|
On July 08 2014 03:07 Cazimirbzh wrote:Show nested quote +The problem there is Blizzard just looks at overall percentages rather than review context. Having Taeja/Bomber/Maru be both the only consistently representing Terrans and perform well means "TvX" tournament win rates look decent, despite the fact that the Terran community is languishing as a whole.
so we forget Bbyong who is the best terran player at the moment and also GuMiho, flash, TY, cure, dream, MarineKing, TUrn.... Show nested quote +where a Gold Terran that would otherwise be Platinum playing and losing against Gold P/Z, best sentence^^ sincerely, there is no differences beetween a gold and a diamond even a low master, one just keep producing harvester/army/upgrades in time. that's all...
States that there is no difference before stating a difference...?
Pretty sure a low master would have over a 95% winrate vs. a gold. It's a bigger difference than you think.
|
Terran Bbyong overall 19-9 68% vs terran 3-0 100% vs zerg 6-3 67% vs toss 10-6 63%
best winrate in proleague, top 5 victory
i guess we dont about the same guy
they're not producing premier tournament results.
i guess that when i disagree proleague > WCS
... Are you serious? At least try sounding reasonable. Just because you're at a certain high skill level doesn't make everyone below you exactly the same. :\
i am reasonable, i coach pple how to be master. i was fed by the best^^
o mighty God of broodwar, cast a spell on david kim to bring terran back
because we all know that's the chosen race
![[image loading]](http://i.qkme.me/3p91uk.jpg)
edit:
retty sure a low master would have over a 95% winrate vs. a gold. It's a bigger difference than you think. of course, but most of the time it's only because of basic mechanics, not strategy, micro so even it's been more than tough time for terran, pple complains a bit too much when u can obviously deduced that terran has the hardest macro compared to toss and zerg. Pretty difficult position when the gamer is design to manage large armies easly. Maybe that's why i get so frustated when terran player (i try to coach) whine about some kind of balance issue when they dont produce continuously scv and
what can i do except keep telling them " scv,...., scv,....,scv...." then whine 
|
On July 07 2014 09:30 Xequecal wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2014 08:06 pure.Wasted wrote:On July 07 2014 07:14 Xequecal wrote:On July 07 2014 07:12 pure.Wasted wrote:On July 07 2014 07:03 Xequecal wrote:On July 07 2014 04:12 Lunareste wrote:
You know how people always say that Boosters should cost the Medivac some energy? What would be the reprecussions of making Photon Overcharge a toggleable ability cost Nexus energy per shot, and burns energy while Overcharge is active?
Personally, I think they'd have nerfed overcharge a long time ago if it wasn't for the mirror. Any significant nerf to overcharge just returns PvP to "whoever expands first loses" like it was in WoL. You need Overcharge to be able to zone out Phoenixes and/or Oracles from constantly murdering probes in your main without having any units up there, because you won't be able to hold an allin on your natural alongside those phoenixes if you're got a bunch of units up by your mainbase's minerals where they can't help defend. Change PO damage from 20 to 5+15 vs. Shields. Am I a genius or what?  How exactly do you zone out air units when it takes 27 shots to kill a Phoenix and 23 shots to kill an Oracle? Sorry, missed the air units thing. That's my fault. Last time I had this conversation it was mostly Gateway pressure that was the problem. Keep PO at 5+15 to help against ground, remove Time Warp (which Protoss have never ever needed) and replace it with a new spell specifically for defending against air units (PvP and Mutas). Just off the top of my head, a spell that creates a 2.5-sized area wherein units take no damage from air attacks for 20 seconds. Love the logic, though. Hellbats ruin TvT, so Blizzard nerfs them for all match ups. Oracles ruin PvP, so Blizzard can't nerf MSC. Admirable consistency. 20 sec nowhere near enough for PvP, typical strategy against Stargate aggression is overcharging the main twice while camping your natural until your expansion's production fully ramps up. Also, it's warpgates that ruin PvP, no defender's advantage means you need an overpowered defensive ability if you want to be able to invest 1500 minerals into an expansion + probes + extra gates and not die. If Oracles and Phoenixes were nerfed alongside overcharge, it would just be warp prism warpins preventing expands in PvP.
At this point I would prefer it if the MSC had a spell that said "Stop Oracles and Phoenixes from entering your base for three minutes." Honestly. The degree to which I don't care about game design elegance in the PvP MU is unprecedented.
I've seen three TvT series in the last week, and every single one of them had more depth, back-and-forth, and strategy than Zest vs Parting from GSL WC, which was the best PvP I'd seen in at least a year. I'm so sick and tired of watching StarCheckers.
|
On July 08 2014 05:14 Cazimirbzh wrote:
Terran Bbyong overall 19-9 68% vs terran 3-0 100% vs zerg 6-3 67% vs toss 10-6 63%
best winrate in proleague, top 5 victory
i guess we dont about the same guy
Yes Bbyong has the best Terran winrate in Proleague, but that still doesn't make him the best Terran in the world. Maru, Bogus and Flash are better.
|
Yes Bbyong has the best Terran winrate in Proleague, but that still doesn't make him the best Terran in the world. Maru, Bogus and Flash are better.
my point was terran still performs.
BOGUS !! = +1 terran, pretty good perf in dragon tournament
|
On July 08 2014 05:14 Cazimirbzh wrote:
Terran Bbyong overall 19-9 68% vs terran 3-0 100% vs zerg 6-3 67% vs toss 10-6 63%
best winrate in proleague, top 5 victory
i guess we dont about the same guy
Again, Proleague wins. His individual tournament results are lackluster at best. In individual tournaments, you have to play against opponents for more than just one game. This means you need to have stronger depth than a one-off BO win or surprise tactic. It's in depth where Terran is lacking as a whole, as our safe, standard play ends up falling behind the other races, while our risks are easily punishable.
Furthermore, the Proleague format allows for much more specialized preparation against both the opponent and map, lending itself more to rewarding the player who's better prepared with an unexpected strategy. It's a very entertaining format, and the performance of players like Bbyong and Flash in that format shows how they're amazing players. Their failure to perform well outside of Proleague format is a clear indication that the overall strength of Terran is weak, as they no longer have the ability to prepare as strongly for a single game to beat those otherwise lesser prepared/skilled players, forcing them into a more standardized TvX matchup.
On July 08 2014 05:14 Cazimirbzh wrote:i guess that when i disagree proleague > WCS
It's nice that you enjoy Proleague more than WCS, but we're talking about balance.
On July 08 2014 05:14 Cazimirbzh wrote:i am reasonable, i coach pple how to be master. i was fed by the best^^
As a former Masters player who still plays against low Masters, I know you're full of it when saying Diamond - Gold is all the same. Calling yourself reasonable does not make it so.
|
On July 08 2014 05:28 Cazimirbzh wrote:Show nested quote +Yes Bbyong has the best Terran winrate in Proleague, but that still doesn't make him the best Terran in the world. Maru, Bogus and Flash are better. my point was terran still performs. BOGUS !! = +1 terran, pretty good perf in dragon tournament
Yep, Terran even performs very well in Minor events!
|
Obviously the format of the tournament will impact the results. PL is Bo1. Proleague has some interesting maps too. So the results I would say are not necessarily meaningful...
When you look at every other tournament which is a Bo3/Bo5 and look at Terran results they are very different.
|
i am reasonable, i coach pple how to be master. i was fed by the best^^
Yet, your diamond and has never been masters ever according to your profile. And no, your totally wrong FYI: There is a big difference in the builds/gameplans of even diamonds and master leagues. Seriosuly, the last fives time I played vs diamond, they just straight up die to 2fact 2 base blue flame hellion builds because they don't understand how to scout and react to the potential timing at all.
A master league terran knows a ton more about the game than lower league players.
|
i am glad u all enjoy wcs
Minor events! indeed, thank you blizzard......but that's another topic
can i mentionned one more minor event? the SanDisk SHOUTcraft Invitational by TotalBiscuit with GoD and BByong and some BO3
Yet, your diamond and has never been masters ever according to your profile. And no, your totally wrong FYI: There is a big difference in the builds/gameplans of even diamonds and master leagues. Seriosuly, the last fives time I played vs diamond, they just straight up die to 2fact 2 base blue flame hellion builds because they don't understand how to scout and react to the potential timing at all. t
there is no differences beetween a gold and a diamond even a low master
why are u taking about players with +1k mmr when i am talking about players between 400 and max 1150 mmr?
Do you know that cheesy build tend to straight up kill your opponent if not scouted IN TIME and reacted proprely IN TIME ?
My point is between 400 and max 1150 mmr only basic mechanics of BO matters.
weird idea: do you think some change on the OC could help terran ?
|
On July 07 2014 19:34 404AlphaSquad wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2014 14:31 Foxxan wrote:On July 07 2014 14:01 Xequecal wrote:
I really don't get the "tank damage is low" complaint. They do double the damage of the BW tank to "small," and have significantly increased damage against "large." Remember the BW tank had a 5 second cooldown, and only did 35 damage to small units. I know a direct comparison is not possible here, but SC2 units have similar HP numbers to broodwar ones. People asking for massive damage are asking for the ability to have tanks work against Immortals by brute force, which is absolutely the wrong way to go. Siege tank in broodwar: 4.4 attackspeed 70 damage versus armored 52,5 versus medium (hydras were medium in broodwar) 35 vs light (Zealots, marines etc) Cost 150/100/2 43~ buildtime and dont forget the lower supply cost.
And zealots were medium in brood war.
On July 07 2014 20:44 Thezzy wrote:
Perhaps, but more massable Tanks would be one way to try and help the unit.
At 150/125/3 trying to get them up in the number you need is hard, especially in the gas department.
Tanks suck until you get atleast 4-5 of them and they still have to siege up.
Early game one might say you could get away with a lower number but their gas cost early on means you can't spend it on anything else.
150/100/2 might a change worth trying out on the test map.
I'd still want to try TheDwf changes as well though to deal with Archons and Immortals.
One other option to help with that and Mech in general is to reintroduce the Warhound as a modified Goliath.
Primarily anti-air, average ground attack (kinda like Ground Viking), around 150 HP and 2 supply, decent speed (2.75 or 2.95) and the Haywire missiles that always deal 30 shield damage (even to an Immortal because it's a spell).
You'd have a mid size Mech unit that can help fill the AA gap, still provide support on the ground and Archons/Immortals would be less of a hard counter.
Tanks are still massable in SC2. The only difference is that once they reach a critical mass and can vaporize everything on the ground, they are too supply inefficient to also let you mass a really good anti-air that makes you invincible like brood war.
On July 07 2014 20:44 Thezzy wrote:
Perhaps, but more massable Tanks would be one way to try and help the unit.
At 150/125/3 trying to get them up in the number you need is hard, especially in the gas department.
Tanks suck until you get atleast 4-5 of them and they still have to siege up.
Early game one might say you could get away with a lower number but their gas cost early on means you can't spend it on anything else.
150/100/2 might a change worth trying out on the test map.
I'd still want to try TheDwf changes as well though to deal with Archons and Immortals.
One other option to help with that and Mech in general is to reintroduce the Warhound as a modified Goliath.
Primarily anti-air, average ground attack (kinda like Ground Viking), around 150 HP and 2 supply, decent speed (2.75 or 2.95) and the Haywire missiles that always deal 30 shield damage (even to an Immortal because it's a spell).
You'd have a mid size Mech unit that can help fill the AA gap, still provide support on the ground and Archons/Immortals would be less of a hard counter.
Widow mines suck unless used in formations. Conga lines are great if you run them lateral to a point you know you're going to be fighting Z at. WHen the engagement starts, his massed bundles of units will evaporate as you dance back and forth over your mines trying to pull him in. Spreads like 4 corners square with little overlap of radius are great for creating a much larger "minefield" area that doesn't waste shots as much. It also is how you vaporize a whole clutch of drones or probes (if the protoss was dumb enough not to have cannons spammed all over like they've been doing since WoL).
Widow Mines i find practically useless vs protoss. The DPS of a deathball, or the detection range of an observer make them terrible against engagements of anything army-like. Unless you build a LOT of them to survive losses to mass cannon defense at his bases, then you'll do no damage there as well.
|
I am pretty sure they had conversation early this year in prologue. It went like this:
Manager: "people, we are loosing numbers compare to last year. People want to see Terrans. they do not want to see only p-p with some p-z"
Coach 1: "But if we put our terran we will loose mach!"
Coach 2:" We do not have terran in roster, we can not pay undeperforming players!"
Manager: "I do not care, put some teran in, work something out!"
Result, notice amount of t-t matches terans playing compare to t-p or t-z.
|
United States353 Posts
On July 08 2014 09:48 Mutineer wrote:
I am pretty sure they had conversation early this year in prologue. It went like this:
Manager: "people, we are loosing numbers compare to last year. People want to see Terrans. they do not want to see only p-p with some p-z"
Coach 1: "But if we put our terran we will loose mach!"
Coach 2:" We do not have terran in roster, we can not pay undeperforming players!"
Manager: "I do not care, put some teran in, work something out!"
Result, notice amount of t-t matches terans playing compare to t-p or t-z.
Yeah but no, Proleague does not care about what their viewers want, they want to win no matter what, they are not like WCS Murica where they try to be entertainers. Everything PL coaches do, they do to win. Best of 1 preparing matches is much different than the best of tournaments where Terrans are having issues.
|
On July 07 2014 22:28 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2014 20:53 Hider wrote:On July 07 2014 14:01 Xequecal wrote:
I really don't get the "tank damage is low" complaint. They do double the damage of the BW tank to "small," and have significantly increased damage against "large." Remember the BW tank had a 5 second cooldown, and only did 35 damage to small units. I know a direct comparison is not possible here, but SC2 units have similar HP numbers to broodwar ones. People asking for massive damage are asking for the ability to have tanks work against Immortals by brute force, which is absolutely the wrong way to go. Yeh I am sure you want Siege Tanks to do all crazy kinds of micro vs Immortals here lol. You refer to BW, but in BW Siege Tanks were cost-effective vs Dragoons. Even if you remove hardend shield, Imortals are still cost-effective vs Tanks (yes it's that bad currently). ??? The equivalent to Dragoons in BW are Stalkers. Same tech path, with similar cost and abilities, minus blink. Immortals ae not related to dragoons at all. Other than some dodgy lore.
Stalkers are also faster and blink might be the single most significant ability you could have against a unit with a long range and deadzone. Meanwhile dragoons were notably terrible at getting up ramps. The two are just as different as dragoons and immortals are really, arguably more different if the Terran has a significant number of marines or any number of ghosts to get rid of hardened shield.
|
On July 08 2014 09:48 Mutineer wrote:
I am pretty sure they had conversation early this year in prologue. It went like this:
Manager: "people, we are loosing numbers compare to last year. People want to see Terrans. they do not want to see only p-p with some p-z"
Coach 1: "But if we put our terran we will loose mach!"
Coach 2:" We do not have terran in roster, we can not pay undeperforming players!"
Manager: "I do not care, put some teran in, work something out!"
Result, notice amount of t-t matches terans playing compare to t-p or t-z.
Terrans are doing well in PL.
|
On July 08 2014 14:49 ETisME wrote:Show nested quote +On July 08 2014 09:48 Mutineer wrote:
I am pretty sure they had conversation early this year in prologue. It went like this:
Manager: "people, we are loosing numbers compare to last year. People want to see Terrans. they do not want to see only p-p with some p-z"
Coach 1: "But if we put our terran we will loose mach!"
Coach 2:" We do not have terran in roster, we can not pay undeperforming players!"
Manager: "I do not care, put some teran in, work something out!"
Result, notice amount of t-t matches terans playing compare to t-p or t-z. Terrans are doing well in PL.
I agree with you, in TvT 100% win rate, can't complain about it, they're doing pretty well.
|
Zealots are not medium in Brood War.
|
so when can we expect these changes that everyone, with the exception of dimaga who misread the question, disagrees with?
|
On July 08 2014 17:32 Mojito99 wrote:
so when can we expect these changes that everyone, with the exception of dimaga who misread the question, disagrees with?
©Soon™
|
I wan viking buff . . . . . . . now viking is either "useful" or useless . . . .
And the useful , u still need large numbers . .
and may become useless when there is tech switch .
I wanna see Viking able to attack land without transformation . .maybe 1.5cd attack time?
Maybe transforming to land give extra armor, or hp . .same as hellion transformation.
Thor too, the ultimate weapon can only do support . and clumsy . . . . . and expensive . .
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
