|
On March 27 2012 09:11 canikizu wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 08:56 the`postman wrote:On March 27 2012 08:45 LavaLava wrote:On March 27 2012 08:35 the`postman wrote:
Where is the post that established this? I'm curious in the math that they used. The fact that it is a "designated building drone" doesn't change the fact that unless you are 100% saturated you could have sent that drone to mine getting you 40 minerals per minute (or 20 if you already have two drones on each patch) for the rest of the game.
But the drone is easily replaceable. That's like saying every zergling you lose is DPS lost for the entire game, and then you start to sound like a music producer, claiming you're losing like 2 billion damage/dollars because the game is going on for a while. You just replace it. It costs 50 minerals plus mining time and a larva. buildings cost larva, using a drone as the vector. I don't understand the logic you are using, let's ignore that bad analogy and go for the starcraft related portion. Losing a zergling IS losing DPS for the entire game, it's why losing a mutalisk is so dire when playing zerg, every muta you lose gets you further from the amount you need to get that critical mass so you can actually engage. Every zergling you lose while scouting or failed run bys makes holding the inevitable attack that much more difficult until you are at 200/200. Let's say you're on two bases with 40 drones and three geysers, when you build a "building drone" you are staying at 40 drones, 31 on minerals. If you had instead put that drone onto your minerals you would have been up to 41 drones, with 32 on minerals, meaning you'd be getting 40 addition minerals per minute. Like I said before, unless you are 100% saturated (30 drones at each base) then each drone you build could have been generating either 20 or 40 minerals per minute, depending on your saturation. Yes, but so what? It's the game design that Zerg have a limit, that is sac drone to build stuff. If Zerg always 5,6 drones ahead of the Terran, it doesn't matter if you sac a drone, your economy is still better. It doesn't matter if you're 100% saturated or not, because the enemy still isn't either. It's not about absolutivity, it's about relativity.
Ok now this is just stupid, just because you can make vague statements like "your economy is better" doesn't mean that it being even better doesn't help. Also, the enemy could easily be saturated, Zerg tends to have more bases which means lower levels of saturation.
Lavalava explained it perfectly, your post is absolutely wrong.
|
For me i see terrans all the time, im a diamond zerg on eu. Balance wise i think terrans is good, i dont think they are op anymore you just have to learn the stuff that makes your race strong. And mkp shows that terran is still very good race the 3cc is so good on some maps and not many terrans use it.
|
On March 27 2012 08:28 whoopadeedoo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 08:21 Chaggi wrote:On March 27 2012 08:05 whoopadeedoo wrote:On March 27 2012 07:56 FreddYCooL wrote:
Whats the point of arguing the mechanics? I think we can safely say the mechanically there is no harder race. What the terrans are complaining about is the lack of good and solid T3 units that can complement our armies in the late game. In TvP bio is so flimsy that after a victory you can hardly ever push as bio lacks the strength to beat the rewarped zealots. This meaning that lots of terran die directly after their first army was lost and then have to gg with several thousand minerals and gas stockpiled but unable to use while the protoss can lose several big engagements and still end up fine.
In TvZ the broodlord/infestor is very very hard to beat especially as the zerg quickly can do tech switches to ultras and back to broodlords again. We're arguing mechanics because a group of Terrans are trying to tell everyone it's harder to play their race. I agree it has nothing to do with mechanics and everything to do with a viable T3 unit. I agree the ghost snipe nerf was horrible for TvZ (right idea to nerf snipe against Z T3, totally wrong way to go about it). The fact that we can't lose an army late game - especially close to our base because our reinforcement abilities are so slow. Even if I have a lot of Rax's, a protoss can instantly warp in and I'll just die. Even Zerg larva mechanic is forgiving at a late game stage cause you can instantly remax, but at least the units have to run across. I get what you're saying. This is really only a problem in full 200/200 engagements where one side wins convincining (and yeah, that adds to terran's TvP difficulties late game). Part of me wants to say that it is offset by the fact that Terran army heals quickly and is highly mobile, whereas if you're Toss, once you engage you better be sure you're winning or doing equal damage in that engagement. Or else Toss dies. Terran can retreat. Toss is pretty much the only race that nothing except phoenixes, blink stalkers, and speed prisms can retreat without heavy losses. Different races are different.
Different doesn't mean balanced. One race can still be more demanding. I just wanted to point out your faulty approach of "its supposed to be different" = "all is fine". Difference is good of course, as no one wants a three copies of the same race, but implying "it's different must be working as intended" sounds like wishful thinking to hide darker secrets.
Additionally the Protoss army is actually more mobile than the Terran army as a whole (both races have "dropships", but stalkers can teleport, collosus can cliff travel, zealots have an insta-gap closer and Protoss has warp while marines/mauraders just have stim for movement speed), so Terran's late game macro disadvantage is not offset by that.
|
On March 27 2012 08:50 LavaLava wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 08:48 malaan wrote:
This thread is seriously starting to stagnate from stupid fucking shit.
Why is the thread going on for 150 pages with people retyping the same thing?
Terran is doing badly because it requires uber multi tasking which is harder at lower levels of play. People got bored and switched race. The end!
How about, lets' try to figure out what specific things are to blame, if anything should be done about it, what can be done about it, and how to go about changing whatever needs changing. Then the end.
What needs to be changed make vikings deal double dmg? if a terran scouts broodlords and have viking produktion he can rape that army with easy we have seen that already. The problem is the tech switch, sometimes when zerg gets that army they cant switch again to ultras becouse it cost so much gas. if they cant, zerg looses. on antiga shipyard terran should be better off late game because the zerg should not be able get a 4th. the terran just drops the zerg to death or cut him off ? This is pro level play but thats whats important anyways.
|
Even with vikings its difficult because competent zergs will have a higher corruptor to BL ratio + infestors and queens. The number of units could be different depending on how much the T got ahead early/mid game but its still a ridiculously hard comp to beat head on.
|
On March 27 2012 09:21 DemigodcelpH wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 08:28 whoopadeedoo wrote:On March 27 2012 08:21 Chaggi wrote:On March 27 2012 08:05 whoopadeedoo wrote:On March 27 2012 07:56 FreddYCooL wrote:
Whats the point of arguing the mechanics? I think we can safely say the mechanically there is no harder race. What the terrans are complaining about is the lack of good and solid T3 units that can complement our armies in the late game. In TvP bio is so flimsy that after a victory you can hardly ever push as bio lacks the strength to beat the rewarped zealots. This meaning that lots of terran die directly after their first army was lost and then have to gg with several thousand minerals and gas stockpiled but unable to use while the protoss can lose several big engagements and still end up fine.
In TvZ the broodlord/infestor is very very hard to beat especially as the zerg quickly can do tech switches to ultras and back to broodlords again. We're arguing mechanics because a group of Terrans are trying to tell everyone it's harder to play their race. I agree it has nothing to do with mechanics and everything to do with a viable T3 unit. I agree the ghost snipe nerf was horrible for TvZ (right idea to nerf snipe against Z T3, totally wrong way to go about it). The fact that we can't lose an army late game - especially close to our base because our reinforcement abilities are so slow. Even if I have a lot of Rax's, a protoss can instantly warp in and I'll just die. Even Zerg larva mechanic is forgiving at a late game stage cause you can instantly remax, but at least the units have to run across. I get what you're saying. This is really only a problem in full 200/200 engagements where one side wins convincining (and yeah, that adds to terran's TvP difficulties late game). Part of me wants to say that it is offset by the fact that Terran army heals quickly and is highly mobile, whereas if you're Toss, once you engage you better be sure you're winning or doing equal damage in that engagement. Or else Toss dies. Terran can retreat. Toss is pretty much the only race that nothing except phoenixes, blink stalkers, and speed prisms can retreat without heavy losses. Different races are different. Different doesn't mean balanced. One race can still be more demanding. I just wanted to point out your faulty approach of "its supposed to be different" = "all is fine". Difference is good of course, as no one wants a three copies of the same race, but implying "it's different must be working as intended" sounds like wishful thinking to hide darker secrets. Additionally the Protoss army is actually more mobile than the Terran army as a whole (both races have "dropships", but stalkers can teleport, collosus can cliff travel, zealots have an insta-gap closer and Protoss has warp while marines/mauraders just have stim for movement speed), so Terran's late game macro disadvantage is not offset by that.
Did I really just read that a protoss robo (colossus) army is MORE mobile than a terran bio army? *stunned moment*
Ok, I think you misunderstand how a death ball army works. If protoss cliff walk their colossus and blink their stalkers up on a cliff they will lose. Without the zealots, archons and HT that's an extremely expensive, extremely vulnerable army. Splitting up the death ball removes the 'ball' part, making it just death.
If stalkers harass you, send your vikings to kill their colossus. What are they going to do? Zealots can't harass PFs making the later bases pretty much safe.
The reason the bio-army is considered more mobile is that 2 dropships full of units isn't massively detrimental to the bio-ball army but is very capable of doing a lot of damage to the protoss infrastructure.
In addition terran have air dominance with the vikings they have to have to deal with the colossus while protoss have almost no air units at all. This 'should' make warp prism harass a weak option, especially if terran would just MAKE A FUCKING SENTRY TOWER.
|
I really like tvp but lately i never really win.
I have major problems against toss who just masses up any kind of combination of army, lots of zealots/archons(high templars with storms) and colousses, just all the units. Feels like my t1 marine/marauder ball is eaten like a cake even with 3/3 upgrades against even a smaller TOS army when he doesnt do anything els but A move and controll his templars to storm me.
This is very stressfull cause i have to kite with my army + controll ghosts/vikings, in other words i have to pull off insane macro. Tho i'm improving!, i just have to find a way to get my ghosts around his army to emp the templars without getting feedbacked to death, this is the main issue i have atm.
I have looked on way better terrans then me like empireKas and Dragons stream but honestly they pretty much had the exact same problem i had, only that they managed it slightly better, consider that they controll there units perfectly, tho still dies.
If i got to change the TOS army i would make templars unable turn into an archon if they dont have something like 75energy, this would make it fair and not so forgiving to just derp around with the templars to then after having them turned into the games strongest anti bio unit.
But i really hope Warhounds make mech more interesting against TOS in heart of the swarm because having to play bio all the time is boring D:
|
On March 27 2012 09:40 YyapSsap wrote:
Even with vikings its difficult because competent zergs will have a higher corruptor to BL ratio + infestors and queens. The number of units could be different depending on how much the T got ahead early/mid game but its still a ridiculously hard comp to beat head on.
yes but vikings are better than corruptors if you split them and not get to fungled you can win against an broodlord army. and what about mkps 3cc in to thor blue flames hellion seemed pritty good. The games is so complex its hard right now to see everything.
|
On March 27 2012 09:45 Kharnage wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 09:21 DemigodcelpH wrote:On March 27 2012 08:28 whoopadeedoo wrote:On March 27 2012 08:21 Chaggi wrote:On March 27 2012 08:05 whoopadeedoo wrote:On March 27 2012 07:56 FreddYCooL wrote:
Whats the point of arguing the mechanics? I think we can safely say the mechanically there is no harder race. What the terrans are complaining about is the lack of good and solid T3 units that can complement our armies in the late game. In TvP bio is so flimsy that after a victory you can hardly ever push as bio lacks the strength to beat the rewarped zealots. This meaning that lots of terran die directly after their first army was lost and then have to gg with several thousand minerals and gas stockpiled but unable to use while the protoss can lose several big engagements and still end up fine.
In TvZ the broodlord/infestor is very very hard to beat especially as the zerg quickly can do tech switches to ultras and back to broodlords again. We're arguing mechanics because a group of Terrans are trying to tell everyone it's harder to play their race. I agree it has nothing to do with mechanics and everything to do with a viable T3 unit. I agree the ghost snipe nerf was horrible for TvZ (right idea to nerf snipe against Z T3, totally wrong way to go about it). The fact that we can't lose an army late game - especially close to our base because our reinforcement abilities are so slow. Even if I have a lot of Rax's, a protoss can instantly warp in and I'll just die. Even Zerg larva mechanic is forgiving at a late game stage cause you can instantly remax, but at least the units have to run across. I get what you're saying. This is really only a problem in full 200/200 engagements where one side wins convincining (and yeah, that adds to terran's TvP difficulties late game). Part of me wants to say that it is offset by the fact that Terran army heals quickly and is highly mobile, whereas if you're Toss, once you engage you better be sure you're winning or doing equal damage in that engagement. Or else Toss dies. Terran can retreat. Toss is pretty much the only race that nothing except phoenixes, blink stalkers, and speed prisms can retreat without heavy losses. Different races are different. Different doesn't mean balanced. One race can still be more demanding. I just wanted to point out your faulty approach of "its supposed to be different" = "all is fine". Difference is good of course, as no one wants a three copies of the same race, but implying "it's different must be working as intended" sounds like wishful thinking to hide darker secrets. Additionally the Protoss army is actually more mobile than the Terran army as a whole (both races have "dropships", but stalkers can teleport, collosus can cliff travel, zealots have an insta-gap closer and Protoss has warp while marines/mauraders just have stim for movement speed), so Terran's late game macro disadvantage is not offset by that. The reason the bio-army is considered more mobile is that 2 dropships full of units isn't massively detrimental to the bio-ball army but is very capable of doing a lot of damage to the protoss infrastructure.
It's common knowledge to just go kill the Terran when he's doing cute drop play after his drops die to static defense and warp-ins.
On March 27 2012 09:45 Kharnage wrote:In addition terran have air dominance with the vikings they have to have to deal with the colossus while protoss have almost no air units at all. This 'should' make warp prism harass a weak option, especially if terran would just MAKE A FUCKING SENTRY TOWER.
By your logic Warp Prisms are just as "weak" as dropships. Stalkers on patrol accomplish the same thing Vikings would.
|
On March 27 2012 09:53 DemigodcelpH wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 09:45 Kharnage wrote:On March 27 2012 09:21 DemigodcelpH wrote:On March 27 2012 08:28 whoopadeedoo wrote:On March 27 2012 08:21 Chaggi wrote:On March 27 2012 08:05 whoopadeedoo wrote:On March 27 2012 07:56 FreddYCooL wrote:
Whats the point of arguing the mechanics? I think we can safely say the mechanically there is no harder race. What the terrans are complaining about is the lack of good and solid T3 units that can complement our armies in the late game. In TvP bio is so flimsy that after a victory you can hardly ever push as bio lacks the strength to beat the rewarped zealots. This meaning that lots of terran die directly after their first army was lost and then have to gg with several thousand minerals and gas stockpiled but unable to use while the protoss can lose several big engagements and still end up fine.
In TvZ the broodlord/infestor is very very hard to beat especially as the zerg quickly can do tech switches to ultras and back to broodlords again. We're arguing mechanics because a group of Terrans are trying to tell everyone it's harder to play their race. I agree it has nothing to do with mechanics and everything to do with a viable T3 unit. I agree the ghost snipe nerf was horrible for TvZ (right idea to nerf snipe against Z T3, totally wrong way to go about it). The fact that we can't lose an army late game - especially close to our base because our reinforcement abilities are so slow. Even if I have a lot of Rax's, a protoss can instantly warp in and I'll just die. Even Zerg larva mechanic is forgiving at a late game stage cause you can instantly remax, but at least the units have to run across. I get what you're saying. This is really only a problem in full 200/200 engagements where one side wins convincining (and yeah, that adds to terran's TvP difficulties late game). Part of me wants to say that it is offset by the fact that Terran army heals quickly and is highly mobile, whereas if you're Toss, once you engage you better be sure you're winning or doing equal damage in that engagement. Or else Toss dies. Terran can retreat. Toss is pretty much the only race that nothing except phoenixes, blink stalkers, and speed prisms can retreat without heavy losses. Different races are different. Different doesn't mean balanced. One race can still be more demanding. I just wanted to point out your faulty approach of "its supposed to be different" = "all is fine". Difference is good of course, as no one wants a three copies of the same race, but implying "it's different must be working as intended" sounds like wishful thinking to hide darker secrets. Additionally the Protoss army is actually more mobile than the Terran army as a whole (both races have "dropships", but stalkers can teleport, collosus can cliff travel, zealots have an insta-gap closer and Protoss has warp while marines/mauraders just have stim for movement speed), so Terran's late game macro disadvantage is not offset by that. The reason the bio-army is considered more mobile is that 2 dropships full of units isn't massively detrimental to the bio-ball army but is very capable of doing a lot of damage to the protoss infrastructure. It's common knowledge to just go kill the Terran when he's doing cute drop play after his drops die to static defense and warp-ins.
This depends on the scale of the drop losses. 2 drop ships + men isn't enough to put a terran in such a position that they can't hold if they fight near a PF.
Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 09:45 Kharnage wrote:In addition terran have air dominance with the vikings they have to have to deal with the colossus while protoss have almost no air units at all. This 'should' make warp prism harass a weak option, especially if terran would just MAKE A FUCKING SENTRY TOWER. By your logic Warp Prisms are just as "weak" as dropships. Stalkers on patrol accomplish the same thing Vikings would.
The whole point of the sentry tower is that you don't need vikings on patrol.
Protoss can't afford to have stalkers on patrol, that's why they build cannons. Plus, if you are watching your drops / scan before dropping then you'll see those stalkers and go home. No harm, no foul, plus you know he's got a bunch of supply patrolling instead of defending his colossus.
Warp prisms also don't work very well once max supply is reached. Neither does the warp in drop defence.
Once a protoss gets maxed terran should be abusing the fact that they can no longer warp in units until you've killed some probes,
|
On March 27 2012 11:55 Kharnage wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 09:53 DemigodcelpH wrote:On March 27 2012 09:45 Kharnage wrote:On March 27 2012 09:21 DemigodcelpH wrote:On March 27 2012 08:28 whoopadeedoo wrote:On March 27 2012 08:21 Chaggi wrote:On March 27 2012 08:05 whoopadeedoo wrote:On March 27 2012 07:56 FreddYCooL wrote:
Whats the point of arguing the mechanics? I think we can safely say the mechanically there is no harder race. What the terrans are complaining about is the lack of good and solid T3 units that can complement our armies in the late game. In TvP bio is so flimsy that after a victory you can hardly ever push as bio lacks the strength to beat the rewarped zealots. This meaning that lots of terran die directly after their first army was lost and then have to gg with several thousand minerals and gas stockpiled but unable to use while the protoss can lose several big engagements and still end up fine.
In TvZ the broodlord/infestor is very very hard to beat especially as the zerg quickly can do tech switches to ultras and back to broodlords again. We're arguing mechanics because a group of Terrans are trying to tell everyone it's harder to play their race. I agree it has nothing to do with mechanics and everything to do with a viable T3 unit. I agree the ghost snipe nerf was horrible for TvZ (right idea to nerf snipe against Z T3, totally wrong way to go about it). The fact that we can't lose an army late game - especially close to our base because our reinforcement abilities are so slow. Even if I have a lot of Rax's, a protoss can instantly warp in and I'll just die. Even Zerg larva mechanic is forgiving at a late game stage cause you can instantly remax, but at least the units have to run across. I get what you're saying. This is really only a problem in full 200/200 engagements where one side wins convincining (and yeah, that adds to terran's TvP difficulties late game). Part of me wants to say that it is offset by the fact that Terran army heals quickly and is highly mobile, whereas if you're Toss, once you engage you better be sure you're winning or doing equal damage in that engagement. Or else Toss dies. Terran can retreat. Toss is pretty much the only race that nothing except phoenixes, blink stalkers, and speed prisms can retreat without heavy losses. Different races are different. Different doesn't mean balanced. One race can still be more demanding. I just wanted to point out your faulty approach of "its supposed to be different" = "all is fine". Difference is good of course, as no one wants a three copies of the same race, but implying "it's different must be working as intended" sounds like wishful thinking to hide darker secrets. Additionally the Protoss army is actually more mobile than the Terran army as a whole (both races have "dropships", but stalkers can teleport, collosus can cliff travel, zealots have an insta-gap closer and Protoss has warp while marines/mauraders just have stim for movement speed), so Terran's late game macro disadvantage is not offset by that. The reason the bio-army is considered more mobile is that 2 dropships full of units isn't massively detrimental to the bio-ball army but is very capable of doing a lot of damage to the protoss infrastructure. It's common knowledge to just go kill the Terran when he's doing cute drop play after his drops die to static defense and warp-ins. This depends on the scale of the drop losses. 2 drop ships + men isn't enough to put a terran in such a position that they can't hold if they fight near a PF. Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 09:45 Kharnage wrote:In addition terran have air dominance with the vikings they have to have to deal with the colossus while protoss have almost no air units at all. This 'should' make warp prism harass a weak option, especially if terran would just MAKE A FUCKING SENTRY TOWER. By your logic Warp Prisms are just as "weak" as dropships. Stalkers on patrol accomplish the same thing Vikings would. The whole point of the sentry tower is that you don't need vikings on patrol. Protoss can't afford to have stalkers on patrol, that's why they build cannons. Plus, if you are watching your drops / scan before dropping then you'll see those stalkers and go home. No harm, no foul, plus you know he's got a bunch of supply patrolling instead of defending his colossus. Warp prisms also don't work very well once max supply is reached. Neither does the warp in drop defence. Once a protoss gets maxed terran should be abusing the fact that they can no longer warp in units until you've killed some probes,
Are these not contradictory messages? ...
Anyways, after watching some games this weekend (understatement) I think people need to man up and drop 2-3 medivacs worth of army in a protoss base at various points in the match. It's like an 8 marine drop for zerg, they suddenly don't know how much to pull back without posing a risk to the rest of their army. I realize that the protoss can just engage your main army and roll over your army, now down 30 supply, but maps are getting bigger, so if the positioning is set up correctly (which is up to Terran to force, and getting slightly easier) they wouldn't be as inclined to move across the map for base race. Righto
|
Oh please. I play at a high diamond/mid masters level and am not having any of these drastic problems people complain about. Remember Protoss a couple of months ago? So they got a couple of buffs, get over it and adapt. This whining is embarassing and pathetic.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On March 27 2012 09:53 DemigodcelpH wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 09:45 Kharnage wrote:On March 27 2012 09:21 DemigodcelpH wrote:On March 27 2012 08:28 whoopadeedoo wrote:On March 27 2012 08:21 Chaggi wrote:On March 27 2012 08:05 whoopadeedoo wrote:On March 27 2012 07:56 FreddYCooL wrote:
Whats the point of arguing the mechanics? I think we can safely say the mechanically there is no harder race. What the terrans are complaining about is the lack of good and solid T3 units that can complement our armies in the late game. In TvP bio is so flimsy that after a victory you can hardly ever push as bio lacks the strength to beat the rewarped zealots. This meaning that lots of terran die directly after their first army was lost and then have to gg with several thousand minerals and gas stockpiled but unable to use while the protoss can lose several big engagements and still end up fine.
In TvZ the broodlord/infestor is very very hard to beat especially as the zerg quickly can do tech switches to ultras and back to broodlords again. We're arguing mechanics because a group of Terrans are trying to tell everyone it's harder to play their race. I agree it has nothing to do with mechanics and everything to do with a viable T3 unit. I agree the ghost snipe nerf was horrible for TvZ (right idea to nerf snipe against Z T3, totally wrong way to go about it). The fact that we can't lose an army late game - especially close to our base because our reinforcement abilities are so slow. Even if I have a lot of Rax's, a protoss can instantly warp in and I'll just die. Even Zerg larva mechanic is forgiving at a late game stage cause you can instantly remax, but at least the units have to run across. I get what you're saying. This is really only a problem in full 200/200 engagements where one side wins convincining (and yeah, that adds to terran's TvP difficulties late game). Part of me wants to say that it is offset by the fact that Terran army heals quickly and is highly mobile, whereas if you're Toss, once you engage you better be sure you're winning or doing equal damage in that engagement. Or else Toss dies. Terran can retreat. Toss is pretty much the only race that nothing except phoenixes, blink stalkers, and speed prisms can retreat without heavy losses. Different races are different. Different doesn't mean balanced. One race can still be more demanding. I just wanted to point out your faulty approach of "its supposed to be different" = "all is fine". Difference is good of course, as no one wants a three copies of the same race, but implying "it's different must be working as intended" sounds like wishful thinking to hide darker secrets. Additionally the Protoss army is actually more mobile than the Terran army as a whole (both races have "dropships", but stalkers can teleport, collosus can cliff travel, zealots have an insta-gap closer and Protoss has warp while marines/mauraders just have stim for movement speed), so Terran's late game macro disadvantage is not offset by that. The reason the bio-army is considered more mobile is that 2 dropships full of units isn't massively detrimental to the bio-ball army but is very capable of doing a lot of damage to the protoss infrastructure.
It's common knowledge to just go kill the Terran when he's doing cute drop play after his drops die to static defense and warp-ins.
On March 27 2012 09:45 Kharnage wrote:In addition terran have air dominance with the vikings they have to have to deal with the colossus while protoss have almost no air units at all. This 'should' make warp prism harass a weak option, especially if terran would just MAKE A FUCKING SENTRY TOWER.
By your logic Warp Prisms are just as "weak" as dropships. Stalkers on patrol accomplish the same thing Vikings would.
cant emphasize enough how right that is....youd have to have the most perfect concave, behind a planetary, to not just flat-out lose once your 2-ship drop just instantly gets shut down by feedback/warp-ins
|
On March 27 2012 12:02 Chinchillin wrote:
Oh please. I play at a high diamond/mid masters level and am not having any of these drastic problems people complain about. Remember Protoss a couple of months ago? So they got a couple of buffs, get over it and adapt. This whining is embarassing and pathetic.
true words brother !
|
On March 27 2012 09:51 Granter wrote:
I really like tvp but lately i never really win.
I have major problems against toss who just masses up any kind of combination of army, lots of zealots/archons(high templars with storms) and colousses, just all the units. Feels like my t1 marine/marauder ball is eaten like a cake even with 3/3 upgrades against even a smaller TOS army when he doesnt do anything els but A move and controll his templars to storm me.
This is very stressfull cause i have to kite with my army + controll ghosts/vikings, in other words i have to pull off insane macro. Tho i'm improving!, i just have to find a way to get my ghosts around his army to emp the templars without getting feedbacked to death, this is the main issue i have atm.
Sums up the current state of the match-up really well. Don't worry it's not just you.
|
Terran aoe is lacking and easily countered late game. In late game, when armies tends to be huge and clumped, aoe becomes exponentially more powerful. Zergs have Fungals, Toss have Collosi/Storm. Terrans have nothing viable.
Seige tanks are neutered by Broodlords. Seige tanks also do terrible against Chargelots/Blinkstalkers. The range/damage/cost on Seeker Missile from Ravens is pathetic, not to mention slow to launch.
Oh, Fungals and Collosi splash don't do friendlyfire damage. GG :S
|
On March 27 2012 09:51 Granter wrote:
I really like tvp but lately i never really win.
I have major problems against toss who just masses up any kind of combination of army, lots of zealots/archons(high templars with storms) and colousses, just all the units. Feels like my t1 marine/marauder ball is eaten like a cake even with 3/3 upgrades against even a smaller TOS army when he doesnt do anything els but A move and controll his templars to storm me.
This is very stressfull cause i have to kite with my army + controll ghosts/vikings, in other words i have to pull off insane macro. Tho i'm improving!, i just have to find a way to get my ghosts around his army to emp the templars without getting feedbacked to death, this is the main issue i have atm.
I have looked on way better terrans then me like empireKas and Dragons stream but honestly they pretty much had the exact same problem i had, only that they managed it slightly better, consider that they controll there units perfectly, tho still dies.
If i got to change the TOS army i would make templars unable turn into an archon if they dont have something like 75energy, this would make it fair and not so forgiving to just derp around with the templars to then after having them turned into the games strongest anti bio unit.
But i really hope Warhounds make mech more interesting against TOS in heart of the swarm because having to play bio all the time is boring D:
if you're getting feedbacked that just means you haven't been sniping obs and/or you aren't getting cloak.
|
On March 27 2012 13:18 plogamer wrote:
Terran aoe is lacking and easily countered late game. In late game, when armies tends to be huge and clumped, aoe becomes exponentially more powerful. Zergs have Fungals, Toss have Collosi/Storm. Terrans have nothing viable.
Seige tanks are neutered by Broodlords. Seige tanks also do terrible against Chargelots/Blinkstalkers. The range/damage/cost on Seeker Missile from Ravens is pathetic, not to mention slow to launch.
Oh, Fungals and Collosi splash don't do friendlyfire damage. GG :S
You are forgetting EMP which is pretty damn huge. And HSM (vs Zerg) does an INSANE amount of damage behind a strong mech army. I think that what T needs most lategame is to have EMP radius rebuffed (if we talk about balance changes) and Thor energy removed (along with that useless strike cannon).
|
On March 27 2012 13:27 rauk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 09:51 Granter wrote:
I really like tvp but lately i never really win.
I have major problems against toss who just masses up any kind of combination of army, lots of zealots/archons(high templars with storms) and colousses, just all the units. Feels like my t1 marine/marauder ball is eaten like a cake even with 3/3 upgrades against even a smaller TOS army when he doesnt do anything els but A move and controll his templars to storm me.
This is very stressfull cause i have to kite with my army + controll ghosts/vikings, in other words i have to pull off insane macro. Tho i'm improving!, i just have to find a way to get my ghosts around his army to emp the templars without getting feedbacked to death, this is the main issue i have atm.
I have looked on way better terrans then me like empireKas and Dragons stream but honestly they pretty much had the exact same problem i had, only that they managed it slightly better, consider that they controll there units perfectly, tho still dies.
If i got to change the TOS army i would make templars unable turn into an archon if they dont have something like 75energy, this would make it fair and not so forgiving to just derp around with the templars to then after having them turned into the games strongest anti bio unit.
But i really hope Warhounds make mech more interesting against TOS in heart of the swarm because having to play bio all the time is boring D: if you're getting feedbacked that just means you haven't been sniping obs and/or you aren't getting cloak.
Yep, toggle cloak, scan, target fire that tiny observer, then snipe/emp.
This is exactly in line with what most Terrans here are saying, its not impossible; just a lot more work(apm, if you prefer) than their opponents require.
|
On March 27 2012 13:35 Sajaki wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 13:18 plogamer wrote:
Terran aoe is lacking and easily countered late game. In late game, when armies tends to be huge and clumped, aoe becomes exponentially more powerful. Zergs have Fungals, Toss have Collosi/Storm. Terrans have nothing viable.
Seige tanks are neutered by Broodlords. Seige tanks also do terrible against Chargelots/Blinkstalkers. The range/damage/cost on Seeker Missile from Ravens is pathetic, not to mention slow to launch.
Oh, Fungals and Collosi splash don't do friendlyfire damage. GG :S You are forgetting EMP which is pretty damn huge. And HSM (vs Zerg) does an INSANE amount of damage behind a strong mech army. I think that what T needs most lategame is to have EMP radius rebuffed (if we talk about balance changes) and Thor energy removed (along with that useless strike cannon).
i would gladly take the removal of thor energy for the removal of strike cannon lol, and think any terran would agree with me on that. Would make thors much better tanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
