|
On April 27 2012 18:18 Snowbear wrote:
I understand that zergs need better scout options, but what about zvt lategame? Broodlord infestor corruptor is EXTREMELY cost-efficiënt, and I NEVER saw a terran that was NOT ahead beat it.
I have never seen a zerg, that was not ahead get there 
|
On April 27 2012 18:18 Snowbear wrote:
I understand that zergs need better scout options, but what about zvt lategame? Broodlord infestor corruptor is EXTREMELY cost-efficiënt, and I NEVER saw a terran that was NOT ahead beat it.
So what are you saying, Terrans that are behind gamewise late game are suppose to beat a tier3 zerg army?
|
so balance is based on winrates??? ROFL.
David Kim just never gets it.
|
On April 27 2012 18:19 SupLilSon wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 18:09 KiLLJoy216 wrote:On April 27 2012 18:05 Naphal wrote:On April 27 2012 17:56 KiLLJoy216 wrote:On April 27 2012 17:49 Naphal wrote:On April 27 2012 17:29 KiLLJoy216 wrote:On April 27 2012 17:21 Scila wrote:On April 27 2012 17:00 KiLLJoy216 wrote:On April 27 2012 16:56 Scila wrote:On April 27 2012 16:53 KiLLJoy216 wrote:
[quote]
Really? Ghosts, Vikings, Ravens seem pretty viable to me, just to mention some. Raven is underrated in my opinion. Ravens are not viable because SM is horrible. Battlecruisers are not viable. Thors are not viable versus Protoss, and somewhat viable against zerg. Ghosts have been nerfed into oblivion, and are only viable against Protoss. :/ seems like you just don't want to try new things. The seeker missile is really powerful when it lands, and the raven has other abilities too. You can make a wall with turrets to funnel zealots and the point defense drone is really good especially early game. Ghosts are really good TvP, don't see why people keep saying otherwise. They outrange templar with snipe and EMP is really effective. Seeker Missile is NEVER seen in proplay because it is a really bad ability. "Wall of turrets" you're just grasping at straws now. I didn't say ghosts were bad in TvP. I said they were bad TvZ, and were overall nerfed too hard. You really have no idea what you're talking about. You clearly don't want enough streams if you haven't seen Terrans using seeker missile. And your argument that because it isn't used means its not viable is what is grasping at straws. I remember beta when Terran only went blind viking and marine/marauder and didn't use ghost. If everyone thought like you Terrans would have never started using the ghost. I agree snipe was nerfed too hard but the ghost is still very much viable. you argue Ghosts win over HTs because of 1 range difference... then you proceed to say terran should make ravens, where HTs have 3 more range on feedback than seekermissile, while seekermissile can be dodged, a raven only has 1 shot (compared to 4 feedbacks or 2 storms for a maxed HT), the SM damage decreases a lot with distance of the impact, so if you hit, you hit mostly shields, EMP is superior in every way imaginable. you know, maybe just act according to your signature... i mean firstly you have not followed any prior balance discussion indicated how you are oblivious to the fact that several progamer stated their issues with this matchup on this very website, secondly please do not suggest halfassed ideas you just came up with, terran has been by far the most explored race, especially compared to protoss (even david kim says so in this blogpost xD) i do not know what has awoken you from your slumber (sudden surge of posts after long silence) but i guess you have not slept well. LOL. I never said to use the Ravens solely for seeker missile so stop assuming. And I've been watching many Protoss streams and templar always gets sniped before getting storm or feedback off. Oh and newsflash... Programmers don't have all the answes. This isn't the first time people have complained about balance. This has happened before and people find new strategies to deal with it. Thanks for the laugh. well i guess i will act according to your signature, please stop making this thread worse with your clueless posting and attitude, i am guessing you hope some poor terran actually tries what you suggest on ladder, only to find out that "PF walls" and "turret walls to block zealots" have the same meaning as "surrender" PFs are too big and block much needed biomicro, and ravens... well i am not going to repeat myself. I am giving out solutions while all you can do is complain. I am the one being productive here unlike you. You don't agree with my solutions? Give out better ones. Stop adding to the problem and offer solutions. Those games in MLG semis and other tournies that were won with PF must have been an illusion than. You don't have to attack head on, you can drop. Stop being narrow minded. Think outside the box. Ciao Think outside the box! Drops! Holy nuts! Really? I read your "solutions" and am trying not to laugh. It's so evident that you've never actually tried any of these pro strats out. WTF is a wall of turrets to funnel zealots. How does that even make sense in theory crafting? Any standard Protoss deathball will just demolish your turret wall with collosus instead of herp derping all their zealots into your cannon D maze or w/e you are proposing. I've seen streamers try to use ravens, I've tried to include 3-5 ravens late game. All the raven spells are really short range. 1 Feedback kills your raven outright, there goes 200 gas worth of a shit unit and however more you wasted into the upgrades. All the while that templar is smashing together with another templar that just killed 50 supply of marines while you were trying to snipe them, and now they make an archon which is ready to tank 20 some maurader shots and probably kill another 10 units. zz
Don't bother arguing with him, he has absolutely no clue about the game. He's just going to resort to ad hominem attacks when you refute his posts logically.
|
On April 27 2012 18:21 Integra wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 18:18 Snowbear wrote:
I understand that zergs need better scout options, but what about zvt lategame? Broodlord infestor corruptor is EXTREMELY cost-efficiënt, and I NEVER saw a terran that was NOT ahead beat it. So what are you saying, Terrans that are behind gamewise late game are suppose to beat a tier3 zerg army?
No, I am saying that a terran that is even with a zerg, shouldn't get stomped so hard.
Terran has no good tier 3 that works well vs zerg.
|
United Kingdom38200 Posts
On April 27 2012 18:20 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 18:17 HolyArrow wrote:On April 27 2012 18:08 Asha` wrote:On April 27 2012 17:55 tomatriedes wrote:On April 27 2012 17:19 Surgical_Strike wrote:On April 27 2012 17:12 Big J wrote:On April 27 2012 17:07 Surgical_Strike wrote:
there is an obvious problem with TvP matchup. It is even until storm charglots are out..and then it gets ugly... anyone denying this is either a biased protoss player or does not watch enough SC2. Id say that most likely storm needs to be nerfed... an idea i was thinking about is possibly giving ghosts stim so they could deal with chargelots a little better and not die because they are so slow during kiting... thus they could be massed easier and giving better opportunities to deny at least a few more storms. I have no idea if that would work but it would be interesting. Yeah, there is an obvious problem with TvP, and it's that Terrans try to make it look Protossfavored, when it is obviously=statistics not. um actually statistics say it is protoss favored and so do the highest level games. have fun with gsl pvp fest. http://www.gomtv.net/records/index.gom?page=1&searchType=3&race=T&vsrace=P&season=2012&leaguetype=20&leagueid=27062&gamever=0&mapid=0&Go=30 This keeps bugging me, how do they both have over 50% match ratio against each other. And how do Protoss have almost twice as many recorded games against T as T does against P. >_< Incidentally if you search the other way around they both have under 50% against each and T is the one with twice as many games. Gom fix yo stats page >< What are you talking about? I don't know what you're doing wrong, but this is what it looks like for me: http://s11.postimage.org/xz6cosjmb/stats1.jpghttp://s13.postimage.org/f9y9bjaxz/stats2.jpgWe clearly see that Protoss is 20-25 against Terran this season. That is consistent either way you search. He thought set win ratio was the win rate for Protoss.
yup, I'm an idiot p=
|
One 'balance' word at context then full of terran whine. How could you forget GomTvT days.... Jeez
Please stop whining and practice.
|
On April 27 2012 18:19 Fubi wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 17:55 tomatriedes wrote:On April 27 2012 17:19 Surgical_Strike wrote:On April 27 2012 17:12 Big J wrote:On April 27 2012 17:07 Surgical_Strike wrote:
there is an obvious problem with TvP matchup. It is even until storm charglots are out..and then it gets ugly... anyone denying this is either a biased protoss player or does not watch enough SC2. Id say that most likely storm needs to be nerfed... an idea i was thinking about is possibly giving ghosts stim so they could deal with chargelots a little better and not die because they are so slow during kiting... thus they could be massed easier and giving better opportunities to deny at least a few more storms. I have no idea if that would work but it would be interesting. Yeah, there is an obvious problem with TvP, and it's that Terrans try to make it look Protossfavored, when it is obviously=statistics not. um actually statistics say it is protoss favored and so do the highest level games. have fun with gsl pvp fest. No they don't. It's actually Terran > protoss both in Korea and internationally at tournament level and also in this season's GSL. Why not try actually looking at statistics rather than just making stuff up? http://imgur.com/a/XmBDVand http://www.gomtv.net/records/index.gom?page=1&searchType=3&race=T&vsrace=P&season=2012&leaguetype=20&leagueid=27062&gamever=0&mapid=0&Go=30 I don't know why people keep brining up the stats. The stats for TvP only appears balanced because most of the Ts just do an all-in or some early stim-timing in order to win. I don't call that balance really, when one side is forced to play with a timer, while the other side just has to defend well to win; it's ridiculously frustrating and not fun to both play or watch.
In all my time on TL, whenever balance discussion ensues, stats are inevitably brought up, and Terran players are always the one to dismiss them as irrelevant. Kind of funny, no? It also just so happens that the objective numbers often favor Terran. Quite the coincidence, huh? Obviously, the stats aren't everything, but they shouldn't be dismissed altogether. They're the one objective thing we have in the midst of arguments and analyses tainted by personal bias depending on what race someone plays or likes.
During the 1-1-1 era when people were giving Puma flak for abusing the 1-1-1 so much, MVP said something along the lines of "I hope people don't give Puma too hard a time. People have to realize that, in the end, winning is the most important thing".
What do these stats illustrate? Who's winning the most, that's what. You say that one side is forced to play on a timer while the other side just has to defend well to win, and even if that's true, the stats illustrate that the side that merely "has to defend well to win" actually has quite a harder time defending than your rhetoric implies. Whether or not TvP is fun to watch is an entirely different issue, though watchability has nothing to do with balanace.
|
On April 27 2012 18:23 Snowbear wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 18:21 Integra wrote:On April 27 2012 18:18 Snowbear wrote:
I understand that zergs need better scout options, but what about zvt lategame? Broodlord infestor corruptor is EXTREMELY cost-efficiënt, and I NEVER saw a terran that was NOT ahead beat it. So what are you saying, Terrans that are behind gamewise late game are suppose to beat a tier3 zerg army? No, I am saying that a terran that is even with a zerg, shouldn't get stomped so hard. Terran has no good tier 3 that works well vs zerg.
But Terran does have good tier 1.5 and tier 2 that works well with zerg tier 3.
|
On April 27 2012 18:21 Integra wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 18:18 Snowbear wrote:
I understand that zergs need better scout options, but what about zvt lategame? Broodlord infestor corruptor is EXTREMELY cost-efficiënt, and I NEVER saw a terran that was NOT ahead beat it. So what are you saying, Terrans that are behind gamewise late game are suppose to beat a tier3 zerg army?
I don't care about this discussion, but that was one nasty comment from you Integra.
You excluded what he said, namely that T and Z could be even at that point.
And you also forget about examples where a T was ahead, and still lost to Z tier3 (Stephano v Bomber on Daybreak). I think that's the consensus, being behind at one point in the game should not mean that you necessarily lose the game. That's why people prefer longer games and non-deathball games.
Edit: stupidity deleted.
|
On April 27 2012 18:19 SupLilSon wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 18:09 KiLLJoy216 wrote:On April 27 2012 18:05 Naphal wrote:On April 27 2012 17:56 KiLLJoy216 wrote:On April 27 2012 17:49 Naphal wrote:On April 27 2012 17:29 KiLLJoy216 wrote:On April 27 2012 17:21 Scila wrote:On April 27 2012 17:00 KiLLJoy216 wrote:On April 27 2012 16:56 Scila wrote:On April 27 2012 16:53 KiLLJoy216 wrote:
[quote]
Really? Ghosts, Vikings, Ravens seem pretty viable to me, just to mention some. Raven is underrated in my opinion. Ravens are not viable because SM is horrible. Battlecruisers are not viable. Thors are not viable versus Protoss, and somewhat viable against zerg. Ghosts have been nerfed into oblivion, and are only viable against Protoss. :/ seems like you just don't want to try new things. The seeker missile is really powerful when it lands, and the raven has other abilities too. You can make a wall with turrets to funnel zealots and the point defense drone is really good especially early game. Ghosts are really good TvP, don't see why people keep saying otherwise. They outrange templar with snipe and EMP is really effective. Seeker Missile is NEVER seen in proplay because it is a really bad ability. "Wall of turrets" you're just grasping at straws now. I didn't say ghosts were bad in TvP. I said they were bad TvZ, and were overall nerfed too hard. You really have no idea what you're talking about. You clearly don't want enough streams if you haven't seen Terrans using seeker missile. And your argument that because it isn't used means its not viable is what is grasping at straws. I remember beta when Terran only went blind viking and marine/marauder and didn't use ghost. If everyone thought like you Terrans would have never started using the ghost. I agree snipe was nerfed too hard but the ghost is still very much viable. you argue Ghosts win over HTs because of 1 range difference... then you proceed to say terran should make ravens, where HTs have 3 more range on feedback than seekermissile, while seekermissile can be dodged, a raven only has 1 shot (compared to 4 feedbacks or 2 storms for a maxed HT), the SM damage decreases a lot with distance of the impact, so if you hit, you hit mostly shields, EMP is superior in every way imaginable. you know, maybe just act according to your signature... i mean firstly you have not followed any prior balance discussion indicated how you are oblivious to the fact that several progamer stated their issues with this matchup on this very website, secondly please do not suggest halfassed ideas you just came up with, terran has been by far the most explored race, especially compared to protoss (even david kim says so in this blogpost xD) i do not know what has awoken you from your slumber (sudden surge of posts after long silence) but i guess you have not slept well. LOL. I never said to use the Ravens solely for seeker missile so stop assuming. And I've been watching many Protoss streams and templar always gets sniped before getting storm or feedback off. Oh and newsflash... Programmers don't have all the answes. This isn't the first time people have complained about balance. This has happened before and people find new strategies to deal with it. Thanks for the laugh. well i guess i will act according to your signature, please stop making this thread worse with your clueless posting and attitude, i am guessing you hope some poor terran actually tries what you suggest on ladder, only to find out that "PF walls" and "turret walls to block zealots" have the same meaning as "surrender" PFs are too big and block much needed biomicro, and ravens... well i am not going to repeat myself. I am giving out solutions while all you can do is complain. I am the one being productive here unlike you. You don't agree with my solutions? Give out better ones. Stop adding to the problem and offer solutions. Those games in MLG semis and other tournies that were won with PF must have been an illusion than. You don't have to attack head on, you can drop. Stop being narrow minded. Think outside the box. Ciao Think outside the box! Drops! Holy nuts! Really? I read your "solutions" and am trying not to laugh. It's so evident that you've never actually tried any of these pro strats out. WTF is a wall of turrets to funnel zealots. How does that even make sense in theory crafting? Any standard Protoss deathball will just demolish your turret wall with collosus instead of herp derping all their zealots into your cannon D maze or w/e you are proposing. I've seen streamers try to use ravens, I've tried to include 3-5 ravens late game. All the raven spells are really short range. 1 Feedback kills your raven outright, there goes 200 gas worth of a shit unit and however more you wasted into the upgrades. All the while that templar is smashing together with another templar that just killed 50 supply of marines while you were trying to snipe them, and now they make an archon which is ready to tank 20 some maurader shots and probably kill another 10 units. zz
First off, drop was an example.You can place turrets from ravens in mineral fields, late game banshees with cloak etc. Second, if you have 50 units worth of supply of marines vs Protoss deathball you are doing something wrong. Third, raven's can launch PDD out of range of templars, not a necessity to seeker missile. Also, they are meant to be a detector so you don't have to waste a scan on DT's and observers that are keeping an eye on your army. Terrans always seem to overlook Ravens primary role as a detector. Its so stupid that Terrans can go a game without building detection. Build a Raven = more energy for mules and scanning opponents base/army. GG. Should look at this post Scila, might enlighten you, if only a little.
|
i wonder how scbw team balance the game without these fancy stats. get over it, david you poor boy, stop persuading all of us that you can balance game by your own and without actually playing the game.
|
Late game TvP? TvZ? Mech in TvP? It's all good 
|
On April 27 2012 18:25 HolyArrow wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 18:19 Fubi wrote:On April 27 2012 17:55 tomatriedes wrote:On April 27 2012 17:19 Surgical_Strike wrote:On April 27 2012 17:12 Big J wrote:On April 27 2012 17:07 Surgical_Strike wrote:
there is an obvious problem with TvP matchup. It is even until storm charglots are out..and then it gets ugly... anyone denying this is either a biased protoss player or does not watch enough SC2. Id say that most likely storm needs to be nerfed... an idea i was thinking about is possibly giving ghosts stim so they could deal with chargelots a little better and not die because they are so slow during kiting... thus they could be massed easier and giving better opportunities to deny at least a few more storms. I have no idea if that would work but it would be interesting. Yeah, there is an obvious problem with TvP, and it's that Terrans try to make it look Protossfavored, when it is obviously=statistics not. um actually statistics say it is protoss favored and so do the highest level games. have fun with gsl pvp fest. No they don't. It's actually Terran > protoss both in Korea and internationally at tournament level and also in this season's GSL. Why not try actually looking at statistics rather than just making stuff up? http://imgur.com/a/XmBDVand http://www.gomtv.net/records/index.gom?page=1&searchType=3&race=T&vsrace=P&season=2012&leaguetype=20&leagueid=27062&gamever=0&mapid=0&Go=30 I don't know why people keep brining up the stats. The stats for TvP only appears balanced because most of the Ts just do an all-in or some early stim-timing in order to win. I don't call that balance really, when one side is forced to play with a timer, while the other side just has to defend well to win; it's ridiculously frustrating and not fun to both play or watch. In all my time on TL, whenever balance discussion ensues, stats are inevitably brought up, and Terran players are always the one to dismiss them as irrelevant. Kind of funny, no? It also just so happens that the objective numbers often favor Terran. Quite the coincidence, huh? Obviously, the stats aren't everything, but they shouldn't be dismissed altogether. They're the one objective thing we have in the midst of arguments and analyses tainted by personal bias depending on what race someone plays or likes. During the 1-1-1 era when people were giving Puma flak for abusing the 1-1-1 so much, MVP said something along the lines of "I hope people don't give Puma too hard a time. People have to realize that, in the end, winning is the most important thing". What do these stats illustrate? Who's winning the most, that's what. You say that one side is forced to play on a timer while the other side just has to defend well to win, and even if that's true, the stats illustrate that the side that merely "has to defend well to win" actually has quite a harder time defending than your rhetoric implies. Whether or not TvP is fun to watch is an entirely different issue, though watchability has nothing to do with balanace.
Your equivocation from one group of terrans on the forums to the next is beautiful, like a painter almost.
|
On April 27 2012 18:25 Laserist wrote:
One 'balance' word at context then full of terran whine. How could you forget GomTvT days.... Jeez
Please stop whining and practice.
Actually it should be protoss players practicing more. With all of the recent buffs, they are still have lower winrates than terran. Which is pretty funny, IMO. =D
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=326449
|
|
|
On April 27 2012 18:25 HolyArrow wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 18:19 Fubi wrote:On April 27 2012 17:55 tomatriedes wrote:On April 27 2012 17:19 Surgical_Strike wrote:On April 27 2012 17:12 Big J wrote:On April 27 2012 17:07 Surgical_Strike wrote:
there is an obvious problem with TvP matchup. It is even until storm charglots are out..and then it gets ugly... anyone denying this is either a biased protoss player or does not watch enough SC2. Id say that most likely storm needs to be nerfed... an idea i was thinking about is possibly giving ghosts stim so they could deal with chargelots a little better and not die because they are so slow during kiting... thus they could be massed easier and giving better opportunities to deny at least a few more storms. I have no idea if that would work but it would be interesting. Yeah, there is an obvious problem with TvP, and it's that Terrans try to make it look Protossfavored, when it is obviously=statistics not. um actually statistics say it is protoss favored and so do the highest level games. have fun with gsl pvp fest. No they don't. It's actually Terran > protoss both in Korea and internationally at tournament level and also in this season's GSL. Why not try actually looking at statistics rather than just making stuff up? http://imgur.com/a/XmBDVand http://www.gomtv.net/records/index.gom?page=1&searchType=3&race=T&vsrace=P&season=2012&leaguetype=20&leagueid=27062&gamever=0&mapid=0&Go=30 I don't know why people keep brining up the stats. The stats for TvP only appears balanced because most of the Ts just do an all-in or some early stim-timing in order to win. I don't call that balance really, when one side is forced to play with a timer, while the other side just has to defend well to win; it's ridiculously frustrating and not fun to both play or watch. In all my time on TL, whenever balance discussion ensues, stats are inevitably brought up, and Terran players are always the one to dismiss them as irrelevant. Kind of funny, no? It also just so happens that the objective numbers often favor Terran. Quite the coincidence, huh? Obviously, the stats aren't everything, but they shouldn't be dismissed altogether. They're the one objective thing we have in the midst of arguments and analyses tainted by personal bias depending on what race someone plays or likes. During the 1-1-1 era when people were giving Puma flak for abusing the 1-1-1 so much, MVP said something along the lines of "I hope people don't give Puma too hard a time. People have to realize that, in the end, winning is the most important thing". What do these stats illustrate? Who's winning the most, that's what. You say that one side is forced to play on a timer while the other side just has to defend well to win, and even if that's true, the stats illustrate that the side that merely "has to defend well to win" actually has quite a harder time defending than your rhetoric implies. Whether or not TvP is fun to watch is an entirely different issue, though watchability has nothing to do with balanace.
Overgeneralize much?
Let me show you how you'll end up dismissing statistics. The Ro8 is currently 5 P, 3 T, no Z. T outnumbered P in the beginning of the season, but P has had a 70% advancement rate.
Now, does that mean you need to accept these statistics and not qualify them in any way?
Every race makes their own arguments, and while I agree that statistics are important, different statistics show different things, and the limitations of statistics need to be discussed too. It's only when all different sources of infomation, in conjunction with their limitations, are discussed that we get a clear picture of the overall situation.
|
On April 27 2012 18:27 KiLLJoy216 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 18:19 SupLilSon wrote:On April 27 2012 18:09 KiLLJoy216 wrote:On April 27 2012 18:05 Naphal wrote:On April 27 2012 17:56 KiLLJoy216 wrote:On April 27 2012 17:49 Naphal wrote:On April 27 2012 17:29 KiLLJoy216 wrote:On April 27 2012 17:21 Scila wrote:On April 27 2012 17:00 KiLLJoy216 wrote:On April 27 2012 16:56 Scila wrote:
[quote]
Ravens are not viable because SM is horrible. Battlecruisers are not viable. Thors are not viable versus Protoss, and somewhat viable against zerg. Ghosts have been nerfed into oblivion, and are only viable against Protoss. :/ seems like you just don't want to try new things. The seeker missile is really powerful when it lands, and the raven has other abilities too. You can make a wall with turrets to funnel zealots and the point defense drone is really good especially early game. Ghosts are really good TvP, don't see why people keep saying otherwise. They outrange templar with snipe and EMP is really effective. Seeker Missile is NEVER seen in proplay because it is a really bad ability. "Wall of turrets" you're just grasping at straws now. I didn't say ghosts were bad in TvP. I said they were bad TvZ, and were overall nerfed too hard. You really have no idea what you're talking about. You clearly don't want enough streams if you haven't seen Terrans using seeker missile. And your argument that because it isn't used means its not viable is what is grasping at straws. I remember beta when Terran only went blind viking and marine/marauder and didn't use ghost. If everyone thought like you Terrans would have never started using the ghost. I agree snipe was nerfed too hard but the ghost is still very much viable. you argue Ghosts win over HTs because of 1 range difference... then you proceed to say terran should make ravens, where HTs have 3 more range on feedback than seekermissile, while seekermissile can be dodged, a raven only has 1 shot (compared to 4 feedbacks or 2 storms for a maxed HT), the SM damage decreases a lot with distance of the impact, so if you hit, you hit mostly shields, EMP is superior in every way imaginable. you know, maybe just act according to your signature... i mean firstly you have not followed any prior balance discussion indicated how you are oblivious to the fact that several progamer stated their issues with this matchup on this very website, secondly please do not suggest halfassed ideas you just came up with, terran has been by far the most explored race, especially compared to protoss (even david kim says so in this blogpost xD) i do not know what has awoken you from your slumber (sudden surge of posts after long silence) but i guess you have not slept well. LOL. I never said to use the Ravens solely for seeker missile so stop assuming. And I've been watching many Protoss streams and templar always gets sniped before getting storm or feedback off. Oh and newsflash... Programmers don't have all the answes. This isn't the first time people have complained about balance. This has happened before and people find new strategies to deal with it. Thanks for the laugh. well i guess i will act according to your signature, please stop making this thread worse with your clueless posting and attitude, i am guessing you hope some poor terran actually tries what you suggest on ladder, only to find out that "PF walls" and "turret walls to block zealots" have the same meaning as "surrender" PFs are too big and block much needed biomicro, and ravens... well i am not going to repeat myself. I am giving out solutions while all you can do is complain. I am the one being productive here unlike you. You don't agree with my solutions? Give out better ones. Stop adding to the problem and offer solutions. Those games in MLG semis and other tournies that were won with PF must have been an illusion than. You don't have to attack head on, you can drop. Stop being narrow minded. Think outside the box. Ciao Think outside the box! Drops! Holy nuts! Really? I read your "solutions" and am trying not to laugh. It's so evident that you've never actually tried any of these pro strats out. WTF is a wall of turrets to funnel zealots. How does that even make sense in theory crafting? Any standard Protoss deathball will just demolish your turret wall with collosus instead of herp derping all their zealots into your cannon D maze or w/e you are proposing. I've seen streamers try to use ravens, I've tried to include 3-5 ravens late game. All the raven spells are really short range. 1 Feedback kills your raven outright, there goes 200 gas worth of a shit unit and however more you wasted into the upgrades. All the while that templar is smashing together with another templar that just killed 50 supply of marines while you were trying to snipe them, and now they make an archon which is ready to tank 20 some maurader shots and probably kill another 10 units. zz First off, drop was an example.You can place turrets from ravens in mineral fields, late game banshees with cloak etc. Second, if you have 50 units worth of supply of marines vs Protoss deathball you are doing something wrong. Third, raven's can launch PDD out of range of templars, not a necessity to seeker missile. Also, they are meant to be a detector so you don't have to waste a scan on DT's and observers that are keeping an eye on your army. Terrans always seem to overlook Ravens primary role as a detector. Its so stupid that Terrans can go a game without building detection. Build a Raven = more energy for mules and scanning opponents base/army. GG. Should look at this post Scila, might enlighten you, if only a little.
I honestly don't even know how to respond. Am I being trolled? I can't tell, gonna just concede to you and Imma go to bed, it's late. Toss OP, Terran Wins. Sounds about right,
|
On April 27 2012 10:28 LlamaNamedOsama wrote:
I have the same concerns about TvP...also, I found their comment that Protoss had the lowest representation at the highest levels of tournaments. Huh? The majority of the top 8 in current code S are protoss...
wow, because there is ONE season where top 8 are 3 Protoss 3 Terram and 2 Zergs ??? nice !
|
On April 27 2012 18:35 NexCa wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2012 10:28 LlamaNamedOsama wrote:
I have the same concerns about TvP...also, I found their comment that Protoss had the lowest representation at the highest levels of tournaments. Huh? The majority of the top 8 in current code S are protoss... wow, because there is ONE season where top 8 are 3 Protoss 3 Terram and 2 Zergs ??? nice !
didn't the guy you quoted say the current season?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
