|
On August 02 2013 08:25 Gullis wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 08:10 GhostOwl wrote:On August 02 2013 07:52 ChristianS wrote:On August 02 2013 07:50 xyzz wrote:
What's the problem with adding Ghosts? Are we trying to make Terran play without Ghosts viable here? That's like whining that Protoss needs to be buffed as a whole because it can't beat mid/late game Bio without 4+ Colossus or mass HT. No, just GreenGringo decided to start arguing Terran win rates would be fine without ghosts, or the ability to lift command centers, or MULEs. Then everyone else in the thread told him that's crazy. Now he's gone for a little while, so we can hopefully get off the topic I guess that's how some of you guys want to deal with anyone who argues against Terran benefits. Report him and hope he's banned. All those things together gone would not be okay, but they do have a fundamental problem and they need to be addressed. He didn't put it into the prettiest of words, but they are indeed unnecessary advantages Terran has. For example, some Terrans will deny that having all your buildings lift off gives you a timing/safety/opening build advantage. But no one can deny that ability to lift your buildings gives you a unfair base trade advantage. I heard someone say "different race is different" as an answer, but why does Terran need to get a base trade advantage even though its different? I really wish, at the very least, that the ability to lift was a 200/200 tech upgrade that needed to be researched available at Orbital. Not being able to swap addons would make terran production way to inflexible. Compared to the other races terran already have a though time to fend to certain allins (mainly from protoss) and in some situations it is required you are able to lift your cc to not loose immediately. There is nothing wrong to have the opinion that terran is to strong (this is a balance thread after all) but you and GreenGringo come with way to anti terran suggestions that makes it pretty clear that you can't keep an objective discussion here. I will try to not respond to either of you again.
You can change addons so that it can lift instead. Have you ever thought of that?
Every race has to fend off allins, Terrans already have an incredibly flexible T1 unit that can shoot both ground + air, and bunkers that can salvage so you can make a ton of them if you fear of an allin. Oh, you also have repair, other races have slow regeneration that takes literally ages (even tho its free)
The only beef I have with lifting is that it gives Terran an unfair base trade advantage. That's all I'm saying.
Then don't reply? I don't need to waste my time with a biased player if who defend their race even with a broken TvZ matchup in front of you. Tournaments are showing up with 65%, 70% problematic percentages and you guys just stick to the "But look at the GSL champions" argument over and over again.
|
On August 02 2013 08:10 GhostOwl wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 07:52 ChristianS wrote:On August 02 2013 07:50 xyzz wrote:
What's the problem with adding Ghosts? Are we trying to make Terran play without Ghosts viable here? That's like whining that Protoss needs to be buffed as a whole because it can't beat mid/late game Bio without 4+ Colossus or mass HT. No, just GreenGringo decided to start arguing Terran win rates would be fine without ghosts, or the ability to lift command centers, or MULEs. Then everyone else in the thread told him that's crazy. Now he's gone for a little while, so we can hopefully get off the topic I guess that's how some of you guys want to deal with anyone who argues against Terran benefits. Report him and hope he's banned. All those things together gone would not be okay, but they do have a fundamental problem and they need to be addressed. He didn't put it into the prettiest of words, but they are indeed unnecessary advantages Terran has. For example, some Terrans will deny that having all your buildings lift off gives you a timing/safety/opening build advantage. But no one can deny that ability to lift your buildings gives you a unfair base trade advantage. I heard someone say "different race is different" as an answer, but why does Terran need to get a base trade advantage even though its different? I really wish, at the very least, that the ability to lift was a 200/200 tech upgrade that needed to be researched available at Orbital.
I don't hope anyone who questions the balance of the Terran race gets banned, but GreenGringo has a pretty consistent habit of saying things in this thread that aren't even really comments on balance, just because they would get banned anywhere else on this site. Asserting that Terrans as a race are stupider for some reason isn't really an acceptable discourse.
On topic: I know the conventional wisdom is never base trade a Terran, but all three races have advantages in base trade scenarios. I think the single best unit to have in a base trade scenario is the dark templar, for instance – with everyone having to replace their bases and tech, having an invisible unit with high damage to control bases is an incredible boon. Warp gates are also incredibly good to have when you're hiding bases around the map and having to defend at a moment's notice, and in a base trade scenario you can defend a hidden base that you didn't think would be scouted merely by warping in a few DTs when Terran shows up unannounced. Zerglings are really good for map control, and zerglings+burrow can easily shut down a huge number of bases in an endgame scenario where both sides are trying to rebuild/hide bases. Zergling/muta can force a Terran to stay at whatever base he lifted off to while Zerg retakes the whole map. And of the three races, Terran's production mechanics are definitely the worst-suited to defending in base races. A lot of times Protoss can warp in zealots over and over again to either barely hold off the Terran army or at least delay long enough for the Protoss army to finish killing the Terran base and then come home to defend. Larvae make production come out in waves, which is much better for defending than popping out one at a time. Not to mention Zerg and Protoss have static defense that can defend a large number of places without stationing troops there, whereas in a base trade Terran cannot afford to defend all his bases with PFs.
In other words, I don't think you have any basis for saying Terran has an "unfair" base trade advantage, and you have even less basis if you want to argue that advantage is bigger than the big disadvantage Terran would have if Terran buildings couldn't lift.
|
On August 02 2013 07:52 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 07:50 xyzz wrote:
What's the problem with adding Ghosts? Are we trying to make Terran play without Ghosts viable here? That's like whining that Protoss needs to be buffed as a whole because it can't beat mid/late game Bio without 4+ Colossus or mass HT. No, just GreenGringo decided to start arguing Terran win rates would be fine without ghosts, or the ability to lift command centers, or MULEs. Then everyone else in the thread told him that's crazy. Now he's gone for a little while, so we can hopefully get off the topic
As a thought experiment though, how detrimental would it be to remove flying CCs? It would cut down greed and prevent terran in combination with the mule form super charging their economy safely. Every other race pays a higher cost in grabbing an expansion compared to the situation where mules can payoff your cc and then grab it the instant you're safe down there.. and then keep it fairly safe against early aggression.
It's a very interesting subtle difference that has some decent advantages. Might be interesting discussion fodder to see how it influences everything else in the way the matchup plays out and how you would want the game to compensate for that edge.
Lets disregard throwing it out of the game simply because it's a unique flavor the race has just like zerg buildings have broodlings and toss buildings warp in. I think it fits into a general theory that terran should by in large be ahead of Toss economically most of the time. Also throws a twist on TvZ since the three CC build can be so powerful. Maybe it's a concept that worked better with a more lategame tank oriented army? Possibly it's one of the factors that unweighted the game giving terran a significant edge in terms of pressure and game ending power earlier on while the other races preferred longer games where tech even it out for them. If we change this could we get rid of the photon overcharge or would it be the first step in more radical changes like making toss less dependent on game changing spells and more micro dancing going on.
Just to clarify, this isn't something I have a massive quibble with. Just something that is an interesting feature of sc.
|
@Christian
All those things you mentioned about production benefits of warp-in and multiple larva...those things won't matter when the main army of one race goes to kill the un-defended base (undefended because the units are attacking the other player's main base). No matter how fast zerglings or gateway units get produced, main army will easily crush any re-inforcing enemy recently produced units.
That being said, DT is a perfect example. Yes, the stealth is a benefit, but a) Terran also has a stealth unit b) scan is the BEST stealth-revealing oops I didn't prepare detection tool c) building advantage is much bigger
What I mean by building advantage being bigger is that, base trade scenario boils down to this(simplified):
main army of one race attacking the buildings of another player
main army of the other player attacking the buildings of another player.
So its:
main army vs. buildings
buildings vs main army
That DT won't make a difference. If all the Protoss buildings die, that DT won't mean anything. The fact that your buildings can lift and escape anywhere else means that they don't have to die fighting the main army. Which means you can keep your buildings alive while crushing the Protoss / Zerg's main base.
|
It'd be pretty detrimental, because most Terran expand strategies depend on flying CCs. No more safe CC first is a pretty big shock to TvZ. Any kind of early expand TvP is no longer safe, since even if you plant it on the low-ground you're depending on the fact that if big warpgate pressure comes, you'll be able to lift off and sit behind a ramp (does anyone actually think Protoss needs their all-ins buffed versus Terran right now?).
TvZ also gets wrecked by the fact that if Zerg knows you can't go 3CC, they just get 3 bases, defend on queens, and play the game out with massive creep spread and an economic lead. The whole dynamic is that Zerg can compete with 3CC by going econ-heavy, but he needs to make sure it's not 2-base aggression because he could die. He can also play more unit-focused, in which case 2-base aggression is easily batted down, but in that case he's not as economically competitive with 3CC. Remove 3CC, and Zerg can get the upper hand every game.
|
On August 02 2013 09:00 ChristianS wrote:
It'd be pretty detrimental, because most Terran expand strategies depend on flying CCs. No more safe CC first is a pretty big shock to TvZ. Any kind of early expand TvP is no longer safe, since even if you plant it on the low-ground you're depending on the fact that if big warpgate pressure comes, you'll be able to lift off and sit behind a ramp (does anyone actually think Protoss needs their all-ins buffed versus Terran right now?).
TvZ also gets wrecked by the fact that if Zerg knows you can't go 3CC, they just get 3 bases, defend on queens, and play the game out with massive creep spread and an economic lead. The whole dynamic is that Zerg can compete with 3CC by going econ-heavy, but he needs to make sure it's not 2-base aggression because he could die. He can also play more unit-focused, in which case 2-base aggression is easily batted down, but in that case he's not as economically competitive with 3CC. Remove 3CC, and Zerg can get the upper hand every game.
Maybe someone will argue that other races need to actually hold their own to be able to take an expansion while Terran gets the unfair benefit of expanding in-base. TvZ is fine without 3CC openings, Terrans think they're too entitled to greedy openings which isn't the case. Every other race pays a higher cost when they grab an expansion because they actually need units to defend it before they can take it.
ANYWAY, that's besides the point. I'm talking about the base-trade scenario. You still haven't been able to reply why Terrans should get a base trade advantage? You quoted DTs and I said those won't matter when Protoss buildings get eliminated. So why? Different races are different argument wont work here.
|
On August 02 2013 08:53 GhostOwl wrote:
@Christian
All those things you mentioned about production benefits of warp-in and multiple larva...those things won't matter when the main army of one race goes to kill the un-defended base (undefended because the units are attacking the other player's main base). No matter how fast zerglings or gateway units get produced, main army will easily crush any re-inforcing enemy recently produced units.
That being said, DT is a perfect example. Yes, the stealth is a benefit, but a) Terran also has a stealth unit b) scan is the BEST stealth-revealing oops I didn't prepare detection tool c) building advantage is much bigger
What I mean by building advantage being bigger is that, base trade scenario boils down to this(simplified):
main army of one race attacking the buildings of another player
main army of the other player attacking the buildings of another player.
So its:
main army vs. buildings
buildings vs main army
That DT won't make a difference. If all the Protoss buildings die, that DT won't mean anything. The fact that your buildings can lift and escape anywhere else means that they don't have to die fighting the main army. Which means you can keep your buildings alive while crushing the Protoss / Zerg's main base.
If you at all anticipate a base trade, then it becomes a game of hiding bases around the map. At this point Terran has his buildings lifted and scan becomes less useful, especially since now MULE and calldown supply will be in high demand once he lands. Zealot warp-ins can help defend your undefended main long enough to hide a base or some buildings somewhere. DTs can force a Terran to retreat from a mostly-undefended location because he doesn't have a scan. Terran does have a stealth unit as well, and banshees are pretty good in base trades, but Protoss almost certainly has a couple observers sitting around so it's nowhere near as powerful as DTs (Terran does not, in 99/100 base trades, have a raven anywhere). Producing DTs is also a lot more generous.
If you play a base trade out right, then you've both retaken bases elsewhere on the map. Your advantage is that you have better map control than the Terran. His advantage is that he didn't have to spend money on rebuilding the CC, he just had to rebuild supply depots, etc. That makes it not so one-sided as you're saying. Not to mention removing liftable buildings destroys a huge portion of Terran openings, just to make the 1/100 games that go into a base trade change from being somewhat Terran-favored to having a dramatic disadvantage for the Terran.
Edit:On August 02 2013 09:05 GhostOwl wrote:
Maybe someone will argue that other races need to actually hold their own to be able to take an expansion while Terran gets the unfair benefit of expanding in-base. TvZ is fine without 3CC openings, Terrans think they're too entitled to greedy openings which isn't the case. Every other race pays a higher cost when they grab an expansion because they actually need units to defend it before they can take it.
It's only kind of true that other races need be able to defend an expansion before they can take it. Zerg can defend a hatch first 10 games out of 10, whereas low-ground CC first is very killable, and even 1 rax expand is only defendable because if things go bad you can lift it. If Terran was forced to take gas or build two barracks before CC in order to be safe against Zerg, that'd break the metagame pretty hard. Against Protoss even 1 rax expand isn't safe, and if you do something safe like reaper expand the only reason that's safe is because in case of massive gateway pressure, you can lift. Protoss, by contrast, can 1-gate expand pretty safely, and virtually nothing hits before the Nexus finishes, so then you don't have to have units to defend it because you have nexus cannon. Zerg doesn't really have anything special that makes them able to defend early expands, they just have early tech and production mechanics that makes it possible to hold 2 bases against any type of 1-base aggression, and just as possible to hold 3 bases against any kind of 2-base aggression.
|
On August 02 2013 08:37 GhostOwl wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 08:25 Gullis wrote:On August 02 2013 08:10 GhostOwl wrote:On August 02 2013 07:52 ChristianS wrote:On August 02 2013 07:50 xyzz wrote:
What's the problem with adding Ghosts? Are we trying to make Terran play without Ghosts viable here? That's like whining that Protoss needs to be buffed as a whole because it can't beat mid/late game Bio without 4+ Colossus or mass HT. No, just GreenGringo decided to start arguing Terran win rates would be fine without ghosts, or the ability to lift command centers, or MULEs. Then everyone else in the thread told him that's crazy. Now he's gone for a little while, so we can hopefully get off the topic I guess that's how some of you guys want to deal with anyone who argues against Terran benefits. Report him and hope he's banned. All those things together gone would not be okay, but they do have a fundamental problem and they need to be addressed. He didn't put it into the prettiest of words, but they are indeed unnecessary advantages Terran has. For example, some Terrans will deny that having all your buildings lift off gives you a timing/safety/opening build advantage. But no one can deny that ability to lift your buildings gives you a unfair base trade advantage. I heard someone say "different race is different" as an answer, but why does Terran need to get a base trade advantage even though its different? I really wish, at the very least, that the ability to lift was a 200/200 tech upgrade that needed to be researched available at Orbital. Not being able to swap addons would make terran production way to inflexible. Compared to the other races terran already have a though time to fend to certain allins (mainly from protoss) and in some situations it is required you are able to lift your cc to not loose immediately. There is nothing wrong to have the opinion that terran is to strong (this is a balance thread after all) but you and GreenGringo come with way to anti terran suggestions that makes it pretty clear that you can't keep an objective discussion here. I will try to not respond to either of you again. You can change addons so that it can lift instead. Have you ever thought of that? Every race has to fend off allins, Terrans already have an incredibly flexible T1 unit that can shoot both ground + air, and bunkers that can salvage so you can make a ton of them if you fear of an allin. Oh, you also have repair, other races have slow regeneration that takes literally ages (even tho its free) The only beef I have with lifting is that it gives Terran an unfair base trade advantage. That's all I'm saying. Then don't reply? I don't need to waste my time with a biased player if who defend their race even with a broken TvZ matchup in front of you. Tournaments are showing up with 65%, 70% problematic percentages and you guys just stick to the "But look at the GSL champions" argument over and over again.
Marines aren't the answer to everything, in tvp the are a number of 1 base allins the protoss can do that each require a specific answer and if the protoss proxy the robo/twiligt/stargate the terran pretty much has to defend against one thing and hope that it was the right choice. (Just stating that some allins are hard to scout, nothing imbalanced here)
I take it you are a zerg player and I can agree with you that tvz is terran favored right now. As for lifting buildings, it does not seem you understand the importance of being able to lift buildings for terrans. That being said I can agree with you that terran base trades are unfair however they are not strong enough to require a nerf, to me it is merely a racial strength.
And it was childish of me to say that I wouldn't respond.
edit
I still don't think you are objective and you should try thinking out of a terran perspective to before shouting out major terran nerfs that would break the game.
|
On August 02 2013 09:10 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 08:53 GhostOwl wrote:
@Christian
All those things you mentioned about production benefits of warp-in and multiple larva...those things won't matter when the main army of one race goes to kill the un-defended base (undefended because the units are attacking the other player's main base). No matter how fast zerglings or gateway units get produced, main army will easily crush any re-inforcing enemy recently produced units.
That being said, DT is a perfect example. Yes, the stealth is a benefit, but a) Terran also has a stealth unit b) scan is the BEST stealth-revealing oops I didn't prepare detection tool c) building advantage is much bigger
What I mean by building advantage being bigger is that, base trade scenario boils down to this(simplified):
main army of one race attacking the buildings of another player
main army of the other player attacking the buildings of another player.
So its:
main army vs. buildings
buildings vs main army
That DT won't make a difference. If all the Protoss buildings die, that DT won't mean anything. The fact that your buildings can lift and escape anywhere else means that they don't have to die fighting the main army. Which means you can keep your buildings alive while crushing the Protoss / Zerg's main base. If you at all anticipate a base trade, then it becomes a game of hiding bases around the map. At this point Terran has his buildings lifted and scan becomes less useful, especially since now MULE and calldown supply will be in high demand once he lands. Zealot warp-ins can help defend your undefended main long enough to hide a base or some buildings somewhere. DTs can force a Terran to retreat from a mostly-undefended location because he doesn't have a scan. Terran does have a stealth unit as well, and banshees are pretty good in base trades, but Protoss almost certainly has a couple observers sitting around so it's nowhere near as powerful as DTs (Terran does not, in 99/100 base trades, have a raven anywhere). Producing DTs is also a lot more generous. If you play a base trade out right, then you've both retaken bases elsewhere on the map. Your advantage is that you have better map control than the Terran. His advantage is that he didn't have to spend money on rebuilding the CC, he just had to rebuild supply depots, etc. That makes it not so one-sided as you're saying. Not to mention removing liftable buildings destroys a huge portion of Terran openings, just to make the 1/100 games that go into a base trade change from being somewhat Terran-favored to having a dramatic disadvantage for the Terran.
How does the other race have better "map control" than Terran? Just because of the ability to produce faster? Remember, you were the one who talked about retaking bases elsewhere. You simple can't produce the same way you've produced before (for example, a new hatchery in a hidden location will not have the mass larva ready, nor will you have spire or other tech buildings so you can't build fighting units)
T's advantage of not having to rebuild buildings is HUGE. Let's say both races retake bases elsewhere. Terran can conserve his money by not having to rebuild production facilities, and start pumping out marines, while other races won't have the money to do that, and can only build zealot for gateway (since cyber core is gone and other tech buildings) and zergs cant even build anything but drones.
On August 02 2013 09:10 ChristianS wrote:Edit: Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 09:05 GhostOwl wrote:
Maybe someone will argue that other races need to actually hold their own to be able to take an expansion while Terran gets the unfair benefit of expanding in-base. TvZ is fine without 3CC openings, Terrans think they're too entitled to greedy openings which isn't the case. Every other race pays a higher cost when they grab an expansion because they actually need units to defend it before they can take it. It's only kind of true that other races need be able to defend an expansion before they can take it. Zerg can defend a hatch first 10 games out of 10, whereas low-ground CC first is very killable, and even 1 rax expand is only defendable because if things go bad you can lift it. If Terran was forced to take gas or build two barracks before CC in order to be safe against Zerg, that'd break the metagame pretty hard. Against Protoss even 1 rax expand isn't safe, and if you do something safe like reaper expand the only reason that's safe is because in case of massive gateway pressure, you can lift. Protoss, by contrast, can 1-gate expand pretty safely, and virtually nothing hits before the Nexus finishes, so then you don't have to have units to defend it because you have nexus cannon. Zerg doesn't really have anything special that makes them able to defend early expands, they just have early tech and production mechanics that makes it possible to hold 2 bases against any type of 1-base aggression, and just as possible to hold 3 bases against any kind of 2-base aggression.
Protoss going Nexus first is also dangerous like Terran, but you don't see them with the ability to safely do it in-base. I like how you use the word "even" for 1 rax expand..no one is forcing you to build CC first. Toss 1 gate expand is safe because they actually pump out a decent number of units before expanding, while Terran chooses to just expand after getting a few marines.
It won't break the game that Terran has to go less macro-opening..Terran macro is already pretty damn scary with mules and cost efficient army & tech tree.
|
On August 02 2013 09:12 Gullis wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 08:37 GhostOwl wrote:On August 02 2013 08:25 Gullis wrote:On August 02 2013 08:10 GhostOwl wrote:On August 02 2013 07:52 ChristianS wrote:On August 02 2013 07:50 xyzz wrote:
What's the problem with adding Ghosts? Are we trying to make Terran play without Ghosts viable here? That's like whining that Protoss needs to be buffed as a whole because it can't beat mid/late game Bio without 4+ Colossus or mass HT. No, just GreenGringo decided to start arguing Terran win rates would be fine without ghosts, or the ability to lift command centers, or MULEs. Then everyone else in the thread told him that's crazy. Now he's gone for a little while, so we can hopefully get off the topic I guess that's how some of you guys want to deal with anyone who argues against Terran benefits. Report him and hope he's banned. All those things together gone would not be okay, but they do have a fundamental problem and they need to be addressed. He didn't put it into the prettiest of words, but they are indeed unnecessary advantages Terran has. For example, some Terrans will deny that having all your buildings lift off gives you a timing/safety/opening build advantage. But no one can deny that ability to lift your buildings gives you a unfair base trade advantage. I heard someone say "different race is different" as an answer, but why does Terran need to get a base trade advantage even though its different? I really wish, at the very least, that the ability to lift was a 200/200 tech upgrade that needed to be researched available at Orbital. Not being able to swap addons would make terran production way to inflexible. Compared to the other races terran already have a though time to fend to certain allins (mainly from protoss) and in some situations it is required you are able to lift your cc to not loose immediately. There is nothing wrong to have the opinion that terran is to strong (this is a balance thread after all) but you and GreenGringo come with way to anti terran suggestions that makes it pretty clear that you can't keep an objective discussion here. I will try to not respond to either of you again. You can change addons so that it can lift instead. Have you ever thought of that? Every race has to fend off allins, Terrans already have an incredibly flexible T1 unit that can shoot both ground + air, and bunkers that can salvage so you can make a ton of them if you fear of an allin. Oh, you also have repair, other races have slow regeneration that takes literally ages (even tho its free) The only beef I have with lifting is that it gives Terran an unfair base trade advantage. That's all I'm saying. Then don't reply? I don't need to waste my time with a biased player if who defend their race even with a broken TvZ matchup in front of you. Tournaments are showing up with 65%, 70% problematic percentages and you guys just stick to the "But look at the GSL champions" argument over and over again. Marines aren't the answer to everything, in tvp the are a number of 1 base allins the protoss can do that each require a specific answer and if the protoss proxy the robo/twiligt/stargate the terran pretty much has to defend against one thing and hope that it was the right choice. (Just stating that some allins are hard to scout, nothing imbalanced here) I take it you are a zerg player and I can agree with you that tvz is terran favored right now. As for lifting buildings, it does not seem you understand the importance of being able to lift buildings for terrans. That being said I can agree with you that terran base trades are unfair however they are not strong enough to require a nerf, to me it is merely a racial strength. And it was childish of me to say that I wouldn't respond. edit I still don't think you are objective and you should try thinking out of a terran perspective to before shouting out major terran nerfs that would break the game.
Thank god. A Terran player on this thread finally admitted that TvZ is Terran favored. Yes I'm not being objective, but neither are you guys. But at least I try to be logical instead of complaining : I can't build 3 CC first with the ability to harrass and looking at 63% as "fine" And I'm way less biased than some of the Terran players here, especially the high leveled ones that are coming off as Avilo 2.0
|
On August 02 2013 09:32 GhostOwl wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 09:12 Gullis wrote:On August 02 2013 08:37 GhostOwl wrote:On August 02 2013 08:25 Gullis wrote:On August 02 2013 08:10 GhostOwl wrote:On August 02 2013 07:52 ChristianS wrote:On August 02 2013 07:50 xyzz wrote:
What's the problem with adding Ghosts? Are we trying to make Terran play without Ghosts viable here? That's like whining that Protoss needs to be buffed as a whole because it can't beat mid/late game Bio without 4+ Colossus or mass HT. No, just GreenGringo decided to start arguing Terran win rates would be fine without ghosts, or the ability to lift command centers, or MULEs. Then everyone else in the thread told him that's crazy. Now he's gone for a little while, so we can hopefully get off the topic I guess that's how some of you guys want to deal with anyone who argues against Terran benefits. Report him and hope he's banned. All those things together gone would not be okay, but they do have a fundamental problem and they need to be addressed. He didn't put it into the prettiest of words, but they are indeed unnecessary advantages Terran has. For example, some Terrans will deny that having all your buildings lift off gives you a timing/safety/opening build advantage. But no one can deny that ability to lift your buildings gives you a unfair base trade advantage. I heard someone say "different race is different" as an answer, but why does Terran need to get a base trade advantage even though its different? I really wish, at the very least, that the ability to lift was a 200/200 tech upgrade that needed to be researched available at Orbital. Not being able to swap addons would make terran production way to inflexible. Compared to the other races terran already have a though time to fend to certain allins (mainly from protoss) and in some situations it is required you are able to lift your cc to not loose immediately. There is nothing wrong to have the opinion that terran is to strong (this is a balance thread after all) but you and GreenGringo come with way to anti terran suggestions that makes it pretty clear that you can't keep an objective discussion here. I will try to not respond to either of you again. You can change addons so that it can lift instead. Have you ever thought of that? Every race has to fend off allins, Terrans already have an incredibly flexible T1 unit that can shoot both ground + air, and bunkers that can salvage so you can make a ton of them if you fear of an allin. Oh, you also have repair, other races have slow regeneration that takes literally ages (even tho its free) The only beef I have with lifting is that it gives Terran an unfair base trade advantage. That's all I'm saying. Then don't reply? I don't need to waste my time with a biased player if who defend their race even with a broken TvZ matchup in front of you. Tournaments are showing up with 65%, 70% problematic percentages and you guys just stick to the "But look at the GSL champions" argument over and over again. Marines aren't the answer to everything, in tvp the are a number of 1 base allins the protoss can do that each require a specific answer and if the protoss proxy the robo/twiligt/stargate the terran pretty much has to defend against one thing and hope that it was the right choice. (Just stating that some allins are hard to scout, nothing imbalanced here) I take it you are a zerg player and I can agree with you that tvz is terran favored right now. As for lifting buildings, it does not seem you understand the importance of being able to lift buildings for terrans. That being said I can agree with you that terran base trades are unfair however they are not strong enough to require a nerf, to me it is merely a racial strength. And it was childish of me to say that I wouldn't respond. edit I still don't think you are objective and you should try thinking out of a terran perspective to before shouting out major terran nerfs that would break the game. Thank god. A Terran player on this thread finally admitted that TvZ is Terran favored. Yes I'm not being objective, but neither are you guys. But at least I try to be logical instead of complaining : I can't build 3 CC first with the ability to harrass and looking at 63% as "fine" And I'm way less biased than some of the Terran players here, especially the high leveled ones that are coming off as Avilo 2.0
Ok I hear you
I just question that someone trying to be logical would want building lift to cost 200/200.
|
On August 02 2013 09:05 GhostOwl wrote:
ANYWAY, that's besides the point. I'm talking about the base-trade scenario. You still haven't been able to reply why Terrans should get a base trade advantage? You quoted DTs and I said those won't matter when Protoss buildings get eliminated. So why? Different races are different argument wont work here.
Why are we even really discussing base races in TvP HoTS? The only reason why the Protoss would be forced into one is if HE WANTS TO base race since he can mass recall back with his MSC and main army to defend anytime he wants. He also gets the benefit of warping in reinforcements directly to his proxy pylon rather then having them sit uselessly in his main before they die to the much larger enemy army. The race that really gets gimped in base races are zergs, hence why they build large spine crawler walls to buy time.
|
On August 02 2013 09:28 GhostOwl wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 09:10 ChristianS wrote:On August 02 2013 08:53 GhostOwl wrote:
@Christian
All those things you mentioned about production benefits of warp-in and multiple larva...those things won't matter when the main army of one race goes to kill the un-defended base (undefended because the units are attacking the other player's main base). No matter how fast zerglings or gateway units get produced, main army will easily crush any re-inforcing enemy recently produced units.
That being said, DT is a perfect example. Yes, the stealth is a benefit, but a) Terran also has a stealth unit b) scan is the BEST stealth-revealing oops I didn't prepare detection tool c) building advantage is much bigger
What I mean by building advantage being bigger is that, base trade scenario boils down to this(simplified):
main army of one race attacking the buildings of another player
main army of the other player attacking the buildings of another player.
So its:
main army vs. buildings
buildings vs main army
That DT won't make a difference. If all the Protoss buildings die, that DT won't mean anything. The fact that your buildings can lift and escape anywhere else means that they don't have to die fighting the main army. Which means you can keep your buildings alive while crushing the Protoss / Zerg's main base. If you at all anticipate a base trade, then it becomes a game of hiding bases around the map. At this point Terran has his buildings lifted and scan becomes less useful, especially since now MULE and calldown supply will be in high demand once he lands. Zealot warp-ins can help defend your undefended main long enough to hide a base or some buildings somewhere. DTs can force a Terran to retreat from a mostly-undefended location because he doesn't have a scan. Terran does have a stealth unit as well, and banshees are pretty good in base trades, but Protoss almost certainly has a couple observers sitting around so it's nowhere near as powerful as DTs (Terran does not, in 99/100 base trades, have a raven anywhere). Producing DTs is also a lot more generous. If you play a base trade out right, then you've both retaken bases elsewhere on the map. Your advantage is that you have better map control than the Terran. His advantage is that he didn't have to spend money on rebuilding the CC, he just had to rebuild supply depots, etc. That makes it not so one-sided as you're saying. Not to mention removing liftable buildings destroys a huge portion of Terran openings, just to make the 1/100 games that go into a base trade change from being somewhat Terran-favored to having a dramatic disadvantage for the Terran. How does the other race have better "map control" than Terran? Just because of the ability to produce faster? Remember, you were the one who talked about retaking bases elsewhere. You simple can't produce the same way you've produced before (for example, a new hatchery in a hidden location will not have the mass larva ready, nor will you have spire or other tech buildings so you can't build fighting units) T's advantage of not having to rebuild buildings is HUGE. Let's say both races retake bases elsewhere. Terran can conserve his money by not having to rebuild production facilities, and start pumping out marines, while other races won't have the money to do that, and can only build zealot for gateway (since cyber core is gone and other tech buildings) and zergs cant even build anything but drones.
I've been experimenting with a playstyle that specifically aims to force a base trade in PvT. Protoss has a lot of advantages in a base trade scenario, especially if they plan their game around utilizing them.
- You can spread your gateways and pylons out across far corners of the map from the start of the game. Warp in allows you to place your buildings anywhere and not suffer from any positional disadvantages. Meanwhile, you can halt a Terran's production by planting an army over his production facilities.
- You can use warp in to perform spot defenses or attacks anywhere on the map. If you see a vulnerable building or unit out on the map, you can instantly have units there to kill it.
- DTs are a fantastic unit to have in base trade scenarios, when your opponent is likely to be low on detection, and when the action (and focus) is likely to be spread across the map.
- You can use the mothership core's recall ability to instantly ferry probes between distant nexii during the scrappy base race phases, allowing you to mine longer and keep your workers safer.
Terran's ability to float buildings may still be stronger overall (and it certainly fits better in the current metagame), but Protoss is hardly without its own unique advantages.
|
The level of hostility from Ghostowl in this thread is ludicrous. I don't know why folks even bother to engage. Let Ghostowl and his pal Greengringo jerk each other for all I care.
|
On August 02 2013 09:28 GhostOwl wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 09:10 ChristianS wrote:On August 02 2013 08:53 GhostOwl wrote:
@Christian
All those things you mentioned about production benefits of warp-in and multiple larva...those things won't matter when the main army of one race goes to kill the un-defended base (undefended because the units are attacking the other player's main base). No matter how fast zerglings or gateway units get produced, main army will easily crush any re-inforcing enemy recently produced units.
That being said, DT is a perfect example. Yes, the stealth is a benefit, but a) Terran also has a stealth unit b) scan is the BEST stealth-revealing oops I didn't prepare detection tool c) building advantage is much bigger
What I mean by building advantage being bigger is that, base trade scenario boils down to this(simplified):
main army of one race attacking the buildings of another player
main army of the other player attacking the buildings of another player.
So its:
main army vs. buildings
buildings vs main army
That DT won't make a difference. If all the Protoss buildings die, that DT won't mean anything. The fact that your buildings can lift and escape anywhere else means that they don't have to die fighting the main army. Which means you can keep your buildings alive while crushing the Protoss / Zerg's main base. If you at all anticipate a base trade, then it becomes a game of hiding bases around the map. At this point Terran has his buildings lifted and scan becomes less useful, especially since now MULE and calldown supply will be in high demand once he lands. Zealot warp-ins can help defend your undefended main long enough to hide a base or some buildings somewhere. DTs can force a Terran to retreat from a mostly-undefended location because he doesn't have a scan. Terran does have a stealth unit as well, and banshees are pretty good in base trades, but Protoss almost certainly has a couple observers sitting around so it's nowhere near as powerful as DTs (Terran does not, in 99/100 base trades, have a raven anywhere). Producing DTs is also a lot more generous. If you play a base trade out right, then you've both retaken bases elsewhere on the map. Your advantage is that you have better map control than the Terran. His advantage is that he didn't have to spend money on rebuilding the CC, he just had to rebuild supply depots, etc. That makes it not so one-sided as you're saying. Not to mention removing liftable buildings destroys a huge portion of Terran openings, just to make the 1/100 games that go into a base trade change from being somewhat Terran-favored to having a dramatic disadvantage for the Terran. How does the other race have better "map control" than Terran? Just because of the ability to produce faster? Remember, you were the one who talked about retaking bases elsewhere. You simple can't produce the same way you've produced before (for example, a new hatchery in a hidden location will not have the mass larva ready, nor will you have spire or other tech buildings so you can't build fighting units) T's advantage of not having to rebuild buildings is HUGE. Let's say both races retake bases elsewhere. Terran can conserve his money by not having to rebuild production facilities, and start pumping out marines, while other races won't have the money to do that, and can only build zealot for gateway (since cyber core is gone and other tech buildings) and zergs cant even build anything but drones. Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 09:10 ChristianS wrote:Edit: On August 02 2013 09:05 GhostOwl wrote:
Maybe someone will argue that other races need to actually hold their own to be able to take an expansion while Terran gets the unfair benefit of expanding in-base. TvZ is fine without 3CC openings, Terrans think they're too entitled to greedy openings which isn't the case. Every other race pays a higher cost when they grab an expansion because they actually need units to defend it before they can take it. It's only kind of true that other races need be able to defend an expansion before they can take it. Zerg can defend a hatch first 10 games out of 10, whereas low-ground CC first is very killable, and even 1 rax expand is only defendable because if things go bad you can lift it. If Terran was forced to take gas or build two barracks before CC in order to be safe against Zerg, that'd break the metagame pretty hard. Against Protoss even 1 rax expand isn't safe, and if you do something safe like reaper expand the only reason that's safe is because in case of massive gateway pressure, you can lift. Protoss, by contrast, can 1-gate expand pretty safely, and virtually nothing hits before the Nexus finishes, so then you don't have to have units to defend it because you have nexus cannon. Zerg doesn't really have anything special that makes them able to defend early expands, they just have early tech and production mechanics that makes it possible to hold 2 bases against any type of 1-base aggression, and just as possible to hold 3 bases against any kind of 2-base aggression. Protoss going Nexus first is also dangerous like Terran, but you don't see them with the ability to safely do it in-base. I like how you use the word "even" for 1 rax expand..no one is forcing you to build CC first. Toss 1 gate expand is safe because they actually pump out a decent number of units before expanding, while Terran chooses to just expand after getting a few marines. It won't break the game that Terran has to go less macro-opening..Terran macro is already pretty damn scary with mules and cost efficient army & tech tree.
Post above does a pretty good job of demonstrating Protoss's advantages in base trades. Terran may be stronger overall in a base trade, but even if that was necessarily a problem (why shouldn't one race have an advantage in base races? if you don't want to base trade, then don't), Terran would be at a huge disadvantage in base trades without.
Toss 1 gate expand is safe because they CAN pump out enough units to defend it. In TvP Terran isn't skipping production; they literally cannot get enough units to be safe in a 1 rax expand. And Terran can't get enough units out to defend a low-ground CC against attacks TvZ; the only reason 1 rax expand is safe is because if big one-base aggression comes out, Terran can lift off and sit behind a wall. So if you remove lifting the CC, 1 rax expand isn't safe. Reaper expand isn't safe, either. You can do something silly like building a low-ground bunker before starting the CC, but then you're way behind before anything even happens in the game.
|
I wish ghost will have some skills that deals with zergs.
Or a new units from g-academy that does good job vs zergs
Just my dream for LotV :p
My opinion is that SC2 is not totally balanced, but not that imba.
but in some match ups, it just get tooo stale and not fun. (PvZ particular thanks to SH)
I hope LotV will come soon but I think wouldn't have time to play 
|
On August 02 2013 11:25 SsDrKosS wrote:I wish ghost will have some skills that deals with zergs. Or a new units from g-academy that does good job vs zergs Just my dream for LotV :p My opinion is that SC2 is not totally balanced, but not that imba. but in some match ups, it just get tooo stale and not fun. (PvZ particular thanks to SH) I hope LotV will come soon but I think wouldn't have time to play
Someone didn't see MVP's ghost/mech TvZ back before the snipe nerf. :p
|
On August 02 2013 11:13 plogamer wrote:
The level of hostility from Ghostowl in this thread is ludicrous. I don't know why folks even bother to engage. Let Ghostowl and his pal Greengringo jerk each other for all I care.
I'm actually engaging in discussion unlike you who just call me out and accuse. What a useful post, next time if you have nothing useful to say like this one, don't say it. Thanks.
|
On August 01 2013 20:33 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On August 01 2013 20:30 SsDrKosS wrote:
yeah sooo true. I can't think of Sc2 without spawn larvae, chrono boost and MULE.
anyway. I'm still curious of blizzard decision on ghost. why would they make it so tanky but expensive?
(compare to HT which is expensive but like paper and BW ghost was sooo weak in hp but great skills!)
and no lock down made me favoring zerg :p
I prefer current ghost to be less in hp, lowering hp and dps but leave the skills. that will make ghost more fun to use! 100 hps = so tanky. 80 hps = like paper. ?
oh, what I meant ghost was tankier was the comparison b/w bw and sc2
Bw ghost-45
sc2 ghost-100
bw HT 40/40
SC2 HT 40/40
That was it. 
Edit: and also, HT is soo slow and no cloak
and
On August 02 2013 11:27 Daralii wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 11:25 SsDrKosS wrote:I wish ghost will have some skills that deals with zergs. Or a new units from g-academy that does good job vs zergs Just my dream for LotV :p My opinion is that SC2 is not totally balanced, but not that imba. but in some match ups, it just get tooo stale and not fun. (PvZ particular thanks to SH) I hope LotV will come soon but I think wouldn't have time to play Someone didn't see MVP's ghost/mech TvZ back before the snipe nerf. :p
not now after huge nerfs
|
On August 02 2013 08:53 Sabu113 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 07:52 ChristianS wrote:On August 02 2013 07:50 xyzz wrote:
What's the problem with adding Ghosts? Are we trying to make Terran play without Ghosts viable here? That's like whining that Protoss needs to be buffed as a whole because it can't beat mid/late game Bio without 4+ Colossus or mass HT. No, just GreenGringo decided to start arguing Terran win rates would be fine without ghosts, or the ability to lift command centers, or MULEs. Then everyone else in the thread told him that's crazy. Now he's gone for a little while, so we can hopefully get off the topic As a thought experiment though, how detrimental would it be to remove flying CCs? It would cut down greed and prevent terran in combination with the mule form super charging their economy safely. Every other race pays a higher cost in grabbing an expansion compared to the situation where mules can payoff your cc and then grab it the instant you're safe down there.. and then keep it fairly safe against early aggression. It's a very interesting subtle difference that has some decent advantages. Might be interesting discussion fodder to see how it influences everything else in the way the matchup plays out and how you would want the game to compensate for that edge. Lets disregard throwing it out of the game simply because it's a unique flavor the race has just like zerg buildings have broodlings and toss buildings warp in. I think it fits into a general theory that terran should by in large be ahead of Toss economically most of the time. Also throws a twist on TvZ since the three CC build can be so powerful. Maybe it's a concept that worked better with a more lategame tank oriented army? Possibly it's one of the factors that unweighted the game giving terran a significant edge in terms of pressure and game ending power earlier on while the other races preferred longer games where tech even it out for them. If we change this could we get rid of the photon overcharge or would it be the first step in more radical changes like making toss less dependent on game changing spells and more micro dancing going on. Just to clarify, this isn't something I have a massive quibble with. Just something that is an interesting feature of sc.
Well, for one, the point you bring up is moot, both p and Z already can take 3 bases safely because of either new units/abilities or new build orders, Terran is only just catching up and hence just looks fancy.
The Terran advantage is already gone, the other races already have the same ability to expand safely.
Protoss can instantly block off access to the natural thanks to the maps and MsC.
Zerg can do the same, safely grab two expansions thanks to dps of two extra range 5 queens, big maps and sacrificial overlords to see oncoming threats.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
