[D] Fundamental problems with Terran - Page 37

On November 30 2011 13:02 SpunXtain wrote:
Let me start with a disclaimer: this is not so much a specific balance thread as it is simply making arguments about fundamental problems I believe exist in the structure of the Terran race, and why it is fundamentally difficult for Blizzard to balance the race.

Strategy games that involve multiple races are always going to face challenges balancing races. This was true in Starcraft, Warcraft III, and many other RTS's out there. However, in Starcraft 2, there are a number of mechanics that make the game fundamentally difficult to balance - particularly across different skill levels.

Terran units, in general, have the ability to exponentially increase in effectiveness with effective micro ability. Banshees are able to perma-kite nonstimmed marines; ghosts in theory outrange infestors and templar with snipe/emp, and stimmed marines can theoretically kite their "hard counters" such as banelings, zealots and ultralisks. Harassment with banshees, hellions, and reapers becomes infinitely more effective with correct micro of these units.

Because this makes Terran units theoretically 'stronger' than the other races, Blizzard has implemented many nerfs to the Terran race to compensate for this micro potential. The way Blizzard appears to view the race is that, in head on battles, Terrans will always lose the fights to storms/colossus/fungals/banelings, etc. However, with good micro, Terran is able to win fights that it theoretically should lose based on raw battle power.

The reason that Terran were able to dominate so well for so long in the GSL is that players at this level were able to exploit the micro potential of the Terran units and use them much more effectively than other races. In response, Blizzard has attempted to balance the Terran race based on top-level Korean players, and nerfed reapers, hellions, ghosts etc. accordingly.

The problem with this response is that at lower levels, where players are not at the same level as the Korean scene and do not have the same micro/multitask potential, Terran is fundamentally going to be a weaker race. Many may dispute this fact, but the results even of top Foreign players show that this statement is true.

Please acknoweldge this data as just an example that this phenomena seems to be occuring based on recent results. As we know, Blizzard does not release its matchup statistics for the wider public to view. As at 30/11/2011, the top 6 foreigners in TLPD are all zerg and protoss. Only two terrans are in the top 10 - Major at 7th, and Kas at 10th.

Furthermore, results from recent tournaments have been very heavily dominated by zergs and protosses from the foreign point of view. These are the top foreign scores from some recent tournaments (gaps are filled by Korean players)

Blizzcon invitational: Sen (Z) 3rd, Naniwa (P) 4th

MLG Orlando: Huk (P) 1st, Idra (Z) 4th

Esports World Cup: Stephano (Z) 1st, Mana (P) 2nd

IEM New York: Gatored (P) 4th, TT1 (P) 5th-8th, Elfi (P) 5th-8th

IEM Guangzhou: Idra (Z) 1st, Elfi (P) 2nd, Hasuobs (P) 4th

IPL 3: Stephano (Z) 1st, Ret (Z) 5th-8th, Idra (Z) 5th-8th

MLG Providence: Naniwa (P) 2nd, Huk (P) 5th, Haypro (Z) 7th, Idra (Z) 8th, Kiwikaki (P) 9th, Ret (Z) 10th-11th, Slush (Z) 10th-11th

The only notable achievements by any Terran foreign players in recent months was Goody's 2nd place behind Nerchio in Battle of Berlin, and Selects 2nd behind Idra in ASUS ROG.

Let me know what you think about this topic, to me it seems like Blizzard have dug themselves into a bit of a hole in terms of balancing the game across the board. Do you think that Heart of the Swarm will fix this issue to some degree? Do others agree that this is a problem with the game?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EDIT:

Apparently this thread has created a lot of confusion and argument within the community, so to better summarize myself and the points I'm trying to make:

1. My argument is not that Terran is underpowered, it is that fundamentally it is difficult to balance the game for different levels of play. The mechanics of the game are such that different levels of players are rewarded more or less by different races - because there are different 'thresholds' of skill levels where races seem to be more or less powerful, there is a fundamental flaw in trying to balance the game in this way.

2. No, this has nothing to do with my own personal play-styles, it is a comment on the way the game is played at multiple levels. I use foreign top players and data as an example to compare against Korean top gamers: I have not omitted Koreans because I'm ignoring them, I've omitted them because I'm comparing against them.

3. This flaw is not necessarily on the Terran's side. It could be, as some pointed out, that the other races have design flaws. If Terran is the 'solid' race and the other 2 races are balanced to compensate for their shortcomings at the top level of play, Terran necessarily appears to be weaker at levels where players cannot fully exploit their full functionality.

4. I did not deliberately omit any recent results, I simply took them from the first page of the Liquipedia calendar of major events.

5. People who say 'so you need to be good to play terran' are completely missing the point of this post. The argument is not that the other races don't require skill, its that Terran has different skill thresholds that make balancing the race difficult across multiple levels.

6. I'm not discussing bronze-platinum level players etc. As you'll note, the only direct references I've made have been to top level tournaments around the world. I don't think Blizzard mind if bronze-masters is not perfectly balanced, but I would argue that one of their objectives is to have a fairly level playing field across both the GSL as well as these higher level tournaments that foreign progamers compete in.


The underlying logic of this post is true; if different races require more multitasking/micro or punish lack of multitasking/micro harder than others, then balancing the game for multiple skill levels has a fundamental flaw. In broodwar I would argue that multitasking owness (during battles or otherwise) was fairly evenly spread between the races, but in its current state this is not necessarily true for SC2. The fact that it is Terran that appears to be 'the micro race' is coincidental; if units were different it could easily be Protoss or Zerg. I realise that this is a difficult concept to confer to people and I probably haven't done the best job of it but hopefully this clears things up a bit.

Perhaps this means that simple buffs/nerfs to individual units is not the correct way for Blizzard to be balancing the game, but instead, trying to rework some of the units themselves. Hopefully HOTS will rectify this problem a bit, and I'm sure its something the Blizzard team have been considering for a while. + Show Spoiler +

On November 30 2011 14:03 canikizu wrote:

Terran got punished for bad micro.

On December 05 2011 09:02 vaderseven wrote:


My own experience. Conversations with players I know such as nrgmonk. Watching a very large % of the pro games that are put into vods and a large amount of replays.

The whole general attitude of Terran being the race that sets the pace of a game supports this as well.

On December 05 2011 12:08 Sajaki wrote:
My quick opinions on the subject, as I play both races. . . .

As Protoss, I feel that the micro is more clutch, as in with FF, if you screw up your forcefields (especially in the early-mid game) It can very well cost you the game. Good micro and bad micro can mean life and death in that regard.

As terran, I feel you are allowed to make more mistakes with your micro and not get punished horribly, however i feel that (to make up for this) you have to micro MORE.

Early game, Toss requires more micro then Terran in order to survive (2 rax, 1-1-1, etc). Midgame and lategame, however, I would say that the Terran player has to micro more in order to come out ahead in a fight. There is no way anyone can argue that chargelot archon is more micro intensive the MMMG, Chargelot archon is the epitome of A-Move. The micro intensive part is with casting feedback and storm, which is matched in difficulty with EMP + snipe. But the terran has to stutter step (for his life btw), and whilst stutter stepping in itself isn't very complicated, it requires a lot more time effort and attention then, say, forcefields.

So, to satisfy both sides (?) I would say that Protoss micro is Quality over Quantity, screwing up can be very costly, especially early/mid game. And Terran is Quantity over Quality, in that screwing up wont end the game (usually), but it requires much more time as you have to micro hard over long durations.

On December 05 2011 16:05 Zombo Joe wrote:
I feel like the biggest problem with Terran is the lack of map control due to how every unit is mega slow with the exception of Hellions which are terrible against anything but Zealots Marines and Zerglings. The only map control Terran can get is drops and banshees, both are denied in the same fashion. I feel like spidermines would be enough and maybe a tank buff to make them not horrible against Toss.
It seems really silly for Terran to go Bio, a style based around mobility when Bio is slower than everything Zerg and Toss have. And no stimming across the map is a dumb idea. However Bio is pretty legit in TvT.

Other than Thorzain, are there any other foreigner Terrans that can consistently beat koreans?

On December 05 2011 16:05 Zombo Joe wrote:
I feel like the biggest problem with Terran is the lack of map control due to how every unit is mega slow with the exception of Hellions which are terrible against anything but Zealots Marines and Zerglings. The only map control Terran can get is drops and banshees, both are denied in the same fashion. I feel like spidermines would be enough and maybe a tank buff to make them not horrible against Toss.
It seems really silly for Terran to go Bio, a style based around mobility when Bio is slower than everything Zerg and Toss have. And no stimming across the map is a dumb idea. However Bio is pretty legit in TvT.

Other than Thorzain, are there any other foreigner Terrans that can consistently beat koreans?

On December 05 2011 16:39 Lavi wrote:


To be fair... bio is faster than protoss ball because their main aoe colossus and templar are slow, so it naturally slows down the army, and getting in the wrong position will get them picked off from a good terran with faster viking and ghosts...

Watch puma vs hero nasl 2 game 6 to see my point... but of course puma is puma, and it takes a ton of multitasking and apm to constantly move your units around, do side distractions, etc. to pull the protoss ball around so that the slower units get into bad positions and are able to be picked off by your ghost /vikings... definitely something not every terran can do but the game should be balanced around pro level anyways ...

On December 05 2011 09:42 DrowSwordsman wrote:
Also, in terms of carpal tunnel and wrist disorders, it's really silly to blame that on the race. There are lots of things that factor into having wrist nerve damage, such as genetic susceptibility and just having poor posture...

On December 05 2011 16:06 Beece wrote:
fundamental problem with Terran.....Marines