|
On April 28 2014 12:20 forsooth wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2014 10:08 LSN wrote:
The problem is that talking about balance does not get anywhere when people are 100% biased and say stuff like the queen patch was not necessary (it was, because before zergs were dieing 50% of games to any kind of semi all-in or all-ins that if perfectly executed were simply not defendable). People still trying to toss this bullshit around even in 2014, amazing. Sorry friend, but you seem to be confusing mid-2012 with 2010 and early 2011. TvZ had been dead even for months and the matchup was amazing to watch, and Blizzard absolutely butchered it with a completely unnecessary change that took the matchup to a state of horrible imbalance.
Yeh, there is just nothing worse than people who completely rewrite history. Happens way way too often.
|
On April 28 2014 12:25 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2014 12:20 forsooth wrote:On April 28 2014 10:08 LSN wrote:
The problem is that talking about balance does not get anywhere when people are 100% biased and say stuff like the queen patch was not necessary (it was, because before zergs were dieing 50% of games to any kind of semi all-in or all-ins that if perfectly executed were simply not defendable). People still trying to toss this bullshit around even in 2014, amazing. Sorry friend, but you seem to be confusing mid-2012 with 2010 and early 2011. TvZ had been dead even for months and the matchup was amazing to watch, and Blizzard absolutely butchered it with a completely unnecessary change that took the matchup to a state of horrible imbalance. Yeh, there is just nothing worse than people who completely rewrite history. Happens way way too often.
Indeed. Balance around early-mid 2012 was roughly the best for all of WoL (and in some ways, better than it has been for HOTS. Not only was the game mostly balanced, but all matchups were interesting and varied). All matchups were around 50%, and race representation was starting to even out rather than being Terran-favoured. If you look at the Liquipedia page, for 2012 Season 3 (the last season before qualifiers would be fully affected by the queen patch), you'll see that it was near dead-even in terms of race representation for Code S and Code A (Terran favoured in Code S by a couple, Zerg favoured in Code A by a couple). This was just after the queen patch and before Zerg players had transitioned to queen heavy play. Before this, only a few select Zerg players were doing queen openings, most notably Losira and a couple others (I used to even have links to games where Losira did 6 queen openings, but GOM's channel that has all the old games is a nightmare. 900+ unorganized VODs of assorted games and years. On the old system I could get a link in like 5 minutes).
To say that Zerg was having trouble and that the queen patch was warranted is quite iffy. PvZ was great, and TvZ was arguably the best it had ever been.
It's just like how people say that we didn't know the problems about infestor/broodlord until after the queen patch or until well after the infestor patch. The community knew about it, and David Kim knew about it (Here's the interview where he talked about it. Sadly the video is gone, so instead I will link page 2 because Torte De Lini's summary covers what the interview was about). As a fun side activity, look at some of the stuff people were saying.
|
On April 28 2014 12:05 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2014 11:51 pure.Wasted wrote:On April 28 2014 11:35 Hider wrote:On April 28 2014 10:33 pure.Wasted wrote:On April 28 2014 10:29 Hider wrote:On April 28 2014 09:58 pure.Wasted wrote:On April 28 2014 09:45 Faust852 wrote:On April 28 2014 09:41 Jerom wrote:On April 28 2014 09:08 Faust852 wrote:
Reverse mine nerf, profit. Bio mine was fun to watch and play, but the match up was super stale aswell. You could basically watch like 10 different TvZ's and have seen about everything that was ever going to happen in that match up. I'd love to see tanks again though. Bio tank was a really fun composition against Zerg. Stale ? It was the most ridiculous argument ever for this patch. TvZ was exactly at 50% before the nerf. Awesome games were played (DRG vs Innovation, DRG vs Soulkey, etc). It was the highest level of mechanical play ever. And it won't change the mech play, allin play etc at all. Nerfing the mine was as stupid as buffing the queen in 2012. ZvZ has been stale since HOTS came out. Where's the patch that nerfs Roaches??? On April 28 2014 09:04 Hider wrote:
Eh TvZ really doesn't end up very quickly generally and nerfing terran (+ nerfing Muta/bling) certainly isn't gonna solve the issue. From a designperspective, its just gonna make terran even more fragile which isn't desireable IMO.
The reason why you some times see TvZ end in midgame is that terran midgame production simply is inferior too zerg unless he gets ahead early on. I think Innovation is simply too used to just outplaying zergs in the early game and overcommited quite a lot in the midgame, which is something he usually can get away with (as he typically has an advantage at that point in the game). A smarter Innovation had just played more passive in that phase.
But generally, I believe that all terran need is just a small buff here. Aka make it practical to focus fire with Widow Mine and you suddenly have a totally new dynamic where zergs needs to micro their banlinegs (once again) and can't just rely on Zerglings detonating the mines.
Also, I gotta disagree that games in general end quickly (or that it's just one battle and that's it). We really have tons of battles in most games and if you go watch the average Snipelot game.... BW isn't actually that different.
Yes there are tons of stupid !@#$%^&* in Sc2 and tons of mediocore stuff that could be potentially awesome (if Blizzard spended more time tweaking stat values), but from a quality perespective, a lot of games are actually pretty decent. The thing about Terran midgame is it's a gamble in both TvZ and TvP. Terran has to be aggressive, but the only units he can be aggressive with, outside of some individual timing windows ie. Hellion vs. Zerg or WM vs. Protoss, are his main army units. If a Protoss loses his Oracle harassing, yeah it sucks for 5 minutes from now when his upgrades will finish a little bit later, but right this second it doesn't matter whatsoever because he wasn't going to use that Oracle in his army anyway. Completely different story with Terran. If he loses a drop -- which can happen regardless of skill, if Mutas come from an angle you didn't see coming, there's nothing you can do -- suddenly his army is down 10 supply! Two drops go poorly at the same time because you're good enough to be harassing in two places at once, like what happened to Innovation? You're down twenty army supply in the span of seconds. You might be on even footing five minutes from now thanks to mules, but right now? You're in HUGE trouble. Muta harass works on the same principle, but it's tougher for Terrans to pick off Mutas than it is for Zerg/Protoss to pick off Medivacs so the situation that "the Zerg lost 20 supply of Mutas while harassing and the Terran has a huge opening to attack right this second!" doesn't really come up all that often. Pushing onto creep is scary regardless of how up you think you are, so even when it does happen Terrans still lose out on the timing as often as not. Terran is balanced around doing econ damage to the other races in the midgame, but to do it they have to take risks. Risks are inherently gambles. It is literally in the design of the game that a great Terran has a reasonable chance of losing to a good Protoss based on nothing but the Stalkers being in a lucky position to intercept Medivacs. Look at TY vs MC g3. TY held off an all in, killed like 20 Probes with his harass, and that's somehow not freaking enough. Now imagine some of those drops don't get so lucky, because MC doesn't make the blunder of pulling his workers back to the mineral line while the WMs are still there as he did in the game twice, and let's say he manages to snipe an additional Medivac with his Stalkers. Suddenly that game isn't even close! Despite the fact that plenty of spectators thought TY was outplaying MC hard and the casters had so little understanding of why MC was able to come back, they actually said "Someone has to explain this to us." It's not a fucking mystery, TY's drops were good but not game endingly good, which isn't something a Terran can actually control! You come up as quite biased. That's not a counter-argument. Here's what a counter-argument looks like: I haven't played SC2 since 2010. I have nothing to gain or lose by !@#$%^&* about what I don't like to watch in this game. IF you haven't played SC2 for years, perhaps you shouldn't comment on how much skills each race/strategy requires since you basically have no idea. Don't need to play the game to have eyes and a brain. So using your logic, if I don't play hockey, the only way I can tell good hockey players from bad ones is by seeing the results of their games? Lol? Well but you don't understand the entire set of stuff you need to do when you play hockey if you don't play the game at all. Like your post ignores so many factors. For instance, how easy is Mutalisks harass really when you need to always have an overseer attached to it while checking for Widow Mines. Mutas are so fragile so you can't leave them alone for just one second really. Marine drops are totally different in that regard as the investment is a lot lower.
Where did I say that Mutalisk harass is easy? I said that failed Mutalisk harass leads directly to Zerg defeats much more rarely than failed Medivac drops lead directly to Terran defeats.
While zerg micro isn't hard, its all the other stuff you need to do that makes the race kinda hard.
If I had said that Zerg micro isn't hard, which I haven't, I would still find this response objectionable. You're implying that Terrans have absolutely nothing to do except for microing their units, which in your opinion evens the races out. I call bullshit. You don't think of stopping creep spread as a macro activity because it involves combat units on the Terran side, but it is absolutely macro, and at this point in the meta it's just as required as spreading it is for the Zerg.
Also your whole comment about losing a dropship to Mutalisks shows you really have no clue how TvZ works from the terran perspective. Basically, as terran you always know whether a drop is basically risk/free (when mutas are on total other side of the map/no mutas are out) and when its a risky thing. And in a lot of sitautions you can postion your drop ship in such a way so you can speed boost it and get on a hill, so you can unload it safely against Speedlings/Banelings (which means you can fight isolated against Mutalisks).
Are you saying Medivacs don't get ambushed by Mutalisks? Are you actually saying that? Either you misunderstood the simplicity of my claim, or maybe playing the game is making you miss the forest for the trees.
And no, terran do not have to do economic damage in any matchup. Your main priority with hellion and reapers isn't actually do kill workers.
Yes, overall terran is a harder race to play (at least that's my opinion), but all of the stuff you mention shows that your thinking extremely onesided and has very little clue about how the game actually works.
Terran doesn't have to do econ damage in any MU. You should probably pass this memo around to all the Terran pros who keep dropping 2-base Protoss as if their lives depend on it, and all the casters who keep saying things like "The Terran died because his drops didn't do enough damage."
Did you watch the TY vs MC game? MC all ins and fails, stays on 2 bases versus TY's 3, TY successfully harasses, takes a couple of okay engagements, and then dies. Read the LR thread. The most frequent Protoss explanation for what happened was 'TY didn't do enough damage when he dropped.' Although he killed a whole bunch of Probes, to an already stifled economy. And Terrans don't need to do econ damage. You've got to be freaking joking, man.
|
I think ,as a protoss player , that Warp-in should not exist, its too much advantage for basically nothing , its an unecessary mechanic.
If , they make toss units better , remove colossi ( plz... reaver... where are you D: ) change chronoboost mechanics to make it more unit-chrono oriented , remove chrono from upgrades , reducing chronoboos energy cost and make it more APM heavy , make protoss all-around microable( taking out stuff like Charge ), remove mothership core, ( with better units , we would not need a 1 click defense, time warp and recall ) would , IMO make the race much more fun and overall strong , cuz , protoss is weak but has a broken, OP design.
Remove other things like storm smartcast and plllease remove Force Field !!
These are just my opinions , im a low level , Platinum Protos player, don't need to be too harsh on me.
PS: English not my native language
|
On April 28 2014 13:08 pure.Wasted wrote:
Did you watch the TY vs MC game? MC all ins and fails, stays on 2 bases versus TY's 3, TY successfully harasses, takes a couple of okay engagements, and then dies. Read the LR thread. The most frequent Protoss explanation for what happened was 'TY didn't do enough damage when he dropped.' Although he killed a whole bunch of Probes, to an already stifled economy. And Terrans don't need to do econ damage. You've got to be freaking joking, man.
Did you watch it? TYs harass allowed him to survive MCs push, take a 4h when MC could only manage to be on 3, build 2 extra orbitals and amass 3 times the resources MC had when the big fight happened. Which he won quite convincingly by the way. At this point he is very far ahead but immediately starts to make horrible mistakes. It is his game to lose and he does.
He decides to march his army to the most distant location of interest, MCs 3rd or worse to chase a group of 7 stalkers and 2 archons in the opposite direction of MCs newest base. In any case TY gets crushed at a location where nothing is to be done anyway and now has to defend when he is up 50 supply. In my opinion this is where he should have won. He should have regrouped, healed up and gone for the 4th. He had more supply and MCs 3-3 wasn't done yet. Instead MCs 4th goes untouched, 3-3 finishes and he is given enough time to get to 200/200 again because TY plays it like TvZ trying to harass multiple places at once instead of just going for one big attack while he has a big supply advantage. (A side note: his macro sucked too, he had too few barracks)
Don't believe everything you read. The game went on for over 30 minutes. Failed harassment is not enough to summarize a game this long. The midgame drops were great and put Terran massively ahead. He just didn't know what to do with the lead.
I believe fixing the game/making the game more interesting is not as simple as a buff here or a nerf there or even a bunch of new units. The way I see it things just spiral out of control way too quickly and advantages are too quickly diminished. If there were fewer units on the map the game wouldn't suffer from terrible, terrible damage syndrome thus making micro more rewarding since every unit is worth more and reducing the need for (AoE-)hardcounters. I believe the way the economy works needs to be changed. Though that's basically a complete rework and I don't see that happening which is why I'm losing interest in this game.
|
On April 28 2014 13:03 Ben... wrote:It's just like how people say that we didn't know the problems about infestor/broodlord until after the queen patch or until well after the infestor patch. The community knew about it, and David Kim knew about it ( Here's the interview where he talked about it. Sadly the video is gone, so instead I will link page 2 because Torte De Lini's summary covers what the interview was about). As a fun side activity, look at some of the stuff people were saying.
People also forget how much the early game impacts the late game. After the queen patch, it allowed Zergs to take a quick third base and defend early aggression, making Terrans play more passive and start opening 1 rax CC as opposed to reactored hellions into expansion, which was the prior standard. This limited creep spread and Zerg to two base, meaning Zerg couldn't amass a million drones super early off pure injects. This leads to completely new timings that will significantly affect the lategame.
|
What good is it to still whine about Infestor WoL era? Do you want to scratch everything HotS and go back to pre-queen patch?
Game is superb right now and there's still being so much figured out. As long as Parting, Life, Taeja wins everything, it's still good right?
The TY vs MC match was perhaps the greatest of the tournament. You could really see where this matchup has gone, more advanced positional drop play, phoenix to counter this strong play and delaying the third, because of hard maps for Protoss and the Widow Mine Bio midgame. We saw Ghosts and a lot of them, sadly his lategame army control wasn't perfect and that's all it takes, for MC to capitalize taking the best engagements as he ossibly could've.
|
Taeja wins everything was in November 2013, and it was the last time T won a tournament.
|
Yes, but are you saying that Taeja is not capable of taking a premier title, due to imbalance?
The last tournament Life won was in October and Taeja won 2 primiers in that November month mind you.
I'm also not stating that Terran has always been doing well, but the Protoss dominance does seem to clear up.
|
On April 28 2014 17:19 ejozl wrote:
Yes, but are you saying that Taeja is not capable of taking a premier title, due to imbalance?
The last tournament Life won was in October and Taeja won 2 primiers in that November month mind you.
I'm also not stating that Terran has always been doing well, but the Protoss dominance does seem to clear up.
yeah, but that has hardly anything to do with Terran, but that Zerg is finally taking a few of those finals that we always knew they were capable of taking, since there is nothing imbalanced about PvZ.
|
That's not what the numbers say, let's take a look at Aligulac (it's a few days early but it's good to take stock after Dreamhack).
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/60B8oD2.png)
Recall that we're still in a situation where T representation is at an all time low (check the number of TvT games above, compare to PvP and ZvZ), with only the very best T players competing (4 terrans in Code S, etc). Furthermore, I doubt anyone will dispute that DH Bucharest had very good T players and very weak P players (Z and T were more equal, I'd say).
In this situation, what do we have? PvT is roughly even, the very best T players in the world are getting a slight edge on weaker P opponents. And ZvT is strongly in Z favour still. The message this sends is the same that has been echoed all throughout this thread in the last few days:
- T is the weakest race, and is not repopulating tournaments,
- T players struggle against the best P players,
- T players struggle against any Z players,
|
(sorry bad english)
To me, the game is reasonable balanced. The problem is that a protoss player can be high GM with 150 apm, which is impossible to zerg and terran. So, it's easier to protoss.
But the biggest problem of sc2 is that it is easier than BroodWar. So, the difference between very skilled players and skilled ones is small than in BroodWar.
I think that sc2 should have more units, more magics, more micro and macro options, to compensate the decrease of difficulty. For example, the difference between crazy koreans who practice 12h daily everyday from foreigners who pratice 5h a day is not so big as it was in Broodwar. This is not fair and it is less funny.
The game lacks a little bit in skill, talent etc. So... I hope the new version of SC2 become harder to play at the very best level. So, the best will be the best (and there will be new "bonjwa's" etc.)
Obs.: the reason that there is no bonjwa in sc2 is because the game is so easy (easier than BW, at least) that everyone is so close and nobody can be a lot better. It sucks!
|
Personally I feel there are a couple of reasons for the lack of Terran success as of late.
1. The maps are not very good for Terran
1.1 - The blink season
During the last season Blink All Ins destroyed Terrans left and right. Much of this was because the maps was very blink friendly and the mothership core had absurd vision range for long time of the season.
1.2 - The size and defensive problems
Many of the new maps have an extreme rush distance compared to the old days of Starcraft when Terran had the glory days.
Compare the maps today to maps like Entombed Valley, Ohana and Antiga Shipyard. All of those maps had smaller rush distances and the bases were overall closer to eachother than the new ones are today.
Many of the maps in todays maps pool does not allow Terran to take a fifth and defend it as easy as it was before. Also due to the higher map size there is no natural flow in Terrans attacks paths that allows them to rally to a defensive position and attack from there without to much fear of being harassed. Bel'Shir Vestige was a great map for Terran to rally to the fourth and putting pressure on Zergs fourth just around the corner.
Today if Terran want to pressure Zergs fourth it is necessary to go far out on creep and the way back home to defend vs runbys and Mutalisk are almost infinitive.
1.3 The amount of bases
Many of the maps in the current map pool has so many bases. Frost for an example allows for both Protoss and Zerg to expand both four and five times in the long macro games. One of the strenghts of Terran when Terrans was at is peak was denying the last "hard" base on the map, commonly a forth or a fifth. Today the fourth and fifth base are quite easily secured and the hard bases to secure becomes base sixth and seven.
This is something that does not benefit Terrans since Terran has extreme problems defending bases lategame due to its lack of mobility. A Zealot warp-in deals with bases, HT-drops, Zerglings with adrenal glance, Ultras, Mutalisks, you name it. All of them have in common they are great in dealing damage. Terrans way is dropships which can deal damage in similar ways. However those are often a one way journey. If you drop, you know Mutalisk will clean them up in the late game. They might be killed even before. Protoss can warp in instantly lategame to defend the drops. Terran does not have this kind of mobility. If you are out of position, the Mutas WILL kill the base. The Zealots will destroy your main before back up has arrived.
The best way for Terran to secure bases it to constantly be aggresive, which is not possible throughout a long maro game.
On April 28 2014 18:54 Big J wrote:
I want to respond to the mapportion of your post, at least for TvZ:
If we look at the map stats from TLPD, smaller maps are not necessarily good for Terran.
Habitation Station is one of the best Zerg maps around currently.
Alterzim is the best Terran map in the current mappool.
Merry-Go-Round has been called out as a great Terran map by Demuslim and Artosis during DH.
Outboxer in Proleague looks to be quite good for Terran, despite being a quite big 2player map.
I fully agree with your position on how many bases a Terran can take though, I believe that this is a key issue. Terran needs the (later) bases very close to the bases they already have and need them very defendable, e.g. with choke points.
Frost, Habitation Station are examples for maps where it is already hard to secure a 4th and 5th bases can only be taken when you are already winning.
I think moreso than mapsizes, there are certain expansion layouts that are better or worse for Terran. And some of the maps are simply worse for bio or mech.
But at the end of the day, I think this comes more down to how well Zerg can deny bases these days with mutaclouds. 2-3turrets do nothing in the lategame, 5turrets means the zerg has to choose the right angle to kill them - but still can do it, assuming there is no immidiate threat of a counterattack or of units that are close by. You need ridiculous amounts of turrets per base to deter mutalisk "harassment".
2.0 The lack of a tier 3 army
I dont think I need to far into this. When you see a Ultralisk - Muta - Infestor army on 200 supply you know Terran is dead in 9 games out of 10 unless they are meching. The same goes for the late game scenarios when Protoss reaches 200 supply on their prefered max out. Sure, there are exepction but the common scenario is that Terrans army does not trade well enough.
2.1 The remax / reinforcements
While having the more fragile army, Terran can not afford to fall behind in the lategame at any point. If Terran and Protoss both trades down to 100 supply Protoss will remax on Chargelots + Archons to 200 in seconds. In the meantime for Terran to remake the Maruaders/Ghosts/Marines they will probably be dead.
The same goes for example Innovation vs Life yesterday. Innovation loses 2 dropship, takes a fight and get massacred by the Zerg macro. Terran today cannot afford to ever take a bad fight since you cannot hold the follow up.
On April 28 2014 18:11 TW wrote:
Just to add a word. If T wins an engegement near their opponents base, by the time their support army arrives it is too late to finish the job. P can warp in, Z has faster army.
So generally the "reinforcements" is the key word right here.
3.0 The vulnerability of getting randomly killed
I dont know how many professional games I have seen when the Terrans dont get to play the game due to an Oracle (Innovation vs Huk on DH for an example - similar for Blink All In, TY vs MC G1) when a Terrans just dies straight up to the first unit Protoss produces. One might say that is to bad scouting. I am however sure Innovation did all he could to try figure out what tech Huk was going for.
Seen from my eyes, it is sad when all responsibility to scout to survive is put to the Terran player. A Protoss player might say "yeah he lost cause his scouting sucked" - however to be fair a Protoss player should also be able to lose cause his scouting sucks. As the Meta is today - Protoss have so many ways to randomly just kill Terrans. Be it DTs, Oracles, 7-gates, Blink-All ins or what not. During the same period of game time Terran has almost zero ways to even threaten the Protoss. Its like playing a game of soccer where one team is playing without a goal. Its quite hard to score on that team and of course they will occasionally score a goal or two. But it is quite hard to criticize them for their defense, since there is not possible to actually win against them. This however has nothing with their skills to do, but their lack of a goal which is exactly what the mothership core is for Protoss.
This and a lot more I believe has to do with the lack of Terrans results. Please share your thoughts.
|
The fact that the game is easier to play than BW does not relate to its balance.
But:
- it is more likely that potentially worse player can beat the better one (it is fine for me).
- when we take 40 best of the best starcraft players, and make them play in a league format, I am pretty sure you will get totally different results each time the league ends.
I think that sc2 should have more units, more magics,
- more units and strategies would mean even more coin flip results at the highest level of play.
|
Personally I feel there are a couple of reasons for the lack of Terran success as of late.
wow well written.
2.1 The remax
While having the more fragile army, Terran can not afford to fall behind in the lategame at any point. If Terran and Protoss both trades down to 100 supply Protoss will remax on Chargelots + Archons to 200 in seconds. In the meantime for Terran to remake the Maruaders/Ghosts/Marines they will probably be dead.
Just to add a word. If T wins an engegement near their opponents base, by the time their support army arrives it is too late to finish the job. P can warp in, Z has faster army.
So generally the "reinforcements" is the key word right here.
|
On April 28 2014 15:39 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2014 13:03 Ben... wrote:It's just like how people say that we didn't know the problems about infestor/broodlord until after the queen patch or until well after the infestor patch. The community knew about it, and David Kim knew about it ( Here's the interview where he talked about it. Sadly the video is gone, so instead I will link page 2 because Torte De Lini's summary covers what the interview was about). As a fun side activity, look at some of the stuff people were saying. People also forget how much the early game impacts the late game. After the queen patch, it allowed Zergs to take a quick third base and defend early aggression, making Terrans play more passive and start opening 1 rax CC as opposed to reactored hellions into expansion, which was the prior standard. This limited creep spread and Zerg to two base, meaning Zerg couldn't amass a million drones super early off pure injects. This leads to completely new timings that will significantly affect the lategame.
Indeed. I wrote about that a couple (maybe a few more than that) pages back. People knew about infestor/broodlord but it wasn't a problematic composition before the queen patch because it took forever to get to. You had to first tech to roach, or at least ling speed in order to get a third (because of the hellions that would be parked outside your natural 99% of games), and then you had to play through the mid game (since at that time, mid game TvZ actually existed, unlike later on where it disappeared), and then then finally later on you could maybe get the composition but usually the game was over by then. The queen buff more or less eliminated the need for Zerg to tech or make units with larva in order to take a third and suddenly that late game that took a long time to get to could be achieved insanely fast because, since the other races could no longer do actual pressure builds since queens shut most of them down pretty hard, they played greedy themselves to counter.
I had been playing Zerg for a good year or so when that patch went through and at first I had a hard time believing they were serious about having it in the game. All this stuff I had been doing and was used to could suddenly be thrown out and simply substituted with queens. It seemed nuts at the time. And as we saw, it turned out to be pretty crazy once the full affects hit the pro level. Now overlords moving the speed they were buffed to seems normal, but at the time it almost felt like cheating. I could always get a full scout. There were no surprise Terran builds anymore.
Essentially, what I was saying in my post on this page was that the broodlord/infestor composition itself was known to be problematic quite early on, but as we have discussed, it didn't become an issue until later.
|
On April 28 2014 17:43 prokofiev wrote:
(sorry bad english)
To me, the game is reasonable balanced. The problem is that a protoss player can be high GM with 150 apm, which is impossible to zerg and terran. So, it's easier to protoss.
But the biggest problem of sc2 is that it is easier than BroodWar. So, the difference between very skilled players and skilled ones is small than in BroodWar.
I think that sc2 should have more units, more magics, more micro and macro options, to compensate the decrease of difficulty. For example, the difference between crazy koreans who practice 12h daily everyday from foreigners who pratice 5h a day is not so big as it was in Broodwar. This is not fair and it is less funny.
The game lacks a little bit in skill, talent etc. So... I hope the new version of SC2 become harder to play at the very best level. So, the best will be the best (and there will be new "bonjwa's" etc.)
Obs.: the reason that there is no bonjwa in sc2 is because the game is so easy (easier than BW, at least) that everyone is so close and nobody can be a lot better. It sucks!
So, you want... Starbow 
|
I want to respond to the mapportion of your post, at least for TvZ:
On April 28 2014 17:56 Glorfindel! wrote:
Personally I feel there are a couple of reasons for the lack of Terran success as of late.
1. The maps are not very good for Terran
On April 28 2014 17:56 Glorfindel! wrote:
1.2 - The size and defensive problems
Many of the new maps have an extreme rush distance compared to the old days of Starcraft when Terran had the glory days.
Compare the maps today to maps like Entombed Valley, Ohana and Antiga Shipyard. All of those maps had smaller rush distances and the bases were overall closer to eachother than the new ones are today.
Many of the maps in todays maps pool does not allow Terran to take a fifth and defend it as easy as it was before. Also due to the higher map size there is no natural flow in Terrans attacks paths that allows them to rally to a defensive position and attack from there without to much fear of being harassed. Bel'Shir Vestige was a great map for Terran to rally to the fourth and putting pressure on Zergs fourth just around the corner.
Today if Terran want to pressure Zergs fourth it is necessary to go far out on creep and the way back home to defend vs runbys and Mutalisk are almost infinitive.
1.3 The amount of bases
Many of the maps in the current map pool has so many bases. Frost for an example allows for both Protoss and Zerg to expand both four and five times in the long macro games. One of the strenghts of Terran when Terrans was at is peak was denying the last "hard" base on the map, commonly a forth or a fifth. Today the fourth and fifth base are quite easily secured and the hard bases to secure becomes base sixth and seven.
This is something that does not benefit Terrans since Terran has extreme problems defending bases lategame due to its lack of mobility. A Zealot warp-in deals with bases, HT-drops, Zerglings with adrenal glance, Ultras, Mutalisks, you name it. All of them have in common they are great in dealing damage. Terrans way is dropships which can deal damage in similar ways. However those are often a one way journey. If you drop, you know Mutalisk will clean them up in the late game. They might be killed even before. Protoss can warp in instantly lategame to defend the drops. Terran does not have this kind of mobility. If you are out of position, the Mutas WILL kill the base. The Zealots will destroy your main before back up has arrived.
The best way for Terran to secure bases it to constantly be aggresive, which is not possible throughout a long maro game.
If we look at the map stats from TLPD, smaller maps are not necessarily good for Terran.
Habitation Station is one of the best Zerg maps around currently.
Alterzim is the best Terran map in the current mappool.
Merry-Go-Round has been called out as a great Terran map by Demuslim and Artosis during DH.
Outboxer in Proleague looks to be quite good for Terran, despite being a quite big 2player map.
I fully agree with your position on how many bases a Terran can take though, I believe that this is a key issue. Terran needs the (later) bases very close to the bases they already have and need them very defendable, e.g. with choke points.
Frost, Habitation Station are examples for maps where it is already hard to secure a 4th and 5th bases can only be taken when you are already winning.
I think moreso than mapsizes, there are certain expansion layouts that are better or worse for Terran. And some of the maps are simply worse for bio or mech.
But at the end of the day, I think this comes more down to how well Zerg can deny bases these days with mutaclouds. 2-3turrets do nothing in the lategame, 5turrets means the zerg has to choose the right angle to kill them - but still can do it, assuming there is no immidiate threat of a counterattack or of units that are close by. You need ridiculous amounts of turrets per base to deter mutalisk "harassment".
|
On April 28 2014 18:54 Big J wrote:I want to respond to the mapportion of your post, at least for TvZ: Show nested quote +On April 28 2014 17:56 Glorfindel! wrote:
Personally I feel there are a couple of reasons for the lack of Terran success as of late.
1. The maps are not very good for Terran Show nested quote +On April 28 2014 17:56 Glorfindel! wrote:
1.2 - The size and defensive problems
Many of the new maps have an extreme rush distance compared to the old days of Starcraft when Terran had the glory days.
Compare the maps today to maps like Entombed Valley, Ohana and Antiga Shipyard. All of those maps had smaller rush distances and the bases were overall closer to eachother than the new ones are today.
Many of the maps in todays maps pool does not allow Terran to take a fifth and defend it as easy as it was before. Also due to the higher map size there is no natural flow in Terrans attacks paths that allows them to rally to a defensive position and attack from there without to much fear of being harassed. Bel'Shir Vestige was a great map for Terran to rally to the fourth and putting pressure on Zergs fourth just around the corner.
Today if Terran want to pressure Zergs fourth it is necessary to go far out on creep and the way back home to defend vs runbys and Mutalisk are almost infinitive.
1.3 The amount of bases
Many of the maps in the current map pool has so many bases. Frost for an example allows for both Protoss and Zerg to expand both four and five times in the long macro games. One of the strenghts of Terran when Terrans was at is peak was denying the last "hard" base on the map, commonly a forth or a fifth. Today the fourth and fifth base are quite easily secured and the hard bases to secure becomes base sixth and seven.
This is something that does not benefit Terrans since Terran has extreme problems defending bases lategame due to its lack of mobility. A Zealot warp-in deals with bases, HT-drops, Zerglings with adrenal glance, Ultras, Mutalisks, you name it. All of them have in common they are great in dealing damage. Terrans way is dropships which can deal damage in similar ways. However those are often a one way journey. If you drop, you know Mutalisk will clean them up in the late game. They might be killed even before. Protoss can warp in instantly lategame to defend the drops. Terran does not have this kind of mobility. If you are out of position, the Mutas WILL kill the base. The Zealots will destroy your main before back up has arrived.
The best way for Terran to secure bases it to constantly be aggresive, which is not possible throughout a long maro game.
If we look at the map stats from TLPD, smaller maps are not necessarily good for Terran. Habitation Station is one of the best Zerg maps around currently. Alterzim is the best Terran map in the current mappool. Merry-Go-Round has been called out as a great Terran map by Demuslim and Artosis during DH. Outboxer in Proleague looks to be quite good for Terran, despite being a quite big 2player map. I fully agree with your position on how many bases a Terran can take though, I believe that this is a key issue. Terran needs the (later) bases very close to the bases they already have and need them very defendable, e.g. with choke points. Frost, Habitation Station are examples for maps where it is already hard to secure a 4th and 5th bases can only be taken when you are already winning. I think moreso than mapsizes, there are certain expansion layouts that are better or worse for Terran. And some of the maps are simply worse for bio or mech. But at the end of the day, I think this comes more down to how well Zerg can deny bases these days with mutaclouds. 2-3turrets do nothing in the lategame, 5turrets means the zerg has to choose the right angle to kill them - but still can do it, assuming there is no immidiate threat of a counterattack or of units that are close by. You need ridiculous amounts of turrets per base to deter mutalisk "harassment".
Can you post where you got your map stats from?
|
On April 28 2014 18:01 TW wrote:The fact that the game is easier to play than BW does not relate to its balance. But: - it is more likely that potentially worse player can beat the better one (it is fine for me). - when we take 40 best of the best starcraft players, and make them play in a league format, I am pretty sure you will get totally different results each time the league ends. - more units and strategies would mean even more coin flip results at the highest level of play.
When is it considered "coin flip" and when is it considered "correct desition making"? What is the difference for you?
Right now for me SC2 is always a "coin flip". First Bio BO, almost always, then against P: did he land the storms? Y/N = L/W. Against Z or T: succesful drops? Y/N = W/L.
I miss more wide strategies (units, spells, buildings...) in SC2. WG shouldn´t be a problem if T could hold better the map control after a succesful battle, but right now thanks to balance and map design, to hold a position it´s useless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
