Hello everyone! It’s been an exciting time at WCS Valencia. Many different strategies have been utilized, all three races were well represented in the playoffs (for us on the balance team this is always heartwarming to see), new faces made it into the top 16, and there were plenty of hats for everyone. Congratulations to Serral for winning WCS Valencia, and hats off to Has for showing us the power of unorthodox play!
To start things off, we wanted to mention that the Team Liquid Map Contest 11 is going on now. The judging phase ends July 30, so make sure to check it out when the finalists are revealed. We are always excited to see all the new maps the community comes up with. Good luck to everyone participating!
In the tournament world, we’re not seeing anything immediately concerning. Interestingly, we’ve been getting some conflicting reports about ZvP. We’ve seen conversations in the community about late-game being Protoss-favored. However, reports from some pro players have said the opposite. Of course, it’s normal for players on any side to believe the others are too strong while also feeling like their own faction needs buffs. From our perspective, Protoss Carrier with High Templar support is very powerful, but if the game goes on for a long period of time, the Zerg does have options to pull them apart and punish that composition’s relative low mobility.
Additionally, many ZvP games are focused around mid-game Zerg pushes and how the Protoss player responds to these, which can be an issue if the majority of games are decided around this singular, pivotal moment.
ZvP also continues to have Stargate as the most common opener. This isn’t a completely unexpected development—Oracles and Phoenixes are some of the fastest scouts for early game Protoss, and they can also double back and defend their base in case of early attacks. Beyond the early build choices, ZvP does have very interesting back-and-forth dynamics during the mid-game and early late-game, so we’re not looking to make an immediate change here.
In TvZ, the previous Raven changes have had the desired effect of reducing the ability of mass Ravens to defeat Zerg armies on their own. It also has generated a number of reports that TvZ has now shifted into the Zerg’s favor late-game in head-on fights. Having an advantage at different points of the game can be fine, as that provides incentive to tech up in a matchup rather than investing deeply into lower tier units and fighting with those. But having it be unwinnable is certainly undesirable. We don’t think this matchup has developed to the point where a tactic can be said to be “unwinnable,” but we will be watching for these situations going forward.
TvP’s biggest change was the Marauder buff. This seems to have had the desired effect of making mid-game battles closer, which results in micro and positioning being very important for both sides in order to gain an advantage. We are still observing how the matchup is playing out in this regard. Since Terrans have a stronger mid-game, Protoss will have to adjust and discover areas where they can get away with more workers or squeeze in an upgrade here and there will take time. Ideally, both races would be able to pressure each other throughout the game through offensive action, although at different times.
For mirror matchups, we are not planning on making any short-term changes. PvP has historically been a matchup where your opening builds are extremely important, but lately, we’ve gotten reports that it’s difficult for games to go safely go beyond three bases. ZvZ has decent diversity between Zergling/Baneling openers, Mutalisk-focused games, and Roach-focused games. This matchup also often evolves in a healthy way into Lurker pushes or Hive tech. In TvT, the early game often centers around Cyclones, but the matchup can diverge into different playstyles, i.e., Bio vs Mech as the game goes on. We are keeping an eye on this matchup in particular to see how it develops.
In TvZ, the previous Raven changes have had the desired effect of reducing the ability of mass Ravens to defeat Zerg armies on their own. It also has generated a number of reports that TvZ has now shifted into the Zerg’s favor late-game in head-on fights. Having an advantage at different points of the game can be fine, as that provides incentive to tech up in a matchup rather than investing deeply into lower tier units and fighting with those. But having it be unwinnable is certainly undesirable.
I swear Blizzard doesn't even think the shit they write through. Being at a disadvantage at different points in the game also disincentivizes tech transitions and incentivizes staying on lower tier units to kill the opponent with the stronger late game.
The issue with ghost/raven was Zerg players hadn't figured out how to punish the Terran player (really just Maru) making that transition. (Too many Zerg players had gotten lazy and assumed that if they hit hive against Terran that they should autowin) Instead of letting players figure it out, they repeated the adept/phoenix balance fiasco and bowed to the balance whiners.
The carrier and high templar combination is also too strong against Terran and Zerg in the late game. If the matchups are balanced, it can be left alone since Blizzcon is coming up. But after Blizzcon, this is something that should be addressed.
But... nothing about late game TvP being protoss favored? At this point it's becoming a meme but also : nothing about mech still being horrible in TvP?
On July 20 2018 03:13 JackONeill wrote: Yeah fair enough TvZ late game is zerg favored.
But... nothing about late game TvP being protoss favored? At this point it's becoming a meme but also : nothing about mech still being horrible in TvP?
Lategame TvP is winnable for terran, even though protoss may be considered at an advantage. But terran is clearly favoured in the midgame, so should be in a stronger position going into the lategame anyway.
TvZ is much much extreme. Once a good bunch of hive units are out, terrans (at the pro level) don't seem to be winning. Assuming they don't have a significant economic lead of course. But LBH is already strong in the midgame so it's not like terran can be expected to have such a lead going into the lategame.
I hope they consider making the raven a pure support unit with something like turret / healing drone / PDD at some point, instead of giving it a missile that alternates between "everyone whines about it" and "wait, ravens can fire a missile?". Turn it into a unit that can't be massed, but having a small pack in the lategame can help with efficiency.. something terran considerably lacks currently. Hell, the earliest iterations of the missile were much better ; it forced micro from the opponent while still fairly easy to negate the damage, but avoiding it meant retreating, making it a great area control tool in the same style as the tank or the lib. Opportunity costs, that stuff..
Balance wise, we're in a good place in terms of numbers, but T is still pigeon holed into the same stuff as always.
Lategame TvP is winnable for terran, even though protoss may be considered at an advantage. But terran is clearly favoured in the midgame, so should be in a stronger position going into the lategame anyway.
Nonsense.
The marauder buff made every pro terran "allin" or perform extraordinarily agressive 2 bases builds versus protoss because late game is near-unwinnable. Late game vs zerg is extremely hard but at least you can manoeuvrer against broodlords.
I'd actually argue that late game TvP is much more of a concern that late game TvZ.
On July 20 2018 03:06 xelnaga_empire wrote: The carrier and high templar combination is also too strong against Terran and Zerg in the late game. If the matchups are balanced, it can be left alone since Blizzcon is coming up. But after Blizzcon, this is something that should be addressed.
Carriers/High Templar are too strong against Terran? Are you sure you're not thinking Broodwar because I literally can't recall the last time I saw them in a professional match.
As they said, late game ZvP is Zerg favored according to the pros so if it is addressed, it should be with a late game Zerg nerf.
Lategame TvP is winnable for terran, even though protoss may be considered at an advantage. But terran is clearly favoured in the midgame, so should be in a stronger position going into the lategame anyway.
Nonsense.
The marauder buff made every pro terran "allin" or perform extraordinarily agressive 2 bases builds versus protoss because late game is near-unwinnable. Late game vs zerg is extremely hard but at least you can manoeuvrer against broodlords.
I'd actually argue that late game TvP is much more of a concern that late game TvZ.
Just because terrans are playing aggressive on 2-3 bases doesn't mean "lategame is unwinnable". It means being aggressive in the midgame is the most effective play. Pro players will do whatever strategy gives the best chance of success. That doesn't mean whatever they do is the only chance of success.
TvZ is a different story, pro terrans generally aren't winning it anymore. TvZ has been at 45-46% recently, so obviously it's not a severe imbalance, but a lot of games seem to be over if zerg gets established on hive tech.
On July 20 2018 03:45 Fango wrote: Just because terrans are playing aggressive on 2-3 bases doesn't mean "lategame is unwinnable". It means being aggressive in the midgame is the most effective play. Pro terrans will do whatever strategy gives the best chance of success.
"Being overly agressive on 2 bases is the best method to win with terran but that doesn't mean that later stages of the game give less chance of winning" Actually it does. And you've obviously not seen TvP late game with disruptor/colossi and constant zealots/DTs warping vs bio, or tempest/revelation vs anything else. Terran is pigeonholed into 2 bases bio allins because the race lacks the means to deal with numerous late game protoss units/protoss late game economy effectively.
On July 20 2018 03:45 Fango wrote: Just because terrans are playing aggressive on 2-3 bases doesn't mean "lategame is unwinnable". It means being aggressive in the midgame is the most effective play. Pro terrans will do whatever strategy gives the best chance of success.
"Being overly agressive on 2 bases is the best method to win with terran but that doesn't mean that later stages of the game give less chance of winning" Actually it does. And you've obviously not seen TvP late game with disruptor/colossi and constant zealots/DTs warping vs bio, or tempest/revelation vs anything else. Terran is pigeonholed into 2 bases bio allins because the race lacks the means to deal with numerous late game protoss units/protoss late game economy effectively.
You completely missed the point. I never said what you've apparently quoted me to.
Being aggressive in the midgame gives terran the best chance at winning. That means lategame is less favourable for terran, not necessarily unwinnable. Pro players will do whatever strategy is best, that doesn't make it the only viable one.
If protoss has disruptors+collosi+tempest+revelation with constant zealot/DT harass, and terran just has bio, then they probably made much better in the previous 15 minutes.
On July 20 2018 03:45 Fango wrote: Just because terrans are playing aggressive on 2-3 bases doesn't mean "lategame is unwinnable". It means being aggressive in the midgame is the most effective play. Pro terrans will do whatever strategy gives the best chance of success.
"Being overly agressive on 2 bases is the best method to win with terran but that doesn't mean that later stages of the game give less chance of winning" Actually it does. And you've obviously not seen TvP late game with disruptor/colossi and constant zealots/DTs warping vs bio, or tempest/revelation vs anything else. Terran is pigeonholed into 2 bases bio allins because the race lacks the means to deal with numerous late game protoss units/protoss late game economy effectively.
You completely missed the point. I never said what you've apparently quoted me to.
Being aggressive in the midgame gives terran the best chance at winning. That means lategame is less favourable for terran, not necessarily unwinnable. Pro players will do whatever strategy is best, that doesn't make it the only viable one.
If protoss has disruptors+collosi+tempest+revelation with constant zealot/DT harass, and terran just has bio, then they probably made much better in the previous 15 minutes.
Late game against Protoss is way harder to win than against Zerg if both players get there on even footing, and both match-ups were strongly affected by the raven nerf in the late game.
the usual 2-dimensional response to player feedback. lots of talk about winrates. nothing about unit design, unit roles, unit synergy, micro potential, or anything that might make the game fun to play.
Dunno about the balance but the game is really fun now, great to watch as well. Personally I have trouble against P storm but that is just me being bad =P
i'm generally a big defender of dev teams from whiny players, and i don't believe in the old, boring, obnoxious "they're idiots! they don't know what they're doing!" cries every single time there's a community announcement, but... the statement they made here about ZvZ is pretty off base and concerns me
ZvZ has decent diversity between Zergling/Baneling openers, Mutalisk-focused games, and Roach-focused games. This matchup also often evolves in a healthy way into Lurker pushes or Hive tech.
the fact that they put "ling bane openers" in the same category as "muta games" and "roach games" makes it sound like whoever wrote this doesn't play ZvZ or know how it works. a ling/bane opener isn't something you do instead of roaches or mutas, it's what you MUST do BEFORE roaches or mutas. if you don't build a baneling nest and your opponent does a competent baneling all-in then you die, period. skipping the bane nest is essentially a greedy economic cheese
more specifically, the meta heavily favors taking an extremely greedy third base while attacking with heavy ling/bane pressure on your opponent's side of the map. it's still possible to play games out by defending the attack and taking a later third, but it puts pressure on the defending player to make something happen before three hatch midgame macro kicks in and the player with an early third gets an advantage. and this is how it's been since the BEGINNING OF LOTV! the matchup is great in macro games, but macro games are not preferred in the meta and i rarely play them because of how aggressive everyone is
the matchup "often evolves in a healthy way" into later tech? does it, really? maybe in a pro meta where aggression is weak, maybe if both players like to macro and no one all-ins, but the reality on ladder is that ZvZ is a nonstop clusterfuck where the people who aren't doing 2 base ling/bane aggression are just early pooling you on 1 base because they want to skip the matchup. my conversations with other zerg players in-game back this up, too. in my perception ZvZ is more hated now than in heart of the swarm. even during the mass roach era it was mechanically satisfying for the better player and it was viable to open with a defensive 2 base roach play without automatically falling behind to a 3 base speedling play. 2 base roach falling out of the meta is another big reason the 3 hatch, 1.5 base mining, ling/bane aggression style is so overwhelming right now
please, blizzard - take another look at ZvZ, and don't just go by professional players who are more comfortable in greedy macro games. i don't mind defending baneling all-ins, it's part of the matchup, but it gets boring as fuck when 9/10 ZvZs barely make lair tech
On July 20 2018 04:03 SHODAN wrote: the usual 2-dimensional response to player feedback. lots of talk about winrates. nothing about unit design, unit roles, unit synergy, micro potential, or anything that might make the game fun to play.
Because manipulating numbers is easier than suggesting actual meaningful changes. Most people are looking for the "easy" way, both because well, it's easy, and because Blizz has shown that's mostly what they're working with anyway when doing changes I've tried with some different raven designs but owell..
SC2 continues to be a great game. thanks for the feedback Mr. Blizzard. I've never been so fascinated by mirror matchups in any RTS game as i am with the 3 mirrors in Starcraft2. Great job making mirror matchups super interesting. That is not an easy task.
On July 20 2018 04:03 SHODAN wrote: the usual 2-dimensional response to player feedback. lots of talk about winrates. nothing about unit design, unit roles, unit synergy, micro potential, or anything that might make the game fun to play.
fortunately, the game is an absolute blast.
they provide some feedback that discusses these things. not in this feedback post though. also, "fun" is very subjective so its hard to discuss over a forum post and much better to discuss in person at places like BlizzCon. Every time i've met members of the Blizzard SC2 team they are ALL EARS and listening to me very, very carefully. This is where a non- 2-dimensional interaction can best occur. In particular, Greg Black very carefully listened to every word i uttered. I feel all my face to face interactions with Blizzard employers are anything but "2-dimensional".
The demand for PC RTS games has been on the decline for many many years. I'm thankful Blizzard has devoted so many resources to a declining genre that i love. I'm not so narcissistic or self-absorbed to believe that just because i love the genre that everyone else does. No one is making big time RTS games any longer because their is no demand for it.
On July 20 2018 04:03 SHODAN wrote: the usual 2-dimensional response to player feedback. lots of talk about winrates. nothing about unit design, unit roles, unit synergy, micro potential, or anything that might make the game fun to play.
did we read the same community update? I see no mention of winrates
On July 20 2018 04:03 SHODAN wrote: the usual 2-dimensional response to player feedback. lots of talk about winrates. nothing about unit design, unit roles, unit synergy, micro potential, or anything that might make the game fun to play.
did we read the same community update? I see no mention of winrates
No immediate changes, but I don't think the game really needs any big changes atm. All the matchups are reasonably well-balanced. Wonder if they are planning another major redesign post-Blizzcon (maybe the Queen?).
On July 20 2018 03:45 Fango wrote: Just because terrans are playing aggressive on 2-3 bases doesn't mean "lategame is unwinnable". It means being aggressive in the midgame is the most effective play. Pro terrans will do whatever strategy gives the best chance of success.
"Being overly agressive on 2 bases is the best method to win with terran but that doesn't mean that later stages of the game give less chance of winning" Actually it does. And you've obviously not seen TvP late game with disruptor/colossi and constant zealots/DTs warping vs bio, or tempest/revelation vs anything else. Terran is pigeonholed into 2 bases bio allins because the race lacks the means to deal with numerous late game protoss units/protoss late game economy effectively.
You completely missed the point. I never said what you've apparently quoted me to.
Being aggressive in the midgame gives terran the best chance at winning. That means lategame is less favourable for terran, not necessarily unwinnable. Pro players will do whatever strategy is best, that doesn't make it the only viable one.
If protoss has disruptors+collosi+tempest+revelation with constant zealot/DT harass, and terran just has bio, then they probably made much better in the previous 15 minutes.
glad you said this, If late game is unfavorable, then early-mid game needs a fix. This is all the more reason for a queen nerf.
On July 20 2018 04:03 SHODAN wrote: the usual 2-dimensional response to player feedback. lots of talk about winrates. nothing about unit design, unit roles, unit synergy, micro potential, or anything that might make the game fun to play.
did we read the same community update? I see no mention of winrates
Someone mentioned winrates earlier in the thread.
Aside from that, I think SHODAN has a very good point.
How Blizzard not figured terran later game is trash, because BC is trash.They need to give them some special function to counter something, not like now hit everything and be useless vs everything.
Something that people need to take into consideration about marauders is that makes both sides of the MU bad.
Yes protoss is favoured in lategame and terran in the midgame but this and never will be good design.
Besides the obvious struggles from the terran perspective it also makes it bad on the protoss side, as a protoss you know the terran is going to all-in you on 2 bases and thats the same problem PvZ had back before they nerfed the hydra upgrades, you were favoured in the late but it meant that game and game again you were going to face off against terran all ins.
This makes the MU be back again to HotS, except you went survive to colossus balls its now survive to charge/storm. You can see that in current pro TvPs. Terran all ins, did it attack before storm/charge/enough templars with energy? Terran win Terran all ins, did it attack after storm/charge/enough templars with energy? Protoss win
Of course thats not 100% of the time but it makes the MU bad for both sides as it becomes too 1 dimentional, the removal of the MsC and the buff to stalkers/zealot made TvP much better because they didn't depended on defending on 3 bases until double/forge storm.
Also saying that theres many strategies its very misleading, yes opener wise its quite good but games end up being the same all the time, how many games have been, either all game or big part, the same thing over and over? PvZ eventually ends up being always about immortals and archons versus banes and hydras, zerg has some choices, yes, but protoss is always ICA into storm/sky.
Same thing about TvP marine/tank/medivac into MMMM with eventual ghosts libs, mech has never been viable at all, only time it was in beta when cyclone and warhounds were OP as shit.
I know they are scared of disrupting balance, because everybody and their mother cares about that, but they need to start making the games more varied instead of the same strategies and methods pidgeon holed time and again because eventually people burn out on that.
I like the interference matrix and the anti armour missile. But the latter needs another type of animation, all that orange is awfull, sometimes both units of the player are orange at the same time.
TvZ is at 46% atm. Pre nerf raven was cancer in TvT and TvZ, but now lategame is Zerg favored. Blizzard needs to compensate by nerfing things like corruptor or viper. Also 8 range queens are unfair and annoying.
On July 20 2018 08:53 Lexender wrote: Something that people need to take into consideration about marauders is that makes both sides of the MU bad.
Yes protoss is favoured in lategame and terran in the midgame but this and never will be good design.
Besides the obvious struggles from the terran perspective it also makes it bad on the protoss side, as a protoss you know the terran is going to all-in you on 2 bases and thats the same problem PvZ had back before they nerfed the hydra upgrades, you were favoured in the late but it meant that game and game again you were going to face off against terran all ins.
This makes the MU be back again to HotS, except you went survive to colossus balls its now survive to charge/storm. You can see that in current pro TvPs. Terran all ins, did it attack before storm/charge/enough templars with energy? Terran win Terran all ins, did it attack after storm/charge/enough templars with energy? Protoss win
Of course thats not 100% of the time but it makes the MU bad for both sides as it becomes too 1 dimentional, the removal of the MsC and the buff to stalkers/zealot made TvP much better because they didn't depended on defending on 3 bases until double/forge storm.
Also saying that theres many strategies its very misleading, yes opener wise its quite good but games end up being the same all the time, how many games have been, either all game or big part, the same thing over and over? PvZ eventually ends up being always about immortals and archons versus banes and hydras, zerg has some choices, yes, but protoss is always ICA into storm/sky.
Same thing about TvP marine/tank/medivac into MMMM with eventual ghosts libs, mech has never been viable at all, only time it was in beta when cyclone and warhounds were OP as shit.
I know they are scared of disrupting balance, because everybody and their mother cares about that, but they need to start making the games more varied instead of the same strategies and methods pidgeon holed time and again because eventually people burn out on that.
I mean before the marauder buff Protoss was favored both in the mid game and the late game
Yah so imo what we are seeing presently is 100% a result of the raven nerf with compensatory mara and viking buff. Its a little unsettling that it wasnt an obvious or intended consequence when you think about it. What else could possibly have happened? You literally dont see terran players (even maru) intending whatsoever to play late game scenarios in any non mirror..it makes no sense. Terran has the worst macro mechanic for this stage in the game..rate of build for remax etc. The raven was stupid to watch but its also really stupid to watch broodlord infestor spore crawler slow push the map.. its also stupid to watch mass templar tempest colo rupter deathballs steamroll a move a late game terran army...so im not saying to revert the raven..but follow thru on fixing the other races caveman bullshit that anyone can execute by literally staying alive for 25 min...im including mech in that equation too.
Edit: Just to be clear.. im not saying all races need equal strength at all times in the game..but i am saying that the ultimate composition of any race should not be so easy to micro and multi with that you cant tell the difference whether stats is playing or some random masters player in a late game fight. Mechanics should be important all the way thru the game so that t > 25 isnt a predetermined conclusion and someone who can micro / macro and multitask 2 x his opponent will still win the game regardless of what race they play.
I've never liked blizzard's philosophy of "different advantages at different points of the game." The problem being: you're basically putting one race (in most cases the terran) on a timer, and forcing them to play a few specific, aggressive ways. That's just not a good way to design a real time strategy game.
The game is fairly balanced but that is just because everyone has adapted their gameplay to the balance situation. No point in trying to play late game if you are Terran now.
Pre patch I remember TvZ and TvP going to the late game quite often. Now every single game is killing Zerg as they transition to Hive and killing Protoss before Carrier/HT.
My win rates are same but the game has become more repetitive.
On July 20 2018 02:52 McNuggets wrote: Nothing about shield batteries and immortals vs zerg. feelsbadman.
Great to hear that it is not only my issue. Played a game recently, as mid-M Z vs dia P, and barely, even luckily won vs shield battery-immortal-disruptor. Usually it's a straight up loss in case P will follow simple steps of checking for a hidden base. Once again, was thinking how to get rid of this cancer, and realized that starting batteries with 0 energy can be an answer. That will allow use them as expected - in defense, but will take some wind out of aggression sails.
Help me out, what s the update here? Basically they tapped themselves on the shoulders saying, Yeah, there are complaints, and there are situational imbalances, but we re pretty awesome and satisfied with ourselves
On July 20 2018 16:52 Geo.Rion wrote: Help me out, what s the update here? Basically they tapped themselves on the shoulders saying, Yeah, there are complaints, and there are situational imbalances, but we re pretty awesome and satisfied with ourselves
On July 20 2018 16:52 Geo.Rion wrote: Help me out, what s the update here? Basically they tapped themselves on the shoulders saying, Yeah, there are complaints, and there are situational imbalances, but we re pretty awesome and satisfied with ourselves
"eh chief, been a while since we wrote one of them typy uppy things about sc2." the lead designer pauses his overwatch session, puts his feet up and drolls: "ehh give it to that new intern on bottom floor. yeah yeah, samantha, the cute one from HR. hell, she probably knows more about balance design than we do!" they all laugh and go back to playing overwatch.
You all need to stop with this "queen nerf" ballshit.
Protoss and Terrans has so many options of early game harras and pushes that nerfing queen in any way means deleting Zerg from the game. Balance is pretty much good in TvZ i would say, especially with that map pool. Ravens after nerf are still good unit and it really makes me laugh that just because Terrans can't mass it into victory, they stopped making even 2 of them to hit some AAM, which in my opinion is very, very good spell still. I mean -3 armour to all hit units?
Korean Terrans still wreck korean Zergs. Queen just like she is now, is a must as a defending tool, especially that Blizzard stripped Zerg from early game agression tool like overlord drops.
I don't like that Zerg matchups are mostly defending till midgame, but hey. It is what it is. It's Protoss and Terran problem to hit my economy and pressure me enough to win.
Again. TvZ is fine in my opinion. I say that with heavy heart because still I get frustrated from diversity of T options in early game, and imba mules and shit.
PvZ though needs some tweeking. Carriers/Storm is imba, also very frustrating is that P can reach tier 3 units in early game without consequences- Archon Drop...My god...Immortals also are too strong, and i think Terrans will agree with me too. I don't say PvZ is totally Protoss favored, but definitely needs some tweaking in those departments.
To be honest I get sick from ppl that want Zerg nerfs, as Zerg was the most nerfed race since major changes. Lurkers- nerfed, Hydras- nerfed, Ravsgers- nerfed, Vipers- nerfed in both Parasitic Bomb and Blinding Cloud, Droperlords- nerfed, Ultralisks- nerfed. Funny how u don't remember that. Sick.
Overall, I agree that the game is in pretty good shape balance wise, maybe needs sone tweaking but it's pretty much fine. Ofc it's fulk of frustrating things, but it's not because of balance, but because of things we can't do on our current level of play.
I think Blizzard is saying that overall u have options as a player- u want to play ultra agressive and active? Change race from Zerg to Terran. The game itself gives u an option to play whatever u want, not necessarily your race.
On July 20 2018 11:08 DomeGetta wrote: Yah so imo what we are seeing presently is 100% a result of the raven nerf with compensatory mara and viking buff. Its a little unsettling that it wasnt an obvious or intended consequence when you think about it. What else could possibly have happened? You literally dont see terran players (even maru) intending whatsoever to play late game scenarios in any non mirror..it makes no sense. Terran has the worst macro mechanic for this stage in the game..rate of build for remax etc. The raven was stupid to watch but its also really stupid to watch broodlord infestor spore crawler slow push the map.. its also stupid to watch mass templar tempest colo rupter deathballs steamroll a move a late game terran army...so im not saying to revert the raven..but follow thru on fixing the other races caveman bullshit that anyone can execute by literally staying alive for 25 min...im including mech in that equation too.
Edit: Just to be clear.. im not saying all races need equal strength at all times in the game..but i am saying that the ultimate composition of any race should not be so easy to micro and multi with that you cant tell the difference whether stats is playing or some random masters player in a late game fight. Mechanics should be important all the way thru the game so that t > 25 isnt a predetermined conclusion and someone who can micro / macro and multitask 2 x his opponent will still win the game regardless of what race they play.
If you think Broodlord/Infestor/Viper/Hydra/Queen army with creep and spores pushes is easy to control, just go and try it in efficient way. I bet u would fall trying.
In Activision HQ, a fat, balding middle-aged man is talking with his secretary. 'Microtransaction sales in SC2 for the last quarter are far lower than expected, tell the SC2 team to do something about it', says the man. 'Uuuugh, sir, there is no SC2 team...we moved them over to Overwatch and Hearthstone a long time ago....' 'Then tell marketing to do something about it, maybe they can have some intern try his hand at it.' And that's how this community feedback update was born.
On July 20 2018 18:08 ihatevideogames wrote: In Activision HQ, a fat, balding middle-aged man is talking with his secretary. 'Microtransaction sales in SC2 for the last quarter are far lower than expected, tell the SC2 team to do something about it', says the man. 'Uuuugh, sir, there is no SC2 team...we moved them over to Overwatch and Hearthstone a long time ago....' 'Then tell marketing to do something about it, maybe they can have some intern try his hand at it.' And that's how this community feedback update was born.
On July 20 2018 18:08 ihatevideogames wrote: In Activision HQ, a fat, balding middle-aged man is talking with his secretary. 'Microtransaction sales in SC2 for the last quarter are far lower than expected, tell the SC2 team to do something about it', says the man. 'Uuuugh, sir, there is no SC2 team...we moved them over to Overwatch and Hearthstone a long time ago....' 'Then tell marketing to do something about it, maybe they can have some intern try his hand at it.' And that's how this community feedback update was born.
Somewhere in a basement, a fat, balding middle-aged man is talking to himself. "I absolutely hate microtransactions in SC2, so I better make sure to let everyone on TL know regardless of the actual topic of the thread", says the man. "Uuuuugh, sir, not sure if there's any connection between microtransactions and game balance in SC2..." "Then I'll just wrap my nonsense in a supposed-to-be-funny dialogue so hopefully nobody finds out it's not related, at all!" And that's how this comment was born.
On July 20 2018 18:08 ihatevideogames wrote: In Activision HQ, a fat, balding middle-aged man is talking with his secretary. 'Microtransaction sales in SC2 for the last quarter are far lower than expected, tell the SC2 team to do something about it', says the man. 'Uuuugh, sir, there is no SC2 team...we moved them over to Overwatch and Hearthstone a long time ago....' 'Then tell marketing to do something about it, maybe they can have some intern try his hand at it.' And that's how this community feedback update was born.
Somewhere in a basement, a fat, balding middle-aged man is talking to himself. "I absolutely hate microtransactions in SC2, so I better make sure to let everyone on TL know regardless of the actual topic of the thread", says the man. "Uuuuugh, sir, not sure if there's any connection between microtransactions and game balance in SC2..." "Then I'll just wrap my nonsense in a supposed-to-be-funny dialouge so hopefully nobody finds out it's not related, at all!" And that's how this comment was born.
On July 20 2018 16:25 Haikus wrote: I've never liked blizzard's philosophy of "different advantages at different points of the game." The problem being: you're basically putting one race (in most cases the terran) on a timer, and forcing them to play a few specific, aggressive ways. That's just not a good way to design a real time strategy game.
It's not anyone's philosophy because Blizzard or people like it. It's just an inevitable outcome of a game with 3 vastly different races. The point is to make it so that those disparities in strength at each stage are minimized.
I think current ballance is in a good spot overall. The muarder change made Terran feel a lot more even in power level with the other races. As I predicted the Viking has done next to nothing to ballance out the raven nerf, but at least Terran midgame is now strong enough that you can often force a midgame advantage that lets you scale into late game faster and shut down Zerg or Protoss before they get there. Ghosts are also still a decent late game unit for Terran that can allow them to close out a game if they have enough of a lead and frankly I think that's fine. In tvz Terran has the initive for most of the game after the hydra nerfs so it's fine that Zerg late game is stronger. In tvp I think ballance is a bit more questionable but Terran at least has several good opening stratagies they can employ to get a lead
That's my take on where we are after the last patch as a primarily Terran but also random master player. overall I'm loving the state of the game right now, balance is fairly good, lots of viable ways to play for all races. Things are going well some small tuning for the pro level might be needed but I think for most of us plebs the game is in a better state than its been in awhile.
On July 20 2018 18:08 ihatevideogames wrote: In Activision HQ, a fat, balding middle-aged man is talking with his secretary. 'Microtransaction sales in SC2 for the last quarter are far lower than expected, tell the SC2 team to do something about it', says the man. 'Uuuugh, sir, there is no SC2 team...we moved them over to Overwatch and Hearthstone a long time ago....' 'Then tell marketing to do something about it, maybe they can have some intern try his hand at it.' And that's how this community feedback update was born.
Somewhere in a basement, a fat, balding middle-aged man is talking to himself. "I absolutely hate microtransactions in SC2, so I better make sure to let everyone on TL know regardless of the actual topic of the thread", says the man. "Uuuuugh, sir, not sure if there's any connection between microtransactions and game balance in SC2..." "Then I'll just wrap my nonsense in a supposed-to-be-funny dialogue so hopefully nobody finds out it's not related, at all!" And that's how this comment was born.
On July 20 2018 18:08 ihatevideogames wrote: In Activision HQ, a fat, balding middle-aged man is talking with his secretary. 'Microtransaction sales in SC2 for the last quarter are far lower than expected, tell the SC2 team to do something about it', says the man. 'Uuuugh, sir, there is no SC2 team...we moved them over to Overwatch and Hearthstone a long time ago....' 'Then tell marketing to do something about it, maybe they can have some intern try his hand at it.' And that's how this community feedback update was born.
Somewhere in a basement, a fat, balding middle-aged man is talking to himself. "I absolutely hate microtransactions in SC2, so I better make sure to let everyone on TL know regardless of the actual topic of the thread", says the man. "Uuuuugh, sir, not sure if there's any connection between microtransactions and game balance in SC2..." "Then I'll just wrap my nonsense in a supposed-to-be-funny dialogue so hopefully nobody finds out it's not related, at all!" And that's how this comment was born.
On July 20 2018 11:08 DomeGetta wrote: Yah so imo what we are seeing presently is 100% a result of the raven nerf with compensatory mara and viking buff. Its a little unsettling that it wasnt an obvious or intended consequence when you think about it. What else could possibly have happened? You literally dont see terran players (even maru) intending whatsoever to play late game scenarios in any non mirror..it makes no sense. Terran has the worst macro mechanic for this stage in the game..rate of build for remax etc. The raven was stupid to watch but its also really stupid to watch broodlord infestor spore crawler slow push the map.. its also stupid to watch mass templar tempest colo rupter deathballs steamroll a move a late game terran army...so im not saying to revert the raven..but follow thru on fixing the other races caveman bullshit that anyone can execute by literally staying alive for 25 min...im including mech in that equation too.
Edit: Just to be clear.. im not saying all races need equal strength at all times in the game..but i am saying that the ultimate composition of any race should not be so easy to micro and multi with that you cant tell the difference whether stats is playing or some random masters player in a late game fight. Mechanics should be important all the way thru the game so that t > 25 isnt a predetermined conclusion and someone who can micro / macro and multitask 2 x his opponent will still win the game regardless of what race they play.
If you think Broodlord/Infestor/Viper/Hydra/Queen army with creep and spores pushes is easy to control, just go and try it in efficient way. I bet u would fall trying.
I hesitate to even respond to this based on your demonstrated capability to whine for Zerg independent of the state of the game (see your previous post for 1 example of this). Having said that - regardless of how much I disagree with even your current point here - you are missing the main idea in my post. Unless you are saying that there is some level of counter-play (micro / multi or even strategy) that can allow a Terran player of higher skill level to beat this ultimate composition - you aren't really disagreeing with me? There is only so much to do with that army above - Broodlords literal a move - queens literal a move and spam transfuse - spores uproot and move forward at your leisure and infestors fungal when units are in range? My proposal is to create tier 3 tech comps for all races that have higher skill ceilings to utilize so that even though one races tier 3 might be stronger than another races - the game isn't 100% over just because it got to that point.
On July 20 2018 11:08 DomeGetta wrote: Yah so imo what we are seeing presently is 100% a result of the raven nerf with compensatory mara and viking buff. Its a little unsettling that it wasnt an obvious or intended consequence when you think about it. What else could possibly have happened? You literally dont see terran players (even maru) intending whatsoever to play late game scenarios in any non mirror..it makes no sense. Terran has the worst macro mechanic for this stage in the game..rate of build for remax etc. The raven was stupid to watch but its also really stupid to watch broodlord infestor spore crawler slow push the map.. its also stupid to watch mass templar tempest colo rupter deathballs steamroll a move a late game terran army...so im not saying to revert the raven..but follow thru on fixing the other races caveman bullshit that anyone can execute by literally staying alive for 25 min...im including mech in that equation too.
Edit: Just to be clear.. im not saying all races need equal strength at all times in the game..but i am saying that the ultimate composition of any race should not be so easy to micro and multi with that you cant tell the difference whether stats is playing or some random masters player in a late game fight. Mechanics should be important all the way thru the game so that t > 25 isnt a predetermined conclusion and someone who can micro / macro and multitask 2 x his opponent will still win the game regardless of what race they play.
If you think Broodlord/Infestor/Viper/Hydra/Queen army with creep and spores pushes is easy to control, just go and try it in efficient way. I bet u would fall trying.
I hesitate to even respond to this based on your demonstrated capability to whine for Zerg independent of the state of the game (see your previous post for 1 example of this). Having said that - regardless of how much I disagree with even your current point here - you are missing the main idea in my post. Unless you are saying that there is some level of counter-play (micro / multi or even strategy) that can allow a Terran player of higher skill level to beat this ultimate composition - you aren't really disagreeing with me? There is only so much to do with that army above - Broodlords literal a move - queens literal a move and spam transfuse - spores uproot and move forward at your leisure and infestors fungal when units are in range? My proposal is to create tier 3 tech comps for all races that have higher skill ceilings to utilize so that even though one races tier 3 might be stronger than another races - the game isn't 100% over just because it got to that point.
80% of Zerg is a-move, but Broodlords are not. You use them like carriers: have them release their volley then retreat. A-moving them at a high level would just get them killed.
Queens (Infestors as well, vipers too) are countered hard by ghosts- try EMP and they are useless- but no... it's easier to queue some snipes on rapid fire and then go whine on forums. Broodlords are countered by ghost too via Snipe.
If u face Broodlord/Viper/Infestor/Queen army, which again- is super hard to control properly to their max efectiveness, you should have Ghosts and Ravens among with bio/tank or Thor/Viking in the same time. Ghosts countering Vioer/Infestor/Queen- really one or two EMP is enough, Raven for AAM and bio for dmg. Look how fast all disappears with -3 armour on it.
Now. I don't say that this Terran compositions is easy to control, but it's also the case for this Zerg composition. Only at the highest level of play we see this level of control and still it's not perfect.
Saying that Broodlord/Vioer/Infestor/Queen is a-move composition is just fucking bias- Avilo Level.
There is at the moment a lot of suggestions about buffing the BC, but imo the cons outweight the pros by far. I think Terran is fine if they don't sit around doing nothing. I do not believe that both players sitting around and macroing up needs to result in an even match. I only believe that the race that is required to be aggressive should not need to have way better multitasking, but that is an entirely different problem. Although these two are often confused. Terran Bio is atm the probably most fun composition in the game so making BC-Raven or whatever the Terran equivalent to Carrier-Templar viable would be extremely stupid. Just because Protoss has a kinda dumb lategame composition doesn't mean Terran needs one too. Two wrongs don't make a right. If anything Blizzard should kill Carrier-Templar. Any mass air composition in general should not be viable at any point. Something about the irrelevance of terrain and unit collisions just makes it much less fun.
On July 20 2018 03:13 JackONeill wrote: Yeah fair enough TvZ late game is zerg favored.
But... nothing about late game TvP being protoss favored? At this point it's becoming a meme but also : nothing about mech still being horrible in TvP?
Is it? Do you have some example games (in GSL) where the Protoss lategame was shown to be imba?
And if you wanna fix Mech being horrible in TvP start remaking the whole Protoss race from the ground up. Its basically like Protoss was inherently designed to kill mech. Which is wonderful since mech is so terrible in SC2.
On July 21 2018 01:22 hiroshOne wrote: Queens (Infestors as well, vipers too) are countered hard by ghosts- try EMP and they are useless- but no... it's easier to queue some snipes on rapid fire and then go whine on forums. Broodlords are countered by ghost too via Snipe.
If u face Broodlord/Viper/Infestor/Queen army, which again- is super hard to control properly to their max efectiveness, you should have Ghosts and Ravens among with bio/tank or Thor/Viking in the same time. Ghosts countering Vioer/Infestor/Queen- really one or two EMP is enough, Raven for AAM and bio for dmg. Look how fast all disappears with -3 armour on it.
Now. I don't say that this Terran compositions is easy to control, but it's also the case for this Zerg composition. Only at the highest level of play we see this level of control and still it's not perfect.
Saying that Broodlord/Vioer/Infestor/Queen is a-move composition is just fucking bias- Avilo Level.
bias avilo level? afaik he also playing zerg and having ok lategame zvt lel
I like that they're takng it slow with updates right now. In my opinion the game is in a pretty good place right now, both design wise and balance wise. I'd like to see things play out for a while before any more changes.
The only change I think is required sometime in the future is some form of buff to the Battlecruiser. I see all other units in high-level tournaments on a regular basis right now ( Which is freaking amazing! ). My wish is mostly design based but I think that a viable Battlecruiser could help balance the lategame vs both Protoss and Zerg. I don't think Terran is massively underpowered lategame ( In terms of available power ) right now but they do require more effort imo ( Just play like Maru ).
I have riddled this post with "imo" since that all that it is. I love this game and as with everyone in here I just want to help it improve even more from what is already the best game in the world! Cheers!
On July 21 2018 01:44 Aunvilgodess wrote: There is at the moment a lot of suggestions about buffing the BC, but imo the cons outweight the pros by far.
Unless they make the unit godly, there are literally no cons.
On July 21 2018 01:44 Aunvilgodess wrote: I think Terran is fine if they don't sit around doing nothing. I do not believe that both players sitting around and macroing up needs to result in an even match. I only believe that the race that is required to be aggressive should not need to have way better multitasking, but that is an entirely different problem.
If the aggressor doesn't need better multitasking, they automatically win. They definitely don't in SC2 since defending drops is a lot harder than shift clicking them. I'd say a good 50% of the design issues in SC2 are because things are significantly harder to defend than to execute.
On July 21 2018 01:44 Aunvilgodess wrote: Any mass air composition in general should not be viable at any point. Something about the irrelevance of terrain and unit collisions just makes it much less fun.
Mass air shouldn't be viable in a space RTS game? Sometimes I wonder about people.
Lategame TvP is winnable for terran, even though protoss may be considered at an advantage. But terran is clearly favoured in the midgame, so should be in a stronger position going into the lategame anyway.
Nonsense.
The marauder buff made every pro terran "allin" or perform extraordinarily agressive 2 bases builds versus protoss because late game is near-unwinnable. Late game vs zerg is extremely hard but at least you can manoeuvrer against broodlords.
I'd actually argue that late game TvP is much more of a concern that late game TvZ.
Just because terrans are playing aggressive on 2-3 bases doesn't mean "lategame is unwinnable". It means being aggressive in the midgame is the most effective play. Pro players will do whatever strategy gives the best chance of success. That doesn't mean whatever they do is the only chance of success.
TvZ is a different story, pro terrans generally aren't winning it anymore. TvZ has been at 45-46% recently, so obviously it's not a severe imbalance, but a lot of games seem to be over if zerg gets established on hive tech.
A lot of that has to do with the maps I think.
Darkness Sanctuary in particular is a dumb map that is borderline impossible to win against Zerg in the late game now.
On July 21 2018 01:22 hiroshOne wrote: Queens (Infestors as well, vipers too) are countered hard by ghosts- try EMP and they are useless- but no... it's easier to queue some snipes on rapid fire and then go whine on forums. Broodlords are countered by ghost too via Snipe.
If u face Broodlord/Viper/Infestor/Queen army, which again- is super hard to control properly to their max efectiveness, you should have Ghosts and Ravens among with bio/tank or Thor/Viking in the same time. Ghosts countering Vioer/Infestor/Queen- really one or two EMP is enough, Raven for AAM and bio for dmg. Look how fast all disappears with -3 armour on it.
Now. I don't say that this Terran compositions is easy to control, but it's also the case for this Zerg composition. Only at the highest level of play we see this level of control and still it's not perfect.
Saying that Broodlord/Vioer/Infestor/Queen is a-move composition is just fucking bias- Avilo Level.
Yeah emp is super easy to land on any Zerg unit under a swarm of broodlings. The broodlord is the problem - not any of the other units - snipe is great if you decide to attack with only broodlords but that isnt a thing? This would be balanced out (and still retarded and horrendous to watch) if you gave Terran a massive T3 unit that had broodlord range air to ground. The only actual argument that has been made in defense of broodlords not being an a move unit is that you have to move command them back at some point - at the speed they move you can do this with negligible apm. LOL. There is literally no micro involved with the unit - you can't just rage that there is and make it so. Vipers/Infestors and Queens all have to cast a spell - well damn - that's super difficult and falls into the same argument that Protoss players make about how hard it is to micro their death-ball. To test this insane argument you are making I would propose the following scenario:
Fast forward in a replay to a split map 10K/10K bank ultimate comp vs ultimate comp situation Tvz and have Maru take over the Terran and a random NA GM zerg player take over the Zerg - log results.
Do the same thing except now get a random NA GM Terran player vs. Rogue from a midgame 2-1-1 position (where Terran is supposed to have an of edge )
Rogue won't drop a game - because even tho Terran has an advantage - his multi/micro will allow him to overwhelm the Terran. Maru will drop a fair share of the games because the situation doesn't allow for his mechanics to help him. It will rely on the zerg player doing something terrible for him to win.
That existing in the game isn't good for any matchup imo.
Same thing I can say about Maru, being in disadvantage , he can pull off the game only with his micro. What's wrong with that? Isn't this what that game is about? Being crybaby because someone is better in the game?
Don't u see that I can say same thing about Infestors or Vipers for example? Easy to say that u have funghals or Blinding clouds or Parasitic Bombs, it's super easy to cast them when Terran has ghosts under his Liberators, when u risk EMP on all your casters- uncounterable by Zerg.
Late game Zerg comp vs Lategsme Terran comp is kind of dance whenre one mistake can cost u the game, but also both sides has a route of escape from engagement if things go wrong. Zerg less because Broodlords are less mobile than ghosts and bio.
On July 21 2018 06:33 hiroshOne wrote: Same thing I can say about Maru, being in disadvantage , he can pull off the game only with his micro. What's wrong with that? Isn't this what that game is about? Being crybaby because someone is better in the game?
Don't u see that I can say same thing about Infestors or Vipers for example? Easy to say that u have funghals or Blinding clouds or Parasitic Bombs, it's super easy to cast them when Terran has ghosts under his Liberators, when u risk EMP on all your casters- uncounterable by Zerg.
Late game Zerg comp vs Lategsme Terran comp is kind of dance whenre one mistake can cost u the game, but also both sides has a route of escape from engagement if things go wrong. Zerg less because Broodlords are less mobile than ghosts and bio.
Having your vipers EMP'ed is not automatically game over in a split map situation since you can retreat back and just regen their energy relatively quickly.
On July 21 2018 01:22 hiroshOne wrote: Queens (Infestors as well, vipers too) are countered hard by ghosts- try EMP and they are useless- but no... it's easier to queue some snipes on rapid fire and then go whine on forums. Broodlords are countered by ghost too via Snipe.
If u face Broodlord/Viper/Infestor/Queen army, which again- is super hard to control properly to their max efectiveness, you should have Ghosts and Ravens among with bio/tank or Thor/Viking in the same time. Ghosts countering Vioer/Infestor/Queen- really one or two EMP is enough, Raven for AAM and bio for dmg. Look how fast all disappears with -3 armour on it.
Now. I don't say that this Terran compositions is easy to control, but it's also the case for this Zerg composition. Only at the highest level of play we see this level of control and still it's not perfect.
Saying that Broodlord/Vioer/Infestor/Queen is a-move composition is just fucking bias- Avilo Level.
Yeah emp is super easy to land on any Zerg unit under a swarm of broodlings. The broodlord is the problem - not any of the other units - snipe is great if you decide to attack with only broodlords but that isnt a thing? This would be balanced out (and still retarded and horrendous to watch) if you gave Terran a massive T3 unit that had broodlord range air to ground. The only actual argument that has been made in defense of broodlords not being an a move unit is that you have to move command them back at some point - at the speed they move you can do this with negligible apm. LOL. There is literally no micro involved with the unit - you can't just rage that there is and make it so. Vipers/Infestors and Queens all have to cast a spell - well damn - that's super difficult and falls into the same argument that Protoss players make about how hard it is to micro their death-ball. To test this insane argument you are making I would propose the following scenario:
Fast forward in a replay to a split map 10K/10K bank ultimate comp vs ultimate comp situation Tvz and have Maru take over the Terran and a random NA GM zerg player take over the Zerg - log results.
Do the same thing except now get a random NA GM Terran player vs. Rogue from a midgame 2-1-1 position (where Terran is supposed to have an of edge )
Rogue won't drop a game - because even tho Terran has an advantage - his multi/micro will allow him to overwhelm the Terran. Maru will drop a fair share of the games because the situation doesn't allow for his mechanics to help him. It will rely on the zerg player doing something terrible for him to win.
That existing in the game isn't good for any matchup imo.
Dude really? I mean having a discussion requires both sides to be arguing in good faith. The idea that maru would drop a fair share of games against random NA gms given the situation you created isn't really believable or backed up by any reason. If you want changes come out and say them; don't make up random ideas to 'support' them.
Lol. I think this community feedback says at least one of two things: 1) we do not care enough about sc2 to think about it 2) we have no idea about what is going on
For about nine months at least half the matches of about every tournament were ZvZ. The latest WCs Valencia is a nice example for that and it became most visible in the playoffs: The winner bracket was essentially ZvZ only. It is unbearable. This overrepresentation of one specific faction should teach everybody that the "equal win rate" argument has been degraded to phony babbling.
In about the same timeframe the game has become a special case of one sided. We see so many matches that end 2:0 or 3:0. The casters do their best to picture games as close, or fights as unpredictable, but the results speak a very different language. A single game might sometimes appear close, but it probably wasn't, when the entire series ends without dropping a game. There is a strange volatility in the game that makes the individual either destroy their opponent or be as successful as I would be in their place. On stage, we don't see any effective improvisation anymore. Nothing cool, no surprises. We might hear people say something else, but the results do not reflect those assessments.
On the whole the entire lot thing keeps going from bad to worse. Quite sad.
Gotta say, I think you guys are arguing about the wrong thing. It’s true enough that lategame armies are a bitch to manage. So many moving parts, so many control groups, so many chances to screw up. But I think that's kind of beside the point.
The point is twofold:
First, enough Ghosts with enough energy and proper control, assuming they’re in a properly sieged and fortified defensive setup, can smash any army that Zerg can produce. The ultimate Terran army beats the ultimate Zerg army, hands down. Planetaries, Liberators, and Marauders shield the Ghosts from the Ling/Bane/Broodlings and let them get their spells off. Barring lucky fungals that catch the entire Ghost ball or an equivalent miracle, EMP will deny spellcasting and snipes will slaughter the Zerg tech units.
Second, Zerg has a massive advantage and will almost certainly win in the lategame. This is not because the ultimate army for Zerg is stronger–it’s weaker. It’s simply because the lategame reverses the conventional roles of each race, and Zerg gains an inherent advantage from that. In normal TvZ, Terran is the aggressor and Zerg the defender. Zerg therefore has certain advantages to facilitate that defense. Like creep, for vision and rapid army movement. It also has the production advantage of larva, which allow army units to be produced on-demand. As the defender, these advantages are necessary to survive. Of course, Terran has offensive advantages too. Mules let the Terran produce fewer scvs and more army, planetaries reduce the need for static defense, and so forth. However, in the lategame, the roles flip. Terran becomes the defender and Zerg the aggressor. And as the aggressor, Zerg’s advantages become overwhelmingly strong whereas Terran’s defensive advantages dwindle to irrelevance, and thus Zerg gains a massive advantage over Terran.
I mentioned earlier that the ultimate Terran army can beat the ultimate Zerg army. Problem is, the ultimate Terran army is slow as fuck and extremely clunky to reposition, because of the need for unsieging and resieging, presplitting, etc. Because Ghosts are the critical unit, it is also hindered by the need to accommodate and protect slow ground units around terrain features. Now to be fair, the ultimate Zerg army is also slow as fuck, despite being more reliant on air units; nobody says BLs are fast.
The key here is that ultimate armies don’t actually matter. The lategame is not about ultimate armies. It’s about the economy.
Think for a moment about a generic TvZ lategame. The map is split in two. The Zerg half, and probably a fair chunk of the Terran half, is covered in creep. Terran is all turtled up behind sensor towers and planetaries and turrets. Both sides have massive banks (Zerg moreso) and both sides have these enormous lategame deathballs squaring off on one side of the map, near Terran’s fifth or sixth.
If Zerg is dumb, they look at their mighty LBH + BL/Infestor/Corruptor/Viper army and go “Hell yeah this army is invincible! Imma go crush that Terran scrub!” They muster up all their micro skill and go for it. Then the Terran army goes pew pew and suddenly that mighty Zerg army is a puddle of blood. The dumb Zerg, in a fit of petulance, reaches for his enormous checkbook and writes himself a big old check for a whole new LBH + BL/Infestor/Corruptor/Viper army. Rinse and repeat until the dumb Zerg realizes that the universe is finite, its resources finite, and promptly dies.
But if the Zerg is smart, they look at their mighty LBH + BL/Infestor/Corruptor/Viper army and go….absolutely nowhere. That mighty Zerg army does nothing at all. It just sits on its ass, right on the edge of Terran’s vision, occasionally poking and posturing and reminding Terran of the horrible swarmy doom that it can unleash at any moment. Any moment now. Aaaaany moment.
Instead, the smart Zerg takes some of the smallest, most insignificant units in that mighty Zerg army, namely Ling/Bane, and runs it to the opposite side of the map, to Terran’s fourth or sixth or whatever. While both players are staring at their enormous deathballs, he amoves or shift-clicks into the base, and gets cleaned up after blowing up some supply depots or something. Then he makes some more Ling/Bane and does it again, at that same base, or another base, doesn’t matter just as long as it’s far away from the big Terran deathball. None of this will accomplish very much, just killing the stray depot or sensor tower or what have you, slowly eroding the walls of the Terran turtle. Attention, after all, is a resource just like minerals or gas, and just as finite. Terran doesn’t have time to fix walls–at least not all of them–when there’s a horrible swarmy doom on his doorstep.
Then the Zerg takes a little more supply, and makes a bunch of banes. A whole lot of banes. He runs them past the broken-down walls and straight into a planetary. Boom. Suddenly Terran is down a base. This, of course, gets a reaction from the Terran. He needs that base, after all. So he sends an scv to build a new CC, or he floats over one of his orbitals, or whatever. Whatever it is, it’s more vulnerable than a planetary was, so it’s a straightforward matter for the Zerg to send a bit more Ling/Bane and deny it. Now the Terran wises up, assuming he didn’t the first time, and sends a couple medivacs worth of bio to clean up the nuisance and secure the expansion. So the next time, Zerg sends the Ling/Bane to a different base. If he’s feeling bold, perhaps he sends some hydras or even ultras along with them. Maybe he even attacks two bases at once. Maybe once Terran has pulled scvs, he burrows some cracklings in the mineral line, or banes along the reinforcement path. You get the idea. Soon enough the Terran is running everywhere, trying to put out fires. Except more of them keep springing up. Except the Ling/Bane arsonists are faster than the MMM firefighters. Except Zerg has a bigger bank than he does, and the larva to use it, and an extra base or two mining because Terran’s fourth or fifth or sixth is always on fire.
The thing is, Ling/Bane is fast. Really fast. When the map is mostly purple, Ling/Bane gets anywhere in a real hurry. As the defender, this is essential in order to react to drops. As the aggressor though, Ling/Bane runs rings around Bio. And Terran's own advantages don't scale the same way. Mules are great but somewhat less important with huge banks. While they do allow larger Terran armies, the issue is not army size but rather army position. Even a maxed army cannot defend everywhere. Planetaries are great against smaller harass but enough banes can and do defeat them. When Terran is the one defending, stimmed bio arrives to the fight half-dead. Boost is a slow reaction when the first warning is banes exploding. And when both players are paying attention to their huge deathballs, amoved Ling/Bane blows up amoved Bio. Cracklings tear buildings down in record time, and while using banes against buildings is inefficient, that doesn’t matter so much when Zerg has an extra base or two mining.
And all the while, Zerg has an enormous deathball waiting patiently outside the Terran base. Waiting for Terran to lose a little too much patience and move out of that fortified position with turrets and planetaries and liberators galore. Waiting for Terran to lose a little too much economy and stop replacing those expensive Ghosts. Waiting for victory.
So maybe Terran doesn’t take the bait and waits, putting out fires as best as he can, trying to harass a Zerg with vision of half the map and then some. Eventually Terran’s smaller bank runs dry and his hope with it. Death by a thousand cuts. Zerg wins.
Or Terran does take the bait and moves out, onto creep, into a spore forest, trying to smash the Zerg in a decisive engagement. Even if he wins the fight by some miracle, what then? Go deep onto creep to kill one hatchery and get surrounded by the remax? Or inch forward, clear a bit of creep, and hope to pull off another miracle against the remax? Death by overextension. Zerg wins.
I think you get the picture. People often say that Terran has a weak lategame against Zerg, which I don’t think is entirely accurate. Terran has a strong lategame. It just doesn’t matter, because lategame isn’t about strength on a fundamental level. It’s about the economy.
Sorry for the wall of text. TL;DR lategame TvZ is a game of economy with Terran defending and Zerg attacking, and inherently favors Zerg.
On July 21 2018 01:44 Aunvilgodess wrote: There is at the moment a lot of suggestions about buffing the BC, but imo the cons outweight the pros by far.
Unless they make the unit godly, there are literally no cons.
On July 21 2018 01:44 Aunvilgodess wrote: I think Terran is fine if they don't sit around doing nothing. I do not believe that both players sitting around and macroing up needs to result in an even match. I only believe that the race that is required to be aggressive should not need to have way better multitasking, but that is an entirely different problem.
If the aggressor doesn't need better multitasking, they automatically win. They definitely don't in SC2 since defending drops is a lot harder than shift clicking them. I'd say a good 50% of the design issues in SC2 are because things are significantly harder to defend than to execute.
On July 21 2018 01:44 Aunvilgodess wrote: Any mass air composition in general should not be viable at any point. Something about the irrelevance of terrain and unit collisions just makes it much less fun.
Mass air shouldn't be viable in a space RTS game? Sometimes I wonder about people.
tbh I agree mass air just kinda sucks in terms of fun. At least for me I prity much never enjoy playing with or against a mass air death ball because the nature of big blobs of slow air units is just less conducive to fun unit micro, tactics and fast paced action. This is the one aspect of rts I think starcraft just does not nail well. I always have fantasized about what sc2 would be like if air units functioned like they did In Red alert three where helicopter like units still functioned in the blooby air deathball kind of way but factions also had access to air units that had to refuel and get bombs from airports. This made it so that air units required a significant amount of babysitting since you would constantly be moving them out on the map than back to your base to resupply and it also allowed air units to on a pound for pound basis be significantly stronger and more impact-full in small numbers than they are in sc2 because they were only very impact full for a specific amount of time in a very localized area.
I think the problem with sc2 air units in general is that they are all "hellicopters" they are all units that just bypass terrain and blob up. This would not be so bad if it wern't for the other problem with sc2 units, that at the higher tiers air units are more powerfull than there ground unit counterparts so they get all the advantages of being an air unit without any significant drawbacks. I think this is a result of sc2 not having dedicated air to air or ground to air specialist units. In brood war air death balls although powerful are not unstoppable because there are units like goliaths, corsairs, scourge, and devourers that specifically fulfill an anti air role and even in zvz where mutas are very powerful these anti air specialists help to provide some interesting mechanics to the air battle. Its worth noting that in brood war things play out so that its almost never desirable except in mirrors for both players to pursue an air deathball, which significantly helps prevent air vs air blobs.
Sc2 is largely lacking on strong anti air specialist units especially when it comes to terran, zerg has the viper which although obviously does not prevent protoss air deathballs is very effective against air blobs, and protoss has the tempest which is very helpful vs air units and static units like tanks without being that great vs other units due to there cost, tech, poor mobility, and low dps. Sc2 trys to balance this out by making strong air units relatively slow but this only turns the late game into a long drawn out turtly kind of game that shares none of the fun mechanics of the early and mid game if both players go into it with large stable economies.
Obviously changing air units would be a huge overhuall of late game and throw balance out of whack but I wish some tweeks would be made that would make ground based late game armies more competitive with air based ones because the gameplay of sc2 in my opinion is at its best when ground units are the core of your army and air units are only there to provide some harass potential and utility to the ground army,.
I still want to believe that they are trying hard enough to represent starcraft as a future e-sport. But current update, that is not what I want to hear from them. Very passive. It sounds for me something like that, we do not want to interfere with it and do something else until autumn. While it needed. At least they should have share much more information about current situation. Do they look at anything other than GSL or Circuit? I mean, maybe... maybe they have time to watch some of streams around. Rogue, Maru or Stats. It's a tangled. - Recall as a tier 1 tech. Come on. - Carriers and storms in ZvP. - Cyclone wars. - Battlecruiser as a unit that never exist (only Maru did it twice during ladder games). - Economic system when protoss is doing cannon rush/proxy voidrays/tempests/ shiled batteries and Z or T are blocked and pretty much dead. Vikings buff is not working. Shocking news!
And they are like we are keep on eye on it? Oh, shit, guys, this is not cool.
On July 21 2018 09:40 pvsnp wrote:TL;DR lategame TvZ is a game of economy with Terran defending and Zerg attacking, and inherently favors Zerg.
great read.
the story is the same with GuMiho-style ground mech. death by a thousand cuts, except it comes at the hand of swarm hosts. when you are trying to push across the map, ravagers can land a thousand corrosive biles along your path, whittling your army down to size, buying time for more vipers, brood lords, and the next wave of locusts.
there is one terran unit that had the potential to solve this sad state of affairs: pre-3.8.0 ground-to-ground lock-on cyclones.
lock-on cyclones out-ranged every zerg ground unit except for lurkers and infestors. lock-on cyclones were faster than every zerg ground unit except for speedlings. theoretically, you could kite against a maxed hydra / roach / ravager army without losing a single unit.
lings, banes, roaches, ravagers, hydras, queens, ultras, spines, spores, mutas and corruptors... any combination of these units alone could be kited and bbq'd to death by cyclone / hellion / mine. what resulted was a completely different kind of TvZ. low economy, no stupid 10k banks, lots and lots of micro, multi-pronged attacks, back-and-forth, and most importantly, anti-deathball.
try to imagine it like this:
terran is at 160 supply (90 army supply) and just about to hit +2 vehicle plating.
terran sends 45 army supply of cyclone / hellion / mine to the north attack path, threatening zerg's 6th base. the other 45 supply goes to the south path, threatening z's 5th base.
to save both hatcheries, zerg had to split his army in half. zerg's army would consist of some mobile force: hydra, roach, and either infestors or vipers. zerg would try to fungal or abduct the cyclones, while terran dodges fungals and picks off units with lock-on range, luring zerg into widow mine traps.
zerg would also have some defensive units.. maybe a few lurkers, spines, queens... and later, brood lords.
swarm hosts could not be used too aggressively against this style of mech because lock-on poses such a threat. swarm hosts waddle across the map... cyclones dash across the other side of the map to counterattack... zerg loses a hatch.
when zerg splits his army and has an answer to both cyclone raiding parties, terran would join army groups A and B and attack the mobile viper / hydra army with his full force... perhaps he would rally all his reinforcements to the north, parade-pushing up to z's 6th hatch. now zerg would have to rearrange his defenses... bringing some lurkers from the south up to the north. this constant rearranging of armies, so that zerg had his units in the right place, right time, created a very fun style of TvZ (at least for me ).
of course, when zerg goes lurkers, terran goes tanks... when zerg goes broods, terran has the choice to go even more mobile and intensify the multi-pronged attacks. lock-on cyclones can't kill broods, but they can work around them.
because cyclone / mine did spell damage, not weapon damage, you could delay the 2nd armory and rush to 8 factories. fast, speedy, swarmy battle mech. it was like playing bio with mech units. this was the pinnacle of sc2 TvZ for me
the speed and amazing synergy of lock-on cyclones + hellions (remember, when cyclones were 4.72 speed) meant that zerg became more and more vulnerable as he expanded towards the terran. it wasn't about sacking blue flame hellions to kill drones. it was about using your hellions to soak damage, while your cyclones focused down the hatch. when the zerg's 6th base is at 12 o'clock, and zerg's 5th base is at 5 o'clock on the map, it is simply impossible to defend against lock-on cyclones with a slow brood-lord / infestor / static defense deathball. also, with such a mobile terran army, you can really fight against creep all game long.
of course, you never saw this in a pro game because lock-on cyclones had a lock-on range bug for most of their existence... not to mention the stupid 4 supply cost and techlab limitation.
I think if we tweaked the old lock-on cyclone we could create a much more entertaining style of mech vZ.
lock-on was a spell, not affected by upgrades. this meant that bio to mech transitions would be possible. bio terran would use the single armory for vehicle plating. just imagine your bog-standard bio vZ... multi-pronged drops to clear creep, leading to a +2 push... when this is all defended by the zerg, terran will turtle up a bit with planetaries and ghosts, just as you described. but now, he makes 2 more factories (4 in total) instead of 9th / 10th raxx + 2nd / 3rd starport. terran then sends some bio and cyclone to pressure the extremities of z's territory. the deathball gets broken up, and now we can run rings around the zerg if he makes such a slow army.
please... anything is better than this zero-skill a-move unmicroable hunk of junk. I am embarassed that this version of the cyclone is still in the game for almost 2 years. it is an amateur effort for a game that is supposedly the king of RTS esports
Cyclone should be replaced with Goliath. Cyclone was rewatched/buffed/nerfed 6 or 7 times. The most rewatched/re-buffed/re-nerfed unit in the history of mankind.
On July 21 2018 01:22 hiroshOne wrote: Queens (Infestors as well, vipers too) are countered hard by ghosts- try EMP and they are useless- but no... it's easier to queue some snipes on rapid fire and then go whine on forums. Broodlords are countered by ghost too via Snipe.
If u face Broodlord/Viper/Infestor/Queen army, which again- is super hard to control properly to their max efectiveness, you should have Ghosts and Ravens among with bio/tank or Thor/Viking in the same time. Ghosts countering Vioer/Infestor/Queen- really one or two EMP is enough, Raven for AAM and bio for dmg. Look how fast all disappears with -3 armour on it.
Now. I don't say that this Terran compositions is easy to control, but it's also the case for this Zerg composition. Only at the highest level of play we see this level of control and still it's not perfect.
Saying that Broodlord/Vioer/Infestor/Queen is a-move composition is just fucking bias- Avilo Level.
Yeah emp is super easy to land on any Zerg unit under a swarm of broodlings. The broodlord is the problem - not any of the other units - snipe is great if you decide to attack with only broodlords but that isnt a thing? This would be balanced out (and still retarded and horrendous to watch) if you gave Terran a massive T3 unit that had broodlord range air to ground. The only actual argument that has been made in defense of broodlords not being an a move unit is that you have to move command them back at some point - at the speed they move you can do this with negligible apm. LOL. There is literally no micro involved with the unit - you can't just rage that there is and make it so. Vipers/Infestors and Queens all have to cast a spell - well damn - that's super difficult and falls into the same argument that Protoss players make about how hard it is to micro their death-ball. To test this insane argument you are making I would propose the following scenario:
Fast forward in a replay to a split map 10K/10K bank ultimate comp vs ultimate comp situation Tvz and have Maru take over the Terran and a random NA GM zerg player take over the Zerg - log results.
Do the same thing except now get a random NA GM Terran player vs. Rogue from a midgame 2-1-1 position (where Terran is supposed to have an of edge )
Rogue won't drop a game - because even tho Terran has an advantage - his multi/micro will allow him to overwhelm the Terran. Maru will drop a fair share of the games because the situation doesn't allow for his mechanics to help him. It will rely on the zerg player doing something terrible for him to win.
That existing in the game isn't good for any matchup imo.
Dude really? I mean having a discussion requires both sides to be arguing in good faith. The idea that maru would drop a fair share of games against random NA gms given the situation you created isn't really believable or backed up by any reason. If you want changes come out and say them; don't make up random ideas to 'support' them.
Dude. Do you read often? Did i say this happened or did i propose testing it and hypothesize a result? You are more than welcome to disagree..but please actually read..it helps prior to giving your "feedback". I gave multiple reasons for my hypothesis..they are in my post..again try reading...and hey..even propose some of ur reasons that you think its unbelievable??
Again. Im not saying maru would lose a game to a random gm na z player..they would die well before reaching that stage.. read plssss.
On July 21 2018 09:40 pvsnp wrote: Gotta say, I think you guys are arguing about the wrong thing. It’s true enough that lategame armies are a bitch to manage. So many moving parts, so many control groups, so many chances to screw up. But I think that's kind of beside the point.
The point is twofold:
First, enough Ghosts with enough energy and proper control, assuming they’re in a properly sieged and fortified defensive setup, can smash any army that Zerg can produce. The ultimate Terran army beats the ultimate Zerg army, hands down. Planetaries, Liberators, and Marauders shield the Ghosts from the Ling/Bane/Broodlings and let them get their spells off. Barring lucky fungals that catch the entire Ghost ball or an equivalent miracle, EMP will deny spellcasting and snipes will slaughter the Zerg tech units.
Second, Zerg has a massive advantage and will almost certainly win in the lategame. This is not because the ultimate army for Zerg is stronger–it’s weaker. It’s simply because the lategame reverses the conventional roles of each race, and Zerg gains an inherent advantage from that. In normal TvZ, Terran is the aggressor and Zerg the defender. Zerg therefore has certain advantages to facilitate that defense. Like creep, for vision and rapid army movement. It also has the production advantage of larva, which allow army units to be produced on-demand. As the defender, these advantages are necessary to survive. Of course, Terran has offensive advantages too. Mules let the Terran produce fewer scvs and more army, planetaries reduce the need for static defense, and so forth. However, in the lategame, the roles flip. Terran becomes the defender and Zerg the aggressor. And as the aggressor, Zerg’s advantages become overwhelmingly strong whereas Terran’s defensive advantages dwindle to irrelevance, and thus Zerg gains a massive advantage over Terran.
I mentioned earlier that the ultimate Terran army can beat the ultimate Zerg army. Problem is, the ultimate Terran army is slow as fuck and extremely clunky to reposition, because of the need for unsieging and resieging, presplitting, etc. Because Ghosts are the critical unit, it is also hindered by the need to accommodate and protect slow ground units around terrain features. Now to be fair, the ultimate Zerg army is also slow as fuck, despite being more reliant on air units; nobody says BLs are fast.
The key here is that ultimate armies don’t actually matter. The lategame is not about ultimate armies. It’s about the economy.
Think for a moment about a generic TvZ lategame. The map is split in two. The Zerg half, and probably a fair chunk of the Terran half, is covered in creep. Terran is all turtled up behind sensor towers and planetaries and turrets. Both sides have massive banks (Zerg moreso) and both sides have these enormous lategame deathballs squaring off on one side of the map, near Terran’s fifth or sixth.
If Zerg is dumb, they look at their mighty LBH + BL/Infestor/Corruptor/Viper army and go “Hell yeah this army is invincible! Imma go crush that Terran scrub!” They muster up all their micro skill and go for it. Then the Terran army goes pew pew and suddenly that mighty Zerg army is a puddle of blood. The dumb Zerg, in a fit of petulance, reaches for his enormous checkbook and writes himself a big old check for a whole new LBH + BL/Infestor/Corruptor/Viper army. Rinse and repeat until the dumb Zerg realizes that the universe is finite, its resources finite, and promptly dies.
But if the Zerg is smart, they look at their mighty LBH + BL/Infestor/Corruptor/Viper army and go….absolutely nowhere. That mighty Zerg army does nothing at all. It just sits on its ass, right on the edge of Terran’s vision, occasionally poking and posturing and reminding Terran of the horrible swarmy doom that it can unleash at any moment. Any moment now. Aaaaany moment.
Instead, the smart Zerg takes some of the smallest, most insignificant units in that mighty Zerg army, namely Ling/Bane, and runs it to the opposite side of the map, to Terran’s fourth or sixth or whatever. While both players are staring at their enormous deathballs, he amoves or shift-clicks into the base, and gets cleaned up after blowing up some supply depots or something. Then he makes some more Ling/Bane and does it again, at that same base, or another base, doesn’t matter just as long as it’s far away from the big Terran deathball. None of this will accomplish very much, just killing the stray depot or sensor tower or what have you, slowly eroding the walls of the Terran turtle. Attention, after all, is a resource just like minerals or gas, and just as finite. Terran doesn’t have time to fix walls–at least not all of them–when there’s a horrible swarmy doom on his doorstep.
Then the Zerg takes a little more supply, and makes a bunch of banes. A whole lot of banes. He runs them past the broken-down walls and straight into a planetary. Boom. Suddenly Terran is down a base. This, of course, gets a reaction from the Terran. He needs that base, after all. So he sends an scv to build a new CC, or he floats over one of his orbitals, or whatever. Whatever it is, it’s more vulnerable than a planetary was, so it’s a straightforward matter for the Zerg to send a bit more Ling/Bane and deny it. Now the Terran wises up, assuming he didn’t the first time, and sends a couple medivacs worth of bio to clean up the nuisance and secure the expansion. So the next time, Zerg sends the Ling/Bane to a different base. If he’s feeling bold, perhaps he sends some hydras or even ultras along with them. Maybe he even attacks two bases at once. Maybe once Terran has pulled scvs, he burrows some cracklings in the mineral line, or banes along the reinforcement path. You get the idea. Soon enough the Terran is running everywhere, trying to put out fires. Except more of them keep springing up. Except the Ling/Bane arsonists are faster than the MMM firefighters. Except Zerg has a bigger bank than he does, and the larva to use it, and an extra base or two mining because Terran’s fourth or fifth or sixth is always on fire.
The thing is, Ling/Bane is fast. Really fast. When the map is mostly purple, Ling/Bane gets anywhere in a real hurry. As the defender, this is essential in order to react to drops. As the aggressor though, Ling/Bane runs rings around Bio. And Terran's own advantages don't scale the same way. Mules are great but somewhat less important with huge banks. While they do allow larger Terran armies, the issue is not army size but rather army position. Even a maxed army cannot defend everywhere. Planetaries are great against smaller harass but enough banes can and do defeat them. When Terran is the one defending, stimmed bio arrives to the fight half-dead. Boost is a slow reaction when the first warning is banes exploding. And when both players are paying attention to their huge deathballs, amoved Ling/Bane blows up amoved Bio. Cracklings tear buildings down in record time, and while using banes against buildings is inefficient, that doesn’t matter so much when Zerg has an extra base or two mining.
And all the while, Zerg has an enormous deathball waiting patiently outside the Terran base. Waiting for Terran to lose a little too much patience and move out of that fortified position with turrets and planetaries and liberators galore. Waiting for Terran to lose a little too much economy and stop replacing those expensive Ghosts. Waiting for victory.
So maybe Terran doesn’t take the bait and waits, putting out fires as best as he can, trying to harass a Zerg with vision of half the map and then some. Eventually Terran’s smaller bank runs dry and his hope with it. Death by a thousand cuts. Zerg wins.
Or Terran does take the bait and moves out, onto creep, into a spore forest, trying to smash the Zerg in a decisive engagement. Even if he wins the fight by some miracle, what then? Go deep onto creep to kill one hatchery and get surrounded by the remax? Or inch forward, clear a bit of creep, and hope to pull off another miracle against the remax? Death by overextension. Zerg wins.
I think you get the picture. People often say that Terran has a weak lategame against Zerg, which I don’t think is entirely accurate. Terran has a strong lategame. It just doesn’t matter, because lategame isn’t about strength on a fundamental level. It’s about the economy.
Sorry for the wall of text. TL;DR lategame TvZ is a game of economy with Terran defending and Zerg attacking, and inherently favors Zerg.
Yah so basically in a nutshell if u throw ur army into a meat grinder position as zerg then ur army loses, which doesnt necessarily lose u the game. Likewise if u move into the zerg meat grinder even with a ton of ghost on creep as terran ur army loses.. and because z can expand and hold expansions easier along with spend the money easier its z favored. I dont think its accurate tho to say that terran has stronger late game units. They can definitely choose to turtle into a position that would force zerg to trade poorly..but since that is a losing strategy you dont actually see that at the top level of play. What you see if the zerg survives to late game is an exploding bank and larva count as the zerg refills his max army a bit rounding out the proper comp a bit at a time while the terran is trying to deny him bases or push his creep back while being unable to take his own bases. Hours and hours of these games on innos stream vods. Main idea for me is that i hope blizzard looks at raising the skill cap for all races at all stages of the game for the next big update. I personally (for the reasons ive stated in multiple posts on this thread) think the late game units broodlord/carrier/tempest need to be looked at for the same reason the raven was. Also think mech should be relooked at or removed from the game. Turtling should not be incentivized for any race....no one wants to watch it.
On July 21 2018 09:40 pvsnp wrote: Gotta say, I think you guys are arguing about the wrong thing. It’s true enough that lategame armies are a bitch to manage. So many moving parts, so many control groups, so many chances to screw up. But I think that's kind of beside the point.
The point is twofold:
First, enough Ghosts with enough energy and proper control, assuming they’re in a properly sieged and fortified defensive setup, can smash any army that Zerg can produce. The ultimate Terran army beats the ultimate Zerg army, hands down. Planetaries, Liberators, and Marauders shield the Ghosts from the Ling/Bane/Broodlings and let them get their spells off. Barring lucky fungals that catch the entire Ghost ball or an equivalent miracle, EMP will deny spellcasting and snipes will slaughter the Zerg tech units.
Second, Zerg has a massive advantage and will almost certainly win in the lategame. This is not because the ultimate army for Zerg is stronger–it’s weaker. It’s simply because the lategame reverses the conventional roles of each race, and Zerg gains an inherent advantage from that. In normal TvZ, Terran is the aggressor and Zerg the defender. Zerg therefore has certain advantages to facilitate that defense. Like creep, for vision and rapid army movement. It also has the production advantage of larva, which allow army units to be produced on-demand. As the defender, these advantages are necessary to survive. Of course, Terran has offensive advantages too. Mules let the Terran produce fewer scvs and more army, planetaries reduce the need for static defense, and so forth. However, in the lategame, the roles flip. Terran becomes the defender and Zerg the aggressor. And as the aggressor, Zerg’s advantages become overwhelmingly strong whereas Terran’s defensive advantages dwindle to irrelevance, and thus Zerg gains a massive advantage over Terran.
I mentioned earlier that the ultimate Terran army can beat the ultimate Zerg army. Problem is, the ultimate Terran army is slow as fuck and extremely clunky to reposition, because of the need for unsieging and resieging, presplitting, etc. Because Ghosts are the critical unit, it is also hindered by the need to accommodate and protect slow ground units around terrain features. Now to be fair, the ultimate Zerg army is also slow as fuck, despite being more reliant on air units; nobody says BLs are fast.
The key here is that ultimate armies don’t actually matter. The lategame is not about ultimate armies. It’s about the economy.
Think for a moment about a generic TvZ lategame. The map is split in two. The Zerg half, and probably a fair chunk of the Terran half, is covered in creep. Terran is all turtled up behind sensor towers and planetaries and turrets. Both sides have massive banks (Zerg moreso) and both sides have these enormous lategame deathballs squaring off on one side of the map, near Terran’s fifth or sixth.
If Zerg is dumb, they look at their mighty LBH + BL/Infestor/Corruptor/Viper army and go “Hell yeah this army is invincible! Imma go crush that Terran scrub!” They muster up all their micro skill and go for it. Then the Terran army goes pew pew and suddenly that mighty Zerg army is a puddle of blood. The dumb Zerg, in a fit of petulance, reaches for his enormous checkbook and writes himself a big old check for a whole new LBH + BL/Infestor/Corruptor/Viper army. Rinse and repeat until the dumb Zerg realizes that the universe is finite, its resources finite, and promptly dies.
But if the Zerg is smart, they look at their mighty LBH + BL/Infestor/Corruptor/Viper army and go….absolutely nowhere. That mighty Zerg army does nothing at all. It just sits on its ass, right on the edge of Terran’s vision, occasionally poking and posturing and reminding Terran of the horrible swarmy doom that it can unleash at any moment. Any moment now. Aaaaany moment.
Instead, the smart Zerg takes some of the smallest, most insignificant units in that mighty Zerg army, namely Ling/Bane, and runs it to the opposite side of the map, to Terran’s fourth or sixth or whatever. While both players are staring at their enormous deathballs, he amoves or shift-clicks into the base, and gets cleaned up after blowing up some supply depots or something. Then he makes some more Ling/Bane and does it again, at that same base, or another base, doesn’t matter just as long as it’s far away from the big Terran deathball. None of this will accomplish very much, just killing the stray depot or sensor tower or what have you, slowly eroding the walls of the Terran turtle. Attention, after all, is a resource just like minerals or gas, and just as finite. Terran doesn’t have time to fix walls–at least not all of them–when there’s a horrible swarmy doom on his doorstep.
Then the Zerg takes a little more supply, and makes a bunch of banes. A whole lot of banes. He runs them past the broken-down walls and straight into a planetary. Boom. Suddenly Terran is down a base. This, of course, gets a reaction from the Terran. He needs that base, after all. So he sends an scv to build a new CC, or he floats over one of his orbitals, or whatever. Whatever it is, it’s more vulnerable than a planetary was, so it’s a straightforward matter for the Zerg to send a bit more Ling/Bane and deny it. Now the Terran wises up, assuming he didn’t the first time, and sends a couple medivacs worth of bio to clean up the nuisance and secure the expansion. So the next time, Zerg sends the Ling/Bane to a different base. If he’s feeling bold, perhaps he sends some hydras or even ultras along with them. Maybe he even attacks two bases at once. Maybe once Terran has pulled scvs, he burrows some cracklings in the mineral line, or banes along the reinforcement path. You get the idea. Soon enough the Terran is running everywhere, trying to put out fires. Except more of them keep springing up. Except the Ling/Bane arsonists are faster than the MMM firefighters. Except Zerg has a bigger bank than he does, and the larva to use it, and an extra base or two mining because Terran’s fourth or fifth or sixth is always on fire.
The thing is, Ling/Bane is fast. Really fast. When the map is mostly purple, Ling/Bane gets anywhere in a real hurry. As the defender, this is essential in order to react to drops. As the aggressor though, Ling/Bane runs rings around Bio. And Terran's own advantages don't scale the same way. Mules are great but somewhat less important with huge banks. While they do allow larger Terran armies, the issue is not army size but rather army position. Even a maxed army cannot defend everywhere. Planetaries are great against smaller harass but enough banes can and do defeat them. When Terran is the one defending, stimmed bio arrives to the fight half-dead. Boost is a slow reaction when the first warning is banes exploding. And when both players are paying attention to their huge deathballs, amoved Ling/Bane blows up amoved Bio. Cracklings tear buildings down in record time, and while using banes against buildings is inefficient, that doesn’t matter so much when Zerg has an extra base or two mining.
And all the while, Zerg has an enormous deathball waiting patiently outside the Terran base. Waiting for Terran to lose a little too much patience and move out of that fortified position with turrets and planetaries and liberators galore. Waiting for Terran to lose a little too much economy and stop replacing those expensive Ghosts. Waiting for victory.
So maybe Terran doesn’t take the bait and waits, putting out fires as best as he can, trying to harass a Zerg with vision of half the map and then some. Eventually Terran’s smaller bank runs dry and his hope with it. Death by a thousand cuts. Zerg wins.
Or Terran does take the bait and moves out, onto creep, into a spore forest, trying to smash the Zerg in a decisive engagement. Even if he wins the fight by some miracle, what then? Go deep onto creep to kill one hatchery and get surrounded by the remax? Or inch forward, clear a bit of creep, and hope to pull off another miracle against the remax? Death by overextension. Zerg wins.
I think you get the picture. People often say that Terran has a weak lategame against Zerg, which I don’t think is entirely accurate. Terran has a strong lategame. It just doesn’t matter, because lategame isn’t about strength on a fundamental level. It’s about the economy.
Sorry for the wall of text. TL;DR lategame TvZ is a game of economy with Terran defending and Zerg attacking, and inherently favors Zerg.
Yah so basically in a nutshell if u throw ur army into a meat grinder position as zerg then ur army loses, which doesnt necessarily lose u the game. Likewise if u move into the zerg meat grinder even with a ton of ghost on creep as terran ur army loses.. and because z can expand and hold expansions easier along with spend the money easier its z favored. I dont think its accurate tho to say that terran has stronger late game units. They can definitely choose to turtle into a position that would force zerg to trade poorly..but since that is a losing strategy you dont actually see that at the top level of play. What you see if the zerg survives to late game is an exploding bank and larva count as the zerg refills his max army a bit rounding out the proper comp a bit at a time while the terran is trying to deny him bases or push his creep back while being unable to take his own bases. Hours and hours of these games on innos stream vods. Main idea for me is that i hope blizzard looks at raising the skill cap for all races at all stages of the game for the next big update. I personally (for the reasons ive stated in multiple posts on this thread) think the late game units broodlord/carrier/tempest need to be looked at for the same reason the raven was. Also think mech should be relooked at or removed from the game. Turtling should not be incentivized for any race....no one wants to watch it.
I’d disagree with your proposal of “removing” mech, that would not only destroy the identity of Terran (ok, you caught me, I love mech) since the release of the original StarCraft, but it would further limit strategical diversity. Turtling might not be as beautiful or interesting to watch as faster paced playstyles, but it is a viable way to play the game as much as cheese is. In addition to that, it’s still a game, so what is nice to watch should never be top priority. All in all we had way worse turtle metas during SC2's lifespan (HotS TvZ SH vs. mech) and Blizzard kinda fixed that.
On July 21 2018 09:40 pvsnp wrote: Gotta say, I think you guys are arguing about the wrong thing. It’s true enough that lategame armies are a bitch to manage. So many moving parts, so many control groups, so many chances to screw up. But I think that's kind of beside the point.
The point is twofold:
First, enough Ghosts with enough energy and proper control, assuming they’re in a properly sieged and fortified defensive setup, can smash any army that Zerg can produce. The ultimate Terran army beats the ultimate Zerg army, hands down. Planetaries, Liberators, and Marauders shield the Ghosts from the Ling/Bane/Broodlings and let them get their spells off. Barring lucky fungals that catch the entire Ghost ball or an equivalent miracle, EMP will deny spellcasting and snipes will slaughter the Zerg tech units.
Second, Zerg has a massive advantage and will almost certainly win in the lategame. This is not because the ultimate army for Zerg is stronger–it’s weaker. It’s simply because the lategame reverses the conventional roles of each race, and Zerg gains an inherent advantage from that. In normal TvZ, Terran is the aggressor and Zerg the defender. Zerg therefore has certain advantages to facilitate that defense. Like creep, for vision and rapid army movement. It also has the production advantage of larva, which allow army units to be produced on-demand. As the defender, these advantages are necessary to survive. Of course, Terran has offensive advantages too. Mules let the Terran produce fewer scvs and more army, planetaries reduce the need for static defense, and so forth. However, in the lategame, the roles flip. Terran becomes the defender and Zerg the aggressor. And as the aggressor, Zerg’s advantages become overwhelmingly strong whereas Terran’s defensive advantages dwindle to irrelevance, and thus Zerg gains a massive advantage over Terran.
I mentioned earlier that the ultimate Terran army can beat the ultimate Zerg army. Problem is, the ultimate Terran army is slow as fuck and extremely clunky to reposition, because of the need for unsieging and resieging, presplitting, etc. Because Ghosts are the critical unit, it is also hindered by the need to accommodate and protect slow ground units around terrain features. Now to be fair, the ultimate Zerg army is also slow as fuck, despite being more reliant on air units; nobody says BLs are fast.
The key here is that ultimate armies don’t actually matter. The lategame is not about ultimate armies. It’s about the economy.
Think for a moment about a generic TvZ lategame. The map is split in two. The Zerg half, and probably a fair chunk of the Terran half, is covered in creep. Terran is all turtled up behind sensor towers and planetaries and turrets. Both sides have massive banks (Zerg moreso) and both sides have these enormous lategame deathballs squaring off on one side of the map, near Terran’s fifth or sixth.
If Zerg is dumb, they look at their mighty LBH + BL/Infestor/Corruptor/Viper army and go “Hell yeah this army is invincible! Imma go crush that Terran scrub!” They muster up all their micro skill and go for it. Then the Terran army goes pew pew and suddenly that mighty Zerg army is a puddle of blood. The dumb Zerg, in a fit of petulance, reaches for his enormous checkbook and writes himself a big old check for a whole new LBH + BL/Infestor/Corruptor/Viper army. Rinse and repeat until the dumb Zerg realizes that the universe is finite, its resources finite, and promptly dies.
But if the Zerg is smart, they look at their mighty LBH + BL/Infestor/Corruptor/Viper army and go….absolutely nowhere. That mighty Zerg army does nothing at all. It just sits on its ass, right on the edge of Terran’s vision, occasionally poking and posturing and reminding Terran of the horrible swarmy doom that it can unleash at any moment. Any moment now. Aaaaany moment.
Instead, the smart Zerg takes some of the smallest, most insignificant units in that mighty Zerg army, namely Ling/Bane, and runs it to the opposite side of the map, to Terran’s fourth or sixth or whatever. While both players are staring at their enormous deathballs, he amoves or shift-clicks into the base, and gets cleaned up after blowing up some supply depots or something. Then he makes some more Ling/Bane and does it again, at that same base, or another base, doesn’t matter just as long as it’s far away from the big Terran deathball. None of this will accomplish very much, just killing the stray depot or sensor tower or what have you, slowly eroding the walls of the Terran turtle. Attention, after all, is a resource just like minerals or gas, and just as finite. Terran doesn’t have time to fix walls–at least not all of them–when there’s a horrible swarmy doom on his doorstep.
Then the Zerg takes a little more supply, and makes a bunch of banes. A whole lot of banes. He runs them past the broken-down walls and straight into a planetary. Boom. Suddenly Terran is down a base. This, of course, gets a reaction from the Terran. He needs that base, after all. So he sends an scv to build a new CC, or he floats over one of his orbitals, or whatever. Whatever it is, it’s more vulnerable than a planetary was, so it’s a straightforward matter for the Zerg to send a bit more Ling/Bane and deny it. Now the Terran wises up, assuming he didn’t the first time, and sends a couple medivacs worth of bio to clean up the nuisance and secure the expansion. So the next time, Zerg sends the Ling/Bane to a different base. If he’s feeling bold, perhaps he sends some hydras or even ultras along with them. Maybe he even attacks two bases at once. Maybe once Terran has pulled scvs, he burrows some cracklings in the mineral line, or banes along the reinforcement path. You get the idea. Soon enough the Terran is running everywhere, trying to put out fires. Except more of them keep springing up. Except the Ling/Bane arsonists are faster than the MMM firefighters. Except Zerg has a bigger bank than he does, and the larva to use it, and an extra base or two mining because Terran’s fourth or fifth or sixth is always on fire.
The thing is, Ling/Bane is fast. Really fast. When the map is mostly purple, Ling/Bane gets anywhere in a real hurry. As the defender, this is essential in order to react to drops. As the aggressor though, Ling/Bane runs rings around Bio. And Terran's own advantages don't scale the same way. Mules are great but somewhat less important with huge banks. While they do allow larger Terran armies, the issue is not army size but rather army position. Even a maxed army cannot defend everywhere. Planetaries are great against smaller harass but enough banes can and do defeat them. When Terran is the one defending, stimmed bio arrives to the fight half-dead. Boost is a slow reaction when the first warning is banes exploding. And when both players are paying attention to their huge deathballs, amoved Ling/Bane blows up amoved Bio. Cracklings tear buildings down in record time, and while using banes against buildings is inefficient, that doesn’t matter so much when Zerg has an extra base or two mining.
And all the while, Zerg has an enormous deathball waiting patiently outside the Terran base. Waiting for Terran to lose a little too much patience and move out of that fortified position with turrets and planetaries and liberators galore. Waiting for Terran to lose a little too much economy and stop replacing those expensive Ghosts. Waiting for victory.
So maybe Terran doesn’t take the bait and waits, putting out fires as best as he can, trying to harass a Zerg with vision of half the map and then some. Eventually Terran’s smaller bank runs dry and his hope with it. Death by a thousand cuts. Zerg wins.
Or Terran does take the bait and moves out, onto creep, into a spore forest, trying to smash the Zerg in a decisive engagement. Even if he wins the fight by some miracle, what then? Go deep onto creep to kill one hatchery and get surrounded by the remax? Or inch forward, clear a bit of creep, and hope to pull off another miracle against the remax? Death by overextension. Zerg wins.
I think you get the picture. People often say that Terran has a weak lategame against Zerg, which I don’t think is entirely accurate. Terran has a strong lategame. It just doesn’t matter, because lategame isn’t about strength on a fundamental level. It’s about the economy.
Sorry for the wall of text. TL;DR lategame TvZ is a game of economy with Terran defending and Zerg attacking, and inherently favors Zerg.
Yah so basically in a nutshell if u throw ur army into a meat grinder position as zerg then ur army loses, which doesnt necessarily lose u the game. Likewise if u move into the zerg meat grinder even with a ton of ghost on creep as terran ur army loses.. and because z can expand and hold expansions easier along with spend the money easier its z favored. I dont think its accurate tho to say that terran has stronger late game units. They can definitely choose to turtle into a position that would force zerg to trade poorly..but since that is a losing strategy you dont actually see that at the top level of play. What you see if the zerg survives to late game is an exploding bank and larva count as the zerg refills his max army a bit rounding out the proper comp a bit at a time while the terran is trying to deny him bases or push his creep back while being unable to take his own bases. Hours and hours of these games on innos stream vods. Main idea for me is that i hope blizzard looks at raising the skill cap for all races at all stages of the game for the next big update. I personally (for the reasons ive stated in multiple posts on this thread) think the late game units broodlord/carrier/tempest need to be looked at for the same reason the raven was. Also think mech should be relooked at or removed from the game. Turtling should not be incentivized for any race....no one wants to watch it.
I’d disagree with your proposal of “removing” mech, that would not only destroy the identity of Terran (ok, you caught me, I love mech) since the release of the original StarCraft, but it would further limit strategical diversity. Turtling might not be as beautiful or interesting to watch as faster paced playstyles, but it is a viable way to play the game as much as cheese is. In addition to that, it’s still a game, so what is nice to watch should never be top priority. All in all we had way worse turtle metas during SC2's lifespan (HotS TvZ SH vs. mech) and Blizzard kinda fixed that.
Yeah SH is bad, but don't touch mech... No, mech is as bad as mass SH.
The biggest problem is tanks, the unit have a stupid 13 range while no upgrade anymore.
It's fine with bio, but with mech, mass tanks is stupid, one volley destroy the whole ground zerg units. So it forces zerg to rush hive and skip midgame for lategame as there are not much they can do (except all-in).
And yeah, lategame is less interesting than mid game because mid game units have more mobility, can provide multiple fight in different locations, while lategame units are slow, "one big fight and gg" most of the time.
On July 21 2018 09:40 pvsnp wrote: Gotta say, I think you guys are arguing about the wrong thing. It’s true enough that lategame armies are a bitch to manage. So many moving parts, so many control groups, so many chances to screw up. But I think that's kind of beside the point.
The point is twofold:
First, enough Ghosts with enough energy and proper control, assuming they’re in a properly sieged and fortified defensive setup, can smash any army that Zerg can produce. The ultimate Terran army beats the ultimate Zerg army, hands down. Planetaries, Liberators, and Marauders shield the Ghosts from the Ling/Bane/Broodlings and let them get their spells off. Barring lucky fungals that catch the entire Ghost ball or an equivalent miracle, EMP will deny spellcasting and snipes will slaughter the Zerg tech units.
Second, Zerg has a massive advantage and will almost certainly win in the lategame. This is not because the ultimate army for Zerg is stronger–it’s weaker. It’s simply because the lategame reverses the conventional roles of each race, and Zerg gains an inherent advantage from that. In normal TvZ, Terran is the aggressor and Zerg the defender. Zerg therefore has certain advantages to facilitate that defense. Like creep, for vision and rapid army movement. It also has the production advantage of larva, which allow army units to be produced on-demand. As the defender, these advantages are necessary to survive. Of course, Terran has offensive advantages too. Mules let the Terran produce fewer scvs and more army, planetaries reduce the need for static defense, and so forth. However, in the lategame, the roles flip. Terran becomes the defender and Zerg the aggressor. And as the aggressor, Zerg’s advantages become overwhelmingly strong whereas Terran’s defensive advantages dwindle to irrelevance, and thus Zerg gains a massive advantage over Terran.
I mentioned earlier that the ultimate Terran army can beat the ultimate Zerg army. Problem is, the ultimate Terran army is slow as fuck and extremely clunky to reposition, because of the need for unsieging and resieging, presplitting, etc. Because Ghosts are the critical unit, it is also hindered by the need to accommodate and protect slow ground units around terrain features. Now to be fair, the ultimate Zerg army is also slow as fuck, despite being more reliant on air units; nobody says BLs are fast.
The key here is that ultimate armies don’t actually matter. The lategame is not about ultimate armies. It’s about the economy.
Think for a moment about a generic TvZ lategame. The map is split in two. The Zerg half, and probably a fair chunk of the Terran half, is covered in creep. Terran is all turtled up behind sensor towers and planetaries and turrets. Both sides have massive banks (Zerg moreso) and both sides have these enormous lategame deathballs squaring off on one side of the map, near Terran’s fifth or sixth.
If Zerg is dumb, they look at their mighty LBH + BL/Infestor/Corruptor/Viper army and go “Hell yeah this army is invincible! Imma go crush that Terran scrub!” They muster up all their micro skill and go for it. Then the Terran army goes pew pew and suddenly that mighty Zerg army is a puddle of blood. The dumb Zerg, in a fit of petulance, reaches for his enormous checkbook and writes himself a big old check for a whole new LBH + BL/Infestor/Corruptor/Viper army. Rinse and repeat until the dumb Zerg realizes that the universe is finite, its resources finite, and promptly dies.
But if the Zerg is smart, they look at their mighty LBH + BL/Infestor/Corruptor/Viper army and go….absolutely nowhere. That mighty Zerg army does nothing at all. It just sits on its ass, right on the edge of Terran’s vision, occasionally poking and posturing and reminding Terran of the horrible swarmy doom that it can unleash at any moment. Any moment now. Aaaaany moment.
Instead, the smart Zerg takes some of the smallest, most insignificant units in that mighty Zerg army, namely Ling/Bane, and runs it to the opposite side of the map, to Terran’s fourth or sixth or whatever. While both players are staring at their enormous deathballs, he amoves or shift-clicks into the base, and gets cleaned up after blowing up some supply depots or something. Then he makes some more Ling/Bane and does it again, at that same base, or another base, doesn’t matter just as long as it’s far away from the big Terran deathball. None of this will accomplish very much, just killing the stray depot or sensor tower or what have you, slowly eroding the walls of the Terran turtle. Attention, after all, is a resource just like minerals or gas, and just as finite. Terran doesn’t have time to fix walls–at least not all of them–when there’s a horrible swarmy doom on his doorstep.
Then the Zerg takes a little more supply, and makes a bunch of banes. A whole lot of banes. He runs them past the broken-down walls and straight into a planetary. Boom. Suddenly Terran is down a base. This, of course, gets a reaction from the Terran. He needs that base, after all. So he sends an scv to build a new CC, or he floats over one of his orbitals, or whatever. Whatever it is, it’s more vulnerable than a planetary was, so it’s a straightforward matter for the Zerg to send a bit more Ling/Bane and deny it. Now the Terran wises up, assuming he didn’t the first time, and sends a couple medivacs worth of bio to clean up the nuisance and secure the expansion. So the next time, Zerg sends the Ling/Bane to a different base. If he’s feeling bold, perhaps he sends some hydras or even ultras along with them. Maybe he even attacks two bases at once. Maybe once Terran has pulled scvs, he burrows some cracklings in the mineral line, or banes along the reinforcement path. You get the idea. Soon enough the Terran is running everywhere, trying to put out fires. Except more of them keep springing up. Except the Ling/Bane arsonists are faster than the MMM firefighters. Except Zerg has a bigger bank than he does, and the larva to use it, and an extra base or two mining because Terran’s fourth or fifth or sixth is always on fire.
The thing is, Ling/Bane is fast. Really fast. When the map is mostly purple, Ling/Bane gets anywhere in a real hurry. As the defender, this is essential in order to react to drops. As the aggressor though, Ling/Bane runs rings around Bio. And Terran's own advantages don't scale the same way. Mules are great but somewhat less important with huge banks. While they do allow larger Terran armies, the issue is not army size but rather army position. Even a maxed army cannot defend everywhere. Planetaries are great against smaller harass but enough banes can and do defeat them. When Terran is the one defending, stimmed bio arrives to the fight half-dead. Boost is a slow reaction when the first warning is banes exploding. And when both players are paying attention to their huge deathballs, amoved Ling/Bane blows up amoved Bio. Cracklings tear buildings down in record time, and while using banes against buildings is inefficient, that doesn’t matter so much when Zerg has an extra base or two mining.
And all the while, Zerg has an enormous deathball waiting patiently outside the Terran base. Waiting for Terran to lose a little too much patience and move out of that fortified position with turrets and planetaries and liberators galore. Waiting for Terran to lose a little too much economy and stop replacing those expensive Ghosts. Waiting for victory.
So maybe Terran doesn’t take the bait and waits, putting out fires as best as he can, trying to harass a Zerg with vision of half the map and then some. Eventually Terran’s smaller bank runs dry and his hope with it. Death by a thousand cuts. Zerg wins.
Or Terran does take the bait and moves out, onto creep, into a spore forest, trying to smash the Zerg in a decisive engagement. Even if he wins the fight by some miracle, what then? Go deep onto creep to kill one hatchery and get surrounded by the remax? Or inch forward, clear a bit of creep, and hope to pull off another miracle against the remax? Death by overextension. Zerg wins.
I think you get the picture. People often say that Terran has a weak lategame against Zerg, which I don’t think is entirely accurate. Terran has a strong lategame. It just doesn’t matter, because lategame isn’t about strength on a fundamental level. It’s about the economy.
Sorry for the wall of text. TL;DR lategame TvZ is a game of economy with Terran defending and Zerg attacking, and inherently favors Zerg.
Yah so basically in a nutshell if u throw ur army into a meat grinder position as zerg then ur army loses, which doesnt necessarily lose u the game. Likewise if u move into the zerg meat grinder even with a ton of ghost on creep as terran ur army loses.. and because z can expand and hold expansions easier along with spend the money easier its z favored. I dont think its accurate tho to say that terran has stronger late game units. They can definitely choose to turtle into a position that would force zerg to trade poorly..but since that is a losing strategy you dont actually see that at the top level of play. What you see if the zerg survives to late game is an exploding bank and larva count as the zerg refills his max army a bit rounding out the proper comp a bit at a time while the terran is trying to deny him bases or push his creep back while being unable to take his own bases. Hours and hours of these games on innos stream vods. Main idea for me is that i hope blizzard looks at raising the skill cap for all races at all stages of the game for the next big update. I personally (for the reasons ive stated in multiple posts on this thread) think the late game units broodlord/carrier/tempest need to be looked at for the same reason the raven was. Also think mech should be relooked at or removed from the game. Turtling should not be incentivized for any race....no one wants to watch it.
I’d disagree with your proposal of “removing” mech, that would not only destroy the identity of Terran (ok, you caught me, I love mech) since the release of the original StarCraft, but it would further limit strategical diversity. Turtling might not be as beautiful or interesting to watch as faster paced playstyles, but it is a viable way to play the game as much as cheese is. In addition to that, it’s still a game, so what is nice to watch should never be top priority. All in all we had way worse turtle metas during SC2's lifespan (HotS TvZ SH vs. mech) and Blizzard kinda fixed that.
Yeah SH is bad, but don't touch mech... No, mech is as bad as mass SH.
The biggest problem is tanks, the unit have a stupid 13 range while no upgrade anymore.
It's fine with bio, but with mech, mass tanks is stupid, one volley destroy the whole ground zerg units. So it forces zerg to rush hive and skip midgame for lategame as there are not much they can do (except all-in).
And yeah, lategame is less interesting than mid game because mid game units have more mobility, can provide multiple fight in different locations, while lategame units are slow, "one big fight and gg" most of the time.
This isnt HotS, what are you even talking about.
Also SH are quite fine, agressive mech styles deal with them with hellbats and by seizing the oportunity and pushing betwen waves, or simply by splitting, forcing locust and attacking in more than one place as one.
Agree 100% I loved that cyclone, funny enough this can actually solve mech TvP too, it added so much flexibility back then, it may be a little too strong in the early game in the current meta but a few tweaks and it could be great.
Agreed 100% on the cyclone. Old cyclone >>>> New cyclone.
The old cyclone filled a needed role for mech (a fast poking and skirmishing unit and mobile anti-air) without being overbearing, and we were just starting to see people like Innovation use them in interesting ways. The new cyclone is just an unga unit whose primary purpose in life seems to be enabling stupid cheeses and making TvT terrible.
without the current cyclone early game would be unplayable as terran. Back when we had the old Cyclone terran had tankivacs to defend against things like Ravager rushes. Take Cyclones away and terran dies every time.
On July 20 2018 02:52 McNuggets wrote: Nothing about shield batteries and immortals vs zerg. feelsbadman.
cuz there isn't much wrong with it.
what might need some addressing is warpprism pickup range and offensive use of shield batteries. but if you address that, you have to address hydra/baneling as well, and we start from scratch again.
On July 22 2018 03:26 Charoisaur wrote: without the current cyclone early game would be unplayable as terran. Back when we had the old Cyclone terran had tankivacs to defend against things like Ravager rushes. Take Cyclones away and terran dies every time.
pre-3.8.0 terran vs 1-base ravager rush?
if I remember correctly, tankivacs were used to punish 1-base ravager rushes. they were not the linchpin of terran's defense.
reaper expand. no SCV scout. reaper runs straight to zerg's natural and finds no hatchery. cancel command center. now try rushing straight for tankivac. you will either straight-up die, or lose too many SCVs while you buy time for the tank and medivac to finish. the correct response was to build a bunker on the high ground, then build 1-2 lock-on cyclones before even thinking about tanks. once you have 4 marines in the bunker, you float the barracks and snipe overlords with lock-on (ahh... back when 1 volley killed an overlord. good times).
yeah, the new cyclone is a crutch. its primary purpose is to help terran survive the early game. but even if we accept the new cyclone on these terms, it is still inadequate. a good ravager rusher or cheesy protoss understands how to win the numbers game. they just need one piece of intel (how many cyclones you are making) and they can run rings around you, defending any attempt to counterattack or punish with cyclones. that's what happens when you are up against an unmicroable unit. oh, he made 6 cyclones? build 1 more phoenix or 1 more immortal. oh, he made 8 cyclones? build 2 more phoenixes or 2 more immortals.
I'm not saying to bring back the old cyclone exactly as it was. my point is that the lock-on mechanic needs to be reinstated. everything else can be tweaked... supply cost, mineral / gas cost, techlab limitation, damage stats, build time, ability upgrades. those things are all on the table. here's what I would suggest:
remove tornado blasters reinstate ground-to-ground lock-on with auto-cast toggle reinstate ground-to-air lock-on with auto-cast toggle revert the movement speed nerf revert the health buff (cyclones should be glass cannons) 3 supply cost... maybe even 2 supply, depending on the damage/health scaling patch 3.7 model size no techlab limitation
reduce the cost from 150/100 to ???/?? (125/75, 100/50, test, test, test) and proportionally reduce ground-to-ground lock-on damage to match the cost
for example: -16.67% health = -16.67% mineral cost = -16.67% damage = 333 damage over 20 seconds -33.33% health = -33.33% mineral cost = -33.33% damage = 267 damage over 20 seconds)
if you scale the old cyclone down to 2 supply with lower health and damage, you can decrease the build time. this would allow terrans to pump out cyclones in a timely fashion vs ravager rushes / toss all-ins. its speed and micro potential would allow terrans to defend rushes with a greater number of mini-cyclones (imagine the cyclone with a hellion-sized model)
if ground-to-ground activation range is a problem early-game vZ (7 range >>> queens, 4.72 movement speed >>> every T1 zerg unit except speedlings), then make lock-on activation range an upgrade, or merge the upgrade bonus with one of the existing 3.7 upgrades (e.g. mag field).
new upgrade: charon boosters. armory or fusion core requirement. increases lock-on activation range of ground-to-air weapons by 3 (activation range, not missile range). this would make cyclones the core AA mech unit even vs capital ships. bye bye thors, nobody will miss you.
if AA damage is a problem in the early game (too strong against oracle / medivacs / banshees), then merge the AA damage bonus with charon boosters. personally, I wouldn't mind reducing the supremacy of air units in the early game, especially TvP, and we also have the little problem of sniping overlords to defend ravager rushes...
and for the icing on the cake, 4 lock-on cyclones fit inside a medivac
On July 21 2018 09:40 pvsnp wrote: Gotta say, I think you guys are arguing about the wrong thing. It’s true enough that lategame armies are a bitch to manage. So many moving parts, so many control groups, so many chances to screw up. But I think that's kind of beside the point.
The point is twofold:
First, enough Ghosts with enough energy and proper control, assuming they’re in a properly sieged and fortified defensive setup, can smash any army that Zerg can produce. The ultimate Terran army beats the ultimate Zerg army, hands down. Planetaries, Liberators, and Marauders shield the Ghosts from the Ling/Bane/Broodlings and let them get their spells off. Barring lucky fungals that catch the entire Ghost ball or an equivalent miracle, EMP will deny spellcasting and snipes will slaughter the Zerg tech units.
Second, Zerg has a massive advantage and will almost certainly win in the lategame. This is not because the ultimate army for Zerg is stronger–it’s weaker. It’s simply because the lategame reverses the conventional roles of each race, and Zerg gains an inherent advantage from that. In normal TvZ, Terran is the aggressor and Zerg the defender. Zerg therefore has certain advantages to facilitate that defense. Like creep, for vision and rapid army movement. It also has the production advantage of larva, which allow army units to be produced on-demand. As the defender, these advantages are necessary to survive. Of course, Terran has offensive advantages too. Mules let the Terran produce fewer scvs and more army, planetaries reduce the need for static defense, and so forth. However, in the lategame, the roles flip. Terran becomes the defender and Zerg the aggressor. And as the aggressor, Zerg’s advantages become overwhelmingly strong whereas Terran’s defensive advantages dwindle to irrelevance, and thus Zerg gains a massive advantage over Terran.
I mentioned earlier that the ultimate Terran army can beat the ultimate Zerg army. Problem is, the ultimate Terran army is slow as fuck and extremely clunky to reposition, because of the need for unsieging and resieging, presplitting, etc. Because Ghosts are the critical unit, it is also hindered by the need to accommodate and protect slow ground units around terrain features. Now to be fair, the ultimate Zerg army is also slow as fuck, despite being more reliant on air units; nobody says BLs are fast.
The key here is that ultimate armies don’t actually matter. The lategame is not about ultimate armies. It’s about the economy.
Think for a moment about a generic TvZ lategame. The map is split in two. The Zerg half, and probably a fair chunk of the Terran half, is covered in creep. Terran is all turtled up behind sensor towers and planetaries and turrets. Both sides have massive banks (Zerg moreso) and both sides have these enormous lategame deathballs squaring off on one side of the map, near Terran’s fifth or sixth.
If Zerg is dumb, they look at their mighty LBH + BL/Infestor/Corruptor/Viper army and go “Hell yeah this army is invincible! Imma go crush that Terran scrub!” They muster up all their micro skill and go for it. Then the Terran army goes pew pew and suddenly that mighty Zerg army is a puddle of blood. The dumb Zerg, in a fit of petulance, reaches for his enormous checkbook and writes himself a big old check for a whole new LBH + BL/Infestor/Corruptor/Viper army. Rinse and repeat until the dumb Zerg realizes that the universe is finite, its resources finite, and promptly dies.
But if the Zerg is smart, they look at their mighty LBH + BL/Infestor/Corruptor/Viper army and go….absolutely nowhere. That mighty Zerg army does nothing at all. It just sits on its ass, right on the edge of Terran’s vision, occasionally poking and posturing and reminding Terran of the horrible swarmy doom that it can unleash at any moment. Any moment now. Aaaaany moment.
Instead, the smart Zerg takes some of the smallest, most insignificant units in that mighty Zerg army, namely Ling/Bane, and runs it to the opposite side of the map, to Terran’s fourth or sixth or whatever. While both players are staring at their enormous deathballs, he amoves or shift-clicks into the base, and gets cleaned up after blowing up some supply depots or something. Then he makes some more Ling/Bane and does it again, at that same base, or another base, doesn’t matter just as long as it’s far away from the big Terran deathball. None of this will accomplish very much, just killing the stray depot or sensor tower or what have you, slowly eroding the walls of the Terran turtle. Attention, after all, is a resource just like minerals or gas, and just as finite. Terran doesn’t have time to fix walls–at least not all of them–when there’s a horrible swarmy doom on his doorstep.
Then the Zerg takes a little more supply, and makes a bunch of banes. A whole lot of banes. He runs them past the broken-down walls and straight into a planetary. Boom. Suddenly Terran is down a base. This, of course, gets a reaction from the Terran. He needs that base, after all. So he sends an scv to build a new CC, or he floats over one of his orbitals, or whatever. Whatever it is, it’s more vulnerable than a planetary was, so it’s a straightforward matter for the Zerg to send a bit more Ling/Bane and deny it. Now the Terran wises up, assuming he didn’t the first time, and sends a couple medivacs worth of bio to clean up the nuisance and secure the expansion. So the next time, Zerg sends the Ling/Bane to a different base. If he’s feeling bold, perhaps he sends some hydras or even ultras along with them. Maybe he even attacks two bases at once. Maybe once Terran has pulled scvs, he burrows some cracklings in the mineral line, or banes along the reinforcement path. You get the idea. Soon enough the Terran is running everywhere, trying to put out fires. Except more of them keep springing up. Except the Ling/Bane arsonists are faster than the MMM firefighters. Except Zerg has a bigger bank than he does, and the larva to use it, and an extra base or two mining because Terran’s fourth or fifth or sixth is always on fire.
The thing is, Ling/Bane is fast. Really fast. When the map is mostly purple, Ling/Bane gets anywhere in a real hurry. As the defender, this is essential in order to react to drops. As the aggressor though, Ling/Bane runs rings around Bio. And Terran's own advantages don't scale the same way. Mules are great but somewhat less important with huge banks. While they do allow larger Terran armies, the issue is not army size but rather army position. Even a maxed army cannot defend everywhere. Planetaries are great against smaller harass but enough banes can and do defeat them. When Terran is the one defending, stimmed bio arrives to the fight half-dead. Boost is a slow reaction when the first warning is banes exploding. And when both players are paying attention to their huge deathballs, amoved Ling/Bane blows up amoved Bio. Cracklings tear buildings down in record time, and while using banes against buildings is inefficient, that doesn’t matter so much when Zerg has an extra base or two mining.
And all the while, Zerg has an enormous deathball waiting patiently outside the Terran base. Waiting for Terran to lose a little too much patience and move out of that fortified position with turrets and planetaries and liberators galore. Waiting for Terran to lose a little too much economy and stop replacing those expensive Ghosts. Waiting for victory.
So maybe Terran doesn’t take the bait and waits, putting out fires as best as he can, trying to harass a Zerg with vision of half the map and then some. Eventually Terran’s smaller bank runs dry and his hope with it. Death by a thousand cuts. Zerg wins.
Or Terran does take the bait and moves out, onto creep, into a spore forest, trying to smash the Zerg in a decisive engagement. Even if he wins the fight by some miracle, what then? Go deep onto creep to kill one hatchery and get surrounded by the remax? Or inch forward, clear a bit of creep, and hope to pull off another miracle against the remax? Death by overextension. Zerg wins.
I think you get the picture. People often say that Terran has a weak lategame against Zerg, which I don’t think is entirely accurate. Terran has a strong lategame. It just doesn’t matter, because lategame isn’t about strength on a fundamental level. It’s about the economy.
Sorry for the wall of text. TL;DR lategame TvZ is a game of economy with Terran defending and Zerg attacking, and inherently favors Zerg.
No offense, but you're entirely wrong. Or rather, you'd be entirely right if ghost snipe were uncancellable.
I've played both sides of the match-up, mega lategame. When i play ZvT, when i get to my army of brood/viper/lurker/queen/nydus with overseers, i never lose, especially versus mass ghosts. The ghosts can't do anything when my 15 broods / lurkers are cancelling snipes over and over again. The ghosts just do that "yell" and then die and i win.
When i play TvZ, ever since the raven nerf, i know i have to kill the Zerg "before he gets there" because if the Zerg chooses to turtle to that army, the only way to win is landing/zoning with nukes and hoping the Zerg gets impatient and walks into one. From the Terran perspective that Zerg army has no counter anymore post-raven nerf. It's worse if the Zerg brings 20 spore crawlers with the "god composition" too.
You're presenting a theoretical "hopeful" view of balance where Terran ghost snipe is hitting 100% of the time without being cancelled. That never actually happens in real gameplay, most of the time snipes are cancelled and the Zerg wins when it reaches that point.
With that said...why are ghost snipes cancellable? If the Terran pays money for a unit, that unit shouldn't have a handicap that makes it not even function, that's kind of bad game design. I think ghost snipe should be uncancellable, then your entire post might be true, and the game might be more balanced late game.
As it is right now, lategame massively favors Zerg. Every ZvT right now, Zerg should just be playing to stop the first 3 attacks of Terran and then you basically have won the game. Even S. Korean Zergs at Homestory cup said the same thing as me. I forget which Zerg it was, they said, "oh stop first attack, stop next one, stop one more attack Zerg win."
On July 20 2018 02:52 McNuggets wrote: Nothing about shield batteries and immortals vs zerg. feelsbadman.
cuz there isn't much wrong with it.
what might need some addressing is warpprism pickup range and offensive use of shield batteries. but if you address that, you have to address hydra/baneling as well, and we start from scratch again.
It'd make me so happy to see that change. Dealing with prism pickups is frustrating. It feels like you can't do much about it unless your opponent messes up.
On July 22 2018 03:26 Charoisaur wrote: without the current cyclone early game would be unplayable as terran. Back when we had the old Cyclone terran had tankivacs to defend against things like Ravager rushes. Take Cyclones away and terran dies every time.
Old cyclones were miles better in early game, they were even nick named the "terran mothership core"
On July 22 2018 03:26 Charoisaur wrote: without the current cyclone early game would be unplayable as terran. Back when we had the old Cyclone terran had tankivacs to defend against things like Ravager rushes. Take Cyclones away and terran dies every time.
Old cyclones were miles better in early game, they were even nick named the "terran mothership core"
against air they were better. Against ground attacks they were almost useless not to mention they required a techlab.
On July 22 2018 03:26 Charoisaur wrote: without the current cyclone early game would be unplayable as terran. Back when we had the old Cyclone terran had tankivacs to defend against things like Ravager rushes. Take Cyclones away and terran dies every time.
Old cyclones were miles better in early game, they were even nick named the "terran mothership core"
against air they were better. Against ground attacks they were almost useless not to mention they required a techlab.
They'd be better against shield battery cheese and you could defend everything Zerg can do with tanks still. But it sounds wrong as hell to open TvZ with defensive tanks past Wings beta.
It's just funny how terran and zerg players are still whining Of course every big tournement this year has been won by a protoss ... oh ... wait ...
Anyways ... i think it's totally fine to don't change anythiong right now. Balance is pretty good, as you can see in nearly all of the big tournements in the last months, from Ro16 until Ro4 there was in most cases a nearly perfect race balance. Of course Terran and Zerg were winning, but often times a toss was in the final, so that's pretty decent ... and in the end of course we have two absolutely dominating players in the regions this year with Maru and Serral ... every player has a very hard time right now to defeat them, doesn't matter if P, Z or T.
In my opinion Blizz should leave the game right now as it is ... i'm sure they will make another big change after blizzcon anyways to keep it interesting ... but until they do that there is no reason to do changes to a - right now - very good working and balanced system.
On July 22 2018 18:20 Charoisaur wrote:Against ground attacks they were almost useless
did you try using them after the lock-on range bug was fixed? the final version of lock-on existed for 11 weeks, between August 2016 and November 2016. before that time, yes... they were indeed useless... but for those glorious 11 weeks, they could outrange marines, marauders, stalkers, immortals, queens, ravagers, upgraded hydras.
Make TvZ great again lets get TvZ how it was in late heart of the swarm were Terrans had to do nothing when going mech and eventually just win after the map mines out and they deflect everything with mass ravens and PDD as one BC kills everything
On July 22 2018 21:41 Carminedust wrote: Make TvZ great again lets get TvZ how it was in late heart of the swarm were Terrans had to do nothing when going mech and eventually just win after the map mines out and they deflect everything with mass ravens and PDD as one BC kills everything
have you tried the battle.net forums? I think that's more your scene, judging by the quality of your post. ctrl+f "pdd"
this is the only other result for "pdd", beside your post:
On July 20 2018 03:31 Lyyna wrote: I hope they consider making the raven a pure support unit with something like turret / healing drone / PDD at some point, instead of giving it a missile that alternates between "everyone whines about it" and "wait, ravens can fire a missile?". Turn it into a unit that can't be massed, but having a small pack in the lategame can help with efficiency.. something terran considerably lacks currently. Hell, the earliest iterations of the missile were much better ; it forced micro from the opponent while still fairly easy to negate the damage, but avoiding it meant retreating, making it a great area control tool in the same style as the tank or the lib. Opportunity costs, that stuff..
Balance wise, we're in a good place in terms of numbers, but T is still pigeon holed into the same stuff as always.
a perfectly reasonable suggestion for the raven, put forward with a positive attitude. if you really want to get fucked by turtle ravens that badly, fine. nobody's judging you. just try to keep your masochistic fantasies to yourself, weirdo.
On July 22 2018 21:41 Carminedust wrote: Make TvZ great again lets get TvZ how it was in late heart of the swarm were Terrans had to do nothing when going mech and eventually just win after the map mines out and they deflect everything with mass ravens and PDD as one BC kills everything
have you tried the battle.net forums? I think that's more your scene, judging by the quality of your post. ctrl+f "pdd"
this is the only other result for "pdd", beside your post:
On July 20 2018 03:31 Lyyna wrote: I hope they consider making the raven a pure support unit with something like turret / healing drone / PDD at some point, instead of giving it a missile that alternates between "everyone whines about it" and "wait, ravens can fire a missile?". Turn it into a unit that can't be massed, but having a small pack in the lategame can help with efficiency.. something terran considerably lacks currently. Hell, the earliest iterations of the missile were much better ; it forced micro from the opponent while still fairly easy to negate the damage, but avoiding it meant retreating, making it a great area control tool in the same style as the tank or the lib. Opportunity costs, that stuff..
Balance wise, we're in a good place in terms of numbers, but T is still pigeon holed into the same stuff as always.
a perfectly reasonable suggestion for the raven, put forward with a positive attitude. if you really want to get fucked by turtle ravens that badly, fine. nobody's judging you. just try to keep your masochistic fantasies to yourself, weirdo.
At least if you trade missile for PDD, there is a clear choice between offense and defense. Same thing with reinstating the old WoL missile : it created a clear choice between damage & area control for the opponent. Even tho you could mass it and blow shit up, it was fairly easy to avoid, and was basically a trade of energy for terrain & time. The entire kit of the raven was made for this support / control role. Something that terran lacks terribly and the other races have a ton of.
Though it would still be a crutch to make up for the real lategame problems : terrible Terran T3, Z / P abilities to control the map, vision, bigger economy, and "risk free" units that create a very unbalanced efficiency in the lategame. You can't really go out on the map, they have more resources, and they have better units. Eh.
The old cyclone was much better in design that the new one. Actually it'd be possible to combine the two : - keeping the cyclone tornado but lowering to 3 dmg flat and lowering its rate of fire to like 0.15 instead of 0.10 (which is like 20 DPS instead of 30 and 50 vs armored), able to hit air and ground - give it 125 HP, 2 supply, reactorable for like 150/75 - reverting the speed nerf - give it a strong lock for air and ground
This way you have a unit that's a bit costly, fragile, but fast and versatile. 3 damage with lower ROF tornado blaster would make a nice backup weapon for the lock's cooldown that can for instance help somewhat with interceptors or mutas.
On July 21 2018 09:40 pvsnp wrote: Gotta say, I think you guys are arguing about the wrong thing. It’s true enough that lategame armies are a bitch to manage. So many moving parts, so many control groups, so many chances to screw up. But I think that's kind of beside the point.
The point is twofold:
First, enough Ghosts with enough energy and proper control, assuming they’re in a properly sieged and fortified defensive setup, can smash any army that Zerg can produce. The ultimate Terran army beats the ultimate Zerg army, hands down. Planetaries, Liberators, and Marauders shield the Ghosts from the Ling/Bane/Broodlings and let them get their spells off. Barring lucky fungals that catch the entire Ghost ball or an equivalent miracle, EMP will deny spellcasting and snipes will slaughter the Zerg tech units.
Second, Zerg has a massive advantage and will almost certainly win in the lategame. This is not because the ultimate army for Zerg is stronger–it’s weaker. It’s simply because the lategame reverses the conventional roles of each race, and Zerg gains an inherent advantage from that. In normal TvZ, Terran is the aggressor and Zerg the defender. Zerg therefore has certain advantages to facilitate that defense. Like creep, for vision and rapid army movement. It also has the production advantage of larva, which allow army units to be produced on-demand. As the defender, these advantages are necessary to survive. Of course, Terran has offensive advantages too. Mules let the Terran produce fewer scvs and more army, planetaries reduce the need for static defense, and so forth. However, in the lategame, the roles flip. Terran becomes the defender and Zerg the aggressor. And as the aggressor, Zerg’s advantages become overwhelmingly strong whereas Terran’s defensive advantages dwindle to irrelevance, and thus Zerg gains a massive advantage over Terran.
I mentioned earlier that the ultimate Terran army can beat the ultimate Zerg army. Problem is, the ultimate Terran army is slow as fuck and extremely clunky to reposition, because of the need for unsieging and resieging, presplitting, etc. Because Ghosts are the critical unit, it is also hindered by the need to accommodate and protect slow ground units around terrain features. Now to be fair, the ultimate Zerg army is also slow as fuck, despite being more reliant on air units; nobody says BLs are fast.
The key here is that ultimate armies don’t actually matter. The lategame is not about ultimate armies. It’s about the economy.
Think for a moment about a generic TvZ lategame. The map is split in two. The Zerg half, and probably a fair chunk of the Terran half, is covered in creep. Terran is all turtled up behind sensor towers and planetaries and turrets. Both sides have massive banks (Zerg moreso) and both sides have these enormous lategame deathballs squaring off on one side of the map, near Terran’s fifth or sixth.
If Zerg is dumb, they look at their mighty LBH + BL/Infestor/Corruptor/Viper army and go “Hell yeah this army is invincible! Imma go crush that Terran scrub!” They muster up all their micro skill and go for it. Then the Terran army goes pew pew and suddenly that mighty Zerg army is a puddle of blood. The dumb Zerg, in a fit of petulance, reaches for his enormous checkbook and writes himself a big old check for a whole new LBH + BL/Infestor/Corruptor/Viper army. Rinse and repeat until the dumb Zerg realizes that the universe is finite, its resources finite, and promptly dies.
But if the Zerg is smart, they look at their mighty LBH + BL/Infestor/Corruptor/Viper army and go….absolutely nowhere. That mighty Zerg army does nothing at all. It just sits on its ass, right on the edge of Terran’s vision, occasionally poking and posturing and reminding Terran of the horrible swarmy doom that it can unleash at any moment. Any moment now. Aaaaany moment.
Instead, the smart Zerg takes some of the smallest, most insignificant units in that mighty Zerg army, namely Ling/Bane, and runs it to the opposite side of the map, to Terran’s fourth or sixth or whatever. While both players are staring at their enormous deathballs, he amoves or shift-clicks into the base, and gets cleaned up after blowing up some supply depots or something. Then he makes some more Ling/Bane and does it again, at that same base, or another base, doesn’t matter just as long as it’s far away from the big Terran deathball. None of this will accomplish very much, just killing the stray depot or sensor tower or what have you, slowly eroding the walls of the Terran turtle. Attention, after all, is a resource just like minerals or gas, and just as finite. Terran doesn’t have time to fix walls–at least not all of them–when there’s a horrible swarmy doom on his doorstep.
Then the Zerg takes a little more supply, and makes a bunch of banes. A whole lot of banes. He runs them past the broken-down walls and straight into a planetary. Boom. Suddenly Terran is down a base. This, of course, gets a reaction from the Terran. He needs that base, after all. So he sends an scv to build a new CC, or he floats over one of his orbitals, or whatever. Whatever it is, it’s more vulnerable than a planetary was, so it’s a straightforward matter for the Zerg to send a bit more Ling/Bane and deny it. Now the Terran wises up, assuming he didn’t the first time, and sends a couple medivacs worth of bio to clean up the nuisance and secure the expansion. So the next time, Zerg sends the Ling/Bane to a different base. If he’s feeling bold, perhaps he sends some hydras or even ultras along with them. Maybe he even attacks two bases at once. Maybe once Terran has pulled scvs, he burrows some cracklings in the mineral line, or banes along the reinforcement path. You get the idea. Soon enough the Terran is running everywhere, trying to put out fires. Except more of them keep springing up. Except the Ling/Bane arsonists are faster than the MMM firefighters. Except Zerg has a bigger bank than he does, and the larva to use it, and an extra base or two mining because Terran’s fourth or fifth or sixth is always on fire.
The thing is, Ling/Bane is fast. Really fast. When the map is mostly purple, Ling/Bane gets anywhere in a real hurry. As the defender, this is essential in order to react to drops. As the aggressor though, Ling/Bane runs rings around Bio. And Terran's own advantages don't scale the same way. Mules are great but somewhat less important with huge banks. While they do allow larger Terran armies, the issue is not army size but rather army position. Even a maxed army cannot defend everywhere. Planetaries are great against smaller harass but enough banes can and do defeat them. When Terran is the one defending, stimmed bio arrives to the fight half-dead. Boost is a slow reaction when the first warning is banes exploding. And when both players are paying attention to their huge deathballs, amoved Ling/Bane blows up amoved Bio. Cracklings tear buildings down in record time, and while using banes against buildings is inefficient, that doesn’t matter so much when Zerg has an extra base or two mining.
And all the while, Zerg has an enormous deathball waiting patiently outside the Terran base. Waiting for Terran to lose a little too much patience and move out of that fortified position with turrets and planetaries and liberators galore. Waiting for Terran to lose a little too much economy and stop replacing those expensive Ghosts. Waiting for victory.
So maybe Terran doesn’t take the bait and waits, putting out fires as best as he can, trying to harass a Zerg with vision of half the map and then some. Eventually Terran’s smaller bank runs dry and his hope with it. Death by a thousand cuts. Zerg wins.
Or Terran does take the bait and moves out, onto creep, into a spore forest, trying to smash the Zerg in a decisive engagement. Even if he wins the fight by some miracle, what then? Go deep onto creep to kill one hatchery and get surrounded by the remax? Or inch forward, clear a bit of creep, and hope to pull off another miracle against the remax? Death by overextension. Zerg wins.
I think you get the picture. People often say that Terran has a weak lategame against Zerg, which I don’t think is entirely accurate. Terran has a strong lategame. It just doesn’t matter, because lategame isn’t about strength on a fundamental level. It’s about the economy.
Sorry for the wall of text. TL;DR lategame TvZ is a game of economy with Terran defending and Zerg attacking, and inherently favors Zerg.
Yah so basically in a nutshell if u throw ur army into a meat grinder position as zerg then ur army loses, which doesnt necessarily lose u the game. Likewise if u move into the zerg meat grinder even with a ton of ghost on creep as terran ur army loses.. and because z can expand and hold expansions easier along with spend the money easier its z favored. I dont think its accurate tho to say that terran has stronger late game units. They can definitely choose to turtle into a position that would force zerg to trade poorly..but since that is a losing strategy you dont actually see that at the top level of play. What you see if the zerg survives to late game is an exploding bank and larva count as the zerg refills his max army a bit rounding out the proper comp a bit at a time while the terran is trying to deny him bases or push his creep back while being unable to take his own bases. Hours and hours of these games on innos stream vods. Main idea for me is that i hope blizzard looks at raising the skill cap for all races at all stages of the game for the next big update. I personally (for the reasons ive stated in multiple posts on this thread) think the late game units broodlord/carrier/tempest need to be looked at for the same reason the raven was. Also think mech should be relooked at or removed from the game. Turtling should not be incentivized for any race....no one wants to watch it.
For you visual learners- watch Dark vs Alive on Acid plant (right around 1 hr 50 min in)
Basically a literal representation of what's being discussed here - With a hilarious ending that I love even as a Terran. Not even gonna go into how it was off of a super aggressive opening which Alive held pretty well.
Now Dark is clearly a way better player than Alive - but the way this game plays out is almost exactly what we've described.
For fun exercise: Post what you think Alive should have done better from splitmap
P.S. anyone got deja vu from Dark v Maru on backwater?!
what if we get rid of larva injects and add on for barrackes and make it so in order to make 2 units at a time you use command center energy much like how protoss has to use crono boost to get units and upgrades done faster and hatcheries just spawn 5 larva instead of 3
For fun exercise: Post what you think Alive should have done better from splitmap
+2 vehicle weapons instead of ship weapons, a few more tanks, a handful of widow mines, more planetaries, thicker walls... a lucky nuke right on top of the banelings. if aLive did that, maybe... just maybe he would have won the privilege of getting rekt by brood lords instead of banelings.
Dark was far better player in this series. This game was all ablut his stellar defence through whole game, and Alive not being able to damage his economy. That's it. If I don't damage protoss as Alive didn't Dark, I die from from Carriers.
Here's an idea to change up Terran late game: what if Starports could produce Tech Reactors?
The cost could be 75/75, like the campaign, and it could take 50 seconds to build.
I have thought for awhile that the tech lab/reactor system works well on the barracks, but falls off in its functionality the higher up in the tech tree you go.
Adding in the Tech Reactor would have multiple effects on the Terran tech tree.
1. Strategic Diversity - It would allow the Terran late game to have a variety of options. In addition to the usual medivacs, liberators, and vikings that are seen from Terran, it would allow an occasional Raven, Banshee, or Battlecruiser to be added in for harass potential. None of these units are seeing much action right now, especially speed Banshees and Battlecruisers, and this would allow for a more reasonable transition to them.
2. Tech - It would keep late game Starport tech from interfering with production. Right now the situation is simple: a Starport is too important a building to generally keep a tech lab on it for too long. Swapping Starports around to get liberator range or other upgrades or building an extra starport just for the tech lab makes Terran production clunky and overly expensive.
3. Openers - It would add diversity to Terran openers, with the built in penalty that if the Starport is building the Tech Reactor, it is not building any air units. A 1-1-1 would be very different if, after the Starport had built its Tech Reactor, it was swapped to the Factory and 2 Siege Tanks were built at a time. There could be interesting openers that revolve around swapping the Tech Reactor to the Barracks and getting double Ghost with upgrades. So far in LOTV Terran has seen the least change in terms of build orders and lost most of the viability of bunker rushes and such, and this might open the possibility for some high risk/high reward builds.
4. General Production - The single starport could be used in ground mech to keep building tech reactors and making a large ground mech army. There is natural risk/reward built in to this system.
5. Sky Terran - We nearly saw some sort of Sky Terran from Maru before the last patch that nerfed the Raven. This might make some form of Sky Terran possible since it would radically change the way Terran air works.
Terran late game is in a stale place right now, and this might be an interesting way to shake it up.
On July 25 2018 08:59 Ransomstarcraft wrote: Here's an idea to change up Terran late game: what if Starports could produce Tech Reactors?
The cost could be 75/75, like the campaign, and it could take 50 seconds to build.
I have thought for awhile that the tech lab/reactor system works well on the barracks, but falls off in its functionality the higher up in the tech tree you go.
Adding in the Tech Reactor would have multiple effects on the Terran tech tree.
1. Strategic Diversity - It would allow the Terran late game to have a variety of options. In addition to the usual medivacs, liberators, and vikings that are seen from Terran, it would allow an occasional Raven, Banshee, or Battlecruiser to be added in for harass potential. None of these units are seeing much action right now, especially speed Banshees and Battlecruisers, and this would allow for a more reasonable transition to them.
2. Tech - It would keep late game Starport tech from interfering with production. Right now the situation is simple: a Starport is too important a building to generally keep a tech lab on it for too long. Swapping Starports around to get liberator range or other upgrades or building an extra starport just for the tech lab makes Terran production clunky and overly expensive.
3. Openers - It would add diversity to Terran openers, with the built in penalty that if the Starport is building the Tech Reactor, it is not building any air units. A 1-1-1 would be very different if, after the Starport had built its Tech Reactor, it was swapped to the Factory and 2 Siege Tanks were built at a time. There could be interesting openers that revolve around swapping the Tech Reactor to the Barracks and getting double Ghost with upgrades. So far in LOTV Terran has seen the least change in terms of build orders and lost most of the viability of bunker rushes and such, and this might open the possibility for some high risk/high reward builds.
4. General Production - The single starport could be used in ground mech to keep building tech reactors and making a large ground mech army. There is natural risk/reward built in to this system.
5. Sky Terran - We nearly saw some sort of Sky Terran from Maru before the last patch that nerfed the Raven. This might make some form of Sky Terran possible since it would radically change the way Terran air works.
Terran late game is in a stale place right now, and this might be an interesting way to shake it up.
So I've actually thought about this for a long time. I don't like the idea of techreactors, because that seems too much of an advantage. I think it's time to eliminate tech labs and reactors and replace it with a single "Add-on". Here's what the Add-on will do:
When producing 'reactorable' units, makes 2 at a time When producing 'tech' units, makes 1 at a time Can research tech upgrades without halting production.
How does that sound?
For cost, we could keep it at 50/50 or raise it to 75/75.
Inno just got wrecked 3-0 by Showtime online, with Showtime opting for disruptor play and early stalker drops. Probably just a case of the EU player abusing cross-server lag, but reminds me of the blink stalker era when top korean terrans being stomped by a foreign toss was just another day at the office.
On July 29 2018 00:35 tskarzyn wrote: Inno just got wrecked 3-0 by Showtime online, with Showtime opting for disruptor play and early stalker drops. Probably just a case of the EU player abusing cross-server lag, but reminds me of the blink stalker era when top korean terrans being stomped by a foreign toss was just another day at the office.
Probably just a case of the EU player abusing cross-server lag
Pretty sure that Showtime is living/playing in Korea in preparation for GSL vs the World, so I doubt this. Inno looked incredibly tilted, mis-microed, and gg'd early multiple times. The same thing happened in his play against Stats. A single player doing poorly in a single day does not make a balance problem. If you look on Aligulac, Protoss winrates against Terran have actually been falling lately, after being fairly high before. In my opinion, it's the least entertaining match-up in the game, but saying it's at all similar to blink stalker era is pretty off base.
Probably just a case of the EU player abusing cross-server lag
Pretty sure that Showtime is living/playing in Korea in preparation for GSL vs the World, so I doubt this. Inno looked incredibly tilted, mis-microed, and gg'd early multiple times. The same thing happened in his play against Stats. A single player doing poorly in a single day does not make a balance problem. If you look on Aligulac, Protoss winrates against Terran have actually been falling lately, after being fairly high before. In my opinion, it's the least entertaining match-up in the game, but saying it's at all similar to blink stalker era is pretty off base.
Fair point, he did look like he was on tilt. That said, it is easy to be tilted when players you are much stronger than mechanically have an equal chance of winning.
Probably just a case of the EU player abusing cross-server lag
Pretty sure that Showtime is living/playing in Korea in preparation for GSL vs the World, so I doubt this. Inno looked incredibly tilted, mis-microed, and gg'd early multiple times. The same thing happened in his play against Stats. A single player doing poorly in a single day does not make a balance problem. If you look on Aligulac, Protoss winrates against Terran have actually been falling lately, after being fairly high before. In my opinion, it's the least entertaining match-up in the game, but saying it's at all similar to blink stalker era is pretty off base.
Fair point, he did look like he was on tilt. That said, it is easy to be tilted when players you are much stronger than mechanically have an equal chance of winning.
The reason he was on tilt was probably because he wasn't playing that well to begin with.
On July 29 2018 00:45 Ishmael wrote: A single player doing poorly in a single day does not make a balance problem.
it's amazing how often people need to be told this specifically about innovation. that's what happens when you take deification of korean players to insane levels
On July 25 2018 08:59 Ransomstarcraft wrote: Here's an idea to change up Terran late game: what if Starports could produce Tech Reactors?
The cost could be 75/75, like the campaign, and it could take 50 seconds to build.
I have thought for awhile that the tech lab/reactor system works well on the barracks, but falls off in its functionality the higher up in the tech tree you go.
Adding in the Tech Reactor would have multiple effects on the Terran tech tree.
1. Strategic Diversity - It would allow the Terran late game to have a variety of options. In addition to the usual medivacs, liberators, and vikings that are seen from Terran, it would allow an occasional Raven, Banshee, or Battlecruiser to be added in for harass potential. None of these units are seeing much action right now, especially speed Banshees and Battlecruisers, and this would allow for a more reasonable transition to them.
2. Tech - It would keep late game Starport tech from interfering with production. Right now the situation is simple: a Starport is too important a building to generally keep a tech lab on it for too long. Swapping Starports around to get liberator range or other upgrades or building an extra starport just for the tech lab makes Terran production clunky and overly expensive.
3. Openers - It would add diversity to Terran openers, with the built in penalty that if the Starport is building the Tech Reactor, it is not building any air units. A 1-1-1 would be very different if, after the Starport had built its Tech Reactor, it was swapped to the Factory and 2 Siege Tanks were built at a time. There could be interesting openers that revolve around swapping the Tech Reactor to the Barracks and getting double Ghost with upgrades. So far in LOTV Terran has seen the least change in terms of build orders and lost most of the viability of bunker rushes and such, and this might open the possibility for some high risk/high reward builds.
4. General Production - The single starport could be used in ground mech to keep building tech reactors and making a large ground mech army. There is natural risk/reward built in to this system.
5. Sky Terran - We nearly saw some sort of Sky Terran from Maru before the last patch that nerfed the Raven. This might make some form of Sky Terran possible since it would radically change the way Terran air works.
Terran late game is in a stale place right now, and this might be an interesting way to shake it up.
So I've actually thought about this for a long time. I don't like the idea of techreactors, because that seems too much of an advantage. I think it's time to eliminate tech labs and reactors and replace it with a single "Add-on". Here's what the Add-on will do:
When producing 'reactorable' units, makes 2 at a time When producing 'tech' units, makes 1 at a time Can research tech upgrades without halting production.
How does that sound?
For cost, we could keep it at 50/50 or raise it to 75/75.
I think something like that could work. The 75/75 is a much more significant penalty in the early game than the late game though, so that's a problem.
I really think that the problem with late game Terran is definitely more related to production than the units themselves. From the design decision that "all units should have a counter", Terran Factory and Starport units are some of the best designed units in the game. The problem is that Certain Protoss units, like Carriers, and some Zerg units, like Vipers, are unduly powerful for their cost. Vikings are no longer a counter to Carriers, and the power of Vipers with the ability to produce Corrupters en masse means Vikings are worthless there too.
It seems to me however you slice it, the late game tech lab/reactor system needs to be looked at.
Vikings can counter Carriers, when u combine this with few Anti Armour Missiles from Ravens for exampe and few ghosts. Zerg cannot engage Carriers without casters, just as Zerg cannot engage mech army in lategame without infestors and vipers. Stop whining that u cannot mass one unit to counter all. It's 2018 for god sake.
I hope that if blizzard does another big meta shaking patch after this years blizcon that they look into moving all the races away from mass air as the superior late game option. The ground game is just more interesting, I admit I was very whiney about 8 armor ultras back when they launched lotv but now tbh I miss them at least they lead to interesting and interactive gameplay where Terran could dart around and go dmg while trying to hold with libs at home. I miss it when carrier ht was not better than any other composition in the game. I'm glad they nerfed ravens but I hope they will look into moving the game away from mass air+spellcaster deathball and towards more ground focused late game armies. Not for ballance reasons, the game is really fair right now, but simply because mass air gameplay is so slow and boring. If races need there late game ground units buffed up to compensate for air nerfs I'm all for it but I honestly hope they get away from the build a big air deathball late game that is so prevelant in most matchups right now if the game goes late.
The real balance update that needs to happen is the return of real sponsored teams with full-time coaches. Jin Air being the only true team left makes this Jin Air and everyone underneath.
On July 31 2018 06:33 hiroshOne wrote: Vikings can counter Carriers, when u combine this with few Anti Armour Missiles from Ravens for exampe and few ghosts. Zerg cannot engage Carriers without casters, just as Zerg cannot engage mech army in lategame without infestors and vipers. Stop whining that u cannot mass one unit to counter all. It's 2018 for god sake.
maybe in your imagination. maybe in the unit tester. but in a real game, vikings do not counter carriers. not even aggressive turret pushing + mass viking can beat carriers. why?? because vikings shoot too slow, are incredible cost inefficient and terrible vs every other protoss unit except colossus. by the time you make enough vikings to contest the carriers, toss will have phoenix, stalkers, archons, cannons... and in that time, he will have expanded and powered up his economy even more. feedback >>> ravens. gumiho played vs carriers yesterday on stream. his words: "more marine, faster, win before protoss gets there"
On July 31 2018 06:33 hiroshOne wrote: Vikings can counter Carriers, when u combine this with few Anti Armour Missiles from Ravens for exampe and few ghosts. Zerg cannot engage Carriers without casters, just as Zerg cannot engage mech army in lategame without infestors and vipers. Stop whining that u cannot mass one unit to counter all. It's 2018 for god sake.
The comment "Vikings can counter Carriers" doesn't really mean anything if the Ravens and Ghosts end up costing 50% in gas of what the mass Viking cluster cost.
taken to the extreme... "SCVs counter every Protoss army. just mix in a few marines, marauders, and medivacs."
On July 31 2018 06:33 hiroshOne wrote: Vikings can counter Carriers, when u combine this with few Anti Armour Missiles from Ravens for exampe and few ghosts. Zerg cannot engage Carriers without casters, just as Zerg cannot engage mech army in lategame without infestors and vipers. Stop whining that u cannot mass one unit to counter all. It's 2018 for god sake.
I wonder what you're smoking.
Even in a vacuum, once you hit larger supply counts, carriers shred through vikings (which won't be helped by the anti armor missile since you'll get a huge overkill at this point anyway).
Now, add tempests for poke, VRs for close range decimation, and storm / archon*.
The only way to fight mass carriers at some point as a terran is to get mass liberators and pray the protoss politely A move into them.
*And we're talking purely about composition here, ignoring the traditional economy / map control / production advantage of the protoss in most late TvPs.
Terran can just get 2 thors, shoot once with air explosive on stacked interceptors and they all die in a second and all the carriers become worthless. And they have a counter for high templars with ghosts...
Try zerg where HT have no counter, and you can't beat mass carriers without some vipers/infestors, than are hard countered by...HT.
On August 01 2018 01:07 Tyrhanius wrote: Terran can just get 2 thors, shoot once with air explosive on stacked interceptors and they all die in a second and all the carriers become worthless. And they have a counter for high templars with ghosts...
Try zerg where HT have no counter, and you can't beat mass carriers without some vipers/infestors, than are hard countered by...HT.
2 magical thors, from happy-land, produced from a big gumdrop house on lollipop lane! not enough minerals? oh, you big silly... these are magical thors, remember? the kind that can kill interceptors in a pinch! the only currency these thors understand is love! bring them 300 sprinkles of fairy dust, and 200 tresses of downy fluff from a Bavarian maiden's arsecheeks, and you'll never lose a TvP again. what other fairy tales do you enjoy? Three Little Pigs, that's a good one. has a nice happy ending.
On August 01 2018 01:07 Tyrhanius wrote: Terran can just get 2 thors, shoot once with air explosive on stacked interceptors and they all die in a second and all the carriers become worthless. And they have a counter for high templars with ghosts...
Try zerg where HT have no counter, and you can't beat mass carriers without some vipers/infestors, than are hard countered by...HT.
2 magical thors, from happy-land, produced from a big gumdrop house on lollipop lane! not enough minerals? oh, you big silly... these are magical thors, remember? the kind that can kill interceptors in a pinch! the only currency these thors understand is love! bring them 300 sprinkles of fairy dust, and 200 tresses of downy fluff from a Bavarian maiden's arsecheeks, and you'll never lose a TvP again. what other fairy tales do you enjoy? Three Little Pigs, that's a good one. has a nice happy ending.
Yeah he has 10 carriers/HT/archons/ but two thors are too expensive for you. You know what ? it means you have lost the game, because you are behind and you deserve to lose.
On July 31 2018 06:33 hiroshOne wrote: Vikings can counter Carriers, when u combine this with few Anti Armour Missiles from Ravens for exampe and few ghosts.
I've never read a comment that screamed "i don't know anything about this game" more that this one.
On August 01 2018 01:07 Tyrhanius wrote: Terran can just get 2 thors, shoot once with air explosive on stacked interceptors and they all die in a second and all the carriers become worthless
Oh wait my bad.
I mean jesus you not only have to not play the game, but also never watch it to make such claims. Thors and vikings are absolutely horrible against carriers it's a well known fact (unless you've got twice the supply and that it's only 4-6 carriers)
On July 31 2018 06:33 hiroshOne wrote: Vikings can counter Carriers, when u combine this with few Anti Armour Missiles from Ravens for exampe and few ghosts.
I've never read a comment that screamed "i don't know anything about this game" more that this one.
On August 01 2018 01:07 Tyrhanius wrote: Terran can just get 2 thors, shoot once with air explosive on stacked interceptors and they all die in a second and all the carriers become worthless
Oh wait my bad.
I mean jesus you not only have to not play the game, but also never watch it to make such claims. Thors and vikings are absolutely horrible against carriers it's a well known fact (unless you've got twice the supply and that it's only 4-6 carriers)
This is what you get when you get the biggest zerg whiners in the TL together. They live in a land were HT don't counter ravens but they counter everything zerg and 2 thors can decimate carriers magically.
Also ghosts don't counter HT anymore than HT counters ghosts, specially because EMP can't kill HTs like old snipe used to, you may render a few unusable for half a minute but thats all but if you feedback a ghosts it has the same fate as any other caster.
On July 31 2018 06:33 hiroshOne wrote: Vikings can counter Carriers, when u combine this with few Anti Armour Missiles from Ravens for exampe and few ghosts.
I've never read a comment that screamed "i don't know anything about this game" more that this one.
On August 01 2018 01:07 Tyrhanius wrote: Terran can just get 2 thors, shoot once with air explosive on stacked interceptors and they all die in a second and all the carriers become worthless
Oh wait my bad.
I mean jesus you not only have to not play the game, but also never watch it to make such claims. Thors and vikings are absolutely horrible against carriers it's a well known fact (unless you've got twice the supply and that it's only 4-6 carriers)
don't you get it? our korean terran pros are hiding this genius mass thor strategy until blizzcon. maru will raise the trophy and thank his friends, family, and the mid-diamond tactical mastermind zerg on TL who brought these new "thor" and "viking" units to his attention.
On July 31 2018 06:33 hiroshOne wrote: Vikings can counter Carriers, when u combine this with few Anti Armour Missiles from Ravens for exampe and few ghosts.
I've never read a comment that screamed "i don't know anything about this game" more that this one.
On August 01 2018 01:07 Tyrhanius wrote: Terran can just get 2 thors, shoot once with air explosive on stacked interceptors and they all die in a second and all the carriers become worthless
Oh wait my bad.
I mean jesus you not only have to not play the game, but also never watch it to make such claims. Thors and vikings are absolutely horrible against carriers it's a well known fact (unless you've got twice the supply and that it's only 4-6 carriers)
don't you get it? our korean terran pros are hiding this genius mass thor strategy until blizzcon. maru will raise the trophy and thank his friends, family, and the mid-diamond tactical mastermind zerg on TL who brought these new "thor" and "viking" units to his attention.
Yeah i've been meching TvP for like 5 years while eagerly watching out for any pro using mech in TvP on the competitive landscape but i must'have missed the infamous "two thors in a medivac drop that kills instantly all my opponent's interceptors" Guess it might have been the same game where mass vikings defeated tempests/revelation/storm
Thors : 12 vs light, 4 attacks =48 x 2shots =96. Interceptors are light, HP =80. Sorry, there are facts.
Of course, if you a-move thors into carriers it won't gonna work because interceptors will spread around the target, you need something to tank the dmg and thors shoot from behind. That's why you build many static defencse vs skytoss.
And nobody says to build thors, you have to full mech.... Yeah it's not gonna work... Mixing with other units... not massing... of course you aslo have marines, WM, liberators, ghosts, and vikings.
Obviously until some kor Terrans doesn't show it, you're unable to think by yourself.
By the way, i don't unsderstand why you complaining about late game if you copy paste Maru's BO : he destroys all P way before lategame can happen.
It's like you don't understand that varying splash radius is a thing.
Two thors aren't going to one-shot all their interceptors unless you get the clump of a lifetime, maybe several lifetimes. Thor shots aren't storm or fungal.
On August 01 2018 06:21 Tyrhanius wrote: Thors : 12 vs light, 4 attacks =48 x 2shots =96. Interceptors are light, HP =80. Sorry, there are facts.
Of course, if you a-move thors into carriers it won't gonna work because interceptors will spread around the target, you need something to tank the dmg and thors shoot from behind. That's why you build many static defencse vs skytoss.
And nobody says to build thors, you have to full mech.... Yeah it's not gonna work... Mixing with other units... not massing... of course you aslo have marines, WM, liberators, ghosts, and vikings.
Obviously until some kor Terrans doesn't show it, you're unable to think by yourself.
By the way, i don't unsderstand why you complaining about late game if you copy paste Maru's BO : he destroys all P way before lategame can happen.
On August 01 2018 06:46 Athenau wrote: It's like you don't understand that varying splash radius is a thing.
Two thors aren't going to one-shot all their interceptors unless you get the clump of a lifetime, maybe several lifetimes. Thor shots aren't storm or fungal.
One shot is exagerated yeah, but if you combine the splash of WM, thors, liberators, the insane DPS of marines, the best static anti-air, the ability to lower your supply cap thx to mules : Terran has all the tools available to beat skytoss.
While zerg plays Lings/bane/ultras/hydras/lurkers/infestors/corruptors/broodlords +/- vipers with mass spores on regularly basic vs skytoss, Terran players start yelling when you suggest them to add thors to their composition while they doesn't require any micro.
On August 01 2018 06:21 Tyrhanius wrote: By the way, i don't unsderstand why you complaining about late game if you copy paste Maru's BO : he destroys all P way before lategame can happen.
Thats exactly because, the game is balanced, yeah, around terrans killing toss before late.
Its not fun for either side, either clash into the toss and pray you win, or try take the terran head on and pray you win.
On August 01 2018 06:46 Athenau wrote: It's like you don't understand that varying splash radius is a thing.
Two thors aren't going to one-shot all their interceptors unless you get the clump of a lifetime, maybe several lifetimes. Thor shots aren't storm or fungal.
One shot is exagerated yeah, but if you combine the splash of WM, thors, liberators, the insane DPS of marines, the best static anti-air, the ability to lower your supply cap thx to mules : Terran has all the tools available to beat skytoss.
While zerg plays Lings/bane/ultras/hydras/lurkers/infestors/corruptors/broodlords +/- vipers with mass spores on regularly basic vs skytoss, Terran players start yelling when you suggest them to add thors to their composition while they doesn't require any micro.
This is just getting better and better.
If you knew anything about the matchup you'd edit all your post out of shame. Thors are probably the worse unit you can build against protoss as terran.
Guys. Thw thing is that killing Protoss mass Carriers is almost impossible either for Terran and Zerg. There is no "magic composition" for both races to do that. Zerg has to go mass spores, vipers, infestors, hydras, corruptors and broodlords/ultras for HT/ARCHON that are below Carriers. It's hard for both of us. But it's not impossible. I still think that ghosts can EMP high templars, raven can AAM carriers and vikings with libs can finish them. The only difference after Raven nerf is that you don't mass them for pure damage (they wrecked Carriers hard as Maru showed) but mix some of them for AAM. I don't say it's easy, as lategame Terran and Zerg armies are incredibly hard to manage compared to mass air of Protoss. But it's possible.
You whine about ghosts being countered by HT, but ghosts can counter HT too. Infestors cannot. They just explode from feedback or storm. We have no EMP. Vipers too. Terran at least can do sth about them. I know that it would be better for u if could mass one unit and a-move them into victory. But it's not My Little Terran wet dream.
I have a couple non-balance things I'd like to see addressed.
The first is more straight-forward. The matchmaking system should try its best not to match you with people from across the planet. I've been getting a ton of games matched with people in South East Asia or Australia despite being in Canada and it's a horrible experience. You can't play anything even close to resembling well in 300+ ping. I play mostly in evening time on the NA server so there certainly won't be a lack of matches from NA at that time.
And now for a more serious issue.
Something should be done about troll/smurf accounts. I've been running into quite a few lately. Yesterday I faced someone three times in four games who was clearly much better than the MMR level they were at and they spent a good chunk of each game being BM and were doing troll strategies. I went into their match history and it appeared that they would throw 10-20 games at the start of each session to tank their MMR and then just troll people the whole time they played. I reported them and specifically said that they were being rude and were deliberately throwing matches to tank MMR. I also faced a GM who was tanking their MMR by worker rushing every game or leaving games instantly. Last week I ran into someone who was master ranked but dropped their MMR to 0 and was then playing unranked to troll people. Same idea.
Whether or not it is "fair" or not doesn't matter, it ruins the experience of the person they're against. If you can't have fun playing the game because the person you are playing against is deliberately being a jerk then you are much less likely to want to play more. I run into someone like this at least once per day now, and I never used to the first 3-4 years I played. It's probably related to the free-to-play stuff. As a result of that, they should be policing this type of behaviour much more strictly.
I was kind of surprised this didn't have its own forum on TL, but I also think this falls under community feedback. Beastyqt uploaded a video recently on why he quit playing Terran. I think his points are reasonable.
i don't think both Mech and Bio need to be both viable in all 4 matchups. Namely TvT, TvP, TvZ, TvR. My biggest personal subjective complaint with Terran is that it is too air-centric. That complaint aside, I'm happy with Terran over all.
On August 13 2018 23:48 Ransomstarcraft wrote: I was kind of surprised this didn't have its own forum on TL, but I also think this falls under community feedback. Beastyqt uploaded a video recently on why he quit playing Terran. I think his points are reasonable. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3ObhIbugn8
The thing is that the points he makes can be made for every race, in a different situation, it's a problem with starcraft 2, not so much terran. It's the same for players from all races. If you can't babysit your army, then you just arent' good enough. You will lose games because of this no matter what race you play. for example terran snipe from ghosts can easily kill 10+ broodlords in a 5 second window where player might be defending a drop or something.
BeastyQT is still just a terran player whos whining a lot and fails to see things from the broader perspective. Just cause he's played random at casual 6k mmr for a while doesn't make him qualified. He won't start understanding the problems protoss and zerg face unless he reaches a skill level with them where he feels he should beat most people he faces as with terran, but still loses! Why? because SC2 is hard and each race can very easily lose at any given moment if there concentration isn't there.
On August 13 2018 23:48 Ransomstarcraft wrote: I was kind of surprised this didn't have its own forum on TL, but I also think this falls under community feedback. Beastyqt uploaded a video recently on why he quit playing Terran. I think his points are reasonable. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3ObhIbugn8
It feels more : "Playing another race after playing one for years is fun, and refreshing".
But all what he said is the same with other races. Like zerg openers are 99% the same. And it hasn't much changed since Wol.
You take 3 bases, drones, because 1 base or 2 bases strat doesn't work, no way to harass the other.
The only new things zerg had like overlord drop are gone. No one goes for speed ovie anymore, except for scouting but you put yourself behind. No one goes for burrow, nor ravager because it doesn't do anything but cost you much, so drone hard is the only thing you can do.
You keep defending vs thousands different openers photon rush, dt/archons, blink, oracle, phoenix, adepts, HT drops, immortal/chargelots push, stalker, bunker rush, 2/1/1, banshee,hellions/banshee, hellions drops, hellbat push, cyclon/hellbats, WM drops, liberator harass, tank/marine push, and you should adjust your army if it's bio or mech, and you can't choose what you want to play, the other decide for you.
And pretty sure protoss players will complain they need to go stargate every game, can't walk freely on the map, should care about not being out of position, else their base will get destroyed in 5s, that they need to protect preciously their high tech units, because else their gateways units are crushed by the T1-T2 of the other races, that if they walk on WM or lurkers they lose the game too.
On August 13 2018 23:48 Ransomstarcraft wrote: I was kind of surprised this didn't have its own forum on TL, but I also think this falls under community feedback. Beastyqt uploaded a video recently on why he quit playing Terran. I think his points are reasonable. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3ObhIbugn8
The thing is that the points he makes can be made for every race, in a different situation, it's a problem with starcraft 2, not so much terran. It's the same for players from all races. If you can't babysit your army, then you just arent' good enough. You will lose games because of this no matter what race you play. for example terran snipe from ghosts can easily kill 10+ broodlords in a 5 second window where player might be defending a drop or something.
BeastyQT is still just a terran player whos whining a lot and fails to see things from the broader perspective. Just cause he's played random at casual 6k mmr for a while doesn't make him qualified. He won't start understanding the problems protoss and zerg face unless he reaches a skill level with them where he feels he should beat most people he faces as with terran, but still loses! Why? because SC2 is hard and each race can very easily lose at any given moment if there concentration isn't there.
He isn't talking about balance. He is talking about how fun the race is to play. And I feel you only skipped through the video. The possibility of losing the game instantly due to miscontrol was only a minor issue he had. What he dislikes most is being so limited in terms of openers and playstyles and playing every game on a timer.
On August 13 2018 23:48 Ransomstarcraft wrote: I was kind of surprised this didn't have its own forum on TL, but I also think this falls under community feedback. Beastyqt uploaded a video recently on why he quit playing Terran. I think his points are reasonable. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3ObhIbugn8
It feels more : "Playing another race after playing one for years is fun, and refreshing".
But all what he said is the same with other races. Like zerg openers are 99% the same. And it hasn't much changed since Wol.
You take 3 bases, drones, because 1 base or 2 bases strat doesn't work, no way to harass the other.
The only new things zerg had like overlord drop are gone. No one goes for speed ovie anymore, except for scouting but you put yourself behind. No one goes for burrow, nor ravager because it doesn't do anything but cost you much, so drone hard is the only thing you can do.
You keep defending vs thousands different openers photon rush, dt/archons, blink, oracle, phoenix, adepts, HT drops, immortal/chargelots push, stalker, bunker rush, 2/1/1, banshee,hellions/banshee, hellions drops, hellbat push, cyclon/hellbats, WM drops, liberator harass, tank/marine push, and you should adjust your army if it's bio or mech, and you can't choose what you want to play, the other decide for you.
And pretty sure protoss players will complain they need to go stargate every game, can't walk freely on the map, should care about not being out of position, else their base will get destroyed in 5s, that they need to protect preciously their high tech units, because else their gateways units are crushed by the T1-T2 of the other races, that if they walk on WM or lurkers they lose the game too.
I agree mostly (this is why I was so surprised when I realised you were the author to the previous balance whine, haha). Each race has their difficulties and each race has fun and boring aspects to it. You need to figure out what works best for you and feels most fun. But I can just imagine that playing years and years of the same race could get boring (or seem like work), as with any sport or activity. Lets see how BeastyQT feels about this in a few more months/years.
On a side note: I really struggle with zerg ATM as protoss (Gold 1/Plat 3). Maybe I'm just too scared of zerg rushes and end up teching and/or expanding too slowly but I either get annihilated in the first few minutes of the game with a zergling, roach or roach-ravager rush, or a little later with a queen/roach nydus, or get destroyed late-game with a roach-hydra or lurker play on a superior economy. I find Terran easy to beat in comparison, Protoss is manageable, and am somehow better at playing vs zerg with Terran (on only 20 games). I would likely be Plat 1 if it wasn't for zerg T_T, must just be my play-style..
I've been saying this since the first 3 months passed after the major rework, terran does feel extremely limited. At first, it felt like terrans could open a few ways after the major rework. Then protosses/zergs figured out how to deal with the openings and they become obsolete. All zerg/protoss has to do is learn how to deal with these initial builds/openings and know what to scout for an they are golden. They figure out how to buy enough time to get to tier 3 and then what? They just win unless you accidentally suicide your army.
Terran is still on a timer to win. Blizzard can't not give terran late game strength if zergs/protoss have ALL of the tools to deflect and deal with our early and midgame. What are terrans supposed to do? Why do zergs/protosses get tools/ways to deal with terran at all stages of the game but terran doesn't get ways to deal with protoss/zerg at all stages of the game? It's a double standard and unfair.
I don't even know what to say about the fact that protoss/zergs have the ability play many different ways/open many different ways. Zergs can be ultra aggressive early on or they can sit back and macro. Protoss has so many different openings it's kind of silly.
Where are the options for terran? Where are the early game build order options? Where are the late game options to deal with protoss/zerg late game?
Terran needs new toys or substantial buffs to some older ones. Terran needs more ways to interact with their opponent.
Does anyone actually remember the reaper from the alpha test of sc2? Skip to 6:25-6:30 of this video.
I'd love to have this in my arsenal. Obviously it would be a little ridiculous if you could use the ability over and over, but what if the charges were a one time use? I feel like reaper harass hit squads could be a thing throughout every stage of the game providing exciting opportunities for interactive gameplay between 2 players as well as fantastic moments to watch as a spectator. It would also have a use in the main army. It would serve as a pseudo vulture essentially. Man i'd kill to have something fun like this. Ask yourself this. Is the current reaper a good unit? you could say it fills its role for the first 2 minutes of the game, sure, but that's it. It's essentially bad and useless after that. It needs either some sort of 50gas/50mineral techlab upgrade or the base abilities it comes with need to be buffed/reworked. No other race has units that are bad/useless late game, why should terran?
I think mapmakers should also deter from making bases have only one or two entry ways into the main. Just use regular cliffs where a reaper could enter from anywhere. Making it so there is only 1 or 2 entry ways into the main hurts because terrans/protosses can easily wall off thus nullifying the unit entirely. This type of practice essentially hurts the value of the reaper and removes an instance where terran could have a way to interact with their opponent.
Also, Why does the marauder still require a 50gas/50mineral concussive shell upgrade? If I recall correctly, the upgrade was added during WoL beta because the strength of the kiting ability was too strong early game versus protoss Blizzard has since changed the way the economy works and protoss can readily have enough defense to not automatically lose to early marauders. That leads me to ask well, if the ability can't be abused early game anymore, why does it need to be an upgrade that terran needs to pay for? It doesn't. My only incentive to purchase the upgrade is so that the marauders don't suck. Maybe terrans might have a little flexibility in early game aggressive openings in tvt/tvp if the marauders came with concussive shell for free and terrans could spend the 50 gas towards tech instead. It could increase diversity in the early game on a small margin which is always a plus. Everyone likes diversity right?
These are just a couple of areas that I think need changes. I'm sure more areas will come to mind. When it comes to sc2, I think the game should have diverse options for each race at all stages of the game, different ways to play each matchup as well as many ways to interact with your opponent. The feedback I provide will be geared towards supporting those principles that I believe make an RTS game both fun to play and fun to watch from a spectator perspective.
Since we're still waiting on some kind of Community Feedback update, I'll comment again on this one.
It seems to me that the central problem with Terran design versus what Protoss and Zerg received in LOTV and the major overhaul last year is this:
Protoss and Zerg were given units and buffs that curbed their weaknesses as well as accentuating their strengths. Terran was given units that fill roles that are already better filled by other units.
1. Protoss - Because of the addition of the Adept and the buff of the Zealot, Protoss has effectively gained infantry. - In the past, Protoss design revolved around being forced to spend resources on costly Gateway units in order to get to its powerful late game army. Now, Protoss is much more versatile. - This is even more true when you consider the change to the Warp Prism. Back door warp prism harass is much deadlier and much more difficult to stop for all 3 races in LOTV.
2. Zerg - Because of the addition of Ravagers and to a lesser degree Lurkers, Zerg has effectively gained burst and splash damage with its already formidable tanking units. - This is why you see so many more immediate ends to games in ZvP and particularly ZvT. Banelings are the go-to for a commanding end to a game right now, but often if a game ends early in ZvT, the Ravager is the primary culprit.
3. Terran - The addition of the Cyclone does not do what it was originally designed to do: keep the Terran alive to the mid-game. The efficiency of Cyclones rarely matches their cost. Like so many other Factory units, the Cyclone is useful in certain situations and then falls off to near uselessness. - Liberators - The Liberator is a useful unit, but as an up-front unit it zones similarly to siege tanks, and as a harass unit it is a niche weapon similar to a Banshee or Medivac drop. - The Widow Mine nerf makes them completely unreliable. It is now a more expensive Baneling that is more difficult to produce and with less general utility. In my opinion, Terran had a net loss by losing the old widow mine drop and gaining the Liberator as a harass unit.
My point is this: Terran has three major holes in its current design: 1. Tanking units 2. Consistent detection 3. Stability/sustainability/flexibility
As a for instance, consider the utility of a Terran army that had no access to Widow Mines, Hellbats, or Cyclones, but instead had access to two units: Medics and Firebats.
Medics would allow Terran to have the versatility that Zerg and Protoss have: picking a timing, from early to mid-game, and producing a large, sustainable force that makes for a definite timing attack.
Firebats would allow Terran to tank damage and stand against Zealots and Zerglings. While the Hit Points of Hellbats have been tweaked, Hellbats have never had stim. Their slow speed is the number 1 reason why they have very little use, followed by a close second: they don't do enough dps when they do reach their target.
I bring up these two units not because they are the only possibilities, but because they illustrate the 3 issues I mentioned earlier. Medics heal a unit and functionally make that unit being healed a "tanking" unit of sorts. Firebats would be the most likely candidate for that tanking job, but would also add versatility to the Terran army by giving them a tanking unit that, frankly, doesn't suck.
Finally, a change like this would solve another fundamental Terran design problem. As soon as you make any bio unit, you know they are not sustainable until you can get a considerable amount of medivacs out. This means your Starport is tied up well before you even build it. This is the greatest reason why Terran cannot get to sustainable detection like Ravens: You always need Medivacs 2-5 minutes before they're even available on the tech tree, which puts you behind on them from the word go.
Again, this is a design problem, not a balance one. There are a lot of ways to approach it, this is just one. The Widow Mine or Hellbat could be overhauled to give greater space control when sieged and unable to move, or all Bio units could be made mechanical as well (like hellbats) and therefore able to be repaired by SCV's. In this scenario, the return of the Raven's repair drone might make sense in some version.
id like to ask you to explain what you mean by terran not having "stability and sustainability" lol i think that point alone is enough to wreck the credibility of what you're trying to say. you're using generic terms without explaining what you mean and applying them all to terran as design flaws.
"sustainability"? ive played this game for years and pretty much always terran has been the race with the strongest comeback mechanics due to MULE/Marine/Medivac mineral efficiency (and that's not me saying terran is too strong, it's just one of the elements of the race, unique from the others as it should be). it seems like you're trying to make your argument just by rephrasing things and using different terms when what you're truly communicating is "i play terran and terran is weak" like everyone else.
edit: also, the units you want buffed were already buffed and both times it resulted in laughably strong drop builds that murdered mineral lines.
I sencerely hope that they don't do any changes at all because the game is in a fantastic state overall. So sick of those (especially terran) whiners who keep theorycrafting with their limited game knowledge and little experience in every thread, instead of playing the game. "This blah blah change to hellbat/medivac w/e will solve that imbalance/design flaw". For gods sake. Just git gud.
Welp, I guess I should just learn to play like Maru. Maybe after 15-30 medivac drops, if I don't lose any units from them, I'll take advantage of this wonderful Terran design. Thanks for the advice friends.
In the meantime
Terran has terrible late game. Terran has very little diversity in openers. Half of the units serve no role or a small niche and certainly don't mesh together.
Beastyqt quit Terran for just these reasons. If you believe he's just another scrub, your opinion is of no value to me.
On Sustainability: 2. pertaining to a system that maintains its own viability by using techniques that allow for continual reuse (From Dictionary.com)
Bio units do not heal like Protoss or Zerg units do. They can be healed, but this option is high in the tech tree. I wrote a design post claiming I believe this is a problem with Terran design.
He is right. Terran has not so many openers. I'd say a few... And it's not fun. Even Maru can't do anything sometimes. And it's actually an argument. Very solid. It's boring.
On August 28 2018 16:20 insitelol wrote: I sencerely hope that they don't do any changes at all because the game is in a fantastic state overall. So sick of those (especially terran) whiners who keep theorycrafting with their limited game knowledge and little experience in every thread, instead of playing the game. "This blah blah change to hellbat/medivac w/e will solve that imbalance/design flaw". For gods sake. Just git gud.
This. A thousand times this. I'm so sick of these pointless redesign patches that take months to sort out the finer details on and leave us no better than when we started. And the constant complaining that I hear from Terran players despite most of their wishes being granted by the balance team drives me up the wall. For example the balance team pretty much bent over backwards for mech players in 2016-2017 and yet we still hear about how mech needs buffs to anti air. I wish half that amount of consideration was given to roach ravager since, like bio and mech, ling bane and roach ravager depend on separate upgrades and are distinct styles on their own.
Weird how people think that skill level is somehow connected to knowing that terran has only 2 options every game. It's BORING as hell. You either cheese proxy someone(which is stupid as shit) or you go 1 rax reaper expand into 5 rax, tank or mines + medivacs. It's boring as shit. It's the same shit day in and day out for the last 8 years. Terran has no variety in openings, has become extremely boring to play and it doesn't take someone with the skill level of Maru to realize it or say it in a thread lol. Why would I spend my time to "git gud" when the race is completely stagnant and boring? I'm just going to wait until blizzard fixes the issue and continue to voice my concerns.
On August 29 2018 00:43 ReachTheSky wrote: Weird how people think that skill level is somehow connected to knowing that terran has only 2 options every game. It's BORING as hell. You either cheese proxy someone(which is stupid as shit) or you go 1 rax reaper expand into 5 rax, tank or mines + medivacs. It's boring as shit. It's the same shit day in and day out for the last 8 years. Terran has no variety in openings, has become extremely boring to play and it doesn't take someone with the skill level of Maru to realize it or say it in a thread lol. Why would I spend my time to "git gud" when the race is completely stagnant and boring? I'm just going to wait until blizzard fixes the issue and continue to voice my concerns.
Just because you think terran is boring doesn't mean it is. I don't know where this "terran has no options" comes from. You can proxy, 2/1/1, Hellion opening with medivac/banshee/liberator/Viking, Hellbat timing, Cyclone allin, widow mine drop, 2 base bio allin and transition into Bio or Mech (at least in 2 out of 3 matchups). When you compare it to the other races you will realize that they don't have much more options except maybe Protoss in PvT. About the "terran has no lategame" part, that may be true in TvP but in TvZ terran actually has a strong lategame with Ghost/Liberator.
1. Terran has options in opening and playstyles. 2. Ask flash if he is having fun with 8 units and very few openings/BO/playstyles he had for 10+ years with no redesign (or even balance) patches. Or ask a Ronaldo or Messi are they having fun with set of rules they got for 100+ years. 3. Having fun (which of course may be an issue) is such an overused and hyporitical excuse for just being bad that i can't take it seriously. While there is no objective indicator of terran being "not fun to play" (numbers are fine in both population and balance) you just have to live with it or quit.
On August 29 2018 00:43 ReachTheSky wrote: Weird how people think that skill level is somehow connected to knowing that terran has only 2 options every game. It's BORING as hell. You either cheese proxy someone(which is stupid as shit) or you go 1 rax reaper expand into 5 rax, tank or mines + medivacs. It's boring as shit. It's the same shit day in and day out for the last 8 years. Terran has no variety in openings, has become extremely boring to play and it doesn't take someone with the skill level of Maru to realize it or say it in a thread lol. Why would I spend my time to "git gud" when the race is completely stagnant and boring? I'm just going to wait until blizzard fixes the issue and continue to voice my concerns.
Just because you think terran is boring doesn't mean it is. I don't know where this "terran has no options" comes from. You can proxy, 2/1/1, Hellion opening with medivac/banshee/liberator/Viking, Hellbat timing, Cyclone allin, widow mine drop, 2 base bio allin and transition into Bio or Mech (at least in 2 out of 3 matchups). When you compare it to the other races you will realize that they don't have much more options except maybe Protoss in PvT. About the "terran has no lategame" part, that may be true in TvP but in TvZ terran actually has a strong lategame with Ghost/Liberator.
To join the terran design discussion, first I feel like it would be good to remind everyone that Protoss and Zerg design is good overall, and this should NOT be changed, whatever terrans problems are. You can have fun playing both races, play very different styles and that is good. You could only say that protoss standard PvZ relies a bit too much on stargate, but even then you can find counter examples, and what happens after the stargate opener can be many different things.
Second, terran lategame is bad atm. You can't deny that. You just can't sit back on equal foot and hope for a fair fight with T3 units against P or Z (against Z it's a bit better, but still far from good), therefore you have a timer. And finally the race feels not fun to play, mostly due to limited numbers of openings, and because of the natural timer on the race as well. People invoking 2-1-1, hellion builds into 1 gazillion things, or hellbat timings in TvZ forget that most of these strats are not viable at equal skill. Players have mostly figured out terran way of playing and have direct counters to those builds, and it's not gonna change because all those builds are very easy to scout, specially for zerg.
To sum up what often comes in discussion or could improve things :
1) The battlecruiser (I wish we had stats on that somewhere) is most probably the most unused unit in the game. In pro play it has like never been used for months AFAK. There is no other unit like that in protoss or zerg arsenal. Swarmhosts are played occasionally in pro play, mostly against mech but even in tricky strats vs protoss, void rays as well is occasionally used in pro play in all matchups, either in cheese or skytoss for example. Again Terran has lategame problems, so why not trying another revamp for the battlecruiser? This year's post season will be a good moment for that. It will be always better to try doing something for it than nothing.
2) The reaper : As said earlier, the reaper gets quickly useless after scout timing. Is it normal? I don't know, but it's another potential unit that could make for the lack of different openings / playstyles for terran. You can do very simple things for the reaper. 1) A mid/lategame upgrade? Or 2) Add the skill to allow reapers to be changed/recycled to marines when near a barrack (but not the other way around)?
3) Starport add-on mechanic : Think about it, every terran games except maybe mech play is fundamentally dependent on this mechanic. Banshee is an absurd investment early game and the raven is almost never built because of this exact reason. Banshee and raven are ok units, but they have very few opportunities to be incorporated in viable builds. Think about these simple changes for example. Either 1) Raven doesn't require techlab to be built anymore. Has no real issue since mass raven is not a thing anymore. Or 2) (the best one in my opinion) Medivac build time could be halfed (from 30s to 15s), but now requires techlab to be built. This would potentially make terran gameplan so much diverse, not frustrating and monodimensional.
4) The liberator : It's the only terran unit that is so badly designed it's good. Not much to say here, just much easier to use than to play against. Siege and forget unit. Frustrating to play against and, mostly it's an air unit that shouldn't counter everything on the ground. Its harass mechanic is dumb. It has to be redesigned.
Personal note : The Cyclone feels rather cost inefficient and gimmicky but in my opinion it can still find some use in some mech gameplan early-mid or even lategame. Maybe its micro potential could be looked at but in my opinion it's not a priority. Almost the same for the Thor, that is ok in TvT and TvZ. Could use some buff in TvP. Buffing it wouldn't make it broken in other MUs, like a buff in hp/mobility/dps against shield. Again not a priority compared to all above points.
The only thing I'm not a fan of watching or playing with is carriers. Otherwise, I like the state of the game.
I think it would be cool also to have a hive-tech upgrade, or maybe a morph that makes it so air units can't attack lurkers when they're burrowed. That would make lategame PvZ really interesting imho.
To go back to @ransomstarcraft original post of items 2 & 3 around detection and late game sustainability, I believe adding an upgrade for reactor on starport or upgrade for tech lab to basically become a reactor for tech lab units would help solve some of the issues. I also believe he has brought this up in a prior post in another thread.
My reasons: -Build a raven at any point like Zerg/Overseer and Protoss/Observer without having to really sacrifice mid game play (deciding to skip medivac production and sacrifice any kind of pushing power or harass) -Banshee production is often halted after building 2 in the early/mid-game. Banshee can be such a fun/cool unit to play if has the upgrades...namely speed upgrade. However, due to the investment and having to decide: a. do I produce this unit and sacrifice any medivac production, which therefore impacts my ability to push/harass (same predicament as building a raven) b. do I forego banshee production + upgrades at all because of the opportunity cost -Battlecruisers, while a neat unit, is likely the most underused unit in the game. Costs a crap ton and, again, having to decide whether to keep medivac production going vs build this sucker which impacts pushing and harassing.
If starport tech lab units were somehow able to be produced simultaneously with non-tech lab units, I believe this could also help provide more varied early game through late game options.
What's the problem with adding another Starport? Especially if it's lategame? I mean, TY or Innovation has no problem with lategame production. Protoss who are adding more robo or more Stargates too.
As a Terran, i think only the battlecruiser is the unit that needs to be reworked/upgraded. Relatively low DPS, speed issue, takes so much time to make, high cost, high cooldown. So useless right now, difficult to implement into your army, difficult to indentify what is the right amount. One or two is really cost ineficient (6 supply, high on tech tree and costs a fortune), but you can't mass them like carriers.. Other than that, the game is in really good shape.
The battlecruiser is in a perfect state, make it strong and terran lategame will become the same snorefest as P/Z lategame. I wouldn't be excited for the mass BC/turret/PF vs mass carrier/cannon/templar vs mass BL/Corruptor/Spore stalemates.
On September 04 2018 22:38 midhigh wrote: As a Terran, i think only the battlecruiser is the unit that needs to be reworked/upgraded. Relatively low DPS, speed issue, takes so much time to make, high cost, high cooldown. So useless right now, difficult to implement into your army, difficult to indentify what is the right amount. One or two is really cost ineficient (6 supply, high on tech tree and costs a fortune), but you can't mass them like carriers.. Other than that, the game is in really good shape.
Battlecruiser dps is higher then carrier dps and it has high burst damage with yarmato. It's damage level is fine.
EPT![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CM809rKWoAAiV0C.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/qcA4rYn.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/NcXffMI.jpg)
