EPTalso using fast units especially hellions and medivac drops, can even see some players using speed reapers. obviously it all depend on maps layout but that is the general idea. i hope all the scv+marine bitbybits terrans and i-can-only-4gate protoss players vanish.
[D] Terran play in bigger maps? - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
PredY
Czech Republic1731 Posts
also using fast units especially hellions and medivac drops, can even see some players using speed reapers. obviously it all depend on maps layout but that is the general idea. i hope all the scv+marine bitbybits terrans and i-can-only-4gate protoss players vanish. | ||
|
Chise
Japan507 Posts
On February 05 2011 05:49 skeldark wrote: post like this and the 1 just shows that you (me) waste your time here. you really think a master t never played a macro game? never tryed it allways go allin in every game? i really think a discussion over any kind of game strategie about sc2 is not possible on tl, signing out... Did you even read my post? I never said that a Master T never played a Macro game. But I'm pretty sure there are some (maybe even a lot?) of Master Terrans out there who prefer 1 or 2 Base play. This means, they are less experienced in long Macro games. It's as simple as that. | ||
|
Somoner
United States4 Posts
| ||
|
Treemonkeys
United States2082 Posts
On February 05 2011 05:43 Bagi wrote: Believe me, Jinro is an inspiration. But not even pros can seem replicate his strategies. Even Jinro does lot of banshee play and other smart harass in his matchups. All of it will be harder to execute with larger maps. What makes you think they can't replicate his strategies? You know they have tried? You know they even want to? It will be interesting to see how it plays out, but I don't think a terran macro style is out of the question on huge maps. They way I see it zerg can drone up all he wants, he still is not going to offensively attack a 200/200 terran army. Meanwhile terran can slow push around the map to take base after base, putting PFs and turrets all over, then eventually stacking up production facilities before pushing. Currently it's just that terran is so powerful at winning a shorter game, they have little incentive to even try to drag the game out and still have an advantage. | ||
|
XXXSmOke
United States1333 Posts
On February 05 2011 05:46 Chise wrote: Well, this is pretty much the answer. The main problem I see is that most Terrans don't even try to play Macro games. Obviously, if only one out of 10 games you play is a Macro game, you will lose to people who play Macro games as often as they can, simply because they are more experienced. Do you really think thats good logic?? Every T just decides to not play a macro game?? Theres a reason why we 1/2 base attack, because every T knows that as the game goes longer the chances of winning grow shorter. This has been discussed to death, but the point is now that the discussion and debate over the past few months has become a reality as the new PTR is showing what maps are to come. | ||
|
sadyque
Romania251 Posts
On February 05 2011 05:44 love.less wrote: your basing this of your own experiences of course but i for one dont rely on "1 or 2 base plays" with "most of my strength coming in early game". terran have some of the best tools for long macro games on bigger maps.. seige tanks, sensor towers, planetary fortress, very cost efficient drop play capability to name just a few. i think the real problem lies in the mentality passed on by a lot of current "pros" who use early aggressive on few bases to cover up the lack of macro managment they have and hopefully bigger maps will seperate the few terrans, in my eyes, that are actually good starcraft players from the many who just seem to be good at taking advantage of the chances they are given due to the current map pool I have no idea why you guys think pro terran players cant macro. MarineKing never won/lost a game in GSL before 3 bases. IMMvP has some of the most awesome macro out there. Jinro went for macro games vs Idra. The best part of Sjow's play is his macro(and game sense -.-). Good terrans CAN macro. Crap players (zerg protoss or terran) CANT macro. It has nothing to do with the maps. The one thing terrans cant do is warp in crap anywhere or have awesome mobility like the zerg army. And dont say medivacs. They were good when they were faster. Now sometimes is better to move ur shit on the ground , w8 for the medivac then load and drop... I do agree that terran is stronger in the first 10 minutes of the game mostly because of the short rush distances and crappy all ins with scvs...But after 10 minutes we are screwed. I believe that after a few months (when protoss and zerg learn how to use the map distances..cuz they dont now) terrans will be screwed big time. | ||
|
Bagi
Germany6799 Posts
On February 05 2011 05:51 Somoner wrote: You seem to think larger maps make drops/banshee harass harder. Larger maps wont necessarily make it harder. If anything, it may make it better at certain times because of the fact that the opponents army (if not in a super defensive position inside the base) will have to move further to come to the rescue of a base being dropped, or they will have to invest more in static defense the more they expand, meaning their army size will be smaller, still giving you the ability to move around the map easier. This is true, and I tried to address it towards the end of my post, not very clearly though. Still, its a lategame thing. The current early game harass that aims for a lead however will be much less efficient. And its one of the more important things in the current terran play. | ||
|
infinity21
Canada6683 Posts
However, warpgate technology allows 4 gates to be just as strong on bigger maps which means Terran has to spend just as much on their defense. I think this us fundamentally flawed and you can't really have maps of varying rush distances. Maybe the only upside is that robo and stargate units come a bit later but those can be proxied as well. | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On February 05 2011 05:50 PredY wrote: i've been playing those big maps for some time and i can tell you, we'll see more of 2/3 base timing pushes with big upgrades also using fast units especially hellions and medivac drops, can even see some players using speed reapers. obviously it all depend on maps layout but that is the general idea. i hope all the scv+marine bitbybits terrans and i-can-only-4gate protoss players vanish. Larger maps only decrease the effectiveness of a 4gate marginally. | ||
|
PredY
Czech Republic1731 Posts
On February 05 2011 05:58 FabledIntegral wrote: Larger maps only decrease the effectiveness of a 4gate marginally. yep, but also you can more easily scout if he is going proxy pylons, also takes more time for his gateway units to get to your base, can't put that much early pressure so you can scout more etc.. | ||
|
Cyanocyst
2222 Posts
On February 05 2011 05:42 FabledIntegral wrote: This has been discussed to death, I feel, nothing new. At the very least, Terran might be represented less in tournaments. Regardless of whether or not T is OP, I'd like to see more of a 33-33-33 distribution in tournies. This might help achieve that. It's not like Terrans are going to disappear completely with the amount of them that we have. Maybe this might cause some to even switch races, which would be awesome. Why would it be awesome of they switched races? Most likely they would fall out of the pro scene if they did. | ||
|
freetgy
1720 Posts
| ||
|
gogogadgetflow
United States2583 Posts
On February 05 2011 05:39 PBJ wrote: The Terran game is all about positioning, especially in TvZ. Luckily for Terran, they have the best units for controlling space and dictating positioning in the game, along with the best static defenses. This is a huge strength for Terran that tends to get ignored. The issue is that these strong points will get weaker on larger maps. Perhaps, as day[9] suggested, there should be some playing around with allowing maximum 300 food. At any rate, Terran also has very strong harass options, which should get stronger on larger maps, and hopefully balance out the change for Terran | ||
|
Oceaniax
146 Posts
On February 05 2011 05:43 Bagi wrote: Believe me, Jinro is an inspiration. But not even pros can seem replicate his strategies. Even Jinro does lot of banshee play and other smart harass in his matchups. All of it will be harder to execute with larger maps. As maps get bigger, units must be spread thinner to defend the wide area and more vulnerabilities open. While very, very early game harassment will likely become harder, have you considered the possibility that mid to late game harassment will become signifigantly easier for terran to exploit? I don't think it's necessary for terran to be successful with early game gimmicky harrassments to be successful. While i'm not accusing anyone here in particular, the amount of highly ranked people that have gotten to where they are merely because they've smoothed out some harrassment at the 6 minute mark followed up by a 1-2 base timing push is rather astounding. | ||
|
dcberkeley
Canada844 Posts
On February 05 2011 06:00 PredY wrote: i still find it funny people actually think terran is "weaker" after 10 or so minutes. that's just ridiculous. marine/marauder gives you edge in early/mid game. what do you expect when you don't win right away, that you can combat collosi/HTs with mainy T1 and T1.5 units? get real. how about trying to play to terran late game strengs as well - mech/air tech. the thing that it's not yet figured out doesn't mean "oohh terran won't win anything on big maps". cut the crap already, seriously getting sick of it. yep, but also you can more easily scout if he is going proxy pylons, also takes more time for his gateway units to get to your base, can't put that much early pressure so you can scout more etc.. Have you tried going mech against colossus ball + HT? I would like a replay where that works. | ||
|
DyEnasTy
United States3714 Posts
I think alot of the balance changes are because of the shitty maps we've been playing on. And larger maps might bring out the larger imbalances. | ||
|
kodas
United States418 Posts
On February 05 2011 06:00 PredY wrote: i still find it funny people actually think terran is "weaker" after 10 or so minutes. that's just ridiculous. marine/marauder gives you edge in early/mid game. what do you expect when you don't win right away, that you can combat collosi/HTs with mainy T1 and T1.5 units? get real. how about trying to play to terran late game strengs as well - mech/air tech. the thing that it's not yet figured out doesn't mean "oohh terran won't win anything on big maps". cut the crap already, seriously getting sick of it. yep, but also you can more easily scout if he is going proxy pylons, also takes more time for his gateway units to get to your base, can't put that much early pressure so you can scout more etc.. This is so bias, it gave me aids. I don't think you understand the fundamental reasoning behind going MMM, Terran's need it to survive the mid game. It gives us the ability to pressure and keep expanding keeping the game on an even footing. If you go straight mech from the start you will die to most common col/stalker midgames or you are force to turtle with tanks and then the Protoss will just out macro you. If you try at any point to trans from bio to mech, the Protoss will kill you. my 2 cents prolly just as bias  User was warned for this post | ||
|
h0neyBadger
184 Posts
On February 05 2011 06:00 PredY wrote: i still find it funny people actually think terran is "weaker" after 10 or so minutes. that's just ridiculous. marine/marauder gives you edge in early/mid game. what do you expect when you don't win right away, that you can combat collosi/HTs with mainy T1 and T1.5 units? get real. how about trying to play to terran late game strengs as well - mech/air tech. the thing that it's not yet figured out doesn't mean "oohh terran won't win anything on big maps". cut the crap already, seriously getting sick of it. sums it up quite well for me. the game has to evolve, we have had small maps for long enough now, im interested to see how things will change on the larger maps. | ||
|
dekuschrub
United States2069 Posts
against zerg yeah you dont wanna get in a worker building contest, but even then, builds that pressure while you take a fast 3rd and get up to like 180-200 with marine/tank/thor are completely awesome. yeah you can't win with 2 rax or other pressure builds, but the bigger maps will just reward players who can transition into a longterm plan more, rather than just making it so that terran can basically win/get a gigantic lead in the stupidly close positions on like metal. | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On February 05 2011 06:00 PredY wrote: i still find it funny people actually think terran is "weaker" after 10 or so minutes. that's just ridiculous. marine/marauder gives you edge in early/mid game. what do you expect when you don't win right away, that you can combat collosi/HTs with mainy T1 and T1.5 units? get real. how about trying to play to terran late game strengs as well - mech/air tech. the thing that it's not yet figured out doesn't mean "oohh terran won't win anything on big maps". cut the crap already, seriously getting sick of it. yep, but also you can more easily scout if he is going proxy pylons, also takes more time for his gateway units to get to your base, can't put that much early pressure so you can scout more etc.. Haha hence the marginally part. | ||
| ||
