On July 07 2014 03:11 SC2John wrote: Pretty much everyone can agree that Terran's late and early game has some holes while the mid game is insanely strong. As a result, I think the feedback in this thread is likely to convince Blizzard to NOT buff mines and medivacs, but rather look toward a better late game solution.
A Mine buff in TvZ cannot be circumvented. It's impossible to fix bio issues without the Mine recovering some of its old power.
If Terran's midgame is "insanely strong," then why is there a lategame problem at all? Terrans would just systematically opt for the "win the game before" solution. I don't understand why people disconnect lategame issues from midgame, as if both phases were independent from each other. As it stands now, there are lategame issues precisely because Terran's midgame is not delivering as it should, so both Zerg and Protoss can block Terran's midgame play with game plans like "defend with blink colo dual forge until 3-0-3" or "defend on creep until 25+ mutas" then smoothly transition into their superior lategame.
Well said!
I don't feel like Terran's midgame is "insanely strong" either, because if it was the Protoss/Zerg wouldn't be hitting the late game with such advantages.
Sure, this is the one time Terran is able to do some damage without having cheesed, but I think the perception is that Terran pressure keeps Z/P defending during the midgame, while the reality is that Z/P are fending off the Terran so they can make their late game armies.
On July 07 2014 03:11 SC2John wrote: Pretty much everyone can agree that Terran's late and early game has some holes while the mid game is insanely strong. As a result, I think the feedback in this thread is likely to convince Blizzard to NOT buff mines and medivacs, but rather look toward a better late game solution.
A Mine buff in TvZ cannot be circumvented. It's impossible to fix bio issues without the Mine recovering some of its old power.
If Terran's midgame is "insanely strong," then why is there a lategame problem at all? Terrans would just systematically opt for the "win the game before" solution. I don't understand why people disconnect lategame issues from midgame, as if both phases were independent from each other. As it stands now, there are lategame issues precisely because Terran's midgame is not delivering as it should, so both Zerg and Protoss can block Terran's midgame play with game plans like "defend with blink colo dual forge until 3-0-3" or "defend on creep until 25+ mutas" then smoothly transition into their superior lategame.
The degree to which it is strong is probably up for discussion. The thing however is that it is Terran that can bring the pressure to the opponent more than the other way around. Hence it is strong in the sense that it forces the opponent into the defense (and still wins a ton of games of the back of this).
It's not strong enough to keep the opponent away from transitioning but neither is a roach/baneling push able to prevent a Terran from getting up his (midgame) medivac and bio production. Despite this, I think we would both call it a strong early game timing.
We should try 4-4 upradges for bio (Marine&Marauder.) They could stand against lategame Ultralisk and vs lategame Protoss. Should be interesting to atleast to test it! Cost would be like 500-500 + 500.-500 ofcourse!
On July 07 2014 03:11 SC2John wrote: Pretty much everyone can agree that Terran's late and early game has some holes while the mid game is insanely strong. As a result, I think the feedback in this thread is likely to convince Blizzard to NOT buff mines and medivacs, but rather look toward a better late game solution.
A Mine buff in TvZ cannot be circumvented. It's impossible to fix bio issues without the Mine recovering some of its old power.
If Terran's midgame is "insanely strong," then why is there a lategame problem at all? Terrans would just systematically opt for the "win the game before" solution. I don't understand why people disconnect lategame issues from midgame, as if both phases were independent from each other. As it stands now, there are lategame issues precisely because Terran's midgame is not delivering as it should, so both Zerg and Protoss can block Terran's midgame play with game plans like "defend with blink colo dual forge until 3-0-3" or "defend on creep until 25+ mutas" then smoothly transition into their superior lategame.
Well said!
I don't feel like Terran's midgame is "insanely strong" either, because if it was the Protoss/Zerg wouldn't be hitting the late game with such advantages.
Sure, this is the one time Terran is able to do some damage without having cheesed, but I think the perception is that Terran pressure keeps Z/P defending during the midgame, while the reality is that Z/P are fending off the Terran so they can make their late game armies.
Protoss is indeed fending off agression to reach a good late game. But for zerg its not exactly the same, zerg is usually defending while harassing because you really don't want to move out off creep, specially before hive. A protoss counter push after defending agression is much more common than zerg counter pushes (except with those super agressive roach plays). Also you can make zerg late game weaker forcing an even more defensive play on mid-game while for protoss its not as simple. You can delay the money composition from toss, but its not going to be any weaker when they get there as long as toss is alive.
For example, if toss have to build four more sentries early, 2 more gates before the third, and delay the third. They still are goint to have six gas eventually. They will NOT skip the robotics facility or the templar archives, its always worth it to get them at some point. If a protoss cannot tech, he is prolly almost dead, since he is goint to make units that trade badly vs a terran with time to get ghosts/widow mines or vikings to adjust the army composition. Delaying protoss only allows terran to get the "perfect army composition" that happens to be in disadvantage vs colossus HT. If something, forcing toss into less greedy builds might affect upgrade timings, and that would be great. Also, proxy stargates, dts and blink timings are going to be more dangerous for protoss if they fail to do enough damage.
For zerg, a stronger terran mid game can delay/kill/cancel bases and slow down the droning. Bases are 2 geysers that zerg is absolutely going to mine from. Each bane morphed is less mutas, thus forcing zerg to morph more on each fight is an cumulative damage that makes zerg late game weaker. Ultras? if the initial count is low terran is going to have a good marauder count before there are too many on the field, zerg is going to wish they had made more mutas instead. BL? same logic. And the muta cloud is going to be smaller during the entire game. Another alternative is to give terran a way to make the muta cloud less active, so i really like Snute's suggestion.
On July 07 2014 03:59 Lunareste wrote: I don't feel like Terran's midgame is "insanely strong" either, because if it was the Protoss/Zerg wouldn't be hitting the late game with such advantages.
TvZ isn't too bad, but TvP is tricky because Protoss can be so strong early game. If you fall behind at all in the early game you forgo your midgame advantage entirely and allow Protoss to enter late game unscathed. And as we all know TvP lategame is incredibly hard unless Protoss make a major mistake.
TvZ isn't that big of an issue IMO. Maybe its probably Terran favored except for Mech. Ravens are just sooo good against Zerg. As for variaty in Late game options yeaa, but it can be solved with bonus to massive from Tanks and Yamato Splash.
As for TvP...... I don't even know where to get started. Their is just so much wrong with this match up. To many hard counters.
Loved Dimaga....NERF TERRAN.
But it seems to be the general idea that Tanks need love. .
Something that I thought was a good idea is something that a friend suggested. Not so much the exact buff to make, but the idea of it being attached to a plus 3 upgrade, thus the buff is inherently and strictly a late game buff.
tanks still need a huge damage buff. they would be prolly used in tvz again and maybe even tvp. tanks are insanely bad on the offensive unless your opponent allows you to take very good position. (which never happens usually)
have you ever seen a straight up tank push on open field? almost every unit will trade cost effective vs tanks - this cannot be right, no matter how blizzard wants to promote clever usage of units. tanks should be fine in direct engagements and have a clear upper hand at choke points or high ground. the single fact that tanks can be easily flanked due to the lack of their mobility should make them stronger in straight up fights, yet this is not the case.
i see a very strong tank army that comes for a zerg in mid/lategame and zerg has to decide weather he wants to fight it/circle around it and pounce/counterattack. right now its a merely 1a flank with roaches/lings/whatever and you will see any mech army melt away. yet zerg has tons of options to absolutely roll over mech with things linke drops/nyduses/split armies/techswitches, etc.
On July 06 2014 07:06 Faust852 wrote: Lol some pro are really fucking biased lol.
And Downfall's article that you jack off to isn't biased?
Because a 100k words article with over 40 references is more biased than Dimaga's "Terran is too strong" and MaNa's "Terran is imbalance in lategame TvP" ? For real ? At least statistics tend to agree with DwF, not with MaNa.
There are lies, damned lies, and then, there are statistics.
Stats can be manipulated very easily to display favourably whatever you like.
On July 07 2014 03:11 SC2John wrote: Pretty much everyone can agree that Terran's late and early game has some holes while the mid game is insanely strong. As a result, I think the feedback in this thread is likely to convince Blizzard to NOT buff mines and medivacs, but rather look toward a better late game solution.
A Mine buff in TvZ cannot be circumvented. It's impossible to fix bio issues without the Mine recovering some of its old power.
If Terran's midgame is "insanely strong," then why is there a lategame problem at all? Terrans would just systematically opt for the "win the game before" solution. I don't understand why people disconnect lategame issues from midgame, as if both phases were independent from each other. As it stands now, there are lategame issues precisely because Terran's midgame is not delivering as it should, so both Zerg and Protoss can block Terran's midgame play with game plans like "defend with blink colo dual forge until 3-0-3" or "defend on creep until 25+ mutas" then smoothly transition into their superior lategame.
You wrote, yourself, in your article, that the mid game problems that Terran faces are a direct result of early game problems. You cited things like a plethora of possible all-ins or pressures that Protoss can do that forces Terran into a smaller box. You mentioned that the MSC allows Protoss to go into the mid game with up to 800 gas more than in WoL. You also cite queen range, speed, and creep advantages, and how they force the Terran to play on a razor thin edge in order to keep up in the mid game (and, as a result, are vulnerable to things like +1/+1 roach attacks).
On top of being fail-safe "greed" features, the MSC and—to a lesser extent—the Queen patch scripted the vT match-ups in such a way that even outclassed players are almost impervious to various early game threats that would otherwise kill or cripple them. Blizzard paved the way so midgame can be reached without much trouble (42): you can't outplay a 2000 hit points Cannon.
There has never been any real doubt, I think, as to the efficacy of Terran's mid game, which is, by far stronger than the other races. That said, IN YOUR ARTICLE, you specifically talk about Terran coming into the late game behind the other races, which was a direct result of early game invulnerability combined with a fair amount of mid game invulnerability (fueled in part bu the early game.
In an eerie combination of factors, Terran's bio play faces common issues in TvP and TvZ:
Terran has less options, leading to a more predictable (and thus more easily "countered") play Terran has a much higher vulnerability to all-ins (partially fueled by scouting issues) Terran is way more unforgiving: mistakes and sloppiness are punished harder, and once the race falls behind there is almost no comeback potential (in particular due to the weaker reproducibility) Terran has an inferior lategame.
In fact, all of the reasons you list in the opening of your article above are early and late game problems with relatively few mid game connections. Without doubt, the mid game is definitely the strongest stage of the game for Terran, and the power of bio can be a real headache in the hands of a good player.
I do not disagree that mines probably need to go back to their original power. However, there is no doubt of the power of MMM and mines in the mid game in all matchups. Personally, I think the best place for Blizzard to start is the late game, where they can literally buff ONE thing and not have it affect the entire matchup. The history of Terran is littered with early and mid game options that, combined with Terran's already strong mid game, made Terran seem invulnerable, therefore leading to a swift blow with the nerf hammer. Starting in the late game will allow Terrans, even Terrans who are behind from the early and mid game, to play more fairly in the Zerg and Protoss dominated late games.
If that isn't enough, then perhaps a buff to the early/mid game can get going. But a buff to the medivac? Why? What's the purpose of buffing Terrans where they're already strong? If you're going to buff a mid game unit, I would much rather just see a mine buff.
Basically every single guy said that Blizzard is going the wrong direction with the changes, as have just about everybody on just about every forum I've seen. Hopefully this won't be another situation where they refuse to be wrong, such as the oracle buff.
On another note, QXC makes a good point about receding creep. *Especially* from the overlords that spluge it all over your 3rd and 4th bases. It takes *forever* for that to recede and IMO it's a little too much.
With Protoss the issue is obviously mainly with the nexus cannon, and has been the whole time. There is no risk/reward mechanic in PvT as the protoss. You do literally whatever you want, and are 100% safe. It's broken.
Buffing mid-game Terran agression via Medivacs and Mines just seems out of place.
Tanks need to go from 35+15 (+3/+2) to something like 2 attacks 18+8 (+2/+1). Their "tankiness" also blows. Increase Thor base armor increased by 1. Increase High Impact Payload damage. Battlecruisers take too long to build and offer too little in return (they also go against the Terran micro).
On July 07 2014 14:11 Iron_ wrote: On another note, QXC makes a good point about receding creep. *Especially* from the overlords that spluge it all over your 3rd and 4th bases. It takes *forever* for that to recede and IMO it's a little too much.
Yup. It's not like if terrans could land their CC outside the creep to start mining, and relocate it later once it's gone.
EPT
Cost would be like 500-500 + 500.-500 ofcourse!
.
