|
On December 10 2011 00:32 gruff wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 00:25 Xalorian wrote:
Terran were dominating Toss for almost a year before Nov. All this time, Terran were just saying in EVERY SINGLE balance thread, that Toss should just Learn 2 play, and that Terran were more skilled and that was why.
Now that Toss had the high end of the stick... for only a MONTH... they are crying to the nerf.
Hypocrites?
I'm not even playing Toss, but for god fucking sake, can we wait another month or two before crying at the imbalance? There was not even that many games played during that month. And it's the most balanced month yet. 49,1% win rate for terran, how can they cry when they were in the complete denial when they were at 58%? I don't even get it. It's possible it's different people crying you know? 
I'm sure that if we actually look at it, many terran crying were telling protoss to L2P in older thread. It's the case on the official SC2 forum, that's for sure.
|
I don't care if I lose, but its just sad when you go watch a replay vs P and you see yourself having to micro crazy in an engagement and you switch to P camera view and they just a move their chargelots and archons. Sadly the only micro I see P doing is moving their lots back to not get kited...its even more stupid to watch when they have a few storms in there. Looking at everything else we are pretty even yet somehow they come out ahead with very minimal micro involved. And if i do majority of the engagement all they have to do is fall back to a pylon while my units are walking across the screen... Personally I'd be a little embarrassed playing toss and in MY OPINION the lack of skill it takes to get wins. Before playing seriously I randomed played P and Z quite a bit in 1s and 2s, and even back then i didn't think either took as much skill as T, seems like any little mistake would cost you the game, regardless of mules, because mules dont make you build units faster.
|
Wow now protoss has the highest winrate in korea and terran has the lowest winrate internationally
|
On December 10 2011 00:55 Superneenja wrote:
I don't care if I lose, but its just sad when you go watch a replay vs P and you see yourself having to micro crazy in an engagement and you switch to P camera view and they just a move their chargelots and archons. Sadly the only micro I see P doing is moving their lots back to not get kited...its even more stupid to watch when they have a few storms in there. Looking at everything else we are pretty even yet somehow they come out ahead with very minimal micro involved. And if i do majority of the engagement all they have to do is fall back to a pylon while my units are walking across the screen... Personally I'd be a little embarrassed playing toss and in MY OPINION the lack of skill it takes to get wins. Before playing seriously I randomed played P and Z quite a bit in 1s and 2s, and even back then i didn't think either took as much skill as T, seems like any little mistake would cost you the game, regardless of mules, because mules dont make you build units faster.
It's arguably true that Terran is mechanically harder than protoss at lower level when you basically have a harder time with your hotkeys and with your hand speeds, but that's pretty much it, in my opinion It's actually easier, at least under master league, to get win as terran, since you can just choose a build and execute the same build every single game without going away from that. If toss don't want to all in, they have to adapt and be reactive. Zerg even more. And it's always the terran that dictate the speed of the game.
No matter what league you actually are, if you are not GM, you will have a 50% win rate, since it's the way that the ladder is working. If you have more than 50% win rate, you will get promoted, no matter what. So, actually, there's no way to know if races are balance or not under GM. There's easier and harder race to play at lower level, but it has nothing to do with balance. And if I look at my super long list of replay on SC2Gears, Zerg have the higher replay and average unspent ressource in Bronze-Plat. Terran have the lower. It could means that Zerg is harder and Terran is the easiest.
But this thread is about tournament level stats, and in pretty much every replay I watched recently, almost all Protoss who had success, had higher APM than their Terran opponent. Sometime WAY HIGHER.
|
The only thing funny an interesting about this post is that people are still whining about the Khadarin Amulet so many month after the removal.
|
On December 10 2011 01:19 Xalorian wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 00:55 Superneenja wrote:
I don't care if I lose, but its just sad when you go watch a replay vs P and you see yourself having to micro crazy in an engagement and you switch to P camera view and they just a move their chargelots and archons. Sadly the only micro I see P doing is moving their lots back to not get kited...its even more stupid to watch when they have a few storms in there. Looking at everything else we are pretty even yet somehow they come out ahead with very minimal micro involved. And if i do majority of the engagement all they have to do is fall back to a pylon while my units are walking across the screen... Personally I'd be a little embarrassed playing toss and in MY OPINION the lack of skill it takes to get wins. Before playing seriously I randomed played P and Z quite a bit in 1s and 2s, and even back then i didn't think either took as much skill as T, seems like any little mistake would cost you the game, regardless of mules, because mules dont make you build units faster. It's arguably true that Terran is mechanically harder than protoss at lower level when you basically have a harder time with your hotkeys and with your hand speeds, but that's pretty much it, in my opinion It's actually easier, at least under master league, to get win as terran, since you can just choose a build and execute the same build every single game without going away from that. If toss don't want to all in, they have to adapt and be reactive. Zerg even more. And it's always the terran that dictate the speed of the game. No matter what league you actually are, if you are not GM, you will have a 50% win rate, since it's the way that the ladder is working. So, actually, there's no way to know if races are balance or not under GM. There's easier and harder race to play at lower level, but it has nothing to do with balance. But this thread is about tournament level stats, and in pretty much every replay I watched recently, almost all Protoss who had success, had higher APM than their Terran opponent. Sometime WAY HIGHER.
Your first statement is completely false, terran is the reactive race in Terran vs Protoss if you play bio. You need to watch out for 1 base and 2 base all ins wich there are about 10 off(4 gate, 5 gate, 3 gate star, 3 gate robo, 6 gate, 6 gate robo, warp prism all in, 2 base collosus) You need to react perfectly to all of these, there are probably more and each has it's own veration. Then when you get into the mid game you have to choose the right tech, ghosts or vikings. And you have to react properly to a double forge build.
Defending against drops is where protoss is being reactive, but with the warp prism being really good right now terran has to do that aswell. You also have to react good against dt's, early and lategame. Also because late game is such a bitch for terran it's really easy for a low level toss to just do a build that's safe against everything whilst sacrificing some eco and just get into the lategame where the terran has to do alot more tasks then the protoss.
Ofcourse this goes the same way for toss, but it's just a little bit easier for a low level toss to just say, well i'm going to sac some eco for safety and get into the lategame and in your tech choice you don't have to react to the terran tech.
|
Protoss imba in Korea! Wowza!
|
On December 10 2011 01:23 Recognizable wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 01:19 Xalorian wrote:On December 10 2011 00:55 Superneenja wrote:
I don't care if I lose, but its just sad when you go watch a replay vs P and you see yourself having to micro crazy in an engagement and you switch to P camera view and they just a move their chargelots and archons. Sadly the only micro I see P doing is moving their lots back to not get kited...its even more stupid to watch when they have a few storms in there. Looking at everything else we are pretty even yet somehow they come out ahead with very minimal micro involved. And if i do majority of the engagement all they have to do is fall back to a pylon while my units are walking across the screen... Personally I'd be a little embarrassed playing toss and in MY OPINION the lack of skill it takes to get wins. Before playing seriously I randomed played P and Z quite a bit in 1s and 2s, and even back then i didn't think either took as much skill as T, seems like any little mistake would cost you the game, regardless of mules, because mules dont make you build units faster. It's arguably true that Terran is mechanically harder than protoss at lower level when you basically have a harder time with your hotkeys and with your hand speeds, but that's pretty much it, in my opinion It's actually easier, at least under master league, to get win as terran, since you can just choose a build and execute the same build every single game without going away from that. If toss don't want to all in, they have to adapt and be reactive. Zerg even more. And it's always the terran that dictate the speed of the game. No matter what league you actually are, if you are not GM, you will have a 50% win rate, since it's the way that the ladder is working. So, actually, there's no way to know if races are balance or not under GM. There's easier and harder race to play at lower level, but it has nothing to do with balance. But this thread is about tournament level stats, and in pretty much every replay I watched recently, almost all Protoss who had success, had higher APM than their Terran opponent. Sometime WAY HIGHER. Your first statement is completely false, terran is the reactive race in Terran vs Protoss if you play bio. You need to watch out for 1 base and 2 base all ins wich there are about 10 off(4 gate, 5 gate, 3 gate star, 3 gate robo, 6 gate, 6 gate robo, warp prism all in, 2 base collosus) You need to react perfectly to all of these, there are probably more and each has it's own veration. Then when you get into the mid game you have to choose the right tech, ghosts or vikings. And you have to react properly to a double forge build. Defending against drops is where protoss is being reactive, but with the warp prism being really good right now terran has to do that aswell. You also have to react good against dt's, early and lategame. Also because late game is such a bitch for terran it's really easy for a low level toss to just do a build that's safe against everything whilst sacrificing some eco and just get into the lategame where the terran has to do alot more tasks then the protoss. Ofcourse this goes the same way for toss, but it's just a little bit easier for a low level toss to just say, well i'm going to sac some eco for safety and get into the lategame and in your tech choice you don't have to react to the terran tech.
Reading comprehension, please.
I was talking about lower league. No, in lower league, terran is not reactive at all. Every terran is actually just going for the same build every single game no matter what, with the same army composition, and can do fairly well against anything, since noobies don't have the apm and the control to use infestor, storm or nice FF.
There is no such thing as Warp Prism play in lower league. It's so rare that noobs don't even have to care about it, since even if they don't pay attention and go for 3 racks expand every single game, they will lose maybe once or twice to warp prism, in 300 games.
Terran may be the hardest race to play at higher level, i'm not even arguing about that. But it's the easiest in the lower league.
|
On December 09 2011 23:11 ZorBa.G wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2011 22:24 Big J wrote:On December 09 2011 08:45 ZorBa.G wrote:On December 09 2011 08:19 Big J wrote:On December 09 2011 07:25 ZorBa.G wrote:
The biggest problem here is;
The skill gap between Wood league and Professional level for Protoss is MUCH smaller then the skill gap for Terran.
What grinds my gears is that Terran is continued with this burden to micro more and more as they keep getting nerfed on Protoss accord.
I think it's obvious what the solution is;
Fix this shit design of a race (Protoss) Blizzard and stop nerfing Terran. The only thing you guys are doing is increasing the skill gap for Terrans whilst minimizing it for Toss. why is the skill gap for Terrans that big in your opinion? I myself as a mid-high master zerg player have no problem with playing Terran around mid-high diamond level without any micro/multitasking training for them... On the other hand I have huge troubles with forcefielding, my stalker kiting usually always leads to a lot of hull damage and I keep on missing warp ins. So from my personal experiences, I would say that Protoss is way harder to play overall than Terran for me, at least if I'm not doing a plain colossus or gateway allin. (note this is ONLY personal experience and note that maybe "zerg skills" simply transfer better to "terran skills" than to "protoss skills") On December 09 2011 07:25 ZorBa.G wrote:
I'm not getting paid to balance the game out, you are Blizzard. Stop trying to find the easy way out trying to nerf Terran, I think it's time to realize that you really screwed up the Toss race in the first place and it's becoming evident you need to fix it.
EDIT: And who is the Einstein that came up with the idea of warp mechanics? Seriously, doesn't it occur to you that one of the fine aspects of RTS games is the timing of moving your army from your base on foot to your opponents base. It's like you designed this race, then went SHIT we have a big problem here (no one new about before it was released) and said oh well "lets just let these guys teleport in front of the Terran/Zergs base." Smart idea indeed! Apparently Starcraft 2 is an RTS and apparently there is warp in in it and apparently it is one of the best games out there, for forum posters like you and me probably the best (else we would play and write about something else). In other great RTS games you will find similar abilities to warp in ("ambush" from C&C generals f.e.), or simply machanics that curcumvent army movement at all (nukes looooooooooooooooooong rang artillery) and even in Starcraft:BW and Starcraft 2 there is another such mechanism that works against such timings: Nydus Network. So I guess no, those walk out timings are not "one of the fine apects of RTS", but "one of the fine aspects of Race X in game Y". PS: Even with all of Warp Ins problems, I love the idea behind it... It just makes Protoss feel different from Terran gameplaywise. (each race no has unique production: larva, "normal RTS rally", warp in) Why is the skill gap that big in my opinion? - IIRC we have 1 Terran going to Blizzcon so far... MVP. - Name me some outstanding foreign Terrans atm? The only ones doing well are the top Terrans in GSL jjakji, MVP, fin (ForGG) looks promising. In Korea. - Look at the general consensus on SC2 forums, I must be imagining things when I see so many Terrans complaining about late game T v P - In my own experiences where my go to build was a 1 rax fe where I "had" an 80% win rate against Toss until recently with the Protoss who now headbutts their keyboard into the 1 A Chargelot/Archon compositon.... I still have not won 1 single game against Toss yet (in the late game). So I consider myself at 0% win rate. Yes I do win still, however it is only when I go for the all-in builds now. - It's not just me saying this, browse over the forums more and you will also find pro gamers saying the same thing if at any time you might think what I say lacks credibility. I can go on for ages with this........ To you next point; Stalker kiting? Force fielding? really?...... You need to come play Terran..... I'm not going to elaborate on this much further because I think we both know here that what you said is utter bullshit in a fail attempt to rebut. I urge you to download ANY professional replay of your choice where the Terran engages a Protoss army, check out the apm whilst engaging. You can't tell me there is much difference from a Pro toss player 1 A'ing a chargelot/archon army then a wood leaguer doing the same thing. Your argument for the whole warp mechanics is pathetic.... it really seems like your trying to grab onto anything here to try and rebut me. Trying to compare nydus network to warp in? Really dude? Come on... Yeah and now I could ask you to name outstanding Protoss players in the GSL last season: Oz... that's it. I could ask you to look at the general consensus in any SC2 forum from the other races about terran: ZvT: "Zerg has to outplay Terran 20mins to get 1one broodlord push. If it fails mass ghost is gonna win against any zerg composition" PvT: "Protoss can't do anything all game long until it has a 200supply deathball, which can't be split and the moment you move out 4marauders kill your whole base in 5sec" You're not imagining that Terrans are whining all over the place, just as much as Protoss and Zergs are whining. (btw I wish any Terran forum poster would stick to all the "zerg players are whiners, terrans would never do that"-stuff they said over time. But apparently, Terrans are just as whiny as any other race. Maybe even more. They are whining about not having completly broken stats anymore, while Protoss and Zergs at least had statistics on their side for whining at some times) I could tell you that if you had 80% winrate against Protoss, you were either way better than your protoss opponents OR the game was pretty broken before. If you only consider hardcore macro wins to be "true wins", I urge you to go and cut corners hardcore (15CC,15CC, 15CC, 15CC as a BO...). You really shouldn't lose any game anymore. As I hadn't checked Pro-APM for a long time I was courious about the "Terran Pros have higher in battle APM in PvT" and opened a random Puma vs Hero game (from IPL). Your statement is simply true. Heros APM were better overall and his in battle peaks were 300-400 against 250-300 from Puma, but with Puma having a little more solid in battle APM (always above 200, while Hero's APM were sometimes wildly going to up to 350+ and then dropping again under 100 for a second). My arguement about Warp In was focusing on the part were you declared everything bullshit that wasn't army movement across the map. Nydus worm is an example for that. Anyways, this whole discussion is pathetic. Terran is nearly as much represented than any other race in any ladder league. Terran is overrepresented in the GSL and other Korean Tournaments (= the highest level of play) and well represented in most tournaments worldwide(like any race has it's better and worse tournaments) The winrate stats of Korea (=highest level) are still over 50% and the matchup that is said to be the "best balanced" (TvZ) is and has nearly always been hugely in favor of Terran. It's only TvP that has gone from completly broken in favor of Terran to Protossfavored FOR ONLY ONE MONTH. There is absolutly no data that would suggest that Terran has any major flaw at any level of play... I'm sorry dude, but for the first couple of paragraphs all I read was blah blah GSL blah blah.... Did you forget that I was merely talking about the skill gap of Terran and Toss at lower to professional levels? Secondly, funny thing is I was never much of a ghost user before the emp nerf.... and yes, I won long macro games without it. After the emp nerf, I learned really fast to start using it due to double forge builds..... and that doesn't even help me. But my personal QQ here and my own flaws are not the point. The point I'm trying to get across here is, I don't believe it's right that a Chargelot/Archon composition should only require a 1 a whereas the Terran has to work so much harder during the engagement. I'm going to say this again..... Nydus Worm? Really? Your still trying to hang on to this? I'm still not even going to bother with this, it's quiet pathetic. Your right, this whole discussion is pathetic. There is no point trying to talk to people that can't see things from your side of the story and are only interested in finding any pathetic way to rebut you. It really is a waste of time. If you have taken any notice to what I have been saying all along, my main argument has been about the Chargelot/Archon composition. I'm sure I speak for many Terrans here when I say that there is nothing worse then trading armies with that composition and then suffer a whole new wave of Chargelot warp-in straight after. Especially knowing during that whole time you were frantically smashing the shit out of your keyboard whilst the Protoss is having a cup of coffee back at his base macro'ing up. But yeah, lets see how things pan out over the next few months. I'm dying to know what that new age T v P composition is! I'm sorry mods, I'm sure there is one of you who wants to give me a warning or whatever, but this is my last post in this thread. I don't like talking to brick walls.
I feel your pain dude. I myself refrain to post most of the times in the forums. I feel like the whole discussion makes no sense. Here we are trying to argue that Terran has a harder time (micro wise) in TvP. But the truth is Protoss players will just say this is not true. It's not a matter of arguments anymore. It has become a matter of faith. They just believe this is not the case. It's like trying to tell people that gypsies don't have psychic powers. They want to believe they do, and that's it.
Maybe deep down they actually consider this as a possibility, but they will never ever admit it in this forum. You know, there is a psychological side in all this discussion. Admitting that your race is actually easier than another race must be devastating.
|
On December 10 2011 01:43 Xalorian wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 01:23 Recognizable wrote:On December 10 2011 01:19 Xalorian wrote:On December 10 2011 00:55 Superneenja wrote:
I don't care if I lose, but its just sad when you go watch a replay vs P and you see yourself having to micro crazy in an engagement and you switch to P camera view and they just a move their chargelots and archons. Sadly the only micro I see P doing is moving their lots back to not get kited...its even more stupid to watch when they have a few storms in there. Looking at everything else we are pretty even yet somehow they come out ahead with very minimal micro involved. And if i do majority of the engagement all they have to do is fall back to a pylon while my units are walking across the screen... Personally I'd be a little embarrassed playing toss and in MY OPINION the lack of skill it takes to get wins. Before playing seriously I randomed played P and Z quite a bit in 1s and 2s, and even back then i didn't think either took as much skill as T, seems like any little mistake would cost you the game, regardless of mules, because mules dont make you build units faster. It's arguably true that Terran is mechanically harder than protoss at lower level when you basically have a harder time with your hotkeys and with your hand speeds, but that's pretty much it, in my opinion It's actually easier, at least under master league, to get win as terran, since you can just choose a build and execute the same build every single game without going away from that. If toss don't want to all in, they have to adapt and be reactive. Zerg even more. And it's always the terran that dictate the speed of the game. No matter what league you actually are, if you are not GM, you will have a 50% win rate, since it's the way that the ladder is working. So, actually, there's no way to know if races are balance or not under GM. There's easier and harder race to play at lower level, but it has nothing to do with balance. But this thread is about tournament level stats, and in pretty much every replay I watched recently, almost all Protoss who had success, had higher APM than their Terran opponent. Sometime WAY HIGHER. Your first statement is completely false, terran is the reactive race in Terran vs Protoss if you play bio. You need to watch out for 1 base and 2 base all ins wich there are about 10 off(4 gate, 5 gate, 3 gate star, 3 gate robo, 6 gate, 6 gate robo, warp prism all in, 2 base collosus) You need to react perfectly to all of these, there are probably more and each has it's own veration. Then when you get into the mid game you have to choose the right tech, ghosts or vikings. And you have to react properly to a double forge build. Defending against drops is where protoss is being reactive, but with the warp prism being really good right now terran has to do that aswell. You also have to react good against dt's, early and lategame. Also because late game is such a bitch for terran it's really easy for a low level toss to just do a build that's safe against everything whilst sacrificing some eco and just get into the lategame where the terran has to do alot more tasks then the protoss. Ofcourse this goes the same way for toss, but it's just a little bit easier for a low level toss to just say, well i'm going to sac some eco for safety and get into the lategame and in your tech choice you don't have to react to the terran tech. Reading comprehension, please. I was talking about lower league. No, in lower league, terran is not reactive at all. Every terran is actually just going for the same build every single game no matter what, with the same army composition, and can do fairly well against anything, since noobies don't have the apm and the control to use infestor, storm or nice FF. There is no such thing as Warp Prism play in lower league. It's so rare that noobs don't even have to care about it, since even if they don't pay attention and go for 3 racks expand every single game, they will lose maybe once or twice to warp prism, in 300 games. Terran may be the hardest race to play at higher level, i'm not even arguing about that. But it's the easiest in the lower league.
Not sure I agree 100% with this. I think it scales down even more. It doesnt take that much apm to use infestors,storm of FF and even using these things half ass-edly* gives a huge advantage in lower leagues especially if the terran player has just as low apm as you. I have another account i use to offrace, and I find it much easier to play the other races, they seem a lot more forgiving to me. Top 20 diamond as T, got to Diamond playing P and Z playing less than half the games. Don't know if thats just in general my play is better, or because of having to deal with mechanics and gameplay of terran.
|
On December 10 2011 01:59 petro1987 wrote:
I feel your pain dude. I myself refrain to post most of the times in the forums. I feel like the whole discussion makes no sense. Here we are trying to argue that Terran has a harder time (micro wise) in TvP. But the truth is Protoss players will just say this is not true. It's not a matter of arguments anymore. It has become a matter of faith. They just believe this is not the case. It's like trying to tell people that gypsies don't have psychic powers. They want to believe they do, and that's it.
The irony in this post is astounding.
What if it works both ways? What if it is a matter of faith for both sides, and you are the ones believing gypsy fairies?
|
On December 10 2011 02:09 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 01:59 petro1987 wrote:
I feel your pain dude. I myself refrain to post most of the times in the forums. I feel like the whole discussion makes no sense. Here we are trying to argue that Terran has a harder time (micro wise) in TvP. But the truth is Protoss players will just say this is not true. It's not a matter of arguments anymore. It has become a matter of faith. They just believe this is not the case. It's like trying to tell people that gypsies don't have psychic powers. They want to believe they do, and that's it.
The irony in this post is astounding. What if it works both ways? What if it is a matter of faith for both sides, and you are the ones believing gypsy fairies?
Your post just further proves my point. There's no argument that Terran players could provide that would convince Protoss players that is the case that TvP is harder micro wise for Terran. It has become a matter of faith.
If that's not the case, please help us all and answer: what would it take for Protoss players even consider the possibility that Terran is harder micro wise in TvP?
|
On December 10 2011 02:04 Superneenja wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 01:43 Xalorian wrote:On December 10 2011 01:23 Recognizable wrote:On December 10 2011 01:19 Xalorian wrote:On December 10 2011 00:55 Superneenja wrote:
I don't care if I lose, but its just sad when you go watch a replay vs P and you see yourself having to micro crazy in an engagement and you switch to P camera view and they just a move their chargelots and archons. Sadly the only micro I see P doing is moving their lots back to not get kited...its even more stupid to watch when they have a few storms in there. Looking at everything else we are pretty even yet somehow they come out ahead with very minimal micro involved. And if i do majority of the engagement all they have to do is fall back to a pylon while my units are walking across the screen... Personally I'd be a little embarrassed playing toss and in MY OPINION the lack of skill it takes to get wins. Before playing seriously I randomed played P and Z quite a bit in 1s and 2s, and even back then i didn't think either took as much skill as T, seems like any little mistake would cost you the game, regardless of mules, because mules dont make you build units faster. It's arguably true that Terran is mechanically harder than protoss at lower level when you basically have a harder time with your hotkeys and with your hand speeds, but that's pretty much it, in my opinion It's actually easier, at least under master league, to get win as terran, since you can just choose a build and execute the same build every single game without going away from that. If toss don't want to all in, they have to adapt and be reactive. Zerg even more. And it's always the terran that dictate the speed of the game. No matter what league you actually are, if you are not GM, you will have a 50% win rate, since it's the way that the ladder is working. So, actually, there's no way to know if races are balance or not under GM. There's easier and harder race to play at lower level, but it has nothing to do with balance. But this thread is about tournament level stats, and in pretty much every replay I watched recently, almost all Protoss who had success, had higher APM than their Terran opponent. Sometime WAY HIGHER. Your first statement is completely false, terran is the reactive race in Terran vs Protoss if you play bio. You need to watch out for 1 base and 2 base all ins wich there are about 10 off(4 gate, 5 gate, 3 gate star, 3 gate robo, 6 gate, 6 gate robo, warp prism all in, 2 base collosus) You need to react perfectly to all of these, there are probably more and each has it's own veration. Then when you get into the mid game you have to choose the right tech, ghosts or vikings. And you have to react properly to a double forge build. Defending against drops is where protoss is being reactive, but with the warp prism being really good right now terran has to do that aswell. You also have to react good against dt's, early and lategame. Also because late game is such a bitch for terran it's really easy for a low level toss to just do a build that's safe against everything whilst sacrificing some eco and just get into the lategame where the terran has to do alot more tasks then the protoss. Ofcourse this goes the same way for toss, but it's just a little bit easier for a low level toss to just say, well i'm going to sac some eco for safety and get into the lategame and in your tech choice you don't have to react to the terran tech. Reading comprehension, please. I was talking about lower league. No, in lower league, terran is not reactive at all. Every terran is actually just going for the same build every single game no matter what, with the same army composition, and can do fairly well against anything, since noobies don't have the apm and the control to use infestor, storm or nice FF. There is no such thing as Warp Prism play in lower league. It's so rare that noobs don't even have to care about it, since even if they don't pay attention and go for 3 racks expand every single game, they will lose maybe once or twice to warp prism, in 300 games. Terran may be the hardest race to play at higher level, i'm not even arguing about that. But it's the easiest in the lower league. Not sure I agree 100% with this. I think it scales down even more. It doesnt take that much apm to use infestors,storm of FF and even using these things half ass-edly* gives a huge advantage in lower leagues especially if the terran player has just as low apm as you. I have another account i use to offrace, and I find it much easier to play the other races, they seem a lot more forgiving to me. Top 20 diamond as T, got to Diamond playing P and Z playing less than half the games. Don't know if thats just in general my play is better, or because of having to deal with mechanics and gameplay of terran.
It doesn't take that much APM, but it does take better control and decision making than what < diamond-master have.
And saying that Zerg is more forgiving than Terran < Diamond is completly ludicrous. Micro is not even a factor in those league, and Terran macro is WAY more forgivin than Zerg. Zerg have to choose between drone and units production, while having a hard time scouting (don't tell me that Zerg scouting is easier than Terran...) the opponent, not missing an inject and not missing an overlord, while expanding at a decent time and teching thoroughly. And Zerg HAVE to be reactive, even at low level, there is no way that you can play blindly and win 50% of your games.
Until High diamond-master, Terran can just go for one of the many viable opening and do it every single games, and still win enough to get promoted at the end... what Zerg can not. Protoss can, but will have an harder time... except if they go for a cheese, but that's not the point here, since Terran even have more and harder to defend cheese.
|
I think part of the big swing in the PvT rates is that protoss players found ways to hold off 1-1-1, that's the reason it favoured terran so much in october. Protoss seem like they are also playing less greedy against terran than they were for a while and a lot of terrans are still doing openings to punish greediness that sets them behind if the protoss isn't being greedy.
|
On December 10 2011 02:23 petro1987 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 02:09 SeaSwift wrote:On December 10 2011 01:59 petro1987 wrote:
I feel your pain dude. I myself refrain to post most of the times in the forums. I feel like the whole discussion makes no sense. Here we are trying to argue that Terran has a harder time (micro wise) in TvP. But the truth is Protoss players will just say this is not true. It's not a matter of arguments anymore. It has become a matter of faith. They just believe this is not the case. It's like trying to tell people that gypsies don't have psychic powers. They want to believe they do, and that's it.
The irony in this post is astounding. What if it works both ways? What if it is a matter of faith for both sides, and you are the ones believing gypsy fairies? Your post just further proves my point. There's no argument that Terran players could provide that would convince Protoss players that is the case that TvP is harder micro wise for Terran. It has become a matter of faith.
You are pretty much right. Its a pointless discussion in most cases. The only way you could get data was if you could in some way calculate the best way to move/cast spells/target fire and program and ai to play out different scenarios. Then you could look at the difference in apm for the two sides and look at which side needed the most apm for perfect micro. Because the skill ceiling for marine/marauder micro and blink stalker micro etc is soooo high, so its pretty pointless to discuss which is the most micro intensive... I dont think any players is even close to reaching any skill ceiling, so how can we discuss which side is more micro intensive?
|
On December 10 2011 02:23 petro1987 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 02:09 SeaSwift wrote:On December 10 2011 01:59 petro1987 wrote:
I feel your pain dude. I myself refrain to post most of the times in the forums. I feel like the whole discussion makes no sense. Here we are trying to argue that Terran has a harder time (micro wise) in TvP. But the truth is Protoss players will just say this is not true. It's not a matter of arguments anymore. It has become a matter of faith. They just believe this is not the case. It's like trying to tell people that gypsies don't have psychic powers. They want to believe they do, and that's it.
The irony in this post is astounding. What if it works both ways? What if it is a matter of faith for both sides, and you are the ones believing gypsy fairies? Your post just further proves my point. There's no argument that Terran players could provide that would convince Protoss players that is the case that TvP is harder micro wise for Terran. It has become a matter of faith. If that's not the case, please help us all and answer: what would it take for Protoss players even consider the possibility that Terran is harder micro wise in TvP?
Your post just further proves our point. There's no argument that Protoss players could provide that would convince Terran players that it's the case, that PvT is harder micro wise for Protoss. It has become a matter of faith.
If that's not the case, please help us all and answer : what would it take for Terran players to even consider the possibility that Protoss is harder micro wise in PvT?
You funny.
|
On December 10 2011 00:37 Xalorian wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 00:32 gruff wrote:On December 10 2011 00:25 Xalorian wrote:
Terran were dominating Toss for almost a year before Nov. All this time, Terran were just saying in EVERY SINGLE balance thread, that Toss should just Learn 2 play, and that Terran were more skilled and that was why.
Now that Toss had the high end of the stick... for only a MONTH... they are crying to the nerf.
Hypocrites?
I'm not even playing Toss, but for god fucking sake, can we wait another month or two before crying at the imbalance? There was not even that many games played during that month. And it's the most balanced month yet. 49,1% win rate for terran, how can they cry when they were in the complete denial when they were at 58%? I don't even get it. It's possible it's different people crying you know? I'm sure that if we actually look at it, many terran crying were telling protoss to L2P in older thread. It's the case on the official SC2 forum, that's for sure.
You mean Terrans who thought Protoss was fine or great before the last patch are complaining that Protoss is broken now? Those crazy people, being consistent with their view of TvP!
|
On December 10 2011 01:43 Xalorian wrote:
I was talking about lower league. No, in lower league, terran is not reactive at all. Every terran is actually just going for the same build every single game no matter what, with the same army composition, and can do fairly well against anything, since noobies don't have the apm and the control to use infestor, storm or nice FF.
There is no such thing as Warp Prism play in lower league. It's so rare that noobs don't even have to care about it, since even if they don't pay attention and go for 3 racks expand every single game, they will lose maybe once or twice to warp prism, in 300 games.
Terran may be the hardest race to play at higher level, i'm not even arguing about that. But it's the easiest in the lower league.
That doesnt make any sense, cant players on low level make chargelots and baneglings?
Because terran army efficiency againts these units is heavily dependant on micro, so i dont see how lower level Terrans have it easier than high level Terrans, its imo other way around.
Race distribution show that Teeran is underepresented in middle leagues and doing quite ok in highest leagues
|
On December 10 2011 02:35 aksfjh wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 00:37 Xalorian wrote:On December 10 2011 00:32 gruff wrote:On December 10 2011 00:25 Xalorian wrote:
Terran were dominating Toss for almost a year before Nov. All this time, Terran were just saying in EVERY SINGLE balance thread, that Toss should just Learn 2 play, and that Terran were more skilled and that was why.
Now that Toss had the high end of the stick... for only a MONTH... they are crying to the nerf.
Hypocrites?
I'm not even playing Toss, but for god fucking sake, can we wait another month or two before crying at the imbalance? There was not even that many games played during that month. And it's the most balanced month yet. 49,1% win rate for terran, how can they cry when they were in the complete denial when they were at 58%? I don't even get it. It's possible it's different people crying you know? I'm sure that if we actually look at it, many terran crying were telling protoss to L2P in older thread. It's the case on the official SC2 forum, that's for sure. You mean Terrans who thought Protoss was fine or great before the last patch are complaining that Protoss is broken now? Those crazy people, being consistent with their view of TvP!
So, when Terran are saying to Protoss to L2P when stats are showing a 40% win rate is fine, but Protoss saying to Terran to L2P when Terran are at 49% win rate is not, right?
|
On December 10 2011 02:32 Ravnemesteren wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2011 02:23 petro1987 wrote:On December 10 2011 02:09 SeaSwift wrote:On December 10 2011 01:59 petro1987 wrote:
I feel your pain dude. I myself refrain to post most of the times in the forums. I feel like the whole discussion makes no sense. Here we are trying to argue that Terran has a harder time (micro wise) in TvP. But the truth is Protoss players will just say this is not true. It's not a matter of arguments anymore. It has become a matter of faith. They just believe this is not the case. It's like trying to tell people that gypsies don't have psychic powers. They want to believe they do, and that's it.
The irony in this post is astounding. What if it works both ways? What if it is a matter of faith for both sides, and you are the ones believing gypsy fairies? Your post just further proves my point. There's no argument that Terran players could provide that would convince Protoss players that is the case that TvP is harder micro wise for Terran. It has become a matter of faith. You are pretty much right. Its a pointless discussion in most cases. The only way you could get data was if you could in some way calculate the best way to move/cast spells/target fire and program and ai to play out different scenarios. Then you could look at the difference in apm for the two sides and look at which side needed the most apm for perfect micro. Because the skill ceiling for marine/marauder micro and blink stalker micro etc is soooo high, so its pretty pointless to discuss which is the most micro intensive... I dont think any players is even close to reaching any skill ceiling, so how can we discuss which side is more micro intensive?
The experiment you propose would measure the apm needed to reach the skill ceiling. I think a better experiment in order to assess our hypothesis is to make AI programs that are limited to use a reasonable amount of apm in a micro battle and see who would come up on top.
Let's say you make a program that can only use 150 APM (in the best way possible - it's up to the heuristics to decide where such apm would be spent) for both (T and P) in a battle (feel free to propose another number). Whoever comes up on top of such battle is certainly the easier race micro wise. What do you guys think of this experiment?
|
|
|
|
|
|
2709
887
366
250
EPT
