|
On August 30 2012 04:08 Yorbon wrote:
I'm not really a fan of balance whine/discussion in general. But i'd like to ask a question.
MVPsniper said in his u&d winner's interview that sentry/immortal all-ins are on the line between being balanced and imbalanced, because it is about protoss hitting his forcefields and not zerg defending well.
Also, i thought i saw ret twitter on this issue a while ago, and he was struggling with it as well.
Are there people with opinions on this matter?
Personally, i haven't encountered it yet with macro decent enough to say anything about this, so i dare not make any comment on is, although they appear very strong when i look at progames (at all pro game levels: code s and upcoming players)
Note: i'm not looking for comments in sniper's direction, i don't care how good or bad he is. Also, it is very easy to link to the current perceived situation in tvz, but please refrain from doing so. Thanks.
I used to think this build was pretty imba until I started adding hydralisks to the mix.
On creep, hydras/lings are strong defenders against both senties and immortals/.
The hydra den is the fastest zerg tech structure buildable (40 game seconds) compared to spawning pool (65 sec), infestation pit (50 secs) or spire (100 sec).
Adding around 6-10 hydras with mass lings can effectively deal with this timing, as you tech directly to spire.
I think the current zerg world is too obsessed with mass roaches since stephano showed them how to max out by 12 minutes.
TLDR: defensive hydralisks are the answer, they are easy to tech to, fast to build, excellent on creep as defenders, safe transition to muta.
|
On August 30 2012 04:08 Yorbon wrote:
I'm not really a fan of balance whine/discussion in general. But i'd like to ask a question.
MVPsniper said in his u&d winner's interview that sentry/immortal all-ins are on the line between being balanced and imbalanced, because it is about protoss hitting his forcefields and not zerg defending well.
Also, i thought i saw ret twitter on this issue a while ago, and he was struggling with it as well.
Are there people with opinions on this matter?
Personally, i haven't encountered it yet with macro decent enough to say anything about this, so i dare not make any comment on is, although they appear very strong when i look at progames (at all pro game levels: code s and upcoming players)
Note: i'm not looking for comments in sniper's direction, i don't care how good or bad he is. Also, it is very easy to link to the current perceived situation in tvz, but please refrain from doing so. Thanks.
Around March-April, Protoss' PvZ discussion was all about Stephano style 12min max roach and how OP it was.
Zerg execution:
[G] Stephano-Style ZvP - The 12 Minute Max-Out
Protoss solution:
[D] PvZ Beating Stephano Style Roaches
Relatively easy Zerg build execution compared to the difficulty to defend it was said to be the problem. It took about 1-2month for Protoss to figure out how to defend it. During that period, so many Protoss complained that this was impossible to defeat without zerg nerf. Today, however, the build is almost obsolete at top level even though no nerf happened to zerg. Protoss just learned what to do against it.
The counterpart in ZvP is this immortal/sentry all-in.
This build appeared as early as January 2012. (or could be before that) After about 8 months, Zerg still don't have much answer to this build. Yeah, I know people have different opinions as to what to do, but the understanding/depth/reliability is not nearly close to what Protoss has about once-said-OP max roach, which took 1/4 of time to figure out as of today. Protoss execution thread was made around the same time as max roach, but only recently was comprehensive guide on how to defend it made.
Protoss execution:
[G] PvZ 7-gate Immortal +1/+1
Zerg solution:
[G/D] ZvP - Defending the Immortal/Sentry all-in
These 2 builds have 1 thing in common: relatively easy execution by aggressor that requires very difficult response by defender.
As sniper said, probably this immortal/sentry is on the verge of "imba" line. Pro Zergs have constantly been dying to this push for more than half a year. Call my memory selective, but immortal/sentry all-in seems to win 80%+ on metropolis, and on Ohana 70%+. Given more time, Zerg might come up with better solution, so I wouldn't personally call it totally imbalanced yet, but no other specific all-in has had this much success for this much period of time as far as I remember. SC2 has beeen out for 25 months, so 8 months struggle is about 1/3rd of it. Let's see how long it takes before this immortal/sentry becomes obsolete like max roach sort of became.
|
On August 30 2012 04:54 Thrombozyt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2012 03:42 Empirimancer wrote:On August 30 2012 03:32 Whitewing wrote:On August 30 2012 02:49 Empirimancer wrote:
Problem: All Protoss harassing options are either bad (zealot drops), demand ultra-high tech (DT drops, HT drops), or are nullified by a little static defense (phoenixes, Oracles).
Suggestion: Change the Oracle's Entomb ability for something that is both effective (i.e. that kills workers) and that isn't nullified by a couple of turrets. Or just give us a droppable unit that kills workers quickly.
Protoss harass is fine (I'm a protoss player, it's not bias), and can be effective. Remember that zealot warp ins don't have to be super effective: you're trading your own minerals for damage, and toss often has an overabundance of minerals. It doesn't need to be as strong as terran or zerg's version. Well, my complaint is that a Terran marine drop or a bunch of mutas can be effective enough to turn a game around, rather than slightly chip at the opponent's economy, and I wish Protoss would have something like that. It is the zealot warp-in... there are a ton of pro-games, where the toss just warps in 2 zealots at a pylon close to the 3rd or 4th when the posturing starts and they score upwards of 15 SCV kills. It's just not the core of protoss play, simply because most protoss prefer the deathball style that is so effective, but chargelots are just as capable of shutting down bases as other drops. Maybe they won't score so many worker kills, but they shut down mining for sure.
Just some additional points. Unlike TvZ, in TvP u need almost your entire army to be together to confront Toss' deathball, leaving very few or no units at home to defend warp ins. And chargelot warp ins can definitely change the game in TvP because when the a bunch of scvs have been killed Terran will fall behind and in TvP Terran can never fall behind. Its very hard to make a come back in TvP. T needs to maintain a lead from early to late game and still cannot guarantee s victory (take a look at yesterday's MKP match).
perhaps there is one thing terran can work on is to build one bunker at each base at strategic location (chokes and protected by depot) to defend toss warp ins.
|
On August 30 2012 11:50 gengka wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2012 04:54 Thrombozyt wrote:On August 30 2012 03:42 Empirimancer wrote:On August 30 2012 03:32 Whitewing wrote:On August 30 2012 02:49 Empirimancer wrote:
Problem: All Protoss harassing options are either bad (zealot drops), demand ultra-high tech (DT drops, HT drops), or are nullified by a little static defense (phoenixes, Oracles).
Suggestion: Change the Oracle's Entomb ability for something that is both effective (i.e. that kills workers) and that isn't nullified by a couple of turrets. Or just give us a droppable unit that kills workers quickly.
Protoss harass is fine (I'm a protoss player, it's not bias), and can be effective. Remember that zealot warp ins don't have to be super effective: you're trading your own minerals for damage, and toss often has an overabundance of minerals. It doesn't need to be as strong as terran or zerg's version. Well, my complaint is that a Terran marine drop or a bunch of mutas can be effective enough to turn a game around, rather than slightly chip at the opponent's economy, and I wish Protoss would have something like that. It is the zealot warp-in... there are a ton of pro-games, where the toss just warps in 2 zealots at a pylon close to the 3rd or 4th when the posturing starts and they score upwards of 15 SCV kills. It's just not the core of protoss play, simply because most protoss prefer the deathball style that is so effective, but chargelots are just as capable of shutting down bases as other drops. Maybe they won't score so many worker kills, but they shut down mining for sure. Just some additional points. Unlike TvZ, in TvP u need almost your entire army to be together to confront Toss' deathball, leaving very few or no units at home to defend warp ins. And chargelot warp ins can definitely change the game in TvP because when the a bunch of scvs have been killed Terran will fall behind and in TvP Terran can never fall behind. Its very hard to make a come back in TvP. T needs to maintain a lead from early to late game and still cannot guarantee s victory (take a look at yesterday's MKP match). perhaps there is one thing terran can work on is to build one bunker at each base at strategic location (chokes and protected by depot) to defend toss warp ins.
How about turrets to prevent the Warp Prism - and the Observers - from getting in in the first place? You could also have a bunch (like 2-3) of Marines moving through your bases on patrol to support the turrets; that few wont be missed at the front.
|
On August 30 2012 11:50 gengka wrote:Show nested quote +On August 30 2012 04:54 Thrombozyt wrote:On August 30 2012 03:42 Empirimancer wrote:On August 30 2012 03:32 Whitewing wrote:On August 30 2012 02:49 Empirimancer wrote:
Problem: All Protoss harassing options are either bad (zealot drops), demand ultra-high tech (DT drops, HT drops), or are nullified by a little static defense (phoenixes, Oracles).
Suggestion: Change the Oracle's Entomb ability for something that is both effective (i.e. that kills workers) and that isn't nullified by a couple of turrets. Or just give us a droppable unit that kills workers quickly.
Protoss harass is fine (I'm a protoss player, it's not bias), and can be effective. Remember that zealot warp ins don't have to be super effective: you're trading your own minerals for damage, and toss often has an overabundance of minerals. It doesn't need to be as strong as terran or zerg's version. Well, my complaint is that a Terran marine drop or a bunch of mutas can be effective enough to turn a game around, rather than slightly chip at the opponent's economy, and I wish Protoss would have something like that. It is the zealot warp-in... there are a ton of pro-games, where the toss just warps in 2 zealots at a pylon close to the 3rd or 4th when the posturing starts and they score upwards of 15 SCV kills. It's just not the core of protoss play, simply because most protoss prefer the deathball style that is so effective, but chargelots are just as capable of shutting down bases as other drops. Maybe they won't score so many worker kills, but they shut down mining for sure. Just some additional points. Unlike TvZ, in TvP u need almost your entire army to be together to confront Toss' deathball, leaving very few or no units at home to defend warp ins. And chargelot warp ins can definitely change the game in TvP because when the a bunch of scvs have been killed Terran will fall behind and in TvP Terran can never fall behind. Its very hard to make a come back in TvP. T needs to maintain a lead from early to late game and still cannot guarantee s victory (take a look at yesterday's MKP match). perhaps there is one thing terran can work on is to build one bunker at each base at strategic location (chokes and protected by depot) to defend toss warp ins.
Something Kas has been doing for a while and that I think is really cool is adding on huge amounts of Orbitals in the midgame. What this allows him to do is both support a larger army and avoid taking as much economic damage to drops simply because he doesn't have any workers. It served him pretty well versus MC in IEM Cologne, although he ended up losing mostly due to inferior unit control on his own part (and the fact that he had only one Reactor Starport the entire game...). I'd like to see some players explore it in more depth.
Aside from that, Missile Turrets seem to be an excellent remediary measure, given that all you need is one Turret whacking on a Prism to ensure that it can't get a warp-in round. So it's just gonna be a couple per base. I don't like the Marine patrol idea, though, because unfortunately a couple Marines can't kill the Prism fast enough. You need a solid handful, and at that point you really should be keeping them at the front or sending them in a Medivac.
|
On August 30 2012 02:37 sibs wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2012 15:22 aksfjh wrote:On August 23 2012 15:03 convention wrote:On August 23 2012 14:49 aksfjh wrote:
Here are some interesting winrate numbers from WCS Korea so far.
TvZ: 11-11 50%
TvP: 7-19 26.9%
PvZ: 28-11 71.8%
Low statistical numbers, I know, but maybe we're starting to see a shift of Protoss dominance? I'm curious to see how MLG turns out this weekend. Not only is that low statistics, look at the participants. It is just like IEM, where the best participants were all terrans, so it was not surprising at all when terran did the best as a race. For WCS, the protoss lineup has all of the best of the best protoss players, whereas terran and zerg do not have their best players participating. This is also the first time that protoss have finally done extremely well in a GSL/high level korean tournament, and there were no recent patches that would have buff toss. Basically, maybe there is a shift, but after one good high level korean tournament were they have all of their top players and the other races do not is a poor indication of protoss dominance. GSL 2 this year was also pretty Protoss favored. As for IEM, the skill gap is arguably much larger than WCS Korea. But you are right, they had a less than stellar showing. This is why MLG is going to be interesting this weekend. There's going to be quite a few big names, and I'm interested to see if there are going to be any lopsided results or upsets. Protoss is absolutely out of control in Korea , it's weird no one is talking about it, people are focusing on Foreign Z vs Foreign T mostly it seems on their whine. See WCS and past 2 GSL's.
For real. It's the consensus over there. I rarely see a QQ about infestors and never see a QQ about queens @PlayXP. Truth to be told, there is very little QQ these days despite Protoss rocking the scene over there. TL is like a totally different world. (I kind of have an idea why but I'd rather not say)
|
I was playing against a Terran who was going primarily Marauder/Medvac (with a few marines tucked in) and I decided to go Chargelot/Archon/HT. Granted I wasn't playing as good as I could have and that he had a strong economy, I never outright won in engagement head-on with the combination. Could Marauders be a bit too healthy right now in PvT? I mainly think it's Concussion Shells (especially considering how the upgrade cost is so damn miniscule), but frankly I don't know. Even after Storming the entire army with 4-6 different HT's and tackling it with a pretty large number of Zealots with about 7 Archons, the Medivacs just healed up and the Marauders trotted along. For that concern, could the Medivac healing rate or ratio be too much? He didn't even try to kite me neither.
It's just a bit irritating when guides tell you Marauders are countered by Zealots and that Zealots are hardly even effective against them when Zealots can be kited or stunned to death.
|
On September 04 2012 06:04 Jasiwel wrote:
I was playing against a Terran who was going primarily Marauder/Medvac (with a few marines tucked in) and I decided to go Chargelot/Archon/HT. Granted I wasn't playing as good as I could have and that he had a strong economy, I never outright won in engagement head-on with the combination. Could Marauders be a bit too healthy right now in PvT? I mainly think it's Concussion Shells (especially considering how the upgrade cost is so damn miniscule), but frankly I don't know. Even after Storming the entire army with 4-6 different HT's and tackling it with a pretty large number of Zealots with about 7 Archons, the Medivacs just healed up and the Marauders trotted along. For that concern, could the Medivac healing rate or ratio be too much? He didn't even try to kite me neither.
It's just a bit irritating when guides tell you Marauders are countered by Zealots and that Zealots are hardly even effective against them when Zealots can be kited or stunned to death.
Next time go with a bit more robo tech and maybe focus with feedbacking the medivacs more instead of storming.
I agree the concussive shell research is cheap and fast to make, but it's necessary for facing mass zealots with bio.
Back in the day I got a lot of sh... from the protoss players for using marauders, but it's not exactly the composition you want to go for in the TvP as their dps is not that high compared to marines. I think people mostly go for them because they can weather the storms better. Just go for a better composition against it.
As for medivacs I don't believe the rate of healing is an issue. The energy on them is finite and again you can just burn through it faster than any terran can.
Cheers
|
On September 04 2012 06:24 lotny wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 06:04 Jasiwel wrote:
I was playing against a Terran who was going primarily Marauder/Medvac (with a few marines tucked in) and I decided to go Chargelot/Archon/HT. Granted I wasn't playing as good as I could have and that he had a strong economy, I never outright won in engagement head-on with the combination. Could Marauders be a bit too healthy right now in PvT? I mainly think it's Concussion Shells (especially considering how the upgrade cost is so damn miniscule), but frankly I don't know. Even after Storming the entire army with 4-6 different HT's and tackling it with a pretty large number of Zealots with about 7 Archons, the Medivacs just healed up and the Marauders trotted along. For that concern, could the Medivac healing rate or ratio be too much? He didn't even try to kite me neither.
It's just a bit irritating when guides tell you Marauders are countered by Zealots and that Zealots are hardly even effective against them when Zealots can be kited or stunned to death. Next time go with a bit more robo tech and maybe focus with feedbacking the medivacs more instead of storming. I agree the concussive shell research is cheap and fast to make, but it's necessary for facing mass zealots with bio. Back in the day I got a lot of sh... from the protoss players for using marauders, but it's not exactly the composition you want to go for in the TvP as their dps is not that high compared to marines. I think people mostly go for them because they can weather the storms better. Just go for a better composition against it. As for medivacs I don't believe the rate of healing is an issue. The energy on them is finite and again you can just burn through it faster than any terran can. Cheers
Thanks for the awesome reply. One reason why I've been confused about Marauder balance is that they do really need that Concussive Shells to fight Zealots, kind of like how Phoenix need that Anion Crystal to effectively combat Mutalisks. However, I feel that those Shells also make the investments put into the Zealots almost pointless, thus my conflict.
Still, I began using Feedback on the Medis when I started converting the HTs to Archons, but it didn't matter as much considering there were more than enough to take the place of the dead ones.
You're totally right about my not getting Robo though. It's just a challenge to have enough gas to support both HT/Archon and Robotics Facilities/Bays. Frankly, I guess my biggest gripe is that for the investments I put into my army and the investments he put into his (I watched the replay and I believe my Army Networth surpassed his a good bit), my army should have won out at least once or twice out of the 5 engagements until he brought out the Ghosts that simply decimated everything I could throw at him elsewise.
What about going Stargate? I've been nudged to go Stargate more and more lately, especially against Zerg Roach and Terran Marauder themes. Is it worth the decrease in Archons to circumvent gas?
|
On September 04 2012 06:35 Jasiwel wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 06:24 lotny wrote:On September 04 2012 06:04 Jasiwel wrote:
I was playing against a Terran who was going primarily Marauder/Medvac (with a few marines tucked in) and I decided to go Chargelot/Archon/HT. Granted I wasn't playing as good as I could have and that he had a strong economy, I never outright won in engagement head-on with the combination. Could Marauders be a bit too healthy right now in PvT? I mainly think it's Concussion Shells (especially considering how the upgrade cost is so damn miniscule), but frankly I don't know. Even after Storming the entire army with 4-6 different HT's and tackling it with a pretty large number of Zealots with about 7 Archons, the Medivacs just healed up and the Marauders trotted along. For that concern, could the Medivac healing rate or ratio be too much? He didn't even try to kite me neither.
It's just a bit irritating when guides tell you Marauders are countered by Zealots and that Zealots are hardly even effective against them when Zealots can be kited or stunned to death. Next time go with a bit more robo tech and maybe focus with feedbacking the medivacs more instead of storming. I agree the concussive shell research is cheap and fast to make, but it's necessary for facing mass zealots with bio. Back in the day I got a lot of sh... from the protoss players for using marauders, but it's not exactly the composition you want to go for in the TvP as their dps is not that high compared to marines. I think people mostly go for them because they can weather the storms better. Just go for a better composition against it. As for medivacs I don't believe the rate of healing is an issue. The energy on them is finite and again you can just burn through it faster than any terran can. Cheers Thanks for the awesome reply. One reason why I've been confused about Marauder balance is that they do really need that Concussive Shells to fight Zealots, kind of like how Phoenix need that Anion Crystal to effectively combat Mutalisks. However, I feel that those Shells also make the investments put into the Zealots almost pointless, thus my conflict. Still, I began using Feedback on the Medis when I started converting the HTs to Archons, but it didn't matter as much considering there were more than enough to take the place of the dead ones. You're totally right about my not getting Robo though. It's just a challenge to have enough gas to support both HT/Archon and Robotics Facilities/Bays. Frankly, I guess my biggest gripe is that for the investments I put into my army and the investments he put into his (I watched the replay and I believe my Army Networth surpassed his a good bit), my army should have won out at least once or twice out of the 5 engagements until he brought out the Ghosts that simply decimated everything I could throw at him elsewise. What about going Stargate? I've been nudged to go Stargate more and more lately, especially against Zerg Roach and Terran Marauder themes. Is it worth the decrease in Archons to circumvent gas?
One of the things about Zealots, especially Chargelots, is that they FORCE the terran to micro. If you do not micro against Zealots (enough of them, that is), your army will be ripped to shreds. You certainly shouldn't rely on them specifically to take down the army, but use them as the.... ah... I don't know. Like. The thing that allow you to easily kill the rest of the army with other methods, such as storm, colossus, or whatever.
Also, I'm no pro with toss or anything, but I'm not sure Stargate would be the right decision. Just because their dps may not be great enough, and stimmed mauraders could easily run away and kill your base if you've invested in too much air. Plus a turret ring can make your virtually immune to air harass as well.
|
On September 04 2012 12:36 CyDe wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 06:35 Jasiwel wrote:On September 04 2012 06:24 lotny wrote:On September 04 2012 06:04 Jasiwel wrote:
I was playing against a Terran who was going primarily Marauder/Medvac (with a few marines tucked in) and I decided to go Chargelot/Archon/HT. Granted I wasn't playing as good as I could have and that he had a strong economy, I never outright won in engagement head-on with the combination. Could Marauders be a bit too healthy right now in PvT? I mainly think it's Concussion Shells (especially considering how the upgrade cost is so damn miniscule), but frankly I don't know. Even after Storming the entire army with 4-6 different HT's and tackling it with a pretty large number of Zealots with about 7 Archons, the Medivacs just healed up and the Marauders trotted along. For that concern, could the Medivac healing rate or ratio be too much? He didn't even try to kite me neither.
It's just a bit irritating when guides tell you Marauders are countered by Zealots and that Zealots are hardly even effective against them when Zealots can be kited or stunned to death. Next time go with a bit more robo tech and maybe focus with feedbacking the medivacs more instead of storming. I agree the concussive shell research is cheap and fast to make, but it's necessary for facing mass zealots with bio. Back in the day I got a lot of sh... from the protoss players for using marauders, but it's not exactly the composition you want to go for in the TvP as their dps is not that high compared to marines. I think people mostly go for them because they can weather the storms better. Just go for a better composition against it. As for medivacs I don't believe the rate of healing is an issue. The energy on them is finite and again you can just burn through it faster than any terran can. Cheers Thanks for the awesome reply. One reason why I've been confused about Marauder balance is that they do really need that Concussive Shells to fight Zealots, kind of like how Phoenix need that Anion Crystal to effectively combat Mutalisks. However, I feel that those Shells also make the investments put into the Zealots almost pointless, thus my conflict. Still, I began using Feedback on the Medis when I started converting the HTs to Archons, but it didn't matter as much considering there were more than enough to take the place of the dead ones. You're totally right about my not getting Robo though. It's just a challenge to have enough gas to support both HT/Archon and Robotics Facilities/Bays. Frankly, I guess my biggest gripe is that for the investments I put into my army and the investments he put into his (I watched the replay and I believe my Army Networth surpassed his a good bit), my army should have won out at least once or twice out of the 5 engagements until he brought out the Ghosts that simply decimated everything I could throw at him elsewise. What about going Stargate? I've been nudged to go Stargate more and more lately, especially against Zerg Roach and Terran Marauder themes. Is it worth the decrease in Archons to circumvent gas? One of the things about Zealots, especially Chargelots, is that they FORCE the terran to micro. If you do not micro against Zealots (enough of them, that is), your army will be ripped to shreds. You certainly shouldn't rely on them specifically to take down the army, but use them as the.... ah... I don't know. Like. The thing that allow you to easily kill the rest of the army with other methods, such as storm, colossus, or whatever. Also, I'm no pro with toss or anything, but I'm not sure Stargate would be the right decision. Just because their dps may not be great enough, and stimmed mauraders could easily run away and kill your base if you've invested in too much air. Plus a turret ring can make your virtually immune to air harass as well.
Yeah and I suppose it's also a bit of my fault for attacking my opponent at very bad locations (it's probably my greatest weakness right now next to expanding times being pretty wacky). For that match, I definitely should have gone with Colossus instead of Storm simply because Colossus are much better at slaying Marauders than Storm (snce Marauders have so much HP). It really just depends if my opponent is going for more Marines or Marauders.
It might be because I'm still in lower leagues, but I actually become very excited when I build Stargates in PvT. Because I've been playing more and more Terrans utilizing Banshees, Phoenix with Observer speed is SOOOOOO wonderful, not to mention Phoenix are good against Vikings if you micro them well. They also help when your opponent is using Siege Tanks and you didn't research Blink. Tanks can actually be effective versus Toss once their upgrades start rolling in. At least as of now they can against me. I seriously need to improve my attacking times and locations. I think I lost 3 or 4 matches yesterday because I lost big engagements as a result of poorly conducted assault angles.
|
what you guys think about uprooted spores counting on buildings?
imho thats something that should be fixed, there is no way to target these if they are under a zerg army.
unlike terran buildings which can be at least be target fired due to their size
|
it's completely ok. Terran buildings have lots of HP, so if you are focus firing them, your army will die fast if it's inferior. And if you have the superior army you win non the less. There is no issue with spore/spine crawlers moving around in base trades!
|
On September 06 2012 08:00 TeeTS wrote:
it's completely ok. Terran buildings have lots of HP, so if you are focus firing them, your army will die fast if it's inferior. And if you have the superior army you win non the less. There is no issue with spore/spine crawlers moving around in base trades!
I agree. Also, if buildings are the biggest priority then learn to utilize Banelings. They have a function specifically meant to target structures.
|
On September 06 2012 07:44 freetgy wrote:
what you guys think about uprooted spores counting on buildings?
imho thats something that should be fixed, there is no way to target these if they are under a zerg army.
unlike terran buildings which can be at least be target fired due to their size
Intentionally lose vision on Zerg army, then revealed spore/spine is the only thing you can target with your army.
|
United States7483 Posts
On September 06 2012 08:00 TeeTS wrote:
it's completely ok. Terran buildings have lots of HP, so if you are focus firing them, your army will die fast if it's inferior. And if you have the superior army you win non the less. There is no issue with spore/spine crawlers moving around in base trades!
There is in PvZ >_>
|
thought about starting a new thread, but realized I should probably post here first:
in terms of recent tournament results, do you think the game is balanced?
+ Show Spoiler +
I noticed this after the WCS European championship, what does this mean as far as balance is concerned? We all know that in korea, the game is relatively balanced, but the rest of the world? I think the WCS results speak for themselves.
Does anybody have any data on the amount of players going into these tournaments? I feel like I always see less and less terran at least making it to the medal stages...
|
On September 20 2012 23:55 renaissanceMAN wrote:thought about starting a new thread, but realized I should probably post here first: in terms of recent tournament results, do you think the game is balanced? + Show Spoiler +I noticed this after the WCS European championship, what does this mean as far as balance is concerned? We all know that in korea, the game is relatively balanced, but the rest of the world? I think the WCS results speak for themselves. Does anybody have any data on the amount of players going into these tournaments? I feel like I always see less and less terran at least making it to the medal stages...
Just going to say I don't like people bringing up WCS. A large number of national champions for countries have always been zerg. In Europe there has been a notable boom of zergs lately which I think some people believe to be an/the issue, but in north america, Oceania and non-korea-asia zerg champions have always been. And best players for a number of nations are the best irrespective of race.
Terran-wise: it never looked good outside Korea. But because terrans in Korea did SO unbelievably well the terran players look worse for wear elsewhere as well. I know speaking for australia locally most of our strongest players are zerg with a few protoss and hardly any big terran players in contention. It's not their race, it's the players.
In short: no I don't think the results mean a thing towards balance. Players, and everything connected to them, make results. Balance is in the games, not the final result.
|
On September 21 2012 00:04 bittman wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2012 23:55 renaissanceMAN wrote:thought about starting a new thread, but realized I should probably post here first: in terms of recent tournament results, do you think the game is balanced? + Show Spoiler +I noticed this after the WCS European championship, what does this mean as far as balance is concerned? We all know that in korea, the game is relatively balanced, but the rest of the world? I think the WCS results speak for themselves. Does anybody have any data on the amount of players going into these tournaments? I feel like I always see less and less terran at least making it to the medal stages... Just going to say I don't like people bringing up WCS. A large number of national champions for countries have always been zerg. In Europe there has been a notable boom of zergs lately which I think some people believe to be an/the issue, but in north america, Oceania and non-korea-asia zerg champions have always been. And best players for a number of nations are the best irrespective of race. Terran-wise: it never looked good outside Korea. But because terrans in Korea did SO unbelievably well the terran players look worse for wear elsewhere as well. I know speaking for australia locally most of our strongest players are zerg with a few protoss and hardly any big terran players in contention. It's not their race, it's the players. In short: no I don't think the results mean a thing towards balance. Players, and everything connected to them, make results. Balance is in the games, not the final result.
What you said about Korean Terrans is true, but where does that leave the rest of the world? I feel like just because zerg & protoss are winning more and more outside of korea, that's influencing a horrible imbalance in the choosing of a race. Aside from MVP, Taeja, and MKP to an extent, there aren't any terrans anywhere that have been producing notable results as of late, and I think this is seriously effecting the game as a whole.
I agree that terran used to be pretty imbalanced, 2011 and the era of gom-tvt was ridiculous, but since then with all the balancing blizzard has been doing we've just seen more and more terrans knocked off of the map. I'm speaking not just in tournament play either, but in ladder as well. I rarely play TvT anymore on the US serv.
I'm posting this because I'm worried that with the upcoming HoTS release, once again terran is going to remain relatively the same. The warhound was ridiculous, but terrans need some other ground unit between the thor and marauder to make mech a viable option. Not only will it shift the overall playstyle, but it'll give us something new to work with and make the race more interesting/enticing to those wanting to play. Zerg's are getting the viper, swarm host, new abilities for ultralisks and hydras, protoss getting the tempest, oracle, mothership core and what do terrans get? The widow mine and the battle hellion? Oh and a passive skills for reapers...
|
Terran has all the tools it needs to make mech viable, as players like Lucifron have demonstrated. All that needs to happen is that some of them be sharpened (buffed).
Oh, and some part of the 1-1-1 needs to be nerfed hard along with. It's a very strong all-in as it is, and doing something like giving tanks 60 damage without nerfing another component will make PvT not only unwinnnable, but also boring as sin to watch. Perhaps the best solution would be bringing tanks down to 2 supply, as that doesn't make the 1-1-1 significantly stronger but does make the lategame mech force just that much more potent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
