|
On March 17 2012 17:49 Empire.Beastyqt wrote:There are couple of problems with terran race. Terran is just harder to play and yes this is coming from terran and I have beaten top EU players with offraces before so I know/did play other races - which makes casual players not wanting to invest more time into game than protoss or zerg. I wanted to make one thing clear, so often I see "terran got mules doesnt matter how many workers you kill". Every time something like this happends zerg or protoss sacrifice their tech in order to do so, 6g allin kills 20scvs or baneling bust kills 20 scvs but T still wins 5min after? Imagine if terran did 5 rax allin vs protoss with marines and protoss gets 3 colossus out and terran got only marines, but killed 20 probes, terran is still going to die just like terran kills zerg or protoss after losing scvs with medivac/stim or/and with tanks. Mules are NEEDED to keep up with zerg/toss early game because we dont have chrono boost or larva, after 10min you use mules for scans so people talking about mules being OP are just completely clueless about game. Are mules IMBA late game with 10 scvs and 50 orbitals? yes, is remaxing 200/200 in two warpins or zerg 200/200 in 20sec IMBA? yes. I'd always trade mules for warpin or larva late game. Making mistake as terran after 20min will cost you the game, there is no question about it 4-5 base vs 4-5 base and you mess up and lose 100 army supply and he got 150 left? you will die due to terran not being able to make units fast enough like Z and P can. This is frustrating for pros but for casual players as well and this thread isnt about GM/GSL level only its for all levels of play. TvZ requires a lot of apm from both sides, but what is problem again for lower league players is that terran is hard to micro, lets say bronze league TvZ, zerg makes 50 banelings and terran got 3-5 tanks and mass marine 1) he wont split 2) he wont split siege tanks (sieged) and all zerg needs is to a-move in order to win, because a-moving with ling and bling is a lot harder than spliting marines and doing siege in good position/on time. Players who dont want to invest time into game will rather play zerg or protoss instead terran, who wouldnt? TvP is just not balanced in late game, I talked to Slayers terrans and I will quote them "protoss 3-3 terran die" and "protoss T_T". What is the problem in TvP? Zealots have too much hp and are too cost effective units which makes them broken in late game along with warpin. One missmicro from T and you will die. Another problem is terran not having T3 units and having to fight with T1 and T2 whole game, Thors and BC's (if we count them as T3) are a joke and the ghost nerf screwed TvP even more than TvZ because you cant snipe zealots anymore which helped A LOT before. If you watch GSL you would know that every terran is allining protoss and those who dont die in hilarious fashion. All of this makes people not wanting to play terran. What us terrans want? and im pretty sure I talk for everyone who plays terran now. We dont want our race easier or boost our marines or marauders, we want viable T3 and if in order to win we need to split marines vs banelings, why does protoss needs to a-move for zealots? Why is there smart AI (or how you call it) that make them auto-surround terran bio? Make protoss have hotkey to use charge every 10sec and if they a-move zealots get stuck one behind another till you micro them just like with ranged units when you a-move the first one to get in range will shoot and those behind will run around, please do same for melee units. We want other races micro to be harder and more rewarding just like terran units are like now, just like blink stalkers or mutas are. My games this season on high GM are: 123 TvP 40.32% 106 TvZ 34.75% 76 TvT 24.91% There is no doubt more and more people keep quiting playing terran and this isnt whine post, this just just a FACT post and stats support what everyone one of us is saying. TLDR: 1) terran requires too much time invested in order to win games, 2) mules are comeback unit only if you sacrificed tech to kill scvs, 3) terran has no T3 units, 4) give other races more micro options and more micro rewarding units. extra: I will always play terran because I have self respect 
I agree on everything except point one on TL;DR. I switched to 1-1-1ing after I got tired of losing to macro toss, and it works much better than macro terran if I execute it correctly. Though, you probably meant 'teran requires too much time invested in order to win macro games.'
I especially agree with the part about a re-worked charge. It sounds like it would be like offensive baneling splitting or something. 0.o
|
Terran will get through this no problem. Zergs and Protoss have cried like babies and Blizzard buffs them or nerfs Terran. Terran didn't even care about removal of the Amulet since emp is workable vs high templars and is good against Protoss units. Real men play Terran though. Thorzain and the Korean Terrans will find a way that will eventually be nerfed by the cries of the Zergs and Protoss. More nerfs until Flash moves over to SC2 and masters BitByBit and owns with scvs and marines. Many more Terrans will quit but only the most skilled will be left making other race users skill pale in comparison.
|
France12911 Posts
On March 20 2012 05:19 SupLilSon wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2012 05:17 JOJOsc2news wrote:On March 20 2012 05:14 Bojas wrote:On March 20 2012 04:31 JOJOsc2news wrote:On March 20 2012 03:54 Bojas wrote:On March 20 2012 03:51 JOJOsc2news wrote: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. 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?  I understand that he's whining but why does he have no clue at all? I assume you are trolling but I will answer anyways. I said "no understanding of Protoss" not "no clue at all". Stop derailing! Why am I saying he has no understanding of Protoss? 1. "Toss is broken" Generalization 2. "Far too strong of a late game" Generalization 3. "Boring as fuck to watch" Generalization 4. "Turtle up to 3 base and a-move with deathball" Shows no understanding whatsoever. 5. "Toss needs to be made more difficult to play and actually require micro." Shows no understanding whatsoever. I assure you I am not trolling. Maybe I'm just stupid, I cannot judge that. But just because he generalizes to what sounds to me standard protoss play doesn't quite means he has clearly no understanding whatsoever. Which I asked of you to eleborate on. I tend to agree with him on point 4 and 5 and I don't see how this is a generalization which apparently means a lack of understanding. Almost every terran in this thread seems to lack that understanding to some degree. Coincidence? So you are literally saying that Protoss does not require micro. You are also saying that Protoss just needs to turtle to a deathball on three bases and then simply a-move (we already established no micro!). You have to be trolling. How is he trolling, and how are either of those statements untrue?
Because protoss requires micro?
Ever heard of sentry positionning (so they are able to cast FF and not get trapped), HT positionning, basically positionning for about every unit of the composition, FF micro, storm usage (landing good storms, avoiding zealots etc), etc...
Basically the only thing that is a problem about protoss' micro is that charge is an autocast which allow them to do something else during the fight, whereas the terran has to kite / reposition his army the whole fight, which is very apm consuming / you can't really do anything else and requires more work on the terran side.
And I'm terran. Really zealots are more frustrating than colossus and archons, it gives you the impression that you can't kill them and slowly die or that you win a fight but you don't have time to gather troops to be able to kill the zealot re-warp.
Oh and protoss doesn't "just have to turtle to a deathball and then simply a-move", these sort of protoss are really easy to beat and when you play "good" protosses there are so many little details that they are doing, playing P is much more complex than what you are trying to claim it is.
Just watch some protoss streams on the korean server (ToD, SaSe, NaNiwa for example) to see if all they have to do to win against competent terrans is "turtle to 3bases and a-move". This is because of this that this topic won't go anywhere, there's too much people who just get smashed on ladder who want to express their frustration on here and they do because of the bandwagon of people barely whining (and for some whining plain and simple) without being banned.
|
Essentially this thread was qq protoss imba from the word go, so I want to elaborate on the matter. Since many bronze-diamond players in this thread are joining in the fray, my opinion about there whining is the following, if terran is underpowered, then just lose games until the alleged "opness" of protoss is counteracted by your opponent's inferior skill. Noone should care about how you feel about balance, balance is only for the pros and semi-pros.
|
On March 20 2012 05:31 Poopi wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2012 05:19 SupLilSon wrote:On March 20 2012 05:17 JOJOsc2news wrote:On March 20 2012 05:14 Bojas wrote:On March 20 2012 04:31 JOJOsc2news wrote:On March 20 2012 03:54 Bojas wrote:On March 20 2012 03:51 JOJOsc2news wrote: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. 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? I understand that he's whining but why does he have no clue at all? I assume you are trolling but I will answer anyways. I said "no understanding of Protoss" not "no clue at all". Stop derailing! Why am I saying he has no understanding of Protoss? 1. "Toss is broken" Generalization 2. "Far too strong of a late game" Generalization 3. "Boring as fuck to watch" Generalization 4. "Turtle up to 3 base and a-move with deathball" Shows no understanding whatsoever. 5. "Toss needs to be made more difficult to play and actually require micro." Shows no understanding whatsoever. I assure you I am not trolling. Maybe I'm just stupid, I cannot judge that. But just because he generalizes to what sounds to me standard protoss play doesn't quite means he has clearly no understanding whatsoever. Which I asked of you to eleborate on. I tend to agree with him on point 4 and 5 and I don't see how this is a generalization which apparently means a lack of understanding. Almost every terran in this thread seems to lack that understanding to some degree. Coincidence? So you are literally saying that Protoss does not require micro. You are also saying that Protoss just needs to turtle to a deathball on three bases and then simply a-move (we already established no micro!). You have to be trolling. How is he trolling, and how are either of those statements untrue? Because protoss requires micro? Ever heard of sentry positionning (so they are able to cast FF and not get trapped), HT positionning, basically positionning for about every unit of the composition, FF micro, storm usage (landing good storms, avoiding zealots etc), etc... Basically the only thing that is a problem about protoss' micro is that charge is an autocast which allow them to do something else during the fight, whereas the terran has to kite / reposition his army the whole fight, which is very apm consuming / you can't really do anything else and requires more work on the terran side. And I'm terran. Really zealots are more frustrating than colossus and archons, it gives you the impression that you can't kill them and slowly die or that you win a fight but you don't have time to gather troops to be able to kill the zealot re-warp. Oh and protoss doesn't "just have to turtle to a deathball and then simply a-move", these sort of protoss are really easy to beat and when you play "good" protosses there are so many little details that they are doing, playing P is much more complex than what you are trying to claim it is. Just watch some protoss streams on the korean server (ToD, SaSe, NaNiwa for example) to see if all they have to do to win against competent terrans is "turtle to 3bases and a-move". This is because of this that this topic won't go anywhere, there's too much people who just get smashed on ladder who want to express their frustration on here and they do because of the bandwagon of people barely whining (and for some whining plain and simple) without being banned.
I'd have to completely agree but sadly the population in this thread are that of the lower league players and thus "I cannot play like those GM ppl!" excuse will come up and won't even attempt to do more than "sit in my base and try to fight a protoss army head on but still lose"
|
On March 20 2012 05:19 Thrombozyt wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2012 05:07 Big J wrote:On March 20 2012 04:21 SupLilSon wrote:On March 20 2012 04:17 Kakaru2 wrote:On March 20 2012 04:11 SupLilSon wrote:On March 20 2012 04:09 Big J wrote:On March 20 2012 03:41 SupLilSon wrote:On March 20 2012 01:59 Big J wrote:On March 20 2012 01:33 Blasterion wrote:On March 20 2012 01:27 Big J wrote:
[quote]
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 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. 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. 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. 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. No, they arent. You're entire post is based off a baseless assumption. And which is that? That warpgate is a broken mechanic? I have news for you, it is. Warpgate should be removed or nerfed, as in producing units from gateway is more time efficient. That together with buffing Protoss gateway units to compensate will lead to a much more better game. That Toss gateway units are somehow balanced to be weaker to compensate for the warpgate mechanic. Show me something concrete to prove that. I remember the OP of the Defender's Advantage post was claiming that and it was quickly determined that Blizzard had never said they balanced WP units that way ever. Just go to any unit tester and do even amounts of ressource battles; roaches and lings win, as well as Marine/Marauder. Whenever a Protoss goes for a bust, he is cutting most lategame tech, upgrades and probes for it, chronoboosting his warp gates and has worked for a special unit setup (often sentryheavy for the FFs; or specific immortal counts) to begin with. All those busts are timed to hit in a phase in which gateways finish to create "ressource banked" timings and usually hit just when standard Terran has invested into tech (usually medivacs, upgrades or ghosts when we talk about 2base timings; stim and shields when we talk about one base timings) but can't quite profit from it yet, so protoss actually just has more stuff on the battlefield. I'm pretty sure chargelots under a guardian shield beat the crap out of marine/marauder in an a move situation. Don't forget, that archons are gateway units. Yes, gateway units are crappy early game in the time window between 1) Terran completes bio upgrades (concussive and stim primarily) and 2) Toss completes twilight upgrades. Before time point 1), Stalker/zealots are at least equal to marine/marauder. After time point 2), I'd even say that toss is slightly favored now that zealots hit stuff.
that is completly amount and ratio dependend. Marines generally win the fight with zealots in high amounts on amove with stim/shield against charge+guardian shield. The higher the marauder count and the lower the general unit count in the battle, the better this will become for the Protoss side.
And yeah, Archons/Templar are gateway units as well, just like ghosts/reaper are barracks units, yet my impression was that "usual" early and midgame situations were being discussed (like those Protoss busts, gateway pressure builds or 2-3rax builds), so I did not include them into my thoughts.
|
On March 20 2012 05:31 Poopi wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2012 05:19 SupLilSon wrote:On March 20 2012 05:17 JOJOsc2news wrote:On March 20 2012 05:14 Bojas wrote:On March 20 2012 04:31 JOJOsc2news wrote:On March 20 2012 03:54 Bojas wrote:On March 20 2012 03:51 JOJOsc2news wrote: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. 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? I understand that he's whining but why does he have no clue at all? I assume you are trolling but I will answer anyways. I said "no understanding of Protoss" not "no clue at all". Stop derailing! Why am I saying he has no understanding of Protoss? 1. "Toss is broken" Generalization 2. "Far too strong of a late game" Generalization 3. "Boring as fuck to watch" Generalization 4. "Turtle up to 3 base and a-move with deathball" Shows no understanding whatsoever. 5. "Toss needs to be made more difficult to play and actually require micro." Shows no understanding whatsoever. I assure you I am not trolling. Maybe I'm just stupid, I cannot judge that. But just because he generalizes to what sounds to me standard protoss play doesn't quite means he has clearly no understanding whatsoever. Which I asked of you to eleborate on. I tend to agree with him on point 4 and 5 and I don't see how this is a generalization which apparently means a lack of understanding. Almost every terran in this thread seems to lack that understanding to some degree. Coincidence? So you are literally saying that Protoss does not require micro. You are also saying that Protoss just needs to turtle to a deathball on three bases and then simply a-move (we already established no micro!). You have to be trolling. How is he trolling, and how are either of those statements untrue? Because protoss requires micro? Ever heard of sentry positionning (so they are able to cast FF and not get trapped), HT positionning, basically positionning for about every unit of the composition, FF micro, storm usage (landing good storms, avoiding zealots etc), etc... Basically the only thing that is a problem about protoss' micro is that charge is an autocast which allow them to do something else during the fight, whereas the terran has to kite / reposition his army the whole fight, which is very apm consuming / you can't really do anything else and requires more work on the terran side. And I'm terran. Really zealots are more frustrating than colossus and archons, it gives you the impression that you can't kill them and slowly die or that you win a fight but you don't have time to gather troops to be able to kill the zealot re-warp. Oh and protoss doesn't "just have to turtle to a deathball and then simply a-move", these sort of protoss are really easy to beat and when you play "good" protosses there are so many little details that they are doing, playing P is much more complex than what you are trying to claim it is. Just watch some protoss streams on the korean server (ToD, SaSe, NaNiwa for example) to see if all they have to do to win against competent terrans is "turtle to 3bases and a-move". This is because of this that this topic won't go anywhere, there's too much people who just get smashed on ladder who want to express their frustration on here and they do because of the bandwagon of people barely whining (and for some whining plain and simple) without being banned.
It's sad that you have to explain something like this. Very well said!
|
On March 20 2012 05:12 SupLilSon wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2012 04:39 ZenithM wrote:On March 20 2012 04:21 SupLilSon wrote:On March 20 2012 04:17 Kakaru2 wrote:On March 20 2012 04:11 SupLilSon wrote:On March 20 2012 04:09 Big J wrote:On March 20 2012 03:41 SupLilSon wrote:On March 20 2012 01:59 Big J wrote:On March 20 2012 01:33 Blasterion wrote:On March 20 2012 01:27 Big J wrote:
[quote]
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 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. 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. 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. 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. No, they arent. You're entire post is based off a baseless assumption. And which is that? That warpgate is a broken mechanic? I have news for you, it is. Warpgate should be removed or nerfed, as in producing units from gateway is more time efficient. That together with buffing Protoss gateway units to compensate will lead to a much more better game. That Toss gateway units are somehow balanced to be weaker to compensate for the warpgate mechanic. Show me something concrete to prove that. I remember the OP of the Defender's Advantage post was claiming that and it was quickly determined that Blizzard had never said they balanced WP units that way ever. Marines are more cost efficient than anything non-AoE in the game. Roaches and lings are pretty good too. When you see pure gateway attacks work, it's always an all in the Protoss sacrificed everything else for and he has like twice the army value of his opponent, yet these all ins can be decently held. So yeah, Gateway units are not very efficient. You seem under the conviction than successful gateway attacks are done with equal army value, that's far from true. And obviously nobody uses pure gateway without templars lategame, so no use talking about that. What is very strong, and probably too much, is the 3-3 chargelots warp-ins after the Terran army has already been weakened by stim and Aoe damage. ??? Are we playing the same game? You're playing Starcraft 2: Wings of Liberty, right? The game where you need a minimum of 2 bunkers, a ramp and mass SCV repair to hold off a gate way push? The game where protoss 3+ gate pressure into expansion no problem? Use FF and GS somewhat intelligently and gateway units can be the most cost efficient by far. Micro your units in the slightest and gateway units can be the most cost efficient by far. You're playing the game where Protoss will have equal or lower resource collection rate yet will have 3x the army value, right? I don't really see what is cost inneficient about Protoss units.
Oh yeah we're definitely playing the same game. I don't know which race you play, but look at the army value when P attacks you (even with a 3 gate pressure). If it's successful, it's that he had way more army value.
I'll give you examples from the last IEM Finals (MC vs Puma) of 3 gates pressure (AFTER expand lol), and because I'm kind, I give you games where MC lost on those failed attacks too.
_ Shakuras: off 3 gates, 1125/700 P vs 1050/0 T, Puma holds, 1 bunker
_ Khoral Compound: off 3 gates, 1250/700 P vs 1250/250 T, Puma holds without taking any damage (he has 1 bunker but also 2 tanks).
_ Daybreak: off 3 gates, 1300/800 P vs 850/0 T, Puma loses, 2 bunkers
Obviously forcefields and GS were used in these 3 games (it's MC :D)
I won't give you the numbers if it's an attack with 6 gates all in (because for one I don't have much replays available :D), but rest assured that the army discrepancy is even worse.
If you play T, you can look at your ladder games where you lose to gateway timings/all ins, you probably will have way less army value than P at this time.
If anything, what is overpowered is being able to bring in front of your base that much army value negating the defender advantage with warpins. BUT units themselves are not monstrously cost efficient like you pretend ("the most cost efficient by far", lol what a joke...)
So bring your proofs now, I want to see a pure gateway army rape a MM ball of higher army value. I'm waiting, show me the magic.
|
On March 20 2012 05:26 JOJOsc2news wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2012 05:19 SupLilSon wrote:On March 20 2012 05:17 JOJOsc2news wrote:On March 20 2012 05:14 Bojas wrote:On March 20 2012 04:31 JOJOsc2news wrote:On March 20 2012 03:54 Bojas wrote:On March 20 2012 03:51 JOJOsc2news wrote: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. 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? I understand that he's whining but why does he have no clue at all? I assume you are trolling but I will answer anyways. I said "no understanding of Protoss" not "no clue at all". Stop derailing! Why am I saying he has no understanding of Protoss? 1. "Toss is broken" Generalization 2. "Far too strong of a late game" Generalization 3. "Boring as fuck to watch" Generalization 4. "Turtle up to 3 base and a-move with deathball" Shows no understanding whatsoever. 5. "Toss needs to be made more difficult to play and actually require micro." Shows no understanding whatsoever. I assure you I am not trolling. Maybe I'm just stupid, I cannot judge that. But just because he generalizes to what sounds to me standard protoss play doesn't quite means he has clearly no understanding whatsoever. Which I asked of you to eleborate on. I tend to agree with him on point 4 and 5 and I don't see how this is a generalization which apparently means a lack of understanding. Almost every terran in this thread seems to lack that understanding to some degree. Coincidence? So you are literally saying that Protoss does not require micro. You are also saying that Protoss just needs to turtle to a deathball on three bases and then simply a-move (we already established no micro!). You have to be trolling. How is he trolling, and how are either of those statements untrue? You can't a move anything. You have to individually bring Zealots to the front otherwise they are stuck behind stalkers. You have to do forcefields, guardian shields, storms, feedbacks, position high templars right to feedback or dodge ghosts. You have to individually micro Stalkers as well as Colossus to keep the Colossus alive and maximize their damage output. This is just a tiny little example of your deathball theory about a-moving. Going up to three bases in a defensive manner is common because Protoss is extremely vulnerable in the transition period into HT tech or Robo tech. I am not actually arguing with someone who says Protoss does not require any micro. That statement alone is proof enough of the fact that nothing valuable can come out of a dialogue with them.
lol. Literally none of that is required to play Protoss to Master level. The degree to which you and others are trying to highlight Protoss "micro" is laughable.
|
On March 20 2012 05:26 JOJOsc2news wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2012 05:19 SupLilSon wrote:On March 20 2012 05:17 JOJOsc2news wrote:On March 20 2012 05:14 Bojas wrote:On March 20 2012 04:31 JOJOsc2news wrote:On March 20 2012 03:54 Bojas wrote:On March 20 2012 03:51 JOJOsc2news wrote: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. 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? I understand that he's whining but why does he have no clue at all? I assume you are trolling but I will answer anyways. I said "no understanding of Protoss" not "no clue at all". Stop derailing! Why am I saying he has no understanding of Protoss? 1. "Toss is broken" Generalization 2. "Far too strong of a late game" Generalization 3. "Boring as fuck to watch" Generalization 4. "Turtle up to 3 base and a-move with deathball" Shows no understanding whatsoever. 5. "Toss needs to be made more difficult to play and actually require micro." Shows no understanding whatsoever. I assure you I am not trolling. Maybe I'm just stupid, I cannot judge that. But just because he generalizes to what sounds to me standard protoss play doesn't quite means he has clearly no understanding whatsoever. Which I asked of you to eleborate on. I tend to agree with him on point 4 and 5 and I don't see how this is a generalization which apparently means a lack of understanding. Almost every terran in this thread seems to lack that understanding to some degree. Coincidence? So you are literally saying that Protoss does not require micro. You are also saying that Protoss just needs to turtle to a deathball on three bases and then simply a-move (we already established no micro!). You have to be trolling. How is he trolling, and how are either of those statements untrue? You can't a move anything. You have to individually bring Zealots to the front otherwise they are stuck behind stalkers. You have to do forcefields, guardian shields, storms, feedbacks, position high templars right to feedback or dodge ghosts. You have to individually micro Stalkers as well as Colossus to keep the Colossus alive and maximize their damage output. This is just a tiny little example of your deathball theory about a-moving. Going up to three bases in a defensive manner is common because Protoss is extremely vulnerable in the transition period into HT tech or Robo tech. I am not actually arguing with someone who says Protoss does not require any micro. That statement alone is proof enough of the fact that nothing valuable can come out of a dialogue with them.
let me breakdown protoss micro for you
chargelots+archons
this is a very strong unit comp. what you do is mabye spread the zealots a bit before the engagement, you select your whole army and a move, and make sure all your unit are attacking.
chargelots+archons+colossus
same as above
chargelots+archons+HT+(colossus)
need a separate hotkey for HTs. you need to take care of your HTs ofc, but you A move the rest.
chargelots+stalkers+archons+HT+(colossus)
you need to protect your colossus with stalkers, but its mostly positioning.
i don't want to say toss has no micro, but its easier to perform
|
On March 20 2012 05:48 HellionDrop wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2012 05:26 JOJOsc2news wrote:On March 20 2012 05:19 SupLilSon wrote:On March 20 2012 05:17 JOJOsc2news wrote:On March 20 2012 05:14 Bojas wrote:On March 20 2012 04:31 JOJOsc2news wrote:On March 20 2012 03:54 Bojas wrote:On March 20 2012 03:51 JOJOsc2news wrote: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. 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? I understand that he's whining but why does he have no clue at all? I assume you are trolling but I will answer anyways. I said "no understanding of Protoss" not "no clue at all". Stop derailing! Why am I saying he has no understanding of Protoss? 1. "Toss is broken" Generalization 2. "Far too strong of a late game" Generalization 3. "Boring as fuck to watch" Generalization 4. "Turtle up to 3 base and a-move with deathball" Shows no understanding whatsoever. 5. "Toss needs to be made more difficult to play and actually require micro." Shows no understanding whatsoever. I assure you I am not trolling. Maybe I'm just stupid, I cannot judge that. But just because he generalizes to what sounds to me standard protoss play doesn't quite means he has clearly no understanding whatsoever. Which I asked of you to eleborate on. I tend to agree with him on point 4 and 5 and I don't see how this is a generalization which apparently means a lack of understanding. Almost every terran in this thread seems to lack that understanding to some degree. Coincidence? So you are literally saying that Protoss does not require micro. You are also saying that Protoss just needs to turtle to a deathball on three bases and then simply a-move (we already established no micro!). You have to be trolling. How is he trolling, and how are either of those statements untrue? You can't a move anything. You have to individually bring Zealots to the front otherwise they are stuck behind stalkers. You have to do forcefields, guardian shields, storms, feedbacks, position high templars right to feedback or dodge ghosts. You have to individually micro Stalkers as well as Colossus to keep the Colossus alive and maximize their damage output. This is just a tiny little example of your deathball theory about a-moving. Going up to three bases in a defensive manner is common because Protoss is extremely vulnerable in the transition period into HT tech or Robo tech. I am not actually arguing with someone who says Protoss does not require any micro. That statement alone is proof enough of the fact that nothing valuable can come out of a dialogue with them. let me breakdown protoss micro for you chargelots+archons this is a very strong unit comp. what you do is mabye spread the zealots a bit before the engagement, you select your whole army and a move, and make sure all your unit are attacking. chargelots+archons+colossus same as above chargelots+archons+HT+(colossus) need a separate hotkey for HTs. you need to take care of your HTs ofc, but you A move the rest. chargelots+stalkers+archons+HT+(colossus) you need to protect your colossus with stalkers, but its mostly positioning. i don't want to say toss has no micro, but its easier to perform
It's sad that you actually have to explain this TO PROTOSS PLAYERS. Very well said!
|
On March 20 2012 05:31 Abrafred wrote:
Essentially this thread was qq protoss imba from the word go, so I want to elaborate on the matter. Since many bronze-diamond players in this thread are joining in the fray, my opinion about there whining is the following, if terran is underpowered, then just lose games until the alleged "opness" of protoss is counteracted by your opponent's inferior skill. Noone should care about how you feel about balance, balance is only for the pros and semi-pros.
Basically, I get frustrated if I see important statistics like sq, eapm, upgrades, micro, apm continually point out that I did that better. Sometimes even every single one of them which tells me that I'm doing something better then my opponent.
If those statistics would be even, or favor them I would be like ''okay, let's watch the replay and see how we can improve in mechanics''. I have that vs terran and most of the time vs zerg.
Your point basically says that if there's imbalance (i'm not saying there is) that we should play on a lower league and accept it. I wonder which player who's goal is to get to the highest league wants that.
I don't really think this discussion is going to get anywhere. There's probably some heavy bias on both sides.
|
On March 20 2012 05:49 SupLilSon wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2012 05:48 HellionDrop wrote:On March 20 2012 05:26 JOJOsc2news wrote:On March 20 2012 05:19 SupLilSon wrote:On March 20 2012 05:17 JOJOsc2news wrote:On March 20 2012 05:14 Bojas wrote:On March 20 2012 04:31 JOJOsc2news wrote:On March 20 2012 03:54 Bojas wrote:On March 20 2012 03:51 JOJOsc2news wrote: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. 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? I understand that he's whining but why does he have no clue at all? I assume you are trolling but I will answer anyways. I said "no understanding of Protoss" not "no clue at all". Stop derailing! Why am I saying he has no understanding of Protoss? 1. "Toss is broken" Generalization 2. "Far too strong of a late game" Generalization 3. "Boring as fuck to watch" Generalization 4. "Turtle up to 3 base and a-move with deathball" Shows no understanding whatsoever. 5. "Toss needs to be made more difficult to play and actually require micro." Shows no understanding whatsoever. I assure you I am not trolling. Maybe I'm just stupid, I cannot judge that. But just because he generalizes to what sounds to me standard protoss play doesn't quite means he has clearly no understanding whatsoever. Which I asked of you to eleborate on. I tend to agree with him on point 4 and 5 and I don't see how this is a generalization which apparently means a lack of understanding. Almost every terran in this thread seems to lack that understanding to some degree. Coincidence? So you are literally saying that Protoss does not require micro. You are also saying that Protoss just needs to turtle to a deathball on three bases and then simply a-move (we already established no micro!). You have to be trolling. How is he trolling, and how are either of those statements untrue? You can't a move anything. You have to individually bring Zealots to the front otherwise they are stuck behind stalkers. You have to do forcefields, guardian shields, storms, feedbacks, position high templars right to feedback or dodge ghosts. You have to individually micro Stalkers as well as Colossus to keep the Colossus alive and maximize their damage output. This is just a tiny little example of your deathball theory about a-moving. Going up to three bases in a defensive manner is common because Protoss is extremely vulnerable in the transition period into HT tech or Robo tech. I am not actually arguing with someone who says Protoss does not require any micro. That statement alone is proof enough of the fact that nothing valuable can come out of a dialogue with them. let me breakdown protoss micro for you chargelots+archons this is a very strong unit comp. what you do is mabye spread the zealots a bit before the engagement, you select your whole army and a move, and make sure all your unit are attacking. chargelots+archons+colossus same as above chargelots+archons+HT+(colossus) need a separate hotkey for HTs. you need to take care of your HTs ofc, but you A move the rest. chargelots+stalkers+archons+HT+(colossus) you need to protect your colossus with stalkers, but its mostly positioning. i don't want to say toss has no micro, but its easier to perform It's sad that you actually have to explain this TO PROTOSS PLAYERS. Very well said!
Lol aren't we a bit conceited now? Go on explaining things about races you don't play. Very well said indeed.
|
Terrans just dont play right imo, if you get a lot of ghosts you can really dominate lategame fights as long as your position and control are good. All too often terrans fight in a bad angle or dont micro well. All these "toss requires less micro" stuff is really nonsense, the races have completely different playstyles so comparing them like that isnt logical.
|
On March 20 2012 05:40 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2012 05:19 Thrombozyt wrote:On March 20 2012 05:07 Big J wrote:On March 20 2012 04:21 SupLilSon wrote:On March 20 2012 04:17 Kakaru2 wrote:On March 20 2012 04:11 SupLilSon wrote:On March 20 2012 04:09 Big J wrote:On March 20 2012 03:41 SupLilSon wrote:On March 20 2012 01:59 Big J wrote:On March 20 2012 01:33 Blasterion wrote:
[quote]
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. 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. 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. 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. No, they arent. You're entire post is based off a baseless assumption. And which is that? That warpgate is a broken mechanic? I have news for you, it is. Warpgate should be removed or nerfed, as in producing units from gateway is more time efficient. That together with buffing Protoss gateway units to compensate will lead to a much more better game. That Toss gateway units are somehow balanced to be weaker to compensate for the warpgate mechanic. Show me something concrete to prove that. I remember the OP of the Defender's Advantage post was claiming that and it was quickly determined that Blizzard had never said they balanced WP units that way ever. Just go to any unit tester and do even amounts of ressource battles; roaches and lings win, as well as Marine/Marauder. Whenever a Protoss goes for a bust, he is cutting most lategame tech, upgrades and probes for it, chronoboosting his warp gates and has worked for a special unit setup (often sentryheavy for the FFs; or specific immortal counts) to begin with. All those busts are timed to hit in a phase in which gateways finish to create "ressource banked" timings and usually hit just when standard Terran has invested into tech (usually medivacs, upgrades or ghosts when we talk about 2base timings; stim and shields when we talk about one base timings) but can't quite profit from it yet, so protoss actually just has more stuff on the battlefield. I'm pretty sure chargelots under a guardian shield beat the crap out of marine/marauder in an a move situation. Don't forget, that archons are gateway units. Yes, gateway units are crappy early game in the time window between 1) Terran completes bio upgrades (concussive and stim primarily) and 2) Toss completes twilight upgrades. Before time point 1), Stalker/zealots are at least equal to marine/marauder. After time point 2), I'd even say that toss is slightly favored now that zealots hit stuff. that is completly amount and ratio dependend. Marines generally win the fight with zealots in high amounts on amove with stim/shield against charge+guardian shield. The higher the marauder count and the lower the general unit count in the battle, the better this will become for the Protoss side. And yeah, Archons/Templar are gateway units as well, just like ghosts/reaper are barracks units, ye t my impression was that "usual" early and midgame situations were being discussed (like those Protoss busts, gateway pressure builds or 2-3rax builds), so I did not include them into my thoughts.
If you read up the quoted posts, you should realize, that the post that triggered your 'but warp gate units are weaker' statement explicitly stated the problem that terran needs to repeatedly win battles due to high volume warp-ins that can just repel attacks made with a weaker left-over force.
You also seem to ignore the fact that I acknowledged, that there is a window of time where bio is stronger than warpgate units. It's just the time window where sentries can negate that advantage as well as the time where protoss deploys their first tech that terran has to react to.
|
Totally unrelated but I just find it funny Zerg and Protoss have equally hard playing against each other (*cough* mutalisk *cough*).
|
On March 20 2012 05:49 SupLilSon wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2012 05:48 HellionDrop wrote:On March 20 2012 05:26 JOJOsc2news wrote:On March 20 2012 05:19 SupLilSon wrote:On March 20 2012 05:17 JOJOsc2news wrote:On March 20 2012 05:14 Bojas wrote:On March 20 2012 04:31 JOJOsc2news wrote:On March 20 2012 03:54 Bojas wrote:On March 20 2012 03:51 JOJOsc2news wrote: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. 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? I understand that he's whining but why does he have no clue at all? I assume you are trolling but I will answer anyways. I said "no understanding of Protoss" not "no clue at all". Stop derailing! Why am I saying he has no understanding of Protoss? 1. "Toss is broken" Generalization 2. "Far too strong of a late game" Generalization 3. "Boring as fuck to watch" Generalization 4. "Turtle up to 3 base and a-move with deathball" Shows no understanding whatsoever. 5. "Toss needs to be made more difficult to play and actually require micro." Shows no understanding whatsoever. I assure you I am not trolling. Maybe I'm just stupid, I cannot judge that. But just because he generalizes to what sounds to me standard protoss play doesn't quite means he has clearly no understanding whatsoever. Which I asked of you to eleborate on. I tend to agree with him on point 4 and 5 and I don't see how this is a generalization which apparently means a lack of understanding. Almost every terran in this thread seems to lack that understanding to some degree. Coincidence? So you are literally saying that Protoss does not require micro. You are also saying that Protoss just needs to turtle to a deathball on three bases and then simply a-move (we already established no micro!). You have to be trolling. How is he trolling, and how are either of those statements untrue? You can't a move anything. You have to individually bring Zealots to the front otherwise they are stuck behind stalkers. You have to do forcefields, guardian shields, storms, feedbacks, position high templars right to feedback or dodge ghosts. You have to individually micro Stalkers as well as Colossus to keep the Colossus alive and maximize their damage output. This is just a tiny little example of your deathball theory about a-moving. Going up to three bases in a defensive manner is common because Protoss is extremely vulnerable in the transition period into HT tech or Robo tech. I am not actually arguing with someone who says Protoss does not require any micro. That statement alone is proof enough of the fact that nothing valuable can come out of a dialogue with them. let me breakdown protoss micro for you chargelots+archons this is a very strong unit comp. what you do is mabye spread the zealots a bit before the engagement, you select your whole army and a move, and make sure all your unit are attacking. chargelots+archons+colossus same as above chargelots+archons+HT+(colossus) need a separate hotkey for HTs. you need to take care of your HTs ofc, but you A move the rest. chargelots+stalkers+archons+HT+(colossus) you need to protect your colossus with stalkers, but its mostly positioning. i don't want to say toss has no micro, but its easier to perform It's sad that you actually have to explain this TO PROTOSS PLAYERS. Very well said!
You spend this whole thread telling protoss players how they play and what's wrong with them, then a protoss player tries to explain what exactly needs to be done from a PROTOSS POV and you take a shot at that? So, what I take is, a Terran player like you can tell protoss players how they play but if a protoss tries to actually state any correct info, it's idiotic.
|
On March 20 2012 05:16 SupLilSon wrote:
I'd sympathise with you a little bit if those upgrades and tech weren't mandatory for Terran users in order for bio to stand a chance against gateway units. Without, stim/cc/concussive/medivacs, you can't leave your ramp as Terran.
thats funny, because mass marines work without any upgrades ...
|
On March 20 2012 05:58 freetgy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2012 05:16 SupLilSon wrote:
I'd sympathise with you a little bit if those upgrades and tech weren't mandatory for Terran users in order for bio to stand a chance against gateway units. Without, stim/cc/concussive/medivacs, you can't leave your ramp as Terran. thats funny, because mass marines work without any upgrades ...
Please show me that race you're playing.
|
On March 20 2012 05:58 freetgy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2012 05:16 SupLilSon wrote:
I'd sympathise with you a little bit if those upgrades and tech weren't mandatory for Terran users in order for bio to stand a chance against gateway units. Without, stim/cc/concussive/medivacs, you can't leave your ramp as Terran. thats funny, because mass marines work without any upgrades ...
if the game is shorter than like 7 minutes, yes
or if you're in silver league
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
