|
On December 01 2011 05:37 Roxy wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 03:44 Empire.Beastyqt wrote:On December 01 2011 02:52 heroofcanton wrote:On December 01 2011 02:05 Umpteen wrote:Not sure if Polt said it 1-2 GSL's ago that once patch hits "all the bad terrans will drop out from GSL because of this" I could sympathise with the OP but for this. Here is Polt (I also think it was him) stating the GSL was oversubscribed with bad Terrans prior to a certain patch. Presumably bad Terrans don't have awesome micro and multitasking. Yet they were still able to eliminate top-notch Zergs and Protoss.To me, this undermines rather than reinforces the pillars supporting the OP's hypothesis. Polt didn't think the GSL was full of Terrans because Terran was balanced but rewarded great micro better. He thought they didn't deserve to be there. He didn't think they were as good as the Zergs and Protoss they were beating. If he's right, and the patch corrected an imbalance that was allowing inferior players to flourish, need we look further for an explanation of the distribution of races in the GSL? I think what Polt said makes a lot of sense. I remember Artosis saying on SotG that a lot of "bad Terrans" were going to suffer because of the EMP nerf, as they would not hit as many and they'd get stormed more. We saw that in that hour-long game between TOD and Happy at dreamhack (not shitting on Happy, just saying pre-nerf he would have left no templar un-EMPed), and that a lot of "bad terrans" who thought they were good were going to start losing more games TvP. I don't sympathize with a lot of the current threads that terran players have been making about the inherent "betterness" of Terran players. Terran micro is simply more rewarding, not more difficult. I don't think Terran has ANY fundamental problems. Furthermore- Terrans are still set on Bio play in TvP, and most refuse to mech instead focusing on Bio play which is going to be inherently weaker, especially to AoE attacks. If terrans want to play a more mobile style they need to accept that its going to be weaker and move on. There needs to be like, a Terran Bunker thread, where all the Terran players can go to post threads like this and they can all agree and have fun together with their marines and ghosts and shit. Bolded part shows how much you know about game, mech in TvP - okay. On December 01 2011 03:03 Roxy wrote:
I completely disagree with so many things here.
I fell like terran is not well equipped to deal with mutalisks. I think these problems will be addressed in HOTS.
I feel like terran is fully equipped to deal with protoss. Especially if they capitalize on their advantages in the early game.
PF with turrets is much more difficult to kill than a comparable amount of canons or spine/spores+queen.
Terran has the most rewarding harass, especially when takign into account that they dont need to diverge from their regular tech path to get medivac/marine or hellions or banshees. The only possible costs wasted on failed harass could be the research of cloak or Blue flame (which could very well end up being useful later in the game). how often do we see a banshee go out and multi-prong mineral lines in the late game. All you have to do is put it close to the mineral line but out of range of any static defenses and hold position until you have the time to attend more micro to it.
Terran has the most unexplored units/upgrades (specifically the raven in all matchups, and thor/tank with bio in tvp). Not to mention, how often do you see terran players repairing their vikings/medivacs in the late game.
They go into large engagements with an army that is injured or damage, medivacs with depleted energy, and often attack into bad angles.
Yes, if you attack up a ramp into zealot/sentry/stalker/colosus/archon.. you shoudl lose... dont do it...
if you attack way in the open, ya you will probably win.. or kill a ton of zealots for only the cost of a stim
You heard it here first, banshees and helions are regular tech path in TvP. Terran having most unexplored units - not sure if you are trolling, thor/tank/bio in tvp? really? More than half of people here are posting stuff like: OMG BUT TERRAN IS GOOD RACE NOOB GTFO!! You should read the thread first, thread isnt about terran being WEAK race, thread is about that terran is more time consuming race because its micro is more difficult than the other 2 races which results in people quiting terran or changing to other race. If you are thinking "well who cares about lower leagues", you should probably re-think again. Terran is already STILL the most hated race from beta which doesnt help new players coming into game or help the old ones stick to their race. I will post again for those people saying "terran was winning before because they were OP and now when they lose terrans suck and zergs and toss are better", sure can you tell me why terrans never won anything outside Korea? You actually want to say that out of over million people that wasnt ONE talented terran player? What terrans want is not their race being boosted, I like my race as it is and I want it to be hard, but I use a lot of time on this game, terrans want the other 2 races to be given MORE options in terms of micro making them not HARDER to use but having the potential to do better, very good example of this are blink stalkers and mutas. Bad example of this is zealot/archon army, the strenght in it is too much for its ..micro - and we need less of those for SC2 to be better game. Also Roxy stop posting you are melting my brain with your posts, newest one "when did zealots become viable vs zerg?". /facepalm I honestly expected more from someone who plays and has as much experience as you. If you have a factory, yes, that means you can build hellions. I dont see what is difficult to understand here. If you have a starport (build vikings or medivacs), do you have a tech lab.. build marauders? How about you switch them and build a banshee... not so hard to figure out bro. If banshee fails, no worries, just switch the starport over to a reactor and build a barax where that tech lab was. again, not hard to do. you are not wasting any money diverging in tech paths (like say... going DTs and realizing they ahve turrets up?) Yes, terran has not fully explored the raven. I thought this was common knowledge. Zerg doesnt have many units, the units that they have are all used. Protoss puts every unit in its ball, no unexpelored units. Carriers suck.. deny it.. i dare you. By default, yes, terran has the most unexplored units. Not to mention the available upgrades that they dont use. Are zealots killing your PF too quickly? 2 more armor on your PF reduces the zealot damage by 20-25%.. how well would this decrease zergling damage? Up until about 6 months ago, ghosts were largely unexplored as well. Terran is not harder to micro. Terran is different to micro. Its not like any protoss or zergs put their hands behind their head, kick back, and spectate their battles. All races have more micro oportunity than is physically possible. I would argue that what makes terran appear to be harder to micro is that if you are attacking a protoss army with an army of lesser value, the battle can drag on and you can stay alive long enough to do tones of damage with an inferior force. A comparable protoss or zerg army would have evaporated well before that point. I would assess that you are confusing the length of time microing with the difficulty of micro. pressing 1 EEE, 2 t, stutter is not substnatically more difficult than the options availabe to the other races. Have you tried incorporating tanks into your play with bio? i'm not guaranteeing that the strategy would be viable, i am just saying that it MAY be viable. tanks trade very cost effectively with stalkers (whether seiged or not), and when not seiged, can kite along with the marine/marauder given that it starts out further back with a minimum of 7 range. Pretty sure a terran won TSL3, pretty sure thorzain took out MC right after he won GSL, and he beat naniwa right around when he cleaned up MLG.. so there is your "Name one foreign terran winner". Pure zealot archon are not unbeatable, nor are they more powerful than they should be. You can kite them nearly endlessely while you are stimmed. When terrans lose to zealot archon, it is because of positioning and an incorrect unit response. Marauders are not the answer to zealot/archon. Are you seriously criticizing me for not knowing that zealots are good against zerg? I'm sorry, i have a job. I dont watch streams 16 hours a day. I said in that OP that i am well aware of zealots being good against zerglings. They would certainly not be my first choice against roach/hydra. I dont excatly know in what situation zealots are good against zerg other than against zerglings, but if you are suggesting that zealot drop play will regularly do critical damage, I beg to differ. Zerg should have a good spread and good map control or they are a failure anyways. If they fail to notice a warp prism coming to their base and fail to respond to it, that is not because zealots are too strong, that is because they are incompetant. They should have a spore and a spine at every base anyways, that will buy enough time for their army to get there. The only reason zealots would ever be used is because unless you have a storm-ready temp, there is no unit that can pay for itself in a drop. Zealots are the cheapest protoss throw-away unit and all the attakc would do to a zerg is buy some time.
Too bad everything you just said about Thorzain is like 6 months old. Also, you need to stop with these posts. Everything I read from you just makes me facepalm.
|
I love how alot of people are suggesting builds/tech paths, theres a reason why we stick to a certain strategy.. its been tested out time and time again in Korea. Mech in TvP what a joke, warp a few units in the T main and if the army is out of position more than likely going to cause way more damage than 2-3 units should.
Especially in TvP I think P has a lot more choices than T in what path they go, but ofcourse the only viable strategy for us is MMM + Vikings/Ghosts, personally I would love a different strategy in TvP but thats just not the case.
High Diamond T here and I'm beginning to hit that wall which sucks, and sadly the only games vs P i've been winning are ones where I'm super risky and double expanding. It would be awesome to have some beefier units early on, but its just too hard to pull off, usually when you have 4 medivacs theres 1-2 colossus out and you really cant attack into that am i right? I just think some of the timings are really whack and T only really has 1 good timing in the match up.
|
On December 01 2011 04:27 ceaRshaf wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 03:58 Bagi wrote:On December 01 2011 03:47 ceaRshaf wrote:On December 01 2011 03:44 Bagi wrote:On December 01 2011 03:35 ceaRshaf wrote:On December 01 2011 02:54 Bagi wrote:
Do people really think mech is the answer in TvP?
Even Goody stopped meching in TvP after the immortal buff for gods sake. Get your heads out of your asses. Adding tanks and ravens is overkill right? Tanks are worthless outside timing pushes. Once you have upgrades like charge and blink, even pure gateway units can deal with tanks no problem. Don't even get me started on the new immortal. Feedback outranges all raven abilities, PDD does jack shit against zealot/archon/colossus. Ravens are absolutely worthless in comparision to ghosts. I'm sorry, but if you believe tanks can solve lategame TvP you truly do not understand this game at all. Positioning and slow pushing make tanks worth their price. Ravens can have a free roam if ghosts are used against templars. And nobody even tried bio+ tanks + ravens + vikings. What you are describing is a 1-2 base timing push, which are quite common. But the longer the game the less you can rely on tanks, which is why you usually see marauder transitions after it. Protoss just has too many units that effectively counter tanks, especially once you have upgrades for them. Once the protoss has a maxed army, your cute little tank army just gets rolled over unless you have perfect positioning. This is not BW where tank lines could break entire armies, don't delude yourself. Lots of people do bio/tanks/ravens/vikings as a timing push, and they know its not viable in a long game. That's why they are progamers and you are not. If only pros would be allowed to talk than TL would be quite. That argument is stupid. And check Hero vs asd from GSL (todays matches). Game 2 is mech play at his best.
You propose a certain unit composition for lategame, the unit composition is used but only in the early-midgame. This means pros have plenty of experience using the said composition but they also avoid using it in longer games, most likely because its simply not effective. If you would still argue that the unit composition is good in longer games, its essentially your word against all the progamers in the world (they all go bio in longer games), and it's pretty obvious who wins that argument. Stop trying to tell better players what they should be doing.
I can't watch GSL because I haven't bought the season, but let me guess: timing push?
|
On December 01 2011 05:46 Phobbers wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 05:37 Roxy wrote:On December 01 2011 03:44 Empire.Beastyqt wrote:On December 01 2011 02:52 heroofcanton wrote:On December 01 2011 02:05 Umpteen wrote:Not sure if Polt said it 1-2 GSL's ago that once patch hits "all the bad terrans will drop out from GSL because of this" I could sympathise with the OP but for this. Here is Polt (I also think it was him) stating the GSL was oversubscribed with bad Terrans prior to a certain patch. Presumably bad Terrans don't have awesome micro and multitasking. Yet they were still able to eliminate top-notch Zergs and Protoss.To me, this undermines rather than reinforces the pillars supporting the OP's hypothesis. Polt didn't think the GSL was full of Terrans because Terran was balanced but rewarded great micro better. He thought they didn't deserve to be there. He didn't think they were as good as the Zergs and Protoss they were beating. If he's right, and the patch corrected an imbalance that was allowing inferior players to flourish, need we look further for an explanation of the distribution of races in the GSL? I think what Polt said makes a lot of sense. I remember Artosis saying on SotG that a lot of "bad Terrans" were going to suffer because of the EMP nerf, as they would not hit as many and they'd get stormed more. We saw that in that hour-long game between TOD and Happy at dreamhack (not shitting on Happy, just saying pre-nerf he would have left no templar un-EMPed), and that a lot of "bad terrans" who thought they were good were going to start losing more games TvP. I don't sympathize with a lot of the current threads that terran players have been making about the inherent "betterness" of Terran players. Terran micro is simply more rewarding, not more difficult. I don't think Terran has ANY fundamental problems. Furthermore- Terrans are still set on Bio play in TvP, and most refuse to mech instead focusing on Bio play which is going to be inherently weaker, especially to AoE attacks. If terrans want to play a more mobile style they need to accept that its going to be weaker and move on. There needs to be like, a Terran Bunker thread, where all the Terran players can go to post threads like this and they can all agree and have fun together with their marines and ghosts and shit. Bolded part shows how much you know about game, mech in TvP - okay. On December 01 2011 03:03 Roxy wrote:
I completely disagree with so many things here.
I fell like terran is not well equipped to deal with mutalisks. I think these problems will be addressed in HOTS.
I feel like terran is fully equipped to deal with protoss. Especially if they capitalize on their advantages in the early game.
PF with turrets is much more difficult to kill than a comparable amount of canons or spine/spores+queen.
Terran has the most rewarding harass, especially when takign into account that they dont need to diverge from their regular tech path to get medivac/marine or hellions or banshees. The only possible costs wasted on failed harass could be the research of cloak or Blue flame (which could very well end up being useful later in the game). how often do we see a banshee go out and multi-prong mineral lines in the late game. All you have to do is put it close to the mineral line but out of range of any static defenses and hold position until you have the time to attend more micro to it.
Terran has the most unexplored units/upgrades (specifically the raven in all matchups, and thor/tank with bio in tvp). Not to mention, how often do you see terran players repairing their vikings/medivacs in the late game.
They go into large engagements with an army that is injured or damage, medivacs with depleted energy, and often attack into bad angles.
Yes, if you attack up a ramp into zealot/sentry/stalker/colosus/archon.. you shoudl lose... dont do it...
if you attack way in the open, ya you will probably win.. or kill a ton of zealots for only the cost of a stim
You heard it here first, banshees and helions are regular tech path in TvP. Terran having most unexplored units - not sure if you are trolling, thor/tank/bio in tvp? really? More than half of people here are posting stuff like: OMG BUT TERRAN IS GOOD RACE NOOB GTFO!! You should read the thread first, thread isnt about terran being WEAK race, thread is about that terran is more time consuming race because its micro is more difficult than the other 2 races which results in people quiting terran or changing to other race. If you are thinking "well who cares about lower leagues", you should probably re-think again. Terran is already STILL the most hated race from beta which doesnt help new players coming into game or help the old ones stick to their race. I will post again for those people saying "terran was winning before because they were OP and now when they lose terrans suck and zergs and toss are better", sure can you tell me why terrans never won anything outside Korea? You actually want to say that out of over million people that wasnt ONE talented terran player? What terrans want is not their race being boosted, I like my race as it is and I want it to be hard, but I use a lot of time on this game, terrans want the other 2 races to be given MORE options in terms of micro making them not HARDER to use but having the potential to do better, very good example of this are blink stalkers and mutas. Bad example of this is zealot/archon army, the strenght in it is too much for its ..micro - and we need less of those for SC2 to be better game. Also Roxy stop posting you are melting my brain with your posts, newest one "when did zealots become viable vs zerg?". /facepalm I honestly expected more from someone who plays and has as much experience as you. If you have a factory, yes, that means you can build hellions. I dont see what is difficult to understand here. If you have a starport (build vikings or medivacs), do you have a tech lab.. build marauders? How about you switch them and build a banshee... not so hard to figure out bro. If banshee fails, no worries, just switch the starport over to a reactor and build a barax where that tech lab was. again, not hard to do. you are not wasting any money diverging in tech paths (like say... going DTs and realizing they ahve turrets up?) Yes, terran has not fully explored the raven. I thought this was common knowledge. Zerg doesnt have many units, the units that they have are all used. Protoss puts every unit in its ball, no unexpelored units. Carriers suck.. deny it.. i dare you. By default, yes, terran has the most unexplored units. Not to mention the available upgrades that they dont use. Are zealots killing your PF too quickly? 2 more armor on your PF reduces the zealot damage by 20-25%.. how well would this decrease zergling damage? Up until about 6 months ago, ghosts were largely unexplored as well. Terran is not harder to micro. Terran is different to micro. Its not like any protoss or zergs put their hands behind their head, kick back, and spectate their battles. All races have more micro oportunity than is physically possible. I would argue that what makes terran appear to be harder to micro is that if you are attacking a protoss army with an army of lesser value, the battle can drag on and you can stay alive long enough to do tones of damage with an inferior force. A comparable protoss or zerg army would have evaporated well before that point. I would assess that you are confusing the length of time microing with the difficulty of micro. pressing 1 EEE, 2 t, stutter is not substnatically more difficult than the options availabe to the other races. Have you tried incorporating tanks into your play with bio? i'm not guaranteeing that the strategy would be viable, i am just saying that it MAY be viable. tanks trade very cost effectively with stalkers (whether seiged or not), and when not seiged, can kite along with the marine/marauder given that it starts out further back with a minimum of 7 range. Pretty sure a terran won TSL3, pretty sure thorzain took out MC right after he won GSL, and he beat naniwa right around when he cleaned up MLG.. so there is your "Name one foreign terran winner". Pure zealot archon are not unbeatable, nor are they more powerful than they should be. You can kite them nearly endlessely while you are stimmed. When terrans lose to zealot archon, it is because of positioning and an incorrect unit response. Marauders are not the answer to zealot/archon. Are you seriously criticizing me for not knowing that zealots are good against zerg? I'm sorry, i have a job. I dont watch streams 16 hours a day. I said in that OP that i am well aware of zealots being good against zerglings. They would certainly not be my first choice against roach/hydra. I dont excatly know in what situation zealots are good against zerg other than against zerglings, but if you are suggesting that zealot drop play will regularly do critical damage, I beg to differ. Zerg should have a good spread and good map control or they are a failure anyways. If they fail to notice a warp prism coming to their base and fail to respond to it, that is not because zealots are too strong, that is because they are incompetant. They should have a spore and a spine at every base anyways, that will buy enough time for their army to get there. The only reason zealots would ever be used is because unless you have a storm-ready temp, there is no unit that can pay for itself in a drop. Zealots are the cheapest protoss throw-away unit and all the attakc would do to a zerg is buy some time. Too bad everything you just said about Thorzain is like 6 months old. Also, you need to stop with these posts. Everything I read from you just makes me facepalm.
That is the only flaw you see in my post after im sure you examined it very closely. While what i said my no longer be relavent, it is not incorrect. Other than huk(questionable if he still counts as foreign) and nerchio, how about you find me a foreign tournament winner that isnt terran?
Most of the tournament winners are korean (including terran winners, http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=283186)
the argument that no foreign terran wins is only valid because foreigners very rarely win tournaments. If you have a population of 4 winners and none of them happen to be terran, that is simpyl not enough to draw any conclusions.
Taking all tournament wins into consideration, the above chart supports that terran is probably the easiest race - contrary to what all of the terrans in this thread are whining about
|
Terran micro is simply more rewarding, not more difficult
Yeah, that's why Terran is doing so well outside Korea. Come on. With the increased skill cap Terran has comes the OBLIGATION to use that skill cap to equal the other races. The micro and multitasking is clearly more difficult, but you can delude yourself in believing otherwise.
|
On December 01 2011 06:07 Roxy wrote:
That is the only flaw you see in my post after im sure you examined it very closely. While what i said my no longer be relavent, it is not incorrect. Other than huk(questionable if he still counts as foreign) and nerchio, how about you find me a foreign tournament winner that isnt terran?
Stephano, Naniwa, HuK, Idra are all foreigners who aren't Terran that have recently won major tournaments (ESWC, IPL3, ASUS ROG, IEM, MLG Invitational).
It is no secret that while Korean Terrans are doing really well at the highest level, foreign Terrans have a harder time, whatever the reason. I don't personally believe it is a great issue - it is one that can be overcome by just playing on a higher level or maybe by switching the mindset. I don't know, I'm no expert. But this isn't a problem which has gone on for months and has had lots of attempts at solutions, like Code S Protoss problems before the Immortal range buff and the EMP nerf/upgrade buff patches. In those days, PvT just looked outright broken, especially after IEM Cologne, but the issue here is far more subtle and less convincing.
|
On December 01 2011 06:07 Roxy wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 05:46 Phobbers wrote:On December 01 2011 05:37 Roxy wrote:On December 01 2011 03:44 Empire.Beastyqt wrote:On December 01 2011 02:52 heroofcanton wrote:On December 01 2011 02:05 Umpteen wrote:Not sure if Polt said it 1-2 GSL's ago that once patch hits "all the bad terrans will drop out from GSL because of this" I could sympathise with the OP but for this. Here is Polt (I also think it was him) stating the GSL was oversubscribed with bad Terrans prior to a certain patch. Presumably bad Terrans don't have awesome micro and multitasking. Yet they were still able to eliminate top-notch Zergs and Protoss.To me, this undermines rather than reinforces the pillars supporting the OP's hypothesis. Polt didn't think the GSL was full of Terrans because Terran was balanced but rewarded great micro better. He thought they didn't deserve to be there. He didn't think they were as good as the Zergs and Protoss they were beating. If he's right, and the patch corrected an imbalance that was allowing inferior players to flourish, need we look further for an explanation of the distribution of races in the GSL? I think what Polt said makes a lot of sense. I remember Artosis saying on SotG that a lot of "bad Terrans" were going to suffer because of the EMP nerf, as they would not hit as many and they'd get stormed more. We saw that in that hour-long game between TOD and Happy at dreamhack (not shitting on Happy, just saying pre-nerf he would have left no templar un-EMPed), and that a lot of "bad terrans" who thought they were good were going to start losing more games TvP. I don't sympathize with a lot of the current threads that terran players have been making about the inherent "betterness" of Terran players. Terran micro is simply more rewarding, not more difficult. I don't think Terran has ANY fundamental problems. Furthermore- Terrans are still set on Bio play in TvP, and most refuse to mech instead focusing on Bio play which is going to be inherently weaker, especially to AoE attacks. If terrans want to play a more mobile style they need to accept that its going to be weaker and move on. There needs to be like, a Terran Bunker thread, where all the Terran players can go to post threads like this and they can all agree and have fun together with their marines and ghosts and shit. Bolded part shows how much you know about game, mech in TvP - okay. On December 01 2011 03:03 Roxy wrote:
I completely disagree with so many things here.
I fell like terran is not well equipped to deal with mutalisks. I think these problems will be addressed in HOTS.
I feel like terran is fully equipped to deal with protoss. Especially if they capitalize on their advantages in the early game.
PF with turrets is much more difficult to kill than a comparable amount of canons or spine/spores+queen.
Terran has the most rewarding harass, especially when takign into account that they dont need to diverge from their regular tech path to get medivac/marine or hellions or banshees. The only possible costs wasted on failed harass could be the research of cloak or Blue flame (which could very well end up being useful later in the game). how often do we see a banshee go out and multi-prong mineral lines in the late game. All you have to do is put it close to the mineral line but out of range of any static defenses and hold position until you have the time to attend more micro to it.
Terran has the most unexplored units/upgrades (specifically the raven in all matchups, and thor/tank with bio in tvp). Not to mention, how often do you see terran players repairing their vikings/medivacs in the late game.
They go into large engagements with an army that is injured or damage, medivacs with depleted energy, and often attack into bad angles.
Yes, if you attack up a ramp into zealot/sentry/stalker/colosus/archon.. you shoudl lose... dont do it...
if you attack way in the open, ya you will probably win.. or kill a ton of zealots for only the cost of a stim
You heard it here first, banshees and helions are regular tech path in TvP. Terran having most unexplored units - not sure if you are trolling, thor/tank/bio in tvp? really? More than half of people here are posting stuff like: OMG BUT TERRAN IS GOOD RACE NOOB GTFO!! You should read the thread first, thread isnt about terran being WEAK race, thread is about that terran is more time consuming race because its micro is more difficult than the other 2 races which results in people quiting terran or changing to other race. If you are thinking "well who cares about lower leagues", you should probably re-think again. Terran is already STILL the most hated race from beta which doesnt help new players coming into game or help the old ones stick to their race. I will post again for those people saying "terran was winning before because they were OP and now when they lose terrans suck and zergs and toss are better", sure can you tell me why terrans never won anything outside Korea? You actually want to say that out of over million people that wasnt ONE talented terran player? What terrans want is not their race being boosted, I like my race as it is and I want it to be hard, but I use a lot of time on this game, terrans want the other 2 races to be given MORE options in terms of micro making them not HARDER to use but having the potential to do better, very good example of this are blink stalkers and mutas. Bad example of this is zealot/archon army, the strenght in it is too much for its ..micro - and we need less of those for SC2 to be better game. Also Roxy stop posting you are melting my brain with your posts, newest one "when did zealots become viable vs zerg?". /facepalm I honestly expected more from someone who plays and has as much experience as you. If you have a factory, yes, that means you can build hellions. I dont see what is difficult to understand here. If you have a starport (build vikings or medivacs), do you have a tech lab.. build marauders? How about you switch them and build a banshee... not so hard to figure out bro. If banshee fails, no worries, just switch the starport over to a reactor and build a barax where that tech lab was. again, not hard to do. you are not wasting any money diverging in tech paths (like say... going DTs and realizing they ahve turrets up?) Yes, terran has not fully explored the raven. I thought this was common knowledge. Zerg doesnt have many units, the units that they have are all used. Protoss puts every unit in its ball, no unexpelored units. Carriers suck.. deny it.. i dare you. By default, yes, terran has the most unexplored units. Not to mention the available upgrades that they dont use. Are zealots killing your PF too quickly? 2 more armor on your PF reduces the zealot damage by 20-25%.. how well would this decrease zergling damage? Up until about 6 months ago, ghosts were largely unexplored as well. Terran is not harder to micro. Terran is different to micro. Its not like any protoss or zergs put their hands behind their head, kick back, and spectate their battles. All races have more micro oportunity than is physically possible. I would argue that what makes terran appear to be harder to micro is that if you are attacking a protoss army with an army of lesser value, the battle can drag on and you can stay alive long enough to do tones of damage with an inferior force. A comparable protoss or zerg army would have evaporated well before that point. I would assess that you are confusing the length of time microing with the difficulty of micro. pressing 1 EEE, 2 t, stutter is not substnatically more difficult than the options availabe to the other races. Have you tried incorporating tanks into your play with bio? i'm not guaranteeing that the strategy would be viable, i am just saying that it MAY be viable. tanks trade very cost effectively with stalkers (whether seiged or not), and when not seiged, can kite along with the marine/marauder given that it starts out further back with a minimum of 7 range. Pretty sure a terran won TSL3, pretty sure thorzain took out MC right after he won GSL, and he beat naniwa right around when he cleaned up MLG.. so there is your "Name one foreign terran winner". Pure zealot archon are not unbeatable, nor are they more powerful than they should be. You can kite them nearly endlessely while you are stimmed. When terrans lose to zealot archon, it is because of positioning and an incorrect unit response. Marauders are not the answer to zealot/archon. Are you seriously criticizing me for not knowing that zealots are good against zerg? I'm sorry, i have a job. I dont watch streams 16 hours a day. I said in that OP that i am well aware of zealots being good against zerglings. They would certainly not be my first choice against roach/hydra. I dont excatly know in what situation zealots are good against zerg other than against zerglings, but if you are suggesting that zealot drop play will regularly do critical damage, I beg to differ. Zerg should have a good spread and good map control or they are a failure anyways. If they fail to notice a warp prism coming to their base and fail to respond to it, that is not because zealots are too strong, that is because they are incompetant. They should have a spore and a spine at every base anyways, that will buy enough time for their army to get there. The only reason zealots would ever be used is because unless you have a storm-ready temp, there is no unit that can pay for itself in a drop. Zealots are the cheapest protoss throw-away unit and all the attakc would do to a zerg is buy some time. Too bad everything you just said about Thorzain is like 6 months old. Also, you need to stop with these posts. Everything I read from you just makes me facepalm. That is the only flaw you see in my post after im sure you examined it very closely. While what i said my no longer be relavent, it is not incorrect. Other than huk(questionable if he still counts as foreign) and nerchio, how about you find me a foreign tournament winner that isnt terran? Most of the tournament winners are korean (including terran winners, http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=283186)the argument that no foreign terran wins is only valid because foreigners very rarely win tournaments. If you have a population of 4 winners and none of them happen to be terran, that is simpyl not enough to draw any conclusions.
Idra with his IEM and Star Invite win, Stephano with his IPL3, Electronic Sports World Cup 2011, and IGN ProLeague Season 4/UK Qualifiers victories. Naniwa's MLG Global Inv victory
Edit: Someone beat me to it >.>
|
On December 01 2011 05:50 Superneenja wrote:
I love how alot of people are suggesting builds/tech paths, theres a reason why we stick to a certain strategy.. its been tested out time and time again in Korea. Mech in TvP what a joke, warp a few units in the T main and if the army is out of position more than likely going to cause way more damage than 2-3 units should.
In BW it was far more important to deny arbiters in your base to prevent recall and it was possible, but with a lot of skill. You can't deny a warpprism if you want to?
Bagi: I can bet you that the pros will change their strategies in 2012 and you will forget my posts and it's ok. But I don't need to be a pro to see that late game terrans don't have a good plan going against protoss. Killer steam rolls late game vs bio. I mean he owns them. Protoss not only did catch up but has passed terrans in the metagame.
And you forget the time when terrans did not use ghosts while people theorized the potential of ghosts. And now ghosts are essential. Ravens are next.
Edit: And most of the players are copy paste of real innovators of strategies. The innovators are few and are in the top, because that's why they are copied. MVP has no reason to change his style now, but if MVP wants to i think he can make mech viable.
|
On December 01 2011 06:14 ceaRshaf wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 05:50 Superneenja wrote:
I love how alot of people are suggesting builds/tech paths, theres a reason why we stick to a certain strategy.. its been tested out time and time again in Korea. Mech in TvP what a joke, warp a few units in the T main and if the army is out of position more than likely going to cause way more damage than 2-3 units should.
In BW it was far more important to deny arbiters in your base to prevent recall and it was possible, but with a lot of skill. You can't deny a warpprism if you want to? Bagi: I can bet you that the pros will change their strategies in 2012 and you will forget my posts and it's ok. But I don't need to be a pro to see that late game terrans don't have a good plan going against protoss. Killer steam rolls late game vs bio. I mean he owns them. Protoss not only did catch up but has passed terrans in the metagame. And you forget the time when terrans did not use ghosts while people theorized the potential of ghosts. And now ghosts are essential. Ravens are next.
Stop rewriting history. Terrans has always been using ghosts. Just aren't that nessarcary vs non archon/HT armies. After archon buff, they was seen alot more, and hence terran used more ghosts (thats the main reason at least). True terrans at times were not building enough ghosts, (like only 3-4 instead of 5+).
|
On December 01 2011 06:18 Hider wrote:
Stop rewriting history. Terrans has always been using ghosts.
I think it is you who is rewriting history here. Useage of Ghosts after SC2 was released was seen as a joke, an ingame comedy, like going for Ultralisk Drops, Motherships or Carriers. TLO was thought to be an amazing player because he managed to pull off playing with Ghosts in TvT by Nuking tanks when they seiged.
To put things in perspective, this was around the same time when every PvT involved going for 1base colossus, and making Phoenix was a laugh outside of Nony's 2 stargate off of 1base Phoenix build in PvZ. Every PvZ was considered a macro game if it made it to 2 bases, and making Barracks before Supply Depot in TvZ was pretty standard.
It was only AFTER Kahydarin Amulet was removed that Ghosts became really popular in TvP, which is another reason why it is so sad they removed the upgrade completely.
EDIT: And the Archon buff had barely anything to do with Ghosts becoming popular. The Archon buff only made it massive and increased the range by one. It made the Archon more ubiquitous and better vs Terran air units, but it alone hardly began the introduction of Ghosts in standard TvP. It may have catalysed it, but not to any great extent.
|
Terrans have always used ghosts, especially in TvP. Maybe not in beta or first few months, but that period of Steppes of War and Blistering Sands is completely irrelevant now, as macro games were extremely rare. People do build ghosts in greater numbers now, but they cannot be compared to ravens.
As for the raven unit itself, how do you propose it changes the terran army? Auto-turrets are only useful in small skirmishes. Stalkers are hardly a problem in the lategame, so that rules out PDD. Seeker missile can only hit a protoss player if they are caught completely off guard by it, which is highly unlikely + you will probably do a few hundred points of damage at most. You're probably more likely to nuke his army than to land a seeker missile, and its easier to get nukes since ghost tech is necessary anyway.
Please, instead of throwaway comments, how about something substantial. How will the raven become useful?
Will players change their strategies in 2012? Well duh, once HOTS is out they will. Until then its bio TvP with the occasional timing push with a few select mech units. If you had played TvP as terran at a decent level, you would know this yourself.
|
I was reading Bagi's comment about PDD, and out of curiosity decided to look up the liquipedia article about it here and was surprised to realise that there are only 3 units the PDD can defend against in TvP. I'm especially curious as to why this might be so - did Blizzard think that PDDs vs Colossi might be OP in the lategame, or is it just because the Thermal Lance isn't a projectile? It's kind of irrelevant to the rest of the thread, but I really wish Ravens were considered viable in the lategame vP. I think a slow transition from bio to air play in TvP would just be such an exciting matchup to watch, but hey ho.
|
On December 01 2011 06:28 Bagi wrote:
Terrans have always used ghosts, especially in TvP. Maybe not in beta or first few months, but that period of Steppes of War and Blistering Sands is completely irrelevant now, as macro games were extremely rare. People do build ghosts in greater numbers now, but they cannot be compared to ravens.
As for the raven unit itself, how do you propose it changes the terran army? Auto-turrets are only useful in small skirmishes. Stalkers are hardly a problem in the lategame, so that rules out PDD. Seeker missile can only hit a protoss player if they are caught completely off guard by it, which is highly unlikely + you will probably do a few hundred points of damage at most. You're probably more likely to nuke his army than to land a seeker missile, and its easier to get nukes since ghost tech is necessary anyway.
Please, instead of throwaway comments, how about something substantial. How will the raven become useful?
Will players change their strategies in 2012? Well duh, once HOTS is out they will. Until then its bio TvP with the occasional timing push with a few select mech units. If you had played TvP as terran at a decent level, you would know this yourself.
So much bullshit in one post. You win. I can't stand the smell.
|
Well you sure proved me wrong.
My personal opinion on the raven is that it needs a major rehaul for HOTS, but I doubt they'll change it much. Terran has too many options already as Browder has said.
|
On December 01 2011 06:11 mlspmatt wrote:Yeah, that's why Terran is doing so well outside Korea. Come on. With the increased skill cap Terran has comes the OBLIGATION to use that skill cap to equal the other races. The micro and multitasking is clearly more difficult, but you can delude yourself in believing otherwise.
You have no proof that this so called "increased skill cap" lies in micros requirement as opposed to game sense requirement.
And Terran are obliged to use their race to their full potential? LOL I don't think you understand the whole idea of competitive gaming. You must really hate esport if you think players should be able to do well at the top without actually using everything that's given to them in the game.
If there's something truly broken, Blizzard should just fix what's broken, i.e. increase the animation cool-down for marine/marauder so they can't be stutter-stepped as well, just like they did with reaver in BW. The wrong thing to do is to make one race so imbalanced at the top just to compensate all the scrubs at the lower level that it will literally destroys the whole competitive scene. Last time I checked there's no Global Red Alert League or anything resembling it. We will soon if everyone starts switching to Terran at the top level play because it's the only race viable.
TLDR:
(Some) low-level Terran are really a bunch of entitled crybabies. I don't know where people get the audacity to put their own low-level frustration ahead of the top-level play, where people's careers and livelihood are directly affected by game balance.
|
On December 01 2011 06:13 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 06:07 Roxy wrote:
That is the only flaw you see in my post after im sure you examined it very closely. While what i said my no longer be relavent, it is not incorrect. Other than huk(questionable if he still counts as foreign) and nerchio, how about you find me a foreign tournament winner that isnt terran? Stephano, Naniwa, HuK, Idra are all foreigners who aren't Terran that have recently won major tournaments (ESWC, IPL3, ASUS ROG, IEM, MLG Invitational). .
Once again, the foreign winners are the ones with Korean training (excepting Stephano). I think there's a more interesting case to be made about the koreans who drop out of the open bracket tending to be Protoss (more drop out and earlier). Though hell I don't care for this argument as much but who are the standout foreign terrans you think of? Qxc... maybe kas? Can't say I'm excited about any of them like I am for players like Mana.
Between the ghost nerf and the map changes it should always have been expected that hte weaker players would fade away as the 1/1/1 and complete dominance in the lategame sustained them.
The ghost post by bagi is complete BS. It was a joke how Terrans were saying ghosts were not viable in March/april of this year. Before the KA switch ghosts were completely underused (especially by todays standards). To say anything else is to be blatantly lieing or ignorant.
|
On December 01 2011 06:28 Bagi wrote:
Terrans have always used ghosts, especially in TvP. Maybe not in beta or first few months, but that period of Steppes of War and Blistering Sands is completely irrelevant now, as macro games were extremely rare. People do build ghosts in greater numbers now, but they cannot be compared to ravens.
As for the raven unit itself, how do you propose it changes the terran army? Auto-turrets are only useful in small skirmishes. Stalkers are hardly a problem in the lategame, so that rules out PDD. Seeker missile can only hit a protoss player if they are caught completely off guard by it, which is highly unlikely + you will probably do a few hundred points of damage at most. You're probably more likely to nuke his army than to land a seeker missile, and its easier to get nukes since ghost tech is necessary anyway.
Please, instead of throwaway comments, how about something substantial. How will the raven become useful?
Will players change their strategies in 2012? Well duh, once HOTS is out they will. Until then its bio TvP with the occasional timing push with a few select mech units. If you had played TvP as terran at a decent level, you would know this yourself.
Open a thread in the strategy forum, discuss how raven would be useful instead of brainlessly whine.
And wrt to HotS, yes it will make Terrans change their strategy: instead of going Marine/Marauder, they will go Hellion/Warhound, which is exactly like Marine/Marauder, but with 50% more splash. (GJ Blizzard).
|
Well terran is by an huge amount the hardest race in the game, no doubt. I am not sure if the game is balanced at the current korean highest level but I can see for sure the level of knowledge and mechanics protoss and zerg require is incomparably inferior. Especially protoss. Zerg can be hard aswell but to a very good and experienced mechanical player from scbw there's not much else to learn. This is the reason foreign terrans do bad. They simply don't have a structure and practice with good enough players to keep up with korean terrans so they just lose to the easier to play races.
|
On December 01 2011 07:02 ppdealer wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 06:28 Bagi wrote:
Terrans have always used ghosts, especially in TvP. Maybe not in beta or first few months, but that period of Steppes of War and Blistering Sands is completely irrelevant now, as macro games were extremely rare. People do build ghosts in greater numbers now, but they cannot be compared to ravens.
As for the raven unit itself, how do you propose it changes the terran army? Auto-turrets are only useful in small skirmishes. Stalkers are hardly a problem in the lategame, so that rules out PDD. Seeker missile can only hit a protoss player if they are caught completely off guard by it, which is highly unlikely + you will probably do a few hundred points of damage at most. You're probably more likely to nuke his army than to land a seeker missile, and its easier to get nukes since ghost tech is necessary anyway.
Please, instead of throwaway comments, how about something substantial. How will the raven become useful?
Will players change their strategies in 2012? Well duh, once HOTS is out they will. Until then its bio TvP with the occasional timing push with a few select mech units. If you had played TvP as terran at a decent level, you would know this yourself. Open a thread in the strategy forum, discuss how raven would be useful instead of brainlessly whine. And wrt to HotS, yes it will make Terrans change their strategy: instead of going Marine/Marauder, they will go Hellion/Warhound, which is exactly like Marine/Marauder, but with 50% more splash. (GJ Blizzard).
I'm not brainlessly whining, this guy is theorycrafting (out of his ass, I might add) how ravens are the next big thing in TvP with tanks. Obviously they are not, which I just explained.
I swear, any text that might suggest something terran-related isn't that great gets labeled as idiotic whine. The antagonizing is getting ridiculous here.
|
It doesn't seem like people are talking about the OP anymore at this point, but I think it's completely right. And as he suggests, there isn't something wrong with Terran -- the issue is that the other races need to have their own units with micro potential that raises the skillcap. This doesn't just mean harass units by the way. I hope HOTS will help with this but I feel that the fundamental issues with the SC2 engine need to be addressed: moving shot and clumping.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
