On September 21 2012 20:18 guN-viCe wrote: IMO Terran is the most difficult race to play late game for these reasons:
1) Terran produces units in the worst way. Lots of Barracks, Factories, or Starports. Zerg gets to make one tech building and they can pop 20 muta, roach, infestor, ulta, etc at once from just their mining bases and a macro hatch. Protoss can max out and wait for cooldown on gateways and instantly repopulate their armies. They also have chrono.
What this means is that Terran is stuck in whatever tech path they choose. If Terran has 10 barracks he can't just switch to 10 factories or starports. There is not enough resources, space, or time, or upgrades.
Z can change army composition on a whim, P can as well to a lesser extent. T is stuck with whatever.
2) Terran battle micro is harder. This is an undeniable fact. Z/P is very 1a + spellcaster, maybe blink or burrow or focus fire. Terran has to split their army to avoid AoE. Has to stim and stutter. Has to siege. Has to cloak shee. Has to EMP/Snipe.
Terran has much more to do in battles, and therefore has more chances to lose their squishy armies if they mess up even one of the micro scenarios I mention.
All of this. Also worth noting, our AoE support unit, the tank, requires more micro than p or z. They cant move and do AoE like collosus, they cant(shouldnt) clump up like collosus, their AoE has to be activated unlike collosus. The same applies to ultras. They are not as versatile as infestor.
p and z make their bones against T with easy to use AoE, and a more forgiving and versatile production base. Plus, they can ALWAYS have more harvesters than you. Protoss should ALWAYS have better upgrades as well. It can be discouraging to feel like you start the game from behind, or to get beat by strats that are relatively simpler to execute.
I'm with most terrans and think that we're a bit underpowered at the moment, not necessarily unit-wise but the metagame sucks for terran atm, no good builds/timings compared to P and Z who have a plethora of these. But the reason to why I quit playing terran, and kinda quit playing SC2 all together, wasn't that I felt that the game was imbalanced or too hard to play, but because it was BORING as hell to play terran.
The only times I enjoyed playing terran was when you could do some fun multitasking with dropships, TvT is boring and tedious to play, super long games that usually revolve around who has the better tank position. TvP is just a volatile matchup that end in a 10-second battle at some point. TvZ was the only matchup I enjoyed because of the amount of strategy that it incorporated.
Terran needs something fun, nukes are fun but too impractical. Snipe was fun but got nerfed, Ravens are fun but retardedly hard to play with. All other units that terran has at their disposal are just straight up DPS-units, and it's not fun to run around with a glass cannon that will either blast shit to oblivion or break in a second.
So yeah, the racial imbalance probably has to do with terran being unfavored in the metagame in most matchups, as well as the map pool not really being in their favor. And the race is pretty boring to play. Rant over.
On September 21 2012 20:18 guN-viCe wrote: IMO Terran is the most difficult race to play late game for these reasons:
1) Terran produces units in the worst way. Lots of Barracks, Factories, or Starports. Zerg gets to make one tech building and they can pop 20 muta, roach, infestor, ulta, etc at once from just their mining bases and a macro hatch. Protoss can max out and wait for cooldown on gateways and instantly repopulate their armies. They also have chrono.
What this means is that Terran is stuck in whatever tech path they choose. If Terran has 10 barracks he can't just switch to 10 factories or starports. There is not enough resources, space, or time, or upgrades.
Z can change army composition on a whim, P can as well to a lesser extent. T is stuck with whatever.
2) Terran battle micro is harder. This is an undeniable fact. Z/P is very 1a + spellcaster, maybe blink or burrow or focus fire. Terran has to split their army to avoid AoE. Has to stim and stutter. Has to siege. Has to cloak shee. Has to EMP/Snipe.
Terran has much more to do in battles, and therefore has more chances to lose their squishy armies if they mess up even one of the micro scenarios I mention.
All of this. Also worth noting, our AoE support unit, the tank, requires more micro than p or z. They cant move and do AoE like collosus, they cant(shouldnt) clump up like collosus, their AoE has to be activated unlike collosus. The same applies to ultras. They are not as versatile as infestor.
p and z make their bones against T with easy to use AoE, and a more forgiving and versatile production base. Plus, they can ALWAYS have more harvesters than you. Protoss should ALWAYS have better upgrades as well. It can be discouraging to feel like you start the game from behind, or to get beat by strats that are relatively simpler to execute.
I very much agree. And just because there are a few godly terrans in Korea does NOT mean that the rest of the world is somehow retarded or under-utilizing the race. It means that those Koreans are really just that godly. I dont know how these numbers can show anything but how hard it is to play terran at the same level as a toss or zerg. I'm also a little shocked that David and Dustin still won't acknowledge this, especially since they supposedly play random when they ladder...
On September 21 2012 10:34 blade55555 wrote: I imagine this has been the case on NA with zerg being mostly in GM for the past 6 months and will probably not change until hots.
On korea I think it's a lot more even and I actually don't know about EU. But can't judge racial balance on just GM, especially on the NA ladder
Excellent point, I don't know why I didn't think to check the other ladders. Here's what they look like-
Korea GM: zerg 37.4%, protoss 34.5%, terran 28.2% Korea masters: zerg 27.6%, protoss 33.3%, terran 34.3%, random 4.8%
Europe GM: zerg 37.3%, protoss 36.7%, terran 24.9%, random 1.2% (random GMs, pretty sick) Europe masters: zerg 35.3%, protoss 35.1%, terran 25.5%, random 4%
SEA GM: zerg 32.4%, protoss 38.1%, terran 25.9%, random 3.6% SEA masters: zerg 32.2%, protoss 32.2%, terran 30.7%, random 5%
China GM: zerg 39.3%, protoss 32.5%, terran 24.8%, random 3.4% China masters: zerg 31.9%, protoss 34.3%, terran 28.2%, random 5.6%
Looks like the results are pretty similar with the exception of Korea... a place known to have higher overall skill levels, so that the skill requirements of terran aren't as much of a drawback. But even there the GM league is low on terrans.
Of course, looking at races used on ladders is a horrible way to determine game balance... tournament competition is one of the best ways, and it's looking pretty even there.
And I couldn't agree more with Bippzy's post... there's nothing wrong with having a race that's tougher to learn but has the most potential if played very skillfully.
Most of us know the truth, just let the others fail to accept reality and come up with reasons like "I think the reason for it is that no one really is a huge name Terran player in the foreign scene compared to the super star Zergs and Protoss." Comical.
Are people actually trying to claim Terran isn't the hardest race? Anyone I know who has properly played all the races would be in agreement that that's the case. The onus is often on Terran is to be pro-active as well, which adds additional difficulty I feel, especially at lower levels.
On September 21 2012 20:53 halfies wrote: if there are under 30% terrans at every level on the ladder then it just means less people play it. it has nothing to do with balance.
And the underlying reason why there's less of them has nothing to do with balance? ever heard of FOTM? regardless of whatever the reason is, the one thing that I'm pretty sure most people can agree with is that the average map size is awful for moving tanks, it takes ages to push into a good position vs a zerg that knows how to bait a siege or push the advantage in TvP when toss has 3 or more bases and templars.
If BW were subjected to the balance discussion of SC2 it would get eviscerated. TvP was the most ridiculously difficult match-up in BW, you had to be about Masters level skill equivalent Terran before you could beat even a platinum equivalent Toss. (I know, I had an iCCup account as Terran and was proud if I managed not to drop to D-, played Toss about 5% of my games and promptly got into C-, it's really just easier at low levels.)
Does that mean that BW P was OP? No, in fact on the pro level usually Terran earns that moniker. But it does mean that if you beat a Terran player as Toss around the D level, it only really demonstrates that you're not significantly worse than your opponent. If playing the game isn't about boosting your ego (why should it be unless you're actually at the top?) then I don't see why it can't be fun to play against people who may be worse than you but make up for it by choosing a more forgiving race.
I don't remamber bitching when zerg had tought time and dont remamber quiting sc2 and changing race. Im zerg at heart thats what matters to me I have passion for zerg, that is the only reason I do play zerg.If terran changed because "its hard to win" then its an obv fail that shows terrans were always in for easy win, not for the race itself. Zerg might be the easier race i dont care which is the "better" i love zerg for what it is , mutated bugs queens lings banes speed weak fast units. Shitty units dying to tank fire vaporising in a second or ovewhelming in a second.
I'm a masters zerg. Don't ladder much, but when I do it's mainly ZvZ. Lucky for me, ZvZ is my best MU and ZvT is my worst. But good terrans are really scary to play against. They might be a little harder to play than P/Z but if played correctly, can do really well. I don't think the stats show terrans aren't good, it's just not as many people play it.
On September 21 2012 20:18 guN-viCe wrote: IMO Terran is the most difficult race to play late game for these reasons:
1) Terran produces units in the worst way. Lots of Barracks, Factories, or Starports. Zerg gets to make one tech building and they can pop 20 muta, roach, infestor, ulta, etc at once from just their mining bases and a macro hatch. Protoss can max out and wait for cooldown on gateways and instantly repopulate their armies. They also have chrono.
What this means is that Terran is stuck in whatever tech path they choose. If Terran has 10 barracks he can't just switch to 10 factories or starports. There is not enough resources, space, or time, or upgrades.
Z can change army composition on a whim, P can as well to a lesser extent. T is stuck with whatever.
2) Terran battle micro is harder. This is an undeniable fact. Z/P is very 1a + spellcaster, maybe blink or burrow or focus fire. Terran has to split their army to avoid AoE. Has to stim and stutter. Has to siege. Has to cloak shee. Has to EMP/Snipe.
Terran has much more to do in battles, and therefore has more chances to lose their squishy armies if they mess up even one of the micro scenarios I mention.
All of this. Also worth noting, our AoE support unit, the tank, requires more micro than p or z. They cant move and do AoE like collosus, they cant(shouldnt) clump up like collosus, their AoE has to be activated unlike collosus. The same applies to ultras. They are not as versatile as infestor.
p and z make their bones against T with easy to use AoE, and a more forgiving and versatile production base. Plus, they can ALWAYS have more harvesters than you. Protoss should ALWAYS have better upgrades as well. It can be discouraging to feel like you start the game from behind, or to get beat by strats that are relatively simpler to execute.
The Colossus only makes up for all our main units (Zealots, Stalkers, Sentries) being completely useless vs. bio. It can be discouraging to know you start the game without the ability to built useful units until the 8 or 9 minute mark.
Stalkers kite marines practically indefinitely w/o stim or bunker, zealots chew up marauders. Sentrys cutting you in half or forcefielding out are useful. You can also have immortals. Without stim, I get ripped to pieces and Im not gonna have stim til about 8 minutes... And even then without medivac support (10 minutes) stimming , which is neccesary to fighting your pure gateway mix, hurts me. Right when the medis come out you should be starting (possibly already have), collosus tech. Archons are also possible. To say nothing of warpgate completely negating defender advantage in the event of a bust.
Dont get me wrong, I can still win, but it seems like I am working harder for less right now.
On September 21 2012 21:08 Miotonir wrote: I don't remamber bitching when zerg had tought time and dont remamber quiting sc2 and changing race. Im zerg at heart thats what matters to me I have passion for zerg, that is the only reason I do play zerg.If terran changed because "its hard to win" then its an obv fail that shows terrans were always in for easy win, not for the race itself. Zerg might be the easier race i dont care which is the "better" i love zerg for what it is , mutated bugs queens lings banes speed weak fast units. Shitty units dying to tank fire vaporising in a second or ovewhelming in a second.
2 years ago everybody flamed players for playing terran, the rage and bm on the ladder was insane.
As of now its pretty much as in BW, you didnt get to play many TvT's there either (although i get a fair amount of TvT's on sc2) But its still mostly TvZ and TvP.
When i started playing in the 2nd season after the release, i made the choice to go with Zerg. I only faced Terrans and lost many many many games, and i got frustrated with it. But i realy like playing as the underdog. It gave me motivation to keep on trying.
Every time i played, i faced Terrans and lost badly. Now its shifting and more people play Zerg, things change. On my 2nd account i play Terran and i am climbing ladders rather quickly
On September 21 2012 21:08 Miotonir wrote: I don't remamber bitching when zerg had tought time and dont remamber quiting sc2 and changing race. Im zerg at heart thats what matters to me I have passion for zerg, that is the only reason I do play zerg.If terran changed because "its hard to win" then its an obv fail that shows terrans were always in for easy win, not for the race itself. Zerg might be the easier race i dont care which is the "better" i love zerg for what it is , mutated bugs queens lings banes speed weak fast units. Shitty units dying to tank fire vaporising in a second or ovewhelming in a second.
2 years ago everybody flamed players for playing terran, the rage and bm on the ladder was insane.
As of now its pretty much as in BW, you didnt get to play many TvT's there either (although i get a fair amount of TvT's on sc2) But its still mostly TvZ and TvP.
Flamed? only if u all inned super cheezy style, nobody(of healthy mind) dares to insult good macro terran ever.
I haven't laddered in a while, its just TvZ was my most favorite matchup because of bio micro, but the new infestor ling fast hive style is so boring to play against. At first i was optimistic that presplitting was the way to go, but now zergs get so good with their timings and defense its just Terran isn't like it was back in the day. Also protoss have gotten very good at securing late game tech.
If anything terran has changed from this super hyper aggressive race, to play greedy and use finicky shit to throw off the other player. Like them hellion banshees....
the argument i keep hearing is that balance seems ok at code S level, but unfortunately 99.999% of blizzard's sc2 customers are not playing there.
then the same old argument made for "noob level" diamonds and masters, perfect your macro + multitasking and you will start winning. but why do that as terran, when you can do that as zerg and win MORE?