|
On June 30 2014 07:17 jojamon wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2014 07:05 Tyrhanius wrote:
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.
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. But T doesn't get tech that fast...and we can't chrono boost or mass produce a unit once the tech structure's out. I like your idea of the 1st-gen tank into 2nd gen tank into 3rd gen tank though. Terran's tier3 units need to be much better. Thors are barely used, BCs NEVER used in any non-mirror matchup unless you want to throw the game, and Ravens are really hard to get en masse.
You make supply barrack, factory and you can have WM, WH (i mean before they remove it), and with armory T3 thor.
If you make thor for example too strong, T can just make 1 base thor and win. It's caricatural but on WOL it's what it look like.
As a zerg i can't make 1 base broodlord so for me T tech fast. But you say it, also the problem is T can make 1 unit T2-T3 very fast, but can't make a lot of units very fast.
Zerg is the opposite, so zerg low tech units are very weak (slow lings for example).
T has to have unit stronger than zerg to compensate their slower production rate, but in the other hand not too strong or they just win the game with stupid early all-in. And unfortunately this balance was never found with Terran race : too OP all-in at the beginning of WOL & HOTS, and after nerf too weak on macro game.
|
On June 30 2014 05:14 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2014 05:08 Trustworthy-Tony wrote:
I miss playing proxy marauder vs protoss. That said, WoL TvP was ridiculously disgustingly terran-favoured. Overall stats said it was pretty balance tho.
Oh right, how could I forget! Stats reveal the true state of balance?!
|
A very nice read, thank you  In some places I felt the truth was told, but in others I laughed hard ^^.
Don't want to go into details because it would just lead to more hate from both parties in this thread.
|
On June 30 2014 07:29 Trustworthy-Tony wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2014 05:14 Faust852 wrote:On June 30 2014 05:08 Trustworthy-Tony wrote:
I miss playing proxy marauder vs protoss. That said, WoL TvP was ridiculously disgustingly terran-favoured. Overall stats said it was pretty balance tho. Oh right, how could I forget! Stats reveal the true state of balance?!
Yes. They do.
They don't say anything about the quality, however (Sentry Immortal vs patchzerg)
|
Great read.
Regardless of my opinion on balance, it would be nice to see more Terrans in GSL. It's fine Blizzard wishes the best for its game (who doesn't understand this?), but it would be nice to have a statement from them regarding this article.
I like the way it's written, in general. Sometimes, though, there is too much attitude and it might be its downfall. The way we say things has a effect on how they are perceived; means and content are communication tools.
There are opinions backed up by great arguments and sound facts, but there are also opinions backed up by opinions, so it's unfair to call it "crap" or "absolute truth". Nevertheless, it's enough for me to think about balance for a while.
Thanks for the article.
|
On June 30 2014 07:17 jojamon wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2014 07:05 Tyrhanius wrote:
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.
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. But T doesn't get tech that fast...and we can't chrono boost or mass produce a unit once the tech structure's out. I like your idea of the 1st-gen tank into 2nd gen tank into 3rd gen tank though. Terran's tier3 units need to be much better. Thors are barely used, BCs NEVER used in any non-mirror matchup unless you want to throw the game, and Ravens are really hard to get en masse.
Terran has faster tech than zerg.
|
Why is this balance whine any worse than any other balance whine? Because it has some level of TL-approval, being put on "news?" Most of the complaints directed at that seem to be people complaining about what other people will think. "It will cause more whining."
It also hurts for 2/3 of players to hear that their race isn't the hardest. Get over it. It's someone's opinion, shared by some others. He did bring some data, however. I've always thought the data showing foreigners of each race beating Koreans pretty damning. Argue a point, at least, instead of trying to take a moral high ground saying that the post is killing SC2. It just looks like dodging.
That said, it wouldn't require huge changes to swing balance heavily in T's favor, but Terran dominance has always been relatively fleeting, due to the stronger late game of the other races vs T. Even in early WoL, Zerg and Protoss were slowly figuring things out. The ever-increasing size of maps helped with that, too.
To answer an earlier question, of course there is some legitimacy to the claim that if TL posts an official article that includes balance whine, that arguably makes it worse, even if they write "this is not TL's official view" disclaimers. But I'd rather glean good from it than cry about how it's hurting things. That's just asking for it to come true.
|
Shut up, Terran dominated starcraft for 2 years, and long before that in brood war.
|
amazing write up, i think Terran deserve some buffs now.
|
terran was removed from the game in HotS, when they nerfed the hellbats 
|
On June 29 2014 20:03 ZAiNs wrote:
Reporter: what do you think is the biggest problem with SC2?
iloveoov: "I have played all blizzard games with the exception of WC3. In WoW, there was a character called the Warlock. He could win 2:1 and 3:1. But blizzard kept releasing balance patches. WoW has 10 classes but I saw as blizzard kept releasing buffs and nerfs. So what ended up happening was, people started playing Warlock when it was powerful but soon jumped to Hunter when that was proven to be powerful. One day I awoke to see that they were also doing the same thing to SC2."
Reporter: I think you're referring to something other than balance.
iloveoov: "Let's compare the two games; In SC1, they only released bug patches and was relatively untouched for ten years. We would do starleagues where at times there would only be one or two protosses. Terrans would occupy more than half the pool. If David Kim were there at that time he would have buffed protoss. That would have meant that we would have been without the exciting and awe-inspiring play of Bisu's prime. Protoss was the minority race and difficult. Thus, its play was given birth to by players like Reach and Nal_Ra. To be frank, I think it is David Kim who creates the winner when it is the gamer who must create the game. It doesn't matter what I say though; the truth is David Kim will keep on tweaking the game. I don't know what his true motives are. Is it to create a 5:5:5 of balance? I truly do not know."
I don't know if iloveoov is right or not, but I do wonder about this. Perhaps Brood War truly is a game with so much more strategic options that players can always find a way, or perhaps it fortuitously had almost perfect balance from the get-go, but that seems unlikely at face value.
I don't know how others feel about this, but I think that one reason that the Protoss late game is so strong in PvT is that, much more than in WoL days, Protoss have learned to make use of warp-ins on the terran's side of the map and spread out templar for defence. There's certainly a lot to be said for a safe early game provided by the mothership core, but there's metagame evolution going on.
|
On June 30 2014 07:23 Captain Peabody wrote:
Here's my huge stonking response. You're welcome.
Most of the article is well thought-out and intelligent. It has convinced me that Terran is probably weaker in the current metagame. Thus far, all is well.
Nevertheless, I have a very basic problem with a large portion of the article, mostly the second half. Allow me to explain.
I've been around the scene a while now. I've read my share of articles and posts complaining about balance with different races. In many of those cases, there was really some kind of problem actually going on. Protoss did lose a lot for a while. Terrans are very underrepresented in tournaments right now. Et cetera.
Nevertheless, at some point, it always begins.
People start complaining about other races. Not just about how they're stronger than them right now. About how the way the other races work is unfair.
Here's the problem. This is how Starcraft works. It is always unfair. Always. Each race has things that are ridiculously strong compared to what the other race has, and things that are ridiculously weak compared to what the other race has. These things do not generally change much, except between expansions.
So, yes, Photon Overcharge is strong. It is hard for Terran to deal with it. This was true six months ago, and it's true now. Simultaneous Medivac drops are hard to fight off. Larvae allow Zerg to rebuild their armies ridiculously fast. Psionic Storm can kill tons of stuff really fast if not microed out of. Marines are ridiculously cost-effective and infinitely microable. These things are all, fundamentally, without question, always and completely unfair.
Nevertheless, these things actually have very little to do with balance. The reason Terran is weak now is not because Protoss has Warp Gate or Colossus or Psionic Storm or because Zerg has larvae or Ultralisks or Mutalisks. The reason Terran is weak right now, as you point out quite well, is because a few tiny things shifted around and changed the way games played out fundamentally. This is how balance works. Everything is always unfair, but the unfairnesses balance each other out so that, generally speaking, really really good players win. At some points, however, various things shift around such that some unfairnesses of one race become more obvious or more easily exploitable or more decisive in a significant portion of games, or the unfairnesses of another race become less obvious or less easily exploitable or less decisive in a significant portion of games. When this happens, we say, colloquially, that things are "unbalanced."
Every race has been in the bad position at one time or other. This also happened a lot in BW as well. I remember two seasons quite vividly, one where PvZ was Protoss dominated, and the other where it was Zerg dominated. In the former, I remember watching games and being amazed by how helpless Zergs looked and how unfair Protoss' advantages seemed; in the latter, the exact opposite was true. Nothing changed in gameplay terms between these two seasons.
And here's my fundamental problem with articles like this. Since beta in SC2, I've read articles and posts complaining about the unfairness of various races. They point to specific unfairnesses. They say these unfairnesses are unfair. Every time I read these articles, I have the same reaction: "Why are you trying to take away my toys?"
Because here's the thing. Unfairness is what makes Starcraft fun, both to play and to watch. I like unfairness. Telling me something is unfair is like music to my ears, like rainbows for my eyes, like popcorn for my soul. If Starcraft wasn't unfair, I sure as heck wouldn't be playing and watching (admittedly mostly the latter) after all this time. The vast majority of unfair things in SC2 are also awesome, cool things. They are things that turn the tide of battles and games. They are things that force your opponent to scramble to try to deal with them. They are the things that make life living and Starcraft worth playing.
Look, I know it's frustrating when you're a competitive player trying to make a living by winning tournaments and then these things happen to you. I understand why Artosis karking hated DT drops in BW. I understand why Arbiters filled Idra with rage. And yes, it really did annoy me when Stork lost to ling runbys for the dozenth time in BW. Like, really karking annoyed me.
Nevertheless, I prefer to keep my Starcraft fundamentally unfair and even occasionally rage-inducing, because that's what makes it great.
So, I don't hate this article or think it's stupid or even really think it's wrong. The author is probably well aware of what I'm talking about here. His article is well-researched, and mostly well thought out. It's also probably right. Things are "unbalanced" right now.
Nevertheless, my objection remains. Stop trying to take away my Waru Damned, Father-Kriffing toys.
The only problem I have with your arguement is the comparison to BroodWar. BroodWar wasn't patched past 2002(?). Blizzard has gotten so involved in the balancing of SC2 with their patches. Unfairness introduced by the incompetence of the game designers is very difficult to work around. Every time something gets powerful, Blizz patches it. Every time P/Z has been UP, Blizz has patched it.They have never allowed a proper amount of time for the game to balance itself through innovation and maps as BW did. So you can't compare the games. Blizz has shaped the state of the game with their own hands, so it is only right that the players continue complaining to them. There were probably several points at which the game was fine and would've balanced out, but Blizz has been to gung-ho every time and fundamentally changed the game. So it is their duty to unfuck the game for the players that support them.
|
Show nested quote +On June 30 2014 07:23 Captain Peabody wrote:
Here's my huge stonking response. You're welcome.
Most of the article is well thought-out and intelligent. It has convinced me that Terran is probably weaker in the current metagame. Thus far, all is well.
Nevertheless, I have a very basic problem with a large portion of the article, mostly the second half. Allow me to explain.
I've been around the scene a while now. I've read my share of articles and posts complaining about balance with different races. In many of those cases, there was really some kind of problem actually going on. Protoss did lose a lot for a while. Terrans are very underrepresented in tournaments right now. Et cetera.
Nevertheless, at some point, it always begins.
People start complaining about other races. Not just about how they're stronger than them right now. About how the way the other races work is unfair.
Here's the problem. This is how Starcraft works. It is always unfair. Always. Each race has things that are ridiculously strong compared to what the other race has, and things that are ridiculously weak compared to what the other race has. These things do not generally change much, except between expansions.
So, yes, Photon Overcharge is strong. It is hard for Terran to deal with it. This was true six months ago, and it's true now. Simultaneous Medivac drops are hard to fight off. Larvae allow Zerg to rebuild their armies ridiculously fast. Psionic Storm can kill tons of stuff really fast if not microed out of. Marines are ridiculously cost-effective and infinitely microable. These things are all, fundamentally, without question, always and completely unfair.
Nevertheless, these things actually have very little to do with balance. The reason Terran is weak now is not because Protoss has Warp Gate or Colossus or Psionic Storm or because Zerg has larvae or Ultralisks or Mutalisks. The reason Terran is weak right now, as you point out quite well, is because a few tiny things shifted around and changed the way games played out fundamentally. This is how balance works. Everything is always unfair, but the unfairnesses balance each other out so that, generally speaking, really really good players win. At some points, however, various things shift around such that some unfairnesses of one race become more obvious or more easily exploitable or more decisive in a significant portion of games, or the unfairnesses of another race become less obvious or less easily exploitable or less decisive in a significant portion of games. When this happens, we say, colloquially, that things are "unbalanced."
Every race has been in the bad position at one time or other. This also happened a lot in BW as well. I remember two seasons quite vividly, one where PvZ was Protoss dominated, and the other where it was Zerg dominated. In the former, I remember watching games and being amazed by how helpless Zergs looked and how unfair Protoss' advantages seemed; in the latter, the exact opposite was true. Nothing changed in gameplay terms between these two seasons.
And here's my fundamental problem with articles like this. Since beta in SC2, I've read articles and posts complaining about the unfairness of various races. They point to specific unfairnesses. They say these unfairnesses are unfair. Every time I read these articles, I have the same reaction: "Why are you trying to take away my toys?"
Because here's the thing. Unfairness is what makes Starcraft fun, both to play and to watch. I like unfairness. Telling me something is unfair is like music to my ears, like rainbows for my eyes, like popcorn for my soul. If Starcraft wasn't unfair, I sure as heck wouldn't be playing and watching (admittedly mostly the latter) after all this time. The vast majority of unfair things in SC2 are also awesome, cool things. They are things that turn the tide of battles and games. They are things that force your opponent to scramble to try to deal with them. They are the things that make life living and Starcraft worth playing.
Look, I know it's frustrating when you're a competitive player trying to make a living by winning tournaments and then these things happen to you. I understand why Artosis karking hated DT drops in BW. I understand why Arbiters filled Idra with rage. And yes, it really did annoy me when Stork lost to ling runbys for the dozenth time in BW. Like, really karking annoyed me.
Nevertheless, I prefer to keep my Starcraft fundamentally unfair and even occasionally rage-inducing, because that's what makes it great.
So, I don't hate this article or think it's stupid or even really think it's wrong. The author is probably well aware of what I'm talking about here. His article is well-researched, and mostly well thought out. It's also probably right. Things are "unbalanced" right now.
Nevertheless, my objection remains. Stop trying to take away my Waru Damned, Father-Kriffing toys.
This is a lovely post. Fantastic defense of Starcraft's basic design. 5/5 will read again, probably several times.
|
Thank you for the amazing write-up. You took every angle possible and the game balance could not stand up to the scrutiny. The same goes for all the lackluster excuses from the forums and design-change posts. I'm glad you took the time to dismantle the several offered up with regularity.
To the sniping critics that offer up tired half-reasons to nitpick: your search for some detached and confident observer writing a post of this length and import is foolhardy.
"not unreasonable points, badly presented" into "unnecessarily confrontational" - This argument is flat. Anybody posting here with skin in the game, watching and cheering Terran, has these emotions and similar bitterness to the fighting chances Terran has in ZParcraft 2. Even casual Terrans have watched Maru walking into the booth and offered up his/her version of a prayer. We cling to this kind of hope against all odds. This deep, thorough analysis is marked by restraint that lends great weight to the argument presented. Even taking this sort of time deconstructing the evolution of Terran in HotS shows a love of the game. Anybody can spend their post history refuting every new explanation for a Terran that deserves his losses. Only the gamer with the "Saving eSports" mindset puts effort into this mega-post.
On June 30 2014 06:03 sc2isnotdying wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2014 05:14 tjtombo wrote:
It's sad how many people dismiss the article as bad and toxic without offering any counter-argument The article is bad and toxic because it's several thousand words of balance whine. Balance whine is bad and toxic. Look, if you follow professional Starcraft it's plainly obvious that Terran is underrepresented at the highest levels. Blizzard knows this and they're going to try to fix it with a new map pool next season. That's like a week away. But let's balance whine in the meantime. Why not? Don't you just want to groan every time the next guy offers up "blizz trying to fix ... using maps" after reading why it's not just maps ... and pages of explanation?
Or when the next forum troll uses words like 'bad,' 'toxic,' and 'balance whine' as descriptions of things the reverse of them?
Or even the excuses like "it's plainly obvious that Terran is underrepresented at the highest levels" without pausing to realize (perhaps intentionally) that he's looking at the answer to the question's followup of "So what does this mean and how did this happen and why hasn't it been fixed?"
The gall of some in this thread to use equivalent lines of argumentation to quoted and assume the OP has no reason to draw sharp contrasts in a scathing piece.
|
Great article. Looks like it's already changed the TL meta  hehe.
|
Another thought about patching vs leaving it be: patching in SC2 has been done with far more knowledge of how the game is played than Brood War was. In addition, each patch can be thought of as an attempt to modify how the game is played; either in a minor way (less hellion drops) or a larger way (less early aggression against Protoss). Thus the metagame of SC2, even if it isn't tightly controlled, is far more controlled by developers than that of BW.
I was thinking about this from the point of view of the nexus cannon, actually; I feel that it really is a feature that has an adverse impact on game diversity.
|
My interest in the game both as a player and an observer has declined with fewer and fewer terrans making it deep in tournaments. Without terran there just isn't enough action in the game to keep my interest. I don't enjoy watching passive macro into timing/allin every single game.
|
On June 30 2014 06:44 Faust852 wrote:Show nested quote +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.
I've been reading some of your posts on this thread, and finally understand where your level of understanding of the game is from this bs claim. No mass baneling in WoL? For someone so self-righteous about Terran, you obv don't know enough about the game's history to talk about it, and you just proved your own lack of knowledge of the game right there. When # of banelings made at a time were more than often 30~50 in pro level WoL ZvT, no mass baneling at all? Rofl
|
This is a very well researched and argued article. I am sure if one of the top Zergs or top Protosses tried to write a similar counterargument, it would end up being much weaker, because the overall data set clearly shows the Terran weakness from multiple angles.
This article got me thinking "what would have happened if Blizz had implemented a stronger Region Lock?". I would presume that the American scene and European scene would also crazily Zerg and Protoss heavy, which would be more glaringly problematic for the scene. In WCS AM we would have Major and ? In WCS EU we would have Bunny and Happy in the Ro of 32 and ?. And then the later rounds of 16 and on would be basically almost all P and Z. Perhaps by allowing Polt, Taeja, ForGG, MMA, etc play in other regions have masked this issue to a certain degree, as there is at least some Terran to watch live in each time zone in the later rounds of any tournament.
I worry about the low number of Terrans coming up the ranks for the health of the game. Judging by Aligulac, and sorting out the older players, it seems most of the up and comers are choosing Zerg and Protoss over Terran. From an economic standpoint it makes sense - choose the race that gives you both the easiest time and requires a lower amount of micro to prevent wrist injuries.
I've been concerned about the wrists of Taeja, Maru, and Scarlett. All three are great for the scene (one of my favorite games was Scarlett's PvZ win over DRG at MLG). Sports injuries this young are concerning, especially when ESports is not particularly lucrative compared to most other sports.
Thank you TheDwf for such a great article, both for the insights and the very comprehensive analysis.
Blizzard, please level the playing field urgently for the health of the game, considering both the short term and long term. While it may be difficult to revert previous changes, there have still been plenty of good ideas to improve Terran's AOE vs mass mutas and banelings (faster better Thor / partial restoration of WM) or vs the Protoss Harass Options/Deathball (improve Ghosts/Vikings/BC). SC2 will benefit from a healthier Terran, especially lategame if you are making the maps so big.
|
What a massive write-up, but very informative to someone that has stopped following SC2 2 years ago. And it just proves my point that I was right to give up the game. The game will never reach a balance like what BroodWar had, you can't perfectly balance a game when races are inherently flawed. Everything about Protoss rewards bad play. Chrono and warpgates when your macro falls behind makes things way too easy... Warping in anywhere on the map opens up all sorts of cheese. Fuck Protoss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
