are a really strong map control thing. So atm pro terrans are able to fight zergs, but the new confident zerg is way to much for the random terran. But who cares its still fun to try and win. Maybe the secret against mutas are armor upgrades, or the famouse bw build 2 turrets beside each other.
Well that is atleast what i noticed, that zergs play much more macro heavy and don't gg once they lost their first 200 supply. Imo hatch+queen is a bit to strong. Maybe blizzard never thought about that you can actually build another hatch in your base to get some over energy away from your queens. I mean as terran you don't have enough space for that many production facilties to keep up with a zerg that has 4 hatches supportet by queens.
Don't think its to much of an issue though, there are already a few micro heavy new terran strats against the fast expansion of the zerg. At the end i am happy to play my favourite race again which is also the hardest race to play *G*. Playing zerg with version 1 was alot of fun beating up all those terrans with simple a clicking or move commands. But zerg don't have siege tanks
On November 07 2010 04:26 1Eris1 wrote: The game is balanced, just not in the right way. Basically every chance has an equal chance to win a game. Terran has to win in the 1st 15 minutes, zerg/protoss basically have to hold on till the 15 minute part. PvZ is at least pretty solid. They should rework certain units, but actual nerfing/buffing isn't really needed that much
That was true a while ago. Now that reapers has been nerfed, that the roach has been buffed and that Zergs (high lvl diamond, I don't care about the rest) have figured out how to scout and defeat all the timing pushes... I'm afraid this is not the case anymore. Holding the games until the 15 minutes part is nothing hard for Zerg now.
Ehh, not entirely. If they go specifically to hold off these pushes, then the terran will have a higher chance to win in late game, then normal. Fact is, terran lategame needs a slight buff, and stim/maybe marauders needs to be toned down, and 90% of this balance complaining will be gone. From both the zergs, and the terran. Oh and those protoss guys
also everyone complaining about roachs? really? finally zerg have a decent staple unit that isnt melee. range 4 should have been done a long time ago. there are TONS of counters too roach. how would terran like having marauders with 3 range? give me a break...
Sigh..all of these balance discussions go out of context. The units aren't supposed to be EQUAL or it wouldn't be Starcraft...they are supposed to be balanced while still making each race unique. While we're at it let's make Roach's missiles slow and Marauders burrow-move underground with rapid regen.
On November 07 2010 05:42 tomatriedes wrote: There were 3 terrans in the GSL ro4 and still they whine. These people will not be happy until every player in the ro64 is a terran. Disgusting.
And it's silly to assume that just because Boxer is a great player he doesn't also have a bias.
maybe think before u talk? GSL ro64 was before the patch. and there were twice as many terrans then protoss or zergs. simple math would tell u that there would be many terrans in ro4. and even if boxer is bias. doesnt change the fact that he wouldnt have said something unless he thinks their is a problem. anytime someone of his caliber says jump.. u say how high..
although i agree with you about all the terran QQ. least it gives me soemthing to laugh about today at work.
I haven't read every post in this thread but just by skimming all I read is people looking at GSL and saying oh look this many percentage of players are this and they are winning by this much and that. What does that truly represent? If every player in the top 64 was terran, would it be safe to assume that terran was OP? Sometimes statistics aren't a way to justify an absolute such as A is better than B.
Has anyone ever considered that maybe the players that play certain races are just better than other players? Putting all race choice aside, I bet I can find that there is not a balance in the amount of skill across all races. Maybe there are better players playing terran. Of course this is just another statistic but I thought it should be put under consideration.
People, stop trying to use "# of people are playing _ made it to _ round" It's already screwed up because although you had 7/16 Z, they all eliminated each other the next rounds...so stop using that data. It sucks I know, but b/c of the matchups and the way it went, you can't use gsl2's results as data sadly...
On November 07 2010 06:02 Avid221 wrote: I haven't read every post in this thread but just by skimming all I read is people looking at GSL and saying oh look this many percentage of players are this and they are winning by this much and that. What does that truly represent? If every player in the top 64 was terran, would it be safe to assume that terran was OP? Sometimes statistics aren't a way to justify an absolute such as A is better than B.
Has anyone ever considered that maybe the players that play certain races are just better than other players? Putting all race choice aside, I bet I can find that there is not a balance in the amount of skill across all races. Maybe there are better players playing terran. Of course this is just another statistic but I thought it should be put under consideration.
There's a reason a "normal distribution" curve is called normal.
Now, if it was just the GSL top 64 for one season, you might be able to argue that the playerbase is too small to pull meaningful statistics out of, but it appears the same thing is happening on the ladders (we won't know for sure untill blizzard posts it's next win/loss ratios), and the ladder population is WAY too big to ever think the race skill distributions are anything other then normal and roughly equivalent.
On November 07 2010 04:23 Cloak wrote: They then enter the midgame with unrivaled economy and can continue to spam their cost effective Roaches. Letting bad Zergs spam Roach all day is ruining ZvT and ZvP and ZvZ. Blizzard needs to stop this Marauder-esque balancing mentality. Overtly broken units is making the metagame stale. GtG needs more cost effective counters for every race.
Well at least you admit that the marauder is the same way.
I like the way zerg is right now, with several viable unit combos. If you want to argue zerg is too strong, well maybe make the other races better against zerg instead of making zerg worse against them.
Which race is OP has circulated back and forth. Blizzard is at least getting closer, and not overshooting as much as they have in the past.
On November 07 2010 04:58 Rushingwolf wrote: i play random and i always think i have no self respect when i get zerg just like it was with terran before the nerf
muta baneling with roach or zerglings is fucked up vs terran and in zvz or zvp you only need roaches now they only cost 75 min and 25 gas für 145 hp 16 damage and 1 armor making them a ridiculously overpowered unit
the reaper is now so bad its just sad to watch them ingame
ps: zergs got so boring too watch lately i didn't see any nydus worms since the patch
Yeah, the wins are getting easier as a Zerg player. If I can survive until midgame, banelings, zerglings, and mutas will take care of the rest. Game feels a bit broken at the moment.
He might as well switch now if his GSL preformance is any indication of balance. It doesn't make any sense why TL isn't flipping the hell out with "ZERG IMBA" threads like they did for Terran, but that's anther issue entirely.
On November 07 2010 14:49 MythicalMage wrote: He might as well switch now if his GSL preformance is any indication of balance. It doesn't make any sense why TL isn't flipping the hell out with "ZERG IMBA" threads like they did for Terran, but that's anther issue entirely.
Maybe because TvZ still remains largely in favor of T and a lot of biased users are over-exaggerating the effects of the last two patches? The most critical nerf from those 2 patches was the supply before rax requirement, and even that is nullified when T uses a more macro-orientated early playstyle by expanding earlier and still has a crapton more flexibility than Z early game
On November 07 2010 14:49 MythicalMage wrote: He might as well switch now if his GSL preformance is any indication of balance. It doesn't make any sense why TL isn't flipping the hell out with "ZERG IMBA" threads like they did for Terran, but that's anther issue entirely.
Maybe because TvZ still remains largely in favor of T and a lot of biased users are over-exaggerating the effects of the last two patches? The most critical nerf from those 2 patches was the supply before rax requirement, and even that is nullified when T uses a more macro-orientated early playstyle by expanding earlier and still has a crapton more flexibility than Z early game
Zerg learning how to stop early pushes. Roach range by +1 stopping helion harass and reapers. Reaper getting triple-nerfed by build time increase, supply before rax and the factory before speed. Bunker build time getting nerfed.
Tanks getting their damage nerfed, greatly changing their effectiveness against the muta ling baneling comp that smashes most terran mid-game.
COOL STORY BRO!
Zerg being a stronger race has been fact since they buffed ultras. Zerg has much better macro mechanics, and they also have the stronger endgame army now. The earlygame cutesy things terran did to them were just things that people stopped after playing against it enough, even before the nerfs, and that's not even considering the silliness of banelings.
I believe zerg and terran are flawed in a general way. Having the best macro mechanics on top of the strongest and most mobile endgame armies as a strength for zerg while terran who has the worst endgame macro mechanics has the weakest army.
But I'm just waiting for Blizz so balance the game. Can't expect it to be perfect, and it's in an enjoyable state as it is.
On November 07 2010 14:49 MythicalMage wrote: He might as well switch now if his GSL preformance is any indication of balance. It doesn't make any sense why TL isn't flipping the hell out with "ZERG IMBA" threads like they did for Terran, but that's anther issue entirely.
Maybe because TvZ still remains largely in favor of T and a lot of biased users are over-exaggerating the effects of the last two patches? The most critical nerf from those 2 patches was the supply before rax requirement, and even that is nullified when T uses a more macro-orientated early playstyle by expanding earlier and still has a crapton more flexibility than Z early game
Zerg learning how to stop early pushes. Roach range by +1 stopping helion harass and reapers. Reaper getting triple-nerfed by build time increase, supply before rax and the factory before speed. Bunker build time getting nerfed.
Tanks getting their damage nerfed, greatly changing their effectiveness against the muta ling baneling comp that smashes most terran mid-game.
COOL STORY BRO!
Zerg being a stronger race has been fact since they buffed ultras. Zerg has much better macro mechanics, and they also have the stronger endgame army now. The earlygame cutesy things terran did to them were just things that people stopped after playing against it enough, even before the nerfs, and that's not even considering the silliness of banelings.
I believe zerg and terran are flawed in a general way. Having the best macro mechanics on top of the strongest and most mobile endgame armies as a strength for zerg while terran who has the worst endgame macro mechanics has the weakest army.
But I'm just waiting for Blizz so balance the game. Can't expect it to be perfect, and it's in an enjoyable state as it is.
As I've said before, Roaches affected ZvP more than ZvT. Roach buff was a necessity because Z had no competent ground mid-game unit until Ultras, especially if T went mech or biomech.
Bunker build time might have been slightly decreased but they're still salvagable. It's the only building where u get ur full money back by canceling it.
Reaper nerf was slightly over-done but a lot of Z pros were complaining about how powerful 5 rax reapers were. The nerf was necessary. Not to mention Reapers were a T1 unit that only cost 50/50 that could jump across cliffs at very early in the game w/o a need for cliff upgrades
Tank damage nerf did not affect roaches, and you shouldn't be using Tanks verse light units like lings anyway. Ling died in the same number of shots before and after patch too. Blizzard was justified in nerfing Tanks as they said "it was doing too good" against ground units and I respect that. Unlike BW, Tanks do optimal splash damage cause units in sc2 hug each other and have smarter AI. You want old damage back AND smarter AI AND more splash? Let's just give tanks the ability to shoot air too while you're at it.
Z Best Macro Mechanics? Lol in what aspect? Because in pure economic effiency, Terran wins with 2 base with Mules equals Z 3 saturated bases. Z is supposed to have weaker units, but make up for that by providing greater number of units and fast reproduction capability. The fast reproduction capability shouldn't be available to Terrans, but reactor add-ons gives T a opportunity to have fast reproduction like Z.
The way I see it, T units > Z units. T macro > Z macro.
On November 08 2010 08:57 Dalavita wrote: Zerg learning how to stop early pushes. Roach range by +1 stopping helion harass and reapers. Reaper getting triple-nerfed by build time increase, supply before rax and the factory before speed. Bunker build time getting nerfed.
Tanks getting their damage nerfed, greatly changing their effectiveness against the muta ling baneling comp that smashes most terran mid-game.
COOL STORY BRO!
Zerg being a stronger race has been fact since they buffed ultras. Zerg has much better macro mechanics, and they also have the stronger endgame army now. The earlygame cutesy things terran did to them were just things that people stopped after playing against it enough, even before the nerfs, and that's not even considering the silliness of banelings.
I believe zerg and terran are flawed in a general way. Having the best macro mechanics on top of the strongest and most mobile endgame armies as a strength for zerg while terran who has the worst endgame macro mechanics has the weakest army.
But I'm just waiting for Blizz so balance the game. Can't expect it to be perfect, and it's in an enjoyable state as it is.
Yup, those are some good insights. Blizzard is staying silent on the issue until the GSL finals are played. If the finals turn out to be lop sided for Zerg, I expect Blizzard to go public and announce changes to fix TvsZ late game issues.
On November 08 2010 08:57 Dalavita wrote: Zerg learning how to stop early pushes. Roach range by +1 stopping helion harass and reapers. Reaper getting triple-nerfed by build time increase, supply before rax and the factory before speed. Bunker build time getting nerfed.
Tanks getting their damage nerfed, greatly changing their effectiveness against the muta ling baneling comp that smashes most terran mid-game.
COOL STORY BRO!
Zerg being a stronger race has been fact since they buffed ultras. Zerg has much better macro mechanics, and they also have the stronger endgame army now. The earlygame cutesy things terran did to them were just things that people stopped after playing against it enough, even before the nerfs, and that's not even considering the silliness of banelings.
I believe zerg and terran are flawed in a general way. Having the best macro mechanics on top of the strongest and most mobile endgame armies as a strength for zerg while terran who has the worst endgame macro mechanics has the weakest army.
But I'm just waiting for Blizz so balance the game. Can't expect it to be perfect, and it's in an enjoyable state as it is.
Yup, those are some good insights. Blizzard is staying silent on the issue until the GSL finals are played. If the finals turn out to be lop sided for Zerg, I expect Blizzard to go public and announce changes to fix TvsZ late game issues.
That would be stupid to judge the game balance based on finals, don't you think?
Also Boxer himself said in the interview that he just belongs to such type of layers who like to cry about balance.
On November 07 2010 14:49 MythicalMage wrote: He might as well switch now if his GSL preformance is any indication of balance. It doesn't make any sense why TL isn't flipping the hell out with "ZERG IMBA" threads like they did for Terran, but that's anther issue entirely.
Maybe because TvZ still remains largely in favor of T and a lot of biased users are over-exaggerating the effects of the last two patches? The most critical nerf from those 2 patches was the supply before rax requirement, and even that is nullified when T uses a more macro-orientated early playstyle by expanding earlier and still has a crapton more flexibility than Z early game
Zerg learning how to stop early pushes. Roach range by +1 stopping helion harass and reapers. Reaper getting triple-nerfed by build time increase, supply before rax and the factory before speed. Bunker build time getting nerfed.
Tanks getting their damage nerfed, greatly changing their effectiveness against the muta ling baneling comp that smashes most terran mid-game.
COOL STORY BRO!
Zerg being a stronger race has been fact since they buffed ultras. Zerg has much better macro mechanics, and they also have the stronger endgame army now. The earlygame cutesy things terran did to them were just things that people stopped after playing against it enough, even before the nerfs, and that's not even considering the silliness of banelings.
I believe zerg and terran are flawed in a general way. Having the best macro mechanics on top of the strongest and most mobile endgame armies as a strength for zerg while terran who has the worst endgame macro mechanics has the weakest army.
But I'm just waiting for Blizz so balance the game. Can't expect it to be perfect, and it's in an enjoyable state as it is.
As I've said before, Roaches affected ZvP more than ZvT. Roach buff was a necessity because Z had no competent ground mid-game unit until Ultras, especially if T went mech or biomech.
Bunker build time might have been slightly decreased but they're still salvagable. It's the only building where u get ur full money back by canceling it.
Reaper nerf was slightly over-done but a lot of Z pros were complaining about how powerful 5 rax reapers were. The nerf was necessary. Not to mention Reapers were a T1 unit that only cost 50/50 that could jump across cliffs at very early in the game w/o a need for cliff upgrades
Tank damage nerf did not affect roaches, and you shouldn't be using Tanks verse light units like lings anyway. Ling died in the same number of shots before and after patch too. Blizzard was justified in nerfing Tanks as they said "it was doing too good" against ground units and I respect that. Unlike BW, Tanks do optimal splash damage cause units in sc2 hug each other and have smarter AI. You want old damage back AND smarter AI AND more splash? Let's just give tanks the ability to shoot air too while you're at it.
Z Best Macro Mechanics? Lol in what aspect? Because in pure economic effiency, Terran wins with 2 base with Mules equals Z 3 saturated bases. Z is supposed to have weaker units, but make up for that by providing greater number of units and fast reproduction capability. The fast reproduction capability shouldn't be available to Terrans, but reactor add-ons gives T a opportunity to have fast reproduction like Z.
The way I see it, T units > Z units. T macro > Z macro.
Wait, what? You honestly think T macro > Z macro? Wow.
On November 07 2010 14:49 MythicalMage wrote: He might as well switch now if his GSL preformance is any indication of balance. It doesn't make any sense why TL isn't flipping the hell out with "ZERG IMBA" threads like they did for Terran, but that's anther issue entirely.
Maybe because TvZ still remains largely in favor of T and a lot of biased users are over-exaggerating the effects of the last two patches? The most critical nerf from those 2 patches was the supply before rax requirement, and even that is nullified when T uses a more macro-orientated early playstyle by expanding earlier and still has a crapton more flexibility than Z early game
Zerg learning how to stop early pushes. Roach range by +1 stopping helion harass and reapers. Reaper getting triple-nerfed by build time increase, supply before rax and the factory before speed. Bunker build time getting nerfed.
Tanks getting their damage nerfed, greatly changing their effectiveness against the muta ling baneling comp that smashes most terran mid-game.
COOL STORY BRO!
Zerg being a stronger race has been fact since they buffed ultras. Zerg has much better macro mechanics, and they also have the stronger endgame army now. The earlygame cutesy things terran did to them were just things that people stopped after playing against it enough, even before the nerfs, and that's not even considering the silliness of banelings.
I believe zerg and terran are flawed in a general way. Having the best macro mechanics on top of the strongest and most mobile endgame armies as a strength for zerg while terran who has the worst endgame macro mechanics has the weakest army.
But I'm just waiting for Blizz so balance the game. Can't expect it to be perfect, and it's in an enjoyable state as it is.
As I've said before, Roaches affected ZvP more than ZvT. Roach buff was a necessity because Z had no competent ground mid-game unit until Ultras, especially if T went mech or biomech.
Bunker build time might have been slightly decreased but they're still salvagable. It's the only building where u get ur full money back by canceling it.
Reaper nerf was slightly over-done but a lot of Z pros were complaining about how powerful 5 rax reapers were. The nerf was necessary. Not to mention Reapers were a T1 unit that only cost 50/50 that could jump across cliffs at very early in the game w/o a need for cliff upgrades
Tank damage nerf did not affect roaches, and you shouldn't be using Tanks verse light units like lings anyway. Ling died in the same number of shots before and after patch too. Blizzard was justified in nerfing Tanks as they said "it was doing too good" against ground units and I respect that. Unlike BW, Tanks do optimal splash damage cause units in sc2 hug each other and have smarter AI. You want old damage back AND smarter AI AND more splash? Let's just give tanks the ability to shoot air too while you're at it.
Z Best Macro Mechanics? Lol in what aspect? Because in pure economic effiency, Terran wins with 2 base with Mules equals Z 3 saturated bases. Z is supposed to have weaker units, but make up for that by providing greater number of units and fast reproduction capability. The fast reproduction capability shouldn't be available to Terrans, but reactor add-ons gives T a opportunity to have fast reproduction like Z.
The way I see it, T units > Z units. T macro > Z macro.
The roach buff helps stop early terran aggression, especially helions, and an endgame 200/200 army exchange, where zerg can trade armies and mass produce roaches for all his stacked larva nd push-win because the terran can't get enough marauders to counter it.
The 5 rax reaper was being stopped at the highest level and even at plat-diamond levels before it got nerfed. It might have been to strong, but nerfing it to oblivion when people learned to deal with ti so no way to go.
The bunker is also the only defensive building that doesn't do crap by itself and needs units in it to work. Having it salvageable only makes a difference if you get the chance to do it. They still cost an opportunity cost of 100 minerals+scv build time which at that point could have been used for different things.
And about your tank damage thread. Do you even play SC2? Tanks were the key unit to kill the banelings. The fact that a quick +1 armor upgrade on the lings makes them take two shots rather than one, added with the lowered splash of tanks makes muta ling baneling that much harder to counteract. PS. Banelings aren't light, and they're the problem. And the tank is good vs armored units thing is a lie. Roaches and ultras both trash tanks. The only thing it actually works against are infestors to a degree.
Also, I don't know what ass you're pulling your math from. A mule adds 3-4 SCVs worth of minerals IF USED THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE GAME WITH 0 SCANS OR SUPPLIES USED FROM THAT ORBITAL. Basically, Every single scan or supply lowers the amount you get from it SCV-wise. Two base = 6-8 SCV advantage? How can a 3 base zerg who can make and replenish drones faster not keep up with a 2 base terran? Don't be silly. The main problem is also that terran struggles to take his third base due to lack of mobility or warp-in to defend. This is where the planetary fortress comes in, but people want to nerf that because boo hoo. /facepalm.
Zerg superior macro mechanics is their ease of expansions, coupled with their fast drone production, and how they can instantly tech-swap with a single building down, coupled with the amount of larva that's available to them at the later stages of the game. Terran and protoss to a lesser degree can't have 8 factories, 8 rax and 8 starports to also get this kind of producing power.
You can say what you want about what Z is SUPPOSED to be like. Ultras, mutas, roaches and banelings makes the maxed zerg army stronger and scarier than the maxed terran one, and once zerg reaches 3-4 bases, the amount of units they can mass produce and how much army trades benefit them, there's very little a terran player can do.
On November 08 2010 19:21 Dalavita wrote: The roach buff helps stop early terran aggression, especially helions, and an endgame 200/200 army exchange, where zerg can trade armies and mass produce roaches for all his stacked larva nd push-win because the terran can't get enough marauders to counter it.
The 5 rax reaper was being stopped at the highest level and even at plat-diamond levels before it got nerfed. It might have been to strong, but nerfing it to oblivion when people learned to deal with ti so no way to go.
The bunker is also the only defensive building that doesn't do crap by itself and needs units in it to work. Having it salvageable only makes a difference if you get the chance to do it. They still cost an opportunity cost of 100 minerals+scv build time which at that point could have been used for different things.
And about your tank damage thread. Do you even play SC2? Tanks were the key unit to kill the banelings. The fact that a quick +1 armor upgrade on the lings makes them take two shots rather than one, added with the lowered splash of tanks makes muta ling baneling that much harder to counteract. PS. Banelings aren't light, and they're the problem. And the tank is good vs armored units thing is a lie. Roaches and ultras both trash tanks. The only thing it actually works against are infestors to a degree.
Also, I don't know what ass you're pulling your math from. A mule adds 3-4 SCVs worth of minerals IF USED THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE GAME WITH 0 SCANS OR SUPPLIES USED FROM THAT ORBITAL. Basically, Every single scan or supply lowers the amount you get from it SCV-wise. Two base = 6-8 SCV advantage? How can a 3 base zerg who can make and replenish drones faster not keep up with a 2 base terran? Don't be silly. The main problem is also that terran struggles to take his third base due to lack of mobility or warp-in to defend. This is where the planetary fortress comes in, but people want to nerf that because boo hoo. /facepalm.
Zerg superior macro mechanics is their ease of expansions, coupled with their fast drone production, and how they can instantly tech-swap with a single building down, coupled with the amount of larva that's available to them at the later stages of the game. Terran and protoss to a lesser degree can't have 8 factories, 8 rax and 8 starports to also get this kind of producing power.
You can say what you want about what Z is SUPPOSED to be like. Ultras, mutas, roaches and banelings makes the maxed zerg army stronger and scarier than the maxed terran one, and once zerg reaches 3-4 bases, the amount of units they can mass produce and how much army trades benefit them, there's very little a terran player can do.
Yup. Those are excellent points. Well said.
Late game TvsZ is busted. All the top Terran players in the GSL are trying to win before the halfway point because past the halfway point, it's auto win for Z.
Blizzard needs to fix late game T play because there isn't any late game T play - it's only late game T losses.
On November 07 2010 14:49 MythicalMage wrote: He might as well switch now if his GSL preformance is any indication of balance. It doesn't make any sense why TL isn't flipping the hell out with "ZERG IMBA" threads like they did for Terran, but that's anther issue entirely.
Maybe because TvZ still remains largely in favor of T and a lot of biased users are over-exaggerating the effects of the last two patches? The most critical nerf from those 2 patches was the supply before rax requirement, and even that is nullified when T uses a more macro-orientated early playstyle by expanding earlier and still has a crapton more flexibility than Z early game
Zerg learning how to stop early pushes. Roach range by +1 stopping helion harass and reapers. Reaper getting triple-nerfed by build time increase, supply before rax and the factory before speed. Bunker build time getting nerfed.
Tanks getting their damage nerfed, greatly changing their effectiveness against the muta ling baneling comp that smashes most terran mid-game.
COOL STORY BRO!
Zerg being a stronger race has been fact since they buffed ultras. Zerg has much better macro mechanics, and they also have the stronger endgame army now. The earlygame cutesy things terran did to them were just things that people stopped after playing against it enough, even before the nerfs, and that's not even considering the silliness of banelings.
I believe zerg and terran are flawed in a general way. Having the best macro mechanics on top of the strongest and most mobile endgame armies as a strength for zerg while terran who has the worst endgame macro mechanics has the weakest army.
But I'm just waiting for Blizz so balance the game. Can't expect it to be perfect, and it's in an enjoyable state as it is.
On November 07 2010 14:49 MythicalMage wrote: He might as well switch now if his GSL preformance is any indication of balance. It doesn't make any sense why TL isn't flipping the hell out with "ZERG IMBA" threads like they did for Terran, but that's anther issue entirely.
Maybe because TvZ still remains largely in favor of T and a lot of biased users are over-exaggerating the effects of the last two patches? The most critical nerf from those 2 patches was the supply before rax requirement, and even that is nullified when T uses a more macro-orientated early playstyle by expanding earlier and still has a crapton more flexibility than Z early game
Zerg learning how to stop early pushes. Roach range by +1 stopping helion harass and reapers. Reaper getting triple-nerfed by build time increase, supply before rax and the factory before speed. Bunker build time getting nerfed.
Tanks getting their damage nerfed, greatly changing their effectiveness against the muta ling baneling comp that smashes most terran mid-game.
COOL STORY BRO!
Zerg being a stronger race has been fact since they buffed ultras. Zerg has much better macro mechanics, and they also have the stronger endgame army now. The earlygame cutesy things terran did to them were just things that people stopped after playing against it enough, even before the nerfs, and that's not even considering the silliness of banelings.
I believe zerg and terran are flawed in a general way. Having the best macro mechanics on top of the strongest and most mobile endgame armies as a strength for zerg while terran who has the worst endgame macro mechanics has the weakest army.
But I'm just waiting for Blizz so balance the game. Can't expect it to be perfect, and it's in an enjoyable state as it is.
Zerg learning how to stop early pushes. Roach range by +1 stopping helion harass and reapers. Reaper getting triple-nerfed by build time increase, supply before rax and the factory before speed. Bunker build time getting nerfed.
Tanks getting their damage nerfed, greatly changing their effectiveness against the muta ling baneling comp that smashes most terran mid-game.
COOL STORY BRO!
Zerg being a stronger race has been fact since they buffed ultras. Zerg has much better macro mechanics, and they also have the stronger endgame army now. The earlygame cutesy things terran did to them were just things that people stopped after playing against it enough, even before the nerfs, and that's not even considering the silliness of banelings.
I believe zerg and terran are flawed in a general way. Having the best macro mechanics on top of the strongest and most mobile endgame armies as a strength for zerg while terran who has the worst endgame macro mechanics has the weakest army.
But I'm just waiting for Blizz so balance the game. Can't expect it to be perfect, and it's in an enjoyable state as it is.
I think the Zergs were already totally imba before the Ultralisk buff with their 1 supply roach and the worst endgame macromechanic is definitely chrono-boost, but I agree with your main point.
I agree with that post as welll all though reapers were never my choice of unit. I always kinda played very aggressive and tried to get an expand in the process but now zergs are getting so good against it I can't break even anymore.
banelings are way to good in zvz / zvt and they are not that useful against protoss? some kind of change that makes them do more damage to one target or something pls
Just Close the Thread Please Some Idiot Terrans who ARE NUB and Angry because their hero lost in GSL and whining about imbalance? like seriously guys..there is ONLY 1 ZERG in gsl 1 and he made it this was a balanced finals and NESTEA was down all the time and managed to catch up. THERE IS NO IMBA IN THIS GAME. only imba map like LOST TEMPLE where terran can cliff all the time?
How can terrans complain when there are no protoss in top 10 of Koreans ladder currently and basically get rolled in GSLs. Random would be a huge mistake since he'd effectively take on, part of, a weaker race than he has now. I don't get it.
On November 13 2010 23:18 W4nteD- wrote: Just Close the Thread Please Some Idiot Terrans who ARE NUB and Angry because their hero lost in GSL and whining about imbalance? like seriously guys..there is ONLY 1 ZERG in gsl 1 and he made it this was a balanced finals and NESTEA was down all the time and managed to catch up. THERE IS NO IMBA IN THIS GAME. only imba map like LOST TEMPLE where terran can cliff all the time?
You obviously didn't pay much attention to the GSL brackets if you just said that there only being 1 Zerg is any indication of the state of balance. Look at the brackets:
In one bracket 4 Zergs had to knock each other out down to one. Only 1 out of 3 great Zerg players, NesTea, IdrA and Zenio could make it through to the semis. Yeah ... balance definitely has something do to with IdrA and Zenio getting knocked out! (Not.)
Idra said the patch changed the way the game played AS BAD TERRANS GET KNOCKED OUT and GOOD TERRANS STAY. so shut the hell up all about the imba shit
Calm down, where did I express any opinion about there being imba? All I said is that you can't make the argument that NesTea was the only Zerg left to prove anything about balance.
Edit (so I don't have to add more replies to the thread): w4anteD- try reading my posts. You're making profanities at me for things I'm not even talking about, and that's not cool man.
MLG: Are you pleased with the way the patch is working out so far?
Idra: Yes, definitely. I believe ZvT is pretty close to balanced right now—it's actually going to seem Z>T for a while as bad Terrans disappear and the remaining ones have to adapt to a new style of play. ZvP is certainly much better, but I'm waiting for the matchup to settle into the new patch before making any real comment on it. My only real complaint is that they still haven't addressed ZvZ, but the matchup is slowly making progress on its own so patching might be unnecessary in the long run.
MLG: Are you pleased with the way the patch is working out so far?
Idra: Yes, definitely. I believe ZvT is pretty close to balanced right now—it's actually going to seem Z>T for a while as bad Terrans disappear and the remaining ones have to adapt to a new style of play. ZvP is certainly much better, but I'm waiting for the matchup to settle into the new patch before making any real comment on it. My only real complaint is that they still haven't addressed ZvZ, but the matchup is slowly making progress on its own so patching might be unnecessary in the long run.
Yes, definitely. I believe ZvT is pretty close to balanced right now—it's actually going to seem Z>T for a while as bad Terrans disappear and the remaining ones have to adapt to a new style of play.
Go and have some comprehension reading skills TEWY
This thread went from Boxer going to random, to Zerg is imba thread and all the people arguing have low post counts lol not saying that means anything, but anyways The finals of the GSL+ Show Spoiler +
had a terran vs a zerg and it went 3-3 what elce could you want? both are great players as well but yes here will still need to be some balance changes just stop arguing it on this thread go to b.net
Oh boy. W4nteD- you should relax...already temp-banned with so few posts and agressive posting. People that do it don't last long. I don't think there's a big balance issue. It's much better than it used to be.
I got into this thread thinking there is new info on Boxer but it's turned into a balance discussion. There's plenty of them already.
Soo, doesn't this mean we are at a point where all races are having difficulty beating one another, toss still has trouble beating terran, and now zerg. Terran are finally having trouble beating zerg and toss. Zerg are still having trouble beating T and protoss. Isn't this a good thing?
MLG: Are you pleased with the way the patch is working out so far?
Idra: Yes, definitely. I believe ZvT is pretty close to balanced right now—it's actually going to seem Z>T for a while as bad Terrans disappear and the remaining ones have to adapt to a new style of play. ZvP is certainly much better, but I'm waiting for the matchup to settle into the new patch before making any real comment on it. My only real complaint is that they still haven't addressed ZvZ, but the matchup is slowly making progress on its own so patching might be unnecessary in the long run.
of course hes pleased, they made his race stronger than the other two races overall. Idras idea of balanced has always revolved around his own success. Idra also said in that interview at dallas that it was well known that the only way to stop him was with cheese. really? An 8 minute timing push is now somehow cheese? How about when he lost to nony? quick expand into 5 gate timing push is cheese? In other words, anything that beats him is cheese and if somehow the game goes standarad and he doesnt win its imbalanced. Idras the most overrated foreigner around.
MLG: Are you pleased with the way the patch is working out so far?
Idra: Yes, definitely. I believe ZvT is pretty close to balanced right now—it's actually going to seem Z>T for a while as bad Terrans disappear and the remaining ones have to adapt to a new style of play. ZvP is certainly much better, but I'm waiting for the matchup to settle into the new patch before making any real comment on it. My only real complaint is that they still haven't addressed ZvZ, but the matchup is slowly making progress on its own so patching might be unnecessary in the long run.
Idras idea of balanced has always revolved around his own success.
I removed everything else, because it was mindless dribble that has nothing to do with anything he posted.
As for the line above, IdrA has not complained once about balance since 1.1.2, even after losing multiple times. So qq more please.
MLG: Are you pleased with the way the patch is working out so far?
Idra: Yes, definitely. I believe ZvT is pretty close to balanced right now—it's actually going to seem Z>T for a while as bad Terrans disappear and the remaining ones have to adapt to a new style of play. ZvP is certainly much better, but I'm waiting for the matchup to settle into the new patch before making any real comment on it. My only real complaint is that they still haven't addressed ZvZ, but the matchup is slowly making progress on its own so patching might be unnecessary in the long run.
of course hes pleased, they made his race stronger than the other two races overall. Idras idea of balanced has always revolved around his own success. Idra also said in that interview at dallas that it was well known that the only way to stop him was with cheese. really? An 8 minute timing push is now somehow cheese? How about when he lost to nony? quick expand into 5 gate timing push is cheese? In other words, anything that beats him is cheese and if somehow the game goes standarad and he doesnt win its imbalanced. Idras the most overrated foreigner around.
I've only been following him since beta but he's idea of balance does not seemed balanced at all, I'd have to agree with you.
I've only been following him since beta but he's idea of balance does not seemed balanced at all, I'd have to agree with you.
IdrA is just like every other player--he wants what's best for his race and his MU's. Sometimes his complaints are genuine balance issues and other times they're just qq in a moment of frustration. The only difference between him and everyone else is that there are more eyes and ears on him due to his success, notoriety, etc.
Despite that, IdrA has changed a lot since beta or is working on changing his image at least. He's not screaming about balance issues or raging in public anymore, and he sounds a lot cooler and even tempered in recent interviews I've seen/read. Maybe that's a reflection of the state of the game, maybe he's changed as a person recently, or maybe he's just bottling it up and we're going to see an IdrA-splosion down the road. Either way, it's all good.
On November 14 2010 04:12 Fa1nT wrote: I removed everything else, because it was mindless dribble that has nothing to do with anything he posted.
As for the line above, IdrA has not complained once about balance since 1.1.2, even after losing multiple times. So qq more please.
Not much for Idra to complain about since the last two winners of GSL were Zerg. It would be like Idra complaining about Terran balance in BW when Flash was winning OSL/MSL as a Terran player.
On November 14 2010 01:24 Moonling wrote: This thread went from Boxer going to random, to Zerg is imba thread and all the people arguing have low post counts lol not saying that means anything, but anyways The finals of the GSL+ Show Spoiler +
had a terran vs a zerg and it went 3-3 what elce could you want? both are great players as well but yes here will still need to be some balance changes just stop arguing it on this thread go to b.net
On November 14 2010 01:24 Moonling wrote: This thread went from Boxer going to random, to Zerg is imba thread and all the people arguing have low post counts lol not saying that means anything, but anyways The finals of the GSL+ Show Spoiler +
had a terran vs a zerg and it went 3-3 what elce could you want? both are great players as well but yes here will still need to be some balance changes just stop arguing it on this thread go to b.net
The people who are saying the matchup is balanced have to just be looking at the final scores and ignoring the actual games.
Every single game from the GSL and from personal experience has shown that Terran has no chance to win the game as it goes later. Winning 3 games by allining and being hyper-aggressive at the start doesn't show balance. Every time Foxer tried to macro (scrap, xel naga) he got crushed horribly.
The entire matchup is incredibly broken, probably more broken than any RTS matchup I've seen in many, many years.
As for IdrA's comment, mutas could shoot bouncing nukes and he would say the matchup is balanced. There will never, ever be a situation where idrA says his own race is overpowered. Ever.
I disagree. Terran need to change his late game mind. i mean I only see terran with big mass army but terran's army is way more effectif in little number Terran need to learn how to play now since the game is balance
MLG: Are you pleased with the way the patch is working out so far?
Idra: Yes, definitely. I believe ZvT is pretty close to balanced right now—it's actually going to seem Z>T for a while as bad Terrans disappear and the remaining ones have to adapt to a new style of play. ZvP is certainly much better, but I'm waiting for the matchup to settle into the new patch before making any real comment on it. My only real complaint is that they still haven't addressed ZvZ, but the matchup is slowly making progress on its own so patching might be unnecessary in the long run.
of course hes pleased, they made his race stronger than the other two races overall. Idras idea of balanced has always revolved around his own success. Idra also said in that interview at dallas that it was well known that the only way to stop him was with cheese. really? An 8 minute timing push is now somehow cheese? How about when he lost to nony? quick expand into 5 gate timing push is cheese? In other words, anything that beats him is cheese and if somehow the game goes standarad and he doesnt win its imbalanced. Idras the most overrated foreigner around.
I've only been following him since beta but he's idea of balance does not seemed balanced at all, I'd have to agree with you.
In beta he complained about protoss being too strong against terran while he played protoss
On November 14 2010 09:35 StoLiVe wrote: I disagree. Terran need to change his late game mind. i mean I only see terran with big mass army but terran's army is way more effectif in little number Terran need to learn how to play now since the game is balance
I think people who play 12 hrs of SC2 a day know what they are talking about. I have seen posts like this in the pre patch threads where terran players wanted zerg players to "learn" to play early game because game is balance.
Yep, he only plays short games, that's just his style. Zerg wants to prolong game because his early aggresion is so limited, unless T doesnt have any defence like it was in these games. I dont think T is broken late game. If he is not 2 or more base behind, he should be ok.
Has completly moved off-topic and has turned into a somewhat unconstructive post imo.
As for BoxeR going random. I wouldn`t really mind. Would be extremely interesting to see a random player doing well(knock on wood). Would be a nice chance to show that he has a superior understanding of the game than most other one-race players.
Okay well I dunno where people are getting this BoxeR doesn't know as much about the agme as the rest fo us cuz last time i checked the ManofOneway account before GSL had way more game splayed that most of the american and european top 200 players s he has plenty of release experience plus he is a practiced pro-gamer so he wouuld know just as much as anyone else imo. TLO switched to zerg after zerg became more powerful so if anything him going to random is better than that even because he's not just going right to zerg which undeniabley is the strong race right now in terms of performance anyways.
2 GSLs. 2 zerg champs. One going basically undefeated until the finals like man.
I mean TvZ is functioning very cool right now and definitley in the right direction but until siege tanks are made less gas heavy and supply heavy it and TvP will always be tough for terran late game in that they will never ahve enough tanks AND there is less gas to spend on essential things liek Ravens which i believe is an essential unit to TvZ that you just cannot afford with siege tank production although without siege tanks terrans gunna die to banes. TvP would also be better with some more tanks too and i think maybe thats the whole problem that SlayerSBoxeR see's with Terran in that siege tanks arent nearly as iconic and useful and potent as in BW. they were the backbone.
On November 14 2010 01:24 Moonling wrote: This thread went from Boxer going to random, to Zerg is imba thread and all the people arguing have low post counts lol not saying that means anything, but anyways The finals of the GSL+ Show Spoiler +
had a terran vs a zerg and it went 3-3 what elce could you want? both are great players as well but yes here will still need to be some balance changes just stop arguing it on this thread go to b.net
The people who are saying the matchup is balanced have to just be looking at the final scores and ignoring the actual games.
Every single game from the GSL and from personal experience has shown that Terran has no chance to win the game as it goes later. Winning 3 games by allining and being hyper-aggressive at the start doesn't show balance. Every time Foxer tried to macro (scrap, xel naga) he got crushed horribly.
The entire matchup is incredibly broken, probably more broken than any RTS matchup I've seen in many, many years.
As for IdrA's comment, mutas could shoot bouncing nukes and he would say the matchup is balanced. There will never, ever be a situation where idrA says his own race is overpowered. Ever.
Man that sounds a lot like PvT in BW and we all know how much of a broken game that was.
On November 14 2010 01:24 Moonling wrote: This thread went from Boxer going to random, to Zerg is imba thread and all the people arguing have low post counts lol not saying that means anything, but anyways The finals of the GSL+ Show Spoiler +
had a terran vs a zerg and it went 3-3 what elce could you want? both are great players as well but yes here will still need to be some balance changes just stop arguing it on this thread go to b.net
The people who are saying the matchup is balanced have to just be looking at the final scores and ignoring the actual games.
Every single game from the GSL and from personal experience has shown that Terran has no chance to win the game as it goes later. Winning 3 games by allining and being hyper-aggressive at the start doesn't show balance. Every time Foxer tried to macro (scrap, xel naga) he got crushed horribly.
The entire matchup is incredibly broken, probably more broken than any RTS matchup I've seen in many, many years.
As for IdrA's comment, mutas could shoot bouncing nukes and he would say the matchup is balanced. There will never, ever be a situation where idrA says his own race is overpowered. Ever.
Man that sounds a lot like PvT in BW and we all know how much of a broken game that was.
lol ye i guess goliaths were a bit imbalanced but TvP up until late was tough as hell in BW. XD
On November 14 2010 01:24 Moonling wrote: This thread went from Boxer going to random, to Zerg is imba thread and all the people arguing have low post counts lol not saying that means anything, but anyways The finals of the GSL+ Show Spoiler +
had a terran vs a zerg and it went 3-3 what elce could you want? both are great players as well but yes here will still need to be some balance changes just stop arguing it on this thread go to b.net
The people who are saying the matchup is balanced have to just be looking at the final scores and ignoring the actual games.
Every single game from the GSL and from personal experience has shown that Terran has no chance to win the game as it goes later. Winning 3 games by allining and being hyper-aggressive at the start doesn't show balance. Every time Foxer tried to macro (scrap, xel naga) he got crushed horribly.
The entire matchup is incredibly broken, probably more broken than any RTS matchup I've seen in many, many years.
As for IdrA's comment, mutas could shoot bouncing nukes and he would say the matchup is balanced. There will never, ever be a situation where idrA says his own race is overpowered. Ever.
Man that sounds a lot like PvT in BW and we all know how much of a broken game that was.
lol Iechoic is shooting this WAY WAY out of proportion. For starters if you think this is soo imbalanced you haven't played RTS games very much at all or a variety. If you have played at least 5 RTS games the "imbalances" you see are nothing.
Also to note terran does have a chance just because you are struggling in tvz doesn't mean oh its bad now maybe its your playing not balance? + Show Spoiler +
Fake boxer has beaten zergs in macro games just because he didn't win the finals doesn't mean zerg is imba fake boxer when he has played macro games against zerg has won more then he's lost just like Nada in tvz as well.
I know from watching some top terran players in tvz they seem to be winning just fine I dont' see them getting stomped in tournaments. I still see terrans win more tournaments then the other races so its really not anywhere near as bad as you think. I have seen many games where the terran has beaten a zerg in macro I think its about time you guys stop QQ'ing and actually improve your game rather then blame balance. The mindset of blaming your losses on balance are pathetic and its no wonder you can't beat xxx race because you think its imba so whatever I dont' know why I bother to reply to Iechoic as I know he's like Avilo in where terran is UP and blames balance instead of himself.
On November 14 2010 09:48 Raiznhell wrote: Okay well I dunno where people are getting this BoxeR doesn't know as much about the agme as the rest fo us cuz last time i checked the ManofOneway account before GSL had way more game splayed that most of the american and european top 200 players s he has plenty of release experience plus he is a practiced pro-gamer so he wouuld know just as much as anyone else imo. TLO switched to zerg after zerg became more powerful so if anything him going to random is better than that even because he's not just going right to zerg which undeniabley is the strong race right now in terms of performance anyways.
2 GSLs. 2 zerg champs. One going basically undefeated until the finals like man.
I mean TvZ is functioning very cool right now and definitley in the right direction but until siege tanks are made less gas heavy and supply heavy it and TvP will always be tough for terran late game in that they will never ahve enough tanks AND there is less gas to spend on essential things liek Ravens which i believe is an essential unit to TvZ that you just cannot afford with siege tank production although without siege tanks terrans gunna die to banes. TvP would also be better with some more tanks too and i think maybe thats the whole problem that SlayerSBoxeR see's with Terran in that siege tanks arent nearly as iconic and useful and potent as in BW. they were the backbone.
Its not only tanks. Terran Mech is crap. TvP you need anti air, but Vikings compared to Goliaths are 50 more mins and 50 more gas
Thors are only good because of mass repair. And their role as Anti muta is a laughing stock.
The day they get rid of Vikings and Thors and put in the Goliath. That would make my day.
The only reason Terran Mech got nerfed was because nobody realized that you can't beat mech with mass lower tier units.They got nerfed before anyone started to use the ultralisk. They got nerfed before Protoss learned that mass Stalker is crap.
Now Zerg and Protoss can literally mass 1 unit and beat Mech. Mass Roach. Mass Ultra. Mass Immortal.
Blizzards decision to nerf mech that early was stupid and they seriously need to look at the factory to fix Terran.
The general gist that I am getting is that many complain about Terran due to the efficiency and number of their early harassment opinions being superior to the other two races. As such, the other two races are more often required to react as opposed to dictate the initial flow of the game. Many who are inexperienced with the flexibility of the Terran race cry imba as they are unable to deal with Terran's early aggression. However, none of Terran's aggression opinions is unstoppable and can be easily torn apart with the proper response that the more casual players found difficult to implement.
As far as late game is concerned, Terran gets the short end of the stick. There are many points that are backing that statement.
I am not sure how switching to random would help Boxer's win rate though.
On November 14 2010 10:32 dukethegold wrote: The general gist that I am getting is that many complain about Terran due to the efficiency and number of their early harassment opinions being superior to the other two races. Many who are inexperienced with the flexibility of the Terran race cry imba as they are unable to deal with them.
As far as late game is concerned, Terran gets the short end of the stick. There are many points that are backing that statement.
I am not sure how switching to random would help Boxer's win rate though.
This is exactly the issue. Most people won't admit that terran is weak because of all the gimmicks we can pull earlygame. But other then that Terran suffers.
If Protoss or Zerg can survive the early game. The Roffle stomp the Terran.
But Boxer's decision is just an excuse to play Zerg 33% of the time
On November 14 2010 09:48 Raiznhell wrote: Okay well I dunno where people are getting this BoxeR doesn't know as much about the agme as the rest fo us cuz last time i checked the ManofOneway account before GSL had way more game splayed that most of the american and european top 200 players s he has plenty of release experience plus he is a practiced pro-gamer so he wouuld know just as much as anyone else imo. TLO switched to zerg after zerg became more powerful so if anything him going to random is better than that even because he's not just going right to zerg which undeniabley is the strong race right now in terms of performance anyways.
2 GSLs. 2 zerg champs. One going basically undefeated until the finals like man.
I mean TvZ is functioning very cool right now and definitley in the right direction but until siege tanks are made less gas heavy and supply heavy it and TvP will always be tough for terran late game in that they will never ahve enough tanks AND there is less gas to spend on essential things liek Ravens which i believe is an essential unit to TvZ that you just cannot afford with siege tank production although without siege tanks terrans gunna die to banes. TvP would also be better with some more tanks too and i think maybe thats the whole problem that SlayerSBoxeR see's with Terran in that siege tanks arent nearly as iconic and useful and potent as in BW. they were the backbone.
Its not only tanks. Terran Mech is crap. TvP you need anti air, but Vikings compared to Goliaths are 50 more mins and 50 more gas
Thors are only good because of mass repair. And their role as Anti muta is a laughing stock.
The day they get rid of Vikings and Thors and put in the Goliath. That would make my day.
The only reason Terran Mech got nerfed was because nobody realized that you can't beat mech with mass lower tier units.They got nerfed before anyone started to use the ultralisk. They got nerfed before Protoss learned that mass Stalker is crap.
Now Zerg and Protoss can literally mass 1 unit and beat Mech. Mass Roach. Mass Ultra. Mass Immortal.
Blizzards decision to nerf mech that early was stupid and they seriously need to look at the factory to fix Terran.
I would trade hellions for vultures w/ mines, and thors for goliaths. I've been saying it since beta, I wish goliaths were back at the factory, half the cost of a thor, and half the supply. Have them "transform" on the battlefield as an option, into a thor.
*Goliath is far more mobile too... I think this is what T is missing right now*
Science Vessel in SP would help Terran a lot late game and help mech. And ditch the Raven. Also ditch SD before barracks - stoopid change. Just up build time of reaper if it's too fast for Zerg. Now Reaper unit is 100% worthless can't even scout worth a crap. I hate seeing worthless units. Shows piss poor design. Terran has 3 worthless units at least which rarely show in games. Raven, Reaper, Battleship.
Toss has 3 maybe 4. DT Carrier MS and Void Ray since 1.1.2 Toss is broke everyone knows this. Weak early Super powerful mid game and only Zerg can beat them late.
IMO Zerg has best units and most are used.. however hydras need a speed buff and roach back to 3.
On November 14 2010 10:35 Raiden X wrote: This is exactly the issue. Most people won't admit that terran is weak because of all the gimmicks we can pull earlygame. But other then that Terran suffers.
If Protoss or Zerg can survive the early game. The Roffle stomp the Terran.
The gimmicks the top Terran players in the GSL are doing are laughable because that's the race the Blizzard has produced. If you don't use gimmicks as Terran, you won't win because late game Terran is so broke, Blizzard should just auto-GG for every Terran player that hasn't won by mid game.
On November 14 2010 11:49 tdt wrote: Science Vessel in SP would help Terran a lot late game and help mech. And ditch the Raven. Also ditch SD before barracks - stoopid change. Just up build time of reaper if it's too fast for Zerg. Now Reaper unit is 100% worthless can't even scout worth a crap. I hate seeing worthless units. Shows piss poor design. Terran has 3 worthless units at least which rarely show in games. Raven, Reaper, Battleship.
Toss has 3 maybe 4. DT Carrier MS and Void Ray since 1.1.2 Toss is broke everyone knows this. Weak early Super powerful mid game and only Zerg can beat them late.
IMO Zerg has best units and most are used.. however hydras need a speed buff and roach back to 3.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with either DTs, Carriers, Void rays, BCs, or Ravens.
i cant agree with boxer everyone acts like nerfing terran is a horrible thing though its horribly needed or at least stop nurfing terran and buffing zerg and toss i played random for a while and saw protoss are easily countered by Maur marine and ghost zerg all you need honestly is to pressure with vikings, than go MMM or drop into someones base with like 4-8 maur and make them GG In my opinion as well they need more Zerg units alot of people also want psy storm nerfed so it does the same damage but a smaller amount with a long amount a time and to my opinion thats bs if blizzard does that i will expect freakin collisi that cant get hit by air!
On November 14 2010 09:48 Raiznhell wrote: Okay well I dunno where people are getting this BoxeR doesn't know as much about the agme as the rest fo us cuz last time i checked the ManofOneway account before GSL had way more game splayed that most of the american and european top 200 players s he has plenty of release experience plus he is a practiced pro-gamer so he wouuld know just as much as anyone else imo. TLO switched to zerg after zerg became more powerful so if anything him going to random is better than that even because he's not just going right to zerg which undeniabley is the strong race right now in terms of performance anyways.
2 GSLs. 2 zerg champs. One going basically undefeated until the finals like man.
I mean TvZ is functioning very cool right now and definitley in the right direction but until siege tanks are made less gas heavy and supply heavy it and TvP will always be tough for terran late game in that they will never ahve enough tanks AND there is less gas to spend on essential things liek Ravens which i believe is an essential unit to TvZ that you just cannot afford with siege tank production although without siege tanks terrans gunna die to banes. TvP would also be better with some more tanks too and i think maybe thats the whole problem that SlayerSBoxeR see's with Terran in that siege tanks arent nearly as iconic and useful and potent as in BW. they were the backbone.
Its not only tanks. Terran Mech is crap. TvP you need anti air, but Vikings compared to Goliaths are 50 more mins and 50 more gas
Thors are only good because of mass repair. And their role as Anti muta is a laughing stock.
The day they get rid of Vikings and Thors and put in the Goliath. That would make my day.
The only reason Terran Mech got nerfed was because nobody realized that you can't beat mech with mass lower tier units.They got nerfed before anyone started to use the ultralisk. They got nerfed before Protoss learned that mass Stalker is crap.
Now Zerg and Protoss can literally mass 1 unit and beat Mech. Mass Roach. Mass Ultra. Mass Immortal.
Blizzards decision to nerf mech that early was stupid and they seriously need to look at the factory to fix Terran.
Has there EVER been a game where the Protoss made only immortals and the Terran's response was to give up because mech was nerfed?
Because... ya know... Terrans don't have marines or air units? You make it sound as if you're restricted to exactly one unit the entire game.
Come on. Look at the win ratios of the races. They're very close to even. And that's because people create healthy unit compositions and don't rely on only one unit for the entire game.
Come on. Look at the win ratios of the races. They're very close to even. And that's because people create healthy unit compositions and don't rely on only one unit for the entire game.
Ratios across the board is vastly different from win ratios at tournament/pro level. People make fun of Foxer for his mass marine but the viability of it over everything else is high given the "gimmicy" style of the terran race.
Come on. Look at the win ratios of the races. They're very close to even. And that's because people create healthy unit compositions and don't rely on only one unit for the entire game.
Ratios across the board is vastly different from win ratios at tournament/pro level. People make fun of Foxer for his mass marine but the viability of it over everything else is high given the "gimmicy" style of the terran race.
I agree that it's very viable if you have great micro, but I don't particularly think it's a better strategy than every other Terran strategy ever.
My point was that the guy I quoted was complaining that Terrans lose when they only make one type of mech unit. Or just pump out of factories in general... as if Terrans shouldn't use their entire spectrum of units. I don't think that's how StarCraft should be played.
Well he really should go another race because at the rate he's going he might ruin his legacy by losing everytime a TvZ pops up, I'm afraid he might actually get booted off RO64 if he faces even a no-name zerg.
EPT
Please put GSL results in spoilers, not all of us have watched the games yet.
