|
On February 28 2014 07:36 ssxsilver wrote:Show nested quote +On February 27 2014 19:18 submarine wrote:On February 27 2014 16:16 ssxsilver wrote:On February 27 2014 14:12 GinDo wrote:On February 27 2014 13:59 FrostedMiniWheats wrote:On February 27 2014 13:50 Havik_ wrote:
The Hydralisk change is bunk. What the hell prompted that!? From what I gathered from when it was first proposed to reduce the gas cost to 25, they want to break up the roach dominance in ZvZ by making the tech transition to roach/hydra easier and more desirable. Also to maybe encourage roach/hydra as a more viable option against bio in ZvT. Personally, I think they're missing the mark and this buff won't make much of a dent in either of those goals. 25 gas hydras are too good, while a 10% buff to dps isn't quite enough. They need a more reasonable middle ground. Maybe they should have considered a mineral reduction from 100 to 75? Or go with what so many pros have been asking for in +1 armor or +10ish HP. I don't understand why this suggestion pops up everywhere. Against which unit exactly would 1 Armor or 10 HP make any difference? This would be the most boring change ever. The hydra is a squishy unit that deals a lot of damage and needs other units in front to tank. That's its role. Buffing its tanking ability would make them a little bit better in direct trades, but would not at all help them to fill their intended role. Zerg has the perfect units to put in front of the Hydra. Right now they just don't do enough damage to be really worth it. I like this purposed change. The next thing i would change if they are still underused after the patch is: -Increase the base range to 6. -Add a hive requirement for the range increase upgrade. Because their DPS has never been an issue. By that same argument, there's no point to combat shields and you might as well give marines +1 attack or something instead. Obviously I'm speaking secondhand when I say it's what a lot of pros want, but those that do give feedback seem to come to the same consensus, the problem occurs once the game gets to the deathball stage. At that point, hydras can't effectively function as AA, because they die instantly to critical mass AOE.
Don't say "by that same argument" if you use a different one. You don't put roaches or anything tanky infront of marines. It's not the same thing.
|
On March 02 2014 21:36 ejozl wrote:
Did anyone test new Hydras vs Immortal allins? Because these Proleague Protoss still crush Zergs with it.
People complaining about Storms, you should note that in the games between Hero and Polt, which have been discussed oh so much.
Pol generally did very well in the later stages of the game, but usually got hugely behind in the early game. This makes sense with all the metagame opening you can do as Protoss, but that has now been nerfed with Blink being worse, scouting is worse and Terran has gotten a better opener in the Widow Mine.
Blink isnt worse you dumb fuck. msc is slightly worse. Protoss is still strong and they can do everything
User was temp banned for this post.
|
Blink isnt worse you dumb fuck. msc is slightly worse. Protoss is still strong and they can do everything
Which makes the Blink build worse..
|
On March 02 2014 10:20 Foxxan wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2014 09:40 plogamer wrote:On March 02 2014 09:30 _Epi_ wrote:
I think one of the core issue is the High Templar Oh but it has no attack. So it's perfectly reasonable that one or two high templars can dent 30+ supply against Terran opponents. It's the Terran's fault for eating storms. Good Terrans never eat storms but even the best protoss cannot dodge emps. Why? Because emp is instant damage. INSTANT. You know it's powerful because it's instant. Very true Against 15storms, a good terran dont eat a single one
The reason terran units needs to be "weaker" is because of the potential of the army. You guys are using marines (50 minerals) and marauders (100/25) in the lategame as your main source of damage output. This sounds weird as fuck in my eyes. A protoss needs colossus (300/200), high templars (50/150) and a meath shield to deal with your army of 50 mineral units. The reason this works is because your units can be worth more the better they are used. An amoving terran will lose horribly because he's using units worth 50 and 100/25, of course they will melt to the amoving protoss units (where the CHEAPEST is 100 minerals, stalkers are 125/50, etc). So the terran army has more "micro" potential to make up for this. In some way it's unfair to the terran player since they will need to "raise" the value of their army with good micro but I guess that's the "payback" for having the cheapest lategame army?
I'm a protoss player and I rarely micro harder than my opponent. He's splitting, stutter stepping vikings, etc while I'm amoving, storming, forcefielding and guardian shielding. It's not that hard to maneuver a protoss army tbh. The thing is though that we invest so much more int our army. I have 4 - 5 colossuses (300/200), I have 5 - 6 high templars (50/150), I have a sentry (50/100), I have 7 - 8 stalkers (125/50), the list goes on. The strength in our army is that it's a ball of heavy, expensive units. Do you terrans really think an expensive army like that should need as much micro as an army consisting of marines and marauders which are significantly cheaper? Add to that the fact that the protoss needs to look away from the fight to reinforce. Would you be able to do the same amount of stutter stepping and splitting if you weren't allowed to look at your army while making new units?
In the end, I think protoss is an easier race and slightly op in pvt but I'm annoyed by terrans who have the mindset that "Since my army requires more micro, I deserve the win more". Sometimes I feel like the power of protoss lies in making the perfect composition while dealing with pressure. To make the ultimate army (Remember that EVERY time a protoss warps in a unit, he's making a choice. Do I want a zealot? Stalker? Sentry? High templar? Dark templar?) WHILE being able to deflect that double medivac drop, WHILE having a stimmed army which can snipe your nexus in under 10 seconds because you're out of position, etc.
I stay away from balance discussions as I don't think anyone here can make an unbiased case. We're all biased. However I wish terrans would stop thinking that because they need to put more apm into the fights, they deserve the win more. That's not how a RTS game works.
|
On March 02 2014 22:58 NVRLand wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2014 10:20 Foxxan wrote:On March 02 2014 09:40 plogamer wrote:On March 02 2014 09:30 _Epi_ wrote:
I think one of the core issue is the High Templar Oh but it has no attack. So it's perfectly reasonable that one or two high templars can dent 30+ supply against Terran opponents. It's the Terran's fault for eating storms. Good Terrans never eat storms but even the best protoss cannot dodge emps. Why? Because emp is instant damage. INSTANT. You know it's powerful because it's instant. Very true Against 15storms, a good terran dont eat a single one The reason terran units needs to be "weaker" is because of the potential of the army. You guys are using marines (50 minerals) and marauders (100/25) in the lategame as your main source of damage output. This sounds weird as fuck in my eyes. A protoss needs colossus (300/200), high templars (50/150) and a meath shield to deal with your army of 50 mineral units. The reason this works is because your units can be worth more the better they are used. An amoving terran will lose horribly because he's using units worth 50 and 100/25, of course they will melt to the amoving protoss units (where the CHEAPEST is 100 minerals, stalkers are 125/50, etc). So the terran army has more "micro" potential to make up for this. In some way it's unfair to the terran player since they will need to "raise" the value of their army with good micro but I guess that's the "payback" for having the cheapest lategame army? I'm a protoss player and I rarely micro harder than my opponent. He's splitting, stutter stepping vikings, etc while I'm amoving, storming, forcefielding and guardian shielding. It's not that hard to maneuver a protoss army tbh. The thing is though that we invest so much more int our army. I have 4 - 5 colossuses (300/200), I have 5 - 6 high templars (50/150), I have a sentry (50/100), I have 7 - 8 stalkers (125/50), the list goes on. The strength in our army is that it's a ball of heavy, expensive units. Do you terrans really think an expensive army like that should need as much micro as an army consisting of marines and marauders which are significantly cheaper? Add to that the fact that the protoss needs to look away from the fight to reinforce. Would you be able to do the same amount of stutter stepping and splitting if you weren't allowed to look at your army while making new units? In the end, I think protoss is an easier race and slightly op in pvt but I'm annoyed by terrans who have the mindset that "Since my army requires more micro, I deserve the win more". Sometimes I feel like the power of protoss lies in making the perfect composition while dealing with pressure. To make the ultimate army (Remember that EVERY time a protoss warps in a unit, he's making a choice. Do I want a zealot? Stalker? Sentry? High templar? Dark templar?) WHILE being able to deflect that double medivac drop, WHILE having a stimmed army which can snipe your nexus in under 10 seconds because you're out of position, etc. I stay away from balance discussions as I don't think anyone here can make an unbiased case. We're all biased. However I wish terrans would stop thinking that because they need to put more apm into the fights, they deserve the win more. That's not how a RTS game works.
Well currently neither Mech, Air or both is viable against toss, i tried diehard to play that versus protoss but as soon as you face a protoss who can handle mech/air you are basically out of the game, high templar deals mostly with 90% of your air comp, feedbacking everything.
You can only play bio vs protoss.
|
On March 02 2014 22:58 NVRLand wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On March 02 2014 10:20 Foxxan wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2014 09:40 plogamer wrote:On March 02 2014 09:30 _Epi_ wrote:
I think one of the core issue is the High Templar Oh but it has no attack. So it's perfectly reasonable that one or two high templars can dent 30+ supply against Terran opponents. It's the Terran's fault for eating storms. Good Terrans never eat storms but even the best protoss cannot dodge emps. Why? Because emp is instant damage. INSTANT. You know it's powerful because it's instant. Very true Against 15storms, a good terran dont eat a single one The reason terran units needs to be "weaker" is because of the potential of the army. You guys are using marines (50 minerals) and marauders (100/25) in the lategame as your main source of damage output. This sounds weird as fuck in my eyes. A protoss needs colossus (300/200), high templars (50/150) and a meath shield to deal with your army of 50 mineral units. The reason this works is because your units can be worth more the better they are used. An amoving terran will lose horribly because he's using units worth 50 and 100/25, of course they will melt to the amoving protoss units (where the CHEAPEST is 100 minerals, stalkers are 125/50, etc). So the terran army has more "micro" potential to make up for this. In some way it's unfair to the terran player since they will need to "raise" the value of their army with good micro but I guess that's the "payback" for having the cheapest lategame army? I'm a protoss player and I rarely micro harder than my opponent. He's splitting, stutter stepping vikings, etc while I'm amoving, storming, forcefielding and guardian shielding. It's not that hard to maneuver a protoss army tbh. The thing is though that we invest so much more int our army. I have 4 - 5 colossuses (300/200), I have 5 - 6 high templars (50/150), I have a sentry (50/100), I have 7 - 8 stalkers (125/50), the list goes on. The strength in our army is that it's a ball of heavy, expensive units. Do you terrans really think an expensive army like that should need as much micro as an army consisting of marines and marauders which are significantly cheaper? Add to that the fact that the protoss needs to look away from the fight to reinforce. Would you be able to do the same amount of stutter stepping and splitting if you weren't allowed to look at your army while making new units? In the end, I think protoss is an easier race and slightly op in pvt but I'm annoyed by terrans who have the mindset that "Since my army requires more micro, I deserve the win more". Sometimes I feel like the power of protoss lies in making the perfect composition while dealing with pressure. To make the ultimate army (Remember that EVERY time a protoss warps in a unit, he's making a choice. Do I want a zealot? Stalker? Sentry? High templar? Dark templar?) WHILE being able to deflect that double medivac drop, WHILE having a stimmed army which can snipe your nexus in under 10 seconds because you're out of position, etc. I stay away from balance discussions as I don't think anyone here can make an unbiased case. We're all biased. However I wish terrans would stop thinking that because they need to put more apm into the fights, they deserve the win more. That's not how a RTS game works.
Those terrans should not be listened to.
The major problems in TvP is that on top of the fact toss still has a lot of early game option vs the almost unique terran (reaper expo), terran has litteraly no lategame composition that is not bio. And keep in mind that ghost are not that cheap at 200/100. (and you want like 15-20 of them in the very late game)
On the toss making a choice when warping vs drops thing, remember that a double medivac drops is 20 supply, so that is kind of a big investment on the terran part. (keep in mind that a terran can see his 2 vacs just melt to 2 feedbacks for free)
|
On March 02 2014 09:40 plogamer wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2014 09:30 _Epi_ wrote:
I think one of the core issue is the High Templar Oh but it has no attack. So it's perfectly reasonable that one or two high templars can dent 30+ supply against Terran opponents. It's the Terran's fault for eating storms. Good Terrans never eat storms but even the best protoss cannot dodge emps. Why? Because emp is instant damage. INSTANT. You know it's powerful because it's instant.
I don't believe that 
Can you please provide us with a game of two high level player where the Terran doesn't eat a storms because he dodges every single storm?
From what I've seen on Pro streams in many games is that even Teaja, Polt, Innovation, Byun, Marineking get their armies demolished by storms from time to time. No Terran can dodge every storm in a TvP vs an at least equally skilled Protoss. If EMP would have the same delay as storms it wouldn't make a difference because the Protoss army is way slower.
However in my opinion the issue is not with the Templar but within the Warpgate design.
Protoss players can use it to:
- Offensively warp in units
- Defensively to defend drops (additional to Photon Overcharge)
- Spend a bank of money to instantly rebuild a strong army
What is so strong about it:
- Build time (faster than normal Gateway build time)
- Chronoboost (makes the build time even faster)
- Lack of opportunity costs (apart from proxy builds Gateways don't offer any advantage over Warpgates)
|
On March 02 2014 23:26 TurboMaN wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2014 09:40 plogamer wrote:On March 02 2014 09:30 _Epi_ wrote:
I think one of the core issue is the High Templar Oh but it has no attack. So it's perfectly reasonable that one or two high templars can dent 30+ supply against Terran opponents. It's the Terran's fault for eating storms. Good Terrans never eat storms but even the best protoss cannot dodge emps. Why? Because emp is instant damage. INSTANT. You know it's powerful because it's instant. I don't believe that Can you please provide us with a game of two high level player where the Terran doesn't eat a storms because he dodges every single storm? From what I've seen on Pro streams in many games is that even Teaja, Polt, Innovation, Byun, Marineking get their armies demolished by storms from time to time. No Terran can dodge every storm in a TvP vs an at least equally skilled Protoss. If EMP would have the same delay as storms it wouldn't make a difference because the Protoss army is way slower. However in my opinion the issue is not with the Templar but within the Warpgate design. Protoss players can use it to: - Offensively warp in units - Defensively to defend drops (additional to Photon Overcharge) - Spend a bank of money to instantly rebuild a strong army What is so strong about it: - Build time (faster than normal Gateway build time) - Chronoboost (makes the build time even faster) - Lack of opportunity costs (apart from proxy builds Gateways don't offer any advantage over Warpgates)
He is joking 
Also one reason why storms are hitting more often is because protoss players are getting better, most kespa players are doing a lot of ht flanks, some would do warp prism ht storm and split up their hts.
from the list of terrans you put up, only taeja really uses ghost heavy TvP style.
It's understandable that storm is extremely good when terran is "forced" to play marine marauder mid game and has smaller room to add ghost tech.
Warp in is fine.
You have to remember it was never much of a problem back in WoL since gateway army is horrible against a nice bio ball anyway.
Terran's heavy marauder ghost viking in WoL was pretty insanely powerful against anything protoss can throw at them.
It's just that in hots, it is harder to survive until that stage and even if the terran does get to that stage, protoss can start having tempests out which makes things a lot harder for terran
|
On March 02 2014 22:58 NVRLand wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2014 10:20 Foxxan wrote:On March 02 2014 09:40 plogamer wrote:On March 02 2014 09:30 _Epi_ wrote:
I think one of the core issue is the High Templar Oh but it has no attack. So it's perfectly reasonable that one or two high templars can dent 30+ supply against Terran opponents. It's the Terran's fault for eating storms. Good Terrans never eat storms but even the best protoss cannot dodge emps. Why? Because emp is instant damage. INSTANT. You know it's powerful because it's instant. Very true Against 15storms, a good terran dont eat a single one The reason terran units needs to be "weaker" is because of the potential of the army. You guys are using marines (50 minerals) and marauders (100/25) in the lategame as your main source of damage output. This sounds weird as fuck in my eyes. A protoss needs colossus (300/200), high templars (50/150) and a meath shield to deal with your army of 50 mineral units. The reason this works is because your units can be worth more the better they are used. An amoving terran will lose horribly because he's using units worth 50 and 100/25, of course they will melt to the amoving protoss units (where the CHEAPEST is 100 minerals, stalkers are 125/50, etc). So the terran army has more "micro" potential to make up for this. In some way it's unfair to the terran player since they will need to "raise" the value of their army with good micro but I guess that's the "payback" for having the cheapest lategame army? I'm a protoss player and I rarely micro harder than my opponent. He's splitting, stutter stepping vikings, etc while I'm amoving, storming, forcefielding and guardian shielding. It's not that hard to maneuver a protoss army tbh. The thing is though that we invest so much more int our army. I have 4 - 5 colossuses (300/200), I have 5 - 6 high templars (50/150), I have a sentry (50/100), I have 7 - 8 stalkers (125/50), the list goes on. The strength in our army is that it's a ball of heavy, expensive units. Do you terrans really think an expensive army like that should need as much micro as an army consisting of marines and marauders which are significantly cheaper? Add to that the fact that the protoss needs to look away from the fight to reinforce. Would you be able to do the same amount of stutter stepping and splitting if you weren't allowed to look at your army while making new units? In the end, I think protoss is an easier race and slightly op in pvt but I'm annoyed by terrans who have the mindset that "Since my army requires more micro, I deserve the win more". Sometimes I feel like the power of protoss lies in making the perfect composition while dealing with pressure. To make the ultimate army (Remember that EVERY time a protoss warps in a unit, he's making a choice. Do I want a zealot? Stalker? Sentry? High templar? Dark templar?) WHILE being able to deflect that double medivac drop, WHILE having a stimmed army which can snipe your nexus in under 10 seconds because you're out of position, etc. I stay away from balance discussions as I don't think anyone here can make an unbiased case. We're all biased. However I wish terrans would stop thinking that because they need to put more apm into the fights, they deserve the win more. That's not how a RTS game works.
Wow, so much wrong stuff in just one post. Protoss armies are not generally more expensive. Please, take a few minutes, go to the unit tester and build several typical mid too late game armies. I think you are in for a surprise. While the core units, rines and rauders are quite cheap, everything else in the terran army is not. On top of that, Toss production generally is far cheaper and more effective. The game balance is a little bit more complex then what you have stated.
A little bit food for thoughts:
If you build a rax for example it takes 65+25+30=120 seconds to get out the first marauder.
Toss can produce a gateway, morph it into a warpgate and get out 3 stalkers at a forward pylon in the same time if they use chrono (65+10+22+22 = 119 seconds). That is something that is often overlooked when people talk about expensive units. Terran production requires more investment earlier. The game is not imbalanced because of that, but complaining about expensive gateway units without looking at the whole picture is just wrong.
|
On March 02 2014 23:32 ETisME wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2014 23:26 TurboMaN wrote:On March 02 2014 09:40 plogamer wrote:On March 02 2014 09:30 _Epi_ wrote:
I think one of the core issue is the High Templar Oh but it has no attack. So it's perfectly reasonable that one or two high templars can dent 30+ supply against Terran opponents. It's the Terran's fault for eating storms. Good Terrans never eat storms but even the best protoss cannot dodge emps. Why? Because emp is instant damage. INSTANT. You know it's powerful because it's instant. I don't believe that Can you please provide us with a game of two high level player where the Terran doesn't eat a storms because he dodges every single storm? From what I've seen on Pro streams in many games is that even Teaja, Polt, Innovation, Byun, Marineking get their armies demolished by storms from time to time. No Terran can dodge every storm in a TvP vs an at least equally skilled Protoss. If EMP would have the same delay as storms it wouldn't make a difference because the Protoss army is way slower. However in my opinion the issue is not with the Templar but within the Warpgate design. Protoss players can use it to: - Offensively warp in units - Defensively to defend drops (additional to Photon Overcharge) - Spend a bank of money to instantly rebuild a strong army What is so strong about it: - Build time (faster than normal Gateway build time) - Chronoboost (makes the build time even faster) - Lack of opportunity costs (apart from proxy builds Gateways don't offer any advantage over Warpgates) He is joking Also one reason why storms are hitting more often is because protoss players are getting better, most kespa players are doing a lot of ht flanks, some would do warp prism ht storm and split up their hts. from the list of terrans you put up, only taeja really uses ghost heavy TvP style. It's understandable that storm is extremely good when terran is "forced" to play marine marauder mid game and has smaller room to add ghost tech. Warp in is fine. You have to remember it was never much of a problem back in WoL since gateway army is horrible against a nice bio ball anyway. Terran's heavy marauder ghost viking in WoL was pretty insanely powerful against anything protoss can throw at them. It's just that in hots, it is harder to survive until that stage and even if the terran does get to that stage, protoss can start having tempests out which makes things a lot harder for terran
You can't compare HoTS with WoL. Gateway army is great against bio until stim and medivacs are out. In WoL, this forced the Protoss to make at least 5-6 sentries to defend that stim+2 medivac push. But with the MsC, that push is no longer effective because Protoss has MSC, so you see Protoss going with 1-2 sentries for guardian shield and going for early storm and quicker third. So by the time Terran has 6 medivacs to overcome the photon overcharge, Protoss already have storm.
That is why Terrans have been having a hard time, the timing window to 'push' back is so small.
|
On March 02 2014 23:57 vthree wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2014 23:32 ETisME wrote:On March 02 2014 23:26 TurboMaN wrote:On March 02 2014 09:40 plogamer wrote:On March 02 2014 09:30 _Epi_ wrote:
I think one of the core issue is the High Templar Oh but it has no attack. So it's perfectly reasonable that one or two high templars can dent 30+ supply against Terran opponents. It's the Terran's fault for eating storms. Good Terrans never eat storms but even the best protoss cannot dodge emps. Why? Because emp is instant damage. INSTANT. You know it's powerful because it's instant. I don't believe that Can you please provide us with a game of two high level player where the Terran doesn't eat a storms because he dodges every single storm? From what I've seen on Pro streams in many games is that even Teaja, Polt, Innovation, Byun, Marineking get their armies demolished by storms from time to time. No Terran can dodge every storm in a TvP vs an at least equally skilled Protoss. If EMP would have the same delay as storms it wouldn't make a difference because the Protoss army is way slower. However in my opinion the issue is not with the Templar but within the Warpgate design. Protoss players can use it to: - Offensively warp in units - Defensively to defend drops (additional to Photon Overcharge) - Spend a bank of money to instantly rebuild a strong army What is so strong about it: - Build time (faster than normal Gateway build time) - Chronoboost (makes the build time even faster) - Lack of opportunity costs (apart from proxy builds Gateways don't offer any advantage over Warpgates) He is joking Also one reason why storms are hitting more often is because protoss players are getting better, most kespa players are doing a lot of ht flanks, some would do warp prism ht storm and split up their hts. from the list of terrans you put up, only taeja really uses ghost heavy TvP style. It's understandable that storm is extremely good when terran is "forced" to play marine marauder mid game and has smaller room to add ghost tech. Warp in is fine. You have to remember it was never much of a problem back in WoL since gateway army is horrible against a nice bio ball anyway. Terran's heavy marauder ghost viking in WoL was pretty insanely powerful against anything protoss can throw at them. It's just that in hots, it is harder to survive until that stage and even if the terran does get to that stage, protoss can start having tempests out which makes things a lot harder for terran You can't compare HoTS with WoL. Gateway army is great against bio until stim and medivacs are out. In WoL, this forced the Protoss to make at least 5-6 sentries to defend that stim+2 medivac push. But with the MsC, that push is no longer effective because Protoss has MSC, so you see Protoss going with 1-2 sentries for guardian shield and going for early storm and quicker third. So by the time Terran has 6 medivacs to overcome the photon overcharge, Protoss already have storm. That is why Terrans have been having a hard time, the timing window to 'push' back is so small.
this is why i said terran is "forced" to play marine marauder.
warp gate tech is not the issue, it's the early game snowballing
|
Remember that PuMa game against... Mana, maybe? In NASL, I think? Where he had those supernatural storm dodges and splits?
|
On March 02 2014 22:58 NVRLand wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2014 10:20 Foxxan wrote:On March 02 2014 09:40 plogamer wrote:On March 02 2014 09:30 _Epi_ wrote:
I think one of the core issue is the High Templar Oh but it has no attack. So it's perfectly reasonable that one or two high templars can dent 30+ supply against Terran opponents. It's the Terran's fault for eating storms. Good Terrans never eat storms but even the best protoss cannot dodge emps. Why? Because emp is instant damage. INSTANT. You know it's powerful because it's instant. Very true Against 15storms, a good terran dont eat a single one The reason terran units needs to be "weaker" is because of the potential of the army. You guys are using marines (50 minerals) and marauders (100/25) in the lategame as your main source of damage output. This sounds weird as fuck in my eyes. A protoss needs colossus (300/200), high templars (50/150) and a meath shield to deal with your army of 50 mineral units. The reason this works is because your units can be worth more the better they are used. An amoving terran will lose horribly because he's using units worth 50 and 100/25, of course they will melt to the amoving protoss units (where the CHEAPEST is 100 minerals, stalkers are 125/50, etc). So the terran army has more "micro" potential to make up for this. In some way it's unfair to the terran player since they will need to "raise" the value of their army with good micro but I guess that's the "payback" for having the cheapest lategame army? I'm a protoss player and I rarely micro harder than my opponent. He's splitting, stutter stepping vikings, etc while I'm amoving, storming, forcefielding and guardian shielding. It's not that hard to maneuver a protoss army tbh. The thing is though that we invest so much more int our army. I have 4 - 5 colossuses (300/200), I have 5 - 6 high templars (50/150), I have a sentry (50/100), I have 7 - 8 stalkers (125/50), the list goes on. The strength in our army is that it's a ball of heavy, expensive units. Do you terrans really think an expensive army like that should need as much micro as an army consisting of marines and marauders which are significantly cheaper? Add to that the fact that the protoss needs to look away from the fight to reinforce. Would you be able to do the same amount of stutter stepping and splitting if you weren't allowed to look at your army while making new units? In the end, I think protoss is an easier race and slightly op in pvt but I'm annoyed by terrans who have the mindset that "Since my army requires more micro, I deserve the win more". Sometimes I feel like the power of protoss lies in making the perfect composition while dealing with pressure. To make the ultimate army (Remember that EVERY time a protoss warps in a unit, he's making a choice. Do I want a zealot? Stalker? Sentry? High templar? Dark templar?) WHILE being able to deflect that double medivac drop, WHILE having a stimmed army which can snipe your nexus in under 10 seconds because you're out of position, etc. I stay away from balance discussions as I don't think anyone here can make an unbiased case. We're all biased. However I wish terrans would stop thinking that because they need to put more apm into the fights, they deserve the win more. That's not how a RTS game works.
And you/protoss use mass zealots(100minerals) in midgame/lategame. Isnt that to weird as fuck?
What about medivacs. They dont count? Vikings, dont count either? And ghost...dont count. Ok i get it, only marine and marauder count
Personally i believe the gameplay would be alot better if toss had micro units to with a more equal macro to terran.
And well, do i need to mention the colossus?
It has been talked to death but the unit is very boring to play against AND to play with imo.
However I wish terrans would stop thinking that because they need to put more apm into the fights, they deserve the win more. That's not how a RTS game works
Thanks for this.
I didnt know this actually
|
On March 03 2014 03:32 Foxxan wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2014 22:58 NVRLand wrote:On March 02 2014 10:20 Foxxan wrote:On March 02 2014 09:40 plogamer wrote:On March 02 2014 09:30 _Epi_ wrote:
I think one of the core issue is the High Templar Oh but it has no attack. So it's perfectly reasonable that one or two high templars can dent 30+ supply against Terran opponents. It's the Terran's fault for eating storms. Good Terrans never eat storms but even the best protoss cannot dodge emps. Why? Because emp is instant damage. INSTANT. You know it's powerful because it's instant. Very true Against 15storms, a good terran dont eat a single one The reason terran units needs to be "weaker" is because of the potential of the army. You guys are using marines (50 minerals) and marauders (100/25) in the lategame as your main source of damage output. This sounds weird as fuck in my eyes. A protoss needs colossus (300/200), high templars (50/150) and a meath shield to deal with your army of 50 mineral units. The reason this works is because your units can be worth more the better they are used. An amoving terran will lose horribly because he's using units worth 50 and 100/25, of course they will melt to the amoving protoss units (where the CHEAPEST is 100 minerals, stalkers are 125/50, etc). So the terran army has more "micro" potential to make up for this. In some way it's unfair to the terran player since they will need to "raise" the value of their army with good micro but I guess that's the "payback" for having the cheapest lategame army? I'm a protoss player and I rarely micro harder than my opponent. He's splitting, stutter stepping vikings, etc while I'm amoving, storming, forcefielding and guardian shielding. It's not that hard to maneuver a protoss army tbh. The thing is though that we invest so much more int our army. I have 4 - 5 colossuses (300/200), I have 5 - 6 high templars (50/150), I have a sentry (50/100), I have 7 - 8 stalkers (125/50), the list goes on. The strength in our army is that it's a ball of heavy, expensive units. Do you terrans really think an expensive army like that should need as much micro as an army consisting of marines and marauders which are significantly cheaper? Add to that the fact that the protoss needs to look away from the fight to reinforce. Would you be able to do the same amount of stutter stepping and splitting if you weren't allowed to look at your army while making new units? In the end, I think protoss is an easier race and slightly op in pvt but I'm annoyed by terrans who have the mindset that "Since my army requires more micro, I deserve the win more". Sometimes I feel like the power of protoss lies in making the perfect composition while dealing with pressure. To make the ultimate army (Remember that EVERY time a protoss warps in a unit, he's making a choice. Do I want a zealot? Stalker? Sentry? High templar? Dark templar?) WHILE being able to deflect that double medivac drop, WHILE having a stimmed army which can snipe your nexus in under 10 seconds because you're out of position, etc. I stay away from balance discussions as I don't think anyone here can make an unbiased case. We're all biased. However I wish terrans would stop thinking that because they need to put more apm into the fights, they deserve the win more. That's not how a RTS game works. And you/protoss use mass zealots(100minerals) in midgame/lategame. Isnt that to weird as fuck? What about medivacs. They dont count? Vikings, dont count either? And ghost...dont count. Ok i get it, only marine and marauder count
I used the term "as the main source of damage output", that's why I left out ghosts/medivacs/vikings. Yes, massive zealot warp-ins late game is op however, that doesn't change my opinion. Zealots are only viable versus terran once they got charge. If you've ever played protoss and tried to defend early aggression you'll find yourself VERY frustrated when you spend 500 minerals on 5 zealots and they do exactly 0 damage because of the terran micro. Terran doesn't have any melee units (except for SCVs) so they don't get this point. Until charge, a zealot isn't doing damage, it's only tanking damage due to stutter step (of course there are exceptions, but you get the general picture hopefully).
On March 03 2014 03:32 Foxxan wrote:
Personally i believe the gameplay would be alot better if toss had micro units to with a more equal macro to terran.
And well, do i need to mention the colossus?
It has been talked to death but the unit is very boring to play against AND to play with imo.
Yep, and there's where your opinion differs from many others. Sure, Blizzard could have made the races exactly the same but with different models. There's a reason mirror match-ups are the least liked though.
On March 03 2014 03:32 Foxxan wrote:Show nested quote +However I wish terrans would stop thinking that because they need to put more apm into the fights, they deserve the win more. That's not how a RTS game works Thanks for this. I didnt know this actually
You seem to be the kind of person who isn't interested in a discussion. You probably just want me to say "Sorry, I'll switch to terran so that my wins suddenly count ", right?
|
Yep, and there's where your opinion differs from many others. Sure, Blizzard could have made the races exactly the same but with different models. There's a reason mirror match-ups are the least liked though.
So if zealots get more micro. Stalker get more micro, and immortals to.
They become the same as terran?
You seem to be the kind of person who isn't interested in a discussion. You probably just want me to say "Sorry, I'll switch to terran so that my wins suddenly count ", right?
Exactly. You really know me inside and out
|
On March 03 2014 06:39 NVRLand wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2014 03:32 Foxxan wrote:On March 02 2014 22:58 NVRLand wrote:On March 02 2014 10:20 Foxxan wrote:On March 02 2014 09:40 plogamer wrote:On March 02 2014 09:30 _Epi_ wrote:
I think one of the core issue is the High Templar Oh but it has no attack. So it's perfectly reasonable that one or two high templars can dent 30+ supply against Terran opponents. It's the Terran's fault for eating storms. Good Terrans never eat storms but even the best protoss cannot dodge emps. Why? Because emp is instant damage. INSTANT. You know it's powerful because it's instant. Very true Against 15storms, a good terran dont eat a single one The reason terran units needs to be "weaker" is because of the potential of the army. You guys are using marines (50 minerals) and marauders (100/25) in the lategame as your main source of damage output. This sounds weird as fuck in my eyes. A protoss needs colossus (300/200), high templars (50/150) and a meath shield to deal with your army of 50 mineral units. The reason this works is because your units can be worth more the better they are used. An amoving terran will lose horribly because he's using units worth 50 and 100/25, of course they will melt to the amoving protoss units (where the CHEAPEST is 100 minerals, stalkers are 125/50, etc). So the terran army has more "micro" potential to make up for this. In some way it's unfair to the terran player since they will need to "raise" the value of their army with good micro but I guess that's the "payback" for having the cheapest lategame army? I'm a protoss player and I rarely micro harder than my opponent. He's splitting, stutter stepping vikings, etc while I'm amoving, storming, forcefielding and guardian shielding. It's not that hard to maneuver a protoss army tbh. The thing is though that we invest so much more int our army. I have 4 - 5 colossuses (300/200), I have 5 - 6 high templars (50/150), I have a sentry (50/100), I have 7 - 8 stalkers (125/50), the list goes on. The strength in our army is that it's a ball of heavy, expensive units. Do you terrans really think an expensive army like that should need as much micro as an army consisting of marines and marauders which are significantly cheaper? Add to that the fact that the protoss needs to look away from the fight to reinforce. Would you be able to do the same amount of stutter stepping and splitting if you weren't allowed to look at your army while making new units? In the end, I think protoss is an easier race and slightly op in pvt but I'm annoyed by terrans who have the mindset that "Since my army requires more micro, I deserve the win more". Sometimes I feel like the power of protoss lies in making the perfect composition while dealing with pressure. To make the ultimate army (Remember that EVERY time a protoss warps in a unit, he's making a choice. Do I want a zealot? Stalker? Sentry? High templar? Dark templar?) WHILE being able to deflect that double medivac drop, WHILE having a stimmed army which can snipe your nexus in under 10 seconds because you're out of position, etc. I stay away from balance discussions as I don't think anyone here can make an unbiased case. We're all biased. However I wish terrans would stop thinking that because they need to put more apm into the fights, they deserve the win more. That's not how a RTS game works. And you/protoss use mass zealots(100minerals) in midgame/lategame. Isnt that to weird as fuck? What about medivacs. They dont count? Vikings, dont count either? And ghost...dont count. Ok i get it, only marine and marauder count I used the term "as the main source of damage output", that's why I left out ghosts/medivacs/vikings. Yes, massive zealot warp-ins late game is op however, that doesn't change my opinion. Zealots are only viable versus terran once they got charge. If you've ever played protoss and tried to defend early aggression you'll find yourself VERY frustrated when you spend 500 minerals on 5 zealots and they do exactly 0 damage because of the terran micro. Terran doesn't have any melee units (except for SCVs) so they don't get this point. Until charge, a zealot isn't doing damage, it's only tanking damage due to stutter step (of course there are exceptions, but you get the general picture hopefully). Show nested quote +On March 03 2014 03:32 Foxxan wrote:
Personally i believe the gameplay would be alot better if toss had micro units to with a more equal macro to terran.
And well, do i need to mention the colossus?
It has been talked to death but the unit is very boring to play against AND to play with imo. Yep, and there's where your opinion differs from many others. Sure, Blizzard could have made the races exactly the same but with different models. There's a reason mirror match-ups are the least liked though. Show nested quote +On March 03 2014 03:32 Foxxan wrote:However I wish terrans would stop thinking that because they need to put more apm into the fights, they deserve the win more. That's not how a RTS game works Thanks for this. I didnt know this actually You seem to be the kind of person who isn't interested in a discussion. You probably just want me to say "Sorry, I'll switch to terran so that my wins suddenly count ", right?
TvT least liked. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
|
On March 02 2014 22:58 NVRLand wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2014 10:20 Foxxan wrote:On March 02 2014 09:40 plogamer wrote:On March 02 2014 09:30 _Epi_ wrote:
I think one of the core issue is the High Templar Oh but it has no attack. So it's perfectly reasonable that one or two high templars can dent 30+ supply against Terran opponents. It's the Terran's fault for eating storms. Good Terrans never eat storms but even the best protoss cannot dodge emps. Why? Because emp is instant damage. INSTANT. You know it's powerful because it's instant. Very true Against 15storms, a good terran dont eat a single one The reason terran units needs to be "weaker" is because of the potential of the army. You guys are using marines (50 minerals) and marauders (100/25) in the lategame as your main source of damage output. This sounds weird as fuck in my eyes. A protoss needs colossus (300/200), high templars (50/150) and a meath shield to deal with your army of 50 mineral units. The reason this works is because your units can be worth more the better they are used. An amoving terran will lose horribly because he's using units worth 50 and 100/25, of course they will melt to the amoving protoss units (where the CHEAPEST is 100 minerals, stalkers are 125/50, etc). So the terran army has more "micro" potential to make up for this. In some way it's unfair to the terran player since they will need to "raise" the value of their army with good micro but I guess that's the "payback" for having the cheapest lategame army? I'm a protoss player and I rarely micro harder than my opponent. He's splitting, stutter stepping vikings, etc while I'm amoving, storming, forcefielding and guardian shielding. It's not that hard to maneuver a protoss army tbh. The thing is though that we invest so much more int our army. I have 4 - 5 colossuses (300/200), I have 5 - 6 high templars (50/150), I have a sentry (50/100), I have 7 - 8 stalkers (125/50), the list goes on. The strength in our army is that it's a ball of heavy, expensive units. Do you terrans really think an expensive army like that should need as much micro as an army consisting of marines and marauders which are significantly cheaper? Add to that the fact that the protoss needs to look away from the fight to reinforce. Would you be able to do the same amount of stutter stepping and splitting if you weren't allowed to look at your army while making new units? In the end, I think protoss is an easier race and slightly op in pvt but I'm annoyed by terrans who have the mindset that "Since my army requires more micro, I deserve the win more". Sometimes I feel like the power of protoss lies in making the perfect composition while dealing with pressure. To make the ultimate army (Remember that EVERY time a protoss warps in a unit, he's making a choice. Do I want a zealot? Stalker? Sentry? High templar? Dark templar?) WHILE being able to deflect that double medivac drop, WHILE having a stimmed army which can snipe your nexus in under 10 seconds because you're out of position, etc. I stay away from balance discussions as I don't think anyone here can make an unbiased case. We're all biased. However I wish terrans would stop thinking that because they need to put more apm into the fights, they deserve the win more. That's not how a RTS game works.
yep... ok... lets just forget terran need to have ghosts vikings and medivacs and that toss don't use units like stalkers and zealots..
lol...
|
On March 03 2014 00:16 ETisME wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2014 23:57 vthree wrote:On March 02 2014 23:32 ETisME wrote:On March 02 2014 23:26 TurboMaN wrote:On March 02 2014 09:40 plogamer wrote:On March 02 2014 09:30 _Epi_ wrote:
I think one of the core issue is the High Templar Oh but it has no attack. So it's perfectly reasonable that one or two high templars can dent 30+ supply against Terran opponents. It's the Terran's fault for eating storms. Good Terrans never eat storms but even the best protoss cannot dodge emps. Why? Because emp is instant damage. INSTANT. You know it's powerful because it's instant. I don't believe that Can you please provide us with a game of two high level player where the Terran doesn't eat a storms because he dodges every single storm? From what I've seen on Pro streams in many games is that even Teaja, Polt, Innovation, Byun, Marineking get their armies demolished by storms from time to time. No Terran can dodge every storm in a TvP vs an at least equally skilled Protoss. If EMP would have the same delay as storms it wouldn't make a difference because the Protoss army is way slower. However in my opinion the issue is not with the Templar but within the Warpgate design. Protoss players can use it to: - Offensively warp in units - Defensively to defend drops (additional to Photon Overcharge) - Spend a bank of money to instantly rebuild a strong army What is so strong about it: - Build time (faster than normal Gateway build time) - Chronoboost (makes the build time even faster) - Lack of opportunity costs (apart from proxy builds Gateways don't offer any advantage over Warpgates) He is joking Also one reason why storms are hitting more often is because protoss players are getting better, most kespa players are doing a lot of ht flanks, some would do warp prism ht storm and split up their hts. from the list of terrans you put up, only taeja really uses ghost heavy TvP style. It's understandable that storm is extremely good when terran is "forced" to play marine marauder mid game and has smaller room to add ghost tech. Warp in is fine. You have to remember it was never much of a problem back in WoL since gateway army is horrible against a nice bio ball anyway. Terran's heavy marauder ghost viking in WoL was pretty insanely powerful against anything protoss can throw at them. It's just that in hots, it is harder to survive until that stage and even if the terran does get to that stage, protoss can start having tempests out which makes things a lot harder for terran You can't compare HoTS with WoL. Gateway army is great against bio until stim and medivacs are out. In WoL, this forced the Protoss to make at least 5-6 sentries to defend that stim+2 medivac push. But with the MsC, that push is no longer effective because Protoss has MSC, so you see Protoss going with 1-2 sentries for guardian shield and going for early storm and quicker third. So by the time Terran has 6 medivacs to overcome the photon overcharge, Protoss already have storm. That is why Terrans have been having a hard time, the timing window to 'push' back is so small. this is why i said terran is "forced" to play marine marauder. warp gate tech is not the issue, it's the early game snowballing
but early game warp gate tech is one of the reasons protoss get the early game snowballing. It is also one of the reasons that PvP needs a 60 second overcharge. Warp ins makes it so that if you get an early army advantage (even 1 or 2 stalkers), it just snowballs because your production can arrive so close to the base.
Things like blink all-ins would be a lot weaker if the protoss needed to walk reinforcement stalkers across the map.
Of course, it isn't just the warp in tech only. It is more a combination of warp in, MsC and the possibility of oracle play that is forcing the terran into very narrow tech paths/builds. That is true for most OP builds. BL/infestors was a combination of Queens, bigger maps, better creep spread, and then finally BL/infestors themselves. 1-1-1 was combination of banshee harass + marines + tank range + maps + terran wall off not allowing protoss to scout.
|
On March 03 2014 06:39 NVRLand wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2014 03:32 Foxxan wrote:On March 02 2014 22:58 NVRLand wrote:On March 02 2014 10:20 Foxxan wrote:On March 02 2014 09:40 plogamer wrote:On March 02 2014 09:30 _Epi_ wrote:
I think one of the core issue is the High Templar Oh but it has no attack. So it's perfectly reasonable that one or two high templars can dent 30+ supply against Terran opponents. It's the Terran's fault for eating storms. Good Terrans never eat storms but even the best protoss cannot dodge emps. Why? Because emp is instant damage. INSTANT. You know it's powerful because it's instant. Very true Against 15storms, a good terran dont eat a single one The reason terran units needs to be "weaker" is because of the potential of the army. You guys are using marines (50 minerals) and marauders (100/25) in the lategame as your main source of damage output. This sounds weird as fuck in my eyes. A protoss needs colossus (300/200), high templars (50/150) and a meath shield to deal with your army of 50 mineral units. The reason this works is because your units can be worth more the better they are used. An amoving terran will lose horribly because he's using units worth 50 and 100/25, of course they will melt to the amoving protoss units (where the CHEAPEST is 100 minerals, stalkers are 125/50, etc). So the terran army has more "micro" potential to make up for this. In some way it's unfair to the terran player since they will need to "raise" the value of their army with good micro but I guess that's the "payback" for having the cheapest lategame army? I'm a protoss player and I rarely micro harder than my opponent. He's splitting, stutter stepping vikings, etc while I'm amoving, storming, forcefielding and guardian shielding. It's not that hard to maneuver a protoss army tbh. The thing is though that we invest so much more int our army. I have 4 - 5 colossuses (300/200), I have 5 - 6 high templars (50/150), I have a sentry (50/100), I have 7 - 8 stalkers (125/50), the list goes on. The strength in our army is that it's a ball of heavy, expensive units. Do you terrans really think an expensive army like that should need as much micro as an army consisting of marines and marauders which are significantly cheaper? Add to that the fact that the protoss needs to look away from the fight to reinforce. Would you be able to do the same amount of stutter stepping and splitting if you weren't allowed to look at your army while making new units? In the end, I think protoss is an easier race and slightly op in pvt but I'm annoyed by terrans who have the mindset that "Since my army requires more micro, I deserve the win more". Sometimes I feel like the power of protoss lies in making the perfect composition while dealing with pressure. To make the ultimate army (Remember that EVERY time a protoss warps in a unit, he's making a choice. Do I want a zealot? Stalker? Sentry? High templar? Dark templar?) WHILE being able to deflect that double medivac drop, WHILE having a stimmed army which can snipe your nexus in under 10 seconds because you're out of position, etc. I stay away from balance discussions as I don't think anyone here can make an unbiased case. We're all biased. However I wish terrans would stop thinking that because they need to put more apm into the fights, they deserve the win more. That's not how a RTS game works. And you/protoss use mass zealots(100minerals) in midgame/lategame. Isnt that to weird as fuck? What about medivacs. They dont count? Vikings, dont count either? And ghost...dont count. Ok i get it, only marine and marauder count I used the term "as the main source of damage output", that's why I left out ghosts/medivacs/vikings. Yes, massive zealot warp-ins late game is op however, that doesn't change my opinion. Zealots are only viable versus terran once they got charge. If you've ever played protoss and tried to defend early aggression you'll find yourself VERY frustrated when you spend 500 minerals on 5 zealots and they do exactly 0 damage because of the terran micro. Terran doesn't have any melee units (except for SCVs) so they don't get this point. Until charge, a zealot isn't doing damage, it's only tanking damage due to stutter step (of course there are exceptions, but you get the general picture hopefully). Show nested quote +On March 03 2014 03:32 Foxxan wrote:
Personally i believe the gameplay would be alot better if toss had micro units to with a more equal macro to terran.
And well, do i need to mention the colossus?
It has been talked to death but the unit is very boring to play against AND to play with imo. Yep, and there's where your opinion differs from many others. Sure, Blizzard could have made the races exactly the same but with different models. There's a reason mirror match-ups are the least liked though. Show nested quote +On March 03 2014 03:32 Foxxan wrote:However I wish terrans would stop thinking that because they need to put more apm into the fights, they deserve the win more. That's not how a RTS game works Thanks for this. I didnt know this actually You seem to be the kind of person who isn't interested in a discussion. You probably just want me to say "Sorry, I'll switch to terran so that my wins suddenly count ", right?
'Zealots are only viable versus terran once they got charge. If you've ever played protoss and tried to defend early aggression you'll find yourself VERY frustrated when you spend 500 minerals on 5 zealots and they do exactly 0 damage because of the terran micro. Terran doesn't have any melee units (except for SCVs) so they don't get this point.'
Zealots do fine before the terran has stim. They are only 'weak' when in between when stim is done and charge has not finished. As for units not doing much damage because they are kited. It doesn't only apply to melee units. What do you think happens when 2 stalkers catch 6 marines that don't have stim in the middle of the map? Yeah, most of those 6 are dead with maybe only shield damage on the stalkers.
And mirrors aren't least liked because the races are too similar. It is more that ZvZ comes down to roach/roach too much and once you have set the concave, there isn't much micro. When it gets to hydra/infestor stage, it is actually pretty good.
As for PvP, it is mainly due to the coin flippy early game and the deathball v deathball late game. If anything, it is the lack of micro which viewers don't like. If roach v roach had the same micro potential as ling/bling and P deathball v deathball had the potential as the early game stalker v stalker micro, I am sure viewers would be fine with mirrors.
|
On March 03 2014 11:36 vthree wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2014 00:16 ETisME wrote:On March 02 2014 23:57 vthree wrote:On March 02 2014 23:32 ETisME wrote:On March 02 2014 23:26 TurboMaN wrote:On March 02 2014 09:40 plogamer wrote:On March 02 2014 09:30 _Epi_ wrote:
I think one of the core issue is the High Templar Oh but it has no attack. So it's perfectly reasonable that one or two high templars can dent 30+ supply against Terran opponents. It's the Terran's fault for eating storms. Good Terrans never eat storms but even the best protoss cannot dodge emps. Why? Because emp is instant damage. INSTANT. You know it's powerful because it's instant. I don't believe that Can you please provide us with a game of two high level player where the Terran doesn't eat a storms because he dodges every single storm? From what I've seen on Pro streams in many games is that even Teaja, Polt, Innovation, Byun, Marineking get their armies demolished by storms from time to time. No Terran can dodge every storm in a TvP vs an at least equally skilled Protoss. If EMP would have the same delay as storms it wouldn't make a difference because the Protoss army is way slower. However in my opinion the issue is not with the Templar but within the Warpgate design. Protoss players can use it to: - Offensively warp in units - Defensively to defend drops (additional to Photon Overcharge) - Spend a bank of money to instantly rebuild a strong army What is so strong about it: - Build time (faster than normal Gateway build time) - Chronoboost (makes the build time even faster) - Lack of opportunity costs (apart from proxy builds Gateways don't offer any advantage over Warpgates) He is joking Also one reason why storms are hitting more often is because protoss players are getting better, most kespa players are doing a lot of ht flanks, some would do warp prism ht storm and split up their hts. from the list of terrans you put up, only taeja really uses ghost heavy TvP style. It's understandable that storm is extremely good when terran is "forced" to play marine marauder mid game and has smaller room to add ghost tech. Warp in is fine. You have to remember it was never much of a problem back in WoL since gateway army is horrible against a nice bio ball anyway. Terran's heavy marauder ghost viking in WoL was pretty insanely powerful against anything protoss can throw at them. It's just that in hots, it is harder to survive until that stage and even if the terran does get to that stage, protoss can start having tempests out which makes things a lot harder for terran You can't compare HoTS with WoL. Gateway army is great against bio until stim and medivacs are out. In WoL, this forced the Protoss to make at least 5-6 sentries to defend that stim+2 medivac push. But with the MsC, that push is no longer effective because Protoss has MSC, so you see Protoss going with 1-2 sentries for guardian shield and going for early storm and quicker third. So by the time Terran has 6 medivacs to overcome the photon overcharge, Protoss already have storm. That is why Terrans have been having a hard time, the timing window to 'push' back is so small. this is why i said terran is "forced" to play marine marauder. warp gate tech is not the issue, it's the early game snowballing but early game warp gate tech is one of the reasons protoss get the early game snowballing. It is also one of the reasons that PvP needs a 60 second overcharge. Warp ins makes it so that if you get an early army advantage (even 1 or 2 stalkers), it just snowballs because your production can arrive so close to the base. Things like blink all-ins would be a lot weaker if the protoss needed to walk reinforcement stalkers across the map. Of course, it isn't just the warp in tech only. It is more a combination of warp in, MsC and the possibility of oracle play that is forcing the terran into very narrow tech paths/builds. That is true for most OP builds. BL/infestors was a combination of Queens, bigger maps, better creep spread, and then finally BL/infestors themselves. 1-1-1 was combination of banshee harass + marines + tank range + maps + terran wall off not allowing protoss to scout.
PvP needs an overcharge is because how coin flipping it is.
Warp in tech is a feature, you can't just say it is why protoss is doing great now.
in WoL, generally Terran has a great map control when medivacs are out.
Warp gate tech only helps in defending them and that part of the game is perfectly balance. (because splitting up protoss army is more complicated than splitting up marine marauder in two locations)
The whole blink all in and how protoss is played out is warp in tech.
there wouldn't even be blink all in if the stalkers needs to walk all the way from the home base.
The fact that blink all in in WoL is largely defendable even with warp gate tech is not because terran player is uber good or protoss player is horrible.
It's just that in hots, blink all in is a lot stronger, with the current map and faster high ground vision unit that gives great support to blink stalkers.
also zvz micro also is about maintaining the concave.
You can see how zerg keeps readjusting the army position to allow better concaves or punch through a weaker army positioning on one side (see tefel vs sort of yesterday zotac cup), especially more of repositioning when hydras are involved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
