EPTIs Terran to remain the lowest played race? - Page 9
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
usethis2
2164 Posts
| ||
|
Kashll
United States1117 Posts
On January 19 2013 11:27 Prevolved wrote: Terran players saying Terran is the hardest. Seems legit. User was warned for this post I'm pretty sure by this point most Protoss and Zerg players can admit that too. Real life example: I played terran at a high masters level, rarely ever offraced. I didn't think i could make a CSL match so we put in a gold protoss instead of me. He got matched up against a high masters zerg. A couple days before the game I realized i could play indeed, so I subbed for our toss. I beat the high masters zerg with 2 base blink stalkers despite never really playing protoss, and never really playing zerg. Does anyone honestly think a high masters protoss player could play terran and beat a high masters zerg player on a dime? It's just not even a debate anymore that terran is MUCH MUCH harder to play. As for top level balance that's still undecided. but difficulty level it's not even a question. | ||
|
xAdra
Singapore1858 Posts
On January 19 2013 11:59 Kashll wrote: It's just not even a debate anymore that terran is MUCH MUCH harder to play. As for top level balance that's still undecided. but difficulty level it's not even a question. I wouldn't call it "much much" harder to play. I play both terran and protoss at masters level (switching between the two whenever I feel like it) and fare equally well. It's just that different races reward different things, and the aspects that a terran needs to master are much more hectic and attention consuming than protoss and zerg. However, terran vs zerg is severely skewed towards being super-duper easy for zerg, no doubt about that. | ||
|
Emzeeshady
Canada4203 Posts
| ||
|
Celestia
Mexico376 Posts
On January 19 2013 12:09 Emzeeshady wrote: As someone who plays all three races at around low masters level I would have to say Toss is BY FAR the easiest to play followed by Terran and Zerg on equal footing. Zerg and Terran are hard for different reasons. Terran macro is much easier for me due to lifting bases, supply drop and reactors while hitting injects is hard for me. Micro wise Terran is harder because I can just go ling/bling Muta and a move. I struggle with using infestors and bio so I usually just go mech of ling/bling/muta for a move armies. Terran is not as hard as Terrans make it out to be but it is still much harder then toss (no macro required, mass warp in, colossus, lol?). Just my 2 cents. Supply drop doesn't count at least you're comfortable having bad mechanics, I rarely see top korean Terrans doing it. | ||
|
Kashll
United States1117 Posts
On January 19 2013 12:09 Emzeeshady wrote: As someone who plays all three races at around low masters level I would have to say Toss is BY FAR the easiest to play followed by Terran and Zerg on equal footing. Zerg and Terran are hard for different reasons. Terran macro is much easier for me due to lifting bases, supply drop and reactors while hitting injects is hard for me. Micro wise Terran is harder because I can just go ling/bling Muta and a move. I struggle with using infestors and bio so I usually just go mech of ling/bling/muta for a move armies. Terran is not as hard as Terrans make it out to be but it is still much harder then toss (no macro required, mass warp in, colossus, lol?). Just my 2 cents. Actually I agree that zerg macro is considerably more difficult than terran macro. The problem is that as a terran you're forced to worry about much more than macro. Being able to put 90% of your attention into a difficult thing makes it much more managable than putting 33% of your attention into it. | ||
|
Pursuit_
United States1330 Posts
On January 19 2013 12:09 Emzeeshady wrote: As someone who plays all three races at around low masters level I would have to say Toss is BY FAR the easiest to play followed by Terran and Zerg on equal footing. Zerg and Terran are hard for different reasons. Terran macro is much easier for me due to lifting bases, supply drop and reactors while hitting injects is hard for me. Micro wise Terran is harder because I can just go ling/bling Muta and a move. I struggle with using infestors and bio so I usually just go mech of ling/bling/muta for a move armies. Terran is not as hard as Terrans make it out to be but it is still much harder then toss (no macro required, mass warp in, colossus, lol?). Just my 2 cents. I feel like for players who are used to playing RTS's Zerg has the highest learning curve simply due to the fact that we're used to "Terran" production (and to a lesser extent Protoss as well) because it's the most widely used form of production in RTS games. My girlfriend who had never touched a RTS in her life found Zerg much easier to learn than Terran or Protoss, and once I got the hang of injects (really quite easy compared to a Terran's macro cycle in my opinion) Zerg's macro mechanics have actually become the easiest part of playing Zerg for me. | ||
|
kill619
United States212 Posts
| ||
|
nailertn
48 Posts
Anyway my point is that having huge maps, no viable timing attacks and anemic harassment potential is just as stupid as steppes of war with strong siege tanks was. If the current race design is to stay, Blizzard and map makers need to find a middle road. Defending early and midgame for zerg and end game for terran needs to be comparable in difficulty and let's be honest, the real picture couldn't be more different. Considering the forgiveness of the terran race, it all comes down to two things: Macro mechanics and AoE. As Agro_Z has worded it so appropriately, "larva inject and warp gate are fundamental flaws in the game that no amount of unit stat tinkering can remedy". And seeing the arrogance of the dev team + their attitude towards BW I don't expect this to change. AoE is a problem because the marine is the backbone of the terran army. Small, slow, low health unit; as susceptible to AoE as it gets. If using the marauder instead was an option, micro requirements wouldn't be nearly as steep. Muta ling bane was the only comp similarly demanding and look how it got phased out despite no nerfs. People naturally gravitated towards brood infestor not only because it is stronger but because it is a lot easier to control. Terrans losing several games to being caught unsieged is a concern, but it has nothing to do with the tank as a unit. Playing the siege / unsiege game is what makes them unique and you SHOULD die if you screw up. Rather it is the lopsided overall game balance forcing terrans to take stupid risks like dashing their whole army over creep is what's at the root of the problem. There are many design choices that seem very backwards to me: Terran, the least mobile race with the best defensive capabilities forced to go out and play the aggressor. Zerg, the race made to expand and given all the tools necessary to be wasteful having the most cost effective end game army of all. Terran - the least flexible race due to production buildings, addons, separate upgrades - having to assume the reactionary role. Maps trying to emulate Brood War in the era of death ball vs. death ball where there is no defender's advantage to speak of and races can't really capitalize on more than three bases, etc... | ||
|
Kashll
United States1117 Posts
On January 19 2013 12:40 kill619 wrote: While the discussion here has been way more civil than most would have guessed, I'm not really seeing the point of it other than being a "Terran is very difficult to play" circle jerk. Not to say that I don't agree, this just doesn't seem productive at all. Hey we need support groups after being traumatized on ladder. | ||
|
kill619
United States212 Posts
On January 19 2013 12:44 Kashll wrote: Hey we need support groups after being traumatized on ladder. I know that feel bro, just surprised no one has closed this yet s'all. I guess there's potential here that I'm just not seeing, or maybe the mods are just taking pity on the Terrans seeing as how blizzard doesn't seem to want to T_T | ||
Genie1
Canada333 Posts
On January 19 2013 12:35 Pursuit_ wrote: I feel like for players who are used to playing RTS's Zerg has the highest learning curve simply due to the fact that we're used to "Terran" production (and to a lesser extent Protoss as well) because it's the most widely used form of production in RTS games. My girlfriend who had never touched a RTS in her life found Zerg much easier to learn than Terran or Protoss, and once I got the hang of injects (really quite easy compared to a Terran's macro cycle in my opinion) Zerg's macro mechanics have actually become the easiest part of playing Zerg for me. Actually most RTS out there are nothing like Starcraft at all. The only one that is close to it is maybe Terran but otherwise the learning curve for Terran is fairly high for people that come from backgrounds like command and conquer series. Zerg is far closer to be like command and conquer just because you can have all your structures and unit creation under one hotkey. To me its not the learning curve or the race balance that I have an issue with its the playstyle of many people that play this game in a very passive way that it sometimes through you off when you see an aggressive player because a vast majority of people in lower leagues never attack until they have a max army which is very frustrating for people trying to learn the game properly but are running into players that are flat out not willing to get better at the game that makes people lose games because going against a purely defensive player frustrates most people that after they attack and lose a majority of there army and then are rebuilding it that the other player never even bothers to use that opportunity to attack and just sits there trying to reach max army. Most of the mineral lines in this game have to many minerals that never forces players to get outside an expand. If they shrunk the amount of minerals in each line then possibly you could see players expanding and possibly attacking because they will run out of resources faster and will be forced to move out on the map to protect there expansion or to stop a player from expanding. Right now though if they don't adjust the amount of minerals in each base then I doubt we will see a change at all from WOL to HOTS. | ||
|
forsooth
United States3648 Posts
On January 19 2013 12:35 Pursuit_ wrote: I feel like for players who are used to playing RTS's Zerg has the highest learning curve simply due to the fact that we're used to "Terran" production (and to a lesser extent Protoss as well) because it's the most widely used form of production in RTS games. My girlfriend who had never touched a RTS in her life found Zerg much easier to learn than Terran or Protoss, and once I got the hang of injects (really quite easy compared to a Terran's macro cycle in my opinion) Zerg's macro mechanics have actually become the easiest part of playing Zerg for me. I started out as a Zerg player back in BW and I remember how annoying it was to have to build all that infrastructure when I switched to Protoss years later. It was only at the end that I learned the nightmare that was Terran base construction. Fuck BW supply depots. Anyway, I find Zerg macro to be by far the simplest in SC2. You basically just operate on a timer and do the same things over and over. All of those active decisions you have to make when playing Terran and to a lesser extent Protoss about where to place buildings, how to most efficiently use your space, which add-ons to use and when, simply don't exist. The only difficult part is knowing when you can drone. | ||
|
Iron_
United States389 Posts
The fact that no foreign terran ever beats a korean Z literally EVER is quite telling, especially when you have white zergs constantly threatening and beating korean terrans. Yes threads like this are all over the place, but what else are Terrans supposed to do? Nobody is listening so I guess be as loud as possible until we finally disappear? | ||
|
Capped
United Kingdom7236 Posts
Although i do think its alot harder to play then protoss at a high level, I wasnt at a high level :-) | ||
|
Emzeeshady
Canada4203 Posts
| ||
|
Protosnake
France295 Posts
Is Terran to remain the lowest played race? Considering they used to be the easiest for quite some time, when all they had to do was to roll the all-in dice, I think it's fair to say that times changes Edit : And that the answer is, obviously no The fact that no foreign terran ever beats a korean Z literally EVER is quite telling, Kas 2-0'd Golden today As many people, including terrans, said before, this thread cannot take any direction but the "Us terran" direction, I regret answering to this already | ||
|
kill619
United States212 Posts
On January 19 2013 12:58 Iron_ wrote: I am not sure why the OP thinks Terran is unbalanced at *lower* levels. With better macro you can always take a step up, regardless of which race you play. It is at the pro level, where macro is basically 99% perfect in every game, where you see the most obvious imbalance. The fact that no foreign terran ever beats a korean Z literally EVER is quite telling, especially when you have white zergs constantly threatening and beating korean terrans. Yes threads like this are all over the place, but what else are Terrans supposed to do? Nobody is listening so I guess be as loud as possible until we finally disappear? Because being marginally better than your opponent shouldn't be a requirement to have an equal chance of beating someone simply because of the race they play. If two races are balanced, then both players should have an equal shot of beating each other regardless of what skill level is being referred to. If the only place the game is "balanced" is at the skill level where quitting your job and playing starcraft for 5-12 hours a day is required, that's a pretty big "fuck you" to a large chunk of your player base. | ||
|
FutureBreedMachine
Australia95 Posts
On January 19 2013 12:06 xAdra wrote: I wouldn't call it "much much" harder to play. I play both terran and protoss at masters level (switching between the two whenever I feel like it) and fare equally well. It's just that different races reward different things, and the aspects that a terran needs to master are much more hectic and attention consuming than protoss and zerg. However, terran vs zerg is severely skewed towards being super-duper easy for zerg, no doubt about that. I'm stating that very small mechanical aspects of the game is what make Terran seem "MUCH MUCH" harder to play at lower levels, when addressing these issues would make for Terran to be more accessible to the more average skilled player. What I'm trying to say is... Terran is roughly on even playing ground in terms of skill. However, due to small aspects of design of the other races as I stated in the OP, the main game deciding battles particularly mid-game to lategame are skewed in the Protoss and Zerg favour. Lets say picking a fight with a Protoss is trying to find the sweet spot, and fighting a zerg is like trying to find the blind spot. Terran macro really isn't all too hard at all. | ||
|
Masq
Canada1792 Posts
Nothing is likely to change because if they buff terran for the average master/gm player (foreigners), terran will become too strong in the hands of top koreans. You have two options, suck it up or switch races. | ||
| ||
