|
On December 01 2011 10:37 kofman wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 10:30 Chamenas wrote:
But the graph is meaningless. It's not actually supported by data. It's just drawn and creates a false representation based upon suppositions that aren't actually in any way based in fact. That's just wrong, and misleading. The true numbers show a very different tale. This is the race distribution in America. Terran is the least played race by a significant margin from gold league onwards. http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/am/1/allThis is the race distribution for Korea, where Terran dominates all divisions except for GM, where toss has slightly more people. http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/fea/1/allThis shows that in America, where Terran's are not as strong, they don't do as well, leading to more people playing the other races. However, in Korea, where the Terran's are better, there are more of them because Terran is the best race when in the most skilled hands. As you can see, the graph isn't "superstition not in any way based in fact".
Race distribution is not the proper statistic to be looking at.
|
On December 01 2011 10:31 s3rp wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 10:09 Jackal888 wrote:On December 01 2011 09:25 Mrvoodoochild1 wrote:
A fundamental problem with terran is that they can lose 95% of their SCVs and because of Mules still amass a sizable army. This concept just breaks my brain. A race should not have a spell that simply gives you money . Agree whole heartedly. One of the only true broken mechanics of the game. Takes away the need for Terran's to Macro consistently. I have seen high level master Terran's miss SCV production consistently throughout replays and make up for it with mules. On the other hand I have seen some players never miss an SCV... macro really well.. and then get the added benefit of mules on top of this.... its a huge advantage. Mules also don't take up any supply which is just dumb. Late game PvT will consist of mass orbital commands with mass mule call down... therefore allowing the Terran to get rid of SCV's and pump more supply into Army. And a Protoss has 20+ Warpgate in these stages allowing him to almost instantly remax ( or at least way faster then the Terran ). So what if the Terran can sacrifice his workers he has the hardest time rebuilding an army in these stages anyways .
If he has the luxury of sacrificing workers, common sense would almost dictate that he has enough production facilities and orbitals and probably banked minerals and gas to sustain maxing rather quickly again, yes protoss has the luxury of remaxing quicker, they also have the not so-luxury of having an army that's almost 50-60 supply smaller due to the need usually for probes.
|
On December 01 2011 10:37 kofman wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 10:36 alpinefpOPP wrote:
i dont quite understand how this is a problem, and forgive me if ive misunderstood, but dont all races benefit from stronger micro and multi tasking? Not really. zerg and protoss don't micro anywhere close to what terran does, and Terran does 10x as many drops as toss or zerg.
Please explain this micro so that i can break it down step by step for you about how wrong you are, please, Tvp, or Tvz. I'll give you an example. Typical TvZ. Tank/marine/medivac vs muta/ling/bane. So if the tanks are sieged, which they should be, the outcome comes to this, zerg attacks, the only real micro that is necessary is marine splits to avoid the banelings, there is micro in terms of having an ideal engagement place but that's typically done pre-battle. So marines run back etc, the zerg comes in shift attacks his mutas on tanks, a moves his lings in, and move commands his banelings in to hit the marines.. that you are splitting, so often time's he is splitting his banes too. Ontop of this they have to macro, so terran often times will have to hit a button but he can still watch the engagement, for zerg to macro, he has to change screen and cycle through 4+ hatcheries typically, which is a couple of seconds where he can not physically be looking at the engagement, which then becomes a choice, do you lose your army because of bad micro, or get behind economically because of missed injects.
|
On December 01 2011 10:36 alpinefpOPP wrote:
i dont quite understand how this is a problem, and forgive me if ive misunderstood, but dont all races benefit from stronger micro and multi tasking?
In my opinion Terran benefints most from having those things / gets bigger disadvantages if you don't have that.
|
On November 30 2011 14:18 Empire.Beastyqt wrote:Problem is just in game design, terran as race is made harder to micro than other 2 races and when one unit is micro'd near perfect it seems as "overpowered" and then blizzard nerfs it since they dont know how to balance it out. Examples are marines vs zerglings vs zealots or stalkers vs marauders vs roaches. Marines and stalkers become much powerful with very good micro, while other 4 unit types dont need to be micro'd very good on low level to be successful. Another example is mutas - void rays - banshees, while void rays are "OP" on low levels, mutas and cloakless banshees probably "suck" because they require much more micro to use their full potential. Like someone mentioned already, terran as a race is made micro oriented while other 2 races are played different (not saying they dont require micro on top level but on low level its much harder for terran players to win their games) which results in terran % of players globally decreasing each season while zerg race players % has been increasing (read this on TL). All this nerfing to terran race, even tho it was needed on the GSL code S level, it is killing the lower leagues and players who are playing the game casually would rather switch races than spend more time on the game itself, because...they play game for fun and fun = winning most of the time. 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" + Show Spoiler +. My personal opinion on the whole balance thing - yes koreans were dominating GSL but if the race was overpowered terrans would dominate foreigner tournaments as well - which wasnt the case. Blizzard is balancing the game based on GSL obviously and even if slight nerf was needed I think blizzard overdid it and that we will see zergs and protoss dominate much more very soon. And for those who will probably be "go play other race if u think yours is shit" - you got it wrong, terran is very good race, but reaching top level or even low level play is much more time consuming than other 2 races if you want to win, which is reason why people complain on terran race atm.
Theres your explanation about why Terran micro is harder than zerg or protoss micro. No need to restate everything that has been said already.
|
On December 01 2011 10:30 Chamenas wrote:
But the graph is meaningless. It's not actually supported by data. It's just drawn and creates a false representation based upon suppositions that aren't actually in any way based in fact. That's just wrong, and misleading. The true numbers show a very different tale.
Unless there isn't 100% proof, it's called a hypothesis. We're here, because the OP wanted to post a hypothesis that is more or less represented by this graph and have a discussion about it. If you are just dismissing the graph, you're probably also not planning on discussing.
|
On December 01 2011 07:02 aTnClouD wrote:
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.
Heres more arguements, from a pro player, about Terran being harder.
|
On December 01 2011 10:44 kofman wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2011 14:18 Empire.Beastyqt wrote:Problem is just in game design, terran as race is made harder to micro than other 2 races and when one unit is micro'd near perfect it seems as "overpowered" and then blizzard nerfs it since they dont know how to balance it out. Examples are marines vs zerglings vs zealots or stalkers vs marauders vs roaches. Marines and stalkers become much powerful with very good micro, while other 4 unit types dont need to be micro'd very good on low level to be successful. Another example is mutas - void rays - banshees, while void rays are "OP" on low levels, mutas and cloakless banshees probably "suck" because they require much more micro to use their full potential. Like someone mentioned already, terran as a race is made micro oriented while other 2 races are played different (not saying they dont require micro on top level but on low level its much harder for terran players to win their games) which results in terran % of players globally decreasing each season while zerg race players % has been increasing (read this on TL). All this nerfing to terran race, even tho it was needed on the GSL code S level, it is killing the lower leagues and players who are playing the game casually would rather switch races than spend more time on the game itself, because...they play game for fun and fun = winning most of the time. 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" + Show Spoiler +. My personal opinion on the whole balance thing - yes koreans were dominating GSL but if the race was overpowered terrans would dominate foreigner tournaments as well - which wasnt the case. Blizzard is balancing the game based on GSL obviously and even if slight nerf was needed I think blizzard overdid it and that we will see zergs and protoss dominate much more very soon. And for those who will probably be "go play other race if u think yours is shit" - you got it wrong, terran is very good race, but reaching top level or even low level play is much more time consuming than other 2 races if you want to win, which is reason why people complain on terran race atm. Theres your explanation about why Terran micro is harder than zerg or protoss micro. No need to restate everything that has been said already.
That doesn't explain at all why terran micro is harder than other races. Period. It provides an argument as to why it should be, but gives no real examples as to why it is. Logically terran should be much micro harder than say zerg, but that's due to the fact that zerg macro by and large is considered harder. Everything you're quoting is just pro terrans saying their race is the hardest, go ask 99% of pros what they think is the hardest, and they will say their race. I'm asking for in game situations as to where the micro of terran units vastly outweighs the micro of other races units.
|
On December 01 2011 08:24 XRaDiiX wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 07:02 aTnClouD wrote:
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. I agree with your post 100% i have a hard time respecting Protoss players as much (at my level) because of how easier IMO personal opinion the Race is . I agree with you that Terran is probably the Hardest Race at the High Level (Top Master, GM) I play ZvT and i love it i feel its balanced and all really well ---PvZ (I don't feel its balanced at my level (Mid Master). I really think Protoss is the Strongest Race at Certain levels (maybe the Strongest possibly at levels a little lower than Nestea,MVP) Although Naniwa has proven this wrong in the Latest MLG. (He beat the two best Players(Beating Nestea Twice in a B03) in world with Protoss)Which actually reinforces your Argument. So with that happening at MLG i really think it brings into attention how strong Protoss really is in terms of balance. (Hero won Dreamhack Winter too (Not to take anything away from that He's an amazing player)
I dont understand this part at all
so Protoss is the strongest....until people are actually good....like Nestea/MVP good.....but once they lose its not because Naniwa is good....its because Protoss is the strongest
|
On December 01 2011 10:40 Ace.Xile wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 10:31 s3rp wrote:On December 01 2011 10:09 Jackal888 wrote:On December 01 2011 09:25 Mrvoodoochild1 wrote:
A fundamental problem with terran is that they can lose 95% of their SCVs and because of Mules still amass a sizable army. This concept just breaks my brain. A race should not have a spell that simply gives you money . Agree whole heartedly. One of the only true broken mechanics of the game. Takes away the need for Terran's to Macro consistently. I have seen high level master Terran's miss SCV production consistently throughout replays and make up for it with mules. On the other hand I have seen some players never miss an SCV... macro really well.. and then get the added benefit of mules on top of this.... its a huge advantage. Mules also don't take up any supply which is just dumb. Late game PvT will consist of mass orbital commands with mass mule call down... therefore allowing the Terran to get rid of SCV's and pump more supply into Army. And a Protoss has 20+ Warpgate in these stages allowing him to almost instantly remax ( or at least way faster then the Terran ). So what if the Terran can sacrifice his workers he has the hardest time rebuilding an army in these stages anyways . If he has the luxury of sacrificing workers, common sense would almost dictate that he has enough production facilities and orbitals and probably banked minerals and gas to sustain maxing rather quickly again, yes protoss has the luxury of remaxing quicker, they also have the not so-luxury of having an army that's almost 50-60 supply smaller due to the need usually for probes.
The only units that rebuild quick enough are MM that die pretty quick without support ( and those units take plenty of time ).
50-60 Probes more ? , how many workers do you build 90-120 ? 20 is more like it in most cases ( unless the Map starts to drown ) and tbh building more workers then having enough to saturate 3-3.5 Bases is way too many no matter what race you play.
|
On December 01 2011 10:46 kofman wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 07:02 aTnClouD wrote:
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. Heres more arguements, from a pro player, about Terran being harder.
Well it's still "Terran being harder", brought to you by a Terran player. Not that convincing.
Ask a pro from every other races, they'll probably state that they play the hardest race as well. When you're a pro, you don't really want to admit that you win (and that you win money) because your race is easier than another, so you say that it's harder.
Fair enough if you ask me, but it still doesn't prove anything.
|
On December 01 2011 10:50 s3rp wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 10:40 Ace.Xile wrote:On December 01 2011 10:31 s3rp wrote:On December 01 2011 10:09 Jackal888 wrote:On December 01 2011 09:25 Mrvoodoochild1 wrote:
A fundamental problem with terran is that they can lose 95% of their SCVs and because of Mules still amass a sizable army. This concept just breaks my brain. A race should not have a spell that simply gives you money . Agree whole heartedly. One of the only true broken mechanics of the game. Takes away the need for Terran's to Macro consistently. I have seen high level master Terran's miss SCV production consistently throughout replays and make up for it with mules. On the other hand I have seen some players never miss an SCV... macro really well.. and then get the added benefit of mules on top of this.... its a huge advantage. Mules also don't take up any supply which is just dumb. Late game PvT will consist of mass orbital commands with mass mule call down... therefore allowing the Terran to get rid of SCV's and pump more supply into Army. And a Protoss has 20+ Warpgate in these stages allowing him to almost instantly remax ( or at least way faster then the Terran ). So what if the Terran can sacrifice his workers he has the hardest time rebuilding an army in these stages anyways . If he has the luxury of sacrificing workers, common sense would almost dictate that he has enough production facilities and orbitals and probably banked minerals and gas to sustain maxing rather quickly again, yes protoss has the luxury of remaxing quicker, they also have the not so-luxury of having an army that's almost 50-60 supply smaller due to the need usually for probes. The only units that rebuild quick enough are MM that die pretty quick without support ( and those units take plenty of time ). 50-60 Probes more ? , how many workers do you build 90-120 ? 20-30 is more like it in most cases ( unless the Map starts to drown ) and tbh building more workers then having enough to saturate 3-3.5 Bases is way too many no matter what race you play.
Why would a protoss only have 20-30 probes across the 3+ bases that won't even support the supposed 20 gateways mentioned. The situation being discussed is where the terran is essentially able to kill of SCVs to free up quite a bit of supply because of the fact that he has enough orbitals.
|
On December 01 2011 10:48 Ace.Xile wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 10:44 kofman wrote:On November 30 2011 14:18 Empire.Beastyqt wrote:Problem is just in game design, terran as race is made harder to micro than other 2 races and when one unit is micro'd near perfect it seems as "overpowered" and then blizzard nerfs it since they dont know how to balance it out. Examples are marines vs zerglings vs zealots or stalkers vs marauders vs roaches. Marines and stalkers become much powerful with very good micro, while other 4 unit types dont need to be micro'd very good on low level to be successful. Another example is mutas - void rays - banshees, while void rays are "OP" on low levels, mutas and cloakless banshees probably "suck" because they require much more micro to use their full potential. Like someone mentioned already, terran as a race is made micro oriented while other 2 races are played different (not saying they dont require micro on top level but on low level its much harder for terran players to win their games) which results in terran % of players globally decreasing each season while zerg race players % has been increasing (read this on TL). All this nerfing to terran race, even tho it was needed on the GSL code S level, it is killing the lower leagues and players who are playing the game casually would rather switch races than spend more time on the game itself, because...they play game for fun and fun = winning most of the time. 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" + Show Spoiler +. My personal opinion on the whole balance thing - yes koreans were dominating GSL but if the race was overpowered terrans would dominate foreigner tournaments as well - which wasnt the case. Blizzard is balancing the game based on GSL obviously and even if slight nerf was needed I think blizzard overdid it and that we will see zergs and protoss dominate much more very soon. And for those who will probably be "go play other race if u think yours is shit" - you got it wrong, terran is very good race, but reaching top level or even low level play is much more time consuming than other 2 races if you want to win, which is reason why people complain on terran race atm. Theres your explanation about why Terran micro is harder than zerg or protoss micro. No need to restate everything that has been said already. That doesn't explain at all why terran micro is harder than other races. Period. It provides an argument as to why it should be, but gives no real examples as to why it is. Logically terran should be much micro harder than say zerg, but that's due to the fact that zerg macro by and large is considered harder. Everything you're quoting is just pro terrans saying their race is the hardest, go ask 99% of pros what they think is the hardest, and they will say their race. I'm asking for in game situations as to where the micro of terran units vastly outweighs the micro of other races units.
I shouldn't even have to explain this, but since your in denial, I guess I have to...
Terran has to:
-split marines
-target fire banelings
-emp all of the toss army
-kite zealots
Zerg has to:
-a move
Protoss has to:
-spam forcefields
-amove
which one sounds the hardest to you?
Heres a direct quote from the AMA with TLO:
Chahlz : Why are you so awesome at Zerg? I love what you do against Protoss.
TLO : Zerg is EZ.
|
On December 01 2011 10:46 Kwanny wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 10:30 Chamenas wrote:
But the graph is meaningless. It's not actually supported by data. It's just drawn and creates a false representation based upon suppositions that aren't actually in any way based in fact. That's just wrong, and misleading. The true numbers show a very different tale. Unless there isn't 100% proof, it's called a hypothesis. We're here, because the OP wanted to post a hypothesis that is more or less represented by this graph and have a discussion about it. If you are just dismissing the graph, you're probably also not planning on discussing.
There doesn't need to be 100% proof, just something concrete. I'd love to discuss, if there was something to discuss, but there isn't. The original poster asserted an opinion as fact, people have called him out on it, other posters are continuing to assert opinion as fact.
Believe it or not, a hypothesis still needs support. Pulling a hypothesis out of thin air is not true theory, it's speculation, and speculation is generally bad if you're trying to make a real argument about concrete things.
There is concrete information out there, statistics about how races match up against each other at various skill levels, all of which would be relevant here, and all of which are being ignored.
Furthermore, a hypothesis is a statement, not a graph. A graph present the illusion of a conclusion. "I have found x data, and have summarized it in a neat little graph for you". When people see a graph, they often, ignorantly, assume you have created the graph based on actual findings. As such, it's misleading to post a graph when the work hasn't been done to support it. At the very least, the graph should have come with a bolded disclaimer stating "this graph is based upon my own anecdotal speculation".
|
On December 01 2011 08:21 Rye. wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 07:09 Plansix wrote:On December 01 2011 06:58 ppdealer wrote:On December 01 2011 06:11 mlspmatt wrote: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. 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. You are braver than I sir, but I totally agree. All of the recent threads have basicly come down to "make the game easier for me, you removed all the abusive things I used and its not fair". I'm amazed so many people think the bronze - platinum players arnt important. We make up 80% of all players. This is blizzards design. I'd have little interest in SC2 if i didn't play it and enjoy playing it. I watch player streams and tournaments, and keep an eye on TL forums. I imagine many other bronze - plats do the same and they are probably a large proportion of stream viewers. my point If we bronze to plat players arnt happy, we'll leave. THATS 80% OF PLAYERS. so get of your high horse about pro players and their livelihoods when WE 80% allow them to have it.
Just wondering:
Poll: Variety of matches at GSL/MLG/Dreamhack etc.. (7) 54% 50/50 winrate from Bronze to Diamond (6) 46% 13 total votes Your vote: (Vote): 50/50 winrate from Bronze to Diamond
(Vote): Variety of matches at GSL/MLG/Dreamhack etc..
Btw, I'm not saying that the design of Terran is fine, just what needs to take priority.
|
On December 01 2011 10:53 kofman wrote:
I shouldn't even have to explain this, but since your in denial, I guess I have to...
Terran has to:
-split marines
-target fire banelings
-emp all of the toss army
-kite zealots
Zerg has to:
-a move
Protoss has to:
-spam forcefields
-amove
which one sounds the hardest to you?
Oh, right. Protoss doesn't have to keep Zealots at the front of their ball. They don't have to split High Templar (or even other units in their army against EMP). They don't have to blink their Stalkers (a rather subpar unit in the mid to late game without the upgrade). There are many many things that both Zerg and Protoss have to do for Micro, just because you don't understand them or know what they are doesn't mean they don't exist and it's disingenuous of you to post as if you do understand. It confuses players who are ignorant to the truth and take in only what others post.
|
On December 01 2011 10:46 kofman wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 07:02 aTnClouD wrote:
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. Heres more arguements, from a pro player, about Terran being harder.
Same logic :
At blizzcon Nestea said that Zerg is way harder than terran. As it was stated before, every pro says that his race is the hardest.
The conclusion is that foreigner terrans should train and become as good as korean ones... Then everyone will be happy  The question is : Is there enough talent on the foreigner scene ?
|
On December 01 2011 10:58 Chamenas wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 10:53 kofman wrote:
I shouldn't even have to explain this, but since your in denial, I guess I have to...
Terran has to:
-split marines
-target fire banelings
-emp all of the toss army
-kite zealots
Zerg has to:
-a move
Protoss has to:
-spam forcefields
-amove
which one sounds the hardest to you? Oh, right. Protoss doesn't have to keep Zealots at the front of their ball. They don't have to split High Templar (or even other units in their army against EMP). They don't have to blink their Stalkers (a rather subpar unit in the mid to late game without the upgrade). There are many many things that both Zerg and Protoss have to do for Micro, just because you don't understand them or know what they are doesn't mean they don't exist and it's disingenuous of you to post as if you do understand. It confuses players who are ignorant to the truth and take in only what others post.
I can't believe you are even disputing the fact that Terran is the most micro intensive race. Its common knowledge.
|
On December 01 2011 10:53 kofman wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 10:48 Ace.Xile wrote:On December 01 2011 10:44 kofman wrote:On November 30 2011 14:18 Empire.Beastyqt wrote:Problem is just in game design, terran as race is made harder to micro than other 2 races and when one unit is micro'd near perfect it seems as "overpowered" and then blizzard nerfs it since they dont know how to balance it out. Examples are marines vs zerglings vs zealots or stalkers vs marauders vs roaches. Marines and stalkers become much powerful with very good micro, while other 4 unit types dont need to be micro'd very good on low level to be successful. Another example is mutas - void rays - banshees, while void rays are "OP" on low levels, mutas and cloakless banshees probably "suck" because they require much more micro to use their full potential. Like someone mentioned already, terran as a race is made micro oriented while other 2 races are played different (not saying they dont require micro on top level but on low level its much harder for terran players to win their games) which results in terran % of players globally decreasing each season while zerg race players % has been increasing (read this on TL). All this nerfing to terran race, even tho it was needed on the GSL code S level, it is killing the lower leagues and players who are playing the game casually would rather switch races than spend more time on the game itself, because...they play game for fun and fun = winning most of the time. 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" + Show Spoiler +. My personal opinion on the whole balance thing - yes koreans were dominating GSL but if the race was overpowered terrans would dominate foreigner tournaments as well - which wasnt the case. Blizzard is balancing the game based on GSL obviously and even if slight nerf was needed I think blizzard overdid it and that we will see zergs and protoss dominate much more very soon. And for those who will probably be "go play other race if u think yours is shit" - you got it wrong, terran is very good race, but reaching top level or even low level play is much more time consuming than other 2 races if you want to win, which is reason why people complain on terran race atm. Theres your explanation about why Terran micro is harder than zerg or protoss micro. No need to restate everything that has been said already. That doesn't explain at all why terran micro is harder than other races. Period. It provides an argument as to why it should be, but gives no real examples as to why it is. Logically terran should be much micro harder than say zerg, but that's due to the fact that zerg macro by and large is considered harder. Everything you're quoting is just pro terrans saying their race is the hardest, go ask 99% of pros what they think is the hardest, and they will say their race. I'm asking for in game situations as to where the micro of terran units vastly outweighs the micro of other races units. I shouldn't even have to explain this, but since your in denial, I guess I have to... Terran has to: -split marines -target fire banelings -emp all of the toss army -kite zealots Zerg has to: -a move Protoss has to: -spam forcefields -amove which one sounds the hardest to you?
Terran has to:
-split marines
-target fire banelings
Terran does have to do that, all while macroing, and on the other hand like i said earlier
Zerg has to:
- a- move with lings, micro group of banelings to attack the marines you are splitting because if you don't they will detonate on the tanks, while microing mutas to attack the tanks and not the marines. All while having to keep up with the macro that is arguably much harder of zerg, to not auto take an economic hit.
As for protoss:
While you're arguing about how hard stutter step micro is (which every race has to do at one point) Protoss do have to forcefields, although somehow you act as if forcefielding is easier than emps for some reason, furthermore to use HTs at all, you either have to use a warp prism or have them all split and be able to move them individually so they don't get clumped and destroyed by one emp, on top of taking out the shields all around them, and in the case of colossus yes bio balls have to stutter step but often times protoss has to micro colossus away from vikings all while focus firing them down with stalkers all while in the middle of the engagement and not dying to your bio ball.
You try to create examples and in the end it just seems as if you've never played any of the other races.
|
On December 01 2011 11:00 Ace.Xile wrote:Show nested quote +On December 01 2011 10:53 kofman wrote:On December 01 2011 10:48 Ace.Xile wrote:On December 01 2011 10:44 kofman wrote:On November 30 2011 14:18 Empire.Beastyqt wrote:Problem is just in game design, terran as race is made harder to micro than other 2 races and when one unit is micro'd near perfect it seems as "overpowered" and then blizzard nerfs it since they dont know how to balance it out. Examples are marines vs zerglings vs zealots or stalkers vs marauders vs roaches. Marines and stalkers become much powerful with very good micro, while other 4 unit types dont need to be micro'd very good on low level to be successful. Another example is mutas - void rays - banshees, while void rays are "OP" on low levels, mutas and cloakless banshees probably "suck" because they require much more micro to use their full potential. Like someone mentioned already, terran as a race is made micro oriented while other 2 races are played different (not saying they dont require micro on top level but on low level its much harder for terran players to win their games) which results in terran % of players globally decreasing each season while zerg race players % has been increasing (read this on TL). All this nerfing to terran race, even tho it was needed on the GSL code S level, it is killing the lower leagues and players who are playing the game casually would rather switch races than spend more time on the game itself, because...they play game for fun and fun = winning most of the time. 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" + Show Spoiler +. My personal opinion on the whole balance thing - yes koreans were dominating GSL but if the race was overpowered terrans would dominate foreigner tournaments as well - which wasnt the case. Blizzard is balancing the game based on GSL obviously and even if slight nerf was needed I think blizzard overdid it and that we will see zergs and protoss dominate much more very soon. And for those who will probably be "go play other race if u think yours is shit" - you got it wrong, terran is very good race, but reaching top level or even low level play is much more time consuming than other 2 races if you want to win, which is reason why people complain on terran race atm. Theres your explanation about why Terran micro is harder than zerg or protoss micro. No need to restate everything that has been said already. That doesn't explain at all why terran micro is harder than other races. Period. It provides an argument as to why it should be, but gives no real examples as to why it is. Logically terran should be much micro harder than say zerg, but that's due to the fact that zerg macro by and large is considered harder. Everything you're quoting is just pro terrans saying their race is the hardest, go ask 99% of pros what they think is the hardest, and they will say their race. I'm asking for in game situations as to where the micro of terran units vastly outweighs the micro of other races units. I shouldn't even have to explain this, but since your in denial, I guess I have to... Terran has to: -split marines -target fire banelings -emp all of the toss army -kite zealots Zerg has to: -a move Protoss has to: -spam forcefields -amove which one sounds the hardest to you? Terran has to: -split marines -target fire banelings Terran does have to do that, all while macroing, and on the other hand like i said earlier Zerg has to: - a- move with lings, micro group of banelings to attack the marines you are splitting because if you don't they will detonate on the tanks, while microing mutas to attack the tanks and not the marines. All while having to keep up with the macro that is arguably much harder of zerg, to not auto take an economic hit. As for protoss: While you're arguing about how hard stutter step micro is (which every race has to do at one point) Protoss do have to forcefields, although somehow you act as if forcefielding is easier than emps for some reason, furthermore to use HTs at all, you either have to use a warp prism or have them all split and be able to move them individually so they don't get clumped and destroyed by one emp, on top of taking out the shields all around them, and in the case of colossus yes bio balls have to stutter step but often times protoss has to micro colossus away from vikings all while focus firing them down with stalkers all while in the middle of the engagement and not dying to your bio ball. You try to create examples and in the end it just seems as if you've never played any of the other races.
Its obvious you've never played Terran if you think that in TvZ zerg has to do anything close to what Terran has to do microwise.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
