|
On August 08 2011 07:19 HolyArrow wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2011 07:07 kodas wrote:On August 08 2011 06:45 HolyArrow wrote:On August 08 2011 06:34 kodas wrote:On August 08 2011 05:47 HolyArrow wrote:On August 08 2011 05:30 kodas wrote:On August 08 2011 05:22 Yaotzin wrote:On August 08 2011 05:00 MonsieurGrimm wrote:
holy hell and people call zerg the whiner race D: ? This is nothing compared to the endless streams of Zerg whine that happened over the months, despite Protoss currently being nearly as shit as Zerg was at their worst (scv allin, 2proxy gate, close positions etc etc). Dunno if it's even whine when it's so obvious subjectively (watch GSL vPs and laugh), and is also reflected in the data. Protoss is just shitty. You whine an awful lot, I see you in LR thread all the time complaining about everything really, Protoss isn't doing terrible everywhere but Korea. Quit exasperating it. In other words, Protoss is doing terrible in the only place that really matters, if we accept Korea as representing the highest levels of play. The big difference between Protoss whining and Zerg whining is that Protoss have fallacious myths about being OP/easy to play associated with them, which amplifies the annoyance people feel when Protoss performs badly in how it adds insult to injury from the sheer contradiction of it all. No in other words, Terrans found a good allin that skewed the results, either the 1/1/1 gets nerfed or the Protoss firgure out how to hold, doesn't mean the game is fundamentally broken. The problem is that 1/1/1 is incredibly difficult to nerf (because none of the units in it are too strong on their own), it's been around since Beta, and Protosses still don't have a consistently effective response for it. The fact that Terran is just designed so well in how its units complement each other can constitute an argument for how the game is "fundamentally broken" - because the other two races aren't designed well enough in contrast. As Beyonder has said, this seems to be more of a design problem rather than a balance problem, and one could argue that a design problem constitutes "fundamental brokenness" because it can't be effectively fixed by just buffing or nerfing stuff - you need to change the matchup at its core, whether it means giving Protoss an effective harass unit as Dustin Browder said in an interview, or through some other means. I could say the same about Col and Hts, I see every time in the late game the Terran over commits to either vikings or Ghosts and suffers because of it. The problem comes because Terran has to HARD counter Hts or col and when the Protoss switches until the Terran is caught without the correct comp, he loses his whole army and Protoss just uses warp gate rebuild his army and roll the Terrans production. What? Go read Beyonder's post. I don't think you understood what is meant by a design problem. In regards to your actual response, I don't see what you're describing happening all that often. Name some games in which that happens, because I can easily name tons of games in which 1-1-1 is wins the day easily.
Nani vs ThorZain EU blizz invite, and I can't think of the other series off the top of my head, I know it was an Assembly game, towards the end
|
Terran players are just so much more skillful. You know how much apm and skill it takes to "multitask" a drop? It's so easy to defend drops. And then upgrades definitely do not help terran. 1-1 is terrible. I don't think a good terran should lose to a toss.
Maybe a tweak to stalkers would do the trick. Only problem would be infinite stalker balls in PvZ but that's mre a matter of poor rallying on Zs side (and fair considring that the opposite is possible with masses of roaches rolling over toss)
Your statement is very weird. There's no way terran players can be more skilled on a general scale. There's just no way that 1/3rd of the higher-skilled sc2 population decided to play terran. The fact of the matter is either that the race is i) easier or ii) overpowered
If it were easier then Korean statistics would show that terran is at 50% (because Koreans play a lot and can play "harder" races just as good as "easier"
But the statistics show otherwise, which means it's simply overpowered.
On top of that drops are MUCH easier done than dealt with. You simply shift queue your units and your opponent has to react. Not to mention protoss armies are good in bulk, whereas terran armies are extremely effective in small numbers as well as large. (4 marauders + medivac can wreck havoc, whereas 4 stalkers would never accomplish much whatsoever).
Upgrades help all races.. I don't know where you're getting this. Terran has some of the highest dps units (marines... marauders) and upgrades just make them so much more effective. Notice when terrans land good emps a tosses army just vanishes?
Which brings me to my next point.
High templars simply do damage with psionic storm (which is a research skill and you have to wait for energy)
Ghosts on the other hand makes sentries absolutely useless, high templars absolutely useless, and on top of that instant shields gone. Point being, even if you miss the casters, you've still done all you needed.
Now we understand that ghosts > high templars by far. What's more is the skill level required to each unit varies by far as well.
A protoss has to first know where the ghosts are coming from with some kind of detection (observers, which are extremely easily spotted and scanned in higher level gaems). The protoss than has to split his high templars and feedback the ghosts in a 200/200 ball where they're extremely hard to find ( not to mention they're skinnier than marines and medivacs cover them).
A terran has to simply lay down a scan, (late game terrans have so many orbitals, and therefore scans) which a protoss can do absolutely nothing about but feel scared due to his opponent having every single bit of map info he needs.
A terran than has to simply emp as much as he can (he should already have the positioning advantage because he can scan as much as he wants, pretty much a maphack on your opponents army). Now a protoss player who doesn't split his high templars loses automatically, one who does split his hts still loses because EMP is an AoE skill. What should really be is emp only takes off shields, and have some other method of "pont and click" skill to remove energy. Protoss essentially relies on tanky core units & casters. When there's one unit in the terran arsenal who can effectively take out both with little to no skill requirement (AoE + instant + ranged) than it's very hard for protoss.
Now just look at the skill difference needed to use a ghost compared to a ht.
|
On August 08 2011 07:34 kodas wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2011 07:19 HolyArrow wrote:On August 08 2011 07:07 kodas wrote:On August 08 2011 06:45 HolyArrow wrote:On August 08 2011 06:34 kodas wrote:On August 08 2011 05:47 HolyArrow wrote:On August 08 2011 05:30 kodas wrote:On August 08 2011 05:22 Yaotzin wrote:On August 08 2011 05:00 MonsieurGrimm wrote:
holy hell and people call zerg the whiner race D: ? This is nothing compared to the endless streams of Zerg whine that happened over the months, despite Protoss currently being nearly as shit as Zerg was at their worst (scv allin, 2proxy gate, close positions etc etc). Dunno if it's even whine when it's so obvious subjectively (watch GSL vPs and laugh), and is also reflected in the data. Protoss is just shitty. You whine an awful lot, I see you in LR thread all the time complaining about everything really, Protoss isn't doing terrible everywhere but Korea. Quit exasperating it. In other words, Protoss is doing terrible in the only place that really matters, if we accept Korea as representing the highest levels of play. The big difference between Protoss whining and Zerg whining is that Protoss have fallacious myths about being OP/easy to play associated with them, which amplifies the annoyance people feel when Protoss performs badly in how it adds insult to injury from the sheer contradiction of it all. No in other words, Terrans found a good allin that skewed the results, either the 1/1/1 gets nerfed or the Protoss firgure out how to hold, doesn't mean the game is fundamentally broken. The problem is that 1/1/1 is incredibly difficult to nerf (because none of the units in it are too strong on their own), it's been around since Beta, and Protosses still don't have a consistently effective response for it. The fact that Terran is just designed so well in how its units complement each other can constitute an argument for how the game is "fundamentally broken" - because the other two races aren't designed well enough in contrast. As Beyonder has said, this seems to be more of a design problem rather than a balance problem, and one could argue that a design problem constitutes "fundamental brokenness" because it can't be effectively fixed by just buffing or nerfing stuff - you need to change the matchup at its core, whether it means giving Protoss an effective harass unit as Dustin Browder said in an interview, or through some other means. I could say the same about Col and Hts, I see every time in the late game the Terran over commits to either vikings or Ghosts and suffers because of it. The problem comes because Terran has to HARD counter Hts or col and when the Protoss switches until the Terran is caught without the correct comp, he loses his whole army and Protoss just uses warp gate rebuild his army and roll the Terrans production. What? Go read Beyonder's post. I don't think you understood what is meant by a design problem. In regards to your actual response, I don't see what you're describing happening all that often. Name some games in which that happens, because I can easily name tons of games in which 1-1-1 is wins the day easily. Nani vs ThorZain EU blizz invite, and I can't think of the other series off the top of my head, I know it was an Assembly game
So... you can name two games. Doesn't sound like a huge or widespread issue to me. I'll name you plenty of games in which 1-1-1 wins the day if you want, but I'm sure you already know of them if you follow the GSL.
|
But this comes back to my original point - how many GOOD protoss are there in gsl? Like those at MVP, Nestea, Bomber, Losira, Dongraegu, MarineKing, Leenock, Nada - and many other zerg/terran - level of skill? Well I guess you could say MC and Huk and...well I can't think of anyone else other than Puzzle - who just won code A in a PvP finals!
I don't think any race should be qqing about imbalance tbh, we have puzzle winning code A - protoss success at homestory/dreamhack - terran success in mlg's - and zvz finals in code S. It seems any race can win if they put in the effort daily like koreans, and maybe a bit of raw talent.
You're sort of contradicting yourself by saying that any race can "win if they put in the effort daily like koreans" and at the same time mentioning that there aren't many shining protosses in the GSL - the biggest korean tournament.
|
On August 08 2011 07:28 warblob004 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2011 07:03 Sabu113 wrote:On August 08 2011 06:52 rpgalon wrote:
and after a year, people still think that protoss is the best race and the protoss players are just bad... Terran players are just so much more skillful. You know how much apm and skill it takes to "multitask" a drop? It's so easy to defend drops. And then upgrades definitely do not help terran. 1-1 is terrible. I don't think a good terran should lose to a toss. Maybe a tweak to stalkers would do the trick. Only problem would be infinite stalker balls in PvZ but that's mre a matter of poor rallying on Zs side (and fair considring that the opposite is possible with masses of roaches rolling over toss) I don't quite understand what you mean, when I play terran I find the initiator of a drop to have a MUCH easier time microing than the defender. As the defender, you must adjust to the size and effectiveness of the drop, whether is BFH or MM, and be constantly on lookout for the drop, as the dropper, you don't need to be on lookout for the drop, you're only looking at your own drop Its like trying to look for a criminal versus stealing a chocolate bar Anyhow, looks like toss needs a bit of a buff in PvZ, and Z seems to be quite the underdog in TvZ lol.
I think he was just trolling you, look at his sign.
There was one time on the PTR where gateway units were produced as fast from gateways as from warpgates, to fix PvP. Eventually only the fix for sentries was kept. Do you know why? I couldn't play the PTR, was it that imbalanced? I guess there were stronger proxy gates but well, proxy gates isn't exactly your insta kill cheese like 1-1-1 seems to be at times, it seems defendable, right?
We can see that PvP didn't get quite so fixed as 4gate is still a very strong build, but wouldn't those reduced production times on gateways allow us to defend more easily very early game and put back some pressure to scout?
Moreover you wouldn't have to spend 50 gas on a research you don't especially need if you don't plan to attack soon and you could actually get a stargate faster, with a forge or robo for detection. I still think that stargate play is the most reliable way to counter those 1-1-1 pushes. What do you think of that?
On the 1-1-1, I think that it's nearly impossible to nerf without being too harsh on terran. It'll only be solved by top players showing us a way to defend it (you can theorycraft as much as I want, if you don't face top players, you're only playing a weaker version of the all-in) or with HotS, hopefully.
My humble analysis is that 1-1-1's strength stems mainly from terran being very strong on one base:
_ Mule extending mineral saturation
_ Swappable addons to maximize production capability without over-investing in expensive production buildings
_ Very efficient units in small numbers (banshee and marine, tank not so much)
_ One unit/upgrade can completely change the gameplay to defend the push (raven, cloak, sometimes even thors, scv or not, stim or no stim)
|
On August 08 2011 07:39 NineteenSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +
Terran players are just so much more skillful. You know how much apm and skill it takes to "multitask" a drop? It's so easy to defend drops. And then upgrades definitely do not help terran. 1-1 is terrible. I don't think a good terran should lose to a toss.
Maybe a tweak to stalkers would do the trick. Only problem would be infinite stalker balls in PvZ but that's mre a matter of poor rallying on Zs side (and fair considring that the opposite is possible with masses of roaches rolling over toss)
Your statement is very weird. There's no way terran players can be more skilled on a general scale. There's just no way that 1/3rd of the higher-skilled sc2 population decided to play terran. The fact of the matter is either that the race is i) easier or ii) overpowered If it were easier than Korean statistics would show that terran is at 50% (because Koreans play a lot and can play "harder" races just as good as "easier" But the statistics show otherwise, which means it's simply overpowered. On top of that drops are MUCH easier done than dealt with. You simply shift queue your units and your opponent has to react. Not to mention protoss armies are good in bulk, whereas terran armies are extremely effective in small numbers as well as large. (4 marauders + medivac can wreck havoc, whereas 4 stalkers would never accomplish much whatsoever). Upgrades help all races.. I don't know where you're getting this. Terran has some of the highest dps units (marines... marauders) and upgrades just make them so much more effective. Notice when terrans land good emps a tosses army just vanishes? Which brings me to my next point. High templars simply do damage with psionic storm (which is a research skill and you have to wait for energy) Ghosts on the other hand makes sentries absolutely useless, high templars absolutely useless, and on top of that instant shields gone. Point being, even if you miss the casters, you've still done all you needed. Now we understand that ghosts > high templars by far. What's more is the skill level required to each unit varies by far as well. A protoss has to first know where the ghosts are coming from with some kind of detection (observers, which are extremely easily spotted and scanned in higher level gaems). The protoss than has to split has high templars and feedback the ghosts in a 200/200 ball where they're extremely hard to find ( not to mention they're skinnier than marines and medivacs cover them). A terran has to simply lay down a scan, (late game terrans have so many orbitals, and therefore scans) which a protoss can do absolutely nothing about but feel scared due to his opponent having every single bit of map info he needs. A terran than has to simply emp as much as he can (he should already have the positioning advantage because he can scan as much as he wants, pretty much a maphack on your opponents army). Now a protoss player who doesn't split his high templars loses automatically, one who does split his hts still loses because EMP is an AoE skill. What should really be is emp only takes off shields, and have some other method of "pont and click" skill to remove energy. Protoss essentially relies on tanky core units & casters. When there's one unit in the terran arsenal who can effectively take out both with little to no skill requirement (AoE + instant + ranged) than it's very hard for protoss. Now just look at the skill difference needed to use a ghost compared to a ht.
Watch Nani vs ThorZaiN , Thor repeatly EMPs everything and still comes out even or even losses the main enagement lategame, where the Toss reinforces much faster anyways, so you DONT need to win the fight, you just need to trade about even.
|
On August 08 2011 07:18 Jesushooves wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2011 07:10 NineteenSC2 wrote:On August 08 2011 06:54 Jesushooves wrote:On August 08 2011 06:49 NineteenSC2 wrote:
Lol no more QQing from NA terrans please. Everytime a terran tells me toss is op I tell them statistics say otherwise and terran will most likely get nerfed, but they think I'm lying lol. If they still think toss is OP I feel bad for when they get nerfed in the upcoming patch. Just keep in mind last month toss was winning 51.7% of the time vs terran globally ^^ That's more than a month ago, and it's not globally that's just international. Like I said, NA terrans are just lacking and their excuse is imbalance. If you look at Korea last month terran is still ahead of protoss full mu-wise and tvp-wise as well. Here's another thing to ponder: Terran has been on TOP of the food chain for more than 7 months now (Since January) in Korea. And internationally it's been on top of the food chain for 7 months as well, except for June when it was tied with the other races. But this comes back to my original point - how many GOOD protoss are there in gsl? Like those at MVP, Nestea, Bomber, Losira, Dongraegu, MarineKing, Leenock, Nada - and many other zerg/terran - level of skill? Well I guess you could say MC and Huk and...well I can't think of anyone else other than Puzzle - who just won code A in a PvP finals! I don't think any race should be qqing about imbalance tbh, we have puzzle winning code A - protoss success at homestory/dreamhack - terran success in mlg's - and zvz finals in code S. It seems any race can win if they put in the effort daily like koreans, and maybe a bit of raw talent.
That acutally raises the point, out of the thousands of people that play the game, you think somehow there's a shortage of talent that pick protoss? Seems highly unlikely because if all the races are generally equal there should be a spread that is atleast some what reasonable. And if the good players are picking zerg and terran because of "higher skill caps" which result in better play from them then Protoss design simply needs to be changed.
|
lol at the argument that the better players in Korea just all decided to play Terran and the crappy ones chose Protoss. Using that logic, no balancing and tweaking will ever be needed as it's not the game's fault the win rates are so skewed. Truth is Protoss at the highest level in Korea has always had a hard time outside of MC.
|
On August 08 2011 07:34 kodas wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2011 07:19 HolyArrow wrote:On August 08 2011 07:07 kodas wrote:On August 08 2011 06:45 HolyArrow wrote:On August 08 2011 06:34 kodas wrote:On August 08 2011 05:47 HolyArrow wrote:On August 08 2011 05:30 kodas wrote:On August 08 2011 05:22 Yaotzin wrote:On August 08 2011 05:00 MonsieurGrimm wrote:
holy hell and people call zerg the whiner race D: ? This is nothing compared to the endless streams of Zerg whine that happened over the months, despite Protoss currently being nearly as shit as Zerg was at their worst (scv allin, 2proxy gate, close positions etc etc). Dunno if it's even whine when it's so obvious subjectively (watch GSL vPs and laugh), and is also reflected in the data. Protoss is just shitty. You whine an awful lot, I see you in LR thread all the time complaining about everything really, Protoss isn't doing terrible everywhere but Korea. Quit exasperating it. In other words, Protoss is doing terrible in the only place that really matters, if we accept Korea as representing the highest levels of play. The big difference between Protoss whining and Zerg whining is that Protoss have fallacious myths about being OP/easy to play associated with them, which amplifies the annoyance people feel when Protoss performs badly in how it adds insult to injury from the sheer contradiction of it all. No in other words, Terrans found a good allin that skewed the results, either the 1/1/1 gets nerfed or the Protoss firgure out how to hold, doesn't mean the game is fundamentally broken. The problem is that 1/1/1 is incredibly difficult to nerf (because none of the units in it are too strong on their own), it's been around since Beta, and Protosses still don't have a consistently effective response for it. The fact that Terran is just designed so well in how its units complement each other can constitute an argument for how the game is "fundamentally broken" - because the other two races aren't designed well enough in contrast. As Beyonder has said, this seems to be more of a design problem rather than a balance problem, and one could argue that a design problem constitutes "fundamental brokenness" because it can't be effectively fixed by just buffing or nerfing stuff - you need to change the matchup at its core, whether it means giving Protoss an effective harass unit as Dustin Browder said in an interview, or through some other means. I could say the same about Col and Hts, I see every time in the late game the Terran over commits to either vikings or Ghosts and suffers because of it. The problem comes because Terran has to HARD counter Hts or col and when the Protoss switches until the Terran is caught without the correct comp, he loses his whole army and Protoss just uses warp gate rebuild his army and roll the Terrans production. What? Go read Beyonder's post. I don't think you understood what is meant by a design problem. In regards to your actual response, I don't see what you're describing happening all that often. Name some games in which that happens, because I can easily name tons of games in which 1-1-1 is wins the day easily. Nani vs ThorZain EU blizz invite, and I can't think of the other series off the top of my head, I know it was an Assembly game, towards the end
You mean Tarson v Naniwa where Tarson did it cross map on Metal with a cloaked banshee variation where the cloaked banshees got 3 kills, followed by him bringing almost all of his scvs to the middle of the map, staying there for a minute, realizing he forgot siege, then waiting with all of those scvs with his army outside of naniwa's base while waiting for siege mode to finish? That game was like a zerg 6 pooling, followed by making a 5 hatchery at his natural and speed before moving to attack.
|
On August 08 2011 07:45 ZenithM wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2011 07:28 warblob004 wrote:On August 08 2011 07:03 Sabu113 wrote:On August 08 2011 06:52 rpgalon wrote:
and after a year, people still think that protoss is the best race and the protoss players are just bad... Terran players are just so much more skillful. You know how much apm and skill it takes to "multitask" a drop? It's so easy to defend drops. And then upgrades definitely do not help terran. 1-1 is terrible. I don't think a good terran should lose to a toss. Maybe a tweak to stalkers would do the trick. Only problem would be infinite stalker balls in PvZ but that's mre a matter of poor rallying on Zs side (and fair considring that the opposite is possible with masses of roaches rolling over toss) I don't quite understand what you mean, when I play terran I find the initiator of a drop to have a MUCH easier time microing than the defender. As the defender, you must adjust to the size and effectiveness of the drop, whether is BFH or MM, and be constantly on lookout for the drop, as the dropper, you don't need to be on lookout for the drop, you're only looking at your own drop Its like trying to look for a criminal versus stealing a chocolate bar Anyhow, looks like toss needs a bit of a buff in PvZ, and Z seems to be quite the underdog in TvZ lol. I think he was just trolling you, look at his sign. There was one time on the PTR where gateway units were produced as fast from gateways as from warpgates, to fix PvP. Eventually only the fix for sentries was kept. Do you know why? I couldn't play the PTR, was it that imbalanced? I guess there were stronger proxy gates but well, proxy gates isn't exactly your insta kill cheese like 1-1-1 seems to be at times, it seems defendable, right? We can see that PvP didn't get quite so fixed as 4gate is still a very strong build, but wouldn't those reduced production times on gateways allow us to defend more easily very early game and put back some pressure to scout? Moreover you wouldn't have to spend 50 gas on a research you don't especially need if you don't plan to attack soon and you could actually get a stargate faster, with a forge or robo for detection. I still think that stargate play is the most reliable way to counter those 1-1-1 pushes. What do you think of that? On the 1-1-1, I think that it's nearly impossible to nerf without being too harsh on terran. It'll only be solved by top players showing us a way to defend it (you can theorycraft as much as I want, if you don't face top players, you're only playing a weaker version of the all-in) or with HotS, hopefully. My humble analysis is that 1-1-1's strength stems mainly from terran being very strong on one base: _ Mule extending mineral saturation _ Swappable addons to maximize production capability without over-investing in expensive production buildings _ Very efficient units in small numbers (banshee and marine, tank not so much) _ One unit/upgrade can completely change the gameplay to defend the push (raven, cloak, sometimes even thors, scv or not, stim or no stim)
At the same time the 1-1-1 seems very easy to nerf because there's such a variety of buildings & units to nerf.
|
On August 08 2011 06:44 Jesushooves wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2011 06:34 kodas wrote:On August 08 2011 05:47 HolyArrow wrote:On August 08 2011 05:30 kodas wrote:On August 08 2011 05:22 Yaotzin wrote:On August 08 2011 05:00 MonsieurGrimm wrote:
holy hell and people call zerg the whiner race D: ? This is nothing compared to the endless streams of Zerg whine that happened over the months, despite Protoss currently being nearly as shit as Zerg was at their worst (scv allin, 2proxy gate, close positions etc etc). Dunno if it's even whine when it's so obvious subjectively (watch GSL vPs and laugh), and is also reflected in the data. Protoss is just shitty. You whine an awful lot, I see you in LR thread all the time complaining about everything really, Protoss isn't doing terrible everywhere but Korea. Quit exasperating it. In other words, Protoss is doing terrible in the only place that really matters, if we accept Korea as representing the highest levels of play. The big difference between Protoss whining and Zerg whining is that Protoss have fallacious myths about being OP/easy to play associated with them, which amplifies the annoyance people feel when Protoss performs badly in how it adds insult to injury from the sheer contradiction of it all. No in other words, Terrans found a good allin that skewed the results, either the 1/1/1 gets nerfed or the Protoss firgure out how to hold, doesn't mean the game is fundamentally broken. I think the trend was for protoss to do a 1-2 gate robo expand, and 1/1/1 allin basically hard counters that because toss doesn't get enough econ or army to defend the push adequately. If you play like genius does, with one gate expand into heavy gateway early game (4-5) without cutting probes and getting twilight council for zealot charge, these pushes become a lot weaker, not saying it is easy but it is possible to beat.
Please refrain from trying to give advice on how to deal with the 1/1/1 if you don't know what you're talking about. The safest way of dealing with that all-in is exactly what you think it hard counters, early expansion and an early Robo.
You basically need the Robo, or risk autolosing from having the wrong unit composition. There are so many ways to execute that all-in, and some of them require drastically different responses. Not to mention he might just be doing a 2 rax with Reactor first and kill your expo...
|
On August 08 2011 07:45 kodas wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2011 07:39 NineteenSC2 wrote:
Terran players are just so much more skillful. You know how much apm and skill it takes to "multitask" a drop? It's so easy to defend drops. And then upgrades definitely do not help terran. 1-1 is terrible. I don't think a good terran should lose to a toss.
Maybe a tweak to stalkers would do the trick. Only problem would be infinite stalker balls in PvZ but that's mre a matter of poor rallying on Zs side (and fair considring that the opposite is possible with masses of roaches rolling over toss)
Your statement is very weird. There's no way terran players can be more skilled on a general scale. There's just no way that 1/3rd of the higher-skilled sc2 population decided to play terran. The fact of the matter is either that the race is i) easier or ii) overpowered If it were easier than Korean statistics would show that terran is at 50% (because Koreans play a lot and can play "harder" races just as good as "easier" But the statistics show otherwise, which means it's simply overpowered. On top of that drops are MUCH easier done than dealt with. You simply shift queue your units and your opponent has to react. Not to mention protoss armies are good in bulk, whereas terran armies are extremely effective in small numbers as well as large. (4 marauders + medivac can wreck havoc, whereas 4 stalkers would never accomplish much whatsoever). Upgrades help all races.. I don't know where you're getting this. Terran has some of the highest dps units (marines... marauders) and upgrades just make them so much more effective. Notice when terrans land good emps a tosses army just vanishes? Which brings me to my next point. High templars simply do damage with psionic storm (which is a research skill and you have to wait for energy) Ghosts on the other hand makes sentries absolutely useless, high templars absolutely useless, and on top of that instant shields gone. Point being, even if you miss the casters, you've still done all you needed. Now we understand that ghosts > high templars by far. What's more is the skill level required to each unit varies by far as well. A protoss has to first know where the ghosts are coming from with some kind of detection (observers, which are extremely easily spotted and scanned in higher level gaems). The protoss than has to split has high templars and feedback the ghosts in a 200/200 ball where they're extremely hard to find ( not to mention they're skinnier than marines and medivacs cover them). A terran has to simply lay down a scan, (late game terrans have so many orbitals, and therefore scans) which a protoss can do absolutely nothing about but feel scared due to his opponent having every single bit of map info he needs. A terran than has to simply emp as much as he can (he should already have the positioning advantage because he can scan as much as he wants, pretty much a maphack on your opponents army). Now a protoss player who doesn't split his high templars loses automatically, one who does split his hts still loses because EMP is an AoE skill. What should really be is emp only takes off shields, and have some other method of "pont and click" skill to remove energy. Protoss essentially relies on tanky core units & casters. When there's one unit in the terran arsenal who can effectively take out both with little to no skill requirement (AoE + instant + ranged) than it's very hard for protoss. Now just look at the skill difference needed to use a ghost compared to a ht. Watch Nani vs ThorZaiN , Thor repeatly EMPs everything and still comes out even or even losses the main enagement lategame, where the Toss reinforces much faster anyways, so you DONT need to win the fight, you just need to trade about even.
All you're doing is naming a single game to try to make your point. I can use the same logic you're using to complain the opposite way - MC is 40 supply up on Puma, Puma EMPs everything, MC's army gets demolished. I haven't seen the Naniwa vs. Thorzain game so I don't know what other factors were present either, but one game does not make a good argument.
|
On August 08 2011 07:56 HolyArrow wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2011 07:45 kodas wrote:On August 08 2011 07:39 NineteenSC2 wrote:
Terran players are just so much more skillful. You know how much apm and skill it takes to "multitask" a drop? It's so easy to defend drops. And then upgrades definitely do not help terran. 1-1 is terrible. I don't think a good terran should lose to a toss.
Maybe a tweak to stalkers would do the trick. Only problem would be infinite stalker balls in PvZ but that's mre a matter of poor rallying on Zs side (and fair considring that the opposite is possible with masses of roaches rolling over toss)
Your statement is very weird. There's no way terran players can be more skilled on a general scale. There's just no way that 1/3rd of the higher-skilled sc2 population decided to play terran. The fact of the matter is either that the race is i) easier or ii) overpowered If it were easier than Korean statistics would show that terran is at 50% (because Koreans play a lot and can play "harder" races just as good as "easier" But the statistics show otherwise, which means it's simply overpowered. On top of that drops are MUCH easier done than dealt with. You simply shift queue your units and your opponent has to react. Not to mention protoss armies are good in bulk, whereas terran armies are extremely effective in small numbers as well as large. (4 marauders + medivac can wreck havoc, whereas 4 stalkers would never accomplish much whatsoever). Upgrades help all races.. I don't know where you're getting this. Terran has some of the highest dps units (marines... marauders) and upgrades just make them so much more effective. Notice when terrans land good emps a tosses army just vanishes? Which brings me to my next point. High templars simply do damage with psionic storm (which is a research skill and you have to wait for energy) Ghosts on the other hand makes sentries absolutely useless, high templars absolutely useless, and on top of that instant shields gone. Point being, even if you miss the casters, you've still done all you needed. Now we understand that ghosts > high templars by far. What's more is the skill level required to each unit varies by far as well. A protoss has to first know where the ghosts are coming from with some kind of detection (observers, which are extremely easily spotted and scanned in higher level gaems). The protoss than has to split has high templars and feedback the ghosts in a 200/200 ball where they're extremely hard to find ( not to mention they're skinnier than marines and medivacs cover them). A terran has to simply lay down a scan, (late game terrans have so many orbitals, and therefore scans) which a protoss can do absolutely nothing about but feel scared due to his opponent having every single bit of map info he needs. A terran than has to simply emp as much as he can (he should already have the positioning advantage because he can scan as much as he wants, pretty much a maphack on your opponents army). Now a protoss player who doesn't split his high templars loses automatically, one who does split his hts still loses because EMP is an AoE skill. What should really be is emp only takes off shields, and have some other method of "pont and click" skill to remove energy. Protoss essentially relies on tanky core units & casters. When there's one unit in the terran arsenal who can effectively take out both with little to no skill requirement (AoE + instant + ranged) than it's very hard for protoss. Now just look at the skill difference needed to use a ghost compared to a ht. Watch Nani vs ThorZaiN , Thor repeatly EMPs everything and still comes out even or even losses the main enagement lategame, where the Toss reinforces much faster anyways, so you DONT need to win the fight, you just need to trade about even. All you're doing is naming a single game to try to make your point. I can use the same logic you're using to complain the opposite way - MC is 40 supply up on Puma, Puma EMPs everything, MC's army gets demolished. I haven't seen the Naniwa vs. Thorzain game so I don't know what other factors were present either, but one game does not make a good argument. It's better than making a bunch of assumptions about how a game SHOULD GO like the poster I quoted at least I BRING SOMETHING FACTUAL TO THE TABLE. Also I can't think of a series that furthers my point. But like I said it was at Assembly , and like I said you can come out uncost effective and just reinforce, MC messed up, got EMPed and lost, that's how it's suppose to work.
EDIT:I will link the VOD once it's up, just give me a bit
|
On August 08 2011 07:42 HolyArrow wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2011 07:34 kodas wrote:On August 08 2011 07:19 HolyArrow wrote:On August 08 2011 07:07 kodas wrote:On August 08 2011 06:45 HolyArrow wrote:On August 08 2011 06:34 kodas wrote:On August 08 2011 05:47 HolyArrow wrote:On August 08 2011 05:30 kodas wrote:On August 08 2011 05:22 Yaotzin wrote:On August 08 2011 05:00 MonsieurGrimm wrote:
holy hell and people call zerg the whiner race D: ? This is nothing compared to the endless streams of Zerg whine that happened over the months, despite Protoss currently being nearly as shit as Zerg was at their worst (scv allin, 2proxy gate, close positions etc etc). Dunno if it's even whine when it's so obvious subjectively (watch GSL vPs and laugh), and is also reflected in the data. Protoss is just shitty. You whine an awful lot, I see you in LR thread all the time complaining about everything really, Protoss isn't doing terrible everywhere but Korea. Quit exasperating it. In other words, Protoss is doing terrible in the only place that really matters, if we accept Korea as representing the highest levels of play. The big difference between Protoss whining and Zerg whining is that Protoss have fallacious myths about being OP/easy to play associated with them, which amplifies the annoyance people feel when Protoss performs badly in how it adds insult to injury from the sheer contradiction of it all. No in other words, Terrans found a good allin that skewed the results, either the 1/1/1 gets nerfed or the Protoss firgure out how to hold, doesn't mean the game is fundamentally broken. The problem is that 1/1/1 is incredibly difficult to nerf (because none of the units in it are too strong on their own), it's been around since Beta, and Protosses still don't have a consistently effective response for it. The fact that Terran is just designed so well in how its units complement each other can constitute an argument for how the game is "fundamentally broken" - because the other two races aren't designed well enough in contrast. As Beyonder has said, this seems to be more of a design problem rather than a balance problem, and one could argue that a design problem constitutes "fundamental brokenness" because it can't be effectively fixed by just buffing or nerfing stuff - you need to change the matchup at its core, whether it means giving Protoss an effective harass unit as Dustin Browder said in an interview, or through some other means. I could say the same about Col and Hts, I see every time in the late game the Terran over commits to either vikings or Ghosts and suffers because of it. The problem comes because Terran has to HARD counter Hts or col and when the Protoss switches until the Terran is caught without the correct comp, he loses his whole army and Protoss just uses warp gate rebuild his army and roll the Terrans production. What? Go read Beyonder's post. I don't think you understood what is meant by a design problem. In regards to your actual response, I don't see what you're describing happening all that often. Name some games in which that happens, because I can easily name tons of games in which 1-1-1 is wins the day easily. Nani vs ThorZain EU blizz invite, and I can't think of the other series off the top of my head, I know it was an Assembly game So... you can name two games. Doesn't sound like a huge or widespread issue to me. I'll name you plenty of games in which 1-1-1 wins the day if you want, but I'm sure you already know of them if you follow the GSL.
Naniwa Thorzain had an element of that as well. It is more prevalent than you think, as in every endgame TvP the colossus/ht switch and gateway flood has to be considered. It's just that these later game scenarios are rarer because usually the games end before them, for now anyway. Whether that means it's less of a problem or not depends I guess. After all, perhaps terran taking into account these late game problems helps shift terran game strategy into all-ins and timing attacks vs p to avoid ending up in this situation.
As a sidenote, protoss favored maps in tvp are often the large ones, like Terminus RE, Tal'Darim Altar, which could be a combination of the difficulty terran would find in ending the game quickly, and this late game situation terran finds itself in.
Maybe a 1/1/1 problem might take precedance for a fix for now though, what with it being so common to see, but it would be wrong to ignore every other 'clunky' aspect of the match-up imo.
|
On August 08 2011 07:58 kodas wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2011 07:56 HolyArrow wrote:On August 08 2011 07:45 kodas wrote:On August 08 2011 07:39 NineteenSC2 wrote:
Terran players are just so much more skillful. You know how much apm and skill it takes to "multitask" a drop? It's so easy to defend drops. And then upgrades definitely do not help terran. 1-1 is terrible. I don't think a good terran should lose to a toss.
Maybe a tweak to stalkers would do the trick. Only problem would be infinite stalker balls in PvZ but that's mre a matter of poor rallying on Zs side (and fair considring that the opposite is possible with masses of roaches rolling over toss)
Your statement is very weird. There's no way terran players can be more skilled on a general scale. There's just no way that 1/3rd of the higher-skilled sc2 population decided to play terran. The fact of the matter is either that the race is i) easier or ii) overpowered If it were easier than Korean statistics would show that terran is at 50% (because Koreans play a lot and can play "harder" races just as good as "easier" But the statistics show otherwise, which means it's simply overpowered. On top of that drops are MUCH easier done than dealt with. You simply shift queue your units and your opponent has to react. Not to mention protoss armies are good in bulk, whereas terran armies are extremely effective in small numbers as well as large. (4 marauders + medivac can wreck havoc, whereas 4 stalkers would never accomplish much whatsoever). Upgrades help all races.. I don't know where you're getting this. Terran has some of the highest dps units (marines... marauders) and upgrades just make them so much more effective. Notice when terrans land good emps a tosses army just vanishes? Which brings me to my next point. High templars simply do damage with psionic storm (which is a research skill and you have to wait for energy) Ghosts on the other hand makes sentries absolutely useless, high templars absolutely useless, and on top of that instant shields gone. Point being, even if you miss the casters, you've still done all you needed. Now we understand that ghosts > high templars by far. What's more is the skill level required to each unit varies by far as well. A protoss has to first know where the ghosts are coming from with some kind of detection (observers, which are extremely easily spotted and scanned in higher level gaems). The protoss than has to split has high templars and feedback the ghosts in a 200/200 ball where they're extremely hard to find ( not to mention they're skinnier than marines and medivacs cover them). A terran has to simply lay down a scan, (late game terrans have so many orbitals, and therefore scans) which a protoss can do absolutely nothing about but feel scared due to his opponent having every single bit of map info he needs. A terran than has to simply emp as much as he can (he should already have the positioning advantage because he can scan as much as he wants, pretty much a maphack on your opponents army). Now a protoss player who doesn't split his high templars loses automatically, one who does split his hts still loses because EMP is an AoE skill. What should really be is emp only takes off shields, and have some other method of "pont and click" skill to remove energy. Protoss essentially relies on tanky core units & casters. When there's one unit in the terran arsenal who can effectively take out both with little to no skill requirement (AoE + instant + ranged) than it's very hard for protoss. Now just look at the skill difference needed to use a ghost compared to a ht. Watch Nani vs ThorZaiN , Thor repeatly EMPs everything and still comes out even or even losses the main enagement lategame, where the Toss reinforces much faster anyways, so you DONT need to win the fight, you just need to trade about even. All you're doing is naming a single game to try to make your point. I can use the same logic you're using to complain the opposite way - MC is 40 supply up on Puma, Puma EMPs everything, MC's army gets demolished. I haven't seen the Naniwa vs. Thorzain game so I don't know what other factors were present either, but one game does not make a good argument. It's better than making a bunch of assumptions about how a game SHOULD GO like the poster I quoted at least I BRING SOMETHING FACTUAL TO THE TABLE. Also I can't think of a series that furthers my point. But like I said it was at Assembly , and like I said you can come out uncost effective and just reinforce, MC messed up, got EMPed and lost, that's how it's suppose to work.
Which game of the series do you mean?
+ Show Spoiler +In game 1, Thorzain decisively won the first big battle, and then proceeded to suicide the bulk of his army into Naniwa's 4th, and subsequently lose. In game 3, he was simply outmacroed after a failed push, and did surprisingly well in battles despite being 50 food behind.
Can't see how that series proves that a Terran can EMP really well and still come out even or behind.
|
Seems like a lot of protoss qq in this thread.. I don't see how statistics will justify it though, looking back in the first gsl you saw a lot of terrans do 5 rax reaper and you could look back at that and say - okay reapers are just waaaay too hard to deal with, I guess the nerf was justified.
I fail to see a similar reasoning for protoss vs terran, if you don't think 1/1/1 is stoppable maybe you should quit, because you can't really nerf tanks any more than they already have, and nerfing marines will totally screw up all the matchups.
|
On August 08 2011 08:03 Szubie wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2011 07:42 HolyArrow wrote:On August 08 2011 07:34 kodas wrote:On August 08 2011 07:19 HolyArrow wrote:On August 08 2011 07:07 kodas wrote:On August 08 2011 06:45 HolyArrow wrote:On August 08 2011 06:34 kodas wrote:On August 08 2011 05:47 HolyArrow wrote:On August 08 2011 05:30 kodas wrote:On August 08 2011 05:22 Yaotzin wrote:
[quote]
? This is nothing compared to the endless streams of Zerg whine that happened over the months, despite Protoss currently being nearly as shit as Zerg was at their worst (scv allin, 2proxy gate, close positions etc etc).
Dunno if it's even whine when it's so obvious subjectively (watch GSL vPs and laugh), and is also reflected in the data. Protoss is just shitty. You whine an awful lot, I see you in LR thread all the time complaining about everything really, Protoss isn't doing terrible everywhere but Korea. Quit exasperating it. In other words, Protoss is doing terrible in the only place that really matters, if we accept Korea as representing the highest levels of play. The big difference between Protoss whining and Zerg whining is that Protoss have fallacious myths about being OP/easy to play associated with them, which amplifies the annoyance people feel when Protoss performs badly in how it adds insult to injury from the sheer contradiction of it all. No in other words, Terrans found a good allin that skewed the results, either the 1/1/1 gets nerfed or the Protoss firgure out how to hold, doesn't mean the game is fundamentally broken. The problem is that 1/1/1 is incredibly difficult to nerf (because none of the units in it are too strong on their own), it's been around since Beta, and Protosses still don't have a consistently effective response for it. The fact that Terran is just designed so well in how its units complement each other can constitute an argument for how the game is "fundamentally broken" - because the other two races aren't designed well enough in contrast. As Beyonder has said, this seems to be more of a design problem rather than a balance problem, and one could argue that a design problem constitutes "fundamental brokenness" because it can't be effectively fixed by just buffing or nerfing stuff - you need to change the matchup at its core, whether it means giving Protoss an effective harass unit as Dustin Browder said in an interview, or through some other means. I could say the same about Col and Hts, I see every time in the late game the Terran over commits to either vikings or Ghosts and suffers because of it. The problem comes because Terran has to HARD counter Hts or col and when the Protoss switches until the Terran is caught without the correct comp, he loses his whole army and Protoss just uses warp gate rebuild his army and roll the Terrans production. What? Go read Beyonder's post. I don't think you understood what is meant by a design problem. In regards to your actual response, I don't see what you're describing happening all that often. Name some games in which that happens, because I can easily name tons of games in which 1-1-1 is wins the day easily. Nani vs ThorZain EU blizz invite, and I can't think of the other series off the top of my head, I know it was an Assembly game So... you can name two games. Doesn't sound like a huge or widespread issue to me. I'll name you plenty of games in which 1-1-1 wins the day if you want, but I'm sure you already know of them if you follow the GSL. Naniwa Thorzain had an element of that as well. It is more prevalent than you think, as in every endgame TvP the colossus/ht switch and gateway flood has to be considered. It's just that these later game scenarios are rarer because usually the games end before them, for now anyway. Whether that means it's less of a problem or not depends I guess. After all, perhaps terran taking into account these late game problems helps shift terran game strategy into all-ins and timing attacks vs p to avoid ending up in this situation. As a sidenote, protoss favored maps in tvp are often the large ones, like Terminus RE, Tal'Darim Altar, which could be a combination of the difficulty terran would find in ending the game quickly, and this late game situation terran finds itself in. Maybe a 1/1/1 problem might take precedance for a fix for now though, what with it being so common to see, but it would be wrong to ignore every other 'clunky' aspect of the match-up imo.
Funny that you mention it, in Korean TLPD both TDA and Terminus are almost perfectly balanced, with Terran ahead by 1-2%. Edit: The same is true for International TLPD, so I don't understand where you get your "Protoss favored" qualification for them.
That aside, I just don't believe in these lategame TvP woes. Or at least I won't until I see Terran constantly dropping and sending small groups of bio at expansions on large maps, as well as getting mass orbitals and a 170 supply army, and then still losing to Protoss tech switches. And we'll never find out anyway if Terrans just keep winning with all-ins.
For the record, this is the same excuse Terran players used to justify their constant all-ins during the early GSLs. They said they had to do it because they couldn't compete with Zerg lategame. Funny how that turned out. Terrans have been doing fine without using the all-in. They use it now because it makes for easy wins against more skilled opponents, nothing more.
|
Australia8532 Posts
On August 08 2011 07:39 NineteenSC2 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +
Terran players are just so much more skillful. You know how much apm and skill it takes to "multitask" a drop? It's so easy to defend drops. And then upgrades definitely do not help terran. 1-1 is terrible. I don't think a good terran should lose to a toss.
Maybe a tweak to stalkers would do the trick. Only problem would be infinite stalker balls in PvZ but that's mre a matter of poor rallying on Zs side (and fair considring that the opposite is possible with masses of roaches rolling over toss)
Your statement is very weird. There's no way terran players can be more skilled on a general scale. There's just no way that 1/3rd of the higher-skilled sc2 population decided to play terran. The fact of the matter is either that the race is i) easier or ii) overpowered If it were easier then Korean statistics would show that terran is at 50% (because Koreans play a lot and can play "harder" races just as good as "easier" But the statistics show otherwise, which means it's simply overpowered. On top of that drops are MUCH easier done than dealt with. You simply shift queue your units and your opponent has to react. Not to mention protoss armies are good in bulk, whereas terran armies are extremely effective in small numbers as well as large. (4 marauders + medivac can wreck havoc, whereas 4 stalkers would never accomplish much whatsoever). Upgrades help all races.. I don't know where you're getting this. Terran has some of the highest dps units (marines... marauders) and upgrades just make them so much more effective. Notice when terrans land good emps a tosses army just vanishes? Which brings me to my next point. High templars simply do damage with psionic storm (which is a research skill and you have to wait for energy) Ghosts on the other hand makes sentries absolutely useless, high templars absolutely useless, and on top of that instant shields gone. Point being, even if you miss the casters, you've still done all you needed. Now we understand that ghosts > high templars by far. What's more is the skill level required to each unit varies by far as well. A protoss has to first know where the ghosts are coming from with some kind of detection (observers, which are extremely easily spotted and scanned in higher level gaems). The protoss than has to split his high templars and feedback the ghosts in a 200/200 ball where they're extremely hard to find ( not to mention they're skinnier than marines and medivacs cover them). A terran has to simply lay down a scan, (late game terrans have so many orbitals, and therefore scans) which a protoss can do absolutely nothing about but feel scared due to his opponent having every single bit of map info he needs. A terran than has to simply emp as much as he can (he should already have the positioning advantage because he can scan as much as he wants, pretty much a maphack on your opponents army). Now a protoss player who doesn't split his high templars loses automatically, one who does split his hts still loses because EMP is an AoE skill. What should really be is emp only takes off shields, and have some other method of "pont and click" skill to remove energy. Protoss essentially relies on tanky core units & casters. When there's one unit in the terran arsenal who can effectively take out both with little to no skill requirement (AoE + instant + ranged) than it's very hard for protoss. Now just look at the skill difference needed to use a ghost compared to a ht .
This is a very long winded way of saying "ZOMG TERRAN OP!" Your biased view is pretty apparent and it is painful to read; you COMPLETELY dismiss the presence of STRATEGY in an RTS game and every win or loss must therefore be attributed to balance. I am glad that you have the brainpower to determine that terran is "simply overpowered" - i just think back a couple weeks and protoss was "simply overpowered" .. There is obviously no point in arguing with you because all you will do is whine about balance; or say some rhetoric like "nerf EMP"
Anyway - i really enjoyed reading the graphs, it's great to see the database translated into a visual format with some really interesting results. The Terran skew i think has a fair amount to do with new strategies that other races simply haven't figured out how exactly to handle yet - 1/1/1 for example. Everyone is very quick to yell something is OP before waiting for the people who devote their lives to this game to figure out a counter strategy.
|
On August 08 2011 08:21 bkrow wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2011 07:39 NineteenSC2 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +
Terran players are just so much more skillful. You know how much apm and skill it takes to "multitask" a drop? It's so easy to defend drops. And then upgrades definitely do not help terran. 1-1 is terrible. I don't think a good terran should lose to a toss.
Maybe a tweak to stalkers would do the trick. Only problem would be infinite stalker balls in PvZ but that's mre a matter of poor rallying on Zs side (and fair considring that the opposite is possible with masses of roaches rolling over toss)
Your statement is very weird. There's no way terran players can be more skilled on a general scale. There's just no way that 1/3rd of the higher-skilled sc2 population decided to play terran. The fact of the matter is either that the race is i) easier or ii) overpowered If it were easier then Korean statistics would show that terran is at 50% (because Koreans play a lot and can play "harder" races just as good as "easier" But the statistics show otherwise, which means it's simply overpowered. On top of that drops are MUCH easier done than dealt with. You simply shift queue your units and your opponent has to react. Not to mention protoss armies are good in bulk, whereas terran armies are extremely effective in small numbers as well as large. (4 marauders + medivac can wreck havoc, whereas 4 stalkers would never accomplish much whatsoever). Upgrades help all races.. I don't know where you're getting this. Terran has some of the highest dps units (marines... marauders) and upgrades just make them so much more effective. Notice when terrans land good emps a tosses army just vanishes? Which brings me to my next point. High templars simply do damage with psionic storm (which is a research skill and you have to wait for energy) Ghosts on the other hand makes sentries absolutely useless, high templars absolutely useless, and on top of that instant shields gone. Point being, even if you miss the casters, you've still done all you needed. Now we understand that ghosts > high templars by far. What's more is the skill level required to each unit varies by far as well. A protoss has to first know where the ghosts are coming from with some kind of detection (observers, which are extremely easily spotted and scanned in higher level gaems). The protoss than has to split his high templars and feedback the ghosts in a 200/200 ball where they're extremely hard to find ( not to mention they're skinnier than marines and medivacs cover them). A terran has to simply lay down a scan, (late game terrans have so many orbitals, and therefore scans) which a protoss can do absolutely nothing about but feel scared due to his opponent having every single bit of map info he needs. A terran than has to simply emp as much as he can (he should already have the positioning advantage because he can scan as much as he wants, pretty much a maphack on your opponents army). Now a protoss player who doesn't split his high templars loses automatically, one who does split his hts still loses because EMP is an AoE skill. What should really be is emp only takes off shields, and have some other method of "pont and click" skill to remove energy. Protoss essentially relies on tanky core units & casters. When there's one unit in the terran arsenal who can effectively take out both with little to no skill requirement (AoE + instant + ranged) than it's very hard for protoss. Now just look at the skill difference needed to use a ghost compared to a ht . This is a very long winded way of saying "ZOMG TERRAN OP!" Your biased view is pretty apparent and it is painful to read; you COMPLETELY dismiss the presence of STRATEGY in an RTS game and every win or loss must therefore be attributed to balance. I am glad that you have the brainpower to determine that terran is "simply overpowered" - i just think back a couple weeks and protoss was "simply overpowered" .. There is obviously no point in arguing with you because all you will do is whine about balance; or say some rhetoric like "nerf EMP" Anyway - i really enjoyed reading the graphs, it's great to see the database translated into a visual format with some really interesting results. The Terran skew i think has a fair amount to do with new strategies that other races simply haven't figured out how exactly to handle yet - 1/1/1 for example. Everyone is very quick to yell something is OP before waiting for the people who devote their lives to this game to figure out a counter strategy.
1-1-1 isn't a new strategy, it's being used since the beta, and giving protoss a really hard time since then.
|
On August 08 2011 07:39 NineteenSC2 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +
Terran players are just so much more skillful. You know how much apm and skill it takes to "multitask" a drop? It's so easy to defend drops. And then upgrades definitely do not help terran. 1-1 is terrible. I don't think a good terran should lose to a toss.
Maybe a tweak to stalkers would do the trick. Only problem would be infinite stalker balls in PvZ but that's mre a matter of poor rallying on Zs side (and fair considring that the opposite is possible with masses of roaches rolling over toss)
Your statement is very weird. There's no way terran players can be more skilled on a general scale. There's just no way that 1/3rd of the higher-skilled sc2 population decided to play terran. The fact of the matter is either that the race is i) easier or ii) overpowered If it were easier then Korean statistics would show that terran is at 50% (because Koreans play a lot and can play "harder" races just as good as "easier" But the statistics show otherwise, which means it's simply overpowered. On top of that drops are MUCH easier done than dealt with. You simply shift queue your units and your opponent has to react. Not to mention protoss armies are good in bulk, whereas terran armies are extremely effective in small numbers as well as large. (4 marauders + medivac can wreck havoc, whereas 4 stalkers would never accomplish much whatsoever). Upgrades help all races.. I don't know where you're getting this. Terran has some of the highest dps units (marines... marauders) and upgrades just make them so much more effective. Notice when terrans land good emps a tosses army just vanishes? Which brings me to my next point. High templars simply do damage with psionic storm (which is a research skill and you have to wait for energy) Ghosts on the other hand makes sentries absolutely useless, high templars absolutely useless, and on top of that instant shields gone. Point being, even if you miss the casters, you've still done all you needed. Now we understand that ghosts > high templars by far. What's more is the skill level required to each unit varies by far as well. A protoss has to first know where the ghosts are coming from with some kind of detection (observers, which are extremely easily spotted and scanned in higher level gaems). The protoss than has to split his high templars and feedback the ghosts in a 200/200 ball where they're extremely hard to find ( not to mention they're skinnier than marines and medivacs cover them). A terran has to simply lay down a scan, (late game terrans have so many orbitals, and therefore scans) which a protoss can do absolutely nothing about but feel scared due to his opponent having every single bit of map info he needs. A terran than has to simply emp as much as he can (he should already have the positioning advantage because he can scan as much as he wants, pretty much a maphack on your opponents army). Now a protoss player who doesn't split his high templars loses automatically, one who does split his hts still loses because EMP is an AoE skill. What should really be is emp only takes off shields, and have some other method of "pont and click" skill to remove energy. Protoss essentially relies on tanky core units & casters. When there's one unit in the terran arsenal who can effectively take out both with little to no skill requirement (AoE + instant + ranged) than it's very hard for protoss. Now just look at the skill difference needed to use a ghost compared to a ht.
Bwhaha Sorry man. I was being sarcastic precisely because of the points you listed out there. I appreciate you still have the patience to repeat what has been said ad nauseum.
With regards to upgrades some korean toss was slightly qqing about how 1-1 ups neutralied toss ups quite well.
The collosi/ht tech change rant is interesting. I am not very sympathetic because of how a straight up fight ends up without our tech. I would think this fear of skewing one or the other way is a good natural part of the matchup that allows us to possibly win. At the same time, I can't deny some emps are absolutely necessary to avoid being ffd to pieces.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
