|
On July 10 2012 07:04 nkr wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 06:55 tdt wrote:
May be balanced in % but Z v anything is becoming worst matchup in the game. Whether 3CC Terran passivity or FFE Protoss passivity every game not much happening but mining first 10 min. That shit is boring to me. I loved back when zealots where 28 seconds, WG was fast, queen was weaker and 11-11s and good BFH. Action from 4 min in.
Its not really balanced though if you watch the games. Once zergs larva mechanic takes over because T cant pressure and force gas speed or roaches as much without being an all in - Terran is usually dead unles they exhibit far superior play. And that's just mid game. Late game? Forgetaboutit. Takes miracle plays. Similar goes for Protoss but at least they have hard hitting durable units so can slow Zerg down and force gas speed/roach and block hatches and late game they have mothership gimmick to deal with totally ridiculous BL/infestor. So more balanced than TvZ and more fun to watch at this point.
I can see where you're coming from, but how would you balance that out for zerg? There's a reason warpgate and proxyrax got nerfed.
I think I have a solution that might break the passive play style of zerg, without removing any of the new tools they have been given. It comes in two changes:
1) Let Creep recede faster
2) Nerf Spine Crawlers, I would say, give them less health or armor
3) In return, make something stronger for zerg, maybe the zergling or hydra?
Why these changes? I think creep spread works better as a tug of war thing, and not something that once placed sticks around seemingly forever. This will keep creep spreading as easy as it is now, but the zerg player will need to stay actively on it to keep all the advantages like mobility and massive map vision. I also feel like there is currently no choice involved here. For terran it is either a mule or some vision for protoss it is either boost economy, upgrades, or army. Zergs can pretty much both inject and keep up creep spread. Maybe this way it becomes more of a choice.
I have two problems with the spine crawler, first, the larva cost, second, the ability to slow down aggression. So the larva cost, with some aggression you want a zerg to spend his larva, and the most effective way to get a zerg to spend larva is to make the zerg build army. The spine crawler combined with the queens is so strong that it reduces the need for a zerg to spend the larva, and I feel that is why a mild harrass will not slow down a zerg. Second, the slow down, we have all seen the spine crawler walls. They cost no supply, pretty much come for free at that point in the game, cover a large area, and slow down the army to a complete halt. Why do I have a problem with this? It becomes too hard to out manouvre the brood lords. The zerg pretty much has all the time in the world to get into position.
I think these are not the areas people are usually looking at changing. I think messing with the inject mechanism would be a big mistake. I think messing with the strengths of the zerg army would be a big mistake. Just give terrans and protoss the ability to actually make use of the weaknesses of the broodlord/infestor army (reduced mobility). The zerg can now pretty much cover this with the large creep and effective static defense.
|
On July 10 2012 08:02 Naphal wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 07:13 lorestarcraft wrote:On July 09 2012 20:33 Naphal wrote:
terran was balanced for the highest level of play before this patch, meaning good micro was no longer benefical, but a requirement for success, we have seen korean terrans dominating tournaments, and the other place where terrans were the majority... was the bronze league.
i liked being the minority in diamond, it did not matter that i could maybe reach high diamond with another race that is less micro reliant, because i had fun being aggressive in TvZ, preparing timings in TvP, and position tanks in TvT... and should i ever encounter something unbeatable, i could always trust a toptier terran to find an answer.
now however, even the toptier terrans do not look good, and do not BS me with "needs more time" these guys play 12+ hours a day, and when all the Slayers terrans cannot figure something out while practicing with coca, or the IM terrans with Nestea or so on, then maybe there IS an imbalance.
Blizzard themselves stated that terrans should aim for an early to midgame advantage in TvP, to fight on even terms in the lategame, now i would say that this is at least twice as important in TvZ, because their lategame is even harder to deal with due to the infestor, the ultra / BL switches and of course their production.
The problem ocurred, when terrans LAST option to control the zerg early game was taken away, the queen would now handle bunker- / hellion- / bansheepressure all alone, providing a "skip early game" option, and with creep out, terrans midgame timings, that used to follow no longer existing harrassment, are not very intimidating.
now terran can either allin or prepare for the lategame... with the most expensive, slowest and inflexible production facilities, many units that are designed as direct counters and thus have very limited purposes, and last but not least crappy T3.
Many may still remember the problem with TvP before the patch, well, below prolevel, that still exists, and now TvZ is even worse, at least you can fight TvP lategame IF you micro much more than the protoss, but no amount of micro can save you from zerg.
Theorycrafting will not help, of course a 3/3 200/200 BC Raven Thor Ghost with only 10 SCVs left will shred anything, but why would a Zerg / Protoss not attack once their deathball is assembled? and you better believe a terran on 5 bases has weakspots in the defense, and should you deny 2 expansions or get into the production, it is over.
so there are 2 solutions, if reverting some patches is out of the question:
1)buff terran lategame
2)make protoss and zerg harder to play
lastly as an afterthought, how can people point at the ryung vs drg match saying "THAT is your solution"?
drg played bad, he assembled a massive army only to have it sit in the middle while ryung had up to 60 supply of mm running wild across the map, then he lost BLs to a nuke, not to mention the infestors he lost...
and finally the last big fight, clumped BL charge into the biggest concave of terran ever seen, clumped infestors follow, corruptors come last, yes, under these circumstances seeker missile can be very good, but if a terran is supposed to split everything everywhere anytime, why should a zerg be successful with an obvious attackmove with the wrong order of units?
and lets not forget that ryung got last place in the group while drg and nestea advanced. This is one of the most ignorant statements I have seen on TL in a while (that's saying something). Anytime some is having difficulty with a particular race, the response is always "they just a-move!" And there race is always harder to play. The fact is, each race is different enough that they are not even comparible to say one is "easier" to play than the other. That is a very personal thing. The other thing I always see is people complain that the other race does not "micro" as much as they do. The 3rd thing we always see is people complaining that their units (especially tier 3) are not nearly as good as anyone elses. We have seen all three of these complaints from all three races at different times. The solution has never been to make an easy cure-all, imba unit. The solution is to evolve. Ravens are meant for support, BCs are meant to be supported by other units. What if somebody got 5 or 6 and supported them with 'rines and tanks? Could be awful, idk, be the effect with yamato cannon could function like a zerg or toss deathball, if that's what you want, but I doubt it is the best solution. Sensor towers, strategic PFs, and Raven harass are all viable options that have largley been unexplored. The poster also mention nukes. Nukes are excellent at forcing armies to move and gaining positioning. They are also cheap and are casted by a units you should be using more anyway. Experiment, don't just theory-craft. My 2 cents. the truth must hurt... terran actually has the worst t3 terran actually needs to micro the most terran really has expensive / slow / inflexible production combined with all the nerfs to our harrassment and early to midgame possibilities, we have a problem now, a problem that only gets mitigated at the highest level through multitasking and micro up to a point where the zergs and protoss have difficulties keeping up (not because they are worse, because their units do not allow for it) edit: still no excuse for the terrible final engagement i talked about. so i think my point still stands, either a higher skill ceiling for protoss and zerg, or a comparable lategame for terrans, your post really is just vague ramblings, and i do not theorycraft, even though my 20+ games a week in diamond league really do not account for anything, it may just be enough to see that being defensive is no good and a terran late lategame army would require surviving the protoss and zerg lategame in decent condition, where my exact problem lies.
You really haven't seen good raven or ghost usage if you think T late game is bad. Honestly please stop being so biased and actually try out T late game rather than going marine/tank vs a T3 army and then complaining about your late game not being good.
|
On July 10 2012 08:16 hunts wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 08:02 Naphal wrote:On July 10 2012 07:13 lorestarcraft wrote:On July 09 2012 20:33 Naphal wrote:
terran was balanced for the highest level of play before this patch, meaning good micro was no longer benefical, but a requirement for success, we have seen korean terrans dominating tournaments, and the other place where terrans were the majority... was the bronze league.
i liked being the minority in diamond, it did not matter that i could maybe reach high diamond with another race that is less micro reliant, because i had fun being aggressive in TvZ, preparing timings in TvP, and position tanks in TvT... and should i ever encounter something unbeatable, i could always trust a toptier terran to find an answer.
now however, even the toptier terrans do not look good, and do not BS me with "needs more time" these guys play 12+ hours a day, and when all the Slayers terrans cannot figure something out while practicing with coca, or the IM terrans with Nestea or so on, then maybe there IS an imbalance.
Blizzard themselves stated that terrans should aim for an early to midgame advantage in TvP, to fight on even terms in the lategame, now i would say that this is at least twice as important in TvZ, because their lategame is even harder to deal with due to the infestor, the ultra / BL switches and of course their production.
The problem ocurred, when terrans LAST option to control the zerg early game was taken away, the queen would now handle bunker- / hellion- / bansheepressure all alone, providing a "skip early game" option, and with creep out, terrans midgame timings, that used to follow no longer existing harrassment, are not very intimidating.
now terran can either allin or prepare for the lategame... with the most expensive, slowest and inflexible production facilities, many units that are designed as direct counters and thus have very limited purposes, and last but not least crappy T3.
Many may still remember the problem with TvP before the patch, well, below prolevel, that still exists, and now TvZ is even worse, at least you can fight TvP lategame IF you micro much more than the protoss, but no amount of micro can save you from zerg.
Theorycrafting will not help, of course a 3/3 200/200 BC Raven Thor Ghost with only 10 SCVs left will shred anything, but why would a Zerg / Protoss not attack once their deathball is assembled? and you better believe a terran on 5 bases has weakspots in the defense, and should you deny 2 expansions or get into the production, it is over.
so there are 2 solutions, if reverting some patches is out of the question:
1)buff terran lategame
2)make protoss and zerg harder to play
lastly as an afterthought, how can people point at the ryung vs drg match saying "THAT is your solution"?
drg played bad, he assembled a massive army only to have it sit in the middle while ryung had up to 60 supply of mm running wild across the map, then he lost BLs to a nuke, not to mention the infestors he lost...
and finally the last big fight, clumped BL charge into the biggest concave of terran ever seen, clumped infestors follow, corruptors come last, yes, under these circumstances seeker missile can be very good, but if a terran is supposed to split everything everywhere anytime, why should a zerg be successful with an obvious attackmove with the wrong order of units?
and lets not forget that ryung got last place in the group while drg and nestea advanced. This is one of the most ignorant statements I have seen on TL in a while (that's saying something). Anytime some is having difficulty with a particular race, the response is always "they just a-move!" And there race is always harder to play. The fact is, each race is different enough that they are not even comparible to say one is "easier" to play than the other. That is a very personal thing. The other thing I always see is people complain that the other race does not "micro" as much as they do. The 3rd thing we always see is people complaining that their units (especially tier 3) are not nearly as good as anyone elses. We have seen all three of these complaints from all three races at different times. The solution has never been to make an easy cure-all, imba unit. The solution is to evolve. Ravens are meant for support, BCs are meant to be supported by other units. What if somebody got 5 or 6 and supported them with 'rines and tanks? Could be awful, idk, be the effect with yamato cannon could function like a zerg or toss deathball, if that's what you want, but I doubt it is the best solution. Sensor towers, strategic PFs, and Raven harass are all viable options that have largley been unexplored. The poster also mention nukes. Nukes are excellent at forcing armies to move and gaining positioning. They are also cheap and are casted by a units you should be using more anyway. Experiment, don't just theory-craft. My 2 cents. the truth must hurt... terran actually has the worst t3 terran actually needs to micro the most terran really has expensive / slow / inflexible production combined with all the nerfs to our harrassment and early to midgame possibilities, we have a problem now, a problem that only gets mitigated at the highest level through multitasking and micro up to a point where the zergs and protoss have difficulties keeping up (not because they are worse, because their units do not allow for it) edit: still no excuse for the terrible final engagement i talked about. so i think my point still stands, either a higher skill ceiling for protoss and zerg, or a comparable lategame for terrans, your post really is just vague ramblings, and i do not theorycraft, even though my 20+ games a week in diamond league really do not account for anything, it may just be enough to see that being defensive is no good and a terran late lategame army would require surviving the protoss and zerg lategame in decent condition, where my exact problem lies. You really haven't seen good raven or ghost usage if you think T late game is bad. Honestly please stop being so biased and actually try out T late game rather than going marine/tank vs a T3 army and then complaining about your late game not being good.
you do not even know what units i make, so please, do not bother, also i do watch gsl and other tournaments when my time allows it, and the success of the raven is underwhelming, it really only shines if the opponent messes up (the pdd is decent though)
the ghost is not t3, and a staple unit against protoss, against zerg however, i personally favor a few more siegetanks to focusfire the infestors, nukes are cute and all, but i do not like relying on a lucky hit.
|
On July 10 2012 08:16 hunts wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 08:02 Naphal wrote:On July 10 2012 07:13 lorestarcraft wrote:On July 09 2012 20:33 Naphal wrote:
terran was balanced for the highest level of play before this patch, meaning good micro was no longer benefical, but a requirement for success, we have seen korean terrans dominating tournaments, and the other place where terrans were the majority... was the bronze league.
i liked being the minority in diamond, it did not matter that i could maybe reach high diamond with another race that is less micro reliant, because i had fun being aggressive in TvZ, preparing timings in TvP, and position tanks in TvT... and should i ever encounter something unbeatable, i could always trust a toptier terran to find an answer.
now however, even the toptier terrans do not look good, and do not BS me with "needs more time" these guys play 12+ hours a day, and when all the Slayers terrans cannot figure something out while practicing with coca, or the IM terrans with Nestea or so on, then maybe there IS an imbalance.
Blizzard themselves stated that terrans should aim for an early to midgame advantage in TvP, to fight on even terms in the lategame, now i would say that this is at least twice as important in TvZ, because their lategame is even harder to deal with due to the infestor, the ultra / BL switches and of course their production.
The problem ocurred, when terrans LAST option to control the zerg early game was taken away, the queen would now handle bunker- / hellion- / bansheepressure all alone, providing a "skip early game" option, and with creep out, terrans midgame timings, that used to follow no longer existing harrassment, are not very intimidating.
now terran can either allin or prepare for the lategame... with the most expensive, slowest and inflexible production facilities, many units that are designed as direct counters and thus have very limited purposes, and last but not least crappy T3.
Many may still remember the problem with TvP before the patch, well, below prolevel, that still exists, and now TvZ is even worse, at least you can fight TvP lategame IF you micro much more than the protoss, but no amount of micro can save you from zerg.
Theorycrafting will not help, of course a 3/3 200/200 BC Raven Thor Ghost with only 10 SCVs left will shred anything, but why would a Zerg / Protoss not attack once their deathball is assembled? and you better believe a terran on 5 bases has weakspots in the defense, and should you deny 2 expansions or get into the production, it is over.
so there are 2 solutions, if reverting some patches is out of the question:
1)buff terran lategame
2)make protoss and zerg harder to play
lastly as an afterthought, how can people point at the ryung vs drg match saying "THAT is your solution"?
drg played bad, he assembled a massive army only to have it sit in the middle while ryung had up to 60 supply of mm running wild across the map, then he lost BLs to a nuke, not to mention the infestors he lost...
and finally the last big fight, clumped BL charge into the biggest concave of terran ever seen, clumped infestors follow, corruptors come last, yes, under these circumstances seeker missile can be very good, but if a terran is supposed to split everything everywhere anytime, why should a zerg be successful with an obvious attackmove with the wrong order of units?
and lets not forget that ryung got last place in the group while drg and nestea advanced. This is one of the most ignorant statements I have seen on TL in a while (that's saying something). Anytime some is having difficulty with a particular race, the response is always "they just a-move!" And there race is always harder to play. The fact is, each race is different enough that they are not even comparible to say one is "easier" to play than the other. That is a very personal thing. The other thing I always see is people complain that the other race does not "micro" as much as they do. The 3rd thing we always see is people complaining that their units (especially tier 3) are not nearly as good as anyone elses. We have seen all three of these complaints from all three races at different times. The solution has never been to make an easy cure-all, imba unit. The solution is to evolve. Ravens are meant for support, BCs are meant to be supported by other units. What if somebody got 5 or 6 and supported them with 'rines and tanks? Could be awful, idk, be the effect with yamato cannon could function like a zerg or toss deathball, if that's what you want, but I doubt it is the best solution. Sensor towers, strategic PFs, and Raven harass are all viable options that have largley been unexplored. The poster also mention nukes. Nukes are excellent at forcing armies to move and gaining positioning. They are also cheap and are casted by a units you should be using more anyway. Experiment, don't just theory-craft. My 2 cents. the truth must hurt... terran actually has the worst t3 terran actually needs to micro the most terran really has expensive / slow / inflexible production combined with all the nerfs to our harrassment and early to midgame possibilities, we have a problem now, a problem that only gets mitigated at the highest level through multitasking and micro up to a point where the zergs and protoss have difficulties keeping up (not because they are worse, because their units do not allow for it) edit: still no excuse for the terrible final engagement i talked about. so i think my point still stands, either a higher skill ceiling for protoss and zerg, or a comparable lategame for terrans, your post really is just vague ramblings, and i do not theorycraft, even though my 20+ games a week in diamond league really do not account for anything, it may just be enough to see that being defensive is no good and a terran late lategame army would require surviving the protoss and zerg lategame in decent condition, where my exact problem lies. You really haven't seen good raven or ghost usage if you think T late game is bad. Honestly please stop being so biased and actually try out T late game rather than going marine/tank vs a T3 army and then complaining about your late game not being good.
Sigh, the truth is, T late game army composition is where the problem stems from. Look at what we have...
Ghosts: Nerfed THREE CONSECUTIVE TIMES. They went from being OP to hilariously bad. EMP used to hit ~15 stalkers, now it hits 6-7. Think about how much protoss would QQ if I reduced storm range by 30%, much less 60%.
Ravens: Seeker Missiles? Honestly, name the last three times you've seen seeker missles in a progame. Auto-Turrets are hilariously bad as well. PDD is the only remotely useful spell the ultra-gas heavy raven has, and that only comes into play in EXTREMELY specific situations. I've seen it used once in a pro-game in the past six months, and i watch ~15 hours of starcraft 2 a week.
Thors: Thors are ocassionally used in TvZ, but these days, that's fast approaching nil as well. Thors are good only if your opponent A-Moves <10 but >4 mutalisks on top of your Thor. That's literally about it. If >10 muta, your Thor is toast. If he micros, we're basically discussing the chances of you successfully chasing down a F1 racecar on your two feet with a baseball bat. The Thor is not only one of the slowest, bulkiest units in the game, it's also designed (genius move here dustin balder) to counter the FASTEST, FLYING unit in the game. Surely that will work. There's a reason why these days Terrans stick with Tank MM with the occasional banshee. Finally, the Thor has some of the lowest DPS of the terran arsenal; in fact I think Thor vs. BL is literally the lowest DPS for cost in the game. Pay all that gas for tier 3 thors? Well, their worth absoutely nothing once BL come out.
Battlecruisers: If you really want to argue this, I'd pay you if you kept a straight face while doing so.
Now look at other units' tier 3s:
Zerg:
Brood Lords: Let's be honest here, BL alone are used more than ghosts, battlecruisers, ravens, Thors combined in current lategame situations. More than the 3 combined and then some. You see zergs rushing to Hive in 10 minutes for these units. Do you ever see terran rush to ravens in 10 minutes? Thors? Battlecruisers? We really dont need to argue this.
Ultralisks: Slightly more situational, Ultralisks will still abosultely demolish 80% of ground forces. Look at some recent Effort games for many examples of Ultras destroying armies.
Infestors: More mid-game, but I'd say the closest other late game unit (modeled after the defiler). Yea, if you really want to argue that Infestors and Ravens are comparable late game spellcasters, I'd laugh in your face. TBH, you probably can't even argue Infestors vs. Ghosts. Ghosts these days is 100% situational to TvP late game. Infestors are used in every single matchup, nearly every single game.
Protoss:
Collosi: Once again, a unit Protoss see as a staple in ALL matchups, with T/Z dedicating a significant amount of otherwise useless units (Vikings/Corruptors) to destory. Overmake Vikings/Corruptors, and your toast. On the other hand, if you are Protoss, overmake HT to compensate against ghosts? Perfectly fine, just storm the crap outta them.
Archons: Once again, nearly every single game, whatever the race, you will see archons. They hold their own, and are basically free after you use up spell casters.
Mothership: Situational, but designed for 1 purpose (archon toilets), and seen nearly every PvZ lategame, or else BL would be OP. Relatively balanced (IMO still needs buffs)
And there you have it. You complain about terrans going MM/Tank late game, but sit and think. If you really think a transition into thors and battlecruisers is going anywhere, you should try that a couple games and see what happens (don't blame me for the ranking drop). Ravens are pretty horrible too, and part of me dies inside when after THREE NERFS, you still try to recommend ghosts. They are pathetically UP these days; when is the last time you've seen these triple-nerfed ghosts used to astoundingly win a game?
|
|
|
The raven. You can use it, and you can win with it. But if you had spent the same money and gas elsewhere, you would have won anyways. It is not a game changing unit where anyone in history has ever said, "man if I hadn't had those ravens I would have lost for sure".
Infestors counter every unit in the game, or stand on their own against them. After seeing Freaky go 40+ infestors, it is safe to say they are broken and should recieve a nerf soon. If you can honestly say you thought that was either fun to watch, or great skill, then there is no point in even having a discussion at all.
|
On July 10 2012 08:52 [Azn]Nada wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 08:16 hunts wrote:On July 10 2012 08:02 Naphal wrote:On July 10 2012 07:13 lorestarcraft wrote:On July 09 2012 20:33 Naphal wrote:
terran was balanced for the highest level of play before this patch, meaning good micro was no longer benefical, but a requirement for success, we have seen korean terrans dominating tournaments, and the other place where terrans were the majority... was the bronze league.
i liked being the minority in diamond, it did not matter that i could maybe reach high diamond with another race that is less micro reliant, because i had fun being aggressive in TvZ, preparing timings in TvP, and position tanks in TvT... and should i ever encounter something unbeatable, i could always trust a toptier terran to find an answer.
now however, even the toptier terrans do not look good, and do not BS me with "needs more time" these guys play 12+ hours a day, and when all the Slayers terrans cannot figure something out while practicing with coca, or the IM terrans with Nestea or so on, then maybe there IS an imbalance.
Blizzard themselves stated that terrans should aim for an early to midgame advantage in TvP, to fight on even terms in the lategame, now i would say that this is at least twice as important in TvZ, because their lategame is even harder to deal with due to the infestor, the ultra / BL switches and of course their production.
The problem ocurred, when terrans LAST option to control the zerg early game was taken away, the queen would now handle bunker- / hellion- / bansheepressure all alone, providing a "skip early game" option, and with creep out, terrans midgame timings, that used to follow no longer existing harrassment, are not very intimidating.
now terran can either allin or prepare for the lategame... with the most expensive, slowest and inflexible production facilities, many units that are designed as direct counters and thus have very limited purposes, and last but not least crappy T3.
Many may still remember the problem with TvP before the patch, well, below prolevel, that still exists, and now TvZ is even worse, at least you can fight TvP lategame IF you micro much more than the protoss, but no amount of micro can save you from zerg.
Theorycrafting will not help, of course a 3/3 200/200 BC Raven Thor Ghost with only 10 SCVs left will shred anything, but why would a Zerg / Protoss not attack once their deathball is assembled? and you better believe a terran on 5 bases has weakspots in the defense, and should you deny 2 expansions or get into the production, it is over.
so there are 2 solutions, if reverting some patches is out of the question:
1)buff terran lategame
2)make protoss and zerg harder to play
lastly as an afterthought, how can people point at the ryung vs drg match saying "THAT is your solution"?
drg played bad, he assembled a massive army only to have it sit in the middle while ryung had up to 60 supply of mm running wild across the map, then he lost BLs to a nuke, not to mention the infestors he lost...
and finally the last big fight, clumped BL charge into the biggest concave of terran ever seen, clumped infestors follow, corruptors come last, yes, under these circumstances seeker missile can be very good, but if a terran is supposed to split everything everywhere anytime, why should a zerg be successful with an obvious attackmove with the wrong order of units?
and lets not forget that ryung got last place in the group while drg and nestea advanced. This is one of the most ignorant statements I have seen on TL in a while (that's saying something). Anytime some is having difficulty with a particular race, the response is always "they just a-move!" And there race is always harder to play. The fact is, each race is different enough that they are not even comparible to say one is "easier" to play than the other. That is a very personal thing. The other thing I always see is people complain that the other race does not "micro" as much as they do. The 3rd thing we always see is people complaining that their units (especially tier 3) are not nearly as good as anyone elses. We have seen all three of these complaints from all three races at different times. The solution has never been to make an easy cure-all, imba unit. The solution is to evolve. Ravens are meant for support, BCs are meant to be supported by other units. What if somebody got 5 or 6 and supported them with 'rines and tanks? Could be awful, idk, be the effect with yamato cannon could function like a zerg or toss deathball, if that's what you want, but I doubt it is the best solution. Sensor towers, strategic PFs, and Raven harass are all viable options that have largley been unexplored. The poster also mention nukes. Nukes are excellent at forcing armies to move and gaining positioning. They are also cheap and are casted by a units you should be using more anyway. Experiment, don't just theory-craft. My 2 cents. the truth must hurt... terran actually has the worst t3 terran actually needs to micro the most terran really has expensive / slow / inflexible production combined with all the nerfs to our harrassment and early to midgame possibilities, we have a problem now, a problem that only gets mitigated at the highest level through multitasking and micro up to a point where the zergs and protoss have difficulties keeping up (not because they are worse, because their units do not allow for it) edit: still no excuse for the terrible final engagement i talked about. so i think my point still stands, either a higher skill ceiling for protoss and zerg, or a comparable lategame for terrans, your post really is just vague ramblings, and i do not theorycraft, even though my 20+ games a week in diamond league really do not account for anything, it may just be enough to see that being defensive is no good and a terran late lategame army would require surviving the protoss and zerg lategame in decent condition, where my exact problem lies. You really haven't seen good raven or ghost usage if you think T late game is bad. Honestly please stop being so biased and actually try out T late game rather than going marine/tank vs a T3 army and then complaining about your late game not being good. Sigh, the truth is, T late game army composition is where the problem stems from. Look at what we have... Ghosts: Nerfed THREE CONSECUTIVE TIMES. They went from being OP to hilariously bad. EMP used to hit ~15 stalkers, now it hits 6-7. Think about how much protoss would QQ if I reduced storm range by 30%, much less 60%. Ravens: Seeker Missiles? Honestly, name the last three times you've seen seeker missles in a progame. Auto-Turrets are hilariously bad as well. PDD is the only remotely useful spell the ultra-gas heavy raven has, and that only comes into play in EXTREMELY specific situations. I've seen it used once in a pro-game in the past six months, and i watch ~15 hours of starcraft 2 a week. Thors: Thors are ocassionally used in TvZ, but these days, that's fast approaching nil as well. Thors are good only if your opponent A-Moves <10 but >4 mutalisks on top of your Thor. That's literally about it. If >10 muta, your Thor is toast. If he micros, we're basically discussing the chances of you successfully chasing down a F1 racecar on your two feet with a baseball bat. The Thor is not only one of the slowest, bulkiest units in the game, it's also designed (genius move here dustin balder) to counter the FASTEST, FLYING unit in the game. Surely that will work. There's a reason why these days Terrans stick with Tank MM with the occasional banshee. Finally, the Thor has some of the lowest DPS of the terran arsenal; in fact I think Thor vs. BL is literally the lowest DPS for cost in the game. Pay all that gas for tier 3 thors? Well, their worth absoutely nothing once BL come out. Battlecruisers: If you really want to argue this, I'd pay you if you kept a straight face while doing so. Now look at other units' tier 3s: Zerg: Brood Lords: Let's be honest here, BL alone are used more than ghosts, battlecruisers, ravens, Thors combined in current lategame situations. More than the 3 combined and then some. You see zergs rushing to Hive in 10 minutes for these units. Do you ever see terran rush to ravens in 10 minutes? Thors? Battlecruisers? We really dont need to argue this. Ultralisks: Slightly more situational, Ultralisks will still abosultely demolish 80% of ground forces. Look at some recent Effort games for many examples of Ultras destroying armies. Infestors: More mid-game, but I'd say the closest other late game unit (modeled after the defiler). Yea, if you really want to argue that Infestors and Ravens are comparable late game spellcasters, I'd laugh in your face. TBH, you probably can't even argue Infestors vs. Ghosts. Ghosts these days is 100% situational to TvP late game. Infestors are used in every single matchup, nearly every single game. Protoss: Collosi: Once again, a unit Protoss see as a staple in ALL matchups, with T/Z dedicating a significant amount of otherwise useless units (Vikings/Corruptors) to destory. Overmake Vikings/Corruptors, and your toast. On the other hand, if you are Protoss, overmake HT to compensate against ghosts? Perfectly fine, just storm the crap outta them. Archons: Once again, nearly every single game, whatever the race, you will see archons. They hold their own, and are basically free after you use up spell casters. Mothership: Situational, but designed for 1 purpose (archon toilets), and seen nearly every PvZ lategame, or else BL would be OP. Relatively balanced (IMO still needs buffs) And there you have it. You complain about terrans going MM/Tank late game, but sit and think. If you really think a transition into thors and battlecruisers is going anywhere, you should try that a couple games and see what happens (don't blame me for the ranking drop). Ravens are pretty horrible too, and part of me dies inside when after THREE NERFS, you still try to recommend ghosts. They are pathetically UP these days; when is the last time you've seen these triple-nerfed ghosts used to astoundingly win a game?
This guy gets it.
|
On July 10 2012 09:42 SnowFox2ne1 wrote:
The raven. You can use it, and you can win with it. But if you had spent the same money and gas elsewhere, you would have won anyways. It is not a game changing unit where anyone in history has ever said, "man if I hadn't had those ravens I would have lost for sure".
Infestors counter every unit in the game, or stand on their own against them. After seeing Freaky go 40+ infestors, it is safe to say they are broken and should recieve a nerf soon. If you can honestly say you thought that was either fun to watch, or great skill, then there is no point in even having a discussion at all.
Exactly
|
On July 10 2012 09:50 Orek wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 09:42 SnowFox2ne1 wrote:
The raven. You can use it, and you can win with it. But if you had spent the same money and gas elsewhere, you would have won anyways. It is not a game changing unit where anyone in history has ever said, "man if I hadn't had those ravens I would have lost for sure".
Infestors counter every unit in the game, or stand on their own against them. After seeing Freaky go 40+ infestors, it is safe to say they are broken and should recieve a nerf soon. If you can honestly say you thought that was either fun to watch, or great skill, then there is no point in even having a discussion at all. Exactly
Ravens are not nearly as useful as Infestors. I hope you're not trying to say they are.
|
On July 10 2012 09:42 SnowFox2ne1 wrote:
The raven. You can use it, and you can win with it. But if you had spent the same money and gas elsewhere, you would have won anyways. It is not a game changing unit where anyone in history has ever said, "man if I hadn't had those ravens I would have lost for sure".
Infestors counter every unit in the game, or stand on their own against them. After seeing Freaky go 40+ infestors, it is safe to say they are broken and should recieve a nerf soon. If you can honestly say you thought that was either fun to watch, or great skill, then there is no point in even having a discussion at all.
Anecdotal evidence is not proof. Ravens are still relatively unexplored, yet still get used successfully occasionally in high level play. PDD, worker line harass, clearing creep spread, HSM. Not as useful as infestors but not terrible.
Infestors counter ever unit in the game? Sure they are a great unit, but I had no idea infestors countered HT and ghosts too. Thanks for clearing that up.
|
|
|
Isnt the whole problem with ZvT that as so many persons have pointet out, Zerg has to choose between making army or economy.
With queens being a very good fighter vs the Terran early game this is no longer the case since Queens do not cost Larva. Zerg can safely drone (make economy) and make a lot of queens (army for the early game, meant for defense of course) which just makes the Zerg economy Sky-rock.
This in combination with the lack of oppurtunites for Terran to stop the creep spread combined with the super strong economy gives Zerg the ability to just produce a lot of units when they see a possible push move out (roaches or lings) and crush almost anything Terran can throw at them from the Early to the Midgame.
For me, the matchup looks more and more like ZvP where Zerg goes full retard on drones untill they scense that a push is coming. Throw down a roach warren and make A LOT of roaches/lings. The difference as I feel is that the pushes from Toss often is so much stronger than then 2 expo pushes from Terran (Terran has got not forcefields or immortals, instant reinforcements, etc.) which makes it a lot easier to shut down any form of pressure from Terran than from Protoss (NOTICE THAT I AM NOT TRYING TO SAY THAT TOSS IS STRONGER THAN T HERE, it's just that the pushes around those timings vs Z I feel are weaker, no other balance discussion).
And the problem with all this is of course that Terran actually seem to have no way to do all this:
1. Keep up with the Zerg eco
2. Keep up with the Zerg Production
3. Keep up with Zerg Upgrades
Mostly, you need to sacrifice one/two of those things as a Terran.
1. If you want to keep up with the Zerg eco you wont be safe vs midgame pushes because you have to go greedy on orbitals.
2. If you want to stay on equal footing with the Zerg army and scare them during midgame you must sacrifice a lot of your economy for any theatening push that for the most times gets shut down.
I have no suggestions on exactly how to fix the matchup. Perhaps the simplest thing is either to just reduce the range on the Queens again or lower their DPS (which would still allow them to attack hellions, but not be the beefy soldier that they are right now which would give Terran early pressures the way to force units from Zerg instead of Queens)
|
On July 10 2012 10:00 TechNoTrance wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 09:42 SnowFox2ne1 wrote:
The raven. You can use it, and you can win with it. But if you had spent the same money and gas elsewhere, you would have won anyways. It is not a game changing unit where anyone in history has ever said, "man if I hadn't had those ravens I would have lost for sure".
Infestors counter every unit in the game, or stand on their own against them. After seeing Freaky go 40+ infestors, it is safe to say they are broken and should recieve a nerf soon. If you can honestly say you thought that was either fun to watch, or great skill, then there is no point in even having a discussion at all. Anecdotal evidence is not proof. Ravens are still relatively unexplored, yet still get used successfully occasionally in high level play. PDD, worker line harass, clearing creep spread, HSM. Not as useful as infestors but not terrible. Infestors counter ever unit in the game? Sure they are a great unit, but I had no idea infestors countered HT and ghosts too. Thanks for clearing that up.
Watch Bomber vs Leenock in GSTL and you'll have all the evidence you need that ravens are shit. 1 Fungal and 7 ravens are completely screwed. They killed 1 infestor with HSM because it strayed too close to them while they were fungalled. Once the ravens got hit with fungal they were 1) nearly guaranteed to die to chain fungal and 2) completely useless even though they all had close to max energy. What were they going to do? Throw down 15 PDDs or 30 auto turrets in bomber's mineral line? All that does is make Leenock fight somewhere else for the next 2-3 minutes.
Before anyone says "just split the ravens!" it's kind of ridiculous to expect terran players to split all their ravens, vikings, and bioball every single time they move their army because if they don't and get hit by 1 fungal they can lose the game.
Auto turrets are terrible unless you use a lot of them. Spinecrawlers are very good against autoturrets even with building armor. A single medivac full of marines can do a lot more damage than 4 auto turrets. The marines also have a chance to escape and come back later.
Ravens are the most expensive unit in the game (per supply) and yet they are slow as hell and have short range spells. Casters being slow is fine if they have decent range like the HT or ghost. Using ravens is such a huge gamble because they pretty much have to suicide to cast their spells or rely upon the zerg having a seizure and not using fungal.
|
Has anyone mentioned maybe allowing siege tanks to ignore broodlings? It would still allow terrans to try early harrass or go long macro game vs a zerg without the fear of just dying to the ultimate infestor/brood/ling/bling comp. It would make the matchup more about position play. Have the zerg spread his infestors to avoid tank fire or flaking with cracklings etc.
|
On July 10 2012 10:35 sirreginold wrote:
Has anyone mentioned maybe allowing siege tanks to ignore broodlings? It would still allow terrans to try early harrass or go long macro game vs a zerg without the fear of just dying to the ultimate infestor/brood/ling/bling comp. It would make the matchup more about position play. Have the zerg spread his infestors to avoid tank fire or flaking with cracklings etc.
What the fuck are you talking about?
|
On July 10 2012 10:45 SnowFox2ne1 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 10:35 sirreginold wrote:
Has anyone mentioned maybe allowing siege tanks to ignore broodlings? It would still allow terrans to try early harrass or go long macro game vs a zerg without the fear of just dying to the ultimate infestor/brood/ling/bling comp. It would make the matchup more about position play. Have the zerg spread his infestors to avoid tank fire or flaking with cracklings etc. What the fuck are you talking about?
Siege tanks not auto attacking broodlings. Makes siege tanks vialble vs the zerg ultimate composition.
|
On July 10 2012 10:00 TechNoTrance wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 09:42 SnowFox2ne1 wrote:
The raven. You can use it, and you can win with it. But if you had spent the same money and gas elsewhere, you would have won anyways. It is not a game changing unit where anyone in history has ever said, "man if I hadn't had those ravens I would have lost for sure".
Infestors counter every unit in the game, or stand on their own against them. After seeing Freaky go 40+ infestors, it is safe to say they are broken and should recieve a nerf soon. If you can honestly say you thought that was either fun to watch, or great skill, then there is no point in even having a discussion at all. Anecdotal evidence is not proof. Ravens are still relatively unexplored, yet still get used successfully occasionally in high level play. PDD, worker line harass, clearing creep spread, HSM. Not as useful as infestors but not terrible. Infestors counter ever unit in the game? Sure they are a great unit, but I had no idea infestors countered HT and ghosts too. Thanks for clearing that up.
The ability to grab cloaked ghosts, or fungal a protoss ball. Not to mention burrow with infested terran vs HT. Also thanks for being a dipshit and choosing anti-casters as the unit I was talking about. Tell me more about how you can fungal as many air units as there are stacked. HSM you have to be retarded to get hit by. It is good in TvT, because terran doesnt really have the ability to keep out of range 100% of the time.
|
On July 10 2012 10:47 sirreginold wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 10:45 SnowFox2ne1 wrote:On July 10 2012 10:35 sirreginold wrote:
Has anyone mentioned maybe allowing siege tanks to ignore broodlings? It would still allow terrans to try early harrass or go long macro game vs a zerg without the fear of just dying to the ultimate infestor/brood/ling/bling comp. It would make the matchup more about position play. Have the zerg spread his infestors to avoid tank fire or flaking with cracklings etc. What the fuck are you talking about? Siege tanks not auto attacking broodlings. Makes siege tanks vialble vs the zerg ultimate composition.
Hmm. They would still die, and soak marine fire, which would allow zerglings to get on marines, and then splash their owns stuff anyways. if you are seiged and BL are attacking, idk who isnt focusing down infestors with their tanks already... I mean im sure it couldnt hurt, but still.
|
On July 10 2012 10:47 sirreginold wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 10:45 SnowFox2ne1 wrote:On July 10 2012 10:35 sirreginold wrote:
Has anyone mentioned maybe allowing siege tanks to ignore broodlings? It would still allow terrans to try early harrass or go long macro game vs a zerg without the fear of just dying to the ultimate infestor/brood/ling/bling comp. It would make the matchup more about position play. Have the zerg spread his infestors to avoid tank fire or flaking with cracklings etc. What the fuck are you talking about? Siege tanks not auto attacking broodlings. Makes siege tanks vialble vs the zerg ultimate composition.
I'll be fine with siege tanks with a hold fire option.
And hunter seeker missiles sucks. The radius at which dmg reduces is harsh so pretty much only the unit it hits will take 100 dmg, while small minority get hits with 50 and vast majority only 25. For a unit that costs so much to make, so long to build, short range, slow flying speed and high energy costs, it is the worst caster in game.
|
On July 10 2012 10:35 sirreginold wrote:
Has anyone mentioned maybe allowing siege tanks to ignore broodlings? It would still allow terrans to try early harrass or go long macro game vs a zerg without the fear of just dying to the ultimate infestor/brood/ling/bling comp. It would make the matchup more about position play. Have the zerg spread his infestors to avoid tank fire or flaking with cracklings etc.
or maybe have siege tanks not splash own units?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
