|
On September 28 2011 13:34 Fanatic-Templar 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." 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.
You're absolutely right. And the reason Blizzard hasn't improved the fundamentals of Zerg and Protoss rather than cutting stuff here and there is simply that it would take a lot more time, effort, and money, and since people don't pay a monthly fee for SC2, it would be crazy of them to do this (from a purely financial and selfish point of view).
However, people will pay for HotS, so if a redesign of Zerg and Protoss is going to happen, it will be in the expansion. Let's hope they do it right (for both races, even though this is the Zerg expansion) or we'll be up for another 2 years of (justified) whining.
|
I hope all you guys claiming "storm is so powerful" just saw Puzzle vs Taeja in the Korean Weekly, where Taeja stood there, ate storms, while taking fire from a Colossus, while Puzzle had a supply advantage, and all he had to do was stim and come out ahead.
|
On September 28 2011 14:06 Empirimancer wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 13:34 Fanatic-Templar 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." 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. You're absolutely right. And the reason Blizzard hasn't improved the fundamentals of Zerg and Protoss rather than cutting stuff here and there is simply that it would take a lot more time, effort, and money, and since people don't pay a monthly fee for SC2, it would be crazy of them to do this (from a purely financial and selfish point of view).
I don't think that's fair criticism. Yes, Blizzard need to be a profitable company, but the way they develop games doesn't fit the profile you're proposing. How many essentially finished artwork iterations did they go through while making SC2? Almost nobody does that.
I think a more reasonable view to take is that keeping the game relatively stable after release (as opposed to adding or removing units) has allowed everyone, Blizzard included, to really get a feel for the dynamics of the matchups.
I was pretty harsh in a recent blog post about the dull and predictable state of Zerg, but I don't really blame Blizzard. On paper Zerg has loads of fun stuff it can do; the fact that, timing and advantage-wise, hardly any of it is worth doing compared to making drones is only appreciable in the context of mature T and P strategies.
In fact, these days I'm all but convinced the macro mechanics are the root of most evils in SC2.
Take larva inject. It means Zerg can make a ton of lings with much less investment in infrastructure. Consequently, lings have had to be made weaker against marines. But that means they scale less well, one consequence of which is that it's no longer feasible to go for fast mutalisks off the back of lings. And the later Mutalisks come out, the more you need to achieve anything, which means more underlying economy and more passivity.
Another consequence of weaker zerglings is the need for banelings at hatch tech, and a consequence of that is burrow having to be moved to Lair to avoid invalidating the Terran macro-mechanic.
Then there's chronoboost, which makes Protoss able to achieve far greater extremes of economy, upgrades, timings or unit production - extremes which directly lead to the dark days of 4-gate vs 4-gate.
|
I've said this in other threads and I'll throw it in this one too now.
Keep in mind when talking balance we are all playing what I consider an unfinished game. We KNOW 2 expansions are coming, and even if those expansions don't change multiplayer a ton it will change it and Zerg and Protoss will end up getting more attention, it is clear those 2 races are "unfinished" while just looking at terran it is more polished and thought out.
This might not be true, but it appears to me what they did was basically laid out a foundation for each of the 3 races. Then added a nice first floor for each race(chronoboost, warp in, the queen, switching of addons..). Then it was time to work on single player for Terran and it needed to be cool and fun so they went, "Ok we have a foundation and first floor for all 3 races let's make Terran single player a good time." The creative juices start flowing for Terran and it ends up trickling into the multiplayer. We get more units, more upgrades, a Command Center that I think is the single best entity in SC2(Holy shit that building can do EVERYTHING).
So what I'm saying is, when playing this game I feel like you have this one nice complete house ready to live in, then you have these 2 houses that are certainly functional, you could live in it, but the upstairs isn't finished and the bathrooms don't flush right.
What that ends up meaning is that Terran is going to be ahead unless you were to just nerf everything across the board because they have more openings, more counters, more to counter, more to work with. The other races are working within a confine that Terran isn't at the moment. That WILL change with the expansions. The game will be more dynamic. But simply put, it was a byproduct of this single player design idea of doing 1 race at a time.
Only reason I bring this up and have before is it makes you take a step back when it comes to balance talk. That doesn't mean you can't have the discussion but I always keep it in mind that it has to factor in and I am looking forward to the expansions rounding things out for all races.
|
On September 29 2011 02:40 FLuE wrote:
I've said this in other threads and I'll throw it in this one too now.
Keep in mind when talking balance we are all playing what I consider an unfinished game. We KNOW 2 expansions are coming, and even if those expansions don't change multiplayer a ton it will change it and Zerg and Protoss will end up getting more attention, it is clear those 2 races are "unfinished" while just looking at terran it is more polished and thought out.
These kind of arguements are possibly the dumbest arguments (that are actually serious) I've ever heard regarding SC2 balance. It is like saying "well we are going to have duel now with guns I consider equal, except that this gun sometimes jams... but it probably won't... though it did during the last duel, but I consider it equal, this is an even match, good luck!"
The mistakes made in balancing were not "polishing" mistakes, they were critical errors in how you can obtain information and once obtained, how you can use it to your advantage for Protoss and Zerg.
Terran can swap out tech labs and access entirely different tech trees very rapidly which Protoss and Zerg do not have this liberty. The scouting for Zerg and Protoss is too slow (especially in light of scans) to give you enough time to react and without the presence of a "safe build" it unbalances the game to an extent where Terran will need significant nerfs or a rebuild, since we've passed the tipping point where Terran players are abusing their advantages to the fullest, and small changes aren't going to do it. Simply put, Protoss and Zerg either need to be able to switch tech trees faster, or they need access to faster scouting to give them the time they need to complete a tech switch to compete against Terrans.
Take TvP. To be perfectly safe vs Terran, you'll need a Robotics Facility to effectively scout the Terran player which means you've already committed to Robo tech for the Protoss, so you've already made a tech choice which you can't revert. Whereas Terran has effective scouting options before the Factory (scans) and gets more time in the Protoss base early game with SCV's because Stalkers come out so much later than Marines.
Another instance is the 1-1-1. The most effective counter appears to be a blind 1 gate fast expand, as staying one base is simply not viable due the fact the Terran can stay one base, and when they run out of minerals, float their CC over to their natural. Of course this 1 gate fast expand is incredibly vulnerable to early Barracks pressure.
Furthermore, look at the units that can possibly come out a factory, barracks, and starport with basic add-ons:
Marines
Marauders
Reapers
Hellions
Tanks
Medivacs
Vikings
Ravens
Banshees
And now think about all the upgrades that available... There is no viable Protoss or Zerg one base all-in that can produce so many different types of units and upgrades.
So if you did decide to go Robotics facility, it doesn't always counter what is coming since by the time you scout the 1-1-1, you don't have time to react to each individual variation, you just know how you are going to die. And Terrans have done an amazing job mixing up their 1-1-1 pushes.
Zerg and Protoss need an effective "safe build" (either by buffing them or nerfing Terran) or a better way of scouting (like having Observers available at the Cybercore, prior to committing to any tech path).
Terran is also the race closest to have an effective "safe build." Due to its scouting abilities, bunker mechanics, and the fact that Terran can swap out tech labs and access entirely different tech trees very rapidly.
In terms of balance as in X unit counters Y unit and X strategy counters Y strategy, yes the game is relatively balanced (there are some unit combinations in TvZ that cause me to worry). But in terms of figuring out what units you need and what strategies you need, the game is completely imbalanced and Protoss and Zerg players are playing with more and more risky with blind builds in order to compete with Terran.
I know people don't want to admit this, that the game could be so poorly balanced, but my argument isn't born from rage, take sometime to think about it. Time will show if my prediction pans out, even with the Terran nerfs in 1.4, I believe we'll see continued Terran domination.
|
On September 29 2011 05:08 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2011 02:40 FLuE wrote:
I've said this in other threads and I'll throw it in this one too now.
Keep in mind when talking balance we are all playing what I consider an unfinished game. We KNOW 2 expansions are coming, and even if those expansions don't change multiplayer a ton it will change it and Zerg and Protoss will end up getting more attention, it is clear those 2 races are "unfinished" while just looking at terran it is more polished and thought out.
Terran can swap out tech labs and access entirely different tech trees very rapidly which Protoss and Zerg do not have this liberty. The scouting for Zerg and Protoss is too slow (especially in light of scans) to give you enough time to react and without the presence of a "safe build" it unbalances the game to an extent where Terran will need significant nerfs or a rebuild, since we've passed the tipping point where Terran players are abusing their advantages to the fullest, and small changes aren't going to do it. Simply put, Protoss and Zerg either need to be able to switch tech trees faster, or they need access to faster scouting to give them the time they need to complete a tech switch to compete against Terrans.
Yeah, let's make all 3 races incomplete, because 1 race just happens to be the most complete one of the 2. It's not like blizzard is making this a e-sports game with a lot of interesting and skill involving matches for spectators. ''-_-
Seriously dude, you don't break a one perfect vase when you made the other 2 vases bad just so that all 3 would look the same. Rather you use it as a kind of template to help make those 2 other vases perfect too. Blizz ain't going to change anything fundamentals in any of the 3 race until an expansion is comes.
|
On September 29 2011 05:49 Mehukannu wrote:
Yeah, let's make all 3 races incomplete, because 1 race just happens to be the most complete one of the 2. It's not like blizzard is making this a e-sports game with a lot of interesting and skill involving matches for spectators. ''-_-
Seriously dude, you don't break a one perfect vase when you made the other 2 vases bad just so that all 3 would look the same. Rather you use it as a kind of template to help make those 2 other vases perfect too. Blizz ain't going to change anything fundamentals in any of the 3 race until an expansion is comes.
And so Blizzard can't balance the game. And Zerg and Protoss players are playing with a gun that can jam.
So we don't really disagree at all, I don't see the point of your post. You just want major buffs for Protoss and Zerg through expansions to fix the scout/tech switch issue (ie make tech switches it faster like the "perfect vase" Terran has), while I want some fixes for the game now.
I don't see the reason we can't have some decent scouting available now for Protoss early game to even things out against Terrans. I think it is a necessity in fact, because maybe X or Y strategy or unit are too strong vs Terran, we just don't get to see them because the matchup is dominated by all-ins, and if the expansion fixes the all-ins (as opposed to fixing them now), it means it will take that much longer to fix the strategies or units that are too strong, but being masked now.
Basically it means we'll wait longer for the game achieve anything close to balance, which might cost the game fans and money. In fact, it already has cost the game money/fans according to this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=270110
|
On September 29 2011 05:08 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2011 02:40 FLuE wrote:
I've said this in other threads and I'll throw it in this one too now.
Keep in mind when talking balance we are all playing what I consider an unfinished game. We KNOW 2 expansions are coming, and even if those expansions don't change multiplayer a ton it will change it and Zerg and Protoss will end up getting more attention, it is clear those 2 races are "unfinished" while just looking at terran it is more polished and thought out.
These kind of arguements are possibly the dumbest arguments (that are actually serious) I've ever heard regarding SC2 balance. It is like saying "well we are going to have duel now with guns I consider equal, except that this gun sometimes jams... but it probably won't... though it did during the last duel, but I consider it equal, this is an even match, good luck!" The mistakes made in balancing were not "polishing" mistakes, they were critical errors in how you can obtain information and once obtained, how you can use it to your advantage for Protoss and Zerg. Terran can swap out tech labs and access entirely different tech trees very rapidly which Protoss and Zerg do not have this liberty. The scouting for Zerg and Protoss is too slow (especially in light of scans) to give you enough time to react and without the presence of a "safe build" it unbalances the game to an extent where Terran will need significant nerfs or a rebuild, since we've passed the tipping point where Terran players are abusing their advantages to the fullest, and small changes aren't going to do it. Simply put, Protoss and Zerg either need to be able to switch tech trees faster, or they need access to faster scouting to give them the time they need to complete a tech switch to compete against Terrans.Take TvP. To be perfectly safe vs Terran, you'll need a Robotics Facility to effectively scout the Terran player which means you've already committed to Robo tech for the Protoss, so you've already made a tech choice which you can't revert. Whereas Terran has effective scouting options before the Factory (scans) and gets more time in the Protoss base early game with SCV's because Stalkers come out so much later than Marines. Another instance is the 1-1-1. The most effective counter appears to be a blind 1 gate fast expand, as staying one base is simply not viable due the fact the Terran can stay one base, and when they run out of minerals, float their CC over to their natural. Of course this 1 gate fast expand is incredibly vulnerable to early Barracks pressure. Furthermore, look at the units that can possibly come out a factory, barracks, and starport with basic add-ons: Marines Marauders Reapers Hellions Tanks Medivacs Vikings Ravens Banshees And now think about all the upgrades that available... There is no viable Protoss or Zerg one base all-in that can produce so many different types of units and upgrades. So if you did decide to go Robotics facility, it doesn't always counter what is coming since by the time you scout the 1-1-1, you don't have time to react to each individual variation, you just know how you are going to die. And Terrans have done an amazing job mixing up their 1-1-1 pushes. Zerg and Protoss need an effective "safe build" (either by buffing them or nerfing Terran) or a better way of scouting (like having Observers available at the Cybercore, prior to committing to any tech path). Terran is also the race closest to have an effective "safe build." Due to its scouting abilities, bunker mechanics, and the fact that Terran can swap out tech labs and access entirely different tech trees very rapidly.
In terms of balance as in X unit counters Y unit and X strategy counters Y strategy, yes the game is relatively balanced (there are some unit combinations in TvZ that cause me to worry). But in terms of figuring out what units you need and what strategies you need, the game is completely imbalanced and Protoss and Zerg players are playing with more and more risky with blind builds in order to compete with Terran. I know people don't want to admit this, that the game could be so poorly balanced, but my argument isn't born from rage, take sometime to think about it. Time will show if my prediction pans out, even with the Terran nerfs in 1.4, I believe we'll see continued Terran domination.
Not just that. Terran can also deny scouting easier than zerg and protoss can.
|
Honestly, I think that Protoss and Zerg need to both have access to powerful timing pushes that don't limit their play but at the same time can't be turned into ridiculously strong all-ins. Let's say, for example, Protoss was able to open with a high-Stalker count timing push into an expand. This push can be held off if the Terran rushes for Siege tech, which the Stalkers are unable to break without significant losses. This means that Terrans have to open up with a small Siege count, and can then expand behind a tank count of 2-3 before deciding upon a midgame strategy. Hell, they might even be able to use those Tanks to do a counterpush against Protoss, that can only be held off with a decent Phoenix count, some Chargelots, or some nice Immortal usage. In this way we have a matchup developing through several distinct phases of each player having to squeeze through their play to hit certain timings where they can turn the game around, just like in Broodwar.
In Broodwar, we see this happen all the time. It's especially noticeable in TvZ, where Z starts with an advantage due to Speedlings that keeps T from moving out but doesn't let Z break a Bunker, then the advantage shifts to T with Medics, Stim, and range for a timing push to try to break the Zerg natural or third, then when Mutas come out the Terran is forced back to defend against the harassment, and then when Science Vessels come out it goes back into Terran's advantage and lets them go back out into the map, and then Z desperately tries to get up Defilers before T manages to break the natural... you get the idea.
Limiting play makes healthy matchups. There should only be a few available builds for each player to choose at each opportunity, and the aggressor should always be more limited than the defender. Right now, we see the aggressor being less limited than the defender in SC2 due to Terran's incredible ability to shuffle tech, and this means that the onus is always on the defender to scout and respond while the Terran dictates the game. There need to be more powerful timing pushes that can be scouted easily and defended only by making very specific decisions, but then defended easily. Let's compare and contrast, say, a 9pool in BW to the 11-11 in SC2. The 9pool (with 6 Zerglings) sets the Zerg back slightly and forces the Protoss to make another Cannon, delaying the first Gateway and thus the first Corsair. If the Protoss does not make a second Cannon, they will almost certainly lose. If they do make a second Cannon, the Zerglings do nothing but clean up enemy scouts. In comparison, the 11-11 can be scouted by the Zerg, but there is no clear-cut counter to it. The Zerg has to make a large Zergling count, micro well, and hope that they come out in the lead. The Terran can decide to not commit at any point, Salvage, and run home. The Zerg has to keep producing Zerglings until they are sure that the threat is gone. They can't just, say, make a Spine Crawler and expect to come out ahead. This is an example of a good and bad kind of pressure. The first requires players to interact and sets up a clear kind of game, the second is far more fuzzy and creates a situation where strategy has really no relevance.
Long way of saying something pretty simple: we need strong timing pushes with simple counters. Levels of tech need to mean things, and players need to be forced into certain areas of play. However, when that forcing happens, it needs to set the forced player in a good position.
|
On September 29 2011 05:53 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2011 05:49 Mehukannu wrote:
Yeah, let's make all 3 races incomplete, because 1 race just happens to be the most complete one of the 2. It's not like blizzard is making this a e-sports game with a lot of interesting and skill involving matches for spectators. ''-_-
Seriously dude, you don't break a one perfect vase when you made the other 2 vases bad just so that all 3 would look the same. Rather you use it as a kind of template to help make those 2 other vases perfect too. Blizz ain't going to change anything fundamentals in any of the 3 race until an expansion is comes.
And so Blizzard can't balance the game. And Zerg and Protoss players are playing with a gun that can jam. So we don't really disagree at all, I don't see the point of your post. You just want major buffs for Protoss and Zerg through expansions to fix the scout/tech switch issue (ie make tech switches it faster like the "perfect vase" Terran has), while I want some fixes for the game now. I don't see the reason we can't have some decent scouting available now for Protoss early game to even things out against Terrans. I think it is a necessity in fact, because maybe X or Y strategy or unit are too strong vs Terran, we just don't get to see them because the matchup is dominated by all-ins, and if the expansion fixes the all-ins (as opposed to fixing them now), it means it will take that much longer to fix the strategies or units that are too strong, but being masked now. Basically it means we'll wait longer for the game achieve anything close to balance, which might cost the game fans and money. In fact, it already has cost the game money/fans according to this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=270110
I don't see why blizzard would just suddenly make a patch to fix everything now, because when a expansion comes there will be new units and maybe some neat new mechanics for all races that are going to change the balance. For now it serves no reason to fix the game now because the balance is going to change anyway when the expansions come, so it serves no purpose to do that. We can't do anything about the big numbers of terrans in tournaments it just so happened that most pros choosed to pick terran, most of them are korean anyway. But I agree it would be nice to have balanced game like next month, but the metagame changes quite fast, especially when the new patch came giving some nice buffs for protoss so there is no way to know what the game will be month or a half a year now. Unfortunately tournaments suffers because of it. =,(
Also where do you get that terran ''fast'' tech switches from anyway? It is only true at early game where you haven't really even committed on any tech path yet, while mid-late game zerg has the fastest tech switches of the 3, unless you mean that terran can tech fast to factory and starport, which is the problem for protoss if terran goes for 1-1-1.
You can also see some flaws with race designs like protoss does not have any unit that is meant to be for harass (voidrays was supposed to do that, but they appeared to be too good at killing structures and they had that upgrade that made them really fast, no terran anti air unit couldn't keep up with them =D ) and zerg are waiting for the corruptors to get something interesting.
|
How can people in this thread put protoss and zerg in the same basket. As far as I know, zergs don't have any problem in any matchup right now, in Korea or in foreign land. In fact they're doing pretty well.
|
[QUOTE]On September 29 2011 05:08 BronzeKnee wrote:
[QUOTE]On September 29 2011 02:40 FLuE wrote:
Take TvP. To be perfectly safe vs Terran, you'll need a Robotics Facility to effectively scout the Terran player which means you've already committed to Robo tech for the Protoss, so you've already made a tech choice which you can't revert. Whereas Terran has effective scouting options before the Factory (scans) and gets more time in the Protoss base early game with SCV's because Stalkers come out so much later than Marines.
Another instance is the 1-1-1. The most effective counter appears to be a blind 1 gate fast expand, as staying one base is simply not viable due the fact the Terran can stay one base, and when they run out of minerals, float their CC over to their natural. Of course this 1 gate fast expand is incredibly vulnerable to early Barracks pressure.
[/QUOTE]
You can scout a terran easily from the front. Zealot stalker pressure will either see marauders, or a bunker.
By the time your probe is killed ina teran base, u can see at least 1 gas & 1 rax. Probing the foront you can see a lot more. Probing the protoss base,a terran usually sees gate core 1 gas MAYBE 2. Even a late second gas can tech fine, for anything except perhaps dt.
If you see marauder, u dont need robo. Also if u see reaper, or you see the actual tech lab on the rax.
Scan is not good for terran, it is a waste of a mule. No top terran scans for scouting. Late game scans used to find army position etc. Most good terrans can figurte out what a toss is doing from probing the front.
111 the counter is 1 gate robo into 3 gate robo, I was one of the worst complainers about 111, but with immortal ragne, the 111 is fine.
|
On September 29 2011 09:18 PeggyHill wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2011 05:08 BronzeKnee wrote:On September 29 2011 02:40 FLuE wrote:
Take TvP. To be perfectly safe vs Terran, you'll need a Robotics Facility to effectively scout the Terran player which means you've already committed to Robo tech for the Protoss, so you've already made a tech choice which you can't revert. Whereas Terran has effective scouting options before the Factory (scans) and gets more time in the Protoss base early game with SCV's because Stalkers come out so much later than Marines.
Another instance is the 1-1-1. The most effective counter appears to be a blind 1 gate fast expand, as staying one base is simply not viable due the fact the Terran can stay one base, and when they run out of minerals, float their CC over to their natural. Of course this 1 gate fast expand is incredibly vulnerable to early Barracks pressure.
You can scout a terran easily from the front. Zealot stalker pressure will either see marauders, or a bunker. By the time your probe is killed ina teran base, u can see at least 1 gas & 1 rax. Probing the foront you can see a lot more. Probing the protoss base,a terran usually sees gate core 1 gas MAYBE 2. Even a late second gas can tech fine, for anything except perhaps dt. If you see marauder, u dont need robo. Also if u see reaper, or you see the actual tech lab on the rax. Scan is not good for terran, it is a waste of a mule. No top terran scans for scouting. Late game scans used to find army position etc. Most good terrans can figurte out what a toss is doing from probing the front. 111 the counter is 1 gate robo into 3 gate robo, I was one of the worst complainers about 111, but with immortal ragne, the 111 is fine.
>fake a build
>stalker scouting completely thwarted.
|
On September 29 2011 08:26 MrCon wrote:
How can people in this thread put protoss and zerg in the same basket. As far as I know, zergs don't have any problem in any matchup right now, in Korea or in foreign land. In fact they're doing pretty well.
At the moment you could argue that, though I would disagree. And maybe a timing push from Protoss will develop tomorrow that will give Protoss a winning percentage vs Terran.
But it doesn't the change the basic part of the game that isn't working (IdrA has talked about this at length before), and that is Player 1 does X, Player 2 scouts X and attempts to do Y which is the counter to X. Player 2 didn't have enough time after scouting to do Y even though he scouted as quickly as possible (can be looked at as either the scouting comes too late, or the tech takes too long to build) and thus died.
So then Player 2 begins opening with Y, hoping Player 1 will do X again.
This is the reality with a number 1-1-1 openings. And by 1-1-1 I mean when the Terran places down a Barracks, Factory and Starport and makes any combination of units out of them with the intent to all-in or use said units to expand (such as this build: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=232753 ) Do not limit the 1-1-1 to the Tank-Marine-Banshee all-in, it was my mistake to not use the terminology that most people expect. In the case of an expanding 1-1-1 build, even if scouted the build is difficult to punish, which in itself is ok initially, since you can then expand yourself, but you also won't be able to tell the units from just seeing the structures themselves, you actually have to see the army composition of your opponent.
Ideally I think we can all agree the game should work like this:
Player 1 does X, Player 2 has the capability to scout X and if Player 2 does scout, Player 2 has the capability to stop X.
Every race should have the right to know what is coming at them if they commit to scouting (ie they sacrifice time and resources in order to scout). Reapers and Scans provide the Terran with superb scouting options quite early, Zerg has slow Overlords and Speedlings early though they are not as good as Reapers and Scans, and Protoss really only has Probes and Stalkers, until Hallucinate Observers or Phoenixes come out. Hallucinate cuts heavily into Sentry energy and requires multiple Sentries in order to accurately keep tabs on your opponent, which cuts into gas and therefore cuts into tech. Observers and Phoenxies both require you to commit to a tech tree. In other words, Protoss has to use considerably amounts of gas just to scout, while Terran and Zerg do not, and their scouting also comes later.
|
Canada13379 Posts
On September 29 2011 08:26 MrCon wrote:
How can people in this thread put protoss and zerg in the same basket. As far as I know, zergs don't have any problem in any matchup right now, in Korea or in foreign land. In fact they're doing pretty well.
Agreed. I feel protoss is having the worst time and t and z are doing fine in all of their matchups from what ive seen.
|
On September 29 2011 09:48 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2011 09:18 PeggyHill wrote:On September 29 2011 05:08 BronzeKnee wrote:On September 29 2011 02:40 FLuE wrote:
Take TvP. To be perfectly safe vs Terran, you'll need a Robotics Facility to effectively scout the Terran player which means you've already committed to Robo tech for the Protoss, so you've already made a tech choice which you can't revert. Whereas Terran has effective scouting options before the Factory (scans) and gets more time in the Protoss base early game with SCV's because Stalkers come out so much later than Marines.
Another instance is the 1-1-1. The most effective counter appears to be a blind 1 gate fast expand, as staying one base is simply not viable due the fact the Terran can stay one base, and when they run out of minerals, float their CC over to their natural. Of course this 1 gate fast expand is incredibly vulnerable to early Barracks pressure.
You can scout a terran easily from the front. Zealot stalker pressure will either see marauders, or a bunker. By the time your probe is killed ina teran base, u can see at least 1 gas & 1 rax. Probing the foront you can see a lot more. Probing the protoss base,a terran usually sees gate core 1 gas MAYBE 2. Even a late second gas can tech fine, for anything except perhaps dt. If you see marauder, u dont need robo. Also if u see reaper, or you see the actual tech lab on the rax. Scan is not good for terran, it is a waste of a mule. No top terran scans for scouting. Late game scans used to find army position etc. Most good terrans can figurte out what a toss is doing from probing the front. 111 the counter is 1 gate robo into 3 gate robo, I was one of the worst complainers about 111, but with immortal ragne, the 111 is fine. >fake a build >stalker scouting completely thwarted.
Faking a build is inefficient, in a way you are ahead if a player fakes his build.
Zealot+stalker scouting in PvT is about seeing wether he has marauder or not, bunker or not.
Marauder = 3 gate expo
Bunker = robo/stargate tech, or gateway tech if you have seen a tech lab on a rax
'Scouting' is not about have a 100% perfect view of your opponents build. It's about reading the small things.
|
On September 29 2011 10:55 PeggyHill wrote:
Faking a build is inefficient, in a way you are ahead if a player fakes his build.
Zealot+stalker scouting in PvT is about seeing wether he has marauder or not, bunker or not.
Marauder = 3 gate expo
Bunker = robo/stargate tech, or gateway tech if you have seen a tech lab on a rax
'Scouting' is not about have a 100% perfect view of your opponents build. It's about reading the small things.
Just hide your marauders, show them a reactored rax and only marines with a wall and there's absolutely nothing the Protoss can do about it.
I've offraced plenty of times, and every time I get a TvP I just do exactly what I stated above, and 9 times out of 10 it elicits a robo/1-base oriented response from the Protoss. Many will think it's a 1-1-1 and therefore go 1-base colossi, in which case something like a 2-rax expo into reactored vikings wins handily or even a 3-rax can outright kill them because they have only zealots in an effort to get fast colossi.
|
On September 29 2011 10:01 ZeromuS wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2011 08:26 MrCon wrote:
How can people in this thread put protoss and zerg in the same basket. As far as I know, zergs don't have any problem in any matchup right now, in Korea or in foreign land. In fact they're doing pretty well. Agreed. I feel protoss is having the worst time and t and z are doing fine in all of their matchups from what ive seen.
I agree, except T is rocking Z decently hard... unless you're DRG or Nestea (especially DRG).
|
On September 29 2011 11:58 Apnea wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2011 10:55 PeggyHill wrote:
Faking a build is inefficient, in a way you are ahead if a player fakes his build.
Zealot+stalker scouting in PvT is about seeing wether he has marauder or not, bunker or not.
Marauder = 3 gate expo
Bunker = robo/stargate tech, or gateway tech if you have seen a tech lab on a rax
'Scouting' is not about have a 100% perfect view of your opponents build. It's about reading the small things.
Just hide your marauders, show them a reactored rax and only marines with a wall and there's absolutely nothing the Protoss can do about it. I've offraced plenty of times, and every time I get a TvP I just do exactly what I stated above, and 9 times out of 10 it elicits a robo/1-base oriented response from the Protoss. Many will think it's a 1-1-1 and therefore go 1-base colossi, in which case something like a 2-rax expo into reactored vikings wins handily or even a 3-rax can outright kill them because they have only zealots in an effort to get fast colossi.
Hide marauder you will struggle harder to hold initial pressure, or will at least take damage.
Reactored rax being shown would require reactor first, or a tech lab on a 2nd hidden rax, which would delay concussive/shields/stim etc. That already is inefficieny.
The exact same sort of 'scouting imbalance' exists in PvZ as well. After your initial probe dies, you can't really scout a zerg until obs/hall. The only scouting you can do is of the front (how many spines, roaches or not etc.) and of a third base.
It's fine, its part of the matchup. You aren't susposed to have perfect knowledge ever, that would be too easy.
I actually cannot believe people are talking about this tbh. It shows such a lack of knowledge about starcraft it is unbelieveable.
|
I don't see how wanting viable scouting that doesn't require me to invest heavily in a tech path means I don't understand the game.
And what early pressure? If you're honestly that scared of a stalker poke then make a bunker - it will only confuse the Protoss that much more and you can always salvage it (lol), although with a depot/rax/depot wall you're pretty much safe regardless. Or if you're referring to being all-in'd, that's your fault for not scouting it.
You see, there exists this period for Protoss where they're almost completely blind. Terran has a wall and can choose what the Toss sees, and knowing that a T has a single gas is almost meaningnless because Terrans have countless gas-light openers (ranging all the way from 1-rax marauder expo to 1-1-1 allins) so it's not like that initial intel is really going far. Sure you can get a general idea with some pokes, but the point is it's absurdly difficult to know what a T is doing and are therefore forced to guess.
It's during this time that a Z would normally sack an overlord or a T would drop a scan, what do you propose Protoss does, flips a coin? Sure, if that's what you call "understanding" the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
