|
HSM is also extremely slow. your opponent can split his army to reduce damage, a lot of the time you can figure out which unit is HSM target and just run that unit away.
|
What, this excuse of a terran whine thread still going on. Ha! Look at the last post above this one. Talking about Seeker Missiles and stuff, WHAT THE FUCK. Pretty far from the original post. 
|
On March 27 2012 17:44 Coeus1 wrote:What, this excuse of a terran whine thread still going on. Ha! Look at the last post above this one. Talking about Seeker Missiles and stuff, WHAT THE FUCK. Pretty far from the original post.
Threads evolve, calm down turbo.
You must be new here.
|
On March 27 2012 17:44 Coeus1 wrote:What, this excuse of a terran whine thread still going on. Ha! Look at the last post above this one. Talking about Seeker Missiles and stuff, WHAT THE FUCK. Pretty far from the original post.
Indeed. This thread lost its substance about 50 pages ago. I hate theorycrafting.
|
On March 27 2012 17:49 NoctemSC wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 17:44 Coeus1 wrote:What, this excuse of a terran whine thread still going on. Ha! Look at the last post above this one. Talking about Seeker Missiles and stuff, WHAT THE FUCK. Pretty far from the original post. Threads evolve, calm down turbo. You must be new here.
Yeah the thread evolved from your opinion that terrans were underrepresented based on 15 games. You then linked sc2gears stats that after checking history weren't much different from a year ago. Then you made some remarks about PvT being annoying.
Now where at the point where terran players cry over PvT, protoss units being too good, terran units like ghosts, thors and vikings being bad, and now about raven HSM needing buffs. Who'd have thunk that based on your OP we'd see a terran whine thread emerge?
|
On March 27 2012 17:56 karpo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 17:49 NoctemSC wrote:On March 27 2012 17:44 Coeus1 wrote:What, this excuse of a terran whine thread still going on. Ha! Look at the last post above this one. Talking about Seeker Missiles and stuff, WHAT THE FUCK. Pretty far from the original post. Threads evolve, calm down turbo. You must be new here. Yeah the thread evolved from your opinion that terrans were underrepresented based on 15 games. You then linked sc2gears stats that after checking history weren't much different from a year ago. Then you made some remarks about PvT being annoying. Now where at the point where terran players cry over PvT, protoss units being too good, terran units like ghosts, thors and vikings being bad, and now about raven HSM needing buffs. Who'd have thunk that based on your OP we'd see a terran whine thread emerge?
Well your double digit posts in this thread make a good case for anyone wanting to find evidence of Protoss players coming into the thread to derail it by talking about balance in 90% of their posts. You're not helping, in fact, you're part of the problem. Instead of whining about the existence of the thread, try to steer it in a better direction. I don't know if it's possible, but there's no excuse for not trying.
|
On March 27 2012 18:16 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 17:56 karpo wrote:On March 27 2012 17:49 NoctemSC wrote:On March 27 2012 17:44 Coeus1 wrote:What, this excuse of a terran whine thread still going on. Ha! Look at the last post above this one. Talking about Seeker Missiles and stuff, WHAT THE FUCK. Pretty far from the original post. Threads evolve, calm down turbo. You must be new here. Yeah the thread evolved from your opinion that terrans were underrepresented based on 15 games. You then linked sc2gears stats that after checking history weren't much different from a year ago. Then you made some remarks about PvT being annoying. Now where at the point where terran players cry over PvT, protoss units being too good, terran units like ghosts, thors and vikings being bad, and now about raven HSM needing buffs. Who'd have thunk that based on your OP we'd see a terran whine thread emerge? Well your double digit posts in this thread make a good case for anyone wanting to find evidence of Protoss players coming into the thread to derail it by talking about balance in 90% of their posts. You're not helping, in fact, you're part of the problem. Instead of whining about the existence of the thread, try to steer it in a better direction. I don't know if it's possible, but there's no excuse for not trying.
I'm not a protoss player. I've spend about as much time the equivalent zerg version of this thread arguing that zerg pro winrates against terran aren't as bad as the, not suprisingly, zerg OP was trying to prove. I just dislike whine and people exaggerating and twisting stuff to suit their subjective opinion on what is balanced and not, especially on a forum that's supposed to not tolerate much of that. And the balance talk started with terran claims in this thread. Big talk about low end "pros" that wouldn't be pro if they played the oh-so-difficult terran race, and how offracing as terran was really tough while Z/P was super easy. And now here we are.
I've shown that sc2ranks doesn't show more than a small change in terran percentages platinum and up between march 2011 and now. Many others have tried to show that TvP isn't imbalanced at pro level and i've asked the question if people would still complain if TvP was super awesome and BW-ish in diversity at pro level yet harder for one race at lower levels. I never got a reply as people seem to want to keep regurgitating the same old complaints and same tired "i can't win" mentality.
One doesn't have to be a protoss to see how much of a circlejerk this thread has become, you assuming that of me just shows your bias. 
|
On March 27 2012 18:32 karpo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 18:16 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 27 2012 17:56 karpo wrote:On March 27 2012 17:49 NoctemSC wrote:On March 27 2012 17:44 Coeus1 wrote:What, this excuse of a terran whine thread still going on. Ha! Look at the last post above this one. Talking about Seeker Missiles and stuff, WHAT THE FUCK. Pretty far from the original post. Threads evolve, calm down turbo. You must be new here. Yeah the thread evolved from your opinion that terrans were underrepresented based on 15 games. You then linked sc2gears stats that after checking history weren't much different from a year ago. Then you made some remarks about PvT being annoying. Now where at the point where terran players cry over PvT, protoss units being too good, terran units like ghosts, thors and vikings being bad, and now about raven HSM needing buffs. Who'd have thunk that based on your OP we'd see a terran whine thread emerge? Well your double digit posts in this thread make a good case for anyone wanting to find evidence of Protoss players coming into the thread to derail it by talking about balance in 90% of their posts. You're not helping, in fact, you're part of the problem. Instead of whining about the existence of the thread, try to steer it in a better direction. I don't know if it's possible, but there's no excuse for not trying. I'm not a protoss player. I've spend about as much time the equivalent zerg version of this thread arguing that zerg pro winrates against terran aren't as bad as the, not suprisingly, zerg OP was trying to prove. I just dislike whine and people exaggerating and twisting stuff to suit their subjective opinion on what is balanced and not, especially on a forum that's supposed to not tolerate much of that. I've shown that sc2ranks doesn't show more than a small change in terran percentages platinum and up between march 2011 and now. Many others have tried to show that TvP isn't imbalanced at pro level and i've asked the question if people would still complain if TvP was super awesome and BW-ish in diversity at pro level yet harder for one race at lower levels. I never got a reply as people seem to want to keep regurgitating the same old complaints and same tired "i can't win" mentality. One doesn't have to be a protoss to see how much of a circlejerk this thread has become, you assuming that of me just shows your bias.
My mistake, I now see that your icon is a Goliath, I thought it was a HT. Bad eyesight.
You being a P player isn't seminal though, it's the fact that you don't move the thread in a better direction.
As to your points, a lot of people have responded to your claims, but you refuse to take note. I'm part of the diamond terrans that are on the ladder, I play my placement match, get demolished (my weakness is Z, not P) and then spend the season grinding mechanics in custom maps. I'm in the sc2ranks statistics you cite but I don't play on the ladder. There are a number of people here wondering why they don't meet many T on the ladder in this thread, so you citing sc2ranks does not invalidate the idea behind the thread.
Also, you are the one pushing to discussing balancing. For ages, balance wasn't discussed in the thread. There was a bad spell of people doing Race X has x and Race Y has y comparisons (bnet forum style) and I thought that was horrible but it's ok to discuss HSM etc, as this brings underutilized abilities to the forefront and people can exchange knowledge and experience of using them. That's the best a TL thread can achieve, imo, on this issue.
You hear a lot of "complaining" because you view the thread though the prism of "balance" and when you antagonize people about it, of course they will cite things that are wrong in their mind with the MU. You then proceed to bash them for balance whining, yet, it's all about the way the MU's work at lower levels. As far as I can tell, the consensus is that terran is pretty close to being balanced at the top. (Hence the lack of hurrah when MKP won with new strategies... those just aren't relevant to the discussion.) Also, I think I and others are confused as to why the BW-awesome argument is relevant in this thread.
|
On March 27 2012 18:47 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 18:32 karpo wrote:On March 27 2012 18:16 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 27 2012 17:56 karpo wrote:On March 27 2012 17:49 NoctemSC wrote:On March 27 2012 17:44 Coeus1 wrote:What, this excuse of a terran whine thread still going on. Ha! Look at the last post above this one. Talking about Seeker Missiles and stuff, WHAT THE FUCK. Pretty far from the original post. Threads evolve, calm down turbo. You must be new here. Yeah the thread evolved from your opinion that terrans were underrepresented based on 15 games. You then linked sc2gears stats that after checking history weren't much different from a year ago. Then you made some remarks about PvT being annoying. Now where at the point where terran players cry over PvT, protoss units being too good, terran units like ghosts, thors and vikings being bad, and now about raven HSM needing buffs. Who'd have thunk that based on your OP we'd see a terran whine thread emerge? Well your double digit posts in this thread make a good case for anyone wanting to find evidence of Protoss players coming into the thread to derail it by talking about balance in 90% of their posts. You're not helping, in fact, you're part of the problem. Instead of whining about the existence of the thread, try to steer it in a better direction. I don't know if it's possible, but there's no excuse for not trying. I'm not a protoss player. I've spend about as much time the equivalent zerg version of this thread arguing that zerg pro winrates against terran aren't as bad as the, not suprisingly, zerg OP was trying to prove. I just dislike whine and people exaggerating and twisting stuff to suit their subjective opinion on what is balanced and not, especially on a forum that's supposed to not tolerate much of that. I've shown that sc2ranks doesn't show more than a small change in terran percentages platinum and up between march 2011 and now. Many others have tried to show that TvP isn't imbalanced at pro level and i've asked the question if people would still complain if TvP was super awesome and BW-ish in diversity at pro level yet harder for one race at lower levels. I never got a reply as people seem to want to keep regurgitating the same old complaints and same tired "i can't win" mentality. One doesn't have to be a protoss to see how much of a circlejerk this thread has become, you assuming that of me just shows your bias. My mistake, I now see that your icon is a Goliath, I thought it was a HT. Bad eyesight. You being a P player isn't seminal though, it's the fact that you don't move the thread in a better direction. As to your points, a lot of people have responded to your claims, but you refuse to take note. I'm part of the diamond terrans that are on the ladder, I play my placement match, get demolished (my weakness is Z, not P) and then spend the season grinding mechanics in custom maps. I'm in the sc2ranks statistics you cite but I don't play on the ladder. There are a number of people here wondering why they don't meet many T on the ladder in this thread, so you citing sc2ranks does not invalidate the idea behind the thread. Also, you are the one pushing to discussing balancing. For ages, balance wasn't discussed in the thread. There was a bad spell of people doing Race X has x and Race Y has y comparisons (bnet forum style) and I thought that was horrible but it's ok to discuss HSM etc, as this brings underutilized abilities to the forefront and people can exchange knowledge and experience of using them. That's the best a TL thread can achieve, imo, on this issue. You hear a lot of "complaining" because you view the thread though the prism of "balance" and when you antagonize people about it, of course they will cite things that are wrong in their mind with the MU. You then proceed to bash them for balance whining, yet, it's all about the way the MU's work at lower levels. As far as I can tell, the consensus is that terran is pretty close to being balanced at the top. (Hence the lack of hurrah when MKP won with new strategies... those just aren't relevant to the discussion.) Also, I think I and others are confused as to why the BW-awesome argument is relevant in this thread.
Sc2ranks was used in the OP to show that terrans were having it bad and to support his 15 match personal experience of terrans dwindling in numbers. That's why i showed that the actual difference from a year ago isn't large according to sc2ranks. So now were back to the argument that terrans played a couple of matches and never laddered again after that, something that's more or less impossible to verify and is ultimately worthless as a argument because it's not backed by any kind of objective measurement.
I started posting in this thread BECAUSE there was so much biased shit being said without anyone arguing the point, and i got annoyed. See my edit about how claims were made that offracing as terran was extremely hard and how low end pros couldn't hack it if they played T instead of Z/P. Alot of bs imo.
My point about BW awesomeness is that imo highest levels of play need to be balanced, if that means the matchup is skewed in one races favor in the lower levels then so be it. I agree that mech needs to be more viable and that terran need something more fun to play. But my feeling is that people would still complain about the matchup even if it was awesome, diverse, and balanced for pros but slightly in one races favour at "casual" levels.
|
Simple question (no offense, please enlighten me): Are there any foreigner Terrans who can compete on a (more or less) consistent basis? It seems the foreigner scene only has strong Zerg (and occasionally Protoss) players.
|
On March 27 2012 18:58 VoO wrote:
Simple question (no offense, please enlighten me): Are there any foreigner Terrans who can compete on a (more or less) consistent basis? It seems the foreigner scene only has strong Zerg (and occasionally Protoss) players.
Thorzain, Kas and Demuslim spring to mind. There really doesnt seem to be that many high profile foreign terrans.
|
On March 27 2012 19:02 FirstGear wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 18:58 VoO wrote:
Simple question (no offense, please enlighten me): Are there any foreigner Terrans who can compete on a (more or less) consistent basis? It seems the foreigner scene only has strong Zerg (and occasionally Protoss) players. Thorzain, Kas and Demuslim spring to mind. There really doesnt seem to be that many high profile foreign terrans.
Sjow and Select are pretty decent too...
|
On March 27 2012 18:47 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 18:32 karpo wrote:On March 27 2012 18:16 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 27 2012 17:56 karpo wrote:On March 27 2012 17:49 NoctemSC wrote:On March 27 2012 17:44 Coeus1 wrote:What, this excuse of a terran whine thread still going on. Ha! Look at the last post above this one. Talking about Seeker Missiles and stuff, WHAT THE FUCK. Pretty far from the original post. Threads evolve, calm down turbo. You must be new here. Yeah the thread evolved from your opinion that terrans were underrepresented based on 15 games. You then linked sc2gears stats that after checking history weren't much different from a year ago. Then you made some remarks about PvT being annoying. Now where at the point where terran players cry over PvT, protoss units being too good, terran units like ghosts, thors and vikings being bad, and now about raven HSM needing buffs. Who'd have thunk that based on your OP we'd see a terran whine thread emerge? Well your double digit posts in this thread make a good case for anyone wanting to find evidence of Protoss players coming into the thread to derail it by talking about balance in 90% of their posts. You're not helping, in fact, you're part of the problem. Instead of whining about the existence of the thread, try to steer it in a better direction. I don't know if it's possible, but there's no excuse for not trying. I'm not a protoss player. I've spend about as much time the equivalent zerg version of this thread arguing that zerg pro winrates against terran aren't as bad as the, not suprisingly, zerg OP was trying to prove. I just dislike whine and people exaggerating and twisting stuff to suit their subjective opinion on what is balanced and not, especially on a forum that's supposed to not tolerate much of that. I've shown that sc2ranks doesn't show more than a small change in terran percentages platinum and up between march 2011 and now. Many others have tried to show that TvP isn't imbalanced at pro level and i've asked the question if people would still complain if TvP was super awesome and BW-ish in diversity at pro level yet harder for one race at lower levels. I never got a reply as people seem to want to keep regurgitating the same old complaints and same tired "i can't win" mentality. One doesn't have to be a protoss to see how much of a circlejerk this thread has become, you assuming that of me just shows your bias. As to your points, a lot of people have responded to your claims, but you refuse to take note. I'm part of the diamond terrans that are on the ladder, I play my placement match, get demolished (my weakness is Z, not P) and then spend the season grinding mechanics in custom maps. I'm in the sc2ranks statistics you cite but I don't play on the ladder. There are a number of people here wondering why they don't meet many T on the ladder in this thread, so you citing sc2ranks does not invalidate the idea behind the thread.
I responded on this topic some pages ago, but noone seemed to take note, so I'm gonna quote what I wrote there:
Also the theory of Terrans being inactive and therefore their MMR dropping more slowly than it would if they played (and lost) does not hold: sc2ranks.com gives you the average points of a player of a race and all across the leagues and continents, I have not seen any level on which the placed Terran players would have significantly less points than their Z/P counterparts, which would be the case if the theory would be true.
It might be true that you and everyone else in this thread do only play their placement match, but all in all Terrans are as active as the other two races.
|
On March 27 2012 19:02 FirstGear wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 18:58 VoO wrote:
Simple question (no offense, please enlighten me): Are there any foreigner Terrans who can compete on a (more or less) consistent basis? It seems the foreigner scene only has strong Zerg (and occasionally Protoss) players. Thorzain, Kas and Demuslim spring to mind. There really doesnt seem to be that many high profile foreign terrans.
Unfortunately, the latter two underperform in large tournaments quite often. I understand that their "good" ranking is based on several weekly EU tournaments. Thorzain is a very quiet player, I don't see him very often since he came back from Korea.
Too bad that it seems that foreign Terrans can't keep up with their Korean equivalents.
|
On March 27 2012 19:02 FirstGear wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 18:58 VoO wrote:
Simple question (no offense, please enlighten me): Are there any foreigner Terrans who can compete on a (more or less) consistent basis? It seems the foreigner scene only has strong Zerg (and occasionally Protoss) players. Thorzain, Kas and Demuslim spring to mind. There really doesnt seem to be that many high profile foreign terrans.
Pretty much this, Thorzain is probably the best/most consistent. I think Demuslim will be making his mark in the very near future, something about him make me think he has great potential.
|
On March 27 2012 19:13 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 18:47 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 27 2012 18:32 karpo wrote:On March 27 2012 18:16 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 27 2012 17:56 karpo wrote:On March 27 2012 17:49 NoctemSC wrote:On March 27 2012 17:44 Coeus1 wrote:What, this excuse of a terran whine thread still going on. Ha! Look at the last post above this one. Talking about Seeker Missiles and stuff, WHAT THE FUCK. Pretty far from the original post. Threads evolve, calm down turbo. You must be new here. Yeah the thread evolved from your opinion that terrans were underrepresented based on 15 games. You then linked sc2gears stats that after checking history weren't much different from a year ago. Then you made some remarks about PvT being annoying. Now where at the point where terran players cry over PvT, protoss units being too good, terran units like ghosts, thors and vikings being bad, and now about raven HSM needing buffs. Who'd have thunk that based on your OP we'd see a terran whine thread emerge? Well your double digit posts in this thread make a good case for anyone wanting to find evidence of Protoss players coming into the thread to derail it by talking about balance in 90% of their posts. You're not helping, in fact, you're part of the problem. Instead of whining about the existence of the thread, try to steer it in a better direction. I don't know if it's possible, but there's no excuse for not trying. I'm not a protoss player. I've spend about as much time the equivalent zerg version of this thread arguing that zerg pro winrates against terran aren't as bad as the, not suprisingly, zerg OP was trying to prove. I just dislike whine and people exaggerating and twisting stuff to suit their subjective opinion on what is balanced and not, especially on a forum that's supposed to not tolerate much of that. I've shown that sc2ranks doesn't show more than a small change in terran percentages platinum and up between march 2011 and now. Many others have tried to show that TvP isn't imbalanced at pro level and i've asked the question if people would still complain if TvP was super awesome and BW-ish in diversity at pro level yet harder for one race at lower levels. I never got a reply as people seem to want to keep regurgitating the same old complaints and same tired "i can't win" mentality. One doesn't have to be a protoss to see how much of a circlejerk this thread has become, you assuming that of me just shows your bias. As to your points, a lot of people have responded to your claims, but you refuse to take note. I'm part of the diamond terrans that are on the ladder, I play my placement match, get demolished (my weakness is Z, not P) and then spend the season grinding mechanics in custom maps. I'm in the sc2ranks statistics you cite but I don't play on the ladder. There are a number of people here wondering why they don't meet many T on the ladder in this thread, so you citing sc2ranks does not invalidate the idea behind the thread. I responded on this topic some pages ago, but noone seemed to take note, so I'm gonna quote what I wrote there: Show nested quote +Also the theory of Terrans being inactive and therefore their MMR dropping more slowly than it would if they played (and lost) does not hold: sc2ranks.com gives you the average points of a player of a race and all across the leagues and continents, I have not seen any level on which the placed Terran players would have significantly less points than their Z/P counterparts, which would be the case if the theory would be true. It might be true that you and everyone else in this thread do only play their placement match, but all in all Terrans are as active as the other two races.
That's a great point. There is a significant point difference for terrans at gold and below levels, but in platinum and diamond (where I would expect it as well, there isn't one). Perhaps terrans get stuck earlier? But that's a good find by Big J. I guess it wasn't noted because you labeled it as a MMR argument.
There is another confusion in this issue, which is the MMR thing. I cannot really lose to lower ranked Z or P, I lose a lot in diamond, but win pretty much every game in Platinum. There just seem to be huge gaps between the leagues, where in diamond people seem to macro, micro like me, play standard, while the guys below me are, as by the definition of mmr, significantly worse.
|
On March 27 2012 19:24 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 19:13 Big J wrote:On March 27 2012 18:47 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 27 2012 18:32 karpo wrote:On March 27 2012 18:16 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 27 2012 17:56 karpo wrote:On March 27 2012 17:49 NoctemSC wrote:On March 27 2012 17:44 Coeus1 wrote:What, this excuse of a terran whine thread still going on. Ha! Look at the last post above this one. Talking about Seeker Missiles and stuff, WHAT THE FUCK. Pretty far from the original post. Threads evolve, calm down turbo. You must be new here. Yeah the thread evolved from your opinion that terrans were underrepresented based on 15 games. You then linked sc2gears stats that after checking history weren't much different from a year ago. Then you made some remarks about PvT being annoying. Now where at the point where terran players cry over PvT, protoss units being too good, terran units like ghosts, thors and vikings being bad, and now about raven HSM needing buffs. Who'd have thunk that based on your OP we'd see a terran whine thread emerge? Well your double digit posts in this thread make a good case for anyone wanting to find evidence of Protoss players coming into the thread to derail it by talking about balance in 90% of their posts. You're not helping, in fact, you're part of the problem. Instead of whining about the existence of the thread, try to steer it in a better direction. I don't know if it's possible, but there's no excuse for not trying. I'm not a protoss player. I've spend about as much time the equivalent zerg version of this thread arguing that zerg pro winrates against terran aren't as bad as the, not suprisingly, zerg OP was trying to prove. I just dislike whine and people exaggerating and twisting stuff to suit their subjective opinion on what is balanced and not, especially on a forum that's supposed to not tolerate much of that. I've shown that sc2ranks doesn't show more than a small change in terran percentages platinum and up between march 2011 and now. Many others have tried to show that TvP isn't imbalanced at pro level and i've asked the question if people would still complain if TvP was super awesome and BW-ish in diversity at pro level yet harder for one race at lower levels. I never got a reply as people seem to want to keep regurgitating the same old complaints and same tired "i can't win" mentality. One doesn't have to be a protoss to see how much of a circlejerk this thread has become, you assuming that of me just shows your bias. As to your points, a lot of people have responded to your claims, but you refuse to take note. I'm part of the diamond terrans that are on the ladder, I play my placement match, get demolished (my weakness is Z, not P) and then spend the season grinding mechanics in custom maps. I'm in the sc2ranks statistics you cite but I don't play on the ladder. There are a number of people here wondering why they don't meet many T on the ladder in this thread, so you citing sc2ranks does not invalidate the idea behind the thread. I responded on this topic some pages ago, but noone seemed to take note, so I'm gonna quote what I wrote there: Also the theory of Terrans being inactive and therefore their MMR dropping more slowly than it would if they played (and lost) does not hold: sc2ranks.com gives you the average points of a player of a race and all across the leagues and continents, I have not seen any level on which the placed Terran players would have significantly less points than their Z/P counterparts, which would be the case if the theory would be true. It might be true that you and everyone else in this thread do only play their placement match, but all in all Terrans are as active as the other two races. That's a great point. There is a significant point difference for terrans at gold and below levels, but in platinum and diamond (where I would expect it as well, there isn't one). Perhaps terrans get stuck earlier? But that's a good find by Big J. I guess it wasn't noted because you labeled it as a MMR argument. There is another confusion in this issue, which is the MMR thing. I cannot really lose to lower ranked Z or P, I lose a lot in diamond, but win pretty much every game in Platinum. There just seem to be huge gaps between the leagues, where in diamond people seem to macro, micro like me, play standard, while the guys below me are, as by the definition of mmr, significantly worse.
Well, in my opinion (which is somewhat what I wrote in that long post the quote comes from), Terrans get stuck somewhere around platinum level. That's the one level where Terrans are the fewest compared to the other leagues and also compared to the other races.
It's the one and only significant data this thread has yet presented (but noone ever pointed this details out).
The comparisons between 1.2.0 and 1.4.3 karpo made, were showing that Terrans decreased ~2.5% in that timeframe overall. But if you only compare platinum level, it's somewhat of 5% decrease.
Without any further data, I think all comes down to guessing why it is like that in detail, but whatever it is, it seems to balance out during diamond and around masters skilllevel.
Below gold, all dynamics are somewhat flawed in my opinion, as there are way more Terrans and Protoss starters than Zerg ones and any statement about why a race suffers more at that level than another one can't be answered without taking into account whatever makes T>P>>Z in terms of attractiveness. (f.e a popular arguement would be that Terran, but also Protoss are both campaign races and therefore a lot of players that try to ladder, but abbandon it very fast again, will be considered Terrans or Protoss and thereby lower the average points of those races and make it look like a lot of T/Ps can't get out of bronze/silver)
|
On March 27 2012 19:02 FirstGear wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 18:58 VoO wrote:
Simple question (no offense, please enlighten me): Are there any foreigner Terrans who can compete on a (more or less) consistent basis? It seems the foreigner scene only has strong Zerg (and occasionally Protoss) players. Thorzain, Kas and Demuslim spring to mind. There really doesnt seem to be that many high profile foreign terrans.
They're pretty much the best foreign terrans, but all are really inconsistent - if demuslim is able to solve his nerve issues and play more consistently he would probably become the best foreign terran imo as he can micro so well.
|
I hate forcefields with a burning passion. Seriously I abhor how I have very limited micro potental during mid-game skirmishes. Once my army gets cut in half, what more can I do other than macro, pull back my dropships, stim + 1A2A3A and pray for the best?
I know there's been much hate against FF in the past, but I'm experiencing it first hand after switching to T. Currently sitting at mid-masters, and seriously I don't know what to do in TvP anymore when my opponents are good enough to spread pylons/stalkers around their bases to stop drops, to leave some zealots/sentries at their naturals, and turtle hardcore / macro close to perfectly on bases with dual upgrades or fast tech.
Once the toss's T3 shit rolls out and takes a third base, and especially considering chrono'ed upgrades, it all goes downhill no matter how much of a macro lead I would have at that point in time.
I need to practice ghost usage more; if I still get dominated past mid-late game in TvP then fuck this shitty race.
|
On March 27 2012 19:42 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On March 27 2012 19:24 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 27 2012 19:13 Big J wrote:On March 27 2012 18:47 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 27 2012 18:32 karpo wrote:On March 27 2012 18:16 Ghanburighan wrote:On March 27 2012 17:56 karpo wrote:On March 27 2012 17:49 NoctemSC wrote:On March 27 2012 17:44 Coeus1 wrote:What, this excuse of a terran whine thread still going on. Ha! Look at the last post above this one. Talking about Seeker Missiles and stuff, WHAT THE FUCK. Pretty far from the original post. Threads evolve, calm down turbo. You must be new here. Yeah the thread evolved from your opinion that terrans were underrepresented based on 15 games. You then linked sc2gears stats that after checking history weren't much different from a year ago. Then you made some remarks about PvT being annoying. Now where at the point where terran players cry over PvT, protoss units being too good, terran units like ghosts, thors and vikings being bad, and now about raven HSM needing buffs. Who'd have thunk that based on your OP we'd see a terran whine thread emerge? Well your double digit posts in this thread make a good case for anyone wanting to find evidence of Protoss players coming into the thread to derail it by talking about balance in 90% of their posts. You're not helping, in fact, you're part of the problem. Instead of whining about the existence of the thread, try to steer it in a better direction. I don't know if it's possible, but there's no excuse for not trying. I'm not a protoss player. I've spend about as much time the equivalent zerg version of this thread arguing that zerg pro winrates against terran aren't as bad as the, not suprisingly, zerg OP was trying to prove. I just dislike whine and people exaggerating and twisting stuff to suit their subjective opinion on what is balanced and not, especially on a forum that's supposed to not tolerate much of that. I've shown that sc2ranks doesn't show more than a small change in terran percentages platinum and up between march 2011 and now. Many others have tried to show that TvP isn't imbalanced at pro level and i've asked the question if people would still complain if TvP was super awesome and BW-ish in diversity at pro level yet harder for one race at lower levels. I never got a reply as people seem to want to keep regurgitating the same old complaints and same tired "i can't win" mentality. One doesn't have to be a protoss to see how much of a circlejerk this thread has become, you assuming that of me just shows your bias. As to your points, a lot of people have responded to your claims, but you refuse to take note. I'm part of the diamond terrans that are on the ladder, I play my placement match, get demolished (my weakness is Z, not P) and then spend the season grinding mechanics in custom maps. I'm in the sc2ranks statistics you cite but I don't play on the ladder. There are a number of people here wondering why they don't meet many T on the ladder in this thread, so you citing sc2ranks does not invalidate the idea behind the thread. I responded on this topic some pages ago, but noone seemed to take note, so I'm gonna quote what I wrote there: Also the theory of Terrans being inactive and therefore their MMR dropping more slowly than it would if they played (and lost) does not hold: sc2ranks.com gives you the average points of a player of a race and all across the leagues and continents, I have not seen any level on which the placed Terran players would have significantly less points than their Z/P counterparts, which would be the case if the theory would be true. It might be true that you and everyone else in this thread do only play their placement match, but all in all Terrans are as active as the other two races. That's a great point. There is a significant point difference for terrans at gold and below levels, but in platinum and diamond (where I would expect it as well, there isn't one). Perhaps terrans get stuck earlier? But that's a good find by Big J. I guess it wasn't noted because you labeled it as a MMR argument. There is another confusion in this issue, which is the MMR thing. I cannot really lose to lower ranked Z or P, I lose a lot in diamond, but win pretty much every game in Platinum. There just seem to be huge gaps between the leagues, where in diamond people seem to macro, micro like me, play standard, while the guys below me are, as by the definition of mmr, significantly worse. Well, in my opinion (which is somewhat what I wrote in that long post the quote comes from), Terrans get stuck somewhere around platinum level. That's the one level where Terrans are the fewest compared to the other leagues and also compared to the other races. It's the one and only significant data this thread has yet presented (but noone ever pointed this details out). The comparisons between 1.2.0 and 1.4.3 karpo made, were showing that Terrans decreased ~2.5% in that timeframe overall. But if you only compare platinum level, it's somewhat of 5% decrease. Without any further data, I think all comes down to guessing why it is like that in detail, but whatever it is, it seems to balance out during diamond and around masters skilllevel. Below gold, all dynamics are somewhat flawed in my opinion, as there are way more Terrans and Protoss starters than Zerg ones and any statement about why a race suffers more at that level than another one can't be answered without taking into account whatever makes T>P>>Z in terms of attractiveness. (f.e a popular arguement would be that Terran, but also Protoss are both campaign races and therefore a lot of players that try to ladder, but abbandon it very fast again, will be considered Terrans or Protoss and thereby lower the average points of those races and make it look like a lot of T/Ps can't get out of bronze/silver)
I have always felt this about terrans at the gold/plat level. There appears to be a binary status of any terran around that level. Option A: player attempting macro or Option B: One base madness. When you look into these levels of play, you hear about "builds" like 3 rax medivac. Now for all of us that know better, that build sounds horrible. But apparently it gives gold and silver level protoss are run for their money. It shouldn't be surprising, since terran is powerful on one base and some players on that level are not aware of TL or the word build.
I personally think that this causes problems for some terran players working their way up the ranks. If the terran player did not know better, they would think they were playing the game "right". After all, they are winning. But as the protoss and zerg are advancing up the ladder, they are learning to sniff these builds out and deal with them. But the one-base terran player is not and may still be getting wins with 3 rax medivac. And that will continue until they hit a hard wall, where all the skills they learned getting to that point might be useless.
I don't think it accounts every reason a terran leaves, but I think it could be why some in the gold/plat drop out. Some of them may have just been playing the game "badly" because they could and it was effective. But then they reached a level where they could no longer play that way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
