Blizzard and the All-In - Page 10

On December 11 2010 16:17 whomybuddy wrote:
Terran all-in can definitely stop with force shield the ramp so that the marines can't micro around the zealots.

On December 12 2010 00:10 Baarn wrote:
Terran wouldn't all in if there was effective harassment tools to slow the zerg but those got nerfed. So it's rine+scv rush now until that changes.

On December 12 2010 00:10 Baarn wrote:
Terran wouldn't all in if there was effective harassment tools to slow the zerg but those got nerfed. So it's rine+scv rush now until that changes.

On December 12 2010 00:13 SovSov wrote:

You think buffing Terran's harassment options later in the game will solve this problem? lol...

On December 12 2010 00:17 HiHiByeBye wrote:

wat do you mean later in the game?

you think by making maps where terrans cant rush and zerg can get a macro lead every game is the solution?

On December 12 2010 00:13 SovSov wrote:

You think buffing Terran's harassment options later in the game will solve this problem? lol...

On December 12 2010 00:12 HiHiByeBye wrote:


Totally agreed. Bigger maps are fine as long as terran can still harrass to stay even. Or else they get way behind way too fast.

Hellions dont do much. Reapers are out. The only thing terran has is banshee and it comes quite late and it can be easily delt with

On December 11 2010 23:56 HiHiByeBye wrote:


Ya toss players has no reason to complain . . .

on the other hand toss all ins with void rays and zealot is nearly unstoppable.

I just feel like all-in are the only thing that works for terran now because they can bearly compete with protoss mid game and gets dominated late game.

and TvZ is the same.

The only real advantage terran has is early game. Why not take advantage of that?

On December 11 2010 07:00 `Zapdos wrote:


Even on the bigger rush distance maps like Scrap, Xel, Blistering, and Shakuras the all ins are still incredibly strong and hardly watered down, I think it has a lot to do with the extra macro mechanics that weren't in Brood War more so then anything else.

On December 11 2010 07:01 SoLaR[i.C] wrote:
First of all, all-ins have been (and will continue to be) part of EVERY strategy game. Big risks will sometimes yield big rewards, and both players need to accept their role within this mindset and play accordingly. The obsession with macro has led to an inordinate amount of hatred for any form aggressive play off one base, regardless of whether or not it's the best way to punish eco-hungry players. People equating expansions and mass unit production with skill are completely off base. The game has shown to be remarkably balanced in the early game with some small, map enabled discrepancies. Leave it be.

But I must agree with what most people are saying, blizzard should really try harder when it comes to testing out new maps: they have a PTR so why not? Maybe set up some kind of MOTW selection that shifts often, making it so that more maps can be tested in normal ladder play (also motivating people to play these maps in custom games for practice), kind of like throwing spaghetti at the wall to see what sticks, we'll eventually have overall better maps. I'm pretty sure that is what most of the community would agree on trying at the moment and I for one would love blizzard if they were to do something like that.

On December 12 2010 00:39 oZii wrote:



QFT leave the game be.

The OP's arguments are somewhat biased. This thread assumes that everyone doesn't like the current state or that all-ins are seen as bad by everyone. One of his arguments is that all-ins are boring to watch which is simply not the case for alot of people.

The amount of all-ins will reduce as people learn to deal with them if people keep asking for changes from blizz then there will continue to be alot of all-ins because people will have to learn the timings again depending ont he change. Starcraft 2 just needs to settle right now and stop being tinkered with. I think 2.0 patch will be one that lasts for a bit. They are really running this through the ringer so just give it time.

On December 11 2010 06:41 goldenwitch wrote:
If, hypothetically, the game reaches a point where the most effective strategies are all in off of one or two base, is it blizzards place to rebalance the game to a point where it becomes effective to play a longer game?

I can see some arguments for both sides of this debate, so I'll go ahead and post them so we have a spot to kick this discussion off from.

Yes, blizzard has a responsibility to make the game enjoyable as a spectator sport and as a game.
- A game of all ins is not very entertaining to watch.
- It takes much less skill to just put all your eggs in one basket in the early game and pray you win. As a result the skill ceiling is lower, requiring less real skill to reach the "top".
- As the developers, blizzard is not only allowed, but should be required to move the game to a point where people can enjoy both watching and playing.

No, blizzard should keep their hands off the game and the players will work out the best way to win.
- Every time blizzard changes something they have the potential to "break" the current balance.
- These "all ins" are viable strategies. By lowering the number of potential viable strategies blizzard would make the game less entertaining to watch and play.
- A developers role is to make the game and only fix absolutely urgent things. The metagame changes frequently and if blizzard responds each time they upset the natural flow of learning that players went through with sc1.


What do you guys think? Personally I think that if the game does end up in a complete all in fest that blizzard should scale back the all ins by turning basic unit abilities into upgrades (ie. marines have 4 range with a +1 range upgrade) or by moving things around (ie. move warp gate tech to twilight council, but buff early protoss ground)

On December 11 2010 23:56 HiHiByeBye wrote:


Ya toss players has no reason to complain . . .

on the other hand toss all ins with void rays and zealot is nearly unstoppable.

I just feel like all-in are the only thing that works for terran now because they can bearly compete with protoss mid game and gets dominated late game.

and TvZ is the same.

The only real advantage terran has is early game. Why not take advantage of that?

On December 12 2010 00:51 Cephei wrote:


Sorry OP but what you say is just wrong, games can and very often do go to late games. Rebalancing games to make then even longer is a really bad idea for a number of reasons.

1/ Long games are fun to watch and play yes, but, imagine nearly every game you watch and play going on +30 minutes, it would get very boring very quickly.
2/ Zerg and Protoss have such strong late games compared to Terran it would just be unfair.
3/ All-ins and cheeses are an integral part of the game, it would cripple the fun knowing you don't have to worry about anything early on.
4/ Long games are meant to happen naturally when players lock horns and can't find a way to take each other down, 'manufacturing' long games won't have the same appeal.

Also to say all-in's require not very much skill is ridiculous, especially from the way you talk I assume you base your points on the GSL. EVERYTHING takes skill in the GSL, yes you need less macro management for an all-in but you need far far far more micro management to either all-in or defend an all-in.

The game needs to be made fun to play, the game is not designed for a spectator sport, the spectator side grew out of the game, so the arguement to make the game more 'fun to watch', lol, I'm really glad that the people who think that don't work for blizzard, they would destroy the game so quickly.

All-in's are just as fun and exciting to watch because take the GSL, they have to be executed near perfectly to work, it just takes a different type of skill than a macro game.

Lastly, please don't come up with these ideas for balance because 99.9% anyone who comes up with their own balance ideas always suggest pure garbage and also only come up with things that will benefit their race.

On December 12 2010 01:01 lowercase wrote:


First off, how is attacking with void rays and zealots an all-in? No probes come off the line, your economy is still fine, it's just a good timing push.

Terran does have an early game advantage, I agree. Reaper harass into banshee was a ridiculous build before 1.2 took reapers out of the equation. I often die to a one-base marauder timing push, but I don't complain and call it cheese or an all-in.

One-base play is not all-in, people, it's just a strategy! I don't consider it cheese unless you pull your workers off the line.