|
On September 21 2012 12:38 Starshaped wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2012 12:18 JackReacher wrote: This thread is making me sick. Mediocre no-name master league players feeding their ego with excuses for why they lose and why they can't compete with top players and such. Want to know the difference between you and GM/pro Terrans who win tournaments? You cry about imbalance, your race being "the hardest" or any amount of bs needed to rationalize why you aren't playing up to your unrealistic expectations about how good you think you are, while they blame losses on themselves not being good enough, which motivates them to practice more. They end up practicing all day, and you end up on here posting about why you are good but your race is just "unfairly nerfed".
This is simply the mindset of a loser. Do you think Taeja or Mvp have this attitude? They have winner's mindsets. Take a cue from people who know how to win. "Terran is the weakest race" -MVP "Terran is the weakest race"
-Taeja
It's been pretty obvious for quite some time that Terran is significantly more difficult to play at pretty much every level above diamond, and it's reflected in the current racial balance on ladder and Terran representation in the top levels of foreign tournaments since pretty much forever. Only the stronger competition and much higher concentration of talent in Korea is producing players who can get enough out of Terran to make it good enough to win at the highest levels.
|
On September 21 2012 13:33 forsooth wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2012 12:38 Starshaped wrote:On September 21 2012 12:18 JackReacher wrote: This thread is making me sick. Mediocre no-name master league players feeding their ego with excuses for why they lose and why they can't compete with top players and such. Want to know the difference between you and GM/pro Terrans who win tournaments? You cry about imbalance, your race being "the hardest" or any amount of bs needed to rationalize why you aren't playing up to your unrealistic expectations about how good you think you are, while they blame losses on themselves not being good enough, which motivates them to practice more. They end up practicing all day, and you end up on here posting about why you are good but your race is just "unfairly nerfed".
This is simply the mindset of a loser. Do you think Taeja or Mvp have this attitude? They have winner's mindsets. Take a cue from people who know how to win. "Terran is the weakest race" -MVP "Terran is the weakest race" -Taeja It's been pretty obvious for quite some time that Terran is significantly more difficult to play at pretty much every level above diamond, and it's reflected in the current racial balance on ladder and Terran representation in the top levels of foreign tournaments since pretty much forever. Only the stronger competition and much higher concentration of talent in Korea is producing players who can get enough out of Terran to make it good enough to win at the highest levels.
"Zerg is the weakest race"
-Bob Marley
|
On September 21 2012 12:18 JackReacher wrote: This thread is making me sick. Mediocre no-name master league players feeding their ego with excuses for why they lose and why they can't compete with top players and such. Want to know the difference between you and GM/pro Terrans who win tournaments? You cry about imbalance, your race being "the hardest" or any amount of bs needed to rationalize why you aren't playing up to your unrealistic expectations about how good you think you are Who are you responding to? I haven't seen anyone in this thread doing anything like that.
|
Really just has to do with Terran's lategame being wildly undiscovered.
Only a handful of Terrans are taking the time to learn the late-game as the only reason to with HotS coming out soon is if you have the potential to win a lot of tournaments before then and most players don't.
|
On September 21 2012 13:50 shadowboxer wrote: Really just has to do with Terran's lategame being wildly undiscovered. What late game?
|
On September 21 2012 13:31 Subversive wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2012 11:34 Artifex Magnus wrote: It's only indicative of population... not skill... True to an extent, but wrong overall. If the proportion of terran players is around 30% at levels below masters (that was the figure given for bronze, but let's assume it's close to that for all levels between bronze and diamond) and the players in masters/grand-masters is more like ~25%, then it is balance or skill or what have you, not just a question of player numbers. Exactly. Population doesn't really matter when it comes to the GM league because the league is so small.
Look at it this way- out of the top 100 zerg players in all of North America, nearly all of them qualified to get into GM.
Out of the top 100 terran players in North America, only 40 of them could win consistently enough to qualify.
|
To be honest, slight imbalances like this our bound to happen - you can't make every race the same difficulty to play across all playing levels. It just so happens terran is tougher to play at masters and grandmaster level but equal at the very top. Kinda cool actually to have a challenging-er race! xD
|
I am a little happy about that. I am Terran and I hate playing TvT. Now TvT is not happening too often if at all. But what is most surprising, even on Korean ladder where I play in awesome Gold league, there are no longer too many Terrans! There was a time that if I wanted to practice TvT all I needed was to play on KR - it is no longer a case.
I don't want to link it to imbalance, but there is one big problem. Tournaments - ZvZ, PvP, PvZ all day long. As an result I stopped watching small tournaments, there are no Terrans in small online tourneys. Since more or less 4 months I watch only the biggest events, where boring for me matchups are compensated by brilliant commentators.
And the opinion that in lower leagues it seems that winning while playing as P or Z is easier than playing as T? It is almost a tabu topic here at tl.net, but I am going to say something. I used to edit liqupedia for z33k.com (tournament page) for 2 years. I edited pages for tourneys such as Simply Silver (gold and bronze), Golden Age (bronze to gold), Platinum Tribes (bronze to platinum) and Diamonds Are Forever (bronze to diamond). And results were very clear. Most wins - always Zerg, then Protoss, and Terran always had smallest amounts of wins. And these tourneys are really old! This winning distribution situation is much, much older then just few recent patches.
I don't believe there is any imba atm. Lack of Terrans in tourneys is annoying for me as hell, but there are number of reason for that, imbalance is not one of them. But I totally support the opinion that on lower levels playing with Terran is the hardest. Call it whining, maybe it is
|
On September 21 2012 13:50 shadowboxer wrote: Really just has to do with Terran's lategame being wildly undiscovered.
Only a handful of Terrans are taking the time to learn the late-game as the only reason to with HotS coming out soon is if you have the potential to win a lot of tournaments before then and most players don't.
I would agree that this is a part of the reason. How often do you see EMP used to try to stop infestor/broodlord? Even the pros rarely try to use ghosts. Terran also finds themselves sitting on excess gas in the lategame... well what's a gas-heavy unit that can deal heavy damage to slow moving targets? But ravens are still not too common (I have seen more lately though).
|
On September 21 2012 14:01 Chocobo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2012 13:50 shadowboxer wrote: Really just has to do with Terran's lategame being wildly undiscovered.
Only a handful of Terrans are taking the time to learn the late-game as the only reason to with HotS coming out soon is if you have the potential to win a lot of tournaments before then and most players don't.
I would agree that this is a part of the reason. How often do you see EMP used to try to stop infestor/broodlord? Even the pros rarely try to use ghosts. Terran also finds themselves sitting on excess gas in the lategame... well what's a gas-heavy unit that can deal heavy damage to slow moving targets? But ravens are still not too common (I have seen more lately though).
There is a reason why ghosts aren't used much against infestors. Ghosts rely on being cloaked to be effective in the lategame. You can snipe 1 obs with viking, you cannot snipe 5 overseers with viking. If ghosts are spotted, either a broodling will trap them, lings will trap them, or they will get some EMPs off and die. Either you come out even or you dont get EMP/snipes off and you are guaranteed to lose the next engagement.
You cannot trade ghosts for infestor energy in the late game because the pressure to end the game is on your hand, not the zerg's.
|
Foreign Scene: Low proportion of terrans compared to Zerg and Protoss.
Korean Scene: Roughly equal proportions of all races.
If we subscribe to the idea that the Korean scene is more skilled than the foreign scene (which it is), we can assume that terran scales better with skill, and is weaker at lower levels.
Therefore, terran is the hardest race to efffectively play. This is basically the only reason which can effectively explain the lack of terrans outside of korea, across every single country and continent.
You can't really argue people all over the world, with the sole exception of koreans, enjoy playing zerg or protoss more than terran.
|
Looking more and more like BW, where Terrans complain about how hard they have it while the most dominant and accomplished players in the world are Terran.
|
Terran doesn't need buffs.
Toss/Zerg just need increased micro requirements in-battle (toss is argueable, zerg for sure *cough* infestors *cough*) to give them a higher chance of messing up an engagement like terran and more reward for successful engagements like terran.
Terran skill requirement is just a bit too high at that level!
|
I think the issue, now, is the way that late-game armies work.
If we looked back at the old ladder pool and tournament pool, 3 base is hard to obtain quickly to just power eco and tech due to smaller maps and map design (3 basing really fast on Metalopolis is harder than, say, entombed valley.)
The capital ships/end game units and really-expensive units were not designed to be made en-masse. They cost a ton of money and can often be rolled over without much support, which means they require high eco to make a lot of them work or less of the intended unit. I mean an endgame zerg, IDEALLY is a shit ton of spines, a metric shitton of infestors, corruptors, and a lot of broods. Ofc ling/bane is mixed in but if you were given infinite money for 10 minutes I'd make that army. Protoss armies have 5-7 collosus, >3 archons, >3 HT ready to storm then turn into archons, etc.
The design looks at the tech units as supplementary to the mid-tier and low-tier units (infestor stunlocks for bane/ling, medivac for marines/maurader/reaper/ghost, collosus to boost the otherwise low long range DPS of toss armies, a clutch spell for each race deciding the game, etc). This is how we see allins and mid game armies looking--tech units supplementing base units. Late-game, when we have a ton of eco, the highest of tech units become the metric to work into. A zerg army of 100 supply isn't always equal: Infestor Brood 100 supply is scary as hell. 200 lings, not so much.
It is seen in the terran tech tree that almost ALL the units are supposed to be used in relation to another. Siege tanks support marines for space control and AoE vZ. Vikings give siege tanks vision. Medivacs heal and drop. Ghosts DENY spells from being cast and eliminate their spellcasters, rather than be an offensive spellcaster like the HT. If I were to piece a 100 supply army together: Most of it would be in marine/maurader/hellions with 3-5 siege tanks, some medivacs and vikings, and maybe a few ghosts to lead the way and clear the spellcasters.
The Zerg and Protoss race has a similar way of being. Infestors are made to let ling/bling connect and chunk armies, and add overall DPS. Roaches and Hydras oddly sync well with range upgrade (and if hydras were more durable, a more viable unit in other MUs), corruptors protect broods. etc.
Moving on, the racial designs suggest that: Terran core armies are highest DPS naturally (high tech units add "little" DPS but add survivability and mobility/safety for the core army. By little, I understand the huge damage a siege line can do if you run right at it, but siege tanks can be taken care of with tech units, vikings are weak on the ground, raven PDD is researched and unreliable, thors/BCs do a good amount of damage but act as a high damage buffer to the core damage army in most cases, but nothing as devastating as sending 2 storms that the entire army eats), Zerg has middle-of-the-road (with ways of catching enemy clumps of army to surround and kill and provide ways of controlling the map endgame with siegeing broods), and Protoss core army being lowest DPS (highest damaging high tech units, storms being the most effective AoE spell damage wise, high concentration of AoE and tanky units). I'm suggesting that with the incredible focus on economy which proves to be the best way to win throughout sc2, we have gotten better at holding aggression with incredibly greedy builds and maps have allowed us to also be more economically greedy. With higher economies really early (See: 3 OC before gas, 3 Hatch before gas/lings, CC first openings, Nexus firsting, etc) we see a significantly higher amount of income that Blizz may not have anticipated when originally creating the game in ANY map. Thus allowing us to build more "high tech" units, which favors the races differently than "low tech" units.
Terran domination early in SC2 (afaik, other than cheese) was caused by unit control and the core armies we still see today: Marine siegetank medivac with drops, sieging up the natural, etc. I will also theorize that it was more successful since overall incomes were lower and marines are good units and get their core upgrades fairly quickly in the game. Now that "endgame" is reached faster and faster with higher and higher tier units seeing the field in greater quantities, Z/P are at advantage since their tech is the most offensive and powerful on their own, as opposed to the supplementary based terran highest tech (based on protecting things rather than pure slaughter, raven PDD, Medivacs, BCs, thors)
|
What's wrong with having a race that's harder to play? BW Terran was also hard as shit to play, but who cares, it's the manly race. It makes winning with it that much more rewarding.
|
Oh look it's this thread again.
*sigh*
I agree with the post before mine.
|
Remember how the first 2-3 years of BW terran was the shit race? Then boxer came =) (kinda like how taeja/mvp came). Now look at terran in sc1.
|
On September 21 2012 14:35 Talack wrote: Terran doesn't need buffs.
Toss/Zerg just need increased micro requirements in-battle (toss is argueable, zerg for sure *cough* infestors *cough*) to give them a higher chance of messing up an engagement like terran and more reward for successful engagements like terran.
Terran skill requirement is just a bit too high at that level!
this is the thing though. everyone claims terran has so much more micro to do etc etc. But its complete crap. no terran matchup comes close in micro requirements to zvz and pvp. protoss and zerg players can micro. Its just in matchups like pvt where the terran bio ball has such high dps its more effective to keep your units together. This is a design point of view where I believe its actually the stimmed marine thats broken, not the other races.
|
On September 21 2012 14:33 Tachion wrote: Looking more and more like BW, where Terrans complain about how hard they have it while the most dominant and accomplished players in the world are Terran.
Terran was the hardest in BW as well. Mechanically speaking anyways. I don't think terran is really all that much harder to play than the other races in sc2, I just think most people prefer to play a passive style and you just can't do that with terran. You need to be a manly man and bring the heat if you want to play terran well in sc2.
|
On September 21 2012 13:50 shadowboxer wrote: Really just has to do with Terran's lategame being wildly undiscovered.
Only a handful of Terrans are taking the time to learn the late-game as the only reason to with HotS coming out soon is if you have the potential to win a lot of tournaments before then and most players don't.
another truth. Typical terran players just do the usual builds, falling to the trap of "routine" its getting a bunch of basic units TvZ, marine/tank/medivac/marauder/viking, TvP, MMM/ghost/viking and go aggro and expand until you wear out your opponent, hoping for them to lose their units or crumble under the pressure... Nobody tries to go for the very late game units (Raven/BC/Viking) and a lot of bases and defend instead of the usual expand and aggro... herp derp, most of you just copy the build orders early on and in the late game, you have no idea what you're doing. Just keep making moar units until we lose. I hardly see players who thinks of buying time for the next step... they just keep making more and more marine.... thats just loser, desperado mentality.
|
|
|
|