|
On June 24 2013 02:15 Sissors wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 01:25 Rabiator wrote:On June 23 2013 22:49 Cloak wrote:On June 23 2013 20:17 Xequecal wrote:On June 23 2013 12:42 GhostOwl wrote:On June 23 2013 11:32 Xequecal wrote:On June 23 2013 08:24 Jevity wrote:
Is there a downside to keeping a bunker or two filled with marines/maruaders at each expansion when you play against protoss?
Is it that you are keeping supply from your main army/drops? Yeah, there is. Terran units are the most cost-effective in the game, but they're the least supply-effective. As such, in the late game supply is Terran's most precious resource, and they can't waste it. Wut? Wat did I just read? Protoss is the least supply-effective race or a Roach-based Zerg army. No, Protoss is the most supply-effective race. A stalker beats a roach, and they're both 2 supply. Sure the stalker costs more, but Protoss is more supply-effective, as in X supply of Protoss units is almost always superior to X supply of units from the other two races. Protoss units are also generally not cost-effective. An immortal loses to 4 roaches or 3 marauders despite being the supposed hard counter to these units and costing about the same amount. However, the immortal is only 4 supply and 4 roaches/3 marauders are 8 and 6 supply. Most Protoss units are like this. I'm pretty sure even a colossus loses to 14 marines, but it beats an equal-supply 6 marines stupidly easily. Terran is the opposite. Marines are incredibly cheap for their damage output, but they still cost 1 supply each. A stalker beats 2 marines easily, hell so does a roach. Most Terran units are like this. The marauder is 100/25 for 2 supply. Terran has medivacs which basically increase the cost effectiveness of all their units, but eat up supply to do so. The whole race is balanced around this concept. That's why ghosts had to be nerfed repeatedly in WoL and why hellbats are getting nerfed now, they both went against this concept - they were overcosted units that were very supply-effective, going against the whole race philosophy. It's also why strategies like 1/1/1 were so ridiculous, if Terran can keep the economy low and keep the supply cap from being a factor, they will completely dominate the opponent with their far more cost-effective units. Cost efficiency is almost always preferable, because supply efficiency only matters if you're maxed, otherwise it's just the hidden cost of more supply needing to be built. Cost efficiency lets you dictate the game all the way until that 200/200. What's worse is that Z and T economies outpace P economy by a decent margin in a default macro game, further exasperating the disparity. That's where Protoss spells come in that need to entirely walloff landscape to make things possible. Exactly right ... supply efficiency is dwarfed by the cost efficiency and the remake efficiency and Zerg blows both other races out of the water with both. The game isnt really about the units but more about your economy and production capability and if you can hurt those of your opponent you have a clear advantage to win the game. A "slower" game like Broodwar is about supply efficiency, because producing units takes a while, but in SC2 it is ridiculously easy to reach that 200 supply limit. On June 24 2013 01:22 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:On June 23 2013 22:50 Sissors wrote:
Sigh, the bolded part shows you didn't understand a single thing I said in the last 3 posts. No I don't remember, nor ever did, because that has never been the goal of turret usage. Its only used that way because turrets in SC2 have ridiculous dps and people think you have to kill air units with them.
I never said I was better, just learn to think for yourself instead of whining until a pro shows you how its done.
And again your post is empty of any kind of useful content. You are only very agressive against terrans that we use turrets wrong, but refuse to say how we use them wrong and how we should use them instead. If we don't use them to kill/deny air units (that is effectively the same, if they can't kill air units, they also can't deny their presence in an area; you cannot deny warp prism play by placing a turret in the middle of your base and hoping the protoss is as ill informed as you are regarding its range. He will just use the prism outside turret range, or skims to the edge of it and tanks the damage), why on earth would we make them? Sure one in the front for detection, but besides that it would be fairly useless to make them. Anyway until you actually get to a higher level than your: LALALLALAA YOU USING THEM WRONG NOOB, level, I guess this is fairly pointless. And it is pretty safe to assume you are just purely trolling and don't actually have a point to make. Let me give you a hit. Play more tower ambush games, there are literally tons of them on Facebook, F* it, let me spell it out for you. Optimise the turret's range, put it "out" there way BEFORE THE BASE NOT INSIDE.The inside of the base is for the marine squad to deal with (stim-kite-etc). That should be a total no brainer IMO. You simply put turrets at the edge of your (main) base to stop the Medivacs or Warp Prisms from even getting their chance to unload stuff or warp in. Sadly I have just been told by them I (and every Terran player) is a complete retard for placing turrets at the edge of your main base, and instead you should place them in the center of your base. But now apparently we aren't supposed to put them at the edge, so I guess he means literally placing a turret outside your main base. Why on earth you would possibly want to do that is a mystery to me. It just gives the protoss free turret kills. Even if the toss would go right over the turret that for some reason he didn't kill yet, a warp prism easily survives that. Sure it gives vision, but there are cheaper options for vision. But anyway placing turrets early in the game outside your base is so idiotic that the only logical explanation is that I fell for a troll  Show nested quote +I think Hyun did that really well to counter early Phoenix' from MC today in the Homestory cup by placing a Spore Crawler at both ends of all his mineral lines. That shut the harrass down completely. Being a miser and only putting one of them in the middle of the mineral line does nothing except make it a little harder to harrass.
Sadly If we have to believe the trolls here that also makes him a horrible player, since you should place one turret/spore in the center of your base, and the rest outside your base. (Sure bit harder for zerg, not impossible though). Edit: See: Show nested quote +Let me guess, you think turrets need to be built on the edge of your base? No wonder you think it is "impossible". When you build a turret on the edge 50% of the coverage is completely wasted, remember prisms need to deploy over ground, they can't deploy units onto air space. So according to them you are wrong that you say turrets should be placed at the edge. (Where 'wrong' is the very mild version of bringing it).
Yeah, next they tell us to rush for turret range upgrade to deal with warp prisms. =D
''What opening are you doing?''
''You know, the usual barracks into engibay for fast turret range upgrade.''
''Those pesky prisms aren't going to get me now!''
Fucking legit opening right there.
|
On June 24 2013 13:10 Mehukannu wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 02:15 Sissors wrote:On June 24 2013 01:25 Rabiator wrote:On June 23 2013 22:49 Cloak wrote:On June 23 2013 20:17 Xequecal wrote:On June 23 2013 12:42 GhostOwl wrote:On June 23 2013 11:32 Xequecal wrote:On June 23 2013 08:24 Jevity wrote:
Is there a downside to keeping a bunker or two filled with marines/maruaders at each expansion when you play against protoss?
Is it that you are keeping supply from your main army/drops? Yeah, there is. Terran units are the most cost-effective in the game, but they're the least supply-effective. As such, in the late game supply is Terran's most precious resource, and they can't waste it. Wut? Wat did I just read? Protoss is the least supply-effective race or a Roach-based Zerg army. No, Protoss is the most supply-effective race. A stalker beats a roach, and they're both 2 supply. Sure the stalker costs more, but Protoss is more supply-effective, as in X supply of Protoss units is almost always superior to X supply of units from the other two races. Protoss units are also generally not cost-effective. An immortal loses to 4 roaches or 3 marauders despite being the supposed hard counter to these units and costing about the same amount. However, the immortal is only 4 supply and 4 roaches/3 marauders are 8 and 6 supply. Most Protoss units are like this. I'm pretty sure even a colossus loses to 14 marines, but it beats an equal-supply 6 marines stupidly easily. Terran is the opposite. Marines are incredibly cheap for their damage output, but they still cost 1 supply each. A stalker beats 2 marines easily, hell so does a roach. Most Terran units are like this. The marauder is 100/25 for 2 supply. Terran has medivacs which basically increase the cost effectiveness of all their units, but eat up supply to do so. The whole race is balanced around this concept. That's why ghosts had to be nerfed repeatedly in WoL and why hellbats are getting nerfed now, they both went against this concept - they were overcosted units that were very supply-effective, going against the whole race philosophy. It's also why strategies like 1/1/1 were so ridiculous, if Terran can keep the economy low and keep the supply cap from being a factor, they will completely dominate the opponent with their far more cost-effective units. Cost efficiency is almost always preferable, because supply efficiency only matters if you're maxed, otherwise it's just the hidden cost of more supply needing to be built. Cost efficiency lets you dictate the game all the way until that 200/200. What's worse is that Z and T economies outpace P economy by a decent margin in a default macro game, further exasperating the disparity. That's where Protoss spells come in that need to entirely walloff landscape to make things possible. Exactly right ... supply efficiency is dwarfed by the cost efficiency and the remake efficiency and Zerg blows both other races out of the water with both. The game isnt really about the units but more about your economy and production capability and if you can hurt those of your opponent you have a clear advantage to win the game. A "slower" game like Broodwar is about supply efficiency, because producing units takes a while, but in SC2 it is ridiculously easy to reach that 200 supply limit. On June 24 2013 01:22 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:On June 23 2013 22:50 Sissors wrote:
Sigh, the bolded part shows you didn't understand a single thing I said in the last 3 posts. No I don't remember, nor ever did, because that has never been the goal of turret usage. Its only used that way because turrets in SC2 have ridiculous dps and people think you have to kill air units with them.
I never said I was better, just learn to think for yourself instead of whining until a pro shows you how its done.
And again your post is empty of any kind of useful content. You are only very agressive against terrans that we use turrets wrong, but refuse to say how we use them wrong and how we should use them instead. If we don't use them to kill/deny air units (that is effectively the same, if they can't kill air units, they also can't deny their presence in an area; you cannot deny warp prism play by placing a turret in the middle of your base and hoping the protoss is as ill informed as you are regarding its range. He will just use the prism outside turret range, or skims to the edge of it and tanks the damage), why on earth would we make them? Sure one in the front for detection, but besides that it would be fairly useless to make them. Anyway until you actually get to a higher level than your: LALALLALAA YOU USING THEM WRONG NOOB, level, I guess this is fairly pointless. And it is pretty safe to assume you are just purely trolling and don't actually have a point to make. Let me give you a hit. Play more tower ambush games, there are literally tons of them on Facebook, F* it, let me spell it out for you. Optimise the turret's range, put it "out" there way BEFORE THE BASE NOT INSIDE.The inside of the base is for the marine squad to deal with (stim-kite-etc). That should be a total no brainer IMO. You simply put turrets at the edge of your (main) base to stop the Medivacs or Warp Prisms from even getting their chance to unload stuff or warp in. Sadly I have just been told by them I (and every Terran player) is a complete retard for placing turrets at the edge of your main base, and instead you should place them in the center of your base. But now apparently we aren't supposed to put them at the edge, so I guess he means literally placing a turret outside your main base. Why on earth you would possibly want to do that is a mystery to me. It just gives the protoss free turret kills. Even if the toss would go right over the turret that for some reason he didn't kill yet, a warp prism easily survives that. Sure it gives vision, but there are cheaper options for vision. But anyway placing turrets early in the game outside your base is so idiotic that the only logical explanation is that I fell for a troll I think Hyun did that really well to counter early Phoenix' from MC today in the Homestory cup by placing a Spore Crawler at both ends of all his mineral lines. That shut the harrass down completely. Being a miser and only putting one of them in the middle of the mineral line does nothing except make it a little harder to harrass.
Sadly If we have to believe the trolls here that also makes him a horrible player, since you should place one turret/spore in the center of your base, and the rest outside your base. (Sure bit harder for zerg, not impossible though). Edit: See: Let me guess, you think turrets need to be built on the edge of your base? No wonder you think it is "impossible". When you build a turret on the edge 50% of the coverage is completely wasted, remember prisms need to deploy over ground, they can't deploy units onto air space. So according to them you are wrong that you say turrets should be placed at the edge. (Where 'wrong' is the very mild version of bringing it). Yeah, next they tell us to rush for turret range upgrade to deal with warp prisms. =D ''What opening are you doing?'' ''You know, the usual barracks into engibay for fast turret range upgrade.'' ''Those pesky prisms aren't going to get me now!'' Fucking legit opening right there.
"What opening are you doing?"
"You know the usual 2 bunkers at my ramp to stop warpgate allins"
No good player does a long opening build order without playing reactive.
|
On June 24 2013 13:26 sluggaslamoo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 13:10 Mehukannu wrote:On June 24 2013 02:15 Sissors wrote:On June 24 2013 01:25 Rabiator wrote:On June 23 2013 22:49 Cloak wrote:On June 23 2013 20:17 Xequecal wrote:On June 23 2013 12:42 GhostOwl wrote:On June 23 2013 11:32 Xequecal wrote:On June 23 2013 08:24 Jevity wrote:
Is there a downside to keeping a bunker or two filled with marines/maruaders at each expansion when you play against protoss?
Is it that you are keeping supply from your main army/drops? Yeah, there is. Terran units are the most cost-effective in the game, but they're the least supply-effective. As such, in the late game supply is Terran's most precious resource, and they can't waste it. Wut? Wat did I just read? Protoss is the least supply-effective race or a Roach-based Zerg army. No, Protoss is the most supply-effective race. A stalker beats a roach, and they're both 2 supply. Sure the stalker costs more, but Protoss is more supply-effective, as in X supply of Protoss units is almost always superior to X supply of units from the other two races. Protoss units are also generally not cost-effective. An immortal loses to 4 roaches or 3 marauders despite being the supposed hard counter to these units and costing about the same amount. However, the immortal is only 4 supply and 4 roaches/3 marauders are 8 and 6 supply. Most Protoss units are like this. I'm pretty sure even a colossus loses to 14 marines, but it beats an equal-supply 6 marines stupidly easily. Terran is the opposite. Marines are incredibly cheap for their damage output, but they still cost 1 supply each. A stalker beats 2 marines easily, hell so does a roach. Most Terran units are like this. The marauder is 100/25 for 2 supply. Terran has medivacs which basically increase the cost effectiveness of all their units, but eat up supply to do so. The whole race is balanced around this concept. That's why ghosts had to be nerfed repeatedly in WoL and why hellbats are getting nerfed now, they both went against this concept - they were overcosted units that were very supply-effective, going against the whole race philosophy. It's also why strategies like 1/1/1 were so ridiculous, if Terran can keep the economy low and keep the supply cap from being a factor, they will completely dominate the opponent with their far more cost-effective units. Cost efficiency is almost always preferable, because supply efficiency only matters if you're maxed, otherwise it's just the hidden cost of more supply needing to be built. Cost efficiency lets you dictate the game all the way until that 200/200. What's worse is that Z and T economies outpace P economy by a decent margin in a default macro game, further exasperating the disparity. That's where Protoss spells come in that need to entirely walloff landscape to make things possible. Exactly right ... supply efficiency is dwarfed by the cost efficiency and the remake efficiency and Zerg blows both other races out of the water with both. The game isnt really about the units but more about your economy and production capability and if you can hurt those of your opponent you have a clear advantage to win the game. A "slower" game like Broodwar is about supply efficiency, because producing units takes a while, but in SC2 it is ridiculously easy to reach that 200 supply limit. On June 24 2013 01:22 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:On June 23 2013 22:50 Sissors wrote:
Sigh, the bolded part shows you didn't understand a single thing I said in the last 3 posts. No I don't remember, nor ever did, because that has never been the goal of turret usage. Its only used that way because turrets in SC2 have ridiculous dps and people think you have to kill air units with them.
I never said I was better, just learn to think for yourself instead of whining until a pro shows you how its done.
And again your post is empty of any kind of useful content. You are only very agressive against terrans that we use turrets wrong, but refuse to say how we use them wrong and how we should use them instead. If we don't use them to kill/deny air units (that is effectively the same, if they can't kill air units, they also can't deny their presence in an area; you cannot deny warp prism play by placing a turret in the middle of your base and hoping the protoss is as ill informed as you are regarding its range. He will just use the prism outside turret range, or skims to the edge of it and tanks the damage), why on earth would we make them? Sure one in the front for detection, but besides that it would be fairly useless to make them. Anyway until you actually get to a higher level than your: LALALLALAA YOU USING THEM WRONG NOOB, level, I guess this is fairly pointless. And it is pretty safe to assume you are just purely trolling and don't actually have a point to make. Let me give you a hit. Play more tower ambush games, there are literally tons of them on Facebook, F* it, let me spell it out for you. Optimise the turret's range, put it "out" there way BEFORE THE BASE NOT INSIDE.The inside of the base is for the marine squad to deal with (stim-kite-etc). That should be a total no brainer IMO. You simply put turrets at the edge of your (main) base to stop the Medivacs or Warp Prisms from even getting their chance to unload stuff or warp in. Sadly I have just been told by them I (and every Terran player) is a complete retard for placing turrets at the edge of your main base, and instead you should place them in the center of your base. But now apparently we aren't supposed to put them at the edge, so I guess he means literally placing a turret outside your main base. Why on earth you would possibly want to do that is a mystery to me. It just gives the protoss free turret kills. Even if the toss would go right over the turret that for some reason he didn't kill yet, a warp prism easily survives that. Sure it gives vision, but there are cheaper options for vision. But anyway placing turrets early in the game outside your base is so idiotic that the only logical explanation is that I fell for a troll I think Hyun did that really well to counter early Phoenix' from MC today in the Homestory cup by placing a Spore Crawler at both ends of all his mineral lines. That shut the harrass down completely. Being a miser and only putting one of them in the middle of the mineral line does nothing except make it a little harder to harrass.
Sadly If we have to believe the trolls here that also makes him a horrible player, since you should place one turret/spore in the center of your base, and the rest outside your base. (Sure bit harder for zerg, not impossible though). Edit: See: Let me guess, you think turrets need to be built on the edge of your base? No wonder you think it is "impossible". When you build a turret on the edge 50% of the coverage is completely wasted, remember prisms need to deploy over ground, they can't deploy units onto air space. So according to them you are wrong that you say turrets should be placed at the edge. (Where 'wrong' is the very mild version of bringing it). Yeah, next they tell us to rush for turret range upgrade to deal with warp prisms. =D ''What opening are you doing?'' ''You know, the usual barracks into engibay for fast turret range upgrade.'' ''Those pesky prisms aren't going to get me now!'' Fucking legit opening right there. "What opening are you doing?" "You know the usual 2 bunkers at my ramp to stop warpgate allins" No good player does a long opening build order without playing reactive.
Clearly you haven't done the masterful defensive PF Rush~
No allins ever, and your army is free to deal with the warp prism! It's a win/win ;D
|
Im not sure what to think of this, even as a P
|
On June 24 2013 13:45 GTPGlitch wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 13:26 sluggaslamoo wrote:On June 24 2013 13:10 Mehukannu wrote:On June 24 2013 02:15 Sissors wrote:On June 24 2013 01:25 Rabiator wrote:On June 23 2013 22:49 Cloak wrote:On June 23 2013 20:17 Xequecal wrote:On June 23 2013 12:42 GhostOwl wrote:On June 23 2013 11:32 Xequecal wrote:On June 23 2013 08:24 Jevity wrote:
Is there a downside to keeping a bunker or two filled with marines/maruaders at each expansion when you play against protoss?
Is it that you are keeping supply from your main army/drops? Yeah, there is. Terran units are the most cost-effective in the game, but they're the least supply-effective. As such, in the late game supply is Terran's most precious resource, and they can't waste it. Wut? Wat did I just read? Protoss is the least supply-effective race or a Roach-based Zerg army. No, Protoss is the most supply-effective race. A stalker beats a roach, and they're both 2 supply. Sure the stalker costs more, but Protoss is more supply-effective, as in X supply of Protoss units is almost always superior to X supply of units from the other two races. Protoss units are also generally not cost-effective. An immortal loses to 4 roaches or 3 marauders despite being the supposed hard counter to these units and costing about the same amount. However, the immortal is only 4 supply and 4 roaches/3 marauders are 8 and 6 supply. Most Protoss units are like this. I'm pretty sure even a colossus loses to 14 marines, but it beats an equal-supply 6 marines stupidly easily. Terran is the opposite. Marines are incredibly cheap for their damage output, but they still cost 1 supply each. A stalker beats 2 marines easily, hell so does a roach. Most Terran units are like this. The marauder is 100/25 for 2 supply. Terran has medivacs which basically increase the cost effectiveness of all their units, but eat up supply to do so. The whole race is balanced around this concept. That's why ghosts had to be nerfed repeatedly in WoL and why hellbats are getting nerfed now, they both went against this concept - they were overcosted units that were very supply-effective, going against the whole race philosophy. It's also why strategies like 1/1/1 were so ridiculous, if Terran can keep the economy low and keep the supply cap from being a factor, they will completely dominate the opponent with their far more cost-effective units. Cost efficiency is almost always preferable, because supply efficiency only matters if you're maxed, otherwise it's just the hidden cost of more supply needing to be built. Cost efficiency lets you dictate the game all the way until that 200/200. What's worse is that Z and T economies outpace P economy by a decent margin in a default macro game, further exasperating the disparity. That's where Protoss spells come in that need to entirely walloff landscape to make things possible. Exactly right ... supply efficiency is dwarfed by the cost efficiency and the remake efficiency and Zerg blows both other races out of the water with both. The game isnt really about the units but more about your economy and production capability and if you can hurt those of your opponent you have a clear advantage to win the game. A "slower" game like Broodwar is about supply efficiency, because producing units takes a while, but in SC2 it is ridiculously easy to reach that 200 supply limit. On June 24 2013 01:22 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:On June 23 2013 22:50 Sissors wrote:
Sigh, the bolded part shows you didn't understand a single thing I said in the last 3 posts. No I don't remember, nor ever did, because that has never been the goal of turret usage. Its only used that way because turrets in SC2 have ridiculous dps and people think you have to kill air units with them.
I never said I was better, just learn to think for yourself instead of whining until a pro shows you how its done.
And again your post is empty of any kind of useful content. You are only very agressive against terrans that we use turrets wrong, but refuse to say how we use them wrong and how we should use them instead. If we don't use them to kill/deny air units (that is effectively the same, if they can't kill air units, they also can't deny their presence in an area; you cannot deny warp prism play by placing a turret in the middle of your base and hoping the protoss is as ill informed as you are regarding its range. He will just use the prism outside turret range, or skims to the edge of it and tanks the damage), why on earth would we make them? Sure one in the front for detection, but besides that it would be fairly useless to make them. Anyway until you actually get to a higher level than your: LALALLALAA YOU USING THEM WRONG NOOB, level, I guess this is fairly pointless. And it is pretty safe to assume you are just purely trolling and don't actually have a point to make. Let me give you a hit. Play more tower ambush games, there are literally tons of them on Facebook, F* it, let me spell it out for you. Optimise the turret's range, put it "out" there way BEFORE THE BASE NOT INSIDE.The inside of the base is for the marine squad to deal with (stim-kite-etc). That should be a total no brainer IMO. You simply put turrets at the edge of your (main) base to stop the Medivacs or Warp Prisms from even getting their chance to unload stuff or warp in. Sadly I have just been told by them I (and every Terran player) is a complete retard for placing turrets at the edge of your main base, and instead you should place them in the center of your base. But now apparently we aren't supposed to put them at the edge, so I guess he means literally placing a turret outside your main base. Why on earth you would possibly want to do that is a mystery to me. It just gives the protoss free turret kills. Even if the toss would go right over the turret that for some reason he didn't kill yet, a warp prism easily survives that. Sure it gives vision, but there are cheaper options for vision. But anyway placing turrets early in the game outside your base is so idiotic that the only logical explanation is that I fell for a troll I think Hyun did that really well to counter early Phoenix' from MC today in the Homestory cup by placing a Spore Crawler at both ends of all his mineral lines. That shut the harrass down completely. Being a miser and only putting one of them in the middle of the mineral line does nothing except make it a little harder to harrass.
Sadly If we have to believe the trolls here that also makes him a horrible player, since you should place one turret/spore in the center of your base, and the rest outside your base. (Sure bit harder for zerg, not impossible though). Edit: See: Let me guess, you think turrets need to be built on the edge of your base? No wonder you think it is "impossible". When you build a turret on the edge 50% of the coverage is completely wasted, remember prisms need to deploy over ground, they can't deploy units onto air space. So according to them you are wrong that you say turrets should be placed at the edge. (Where 'wrong' is the very mild version of bringing it). Yeah, next they tell us to rush for turret range upgrade to deal with warp prisms. =D ''What opening are you doing?'' ''You know, the usual barracks into engibay for fast turret range upgrade.'' ''Those pesky prisms aren't going to get me now!'' Fucking legit opening right there. "What opening are you doing?" "You know the usual 2 bunkers at my ramp to stop warpgate allins" No good player does a long opening build order without playing reactive. Clearly you haven't done the masterful defensive PF Rush~ No allins ever, and your army is free to deal with the warp prism! It's a win/win ;D
Nah ... just build two bunkers at the bottom of his ramp and then get the PF at his natural. If he attacks your main just lift that and get out ... you still mine at his natural. All you need to do now is get a ring of turrets around him and make sure he has no probe outside to build a nexus anywhere. If Zerg can proxy-natural-rush Terrans should be able to do so too. Neo Plant S seems like the perfect map for this ... proxy the barracks in the middle and then build the CC after the Barracks finishes. No one ever really scouts there anymore, because no one ever uses that base.
|
On June 24 2013 13:45 GTPGlitch wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 13:26 sluggaslamoo wrote:On June 24 2013 13:10 Mehukannu wrote:On June 24 2013 02:15 Sissors wrote:On June 24 2013 01:25 Rabiator wrote:On June 23 2013 22:49 Cloak wrote:On June 23 2013 20:17 Xequecal wrote:On June 23 2013 12:42 GhostOwl wrote:On June 23 2013 11:32 Xequecal wrote:On June 23 2013 08:24 Jevity wrote:
Is there a downside to keeping a bunker or two filled with marines/maruaders at each expansion when you play against protoss?
Is it that you are keeping supply from your main army/drops? Yeah, there is. Terran units are the most cost-effective in the game, but they're the least supply-effective. As such, in the late game supply is Terran's most precious resource, and they can't waste it. Wut? Wat did I just read? Protoss is the least supply-effective race or a Roach-based Zerg army. No, Protoss is the most supply-effective race. A stalker beats a roach, and they're both 2 supply. Sure the stalker costs more, but Protoss is more supply-effective, as in X supply of Protoss units is almost always superior to X supply of units from the other two races. Protoss units are also generally not cost-effective. An immortal loses to 4 roaches or 3 marauders despite being the supposed hard counter to these units and costing about the same amount. However, the immortal is only 4 supply and 4 roaches/3 marauders are 8 and 6 supply. Most Protoss units are like this. I'm pretty sure even a colossus loses to 14 marines, but it beats an equal-supply 6 marines stupidly easily. Terran is the opposite. Marines are incredibly cheap for their damage output, but they still cost 1 supply each. A stalker beats 2 marines easily, hell so does a roach. Most Terran units are like this. The marauder is 100/25 for 2 supply. Terran has medivacs which basically increase the cost effectiveness of all their units, but eat up supply to do so. The whole race is balanced around this concept. That's why ghosts had to be nerfed repeatedly in WoL and why hellbats are getting nerfed now, they both went against this concept - they were overcosted units that were very supply-effective, going against the whole race philosophy. It's also why strategies like 1/1/1 were so ridiculous, if Terran can keep the economy low and keep the supply cap from being a factor, they will completely dominate the opponent with their far more cost-effective units. Cost efficiency is almost always preferable, because supply efficiency only matters if you're maxed, otherwise it's just the hidden cost of more supply needing to be built. Cost efficiency lets you dictate the game all the way until that 200/200. What's worse is that Z and T economies outpace P economy by a decent margin in a default macro game, further exasperating the disparity. That's where Protoss spells come in that need to entirely walloff landscape to make things possible. Exactly right ... supply efficiency is dwarfed by the cost efficiency and the remake efficiency and Zerg blows both other races out of the water with both. The game isnt really about the units but more about your economy and production capability and if you can hurt those of your opponent you have a clear advantage to win the game. A "slower" game like Broodwar is about supply efficiency, because producing units takes a while, but in SC2 it is ridiculously easy to reach that 200 supply limit. On June 24 2013 01:22 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:On June 23 2013 22:50 Sissors wrote:
Sigh, the bolded part shows you didn't understand a single thing I said in the last 3 posts. No I don't remember, nor ever did, because that has never been the goal of turret usage. Its only used that way because turrets in SC2 have ridiculous dps and people think you have to kill air units with them.
I never said I was better, just learn to think for yourself instead of whining until a pro shows you how its done.
And again your post is empty of any kind of useful content. You are only very agressive against terrans that we use turrets wrong, but refuse to say how we use them wrong and how we should use them instead. If we don't use them to kill/deny air units (that is effectively the same, if they can't kill air units, they also can't deny their presence in an area; you cannot deny warp prism play by placing a turret in the middle of your base and hoping the protoss is as ill informed as you are regarding its range. He will just use the prism outside turret range, or skims to the edge of it and tanks the damage), why on earth would we make them? Sure one in the front for detection, but besides that it would be fairly useless to make them. Anyway until you actually get to a higher level than your: LALALLALAA YOU USING THEM WRONG NOOB, level, I guess this is fairly pointless. And it is pretty safe to assume you are just purely trolling and don't actually have a point to make. Let me give you a hit. Play more tower ambush games, there are literally tons of them on Facebook, F* it, let me spell it out for you. Optimise the turret's range, put it "out" there way BEFORE THE BASE NOT INSIDE.The inside of the base is for the marine squad to deal with (stim-kite-etc). That should be a total no brainer IMO. You simply put turrets at the edge of your (main) base to stop the Medivacs or Warp Prisms from even getting their chance to unload stuff or warp in. Sadly I have just been told by them I (and every Terran player) is a complete retard for placing turrets at the edge of your main base, and instead you should place them in the center of your base. But now apparently we aren't supposed to put them at the edge, so I guess he means literally placing a turret outside your main base. Why on earth you would possibly want to do that is a mystery to me. It just gives the protoss free turret kills. Even if the toss would go right over the turret that for some reason he didn't kill yet, a warp prism easily survives that. Sure it gives vision, but there are cheaper options for vision. But anyway placing turrets early in the game outside your base is so idiotic that the only logical explanation is that I fell for a troll I think Hyun did that really well to counter early Phoenix' from MC today in the Homestory cup by placing a Spore Crawler at both ends of all his mineral lines. That shut the harrass down completely. Being a miser and only putting one of them in the middle of the mineral line does nothing except make it a little harder to harrass.
Sadly If we have to believe the trolls here that also makes him a horrible player, since you should place one turret/spore in the center of your base, and the rest outside your base. (Sure bit harder for zerg, not impossible though). Edit: See: Let me guess, you think turrets need to be built on the edge of your base? No wonder you think it is "impossible". When you build a turret on the edge 50% of the coverage is completely wasted, remember prisms need to deploy over ground, they can't deploy units onto air space. So according to them you are wrong that you say turrets should be placed at the edge. (Where 'wrong' is the very mild version of bringing it). Yeah, next they tell us to rush for turret range upgrade to deal with warp prisms. =D ''What opening are you doing?'' ''You know, the usual barracks into engibay for fast turret range upgrade.'' ''Those pesky prisms aren't going to get me now!'' Fucking legit opening right there. "What opening are you doing?" "You know the usual 2 bunkers at my ramp to stop warpgate allins" No good player does a long opening build order without playing reactive. Clearly you haven't done the masterful defensive PF Rush~ No allins ever, and your army is free to deal with the warp prism! It's a win/win ;D
And I would think that littering the map full with turrets would have been a better solution. Clearly I was wrong. =P
|
Going to try to post a serious answer here, which I'll probably regret. Sadly I have become very cynical about the ability of this community to objectively evaluate the state of the game. I can't recall such whining EVERY being acceptable on Team Liquid - this was supposed to be the forum people went to GET AWAY FROM the bnet sc2 forums. But it seems that the whiners like to do their whining in as many places as possible, so perhaps that's partly to blame for this sillyness.
I honestly thought the community was more mature than this. How disappointing. Even people like DWF who I formerly respected very much are susceptible to bias on an extreme level, but most people are of course blind to their own biases. It would be very interesting to see the reactions of these posters to previous and future balance changes. I suppose the silver lining is that this type of mentality will hold these players back and keep them from succeeding.
Also, how many players have now complained about the possible effects of this patch in terms of lategame PvT? I just think it's hilarious, I'm sorry but any Protoss who has 1) 20+ gates 2) a warp prism 3) a brain, also has Gravitic Drive. If I really need to explain this further, I can. But I hope I don't have to.
For these players to be complaining while seemingly being unaware of an upgrade that has been in the game for more than two years is truly astounding.
People need to remember that humans have a proven psychological tendency to be biased, especially when it comes to their own success or failure. The fact that players as talented as DWF sink down to the level of even the whiniest ladder scrubs just goes to show that everyone is susceptible to this. I for one have called things imbalanced in the past that I later realized to be completely fine. So I try to take a step back and think about what is best for the game as a whole rather than for my race.
All the same while I don't believe this buff is going to be all that significant. One of the reasons for this is that although the warp prism might be able to warp in units, it can only escape with 4 units at most, and the rest will most often all die. Medivacs cannot warp in units, but they do hold more initially and can escape with all units used to perform the drop, and can do so quite reliably due to medivac boost.
Additionally, it is common knowledge that Protoss relies more heavily on having their units together in a ball than does Terran or Zerg. Spending too much money on drops that despite causing damage are ultimately lost not only reduces the cost effectiveness of the drop. Dropping 4 zealots is terrible, dropping 8-10 is mediocre but costs 800-1000 minerals that are now not tanking for your main army. I have lost MANY games by being too zealous with speed prisms (no pun intended) and though I manage to do a great deal of damage, still end up unable to stop the frontal push after having spent so much money on dropping melee units.
That being said, little buffs CAN have a huge impact on this game.
If Terran really does suffer, I will be the first one to say I was wrong and that they need buffs. I've never called for nerfs to anything in HOTS: not hellbats, not widow mines, not swarm hosts, not medivac boost, not mutas in zvp, nothing.
People forget SO quickly that in the past things they were 100% sure to be overpowered or unfair turn out to not be such a big deal.
I'm a Protoss player and I was quite convinced Skytoss was OP just by reading the forums without playing the game at all. Now I don't hear a word about it. Not even from Zerg players on ladder. Just an example.
Be rational. But if this patch DOES fuck things up, let's not let this game go the way WOL did for the last year..
|
The fact that I am having to repeat myself with quotes over and over again shows that you just don't care, you just want an excuse to whine.
The problem isn't that I couldn't read your posts, it is that they don't contain any information. So you can keep repeating them, but that doesn't magically give them content.
You keep claiming all terrans place turrets completely wrong, but refuse to tell how they are placed wrong or where they should be placed. The only posts placed here on where turrets should be placed make no sense whatsoever. Such as in the middle of your base, even though a turret won't have nearly enough range to cover a base from there. Outside your base, which is frankly just stupid and a waste of minerals. And on the edge of your base. Which would make sense if the next one wasnt telling we are all stupid for placing them at the edge of the base.
So I am not asking you to repeat posts without actual content, but to tell how we are all placing them wrong, and how we should place them instead. That's also not whining, that is requesting help from someone who claims to know it better than every terran player in existence.
Obviously I am not worried about mid-late game, I can stop terran doom drops generally fine, I can also intercept a warp prism. But protoss all-ins based arround warp prism will come faster and leave less reaction time, that I am worried about. So then the claims here 2 turrets can cover your main and natural from any warp prism play are interesting. Minus that they don't make sense.
|
On June 24 2013 14:17 JSK wrote:
Going to try to post a serious answer here, which I'll probably regret. Sadly I have become very cynical about the ability of this community to objectively evaluate the state of the game. I can't recall such whining EVERY being acceptable on Team Liquid - this was supposed to be the forum people went to GET AWAY FROM the bnet sc2 forums. But it seems that the whiners like to do their whining in as many places as possible, so perhaps that's partly to blame for this sillyness.
I honestly thought the community was more mature than this. How disappointing. Even people like DWF who I formerly respected very much are susceptible to bias on an extreme level, but most people are of course blind to their own biases. It would be very interesting to see the reactions of these posters to previous and future balance changes. I suppose the silver lining is that this type of mentality will hold these players back and keep them from succeeding.
Also, how many players have now complained about the possible effects of this patch in terms of lategame PvT? I just think it's hilarious, I'm sorry but any Protoss who has 1) 20+ gates 2) a warp prism 3) a brain, also has Gravitic Drive. If I really need to explain this further, I can. But I hope I don't have to.
For these players to be complaining while seemingly being unaware of an upgrade that has been in the game for more than two years is truly astounding.
People need to remember that humans have a proven psychological tendency to be biased, especially when it comes to their own success or failure. The fact that players as talented as DWF sink down to the level of even the whiniest ladder scrubs just goes to show that everyone is susceptible to this. I for one have called things imbalanced in the past that I later realized to be completely fine. So I try to take a step back and think about what is best for the game as a whole rather than for my race.
All the same while I don't believe this buff is going to be all that significant. One of the reasons for this is that although the warp prism might be able to warp in units, it can only escape with 4 units at most, and the rest will most often all die. Medivacs cannot warp in units, but they do hold more initially and can escape with all units used to perform the drop, and can do so quite reliably due to medivac boost.
Additionally, it is common knowledge that Protoss relies more heavily on having their units together in a ball than does Terran or Zerg. Spending too much money on drops that despite causing damage are ultimately lost not only reduces the cost effectiveness of the drop. Dropping 4 zealots is terrible, dropping 8-10 is mediocre but costs 800-1000 minerals that are now not tanking for your main army. I have lost MANY games by being too zealous with speed prisms (no pun intended) and though I manage to do a great deal of damage, still end up unable to stop the frontal push after having spent so much money on dropping melee units.
That being said, little buffs CAN have a huge impact on this game.
If Terran really does suffer, I will be the first one to say I was wrong and that they need buffs. I've never called for nerfs to anything in HOTS: not hellbats, not widow mines, not swarm hosts, not medivac boost, not mutas in zvp, nothing.
People forget SO quickly that in the past things they were 100% sure to be overpowered or unfair turn out to not be such a big deal.
I'm a Protoss player and I was quite convinced Skytoss was OP just by reading the forums without playing the game at all. Now I don't hear a word about it. Not even from Zerg players on ladder. Just an example.
Be rational. But if this patch DOES fuck things up, let's not let this game go the way WOL did for the last year..
1. ROFL
2. Starting a post with several paragraphs of "insulting" the community is bad.
3. The big problem isnt the community but rather Blizzard, who do not realize that making the game faster and faster will make it even more unplayable (speak: random in its results) for lower skill players.
4. Your points are quite moot:
4a. The late game isnt the problem, the early game is.
4b. All dropships have eight slots ... Zealots and Stalkers just take up more space (but less than Hellbats).
4c. Neither the Medivac boost nor this speed boost of the Warp Prism are really good for the game, because they increase the chance for success for early harrass. This is at its core a coinflip which should not be dictating the outcome of the game.
4d. Maybe it is time for Protoss to use the Warp Prism as a shuttle instead of just a warp-in point. If you have more than one of them you can evacuate more than just four units. Simply unloading stuff right on the target (and then flying away) is much faster than transforming into warp-mode, warping in units and then running towards your target. Just get three Warp Prisms with a dozen Zealots and unload them right on the Queen. The surprise factor AND the ability to evacuate all your units after they assassinated a Queen and whatever tech they can really make this a good option.
|
On June 24 2013 15:19 Sissors wrote:Show nested quote +
The fact that I am having to repeat myself with quotes over and over again shows that you just don't care, you just want an excuse to whine.
The problem isn't that I couldn't read your posts, it is that they don't contain any information. So you can keep repeating them, but that doesn't magically give them content. You keep claiming all terrans place turrets completely wrong, but refuse to tell how they are placed wrong or where they should be placed. The only posts placed here on where turrets should be placed make no sense whatsoever. Such as in the middle of your base, even though a turret won't have nearly enough range to cover a base from there. Outside your base, which is frankly just stupid and a waste of minerals. And on the edge of your base. Which would make sense if the next one wasnt telling we are all stupid for placing them at the edge of the base. So I am not asking you to repeat posts without actual content, but to tell how we are all placing them wrong, and how we should place them instead. That's also not whining, that is requesting help from someone who claims to know it better than every terran player in existence. Obviously I am not worried about mid-late game, I can stop terran doom drops generally fine, I can also intercept a warp prism. But protoss all-ins based arround warp prism will come faster and leave less reaction time, that I am worried about. So then the claims here 2 turrets can cover your main and natural from any warp prism play are interesting. Minus that they don't make sense.
Again, I already gave you enough clues, plus posts of other people also giving you clues. Any more and I would literally have to print out a map with all the turret placements which I'm not going to bother doing.
Anyone who has played/watched enough BW would know exactly what I'm talking about, e.g 3 turret placement with the Flash build. Note that it does not outright stop drops, not even close, but its enough to make it not cost effective enough to be worth it and that is all that is required. You could even suicide a shuttle and drop a reaver, and wipe out an entire mineral line in one shot, you still didn't make 10 turrets to prevent it, just 3. In sc2 turrets are 4x more powerful, and M&M can kite zealots all day every day.
You seem to live in this weird world where tech choices and resources come free for Protoss. You don't need to outright prevent things to make it unviable, only make it well, unviable.
Requote again
On June 22 2013 20:12 sluggaslamoo wrote:
The most likely positions will be near the middle of your main, and two covering the most critical spaces where the prism should be traveling. While the prism is playing Where's Wally to find a pocket of ground where it can actually deploy, its half dead and you have marines built from your barracks to finish it off and deal with the measly first warp in that will serve as a complete waste of resources and time for Protoss.
This is easily enough information. If its not, clearly you are not even trying, or not capable of thinking for yourself.
|
If shuttles turn out to be fast enough to get your units to safety after a drop, that would be a big change - you can stick expensive units in there, like DTs.
|
On June 20 2013 06:57 eviltomahawk wrote:
Time to give Overlords boosters. Overlords should get a counter that increases while they produce creep (stationary) and then can be spent when moving for speed boosts. The logic behind it is that when they poop, they lose weight, so then they can move faster for a while.
|
On June 24 2013 16:13 sluggaslamoo wrote:Requote again Show nested quote +On June 22 2013 20:12 sluggaslamoo wrote:
The most likely positions will be near the middle of your main, and two covering the most critical spaces where the prism should be traveling. While the prism is playing Where's Wally to find a pocket of ground where it can actually deploy, its half dead and you have marines built from your barracks to finish it off and deal with the measly first warp in that will serve as a complete waste of resources and time for Protoss.
This is easily enough information. If its not, clearly you are not even trying, or not capable of thinking for yourself.
Or plan B, you are just trolling since placing a turret in the middle of your base is a complete waste of resources early in the game. It is only useful later in the game to finish anything that comes over your outer turret wall, and to make sure the warp prism can't then just keep warping in units indefinately.
But anything before late game placing a turret in the middle of your base is a complete waste of resources. It doesn't even cover your mineral line, or in any way prevent a toss from warping in units. So forgive me for going on my own experience, which is confirmed by pro players to be efficient turret locations, instead of a random TL troll. (And yes if you would want to be taken serious you need to make a screenshot of where to put them + roughly their range. Oh and it is nice if we don't need another 3 turrets for oracles + DTs, 6 turrets early game is pretty much autoloss).
|
On June 24 2013 16:24 figq wrote:Overlords should get a counter that increases while they produce creep (stationary) and then can be spent when moving for speed boosts. The logic behind it is that when they poop, they lose weight, so then they can move faster for a while.
Obviously the Overlords would be losing hp at the same time, because they are shedding a significant amount of weight to increase their speed.
The best solution would be to take out all the buffs to speed which units got with HotS since it isnt ok to have something too strong if all three races get something too strong. Sadly this wont happen, because the Blizzard devs are smoking their "make harrassment stronger at all cost" weed. They do not consider consequences or even logic ... which would tell them that players are not engaging because they are afraid of losing everything and thus rather wait until they have a maxed army. In short: the game has too many units involved in battles and this makes units less durable as a whole and the battle is more risky. Lower unit density on the battlefield and players will engage in "few vs few units" battles a lot more readily because there is a chance to save some of their units through micro.
|
On June 24 2013 19:39 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2013 16:24 figq wrote:On June 20 2013 06:57 eviltomahawk wrote:
Time to give Overlords boosters. Overlords should get a counter that increases while they produce creep (stationary) and then can be spent when moving for speed boosts. The logic behind it is that when they poop, they lose weight, so then they can move faster for a while. Obviously the Overlords would be losing hp at the same time, because they are shedding a significant amount of weight to increase their speed. The best solution would be to take out all the buffs to speed which units got with HotS since it isnt ok to have something too strong if all three races get something too strong. Sadly this wont happen, because the Blizzard devs are smoking their "make harrassment stronger at all cost" weed. They do not consider consequences or even logic ... which would tell them that players are not engaging because they are afraid of losing everything and thus rather wait until they have a maxed army. In short: the game has too many units involved in battles and this makes units less durable as a whole and the battle is more risky. Lower unit density on the battlefield and players will engage in "few vs few units" battles a lot more readily because there is a chance to save some of their units through micro.
- And then reduce all speeds of fast units further, because 3.75 or 4.0 really doesn't matter at all for lowlevel players, not to mention when other units have even more speed anyways. I think having everything at 2.25 and fast units at 2.75 should do the trick.
- Then reduce siege tank range to 5 or something like that, because most units can't even see siege tanks before they shoot them (11sight+13range, while most units in the game are between 8 to 10sight) and it's simply too hard to handle for Mr. Bronze guy to scout ahead all the time. I think the best solution would be to make everything melee (similar issues exist for everything else with highrange).
- Then we remove cloaked/burrowed units from the game, because they are too hard to handle for Dr. Silver (as we know from fundaymonday, BronzeleagueHeros etc., it's just way too hard to have detection AND sufficient units at once for those guys).
- Then we remove everything that does a lot of damage at once from the game, because Miss Gold does simply not have the micro to avoid banelings, siege tanks, storms, widow mines, HSM, fungals, Colossi...
...
Hopefully then the game will be easy enough for Mr Rabiator. (well it won't be. we will still have to make it "easier" by introducing retarted unit behavior and limited controloptions...)
|
lmao at this thread
terrans literally mad at drop ship speed buff when hellbats are a thing
|
On June 24 2013 20:27 Little-Chimp wrote:
lmao at this thread
terrans literally mad at drop ship speed buff when hellbats are a thing
Go to the hellbat thread to discuss hellbats, this is the warp prism thread.
|
Very very minor warp prism speed buff isn't going to do much of anything. It will have little to no effect on the balance of this game, and all the whining is pretty hilarious but also expected from the SC2 community. They could have buffed zealot hp by 1 and people would be up in arms in an outrage because of the word "buff".
All the Terran whine is especially amusing. They got a 40% up-time 70% speedboost to medivacs in HOTS, moving at a massive 4.25 speed for no cost, and yet they whine about an 18.12% speed boost to warp prisms. They also seem to have forgotten a warp prism speed upgrade that has been in the game since launch surpasses this, and is easily attainable by the late game "30 warpgate" scenario anyway.
|
On June 24 2013 14:17 JSK wrote:
Going to try to post a serious answer here, which I'll probably regret. Sadly I have become very cynical about the ability of this community to objectively evaluate the state of the game. I can't recall such whining EVERY being acceptable on Team Liquid - this was supposed to be the forum people went to GET AWAY FROM the bnet sc2 forums. But it seems that the whiners like to do their whining in as many places as possible, so perhaps that's partly to blame for this sillyness.
I honestly thought the community was more mature than this. How disappointing. Even people like DWF who I formerly respected very much are susceptible to bias on an extreme level, but most people are of course blind to their own biases. It would be very interesting to see the reactions of these posters to previous and future balance changes. I suppose the silver lining is that this type of mentality will hold these players back and keep them from succeeding.
Also, how many players have now complained about the possible effects of this patch in terms of lategame PvT? I just think it's hilarious, I'm sorry but any Protoss who has 1) 20+ gates 2) a warp prism 3) a brain, also has Gravitic Drive. If I really need to explain this further, I can. But I hope I don't have to.
For these players to be complaining while seemingly being unaware of an upgrade that has been in the game for more than two years is truly astounding.
People need to remember that humans have a proven psychological tendency to be biased, especially when it comes to their own success or failure. The fact that players as talented as DWF sink down to the level of even the whiniest ladder scrubs just goes to show that everyone is susceptible to this. I for one have called things imbalanced in the past that I later realized to be completely fine. So I try to take a step back and think about what is best for the game as a whole rather than for my race.
All the same while I don't believe this buff is going to be all that significant. One of the reasons for this is that although the warp prism might be able to warp in units, it can only escape with 4 units at most, and the rest will most often all die. Medivacs cannot warp in units, but they do hold more initially and can escape with all units used to perform the drop, and can do so quite reliably due to medivac boost.
Additionally, it is common knowledge that Protoss relies more heavily on having their units together in a ball than does Terran or Zerg. Spending too much money on drops that despite causing damage are ultimately lost not only reduces the cost effectiveness of the drop. Dropping 4 zealots is terrible, dropping 8-10 is mediocre but costs 800-1000 minerals that are now not tanking for your main army. I have lost MANY games by being too zealous with speed prisms (no pun intended) and though I manage to do a great deal of damage, still end up unable to stop the frontal push after having spent so much money on dropping melee units.
That being said, little buffs CAN have a huge impact on this game.
If Terran really does suffer, I will be the first one to say I was wrong and that they need buffs. I've never called for nerfs to anything in HOTS: not hellbats, not widow mines, not swarm hosts, not medivac boost, not mutas in zvp, nothing.
People forget SO quickly that in the past things they were 100% sure to be overpowered or unfair turn out to not be such a big deal.
I'm a Protoss player and I was quite convinced Skytoss was OP just by reading the forums without playing the game at all. Now I don't hear a word about it. Not even from Zerg players on ladder. Just an example.
Be rational. But if this patch DOES fuck things up, let's not let this game go the way WOL did for the last year..
I agree wholeheartedly with the first point of this post. People are ridiculously irrational when it comes to balance patches as if it actually mattered for their own play. I mean, I would mind it if I was actually trying to make money on this game, but I am not. I'm just trying to be the best that I can with the tools that I have. Now some of the tools change but that doesn't change my goal of being as good as possible with the tools I am given. Even if you want to discuss balance, you could just do it in a careless and objective matter as if it only actually affects the pro players, which is true.
I wonder if it could help if Blizzard (or rather SC2ranks actually) would make a ladder for each race just like Company of Heroes. This way, you could measure your progress in relation to your own race, and therefore balance changes wouldn't have any impact on the ladder rank of your own race. I'm not saying it would solve the problem but it could help, and it would be kind of cool and fun to see.
However, I would just like to add that there is nothing in your post that suggests that you are any less biased than the very people you complain about. The use of several words in CAPS and the harsh wording against the other posters whose opinion differ from yours doesn't exactly reek of objectivity and open-mindedness, in my humble opinion.
|
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/qdg9oTA.jpg)
User was warned for this post
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
