|
On September 28 2011 06:22 Umpteen wrote:
Terran isn't overpowered. It is simply, as Blizzard themselves have stated, better designed. It flows. If units or tech are forced for whatever reason, it's never a bad thing - it never makes the terran more vulnerable. If anything, forcing tech out of a Terran just gives you more of a headache. But that's a problem with the clunky, uncomfortable Z and P tech trees, nothing more.
What I've learned from this post: If one race is better designed, flows better than the others and isn't set back when forced to switch tech whilst the other two races have uncomfortable tech trees it still doesn't mean the games unbalanced.
Sounds legit lol...
|
On September 28 2011 06:48 P3rytt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 06:22 Umpteen wrote:
Terran isn't overpowered. It is simply, as Blizzard themselves have stated, better designed. It flows. If units or tech are forced for whatever reason, it's never a bad thing - it never makes the terran more vulnerable. If anything, forcing tech out of a Terran just gives you more of a headache. But that's a problem with the clunky, uncomfortable Z and P tech trees, nothing more. What I've learned from this post: If one race is better designed, flows better than the others and isn't set back when forced to switch tech whilst the other two races have uncomfortable tech trees it still doesn't mean the games unbalanced. Sounds legit lol...
Lol I reacted the same way...
"Listen, Terran isn't OP. They are just better overall."
|
But thats kinda true, isnt it?
The problem isnt that terran was designed to be better (except for the ghost which IMO is a complete catastrophe) but that the other 2 races are really awkward and weird. The result is the same but we should look at P / Z for improvement, not ruin terrans. Imagine if all 3 races had all the stuff terra has...
|
In my opinion, pvz is about to become heavily toss favored for a time, for how long I cant say, with the advent of these new blink/dt plays as zerg's detection is easily sniped. The initial dt drops are difficult to deal with in the current metagame where zerg goes for 3 base before lair in response to a ffe while relying on spores for detection and anti air along with queens. There are not yet enough pvz's out there where this style is utilized to pass judgement on the overall balance of it, but it will definitely give toss an advantage in the matchup for a while.
|
On September 28 2011 06:30 Bagi wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 06:22 Umpteen wrote:
Terran isn't overpowered. It is simply, as Blizzard themselves have stated, better designed. It flows. If units or tech are forced for whatever reason, it's never a bad thing - it never makes the terran more vulnerable. If anything, forcing tech out of a Terran just gives you more of a headache. But that's a problem with the clunky, uncomfortable Z and P tech trees, nothing more. To me, this post seems like generic mumbo-jumbo that doesn't make any sense at all.
Fair point - I've over-compressed.
TvZ especially feels like walking on a knifes edge - the zerg can force you to overproduce vikings (broodlords)
No, Broodlords can force you to make some vikings (or ghosts). Overproduction can only be forced by mass Corruptors, which are ultimately more detrimental to the Zerg than to the Terran.
marauders (ultras)
Or ghosts.
ghosts(infestors)
...effectively denying their own hive tech 
and afterwards roll over you with an entirely different army composition. I'm not sure if that's what you mean by forcing tech, but it certainly makes the terran more vulnerable in many ways.
Ok, the objections above aside, what you're talking about is the ability of a 5-6 base Zerg with a massive trust fund and who isn't being bothered by drops to tech-switch at the 20 minute mark and make a Terran who isn't thinking straight overreact. That's not the same thing I'm talking about.
Think about the knots Zergs tie themselves in to avoid building Hydra. Why? Because Hydra are a dead end. What happens if a Zerg forces a bunker and tanks by threatening roach aggression? Well, maybe now the Terran has tanks instead of more marines like he was planning - but the Zerg's ability to exploit the lack of marines with mutas is delayed and hampered by the spending on roaches. That's why Terrans don't really mind seeing a roach response to hellions, and why there are threads about avoiding making roaches.
|
On September 28 2011 07:03 -y0shi- wrote:
But thats kinda true, isnt it?
The problem isnt that terran was designed to be better (except for the ghost which IMO is a complete catastrophe) but that the other 2 races are really awkward and weird. The result is the same but we should look at P / Z for improvement, not ruin terrans. Imagine if all 3 races had all the stuff terra has...
Even if what he is saying is true, his logic is flawed.
How can a race have all the characteristics mentioned (which the other races lack) but not be overpowered?
Being designed in a more complete fashion causes Terran to be overpowered when playing against P/Z.
If the game was perfectly balanced at this time, then Terran would be just as "gimped" as Protoss or Zerg when it comes to game design. The races would all be designed poorly but there would be no balance issues.
|
On September 28 2011 06:53 QTIP. wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 06:48 P3rytt wrote:On September 28 2011 06:22 Umpteen wrote:
Terran isn't overpowered. It is simply, as Blizzard themselves have stated, better designed. It flows. If units or tech are forced for whatever reason, it's never a bad thing - it never makes the terran more vulnerable. If anything, forcing tech out of a Terran just gives you more of a headache. But that's a problem with the clunky, uncomfortable Z and P tech trees, nothing more. What I've learned from this post: If one race is better designed, flows better than the others and isn't set back when forced to switch tech whilst the other two races have uncomfortable tech trees it still doesn't mean the games unbalanced. Sounds legit lol... Lol I reacted the same way... "Listen, Terran isn't OP. They are just better overall."
Har har, ok, it's an easy thing to make sound absurd. But I stand by it. If Zerg or Protoss respond correctly, they can win. They aren't too weak. But they are more easily thrown off balance.
|
On September 28 2011 07:19 Umpteen wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 06:53 QTIP. wrote:On September 28 2011 06:48 P3rytt wrote:On September 28 2011 06:22 Umpteen wrote:
Terran isn't overpowered. It is simply, as Blizzard themselves have stated, better designed. It flows. If units or tech are forced for whatever reason, it's never a bad thing - it never makes the terran more vulnerable. If anything, forcing tech out of a Terran just gives you more of a headache. But that's a problem with the clunky, uncomfortable Z and P tech trees, nothing more. What I've learned from this post: If one race is better designed, flows better than the others and isn't set back when forced to switch tech whilst the other two races have uncomfortable tech trees it still doesn't mean the games unbalanced. Sounds legit lol... Lol I reacted the same way... "Listen, Terran isn't OP. They are just better overall." Har har, ok, it's an easy thing to make sound absurd. But I stand by it. If Zerg or Protoss respond correctly, they can win. They aren't too weak. But they are more easily thrown off balance.
Lol, I'm not trying to make you sound like an idiot. I get at what you're saying, but I think that a race's superior design relative to others causes that race to be overpowered in competition.
|
On September 28 2011 07:19 Umpteen wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 06:53 QTIP. wrote:On September 28 2011 06:48 P3rytt wrote:On September 28 2011 06:22 Umpteen wrote:
Terran isn't overpowered. It is simply, as Blizzard themselves have stated, better designed. It flows. If units or tech are forced for whatever reason, it's never a bad thing - it never makes the terran more vulnerable. If anything, forcing tech out of a Terran just gives you more of a headache. But that's a problem with the clunky, uncomfortable Z and P tech trees, nothing more. What I've learned from this post: If one race is better designed, flows better than the others and isn't set back when forced to switch tech whilst the other two races have uncomfortable tech trees it still doesn't mean the games unbalanced. Sounds legit lol... Lol I reacted the same way... "Listen, Terran isn't OP. They are just better overall." Har har, ok, it's an easy thing to make sound absurd. But I stand by it. If Zerg or Protoss respond correctly, they can win. They aren't too weak. But they are more easily thrown off balance.
the GSL begs to differ. currently, the zvt matchup is skewed for terran, but it's not so bad as to be unwinnable. the pvt matchup is significantly worse. yes, it's not impossible to win, but the fact that the ghost has no real counter aside from completely outplaying someone (warp prism play to break even) makes it very difficult to beat players who have good unit control. this is compounded by the relative weakness of gateway units against barracks units, particularly the marauder.
|
On September 28 2011 06:22 Umpteen wrote:
Terran isn't overpowered. It is simply, as Blizzard themselves have stated, better designed. It flows. If units or tech are forced for whatever reason, it's never a bad thing - it never makes the terran more vulnerable. If anything, forcing tech out of a Terran just gives you more of a headache. But that's a problem with the clunky, uncomfortable Z and P tech trees, nothing more.
Undeniable proof that Terran is OP:
http://whitecosmos.tumblr.com/post/10716607129/unique-characteristics-of-races-in-starcraft-2
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On September 28 2011 07:22 QTIP. wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 07:19 Umpteen wrote:On September 28 2011 06:53 QTIP. wrote:On September 28 2011 06:48 P3rytt wrote:On September 28 2011 06:22 Umpteen wrote:
Terran isn't overpowered. It is simply, as Blizzard themselves have stated, better designed. It flows. If units or tech are forced for whatever reason, it's never a bad thing - it never makes the terran more vulnerable. If anything, forcing tech out of a Terran just gives you more of a headache. But that's a problem with the clunky, uncomfortable Z and P tech trees, nothing more. What I've learned from this post: If one race is better designed, flows better than the others and isn't set back when forced to switch tech whilst the other two races have uncomfortable tech trees it still doesn't mean the games unbalanced. Sounds legit lol... Lol I reacted the same way... "Listen, Terran isn't OP. They are just better overall." Har har, ok, it's an easy thing to make sound absurd. But I stand by it. If Zerg or Protoss respond correctly, they can win. They aren't too weak. But they are more easily thrown off balance. Lol, I'm not trying to make you sound like an idiot. I get at what you're saying, but I think that a race's superior design relative to others causes that race to be overpowered in competition.
I agree - it's more of a perpetual meta-game advantage rather than a 'race OP' problem. Protoss and Zerg have had some proper head-scratchers to deal with, and the solutions never seem to be small deviations. Roach/Hydra/Corruptor -> Infestor is a massive change of focus. Terran just seems to have the initiative, which at this stage of the game being figured out means they're at an advantage. I actually suspect that, in the absence of any further patches, Terran might eventually sink without trace as the matchups become more figured out.
That's no fun though, because for the majority of players (whom Blizzard do have to care about) the game as it stands would be ruined by changes that balanced the races purely strength-wise for pro players. I'm happy that Blizzard acknowledge how much better Terran was designed, because hopefully they'll accomplish something similar in HotS for the other races, which will make it easier (or at least within the realms of possibility) to balance the races more closely at most levels of play
|
On September 28 2011 07:51 Umpteen wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 07:22 QTIP. wrote:On September 28 2011 07:19 Umpteen wrote:On September 28 2011 06:53 QTIP. wrote:On September 28 2011 06:48 P3rytt wrote:On September 28 2011 06:22 Umpteen wrote:
Terran isn't overpowered. It is simply, as Blizzard themselves have stated, better designed. It flows. If units or tech are forced for whatever reason, it's never a bad thing - it never makes the terran more vulnerable. If anything, forcing tech out of a Terran just gives you more of a headache. But that's a problem with the clunky, uncomfortable Z and P tech trees, nothing more. What I've learned from this post: If one race is better designed, flows better than the others and isn't set back when forced to switch tech whilst the other two races have uncomfortable tech trees it still doesn't mean the games unbalanced. Sounds legit lol... Lol I reacted the same way... "Listen, Terran isn't OP. They are just better overall." Har har, ok, it's an easy thing to make sound absurd. But I stand by it. If Zerg or Protoss respond correctly, they can win. They aren't too weak. But they are more easily thrown off balance. Lol, I'm not trying to make you sound like an idiot. I get at what you're saying, but I think that a race's superior design relative to others causes that race to be overpowered in competition. I agree - it's more of a perpetual meta-game advantage rather than a 'race OP' problem. Protoss and Zerg have had some proper head-scratchers to deal with, and the solutions never seem to be small deviations. Roach/Hydra/Corruptor -> Infestor is a massive change of focus. Terran just seems to have the initiative, which at this stage of the game being figured out means they're at an advantage. I actually suspect that, in the absence of any further patches, Terran might eventually sink without trace as the matchups become more figured out. That's no fun though, because for the majority of players (whom Blizzard do have to care about) the game as it stands would be ruined by changes that balanced the races purely strength-wise for pro players. I'm happy that Blizzard acknowledge how much better Terran was designed, because hopefully they'll accomplish something similar in HotS for the other races, which will make it easier (or at least within the realms of possibility) to balance the races more closely at most levels of play
Good response. I'm in the same boat as you.
|
On September 28 2011 07:26 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 07:19 Umpteen wrote:On September 28 2011 06:53 QTIP. wrote:On September 28 2011 06:48 P3rytt wrote:On September 28 2011 06:22 Umpteen wrote:
Terran isn't overpowered. It is simply, as Blizzard themselves have stated, better designed. It flows. If units or tech are forced for whatever reason, it's never a bad thing - it never makes the terran more vulnerable. If anything, forcing tech out of a Terran just gives you more of a headache. But that's a problem with the clunky, uncomfortable Z and P tech trees, nothing more. What I've learned from this post: If one race is better designed, flows better than the others and isn't set back when forced to switch tech whilst the other two races have uncomfortable tech trees it still doesn't mean the games unbalanced. Sounds legit lol... Lol I reacted the same way... "Listen, Terran isn't OP. They are just better overall." Har har, ok, it's an easy thing to make sound absurd. But I stand by it. If Zerg or Protoss respond correctly, they can win. They aren't too weak. But they are more easily thrown off balance. the GSL begs to differ. currently, the zvt matchup is skewed for terran, but it's not so bad as to be unwinnable. the pvt matchup is significantly worse. yes, it's not impossible to win, but the fact that the ghost has no real counter aside from completely outplaying someone (warp prism play to break even) makes it very difficult to beat players who have good unit control. this is compounded by the relative weakness of gateway units against barracks units, particularly the marauder.
From what I've seen in the GSL games, the games that do go down to mid/late game tvp, the winner is the player that outplays the other. It's not imbalance due to ghosts, sorry. List the games out you believe are won through terran being broken because of ghosts and not because the protoss got outplayed. It's not that protoss don't have a way to deal with ghost, they're actually starting to incorporate plays that let them fight ghosts(boxer vs naniwa, AOL).
|
On September 28 2011 08:41 proot wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 07:26 Shiori wrote:On September 28 2011 07:19 Umpteen wrote:On September 28 2011 06:53 QTIP. wrote:On September 28 2011 06:48 P3rytt wrote:On September 28 2011 06:22 Umpteen wrote:
Terran isn't overpowered. It is simply, as Blizzard themselves have stated, better designed. It flows. If units or tech are forced for whatever reason, it's never a bad thing - it never makes the terran more vulnerable. If anything, forcing tech out of a Terran just gives you more of a headache. But that's a problem with the clunky, uncomfortable Z and P tech trees, nothing more. What I've learned from this post: If one race is better designed, flows better than the others and isn't set back when forced to switch tech whilst the other two races have uncomfortable tech trees it still doesn't mean the games unbalanced. Sounds legit lol... Lol I reacted the same way... "Listen, Terran isn't OP. They are just better overall." Har har, ok, it's an easy thing to make sound absurd. But I stand by it. If Zerg or Protoss respond correctly, they can win. They aren't too weak. But they are more easily thrown off balance. the GSL begs to differ. currently, the zvt matchup is skewed for terran, but it's not so bad as to be unwinnable. the pvt matchup is significantly worse. yes, it's not impossible to win, but the fact that the ghost has no real counter aside from completely outplaying someone (warp prism play to break even) makes it very difficult to beat players who have good unit control. this is compounded by the relative weakness of gateway units against barracks units, particularly the marauder. From what I've seen in the GSL games, the games that do go down to mid/late game tvp, the winner is the player that outplays the other. It's not imbalance due to ghosts, sorry. List the games out you believe are won through terran being broken because of ghosts and not because the protoss got outplayed. It's not that protoss don't have a way to deal with ghost, they're actually starting to incorporate plays that let them fight ghosts(boxer vs naniwa, AOL).
there aren't any non-gimmicky plays that counter ghosts. what you're talking about is damage control. as it stands, well-placed emps are game-ending. protoss players are trying strange things to mitigate this damage. at no point will a protoss player do to ghosts what ghosts do to high templars. this isn't even accounting for the fact that once this warp prism stuff becomes vogue, terran will prepare for it and kill the prism (since it has a huge army value).
|
On September 28 2011 07:17 QTIP. wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 07:03 -y0shi- wrote:
But thats kinda true, isnt it?
The problem isnt that terran was designed to be better (except for the ghost which IMO is a complete catastrophe) but that the other 2 races are really awkward and weird. The result is the same but we should look at P / Z for improvement, not ruin terrans. Imagine if all 3 races had all the stuff terra has... Even if what he is saying is true, his logic is flawed. How can a race have all the characteristics mentioned (which the other races lack) but not be overpowered?
Imagine Z suddenly has a tier 1, 50/0 unit that is invincible, hits flying and kills every unit in one hit. Terran still has every characteristic mentioned, but you'd be crazy to call Terran OP.
edit: Never mind, I didn't read the whole post up until this point.
|
United States7483 Posts
On September 28 2011 09:10 Phried wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 07:17 QTIP. wrote:On September 28 2011 07:03 -y0shi- wrote:
But thats kinda true, isnt it?
The problem isnt that terran was designed to be better (except for the ghost which IMO is a complete catastrophe) but that the other 2 races are really awkward and weird. The result is the same but we should look at P / Z for improvement, not ruin terrans. Imagine if all 3 races had all the stuff terra has... Even if what he is saying is true, his logic is flawed. How can a race have all the characteristics mentioned (which the other races lack) but not be overpowered? Imagine Z suddenly has a tier 1, 50/0 unit that is invincible, hits flying and kills every unit in one hit. Terran still has every characteristic mentioned, but you'd be crazy to call Terran OP. edit: Never mind, I didn't read the whole post up until this point.
Not if it costs 201 supply =p.
|
I would just like to make a point about the three races "unique" abilities:
Mobile Detection:
Terran: 50 Energy Scan, Raven, produced from the same building as a core unit in every match-up, featuring additional utility such as Seeker Missile, Point Defense Drone, and Auto-Turret
Zerg: Overseer, morphed from a unit you already have no matter what, featuring additional utilities such as Contamination and Changelings
Protoss: Observer, coming from one of three possible tech paths, cloaked.
Now, it would seem odd lore-wise that the most technologically advanced race would have the worst mobile detection, but I can buy it for the sake of game balance, however, would I be wrong in assuming that being forced down a specific tech tree for detection is a severe issue as opposed to detection coming from one of the multitude of supply granting units already floating around, or from a brief one-cycle add-on switch of a production structure, or even just having one on hand that costs nothing but Energy, a cost-free, self-renewing resource, because from my point of view, that seems like it might be a bit imbalanced, but my position might be a tad bit skewed, is it?
|
On September 28 2011 06:53 QTIP. wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 06:48 P3rytt wrote:On September 28 2011 06:22 Umpteen wrote:
Terran isn't overpowered. It is simply, as Blizzard themselves have stated, better designed. It flows. If units or tech are forced for whatever reason, it's never a bad thing - it never makes the terran more vulnerable. If anything, forcing tech out of a Terran just gives you more of a headache. But that's a problem with the clunky, uncomfortable Z and P tech trees, nothing more. What I've learned from this post: If one race is better designed, flows better than the others and isn't set back when forced to switch tech whilst the other two races have uncomfortable tech trees it still doesn't mean the games unbalanced. Sounds legit lol... Lol I reacted the same way... "Listen, Terran isn't OP. They are just better overall."
Well, I kinda agree. Saying Terran is OP implies Terrans need to be nerfed. In that sense, they aren't, it's Zerg and Protoss that are UP.
In fact, I wish some of the Terran nerfs were revoked - Reaper speed being restored to it previous tech requirements and Thor Strike Cannons being Cooldown-based again rather than energy-based. Those nerfs removed interesting strategies, and I was sorry to see them go, much like I find the Khaydarin Amulet removal unforgivable. Balance shouldn't be found by nerfing the best designed race, it should be found by redesigning the worse races until they're as fun to play and watch as Terrans.
|
On September 28 2011 12:00 VirgilSC2 wrote:
I would just like to make a point about the three races "unique" abilities:
Mobile Detection:
Terran: 50 Energy Scan, Raven, produced from the same building as a core unit in every match-up, featuring additional utility such as Seeker Missile, Point Defense Drone, and Auto-Turret
Zerg: Overseer, morphed from a unit you already have no matter what, featuring additional utilities such as Contamination and Changelings
Protoss: Observer, coming from one of three possible tech paths, cloaked.
Now, it would seem odd lore-wise that the most technologically advanced race would have the worst mobile detection, but I can buy it for the sake of game balance, however, would I be wrong in assuming that being forced down a specific tech tree for detection is a severe issue as opposed to detection coming from one of the multitude of supply granting units already floating around, or from a brief one-cycle add-on switch of a production structure, or even just having one on hand that costs nothing but Energy, a cost-free, self-renewing resource, because from my point of view, that seems like it might be a bit imbalanced, but my position might be a tad bit skewed, is it?
Rofl? So you call "having to build a robo just for an Observer" being forced down a tech path? Well the other races do have to build production buildings which cost gas too and which they might not need / use. Bio-Terrans dont need their Factory for anything other than unlocking Starports and Muta-Broodlord focused Zerg dont need their Infestation pit for anything other than upgrading their Hive. Look beyond your own plate and start using the Observer correctly ... i.e. NOT on follow on the opponents army so a good player can see the shimmer and shoot it down; just place some of them on key locations for advanced warning on ioncoming forces.
|
On September 28 2011 13:49 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 12:00 VirgilSC2 wrote:
I would just like to make a point about the three races "unique" abilities:
Mobile Detection:
Terran: 50 Energy Scan, Raven, produced from the same building as a core unit in every match-up, featuring additional utility such as Seeker Missile, Point Defense Drone, and Auto-Turret
Zerg: Overseer, morphed from a unit you already have no matter what, featuring additional utilities such as Contamination and Changelings
Protoss: Observer, coming from one of three possible tech paths, cloaked.
Now, it would seem odd lore-wise that the most technologically advanced race would have the worst mobile detection, but I can buy it for the sake of game balance, however, would I be wrong in assuming that being forced down a specific tech tree for detection is a severe issue as opposed to detection coming from one of the multitude of supply granting units already floating around, or from a brief one-cycle add-on switch of a production structure, or even just having one on hand that costs nothing but Energy, a cost-free, self-renewing resource, because from my point of view, that seems like it might be a bit imbalanced, but my position might be a tad bit skewed, is it? Rofl? So you call "having to build a robo just for an Observer" being forced down a tech path? Well the other races do have to build production buildings which cost gas too and which they might not need / use. Bio-Terrans dont need their Factory for anything other than unlocking Starports and Muta-Broodlord focused Zerg dont need their Infestation pit for anything other than upgrading their Hive. Look beyond your own plate and start using the Observer correctly ... i.e. NOT on follow on the opponents army so a good player can see the shimmer and shoot it down; just place some of them on key locations for advanced warning on ioncoming forces.
The comparison I was making is ONLY for Detection, nothing else, so don't comment if your post is some general "both races have to build buildings you're just using your buildings wrong" statement. Nothing you said had anything to do with detection other than "use your Observers right." which makes no sense, seeing as you don't know how I use my observers, because you've never seen me play.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
