|
So terran does bad for a little bit and we get a big post. Same thing happened with Protoss and Zerg in the past.
|
On June 30 2014 06:52 goofyballer wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2014 06:44 Faust852 wrote:On June 30 2014 06:39 goofyballer wrote:On June 30 2014 06:17 Faust852 wrote:On June 30 2014 06:00 goofyballer wrote:On June 30 2014 05:24 Faust852 wrote:On June 30 2014 05:22 cloneThorN wrote:On June 30 2014 05:17 Zealously wrote:On June 30 2014 05:03 ZAiNs wrote:On June 30 2014 05:02 goofyballer wrote:
How is it that a site which usually moderates balance whining pretty heavily could allow an article to be published that spends thousands of words crying about how unfair Blizzard is to one race? Apparently it's all fine if you say "Note: This is an editorial. The opinions expressed by this article do not reflect the official position of TeamLiquid.net or its staff (other than TheDwf)." No, it's "all fine" if you put weeks of work into your post and back your claims up by several dozen examples and considerable expertise. So if IdrA/Avilo/CombatEX put weeks worth of effort to make a post, and back their claims up with statistics and example they themself picked, then it would be ok too, to make a balance thread? Because i'm pretty sure, that each of those players could make an article similar to this, and make it so that their race looked weaker. I bet you 10$ you won't find half the content to proove a point in favor of P or Z underpowered as DwF did for T. There is so much replays/vod/other exemple it's enough to provide a point imho. Ten dollars? Oh wow, what great inspiration to spend hours and hours of my time writing thousands of words of balance whine, to be able to purchase ten junior bacon cheeseburgers when I'm done. You must be a professional Terran player to be this broke. I could say one thousand it wouldn't change anything since I'm 100% sure there is not enough content to make a counter article this detailed. It would be very easy to make such a counter article if I was allowed to make up bullshit at the rate the OP has done so. Let's look at this, for example: On June 29 2014 19:48 TheDwf wrote:
Yet was Terran struggling on Whirlwind at the beginning of HotS? Is it because of the new maps Terran no longer had any form of AoE properly working so their armies were repeatedly wiped out by mass banes regardless of how well splits were performed? OP is basically making the argument that MMMM - with post-nerf widow mines - is worse than MMM from WoL. How often did you see the best Terrans in Wings of Liberty cry about mass baneling and how powerless they were to do anything about it? And Blizzard, in HotS, gives them even better tools to deal with banelings: - siege tanks buffed, multiple times - no siege mode research, faster fire rate - widow mines added to give Terrans another form of splash against lings, banes, mutas, way cheaper and more mobile than tanks Terran's ability to deal with mass bane is indisputably much better now than it was in WoL. They have more and better tools at their disposal to do splash damage to clumps of banes, while banelings were not buffed at all. And OP writes an article crying about it because one of those tools is slightly worse than it was at an earlier point in time, because if one mine can't kill 20 banelings then how is Terran supposed to ever win??? And of course, Faust852 eats it all up, accepting all of it uncritically despite total bullshit passages like the above that are dismantled by even the most rudimentary application of logic. It's utterly hilarious that OP craps on Parting by posting that Youtube clip where he says "super imba" to Flash before leaving, referring to him overreacting to the novelty of speed medivacs, while refusing to apply that same logic to his own balance whining about strategies that Terran should be having an easier time dealing with now than in WoL. But apparently, post-nerf widow mines have made Terran a worse race against banelings than they were in WoL, even though Terran could always elect to just not make them if they're so awful. Please if you think tanks are stronger now. Give me a reason why you NEVER see them ?Baneling weren't a problem in WoL because there weren't mass baneling at all since Infestors was kinda much stronger yaknow. See? You aren't thinking about this whatsoever. Tanks are stronger now. This is a fact. Their dps is higher than in WoL, they're a little cheaper (in WoL you had to spend 100/100 on siege research, so spread that across the cost of every tank you make to see how much you save now), and they're useful faster (because no siege research). But herp derp people don't make them as much, they must be worse! They're not worse, Terrans make widow mines instead because widow mines are still a really good unit, despite what the OP apparently thinks about them. Again, if widow mines are so bad, stop making them! Make tanks! Why is the OP crying to Blizzard about the failure of his own race to utilize good unit compositions?
Tanks are better than in WoL and mutas are better than in WoL, too, which means despite being better than wol tanks statistically, they fare worse against zerg.
|
I find it hilarious that such an OP can be written. It's full of facts and really displays what I'd want to call incompetence from Blizzard. Seriously. It's really damn sad.
This does however not belong on TL. The fact such a thread can be started on Team Liquid should tell the people in charge more than enough.
But alas, a recent blue post showed they have no plans/ideas/are not willing to change anything for the coming 1/2 months.
|
On June 30 2014 06:52 goofyballer wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2014 06:44 Faust852 wrote:On June 30 2014 06:39 goofyballer wrote:On June 30 2014 06:17 Faust852 wrote:On June 30 2014 06:00 goofyballer wrote:On June 30 2014 05:24 Faust852 wrote:On June 30 2014 05:22 cloneThorN wrote:On June 30 2014 05:17 Zealously wrote:On June 30 2014 05:03 ZAiNs wrote:On June 30 2014 05:02 goofyballer wrote:
How is it that a site which usually moderates balance whining pretty heavily could allow an article to be published that spends thousands of words crying about how unfair Blizzard is to one race? Apparently it's all fine if you say "Note: This is an editorial. The opinions expressed by this article do not reflect the official position of TeamLiquid.net or its staff (other than TheDwf)." No, it's "all fine" if you put weeks of work into your post and back your claims up by several dozen examples and considerable expertise. So if IdrA/Avilo/CombatEX put weeks worth of effort to make a post, and back their claims up with statistics and example they themself picked, then it would be ok too, to make a balance thread? Because i'm pretty sure, that each of those players could make an article similar to this, and make it so that their race looked weaker. I bet you 10$ you won't find half the content to proove a point in favor of P or Z underpowered as DwF did for T. There is so much replays/vod/other exemple it's enough to provide a point imho. Ten dollars? Oh wow, what great inspiration to spend hours and hours of my time writing thousands of words of balance whine, to be able to purchase ten junior bacon cheeseburgers when I'm done. You must be a professional Terran player to be this broke. I could say one thousand it wouldn't change anything since I'm 100% sure there is not enough content to make a counter article this detailed. It would be very easy to make such a counter article if I was allowed to make up bullshit at the rate the OP has done so. Let's look at this, for example: On June 29 2014 19:48 TheDwf wrote:
Yet was Terran struggling on Whirlwind at the beginning of HotS? Is it because of the new maps Terran no longer had any form of AoE properly working so their armies were repeatedly wiped out by mass banes regardless of how well splits were performed? OP is basically making the argument that MMMM - with post-nerf widow mines - is worse than MMM from WoL. How often did you see the best Terrans in Wings of Liberty cry about mass baneling and how powerless they were to do anything about it? And Blizzard, in HotS, gives them even better tools to deal with banelings: - siege tanks buffed, multiple times - no siege mode research, faster fire rate - widow mines added to give Terrans another form of splash against lings, banes, mutas, way cheaper and more mobile than tanks Terran's ability to deal with mass bane is indisputably much better now than it was in WoL. They have more and better tools at their disposal to do splash damage to clumps of banes, while banelings were not buffed at all. And OP writes an article crying about it because one of those tools is slightly worse than it was at an earlier point in time, because if one mine can't kill 20 banelings then how is Terran supposed to ever win??? And of course, Faust852 eats it all up, accepting all of it uncritically despite total bullshit passages like the above that are dismantled by even the most rudimentary application of logic. It's utterly hilarious that OP craps on Parting by posting that Youtube clip where he says "super imba" to Flash before leaving, referring to him overreacting to the novelty of speed medivacs, while refusing to apply that same logic to his own balance whining about strategies that Terran should be having an easier time dealing with now than in WoL. But apparently, post-nerf widow mines have made Terran a worse race against banelings than they were in WoL, even though Terran could always elect to just not make them if they're so awful. Please if you think tanks are stronger now. Give me a reason why you NEVER see them ?Baneling weren't a problem in WoL because there weren't mass baneling at all since Infestors was kinda much stronger yaknow. See? You aren't thinking about this whatsoever. Tanks are stronger now. This is a fact. Their dps is higher than in WoL, they're a little cheaper (in WoL you had to spend 100/100 on siege research, so spread that across the cost of every tank you make to see how much you save now), and they're useful faster (because no siege research). But herp derp people don't make them as much, they must be worse! They're not worse, Terrans make widow mines instead because widow mines are still a really good unit, despite what the OP apparently thinks about them. Again, if widow mines are so bad, stop making them! Make tanks! Why is the OP crying to Blizzard about the failure of his own race to utilize good unit compositions?
This must surely be a troll (?)
|
On June 30 2014 06:52 goofyballer wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2014 06:44 Faust852 wrote:On June 30 2014 06:39 goofyballer wrote:On June 30 2014 06:17 Faust852 wrote:On June 30 2014 06:00 goofyballer wrote:On June 30 2014 05:24 Faust852 wrote:On June 30 2014 05:22 cloneThorN wrote:On June 30 2014 05:17 Zealously wrote:On June 30 2014 05:03 ZAiNs wrote:On June 30 2014 05:02 goofyballer wrote:
How is it that a site which usually moderates balance whining pretty heavily could allow an article to be published that spends thousands of words crying about how unfair Blizzard is to one race? Apparently it's all fine if you say "Note: This is an editorial. The opinions expressed by this article do not reflect the official position of TeamLiquid.net or its staff (other than TheDwf)." No, it's "all fine" if you put weeks of work into your post and back your claims up by several dozen examples and considerable expertise. So if IdrA/Avilo/CombatEX put weeks worth of effort to make a post, and back their claims up with statistics and example they themself picked, then it would be ok too, to make a balance thread? Because i'm pretty sure, that each of those players could make an article similar to this, and make it so that their race looked weaker. I bet you 10$ you won't find half the content to proove a point in favor of P or Z underpowered as DwF did for T. There is so much replays/vod/other exemple it's enough to provide a point imho. Ten dollars? Oh wow, what great inspiration to spend hours and hours of my time writing thousands of words of balance whine, to be able to purchase ten junior bacon cheeseburgers when I'm done. You must be a professional Terran player to be this broke. I could say one thousand it wouldn't change anything since I'm 100% sure there is not enough content to make a counter article this detailed. It would be very easy to make such a counter article if I was allowed to make up bullshit at the rate the OP has done so. Let's look at this, for example: On June 29 2014 19:48 TheDwf wrote:
Yet was Terran struggling on Whirlwind at the beginning of HotS? Is it because of the new maps Terran no longer had any form of AoE properly working so their armies were repeatedly wiped out by mass banes regardless of how well splits were performed? OP is basically making the argument that MMMM - with post-nerf widow mines - is worse than MMM from WoL. How often did you see the best Terrans in Wings of Liberty cry about mass baneling and how powerless they were to do anything about it? And Blizzard, in HotS, gives them even better tools to deal with banelings: - siege tanks buffed, multiple times - no siege mode research, faster fire rate - widow mines added to give Terrans another form of splash against lings, banes, mutas, way cheaper and more mobile than tanks Terran's ability to deal with mass bane is indisputably much better now than it was in WoL. They have more and better tools at their disposal to do splash damage to clumps of banes, while banelings were not buffed at all. And OP writes an article crying about it because one of those tools is slightly worse than it was at an earlier point in time, because if one mine can't kill 20 banelings then how is Terran supposed to ever win??? And of course, Faust852 eats it all up, accepting all of it uncritically despite total bullshit passages like the above that are dismantled by even the most rudimentary application of logic. It's utterly hilarious that OP craps on Parting by posting that Youtube clip where he says "super imba" to Flash before leaving, referring to him overreacting to the novelty of speed medivacs, while refusing to apply that same logic to his own balance whining about strategies that Terran should be having an easier time dealing with now than in WoL. But apparently, post-nerf widow mines have made Terran a worse race against banelings than they were in WoL, even though Terran could always elect to just not make them if they're so awful. Please if you think tanks are stronger now. Give me a reason why you NEVER see them ?Baneling weren't a problem in WoL because there weren't mass baneling at all since Infestors was kinda much stronger yaknow. See? You aren't thinking about this whatsoever. Tanks are stronger now. This is a fact. Their dps is higher than in WoL, they're a little cheaper (in WoL you had to spend 100/100 on siege research, so spread that across the cost of every tank you make to see how much you save now), and they're useful faster (because no siege research). But herp derp people don't make them as much, they must be worse! They're not worse, Terrans make widow mines instead because widow mines are still a really good unit, despite what the OP apparently thinks about them. Again, if widow mines are so bad, stop making them! Make tanks! Why is the OP crying to Blizzard about the failure of his own race to utilize good unit compositions?
Yeah this is true that tank are stronger, but they are weaker in TvZ still ! I know this sounds stupid, but since there have been zerg buffs as well (mostly mutas speed and regen, and viper) that counters tanks, you could say that tanks are weaker in HOTS than in WOL in tvz 
|
On June 30 2014 06:55 SsoL wrote:
Regardless of balance, there seems to be a consensus that terran makes the game more exciting from a spectator pov than the other two races.
There is no such thing. Which is why you see people arguing for a balanced game instead of arguing for a terran-favored game.
If you think terran is better for spectators, it only makes sense that you would want to promote a terran-favored game.
|
On June 30 2014 06:55 SigmaoctanusIV wrote:
So terran does bad for a little bit and we get a big post. Same thing happened with Protoss and Zerg in the past.
Little bit?
Terran is ~8-10% behind in statistics vs both races with a fourth of the games played.
Meaning that the very best Terrans match up verse far inferior Zergs/Protosses and still can't manage to get a 50/50 winrate.
Past mid-2011, Balance has never been so poor for one race for this long.
Mind you, Terran has been a pretty poor race since 2012, with the exception of 4 months in HOTS.
|
Give it a few months. Then Zerg will figure out how to get to SH safely against Protoss and WoL 2.0 will have the exact same history. Terran smashes everyone with the tools custom built for the job... then it starts getting figured out and Protoss blows everyone up with powerful timings, and then those in turn get figured out and Zerg macro mechanics emerge as the Unstoppable Force.
|
On June 30 2014 06:57 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2014 06:55 SsoL wrote:
Regardless of balance, there seems to be a consensus that terran makes the game more exciting from a spectator pov than the other two races. There is no such thing. Which is why you see people arguing for a balanced game instead of arguing for a terran-favored game. If you think terran is better for spectators, it only makes sense that you would want to promote a terran-favored game.
Spectators appreciate terran because terran has the most 'fancy' moves that happen. Positioning HTs / Infestors / armies is not half as 'impressive' looking as splitting marines in seconds, but those moves require less mechanical skill but more understanding.
Terran looks fancy, while P/Z are doing other, less spectacular things.
|
On June 30 2014 06:59 SC2Toastie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2014 06:57 Nebuchad wrote:On June 30 2014 06:55 SsoL wrote:
Regardless of balance, there seems to be a consensus that terran makes the game more exciting from a spectator pov than the other two races. There is no such thing. Which is why you see people arguing for a balanced game instead of arguing for a terran-favored game. If you think terran is better for spectators, it only makes sense that you would want to promote a terran-favored game. Spectators appreciate terran because terran has the most 'fancy' moves that happen. Positioning HTs / Infestors / armies is not half as 'impressive' looking as splitting marines in seconds, but those moves require less mechanical skill but more understanding. Terran looks fancy, while P/Z are doing other, less spectacular things.
"The majority of spectators" isn't "spectators". It's important because, again, if what you write were to be true, it wouldn't make any sense to create a balanced game.
|
On June 30 2014 06:55 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2014 06:52 goofyballer wrote:On June 30 2014 06:44 Faust852 wrote:On June 30 2014 06:39 goofyballer wrote:On June 30 2014 06:17 Faust852 wrote:On June 30 2014 06:00 goofyballer wrote:On June 30 2014 05:24 Faust852 wrote:On June 30 2014 05:22 cloneThorN wrote:On June 30 2014 05:17 Zealously wrote:On June 30 2014 05:03 ZAiNs wrote:
[quote]
Apparently it's all fine if you say "Note: This is an editorial. The opinions expressed by this article do not reflect the official position of TeamLiquid.net or its staff (other than TheDwf)." No, it's "all fine" if you put weeks of work into your post and back your claims up by several dozen examples and considerable expertise. So if IdrA/Avilo/CombatEX put weeks worth of effort to make a post, and back their claims up with statistics and example they themself picked, then it would be ok too, to make a balance thread? Because i'm pretty sure, that each of those players could make an article similar to this, and make it so that their race looked weaker. I bet you 10$ you won't find half the content to proove a point in favor of P or Z underpowered as DwF did for T. There is so much replays/vod/other exemple it's enough to provide a point imho. Ten dollars? Oh wow, what great inspiration to spend hours and hours of my time writing thousands of words of balance whine, to be able to purchase ten junior bacon cheeseburgers when I'm done. You must be a professional Terran player to be this broke. I could say one thousand it wouldn't change anything since I'm 100% sure there is not enough content to make a counter article this detailed. It would be very easy to make such a counter article if I was allowed to make up bullshit at the rate the OP has done so. Let's look at this, for example: On June 29 2014 19:48 TheDwf wrote:
Yet was Terran struggling on Whirlwind at the beginning of HotS? Is it because of the new maps Terran no longer had any form of AoE properly working so their armies were repeatedly wiped out by mass banes regardless of how well splits were performed? OP is basically making the argument that MMMM - with post-nerf widow mines - is worse than MMM from WoL. How often did you see the best Terrans in Wings of Liberty cry about mass baneling and how powerless they were to do anything about it? And Blizzard, in HotS, gives them even better tools to deal with banelings: - siege tanks buffed, multiple times - no siege mode research, faster fire rate - widow mines added to give Terrans another form of splash against lings, banes, mutas, way cheaper and more mobile than tanks Terran's ability to deal with mass bane is indisputably much better now than it was in WoL. They have more and better tools at their disposal to do splash damage to clumps of banes, while banelings were not buffed at all. And OP writes an article crying about it because one of those tools is slightly worse than it was at an earlier point in time, because if one mine can't kill 20 banelings then how is Terran supposed to ever win??? And of course, Faust852 eats it all up, accepting all of it uncritically despite total bullshit passages like the above that are dismantled by even the most rudimentary application of logic. It's utterly hilarious that OP craps on Parting by posting that Youtube clip where he says "super imba" to Flash before leaving, referring to him overreacting to the novelty of speed medivacs, while refusing to apply that same logic to his own balance whining about strategies that Terran should be having an easier time dealing with now than in WoL. But apparently, post-nerf widow mines have made Terran a worse race against banelings than they were in WoL, even though Terran could always elect to just not make them if they're so awful. Please if you think tanks are stronger now. Give me a reason why you NEVER see them ?Baneling weren't a problem in WoL because there weren't mass baneling at all since Infestors was kinda much stronger yaknow. See? You aren't thinking about this whatsoever. Tanks are stronger now. This is a fact. Their dps is higher than in WoL, they're a little cheaper (in WoL you had to spend 100/100 on siege research, so spread that across the cost of every tank you make to see how much you save now), and they're useful faster (because no siege research). But herp derp people don't make them as much, they must be worse! They're not worse, Terrans make widow mines instead because widow mines are still a really good unit, despite what the OP apparently thinks about them. Again, if widow mines are so bad, stop making them! Make tanks! Why is the OP crying to Blizzard about the failure of his own race to utilize good unit compositions? Tanks are better than in WoL and mutas are better than in WoL, too, which means despite being better than wol tanks statistically, they fare worse against zerg.
This would be the beginning of a decent argument. But that's not the argument OP made - he literally said "Terran no longer had any form of AoE properly working so their armies were repeatedly wiped out by mass banes regardless of how well splits were performed" which is stupid, untrue balance whining drivel. It's sad that Terrans are praising this.
|
On June 30 2014 07:01 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2014 06:59 SC2Toastie wrote:On June 30 2014 06:57 Nebuchad wrote:On June 30 2014 06:55 SsoL wrote:
Regardless of balance, there seems to be a consensus that terran makes the game more exciting from a spectator pov than the other two races. There is no such thing. Which is why you see people arguing for a balanced game instead of arguing for a terran-favored game. If you think terran is better for spectators, it only makes sense that you would want to promote a terran-favored game. Spectators appreciate terran because terran has the most 'fancy' moves that happen. Positioning HTs / Infestors / armies is not half as 'impressive' looking as splitting marines in seconds, but those moves require less mechanical skill but more understanding. Terran looks fancy, while P/Z are doing other, less spectacular things. "The majority of spectators" isn't "spectators". It's important because, again, if what you write were to be true, it wouldn't make any sense to create a balanced game.
Just trying to explain why Terran has the most 'best game of month/year' games.
Ofcourse a balanced game is super important, else matches lose their importance as people believe the game is lost on race. it kills the hype. (see GSL finals, viewership of every tournament in which the last terran falls)
|
On June 30 2014 05:45 cloneThorN wrote:
You can do the exact same shit with terran, even with mech, if you have enough money. It's insulting as hell, and frankly my 6 year old cousing could make a better argument while tired.
You actually have to micro each mech unit to use it effectively. It's what makes mech mech. A moving is never an option. You must seige the tanks... transform the hellbats, burrow the mines, transform thors...
What do you micro with ultras? LOL, please... PLEASE!
I'm so glad this article is such a success. 25 pages and not a single valid counter-point. Just a bunch of laughter and sadness. It's a beautiful day.
|
On June 30 2014 07:01 goofyballer wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2014 06:55 Nebuchad wrote:On June 30 2014 06:52 goofyballer wrote:On June 30 2014 06:44 Faust852 wrote:On June 30 2014 06:39 goofyballer wrote:On June 30 2014 06:17 Faust852 wrote:On June 30 2014 06:00 goofyballer wrote:On June 30 2014 05:24 Faust852 wrote:On June 30 2014 05:22 cloneThorN wrote:On June 30 2014 05:17 Zealously wrote:
[quote]
No, it's "all fine" if you put weeks of work into your post and back your claims up by several dozen examples and considerable expertise. So if IdrA/Avilo/CombatEX put weeks worth of effort to make a post, and back their claims up with statistics and example they themself picked, then it would be ok too, to make a balance thread? Because i'm pretty sure, that each of those players could make an article similar to this, and make it so that their race looked weaker. I bet you 10$ you won't find half the content to proove a point in favor of P or Z underpowered as DwF did for T. There is so much replays/vod/other exemple it's enough to provide a point imho. Ten dollars? Oh wow, what great inspiration to spend hours and hours of my time writing thousands of words of balance whine, to be able to purchase ten junior bacon cheeseburgers when I'm done. You must be a professional Terran player to be this broke. I could say one thousand it wouldn't change anything since I'm 100% sure there is not enough content to make a counter article this detailed. It would be very easy to make such a counter article if I was allowed to make up bullshit at the rate the OP has done so. Let's look at this, for example: On June 29 2014 19:48 TheDwf wrote:
Yet was Terran struggling on Whirlwind at the beginning of HotS? Is it because of the new maps Terran no longer had any form of AoE properly working so their armies were repeatedly wiped out by mass banes regardless of how well splits were performed? OP is basically making the argument that MMMM - with post-nerf widow mines - is worse than MMM from WoL. How often did you see the best Terrans in Wings of Liberty cry about mass baneling and how powerless they were to do anything about it? And Blizzard, in HotS, gives them even better tools to deal with banelings: - siege tanks buffed, multiple times - no siege mode research, faster fire rate - widow mines added to give Terrans another form of splash against lings, banes, mutas, way cheaper and more mobile than tanks Terran's ability to deal with mass bane is indisputably much better now than it was in WoL. They have more and better tools at their disposal to do splash damage to clumps of banes, while banelings were not buffed at all. And OP writes an article crying about it because one of those tools is slightly worse than it was at an earlier point in time, because if one mine can't kill 20 banelings then how is Terran supposed to ever win??? And of course, Faust852 eats it all up, accepting all of it uncritically despite total bullshit passages like the above that are dismantled by even the most rudimentary application of logic. It's utterly hilarious that OP craps on Parting by posting that Youtube clip where he says "super imba" to Flash before leaving, referring to him overreacting to the novelty of speed medivacs, while refusing to apply that same logic to his own balance whining about strategies that Terran should be having an easier time dealing with now than in WoL. But apparently, post-nerf widow mines have made Terran a worse race against banelings than they were in WoL, even though Terran could always elect to just not make them if they're so awful. Please if you think tanks are stronger now. Give me a reason why you NEVER see them ?Baneling weren't a problem in WoL because there weren't mass baneling at all since Infestors was kinda much stronger yaknow. See? You aren't thinking about this whatsoever. Tanks are stronger now. This is a fact. Their dps is higher than in WoL, they're a little cheaper (in WoL you had to spend 100/100 on siege research, so spread that across the cost of every tank you make to see how much you save now), and they're useful faster (because no siege research). But herp derp people don't make them as much, they must be worse! They're not worse, Terrans make widow mines instead because widow mines are still a really good unit, despite what the OP apparently thinks about them. Again, if widow mines are so bad, stop making them! Make tanks! Why is the OP crying to Blizzard about the failure of his own race to utilize good unit compositions? Tanks are better than in WoL and mutas are better than in WoL, too, which means despite being better than wol tanks statistically, they fare worse against zerg. This would be the beginning of a decent argument. But that's not the argument OP made - he literally said " Terran no longer had any form of AoE properly working so their armies were repeatedly wiped out by mass banes regardless of how well splits were performed" which is stupid, untrue balance whining drivel. It's sad that Terrans are praising this.
I think you don't understand what it says.
PROPERLY WORKING WITH THEIR ARMY is key.
|
On June 30 2014 07:03 SC2Toastie wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2014 07:01 Nebuchad wrote:On June 30 2014 06:59 SC2Toastie wrote:On June 30 2014 06:57 Nebuchad wrote:On June 30 2014 06:55 SsoL wrote:
Regardless of balance, there seems to be a consensus that terran makes the game more exciting from a spectator pov than the other two races. There is no such thing. Which is why you see people arguing for a balanced game instead of arguing for a terran-favored game. If you think terran is better for spectators, it only makes sense that you would want to promote a terran-favored game. Spectators appreciate terran because terran has the most 'fancy' moves that happen. Positioning HTs / Infestors / armies is not half as 'impressive' looking as splitting marines in seconds, but those moves require less mechanical skill but more understanding. Terran looks fancy, while P/Z are doing other, less spectacular things. "The majority of spectators" isn't "spectators". It's important because, again, if what you write were to be true, it wouldn't make any sense to create a balanced game. Just trying to explain why Terran has the most 'best game of month/year' games. Ofcourse a balanced game is super important, else matches lose their importance as people believe the game is lost on race. it kills the hype. (see GSL finals, viewership of every tournament in which the last terran falls)
So basically, you agree with me, but you feel like you have to write something in contradiction because I spoke against someone who said terran was fabulous.
|
On June 30 2014 07:04 eightym wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2014 05:45 cloneThorN wrote:
You can do the exact same shit with terran, even with mech, if you have enough money. It's insulting as hell, and frankly my 6 year old cousing could make a better argument while tired. You actually have to micro each mech unit to use it effectively. It's what makes mech mech. A moving is never an option. You must seige the tanks... transform the hellbats, burrow the mines, transform thors... What do you micro with ultras? LOL, please... PLEASE! I'm so glad this article is such a success. 25 pages and not a single valid counter-point. Just a bunch of laughter and sadness. It's a beautiful day.
I find it sad such a thing is happening...
|
On June 30 2014 06:39 goofyballer wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2014 06:17 Faust852 wrote:On June 30 2014 06:00 goofyballer wrote:On June 30 2014 05:24 Faust852 wrote:On June 30 2014 05:22 cloneThorN wrote:On June 30 2014 05:17 Zealously wrote:On June 30 2014 05:03 ZAiNs wrote:On June 30 2014 05:02 goofyballer wrote:
How is it that a site which usually moderates balance whining pretty heavily could allow an article to be published that spends thousands of words crying about how unfair Blizzard is to one race? Apparently it's all fine if you say "Note: This is an editorial. The opinions expressed by this article do not reflect the official position of TeamLiquid.net or its staff (other than TheDwf)." No, it's "all fine" if you put weeks of work into your post and back your claims up by several dozen examples and considerable expertise. So if IdrA/Avilo/CombatEX put weeks worth of effort to make a post, and back their claims up with statistics and example they themself picked, then it would be ok too, to make a balance thread? Because i'm pretty sure, that each of those players could make an article similar to this, and make it so that their race looked weaker. I bet you 10$ you won't find half the content to proove a point in favor of P or Z underpowered as DwF did for T. There is so much replays/vod/other exemple it's enough to provide a point imho. Ten dollars? Oh wow, what great inspiration to spend hours and hours of my time writing thousands of words of balance whine, to be able to purchase ten junior bacon cheeseburgers when I'm done. You must be a professional Terran player to be this broke. I could say one thousand it wouldn't change anything since I'm 100% sure there is not enough content to make a counter article this detailed. It would be very easy to make such a counter article if I was allowed to make up bullshit at the rate the OP has done so. Let's look at this, for example: Show nested quote +On June 29 2014 19:48 TheDwf wrote:
Yet was Terran struggling on Whirlwind at the beginning of HotS? Is it because of the new maps Terran no longer had any form of AoE properly working so their armies were repeatedly wiped out by mass banes regardless of how well splits were performed? OP is basically making the argument that MMMM - with post-nerf widow mines - is worse than MMM from WoL. How often did you see the best Terrans in Wings of Liberty cry about mass baneling and how powerless they were to do anything about it? And Blizzard, in HotS, gives them even better tools to deal with banelings: - siege tanks buffed, multiple times - no siege mode research, faster fire rate - widow mines added to give Terrans another form of splash against lings, banes, mutas, way cheaper and more mobile than tanks Terran's ability to deal with mass bane is indisputably much better now than it was in WoL. They have more and better tools at their disposal to do splash damage to clumps of banes, while banelings were not buffed at all. And OP writes an article crying about it because one of those tools is slightly worse than it was at an earlier point in time, because if one mine can't kill 20 banelings then how is Terran supposed to ever win??? And of course, Faust852 eats it all up, accepting all of it uncritically despite total bullshit passages like the above that are dismantled by even the most rudimentary application of logic. It's utterly hilarious that OP craps on Parting by posting that Youtube clip where he says "super imba" to Flash before leaving, referring to him overreacting to the novelty of speed medivacs, while refusing to apply that same logic to his own balance whining about strategies that Terran should be having an easier time dealing with now than in WoL. But apparently, post-nerf widow mines have made Terran a worse race against banelings than they were in WoL, even though Terran could always elect to just not make them if they're so awful.
Clearly you didn't actually watch WoL (or HotS, for that matter). Seige tank firing time buff doesn't affect TvZ whatsoever since speedling/bane will hit your tanks after the first volley, the real problem has always been base damage. The matchup that really targets is TvT (because mech TvP is still trash). Also, MMM was never viable in WoL at a high level, you always needed tanks (infestors and banes). Marine/Tank/Medivac was far and away the most used composition. <--- Also note that since end 2011, TvZ was Zerg favored by far (when using this composition). I stopped playing because Queens -> Infestors -> BL was so broken.
However, a new thing called the widow mine was introduced that was more effective than the seige-tank. This became the new staple of how terrans played TvZ. Blizzard then nerf it so that it is far less effective than it was, crippling terrans ability to engage in late game TvZ (has always a problem since the ghost nerfs). And your arguement is that this addition makes Terrans much stronger? Mines and tanks pretty much serve the same purpose, so I'm missing how having both of them magically makes terran better?
Additionally, Zergs have gotten much better at using ling bane than they ever used to be (plus mutas are more effective). The Queen patch which made Inf/BL ungodly also saw the end of Mutas because infestors were so much better, and a lot of the tools terran was using up to that point were slammed with nerfs (whose full effect was overlooked due to Inf/BL). Now that the infestor is nerfed in HotS, we finally saw the glory of new queens and Muta/Ling/Bane. Add that to the nerfs that terran had in mid-late 2011 and the increase in skill that zergs have undergone. The old "tools" for TvZ have been ineffective for a long time. the new "tool" was nerfed. That's the whole point.
|
Problem of T balance is they was way too strong in the early game. They killed other races in the egg, and that wasn't fun at all.
So this part of their gameplay was nerfed, cause it's not fun for other races to just defend in the early game with low tech units vs high tech units while you can't tech yourself because all your money is used to keep you alive.
The problem is balance patch haven't compensated these nerfed on early game by buff in mid/late game. And HOTS release was the same : broken WH, WM, hellbats that crush Z/P in early game. So they got nerfed, and now T had trouble cause they can't kill/hurt other in the early game and after their mid/late game is weaker.
The problem is T tech way too fast. In my opinion, it could be wise to consider buffing some units but make it longer for T to get them, or make T units evolve (a bit like zerg who can get slow roach, then fast roach, then burrow mouvement roach), like first Generation Tank, Second generation tank, Third generation tank : Then T can get tank early, but they're not too strong and won't crush P/Z at 5minutes, and they're going to be stronger and stronger as they will face stronger and stronger P/Z tech units.
Also the dichotomy : mech or bio make the race less interesting. I will be more interesting to give some way for Terran to adapt, like if you play against mutas heavy comp, you can decide to upgrade vikings on 2nd or third gen which for example can kite mutas or if you face heavy baneling composition upgrades tank.
|
On June 30 2014 06:57 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2014 06:52 goofyballer wrote:On June 30 2014 06:44 Faust852 wrote:On June 30 2014 06:39 goofyballer wrote:On June 30 2014 06:17 Faust852 wrote:On June 30 2014 06:00 goofyballer wrote:On June 30 2014 05:24 Faust852 wrote:On June 30 2014 05:22 cloneThorN wrote:On June 30 2014 05:17 Zealously wrote:On June 30 2014 05:03 ZAiNs wrote:
[quote]
Apparently it's all fine if you say "Note: This is an editorial. The opinions expressed by this article do not reflect the official position of TeamLiquid.net or its staff (other than TheDwf)." No, it's "all fine" if you put weeks of work into your post and back your claims up by several dozen examples and considerable expertise. So if IdrA/Avilo/CombatEX put weeks worth of effort to make a post, and back their claims up with statistics and example they themself picked, then it would be ok too, to make a balance thread? Because i'm pretty sure, that each of those players could make an article similar to this, and make it so that their race looked weaker. I bet you 10$ you won't find half the content to proove a point in favor of P or Z underpowered as DwF did for T. There is so much replays/vod/other exemple it's enough to provide a point imho. Ten dollars? Oh wow, what great inspiration to spend hours and hours of my time writing thousands of words of balance whine, to be able to purchase ten junior bacon cheeseburgers when I'm done. You must be a professional Terran player to be this broke. I could say one thousand it wouldn't change anything since I'm 100% sure there is not enough content to make a counter article this detailed. It would be very easy to make such a counter article if I was allowed to make up bullshit at the rate the OP has done so. Let's look at this, for example: On June 29 2014 19:48 TheDwf wrote:
Yet was Terran struggling on Whirlwind at the beginning of HotS? Is it because of the new maps Terran no longer had any form of AoE properly working so their armies were repeatedly wiped out by mass banes regardless of how well splits were performed? OP is basically making the argument that MMMM - with post-nerf widow mines - is worse than MMM from WoL. How often did you see the best Terrans in Wings of Liberty cry about mass baneling and how powerless they were to do anything about it? And Blizzard, in HotS, gives them even better tools to deal with banelings: - siege tanks buffed, multiple times - no siege mode research, faster fire rate - widow mines added to give Terrans another form of splash against lings, banes, mutas, way cheaper and more mobile than tanks Terran's ability to deal with mass bane is indisputably much better now than it was in WoL. They have more and better tools at their disposal to do splash damage to clumps of banes, while banelings were not buffed at all. And OP writes an article crying about it because one of those tools is slightly worse than it was at an earlier point in time, because if one mine can't kill 20 banelings then how is Terran supposed to ever win??? And of course, Faust852 eats it all up, accepting all of it uncritically despite total bullshit passages like the above that are dismantled by even the most rudimentary application of logic. It's utterly hilarious that OP craps on Parting by posting that Youtube clip where he says "super imba" to Flash before leaving, referring to him overreacting to the novelty of speed medivacs, while refusing to apply that same logic to his own balance whining about strategies that Terran should be having an easier time dealing with now than in WoL. But apparently, post-nerf widow mines have made Terran a worse race against banelings than they were in WoL, even though Terran could always elect to just not make them if they're so awful. Please if you think tanks are stronger now. Give me a reason why you NEVER see them ?Baneling weren't a problem in WoL because there weren't mass baneling at all since Infestors was kinda much stronger yaknow. See? You aren't thinking about this whatsoever. Tanks are stronger now. This is a fact. Their dps is higher than in WoL, they're a little cheaper (in WoL you had to spend 100/100 on siege research, so spread that across the cost of every tank you make to see how much you save now), and they're useful faster (because no siege research). But herp derp people don't make them as much, they must be worse! They're not worse, Terrans make widow mines instead because widow mines are still a really good unit, despite what the OP apparently thinks about them. Again, if widow mines are so bad, stop making them! Make tanks! Why is the OP crying to Blizzard about the failure of his own race to utilize good unit compositions? This must surely be a troll (?)
Nah, just someone who doesn't play the game. You know, almighty bronze with gm knowledge.
|
On June 30 2014 07:04 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2014 07:03 SC2Toastie wrote:On June 30 2014 07:01 Nebuchad wrote:On June 30 2014 06:59 SC2Toastie wrote:On June 30 2014 06:57 Nebuchad wrote:On June 30 2014 06:55 SsoL wrote:
Regardless of balance, there seems to be a consensus that terran makes the game more exciting from a spectator pov than the other two races. There is no such thing. Which is why you see people arguing for a balanced game instead of arguing for a terran-favored game. If you think terran is better for spectators, it only makes sense that you would want to promote a terran-favored game. Spectators appreciate terran because terran has the most 'fancy' moves that happen. Positioning HTs / Infestors / armies is not half as 'impressive' looking as splitting marines in seconds, but those moves require less mechanical skill but more understanding. Terran looks fancy, while P/Z are doing other, less spectacular things. "The majority of spectators" isn't "spectators". It's important because, again, if what you write were to be true, it wouldn't make any sense to create a balanced game. Just trying to explain why Terran has the most 'best game of month/year' games. Ofcourse a balanced game is super important, else matches lose their importance as people believe the game is lost on race. it kills the hype. (see GSL finals, viewership of every tournament in which the last terran falls) So basically, you agree with me, but you feel like you have to write something in contradiction because I spoke against someone who said terran was fabulous.
Well, I suppose I misunderstood you then. Didn't mean to offend/go into your post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
