|
Nice to see some actual progamers opinions not like the first time (Nerchio etc..).
I think, as supernova said, that this change is nice but doesn't adress to the stages terrans are struggling at : Late game and defending the X possible protoss all-ins.
User was warned for this post
|
United States7483 Posts
On July 19 2014 13:55 Socup wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2014 11:29 Universum wrote:On July 19 2014 11:23 Faust852 wrote:
People should stop saying that protoss are forced to play colossi atm, this is in no way true. It might be with the future patch, but it's currently not the case at all. Protoss are not forced to play colossi. It's just that it's easier and safer, so they use that. But in no way HT opening are not viable. You should try (At least in Masters league) to get consistant result with templar openings, you would see how inconsistent it vs Robo builds.With a Robo build you can survive a mis-scouted Widow mine drop/play whereas with Templar openings you have no way of defending widow mine harass unless you manage to pick them off before they burrow. Some say '' Well build a robo anyway even if templar opening '', but it delays Charge/Storm sufficiently that you can barely/can't hold the regular timing pushes Terrans are doing atm What? How can that be true? Widow mines dont move when they are burrowed. Storm the area or run drones and build a single cannon. You have a forge for upgrades, right? In the event you need a meatshield to soak up a shot of WM, make an archon. Shields regenerate. Show nested quote +On July 19 2014 13:20 Loccstana wrote:
Widow mines still dont do enough damage. They need to make it do 125 splash in the entire radius. I want to see games like this:
A few problems. First, the auto-ball feature of SC2 makes it more deadly. I don't recall whether in SC:BW if you separated a few units and then clicked to move to an area, they stayed in formation or not. It can be done to some degree in SC2, but its costly APM that can go into macro or kiting. The WM is still easily visible in the ground without need for an observer. SM's aren't. SM's can detect and kill cloaked units. WM's can't. One of my peeves about the WM is it's lack of micro in a big battle situation. Any interaction with the WM causes the countdown to fire to reset, which essentially makes attempting to use them intelligently useless in most scenarios except mineral line drops or defense against some small time harass.
You can't afford to use storms on widow mines unless they're all super clumped up in the same spot and not spread out like they should be, at least not in the mid-game. It takes 2 storms to kill a widow mine, and you need the storms for the bio. During the mid-game against a good terran executing well, if you don't hit at least 2-3 storms on the bio with a chargelot/templar style you just die. Further, if you don't have any zealots left over because they all got killed by mines, you just die. The mines zone the templar out and destroy zealots very well.
|
On July 19 2014 11:29 Universum wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2014 11:23 Faust852 wrote:
People should stop saying that protoss are forced to play colossi atm, this is in no way true. It might be with the future patch, but it's currently not the case at all. Protoss are not forced to play colossi. It's just that it's easier and safer, so they use that. But in no way HT opening are not viable. You should try (At least in Masters league) to get consistant result with templar openings, you would see how inconsistent it vs Robo builds.With a Robo build you can survive a mis-scouted Widow mine drop/play whereas with Templar openings you have no way of defending widow mine harass unless you manage to pick them off before they burrow. Some say '' Well build a robo anyway even if templar opening '', but it delays Charge/Storm sufficiently that you can barely/can't hold the regular timing pushes Terrans are doing atm
Sorry but the game does not revolve around you. If you dont want to adapt, its your own fault. Whats wrong with including a robo in your build? Immortal, templar, zealot compositions are very strong against bio, plus you get detection and are able to snipe mines with immortals.
|
On July 19 2014 14:02 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2014 13:55 Socup wrote:On July 19 2014 11:29 Universum wrote:On July 19 2014 11:23 Faust852 wrote:
People should stop saying that protoss are forced to play colossi atm, this is in no way true. It might be with the future patch, but it's currently not the case at all. Protoss are not forced to play colossi. It's just that it's easier and safer, so they use that. But in no way HT opening are not viable. You should try (At least in Masters league) to get consistant result with templar openings, you would see how inconsistent it vs Robo builds.With a Robo build you can survive a mis-scouted Widow mine drop/play whereas with Templar openings you have no way of defending widow mine harass unless you manage to pick them off before they burrow. Some say '' Well build a robo anyway even if templar opening '', but it delays Charge/Storm sufficiently that you can barely/can't hold the regular timing pushes Terrans are doing atm What? How can that be true? Widow mines dont move when they are burrowed. Storm the area or run drones and build a single cannon. You have a forge for upgrades, right? In the event you need a meatshield to soak up a shot of WM, make an archon. Shields regenerate. On July 19 2014 13:20 Loccstana wrote:
Widow mines still dont do enough damage. They need to make it do 125 splash in the entire radius. I want to see games like this:
A few problems. First, the auto-ball feature of SC2 makes it more deadly. I don't recall whether in SC:BW if you separated a few units and then clicked to move to an area, they stayed in formation or not. It can be done to some degree in SC2, but its costly APM that can go into macro or kiting. The WM is still easily visible in the ground without need for an observer. SM's aren't. SM's can detect and kill cloaked units. WM's can't. One of my peeves about the WM is it's lack of micro in a big battle situation. Any interaction with the WM causes the countdown to fire to reset, which essentially makes attempting to use them intelligently useless in most scenarios except mineral line drops or defense against some small time harass. You can't afford to use storms on widow mines unless they're all super clumped up in the same spot and not spread out like they should be, at least not in the mid-game. It takes 2 storms to kill a widow mine, and you need the storms for the bio. During the mid-game against a good terran executing well, if you don't hit at least 2-3 storms on the bio with a chargelot/templar style you just die. Further, if you don't have any zealots left over because they all got killed by mines, you just die. The mines zone the templar out and destroy zealots very well.
You can't afford to use emp on high templar unless they're all super clumped up in the same spot and not spread out like they should be, at least not in the mid-game. It takes 2 emps to drain a templar's energy, and you need the emps for the rest of the protoss army. During the mid-game against a good protoss executing well, if you don't hit at least 2-3 emps on the chargelot/templar with a bio/ghost style you just die. Further, if you don't have any bio left over because they all got killed by the templar, you just die. The storms zone the ghosts out and destroy bio very well.
|
I just had a game where I massed tanks vs stalker spam with immortals thrown in to see what would happen.
Is it my imagination, or do tanks prioritize shooting immortals over shooting anything within range? I'll have to check the replay, but it seems like they were going after immortals the entire time unless i tried to micro their shots.
Can anyone else confirm if tanks give immortals high priority? If so, that'd be the reason they are terrible vs P..
|
On July 19 2014 14:42 Socup wrote:
I just had a game where I massed tanks vs stalker spam with immortals thrown in to see what would happen.
Is it my imagination, or do tanks prioritize shooting immortals over shooting anything within range? I'll have to check the replay, but it seems like they were going after immortals the entire time unless i tried to micro their shots.
Can anyone else confirm if tanks give immortals high priority? If so, that'd be the reason they are terrible vs P..
Possibly, but did you check to see if the toss player was microing the stalkers to avoid being targeted?
For instance, tanks will priorities units that are on an attack command over units that are on a regular move command. For example, I a-move SCVs onto a tank line and right click move a bunch of marauders. The tanks will ignore the marauders and go after the SCV's until the marauders issue an attack command.
|
On July 19 2014 14:51 Rowrin wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2014 14:42 Socup wrote:
I just had a game where I massed tanks vs stalker spam with immortals thrown in to see what would happen.
Is it my imagination, or do tanks prioritize shooting immortals over shooting anything within range? I'll have to check the replay, but it seems like they were going after immortals the entire time unless i tried to micro their shots.
Can anyone else confirm if tanks give immortals high priority? If so, that'd be the reason they are terrible vs P.. Possibly, but did you check to see if the toss player was microing the stalkers to avoid being targeted? For instance, tanks will priorities units that are on an attack command over units that are on a regular move command. For example, I a-move SCVs onto a tank line and right click move a bunch of marauders. The tanks will ignore the marauders and go after the SCV's until the marauders issue an attack command.
I think it would be nice if your could set custom attack priorities on all of the units, much like how you set up a keyboard config.
|
United States4883 Posts
On July 19 2014 14:03 Loccstana wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2014 11:29 Universum wrote:On July 19 2014 11:23 Faust852 wrote:
People should stop saying that protoss are forced to play colossi atm, this is in no way true. It might be with the future patch, but it's currently not the case at all. Protoss are not forced to play colossi. It's just that it's easier and safer, so they use that. But in no way HT opening are not viable. You should try (At least in Masters league) to get consistant result with templar openings, you would see how inconsistent it vs Robo builds.With a Robo build you can survive a mis-scouted Widow mine drop/play whereas with Templar openings you have no way of defending widow mine harass unless you manage to pick them off before they burrow. Some say '' Well build a robo anyway even if templar opening '', but it delays Charge/Storm sufficiently that you can barely/can't hold the regular timing pushes Terrans are doing atm Sorry but the game does not revolve around you. If you dont want to adapt, its your own fault. Whats wrong with including a robo in your build? Immortal, templar, zealot compositions are very strong against bio, plus you get detection and are able to snipe mines with immortals.
There's nothing wrong with opening robo into templar. It's how Protoss played Templar openings throughout all of WoL and the first half of HotS. The only time we really started to see roboless templar play was when blink was so strong. HOWEVER, even with a robo, it's difficult just because the execution of poking out with stalkers to kill mines without getting your observer killed is very very difficult. On top of that, you really can't afford more than 4-6 stalkers in a templar opening because the templar cost sooooooooo much gas.
On July 19 2014 14:07 Loccstana wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2014 14:02 Whitewing wrote:On July 19 2014 13:55 Socup wrote:On July 19 2014 11:29 Universum wrote:On July 19 2014 11:23 Faust852 wrote:
People should stop saying that protoss are forced to play colossi atm, this is in no way true. It might be with the future patch, but it's currently not the case at all. Protoss are not forced to play colossi. It's just that it's easier and safer, so they use that. But in no way HT opening are not viable. You should try (At least in Masters league) to get consistant result with templar openings, you would see how inconsistent it vs Robo builds.With a Robo build you can survive a mis-scouted Widow mine drop/play whereas with Templar openings you have no way of defending widow mine harass unless you manage to pick them off before they burrow. Some say '' Well build a robo anyway even if templar opening '', but it delays Charge/Storm sufficiently that you can barely/can't hold the regular timing pushes Terrans are doing atm What? How can that be true? Widow mines dont move when they are burrowed. Storm the area or run drones and build a single cannon. You have a forge for upgrades, right? In the event you need a meatshield to soak up a shot of WM, make an archon. Shields regenerate. On July 19 2014 13:20 Loccstana wrote:
Widow mines still dont do enough damage. They need to make it do 125 splash in the entire radius. I want to see games like this:
A few problems. First, the auto-ball feature of SC2 makes it more deadly. I don't recall whether in SC:BW if you separated a few units and then clicked to move to an area, they stayed in formation or not. It can be done to some degree in SC2, but its costly APM that can go into macro or kiting. The WM is still easily visible in the ground without need for an observer. SM's aren't. SM's can detect and kill cloaked units. WM's can't. One of my peeves about the WM is it's lack of micro in a big battle situation. Any interaction with the WM causes the countdown to fire to reset, which essentially makes attempting to use them intelligently useless in most scenarios except mineral line drops or defense against some small time harass. You can't afford to use storms on widow mines unless they're all super clumped up in the same spot and not spread out like they should be, at least not in the mid-game. It takes 2 storms to kill a widow mine, and you need the storms for the bio. During the mid-game against a good terran executing well, if you don't hit at least 2-3 storms on the bio with a chargelot/templar style you just die. Further, if you don't have any zealots left over because they all got killed by mines, you just die. The mines zone the templar out and destroy zealots very well. You can't afford to use emp on high templar unless they're all super clumped up in the same spot and not spread out like they should be, at least not in the mid-game. It takes 2 emps to drain a templar's energy, and you need the emps for the rest of the protoss army. During the mid-game against a good protoss executing well, if you don't hit at least 2-3 emps on the chargelot/templar with a bio/ghost style you just die. Further, if you don't have any bio left over because they all got killed by the templar, you just die. The storms zone the ghosts out and destroy bio very well.
This is the most near-sighted and dumb thing I've read on TL. There is never a point in which you are so short on ghost mana (especially after the recent buff), and even then ghosts are still useful for DPS. A HT without energy for storm is a useless unit. The problem with the mine/zealot problem in question is that it's very difficult to clear the mines and zealots/archons just slowly get kited and mined to death. Whitewing put it eloquently with the phrase "hemorrhaging units". The end solution is a lot like the old TvZs. You just keep trading gas units and taking inefficient trades until you can't afford it anymore and the Terran dam breaks over and kills you.
The situation that you describe is nothing like templar vs biomine, and it's simply moronic to take that comparison seriously.
ALL THAT SAID, we really need to stop quoting Rain for saying "templar openings are dead", "Mine OP can't play templar anymore", etc., etc. He said something along those lines, but we don't need to take it as far as saying "Rain gave authority that playing templar openings is impossible, so it's absolutely true". And second, that may have just been Rain's view on the situation (who has generally preferred the more classic blink/colossus opening), and it doesn't necessarily give full authority to the statement that NO PROTOSS CAN OPEN TEMPLAR BECAUSE ITS IMPOSSIBLE IMBA IMBA.
I think robo -> templar is still viable, but the execution of it is much much harder than it was before. If this patch goes through, I don't think it will really affect the dynamic of this composition war all that much; it will still be difficult as hell to do, but it will probably still be viable with excellent control and the right circumstances.
Haven't we proven that colossus builds don't die to SCV pulls by now? Can we not put labels on things as "impossible" just because they're not necessarily popular? (And no, this does not include mech TvP or "The Avilo Build", which are simply nonsensical strategies).
|
On July 19 2014 15:32 SC2John wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2014 14:03 Loccstana wrote:On July 19 2014 11:29 Universum wrote:On July 19 2014 11:23 Faust852 wrote:
People should stop saying that protoss are forced to play colossi atm, this is in no way true. It might be with the future patch, but it's currently not the case at all. Protoss are not forced to play colossi. It's just that it's easier and safer, so they use that. But in no way HT opening are not viable. You should try (At least in Masters league) to get consistant result with templar openings, you would see how inconsistent it vs Robo builds.With a Robo build you can survive a mis-scouted Widow mine drop/play whereas with Templar openings you have no way of defending widow mine harass unless you manage to pick them off before they burrow. Some say '' Well build a robo anyway even if templar opening '', but it delays Charge/Storm sufficiently that you can barely/can't hold the regular timing pushes Terrans are doing atm Sorry but the game does not revolve around you. If you dont want to adapt, its your own fault. Whats wrong with including a robo in your build? Immortal, templar, zealot compositions are very strong against bio, plus you get detection and are able to snipe mines with immortals. There's nothing wrong with opening robo into templar. It's how Protoss played Templar openings throughout all of WoL and the first half of HotS. The only time we really started to see roboless templar play was when blink was so strong. HOWEVER, even with a robo, it's difficult just because the execution of poking out with stalkers to kill mines without getting your observer killed is very very difficult. On top of that, you really can't afford more than 4-6 stalkers in a templar opening because the templar cost sooooooooo much gas. Show nested quote +On July 19 2014 14:07 Loccstana wrote:On July 19 2014 14:02 Whitewing wrote:On July 19 2014 13:55 Socup wrote:On July 19 2014 11:29 Universum wrote:On July 19 2014 11:23 Faust852 wrote:
People should stop saying that protoss are forced to play colossi atm, this is in no way true. It might be with the future patch, but it's currently not the case at all. Protoss are not forced to play colossi. It's just that it's easier and safer, so they use that. But in no way HT opening are not viable. You should try (At least in Masters league) to get consistant result with templar openings, you would see how inconsistent it vs Robo builds.With a Robo build you can survive a mis-scouted Widow mine drop/play whereas with Templar openings you have no way of defending widow mine harass unless you manage to pick them off before they burrow. Some say '' Well build a robo anyway even if templar opening '', but it delays Charge/Storm sufficiently that you can barely/can't hold the regular timing pushes Terrans are doing atm What? How can that be true? Widow mines dont move when they are burrowed. Storm the area or run drones and build a single cannon. You have a forge for upgrades, right? In the event you need a meatshield to soak up a shot of WM, make an archon. Shields regenerate. On July 19 2014 13:20 Loccstana wrote:
Widow mines still dont do enough damage. They need to make it do 125 splash in the entire radius. I want to see games like this:
A few problems. First, the auto-ball feature of SC2 makes it more deadly. I don't recall whether in SC:BW if you separated a few units and then clicked to move to an area, they stayed in formation or not. It can be done to some degree in SC2, but its costly APM that can go into macro or kiting. The WM is still easily visible in the ground without need for an observer. SM's aren't. SM's can detect and kill cloaked units. WM's can't. One of my peeves about the WM is it's lack of micro in a big battle situation. Any interaction with the WM causes the countdown to fire to reset, which essentially makes attempting to use them intelligently useless in most scenarios except mineral line drops or defense against some small time harass. You can't afford to use storms on widow mines unless they're all super clumped up in the same spot and not spread out like they should be, at least not in the mid-game. It takes 2 storms to kill a widow mine, and you need the storms for the bio. During the mid-game against a good terran executing well, if you don't hit at least 2-3 storms on the bio with a chargelot/templar style you just die. Further, if you don't have any zealots left over because they all got killed by mines, you just die. The mines zone the templar out and destroy zealots very well. You can't afford to use emp on high templar unless they're all super clumped up in the same spot and not spread out like they should be, at least not in the mid-game. It takes 2 emps to drain a templar's energy, and you need the emps for the rest of the protoss army. During the mid-game against a good protoss executing well, if you don't hit at least 2-3 emps on the chargelot/templar with a bio/ghost style you just die. Further, if you don't have any bio left over because they all got killed by the templar, you just die. The storms zone the ghosts out and destroy bio very well. This is the most near-sighted and dumb thing I've read on TL. There is never a point in which you are so short on ghost mana (especially after the recent buff), and even then ghosts are still useful for DPS. A HT without energy for storm is a useless unit. The problem with the mine/zealot problem in question is that it's very difficult to clear the mines and zealots/archons just slowly get kited and mined to death. Whitewing put it eloquently with the phrase "hemorrhaging units". The end solution is a lot like the old TvZs. You just keep trading gas units and taking inefficient trades until you can't afford it anymore and the Terran dam breaks over and kills you. The situation that you describe is nothing like templar vs biomine, and it's simply moronic to take that comparison seriously.
ALL THAT SAID, we really need to stop quoting Rain for saying "templar openings are dead", "Mine OP can't play templar anymore", etc., etc. He said something along those lines, but we don't need to take it as far as saying "Rain gave authority that playing templar openings is impossible, so it's absolutely true". And second, that may have just been Rain's view on the situation (who has generally preferred the more classic blink/colossus opening), and it doesn't necessarily give full authority to the statement that NO PROTOSS CAN OPEN TEMPLAR BECAUSE ITS IMPOSSIBLE IMBA IMBA. I think robo -> templar is still viable, but the execution of it is much much harder than it was before. If this patch goes through, I don't think it will really affect the dynamic of this composition war all that much; it will still be difficult as hell to do, but it will probably still be viable with excellent control and the right circumstances. Haven't we proven that colossus builds don't die to SCV pulls by now? Can we not put labels on things as "impossible" just because they're not necessarily popular? (And no, this does not include mech TvP or "The Avilo Build", which are simply nonsensical strategies).
I'm disgusted that you just wrote off mech TvP as a nonsensical strategy. That kind of attitude is contrary to the direction that is favorable...
|
|
|
On July 19 2014 15:32 SC2John wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2014 14:03 Loccstana wrote:On July 19 2014 11:29 Universum wrote:On July 19 2014 11:23 Faust852 wrote:
People should stop saying that protoss are forced to play colossi atm, this is in no way true. It might be with the future patch, but it's currently not the case at all. Protoss are not forced to play colossi. It's just that it's easier and safer, so they use that. But in no way HT opening are not viable. You should try (At least in Masters league) to get consistant result with templar openings, you would see how inconsistent it vs Robo builds.With a Robo build you can survive a mis-scouted Widow mine drop/play whereas with Templar openings you have no way of defending widow mine harass unless you manage to pick them off before they burrow. Some say '' Well build a robo anyway even if templar opening '', but it delays Charge/Storm sufficiently that you can barely/can't hold the regular timing pushes Terrans are doing atm Sorry but the game does not revolve around you. If you dont want to adapt, its your own fault. Whats wrong with including a robo in your build? Immortal, templar, zealot compositions are very strong against bio, plus you get detection and are able to snipe mines with immortals. There's nothing wrong with opening robo into templar. It's how Protoss played Templar openings throughout all of WoL and the first half of HotS. The only time we really started to see roboless templar play was when blink was so strong. HOWEVER, even with a robo, it's difficult just because the execution of poking out with stalkers to kill mines without getting your observer killed is very very difficult. On top of that, you really can't afford more than 4-6 stalkers in a templar opening because the templar cost sooooooooo much gas. Show nested quote +On July 19 2014 14:07 Loccstana wrote:On July 19 2014 14:02 Whitewing wrote:On July 19 2014 13:55 Socup wrote:On July 19 2014 11:29 Universum wrote:On July 19 2014 11:23 Faust852 wrote:
People should stop saying that protoss are forced to play colossi atm, this is in no way true. It might be with the future patch, but it's currently not the case at all. Protoss are not forced to play colossi. It's just that it's easier and safer, so they use that. But in no way HT opening are not viable. You should try (At least in Masters league) to get consistant result with templar openings, you would see how inconsistent it vs Robo builds.With a Robo build you can survive a mis-scouted Widow mine drop/play whereas with Templar openings you have no way of defending widow mine harass unless you manage to pick them off before they burrow. Some say '' Well build a robo anyway even if templar opening '', but it delays Charge/Storm sufficiently that you can barely/can't hold the regular timing pushes Terrans are doing atm What? How can that be true? Widow mines dont move when they are burrowed. Storm the area or run drones and build a single cannon. You have a forge for upgrades, right? In the event you need a meatshield to soak up a shot of WM, make an archon. Shields regenerate. On July 19 2014 13:20 Loccstana wrote:
Widow mines still dont do enough damage. They need to make it do 125 splash in the entire radius. I want to see games like this:
A few problems. First, the auto-ball feature of SC2 makes it more deadly. I don't recall whether in SC:BW if you separated a few units and then clicked to move to an area, they stayed in formation or not. It can be done to some degree in SC2, but its costly APM that can go into macro or kiting. The WM is still easily visible in the ground without need for an observer. SM's aren't. SM's can detect and kill cloaked units. WM's can't. One of my peeves about the WM is it's lack of micro in a big battle situation. Any interaction with the WM causes the countdown to fire to reset, which essentially makes attempting to use them intelligently useless in most scenarios except mineral line drops or defense against some small time harass. You can't afford to use storms on widow mines unless they're all super clumped up in the same spot and not spread out like they should be, at least not in the mid-game. It takes 2 storms to kill a widow mine, and you need the storms for the bio. During the mid-game against a good terran executing well, if you don't hit at least 2-3 storms on the bio with a chargelot/templar style you just die. Further, if you don't have any zealots left over because they all got killed by mines, you just die. The mines zone the templar out and destroy zealots very well. You can't afford to use emp on high templar unless they're all super clumped up in the same spot and not spread out like they should be, at least not in the mid-game. It takes 2 emps to drain a templar's energy, and you need the emps for the rest of the protoss army. During the mid-game against a good protoss executing well, if you don't hit at least 2-3 emps on the chargelot/templar with a bio/ghost style you just die. Further, if you don't have any bio left over because they all got killed by the templar, you just die. The storms zone the ghosts out and destroy bio very well. This is the most near-sighted and dumb thing I've read on TL. There is never a point in which you are so short on ghost mana (especially after the recent buff), and even then ghosts are still useful for DPS. A HT without energy for storm is a useless unit. The problem with the mine/zealot problem in question is that it's very difficult to clear the mines and zealots/archons just slowly get kited and mined to death. Whitewing put it eloquently with the phrase "hemorrhaging units". The end solution is a lot like the old TvZs. You just keep trading gas units and taking inefficient trades until you can't afford it anymore and the Terran dam breaks over and kills you. The situation that you describe is nothing like templar vs biomine, and it's simply moronic to take that comparison seriously.
ALL THAT SAID, we really need to stop quoting Rain for saying "templar openings are dead", "Mine OP can't play templar anymore", etc., etc. He said something along those lines, but we don't need to take it as far as saying "Rain gave authority that playing templar openings is impossible, so it's absolutely true". And second, that may have just been Rain's view on the situation (who has generally preferred the more classic blink/colossus opening), and it doesn't necessarily give full authority to the statement that NO PROTOSS CAN OPEN TEMPLAR BECAUSE ITS IMPOSSIBLE IMBA IMBA. I think robo -> templar is still viable, but the execution of it is much much harder than it was before. If this patch goes through, I don't think it will really affect the dynamic of this composition war all that much; it will still be difficult as hell to do, but it will probably still be viable with excellent control and the right circumstances. Haven't we proven that colossus builds don't die to SCV pulls by now? Can we not put labels on things as "impossible" just because they're not necessarily popular? (And no, this does not include mech TvP or "The Avilo Build", which are simply nonsensical strategies).
"A HT without energy for storm is a useless unit. " - SC2John
![[image loading]](http://www.theuen.com/images/archon.jpg)
|
And Flash doesnt want any patch
|
Like I said before, we need widow mines to do even more damage.
|
you can tell Happy's not a legit pro when he seriously thinks Terran players are just somehow superior in skill compared to Zerg or Protoss players. Has he even put in the same amount of time and research as Korean Zergs and Protoss players when he makes this statement? Absolutely not, it's just his own lack of effort that somehow led to a defeatist mentality. Even among foreign Terrans, he's on a lower tier these days so his assessment of the situation is really not all that credible.
Aside from Happy's unintelligent and unwarranted remark, it's sad that Blizzard faces a deadlock at this point. To address the issues Terran's having (variety of solid openings in TvP, late-game composition in bio TvZ or TvP), fairly significant changes need to be made, such as buffing BCs or offering an upgrade for tier 1-2 units. But because DK is so stubborn as to not give out any such meaningful changes that can help change the stale metagame, the way the game plays out will ever be the same with tweaks in advantages. For example, early stim timings might be able to kill a few more probes or get a sentry through minor number tweaks in TvP (like this time warp nerf), but the styles offered in the game are going to be ever the same. And because Protoss lategame composition with Tempests are going to be superior to whatever Terran bio compositions can offer, the fundamental issue of Terran difficulty in lategame TvP never goes away. Perhaps that lategame stage will be reached later due to these aforementioned tweaks, but that's it.
User was warned for this post
|
What makes me sick when I listen to statements about T too weak in TvP late game is that, they never address or admit T being too strong in TvP MID GAME. I do not mind T buff in late game, but at same time I want to see T mid game nerf. Right now in TvP I feel that the Terran player who SCV-pull and do mid game all-in, is better rewarded more than the T player whos willing to play TvP late game which I think is quite sad.
|
"Well it's a Protoss nerf so, by default, I think it's good!" - what a childish comment.
|
On July 19 2014 16:40 pieroog wrote:
"Well it's a Protoss nerf so, by default, I think it's good!" - what a childish comment.
childish but true...
|
On July 19 2014 16:19 CriMsoN sc2 wrote:
What makes me sick when I listen to statements about T too weak in TvP late game is that, they never address or admit T being too strong in TvP MID GAME. I do not mind T buff in late game, but at same time I want to see T mid game nerf. Right now in TvP I feel that the Terran player who SCV-pull and do mid game all-in, is better rewarded more than the T player whos willing to play TvP late game which I think is quite sad.
Er....
Wut?
Maybe defend properly, SCV pulls haven't been problematic or even dangerous in months, lategame has never been dangerous which is why Terrans go almost all in in the midgame.
I think you got too used to freewinning vs Terran, if you claim midgame is near OP.
Too elaborate, Terran buils have been tailored to the midgame for years. It's the tiny 2 minute timing Terran puts all their focus towards because it's the only little timing they have the potential to take control of the game. If Terran had a lategame, this sort of midgame "all-in" strategy wouldn't need to exist.
This makes lategame Terran strategies a lot stronger, but tgose strategies come at the cost of a weaker, less aggressove but more transitional midgame.
MMMM all dat erry day is not like that, however.
|
Italy12246 Posts
On July 19 2014 16:17 Loccstana wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2014 15:32 SC2John wrote:On July 19 2014 14:03 Loccstana wrote:On July 19 2014 11:29 Universum wrote:On July 19 2014 11:23 Faust852 wrote:
People should stop saying that protoss are forced to play colossi atm, this is in no way true. It might be with the future patch, but it's currently not the case at all. Protoss are not forced to play colossi. It's just that it's easier and safer, so they use that. But in no way HT opening are not viable. You should try (At least in Masters league) to get consistant result with templar openings, you would see how inconsistent it vs Robo builds.With a Robo build you can survive a mis-scouted Widow mine drop/play whereas with Templar openings you have no way of defending widow mine harass unless you manage to pick them off before they burrow. Some say '' Well build a robo anyway even if templar opening '', but it delays Charge/Storm sufficiently that you can barely/can't hold the regular timing pushes Terrans are doing atm Sorry but the game does not revolve around you. If you dont want to adapt, its your own fault. Whats wrong with including a robo in your build? Immortal, templar, zealot compositions are very strong against bio, plus you get detection and are able to snipe mines with immortals. There's nothing wrong with opening robo into templar. It's how Protoss played Templar openings throughout all of WoL and the first half of HotS. The only time we really started to see roboless templar play was when blink was so strong. HOWEVER, even with a robo, it's difficult just because the execution of poking out with stalkers to kill mines without getting your observer killed is very very difficult. On top of that, you really can't afford more than 4-6 stalkers in a templar opening because the templar cost sooooooooo much gas. On July 19 2014 14:07 Loccstana wrote:On July 19 2014 14:02 Whitewing wrote:On July 19 2014 13:55 Socup wrote:On July 19 2014 11:29 Universum wrote:On July 19 2014 11:23 Faust852 wrote:
People should stop saying that protoss are forced to play colossi atm, this is in no way true. It might be with the future patch, but it's currently not the case at all. Protoss are not forced to play colossi. It's just that it's easier and safer, so they use that. But in no way HT opening are not viable. You should try (At least in Masters league) to get consistant result with templar openings, you would see how inconsistent it vs Robo builds.With a Robo build you can survive a mis-scouted Widow mine drop/play whereas with Templar openings you have no way of defending widow mine harass unless you manage to pick them off before they burrow. Some say '' Well build a robo anyway even if templar opening '', but it delays Charge/Storm sufficiently that you can barely/can't hold the regular timing pushes Terrans are doing atm What? How can that be true? Widow mines dont move when they are burrowed. Storm the area or run drones and build a single cannon. You have a forge for upgrades, right? In the event you need a meatshield to soak up a shot of WM, make an archon. Shields regenerate. On July 19 2014 13:20 Loccstana wrote:
Widow mines still dont do enough damage. They need to make it do 125 splash in the entire radius. I want to see games like this:
A few problems. First, the auto-ball feature of SC2 makes it more deadly. I don't recall whether in SC:BW if you separated a few units and then clicked to move to an area, they stayed in formation or not. It can be done to some degree in SC2, but its costly APM that can go into macro or kiting. The WM is still easily visible in the ground without need for an observer. SM's aren't. SM's can detect and kill cloaked units. WM's can't. One of my peeves about the WM is it's lack of micro in a big battle situation. Any interaction with the WM causes the countdown to fire to reset, which essentially makes attempting to use them intelligently useless in most scenarios except mineral line drops or defense against some small time harass. You can't afford to use storms on widow mines unless they're all super clumped up in the same spot and not spread out like they should be, at least not in the mid-game. It takes 2 storms to kill a widow mine, and you need the storms for the bio. During the mid-game against a good terran executing well, if you don't hit at least 2-3 storms on the bio with a chargelot/templar style you just die. Further, if you don't have any zealots left over because they all got killed by mines, you just die. The mines zone the templar out and destroy zealots very well. You can't afford to use emp on high templar unless they're all super clumped up in the same spot and not spread out like they should be, at least not in the mid-game. It takes 2 emps to drain a templar's energy, and you need the emps for the rest of the protoss army. During the mid-game against a good protoss executing well, if you don't hit at least 2-3 emps on the chargelot/templar with a bio/ghost style you just die. Further, if you don't have any bio left over because they all got killed by the templar, you just die. The storms zone the ghosts out and destroy bio very well. This is the most near-sighted and dumb thing I've read on TL. There is never a point in which you are so short on ghost mana (especially after the recent buff), and even then ghosts are still useful for DPS. A HT without energy for storm is a useless unit. The problem with the mine/zealot problem in question is that it's very difficult to clear the mines and zealots/archons just slowly get kited and mined to death. Whitewing put it eloquently with the phrase "hemorrhaging units". The end solution is a lot like the old TvZs. You just keep trading gas units and taking inefficient trades until you can't afford it anymore and the Terran dam breaks over and kills you. The situation that you describe is nothing like templar vs biomine, and it's simply moronic to take that comparison seriously.
ALL THAT SAID, we really need to stop quoting Rain for saying "templar openings are dead", "Mine OP can't play templar anymore", etc., etc. He said something along those lines, but we don't need to take it as far as saying "Rain gave authority that playing templar openings is impossible, so it's absolutely true". And second, that may have just been Rain's view on the situation (who has generally preferred the more classic blink/colossus opening), and it doesn't necessarily give full authority to the statement that NO PROTOSS CAN OPEN TEMPLAR BECAUSE ITS IMPOSSIBLE IMBA IMBA. I think robo -> templar is still viable, but the execution of it is much much harder than it was before. If this patch goes through, I don't think it will really affect the dynamic of this composition war all that much; it will still be difficult as hell to do, but it will probably still be viable with excellent control and the right circumstances. Haven't we proven that colossus builds don't die to SCV pulls by now? Can we not put labels on things as "impossible" just because they're not necessarily popular? (And no, this does not include mech TvP or "The Avilo Build", which are simply nonsensical strategies). "A HT without energy for storm is a useless unit. " - SC2John
By the time a Terran has 6 medivacs archons are not enough to kill the bio army, not to mention that they also get destroyed by mines. They aren't completely useless per se if you can recylce them and morph them, but they will still die to mines along all the zealots, and even if they dont the bio can still beat zealot/archon easily once enough medivacs are on the field.
So yes, this patch puts the final nail in the coffin for templar openings, which makes PvT games considerably more boring, especially because mines will remain useless against colossi. If they wanted to get rid of some PvT builds (which is fine) they should have in some way targeted colossi builds, not templar.
On July 19 2014 15:59 emidanRKO wrote:
I'm disgusted that you just wrote off mech TvP as a nonsensical strategy. That kind of attitude is contrary to the direction that is favorable...
As long as the immortal and tempest exist mech will always be shit. The fact that one random whiny low GM na terran does it to get more viewers doesnt mean anything.
|
On July 19 2014 16:40 pieroog wrote:
"Well it's a Protoss nerf so, by default, I think it's good!" - what a childish comment.
as childish as "Well it's a Protoss nerf so, by default, I think it's bad!"
On July 19 2014 16:19 CriMsoN sc2 wrote:
What makes me sick when I listen to statements about T too weak in TvP late game is that, they never address or admit T being too strong in TvP MID GAME. I do not mind T buff in late game, but at same time I want to see T mid game nerf. Right now in TvP I feel that the Terran player who SCV-pull and do mid game all-in, is better rewarded more than the T player whos willing to play TvP late game which I think is quite sad.
What makes me sick when I listen to statements about P too weak in TvP mid game is that, they never address or admit P being too strong in TvP EARLY GAME. I do not mind P buff in mid game, but at same time I want to see P early game nerf. Right now in TvP I feel that the Protoss player who do early game all-in, is better rewarded more than the P player whos willing to play TvP mid game which I think is quite sad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
