EPTAs a protoss I definitely hope they overhaul the race for LotV. Warpgate design just doesn't work in a RTS.
Where did all of the terrans go? - Page 17
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Serelitz
Netherlands2895 Posts
As a protoss I definitely hope they overhaul the race for LotV. Warpgate design just doesn't work in a RTS. | ||
|
rahl.pwnage
United States2 Posts
On March 11 2012 13:37 Spieltor wrote: Grand Masters- Terran 29.15% Protoss 35.99% Zerg 33.05% ... T and P are less played. T and P have the highest representation of their races in GM and master. Tells you which race is UP. I blame hatch and lair tech. I don't necessarily think T and P are OP, just that zerg is slightly up with regard to low tech units. brood lord festor corruptor obviously being a slight exception. Just FYI, you've got to normalize that data for race population. When you do, Zerg is actually overrepresented in GM, and Masters. In short, if you go to SC2Ranks.com you'll see something similar to this: -145,000 active Protoss -130,000 active Terran -120,000 active Zerg So, when you look at it as a proportion, Zerg is actually the single most succesful race. Granted, it's not anything huge that makes you think "OMG, OP, OP!" lol | ||
|
Baum
Germany1010 Posts
On March 11 2012 22:13 Kaitokid wrote: lol do you really expect to have an opening which gives you an "significant advantage against any style"? Protoss doesn't have that either, with your argumentation everything in SC2 is just based on blindcountering. Did you read the post to which i replied to? If I have to get a significant advantage before the 15 minute mark to be able to win lategame (which is what plexa wrote) I need an opening that makes it possible for me to gain an advantage reliably if I make the correct decisions so that the game can even out later on. But if reactive openings fall behind early on and you have to play from behind all game long and there is no compensation for that late game then there is no point in doing reactive openings and you have to rely on getting build order advantages by chance. | ||
|
cydial
United States750 Posts
You have to have much better micro and awareness than a protoss or zerg in big engagements because you can't just a move into them. This isn't saying that protoss and zerg players are bad. This is just the way the game is designed. Terran units benefit from micro a shit ton more than zerg or toss. | ||
|
OtoshimonoU
United States509 Posts
| ||
|
FinalForm
United States450 Posts
 ... go back to base to swap an addon, lose your 4 hellions to zergling surround -> proceed to lose the game | ||
|
Erasme
Bahamas15899 Posts
| ||
|
jaminski
England84 Posts
On March 11 2012 11:21 Gardel wrote: All the terrans are in Korea  , lol jk but really many people get tired of getting nerfed constantly, and just don´t feel like playing T anymore. toss has been getting nerfed since day 1 minus a few patches and people still play toss now we've just manned up and got on with it...i think as for the terran situation its because the all-ins have been nerfed and counterable people have stopped playing them for example look at how unsuccesfful trump / qxc have been since alot of the nerfs to all ins... when terrans are forced to play proper alot start to lose because there so used to doing all ins they cant do a standard game | ||
|
Kaitokid
Germany1327 Posts
| ||
|
cactusjack914
United States183 Posts
In what ways was Trump ever successful? you beat me to it. And, in what ways is QXC unsuccessful? what major tournament did he win all inn'ing every game? | ||
|
Sianos
580 Posts
| ||
|
ClysmiC
United States2192 Posts
I keep stat checkpoints every 50 games I play. At my 450 game checkmark I had: 132 T 169 P 153 Z But I only noticed the discrepancy on the most recent 200 games. As a matter of fact, after the first 200 games, T was *just* behind P for most common. Additionally, only 1 of my last 19 opponents has been Terran (not even exaggerating). I've never had an absence streak like this with P or Z. I know it's still a relatively small sample size, but apparently I'm not the only one who has been noticing it. | ||
|
Sergio1992
Italy522 Posts
On March 11 2012 23:05 jaminski wrote: toss has been getting nerfed since day 1 minus a few patches and people still play toss now we've just manned up and got on with it...sorry but that's not true  | ||
|
Elean
689 Posts
On March 11 2012 22:43 rahl.pwnage wrote: I wish they'd do something to fix the TvP matchup or something will change in the metagame. The early aggression is too strong, and the late game Protoss deathball does seem to make quick work of a PvT. Just FYI, you've got to normalize that data for race population. When you do, Zerg is actually overrepresented in GM, and Masters. In short, if you go to SC2Ranks.com you'll see something similar to this: -145,000 active Protoss -130,000 active Terran -120,000 active Zerg So, when you look at it as a proportion, Zerg is actually the single most succesful race. Granted, it's not anything huge that makes you think "OMG, OP, OP!" lol Top 100 TLPD: 34 T, 28 Z, 38 P Top 100 sc2charts.net: 36 T, 28Z, 36P At pro level, zerg have always been the least successful, even if it is much closer now. Protoss is kinda stable, but terran used to be much higher and zerg much lower. | ||
|
FinalForm
United States450 Posts
| ||
|
nemonic
132 Posts
On March 11 2012 22:43 rahl.pwnage wrote: I wish they'd do something to fix the TvP matchup or something will change in the metagame. The early aggression is too strong, and the late game Protoss deathball does seem to make quick work of a PvT. Just FYI, you've got to normalize that data for race population. When you do, Zerg is actually overrepresented in GM, and Masters. In short, if you go to SC2Ranks.com you'll see something similar to this: -145,000 active Protoss -130,000 active Terran -120,000 active Zerg So, when you look at it as a proportion, Zerg is actually the single most succesful race. Granted, it's not anything huge that makes you think "OMG, OP, OP!" lol It just doesn't mean anything. You could also say that it actually is the other way round since the lesser percentage of Zergs in lower leagues shows that it is much harder to play Zerg. You just can't make much conclusions from such numbers. | ||
|
peterra
Finland3 Posts
I feel like the number of terrans has consistantly been going down and protoss and zergs are taking over in number. I still feel like terran is the most complete of all the races, being extremely rewarding and good to play as terran nearly always wins when he plays right. Terran always needs huge blunders to lose a game and they've the best skill cealing of all the races. Every terran unit gets extremely good when they're controlled properly and every unit is extremely bad when they're controlled sloppy or badly. Terran receives the most out of skill while needing the most skill to exploit the race at its best. This is how every race should be, of course, by design, zerg/protoss lacks a lot and you cannot make your performance a lot better with simple control. The only units zerg has that get obviously way much better with control are infestors and mutalisks and for the case of protoss pretty much only air units that get a lot more and a lot better when they're used with control. Of course HT as well. However the standard units, roaches, hydralisks, speedlings etc. etc. cannot perform exceptionally much better or stalkers or zealots even if you controlled them like a boss. They're just...a-click units that you put to fight and hope they do what they're supposed to. They don't get such heights as units like marines and marauders that are absolutely amazing when you split them and use their attack animation and micro them around. It's simple amazing what these units can do in the hands of the right player. Then again this has the "downside" that terran seems to have a high skill cealing. Since their army hardly ever works properly without target-fire and spreading they're always gonna lose the fight of a-click vs. a-click basically and they need to keep their army controlled at all times, they cannot just leave it somewhere and hope it works. They need to keep an eye on the fights and let their macro split in exchange. Every race should be more like terran and every race should be less like zerg/protoss is in the fights. This is showcased on the lowest level where people feel like terran is too hard and do the switch already before masters to either of the two other races that require mechanical and strategical skills but not really micro-intensive in the same regard. As is I believe terran, if you bother to train with it and keep making your control better and better it gets extremely hard to beat you once you approach grandmaster. Before that you need to wash your face 1000 times because you prolly lost to marginally worse zergs and protosses. Imho terran is still the best race if you aim for professional career as its versatile, strong and extremely skillful where every piece can be improved so much. Zergs and protosses start to lose their touch in the GM/high master because terrans are handling their race so good, therefore most of protosses and zergs keep naming terran "imbalanced" in professional level and it's also kind of understandable that it's going to happen, it's natural. The guys play for a living and want to do their best in every single thing but hey with protoss and zerg you cannot really do much more than a-click with your standard units and then keep improving your strats and mechanics. You cannot make 10 lings work miracles but you can make 10 marines kill two hatcheries if you control it right. For that this issue, by design, would get fixed I use my personal experience as a basing. Whenever I play with terran I feel like I am playing with terran as i am playing with toss and zerg and i feel like terran, up to 20 minutes, is exactly as good and great as zerg/protoss but when the game gets beyond 20 minutes I start to be in trouble with terran. My mainproblem is that for having a chance in a lategame battle i need to micro my heart out. My army neeeds my absolute concentration at all times so i kind of start to macro pretty badly due to how heavily i need to concentrate on my army. Terran needs to keep building all game long, you never have enough production if you take mroe bases. I am always queing so many marines and tanks that it's obvious i've way too few production facilities. Zerg/protoss can pretty much stop the building once protoss has enough gates (12-15) + protoss only needs to pull 1 probe to build unlimited amount of buildings. Zerg on the other hand only needs to place the buildings once and from there just replace the drones that went to build. With terran i keep noticing a lot that i've a lot of my scvs, when building under consistant pressure, hanging about and i forget to shift-click them back to minerals. it feels like each expansion in the lategame needs about 1000 rallies for workers and 1000 useless shift-clicks just to keep the actual mining still happening. This is where I gget crippled, i keep building building and building and fighting fighting fighting and i need to be so fast and so all around while with zerg and protoss i am done with building and i only need to keep up with actual unit production and inject waves, i don't need to shiftclick 1000 times and build more hatcheries or spines or whatsoever. this allows me to give the fights, in the lategame, a lot of attention while my macro might already be allowed to slip a bit. To make terran more "noob-friendly" for lower players I'd like the idea that the scvs return automatically after finishing a building to their mineral line. As is terran needs more eye on his army and for my mind it'd make sense that they're a bit more forgiven in macro. This would spare them a lot of clicks and allow them to concentrate equally to the their armies as zergs and protosses which would improve their performance on lowest levels. This wouldn't change anything on the highest levels of game but would definitely help on the lower ones and these kind of changes are what terran needs. If you're looking for problems in units you are mislead, this is not about units, it's about the need of multitask/concentration on your army where zerg/protoss in the lategame are a bit more free. I think this would help players on low levels but wouldn't really improve the good performance of terrans in the professional scene. And after this change they'd still have to keep building/clicking the right add-ons and keep flying their buildings around. I think there're enough tasks to do with terran, helping this task a bit might help a lot. What you guys think? | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On March 11 2012 22:43 rahl.pwnage wrote: I wish they'd do something to fix the TvP matchup or something will change in the metagame. The early aggression is too strong, and the late game Protoss deathball does seem to make quick work of a PvT. Just FYI, you've got to normalize that data for race population. When you do, Zerg is actually overrepresented in GM, and Masters. In short, if you go to SC2Ranks.com you'll see something similar to this: -145,000 active Protoss -130,000 active Terran -120,000 active Zerg So, when you look at it as a proportion, Zerg is actually the single most succesful race. Granted, it's not anything huge that makes you think "OMG, OP, OP!" lol and when you see how the Terran ratio after plat-diamond is strongly increasing, it seems like Terran is by far the most succesful race at that level. | ||
|
Ucs
264 Posts
On March 11 2012 23:28 Elean wrote: Top 100 TLPD: 34 T, 28 Z, 38 P Top 100 sc2charts.net: 36 T, 28Z, 36P At pro level, zerg have always been the least successful, even if it is much closer now. Protoss is kinda stable, but terran used to be much higher and zerg much lower. One word that explain those stats and still holds true what the OP points out: koreans... Thats why you have so many top 100 terrans. If you cut out Korea, the top 100 for rest of the world would be completly diffrent. | ||
|
Aquila-
516 Posts
| ||
| ||
