Welcome to ZParcraft II - Page 19

On June 30 2014 03:46 ssxsilver wrote:
I like a lot of the points of the article. Only major thing I disagree with was the dismissal of Hellbat drops. That was terrible to spectate and I hope w/e buffs Terrans badly need comes in other areas.

On June 30 2014 00:34 SC2John wrote:
I'll go ahead and give my input.

First of all, TL Strategy pretty much sanctioned this piece as a well-written article with a lot of solid points to provoke conversation. TheDwf brought it to us to proofread and look through, and for the most part, although we didn't all agree on all the points, we found it to be a thought-provoking read and expected it to incite real conversation on the actual state of Terran currently.

As far as I know, I was the person who disagreed most with this article. There are definitely some solid points contained in here, especially in the first few paragraphs that get into patches and why Terran play has slowly declined in HotS and explaining the "map paradox" associated with blink all-ins and such; HOWEVER, as I went on to read the following sections, which address all of the problems with TvZ and TvP in great detail, I soon started to feel like I was drowning in balance whine material. It was all stuff I had heard before -- plenty of times. Granted, it was incredibly well put, well sourced, and explained these overly discussed "Terran problems" in a way that made sense and made a solid point. But what did it really add to the article?

Upon reflection, I realize what the point of this article is. Even though TheDwf doesn't really tie it together all that well, he's essentially saying: Terran's early and mid game has been constantly nerfed since the beginning of HotS, and as a result, have less and less momentum going into the mid and late game. Without any ability to do any real pressure early on, Terran has no ability to even threaten their opponent's greed, and cannot get into the later stages of the game with any real advantage. This is a problem because it limits Terran's options and forces them to walk a fine line between greed and safety while also forcing them to have to play to the late game in which they are not favored against the other races (as per asymmetrical balance).

When reading it like that, this article makes perfect sense, and I begin to question where Blizzard ACTUALLY needs to start with balancing. In my opinion, we've seen all too often in the past that giving Terrans early options tends to result in Terran dominance; would it make more sense to start with the late game and giving Terrans an upgraded late game first? Buffing the Terran early game will do nothing more than boost Terrans back into the spotlight followed by a direct nerf. However, something like reverting the ghost snipe nerf completely changes how powerful late game Terran is without hugely shifting the playing field. These are just ideas. There could be much better ones.

Instead of arguing over whether this article is a balance whine or a much needed post, let's actually talk about the points and come up with some suggestions and solutions on how to fix what is obviously a problem (I don't think anyone here can REALLY say Terran doesn't have some kind of disadvantage and still be taken seriously as a person).

On June 29 2014 22:14 Nine Gates wrote:
Here's the problem with this article:

In the beginning, the premise is that the game was balanced early-mid 2013. Hellbat and Widow Mine nerfs were unnecessary or at least too much; with no nerfs or only a small Hellbat nerf, the game would have naturally balanced. Statistics support this. Statistics also support that the nerfs directly caused the drop in Terran success.

But then, the article goes on to rant about Roaches, 3 hatch, Larva, MSC, Tempests, harass & static defense, Storms, Colossi, Warp Prism, Protoss all-ins and PvT control requirements.

So, if you were to restore Hellbats and Widow Mines into their previous strength, and the proceed to nerf everything mentioned in the latter half of the article, wouldn't Terran utterly dominate? And if the article isn't suggesting that those need to be nerfed, then what is the point in mentioning them? If the premise of the article was that the game was balanced in early-mid 2013 and that Protosses and Zergs were wrong to whine about Hellbats and 4M, why does the writer get to whine about everything Protoss and Zerg?

On June 30 2014 00:34 SC2John wrote:
I'll go ahead and give my input.

First of all, TL Strategy pretty much sanctioned this piece as a well-written article with a lot of solid points to provoke conversation. TheDwf brought it to us to proofread and look through, and for the most part, although we didn't all agree on all the points, we found it to be a thought-provoking read and expected it to incite real conversation on the actual state of Terran currently.

As far as I know, I was the person who disagreed most with this article. There are definitely some solid points contained in here, especially in the first few paragraphs that get into patches and why Terran play has slowly declined in HotS and explaining the "map paradox" associated with blink all-ins and such; HOWEVER, as I went on to read the following sections, which address all of the problems with TvZ and TvP in great detail, I soon started to feel like I was drowning in balance whine material. It was all stuff I had heard before -- plenty of times. Granted, it was incredibly well put, well sourced, and explained these overly discussed "Terran problems" in a way that made sense and made a solid point. But what did it really add to the article?

Upon reflection, I realize what the point of this article is. Even though TheDwf doesn't really tie it together all that well, he's essentially saying: Terran's early and mid game has been constantly nerfed since the beginning of HotS, and as a result, have less and less momentum going into the mid and late game. Without any ability to do any real pressure early on, Terran has no ability to even threaten their opponent's greed, and cannot get into the later stages of the game with any real advantage. This is a problem because it limits Terran's options and forces them to walk a fine line between greed and safety while also forcing them to have to play to the late game in which they are not favored against the other races (as per asymmetrical balance).

When reading it like that, this article makes perfect sense, and I begin to question where Blizzard ACTUALLY needs to start with balancing. In my opinion, we've seen all too often in the past that giving Terrans early options tends to result in Terran dominance; would it make more sense to start with the late game and giving Terrans an upgraded late game first? Buffing the Terran early game will do nothing more than boost Terrans back into the spotlight followed by a direct nerf. However, something like reverting the ghost snipe nerf completely changes how powerful late game Terran is without hugely shifting the playing field. These are just ideas. There could be much better ones.

Instead of arguing over whether this article is a balance whine or a much needed post, let's actually talk about the points and come up with some suggestions and solutions on how to fix what is obviously a problem (I don't think anyone here can REALLY say Terran doesn't have some kind of disadvantage and still be taken seriously as a person).