Where did all of the terrans go? - Page 92

On March 20 2012 00:07 Blasterion wrote:

Unlike what you imagined, no Koreans didn't have warp in in Age of Empires 2 they had War Wagons and Turtleships

On March 20 2012 00:41 Big J wrote:


Unlike what you imagine, there is something called "new" in the world... I know, that's really creative and scary for a lot of people. Things that are there but have not been there since the big bang, imagine how different things can become with those type of things... :O
Imagine there could be RTS games without defenders advantage :O
Imagine there are already RTS games that are great fun and have way less defenders advantages than SC2 (walking distance isn't the only defenders advantage )

On March 20 2012 01:14 Blasterion wrote:

nope but it's a damn good one.

On March 20 2012 01:27 Big J wrote:


yup and absolutly necessary in SC2, but not generally in RTS, like the whole defenders advantage concept is not generally needed to make a good RTS

On March 20 2012 01:33 Blasterion wrote:

But that's exactly why Sc2 is a deathball game, nobody wants to make small to medium scale aggressions because of a lack of defender's advantage, If you lose your small aggression his now bigger army can run you over, So you have players sitting on their units until 200/200 for this so called epic battle. Which is just terrible game design. Protoss defies that defender's advantage, always reinforces first. and can chrono boost their reinforcement. I think the problem is pretty clear.

On March 19 2012 21:33 Everlong wrote:


Yes, pretty much this. But I don't care that much as they are removing Thor in Hots.. Now the energy on Thor is there only for 1 purpose and that is so that it can be countered by HT. +1 Vehicle upgrades makes Thor deal more dmg then Strike Cannons, which pretty much says everything about how drunken were those guys..

On March 20 2012 01:33 Blasterion wrote:

But that's exactly why Sc2 is a deathball game, nobody wants to make small to medium scale aggressions because of a lack of defender's advantage, If you lose your small aggression his now bigger army can run you over, So you have players sitting on their units until 200/200 for this so called epic battle. Which is just terrible game design. Protoss defies that defender's advantage, always reinforces first. and can chrono boost their reinforcement. I think the problem is pretty clear.

On March 20 2012 03:27 Kakaru2 wrote:
Constant nerfing does make an impression. But small, if nerf are justified. I mean, the reaper used to be a pain for 2v2. Together with zerg ally it was just broken. I didn't complained that it got so nerfed that reaper are no use anymore. Perhaps they should just remove the reaper, it's not worth it.

But what's important is that the matchup is fair. When I lose i want to say gg, you sir outplayed me. I don't want to rage because I'm hitting a stonewall head on. And that's how TvP felt like. Either go for cheese or lose outright. And versus zerg late game have become so too after last patch. You can't attack the toss or zerg frontal.

And I'm not Polt to drop 4 places at once. I stayed up all night yesterday to see Polt vs Stephano. He dropped like a maniac and multitasked non stop but Stephano got a lot better in the last month (after assembly) at defending drops. And Polt vanished, 1-2 and 1-3. Stephano is good, and I like him, but at assembly Polt beat him by avoiding a fight and dropping. I don't enjoy this style of play. For me honor is about meeting 1 on 1, equal weapons and fight it out. And you can't to that at all. And even if you want to fight dirty the problem is you need 300 apm and a crazy multitasking. And that means you should play 12h/day as Terran. Doesn't cut it, unless you are a pro. For whoever it isn't the game isn't just. And being perceived as just is more important for a game to be balnced if you want that game to have a healthy following and be an e-sport. An e-sport without casual players is going to wither and die.

That's why I stopped playing, until Blizzard fix this fairness problem. In Broodwar when I lost with either of the 3 races (yes I play them all) I felt at peace. I knew I had lost to a better player. I want this feeling back.

On March 20 2012 01:59 Big J wrote:


I disagree. In my opinion the defenders advantage is too big. But that's not because of any crazy defenders mechanics, but because the economy is too big in SC2. You will nearly always attack with 20 less supply than your opponent defends with, because army creation is too fast.
So the only way to get aggressive is to sacrifice economy for army most of the time, which leaves the game in an awkward situation, in which you either balance the game around "semi-allins" being an efficient strategy, and/or turteling being an efficient strategy, but never "just walking out and attacking" being efficient - due to the amount of units produced in the time it takes you to walk across.
I think this thread describes the problem the best: too much money in the game leads to too little time in which an active army is actually useful, therefore activness is often not rewarding which leads to one big army > several smaller armies and replacing > keeping alive.

On March 19 2012 23:17 magnaflow wrote:
Toss is broken. Somewhat weak early game (although they are learning how to deal with it) and far too strong of a late game. And the worst part of it all is whenever a PvX game is played it is boring as fuck to watch. Turtle up to 3 base and amove with deathball, not very entertaining. Toss needs to be made more difficult to play and actually require micro.

On March 20 2012 03:51 JOJOsc2news wrote:


This is such a bitter little whine.
You clearly have no understanding of Protoss whatsoever.
This thread looks to be more and more derailing into Terran players complaining about how their race is the worst of them all.

As to the OP. While I have definitely seen the trend of vanishing Terrans I seem to play more Terrans this season. I mostly play Zerg, then Terran and quite far behind Protoss. I never quite had that distribution yet. Might the Terrans be coming back or are they all busy on the forums complaining?

On March 20 2012 03:54 Bojas wrote:

I understand that he's whining but why does he have no clue at all?

On March 20 2012 04:02 SupLilSon wrote:

People generally lump the 2 together, because inherently there's nothing wrong with whining, but people want there to be so they associate whining with lack of intelligence. People are so naive thinking SC2 is just going to magically balance itself like BW did. News flash, this game is nothing like BW.

On March 20 2012 03:41 SupLilSon wrote:


You realize this is exactly one of the massive problems with Terran.... The fact that Protoss is an EXCEPTION to that. Protoss can actually have more supply than you while attacking, even after you repel them. It's the reason why you need to win 6 fights in a row to beat down a Protoss but they usually only need to win 1 fight before stream rolling all the way to your natural. Protoss completely ignore map size and distance. Terran is the race hindered most by reinforcement distance, meaning that if we all in, it usually has to include SCVs, or it needs to be a completely unscouted push that the enemy is simply unprepared for.

On March 20 2012 04:09 Big J wrote:


That's why every Protoss unit that comes from a warpgate is costinefficient compared to their Terran and Zerg "low Tier counterparts" and thereby Protoss has to have a more expensive army than the opponent to attack. All those things are completly fine, due to the costinefficiency of Protoss WG units, but where I do agree is that it becomes complicated when the question is not cost- but supplyefficiency, like in the scenarios in which both players hit a max and afterwards can reinforce from a bank, so costs don't matter as much, but production facilities do. In that scenarios Terran needs supplyefficient units to deal with the faster opponents supplyefficient reinforcements. In TvZ this is fine imo (a Terran usually does not die to lings/roaches which are easy to reinforce in the lategame due to mechanic supplyefficient units), in TvP it forces Terran to win the maxed engagement very efficiently.
So the question is, is this consistently possible (~50% of the time)? With the current Terran aggressive TvP styles which don't build up many supplyefficient units but meanwhile focus on getting ahead/winning in the midgame by doing damage, I'd say it is not. With other styles, it might be. The question with those is, if they can achieve the same consistently strong overall winrates, or if they will drop below 50% and therefore have to be considered instable "cheese" strategies.