| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
ensis
Germany340 Posts
things that may somewhat support that thought are, that protoss just lacks a unit for harrass. its not like protoss harrassment units are too weak, its more like, there is no such unit. anyways, terran is perfect, dont touch them, instead work on the other two races, especially toss. | ||
|
kcdc
United States2311 Posts
| ||
|
Piy
Scotland3152 Posts
| ||
|
Cerebrate.Monthly
United States21 Posts
The chorus of answers that Blizzard fans said to me was what you were thinking: The expansions will polish the other 2 races. But if the game is balanced around the current state of the game, will Terran get a major overhaul of buffs to accomodate such changes to zerg/protoss mechanics. Or will they get even more options and choices on top of that as Brood War did. It's not really a huge issue as of yet but definitely an interesting read. | ||
|
kthnx
20 Posts
i do agree that they probably have the most potential currently but that should change after the expansions | ||
|
ensis
Germany340 Posts
On November 30 2010 01:03 kthnx wrote: i actually feel terran is probably the least micro intensive simply because all of their units are fairl long ranged and there are very few spell casters. stimming is just one action for an entire battle whereas forcefields are 2 each and zerg have to micro zerglings for good surrounds and rely heavily on the queen for early defense. i do agree that they probably have the most potential currently but that should change after the expansions since foxer did some decent marine micro, people think, terran requires micro. they completely ignore, that select a marine, move it to a different location is nothing more than select a stalker, blink it to the back or spreading your templars. and some may even say, stim-micro is so very very hard to pull off. every and i really mean every protoss kites zealots and zerglings all the time, the only differnence? well, stalkers are slower than stimmed marauders and dont have concussive shells. yeah, dropping requires somewhat micro, but so does phoenix or muta harrass. | ||
|
Sadist
United States7291 Posts
On November 30 2010 01:03 kthnx wrote: i actually feel terran is probably the least micro intensive simply because all of their units are fairl long ranged and there are very few spell casters. stimming is just one action for an entire battle whereas forcefields are 2 each and zerg have to micro zerglings for good surrounds and rely heavily on the queen for early defense. i do agree that they probably have the most potential currently but that should change after the expansions Wrong. Spell casters are easy to use in this game especially with smart cast. | ||
|
Mentor
Germany219 Posts
| ||
|
Xxavi
United States1248 Posts
As a Zerg, the diversity of play is greater. You can have banelings, you can burrow them. You can have other cool abilities, infested terrans, fungal growth etc. So it is better in that regard. For Terran, you have tons of units with special abilities. Only a fraction of them are used to their fullest, and even after a year or two, terran will have some novel plays to offer. A better use of raven's or ghosts or this or that. In comparison, I don't know what Protoss are going to discover for coming months. | ||
|
Zoler
Sweden6339 Posts
On November 30 2010 01:03 kthnx wrote: i actually feel terran is probably the least micro intensive simply because all of their units are fairl long ranged and there are very few spell casters. stimming is just one action for an entire battle whereas forcefields are 2 each and zerg have to micro zerglings for good surrounds and rely heavily on the queen for early defense. i do agree that they probably have the most potential currently but that should change after the expansions spells are easy as shit to use, it's the units that are hard to control I'm outta these sc2 threads now, I just keep lol'ing too much | ||
|
ArcNatural
United States13 Posts
I just feel like their needs to be repair caps for terran. Something like 2-3 scvs to repair standard mech/buildings like barracks/thor/tank/bunker/etc. Maybe something like 5-10 for a CC/Planetary so it can stop or delay army pushes for your mech army to get there. But I hate it when I see something like a protoss attack a PF with his main force the terran uses 24 scvs to repair and the protoss straight up loses, retreats and is now way behind. I feel like the mechanic is NOT how it's supposed to be. Hold it off or delay it against small pushes or drops sure, but not entire forces. I just think repair the way it is at the moment is too much. I think this would go a long way in fixing some of the little issues without heavily breaking anything. I'm also 50/50 in removing repair from mules... But I'm not sure if that's entirely necessary as I do think call down mules for repair is a nice option for Terran to have. I have to trust that when pros say Terran lategame loses to Zerg that it's true and may need some tweaks. But I honestly haven't seen enough of it go either way to be certain. Zerg: Seems ok at the moment. Nothing terribly wrong or bad with the race that I don't think could be fixed by the repair solution above. At least I don't see anything as radical as what I suggested above. Protoss: Protoss is hard to me. I feel like the race is almost OP but they aren't. Lately some of the new BOs have been interesting. A lot of faults for Protoss to me have to do with how straightforward they are at times. It's almost weird in that they have a lot of magic casting and unique skills but it's still fairly straightforward to use them. I feel like Protoss is the hardest situation right now. I feel like the smallest tweak could easily make them broken for some reason. | ||
|
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
On November 29 2010 21:50 TrzystaDrzew wrote: I refuse to agree with this. Do you really think they gave mule repair ability without idea of rep-drop function? I think you underestimate Blizz. What is more an argument "they did not tell about it" is kinda desperate move. No offense. Think backwards. Why would someone ever use a MULE to repair? They are (relatively) inefficient at this function, as that repair is actually costing you upwards of 270 minerals minimum. Already the number of situations where this might seem like a good idea has plummetted down. A player could conceivably use it to save a building in the red that no SCVs can get to. He could also use it to save a mechanical unit in an area no one can get to. Why is there only one such mechanical unit and why is saving it so important? Well, cause you've got this Thor, see, and you put him up on a ledge in a way Blizzard didn't really expect. But there were no equivalents to the Thor in SC1, no mech unit that became OP just by virtue of rushing to it, and repair had far fewer opportunities to make or break the game. I don't for a moment believe that Blizzard anticipated the amount of trouble they'd have with anything revolving around just rushing to 1 Thor, so the "need" to repair it with MULEs would never even come up. On November 29 2010 22:40 pigscanfly wrote: 1. new supply depot mechanic = warp prism = overlord creep spread = new creative ways to place buildings But Protoss could already place buildings in weird ways, they just had to use a Pylon to do it. Nothing's really changed. It's not as though sneaking a Probe into somebody's main in mid/late-game is unheard of. 3. scans = spreading creep tumour vision/changelings= hallucinate= ways to gain scouting information It's curious that you pick Scans, which I never mentioned in my OP. This gets a little less fair when we look at the MULE instead. Let's look for proxy functionalities. The Zerg have the Overlord's Creep Drop, right? And the Protoss have Warp Prism's pylon field. Problem is, the MULE isn't even a unit! The Protoss and Zerg waste an entire unit in their roster to make up for something that Terrans get outside of units, as a mechanic. And Protoss and Zerg have fewer units than Terran to start with! What does that say for how many options are available to these races? 4. planetary fortresses = moving spinecrawlers = protoss ability to warp in 5 cannons at a go without sacrificing more than one probe to build = easy way to defend expansions Where's the "free Bunker" fit in there? Where's the Sensor "free maphack" tower's parallel? I'm not saying that Terrans have the ONLY things, I'm saying that they have by far the MOST things. In some things, such as options, quantity really can be a good unto itself. The races ARE different and are meant to be different. It's like comparing clouds and teddy bears. I don't really think that they are, though. I'd be curious to know what you think of the Edited portion at the end of my OP, specifically. On November 30 2010 00:33 kcdc wrote: Holy crap. Learn to cut the fat out of your posts, kids. This was 50x the number of words it needed to be. You'd think so, right? Except I made it that long to ensure that people couldn't possibly confuse what I was talking about, and half of the readers still managed to do exactly that. On November 30 2010 02:32 ArcNatural wrote: Terran: I just feel like their needs to be repair caps for terran. Something like 2-3 scvs to repair standard mech/buildings like barracks/thor/tank/bunker/etc. Maybe something like 5-10 for a CC/Planetary so it can stop or delay army pushes for your mech army to get there. But I hate it when I see something like a protoss attack a PF with his main force the terran uses 24 scvs to repair and the protoss straight up loses, retreats and is now way behind. I feel like the mechanic is NOT how it's supposed to be. Hold it off or delay it against small pushes or drops sure, but not entire forces. I just think repair the way it is at the moment is too much. I think this would go a long way in fixing some of the little issues without heavily breaking anything. I'm also 50/50 in removing repair from mules... But I'm not sure if that's entirely necessary as I do think call down mules for repair is a nice option for Terran to have. I have to trust that when pros say Terran lategame loses to Zerg that it's true and may need some tweaks. But I honestly haven't seen enough of it go either way to be certain. Zerg: Seems ok at the moment. Nothing terribly wrong or bad with the race that I don't think could be fixed by the repair solution above. At least I don't see anything as radical as what I suggested above. Protoss: Protoss is hard to me. I feel like the race is almost OP but they aren't. Lately some of the new BOs have been interesting. A lot of faults for Protoss to me have to do with how straightforward they are at times. It's almost weird in that they have a lot of magic casting and unique skills but it's still fairly straightforward to use them. I feel like Protoss is the hardest situation right now. I feel like the smallest tweak could easily make them broken for some reason. I feel like you're falling into the trap of assuming immediately that versatility equates with overpoweredness. While the power of a single PF can be annoying, these things are also easily countered if the opposing player simply keeps a clear head and doesn't get into /stubborn mode where he blindly rushes at it because "it has to fucking die this time." I notice that you don't suggest to cut anything out, whether it be unit repair or building repair or MULE repair, you suggest simply on nerfs. But why even do that? Why not instead give other races the options Terrans have? Think of it this way. If Planetary Fortresses are used by TLO for area denial once he has way too much cash and is supply capped, what are Protoss players with too much cash expected to do? Cannons are inadequate because they're balanced around the early game (when they can be easily gotten) which makes them too easy to counter later on. A Terran can burn his money on a huge variety of structures (Turrets, Bunkers, Sensor Towers, PFs) but a Protoss only has one option. By working backwards we've discovered an area where the Protoss could have something, but don't. "Why do Terrans get a Sensor Tower but the Protoss don't?" Everything comes back to this question. It's not as though the Protoss couldn't use it. In fact, with the current state of Muta vs. T/P, they need it far more than Terrans do. Yet Terrans get it, just cuz. ...why? | ||
|
SilverPotato
United States560 Posts
| ||
|
Debo
United States95 Posts
But I find that it is coming down to the fact that Protoss, and Zerg are not trying to put themselves into situations that benefit their race, and instead try to put themselves in a position that is immensely more favorable to Terran. Zerg are still going 14 hatch knowing it isn't safe vs terran. Protoss are still rushing Colossus w/o building sufficient gateway units to stay properly safe. I play terran, for the first 12-15 minutes of the game I have the advantage, but after that it switches dramatically. But even with all these issues Z/P seem to have vs terran..... Zerg has won both GSL tournaments, so maybe the game isn't the issue, it's the players. | ||
|
hugman
Sweden4644 Posts
| ||
|
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
On November 30 2010 03:57 Debo wrote:But even with all these issues Z/P seem to have vs terran..... Zerg has won both GSL tournaments, so maybe the game isn't the issue, it's the players. Keep in mind that I'm not really concerned with balance, but rather dynamic play. We can make the Zealot into a 500/500 unit (Shield/HP, not min/gas) and that would make Protoss win every single game every single time, but it wouldn't make the game dynamic, and it wouldn't help it to stay fresh and interesting months down the line. | ||
|
SilverPotato
United States560 Posts
On November 30 2010 04:04 pure.Wasted wrote: Keep in mind that I'm not really concerned with balance, but rather dynamic play. We can make the Zealot into a 500/500 unit (Shield/HP, not min/gas) and that would make Protoss win every single game every single time, but it wouldn't make the game dynamic, and it wouldn't help it to stay fresh and interesting months down the line. You're so smart ^^ One of the first people to fully understand SC2 is meant to be a viewers sport, fun and entertaining for an audience unlike BW which has become more about who could execute the same bland build better  That's why these big Macro maps won't be fully endorsed by Blizz, they want SC2 to maintain a status of fast paced action. | ||
|
TheOGBlitzKrieg
United States346 Posts
| ||
|
Treva
United States533 Posts
| ||
|
Skysec
United States164 Posts
Whether a race is over powered or underpowered can easily be affected by a switch of the numbers. Making one unit deal one more damage or give it a range boost (roach) can go a long way towards changing balance but does very little to change creative/strategic/tactical play (range change does affect this though) | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Other Games |
|
PiGosaur Cup
RSL Revival
Classic vs Creator
Cure vs TriGGeR
Kung Fu Cup
GuMiho vs MaNa
herO vs ShoWTimE
Classic vs TBD
WardiTV Korean Royale
CranKy Ducklings
RSL Revival
herO vs Gerald
ByuN vs SHIN
Kung Fu Cup
Cure vs Reynor
IPSL
ZZZero vs rasowy
Napoleon vs KameZerg
BSL 21
Tarson vs Julia
Doodle vs OldBoy
eOnzErG vs WolFix
StRyKeR vs Aeternum
Sparkling Tuna Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
