|
On May 12 2012 04:23 dUTtrOACh wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2012 04:16 Maragor wrote:On May 12 2012 04:03 ZAiNs wrote:On May 12 2012 04:01 Doganaws wrote:And when a terran wins the next MLG they'll still be crying Now everybody lister CLEARELY: I am not M V P I don't care about who wins GSL, MLG, NASL, IGN PRO LEAGUE, Wooden league middleland championship... I care about me... and personally (this is a forum right?) i'll not be as good as before against Z. All of my vZ strats are a little hurt. And as a plat player (who dosn't want to play 6 hours a day because of work and wife) i'll not be able to react to this "LIKE A PRO". And tomorrow i'll post my replays... and in 4 days i'll start to play diablo 3 You are Platinum and think the game should be balanced around you? When Diablo III comes out don't bother coming back to SC2. Stupid comments like that need to not be said. Why shouldn't he believe the game should be balanced around himself? He paid $60 to enjoy his game. :s I personally am disgusted by how ez zerg at the lower levels is...just a-move lings/blings/ultras at a Terran army...gg. The only time lower level zerg had to micro is with infestors...and with the early game harass Terran had with helions/reapers. Now they can just a-move their queens and not even bother to keep looking to micro. I think low level terran need to stop trying to play like Marine king, anyway. They should just mass thors like foreign terrans.
You do realize that the perfect counter to mass Thors...is blings? Thors clump up so often and it is nearly impossible to micro them to be separated far enough to avoid the splash damage. Not to mention BLs > Thors. :s So not only does the "Tier 3" Terran unit suck ass against the Zerg "Tier 3" flying...but it also gets raped by their "Tier 1" blings.
|
On May 12 2012 04:29 Maragor wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2012 04:23 dUTtrOACh wrote:On May 12 2012 04:16 Maragor wrote:On May 12 2012 04:03 ZAiNs wrote:On May 12 2012 04:01 Doganaws wrote:And when a terran wins the next MLG they'll still be crying Now everybody lister CLEARELY: I am not M V P I don't care about who wins GSL, MLG, NASL, IGN PRO LEAGUE, Wooden league middleland championship... I care about me... and personally (this is a forum right?) i'll not be as good as before against Z. All of my vZ strats are a little hurt. And as a plat player (who dosn't want to play 6 hours a day because of work and wife) i'll not be able to react to this "LIKE A PRO". And tomorrow i'll post my replays... and in 4 days i'll start to play diablo 3 You are Platinum and think the game should be balanced around you? When Diablo III comes out don't bother coming back to SC2. Stupid comments like that need to not be said. Why shouldn't he believe the game should be balanced around himself? He paid $60 to enjoy his game. :s I personally am disgusted by how ez zerg at the lower levels is...just a-move lings/blings/ultras at a Terran army...gg. The only time lower level zerg had to micro is with infestors...and with the early game harass Terran had with helions/reapers. Now they can just a-move their queens and not even bother to keep looking to micro. I think low level terran need to stop trying to play like Marine king, anyway. They should just mass thors like foreign terrans. You do realize that the perfect counter to mass Thors...is blings? Thors clump up so often and it is nearly impossible to micro them to be separated far enough to avoid the splash damage. Not to mention BLs > Thors. :s So not only does the "Tier 3" Terran unit suck ass against the Zerg "Tier 3" flying...but it also gets raped by their "Tier 1" blings.
Blings are horribly cost inefficient against Thors. Just because NesTea bashed NaDa in the face because of horrible position doesn't mean banelings counter thors. If you'd have said zerglings, I may have believed you.
|
On May 12 2012 04:38 dUTtrOACh wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2012 04:29 Maragor wrote:On May 12 2012 04:23 dUTtrOACh wrote:On May 12 2012 04:16 Maragor wrote:On May 12 2012 04:03 ZAiNs wrote:On May 12 2012 04:01 Doganaws wrote:And when a terran wins the next MLG they'll still be crying Now everybody lister CLEARELY: I am not M V P I don't care about who wins GSL, MLG, NASL, IGN PRO LEAGUE, Wooden league middleland championship... I care about me... and personally (this is a forum right?) i'll not be as good as before against Z. All of my vZ strats are a little hurt. And as a plat player (who dosn't want to play 6 hours a day because of work and wife) i'll not be able to react to this "LIKE A PRO". And tomorrow i'll post my replays... and in 4 days i'll start to play diablo 3 You are Platinum and think the game should be balanced around you? When Diablo III comes out don't bother coming back to SC2. Stupid comments like that need to not be said. Why shouldn't he believe the game should be balanced around himself? He paid $60 to enjoy his game. :s I personally am disgusted by how ez zerg at the lower levels is...just a-move lings/blings/ultras at a Terran army...gg. The only time lower level zerg had to micro is with infestors...and with the early game harass Terran had with helions/reapers. Now they can just a-move their queens and not even bother to keep looking to micro. I think low level terran need to stop trying to play like Marine king, anyway. They should just mass thors like foreign terrans. You do realize that the perfect counter to mass Thors...is blings? Thors clump up so often and it is nearly impossible to micro them to be separated far enough to avoid the splash damage. Not to mention BLs > Thors. :s So not only does the "Tier 3" Terran unit suck ass against the Zerg "Tier 3" flying...but it also gets raped by their "Tier 1" blings. Blings are horribly cost inefficient against Thors. Just because NesTea bashed NaDa in the face because of horrible position doesn't mean banelings counter thors. If you'd have said zerglings, I may have believed you.
Agreed, turtle mech for lower level Terrans seems like the strongest strat against Zergs imho. When they start adding broodlords start adding vikings. M/M/M requires a lot of micro compared to mass thor with viking/hellion support. Lower level players typically don't have the APM to execute the M/M/M playstyle then bitch about how imba Zerg is rather than trying something else.
|
On May 12 2012 03:47 FLuE wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2012 03:16 s3rp wrote:On May 12 2012 02:54 mrjpark wrote:On May 12 2012 02:26 Greenei wrote:On May 12 2012 02:23 FLuE wrote:
Please please please stop saying scans cost money.
That simply isn't true. Scans cost energy. It is a huge difference. energy is not a comparable concept though. 50 energy on a queen aren't wort nearly as much as 50 energy on a oc (if you have more then 2 queens). but it's a standard zerg/toss tactic to deny the worth of mules when the topic is scans and exaggerate it when the topic is mules. No, the argument is pretty simple. Dropping a scan does not 'cost' you money, you just mine it slower. Dropping a mule gives you a big boost in economy at the cost of energy. The effect mules is actually huge, pros have been able to almost come back from having zero scv's because of the impact of mules in low economy games. I'm not saying they're imbalanced, mind you, but that mules are in a way a luxury more than a right. While you design your production around having mules, this is with the knowledge that if you drop a scan instead, your production will be inefficient -- it is a conscious decision you made.On May 12 2012 02:48 Plansix wrote:On May 12 2012 02:39 TeeTS wrote:
Blizzard has ruined the TvP matchup successfully for terran with the EMP nerf & upgrade cost reduction for protoss. Now they try to ruin TvZ.
While PvZ winrates tend to go out of control tournamentwhise, Blizzard brings in a buff for zerg, that has absolutely no impact on ZvP, but a damn huge on ZvT, which was so far the best balanced matchup in the game (proven by winrates all over the place)! Greatjob Blizz! Why focus on matchups where winrates go out of control? Let's just take the nearly 50-50 matchup and break it apart. Well done!
I really hope for HotS to repair the bullshit they've done in the past months. If not, maybe LoL is a good alternative -_- I love when people cite the upgrade cost reduction for protoss. Like we are going to do a lot with the whole extra half a sentry for +2/+2. Clearly this man fears the 8 observer rush comming 80 second earlier. Snipe is the only nerf for terran where they went to far. It should have just done less damage to massive and left it as it was. It's not the cost itself that people are complaining about, it's how much faster Protoss can pump out upgrades, especially with the use of chronoboost. It may seem minimal, but you can see the difference it has made in how pro Terrans have reacted with their double engineering bay timings. They basically have to cross their fingers and hope Protoss doesn't just constantly upgrade because they won't be able to keep up. In the early game before you have all your bases saturated scanning effectly slows you down ALOT if you scan. They're the Larva Inject / Chronoboost of Terran since Terran can't produce workers as fast. Early scan hurt as much as building Units when you don't want to as a Zerg probably more. With 3-4 Orbitals and plenty of SCV's mining Mules become a luxury but in the early and midgame they are what keep the Terran eco on even footing. You are missing the point. I'm not addressing the idea of using a scan vs a mule and how it affects the game. I'm saying I'm sick of seeing people say scans cost money. Those 270 minerals don't disappear. Scans don't cost minerals. End of story.
It at least costs 100 Minerals which you could've used on supply drop . Scanning isn't for free ...
|
On May 12 2012 03:47 FLuE wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2012 03:16 s3rp wrote:On May 12 2012 02:54 mrjpark wrote:On May 12 2012 02:26 Greenei wrote:On May 12 2012 02:23 FLuE wrote:
Please please please stop saying scans cost money.
That simply isn't true. Scans cost energy. It is a huge difference. energy is not a comparable concept though. 50 energy on a queen aren't wort nearly as much as 50 energy on a oc (if you have more then 2 queens). but it's a standard zerg/toss tactic to deny the worth of mules when the topic is scans and exaggerate it when the topic is mules. No, the argument is pretty simple. Dropping a scan does not 'cost' you money, you just mine it slower. Dropping a mule gives you a big boost in economy at the cost of energy. The effect mules is actually huge, pros have been able to almost come back from having zero scv's because of the impact of mules in low economy games. I'm not saying they're imbalanced, mind you, but that mules are in a way a luxury more than a right. While you design your production around having mules, this is with the knowledge that if you drop a scan instead, your production will be inefficient -- it is a conscious decision you made.On May 12 2012 02:48 Plansix wrote:On May 12 2012 02:39 TeeTS wrote:
Blizzard has ruined the TvP matchup successfully for terran with the EMP nerf & upgrade cost reduction for protoss. Now they try to ruin TvZ.
While PvZ winrates tend to go out of control tournamentwhise, Blizzard brings in a buff for zerg, that has absolutely no impact on ZvP, but a damn huge on ZvT, which was so far the best balanced matchup in the game (proven by winrates all over the place)! Greatjob Blizz! Why focus on matchups where winrates go out of control? Let's just take the nearly 50-50 matchup and break it apart. Well done!
I really hope for HotS to repair the bullshit they've done in the past months. If not, maybe LoL is a good alternative -_- I love when people cite the upgrade cost reduction for protoss. Like we are going to do a lot with the whole extra half a sentry for +2/+2. Clearly this man fears the 8 observer rush comming 80 second earlier. Snipe is the only nerf for terran where they went to far. It should have just done less damage to massive and left it as it was. It's not the cost itself that people are complaining about, it's how much faster Protoss can pump out upgrades, especially with the use of chronoboost. It may seem minimal, but you can see the difference it has made in how pro Terrans have reacted with their double engineering bay timings. They basically have to cross their fingers and hope Protoss doesn't just constantly upgrade because they won't be able to keep up. In the early game before you have all your bases saturated scanning effectly slows you down ALOT if you scan. They're the Larva Inject / Chronoboost of Terran since Terran can't produce workers as fast. Early scan hurt as much as building Units when you don't want to as a Zerg probably more. With 3-4 Orbitals and plenty of SCV's mining Mules become a luxury but in the early and midgame they are what keep the Terran eco on even footing. You are missing the point. I'm not addressing the idea of using a scan vs a mule and how it affects the game. I'm saying I'm sick of seeing people say scans cost money. Those 270 minerals don't disappear. Scans don't cost minerals. End of story.
scans cost BANK
its either mule or scan do the math
|
On May 12 2012 04:51 zergmacro34 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2012 03:47 FLuE wrote:On May 12 2012 03:16 s3rp wrote:On May 12 2012 02:54 mrjpark wrote:On May 12 2012 02:26 Greenei wrote:On May 12 2012 02:23 FLuE wrote:
Please please please stop saying scans cost money.
That simply isn't true. Scans cost energy. It is a huge difference. energy is not a comparable concept though. 50 energy on a queen aren't wort nearly as much as 50 energy on a oc (if you have more then 2 queens). but it's a standard zerg/toss tactic to deny the worth of mules when the topic is scans and exaggerate it when the topic is mules. No, the argument is pretty simple. Dropping a scan does not 'cost' you money, you just mine it slower. Dropping a mule gives you a big boost in economy at the cost of energy. The effect mules is actually huge, pros have been able to almost come back from having zero scv's because of the impact of mules in low economy games. I'm not saying they're imbalanced, mind you, but that mules are in a way a luxury more than a right. While you design your production around having mules, this is with the knowledge that if you drop a scan instead, your production will be inefficient -- it is a conscious decision you made.On May 12 2012 02:48 Plansix wrote:On May 12 2012 02:39 TeeTS wrote:
Blizzard has ruined the TvP matchup successfully for terran with the EMP nerf & upgrade cost reduction for protoss. Now they try to ruin TvZ.
While PvZ winrates tend to go out of control tournamentwhise, Blizzard brings in a buff for zerg, that has absolutely no impact on ZvP, but a damn huge on ZvT, which was so far the best balanced matchup in the game (proven by winrates all over the place)! Greatjob Blizz! Why focus on matchups where winrates go out of control? Let's just take the nearly 50-50 matchup and break it apart. Well done!
I really hope for HotS to repair the bullshit they've done in the past months. If not, maybe LoL is a good alternative -_- I love when people cite the upgrade cost reduction for protoss. Like we are going to do a lot with the whole extra half a sentry for +2/+2. Clearly this man fears the 8 observer rush comming 80 second earlier. Snipe is the only nerf for terran where they went to far. It should have just done less damage to massive and left it as it was. It's not the cost itself that people are complaining about, it's how much faster Protoss can pump out upgrades, especially with the use of chronoboost. It may seem minimal, but you can see the difference it has made in how pro Terrans have reacted with their double engineering bay timings. They basically have to cross their fingers and hope Protoss doesn't just constantly upgrade because they won't be able to keep up. In the early game before you have all your bases saturated scanning effectly slows you down ALOT if you scan. They're the Larva Inject / Chronoboost of Terran since Terran can't produce workers as fast. Early scan hurt as much as building Units when you don't want to as a Zerg probably more. With 3-4 Orbitals and plenty of SCV's mining Mules become a luxury but in the early and midgame they are what keep the Terran eco on even footing. You are missing the point. I'm not addressing the idea of using a scan vs a mule and how it affects the game. I'm saying I'm sick of seeing people say scans cost money. Those 270 minerals don't disappear. Scans don't cost minerals. End of story. scans cost BANK its either mule or scan do the math
There is no math to be done. They don't cost bank. They cost energy. Again, I'm not talking about the OPPORTUNITY COST of using a scan vs. a mule. I'm simply stating that this idea that a scan costs 270 minerals which has been stated several times in this thread to argue about creep denial isn't a true statement.
It isn't that tough to understand.
|
On May 12 2012 04:55 FLuE wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2012 04:51 zergmacro34 wrote:On May 12 2012 03:47 FLuE wrote:On May 12 2012 03:16 s3rp wrote:On May 12 2012 02:54 mrjpark wrote:On May 12 2012 02:26 Greenei wrote:On May 12 2012 02:23 FLuE wrote:
Please please please stop saying scans cost money.
That simply isn't true. Scans cost energy. It is a huge difference. energy is not a comparable concept though. 50 energy on a queen aren't wort nearly as much as 50 energy on a oc (if you have more then 2 queens). but it's a standard zerg/toss tactic to deny the worth of mules when the topic is scans and exaggerate it when the topic is mules. No, the argument is pretty simple. Dropping a scan does not 'cost' you money, you just mine it slower. Dropping a mule gives you a big boost in economy at the cost of energy. The effect mules is actually huge, pros have been able to almost come back from having zero scv's because of the impact of mules in low economy games. I'm not saying they're imbalanced, mind you, but that mules are in a way a luxury more than a right. While you design your production around having mules, this is with the knowledge that if you drop a scan instead, your production will be inefficient -- it is a conscious decision you made.On May 12 2012 02:48 Plansix wrote:On May 12 2012 02:39 TeeTS wrote:
Blizzard has ruined the TvP matchup successfully for terran with the EMP nerf & upgrade cost reduction for protoss. Now they try to ruin TvZ.
While PvZ winrates tend to go out of control tournamentwhise, Blizzard brings in a buff for zerg, that has absolutely no impact on ZvP, but a damn huge on ZvT, which was so far the best balanced matchup in the game (proven by winrates all over the place)! Greatjob Blizz! Why focus on matchups where winrates go out of control? Let's just take the nearly 50-50 matchup and break it apart. Well done!
I really hope for HotS to repair the bullshit they've done in the past months. If not, maybe LoL is a good alternative -_- I love when people cite the upgrade cost reduction for protoss. Like we are going to do a lot with the whole extra half a sentry for +2/+2. Clearly this man fears the 8 observer rush comming 80 second earlier. Snipe is the only nerf for terran where they went to far. It should have just done less damage to massive and left it as it was. It's not the cost itself that people are complaining about, it's how much faster Protoss can pump out upgrades, especially with the use of chronoboost. It may seem minimal, but you can see the difference it has made in how pro Terrans have reacted with their double engineering bay timings. They basically have to cross their fingers and hope Protoss doesn't just constantly upgrade because they won't be able to keep up. In the early game before you have all your bases saturated scanning effectly slows you down ALOT if you scan. They're the Larva Inject / Chronoboost of Terran since Terran can't produce workers as fast. Early scan hurt as much as building Units when you don't want to as a Zerg probably more. With 3-4 Orbitals and plenty of SCV's mining Mules become a luxury but in the early and midgame they are what keep the Terran eco on even footing. You are missing the point. I'm not addressing the idea of using a scan vs a mule and how it affects the game. I'm saying I'm sick of seeing people say scans cost money. Those 270 minerals don't disappear. Scans don't cost minerals. End of story. scans cost BANK its either mule or scan do the math There is no math to be done. They don't cost bank. They cost energy. Again, I'm not talking about the OPPORTUNITY COST of using a scan vs. a mule. I'm simply stating that this idea that a scan costs 270 minerals which has been stated several times in this thread to argue about creep denial isn't a true statement. It isn't that tough to understand.
And what your point here ? Scanning to remove creep in the early stages will put you behind economical even if you don't count a mule as 270 minerals . Its a bad idea , end of story.
|
On May 12 2012 04:55 FLuE wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2012 04:51 zergmacro34 wrote:On May 12 2012 03:47 FLuE wrote:On May 12 2012 03:16 s3rp wrote:On May 12 2012 02:54 mrjpark wrote:On May 12 2012 02:26 Greenei wrote:On May 12 2012 02:23 FLuE wrote:
Please please please stop saying scans cost money.
That simply isn't true. Scans cost energy. It is a huge difference. energy is not a comparable concept though. 50 energy on a queen aren't wort nearly as much as 50 energy on a oc (if you have more then 2 queens). but it's a standard zerg/toss tactic to deny the worth of mules when the topic is scans and exaggerate it when the topic is mules. No, the argument is pretty simple. Dropping a scan does not 'cost' you money, you just mine it slower. Dropping a mule gives you a big boost in economy at the cost of energy. The effect mules is actually huge, pros have been able to almost come back from having zero scv's because of the impact of mules in low economy games. I'm not saying they're imbalanced, mind you, but that mules are in a way a luxury more than a right. While you design your production around having mules, this is with the knowledge that if you drop a scan instead, your production will be inefficient -- it is a conscious decision you made.On May 12 2012 02:48 Plansix wrote:On May 12 2012 02:39 TeeTS wrote:
Blizzard has ruined the TvP matchup successfully for terran with the EMP nerf & upgrade cost reduction for protoss. Now they try to ruin TvZ.
While PvZ winrates tend to go out of control tournamentwhise, Blizzard brings in a buff for zerg, that has absolutely no impact on ZvP, but a damn huge on ZvT, which was so far the best balanced matchup in the game (proven by winrates all over the place)! Greatjob Blizz! Why focus on matchups where winrates go out of control? Let's just take the nearly 50-50 matchup and break it apart. Well done!
I really hope for HotS to repair the bullshit they've done in the past months. If not, maybe LoL is a good alternative -_- I love when people cite the upgrade cost reduction for protoss. Like we are going to do a lot with the whole extra half a sentry for +2/+2. Clearly this man fears the 8 observer rush comming 80 second earlier. Snipe is the only nerf for terran where they went to far. It should have just done less damage to massive and left it as it was. It's not the cost itself that people are complaining about, it's how much faster Protoss can pump out upgrades, especially with the use of chronoboost. It may seem minimal, but you can see the difference it has made in how pro Terrans have reacted with their double engineering bay timings. They basically have to cross their fingers and hope Protoss doesn't just constantly upgrade because they won't be able to keep up. In the early game before you have all your bases saturated scanning effectly slows you down ALOT if you scan. They're the Larva Inject / Chronoboost of Terran since Terran can't produce workers as fast. Early scan hurt as much as building Units when you don't want to as a Zerg probably more. With 3-4 Orbitals and plenty of SCV's mining Mules become a luxury but in the early and midgame they are what keep the Terran eco on even footing. You are missing the point. I'm not addressing the idea of using a scan vs a mule and how it affects the game. I'm saying I'm sick of seeing people say scans cost money. Those 270 minerals don't disappear. Scans don't cost minerals. End of story. scans cost BANK its either mule or scan do the math There is no math to be done. They don't cost bank. They cost energy. Again, I'm not talking about the OPPORTUNITY COST of using a scan vs. a mule. I'm simply stating that this idea that a scan costs 270 minerals which has been stated several times in this thread to argue about creep denial isn't a true statement. It isn't that tough to understand.
a scan will remove 270 additional minerals in income you would have had
what does that mean to u?
|
If you're going to play the "scan costs minerals because it means I don't drop a mule" card, then by the same logic all Zerg players could play the "making any building costs <drone mining for the duration of the game> minerals since it consumes a drone" card, which is also a silly thing to say.
Scan is very often worth using.
|
On May 12 2012 05:10 avc wrote:
If you're going to play the "scan costs minerals because it means I don't drop a mule" card, then by the same logic all Zerg players could play the "making any building costs <drone mining for the duration of the game> minerals since it consumes a drone" card, which is also a silly thing to say.
Scan is very often worth using.
And? Our SCV has to sit there constructing buildings the entire time. Your point has been rendered invalid.
|
On May 12 2012 03:02 Tassadarstarcraft2 wrote:
once again my question, is it live on eu now?
Yes, went live early this morning.
On May 12 2012 04:29 Maragor wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2012 04:23 dUTtrOACh wrote:On May 12 2012 04:16 Maragor wrote:On May 12 2012 04:03 ZAiNs wrote:On May 12 2012 04:01 Doganaws wrote:And when a terran wins the next MLG they'll still be crying Now everybody lister CLEARELY: I am not M V P I don't care about who wins GSL, MLG, NASL, IGN PRO LEAGUE, Wooden league middleland championship... I care about me... and personally (this is a forum right?) i'll not be as good as before against Z. All of my vZ strats are a little hurt. And as a plat player (who dosn't want to play 6 hours a day because of work and wife) i'll not be able to react to this "LIKE A PRO". And tomorrow i'll post my replays... and in 4 days i'll start to play diablo 3 You are Platinum and think the game should be balanced around you? When Diablo III comes out don't bother coming back to SC2. Stupid comments like that need to not be said. Why shouldn't he believe the game should be balanced around himself? He paid $60 to enjoy his game. :s I personally am disgusted by how ez zerg at the lower levels is...just a-move lings/blings/ultras at a Terran army...gg. The only time lower level zerg had to micro is with infestors...and with the early game harass Terran had with helions/reapers. Now they can just a-move their queens and not even bother to keep looking to micro. I think low level terran need to stop trying to play like Marine king, anyway. They should just mass thors like foreign terrans. You do realize that the perfect counter to mass Thors...is blings? Thors clump up so often and it is nearly impossible to micro them to be separated far enough to avoid the splash damage. Not to mention BLs > Thors. :s So not only does the "Tier 3" Terran unit suck ass against the Zerg "Tier 3" flying...but it also gets raped by their "Tier 1" blings.
Sorry but this is horribly wrong. Banelings are hardly cost efficient to take down Thors, It takes something stupid like 9 banelings to kill a single tank with equal upgrades, so you're not trading army well at all. Mass upgraded roach is the best counter to mech as roaches are cheap and do good damage.
|
Finally this game gets it's final touch and is ready to be played by Koreans...
...to get backpatched. :D
|
On May 12 2012 05:04 zergmacro34 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2012 04:55 FLuE wrote:On May 12 2012 04:51 zergmacro34 wrote:On May 12 2012 03:47 FLuE wrote:On May 12 2012 03:16 s3rp wrote:On May 12 2012 02:54 mrjpark wrote:On May 12 2012 02:26 Greenei wrote:On May 12 2012 02:23 FLuE wrote:
Please please please stop saying scans cost money.
That simply isn't true. Scans cost energy. It is a huge difference. energy is not a comparable concept though. 50 energy on a queen aren't wort nearly as much as 50 energy on a oc (if you have more then 2 queens). but it's a standard zerg/toss tactic to deny the worth of mules when the topic is scans and exaggerate it when the topic is mules. No, the argument is pretty simple. Dropping a scan does not 'cost' you money, you just mine it slower. Dropping a mule gives you a big boost in economy at the cost of energy. The effect mules is actually huge, pros have been able to almost come back from having zero scv's because of the impact of mules in low economy games. I'm not saying they're imbalanced, mind you, but that mules are in a way a luxury more than a right. While you design your production around having mules, this is with the knowledge that if you drop a scan instead, your production will be inefficient -- it is a conscious decision you made.On May 12 2012 02:48 Plansix wrote:On May 12 2012 02:39 TeeTS wrote:
Blizzard has ruined the TvP matchup successfully for terran with the EMP nerf & upgrade cost reduction for protoss. Now they try to ruin TvZ.
While PvZ winrates tend to go out of control tournamentwhise, Blizzard brings in a buff for zerg, that has absolutely no impact on ZvP, but a damn huge on ZvT, which was so far the best balanced matchup in the game (proven by winrates all over the place)! Greatjob Blizz! Why focus on matchups where winrates go out of control? Let's just take the nearly 50-50 matchup and break it apart. Well done!
I really hope for HotS to repair the bullshit they've done in the past months. If not, maybe LoL is a good alternative -_- I love when people cite the upgrade cost reduction for protoss. Like we are going to do a lot with the whole extra half a sentry for +2/+2. Clearly this man fears the 8 observer rush comming 80 second earlier. Snipe is the only nerf for terran where they went to far. It should have just done less damage to massive and left it as it was. It's not the cost itself that people are complaining about, it's how much faster Protoss can pump out upgrades, especially with the use of chronoboost. It may seem minimal, but you can see the difference it has made in how pro Terrans have reacted with their double engineering bay timings. They basically have to cross their fingers and hope Protoss doesn't just constantly upgrade because they won't be able to keep up. In the early game before you have all your bases saturated scanning effectly slows you down ALOT if you scan. They're the Larva Inject / Chronoboost of Terran since Terran can't produce workers as fast. Early scan hurt as much as building Units when you don't want to as a Zerg probably more. With 3-4 Orbitals and plenty of SCV's mining Mules become a luxury but in the early and midgame they are what keep the Terran eco on even footing. You are missing the point. I'm not addressing the idea of using a scan vs a mule and how it affects the game. I'm saying I'm sick of seeing people say scans cost money. Those 270 minerals don't disappear. Scans don't cost minerals. End of story. scans cost BANK its either mule or scan do the math There is no math to be done. They don't cost bank. They cost energy. Again, I'm not talking about the OPPORTUNITY COST of using a scan vs. a mule. I'm simply stating that this idea that a scan costs 270 minerals which has been stated several times in this thread to argue about creep denial isn't a true statement. It isn't that tough to understand. a scan will remove 270 additional minerals in income you would have had what does that mean to u?
This is something allot Terrans are having trouble coming with terms with. During a 20 minute game using your scan instead of mules those few vital times when scan really matters, far outweighs those extra total 810 minerals you would otherwise have. really that sum of minerals doesn't matter squat compared to the total mineral amount you would had collected and the actual intel you would had gotten for that particular situation.
|
On May 12 2012 04:29 Maragor wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2012 04:23 dUTtrOACh wrote:On May 12 2012 04:16 Maragor wrote:On May 12 2012 04:03 ZAiNs wrote:On May 12 2012 04:01 Doganaws wrote:And when a terran wins the next MLG they'll still be crying Now everybody lister CLEARELY: I am not M V P I don't care about who wins GSL, MLG, NASL, IGN PRO LEAGUE, Wooden league middleland championship... I care about me... and personally (this is a forum right?) i'll not be as good as before against Z. All of my vZ strats are a little hurt. And as a plat player (who dosn't want to play 6 hours a day because of work and wife) i'll not be able to react to this "LIKE A PRO". And tomorrow i'll post my replays... and in 4 days i'll start to play diablo 3 You are Platinum and think the game should be balanced around you? When Diablo III comes out don't bother coming back to SC2. Stupid comments like that need to not be said. Why shouldn't he believe the game should be balanced around himself? He paid $60 to enjoy his game. :s I personally am disgusted by how ez zerg at the lower levels is...just a-move lings/blings/ultras at a Terran army...gg. The only time lower level zerg had to micro is with infestors...and with the early game harass Terran had with helions/reapers. Now they can just a-move their queens and not even bother to keep looking to micro. I think low level terran need to stop trying to play like Marine king, anyway. They should just mass thors like foreign terrans. You do realize that the perfect counter to mass Thors...is blings? Thors clump up so often and it is nearly impossible to micro them to be separated far enough to avoid the splash damage. Not to mention BLs > Thors. :s So not only does the "Tier 3" Terran unit suck ass against the Zerg "Tier 3" flying...but it also gets raped by their "Tier 1" blings.
Actually counter is roach/bling, since terran players don't usually get more than a few tanks, you can use banelings to soften thors and kill any hellions or scv's and send in roaches to clean up.
|
On May 12 2012 05:15 Integra wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2012 05:04 zergmacro34 wrote:On May 12 2012 04:55 FLuE wrote:On May 12 2012 04:51 zergmacro34 wrote:On May 12 2012 03:47 FLuE wrote:On May 12 2012 03:16 s3rp wrote:On May 12 2012 02:54 mrjpark wrote:On May 12 2012 02:26 Greenei wrote:On May 12 2012 02:23 FLuE wrote:
Please please please stop saying scans cost money.
That simply isn't true. Scans cost energy. It is a huge difference. energy is not a comparable concept though. 50 energy on a queen aren't wort nearly as much as 50 energy on a oc (if you have more then 2 queens). but it's a standard zerg/toss tactic to deny the worth of mules when the topic is scans and exaggerate it when the topic is mules. No, the argument is pretty simple. Dropping a scan does not 'cost' you money, you just mine it slower. Dropping a mule gives you a big boost in economy at the cost of energy. The effect mules is actually huge, pros have been able to almost come back from having zero scv's because of the impact of mules in low economy games. I'm not saying they're imbalanced, mind you, but that mules are in a way a luxury more than a right. While you design your production around having mules, this is with the knowledge that if you drop a scan instead, your production will be inefficient -- it is a conscious decision you made.On May 12 2012 02:48 Plansix wrote:On May 12 2012 02:39 TeeTS wrote:
Blizzard has ruined the TvP matchup successfully for terran with the EMP nerf & upgrade cost reduction for protoss. Now they try to ruin TvZ.
While PvZ winrates tend to go out of control tournamentwhise, Blizzard brings in a buff for zerg, that has absolutely no impact on ZvP, but a damn huge on ZvT, which was so far the best balanced matchup in the game (proven by winrates all over the place)! Greatjob Blizz! Why focus on matchups where winrates go out of control? Let's just take the nearly 50-50 matchup and break it apart. Well done!
I really hope for HotS to repair the bullshit they've done in the past months. If not, maybe LoL is a good alternative -_- I love when people cite the upgrade cost reduction for protoss. Like we are going to do a lot with the whole extra half a sentry for +2/+2. Clearly this man fears the 8 observer rush comming 80 second earlier. Snipe is the only nerf for terran where they went to far. It should have just done less damage to massive and left it as it was. It's not the cost itself that people are complaining about, it's how much faster Protoss can pump out upgrades, especially with the use of chronoboost. It may seem minimal, but you can see the difference it has made in how pro Terrans have reacted with their double engineering bay timings. They basically have to cross their fingers and hope Protoss doesn't just constantly upgrade because they won't be able to keep up. In the early game before you have all your bases saturated scanning effectly slows you down ALOT if you scan. They're the Larva Inject / Chronoboost of Terran since Terran can't produce workers as fast. Early scan hurt as much as building Units when you don't want to as a Zerg probably more. With 3-4 Orbitals and plenty of SCV's mining Mules become a luxury but in the early and midgame they are what keep the Terran eco on even footing. You are missing the point. I'm not addressing the idea of using a scan vs a mule and how it affects the game. I'm saying I'm sick of seeing people say scans cost money. Those 270 minerals don't disappear. Scans don't cost minerals. End of story. scans cost BANK its either mule or scan do the math There is no math to be done. They don't cost bank. They cost energy. Again, I'm not talking about the OPPORTUNITY COST of using a scan vs. a mule. I'm simply stating that this idea that a scan costs 270 minerals which has been stated several times in this thread to argue about creep denial isn't a true statement. It isn't that tough to understand. a scan will remove 270 additional minerals in income you would have had what does that mean to u? This is something allot Terrans are having trouble coming with terms with. During a 20 minute game using your scan instead of mules those few vital times when scan really matters, far outweighs those extra total 810 minerals you would otherwise have. really that sum of minerals doesn't matter squat compared to the total mineral amount you would had collected and the actual intel you would had gotten for that particular situation.
Not to mention those minerals don't just vanish from your mineral lines, they are still there to be mined, it doesn't COST you minerals , if anything it cost time.
|
On May 11 2012 23:10 Cereb wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2012 18:30 Perseverance wrote:On May 11 2012 18:20 -Archangel- wrote:On May 11 2012 17:57 locant wrote:
i cant understand why protoss and zerg players purely come to this thread to bash on terran players. We have been nerfed in the last 3 patches while the other races get stronger yet there are no signs of this trend stopping...
Personally i dont really care for the changes as im not a fan of hellions its just the attitude of Z and P players which gets me I would have rather Zerg was OP from the start and then slowly being nerfed for 2 years then being UP and slowly being made stronger (or other races nerfed). Then I would have been in your situation. You had your 2 years of OP, now L2P. Technically Z was OP first...if you count the state of Roaches in the beta haha, I sure do miss those days >< Anyway, I look forward to these changes...it really gives me motivation to start playing again. ^^ Anyone got an hour count until this thing goes live? Ha! Those good ol' days  I still feel like the roach would have been a better 1 food unit. I wish they would just have given it a big damage nerf instead so it'd be easier to flod the screen with zerg units On another note, why do EU have to wait one more #%¤/"! day for every single patch to hit?! I'm calling racism! 
haha...I am guessing it's because you guys are 8-10 hours ahead of the west coast.
On another note, I think it would of been cool if they found a way to make the roach a 1 food unit too t.t
Oh well /sigh
|
On May 12 2012 05:15 Integra wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2012 05:04 zergmacro34 wrote:On May 12 2012 04:55 FLuE wrote:On May 12 2012 04:51 zergmacro34 wrote:On May 12 2012 03:47 FLuE wrote:On May 12 2012 03:16 s3rp wrote:On May 12 2012 02:54 mrjpark wrote:On May 12 2012 02:26 Greenei wrote:On May 12 2012 02:23 FLuE wrote:
Please please please stop saying scans cost money.
That simply isn't true. Scans cost energy. It is a huge difference. energy is not a comparable concept though. 50 energy on a queen aren't wort nearly as much as 50 energy on a oc (if you have more then 2 queens). but it's a standard zerg/toss tactic to deny the worth of mules when the topic is scans and exaggerate it when the topic is mules. No, the argument is pretty simple. Dropping a scan does not 'cost' you money, you just mine it slower. Dropping a mule gives you a big boost in economy at the cost of energy. The effect mules is actually huge, pros have been able to almost come back from having zero scv's because of the impact of mules in low economy games. I'm not saying they're imbalanced, mind you, but that mules are in a way a luxury more than a right. While you design your production around having mules, this is with the knowledge that if you drop a scan instead, your production will be inefficient -- it is a conscious decision you made.On May 12 2012 02:48 Plansix wrote:On May 12 2012 02:39 TeeTS wrote:
Blizzard has ruined the TvP matchup successfully for terran with the EMP nerf & upgrade cost reduction for protoss. Now they try to ruin TvZ.
While PvZ winrates tend to go out of control tournamentwhise, Blizzard brings in a buff for zerg, that has absolutely no impact on ZvP, but a damn huge on ZvT, which was so far the best balanced matchup in the game (proven by winrates all over the place)! Greatjob Blizz! Why focus on matchups where winrates go out of control? Let's just take the nearly 50-50 matchup and break it apart. Well done!
I really hope for HotS to repair the bullshit they've done in the past months. If not, maybe LoL is a good alternative -_- I love when people cite the upgrade cost reduction for protoss. Like we are going to do a lot with the whole extra half a sentry for +2/+2. Clearly this man fears the 8 observer rush comming 80 second earlier. Snipe is the only nerf for terran where they went to far. It should have just done less damage to massive and left it as it was. It's not the cost itself that people are complaining about, it's how much faster Protoss can pump out upgrades, especially with the use of chronoboost. It may seem minimal, but you can see the difference it has made in how pro Terrans have reacted with their double engineering bay timings. They basically have to cross their fingers and hope Protoss doesn't just constantly upgrade because they won't be able to keep up. In the early game before you have all your bases saturated scanning effectly slows you down ALOT if you scan. They're the Larva Inject / Chronoboost of Terran since Terran can't produce workers as fast. Early scan hurt as much as building Units when you don't want to as a Zerg probably more. With 3-4 Orbitals and plenty of SCV's mining Mules become a luxury but in the early and midgame they are what keep the Terran eco on even footing. You are missing the point. I'm not addressing the idea of using a scan vs a mule and how it affects the game. I'm saying I'm sick of seeing people say scans cost money. Those 270 minerals don't disappear. Scans don't cost minerals. End of story. scans cost BANK its either mule or scan do the math There is no math to be done. They don't cost bank. They cost energy. Again, I'm not talking about the OPPORTUNITY COST of using a scan vs. a mule. I'm simply stating that this idea that a scan costs 270 minerals which has been stated several times in this thread to argue about creep denial isn't a true statement. It isn't that tough to understand. a scan will remove 270 additional minerals in income you would have had what does that mean to u? This is something allot Terrans are having trouble coming with terms with. During a 20 minute game using your scan instead of mules those few vital times when scan really matters, far outweighs those extra total 810 minerals you would otherwise have. really that sum of minerals doesn't matter squat compared to the total mineral amount you would had collected and the actual intel you would had gotten for that particular situation.
"that particular situation"
in what pro games do you see that first 50 energy used as a scan? do you watch gsl? Soon as those Ts get their orbital its scan scan scan!
no
they're so greedy with mules dt rushes frequently work on them
|
On May 12 2012 05:17 Leth0 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2012 05:15 Integra wrote:On May 12 2012 05:04 zergmacro34 wrote:On May 12 2012 04:55 FLuE wrote:On May 12 2012 04:51 zergmacro34 wrote:On May 12 2012 03:47 FLuE wrote:On May 12 2012 03:16 s3rp wrote:On May 12 2012 02:54 mrjpark wrote:On May 12 2012 02:26 Greenei wrote:On May 12 2012 02:23 FLuE wrote:
Please please please stop saying scans cost money.
That simply isn't true. Scans cost energy. It is a huge difference. energy is not a comparable concept though. 50 energy on a queen aren't wort nearly as much as 50 energy on a oc (if you have more then 2 queens). but it's a standard zerg/toss tactic to deny the worth of mules when the topic is scans and exaggerate it when the topic is mules. No, the argument is pretty simple. Dropping a scan does not 'cost' you money, you just mine it slower. Dropping a mule gives you a big boost in economy at the cost of energy. The effect mules is actually huge, pros have been able to almost come back from having zero scv's because of the impact of mules in low economy games. I'm not saying they're imbalanced, mind you, but that mules are in a way a luxury more than a right. While you design your production around having mules, this is with the knowledge that if you drop a scan instead, your production will be inefficient -- it is a conscious decision you made.On May 12 2012 02:48 Plansix wrote:On May 12 2012 02:39 TeeTS wrote:
Blizzard has ruined the TvP matchup successfully for terran with the EMP nerf & upgrade cost reduction for protoss. Now they try to ruin TvZ.
While PvZ winrates tend to go out of control tournamentwhise, Blizzard brings in a buff for zerg, that has absolutely no impact on ZvP, but a damn huge on ZvT, which was so far the best balanced matchup in the game (proven by winrates all over the place)! Greatjob Blizz! Why focus on matchups where winrates go out of control? Let's just take the nearly 50-50 matchup and break it apart. Well done!
I really hope for HotS to repair the bullshit they've done in the past months. If not, maybe LoL is a good alternative -_- I love when people cite the upgrade cost reduction for protoss. Like we are going to do a lot with the whole extra half a sentry for +2/+2. Clearly this man fears the 8 observer rush comming 80 second earlier. Snipe is the only nerf for terran where they went to far. It should have just done less damage to massive and left it as it was. It's not the cost itself that people are complaining about, it's how much faster Protoss can pump out upgrades, especially with the use of chronoboost. It may seem minimal, but you can see the difference it has made in how pro Terrans have reacted with their double engineering bay timings. They basically have to cross their fingers and hope Protoss doesn't just constantly upgrade because they won't be able to keep up. In the early game before you have all your bases saturated scanning effectly slows you down ALOT if you scan. They're the Larva Inject / Chronoboost of Terran since Terran can't produce workers as fast. Early scan hurt as much as building Units when you don't want to as a Zerg probably more. With 3-4 Orbitals and plenty of SCV's mining Mules become a luxury but in the early and midgame they are what keep the Terran eco on even footing. You are missing the point. I'm not addressing the idea of using a scan vs a mule and how it affects the game. I'm saying I'm sick of seeing people say scans cost money. Those 270 minerals don't disappear. Scans don't cost minerals. End of story. scans cost BANK its either mule or scan do the math There is no math to be done. They don't cost bank. They cost energy. Again, I'm not talking about the OPPORTUNITY COST of using a scan vs. a mule. I'm simply stating that this idea that a scan costs 270 minerals which has been stated several times in this thread to argue about creep denial isn't a true statement. It isn't that tough to understand. a scan will remove 270 additional minerals in income you would have had what does that mean to u? This is something allot Terrans are having trouble coming with terms with. During a 20 minute game using your scan instead of mules those few vital times when scan really matters, far outweighs those extra total 810 minerals you would otherwise have. really that sum of minerals doesn't matter squat compared to the total mineral amount you would had collected and the actual intel you would had gotten for that particular situation. Not to mention those minerals don't just vanish from your mineral lines, they are still there to be mined, it doesn't COST you minerals , if anything it cost time.
Holy shit, you are right, Terrans always talk like they are losing the minerals, when they really only are losing mineral time or mineral rate. OMG.
|
On May 12 2012 05:17 Leth0 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2012 05:15 Integra wrote:On May 12 2012 05:04 zergmacro34 wrote:On May 12 2012 04:55 FLuE wrote:On May 12 2012 04:51 zergmacro34 wrote:On May 12 2012 03:47 FLuE wrote:On May 12 2012 03:16 s3rp wrote:On May 12 2012 02:54 mrjpark wrote:On May 12 2012 02:26 Greenei wrote:On May 12 2012 02:23 FLuE wrote:
Please please please stop saying scans cost money.
That simply isn't true. Scans cost energy. It is a huge difference. energy is not a comparable concept though. 50 energy on a queen aren't wort nearly as much as 50 energy on a oc (if you have more then 2 queens). but it's a standard zerg/toss tactic to deny the worth of mules when the topic is scans and exaggerate it when the topic is mules. No, the argument is pretty simple. Dropping a scan does not 'cost' you money, you just mine it slower. Dropping a mule gives you a big boost in economy at the cost of energy. The effect mules is actually huge, pros have been able to almost come back from having zero scv's because of the impact of mules in low economy games. I'm not saying they're imbalanced, mind you, but that mules are in a way a luxury more than a right. While you design your production around having mules, this is with the knowledge that if you drop a scan instead, your production will be inefficient -- it is a conscious decision you made.On May 12 2012 02:48 Plansix wrote:On May 12 2012 02:39 TeeTS wrote:
Blizzard has ruined the TvP matchup successfully for terran with the EMP nerf & upgrade cost reduction for protoss. Now they try to ruin TvZ.
While PvZ winrates tend to go out of control tournamentwhise, Blizzard brings in a buff for zerg, that has absolutely no impact on ZvP, but a damn huge on ZvT, which was so far the best balanced matchup in the game (proven by winrates all over the place)! Greatjob Blizz! Why focus on matchups where winrates go out of control? Let's just take the nearly 50-50 matchup and break it apart. Well done!
I really hope for HotS to repair the bullshit they've done in the past months. If not, maybe LoL is a good alternative -_- I love when people cite the upgrade cost reduction for protoss. Like we are going to do a lot with the whole extra half a sentry for +2/+2. Clearly this man fears the 8 observer rush comming 80 second earlier. Snipe is the only nerf for terran where they went to far. It should have just done less damage to massive and left it as it was. It's not the cost itself that people are complaining about, it's how much faster Protoss can pump out upgrades, especially with the use of chronoboost. It may seem minimal, but you can see the difference it has made in how pro Terrans have reacted with their double engineering bay timings. They basically have to cross their fingers and hope Protoss doesn't just constantly upgrade because they won't be able to keep up. In the early game before you have all your bases saturated scanning effectly slows you down ALOT if you scan. They're the Larva Inject / Chronoboost of Terran since Terran can't produce workers as fast. Early scan hurt as much as building Units when you don't want to as a Zerg probably more. With 3-4 Orbitals and plenty of SCV's mining Mules become a luxury but in the early and midgame they are what keep the Terran eco on even footing. You are missing the point. I'm not addressing the idea of using a scan vs a mule and how it affects the game. I'm saying I'm sick of seeing people say scans cost money. Those 270 minerals don't disappear. Scans don't cost minerals. End of story. scans cost BANK its either mule or scan do the math There is no math to be done. They don't cost bank. They cost energy. Again, I'm not talking about the OPPORTUNITY COST of using a scan vs. a mule. I'm simply stating that this idea that a scan costs 270 minerals which has been stated several times in this thread to argue about creep denial isn't a true statement. It isn't that tough to understand. a scan will remove 270 additional minerals in income you would have had what does that mean to u? This is something allot Terrans are having trouble coming with terms with. During a 20 minute game using your scan instead of mules those few vital times when scan really matters, far outweighs those extra total 810 minerals you would otherwise have. really that sum of minerals doesn't matter squat compared to the total mineral amount you would had collected and the actual intel you would had gotten for that particular situation. Not to mention those minerals don't just vanish from your mineral lines, they are still there to be mined, it doesn't COST you minerals , if anything it cost time.
Terran is far slower saturated than the other 2 races . If waste your Energy on Scans too early you fall behind like crazy.
|
On May 12 2012 05:25 zergmacro34 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 12 2012 05:15 Integra wrote:On May 12 2012 05:04 zergmacro34 wrote:On May 12 2012 04:55 FLuE wrote:On May 12 2012 04:51 zergmacro34 wrote:On May 12 2012 03:47 FLuE wrote:On May 12 2012 03:16 s3rp wrote:On May 12 2012 02:54 mrjpark wrote:On May 12 2012 02:26 Greenei wrote:On May 12 2012 02:23 FLuE wrote:
Please please please stop saying scans cost money.
That simply isn't true. Scans cost energy. It is a huge difference. energy is not a comparable concept though. 50 energy on a queen aren't wort nearly as much as 50 energy on a oc (if you have more then 2 queens). but it's a standard zerg/toss tactic to deny the worth of mules when the topic is scans and exaggerate it when the topic is mules. No, the argument is pretty simple. Dropping a scan does not 'cost' you money, you just mine it slower. Dropping a mule gives you a big boost in economy at the cost of energy. The effect mules is actually huge, pros have been able to almost come back from having zero scv's because of the impact of mules in low economy games. I'm not saying they're imbalanced, mind you, but that mules are in a way a luxury more than a right. While you design your production around having mules, this is with the knowledge that if you drop a scan instead, your production will be inefficient -- it is a conscious decision you made.On May 12 2012 02:48 Plansix wrote:On May 12 2012 02:39 TeeTS wrote:
Blizzard has ruined the TvP matchup successfully for terran with the EMP nerf & upgrade cost reduction for protoss. Now they try to ruin TvZ.
While PvZ winrates tend to go out of control tournamentwhise, Blizzard brings in a buff for zerg, that has absolutely no impact on ZvP, but a damn huge on ZvT, which was so far the best balanced matchup in the game (proven by winrates all over the place)! Greatjob Blizz! Why focus on matchups where winrates go out of control? Let's just take the nearly 50-50 matchup and break it apart. Well done!
I really hope for HotS to repair the bullshit they've done in the past months. If not, maybe LoL is a good alternative -_- I love when people cite the upgrade cost reduction for protoss. Like we are going to do a lot with the whole extra half a sentry for +2/+2. Clearly this man fears the 8 observer rush comming 80 second earlier. Snipe is the only nerf for terran where they went to far. It should have just done less damage to massive and left it as it was. It's not the cost itself that people are complaining about, it's how much faster Protoss can pump out upgrades, especially with the use of chronoboost. It may seem minimal, but you can see the difference it has made in how pro Terrans have reacted with their double engineering bay timings. They basically have to cross their fingers and hope Protoss doesn't just constantly upgrade because they won't be able to keep up. In the early game before you have all your bases saturated scanning effectly slows you down ALOT if you scan. They're the Larva Inject / Chronoboost of Terran since Terran can't produce workers as fast. Early scan hurt as much as building Units when you don't want to as a Zerg probably more. With 3-4 Orbitals and plenty of SCV's mining Mules become a luxury but in the early and midgame they are what keep the Terran eco on even footing. You are missing the point. I'm not addressing the idea of using a scan vs a mule and how it affects the game. I'm saying I'm sick of seeing people say scans cost money. Those 270 minerals don't disappear. Scans don't cost minerals. End of story. scans cost BANK its either mule or scan do the math There is no math to be done. They don't cost bank. They cost energy. Again, I'm not talking about the OPPORTUNITY COST of using a scan vs. a mule. I'm simply stating that this idea that a scan costs 270 minerals which has been stated several times in this thread to argue about creep denial isn't a true statement. It isn't that tough to understand. a scan will remove 270 additional minerals in income you would have had what does that mean to u? This is something allot Terrans are having trouble coming with terms with. During a 20 minute game using your scan instead of mules those few vital times when scan really matters, far outweighs those extra total 810 minerals you would otherwise have. really that sum of minerals doesn't matter squat compared to the total mineral amount you would had collected and the actual intel you would had gotten for that particular situation. "that particular situation" in what pro games do you see that first 50 energy used as a scan? do you watch gsl? Soon as those Ts get their orbital its scan scan scan! no they're so greedy with mules dt rushes frequently work on them
Point of the post was that there exists situations where scan is better than MULES.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
