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 09:42 SnowFox2ne1 wrote: 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.
What's this Freaky game with 40+ infestors you're talking about?
As for siege tank hold fire option, I'd welcome that, if only for the gimmicky ability to create siege traps.
Current season of GSTL NSH vs Slayers. Freaky played a ZvZ and a ZvP and both times he just went mass infestors.
let me try and do this according to the templates from the first page:
Metagame observation: a lot of the recent pro matches i've seen with Terran in non-mirror matchup, Terran make too late of a heavy starport transition. I mean, after they get their one reactor starport for medivacs. In TvZ, they'll wait for after scouting the greater spire or when it's already too late to drop the extra starports, and sometimes they will have already sac'd their factory from scouting so that they'd need to rebuild that before being able to throw down extra starports. Likewise in TvP where Colossus comes out and sometimes before Terran has the ideal medivac cloud, they are forced to stop medivac production for vikings.
proposed Metagame evolution: what if once Terran secures his third, he throws down two extra starports (or just builds two to begin with, or on 2base and throws down a 3rd or 4th) even if not to directly produce out of, but to have the infrastructure ready to produce in case a switch vikings or other air unit is needed? one reactor starport for early-midgame medivacs, and then add techlabs to other starports once Terran feels he has the economy and game stability to transition to something like lategame BCs or other tech units such as lategame raven play. This type of infrastructure preempt would be analogous to Zerg stockpiling larva and having tech structures ready, not to always produce with right away but when the situation calls for (either army is maxed or you're waiting for tech to transition). Having the infrastructure ready for Terran means that Terran too can be ready to switch sooner than before, as the game flow dictates.
1) immediate resource cost: 150m 100gas x 3 (or 4) and then [50m/50gas + 50m/25gas (x2 or x3)] for add-ons can be redistributed so many different ways through existing production facilities for Terran, and sometimes depending on the flow of battle (especially aggressive style terran) the resources are needed to replenish an army right away.
2) space in the base: was your sim-city good enough to have space left for these buildings and their add-ons?
3)resource cost over time: starport units are pretty gas heavy, so this is self-explanatory. i think it is ideal on 3base minimum, but depending on how well you're trading your fighting force, gas and (to a relatively lesser extent) mineral starvation can be a problem. make sure to keep on expanding. also, if you need to be pumping out those vikings as priority over other units, i think cutting production elsewhere is an option.
these are all that i can think of right away, please feel free to add more in the discussions, but i think number 1 is the greatest disadvantage. maybe those resources could be the difference between ending the game after a significant engagement or dragging the game on 5-25 minutes longer
1. infrastructure is ready to produce soon as enemy army/tech is scouted. scout a greater spire morphing with your scan from your macro orbital? start pumping the vikings and take command of the skies! they switch back to ultras? well if you got the techlabs i prescribed, you can just make some BCs or Banshees to add extra dps against the ground units. same principle applies in TvP for colossus techswaps
2. sets up for later transitions into BCs/Ravens depending on the flow the game. this is pretty much the same as advantage #1, but for ultra lategame. If you planned on doing BCs before the start of the game or by the mid-game, you can preempt the transition further with getting air upgrades from your armory, or with Ravens, you can plan ahead with taking the building armor and hi-sec auto-tracking upgrades from the engineering bays (usually though it'd probably better to do that after your 3/3 infantry is done unless you meched/sky-terran'd to begin with)
3. you can get Caduceus Reactors. i'm half joking and half serious, and this could be it's own metagame evolution i suppose: a lot of lategame TvP and TvZ end up with lots of medivacs running out of energy at some point from healing storm/stim/fungal damage, so why not get this once you're on 4 or more bases? the only risk is when high templar try to feedback, but that means they aren't storming you (yet), and with 4 starports you can remake your medivac cloud without killing your viking production if you expect a colossus/voidray/carrier transition.
4. opponent overreacts and does something he wouldn't have done, sometimes to your advantage. maybe he sees this and thinks "okay time to kill him" but runs in to your well fortified siege line. maybe he dumps a ton of resources into cannons because he thinks you will banshee his expos (which you might want to do at some point)
last words: the whole "throw down more starports" hinges on the idea that you don't need to be constantly producing from these structures, but by having the infrastructure ready, you can save yourself critical time when you need the production to respond to what the enemy is doing. there was an old joke about making one of every unit, but i always thought that at some point there is a modicum of truth in it. getting earlier infrastructure for sky terran will help you stay prepared for anything
On July 10 2012 12:24 fenrysk wrote: let me try and do this according to the templates from the first page:
Metagame observation: a lot of the recent pro matches i've seen with Terran in non-mirror matchup, Terran make too late of a heavy starport transition. I mean, after they get their one reactor starport for medivacs. In TvZ, they'll wait for after scouting the greater spire or when it's already too late to drop the extra starports, and sometimes they will have already sac'd their factory from scouting so that they'd need to rebuild that before being able to throw down extra starports. Likewise in TvP where Colossus comes out and sometimes before Terran has the ideal medivac cloud, they are forced to stop medivac production for vikings.
proposed Metagame evolution: what if once Terran secures his third, he throws down two extra starports (or just builds two to begin with, or on 2base and throws down a 3rd or 4th) even if not to directly produce out of, but to have the infrastructure ready to produce in case a switch vikings or other air unit is needed? one reactor starport for early-midgame medivacs, and then add techlabs to other starports once Terran feels he has the economy and game stability to transition to something like lategame BCs or other tech units such as lategame raven play. This type of infrastructure preempt would be analogous to Zerg stockpiling larva and having tech structures ready, not to always produce with right away but when the situation calls for (either army is maxed or you're waiting for tech to transition). Having the infrastructure ready for Terran means that Terran too can be ready to switch sooner than before, as the game flow dictates.
1) immediate resource cost: 150m 100gas x 3 (or 4) and then [50m/50gas + 50m/25gas (x2 or x3)] for add-ons can be redistributed so many different ways through existing production facilities for Terran, and sometimes depending on the flow of battle (especially aggressive style terran) the resources are needed to replenish an army right away.
2) space in the base: was your sim-city good enough to have space left for these buildings and their add-ons?
3)resource cost over time: starport units are pretty gas heavy, so this is self-explanatory. i think it is ideal on 3base minimum, but depending on how well you're trading your fighting force, gas and (to a relatively lesser extent) mineral starvation can be a problem. make sure to keep on expanding. also, if you need to be pumping out those vikings as priority over other units, i think cutting production elsewhere is an option.
these are all that i can think of right away, please feel free to add more in the discussions, but i think number 1 is the greatest disadvantage. maybe those resources could be the difference between ending the game after a significant engagement or dragging the game on 5-25 minutes longer
1. infrastructure is ready to produce soon as enemy army/tech is scouted. scout a greater spire morphing with your scan from your macro orbital? start pumping the vikings and take command of the skies! they switch back to ultras? well if you got the techlabs i prescribed, you can just make some BCs or Banshees to add extra dps against the ground units. same principle applies in TvP for colossus techswaps
2. sets up for later transitions into BCs/Ravens depending on the flow the game. this is pretty much the same as advantage #1, but for ultra lategame. If you planned on doing BCs before the start of the game or by the mid-game, you can preempt the transition further with getting air upgrades from your armory, or with Ravens, you can plan ahead with taking the building armor and hi-sec auto-tracking upgrades from the engineering bays (usually though it'd probably better to do that after your 3/3 infantry is done unless you meched/sky-terran'd to begin with)
3. you can get Caduceus Reactors. i'm half joking and half serious, and this could be it's own metagame evolution i suppose: a lot of lategame TvP and TvZ end up with lots of medivacs running out of energy at some point from healing storm/stim/fungal damage, so why not get this once you're on 4 or more bases? the only risk is when high templar try to feedback, but that means they aren't storming you (yet), and with 4 starports you can remake your medivac cloud without killing your viking production if you expect a colossus/voidray/carrier transition.
4. opponent overreacts and does something he wouldn't have done, sometimes to your advantage. maybe he sees this and thinks "okay time to kill him" but runs in to your well fortified siege line. maybe he dumps a ton of resources into cannons because he thinks you will banshee his expos (which you might want to do at some point)
last words: the whole "throw down more starports" hinges on the idea that you don't need to be constantly producing from these structures, but by having the infrastructure ready, you can save yourself critical time when you need the production to respond to what the enemy is doing. there was an old joke about making one of every unit, but i always thought that at some point there is a modicum of truth in it. getting earlier infrastructure for sky terran will help you stay prepared for anything
The main problem with this is that terran infrastructure are so much more expensive. For zerg, they make 1 extra tech building and save up larvae (which can be used for other units). 2-3 starports with add ons is a much bigger investment. Zergs scouts this and just goes Ultras/bane (unless the map is horrible for Ultras). I feel that add-ons gives terrans a lot of flexibility early/mid game but actually hampers them in the late game. And since Blizzard seems to want to move games to late game more (Queen buff nullifies most early/mid game pushes), the terran disadvantage becomes more apparent.
2. Reread David Kim's comment before the queen buff is again interesting:
""We’re currently looking into a couple of potential issues. Zerg has recently shifted from making a very strong showing in tournaments, to having slightly weaker representation only at the highest levels of professional play. We’re also continuing to see a slight advantage for terran in terms of opening flexibility and scouting denial. In response, we’re considering offering zerg better scouting options in the early game.""
It seems like even David Kim didn't notice that there are hidden problems in TvZ mid-to-lategame that the queen buff exposes.
The reason that Terran has do early economic damage to Zerg is that there are fundamental design flaws and basic imbalances in the mid-to-late game compositions that disfavor Terran. Even in equal economy + equal supply, Terran usually has a difficult time to win, because of the mid-to-late game army strength is imbalanced. No to mention that Zerg is easy to be ahead economically.
3. Since this season, the Terran play style in early, mid, and late game are drastically different from the pre-queen-buff era. The innovation that these players put out is phenomenal. And all these new strategies that Terran used in GSL are spread out into other tournaments as well. Did they improve Terran's chance against the new Zerg? Yes. But did those innovations achieve good results for Terran? No.
4. This is the difference of Terran micro and Zerg a-move that people are talking about:
5. Some best example of nerfs going too far:
Reaper changes:
The damage done from D-8 Charges has decreased from 40 to 30. The delay between attacks for D-8 Charges has decreased from 2.5 to 1.8.
The build time was increased from 30 to 40. Nitro Boost: The build time was increased from 90 to 100.
Reaper build time increased from 40 to 45 seconds.
Nitro Packs now require Factory.
Ghost changes:
Cost changed from 100 Minerals and 200 Vespene Gas to 150 Minerals and 150 Vespene Gas. EMP Round radius decreased from 3 to 2.
EMP now drains up to 100 energy instead of all available energy. The effect on Protoss shields remains unchanged.
Cost changed from 150/150 to 200/100
EMP Round radius decreased from 2 to 1.5.
Snipe damage changed from 45 to 25 (+25 vs Psionic).
On July 10 2012 12:24 fenrysk wrote: let me try and do this according to the templates from the first page:
Metagame observation: a lot of the recent pro matches i've seen with Terran in non-mirror matchup, Terran make too late of a heavy starport transition. I mean, after they get their one reactor starport for medivacs. In TvZ, they'll wait for after scouting the greater spire or when it's already too late to drop the extra starports, and sometimes they will have already sac'd their factory from scouting so that they'd need to rebuild that before being able to throw down extra starports. Likewise in TvP where Colossus comes out and sometimes before Terran has the ideal medivac cloud, they are forced to stop medivac production for vikings.
proposed Metagame evolution: what if once Terran secures his third, he throws down two extra starports (or just builds two to begin with, or on 2base and throws down a 3rd or 4th) even if not to directly produce out of, but to have the infrastructure ready to produce in case a switch vikings or other air unit is needed? one reactor starport for early-midgame medivacs, and then add techlabs to other starports once Terran feels he has the economy and game stability to transition to something like lategame BCs or other tech units such as lategame raven play. This type of infrastructure preempt would be analogous to Zerg stockpiling larva and having tech structures ready, not to always produce with right away but when the situation calls for (either army is maxed or you're waiting for tech to transition). Having the infrastructure ready for Terran means that Terran too can be ready to switch sooner than before, as the game flow dictates.
1) immediate resource cost: 150m 100gas x 3 (or 4) and then [50m/50gas + 50m/25gas (x2 or x3)] for add-ons can be redistributed so many different ways through existing production facilities for Terran, and sometimes depending on the flow of battle (especially aggressive style terran) the resources are needed to replenish an army right away.
2) space in the base: was your sim-city good enough to have space left for these buildings and their add-ons?
3)resource cost over time: starport units are pretty gas heavy, so this is self-explanatory. i think it is ideal on 3base minimum, but depending on how well you're trading your fighting force, gas and (to a relatively lesser extent) mineral starvation can be a problem. make sure to keep on expanding. also, if you need to be pumping out those vikings as priority over other units, i think cutting production elsewhere is an option.
these are all that i can think of right away, please feel free to add more in the discussions, but i think number 1 is the greatest disadvantage. maybe those resources could be the difference between ending the game after a significant engagement or dragging the game on 5-25 minutes longer
1. infrastructure is ready to produce soon as enemy army/tech is scouted. scout a greater spire morphing with your scan from your macro orbital? start pumping the vikings and take command of the skies! they switch back to ultras? well if you got the techlabs i prescribed, you can just make some BCs or Banshees to add extra dps against the ground units. same principle applies in TvP for colossus techswaps
2. sets up for later transitions into BCs/Ravens depending on the flow the game. this is pretty much the same as advantage #1, but for ultra lategame. If you planned on doing BCs before the start of the game or by the mid-game, you can preempt the transition further with getting air upgrades from your armory, or with Ravens, you can plan ahead with taking the building armor and hi-sec auto-tracking upgrades from the engineering bays (usually though it'd probably better to do that after your 3/3 infantry is done unless you meched/sky-terran'd to begin with)
3. you can get Caduceus Reactors. i'm half joking and half serious, and this could be it's own metagame evolution i suppose: a lot of lategame TvP and TvZ end up with lots of medivacs running out of energy at some point from healing storm/stim/fungal damage, so why not get this once you're on 4 or more bases? the only risk is when high templar try to feedback, but that means they aren't storming you (yet), and with 4 starports you can remake your medivac cloud without killing your viking production if you expect a colossus/voidray/carrier transition.
4. opponent overreacts and does something he wouldn't have done, sometimes to your advantage. maybe he sees this and thinks "okay time to kill him" but runs in to your well fortified siege line. maybe he dumps a ton of resources into cannons because he thinks you will banshee his expos (which you might want to do at some point)
last words: the whole "throw down more starports" hinges on the idea that you don't need to be constantly producing from these structures, but by having the infrastructure ready, you can save yourself critical time when you need the production to respond to what the enemy is doing. there was an old joke about making one of every unit, but i always thought that at some point there is a modicum of truth in it. getting earlier infrastructure for sky terran will help you stay prepared for anything
The main problem with this is that terran infrastructure are so much more expensive. For zerg, they make 1 extra tech building and save up larvae (which can be used for other units). 2-3 starports with add ons is a much bigger investment. Zergs scouts this and just goes Ultras/bane (unless the map is horrible for Ultras). I feel that add-ons gives terrans a lot of flexibility early/mid game but actually hampers them in the late game. And since Blizzard seems to want to move games to late game more (Queen buff nullifies most early/mid game pushes), the terran disadvantage becomes more apparent.
your points i've already accounted for in my disadvantages and advantages sections. 2-3 starports with addons is a much bigger investment indeed, but i feel the investment is worth it going into the lategame (and probably would've made a lot of the pro-matches i've seen go a lot differently in favor of Terran). them going ultra-bane means you can turtle harder (thicker building walloffs, forward PFs) and make all their attacks against you very inefficient (ultra/bling is pretty gas heavy, no?), and/or you can make use of the starports and crank enough banshees to wipe his ultras and then snipe an expansion or two (enough to kill sporecrawlers and queens at that!).
i'm not as worried about my structures being more expensive when i can mule hammer all day long (as long as i'm taking expansions and building macro orbitals) and mine more than the zerg can with less SCVs than he has drones, than i am of being caught off guard by a tech transition that i scout too late.
On July 10 2012 12:24 fenrysk wrote: let me try and do this according to the templates from the first page:
Metagame observation: a lot of the recent pro matches i've seen with Terran in non-mirror matchup, Terran make too late of a heavy starport transition. I mean, after they get their one reactor starport for medivacs. In TvZ, they'll wait for after scouting the greater spire or when it's already too late to drop the extra starports, and sometimes they will have already sac'd their factory from scouting so that they'd need to rebuild that before being able to throw down extra starports. Likewise in TvP where Colossus comes out and sometimes before Terran has the ideal medivac cloud, they are forced to stop medivac production for vikings.
proposed Metagame evolution: what if once Terran secures his third, he throws down two extra starports (or just builds two to begin with, or on 2base and throws down a 3rd or 4th) even if not to directly produce out of, but to have the infrastructure ready to produce in case a switch vikings or other air unit is needed? one reactor starport for early-midgame medivacs, and then add techlabs to other starports once Terran feels he has the economy and game stability to transition to something like lategame BCs or other tech units such as lategame raven play. This type of infrastructure preempt would be analogous to Zerg stockpiling larva and having tech structures ready, not to always produce with right away but when the situation calls for (either army is maxed or you're waiting for tech to transition). Having the infrastructure ready for Terran means that Terran too can be ready to switch sooner than before, as the game flow dictates.
1) immediate resource cost: 150m 100gas x 3 (or 4) and then [50m/50gas + 50m/25gas (x2 or x3)] for add-ons can be redistributed so many different ways through existing production facilities for Terran, and sometimes depending on the flow of battle (especially aggressive style terran) the resources are needed to replenish an army right away.
2) space in the base: was your sim-city good enough to have space left for these buildings and their add-ons?
3)resource cost over time: starport units are pretty gas heavy, so this is self-explanatory. i think it is ideal on 3base minimum, but depending on how well you're trading your fighting force, gas and (to a relatively lesser extent) mineral starvation can be a problem. make sure to keep on expanding. also, if you need to be pumping out those vikings as priority over other units, i think cutting production elsewhere is an option.
these are all that i can think of right away, please feel free to add more in the discussions, but i think number 1 is the greatest disadvantage. maybe those resources could be the difference between ending the game after a significant engagement or dragging the game on 5-25 minutes longer
1. infrastructure is ready to produce soon as enemy army/tech is scouted. scout a greater spire morphing with your scan from your macro orbital? start pumping the vikings and take command of the skies! they switch back to ultras? well if you got the techlabs i prescribed, you can just make some BCs or Banshees to add extra dps against the ground units. same principle applies in TvP for colossus techswaps
2. sets up for later transitions into BCs/Ravens depending on the flow the game. this is pretty much the same as advantage #1, but for ultra lategame. If you planned on doing BCs before the start of the game or by the mid-game, you can preempt the transition further with getting air upgrades from your armory, or with Ravens, you can plan ahead with taking the building armor and hi-sec auto-tracking upgrades from the engineering bays (usually though it'd probably better to do that after your 3/3 infantry is done unless you meched/sky-terran'd to begin with)
3. you can get Caduceus Reactors. i'm half joking and half serious, and this could be it's own metagame evolution i suppose: a lot of lategame TvP and TvZ end up with lots of medivacs running out of energy at some point from healing storm/stim/fungal damage, so why not get this once you're on 4 or more bases? the only risk is when high templar try to feedback, but that means they aren't storming you (yet), and with 4 starports you can remake your medivac cloud without killing your viking production if you expect a colossus/voidray/carrier transition.
4. opponent overreacts and does something he wouldn't have done, sometimes to your advantage. maybe he sees this and thinks "okay time to kill him" but runs in to your well fortified siege line. maybe he dumps a ton of resources into cannons because he thinks you will banshee his expos (which you might want to do at some point)
last words: the whole "throw down more starports" hinges on the idea that you don't need to be constantly producing from these structures, but by having the infrastructure ready, you can save yourself critical time when you need the production to respond to what the enemy is doing. there was an old joke about making one of every unit, but i always thought that at some point there is a modicum of truth in it. getting earlier infrastructure for sky terran will help you stay prepared for anything
The main problem with this is that terran infrastructure are so much more expensive. For zerg, they make 1 extra tech building and save up larvae (which can be used for other units). 2-3 starports with add ons is a much bigger investment. Zergs scouts this and just goes Ultras/bane (unless the map is horrible for Ultras). I feel that add-ons gives terrans a lot of flexibility early/mid game but actually hampers them in the late game. And since Blizzard seems to want to move games to late game more (Queen buff nullifies most early/mid game pushes), the terran disadvantage becomes more apparent.
your points i've already accounted for in my disadvantages and advantages sections. 2-3 starports with addons is a much bigger investment indeed, but i feel the investment is worth it going into the lategame (and probably would've made a lot of the pro-matches i've seen go a lot differently in favor of Terran). them going ultra-bane means you can turtle harder (thicker building walloffs, forward PFs) and make all their attacks against you very inefficient (ultra/bling is pretty gas heavy, no?), and/or you can make use of the starports and crank enough banshees to wipe his ultras and then snipe an expansion or two (enough to kill sporecrawlers and queens at that!).
i'm not as worried about my structures being more expensive when i can mule hammer all day long (as long as i'm taking expansions and building macro orbitals) and mine more than the zerg can with less SCVs than he has drones, than i am of being caught off guard by a tech transition that i scout too late.
Could work in a perfect world where a 200/200 zerg with ultras, BL, and infestors doesn't want to attack you until you have the perfect comp to beat him. If you make 3 starports and he goes ultras, you pretty much die. If you are talking unlimited production off of unlimited money, then how does any race lose?
On July 10 2012 12:24 fenrysk wrote: let me try and do this according to the templates from the first page:
Metagame observation: a lot of the recent pro matches i've seen with Terran in non-mirror matchup, Terran make too late of a heavy starport transition. I mean, after they get their one reactor starport for medivacs. In TvZ, they'll wait for after scouting the greater spire or when it's already too late to drop the extra starports, and sometimes they will have already sac'd their factory from scouting so that they'd need to rebuild that before being able to throw down extra starports. Likewise in TvP where Colossus comes out and sometimes before Terran has the ideal medivac cloud, they are forced to stop medivac production for vikings.
proposed Metagame evolution: what if once Terran secures his third, he throws down two extra starports (or just builds two to begin with, or on 2base and throws down a 3rd or 4th) even if not to directly produce out of, but to have the infrastructure ready to produce in case a switch vikings or other air unit is needed? one reactor starport for early-midgame medivacs, and then add techlabs to other starports once Terran feels he has the economy and game stability to transition to something like lategame BCs or other tech units such as lategame raven play. This type of infrastructure preempt would be analogous to Zerg stockpiling larva and having tech structures ready, not to always produce with right away but when the situation calls for (either army is maxed or you're waiting for tech to transition). Having the infrastructure ready for Terran means that Terran too can be ready to switch sooner than before, as the game flow dictates.
1) immediate resource cost: 150m 100gas x 3 (or 4) and then [50m/50gas + 50m/25gas (x2 or x3)] for add-ons can be redistributed so many different ways through existing production facilities for Terran, and sometimes depending on the flow of battle (especially aggressive style terran) the resources are needed to replenish an army right away.
2) space in the base: was your sim-city good enough to have space left for these buildings and their add-ons?
3)resource cost over time: starport units are pretty gas heavy, so this is self-explanatory. i think it is ideal on 3base minimum, but depending on how well you're trading your fighting force, gas and (to a relatively lesser extent) mineral starvation can be a problem. make sure to keep on expanding. also, if you need to be pumping out those vikings as priority over other units, i think cutting production elsewhere is an option.
these are all that i can think of right away, please feel free to add more in the discussions, but i think number 1 is the greatest disadvantage. maybe those resources could be the difference between ending the game after a significant engagement or dragging the game on 5-25 minutes longer
1. infrastructure is ready to produce soon as enemy army/tech is scouted. scout a greater spire morphing with your scan from your macro orbital? start pumping the vikings and take command of the skies! they switch back to ultras? well if you got the techlabs i prescribed, you can just make some BCs or Banshees to add extra dps against the ground units. same principle applies in TvP for colossus techswaps
2. sets up for later transitions into BCs/Ravens depending on the flow the game. this is pretty much the same as advantage #1, but for ultra lategame. If you planned on doing BCs before the start of the game or by the mid-game, you can preempt the transition further with getting air upgrades from your armory, or with Ravens, you can plan ahead with taking the building armor and hi-sec auto-tracking upgrades from the engineering bays (usually though it'd probably better to do that after your 3/3 infantry is done unless you meched/sky-terran'd to begin with)
3. you can get Caduceus Reactors. i'm half joking and half serious, and this could be it's own metagame evolution i suppose: a lot of lategame TvP and TvZ end up with lots of medivacs running out of energy at some point from healing storm/stim/fungal damage, so why not get this once you're on 4 or more bases? the only risk is when high templar try to feedback, but that means they aren't storming you (yet), and with 4 starports you can remake your medivac cloud without killing your viking production if you expect a colossus/voidray/carrier transition.
4. opponent overreacts and does something he wouldn't have done, sometimes to your advantage. maybe he sees this and thinks "okay time to kill him" but runs in to your well fortified siege line. maybe he dumps a ton of resources into cannons because he thinks you will banshee his expos (which you might want to do at some point)
last words: the whole "throw down more starports" hinges on the idea that you don't need to be constantly producing from these structures, but by having the infrastructure ready, you can save yourself critical time when you need the production to respond to what the enemy is doing. there was an old joke about making one of every unit, but i always thought that at some point there is a modicum of truth in it. getting earlier infrastructure for sky terran will help you stay prepared for anything
The main problem with this is that terran infrastructure are so much more expensive. For zerg, they make 1 extra tech building and save up larvae (which can be used for other units). 2-3 starports with add ons is a much bigger investment. Zergs scouts this and just goes Ultras/bane (unless the map is horrible for Ultras). I feel that add-ons gives terrans a lot of flexibility early/mid game but actually hampers them in the late game. And since Blizzard seems to want to move games to late game more (Queen buff nullifies most early/mid game pushes), the terran disadvantage becomes more apparent.
your points i've already accounted for in my disadvantages and advantages sections. 2-3 starports with addons is a much bigger investment indeed, but i feel the investment is worth it going into the lategame (and probably would've made a lot of the pro-matches i've seen go a lot differently in favor of Terran). them going ultra-bane means you can turtle harder (thicker building walloffs, forward PFs) and make all their attacks against you very inefficient (ultra/bling is pretty gas heavy, no?), and/or you can make use of the starports and crank enough banshees to wipe his ultras and then snipe an expansion or two (enough to kill sporecrawlers and queens at that!).
i'm not as worried about my structures being more expensive when i can mule hammer all day long (as long as i'm taking expansions and building macro orbitals) and mine more than the zerg can with less SCVs than he has drones, than i am of being caught off guard by a tech transition that i scout too late.
Could work in a perfect world where a 200/200 zerg with ultras, BL, and infestors doesn't want to attack you until you have the perfect comp to beat him. If you make 3 starports and he goes ultras, you pretty much die. If you are talking unlimited production off of unlimited money, then how does any race lose?
just because i make 2 extra starports doesn't mean i don't have other production buildings. i don't see how making 3 starports = death by ultras if i'm still making other stuff (MMM/tanks). okay so i cut one production cycle but i have an contingency plan for when after the ultras fail against my defense and they then try for the BL switch.
if you read my original post i stated that you don't need to produce off the starports right away if you don't feel like it and that once you're on three base, terran should just add more starports from after the initial one. i just think it's so dumb how many high level terran only build off of one starport till it's almost too late, even though their economy is enough at support the infrastructure. like i stated in the original post, you could even build the extra starports as a feint. they scout it, and go ultra/bling. but you scouted that they overreacted so you plan 2 steps ahead and already got more marauders, tanks and building walls ready.
zerg don't always constantly build off of their macro hatches and protoss after they max still add gateways as they expand even though they aren't hitting each warp-in cycle. why? because after a big engagement, sometimes you just need to remax faster, and the only way to do is if you have infrastructure. i'm applying the same principle with starports-- you don't always need to be building off of them, but having extra starports leaves you better prepared to deal with tech swaps.
The metagame and size of maps There are too few adjustments to balance on the "metagame side" and only adjustments made to units. With "metagame" I mean the economic and production for each race. The maps have finally reached an acceptable size - not "Blizzard-tiny" like Steppes of War - and thus we get engagements with more and more bases and resources involved in battles. The disparity and imbalance between the three races and their methods of being able to spend those "unlimited resources" is only showing now.
1. Terran: The way to get more resources is to use a MULE, but enabling that also costs resources, thus they have the most expensive command center and apart from scanning it has no additional use. It even loses the ability to carry SCVs. The "production increase" is done via reactors, but they only speed up the production of the most basic units (which are easily countered in the late game and thus not really worth that much).
2. Protoss: Chronoboost can be used to speed up production of Probes and thus there is a chance to get ahead economically in the early game. In the mid-to-late game this doesnt matter as much anymore and you only get to use it on upgrades or those buildings which you only have one or two of (Robotics or Starport). Warp Gate speeds up the production of basic ground units immensely, but contrary to Terrans you can have higher tier units very fast and not only the most basic one.
3. Zerg: Zerg start out with the cheapest main building (350) and each of them can hold an unlimited number of larvae. Even though Zerg have to spend 150 minerals for a Queen - as much as an Orbital Command - they still have the advantage over Terrans IMO because the Queen isnt "dead weight" when it comes to base defense and it has other utilities than injecting larvae. Being able to produce "a whole lot of units of any type" is a killer in the late game and the ability to stockpile an unlimited amount of larvae on each hatchery is a tad much with todays LARGE maps. Even Orbital Command/Nexus energy can only go to 200.
This difference in the macro-economic and productive style between the races is totally obvious and part of the reason why we are having such a dominance of Zerg nowadays. It was obvious from the start, but that doesnt really matter. The question is: What does Blizzard need to do about it? Here are my suggestions:
Suggested changes (just some examples on how things could be changed) a. Limit the number of larvae one hatchery can hold to 5-7 by introducing a "decay" on those extra larvae, which would mean you still have to inject larvae even if you already have 7 stored. This means the race cant "stockpile its production" for a BURST unless they produce A LOT of hatcheries which could be sniped and thus have to be defended. The other two races need extra production buildings, so why shouldnt the Zerg? This would be a BAD change IMO because it involves a lot of "extra non-fun work". b. Reduce the number of extra larvae to 2. This would make the Zerg pretty weak in the early game and tone down their late game a notch or two. Again it requires extra work, but without having larvae decay you are allowed to "slack" every once in a while without being punished for it. The other two races economic boosts need to be tuned down as well.
c. I never understood why Protoss are NOT getting an OPTION to choose between Warp Gate and Gateway production. The "instant" reproduction of units on the battlefield should come at a cost, but it comes at a discount and that is bad. Thus Warp Gate should be changed to allow production everywhere with power, BUT the reduced cooldown should be for Gateways and Warp Gates should have a slight increase in cooldown. This would give a defender a clear advantage in a PvP where warp-ins are important OR you have to devise the "perfect timing" to switch between both.
d. Terrans are the "weak boys" when it comes to production since they only get "noncombat units" from their Starport with Reactors (Vikings are practically noncombat since they only shoot air) and Hellions are too weak against everything except Zerglings anyways. The "battle Hellion" in HotS might change that, but I am not convinced since they still cant shoot air. Marines are powerful, but can be countered so easily (Banelings, Storm, Colossus, Force Field, Fungal Growth, ...) that they arent worth much more than Zerglings. Thus I would like a general rework of the "Reactor concept", but I havent come up with anything useful - apart from turning that into a tier 2-3 upgrade which boosts all production by 50%. Terrans already have that "weak extra building" they need on EVERY production building and are disadvantaged by that. They dont get an advantage for it in return. Their units are "balanced to be fair" ...
e. Introduce a "creep-neutralizing method" other than killing the tumors. Psi Storm and EMP could temporarily and instantly remove it for example to allow the other races to build something there. This would open up new strategies.
Conclusion The biggest problem is that such huge maps - which I like - have a different effect during the course of a game. Zerg will only get stronger over time and this is good, BUT the other two races need something other than "harrass the Zerg early or lose" to get even. The units have been "balanced to counter this" and none of the Terran high tier units for example (BC and Thor) are particularly strong against the other races. They affected by Neural Parasite and Feedback which are very cheap to come by in comparison. Siege Tanks have been nerfed to a point where you practically need ALL of them in a battle to be able to survive a Zerg swarm attack (even without Dark Swarm or its HotS counterpart) and this is wrong. As the only unit which has several drawbacks to its power this seems wrong and you basically lose once your Tanks have been steamrolled by the opponent.
Thus the conclusion is that the macroing tools in SC2 are nice and nifty, but they change the power of a race by the time in the game. They need to be changed (completely), toned down or even scrapped totally. Inject Larva, MULE, Reactor, Warp Gate, Chronoboost altogether seem nice, but they push the races into different levels of power which are not made up for - late game - by tougher units for the races with the weaker mechanism. As an alternative Blizzard could SERIOUSLY BUFF late game units like the Battlecruiser and the Carrier by adding specific upgrades for them and maybe even include a second +2 building armor upgrade for Terrans (which would make bunkers pretty good against Zerglings).
because 2 extra startports in the midgmae is 12 marines and 200 gas... thats what you have left over after an engagement to do damage or do a drop. It's a big investment to put down 2 starports... would be better to just get an earlier 3rd to support building them.
2. Reread David Kim's comment before the queen buff is again interesting:
""We’re currently looking into a couple of potential issues. Zerg has recently shifted from making a very strong showing in tournaments, to having slightly weaker representation only at the highest levels of professional play. We’re also continuing to see a slight advantage for terran in terms of opening flexibility and scouting denial. In response, we’re considering offering zerg better scouting options in the early game.""
It seems like even David Kim didn't notice that there are hidden problems in TvZ mid-to-lategame that the queen buff exposes.
The reason that Terran has do early economic damage to Zerg is that there are fundamental design flaws and basic imbalances in the mid-to-late game compositions that disfavor Terran. Even in equal economy + equal supply, Terran usually has a difficult time to win, because of the mid-to-late game army strength is imbalanced. No to mention that Zerg is easy to be ahead economically.
3. Since this season, the Terran play style in early, mid, and late game are drastically different from the pre-queen-buff era. The innovation that these players put out is phenomenal. And all these new strategies that Terran used in GSL are spread out into other tournaments as well. Did they improve Terran's chance against the new Zerg? Yes. But did those innovations achieve good results for Terran? No.
Lol, bullseye man! The silence from the "Blizzard balancing team" is defeaning regarding to what has been going on after the installment of the last patch (Terran getting raped across the board). That's odd considering how promptfull they have been on other occassions (reaper nerfs, ghost nerfs, thor nerfs etc. etc.). To my eyes they look reluctant to admit their fault
On July 10 2012 14:35 WaKai wrote: because 2 extra startports in the midgmae is 12 marines and 200 gas... thats what you have left over after an engagement to do damage or do a drop. It's a big investment to put down 2 starports... would be better to just get an earlier 3rd to support building them.
yes that's what i said in the original post, put down the two extra starports after terran secures the third base. the cost of minerals and gas i accounted for in the disadvantages, but i still think the investment is worth it in the long term. I mean, if the last engagement was favorable for you and you can just go kill your opponent out right, then by all means do so, but if you aren't going to be killing him, why not pay the price and be a bit more prepared for the later stages?
On July 10 2012 14:34 Rabiator wrote: The metagame and size of maps There are too few adjustments to balance on the "metagame side" and only adjustments made to units. With "metagame" I mean the economic and production for each race. The maps have finally reached an acceptable size - not "Blizzard-tiny" like Steppes of War - and thus we get engagements with more and more bases and resources involved in battles. The disparity and imbalance between the three races and their methods of being able to spend those "unlimited resources" is only showing now.
1. Terran: The way to get more resources is to use a MULE, but enabling that also costs resources, thus they have the most expensive command center and apart from scanning it has no additional use. It even loses the ability to carry SCVs. The "production increase" is done via reactors, but they only speed up the production of the most basic units (which are easily countered in the late game and thus not really worth that much).
2. Protoss: Chronoboost can be used to speed up production of Probes and thus there is a chance to get ahead economically in the early game. In the mid-to-late game this doesnt matter as much anymore and you only get to use it on upgrades or those buildings which you only have one or two of (Robotics or Starport). Warp Gate speeds up the production of basic ground units immensely, but contrary to Terrans you can have higher tier units very fast and not only the most basic one.
3. Zerg: Zerg start out with the cheapest main building (350) and each of them can hold an unlimited number of larvae. Even though Zerg have to spend 150 minerals for a Queen - as much as an Orbital Command - they still have the advantage over Terrans IMO because the Queen isnt "dead weight" when it comes to base defense and it has other utilities than injecting larvae. Being able to produce "a whole lot of units of any type" is a killer in the late game and the ability to stockpile an unlimited amount of larvae on each hatchery is a tad much with todays LARGE maps. Even Orbital Command/Nexus energy can only go to 200.
This difference in the macro-economic and productive style between the races is totally obvious and part of the reason why we are having such a dominance of Zerg nowadays. It was obvious from the start, but that doesnt really matter. The question is: What does Blizzard need to do about it? Here are my suggestions:
Suggested changes (just some examples on how things could be changed) a. Limit the number of larvae one hatchery can hold to 5-7 by introducing a "decay" on those extra larvae, which would mean you still have to inject larvae even if you already have 7 stored. This means the race cant "stockpile its production" for a BURST unless they produce A LOT of hatcheries which could be sniped and thus have to be defended. The other two races need extra production buildings, so why shouldnt the Zerg? This would be a BAD change IMO because it involves a lot of "extra non-fun work". b. Reduce the number of extra larvae to 2. This would make the Zerg pretty weak in the early game and tone down their late game a notch or two. Again it requires extra work, but without having larvae decay you are allowed to "slack" every once in a while without being punished for it. The other two races economic boosts need to be tuned down as well.
c. I never understood why Protoss are NOT getting an OPTION to choose between Warp Gate and Gateway production. The "instant" reproduction of units on the battlefield should come at a cost, but it comes at a discount and that is bad. Thus Warp Gate should be changed to allow production everywhere with power, BUT the reduced cooldown should be for Gateways and Warp Gates should have a slight increase in cooldown. This would give a defender a clear advantage in a PvP where warp-ins are important OR you have to devise the "perfect timing" to switch between both.
d. Terrans are the "weak boys" when it comes to production since they only get "noncombat units" from their Starport with Reactors (Vikings are practically noncombat since they only shoot air) and Hellions are too weak against everything except Zerglings anyways. The "battle Hellion" in HotS might change that, but I am not convinced since they still cant shoot air. Marines are powerful, but can be countered so easily (Banelings, Storm, Colossus, Force Field, Fungal Growth, ...) that they arent worth much more than Zerglings. Thus I would like a general rework of the "Reactor concept", but I havent come up with anything useful - apart from turning that into a tier 2-3 upgrade which boosts all production by 50%. Terrans already have that "weak extra building" they need on EVERY production building and are disadvantaged by that. They dont get an advantage for it in return. Their units are "balanced to be fair" ...
e. Introduce a "creep-neutralizing method" other than killing the tumors. Psi Storm and EMP could temporarily and instantly remove it for example to allow the other races to build something there. This would open up new strategies.
Conclusion The biggest problem is that such huge maps - which I like - have a different effect during the course of a game. Zerg will only get stronger over time and this is good, BUT the other two races need something other than "harrass the Zerg early or lose" to get even. The units have been "balanced to counter this" and none of the Terran high tier units for example (BC and Thor) are particularly strong against the other races. They affected by Neural Parasite and Feedback which are very cheap to come by in comparison. Siege Tanks have been nerfed to a point where you practically need ALL of them in a battle to be able to survive a Zerg swarm attack (even without Dark Swarm or its HotS counterpart) and this is wrong. As the only unit which has several drawbacks to its power this seems wrong and you basically lose once your Tanks have been steamrolled by the opponent.
Thus the conclusion is that the macroing tools in SC2 are nice and nifty, but they change the power of a race by the time in the game. They need to be changed (completely), toned down or even scrapped totally. Inject Larva, MULE, Reactor, Warp Gate, Chronoboost altogether seem nice, but they push the races into different levels of power which are not made up for - late game - by tougher units for the races with the weaker mechanism. As an alternative Blizzard could SERIOUSLY BUFF late game units like the Battlecruiser and the Carrier by adding specific upgrades for them and maybe even include a second +2 building armor upgrade for Terrans (which would make bunkers pretty good against Zerglings).
you're still proposing changes to units and structures for the sake balance. macro mechanics are still part of race/unit-side design. metagame refers to overall strategy used as a result of knowledge from outside the given game.
but to your point of macro mechanics, i agree that terran is the weakest when it comes to production, but that can be worked around with adequate infrastructure. still, i don't think terran are making enough use out of macro orbitals.
On July 10 2012 14:34 Rabiator wrote: The metagame and size of maps There are too few adjustments to balance on the "metagame side" and only adjustments made to units. With "metagame" I mean the economic and production for each race. The maps have finally reached an acceptable size - not "Blizzard-tiny" like Steppes of War - and thus we get engagements with more and more bases and resources involved in battles. The disparity and imbalance between the three races and their methods of being able to spend those "unlimited resources" is only showing now.
1. Terran: The way to get more resources is to use a MULE, but enabling that also costs resources, thus they have the most expensive command center and apart from scanning it has no additional use. It even loses the ability to carry SCVs. The "production increase" is done via reactors, but they only speed up the production of the most basic units (which are easily countered in the late game and thus not really worth that much).
2. Protoss: Chronoboost can be used to speed up production of Probes and thus there is a chance to get ahead economically in the early game. In the mid-to-late game this doesnt matter as much anymore and you only get to use it on upgrades or those buildings which you only have one or two of (Robotics or Starport). Warp Gate speeds up the production of basic ground units immensely, but contrary to Terrans you can have higher tier units very fast and not only the most basic one.
3. Zerg: Zerg start out with the cheapest main building (350) and each of them can hold an unlimited number of larvae. Even though Zerg have to spend 150 minerals for a Queen - as much as an Orbital Command - they still have the advantage over Terrans IMO because the Queen isnt "dead weight" when it comes to base defense and it has other utilities than injecting larvae. Being able to produce "a whole lot of units of any type" is a killer in the late game and the ability to stockpile an unlimited amount of larvae on each hatchery is a tad much with todays LARGE maps. Even Orbital Command/Nexus energy can only go to 200.
This difference in the macro-economic and productive style between the races is totally obvious and part of the reason why we are having such a dominance of Zerg nowadays. It was obvious from the start, but that doesnt really matter. The question is: What does Blizzard need to do about it? Here are my suggestions:
Suggested changes (just some examples on how things could be changed) a. Limit the number of larvae one hatchery can hold to 5-7 by introducing a "decay" on those extra larvae, which would mean you still have to inject larvae even if you already have 7 stored. This means the race cant "stockpile its production" for a BURST unless they produce A LOT of hatcheries which could be sniped and thus have to be defended. The other two races need extra production buildings, so why shouldnt the Zerg? This would be a BAD change IMO because it involves a lot of "extra non-fun work". b. Reduce the number of extra larvae to 2. This would make the Zerg pretty weak in the early game and tone down their late game a notch or two. Again it requires extra work, but without having larvae decay you are allowed to "slack" every once in a while without being punished for it. The other two races economic boosts need to be tuned down as well.
c. I never understood why Protoss are NOT getting an OPTION to choose between Warp Gate and Gateway production. The "instant" reproduction of units on the battlefield should come at a cost, but it comes at a discount and that is bad. Thus Warp Gate should be changed to allow production everywhere with power, BUT the reduced cooldown should be for Gateways and Warp Gates should have a slight increase in cooldown. This would give a defender a clear advantage in a PvP where warp-ins are important OR you have to devise the "perfect timing" to switch between both.
d. Terrans are the "weak boys" when it comes to production since they only get "noncombat units" from their Starport with Reactors (Vikings are practically noncombat since they only shoot air) and Hellions are too weak against everything except Zerglings anyways. The "battle Hellion" in HotS might change that, but I am not convinced since they still cant shoot air. Marines are powerful, but can be countered so easily (Banelings, Storm, Colossus, Force Field, Fungal Growth, ...) that they arent worth much more than Zerglings. Thus I would like a general rework of the "Reactor concept", but I havent come up with anything useful - apart from turning that into a tier 2-3 upgrade which boosts all production by 50%. Terrans already have that "weak extra building" they need on EVERY production building and are disadvantaged by that. They dont get an advantage for it in return. Their units are "balanced to be fair" ...
e. Introduce a "creep-neutralizing method" other than killing the tumors. Psi Storm and EMP could temporarily and instantly remove it for example to allow the other races to build something there. This would open up new strategies.
Conclusion The biggest problem is that such huge maps - which I like - have a different effect during the course of a game. Zerg will only get stronger over time and this is good, BUT the other two races need something other than "harrass the Zerg early or lose" to get even. The units have been "balanced to counter this" and none of the Terran high tier units for example (BC and Thor) are particularly strong against the other races. They affected by Neural Parasite and Feedback which are very cheap to come by in comparison. Siege Tanks have been nerfed to a point where you practically need ALL of them in a battle to be able to survive a Zerg swarm attack (even without Dark Swarm or its HotS counterpart) and this is wrong. As the only unit which has several drawbacks to its power this seems wrong and you basically lose once your Tanks have been steamrolled by the opponent.
Thus the conclusion is that the macroing tools in SC2 are nice and nifty, but they change the power of a race by the time in the game. They need to be changed (completely), toned down or even scrapped totally. Inject Larva, MULE, Reactor, Warp Gate, Chronoboost altogether seem nice, but they push the races into different levels of power which are not made up for - late game - by tougher units for the races with the weaker mechanism. As an alternative Blizzard could SERIOUSLY BUFF late game units like the Battlecruiser and the Carrier by adding specific upgrades for them and maybe even include a second +2 building armor upgrade for Terrans (which would make bunkers pretty good against Zerglings).
For Terran, some one came out with an idea of tech-reactor, that is a research in the fusion core, which allows you to build tech-reactor or upgrade your existing techlab and reactor into tech-reactor. It's just the same thing from the campaign, but it helps Terran to get rid of the old fashion production method.
On July 10 2012 14:34 Rabiator wrote: The metagame and size of maps There are too few adjustments to balance on the "metagame side" and only adjustments made to units. With "metagame" I mean the economic and production for each race. The maps have finally reached an acceptable size - not "Blizzard-tiny" like Steppes of War - and thus we get engagements with more and more bases and resources involved in battles. The disparity and imbalance between the three races and their methods of being able to spend those "unlimited resources" is only showing now.
1. Terran: The way to get more resources is to use a MULE, but enabling that also costs resources, thus they have the most expensive command center and apart from scanning it has no additional use. It even loses the ability to carry SCVs. The "production increase" is done via reactors, but they only speed up the production of the most basic units (which are easily countered in the late game and thus not really worth that much).
2. Protoss: Chronoboost can be used to speed up production of Probes and thus there is a chance to get ahead economically in the early game. In the mid-to-late game this doesnt matter as much anymore and you only get to use it on upgrades or those buildings which you only have one or two of (Robotics or Starport). Warp Gate speeds up the production of basic ground units immensely, but contrary to Terrans you can have higher tier units very fast and not only the most basic one.
3. Zerg: Zerg start out with the cheapest main building (350) and each of them can hold an unlimited number of larvae. Even though Zerg have to spend 150 minerals for a Queen - as much as an Orbital Command - they still have the advantage over Terrans IMO because the Queen isnt "dead weight" when it comes to base defense and it has other utilities than injecting larvae. Being able to produce "a whole lot of units of any type" is a killer in the late game and the ability to stockpile an unlimited amount of larvae on each hatchery is a tad much with todays LARGE maps. Even Orbital Command/Nexus energy can only go to 200.
This difference in the macro-economic and productive style between the races is totally obvious and part of the reason why we are having such a dominance of Zerg nowadays. It was obvious from the start, but that doesnt really matter. The question is: What does Blizzard need to do about it? Here are my suggestions:
Suggested changes (just some examples on how things could be changed) a. Limit the number of larvae one hatchery can hold to 5-7 by introducing a "decay" on those extra larvae, which would mean you still have to inject larvae even if you already have 7 stored. This means the race cant "stockpile its production" for a BURST unless they produce A LOT of hatcheries which could be sniped and thus have to be defended. The other two races need extra production buildings, so why shouldnt the Zerg? This would be a BAD change IMO because it involves a lot of "extra non-fun work". b. Reduce the number of extra larvae to 2. This would make the Zerg pretty weak in the early game and tone down their late game a notch or two. Again it requires extra work, but without having larvae decay you are allowed to "slack" every once in a while without being punished for it. The other two races economic boosts need to be tuned down as well.
c. I never understood why Protoss are NOT getting an OPTION to choose between Warp Gate and Gateway production. The "instant" reproduction of units on the battlefield should come at a cost, but it comes at a discount and that is bad. Thus Warp Gate should be changed to allow production everywhere with power, BUT the reduced cooldown should be for Gateways and Warp Gates should have a slight increase in cooldown. This would give a defender a clear advantage in a PvP where warp-ins are important OR you have to devise the "perfect timing" to switch between both.
d. Terrans are the "weak boys" when it comes to production since they only get "noncombat units" from their Starport with Reactors (Vikings are practically noncombat since they only shoot air) and Hellions are too weak against everything except Zerglings anyways. The "battle Hellion" in HotS might change that, but I am not convinced since they still cant shoot air. Marines are powerful, but can be countered so easily (Banelings, Storm, Colossus, Force Field, Fungal Growth, ...) that they arent worth much more than Zerglings. Thus I would like a general rework of the "Reactor concept", but I havent come up with anything useful - apart from turning that into a tier 2-3 upgrade which boosts all production by 50%. Terrans already have that "weak extra building" they need on EVERY production building and are disadvantaged by that. They dont get an advantage for it in return. Their units are "balanced to be fair" ...
e. Introduce a "creep-neutralizing method" other than killing the tumors. Psi Storm and EMP could temporarily and instantly remove it for example to allow the other races to build something there. This would open up new strategies.
Conclusion The biggest problem is that such huge maps - which I like - have a different effect during the course of a game. Zerg will only get stronger over time and this is good, BUT the other two races need something other than "harrass the Zerg early or lose" to get even. The units have been "balanced to counter this" and none of the Terran high tier units for example (BC and Thor) are particularly strong against the other races. They affected by Neural Parasite and Feedback which are very cheap to come by in comparison. Siege Tanks have been nerfed to a point where you practically need ALL of them in a battle to be able to survive a Zerg swarm attack (even without Dark Swarm or its HotS counterpart) and this is wrong. As the only unit which has several drawbacks to its power this seems wrong and you basically lose once your Tanks have been steamrolled by the opponent.
Thus the conclusion is that the macroing tools in SC2 are nice and nifty, but they change the power of a race by the time in the game. They need to be changed (completely), toned down or even scrapped totally. Inject Larva, MULE, Reactor, Warp Gate, Chronoboost altogether seem nice, but they push the races into different levels of power which are not made up for - late game - by tougher units for the races with the weaker mechanism. As an alternative Blizzard could SERIOUSLY BUFF late game units like the Battlecruiser and the Carrier by adding specific upgrades for them and maybe even include a second +2 building armor upgrade for Terrans (which would make bunkers pretty good against Zerglings).
you're still proposing changes to units and structures for the sake balance. macro mechanics are still part of race/unit-side design. metagame refers to overall strategy used as a result of knowledge from outside the given game.
but to your point of macro mechanics, i agree that terran is the weakest when it comes to production, but that can be worked around with adequate infrastructure. still, i don't think terran are making enough use out of macro orbitals.
The main point is that these macro-economics and production differences between the races make the game totally different based on the size and style of the map. Thus they should - due to a lack of adjustability - be scrapped IMO. The alternative - buffing units of "weaker macro races" - would make the game fine for large maps and totally screw up the balance for small ones. Sadly I think Blizzard is either too dumb to notice this problem or has too much of an ego (of being right), so these mechanics will stay.
On July 10 2012 15:33 larse wrote: For Terran, some one came out with an idea of tech-reactor, that is a research in the fusion core, which allows you to build tech-reactor or upgrade your existing techlab and reactor into tech-reactor. It's just the same thing from the campaign, but it helps Terran to get rid of the old fashion production method.
The tech-reactor is in the single-player campaign, but it doesnt really help much. Early on you would still need a regular reactor and thus it is better to get totally rid of all the problematic macro-economic and production boosts for all races. The game would have battles with fewer units, but so what? It wouldnt be any less exciting. As I said above ... fiddling around with unit stats and production speeds and so on will only work for maps of one size category and the game should be balanced equally well for all sizes.
EPT
