|
On April 06 2012 04:10 IronManSC wrote: I've been facing a TON of terrans the past few days :O I think they are returning! Lord of the Rines: Return of the Terran Emperor
sounds like a box office hit.
|
On April 06 2012 04:10 IronManSC wrote: I've been facing a TON of terrans the past few days :O I think they are returning!
Ladder lock T_T
I'm sure most Terrans built up a healthy amount of bonus pool this season, people are probably just playing for the shitz and gigz since you can't get demoted.
Out of 41 1v1 game this season (mid master) only 5 games against Terran
|
On April 06 2012 03:17 Bagi wrote: While most terrans are annoyed about the amount of control terran requires, I really think terran is the best designed race in SC2 right now. Both protoss and zerg should require at least as much APM, and should have the micro options (and requirements) units like marines and tanks bring to the terran race.
Not sure about that... As long as Mech/Sky transitioning is not viable in PvT, Terran lacks supplyefficient units in the lategame. On the other hand, Terrans bio units are just way more cost and supplyefficient than the other T1-T1.5 units in the game, which makes all those early-midgame allins possible that lead to the need for powerful splashunits on the other races.
The only thing that makes Terran seem so complete, is how little you have to coinflip in the early game compared to the other races. But by not coinflipping Terran falls behind against the other races if they do coinflip (that's why Terran pros cut corners just as hard as other races) and f.e. don't get detection. Honestly, I think this is one of the biggest problems that Terrans struggle with on lower level. Zergs and even Protoss have to coinflip every game anyways (detection, air defense, how many canons/spines and where to put them, chrono/droning). When I play zerg, I often find it very easy to at least "feel" ahead, because I just crossed my fingers and hoped there would not be anything that requires an evo chamber and spores. Voila, now I have 500 minerals more in the midgame than I should have. With Terran it often feels very complicated to do the same and I find myself very often building an extra turret, just because it is so good "if he goes mutas", an extra barracks and then immidiatly adding the reactor and then realizing I can't produce steadily anyways when I want to squeeze in anoter CC and those upgrades and never cutting units, because of the "probes and pylons" mentality that people call good macro, but often is just bad decision making. I think this is also somewhat, what blizzard said was very complicated for low league Terran players. It's so easy not to lose early, that you often just find yourself unable to win later on. You have a lot of stuff to choose from early in a game as Terran, but the only way to compete with the other races in the longrun, is to limit yourself to as few options as your opponent has at that time. Just a thought on my own experiences with Terran from the last weeks.
|
On April 06 2012 02:24 SeventhPride wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2012 02:21 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 06 2012 02:14 SeventhPride wrote:On April 06 2012 02:11 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 06 2012 01:58 SeventhPride wrote:On April 06 2012 01:54 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 06 2012 01:50 SeventhPride wrote:On April 06 2012 01:44 Plansix wrote:On April 06 2012 01:15 Superneenja wrote:Actually this thread was started to see where all the terrans have gone, because people have seen a fairly dramatic decrease in the terran population on ladder. And I think an idea came about that the terrans were becoming frustrated at the MUs and were either quitting or switching races. I myself quit around end of season 3 after reaching top 5 diamond, and have recently picked up playing again. I think what we all really want is that everyone is on a equal footing meaning you have to do as much as I have to do to keep things even, but this is just not the case and I doubt it will ever be. It's saddening...but ya right now I want to get back in form and shut some protoss up  The whole having to play with skills of a higher league to beat a certain race in the same league as you is the frustrating part. Think of it this way lets say 2 people were going to perfect T and P play, who has more things to perfect? And out of those things each has to perfect which of things is harder to learn. A lot of us understand having a fustrating match up, but the issues people have in this thread are nothing new to SC2. PvZ has similar issues. Stephano developed a style of play where he maxes on roaches in 12 minutes and SMASHES a protoss third base, which is followed by a loss. Maxes on a single unit that is slightly upgraded to roll over a protoss attempting to expand. Currently there are a lot of people talking about how to stop it. So many, it has created a 52 page thread as shown below: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=320894I am not going to say that a zerg that can pull off maxing in 12 minutes is not talented, because that is a feat. But stopping 140 supply of roaches(the zerg gets 60 drones) at the 12 minute mark for a protoss is ROUGH. I could say it is harder than controlling the 200 roach blob, or a least is seems that way. . But I am not telling all zergs they are scrubs or saying that protoss is so much harder than zerg. That is just not true and I am not going gripe about how we are not on equal footing. I watch this thread to see if a solution is found, because I cannot beat that build with my current skills. Protoss have provided pointers to those who posted replays. Those pointers and tips have been responded to with more griping, balance whining and grief. The funny thing is, players can actually prevent the stephano build by not going forge/nexus first. But of course, they will then state zergs have it easier if they do that. Kinda retarded how they just want a build that automatically give them an advantage It's pretty much established that FFE is the current best opening in PvZ >.> Going gateway first really isn't popular and you have to have some really ridiculous trick up your sleeve. After your FFE, you can get your econ and upgrades going and try a whole bunch of different harrassment options. If you go gateway first in hopes that you can shut down a mass roach opening, the Zerg doesn't even have to go mass roaches (they obviously have map control for the first 5 minutes of the game with their first few lings, so they have the watchtowers and know when your expansion is going down... plus they can scout your base with an overlord). What you just state just proved my point, everyone thinks its the best opening yet they whine that zerg can get 3 bases easily. if you want to prevent zerg from getting 3 bases, go gate way first and pressure. Learn from the terrans, they pressure us and prevent us from getting our 3rd up quickly. And by forcing lings you can actually decrease our economy. And again, learn from the terrans, they have long learned that pressuring a zerg to make even 8 lings is enough to damage our economy. And btw, doing 5 zealot push would actually force more then 20 lings. Which is equivalent to more then 10 drones Edit: and before you argue that protoss is sacrificing 500 minerals, at least know, that you can still make probes from your nexus, while WE are spending larvae on zerglings. And we won't have enough for more drones. While I like your ideas in theory, it's unfortunately the case that TvZ and TvP aren't identical match-ups (especially with the openings). Opening 2rax is completely standard, because marines are cheap and quick to produce. Protoss can't open 2gate and throw ranged zealots in a bunker to do harrassment while expanding and throwing down a cybernetics core and getting gas. The +1 is what makes zealots really really good against zerglings, plus without the early forge, we could die pretty easily to runbys or early all-ins. And I'd rather have a Zerg opponent on 3 bases and myself on 2... then him on 2 and me only on 1. Besides, even if I deny the third base from going down at proper expansion, they can drop a macro hatch if they want to go all-in. I still think FFE is the best route to go, and all the Protoss pros clearly do too. Its not theory, dude I am being 100% non sarcastic with you, protoss players don't know how hurtful it is for a zerg to give up drones for lings. Look at genius play style, he opens gate/expand/ stargate. Its so safe and allows him to have tech choices AND forces the zerg to spend on spores. I will repeat, gateway openings are gonna be popular again, look at the recent gsl, some are already opening gate way first. All right, well I'll have to try opening that way a few times then to get a feel for it  I don't suppose there's any harm in trying out a new strategy. (By the way, I didn't think you were being sarcastic; I just felt like your idea was unrealistic.) If you happen to have a solid replay or two of a high-level PvZ where the Protoss opens gateway first into expansion to some decent success (for the reasons you explained), I would greatly appreciate it if you posted it ^^ Watch genius games on gsl. I think you can watch all his first games for free. He basically opens gate way first. Though he does go forge sometimes. He mixes them up but he has success with both of them.
Im pretty sure he just goes gateway first on maps like crossfire where FFEing is difficult. I cant remember many games of him going gate first on a FFE map.
Some specific games would be nice as i have a season 1 and 2 ticket and thats pretty much the only map i remember/would expect and i dont want to rewatch every one of his games lol.
I gotta agree with the gateway expand builds sucking on the current map set assuming a player is familiar vs FFE and vs gateway openers.
I am open to the opinion that it is good but i just need more proof than player doing it once in a while on maps that are bad for FFE and i dont want to rewatch every protoss game from season 1
|
Genius goes FFE every game vs Zerg lol. 1 base openers force Zerg to get gas, and thats about it. You won't delay their third more than you delay your natural.
|
The thing is that we need to remember is that Terrans can't innovate any new strategies to counter the current metagame because we all know that it'll get nerfed. -coughcough-
|
United States7483 Posts
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=326449
Winrates for march heavily favored terran in TvP internationally, and even worse in Korea at the pro level.
TvZ favored zerg both internationally and in Korea.
Overall win rate internationally has Z > T > P, and in Korea it has T > Z > P
So it's pretty hard to have an argument where P is OP vs. Terran, I'm surprised we see more complaints vs. P than vs. Z.
That said, it's really hard to justify any sort of complaint that terran is too hard at low levels when you realize that people aren't playing well, and any sort of buff would make T even more powerful at the top level of play (which is indicated by the Korean results).
|
On April 06 2012 08:34 Whitewing wrote:http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=326449Winrates for march heavily favored terran in TvP internationally, and even worse in Korea at the pro level. TvZ favored zerg both internationally and in Korea. Overall win rate internationally has Z > T > P, and in Korea it has T > Z > P So it's pretty hard to have an argument where P is OP vs. Terran, I'm surprised we see more complaints vs. P than vs. Z. That said, it's really hard to justify any sort of complaint that terran is too hard at low levels when you realize that people aren't playing well, and any sort of buff would make T even more powerful at the top level of play (which is indicated by the Korean results).
Nobody asked for a buff or said that TvP is P favored. Just harder at lower level.
Analogy, if you have a game with two characters, both have one skill which do 1 damage and can only be cast every 5 seconds. But the 1st character has to click twice in order to the skill to go off, while the second one only have to click once. The game is balanced but 1st character is harder to play. And it's easy to change.
That's the subject of this topic and a lot of people don't understand that.
|
On April 06 2012 08:59 Bidj wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2012 08:34 Whitewing wrote:http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=326449Winrates for march heavily favored terran in TvP internationally, and even worse in Korea at the pro level. TvZ favored zerg both internationally and in Korea. Overall win rate internationally has Z > T > P, and in Korea it has T > Z > P So it's pretty hard to have an argument where P is OP vs. Terran, I'm surprised we see more complaints vs. P than vs. Z. That said, it's really hard to justify any sort of complaint that terran is too hard at low levels when you realize that people aren't playing well, and any sort of buff would make T even more powerful at the top level of play (which is indicated by the Korean results). Nobody asked for a buff or said that TvP is P favored. Just harder at lower level. Analogy, if you have a game with two characters, both have one skill which do 1 damage and can only be cast every 5 seconds. But the 1st character has to click twice in order to the skill to go off, while the second one only have to click once. The game is balanced but 1st character is harder to play. And it's easy to change. That's the subject of this topic and a lot of people don't understand that.
The Game is Imbalanced for Me! argument strikes again.
|
As a Z in the early levels (Bronze to Plat) its nearly impossible to go two games without playing terran. I usually end up fighting against toss or terran, making my ZvZ matchup by far the worst.
|
On April 06 2012 09:02 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2012 08:59 Bidj wrote:On April 06 2012 08:34 Whitewing wrote:http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=326449Winrates for march heavily favored terran in TvP internationally, and even worse in Korea at the pro level. TvZ favored zerg both internationally and in Korea. Overall win rate internationally has Z > T > P, and in Korea it has T > Z > P So it's pretty hard to have an argument where P is OP vs. Terran, I'm surprised we see more complaints vs. P than vs. Z. That said, it's really hard to justify any sort of complaint that terran is too hard at low levels when you realize that people aren't playing well, and any sort of buff would make T even more powerful at the top level of play (which is indicated by the Korean results). Nobody asked for a buff or said that TvP is P favored. Just harder at lower level. Analogy, if you have a game with two characters, both have one skill which do 1 damage and can only be cast every 5 seconds. But the 1st character has to click twice in order to the skill to go off, while the second one only have to click once. The game is balanced but 1st character is harder to play. And it's easy to change. That's the subject of this topic and a lot of people don't understand that. The Game is Imbalanced for Me! argument strikes again.
No, that's not what that is. His example, while theoretical, is quite legitimate. Games shouldn't be designed like that, and it seems like Terran vs Protoss has a similar design to that, at least in the lategame.
|
On April 06 2012 08:34 Whitewing wrote:http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=326449Winrates for march heavily favored terran in TvP internationally, and even worse in Korea at the pro level. TvZ favored zerg both internationally and in Korea. Overall win rate internationally has Z > T > P, and in Korea it has T > Z > P So it's pretty hard to have an argument where P is OP vs. Terran, I'm surprised we see more complaints vs. P than vs. Z. That said, it's really hard to justify any sort of complaint that terran is too hard at low levels when you realize that people aren't playing well, and any sort of buff would make T even more powerful at the top level of play (which is indicated by the Korean results).
there have been several arguments in this thread, and I dont think any of them have involved anyone saying P is just OP vs terran. you're either misunderstanding something, or you just haven't been reading.
|
Statistics have been attempted over and over it seems on TL. Fact of the matter is that we can't really get at the underlying changes, that is that there are just too many variables to be able to accurately portray or display the movement and shifts of any one race at any one time. I really don't see any reason to continue this endeavor, as even the results will always be controversial and seen as missing something or without enough data. Do yourselves a favor and give up.
|
On April 06 2012 09:08 Gako wrote: As a Z in the early levels (Bronze to Plat) its nearly impossible to go two games without playing terran. I usually end up fighting against toss or terran, making my ZvZ matchup by far the worst.
Are you sure? I just reached Plat, had 25 Matches and not ONE of them against Terran, not one! Everyone is playing protoss... I guess it´s time for me to take a break from SC2. 8/10 Games are ZvP, thats not funny anymore....
|
I think overall winrates have been something of a distraction in this thread.
If something caused a lot of Terrans to give up and switch or leave the game, those Terrans would disproportionately be the worst players, meaning the average skill of Terrans would shoot up. Then if they were still playing, they would be starting off anew as Zerg and Protoss players and playing like shit, pushing Terran winrates higher.
It's really hard to quantify these effects though.
But basically, the discussion should be about the actual gameplay, and what's causing people to stop playing Terran.
Quite a few pages back, there was talk reaching something near a consensus that in TvP for example, Terran was too strong in the late-earlygame and midgame, and far too weak in the lategame. This means Terran players have to rely on risky aggression, which often works, but if it doesn't work then that game becomes incredibly frustrating in the lategame.
There is a similar thing for Zerg, where their lategame is really, really good compared to Terran after a variously even or Terran favored early to early mid game.
We need to talk about these things instead of balance. Only the most casual and stupid runners by of this thread failed to admit that Terran is favored until the lategame. Let's focus on evening out games so they are a little less one sided at all times.
A long time ago back when stalker-colossus deathballs off 2 base were extremely popular and difficult to stop, Blizzard expressed a desire to prevent situations where one race sits and survives and has a hard time until an arbitrary point in the game where they become very difficult to stop. We want to change it so that it's anyone's game in a consistent macro scenario.
|
I heard statistics with no explanatory variables are pretty good
|
You know I'm glad that Terrans are declining in numbers. If it's such a successful race, it shouldn't be an easy one to play or master. If it's both easy and successful...that's called broken. So kudos to all you Terrans who stuck with it. People who switched are just looking for an easy win, once many of their abusive crap's been figured out, they will have nothing to fall back on.
|
On April 06 2012 10:48 neoghaleon55 wrote: You know I'm glad that Terrans are declining in numbers. If it's such a successful race, it shouldn't be an easy one to play or master. If it's both easy and successful...that's called broken. So kudos to all you Terrans who stuck with it. People who switched are just looking for an easy win, once many of their abusive crap's been figured out, they will have nothing to fall back on.
There are a few of us to feel that way. But no one likes to hear "Well maybe you just aren't that good." Still every time I ask for help, all I hear is how much I could improve.
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
We decided to lock because this thread was going down hill.
|
|
|
|