|
![[image loading]](http://img220.imageshack.us/img220/3356/sc222.png) This bad-ass banner brought to you by your friendly neighbourhood Grend
And, even speaking as a Terran, this isn’t a good thing. The reasons are plenty, but two that I won’t be getting into deliberately are micro and macro. Common sense usually holds that Terrans are the most micro-intensive race and that Zerg is the most macro-intensive, but you try telling Foxer that he doesn’t need to worry about macro in his TvZ, or white-Ra that he doesn’t need excellent micro in his Phoenix/Void-Ray play in PvZ, or any lategame Zerg that he doesn’t need good micro to flank and engage the Terran bioball. It just doesn’t work that way, the game is too flexible and these factors are too debateable, so I’m going to leave units, their production, and their control completely out of this equation. I’m only going to talk about factors that are objective, set-in-stone and, in my opinion, not open to debate. I’m going to talk about racial design (intentional and not) and synergy (intentional and not), and how these create a disparity in the skill-caps between the races.
First, what does that even mean? I’m not saying that Terran players are better, or that the Terran race takes more skill to play. I’m saying that over the course of SC2’s meta-game, if nothing at all is patched from this point onward, Terran gameplay is going to change the most radically, especially in subtle ways, and that comparing Terran play now to the Beta, it already has. And if you're about to inform me on the unorthodoxy of my definition for 'skill ceiling,' save yourself the trouble. That's both known and entirely irrelevant to the point I'm trying to make.
DESIGN
Remember how Supply Depots in SC2 were designed from the ground-up to allow Terrans to wall-in easier (a convenience that wasn’t paralleled for either Zerg or Protoss)? And for a long time, that’s exactly what Terran players did. But watch any recent TvZ or TvP, and a good half of the time that Depot won’t be anywhere near the wall. What changed? Well, for one thing, Terrans realized that a Depot was too weak to repel a Baneling Bust and created an opening for the enemy to exploit. But that doesn’t tell you where to place the Depot, only where not to place it. So why is it that almost every Terran will place his first Depots around – or under – his mineral line, especially in TvT? The short answer is: because he can.
![[image loading]](http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/8456/depot.png) Obligatory visual aids included.
The long answer is that the Depot has the uncanny ability to submerge under the ground, where it takes up no space, and can therefore be hidden next to very well protected areas so that it doesn’t get destroyed by Banelings, Mutalisks, Void Rays, or Banshees. As soon as Terrans realized that their Depots were a liability, they wondered, “How do we remedy that?” And the tools to do this were already built into the game, perfectly at their disposal. This doesn’t mean that sniping Depots is now impossible and that Terrans are imbalanced. All it means is that they had an unorthodox tool at their disposal, and when the time came, they found a way to take advantage of it. The moral of the story is: having unorthodox, arbitrary tools at a race’s disposal is a very, very good thing for fostering fresh and creative play. I genuinely wonder how the submerge functionality will be taken advantage of one year from now… two years, three years.
The problem is Terrans have a disproportionate amount of unorthodox features at their disposal. Some are subtle. Take the Command Center, which could, as early as SC1, lift off. But apparently that wasn’t enough. Now it can also load and unload workers to protect and/or transport them. Now it can upgrade into a spellcaster with a number of versatile abilities, or a powerful stationary defense. The tactics opened up by the CC’s weirdness and the weirdness of its progeny alone is staggering. Not only are early expansions to islands possible in SC1, with the 5 workers maynard they are in many cases even a good idea (Kulas Ravine). You can use your expanding CC as an emergency wall and simply relocate it at your convenience. And of course you can keep your CC alive against many, many units just by lifting it into the air. (Never mind all the sacrificial Engineering Bays and Barrackses over the years, a role the CC would naturally fulfill if other structures could not.) And we haven’t even gotten to the OC or the PF: who’d have imagined on Day 1 of Beta that MULEs would be dropped on Lost Temple ledges to keep Thors alive, or that Planetary Fortresses would be commonly built for late-game area denial when supplies are capped but resources are plenty? A Planetary Fortress is a powerful defensive tool… only thing is, combined with the Command Center’s ability to fly and its ability to carry SCVs, it can even be used offensively in the early game.
These last few are obviously unintentional, but they’re there just the same. Contrast and compare with Creep Tumors, the use of which hasn’t changed in any way since Day 1. Sure, people use them more, but they don’t use them differently, because there’s no way to use these things differently. Their function is clear-cut. So why is it that a MULE, also with a seemingly clear-cut function, can be used differently? Synergy, and all I’ll get to that in a minute.
Back to design: Command Centers, Orbital Commands, and Planetary Fortresses are still not all the Terrans have. Bunkers now have the arbitrary Salvage ability, which, combined with Reapers, made them for a time an incredibly powerful offensive tool, and gives them added functionality all over the place. Just cuz. Sensor Towers are entirely superfluous structures – Zerg might have easy map vision through Creep Tumors, but Protoss still have nothing. Why is that? Did Blizzard decide that Stalkers are just too friggin’ good at fighting back Mutalisk harass compared to Thors? Sensor Towers may not add so much to the skill cap, but they do add arbitrarily to the number of options available to a Terran player in-game, and each of those options has its own skill ceiling.
It’s not that Protoss and Zerg have no options outside of regular unit selection (which Terran shares); Pylon placement for Warp-in is an interesting addition. Creep Tumor placement is an interesting addition. So are Nydus Worms. The problems are that 1) there aren’t enough parallel mechanics for the other races, and 2) those mechanics simply aren’t deep enough; they don’t reward creative use. And that brings us to the next point.
SYNERGY
Whether it’s by accident or deliberately, the Terran race has by far the most synergy. The synergy exists between units, it exists between buildings, and in many cases even between units and buildings. Marines and Medivacs aren’t simply good together in the sense that Sentries and Colossi are good together. They’re designed from the ground-up to complement one another, like Fungal Growth and Banelings. The divide between ‘infantry’ and ‘mechanical’ units is not merely there (so is the divide between Psionic and non-Psionic units for the Protoss), it is absolutely pervasive, and Terran mechanics are built completely around it. Only infantry units can enter Bunkers; only infantry units are healed by Medivacs. Only structures burn down; only mechanical units (and structures) cannot replenish life without cost. And that last is key, because it brings us to Repair.
The 8-minute Thor rush (or its faster variants) wouldn’t be possible without repair. Planetary Fortresses would be nearly useless without repair. Wall-Ins would be too dangerous without repair. Getting Battlecruisers would be even riskier if you weren’t able to keep the first one or two alive with mass SCVs before you reached critical mass. This might not have been what Blizzard had in mind when they came up with Repair back in 1998, but now it is a central part of the race, and the beauty of it is how naturally it flows from instance to instance. When you bring SCVs to repair a Thor on LT ledge overlooking Zerg natural, that same SCV can be used to build a forward Bunker, that same SCV can be used to build a Missile Turret to keep the Thor safe from unclumped, microed Mutas, that same SCV can repair the Medivac that’s getting hit by Queens while it gives your Siege Tank (if you went Tank instead of Thor) vision. When a Terran leapfrogs across the map with sieged tanks, the same SCVs that are keeping his mech army alive are constructing Missile Turrets and Sensor Towers to contain his opponent.
Why does this matter? Because a Queen managed to take out the Medivac, the Thor is in danger, and suddenly you drop down two MULEs on the ledge to keep the Thor alive. Because MULEs can repair, too. They’re SCVs that can be where you need them, when you need them. Sure, there’s a price tag attached, but whether or not it’s worth it is your call to make. At least you have that option. Even if the design behind MULEs wasn’t deliberately in support of this tactic, the fact that it has more abilities than it “needed” (it didn’t need Repair to do what it was made for, which is mining) allowed players to get creative.
That’s what this is all about. Options. A year from now, you won’t see Chrono Boost being used in new and inventive ways, because there simply are no other ways than “speeding up production” to use it. Choosing what to speed up, when to conserve and when to spend, may be good tactical choices… but the ability is shallow, because it creates no synergy between other abilities. You’re not going to see Nexuses placed in strange positions six months from now, because there’s no benefit to be gleaned from it, there never could be. You’re not going to see Drones suddenly sent out with mid-game armies, because there is no potential use for them. They have no ability to interact with other units and structures of their race, nothing new to be discovered and perfected. Unlike the Command Center/SCV/Planetary Fortress relationship, which is entirely symbiotic and dynamic, the Nexus has absolutely no relation to anything else. Warp-In and Creep Tumors were undeniably good moves by Blizzard and both add depth to their respective races – but for every step taken by Protoss and Zerg in the development of this game, the Terrans were taking five.
CONCLUSIONS
The question remains “why?” Why do Terrans get a building that can fly, take in SCVs, and cast 3 different versatile spells, all at the same time? And why does that come as an alternative to a different, equally versatile upgrade? Where are the parallels for the other races? Sure, they have unit micro and timings to discover and perfect, but so do Terrans. All of the things I mentioned here are on top of the timings and knowledge the other races have to pick up. “Terrans are defensive” isn’t enough, because the abilities and upgrades they get have, as it turns out, far more than merely defensive applications, because of the synergies already in place.
Blizzard needs to change their approach to designing the races come Heart of the Swarm and Legacy of the Void. Adding two units may be perfectly enough for Terrans, but if they want Protoss and Zerg gameplay to keep from getting stale – not just unit tactics, but racial tactics – they’re going to have to go back all the way to the fundamentals. Give players reasons to get creative with their building placement. Give them access to versatile spells for the sake of giving them access to versatile spells that will be used in unpredictable new ways. Create new relationships between units. The Overlord spreading creep may have been an attempt to do just that, but it isn’t enough. It isn't enough because using Overlords to spread Creep is inefficient, and it isn't enough because Creep itself is entirely predictable. Its uses don't change based on whether you cast it on a mineral patch or on a Siege Tank or on a lonely structure whose HP is in the red. It always, always makes your units faster. It isn't bad -- but it is shallow. The potential to take advantage of the races' differences is obviously there. But the depth isn't. Not yet.
Edit: The question of racial identity came up (from -(Cake)-), which I think prompted a rather constructive response:
--It's interesting that Cake brings up the racial divide: quantity, quality, and versatility. That's true of the units, right? You get two Zerglings, you get a tough Zealot, or you get a ranged Marine. Quantity, quality, versatility. Except what happens when we bring the buildings into the discussion? Terran buildings support the theme of versatility 100%, but do Zerg ones support the theme of quantity? Sure, through Creep Tumors, but that's a very small example. Do Protoss buildings support the theme of quality?
If you want to carry the racial themes into racial mechanics... you have to make sure you do it for all races. And if you can't do that, then at least put them on even ground in versatility, because racially-appropriate or not it's at least dynamic and keeps the match-up fresh. Right now, Protoss and Zerg bases are just "there," they're not contributing to the game at all, really, in the way that Add-ons or all these spiffy Terran mechanics are.
|
If you're not walling off, placing the depot next to the mineral line is the most efficient use of resources, as SCVs can return to mining immediately after --there's a reason for that, it's not "because they can".
A lot of the points you're making are common sense to Brood War players and while I'm on the subject of Brood War, if you want a real management game, try playing SK Terran in Brood War.
|
On November 29 2010 14:18 Loser777 wrote:
If you're not walling off, placing the depot next to the mineral line is the most efficient use of resources, as SCVs can return to mining immediately after --there's a reason for that, it's not "because they can".
Try as they might, Protoss can't place their Pylon in the middle of their mineral line, although that would be just as resource efficient.
|
Nice post.
I have to agree, Terran seems like a dynamic race.
It changes a lot.
|
’m saying that over the course of SC2’s meta-game, if nothing at all is patched from this point onward, Terran gameplay is going to change the most radically, especially in subtle ways, and that comparing Terran play now to the Beta, it already has.
stopped reading there. what's with newcomers and hypothetical situations on TL? =[
User was warned for this post
|
I take issue with the statement that creep is spread the same way every game. This is definitely not the case. In the early-mid game the Zerg has to choose where they put creep because they can't put it everywhere (until the late game).
Do they make a highway to their opponents base for an attack? Do they attempt to connect all their expansions for easy defense? Do they spread it out widely around where they fear an attack, thus enabling them to get an easy defensive flank? Also, overlords drop creep to delay enemy expansions, but only if it is safe to have them roaming the map.
It's not entirely inefficient for overlords to spread creep for other reasons. Idra used overlord creep spread against his opponent in an extremely effective way in his RO64 match in the GSL 3.
On the issue of the command center: The Zerg queen is almost comparable in versatility. Three spells that can be casted, and in the early game especially it's a pretty big decision how you use their energy. It may remain a big decision in the late game if players become good enough to spend all of the energy while engaged in other tasks as well.
EDIT: I also just realized that Zerg have quite a versatile building as well: The Spine/Spore Crawler. It's the only tower that you can move.
|
You suggest an interesting question: maybe Blizzard would do well to take protoss and zerg back to their fundamentals and come back with some groundbreaking changes. Is such an overhaul likely? That would be a major second-guess by a game designer. No other game comes to mind where the developer has been willing to retool the core gameplay so heavily with an expansion.
I think, however, that it is entirely plausible. Expanding the game in the way you've mentioned could make SC 2 one of the deepest most unbelievable multiplayer games to date.
If there's one company that cares about its product and community enough to do something like that, it's Blizzard.
|
Well obviously you put in a lot of time/effort on this,
Traditionally, zerg is about quantity, toss is about quality, and terran is about versatility
Terran's options are part of racial identity. I think skill ceiling is the wrong phrase here, It doesn't really matter what race has the highest skill cap because even the top pros are probably not going to reach it
So what i got from this is that you are saying terran has more options than the other races, solid point, arguable a issue with the game, but could have been said in much less time/words
|
At least you have that option.
This is basically the premise of your entire post. I agree, terran benefits the most out of fast hands and a clear brain.
it does not make it a better race and blizzard does not need to change their approach to either factions.
Zerg will always be obvious and pure with very few predictable tricks up their sleves its still fun to play.
|
On November 29 2010 14:21 alexanderzero wrote:
I take issue with the statement that creep is spread the same way every game. This is definitely not the case. In the early-mid game the Zerg has to choose where they put creep because they can't put it everywhere (until the late game).
Do they make a highway to their opponents base for an attack? Do they attempt to connect all their expansions for easy defense? Do they spread it out widely around where they fear an attack, thus enabling them to get an easy defensive flank? Also, overlords drop creep to delay enemy expansions, but only if it is safe to have them roaming the map.
It's not entirely inefficient for overlords to spread creep for other reasons. Idra used overlord creep spread against his opponent in an extremely effective way in his RO64 match in the GSL 3.
I didn't mean to imply that Zerg Creep is used in the same way from game to game. What I meant to imply is that it has already been used in every way it can be used. There are many, many tricks to learn in mastering Creep spread, but all of them are already at players' disposal. Those tricks aren't going to change in six months' time.
On the issue of the command center: The Zerg queen is almost comparable in versatility. Three spells that can be casted, and in the early game especially it's a pretty big decision how you use their energy. It may remain a big decision in the late game if players become good enough to spend all of the energy while engaged in other tasks as well.
If you'll note, I actually didn't make a single reference to Scan or to Calldown Supplies, although both abilities obviously serve their functions (Scan moreso), and there's plenty of tension especially in the midgame before minerals become TOO common. Energy tension isn't enough to create depth in abilities that have only a straight-forward use. Actually, I would say that surprisingly enough Transfusion turned out to be the most unpredictable ability, as it allowed for some very curious mass-Queen play that obviously wasn't forseen by Blizzard.
|
Awesome post. I'm very interested in seeing where this discussion will go.
~LoA
|
good read. i agree that terran has some major synergy advantages but it could be argued that zerg has just as many skill based design features as terran. overlords, overseers, larva management, creep spreading, tech switch etc.
|
From a purely design point of view, Terran certainly seem more developed than Protoss or Zerg. They have more racial perks at their disposal and just feel much more fleshed out than the other two races.
As for how that translates to potential skill ceiling/balancing, I don't have a clue and I don't see how anyone else can at this point.
|
On November 29 2010 14:20 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 14:18 Loser777 wrote:
If you're not walling off, placing the depot next to the mineral line is the most efficient use of resources, as SCVs can return to mining immediately after --there's a reason for that, it's not "because they can". Try as they might, Protoss can't place their Pylon in the middle of their mineral line, although that would be just as resource efficient.
Yes they can,
![[image loading]](http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/4523/screenshot2010112821325.jpg)
|
What I meant to imply is that it has already been used in every way it can be used. There are many, many tricks to learn in mastering Creep spread, but all of them are already at players' disposal. Those tricks aren't going to change in six months' time.
I find this statement a little bit unjustified. If the history of both Brood War and SC2 is any indication, even the simplest of mechanics may hold juicy secrets to be discovered in the future.
Energy tension isn't enough to create depth in abilities that have only a straight-forward use.
I'm actually kind of confused about this statement. Could you explain it another way?
|
As others have said, this is a pretty well drawn out post. I have to general idea of terran having the most to gain out of skill.
Also as someone said earlier, I think it's a design flaw. During the beta I always felt like Protoss was going to be the race filled with tricks and cunning, I.E. Warp gates and warp prisms, colossi, and blink. It sucks to see how it all boiled down. I think a retouching of some of the Protoss mechanics would do wonders. Protoss has all these awesomely unique abilities but most of them aren't actually viable.
That's not even touching on Zerg
|
I don't see the connection; Highest skill ceiling because they are the most dynamic? What?
Skill ceiling could be argued for any race; Baneling drop/Mutas and mutas are fairly micro based, as well as zerg having some ranged step move units ie roach, making ground banelings hit groups of more than 3 marines etc
A similar arguement could be made for toss, and flanking being good is almost universal, all races benefit from a flank
The number of tactics available is higher because they have more stuff, that has no bearing on the skill ceiling though..
|
I really liked the conclusion of your post and your description of shallow synergies.
I do often get the sneaking, worried feeling that there is a problem with the core fundamentals of some of the race mechanics, so i'm inclined to agree with you on that as well.
I just hope everything gets appropriately remedied to ensure the longevity of starcraft.
|
I read through this and just took it to basically say what I already think, which is that because the game was released with a "terran" focus in the single player, Terran has been released as the more complete race with more of their complete tools at their disposal. Almost has the feel like a new MMORPG where levels 1-30 are nice and polished with loads of content, then you get to level 36 and the game comes to a halt because they know they'll clean that up down the road with patches/expansions.
I mean when you go through the list of options and features terran has that they could deal without, it almost looks like Terran is the race that already has the expansion units/features. I've done this before, start to list out all the terran units, buildings, upgrades, features, etc. The list is enormous compared to the other races. I mean simple enough is to start with all the command center can do. I am fine with the mules, and the scan, but then you get the PF ok, oh wait you can also LOAD units into it as well and fly.
It is like they took 1 month to develop the Command Center then went "oh shit we only have 3 days to develop the hatch.. how about a queen... oh shit we have 10 minutes to develop the nexus.. how about a 25 energy spell that boost stuff?" Ok cool back on schedule... now lets move on to tier 1...the barracks..I know that isn't the approach they really took but that is just how it feels to me at times. And I can understand that because maybe to some degree for the single player to feel complete and thought out for the Terran focus it meant that the race in general got more attention.
In the future expansions I'm full expecting Terran to get the least attention, least units and features added, while the other 2 races go through more polish. This doesn't mean buff/nerfs, just added elements that can change up gameplay, open up different styles of play, etc.
This was one of the reason when choosing my race after playing random for a long time I didn't pick Terran. It was almost overwhelming the number of features and options.
|
I disagree. I don't think these add creative play, but just more play. I don't find MULEs being dropped to repair or SCVs brought along with a push to repair creative. They were intended to do that, but that is about as far as they can go. It just took time, not innovation for a player to find out these things. I'm sure in developing, the Blizzard guys were planning for Planetary Fortresses to be mass repaired and bunker rushes to be more common and more bombastic because of salvage.
who’d have imagined on Day 1 of Beta that MULEs would be dropped on Lost Temple ledges to keep Thors alive, or that Planetary Fortresses would be commonly built for late-game area denial when supplies are capped but resources are plenty?
Given time, these aren't outlandish concepts. It isn't hard to think of: "Oh, maybe I build this huge fortress to help my defenses!" or "Well a MULE can repair, and it can be dropped anywhere in my vision. So let me drop it on a mechanical unit to repair it!" These ideas just appeared a little late because Terran has a bunch of this stuff to explore.
I much rather the simplicity of Protoss and Zerg. It forces players to think outside of the box to be creative because they cannot rely on their race's intentions to win. They must rely on themselves. For example, I consider this creativity: "Look at this changeling, it is clearly meant to scout...but what if I create 4 and block my enemies ramp with it using hold position!" That is completely not the purpose of the changeling but through creativity, Zerg players use it this way. Who would've thought to use a Phoenixes graviton beam on their own unit to avoid the Thor's special ability. Who would've though to use a few Ravens, a support caster, to use a mass Auto-Turret harass tactic. I don't even want to imagine the positional tactics Hunter Seeker Missiles will create when heavy macro games become more common.
In the future expansions, I want all the races to have more tools, but I want the races to have simple tools. Then it will be up to the players to make them useful. However, I'm glad that Terran has these tools. It adds more versatility to the races! I just don't want Protoss and Zerg to have these clear-cut tools.
|
Overlords with creep is an amazing idea, coming from a BW Terran player, the ability to proxy key buildings such as a Spire is a great deceptive tool.
|
Congratz Sigur on becoming a hydralisk
Back to the article, I must agree that Terran does indeed carry a very high skill ceiling. It was not always that I thought this, especially during the early days of SC2 beta where tanks ruled the ground and MMM balls were rampant. It always felt like A-attack Move was the trademark of the Terran during this era. However, now they must use drop harass, marine split, tank siege, hellion harass, clutch scans, etc just to keep up with a Zerg.
Lategame Zerg vs Terran is atrocious. Even a diamond Z such as myself find it too easy to deny the 3rd and roll everything with bling/muta. I commend Terran players!
|
I disagree and feel that you are looking at this very biased as probably a terran player yourself...
Infact yes you will see mass drones being sent out mid-game to make a spinecrawler push.
The overseer will be used in drastically new ways to slow down a build once the game get's more refined with it's builds.
Fast cliff drop with creep and spines may become popular in the future...
Maybe some figure out a way to use corruptors and their 20% additional damage spell cost efficiently...
There is a lot of potential with neural parasite, hell I can neural a probe, make a mothership and kill you with cloaked ultras and broodlords...
Nydus hasn't been used to it's full potential yet either...
Queen's will probably be used as medics, hell they only cost 150 minerals and with creep they aren't too slow.
Not to mention creep spread in it self, you can deny buildings, increase speed of all your units, which makes any zerg unit very different...
When people get better and better with burrowed banelings suddenly terran and protoss will be forced to use detection like BW lurker days...
etc. etc. etc.
Sure there is a lot of versatility with terran, but I'm not convinced it got the highest skill ceiling at all.
I'm no protoss player so someone else should probably go a little more indepth on this, but the mothership hasn't shown it's true potential yet, neither has warp prism, hightemplars or even carriers...
I doubt that it's only terran that can be evolved further in the next 6 months...
However I truely hope that the expansions will bring some truely game changing units for all races...
|
I dunno, zerg do have nydus worms, which can be used in all sorts of dynamic and interesting strategies. There are tons of different ways to use them, and I doubt we've explored them all.
Terran was always meant to be a Modular race. Their add-ons can even switch with each other, which is kind of a perfect metaphor for what you're trying to describe.
And I would like to point that a forward Nexus could be a potential benefit as it could allow you to Proxy Mothership. Sounds crazy, but who knows what's in store for the future?
|
I stopped reading after you said creep tumors haven't changed since day 1...no just no. If you watch any game at the beginning of the beta, you realized that creep spreading wasn't big on player's to do list. Now it's a given.
Anyway, OT the reason Command Centers have mules is so Terran can continue to macro late game since they can't keep up with either the Protoss or Zerg.
When it comes to Supply Depots, let's think about it: Overlords can fly anywhere on the map (and therefore don't obscure building placement with the added bonus of being able to be defended) and Pylons can warp in units for easy protection...supply depots have no abilities other than burrow. If they couldn't burrow, then they'd have to be spread out all over the map and could easily be picked off with the addition disadvantaged of being in the way of everything.
Honestly it just sounds like you are posting a Terran is Imba rant, and I'm just not seeing how supply depots being able to burrow breaks the game.
|
Terran definitely is the most complex race, probably due to the fact that the first installment had a total Terran focus. The campaign would be a lot less fun without these mechanics, and they just ported over to multiplayer. I don't know if that necessarily translates to "highest skill ceiling," though; that title I believe has to go to the Zerg. Most room for creativity, though.. sure.
I know it's annoying when people stick in ideas and such when nobody asked, but..
..what if Chronoboost worked on units, basically like stim? or reducing cooldowns / speeding energy regen?
I would also like to see a minor change to creep, although what, I have no idea. Not the standard "increase regen," general buff crap, but.. I don't know. Just something.
On November 29 2010 14:46 Musiq wrote:
Overlords with creep is an amazing idea, coming from a BW Terran player, the ability to proxy key buildings such as a Spire is a great deceptive tool.
Cool in theory, but I don't think I've actually seen a Zerg doing that yet. At least not in the GSL.
|
Canada1637 Posts
I dunno to me it feels like zerg has by far the highest skill ceiling, maybe a poll would be interesting. I think people exaggerative a lot of things terran has. I've heard people say bunkers are free a million times when everyone who puts a second of thought into it will immediately realize 100 minerals at the 4 minute mark is worth alot more than 100 minerals at the 6 minute mark.
Also, protoss has no easy options for map control? Isn't the observer the classic answer here?
Saying OLs generating creep is inefficient is just foolish too, spreading creep at a third is huge in zvt zvp, and once you get OL speed using it around the map is good, especially in a few months when people become more aggressive with stopping creep tumours, having a hotkeyed group of overlords and cloning them (bw style) to spread creep down a path is a pretty leet move. Also completely free with OL speed which is only 100/100 and most z will want regardless in any game over moderate length.
Also I think you're kinda pressing on the connection between gimmicky features and a high skill ceiling. Just zerg economy and the larva mechanic isn't gimmicky and cool like salvaging bunkers but really benefits those who are close to the skill ceiling.
|
On November 29 2010 14:23 ForPony wrote:
You suggest an interesting question: maybe Blizzard would do well to take protoss and zerg back to their fundamentals and come back with some groundbreaking changes. Is such an overhaul likely? That would be a major second-guess by a game designer. No other game comes to mind where the developer has been willing to retool the core gameplay so heavily with an expansion.
I think, however, that it is entirely plausible. Expanding the game in the way you've mentioned could make SC 2 one of the deepest most unbelievable multiplayer games to date.
If there's one company that cares about its product and community enough to do something like that, it's Blizzard.
And if there's one company that is willing to mess with their game developers for the sake of short-term profit, it's Activision
We all know that zerg requires much more skill than terran. This idea of skill ceiling is kinda stupid seeing as how the game is continuing to evolve. We see changes in the metagame all the time in pro levels. As time goes on, more skill will be required (not in apm sense). Maybe when this game reaches a point where it can no longer evolve, then a skill ceiling will exist, but that will be later in the future, and only if the games stops evolving.
|
Although it's way too early in the game's life to conclusively say, it's pretty interesting nonetheless. I somehow think that protoss and zerg just haven't been as explored as terran. This may be because exploring is easier with terran? I have no idea, but that idea of exploration is how I've been looking at it.
The defense is always that these tactics from zerg and protoss "aren't viable". Warp prisms aren't viable. Nydus networks aren't viable. etc etc. Terrans have had this same problem but have somehow found a way to make it work. Here is my theory on why this is the case:
Zerg and protoss have both "standardized" a little bit. When I say this, I don't mean they've been totally figured out, I just mean that as the metagame has progressed, there are pretty normal strategies you see from both these races. Zerg almost always does x and maybe y, protoss almost always does x and maybe y. X and Y change as time goes on, but there are usually only 1 or 2 strategies that are used. This doesn't seem to be the case with Terran. As time goes on and X and Y change, Terran is forced to use things that used to "not be viable" to counter X and Y from both races. Terran is therefore forced to explore the race at a faster rate.
Take this with a grain of salt as I am not a starcraft 2 expert, and this is strictly based on feeling and watching an absolute shit-ton of pro-level games.
|
On November 29 2010 14:36 CrazyF1r3f0x wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 14:20 pure.Wasted wrote:On November 29 2010 14:18 Loser777 wrote:
If you're not walling off, placing the depot next to the mineral line is the most efficient use of resources, as SCVs can return to mining immediately after --there's a reason for that, it's not "because they can". Try as they might, Protoss can't place their Pylon in the middle of their mineral line, although that would be just as resource efficient. Yes they can,
Are you playing a semantics game, or is that really some valid strat I've somehow never run across before? I'm not ruling that possibility out... but I will still say that the Terran is given an arbitrary advantage in that his mining time would not be reduced by 1 second by the same placement of a Depot.
On November 29 2010 14:39 alexanderzero wrote:Show nested quote +What I meant to imply is that it has already been used in every way it can be used. There are many, many tricks to learn in mastering Creep spread, but all of them are already at players' disposal. Those tricks aren't going to change in six months' time. I find this statement a little bit unjustified. If the history of both Brood War and SC2 is any indication, even the simplest of mechanics may hold juicy secrets to be discovered in the future.
Fair enough. It is possible that some sort of Creep Generate + Spine Crawler strat will come up at some point, a Zerg equivalent of the offensive Reaper Bunker. Or something. But I'm a little concerned that the... tools the Zerg players have to come up with such creative strategies are unfairly limited and limiting.
Energy tension isn't enough to create depth in abilities that have only a straight-forward use.
I'm actually kind of confused about this statement. Could you explain it another way?[/QUOTE]
Supply Calldown is an example of an ability with "straight-forward" use. It does not provide any auxiliary benefits that could possibly be taken advantage of in creative ways. The fact that it creates energy tension with MULE (even if that were 100% true 100% of the time) wouldn't change the fact that the ability itself is entirely shallow. No one will ever surprise you with their creative use of Supply Calldown. It does give the player options, which is good, but options should where possible have depth. Now this isn't too much of a problem for the Terran, but for your Zerg who's choosing between Creep Tumor and Spawn Larvae -- sure, there's valid energy tension, but the abilities are too limiting, they don't give the player any room to maneuver in realizing new creative ways of using them.
That's why the Queen, while standing up for the "options" part of my complaint, doesn't really do anything for the versatility of skills. It doesn't create any brand new synergies that didn't exist before, it doesn't take advantage of synergies that already did. Unlike, say, MULEs which have the potential to be used in a variety of ways, not all of them intended, Spawn Larvae can only be used in one way. Always.
On November 29 2010 14:42 Cyber_Cheese wrote:
I don't see the connection; Highest skill ceiling because they are the most dynamic? What?
Skill ceiling could be argued for any race; Baneling drop/Mutas and mutas are fairly micro based, as well as zerg having some ranged step move units ie roach, making ground banelings hit groups of more than 3 marines etc
A similar arguement could be made for toss, and flanking being good is almost universal, all races benefit from a flank
The number of tactics available is higher because they have more stuff, that has no bearing on the skill ceiling though..
I had a bit of an unorthodox definition for 'skill ceiling' in this thread and I tried to explain that in paragraph 2 or 3. Basically, I'm talking about skills and mechanics that are so unrestricting that they will allow the RACE (not individual players) to evolve continuously over the course of SC2's life. Wildly new applications of these spells and mechanics will (and have) come up, unlike how they were used previously, over time. I am concerned that Terrans have much more potential to grow in this way than Zerg or Protoss.
|
On November 29 2010 14:53 frodoguy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 14:23 ForPony wrote:
You suggest an interesting question: maybe Blizzard would do well to take protoss and zerg back to their fundamentals and come back with some groundbreaking changes. Is such an overhaul likely? That would be a major second-guess by a game designer. No other game comes to mind where the developer has been willing to retool the core gameplay so heavily with an expansion.
I think, however, that it is entirely plausible. Expanding the game in the way you've mentioned could make SC 2 one of the deepest most unbelievable multiplayer games to date.
If there's one company that cares about its product and community enough to do something like that, it's Blizzard. And if there's one company that is willing to mess with their game developers for the sake of short-term profit, it's Activision We all know that zerg requires much more skill than terran. This idea of skill ceiling is kinda stupid seeing as how the game is continuing to evolve. We see changes in the metagame all the time in pro levels. As time goes on, more skill will be required (not in apm sense). Maybe when this game reaches a point where it can no longer evolve, then a skill ceiling will exist, but that will be later in the future, and only if the games stops evolving.
They are business partners, they don't make games together, Activision didn't even publish Starcraft II. They had no part in making it.
I respect your attempt at humor though ^_^
|
The choices Terran are given seem to have no consequence like that did in SC1. Misplacement of buildings isn't an issue w/ Terran. Can either be sunk or be lifted and landed in better spot. With orbital command its basically time=minerals or vision. SCVs have 5 more hitpoints. There energy units from Terran are by far the most synergistic. And as mentioned by thread creator, no parallel from other races. Would be different if creep allowed for faster healing for Zerg and pylons could recharge shields faster. Medivacs having transport and healing capabilities. On top of Terran having the highest skill ceiling, they also have the highest recoverability for lower level players.
|
+ Show Spoiler +Yes they can,
[image loading]
|
On November 29 2010 14:36 CrazyF1r3f0x wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 14:20 pure.Wasted wrote:On November 29 2010 14:18 Loser777 wrote:
If you're not walling off, placing the depot next to the mineral line is the most efficient use of resources, as SCVs can return to mining immediately after --there's a reason for that, it's not "because they can". Try as they might, Protoss can't place their Pylon in the middle of their mineral line, although that would be just as resource efficient. Yes they can,
Your mining time would be reduced with that pylon placement.
@OP, I agree with your post. Terran's abilities seem a little more developed and synergetic than the other races. Repair as an ability, seems like a pretty big advantage as an OPTION rather than zerg's heal or protoss' shield, which reduces their fluidity.
|
Building depots behind minerals in TvT often isnt a good idea, since banshees can out range marines and attack the depots, ive had a few loses because of it, and now i NEVER build depots behind minerals, always next go gas and the opposite direction going away from my command center. Interesting read though
|
There are some basic observations, that I think anyone can agree with, in your post, but there is no convincing argument that Terran has the highest skill ceiling.
A race being overdeveloped, relatively, isn't an argument for them having the highest skill ceiling.
|
@OP, I agree with your post. Terran's abilities seem a little more developed and synergetic than the other races. Repair as an ability, seems like a pretty big advantage as an OPTION rather than zerg's heal or protoss' shield, which reduces their fluidity.
Repair cost money and mining time, how is that different from creating a additional queen that can spread creep ( which is like a SUPER speed upgrade ) plus it can attack quite well and heal for only 150 minerals?
Using that additional queen to heal almost dead units INSTANTLY seems more "fluid" than repairing which costs minerals and take time...
|
I was enjoying the post until the last part where it became somewhat of a balance whine.
Yeah, terran are meant to be versatile by design. No,the 3 races are not supposed to have counterparts for other races units. Yes, the Terran Macro Mechanics are versatile, but that also makes them weaker in late game.
A Terran can´t speed up production if they are in a pinch(Protoss with chronoboost), a Terran can´t stockpile buildings so that he can pump out the unit he needs in great numbers unless they pay a lot of money to do so.
All races are different, protoss and Zerg have good units and they are different. One thing I love about StarCraft is the variety. Both P and Z can have creative building placement. I think you are assuming too much, you basically say that Terran gameplay will evolve and evolve while Z and P will keep stale.
Don´t underestimate the other races, yeah Terran gameplay has evolved a lot. There are still a lot of underused units in all matchups.Both warp ins and creep tumors have been used in somewhat creative ways.
Sorry if I come off somewhat rough or rude, but I am really tired of people just assuming a lot of stuff about how this game will evolve. I still have memory of some TL posters saying that Z was a broken race, that literally there was no way to fix it that Blizzard had somewhat screwed up the race and that they needed to go back to the drawing board. Look now, Zerg are doing pretty fine, in fact they are doing so fine that people are now calling Z OP(Just to be clear I don´t think that).
There is no way to know how the game will evolve. I´d say that even without expansions WoL has a lot of potential to growth for every race
|
I'm not looking forward to the day that Terrans consistently use the sensor tower. It's basically a maphack in the proper position.
Terrans easily got the most new toys to play with. Free(ish) bunkers, OC, flying medics that can drop units, super streamlined tech path, fog of war maphack.
Protoss and Zerg got better things, Terran got new things. I think that's what it boils down to. If you compared the differences between SC1 and SC2, you'll find Terran got a ton new toys to play on top of major improvements with while Toss/Zerg got 1 or 2 new things to play with. Toss, especially, got the short stick. For instance, cannons are unchanged from BW, while bunkers are refundable and spines/spores can move around, essentially making them much more valuable.
The creative juices started and ended with Terran it seems like.
|
On November 29 2010 14:49 PurpleCrack wrote:The overseer will be used in drastically new ways to slow down a build once the game get's more refined with it's builds.
Fast cliff drop with creep and spines may become popular in the future...
Maybe some figure out a way to use corruptors and their 20% additional damage spell cost efficiently...
There is a lot of potential with neural parasite, hell I can neural a probe, make a mothership and kill you with cloaked ultras and broodlords...
Nydus hasn't been used to it's full potential yet either...
Queen's will probably be used as medics, hell they only cost 150 minerals and with creep they aren't too slow.
Not to mention creep spread in it self, you can deny buildings, increase speed of all your units, which makes any zerg unit very different...
When people get better and better with burrowed banelings suddenly terran and protoss will be forced to use detection like BW lurker days...
etc. etc. etc.
Sure there is a lot of versatility with terran, but I'm not convinced it got the highest skill ceiling at all.
I'm no protoss player so someone else should probably go a little more indepth on this, but the mothership hasn't shown it's true potential yet, neither has warp prism, hightemplars or even carriers...
I doubt that it's only terran that can be evolved further in the next 6 months...
However I truely hope that the expansions will bring some truely game changing units for all races...
A lot of the things you described are -- while possible -- not quite what I'm getting at. I mentioned right at the beginning that I was going to avoid unit micro altogether and there was a reason for that. Sure, there might be Overseer tricks left to discover, but there might also be Raven tricks left to discover, or Ghost tricks. My point isn't to compare tactics on units, which seem (for the moment) to be endless for all races, but tactics of mechanics, which are in some cases quite end...ful. 
On November 29 2010 14:51 mastergriggy wrote:
I stopped reading after you said creep tumors haven't changed since day 1...no just no. If you watch any game at the beginning of the beta, you realized that creep spreading wasn't big on player's to do list. Now it's a given.
That players chose to ignore an ability's explicit purpose does not change the fact that ... that was the ability's explicit purpose. Blizzard put Creep Tumors into the game to do what they're doing now; it's simply taken players that long to catch up.
They did NOT put Thors into the game to be surrounded by 50 SCVs and repaired, which is obvious given the amount of new tactics that have come up for the unit over the last few months despite how long it's been in internal testing... and Blizzard's latest stance on the unit. (I believe David Kim mentioned the possibility of increasing priority of repairing SCVs, or reducing the Thor's unit size.) If they'd meant for this from the start, wouldn't they have been prepared for it seeing as how they'd have been doing it all along?
Honestly it just sounds like you are posting a Terran is Imba rant, and I'm just not seeing how supply depots being able to burrow breaks the game.
Should have read to the end. I'm not complaining about what Terrans have, I'm complaining about what the other races don't. I genuinely hope they're going to catch up. 
|
I think that sensor towers will be nerfed (cost more) in the future if they will somehow be implemented in such a way that EVERY terran will have 3 sensor towers every game.
If you can memorize the "speed" of different units as they show up and move over the minimap it will infact be a fullblown maphack, which would make it nearly impossible to play against...
|
While i agree that terrans have *alot* of diversity and evolution, this =/= skill ceiling.
I was under the impression (from listening to streams, sotg, that kind of thing) that alot of pros feel that protoss has the highest "potential" or skill ceiling, meaning that if everyone played absolouty perfectly, protoss would win.
the way protoss works is that if you make even a tiny mistake, (miss a ff, get wrong unit composition, get caught out of position) then you lose the game (at top level play,) as protoss doesnt have the same ability that the other races to do play from behind. terran can put 4 marauders into a medivac and snipe a nexus, zerg can do a total tech switch or sneak expansions more easily then protoss, and send speedlings to harrass all over the map, while protoss needs to keep their army together to maintain effecctiveness.
also, the protoss lategame is probably the strongest. fullt upgraded collosus death ball with storm is almost unstoppable, and more toss players are starting to incorporate void rays into the mix. its generally accepted that if toss survives til lategame on equal footing with terran, (and to a lesser extent zerg) then they have an advantage.
to summarise this (way too long) post, if toss loses a game its normally because toss made a mistake, as opposed to the other player doing something brilliant. if a toss played perfectly there would not really be any way they would lose.
there are protoss users getting first place in major tourneys around the world against terrans who macro perfecly, and yet the toss normally barely uses their chronoboost past the opening phase of the game.
|
When I watch Starcraft, I prefer to watch Terran.
|
On November 29 2010 15:02 mizU wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 14:36 CrazyF1r3f0x wrote:On November 29 2010 14:20 pure.Wasted wrote:On November 29 2010 14:18 Loser777 wrote:
If you're not walling off, placing the depot next to the mineral line is the most efficient use of resources, as SCVs can return to mining immediately after --there's a reason for that, it's not "because they can". Try as they might, Protoss can't place their Pylon in the middle of their mineral line, although that would be just as resource efficient. Yes they can, Your mining time would be reduced with that pylon placement. @OP, I agree with your post. Terran's abilities seem a little more developed and synergetic than the other races. Repair as an ability, seems like a pretty big advantage as an OPTION rather than zerg's heal or protoss' shield, which reduces their fluidity.
You can do this placement without losing mining time, you just have to tell the probe on the far right right to build it.
![[image loading]](http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/7083/screenshot2010112822102.jpg)
|
I was under the impression (from listening to streams, sotg, that kind of thing) that alot of pros feel that protoss has the highest "potential" or skill ceiling, meaning that if everyone played absolouty perfectly, protoss would win.
Protoss has the lowest skill cap by a large margin.
Auto losing early on when you do a trashy force field off the ramp(not exactly a difficult feat) just means it's unforgiving for them if they mess up.
|
OP please tell me the difference between using the overseer to stop certain builds and using SCVs to repair a thor?
Overseer were given the ability to contaminate, like SCV's were given repair, but if I remember correctly contaminate was nerfed in the beta for being too cheap which would make it very easy to contaminate every building.
How is this different from nerfing a thor to a smaller size so scvs can't repair it as effectively?
|
Good points. Hopefully people just write it off as some sort of balance whine QQ thread.
Terran has the most options by far. I just feel I have so many viable options in every match up, even mirrors. While in other match ups, I feel there a fewer viable strategies if the opponent plays standard unless I'm Terran. Example. PvT, if I don't open some sort of 1 or 2 gate Robo I just get raped by banshees. I know there are possibilities, I'm just saying it is difficult sometimes for other races.
|
On November 29 2010 15:13 CrazyF1r3f0x wrote:You can do this placement without losing mining time, you just have to tell the probe on the far right right to build it.
And how is that Protoss supposed to wall?
Terrans don't lose the ability to wall, or wall quickly, by building Depots next to their gas. What it comes down to is what I've been saying all along -- not that Protoss is UP, but that the Protoss player is missing basic options that are available to the Terran. The Terran doesn't have to choose between walling and keeping his Depots safe. The Protoss does.
|
1) Terrans have not the highest skill ceiling. Yes, they are more versatile than the other races, but that doesn't mean that you need more skill to play them. Someone figures out a new trick and alle the others will just copy it, like every other technique
2) Most of the things terran can do are already explored. Yes there will be some new amazing things people will find, but alle the things you talked about are pretty obvious. And really you only talked about late-defensive-planetry-fortresses and the mule beeing able to repair. bringing scvs to the front to repair and build bunkers and acting as a meatshield is really nothing new
3) Protoss and Zerg have many unexplored things too. Burrow is widely underused, Carriers rarely make an appearance, Nydus worms arent used in todays games (if there is no island).
4) Only because a race has not so many obvious options like terran, it doesnt mean they are shallow. With zerg your unit production alone is extremly deep (do i make units [which ones], drones, both or save some larvae, alle depending on your current knowledge about the game). With protoss you really have to care about your army movement and pylon placements over the map because terrans and zerg are so much more mobile than you.
=> Zerg and Protoss are not as shallow as you think and Terran not as versatile as you describe them in your article
|
Skill ceiling? Haven't heard that one before. Skill cap, sure.
Whilst Terran may have the highest skill ceiling, Protoss can certainly brag about it's fancy furniture paired with the swirling remnants of chronoboosts and a general theme of "shiny stuff". They truly are the occupants of a glass house who can throw stones.
Meanwhile in the house of Zerg; have you ever wanted to just come home and sit down on a couch that is constantly throbbing and morphing beneath your very ass? Well shit, zerg is the race for you. You really just can't go past the organic, earthy, back to your roots, smelly, holyshitmytvjustevolvedintoacat appeal.
Sup china
|
On November 29 2010 14:20 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 14:18 Loser777 wrote:
If you're not walling off, placing the depot next to the mineral line is the most efficient use of resources, as SCVs can return to mining immediately after --there's a reason for that, it's not "because they can". Try as they might, Protoss can't place their Pylon in the middle of their mineral line, although that would be just as resource efficient.
Viewing this as a completely isolated case and ignoring the fact that Terrans have 1 supply more than P or Z, Protoss are actually considerably more efficient because they don't have to build those buildings.
|
On November 29 2010 15:18 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 15:13 CrazyF1r3f0x wrote:You can do this placement without losing mining time, you just have to tell the probe on the far right right to build it. And how is that Protoss supposed to wall? Terrans don't lose the ability to wall, or wall quickly, by building Depots next to their gas. What it comes down to is what I've been saying all along -- not that Protoss is UP, but that the Protoss player is missing basic options that are available to the Terran. The Terran doesn't have to choose between walling and keeping his Depots safe. The Protoss does.
Is this argument for Terran having the highest skill ceiling? If it is, I don't see it. What does diversity have to do with skill? You don't answer that anywhere in your post with sufficient backing.
You're whole post seems like you are saying something, that everyone generally agrees with: "Terran are the most diverse/developed race" and trying to twist it into an argument for skill ceiling. They simply are not the same thing.
|
On November 29 2010 14:52 .Aar wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 14:46 Musiq wrote:
Overlords with creep is an amazing idea, coming from a BW Terran player, the ability to proxy key buildings such as a Spire is a great deceptive tool. Cool in theory, but I don't think I've actually seen a Zerg doing that yet. At least not in the GSL.
It's pretty cool in practice too. Fruitdealer proxy'd a tech structure (probably a spire I think) in the GSL Season 1 Grand Final against Rainbow on Desert Oasis.
Funny coincidence that Fruitdealer used to be called Cool too ... haha.
|
On November 29 2010 15:18 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 15:13 CrazyF1r3f0x wrote:You can do this placement without losing mining time, you just have to tell the probe on the far right right to build it. And how is that Protoss supposed to wall? Terrans don't lose the ability to wall, or wall quickly, by building Depots next to their gas. What it comes down to is what I've been saying all along -- not that Protoss is UP, but that the Protoss player is missing basic options that are available to the Terran. The Terran doesn't have to choose between walling and keeping his Depots safe. The Protoss does.
A terran who doesnt build a supply at the wall is as delayed as the toss who doesn't build the pylong at his
if not more so due to the extra mining time lost
|
Actually proxying zerg tech with creep is used by pretty much every diamond zerg player 
I deny to believe this doesn't happen in most games at the GSL
|
On November 29 2010 15:15 PurpleCrack wrote:
OP please tell me the difference between using the overseer to stop certain builds and using SCVs to repair a thor?
Overseer were given the ability to contaminate, like SCV's were given repair, but if I remember correctly contaminate was nerfed in the beta for being too cheap which would make it very easy to contaminate every building.
How is this different from nerfing a thor to a smaller size so scvs can't repair it as effectively?
The difference lies in the "synergy" portion. Because Repair is an established fundamental part of the game, everything else that is introduced will in some way revolve around it. The relationships grow more and more complicated naturally, which means Blizzard doesn't have to foresee every single aspect of what they add, the players will come up with ideas all on their own.
That's why MULEs, which were not created for the purpose of Repairing Thors (when have we seen/heard Blizzard talk about this?), can do so. Natural synergy of existing mechanics.
There is no synergy involved in the Overseer's ability. It exists in a vacuum, doing one thing because it can do one thing, without any relationship to other Zerg mechanics. That means that its uses are entirely predictable, since they can be immediately forseen when the ability is created.
The more complex a system, the more interesting it is, the easier it is to find new relationships between different parts of it. Terrans have just such a complex system. It's kind of a theoretical answer but I hope it helps to understand. If not, I'll be happy to clarify once more..
|
On November 29 2010 15:12 killerdog wrote:
I was under the impression (from listening to streams, sotg, that kind of thing) that alot of pros feel that protoss has the highest "potential" or skill ceiling, meaning that if everyone played absolouty perfectly, protoss would win.
.
I've heard this be said as well but you are misinterpreting the meaning. They mean "perfect protoss wins", not "protoss players have so many ways to improve".
Zerg and Terran definetly have the most ways to improve. As Zerg you're macro tasks run on timers, and then you expand and focus on the battle. As Terran you manage independant timings.
Terran has the ability to choose between controlling the game and reacting to his or her opponent.
At first, Terran armies could overpower the enemy with sheer force, but now that rarely happens. While I am told that this is still true against Protoss my personal feelings disagree. These days, Terran overpowerment is typically in the form of unstoppable siege tank fire.
Perfect Terran is pretty hard to pull off. Marines continue to be one of the most microable units in Starcraft.
I play Terran because Terran is my favourite race. I feel like Protoss should be my second favourite but I think I need HuK to show the world what-the-fuck-is-up-with-protoss by becoming a fucking champion for GSL4.
When HuK starts to get angry, his APM shoots to 380+... watching his replays you can just tell he's a Sith Lord.
|
On November 29 2010 15:21 keV. wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 15:18 pure.Wasted wrote:On November 29 2010 15:13 CrazyF1r3f0x wrote:You can do this placement without losing mining time, you just have to tell the probe on the far right right to build it. And how is that Protoss supposed to wall? Terrans don't lose the ability to wall, or wall quickly, by building Depots next to their gas. What it comes down to is what I've been saying all along -- not that Protoss is UP, but that the Protoss player is missing basic options that are available to the Terran. The Terran doesn't have to choose between walling and keeping his Depots safe. The Protoss does. Is this argument for Terran having the highest skill ceiling? If it is, I don't see it. What does diversity have to do with skill? You don't answer that anywhere in your post with sufficient backing. You're whole post seems like you are saying something, that everyone generally agrees with: "Terran are the most diverse/developed race" and trying to twist it into an argument for skill ceiling. They simply are not the same thing.
I'm a little upset that people are getting caught up on the "skill ceiling" phrasing, which I think is causing a lot of confusion unfortunately. While I admit it might not be ideal, I did explain precisely what definition of 'skill ceiling' I was using for my purposes in paragraph 2. I am not talking about the skill ceiling of players, but of the race as a whole. If it makes more sense to think of this as versatility, go right ahead.
|
Building a depot in the same spot as that pylon would disrupt mining while it builds...building a pylon in the same spot as the depot in the first picture wouldn't disrupt mining at all.
|
On November 29 2010 15:26 Techno wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 15:12 killerdog wrote:
I was under the impression (from listening to streams, sotg, that kind of thing) that alot of pros feel that protoss has the highest "potential" or skill ceiling, meaning that if everyone played absolouty perfectly, protoss would win.
. I've heard this be said as well but you are misinterpreting the meaning. They mean "perfect protoss wins", not "protoss players have so many ways to improve". Zerg and Terran definetly have the most ways to improve. As Zerg you're macro tasks run on timers, and then you expand and focus on the battle. As Terran you manage independant timings. Terran has the ability to choose between controlling the game and reacting to his or her opponent. At first, Terran armies could overpower the enemy with sheer force, but now that rarely happens. While I am told that this is still true against Protoss my personal feelings disagree. These days, Terran overpowerment is typically in the form of unstoppable siege tank fire. Perfect Terran is pretty hard to pull off. Marines continue to be one of the most microable units in Starcraft. I play Terran because Terran is my favourite race. I feel like Protoss should be my second favourite but I think I need HuK to show the world what-the-fuck-is-up-with-protoss by becoming a fucking champion for GSL4. When HuK starts to get angry, his APM shoots to 380+... watching his replays you can just tell he's a Sith Lord.
Huk can't play in GSL 4.
(Correct me if I am wrong) He has to ladder in Korea and be top 16 and then beat the A-class gamers. After beating the "lower tier" A-class gamers he then spends the following season playing in A-class and following this up if he is in the top of the A-class then proceeds into a tournament vs lower tier S-class. Only, and if only he beats the S-class players then he will be able to "what-the-fuck-is-up-with-protoss" as you might say.
So maybe GSL 6 he will be able to pwn
|
On November 29 2010 15:32 Melancholia wrote:
Building a depot in the same spot as that pylon would disrupt mining while it builds...building a pylon in the same spot as the depot in the first picture wouldn't disrupt mining at all.
You're arguing semantics. The point is that Terrans' food-building has a fun ability that demands to be used in creative new ways that Blizzard did not intend, and the Protoss one doesn't. This has been reflected by Terran building placement changes from Beta into retail -- this is all I meant to suggest.
|
On November 29 2010 15:31 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 15:21 keV. wrote:On November 29 2010 15:18 pure.Wasted wrote:On November 29 2010 15:13 CrazyF1r3f0x wrote:You can do this placement without losing mining time, you just have to tell the probe on the far right right to build it. And how is that Protoss supposed to wall? Terrans don't lose the ability to wall, or wall quickly, by building Depots next to their gas. What it comes down to is what I've been saying all along -- not that Protoss is UP, but that the Protoss player is missing basic options that are available to the Terran. The Terran doesn't have to choose between walling and keeping his Depots safe. The Protoss does. Is this argument for Terran having the highest skill ceiling? If it is, I don't see it. What does diversity have to do with skill? You don't answer that anywhere in your post with sufficient backing. You're whole post seems like you are saying something, that everyone generally agrees with: "Terran are the most diverse/developed race" and trying to twist it into an argument for skill ceiling. They simply are not the same thing. I'm a little upset that people are getting caught up on the "skill ceiling" phrasing, which I think is causing a lot of confusion unfortunately. While I admit it might not be ideal, I did explain precisely what definition of 'skill ceiling' I was using for my purposes in paragraph 2. I am not talking about the skill ceiling of players, but of the race as a whole. If it makes more sense to think of this as versatility, go right ahead.
You wrote the topic title bud. Though, I can understand you not calling it straight. A thread called "Terran are the most diverse race" would've been met with a bunch of nods and then ended.
|
On November 29 2010 15:18 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 15:13 CrazyF1r3f0x wrote:You can do this placement without losing mining time, you just have to tell the probe on the far right right to build it. And how is that Protoss supposed to wall? Terrans don't lose the ability to wall, or wall quickly, by building Depots next to their gas. What it comes down to is what I've been saying all along -- not that Protoss is UP, but that the Protoss player is missing basic options that are available to the Terran. The Terran doesn't have to choose between walling and keeping his Depots safe. The Protoss does.
As Protoss you don't need to wall in any match up except PvZ., and in TvZ the Terran must wall off or he will be vulnerable to ling harass, just like the Protoss. Protoss and Terran can wall off if they want to, but they only have to versus Zerg.
You don't lose the ability to wall if you build your first pylon next to your gas. Believe it or not you can build a second pylon (then add a gate/core or other similar sized building) to wall off your ramp later.
|
On November 29 2010 15:35 keV. wrote:You wrote the topic title bud. Though, I can understand you not calling it straight. A thread called "Terran are the most diverse race" would've been met with a bunch of nods and then ended.
I also wrote paragraph numero deux. It is common practice to grant someone an unorthodox definition for a term if they insist on using it; I wasn't asking for anything unreasonable.
My point isn't that "Terrans are the most versatile." It's that "Terrans are the most versatile and this is a bad thing." And there have been quite a few disagreements already, not just nods.
|
On November 29 2010 15:40 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 15:35 keV. wrote:You wrote the topic title bud. Though, I can understand you not calling it straight. A thread called "Terran are the most diverse race" would've been met with a bunch of nods and then ended.
I also wrote paragraph numero deux. It is common practice to grant someone an unorthodox definition for a term if they insist on using it; I wasn't asking for anything unreasonable. My point isn't that "Terrans are the most versatile." It's that "Terrans are the most versatile and this is a bad thing." And there have been quite a few disagreements already, not just nods.
Edit: Forget it, I don't want to derail you're thread.
|
I think zerg still has a lot of exploration to do. Until only recently have they become more popular as they are no longer easily the weakest race. Hell, hardly anybody uses OL speed/drops, and with that you can:
-baneling bomb
-carry a queen to spit creep tumors anywhere on the map (with OL creep spread to lay the foundation). This includes expansions (so you don't have to leave overlords exposed) and even your opponents base (to spy for nydus or take up building room)
-if you've already got OL speed/drop and a nydus, you can doom drop into their base and immediately start a worm for your units to retreat through when their army arrives
Plus there's burrow which can be used for:
-baneling minefields (lay traps for unsuspecting marines! Or show up at their mineral line and the workers are already gone? burrow to delay them from returning!)
-roach/infestors sneaking into their base, or digging underneath their army and popping up or shooting IT eggs to surround them or choke their ramp)
-a sling to burrow underneath an expo so they can't place a CC/nexus/ on it
-and obviously there's roach regeneration, ambushes, and hiding until reinforcements arrive (unless they have detection, or you force a scan)
What about double nydus for double the worms? they share the same network
What about FG+banelings to rape light units? Mass NP on collosi/thors/spellcasters?
|
@OP
Thanks, thats a very sufficient explanation of your point.
However I disagree, and here is why:
Sure contaminate exist in a "vacuum", but take the changeling, you can use changelings to block ramp or you could also use it as a mind game, making your opponent think he has more marines than he has, so he stops production, these small but very important things that I doubt blizzard had in mind while creating the game...
I also doubt that creep was meant to be used to hinder people from building buildings, I can see this become a viable strat to spread goo all over someones main near pylons pretty early in the game to stop people from throwing down gateways etc.
not to mention you can deny expansions on island/expansions behind rocks, I doubt they had this in mind...
Burrow is meant to hide units, but it can also be used to heal units (not thinking of roaches, they are obviously meant to heal underground), you can use burrow as scout and you can use burrow to deny buildings.
These are just a few things..
|
I would be interested to see Chrono Boost on units.
Although it might have to be restricted from Massive units, or have duration dependent on unit cost/food or something. Colossi really don't need Stimpacks.
|
On November 29 2010 15:44 keV. wrote:Why do you insist on altering the definition of an, already, well-credited expression?
Because it's no more misleading than using "Terrans are Versatile" as title would have been. Terrans aren't just versatile now. My point has been that they will continue to be versatile while other races stagnate, because of the amount of tricks at their disposal and the synergy between these tricks. I'm done arguing about this. If you want to think that I deliberately misled people to create controversy, you're welcome to ask a mod to change the title to something you guys find more agreeable, I really couldn't care less.
On November 29 2010 15:44 kef wrote:
I think zerg still has a lot of exploration to do. Until only recently have they become more popular as they are no longer easily the weakest race. Hell, hardly anybody uses OL speed/drops, and with that you can:
-baneling bomb
-carry a queen to spit creep tumors anywhere on the map (with OL creep spread to lay the foundation). This includes expansions (so you don't have to leave overlords exposed) and even your opponents base (to spy for nydus or take up building room)
-if you've already got OL speed/drop and a nydus, you can doom drop into their base and immediately start a worm for your units to retreat through when their army arrives
Plus there's burrow which can be used for:
-baneling minefields (lay traps for unsuspecting marines! Or show up at their mineral line and the workers are already gone? burrow to delay them from returning!)
-roach/infestors sneaking into their base, or digging underneath their army and popping up or shooting IT eggs to surround them or choke their ramp)
-a sling to burrow underneath an expo so they can't place a CC/nexus/ on it
-and obviously there's roach regeneration, ambushes, and hiding until reinforcements arrive (unless they have detection, or you force a scan)
What about double nydus for double the worms? they share the same network
What about FG+banelings to rape light units? Mass NP on collosi/thors/spellcasters?
A lot of the points you make here revolve around unit abilities and I was very careful to avoid talking about those. Each race has unit micro tricks that remain to be found, it's not fair to say "Zerg balances out the OC and the PF with the Overseer" because I could just as easily say "the Overseer is only balancing out for the Raven."
|
On November 29 2010 15:06 PurpleCrack wrote:Show nested quote +
@OP, I agree with your post. Terran's abilities seem a little more developed and synergetic than the other races. Repair as an ability, seems like a pretty big advantage as an OPTION rather than zerg's heal or protoss' shield, which reduces their fluidity.
Repair cost money and mining time, how is that different from creating a additional queen that can spread creep ( which is like a SUPER speed upgrade ) plus it can attack quite well and heal for only 150 minerals? Using that additional queen to heal almost dead units INSTANTLY seems more "fluid" than repairing which costs minerals and take time...
A thor rush with scvs repairing is different from a rush with a queen for transfusion. Why? Queens are too slow for such a rush. Scvs can also heal planetary fortresses, or turrets. The difference is the versatility. And what about protoss?
On November 29 2010 15:13 CrazyF1r3f0x wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 15:02 mizU wrote:On November 29 2010 14:36 CrazyF1r3f0x wrote:On November 29 2010 14:20 pure.Wasted wrote:On November 29 2010 14:18 Loser777 wrote:
If you're not walling off, placing the depot next to the mineral line is the most efficient use of resources, as SCVs can return to mining immediately after --there's a reason for that, it's not "because they can". Try as they might, Protoss can't place their Pylon in the middle of their mineral line, although that would be just as resource efficient. Yes they can, Your mining time would be reduced with that pylon placement. @OP, I agree with your post. Terran's abilities seem a little more developed and synergetic than the other races. Repair as an ability, seems like a pretty big advantage as an OPTION rather than zerg's heal or protoss' shield, which reduces their fluidity. You can do this placement without losing mining time, you just have to tell the probe on the far right right to build it.
The point wasn't about losing mining time to build the structure, it was placement of the structure (IN the mineral line), without losing mining time, due to it being in the way.
|
Supply Calldown is an example of an ability with "straight-forward" use. It does not provide any auxiliary benefits that could possibly be taken advantage of in creative ways. The fact that it creates energy tension with MULE (even if that were 100% true 100% of the time) wouldn't change the fact that the ability itself is entirely shallow. No one will ever surprise you with their creative use of Supply Calldown.
People surprised me back in the beta when they used it to create tougher wall-ins at their front door. Admittedly the trick isn't considered practical right now, but to say that nobody could ever use it in a creative or surprising way is false.
Also, I don't know why you consider using economic trade offs in a strategy to be uncreative. Making the correct decisions with energy in order to execute a specialized rush or abuse a slight timing window takes a lot of creativity. You might say that certain abilities don't synergize with the rest of a players army, but if that were true then the ability would never be used.
|
On November 29 2010 14:06 pure.Wasted wrote:
Common sense usually holds that Terrans are the most micro-intensive race
Any1 else disagree with this? Its apparently "common sense" but I've never heard anyone describe Terran as needing the most micro.
|
On November 29 2010 15:55 Subversion wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 14:06 pure.Wasted wrote:
Common sense usually holds that Terrans are the most micro-intensive race Any1 else disagree with this? Its apparently "common sense" but I've never heard anyone describe Terran as needing the most micro.
I don't understand that comment at all. Controlling a bio ball with medivacs is vastly easier than any other similar tiered composition. You're not alone.
|
[B]On November 29 2010 15:52 mizU wrote:
A thor rush with scvs repairing is different from a rush with a queen for transfusion. Why? Queens are too slow for such a rush. Scvs can also heal planetary fortresses, or turrets. The difference is the versatility. And what about protoss?
Queens on creep aren't much slower than thors, so no...
Creep spread can occur quite quickly with nice tumor control and speed overlords with creep spread.
You can transfuse spines and spores too you know... not to mention EVERY unit, you can't repair a marine/marauder/ghost.
What about protoss?
|
The point wasn't about losing mining time to build the structure, it was placement of the structure (IN the mineral line), without losing mining time, due to it being in the way.
I know, that's why I modified it O_O
|
Terran are the most dynamic race but not because they place supply depots in fancy places.
The tech lab and reactor are going to be what change the meta game in my opinion. Terrans will be able to think ahead, have extra reactors, and change unit compositions as quickly as Zerg. Thor siege tank marine banshee one second, and then mass hellion marauder dropship the next.
|
On November 29 2010 15:47 PurpleCrack wrote:Sure contaminate exist in a "vacuum", but take the changeling, you can use changelings to block ramp or you could also use it as a mind game, making your opponent think he has more marines than he has, so he stops production, these small but very important things that I doubt blizzard had in mind while creating the game...
While these are definitely interesting uses of the ability, they are really no more interesting than a mass of Ghosts being used to snipe down Ultralisks. Both are 'unorthodox' plays that are fun to watch... but because there are so many micro possibilities for the units of all races already, I don't think it's productive to focus the discussion over that kind of unit micro. Think of it this way: every Zerg unit's micro is canceled out by every Terran unit's micro. Except on top of that the Terran has the CC, the OC, the PF, the Bunker all doing strange and unpredictable things, and this is what the Zerg and especially the Protoss have no equivalent to.
I also doubt that creep was meant to be used to hinder people from building buildings, I can see this become a viable strat to spread goo all over someones main near pylons pretty early in the game to stop people from throwing down gateways etc.
not to mention you can deny expansions on island/expansions behind rocks, I doubt they had this in mind...
I always loved the idea of Creep pushing, and was incredibly sad to hear it nerfed because of some 2v2 ally complications. While in theory this is an interesting suggestion, I'm not sure it's viable in practice. By the time you can get Creep Tumors into his nat or his main he's already got detection, and if you use Overlords to do it instead, well, they're shot down very, very easily and the advantage is lost.
Burrow is meant to hide units, but it can also be used to heal units (not thinking of roaches, they are obviously meant to heal underground), you can use burrow as scout and you can use burrow to deny buildings.
These are just a few things..
I definitely agree that Burrow and especially Burrow+heal and Burrow+move have been great additions to Zerg... but I still think there's something fundamental missing from this picture. It's like having Terran mechanical units not regenerate their HP in any way and then not adding Repair. You get a sense of the racial identity, but it isn't really complete, if that makes sense. There's rooms to complicate the system -- by adding new mechanics to the Queen, or to the Hatchery/Lair/Hive, or to Creep Tumors, or to a completely new structure that serves no purpose other than parallel the Sensor Tower in its utility value.
|
On November 29 2010 15:56 PurpleCrack wrote:Show nested quote +[B]On November 29 2010 15:52 mizU wrote:
A thor rush with scvs repairing is different from a rush with a queen for transfusion. Why? Queens are too slow for such a rush. Scvs can also heal planetary fortresses, or turrets. The difference is the versatility. And what about protoss? Queens on creep aren't much slower than thors, so no... Creep spread can occur quite quickly with nice tumor control and speed overlords with creep spread. You can transfuse spines and spores too you know... not to mention EVERY unit, you can't repair a marine/marauder/ghost. What about protoss?
You won't reach the enemy base in the same time it takes for a Thor rush to hit, and even if you could you'd be running straight into his frontline defenses whereas a Thor rush can fly anywhere. They aren't comparable.
|
On November 29 2010 15:55 Subversion wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 14:06 pure.Wasted wrote:
Common sense usually holds that Terrans are the most micro-intensive race Any1 else disagree with this? Its apparently "common sense" but I've never heard anyone describe Terran as needing the most micro.
Tell that to Foxer whose Marines can counter Banelings, their hard counter. It doesn't really matter if you agree or disagree, as the very next sentence says "this is completely open to debate." Which you're doing. Which is why I chose not to talk about micro at all, except insofar as to say I won't be talking about it.
|
Well I read the post most of what your saying happens with many other races it sounds like your highlighting many of the abilities of the race and thinking of how it was used in beta and how over time it has changed.
Every race has had many changes I don't know maybe you don't have alot of experience watching the other races or not.
Just some things for Protoss Warping in with pylons into your opponents base once you have high ground vision that wasn't something people were doing beginning of beta. No one has touched hallucinate and there are many threads discussing its potential. You say Chronoboost is stale but I disagree Chronoboost can make a 10 second difference in a timing and when to attack and 10 seconds is huge so you could be looking at many different strategies just based on how many chronoboost are used here or there. Guineapigs GSL going 2 pylon if a Zerg FE. Pylon blocking an opponent in. Using Forcefields to contain an opponent rather than keep them out. Warp Prism are pretty unexplored. Something are placed into the game just to be placed. Like turning a warpgate back into a warp gate its there but no uses it maybe someone discovers something with it.
I could go on and on basically every races potential is all dependent on there design. What I mean is terran is all about having options so they have quirky things dealing with there options. Protoss has chrono and warp in ability and like you say with the supply depot you place it were ever because you can. A protoss can chrono a warpgate or not because he can. A zerg can not produce units and drone hard because they can or double extractor trick because they can. There are so many things not figured out I don't think supply depot has or will have a big outcome on the potential of Terran. If synergy was just so fluid with terran you would be suggesting that there is no holes to exploit timings when to best attack terran but thats not the case.
I like the effort but honestly its kind of like the many many other threads that seem to pop up lately. Someone place X race and loves X race and theorycrafts to themselves and thinks of tons of cool things about there race they havent seen mentioned. They log onto TL and make a Thread to share there revelation and joy. I am just not a fan of I love my race here is why threads. Good effort nonetheless
Like the HUGE GSL thread where people trying to figure out what is wrong with Protoss.
|
I enjoyed the OP, good read. Your observations of the race mechanics and gimmicks are quite right, but I would interpret it otherwise, as using the versatility of a race does not translate into skill necessarily.
As I view it, there are different skills present in Starcraft 2 (and in BW too for that matter) and needed for different races. I know it becomes old but I like to compare SC2 Zerg to BW Terran a little bit because I think those two represent the "management" aspect in RTS. You spend most of the time looking at your base, you have much to do just in the basic mechanics, controlling your units individually is not as important as it is with Protoss or Terran with the exception of some situations. Therefore Zerg is the race which profits most from good mechanics (preferably BW ones) and I predicted it back in the beta, once Zerg is figured out "how to be played" they will dominate for some time.
Terran is the agressive powerhouse in SC2 and their versatility and the innovative spirit of their players is needed because naturally Protoss and Zerg players adapt to the shenanigans a Terran can throw at you. What I'm trying to say is, that just the agressor-defender-scheme of all the T vs. X matchups dictates that the Terran is the one who needs to figure out new things every month (exaggerated) while to other one tries to adapt its build to it. It requires its own skill. I'm wondering how Terran gameplay will look in one year from now. I'm not even sure if there will be some "normal" way to play them as that could possibly a downside for the Terran because it seems they are meant to be unpredictable.
I'm not entirely sure where to put Protoss right now. Their metagame is not as evolved possibly. They have much raw power but are very fragile if caught with their pants down with good timing. Protoss certainly is much about micro, spellcasting and so on and could become a "timing race" which needs certain timings created by chronoboost to do as much damage as possible with their gamebreaking units and get themselves in a better position. But as said, I'm not so sure about them.
|
On November 29 2010 16:14 oZii wrote:Just some things for Protoss Warping in with pylons into your opponents base once you have high ground vision that wasn't something people were doing beginning of beta.
I'll give you that.
You say Chronoboost is stale but I disagree Chronoboost can make a 10 second difference in a timing and when to attack and 10 seconds is huge so you could be looking at many different strategies just based on how many chronoboost are used here or there.
Well if you want to give the Protoss points for Chronoboost, how many points do we give the Terrans for Techlab/Reactor, which I didn't even mention once? I'm not sure you want to go down that road, heh.
Your other suggestions were all about unit micro and I've explained quite a few times (in OP and on this last page) why I feel we ought to leave that out of the discussion.
|
I watched some of the Dream Hack videos from day9tv and I gotta hand it to
+ Show Spoiler + Naama vs DarkForce in Lost Temple, I just knew it that you should have a good amount of vikings, not to many to defend against muta/bling/ling/roach composition
I really have to agree that terran units complement each other unlike that of zerg and protoss.
P.S. a few vikings is really a good counter against muta harass.
|
On November 29 2010 15:40 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 15:35 keV. wrote:You wrote the topic title bud. Though, I can understand you not calling it straight. A thread called "Terran are the most diverse race" would've been met with a bunch of nods and then ended.
My point isn't that "Terrans are the most versatile." It's that "Terrans are the most versatile and this is a bad thing." And there have been quite a few disagreements already, not just nods.
Effectively making it a whine thread, albeit an extra wordy and convoluted one.
|
On November 29 2010 16:30 Sideburn wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 15:40 pure.Wasted wrote:On November 29 2010 15:35 keV. wrote:You wrote the topic title bud. Though, I can understand you not calling it straight. A thread called "Terran are the most diverse race" would've been met with a bunch of nods and then ended.
My point isn't that "Terrans are the most versatile." It's that "Terrans are the most versatile and this is a bad thing." And there have been quite a few disagreements already, not just nods. Effectively making it a whine thread, albeit an extra wordy and convoluted one.
Sideburn, meet constructive criticism.
Constructive criticism, Sideburn.
I don't believe you've met.
|
Protoss has many ways of placing their buildings. Thats why theres warp in and pylon power. Zergs have overlords to spread creep for nydus worms....
|
On November 29 2010 16:13 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 15:55 Subversion wrote:On November 29 2010 14:06 pure.Wasted wrote:
Common sense usually holds that Terrans are the most micro-intensive race Any1 else disagree with this? Its apparently "common sense" but I've never heard anyone describe Terran as needing the most micro. Tell that to Foxer whose Marines can counter Banelings, their hard counter. It doesn't really matter if you agree or disagree, as the very next sentence says "this is completely open to debate." Which you're doing. Which is why I chose not to talk about micro at all, except insofar as to say I won't be talking about it.
I think its a little problematic to say something is "common sense" and also that it is "open to debate". Something which is "common sense and generally accepted" isn't really very open to debate at all.
As far as FoxeR's marine micro, yeah the kid can micro, but that doesn't mean Terran requires micro. What FoxeR did was make an awful build good through micro. That's not Terran requiring micro, thats FoxeR requiring micro to make his build work.
Also, if Kyrix makes infestors that build sucks anyway ^^
|
On November 29 2010 14:36 CrazyF1r3f0x wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 14:20 pure.Wasted wrote:On November 29 2010 14:18 Loser777 wrote:
If you're not walling off, placing the depot next to the mineral line is the most efficient use of resources, as SCVs can return to mining immediately after --there's a reason for that, it's not "because they can". Try as they might, Protoss can't place their Pylon in the middle of their mineral line, although that would be just as resource efficient. Yes they can,
Dat Pylon.
gg good sir.
But yeah, I agree pretty wholeheartedly with the OP. It doesnt mean terran is op, just more versatile, which can make terran the best race for someone who is reallly good, and knows how to use the versatility to his advantage.
|
Each race requires different amounts of micro depending on what you're doing. I believe each race has its moments where good micro is required, so saying one race is more micro intensive would be false.
As for the OP's article, I also agree. OP did not even touch on the things like the Nuke. Which by itsself is a good ability. The ability to call down a giant missile on a select area. It sounds simple, but that itself opens up new and interesting ways that it can be utilized. I find that Zerg and Protoss lack this kind of thing.
But perhaps I speak too soon.
|
Using warp-in units to create a temporary wall was the only new cool trick I've seen from Protoss.
|
I wonder if the ability to chrono boost units(like a stim but weaker since it wouldnt do damage or have it do damage since 'warping' time on a living thing hurts it or w/e), or buildings IN production would add something to the protoss arsenal.
Early game unit chrono boosting wouldnt have too much effect, especially since you would have to give up either probe production / or upgrade speed. Mid / late game you could really use the extra energy to add some. Or make it so you dont target a unit but its a aoe spell, 'time goes faster in chronoboosted area' - adjust building and unit speed increase to balance.
Chrono boosting builds in production... just a few ideas that popped into my head while reading post
|
Russian Federation798 Posts
I think the OP is trying to say terran benefits most from fast hands. imagine some guy with hands fast enough to perfectly micro marines vs banelings so they each take 2 banes to hit?
|
I definitely agree, well written OP. I think part of the depth has to do with the campaign being for terran, hopefully in the next two expansions we will see the same depth and creativity for zerg and toss! Without wanting to bring balance into it at all, I love watching terrans because they definitely can be the most creative race if the player chooses.
|
I entirely agree with the OP.
Terran has a wide variety of cool abilities, spells, special units, which a pro of Flash's level will use to its fullest, that both Zerg and Protoss will cry in a year. Come to think of it, supply depots, CCs, planetary fortresses, stim, concussive shells, marauders, ghosts, raven's, banshees, thors etc. are all upgrades on what terran had in SC1. The only clear downgrade is vultures and stronger tanks.
Current terran will evolve into some beastly stuff pretty soon.
I do not see the same upgrades for other races that can be used as much. Obviously, Zerg units have some cool abilities as well, which will find a great use, but I don't see an upgrade in the diversity of play compared to SC1 much.
Now, Protoss interestingly seems lost a lot of funky and diverse plays they can offer. So clearly has the lowest skill ceiling. I hope a player like Afrotoss or Bisu shows up soon and proves me wrong, but there simply isn't the same amount of interesting and viable units that can offer such diverse playstyle as Terran does.
|
On November 29 2010 15:35 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 15:32 Melancholia wrote:
Building a depot in the same spot as that pylon would disrupt mining while it builds...building a pylon in the same spot as the depot in the first picture wouldn't disrupt mining at all. You're arguing semantics. The point is that Terrans' food-building has a fun ability that demands to be used in creative new ways that Blizzard did not intend, and the Protoss one doesn't. This has been reflected by Terran building placement changes from Beta into retail -- this is all I meant to suggest.
Being able to warp in units at a pylon anywhere on the map isn't letting you get "creative" is this a joke? Just another disgusted nerf terran thread.
|
My first reaction was to agree with the OP but after thinking about I'm beginning to feel that it's really hard to prove that Terran units have more depth or are multi-dimensional relative to the other races. It's obvious Blizzard worked very hard to give each race an equal number of unique and interesting abilities and traits.
But at a certain point something appears to be very wrong and it's obvious when you watch the mirror matchups. TvT tends to produce many more interesting games than the other mirrors. Is it because I personally like watching Terran unit animations more than those of other races? Or could it have something to do with the diversity of Terran units and strategies with which the OP is concerned?
Speaking of diversity, there's a closed thread that polls what viewers' favorite MUs were: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=168418
I wonder if strategy diversity is correlated at all with favorite MUs.
Well whatever it is, I hope someone at Blizzard finds out so that ZvZ and PvP become more of a pleasure to watch.
|
On November 29 2010 15:56 PurpleCrack wrote:Show nested quote +[B]On November 29 2010 15:52 mizU wrote:
A thor rush with scvs repairing is different from a rush with a queen for transfusion. Why? Queens are too slow for such a rush. Scvs can also heal planetary fortresses, or turrets. The difference is the versatility. And what about protoss? Queens on creep aren't much slower than thors, so no... Creep spread can occur quite quickly with nice tumor control and speed overlords with creep spread. You can transfuse spines and spores too you know... not to mention EVERY unit, you can't repair a marine/marauder/ghost. What about protoss?
Yeah, they are slower than thors off creep. And in what circumstance would you have creep all the way to an opponent's base to create a Thor rush-esque situation?
Are you ignoring protoss for the sake of argument?
|
I'd argue that Protoss is the most micro intensive race because Warcraft players have a easier time to transition to protoss and protoss units are the most expensive and thus require the most attention to.
|
On November 29 2010 16:53 JJEOS wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 15:35 pure.Wasted wrote:On November 29 2010 15:32 Melancholia wrote:
Building a depot in the same spot as that pylon would disrupt mining while it builds...building a pylon in the same spot as the depot in the first picture wouldn't disrupt mining at all. You're arguing semantics. The point is that Terrans' food-building has a fun ability that demands to be used in creative new ways that Blizzard did not intend, and the Protoss one doesn't. This has been reflected by Terran building placement changes from Beta into retail -- this is all I meant to suggest. Being able to warp in units at a pylon anywhere on the map isn't letting you get "creative" is this a joke? Just another disgusted nerf terran thread.
No matter how creative you get with pylon placements, warping units is still just that, warping units.
|
On November 29 2010 17:02 Penetrates wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 16:53 JJEOS wrote:On November 29 2010 15:35 pure.Wasted wrote:On November 29 2010 15:32 Melancholia wrote:
Building a depot in the same spot as that pylon would disrupt mining while it builds...building a pylon in the same spot as the depot in the first picture wouldn't disrupt mining at all. You're arguing semantics. The point is that Terrans' food-building has a fun ability that demands to be used in creative new ways that Blizzard did not intend, and the Protoss one doesn't. This has been reflected by Terran building placement changes from Beta into retail -- this is all I meant to suggest. Being able to warp in units at a pylon anywhere on the map isn't letting you get "creative" is this a joke? Just another disgusted nerf terran thread. No matter how creative you get with pylon placements, warping units is still just that, warping units.
warping in units to kill a drop ship, delay a push, harass, reinforce your army, ect... You're right no creativity in this game for protoss.
|
On November 29 2010 17:00 aztrorisk wrote:
I'd argue that Protoss is the most micro intensive race because Warcraft players have a easier time to transition to protoss and protoss units are the most expensive and thus require the most attention to.
Expense is relative. Protoss units are also more durable than their similar counter parts, meaning you can focus more on macro then macro. I'd be careful of saying one race is more micro intensive than another race.
|
On November 29 2010 17:02 Penetrates wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 16:53 JJEOS wrote:On November 29 2010 15:35 pure.Wasted wrote:On November 29 2010 15:32 Melancholia wrote:
Building a depot in the same spot as that pylon would disrupt mining while it builds...building a pylon in the same spot as the depot in the first picture wouldn't disrupt mining at all. You're arguing semantics. The point is that Terrans' food-building has a fun ability that demands to be used in creative new ways that Blizzard did not intend, and the Protoss one doesn't. This has been reflected by Terran building placement changes from Beta into retail -- this is all I meant to suggest. Being able to warp in units at a pylon anywhere on the map isn't letting you get "creative" is this a joke? Just another disgusted nerf terran thread. No matter how creative you get with pylon placements, warping units is still just that, warping units.
No matter how creative you get with your words, poetry is still just that, words.
|
That being said, I'm pretty sure that Blizzard came up with all these cool ideas for Terran because they needed content for the single player campaing missions.
Let's wait and see what Heart of the Swarm will have in store.
|
A very nice post but I have to disagree, I think this post is more about versatility and dynamics, IMO Zerg has the highest skill ceiling, simply because of the amounts of things that require attention and the fact that they have to scout constantly to know the counters needed. Terran is the most versatile for sure
|
balance has been perfected yet but i wouldn't say any race is better than the other two
|
On November 29 2010 17:09 Gegenschein wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 17:02 Penetrates wrote:On November 29 2010 16:53 JJEOS wrote:On November 29 2010 15:35 pure.Wasted wrote:On November 29 2010 15:32 Melancholia wrote:
Building a depot in the same spot as that pylon would disrupt mining while it builds...building a pylon in the same spot as the depot in the first picture wouldn't disrupt mining at all. You're arguing semantics. The point is that Terrans' food-building has a fun ability that demands to be used in creative new ways that Blizzard did not intend, and the Protoss one doesn't. This has been reflected by Terran building placement changes from Beta into retail -- this is all I meant to suggest. Being able to warp in units at a pylon anywhere on the map isn't letting you get "creative" is this a joke? Just another disgusted nerf terran thread. No matter how creative you get with pylon placements, warping units is still just that, warping units. No matter how creative you get with your words, poetry is still just that, words.
What's your point? -_-
Warping units in itself is still being used the same way as it was in beta.
|
On November 29 2010 17:24 Penetrates wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 17:09 Gegenschein wrote:On November 29 2010 17:02 Penetrates wrote:On November 29 2010 16:53 JJEOS wrote:On November 29 2010 15:35 pure.Wasted wrote:On November 29 2010 15:32 Melancholia wrote:
Building a depot in the same spot as that pylon would disrupt mining while it builds...building a pylon in the same spot as the depot in the first picture wouldn't disrupt mining at all. You're arguing semantics. The point is that Terrans' food-building has a fun ability that demands to be used in creative new ways that Blizzard did not intend, and the Protoss one doesn't. This has been reflected by Terran building placement changes from Beta into retail -- this is all I meant to suggest. Being able to warp in units at a pylon anywhere on the map isn't letting you get "creative" is this a joke? Just another disgusted nerf terran thread. No matter how creative you get with pylon placements, warping units is still just that, warping units. No matter how creative you get with your words, poetry is still just that, words. What's your point? -_-
I'm only saying poetry is not capable of being creative in a way not previously intended, because for the last 4000 years it's only consisted of words.
Pylons are actually better than poetry, because I'd say Blizzard didn't intend for them to be such effective ramp blockers against Zerg early game.
|
Overlord creep can be used to save buildings if the Hatch or tumour dies.. maybe if the buildings repaired quicker on creep, much like scv's can repair a building. having an overlord spit creep ontop of a building? to help speed its recovery. As an overlord can b sniped easy as well as setting back supply, be interesting to see how that could be handled. Buildings already repair on creep, so why not just expand that idea a little. Don't play toss so i've no idea what existing things could be easily expanded without being overkill to add a little more depth.
|
your title is misleading.. highest skill ceiling implies the race will take the most skill to master and play @ 100%
i really wouldn't call many of the examples you gave proof that terran has a higher skill ceiling... they are more like examples of creative play shown by terrans.
dropping a mule to repair a thor might be creative but it doesnt take much skill... one the tactic is out any one from bronze to diamond can pull it off
something that demonstrates high skill ceiling IMO would be pro marine spreading, target firing banleings with tanks, multi prong drops/attacks etc.
|
Nevermind. Don't want to derail the thread.
|
On November 29 2010 14:46 Musiq wrote:
Overlords with creep is an amazing idea, coming from a BW Terran player, the ability to proxy key buildings such as a Spire is a great deceptive tool.
Just chirping in. Are you sure you know what proxy means? It means to build stuff close to your opponent. You would (or at least should) never do that with a Spire. A Hatchery, perhaps.
Of course, you can hide a Spire elsewhere. But for the sake of Zergdom, please don't just build it in your opponent's natural.
|
Blizzard's attitude on WoL is so obvious:' look ,people,this is a terran pack, get over it! we are doing as best as we can to keep the balance, make the game playable, and thats it! dont forget we still have 2 expansions that you have to buy them!!'.
terran as a race has too much options and strong units(MMM,thors,siege,viking's range and reaper are still freaking powerful but people dont do them anymore because there is too much effort rather than the old 'mass reaper and win') that i bet most terrans are busy to use them to grab their wins by 'easy' strategy rather than play the race really well.
imagine one day we see a timing triple drop by terran with reaper,hellion and M/M.
|
On November 29 2010 18:10 BurningSera wrote:
Blizzard's attitude on WoL is so obvious:' look ,people,this is a terran pack, get over it! we are doing as best as we can to keep the balance, make the game playable, and thats it! dont forget we still have 2 expansions that you have to buy them!!'.
terran as a race has too much options and strong units(MMM,thors,siege,viking's range and reaper are still freaking powerful but people dont do them anymore because there is too much effort rather than the old 'mass reaper and win') that i bet most terrans are busy to use them to grab their wins by 'easy' strategy rather than play the race really well.
imagine one day we see a timing triple drop by terran with reaper,hellion and M/M.
as a terran player i wish this were true but unfortunately we don't do that because we would lose 
|
So biased...
The most undiscovered race is protoss. They are the only race with underused units...
The highest skill ceiling is unarguably zerg actually....which you would be able to pick up on if you read any of the interviews from pros on WHY did they choose their race or what did they think of them before choosing (example idra/artosis/tlo from beta) and from those that switched.
|
Sorry but most T's just spam tier 1 units and add a small number of higher tier units like medivac and viking as support whilst still spamming the same tier 1 units 30 minutes into the game.They then just stim and a click.
Hardly ground breakingly high skill ceiling when compared to brood war.
|
Completely agree with the OP, nicely put - to all the people saying "highest skill ceiling means requires the most skill"...sorry but WRONG. This means, that a truly perfect player can get the most out of terran, NOT that playing terran by definition requires more skill. It says that improving your play pays off the most if you are terran.
From a protoss-perspective I agree 100%. Although i still pretty much suck, even I have moments in the game where I'm:
"ok, now I'm waiting for my first colossus since this is all I can do in midgame PvT....*looking at the clock*....*spamming some apm*...ok, drop incoming, now I got something to do again"
Notice that this is NOT a "omfg terran is OP QQ". This has nothing to do with one race being stronger or weaker. It's about strategic diversity, the ability to keep your opponent on his toes, to constantly come up with new builds and unit-compositions, the ability to always have cool stuff to do all the time.
Since I'm trying hard to avoid this looking like a QQ, let's look at the TvT: TvT is now said to be one of the most difficult match-ups for the players, so much going on, so much meta-game aspects to be considered...true! And this is because terran has so much possibilities all that need to be accounted for, and vice versa. Banshee harass? Maybe. Blue flame hellions? Could be. Drops? Who knows. Landed viking harass? Unlikely but not completely out of the question. Seeker missile into the worker-line? Nobody has ever done that, but maybe my opponent will be the first to try.
To make my point even more clear, I do NOT think that you should nerf/remove any of those possibilities...but on the contrary ADD more cool stuff to protoss and zerg. Zerg only has mutas for harassment...terribly predictable, every terran and their grandmothers know that zergs will probably muta-harass. Toss has...umm...nothing really for harassment, only in lategame PvT there "might" be a warpprism warping in amulet-templars. But 99% of the games will have ended (or at least been decided) before that.
Especially protoss needs something "similar" as reavers or useful arbiters (I wrote similar by indicating that I'm not just promoting the "bring unit xyz back from BW").
The core problem is, that many units/abilities of protoss and zerg do NOT "scale with skill". This means, once you got down how to build colossi, you've pretty much mastered the "colossus", no micro, no nothing you could do with this thingy. SC2 needs more stuff that is HARD to use, stuff that will get you killed if you don't know what you are doing. But stuff that will do terrible, terrible damage if you have the skill to pull it off. This is what made reavers so cool, only ppl with skill got the most out of it. Colossi now are dumb, there's no difference between the colossus-use of a progamer and...well....myself. The only difference is, that the progamer will probably have them earlier/more of them.
DREAMHACK SPOILER
+ Show Spoiler +Just think about the cloak-banshee harass WHILE harassing with blue-flame hellions from fenix vs tyler. This made me realize "holy shit, there are so many harassment-styles still unexplored". Mix this up with "MM-drop while hellion-harassing" or "MM-drop while banshee-harassing". Or...my most dreaded nightmare "double blue-flame hellion drop into both mineral lines". Protoss and zerg got nothing related to that, nothing cool and heavily skill-dependent that could give you a huge advantage.
|
I respect your opinion and the work you put into your opening post but I disagree with most of it. The reason why I choose Protoss in the first place (which I did even before beta) was that I recognized the creativeness of the race and I still think that stands.
|
On November 29 2010 17:06 JJEOS wrote:Just another disgusted nerf terran thread.
It pays to read the whole thread. The last paragraph is devoted to explaining that the problem isn't Terran having too much, but the other races having too little.
On November 29 2010 17:06 JJEOS wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 17:02 Penetrates wrote:On November 29 2010 16:53 JJEOS wrote:On November 29 2010 15:35 pure.Wasted wrote:On November 29 2010 15:32 Melancholia wrote:
Building a depot in the same spot as that pylon would disrupt mining while it builds...building a pylon in the same spot as the depot in the first picture wouldn't disrupt mining at all. You're arguing semantics. The point is that Terrans' food-building has a fun ability that demands to be used in creative new ways that Blizzard did not intend, and the Protoss one doesn't. This has been reflected by Terran building placement changes from Beta into retail -- this is all I meant to suggest. Being able to warp in units at a pylon anywhere on the map isn't letting you get "creative" is this a joke? Just another disgusted nerf terran thread. No matter how creative you get with pylon placements, warping units is still just that, warping units. warping in units to kill a drop ship, delay a push, harass, reinforce your army, ect... You're right no creativity in this game for protoss.
Riddle me this: apart from the really cool example brought up by Penetrates, when was the last time you saw a Protoss use Warp-In in a way that made you go, "Holy shit, I had not thought of that and have never seen it before"? I'm gonna guess it's been a while. That's what I mean by not creative. It's been done. We've seen it all.*
Now going back to first page to address some older replies.
On November 29 2010 14:25 -{Cake}- wrote:
Well obviously you put in a lot of time/effort on this,
Traditionally, zerg is about quantity, toss is about quality, and terran is about versatility
Terran's options are part of racial identity. I think skill ceiling is the wrong phrase here, It doesn't really matter what race has the highest skill cap because even the top pros are probably not going to reach it
So what i got from this is that you are saying terran has more options than the other races, solid point, arguable a issue with the game, but could have been said in much less time/words
On November 29 2010 14:29 Madkipz wrote:This is basically the premise of your entire post. I agree, terran benefits the most out of fast hands and a clear brain. it does not make it a better race and blizzard does not need to change their approach to either factions. Zerg will always be obvious and pure with very few predictable tricks up their sleves its still fun to play.
It's interesting that Cake brings up the racial divide: quantity, quality, and versatility. That's true of the units, right? You get two Zerglings, you get a tough Zealot, or you get a ranged Marine. Quantity, quality, versatility. Except what happens when we bring the buildings into the discussion? Terran buildings support the theme of versatility 100%, but do Zerg ones support the theme of quantity? Sure, through Creep Tumors, but that's a very small example. Do Protoss buildings support the theme of quality?
If you want to carry the racial themes into racial mechanics... you have to make sure you do it for all races. And if you can't do that, then at least put them on even ground in versatility, because racially-appropriate or not it's at least dynamic and keeps the match-up fresh. Right now, Protoss and Zerg bases are just "there," they're not contributing to the game at all, really, in the way that Add-ons or all these spiffy Terran mechanics are.
*Apparently not, as Pen. demonstrated, but Warp-In's got a long way to go if it's gonna single-handedly challenge everything that Terrans have.
|
On November 29 2010 17:13 Gegenschein wrote:
That being said, I'm pretty sure that Blizzard came up with all these cool ideas for Terran because they needed content for the single player campaing missions.
Let's wait and see what Heart of the Swarm will have in store.
I think you're right. Could you imagine if drop pods were still around?! They had so many cool ideas for Terran it was hard to keep the single player devs from ruining the multiplayer. Things will get cooler with each expansion, if we're lucky.
|
On November 29 2010 18:30 sleepingdog wrote:Completely agree with the OP, nicely put - to all the people saying "highest skill ceiling means requires the most skill"...sorry but WRONG. This means, that a truly perfect player can get the most out of terran, NOT that playing terran by definition requires more skill. It says that improving your play pays off the most if you are terran. From a protoss-perspective I agree 100%. Although i still pretty much suck, even I have moments in the game where I'm: "ok, now I'm waiting for my first colossus since this is all I can do in midgame PvT....*looking at the clock*....*spamming some apm*...ok, drop incoming, now I got something to do again" Notice that this is NOT a "omfg terran is OP QQ". This has nothing to do with one race being stronger or weaker. It's about strategic diversity, the ability to keep your opponent on his toes, to constantly come up with new builds and unit-compositions, the ability to always have cool stuff to do all the time. Since I'm trying hard to avoid this looking like a QQ, let's look at the TvT: TvT is now said to be one of the most difficult match-ups for the players, so much going on, so much meta-game aspects to be considered...true! And this is because terran has so much possibilities all that need to be accounted for, and vice versa. Banshee harass? Maybe. Blue flame hellions? Could be. Drops? Who knows. Landed viking harass? Unlikely but not completely out of the question. Seeker missile into the worker-line? Nobody has ever done that, but maybe my opponent will be the first to try. To make my point even more clear, I do NOT think that you should nerf/remove any of those possibilities...but on the contrary ADD more cool stuff to protoss and zerg. Zerg only has mutas for harassment...terribly predictable, every terran and their grandmothers know that zergs will probably muta-harass. Toss has...umm...nothing really for harassment, only in lategame PvT there "might" be a warpprism warping in amulet-templars. But 99% of the games will have ended (or at least been decided) before that. Especially protoss needs something "similar" as reavers or useful arbiters (I wrote similar by indicating that I'm not just promoting the "bring unit xyz back from BW"). The core problem is, that many units/abilities of protoss and zerg do NOT "scale with skill". This means, once you got down how to build colossi, you've pretty much mastered the "colossus", no micro, no nothing you could do with this thingy. SC2 needs more stuff that is HARD to use, stuff that will get you killed if you don't know what you are doing. But stuff that will do terrible, terrible damage if you have the skill to pull it off. This is what made reavers so cool, only ppl with skill got the most out of it. Colossi now are dumb, there's no difference between the colossus-use of a progamer and...well....myself. The only difference is, that the progamer will probably have them earlier/more of them. DREAMHACK SPOILER + Show Spoiler +Just think about the cloak-banshee harass WHILE harassing with blue-flame hellions from fenix vs tyler. This made me realize "holy shit, there are so many harassment-styles still unexplored". Mix this up with "MM-drop while hellion-harassing" or "MM-drop while banshee-harassing". Or...my most dreaded nightmare "double blue-flame hellion drop into both mineral lines". Protoss and zerg got nothing related to that, nothing cool and heavily skill-dependent that could give you a huge advantage.
Oh man seeker missile to the mineral line. I thought we would be seeing a ton of that when I first saw that ability and now I realize I've never seen it because it's sooooooooooo slow. Thank god it is though. Last thing Terran needs is Shuttle Reaver in one frickin' unit (I play Terran in SC2 btw).
Actually, OP captures a lot of why I changed to Terran - it just seems more fun than Protoss and Zerg. It feels like the other races are comparatively... missing something. And I hope the expansions will flush them out and I think they will. And the discrepancy is not awful in the meantime.
I don't know if the topic name is the best. I think Terran has the most "strategic breadth" but not necessarily the highest skill ceiling. I think that highest skill ceiling belongs to the toughest race to max out your skills in, and I'm not sure that is Terran. Terran has more mechanics but the other races might have fewer tougher mechanics. Force field micro can be used in several ways, and can be difficult. It's hard for me anyway; it's the number one reason I switched from Protoss.
I think SCV repair is underused in Brood War, actually. Metal medics can be really awesome and we're seeing more of it in SC2 due in no small part to autorepair. Other races have some stuff they could do with extra actions, though, like gooping buildings, hallucinations to scout, denying expansions with overlord creep, scouting with changelings (lol Sen), and more. Terran have at least a bit more though, I feel.
|
i'm trying to imagine stim being more micro intensive than blink. ghost more micro intensive than ht, or medivac being more micro intensive than sentry... but i'm just not seeing it.
OP is mistaken from an obviously terran biased point of view. A toss would say the same thing about forcefield and gateway/colosi as well as gaurdian shield and stalker as well as psi storm and colossus and well as psi storm/archon as well as phoenix and colossus as well as void ray and colossus as well as zealot/sentry.
|
actually zerg does. And not only are there ex-terran players like morrow or TLO telling you this but there is also statistical proof.
Zergs are doing like shit in random tournaments that run over the course of few hours or few days.
Yet all big GOM tournaments were won by zerg. How come? Simply because zerg has more leverage the more skill is involved in teh equation- when zerg has time to prepare and study their opponents they always have the upper leg.
|
On November 29 2010 18:45 NearPerfection wrote:
i'm trying to imagine stim being more micro intensive than blink. ghost more micro intensive than ht, or medivac being more micro intensive than sentry... but i'm just not seeing it.
OP is mistaken from an obviously terran biased point of view. A toss would say the same thing about forcefield and gateway/colosi as well as gaurdian shield and stalker as well as psi storm and colossus and well as psi storm/archon as well as phoenix and colossus as well as void ray and colossus as well as zealot/sentry.
Yeah, I dunno about ghost vs ht - I would say ghost is harder. But stim is reallllly easy (not sure why they get wasted so often...) and incredibly powerful and easier than blink. Sentry is also a very tricky unit. When you think of gold level play and below, you can get hit with rushes where clutch sentry micro is essential and that's a tougher skill than what other races have to deal with at that level I think.
|
On November 29 2010 18:45 Sfydjklm wrote:
actually zerg does. And not only are there ex-terran players like morrow or TLO telling you this but there is also statistical proof.
Zergs are doing like shit in random tournaments that run over the course of few hours or few days.
Yet all big GOM tournaments were won by zerg. How come? Simply because zerg has more leverage the more skill is involved in teh equation- when zerg has time to prepare and study their opponents they always have the upper leg.
I'm not sure the fact that Zerg players require more intel on their opponents means the race has a higher skill ceiling. That would suggest that other races have a higher variability in what they can do which is the OP's claim. Now you can say that higher variability does not mean higher skill ceiling and I may agree, but that does not go against most of what the OP is saying.
Also, the OP doesn't seem to be saying that Terran would be the best race if players were perfect (or maybe he is?) It seems like "Terran has the widest skill gradient," i.e. Terran has the most improvement yet to be discovered or something. Eh I'm babbling now.
|
variety of options or strategical depth doesnt equal skill ceiling. any cool idea, trick or synergy that is easy to use once u know about it wont substantially improve the skill ceiling of a race, it will just need someone to figure these things out, so that the rest of the world can copy it.
for example, walling as terran in bw was (afaik) popularized by boxer, so everybody copied it. does this increase the skill ceiling of terrans? hell no, walling is easy.
i dont know about which race has the highest skill ceiling in sc2, but in bw pretty much all pro´s agreed that playing the perfect game as zerg would be the hardest of all races. coordinating big lategame attacks as zerg required sick amounts of apm. so much that many pros, including jaedong himself, said that incorporating queens into the standard lategame zvt mix would not be feasilbe as they would require too many additional actions.
|
On November 29 2010 18:45 NearPerfection wrote:OP is mistaken from an obviously terran biased point of view. A toss would say the same thing about forcefield and gateway/colosi as well as gaurdian shield and stalker as well as psi storm and colossus and well as psi storm/archon as well as phoenix and colossus as well as void ray and colossus as well as zealot/sentry.
I'm not really interested in unit micro, though. I only brought that up in the OP to show that it's a contested issue, and that I want to steer completely clear of it. When I talk about versatility, I don't mean "just how well can a perfect play Protoss use his High Templar?" I'm talking about the mechanics of the race, and how many mechanics exist to be taken advantage of in the first place.
On November 29 2010 18:45 Sfydjklm wrote:
actually zerg does. And not only are there ex-terran players like morrow or TLO telling you this but there is also statistical proof.
Zergs are doing like shit in random tournaments that run over the course of few hours or few days.
Yet all big GOM tournaments were won by zerg. How come? Simply because zerg has more leverage the more skill is involved in teh equation- when zerg has time to prepare and study their opponents they always have the upper leg.
I'm updating the OP to emphasize that I'm not talking about player skill or players' ability to win. Having more options (ie, the number of different buildings you can construct, the number of abilities your buildings can cast) doesn't necessarily translate into a victory. It just translates into a more dynamic playstyle.
On November 29 2010 18:56 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 18:45 Sfydjklm wrote:
actually zerg does. And not only are there ex-terran players like morrow or TLO telling you this but there is also statistical proof.
Zergs are doing like shit in random tournaments that run over the course of few hours or few days.
Yet all big GOM tournaments were won by zerg. How come? Simply because zerg has more leverage the more skill is involved in teh equation- when zerg has time to prepare and study their opponents they always have the upper leg. Also, the OP doesn't seem to be saying that Terran would be the best race if players were perfect (or maybe he is?) It seems like "Terran has the widest skill gradient," i.e. Terran has the most improvement yet to be discovered or something. Eh I'm babbling now.
You read me exactly right. This thread is not about Terran being OP... and if they are (regardless of this thread) I don't think it's because of the versatility of mechanics. Versatility of mechanics doesn't make a race inherently OP, just have more depth. A race can have complex, interesting mechanics and be seriously underpowered.
|
On November 29 2010 19:04 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 18:45 Sfydjklm wrote:
actually zerg does. And not only are there ex-terran players like morrow or TLO telling you this but there is also statistical proof.
Zergs are doing like shit in random tournaments that run over the course of few hours or few days.
Yet all big GOM tournaments were won by zerg. How come? Simply because zerg has more leverage the more skill is involved in teh equation- when zerg has time to prepare and study their opponents they always have the upper leg. I'm updating the OP to emphasize that I'm not talking about player skill or players' ability to win. Having more options (ie, the number of different buildings you can construct, the number of abilities your buildings can cast) doesn't necessarily translate into a victory. It just translates into a more dynamic playstyle.
yea i mostly agree with you, aside from the way you chose to title your post
|
On November 29 2010 18:58 Black Gun wrote:
variety of options or strategical depth doesnt equal skill ceiling. any cool idea, trick or synergy that is easy to use once u know about it wont substantially improve the skill ceiling of a race, it will just need someone to figure these things out, so that the rest of the world can copy it.
for example, walling as terran in bw was (afaik) popularized by boxer, so everybody copied it. does this increase the skill ceiling of terrans? hell no, walling is easy.
i dont know about which race has the highest skill ceiling in sc2, but in bw pretty much all pro´s agreed that playing the perfect game as zerg would be the hardest of all races. coordinating big lategame attacks as zerg required sick amounts of apm. so much that many pros, including jaedong himself, said that incorporating queens into the standard lategame zvt mix would not be feasilbe as they would require too many additional actions.
I agree with those pros saying Zerg has the highest ceiling, but how much of that is out the window with SC2's lack of group selection limits? It kinda blew my mind when I saw what SC1 zerg had to deal with in Day 9's video covering his game vs... ( insert SC1 terran at WCG here - Silent Control or Xellos... I think Xellos). Zerg couldn't hotkey lings so you had to create piles of them to quickly drag, which is totally alien to me as a SC1 toss. I wonder how much of Toss's relative ease at D/C level Iccup is due to Protoss units' higher supply costs... I mean I would often beat Terrans with 180 APM with my 40 APM. Less to do means less to fuck up, so it could make a race more powerful at a lower level. And of course, Protosses have struggled at the highest levels due to that, perhaps?
At the end of the day, though, skill ceilings are purely theoretical. Even if you think SC1 toss is the lowest skill ceiling in that game, and you agree with Nada and Boxer that SC2 requires more "intellect" due to more units and possibility space and what not, you have to agree that no one has maxed the protoss skill ceiling. Bisu still envies Stork's carrier micro and Stork still wishes for Bisu's PvZ and Jangbi's storming hand speed.
|
On November 29 2010 18:56 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 18:45 Sfydjklm wrote:
actually zerg does. And not only are there ex-terran players like morrow or TLO telling you this but there is also statistical proof.
Zergs are doing like shit in random tournaments that run over the course of few hours or few days.
Yet all big GOM tournaments were won by zerg. How come? Simply because zerg has more leverage the more skill is involved in teh equation- when zerg has time to prepare and study their opponents they always have the upper leg. I'm not sure the fact that Zerg players require more intel on their opponents means the race has a higher skill ceiling. That would suggest that other races have a higher variability in what they can do which is the OP's claim. Now you can say that higher variability does not mean higher skill ceiling and I may agree, but that does not go against most of what the OP is saying.
well, i agree with you that "its not that simple" but not to derail OP its just generally accepted that more preparation= higher skill. Like a boxing match would be more indicative of fighters skill then a bar room brawl.
|
On November 29 2010 19:04 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 18:45 NearPerfection wrote:OP is mistaken from an obviously terran biased point of view. A toss would say the same thing about forcefield and gateway/colosi as well as gaurdian shield and stalker as well as psi storm and colossus and well as psi storm/archon as well as phoenix and colossus as well as void ray and colossus as well as zealot/sentry. I'm not really interested in unit micro, though. I only brought that up in the OP to show that it's a contested issue, and that I want to steer completely clear of it. When I talk about versatility, I don't mean "just how well can a perfect play Protoss use his High Templar?" I'm talking about the mechanics of the race, and how many mechanics exist to be taken advantage of in the first place. Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 18:45 Sfydjklm wrote:
actually zerg does. And not only are there ex-terran players like morrow or TLO telling you this but there is also statistical proof.
Zergs are doing like shit in random tournaments that run over the course of few hours or few days.
Yet all big GOM tournaments were won by zerg. How come? Simply because zerg has more leverage the more skill is involved in teh equation- when zerg has time to prepare and study their opponents they always have the upper leg. I'm updating the OP to emphasize that I'm not talking about player skill or players' ability to win. Having more options (ie, the number of different buildings you can construct, the number of abilities your buildings can cast) doesn't necessarily translate into a victory. It just translates into a more dynamic playstyle. Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 18:56 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:On November 29 2010 18:45 Sfydjklm wrote:
actually zerg does. And not only are there ex-terran players like morrow or TLO telling you this but there is also statistical proof.
Zergs are doing like shit in random tournaments that run over the course of few hours or few days.
Yet all big GOM tournaments were won by zerg. How come? Simply because zerg has more leverage the more skill is involved in teh equation- when zerg has time to prepare and study their opponents they always have the upper leg. Also, the OP doesn't seem to be saying that Terran would be the best race if players were perfect (or maybe he is?) It seems like "Terran has the widest skill gradient," i.e. Terran has the most improvement yet to be discovered or something. Eh I'm babbling now. You read me exactly right. This thread is not about Terran being OP... and if they are (regardless of this thread) I don't think it's because of the versatility of mechanics. Versatility of mechanics doesn't make a race inherently OP, just have more depth. A race can have complex, interesting mechanics and be seriously underpowered.
Don't forget, though, that too many mechanics can start to make the game worse. I dunno that we are at that point, but at some point there are so many possible builds that things become a crap shoot because there is no real meta-game. For example, in Total Annihilation when you can have 200+ types of units and stuff, it doesn't increase the strategic depth if there is no way to dig into a constantly sloshing mess with no concrete substance.
|
On November 29 2010 19:09 Sfydjklm wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 18:56 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:On November 29 2010 18:45 Sfydjklm wrote:
actually zerg does. And not only are there ex-terran players like morrow or TLO telling you this but there is also statistical proof.
Zergs are doing like shit in random tournaments that run over the course of few hours or few days.
Yet all big GOM tournaments were won by zerg. How come? Simply because zerg has more leverage the more skill is involved in teh equation- when zerg has time to prepare and study their opponents they always have the upper leg. I'm not sure the fact that Zerg players require more intel on their opponents means the race has a higher skill ceiling. That would suggest that other races have a higher variability in what they can do which is the OP's claim. Now you can say that higher variability does not mean higher skill ceiling and I may agree, but that does not go against most of what the OP is saying. well, i agree with you that "its not that simple" but not to derail OP its just generally accepted that more preparation= higher skill. Like a boxing match would be more indicative of fighters skill then a bar room brawl.
This comes up often in Policy Debate, where the conventional wisdom agrees with you. I feel that impromptu play and play with long preparation are both worthy skills and I'm not sure one is superior. For example, if you are only good at fighting against someone who is also using boxing gloves, are you more skilled than someone who can fight against many different skills in many different contexts? That boxer who tried MMA sure got his butt kicked, because boxing does not work against someone with more skill diversity. I also find it more badass to, say, save lives by impromptu kicking someone's ass, like a plane hijacker or something, than it is to win a televised fight you've had a lot of fair warning about.
|
Interesting post. I find myself agreeing with a lot of what the OP said, I'm not sure the highest skill ceiling was the right approach. However it certainly does feel as Bliz put a lot more effort into Terran than the other 2 races.
I see a lot of what I consider failed attempts on the dev team's part in Z/P.
First lets look at Z. The most obvious one here (imo) is the creep speed bonus. And like it seems like all the cool perks were added from this starting point in a 1 step at a time type process. Hey lets make units run faster on creep, now we need a way to spread creep, creep colonies won't do, I know we'll just cloak them and make them reproduce, give it to overlords too. Hey if units run faster what about buildings, we can make the buildings move faster on the creep too. Like it just seems like they took a very linear approach to zerg. They take the race defining feature (creep) and go from there and just buff stuff from sc1 to work with it (eg. nydus canal -> worms, sunkens -> crawlers) Then there are just random things they seem to have thrown in, like broodlings. I'm not entirely sure what the point of what the buildings dropping broolings are but it seems to be an anti rush mechanism. It just seems inherently flawed as it like requires ur tech building to DIE first so the damage is already done, perhaps if they spawned from dead crawlers or buildings had the ability to spawn them or queens or something. Its this kind of seemingly linear and random stuff that is absent from Terran where everything is made to work together in perfect synnergy as pointed out by the OP.
Then there's protoss which largely follows the same pattern, they have pylon fields how can we change them, I know! warp in, since protoss units are meant to be buff and in small numbers this should work fine. I'm not sure if my point is getting across, its kind of hard to articulate, it just seems like they made Terran first, tried to bring Z to its level, then tried again with P. When you look at an ability like choroboost, in my mind it really looks like it was spawned out of "we gave terrans mules, zerg can make a shitton of drones with queens we gotta give protoss something, how about we just let them build fast ...."
tl;dr I really do feel they put a lot more effort into terran each perk they gave terran seems to have a well reasoned reason for being there. Then they tried to make zerg and protoss be as interesting, with cool little abilities which resulted in some random stuff coming out that doesn't make a whole lot of sense (broodlings) and a few things were just added cus someone else had them (chronoboost)
|
On November 29 2010 14:18 Loser777 wrote:
If you're not walling off, placing the depot next to the mineral line is the most efficient use of resources, as SCVs can return to mining immediately after --there's a reason for that, it's not "because they can".
A lot of the points you're making are common sense to Brood War players and while I'm on the subject of Brood War, if you want a real management game, try playing SK Terran in Brood War.
To add onto this just like zerg or toss might want to learn timings like 2port banshee. Terrans learn timings as well putting the depo by my cc gives that scv more mining time keeps the weak building safer and unless I am being 6 pooled or 2 gate proxied I have more than enough time to get a barracks up and if I feel unsafe I can clog the remaining crack with an addon to the rax plus a salvageable bunker. (although this might enforce the ops point a bit.) If there were a variety of builds that zerg and toss could do to punish terrans for not walling off with their first depo like in BW then we would see more terrans choosing to use it in the wall off even though it may turn into a liability later on.
On November 29 2010 14:25 -{Cake}- wrote:
Well obviously you put in a lot of time/effort on this,
Traditionally, zerg is about quantity, toss is about quality, and terran is about versatility
Terran's options are part of racial identity. I think skill ceiling is the wrong phrase here, It doesn't really matter what race has the highest skill cap because even the top pros are probably not going to reach it
So what i got from this is that you are saying terran has more options than the other races, solid point, arguable a issue with the game, but could have been said in much less time/words
Well said. Starcraft is not a game of identical races they should not all be completely parallel.
|
On November 29 2010 19:30 terranghost wrote:Well said. Starcraft is not a game of identical races they should not all be completely parallel.
What do you think of my response (found on this page, and edited into the bottom of the OP)?
|
I read the article and while your ideas are interesting, I disagree.
Fundamentally, Zerg should have the highest skill ceiling. A zerg player has more to worry about than a terran or protoss. Chrono/Mule are pathetic to manage compared to tumors (which require thoughtful placement rather than repetitive routine.
To posit an experiment, if the duties of a terran player were split into ten players there would be appreciable gains up to a point. Beyond three players a terran really wouldn't gain too much advantage other than drop/harass tactics.
Zerg on the other hand could have 1 player designated to larvae, 1 for creep tumors, 1 for overlord scouting, 1 for other macro (teching) and then gain advantage from harassing in small groups. A zerg would still gain benefit up to the seventh player at least (especially mid-late game).
Simply put, I think it is comparably easier to play 'perfect terran' than it is to play 'perfect zerg'. As to your argument which is really about versatility. Well, I imagine though versatile, metagame will narrow/throw out many of the viable tactics and narrow the dynamic down from a creative to a prescriptive play. Terran having the largest unit/ability groups will probably still be the most versatile.
|
On November 29 2010 14:23 ForPony wrote:
If there's one company that cares about its product and community enough to do something like that, it's Blizzard.
Where have you been in the last 5 years?
|
Powerful CCs and bunkers are due to force projection. Zerg makes units at every hatch and has extra speed on creep for reinforcing. Protoss can project anywhere with power.
|
Really good post, it's a shame so many people seem to be misinterpreting it.
It would be really interesting to see a list of terran units, buildings and abilities and the multiple kinds of ways in which they can/could be used. No doubt that a comparative list for the other races would be much smaller.
|
Good post, well stated but as many others, I disagree with the whole "skill ceiling" bit for Terran, and I'm in agreement with the others that state that Zerg has the highest skill ceiling, however the main thing we need to keep in mind is that SC2 is only 1/3 done. We don't really know what the new expansions will bring and if that will change the game for Zerg and Protoss. Who knows, maybe they'll add one or two new mechanics and a unit or two for Zerg and Protoss for the expansions, giving Terran the short end of the stick with only a new unit or two. Would be nice to see some abilities that require lots of thought to make the most out of.
But yeah, total agreement for the Terran versatility bit.
|
On November 29 2010 18:27 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:
Sorry but most T's just spam tier 1 units and add a small number of higher tier units like medivac and viking as support whilst still spamming the same tier 1 units 30 minutes into the game.They then just stim and a click.
Hardly ground breakingly high skill ceiling when compared to brood war.
So... Zerg do not spam lings/Blings and toss do not spam leglots/stalkers... isnt it?
To OP
"A Planetary Fortress is a powerful defensive tool… only thing is, combined with the Command Center’s ability to fly and its ability to carry SCVs, it can even be used offensively in the early game." line.
No PF cant fly an if i do not remember bad, neither PF or OC, can carry SCVs. and PF rush do not work vs a good player.
|
Everyone's missing the point about skill ceiling. He's not saying the skill ceiling in terms of handspeed and things like that. He's saying the ceiling in terms of tactics and strategies and the like. Those will keep being found out long after hand speed is perfected, and those have a higher ceiling for Terran.
|
I'm confident Zerg and Protoss will get a bit more "flair" like Terran in upcoming expansions.
I sincerely doubt that the expansions won't include extra units for multiplayer, or at least some new synergies/upgrades/mechanics.
|
|
|
That's why MULEs, which were not created for the purpose of Repairing Thors (when have we seen/heard Blizzard talk about this?), can do so. Natural synergy of existing mechanics.
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.
|
I totally agree
In Sc2
Terran is a formation race where you need to get your unit in a perfect line-up
Zerg feature is dynamic- fast tech - fast production
Protoss feature is strong but ex
Now they are putting dynamic factor into toss and esp Terran.
Take a good look at the 2 barrack marine rush all in with scv against Zerg. It is totally disgusting.
Now every races feature seem to have combined together.
The game seriously dry fast if the company still does not do anything about it
|
There are some great things you're overlooking about the other two races.
For zerg, we have a small thing that I believe will be very important later on. Broodlings. They spawn when your buildings die. I just saw a game where a zerg lost to a terran who attacked his evolution chamber until it had 1 hp. If he had killed his own evolution chamber with a drone, the broodlings might have been enough to help hold off the attack. We've also seen broodlings on the offense. Proxy evolution chambers acting as time bombs off creep. Who knows how else they'll end up being used. And creep isn't as one-dimensional as you make it seem. Not only does it speed your units up, but it also allows you to build, and prevents your opponent from building. You could load up a queen in an overlord and drop on expansions all over the map and lay creep tumors, forcing terrans to use scans just to expand.
For protoss we have the warp prism. Everyone says it's underused, sure. But I don't mean for drops. Did you realize the warp prism also powers buildings? There just hasn't been enough creative usage of warp prisms powering buildings, whether that be for proxy buildings, cannon rushes, or what have you. It's got a lot of potential. And it only costs the price of 2 pylons, it's like having a pylon that can move around. Imagine loading a probe into a warp prism and proxying a stargate on an island somewhere. There's also the graviton beam which most people don't realize also works on your own units. It's like a pseudo-stasis.
There are still plenty of things left to explore for all of the races.
|
If graviton beam can lift my immortals and move it up a cliff I would be happy. haha
|
you're definition of skill ceiling is inadequate. You dont mention any objective method of how to measure it. You talk of "synergy" between units by talking about medivac and repair, but as many others have pointed out, you neglect to discuss synergy in other races. Putting APM aside is perfectly okay, but you mention nothing of battle decisions and positioning.
On top of that, if you're arguing that terran has more synergistic units that allow for more viable unit combinations, couldn't that be used also to counter the point you are making? Terrans have it easy because they can make whatever they want and it will fit well, whereas other races have to think very carefully in order to carve out a viable build. So the other races require more skill to play. I do not agree with the premise of this argument, but it seems to me that you can argue both sides from it.
|
Terran just have all the broken units, so using them well has the most impact. I mean look at the Marine: high dps, high speed, just godly unit all around. Weak only to aoe which can be micro'd to remove that weakness. They hand these god mode units on a silver platter to Terran. Zerglings just need to Right Click-Stop to reach full effectiveness because of the new pathing system and Zealots get kited all day. Very little potential.
|
Singapore147 Posts
1. new supply depot mechanic = warp prism = overlord creep spread = new creative ways to place buildings
2. medivac/infantry and scv repairs= queen/anything = forcefield runaway and recharge your shields = ways to regenerate your units health. (i know the protoss case is a bit of a stretch, you can clearly see how the shield regen mechanic works in any basic micro)
3. scans = spreading creep tumour vision/changelings= hallucinate= ways to gain scouting information
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
It's disingenuous to claim that terran has so much more versatility than the other races. There are many things you haven't mentioned. i.e. warp in, which isn't as static as you make it out to be. Sure, you can say there are only so many ways to warp in units, but it gives protoss a flexibility on offence and defence that can be hard for the other races to match. It also means gateways can be placed anywhere to form any kind of wall in since once you get warp gate up (which is always pretty damn early) it doesn't matter where you've placed the gateways.
Looking at another way, Terran is not versatile enough since once you get to their unit production structures, you can pick off units one by one as they come out of the barracks. Bunkers aren't versatile because they can't move, unlike spine crawlers. They require infantry units in them, which require supply, which caps the amount of defensive structures you can build = cap on versatility. Terran structures burn down. They don't auto repair like zerg structures or regenerate shields like protoss buildings = lack of versatility, since you have to have a scv ready to repair them. Terran addons= as much a liability as versatility as they are low-hp, and once picked off you can't produce any high-tier units.
The races ARE different and are meant to be different. It's like comparing clouds and teddy bears.
|
On November 29 2010 15:56 keV. wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 15:55 Subversion wrote:On November 29 2010 14:06 pure.Wasted wrote:
Common sense usually holds that Terrans are the most micro-intensive race Any1 else disagree with this? Its apparently "common sense" but I've never heard anyone describe Terran as needing the most micro. I don't understand that comment at all. Controlling a bio ball with medivacs is vastly easier than any other similar tiered composition. You're not alone.
It depends on what the OP means by micro, he could be using an innapropriate word again. As far as micro goes, every race gets a lot out of it. Terrans have to stim kite and often are using drop play in a micro heavy way. Thor timing pushes also require a bit of micro.
Protoss players must constantly micro positioning. Keep the zealots in front. Split up the templar, make sure you keep them close enough to insta-storm. Keep the obs in front and looking for cloaked ghosts. Feedback ghosts before you get into emp range. Keep colossi within attack range but outside of range of an easy kill for your opponent. When and where to blink stalkers. Immortal micro, dropping forcefields appropriately, moving sentries for propper guardian shield coverage, phoenix worker harass and siege tank lifting, warp prism drops, manually charging a group of marauders to ensure a surround to prevent them stim concussive shelling away.
Ok... so I play protoss. But I still think we can argue that both races are micro intensive. I would argue that protoss need to have good micro in order to get most of the value of many of their units out.
Similarly for zerg. I would almost ALMOST argue that terrans tend to be the "set it and forget it" race. But I know better.
|
The OP is probably right, a quick glance at terran build orders at liquipedia will show they have by far the most available viable builds.
Someone responded that Zerg have quantity, toss have quality and terran have versitility. This may have been the goal but it isn't the reality.
Terran have the quality units and the versitility. Marines and marauders are the best early units by some distance once stim is up. Banshees are hundreds of times better than DTs. Vikings rule the air with marine support because of their siege range. BCs are probably the strongest single unit in the game with Yammato cannon if you are looking at a quality in a lone unit.
Even zerg don't have to follow the pattern if they don't want to. They have expensive, quality units available to them late game in the broodlord and ultra.
Protoss 4 warp gate is the opposite of what they are supposed to be too. It's a build that produces a high volume of crappy units at an early point in the game. 4warp gate just throws wave after wave of garbage units at you in a zerg like manner till you break. Certainly protoss have expensive units but the only quality ones are the collossus and HT.
Excluding the costs in teching to it (which are massive) the HT is kinda cheap as well for a caster which again doesn't follow the traditional race makeup.
The traditional race roles don't seem to exist in SC2 in any individual match.
Zerg can win with high cost units late game, protoss with high numbers of low quality ones early and terran can certainly win with single unit type compositions ignoring their races versitility altogether.
|
I've alway felt that Terran was the most "complete" race, and thank you for writing about it so clearly. I'm fairly certain that during the development of SC2 the bulk of the energy was spent polishing the Terran race and then "fitting" the other two races to it. So Terran has SO MUCH great stuff, so many options for everything, and so much to do. Zerg wins games because they can take the whole map and macro their way to victory, and Toss... well, Protoss sucks, let's be honest.
The repair points were really quite good also. Would anybody else like to see repair work on a logarithmic scale rather than a linear one? For example:
1 SCV repairing: 1 hp / sec
2 SCVs repairing: 1.9 hp/sec
3 SCVs repairing: 2.7 hp/sec
4 SCVs repairing: 3.4 hp/sec
5 SCVs repairing: 4.0 hp/sec
etc.
The numbers are arbitrary. I would just like to see each additional repairing SCV contribute slightly less as the numbers increase. I've always thought repair was imba.
|
Terran has always rewarded creativity
Boxer (Emperor) - memorable Terran plays in SC:BW
|
There are spots to place pylons in your mineral line at. Get your facts straight, altough I agree with your points.
One thing to remember tho, fun and versatile doesn't mean better.
|
As a Terran who switched to Zerg I don't agree.
It comes down to your definition of 'skill ceiling'. Zerg is so much more intensive to make work, there is so much more inbuilt knowledge and 'feeling' involved in balancing army and economy, and covering all the harrassment options of terran.
To me, a zerg who knows exactly how and when to drone is the unteachable 'skill' that is the highest ceiling, knowing how and when to drop a spinecrawler or has the mechanics (and APM) to multi-task overlord placement, creep, injects and unit control.
If you play zerg for the macro - which I would guess most like to - you need so much experience and knowledge that cannot be taught per se. Therefore zerg is the race, for me, that the best player will do 'most well' with - i.e has the biggest skill ceiling.
|
This was a very well thought out article but I'm afraid I disagree. The skill cap isn't determined by the versatility of your race but by the mechanics required to play it. In a years time people will have terran figured out almost to a science. On the other hand even the best pros will miss a larva inject in a game while playing Zerg. Right now the highest skill cap is that of the zerg players. To quote IdrA Zerg will be the best race for good players when all the balancing is done. EAPM is more important to Zerg right now than any other race between the queen mechanics etc. The problem with terran right now is that there is so many cutesy plays that they can do which will all fade as people become more prepared for their cheese. Just like with 4 warpgate everyone has to grow up eventually and learn that the macro game is just a better way to play.
|
On November 29 2010 21:27 ShadowIord wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 18:27 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:
Sorry but most T's just spam tier 1 units and add a small number of higher tier units like medivac and viking as support whilst still spamming the same tier 1 units 30 minutes into the game.They then just stim and a click.
Hardly ground breakingly high skill ceiling when compared to brood war. So... Zerg do not spam lings/Blings and toss do not spam leglots/stalkers... isnt it? To OP "A Planetary Fortress is a powerful defensive tool… only thing is, combined with the Command Center’s ability to fly and its ability to carry SCVs, it can even be used offensively in the early game." line. No PF cant fly an if i do not remember bad, neither PF or OC, can carry SCVs. and PF rush do not work vs a good player.
I think NettleS' point was that all the way into the late game T players are relying almost entirely on their Teir 1 units with some tier 3 support. I do not think this is the way blizzard intended the game to be played, but they still have a lot of work to do. Ideally, (and this is theory here) they would want terrans to have marines and marauders supporting thors and siege tanks and such units as additionaly firepower rather than mass bio ball being used to take on tier 3 units. This doesnt mean you wouldn't have a large number of marines/marauders, but rather than you would be forced to make some more tier 3 units rather than just pumping off of 8 raxes.
Yes protoss make zealots and zerg make ling/bling, but we dont spam them. We would lose big time if we did. Ideally, the same concept of low tier units losing effect over time should apply to terrans as well. But because of the OP's "Unit Synergy" you are allowed to keep making bio for the entire game up until a protoss gets templar AND colossi, or a zerg player can get fungal/bling.
|
"Common sense usually holds that Terrans are the most micro-intensive race "
Really? I mean are you REALLY going to try and pass this bull shit off?
|
You are so friggin' damn right, it's not beautiful anymore.
Even that some Terran Units have more Quality than Protoss Units (at least in cost-effectiveness) makes the game never gonna be balanced perfectly before the next add-on.
Terran has so much potential: HSM, BCs, Medivac Energy, Bunker Placement Upgrade are not at all built/upgraded nowadays.
Say that Zergs or Protosses, who mostly need their upgrades to stay alive ... or even have some units where upgrading isn't worth it at all (paperplane speed lol)
Imo it should be: Terran has so much versatility, so they Need to be creative to win. But: they don't need that at all. MMM is powerful since day1 of the beta until now, The most Terrans don't even play mech, but i think it is way more powerful than MMM only.
What some people mention: I too think, that Zerg has the highest possible skill ceiling in terms of mechanics. But that is not the point of the OP.
|
thats what i say since beta, that sc2 will soon reach the point you very well described. and i actually dont like that, terran is imba, because its the terran part of the game babbling, but, lets try to think about this for a moment. blizzard wants money and their game on the undesputable throne of rts games. in thats its the interest of blizzard to create a perfect game. for a perfect game, i need 3 very versatile and perfectly balanced races. so lets rewrite the thesis, that "terran needs to be imbalanced in their part of the game" and substitute " terran needs to be made perfect in their part of the game". terran is almost perfect, its an incredible race to play. no matter what style suits you, you can play it. be it positioning and turtling that you like or you find your joy in constant harrass. terran suits you best. you might think they just want that terran is absolutely versatile and that everythings near perfection until they start working or rather perfectioning on the other two races. yes its somewhat of a conspiracytheory, but i really dont think blizzard is stupid enough to make a game for 10 years and everything they come up with is a screwed up platform and one good race.
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.
|
Holy crap. Learn to cut the fat out of your posts, kids. This was 50x the number of words it needed to be.
|
If Terran does more stuff, zerg also has to deal with more stuff, combined with the large amount of stuff they already have to do that Terran doesn't.
|
This is actually something I noticed and commented about during the early Beta that though it didn't necessarily make Terran a OP race it was definitely the most polished of the races with it's varied gameplay options and myriad of choices.
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.
|
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
|
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.
|
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.
|
The opening post pretty much sums up my thoughts since beta, where Terran was considered the weakest race, but imo only because the other two races were more streamlined in their playstyle brcause of less dynamic relationships between units and buildings. Terran is the Lego race.
|
Highest skill ceiling for me means that you can keep improving as a player in that race. In Protoss, it seems, you quickly run into a dead end because of the limited abilities of units or just them totally sucking balls and not being viable options.
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.
|
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
|
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.
|
On November 29 2010 21:50 TrzystaDrzew wrote:Show nested quote +
That's why MULEs, which were not created for the purpose of Repairing Thors (when have we seen/heard Blizzard talk about this?), can do so. Natural synergy of existing mechanics.
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?
|
OP is right, I feel like Zerg is 90% figured out, and Protoss is close behind, Terran on the other hand is currently showing the tip of the iceberg. I can't wait to see T develop as a race both in and outside of the game.
|
I think if maps changed, and Z/P players actually did builds that focused on surviving to the mid-late game you would be surprised on how the z/p maro capabilities clearly overpowers terrans.
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.
|
I think you just articulated what everyone already knew. There was a lot more put into T's design, they have more neat stuff, especially compared to Zerg which have almost none of it which is what makes them such a repetitive race.
|
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.
|
On November 30 2010 04:04 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +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.
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.
|
i think they should bring back the moving photon cannon for protoss
|
Very well written post. I agree with almost everything you said and the fact that it doesn't mean terran is harder or takes more skill, it just has more options like you said. It's very interesting to actually sit back and think of all the things you can use the CC/Mule for. Again, very nice.
|
I find it hard how anybody who's actually read the OP would bring up OP/UP into this discussion, this is a thread about being creative with each of the races and the options that each race has to them.
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)
|
It's so easy to be convinced about 1 race by reading all its highlights, but then just as equally be convinced about another race by reading another post/article. I think this debate will just go on forever.
|
This is just conjecture, but maybe the expansions will allow Protoss and Zerg to grow more? Brood War was the culmination of SC1, and it took numerous patches before all the races felt as free, explorable, and potential-filled as they do currently.
I realize your point is that right here and right now, Terran seems to have a huge range of possibility, while the other two races seem strangely limited and clear-cut, but I think that future patches--and especially the expansions (even the name itself implies a great deal of improvement)--will reveal the full scale of all the races. I read before that this is a tired/overused argument, and it does feel that way. I still feel like it's worth mentioning, though. >o<"
Overall, I definitely agree with your point. Terran has that choice, while the other races (in most, if not virtually all cases) are significantly limited in options and general outlook.
|
I agree they have more options. More options doesn't mean higher skill cap.
No one will ever reach the "skill cap" for any race.
|
I have to disagree.
Overlords can spread creep anywhere on the map, drones can build spore/sunken colonies anywhere on the map. protoss can build cannons and warp units anywhere on the map. sup? Have you never seen zerg or protoss pull workers to defend a push, or to finish off an opponent? I know there is a zvp rush where the zerg 6 pools and brings all drones and can catch the protoss without a zealot. Your worker argument isn't good. Sure, scvs can repair mech units and buildings, but QUEENS CAN TRANSFUSE. Don't tell me you forgot that? Queens also have spells at their disposal, and I'd like to see you tell LiquidTyler that choosing what to chronoboost doesn't allow you to have more flexibility in your build.
Choosing what to produce faster changes the flow of the game just as much as dropping a siege tank on a cliff does.
protoss have warp prisms, not only can they drop, but they can warp in MORE units of their choice too?
Why can't terran chrono boost their tanks, or choose to make 10 scvs at once? If anything, zerg has the best flexibility, they can make an entire army from scratch in 1 production cycle to deflect whatever their opponent is doing. Your post is completely wrong, and looks like a streamline of QQ terran OP.
|
On November 30 2010 10:48 shtdisturbance wrote:
I agree they have more options. More options doesn't mean higher skill cap.
No one will ever reach the "skill cap" for any race.
I agree that the skill cap isn't important, since it will never be reached. The important aspect is which race has more potential at the upper ranges of human skill, which is is definitely related to how many options they have, but is probably more influenced by the quality of those options (doesn't matter if you can choose to do 5 different strats if they all lose to 1 strat of the opponent).
|
Forcefield. the entire t1 of protoss is balanced around its correct usage yet the difficulty of using on the fly correctly is unparalleled at least in the early game. It doesn't matter that there aren't many ways of using forcefield inventively at this point. it still raises the skill cap of protoss insanely high, much farther than any other race in army vs army confrontations regardless of mule repair or not.
Repair raises the skill cap? hah---maybe you could argue that if repairing scv's were AI target priorities, but as it stands sending auto-repair scv's with your army makes the skillcap lower, not higher because you get to make more mistakes and force a high-apm response from your opponent (targeting scv's)
that and being a 100% range based army composition basically makes army micro a joke in comparison to zerg/toss. marine micro vs banelings yeah ok you've got that going for you, pretty sure banelings are supposed to be considered a counter unit though, the fact that through micro you nullify a counter unit is cool. its too bad marauders and marines stink on anything on the ground.
saying that the terran meta game is still developing because of "all the little cool things you can do" is more a testament to the unbalance of "viable" units terran has vs zerg/toss units. AKA terran is OP LOOOOOOOOOO
|
On November 30 2010 11:00 QQmonster wrote:Have you never seen zerg or protoss pull workers to defend a push, or to finish off an opponent? I know there is a zvp rush where the zerg 6 pools and brings all drones and can catch the protoss without a zealot. Your worker argument isn't good.
This isn't a binary question -- "either other races are on par with Terrans or they have absolutely nothing." There are alternatives, one of them being that they have something, it just isn't enough. Probes and Drones have uses outside of gathering resources and constructing buildings... there just aren't enough. Now, there's no reason to make races entirely parallel in that if SCVs can Repair then we HAVE to have Probes doing X! It doesn't have to be Probes doing it. The problem is, nothing is doing it (to the same degree that Terrans have).
Queens also have spells at their disposal, and I'd like to see you tell LiquidTyler that choosing what to chronoboost doesn't allow you to have more flexibility in your build. Choosing what to produce faster changes the flow of the game just as much as dropping a siege tank on a cliff does.
Queens were discussed in an earlier post, and I did agree that Transfuse has actually turned out to be the most diverse spell in the gameplay it's allowed. However, Chronoboost doesn't work. It's not enough to give a player a spell (although that does help) -- there's a reason I didn't mention Scan or Calldown Supplies once in my post. These abilities have energy tension and they have some very varying tactical choices, but that's not enough. They are still shallow in and of themselves, because they only fulfill a single function. On page 3 I believe I talked about 'complex systems' and the way you need to create complex systems to allow units to form natural synergies. Natural synergies lead to unpredictable, deep gameplay.
Blizzard didn't need to design the MULE with Thor repair in mind. It just happened because the ideas of "mech" and "repair" already existed in the race. We got a new mech, we got a new way to repair, and players creatively put the two together. Chronoboost has no synergies with anything, there is no creative way to use it outside of its standard use.
I'm not saying that the Protoss has no options to influence the flow of the game and has no tactical decisions to make. He does. But I'm saying that his options are clear-cut, already available. The options for Terrans however will take time to discover, because they are unpredictable and were not all intended by Blizzard from the get-go, which makes them all the more interesting. Hence the race having a higher skill-cap, in the sense that they will keep coming up with newer and newer tricks, whereas I expect Protoss can only come up with variations of tricks we've already seen.
Your post is completely wrong, and looks like a streamline of QQ terran OP.
Yes, that's right. I play Terran and I'm asking for more options to be given to the other races because winning is far too easy, as my low Diamond 50% win record will attest. You're totally on to me.
|
I think terran has the most micro skill ceiling and zerg the macro, protoss is just easy (random player here xDDDDD )
|
The OP uses so many words to say so little. It's impossible to see how the development of each race will proceed, especially since we haven't yet reached a final balance and there are still expansions with new content to come. I don't see much of a point sitting here and discussing the future of a race in its current condition when we know full well that it will not remain in its current condition. I also don't see how you can say definitively that the design of the Terran race allows for any more depth in gameplay or has more potential than any other race considering the fact that new concepts are being explored everyday.
|
On November 30 2010 11:46 LegendaryZ wrote:
The OP uses so many words to say so little. It's impossible to see how the development of each race will proceed, especially since we haven't yet reached a final balance and there are still expansions with new content to come. I don't see much of a point sitting here and discussing the future of a race in its current condition when we know full well that it will not remain in its current condition. I also don't see how you can say definitively that the design of the Terran race allows for any more depth in gameplay or has more potential than any other race considering the fact that new concepts are being explored everyday.
I think you make one critical assumption that I simply don't take for granted -- that, come expansion time, big changes are coming. In fact, helping to demonstrate that such changes NEED to take place is the entire purpose of this thread. I'm by no means suggesting that the other two races are hopeless. But I'm not at all convinced that Blizzard sees and intends to do something about this discrepancy.
|
This has nothing to do with skill ceiling. Zerg has the highest skill ceiling, everyone agrees. However, Terran does have the most variation of strategies where innovation can play a huge part to further advance how the race is played.
|
This thread tl,dr: Terran got all the good shit.
Pretty much true.
|
I believe Terran and Zerg both have very high skill ceilings. Protoss, on the other hand, is a different story.
|
You mean like fazing and spacewalking collosus? What about bulldogging tanks by dropping zealots and then warping in more zealots on top of them? Chronoboost synergizes with every single building the protoss has, which means by extension it also synergises with every unit, upgrade, and tactic the protoss can do. protoss builds can be looked at as a web of building ordering and chronoboost ordering. It's like the protoss is executing 2 builds at once.
You talk about thor dropping with mules to repair, what if a protoss puts a collosus with thermal lance there, and warps in stalkers to shoot down vikings? There are plenty of ways protoss can synergize theyre utility belt too.
Zerg and protoss can both teleport units accross the map, I don't see terrans doing this. you haven't even mentioned the mothership in your OP, or burrowed/dropped banelings.
Zerg and protoss have tonnes of ways of synergizing their units and build orders... terran has some too..
|
yep terran is the most difficult race.
Sitting in your base droning up while sending a few lings/lords around to scout is easy.
Having to constantly harass your opponents to ensure you don't fall behind economically throughout the game + using weaker lategame units = hard.
|
On November 30 2010 13:43 QQmonster wrote:
You mean like fazing and spacewalking collosus? What about bulldogging tanks by dropping zealots and then warping in more zealots on top of them?
I don't, actually. All races have micro tricks, this isn't about that at all.
Chronoboost synergizes with every single building the protoss has, which means by extension it also synergises with every unit, upgrade, and tactic the protoss can do. protoss builds can be looked at as a web of building ordering and chronoboost ordering. It's like the protoss is executing 2 builds at once.
If CB is synergetic, then so are MULEs, since they get you money and money's great for everything!! ...see how useless a term it suddenly becomes when you use it so broadly? I'm talking about synergy that's a little more nuanced than that.
You talk about thor dropping with mules to repair, what if a protoss puts a collosus with thermal lance there, and warps in stalkers to shoot down vikings? There are plenty of ways protoss can synergize theyre utility belt too.
What you described is an excellent tactic. It's also absolutely vanilla, a minor variation on what we've all seen a hundred times. Warp-in was made for doing precisely what you described. MULEs weren't made for maintaining offensive positions.
Zerg and protoss can both teleport units accross the map, I don't see terrans doing this. you haven't even mentioned the mothership in your OP, or burrowed/dropped banelings.
Zerg and protoss have tonnes of ways of synergizing their units and build orders... terran has some too..
The Baneling is actually an AMAZING example of just what I'm talking about when I say natural synergy. You have a race that can burrow, you give them a unit that blows up, bam, a natural combination. Problem is, that's one legit, viable combination. Terrans have one of those for every single mech unit they got. And Protoss.. they've got nothing at all.
|
On November 30 2010 14:13 vnlegend wrote:
yep terran is the most difficult race.
Sitting in your base droning up while sending a few lings/lords around to scout is easy.
Having to constantly harass your opponents to ensure you don't fall behind economically throughout the game + using weaker lategame units = hard.
That's the exact same thing for all other races...
|
I wouldn't be too worried, my guess is they put 2x as much effort into Terran because they didn't plan on doing another Terran release.
Unlike the expected Zerg and Protoss expansions Terran is complete.
|
On November 30 2010 14:13 vnlegend wrote:
yep terran is the most difficult race.
Sitting in your base droning up while sending a few lings/lords around to scout is easy.
Having to constantly harass your opponents to ensure you don't fall behind economically throughout the game + using weaker lategame units = hard.
Terrans may be the most difficult, or they may not. Regardless, that's outside of the purview of this thread. The verstility of a given race's mechanics reflects on neither the skill of players nor game balance. Not necessarily, at any rate.
|
The Baneling is actually an AMAZING example of just what I'm talking about when I say natural synergy. You have a race that can burrow, you give them a unit that blows up, bam, a natural combination. Problem is, that's one legit, viable combination. Terrans have one of those for every single mech unit they got. And Protoss.. they've got nothing at all.
Well certainly warp prism and warp gate have natural synergy. One warps units into a power field, and the other puts a power field anywhere. That's about as natural as you can get. Saying "but that's just what its supposed to do" isn't fair. MULEs can repair, so obviously dropping them to repair in a Thor Drop is something they're supposed to do.
I do think Nydus Worms have tons of application in a ton of situations. There's 101 ways to use them, honestly, and not all of them are straightforward. Similarly, Infested Terran can actually be used to do all sorts of things that you wouldn't necessarily think of. Screwing up Tanks, granting sight, forming a wall...
|
I think toss and zerg are just unfinished and that they are waiting until the expansion. Protoss in particular feels very empty and unpolished. A good example is the dark shrine is a buildilng that does literally nothing besides allow you to build a unit (I think it is the only building like that? ) Protoss also doesn't have any of the random upgrades that terran has like building armor or turret range which are non-essential to gameplay but add a feeling of completeness to terran.
|
Terran is not the most dynamic race; rather, Terran is the only dynamic race.
|
I have to say, that badass banner made the thread doubly better.
Good work!
|
On November 30 2010 11:00 QQmonster wrote:
Why can't terran chrono boost their tanks, or choose to make 10 scvs at once? If anything, zerg has the best flexibility, they can make an entire army from scratch in 1 production cycle to deflect whatever their opponent is doing. Your post is completely wrong, and looks like a streamline of QQ terran OP.
That's called a mule.
|
I find it hard how anybody who's actually read the OP would bring up OP/UP into this discussion, this is a thread about being creative with each of the races and the options that each race has to them.
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)
This needs to be posted again. As any discussion seems to just digress into this balance/op/up L2P instead of staying anywhere near what is a rather interesting topic. I took the OP to basically be saying the following.. The Terran race seems to be more complete in all aspects of gameplay than the other 2 races. They have all the bells and whistles in place already, and a lot of the features of the terran race are still being figured out and explored. The depth of Terran seems to be there, while the other races don't seem to have that yet. It isn't a "skill ceiling" it is simply that Terran has more units, more upgrades, more building features, and that leads to a ton more gameplay options.
I made a post on the first page of this thread basically saying that I felt this was true, and a lot had to do with the fact that the game was released centered around Terran so it was important to polish Terran as much as possible, because they "could get around to the other races" with the next patches/expansions. I think the single player could have been a lot weaker if effort wasn't put in to make sure Terran had these features, be it with units, spells, building features, etc. The single player experience wouldn't have been as fulfilling.
I love to use the command center as an example. What a complete, and unique entity in this game. It seems to me like they put SO much though into the creation of the command center, how it would work within the Terran race, and all the features and details. I mean to count the number of times I had a Terran on the ropes, and he was able to pull out a close win because of what the command center offers. Flying to an island, mass repair on a PF, loading up SCVs... And it should do all those things. It is THE command center for the race, air force one and the pentagon all rolled into one building. But then you look at the nexus.. and the hatchery. I mean the hatchery isn't bad but it is basically a carry over from SC1 with the queen that is good. But then you look at the Nexus and its like um.. was everyone sick on the day they developed the nexus?
I'm hoping the expansion will add some bells and whistles, and more of a "complete" feel to all the races but specifically Toss and Zerg which I feel seem incomplete at the moment. Just my thoughts in regards to the OP.
|
On November 30 2010 14:39 DoubleReed wrote:Show nested quote +The Baneling is actually an AMAZING example of just what I'm talking about when I say natural synergy. You have a race that can burrow, you give them a unit that blows up, bam, a natural combination. Problem is, that's one legit, viable combination. Terrans have one of those for every single mech unit they got. And Protoss.. they've got nothing at all. Well certainly warp prism and warp gate have natural synergy. One warps units into a power field, and the other puts a power field anywhere. That's about as natural as you can get. Saying "but that's just what its supposed to do" isn't fair. MULEs can repair, so obviously dropping them to repair in a Thor Drop is something they're supposed to do.
I will give you Warp Prisms as an example of otherwise lacking Protoss synergy, but I won't give you MULE repair being intentional. :p The repair itself, certainly, but not this bizarro combination that players have been taking advantage of -- Thor's power, MULEs' teleport, and repair.
I do think Nydus Worms have tons of application in a ton of situations. There's 101 ways to use them, honestly, and not all of them are straightforward. Similarly, Infested Terran can actually be used to do all sorts of things that you wouldn't necessarily think of. Screwing up Tanks, granting sight, forming a wall...
Whatever happened to not bringing unit micro into the discussion? ?: (
|
The ceiling of each race are definitely not the same. However, whether Terran ceiling is highest is still debatable. The problem can be ignore if those ceiling of each race are too high for human being to reach. For example, 2 marines will always beat 1 zealot if you control it perfectly. Thus, 11 marine should be able to beat 10 zealot with perfect control as well. But that is the ceiling that we couldn't reach.
Another point of OP saying that Terran have more room for strategy innovation is still debatable.
Some of Terran building seems to be more useful and have multipurpose than Zerg but i couldn't see why Terran strategy will develop faster or further than those Protoss and Zerg.
As a race, Terran make use of their building the most. just like zerg is using their ability to easier expand while Protoss will make use of their ability to proxy or whatever they have.
These are nature of each race, not a flaw of a design or anything. I am not saying the game has perfect balance but I don't see synergy problem that you mentioned.
|
On November 30 2010 14:56 pedduck wrote:
just like zerg is using their ability to easier expand while Protoss will make use of their ability to proxy or whatever they have.
"Or whatever they have." I think that's the problem OP is trying to address .
|
quote from pure wasted
I'm not saying that the Protoss has no options to influence the flow of the game and has no tactical decisions to make. He does. But I'm saying that his options are clear-cut, already available. The options for Terrans however will take time to discover
Its the same for protoss, it just takes more time to discover some unexpected synergys then it took for terran
What are all thoose not straight forward synergys for terran btw?
Beside the mule repair (wich feels more like a gimmicky trick to me) i dont see anny other mentioned
Protoss also has at least one not straight forward synergy discovered so far and that is using an halucination to scout and maybe in future manny more interesting strategys involving halucinations will be evolved
the posibilities of the mothership are also barely explored
|
Wow my mind have been blown, thanks pure.Wasted for figuring out not only Terran, but also Zerg and Protoss.
You have successfully deciphered Starcraft 2's gameplay, that's no small feat. Thanks to this thread I'm now aware that Terran is too dynamic, while Zerg & Protoss are too unidimensional. It must be bad news for all these Z and P progamers trying to develop BOs and strats. We got to tell them that their efforts are pointless and that they must switch to T.
But hold on, I also learned that all that stuff doesn't matter because "come expansion time, big changes are coming."
I can stop playing sc2 and watching games until the release of Heart of the Swarm.
|
I totally agree with this. Terran had huge depth and potential, and creative play can make the game so much more exciting and fun.
Sure the game is diverse and there is already huge amounts of depths, but things such as this can add alot more.
Thanks for this analysis.
|
Very pithy and very right, rackdude.
On November 30 2010 15:04 Rassy wrote:What are all thoose not straight forward synergys for terran btw?
Beside the mule repair (wich feels more like a gimmicky trick to me) i dont see anny other mentioned
Supply Depots built around resource line. There was a reason I devoted a whole visual aid to it! Building that's vulnerable to harass just begs to be placed where it can be most easily defended -- next to the 3 MTs protecting your SCVs. With any other building that'd be a bitch, but lookee here, when they're submerged, they don't get in the way one bit AND they can be raised to keep lings at bay. All that from an ability designed for walling in.
|
On the topic of Zerg versatility, there are alot of mechanics which aren't seeing alot of use yet. We've only *just* started seeing Overseers used for their Contamination ability; albeit it's mainly in ZvZ where you can have a significant impact on the production of your opponent. In around 1000 games played across the 3 GSL televised seasons so far, we've yet to see someone use an Overseer to prevent critical research such as Thermal Lances or Siege Mode. With very little effort, a Zerg player can use 2 Overseers to significantly reduce the number of Colossi or Thors an opponent can bring to a battle. But there still appears to be a high level of "brute force" mentality among a large population of players where they can win with strong macro and "a lot of units", so anything more is just viewed as a cute gimmick.
There was a game in the Ro32 lastnight - Fruit Dealer's first game on Xel'Naga Caverns where FD delayed his oppponent's push by sending a large wave of Zerglings around the edges of the map and into the Terran base. His opponent was forced to send his entire (huge) army of Marines home to prevent his production facilities from being destroyed, and I was just thinking to myself the entire time:
- What if FD had 1 Infestor with that group of Zerglings, and used Fungal Growth on that HUGE clump of Marines as they approached the ramp? He could have delayed the Terran army from getting inside for much longer, and perhaps even killed a nice clump of Marines.
- What if FD morphed 4 of those Zerglings into Banelings, and burrowed them on the Terran ramp? There was a perfect opportunity of clumping where he could have killed at least half of the Terran army with a handful of Banelings on that ramp.
Sure, it's easy to look back in retrospect and think, "Wow, imagine that." Of course it's much more difficult to execute in real-time, but the point I'm trying to make is that we have yet to see these kinds of mechanics introduced to the game. Another example I can give, was a ladder game I played yesterday where I randomed P vs a Zerg player on Jungle Basin. We each had 3+ bases and had been playing very Gate+Robo heavy. Air was not an option for me at the time, as my opponent had a frighteningly large army of Ultra + Hydra. At one point during the game, I baited my opponent to defend his 3'o'clock expansion by sending a pair of Zealots to attack it. Little did he know, there were 4 DT's on hold position at the top of the ramp, with another 4 nearby at the bottom. I waited until he sent his army up the ramp to kill my Zealots, then sealed the gap at the bottom of the ramp - trapping 5 Ultralisks and several Hydralisks to be torn apart by the DT's. By the time the Overseer arrived, he'd lost more than 50 food - allowing me to move in and finish off the few units that escaped with the bulk of my army. Now of course this is nothing breathtaking, but it's mechanics like these that aren't being considered widely. Most players would have just made Immortals, Zealots and HT or Colossi and brute forced their way into that Zerg army, win or lose.
![[image loading]](http://img574.imageshack.us/img574/485/dtwall.jpg)
EDIT: Screenshot example
In closing, I'll point out that we have only *just* seen our first Carrier produced in the entire GSL lastnight, and I'm pretty damn certain that we've yet to see a single Warp Prism. Protoss players are still playing very gate-heavy games, not capitalising on their ability to follow up on a drop by warping in additional units. We're not seeing Colossus (as an alternative to Reaver) drops or Storm drops like we would commonly see in Brood War.
I look forward to the day when the game evolves to the point where non-Terrans really expand their horizons beyond what we're seeing at the moment.
|
I enjoy this post and and many of the thought out responses- but the point of the variation in races being inherent and intentional; I'd like to add a few things.
Zerg: Quantity
Terran: Versatility
Protoss: Quality
Zerg has more than merely quantity; and you do see the "quantity" aspect of their nature in their buildings as well as their units. Queens are a quasi-building/unit, as are spore and spine crawlers. The creep mechanic is indeed shallow, but there are creative ways to use it. Having faster units and vision over large areas of the map is a huge strategic superiority piece. Nydus worms used to connect bases means the zerg ground army is effectively everywhere. The skill ceiling too and "lack of synergy" in zerg bases? I'm not so sure I buy into that.
I will say that addon synergy has really not been fully explored and 1-1-1 / BFBP openings using different addon combinations will certainly find interesting timing pushes, but I will guarantee that zerg macro play has also not been fully explored.
As for protoss, the ability to warp in units to any base seems pretty synergistic... and the ability to speed up production when you need it... well thats ridiculous. Nothing underpowered about it. Blunt, absolutely, but amazingly powerful. Who's to say that you wont see people 2nexusing for extra chrono boosts at some point for some crazy build?
Still; a cool post.
|
OP's post has nothing to do with "skill" cieling... this is a joke...
he's talking more about "race potential" in regards to strategies, or something. and he only brings up minor stuff like floating CC's and depots. those aren't the things that foster real strategy they just make Terran better at the sim city aspect of the game. weak argument OP, I don't care how much you write your argument is poorly supported.
|
On November 30 2010 15:28 Zoltan wrote:Zerg has more than merely quantity; and you do see the "quantity" aspect of their nature in their buildings as well as their units. Queens are a quasi-building/unit, as are spore and spine crawlers. The creep mechanic is indeed shallow, but there are creative ways to use it.
I wonder... do you think the average TvZ sees more Queens and Crawlers built, or more Bunkers + MTs + Sensor Towers + Add-ons? (+ PFs, if it's TLO playing :p ) Because, for it to reflect on Zerg identity, I imagine that Zerg would have to come out disproportionally on top, now, wouldn't they?
|
On November 30 2010 15:33 attackfighter wrote:
OP's post has nothing to do with "skill" cieling... this is a joke...
he's talking more about "race potential" in regards to strategies, or something. and he only brings up minor stuff like floating CC's and depots. those aren't the things that foster real strategy they just make Terran better at the sim city aspect of the game. weak argument OP, I don't care how much you write your argument is poorly supported.
We can have a zerg who have 1000 apm to spread creep, produce larva, macro, harass, which is indeed great skill. However the limitation of the zerg race is only stuck there, thus the zerg's 'service ceiling' is definately high, but the 'absolute ceiling(maximum potential)' is not that really far from it. Same goes with the Protoss.
Terran on the other hand, have a high 'absolute ceiling' with all the tech and macro they can do. You can lift the barracks to be exchanged with the starport or with the factory or another barracks with the...............list goes on and this is only the touching the building switching. Thus "race potential" very high and with potential comes skill needed to achieve those 'potentials' hence the 'higher skill ceiling'
Heck you can even make a factory in your base float it to somewhere else, build a techlab, float it again to the enemy base and make a reactor, yeah it makes no sense but that still can be categories as 'potential' which again put the terran's 'skill ceiling' higher.
In other words, let's say all the tricks in the game for each race has already been discovered and disregarding the basics macro,micro, which race do you think will have more 'tricks' in their sleeves, and the skill to utilize those tricks.
I'm bad in explaining tho. Hope I shed some light.
|
On November 30 2010 14:55 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2010 14:39 DoubleReed wrote:The Baneling is actually an AMAZING example of just what I'm talking about when I say natural synergy. You have a race that can burrow, you give them a unit that blows up, bam, a natural combination. Problem is, that's one legit, viable combination. Terrans have one of those for every single mech unit they got. And Protoss.. they've got nothing at all. Well certainly warp prism and warp gate have natural synergy. One warps units into a power field, and the other puts a power field anywhere. That's about as natural as you can get. Saying "but that's just what its supposed to do" isn't fair. MULEs can repair, so obviously dropping them to repair in a Thor Drop is something they're supposed to do. I will give you Warp Prisms as an example of otherwise lacking Protoss synergy, but I won't give you MULE repair being intentional. :p The repair itself, certainly, but not this bizarro combination that players have been taking advantage of -- Thor's power, MULEs' teleport, and repair. Show nested quote +I do think Nydus Worms have tons of application in a ton of situations. There's 101 ways to use them, honestly, and not all of them are straightforward. Similarly, Infested Terran can actually be used to do all sorts of things that you wouldn't necessarily think of. Screwing up Tanks, granting sight, forming a wall... Whatever happened to not bringing unit micro into the discussion? ?: (
If you don't want unit micro discussion, we cannot talk about repair either.
|
On November 30 2010 16:11 yrag89 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2010 15:33 attackfighter wrote:
OP's post has nothing to do with "skill" cieling... this is a joke...
he's talking more about "race potential" in regards to strategies, or something. and he only brings up minor stuff like floating CC's and depots. those aren't the things that foster real strategy they just make Terran better at the sim city aspect of the game. weak argument OP, I don't care how much you write your argument is poorly supported. We can have a zerg who have 1000 apm to spread creep, produce larva, macro, harass, which is indeed great skill. However the limitation of the zerg race is only stuck there, thus the zerg's 'service ceiling' is definately high, but the 'absolute ceiling(maximum potential)' is not that really far from it. Same goes with the Protoss. Terran on the other hand, have a high 'absolute ceiling' with all the tech and macro they can do. You can lift the barracks to be exchanged with the starport or with the factory or another barracks with the...............list goes on and this is only the touching the building switching. Thus "race potential" very high and with potential comes skill needed to achieve those 'potentials' hence the 'higher skill ceiling' Heck you can even make a factory in your base float it to somewhere else, build a techlab, float it again to the enemy base and make a reactor, yeah it makes no sense but that still can be categories as 'potential' which again put the terran's 'skill ceiling' higher. In other words, let's say all the tricks in the game for each race has already been discovered and disregarding the basics macro,micro, which race do you think will have more 'tricks' in their sleeves, and the skill to utilize those tricks. I'm bad in explaining tho. Hope I shed some light.
this makes no sense... swapping add-ons is easymode, a baby could probably do it, it has an exremely insignificant impact on the game's skill cieling. and you said so yourself, your examples are nonsensical, so I don't know where you're trying to go with them.
you, like the OP, seem to have skill cieling confused with strategic potential. and also like OP you're reasoning behind Terran having more is very weak.
|
On November 30 2010 16:22 kochujang wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2010 14:55 pure.Wasted wrote:On November 30 2010 14:39 DoubleReed wrote:The Baneling is actually an AMAZING example of just what I'm talking about when I say natural synergy. You have a race that can burrow, you give them a unit that blows up, bam, a natural combination. Problem is, that's one legit, viable combination. Terrans have one of those for every single mech unit they got. And Protoss.. they've got nothing at all. Well certainly warp prism and warp gate have natural synergy. One warps units into a power field, and the other puts a power field anywhere. That's about as natural as you can get. Saying "but that's just what its supposed to do" isn't fair. MULEs can repair, so obviously dropping them to repair in a Thor Drop is something they're supposed to do. I will give you Warp Prisms as an example of otherwise lacking Protoss synergy, but I won't give you MULE repair being intentional. :p The repair itself, certainly, but not this bizarro combination that players have been taking advantage of -- Thor's power, MULEs' teleport, and repair. I do think Nydus Worms have tons of application in a ton of situations. There's 101 ways to use them, honestly, and not all of them are straightforward. Similarly, Infested Terran can actually be used to do all sorts of things that you wouldn't necessarily think of. Screwing up Tanks, granting sight, forming a wall... Whatever happened to not bringing unit micro into the discussion? ?: ( If you don't want unit micro discussion, we cannot talk about repair either.
Perhaps I should clarify what I mean when I say that unit micro doesn't belong in this discussion. Terrans have 13 standard units, counting SCVs. Zerg have 13 standard units, counting Drones, Queens, and Overlords. Protoss have 15. All very close, and the units of each race offer micro possibilities (shoot and skoot vs. fungal + flank vs. blink stalkers, and so on). It isn't really possible to figure out which race offers more such possibilities, especially as there are still many abilities that don't see a lot of use, that inevitably will -- Seeker Missile, Infested Terrans, anything on the Mothership, etc. We just don't know which race has more... so, seeing as how they're very close in number, I decided to just call it even. Let's assume for the sake of argument that all races' unit micro is even across the board, even including things that are not yet discovered. We do this because micro possibilities, and especially how difficult they are to pull off, are incredibly subjective. That Terrans have access to the superfluous yet useful Sensor Tower while Protoss don't is not subjective. This is why I feel the question of whether or not Infestors, or Overseers, or whatever, have tricks yet to be discovered is not one that should interest us. Whatever tricks the Infestors or Overseers may or may not have may or may not perfectly cancel out other tricks that Terrans have, ie. Ravens' spells, Ghosts' spells, and so on.
MULEs are not a standard unit, however; moreover, their Repair ability which is the focus of our analysis is a meta-ability, a racial mechanic -- despite the fact that it is on a single unit. I admitted that Baneling mines are a perfect example of synergy between units and mechanics, and that's because Burrow, like Repair, is a racial mechanic. That it also happens to be on the unit in question (Baneling) is irrelevant.
The moment a Zerg player figures out how to use Infested Terrans in combination with Burrow to gather resources, I will start paying attention. For now I can't possibly see that happening, so my focus remains elsewhere.
On November 30 2010 16:58 attackfighter wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2010 16:11 yrag89 wrote:On November 30 2010 15:33 attackfighter wrote:
OP's post has nothing to do with "skill" cieling... this is a joke...
he's talking more about "race potential" in regards to strategies, or something. and he only brings up minor stuff like floating CC's and depots. those aren't the things that foster real strategy they just make Terran better at the sim city aspect of the game. weak argument OP, I don't care how much you write your argument is poorly supported. We can have a zerg who have 1000 apm to spread creep, produce larva, macro, harass, which is indeed great skill. However the limitation of the zerg race is only stuck there, thus the zerg's 'service ceiling' is definately high, but the 'absolute ceiling(maximum potential)' is not that really far from it. Same goes with the Protoss. Terran on the other hand, have a high 'absolute ceiling' with all the tech and macro they can do. You can lift the barracks to be exchanged with the starport or with the factory or another barracks with the...............list goes on and this is only the touching the building switching. Thus "race potential" very high and with potential comes skill needed to achieve those 'potentials' hence the 'higher skill ceiling' Heck you can even make a factory in your base float it to somewhere else, build a techlab, float it again to the enemy base and make a reactor, yeah it makes no sense but that still can be categories as 'potential' which again put the terran's 'skill ceiling' higher. In other words, let's say all the tricks in the game for each race has already been discovered and disregarding the basics macro,micro, which race do you think will have more 'tricks' in their sleeves, and the skill to utilize those tricks. I'm bad in explaining tho. Hope I shed some light. this makes no sense... swapping add-ons is easymode, a baby could probably do it, it has an exremely insignificant impact on the game's skill cieling. and you said so yourself, your examples are nonsensical, so I don't know where you're trying to go with them. you, like the OP, seem to have skill cieling confused with strategic potential. and also like OP you're reasoning behind Terran having more is very weak.
I appreciate the concern, but there's no confusion -- from my side, at least. I explain in my bolded and underlined second paragraph that for the purposes of this thread I am using an unorthodox definition of skill ceiling. That you can't let go of concepts external to this thread when I've explicitly pointed out what I am taking that word to mean in this thread is no fault of mine.
I'm not trying to trick people by using 'skill ceiling' two different ways. It still means exactly the same thing in my last paragraph that it does in my first. How easy strategies are to pull off and how much skill the race takes to place are completely irrelevant questions here.
|
On November 30 2010 17:16 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2010 16:22 kochujang wrote:On November 30 2010 14:55 pure.Wasted wrote:On November 30 2010 14:39 DoubleReed wrote:The Baneling is actually an AMAZING example of just what I'm talking about when I say natural synergy. You have a race that can burrow, you give them a unit that blows up, bam, a natural combination. Problem is, that's one legit, viable combination. Terrans have one of those for every single mech unit they got. And Protoss.. they've got nothing at all. Well certainly warp prism and warp gate have natural synergy. One warps units into a power field, and the other puts a power field anywhere. That's about as natural as you can get. Saying "but that's just what its supposed to do" isn't fair. MULEs can repair, so obviously dropping them to repair in a Thor Drop is something they're supposed to do. I will give you Warp Prisms as an example of otherwise lacking Protoss synergy, but I won't give you MULE repair being intentional. :p The repair itself, certainly, but not this bizarro combination that players have been taking advantage of -- Thor's power, MULEs' teleport, and repair. I do think Nydus Worms have tons of application in a ton of situations. There's 101 ways to use them, honestly, and not all of them are straightforward. Similarly, Infested Terran can actually be used to do all sorts of things that you wouldn't necessarily think of. Screwing up Tanks, granting sight, forming a wall... Whatever happened to not bringing unit micro into the discussion? ?: ( If you don't want unit micro discussion, we cannot talk about repair either. Perhaps I should clarify what I mean when I say that unit micro doesn't belong in this discussion. Terrans have 13 standard units, counting SCVs. Zerg have 13 standard units, counting Drones, Queens, and Overlords. Protoss have 15. All very close, and the units of each race offer micro possibilities (shoot and skoot vs. fungal + flank vs. blink stalkers, and so on). It isn't really possible to figure out which race offers more such possibilities, especially as there are still many abilities that don't see a lot of use, that inevitably will -- Seeker Missile, Infested Terrans, anything on the Mothership, etc. We just don't know which race has more... so, seeing as how they're very close in number, I decided to just call it even. Let's assume for the sake of argument that all races' unit micro is even across the board, even including things that are not yet discovered. We do this because micro possibilities, and especially how difficult they are to pull off, are incredibly subjective. That Terrans have access to the superfluous yet useful Sensor Tower while Protoss don't is not subjective. This is why I feel the question of whether or not Infestors, or Overseers, or whatever, have tricks yet to be discovered is not one that should interest us. Whatever tricks the Infestors or Overseers may or may not have may or may not perfectly cancel out other tricks that Terrans have, ie. Ravens' spells, Ghosts' spells, and so on. MULEs are not a standard unit, however; moreover, their Repair ability which is the focus of our analysis is a meta-ability, a racial mechanic -- despite the fact that it is on a single unit. I admitted that Baneling mines are a perfect example of synergy between units and mechanics, and that's because Burrow, like Repair, is a racial mechanic. That it also happens to be on the unit in question (Baneling) is irrelevant. The moment a Zerg player figures out how to use Infested Terrans in combination with Burrow to gather resources, I will start paying attention. For now I can't possibly see that happening, so my focus remains elsewhere.
You always talk about mechanics used in unorthodox ways, or offer abilities which have not been explored yet.
Lets talk about the aspect healing. Protoss regenerates their shields fast outside of combat, zerg heal slowly (except for burrowed Roach) but can be healed by Queen. Terran can repair (SVC or MULE) or heal (Medivac). These mechanics are very clear-cut and simple, but somehow you want to label the terran repair as something special? Repair does exactly what it says, it repairs. That you can call down MULE anywhere and repair is tactic, and frankly micro. Who says you cannot find a fantastic way to use force-fields or warp-prism to get protoss units out of the way to abuse the faster healing of shields? No, we cannot discuss that, because that is (unit) micro. Repair is pretty well defined, so there is nothing to discover here.
Salvage? That comes under construction/deconstruction. Protoss well ahead here since they can warp in tons of different buildings with one single probe. You can even use the synergy with Warp-prism, but that doesn't go well with you, because it is too well defined. Well, salvage is pretty well-defined also, except for situations where you are using them together with units, but we can't have micro-talk here right? Protoss is ahead.
Shelter. An ability only terran have, which is supported by bunker and cc. Plus for terran.
Warp-in can be used to call reinforcements everywhere on the map. Terran has no such ability. Synergy is given, which like repair, is not something you need to discover, only how you use it with your units. Plus for protoss
I would like to set chrono-boost together with addons. You can combine different addons to achieve the following: better/faster tech or faster units. Chrono can achieve the same, but is more flexible. I would call it equal.
Scouting. Terran have sensor-towers and scans, Zerg can use burrow. Protoss have the hardest time here, but they also have the best scouting unit, the observer. You could leave any units out of the equation but that does not make much sense, since it is known that terran is the most difficult race to scout in the beginning.
I think I know what you are trying to say, but your arguments are a bit flawed and I also disagree with your statement ;-)
|
but...
the entire game itself has an endless skill ceiling.
|
A year from now, you won’t see Chrono Boost being used in new and inventive ways
Famous last words.
If you played Protoss, you'd know this is one of the most underutilized abilities in their arsenal. While constantly keeping your chrono low is the style of today, and the optimal usage on-paper, the real value is going to come from unscoutable timing attacks, impossible tech switches, and double expo transitions that are only possible by stockpiling your chrono.
Nobody really has developed a protoss style yet that's only possible with smart chrono use. The fact that it can rush probe production, tech, and unit production means if you focus 200 energy of chrono on only one of those areas, you're going to see a dramatic transformation in your army. A year from now, we'll only be seeing the very beginnings of pro-level chrono builds.
And the highest skill ceiling is zerg, because skill ceiling has NOTHING to do with the meta game. Zerg reward good decision making better than the other races, since you can devote 100% production to drones or units at any moment. Zerg also punishes bad decision making much worse than the other races, since if a zerg prepares for an attack that doesn't come, they might never recover economically. This is why a zerg took GSL when they were universally considered the most underpowered race.
It's also why TLO decided to switch to swarm before the patch changes took effect. This is not dependent on the meta game, it's a hard-wired mechanic that rewards Zerg players who successfully predict their opponent's movements MORE than the other races.
|
I think that both toss and zerg have abilities that are severely underused at the moment and that can be abused in very subtle ways to great effect.
the prime example is the overseer, which i have not gotten or seen others get very often for reasons other then detection. imagine the power of well executed mass-contaminate strategies or the possibilities of using large amounts of changelings to block of a ramp and keep enemy re-enforcements from joining a fight. clever usage of the nydus worm has not been tapped into a lot (theres a ZvP on metalopolis somewhere on HDs account which showcases very interesting and abusive nydus use, but i forget who played in it). Mass transfuse could be very abusable, especially since queens dont cost any gas. imagine late-game ultra/queen mass transfuse. with good micro, this is really scary
terrans are merely the first to start abusing their mechanics because theirs have rather obvious and straight-forward way of being abused. the other races will follow in time.
|
I think Zerg has the highest skill Ceiling:
1) Creep Spread.
2) Overlord spread
(with these two, your map control is insane already)
3) Spawn Larva ( absolutely the strongest macro mechanic in SC2)
If you do these three things perfectly, you will be at huge advantage against other races already.
And zerg has lots of strategy options too :
1) Banelings/Ultra Drops.
2) Nice amount of queens in battle to use transfusion.
3) Correct Infestors play. ( Using IT walls to kill splited groups of MM, fungal growths on workers, neutral parasite with burrow, neutral parasite with drops and so on...)
4) Nydus play (may it be on defensive purpose to defend expos easily or to be aggresive and siege someones base without them noticing it fast enough/getting them unprepared.)
5) Overseers play.
Etc.
I'm a Terran player, and they have a huge skill ceiling with their building positioning (Like we see Flash doing in SC:BW) but in most of the cases they won't reach the point when they could use it and they are not as perspective on other skill celling stuff like zerg.
|
Zerg are more unit centric meaning that they focus on overrunning/surrounding their opponents. They can make much more units faster. Larva injection are used to increase number of units you can make. etc.
Protoss are more focused on building, their placements around pylon, they can build multiple at a time. One thing people don't mention is that Protss can stack all of their warpgates together , or any formation they want as matter of fact without blocking any of those units in. Hiding tech for fleet beacon and DT shrine becomes more important. I know other races can do this but this is specially true for things like DT or Mothership rush (lol)
Terran focuses on the synergy between the two. Units can repair building, building can build units anywhere after it lands or transport them as well as call them down. Buildings can switch add-on to produce different combination of units.
More examples to consider, Zerg's food are units, they can be left alone floating, Protoss's food effects their psi as well as their buildings, Terrans kind of mixes up the two in a sense their SD can move up and down as to not get in the way, but the movement is severely limited. Lastly Zerg take a worker to be converted into building, protoss can just start it and leave. While terran buildings takes a worker for the duration of the building.
OP only talks about the synergy between building and units in this "skill ceiling" discussion, there are some examples of what each race's synergy that fits their theme.
|
On November 30 2010 22:22 Wodenborn wrote:
It's also why TLO decided to switch to swarm before the patch changes took effect. This is not dependent on the meta game, it's a hard-wired mechanic that rewards Zerg players who successfully predict their opponent's movements MORE than the other races.
TLO switched after GSL 2, well after the T openings were nerfed
|
Speaking of TLO's switch, I think it was premature. I know he felt that he is not improving even if he practiced and played more as a terran, but the real problem is, 3-4 months down the road (most likely wasted time), he might feel the same about Zerg. He feels he keeps improving if he puts hours into Zerg, but that's because his level as a zerg is not high right now, so he will keep improving, until he reaches a saturation point, like he felt he did with Terran.
When you feel you don't improve, probably the next step is to come up with YOUR OWN WORKING STRATEGIES. It's not like TLO discovered all strategies, broke the race and game, it became boring.
My feeling is that, Terran suited TLO more. He had a decent shot at becoming one of the better Terrans around. As a Zerg... I'm skeptical.
|
On November 29 2010 23:45 bobcat wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 21:27 ShadowIord wrote:On November 29 2010 18:27 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:
Sorry but most T's just spam tier 1 units and add a small number of higher tier units like medivac and viking as support whilst still spamming the same tier 1 units 30 minutes into the game.They then just stim and a click.
Hardly ground breakingly high skill ceiling when compared to brood war. So... Zerg do not spam lings/Blings and toss do not spam leglots/stalkers... isnt it? To OP "A Planetary Fortress is a powerful defensive tool… only thing is, combined with the Command Center’s ability to fly and its ability to carry SCVs, it can even be used offensively in the early game." line. No PF cant fly an if i do not remember bad, neither PF or OC, can carry SCVs. and PF rush do not work vs a good player. I think NettleS' point was that all the way into the late game T players are relying almost entirely on their Teir 1 units with some tier 3 support. I do not think this is the way blizzard intended the game to be played, but they still have a lot of work to do. Ideally, (and this is theory here) they would want terrans to have marines and marauders supporting thors and siege tanks and such units as additionaly firepower rather than mass bio ball being used to take on tier 3 units. This doesnt mean you wouldn't have a large number of marines/marauders, but rather than you would be forced to make some more tier 3 units rather than just pumping off of 8 raxes. Yes protoss make zealots and zerg make ling/bling, but we dont spam them. We would lose big time if we did. Ideally, the same concept of low tier units losing effect over time should apply to terrans as well. But because of the OP's "Unit Synergy" you are allowed to keep making bio for the entire game up until a protoss gets templar AND colossi, or a zerg player can get fungal/bling.
Not gonna argue whether or not going MMM the whole game is imba or not op or not needed or not.
However, not what blizzard intended? I'm not so sure about that. Have you ever watched BW tvz? Even if you haven't I'm sure people that have worked on sc2 at blizzard have. tvz in BW was some combination of marine/medic/tank/vessel (T1.5 plus support units) almost regardless of what the zerg goes for.
During the alpha of SC2 there was commentary on the blizz forums from someone at blizzard that the medic was being removed and its abilities were given to the dropship (thus the birth of the medivac). The reason for this was medics were too slow to keep up with reapers. I'm sure they realized with the way terran tech worked out it was relatively easy to tech to medivacs to aid reapers. Now blizzard isn't dumb I'm sure they realized that medivacs would not just be used in combination with reapers but with other infantry units as well also I'm sure they knew how well it would work because there is already an instance in BW where this has happened. Blizzard even admits via the SC2 single player that marauders are good vs stalkers. Therefore I cannot see them not foreseeing MMM. In BW thats exactly how it worked. If the zerg player was stubborn enough to only build zergling/hydra/muta the whole game as soon as the terran player had adequate turrets to defend his bass MM rolled the zerg. So zerg would evolve and get lurkers which would devastate marine/medic. How did terran players respond? They started supporting their MM with tanks against lurkers.
In SC2 what happens the zerg goes for blings against the massive amount of Marine count the terran has. Therefore the terran builds tanks to kill the banelings or marauders to soak up the damage. And in tvp for sc2 toss responds to MMM by building collosus so terran adds vikings as their support unit.
It all comes back to the same BW concept.
Now if you said that blizzard did not intend for BW zvt to end up with massive amounts of t1.5 plus support units then I would believe you. But for sc2 seeing as how blizzard has a previous instance of this happening I do not believe you.
Edit: If blizzard wasn't wanting MMM the whole game why give the abilities of the medic to the dropship knowing the consequences of this choice. If they were not wanting MMM spam then a choice to simply give the Marines and marauders an upgrade later on in the game to make them more useful would have been better.
(and before anyone says something I said MORE useful which does not mean they were useless before)
|
Great topic. No time to read all responses just yet but my thoughts on the matter to follow.
Agree Terran definitely have the most options. They are fun to play and the options make them more fun. I want more options for Zerg and Protoss! The game doesn't need to change drastically to insert some of these things into the expansions.
CC, OC, and PF are great interesting and versatile in many ways.
The queen comes in second, and does have some synergy w/ buildings and units with it's version of heal. Creep tumors/creeping overlords are fairly shallow, I'll give you that. I wouldn't mind seeing an "upgraded creep" option in an expansion that allows a certain area of creep to buff friendlies regen or the creep itself attacks.
Chronoboost is a great edition to Protoss, since they have flexibility problems... the worst ability to anti air, tech switch, scout (except for early midgame with an observer), etc. Chrono helps all of these things at least somewhat by giving Protoss extra probes early for an earlier scouting probe, quicker build time of observer in those oh shit moments a banshee is in my base, etc.
But wouldn't it be nice if chrono could do something for units themselves like make a unit move faster (for the duration of the ability) by casting chrono on it. It wouldn't be used all the time, but for instance with a voidray harass, colossus being chased by vikings, or mothership getting from one side of the map to another... it could be useful. Maybe it could speed up energy and shield regen on units as well, making it a little like a MULE on a thor drop.
Protoss additions that may add synergy and options:
1. Make the warp prism double as a shield battery. This would make harass slightly more viable and less "you will lose all the units you warp in".
2. Allow chrono boost cast on a unit to enable an ability that you haven't researched yet. This will allow for a hallucination early on for a scout before you get observers. Will give the option to "cast" charge or blink on one or two zealots or stalkers for specific early game harass or escaping from Concussive.
3. As before, chrono cast on units speed them up in movement, shield regen, energy regen, cooldown (blink) timer.
4. Pylons having some sort of warp-across option. Such as you walk in a pylon at point A, it's connected to B to C to D (fields overlap). You right click units onto pylon A, then use pylon D to bring them out of warp. Useful for defense vs. air units that hit and run before you have blink, useful for dealing with PvP 4 gate all-ins when you went tech (keep your red health units alive longer for shield regen).
5. Allow building shields to protect touching units - so you could run probes to your nexus. Would compare to burrowing drones or running SCVs behind a planetary fortress. Would also allow early game defense to be better comparable to marines hiding behind SCVs/depots or ling speed on creep. Would be some relief from the "perfect forcefield placement" complaint if you could double the shields on your zealots at your ramp. Protect that early expand from a concussive + stim rush without nerfing stim, etc.
Zerg additions for synergy and options:
1. A creep tumor that hasn't duplicated itself (created a new tumor, I'll call it "uncast creep tumor") has the option to be cast on a friendly unit or area of units for a temp buff or heal. Or cast on enemies for damage, etc.
2. Overlords spewing creep on top of friendly units or buildings make them regen quickly. Useful for defense or holding a spine crawler line.
3. Overlords spewing creep on top of "temp" units like broodlings or changelings make them last indefinitely. Hold a xel' tower for "free".
4. Overlords suicide land to produce broodlings. Useful for harass, defense, attacks, you name it.
Out of time... but there are lots of things in the game that could be slightly tweaked to give all sorts of options.
|
On December 01 2010 00:19 hugman wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2010 22:22 Wodenborn wrote:
It's also why TLO decided to switch to swarm before the patch changes took effect. This is not dependent on the meta game, it's a hard-wired mechanic that rewards Zerg players who successfully predict their opponent's movements MORE than the other races. TLO switched after GSL 2, well after the T openings were nerfed
It is to my understanding that he switched before GSL 2 however, he had already chosen terran to play at GSL 2 and wasn't allowed to change it. I also believe it was said during an interview that he was practicing playing again as zerg long before the patch 1.1.2 came into effect which is the one you are referring to if I am not mistaken.
|
It's way too early to tell but if I happen to throw a guess I would say that 1 year from now:
Protoss will be way different
Terran will be slightly less different
Zerg will be pretty much the same
|
I just realized that the day terrans perfect marine control, banelings will be completely useless. Blings rely solely on the opponent being bad so they will probably become phazed out in high play,(Except on creep with speed upgrade I guess.) If the terran spreads out his marines, then even perfectly microed blings will result in a minimum 2-1 ratio. 100 min, and 50 gas for a marine? Thats a concrete example of how terran skill ceiling is higher.
|
I'm not sure if creep spread was the best example...things like dropping queens at expansions and all other the map to place creep tumors is something that zerg has figured out over time as being possible to spread creep.
|
I just realized that the day terrans perfect marine control, banelings will be completely useless. Blings rely solely on the opponent being bad so they will probably become phazed out in high play,(Except on creep with speed upgrade I guess.) If the terran spreads out his marines, then even perfectly microed blings will result in a minimum 2-1 ratio. 100 min, and 50 gas for a marine? Thats a concrete example of how terran skill ceiling is higher.
The deal is, Zerg are also working on countering this. Although Marine micro is what it is, im rather skeptical about the fact that banelings are useless against them. Infestors totally shut down marines and when they cannot be moved, they cannot be microed, making Infestors and Banelings a brutal combo against quite a bit of marines.
We cannot forget carpetbombing either. All of these strategies evolve as the need to beat a certain strategy arises, this will keep happening for years to come.
|
On December 01 2010 20:33 Grend wrote:
I just realized that the day terrans perfect marine control, banelings will be completely useless. Blings rely solely on the opponent being bad so they will probably become phazed out in high play,(Except on creep with speed upgrade I guess.) If the terran spreads out his marines, then even perfectly microed blings will result in a minimum 2-1 ratio. 100 min, and 50 gas for a marine? Thats a concrete example of how terran skill ceiling is higher.
With flanks and pincer attacks this isn't as true as it could be but yeh you have a point.
|
Good points TyrianD! I also forgot about bling mines, though that also relies on your opponent being sloppy. But the infestor also relies on the opponent not spreading well. Sort of disturbing how all these counters to marines are based on the Marines clumping up, something which can be remedied by a good terran. I really hope carpetbombing becomes more used, as it is an awesome strategy. But yeah, saying completely useless was hyperbole, and quite the overexaggeration.
|
This post captures everything that is wrong with Terran at the moment (or Zerg and Protoss depending on the viewpoint). I've been saying for a while now that Terran can make any random units and they will do at least average while at the same time Zerg, and to some extent Protoss, have to make exactly the right units and get exactly the right tech or they will die hardcore. But I think you said it better.
One of Zerg's synergies that was removed from the game was queen creep tumors and overlord creep. I think it would be cool to walk a queen to different spots around the map and lay creep tumors, but nowadays you'd first have to spend 300/300 to upgrade overlords to carry the queen because she's to slow off creep.
|
Wanna bet?!
You will see overlord spreading creep to prevent expos, you will see overlord spreading creep to hide buildings or position crawlers near the front of the enemy base!
On the protoss side, you will see sentries left at random chokes to prevent enemy movement for the reminder of the game and you will see multiple nexi in one base to be able to chrono non-stop all your structures in the late game..
Just give it time.. People are creative as shit!
|
One of Zerg's synergies that was removed from the game was queen creep tumors and overlord creep. I think it would be cool to walk a queen to different spots around the map and lay creep tumors, but nowadays you'd first have to spend 300/300 to upgrade overlords to carry the queen because she's to slow off creep.
You really only need overlord speed to pull this off. With enough overlords properly used, you can spread a very quick line for a queen or two to scoot and lay creep tumors along. Then you group your overlords and do it again. This is very effective way to suddenly surge forward with creep aggressively.
Try it out. You can actually spread creep really fast if you try.
|
On December 01 2010 21:39 Stormstealth wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2010 20:33 Grend wrote:
I just realized that the day terrans perfect marine control, banelings will be completely useless. Blings rely solely on the opponent being bad so they will probably become phazed out in high play,(Except on creep with speed upgrade I guess.) If the terran spreads out his marines, then even perfectly microed blings will result in a minimum 2-1 ratio. 100 min, and 50 gas for a marine? Thats a concrete example of how terran skill ceiling is higher. With flanks and pincer attacks this isn't as true as it could be but yeh you have a point.
and then zergs ability to take prevent that with infestors, take advantage of it with brood lords/hydras/Lings (perfectly spread = less units attacking and much more surface area) makes zerg yet again higher skill ceiling.
(and then you counter that and then i counter you ect ect).
|
On December 02 2010 07:21 PrinceXizor wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2010 21:39 Stormstealth wrote:On December 01 2010 20:33 Grend wrote:
I just realized that the day terrans perfect marine control, banelings will be completely useless. Blings rely solely on the opponent being bad so they will probably become phazed out in high play,(Except on creep with speed upgrade I guess.) If the terran spreads out his marines, then even perfectly microed blings will result in a minimum 2-1 ratio. 100 min, and 50 gas for a marine? Thats a concrete example of how terran skill ceiling is higher. With flanks and pincer attacks this isn't as true as it could be but yeh you have a point. and then zergs ability to take prevent that with infestors, take advantage of it with brood lords/hydras/Lings (perfectly spread = less units attacking and much more surface area) makes zerg yet again higher skill ceiling. (and then you counter that and then i counter you ect ect).
If you read his post carefully, you'd see that his definition of "skill ceiling" is basically the number of branching paths.
E.g., if I were to do an algorithm to find out all the possible moves with alpha-pruning, then terran has a lot, because there are so many moves that we can't rule out as "the worst possible move".
And yes, because zerg has more "units", it should have more branching paths. But this is why I saw "with alpha pruning", because most of those paths can be considered a stupid move.
[Note: If you read my posts, I usually refer back to econ/math/cs. It's GG then~]
|
On December 02 2010 08:30 ScythedBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2010 07:21 PrinceXizor wrote:On December 01 2010 21:39 Stormstealth wrote:On December 01 2010 20:33 Grend wrote:
I just realized that the day terrans perfect marine control, banelings will be completely useless. Blings rely solely on the opponent being bad so they will probably become phazed out in high play,(Except on creep with speed upgrade I guess.) If the terran spreads out his marines, then even perfectly microed blings will result in a minimum 2-1 ratio. 100 min, and 50 gas for a marine? Thats a concrete example of how terran skill ceiling is higher. With flanks and pincer attacks this isn't as true as it could be but yeh you have a point. and then zergs ability to take prevent that with infestors, take advantage of it with brood lords/hydras/Lings (perfectly spread = less units attacking and much more surface area) makes zerg yet again higher skill ceiling. (and then you counter that and then i counter you ect ect). If you read his post carefully, you'd see that his definition of "skill ceiling" is basically the number of branching paths. E.g., if I were to do an algorithm to find out all the possible moves with alpha-pruning, then terran has a lot, because there are so many moves that we can't rule out as "the worst possible move". And yes, because zerg has more "units", it should have more branching paths. But this is why I saw "with alpha pruning", because most of those paths can be considered a stupid move. [Note: If you read my posts, I usually refer back to econ/math/cs. It's GG then~]
marines were considered a stupid move vs banelings. Knowledge of the game has to be complete in order to say which paths are not worth taking.
|
I think Hots and LoTV will open up some options for zerg and protoss.
|
I'm not really interested in unit micro, though. I only brought that up in the OP to show that it's a contested issue
A Contested issue, yet you say that "Common sense usually holds that Terrans are the most micro-intensive race" also in the OP.
Great mix of words. Just like the title.
|
On November 30 2010 14:55 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2010 14:39 DoubleReed wrote:The Baneling is actually an AMAZING example of just what I'm talking about when I say natural synergy. You have a race that can burrow, you give them a unit that blows up, bam, a natural combination. Problem is, that's one legit, viable combination. Terrans have one of those for every single mech unit they got. And Protoss.. they've got nothing at all. Well certainly warp prism and warp gate have natural synergy. One warps units into a power field, and the other puts a power field anywhere. That's about as natural as you can get. Saying "but that's just what its supposed to do" isn't fair. MULEs can repair, so obviously dropping them to repair in a Thor Drop is something they're supposed to do. I will give you Warp Prisms as an example of otherwise lacking Protoss synergy, but I won't give you MULE repair being intentional. :p The repair itself, certainly, but not this bizarro combination that players have been taking advantage of -- Thor's power, MULEs' teleport, and repair. Show nested quote +I do think Nydus Worms have tons of application in a ton of situations. There's 101 ways to use them, honestly, and not all of them are straightforward. Similarly, Infested Terran can actually be used to do all sorts of things that you wouldn't necessarily think of. Screwing up Tanks, granting sight, forming a wall... Whatever happened to not bringing unit micro into the discussion? ?: (
These are all assumptions there is no way in the world anyone outside of blizzard knows what was intentional or not. Logic would point that these possible scenario's such as dropping mules by thors are intentional. Sure there are going to be somethings that go through the crack. It sounds like your saying that Blizzard gave zerg and protoss to one person to develop with no oversight and Terran was put together and designed by a team that didn't collaborate with each other on the final design choices and just shipped the game without test.
10 years to make this game and a idea as simple as dropping a mule to repair a thor deployed to the battle field is something that they probably did to themselves, if the community discovered it in less than 6 months. Let's be reasonable. Putting supply depots in the mineral line isn't nothing spectacular even if your just using it as an example again the community figured they could do this in less than 6 months. It would be foolish to think blizzard didn't try something like this themselves while they were 6-pooling themselves during testing. Anything that blizzard does't want in the game they can easily take out. Abusive strategies is what they can't forsee sometimes. Supply depot submerge, mules repairing thors deployed to the battlefield (which is the same concept as deploying them to a island mineral line) are things im sure blizzard thought of. Terrans can float building since BW and Terrans are the race that used islands the most in BW why wouldn't they ever think hey lets allow terran to mule to a island expansion.
Was the supply depot designed with submerge just to wall-in? Many terrans don't wall in TvP or TvT anymore. Was submerge designed to save space so that terrans would have more room to place there stuff and supply depots werent getting in the way of troops? Common sense should point out that many of these so called un-intended uses are probably intended or at least known about before the game released and there weren't removed on purpose.
|
On December 02 2010 09:07 jambam wrote:
I think Hots and LoTV will open up some options for zerg and protoss.
Personally, I'd rather not wait on some mythical knight in shining armor with a 50$ price tag. I'm playing the game NOW and want to deal with the things that protoss have and can utilize NOW.
|
Sorry but I wouldn't agree with the "common sense" that Terran is the micro race. Hasn't Protoss always been considered the "micro-race" even if they don't necessarily need to micro, whatever that means? Perhaps this role is switched around in sc2, but in SC1, the idea was this
Zerg = macro, swarm (less micro)
Terran = middle, middle
Protoss = micro, less but strong units
|
On December 10 2010 05:41 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
Sorry but I wouldn't agree with the "common sense" that Terran is the micro race. Hasn't Protoss always been considered the "micro-race" even if they don't necessarily need to micro, whatever that means? Perhaps this role is switched around in sc2, but in SC1, the idea was this
Zerg = macro, swarm (less micro)
Terran = middle, middle
Protoss = micro, less but strong units
Protoss had the least micro in BW relative to the other races. You didn't have to babysit your units as much. You could F2 back to your base pretty safely during battle. This is one of the reasons that people say that protoss was the easiest race to play in BW.
|
On December 10 2010 05:41 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
Sorry but I wouldn't agree with the "common sense" that Terran is the micro race. Hasn't Protoss always been considered the "micro-race" even if they don't necessarily need to micro, whatever that means? Perhaps this role is switched around in sc2, but in SC1, the idea was this
Zerg = macro, swarm (less micro)
Terran = middle, middle
Protoss = micro, less but strong units
actually it depended a lot. in order of micro requirements, ignoring mirrors:
bio tvz > pvz = bio zvt > zvp > mech zvt > mech tvz ~ tvp = pvt.
basically, protoss in sc2 is the race which is clearly the strongest on utterly terrible mechanics. but at the same time, it is the race for which micro is the most essential on higher lvls of play. ffs, storm, feedback, blink, phoenix play, colossi babysitting, splitting templar against emp, vr charge juggling, positioning an army in which the ranged units run faster than the melees, the shield mechanics extremely rewarding saving units etc.
if strategy, bo, macro and decision-making are all on a high lvl, then protoss is the race which will yield the worst results if the player is barely microing at all.
|
Is this thread still around?
Yes, Terrans definitely did get the most cool stuff. I blame it on the development and Blizzard putting out the Terran campaign first. They definitely built terran first, and then constructed the other two races "around" a finished one, with some alterations.
More stuff = more options. I just hope Zerg and Protoss get some wicked game-changing stuff in the next two expansions.
PS: Anybody else predicting the Zerg gets a bit more "romanticized" in HotS? Kind of like how Orcs in Warcraft went from being bloodthirsty evildoers into tribal shamans. I expect Zerg to turn into some "force of nature" bullshit.
|
On December 10 2010 05:50 Black Gun wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 05:41 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
Sorry but I wouldn't agree with the "common sense" that Terran is the micro race. Hasn't Protoss always been considered the "micro-race" even if they don't necessarily need to micro, whatever that means? Perhaps this role is switched around in sc2, but in SC1, the idea was this
Zerg = macro, swarm (less micro)
Terran = middle, middle
Protoss = micro, less but strong units
actually it depended a lot. in order of micro requirements, ignoring mirrors: bio tvz > pvz = bio zvt > zvp > mech zvt > mech tvz ~ tvp = pvt. basically, protoss in sc2 is the race which is clearly the strongest on utterly terrible mechanics. but at the same time, it is the race for which micro is the most essential on higher lvls of play. ffs, storm, feedback, blink, phoenix play, colossi babysitting, splitting templar against emp, vr charge juggling, positioning an army in which the ranged units run faster than the melees, the shield mechanics extremely rewarding saving units etc. if strategy, bo, macro and decision-making are all on a high lvl, then protoss is the race which will yield the worst results if the player is barely microing at all.
eh.. i disagree. I play protoss very little besides FFA and custom games (like sc1 + 2 total conversion) and first off, things like storming and forcefields are the easiest thing to do. hold down f or t and click once per .3 seconds or whatever it is. its a fine tuned skill but easily, easily mastered and will be more or less the same for any situation.
the old void ray mechanics were definitely micro intensive, holding a level 3 charge and the fazing the beams vs small targets was insane, when seen done correctly. However, stalker blinking/shield rearrangement is the same for any race. you need to run back groups of 10 marines (rather than 1 stalker) to an incoming baneling ball. zerg vs zerg roach wars benefits those who focus fire with groups of 4-5 roaches while moving focused roaches back, as well as forming a faster concave.
baby sitting collosi isnt even close compared to managing a siege tank line...
all in all, protoss micro is the easiest, because they have the least "nifty"(marine split, baneling carpet bomb, no more void ray charge juggle) techniques, and share the basic techniques with the other races (concave, focus fire retreat and focusing key targets, baby sitting important units and spell casters)
|
On November 29 2010 14:20 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 14:18 Loser777 wrote:
If you're not walling off, placing the depot next to the mineral line is the most efficient use of resources, as SCVs can return to mining immediately after --there's a reason for that, it's not "because they can". Try as they might, Protoss can't place their Pylon in the middle of their mineral line, although that would be just as resource efficient.
Probes dont have to sit there and build the building. So thats even more flexible, plus they have shields.
|
Makes sense, considering it is the terran expansion and a lot of stuff still has yet to become fully utilitzed, too bad every Terran at the moment is too focused on all in mass marine builds.
They have the most tools and neat little perks the other races don't really get. A slow effect, instant walling/dewalling, cloaked air unit (that's worth a darn), building armor upgrade, turret range, bunker space upgrade, orbital command with instant supply production/mules/detection, reaper drops, units with 9+ range, repair, liftoff, high unit retention and on and on..
Yeah they have more things they can do, but terran isn't hard to play. Mechanically Zerg is much tougher since they have to rely so heavily on masses of weak units and if your macro slips once it could be gg.
|
Some problems with protoss.
Stalkers don't synergize with anything. They are kinda just decent units in a bunch of situations. They don't provide enough dps when tanking with zealots. They have too low of health and armor to be considered "tough", but they are protosses only anti-air unless they build a starport, but the problem is, starport units suck in battle until you get a critical amount. Also the immortal is a bizarre unit. It's great dps, but it has such bad AI that it mostly does nothing if you have too many stalkers. Also they don't shoot up. How awesome would it be if immortals could shoot up? Immortals and stalkers also take the exact same resource ratio requirements (2 stalkers = 1 immortal). Except that the immortal is terrible against marines and lings.
For protoss, innovation won't come around microing units, there's nothing to micro. You used to use void rays, but now they suck (without speed). You can do some blink stuff early, but it doesn't help mid/late game. Charge AI is bad and concussive shells makes zealots bad. (charging against lings is a bad idea as it will cause them to get surrounded.). Phoenix are cool, but require more micro than mutas and aren't nearly as strong in battle.
One thing that is important to note is how quickly units die, which is almost more important that dps. Terran is good not only because of their dps and rage, but because they can get off a ton of shots because even getting hit. Try microing collosus against vikings? A ball of 8 vikings can like 2 shot a collosus. Who cares if the vikings all die eventually due to stalkers, vikings kill colllosus much faster than protoss can kill the vikings.
PvT i think will eventually move away from the collosus. Collosus are simply too expensive and countered too easily to last. They will be around, but less frequently i think. I think instead, that templar tech will be researched a lot faster. The future of protoss might be 2 gate robo -> twilight council (charge) -> HT off of 2 bases. Early units will revolve around the zealot, immortal and sentry. With cheap observers, scouting will be less of a problem so if protosss sees the banshee play, protoss can simply make 4-5 stalkers and be ahead, but cutting stalkers will be important.
Mid game play will be mostly about surviving until storm and amulet are done and denying the terran a third base. Taking a 3rd in pvt is simply too risky against timing pushes right now and i highly doubt that will change. Once storm is out, protoss can then transition into collosus because templar are actually really good against vikings. Late game armies are going to be zealot/immortal/HT -> zealot/collosus/HT.
I could be really wrong, but I think stalkers and collosi are used waaaaaaaay too much right now and immortals/HT are not. Void rays are now terrible against terran and phoenix play will be used as an alternative to sentry play if terran goes the mech route (since forcefields don't help against siege tanks). Now, there is one more thing to consider. If you are successful in staying equal and getting to 3 bases with this composition, you can effectively transition into carriers. The final death ball of protoss will consist of chargelots/high templar/carriers. I can't think of a good combination against this for terran at all. The key will be to hide the carrier tech as long as possible. Proxying 2 stargates and not using the carriers until you have 4 of them minimum and then hitting as soon as possible. Marines are good against both carriers and decent against chargelots, but not against both at the same time. Essentially what i'm saying is that protoss is the turtle/timing attack race.
Very little micro is required to pull all of this off. Also getting a third base in PvT will basically be GG if protoss can do it because they will be able to get those high tech units. Protoss low tier units are too ineffective in the mid game, that teching will be the way for protoss to win.
Terran on the other hand has a terrible end game. The minute that high templar are out is when MMM is dead. This is when terran starts making tanks or thors and marauders (since they have more health than marines). The thing is, if protoss can stop marine production outright, the they can counter marauders hard with immortals and carriers. The thing is, immortals are countered by marines and banshees, but marines and banshees are both bad against carrier/chargelot.
Who knows, maybe sc2 will never get out of this hyper agressive mode. If it does, then protoss gets a lot more exciting.
|
On November 29 2010 14:06 pure.Wasted wrote:
The question remains “why?” Why do Terrans get a building that can fly, take in SCVs, and cast 3 different versatile spells, all at the same time?
I used to joke with my relatives that Blizzard must have had a long list of features/abilities and they were trying to figure out how to divide them among the races. Then they just decided to give 1 to Protoss and Zerg and just give the rest to Terran.
|
Awesome post, I really hope Blizzard starts thinking along the same lines as this. I've long wondered the same things to myself for quite a while yet without taking the time to put it in such eloquent terms.
Really the only thing that has gone towards helping Zerg as far as the swarmy building mechanics is the ability to uproot their defense structures. Protoss? Buildings are the same as SC 1 unless you count they can be powered by a fragile tier 2 flier as well as Pylons.
I feel like the axing of the Dark Obelisk for toss prior to beta was a mistake. Obviously Proton Charge was a terrible ability for it, but the other abilities added a great deal of potential depth iirc:
- It could cloak nearby units and buildings temporarily
- It could restore energy on nearby spellcasters
Oh yeah, and here's something for versatile:
-Graviton beam was on the sentry. And it could pick up buildings. But alas, blizz felt breaking the terran wall with 1 ability just wasn't fair.
Zerg well, lost the lurker and a much more interesting (though probably imbalanced) corrupter. TBH I thought the corrupter in the beta was much more interesting, since it had the overseer's building slime ability. I remember actually combining it with a muta harass to shut down missile turrets while the mutas would go to work (it stopped missile turrets and PFs from firing back then too)
Hmmm. Starting to feel like a few good ideas just didn't make it through the chopping block.
|
On December 02 2010 07:13 Dagon wrote:
Wanna bet?!
You will see overlord spreading creep to prevent expos, you will see overlord spreading creep to hide buildings or position crawlers near the front of the enemy base!
On the protoss side, you will see sentries left at random chokes to prevent enemy movement for the reminder of the game and you will see multiple nexi in one base to be able to chrono non-stop all your structures in the late game..
Just give it time.. People are creative as shit!
The problem is that the kind of thing you are talking about demand too much attention. Yeah sure it's cool to let some sentries around the map, but most of the time it will only lead to loosetime because you need to macro / micro everywhere on the map and on the same time check your sentries to make sure you don't miss the windows to put your force field down.
It will always be a "wawww" move, like some kind of move that you do once in a while.
|
On November 29 2010 14:35 Exarl25 wrote:
From a purely design point of view, Terran certainly seem more developed than Protoss or Zerg. They have more racial perks at their disposal and just feel much more fleshed out than the other two races.
As for how that translates to potential skill ceiling/balancing, I don't have a clue and I don't see how anyone else can at this point.
^This exactly. Btw great thread OP, hoping to see more love development-wise for zerg/protoss. They seem to be lacking the options Terrans have in utility. Not that its imbalanced or anything, just Terran seems to have so many more gadgets at their disposal, many of which have not been fully realised yet.
|
On December 10 2010 05:44 Stoids wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 05:41 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
Sorry but I wouldn't agree with the "common sense" that Terran is the micro race. Hasn't Protoss always been considered the "micro-race" even if they don't necessarily need to micro, whatever that means? Perhaps this role is switched around in sc2, but in SC1, the idea was this
Zerg = macro, swarm (less micro)
Terran = middle, middle
Protoss = micro, less but strong units
Protoss had the least micro in BW relative to the other races. You didn't have to babysit your units as much. You could F2 back to your base pretty safely during battle. This is one of the reasons that people say that protoss was the easiest race to play in BW.
My control group of Dragoons attempting to navigate the unfathomable complexity of the Gordian knot commonly known as a "ramp" would like a word with you.
|
Well designwise I think terran is the most diverse race but in terms of unit-concepts and unit desing Protoss is in my opinion cooler than terran. ForceFields, Colossi-micro, HTs, Blink micro - there are so many cool units for protoss that stem from really great unit concepts.
The only race that seems a bit "flat" to me is zerg who have basically just units that simply attack...
|
On December 11 2010 01:27 Iamyournoob wrote:
The only race that seems a bit "flat" to me is zerg who have basically just units that simply attack...
What about burrowed banelings, flying banelings, burrowed roaches, infestors, nydus etc. they all make Zerg unique.
|
On December 11 2010 01:52 aRRR wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2010 01:27 Iamyournoob wrote:
The only race that seems a bit "flat" to me is zerg who have basically just units that simply attack... What about burrowed banelings, flying banelings, burrowed roaches, infestors, nydus etc. they all make Zerg unique.
wat
don't you mean Scourge from BW?
|
I dont remember the post exactly, but the mere fact that Terran has more units, thus more options, makes them have the highest skill ceiling by far. Zerg is more dynamic, but the ceiling is much lower -- once you master creep spread, various micros, queen inject, what else is there for Z?
|
The fact that it is so versatile raises its skill ceiling much higher than Zerg and Protoss
|
Its a bit unfair to compare sc2 and sc1, see that sc1 has over 10 years of balance and testing. Sc2 isnt that old and yet is doing all right in the balance department. The three races should be as diverse as possible, you don't want 3 races that differ by only by a couple of units. If your a fan of flying buildings, i suggest playing a ums and making as many buildings as you can and fly them around. Get it out of your system. Anti air is a great counter to flying buildings. On a more serious note, racial difference are good, are racial equalities necessary. Do protoss and terran need a nydus worm, or creep to make thier units move faster?
Thanks for all the hard work, Adun.
|
On December 11 2010 01:59 SmoKim wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2010 01:52 aRRR wrote:On December 11 2010 01:27 Iamyournoob wrote:
The only race that seems a bit "flat" to me is zerg who have basically just units that simply attack... What about burrowed banelings, flying banelings, burrowed roaches, infestors, nydus etc. they all make Zerg unique. wat don't you mean Scourge from BW?
I think he means Baneling Drops.
|
On December 10 2010 05:44 Stoids wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2010 05:41 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
Sorry but I wouldn't agree with the "common sense" that Terran is the micro race. Hasn't Protoss always been considered the "micro-race" even if they don't necessarily need to micro, whatever that means? Perhaps this role is switched around in sc2, but in SC1, the idea was this
Zerg = macro, swarm (less micro)
Terran = middle, middle
Protoss = micro, less but strong units
Protoss had the least micro in BW relative to the other races. You didn't have to babysit your units as much. You could F2 back to your base pretty safely during battle. This is one of the reasons that people say that protoss was the easiest race to play in BW.
At lower levels yes. At higher levels it's not so true. Against Terran, if you 1a2a3a without some form of control your army dies easily to tanks and mines. Second, against zerg, early game if you 1a2a3a into a lurker contain, your zealots disappear and your goons then get run down by lings, not to mention that you need to look after your observers because they can get scourged over and over again and by the time you break out, zerg has the map.
At lower levels of play, Protoss seems op because people can't macro or micro enough to exploit P's weaknesses, and its the same in SC2.
|
why do you all want the zerg units to have abilities? its hard enough to keep up with the insane macro. its like the opposite for terran, you have easy macro but really difficult micro since most units have a set of abilites you need to use correctly or you die
|
The OP's point is that Terran units, buildings and macro mechanics all synergize and fit into a general design conceit of versatility.
But Protoss have synergy as well. Consider the features of Protoss units:
They are expensive
They are slow to build
They are very powerful at a few highly specialized purposes
Army composition is therefore crucial for a Protoss player. If you have the wrong composition, your expensive units will die and it will be difficult to replace them before you are overrun and/or falge massively behind. On the other hand, if you have the right units to handle the specific task you've tasked them with, they can do so tremendously effective. This (along with massive reliance on forcefields) is why people think Toss is so punishing of mistakes and so damn powerful when played "perfectly".
So what do the two Protoss macro mechanics do?
They allow you to get the units you need, when and where you need them.
Not without limits, of course. But chronoboost is an incredibly powerful, versatile tool that is not just a terrific economic booster, but also a fantastic way to get the army you want when you want it. Need an observer last minute to save yourself from banshees that were scouted a bit late? CB can help. Want to crank out Colossi to make that lategame army absolutely devastating? Look no further than CB.
Chronoboost is also perhaps the most underused tool currently in the Protoss arsenal. Watch even the pros, and by mid to late game all their Nexuses have a ton of energy. I think that's the next great frontier of Protoss development--and that, given Chronoboost's versatility, it will be *years* before we've 100% "solved" how to best use it.
The other tool is of course warp gates. Warp gates warp in units essentially instantly, meaning build time is not a factor when warping in those first couple stalkers to stop a drop, or a few zealots to begin some early aggression. They also warp your units in anywhere you have a pylon, which means that a typical major weakness of long build times--slow reinforcements--is completely bypassed.
No you can't get "creative" ala flashy stuff like Mule repair. But chronoboost is so outrageously versatile that it ultimately enhances Toss adaptability tremendously, and warp-in may just be straight up the most powerful tech in the game. Together the two combine perfectly to paper over Protoss weaknesses and play to their strengths.
|
It seems creative play for zerg or protoss takes place mostly in the mid/late game, whereas Terran seems to have the creative options as early as the early game. Love this post, very clear and well said.
|
Isn't it weird, though, that terran has an army thats the hardest to reproduce out of all the races? That should by logic be protoss. Without looking at the balance at all, I think its a slight design mistake..
|
So you are saying that terran is the most developed and wellrounded race in this early stage of SC2's lifespan, hence terran players has so many more options, tactics and strategies to explore.
Thats a revolutionary insight right there.
|
As a protoss player, as of right now, from my own anecdotal account, I agree that terran has the highest skill cap. However, the perception of skill ceilings changes over time; there was a time when many thought terran to be too easy because of mm efficiency and the community lagging on developing airtight responses. In addition, I feel that protoss has the potential to have the highest micro skill cap after watching ogsmc's use of warp prisms and other harass, as well as seeing prism + forcefield play in greater frequency to magnify the zoning drops create; in part it may be a similar phenomena to early release t- i.e. the toss community feeling the growing pains of weaning out of the musclebound colossi balls of doom into more varied play.
As of now I don't have any visions of me considering zerg to have a higher skill ceiling than protoss or terran from my perspective, but again this is highly anecdotal, because all of the zerg mechanics come very naturally to me while the terran mechanics do not. In fact, I consider the ease of use for the zerg race to be a sign of good design as it very quickly came to feel like an extension of my self.
Why is terran so much harder for me to play? I like the race a lot, I think it's potent competitively, and very enjoyable to watch. I think the answer is that I have a more instinctual and impulsive style; as a player I feel protoss and zerg augment my strengths more precisely, whereas terran gives me the feel of a very premeditated race, where everything needs to be thought out and planned precisely with meticulous attention to detail. I can see how a person with a different set of strengths and weaknesses could find the other races more challenging, with terran being second nature- but that individual, I am not.
|
Good analysis, although I think the use of the mule was intentional, as they are lacking attack ability, so leaving repair was obviously on purpose.
|
being the most adaptable race is not skill requiring compared to winning against the most adaptable race.
Is it hellion marauders or banshee coming? Huge skill required from zerg to find out while terran can just execute the build.
|
I am just surprised how somebody puts a big effort into a theoretical analysis and was able to express it that clearly, but got misinterpreted nearly all the time.
I am much more surprised that this "discussion" was supported by some people, who are trying to explain it with examples, so that loldudes can grasp whats all about.
but i am really flabberghasted how some(...many) oneline-nobrainers could possibly manage to derail an interesting thread into a how skilled is a typical terran player QQ.
is this the way to get more comments?
can one srsly expect discussions here?
i see an incessant increase in whine at exponential scale.
anger, hate, frustration.
|
All i can say is that you need more micro for terran then you would need for the other races to be in diamond.
Not sure if terrans have the highest skill ceiling, but if you can control the 5 unit types that all needs a positioning or a skill you need to use while engaging against the 2 unit types the opponent uses, then the terran army is super effectiv.
But i think zergs need a different skill after terrans got better in unit control, just like a toss will need other skills to make his race more effectiv. Think the stuff a terran needs is more obvious then the stuff a zerg or toss needs and that way it looks that way that terran will own everything once some people have their 600 apm hehe.
We will probably see over the years if a race is really superior to the other, because they get to strong with growing skill. But then there will be blizzard balance patches to even that out. (i like the bw style "terran is up we make terran favored maps now" solution more)
|
On December 27 2010 04:09 FeyFey wrote:
All i can say is that you need more micro for terran then you would need for the other races to be in diamond.
Considering walling in requires no unit micromanagement and it stops pretty much all low level cheese dead, I think Terran is the race that needs LEAST micro to reach Diamond.
|
All i can say is that you need more micro for terran then you would need for the other races to be in diamond.
Statements like that are so frustratingly wrong. It is clear that you(a terran player probably) posts things like that to feel good that "the race I play is the most micro intensive, I feel good about myself now."
Just sick of people that aren't able to take a logical, and all around approach to a topic because they are simply blinded by the race that they play and don't want to look at it from a non-bias point of view, but I guess that is welcome to the internet right?
Are there times that Terran is very micro intensive? Sure. I also believe you can get to Diamond by simply learning a 4-5 rax build and just a moving a 1 base timing no problem. That doesn't require hardly any micro. Any of the races have times they are micro intensive and times they aren't. Using Diamond as the standard of anything is a joke as well, I'm like a 2300 point Diamond zerg and I suck ass at the game.
Sometimes I wonder what the game would be like if you weren't able to pick your race, it was just random all the time. I feel like some people post and have never once played any of the other races. All players should play a few customs every week going random just to see the point of view of the other races.
Not to mention your statement doesn't even have anything to do w/ the OP at all anyway.
|
On November 29 2010 15:13 CrazyF1r3f0x wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2010 15:02 mizU wrote:On November 29 2010 14:36 CrazyF1r3f0x wrote:On November 29 2010 14:20 pure.Wasted wrote:On November 29 2010 14:18 Loser777 wrote:
If you're not walling off, placing the depot next to the mineral line is the most efficient use of resources, as SCVs can return to mining immediately after --there's a reason for that, it's not "because they can". Try as they might, Protoss can't place their Pylon in the middle of their mineral line, although that would be just as resource efficient. Yes they can, Your mining time would be reduced with that pylon placement. @OP, I agree with your post. Terran's abilities seem a little more developed and synergetic than the other races. Repair as an ability, seems like a pretty big advantage as an OPTION rather than zerg's heal or protoss' shield, which reduces their fluidity. You can do this placement without losing mining time, you just have to tell the probe on the far right right to build it.
![[image loading]](http://i55.tinypic.com/28tgj2b.jpg)
|
The most micro-intensive race is protoss, especially in zerg vs protoss where you really can't afford to loose units, you loose your entire army at any point it's practicly over.
|
I really hate the term "skill ceiling" or "skill cap", because it assumes that its possible to reach some point where you can't get any better. It is not possible to play perfectly, we can only get as close to perfection as humanly possible. No one is fast enough to do everything perfectly in the late game, there are simply too many possible things we could do and we can only be in one place at a time.
Even a player like Flash, amazing as he is, could get better and will never be able to play brood war perfecly, but he is as close to perfection as anyone I have seen.
|
[QUOTE]On December 27 2010 04:23 FLuE wrote:
[quote]All i can say is that you need more micro for terran then you would need for the other races to be in diamond.[/quote]
im guessing uve never played starcraft 1d ont talk about terran being the most micro heavy race in sc2. sc2 macro is gone now that terran can mass select buildings protoss can warp any gateway unit with w. and zerg can hold down 1 key to make a ton of units.
every race is micro intensive.
unless u played rank B or higher in iccup as terran vs zerg going bio
thats the most micro intense games ive ever played. terrans mainly need fast hands in sc1
as do all races but thats not the case in starcraft 2
|
Yeah I never said that, someone else did I had just quoted them. So use their name and their quote I said it wasn't true. You took my quote of a quote and made it look like I said that, would appreciate you editing and fixing that.
Also, comparing sc1 and sc2 to talk about race micro is the dumbest thing ever with all the different mechanics that exist for all races in sc2 unless you are having some discussion directly comparing the 2 games. This thread, and the micro comments have no relation to SC1 no real need to bring SC1 into the conversation at all. So your post is all sorts of fail good work.
|
On December 27 2010 05:04 FLuE wrote:
Yeah I never said that, someone else did I had just quoted them. So use their name and their quote I said it wasn't true. You took my quote of a quote and made it look like I said that, would appreciate you editing and fixing that.
Also, comparing sc1 and sc2 to talk about race micro is the dumbest thing ever with all the different mechanics that exist for all races in sc2 unless you are having some discussion directly comparing the 2 games. This thread, and the micro comments have no relation to SC1 no real need to bring SC1 into the conversation at all. So your post is all sorts of fail good work.
then dont compare an easy race to play with other races in sc2.
terran dosent require good micro
marines have very high dps they can basicaly shot while moving.
sc2 is very easy to micro any unit because there is no unit delay in movement in sc2
so u fail, i wont compare sc1 to sc2 anymore since its clear uve never played sc1 or even at a high level
|
On December 27 2010 06:03 blacksnow wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 05:04 FLuE wrote:
Yeah I never said that, someone else did I had just quoted them. So use their name and their quote I said it wasn't true. You took my quote of a quote and made it look like I said that, would appreciate you editing and fixing that.
Also, comparing sc1 and sc2 to talk about race micro is the dumbest thing ever with all the different mechanics that exist for all races in sc2 unless you are having some discussion directly comparing the 2 games. This thread, and the micro comments have no relation to SC1 no real need to bring SC1 into the conversation at all. So your post is all sorts of fail good work. then dont compare an easy race to play with other races in sc2. terran dosent require good micro marines have very high dps they can basicaly shot while moving. sc2 is very easy to micro any unit because there is no unit delay in movement in sc2 so u fail, i wont compare sc1 to sc2 anymore since its clear uve never played sc1 or even at a high level
What is this, I don't even...I was just wandering TL, and I saw this comment. I have no clue what you're trying to say or why you seem so elitist when he seems to be taking a very logical and neutral stance. He never even compares SC1 to SC2, but apparently he fails. Are you trying to say that T is the "easy race" in SC2? That because it's easier to micro every unit, it makes T easy to play? I'm no pro, but every race is quite difficult to play at a decent level, and trying to stutterstep an entire fight while macroing well doesn't seem like an easy task.
|
8748 Posts
terran and zerg have highest skill ceilings because they're further away from hitting the protoss ceiling, which is the highest, because they first need to switch race to protoss.
|
terr13, thank you. I have no idea what he is talking about. I am either being trolled big time or the guy has the reading comprehension of a monkey.
Not even sure how I got drug into what he said, I think it started with him using a quote by FeyFey and attributing it to me? Somehow SC1 is now involved?
Jesus, shit like that just makes my brain hurt.
|
I would like to see Chronoboost and Zerg Creep have more then it's 1 use. Chrono boosting an individual unit to increase shield regen and or abilities? Or even give the nexus a secondary ability to phase any unit or allied building out for 10 seconds but have it cost 50 energy so it can be spammed?? (kinda of like the mothership ability?) IT could allow for some interesting ways to save collosi or help pvz by walling in? For Zerg maybe give all buildings a light static defense? since they are alive?
|
On December 27 2010 06:15 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
terran and zerg have highest skill ceilings because they're further away from hitting the protoss ceiling, which is the highest, because they first need to switch race to protoss.
Nony trolling leading the way!
|
On December 27 2010 06:15 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
terran and zerg have highest skill ceilings because they're further away from hitting the protoss ceiling, which is the highest, because they first need to switch race to protoss.
You actually think protoss has the highest skill ceiling? I'd really like to know why.
|
On December 27 2010 06:15 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
terran and zerg have highest skill ceilings because they're further away from hitting the protoss ceiling, which is the highest, because they first need to switch race to protoss.
Whereas the Protoss skill ceiling is flying in the air like the eagles of America...
Anyways, I don't think there's a point to this thread. There's no real meaningful discussion. "Terran have the highest skill ceiling."
.....
So? It's not like anyone's going to switch out from Terran or anything. Most of this thread is people flaming other people, anyways.
Although I do have to agree that Terran units have more synergy than the other races (Zealots charge while you have Storm... so they charge into the storm? D
|
he just stated why... :S because they need to switch to protoss first...
|
8748 Posts
On December 27 2010 10:55 AndAgain wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 06:15 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
terran and zerg have highest skill ceilings because they're further away from hitting the protoss ceiling, which is the highest, because they first need to switch race to protoss. You actually think protoss has the highest skill ceiling? I'd really like to know why.
i have no idea. the skill ceiling for starcraft in general, for any race, is so high that no one is near reaching it. it will never matter which race has the highest skill ceiling because the race with the lowest ceiling is still far beyond our reach.
but i am very tempted to tell the next terran i lose to that i would have won if only my race could take advantage of my skills. that's a new level of trash talking and arrogance.
|
On December 27 2010 06:03 blacksnow wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 05:04 FLuE wrote:
Yeah I never said that, someone else did I had just quoted them. So use their name and their quote I said it wasn't true. You took my quote of a quote and made it look like I said that, would appreciate you editing and fixing that.
Also, comparing sc1 and sc2 to talk about race micro is the dumbest thing ever with all the different mechanics that exist for all races in sc2 unless you are having some discussion directly comparing the 2 games. This thread, and the micro comments have no relation to SC1 no real need to bring SC1 into the conversation at all. So your post is all sorts of fail good work. then dont compare an easy race to play with other races in sc2. terran dosent require good micro marines have very high dps they can basicaly shot while moving. sc2 is very easy to micro any unit because there is no unit delay in movement in sc2 so u fail, i wont compare sc1 to sc2 anymore since its clear uve never played sc1 or even at a high level
In order to make marines shutter shoot, you need micro...
|
On December 27 2010 14:05 canikizu wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 06:03 blacksnow wrote:On December 27 2010 05:04 FLuE wrote:
Yeah I never said that, someone else did I had just quoted them. So use their name and their quote I said it wasn't true. You took my quote of a quote and made it look like I said that, would appreciate you editing and fixing that.
Also, comparing sc1 and sc2 to talk about race micro is the dumbest thing ever with all the different mechanics that exist for all races in sc2 unless you are having some discussion directly comparing the 2 games. This thread, and the micro comments have no relation to SC1 no real need to bring SC1 into the conversation at all. So your post is all sorts of fail good work. then dont compare an easy race to play with other races in sc2. terran dosent require good micro marines have very high dps they can basicaly shot while moving. sc2 is very easy to micro any unit because there is no unit delay in movement in sc2 so u fail, i wont compare sc1 to sc2 anymore since its clear uve never played sc1 or even at a high level In order to make marines shutter shoot, you need micro...
Yep that's like saying
"Protoss doesn't require micro.
And
Reavers wreck mineral lines" when discussing BW.
|
enjoyed the read. good analysis
|
Too bad blizzard just nerfs so much that strategies get funneled. Supply depot b4 rax is a prime example. They are nerfing everything that seems overpowered, and now we have limited options. Compare this to BW, where a bunch of individual overpowered units mashed together formed perfect balance.
|
I wanted to type up some nonsense about how a mechanical skill ceiling isn't even relative... This is a strategy game, and as long as a strategy game is reasonably balanced then best responses and Nash equilibrium and game theory+mind games take far more precedent over something like a mechanical skill ceiling... But I'm no pro gamer or game theorist either. And there will never be a consensus on "balance" (at least not for a long time)
Now if you want to talk about a game theory skill ceiling, I'd say you're totally jumping the gun, the meta game is totally under developed and best responses are still being formulated...
EDIT: +1 to what NonY Liquid`Tyler said as well :D
|
It's not about playing your race perfectly. It's about reaching that point where the improvement mountain becomes steeper.
I think that point comes earlier for protoss than terran or zerg. While I'm moving my army around in a big ball, terrans can do drops and harass without a problem, zergs can focus on heavy expanding and getting map control. Protoss can do that, but it has to be forced given the race clearly isn't designed for those kind of things.
|
I looked at the title and I lol'd. Zerg has the highest ceiling, and Protoss second. Terran is forgiving. You can call down mules if you forget to, or if you pose alll your workers. Furthermore, you can scan instead of scouting.
|
On December 27 2010 14:57 RonaldRayGun wrote:
I looked at the title and I lol'd. Zerg has the highest ceiling, and Protoss second. Terran is forgiving. You can call down mules if you forget to, or if you pose alll your workers. Furthermore, you can scan instead of scouting.
yes and these are the only factors in the game
OH WAIT
I could just as easily say it's easiest for zerg to replenish lost units so they're forgiving
force fields allow toss to engage in bad spots so they're forgiving.
... in fact, all the races forgive certain mistakes more than others. it's almost like they're all different and yet balanced against each other.
|
On December 27 2010 14:51 AndAgain wrote:
It's not about playing your race perfectly. It's about reaching that point where the improvement mountain becomes steeper.
I think that point comes earlier for protoss than terran or zerg. While I'm moving my army around in a big ball, terrans can do drops and harass without a problem, zergs can focus on heavy expanding and getting map control. Protoss can do that, but it has to be forced given the race clearly isn't designed for those kind of things.
warp in + warp prism isn't designed for strong harass?
warp in isn't great for defending an expo?
|
Zerg has the highest ceiling, and Protoss second. Terran is forgiving. You can call down mules if you forget to, or if you pose alll your workers. Furthermore, you can scan instead of scouting.
yet if a terran push out with their army and lose it all, and the opponent decides to counter attack the terran will almost certainly lose because of their production mechanic, if the same scenario was applied to protoss and zerg, toss will have warpgates to quickly warp in units and zerg have larvae to mass spawn units.
|
On December 27 2010 15:08 Niso wrote:Show nested quote +Zerg has the highest ceiling, and Protoss second. Terran is forgiving. You can call down mules if you forget to, or if you pose alll your workers. Furthermore, you can scan instead of scouting. yet if a terran push out with their army and lose it all, and the opponent decides to counter attack the terran will almost certainly lose because of their production mechanic, if the same scenario was applied to protoss and zerg, toss will have warpgates to quickly warp in units and zerg have larvae to mass spawn units.
It's their fault for not attacking with a superior army due to their ease in mineral harvesting, ease of expansion, and overpowered units.
Regardless, your point is irrelevant because this is a discussion of skill ceiling, not minimum skill required.
|
On December 27 2010 14:57 RonaldRayGun wrote:
I looked at the title and I lol'd. Zerg has the highest ceiling, and Protoss second. Terran is forgiving. You can call down mules if you forget to, or if you pose alll your workers. Furthermore, you can scan instead of scouting.
You're the perfect example of a brainwashed person. You're very likely to be in bronze and can only repeat false claims made by other bronze noobs. You don't even know what skill ceiling means, so you assume it has something to do with the difficulty of playing a race. Please stop polluting the forums.
|
On December 27 2010 15:19 Saechiis wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 14:57 RonaldRayGun wrote:
I looked at the title and I lol'd. Zerg has the highest ceiling, and Protoss second. Terran is forgiving. You can call down mules if you forget to, or if you pose alll your workers. Furthermore, you can scan instead of scouting. You're the perfect example of a brainwashed person. You're very likely to be in bronze and can only repeat false claims made by other bronze noobs. You don't even know what skill ceiling means, so you assume it has something to do with the difficulty of playing a race. Please stop polluting the forums.
Ouch
|
On December 27 2010 15:19 Saechiis wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 14:57 RonaldRayGun wrote:
I looked at the title and I lol'd. Zerg has the highest ceiling, and Protoss second. Terran is forgiving. You can call down mules if you forget to, or if you pose alll your workers. Furthermore, you can scan instead of scouting. You're the perfect example of a brainwashed person. You're very likely to be in bronze and can only repeat false claims made by other bronze noobs. You don't even know what skill ceiling means, so you assume it has something to do with the difficulty of playing a race. Please stop polluting the forums.
Absolutely not. I listen to the pros like Artosis and IdrA. Incontrol and NonY also had some harsh words for this mechanic.
It seems a little OP. Not in my level of play (gold), but in pro level.
|
It's a pity we can't really program a flawless micro/macro/scout & decision making AI to see what the game looks like at the highest skill ceiling
My bet is on Zerg, because of the production mechanics. At the highest level it will be all about math, and Zerg shine when it comes to maths as far as I, a pretty clever chimpanzee, can tell. + Show Spoiler +But maybe perfect Marine micro is just too imba..
|
On December 27 2010 15:13 RonaldRayGun wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 15:08 Niso wrote:Zerg has the highest ceiling, and Protoss second. Terran is forgiving. You can call down mules if you forget to, or if you pose alll your workers. Furthermore, you can scan instead of scouting. yet if a terran push out with their army and lose it all, and the opponent decides to counter attack the terran will almost certainly lose because of their production mechanic, if the same scenario was applied to protoss and zerg, toss will have warpgates to quickly warp in units and zerg have larvae to mass spawn units. It's their fault for not attacking with a superior army due to their ease in mineral harvesting, ease of expansion, and overpowered units. Regardless, your point is irrelevant because this is a discussion of skill ceiling, not minimum skill required.
yeah you don't seem biased at all
|
I am biased. I play Protoss, and I am bitter about losing, but when I win, I know it is skill that allows me to win.
Back on topic: Terran does not have the highest skill cmeilig. Their production mechanics prevent that. So does their amount of units; one cannot get them all.
|
On December 27 2010 15:22 RonaldRayGun wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 15:19 Saechiis wrote:On December 27 2010 14:57 RonaldRayGun wrote:
I looked at the title and I lol'd. Zerg has the highest ceiling, and Protoss second. Terran is forgiving. You can call down mules if you forget to, or if you pose alll your workers. Furthermore, you can scan instead of scouting. You're the perfect example of a brainwashed person. You're very likely to be in bronze and can only repeat false claims made by other bronze noobs. You don't even know what skill ceiling means, so you assume it has something to do with the difficulty of playing a race. Please stop polluting the forums. Absolutely not. I listen to the pros like Artosis and IdrA. Incontrol and NonY also had some harsh words for this mechanic. It seems a little OP. Not in my level of play (gold), but in pro level.
2 Zergs and 2 Protosses think a race other than their own is overpowered, shocking.
The MULE is the more forgiving of the three macro mechanics in essence that you can instantly spend your energy when you've been sloppy in your macro. Unfortunately though, you can't just look at it in a vacuum.
First of all, the MULE isn't some kind of bonus on top of even economies. Terran is the only race that can't power harvesters, which is kind of key in an economy based RTS. SCV's will always take 17 seconds to build and can be only built 1 at a time per CC. Compare that to Zerg who can built multiple drones at a time and Protoss that can cut down probe build time by 10 seconds per chronoboost, and you'll see that Terran will inevitably lag behind in worker production, and consequently income. Hence the Terran macro mechanic, the MULE, which exists to counteract the disparity in mining workers.
The reason that the MULE is more forgiving a macro mechanic in forgetting it, is because Terran macro itself is the most unforgiving of the three races. Since Zerg and Protoss have macro mechanics that boost production it's easier for them to boost out units to spend their money excesses. Terran production can only be boosted by building more production facilities which inevitably means that you can't spend your money if you haven't been macro'ing well. If you're floating 5k gas you can't spend it instantly to morph all your larvae into Ultra's, you can only build a bunch of extra factories/ starports/ add-ons and wait 60 seconds before you can start using them to produce actual units. And once you've burned through your excess gas by building more production facilities than you can actually support from your income ,you're stuck with expensive idle buildings.
Sure it seems overpowered when a bad macroíng Terran throws down 8 MULE's and matches his opponents mineral income with it for their 90 second duration. But he can't actually pour that money immediately into units. He's just now getting the money he would have gotten during the 8x 90 seconds before if he had macroed well.
Overall, Terran's slower worker production combined with the MULE's ability of ignoring mineral saturation means that Terrans overall stay on 1 base longer, which gives many noobs the idea that "Terran can just 1-base forever since MULE's give infinity minerals".
Edit: I feel like I've wasted my time explaining race mechanics to someone who just wants to put his fingers in his ears and yell imba so he doesn't have to face the fact that he's in Gold because he's just not that good a player.
|
Why even discuss such a thing when no one will ever be close to reaching any skill ceiling? there's just way too much to do to play a "perfect game" and it'll never ever happen. Not even flash who's a fucking genious in sc:bw does everything perfectly.
|
I don't want to lock this thread, but all this "my race is harder" bullshit is getting really tiresome.
|
On December 27 2010 17:33 Saracen wrote:
I don't want to lock this thread, but all this "my race is harder" bullshit is getting really tiresome.
i'm suprised it wasn't locked already, everyone chose their race because it fits them more and it capitalizes on their skill set.
However after playing 1,000 games as protoss in high diamond i switched to Terran because i felt it had the highest skill ceiling as a warcraft 3 player. Protoss NEEDED defensive micro ie pulling zealots back/ahead using forcefields... where as Terran didn't need but REWARDED offensive micro such as splitting/stutterstep and multi tasking drop ships.
Theres never going to be a way to say "X race" is harder or has a higher skill ceiling because everyone thinks differently, which is why this game is so great.
|
On December 27 2010 15:43 RonaldRayGun wrote:
I am biased. I play Protoss, and I am bitter about losing, but when I win, I know it is skill that allows me to win.
and when the other player wins it's just the same
the sooner you accept that the better you'll feel. promise.
|
On December 27 2010 14:57 RonaldRayGun wrote:
I looked at the title and I lol'd. Zerg has the highest ceiling, and Protoss second. Terran is forgiving. You can call down mules if you forget to, or if you pose alll your workers. Furthermore, you can scan instead of scouting.
Skill ceiling =/= how easy it is to play. Obviously if you're playing Terran at the "highest level possible" you aren't forgetting any mules, thus your argument is null.
|
On December 27 2010 15:22 RonaldRayGun wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 15:19 Saechiis wrote:On December 27 2010 14:57 RonaldRayGun wrote:
I looked at the title and I lol'd. Zerg has the highest ceiling, and Protoss second. Terran is forgiving. You can call down mules if you forget to, or if you pose alll your workers. Furthermore, you can scan instead of scouting. You're the perfect example of a brainwashed person. You're very likely to be in bronze and can only repeat false claims made by other bronze noobs. You don't even know what skill ceiling means, so you assume it has something to do with the difficulty of playing a race. Please stop polluting the forums. Absolutely not. I listen to the pros like Artosis and IdrA. Incontrol and NonY also had some harsh words for this mechanic. It seems a little OP. Not in my level of play (gold), but in pro level.
if you listen to artosis and idra, may god have mercy on your soul
i play protoss and terran definitely has the highest skil ceiling. there are so many things you can do with terran it's insane. i think toss and zerg are easier to get good at.
|
I dont know which race has the hardest skill ceiling. I've dabbled a bit in protoss and I did a very tiny amount in terran, maining zerg.
Every race has their hardness.
As zerg I need to know exactly how I defend. If I get behind economically or lose all mapcontroll, I can easily lose the game.
As protoss I need to know when and where to put my forcefields down. Make sure there are pylons around the map and keeping up with chronoboosts.
As terran, hell if I know what I should do. I'm a zerg, not a terran, bah. I'll quote a progamer on this one and say the hardest is to keep your money low. Which coming from zerg is actually much harder than it may seem. If I have 1000 minerals as zerg, I'll gladly make 20 drones and grin like a toddler. With terran, I can make sure my marines inside the barracks have company, but it doesn't really help the situation any further.
All these things. Points, Diamond/platinum/gold, ranks, skill ceilings, apm. They all are numbers that distract you from getting better.
|
Why is this topic still open? Even the title by itself is so rage-inducing, it's ridiculous.
|
On December 27 2010 18:06 Madder wrote:
Why is this topic still open? Even the title by itself is so rage-inducing, it's ridiculous.
because if it was closed another would just open up. This way we can get a good look at all the people to ignore on the forums :D
|
i alwahs thought the opposite is true. Terran has the lowest skill ceiling, I think of it like this:
Forgot to macro:
spam mule
Supply block:
spam extra supply
Forgot to scout:
scan
Can't defend an expansion:
fortress
Let's to early aggression!!
Bunker rush
Early aggression looks like it's done enough damage!
Salvage bunker
Like there's such a layed out solution to a lot of things for terran it isn't too great of a skill ceiling. I think terran is probably easiest to play on lower levels because you DO forget to scout/macro/supply/ and such. Not to mention you can just all-in with scv/marine up to the top of the ladder.
|
woah in retrospect I shouldn't have posted hahaha, this thread is so galvinized I don't want anything to do with it!!
I'm off!!
I think protoss is quite hard, I tried a game with my friend where I off-raced protoss and force field is REALLY hard omg omg!!
Also I off-raced with terran but it felt more natural, stim micro and such felt natural, but it might just be I'm better at terran so it is't saying much
|
I play Terran and because of the endless whining I really got the feeling I was playing an OP race. Just started playing random and honestly Zerg and Protoss are pretty string. I dont see what all the endless fuz is about .... maybe we should get a national holiday on Tl, one where everybody plays random to get respect for the other races and to think about the great game that we have.
|
On December 27 2010 18:15 Deckkie wrote:
I play Terran and because of the endless whining I really got the feeling I was playing an OP race. Just started playing random and honestly Zerg and Protoss are pretty string. I dont see what all the endless fuz is about .... maybe we should get a national holiday on Tl, one where everybody plays random to get respect for the other races and to think about the great game that we have.
good idea lol.
|
On December 27 2010 18:22 men1kmati wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 18:15 Deckkie wrote:
I play Terran and because of the endless whining I really got the feeling I was playing an OP race. Just started playing random and honestly Zerg and Protoss are pretty string. I dont see what all the endless fuz is about .... maybe we should get a national holiday on Tl, one where everybody plays random to get respect for the other races and to think about the great game that we have. good idea lol.
does sound like a good idea...
and with TL's popularity this might actually work out hahaha
|
On December 26 2010 19:37 Patriot.dlk wrote:
Is it hellion marauders or banshee coming? Huge skill required from zerg to find out while terran can just execute the build.
How does scouting (i.e., moving with a slow as molasses overlord, or running zerglings up a ramp, or hiding a drone) require "huge skill from zerg"? That's just something you do, as a Zerg player, because Zerg is a reactionary race. If you lose to an early push (as any race) it's your own fault for not scouting it, it has rarely has anything to do with large quantities of skill you may or may not have. Skill in the context of scouting is knowing when to scout, knowing what to look for, and having the game sense to suspect proxies.
Having played both Terran and Zerg to diamond, I think Terran definitely is the more dynamic race of the two, having a lot of options to choose from in the opening stages of the game. Properly playing Terran against Zerg or Protoss generally requires at least some mineral/base harass to stay in the game while being able to macro up a large enough army to overrun your opponent's. Because of the large number of strategies open to Terran at the early game, Terran players have the ability to execute them all simultaneously into the middle/late game-->because of the efficiency of some of these strategies, a player who is able to multitask well can really excel at Terran. Due in part to the lack of early-game, cheap, efficient strategies, Zerg and Protoss need to go up an expensive tech tree in order to effectuate the same results, while Terran generally opens up more strategies as they tech up. It's because of this (perceived) inequality in diversity of strategy that Terran has the most room to expand. I think Protoss is probably comparable to Terran with regard to diversity of strategy, but their options are generally much more expensive to carry out, and so Terran has a slight edge.
On December 27 2010 18:10 evanthebouncy! wrote:
i alwahs thought the opposite is true. Terran has the lowest skill ceiling
Reading the content of your post made me laugh. "marine/scv all-in to the top of the ladder"? What game do you play? I've lost to a marine/scv all-in like 3 times. Total. And those 3 losses were the first 3 times I encountered a marine/scv all-in.
|
On December 27 2010 19:37 MozzarellaL wrote:Show nested quote +On December 26 2010 19:37 Patriot.dlk wrote:
Is it hellion marauders or banshee coming? Huge skill required from zerg to find out while terran can just execute the build. How does scouting (i.e., moving with a slow as molasses overlord, or running zerglings up a ramp, or hiding a drone) require "huge skill from zerg"? That's just something you do, as a Zerg player, because Zerg is a reactionary race. If you lose to an early push (as any race) it's your own fault for not scouting it, it has rarely has anything to do with large quantities of skill you may or may not have. Skill in the context of scouting is knowing when to scout, knowing what to look for, and having the game sense to suspect proxies.
You're serious? How easy do you think it is to scout Terran? Even if you do manage to sneak an overlord in, its impossible to tell what Terran is doing because they just have so many options. Example: scout 2 gas = fast banshees, fast hellion drop / thor drop, fast tank/marines push. Scout 2 rax = expo, all-in, transition 2 gas to any build listed above, early agression, 4 OC push. Possibilities are endless for Terran, yet all T has to do to scout Zerg is find 1 tech building.
|
excellent post; a great read.
I never realized how limited zerg and protoss were in comparison of versitility until your post...
Now I hate terran even more, but at the same time it brings to me more pleasure when I win^^
|
On December 27 2010 15:22 RonaldRayGun wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 15:19 Saechiis wrote:On December 27 2010 14:57 RonaldRayGun wrote:
I looked at the title and I lol'd. Zerg has the highest ceiling, and Protoss second. Terran is forgiving. You can call down mules if you forget to, or if you pose alll your workers. Furthermore, you can scan instead of scouting. You're the perfect example of a brainwashed person. You're very likely to be in bronze and can only repeat false claims made by other bronze noobs. You don't even know what skill ceiling means, so you assume it has something to do with the difficulty of playing a race. Please stop polluting the forums. Not in my level of play (gold)
Stop posting
|
On November 29 2010 14:06 pure.Wasted wrote:
First, what does that even mean? I’m not saying that Terran players are better, or that the Terran race takes more skill to play. I’m saying that over the course of SC2’s meta-game, if nothing at all is patched from this point onward, Terran gameplay is going to change the most radically, especially in subtle ways, and that comparing Terran play now to the Beta, it already has.
Skill ceiling is the wrong word. Maybe this thread has become so whiny because of this miscommunication.
It sounds to me like you mean to say that Terran has the most options and as such will have the most versatile "meta-game" since there is more room to change.
Being creative does not mean being skillful. TLO can do the craziest shit there is, but I'd take oGsMC's 3 gate//Void Ray rush over him everyday of the week.
|
Yeah the real problem is that "skill ceiling" isn't a bad word to use for those of us with common sense and understand what the OP is saying.
The problem is the word "skill" and the implication that one race requires more than another. As soon as that comes into the equation any logical and reasonable discussion about race potential gets thrown out the window because every gets butt hurt that their race that they think is so hard to play isn't considered the hardest. Nobody wants to be told they are playing the easy race, and then it just becomes a he said she said defend my side no matter what and 17 pages later this is where we are at.
To me you can simply tl;dr the entire thread to:
Single player is Terran focused -> Terran has more complete initial feel on release ->Terran has more units and buildings options currently(expansions will change this) -> more units will mean more potential options and "new" strategy -> more BO and meta game combinations and strategies will exist and change over time for terran.
Has nothing to do with the skill, or strength, or game balance. It also doesn't mean the other races won't come up with new ideas or change their style. Just simple math, more units, more buildings(especially with addon switching) will lead to more combinations for terran. Couple that in with building placement options, etc just means terran has a very wide variety to continue to build on. It is just a shame that there can never be an interesting discussion because it always melts down into a race war where nobody wants to feel like they aren't good.
|
|
|
um.. I'm agreeing with you the whole way. and wasn't rude at all.
|
On December 27 2010 23:59 FLuE wrote:
um.. I'm agreeing with you the whole way. and wasn't rude at all.
Rofl. I read that first line so incredibly wrong... fixed. Sorry about that, hey I found an ally. Sup.
|
On December 27 2010 18:10 evanthebouncy! wrote:
i alwahs thought the opposite is true. Terran has the lowest skill ceiling, I think of it like this:
Forgot to macro:
spam mule
Supply block:
spam extra supply
Forgot to scout:
scan
Can't defend an expansion:
fortress
Let's to early aggression!!
Bunker rush
Early aggression looks like it's done enough damage!
Salvage bunker
Like there's such a layed out solution to a lot of things for terran it isn't too great of a skill ceiling. I think terran is probably easiest to play on lower levels because you DO forget to scout/macro/supply/ and such. Not to mention you can just all-in with scv/marine up to the top of the ladder.
What you said has nothing about skill ceiling. You described a low skill floor for terran, not a ceiling.
|
np, we on the same page! we see the light...
|
On December 27 2010 18:10 evanthebouncy! wrote:
i alwahs thought the opposite is true. Terran has the lowest skill ceiling, I think of it like this:
Forgot to macro:
spam mule
Supply block:
spam extra supply
Forgot to scout:
scan
Can't defend an expansion:
fortress
Let's to early aggression!!
Bunker rush
Early aggression looks like it's done enough damage!
Salvage bunker
Like there's such a layed out solution to a lot of things for terran it isn't too great of a skill ceiling. I think terran is probably easiest to play on lower levels because you DO forget to scout/macro/supply/ and such. Not to mention you can just all-in with scv/marine up to the top of the ladder.
I love this game!
Zerg
Suck at continually building units:
inject larva ==> instant army
Suck at taking territory on map:
Mutalisk harass
Looks like they got AA!
Only need 1 tech building for tech switch
I forgot to DL the maphax!
Creep tumors
I didnt scout for cloaking tech:
17 second overseer morph
Protoss
Army out of position to defend probe harass:
5 second warp in
Forgot to rally troops
Warp Gates
I hate hotkeying my buildings:
Press W for all warpgates
Slacked on continually building probes:
Chrono Boost on nexus
Slacked on upgrades:
Chrono Boost spam
Forget to bring back worker after building:
probes dont have to stay to construct
OMG Zerg and Protoss are easy mode!
Youre playing the idiotic game that all those youtube SC2 players do: list the perks of a race and claim that theyre OP/easymode. Anyone can do that for any race.
|
You sir, might have just won the thread with the longest post completely missing the point.
|
On December 28 2010 01:00 FLuE wrote:
You sir, might have just won the thread with the longest post completely missing the point.
Elaborate please.
Guy says Terrans have the lowest skill ceiling because of a bunch of Terran perks. I list a bunch of Zerg and Protoss perks and say that anyone can list perks but it doesnt make a race have a lower skill ceiling. How is that missing the point?
|
I would like to see banhammering action.. (jesus, because he has the highest skillceiling due to most diversive playstyle in dreamhack.)
|
Because the OP, regardless of how the thread has deteriorated over the past 18 pages, has nothing to do with what you spent time typing and responding to.
"Perks" of any of the races have nothing at all to do with skill ceiling. The things you listed in no way or shape reflect the skill ceiling and how that term is being used in this thread.You just listed a bunch of race features that help when you screw up and have to recover.
There are moments during a game where races are more forgiving, but for example missing probes and being able to chrono boost out more has nothing to do with skill ceiling. You shouldn't have missed making the probes in the first place.
Basically you responded to a pointless post with a longer pointless post which has no correlation to what the original poster was talking about.
|
I would say that Terran has the highest potential skill ceiling for sure. If we made an impossibly good AI script, I'm pretty much willing to bet that T would win most of the time, because their units just gain so much from micro. Imagine...20 marines vs 20 banelings would result in 20 marines alive. Granted, no human can ever do that, but the ceiling is there.
Within human bounds, I have no idea...one thing is for sure though, and that is that holding hotkeys down does not qualify as extra APM, zerg players, nor spamming move orders to slings.
|
On December 28 2010 01:22 FLuE wrote:
Because the OP, regardless of how the thread has deteriorated over the past 18 pages, has nothing to do with what you spent time typing and responding to.
"Perks" of any of the races have nothing at all to do with skill ceiling. The things you listed in no way or shape reflect the skill ceiling and how that term is being used in this thread.You just listed a bunch of race features that help when you screw up and have to recover.
There are moments during a game where races are more forgiving, but for example missing probes and being able to chrono boost out more has nothing to do with skill ceiling. You shouldn't have missed making the probes in the first place.
Basically you responded to a pointless post with a longer pointless post which has no correlation to what the original poster was talking about.
Fair enough. I try to read through the thread to get an idea of what kind of discussion has been going on, but apparently it backfires somtimes
|
On December 28 2010 01:25 shadymmj wrote:
I would say that Terran has the highest potential skill ceiling for sure. If we made an impossibly good AI script, I'm pretty much willing to bet that T would win most of the time, because their units just gain so much from micro. Imagine...20 marines vs 20 banelings would result in 20 marines alive. Granted, no human can ever do that, but the ceiling is there.
Within human bounds, I have no idea...one thing is for sure though, and that is that holding hotkeys down does not qualify as extra APM, zerg players, nor spamming move orders to slings.
Yes that AI part pretty much says all.
If you get better and better micro the Terran units will gain the most out of it; as they all range and with Stim the potential to hit&run is very big.
However, humans will reach a limit of Micro; so in this view the game will shift to more Micro anyway if players get a pretty much perfect Macro.
Currently theirs enough mistakes in macro even at Pro level that easily decide a game; so if all get better and Macro mistakes are eliminated to a minimum the Micro is the factor that matters most.
|
On December 27 2010 19:49 GenesisX wrote:
You're serious? How easy do you think it is to scout Terran? Even if you do manage to sneak an overlord in, its impossible to tell what Terran is doing because they just have so many options. Example: scout 2 gas = fast banshees, fast hellion drop / thor drop, fast tank/marines push. Scout 2 rax = expo, all-in, transition 2 gas to any build listed above, early agression, 4 OC push. Possibilities are endless for Terran, yet all T has to do to scout Zerg is find 1 tech building.
It isn't as difficult as you make it out to be. The ability to scout correctly and conclude what your opponent is doing is divorced from skill. Skill is tied in with micro and macro, scouting and the ability to predict what your opponent is doing comes almost purely from game experience and being able to correctly interpret minor tells in what your opponent is doing. That has little to do with skill.
|
On December 28 2010 05:13 MozzarellaL wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 19:49 GenesisX wrote:
You're serious? How easy do you think it is to scout Terran? Even if you do manage to sneak an overlord in, its impossible to tell what Terran is doing because they just have so many options. Example: scout 2 gas = fast banshees, fast hellion drop / thor drop, fast tank/marines push. Scout 2 rax = expo, all-in, transition 2 gas to any build listed above, early agression, 4 OC push. Possibilities are endless for Terran, yet all T has to do to scout Zerg is find 1 tech building. It isn't as difficult as you make it out to be. The ability to scout correctly and conclude what your opponent is doing is divorced from skill. Skill is tied in with micro and macro, scouting and the ability to predict what your opponent is doing comes almost purely from game experience and being able to correctly interpret minor tells in what your opponent is doing. That has little to do with skill.
completely agree with this... how else can people who are not pros have such a deep knowledge of the game. Some people are students/fans of the game.and know just as much without having to play at the highest level.
|
I think someone a couple pages back hit the nail on the head in saying Terran will be the most diverse race because it has inexpensive and efficient early game strategies that lead to additional mid-game strategies. Why do you think blizzard is so hesitant to buff terran lategame in response to the terran outcry? I feel they have a huge advantage in these stages of the game given their efficiency making it hard to justify buffing the late game without toning down the early and midgame power of bio
|
On December 28 2010 05:13 MozzarellaL wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 19:49 GenesisX wrote:
You're serious? How easy do you think it is to scout Terran? Even if you do manage to sneak an overlord in, its impossible to tell what Terran is doing because they just have so many options. Example: scout 2 gas = fast banshees, fast hellion drop / thor drop, fast tank/marines push. Scout 2 rax = expo, all-in, transition 2 gas to any build listed above, early agression, 4 OC push. Possibilities are endless for Terran, yet all T has to do to scout Zerg is find 1 tech building. It isn't as difficult as you make it out to be. The ability to scout correctly and conclude what your opponent is doing is divorced from skill. Skill is tied in with micro and macro, scouting and the ability to predict what your opponent is doing comes almost purely from game experience and being able to correctly interpret minor tells in what your opponent is doing. That has little to do with skill.
I see. You're one of those people who think reaction speed and accuracy is what constitutes skill. Let me guess you played FPS games much? Might want to refer to a dictionary sometime.
|
On December 28 2010 05:59 Jayrod wrote:Show nested quote +On December 28 2010 05:13 MozzarellaL wrote:On December 27 2010 19:49 GenesisX wrote:
You're serious? How easy do you think it is to scout Terran? Even if you do manage to sneak an overlord in, its impossible to tell what Terran is doing because they just have so many options. Example: scout 2 gas = fast banshees, fast hellion drop / thor drop, fast tank/marines push. Scout 2 rax = expo, all-in, transition 2 gas to any build listed above, early agression, 4 OC push. Possibilities are endless for Terran, yet all T has to do to scout Zerg is find 1 tech building. It isn't as difficult as you make it out to be. The ability to scout correctly and conclude what your opponent is doing is divorced from skill. Skill is tied in with micro and macro, scouting and the ability to predict what your opponent is doing comes almost purely from game experience and being able to correctly interpret minor tells in what your opponent is doing. That has little to do with skill. completely agree with this... how else can people who are not pros have such a deep knowledge of the game. Some people are students/fans of the game.and know just as much without having to play at the highest level.
There is practically no one who is bad at the game who deep knowledge of the game. Pretty much the only person I can think of is day[9], and I highly doubt he would have trouble making top 200 in less than a month if he put any amount of time into playing the game (assuming he isn't already top 200 calibre on some smurf name).
The ability to scout correctly and conclude what the opponent is doing may not be terribly difficult, but knowing how to do this in an effective way requires a lot of skill. Sure, any idiot can send an overlord in at 6:35 or whatever timing and see "oh he's making a factory," but is his scouting actually beneficial to his build order? Does seeing the factory help him adjust or is it just "oh he's making a factory?"
Good players with a deep understanding of the game scout at appropriate timings for their particular build in order to properly adjust to what their opponent is doing while wasting as few resources as possible. Players who aren't at the top level have a hard time noticing these things and can't really comprehend them at all; they're too busy losing to every possible build the opponent does where they macro well.
Calling mechanical skill the only valid type of skill is absolutely ridiculous, and there are a lot of 2nd teir players (players who are, for example, on the top 200 and do well in smaller tournaments but not MLG, GSL, and so on) who are relatively weak mechanically. Similarly, even among top teir players, some are stronger mechanically while others are somewhat weaker at mechanics but still perform well. Saying that only the mechanically strong players are "skilled" is absurd.
|
Dear OP,
Nothing you said here is skill
From Silent90
|
As a Zerg player I think most people who have a hard time playing Zerg do more so out of their own stupidity, for lack of a better word, than any actual weaknesses with the Zerg. That said I would like to see a few additional Zerg units and perhaps a few more abilities. For example: bring back the Lurker and maybe give us a capital air unit that can contend with Carriers and Battlecruisers effectively. Even if I have to do so 2 or 3 to 1. But what about a "Zergling Frenzy" which would cause Zerglings to attack twice as fast for a period of time, but could not be stopped either until there are no enemeis within their vision range or until that time is up. Those are just examples and random thoughts if someone were to put some real thought into it I'm sure we could come up with more interesting qualities to add to game depth. It's not necessary I would just like to see it done. If only for experimental purposes.
|
On December 27 2010 13:32 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 10:55 AndAgain wrote:On December 27 2010 06:15 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
terran and zerg have highest skill ceilings because they're further away from hitting the protoss ceiling, which is the highest, because they first need to switch race to protoss. You actually think protoss has the highest skill ceiling? I'd really like to know why. i have no idea. the skill ceiling for starcraft in general, for any race, is so high that no one is near reaching it. it will never matter which race has the highest skill ceiling because the race with the lowest ceiling is still far beyond our reach. but i am very tempted to tell the next terran i lose to that i would have won if only my race could take advantage of my skills. that's a new level of trash talking and arrogance.
HAHA well spoken bro! Totally agree
|
This wasn't true until Bliz nerfed BBS out of the game
I would also rather have quadruple production and double speed instead of the mule
|
I'm sorry if this has already been said, but I don't think what the OP said really reflects a skill ceiling. It certainly represents a larger variety of options for the Terran, but I don't know if that necesarrily equates to allowing a greater use of personal skill. Even if it did, couldn't it be argued that other races having to know the responses to each of Terran's options would require an equivalent amount of skill?
I can understand the idea of Terran's synergy allowing more diverse playstyles and a lot more individual tactics, but I don't think that necessarily equates to allowing a greater use of skill and, as I already said, even if it did wouldn't the other player's reaction to it always require a similar amount of skill? I certainly think Terran may end up having the most diverse arsenal, but due to the nature of the game I can't see that actually reflecting any skill ceiling, although it may well reflect a greater... Creativity ceiling? I assume you know what I mean and I feel like I'm rambling, so I'll end the post here.
|
this is very true, im bumping this farther so it gets more noticed
|
I seriously think that sentries just make up for the lack of additional abilities, for protoss at least.
But I see OP's point, though I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing that Terran is how it is now. I agree that the next two patches should add some more change to Zerg and Protoss.
|
On December 27 2010 16:25 Saechiis wrote:Show nested quote +On December 27 2010 15:22 RonaldRayGun wrote:On December 27 2010 15:19 Saechiis wrote:On December 27 2010 14:57 RonaldRayGun wrote:
I looked at the title and I lol'd. Zerg has the highest ceiling, and Protoss second. Terran is forgiving. You can call down mules if you forget to, or if you pose alll your workers. Furthermore, you can scan instead of scouting. You're the perfect example of a brainwashed person. You're very likely to be in bronze and can only repeat false claims made by other bronze noobs. You don't even know what skill ceiling means, so you assume it has something to do with the difficulty of playing a race. Please stop polluting the forums. Absolutely not. I listen to the pros like Artosis and IdrA. Incontrol and NonY also had some harsh words for this mechanic. It seems a little OP. Not in my level of play (gold), but in pro level. 2 Zergs and 2 Protosses think a race other than their own is overpowered, shocking. The MULE is the more forgiving of the three macro mechanics in essence that you can instantly spend your energy when you've been sloppy in your macro. Unfortunately though, you can't just look at it in a vacuum. First of all, the MULE isn't some kind of bonus on top of even economies. Terran is the only race that can't power harvesters, which is kind of key in an economy based RTS. SCV's will always take 17 seconds to build and can be only built 1 at a time per CC. Compare that to Zerg who can built multiple drones at a time and Protoss that can cut down probe build time by 10 seconds per chronoboost, and you'll see that Terran will inevitably lag behind in worker production, and consequently income. Hence the Terran macro mechanic, the MULE, which exists to counteract the disparity in mining workers. The reason that the MULE is more forgiving a macro mechanic in forgetting it, is because Terran macro itself is the most unforgiving of the three races. Since Zerg and Protoss have macro mechanics that boost production it's easier for them to boost out units to spend their money excesses. Terran production can only be boosted by building more production facilities which inevitably means that you can't spend your money if you haven't been macro'ing well. If you're floating 5k gas you can't spend it instantly to morph all your larvae into Ultra's, you can only build a bunch of extra factories/ starports/ add-ons and wait 60 seconds before you can start using them to produce actual units. And once you've burned through your excess gas by building more production facilities than you can actually support from your income ,you're stuck with expensive idle buildings. Sure it seems overpowered when a bad macroíng Terran throws down 8 MULE's and matches his opponents mineral income with it for their 90 second duration. But he can't actually pour that money immediately into units. He's just now getting the money he would have gotten during the 8x 90 seconds before if he had macroed well. Overall, Terran's slower worker production combined with the MULE's ability of ignoring mineral saturation means that Terrans overall stay on 1 base longer, which gives many noobs the idea that "Terran can just 1-base forever since MULE's give infinity minerals". Edit: I feel like I've wasted my time explaining race mechanics to someone who just wants to put his fingers in his ears and yell imba so he doesn't have to face the fact that he's in Gold because he's just not that good a player.
Actually, this is quite an eye-opening post. It makes a decent amount of sense, but unfortunately off-topic. Still, though, I am impressed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/5344/72237352.png)
![[image loading]](http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/3860/thorm.png)
![[image loading]](http://www.dangerousminds.net/images/uploads/1269385664419_thumb.jpeg)
