|
On September 11 2019 09:59 washikie wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2019 00:42 KobeSteak wrote:On September 11 2019 00:36 BerserkSword wrote:On September 11 2019 00:13 deacon.frost wrote:On September 10 2019 23:58 KobeSteak wrote:On September 10 2019 16:55 midhigh wrote:I am not saying i could do it, but for me it is really suprising no terran player basically has ever tried to flank with ghosts. They usually send their ghost's to nuke, while they could try to flank with a group of ghosts from many angles to EMP Infestors, and actually try to kill the Zerg army, or weaken enough to win later. We have seen many games and fights won by Zergs (mostly Serral), against superior army with good ling/roach/etc flanks. One of the best and most recent examples: I know, it is kind of risky, but when you are already behind (because Zerg late game is OP theorically), you must try to do something unexpected. In general, Terrans never adapt/evolve their playstyle compare to toss and zergs. Terrans were always praised for their bio splits against banes or HT for years. However, today splitting is a basic skill that all 3 races have in their skillset Toss and Zergs learned how to use their spellcaster more effectively, e.g warp prism HT. Both toss and zergs know how to flank with their spellcasters at different locations/angles Been almost a decade and terran still use ghost the same way. Ghost will ALWAYS bunched with the bio and come in the front (one direction). You will never see them use ghost and flank from behind or even hide them in medivac. Terran engagements has always been the same with very minor changes through the years. Frontal engagement and hopefully break enemy with brutal bio DPS Is this a troll account? HAve you like ever seen the top Maru's games? The ones where the spectator has issues of following the fight on the maximum zoom-out while Maru engages from 3 different angles, simultaneously? IN HOTS? Where have you been when mulitple shifts in T play happened? It may surprise you but T play evolved. If nothing else - the damn Raven play? Like, seriously? to be fair, he said terran players don't adapt/evolve compared to protoss and zerg players. And I'm inclined to agree. Look at 2019 for example. Protoss and zerg were met with massive nerfs. Protoss lategame was obliterated (carriers turned to garbage with the loss of graviton catapult, Tempests were temporarily when they exchanged durability for speed, but then nerfed into the ground when they lost most of the speed buff while still losing all that durability, and feedback was nerfed in half). Zerg early and mid-game was decimated by the new creep dynamic (creep used to advance and recede at the same rate, now it recession rate is higher) and the transfuse nerf Protoss pros developed insanely sharp timings to end the game before lategame. Zerg pros developed a defensive "turtle" style that led to the feared broodlord + infestor compositions that have become very common compared to pre-creep/queen nerfs. This is all thanks to the NERFS the races received. Terran has received nothing but buffs but we have guys like innovation and maru standing there after winning more premier tournaments, talking about how the race is weak and underpowered. Of course Terran play evolves to some extent. He was talking about relative to Protoss and Zerg though. Gumiho is the closest to a Terran pro that pushes the boundaries in terms of innovation. Maru is up there too of course, but when you compare him to stats or dark for example, the dynamism isnt on the same level. Thank you, finally someone who can understand. I never said terran players were garbage. They just never adapt/evolve their playstyle. E.G. In HOTS Toss/zergs were forced to learn and improve their splitting due to Mines (One of the most cancer unit in HOTS) It’s hard to adapt or inovate when any build that strays to far from the norm is nerfed into the ground. Consider the following list of nerfs Terran got as they came up with new builds: 3 rax reaper: nade nerfed to kill Byun style reaper games. 16 marine drop: zerg queen range buffed killing the build at higher levels of play. Mass raven mech: seeker missle removed from the game. Proxy cyclone build: cyclone reverted to lock on version killing all proxy cyclone builds. BC rush, yamotoe cannon nerfed tuning the build fown to the point it’s rarely seen at a professional level any more.
There is a difference between innovation and abusing broken features of the game lmao.
The BC wasnt nerfed btw. It was overall buffed. Yamato was nerfed but it still gets to OHKO or 2HKO everything it needs to...nobody uses void rays. On the other hand, it got a MASSIVE buff in the form of being able to fire while moving.
|
Nice clickbait but also very true with context. When BL/Inferstor combo first prevailed, some would say about Zerg players that their "practice have paid off" or "have a good sense of distance". But now we all know that it's just because this combo have super long attack/spellcast range. With Serral or Reynor (and Elazer)'s level of micro, it's basically unsolvable.
Some possible counter-measure for Terran though: massive BC fleet warp in + Yamato all infestors; this tactic was proposed by Heromarine if memory serves me right. I haven't seen many actual games with this move though.
Another wild proposition: fast Medivac drop Ghosts + EMP against infestors. Obviously hard to micro and you have to evade infestor fungal. This was proposed by F91 during streaming, but I'm not sure if it is applicable.
Again I'm no GM player and this is only a theoretical discussion. One nerf in the last patch I feel unnecessary was the warp prism though. The cut in pickup radius is too much.
|
On September 11 2019 10:26 BerserkSword wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2019 05:20 GoSuNamhciR wrote:
I think the big problem with terran vs. anything late game is just how bad vikings are. This unit is in dire need of a late game buff. Terran doesn't have good AtA options and are forced into a narrow gameplan with Thors that are so slow and immobile. If terran had a better way to counter Zerg and Protoss air late game with a mobile army alot of their problems would be alleviated.
Also I think PvZ is much more balanced late game for a protss. But my Protoss/Zerg is only M1 level, so that doesn't really mean anything
Terran can obliterate late game protoss with mass BCs. The only time I've seen pro level mass BCs lose to lategame protoss is Maru vs Dear. Every other time the Protoss mass tempest compositions get steamrolled Maru vs Classic Beastyqt vs Mana Beastyqt vs Harstem Heromrine vs Beastyqt TY vs Creator Vikings do not need buffs. Thors are fine against BLs which are even slower than thors. PvZ is basically unwinnable in the lategame for Protoss.
With Infested Terrans damage nerfed and Carriers buffed, I wouldn't be so sure that PvZ is still unwinnable.
|
On September 11 2019 10:30 BerserkSword wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2019 09:59 washikie wrote:On September 11 2019 00:42 KobeSteak wrote:On September 11 2019 00:36 BerserkSword wrote:On September 11 2019 00:13 deacon.frost wrote:On September 10 2019 23:58 KobeSteak wrote:On September 10 2019 16:55 midhigh wrote:I am not saying i could do it, but for me it is really suprising no terran player basically has ever tried to flank with ghosts. They usually send their ghost's to nuke, while they could try to flank with a group of ghosts from many angles to EMP Infestors, and actually try to kill the Zerg army, or weaken enough to win later. We have seen many games and fights won by Zergs (mostly Serral), against superior army with good ling/roach/etc flanks. One of the best and most recent examples: https://clips.twitch.tv/GenerousJollyGorillaUncleNoxI know, it is kind of risky, but when you are already behind (because Zerg late game is OP theorically), you must try to do something unexpected. In general, Terrans never adapt/evolve their playstyle compare to toss and zergs. Terrans were always praised for their bio splits against banes or HT for years. However, today splitting is a basic skill that all 3 races have in their skillset Toss and Zergs learned how to use their spellcaster more effectively, e.g warp prism HT. Both toss and zergs know how to flank with their spellcasters at different locations/angles Been almost a decade and terran still use ghost the same way. Ghost will ALWAYS bunched with the bio and come in the front (one direction). You will never see them use ghost and flank from behind or even hide them in medivac. Terran engagements has always been the same with very minor changes through the years. Frontal engagement and hopefully break enemy with brutal bio DPS Is this a troll account? HAve you like ever seen the top Maru's games? The ones where the spectator has issues of following the fight on the maximum zoom-out while Maru engages from 3 different angles, simultaneously? IN HOTS? Where have you been when mulitple shifts in T play happened? It may surprise you but T play evolved. If nothing else - the damn Raven play? Like, seriously? to be fair, he said terran players don't adapt/evolve compared to protoss and zerg players. And I'm inclined to agree. Look at 2019 for example. Protoss and zerg were met with massive nerfs. Protoss lategame was obliterated (carriers turned to garbage with the loss of graviton catapult, Tempests were temporarily when they exchanged durability for speed, but then nerfed into the ground when they lost most of the speed buff while still losing all that durability, and feedback was nerfed in half). Zerg early and mid-game was decimated by the new creep dynamic (creep used to advance and recede at the same rate, now it recession rate is higher) and the transfuse nerf Protoss pros developed insanely sharp timings to end the game before lategame. Zerg pros developed a defensive "turtle" style that led to the feared broodlord + infestor compositions that have become very common compared to pre-creep/queen nerfs. This is all thanks to the NERFS the races received. Terran has received nothing but buffs but we have guys like innovation and maru standing there after winning more premier tournaments, talking about how the race is weak and underpowered. Of course Terran play evolves to some extent. He was talking about relative to Protoss and Zerg though. Gumiho is the closest to a Terran pro that pushes the boundaries in terms of innovation. Maru is up there too of course, but when you compare him to stats or dark for example, the dynamism isnt on the same level. Thank you, finally someone who can understand. I never said terran players were garbage. They just never adapt/evolve their playstyle. E.G. In HOTS Toss/zergs were forced to learn and improve their splitting due to Mines (One of the most cancer unit in HOTS) It’s hard to adapt or inovate when any build that strays to far from the norm is nerfed into the ground. Consider the following list of nerfs Terran got as they came up with new builds: 3 rax reaper: nade nerfed to kill Byun style reaper games. 16 marine drop: zerg queen range buffed killing the build at higher levels of play. Mass raven mech: seeker missle removed from the game. Proxy cyclone build: cyclone reverted to lock on version killing all proxy cyclone builds. BC rush, yamotoe cannon nerfed tuning the build fown to the point it’s rarely seen at a professional level any more. There is a difference between innovation and abusing broken features of the game lmao. The BC wasnt nerfed btw. It was overall buffed. Yamato was nerfed but it still gets to OHKO or 2HKO everything it needs to...nobody uses void rays. On the other hand, it got a MASSIVE buff in the form of being able to fire while moving.
Is their though? arguably any new strategy needs to be strong for it to be used. If its not strong whats the point of using it? zerg complain terran dont inovate but when they do o boy they get nerfed hard
|
On September 11 2019 11:08 Xain0n wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2019 10:26 BerserkSword wrote:On September 11 2019 05:20 GoSuNamhciR wrote:
I think the big problem with terran vs. anything late game is just how bad vikings are. This unit is in dire need of a late game buff. Terran doesn't have good AtA options and are forced into a narrow gameplan with Thors that are so slow and immobile. If terran had a better way to counter Zerg and Protoss air late game with a mobile army alot of their problems would be alleviated.
Also I think PvZ is much more balanced late game for a protss. But my Protoss/Zerg is only M1 level, so that doesn't really mean anything
Terran can obliterate late game protoss with mass BCs. The only time I've seen pro level mass BCs lose to lategame protoss is Maru vs Dear. Every other time the Protoss mass tempest compositions get steamrolled Maru vs Classic Beastyqt vs Mana Beastyqt vs Harstem Heromrine vs Beastyqt TY vs Creator Vikings do not need buffs. Thors are fine against BLs which are even slower than thors. PvZ is basically unwinnable in the lategame for Protoss. With Infested Terrans damage nerfed and Carriers buffed, I wouldn't be so sure that PvZ is still unwinnable.
The carrier buff is a literal joke. And the IT nerf is more significant against BCs not skyotss.
PvZ will still be unwinnable. Protoss efficiency in the lategame just isnt there. Building interceptors faster just to be destroyed faster is not efficiency.
PvZ was difficult (although not unwinnable) even in 2018, when carriers had graviton catapult, Tempests were more durable, and Feedback was extremely threatening. Protoss lategame was completely defanged and is helpless against the ultimate lategame zerg and terran comps.
A 2 second interceptor build time buff and a IT damage output reduction does not reverse what happened to Protoss lategame
|
On September 11 2019 11:25 washikie wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2019 10:30 BerserkSword wrote:On September 11 2019 09:59 washikie wrote:On September 11 2019 00:42 KobeSteak wrote:On September 11 2019 00:36 BerserkSword wrote:On September 11 2019 00:13 deacon.frost wrote:On September 10 2019 23:58 KobeSteak wrote:On September 10 2019 16:55 midhigh wrote:I am not saying i could do it, but for me it is really suprising no terran player basically has ever tried to flank with ghosts. They usually send their ghost's to nuke, while they could try to flank with a group of ghosts from many angles to EMP Infestors, and actually try to kill the Zerg army, or weaken enough to win later. We have seen many games and fights won by Zergs (mostly Serral), against superior army with good ling/roach/etc flanks. One of the best and most recent examples: https://clips.twitch.tv/GenerousJollyGorillaUncleNoxI know, it is kind of risky, but when you are already behind (because Zerg late game is OP theorically), you must try to do something unexpected. In general, Terrans never adapt/evolve their playstyle compare to toss and zergs. Terrans were always praised for their bio splits against banes or HT for years. However, today splitting is a basic skill that all 3 races have in their skillset Toss and Zergs learned how to use their spellcaster more effectively, e.g warp prism HT. Both toss and zergs know how to flank with their spellcasters at different locations/angles Been almost a decade and terran still use ghost the same way. Ghost will ALWAYS bunched with the bio and come in the front (one direction). You will never see them use ghost and flank from behind or even hide them in medivac. Terran engagements has always been the same with very minor changes through the years. Frontal engagement and hopefully break enemy with brutal bio DPS Is this a troll account? HAve you like ever seen the top Maru's games? The ones where the spectator has issues of following the fight on the maximum zoom-out while Maru engages from 3 different angles, simultaneously? IN HOTS? Where have you been when mulitple shifts in T play happened? It may surprise you but T play evolved. If nothing else - the damn Raven play? Like, seriously? to be fair, he said terran players don't adapt/evolve compared to protoss and zerg players. And I'm inclined to agree. Look at 2019 for example. Protoss and zerg were met with massive nerfs. Protoss lategame was obliterated (carriers turned to garbage with the loss of graviton catapult, Tempests were temporarily when they exchanged durability for speed, but then nerfed into the ground when they lost most of the speed buff while still losing all that durability, and feedback was nerfed in half). Zerg early and mid-game was decimated by the new creep dynamic (creep used to advance and recede at the same rate, now it recession rate is higher) and the transfuse nerf Protoss pros developed insanely sharp timings to end the game before lategame. Zerg pros developed a defensive "turtle" style that led to the feared broodlord + infestor compositions that have become very common compared to pre-creep/queen nerfs. This is all thanks to the NERFS the races received. Terran has received nothing but buffs but we have guys like innovation and maru standing there after winning more premier tournaments, talking about how the race is weak and underpowered. Of course Terran play evolves to some extent. He was talking about relative to Protoss and Zerg though. Gumiho is the closest to a Terran pro that pushes the boundaries in terms of innovation. Maru is up there too of course, but when you compare him to stats or dark for example, the dynamism isnt on the same level. Thank you, finally someone who can understand. I never said terran players were garbage. They just never adapt/evolve their playstyle. E.G. In HOTS Toss/zergs were forced to learn and improve their splitting due to Mines (One of the most cancer unit in HOTS) It’s hard to adapt or inovate when any build that strays to far from the norm is nerfed into the ground. Consider the following list of nerfs Terran got as they came up with new builds: 3 rax reaper: nade nerfed to kill Byun style reaper games. 16 marine drop: zerg queen range buffed killing the build at higher levels of play. Mass raven mech: seeker missle removed from the game. Proxy cyclone build: cyclone reverted to lock on version killing all proxy cyclone builds. BC rush, yamotoe cannon nerfed tuning the build fown to the point it’s rarely seen at a professional level any more. There is a difference between innovation and abusing broken features of the game lmao. The BC wasnt nerfed btw. It was overall buffed. Yamato was nerfed but it still gets to OHKO or 2HKO everything it needs to...nobody uses void rays. On the other hand, it got a MASSIVE buff in the form of being able to fire while moving. Is their though? arguably any new strategy needs to be strong for it to be used. If its not strong whats the point of using it? zerg complain terran dont inovate but when they do o boy they get nerfed hard
Yes, there is.
Zerg and Protoss players innovate more in the face of nerfs.
Terran receives a nerf to an incredibly broken feature, and gets buffs in other areas.
Youre acting like Terran is the only thing that loses overpowered strategies/builds.
As if protoss hasnt lost the blink all in, the adept all ins, the KA, etc
|
On September 11 2019 10:26 BerserkSword wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2019 05:20 GoSuNamhciR wrote:
I think the big problem with terran vs. anything late game is just how bad vikings are. This unit is in dire need of a late game buff. Terran doesn't have good AtA options and are forced into a narrow gameplan with Thors that are so slow and immobile. If terran had a better way to counter Zerg and Protoss air late game with a mobile army alot of their problems would be alleviated.
Also I think PvZ is much more balanced late game for a protss. But my Protoss/Zerg is only M1 level, so that doesn't really mean anything
Terran can obliterate late game protoss with mass BCs. The only time I've seen pro level mass BCs lose to lategame protoss is Maru vs Dear. Every other time the Protoss mass tempest compositions get steamrolled Maru vs Classic Beastyqt vs Mana Beastyqt vs Harstem Heromrine vs Beastyqt TY vs Creator
It's funny because I agree with you on the opinion that Terrans should make more BC's in the late-game, but your arguments are so disinginuous that I feel the need to point it out.
Out of the 5 games you used to prove your point, only one can be conclusive. You're seriously using Beastyqt as an exemple to why BC's are OP? I love the guy but come on, he's a streamer playing random and doing stupid builds for fun. And one of his game is against Heromarine??? Is that a typo? And using TY vs Creator as en example... TY the best late game terran player beating a Protoss who hasn't been remotely relevant for the past 6 or 7 years? That would be like saying mass voidrays are OP because Stats beat Bomber with it this one time.
Vikings do not need buffs. Thors are fine against BLs which are even slower than thors.
Nice whataboutism. What do thors and BLs have to do with the strength of vikings? Vikings are dead supply except in TvT because both Protoss and Zerg have strong AOE spells that can hit air and decimate viking's low health pool.
PvZ is basically unwinnable in the lategame for Protoss
Be careful writing unfounded blanket statement that can be easily contradicted by facts. 67% and 62% winrate doesn't seem that "unwinnable" to me when talking about 15 to 20 minutes and 20 minutes or more respectively.
|
On September 11 2019 13:05 fastr wrote:
It's funny because I agree with you on the opinion that Terrans should make more BC's in the late-game, but your arguments are so disinginuous that I feel the need to point it out.
Out of the 5 games you used to prove your point, only one can be conclusive. You're seriously using Beastyqt as an exemple to why BC's are OP? I love the guy but come on, he's a streamer playing random and doing stupid builds for fun. And one of his game is against Heromarine??? Is that a typo? And using TY vs Creator as en example... TY the best late game terran player beating a Protoss who hasn't been remotely relevant for the past 6 or 7 years? That would be like saying mass voidrays are OP because Stats beat Bomber with it this one time.
You are literally proving my point.
Yes - Beastyqt is a streamer
A streamer who regularly steamrolls some of Europe's best Protoss PROFESSIONAL PLAYERS like Harstem and Mana
using mass BCs in the lategame, which is the hardest phase of SC2
And when the roles are flipped - streamer using Protoss against a top EU Terran Pro in heromarine, beastyqt loses
The common denominator here is that BCs stomp protoss lategame, even if the BC user is a streamer and the Protoss player is a top professional player.
TY vs creator would be irrelevant if that's the only example I gave. But I gave you many games.
On September 11 2019 13:05 fastr wrote:
Nice whataboutism. What do thors and BLs have to do with the strength of vikings? Vikings are dead supply except in TvT because both Protoss and Zerg have strong AOE spells that can hit air and decimate viking's low health pool.
Read the post i was responding to and you'll know why Thors are relevant.
Vikings are not dead supply. Especially now in TvP where Terran has AOE that is stronger than storm while also preventing storm.
Vikings are weaker in TvZ but a handful them can be efficient in damaging brood lords and threatening vipers
On September 11 2019 13:05 fastr wrote:Be careful writing unfounded blanket statement that can be easily contradicted by facts. 67% and 62% winrate doesn't seem that "unwinnable" to me when talking about 15 to 20 minutes and 20 minutes or more respectively.
fine, i will clarify my statement
BL infestor is virtually invincible vs protoss in the lategame
|
On September 10 2019 23:58 KobeSteak wrote:Show nested quote +On September 10 2019 16:55 midhigh wrote:I am not saying i could do it, but for me it is really suprising no terran player basically has ever tried to flank with ghosts. They usually send their ghost's to nuke, while they could try to flank with a group of ghosts from many angles to EMP Infestors, and actually try to kill the Zerg army, or weaken enough to win later. We have seen many games and fights won by Zergs (mostly Serral), against superior army with good ling/roach/etc flanks. One of the best and most recent examples: https://clips.twitch.tv/GenerousJollyGorillaUncleNoxI know, it is kind of risky, but when you are already behind (because Zerg late game is OP theorically), you must try to do something unexpected. In general, Terrans never adapt/evolve their playstyle compare to toss and zergs. Terrans were always praised for their bio splits against banes or HT for years. However, today splitting is a basic skill that all 3 races have in their skillset Toss and Zergs learned how to use their spellcaster more effectively, e.g warp prism HT. Both toss and zergs know how to flank with their spellcasters at different locations/angles Been almost a decade and terran still use ghost the same way. Ghost will ALWAYS bunched with the bio and come in the front (one direction). You will never see them use ghost and flank from behind or even hide them in medivac. Terran engagements has always been the same with very minor changes through the years. Frontal engagement and hopefully break enemy with brutal bio DPS
terrans bad, Z&P good!!
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/CRCyrwp.jpg)
|
On September 11 2019 11:58 BerserkSword wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2019 11:25 washikie wrote:On September 11 2019 10:30 BerserkSword wrote:On September 11 2019 09:59 washikie wrote:On September 11 2019 00:42 KobeSteak wrote:On September 11 2019 00:36 BerserkSword wrote:On September 11 2019 00:13 deacon.frost wrote:On September 10 2019 23:58 KobeSteak wrote:On September 10 2019 16:55 midhigh wrote:I am not saying i could do it, but for me it is really suprising no terran player basically has ever tried to flank with ghosts. They usually send their ghost's to nuke, while they could try to flank with a group of ghosts from many angles to EMP Infestors, and actually try to kill the Zerg army, or weaken enough to win later. We have seen many games and fights won by Zergs (mostly Serral), against superior army with good ling/roach/etc flanks. One of the best and most recent examples: https://clips.twitch.tv/GenerousJollyGorillaUncleNoxI know, it is kind of risky, but when you are already behind (because Zerg late game is OP theorically), you must try to do something unexpected. In general, Terrans never adapt/evolve their playstyle compare to toss and zergs. Terrans were always praised for their bio splits against banes or HT for years. However, today splitting is a basic skill that all 3 races have in their skillset Toss and Zergs learned how to use their spellcaster more effectively, e.g warp prism HT. Both toss and zergs know how to flank with their spellcasters at different locations/angles Been almost a decade and terran still use ghost the same way. Ghost will ALWAYS bunched with the bio and come in the front (one direction). You will never see them use ghost and flank from behind or even hide them in medivac. Terran engagements has always been the same with very minor changes through the years. Frontal engagement and hopefully break enemy with brutal bio DPS Is this a troll account? HAve you like ever seen the top Maru's games? The ones where the spectator has issues of following the fight on the maximum zoom-out while Maru engages from 3 different angles, simultaneously? IN HOTS? Where have you been when mulitple shifts in T play happened? It may surprise you but T play evolved. If nothing else - the damn Raven play? Like, seriously? to be fair, he said terran players don't adapt/evolve compared to protoss and zerg players. And I'm inclined to agree. Look at 2019 for example. Protoss and zerg were met with massive nerfs. Protoss lategame was obliterated (carriers turned to garbage with the loss of graviton catapult, Tempests were temporarily when they exchanged durability for speed, but then nerfed into the ground when they lost most of the speed buff while still losing all that durability, and feedback was nerfed in half). Zerg early and mid-game was decimated by the new creep dynamic (creep used to advance and recede at the same rate, now it recession rate is higher) and the transfuse nerf Protoss pros developed insanely sharp timings to end the game before lategame. Zerg pros developed a defensive "turtle" style that led to the feared broodlord + infestor compositions that have become very common compared to pre-creep/queen nerfs. This is all thanks to the NERFS the races received. Terran has received nothing but buffs but we have guys like innovation and maru standing there after winning more premier tournaments, talking about how the race is weak and underpowered. Of course Terran play evolves to some extent. He was talking about relative to Protoss and Zerg though. Gumiho is the closest to a Terran pro that pushes the boundaries in terms of innovation. Maru is up there too of course, but when you compare him to stats or dark for example, the dynamism isnt on the same level. Thank you, finally someone who can understand. I never said terran players were garbage. They just never adapt/evolve their playstyle. E.G. In HOTS Toss/zergs were forced to learn and improve their splitting due to Mines (One of the most cancer unit in HOTS) It’s hard to adapt or inovate when any build that strays to far from the norm is nerfed into the ground. Consider the following list of nerfs Terran got as they came up with new builds: 3 rax reaper: nade nerfed to kill Byun style reaper games. 16 marine drop: zerg queen range buffed killing the build at higher levels of play. Mass raven mech: seeker missle removed from the game. Proxy cyclone build: cyclone reverted to lock on version killing all proxy cyclone builds. BC rush, yamotoe cannon nerfed tuning the build fown to the point it’s rarely seen at a professional level any more. There is a difference between innovation and abusing broken features of the game lmao. The BC wasnt nerfed btw. It was overall buffed. Yamato was nerfed but it still gets to OHKO or 2HKO everything it needs to...nobody uses void rays. On the other hand, it got a MASSIVE buff in the form of being able to fire while moving. Is their though? arguably any new strategy needs to be strong for it to be used. If its not strong whats the point of using it? zerg complain terran dont inovate but when they do o boy they get nerfed hard Yes, there is. Zerg and Protoss players innovate more in the face of nerfs. Terran receives a nerf to an incredibly broken feature, and gets buffs in other areas. Youre acting like Terran is the only thing that loses overpowered strategies/builds. As if protoss hasnt lost the blink all in, the adept all ins, the KA, etc
name to me one zerg or protoss unit that has received a complete rework such that it now requires a different production structure to make and functions entirely differently.
name to me one caster unit zerg or protoss has that had 2 of its 3 abilities removed and replaced with something completely different.
can you one of these things. I cant.
when protoss gets nerfed they have the range of a unit's pickup changed. When terran gets nerfed they have one of their units reworked. but sure terran cant adapt to drastic changes, they just keep going bio lolololololol. Its not like when they develop new strategies bliz just removes them from the game nope that's not it at all.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On September 11 2019 14:15 washikie wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2019 11:58 BerserkSword wrote:On September 11 2019 11:25 washikie wrote:On September 11 2019 10:30 BerserkSword wrote:On September 11 2019 09:59 washikie wrote:On September 11 2019 00:42 KobeSteak wrote:On September 11 2019 00:36 BerserkSword wrote:On September 11 2019 00:13 deacon.frost wrote:On September 10 2019 23:58 KobeSteak wrote:On September 10 2019 16:55 midhigh wrote:I am not saying i could do it, but for me it is really suprising no terran player basically has ever tried to flank with ghosts. They usually send their ghost's to nuke, while they could try to flank with a group of ghosts from many angles to EMP Infestors, and actually try to kill the Zerg army, or weaken enough to win later. We have seen many games and fights won by Zergs (mostly Serral), against superior army with good ling/roach/etc flanks. One of the best and most recent examples: https://clips.twitch.tv/GenerousJollyGorillaUncleNoxI know, it is kind of risky, but when you are already behind (because Zerg late game is OP theorically), you must try to do something unexpected. In general, Terrans never adapt/evolve their playstyle compare to toss and zergs. Terrans were always praised for their bio splits against banes or HT for years. However, today splitting is a basic skill that all 3 races have in their skillset Toss and Zergs learned how to use their spellcaster more effectively, e.g warp prism HT. Both toss and zergs know how to flank with their spellcasters at different locations/angles Been almost a decade and terran still use ghost the same way. Ghost will ALWAYS bunched with the bio and come in the front (one direction). You will never see them use ghost and flank from behind or even hide them in medivac. Terran engagements has always been the same with very minor changes through the years. Frontal engagement and hopefully break enemy with brutal bio DPS Is this a troll account? HAve you like ever seen the top Maru's games? The ones where the spectator has issues of following the fight on the maximum zoom-out while Maru engages from 3 different angles, simultaneously? IN HOTS? Where have you been when mulitple shifts in T play happened? It may surprise you but T play evolved. If nothing else - the damn Raven play? Like, seriously? to be fair, he said terran players don't adapt/evolve compared to protoss and zerg players. And I'm inclined to agree. Look at 2019 for example. Protoss and zerg were met with massive nerfs. Protoss lategame was obliterated (carriers turned to garbage with the loss of graviton catapult, Tempests were temporarily when they exchanged durability for speed, but then nerfed into the ground when they lost most of the speed buff while still losing all that durability, and feedback was nerfed in half). Zerg early and mid-game was decimated by the new creep dynamic (creep used to advance and recede at the same rate, now it recession rate is higher) and the transfuse nerf Protoss pros developed insanely sharp timings to end the game before lategame. Zerg pros developed a defensive "turtle" style that led to the feared broodlord + infestor compositions that have become very common compared to pre-creep/queen nerfs. This is all thanks to the NERFS the races received. Terran has received nothing but buffs but we have guys like innovation and maru standing there after winning more premier tournaments, talking about how the race is weak and underpowered. Of course Terran play evolves to some extent. He was talking about relative to Protoss and Zerg though. Gumiho is the closest to a Terran pro that pushes the boundaries in terms of innovation. Maru is up there too of course, but when you compare him to stats or dark for example, the dynamism isnt on the same level. Thank you, finally someone who can understand. I never said terran players were garbage. They just never adapt/evolve their playstyle. E.G. In HOTS Toss/zergs were forced to learn and improve their splitting due to Mines (One of the most cancer unit in HOTS) It’s hard to adapt or inovate when any build that strays to far from the norm is nerfed into the ground. Consider the following list of nerfs Terran got as they came up with new builds: 3 rax reaper: nade nerfed to kill Byun style reaper games. 16 marine drop: zerg queen range buffed killing the build at higher levels of play. Mass raven mech: seeker missle removed from the game. Proxy cyclone build: cyclone reverted to lock on version killing all proxy cyclone builds. BC rush, yamotoe cannon nerfed tuning the build fown to the point it’s rarely seen at a professional level any more. There is a difference between innovation and abusing broken features of the game lmao. The BC wasnt nerfed btw. It was overall buffed. Yamato was nerfed but it still gets to OHKO or 2HKO everything it needs to...nobody uses void rays. On the other hand, it got a MASSIVE buff in the form of being able to fire while moving. Is their though? arguably any new strategy needs to be strong for it to be used. If its not strong whats the point of using it? zerg complain terran dont inovate but when they do o boy they get nerfed hard Yes, there is. Zerg and Protoss players innovate more in the face of nerfs. Terran receives a nerf to an incredibly broken feature, and gets buffs in other areas. Youre acting like Terran is the only thing that loses overpowered strategies/builds. As if protoss hasnt lost the blink all in, the adept all ins, the KA, etc name to me one zerg or protoss unit that has received a complete rework such that it now requires a different production structure to make and functions entirely differently. name to me one caster unit zerg or protoss has that had 2 of its 3 abilities removed and replaced with something completely different. can you one of these things. I cant. when protoss gets nerfed they have the range of a unit's pickup changed. When terran gets nerfed they have one of their units reworked. but sure terran cant adapt to drastic changes, they just keep going bio lolololololol. Its not like when they develop new strategies bliz just removes them from the game nope that's not it at all.
I quite enjoy how we show them all the innovations and yet - Doen't count, TERRANS DON'T INNOVATE!$!#!# And then they say - look, I don't know HOW they should innovate, all I know is their innovations are not good enough for me to accept them but they need to innovate 
Edit> The last thing I remember being changed this way was the Khaydarin Amulet. Can't remember anything remotely similar for Zerg. (but i am mostly Protoss )
Edit 2> BTW I am a Protoss fanboy, at least I used to be until LotV was released with the glorious idiocy named Adept. I hate adepts with furious rage. (it was the biggest reason I started to leave mirror matches, I just hate PvP nowadays)
|
On September 11 2019 13:24 BerserkSword wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2019 13:05 fastr wrote:
It's funny because I agree with you on the opinion that Terrans should make more BC's in the late-game, but your arguments are so disinginuous that I feel the need to point it out.
Out of the 5 games you used to prove your point, only one can be conclusive. You're seriously using Beastyqt as an exemple to why BC's are OP? I love the guy but come on, he's a streamer playing random and doing stupid builds for fun. And one of his game is against Heromarine??? Is that a typo? And using TY vs Creator as en example... TY the best late game terran player beating a Protoss who hasn't been remotely relevant for the past 6 or 7 years? That would be like saying mass voidrays are OP because Stats beat Bomber with it this one time.
You are literally proving my point. Yes - Beastyqt is a streamer A streamer who regularly steamrolls some of Europe's best Protoss PROFESSIONAL PLAYERS like Harstem and Mana using mass BCs in the lategame, which is the hardest phase of SC2 And when the roles are flipped - streamer using Protoss against a top EU Terran Pro in heromarine, beastyqt loses The common denominator here is that BCs stomp protoss lategame, even if the BC user is a streamer and the Protoss player is a top professional player. TY vs creator would be irrelevant if that's the only example I gave. But I gave you many games. Show nested quote +On September 11 2019 13:05 fastr wrote:
Nice whataboutism. What do thors and BLs have to do with the strength of vikings? Vikings are dead supply except in TvT because both Protoss and Zerg have strong AOE spells that can hit air and decimate viking's low health pool.
Read the post i was responding to and you'll know why Thors are relevant. Vikings are not dead supply. Especially now in TvP where Terran has AOE that is stronger than storm while also preventing storm. Vikings are weaker in TvZ but a handful them can be efficient in damaging brood lords and threatening vipers Show nested quote +On September 11 2019 13:05 fastr wrote:Be careful writing unfounded blanket statement that can be easily contradicted by facts. 67% and 62% winrate doesn't seem that "unwinnable" to me when talking about 15 to 20 minutes and 20 minutes or more respectively. fine, i will clarify my statement BL infestor is virtually invincible vs protoss in the lategame
All I have ever seen you do, on every forum you are on, is balance whine about terran, I actually dont know how you have the time of day to complain this often, it's pretty wild stuff, I mean do you even play sc2? I just always read your posts because you post everywhere, and every single time I ignore it because it's usually just theory based nonsense.
But I am generally curious, how much of this game do you actually play, what level of play do you complain from? I just cant comprehend how much time you invest into typing balance whining and praising the all powerful zerg race. It's getting exhausting to read.
Try and just enjoy the game instead of preaching on the forums night and day lmao. Omega yikes
|
I would say medivac drop + EMP combo isn't practical in any case. Way too much APM for fairly low gains.
Ghost flanks might work, but i'm spectical again about how much APM it requires and atleast vs Z they feel pretty impractical considering how many ghosts you need for the flank to actually get the energy off of the infestors.
|
On September 11 2019 19:06 Luolis wrote:
I would say medivac drop + EMP combo isn't practical in any case. Way too much APM for fairly low gains.
Ghost flanks might work, but i'm spectical again about how much APM it requires and atleast vs Z they feel pretty impractical considering how many ghosts you need for the flank to actually get the energy off of the infestors.
i've written about this before, but it's got to be pretty map dependant.
spending 150/125 and sitting on 300/300 worth of ghost upgrades.
10 seconds of cloaking is about 15 energy spent + 25 activation.
for the sake of brevity, it takes about 50 seconds IRL for a fresh ghost to have enough to cloak for 10 seconds and EMP.
for every 5 seconds of cloaking, that is a~7 energy
having a chance to seal an engagement to have a chance at winning the game down the line, unsure of where the engagement might actually take place, makes this a very difficult core tactic to back.
it's probable to work very well especially with practice and it seems very strong on paper, nobody is arguing against that.
but it's the amount of factors involved.
and as it's been said, the amount of ghosts you would need vs. the possible solutions.
speaking as the zerg player btw,
the reality is, when you're about 20 range from a base--army meeting army--and creep+spores being out about as far, tanks are becoming a liability. banelings will happily run in to take a fishing ghost, or multiple.
i think it really comes down to this baneling unit in equal or greater resource situations for Z.
and then time becomes the greatest factor in those situations.
|
Northern Ireland25898 Posts
On September 11 2019 19:06 Luolis wrote:
I would say medivac drop + EMP combo isn't practical in any case. Way too much APM for fairly low gains.
Ghost flanks might work, but i'm spectical again about how much APM it requires and atleast vs Z they feel pretty impractical considering how many ghosts you need for the flank to actually get the energy off of the infestors.
If anything I feel it’s the other way around, least I find it easier to babysit a Prism than staggered Templars, especially when trying to time a storm. I think partly that’s because you’re pre-actively planning a move vs reacting quickly to your opponent showing up in the right spot.
I was testing it a bit earlier, seems doable.
On the other hand in how it fits into the flow of a game, Hm. The only scenario I feel you’d ever want to sac medivacs and EMP drop is as a Hail Mary to try and nail all the Infestor energy in a TvZ.
Even assuming you can get the timing down, scan, find a corridor to boost through, drop and nail your EMPs, compositionally it’s going to be very awkward. I mean presumably a game scenario where you both have ghosts and medivacs and can spare them for such a move you probably have an edge anyway to win with a more conventional engagement.
|
On September 11 2019 19:44 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2019 19:06 Luolis wrote:
I would say medivac drop + EMP combo isn't practical in any case. Way too much APM for fairly low gains.
Ghost flanks might work, but i'm spectical again about how much APM it requires and atleast vs Z they feel pretty impractical considering how many ghosts you need for the flank to actually get the energy off of the infestors. If anything I feel it’s the other way around, least I find it easier to babysit a Prism than staggered Templars, especially when trying to time a storm. I think partly that’s because you’re pre-actively planning a move vs reacting quickly to your opponent showing up in the right spot. I was testing it a bit earlier, seems doable. On the other hand in how it fits into the flow of a game, Hm. The only scenario I feel you’d ever want to sac medivacs and EMP drop is as a Hail Mary to try and nail all the Infestor energy in a TvZ. Even assuming you can get the timing down, scan, find a corridor to boost through, drop and nail your EMPs, compositionally it’s going to be very awkward. I mean presumably a game scenario where you both have ghosts and medivacs and can spare them for such a move you probably have an edge anyway to win with a more conventional engagement.
Yeah my point about it is basically that controlling it would probably be less worth than just fighting conventionally. You still need to control your bio and if your APM is being spent on controlling a medivac dropping ghosts and then EMPing i think it's way too much focus on something that doesn't matter if your main army melts at the same time.
One problem for TvP for that is also that if protoss splits the HTs or has them in the prism, dropping ghosts from medivacs is kinda pointless because the main targets are unavailable to be hit.
The way Terran works, atleast with bio, is almost always the way that it's better to take a conventional engagement than micro one or two units in a different spot, because you almost have to babysit your main army.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On September 11 2019 19:54 Luolis wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2019 19:44 Wombat_NI wrote:On September 11 2019 19:06 Luolis wrote:
I would say medivac drop + EMP combo isn't practical in any case. Way too much APM for fairly low gains.
Ghost flanks might work, but i'm spectical again about how much APM it requires and atleast vs Z they feel pretty impractical considering how many ghosts you need for the flank to actually get the energy off of the infestors. If anything I feel it’s the other way around, least I find it easier to babysit a Prism than staggered Templars, especially when trying to time a storm. I think partly that’s because you’re pre-actively planning a move vs reacting quickly to your opponent showing up in the right spot. I was testing it a bit earlier, seems doable. On the other hand in how it fits into the flow of a game, Hm. The only scenario I feel you’d ever want to sac medivacs and EMP drop is as a Hail Mary to try and nail all the Infestor energy in a TvZ. Even assuming you can get the timing down, scan, find a corridor to boost through, drop and nail your EMPs, compositionally it’s going to be very awkward. I mean presumably a game scenario where you both have ghosts and medivacs and can spare them for such a move you probably have an edge anyway to win with a more conventional engagement. Yeah my point about it is basically that controlling it would probably be less worth than just fighting conventionally. You still need to control your bio and if your APM is being spent on controlling a medivac dropping ghosts and then EMPing i think it's way too much focus on something that doesn't matter if your main army melts at the same time. One problem for TvP for that is also that if protoss splits the HTs or has them in the prism, dropping ghosts from medivacs is kinda pointless because the main targets are unavailable to be hit. The way Terran works, atleast with bio, is almost always the way that it's better to take a conventional engagement than micro one or two units in a different spot, because you almost have to babysit your main army.
But the whole discussion is kinda pointless. HeroMarine(I believe) did a ghost flank few days ago.
There were ghost flanks in the PvT before, that's why Templars are nowadays in the prism, ghosts were too dangerous.
It's just not present nowadays that much, which isn't that surprising considering many players stop using ghosts and before that it was mostly for the snipe.
|
Serral is such a nice guy, he seems against region lock and thinks Z op, I wonder why koreans' exclusive fans dislike him
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On September 11 2019 22:01 stilt wrote:Serral is such a nice guy, he seems against region lock and thinks Z op, I wonder why koreans' exclusive fans dislike him
Mostly because of the fanboys, not because of him?
|
On September 11 2019 21:56 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On September 11 2019 19:54 Luolis wrote:On September 11 2019 19:44 Wombat_NI wrote:On September 11 2019 19:06 Luolis wrote:
I would say medivac drop + EMP combo isn't practical in any case. Way too much APM for fairly low gains.
Ghost flanks might work, but i'm spectical again about how much APM it requires and atleast vs Z they feel pretty impractical considering how many ghosts you need for the flank to actually get the energy off of the infestors. If anything I feel it’s the other way around, least I find it easier to babysit a Prism than staggered Templars, especially when trying to time a storm. I think partly that’s because you’re pre-actively planning a move vs reacting quickly to your opponent showing up in the right spot. I was testing it a bit earlier, seems doable. On the other hand in how it fits into the flow of a game, Hm. The only scenario I feel you’d ever want to sac medivacs and EMP drop is as a Hail Mary to try and nail all the Infestor energy in a TvZ. Even assuming you can get the timing down, scan, find a corridor to boost through, drop and nail your EMPs, compositionally it’s going to be very awkward. I mean presumably a game scenario where you both have ghosts and medivacs and can spare them for such a move you probably have an edge anyway to win with a more conventional engagement. Yeah my point about it is basically that controlling it would probably be less worth than just fighting conventionally. You still need to control your bio and if your APM is being spent on controlling a medivac dropping ghosts and then EMPing i think it's way too much focus on something that doesn't matter if your main army melts at the same time. One problem for TvP for that is also that if protoss splits the HTs or has them in the prism, dropping ghosts from medivacs is kinda pointless because the main targets are unavailable to be hit. The way Terran works, atleast with bio, is almost always the way that it's better to take a conventional engagement than micro one or two units in a different spot, because you almost have to babysit your main army. But the whole discussion is kinda pointless. HeroMarine(I believe) did a ghost flank few days ago. There were ghost flanks in the PvT before, that's why Templars are nowadays in the prism, ghosts were too dangerous. It's just not present nowadays that much, which isn't that surprising considering many players stop using ghosts and before that it was mostly for the snipe.
I was specifically talking about medivac drop + ghosts in this post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
