|
On March 12 2012 17:57 Vindicare605 wrote:
This thread is just evidence for the "Terran Stigma" argument.
Honestly reading pages of pages of under the surface resentment for Terran domination in the GSL as well as imbalances in Season 1 and 2 (which I still say had more to do with the retarded map pool than the races) and using that to justify legitimate gripes about the learning curve of Terran at all levels below GM and professional is just disheartening. I wish I could expect more from the forum community.
Yeah, you'd think that people would stop with that "Terran is harder", "Terran players are just better", "Zerg/Protoss are easy a-move races", "Terran Pro players are better" bullshit, but that thread is just another monument of how biased the community is.
|
at my level (silver league) everything revolves around execution in PVZ , if i execute well my 7 gate 2 base timing , the zerg dies , if he executes a Roach push before that and im not ready (cannons and good wall) before my gates kick in , im dead ; but hey , its silver league so...
Thats most of the time , when it goes after that it evolves into a crazy matchup of base sniping and ling runbys so... its not that bad.
Actually I think PvT is in a much worse shape as it revolves around the protoss getting his AOE to kill the bio force of the T in time...
|
On March 12 2012 18:05 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2012 17:57 Vindicare605 wrote:
This thread is just evidence for the "Terran Stigma" argument.
Honestly reading pages of pages of under the surface resentment for Terran domination in the GSL as well as imbalances in Season 1 and 2 (which I still say had more to do with the retarded map pool than the races) and using that to justify legitimate gripes about the learning curve of Terran at all levels below GM and professional is just disheartening. I wish I could expect more from the forum community. Yeah, you'd think that people would stop with that "Terran is harder", "Terran players are just better", "Zerg/Protoss are easy a-move races", "Terran Pro players are better" bullshit, but that thread is just another monument of how biased the community is.
I don't really get what's so bullshit about Terran needed a good deal more micro and attention during the battle than the other 2 races. It seem's pretty clear.. ;\
|
Stopped playing ladder Terran because of the absolut retardness of the TvP.
|
Sweden235 Posts
Over the last month ive had 140 TvPs, 159 TvZ and 56 TvTs, and that's kinda of insane. It's also very bad because my TvT becomes severely worse than my other matchup because i get to play like 1-2 TvTs a day TOPS, but it's all because of blizzards dumb balancing which is slightly nerfing Terran every single patch instead of trying to evolve the metagame.
Oh and TvP and TvT probably make most terrans want to quit life aswell.
|
On March 12 2012 09:13 danielrosca wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2012 07:02 Rye. wrote:On March 12 2012 06:45 MuteZephyr wrote:
I love how every person complaining about sample size selectively ignores the SC2rank statistics as well as the poll statistics and just so happen to have a non-terran icon. Just because Terran was OP a while back and you where angry about it doesn't mean you have to carry a grudge forever. I remember pretty much giving up as soon as I saw T as Z, but now it's pretty much a cakewalk due to Terran lack of late game options. Most Zergs seem to have the same sentiment.
This situation has been apparent for a long time. At professional levels, Terran is great but the skill curve is so extreme to get to that level of play that for all people that don't make a living playing sc2, Terran is not worth it if you care about winning. you cant use sc2ranks. It shows % of players in each race, not number of games each race has played. A terran might just play 1 game at the start of the season then quit, he'd be counted in the sc2ranks race distribution, but he wouldnt be producing games with terran in them. sc2ranks is the foremost method to pick any trend, i hope you were joking about not being able to use it for inferring racial prefference. As for your example, it actually makes matters worse when you combine %players shown in sc2ranks with results here (% in games played) That is terran at around 25%.
You missed my point. Looking at how many players are in each race shows nothing.
eg.
you have 3 players
1 Terran
1 Protoss
1 Zerg
the zerg has played 99 games, the protoss has played 100 games, the terran played a single game then quit.
the sc2ranks distibution would be... 33% terran, 33% Protoss, 33% Zerg, as the stats are for the number of players in each race. These stats clearly dont show that only one game in a hundred had a terran in it.
personally, ive have noticed a tiny number of terrans on the ladder. i've started keeping track of my opponents race.
So far....
1 Terran
9 Zerg
2 Protoss.
Its a tiny sample size, and the lack of protoss makes me see that such a small sample cant be relied on.
|
On March 12 2012 15:09 EngrishTeacher wrote:
Wtf? TvP is still easy as ever.
Maybe it's because of my mindset that gets me the wins:
Abuse protoss lack of early game scouting options, always try to be aggressive trading barracks units with gateways units, always/constantly drop, always keep main army moving, and sneak in orbitals into my build whenever I can for more marines. That and the fact that I always split my MM ball into 3 control groups (BW habit) to allow for better micro.
TvP is still easy, terrans complaining just fail to abuse the advantages that T has over P such as stronger T1 to T2 units, higher mobility/drops, making orbitals, and USING SCANS to always know what the P is doing.
What league are you in?
|
On March 12 2012 18:41 Rye. wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2012 09:13 danielrosca wrote:On March 12 2012 07:02 Rye. wrote:On March 12 2012 06:45 MuteZephyr wrote:
I love how every person complaining about sample size selectively ignores the SC2rank statistics as well as the poll statistics and just so happen to have a non-terran icon. Just because Terran was OP a while back and you where angry about it doesn't mean you have to carry a grudge forever. I remember pretty much giving up as soon as I saw T as Z, but now it's pretty much a cakewalk due to Terran lack of late game options. Most Zergs seem to have the same sentiment.
This situation has been apparent for a long time. At professional levels, Terran is great but the skill curve is so extreme to get to that level of play that for all people that don't make a living playing sc2, Terran is not worth it if you care about winning. you cant use sc2ranks. It shows % of players in each race, not number of games each race has played. A terran might just play 1 game at the start of the season then quit, he'd be counted in the sc2ranks race distribution, but he wouldnt be producing games with terran in them. sc2ranks is the foremost method to pick any trend, i hope you were joking about not being able to use it for inferring racial prefference. As for your example, it actually makes matters worse when you combine %players shown in sc2ranks with results here (% in games played) That is terran at around 25%. You missed my point. Looking at how many players are in each race shows nothing. eg. you have 3 players 1 Terran 1 Protoss 1 Zerg the zerg has played 99 games, the protoss has played 100 games, the terran played a single game then quit. the sc2ranks distibution would be... 33% terran, 33% Protoss, 33% Zerg, as the stats are for the number of players in each race. These stats clearly dont show that only one game in a hundred had a terran in it. personally, ive have noticed a tiny number of terrans on the ladder. i've started keeping track of my opponents race. So far.... 1 Terran 9 Zerg 2 Protoss. Its a tiny sample size, and the lack of protoss makes me see that such a small sample cant be relied on.
Just some advice, install sc2gears so you don't have to remember to count them
|
Stopped playing ladder due to TvP. I would beat high masters Zergs and Terrans but would get absolutely roflstomped by equivalent Protoss. And since there are so many Protoss players on the ladder I just gave up. Simple.
|
Well i played zerg for a pretty long time. Now i play some terran also. The thing is that with zerg you dont really need to micro. Well offcourse you need sometimes. But the main thing is to keep your exp alive and keep exp. As terran you need to be very focused on what your opponent is doing and you also need to constantly mirco and macro. If you get your marines cought in one fungle you are most likly dead, or if you aint looking on your army when some banes comes you are also dead. And if you aint constantly microing vs protoss you are dead. Or if you forget your macro while microing you are dead. My main point is that with zerg its enough with good knowledge of the race to win or go up in leagues. The main thing i have learned when playing terran is that when you win you really think you have played really well. Wasent offten i felt that way when i played zerg on a much higher level then i am playing terran on at the moment. And one more thing i want to put out there. Its very much bm talk on NA compared to EU. Dont know much about protoss so i skip that part. :D
|
On March 12 2012 18:14 SupLilSon wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2012 18:05 Big J wrote:On March 12 2012 17:57 Vindicare605 wrote:
This thread is just evidence for the "Terran Stigma" argument.
Honestly reading pages of pages of under the surface resentment for Terran domination in the GSL as well as imbalances in Season 1 and 2 (which I still say had more to do with the retarded map pool than the races) and using that to justify legitimate gripes about the learning curve of Terran at all levels below GM and professional is just disheartening. I wish I could expect more from the forum community. Yeah, you'd think that people would stop with that "Terran is harder", "Terran players are just better", "Zerg/Protoss are easy a-move races", "Terran Pro players are better" bullshit, but that thread is just another monument of how biased the community is. I don't really get what's so bullshit about Terran needed a good deal more micro and attention during the battle than the other 2 races. It seem's pretty clear.. ;\
because my Terran opponents don't have more APM than my Zerg or Protoss opponents (or me) at Masters.
because the multitasking strategies people keep on talking about when glorifying Terrans problems are not being played: I don't play against massive multidropping; and when I do those drops are idle half of the time because they are rallied all across the map and needed exactly 5 actions
because the "crazy splitting/micro by Terrans" is big myth... my opponents mostly stim and run in 1-2clumps in battles
because Terran has it's own "deathball" strategy, at least in TvZ and though I don't play a lot against it, Mech is definatly viable
because Terran does not have to deny bases and go aggressive all the time... I shortly lost to a Terran reacting to a 3base opening with 4 OCs into mass marine rally into BCs at masters and he beat me quite decisevly; I have seen Idra on his stream lose to a Terran going 2base with an additional Planetary Fortress to protect his 2bases for ~15min into mass expand skymech Terran with viking/raven/thor (that was pretty much the only time I turned on that stream... nothing impressive going on there either)... Terran players have to realize that they can just do stupid bullshit on the ladder and don't have to imitate play styles that might indeed be very hard to pull of, but that are exclusivly needed against people who play very hard to pull of stuff as well
because every race needs to pay attention to everything that is happening all the time, and there are millions of possibilities to just lose the game for every race in every matchup if you fuck up once... that's not a terran problem!
That stuff seems pretty clear, if you actually play the game.
|
I dont think that it´s only a balance or "Terrans has to be better to win" thing (and yea i think terran is the hardest race to play but... nermind), i believe its more the psychological part that hurts terrans.
How often terrans hit almost every emp and microing as best as he can and dies to just two storms or fungals. Its more the feeling of doing everything you can and die anyways. In addition we dont have the "stopping 50 supply with 10" spellcasters like ht´s or infestors which makes the loose of a big army an instant loss instead of fighting 10 minutes to death with warpin or mass spine/zergling to delay the defeat which gives a better feeling instead of loosing in 3 seconds on 1 wrong move.
|
On March 12 2012 19:20 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2012 18:14 SupLilSon wrote:On March 12 2012 18:05 Big J wrote:On March 12 2012 17:57 Vindicare605 wrote:
This thread is just evidence for the "Terran Stigma" argument.
Honestly reading pages of pages of under the surface resentment for Terran domination in the GSL as well as imbalances in Season 1 and 2 (which I still say had more to do with the retarded map pool than the races) and using that to justify legitimate gripes about the learning curve of Terran at all levels below GM and professional is just disheartening. I wish I could expect more from the forum community. Yeah, you'd think that people would stop with that "Terran is harder", "Terran players are just better", "Zerg/Protoss are easy a-move races", "Terran Pro players are better" bullshit, but that thread is just another monument of how biased the community is. I don't really get what's so bullshit about Terran needed a good deal more micro and attention during the battle than the other 2 races. It seem's pretty clear.. ;\ because my Terran opponents don't have more APM than my Zerg or Protoss opponents (or me) at Masters. because the multitasking strategies people keep on talking about when glorifying Terrans problems are not being played: I don't play against massive multidropping; and when I do those drops are idle half of the time because they are rallied all across the map and needed exactly 5 actions because the "crazy splitting/micro by Terrans" is big myth... my opponents mostly stim and run in 1-2clumps in battles because Terran has it's own "deathball" strategy, at least in TvZ and though I don't play a lot against it, Mech is definatly viable because Terran does not have to deny bases and go aggressive all the time... I shortly lost to a Terran reacting to a 3base opening with 4 OCs into mass marine rally into BCs at masters and he beat me quite decisevly; I have seen Idra on his stream lose to a Terran going 2base with an additional Planetary Fortress to protect his 2bases for ~15min into mass expand skymech Terran with viking/raven/thor (that was pretty much the only time I turned on that stream... nothing impressive going on there either)... Terran players have to realize that they can just do stupid bullshit on the ladder and don't have to imitate play styles that might indeed be very hard to pull of, but that are exclusivly needed against people who play very hard to pull of stuff as well because every race needs to pay attention to everything that is happening all the time, and there are millions of possibilities to just lose the game for every race in every matchup if you fuck up once... that's not a terran problem! That stuff seems pretty clear, if you actually play the game.
I honestly just want all races to be crushed if they just a-move. At the moment you can play a great game with a P or Z and get a-moved any second if tanks are slightly out of position. I have never gained a win from a-move with T, ever. I have been defeated by obviously worse players who a-move and win the coin flip. The feel that you work for your wins while the other races gain them while eating chips is the reason T's do the only thing they can: stop playing.
A change in Collosus, smart surround, and more emphasis on positional units in all races should do the trick.
|
They all went to code S brah, have a look
|
On March 12 2012 19:33 USvBleakill wrote:
I dont think that it´s only a balance or "Terrans has to be better to win" thing (and yea i think terran is the hardest race to play but... nermind), i believe its more the psychological part that hurts terrans.
How often terrans hit almost every emp and microing as best as he can and dies to just two storms or fungals. Its more the feeling of doing everything you can and die anyways. In addition we dont have the "stopping 50 supply with 10" spellcasters like ht´s or infestors which makes the loose of a big army an instant loss instead of fighting 10 minutes to death with warpin or mass spine/zergling to delay the defeat which gives a better feeling instead of loosing in 3 seconds on 1 wrong move.
Yeah forgot that part. Terran spellcasting is how all spellcasting should be like. If you snipe your own unit, it dies. If you feedback a marine it doesn't go off, giving you another chance. Hitting a great EMP is a start to a battle you might win. Hitting a storm is instantwin. Hitting a fungal is just plain easy.
|
On March 12 2012 19:41 Osteriet wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2012 19:20 Big J wrote:On March 12 2012 18:14 SupLilSon wrote:On March 12 2012 18:05 Big J wrote:On March 12 2012 17:57 Vindicare605 wrote:
This thread is just evidence for the "Terran Stigma" argument.
Honestly reading pages of pages of under the surface resentment for Terran domination in the GSL as well as imbalances in Season 1 and 2 (which I still say had more to do with the retarded map pool than the races) and using that to justify legitimate gripes about the learning curve of Terran at all levels below GM and professional is just disheartening. I wish I could expect more from the forum community. Yeah, you'd think that people would stop with that "Terran is harder", "Terran players are just better", "Zerg/Protoss are easy a-move races", "Terran Pro players are better" bullshit, but that thread is just another monument of how biased the community is. I don't really get what's so bullshit about Terran needed a good deal more micro and attention during the battle than the other 2 races. It seem's pretty clear.. ;\ because my Terran opponents don't have more APM than my Zerg or Protoss opponents (or me) at Masters. because the multitasking strategies people keep on talking about when glorifying Terrans problems are not being played: I don't play against massive multidropping; and when I do those drops are idle half of the time because they are rallied all across the map and needed exactly 5 actions because the "crazy splitting/micro by Terrans" is big myth... my opponents mostly stim and run in 1-2clumps in battles because Terran has it's own "deathball" strategy, at least in TvZ and though I don't play a lot against it, Mech is definatly viable because Terran does not have to deny bases and go aggressive all the time... I shortly lost to a Terran reacting to a 3base opening with 4 OCs into mass marine rally into BCs at masters and he beat me quite decisevly; I have seen Idra on his stream lose to a Terran going 2base with an additional Planetary Fortress to protect his 2bases for ~15min into mass expand skymech Terran with viking/raven/thor (that was pretty much the only time I turned on that stream... nothing impressive going on there either)... Terran players have to realize that they can just do stupid bullshit on the ladder and don't have to imitate play styles that might indeed be very hard to pull of, but that are exclusivly needed against people who play very hard to pull of stuff as well because every race needs to pay attention to everything that is happening all the time, and there are millions of possibilities to just lose the game for every race in every matchup if you fuck up once... that's not a terran problem! That stuff seems pretty clear, if you actually play the game. I honestly just want all races to be crushed if they just a-move. At the moment you can play a great game with a P or Z and get a-moved any second if tanks are slightly out of position. I have never gained a win from a-move with T, ever. I have been defeated by obviously worse players who a-move and win the coin flip. The feel that you work for your wins while the other races gain them while eating chips is the reason T's do the only thing they can: stop playing. A change in Collosus, smart surround, and more emphasis on positional units in all races should do the trick.
Easy win happen as terran, don't make a fool out of us.
It's perhaps not a simple a-move, but you probably have these games where you just caught a guy being greedy or unsafe and just win easily. It's not often but i still get some win right away with the simple medivac&stim timing in TvP with very basic unit control for example.
|
Because TvP makes you hate this game and at least 40% of my games are against Protoss. No offense but the matchup is retarded and no fun at all for the terran and thats a big reason imo.
|
On March 12 2012 18:41 Rye. wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2012 09:13 danielrosca wrote:On March 12 2012 07:02 Rye. wrote:On March 12 2012 06:45 MuteZephyr wrote:
I love how every person complaining about sample size selectively ignores the SC2rank statistics as well as the poll statistics and just so happen to have a non-terran icon. Just because Terran was OP a while back and you where angry about it doesn't mean you have to carry a grudge forever. I remember pretty much giving up as soon as I saw T as Z, but now it's pretty much a cakewalk due to Terran lack of late game options. Most Zergs seem to have the same sentiment.
This situation has been apparent for a long time. At professional levels, Terran is great but the skill curve is so extreme to get to that level of play that for all people that don't make a living playing sc2, Terran is not worth it if you care about winning. you cant use sc2ranks. It shows % of players in each race, not number of games each race has played. A terran might just play 1 game at the start of the season then quit, he'd be counted in the sc2ranks race distribution, but he wouldnt be producing games with terran in them. sc2ranks is the foremost method to pick any trend, i hope you were joking about not being able to use it for inferring racial prefference. As for your example, it actually makes matters worse when you combine %players shown in sc2ranks with results here (% in games played) That is terran at around 25%. You missed my point. Looking at how many players are in each race shows nothing. eg. you have 3 players 1 Terran 1 Protoss 1 Zerg the zerg has played 99 games, the protoss has played 100 games, the terran played a single game then quit. the sc2ranks distibution would be... 33% terran, 33% Protoss, 33% Zerg, as the stats are for the number of players in each race. These stats clearly dont show that only one game in a hundred had a terran in it. personally, ive have noticed a tiny number of terrans on the ladder. i've started keeping track of my opponents race. So far.... 1 Terran 9 Zerg 2 Protoss. Its a tiny sample size, and the lack of protoss makes me see that such a small sample cant be relied on.
There's no point to miss. Given such a large sample size, the chance for a player to drop out is almost even for any race and assuming terran base is low to begin with (check the sum of matches in this topic) a player quitting adds more to % than other race would.
There are two facts that complement each other: sc2ranks and sum of matches listed here.
|
On March 12 2012 19:41 Osteriet wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2012 19:20 Big J wrote:On March 12 2012 18:14 SupLilSon wrote:On March 12 2012 18:05 Big J wrote:On March 12 2012 17:57 Vindicare605 wrote:
This thread is just evidence for the "Terran Stigma" argument.
Honestly reading pages of pages of under the surface resentment for Terran domination in the GSL as well as imbalances in Season 1 and 2 (which I still say had more to do with the retarded map pool than the races) and using that to justify legitimate gripes about the learning curve of Terran at all levels below GM and professional is just disheartening. I wish I could expect more from the forum community. Yeah, you'd think that people would stop with that "Terran is harder", "Terran players are just better", "Zerg/Protoss are easy a-move races", "Terran Pro players are better" bullshit, but that thread is just another monument of how biased the community is. I don't really get what's so bullshit about Terran needed a good deal more micro and attention during the battle than the other 2 races. It seem's pretty clear.. ;\ because my Terran opponents don't have more APM than my Zerg or Protoss opponents (or me) at Masters. because the multitasking strategies people keep on talking about when glorifying Terrans problems are not being played: I don't play against massive multidropping; and when I do those drops are idle half of the time because they are rallied all across the map and needed exactly 5 actions because the "crazy splitting/micro by Terrans" is big myth... my opponents mostly stim and run in 1-2clumps in battles because Terran has it's own "deathball" strategy, at least in TvZ and though I don't play a lot against it, Mech is definatly viable because Terran does not have to deny bases and go aggressive all the time... I shortly lost to a Terran reacting to a 3base opening with 4 OCs into mass marine rally into BCs at masters and he beat me quite decisevly; I have seen Idra on his stream lose to a Terran going 2base with an additional Planetary Fortress to protect his 2bases for ~15min into mass expand skymech Terran with viking/raven/thor (that was pretty much the only time I turned on that stream... nothing impressive going on there either)... Terran players have to realize that they can just do stupid bullshit on the ladder and don't have to imitate play styles that might indeed be very hard to pull of, but that are exclusivly needed against people who play very hard to pull of stuff as well because every race needs to pay attention to everything that is happening all the time, and there are millions of possibilities to just lose the game for every race in every matchup if you fuck up once... that's not a terran problem! That stuff seems pretty clear, if you actually play the game. I honestly just want all races to be crushed if they just a-move. At the moment you can play a great game with a P or Z and get a-moved any second if tanks are slightly out of position. I have never gained a win from a-move with T, ever. I have been defeated by obviously worse players who a-move and win the coin flip. The feel that you work for your wins while the other races gain them while eating chips is the reason T's do the only thing they can: stop playing. A change in Collosus, smart surround, and more emphasis on positional units in all races should do the trick.
Ever tried 3 rax stim into double expand? the first push often wins without micro, just with a-move so its not completely true it can work for all races, and fail for all races too
|
On March 12 2012 19:41 Osteriet wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2012 19:20 Big J wrote:On March 12 2012 18:14 SupLilSon wrote:On March 12 2012 18:05 Big J wrote:On March 12 2012 17:57 Vindicare605 wrote:
This thread is just evidence for the "Terran Stigma" argument.
Honestly reading pages of pages of under the surface resentment for Terran domination in the GSL as well as imbalances in Season 1 and 2 (which I still say had more to do with the retarded map pool than the races) and using that to justify legitimate gripes about the learning curve of Terran at all levels below GM and professional is just disheartening. I wish I could expect more from the forum community. Yeah, you'd think that people would stop with that "Terran is harder", "Terran players are just better", "Zerg/Protoss are easy a-move races", "Terran Pro players are better" bullshit, but that thread is just another monument of how biased the community is. I don't really get what's so bullshit about Terran needed a good deal more micro and attention during the battle than the other 2 races. It seem's pretty clear.. ;\ because my Terran opponents don't have more APM than my Zerg or Protoss opponents (or me) at Masters. because the multitasking strategies people keep on talking about when glorifying Terrans problems are not being played: I don't play against massive multidropping; and when I do those drops are idle half of the time because they are rallied all across the map and needed exactly 5 actions because the "crazy splitting/micro by Terrans" is big myth... my opponents mostly stim and run in 1-2clumps in battles because Terran has it's own "deathball" strategy, at least in TvZ and though I don't play a lot against it, Mech is definatly viable because Terran does not have to deny bases and go aggressive all the time... I shortly lost to a Terran reacting to a 3base opening with 4 OCs into mass marine rally into BCs at masters and he beat me quite decisevly; I have seen Idra on his stream lose to a Terran going 2base with an additional Planetary Fortress to protect his 2bases for ~15min into mass expand skymech Terran with viking/raven/thor (that was pretty much the only time I turned on that stream... nothing impressive going on there either)... Terran players have to realize that they can just do stupid bullshit on the ladder and don't have to imitate play styles that might indeed be very hard to pull of, but that are exclusivly needed against people who play very hard to pull of stuff as well because every race needs to pay attention to everything that is happening all the time, and there are millions of possibilities to just lose the game for every race in every matchup if you fuck up once... that's not a terran problem! That stuff seems pretty clear, if you actually play the game. I honestly just want all races to be crushed if they just a-move. At the moment you can play a great game with a P or Z and get a-moved any second if tanks are slightly out of position. I have never gained a win from a-move with T, ever. I have been defeated by obviously worse players who a-move and win the coin flip. The feel that you work for your wins while the other races gain them while eating chips is the reason T's do the only thing they can: stop playing. A change in Collosus, smart surround, and more emphasis on positional units in all races should do the trick.
This, exactly. I'm so tired of microing my ass off and seeing the opponent amove over my army. I watch replays and he does one or two clicks while my APM shoots up into the 200's. This goes for zerg now too since mass ling is gaining so much popularity these days. Even with hellions you still have to micro a lot while they only amove....
I'm a platinum terran and I hardly ever see a TvT. I actually love the matchup too so it's very saddening 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
