in this thread i'd like to share my views on the terran matchups, especially Terran vs Protoss. Everything i will be talking about is just my oppinion and i'm open to discussion.
(Excuse me if the english is not perfect)
1 Introduction, StarCraft 2 philosophy?
First off, i'd like to mention that i'm not gonna talk about balance. The purpose of this thread is to discuss the state of Terran, especially TvP matchup game-design and gameplay wise.
I believe blizzards intended to make sc2 a fast paced game, which means they wanted to make low tier units useful, Marine+Marauder being the prime example of that. It means that there's rarely a passage in the game where nothing is happening (on the pro level). But does this hurt the game? Are low tier units too strong?
Also it seems blizzard wants to make as many units viable as possible in all matchups so they can have variety in the gameplay. In BW, that was not the case, as marines were almost useless in both TvT and TvP besides couple timing attacks (f.e. Deep6). I believe sc2 TvP has the similar issue, but i'll get to that later.
2 Terran in SC2
This thread is a result of my frustration with TvP. I used to play BroodWar where Terran was often the one who would defend and expand with a lot of harassment (TvP, TvT), or would go for timing attacks to gain the upper hand (TvZ). Terran was strong in both midgame and lategame thanks to wide range of units. I believe the same cannot be said about terran in SC2. In my oppinion, terran in sc2 is the strongest in early and midgame due to strong low tier units (marines+marauders) and also thanks to MULEs, which allow you to run low on SCVs and focus on making more units. In result, terran allins are very powerful.
3 Terran matchups and variety
3.1 TvT and TvZ
Current TvT and TvZ looks good to me. In both matchups there's a wide range of strategies that are viable. Bio+mech and Pure mech being the most popular. Both macro games and 2base timing attacks can be seen. In TvT there's a lot of tank positioning, controling ground and eventually switching to powerful air units (+ nukes). In TvZ, using marines early on to pressure zerg, then switching to either mech or marine tank compositions, with ghosts (and quite possibly ravens) as the ultimate tech vs T3 zerg units. Again, a lot of tanks positioning go gain ground and using the map to your advantage as much as possible. TvZ is also very micro intensive, as not paying an attention for a second can cause all your marines to blow up to couple of banelings.
From spectator point of view, both TvT and TvZ are quite exciting i think, especially TvZ, because TvT can be a bit dull sometimes (mech vs mech).
I'd consider TvZ the closest to BW TvZ as it's very micro intensive, requires a lot of multitasking and there are strong timing attacks and precise scouting is required. Good control (micro marines and target firing with tanks) can win you games which is for me one of the most important factors in the game. TvT, especially mech vs mech is very close to BW TvT as well.
PS. i make these comparisons because i used to play BW for years and because it was such a great game and i knew i can always improve my timing, my transitioning and my control (micro) it drove me on to practice more and more.
3.2 TvP
Now to the main issue i have with terran in SC2. If we consider korean pros (GSL), unless going for 1-1-1, we see MMM viking ghost for 95% games (a very nice exception being Byun vs OZ from Code A, VOD is free and can be found here). Even then though, it's only a 2base timing attack and cannot be considered as standart TvP build.
I talked about TvZ and TvT. Do you know what those matchups have in common? Tanks. Tanks made BW so awesome. Tanks make TvZ and TvT in SC2 very fun to play/watch. You can control ground, abuse the terrain, siege. They take a lot of skill to play with but the reward is high, but not in TvP. It's quite sad but almost every protoss unit counters them. Do you remember when tanks did 60 damage? Good times. They were actually quite useful back then. Right now, i wanna cry every time i have 20 of them slaughtered in 10 seconds.
I must admit, on some maps, tanks are quite viable. For example, on Shakuras, it's possible to play marine tank with support (ghost/banshee) - an example is a game from Shoutcraft 3 DDE vs Socke (VOD). Unfortunately, on most maps it's suicidide to go anything but bio (f.e. Taldarim). It works well on Shakuras because there's not much room to blink harass and 3base is quite safe, then split map situation favors terran.
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Another issue i have with TvP is there's minimum micro in fights, all you do is make concave before the fight them stim and run in. Cast some emps. Then you watch if you have enough or not. Theres no micro against banelings or infestors like in TvZ. Micro will never save your ass like in TvZ. Good position will never save your ass like in TvT, because you have no tanks, and warpgates are pretty good eh! Nothings angers me more than cutting off protoss expo from his main army and have 20 zealots warped in to my back, same with drops.
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
4 Conclusion
Solution? I don't thing there's any at the moment. Wait for HoTS for a new unit that will complement tanks just like vultures with mines? I don't hold my hopes high. Besides map specific strategies i don't see any solution at the moment, unless some things are adjusted (tanks, warpgate mechanic). Or just korean terrans don't feel like developing any biomech/mech strategies that wouldn't be timing pushes? Btw, i'm aware of people like Goody playing mech in TvP, and i don't know his winrate not any other terran's. But unless we see a terran winnig GSL/MLG/DH with mech in TvP i'd like to focus on koreans as they are clearly the top players currently.
The thing with TvP is that it doesn't feel terran-ish at all, if i wanted to make a lot of T1 units i'd play zerg! I really hate getting slaughtered by high tech protoss lategame army with HTs and Collosus, while i battle them with "awesome" marauders. As i said, TvP is really frustrating for me, making me not wanting to play the game at all, therefore there might be some over-the-top comparisons, hope you understand what i meant and give some feedback.
What do you mean, T1 units vs "hightech bio death ball"
The same mineral resources you invest in marine marauder he invests in zealot/stalker, the gas you invest in ghosts he invests in templars, the gas you invest in starport units he invests in collossi.
This "omg mass t1 vs my t3" is something coined by laddertosses who cheese 9/10 games and start panicking once the game goes past 12 minutes. It's not actually true - there's clear parallels between the tech/gas investment between the races at all stages in the game.
I honestly would take this TvP bio playstyle anyday over making tanks in TvZ and TvT - but I suppose that's personal pref. - you coming from a BW background, as you say, probably like the positional aspect of it more.
Great post and i agree 100% with you. In TvP the only micro is EMP and maybe storm dodging, but after that, as you said, is just watching if all you have is enough fir the big fight. And is also terrible to see just the same composition every single game.
I totally agree with the op. I play quite a bit of terran and toss, and the match up is barely a shadow of how cool it was in BW. Putting any balance talk aside, the fact that everything from protoss counters tanks (charge,blink,immortals,voids) and the synergy of MMM, your right that it is very unlikely we'll see anything different in the near future. From the protoss point of view, I really miss arbiters and reavers. But yea the warp gate and the poopy tanks in sc2 definitely ruined such a beautiful match up.
Like the op, I sincerely hope we get a severe overhaul of the races. But honestly, I really don't like TvZ in sc2 either. The matchup seems ridiculous, 9 out of 10 times it comes down to either rushing the zergs fast expand (bunker, hellion or some other all in), or doing a 2 base tank marine timing push.
The results of these pretty much decide the game. It may go on for 15 more minutes, but was decided when these things either succeeded or failed. The zerg either defends well and gets out of control macro wise, or crippled by the 10-12 minute mark.
i agree on everything. i think there definately needs to be a better tank support unit added or a current unit changed to fit the role better. either that or bring back 60 damage to all armor types and remove smart firing i think id settle for that ^^
On October 01 2011 06:06 Reborn8u wrote: I totally agree with the op. I play quite a bit of terran and toss, and the match up is barely a shadow of how cool it was in BW. Putting any balance talk aside, the fact that everything from protoss counters tanks (charge,blink,immortals,voids) and the synergy of MMM, your right that it is very unlikely we'll see anything different in the near future. From the protoss point of view, I really miss arbiters and reavers. But yea the warp gate and the poopy tanks in sc2 definitely ruined such a beautiful match up.
Like the op, I sincerely hope we get a severe overhaul of the races. But honestly, I really don't like TvZ in sc2 either. The matchup seems ridiculous, 9 out of 10 times it comes down to either rushing the zergs fast expand (bunker, hellion or some other all in), or doing a 2 base tank marine timing push.
The results of these pretty much decide the game. It may go on for 15 more minutes, but was decided when these things either succeeded or failed. The zerg either defends well and gets out of control macro wise, or crippled by the 10-12 minute mark.
In BW, didn't quite a few TvZ's revolve around a 2base tank marine medic push designed to attempt to kill the zerg before he got hive? correct me if i'm wrong..
I feel that TvP IS really micro intensive. EMP everything, move your units out of storms, focus fire individual colossi with vikings and kite zealots if he's zealot heavy. And while you're kiting zealots you have to move back your ghosts so that they dont all get killed in the blink of an eye. All these things at the same time. It's freaking hard if you ask me!
I agree with everything you say PredY. TvP is not good at all. I wonder how the matchup would look like in SC2 if there was no warpgates. What do you guys think?
I've been playing BW only the whole week and going mech and gaining mapcontrol and cover ground with tanks and mines is so beautiful <3.
Oh yeah the micro part I have to agree with Thorzain tho. Feels like you as a Terran have to do so much much more in the battles and you have to macro at the same too since you can't warpin 20 units when you lose your army, hehe.
Warpgates is already discussed here, it fucks up PvP, and makes allins really powerful. MULEs are in the game only so that T can keep up with drones/probes. Larva mechanics are too strong mid/late, but they need to be to survive the bullshit that is early game.
The end result is a bunch of shitty matchups. In TvZ, Z is impossible to catch up to with any lead. Either you hit a 2 (10m) or 3 base (15m) timing, and continuously trade from there, or there's no chance. Look at MVPvsDarkforce, there is no T army that is capable of moving out against late game Z once you miss your timing - you can't match Z macro, you have to trade. This is pretty much the same for PvZ.
TvP, remove marauders and remove colo. Bring back reavers and vultures. They changed the entire dynamic of the matchup by designing mech to only counter low HP units. Used to be that mech wasn't always viable vs Z because of mobility, but not it's not viable against P because they tweaked all mech output for anti-Z. Hellions/tanks are shit at real combat, but good for things they can one shot: lings banes. So unless the entire profile of those 2 units are changed, mech vs P can't come back.
On October 01 2011 06:16 Thorzain wrote: I feel that TvP IS really micro intensive. EMP everything, move your units out of storms, focus fire individual colossi with vikings and kite zealots if he's zealot heavy. And while you're kiting zealots you have to move back your ghosts so that they dont all get killed in the blink of an eye. All these things at the same time. It's freaking hard if you ask me!
This, Completely. I frequently have people whine on ladder that there are so many Terrans in Code S, but yet I rarely if ever face a terran on ladder (diamond). This is basically the reason, TVP is very difficult in my own experience unless your micro and multitask are extremely good.
I totally agree with the op. I play quite a bit of terran and toss, and the match up is barely a shadow of how cool it was in BW. Putting any balance talk aside, the fact that everything from protoss counters tanks (charge,blink,immortals,voids) and the synergy of MMM, your right that it is very unlikely we'll see anything different in the near future. From the protoss point of view, I really miss arbiters and reavers. But yea the warp gate and the poopy tanks in sc2 definitely ruined such a beautiful match up.
Like the op, I sincerely hope we get a severe overhaul of the races. But honestly, I really don't like TvZ in sc2 either. The matchup seems ridiculous, 9 out of 10 times it comes down to either rushing the zergs fast expand (bunker, hellion or some other all in), or doing a 2 base tank marine timing push.
The results of these pretty much decide the game. It may go on for 15 more minutes, but was decided when these things either succeeded or failed. The zerg either defends well and gets out of control macro wise, or crippled by the 10-12 minute mark.
Agree with this and the OP. I guess the best you can say for TvZ is that there are a few variations on your attempt to cripple the zerg before 10-12 minutes, whereas for TvP it's always the same if no one allins.
Tanks make for interesting batttles of positioning, leap-frogging and macro. They create suspension whereas marauders just ... kite and shoot ... all day? I think a good 90% percent of SC2 players thinks the marauder's an uninspired boring and unterran-like unit.
I'm afraid Blizzard's just focusing on balance though, removing the marauder would put balancing in all MU's back to square 1 (TvZ might be OK).
On October 01 2011 06:06 Reborn8u wrote: I totally agree with the op. I play quite a bit of terran and toss, and the match up is barely a shadow of how cool it was in BW. Putting any balance talk aside, the fact that everything from protoss counters tanks (charge,blink,immortals,voids) and the synergy of MMM, your right that it is very unlikely we'll see anything different in the near future. From the protoss point of view, I really miss arbiters and reavers. But yea the warp gate and the poopy tanks in sc2 definitely ruined such a beautiful match up.
Like the op, I sincerely hope we get a severe overhaul of the races. But honestly, I really don't like TvZ in sc2 either. The matchup seems ridiculous, 9 out of 10 times it comes down to either rushing the zergs fast expand (bunker, hellion or some other all in), or doing a 2 base tank marine timing push.
The results of these pretty much decide the game. It may go on for 15 more minutes, but was decided when these things either succeeded or failed. The zerg either defends well and gets out of control macro wise, or crippled by the 10-12 minute mark.
In BW, didn't quite a few TvZ's revolve around a 2base tank marine medic push designed to attempt to kill the zerg before he got hive? correct me if i'm wrong..
The 2 base Medic marine timing (with or without tanks) was certainly a big part of the mathcup, but there was also the muta phase. Either could determine the outcome, but both players had the burden of defending one timing and putting forth their own timing. Typically, the game wouldn't really be ended by either (unless severe damage occurs). But just like the terrans timing attacks force sunkens, and units, the mutas force turrets and the terran has to stay at home for a bit.
The games would quite often go beyond this point and we'd get a wonderful and robust war of ling/lurker/muta into hive tech (defilers and ultras) vs Marine medic firebat with some tanks and science vessels. Which often led to huge split map battle royals.
In sc2 usually around the time when mutas enter, the game is decided from what I've seen. It just takes a while for the advantage to play out. The terran does his timing push and if he doesn't cripple the zerg at that point, the zergs starts taking bases and gets out of control. We sometimes see amazing drop play that can win the game after this point, but a zerg that defends against drops well becomes overwhelmingly favored if the terran isn't able to have done significant damage by the time the 3rd is up. Once the zergs gets 3 base econ, infestors, and starts down hive tech the terran is dead if he hasn't been able to directly damage zergs economy in a significant way.
Of course non of this is concrete. I realize I'm making a very wide generalization here. But I just don't think the tvz matchup is nearly as robust as it was in BW. In BW it seemed very close at every point in the game, in sc2 it seems terran is favored in the early game and zerg is favored in the late game.
There's actually quite a few one-sided engagements in TvP due to relative unit imbalance. Stalkers and slow Zealots are outright slaughtered by marauders. HTs and Colossi completely destroy bio. Then we have the units that hard counter high tier units of the other race (HT vs BC/Thor/Banshee, Viking vs Colossi/Voidray/Carrier). If we look at the TvZ matchup, there aren't as many one sided engagements. Marines without tanks can take on ling baneling with at least decent micro, Thors can still be killed quite easily by mutas, etc. As long as these hard counters exist and are relatively hard to micro against, I think we're going to see the same delicate approach to unit comp.
On October 01 2011 06:16 Thorzain wrote: I feel that TvP IS really micro intensive. EMP everything, move your units out of storms, focus fire individual colossi with vikings and kite zealots if he's zealot heavy. And while you're kiting zealots you have to move back your ghosts so that they dont all get killed in the blink of an eye. All these things at the same time. It's freaking hard if you ask me!
I know I might seem arrogant quoting a player of your caliber, but I disagree with you to a certain extent. Yes, there are forms of micro in TvP, like the ones you mentioned in your post, but still I have the feeling that the battle neds in 4-5 second max. And the winner of the battle wins usually by a landslide ( I know even trades may be possible), and then just proceed to roll into the enemy nat. Of course there is a kind of micro in TvP, the problem is that the micro involved ends in 5 seconds in the big engagement, the rest is your army (or the opponent's) evaporating. And i don't wanna get flamed for having quoted you or having expressed my feelings, I would like having a nice discussion with interesting arguments
On October 01 2011 06:00 n0ise wrote: What do you mean, T1 units vs "hightech bio ball"
The same mineral resources you invest in marine marauder he invests in zealot/stalker, the gas you invest in ghosts he invests in templars, the gas you invest in starport units he invests in collossi.
This "omg mass t1 vs my t3" is something coined by laddertosses who cheese 9/10 games and start panicking once the game goes past 12 minutes. It's not actually true - there's clear parallels between the tech/gas investment between the races at all stages in the game.
I honestly would take this TvP bio playstyle anyday over making tanks in TvZ and TvT - but I suppose that's personal pref. - you coming from a BW background, as you say, probably like the positional aspect of it more.
Terran in SC2 is literally Toss in SCBW. Its not Terran at all. But, really the issue isn't so much the warp gate OP its how protoss is designed. Blizzard made SC2 Protoss by examining its fualts in BW and buffing it. At the same time they had to nerf some things to keep it balance.
Immortals, Charge, Blink, Fast 9 range Reavers. Hell even Archons counter mech now. Also if you were around when Dustin was giving his ideas on Terran. He wanted to make Terran bio very viable vs Protoss. As we all now TvP was by far the hardest match up to play. Terran could be building and in 1 fell swope lose to a 1a Goon Zeal push. Thats why we have quick emps and marauders know.
Blizzard made bio the main stay on purpose. And it makes the match up very stale.
I have a sad 50min replay if you want to see. Where I struggle to make mech work, but to no avail T_T.
On October 01 2011 06:00 n0ise wrote: What do you mean, T1 units vs "hightech bio ball"
The same mineral resources you invest in marine marauder he invests in zealot/stalker, the gas you invest in ghosts he invests in templars, the gas you invest in starport units he invests in collossi.
This "omg mass t1 vs my t3" is something coined by laddertosses who cheese 9/10 games and start panicking once the game goes past 12 minutes. It's not actually true - there's clear parallels between the tech/gas investment between the races at all stages in the game.
I honestly would take this TvP bio playstyle anyday over making tanks in TvZ and TvT - but I suppose that's personal pref. - you coming from a BW background, as you say, probably like the positional aspect of it more.
Terran in SC2 is literally Toss in SCBW. Its not Terran at all. But, really the issue isn't so much the warp gate OP its how protoss is designed. Blizzard made SC2 Protoss by examining its fualts in BW and buffing it. At the same time they had to nerf some things to keep it balance.
Immortals, Charge, Blink, Fast 9 range Reavers. Hell even Archons counter mech now. Also if you were around when Dustin was giving his ideas on Terran. He wanted to make Terran bio very viable vs Protoss. As we all now TvP was by far the hardest match up to play. Terran could be building and in 1 fell swope lose to a 1a Goon Zeal push. Thats why we have quick emps and marauders know.
Blizzard made bio the main stay on purpose. And it makes the match up very stale.
I have a sad 50min replay if you want to see. Where I struggle to make mech work, but to no avail T_T.
I totally agree with the op. I play quite a bit of terran and toss, and the match up is barely a shadow of how cool it was in BW. Putting any balance talk aside, the fact that everything from protoss counters tanks (charge,blink,immortals,voids) and the synergy of MMM, your right that it is very unlikely we'll see anything different in the near future. From the protoss point of view, I really miss arbiters and reavers. But yea the warp gate and the poopy tanks in sc2 definitely ruined such a beautiful match up.
Like the op, I sincerely hope we get a severe overhaul of the races. But honestly, I really don't like TvZ in sc2 either. The matchup seems ridiculous, 9 out of 10 times it comes down to either rushing the zergs fast expand (bunker, hellion or some other all in), or doing a 2 base tank marine timing push.
The results of these pretty much decide the game. It may go on for 15 more minutes, but was decided when these things either succeeded or failed. The zerg either defends well and gets out of control macro wise, or crippled by the 10-12 minute mark.
Agree with this and the OP. I guess the best you can say for TvZ is that there are a few variations on your attempt to cripple the zerg before 10-12 minutes, whereas for TvP it's always the same if no one allins.
That Idea about having to crush zerg before the 10 min mark is total b.s. Its a fib told by qqers. Terran can hold their own against Zerg in a long macro game. That is until BL infestor comes out. Then its gg. But thats around the 25 min mark.
reading this thread feels like you guys somehow forgot that tvp is the most broken matchup in the game in favor of terran. how about you slow down a little. the point op was trying to make is that he doesn't like bio and thinks mech is cooler.
guess what, i prefer bio. and lots of people do as well. i think bio is way cooler to watch than boring tank sieging bullshit. it needs adjustments on both sides at certain points in the game sure but why the HELL would you want to scratch bio altogether and watch people siege tanks and go afk instead of sick micro maneuvers and gosu multitasking everywhere? WHY? also LOL at anyone thinking mech is 'not viable' when there is goody who literally does nothing except what i described above and wins. you might think people would have enough of all that OH HE SIEGED HIS TANKS I GUESS WE AREN'T GOING TO SEE ANYTHING IN THE NEXT 30 MINUTES watching tvt all day erry day in gsl.
On October 01 2011 06:45 willsterben wrote: reading this thread feels like you guys somehow forgot that tvp is the most broken matchup in the game in favor of terran. how about you slow down a little. the point op was trying to make is that he doesn't like bio and thinks mech is cooler.
guess what, i prefer bio. and lots of people do as well. i think bio is way cooler to watch than boring tank sieging bullshit. it needs adjustments on both sides at certain points in the game sure but why the HELL would you want to scratch bio altogether and watch people siege tanks and go afk instead of sick micro maneuvers and gosu multitasking everywhere? WHY? also LOL at anyone thinking mech is 'not viable' when there is goody who literally does nothing except what i described above and wins. you might think people would have enough of all that OH HE SIEGED HIS TANKS I GUESS WE AREN'T GOING TO SEE ANYTHING IN THE NEXT 30 MINUTES watching tvt all day erry day in gsl.
Nice attitude man. You have clearly seen alot of mech play in Brood War and why mech is awesome.
tvp is a major concern late game for me as well. something not mentioned here is how fast P can catch up to 3-0-3 upgrades against T mid/late game. also, the food mechanic favors Protoss as zealots,stalker,archon has higher HP/food ratio than marine, marauder, ghost.
another thing worth tweaking would be the EMP spell. Change the spell to reflect BW, that is it drains all energy and shields. this would make ghosts more viable against archons as you need to hit 3 emps on each archon to deal maxiumun damage. another thing would be to reduce the food requirement for ghosts to 1 food instead of 2.
I would also like to see the tank's food reduced to 2. scv mining time+depot costs are high mid game for terrans who want to mech.
Fairly objective post (I play T too). One thing I think you didn't consider, especially in Part 1, is that Blizz wanted to make the game different enough from BW that there was a reason to play it, besides new graphics. IMO, the real shame is the marauder is basically a glorified marine, and it has been untouched, while interesting units e.g. reapers and tanks were nerfed.
To be honest, it's mainly because of protoss design. Terran ain't really the problem. ( if we're talking about design and not balance ) Warpgate technologie and Colossus both force your opponent into certains thing that make a XvP pretty straight forward " Do that or lose "
On October 01 2011 06:49 TheSurgeonTV wrote: tvp is a major concern late game for me as well. something not mentioned here is how fast P can catch up to 3-0-3 upgrades against T mid/late game. also, the food mechanic favors Protoss as zealots,stalker,archon has higher HP/food ratio than marine, marauder, ghost.
another thing worth tweaking would be the EMP spell. Change the spell to reflect BW, that is it drains all energy and shields. this would make ghosts more viable against archons as you need to hit 3 emps on each archon to deal maxiumun damage. another thing would be to reduce the food requirement for ghosts to 1 food instead of 2.
I would also like to see the tank's food reduced to 2. scv mining time+depot costs are high mid game for terrans who want to mech.
any thoughts?
I think that the EMP change would be too much. I do think the matchup is approaching balanced, hence I tend to worry about balance changes, esp. favoring T, but I do agree with OP that the MU is stale. Not many viable strats. Or the viable ones are boring.
On October 01 2011 06:54 Noocta wrote: To be honest, it's mainly because of protoss design. Terran ain't really the problem. ( if we're talking about design and not balance ) Warpgate technologie and Colossus both force your opponent into certains thing that make a XvP pretty straight forward " Do that or lose "
I understand your point about colo., but can you explain what you mean about WG?
Nice read through your post but what I think is: Isnt Goody a perfekt example that you are wrong?He is playing in almost every circumstance mech. TvP, TVT,and TVZ. I am not coming from Brood War nor SC1 but I think tanks are really really boring to watch. I really hate every games tanks are in. Especially terran vs terran. There is no fun in watching the whole game two tank armys are standing next to each waiting for the one making a wrong move. Its probably intense for the players, but it is extremely boring to watch. And whats with 1-1-1 . Yes you see it rarely but why do you bother others gameplay?You could play 1-1-1 have your tanks and still crush Protoss, especially in ladder, nearly every time with a proper execution.
To the micro part: Yes that are probably just 4-5 seconds of really really intense action, but you have to do so many things in that matchup in a battle like Thorzain mentioned. You got the same result in a TvZ. With banelings, infestors etc. And in a TvT alot of fights are not even one second, due to a missclick losing alot of units. I have just seen one exciting TvT in about 50, because of tanks. I mostly watch Sc2 and dont play it very often, but atleast I am diamond and I am ok with this..
On October 01 2011 06:54 Noocta wrote: To be honest, it's mainly because of protoss design. Terran ain't really the problem. ( if we're talking about design and not balance ) Warpgate technologie and Colossus both force your opponent into certains thing that make a XvP pretty straight forward " Do that or lose "
I understand your point about colo., but can you explain what you mean about WG?
Warpgate make protoss way to mobile to fight against with anything but bio. Protoss got a lot of tools that help them against immobile force ( blink, warp prism, warp mechanic ) And the nature of warpgate made blizzard nerf gateway unit power.
Dustin Browder talked about that one day. They wanted to make the Colossus idea work so hard, i think they ended up screwing everything else design wise.
On October 01 2011 06:00 n0ise wrote: What do you mean, T1 units vs "hightech bio ball"
The same mineral resources you invest in marine marauder he invests in zealot/stalker, the gas you invest in ghosts he invests in templars, the gas you invest in starport units he invests in collossi.
This "omg mass t1 vs my t3" is something coined by laddertosses who cheese 9/10 games and start panicking once the game goes past 12 minutes. It's not actually true - there's clear parallels between the tech/gas investment between the races at all stages in the game.
I honestly would take this TvP bio playstyle anyday over making tanks in TvZ and TvT - but I suppose that's personal pref. - you coming from a BW background, as you say, probably like the positional aspect of it more.
Terran in SC2 is literally Toss in SCBW. Its not Terran at all. But, really the issue isn't so much the warp gate OP its how protoss is designed. Blizzard made SC2 Protoss by examining its fualts in BW and buffing it. At the same time they had to nerf some things to keep it balance.
Immortals, Charge, Blink, Fast 9 range Reavers. Hell even Archons counter mech now. Also if you were around when Dustin was giving his ideas on Terran. He wanted to make Terran bio very viable vs Protoss. As we all now TvP was by far the hardest match up to play. Terran could be building and in 1 fell swope lose to a 1a Goon Zeal push. Thats why we have quick emps and marauders know.
Blizzard made bio the main stay on purpose. And it makes the match up very stale.
I have a sad 50min replay if you want to see. Where I struggle to make mech work, but to no avail T_T.
Haven't played BW, so I wouldn't know. Again, it's probably a question of personal preference. I like bio since it allows you to play any playstyle you deem appropriate. You can play macro and campy without leaving your half of the map, you can go mass drop, mass expand, aggressive upgrades and so on.
Pretty cool overall. And, contrary to what OP says, pretty micro and multitasking requiring.
And as a paranthesis about what you said about TvZ - the "bl/infestor" is why most Ts say it's hard to play an -actual- macro game - yes you can have clever timings, constantly trade and build expansions behind this. But if I expand and build my economy for 10-12 mins and he does the same, he's maxed out and halfway to Hive while I have 150 pop trying not to die to mutas. Case in which BL/inf comes much, much faster than 25 mins. That's what "less-then-ideal" design looks like in my mind - that you have to consistently come up with this weird timings, little pushes, harasses, to throw him off - or you're kinda behind by default.
I love TvP! As a Terran, I often find it the hardest matchup. It probably requires the most micro, and to an extent the most macro from my experiences. It's not just a simple case of massing a ball and hitting a-move. There is, as Thorzain says, a lot of micro. EMPs, spreading to mitigate collosus damage/storm damage, kiting zealots, more drops. You may suggest that they're lower tier units, and it's unfair that they're so strong. But they're only strong when they're used effectively.
I find TvP the best match to watch and the hardest to play, and as a result it's the most interesting. I think pure bio or bio mech will always be more interesting then pure mech - I was half tempted to quit when pure mech was shining the most. It just made games so boring, from a player and spectating perspective.
It's really a similar issue, if not the same as TvZ. The T army is really efficient and powerful within a small window of parameters. If the T is constantly able to go out on the field, and have even fights against a P, and trade, then it's in T's favor.
If P can win a fight or two, and exchange his composition for more colo/templar than would be available normally, then the game swings in P favor, since T cannot overcompensate without losing balance. You can field 10 colo + 10 templar + rest gate, and have a good army. You cannot bring 30 vikings and 10 ghosts + bio because you won't have enough bio to DPS+survive. The fact is that you HAVE to have a ton of bio to do DPS.
So basically T has a fairly linear and static production cycle with minor variations, that he has to use to suppress the opponent. But this also means that T is really shitty on 3+ gas, since there's zero scaling capability in the army.
Well, I'm protoss but if T did not have marauders they won't get out of their main until they have seige tanks. (Tastless contain FTW) Haha. I could dream i guess. Yes, warp-ins help but unupgraded marines alone are not a match for gateway balls.
Honestly marauders don't bother me much. Maybe because at my level Ts aren't that good at kiting and so easily get trapped in forcefields. I hate marines way more than marauders. Especially when dropped in mineral lines.
TvP is a really odd matchup, where I think someone with perfect control and macro will be unbeatable, regardless of how well the Protoss plays (this is barring 1-1-1 which I do think is imbalanced), but like 99% of players I don't have that, so the matchup is hard as fuck. At the highest level, it's possible that it's imbalanced, but at every other level, the people who complain about Terran are idiots. Lategame TvP is extremely hard, and personally, I have never seen anybody beat Hasuobs when he gets Templar/Collosus and a solid 3-4 base economy, regardless of how far behind he is.
I totally agree with the op. I play quite a bit of terran and toss, and the match up is barely a shadow of how cool it was in BW. Putting any balance talk aside, the fact that everything from protoss counters tanks (charge,blink,immortals,voids) and the synergy of MMM, your right that it is very unlikely we'll see anything different in the near future. From the protoss point of view, I really miss arbiters and reavers. But yea the warp gate and the poopy tanks in sc2 definitely ruined such a beautiful match up.
Like the op, I sincerely hope we get a severe overhaul of the races. But honestly, I really don't like TvZ in sc2 either. The matchup seems ridiculous, 9 out of 10 times it comes down to either rushing the zergs fast expand (bunker, hellion or some other all in), or doing a 2 base tank marine timing push.
The results of these pretty much decide the game. It may go on for 15 more minutes, but was decided when these things either succeeded or failed. The zerg either defends well and gets out of control macro wise, or crippled by the 10-12 minute mark.
Agree with this and the OP. I guess the best you can say for TvZ is that there are a few variations on your attempt to cripple the zerg before 10-12 minutes, whereas for TvP it's always the same if no one allins.
That Idea about having to crush zerg before the 10 min mark is total b.s. Its a fib told by qqers. Terran can hold their own against Zerg in a long macro game. That is until BL infestor comes out. Then its gg. But thats around the 25 min mark.
If 25 = 17. It will just be 25 if you keep zerg on his toes the whole game. TvZ is an atrittion war, turtling terran will be picked apart by good muta harass. Ofc Terran doesnt need to kill Zerg right away but he needs to keep zerg guessing, you WILL lose if zerg has 7 bases and 5 macro hatches and creep all over the map. BUT ON THE TOPIC:
PredY man..he is freaking damn right. I want my tanks, I play Terran because it the positional race, the "setup" race. I love TvT and TvZ but TvP is just not fun, I dont want Marauders, I want spider mines. ):
On October 01 2011 06:45 willsterben wrote: reading this thread feels like you guys somehow forgot that tvp is the most broken matchup in the game in favor of terran. how about you slow down a little. the point op was trying to make is that he doesn't like bio and thinks mech is cooler.
guess what, i prefer bio. and lots of people do as well. i think bio is way cooler to watch than boring tank sieging bullshit. it needs adjustments on both sides at certain points in the game sure but why the HELL would you want to scratch bio altogether and watch people siege tanks and go afk instead of sick micro maneuvers and gosu multitasking everywhere? WHY? also LOL at anyone thinking mech is 'not viable' when there is goody who literally does nothing except what i described above and wins. you might think people would have enough of all that OH HE SIEGED HIS TANKS I GUESS WE AREN'T GOING TO SEE ANYTHING IN THE NEXT 30 MINUTES watching tvt all day erry day in gsl.
properly played mech can be very action-packed and aggressive. also, there is something to say about those who defend immaculately and it is actually fun to watch.
forcing your opponent to attack -> action needing to do harass to equalize immobile main army -> action
I feel like Terran actually has a lot of options in TvP. You see someone like Polt (insane TvP record) who opens like reactor Hellion expand into bio, there's one/two base 1/1/1 builds, cloaked banshee openings, an expand build that gets a couple siege tanks + siege mode for defense, ghost pressure, and even occasional mech or biomech. Drop play and multi-tasking is strongly rewarded, and even BFH drops can be viable.
Why would you want to be forced into siege tanks for all three match-ups? They already have viable timings in TvP, and pair really well with banshees against pure ground because stalkers are the only G2A AA toss has. Don't agree with OP at all.
I don't think the match ups in SC2 are even close to how entertaining and deep they were in BW! I thought I'd post a TvP and TvZ for those unfamiliar. Check these out if you haven't watched much pro BW and compare them to the sc2 matchups. To me it's like comparing Michelangelo's David to that clay ash tray I made in art class when I was 8.
On October 01 2011 07:23 xsevR wrote: I feel like Terran actually has a lot of options in TvP. You see someone like Polt (insane TvP record) who opens like reactor Hellion expand into bio, there's one/two base 1/1/1 builds, cloaked banshee openings, an expand build that gets a couple siege tanks + siege mode for defense, ghost pressure, and even occasional mech or biomech. Drop play and multi-tasking is strongly rewarded, and even BFH drops can be viable.
Why would you want to be forced into siege tanks for all three match-ups? They already have viable timings in TvP, and pair really well with banshees against pure ground because stalkers are the only G2A AA toss has. Don't agree with OP at all.
Fully agreed I'd even go as far as to say protoss is just as limited in their options against terran. It's not like this match-up is the only one in this situation either, pretty much every single zerg does ling/mutabling into infestor into BL's against terran. Would be really cool if they tweaked hydras, carriers and BC's to give every race more options before releasing new units in HotS.
I find that even if you will end up with MMM+G+Viking, there's a lot of different way to get there. Quick Ghost ? Quick Medivac ? Heavy barracks ? Fast upgrades ?
I totally agree. Warpgate mechanic is just silly and is the cause of many problems in game. I hate nothing more than barely winning a fight in TvP only to lose to mass Toss warp-in, just because I cannot reinforce as fast as him.
I want Tanks...but it seems like Toss army is designed to kill tanks...chargelots, now 6 range immortals, void rays, blink stalkers, the list goes on. It's so boring.
On October 01 2011 07:55 Noocta wrote: I find that even if you will end up with MMM+G+Viking, there's a lot of different way to get there. Quick Ghost ? Quick Medivac ? Heavy barracks ? Fast upgrades ?
It' still something.
That's where all the strategy is, people get confused between strategy and unit composition.
The pieces on a chess board don't change, but that's not where the strategy is.
you can go mech in tvp. thor bf hellions with ghost is great but its tricky to get up in running. sure koreans dont do it but they suck at mech anyway from what i see. remember when thorzain did his thor build to mc? that build still kind of works but you need ghosts now to be effective.
i think overall blizzard is pushing bio play over mech play and its really quite saddening. i used to love watching gsl for new exciting strategies but now all i see is marine marauder for tvp, and marine tank for tvz. watching sc2 makes me yawn now
I agree with every point except for the micro intensity of TvP, mostly its drops, and constantly prodding here and there while scouting, but I feel it's more intensive to micro than TvT if you're meching. I'm also assuming that the late game mech you used to run went by the wayside =( yes, I would like BW TvP very much but I don't see it happening in the near future
I can see what you're on about. TvP is frustrating for the protoss as well. The collosus needs to be reworked, badly. But I'm not going to go on about that, theres already thousands of threads about it =| Can't wait for HoTS.
I think this is probably more of a blog than a strategy section thread, btw.
I'd really like to see a way to incorporate tanks into TvP. The problem is that pretty much every single toss unit is designed to be a counter to tanks, some more than others. I can't really forsee tvp moving away from pure bio tbh.
Basically, a tank heavy composition could beat, in theory, the standard "deathball" stalker/collo/immortal w/e if you had good upgrades, emps, and ravens to PDD or HSM. The problem is fighting mass chargelot. Tanks are just irredeemably bad against chargelots. Maybe a slow, slow push with +armor upgrade bunkers and banshees to force stalkers?
in bw i really loved tvp, mech was just simply amazing and in a way i feel like tvp was a work of art, it was just beautiful. i would really love to see more people work on getting mech to work or something but i'm not sure if that would be possible at the highest levels of play right now the way the game is but, we can only hope that in the future it will be because i really hate bio in tvp.
So.. sorry if I sound rude bu whats the point of this thread?
Say you don´t like Bio in TvP? Well.... Ok? Several people play Mech in TvP too, if you want to argue that its not GSL level well yeah. But people were saying that TvT was all about Biomech or pure Bio several months ago and yet there was a solution found to make Mech Viable in TvT, to say that Mech is not Viable at this stage of the game(where not even top pros are playing perfectly)seems just silly to me.
As for no Micro in TvP... well I will have to disagree, you can Micro against Colossi at low Colossi numbers and Hell yeah you can Micro against Storms to take little damage.Of course it is more efficient to Get ghosts and Vikings. Also I don´t feel like the MU has been A move vs A move in a long while where the Terran needs to do constant drops and multitasking to engage against the relatively immobile P army.
I don´t feel the MU is boring atm, but it can still Evolve. I remember at launch people were saying that Mech was dead and yet a solution was found to make it viable in 2/3 MUs.Hell Bio was king at launch. I am not really that worried as the game can and will evolve as it goes on.
As far as Warpgate goes, well to me it seems you are confusing "I don't like it" with "its bad design". Its Ok to not like warpgate but overall I think it gets waaay too much blame just because its something radically different, I actually like it,it could still use some tweaks but overall I think its just a mechanic that people are still not used to, but overall as far as mechanics go couldn't the same be said about some of the BW mechanics when compared to previous games like W2?(Workers not needing to be present to build something, Units being built from another unit.. etc)
Well its all your opinion but I don't get whats your point. Mech is not viable in TvP and we should hope for the expansion to fix that? Well, its Ok I guess. But overall I think that a viable mech build may start emerging like it did in TvT(Like what Byun did, yeah it was an all in but it showed the power of Mech).
But I agree with you on one thing, Blizzard does really seem to try to make both Mech, Bio and Bionic viable which IMO is awesomely cool(I loved Bio in BW, but oh well we all know how that turned out). And don't hate on the Marauder he is the sole reason Pure Bio is viable outside of gimmicky Mass marines strats that all got figured out.
On October 01 2011 08:07 Fission wrote: I'd really like to see a way to incorporate tanks into TvP. The problem is that pretty much every single toss unit is designed to be a counter to tanks, some more than others. I can't really forsee tvp moving away from pure bio tbh.
Basically, a tank heavy composition could beat, in theory, the standard "deathball" stalker/collo/immortal w/e if you had good upgrades, emps, and ravens to PDD or HSM. The problem is fighting mass chargelot. Tanks are just irredeemably bad against chargelots. Maybe a slow, slow push with +armor upgrade bunkers and banshees to force stalkers?
uh...hellions? The basic mech unit that you can pump out of a factory two at a time with a reactor?
OP's analysis is sound. I also think Warpgate Mechanic and the Marauder unit are bad for the game. All we can do is cross our fingers for HotS, I guess.
On October 01 2011 08:02 RedMosquito wrote: you can go mech in tvp. thor bf hellions with ghost is great but its tricky to get up in running. sure koreans dont do it but they suck at mech anyway from what i see. remember when thorzain did his thor build to mc? that build still kind of works but you need ghosts now to be effective.
i think overall blizzard is pushing bio play over mech play and its really quite saddening. i used to love watching gsl for new exciting strategies but now all i see is marine marauder for tvp, and marine tank for tvz. watching sc2 makes me yawn now
tell that to ANY BW Terran Pro, even the bad ones.
i hate to be that guy, but you're just whining dude.
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose.
theorycrafting does about as good as bitching when you're the #1 most represented race amongst the top players (referring to the gsl code s), by a large margin. the only thing you seem to have right is that terran is boring, "oh i build the same units as i get in the first few minutes, all game long, and win if my micro is decent and i hit the scan button a couple times in the game so i don't die to dts or something." the only exception is the mirror match, but of course, when op fights op you get epic battles.
On October 01 2011 08:07 Fission wrote: I'd really like to see a way to incorporate tanks into TvP. The problem is that pretty much every single toss unit is designed to be a counter to tanks, some more than others. I can't really forsee tvp moving away from pure bio tbh.
Basically, a tank heavy composition could beat, in theory, the standard "deathball" stalker/collo/immortal w/e if you had good upgrades, emps, and ravens to PDD or HSM. The problem is fighting mass chargelot. Tanks are just irredeemably bad against chargelots. Maybe a slow, slow push with +armor upgrade bunkers and banshees to force stalkers?
uh...hellions? The basic mech unit that you can pump out of a factory two at a time with a reactor?
Don't be silly, hellions are terrible vs charge* zealots, especially now with the BF nerf.
On October 01 2011 07:27 willsterben wrote: yeah and now compare those games to sc1 game 1 year after release. thanks though. will watch.
The thing is, that really isn't a good comparison. The reason I say that is because when Starcraft + BW came out there weren't any other games with a 3 way race dynamic. All the RTS games I can remember were basically 2 extremely similar races. The thing you have to realize is there has been over a decade of people figuring out RTS play, and some of the things that have been learned are almost universal. When Starcraft first came out the idea of transferring workers was revolutionary. People just didn't have experience with the kind of economy management and thought processes to figure the game out.
Sc2 is moving MUCH faster in terms of being figured out. The fundamentals of RTS and mechanics were already understood before the game was released. So they just had to be applied and slightly reworked to be fit onto Sc2. Seriously, we have had threads since beta scientifically analyzing the game and figuring out optimal income and worker saturation. This was unheard of when Starcraft vanilla was released.
I do believe there are things to be understood in the future about compositions and transitions for builds, but I doubt we will see anything as revolutionary as when Mech was first invented, muta stacking/harass, sk terran or the bisu build in BW.
Hopefully I'm wrong. Perhaps the expansions will provide more depth and allow for more to develop in the game. But if you look at BW today, the matchups are still evolving at the highest levels. I think a lot of what the OP presented is key to this. You need to have relatively weak tier one (that requires upgrades) and weak production capabilities in the early game. Strong flexible tier two (and sick upgrades) and insane tier 3.
This gives players more flexibility in the early game to set up for different builds.However in Sc2, because of the power of early units (marine,marauder,reaper,sentries, roaches banlings, ) and early production mechanics (addon swapping, reactors, warpgate, larva inject) the early game is basically a frenzy. Where you have to try and scout constantly so you don't die because of the ability for units to mass so early, or for a huge econ advantage to occur (think of a zerg who hatch firsts and drones up, a protoss who expands really fast and crono probes, or a terrans with mules). In a way a lot of things in SC2 are forced because of these concepts which prevents a lot of flexibility.
I feel that there is a lot of micro that you should be able to do in big engagements PvT.
* Kite zealots * Target fire colossus * EMP clumps of units * EMP immortals, archons, high templars. * Control your medivacs so they are properly positioned to not get feedbacked / stormed * Lift drop off in front or behind forcefields. * Spread your units to have colossus AE not hit maximum amount of units * Zealot kiting with stutter step. * Macro during engagement and set rally points properly depending on how the fight is going / reinforcements are needed. * Snipe if you have enough spare ghosts.
... possibly more.
To be honest, I feel that a TvP engagement is possibly the fight that is the most micro-intensive?
One of the reasons I don't want to play T is that my APM is far too low to do even half of that stuff properly ... Terran seems like the race that benefit the most from extremely high APM if used effectively.
I really dislike tvp and it is exactly because tanks have no role in the match-up beyond a one base all-in (and after the immortal buff, I suspect not even that). It's hard to not get into balance stuff in a thread like this, because the weakness of the tank is directly related to balancing done in the beta around really tiny maps like Steppes.. the tank just feels way too flimsy at present, with way too low damage against most units unless there are a somewhat unhealthy amount of tanks. I don't think something like spider mines would really fix that. In a perfect world, Blizzard would never have added the marauder and kept tanks at a more viable dps, supply cost and durability.
On October 01 2011 09:38 aebriol wrote: I feel that there is a lot of micro that you should be able to do in big engagements PvT.
* Kite zealots * Target fire colossus * EMP clumps of units * EMP immortals, archons, high templars. * Control your medivacs so they are properly positioned to not get feedbacked / stormed * Lift drop off in front or behind forcefields. * Spread your units to have colossus AE not hit maximum amount of units * Zealot kiting with stutter step. * Macro during engagement and set rally points properly depending on how the fight is going / reinforcements are needed. * Snipe if you have enough spare ghosts.
... possibly more.
To be honest, I feel that a TvP engagement is possibly the fight that is the most micro-intensive?
One of the reasons I don't want to play T is that my APM is far too low to do even half of that stuff properly ... Terran seems like the race that benefit the most from extremely high APM if used effectively.
But you hardly have to do all this in order to actually win the fight. If you pull off blancket EMPs you are going to win anyway. Half the things you said are not even clever or efficient.
'Kite Zealots': this is fine, everyone does it. 'Target fire colossus' : this is also fine, but it is hardly difficult. a shift clickclickclickclick, done in less then half a second 'EMP': Obviously important. Next point goes hand in hand. 'Control your medivacs' moot point. If the mmm ball is on attack move the medivacs will control themselves. 'Lift drop' If you EMP, no ff. If they are zealot heavy, ff is gonna be bad for them (unless you balled instead of concaved). If stalker heavy, medivac is gonna die. 'Spread units' make a concave, yes. You already said kiting zealots 'macro' this isn't part of micro and is more part of multitask. In TvP, if you win the engagement, you win regardless if you floated to 1000 minerals in the fight. 'Snipe', this is hardly going to make a difference in the fight.
So, basically, you wrote a lot of words to make it sound like there is a lot to do when in actual fact, you can't even theory craft more micro to do. Concave, e click, t, a click, stutter step. BS like medivac over forcefields and controlling medivacs (if they are going towards enemy, they are not healing! ie they are on move command).
On October 01 2011 09:38 aebriol wrote: I feel that there is a lot of micro that you should be able to do in big engagements PvT.
* Kite zealots * Target fire colossus * EMP clumps of units * EMP immortals, archons, high templars. * Control your medivacs so they are properly positioned to not get feedbacked / stormed * Lift drop off in front or behind forcefields. * Spread your units to have colossus AE not hit maximum amount of units * Zealot kiting with stutter step. * Macro during engagement and set rally points properly depending on how the fight is going / reinforcements are needed. * Snipe if you have enough spare ghosts.
... possibly more.
To be honest, I feel that a TvP engagement is possibly the fight that is the most micro-intensive?
One of the reasons I don't want to play T is that my APM is far too low to do even half of that stuff properly ... Terran seems like the race that benefit the most from extremely high APM if used effectively.
But you hardly have to do all this in order to actually win the fight. If you pull off blancket EMPs you are going to win anyway. Half the things you said are not even clever or efficient.
'Kite Zealots': this is fine, everyone does it. 'Target fire colossus' : this is also fine, but it is hardly difficult. a shift clickclickclickclick, done in less then half a second 'EMP': Obviously important. Next point goes hand in hand. 'Control your medivacs' moot point. If the mmm ball is on attack move the medivacs will control themselves. 'Lift drop' If you EMP, no ff. If they are zealot heavy, ff is gonna be bad for them (unless you balled instead of concaved). If stalker heavy, medivac is gonna die. 'Spread units' make a concave, yes. You already said kiting zealots 'macro' this isn't part of micro and is more part of multitask. In TvP, if you win the engagement, you win regardless if you floated to 1000 minerals in the fight. 'Snipe', this is hardly going to make a difference in the fight.
So, basically, you wrote a lot of words to make it sound like there is a lot to do when in actual fact, you can't even theory craft more micro to do. Concave, e click, t, a click, stutter step. BS like medivac over forcefields and controlling medivacs (if they are going towards enemy, they are not healing! ie they are on move command).
It's more demanding than Protoss which is 1a2a *Guardian shield if you still have sentries lategame *Templar T-click, they should already be spread out *Concave and don't have zealots in the back
Also, it depends on the stage of the game when Protoss loses his army. If it's when he has 15+ gateways and 2/3 robos, he can easily throw armies away, provided he doesn't get absolutely raped (in which if the opposite happen, terran would lose too).
On October 01 2011 09:38 aebriol wrote: I feel that there is a lot of micro that you should be able to do in big engagements PvT.
* Kite zealots * Target fire colossus * EMP clumps of units * EMP immortals, archons, high templars. * Control your medivacs so they are properly positioned to not get feedbacked / stormed * Lift drop off in front or behind forcefields. * Spread your units to have colossus AE not hit maximum amount of units * Zealot kiting with stutter step. * Macro during engagement and set rally points properly depending on how the fight is going / reinforcements are needed. * Snipe if you have enough spare ghosts.
... possibly more.
To be honest, I feel that a TvP engagement is possibly the fight that is the most micro-intensive?
One of the reasons I don't want to play T is that my APM is far too low to do even half of that stuff properly ... Terran seems like the race that benefit the most from extremely high APM if used effectively.
But you hardly have to do all this in order to actually win the fight. If you pull off blancket EMPs you are going to win anyway. Half the things you said are not even clever or efficient.
'Kite Zealots': this is fine, everyone does it. 'Target fire colossus' : this is also fine, but it is hardly difficult. a shift clickclickclickclick, done in less then half a second 'EMP': Obviously important. Next point goes hand in hand. 'Control your medivacs' moot point. If the mmm ball is on attack move the medivacs will control themselves. 'Lift drop' If you EMP, no ff. If they are zealot heavy, ff is gonna be bad for them (unless you balled instead of concaved). If stalker heavy, medivac is gonna die. 'Spread units' make a concave, yes. You already said kiting zealots 'macro' this isn't part of micro and is more part of multitask. In TvP, if you win the engagement, you win regardless if you floated to 1000 minerals in the fight. 'Snipe', this is hardly going to make a difference in the fight.
So, basically, you wrote a lot of words to make it sound like there is a lot to do when in actual fact, you can't even theory craft more micro to do. Concave, e click, t, a click, stutter step. BS like medivac over forcefields and controlling medivacs (if they are going towards enemy, they are not healing! ie they are on move command).
It's more demanding than Protoss which is 1a2a *Guardian shield if you still have sentries lategame *Templar T-click, they should already be spread out *Concave and don't have zealots in the back
Also, it depends on the stage of the game when Protoss loses his army. If it's when he has 15+ gateways and 2/3 robos, he can easily throw armies away, provided he doesn't get absolutely raped (in which if the opposite happen, terran would lose too).
Not really, coming out on top after a Ghost vs HT battle is probably one of the hardest things in the game for a Protoss. You can snipe to your hearts content when sitting in storm, can't say the same for feedbacking in EMPs.
Theres a reason why the resurgence of the protoss in GSTL is hand in hand with the shifting away from HTs back into colossi.
Whether or not mech is viable in TvP, the bottom line is that bio is the standard in the matchup for every terran progamer, and I think most people can agree that watching a bioball vs colossusball is a lot less interesting than watching a protoss try to exploit mobility while terran uses mech positioning to his advantage.
Same here... I feel like I just macro up in TvP and maybe do a drop or two, but the big fight really decides to battle, either you come out WAAAY ahead or get obliterated because of HT/Collosus then proceed to losing, really boring compared to vT or vZ
Oh god this thread is turning into another shitfest about who micros more in PvT/TvP.
Anyway, SC2 protoss is completely designed to counter immobile armies, especially mech. Warpin, Charge, Blink, VRs, Pheonixes, Immortals etc. They especially wanted to make Bio much more viable in SC2 than in SC:BW because they felt that TvP mech was far too hard for casual players and thus introduced the marauder which basically forces the protoss to go AoE because it destroys protoss T1.
Anyway PvT used to be my favorite matchup to watch until the 1/1/1 and mass emp happened because of the wide variety of compositions we saw eg. storm drops, nukes etc.
On October 01 2011 06:16 Thorzain wrote: I feel that TvP IS really micro intensive. EMP everything, move your units out of storms, focus fire individual colossi with vikings and kite zealots if he's zealot heavy. And while you're kiting zealots you have to move back your ghosts so that they dont all get killed in the blink of an eye. All these things at the same time. It's freaking hard if you ask me!
This coming from one of the top Foreigner Terrans who also has a BEASTLY TvP.
Everything he says is true. It's VERY micro intensive for the Terran, but I hesitate to say the same for Protoss. You pre-split to avoid EMPs, A-move in, back up Colossi as necessary, and drop Psi Storms. Lategame Protoss seems very minimal on micro, but early game Protoss all ins are loaded with it (Blink Stalker all ins, PvP 4 Gate wars, and 3 Gate Void Ray).
On October 01 2011 06:00 n0ise wrote: What do you mean, T1 units vs "hightech bio ball"
The same mineral resources you invest in marine marauder he invests in zealot/stalker, the gas you invest in ghosts he invests in templars, the gas you invest in starport units he invests in collossi.
This "omg mass t1 vs my t3" is something coined by laddertosses who cheese 9/10 games and start panicking once the game goes past 12 minutes. It's not actually true - there's clear parallels between the tech/gas investment between the races at all stages in the game.
I honestly would take this TvP bio playstyle anyday over making tanks in TvZ and TvT - but I suppose that's personal pref. - you coming from a BW background, as you say, probably like the positional aspect of it more.
Terran in SC2 is literally Toss in SCBW. Its not Terran at all. But, really the issue isn't so much the warp gate OP its how protoss is designed. Blizzard made SC2 Protoss by examining its fualts in BW and buffing it. At the same time they had to nerf some things to keep it balance.
Immortals, Charge, Blink, Fast 9 range Reavers. Hell even Archons counter mech now. Also if you were around when Dustin was giving his ideas on Terran. He wanted to make Terran bio very viable vs Protoss. As we all now TvP was by far the hardest match up to play. Terran could be building and in 1 fell swope lose to a 1a Goon Zeal push. Thats why we have quick emps and marauders know.
Blizzard made bio the main stay on purpose. And it makes the match up very stale.
I have a sad 50min replay if you want to see. Where I struggle to make mech work, but to no avail T_T.
Hmmm... I suppose there is some truth to what you say. Terran in BW could straight up die to Zealot rushes at the lower level (like 2 Zealots). At the lower level of PvT, Protoss players can straight up die to a properly executed 1 Barracks pressure expand (1 Marine and 2 Marauders with slow). Something similar could be said about the 2 base Terran timing attacks that hit around the 10 minute mark. But Terran can't just sit right out of range of a Protoss expansion hitting it for free like Protoss could with Range upgraded Dragoons in BW.
But Reavers did NOT need to be sped up. Using Shuttles to move them around quickly was fine, it's what some Terrans do to reinforce with mech units (Thors or Tanks) more quickly.
And with the buff to Warp Prism encouraging Warp Prism play, players are having huge headaches dealing with 6-8 units in their base.
On October 01 2011 06:00 n0ise wrote: What do you mean, T1 units vs "hightech bio ball"
The same mineral resources you invest in marine marauder he invests in zealot/stalker, the gas you invest in ghosts he invests in templars, the gas you invest in starport units he invests in collossi.
This "omg mass t1 vs my t3" is something coined by laddertosses who cheese 9/10 games and start panicking once the game goes past 12 minutes. It's not actually true - there's clear parallels between the tech/gas investment between the races at all stages in the game.
I honestly would take this TvP bio playstyle anyday over making tanks in TvZ and TvT - but I suppose that's personal pref. - you coming from a BW background, as you say, probably like the positional aspect of it more.
I don't know where you're quoting that. The OP says he hates using mass T1 units. And to be honest, I'm tired of massing pure bio for the sake of it being the only safe composition and that transitioning to anything else takes too long. I still feel Mech is viable when played very well, but it has so many holes in it now.
And I would much rather use Tanks than bio. But to be honest, Tanks are a very easy unit to use if you know how to properly use them. Bio in TvZ is gimmicky, but can still work if you force early Roaches and there aren't any Banelings (and a low Speedling count). Bio in TvT has a purpose (that it counters pure mech similar to how pure mech countered bio mech, which counters bio). Bio in TvP has no real purpose other than it's the best choice, which still isn't that good of a choice. This is partly due to how freakin' quickly you can die to a Protoss all in out of nowhere. Zerg can get around that with how quickly they can pump units and the fact that Zerglings are so cheap and so insanely fast. I mean, if you can spend 25 minerals immediately on a scout, and whenever the Protoss moves out have it back in your base in like 20 seconds, it's a HUGE bonus. Terran can't do that. Their timings to move out hit RIGHT BEFORE Warp Gate finishes. So you move out, didn't scout the proxy Pylon at your third (or some other position), then when you hit his base with 3-6 units, he hits your base with like 4 Stalkers and 2 Zealots and you just facepalm.
I feel like all the matchups involving Protoss just got shot to hell.
As for TvZ, there are ways to play macro TvZ, but it's different from standard macro play due to the nature of Zerg production. You can play high economy macro play or low economy macro play (which Mvp advocates). The game doesn't necessarily have to swing in one player or another's favor after a Terran timing attack, especially if a Terran intends to macro behind it. If a Zerg is forced at a certain time during the game to stop powering Drones and instead power his army production, Terran is relatively fine as long as he constantly keeps Zerg's army as close to 0 as possible after each battle so that Terran can continuously repeat the cycle until he can get on even footing with the Zerg (by not cutting SCV production), where MULES will help them get ahead. It's up to Zerg to be as greedy as possible to carry themselves into the mid-game then they have to use their micro and positioning to be as cost efficient with their units as possible to squeeze out enough of an edge to allow them to squeeze in a few Drones before the next push. The fact is, if you know when you have timings to attack and take them, you'll generally be safe to do damage to give yourself a lead without committing to an all in (like by cutting SCV production beforehand and so on). But you also need to know when to defend and not over-extend, or you lose everything.
You can't really straight outmacro a Zerg... You can let them get VASTLY ahead, then try to catch up, but you're relying on the Zerg to make a lot of mistakes (max out too early on useless low tier units that won't break the Terran front then suiciding them into the Terran wall a few times as the Terran maxes out).
And Broodlord+Infestor doesn't mean it's over if you have Ghosts... If you don't... Well... If you can't kill the Broodlords... lol
On October 01 2011 06:06 Reborn8u wrote: That Idea about having to crush zerg before the 10 min mark is total b.s. Its a fib told by qqers. Terran can hold their own against Zerg in a long macro game. That is until BL infestor comes out. Then its gg. But thats around the 25 min mark.
On October 01 2011 06:45 willsterben wrote: reading this thread feels like you guys somehow forgot that tvp is the most broken matchup in the game in favor of terran.
I thought zvp was statistically the worst balanced match up in terms of win rate in Korea in the relevant recent time span?( http://i.imgur.com/HvaeL.png ) I realize it's not the biggest sample size but 59% to 41% still seems significant
I haven't seen stats for recent GSL win percentages though so those might be skewed like you said if that's what you are referring to, could you link a source or data please? Or did you mean just in your opinion it's the most broken match up despite zerg having a higher win rate.
(I am not saying tvp isn't broken btw I'm just pointing out statistically zvp seemed to be more broken ofc with patch 1.4 this could be quite different, will be interesting to see if with the infestor nerf the trend changes drastically)
On October 01 2011 08:07 Fission wrote: I'd really like to see a way to incorporate tanks into TvP. The problem is that pretty much every single toss unit is designed to be a counter to tanks, some more than others. I can't really forsee tvp moving away from pure bio tbh.
Basically, a tank heavy composition could beat, in theory, the standard "deathball" stalker/collo/immortal w/e if you had good upgrades, emps, and ravens to PDD or HSM. The problem is fighting mass chargelot. Tanks are just irredeemably bad against chargelots. Maybe a slow, slow push with +armor upgrade bunkers and banshees to force stalkers?
uh...hellions? The basic mech unit that you can pump out of a factory two at a time with a reactor?
Don't be silly, hellions are terrible vs charge* zealots, especially now with the BF nerf.
-_- bro... I Mech in TvP and I will tell you chargelots aren't an issue. Even with the nerf Hellions are great against Zeals and a very cost effective counter.
Sorry I don't have much time to elaborate on my thoughts before I have to run but I feel like the marine is too all purpose, especially compared to BW match ups. I don't really get why they got rid of the marine range upgrade from BW and gave it to the marine pre-baked. To me that's like giving zerglings the speed upgrade default.
Now I know there are already too many upgrades in the tech lab but I don't see why marines get a free ride with getting 5 range right off the bat. Maybe adding an upgrade in the reactor for upgrading 4 range to 5? Then to compensate maybe we can give the siege tank some of its damage they nerfed in some of the earlier patches? That way early game terran bio wouldn't be so dominating but late game would be buffed to make up for it. Any thoughts?
I feel TvP is fairly micro intensive. Definately more so than TvT and debatable with TvZ. With TvZ you can pre-split a lot of the time and position your tanks nicely. With TvP you can pre-spread, but still you have to emp with your ghosts, stutterstep your MM and target collusus with your vikings.
Anyway, I don't feel like mech has been fully explored either. Hellions are really underrated for killing zealots / stalkers and thors and tanks can hold their own against most of the protoss arsenal. Mix in some vikings for collusus or ghosts for high templars (EMP your own thors!).
That said, I dislike TvP the most also. A lot of the time it seems to come down to either: - Emp vs Storm - Does he have enough vikings? Or too many?
Maybe if we do start seeing more mech, either in this expansion or the next, the match up will become more interesting for a spectator.
On October 01 2011 07:00 LordVogelweide wrote: Nice read through your post but what I think is: Isnt Goody a perfekt example that you are wrong?He is playing in almost every circumstance mech. TvP, TVT,and TVZ. I am not coming from Brood War nor SC1 but I think tanks are really really boring to watch. I really hate every games tanks are in. Especially terran vs terran. There is no fun in watching the whole game two tank armys are standing next to each waiting for the one making a wrong move. Its probably intense for the players, but it is extremely boring to watch. And whats with 1-1-1 . Yes you see it rarely but why do you bother others gameplay?You could play 1-1-1 have your tanks and still crush Protoss, especially in ladder, nearly every time with a proper execution.
To the micro part: Yes that are probably just 4-5 seconds of really really intense action, but you have to do so many things in that matchup in a battle like Thorzain mentioned. You got the same result in a TvZ. With banelings, infestors etc. And in a TvT alot of fights are not even one second, due to a missclick losing alot of units. I have just seen one exciting TvT in about 50, because of tanks. I mostly watch Sc2 and dont play it very often, but atleast I am diamond and I am ok with this..
My cents
Goody's TvP is his worst MU for a reason mech isn't that strong against Toss.
On October 01 2011 11:59 kidcrash wrote: Sorry I don't have much time to elaborate on my thoughts before I have to run but I feel like the marine is too all purpose, especially compared to BW match ups. I don't really get why they got rid of the marine range upgrade from BW and gave it to the marine pre-baked. To me that's like giving zerglings the speed upgrade default.
Now I know there are already too many upgrades in the tech lab but I don't see why marines get a free ride with getting 5 range right off the bat. Maybe adding an upgrade in the reactor for upgrading 4 range to 5? Then to compensate maybe we can give the siege tank some of its damage they nerfed in some of the earlier patches? That way early game terran bio wouldn't be so dominating but late game would be buffed to make up for it. Any thoughts?
Its not that Marines are to all purpose. Its that Zerglings were nerfed from BW. They used to actually be able to kill large clumps of Marines. And in TvP Marines are an issue the same as they were in BW. The diffrence in that BW nobady made them because 1 reaver means gg marines. In SC2 Splash comes very later and Marauders flipping Marauders.
Adding a range upgrade won't change anything. Also did you know that stim was nerfed from its BW counterpart? I'm to completely tired of people saying that Marines are to all purpose when Protosses just spam Blink stalkers in PvP and PvZ. The only reason they don;t in TvP is because Marauders crap on anything armored.
Well, looks like someone already said most of the things I am thinking and did a much better job of it. If you have already read this link, feel free to skip ahead!
The issue at the pro level is not that the Terran player has to micro more, it is that they get to micro more. Terran units in current TvP have far more opportunities for micro to increase their effectiveness, in my opinion. So, for average players, it is hard, because not everyone can do all those things Thorzain talked about well enough to beat a big Protoss army, but at the highest level, a good Terran player can smash a Protoss player and there little room for the Protoss to work with in a battle of control (there is a similar relationship in TvZ when a Zerg player is trying to fight bio with banelings. This is why the lurker is a better unit, but that seems like a different conversation).
On October 01 2011 06:54 Noocta wrote: To be honest, it's mainly because of protoss design. Terran ain't really the problem. ( if we're talking about design and not balance ) Warpgate technologie and Colossus both force your opponent into certains thing that make a XvP pretty straight forward " Do that or lose "
I understand your point about colo., but can you explain what you mean about WG?
They wanted to make the Colossus idea work so hard, i think they ended up screwing everything else design wise.
In my mind, this is the biggest problem with Protoss and kind of in SC2 as a whole. The entire Protoss race seems like it was designed by saying "wouldn't it be cool if..." instead of thinking about game mechanics. Forcefield, colossus, warp gate, mothership, phoenix - wouldn't it be cool if..."Protoss could modify the map terrain" "there was a giant War of the Worlds tripod style unit" "players could control that Protoss warp technology for their units" "we brought in the giant Protoss world ships" "a unit could shoot while moving". I'd say the same thing seems to apply to reapers (jet packs), hellions (flame throwers), thors (giant battle mechs) and banelings (explosions/goo). Then game mechanics and balance are worked in around all of this, the "really important stuff".
Another point, look at the new SC2 units compared to BW units that were lost and their micro potential (vultures to hellions, lurkers to banelings, reaver to colossus, goliaths to thors, defilers and dark swarm to infestors with fungal growth) and new SC2 units alone (roaches, marauders with concussive shells, broodlords). Micro just took a real shot to the pills with a lot of these. Though, I will say, SC2 devs did have successes: I think blink stalkers are tits, the vikings as transformers has worked out really well, and phoenix (not counting gravitron beam - I am no big fan of any snares/stuns) are one of my favorite units. Roaches with burrow also had potential to be like blink stalkers, I think, but it just hasn't worked out. Still a good idea, though. Then compare the number of micro stopping abilities in BW to the number in SC2 (lockdown vs concussive shells, forcefield, gravitron beam, fungal growth, ).
I seem to have gotten off topic...oh yes:
Chronoboost is dick compared to MULE and inject. It is great early game and has uses in the mid game, but it's potential for greatness is significantly lower, I think, then the other two macro mechanics. Inject and larve lets you remax and/or 100% tech swith almost instantly. MULEs let Terran players make phenomenal comebacks, abandon SCV's entirely and they can even be dropped on banrlings/tanks. Chronoboost? Nothing beyond its initial purpose of making things slightly faster.
So, I think Protoss needs less fluff and more practicality and both chronoboost and warpgate need overalls or a just to be replaced entirely. This would make the race more interesting and allow for sensible buffs and balancing, instead of trying to dance around all the "coolness".
As for the matchup of TvP, one problem is that Terran players are almost pigeonholed into going bio. In TvT or TvZ, there are options of full mech, biomech on a sliding scale and full bio. Each composition has its own style and strategy. TvP, however, feels like there is a lot less choice in composition/tactics on the Terran side. I think a lot of excitement could be added to TvP if there was simply more choice. However, personally, I will always prefer bio, I think. Biomech can be good, too (I like tanks), but Thors are too clunky and hellions too one dimensional, in my opinion.
That's how I see it, anyway.
Also, vultures really should come back. Seriously. This one unit adds so much micro. It could also make mech in TvP much more viable. If I got just one StarCraft development related wish, it would be for vultures to come back. I love them so much.
After reading this thread, I agree SC2 may have it's problems in the T v P matchup... but people! Please remember the game is still relatively new. No one has any idea what HoTS will bring to us yet.
Me personally, I am sick and tired of people comparing SC1 to SC2. When will people realise SC2 is a "different" game?!?! Just let go of SC1 already, yes the games were awesome to watch. but guess what, it's now outdated (graphics are crap and not easy on the eyes) and it's only a matter of time now until SC1 dies out.
Honestly, it seems like you guys just want to turn SC2 into Broodwar...... if so, what is the point of having an SC2?
EDIT: I'm actually a terran player and I do hope the return of a vulture like unit comes in Hots. Wouldn't it be awesome if hellions got the ability to reseach "Mines."
On October 01 2011 12:19 Tehs Tehklz wrote: The issue at the pro level is not that the Terran player has to micro more, it is that they get to micro more. Terran units in current TvP have far more opportunities for micro to increase their effectiveness, in my opinion. So, for average players, it is hard, because not everyone can do all those things Thorzain talked about well enough to beat a big Protoss army, but at the highest level, a good Terran player can smash a Protoss player and there little room for the Protoss to work with in a battle of control (there is a similar relationship in TvZ when a Zerg player is trying to fight bio with banelings. This is why the lurker is a better unit, but that seems like a different conversation).
On October 01 2011 06:54 Noocta wrote: To be honest, it's mainly because of protoss design. Terran ain't really the problem. ( if we're talking about design and not balance ) Warpgate technologie and Colossus both force your opponent into certains thing that make a XvP pretty straight forward " Do that or lose "
I understand your point about colo., but can you explain what you mean about WG?
They wanted to make the Colossus idea work so hard, i think they ended up screwing everything else design wise.
In my mind, this is the biggest problem with Protoss and kind of in SC2 as a whole. The entire Protoss race seems like it was designed by saying "wouldn't it be cool if..." instead of thinking about game mechanics. Forcefield, colossus, warp gate, mothership, phoenix - wouldn't it be cool if..."Protoss could modify the map terrain" "there was a giant War of the Worlds tripod style unit" "players could control that Protoss warp technology for their units" "we brought in the giant Protoss world ships" "a unit could shoot while moving". I'd say the same thing seems to apply to reapers (jet packs), hellions (flame throwers), thors (giant battle mechs) and banelings (explosions/goo). Then game mechanics and balance are worked in around all of this, the "really important stuff".
Another point, look at the new SC2 units compared to BW units that were lost and their micro potential (vultures to hellions, lurkers to banelings, reaver to colossus, goliaths to thors, defilers and dark swarm to infestors with fungal growth) and new SC2 units alone (roaches, marauders with concussive shells, broodlords). Micro just took a real shot to the pills with a lot of these. Though, I will say, SC2 devs did have successes: I think blink stalkers are tits, the vikings as transformers has worked out really well, and phoenix (not counting gravitron beam - I am no big fan of any snares/stuns) are one of my favorite units. Roaches with burrow also had potential to be like blink stalkers, I think, but it just hasn't worked out. Still a good idea, though. Then compare the number of micro stopping abilities in BW to the number in SC2 (lockdown vs concussive shells, forcefield, gravitron beam, fungal growth, ).
I seem to have gotten off topic...oh yes:
Chronoboost is dick compared to MULE and inject. It is great early game and has uses in the mid game, but it's potential for greatness is significantly lower, I think, then the other two macro mechanics. Inject and larve lets you remax and/or 100% tech swith almost instantly. MULEs let Terran players make phenomenal comebacks, abandon SCV's entirely and they can even be dropped on banrlings/tanks. Chronoboost? Nothing beyond its initial purpose of making things slightly faster.
So, I think Protoss needs less fluff and more practicality and both chronoboost and warpgate need overalls or a just to be replaced entirely. This would make the race more interesting and allow for sensible buffs and balancing, instead of trying to dance around all the "coolness".
As for the matchup of TvP, one problem is that Terran players are almost pigeonholed into going bio. In TvT or TvZ, there are options of full mech, biomech on a sliding scale and full bio. Each composition has its own style and strategy. TvP, however, feels like there is a lot less choice in composition/tactics on the Terran side. I think a lot of excitement could be added to TvP if there was simply more choice. However, personally, I will always prefer bio, I think. Biomech can be good, too (I like tanks), but Thors are too clunky and hellions too one dimensional, in my opinion.
That's how I see it, anyway.
Also, vultures really should come back. Seriously. This one unit adds so much micro. It could also make mech in TvP much more viable. If I got just one StarCraft development related wish, it would be for vultures to come back. I love them so much.
I would love Vultures. But they don;t fit in SC2. Chargelots would drag them to well and Collosi cleans up Mines to quickly with its sweeper motion. Not to mention that Immortals can just walk over them without a care. And Mines would be OP against Ling Banling.
First and foremost: All my my 1v1's are as protoss, and I'm in masters.
I think tanks are completely stupid against protoss. Blink, charge lots, Colossus (splash does a SHITLOAD vs stacked tanks), Immortals, all of these absolutely destroy tanks. They need to do something about this IMO, I even thought the old tanks were fine...it seems as if Terran are setting up to lose the game if they want to go with tanks, almost as if Blizzard FORCED them to go main bio (which is what they did) much how they pretty much force us Toss to get a robo for obs etc.
When they force toss to get a robo for obs, you can easily pump out immortals because you already have the tech, which makes tank play a terrible idea for terran.
On October 01 2011 12:19 Tehs Tehklz wrote: The issue at the pro level is not that the Terran player has to micro more, it is that they get to micro more. Terran units in current TvP have far more opportunities for micro to increase their effectiveness, in my opinion. So, for average players, it is hard, because not everyone can do all those things Thorzain talked about well enough to beat a big Protoss army, but at the highest level, a good Terran player can smash a Protoss player and there little room for the Protoss to work with in a battle of control (there is a similar relationship in TvZ when a Zerg player is trying to fight bio with banelings. This is why the lurker is a better unit, but that seems like a different conversation).
On October 01 2011 07:01 Noocta wrote:
On October 01 2011 06:56 homeless_guy wrote:
On October 01 2011 06:54 Noocta wrote: To be honest, it's mainly because of protoss design. Terran ain't really the problem. ( if we're talking about design and not balance ) Warpgate technologie and Colossus both force your opponent into certains thing that make a XvP pretty straight forward " Do that or lose "
I understand your point about colo., but can you explain what you mean about WG?
They wanted to make the Colossus idea work so hard, i think they ended up screwing everything else design wise.
In my mind, this is the biggest problem with Protoss and kind of in SC2 as a whole. The entire Protoss race seems like it was designed by saying "wouldn't it be cool if..." instead of thinking about game mechanics. Forcefield, colossus, warp gate, mothership, phoenix - wouldn't it be cool if..."Protoss could modify the map terrain" "there was a giant War of the Worlds tripod style unit" "players could control that Protoss warp technology for their units" "we brought in the giant Protoss world ships" "a unit could shoot while moving". I'd say the same thing seems to apply to reapers (jet packs), hellions (flame throwers), thors (giant battle mechs) and banelings (explosions/goo). Then game mechanics and balance are worked in around all of this, the "really important stuff".
Another point, look at the new SC2 units compared to BW units that were lost and their micro potential (vultures to hellions, lurkers to banelings, reaver to colossus, goliaths to thors, defilers and dark swarm to infestors with fungal growth) and new SC2 units alone (roaches, marauders with concussive shells, broodlords). Micro just took a real shot to the pills with a lot of these. Though, I will say, SC2 devs did have successes: I think blink stalkers are tits, the vikings as transformers has worked out really well, and phoenix (not counting gravitron beam - I am no big fan of any snares/stuns) are one of my favorite units. Roaches with burrow also had potential to be like blink stalkers, I think, but it just hasn't worked out. Still a good idea, though. Then compare the number of micro stopping abilities in BW to the number in SC2 (lockdown vs concussive shells, forcefield, gravitron beam, fungal growth, ).
I seem to have gotten off topic...oh yes:
Chronoboost is dick compared to MULE and inject. It is great early game and has uses in the mid game, but it's potential for greatness is significantly lower, I think, then the other two macro mechanics. Inject and larve lets you remax and/or 100% tech swith almost instantly. MULEs let Terran players make phenomenal comebacks, abandon SCV's entirely and they can even be dropped on banrlings/tanks. Chronoboost? Nothing beyond its initial purpose of making things slightly faster.
So, I think Protoss needs less fluff and more practicality and both chronoboost and warpgate need overalls or a just to be replaced entirely. This would make the race more interesting and allow for sensible buffs and balancing, instead of trying to dance around all the "coolness".
As for the matchup of TvP, one problem is that Terran players are almost pigeonholed into going bio. In TvT or TvZ, there are options of full mech, biomech on a sliding scale and full bio. Each composition has its own style and strategy. TvP, however, feels like there is a lot less choice in composition/tactics on the Terran side. I think a lot of excitement could be added to TvP if there was simply more choice. However, personally, I will always prefer bio, I think. Biomech can be good, too (I like tanks), but Thors are too clunky and hellions too one dimensional, in my opinion.
That's how I see it, anyway.
Also, vultures really should come back. Seriously. This one unit adds so much micro. It could also make mech in TvP much more viable. If I got just one StarCraft development related wish, it would be for vultures to come back. I love them so much.
I would love Vultures. But they don;t fit in SC2. Chargelots would drag them to well and Collosi cleans up Mines to quickly with its sweeper motion. Not to mention that Immortals can just walk over them without a care. And Mines would be OP against Ling Banling.
On October 01 2011 06:16 Thorzain wrote: I feel that TvP IS really micro intensive. EMP everything, move your units out of storms, focus fire individual colossi with vikings and kite zealots if he's zealot heavy. And while you're kiting zealots you have to move back your ghosts so that they dont all get killed in the blink of an eye. All these things at the same time. It's freaking hard if you ask me!
Yeah I would agree with you there. I really think that tvp and pvt is heavily micro intensive. Also, holy crap your TSL emblem is huge. ^^
I feel as if the competitiveness of SC2 off the bat somewhat discourages new and creative thinking for the match-ups. Mech will eventually find a place in TvP but as of right now it sucks.
When it comes to mirror match-ups, I don't mind at all if some strategies aren't sustainable, but when it's a non-mirror, almost all strategies/army comps have to be viable
On October 01 2011 06:16 Thorzain wrote: I feel that TvP IS really micro intensive. EMP everything, move your units out of storms, focus fire individual colossi with vikings and kite zealots if he's zealot heavy. And while you're kiting zealots you have to move back your ghosts so that they dont all get killed in the blink of an eye. All these things at the same time. It's freaking hard if you ask me!
And I enjoy watching PvTs where this intense micro is going on. As a spectator, I much prefer the MU since ghost play became more routine (a few months ago).
As a toss player, I love to see how other P keep there colossi alive, FF, move their templar to the front...and also the positioning--all the army movement and baiting that takes place before the actual engagement.
I think that the main point being made by the OP and the point that people are generally missing in the rush to get out their own opinions on what are really just tangents is that -- to put it in more abstract terms -- in a particular matchup it seems there is a lack of variety of viable unit composition, and consequently, to some degree, strategy. (And thus it makes the match up less fun.)
Is there? And if so, how is it fixed?
To bring it back to the particulars, is the Tank / Mech play really not viable in TvP? Is there a way to fix it (without breaking other stuff)?
I think Thorzain's mention of micro is why I've hit a plateau in this matchup. Storm and Colossus just add so much DPS and much like predy said, if you don't have enough ghosts or vikings for each matchup, you lose.
I've sort of lost an interest in what my ladder ranking is just because I know my micro is at a point where I would only improve it with practice, and I just value my time better spent elsewhere!
And as others have said, watching TvP at a pro level is much more fun than actually playing it yourself. You always KNOW what you need to do, but you bungle your executions. Watching a pro play it out is always more entertaining.
On October 01 2011 06:16 Thorzain wrote: I feel that TvP IS really micro intensive. EMP everything, move your units out of storms, focus fire individual colossi with vikings and kite zealots if he's zealot heavy. And while you're kiting zealots you have to move back your ghosts so that they dont all get killed in the blink of an eye. All these things at the same time. It's freaking hard if you ask me!
There is still a layer of micro that is untouched as well, since the collosus attacks in a line, theoretically if you moved units forward and backwards you can make it so that collosi only hit one unit at a time while retaining near full army DPS vs gateway units.
I second the SC2 is not broodwar sentiment. They were meant to be complimentary products not cannibalistic. IMHO Blizzard should release an official SC1+BW downloadable mission pack.
I don't understand why tanks need to be the staple of every match up? I personally enjoy bio, I like having a more mobile army and it's that simple. Mech is possible against protoss at all levels except maybe the very highest, and even then you can see it occasionally (read: Goody).
Is it reasonable to question why pure bio is practically unusable in anything BUT TvP? Mech players enjoy seeing mech units in all aspects of the game, and to an extent it's possible, but in TvT and TvZ you have no choice but to make tanks. Bio-mech is obviously a sort of balance, but pure bio is completely unusable in anything but TvP. Now people want to completely eliminate it from the game?
Balance issue aside. I agree with op on boring gameplay of tvp. I know good micro can win you a game just like any matchup but the feeling of tvp is not the same exciting as sc1. I will always miss that slow push of mech in sc1.
I agree, especially the part where if you don't have vikings vs colossus, you die and if you don't have emp's vs HT, you die. Also the part where you can't go mech anymore vs P
On October 01 2011 06:16 Thorzain wrote: I feel that TvP IS really micro intensive. EMP everything, move your units out of storms, focus fire individual colossi with vikings and kite zealots if he's zealot heavy. And while you're kiting zealots you have to move back your ghosts so that they dont all get killed in the blink of an eye. All these things at the same time. It's freaking hard if you ask me!
Woot! awsome that thorzain himself posted on this. But I like this post, but i dnt like some of the responses. Not saying people are wrong, just saying that i meet a lot of sc2 players that i meet, bsides absolute baller pro dont want to have to do what thorzain said. Every race has there micro intensive stuff, and in order to win, you should take advantage and do it all. I feel that too many people want to win with as little micro as possible, and thats not sc2, like i said, not EVERYONE feels this way, just most non-pros imo
Too be fair Thorzain is correct about the micro intensive nature of TvP, but I like what Tehklz wrote about it
On October 01 2011 12:19 Tehs Tehklz wrote: The issue at the pro level is not that the Terran player has to micro more, it is that they get to micro more. Terran units in current TvP have far more opportunities for micro to increase their effectiveness, in my opinion. So, for average players, it is hard, because not everyone can do all those things Thorzain talked about well enough to beat a big Protoss army, but at the highest level, a good Terran player can smash a Protoss player and there little room for the Protoss to work with in a battle of control (there is a similar relationship in TvZ when a Zerg player is trying to fight bio with banelings. This is why the lurker is a better unit, but that seems like a different conversation).
Tehklz is right, at lower levels Terrans find fighting Protoss hard because they don't micro well in the engagements, whereas Protoss doesnt really have to (but that is more unit design than choice). Protoss can 1A, but eventually as terrans become better, ghost play becomes more common and At higher levels, Protoss absolutely HAVE to set up the engagement because if they don't, they actually CANT micro (no energy templar, no energy sentries). Warp Prism is of course going to have to be a staple in PvT, but as terran gets better and learns to respond to this with vikings, its up to protoss to set up their prism properly.
This feels a lot different than BW where Terran absolutely had to set up the engagement (mines, tank placement), because if they didn't Terran would actually straight up die, which was partially why PvT was such a pain. Bio against protoss was terrible (goon range + micro) whereas in SC2 that same relationship doesn't hold because terran essentially has a better version of the dragoon. Watching mech play in BW was awesome because of the sheer tension. In SC2 - if terran gets off the carpet EMPs, or protoss gets the feedbacks/storm - the engagements lasts 5 seconds.
Fixing why bio is superior in TvP in SC2 will take nothing short of a major redesign of both races, which won't be seen until something like HOTS. I agree with the OP in that respect - whether it has to be mech or something else remains to be discussed.
Thank you so much for making this thread couldnt agree more, Ive always thought TvP lacked since later beta and release.
I will always remember in beta when i first started seeing replays of pros going pure bio and i remeber thinking "Wtf???!?! he wow ith just rines and rauders, i kept expecting the T to transition into some high tech unit and pwn the toss, but nope he just instead attacked a ton of different locations at once and never engaged the toss fully." I felt so disheartned when i saw this build really rise up to being standard. Its just so boring to watch.
I really like where TvT and espcially TvZ are at, those definately feel BW worthy, yea TvT can be boring sometimes but its still generally exciting and takes a ton of skill. TvZ is so much fun to play for a few reasons
1) TvZ has that unexpected element of battle still to it. Alot of the muta/bling/ling vs rine tank battles are so close theres so many times where the blings are just inches away from a rine and then they get blasted by a tank, or theres times where the blings perfectly clobber a huge group of rines. Its so exciting, the battles are really unpredicatable and just crazy.
2) Tanks tanks tanks, I really feel that tanks are the key to excitement and fun in any Terran MU. Tanks literally define the race, seigeing up controlling areas and long range really makes Terran feel like Terran. Its so epic when the other races rush the tank line, will they blow through? will they be annihlated? Will the Terran hold his ground with just 1 or two tanks left in his army? Not to mention a million siegie tank explosions on high graphic settings is visually stunning itself(important for a MU to be fun to watch is the visual aspect.)
3) A ton of units are used in progression starting with low tier units all the way up to tier 3
I loved BW TvZ because the progression of units was so cool
Generally T starts Marine/medic Z starts ling/sunken colony. Terran techs to siege tank Z techs to muta to keep T in base. Z gets lurkers, T gets science vessels Z gets defielers and Ultras and so on. This is so much fun to watch both races have all these different timings as they slowly climb the tech trees. Almost every unit is used in the MU. Its really exciting to watch, for example every BW T knows that feeling when the first dark swarm comes out on the field, this kind of stuff is great, both players keep progressing through their tech tree, theres not one magic army(Cough MMM G/V Cough) thats just going to work the entire game, you have to keep adapting until the latest stage of the game.
When you look at these things and put them to work in sc2 TvP you are hurting.
Theres very limited surprise in battles, oh he got emps, oh he got feedbacked. Oh he made a concave, oh he made good ff's. Its boring and bland, most of the time the armies also steam roll each other so fast that you cant tell wtf just happened. Not to mention that half the game is just the T dropping and not even engaging the main army.
There are no tanks in standard TvP, 1-1-1 is cheesy not standard. No postional play, the OP made such a good point that ive been saying forever, TvP feels like im playing Zerg, making a bunch of tier 1 units,
Theres very little progression, you start tier 1 then add some ghosts and vikings and ur done. Toss gets either collsi or archon or HT.
THis MU has also made me not play as much its just so damn frustrating, not fun to watch, and not fun to play. Its broken on so many levels. The only fix I could think of to make tanks work is maybe a bonus dmg buff to sheilds or something? Or make them 2 food, or maybe not make every single protoss unit counter them.
On October 01 2011 12:19 Tehs Tehklz wrote: The issue at the pro level is not that the Terran player has to micro more, it is that they get to micro more. Terran units in current TvP have far more opportunities for micro to increase their effectiveness, in my opinion. So, for average players, it is hard, because not everyone can do all those things Thorzain talked about well enough to beat a big Protoss army, but at the highest level, a good Terran player can smash a Protoss player and there little room for the Protoss to work with in a battle of control (there is a similar relationship in TvZ when a Zerg player is trying to fight bio with banelings. This is why the lurker is a better unit, but that seems like a different conversation).
On October 01 2011 07:01 Noocta wrote:
On October 01 2011 06:56 homeless_guy wrote:
On October 01 2011 06:54 Noocta wrote: To be honest, it's mainly because of protoss design. Terran ain't really the problem. ( if we're talking about design and not balance ) Warpgate technologie and Colossus both force your opponent into certains thing that make a XvP pretty straight forward " Do that or lose "
I understand your point about colo., but can you explain what you mean about WG?
They wanted to make the Colossus idea work so hard, i think they ended up screwing everything else design wise.
In my mind, this is the biggest problem with Protoss and kind of in SC2 as a whole. The entire Protoss race seems like it was designed by saying "wouldn't it be cool if..." instead of thinking about game mechanics. Forcefield, colossus, warp gate, mothership, phoenix - wouldn't it be cool if..."Protoss could modify the map terrain" "there was a giant War of the Worlds tripod style unit" "players could control that Protoss warp technology for their units" "we brought in the giant Protoss world ships" "a unit could shoot while moving". I'd say the same thing seems to apply to reapers (jet packs), hellions (flame throwers), thors (giant battle mechs) and banelings (explosions/goo). Then game mechanics and balance are worked in around all of this, the "really important stuff".
Another point, look at the new SC2 units compared to BW units that were lost and their micro potential (vultures to hellions, lurkers to banelings, reaver to colossus, goliaths to thors, defilers and dark swarm to infestors with fungal growth) and new SC2 units alone (roaches, marauders with concussive shells, broodlords). Micro just took a real shot to the pills with a lot of these. Though, I will say, SC2 devs did have successes: I think blink stalkers are tits, the vikings as transformers has worked out really well, and phoenix (not counting gravitron beam - I am no big fan of any snares/stuns) are one of my favorite units. Roaches with burrow also had potential to be like blink stalkers, I think, but it just hasn't worked out. Still a good idea, though. Then compare the number of micro stopping abilities in BW to the number in SC2 (lockdown vs concussive shells, forcefield, gravitron beam, fungal growth, ).
I seem to have gotten off topic...oh yes:
Chronoboost is dick compared to MULE and inject. It is great early game and has uses in the mid game, but it's potential for greatness is significantly lower, I think, then the other two macro mechanics. Inject and larve lets you remax and/or 100% tech swith almost instantly. MULEs let Terran players make phenomenal comebacks, abandon SCV's entirely and they can even be dropped on banrlings/tanks. Chronoboost? Nothing beyond its initial purpose of making things slightly faster.
So, I think Protoss needs less fluff and more practicality and both chronoboost and warpgate need overalls or a just to be replaced entirely. This would make the race more interesting and allow for sensible buffs and balancing, instead of trying to dance around all the "coolness".
As for the matchup of TvP, one problem is that Terran players are almost pigeonholed into going bio. In TvT or TvZ, there are options of full mech, biomech on a sliding scale and full bio. Each composition has its own style and strategy. TvP, however, feels like there is a lot less choice in composition/tactics on the Terran side. I think a lot of excitement could be added to TvP if there was simply more choice. However, personally, I will always prefer bio, I think. Biomech can be good, too (I like tanks), but Thors are too clunky and hellions too one dimensional, in my opinion.
That's how I see it, anyway.
Also, vultures really should come back. Seriously. This one unit adds so much micro. It could also make mech in TvP much more viable. If I got just one StarCraft development related wish, it would be for vultures to come back. I love them so much.
I would love Vultures. But they don;t fit in SC2. Chargelots would drag them to well and Collosi cleans up Mines to quickly with its sweeper motion. Not to mention that Immortals can just walk over them without a care. And Mines would be OP against Ling Banling.
This is exactly why I want Vultures. It will surely make it easier for terran to expo. Thats for sure. It might actually give terran a chance to actually out macro a zerg for once.
I agree with everything with op. I think TvP is really boring and warp gate mechanic is way too good. I always love that when you drop to protoss expand and he just warps some units there, ehh! It is pretty boring that you have to MMM every single game but that's not the biggest problem. As you said, there is no real micro in TvP. It is just mass vs mass. ;B
So all I can read is: "I want to play Mech in TvP!"
I really don't see why in TvX Terran should always be able to choose Mech, Bio or Biomech... I don't see Protoss complaining about: "I can't go Robo-Units only!" Also at the current state of the game, I don't like how Terrans can go pure Mech in TvZ, as Zergs have to adapt brutally to Terran then ("hey I went mass thor in the midgame, and you didn't go mass roach--> you lost").
I hate TvP and it's my worst match-up. I always feel fragile at any point in the game. If you're not 100% ready for an engagement, or you didn't do the right thing, you just outright die. Didn't get enough vikings or any at all for Colossus, you die, didn't get ghosts vs pure gateway, you die.
Didn't set up your units well and didn't emp 90% of the Protoss casters in the late game, you also die. Not saying it's imbalanced, it's just very difficult to be 100% prepared for units compositions and large fights unless you're a pro. I ALWAYS get rolled over by Protoss late game as well. How are you supposed to EMP the sentries/HTs when they are behind the wall of Colossus/zealot/stalker? :D
Siege tanks being viable would make this match up so much better. Would be awesome to just siege up a bunch of tanks and KNOW that Protoss can't just a-move into it with his ball of death.
+1 Predy. I am so glad that i am in diamod league playing tank/hellion vs P ( where P has basically half of my APM ) and get 50 percent chance to win. Of course tanks are not viable, but in noobish place in diamond ladder you can get shot with mech style close to BW tank/vulture
I remember reading this and i fully agreed about unit design (burrowing lurkers, sieging tanks and dropping reavers vs A move collosi, marauders) and tension of the game created by positioning. a lot of it comes down to game mechanics (12 units max, no smartcasting) so that's what we obviously can't expect blizzard to put in the game in 2010, but they should have learned about the great units that made BW so awesome to watch and play.
Also i'm glad most of you got the point i was trying to make, and that's in most situations you're forced to make bio because there's no other way to play safe. And i think it's not too bad only if there was a way to transition out of it, just like in TvZ or TvT. But no, all you must do is to get more and more bio with support units (ghost/viking) according to what protoss makes and if you don't, you have no chance because you just can't outmicro protoss ball with collosus with no vikings. That was the point i was trying to make, obviously there's some micro in battles as thorzain said, target firing collosi with vikings, EMPing, some kiting. The thing is it's more down to the unit composition (viking-collo, ghost-HT). There's just no way to outmicro your opponent when you don't have the right "hard counter", unlike in TvZ (well even there it's hard due to easier control but still). Also heavy multitasking is required which is great, don't get me wrong. It's just even then, dropping and positional play means nothing in longer game due to warpgate mechanic.
Also a fair argument was battles doesn't last too long, but that's a sitation in most of sc2 matchups but it's a fair point and i agree, the thing is tanks when sieging up an expansion it creates longer "battles" because there's something happening, and spectators waits for the opponent to run in and defend. The only thing when i watch korean TvP is "are they gonna battle now? no not, yet, ok. maybe now?" and then it's all lazers and EMP blurs and then one is trying to run away.
Also as many stated, it's just my personal preference to play tanks. But it comes down to years of BW experience where playing mech was hard but the reward was high. In sc2 TvT it's quite similar (although with hellion nerf we'll see, still very strong tho). There's just nothing like that in TvP.
On October 01 2011 12:25 ZorBa.G wrote: After reading this thread, I agree SC2 may have it's problems in the T v P matchup... but people! Please remember the game is still relatively new. No one has any idea what HoTS will bring to us yet.
Me personally, I am sick and tired of people comparing SC1 to SC2. When will people realise SC2 is a "different" game?!?! Just let go of SC1 already, yes the games were awesome to watch. but guess what, it's now outdated (graphics are crap and not easy on the eyes) and it's only a matter of time now until SC1 dies out.
Honestly, it seems like you guys just want to turn SC2 into Broodwar...... if so, what is the point of having an SC2?
EDIT: I'm actually a terran player and I do hope the return of a vulture like unit comes in Hots. Wouldn't it be awesome if hellions got the ability to reseach "Mines."
We know what Dustin Browder is thinking with HotS "take out some units and add nothing". They said in an interview that they weren't sure about adding new units, but were thinking of removing some units. I hope to God they take out the Colossus, the Banshee, the Warp Prism or the Warp In mechanic, and Roaches (and replace them with something fucking decent or give back the old Hydras).
And I don't mind SC2 basically turning into Broodwar. It means having a game as awesome as Broodwar without having an extra 50-100 APM spent solely on making sure your macro is going (clicking all your production buildings and making your workers mine) as well as not having to spend an extra 5-10 actions to make sure your units are doing what you want them to do (because of the retarded pathing and AI). But that would likely create some imbalances... So I guess a brand new game isn't so bad either... If only they could get SC2:BW to work properly.
On October 01 2011 06:45 willsterben wrote: reading this thread feels like you guys somehow forgot that tvp is the most broken matchup in the game in favor of terran. how about you slow down a little. the point op was trying to make is that he doesn't like bio and thinks mech is cooler.
guess what, i prefer bio. and lots of people do as well. i think bio is way cooler to watch than boring tank sieging bullshit. it needs adjustments on both sides at certain points in the game sure but why the HELL would you want to scratch bio altogether and watch people siege tanks and go afk instead of sick micro maneuvers and gosu multitasking everywhere? WHY? also LOL at anyone thinking mech is 'not viable' when there is goody who literally does nothing except what i described above and wins. you might think people would have enough of all that OH HE SIEGED HIS TANKS I GUESS WE AREN'T GOING TO SEE ANYTHING IN THE NEXT 30 MINUTES watching tvt all day erry day in gsl.
To be honest, I found TvP in BW to look boring as eff to watch as well simply because you HAD to mass an army in order to engage, and before you did that, you needed to be sure you were safe so you set up this giant Tank line and slow pushed across the map with Spider Mines and Tanks at the speed of a slug on superglue. TvT was a little more interesting...
But in SC2's TvZ, if they siege their Tanks (unless it's at a gold base in the middle of the map with access to every other base on the freakin' map), it doesn't necessarily mean the game is going to be stagnant for the next 30 minutes.
On October 01 2011 11:59 kidcrash wrote: Sorry I don't have much time to elaborate on my thoughts before I have to run but I feel like the marine is too all purpose, especially compared to BW match ups. I don't really get why they got rid of the marine range upgrade from BW and gave it to the marine pre-baked. To me that's like giving zerglings the speed upgrade default.
Now I know there are already too many upgrades in the tech lab but I don't see why marines get a free ride with getting 5 range right off the bat. Maybe adding an upgrade in the reactor for upgrading 4 range to 5? Then to compensate maybe we can give the siege tank some of its damage they nerfed in some of the earlier patches? That way early game terran bio wouldn't be so dominating but late game would be buffed to make up for it. Any thoughts?
Yeah... Simple thoughts... We're going to make PvT even easier in the early game! You want to 1 Rax FE without gas? YOU DIE TO STALKERS! LOLOLOLOLOLOL Stalkers come in, pokes the range 5 Marines in the Bunker (4+1), and just laughs as the better pathing and AI allows the Stalkers to simply be clicked onto the Bunker to safely harass it. Unless the range upgrade finishes really quickly for relatively low cost (otherwise Terran can never FE vs Protoss due to the low gas count from 1 Rax FE and 14 CC).
If you nerf the Marine, early game Terran will be near impossible unless they get a massive buff elsewhere or nerf the Protoss or Terran starts cheesing the fuck out of Protoss (and gets nerfed again; annnnd we're back to 40 hp 4 range Marines!).
You're focusing on your bias against the Marine (you're a Zerg player huh?) and ignoring how even now in TvP, they aren't that great of a unit. Granted, they're much better than they were in BW, but the only reason they're good is their straight up DPS, which is nice to have against the beefy ass Protoss units, but they're also squishy as eff and straight up die to Storms and Colossi. However, players like EG.PuMa have shown that heavy Marine compositions CAN work IF AND ONLY IF you have Ghosts and your opponent went for Templar-based play (since you EMP or Snipe the High Templar before they can Psi Storm you, removing their splash damage [aside from Archons which should be weakened with several EMPs] and allowing you to use the sheer DPS of the Marine to deal with the Protoss units. I've tried Marines+Ghosts+Vikings+Medivacs in a game on Taldarim once, and it should've been a victory if my Barracks weren't improperly rallied, leaving me with 30 Marines at home and wondering why my Supply was so high but my army size was so small... It would've helped a lot when I pushed his main while he had no units... -.-
Marines are good, but it's still very sketchy to use a heavily Marine-based play in TvP... You need to play it very well for it to work. But this illustrates a bit of how useless the Marauder is... It's only good against Stalkers, Hydras (oddly enough they're reasonable against them), Roaches, Infestors?, Ultralisks?, Siege Tanks, and Thors (somewhat). Sure, you can use them to kite Zealots, but the units behind the Zealot wall will still be doing damage to your units. Might as well have them be Marines and clear up the Zealots a bit faster eh? Or is this a testament to how freakin' good Marines are? A little bit of both... (Thank God MarineKing opened our eyes!)
The big problem right now with buffing the Tank is that 1-1-1 would be more difficult to deal with... Do we really want that? Nerf Marines and buff the Tank... Then we have an issue with early game PvT where Protoss can harass like mad until a Siege Tank with Siege or that Marine range upgrade finishes. On the other hand, I'm all for it in terms of TvZ and TvT. It makes Mech a little bit better early on (due to Hellions outranging Marines allowing them to kite perfectly forever - wait... is that a good thing??). And for TvZ, well the 2 Rax becomes a bit weaker.
It's a good idea for 2 out of the 3 matchups (sort of questionable in TvT though), but it's a TERRIBLE idea for the matchup we're currently talking about... Did you really think this through??
And on another note, I used to be all for nerfing the Marauder to hell... Now I'm VERY glad that they didn't... Otherwise... What would Terran do? Go for a weak mech opening? Mass Marines and get kited by Stalkers all day?
In TvT and TvZ, you can choose between pure mech, pure bio and biomech. In TvP, You are forced to either allin or go pure bio. I like bio, so I have no problem with going bio in TvP, but I admit having only one choice compared to the other ones' 3 is getting the short end of the stick.
I also agree with Predy. My worst match up is TvP and mostly i have no chance when i do no real damage in the early game. Atm i do mostly the 1-1-1 Built or when im really motivated i try to get a FE with a stim timing attack, but than mostly lose at the late mid game - late game. Actually im really depressed by the way to play TvP.
First and foremost, dragoons in BW had the range upgrade so the bunkers were there temporary to stop the dragoons til you got a tank out. Marine with upgraded range = dragoon with upgraded range which means marines had range 6 in sc2 terms, this also effectively minimized muta harass somewhat which would make Z start getting out lurkers and so forth. (Unlike sc2 where you just mass some more mutas).
Anyway I completely agree with the op. I mean, they decide to bring all these units/mechanics that increase the protoss's mobility, map control and units that specifically counter the tank all in awhile mech is nerfed by removing map control (spider mines), and mobility with weak GTA unit (Having 2~3 goliaths would be WAY better than having a single thor). It really does show how they wanted to make bio standard.
I wonder how the current protoss would fair against the vulture/tank/goliath combo (sc2 versions ala single player units), would be pretty entertaining to watch. Cant believe DB chose the thor over the goliath..
On October 01 2011 19:22 Boxxer wrote: Terran's T1 units are not too strong, it's just our T3 suck vs protoss and are easily countered by zerg as well.
Terran's T1 units are so strong, that everything else has to suffer... Marine: counters anything that doesn't have splash or isn't a flagship (broodlord, carrier, BC) Marauder: counters anything that is armored and on the ground, does well against small amounts of splash
also I disagree with bio being T1... Medivacs, Vikings and Ghosts are all at least T2 Tech - all of them are needed for bio vs Protoss. Lots of bio upgrades are T1.5 or even higher Tier (moebius reactor, stim, shields, concussive shells)
The straight up problem why tanks are worse than in BW is, that Marines are just sooo good. The TvZ role of the tank right now is to protect Marines from banelings. Marines do everything else. The TvT role of the tank right now is to kill Marines (yeah, Terran has hellions as well to deal with them, but those are to vulnerable to marauders), else Marines would win every battle.
Now imagine if Tanks could deal with even more stuff, than those rather small units like marines and banes... Wouldn't that mean that Tanks+Marines would be so powerful that you can't ever engage them in straight battles? Yes it would! Tanks were nerfed from 60 to 50 and then to 35(+15) damage because they dealt with everything before that, which was just retarted, as that was already the job of the marine.
So the problem is not Protoss design, it's terrans design!
agree, marauders suck :O the one who came up with the idea to turn Terran into Protoss deserves to be plagued, irradiated and stormed at the same time ;_;
TvP feels so stale and well uninteresting. The whole game you do the same thing and never really transition from it. It's just strange. I'd love some kind of design changes to allow for more options but I don't see that coming.
On October 01 2011 19:05 YyapSsap wrote: First and foremost, dragoons in BW had the range upgrade so the bunkers were there temporary to stop the dragoons til you got a tank out. Marine with upgraded range = dragoon with upgraded range which means marines had range 6 in sc2 terms, this also effectively minimized muta harass somewhat which would make Z start getting out lurkers and so forth. (Unlike sc2 where you just mass some more mutas).
Anyway I completely agree with the op. I mean, they decide to bring all these units/mechanics that increase the protoss's mobility, map control and units that specifically counter the tank all in awhile mech is nerfed by removing map control (spider mines), and mobility with weak GTA unit (Having 2~3 goliaths would be WAY better than having a single thor). It really does show how they wanted to make bio standard.
I wonder how the current protoss would fair against the vulture/tank/goliath combo (sc2 versions ala single player units), would be pretty entertaining to watch. Cant believe DB chose the thor over the goliath..
On October 01 2011 12:25 ZorBa.G wrote: After reading this thread, I agree SC2 may have it's problems in the T v P matchup... but people! Please remember the game is still relatively new. No one has any idea what HoTS will bring to us yet.
Me personally, I am sick and tired of people comparing SC1 to SC2. When will people realise SC2 is a "different" game?!?! Just let go of SC1 already, yes the games were awesome to watch. but guess what, it's now outdated (graphics are crap and not easy on the eyes) and it's only a matter of time now until SC1 dies out.
Honestly, it seems like you guys just want to turn SC2 into Broodwar...... if so, what is the point of having an SC2?
EDIT: I'm actually a terran player and I do hope the return of a vulture like unit comes in Hots. Wouldn't it be awesome if hellions got the ability to reseach "Mines."
We know what Dustin Browder is thinking with HotS "take out some units and add nothing". They said in an interview that they weren't sure about adding new units, but were thinking of removing some units. I hope to God they take out the Colossus, the Banshee, the Warp Prism or the Warp In mechanic, and Roaches (and replace them with something fucking decent or give back the old Hydras).
And I don't mind SC2 basically turning into Broodwar. It means having a game as awesome as Broodwar without having an extra 50-100 APM spent solely on making sure your macro is going (clicking all your production buildings and making your workers mine) as well as not having to spend an extra 5-10 actions to make sure your units are doing what you want them to do (because of the retarded pathing and AI). But that would likely create some imbalances... So I guess a brand new game isn't so bad either... If only they could get SC2:BW to work properly.
On October 01 2011 06:45 willsterben wrote: reading this thread feels like you guys somehow forgot that tvp is the most broken matchup in the game in favor of terran. how about you slow down a little. the point op was trying to make is that he doesn't like bio and thinks mech is cooler.
guess what, i prefer bio. and lots of people do as well. i think bio is way cooler to watch than boring tank sieging bullshit. it needs adjustments on both sides at certain points in the game sure but why the HELL would you want to scratch bio altogether and watch people siege tanks and go afk instead of sick micro maneuvers and gosu multitasking everywhere? WHY? also LOL at anyone thinking mech is 'not viable' when there is goody who literally does nothing except what i described above and wins. you might think people would have enough of all that OH HE SIEGED HIS TANKS I GUESS WE AREN'T GOING TO SEE ANYTHING IN THE NEXT 30 MINUTES watching tvt all day erry day in gsl.
To be honest, I found TvP in BW to look boring as eff to watch as well simply because you HAD to mass an army in order to engage, and before you did that, you needed to be sure you were safe so you set up this giant Tank line and slow pushed across the map with Spider Mines and Tanks at the speed of a slug on superglue. TvT was a little more interesting...
But in SC2's TvZ, if they siege their Tanks (unless it's at a gold base in the middle of the map with access to every other base on the freakin' map), it doesn't necessarily mean the game is going to be stagnant for the next 30 minutes.
On October 01 2011 11:59 kidcrash wrote: Sorry I don't have much time to elaborate on my thoughts before I have to run but I feel like the marine is too all purpose, especially compared to BW match ups. I don't really get why they got rid of the marine range upgrade from BW and gave it to the marine pre-baked. To me that's like giving zerglings the speed upgrade default.
Now I know there are already too many upgrades in the tech lab but I don't see why marines get a free ride with getting 5 range right off the bat. Maybe adding an upgrade in the reactor for upgrading 4 range to 5? Then to compensate maybe we can give the siege tank some of its damage they nerfed in some of the earlier patches? That way early game terran bio wouldn't be so dominating but late game would be buffed to make up for it. Any thoughts?
Yeah... Simple thoughts... We're going to make PvT even easier in the early game! You want to 1 Rax FE without gas? YOU DIE TO STALKERS! LOLOLOLOLOLOL Stalkers come in, pokes the range 5 Marines in the Bunker (4+1), and just laughs as the better pathing and AI allows the Stalkers to simply be clicked onto the Bunker to safely harass it. Unless the range upgrade finishes really quickly for relatively low cost (otherwise Terran can never FE vs Protoss due to the low gas count from 1 Rax FE and 14 CC).
If you nerf the Marine, early game Terran will be near impossible unless they get a massive buff elsewhere or nerf the Protoss or Terran starts cheesing the fuck out of Protoss (and gets nerfed again; annnnd we're back to 40 hp 4 range Marines!).
You're focusing on your bias against the Marine (you're a Zerg player huh?) and ignoring how even now in TvP, they aren't that great of a unit. Granted, they're much better than they were in BW, but the only reason they're good is their straight up DPS, which is nice to have against the beefy ass Protoss units, but they're also squishy as eff and straight up die to Storms and Colossi. However, players like EG.PuMa have shown that heavy Marine compositions CAN work IF AND ONLY IF you have Ghosts and your opponent went for Templar-based play (since you EMP or Snipe the High Templar before they can Psi Storm you, removing their splash damage [aside from Archons which should be weakened with several EMPs] and allowing you to use the sheer DPS of the Marine to deal with the Protoss units. I've tried Marines+Ghosts+Vikings+Medivacs in a game on Taldarim once, and it should've been a victory if my Barracks weren't improperly rallied, leaving me with 30 Marines at home and wondering why my Supply was so high but my army size was so small... It would've helped a lot when I pushed his main while he had no units... -.-
Marines are good, but it's still very sketchy to use a heavily Marine-based play in TvP... You need to play it very well for it to work. But this illustrates a bit of how useless the Marauder is... It's only good against Stalkers, Hydras (oddly enough they're reasonable against them), Roaches, Infestors?, Ultralisks?, Siege Tanks, and Thors (somewhat). Sure, you can use them to kite Zealots, but the units behind the Zealot wall will still be doing damage to your units. Might as well have them be Marines and clear up the Zealots a bit faster eh? Or is this a testament to how freakin' good Marines are? A little bit of both... (Thank God MarineKing opened our eyes!)
The big problem right now with buffing the Tank is that 1-1-1 would be more difficult to deal with... Do we really want that? Nerf Marines and buff the Tank... Then we have an issue with early game PvT where Protoss can harass like mad until a Siege Tank with Siege or that Marine range upgrade finishes. On the other hand, I'm all for it in terms of TvZ and TvT. It makes Mech a little bit better early on (due to Hellions outranging Marines allowing them to kite perfectly forever - wait... is that a good thing??). And for TvZ, well the 2 Rax becomes a bit weaker.
It's a good idea for 2 out of the 3 matchups (sort of questionable in TvT though), but it's a TERRIBLE idea for the matchup we're currently talking about... Did you really think this through??
And on another note, I used to be all for nerfing the Marauder to hell... Now I'm VERY glad that they didn't... Otherwise... What would Terran do? Go for a weak mech opening? Mass Marines and get kited by Stalkers all day?
Hell Protosses could go 1 gate Robo and bust your bunker because the Immortal out ranges the bunkered marine. People want a range nerf? Then make goons and immortals have a range nerf and give them an upgrade in the core like in BW. That way they have to choose between WG or Range.
TvP was such an amazing MU in BW, i hate it in sc2 because most people go Bio and it is SO boring to watch marine+marauder+medivac+ghost every single time.
On October 01 2011 16:26 Big J wrote: So all I can read is: "I want to play Mech in TvP!"
I really don't see why in TvX Terran should always be able to choose Mech, Bio or Biomech... I don't see Protoss complaining about: "I can't go Robo-Units only!" Also at the current state of the game, I don't like how Terrans can go pure Mech in TvZ, as Zergs have to adapt brutally to Terran then ("hey I went mass thor in the midgame, and you didn't go mass roach--> you lost").
Wait so you play a game with 3 races and don't want each race to have more than 1 viable option per matchup?
And then you complain about a strat that is used by very few people?
I love it when Z goes infestor ling, or July style something other than ling bling because it adds variety into my play sessions which is a good thing.
Your argument is similar to complaining about getting AA if a Toss goes void ray....wtf. You adapt to fit your opponent's strategy every game, it's part of SC2...
On October 01 2011 18:14 RyLai wrote: To be honest, I found TvP in BW to look boring as eff to watch as well simply because you HAD to mass an army in order to engage, and before you did that, you needed to be sure you were safe so you set up this giant Tank line and slow pushed across the map with Spider Mines and Tanks at the speed of a slug on superglue. TvT was a little more interesting...
:O, have you not watched the latest OSL Final ...
Most TvP's involving Flash and Sea are like that, but the second best TvP'er Fantasy has some of the most dynamic TvP play I've ever seen in recent times. Same can be said about Stork.
On October 01 2011 12:25 ZorBa.G wrote: After reading this thread, I agree SC2 may have it's problems in the T v P matchup... but people! Please remember the game is still relatively new. No one has any idea what HoTS will bring to us yet.
Me personally, I am sick and tired of people comparing SC1 to SC2. When will people realise SC2 is a "different" game?!?! Just let go of SC1 already, yes the games were awesome to watch. but guess what, it's now outdated (graphics are crap and not easy on the eyes) and it's only a matter of time now until SC1 dies out.
Honestly, it seems like you guys just want to turn SC2 into Broodwar...... if so, what is the point of having an SC2?
EDIT: I'm actually a terran player and I do hope the return of a vulture like unit comes in Hots. Wouldn't it be awesome if hellions got the ability to reseach "Mines."
We know what Dustin Browder is thinking with HotS "take out some units and add nothing". They said in an interview that they weren't sure about adding new units, but were thinking of removing some units. I hope to God they take out the Colossus, the Banshee, the Warp Prism or the Warp In mechanic, and Roaches (and replace them with something fucking decent or give back the old Hydras).
And I don't mind SC2 basically turning into Broodwar. It means having a game as awesome as Broodwar without having an extra 50-100 APM spent solely on making sure your macro is going (clicking all your production buildings and making your workers mine) as well as not having to spend an extra 5-10 actions to make sure your units are doing what you want them to do (because of the retarded pathing and AI). But that would likely create some imbalances... So I guess a brand new game isn't so bad either... If only they could get SC2:BW to work properly.
On October 01 2011 06:45 willsterben wrote: reading this thread feels like you guys somehow forgot that tvp is the most broken matchup in the game in favor of terran. how about you slow down a little. the point op was trying to make is that he doesn't like bio and thinks mech is cooler.
guess what, i prefer bio. and lots of people do as well. i think bio is way cooler to watch than boring tank sieging bullshit. it needs adjustments on both sides at certain points in the game sure but why the HELL would you want to scratch bio altogether and watch people siege tanks and go afk instead of sick micro maneuvers and gosu multitasking everywhere? WHY? also LOL at anyone thinking mech is 'not viable' when there is goody who literally does nothing except what i described above and wins. you might think people would have enough of all that OH HE SIEGED HIS TANKS I GUESS WE AREN'T GOING TO SEE ANYTHING IN THE NEXT 30 MINUTES watching tvt all day erry day in gsl.
To be honest, I found TvP in BW to look boring as eff to watch as well simply because you HAD to mass an army in order to engage, and before you did that, you needed to be sure you were safe so you set up this giant Tank line and slow pushed across the map with Spider Mines and Tanks at the speed of a slug on superglue. TvT was a little more interesting...
But in SC2's TvZ, if they siege their Tanks (unless it's at a gold base in the middle of the map with access to every other base on the freakin' map), it doesn't necessarily mean the game is going to be stagnant for the next 30 minutes.
On October 01 2011 11:59 kidcrash wrote: Sorry I don't have much time to elaborate on my thoughts before I have to run but I feel like the marine is too all purpose, especially compared to BW match ups. I don't really get why they got rid of the marine range upgrade from BW and gave it to the marine pre-baked. To me that's like giving zerglings the speed upgrade default.
Now I know there are already too many upgrades in the tech lab but I don't see why marines get a free ride with getting 5 range right off the bat. Maybe adding an upgrade in the reactor for upgrading 4 range to 5? Then to compensate maybe we can give the siege tank some of its damage they nerfed in some of the earlier patches? That way early game terran bio wouldn't be so dominating but late game would be buffed to make up for it. Any thoughts?
Yeah... Simple thoughts... We're going to make PvT even easier in the early game! You want to 1 Rax FE without gas? YOU DIE TO STALKERS! LOLOLOLOLOLOL Stalkers come in, pokes the range 5 Marines in the Bunker (4+1), and just laughs as the better pathing and AI allows the Stalkers to simply be clicked onto the Bunker to safely harass it. Unless the range upgrade finishes really quickly for relatively low cost (otherwise Terran can never FE vs Protoss due to the low gas count from 1 Rax FE and 14 CC).
If you nerf the Marine, early game Terran will be near impossible unless they get a massive buff elsewhere or nerf the Protoss or Terran starts cheesing the fuck out of Protoss (and gets nerfed again; annnnd we're back to 40 hp 4 range Marines!).
You're focusing on your bias against the Marine (you're a Zerg player huh?) and ignoring how even now in TvP, they aren't that great of a unit. Granted, they're much better than they were in BW, but the only reason they're good is their straight up DPS, which is nice to have against the beefy ass Protoss units, but they're also squishy as eff and straight up die to Storms and Colossi. However, players like EG.PuMa have shown that heavy Marine compositions CAN work IF AND ONLY IF you have Ghosts and your opponent went for Templar-based play (since you EMP or Snipe the High Templar before they can Psi Storm you, removing their splash damage [aside from Archons which should be weakened with several EMPs] and allowing you to use the sheer DPS of the Marine to deal with the Protoss units. I've tried Marines+Ghosts+Vikings+Medivacs in a game on Taldarim once, and it should've been a victory if my Barracks weren't improperly rallied, leaving me with 30 Marines at home and wondering why my Supply was so high but my army size was so small... It would've helped a lot when I pushed his main while he had no units... -.-
Marines are good, but it's still very sketchy to use a heavily Marine-based play in TvP... You need to play it very well for it to work. But this illustrates a bit of how useless the Marauder is... It's only good against Stalkers, Hydras (oddly enough they're reasonable against them), Roaches, Infestors?, Ultralisks?, Siege Tanks, and Thors (somewhat). Sure, you can use them to kite Zealots, but the units behind the Zealot wall will still be doing damage to your units. Might as well have them be Marines and clear up the Zealots a bit faster eh? Or is this a testament to how freakin' good Marines are? A little bit of both... (Thank God MarineKing opened our eyes!)
The big problem right now with buffing the Tank is that 1-1-1 would be more difficult to deal with... Do we really want that? Nerf Marines and buff the Tank... Then we have an issue with early game PvT where Protoss can harass like mad until a Siege Tank with Siege or that Marine range upgrade finishes. On the other hand, I'm all for it in terms of TvZ and TvT. It makes Mech a little bit better early on (due to Hellions outranging Marines allowing them to kite perfectly forever - wait... is that a good thing??). And for TvZ, well the 2 Rax becomes a bit weaker.
It's a good idea for 2 out of the 3 matchups (sort of questionable in TvT though), but it's a TERRIBLE idea for the matchup we're currently talking about... Did you really think this through??
And on another note, I used to be all for nerfing the Marauder to hell... Now I'm VERY glad that they didn't... Otherwise... What would Terran do? Go for a weak mech opening? Mass Marines and get kited by Stalkers all day?
Hell Protosses could go 1 gate Robo and bust your bunker because the Immortal out ranges the bunkered marine. People want a range nerf? Then make goons and immortals have a range nerf and give them an upgrade in the core like in BW. That way they have to choose between WG or Range.
An Immortal (6) doesn't out-range a marine (5) in a bunker (+1).
I think every Protoss that plays the game would be quite happy to see Tanks buffed if marine/marauder were nerfed. MM dominates Toss early-game, outmanoeuvres them in the mid-game (Terran army can be quite vulnerable if the appropriate tech path is not taken in the mid-game or cannot yet be afforded) and kills them outright in the late game (though of course this is micro and positionally dependent).
A range nerf for MM (but IMO give them +2 range in bunkers so expos can be defended vs early pressure) as well as a marauder health nerf coupled with a supply buff to Tanks (2 instead of 3) and some sort of changed/new unit that can support tanks better would make PvT better IMO.
On October 01 2011 22:23 Connor987 wrote: if you honestly think terran is underpowered in any way against protoss, you are seriously mistaken. 7 terran 1 protoss (i think) in code S shows this
noone was talking about anything being underpowered ffs
On October 01 2011 16:26 Big J wrote: So all I can read is: "I want to play Mech in TvP!"
I really don't see why in TvX Terran should always be able to choose Mech, Bio or Biomech... I don't see Protoss complaining about: "I can't go Robo-Units only!" Also at the current state of the game, I don't like how Terrans can go pure Mech in TvZ, as Zergs have to adapt brutally to Terran then ("hey I went mass thor in the midgame, and you didn't go mass roach--> you lost").
Wait so you play a game with 3 races and don't want each race to have more than 1 viable option per matchup?
And then you complain about a strat that is used by very few people?
I love it when Z goes infestor ling, or July style something other than ling bling because it adds variety into my play sessions which is a good thing.
Your argument is similar to complaining about getting AA if a Toss goes void ray....wtf. You adapt to fit your opponent's strategy every game, it's part of SC2...
no, I do like it when races have different options in each Match-Up. I just don't like it, if one race can choose any composition while the other race has to wait for that choice and then choose it's countercomposition. Also I wouldn't say I complain about Mech in TvZ... If Terran doesn't want to have a chance against an opponent who finds out what you're doing, it's their choice to lose... But I don't like how this forces zerg to play non-standard compositions.
There is a huge difference between playing Mech vs Zerg and zerg being able to choose infestor/ling or offensive muta/ling/bling (july style) or even roach/ling/bling instead of defensive muta/ling/bling. Marine/Tank/Medivac deals with all of those compositions. You might want to add more tanks, earlier ghosts, some marauders, but basically you can still play M/M/T.
Comparing this to AntiAir vs Protoss is just silly. You can still go for the same composition you wanted before, but you will have to add some antiair first. (it's not like vs Mech, when you're banelings suddenly become useless - and I'm not talking about clumping all your Thors and being the first to experience what happens if you blow up 100supply of banelings on 60supply of Thors, after not pushing the strongest macro zerg in the world for something like 16mins... numbers might be wrong, but I guess you know what I mean)
And to add to this, I would like to hear your opinion on PvT compositions... Gateway into Colossus into Templar/Archon (or the other way round)... I really don't see a lot of variety that Protoss can go for against Terran either. Yeah you can choose between colossi and templar, or die to marines, but that's basically it. (no matter if you go double upgrades, charge, blink, dt's, void rays etc... first. If you want a macro game as protoss vs Terran you have to go gateway into splash)
i'm experimenting TvP mech (tankthorhellionghost + turrets) style on ladder (100ish GM terran if you want to know) and againts certain styles of toss players on certain map it would work (like shakuras, antiga, xelnaga etc.) if you make the only good decision in every situations with constant harassment. Do i have to push with my forces? Do i have to camp now and take another base? Do i have to push is natural or his 3rd? If you fail 1 (or max 2) times you are dead, there is no comeback. Ive got mixed success with this, your ground army can be invincible at a point, but the carriers are good againts mech, they are a very viable units (not againts MMM) againts mech. But if you do it properly it can be very strong, and if you can transition from bio style (for pressuring, and make the toss believe that it will be standard bio play) in the early game to mech, without scouted (or perfectly scouted) it can be very strong. But obviously Koreans know best, when it comes to working.
On October 01 2011 22:00 Pulimuli wrote: TvP was such an amazing MU in BW, i hate it in sc2 because most people go Bio and it is SO boring to watch marine+marauder+medivac+ghost every single time.
Because in every other unit comp, it's a free win for the Protoss? Do you even try them out in the unit tester?
Any sky terran build is auto lose against mass blink stalker + few HTs for feedback. Marine/tank? Proven fail in most tournaments.
I agree with most of what you said. I don't agree with that there is to little micro in TvP, since with drops you can have 3 battles going on at once, and you can pick apart your opponent if your multitasking is good enough.
That being said, it does frustrate me how boring TvP in SC2 is compared to TvP in BW(heck i rolled terran big part due to TvP in BW). I'm guessing Blizzard wanted to please BW tosses who were tired of getting slaughtered by tanks, so they gave all their units abilities to counter tanks and a design(warpin) which kind of makes tanks strong point, the position, diminished.
I feel the issue isn't really that there's so little micro in TvP, it's rather that in a macro game, the only really viable unit combo is MMM+V+G. Sure you *can* go another combo, but for the most part it's either gimmicky(as in hope the opponent doesn't know how to react) or just simply handicapping yourself.
Also I feel in general that toss has aoe availeble to them way to late, compared to how strong the rine can be.
I really wish blizz would make some changes to TvP, either by patching WoL or adding/modifying units in HotS.
As PredY said, TvP doesnt feel like a terran matchup at all and its quite depressing when TvZ and TvT are so much fun. TvP makes you NOT want to play terran, where in BW it actually made me switch to terran because the matchup was so epic
On October 02 2011 01:10 Pulimuli wrote: I really wish blizz would make some changes to TvP, either by patching WoL or adding/modifying units in HotS.
As PredY said, TvP doesnt feel like a terran matchup at all and its quite depressing when TvZ and TvT are so much fun. TvP makes you NOT want to play terran, where in BW it actually made me switch to terran because the matchup was so epic
Its not so much that Mech is bad. Its that in a 200 vs 200 scenario the Protoss army decimates Mech. Not only does it beat it in fire power, but in mobility, and reinforcement. I played a game where Toss went Blink Collosi and would pick off an expansion in like 2 seconds and then be right at my push with PF and Turrets. Not to mention that Hellion harass is good, but not always viable once Protoss puts a few cannons and walls off. Not to mention that the WG mechanic makes harass with hellions very weak in that he can instantly warp in 6 stalkers anywhere he needs them.
Maybe if Tanks were 2 food and do extra dmg to the single unit that they target(like in campaign) would make it more viable. But as of now a 200 Protoss army is the ultimate army in power mobility and reinforcement. Thats why mech isn't viable.
protoss just have to start to use templars more and rape bioballs, simple.
Havent played against many protoss that does this in a long time. If you see templars it's just because they want to get archons wich is totaly fail.
They need to remake the protoss units i think to make them more than attack move units wich is basicly what protoss ball is. zealots, ato attack unit, archon auto attack unit list goes on.
Only unit that truely req's some micro is stalker and templar, now compare this to something like zerg and terran. as zerg you have to be really fast with all your units to time attack and with terran a high amount of controll is required on all, thor being one of the few units that doesnt req you to do anything more than attack move it.
I dont understand alot of what your complaining about.
Yea, you can't mass tanks in TvP. You can have 1 or 2 in the very back with a thor here and there though to supplement your bio force. The game design of terran vs protoss was that bio would be the 'standard' to whatever other units you through in the mix.
It really seems like your complaining that you can't use Tanks vs protoss because they got nerfed in beta. Did you play beta? Fucking tanks were ridiculous.
The only reason Koreans are going Marauder/Viking/Ghost is because it rapes Protoss. There are other styles, buy why use them when you have an 'I WIN' button. The fact that you actually complained about Colosus and HT in the same post makes me ignore the fact your text is all blue. Terran can counter Colosus and HT better than any other race (i know ht dont get used in in pvp, but other than that its harder for protoss to counter colosus than it is for terran, and is harder for zerg to counter colosus/ht then terran).
Terran is the Anti-Protoss race. The fact you complain about it when there are huge amount of strats that abuse game mechanics vs protoss is laughable. The only reason people aren't use more tanks, or doing sky terran (which does work) is because they know they can win easier with reactored vikings and bio play.
On October 02 2011 02:24 ohampatu wrote: I dont understand alot of what your complaining about.
Yea, you can't mass tanks in TvP. You can have 1 or 2 in the very back with a thor here and there though to supplement your bio force. The game design of terran vs protoss was that bio would be the 'standard' to whatever other units you through in the mix.
It really seems like your complaining that you can't use Tanks vs protoss because they got nerfed in beta. Did you play beta? Fucking tanks were ridiculous.
The only reason Koreans are going Marauder/Viking/Ghost is because it rapes Protoss. There are other styles, buy why use them when you have an 'I WIN' button. The fact that you actually complained about Colosus and HT in the same post makes me ignore the fact your text is all blue. Terran can counter Colosus and HT better than any other race (i know ht dont get used in in pvp, but other than that its harder for protoss to counter colosus than it is for terran, and is harder for zerg to counter colosus/ht then terran).
Terran is the Anti-Protoss race. The fact you complain about it when there are huge amount of strats that abuse game mechanics vs protoss is laughable. The only reason people aren't use more tanks, or doing sky terran (which does work) is because they know they can win easier with reactored vikings and bio play.
So your argument is that we shouldn't complain because we have an EZ button?
The real reason why we don;t mech is because its crap against Toss. Yeah Marauders are good. But what if thats the reason we don't want to make them, because its to easy?
And If you have kept up with everything you would know that people like MVP, Jinro, and other Terrans have tried Mech, but realized its impossible against equal Protosses.
I don't know why so many people are being such idiots about the subject. What were trying to do is promote a better game. How are we going to do that? By having our voices heard. If not Bliz won't do !@#$. If you want to lose to marauders and a lucky stim/doom drop for the rest of your life thats your problem.
I think GoOdy would disagree that mech is inviable vs. Protoss. Sure, he's certainly not best player in the world level, but given his poor mechanics and macro, certainly there must be something to his playstyle since he can keep up with a lot of very good protoss players.
Also, I feel like Sky Terran vs. protoss is underplayed, get some ghosts in there to nullify high templar.
But yeah, I don't like playing against terran using marine/marauders, I'd much rather fight a terran going mech, and not because I think it's easier, but because I think it's more interesting and requires more thought and decision making.
I love both BW and SC2, but watching/playing out a Bioball fight vs Protoss Deathball is just not as great as watching a massive Protoss army trying to flank a huge terran Mech trenchline with mines and stasis field all going off. Mech is just so pointless in SC2 right now unless its TvT, I am just tired of seeing and using Bio myself all the time as Terran. Goody is awesome for what he does but like Predy says someone has to win often and win a big tournament with a mech style TvP first for it to be truly legitimate, but that isnt going to happen because Bioball ghost is just so good due to it's mobility and cost efficiency with medivacs.
A few months ago I remember watching a TvP GSTL match between some Terran whose name I forgot vs MC, who did a really awesome mech tank ghost push. He became exposed on his flanks and went from being massively ahead to losing due to how exposed his tank line was due to a lack of buffer units and something like spidermines protecting his flank.
I really hope spider mines come back in HoTs or something similar to it so that we don't have to play bio almost all of the time. Protoss also needs some changes so that carriers are actually viable in 1v1 to spice up TvP more.
On October 02 2011 02:24 ohampatu wrote: I dont understand alot of what your complaining about.
Yea, you can't mass tanks in TvP. You can have 1 or 2 in the very back with a thor here and there though to supplement your bio force. The game design of terran vs protoss was that bio would be the 'standard' to whatever other units you through in the mix.
It really seems like your complaining that you can't use Tanks vs protoss because they got nerfed in beta. Did you play beta? Fucking tanks were ridiculous.
The only reason Koreans are going Marauder/Viking/Ghost is because it rapes Protoss. There are other styles, buy why use them when you have an 'I WIN' button. The fact that you actually complained about Colosus and HT in the same post makes me ignore the fact your text is all blue. Terran can counter Colosus and HT better than any other race (i know ht dont get used in in pvp, but other than that its harder for protoss to counter colosus than it is for terran, and is harder for zerg to counter colosus/ht then terran).
Terran is the Anti-Protoss race. The fact you complain about it when there are huge amount of strats that abuse game mechanics vs protoss is laughable. The only reason people aren't use more tanks, or doing sky terran (which does work) is because they know they can win easier with reactored vikings and bio play.
So your argument is that we shouldn't complain because we have an EZ button?
The real reason why we don;t mech is because its crap against Toss. Yeah Marauders are good. But what if thats the reason we don't want to make them, because its to easy?
And If you have kept up with everything you would know that people like MVP, Jinro, and other Terrans have tried Mech, but realized its impossible against equal Protosses.
I don't know why so many people are being such idiots about the subject. What were trying to do is promote a better game. How are we going to do that? By having our voices heard. If not Bliz won't do !@#$. If you want to lose to marauders and a lucky stim/doom drop for the rest of your life thats your problem.
No, the problem is that the game isn't how you want it to be, so more pointless threads get made that aren't relevant to the strategy forum in all. Just because theirs a big 'D' for discussion, doesn't mean its not a balance/racial whine that should be taken to the balance forum. At no part is strategy being talked about.
My argument is you are seriously complaining about shit that is stupid. You made a complaint about Colosus. Terran have the easiest Anti-Colosus tools in the game. You dont care that zerg has an infinetly harder time countering it. You dont care that the only counter for protoss is to match the opponent Colosus count. So yes. I will call you out when you complain about a unit that you can counter effectively very easy. If your trying to argue that you want more ways to counter colosus. Tough luck, none of us other races have multiple options to counter certain t3 units.
Lets take a look at another thing you complained about. HT. Its not used in PvP because of the shield mechanic so we'll ignore that. Terran can counter HT more effectively than Zerg can. Not only can they counter it more effectively they have a unit that is solely built on countering it.
Again. You bring up mech. All i see is you whining that you can't go strictly mech. Who Cares? If you can't, so what? If blizzard doesn't want full mech to be a standard vs protoss, then it wont be.
Now we come back to you not talking about strategy at all. I see games all the time where terran is doing more than just 'bio'. Just because you cant spam tanks, doesn't mean 1 tank defensively, or some air play here and their, isn't viable. It is. You aren't the best player in the world. You can outplay your opponent with BO's that aren't just bio.
And i disagree with you. When a Korean is fighting for the GSL Championship, he is going to do the easiest possible thing to beat his opponenet.. So even if he could outplay his opponent with some air play he wont do it because its dangerous and if countered could mean a loss. Flue flame drops are still very much effective. Tank contains into 3 base bio/ghost play is viable as well. There are many vialbe strat's that use BIO + other units. Again, they use the current metagame because they know that TvP is 64 percent terran favored. I dont care what you say these people do. All of these people aren't in this forum. This is a strategy forum, a Discussion about 'wahh wahh i can't go strictly mech' is pointless.
I see so many Terrans complaining that its a 'coinflip'. Its not a 'coinflip'. If you choose to do a 2 base ghost/bio timing and i countered it with Colosus. You just got a BO loss. If i was going for charge play, i would have the BO loss. As much as you hate it, this game has BO losses, especially early game Some things will work at certain times, and some things wont.
Its just like the warp gate complaints sprinkled here and there. Well, us 'protoss' like the warp gate mechanic. Late game its not near as easy as all you make it out to be. And its arguably more devastating for a protoss to miss a warp gate cycle then it is for terran/zerg to miss a unit cycle. But thats a different discussion i dont want to have with a terran who complains about colosus and ht. Like its easy for use to use those 2 units and beat you in a late game scenario. Talk strategy or take whining to balance discussion.
On October 02 2011 02:24 ohampatu wrote: I dont understand alot of what your complaining about.
Yea, you can't mass tanks in TvP. You can have 1 or 2 in the very back with a thor here and there though to supplement your bio force. The game design of terran vs protoss was that bio would be the 'standard' to whatever other units you through in the mix.
It really seems like your complaining that you can't use Tanks vs protoss because they got nerfed in beta. Did you play beta? Fucking tanks were ridiculous.
The only reason Koreans are going Marauder/Viking/Ghost is because it rapes Protoss. There are other styles, buy why use them when you have an 'I WIN' button. The fact that you actually complained about Colosus and HT in the same post makes me ignore the fact your text is all blue. Terran can counter Colosus and HT better than any other race (i know ht dont get used in in pvp, but other than that its harder for protoss to counter colosus than it is for terran, and is harder for zerg to counter colosus/ht then terran).
Terran is the Anti-Protoss race. The fact you complain about it when there are huge amount of strats that abuse game mechanics vs protoss is laughable. The only reason people aren't use more tanks, or doing sky terran (which does work) is because they know they can win easier with reactored vikings and bio play.
So your argument is that we shouldn't complain because we have an EZ button?
The real reason why we don;t mech is because its crap against Toss. Yeah Marauders are good. But what if thats the reason we don't want to make them, because its to easy?
And If you have kept up with everything you would know that people like MVP, Jinro, and other Terrans have tried Mech, but realized its impossible against equal Protosses.
I don't know why so many people are being such idiots about the subject. What were trying to do is promote a better game. How are we going to do that? By having our voices heard. If not Bliz won't do !@#$. If you want to lose to marauders and a lucky stim/doom drop for the rest of your life thats your problem.
No, the problem is that the game isn't how you want it to be, so more pointless threads get made that aren't relevant to the strategy forum in all. Just because theirs a big 'D' for discussion, doesn't mean its not a balance/racial whine that should be taken to the balance forum. At no part is strategy being talked about.
My argument is you are seriously complaining about shit that is stupid. You made a complaint about Colosus. Terran have the easiest Anti-Colosus tools in the game. You dont care that zerg has an infinetly harder time countering it. You dont care that the only counter for protoss is to match the opponent Colosus count. So yes. I will call you out when you complain about a unit that you can counter effectively very easy. If your trying to argue that you want more ways to counter colosus. Tough luck, none of us other races have multiple options to counter certain t3 units.
Lets take a look at another thing you complained about. HT. Its not used in PvP because of the shield mechanic so we'll ignore that. Terran can counter HT more effectively than Zerg can. Not only can they counter it more effectively they have a unit that is solely built on countering it.
Again. You bring up mech. All i see is you whining that you can't go strictly mech. Who Cares? If you can't, so what? If blizzard doesn't want full mech to be a standard vs protoss, then it wont be.
Now we come back to you not talking about strategy at all. I see games all the time where terran is doing more than just 'bio'. Just because you cant spam tanks, doesn't mean 1 tank defensively, or some air play here and their, isn't viable. It is. You aren't the best player in the world. You can outplay your opponent with BO's that aren't just bio.
And i disagree with you. When a Korean is fighting for the GSL Championship, he is going to do the easiest possible thing to beat his opponenet.. So even if he could outplay his opponent with some air play he wont do it because its dangerous and if countered could mean a loss. Flue flame drops are still very much effective. Tank contains into 3 base bio/ghost play is viable as well. There are many vialbe strat's that use BIO + other units. Again, they use the current metagame because they know that TvP is 64 percent terran favored. I dont care what you say these people do. All of these people aren't in this forum. This is a strategy forum, a Discussion about 'wahh wahh i can't go strictly mech' is pointless.
I see so many Terrans complaining that its a 'coinflip'. Its not a 'coinflip'. If you choose to do a 2 base ghost/bio timing and i countered it with Colosus. You just got a BO loss. If i was going for charge play, i would have the BO loss. As much as you hate it, this game has BO losses, especially early game Some things will work at certain times, and some things wont.
Its just like the warp gate complaints sprinkled here and there. Well, us 'protoss' like the warp gate mechanic. Late game its not near as easy as all you make it out to be. And its arguably more devastating for a protoss to miss a warp gate cycle then it is for terran/zerg to miss a unit cycle. But thats a different discussion i dont want to have with a terran who complains about colosus and ht. Like its easy for use to use those 2 units and beat you in a late game scenario. Talk strategy or take whining to balance discussion.
you sir completely missed what i was talking about. you're right there's no strategy, maybe because it was moved to strategy forum from sc2 general forum where i originaly made the thread. also, i think you need to upgrade your reading skills because i don't talk about balance at all.
EDIT: i dont care about winrate numbers. i dont care about balance. i talk about bio being the only option in the long run against protoss. it's the current state of the game. and no i dont want to outplay lesser opponents with strats i cant use vs pros
I don't see how this is so different from in BW where mech is the only option in TvP (unless you are Boxer). Not every strategy has to be viable; in fact the game would be stupid if that were the case.
I can't go pure Robotics in any match-up. Immortals should be able to shoot air, to make Robotics play viable. Because I should be able to use only 1/3rd of my tech options and win.
in this thread i'd like to share my views on the terran matchups, especially Terran vs Protoss. Everything i will be talking about is just my oppinion and i'm open to discussion.
(Excuse me if the english is not perfect)
1 Introduction, StarCraft 2 philosophy?
First off, i'd like to mention that i'm not gonna talk about balance. The purpose of this thread is to discuss the state of Terran, especially TvP matchup game-design and gameplay wise.
I believe blizzards intended to make sc2 a fast paced game, which means they wanted to make low tier units useful, Marine+Marauder being the prime example of that. It means that there's rarely a passage in the game where nothing is happening (on the pro level). But does this hurt the game? Are low tier units too strong?
Also it seems blizzard wants to make as many units viable as possible in all matchups so they can have variety in the gameplay. In BW, that was not the case, as marines were almost useless in both TvT and TvP besides couple timing attacks (f.e. Deep6). I believe sc2 TvP has the similar issue, but i'll get to that later.
2 Terran in SC2
This thread is a result of my frustration with TvP. I used to play BroodWar where Terran was often the one who would defend and expand with a lot of harassment (TvP, TvT), or would go for timing attacks to gain the upper hand (TvZ). Terran was strong in both midgame and lategame thanks to wide range of units. I believe the same cannot be said about terran in SC2. In my oppinion, terran in sc2 is the strongest in early and midgame due to strong low tier units (marines+marauders) and also thanks to MULEs, which allow you to run low on SCVs and focus on making more units. In result, terran allins are very powerful.
3 Terran matchups and variety
3.1 TvT and TvZ
Current TvT and TvZ looks good to me. In both matchups there's a wide range of strategies that are viable. Bio+mech and Pure mech being the most popular. Both macro games and 2base timing attacks can be seen. In TvT there's a lot of tank positioning, controling ground and eventually switching to powerful air units (+ nukes). In TvZ, using marines early on to pressure zerg, then switching to either mech or marine tank compositions, with ghosts (and quite possibly ravens) as the ultimate tech vs T3 zerg units. Again, a lot of tanks positioning go gain ground and using the map to your advantage as much as possible. TvZ is also very micro intensive, as not paying an attention for a second can cause all your marines to blow up to couple of banelings.
From spectator point of view, both TvT and TvZ are quite exciting i think, especially TvZ, because TvT can be a bit dull sometimes (mech vs mech).
I'd consider TvZ the closest to BW TvZ as it's very micro intensive, requires a lot of multitasking and there are strong timing attacks and precise scouting is required. Good control (micro marines and target firing with tanks) can win you games which is for me one of the most important factors in the game. TvT, especially mech vs mech is very close to BW TvT as well.
PS. i make these comparisons because i used to play BW for years and because it was such a great game and i knew i can always improve my timing, my transitioning and my control (micro) it drove me on to practice more and more.
3.2 TvP
Now to the main issue i have with terran in SC2. If we consider korean pros (GSL), unless going for 1-1-1, we see MMM viking ghost for 95% games (a very nice exception being Byun vs OZ from Code A, VOD is free and can be found here). Even then though, it's only a 2base timing attack and cannot be considered as standart TvP build.
I talked about TvZ and TvT. Do you know what those matchups have in common? Tanks. Tanks made BW so awesome. Tanks make TvZ and TvT in SC2 very fun to play/watch. You can control ground, abuse the terrain, siege. They take a lot of skill to play with but the reward is high, but not in TvP. It's quite sad but almost every protoss unit counters them. Do you remember when tanks did 60 damage? Good times. They were actually quite useful back then. Right now, i wanna cry every time i have 20 of them slaughtered in 10 seconds.
I must admit, on some maps, tanks are quite viable. For example, on Shakuras, it's possible to play marine tank with support (ghost/banshee) - an example is a game from Shoutcraft 3 DDE vs Socke (VOD). Unfortunately, on most maps it's suicidide to go anything but bio (f.e. Taldarim). It works well on Shakuras because there's not much room to blink harass and 3base is quite safe, then split map situation favors terran.
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Another issue i have with TvP is there's minimum micro in fights, all you do is make concave before the fight them stim and run in. Cast some emps. Then you watch if you have enough or not. Theres no micro against banelings or infestors like in TvZ. Micro will never save your ass like in TvZ. Good position will never save your ass like in TvT, because you have no tanks, and warpgates are pretty good eh! Nothings angers me more than cutting off protoss expo from his main army and have 20 zealots warped in to my back, same with drops.
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
4 Conclusion
Solution? I don't thing there's any at the moment. Wait for HoTS for a new unit that will complement tanks just like vultures with mines? I don't hold my hopes high. Besides map specific strategies i don't see any solution at the moment, unless some things are adjusted (tanks, warpgate mechanic). Or just korean terrans don't feel like developing any biomech/mech strategies that wouldn't be timing pushes? Btw, i'm aware of people like Goody playing mech in TvP, and i don't know his winrate not any other terran's. But unless we see a terran winnig GSL/MLG/DH with mech in TvP i'd like to focus on koreans as they are clearly the top players currently.
The thing with TvP is that it doesn't feel terran-ish at all, if i wanted to make a lot of T1 units i'd play zerg! I really hate getting slaughtered by high tech protoss lategame army with HTs and Collosus, while i battle them with "awesome" marauders. As i said, TvP is really frustrating for me, making me not wanting to play the game at all, therefore there might be some over-the-top comparisons, hope you understand what i meant and give some feedback.
You dont mention balance at all. But a racial whine falls into the same category as a balance whine. My reading skills work as well as your's it seems. Also, discusions become very frivoulous when all you can do is bash the poster defending what you stated.
The reason you didn't get banned instead of somebody else, is because your writing skills are better than most. A mod would have banned me if i wrote what you did in any less grammitcally correct way. Because you have blue posts and are 'respected' or whatever means your whining is valid?
But i'll skip over your post being a 'hidden' whine about the protoss race or game design. Lets look at this thread as a whole. If your posts dont follow under that catgory, half the posts after do.
I'll break it down a bit more for you. 1. I have a 200/200 army. Im fighting a terran. That army is going to consist of prolly 4ish colosus with 3ish+ templar. The rest of my army is Gateway Units. Technically Templar is gateway anyway. So To be honest, apart from the 25+ supply of Colosus I have, im using only gateway units. By your argument that is wrong, because if i wanted i should be able to do something besides mass gateway units right?
2. Zerg has a 200/200 army. They are fighting a protoss. That army is going to consist of mostly lings, or roaches. They will add in a few casters (infestors) and try and make it to brood lords. By your argument, zerg should be able to do something other than just mass roach and/or ling right?
3. Terran has a 200/200 army. They are fighting protoss. That army is is going to consist of mostly marines/marauders. They will add in a few casters (sometimes early for a timing push, most defintely by late game to neutralize my casters) and vikings.
Can you physically tell me what the problem is? I can. The problem is you want to make only mech, and thats not how the game is balanced. This isn't Broodwar TvP. If you want Broodwar TvP go play Broodwar. In Starcraft 2, all of the races have the same canundrum. We all have to have mostly 't1ish' units. Why would terran be allowed to have multiple completely different tech paths available that work in all situations, and the other races not? I dont see protoss complaining that zealots/stalkers are the majority of their army. I dont see zergs complaing that lings and/or roaches are the majority of their army. You want to know what i do see? I see terrans complaining that marines/marauders are the majority of their army.
Its RIDICULOUS.
If you want i can copy/paste what you say specifically: "The thing with TvP is that it doesn't feel terran-ish at all, if i wanted to make a lot of T1 units i'd play zerg! I really hate getting slaughtered by high tech protoss lategame army with HTs and Collosus, while i battle them with "awesome" marauders. As i said, TvP is really frustrating for me, making me not wanting to play the game at all, therefore there might be some over-the-top comparisons, hope you understand what i meant and give some feedback."
So. Umm. Read what i posted above. We all have to make mostly T1 units. So maybe you should go back to Broodwar or something. The fact that you even state 'zerg is fine with making only t1 untis' and assume that should be correct, and then go on to assume that you shouldn't have to do that is fucking stupid dude.
We all have to do that. You are too caught up in your good old broodwar days. That you fail to see your complaining about something that is the STAPLE for all units. I'll go on re-iterate the first post after yours:
n0ise What do you mean, T1 units vs "hightech bio ball"
The same mineral resources you invest in marine marauder he invests in zealot/stalker, the gas you invest in ghosts he invests in templars, the gas you invest in starport units he invests in collossi.
This "omg mass t1 vs my t3" is something coined by laddertosses who cheese 9/10 games and start panicking once the game goes past 12 minutes. It's not actually true - there's clear parallels between the tech/gas investment between the races at all stages in the game.
I honestly would take this TvP bio playstyle anyday over making tanks in TvZ and TvT - but I suppose that's personal pref. - you coming from a BW background, as you say, probably like the positional aspect of it more.
On October 02 2011 04:34 Alzadar wrote: I don't see how this is so different from in BW where mech is the only option in TvP (unless you are Boxer). Not every strategy has to be viable; in fact the game would be stupid if that were the case.
I can't go pure Robotics in any match-up. Immortals should be able to shoot air, to make Robotics play viable. Because I should be able to use only 1/3rd of my tech options and win.
exactly my thoughts! (and a post of mine)
people always tend to think that strategy X has to be viable because it was viable in Broodwar, or because it is viable in another MU... Guess what, Blizzard tries to make Bio and Biomech and Mech useable, but at some point they have to consider that terran is one race, and that buffing mech will buff biomech as well, which means that if biomech now is balanced, it might become too strong, thus resulting in nerfing bio to nerf biomech... which will ultimatly make bio less playable and terran early game worse, which will just change the entire balancing... Guess what happens if zerglings and zealots counter marines? Bye bye any pressure Terran can go for early. Hello 16hatch/18hatch/20hatch/22hatch.../100pool!
I guess there might be options to change things in ways, so that more compositions will be viable in each MU, and some of those options, might even not rely on coinflips... But without completly redesigning parts of the game, this will stay an utopia.
On October 02 2011 04:34 Alzadar wrote: I don't see how this is so different from in BW where mech is the only option in TvP (unless you are Boxer). Not every strategy has to be viable; in fact the game would be stupid if that were the case.
I can't go pure Robotics in any match-up. Immortals should be able to shoot air, to make Robotics play viable. Because I should be able to use only 1/3rd of my tech options and win.
Yes, that's true, but mech required was more entertaining to play and watch because it was an epic fight: zealot bombing and carpet storms to break a huge siege line, goon trying to flank, vultures protecting flank with mine, mine dragging, ecc... Now is all about (not saying that is easy) 2 balls emping , storming and stutterstepping mainly. There isn't the feeling of an "extended", prolonged battle/warfare, with tank lines covering ground and vulture protecting flanks. It's 2 balls melting in 4-5 seconds. And no, that's not that fun to watch imo.
On October 02 2011 04:34 Alzadar wrote: I don't see how this is so different from in BW where mech is the only option in TvP (unless you are Boxer). Not every strategy has to be viable; in fact the game would be stupid if that were the case.
I can't go pure Robotics in any match-up. Immortals should be able to shoot air, to make Robotics play viable. Because I should be able to use only 1/3rd of my tech options and win.
Yes, that's true, but mech required was more entertaining to play and watch because it was an epic fight: zealot bombing and carpet storms to break a huge siege line, goon trying to flank, vultures protecting flank with mine, mine dragging, ecc... Now is all about (not saying that is easy) 2 balls emping , storming and stutterstepping mainly. There isn't the feeling of an "extended", prolonged battle/warfare, with tank lines covering ground and vulture protecting flanks. It's 2 balls melting in 4-5 seconds. And no, that's not that fun to watch imo.
Whoops. More Broodwar fanbois. Read my last 2 posts. Counter them. If you want a discussion of this caliber (i still can't believe mods are letting this thread go) then have a proper discussion please.
On October 02 2011 04:34 Alzadar wrote: I don't see how this is so different from in BW where mech is the only option in TvP (unless you are Boxer). Not every strategy has to be viable; in fact the game would be stupid if that were the case.
I can't go pure Robotics in any match-up. Immortals should be able to shoot air, to make Robotics play viable. Because I should be able to use only 1/3rd of my tech options and win.
The difference between Terran going pure Mech and Protoss going pure Robo is that:
1.) In BW, Terran could go pure Mech, so there is precedence. Protoss couldn't go pure Robo in BW so it stands to reason that they also wouldn't in SC2.
2.) Factory tech is a much more complete tech path. Meaning, there are mobile/fast units (Hellions), AoE/Positional units (Siege tanks) and Anti-Air/tanky unit (Thor). Whereas Robo only has a tanky unit (Immortal) and an AoE unit (Colossus) and lacks Anti Air. Looking at this, one would logically assume that you could choose to go either Barracks or Factory tech and have a complete, stand-alone unit composition. Also, the way upgrading works with Terran lends itself to much more one-sided tech paths.
3.) The way Terran teching works makes reaching tier 3 much easier. As a result, the higher tiered units aren't nearly as threatening. For example, the response necessary a few Thors is drastically less significant than the response necessary for a few Colossi.
It seems clear from design that Robo is meant to be a support tech path (Whether or not this should be different is a different argument entirely). Factory tech, however, appears to be a complete tech path, and it can be in TvZ and TvT, but it doesn't work well in TvP. It doesn't even work well as a support tech path in TvP as Thors/Tanks are just too immobile, too expensive, and don't do anything that Marines and Marauders don't already do better.
This seems to be the issue the OP is raising. Meching works in TvT and TvZ, so why can't/shouldn't/doesn't it work at a high level in TvP?
This debate reminds me of Paladins in WoW during Vanilla and BC, where Paladins wanted to do something besides Heal, seeing as they had tanking and DPS trees, and every just kept saying, "but you're so good at healing, so just heal".
On October 02 2011 04:34 Alzadar wrote: I don't see how this is so different from in BW where mech is the only option in TvP (unless you are Boxer). Not every strategy has to be viable; in fact the game would be stupid if that were the case.
I can't go pure Robotics in any match-up. Immortals should be able to shoot air, to make Robotics play viable. Because I should be able to use only 1/3rd of my tech options and win.
Yes, that's true, but mech required was more entertaining to play and watch because it was an epic fight: zealot bombing and carpet storms to break a huge siege line, goon trying to flank, vultures protecting flank with mine, mine dragging, ecc... Now is all about (not saying that is easy) 2 balls emping , storming and stutterstepping mainly. There isn't the feeling of an "extended", prolonged battle/warfare, with tank lines covering ground and vulture protecting flanks. It's 2 balls melting in 4-5 seconds. And no, that's not that fun to watch imo.
because the game is too young... Stop expecting 1year old SC2 to be as figuered out as 10year old SC:BW. Once PvT MMM vs Deathball play is so figuered out, that the one that attacks ultimatly has to lose, people will invent new metagame styles and maybe mech-units will play a role in it. Right now we have new styles/builds every GSL-month... GSTL spoiler + Show Spoiler +
If you saw TvP in the last 1-2months, Protoss usually was the underdog. CreatorPrime's double forge+blink build broke TvP so hard, that Genius straight up stole it. Those 2players just wrecked terrans with staying on gateway units longer, getting ahead in upgrades, and then adding colossi (like adding insult to injury) We can't know, but in those games, I didn't see any Terran have any clue what to do about that style... Maybe the answer will be MarineKings Marine/Tank TvP build he used in his GSTL match, maybe it will be just more solid Macro play by MVP...
OP is right, Terran feels like the most limited race atm, especially in TvP. They need more options, 60 damage tanks and vultures also, because they lack good harassment units! Protoss on the other hand need to be able to build several motherships (like the arbiters ^_^). With this, the matchup should get fixed.
Edit: 111 doesn't contain marauders, but contain siege tanks. There you go: buff 111.
Firstly: People should stop comparing SC2 to SC:BW!! They're two entirely different games, and that is how Blizzard intended it to be.
Secondly: Have you ever thought about the fact that the BW games we see now, are of a game that has been played for over ten years? Starcraft 2 has been out for roughly a year now, so the Matchups and strategies, and even the game itself (two expansions coming up?) aren't even close to completely developed yet.
On October 02 2011 04:34 Alzadar wrote: I don't see how this is so different from in BW where mech is the only option in TvP (unless you are Boxer). Not every strategy has to be viable; in fact the game would be stupid if that were the case.
I can't go pure Robotics in any match-up. Immortals should be able to shoot air, to make Robotics play viable. Because I should be able to use only 1/3rd of my tech options and win.
Yes, that's true, but mech required was more entertaining to play and watch because it was an epic fight: zealot bombing and carpet storms to break a huge siege line, goon trying to flank, vultures protecting flank with mine, mine dragging, ecc... Now is all about (not saying that is easy) 2 balls emping , storming and stutterstepping mainly. There isn't the feeling of an "extended", prolonged battle/warfare, with tank lines covering ground and vulture protecting flanks. It's 2 balls melting in 4-5 seconds. And no, that's not that fun to watch imo.
Whoops. More Broodwar fanbois. Read my last 2 posts. Counter them. If you want a discussion of this caliber (i still can't believe mods are letting this thread go) then have a proper discussion please.
we're not complaining that mecch isn't viable and T has too few strategy,we're complaining that theoretically mech fights would allow for more interesting and strategic fights than bio balls clashing. We're not saying tha toss>terran.
Well. Im not going to have a discussion based off of:
Broodwar we could do it, so theres precedence. This is a new game. Precedence doesn't matter. Universal Balance and Game Design according to Blizzard is what matters.
If pure robo isn't viable, pure mech shouldn't be either imo. Even in TvT and TvZ its Bio-Mech. Also, just because the unit comps are similar, doesn't make games similar or opening BO's similar. If it was all that similar, none of us would play the game.
Edit. Regardless whether i think it should be viable or you think it should be. It all depends on blizzard, and the previous 'half page' post i made still hasn't been addressed.
On October 02 2011 05:03 DoctorClock wrote: 2.) Factory tech is a much more complete tech path. Meaning, there are mobile/fast units (Hellions), AoE/Positional units (Siege tanks) and Anti-Air/tanky unit (Thor). Whereas Robo only has a tanky unit (Immortal) and an AoE unit (Colossus) and lacks Anti Air. Looking at this, one would logically assume that you could choose to go either Barracks or Factory tech and have a complete, stand-alone unit composition. Also, the way upgrading works with Terran lends itself to much more one-sided tech paths.
Yes and no... Factory tech was clearly designed to be kind of complete. But only kind of, because due to reactor/techlab addons in SC2, it is way easier to go hybrid styles (which is also clearly a part of the design) and also because Factory lacks anti air. Agreed that Thors do fine vs Mutalisks and banshees. But that's only because blizzard wanted them to do well vs light air. Factory antiair just sucks against stronger anti air, since they moved the viking from the factory to the starport (another sign, that Mech isn't supposed to work on it's on, but against air only in a conjunction with starport units or with marines) Also I want to point out, that Zerg Upgrades work similar as Terran upgrades (yes we have one less armor upgrade), still Zerg is supposed to counter Mech with Roaches... with every other unit that is being used in this matchup being melee... (and with Zerg not having any good lategame range composition, since they removed the lurker and nerfed the roach to 1supply)
Edit: I'll make this nicer so that it fits better with the OP, getting warned by my favorite caster is enough for me. I originally responded while very tired and sick, and I didn't get much of a chance to explain my thoughts and it turned into a flame, my apologies.
Personally I think tanks are very powerful in TvP, just not against tech that will always be targeted at countering tanks. Against robo and stargate builds they tend to fail, but tanks do own gateway units, which I feel is why protoss tech past that asap. Tanks are a very powerful unit, which I feel is why they are so readily countered. Doing anything except that against a terran playing defensively is suicide. In essence the problem with tanks is that they are such a pivotal unit that the TvP matchup is based around countering them.
*Chargelots counter tanks when they have no support and are microed against the wrong units, especially when they target chargelots next to your bio units. With proper micro though you can still use tanks against gateway unit armies.
*Immortals hard counter tanks so I think its a little ridiculous to to expect to still be able to make tanks and win, why are you still massing tanks when I have immortals (in the OP you complain about losing 20 instantly)? Luckily for terran it is conveniently pre-countered by your first unit, marines, which is part of what you are complaining about and i agree, why do terran have to make tier 1 units to counter tier 2 units that are used to counter tanks, but what are you complaining about, this is to your benefit, even if it is boring. Ghosts are less boring imo and counter immortals better depending on how you use them.
*Void rays counter tanks, but are in an expensive tech tree with expensive units and only sometimes counters tanks when you leave them. Luckily for terran, marines counter VRs too.
*Blink stalks sometimes counter tanks, but not really. They are fragile, do fairly minimal damage for the costs, even against armor, and are owned by terran's second unit, marauders, as well as tanks.
I guess this highlights both of your problems, terran is forced to use mostly tier 1 units to counter units that protoss makes specifically to counter tanks, unfortunately, I have no idea as to a solution for this matchup. However i also don't consider the match up "broken" as much as i consider it stagnant and repetitive. I don't think this needs to be fixed immediately, but perhaps in the future as strategy evolves they may find a solution for this.
On October 02 2011 05:10 ohampatu wrote: Well. Im not going to have a discussion based off of:
Broodwar we could do it, so theres precedence. This is a new game. Precedence doesn't matter. Universal Balance and Game Design according to Blizzard is what matters.
If pure robo isn't viable, pure mech shouldn't be either imo. Even in TvT and TvZ its Bio-Mech. Also, just because the unit comps are similar, doesn't make games similar or opening BO's similar. If it was all that similar, none of us would play the game.
Edit. Regardless whether i think it should be viable or you think it should be. It all depends on blizzard, and the previous 'half page' post i made still hasn't been addressed.
SC2 is a sequel. It stands to reason that there would be significant carry-over and the way the race felt/plays would be similar so how it played in the previous game. This is true in TvZ and TvT for the most part, so why does TvP in SC2 feel so overwhelmingly un-Terran as compared to the previous game?
I understand it is a new game, but can you imagine the outrage if in the new Street Fighter game Ryu's Haduken suddenly became not a staple ability? Or Dhalsim's reach suddenly became less significant because certain characters had teleport?
On October 01 2011 06:16 Thorzain wrote: I feel that TvP IS really micro intensive. EMP everything, move your units out of storms, focus fire individual colossi with vikings and kite zealots if he's zealot heavy. And while you're kiting zealots you have to move back your ghosts so that they dont all get killed in the blink of an eye. All these things at the same time. It's freaking hard if you ask me!
Ya, I feel this way in my TvP bio engagements. I usually am overwhelmed by everything I need to do and control. So in the sense of difficulty, I don't feel like mid/late game tvp engagements are lacking. Bio might be less exciting to watch then with tanks, but I'm not so certain about this either.
On October 02 2011 05:24 attwell wrote: Lol is this a joke? It has to be...a terran complaining that tanks aren't powerful enough and are too easily countered?
Chargelots counter tanks when they have no support and you micro them like a retard, dont target my zealots with the tanks if they are next to your units, you deserve to lose if you do.
Immortals counter tanks, no shit...why are you still massing tanks when I have immortals? Luckily for noobs it is conveniently pre-countered by your first unit, marines, so what are you complaining about? Can't figure out marines? Guess what, blizzard heard about your party and decided to cater it with ghosts.
Void rays counter tanks. OMG call the mayor, an expensive tech tree with expensive units sometimes counters tanks when you leave them alone like an idiot. You know what counters void rays? You guessed it, marines...I'm starting to see a pattern here.
Blink stalks sometimes counter tanks, but not really. They are fragile, do minimal damage, even against armor, and are owned by terran's second unit, marauders, as well as tanks.
So what is the problem exactly? You want to just keep making units and win without reacting or changing tech at all? Mass marines, tanks, and get 5 vikings, you just won 75% of your TvP games.
On October 02 2011 05:24 attwell wrote: Lol is this a joke? It has to be...a terran complaining that tanks aren't powerful enough and are too easily countered?
Chargelots counter tanks when they have no support and you micro them like a retard, dont target my zealots with the tanks if they are next to your units, you deserve to lose if you do.
Immortals counter tanks, no shit...why are you still massing tanks when I have immortals? Luckily for noobs it is conveniently pre-countered by your first unit, marines, so what are you complaining about? Can't figure out marines? Guess what, blizzard heard about your party and decided to cater it with ghosts.
Void rays counter tanks. OMG call the mayor, an expensive tech tree with expensive units sometimes counters tanks when you leave them alone like an idiot. You know what counters void rays? You guessed it, marines...I'm starting to see a pattern here.
Blink stalks sometimes counter tanks, but not really. They are fragile, do minimal damage, even against armor, and are owned by terran's second unit, marauders, as well as tanks.
So what is the problem exactly? You want to just keep making units and win without reacting or changing tech at all? Mass marines, tanks, and get 5 vikings, you just won 75% of your TvP games.
On October 02 2011 05:10 ohampatu wrote: Well. Im not going to have a discussion based off of:
Broodwar we could do it, so theres precedence. This is a new game. Precedence doesn't matter. Universal Balance and Game Design according to Blizzard is what matters.
If pure robo isn't viable, pure mech shouldn't be either imo. Even in TvT and TvZ its Bio-Mech. Also, just because the unit comps are similar, doesn't make games similar or opening BO's similar. If it was all that similar, none of us would play the game.
Edit. Regardless whether i think it should be viable or you think it should be. It all depends on blizzard, and the previous 'half page' post i made still hasn't been addressed.
so i assume you've never played broodwar nor watched it which means you shouldn't really talk about something you don't understand. from your tone it's obvious you'd like to flame so i'm not sure what to do now. i can probably tell you what i mean by the OP but you'll probably won't care anyway.
in starcraft all races are different yet you talk about every race using their tier 1 units with some tech support and caster support which is fine. as someone already stated, factory tech is a more completed tech than robo tech which act as a support to main ground gateway force. it was the same in BW, where there were reaver, HT and arbiters.
How do you explain that in sc2 in tvt pure mech is viable in tvt and tvz but not in tvp. My point was that TvP in sc2 is very limited unlike the other 2 matchups and very stale, not fun to play. I tried to explain why mech (tanks) make the game exciting, i don't know what you didnt understand. I stated it's my personal oppinion which means you don't have to agree with me.
Awesome post, I think that protoss has been given too many "crutches" like warpgates chargelots and an army that all shares 1 upgrade set to make anything but bio viable, a few weird maps allow you to play some tank based styles, but even then they're pretty risky.
On October 02 2011 05:24 attwell wrote: Lol is this a joke? It has to be...a terran complaining that tanks aren't powerful enough and are too easily countered?
Chargelots counter tanks when they have no support and you micro them like a retard, dont target my zealots with the tanks if they are next to your units, you deserve to lose if you do.
Immortals counter tanks, no shit...why are you still massing tanks when I have immortals? Luckily for noobs it is conveniently pre-countered by your first unit, marines, so what are you complaining about? Can't figure out marines? Guess what, blizzard heard about your party and decided to cater it with ghosts.
Void rays counter tanks. OMG call the mayor, an expensive tech tree with expensive units sometimes counters tanks when you leave them alone like an idiot. You know what counters void rays? You guessed it, marines...I'm starting to see a pattern here.
Blink stalks sometimes counter tanks, but not really. They are fragile, do minimal damage, even against armor, and are owned by terran's second unit, marauders, as well as tanks.
So what is the problem exactly? You want to just keep making units and win without reacting or changing tech at all? Mass marines, tanks, and get 5 vikings, you just won 75% of your TvP games.
You have no idea who Predy is, do you?
He may not know. But i can state im prolly the biggest 'arguer' against his statements if you read the whole thread. I do know who he is. I even stated i thought i was outrageous that person of his caliber was complaining. I made 2 'half page' posts. The first was addressed, although to be honest it was more just me being bashed on. The 2nd was ignored. I have tried to make it a discussion, I included paragraphs and examples of all races. You terrans dont care what we say. So why should i care what you say?
I really get that alot of Broodwar people want it to be like Broodwar. But alot of us dont want it to be like Broodwar. Ignoring my huge rants earlier, the problem really comes down to it not being fair racial wise. All races are bottlenecked into this. This thread was summed up after the first post that 'n0ise' made. I dont see anybody discussing this. I only see Terrans complaining. The battle.net forums are --------> way
Fantastic post! I do wish Terran armies without area-of-effect were less viable against Protoss, but I don't really see it changing unfortunately ... The 'f.e.' instead of 'e.g.' kept making me think 'fast expand' .
On October 02 2011 05:24 attwell wrote: Lol is this a joke? It has to be...a terran complaining that tanks aren't powerful enough and are too easily countered?
Chargelots counter tanks when they have no support and you micro them like a retard, dont target my zealots with the tanks if they are next to your units, you deserve to lose if you do.
Immortals counter tanks, no shit...why are you still massing tanks when I have immortals? Luckily for noobs it is conveniently pre-countered by your first unit, marines, so what are you complaining about? Can't figure out marines? Guess what, blizzard heard about your party and decided to cater it with ghosts.
Void rays counter tanks. OMG call the mayor, an expensive tech tree with expensive units sometimes counters tanks when you leave them alone like an idiot. You know what counters void rays? You guessed it, marines...I'm starting to see a pattern here.
Blink stalks sometimes counter tanks, but not really. They are fragile, do minimal damage, even against armor, and are owned by terran's second unit, marauders, as well as tanks.
So what is the problem exactly? You want to just keep making units and win without reacting or changing tech at all? Mass marines, tanks, and get 5 vikings, you just won 75% of your TvP games.
On October 02 2011 05:10 ohampatu wrote: Well. Im not going to have a discussion based off of:
Broodwar we could do it, so theres precedence. This is a new game. Precedence doesn't matter. Universal Balance and Game Design according to Blizzard is what matters.
If pure robo isn't viable, pure mech shouldn't be either imo. Even in TvT and TvZ its Bio-Mech. Also, just because the unit comps are similar, doesn't make games similar or opening BO's similar. If it was all that similar, none of us would play the game.
Edit. Regardless whether i think it should be viable or you think it should be. It all depends on blizzard, and the previous 'half page' post i made still hasn't been addressed.
so i assume you've never played broodwar nor watched it which means you shouldn't really talk about something you don't understand. from your tone it's obvious you'd like to flame so i'm not sure what to do now. i can probably tell you what i mean by the OP but you'll probably won't care anyway.
in starcraft all races are different yet you talk about every race using their tier 1 units with some tech support and caster support which is fine. as someone already stated, factory tech is a more completed tech than robo tech which act as a support to main ground gateway force. it was the same in BW, where there were reaver, HT and arbiters.
How do you explain that in sc2 in tvt pure mech is viable in tvt and tvz but not in tvp. My point was that TvP in sc2 is very limited unlike the other 2 matchups and very stale, not fun to play. I tried to explain why mech (tanks) make the game exciting, i don't know what you didnt understand. I stated it's my personal oppinion which means you don't have to agree with me.
Thanks for responding. Im not trying to be a flamer or anything like that. The 2nd half page post I made was thought out imo, trying to showcase how i saw the game. Believe me i wouldn't waste 200 words on a thread for no reason other than to make you mad, its not worth my time. Again, all it feels like is that im being bashed for showing the obvious 'relationships' between the races and how the game 'plays out'. Why does the argument have to be 'factory tech is more complete so it should work'. Or 'it works in TvT' but nothing else.
It doesn't work in all mu's. It works for certain unit comps, and Zerg and Terran unit comps allow the full mech to work. Protoss unit comps do not (according to you and apparently every terran, which i disagree on). Each race is designed differently. But still falls to the same thing i stated then. What 'n0ise' posted was completely accurate.
What i want is a discussion that doesn't revolve around Broodwar or Race vs Race. I wish you would look at unit comp instead and base it off of that. Because of the way Terran and Zerg play out through the game, it leaves it possibly to play almost purely mech against them. To be honest though nobody really plays full mech, most people do a hybrid bio-mech. Even pure late game mech included ghosts.
Protoss isn't like that though. The current unit comps that Protoss favors currently seem to decimate pure mech. Thats just how the game is. Like in your original post i did play beta, and remember the 60 dmg. And it needed nerfed. It didn't break tvz. It didn't break tvp. It didn't break tvz. The 60 dmg was just too much at the time, partiall because of the maps. Do you remember playing TvP on Steppes? As a toss it was ridiculous to fight turtle terrans on some maps. This may be able to be changed back now. Hell do it for all i care to see if tanks become more viable. Id rather have a discusion in how to make changes to Terran to make it work vs Protoss then argue about why it worked in Broodwar and why it doesn't work now.
Edit: It just feels to me like you think its fine if Terran has all these different options and tech choices and you dont mind ignoring that the other races aren't like this. I feel like you want Terran to be Broodwar Terran. Well, i hate having to make a robo every single game. You think blizzard cares?
On October 02 2011 05:24 attwell wrote: Lol is this a joke? It has to be...a terran complaining that tanks aren't powerful enough and are too easily countered?
Chargelots counter tanks when they have no support and you micro them like a retard, dont target my zealots with the tanks if they are next to your units, you deserve to lose if you do.
Immortals counter tanks, no shit...why are you still massing tanks when I have immortals? Luckily for noobs it is conveniently pre-countered by your first unit, marines, so what are you complaining about? Can't figure out marines? Guess what, blizzard heard about your party and decided to cater it with ghosts.
Void rays counter tanks. OMG call the mayor, an expensive tech tree with expensive units sometimes counters tanks when you leave them alone like an idiot. You know what counters void rays? You guessed it, marines...I'm starting to see a pattern here.
Blink stalks sometimes counter tanks, but not really. They are fragile, do minimal damage, even against armor, and are owned by terran's second unit, marauders, as well as tanks.
So what is the problem exactly? You want to just keep making units and win without reacting or changing tech at all? Mass marines, tanks, and get 5 vikings, you just won 75% of your TvP games.
On October 02 2011 05:10 ohampatu wrote: Well. Im not going to have a discussion based off of:
Broodwar we could do it, so theres precedence. This is a new game. Precedence doesn't matter. Universal Balance and Game Design according to Blizzard is what matters.
If pure robo isn't viable, pure mech shouldn't be either imo. Even in TvT and TvZ its Bio-Mech. Also, just because the unit comps are similar, doesn't make games similar or opening BO's similar. If it was all that similar, none of us would play the game.
Edit. Regardless whether i think it should be viable or you think it should be. It all depends on blizzard, and the previous 'half page' post i made still hasn't been addressed.
so i assume you've never played broodwar nor watched it which means you shouldn't really talk about something you don't understand. from your tone it's obvious you'd like to flame so i'm not sure what to do now. i can probably tell you what i mean by the OP but you'll probably won't care anyway.
in starcraft all races are different yet you talk about every race using their tier 1 units with some tech support and caster support which is fine. as someone already stated, factory tech is a more completed tech than robo tech which act as a support to main ground gateway force. it was the same in BW, where there were reaver, HT and arbiters.
How do you explain that in sc2 in tvt pure mech is viable in tvt and tvz but not in tvp. My point was that TvP in sc2 is very limited unlike the other 2 matchups and very stale, not fun to play. I tried to explain why mech (tanks) make the game exciting, i don't know what you didnt understand. I stated it's my personal oppinion which means you don't have to agree with me.
In TvT Mech is viable, because it deals easily with Marines, so there is no threat from bio in straigth engagements, as the marauder on it's own just isn't a very good unit. In TvZ Mech is viable, because Zerg doesn't know how many Tanks/Thors you currently have, so bad zergs may lose to it...
Pure mech was viable in BW, pure bio wasn't. So far in SC2, bio is viable, but mech is still having some trouble. Give it time. It might take a switch from bio -> mech to allow pure mech to hold 2 base pushes. Once you get 6 gas, mech becomes much more viable.
The main problems with PvT is the strength of Terran in small numbers (see bio) and the strength of Protoss when maxed (death ball). Then after the maxed battle is over, it's a race to who can remax the fastest (more gateway bio). The lack of slow pushes in the matchup, unlike TvZ or TvT is the main problem with mech imo.
I think maurader hellion to open and harass -> hellion tank viking might work on a map like T'D Alter where there is room to counter attack and drop with hellions. In BW, mech worked a lot better when you could expand towards your opponent. Most maps in SC2 have expos ring the outside of the map, making mech more difficult.
After re-reading thorugh this thread. I find that you keep skipping on what to reply to me. I haven't flamed you. Untill A Terran Player, or Predy responds to this post with at least as much effort as I put into it. Im done with this discussion. You can go play broodwar if you dont want to have the discussion you decided to create. n0ise said it with the least amount of words
On October 02 2011 04:45 ohampatu wrote: You dont mention balance at all. But a racial whine falls into the same category as a balance whine. My reading skills work as well as your's it seems. Also, discusions become very frivoulous when all you can do is bash the poster defending what you stated.
The reason you didn't get banned instead of somebody else, is because your writing skills are better than most. A mod would have banned me if i wrote what you did in any less grammitcally correct way. Because you have blue posts and are 'respected' or whatever means your whining is valid?
But i'll skip over your post being a 'hidden' whine about the protoss race or game design. Lets look at this thread as a whole. If your posts dont follow under that catgory, half the posts after do.
I'll break it down a bit more for you. 1. I have a 200/200 army. Im fighting a terran. That army is going to consist of prolly 4ish colosus with 3ish+ templar. The rest of my army is Gateway Units. Technically Templar is gateway anyway. So To be honest, apart from the 25+ supply of Colosus I have, im using only gateway units. By your argument that is wrong, because if i wanted i should be able to do something besides mass gateway units right?
2. Zerg has a 200/200 army. They are fighting a protoss. That army is going to consist of mostly lings, or roaches. They will add in a few casters (infestors) and try and make it to brood lords. By your argument, zerg should be able to do something other than just mass roach and/or ling right?
3. Terran has a 200/200 army. They are fighting protoss. That army is is going to consist of mostly marines/marauders. They will add in a few casters (sometimes early for a timing push, most defintely by late game to neutralize my casters) and vikings.
Can you physically tell me what the problem is? I can. The problem is you want to make only mech, and thats not how the game is balanced. This isn't Broodwar TvP. If you want Broodwar TvP go play Broodwar. In Starcraft 2, all of the races have the same canundrum. We all have to have mostly 't1ish' units. Why would terran be allowed to have multiple completely different tech paths available that work in all situations, and the other races not? I dont see protoss complaining that zealots/stalkers are the majority of their army. I dont see zergs complaing that lings and/or roaches are the majority of their army. You want to know what i do see? I see terrans complaining that marines/marauders are the majority of their army.
Its RIDICULOUS.
If you want i can copy/paste what you say specifically: "The thing with TvP is that it doesn't feel terran-ish at all, if i wanted to make a lot of T1 units i'd play zerg! I really hate getting slaughtered by high tech protoss lategame army with HTs and Collosus, while i battle them with "awesome" marauders. As i said, TvP is really frustrating for me, making me not wanting to play the game at all, therefore there might be some over-the-top comparisons, hope you understand what i meant and give some feedback."
So. Umm. Read what i posted above. We all have to make mostly T1 units. So maybe you should go back to Broodwar or something. The fact that you even state 'zerg is fine with making only t1 untis' and assume that should be correct, and then go on to assume that you shouldn't have to do that is fucking stupid dude.
We all have to do that. You are too caught up in your good old broodwar days. That you fail to see your complaining about something that is the STAPLE for all units. I'll go on re-iterate the first post after yours:
n0ise What do you mean, T1 units vs "hightech bio ball"
The same mineral resources you invest in marine marauder he invests in zealot/stalker, the gas you invest in ghosts he invests in templars, the gas you invest in starport units he invests in collossi.
This "omg mass t1 vs my t3" is something coined by laddertosses who cheese 9/10 games and start panicking once the game goes past 12 minutes. It's not actually true - there's clear parallels between the tech/gas investment between the races at all stages in the game.
I honestly would take this TvP bio playstyle anyday over making tanks in TvZ and TvT - but I suppose that's personal pref. - you coming from a BW background, as you say, probably like the positional aspect of it more.
edit: the post i have in spoilers, and the post on the previous page are the two posts i would like terrans to respond to
On October 02 2011 05:24 attwell wrote: Lol is this a joke? It has to be...a terran complaining that tanks aren't powerful enough and are too easily countered?
Chargelots counter tanks when they have no support and you micro them like a retard, dont target my zealots with the tanks if they are next to your units, you deserve to lose if you do.
Immortals counter tanks, no shit...why are you still massing tanks when I have immortals? Luckily for noobs it is conveniently pre-countered by your first unit, marines, so what are you complaining about? Can't figure out marines? Guess what, blizzard heard about your party and decided to cater it with ghosts.
Void rays counter tanks. OMG call the mayor, an expensive tech tree with expensive units sometimes counters tanks when you leave them alone like an idiot. You know what counters void rays? You guessed it, marines...I'm starting to see a pattern here.
Blink stalks sometimes counter tanks, but not really. They are fragile, do minimal damage, even against armor, and are owned by terran's second unit, marauders, as well as tanks.
So what is the problem exactly? You want to just keep making units and win without reacting or changing tech at all? Mass marines, tanks, and get 5 vikings, you just won 75% of your TvP games.
On October 02 2011 05:10 ohampatu wrote: Well. Im not going to have a discussion based off of:
Broodwar we could do it, so theres precedence. This is a new game. Precedence doesn't matter. Universal Balance and Game Design according to Blizzard is what matters.
If pure robo isn't viable, pure mech shouldn't be either imo. Even in TvT and TvZ its Bio-Mech. Also, just because the unit comps are similar, doesn't make games similar or opening BO's similar. If it was all that similar, none of us would play the game.
Edit. Regardless whether i think it should be viable or you think it should be. It all depends on blizzard, and the previous 'half page' post i made still hasn't been addressed.
so i assume you've never played broodwar nor watched it which means you shouldn't really talk about something you don't understand. from your tone it's obvious you'd like to flame so i'm not sure what to do now. i can probably tell you what i mean by the OP but you'll probably won't care anyway.
in starcraft all races are different yet you talk about every race using their tier 1 units with some tech support and caster support which is fine. as someone already stated, factory tech is a more completed tech than robo tech which act as a support to main ground gateway force. it was the same in BW, where there were reaver, HT and arbiters.
How do you explain that in sc2 in tvt pure mech is viable in tvt and tvz but not in tvp. My point was that TvP in sc2 is very limited unlike the other 2 matchups and very stale, not fun to play. I tried to explain why mech (tanks) make the game exciting, i don't know what you didnt understand. I stated it's my personal oppinion which means you don't have to agree with me.
Thanks for responding. Im not trying to be a flamer or anything like that. The 2nd half page post I made was thought out imo, trying to showcase how i saw the game. Believe me i wouldn't waste 200 words on a thread for no reason other than to make you mad, its not worth my time. Again, all it feels like is that im being bashed for showing the obvious 'relationships' between the races and how the game 'plays out'. Why does the argument have to be 'factory tech is more complete so it should work'. Or 'it works in TvT' but nothing else.
It doesn't work in all mu's. It works for certain unit comps, and Zerg and Terran unit comps allow the full mech to work. Protoss unit comps do not (according to you and apparently every terran, which i disagree on). Each race is designed differently. But still falls to the same thing i stated then. What 'n0ise' posted was completely accurate.
What i want is a discussion that doesn't revolve around Broodwar or Race vs Race. I wish you would look at unit comp instead and base it off of that. Because of the way Terran and Zerg play out through the game, it leaves it possibly to play almost purely mech against them. To be honest though nobody really plays full mech, most people do a hybrid bio-mech. Even pure late game mech included ghosts.
Protoss isn't like that though. The current unit comps that Protoss favors currently seem to decimate pure mech. Thats just how the game is. Like in your original post i did play beta, and remember the 60 dmg. And it needed nerfed. It didn't break tvz. It didn't break tvp. It didn't break tvz. The 60 dmg was just too much at the time, partiall because of the maps. Do you remember playing TvP on Steppes? As a toss it was ridiculous to fight turtle terrans on some maps. This may be able to be changed back now. Hell do it for all i care to see if tanks become more viable. Id rather have a discusion in how to make changes to Terran to make it work vs Protoss then argue about why it worked in Broodwar and why it doesn't work now.
Edit: It just feels to me like you think its fine if Terran has all these different options and tech choices and you dont mind ignoring that the other races aren't like this. I feel like you want Terran to be Broodwar Terran. Well, i hate having to make a robo every single game. You think blizzard cares?
yes i know blizzard doesn't care. but as you see in this thread a lot of players tend to agree with me and that means blizzard should care. but they wont i dont have false hopes.
i agree that maps like steppes of war forced blizzard into balancing the game in the certain way. then taldarim altar popped out and we had a whole new set of problems. blizzard made a mistake balancing the game around maps like desert oasis and steppes of war. but it's too late to cry over that.
i have a very objective look into the matchup dont worry. i can see your arguments being very valid. both races make a lot of low tier units and then add spellcasters and other support units. looks good on the paper right? i understand new people coming in that has no experience with BW and they like it. they like to run around with bio and dropping all over the place etc. it's just the way i (and many others in this thread) see it it just doesn't feel like anything we used to play like for years and years in broodwar. is that a wrong thing? it might be. as i said, on maps likes shakuras plateau it works to go biomech or mech because of the map structure. and that's ok because you can make the decision how you want to play. but on maps like taldarim? hell theres no way to outplay protoss who knows what to do (that comes down to the game and unit mechanics i mentioned like warpgates, mobility etc.). that's the main issue i was trying to make. it's just that tanks were adjusted not to be OP in TvZ and on maps like steppes of war, which makes me really sad as i strongly believe that was a bad move.
Well written OP, but I have to say you need to let BW be BW and SC2 to be SC2. They're different games, and the drastic changes Predy is suggesting/implying won't happen.
I agree from a game design perspective that it would be better if warpgate were a mid/late game ability or not in it at all, and compensate by making gateway units decent..
But even you do make tanks better, terrans will still go MMM. Protoss doesn't have air control usually(unlike zerg) and protoss doesn't have good defensive capabilities(unlike terran) so drop play will always be good. The mobility in going MMM is invaluable.
On October 02 2011 05:24 attwell wrote: Lol is this a joke? It has to be...a terran complaining that tanks aren't powerful enough and are too easily countered?
Chargelots counter tanks when they have no support and you micro them like a retard, dont target my zealots with the tanks if they are next to your units, you deserve to lose if you do.
Immortals counter tanks, no shit...why are you still massing tanks when I have immortals? Luckily for noobs it is conveniently pre-countered by your first unit, marines, so what are you complaining about? Can't figure out marines? Guess what, blizzard heard about your party and decided to cater it with ghosts.
Void rays counter tanks. OMG call the mayor, an expensive tech tree with expensive units sometimes counters tanks when you leave them alone like an idiot. You know what counters void rays? You guessed it, marines...I'm starting to see a pattern here.
Blink stalks sometimes counter tanks, but not really. They are fragile, do minimal damage, even against armor, and are owned by terran's second unit, marauders, as well as tanks.
So what is the problem exactly? You want to just keep making units and win without reacting or changing tech at all? Mass marines, tanks, and get 5 vikings, you just won 75% of your TvP games.
On October 02 2011 05:10 ohampatu wrote: Well. Im not going to have a discussion based off of:
Broodwar we could do it, so theres precedence. This is a new game. Precedence doesn't matter. Universal Balance and Game Design according to Blizzard is what matters.
If pure robo isn't viable, pure mech shouldn't be either imo. Even in TvT and TvZ its Bio-Mech. Also, just because the unit comps are similar, doesn't make games similar or opening BO's similar. If it was all that similar, none of us would play the game.
Edit. Regardless whether i think it should be viable or you think it should be. It all depends on blizzard, and the previous 'half page' post i made still hasn't been addressed.
so i assume you've never played broodwar nor watched it which means you shouldn't really talk about something you don't understand. from your tone it's obvious you'd like to flame so i'm not sure what to do now. i can probably tell you what i mean by the OP but you'll probably won't care anyway.
in starcraft all races are different yet you talk about every race using their tier 1 units with some tech support and caster support which is fine. as someone already stated, factory tech is a more completed tech than robo tech which act as a support to main ground gateway force. it was the same in BW, where there were reaver, HT and arbiters.
How do you explain that in sc2 in tvt pure mech is viable in tvt and tvz but not in tvp. My point was that TvP in sc2 is very limited unlike the other 2 matchups and very stale, not fun to play. I tried to explain why mech (tanks) make the game exciting, i don't know what you didnt understand. I stated it's my personal oppinion which means you don't have to agree with me.
Thanks for responding. Im not trying to be a flamer or anything like that. The 2nd half page post I made was thought out imo, trying to showcase how i saw the game. Believe me i wouldn't waste 200 words on a thread for no reason other than to make you mad, its not worth my time. Again, all it feels like is that im being bashed for showing the obvious 'relationships' between the races and how the game 'plays out'. Why does the argument have to be 'factory tech is more complete so it should work'. Or 'it works in TvT' but nothing else.
It doesn't work in all mu's. It works for certain unit comps, and Zerg and Terran unit comps allow the full mech to work. Protoss unit comps do not (according to you and apparently every terran, which i disagree on). Each race is designed differently. But still falls to the same thing i stated then. What 'n0ise' posted was completely accurate.
What i want is a discussion that doesn't revolve around Broodwar or Race vs Race. I wish you would look at unit comp instead and base it off of that. Because of the way Terran and Zerg play out through the game, it leaves it possibly to play almost purely mech against them. To be honest though nobody really plays full mech, most people do a hybrid bio-mech. Even pure late game mech included ghosts.
Protoss isn't like that though. The current unit comps that Protoss favors currently seem to decimate pure mech. Thats just how the game is. Like in your original post i did play beta, and remember the 60 dmg. And it needed nerfed. It didn't break tvz. It didn't break tvp. It didn't break tvz. The 60 dmg was just too much at the time, partiall because of the maps. Do you remember playing TvP on Steppes? As a toss it was ridiculous to fight turtle terrans on some maps. This may be able to be changed back now. Hell do it for all i care to see if tanks become more viable. Id rather have a discusion in how to make changes to Terran to make it work vs Protoss then argue about why it worked in Broodwar and why it doesn't work now.
Edit: It just feels to me like you think its fine if Terran has all these different options and tech choices and you dont mind ignoring that the other races aren't like this. I feel like you want Terran to be Broodwar Terran. Well, i hate having to make a robo every single game. You think blizzard cares?
yes i know blizzard doesn't care. but as you see in this thread a lot of players tend to agree with me and that means blizzard should care. but they wont i dont have false hopes.
i agree that maps like steppes of war forced blizzard into balancing the game in the certain way. then taldarim altar popped out and we had a whole new set of problems. blizzard made a mistake balancing the game around maps like desert oasis and steppes of war. but it's too late to cry over that.
i have a very objective look into the matchup dont worry. i can see your arguments being very valid. both races make a lot of low tier units and then add spellcasters and other support units. looks good on the paper right? i understand new people coming in that has no experience with BW and they like it. they like to run around with bio and dropping all over the place etc. it's just the way i (and many others in this thread) see it it just doesn't feel like anything we used to play like for years and years in broodwar. is that a wrong thing? it might be. as i said, on maps likes shakuras plateau it works to go biomech or mech because of the map structure. and that's ok because you can make the decision how you want to play. but on maps like taldarim? hell theres no way to outplay protoss who knows what to do (that comes down to the game and unit mechanics i mentioned like warpgates, mobility etc.). that's the main issue i was trying to make. it's just that tanks were adjusted not to be OP in TvZ and on maps like steppes of war, which makes me really sad as i strongly believe that was a bad move.
without defilers, smart-firing tanks in sc2 with 70 damage break the game. period.
i respect you as a player but you need to wake up and listen to yourself.
1. you admit that the majority of your reasoning for 'bio being the only viable option in TvP being bad' is because its "not what you are used to playing for 10 years and its not 'terran'" 2. you expect to be taken seriously even though you don't use ANY objective logic whatsoever in either stating your argument or responding to it. 3. BW and SC2 are DIFFERENT FUCKING GAMES. if you want TvP mech so bad, the hardest matchup in the game bar ZvT btw, go back to bw, sign up for ISL3 if its ever gonna be run and go win peanuts in the biggest non-korean bw tournament still going on, if you still want to play bw.
On October 01 2011 06:00 n0ise wrote: What do you mean, T1 units vs "hightech bio death ball"
The same mineral resources you invest in marine marauder he invests in zealot/stalker, the gas you invest in ghosts he invests in templars, the gas you invest in starport units he invests in collossi.
This "omg mass t1 vs my t3" is something coined by laddertosses who cheese 9/10 games and start panicking once the game goes past 12 minutes. It's not actually true - there's clear parallels between the tech/gas investment between the races at all stages in the game.
I honestly would take this TvP bio playstyle anyday over making tanks in TvZ and TvT - but I suppose that's personal pref. - you coming from a BW background, as you say, probably like the positional aspect of it more.
so true
did you ever lose with chargelot archon templar or blink stalker colossus vs mass t1?
NO YOU DIDNT (or maybe you did and played horrible)
there is not that much of a difference since its even harder for terran to go to the right tech since they need to react to the protoss killer- units instead of having killer-units themselves
On October 02 2011 06:06 ohampatu wrote: After re-reading thorugh this thread. I find that you keep skipping on what to reply to me. I haven't flamed you. Untill A Terran Player, or Predy responds to this post with at least as much effort as I put into it. Im done with this discussion. You can go play broodwar if you dont want to have the discussion you decided to create. n0ise said it with the least amount of words
On October 02 2011 04:45 ohampatu wrote: You dont mention balance at all. But a racial whine falls into the same category as a balance whine. My reading skills work as well as your's it seems. Also, discusions become very frivoulous when all you can do is bash the poster defending what you stated.
The reason you didn't get banned instead of somebody else, is because your writing skills are better than most. A mod would have banned me if i wrote what you did in any less grammitcally correct way. Because you have blue posts and are 'respected' or whatever means your whining is valid?
But i'll skip over your post being a 'hidden' whine about the protoss race or game design. Lets look at this thread as a whole. If your posts dont follow under that catgory, half the posts after do.
I'll break it down a bit more for you. 1. I have a 200/200 army. Im fighting a terran. That army is going to consist of prolly 4ish colosus with 3ish+ templar. The rest of my army is Gateway Units. Technically Templar is gateway anyway. So To be honest, apart from the 25+ supply of Colosus I have, im using only gateway units. By your argument that is wrong, because if i wanted i should be able to do something besides mass gateway units right?
2. Zerg has a 200/200 army. They are fighting a protoss. That army is going to consist of mostly lings, or roaches. They will add in a few casters (infestors) and try and make it to brood lords. By your argument, zerg should be able to do something other than just mass roach and/or ling right?
3. Terran has a 200/200 army. They are fighting protoss. That army is is going to consist of mostly marines/marauders. They will add in a few casters (sometimes early for a timing push, most defintely by late game to neutralize my casters) and vikings.
Can you physically tell me what the problem is? I can. The problem is you want to make only mech, and thats not how the game is balanced. This isn't Broodwar TvP. If you want Broodwar TvP go play Broodwar. In Starcraft 2, all of the races have the same canundrum. We all have to have mostly 't1ish' units. Why would terran be allowed to have multiple completely different tech paths available that work in all situations, and the other races not? I dont see protoss complaining that zealots/stalkers are the majority of their army. I dont see zergs complaing that lings and/or roaches are the majority of their army. You want to know what i do see? I see terrans complaining that marines/marauders are the majority of their army.
Its RIDICULOUS.
If you want i can copy/paste what you say specifically: "The thing with TvP is that it doesn't feel terran-ish at all, if i wanted to make a lot of T1 units i'd play zerg! I really hate getting slaughtered by high tech protoss lategame army with HTs and Collosus, while i battle them with "awesome" marauders. As i said, TvP is really frustrating for me, making me not wanting to play the game at all, therefore there might be some over-the-top comparisons, hope you understand what i meant and give some feedback."
So. Umm. Read what i posted above. We all have to make mostly T1 units. So maybe you should go back to Broodwar or something. The fact that you even state 'zerg is fine with making only t1 untis' and assume that should be correct, and then go on to assume that you shouldn't have to do that is fucking stupid dude.
We all have to do that. You are too caught up in your good old broodwar days. That you fail to see your complaining about something that is the STAPLE for all units. I'll go on re-iterate the first post after yours:
n0ise What do you mean, T1 units vs "hightech bio ball"
The same mineral resources you invest in marine marauder he invests in zealot/stalker, the gas you invest in ghosts he invests in templars, the gas you invest in starport units he invests in collossi.
This "omg mass t1 vs my t3" is something coined by laddertosses who cheese 9/10 games and start panicking once the game goes past 12 minutes. It's not actually true - there's clear parallels between the tech/gas investment between the races at all stages in the game.
I honestly would take this TvP bio playstyle anyday over making tanks in TvZ and TvT - but I suppose that's personal pref. - you coming from a BW background, as you say, probably like the positional aspect of it more.
edit: the post i have in spoilers, and the post on the previous page are the two posts i would like terrans to respond to
Well, I imagine the reason people aren't too keen on responding is because you start off backseat moderating, which is annoying. That aside, you also seem to be confused about the entire conversation. This is not about Protoss or TvP alone and this is not a racial whine or a balance whine and whether or not Protoss should be able to have more options is a different discussion.
This is about TvP versus TvT and TvZ. In the latter two match-ups, Terran players have more options than they do in TvP and it is the opinion of many people here that that limitation has made the match-up stale and less interesting than the others and less interesting than it could be. Brood War is being used as a reference because mech was viable there and it provided for some very interesting games. So, people would like to bring some of that same dynamic to SC2. People are also talking about the aspects of the Protoss race that limit Terran players' options and how the Protoss race could be changed to be more interesting and the aspects of SC2 itself that contribute to this problem, as well.
That is what we are talking about. You post seems to be about something else.
Sure, Terran in TvP might have fewer options than you would like, but you seem to bash Protoss WAYY too much. Protoss have to build their composition reactively in most situations, so technically they have even less choices than Terran does.
Also, saying that something was like X in Brood War doesn't make it a good idea in Starcraft. Different games etc.
To the OP, I agree with your post but I would advise you not waste your breath trying to convince anyone of it. Here on the internet everyone believes their opinion is of paramount importance.
The people who agree will quietly support you, and everyone else will simply talk louder and more obnoxiously until they're sure you understand they believe themselves much smarter than you. Persuasion doesn't exist on internet forums.
As a protoss player I have pretty much the same feelings about the match up. Every game I fight marine marauder (or 1-1-1) and there's rarely any differences. The only way i can distinguish terran styles is expansion timings, aggression and ratio of the M/M/M/ghost/viking. There's no such thing like "Ooh interesting this terran is making <insert more fun units composition here>" and as such I only need to scout for cheese and then I do whatever strategy I want. Protoss can choose from more unit compositions I feel like with either upgrades, HTs, colossi or archons in the mid game.
I get that you (PredY) aren't exactly a nobody (I saw you play at Dreamhack I believe, that's all great) but your post is a bit whiny for a good player and a blue poster imho. So, stop me if I'm wrong, but as I understand, you don't like TvP, because you can't make tanks, and you must produce biological units, marauder especially, which you don't like, and you don't like warp gate, colossus, void rays either. You find that Broodwar was a much more interesting game because of tanks and the positional play they promote. Fine.
Broodwar was indeed very interesting, but it was also a completely different game, you can't just buff tanks to 60 damage and have again the BW experience in SC2 (we can all agree that with that kind of buff you can indeed make terran more "interesting", as in "having a full 64 terran roster GSL Code A and Code S" and such: tanks would rape TvZ, and you just have to 111 the other race to oblivion). If you want strong mech play vs Protoss, you would likely have to change protoss, and zerg indirectly. Furthermore, finding tanks more interesting than bio is your own opinion, not everyone shares it, don't make it some kind of universal truth.
With that out of the window, it's still true than a Terran tech path is not very viable against Protoss atm. Oh! The horror! Terran cannot just decide to build whatever they feel like and still win? Can I go stargate void rays + carriers? Do I whine about stargate not being viable against terran? About it not being viable in virtually any matchup?
I seriously hope that your post was not a balance whine (I highly doubt it but still) disguised as a game design/Broodwar nostalgia rant. If you lose a lot vs Protoss atm, it's not because Protoss is too strong and Terran badly designed. But it might be because you just "watch" the fights, as you said.
I'm not so pessimistic about TvP. The matchup is still changing and even though it may be bio based it will become more and more micro intensive and complex. We all know small changes in future patches may change everything. We're still learning to play here. Look at TvT. The tank nerf saved the matchup!
I do think it's boring we don't have any good transitions out of bio TvP however. Hoping for Hots.
While TvT and TvZ feel varied and fun, TvP just seems like the same thing every game. I guess the reason for mech to be bad in TvP is that mech units take forever to build and take up huge supply. Watch a toss kill all your tanks and reappear with a fresh set of stalker/zealot/templar before your first hellion even popped.
On October 02 2011 06:06 ohampatu wrote: After re-reading thorugh this thread. I find that you keep skipping on what to reply to me. I haven't flamed you. Untill A Terran Player, or Predy responds to this post with at least as much effort as I put into it. Im done with this discussion. You can go play broodwar if you dont want to have the discussion you decided to create. n0ise said it with the least amount of words
On October 02 2011 04:45 ohampatu wrote: You dont mention balance at all. But a racial whine falls into the same category as a balance whine. My reading skills work as well as your's it seems. Also, discusions become very frivoulous when all you can do is bash the poster defending what you stated.
The reason you didn't get banned instead of somebody else, is because your writing skills are better than most. A mod would have banned me if i wrote what you did in any less grammitcally correct way. Because you have blue posts and are 'respected' or whatever means your whining is valid?
But i'll skip over your post being a 'hidden' whine about the protoss race or game design. Lets look at this thread as a whole. If your posts dont follow under that catgory, half the posts after do.
I'll break it down a bit more for you. 1. I have a 200/200 army. Im fighting a terran. That army is going to consist of prolly 4ish colosus with 3ish+ templar. The rest of my army is Gateway Units. Technically Templar is gateway anyway. So To be honest, apart from the 25+ supply of Colosus I have, im using only gateway units. By your argument that is wrong, because if i wanted i should be able to do something besides mass gateway units right?
2. Zerg has a 200/200 army. They are fighting a protoss. That army is going to consist of mostly lings, or roaches. They will add in a few casters (infestors) and try and make it to brood lords. By your argument, zerg should be able to do something other than just mass roach and/or ling right?
3. Terran has a 200/200 army. They are fighting protoss. That army is is going to consist of mostly marines/marauders. They will add in a few casters (sometimes early for a timing push, most defintely by late game to neutralize my casters) and vikings.
Can you physically tell me what the problem is? I can. The problem is you want to make only mech, and thats not how the game is balanced. This isn't Broodwar TvP. If you want Broodwar TvP go play Broodwar. In Starcraft 2, all of the races have the same canundrum. We all have to have mostly 't1ish' units. Why would terran be allowed to have multiple completely different tech paths available that work in all situations, and the other races not? I dont see protoss complaining that zealots/stalkers are the majority of their army. I dont see zergs complaing that lings and/or roaches are the majority of their army. You want to know what i do see? I see terrans complaining that marines/marauders are the majority of their army.
Its RIDICULOUS.
If you want i can copy/paste what you say specifically: "The thing with TvP is that it doesn't feel terran-ish at all, if i wanted to make a lot of T1 units i'd play zerg! I really hate getting slaughtered by high tech protoss lategame army with HTs and Collosus, while i battle them with "awesome" marauders. As i said, TvP is really frustrating for me, making me not wanting to play the game at all, therefore there might be some over-the-top comparisons, hope you understand what i meant and give some feedback."
So. Umm. Read what i posted above. We all have to make mostly T1 units. So maybe you should go back to Broodwar or something. The fact that you even state 'zerg is fine with making only t1 untis' and assume that should be correct, and then go on to assume that you shouldn't have to do that is fucking stupid dude.
We all have to do that. You are too caught up in your good old broodwar days. That you fail to see your complaining about something that is the STAPLE for all units. I'll go on re-iterate the first post after yours:
n0ise What do you mean, T1 units vs "hightech bio ball"
The same mineral resources you invest in marine marauder he invests in zealot/stalker, the gas you invest in ghosts he invests in templars, the gas you invest in starport units he invests in collossi.
This "omg mass t1 vs my t3" is something coined by laddertosses who cheese 9/10 games and start panicking once the game goes past 12 minutes. It's not actually true - there's clear parallels between the tech/gas investment between the races at all stages in the game.
I honestly would take this TvP bio playstyle anyday over making tanks in TvZ and TvT - but I suppose that's personal pref. - you coming from a BW background, as you say, probably like the positional aspect of it more.
edit: the post i have in spoilers, and the post on the previous page are the two posts i would like terrans to respond to
Ill Reply.
First of all your 200/200 numbers are way way off, you really think a toss player is only going to have 4 collsi???? Try 6-8. 3 Templars??? Try 7-9. Your also forgetting to mention about DT's archons as well
Lets compare that to a 200/200 Terran army, a 200/200 T army would be around 20-30 rines, 20-30 rauders 12 vikings 8 medivacs and maybe 6-8 ghosts. The majority of the army is Tier 1(Around 80 supply).
There is a major problem in TvP where the first 15 minutes of the game are dominated by Terran, with their poweful early tier 1 units, and then past the 15 minute mark the game is dominated by the Protoss Tier 3. So you end up in this ridiclous cycle of having to end the game within 15 minutes or you get crushed(not saying every game, yes T can win a game longer than 15, but he is defainetly at a disadvantage when the toss gets 3+ base.) This is a horrible design for a strategy game, it takes away alot from the game and makes the MU way to quick and random. Tier 1 vs Tier 3 is Pretty uninteresting to watch, and almost all TvP's get to the point where the the T wins by never engaging the oppenant but instead by dropping everywhere. If the big battle happens its over in literally seconds.
Now onto the next point that everyone seems to get so offended when people use the term "BW". Have you guys ever put some thought on why people would compare sc2 to BW??? Its not just because its the sequel. What do you guys think the #1 goal of an RTS game with different races??? Balance is what everyone wants, a fun balanced exciting game. A game so balanced that almost every MU ends being 30 to 45 minutes plus because it is so hard to achieve victory in a perfectly balanced game. I hope no one hear has the audacity to claim BW is imbalanced because it is a well known fact that BW is the most balanced RTS there is. So why dont you put some more thought and realize that most people are citing BW because BW=Balance we want SC2 to be just as balanced.
On October 02 2011 04:34 Alzadar wrote: I don't see how this is so different from in BW where mech is the only option in TvP (unless you are Boxer). Not every strategy has to be viable; in fact the game would be stupid if that were the case.
I can't go pure Robotics in any match-up. Immortals should be able to shoot air, to make Robotics play viable. Because I should be able to use only 1/3rd of my tech options and win.
Yes, that's true, but mech required was more entertaining to play and watch because it was an epic fight: zealot bombing and carpet storms to break a huge siege line, goon trying to flank, vultures protecting flank with mine, mine dragging, ecc... Now is all about (not saying that is easy) 2 balls emping , storming and stutterstepping mainly. There isn't the feeling of an "extended", prolonged battle/warfare, with tank lines covering ground and vulture protecting flanks. It's 2 balls melting in 4-5 seconds. And no, that's not that fun to watch imo.
Whoops. More Broodwar fanbois. Read my last 2 posts. Counter them. If you want a discussion of this caliber (i still can't believe mods are letting this thread go) then have a proper discussion please.
we're not complaining that mecch isn't viable and T has too few strategy,we're complaining that theoretically mech fights would allow for more interesting and strategic fights than bio balls clashing. We're not saying tha toss>terran.
Totally agree, Alot of people are misreading this and thinking of this as whine,
The main point of this thread is that the MU is very uninteresting with the way it has meta gamed into MMM G/V vs Gateway/Collsi.
Uninteresting is way different than "imbalance" Predy and alot of Terran players agree the MU is uninteresting, mech is a suggestion to make the MU more interesting.
Hell the MU could turn into hellion/Thor/BC still be tankless and that would mmake for a way more interesting game than a million T1 units getting slaughtered by collsi. Or a Terran that wins just by dropping every point of the map to which the toss cant respond. THere would actully be lengthy high tech battles with one immobile really powerful army compared to a slighty more mobile/versatile Protoss deathball. I hope this helps on what I think the OP and my self are tyring to convey.
On October 02 2011 06:35 SeaSwift wrote: Sure, Terran in TvP might have fewer options than you would like, but you seem to bash Protoss WAYY too much. Protoss have to build their composition reactively in most situations, so technically they have even less choices than Terran does.
Also, saying that something was like X in Brood War doesn't make it a good idea in Starcraft. Different games etc.
Protoss in PvT is not reactive. They choses the tech route and T reacts. MMMG against colossus? Die. MMMV against HT. Die.
Dont scout 2 base DT play, or that cheeky proxy stargate? or warp prism shenanigans? Lose a shit ton of eco.
Dont get me wrong, I love bio and TvP is my fave matchup, however the emphasis is almost 100% on the T to scout perfectly and react accordingly.
PvT is not unfun, it's a pretty involved and interesting matchup for the P, that involves the use of the entire tech tree, good defense, good macro.
TvP is not fun. There's like 3 major inflection points total for the T- defend potential 1 base while 1raxCC, get dropship+stim, get 3rd, get ghost. That's it.
That's the entire matchup. All the tech and decision tree is compressed into that, since nothing else is viable. Compare this to TvZ and TvT, which are very full matchups with a lot of possibilities and tech.
I get these vibes of being thoroughly unimpressed when I think that a not very highly ranked player makes a write-up like this and gets praised by similar gold and below ranked players. Sorry, I just don't see the TvP matchup the same way as you do- this coming from a masters random player who plays both plenty of TvPs and PvTs as well as watching many interesting pro PvTs in the past year.
Bio ball vs deathball is the staple of TvP of SC2 just as much as vulture tank vs zealot goon templar arbiter was in BW. You already know the types of units you generally want for end-game for both games. Aside from the differences in how they're used, the concept is the same. And in SC1, I've never heard of bio vs protoss being successful outside of cheesing. Talk about strategy limitations there!
If you're T fighting P, you can handily bet your ass that fights are gonna be micro intensive. The micro comes from pulling off MKP style splits to minimize colossus damage and getting that perfect concave, making sure your vikings don't get sniped by the menacing stalker ball. Pull it off right and you make TvP look stacked so heavily for T instead of getting plain rolled over. Read ThorZain's response in the first page. You should take that lil' snippet very seriously.
On October 02 2011 10:42 Lunchador wrote: I get these vibes of being thoroughly unimpressed when I think that a not very highly ranked player makes a write-up like this and gets praised by similar gold and below ranked players. Sorry, I just don't see the TvP matchup the same way as you do- this coming from a masters random player who plays both plenty of TvPs and PvTs as well as watching many interesting pro PvTs in the past year.
Bio ball vs deathball is the staple of TvP of SC2 just as much as vulture tank vs zealot goon templar arbiter was in BW. You already know the types of units you generally want for end-game for both games. Aside from the differences in how they're used, the concept is the same. And in SC1, I've never heard of bio vs protoss being successful outside of cheesing. Talk about strategy limitations there!
If you're T fighting P, you can handily bet your ass that fights are gonna be micro intensive. The micro comes from pulling off MKP style splits to minimize colossus damage and getting that perfect concave, making sure your vikings don't get sniped by the menacing stalker ball. Pull it off right and you make TvP look stacked so heavily for T instead of getting plain rolled over. Read ThorZain's response in the first page. You should take that lil' snippet very seriously.
Noone is saying there is no micro. If they are, sorry i havent seen it. The general vibe seems to be that TvP is so completely reactive its kinda boring. It almost always comes down to 1 or 2 huge fights.
PvZ for instance often has many many big engagments throughout the game. However this is because they often trade armies. In PvT the person who micros better (HT vs Ghost) often decimated the other player.
Did he land 4 godly storms on your bio ebfore you got emps down. You have no army and get rofl stomped. Did you blanket emp everything? GG
One of the better OP's I have read in this forum, exactly parallels my thinking on a variety of levels. Also, I am sure I am not alone in this. More people than OP, PredY, and myself have this understanding of the game.
I would like to add a few points however. Map control being the most important of them. I feel that it is simply wrong the way the current SC2 system evaluates the meaning of "map control." Right here in the TL strategy forum you will read people say things like "only one person can have map control at a time" and might even claim such a thing is "obvious." This is preposterous. Map control is simply control of areas of the map. If you control the ENTIRE map, then I suppose you have map control and the other player cannot, but that is an unusual edge case. Most of the time you should have control of some areas, and your opponent should have control of other areas.
Every race needs the tools for strong positional play. Abilities like spider mines, units like lurkers. Abilities and effects that can give a strong local advantage such as dark swarm (also positional). This is very lacking in Starcraft 2 at the moment, and creates these extremely fast, aggressive, low-tech games where defensive, reactive play is either disincentivized or purely unnecessary. All you get are better tools to aggress against the enemy army directly, which you could do equally well with MORE UNITS, having the added advantage of hitting sooner. In the event that both players play defensively, all you get is two blobs smashing into one another to decide the winner. Silly.
Localization and positional play mean the player that splits their army up effectively has a huge combat advantage. Rather than having two armies of half strength, you have two groups which significantly outperform the blob you would get if you balled them together. Divide again to amplify the effect further, down to the minimum effective combat group size determined by your opponent's force distribution.
Blizzard is almost thinking like a noob in that they are very focused on unit composition and not on tactical play- they assume you have 'an army.' This is further evidenced by their treatment of unit supply costs. Hydralisks, roaches, ultras, siege tanks, immortals, thors, colossi, motherships, all have huge supply costs to justify big 'cool' units. Starcraft would, like most strategy games, be much stronger with more units (more pieces) than with bigger arbitrary stats ("stronger" pieces, which makes no sense since strength is relative). The improved pathing and unit AI also means units blob up more effectively, which means more positional play elements should be added to incentivize splitting forces up. Splash damage is the idiot's solution because... micro, or counter to nullify splash damage dealing unit. Back to "unit composition is king" thinking.
On October 01 2011 06:16 Thorzain wrote: I feel that TvP IS really micro intensive. EMP everything, move your units out of storms, focus fire individual colossi with vikings and kite zealots if he's zealot heavy. And while you're kiting zealots you have to move back your ghosts so that they dont all get killed in the blink of an eye. All these things at the same time. It's freaking hard if you ask me!
I agree that TvP is very micro-intensive, but I feel that PredY is right in the fact that it is also a very one-dimensional match-up. You rarely see anything more than MMM and then if the P has Colossi and you don't have Vikings, you lose, and if the P has High Templar and you don't have Ghosts, you lose. It's just not a horribly fun match-up to play, because other than cheeses and timing attacks, there is very little differences in the play styles.
That being said, builds like what we saw Byun do in Code A (easily one of the coolest builds I've ever seen) gives me hope that eventually we'll see an increase in mech usage. Personally, I feel that mech is fun to play in TvP, but it's just not nearly as good as bio.
I think it would be cooler if in HotS they nerfed bio, but made mech a lot stronger.
We don't see bio used in either of the other two terran match ups. Why do we need it to disappear from the game entirely? OP is acting like there is no skill to micro bio ball vs protoss, but it's simply not true. If anything it will probably become even more interesting to micro in the future, if the ghost gets nerfed, as many suspect it will.
You also have to consider the possibility that tanks currently ARE viable versus protoss, but terrans just have not developed the style to properly use them yet. There's no way to confirm either way whether they are actually good or not until we see the level of play get higher. Give it time, and in the mean time, use your bio composition, which works perfectly well.
On October 01 2011 07:11 eourcs wrote: TvP is a really odd matchup, where I think someone with perfect control and macro will be unbeatable, regardless of how well the Protoss plays (this is barring 1-1-1 which I do think is imbalanced), but like 99% of players I don't have that, so the matchup is hard as fuck. At the highest level, it's possible that it's imbalanced, but at every other level, the people who complain about Terran are idiots. Lategame TvP is extremely hard, and personally, I have never seen anybody beat Hasuobs when he gets Templar/Collosus and a solid 3-4 base economy, regardless of how far behind he is.
I feel the opposite - TvP is a matchup where if both players played perfectly, terran should never ever win. So dependant on getting good drops etc.
Of course its pretty damn close to impossible to play the level of perfect that you can consistently every game deny every single drop which might even make it terran favored in reality.
Anyway, I agree 100% with PredY's post, bio TvP makes me want to quit -_-
On October 02 2011 05:55 ohampatu wrote:What i want is a discussion that doesn't revolve around Broodwar or Race vs Race
Why do you feel entitled to dictating the terms of discussion in thread you did not create?
Fact is, a lot of terrans want to play terran because of the siege tank mechanic - partially because of how it worked in BW. You can't take BW out of the discussion - especially when the OP of the thread contains so many references to it.
There seems to be a lot of people claiming that Terran is a bit stronger early game but significantly weaker late game. In fact Terran is stronger in both the early (1-2 base) and late game (3-4 bases) if both players are playing well however in the mid-game (2-3 bases) and VERY late-game (5+ bases) Protoss has some timings they can hit where Terran hasn't got the right amount of vikings/ghosts.
Late game only bad Terran players will lose an engagement (or the Protoss player they are playing is WAY better at micro/ahead). Once you get to the VERY late game where Protoss has 5-6 bases and 20+ warpgates they will usually lose a big engagement but obviously they can remax much faster and normally roll over the Terran or at least secure a game-ending advantage.
Protoss relies on Terran mucking up their unit composition (and to be fair it's BLOODY hard to get this right as a Terran, so far it's basically only some Koreans and maybe Thorzain + Select who have done so consistently). When Terran does get it wrong Protoss can win in a pretty easy-looking fashion. The late mid-game is usually when this happens and it's usually a case of not enough vikings + too many marines.
Super-late game Protoss has a mammoth advantage with 80 supply armies coming out in 25s in the middle of the map. If the game gets to this point (assuming the game is relatively even here) There's no way Protoss should lose.
add spiderminessssssssssss I really hate playing TvP too, its just frustating. There is a point where protoss has so many bases and warpgates that as terran it's just impossible to win.
On October 02 2011 11:51 Reptilia wrote: add spiderminessssssssssss I really hate playing TvP too, its just frustating. There is a point where protoss has so many bases and warpgates that as terran it's just impossible to win.
As someone said, spidermines would be useless in this game. Colossus + an obs would just clean everything in 2 or 3 volley.
On October 02 2011 11:51 Reptilia wrote: add spiderminessssssssssss I really hate playing TvP too, its just frustating. There is a point where protoss has so many bases and warpgates that as terran it's just impossible to win.
As someone said, spidermines would be useless in this game. Colossus + an obs would just clean everything in 2 or 3 volley.
i really don't think they would be useless. Against their main army head 2 head they would but they would be a nice way of gaining map control and dealing with harass or heavy zealot armies.
On October 02 2011 05:24 attwell wrote: Lol is this a joke? It has to be...a terran complaining that tanks aren't powerful enough and are too easily countered?
Chargelots counter tanks when they have no support and you micro them like a retard, dont target my zealots with the tanks if they are next to your units, you deserve to lose if you do.
Immortals counter tanks, no shit...why are you still massing tanks when I have immortals? Luckily for noobs it is conveniently pre-countered by your first unit, marines, so what are you complaining about? Can't figure out marines? Guess what, blizzard heard about your party and decided to cater it with ghosts.
Void rays counter tanks. OMG call the mayor, an expensive tech tree with expensive units sometimes counters tanks when you leave them alone like an idiot. You know what counters void rays? You guessed it, marines...I'm starting to see a pattern here.
Blink stalks sometimes counter tanks, but not really. They are fragile, do minimal damage, even against armor, and are owned by terran's second unit, marauders, as well as tanks.
So what is the problem exactly? You want to just keep making units and win without reacting or changing tech at all? Mass marines, tanks, and get 5 vikings, you just won 75% of your TvP games.
On October 02 2011 05:10 ohampatu wrote: Well. Im not going to have a discussion based off of:
Broodwar we could do it, so theres precedence. This is a new game. Precedence doesn't matter. Universal Balance and Game Design according to Blizzard is what matters.
If pure robo isn't viable, pure mech shouldn't be either imo. Even in TvT and TvZ its Bio-Mech. Also, just because the unit comps are similar, doesn't make games similar or opening BO's similar. If it was all that similar, none of us would play the game.
Edit. Regardless whether i think it should be viable or you think it should be. It all depends on blizzard, and the previous 'half page' post i made still hasn't been addressed.
so i assume you've never played broodwar nor watched it which means you shouldn't really talk about something you don't understand. from your tone it's obvious you'd like to flame so i'm not sure what to do now. i can probably tell you what i mean by the OP but you'll probably won't care anyway.
in starcraft all races are different yet you talk about every race using their tier 1 units with some tech support and caster support which is fine. as someone already stated, factory tech is a more completed tech than robo tech which act as a support to main ground gateway force. it was the same in BW, where there were reaver, HT and arbiters.
How do you explain that in sc2 in tvt pure mech is viable in tvt and tvz but not in tvp. My point was that TvP in sc2 is very limited unlike the other 2 matchups and very stale, not fun to play. I tried to explain why mech (tanks) make the game exciting, i don't know what you didnt understand. I stated it's my personal oppinion which means you don't have to agree with me.
Thanks for responding. Im not trying to be a flamer or anything like that. The 2nd half page post I made was thought out imo, trying to showcase how i saw the game. Believe me i wouldn't waste 200 words on a thread for no reason other than to make you mad, its not worth my time. Again, all it feels like is that im being bashed for showing the obvious 'relationships' between the races and how the game 'plays out'. Why does the argument have to be 'factory tech is more complete so it should work'. Or 'it works in TvT' but nothing else.
It doesn't work in all mu's. It works for certain unit comps, and Zerg and Terran unit comps allow the full mech to work. Protoss unit comps do not (according to you and apparently every terran, which i disagree on). Each race is designed differently. But still falls to the same thing i stated then. What 'n0ise' posted was completely accurate.
What i want is a discussion that doesn't revolve around Broodwar or Race vs Race. I wish you would look at unit comp instead and base it off of that. Because of the way Terran and Zerg play out through the game, it leaves it possibly to play almost purely mech against them. To be honest though nobody really plays full mech, most people do a hybrid bio-mech. Even pure late game mech included ghosts.
Protoss isn't like that though. The current unit comps that Protoss favors currently seem to decimate pure mech. Thats just how the game is. Like in your original post i did play beta, and remember the 60 dmg. And it needed nerfed. It didn't break tvz. It didn't break tvp. It didn't break tvz. The 60 dmg was just too much at the time, partiall because of the maps. Do you remember playing TvP on Steppes? As a toss it was ridiculous to fight turtle terrans on some maps. This may be able to be changed back now. Hell do it for all i care to see if tanks become more viable. Id rather have a discusion in how to make changes to Terran to make it work vs Protoss then argue about why it worked in Broodwar and why it doesn't work now.
Edit: It just feels to me like you think its fine if Terran has all these different options and tech choices and you dont mind ignoring that the other races aren't like this. I feel like you want Terran to be Broodwar Terran. Well, i hate having to make a robo every single game. You think blizzard cares?
yes i know blizzard doesn't care. but as you see in this thread a lot of players tend to agree with me and that means blizzard should care. but they wont i dont have false hopes.
i agree that maps like steppes of war forced blizzard into balancing the game in the certain way. then taldarim altar popped out and we had a whole new set of problems. blizzard made a mistake balancing the game around maps like desert oasis and steppes of war. but it's too late to cry over that.
i have a very objective look into the matchup dont worry. i can see your arguments being very valid. both races make a lot of low tier units and then add spellcasters and other support units. looks good on the paper right? i understand new people coming in that has no experience with BW and they like it. they like to run around with bio and dropping all over the place etc. it's just the way i (and many others in this thread) see it it just doesn't feel like anything we used to play like for years and years in broodwar. is that a wrong thing? it might be. as i said, on maps likes shakuras plateau it works to go biomech or mech because of the map structure. and that's ok because you can make the decision how you want to play. but on maps like taldarim? hell theres no way to outplay protoss who knows what to do (that comes down to the game and unit mechanics i mentioned like warpgates, mobility etc.). that's the main issue i was trying to make. it's just that tanks were adjusted not to be OP in TvZ and on maps like steppes of war, which makes me really sad as i strongly believe that was a bad move.
Thanks for responding!!
Im not saying i completely disagree with you in getting the units out there. Its just from us new people, and from us people playing the other races, you seem to ask for something we dont have and expect it as standard. Or so it feels like. Thats why alot of toss are responding the way they are in this thread, and i apologize for it. They are just responding to how they see it laid out in front of them. By balance (that may or may not be liked) the game was made very linear.
I think it kinda come's down to a few things. Tanks are seen as the 'terran' unit. I think the last TL poll showed when people thought of the terran they thought of the tank. So naturally there's are large fanbase for it. Im sorry but i can't agree that straight factory/pure mech play needs to be viable in all matchups, when the other races are snowballed in to certain bo's early game to be considered 'safe'. I do agree though that a Bio-Mech should be able to be played in any MU considering map balance. From the posts that I can see here, it really seems like the best solution to make people happy would be to increase maps that allow for tanks to be used, even if its just 2-3. That way different styles of play would be used per different kind of maps. I dont see the 60 dmg coming back. I know you mention it being overpowered in tvz, but it was just as bad for tvp and even tvt from my experiences because of current t1 unit health. Critical masses (8+) just made the game completely stalemate just because everybody is 'scared' to do anything for fear of 50+ pop dieing in 2 seconds. Games were won by having to catch your opponent unsieged. I dont know how that was ever considered fun. Sitting around a map mined out with max army waiting for 'that one chance' to catch him off guard.
So why dont we ask some Map of the Month makers to make some 'clover' like maps. That maybe allow for your set of expansions to be somewhat linear, to make it more viable?
Edit: Well. Im glad Predy replied and was pretty manner. For those of you terrans recently joining the conversation who have started to shift it to 'terran unwinnable in late game'. Please lets not do that if possible. Jinro's post for example, is nothing but a complete whine that Protoss is > Terran. None of that contributes to a discussion about tanks being used.
Edit 2: Predy. What is your stance on Antiga shipyard? You mention Shakuras as being mech friendly. Would not Antiga play at least till 4 bases similar to shakuras.
On October 02 2011 11:51 Reptilia wrote: add spiderminessssssssssss I really hate playing TvP too, its just frustating. There is a point where protoss has so many bases and warpgates that as terran it's just impossible to win.
As someone said, spidermines would be useless in this game. Colossus + an obs would just clean everything in 2 or 3 volley.
That's not how spider mines work, you could also clean up spider mines very easily in Broodwar with range goons and speedlots.
Spidermines are a great way to keep Protoss bases under control, and keep an eye on the Protoss army.
You can put one spider mine at every base, if it disappears protoss is likely expanding.
You throw spidermines all over the map, if any of them disappear, that's where the protoss army is.
2 vulture 1 tank drop, arguably the most powerful drop in the game if done right. You can keep a base occupied for a very long time with good micro, but its not stupid like a blue flame hellion drop it actually takes a lot of skill, timing, positioning, awareness. Its also very Terran-like, in terms of area control and defense, you take up a tiny pocket of space in someones base and completely deny any access to it.
On October 02 2011 13:21 ohampatu wrote: I think it kinda come's down to a few things. Tanks are seen as the 'terran' unit. I think the last TL poll showed when people thought of the terran they thought of the tank. So naturally there's are large fanbase for it. Im sorry but i can't agree that straight factory/pure mech play needs to be viable in all matchups, when the other races are snowballed in to certain bo's early game to be considered 'safe'. I do agree though that a Bio-Mech should be able to be played in any MU considering map balance. From the posts that I can see here, it really seems like the best solution to make people happy would be to increase maps that allow for tanks to be used, even if its just 2-3. That way different styles of play would be used per different kind of maps. I dont see the 60 dmg coming back. I know you mention it being overpowered in tvz, but it was just as bad for tvp and even tvt from my experiences because of current t1 unit health. Critical masses (8+) just made the game completely stalemate just because everybody is 'scared' to do anything for fear of 50+ pop dieing in 2 seconds. Games were won by having to catch your opponent unsieged. I dont know how that was ever considered fun. Sitting around a map mined out with max army waiting for 'that one chance' to catch him off guard.
Bio, Mech, Air, and any combination of the 3 should be available in all matchups. Instead we get the one composition over and over in the same matchup, where its just a mishmash of every unit because of how gimmicky they are. For example, the only reason you have vikings is to counter colossus, that's it, it serves no other purpose. Sticking to only a few units against good players will just mean you get countered really hard, and that's bad for strategy and variance.
It's unfortunate that people were upset about Terran Mech because they couldn't just 1a into it and win. I honestly don't understand why these people are playing Starcraft. Protoss has so many extremely powerful units to use against mech unlike BW, void rays, phoenixs, immortals, 9 range colossus, chargelots, blink stalkers. Back then Void Rays were a lot stronger too especially when they could out-range turrets, 3 gate Stargate was basically auto-win against a mech opening.
Bio, Mech, Air, and any combination of the 3 should be available in all matchups. Instead we get the one composition over and over in the same matchup, where its just a mishmash of every unit because of how gimmicky they are. For example, the only reason you have vikings is to counter colossus, that's it, it serves no other purpose. Sticking to only a few units against good players will just mean you get countered really hard, and that's bad for strategy and variance.
It's unfortunate that people were upset about Terran Mech because they couldn't just 1a into it and win. I honestly don't understand why these people are playing Starcraft. Protoss has so many extremely powerful units to use against mech unlike BW, void rays, phoenixs, immortals, 9 range colossus, chargelots, blink stalkers. Back then Void Rays were a lot stronger too especially when they could out-range turrets, 3 gate Stargate was almost auto-win against a mech opening.
This is why the protoss players are coming in here getting angry. You shouldn't have 3 completely different tech paths that you can do at any point and it be viable throughout the whole game.
Stargate play would like to have a word with you in the PvT MU. I dont care how it was back then. Protoss is forced to play a certain way just so that we dont auto lose. Zerg is forced (in some situations) to play a certain way so they dont autolose. Why are you allowed soo many different options and dislike that they auto lose in some circumstances?
I really like how you ignored the part where i mentioned getting tanks to be a 'standard' or 'staple unit'. Which is what Predy is namely asking for.
I though the map idea was good
Edit: People were unfortunate about terran mech in beta because it was overpowered.
I agree with everything you said.Tanks need to be back to 60 damage. They were only nerfed because of TvZ STEPPES OF WAR which is ludicrous to nerf an entire core unit because of close positions and horribly designed maps (remember incineration zone LOL).
I have tried to make mech work for a long while now, and only in the past week or two have i fully switched back to marine marauder, because...i like winning like everyone else does, and mech is just not viable tvp, they took everything that made it viable away.
First the tank. Then the thor. Then the hellion. No change to armory price, no change to anything else, tanks just suck tvp, doubt it will ever change. Nice thread =/ it's just sickening they nerf stuff like the hellion and tank so quickly, but it takes them 5 months + to nerf something as obvious as the infestor.
sighs. I wish you weren't punished for building tanks TvP like predy said, every single protoss unit + warpgate counters mech. Literally every single unit. Most good protoss players, once they see that you are committing to mech, will mass 100% blink stalker+collosus on some maps, or mass charge zealot immortal, or mass void ray...basically ANYTHING. And it destroys mech.
BRING TANKS BACK! =/ mashing the D, A, and V keysin TvP doesn't make me feel skilled as a Terran player, but sadly it's the only thing we can do in TvP.
also fyi @ people saying mech in beta was OP - it wasn't OP. Whiners were OP - there was a huge thread about mech imbalance tvz on ... STEPPES OF WAR...
the map is the size of everyone's pinky, no shit mech was imba on the map. The horrible map pool has actually been the cause for some of the ridiculous changes in the game such as the tank nerf.
The idiotic thing about the TvZ mech "balancing" is that the only reason it is even a problem is they broke zerg. There are two ways to deal with units that have high lump-sum damage. You can either have a lot of hitpoints, or you can have a large number of units. Protoss exemplifies the first approach, zerg the second.
Zerglings are situationally useful against tanks because of this fact. Although tanks do deal splash damage, it makes no difference if the tank is dishing 35 or 1000 damage to the zerglings- they are absorbing damage with unit count rather than tanking HP. As a result, making roaches, hydras, etc. more expensive and 2 supply fundamentally breaks zerg. Consider the hydralisk. A 1 supply hydralisk can have twice the numbers for the same supply. Now, tanks are supposed to counter hydras so perhaps this is a poor example, but double the hydras and they will work better than they currently do against tanks anyway.
Nerfing tank damage simply makes them useless against protoss. They still kill zerg units in approximately the same manner- kill count rather than tanking HP. Zerg just has fewer units, making that army dramatically more vulnerable to big numbers of damage. I propose the roach and hydra be made 1 supply, reduced model size, and rebalanced to fit for HotS. For the roach this will likely require an HP reduction. If the zerg players around here think it would be a good idea, this might be an especially serious reduction, but give the roach back its 2 armor and unusually fast regeneration. Also, the hydra will most likely require a reduced resource cost. Reduce the ultralisk to 4 supply, shrink model size, and adjust stats if necessary (probably not necessary for ultra).
After we fix zerg then we can start talking about buffing terran mech.
Edit: People were unfortunate about terran mech in beta because it was overpowered.
mech was overpowered on steppes of war and kulas ravine. One tiny map and another with ledges all and narrow chokes all over the place. A 60 damage per shot siege tank would not be overpowered on a map like tal darim, simply because they are so immobile.
Well I wouldn't exactly call MMM + ghost + viking T1 really, it's just a T1 core with higher tech supporting units. But hey... that's exactly like Protoss with a T1 core (gateway units) with higher tech supporting units (collosi/HT).
What I do agree the OP on is the introduction of these "boring" units and lack of micro. Mobile, super long range units I think are very stupid and not fun (colossi/vikings). Reavers were fun. Spider Mines were cool. Mech play was awesome in BW, and can be that way in SC2.
I hate the whole idea of warpgate tech, and wish they would change it to a defender's advantage mechanic and limit offensive warp-ins in HoTS and then rebalance Protoss T1. Right now Protoss T1 sucks, but their lategame is OP. Statistically speaking overall it may be fairly balanced, but it doesn't promote creative play. All the races should be balanced throughout every portion of the game. I also dislike how to balance the races every map pretty much has to have a narrow ramp.
Bio, Mech, Air, and any combination of the 3 should be available in all matchups. Instead we get the one composition over and over in the same matchup, where its just a mishmash of every unit because of how gimmicky they are. For example, the only reason you have vikings is to counter colossus, that's it, it serves no other purpose. Sticking to only a few units against good players will just mean you get countered really hard, and that's bad for strategy and variance.
It's unfortunate that people were upset about Terran Mech because they couldn't just 1a into it and win. I honestly don't understand why these people are playing Starcraft. Protoss has so many extremely powerful units to use against mech unlike BW, void rays, phoenixs, immortals, 9 range colossus, chargelots, blink stalkers. Back then Void Rays were a lot stronger too especially when they could out-range turrets, 3 gate Stargate was almost auto-win against a mech opening.
This is why the protoss players are coming in here getting angry. You shouldn't have 3 completely different tech paths that you can do at any point and it be viable throughout the whole game.
Stargate play would like to have a word with you in the PvT MU. I dont care how it was back then. Protoss is forced to play a certain way just so that we dont auto lose. Zerg is forced (in some situations) to play a certain way so they dont autolose. Why are you allowed soo many different options and dislike that they auto lose in some circumstances?
I really like how you ignored the part where i mentioned getting tanks to be a 'standard' or 'staple unit'. Which is what Predy is namely asking for.
I though the map idea was good
Edit: People were unfortunate about terran mech in beta because it was overpowered.
I just don't know what to say to this. It has nothing to do with balance and everything to do with gameplay.
Toss and Zerg should also have a lot of viable openings, but we are talking about Terran here.
If you want interesting games you need to have many viable openings and compositions that work throughout the game, but these compositions should not consist of 7 units because that means you won't have dynamic compositions, the magic number feels like 3 or 4 with 1 support unit sprinkled over the top and 1 utility unit such as a dropship.
For example MMM really isn't bio and really isn't MMM. Its actually MMMVGBR. Marine Marauder Medivac Ghost Viking Raven and is the only composition ever used in TvP, unless you consider 1-1-1 which is Marine Marauder Medivac Banshee Raven Tank. What about TvZ, its Marine Marauder Medivac Tank Thor. Makes things extremely confusing, and boring at the same time because the compositions will never be drastically different.
Lets look at viable compositions Terran has between the two games.
Core = You produce these units in numbers more than ~5. Support = You produce these units in numbers less than ~5.
TvZ Bionic [Marine Medivac Tank | Ghost] (Notice it falls within the magic range and is also the most exciting matchup)
SCBW:
[Core | Support] TvP Deep6 / Mame [Marine Medic | Tank] (I count 1-1-1 so I guess I can count this) Heavy Metal [Tank Goliath Vulture | Vessel]
TvZ Bionic / Bechanic [Marine Medic Tank | Vessel] Valkonic [Marine Medic Firebat | Valkyrie] SKTerran [Marine Medic Firebat | Vessel] HeavyMetal [Tank Goliath Vulture | Vessel] Marine Goliath [Obvious] Tank Science-Vessel [Obvious] 5 Rax Bionic into HeavyMetal (The difference is once the switch occurs theres a completely different composition of units its never a mishmash of 7 different units) 2 port Wraith [Wraiths Marine Medic | Firebat] (Edit: Omg how could I forget this?)
There's one reason why most people prefer watching TvZ over TvP in both matchups as well.
If having too many viable compositions is imbalanced then why is the Kespa rank full of zergs? We should never restrict the amount of viable compositions because we know it has nothing to do with balance, but it does make the game a lot more interesting. SC2 suffers from having too many gimmicky single purpose units, this means that you need 7 different units when it comes to a macro game. Instead you should have units that specifically complement other units in the same "group", and have high utility.
Well, I agree completely about the Siege Tank. It just got completely fucked, it's just a shadow of its former self being more expensive, taking up more supply, and doing less damage. Yes, it does have good A.I to complement it, but its kinda dumb how every unit protoss has counters it. I think this is more due to the way SC2 was designed though, often units just have hard counters to them, tanks just happen to be countered by....everything protoss has pretty much.
I don't know how they would fix the tank though, a damage buff would be nice but then they might become too strong vs zerg, and in TvT we would see the resurgence of tank/viking wars since bio will become obsolete again. I hope they try to mess around with it in HotS to fix the damn thing.
TvP is torture for me though. It's way too set in stone in what can work, makes me cringe everytime I run into a protoss on ladder ~_~
On October 02 2011 07:26 ZenithM wrote: I get that you (PredY) aren't exactly a nobody (I saw you play at Dreamhack I believe, that's all great) but your post is a bit whiny for a good player and a blue poster imho. So, stop me if I'm wrong, but as I understand, you don't like TvP, because you can't make tanks, and you must produce biological units, marauder especially, which you don't like, and you don't like warp gate, colossus, void rays either. You find that Broodwar was a much more interesting game because of tanks and the positional play they promote. Fine.
Broodwar was indeed very interesting, but it was also a completely different game, you can't just buff tanks to 60 damage and have again the BW experience in SC2 (we can all agree that with that kind of buff you can indeed make terran more "interesting", as in "having a full 64 terran roster GSL Code A and Code S" and such: tanks would rape TvZ, and you just have to 111 the other race to oblivion). If you want strong mech play vs Protoss, you would likely have to change protoss, and zerg indirectly. Furthermore, finding tanks more interesting than bio is your own opinion, not everyone shares it, don't make it some kind of universal truth.
With that out of the window, it's still true than a Terran tech path is not very viable against Protoss atm. Oh! The horror! Terran cannot just decide to build whatever they feel like and still win? Can I go stargate void rays + carriers? Do I whine about stargate not being viable against terran? About it not being viable in virtually any matchup?
I seriously hope that your post was not a balance whine (I highly doubt it but still) disguised as a game design/Broodwar nostalgia rant. If you lose a lot vs Protoss atm, it's not because Protoss is too strong and Terran badly designed. But it might be because you just "watch" the fights, as you said.
have you ever seen whitera sky play vs zerg? but you're right that i don't like marauders but like tanks more. it's probably a nostalgia rant as you say. still, i love starcraft so much i really want sc2 to succed. i just feel if tanks were better in tvp it would create more interesting games for the players and the spectators. i really hoped that these ball vs ball fights would last only in the beta but since that, tvp hasnt changed almost at all from the terran point of view, the only thing (well besides 111allin) was adding ghosts as a standart unit.
On October 02 2011 05:24 attwell wrote: Lol is this a joke? It has to be...a terran complaining that tanks aren't powerful enough and are too easily countered?
Chargelots counter tanks when they have no support and you micro them like a retard, dont target my zealots with the tanks if they are next to your units, you deserve to lose if you do.
Immortals counter tanks, no shit...why are you still massing tanks when I have immortals? Luckily for noobs it is conveniently pre-countered by your first unit, marines, so what are you complaining about? Can't figure out marines? Guess what, blizzard heard about your party and decided to cater it with ghosts.
Void rays counter tanks. OMG call the mayor, an expensive tech tree with expensive units sometimes counters tanks when you leave them alone like an idiot. You know what counters void rays? You guessed it, marines...I'm starting to see a pattern here.
Blink stalks sometimes counter tanks, but not really. They are fragile, do minimal damage, even against armor, and are owned by terran's second unit, marauders, as well as tanks.
So what is the problem exactly? You want to just keep making units and win without reacting or changing tech at all? Mass marines, tanks, and get 5 vikings, you just won 75% of your TvP games.
On October 02 2011 05:10 ohampatu wrote: Well. Im not going to have a discussion based off of:
Broodwar we could do it, so theres precedence. This is a new game. Precedence doesn't matter. Universal Balance and Game Design according to Blizzard is what matters.
If pure robo isn't viable, pure mech shouldn't be either imo. Even in TvT and TvZ its Bio-Mech. Also, just because the unit comps are similar, doesn't make games similar or opening BO's similar. If it was all that similar, none of us would play the game.
Edit. Regardless whether i think it should be viable or you think it should be. It all depends on blizzard, and the previous 'half page' post i made still hasn't been addressed.
so i assume you've never played broodwar nor watched it which means you shouldn't really talk about something you don't understand. from your tone it's obvious you'd like to flame so i'm not sure what to do now. i can probably tell you what i mean by the OP but you'll probably won't care anyway.
in starcraft all races are different yet you talk about every race using their tier 1 units with some tech support and caster support which is fine. as someone already stated, factory tech is a more completed tech than robo tech which act as a support to main ground gateway force. it was the same in BW, where there were reaver, HT and arbiters.
How do you explain that in sc2 in tvt pure mech is viable in tvt and tvz but not in tvp. My point was that TvP in sc2 is very limited unlike the other 2 matchups and very stale, not fun to play. I tried to explain why mech (tanks) make the game exciting, i don't know what you didnt understand. I stated it's my personal oppinion which means you don't have to agree with me.
Thanks for responding. Im not trying to be a flamer or anything like that. The 2nd half page post I made was thought out imo, trying to showcase how i saw the game. Believe me i wouldn't waste 200 words on a thread for no reason other than to make you mad, its not worth my time. Again, all it feels like is that im being bashed for showing the obvious 'relationships' between the races and how the game 'plays out'. Why does the argument have to be 'factory tech is more complete so it should work'. Or 'it works in TvT' but nothing else.
It doesn't work in all mu's. It works for certain unit comps, and Zerg and Terran unit comps allow the full mech to work. Protoss unit comps do not (according to you and apparently every terran, which i disagree on). Each race is designed differently. But still falls to the same thing i stated then. What 'n0ise' posted was completely accurate.
What i want is a discussion that doesn't revolve around Broodwar or Race vs Race. I wish you would look at unit comp instead and base it off of that. Because of the way Terran and Zerg play out through the game, it leaves it possibly to play almost purely mech against them. To be honest though nobody really plays full mech, most people do a hybrid bio-mech. Even pure late game mech included ghosts.
Protoss isn't like that though. The current unit comps that Protoss favors currently seem to decimate pure mech. Thats just how the game is. Like in your original post i did play beta, and remember the 60 dmg. And it needed nerfed. It didn't break tvz. It didn't break tvp. It didn't break tvz. The 60 dmg was just too much at the time, partiall because of the maps. Do you remember playing TvP on Steppes? As a toss it was ridiculous to fight turtle terrans on some maps. This may be able to be changed back now. Hell do it for all i care to see if tanks become more viable. Id rather have a discusion in how to make changes to Terran to make it work vs Protoss then argue about why it worked in Broodwar and why it doesn't work now.
Edit: It just feels to me like you think its fine if Terran has all these different options and tech choices and you dont mind ignoring that the other races aren't like this. I feel like you want Terran to be Broodwar Terran. Well, i hate having to make a robo every single game. You think blizzard cares?
yes i know blizzard doesn't care. but as you see in this thread a lot of players tend to agree with me and that means blizzard should care. but they wont i dont have false hopes.
i agree that maps like steppes of war forced blizzard into balancing the game in the certain way. then taldarim altar popped out and we had a whole new set of problems. blizzard made a mistake balancing the game around maps like desert oasis and steppes of war. but it's too late to cry over that.
i have a very objective look into the matchup dont worry. i can see your arguments being very valid. both races make a lot of low tier units and then add spellcasters and other support units. looks good on the paper right? i understand new people coming in that has no experience with BW and they like it. they like to run around with bio and dropping all over the place etc. it's just the way i (and many others in this thread) see it it just doesn't feel like anything we used to play like for years and years in broodwar. is that a wrong thing? it might be. as i said, on maps likes shakuras plateau it works to go biomech or mech because of the map structure. and that's ok because you can make the decision how you want to play. but on maps like taldarim? hell theres no way to outplay protoss who knows what to do (that comes down to the game and unit mechanics i mentioned like warpgates, mobility etc.). that's the main issue i was trying to make. it's just that tanks were adjusted not to be OP in TvZ and on maps like steppes of war, which makes me really sad as i strongly believe that was a bad move.
Thanks for responding!!
Im not saying i completely disagree with you in getting the units out there. Its just from us new people, and from us people playing the other races, you seem to ask for something we dont have and expect it as standard. Or so it feels like. Thats why alot of toss are responding the way they are in this thread, and i apologize for it. They are just responding to how they see it laid out in front of them. By balance (that may or may not be liked) the game was made very linear.
I think it kinda come's down to a few things. Tanks are seen as the 'terran' unit. I think the last TL poll showed when people thought of the terran they thought of the tank. So naturally there's are large fanbase for it. Im sorry but i can't agree that straight factory/pure mech play needs to be viable in all matchups, when the other races are snowballed in to certain bo's early game to be considered 'safe'. I do agree though that a Bio-Mech should be able to be played in any MU considering map balance. From the posts that I can see here, it really seems like the best solution to make people happy would be to increase maps that allow for tanks to be used, even if its just 2-3. That way different styles of play would be used per different kind of maps. I dont see the 60 dmg coming back. I know you mention it being overpowered in tvz, but it was just as bad for tvp and even tvt from my experiences because of current t1 unit health. Critical masses (8+) just made the game completely stalemate just because everybody is 'scared' to do anything for fear of 50+ pop dieing in 2 seconds. Games were won by having to catch your opponent unsieged. I dont know how that was ever considered fun. Sitting around a map mined out with max army waiting for 'that one chance' to catch him off guard.
So why dont we ask some Map of the Month makers to make some 'clover' like maps. That maybe allow for your set of expansions to be somewhat linear, to make it more viable?
Edit: Well. Im glad Predy replied and was pretty manner. For those of you terrans recently joining the conversation who have started to shift it to 'terran unwinnable in late game'. Please lets not do that if possible. Jinro's post for example, is nothing but a complete whine that Protoss is > Terran. None of that contributes to a discussion about tanks being used.
Edit 2: Predy. What is your stance on Antiga shipyard? You mention Shakuras as being mech friendly. Would not Antiga play at least till 4 bases similar to shakuras.
i feel we're starting to understand each other i don't think pure mech is viable at all in TvP (due to no spider mines and thors not too good vs air) because protoss unit counters tank thors hellions just too well and that's ok. i think going bio first and then transitioning into more mech/air play is just what would add more variety to that matchup. but as i mentioned, besides on some maps it almost doesn't work.
so why does it work on shakuras? the thing is, when protoss players see you make tanks (and they will because you cant deny his obersvers all game) the best counter to them is to make blink + collo and then walk around terran bases (especially when terran has 3bases, on current maps your bases are spread too thin) and harass everything they can. since mostly you make marines and save gas for tanks or vikings, you need to move your tanks and that takes a lot of time. on shakuras though, your 3base is perfectly safe from any blink stalker harassment (well your main is a bit exposed from one side but that's managable). then you can proceed to take half the map when you have enough units and that favors the terran since you can siege your tanks at the xelnagas and kill 2 protoss bases and use the terrain to your advantage. but the main point is, you have your 3base relatively fast and safe which is what you want if you want to go past 2base timing push with your tanks.
On October 02 2011 17:00 Enki wrote: Well, I agree completely about the Siege Tank. It just got completely fucked, it's just a shadow of its former self being more expensive, taking up more supply, and doing less damage. Yes, it does have good A.I to complement it, but its kinda dumb how every unit protoss has counters it. I think this is more due to the way SC2 was designed though, often units just have hard counters to them, tanks just happen to be countered by....everything protoss has pretty much.
I don't know how they would fix the tank though, a damage buff would be nice but then they might become too strong vs zerg, and in TvT we would see the resurgence of tank/viking wars since bio will become obsolete again. I hope they try to mess around with it in HotS to fix the damn thing.
TvP is torture for me though. It's way too set in stone in what can work, makes me cringe everytime I run into a protoss on ladder ~_~
well that was one of points i was making in the OP. it's the "hard counter" philosophy blizzard took up when making this game. prime example is immortal vs tanks. do you know banelings are supposed to counter marines? well they do, but if marines are microed well, blings became cost inneficient and it's good for the terran. i wish there was more stuff like this in this game. and i came back to my point, not having vikings vs collo = dead. its more of an unit composition game.
I completely agree with the OP, the tank is in a sad state for TvP and really holds back the potential for great possibilities. Even if they do restore the tank back to 60 damage, I still feel that the current state of the game with immortal range, blink stalkers, etc etc all will still hard counter a mech style. Right now, TvP is like what the OP said: massing, concave, and core spellcasters from both sides praying to get spells off. 2 EMPS landed and Terran wins, 2-3 storms landed from templar and Protoss win.
So what's the conclusion? In the OP you write that you don't know what can be done about it, and you don't think that there will be something done (while I do believe that HotS will bring a new mech unit, or at least change Mech in a way)
Buff the Tanks damage? - it would break current TvT (only Mech viable then) and TvZ (Roaches would become useless, Ultras would go from useless to unuseable, Infestors would suffer extremly) Buff the Tanks splash? - again TvT (only Mech viable then) and TvZ (no more zerglings, banelings, roaches) Buff the Tanks HP? - might not turn out too imbalanced, though it would definatly be a big buff against biobased compositions in TvT (no more stimming into "thin" tanklines) and TvZ (less risk of getting sniped by mutas, banelings would be shot more often in combats...); it also wouldn't really help a lot vs P in my eyes Spidermines on Hellions? - they already grant mapcontrol in TvZ; also zerg has no unit to kill spidermines until T3 and don't forget, overlords aren't detectors anymore, so spidermines would naturally be stronger against Zerg than in BW; (also you couldn't punish a terran anymore for not sieging, because you would permanently charge into spidermines... not to mention how freaking imba reactored spidermines of a unit that already fights well would be) buff Thors? - No! Mass Thor is already so extremly strong, that zerg can't deal with it in higher amounts... Also it would break your Tankline philosophy, because at some point you really wouldn't care to build Tanks anymore, because Thor/Hellion is just better
Terran resolves around Marines now, a unit that is so fundamentally and extremly overpowered, that everything else has to suffer. wait for HotS!
On October 02 2011 18:04 Big J wrote: So what's the conclusion? In the OP you write that you don't know what can be done about it, and you don't think that there will be something done (while I do believe that HotS will bring a new mech unit, or at least change Mech in a way)
Buff the Tanks damage? - it would break current TvT (only Mech viable then) and TvZ (Roaches would become useless, Ultras would go from useless to unuseable, Infestors would suffer extremly) Buff the Tanks splash? - again TvT (only Mech viable then) and TvZ (no more zerglings, banelings, roaches) Buff the Tanks HP? - might not turn out too imbalanced, though it would definatly be a big buff against biobased compositions in TvT (no more stimming into "thin" tanklines) and TvZ (less risk of getting sniped by mutas, banelings would be shot more often in combats...); it also wouldn't really help a lot vs P in my eyes Spidermines on Hellions? - they already grant mapcontrol in TvZ; also zerg has no unit to kill spidermines until T3 and don't forget, overlords aren't detectors anymore, so spidermines would naturally be stronger against Zerg than in BW; (also you couldn't punish a terran anymore for not sieging, because you would permanently charge into spidermines... not to mention how freaking imba reactored spidermines of a unit that already fights well would be) buff Thors? - No! Mass Thor is already so extremly strong, that zerg can't deal with it in higher amounts... Also it would break your Tankline philosophy, because at some point you really wouldn't care to build Tanks anymore, because Thor/Hellion is just better
Terran resolves around Marines now, a unit that is so fundamentally and extremly overpowered, that everything else has to suffer. wait for HotS!
Did you read an interview with Browder ? He says that Terran is now pretty much finished.. They will be maybe tweaking some units but adding of new units will come down to zergs and tosses only (for toss mainly because of lack of cheesy variety in early game apparently - thats what he said)... Terran is flexible as shit already and you would like to have an other unit.. pfffffffffffffff
On October 01 2011 06:16 Thorzain wrote: I feel that TvP IS really micro intensive. EMP everything, move your units out of storms, focus fire individual colossi with vikings and kite zealots if he's zealot heavy. And while you're kiting zealots you have to move back your ghosts so that they dont all get killed in the blink of an eye. All these things at the same time. It's freaking hard if you ask me!
It certainly IS micro intensive but I believe the meaning of his post is Marine Marauder does not feel Terran at all and i agree with the OP 100%
Look through all my posts and you'll see like 90% of them are me whining for my Mech TvP back as I am absolutely disgusted with the Marauder and now having to start playing Bio all the time. I don't feel anything like Terran when I make the Marauder.
Honestly changes I feel that could help make Mech useful in TvP again would be to:
1. Bring the hellions base damage to 10 and double the fire rate but remove the pre-igniter upgrade (helps to deal with early immortals)
2. Spider Mines
3. Goliaths instead of Vikings although let the Goliaths use air Damage against Collosus instead of ground damage.
4. Make the Siege Tanks damage 35+20 vs armored (allows them to 3 shot unupgraded stalkers at the start to help defend close position 4 gates.) -Also make it 2 supply again and 100 gas -A huge problem with Mech is that you can only ever have 2/3 the amount of tanks you could in BW which sucks regardless of smart fire. -Also the fact that tanks burn so much gas with the extra 25 with that removed you could build another tank for every 4 you make bringing out earlier pushes so toss doesn't have the map by the time you get a decent push timing.
And removing the Thor and marauder. (dunno how well thors would fit in with goliaths)
On October 02 2011 18:04 Big J wrote:Buff the Tanks damage? - it would break current TvT (only Mech viable then) and TvZ (Roaches would become useless, Ultras would go from useless to unuseable, Infestors would suffer extremly)
You would be looking at buffing damage to armoured and possibly massive targets. So something like 35(light)/55(armoured)/75(massive). This would still make bio viable. Ultras theoretically counter tanks since each one eats up about 9 shots (or more depending on upgrades) hence the bonus to massive. This would apply to archons as well.
On October 02 2011 18:04 Big J wrote:Buff the Tanks HP? - might not turn out too imbalanced, though it would definatly be a big buff against biobased compositions in TvT (no more stimming into "thin" tanklines) and TvZ (less risk of getting sniped by mutas, banelings would be shot more often in combats...); it also wouldn't really help a lot vs P in my eyes
Instead of increasing hp, they should reduce it and make them 2 food while costing 100 gas.
On October 02 2011 18:04 Big J wrote:Spidermines on Hellions? - they already grant mapcontrol in TvZ; also zerg has no unit to kill spidermines until T3 and don't forget, overlords aren't detectors anymore, so spidermines would naturally be stronger against Zerg than in BW; (also you couldn't punish a terran anymore for not sieging, because you would permanently charge into spidermines... not to mention how freaking imba reactored spidermines of a unit that already fights well would be)
You know what would be great? A speed upgrade on the hellions + either the spidermine upgrade OR the normal BF upgrade. Allows the T to either invest heavily into the hellion since its going to be the core unit, while increasing the risk for going BFH drops. Also reduces hellion runbys somewhat into the main during early game.
Spider mines can be cleared by a single speedling heading in one direction. Unless the mines themselves have smart A.I lol
On October 02 2011 18:04 Big J wrote:buff Thors? - No! Mass Thor is already so extremly strong, that zerg can't deal with it in higher amounts... Also it would break your Tankline philosophy, because at some point you really wouldn't care to build Tanks anymore, because Thor/Hellion is just better
Something needs to be done with the strike cannons period. Anything either than its current implementation would be a buff.
Well, pretty much wait for HOTS and the protoss expansion is the answer since theres so much one can do with number tweaking. I wonder what the protoss players would say with regards to warp gates/weak gateway units or gateways/stronger gateway units/HTamulet back.
On October 02 2011 18:04 Big J wrote: So what's the conclusion? In the OP you write that you don't know what can be done about it, and you don't think that there will be something done (while I do believe that HotS will bring a new mech unit, or at least change Mech in a way)
Buff the Tanks damage? - it would break current TvT (only Mech viable then) and TvZ (Roaches would become useless, Ultras would go from useless to unuseable, Infestors would suffer extremly) Buff the Tanks splash? - again TvT (only Mech viable then) and TvZ (no more zerglings, banelings, roaches) Buff the Tanks HP? - might not turn out too imbalanced, though it would definatly be a big buff against biobased compositions in TvT (no more stimming into "thin" tanklines) and TvZ (less risk of getting sniped by mutas, banelings would be shot more often in combats...); it also wouldn't really help a lot vs P in my eyes Spidermines on Hellions? - they already grant mapcontrol in TvZ; also zerg has no unit to kill spidermines until T3 and don't forget, overlords aren't detectors anymore, so spidermines would naturally be stronger against Zerg than in BW; (also you couldn't punish a terran anymore for not sieging, because you would permanently charge into spidermines... not to mention how freaking imba reactored spidermines of a unit that already fights well would be) buff Thors? - No! Mass Thor is already so extremly strong, that zerg can't deal with it in higher amounts... Also it would break your Tankline philosophy, because at some point you really wouldn't care to build Tanks anymore, because Thor/Hellion is just better
Terran resolves around Marines now, a unit that is so fundamentally and extremly overpowered, that everything else has to suffer. wait for HotS!
Did you read an interview with Browder ? He says that Terran is now pretty much finished.. They will be maybe tweaking some units but adding of new units will come down to zergs and tosses only (for toss mainly because of lack of cheesy variety in early game apparently - thats what he said)... Terran is flexible as shit already and you would like to have an other unit.. pfffffffffffffff
do you have a link to that interview? Terran is not flexible as ***. Marines are!
On October 01 2011 06:16 Thorzain wrote: I feel that TvP IS really micro intensive. EMP everything, move your units out of storms, focus fire individual colossi with vikings and kite zealots if he's zealot heavy. And while you're kiting zealots you have to move back your ghosts so that they dont all get killed in the blink of an eye. All these things at the same time. It's freaking hard if you ask me!
It certainly IS micro intensive but I believe the meaning of his post is Marine Marauder does not feel Terran at all and i agree with the OP 100%
Look through all my posts and you'll see like 90% of them are me whining for my Mech TvP back as I am absolutely disgusted with the Marauder and now having to start playing Bio all the time. I don't feel anything like Terran when I make the Marauder.
Honestly changes I feel that could help make Mech useful in TvP again would be to:
1. Bring the hellions base damage to 10 and double the fire rate but remove the pre-igniter upgrade (helps to deal with early immortals)
2. Spider Mines
3. Goliaths instead of Vikings although let the Goliaths use air Damage against Collosus instead of ground damage.
4. Make the Siege Tanks damage 35+20 vs armored (allows them to 3 shot unupgraded stalkers at the start to help defend close position 4 gates.) -Also make it 2 supply again and 100 gas -A huge problem with Mech is that you can only ever have 2/3 the amount of tanks you could in BW which sucks regardless of smart fire. -Also the fact that tanks burn so much gas with the extra 25 with that removed you could build another tank for every 4 you make bringing out earlier pushes so toss doesn't have the map by the time you get a decent push timing.
And removing the Thor and marauder. (dunno how well thors would fit in with goliaths)
You have any clue about balancing? Increasing hellion damage to 10 and doubling the fire rate, so it has Marine like dps against nonlight and stimmed marine like dps against light but with splash and then add spidermines to them while it still remains the most mobile ground unit in the game that doesn't cost gas and can be reactored??? Remove vikings so that Terran has no Air to Air unit? Make tanks even better/cheaper, to further strengthen 1-1-1 Remove the marauder so that you can make sure bio is unplayable in most scenarios, because you don't like it?
Go play broodwar, if you want to play Mech instead of having a variety of strategies!
On October 02 2011 18:57 sunman1g wrote: god if you had to mech in all 3 match ups i'd rather play another game.
i do not understand people loving mech so much. clearly not hardcore terran players...
TvT is already going in that direction. in TvZ you can go marine/tank or almost pure mech with ghosts later on.
if TvP was marine/tank or any bullshit like that i'd seriously quit playing/watching starcraft. i like MMM+V+G play vs P and I think its fun to watch.
as thorzain stated it's also pretty hard to micro
Us REAL hardcore Terrans don't want Mech in EVERY match up we simply don't want Marauder spam in TvP, it's an absolutely disgusting unit that isn't Terran at all. It screams Protoss EZ mode.
I still want to see lots or marines in TvZ i actually eventually want to see a Marine/Ghost/Raven composition come out that would be similar to SK Terran style in BW.
I don't understand how new Terran can appreciate a unit like the Marauder. SUPER cheap, has tons and tons of HP, can stim, slows units so you don't have to micro well on top of all this plus dishes out way more damage than necessary. It simply makes no sense making a unit that foolproof and mindless.
On October 02 2011 18:04 Big J wrote: So what's the conclusion? In the OP you write that you don't know what can be done about it, and you don't think that there will be something done (while I do believe that HotS will bring a new mech unit, or at least change Mech in a way)
Buff the Tanks damage? - it would break current TvT (only Mech viable then) and TvZ (Roaches would become useless, Ultras would go from useless to unuseable, Infestors would suffer extremly) Buff the Tanks splash? - again TvT (only Mech viable then) and TvZ (no more zerglings, banelings, roaches) Buff the Tanks HP? - might not turn out too imbalanced, though it would definatly be a big buff against biobased compositions in TvT (no more stimming into "thin" tanklines) and TvZ (less risk of getting sniped by mutas, banelings would be shot more often in combats...); it also wouldn't really help a lot vs P in my eyes Spidermines on Hellions? - they already grant mapcontrol in TvZ; also zerg has no unit to kill spidermines until T3 and don't forget, overlords aren't detectors anymore, so spidermines would naturally be stronger against Zerg than in BW; (also you couldn't punish a terran anymore for not sieging, because you would permanently charge into spidermines... not to mention how freaking imba reactored spidermines of a unit that already fights well would be) buff Thors? - No! Mass Thor is already so extremly strong, that zerg can't deal with it in higher amounts... Also it would break your Tankline philosophy, because at some point you really wouldn't care to build Tanks anymore, because Thor/Hellion is just better
Terran resolves around Marines now, a unit that is so fundamentally and extremly overpowered, that everything else has to suffer. wait for HotS!
Did you read an interview with Browder ? He says that Terran is now pretty much finished.. They will be maybe tweaking some units but adding of new units will come down to zergs and tosses only (for toss mainly because of lack of cheesy variety in early game apparently - thats what he said)... Terran is flexible as shit already and you would like to have an other unit.. pfffffffffffffff
do you have a link to that interview? Terran is not flexible as ***. Marines are!
On October 01 2011 06:16 Thorzain wrote: I feel that TvP IS really micro intensive. EMP everything, move your units out of storms, focus fire individual colossi with vikings and kite zealots if he's zealot heavy. And while you're kiting zealots you have to move back your ghosts so that they dont all get killed in the blink of an eye. All these things at the same time. It's freaking hard if you ask me!
It certainly IS micro intensive but I believe the meaning of his post is Marine Marauder does not feel Terran at all and i agree with the OP 100%
Look through all my posts and you'll see like 90% of them are me whining for my Mech TvP back as I am absolutely disgusted with the Marauder and now having to start playing Bio all the time. I don't feel anything like Terran when I make the Marauder.
Honestly changes I feel that could help make Mech useful in TvP again would be to:
1. Bring the hellions base damage to 10 and double the fire rate but remove the pre-igniter upgrade (helps to deal with early immortals)
2. Spider Mines
3. Goliaths instead of Vikings although let the Goliaths use air Damage against Collosus instead of ground damage.
4. Make the Siege Tanks damage 35+20 vs armored (allows them to 3 shot unupgraded stalkers at the start to help defend close position 4 gates.) -Also make it 2 supply again and 100 gas -A huge problem with Mech is that you can only ever have 2/3 the amount of tanks you could in BW which sucks regardless of smart fire. -Also the fact that tanks burn so much gas with the extra 25 with that removed you could build another tank for every 4 you make bringing out earlier pushes so toss doesn't have the map by the time you get a decent push timing.
And removing the Thor and marauder. (dunno how well thors would fit in with goliaths)
You have any clue about balancing? Increasing hellion damage to 10 and doubling the fire rate, so it has Marine like dps against nonlight and stimmed marine like dps against light but with splash and then add spidermines to them while it still remains the most mobile ground unit in the game that doesn't cost gas and can be reactored??? Remove vikings so that Terran has no Air to Air unit? Make tanks even better/cheaper, to further strengthen 1-1-1 Remove the marauder so that you can make sure bio is unplayable in most scenarios, because you don't like it?
Go play broodwar, if you want to play Mech instead of having a variety of strategies!
You don't have any clue about balance either. And the problem with SC2 is no variety...you HAVE to marauder spam or you lose in TvP. Also why would you need an Air to Air when you already have amazing Ground to Air?
On October 02 2011 18:57 sunman1g wrote: god if you had to mech in all 3 match ups i'd rather play another game.
i do not understand people loving mech so much. clearly not hardcore terran players...
TvT is already going in that direction. in TvZ you can go marine/tank or almost pure mech with ghosts later on.
if TvP was marine/tank or any bullshit like that i'd seriously quit playing/watching starcraft. i like MMM+V+G play vs P and I think its fun to watch.
as thorzain stated it's also pretty hard to micro
I agree with your opinion. There's presently variety in the pro-matches where TvZ feels like watching a Starship troopers movie and TvP being "Independence Day". TvT being any of the two extremes. It's fun to watch, measured and precise movements TvZ versus the fanatic build up of units for the final show down.
And again to the blue OP, I do not want to be forced play or watch SC:BW.
Could Protoss explore their higher tech to change the face of the current game state? The recent mothership changes look promising.
On October 02 2011 18:04 Big J wrote: So what's the conclusion? In the OP you write that you don't know what can be done about it, and you don't think that there will be something done (while I do believe that HotS will bring a new mech unit, or at least change Mech in a way)
Buff the Tanks damage? - it would break current TvT (only Mech viable then) and TvZ (Roaches would become useless, Ultras would go from useless to unuseable, Infestors would suffer extremly) Buff the Tanks splash? - again TvT (only Mech viable then) and TvZ (no more zerglings, banelings, roaches) Buff the Tanks HP? - might not turn out too imbalanced, though it would definatly be a big buff against biobased compositions in TvT (no more stimming into "thin" tanklines) and TvZ (less risk of getting sniped by mutas, banelings would be shot more often in combats...); it also wouldn't really help a lot vs P in my eyes Spidermines on Hellions? - they already grant mapcontrol in TvZ; also zerg has no unit to kill spidermines until T3 and don't forget, overlords aren't detectors anymore, so spidermines would naturally be stronger against Zerg than in BW; (also you couldn't punish a terran anymore for not sieging, because you would permanently charge into spidermines... not to mention how freaking imba reactored spidermines of a unit that already fights well would be) buff Thors? - No! Mass Thor is already so extremly strong, that zerg can't deal with it in higher amounts... Also it would break your Tankline philosophy, because at some point you really wouldn't care to build Tanks anymore, because Thor/Hellion is just better
Terran resolves around Marines now, a unit that is so fundamentally and extremly overpowered, that everything else has to suffer. wait for HotS!
Did you read an interview with Browder ? He says that Terran is now pretty much finished.. They will be maybe tweaking some units but adding of new units will come down to zergs and tosses only (for toss mainly because of lack of cheesy variety in early game apparently - thats what he said)... Terran is flexible as shit already and you would like to have an other unit.. pfffffffffffffff
do you have a link to that interview? Terran is not flexible as ***. Marines are!
On October 02 2011 18:44 Raiznhell wrote:
On October 01 2011 06:16 Thorzain wrote: I feel that TvP IS really micro intensive. EMP everything, move your units out of storms, focus fire individual colossi with vikings and kite zealots if he's zealot heavy. And while you're kiting zealots you have to move back your ghosts so that they dont all get killed in the blink of an eye. All these things at the same time. It's freaking hard if you ask me!
It certainly IS micro intensive but I believe the meaning of his post is Marine Marauder does not feel Terran at all and i agree with the OP 100%
Look through all my posts and you'll see like 90% of them are me whining for my Mech TvP back as I am absolutely disgusted with the Marauder and now having to start playing Bio all the time. I don't feel anything like Terran when I make the Marauder.
Honestly changes I feel that could help make Mech useful in TvP again would be to:
1. Bring the hellions base damage to 10 and double the fire rate but remove the pre-igniter upgrade (helps to deal with early immortals)
2. Spider Mines
3. Goliaths instead of Vikings although let the Goliaths use air Damage against Collosus instead of ground damage.
4. Make the Siege Tanks damage 35+20 vs armored (allows them to 3 shot unupgraded stalkers at the start to help defend close position 4 gates.) -Also make it 2 supply again and 100 gas -A huge problem with Mech is that you can only ever have 2/3 the amount of tanks you could in BW which sucks regardless of smart fire. -Also the fact that tanks burn so much gas with the extra 25 with that removed you could build another tank for every 4 you make bringing out earlier pushes so toss doesn't have the map by the time you get a decent push timing.
And removing the Thor and marauder. (dunno how well thors would fit in with goliaths)
You have any clue about balancing? Increasing hellion damage to 10 and doubling the fire rate, so it has Marine like dps against nonlight and stimmed marine like dps against light but with splash and then add spidermines to them while it still remains the most mobile ground unit in the game that doesn't cost gas and can be reactored??? Remove vikings so that Terran has no Air to Air unit? Make tanks even better/cheaper, to further strengthen 1-1-1 Remove the marauder so that you can make sure bio is unplayable in most scenarios, because you don't like it?
Go play broodwar, if you want to play Mech instead of having a variety of strategies!
You don't have any clue about balance either. And the problem with SC2 is no variety...you HAVE to marauder spam or you lose in TvP. Also why would you need an Air to Air when you already have amazing Ground to Air?
I'm not the one who is whining about having no variety in TvP and then suggests to remove the marauder and buff mech... It still doesn't create variety. It creates Mech instead of bio! I would love to see Mech being played in TvP, but I fail to see this being accomplished without redesigning the game, which won't happen before HotS.
Why I want Air to Air when I already have ground to air? It creates variety! It gives me the chance to play/watch air battles! I could ask you "why do you need amazing Mech vs P , when you already have amazing bio vs P?", but I won't because I would like that variety.
I totally agree with the op. I play quite a bit of terran and toss, and the match up is barely a shadow of how cool it was in BW. Putting any balance talk aside, the fact that everything from protoss counters tanks (charge,blink,immortals,voids) and the synergy of MMM, your right that it is very unlikely we'll see anything different in the near future. From the protoss point of view, I really miss arbiters and reavers. But yea the warp gate and the poopy tanks in sc2 definitely ruined such a beautiful match up.
Like the op, I sincerely hope we get a severe overhaul of the races. But honestly, I really don't like TvZ in sc2 either. The matchup seems ridiculous, 9 out of 10 times it comes down to either rushing the zergs fast expand (bunker, hellion or some other all in), or doing a 2 base tank marine timing push.
The results of these pretty much decide the game. It may go on for 15 more minutes, but was decided when these things either succeeded or failed. The zerg either defends well and gets out of control macro wise, or crippled by the 10-12 minute mark.
Agree with this and the OP. I guess the best you can say for TvZ is that there are a few variations on your attempt to cripple the zerg before 10-12 minutes, whereas for TvP it's always the same if no one allins.
That Idea about having to crush zerg before the 10 min mark is total b.s. Its a fib told by qqers. Terran can hold their own against Zerg in a long macro game. That is until BL infestor comes out. Then its gg. But thats around the 25 min mark.
that's not true anymore with now ghosts are used so often in TvZ
On October 02 2011 10:54 ledarsi wrote: One of the better OP's I have read in this forum, exactly parallels my thinking on a variety of levels. Also, I am sure I am not alone in this. More people than OP, PredY, and myself have this understanding of the game.
I would like to add a few points however. Map control being the most important of them. I feel that it is simply wrong the way the current SC2 system evaluates the meaning of "map control." Right here in the TL strategy forum you will read people say things like "only one person can have map control at a time" and might even claim such a thing is "obvious." This is preposterous. Map control is simply control of areas of the map. If you control the ENTIRE map, then I suppose you have map control and the other player cannot, but that is an unusual edge case. Most of the time you should have control of some areas, and your opponent should have control of other areas.
Every race needs the tools for strong positional play. Abilities like spider mines, units like lurkers. Abilities and effects that can give a strong local advantage such as dark swarm (also positional). This is very lacking in Starcraft 2 at the moment, and creates these extremely fast, aggressive, low-tech games where defensive, reactive play is either disincentivized or purely unnecessary. All you get are better tools to aggress against the enemy army directly, which you could do equally well with MORE UNITS, having the added advantage of hitting sooner. In the event that both players play defensively, all you get is two blobs smashing into one another to decide the winner. Silly.
Localization and positional play mean the player that splits their army up effectively has a huge combat advantage. Rather than having two armies of half strength, you have two groups which significantly outperform the blob you would get if you balled them together. Divide again to amplify the effect further, down to the minimum effective combat group size determined by your opponent's force distribution.
Blizzard is almost thinking like a noob in that they are very focused on unit composition and not on tactical play- they assume you have 'an army.' This is further evidenced by their treatment of unit supply costs. Hydralisks, roaches, ultras, siege tanks, immortals, thors, colossi, motherships, all have huge supply costs to justify big 'cool' units. Starcraft would, like most strategy games, be much stronger with more units (more pieces) than with bigger arbitrary stats ("stronger" pieces, which makes no sense since strength is relative). The improved pathing and unit AI also means units blob up more effectively, which means more positional play elements should be added to incentivize splitting forces up. Splash damage is the idiot's solution because... micro, or counter to nullify splash damage dealing unit. Back to "unit composition is king" thinking.
so true defender gets very small advantages in SC2 so it makes splitting ur army and controlling key pieces of the map very hard
My favourite TvP build is 2rax FE into 4 port Marine Thor Banshee with a Raven or two, works well at Diamond I'm sure a pro could tune it up and make it viable
In BW you didn't go mech in all matchups... Same as in SC2. And its' completely wrong to say that TvP requires no micro, it requires a huge amount of micro. It also benefits multitasking more, as drop play is much easier with bio. Tanks are super viable in 2 out of 3 matchups, isn't that enough?
I believe the biggest problem with TvP is something related but different - it's the lack of any kind of positioning or zoning elements from either player. Tanks are basically the only space-control unit to remain from BW and so many of the Protoss changes in SC2 were specifically designed to combat tank lines (Blink, Charge, hardened shields, to a lesser extent graviton beam) that tanks have become nigh-useless outside of a very few situations.
The problem is, without any elements of map control or positioning, the game tends to devolve into a pure army-strength contest. Any small loss, can easily put the game completely out of reach. That means you can get into very boring games where it's just blob-vs-blob the entire game. It just gets very tedious.
I can't see Blizzard really changing it, though - it would apparently go against the entire SC2 design mindset to have Terran players able to reliably choose mech vs Protoss.
On October 02 2011 18:57 sunman1g wrote: god if you had to mech in all 3 match ups i'd rather play another game.
i do not understand people loving mech so much. clearly not hardcore terran players...
TvT is already going in that direction. in TvZ you can go marine/tank or almost pure mech with ghosts later on.
if TvP was marine/tank or any bullshit like that i'd seriously quit playing/watching starcraft. i like MMM+V+G play vs P and I think its fun to watch.
as thorzain stated it's also pretty hard to micro
Us REAL hardcore Terrans don't want Mech in EVERY match up we simply don't want Marauder spam in TvP, it's an absolutely disgusting unit that isn't Terran at all. It screams Protoss EZ mode.
I still want to see lots or marines in TvZ i actually eventually want to see a Marine/Ghost/Raven composition come out that would be similar to SK Terran style in BW.
I don't understand how new Terran can appreciate a unit like the Marauder. SUPER cheap, has tons and tons of HP, can stim, slows units so you don't have to micro well on top of all this plus dishes out way more damage than necessary. It simply makes no sense making a unit that foolproof and mindless.
I was just about to post this exactly.
Just wanted to add also that Bio is totally viable in TvZ with Raven and Ghost support like you said. And it looks way cooler because their still tons of micro involved in splitting your MM against banlings, sniping infestors, and HSM Mutas,Infestors, and banling clumps.
This is diffrent then in TvP where I mass maruaders 1at snipe his collosi with my mass vikings and emp the !@#$ out of Protoss. Maruaders make this game so dull. Their just so good. Its so stupid how fast 4 of them with stim take out a nexus.
On October 02 2011 20:29 Ayjayz wrote: I believe the biggest problem with TvP is something related but different - it's the lack of any kind of positioning or zoning elements from either player. Tanks are basically the only space-control unit to remain from BW and so many of the Protoss changes in SC2 were specifically designed to combat tank lines (Blink, Charge, hardened shields, to a lesser extent graviton beam) that tanks have become nigh-useless outside of a very few situations.
The problem is, without any elements of map control or positioning, the game tends to devolve into a pure army-strength contest. Any small loss, can easily put the game completely out of reach. That means you can get into very boring games where it's just blob-vs-blob the entire game. It just gets very tedious.
I can't see Blizzard really changing it, though - it would apparently go against the entire SC2 design mindset to have Terran players able to reliably choose mech vs Protoss.
This has to be one of the smartest things I read from this thread as of yet.
Tanks costing 125 gas and 3 food is a downer compared to BW, but I'm curious to see how a change to 100 gas and 2 food would affect the other matchups. Mass Tank would be easier to get up but I doubt if it would make it more viable against Protoss.
Buffing tanks without affecting the other matchups is not going to be easy. The only way I see to improve tanks vs Protoss would be to do something with the damage to shields, but that would have no use against the other matchups, which would feel out of place.
And for those thinking Bio is 1+a+stim, please try Terran yourself and you'll soon find out it's anything but. Microing the ball, focusing the Colossi, dodging storms, landing EMPs, not getting your Vikings/Medivacs/Ghosts killed off all comes into it.
Wouldn't a tank buff make 1/2-base marine/tank pushes extremely strong? Recent GSTL I saw marineking destroy a protoss with a marine/tank/medivac timing, and it was from 2 base.
On October 02 2011 20:52 Whalecore wrote: Wouldn't a tank buff make 1/2-base marine/tank pushes extremely strong? Recent GSTL I saw marineking destroy a protoss with a marine/tank/medivac timing, and it was from 2 base.
yeah, but don't talk about mech units being used against Protoss in this thread... it destroys the threads purpose!
hm someone mentioned adding bonus damage to massive, which would outside of TvP affected only ultras (and thors, that sometimes can be annoying because you use thors to break siege lines), with which you dont want to attack sieged tanks anyway but would rather use broodlords for them to unsiege first (still tanks with +3 might be too good vs ultras, althought marauders are bigger threat, until fungaled). in TvP it would really help out vs early collosi (or archon) which you always target fire with tanks. if they die faster then more marines will live and will help clean the rest (zealot stalkers sentry)
On October 01 2011 06:16 Thorzain wrote: I feel that TvP IS really micro intensive. EMP everything, move your units out of storms, focus fire individual colossi with vikings and kite zealots if he's zealot heavy. And while you're kiting zealots you have to move back your ghosts so that they dont all get killed in the blink of an eye. All these things at the same time. It's freaking hard if you ask me!
I agree that TvP is very micro-intensive, but I feel that PredY is right in the fact that it is also a very one-dimensional match-up. You rarely see anything more than MMM and then if the P has Colossi and you don't have Vikings, you lose, and if the P has High Templar and you don't have Ghosts, you lose. It's just not a horribly fun match-up to play, because other than cheeses and timing attacks, there is very little differences in the play styles.
That being said, builds like what we saw Byun do in Code A (easily one of the coolest builds I've ever seen) gives me hope that eventually we'll see an increase in mech usage. Personally, I feel that mech is fun to play in TvP, but it's just not nearly as good as bio.
I think it would be cooler if in HotS they nerfed bio, but made mech a lot stronger.
Mech is so bad outside of specific timings, on almost all maps.
It just isnt able to do anything at all late game - if you want to kill an expansion that has 1 pylon at it you need to bring your entire army because of warpin, if protoss gets 1 warp prism up in your base........ you will never defend.
You cant stop addon sniping, your army will not trade nearly effectively enough vs his to make up for his instant 50 supply re-supply vs your super slow pace..... You are just not able to control the map at all, so unless you are doing a 2 base timing its pretty hopeless.
Edit: Well. Im glad Predy replied and was pretty manner. For those of you terrans recently joining the conversation who have started to shift it to 'terran unwinnable in late game'. Please lets not do that if possible. Jinro's post for example, is nothing but a complete whine that Protoss is > Terran. None of that contributes to a discussion about tanks being used.
No it isnt, what the fuck?
Guy 1 says if both players played perfect terran should never lose, I disagree I think its the opposite, I just dont think Protoss can play perfect without maphacking.
Give protoss maphack and I think T would never beat P, pretty much. Thats fine tho, because P doesnt actually have maphack.....
Also, for people complaining about how their race doesnt have the option of doing anything but playing the same thing every game either...... Well, how about you make a thread about that as well? Its not like thats a good thing and all us terrans want to keep it that way --
warpgate is just stupid and broken mechanics which shouldnt be in rts at the first place, it dumbed down evey P MU and is partialy responsible for the state of toss nowadays
On October 02 2011 21:45 humbre wrote: warpgate is just stupid and broken mechanics which shouldnt be in rts at the first place, it dumbed down evey P MU and is partialy responsible for the state of toss nowadays
I think its a really cool mechanic tho, I just dont know if it should be so universally available.
If it was only available in conjunction with a mothership or warp prism, it would be better I think BUT this would require an AMAZING rework of every Protoss matchup, because the game is not broken right now, just a little limited.
If mech could somehow prevent warp-ins in areas that would do a lot for its ability to function in longer games and on maps where not everything is clustered tightly together... Still would need some other changes to occur, but that is one of the bigger problems - inability to handle warpins at your expansions or main, as well as the inability to do anything to a far away protoss expansion without committing your entire army.
Maybe another raven spell..? Like a 30 second signal jammer or something with X radius.
I think the raven is one of the most important units for making TvT mech work, if it could somehow be made to have a similar impact on mech in TvP, I think we could have something viable. As it stands it doesnt add much unless the protoss is forced to go stalker heavy, and its very vulnerable to being sniped by feedback or phoenix, and vs archon/zealot/immortal it literally does nothing.
Some other things that are pretty minor but I would still like to see, is for the immortal shot to not be instant - being able to dropship micro tanks vs immortals in super small scale situations is desireable IMO. As it is, you can kinda do it by letting him shoot something else, dropping, picking back up.... but that means there has to be something else to shoot at, immortals tend to do a good job of killing things unfortunately.
Id also like to see tanks be able to move-shoot kite or semi-kite immortals, as it is they do a full turn around everytime you stop to shoot if moving backwards, which makes micro pretty pointless vs immortals. Id like to see some way of bringing back the move, hold, move, hold micro of dragoons and siege tanks from SC1. Maybe just a faster turning animation.
Like, I think immortals should still be able to catch the tank, just there should be a point to microing it back and shooting, like maybe you get off a couple of extra shots or if you do it perfectly you could back away "forever"... something like that.
althought i did not play BW on a level that i do sc2 now, coming from a masters Terran, i find TvP to be my weakest matchup because i'm forced to play a style that is not my style. by this i mean in tvt, and tvz i play mainly mech with siege tanks and i love this style of play, i find the bio play in tvp to be very strong in the early game but once a game gets to a 3 base point. i find it almost impossible to win any game vs a protoss even versus much lower league protoss. i honestly feel that it's just unfair in the late game the amount of micro required by the Terran to just barely survive vs the amount of micro the toss puts in to deal so much damage. late game scenarios i've been toying with other strategies to try and find something other than mmmvg that is viable but i just can't seem to make anything work even mmmvg. i agree with Thorizain that it's one of the most micro intensive matchups for a terran and i'd like to add that you must do damage early if not flat out kill the protoss or your just going to snowball out of control. i'd like to see some strong late game units that terrans can utilize perhaps something needs to change with the thor? not sure
What does Warpgate require? A gateway, a Cybercore, a 50/50 cost research, oh but there's a catch, you need a pylon.
What sucks is that the research takes so long, but is so crucial to Toss, that it removes any strategy related to Cybercore upgrades.
Instead they should just relegate it to the highest tier structure, make the research more expensive, and then buff all the gateway units so you don't have ridiculous Robo units to compensate and then Terran and Zerg won't have ridiculous timing attacks that they can use against Protoss.
The only time Warpgate is really necessary is when Terran has an unstoppable 2/1 mech deathball that you can't engage head on, and Terran can just drop 6 mini-nukes and a map-crossing arclite cannon at every base making it impossible to get any ROI on your expansions.
In BW Toss vs Terran late-game is almost impossible, unless you gain a massive advantage in the beginning by having 3 times as many bases and not losing any probes and can carpal tunnel pump from 30 gateways because Flash made beating carriers possible even for a 5 year old kid. Honestly my thought process as Terran in TvP is, "As long as i can get 3 bases or he goes carriers I will win". In this situation I can see warp-gate being really useful and making the game more exciting.
"The catch is you need a pylon." Having arbiter recall available at the cybernetics core for 50/50 and having each arbiter be a 100 mineral building sounds like a great deal to me lol.
More on topic...yeah, they should make it so the tank is usable in tvp like it was in beta. I remember epic macro games when my tanks actually killed stuff, instead of got runover by 1A like tonka toys.
You can never really pure mech anyways. You have to build ghosts with mech, and i'm pretty sure ghost nuke harrass is the key to hitting those faraway expos jinro was talking about without having to commit your entire army (as you cannot do that anyways).
The problem is still though that basically every protoss unit is designed to counter the siege tank, every upgrade is, and that getting double armories costs too much gas right now. I don't understand why they don't cost 150/50 instead of 100 gas. You shouldn't be punished for wanting to take a mech tech route and needing to upgrade your units. ebays/forges/evo chambers are minerals and upgrade every ground unit for their race along those tech paths.
If you want to go mech, instead of bio, your upgrade centers take a ridiculous amount of gas...which makes mech even more difficult to use.
Even then, copy paste everything jinro said, 1 warp prism getting through, 1 blink stalker backstab, 1 pylon basically anywhere on the map where you are planning to attack...and your army is gonna get melted away because protoss can take faraway bases and instantly reinforce.
Too many people arguing over "what takes more micro" in this thread. predy, and many, many other Terran players just want the tank to be useable in TvP instead of a paper weight.
The problem with warp gate should be obvious to anyone. Compare the Warp Gate and the Gateway. The warp gate has a shorter cooldown than the gateway has build time, and in addition allows the protoss to warp in their units anywhere.
The correct way to balance warp gate would be to have the warp gate cooldown be longer than the time needed by a gateway to construct the same unit. However, you may warp in that unit anywhere. This means going for the fast warp gate can be used offensively, however if you continue to aggress ineffectively the defending protoss building out of gateways will slowly build a bigger army. Strategy games are about tradeoffs, and warp gate isn't one. Warp gates are strictly dominant over gateways.
Their pitiful attempt to balance this strict dominance was to just give it a MASSIVE build time, which just hurts my brain as to what they could possibly be thinking.
The total lack of positional play making the game blob warz is a very astute comment. Blizzard has put in so many mechanics to discourage positional play because they think it is "static" and "boring." They understand nothing.
On October 03 2011 03:39 ledarsi wrote: The problem with warp gate should be obvious to anyone. Compare the Warp Gate and the Gateway. The warp gate has a shorter cooldown than the gateway has build time, and in addition allows the protoss to warp in their units anywhere.
The correct way to balance warp gate would be to have the warp gate cooldown be longer than the time needed by a gateway to construct the same unit. However, you may warp in that unit anywhere. This means going for the fast warp gate can be used offensively, however if you continue to aggress ineffectively the defending protoss building out of gateways will slowly build a bigger army. Strategy games are about tradeoffs, and warp gate isn't one. Warp gates are strictly dominant over gateways.
Their pitiful attempt to balance this strict dominance was to just give it a MASSIVE build time, which just hurts my brain as to what they could possibly be thinking.
The total lack of positional play making the game blob warz is a very astute comment. Blizzard has put in so many mechanics to discourage positional play because they think it is "static" and "boring." They understand nothing.
hmm, this actually is very intersting and i think you could be on to something with this. it really got me thinking, and if warpgate had a longer cooldown it would make for some interesting play, esp. in pvp. but could give protoss the defenders advantage they're lacking, as well as fix some warpgate mechanics
On October 03 2011 03:39 ledarsi wrote: The problem with warp gate should be obvious to anyone. Compare the Warp Gate and the Gateway. The warp gate has a shorter cooldown than the gateway has build time, and in addition allows the protoss to warp in their units anywhere.
The correct way to balance warp gate would be to have the warp gate cooldown be longer than the time needed by a gateway to construct the same unit. However, you may warp in that unit anywhere. This means going for the fast warp gate can be used offensively, however if you continue to aggress ineffectively the defending protoss building out of gateways will slowly build a bigger army. Strategy games are about tradeoffs, and warp gate isn't one. Warp gates are strictly dominant over gateways.
Their pitiful attempt to balance this strict dominance was to just give it a MASSIVE build time, which just hurts my brain as to what they could possibly be thinking.
The total lack of positional play making the game blob warz is a very astute comment. Blizzard has put in so many mechanics to discourage positional play because they think it is "static" and "boring." They understand nothing.
This could be interesting, but in that case it would be cool for the protoss units to actually do damage, for instance the stalker, because we will end up with a lot less units.
Perhaps make the gateway build time the equal of the warp gate's current cooldown, so if you just stick with gateways you have exactly the same number of units you do now with warp gate?
And make the warp gate require the current gateway's unit build time in cooldown, possibly add 5 seconds?
Basically, swap the build times between warp gate and gateways.
there's been some threads on the warpgate mechanic recently so i didn't really want to talk too much about it, but it's definately an issue. but for that we're gonna have to wait for HoTS and see what happens. but as you said i'd love if warpgates weren't the ideal option, rather have gateways as the main production facility + a few warpgates to warpin DTs to harass or HTs to faraway expo so you can defend. maybe allow as many warpgates as you have nexi? obviously rebalancing gateway units would be necessary t_t
So many good players posting here, I feel like I should be quiet while the grown-ups are talking ; ).
But, I don't think it's as simple as "nerf bio, buff mech." I think most Terran players (and Blizzard) would prefer that both are pretty good. (Even in Brood War, there are a few brave souls who try to do bio TvP, but as Predy said it works mostly as a 'surprise' all-in.)
On October 03 2011 04:23 ComTrav wrote: So many good players posting here, I feel like I should be quiet while the grown-ups are talking ; ).
But, I don't think it's as simple as "nerf bio, buff mech." I think most Terran players (and Blizzard) would prefer that both are pretty good. (Even in Brood War, there are a few brave souls who try to do bio TvP, but as Predy said it works mostly as a 'surprise' all-in.)
There are brave souls who do mech TvP in SC2 as well. That doesnt change that bio TvP sucks in BW and mech TvP sucks in SC2.
I don't think it's possible for the tank to be useable in TvP without a MASSIVE rework of 2 or all races I believe. Immortal/Chargelots/Collo/Storm all counter the tank pretty effectively + Guardian shield...
I wish it would work as bio is boring. Maybe more damage but less splash?
On October 03 2011 04:14 PredY wrote: there's been some threads on the warpgate mechanic recently so i didn't really want to talk too much about it, but it's definately an issue. but for that we're gonna have to wait for HoTS and see what happens. but as you said i'd love if warpgates weren't the ideal option, rather have gateways as the main production facility + a few warpgates to warpin DTs to harass or HTs to faraway expo so you can defend. maybe allow as many warpgates as you have nexi? obviously rebalancing gateway units would be necessary t_t
Easy solution: rebalance gateways, and put warpgate tech on the Templar Archives, to make it end-game tech that's available only if you go down that route, or something similar. Would probably have to nerf ghosts though, at least a little. *muses*
DB said as recently as August that Terran was designed too well. So whether or not Terran is not the master race is out of the question. None of those conspiracy theories are required, Gindo, when Blizzard themselves have said Terran is incredibly designed. Also Protoss being buffed in all regards from BW? LOL!!! Gateway units are shit now because of the warp gate mechanic (imagine decent Zealots/Stalkers off a 4gate... insta-win every game), and Archons are actually worse now fyi.
Dustin Browder says: DB: There's currently a concern with the Zerg Infestor's power fungal growth. I still hear a lot of complaints about the Zerg still not being strong enough, as well as Terrans still being too flexible. The latter's the most persistent one for the longest time. That's almost a design flaw not a balance flaw. We just have too many good units in that race. It's hard to cut units in that race and say, "I know you have a lot of good units, but we're killing two because [your race] is too good." (laughs) That's not going to work. And it's not fun to go, "Hey, you know that unit that was fun and useful? Well, we ruined it, so now your race is balanced." That feels terrible too. Those are some of the hot areas I've heard.
If anything, Browder's comment kills the point of the OP. I can't see the point of it besides ladder rage, when the fact of the matter is that Protoss is the worst race at pro play, and Browder states the exact opposite of the OP.
On October 03 2011 04:14 PredY wrote: there's been some threads on the warpgate mechanic recently so i didn't really want to talk too much about it, but it's definately an issue. but for that we're gonna have to wait for HoTS and see what happens. but as you said i'd love if warpgates weren't the ideal option, rather have gateways as the main production facility + a few warpgates to warpin DTs to harass or HTs to faraway expo so you can defend. maybe allow as many warpgates as you have nexi? obviously rebalancing gateway units would be necessary t_t
Warpgate mechanic and forcefield is definitely destroying the game. It makes map balance useless. Also the key reason of why Protoss unit sucks. The power of Protoss rely on the timing i.e. cheese With the warp mechanic and ff skill, even a slightly buff of Protoss gateway unit would become a nightmare of the other two races. So good BW protoss players just cant do their normal play and are forced to play cheese which is kind of really really sad.
On October 03 2011 03:39 ledarsi wrote: The problem with warp gate should be obvious to anyone. Compare the Warp Gate and the Gateway. The warp gate has a shorter cooldown than the gateway has build time, and in addition allows the protoss to warp in their units anywhere.
The correct way to balance warp gate would be to have the warp gate cooldown be longer than the time needed by a gateway to construct the same unit. However, you may warp in that unit anywhere. This means going for the fast warp gate can be used offensively, however if you continue to aggress ineffectively the defending protoss building out of gateways will slowly build a bigger army. Strategy games are about tradeoffs, and warp gate isn't one. Warp gates are strictly dominant over gateways.
Their pitiful attempt to balance this strict dominance was to just give it a MASSIVE build time, which just hurts my brain as to what they could possibly be thinking.
The total lack of positional play making the game blob warz is a very astute comment. Blizzard has put in so many mechanics to discourage positional play because they think it is "static" and "boring." They understand nothing.
great post.
As a terran I would love to see a reworking of Protoss to their role of having the 'stronger' units, but warpgates make this impossible. Your suggestion is an interesting fix without completely breaking the game. But then again if it happened, Protoss units might require buffs.
It's a shame none of these recommendations have any chance of ever happening, a reexamining of warpgate mechanics, siege tank damage, etc. I wouldn't hold my breath for HotS to be some revolutionary game-changer as many are hoping. But I hope I myself am proven wrong
On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote: The thing with TvP is that it doesn't feel terran-ish at all, if i wanted to make a lot of T1 units i'd play zerg!
This! I agree completely.
Been saying this since beta, fuck bio man, Its not terran at all, its like terran wearing a zerg hat yelling "look at me! I'm mobile and give you map control but I will lose in properly controlled max engagements so you better do some damage before then!"
Its absolutely fucking retarded.
Proposed solution (HoTS) Remove marauder, replace with firebat, buff tanks (with 25 less gas and 2 supply cost, and/or a damage buff) give hellions mines or just replace that hotwheel flame thrower with the vulture.
On October 03 2011 03:39 ledarsi wrote: The problem with warp gate should be obvious to anyone. Compare the Warp Gate and the Gateway. The warp gate has a shorter cooldown than the gateway has build time, and in addition allows the protoss to warp in their units anywhere.
The correct way to balance warp gate would be to have the warp gate cooldown be longer than the time needed by a gateway to construct the same unit. However, you may warp in that unit anywhere. This means going for the fast warp gate can be used offensively, however if you continue to aggress ineffectively the defending protoss building out of gateways will slowly build a bigger army. Strategy games are about tradeoffs, and warp gate isn't one. Warp gates are strictly dominant over gateways.
Their pitiful attempt to balance this strict dominance was to just give it a MASSIVE build time, which just hurts my brain as to what they could possibly be thinking.
The total lack of positional play making the game blob warz is a very astute comment. Blizzard has put in so many mechanics to discourage positional play because they think it is "static" and "boring." They understand nothing.
Exactly. Warpgate should be used as defense and harass not offense. It's kind of ridiculous that it turns all your minerals to army...and... in your opponent's base. This is exactly the ideal goal of a good strategy for each race: make all your minerals to army and quickly go to your opponent base before time XXX.
From a time-value point, units value are becoming less and less in the time frame. i.e. the 3 marine from 2 rax in 3:30 is like the value of 30 marines in 12:00.
In T/Z view, this means protoss always can attack at the peak when their army value is most. In P view, this means if you dont use this warpgate advantage, you have to rely on the crap units to defend.
I dont agree wirh this because even if you dont have emps u dont always lose to fungal growth. They do about the same damage right? I mean if you have good micro you could alwayd dodge storms.
Hmm I agree, I played you sometimes in ladder and I could just see the frustration in your play, however I play both terran and protoss and I also find the matchup from both sides very boring ;/
On October 03 2011 03:39 ledarsi wrote: The problem with warp gate should be obvious to anyone. Compare the Warp Gate and the Gateway. The warp gate has a shorter cooldown than the gateway has build time, and in addition allows the protoss to warp in their units anywhere.
The correct way to balance warp gate would be to have the warp gate cooldown be longer than the time needed by a gateway to construct the same unit. However, you may warp in that unit anywhere. This means going for the fast warp gate can be used offensively, however if you continue to aggress ineffectively the defending protoss building out of gateways will slowly build a bigger army. Strategy games are about tradeoffs, and warp gate isn't one. Warp gates are strictly dominant over gateways.
Their pitiful attempt to balance this strict dominance was to just give it a MASSIVE build time, which just hurts my brain as to what they could possibly be thinking.
The total lack of positional play making the game blob warz is a very astute comment. Blizzard has put in so many mechanics to discourage positional play because they think it is "static" and "boring." They understand nothing.
I love this post I could see a situation where the Warp gate timer could be say 60-80 seconds so it wouldn't be a great idea to use it, in less you were going on the offensive or trying a harass with warp prism. This change needs to be made, I don't know how they would buff basic gateway units to make the change though bringing Khardarin Amulet back would be a start.
i strongly disagree that tvp is not micro intensive. late game multi pronged drops take some good multitasking skills to be effective and the feedback/emp duel is always intense.
Terrans are lazy, thats why the game is always just mmm lategame. You mentioned the oz v byun video in your post which i found to be a great game. It shows that other compositions are viable, just that most terrans would rather hit t and a click with bio than micro hellions and spread tanks. Thorzain is another good example. His TSL 3 games (while dated) were incredible and his heavy thor usage was quite the innovation. Terrans just need to experiment more and try to think outside the box, because as it stands many pro terrans end up just going for a mass marauder medivac 2 base timing for a quick ezpz win against a toss who's transitioning to collosus or HT -_-
TvZ is probably the coolest macro matchup though, especially when its DRG v terrans since his decision making and unit control are just impeccable.
i like most of the points made in the OP, but i think the author forgets one thing: the medivac. a good terran is constantly doing drops, killing probes, sniping important buildings, etc.... multi-tasking becomes very important.
at some point, drops become much less viable, but a protoss' ability to deal with drops in the early/mid-game sets up the rest of the game.
I totally agree with you Predy, TvP feels very blan to me and also feels like its missing an element of positional play. But yes, it is only vanilla SC2 and you cannot say SC1 was a great game until BW. So hopefully well see some nice changes as the game evolves. Thanks for sharing
On October 01 2011 07:11 eourcs wrote: TvP is a really odd matchup, where I think someone with perfect control and macro will be unbeatable, regardless of how well the Protoss plays (this is barring 1-1-1 which I do think is imbalanced), but like 99% of players I don't have that, so the matchup is hard as fuck. At the highest level, it's possible that it's imbalanced, but at every other level, the people who complain about Terran are idiots. Lategame TvP is extremely hard, and personally, I have never seen anybody beat Hasuobs when he gets Templar/Collosus and a solid 3-4 base economy, regardless of how far behind he is.
I feel the opposite - TvP is a matchup where if both players played perfectly, terran should never ever win. So dependant on getting good drops etc.
Of course its pretty damn close to impossible to play the level of perfect that you can consistently every game deny every single drop which might even make it terran favored in reality.
Anyway, I agree 100% with PredY's post, bio TvP makes me want to quit -_-
I agree that if the Protoss can deny every drop they should be ahead, but I just assumed that the perfect Terran would always find a way to deal damage with a drop; so it's mostly an unstoppable force vs. an unmovable object argument ^_^. Though I think that it's possible for a Terran to always do some damage with a drop, while it's virtually impossible for a Protoss to deny every drop unless, like you said, they have maphacks.
On October 03 2011 03:39 ledarsi wrote: The problem with warp gate should be obvious to anyone. Compare the Warp Gate and the Gateway. The warp gate has a shorter cooldown than the gateway has build time, and in addition allows the protoss to warp in their units anywhere.
The correct way to balance warp gate would be to have the warp gate cooldown be longer than the time needed by a gateway to construct the same unit. However, you may warp in that unit anywhere. This means going for the fast warp gate can be used offensively, however if you continue to aggress ineffectively the defending protoss building out of gateways will slowly build a bigger army. Strategy games are about tradeoffs, and warp gate isn't one. Warp gates are strictly dominant over gateways.
Their pitiful attempt to balance this strict dominance was to just give it a MASSIVE build time, which just hurts my brain as to what they could possibly be thinking.
The total lack of positional play making the game blob warz is a very astute comment. Blizzard has put in so many mechanics to discourage positional play because they think it is "static" and "boring." They understand nothing.
I love this post I could see a situation where the Warp gate timer could be say 60-80 seconds so it wouldn't be a great idea to use it, in less you were going on the offensive or trying a harass with warp prism. This change needs to be made, I don't know how they would buff basic gateway units to make the change though bringing Khardarin Amulet back would be a start.
I want to add to the love for this idea with one caviat, I would like to see it implemented in a way where you don't have to transform the gateway every time you want to do a warp instead.
When KA first got removed I thought of an idea where mabye making them out of a gateway would give the KA buff, but then I realized that if you begin building a HT and warp in a HT at the same time with this mechanic they'd have roughly the same energy when the built one popped out, just another example of gateways being oddly useless.
im sorry.What? Ive never really played terran, not above the campaign or at a high gold level a few season ago, but tanks in TvT are so fucking boring. I dunno about TvZ, sometimes it can be fun watching tanks blow the shit out of banelings, but id say they're pretty boring to watch.
Saying 'toss go collosus and you have no vikings? you die.They go HT and you have no ghosts? you die' (its the same for toss btw. If a terran goes ghosts and you dont have HT you die, unless they cant emp for shit)
thats the same for any race in any MU - if you dont scout your opponents tech path/composition you deserve to die tbh.
And bad positioning can destroy a toss army.If you capure him with his army split up even the slighest, or with his zealots at the back and sentries at the front, all the HT together, collosus vulnerable ect then you can win the game there and then as terran.
@ Ledarsi what league are you? cos your views on balance are obviously blinded by something. What you say about the WG - its cooldown should be longer then the gateway but you can warp in anywhere. Think about how that would work, for just a second.
Toss would have to decide between being defensive and aggresive. If you change to WG and then a small, early game terran force appears at your ramp, and you units, which already nearly take twice as long to build as terran tier one, now take EVEN longer to warp in......thats GG
You;d have to make it so you can build them normally from a gateway, or warp them in, without having to morph the gateway. Either that or a toss player would have to make half WG and leave the rest as gateways just in case.
i agree that the warp in mechanic needs to be changed, but you cant just blindly make it longer then the gateway build time, as terran would have an even bigger advantage early game.
I have no idea why this was spotlighted. So a mod agreed with the sentiment and this get's spotlighted? Seriously?
On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote: 1 Introduction, StarCraft 2 philosophy?
I believe blizzards intended to make sc2 a fast paced game, which means they wanted to make low tier units useful, Marine+Marauder being the prime example of that. It means that there's rarely a passage in the game where nothing is happening (on the pro level). But does this hurt the game? Are low tier units too strong?
Also it seems blizzard wants to make as many units viable as possible in all matchups so they can have variety in the gameplay. In BW, that was not the case, as marines were almost useless in both TvT and TvP besides couple timing attacks (f.e. Deep6). I believe sc2 TvP has the similar issue, but i'll get to that later.
I have a few questions right off the bat. What do you mean by hurt the game? Do you mean that it is boring to watch, or boring to play, or both? I'm not sure I understand the sentiment that it hurts the game, unless you give me some qualifications for that statement.
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Again, you just throw out something random without qualification. What do you mean the marauder is boring? What does that actually mean in terms of gameplay or observing? I happen to like the marauder. I think the marauder introduces variety into the TvT match-up. I like that bio play can play against mech since it punishes mistakes. I like that bio can transition into mech and then into sky terran. I think that actually makes for exciting TvT and the reason TvT is the best mirror.
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
And this is a problem with any race. Build order losses happen. This has been addressed by other people in the thread. If you have cloacked banshees and your opponent has no form of detection, then you lose. What is your point?
I skimmed through this thread and saw a lot of different posts addressing the issues with the OP. I get that the OP wants a more positional game and wants more micro capabilities. That's fine, the OP has a right to his opinion. But why was this spotlighted? This should be a blog post. There is no discussion to be had. The OP hates the marauder, while other people do not. What is it that we are supposed to be discussing? How much the marauder sucks? How is any of this useful either to TL or to Blizzard?
TvP is actually my favourite MU both to play and watch. To comment on a couple of points made:
1) Late game TvP is very micro intensive for Terran players - as mentioned by Thorzain. Kiting is key, while also managing EMP and viking targeting.
2) The original comment that the MU is bland seems to me more a preference or style issue. Personally I enjoy the speed of the engagements; the manner in which moving/positioning your bio and vikings is important; the way battles tend to move backwards and forwards as storms go off and/or EMPs necessitate and retreat and regroup. Blink adds an additional dynamic to an engagement. While the MU may lock you in to a certain army composition, is this not the same with all other matchups? Indeed, at the highest level of play, there is an accepted standard/compositional strategy that yields the best results.
3) That being said, as the game evolves, different effective strategies will be discovered and perfected. Remember, SC2 is only a year old! BW took much longer to reach the pinnacle of its competitiveness and diversity. Just a few weeks ago, Protoss was considered the weakest race of the three, only to have been given a new lease on life as innovative and exciting strategies are developed and unknown players storm onto the scene.
4) In an RTS game, every unit must have something to counter it, otherwise we see even more homogeneous army compositions. It's not designing new units or deleting/adding technologies that will change this MU, but rather tweaking existing counters until a subtle balance is found that allows a smooth flow to a match. All patches to this point are doing exactly that, slowly but surely refining the game, not redefining it. I fear that if radical changes are made like some people in this thread would advocate, it would set the game back rather than move it forward.
I agree the OP, TvP doesn't really capture the essence of Terran, it feels like something more like Zerg or Protoss. I really like how TvT and TvZ are, because there are a multitude of styles and ways you can play those MUs, but TvP is strictly limited to bio. I don't care if bio is good, in fact, i think the best way is to have both bio and mech/biomech be viable, so that different types of players can still have an enjoyable experience.
I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff.
On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote: I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff.
wow i dont know the exact cost of tanks, but wanting 2 to defend an expo is completely retarded. If that was possible then terran, and tanks, would be completely broken.
If you remove the warp mechanic, you reduce the build time, or buff every gateway unit, or do something that isnt going to completely destroy the game - which is what would happen if you simply remove warp gate tech.
Id be amazed if they werent trying to find ways to change it right now, but its alot harder then some people like to think, the people who think they know how to balance this game. Which to them is basically making every race that isnt their own weaker and worse.
And i dont think blizz are too stubborn to go back on themselves, if they realise that warp in really doesnt work then they'll remove it. But that would result in a complete overhaul of toss, cos their main ability to counter attack and apply pressure would be gone and then they;d just be a turtling race - if you last past the early-mid game, what with terran tier one units being cheaper, quicker to build, and just all round better. They're much better off trying to fixWG as apposed to removing it, and then rebuilding toss as it were
Completely agree with you about this. Most of the time when i type about how imba TvP is for both sides i get banned or laughed at maybe because my english is limited who knows. I think because of some nerfs to balance other things you are limited to 1 thing and 1 thing only in TvP going bio no matter what your late game comp will be marine,rauders,vikings,ghost with 2-3 medivacs some pros go marine,vikings,ghost lots of medivacs and 2-3 rauders just for slows because their micro is awesome but the point still stays that you are limited to go bio everytime.
I can't see any answers how to make mech viable in TvP if they buff tanks they will make them op in other matchups, hellions are also kinda meh because of how charge works and they die to your own splash and thors are slow and to much resources. I rather have stable builds and just by improving my positioning and decision making to win games then to have this up&down allinish TvP where late game is : Ups drop in your main, ups run in to ghost emp, ups choke point say hello to aoe in sc2,ups made to much vikings other dude has more hts, ups "special" units got focused now i'm dead and so on..... The machup is really fragile and I can't see stabilizing soon. Early game toss has to gamble what harass is coming, lategame terran has to gamble what tech switch is coming. Atleast this is my opinion.
As a protoss player, I can kind of see what you're saying I often offrace as Terran, and when I play vs protoss, I'm always taken back by how powerful toss armies are
However, from the toss perspective, I think picking the protoss apart by multitasking (dropping 2-3 things, harassing, sniping buildings) comes pretty easily If the protoss spreads out to defend everything, your main army can just push in and kill
Also, i believe mech IS viable, I've seen a handful of players consistently pull it off (masters league)
Edit: Well. Im glad Predy replied and was pretty manner. For those of you terrans recently joining the conversation who have started to shift it to 'terran unwinnable in late game'. Please lets not do that if possible. Jinro's post for example, is nothing but a complete whine that Protoss is > Terran. None of that contributes to a discussion about tanks being used.
No it isnt, what the fuck?
Guy 1 says if both players played perfect terran should never lose, I disagree I think its the opposite, I just dont think Protoss can play perfect without maphacking.
Give protoss maphack and I think T would never beat P, pretty much. Thats fine tho, because P doesnt actually have maphack.....
Also, for people complaining about how their race doesnt have the option of doing anything but playing the same thing every game either...... Well, how about you make a thread about that as well? Its not like thats a good thing and all us terrans want to keep it that way --
If only the colossus was a reaver....
You said that, but not much reasoning behind that statement and I am interested why would you think so. And hopefully you mean both players having maphack in your scenario, otherwise the outcome has nothing to do with statement in question.
Anyway why I have different feeling is that lately I see terran late game bio+ghost(ev. vikings) armies demolish late game protoss armies thanks to emp/snipe and smart scans. Of course with maphacks on both sides I see it as more of a stalemate, not in any way decidedly good for protoss.
On October 03 2011 05:37 flowSthead wrote: I have no idea why this was spotlighted. So a mod agreed with the sentiment and this get's spotlighted? Seriously?
On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote: 1 Introduction, StarCraft 2 philosophy?
I believe blizzards intended to make sc2 a fast paced game, which means they wanted to make low tier units useful, Marine+Marauder being the prime example of that. It means that there's rarely a passage in the game where nothing is happening (on the pro level). But does this hurt the game? Are low tier units too strong?
Also it seems blizzard wants to make as many units viable as possible in all matchups so they can have variety in the gameplay. In BW, that was not the case, as marines were almost useless in both TvT and TvP besides couple timing attacks (f.e. Deep6). I believe sc2 TvP has the similar issue, but i'll get to that later.
I have a few questions right off the bat. What do you mean by hurt the game? Do you mean that it is boring to watch, or boring to play, or both? I'm not sure I understand the sentiment that it hurts the game, unless you give me some qualifications for that statement.
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Again, you just throw out something random without qualification. What do you mean the marauder is boring? What does that actually mean in terms of gameplay or observing? I happen to like the marauder. I think the marauder introduces variety into the TvT match-up. I like that bio play can play against mech since it punishes mistakes. I like that bio can transition into mech and then into sky terran. I think that actually makes for exciting TvT and the reason TvT is the best mirror.
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
And this is a problem with any race. Build order losses happen. This has been addressed by other people in the thread. If you have cloacked banshees and your opponent has no form of detection, then you lose. What is your point?
I skimmed through this thread and saw a lot of different posts addressing the issues with the OP. I get that the OP wants a more positional game and wants more micro capabilities. That's fine, the OP has a right to his opinion. But why was this spotlighted? This should be a blog post. There is no discussion to be had. The OP hates the marauder, while other people do not. What is it that we are supposed to be discussing? How much the marauder sucks? How is any of this useful either to TL or to Blizzard?
by boring marauder i mean the unit has no cool abilities and feels out of place. good low tier units with a lot of HP (and concussive shells) and very good damage, is cheap and easy to get (similar to roach). collosus is for example boring for me as well, since its a big machine with lazers thats just A move. you don't need to deploy it like lurkers or siege tanks.
about the unit composition. i meant that there's no way to counter collosus other than with vikings (or corruptors) which means whenever you don't have those around you're doomed, it's not like in tvz where you can "dance" your marines vs blings, in tvp if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings, especially late game. with wall of support units in front
and as you mentioned yourself, tvt is an exciting matchup since while the match goes on you climb the tech tree, bio - mech - air. nothing like that happens in tvp where you have units you need since 12 or so minute mark.
On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote: I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff.
The siege tank was balanced in beta against protoss. You could build them and it was worthwhile to go mech. And viable.
It was only "impossible to balance" on retardedly designed maps such as steppes of war where it takes about 5 seconds to cross the entire map, along with being 3 siege tank shot lengths away from your opponent's natural...
I remember being one of the first/few in beta to be playing mech/ghostmech against protoss, and i would have sick macro games where tanks actually didn't get insta-gibbed and holding a position actually meant something. Protoss had to be smart like in brood war to engage you, not just "hello 1A into your tank line at any angle i want to and come out ahead."
As it stands right now, you cannot hold a position with mech like you could in the beta because of the tank nerf. Protoss actually feared your tanks and if they played bad (and most did because they apparently all forgot their brood war skills) then they were punished for 1Aing in bad positions/bad spots. As of now, protoss is not punished for you gaining a better position on them because siege tanks just tickle their units, or you can mass collosus+blink stalker and walk around their army 100% of the time and base trade with DTS + warpgates + sniping the remaining orbitals = protoss win.
With the recent hellion nerf, TvT is back to more of "I build more marines than you." How anyone can not see that this is horrible for SC2 is beyond me. It's just another nerf that makes positioning mean less, and micro mean less. Because now TvT for example, you can mass marines and come out ahead due to the extra shots hellion take on marines. Marines easily will out dps every other unit and the only micro required? Pre-spread into an arc and 1A.
Mech actually took forethought, overarching strategy, spotting, and positioning that is difficult, very difficult (ala brood war difficulty) for a player to learn. With bio, you can blindly run in, and as long as you make an arc, you are good to go no matter how intricate or good your opponent's positioning was, because that's how bio plays.
Bio plays very linearly "make more of these tier1 units, throw them at your opponent for gain, when they die, make more and do it again. If you have less you lose, when you have more u win."
Siege tanks on the other hand, if they had their beta damage back, and you had a few on a cliff, it's not suddenly "i do not have an equal army supply to the protoss so i'm going to die 100%" but it is "i have better position, if he runs up he's going to lose more units than it is worth."
Right now, 99% of the time tanks do not scare protoss because they had their balls removed, so instead of beta where you could hold that position with tanks and protoss would HAVE to back off, they instead 1A into your tanks or blink into them or charge or whatever and they trade cost effectively and will always come out ahead. It's why mech is not viable in TvP.
And don't cite goody as an example. Just because you can do something and it will work against lower tiered protosses or once in a best out of 5, does not mean you should 100% of the time. There are Terran players with 10x better multi-tasking that don't queue up 5 tanks in one factory and 5 SCVS in one CC that still get thrashed by protosses when they try to mech and it's not because they're doing it any less better than goody or anyone else.
It's disheartening really just how bad mech is in TvP. =/ also keep in mind one of the key ways mech had to harrass protoss was with blue flame hellions that actually could kill workers. Now it is worthless to even try that because they 3 shot workers, it's the difference between successful harass and killing 2 probes and having protoss laugh at you for wasting the resources while their 1A ball just grew in size for free.
It sounds like you believe sieging and unsieging tanks has more to do with micro than maintaining and organising a large bio army with ghosts + vikings, etc. You're having a laugh, mate. And 2 siege tanks for one expo? Someone else want to help with this guy?
And I don't even know where to begin on all this WG hating. Without WG Protoss are weakened to the point where the entire game has to be redesigned. Rather than whiplash-demanding it be removed, how about we think about ways to slightly tweak it (if that is even necessary). Oh wait, Blizzard are already on that - WG research time increased a couple patches ago...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but this thread was a comment on the playing style of TvP, not a chance for all the loons to come out of the woodwork and whine about balance.
Imo there is a lot of micro like what thorzain said on the first page, but the problem is you always need the correct composition otherwise you just insta die, like you said in the last paragraph of 3.2. Especially in late game this is annoying when they can tech switch their deathball instantly and warp in ht/archon anywhere while you have to wait for your ghosts to pop out.
On October 03 2011 05:37 flowSthead wrote: I have no idea why this was spotlighted. So a mod agreed with the sentiment and this get's spotlighted? Seriously?
On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote: 1 Introduction, StarCraft 2 philosophy?
I believe blizzards intended to make sc2 a fast paced game, which means they wanted to make low tier units useful, Marine+Marauder being the prime example of that. It means that there's rarely a passage in the game where nothing is happening (on the pro level). But does this hurt the game? Are low tier units too strong?
Also it seems blizzard wants to make as many units viable as possible in all matchups so they can have variety in the gameplay. In BW, that was not the case, as marines were almost useless in both TvT and TvP besides couple timing attacks (f.e. Deep6). I believe sc2 TvP has the similar issue, but i'll get to that later.
I have a few questions right off the bat. What do you mean by hurt the game? Do you mean that it is boring to watch, or boring to play, or both? I'm not sure I understand the sentiment that it hurts the game, unless you give me some qualifications for that statement.
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Again, you just throw out something random without qualification. What do you mean the marauder is boring? What does that actually mean in terms of gameplay or observing? I happen to like the marauder. I think the marauder introduces variety into the TvT match-up. I like that bio play can play against mech since it punishes mistakes. I like that bio can transition into mech and then into sky terran. I think that actually makes for exciting TvT and the reason TvT is the best mirror.
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
And this is a problem with any race. Build order losses happen. This has been addressed by other people in the thread. If you have cloacked banshees and your opponent has no form of detection, then you lose. What is your point?
I skimmed through this thread and saw a lot of different posts addressing the issues with the OP. I get that the OP wants a more positional game and wants more micro capabilities. That's fine, the OP has a right to his opinion. But why was this spotlighted? This should be a blog post. There is no discussion to be had. The OP hates the marauder, while other people do not. What is it that we are supposed to be discussing? How much the marauder sucks? How is any of this useful either to TL or to Blizzard?
by boring marauder i mean the unit has no cool abilities and feels out of place. good low tier units with a lot of HP (and concussive shells) and very good damage, is cheap and easy to get (similar to roach). collosus is for example boring for me as well, since its a big machine with lazers thats just A move. you don't need to deploy it like lurkers or siege tanks.
about the unit composition. i meant that there's no way to counter collosus other than with vikings (or corruptors) which means whenever you don't have those around you're doomed, it's not like in tvz where you can "dance" your marines vs blings, in tvp if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings, especially late game. with wall of support units in front
and as you mentioned yourself, tvt is an exciting matchup since while the match goes on you climb the tech tree, bio - mech - air. nothing like that happens in tvp where you have units you need since 12 or so minute mark.
ignorance is bliss
so what youre saying is that you want all your tier 1 units to have 'cool abilities' as if stim and CS arent enough? so you just want every terran unit to be able to do something other then just attack with alot of health, and cost wise, counter anything toss can send out of a gateway.
'if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings' im gonna watch any pro toss player who handles their collosus, and as soon as one dies to a unit which isnt a viking (which happens alot btw) im gonna start hating on them for not keeping it alive.
On October 03 2011 05:37 flowSthead wrote: I have no idea why this was spotlighted. So a mod agreed with the sentiment and this get's spotlighted? Seriously?
On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote: 1 Introduction, StarCraft 2 philosophy?
I believe blizzards intended to make sc2 a fast paced game, which means they wanted to make low tier units useful, Marine+Marauder being the prime example of that. It means that there's rarely a passage in the game where nothing is happening (on the pro level). But does this hurt the game? Are low tier units too strong?
Also it seems blizzard wants to make as many units viable as possible in all matchups so they can have variety in the gameplay. In BW, that was not the case, as marines were almost useless in both TvT and TvP besides couple timing attacks (f.e. Deep6). I believe sc2 TvP has the similar issue, but i'll get to that later.
I have a few questions right off the bat. What do you mean by hurt the game? Do you mean that it is boring to watch, or boring to play, or both? I'm not sure I understand the sentiment that it hurts the game, unless you give me some qualifications for that statement.
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Again, you just throw out something random without qualification. What do you mean the marauder is boring? What does that actually mean in terms of gameplay or observing? I happen to like the marauder. I think the marauder introduces variety into the TvT match-up. I like that bio play can play against mech since it punishes mistakes. I like that bio can transition into mech and then into sky terran. I think that actually makes for exciting TvT and the reason TvT is the best mirror.
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
And this is a problem with any race. Build order losses happen. This has been addressed by other people in the thread. If you have cloacked banshees and your opponent has no form of detection, then you lose. What is your point?
I skimmed through this thread and saw a lot of different posts addressing the issues with the OP. I get that the OP wants a more positional game and wants more micro capabilities. That's fine, the OP has a right to his opinion. But why was this spotlighted? This should be a blog post. There is no discussion to be had. The OP hates the marauder, while other people do not. What is it that we are supposed to be discussing? How much the marauder sucks? How is any of this useful either to TL or to Blizzard?
by boring marauder i mean the unit has no cool abilities and feels out of place. good low tier units with a lot of HP (and concussive shells) and very good damage, is cheap and easy to get (similar to roach). collosus is for example boring for me as well, since its a big machine with lazers thats just A move. you don't need to deploy it like lurkers or siege tanks.
about the unit composition. i meant that there's no way to counter collosus other than with vikings (or corruptors) which means whenever you don't have those around you're doomed, it's not like in tvz where you can "dance" your marines vs blings, in tvp if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings, especially late game. with wall of support units in front
and as you mentioned yourself, tvt is an exciting matchup since while the match goes on you climb the tech tree, bio - mech - air. nothing like that happens in tvp where you have units you need since 12 or so minute mark.
ignorance is bliss
so what youre saying is that you want all your tier 1 units to have 'cool abilities' as if stim and CS arent enough? so you just want every terran unit to be able to do something other then just attack with alot of health, and cost wise, counter anything toss can send out of a gateway.
'if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings' im gonna watch any pro toss player who handles their collosus, and as soon as one dies to a unit which isnt a viking (which happens alot btw) im gonna start hating on them for not keeping it alive.
It seems you don't understand the OP he says that units like rauders should be never in the game because their CS limits the game skill and their are to powerful to be skiped and they blow in the lategame where you are limited by your options because of their "cool skills".
On October 03 2011 05:37 flowSthead wrote: I have no idea why this was spotlighted. So a mod agreed with the sentiment and this get's spotlighted? Seriously?
On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote: 1 Introduction, StarCraft 2 philosophy?
I believe blizzards intended to make sc2 a fast paced game, which means they wanted to make low tier units useful, Marine+Marauder being the prime example of that. It means that there's rarely a passage in the game where nothing is happening (on the pro level). But does this hurt the game? Are low tier units too strong?
Also it seems blizzard wants to make as many units viable as possible in all matchups so they can have variety in the gameplay. In BW, that was not the case, as marines were almost useless in both TvT and TvP besides couple timing attacks (f.e. Deep6). I believe sc2 TvP has the similar issue, but i'll get to that later.
I have a few questions right off the bat. What do you mean by hurt the game? Do you mean that it is boring to watch, or boring to play, or both? I'm not sure I understand the sentiment that it hurts the game, unless you give me some qualifications for that statement.
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Again, you just throw out something random without qualification. What do you mean the marauder is boring? What does that actually mean in terms of gameplay or observing? I happen to like the marauder. I think the marauder introduces variety into the TvT match-up. I like that bio play can play against mech since it punishes mistakes. I like that bio can transition into mech and then into sky terran. I think that actually makes for exciting TvT and the reason TvT is the best mirror.
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
And this is a problem with any race. Build order losses happen. This has been addressed by other people in the thread. If you have cloacked banshees and your opponent has no form of detection, then you lose. What is your point?
I skimmed through this thread and saw a lot of different posts addressing the issues with the OP. I get that the OP wants a more positional game and wants more micro capabilities. That's fine, the OP has a right to his opinion. But why was this spotlighted? This should be a blog post. There is no discussion to be had. The OP hates the marauder, while other people do not. What is it that we are supposed to be discussing? How much the marauder sucks? How is any of this useful either to TL or to Blizzard?
by boring marauder i mean the unit has no cool abilities and feels out of place. good low tier units with a lot of HP (and concussive shells) and very good damage, is cheap and easy to get (similar to roach). collosus is for example boring for me as well, since its a big machine with lazers thats just A move. you don't need to deploy it like lurkers or siege tanks.
about the unit composition. i meant that there's no way to counter collosus other than with vikings (or corruptors) which means whenever you don't have those around you're doomed, it's not like in tvz where you can "dance" your marines vs blings, in tvp if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings, especially late game. with wall of support units in front
and as you mentioned yourself, tvt is an exciting matchup since while the match goes on you climb the tech tree, bio - mech - air. nothing like that happens in tvp where you have units you need since 12 or so minute mark.
As the game exists currently, I think any buff to mech should be accompanied by an equal nerf to bio in order to balance out TvP. Also as things stands, I'm wary of buffing the siege tank simply because of the 1-1-1, which is already twice as difficult to hold by the toss as it is the execute by the Terran, and any buff to siege tank would simply make it impossible to hold the 1-1-1.
Also as it is, terran has the easiest time holding expansions and preventing harass because of planetary fortress + turrets. Also the protoss answer to heavy mech in bw - carrier is just ridiculously cost inefficient in SC2, and is hard countered by the insanely long ranged Vikings. All these factors combined make it very hard for Blizzard to buff siege tanks/ mech without horribly tilting the game in terran's favor. Any buff to terran mech would lead to a buff to toss late game, and then we would be literally back to square one.
On October 03 2011 05:37 flowSthead wrote: I have no idea why this was spotlighted. So a mod agreed with the sentiment and this get's spotlighted? Seriously?
On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote: 1 Introduction, StarCraft 2 philosophy?
I believe blizzards intended to make sc2 a fast paced game, which means they wanted to make low tier units useful, Marine+Marauder being the prime example of that. It means that there's rarely a passage in the game where nothing is happening (on the pro level). But does this hurt the game? Are low tier units too strong?
Also it seems blizzard wants to make as many units viable as possible in all matchups so they can have variety in the gameplay. In BW, that was not the case, as marines were almost useless in both TvT and TvP besides couple timing attacks (f.e. Deep6). I believe sc2 TvP has the similar issue, but i'll get to that later.
I have a few questions right off the bat. What do you mean by hurt the game? Do you mean that it is boring to watch, or boring to play, or both? I'm not sure I understand the sentiment that it hurts the game, unless you give me some qualifications for that statement.
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Again, you just throw out something random without qualification. What do you mean the marauder is boring? What does that actually mean in terms of gameplay or observing? I happen to like the marauder. I think the marauder introduces variety into the TvT match-up. I like that bio play can play against mech since it punishes mistakes. I like that bio can transition into mech and then into sky terran. I think that actually makes for exciting TvT and the reason TvT is the best mirror.
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
And this is a problem with any race. Build order losses happen. This has been addressed by other people in the thread. If you have cloacked banshees and your opponent has no form of detection, then you lose. What is your point?
I skimmed through this thread and saw a lot of different posts addressing the issues with the OP. I get that the OP wants a more positional game and wants more micro capabilities. That's fine, the OP has a right to his opinion. But why was this spotlighted? This should be a blog post. There is no discussion to be had. The OP hates the marauder, while other people do not. What is it that we are supposed to be discussing? How much the marauder sucks? How is any of this useful either to TL or to Blizzard?
by boring marauder i mean the unit has no cool abilities and feels out of place. good low tier units with a lot of HP (and concussive shells) and very good damage, is cheap and easy to get (similar to roach). collosus is for example boring for me as well, since its a big machine with lazers thats just A move. you don't need to deploy it like lurkers or siege tanks.
about the unit composition. i meant that there's no way to counter collosus other than with vikings (or corruptors) which means whenever you don't have those around you're doomed, it's not like in tvz where you can "dance" your marines vs blings, in tvp if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings, especially late game. with wall of support units in front
and as you mentioned yourself, tvt is an exciting matchup since while the match goes on you climb the tech tree, bio - mech - air. nothing like that happens in tvp where you have units you need since 12 or so minute mark.
ignorance is bliss
so what youre saying is that you want all your tier 1 units to have 'cool abilities' as if stim and CS arent enough? so you just want every terran unit to be able to do something other then just attack with alot of health, and cost wise, counter anything toss can send out of a gateway.
'if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings' im gonna watch any pro toss player who handles their collosus, and as soon as one dies to a unit which isnt a viking (which happens alot btw) im gonna start hating on them for not keeping it alive.
It seems you don't understand the OP he says that units like rauders should be never in the game because their CS limits the game skill and their are to powerful to be skiped and they blow in the lategame where you are limited by your options because of their "cool skills".
not entirely sure what youre trying to say here but ill respond the best i can.
marauders should be taken out the game, cos they dont have a 'cool skill' that can be used late game. Im sorry but that makes very little sense. Zealots/zerglings are boring cos they have no 'cool skill' (ok you have charge but marduers have CS which is an automated ability so we'll not count it.) but that doesnt stop them being used. Why wouldnt marauders be used late game by terran? They take more of a beating off collosus/storm and deal much more damage to stalkers and such then marines do. Plus,dropping 4 and stimming them into a toss main can do sooooooooo much damage
On October 03 2011 05:37 flowSthead wrote: I have no idea why this was spotlighted. So a mod agreed with the sentiment and this get's spotlighted? Seriously?
On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote: 1 Introduction, StarCraft 2 philosophy?
I believe blizzards intended to make sc2 a fast paced game, which means they wanted to make low tier units useful, Marine+Marauder being the prime example of that. It means that there's rarely a passage in the game where nothing is happening (on the pro level). But does this hurt the game? Are low tier units too strong?
Also it seems blizzard wants to make as many units viable as possible in all matchups so they can have variety in the gameplay. In BW, that was not the case, as marines were almost useless in both TvT and TvP besides couple timing attacks (f.e. Deep6). I believe sc2 TvP has the similar issue, but i'll get to that later.
I have a few questions right off the bat. What do you mean by hurt the game? Do you mean that it is boring to watch, or boring to play, or both? I'm not sure I understand the sentiment that it hurts the game, unless you give me some qualifications for that statement.
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Again, you just throw out something random without qualification. What do you mean the marauder is boring? What does that actually mean in terms of gameplay or observing? I happen to like the marauder. I think the marauder introduces variety into the TvT match-up. I like that bio play can play against mech since it punishes mistakes. I like that bio can transition into mech and then into sky terran. I think that actually makes for exciting TvT and the reason TvT is the best mirror.
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
And this is a problem with any race. Build order losses happen. This has been addressed by other people in the thread. If you have cloacked banshees and your opponent has no form of detection, then you lose. What is your point?
I skimmed through this thread and saw a lot of different posts addressing the issues with the OP. I get that the OP wants a more positional game and wants more micro capabilities. That's fine, the OP has a right to his opinion. But why was this spotlighted? This should be a blog post. There is no discussion to be had. The OP hates the marauder, while other people do not. What is it that we are supposed to be discussing? How much the marauder sucks? How is any of this useful either to TL or to Blizzard?
by boring marauder i mean the unit has no cool abilities and feels out of place. good low tier units with a lot of HP (and concussive shells) and very good damage, is cheap and easy to get (similar to roach). collosus is for example boring for me as well, since its a big machine with lazers thats just A move. you don't need to deploy it like lurkers or siege tanks.
about the unit composition. i meant that there's no way to counter collosus other than with vikings (or corruptors) which means whenever you don't have those around you're doomed, it's not like in tvz where you can "dance" your marines vs blings, in tvp if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings, especially late game. with wall of support units in front
and as you mentioned yourself, tvt is an exciting matchup since while the match goes on you climb the tech tree, bio - mech - air. nothing like that happens in tvp where you have units you need since 12 or so minute mark.
As for the unit composition, but that is true for many other units in many matchups. Fighting marauders with stim with stalkers is also impossible, if you don't have observers/overseers cloaked banshees kill your army, and so on.
In general, the points you said that I agree with(mostly those about positional play making the game better) are not limited to TvP matchup, but to whole design of SC2. It is just designed differently than BW. I might agree with you that some elements are more boring, but the reasons are deeper than lack of ability to mech in TvP. I think whole SC2 was designed with less emphasis on position and more on quick decisions in extremely variable environment. It is just in general game with more fragile states. But I don't think that can be fixed without total overhaul of the game. I think it would be better if it was more like BW and I say that as a person who started sporadically watching BW around the release of SC2, I am not some elitist BW fanboy
One way that I see as possible to address it at least to some degree (and it would also probably include making tanks more viable in TvP) is Day9's idea to introduce space controlling units (like tanks, lurkers, defilers and to lesser degree hts and reavers in BW). But I think making tanks better would necessitate the removal of marauders or at least make them unable to stim, which might be ok to you, but I doubt Blizzard will ever do that
On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote: I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff.
wow i dont know the exact cost of tanks, but wanting 2 to defend an expo is completely retarded. If that was possible then terran, and tanks, would be completely broken.
No, it's not retarded and it wouldn't be broken. It's like how in BW you could hold chokes with lurkers or siege tanks/mines. Lower amounts of units mattered more - position mattered more, it wasn't all about always just bum rushing into something.
On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote: I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff.
The siege tank was balanced in beta against protoss. You could build them and it was worthwhile to go mech. And viable.
It was only "impossible to balance" on retardedly designed maps such as steppes of war where it takes about 5 seconds to cross the entire map, along with being 3 siege tank shot lengths away from your opponent's natural... .
Yes, I agree with you... but I think as long as blizzard wants the map pool to be like what it is today, they'll never be able to make the tank what it should be (in any of the match ups). But I think the least they could do is change the damage to 50 (-15 to light) just so that archons aren't basically warp-inable Immortals.
On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote: I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff.
wow i dont know the exact cost of tanks, but wanting 2 to defend an expo is completely retarded. If that was possible then terran, and tanks, would be completely broken.
No, it's not retarded and it wouldn't be broken. It's like how in BW you could hold chokes with lurkers or siege tanks/mines. Lower amounts of units mattered more - position mattered more, it wasn't all about always just bum rushing into something.
On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote: I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff.
The siege tank was balanced in beta against protoss. You could build them and it was worthwhile to go mech. And viable.
It was only "impossible to balance" on retardedly designed maps such as steppes of war where it takes about 5 seconds to cross the entire map, along with being 3 siege tank shot lengths away from your opponent's natural... .
Yes, I agree with you... but I think as long as blizzard wants the map pool to be like what it is today, they'll never be able to make the tank what it should be (in any of the match ups). But I think the least they could do is change the damage to 50 (-15 to light) just so that archons aren't basically warp-inable Immortals.
so youre saying that its completely fine for one race to be able to build 2 of the same units and use them to nail down an expansion?
i dont even know how to respond to that........it doesnt make any sense.Tanks would have to be made so strong that if they were used for aggression in anyway it would be completely one sided.
edit: warp-inable immortals - that cost 250-300 gas which are completely negated by ghosts
try holding off the stupidly broken 1-1-1 build while a siege tank is dealing 50 damage
On October 03 2011 05:37 flowSthead wrote: I have no idea why this was spotlighted. So a mod agreed with the sentiment and this get's spotlighted? Seriously?
On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote: 1 Introduction, StarCraft 2 philosophy?
I believe blizzards intended to make sc2 a fast paced game, which means they wanted to make low tier units useful, Marine+Marauder being the prime example of that. It means that there's rarely a passage in the game where nothing is happening (on the pro level). But does this hurt the game? Are low tier units too strong?
Also it seems blizzard wants to make as many units viable as possible in all matchups so they can have variety in the gameplay. In BW, that was not the case, as marines were almost useless in both TvT and TvP besides couple timing attacks (f.e. Deep6). I believe sc2 TvP has the similar issue, but i'll get to that later.
I have a few questions right off the bat. What do you mean by hurt the game? Do you mean that it is boring to watch, or boring to play, or both? I'm not sure I understand the sentiment that it hurts the game, unless you give me some qualifications for that statement.
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Again, you just throw out something random without qualification. What do you mean the marauder is boring? What does that actually mean in terms of gameplay or observing? I happen to like the marauder. I think the marauder introduces variety into the TvT match-up. I like that bio play can play against mech since it punishes mistakes. I like that bio can transition into mech and then into sky terran. I think that actually makes for exciting TvT and the reason TvT is the best mirror.
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
And this is a problem with any race. Build order losses happen. This has been addressed by other people in the thread. If you have cloacked banshees and your opponent has no form of detection, then you lose. What is your point?
I skimmed through this thread and saw a lot of different posts addressing the issues with the OP. I get that the OP wants a more positional game and wants more micro capabilities. That's fine, the OP has a right to his opinion. But why was this spotlighted? This should be a blog post. There is no discussion to be had. The OP hates the marauder, while other people do not. What is it that we are supposed to be discussing? How much the marauder sucks? How is any of this useful either to TL or to Blizzard?
by boring marauder i mean the unit has no cool abilities and feels out of place. good low tier units with a lot of HP (and concussive shells) and very good damage, is cheap and easy to get (similar to roach). collosus is for example boring for me as well, since its a big machine with lazers thats just A move. you don't need to deploy it like lurkers or siege tanks.
about the unit composition. i meant that there's no way to counter collosus other than with vikings (or corruptors) which means whenever you don't have those around you're doomed, it's not like in tvz where you can "dance" your marines vs blings, in tvp if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings, especially late game. with wall of support units in front
and as you mentioned yourself, tvt is an exciting matchup since while the match goes on you climb the tech tree, bio - mech - air. nothing like that happens in tvp where you have units you need since 12 or so minute mark.
ignorance is bliss
so what youre saying is that you want all your tier 1 units to have 'cool abilities' as if stim and CS arent enough? so you just want every terran unit to be able to do something other then just attack with alot of health, and cost wise, counter anything toss can send out of a gateway.
'if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings' im gonna watch any pro toss player who handles their collosus, and as soon as one dies to a unit which isnt a viking (which happens alot btw) im gonna start hating on them for not keeping it alive.
It seems you don't understand the OP he says that units like rauders should be never in the game because their CS limits the game skill and their are to powerful to be skiped and they blow in the lategame where you are limited by your options because of their "cool skills".
not entirely sure what youre trying to say here but ill respond the best i can.
marauders should be taken out the game, cos they dont have a 'cool skill' that can be used late game. Im sorry but that makes very little sense. Zealots/zerglings are boring cos they have no 'cool skill' (ok you have charge but marduers have CS which is an automated ability so we'll not count it.) but that doesnt stop them being used. Why wouldnt marauders be used late game by terran? They take more of a beating off collosus/storm and deal much more damage to stalkers and such then marines do. Plus,dropping 4 and stimming them into a toss main can do sooooooooo much damage
Maybe i didn't explain it good enough because my english is bad. So i will try again lul Those units that you said zeals and zerglings they excel in their roles and they have positional advantage (surronds by zergling makes them more effective or puting your zeal to be attacked from only 1 side also makes them more efficent) you can harass with them you can do micro with them. With rauders you have limited micro and you limit your opponets micro also which is dumb in my opinion they can't excel they have 1 purpose and thats it they put skill cap in the game.
Good observations. To me TvP is at the same time the easiest and the hardest match up. It's super easy to play, but in the end you either just win or just lose, no middle ground. And you're right, theres nowhere to go in TvP. M&m&m and more m&m&m. If you try to transition to thors or bcs, you get rolled because they take too long and aren't that good. Ghosts make things a little better, but it takes like a minute for P to switch between templar and colossus (because unlike thors or bcs, 3 colossus will turn the game) and even faster after that. Vikings have opportunity cost associated with them, and with warp in, harassment isn't very effective. It's just boring. What's worse is that you can't sit back and out macro a Protoss. I mean you CAN get a better economy, but it doesn't mean shit. Your army has to be bigger than theirs at all times because you can't rebuild faster than them if you lose or trade in a battle. The last TvP I played, I had 105 scvs on 5 bases when he had 60 probes on 3. I had 200 food when he had 136. I traded armys a couple times, he colossus switched I didn't have ENOUGH vikings, and he won one battle, I remaxed off of 16 raxes and he still rolled me because he had 3 colossus and once production cycle ahead of me and I couldn't build vikings fast enough. Really, really frustrating.
The first is marauders. Why? Marauders literally run circles around early-game protoss options (stalkers and zealots). They're not necessarily imbalanced, but they do demand a reaction. This in turn forces protoss to acknowledge the threat, except protoss cannot really "defend" in the same way that T can put up bunkers or Z can plant spines. So instead of defending, Protoss often tilts to go hyper-aggressive to circumvent the potential early marauder pressure. Then what happens is a spiral of increasingly aggressive builds that just turn TvP into a pseudo cheese fest. e.g. the 1-1-1 from terran, the void ray all-in from protoss. the 3rax conc. shell timing, even the 4gate. The fact that marauders even exist in this way also brings Terran the opportunity to exploit protoss' vunerability early game (and lets face it, the pros have cracked how to hold early game protoss pressure, and not just in TvP). I also dislike marauders because their high hp, damage vs armoured and speed means that Terran never really has to tech switch vs Protoss (which is pretty much what the OP said). tl;dr I blame marauders for the pathetic TvP metagame.
The second "problem" I'd point out is Protoss' severe lack of defence (cannons suck. ffs are as much an offensive tool as a defensive one). This forces hyper-aggression and thereby diminishes Terran's role in the matchup to zerg-esque T1 fast units ("I'm going to harrass you to death and supply cap before you"). Tanks work wonders in TvT and TvP because tanks shit all over turtling players (who don't have tanks) due to their range, which forces a positioning battle and adds a dynamic to the match-up. I really think that if Protoss had better defending options, that this may encourage more passive play from protoss, which might lessen the effectiveness of Zerg-esque MMM armies and make mech more viable in the matchup.
The third problem (and one so brilliantly addressed in this thread thusfar) is Warp gate technology. As a protoss player, I loathe the mechanic. But, to avoid getting fallacious, what it essentially does is make Toss pseudo-omnipresent in the matchup. Against mech (which relies SO much on positioning), it is a pure hard counter. However bio- play circumvents the presence of warp tech and thus makes the matchup "easier" for terran (maybe a better word would be "possible"). Warp Gate technology also negates distance, and so allows protoss to be so massively aggressive in the matchup (which ties into what I was saying earlier).
Of all the ways to best "address" WG, the one I agree with most is to make it ultra-late game tech (i.e. templar achives), switch the Gateway and Warp Gate build/cooldown times, and slightly buff gateway units. That or make the warp gate a separate building that needs to be build after the upgarde (and also make warp gates more expensive and switch the "build" delay/time).
At the moment WG tech makes protoss 200/200 feel like "I have 50 zealots/stalkers that are shepherding 3collosi/ 5HT. Even with charge/blink, gateway units suck in the MU, and this becomes augmented when Terran gets ghosts. Hence, TvP basically becomes "if protoss goes colossi i go vikings, if not I go ghost/ medivac". And with scans (and observers) the matchup becomes stale and monotonous. I'd love to see mech-play become popular; not just too add to Terran's diversity, but also to make units like the phoenix and carrier available to protoss.
On October 03 2011 06:15 Churchill wrote: It sounds like you believe sieging and unsieging tanks has more to do with micro than maintaining and organising a large bio army with ghosts + vikings, etc. You're having a laugh, mate. And 2 siege tanks for one expo? Someone else want to help with this guy?
And I don't even know where to begin on all this WG hating. Without WG Protoss are weakened to the point where the entire game has to be redesigned. Rather than whiplash-demanding it be removed, how about we think about ways to slightly tweak it (if that is even necessary). Oh wait, Blizzard are already on that - WG research time increased a couple patches ago...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but this thread was a comment on the playing style of TvP, not a chance for all the loons to come out of the woodwork and whine about balance.
No one was whining about balance, and the thread starter is pointing out that you can only do one thing TvP that works - which is going bio + ghost + viking. He pointed out that warp gate is one of the contributing factors to why mech sucks, and it's true. No one is asking for it to be nerfed. It was a design flaw from the very beginning to be able to have no travel time on reinforcements, so it won't be changed.
And before you start "protoss needs warpgate" - did you ever play brood war? "Warp gate" aka arbiter recall was an ability that took forethought and skill, and sneakyness, you weren't given it for free for every gateway you created + building a cyber core
Anyways, the discussion is more about how tanks suck tvp and as a Terran you're forced into bio play. Lots of people are remeniscent about brood war tvp for good reason too - to be blunt, brood war tvp required more skill on both sides of the coin.
Also, btw, don't know if you did play brood war, or much mech in SC2, but what you said about sieging and unsieging etc taking more skill than maintaining a bio army...here is the difference for you.
If you get caught out of position with a bio/viking/ghost army, you simply can run away and reposition.
If you do not spot ahead for your mech army and are not sieged that instant that you need to have already been sieged, you lose your entire army.
So yes, there is a huge difference, as one is much easier to do than the other, mech you aren't sieged you lose everything; bio you are out of position you run away and keep entire army alive.
I don't know if anyone has mentioned this, but this is exactly why we saw so much 111 all inning recently. Nobody wants to play a straight game vs toss because it feels to random. Same with all the harassing in TvZ, kind of, but at least in TvZ you can still come out ahead if you outplay your opponent.
On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote: I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff.
The siege tank was balanced in beta against protoss. You could build them and it was worthwhile to go mech. And viable.
It was only "impossible to balance" on retardedly designed maps such as steppes of war where it takes about 5 seconds to cross the entire map, along with being 3 siege tank shot lengths away from your opponent's natural...
I remember being one of the first/few in beta to be playing mech/ghostmech against protoss, and i would have sick macro games where tanks actually didn't get insta-gibbed and holding a position actually meant something. Protoss had to be smart like in brood war to engage you, not just "hello 1A into your tank line at any angle i want to and come out ahead."
As it stands right now, you cannot hold a position with mech like you could in the beta because of the tank nerf. Protoss actually feared your tanks and if they played bad (and most did because they apparently all forgot their brood war skills) then they were punished for 1Aing in bad positions/bad spots. As of now, protoss is not punished for you gaining a better position on them because siege tanks just tickle their units, or you can mass collosus+blink stalker and walk around their army 100% of the time and base trade with DTS + warpgates + sniping the remaining orbitals = protoss win.
With the recent hellion nerf, TvT is back to more of "I build more marines than you." How anyone can not see that this is horrible for SC2 is beyond me. It's just another nerf that makes positioning mean less, and micro mean less. Because now TvT for example, you can mass marines and come out ahead due to the extra shots hellion take on marines. Marines easily will out dps every other unit and the only micro required? Pre-spread into an arc and 1A.
Mech actually took forethought, overarching strategy, spotting, and positioning that is difficult, very difficult (ala brood war difficulty) for a player to learn. With bio, you can blindly run in, and as long as you make an arc, you are good to go no matter how intricate or good your opponent's positioning was, because that's how bio plays.
Bio plays very linearly "make more of these tier1 units, throw them at your opponent for gain, when they die, make more and do it again. If you have less you lose, when you have more u win."
Siege tanks on the other hand, if they had their beta damage back, and you had a few on a cliff, it's not suddenly "i do not have an equal army supply to the protoss so i'm going to die 100%" but it is "i have better position, if he runs up he's going to lose more units than it is worth."
Right now, 99% of the time tanks do not scare protoss because they had their balls removed, so instead of beta where you could hold that position with tanks and protoss would HAVE to back off, they instead 1A into your tanks or blink into them or charge or whatever and they trade cost effectively and will always come out ahead. It's why mech is not viable in TvP.
And don't cite goody as an example. Just because you can do something and it will work against lower tiered protosses or once in a best out of 5, does not mean you should 100% of the time. There are Terran players with 10x better multi-tasking that don't queue up 5 tanks in one factory and 5 SCVS in one CC that still get thrashed by protosses when they try to mech and it's not because they're doing it any less better than goody or anyone else.
It's disheartening really just how bad mech is in TvP. =/ also keep in mind one of the key ways mech had to harrass protoss was with blue flame hellions that actually could kill workers. Now it is worthless to even try that because they 3 shot workers, it's the difference between successful harass and killing 2 probes and having protoss laugh at you for wasting the resources while their 1A ball just grew in size for free.
As for the hellion nerf, I think the problem is that it is one of the worst designed units in SC2 that do not fit in the game. Unlike vultures, with reasonable amount of luck(opponent just slightly misclicks) 2 bf hellions could kill even 25+ workers in one shot, now you need 3. And the killcount was too dependent on luck as compared to micro/planning. In already fragile game this makes it even worse.
On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote: I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff.
The siege tank was balanced in beta against protoss. You could build them and it was worthwhile to go mech. And viable.
It was only "impossible to balance" on retardedly designed maps such as steppes of war where it takes about 5 seconds to cross the entire map, along with being 3 siege tank shot lengths away from your opponent's natural...
I remember being one of the first/few in beta to be playing mech/ghostmech against protoss, and i would have sick macro games where tanks actually didn't get insta-gibbed and holding a position actually meant something. Protoss had to be smart like in brood war to engage you, not just "hello 1A into your tank line at any angle i want to and come out ahead."
As it stands right now, you cannot hold a position with mech like you could in the beta because of the tank nerf. Protoss actually feared your tanks and if they played bad (and most did because they apparently all forgot their brood war skills) then they were punished for 1Aing in bad positions/bad spots. As of now, protoss is not punished for you gaining a better position on them because siege tanks just tickle their units, or you can mass collosus+blink stalker and walk around their army 100% of the time and base trade with DTS + warpgates + sniping the remaining orbitals = protoss win.
With the recent hellion nerf, TvT is back to more of "I build more marines than you." How anyone can not see that this is horrible for SC2 is beyond me. It's just another nerf that makes positioning mean less, and micro mean less. Because now TvT for example, you can mass marines and come out ahead due to the extra shots hellion take on marines. Marines easily will out dps every other unit and the only micro required? Pre-spread into an arc and 1A.
Mech actually took forethought, overarching strategy, spotting, and positioning that is difficult, very difficult (ala brood war difficulty) for a player to learn. With bio, you can blindly run in, and as long as you make an arc, you are good to go no matter how intricate or good your opponent's positioning was, because that's how bio plays.
Bio plays very linearly "make more of these tier1 units, throw them at your opponent for gain, when they die, make more and do it again. If you have less you lose, when you have more u win."
Siege tanks on the other hand, if they had their beta damage back, and you had a few on a cliff, it's not suddenly "i do not have an equal army supply to the protoss so i'm going to die 100%" but it is "i have better position, if he runs up he's going to lose more units than it is worth."
Right now, 99% of the time tanks do not scare protoss because they had their balls removed, so instead of beta where you could hold that position with tanks and protoss would HAVE to back off, they instead 1A into your tanks or blink into them or charge or whatever and they trade cost effectively and will always come out ahead. It's why mech is not viable in TvP.
And don't cite goody as an example. Just because you can do something and it will work against lower tiered protosses or once in a best out of 5, does not mean you should 100% of the time. There are Terran players with 10x better multi-tasking that don't queue up 5 tanks in one factory and 5 SCVS in one CC that still get thrashed by protosses when they try to mech and it's not because they're doing it any less better than goody or anyone else.
It's disheartening really just how bad mech is in TvP. =/ also keep in mind one of the key ways mech had to harrass protoss was with blue flame hellions that actually could kill workers. Now it is worthless to even try that because they 3 shot workers, it's the difference between successful harass and killing 2 probes and having protoss laugh at you for wasting the resources while their 1A ball just grew in size for free.
As for the hellion nerf, I think the problem is that it is one of the worst designed units in SC2 that do not fit in the game. Unlike vultures, with reasonable amount of luck(opponent just slightly misclicks) 2 bf hellions could kill even 25+ workers in one shot, now you need 3. And the killcount was too dependent on luck as compared to micro/planning. In already fragile game this makes it even worse.
Ah, the people that were really good at hellion harrass micro'd their hellions very good. You had to time shots perfectly to get the max amount of kills.
Also, how is something like that bad for SC2? SC1 had the reaver, it had psi storm, lurker shots, spider mines that all served the same function as a blue flame hellion shot that can 2 shot workers.
SC2 has banelings still, collosus, storm still, but they all require a lot less micro and simple 1A. A 2 shot blue flame hellion was perfectly fine, you should feel threatened by such a unit, just like you would be threatened by a reaver in your mineral line.
As of the last patch, it simply isn't as threatening anymore.
It's also funny you would argue that hellions are "luck based" as you can control the shot with good micro and waiting for the "line em up." Reavers scarabs and spider mines literally were things that did have random luck influence them. So you can actually say something like the SC2 hellion is less of a luck influenced unit then the vulture was...pretty crazy isn't it?
On October 03 2011 06:42 theBOOCH wrote: Good observations. To me TvP is at the same time the easiest and the hardest match up. It's super easy to play, but in the end you either just win or just lose, no middle ground. And you're right, theres nowhere to go in TvP. M&m&m and more m&m&m. If you try to transition to thors or bcs, you get rolled because they take too long and aren't that good. Ghosts make things a little better, but it takes like a minute for P to switch between templar and colossus (because unlike thors or bcs, 3 colossus will turn the game) and even faster after that. Vikings have opportunity cost associated with them, and with warp in, harassment isn't very effective. It's just boring. What's worse is that you can't sit back and out macro a Protoss. I mean you CAN get a better economy, but it doesn't mean shit. Your army has to be bigger than theirs at all times because you can't rebuild faster than them if you lose or trade in a battle. The last TvP I played, I had 105 scvs on 5 bases when he had 60 probes on 3. I had 200 food when he had 136. I traded armys a couple times, he colossus switched I didn't have ENOUGH vikings, and he won one battle, I remaxed off of 16 raxes and he still rolled me because he had 3 colossus and once production cycle ahead of me and I couldn't build vikings fast enough. Really, really frustrating.
i feel your pain man i really do, i share the same experiences :[ , i always feel as if i can get really ahead i take my expansion faster, i feel i build enough raxxes, but i always just feel that i can never engage the protoss after the third base mark... even often times after sniping a nexus with a drop or something that seems like it would snowball me so far ahead, when it comes down to it, you have to kill that army at some point and when that point comes if you don't kill it no matter how much damage you did to their economy, because the way terran works and you can't warp in all your reinforcements into one safe place and keep cycling them there until it's big enough to re engage, the toss can just move into your production and it's a gg. i see a lot of people talking a out dropping and splitting the toss up and what not, but what they are all forgetting is that, eventually there is a time in every game where the protoss gathers all his forces and moves out and that is what we're talking about here the battle when the toss moves out and you are forced to engage the toss army... what do you do? i literally feel that i have to win before the third/fourth bases go up or i will lose the game, i can't recall the last time i've gone to the late game vs a toss and won. i really can't. (mid masters terran)
i think it all just comes down to somehow balancing the game better in the lategame, terran is so strong in the early game but almost every option snowballs weaker into the lategame regardless of composition. we have no choice really but to build more mauraders, or more vikings to counter collosus. i'd like to see the thor more in a tvp scenario, maybe they should finally look into reworking the 250mm cannon strike to make it into something more usefull that could provide some sort of protection for a mech style composition since it's so underused atm
First of all Hyperdub had some sick banshee games in TvP And I honestly do think mech is stil viable on some maps (shakuras and crossfire comes to mind). I think we could put some blame on map designers here.
However I do agree that TvP is mostly uninteresting... It's even worse if you play P... Con shell is micro killer. Usualy you counter it with FF - another micro killer. Ad warpins into that and you have cure for insomnia. God I hope pros just haven't figured out the game yet.
On October 03 2011 05:37 flowSthead wrote: I have no idea why this was spotlighted. So a mod agreed with the sentiment and this get's spotlighted? Seriously?
On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote: 1 Introduction, StarCraft 2 philosophy?
I believe blizzards intended to make sc2 a fast paced game, which means they wanted to make low tier units useful, Marine+Marauder being the prime example of that. It means that there's rarely a passage in the game where nothing is happening (on the pro level). But does this hurt the game? Are low tier units too strong?
Also it seems blizzard wants to make as many units viable as possible in all matchups so they can have variety in the gameplay. In BW, that was not the case, as marines were almost useless in both TvT and TvP besides couple timing attacks (f.e. Deep6). I believe sc2 TvP has the similar issue, but i'll get to that later.
I have a few questions right off the bat. What do you mean by hurt the game? Do you mean that it is boring to watch, or boring to play, or both? I'm not sure I understand the sentiment that it hurts the game, unless you give me some qualifications for that statement.
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Again, you just throw out something random without qualification. What do you mean the marauder is boring? What does that actually mean in terms of gameplay or observing? I happen to like the marauder. I think the marauder introduces variety into the TvT match-up. I like that bio play can play against mech since it punishes mistakes. I like that bio can transition into mech and then into sky terran. I think that actually makes for exciting TvT and the reason TvT is the best mirror.
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
And this is a problem with any race. Build order losses happen. This has been addressed by other people in the thread. If you have cloacked banshees and your opponent has no form of detection, then you lose. What is your point?
I skimmed through this thread and saw a lot of different posts addressing the issues with the OP. I get that the OP wants a more positional game and wants more micro capabilities. That's fine, the OP has a right to his opinion. But why was this spotlighted? This should be a blog post. There is no discussion to be had. The OP hates the marauder, while other people do not. What is it that we are supposed to be discussing? How much the marauder sucks? How is any of this useful either to TL or to Blizzard?
by boring marauder i mean the unit has no cool abilities and feels out of place. good low tier units with a lot of HP (and concussive shells) and very good damage, is cheap and easy to get (similar to roach). collosus is for example boring for me as well, since its a big machine with lazers thats just A move. you don't need to deploy it like lurkers or siege tanks.
about the unit composition. i meant that there's no way to counter collosus other than with vikings (or corruptors) which means whenever you don't have those around you're doomed, it's not like in tvz where you can "dance" your marines vs blings, in tvp if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings, especially late game. with wall of support units in front
and as you mentioned yourself, tvt is an exciting matchup since while the match goes on you climb the tech tree, bio - mech - air. nothing like that happens in tvp where you have units you need since 12 or so minute mark.
ignorance is bliss
so what youre saying is that you want all your tier 1 units to have 'cool abilities' as if stim and CS arent enough? so you just want every terran unit to be able to do something other then just attack with alot of health, and cost wise, counter anything toss can send out of a gateway.
'if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings' im gonna watch any pro toss player who handles their collosus, and as soon as one dies to a unit which isnt a viking (which happens alot btw) im gonna start hating on them for not keeping it alive.
It seems you don't understand the OP he says that units like rauders should be never in the game because their CS limits the game skill and their are to powerful to be skiped and they blow in the lategame where you are limited by your options because of their "cool skills".
not entirely sure what youre trying to say here but ill respond the best i can.
marauders should be taken out the game, cos they dont have a 'cool skill' that can be used late game. Im sorry but that makes very little sense. Zealots/zerglings are boring cos they have no 'cool skill' (ok you have charge but marduers have CS which is an automated ability so we'll not count it.) but that doesnt stop them being used. Why wouldnt marauders be used late game by terran? They take more of a beating off collosus/storm and deal much more damage to stalkers and such then marines do. Plus,dropping 4 and stimming them into a toss main can do sooooooooo much damage
Marauders should be taken out of the game simply because their function overlaps with siege tanks without being nearly as cool and "terran-y" It's also counter-intuitive to keep making marauders all game long, because logically what you want by endgame is aoe. But against toss, siege tanks simply do not work - so all terran has is emp, which can't actually kill anything, nor can it really enforce positional play.
On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote: I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff.
wow i dont know the exact cost of tanks, but wanting 2 to defend an expo is completely retarded. If that was possible then terran, and tanks, would be completely broken.
No, it's not retarded and it wouldn't be broken. It's like how in BW you could hold chokes with lurkers or siege tanks/mines. Lower amounts of units mattered more - position mattered more, it wasn't all about always just bum rushing into something.
On October 03 2011 06:13 avilo wrote:
On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote: I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff.
The siege tank was balanced in beta against protoss. You could build them and it was worthwhile to go mech. And viable.
It was only "impossible to balance" on retardedly designed maps such as steppes of war where it takes about 5 seconds to cross the entire map, along with being 3 siege tank shot lengths away from your opponent's natural... .
Yes, I agree with you... but I think as long as blizzard wants the map pool to be like what it is today, they'll never be able to make the tank what it should be (in any of the match ups). But I think the least they could do is change the damage to 50 (-15 to light) just so that archons aren't basically warp-inable Immortals.
so youre saying that its completely fine for one race to be able to build 2 of the same units and use them to nail down an expansion?
i dont even know how to respond to that........it doesnt make any sense.Tanks would have to be made so strong that if they were used for aggression in anyway it would be completely one sided.
edit: warp-inable immortals - that cost 250-300 gas which are completely negated by ghosts
try holding off the stupidly broken 1-1-1 build while a siege tank is dealing 50 damage
Stop being such a touchy and defensive toss - I don't think anybody here cares. No one is forcing you to respond when you admittedly "don't know even know how to respond" It wouldn't matter if tanks did 60 damage or 35 damage in a 1-1-1 situation, since it's the marines that makes the push so effective and an immortal wouldn't take any more damage from a tank doing the same damage that it did back in the beta. The biggest reason why 1-1-1 is so strong is because warp gate units HAVE to be relatively weak early game because of warp tech.
Considering how immobile a siege tank is, their damage should be more in line with this immobility. Two siege tanks would only be threatening up to a point, but right now a PF on the gold on Xel naga with a 72-food siege tank line walled off against chargelots with depots will fall to a standard colossus based army, and the subsequent round of warp ins will win the protoss the game. That's just completely disheartening.
On October 03 2011 05:37 flowSthead wrote: I have no idea why this was spotlighted. So a mod agreed with the sentiment and this get's spotlighted? Seriously?
On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote: 1 Introduction, StarCraft 2 philosophy?
I believe blizzards intended to make sc2 a fast paced game, which means they wanted to make low tier units useful, Marine+Marauder being the prime example of that. It means that there's rarely a passage in the game where nothing is happening (on the pro level). But does this hurt the game? Are low tier units too strong?
Also it seems blizzard wants to make as many units viable as possible in all matchups so they can have variety in the gameplay. In BW, that was not the case, as marines were almost useless in both TvT and TvP besides couple timing attacks (f.e. Deep6). I believe sc2 TvP has the similar issue, but i'll get to that later.
I have a few questions right off the bat. What do you mean by hurt the game? Do you mean that it is boring to watch, or boring to play, or both? I'm not sure I understand the sentiment that it hurts the game, unless you give me some qualifications for that statement.
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Again, you just throw out something random without qualification. What do you mean the marauder is boring? What does that actually mean in terms of gameplay or observing? I happen to like the marauder. I think the marauder introduces variety into the TvT match-up. I like that bio play can play against mech since it punishes mistakes. I like that bio can transition into mech and then into sky terran. I think that actually makes for exciting TvT and the reason TvT is the best mirror.
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
And this is a problem with any race. Build order losses happen. This has been addressed by other people in the thread. If you have cloacked banshees and your opponent has no form of detection, then you lose. What is your point?
I skimmed through this thread and saw a lot of different posts addressing the issues with the OP. I get that the OP wants a more positional game and wants more micro capabilities. That's fine, the OP has a right to his opinion. But why was this spotlighted? This should be a blog post. There is no discussion to be had. The OP hates the marauder, while other people do not. What is it that we are supposed to be discussing? How much the marauder sucks? How is any of this useful either to TL or to Blizzard?
by boring marauder i mean the unit has no cool abilities and feels out of place. good low tier units with a lot of HP (and concussive shells) and very good damage, is cheap and easy to get (similar to roach). collosus is for example boring for me as well, since its a big machine with lazers thats just A move. you don't need to deploy it like lurkers or siege tanks.
about the unit composition. i meant that there's no way to counter collosus other than with vikings (or corruptors) which means whenever you don't have those around you're doomed, it's not like in tvz where you can "dance" your marines vs blings, in tvp if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings, especially late game. with wall of support units in front
and as you mentioned yourself, tvt is an exciting matchup since while the match goes on you climb the tech tree, bio - mech - air. nothing like that happens in tvp where you have units you need since 12 or so minute mark.
ignorance is bliss
so what youre saying is that you want all your tier 1 units to have 'cool abilities' as if stim and CS arent enough? so you just want every terran unit to be able to do something other then just attack with alot of health, and cost wise, counter anything toss can send out of a gateway.
'if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings' im gonna watch any pro toss player who handles their collosus, and as soon as one dies to a unit which isnt a viking (which happens alot btw) im gonna start hating on them for not keeping it alive.
It seems you don't understand the OP he says that units like rauders should be never in the game because their CS limits the game skill and their are to powerful to be skiped and they blow in the lategame where you are limited by your options because of their "cool skills".
not entirely sure what youre trying to say here but ill respond the best i can.
marauders should be taken out the game, cos they dont have a 'cool skill' that can be used late game. Im sorry but that makes very little sense. Zealots/zerglings are boring cos they have no 'cool skill' (ok you have charge but marduers have CS which is an automated ability so we'll not count it.) but that doesnt stop them being used. Why wouldnt marauders be used late game by terran? They take more of a beating off collosus/storm and deal much more damage to stalkers and such then marines do. Plus,dropping 4 and stimming them into a toss main can do sooooooooo much damage
Maybe i didn't explain it good enough because my english is bad. So i will try again lul Those units that you said zeals and zerglings they excel in their roles and they have positional advantage (surronds by zergling makes them more effective or puting your zeal to be attacked from only 1 side also makes them more efficent) you can harass with them you can do micro with them. With rauders you have limited micro and you limit your opponets micro also which is dumb in my opinion they can't excel they have 1 purpose and thats it they put skill cap in the game.
You have limited micro with marauders? i dont understand that. You have concussive shells and stimm, which allow you to move faster then most ground units and slow other units down. Have you seen the micro involved in early game terran pushes with a few marduers and a few marines and SCV? its probbaly the most amount of micro you'll see
On October 03 2011 06:42 theBOOCH wrote: Good observations. To me TvP is at the same time the easiest and the hardest match up. It's super easy to play, but in the end you either just win or just lose, no middle ground. And you're right, theres nowhere to go in TvP. M&m&m and more m&m&m. If you try to transition to thors or bcs, you get rolled because they take too long and aren't that good. Ghosts make things a little better, but it takes like a minute for P to switch between templar and colossus (because unlike thors or bcs, 3 colossus will turn the game) and even faster after that. Vikings have opportunity cost associated with them, and with warp in, harassment isn't very effective. It's just boring. What's worse is that you can't sit back and out macro a Protoss. I mean you CAN get a better economy, but it doesn't mean shit. Your army has to be bigger than theirs at all times because you can't rebuild faster than them if you lose or trade in a battle. The last TvP I played, I had 105 scvs on 5 bases when he had 60 probes on 3. I had 200 food when he had 136. I traded armys a couple times, he colossus switched I didn't have ENOUGH vikings, and he won one battle, I remaxed off of 16 raxes and he still rolled me because he had 3 colossus and once production cycle ahead of me and I couldn't build vikings fast enough. Really, really frustrating.
you had only 25 more supply in your army then him, thats nothing really when you have unit compisitions like that. Ive seen terran armies with 40 food less then a toss roll them just cos of fucking storm.
it takes a minute to switch from templar to collosus? please dont come here if you're not gonna know what youre talking about.
Lets assume you already have a robo, you need to build the robo bay (65) then a collosus (75) thermal lance takes 140. So in just over 2 mins you can have 1 collosus with no range upgtade - which is pointless. Or in over 3 mins you'll have 2 with range.
Everyone knows toss has the hardest time changing tech
On October 03 2011 05:37 flowSthead wrote: I have no idea why this was spotlighted. So a mod agreed with the sentiment and this get's spotlighted? Seriously?
On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote: 1 Introduction, StarCraft 2 philosophy?
I believe blizzards intended to make sc2 a fast paced game, which means they wanted to make low tier units useful, Marine+Marauder being the prime example of that. It means that there's rarely a passage in the game where nothing is happening (on the pro level). But does this hurt the game? Are low tier units too strong?
Also it seems blizzard wants to make as many units viable as possible in all matchups so they can have variety in the gameplay. In BW, that was not the case, as marines were almost useless in both TvT and TvP besides couple timing attacks (f.e. Deep6). I believe sc2 TvP has the similar issue, but i'll get to that later.
I have a few questions right off the bat. What do you mean by hurt the game? Do you mean that it is boring to watch, or boring to play, or both? I'm not sure I understand the sentiment that it hurts the game, unless you give me some qualifications for that statement.
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Again, you just throw out something random without qualification. What do you mean the marauder is boring? What does that actually mean in terms of gameplay or observing? I happen to like the marauder. I think the marauder introduces variety into the TvT match-up. I like that bio play can play against mech since it punishes mistakes. I like that bio can transition into mech and then into sky terran. I think that actually makes for exciting TvT and the reason TvT is the best mirror.
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
And this is a problem with any race. Build order losses happen. This has been addressed by other people in the thread. If you have cloacked banshees and your opponent has no form of detection, then you lose. What is your point?
I skimmed through this thread and saw a lot of different posts addressing the issues with the OP. I get that the OP wants a more positional game and wants more micro capabilities. That's fine, the OP has a right to his opinion. But why was this spotlighted? This should be a blog post. There is no discussion to be had. The OP hates the marauder, while other people do not. What is it that we are supposed to be discussing? How much the marauder sucks? How is any of this useful either to TL or to Blizzard?
by boring marauder i mean the unit has no cool abilities and feels out of place. good low tier units with a lot of HP (and concussive shells) and very good damage, is cheap and easy to get (similar to roach). collosus is for example boring for me as well, since its a big machine with lazers thats just A move. you don't need to deploy it like lurkers or siege tanks.
about the unit composition. i meant that there's no way to counter collosus other than with vikings (or corruptors) which means whenever you don't have those around you're doomed, it's not like in tvz where you can "dance" your marines vs blings, in tvp if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings, especially late game. with wall of support units in front
and as you mentioned yourself, tvt is an exciting matchup since while the match goes on you climb the tech tree, bio - mech - air. nothing like that happens in tvp where you have units you need since 12 or so minute mark.
ignorance is bliss
so what youre saying is that you want all your tier 1 units to have 'cool abilities' as if stim and CS arent enough? so you just want every terran unit to be able to do something other then just attack with alot of health, and cost wise, counter anything toss can send out of a gateway.
'if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings' im gonna watch any pro toss player who handles their collosus, and as soon as one dies to a unit which isnt a viking (which happens alot btw) im gonna start hating on them for not keeping it alive.
It seems you don't understand the OP he says that units like rauders should be never in the game because their CS limits the game skill and their are to powerful to be skiped and they blow in the lategame where you are limited by your options because of their "cool skills".
not entirely sure what youre trying to say here but ill respond the best i can.
marauders should be taken out the game, cos they dont have a 'cool skill' that can be used late game. Im sorry but that makes very little sense. Zealots/zerglings are boring cos they have no 'cool skill' (ok you have charge but marduers have CS which is an automated ability so we'll not count it.) but that doesnt stop them being used. Why wouldnt marauders be used late game by terran? They take more of a beating off collosus/storm and deal much more damage to stalkers and such then marines do. Plus,dropping 4 and stimming them into a toss main can do sooooooooo much damage
Marauders should be taken out of the game simply because their function overlaps with siege tanks without being nearly as cool and "terran-y" It's also counter-intuitive to keep making marauders all game long, because logically what you want by endgame is aoe. But against toss, siege tanks simply do not work - so all terran has is emp, which can't actually kill anything, nor can it really enforce positional play.
On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote: I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff.
wow i dont know the exact cost of tanks, but wanting 2 to defend an expo is completely retarded. If that was possible then terran, and tanks, would be completely broken.
No, it's not retarded and it wouldn't be broken. It's like how in BW you could hold chokes with lurkers or siege tanks/mines. Lower amounts of units mattered more - position mattered more, it wasn't all about always just bum rushing into something.
On October 03 2011 06:13 avilo wrote:
On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote: I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff.
The siege tank was balanced in beta against protoss. You could build them and it was worthwhile to go mech. And viable.
It was only "impossible to balance" on retardedly designed maps such as steppes of war where it takes about 5 seconds to cross the entire map, along with being 3 siege tank shot lengths away from your opponent's natural... .
Yes, I agree with you... but I think as long as blizzard wants the map pool to be like what it is today, they'll never be able to make the tank what it should be (in any of the match ups). But I think the least they could do is change the damage to 50 (-15 to light) just so that archons aren't basically warp-inable Immortals.
so youre saying that its completely fine for one race to be able to build 2 of the same units and use them to nail down an expansion?
i dont even know how to respond to that........it doesnt make any sense.Tanks would have to be made so strong that if they were used for aggression in anyway it would be completely one sided.
edit: warp-inable immortals - that cost 250-300 gas which are completely negated by ghosts
try holding off the stupidly broken 1-1-1 build while a siege tank is dealing 50 damage
Stop being such a touchy and defensive toss - I don't think anybody here cares. No one is forcing you to respond when you admittedly "don't know even know how to respond" It wouldn't matter if tanks did 60 damage or 35 damage in a 1-1-1 situation, since it's the marines that makes the push so effective and an immortal wouldn't take any more damage from a tank doing the same damage that it did back in the beta. The biggest reason why 1-1-1 is so strong is because warp gate units HAVE to be relatively weak early game because of warp tech.
Considering how immobile a siege tank is, their damage should be more in line with this immobility. Two siege tanks would only be threatening up to a point, but right now a PF on the gold on Xel naga with a 72-food siege tank line walled off against chargelots with depots will fall to a standard colossus based army, and the subsequent round of warp ins will win the protoss the game. That's just completely disheartening.
yea ill 'Stop being such a touchy and defensive toss' when people stop talking nonsene. Yea its the marines that deal the damage, and no the extra damage wouldnt help against immortals. But this is where that micro thing comes in. You dont focus the tanks onto the immortals, thats what marines are for. And the tanks stop a toss from being able to engage the terran wher and when they want. Otherwise with decent poisitioning and FF and with guardian shield, you can rip the marines apart.
If you've built a 72 food siege tank army, when the toss is going collosus, and you ahve no vikings, you deserve to lose. No unit, no compisition and no build is unbeatable in this game, if its scouted. If you lose a game like that its your own fault for not knowing what he was doing
On October 03 2011 06:57 Lobotomist wrote: So the OP pretty much boils down to "Make tanks better so that I can use them in TvP, I liked Broodwar TvP more."
Don't really get the point. Tanks don't HAVE to be used in a matchup to make it a good matchup.
No, what tanks make possible is that you can actually barely hold or barely win. TvP right now has no middle ground. Have you ever seen toss hold first 1/1/1 push by the skin of his teeth? Well, he will die to the next batch of units then. Same for terran, you get caught by 2+ colossi or storms without EMP and you are going to lose horribly.
Same goes for toss to some extent, unless you use force field, you have no way to survive against overwhelming odds.
Dont know how you can say TvP isnt micro intensive o.o if protoss plays good he wont have all ht's emp'd and will block ghosts from reaching ht's and then you are left to dodge storms while him having colossus late game and you cant let your vikings die into stalkers. Even with all that I find it easier to play TvP late game with nukes and 200 vs 200 than playing vs 2 base immortal allins early game
Warpin is terrible mechanic from start of SC2, they should make it at least being able to warp-in in range of your expos, warping in 20-30 zealots late game in middle of fight is dumb and would stop allining 1 or 2 base more or less.
Mech isnt viable because of the zealots in TvP, they make your tanks kill your units more than his, if you try bio/tank once zealots charge into marines tanks destroy your marines along with warp prism immortal drops on tanks and storm drops on marines. In HoTS if blizzard wants mech to be fun and good they need to remove thor because TvP mech now you make helion/tank/ghost and you make 1-2 thors to act as walls. For me thor as unit makes no sense its slow attacking high dps unit serving to kill stuff like ultras and then it has ability 250mm C that is another high single target dps skill Add goliath or maybe some new unit but I dont think vultures mines are good, chargelots would be just stronger vs mech (unless mines explode instantly). Another problem with mech atm is that on maps like Tal'darim protoss can make pylons everywhere and harass your expos with blink stalkers because your army is very slow, he can even just base trade vs mech on big maps. Overall dont really know how to make mech playable in TvP but some changes need to be made, if you add siege tank 60 damage that would make zealots easier to handle but would make TvT into more mech fest and would make TvZ broken and it would still mean terran mech cant be played on big maps. Even on small maps protoss can just go blink stalker/colossus base trade blinking into your main base and T needs some unit that would be able to handle blink stalkers and make T army more mobile without breaking other 2 MU's which is just hard and even with that by denying blink stalker counter attacking what is protoss supposed to do vs mech on maps like shattered - just get rolled over , maybe we'll just play MMM forever
Oh and about some guy saying derp he makes colossus you make vikings he makes ht you make ghost, I wish thats how game always goes, good protoss will know when to do tech-switch and if you arent prepared you just die. Terrans cant tech switch to mech and kill protoss because like PredY said any P unit can kill tanks (except sentries).
the only one question to topic starter: have you ever saw dSelecT games? If you did: why you still think that there is no micro in TvP when terran playing bio?
On October 03 2011 07:05 Empire.Beastyqt wrote: Oh and about some guy saying derp he makes colossus you make vikings he makes ht you make ghost, I wish thats how game always goes, good protoss will know when to do tech-switch and if you arent prepared you just die. Terrans cant tech switch to mech and kill protoss because like PredY said any P unit can kill tanks (except sentries).
Terrans can't tech switch this is true, but they also don't have to bother with tech switch. MMM is insanely powerful, and with ghost and viking support can beat any tech switch. Scout it out, and if you're prepared you'll have no problem with the tech switches.
Personally I think it boils down to its been a little over a year since the game came out. There has been no expansion and we are still comparing it to BW. In a year the builds and strats have evolved immensely. I think saying you want the game to be like it was with a specific unit comp is wrong. You seems to miss specific units and mechanics of those units that weren't fully realized until (i honestly don't know) later in the game history. This is not BW. While it has alot of similarities it just isn't the same game and with the units that are currently in the game it will never be that way.
On October 03 2011 05:37 flowSthead wrote: I have no idea why this was spotlighted. So a mod agreed with the sentiment and this get's spotlighted? Seriously?
On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote: 1 Introduction, StarCraft 2 philosophy?
I believe blizzards intended to make sc2 a fast paced game, which means they wanted to make low tier units useful, Marine+Marauder being the prime example of that. It means that there's rarely a passage in the game where nothing is happening (on the pro level). But does this hurt the game? Are low tier units too strong?
Also it seems blizzard wants to make as many units viable as possible in all matchups so they can have variety in the gameplay. In BW, that was not the case, as marines were almost useless in both TvT and TvP besides couple timing attacks (f.e. Deep6). I believe sc2 TvP has the similar issue, but i'll get to that later.
I have a few questions right off the bat. What do you mean by hurt the game? Do you mean that it is boring to watch, or boring to play, or both? I'm not sure I understand the sentiment that it hurts the game, unless you give me some qualifications for that statement.
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Again, you just throw out something random without qualification. What do you mean the marauder is boring? What does that actually mean in terms of gameplay or observing? I happen to like the marauder. I think the marauder introduces variety into the TvT match-up. I like that bio play can play against mech since it punishes mistakes. I like that bio can transition into mech and then into sky terran. I think that actually makes for exciting TvT and the reason TvT is the best mirror.
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
And this is a problem with any race. Build order losses happen. This has been addressed by other people in the thread. If you have cloacked banshees and your opponent has no form of detection, then you lose. What is your point?
I skimmed through this thread and saw a lot of different posts addressing the issues with the OP. I get that the OP wants a more positional game and wants more micro capabilities. That's fine, the OP has a right to his opinion. But why was this spotlighted? This should be a blog post. There is no discussion to be had. The OP hates the marauder, while other people do not. What is it that we are supposed to be discussing? How much the marauder sucks? How is any of this useful either to TL or to Blizzard?
by boring marauder i mean the unit has no cool abilities and feels out of place. good low tier units with a lot of HP (and concussive shells) and very good damage, is cheap and easy to get (similar to roach). collosus is for example boring for me as well, since its a big machine with lazers thats just A move. you don't need to deploy it like lurkers or siege tanks.
about the unit composition. i meant that there's no way to counter collosus other than with vikings (or corruptors) which means whenever you don't have those around you're doomed, it's not like in tvz where you can "dance" your marines vs blings, in tvp if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings, especially late game. with wall of support units in front
and as you mentioned yourself, tvt is an exciting matchup since while the match goes on you climb the tech tree, bio - mech - air. nothing like that happens in tvp where you have units you need since 12 or so minute mark.
ignorance is bliss
so what youre saying is that you want all your tier 1 units to have 'cool abilities' as if stim and CS arent enough? so you just want every terran unit to be able to do something other then just attack with alot of health, and cost wise, counter anything toss can send out of a gateway.
'if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings' im gonna watch any pro toss player who handles their collosus, and as soon as one dies to a unit which isnt a viking (which happens alot btw) im gonna start hating on them for not keeping it alive.
It seems you don't understand the OP he says that units like rauders should be never in the game because their CS limits the game skill and their are to powerful to be skiped and they blow in the lategame where you are limited by your options because of their "cool skills".
not entirely sure what youre trying to say here but ill respond the best i can.
marauders should be taken out the game, cos they dont have a 'cool skill' that can be used late game. Im sorry but that makes very little sense. Zealots/zerglings are boring cos they have no 'cool skill' (ok you have charge but marduers have CS which is an automated ability so we'll not count it.) but that doesnt stop them being used. Why wouldnt marauders be used late game by terran? They take more of a beating off collosus/storm and deal much more damage to stalkers and such then marines do. Plus,dropping 4 and stimming them into a toss main can do sooooooooo much damage
Marauders should be taken out of the game simply because their function overlaps with siege tanks without being nearly as cool and "terran-y" It's also counter-intuitive to keep making marauders all game long, because logically what you want by endgame is aoe. But against toss, siege tanks simply do not work - so all terran has is emp, which can't actually kill anything, nor can it really enforce positional play.
On October 03 2011 06:38 ThatGuy89 wrote:
On October 03 2011 06:34 Quotidian wrote:
On October 03 2011 06:02 ThatGuy89 wrote:
On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote: I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff.
wow i dont know the exact cost of tanks, but wanting 2 to defend an expo is completely retarded. If that was possible then terran, and tanks, would be completely broken.
No, it's not retarded and it wouldn't be broken. It's like how in BW you could hold chokes with lurkers or siege tanks/mines. Lower amounts of units mattered more - position mattered more, it wasn't all about always just bum rushing into something.
On October 03 2011 06:13 avilo wrote:
On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote: I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff.
The siege tank was balanced in beta against protoss. You could build them and it was worthwhile to go mech. And viable.
It was only "impossible to balance" on retardedly designed maps such as steppes of war where it takes about 5 seconds to cross the entire map, along with being 3 siege tank shot lengths away from your opponent's natural... .
Yes, I agree with you... but I think as long as blizzard wants the map pool to be like what it is today, they'll never be able to make the tank what it should be (in any of the match ups). But I think the least they could do is change the damage to 50 (-15 to light) just so that archons aren't basically warp-inable Immortals.
so youre saying that its completely fine for one race to be able to build 2 of the same units and use them to nail down an expansion?
i dont even know how to respond to that........it doesnt make any sense.Tanks would have to be made so strong that if they were used for aggression in anyway it would be completely one sided.
edit: warp-inable immortals - that cost 250-300 gas which are completely negated by ghosts
try holding off the stupidly broken 1-1-1 build while a siege tank is dealing 50 damage
Stop being such a touchy and defensive toss - I don't think anybody here cares. No one is forcing you to respond when you admittedly "don't know even know how to respond" It wouldn't matter if tanks did 60 damage or 35 damage in a 1-1-1 situation, since it's the marines that makes the push so effective and an immortal wouldn't take any more damage from a tank doing the same damage that it did back in the beta. The biggest reason why 1-1-1 is so strong is because warp gate units HAVE to be relatively weak early game because of warp tech.
Considering how immobile a siege tank is, their damage should be more in line with this immobility. Two siege tanks would only be threatening up to a point, but right now a PF on the gold on Xel naga with a 72-food siege tank line walled off against chargelots with depots will fall to a standard colossus based army, and the subsequent round of warp ins will win the protoss the game. That's just completely disheartening.
.
If you've built a 72 food siege tank army, when the toss is going collosus, and you ahve no vikings, you deserve to lose. No unit, no compisition and no build is unbeatable in this game, if its scouted. If you lose a game like that its your own fault for not knowing what he was doing
Who said anything about not having vikings? Unlike tanks, colossus actually dictate a specific response from a player other than simply continuing to mass the units you were going to make anyway and a-moving. The fact is, you need just as many vikings if you're going mass tank/hellion/ghost or something, as you need when going bio. That alone makes zero sense to me. And considering how mobile colossus are, they should be significantly weaker than mass siege tanks. But no, they can just tip toe into a tank line like it's nothing - the terran army, along with the PF, will die.
I'd love it if someone here goes to Blizzcon this year and asks a very specific question at a game design panel about Blizzard's "vision" for mech and specifically for siege tanks in tvp.
I see your point, however, I'm suggesting that in the design of the game, it's pretty obvious that Blizzard didn't mean for every unit of every race to be used in every single MU. Some MUs require tanks - TvT positional play, TvZ to avoid being rolled by banes - but TvP doesn't. My opinion is only that such diversity in the game is something to be celebrated. Each MU is different, requiring different strategies and styles of play to succeed. If you're someone who enjoys a good strategic TvT with massive tank lines in the middle of the map, great. If you're someone who wants to run around shooting shit with your marauders, laughing as some poor bastard's stalkers can't get out of the way, great too.
That being said - I agree that anything that allows a wider range of strategies to be used in a MU is something to be looked at, but what this thread seems to be forgetting is that all these units and abilities exist for a reason - and while these reasons may not be readily apparent in TvP, by changing them to alter only one MU, you're possibly breaking others. I also suggested that the game is only one year old. Yes, I did play BW and know that it took a lot of work and more than a year's worth of patches to get the state of the game to the pinnacle at which it is now. I also think it's hard to argue that SC2 isn't evolving week-to-week, and just because we can't see how something is viable now, doesn't mean it still won't be later this month.
On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote: I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff.
The siege tank was balanced in beta against protoss. You could build them and it was worthwhile to go mech. And viable.
It was only "impossible to balance" on retardedly designed maps such as steppes of war where it takes about 5 seconds to cross the entire map, along with being 3 siege tank shot lengths away from your opponent's natural...
I remember being one of the first/few in beta to be playing mech/ghostmech against protoss, and i would have sick macro games where tanks actually didn't get insta-gibbed and holding a position actually meant something. Protoss had to be smart like in brood war to engage you, not just "hello 1A into your tank line at any angle i want to and come out ahead."
As it stands right now, you cannot hold a position with mech like you could in the beta because of the tank nerf. Protoss actually feared your tanks and if they played bad (and most did because they apparently all forgot their brood war skills) then they were punished for 1Aing in bad positions/bad spots. As of now, protoss is not punished for you gaining a better position on them because siege tanks just tickle their units, or you can mass collosus+blink stalker and walk around their army 100% of the time and base trade with DTS + warpgates + sniping the remaining orbitals = protoss win.
With the recent hellion nerf, TvT is back to more of "I build more marines than you." How anyone can not see that this is horrible for SC2 is beyond me. It's just another nerf that makes positioning mean less, and micro mean less. Because now TvT for example, you can mass marines and come out ahead due to the extra shots hellion take on marines. Marines easily will out dps every other unit and the only micro required? Pre-spread into an arc and 1A.
Mech actually took forethought, overarching strategy, spotting, and positioning that is difficult, very difficult (ala brood war difficulty) for a player to learn. With bio, you can blindly run in, and as long as you make an arc, you are good to go no matter how intricate or good your opponent's positioning was, because that's how bio plays.
Bio plays very linearly "make more of these tier1 units, throw them at your opponent for gain, when they die, make more and do it again. If you have less you lose, when you have more u win."
Siege tanks on the other hand, if they had their beta damage back, and you had a few on a cliff, it's not suddenly "i do not have an equal army supply to the protoss so i'm going to die 100%" but it is "i have better position, if he runs up he's going to lose more units than it is worth."
Right now, 99% of the time tanks do not scare protoss because they had their balls removed, so instead of beta where you could hold that position with tanks and protoss would HAVE to back off, they instead 1A into your tanks or blink into them or charge or whatever and they trade cost effectively and will always come out ahead. It's why mech is not viable in TvP.
And don't cite goody as an example. Just because you can do something and it will work against lower tiered protosses or once in a best out of 5, does not mean you should 100% of the time. There are Terran players with 10x better multi-tasking that don't queue up 5 tanks in one factory and 5 SCVS in one CC that still get thrashed by protosses when they try to mech and it's not because they're doing it any less better than goody or anyone else.
It's disheartening really just how bad mech is in TvP. =/ also keep in mind one of the key ways mech had to harrass protoss was with blue flame hellions that actually could kill workers. Now it is worthless to even try that because they 3 shot workers, it's the difference between successful harass and killing 2 probes and having protoss laugh at you for wasting the resources while their 1A ball just grew in size for free.
As for the hellion nerf, I think the problem is that it is one of the worst designed units in SC2 that do not fit in the game. Unlike vultures, with reasonable amount of luck(opponent just slightly misclicks) 2 bf hellions could kill even 25+ workers in one shot, now you need 3. And the killcount was too dependent on luck as compared to micro/planning. In already fragile game this makes it even worse.
Ah, the people that were really good at hellion harrass micro'd their hellions very good. You had to time shots perfectly to get the max amount of kills.
Also, how is something like that bad for SC2? SC1 had the reaver, it had psi storm, lurker shots, spider mines that all served the same function as a blue flame hellion shot that can 2 shot workers.
SC2 has banelings still, collosus, storm still, but they all require a lot less micro and simple 1A. A 2 shot blue flame hellion was perfectly fine, you should feel threatened by such a unit, just like you would be threatened by a reaver in your mineral line.
As of the last patch, it simply isn't as threatening anymore.
It's also funny you would argue that hellions are "luck based" as you can control the shot with good micro and waiting for the "line em up." Reavers scarabs and spider mines literally were things that did have random luck influence them. So you can actually say something like the SC2 hellion is less of a luck influenced unit then the vulture was...pretty crazy isn't it?
By luck based I did not mean that by better control you could not get better results, just that even with terrible control you could get the same results with luck and with bf hellions it happened quite often.
Also I would argue that compared to all other harass options that you mentioned in SC2 being perceptive and aware and running your workers is good enough defense. Not so much for hellions.
Also saying bf hellion 2-shots workers is slightly misleading as it could 2-shot workers, but it could also 2-shot whole mineral line And investing into reaver/lurker drop(other way to get them into position)/storm drop is slightly more expensive than bf hellion especially compared to results. And I know about intelligence of scarabs(or mines) but the actual act of reaver dropping well is much more skill based and the loss of reaver(+shuttle eventually) is more painful, again especially compared to possible results.
But those are just opinions, my point was that bf hellion harass damage is too loosely correlated with the skill of the harass, it is still correlated, but too little.
And just to note even after patch bf hellion harass is still threatening, just not in TvP, but that was mostly the case even before the patch.
On October 03 2011 05:37 flowSthead wrote: I have no idea why this was spotlighted. So a mod agreed with the sentiment and this get's spotlighted? Seriously?
On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote: 1 Introduction, StarCraft 2 philosophy?
I believe blizzards intended to make sc2 a fast paced game, which means they wanted to make low tier units useful, Marine+Marauder being the prime example of that. It means that there's rarely a passage in the game where nothing is happening (on the pro level). But does this hurt the game? Are low tier units too strong?
Also it seems blizzard wants to make as many units viable as possible in all matchups so they can have variety in the gameplay. In BW, that was not the case, as marines were almost useless in both TvT and TvP besides couple timing attacks (f.e. Deep6). I believe sc2 TvP has the similar issue, but i'll get to that later.
I have a few questions right off the bat. What do you mean by hurt the game? Do you mean that it is boring to watch, or boring to play, or both? I'm not sure I understand the sentiment that it hurts the game, unless you give me some qualifications for that statement.
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Again, you just throw out something random without qualification. What do you mean the marauder is boring? What does that actually mean in terms of gameplay or observing? I happen to like the marauder. I think the marauder introduces variety into the TvT match-up. I like that bio play can play against mech since it punishes mistakes. I like that bio can transition into mech and then into sky terran. I think that actually makes for exciting TvT and the reason TvT is the best mirror.
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
And this is a problem with any race. Build order losses happen. This has been addressed by other people in the thread. If you have cloacked banshees and your opponent has no form of detection, then you lose. What is your point?
I skimmed through this thread and saw a lot of different posts addressing the issues with the OP. I get that the OP wants a more positional game and wants more micro capabilities. That's fine, the OP has a right to his opinion. But why was this spotlighted? This should be a blog post. There is no discussion to be had. The OP hates the marauder, while other people do not. What is it that we are supposed to be discussing? How much the marauder sucks? How is any of this useful either to TL or to Blizzard?
by boring marauder i mean the unit has no cool abilities and feels out of place. good low tier units with a lot of HP (and concussive shells) and very good damage, is cheap and easy to get (similar to roach). collosus is for example boring for me as well, since its a big machine with lazers thats just A move. you don't need to deploy it like lurkers or siege tanks.
Right, Marauders are not positional units. But most units are not positional units. Marines, zealots, stalkers, zerglings, marauders, roaches, hydralisks, etc. all are not positional units. Why is the marauder the exception that makes it boring? I can understand the issue with the Colossus because it is a siege unit, but it works similarly to how Broodlords/Guardians work in that it can be taken out by air and has a long ground range. I don't understand what you mean by out of place.
about the unit composition. i meant that there's no way to counter collosus other than with vikings (or corruptors) which means whenever you don't have those around you're doomed, it's not like in tvz where you can "dance" your marines vs blings, in tvp if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings, especially late game. with wall of support units in front
I'm not sure I agree with your interpretation. You do not dance your marines vs banelings unless you are going predominantly with marines. Your siege tanks take care of the banelings and your marines protect the tanks from mutalisks and occasionally from zerglings if they are right next to a sieged tank. The zerg then tries to overrun the Terran by forcing him to run away his marines and kill the tanks with the mutalisks. There is a dance, but it is not purely marine versus baneling. Either way, the tanks are there to control space.
The Protoss deathball does not work in quite the same way, but it is comparable. Essentially, the space control is in front of the Colossus which is moving, rather than the stationary position of a tank or lurker. The zealot/stalker/sentry force in front of the Colossus protects the Colossus so that it can deal the damage from afar. You are right in that there isn't much of dance there unless there are Vikings. But then the dance exists by virtue of Vikings + Marauder versus Colossus + Stalker. If the Terran manages to separate the Colossus from the support units, then either all of the Colossus die and the Protoss ground army becomes vulnerable, or all of the ground army dies and the Colossus die to Marines and Marauders super easily. I'm not sure what the problem is, except that a deathball may not be as interesting to watch as a positional tank placement. But again, that is subjective. A person may find the moving deathball more exciting than the tank slow push.
and as you mentioned yourself, tvt is an exciting matchup since while the match goes on you climb the tech tree, bio - mech - air. nothing like that happens in tvp where you have units you need since 12 or so minute mark.
True, but you climb the tech tree in different ways. You get upgrades and vikings and ghosts. You do not get BCs and Thors, but then again you don't get those in a typical TvZ either. Most TvZs revolve around the Terran getting Marine/Medivac/Tank. If the Zerg manages to get up to Broodlords (in other words, either you havent died to Muta/ling/bling, or he hasn't died) then you make Vikings/ghosts against the Broodlords, or just ghosts against Ultralisks (or marauders). Look at that. The only difference between TvZ and TvP is the marauder exchange for the tank. Vikings still factor in and so do ghosts if it goes super late game. Hellions exist in both match up. Thors are rare, but I have seen them in both (although more so in TvZ).
I would actually argue that if anything the Viking is the problem with TvP, not the marauder, from the Terran side. The Protoss side has the damn sentry which kills strength from the ground force and that has been discussed. But the Viking kills all possible air play from the Protoss. Vikings and Marines in combo means that a Stargate is really only useful for early game Void-Ray harass. I have seen Phoenixes used to kill Medivacs, but only when the Terran does not go Vikings, and then keeps his Medivacs slightly head or behind of his Marine force (in other words, Terrans not used to seeing Phoenixes not microing their medivacs away from the Phoenixes).
To put it another way, Vikings are such a hard counter to both Colossi and Stargate play, that the question is not if the Vikings will kill the Colossi/Voidrays/Phoenixes, but when. You are right that this is not the case with TvZ. In TvZ the question is always if or will, as in "will the Mutas kill the tanks" or "will the banelings kill the marines". In TvP it is "when will the Vikings kill the Colossi".
I think the main idea is that even MMM is very powerful, Ts want something else to be viable even if it's a bit weaker. Something that can work under some circunstances.
And tanks are very far from that role as they get destroyed by everything.
On October 03 2011 05:37 flowSthead wrote: I have no idea why this was spotlighted. So a mod agreed with the sentiment and this get's spotlighted? Seriously?
On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote: 1 Introduction, StarCraft 2 philosophy?
I believe blizzards intended to make sc2 a fast paced game, which means they wanted to make low tier units useful, Marine+Marauder being the prime example of that. It means that there's rarely a passage in the game where nothing is happening (on the pro level). But does this hurt the game? Are low tier units too strong?
Also it seems blizzard wants to make as many units viable as possible in all matchups so they can have variety in the gameplay. In BW, that was not the case, as marines were almost useless in both TvT and TvP besides couple timing attacks (f.e. Deep6). I believe sc2 TvP has the similar issue, but i'll get to that later.
I have a few questions right off the bat. What do you mean by hurt the game? Do you mean that it is boring to watch, or boring to play, or both? I'm not sure I understand the sentiment that it hurts the game, unless you give me some qualifications for that statement.
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Again, you just throw out something random without qualification. What do you mean the marauder is boring? What does that actually mean in terms of gameplay or observing? I happen to like the marauder. I think the marauder introduces variety into the TvT match-up. I like that bio play can play against mech since it punishes mistakes. I like that bio can transition into mech and then into sky terran. I think that actually makes for exciting TvT and the reason TvT is the best mirror.
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
And this is a problem with any race. Build order losses happen. This has been addressed by other people in the thread. If you have cloacked banshees and your opponent has no form of detection, then you lose. What is your point?
I skimmed through this thread and saw a lot of different posts addressing the issues with the OP. I get that the OP wants a more positional game and wants more micro capabilities. That's fine, the OP has a right to his opinion. But why was this spotlighted? This should be a blog post. There is no discussion to be had. The OP hates the marauder, while other people do not. What is it that we are supposed to be discussing? How much the marauder sucks? How is any of this useful either to TL or to Blizzard?
by boring marauder i mean the unit has no cool abilities and feels out of place. good low tier units with a lot of HP (and concussive shells) and very good damage, is cheap and easy to get (similar to roach). collosus is for example boring for me as well, since its a big machine with lazers thats just A move. you don't need to deploy it like lurkers or siege tanks.
about the unit composition. i meant that there's no way to counter collosus other than with vikings (or corruptors) which means whenever you don't have those around you're doomed, it's not like in tvz where you can "dance" your marines vs blings, in tvp if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings, especially late game. with wall of support units in front
and as you mentioned yourself, tvt is an exciting matchup since while the match goes on you climb the tech tree, bio - mech - air. nothing like that happens in tvp where you have units you need since 12 or so minute mark.
ignorance is bliss
so what youre saying is that you want all your tier 1 units to have 'cool abilities' as if stim and CS arent enough? so you just want every terran unit to be able to do something other then just attack with alot of health, and cost wise, counter anything toss can send out of a gateway.
'if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings' im gonna watch any pro toss player who handles their collosus, and as soon as one dies to a unit which isnt a viking (which happens alot btw) im gonna start hating on them for not keeping it alive.
It seems you don't understand the OP he says that units like rauders should be never in the game because their CS limits the game skill and their are to powerful to be skiped and they blow in the lategame where you are limited by your options because of their "cool skills".
not entirely sure what youre trying to say here but ill respond the best i can.
marauders should be taken out the game, cos they dont have a 'cool skill' that can be used late game. Im sorry but that makes very little sense. Zealots/zerglings are boring cos they have no 'cool skill' (ok you have charge but marduers have CS which is an automated ability so we'll not count it.) but that doesnt stop them being used. Why wouldnt marauders be used late game by terran? They take more of a beating off collosus/storm and deal much more damage to stalkers and such then marines do. Plus,dropping 4 and stimming them into a toss main can do sooooooooo much damage
Marauders should be taken out of the game simply because their function overlaps with siege tanks without being nearly as cool and "terran-y" It's also counter-intuitive to keep making marauders all game long, because logically what you want by endgame is aoe. But against toss, siege tanks simply do not work - so all terran has is emp, which can't actually kill anything, nor can it really enforce positional play.
On October 03 2011 06:38 ThatGuy89 wrote:
On October 03 2011 06:34 Quotidian wrote:
On October 03 2011 06:02 ThatGuy89 wrote:
On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote: I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff.
wow i dont know the exact cost of tanks, but wanting 2 to defend an expo is completely retarded. If that was possible then terran, and tanks, would be completely broken.
No, it's not retarded and it wouldn't be broken. It's like how in BW you could hold chokes with lurkers or siege tanks/mines. Lower amounts of units mattered more - position mattered more, it wasn't all about always just bum rushing into something.
On October 03 2011 06:13 avilo wrote:
On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote: I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff.
The siege tank was balanced in beta against protoss. You could build them and it was worthwhile to go mech. And viable.
It was only "impossible to balance" on retardedly designed maps such as steppes of war where it takes about 5 seconds to cross the entire map, along with being 3 siege tank shot lengths away from your opponent's natural... .
Yes, I agree with you... but I think as long as blizzard wants the map pool to be like what it is today, they'll never be able to make the tank what it should be (in any of the match ups). But I think the least they could do is change the damage to 50 (-15 to light) just so that archons aren't basically warp-inable Immortals.
so youre saying that its completely fine for one race to be able to build 2 of the same units and use them to nail down an expansion?
i dont even know how to respond to that........it doesnt make any sense.Tanks would have to be made so strong that if they were used for aggression in anyway it would be completely one sided.
edit: warp-inable immortals - that cost 250-300 gas which are completely negated by ghosts
try holding off the stupidly broken 1-1-1 build while a siege tank is dealing 50 damage
Stop being such a touchy and defensive toss - I don't think anybody here cares. No one is forcing you to respond when you admittedly "don't know even know how to respond" It wouldn't matter if tanks did 60 damage or 35 damage in a 1-1-1 situation, since it's the marines that makes the push so effective and an immortal wouldn't take any more damage from a tank doing the same damage that it did back in the beta. The biggest reason why 1-1-1 is so strong is because warp gate units HAVE to be relatively weak early game because of warp tech.
Considering how immobile a siege tank is, their damage should be more in line with this immobility. Two siege tanks would only be threatening up to a point, but right now a PF on the gold on Xel naga with a 72-food siege tank line walled off against chargelots with depots will fall to a standard colossus based army, and the subsequent round of warp ins will win the protoss the game. That's just completely disheartening.
.
If you've built a 72 food siege tank army, when the toss is going collosus, and you ahve no vikings, you deserve to lose. No unit, no compisition and no build is unbeatable in this game, if its scouted. If you lose a game like that its your own fault for not knowing what he was doing
Who said anything about not having vikings? Unlike tanks, colossus actually dictate a specific response from a player other than simply continuing to mass the units you were going to make anyway and a-moving. The fact is, you need just as many vikings if you're going mass tank/hellion/ghost or something, as you need when going bio. That alone makes zero sense to me. And considering how mobile colossus are, they should be significantly weaker than mass siege tanks. But no, they can just tip toe into a tank line like it's nothing - the terran army, along with the PF, will die.
I'd love it if someone here goes to Blizzcon this year and asks a very specific question at a game design panel about Blizzard's "vision" for mech and specifically for siege tanks in tvp.
I would imagine they would say something along the lines of "We don't have a vision for one specific unit in a matchup and that we are going for balance as a whole"
On October 03 2011 05:37 flowSthead wrote: I have no idea why this was spotlighted. So a mod agreed with the sentiment and this get's spotlighted? Seriously?
On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote: 1 Introduction, StarCraft 2 philosophy?
I believe blizzards intended to make sc2 a fast paced game, which means they wanted to make low tier units useful, Marine+Marauder being the prime example of that. It means that there's rarely a passage in the game where nothing is happening (on the pro level). But does this hurt the game? Are low tier units too strong?
Also it seems blizzard wants to make as many units viable as possible in all matchups so they can have variety in the gameplay. In BW, that was not the case, as marines were almost useless in both TvT and TvP besides couple timing attacks (f.e. Deep6). I believe sc2 TvP has the similar issue, but i'll get to that later.
I have a few questions right off the bat. What do you mean by hurt the game? Do you mean that it is boring to watch, or boring to play, or both? I'm not sure I understand the sentiment that it hurts the game, unless you give me some qualifications for that statement.
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Again, you just throw out something random without qualification. What do you mean the marauder is boring? What does that actually mean in terms of gameplay or observing? I happen to like the marauder. I think the marauder introduces variety into the TvT match-up. I like that bio play can play against mech since it punishes mistakes. I like that bio can transition into mech and then into sky terran. I think that actually makes for exciting TvT and the reason TvT is the best mirror.
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
And this is a problem with any race. Build order losses happen. This has been addressed by other people in the thread. If you have cloacked banshees and your opponent has no form of detection, then you lose. What is your point?
I skimmed through this thread and saw a lot of different posts addressing the issues with the OP. I get that the OP wants a more positional game and wants more micro capabilities. That's fine, the OP has a right to his opinion. But why was this spotlighted? This should be a blog post. There is no discussion to be had. The OP hates the marauder, while other people do not. What is it that we are supposed to be discussing? How much the marauder sucks? How is any of this useful either to TL or to Blizzard?
by boring marauder i mean the unit has no cool abilities and feels out of place. good low tier units with a lot of HP (and concussive shells) and very good damage, is cheap and easy to get (similar to roach). collosus is for example boring for me as well, since its a big machine with lazers thats just A move. you don't need to deploy it like lurkers or siege tanks.
about the unit composition. i meant that there's no way to counter collosus other than with vikings (or corruptors) which means whenever you don't have those around you're doomed, it's not like in tvz where you can "dance" your marines vs blings, in tvp if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings, especially late game. with wall of support units in front
and as you mentioned yourself, tvt is an exciting matchup since while the match goes on you climb the tech tree, bio - mech - air. nothing like that happens in tvp where you have units you need since 12 or so minute mark.
ignorance is bliss
so what youre saying is that you want all your tier 1 units to have 'cool abilities' as if stim and CS arent enough? so you just want every terran unit to be able to do something other then just attack with alot of health, and cost wise, counter anything toss can send out of a gateway.
'if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings' im gonna watch any pro toss player who handles their collosus, and as soon as one dies to a unit which isnt a viking (which happens alot btw) im gonna start hating on them for not keeping it alive.
It seems you don't understand the OP he says that units like rauders should be never in the game because their CS limits the game skill and their are to powerful to be skiped and they blow in the lategame where you are limited by your options because of their "cool skills".
not entirely sure what youre trying to say here but ill respond the best i can.
marauders should be taken out the game, cos they dont have a 'cool skill' that can be used late game. Im sorry but that makes very little sense. Zealots/zerglings are boring cos they have no 'cool skill' (ok you have charge but marduers have CS which is an automated ability so we'll not count it.) but that doesnt stop them being used. Why wouldnt marauders be used late game by terran? They take more of a beating off collosus/storm and deal much more damage to stalkers and such then marines do. Plus,dropping 4 and stimming them into a toss main can do sooooooooo much damage
Marauders should be taken out of the game simply because their function overlaps with siege tanks without being nearly as cool and "terran-y" It's also counter-intuitive to keep making marauders all game long, because logically what you want by endgame is aoe. But against toss, siege tanks simply do not work - so all terran has is emp, which can't actually kill anything, nor can it really enforce positional play.
On October 03 2011 06:38 ThatGuy89 wrote:
On October 03 2011 06:34 Quotidian wrote:
On October 03 2011 06:02 ThatGuy89 wrote:
On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote: I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff.
wow i dont know the exact cost of tanks, but wanting 2 to defend an expo is completely retarded. If that was possible then terran, and tanks, would be completely broken.
No, it's not retarded and it wouldn't be broken. It's like how in BW you could hold chokes with lurkers or siege tanks/mines. Lower amounts of units mattered more - position mattered more, it wasn't all about always just bum rushing into something.
On October 03 2011 06:13 avilo wrote:
On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote: I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff.
The siege tank was balanced in beta against protoss. You could build them and it was worthwhile to go mech. And viable.
It was only "impossible to balance" on retardedly designed maps such as steppes of war where it takes about 5 seconds to cross the entire map, along with being 3 siege tank shot lengths away from your opponent's natural... .
Yes, I agree with you... but I think as long as blizzard wants the map pool to be like what it is today, they'll never be able to make the tank what it should be (in any of the match ups). But I think the least they could do is change the damage to 50 (-15 to light) just so that archons aren't basically warp-inable Immortals.
so youre saying that its completely fine for one race to be able to build 2 of the same units and use them to nail down an expansion?
i dont even know how to respond to that........it doesnt make any sense.Tanks would have to be made so strong that if they were used for aggression in anyway it would be completely one sided.
edit: warp-inable immortals - that cost 250-300 gas which are completely negated by ghosts
try holding off the stupidly broken 1-1-1 build while a siege tank is dealing 50 damage
Stop being such a touchy and defensive toss - I don't think anybody here cares. No one is forcing you to respond when you admittedly "don't know even know how to respond" It wouldn't matter if tanks did 60 damage or 35 damage in a 1-1-1 situation, since it's the marines that makes the push so effective and an immortal wouldn't take any more damage from a tank doing the same damage that it did back in the beta. The biggest reason why 1-1-1 is so strong is because warp gate units HAVE to be relatively weak early game because of warp tech.
Considering how immobile a siege tank is, their damage should be more in line with this immobility. Two siege tanks would only be threatening up to a point, but right now a PF on the gold on Xel naga with a 72-food siege tank line walled off against chargelots with depots will fall to a standard colossus based army, and the subsequent round of warp ins will win the protoss the game. That's just completely disheartening.
.
If you've built a 72 food siege tank army, when the toss is going collosus, and you ahve no vikings, you deserve to lose. No unit, no compisition and no build is unbeatable in this game, if its scouted. If you lose a game like that its your own fault for not knowing what he was doing
Who said anything about not having vikings? Unlike tanks, colossus actually dictate a specific response from a player other than simply continuing to mass the units you were going to make anyway and a-moving. The fact is, you need just as many vikings if you're going mass tank/hellion/ghost or something, as you need when going bio. That alone makes zero sense to me. And considering how mobile colossus are, they should be significantly weaker than mass siege tanks. But no, they can just tip toe into a tank line like it's nothing - the terran army, along with the PF, will die.
I'd love it if someone here goes to Blizzcon this year and asks a very specific question at a game design panel about Blizzard's "vision" for mech and specifically for siege tanks in tvp.
I would imagine they would say something along the lines of "We don't have a vision for one specific unit in a matchup and that we are going for balance as a whole"
Of course they have a vision or at the very least an opinion about a single unit in a match up, otherwise the Immortal would never have been added to the game. No, they'd probably have some polite, noncommittal response - Browder will probably say he thinks tanks are good in tvp in certain situations, Kim will say something about top Korean pros and that'll be pretty much it. But I still want to hear them talk about it.
On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote: I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff.
The siege tank was balanced in beta against protoss. You could build them and it was worthwhile to go mech. And viable.
It was only "impossible to balance" on retardedly designed maps such as steppes of war where it takes about 5 seconds to cross the entire map, along with being 3 siege tank shot lengths away from your opponent's natural...
I remember being one of the first/few in beta to be playing mech/ghostmech against protoss, and i would have sick macro games where tanks actually didn't get insta-gibbed and holding a position actually meant something. Protoss had to be smart like in brood war to engage you, not just "hello 1A into your tank line at any angle i want to and come out ahead."
As it stands right now, you cannot hold a position with mech like you could in the beta because of the tank nerf. Protoss actually feared your tanks and if they played bad (and most did because they apparently all forgot their brood war skills) then they were punished for 1Aing in bad positions/bad spots. As of now, protoss is not punished for you gaining a better position on them because siege tanks just tickle their units, or you can mass collosus+blink stalker and walk around their army 100% of the time and base trade with DTS + warpgates + sniping the remaining orbitals = protoss win.
With the recent hellion nerf, TvT is back to more of "I build more marines than you." How anyone can not see that this is horrible for SC2 is beyond me. It's just another nerf that makes positioning mean less, and micro mean less. Because now TvT for example, you can mass marines and come out ahead due to the extra shots hellion take on marines. Marines easily will out dps every other unit and the only micro required? Pre-spread into an arc and 1A.
Mech actually took forethought, overarching strategy, spotting, and positioning that is difficult, very difficult (ala brood war difficulty) for a player to learn. With bio, you can blindly run in, and as long as you make an arc, you are good to go no matter how intricate or good your opponent's positioning was, because that's how bio plays.
Bio plays very linearly "make more of these tier1 units, throw them at your opponent for gain, when they die, make more and do it again. If you have less you lose, when you have more u win."
Siege tanks on the other hand, if they had their beta damage back, and you had a few on a cliff, it's not suddenly "i do not have an equal army supply to the protoss so i'm going to die 100%" but it is "i have better position, if he runs up he's going to lose more units than it is worth."
Right now, 99% of the time tanks do not scare protoss because they had their balls removed, so instead of beta where you could hold that position with tanks and protoss would HAVE to back off, they instead 1A into your tanks or blink into them or charge or whatever and they trade cost effectively and will always come out ahead. It's why mech is not viable in TvP.
And don't cite goody as an example. Just because you can do something and it will work against lower tiered protosses or once in a best out of 5, does not mean you should 100% of the time. There are Terran players with 10x better multi-tasking that don't queue up 5 tanks in one factory and 5 SCVS in one CC that still get thrashed by protosses when they try to mech and it's not because they're doing it any less better than goody or anyone else.
It's disheartening really just how bad mech is in TvP. =/ also keep in mind one of the key ways mech had to harrass protoss was with blue flame hellions that actually could kill workers. Now it is worthless to even try that because they 3 shot workers, it's the difference between successful harass and killing 2 probes and having protoss laugh at you for wasting the resources while their 1A ball just grew in size for free.
As for the hellion nerf, I think the problem is that it is one of the worst designed units in SC2 that do not fit in the game. Unlike vultures, with reasonable amount of luck(opponent just slightly misclicks) 2 bf hellions could kill even 25+ workers in one shot, now you need 3. And the killcount was too dependent on luck as compared to micro/planning. In already fragile game this makes it even worse.
Ah, the people that were really good at hellion harrass micro'd their hellions very good. You had to time shots perfectly to get the max amount of kills.
Also, how is something like that bad for SC2? SC1 had the reaver, it had psi storm, lurker shots, spider mines that all served the same function as a blue flame hellion shot that can 2 shot workers.
SC2 has banelings still, collosus, storm still, but they all require a lot less micro and simple 1A. A 2 shot blue flame hellion was perfectly fine, you should feel threatened by such a unit, just like you would be threatened by a reaver in your mineral line.
As of the last patch, it simply isn't as threatening anymore.
It's also funny you would argue that hellions are "luck based" as you can control the shot with good micro and waiting for the "line em up." Reavers scarabs and spider mines literally were things that did have random luck influence them. So you can actually say something like the SC2 hellion is less of a luck influenced unit then the vulture was...pretty crazy isn't it?
By luck based I did not mean that by better control you could not get better results, just that even with terrible control you could get the same results with luck and with bf hellions it happened quite often.
Also saying bf hellion 2-shots workers is slightly misleading as it could 2-shot workers, but it could also 2-shot whole mineral line And investing into reaver/lurker drop(other way to get them into position)/storm drop is slightly more expensive than bf hellion especially compared to results. And I know about intelligence of scarabs(or mines) but the actual act of reaver dropping well is much more skill based and the loss of reaver(+shuttle eventually) is more painful, again especially compared to possible results.
But those are just opinions, my point was that bf hellion harass damage is too loosely correlated with the skill of the harass, it is still correlated, but too little.
And just to note even after patch bf hellion harass is still threatening, just not in TvP, but that was mostly the case even before the patch.
Also I would argue that compared to all other harass options that you mentioned in SC2 being perceptive and aware and running your workers is good enough defense. Not so much for hellions.
I think that was the problem with them. They were just SO powerful and yet so cheap. So I agree, they needed a change they are now still very powerful if you want to drop helions you just need to invest more for the same potential return.
First half of you're story is based on your poor opinion on marauders, and that youre facorite BW units cant be used (tank) which makes this 'complaining' about the matchup not based on facts but on your own opinion.
about ur warpgates, you might have a point there, heck i'd like as a protoss myself if i could make units as 'easy' as a terran can so i can focus more on the battle instead of having to look awway to warp in and keep my macro up.
but the micropart? you cannot be serious. first you are saying that its so awesome to micro against banes and fungles in tvz. but seriously you could do the same ammount of micro against storms as puma did amazingly here @ 26:05 or lifting up your units in ur medivacs to avoid FF's as select showcased in a match i cant remember on tal d'arim altar. or MKP in a match i can't remember either on crevasse where he one shotted units with marauders so they go slowed and couldnt get away.
about the micro in a general battle, well just read what thorzain said, seems pretty intense to me tbh.
and again the unitcomposition is biased by your opinion of not liking MM but using the argument "its basicly mmm viking ghost all the time" doesn't make much sens to me either as each matchup has a standard composition, that you dont like this one isnt the games fault.
On October 01 2011 07:11 eourcs wrote: TvP is a really odd matchup, where I think someone with perfect control and macro will be unbeatable, regardless of how well the Protoss plays (this is barring 1-1-1 which I do think is imbalanced), but like 99% of players I don't have that, so the matchup is hard as fuck. At the highest level, it's possible that it's imbalanced, but at every other level, the people who complain about Terran are idiots. Lategame TvP is extremely hard, and personally, I have never seen anybody beat Hasuobs when he gets Templar/Collosus and a solid 3-4 base economy, regardless of how far behind he is.
I feel the opposite - TvP is a matchup where if both players played perfectly, terran should never ever win. So dependant on getting good drops etc.
Of course its pretty damn close to impossible to play the level of perfect that you can consistently every game deny every single drop which might even make it terran favored in reality.
Anyway, I agree 100% with PredY's post, bio TvP makes me want to quit -_-
This pretty much sums up how I feel completely. Bio in any match-ups just isn't fun.
On October 01 2011 06:01 IGotPlayguuu wrote: Great post and i agree 100% with you. In TvP the only micro is EMP and maybe storm dodging, but after that, as you said, is just watching if all you have is enough fir the big fight. And is also terrible to see just the same composition every single game.
Yes, it is terrible to see the same unit composition every game. I mean, it's not like SC1 TvP was just Mech+Vessels vs. Dragoon/Zealot+Arbiters. Every. Single. Game.
Now to be fair, that doesn't excuse the current state of SC2 TvP. It could certainly be better. But Terran Mech has a snowball effect, where the more Mech you get, the better it is. Once you start allowing Mech to work, then it is very likely to become standard play. Which basically mean degenerating to SC1 TvP.
Which some people might like. But I'm not one of them. SC1 TvZ was always my favorite matchup: so many viable possibilities on both sides...
great post and needs to be discussed alot alot more. I think you missed the real point though.
TvP there is _NO_ stategy. Every pro will tell you, its you make maruders drop and hope you get enough drop dmg done to hit a timming and every single game is like that. And one of the biggest problems with the warp gate mechanics still so many protoss want to abuse instant proxied reinforcement pushes for free.
I do go mech in tvp and omg it is hard. I actually think one of the biggest problems is the mech units themselves are kind of awful in some ways the helion is just a bad unit. Having mines was super important in BW to hold flanks if you just flank with zealots you loose your mech army for free in sc2.
Also the thor is in some ways a broken unit if the protoss decides to instantly go 2 stargate carriar you have to go viking. and you mech army is non existant.
Then think about tanks in tvp is so extremely stupidly easy for protoss to catch a terran un-sieged like its unbelievable how easy it is with units like the immortal.
Or if they decide to go mass collosus you would be suprised wat that will do to a mech army or if they go for a wierd immortal push you have to have 2 or 3 good emps or you just loose insantly.
And in the end if you want to go into more detail you need to think about the meta game, the reason terran could start to push out and pressure the protoss so they couldn't just go carriar in BW was that they had to be +1 expansion of the terran. and you had the timing to move out.
But it still comes down to the fact that there are still 100000 things that protoss can do to just kill your mech army super super easily. and really the problem is siege tanks in the end do sooooooooooo little dmg to protoss units its kind of depressing and coulpled wit the fact mech anti air options are awful and expenisve because 1 thor wont do shit and you have to invest so much into them and so much supply for bad anti air options compared to goliaths and then we havbe no mines to help defend flanks.
And say this was all fixed then we would _need_ arbiters back. because the mothership just seems like the wrong idea for what its meant to do.
I personally really hate maruders abut i hope some day this will be adressed so skill actualy comes to play in tvp
TvP is really great imo. I don't 1-1-1 so I'll ignore that. When going either player opens with a pressure build, the first micro engagement is very intense, and the slightest MC can direct the course of the game. If focusing on macro, holy cow does the macro race get insane. There's no other MU where both players can expand at such a rate and still be neck and neck. It's not passive, engagaments are very common. Often I think that it becomes the player with the better mechanics wins, more than any other MU (bar ZvZ).
On October 03 2011 08:18 redbrain wrote: Also the thor is in some ways a broken unit if the protoss decides to instantly go 2 stargate carriar you have to go viking. and you mech army is non existant.
What? Are you seriously trying to argue that 2 stargate carrier is cheaper than than Vikings? That if you go Vikings your mech army will be small, but the Protoss army will be big? Do you have a replay or something because that is the craziest thing I have ever heard. Double stargate is so expensive for a Protoss that you could probably just kill him with one cloacked banshee.
TvP is really great imo. I don't 1-1-1 so I'll ignore that. When going either player opens with a pressure build, the first micro engagement is very intense, and the slightest MC can direct the course of the game. If focusing on macro, holy cow does the macro race get insane. There's no other MU where both players can expand at such a rate and still be neck and neck. It's not passive, engagaments are very common. Often I think that it becomes the player with the better mechanics wins, more than any other MU (bar ZvZ).
I dont agree with that to be honest TvZ i think really is the matchup if you want to see people with good mechanics because it requires multi tasking and thought (strategy) if both players play properly and standard. TvZ is actually an amazing matchup in many ways but i do think the maruder needs removed and mech buff'd or changed.
On October 03 2011 08:18 redbrain wrote: Also the thor is in some ways a broken unit if the protoss decides to instantly go 2 stargate carriar you have to go viking. and you mech army is non existant.
What? Are you seriously trying to argue that 2 stargate carrier is cheaper than than Vikings? That if you go Vikings your mech army will be small, but the Protoss army will be big? Do you have a replay or something because that is the craziest thing I have ever heard. Double stargate is so expensive for a Protoss that you could probably just kill him with one cloacked banshee.
In my experience trying to mech as terran, the protoss is free to expand all over the place and has the capabilities to have a huge warpgate infrastructure and transition into carrier. If you can survive the carriers with vikings, your ground army is so much smaller that the warpgates can easily roll you over now that you have a bunch of vikings doing nothing.
you should play SC2BW. your love of tanks and vultures will be rewarded; tanks and spider mines do twice their regular damage. your complete failure to understand starcraft 2 balance will not be rewarded in standard starcraft 2 however, nor will your failure to understand that there are 22 terrans in code s gsl out of 32 players for a reason
No one cares about Code S. The reason there are so many terrans there is also a result of the tournament structure, not just balance. This thread is obviously about someone who wants to play the game a certain way, but is forced into a stereotyped match up because terran only has one viable unit comp lategame that isn't stable, fun or rewarding to use at all.
I'd love to play something that took what's good about SC2 and mixed it with SC2BW though.
On October 03 2011 08:18 redbrain wrote: Also the thor is in some ways a broken unit if the protoss decides to instantly go 2 stargate carriar you have to go viking. and you mech army is non existant.
What? Are you seriously trying to argue that 2 stargate carrier is cheaper than than Vikings? That if you go Vikings your mech army will be small, but the Protoss army will be big? Do you have a replay or something because that is the craziest thing I have ever heard. Double stargate is so expensive for a Protoss that you could probably just kill him with one cloacked banshee.
In my experience trying to mech as terran, the protoss is free to expand all over the place and has the capabilities to have a huge warpgate infrastructure and transition into carrier. If you can survive the carriers with vikings, your ground army is so much smaller that the warpgates can easily roll you over now that you have a bunch of vikings doing nothing.
I don't have that much experience with Mech in TvP which is why I asked for a replay, but the Protoss shouldn't be free to expand all over the place. Yes, they should be expanding more than the Terran, but don't the hellions then go around trying to harass? I'm missing something in this clearly.
Dustin Browder was playing Quake 2 because it's a badass game. He came across his first Tank (it's a heavy infantry enemy) and was like OMG THIS THING IS SUPER POWERFUL!! :O
However, he realized that the Tank was extremely slow, and just peeking around a corner, firing a railgun slug, hiding, rinsing and repeating, could easily kill them while suffering no damage.
He really loved the Strogg Tank infantry, but cried that it was too slow. But he knew what to do! He would put a human version of the Strogg Tank in SC2! It would move as fast as Marines, not < 1 mph like the Tank! It would have the same ungodly firepower of the Tank! AND SO THE MARAUDER WAS BORN!!!
Btw, thank you id for making such incredible shooters. It's been a great 18 years playing your games .
On October 01 2011 06:49 TheSurgeonTV wrote: tvp is a major concern late game for me as well. something not mentioned here is how fast P can catch up to 3-0-3 upgrades against T mid/late game. also, the food mechanic favors Protoss as zealots,stalker,archon has higher HP/food ratio than marine, marauder, ghost.
another thing worth tweaking would be the EMP spell. Change the spell to reflect BW, that is it drains all energy and shields. this would make ghosts more viable against archons as you need to hit 3 emps on each archon to deal maxiumun damage. another thing would be to reduce the food requirement for ghosts to 1 food instead of 2.
I would also like to see the tank's food reduced to 2. scv mining time+depot costs are high mid game for terrans who want to mech.
any thoughts?
I don't know when you got sc2, but EMP was exactly the same as it was in Brood War until a few months ago when it got nerfed multiple times.
1 supply ghosts and 2 supply tanks would likely be overpowered, too.
On October 03 2011 08:18 redbrain wrote: Also the thor is in some ways a broken unit if the protoss decides to instantly go 2 stargate carriar you have to go viking. and you mech army is non existant.
What? Are you seriously trying to argue that 2 stargate carrier is cheaper than than Vikings? That if you go Vikings your mech army will be small, but the Protoss army will be big? Do you have a replay or something because that is the craziest thing I have ever heard. Double stargate is so expensive for a Protoss that you could probably just kill him with one cloacked banshee.
In my experience trying to mech as terran, the protoss is free to expand all over the place and has the capabilities to have a huge warpgate infrastructure and transition into carrier. If you can survive the carriers with vikings, your ground army is so much smaller that the warpgates can easily roll you over now that you have a bunch of vikings doing nothing.
I don't have that much experience with Mech in TvP which is why I asked for a replay, but the Protoss shouldn't be free to expand all over the place. Yes, they should be expanding more than the Terran, but don't the hellions then go around trying to harass? I'm missing something in this clearly.
I've had games where I kill like 40 probes, but can't actually move out and push because my tanks will just get crapped on by mass gateway units. So even though I can constantly be trying to harass with hellions it isn't enough to keep the protoss army from getting out of hand and it doesn't stop them from expanding. They figure out pretty quickly what's going on and drop a few cannons at expansions like in PvZ and pretty quickly hellions stop doing as well.
The games I have won playing mech vs P (which I've stopped doing) are either because I did an absurd amount of early damage either by opening banshees or by opening hellion drop (in which case I would have just as well won with bio) or I was playing against a protoss that was just really bad at macro and knowing how to play vs mech.
yeah but thing is with warp gates countering around the map with helions works nothing like vultures in BW because they juist warp in some units and they die. So protoss doesnt even really have to invest into cannons when they should have to. bnelive me protss has so many options it all comes back to the fact that you can catch them unsiged very easily as well as the fact even when they dont tanks dont do much dmg and you have to find a timming to push out to pressure the protoss so they cant just take the map and go carriar.
And considering if your going mech. your _ONLY_ anti air is thors which is just a huge investment. and going viking makes your mech army awful and you need to make quiote alot of vikings if protoss dedicates to an air force its different if they go phoenix you can just make 3 thors and your fine but void ray timmings or just straight carriar its a nightmare to start going viking unless you have a big advantage
On October 01 2011 06:16 Thorzain wrote: I feel that TvP IS really micro intensive. EMP everything, move your units out of storms, focus fire individual colossi with vikings and kite zealots if he's zealot heavy. And while you're kiting zealots you have to move back your ghosts so that they dont all get killed in the blink of an eye. All these things at the same time. It's freaking hard if you ask me!
Couldn't agree more with this. I love playing Terran because I find it to be a dynamic race to play with a lot of different attack paths etc., but in the end when it comes down to a straight up army on army battle it's always the Terran player who has to counter the two other races' fearsome units. Vikings against broodlords, colossi, and ghosts to EMP High Templars. Imo. that's the biggest problem I have with playing terran. Not having one of those big scary units such as colossus, HT, broodlord or even ultra that can catch the enemy player off guard completely and win you the game, or at least force him down a tech path. Terran has to do A LOT compared to protoss. I played random for the first year of my Starcraft life, and with protoss I've pretty much been fine with just attackmoving and letting the battle happen while I did other things. Hell, if you can't be arsed to use psi storms, just warp them into archons immediately and attack move. ^^ I find this really frustrating to lose against, because I feel like you can be a better player as terran, but it's just so much easier to get close to skillcap as protoss because certain aspects off the race are so easy to execute.
SC2 TvP is irreparably fucked, I can't even think of a way to change it. Like others said, everything P has counters tanks, and even vultures wouldn't fix that.
They knew that BW TvP is very hard for Terrans at the beginner level, and in the process of trying to fix that they sucked the fun from the matchup.
Also I 100% agree that warpgates are the single dumbest decision ever made for SC2. Who thought it would be a good idea to kill off the excitement of having to macro positionally and watching streams of units run as fast as they can to reinforce their buddies? As a spectator it's boring as hell to watch durrrrrr warpin, and that goes for every Protoss matchup.
I'm not exaclty sure if this is on topic but I think it would be a lot better for the game if marauder slow acted more like stim. It'd be cool to see maybe a cooldown placed into the game for the slow without a mana cost. Maybe a health cost but that might be too much. Imagine someone having a group of marauders and only using half their slow in a big battle and saving the other half for the next wave.
There would be some nice micro involved with that. It wouldn't necessarily take the marauder out of the game nor sway people to use more mech but I think it would somewhat change how the matchup would be played and possibly make it more exciting. Just a shitty random players two cents.
the fact still remains that the marauder is super duper strong and there is no real strategy anymore other than hoping you get lucky with drops and going for a timming because mech is super awful vs protoss
Although I can understand the OP, it feels weird to see a Terran complain, was a while ago hehehe. But yeah, marauders are gay, and so are warpgates, hard to argue against that. Was a good read nevertheless.
It would be better if they just made HotS it's own game. They could use the same graphics engine (or whatever) but just do an overhaul of all three races. Change (or get rid of) anti hype units such as colossus and marauder, get rid of warpgate and make gateway units better etc.
Blizzard knowingly took some risks when designing the game, and that's a good thing overall, but some things just really didn't work.
But it won't happen. Plus it would probably take another 10 years, and nobody wants that.
There are a lot things that popped out at me while reading this:
-You lament the loss of the uber-tank and then go on to complain there's no micro. Huh?
-You just kind of said 'warpgates' and then never explained yourself. I wasn't aware the existence of warpgates had any effect on the balance of anything outside of Protoss. If anything, you could postulate that warpgates caused Protoss gateway units to be tuned to be weaker. I don't find myself watching many longer PvT or PvZ games where I think- if only there were no warpgates, the other guy would have won.
-I can't read the last part with a whole lot of sympathy. Terran has the best drops and their units work the best in small numbers. I can't read that without hearing you say 'I want to be able to destroy expansions with impunity'. You have medivacs, zerg has mobility, Protoss has warpgates.
On a side note, I'm not sure why threads are constantly closed for saying 'why isn't it like this', but if the thread is 'why isn't it like BW?' it's somehow ok.
With regard to 111, I almost feel like Toss is too vulnerable to siege tanks in the early/early-mid game (when their army is mostly gateway units without upgrades), yet rapidly accumulates several options to completely shut down tank play as the game reaches a midpoint (charge, blink, collosi, greater immortal numbers, etc).
People complain about the marine being the problem, but how often do you see anyone lose a 3rax anymore, for example? And siege timings exist that can outright crush an early nexus (see Huk vs MVP). I'm not sure how this would be addressed without breaking the game quite severely, however.
Tanks are pretty much useless in TvP, lets agree on that. like many more have said before me, Immortals, charge, blink, etc etc etc.
Also in TvP, the main army for terran throughout the entire game is MMM. Once you get to mid-late game you add ghosts and vikings, but the main army is still MMM, which is T1 and is obviously a problem. No thors, no hellions, no BCs, no anything.
On the thorzain comment, I half-agree. Yes, it is micro intensive to a certain degree. HOWEVER, it isn't nearly as micro intensive as the other terran matchups: e.g. in TvT, vikings vs vikings, adding a pdd, making a perfect concave with tanks, defending from BFH runbys/drops, etc etc. in TvZ, marine splitting, defending ur tanks from mutas, scaning for creep tumours, dropping everywhere, having a leapfrog-pattern of tanks etc etc.
Nice write-up. Let's see what blizzard has in store for us for HotS.
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose.
theorycrafting does about as good as bitching when you're the #1 most represented race amongst the top players (referring to the gsl code s), by a large margin. the only thing you seem to have right is that terran is boring, "oh i build the same units as i get in the first few minutes, all game long, and win if my micro is decent and i hit the scan button a couple times in the game so i don't die to dts or something." the only exception is the mirror match, but of course, when op fights op you get epic battles.
On October 01 2011 07:26 Reborn8u wrote: I don't think the match ups in SC2 are even close to how entertaining and deep they were in BW! I thought I'd post a TvP and TvZ for those unfamiliar. Check these out if you haven't watched much pro BW and compare them to the sc2 matchups. To me it's like comparing Michelangelo's David to that clay ash tray I made in art class when I was 8.
The stork-falsh game is not really good in my opinion because the map was kind of bad with t able to attack p's 3rd with a handfull of seconds walking distance. Btw compairing BW after a year to sc2 is just ridiculous because BW was basically the game competitive rts developed from. Timing pushes and build orders and macro mechanics basically developed from there and players of today have all played other rts games before and feed on the experiences made from that era. The problem is in my opinion that there are some fundamental flaws in sc2 that prevent it from being as exciting as BW. The matchup defining units of pvt in broodwar were tanks and especially vultures for terran and arbiters and a mobil army for protoss. The matchup in sc2 just seems to be too reliant on a handfull of units. If t can emp the templars in a game without any/many collossi P loses and has no chance of doing anything. If the ghosts dont get the emps of storms destroy terran and the fight is over in a second, too. The clumping of units makes me think that the extreme dencity of firepower is a huge factor of why battles in sc2 cant really entertain as much as in bw. I hope blizzard can find a few good solutions in the next expansion.
I really can't agree with much of this. I respect OP as a player and a contributor, but it's a completely subjective analysis. He likes tanks. Tanks aren't very good in TvP. Therefore, tanks need to be better. I don't necessarily like that logic.
I also find the general TvP stuff a little ironic. Do Terrans really find the matchup that hard?
It's obvious that toss is very good at killing tanks, fine. It's also pretty obvious that toss really struggles against mass supported bio when it's well controlled. It's not enough to say that everything was better when tanks did 60 damage, because that just gives more options and more power to a race that really doesn't need them, for completely aesthetic reasons.
The question is one of preference, not balance. Terrans are doing plenty fine. If you want mech units to come into their own, you need to be willing to accept bio nerfs to make biomech necessary. Otherwise it would just be silly, because winrates are already sky high with mmmgv.
I think there isn't a single terran saying mech needs help who does not think marauders are bullshit and bio needs a nerf to balance out any mech buffs.
Ideally protoss would have units that make the bio ball less effective than it currently is, as colossi and psi storm are somewhat usable, but not effective enough to discourage mass marauder balls.
On October 01 2011 08:52 Dbla08 wrote: i hate to be that guy, but you're just whining dude.
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose.
theorycrafting does about as good as bitching when you're the #1 most represented race amongst the top players (referring to the gsl code s), by a large margin. the only thing you seem to have right is that terran is boring, "oh i build the same units as i get in the first few minutes, all game long, and win if my micro is decent and i hit the scan button a couple times in the game so i don't die to dts or something." the only exception is the mirror match, but of course, when op fights op you get epic battles.
Oh he's the one whining, is he?
the reason terrans are the most represented race is because they have a build (1-1-1) that has a winrate way over 50%, yet theres no way to nerf that or buff protoss without messing up other matchups, which are pretty well balanced.
On October 03 2011 10:04 ledarsi wrote: I think there isn't a single terran saying mech needs help who does not think marauders are bullshit and bio needs a nerf to balance out any mech buffs.
Ideally protoss would have units that make the bio ball less effective than it currently is, as colossi and psi storm are somewhat usable, but not effective enough to discourage mass marauder balls.
But Mech doesn't need help. Mech is pretty much dominant in TvT, and it's strong in TvZ.
The only reason to say that Mech needs help is if you want Mech in every matchup. And we (thankfully) didn't even have that in SC1.
What is wrong with having one matchup without those Goddamned Siege Tanks in it?
That's a great post summarizing my and probably a lot of people's frustration with the match up. Every time something that even appears viable comes up, it gets nerfed back to MMMVG. It is a dull match up.
Either MMMVG is too strong or everything else is too weak. I suspect the latter since Terran unlike Zerg do not change unit composition due to the way upgrades worth. They get to a unit composition and stay with it and augment with other tech paths. The closest thing I can estimate as potentially viable (Mass Banshee into BC, and Thor-mech) are basically very situational compared to spraying MMMVG all over most maps during the mid-game.
It just makes the match up a micro match and more like PvP from BW. :| Its not an issue of imbalance, its an issue of frigging dull because you don't develop the Terran army, you get your core immediately and you tech for support units...
One of the problems is that Feedback on Templars basically neutralizes every ground attack Terran unit after the siege tank.
On October 03 2011 09:23 Jerubaal wrote: There are a lot things that popped out at me while reading this:
-You lament the loss of the uber-tank and then go on to complain there's no micro. Huh?
-You just kind of said 'warpgates' and then never explained yourself. I wasn't aware the existence of warpgates had any effect on the balance of anything outside of Protoss. If anything, you could postulate that warpgates caused Protoss gateway units to be tuned to be weaker. I don't find myself watching many longer PvT or PvZ games where I think- if only there were no warpgates, the other guy would have won.
-I can't read the last part with a whole lot of sympathy. Terran has the best drops and their units work the best in small numbers. I can't read that without hearing you say 'I want to be able to destroy expansions with impunity'. You have medivacs, zerg has mobility, Protoss has warpgates.
On a side note, I'm not sure why threads are constantly closed for saying 'why isn't it like this', but if the thread is 'why isn't it like BW?' it's somehow ok.
Thank you! I kept reading about how WG are a bad mechanic.. perhaps somewhere in this thread there is at least an attempt at an explanation.
As for TvP micro, the one thing I noticed is that the micro is way more exciting when both sides have to react to each other. The harder the Protoss micros, the harder the Terran has to micro and vice versa (sort of). I think we should just let the gameplay evolve a bit more. If TvP looks more like sC vs MC last night then I think it's gonna be fine.
This is very well written - but I personally don't agree with some of the things. This: "unless we see a terran winning GSL/MLG/DH with mech in TvP" particularly bothers me, high level Korean terrans have been owning protoss players in GSL (aside from 1/1/1) with MMM+V/G for a while now, when you can consistently win with something, why would pro players, who play for money, bother to change with what works for no reason? Its so effective to the point that protoss players in code S are almost extinct. TvP in Korea at top levels has a win rate average of over 55+% the past five months - maybe someone like Huk/Jinro can shed some light on this, but I seriously doubt any of the top terrans in the OGS house would spend much of their time trying out new stuff as opposed to continually fine tuning their bio-centric play during practice.
It doesn't necessarily mean other unit compositions are unfeasible, I hate to bring up the points QQ'ers do, but there is some truth in that there isn't the incentive to innovate when you already dominate the matchup. I'm pretty sure that if marauders weren't so bloody good against protoss, you would have seen more players try to incorporate other units faster already.
Would it be any good? I don't know - point is, it takes time for metagame to develop, for instance blue flame hellions were sick good from release, however pretty much nobody used them in the first few seasons. They turned out to be so good that they had to be nerfed in the last patch, but it took almost a year for people to realize that. I definitely remember there used to be threads on TL complaining that bio was too good in TvT that the good ol' BW tank usage is all but gone in SC2, which clearly isn't the case anymore despite any significant patch changes regarding those units.
There is a ton of possibilities that haven't even been explored yet, to say that the game has already been completely figured out and that in TvP, bio is the only effective way you can play just can't be right. There are a lot of things which are heavily underused in TvP on GSL levels (such as sensor towers for one) which can definitely play a role in the usage of mech to help combat the loss in mobility in the matchup imo. But it won't happen anytime soon as long as Korean protoss players continue to struggle against existing terran builds.
I'm going to regret replying to this thread, but it was linked on the news page so I'm interested and I want to talk about a bunch of different things.
1. Comparisons to Brood War: I actually think that SCII TvP plays more like BW TvZ. Consider first that in BW the standard terran build was bio with science vessels for irradiate. The zerg would try to expand ahead of the terran, who would try to make certain timing attacks using medics and stimmed marines, later incorporating science vessels and perhaps a mech switch in order to make an unstoppable army. It was also extremely common for the terran to use multiple drops using marines and medics, stretching the multitasking ability of the defending zerg.
Now, compare that to SCII TvP. The terran again builds a powerful and mobile base of MMM that can be used to quickly attack, for timings, and to challenge the opponent's multitasking using drops. Ghosts have essentially replaced science vessels and emp provides the powerful area damage necessary to weaken the opposing army, while vikings against colossi actually take on a sort of siege role as well by attacking the opponent's siege units from a long distance. A late game switch to mech might even be possible. It took years to develop the mech switch in BW TvZ and I'm not sure we're ready to give up on such a thing in SCII TvP just yet.
2. Boring nature of the composition: I'm not really sure what to say to this kind of thing. Is it really boring to play? Even with multiple drops across the map, EMPs, viking snipes, storm dodging, basically all the stuff that Thorzain said on page 2. To the extent that Starcraft is about challenging your ability to execute a strategy and act quickly, I find it hard to believe that Terran is boring to play.
Maybe the issue isn't boredom per se, but rather that Terran playstyle does not match up to expectations. People go into Terran expecting it to be the turtle race that builds up a powerful physical army and eventually smashes its way to victory, taking advantage of superior positioning, like a chess game where you slowly move your pawns up, choking off all of the opponent's moves.
If that's the case, I'm not really sure how to respond. I would think you could play 10 or so games as Terran, realize that it's not the turtle race (at least in PvT) and switch to protoss so you can build up a death ball and slowly push across the map. Because honestly, in standard strategies the roles of P and T have switched relative to their positions in BW. (Aside: if protoss ever figures out a way to harass while turtling the way that vultures worked for terran in BW TvP, I think that the matchup actually would mirror BW with the roles swapped 100% because it is very hard to attack into a defensive P with storms, forcefields, and colossi.)
3. Terran Aesthetics: Now, maybe it could be that Terran is boring to watch. Maybe the problem is that the marauder is fat and ugly? Or it's projectile and sound effect are displeasing to the eye and ear? People naturally like the beautiful lines of the siege tank while growing disgusted with the fact that a bioball of MMMG just looks like a greyish black blob. If this is the case, lots of people should complain about it and perhaps Blizzard will give the race an art overhaul as part of HotS or Legacy of the Void. One can hope, right?
4. On Micro: I really can't say that there's a micro advantage either way. I think that sniping colossi is easier than feedbacking ghosts because ghosts are so bloody hard to click on. But dodging storms is way harder than laying forcefields. EMPs might be too easy, but colossi are basically a 1a unit and it actively hurts your chances to micro zealots with charge (because it cancels the charge). It really seems like both races have different advantages. I will make one note, which is that I think that Terran at 3/3 upgrades has an advantage over protoss. This takes the following logic: of stalkers, zealots, marines, and marauders, only the marauder scales with attack upgrades better than armor (gaining an additional +1 against armored units), so parity at the top level is mostly preserved and/or Terran has a larger advantage at 3/3 than at 0/0 on both sides. Moreover, the range of EMP on ghosts slightly outranges feedback and storm due to the aoe. At equal micro, this makes is seem likely that the terran would get off better EMPs than the protoss got off storms and that the basic units would be slightly in favor of terran, leading to clear wins at 200/200 max upgrades (should the game ever progress to that point). This could actually be an appropriate place for use of a mothership.
5. On warpgates. Can someone explain to me the issue with warpgates in the TvP match? Very few protoss rushes work effectively against T and they don't cut drops much shorter than a full round of regular gateway units popping normally in the base. Maybe with the warp prism now at 100 shields we'll start seeing more active harass using warp-ins, but if nobody scouts and there are pylons all around the map, I don't think that's a warp-in problem, it's a scouting problem.
6. Parting shot (if this is the only thing you read, god help you): Let P mix in carriers lategame and we'll talk about giving Terran a switch over to mech.
So basically, this should be Brood War? I honestly don't get why people spend half of their time suggesting that starcraft 2 become a game that had about 7 years of professional gamers testing builds and working out strategies. I know it seems like things are hard or stupid now but we're still in the early stages of the games development. Please stop hoping for a massive unit change in the expansion or some sort of super buff/nerf. I think Blizzard's made it clear that atm they're only doing changes to affect how certain units are used (infestor fungal change) and the occasional big one to change a stagnant match-up (Pvp for instance). Saying that a certain match-up/unit/composition is unsuitable or dumb in terms of the whole game seems really arrogant to me.
We won't know they're true use until all the options are fully explored. You quoted vultures, remember when people thought they were useless in bw? No terrans would use them and now if a terran doesn't players get suspicious. Hellions and ravens are the same for sc2. I say wait a few years for things to play out (It's been lesss than 18 months since relase) and then start complaining.
Does this seem to anyone like a glorified whine thread? I mean there isnt a whole lot of strategy to it. Its not even really about the marauder as a unit. Its about how PreDy probably a very, very highly ranked player, complaining that Sc2 TvP micro isnt BW and he can't use tanks. Like the OP doesnt solve anything by his post. Sc2 doesnt have as much micro as BW, we heard it before, and how you can only ever use the marauder, which is a point I dont agree with anyway.
I dont like doing this either, but I am at 1000 masters protoss with a 53ish win percentage, however much that means to you, whatever its there.
For TvP, on the fact that in battles there is no micro, I definitely don't agree. Ive had games where if the T didnt kite me, I ran him over with equal ups, and games where he did and I got totally dominated. Where he didnt run from my storms and it was over, he did and it was an equal fight. Like if I didnt pull back my units after he runs, or if he doesnt kite me during the fight, the battles turn out completely, completely different. And Viking micro is very very important in Colossus battles, how you position both in the battle, who pulls their colossus/viking back or how how many hits they get off is incredibly important in battles. Early game micro is incredibly important! Forcefields make micro incredibly important for both sides, and early stim timing make micro for T and P still very important. I dont get where you think there isnt micro. I mean sure it isnt spectacular like TvZ but I mean its there, mostly in engage timing and AoE control.
And for the whole composition point, I'm sorry but that is just how the matchup works. You need to have the right amount of units and the right time of the right kind. For Both sides, and that is just a facet of the matchup. Whether or not you like it, we can't help that its just the way it is. I personally like it, because the littlest mistake in unit choice or your build order can mean the game, which it makes the game however more precise.
Why do people think feedback is designed to counter ghost?
I see this idea pop up all the time, stop trying to primarily feedback ghosts. If you feedback ghosts, you got lucky. T mispositioned, moved his ghosts when he should have microed/scanned.
Feedback's primary purpose is to counter medivac. It does a great job of shutting down a 100/100 unit, possibly with cargo inside.
I think Blizzard did a poll a while ago about the favorite matchups to watch. Mirror matchups were dead last, with PvP worst of all, then TvT, then ZvZ. I think TvP was last of the other matchups, then ZvP, and TvZ got something like 33% of the vote
On October 01 2011 06:16 Thorzain wrote: I feel that TvP IS really micro intensive. EMP everything, move your units out of storms, focus fire individual colossi with vikings and kite zealots if he's zealot heavy. And while you're kiting zealots you have to move back your ghosts so that they dont all get killed in the blink of an eye. All these things at the same time. It's freaking hard if you ask me!
and for the protoss? storm + a move =/ Perhaps move collosus away from vikings, in case you had bad positioning frmo the very start. it's not broken, it's just boring to play and watch kinda
I believe that SC2 should be designed from the ground up, first without things like MULEs or warpgates. If the game can be balanced and made fun at that level, then they can start thinking about things like macro mechanics.
OP you are spot on about how terran was playing in BW, except both harassment and timing attacks were used in all 3 matchups. (2/1 armory fast 3rd expo in TvP, and dropship play in TvZ). I just hate Dustin Browder when he says something dumb like "X race is the macro race" or "X race is the harass ment race". IMO all 3 races should be able to play different styles efficiently.
On October 03 2011 11:13 zdragon wrote: Why do people think feedback is designed to counter ghost?
I see this idea pop up all the time, stop trying to primarily feedback ghosts. If you feedback ghosts, you got lucky. T mispositioned, moved his ghosts when he should have microed/scanned.
Feedback's primary purpose is to counter medivac. It does a great job of shutting down a 100/100 unit, possibly with cargo inside.
Feedback is great, but Terrans have aoe feedback that can be cast at slightly longer range. 25 extra energy for +1 range, +2 radius. Each EMP probably does more damage than a feedback too. Ghosts can also be invisible and move pretty quick while my HT's are a self clumping group of slackers!
On October 03 2011 11:23 Nazza wrote: I believe that SC2 should be designed from the ground up, first without things like MULEs or warpgates. If the game can be balanced and made fun at that level, then they can start thinking about things like macro mechanics.
OP you are spot on about how terran was playing in BW, except both harassment and timing attacks were used in all 3 matchups. (2/1 armory fast 3rd expo in TvP, and dropship play in TvZ). I just hate Dustin Browder when he says something dumb like "X race is the macro race" or "X race is the harass ment race". IMO all 3 races should be able to play different styles efficiently.
Warp gate isn't tosses macro mechanic. It's an attempt to band-aid our extremely lackluster units by being able to have them wherever we want. I don't think warp gate has been an issue for anyone decently skilled since the first month or two after release, except in PvP.
On October 03 2011 10:09 NicolBolas wrote: What is wrong with having one matchup without those Goddamned Siege Tanks in it?
There are quite a few people in this thread who share this sentiment. But the fact of the matter is that the siege tank has been the backbone of the terran army since the starcraft 1 was released. Tanks are what terran has always been all about. Quite frankly, if you don't like the siege tank as a unit then you really are not a terran player at heart and should think about playing a different race.
On October 03 2011 10:09 NicolBolas wrote: What is wrong with having one matchup without those Goddamned Siege Tanks in it?
There are quite a few people in this thread who share this sentiment. But the fact of the matter is that the siege tank has been the backbone of the terran army since the starcraft 1 was released. Tanks are what terran has always been all about. Quite frankly, if you don't like the siege tank as a unit then you really are not a terran player at heart and should think about playing a different race.
Yes, because Banex is the decider of what makes a terran player. Man, I was so unsure about what race to play, but then I read your post and realized that because I didn't like siege tanks, I probably shouldn't play terran...
By the way, in case you can't tell, that was sarcasm. I actually like siege tanks just fine, but the content of your post is ridiculous.
So many people are missing the whole point of this thread.
The key word is uninteresting MMMVG vs Collsi/Gateway has almost zero strategy to it and is extrmeley uninteresting.
OP was suggesting tanks as a way to make the MU interesting but since he used the "BW" word alot of people gave him shit.
Now while im with the OP and many other Terrans that would love to see the tank and a "BW" Style TvP. It doesnt mean that has to be the fix. As I said earlier, the MU could turn into Thor/Hellion/Raven/BC still be tankless and be 1000 times more interesting than it currently is.
This guy gets it. Tanks, and other units that control space (like lurkers/tanks did in bw) are what made starcraft such a good game. They make various RTS principles important, such as map design/layout, controlling areas on the map, the 'dance' between strongly held areas and mobile forces circumventing said areas, which in turn spreads the defender more thin as the number of bases increases, promoting more smaller engagements around the map rather than just a giant blob wars.
I do hope for example that colossus become very immobile units in HotS so they can start fulfilling the same role as the tank/lurker did, rather than the opposite of that which is what it is now, with unit-walking and cliff-walking, which is the main reason why games involving colossi tend to come down to huge army vs army battles.
I'm not in 100% agreement as its among several reasons why Protoss goes for blob. Other reasons as I'm sure you know is that Protoss armies tend to act very efficiently in small compact balls.
I think space control is somewhat a separate discussion. You have methods of space control but its food inefficient in this game which is probably why blizzard published small maps initially. They realized that you cannot control a large amount of space anymore with 3 food tanks and no mines. The only real space control unit in the traditional sense (food cheap) are Terran and vikings for air. Ground wise, you can control space but you have to invest so much in doing it that it becomes a risky assumption. Protoss has a death ball which is only more relatively more mobile than BW tanks. But a Protoss deathball isn't world ending like the giant river of tanks from BW so it kinda balances out. Like I said, I wouldn't say area control is dead, its just not as strong as it could be because Blizzard restricted the amount of space one can control heavily.
I think TvP doesn't so much come down to space control but it comes down to lack of options other than MMMVG. If space control was wholely absent, Terran wouldn't have to do multi-prong drops to avoid the Protoss death ball.
god.. people quoting artosis almost literally regarding the marauder makes me laugh every time.
i personally like the marauder, it adds a lot of variety to every match up, TvT and TvZ too. there's tons of people who like the marauder yet so many talk about about it like if EVERYONE hated it. that's simply not true. and I am talking about Terran users.
... without it, you wouldn't be able to go bio vs mech or pure bio vs Z.
I do not want a slow-long game with 84283 bases, 242834 tanks every time I have to play. Mech is boring shit.
On a side note, I am so happy ST_Bomber also dislikes mech he stated in an interview that "Mech in TvT is extremely boring" and that he will try to use bio as much as he can, he will try to change the current trend.
On October 03 2011 13:05 sunman1g wrote: god.. people quoting artosis almost literally regarding the marauder makes me laugh every time.
i personally like the marauder, it adds a lot of variety to every match up, TvT and TvZ too. there's tons of people who like the marauder yet so many talk about about it like if EVERYONE hated it. that's simply not true. and I am talking about Terran users.
... without it, you wouldn't be able to go bio vs mech or pure bio vs Z.
I do not want a slow-long game with 84283 bases, 242834 tanks every time I have to play. Mech is boring shit.
On a side note, I am so happy ST_Bomber also dislikes mech he stated in an interview that "Mech in TvT is extremely boring" and that he will try to use bio as much as he can, he will try to change the current trend.
Well the sentiment probably comes from Beta when people only build marauders, roaches, and stalkers. Marauders were regarded as imba and a dull unit..
On October 03 2011 11:03 MrSandman wrote: So basically, this should be Brood War? I honestly don't get why people spend half of their time suggesting that starcraft 2 become a game that had about 7 years of professional gamers testing builds and working out strategies. I know it seems like things are hard or stupid now but we're still in the early stages of the games development. Please stop hoping for a massive unit change in the expansion or some sort of super buff/nerf. I think Blizzard's made it clear that atm they're only doing changes to affect how certain units are used (infestor fungal change) and the occasional big one to change a stagnant match-up (Pvp for instance). Saying that a certain match-up/unit/composition is unsuitable or dumb in terms of the whole game seems really arrogant to me.
We won't know they're true use until all the options are fully explored. You quoted vultures, remember when people thought they were useless in bw? No terrans would use them and now if a terran doesn't players get suspicious. Hellions and ravens are the same for sc2. I say wait a few years for things to play out (It's been lesss than 18 months since relase) and then start complaining.
No, it shouldn't or wouldn't be brood war just because terran players want to play something else than mmmvg in tvp. It's like people forget that the biggest advances from BW to SC2 are user inferface related and graphics - the actual gameplay isn' that different. Most of the new units don't actually improve SC2 over BW. By saying we want mech in tvp, because it's simply more fun and more in tune with terran from a conceptual point of view, that does not mean we want a SC2BW-like game. I like SC2 supply depots, I like auto mining, I like SC2 unit selection. But I fucking hate spamming the D key, I hate warp gates and stupid hard-hard counter units lik immortals - and I hate not being able to use tanks as the backbone of my army. It just doesn't feel right.
Agree with the OP. Marauder and Colo are the two most boring units to watch, and the easiest to play with. They're too good not to get which makes me hate playing this match up. It really takes a lot of strategy out of the game
On October 03 2011 12:41 Zelniq wrote: This guy gets it. Tanks, and other units that control space (like lurkers/tanks did in bw) are what made starcraft such a good game. They make various RTS principles important, such as map design/layout, controlling areas on the map, the 'dance' between strongly held areas and mobile forces circumventing said areas, which in turn spreads the defender more thin as the number of bases increases, promoting more smaller engagements around the map rather than just a giant blob wars.
I do hope for example that colossus become very immobile units in HotS so they can start fulfilling the same role as the tank/lurker did, rather than the opposite of that which is what it is now, with unit-walking and cliff-walking, which is the main reason why games involving colossi tend to come down to huge army vs army battles.
Let me preface this by saying I have a lot of respect for you as a member of this community Zelniq. Yours is a name that pops up with "that was cool" in my head with bans and things So...big fan...
But I have to say this is not brood war. I think the game will progress a great deal when we all focus on it as a new entity with only lore connections to brood war. The maps, units and main principals are simliar in some ways but things such as "the dance" are not quite there yet for sc2. There will be eventually, as players become more confident in moving their forces around the map and having the right composition, but this is so early on in the game that I think it's a little unfair to expect people to be able to make decisions/micro/strategize at the level of brood war even as early as 2008.
On October 01 2011 06:12 love.less wrote: bring back 60 damage to all armor types and remove smart firing i think id settle for that ^^
it wasn't even like that in bw... they did 70, but 50% to small units at 75% to medium. 60 to all would be horrible. horrible horrible. noone would be able to attack a tank line if it were the case.
The fundamental problem imho is Terran early timings. They hard to predict/scout, highly adaptable while in the same time being painless to transition out of. Balance-wise it works out because the rush distances on current maps are so long. Other races need them to be able to prepare. But now that the maps are so big, mobility is of such great importance.
It's not that the mech army is weak. Cost for cost, nothing beats a maxed mech army on the ground. It's just to much of a commitment to attack something. It leaves terran open for counter attacks, and opponents could just sack the expo and expand somewhere else.
If the early terran timings weren't that strong -> the maps could be made smaller -> mech pushes would become more viable.
If you are using mech, why not use sensor towers to detect pylons or probes moving out to set up proxy pylons? Another idea, using ravens to defend warp-ins with auto turrets/PDD while tanks hold the front line. Hell why not both of them together that way your ravens will have more time to get to the location before damage even occurs.
I realize that's a lot of gas being invested into just keeping yourself alive, but I'm just throwing ideas out there.
On October 03 2011 13:05 sunman1g wrote: god.. people quoting artosis almost literally regarding the marauder makes me laugh every time. .
People aren't quoting artosis, there are a ton of people that hate the marauder, and surprisingly a lot that do hate the marauder are actually TERRAN players!
Currently, I find lategame TvP between 2 good players very exciting to watch. Firstly, there is the importance of army positioning and choosing a good terrain to engage. Then there is the dance between ghosts vs HT. If colossi are present, the terran needs to focus fire using vikings and kite their bio-ball. Of course, if 2 poor players are playing, it can get pretty boring.
The OP makes this claim:
Another issue i have with TvP is there's minimum micro in fights, all you do is make concave before the fight them stim and run in. Cast some emps. Then you watch if you have enough or not. Theres no micro against banelings or infestors like in TvZ. Micro will never save your ass like in TvZ. Good position will never save your ass like in TvT, because you have no tanks, and warpgates are pretty good eh! Nothings angers me more than cutting off protoss expo from his main army and have 20 zealots warped in to my back, same with drops.
However, as Thorzain points out, he disagrees (like I do), with this assessment:
On October 01 2011 06:16 Thorzain wrote: I feel that TvP IS really micro intensive. EMP everything, move your units out of storms, focus fire individual colossi with vikings and kite zealots if he's zealot heavy. And while you're kiting zealots you have to move back your ghosts so that they dont all get killed in the blink of an eye. All these things at the same time. It's freaking hard if you ask me!
On October 03 2011 13:05 sunman1g wrote: god.. people quoting artosis almost literally regarding the marauder makes me laugh every time. .
People aren't quoting artosis, there are a ton of people that hate the marauder, and surprisingly a lot that do hate the marauder are actually TERRAN players!
Terran players hate the marauder in much the same way that protoss players hate the colossus. Luckily for terran, they only have to endure making their hated unit in one matchup. Hopefully they are both changed significantly in HotS.
I'm not saying I don't see your point, but I disagree that the match up is stale to watch. I do agree that there could be more viable strategies added in the coming expansions but the ones we have are pretty fun to watch as well as to play.
TvP is very micro intensive from my point of view it requires a lot of fast paced aggression from the Terran and good tactical decisions from the Protoss.
It's a lot different than the other match ups, but I don't think it's necessarily bad. I do wish that siege tanks were a bit more viable than they are in that match up but I think that has more to do with the fact that Hellions are not even close to as viable against Protoss as Vultures were as a support unit for Siege Tanks.
Well from a lore point of view, why would you always expect one weapon or technology class to work equally well against 3 separate races? Tanks dominate T and Z when used right, but the toss are aliens from a higher race and all that.
I don't mind the differences in tactics required for Tv T/P/Z. But I would love to see some HOTS change to collossi. 4 collossi is like 8 tanks dps with a much higher movement rate and no penalties whatsoever compared to trying to move 8 tanks.
To make tanks worthwhile in TvP, maybe a health decrease to the zealot, or a firing delay to the collossi or movement speed decrease to collossi, or tanks become massive once sieged, or faster unsiege or faster siege, or reduced self-splash damage, decreased gas cost to factory etc.
There's lots of possibilities to try and even things out. But currently there is no corresponding scarefactor to protoss when we sacrifice mobility by going tanks because there are simply too many toss counters to tanks and even thors in TvP.
I think we can start to see tank play in TvP only if it can be done without breaking TvZ/T. Given the trend towards larger maps, mmmvgr is always going to be more manouverable and keep us in the game longer vs chargelots/blink/phoenix/collossi.
On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote: I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff.
wow i dont know the exact cost of tanks, but wanting 2 to defend an expo is completely retarded. If that was possible then terran, and tanks, would be completely broken.
If you remove the warp mechanic, you reduce the build time, or buff every gateway unit, or do something that isnt going to completely destroy the game - which is what would happen if you simply remove warp gate tech.
Id be amazed if they werent trying to find ways to change it right now, but its alot harder then some people like to think, the people who think they know how to balance this game. Which to them is basically making every race that isnt their own weaker and worse.
And i dont think blizz are too stubborn to go back on themselves, if they realise that warp in really doesnt work then they'll remove it. But that would result in a complete overhaul of toss, cos their main ability to counter attack and apply pressure would be gone and then they;d just be a turtling race - if you last past the early-mid game, what with terran tier one units being cheaper, quicker to build, and just all round better. They're much better off trying to fixWG as apposed to removing it, and then rebuilding toss as it were
The whole point of having a couple of units beat a whole army is to reduce 200/200 blob vs blob wars, and have more tactical squad based games. You think 2 tanks defending an expo is bad? A 2 vulture, 1 tank drop can win you the Grand Final :D.
I want to make tanks and have vultures in TvP and micro more than I already do because I don't like marauders or the micro involved and if you don't have vikings or ghosts when you need them you lose. There is no solution to this but maybe it will get changed.
... "give some feedback" What the hell do you want feedback on? How to not hate marauders or how to better tell people how you feel about one MU not playing out how you want it to?
On October 03 2011 15:24 Shebuha wrote: So I think I just basically read this:
I want to make tanks and have vultures in TvP and micro more than I already do because I don't like marauders or the micro involved and if you don't have vikings or ghosts when you need them you lose. There is no solution to this but maybe it will get changed.
... "give some feedback" What the hell do you want feedback on? How to not hate marauders or how to better tell people how you feel about one MU not playing out how you want it to?
So I think I can basically read your post and tell you to re-read OP the point of the discussion is NOT a BW rant/balance discussion/or a "I like Tanks so we should always have tanks" The point of this thread is that the OP is claiming that this MU is extremely uninteresting due to bad game design. Collsi/maruder/warp gate/FF/mainly tier 1 units/ no positional play or control/blob vsblob/battles over in 3 secs/T feels more like Z. Its not fun to play seemingly for either side. Tanks were a suggestion from the OP as one possible way of addressing this issue
I really think that HT's feedback is the thing that breaks the match up. It counters basically everything except for bio - thors, ravens, banshees, BCs. You need these thors to anchor the tank forces, but with feedback thors are just a loke. same goes for ravens and battlecruisers, skyterran is a joke against templars. So... Just make mmmvg and rely on good EMPs. Not that it was boring (very intense!), it's just monotonous to have a single option in the MU.
and many people here were mentioning Goody... Goody is an exception that underlines the rule: don't go mech in TvP. I've seen Goody win with it only against casual GM protosses. When Goody's tanks clash on a guy like Naniwa or Huk, they get crushed just as miserably as any other tanks in TvP.
On October 03 2011 12:41 Zelniq wrote: This guy gets it. Tanks, and other units that control space (like lurkers/tanks did in bw) are what made starcraft such a good game. They make various RTS principles important, such as map design/layout, controlling areas on the map, the 'dance' between strongly held areas and mobile forces circumventing said areas, which in turn spreads the defender more thin as the number of bases increases, promoting more smaller engagements around the map rather than just a giant blob wars.
I do hope for example that colossus become very immobile units in HotS so they can start fulfilling the same role as the tank/lurker did, rather than the opposite of that which is what it is now, with unit-walking and cliff-walking, which is the main reason why games involving colossi tend to come down to huge army vs army battles.
I actually made a very long post about the fundamentally wrong design of colossus's mobility half year ago and got closed by some mod who thinks I'm a average QQer crying for the death-ball. The content is pretty much the same as u said here.
Being a unit with cliff-walking and long range AOE, colossus is already an ideal unit for defense. But the problem is it's mobility in the normal walk and overlap with ground unit. With blink stalkers, this totally makes positioning a joke in SC2. With the power of warp-in, basically it makes protoss army more like zerg army. And Blizzard have to nerf the protoss units coz they are so mobile...
Also the idea of AOE unit created from BW always follows a role of defense and positioning. Like tank, lurker, reaver, templer. If you want it more moblie, fine, get a shuttle and use your micro. Otherwise, these AOE allow u to have great defense power. But if you want to use these power for offense, these units could be easily caught off guard and be punished. So we have the defense advantage in macro game.
Colossus is just such a bad design. I always joke that considering you make a tank being able to move in the seiged mode, at the speed of your bio ball and it overlaps with it, it will be more entertaining to watch...
I would say that TvP was the least micro-intensive matchup at the highest levels of play in Broodwar (barring vulture shenanigans), and the MMM + ghost vs. Colossus sentry zealot stalker is quite refreshing to watch compared to some of the slow-push with mines + turret mechanics from BW.
I think what you're longing for is the knife-edge matchups in Broodwar: A poorly positioned Terran army, once flanked, gets utterly demolished by Protoss. A well positioned Terran army, on the other hand, with buildings and mines to cover flanks, will roll over a Protoss army all day long, but at the cost of massively reduced mobility.
I don't entirely agree with your assessment that the warpgate is a stupid mechanic. It really lets Protoss be the versatile tech-based reactive race it was meant to be from Broodwar (with respect to the PvT matchup). Unlike T, P can say "I need a zealot now, so I will build a zealot now." Its units being somewhat less cost-effective for most battle situations balances out this time-knowledge advantage.
Being a master league protoss player I honestly think you're wrong. There's sooooo much finesse revolving PvT. Especially after the latest patch. It's NOT just colos/gateway all in (seeing from the P point of view) - there's tosn of builds: - Gateway heavy build with double forges/twilight - Stargate play revolving around harrass/timings making expansions more safe - DT play giving mapcontrol and punishing greedy terrans for muling and not getting enough detection - Warp prism drops making the midgame a more cross-harrassing state - rather than P expandind/upgrading while just defending harrass - Scouting (for both races) is not at all impossible - making both players able to adapt to eachother.
If you're not counting early game pressure, expansion pressure, harrasment, proper decisionmaking, mappools, multitasking, forcing mistakes, match-ending mistakes (missed FF's/EMPs) being factors then sure. Both players just lean back and go 3base 200/200...
Oh wait... This DOESN'T happen. Pro players (and even "just" on my master league level) people are CONSTANTLY harrassing, dropping, bansheeing, dt'ing, immortaldropping, hellion roasting etc etc... Imo this matchup is one of the best and most intensive matchups.
And being a protoss player - I dont find neither the colossus nor the hightemplar being the issues as both of these have groundbreaking hardcounters. The biggest problem is chargelots. Chargelots with 3/3 and guardian will have 4(+2) dmg reduction from bio - making them tank AND damage like bosses - for 100mins.
Just my 2cents
Edit: 1 thing I DO find terrible is the strength of terran 1base all in. And the lack of consequence (mules / having the most costeffecient units / ability to "just" fly OC to natural if mined out)
On October 03 2011 16:01 Ganseng wrote: I really think that HT's feedback is the thing that breaks the match up. It counters basically everything except for bio - thors, ravens, banshees, BCs. You need these thors to anchor the tank forces, but with feedback thors are just a loke. same goes for ravens and battlecruisers, skyterran is a joke against templars. So... Just make mmmvg and rely on good EMPs. Not that it was boring (very intense!), it's just monotonous to have a single option in the MU.
I don't get it, whats stopping you from getting a few ghosts in the late game to support your mech army? Its not like you can only go either pure mech or MMMVG. The snipe before feedback battle that currently exists between ghosts and high templars still applies just the same, only difference is that this time the templar is trying to feedback something else.
On October 03 2011 10:09 NicolBolas wrote: What is wrong with having one matchup without those Goddamned Siege Tanks in it?
There are quite a few people in this thread who share this sentiment. But the fact of the matter is that the siege tank has been the backbone of the terran army since the starcraft 1 was released. Tanks are what terran has always been all about. Quite frankly, if you don't like the siege tank as a unit then you really are not a terran player at heart and should think about playing a different race.
Yes, and there were matchups in SC1 where STs were once unlikely to appear. TvZ, namely. The matchup I enjoyed most, precisely because it wasn't a tank-fest. It wasn't a fight between slow units and slow units. It was a free-wheeling melee between M&M running around shutting down Zerg expos, and the Zerg trying desperately to hold on to some territory. A game of harass vs. harass, eventually culminating in one side being resource starved and killed.
Nowadays in SC1, STs have managed to infest TvZ to a much greater degree, and I don't care for it much anymore. SK-Terran for life!
I don't hate Siege Tanks per-se. But there is no reason that they should be viable in every matchup. I don't want to see Mech in every game involving Terrans. I want there to be matchups where Air or Bio is viable. And in order for that to happen, Mech cannot be viable in that match.
The simple fact is that Mech is all-consuming. If Mech is viable in a match, it will almost always be the strongest strategy. It may require more work, but you get more out of it, so all Terran play eventually gravitates to it. Once you master the mechanics and micro of positional play, it owns all. Ensuring that there is at least one matchup where Mech is non-viable is a good thing.
Just watch. Mech is already the only way to play TvT. TvZ is already moving heavily towards playstyles that lead to Mech. In another year, assuming HotS changes nothing about this, Bio in TvZ will be relegated to support at best, nonexistent at worst.
On October 03 2011 12:00 XXXSmOke wrote: So many people are missing the whole point of this thread.
The key word is uninteresting MMMVG vs Collsi/Gateway has almost zero strategy to it and is extrmeley uninteresting.
OP was suggesting tanks as a way to make the MU interesting but since he used the "BW" word alot of people gave him shit.
Now while im with the OP and many other Terrans that would love to see the tank and a "BW" Style TvP. It doesnt mean that has to be the fix. As I said earlier, the MU could turn into Thor/Hellion/Raven/BC still be tankless and be 1000 times more interesting than it currently is.
Even if I subscribed to your premise that the current TvP is uninteresting, how would Thor/Hellion/Raven/BC be better? Thors are basically giant Marauders that can shoot up. Hellions aren't particularly interesting in and of themselves. Ravens have some nice spells, but so do Ghosts. And BCs are just flying Marines with loads of Hp. Slow, flying Marines.
The principle difference in that composition is that it's slow. Oh good, because that's what a free-wheeling game needs: to be slow.
The current TvP state of play involves a lot of the Terran harassing the Protoss with drops and so forth. While it does eventually come down to two armies running into one another, there is a lot of harassment intended to slow the Protoss down. How well the harass is executed and how well it is dealt with is often what determines who wins or not.
I'm not saying that every matchup needs to be that way. But some diversity would be nice. I don't want every Terran match to be "how do I get around his Goddamn Siege Tanks?" And if there's one good thing that Marauders do, it is that they give Terrans a real alternative to using STs everywhere.
But I fucking hate spamming the D key, I hate warp gates and stupid hard-hard counter units lik immortals - and I hate not being able to use tanks as the backbone of my army. It just doesn't feel right.
I love it when people call the Immortal a "hard-hard counter unit". As though SC1 didn't have the quintessential hard-counter unit.
Why don't Terrans go Bio in SC1 TvP? On the face of it, it seems like a good idea. Marines have lots of DPS. Dragoons only do half-damage to them. And so forth. Go ahead and try. Build up a nice force of M&M, then walk up to a Protoss and attack their natural. As you approach, a glowing orb of destruction will jump out of the fog of war, and all your units will die.
Reavers. Reavers are the primary reason SC1 Terrans cannot go M&M. The best you can do is go for some kind of Marine all-in before Robo-tech gets out. Because if even one Reaver hits the field, it's game over. They hard-counter everything that comes out of the Barracks. Quickly, easily, and far more cost-effectively than Immortals kill Siege Tanks. One Reaver can kill virtually unlimited numbers of Marines, even without a Shuttle. Two Immortals will eventually be brought down by STs.
The only reason Immortals get crap is because they dare to be designed to kill Siege Tanks, unlike Reavers who make those boring Marines obsolete. And Immortals have the gall to "cheat": they use a special ability to do it. Unlike Reavers who just do metric-assloads of AoE damage.
On October 03 2011 16:01 Ganseng wrote: I really think that HT's feedback is the thing that breaks the match up. It counters basically everything except for bio - thors, ravens, banshees, BCs. You need these thors to anchor the tank forces, but with feedback thors are just a loke. same goes for ravens and battlecruisers, skyterran is a joke against templars. So... Just make mmmvg and rely on good EMPs. Not that it was boring (very intense!), it's just monotonous to have a single option in the MU.
I don't get it, whats stopping you from getting a few ghosts in the late game to support your mech army? Its not like you can only go either pure mech or MMMVG. The snipe before feedback battle that currently exists between ghosts and high templars still applies just the same, only difference is that this time the templar is trying to feedback something else.
you don't have the resources for mech and ghosts. And you are too immobile to stay on equal bases. Show me a couple of games where top tier protoss loses to something other than mmmvg in late game, I'll appreciate it very much.
And i dont think blizz are too stubborn to go back on themselves, if they realise that warp in really doesnt work then they'll remove it.
Keep dreaming. Warp Gate has been in the game for as long as the public has known of its existence. Mid-2007. Blizzard has been testing it for that long; if they had any reservations about it, they had plenty of time to resolve them.
They're not going to rip out Warp-in. The absolute most that they might do is delay it to mid-game or something. But even that is unlikely. It'd be like taking larva away from the Zerg. Not Spawn Larva; I mean larva-based production.
Man, warp-gate is getting some hate lately. Am I the only one that thinks it's a cool mechanic? In general Protoss armies aren't very mobile on big-map scale (e.g. Tal'darim Altar), and warp-gate gives them a way to have an implied presence across the map, without having to split their army unreasonably heavily. It also gives them a chance to compete with Zerg's fast army rebuild rate. Why the hate?
On October 03 2011 18:05 ChristianS wrote: Man, warp-gate is getting some hate lately. Am I the only one that thinks it's a cool mechanic? In general Protoss armies aren't very mobile on big-map scale (e.g. Tal'darim Altar), and warp-gate gives them a way to have an implied presence across the map, without having to split their army unreasonably heavily. It also gives them a chance to compete with Zerg's fast army rebuild rate. Why the hate?
I definately think it's a cool mechanic but that doesn't mean it "works" in all situations.
Lets look at why it isnt viable again it comes down to 5 things i think:
1 - tank, it doesnt actually do that much dmg but i do play mech in TvP if you get your mech to 3-3 mech IS viable. but only when you get the upgrades to max so +5 starting dmg to the tank would make a big difference so its like it already had +1 attack upgrade.
2 - helion isnt what you need but it can be ok, we need mines back to help for vision and map control + holding flanks although helions can destroy zealots if they line up but vultures were a far more apropriate unit and i feel if helions had mines they would be overpowered or have to cost too much and you couldnt make enough to defend your tanks in a battle
3 - Thor is a very very poor mech anti air option since its huge cost in supply and mineral/gas you cant just start going thor for anti air because its super bad vs anything untill you have a few of them and you cant use them to help fend off carriers because it eats up so much supply your mech army is awful.
4 - the immortal requires ghosts to take down you can experiment with walking vikings to dealwith it since they have a high fire to eat up harden shields rate but its not great and even when you get the shields down tanks will probably not kill it but 1 immortal _will_ probably kill a tank at least and soak up tonnes of dps + insta kill a tank
5 - mass collosus entirely destorys mech so much its depressing even being the smallest part out of position the colossus is so mobile it can pick off tanks which are all spread out.
I am considering the raven might be a good idea in tvp vs protoss instead or aswell as ghosts to use hunter seeker might be a viable option to help move out across the map as well as turrerts to take down the harden shields of immortals but i dunno seems really hard and even then
the main problem is tanks do so little dmg and you cant fend off flanks that well so you cant pressure the protoss at all. And you have to pressure them because otherwise they could just go carriar like they would in bw its the same here or just mass expand.
I actually believe that the warp prisim will be overpowered in the future _IF_ mech is viable because if you just keep warping in units with warp prisms you can hit _ALOT_ of stupid timmings with a 3 gate robo to get 2 warp prisms and into a 4 gate you would be suprised how well that does vs a siege expand even if you know its coming since they can drop immortals on your tank if they decided to randomly make 1 and just pump and drop zealots on you it just hits a funny timming and you need to kill the warp prism off early but its super hard to do
Everyone who hates warp gate mechanics i think the main problem is even day 9 said this on STOG a good while ago is that there is no reason to ever use gateways at all the upgrade to warp gate is essentially free but just takes a long time, and it nearly comes across to most protoss i think that you _need_ warpgates to make units it makes the protoss macro stupidly easy imo.
If warp gates research required robotics support facilty and cost 200-200 or had a cost on changing a gate way into a warp gate then it would be different because it would be a 100x more interesting mechanic if you had 6 gate ways with only 2 warp gates yo ucan use the 2 warp gates to warp in somewhere else to defend or harase with support of the warp prism.
I think the warp prism will eventually need the warp field as an upgrade from the robotics facility if mech is to be viable as well it would make it more feel like a shuttle instead of a way of proxing units into a base and people getting carried away.
People who like using bio in TvP clearly dont understand anything what Terran or starcraft is about.
As a protoss-player, I agree that TvP is a completely stupid match-up. On the one hand, terran has complete mapcontrol throughout most of the game while protoss techs up to have something that beats MMM. On the other hand, once I have my tech-units, it's all about ghost vs HTs (which favours terrans) while I use the 300 supply effect of warpgates to profit with chargelots (which makes battles winnable for toss).
The main problem I see is, that too many units can be warped in. Why did amulet get nerfed? Right, because of templar WARP IN, not because amulet would be too strong. Why does DT-tech take forever? Right because of DT WARP IN, not because DTs would be so uber strong in themselves. Basicly the whole templar tech-tree sucks compared to BW because you can get the templars asap. Just imagine what the colossus would look like if you could warp in colossi....
Imo the best way to re-configure this would be to just not allow warp ins near pylons at all. Make it so you can only warp in near your own nexi AND near warp prisms! Would make mid/late-game prism play amazing to watch (kill the prism = kill the push) and would make prisms less of a gimmicky unit. Furthermore it would completely remove all stupid proxy pylon attacks that are the main reason why warpgate units in general are so weak.
Then we could start buffing some terran-units that need tech again.
But I fucking hate spamming the D key, I hate warp gates and stupid hard-hard counter units lik immortals - and I hate not being able to use tanks as the backbone of my army. It just doesn't feel right.
I love it when people call the Immortal a "hard-hard counter unit". As though SC1 didn't have the quintessential hard-counter unit.
Why don't Terrans go Bio in SC1 TvP? On the face of it, it seems like a good idea. Marines have lots of DPS. Dragoons only do half-damage to them. And so forth. Go ahead and try. Build up a nice force of M&M, then walk up to a Protoss and attack their natural. As you approach, a glowing orb of destruction will jump out of the fog of war, and all your units will die.
Reavers. Reavers are the primary reason SC1 Terrans cannot go M&M. The best you can do is go for some kind of Marine all-in before Robo-tech gets out. Because if even one Reaver hits the field, it's game over. They hard-counter everything that comes out of the Barracks. Quickly, easily, and far more cost-effectively than Immortals kill Siege Tanks. One Reaver can kill virtually unlimited numbers of Marines, even without a Shuttle. Two Immortals will eventually be brought down by STs.
The only reason Immortals get crap is because they dare to be designed to kill Siege Tanks, unlike Reavers who make those boring Marines obsolete. And Immortals have the gall to "cheat": they use a special ability to do it. Unlike Reavers who just do metric-assloads of AoE damage.
I love it when people talk about BW as if they know anything about it.
Now try that with tanks vs immortals. Hurrrr durrrr.
On October 03 2011 10:41 Zealot Lord wrote: This is very well written - but I personally don't agree with some of the things. This: "unless we see a terran winning GSL/MLG/DH with mech in TvP" particularly bothers me, high level Korean terrans have been owning protoss players in GSL (aside from 1/1/1) with MMM+V/G for a while now, when you can consistently win with something, why would pro players, who play for money, bother to change with what works for no reason? Its so effective to the point that protoss players in code S are almost extinct. TvP in Korea at top levels has a win rate average of over 55+% the past five months - maybe someone like Huk/Jinro can shed some light on this, but I seriously doubt any of the top terrans in the OGS house would spend much of their time trying out new stuff as opposed to continually fine tuning their bio-centric play during practice.
It doesn't necessarily mean other unit compositions are unfeasible, I hate to bring up the points QQ'ers do, but there is some truth in that there isn't the incentive to innovate when you already dominate the matchup. I'm pretty sure that if marauders weren't so bloody good against protoss, you would have seen more players try to incorporate other units faster already.
Would it be any good? I don't know - point is, it takes time for metagame to develop, for instance blue flame hellions were sick good from release, however pretty much nobody used them in the first few seasons. They turned out to be so good that they had to be nerfed in the last patch, but it took almost a year for people to realize that. I definitely remember there used to be threads on TL complaining that bio was too good in TvT that the good ol' BW tank usage is all but gone in SC2, which clearly isn't the case anymore despite any significant patch changes regarding those units.
There is a ton of possibilities that haven't even been explored yet, to say that the game has already been completely figured out and that in TvP, bio is the only effective way you can play just can't be right. There are a lot of things which are heavily underused in TvP on GSL levels (such as sensor towers for one) which can definitely play a role in the usage of mech to help combat the loss in mobility in the matchup imo. But it won't happen anytime soon as long as Korean protoss players continue to struggle against existing terran builds.
i agree with you and i didn't really think about that before, but you're right there's no need to develop any new strategies since MMMGV works very well for the koreans. you know i was really happy when jinro used mech vs MC. i thought other koreans would build up on it. unfortunately that didn't happen. there's just no need to search for anything else besides MMMVG now.
On October 03 2011 14:36 antz0r wrote: Well from a lore point of view, why would you always expect one weapon or technology class to work equally well against 3 separate races? Tanks dominate T and Z when used right, but the toss are aliens from a higher race and all that.
I don't mind the differences in tactics required for Tv T/P/Z. But I would love to see some HOTS change to collossi. 4 collossi is like 8 tanks dps with a much higher movement rate and no penalties whatsoever compared to trying to move 8 tanks.
To make tanks worthwhile in TvP, maybe a health decrease to the zealot, or a firing delay to the collossi or movement speed decrease to collossi, or tanks become massive once sieged, or faster unsiege or faster siege, or reduced self-splash damage, decreased gas cost to factory etc.
There's lots of possibilities to try and even things out. But currently there is no corresponding scarefactor to protoss when we sacrifice mobility by going tanks because there are simply too many toss counters to tanks and even thors in TvP.
I think we can start to see tank play in TvP only if it can be done without breaking TvZ/T. Given the trend towards larger maps, mmmvgr is always going to be more manouverable and keep us in the game longer vs chargelots/blink/phoenix/collossi.
you know, i think just tweaking the numbers just wouldn't work. it's the unit design that keeps mech almost unusable in tvp - blink, cliff walking collosus, warpgates. it's like jinro and many other said, you can't send couple hellions to harass an expo while you contain your opponents army. he will just warp stuff in. you have to commit with mass army on the other side of the map, which is just too risky. same with drops and everything (talking about mid-late game when P has enough gates).
on the other hand in TvT and TvZ when you control ground and your opponent can't leave, just send some units to harass some far away expo of your opponent. i makes tvz so awesome because you send few marines to each Z expo while you use your main force to siege Z main and contain his army, using map terrain to your advantage and microing marines vs fungal/blings.
this is what bothers me most about tvp and positional play. insta warpin. to protect anything you want becase you just sucked with positional play.
On October 03 2011 12:41 Zelniq wrote: This guy gets it. Tanks, and other units that control space (like lurkers/tanks did in bw) are what made starcraft such a good game. They make various RTS principles important, such as map design/layout, controlling areas on the map, the 'dance' between strongly held areas and mobile forces circumventing said areas, which in turn spreads the defender more thin as the number of bases increases, promoting more smaller engagements around the map rather than just a giant blob wars.
I do hope for example that colossus become very immobile units in HotS so they can start fulfilling the same role as the tank/lurker did, rather than the opposite of that which is what it is now, with unit-walking and cliff-walking, which is the main reason why games involving colossi tend to come down to huge army vs army battles.
I actually made a very long post about the fundamentally wrong design of colossus's mobility half year ago and got closed by some mod who thinks I'm a average QQer crying for the death-ball. The content is pretty much the same as u said here.
Being a unit with cliff-walking and long range AOE, colossus is already an ideal unit for defense. But the problem is it's mobility in the normal walk and overlap with ground unit. With blink stalkers, this totally makes positioning a joke in SC2. With the power of warp-in, basically it makes protoss army more like zerg army. And Blizzard have to nerf the protoss units coz they are so mobile...
Also the idea of AOE unit created from BW always follows a role of defense and positioning. Like tank, lurker, reaver, templer. If you want it more moblie, fine, get a shuttle and use your micro. Otherwise, these AOE allow u to have great defense power. But if you want to use these power for offense, these units could be easily caught off guard and be punished. So we have the defense advantage in macro game.
Colossus is just such a bad design. I always joke that considering you make a tank being able to move in the seiged mode, at the speed of your bio ball and it overlaps with it, it will be more entertaining to watch...
im sorry your thread was shut down, but i agree. AoE in BW was powerful but relatively slow and hard to use because you had to have good control (HT, collosus, moving shot EMP)
On October 03 2011 10:09 NicolBolas wrote: What is wrong with having one matchup without those Goddamned Siege Tanks in it?
There are quite a few people in this thread who share this sentiment. But the fact of the matter is that the siege tank has been the backbone of the terran army since the starcraft 1 was released. Tanks are what terran has always been all about. Quite frankly, if you don't like the siege tank as a unit then you really are not a terran player at heart and should think about playing a different race.
Yes, and there were matchups in SC1 where STs were once unlikely to appear. TvZ, namely. The matchup I enjoyed most, precisely because it wasn't a tank-fest. It wasn't a fight between slow units and slow units. It was a free-wheeling melee between M&M running around shutting down Zerg expos, and the Zerg trying desperately to hold on to some territory. A game of harass vs. harass, eventually culminating in one side being resource starved and killed.
Nowadays in SC1, STs have managed to infest TvZ to a much greater degree, and I don't care for it much anymore. SK-Terran for life!
I don't hate Siege Tanks per-se. But there is no reason that they should be viable in every matchup. I don't want to see Mech in every game involving Terrans. I want there to be matchups where Air or Bio is viable. And in order for that to happen, Mech cannot be viable in that match.
The simple fact is that Mech is all-consuming. If Mech is viable in a match, it will almost always be the strongest strategy. It may require more work, but you get more out of it, so all Terran play eventually gravitates to it. Once you master the mechanics and micro of positional play, it owns all. Ensuring that there is at least one matchup where Mech is non-viable is a good thing.
Just watch. Mech is already the only way to play TvT. TvZ is already moving heavily towards playstyles that lead to Mech. In another year, assuming HotS changes nothing about this, Bio in TvZ will be relegated to support at best, nonexistent at worst.
On October 03 2011 12:00 XXXSmOke wrote: So many people are missing the whole point of this thread.
The key word is uninteresting MMMVG vs Collsi/Gateway has almost zero strategy to it and is extrmeley uninteresting.
OP was suggesting tanks as a way to make the MU interesting but since he used the "BW" word alot of people gave him shit.
Now while im with the OP and many other Terrans that would love to see the tank and a "BW" Style TvP. It doesnt mean that has to be the fix. As I said earlier, the MU could turn into Thor/Hellion/Raven/BC still be tankless and be 1000 times more interesting than it currently is.
Even if I subscribed to your premise that the current TvP is uninteresting, how would Thor/Hellion/Raven/BC be better? Thors are basically giant Marauders that can shoot up. Hellions aren't particularly interesting in and of themselves. Ravens have some nice spells, but so do Ghosts. And BCs are just flying Marines with loads of Hp. Slow, flying Marines.
The principle difference in that composition is that it's slow. Oh good, because that's what a free-wheeling game needs: to be slow.
The current TvP state of play involves a lot of the Terran harassing the Protoss with drops and so forth. While it does eventually come down to two armies running into one another, there is a lot of harassment intended to slow the Protoss down. How well the harass is executed and how well it is dealt with is often what determines who wins or not.
I'm not saying that every matchup needs to be that way. But some diversity would be nice. I don't want every Terran match to be "how do I get around his Goddamn Siege Tanks?" And if there's one good thing that Marauders do, it is that they give Terrans a real alternative to using STs everywhere.
But I fucking hate spamming the D key, I hate warp gates and stupid hard-hard counter units lik immortals - and I hate not being able to use tanks as the backbone of my army. It just doesn't feel right.
I love it when people call the Immortal a "hard-hard counter unit". As though SC1 didn't have the quintessential hard-counter unit.
Why don't Terrans go Bio in SC1 TvP? On the face of it, it seems like a good idea. Marines have lots of DPS. Dragoons only do half-damage to them. And so forth. Go ahead and try. Build up a nice force of M&M, then walk up to a Protoss and attack their natural. As you approach, a glowing orb of destruction will jump out of the fog of war, and all your units will die.
Reavers. Reavers are the primary reason SC1 Terrans cannot go M&M. The best you can do is go for some kind of Marine all-in before Robo-tech gets out. Because if even one Reaver hits the field, it's game over. They hard-counter everything that comes out of the Barracks. Quickly, easily, and far more cost-effectively than Immortals kill Siege Tanks. One Reaver can kill virtually unlimited numbers of Marines, even without a Shuttle. Two Immortals will eventually be brought down by STs.
The only reason Immortals get crap is because they dare to be designed to kill Siege Tanks, unlike Reavers who make those boring Marines obsolete. And Immortals have the gall to "cheat": they use a special ability to do it. Unlike Reavers who just do metric-assloads of AoE damage.
i agree with you about the SK terran. it was fun. it added variety to the matchup as you could do tank or mech based builds too. i think we might see eventually some marine ghost medivac raven builds in sc2 too. i loved BW tvz and i was my favorite matchup, mainly due to lurker / defilers / tank / vessels interaction.
On October 03 2011 07:26 Dezire wrote: Oke i disagree with this one so hard.
First half of you're story is based on your poor opinion on marauders, and that youre facorite BW units cant be used (tank) which makes this 'complaining' about the matchup not based on facts but on your own opinion.
about ur warpgates, you might have a point there, heck i'd like as a protoss myself if i could make units as 'easy' as a terran can so i can focus more on the battle instead of having to look awway to warp in and keep my macro up.
but the micropart? you cannot be serious. first you are saying that its so awesome to micro against banes and fungles in tvz. but seriously you could do the same ammount of micro against storms as puma did amazingly here @ 26:05 or lifting up your units in ur medivacs to avoid FF's as select showcased in a match i cant remember on tal d'arim altar. or MKP in a match i can't remember either on crevasse where he one shotted units with marauders so they go slowed and couldnt get away.
about the micro in a general battle, well just read what thorzain said, seems pretty intense to me tbh.
and again the unitcomposition is biased by your opinion of not liking MM but using the argument "its basicly mmm viking ghost all the time" doesn't make much sens to me either as each matchup has a standard composition, that you dont like this one isnt the games fault.
well there's micro and i acknowledged that later on in the thread. you know i like going bio early on because it's safe and it can do alot of damage, pin P back to his base because of fear of the drops. early bio battles are pretty cool. but give me an option to transition out of it. add variety to that matchup so that you can do both bio or biomech builds.
Alot of protoss players whine about having weak gateway units, no KA etc etc. This is all due to the warpgate mechanic. Warp gates allows an instant wave of reinforcements at any moments of the game unlike the 2 other races where you have to defend with what you have and rally in the units that are being produced (or produce if not being built/caught off guard).
Not only the instant reinforcement, but coupled with the fact that warpgates basically ignore map/rush distance, there are certain points in the game where the P can suddenly get rid of any defender's advantage that you may have had. The defenders advantage I am talking about is the ability for the other races to build up its forces while the P army is closing in (since positional advantage along with higher ground isn't as effective as it was in BW or even WC3).
Now due to this mechanic, the P simply cannot have strong gateway units as it would be just too deadly. It is another reason the KA amulet was removed because of the on demand storm warpins. You bet the KA would be back if warp gates were removed and stalkers wont be so laughable compared to dragoons. I also think that the warp mechanic gets out of control as the game goes by since even if the T won the 200/200 fight barely, it would take time to remax while the P has his units out already. The T has his core composition broken, while the P has it up and running again.
Plus what is the difference between a zerg spamming a thousand lings compared to a P spamming a thousand zealots after the engagement? SC2 has way too many gimmicks and should try to improve from its origins.
I always get the feeling that DB and the co watched way too many "boxer best moments" and things like that which made the game WAY too gimmicky ala reapers.
I fully agree with the OP. Ever since release TvZ has been my favorite matchup, it just feels so right all the way from the first minutes of the game to the very longest most epic games. I'd say almost everything is viable also. Bio - Bio Mech - Mech. Ghost/Ravens/Thors/ BC's. You name it, they can all be used to crush the Zerg.
TvT is also a great matchup, by far the mirror i enjoy most and the reason i play terran. If starcraft can be compared to chess in anyway I'd say TvT is the pinnacle of the view. Tanks find a great use here for holding strategical positions along with turrets/bunkers. At the same time pure bio can be used to launch massive drops/ counter attacks.
At my level atleast i feel every unit in the Terran's arsenal works here aswell. Bio - Bio Mech - Mech - Sky terran (Yes it was nerfed when BFH where nerfed but it's still viable).
Now TvP, that's another story.
I admit i haven't much love for Protoss even though I've been a random player. Not because i didn't enjoy playing P, but mostly because i never have enjoyed playing against them. Void Rays, DT's and the old Deathballs. All these things are combined the targets of almost all my rage/banter this past year of SC2.
In short, i have never enjoyed TvP. Not because i can't win, but because i can only win one way when the game goes into mid-late game. MMM-G-V. Sure tanks/banshees work if your going for a 1-1-1 build where you try to kill your opponent early, but not for much else.
As I play Zerg I do not actually have this problem myself. But when watching games (I see way to many VODs a day) it is clear that TvP is the boring matchup. At least for me, for as the op says it boils down to 1-2 emps/storms and "who has the most". No mirco, barely any macro. Compared to the other matchups that is.
so, as I have a ton of thoughts on this topic and on this thread, I made a looooooong post. It's just my personal opinion and maybe I'm a little biased against Mech play, because I play Zerg and I'm really annoyed by other races that rant about not being able to do whatever they want, while running into build order/composition losses with "standard" play all the time.
on Marauders, "A boring unit": Marauders have Concussive Shells & Stim. They only work well vs armored units, but really aren't good vs Protoss most basic unit, the zealot. I really don't see how Marauders are boring unit. You stim, you scoot and shoot, you drop. True they are not high tech units, that make you go "just hold out 1more min and then I will have my first BC!", but really there are way more boring units in the game. (example? Marine! "Hey I require no tech, I cost close to nothing and counter every unit in the game that doesn't have splash! Btw, I can shoot air and come out of reactors "; another one? Ultralisk! "I'm high tech, cost a lot, need a lot of babysitting to not get me stuck behind my zergfriends and don't do shit if there are no infestors around. But hey, I can burrow now ")
on Marauders overlaps with Siege Tanks: I have never seen a Terran player go Marauder to splash banelings or to use as artillery. If Marauders would overlap with the Siege Tank, noone would need this thread, because then MMM would have its own "Tank".
on Warpgates: I like them. It falls under the concept that each race is unique in nearly every way. Zerg has larva, Terran has rally and Protoss has WarpGate. True all 3races have rally points for units (high tech P), but that's rather a question of balancing (giving protoss ridicoulously weak lategame units, that warp in?) and general design (Protoss is the "in-between"-race from a point of tech. They tech slower than terrans, but already get a nearly complete army out of 1structure) If it wasn't for Warpgate rushes, Protoss would not even build Gateways anymore!
on Mech buffs: serioulsy? As if MechUnits weren't hard enough to be dealt with in 2/3 matchups. Don't get me wrong. I would like to see mech or biomech in TvP and blizzard clearly didn't plan on Mech becoming so underused in that matchup. But I don't see how buffing existing mech units wouldn't change TvT and TvZ. In my eyes (apart from redesigning the whole game), the only option to make Mech instantly work on its own in TvP, would be a new factory unit, specifically designed for that purpose.
on broodwar, "terranish feeling": in broodwar bio was nearly unplayable, due to only being able to select 12units, and poor pathing. But it was part of the game. SK Terran anyone? So I don't get why playing without tanks is considered unterranish... Also I wouldn't say that Brood War balancing was that good... it's rather that noone will ever see how bad it was, due to the game being so old/userunfriendly, that controlling units properly was often times more important, than making the right decisions. (not saying that this isn't a good/interesting concept... still I prefer my army moving in one formation with a few clicks, rather than a never ending trail, running all over the map and getting stuck in every corner, if I don't spam 200 APM on moving)
on Mech metagame: SC2+beta are now like 1.5years old. Broodwar is 10years old. TvP in Broodwar is said to be the hardest matchup (from a terrans perspective), but all in all, high level Terrans do pretty well in it. Maybe Mech/Biomech just hasn't been figuered out in SC2. Truely, pure Mech doesn't seem to have a bright future right now. But I really don't see, why there shouldn't be some kind of Marine/Ghost/Tank or Marauder/Hellion/Viking mix at some point of the game. Theoretically speaking, pure Mech doesn't seem to stand much of a chance against chargelots, immortals, blink stalkers, phoenix, void rays and carriers. Practically we have seen Jinro and Thorzain murder MC with Mech (on older patches, but who can say if strike canons are completly useless, if noone ever tries to develop this style). I'm not saying it's going to happen. But before Bisu entered the stage, noone thought Protoss can beat Zerg at all. Therefore I don't see, why existing units that are clearly not underpowered, should undergo drastical changes. Again, maybe Mech needs another unit. Maybe Mech wasn't supposed to work on its own in broodwar (as blizzard really didn't make starcraft to start an e-sports revolution in Korea, but rather to show, that they can make an entertaining game with 3races - that earns them a lot of money)
on "too many 'hardcounters'": I don't feel like Mech isn't playable because Protoss got too many new (=non broodwar) abilities that were specifically designed to counter Mech play. Surely the Immortal does well against tanks. But it straight up sucks against Marines. Tanklines do splash damage, thus doing way better in immortal vs tank fights, than few tanks vs few immortals. Ghosts, Marines, blocking Hellions, Air support, Strike Canons... you name it... All of those things are good to help tanks vs immortals. The same goes for Chargelots. Marines and Hellions both do well against them. Charge is a pretty stupid ability. It is pretty easy to trigger charge on a unit the protoss doesn't want it to trigger. And suddenly a bunch of Zealots stand in nomans land fighting hellions instead of closing in on tanks. Blink... sounds pretty nice to have Stalkers blinking on top of tanks, causing them to splash themselves and sniping them? Well stalkers cost ~75% of tanks and get decimated pretty brutally by nearly any terran unit... that's why they usually don't blink in any terran army... True, they can be massed way more easily than tanks, but maybe that's the tricky thing with going Mech? Like in broodwar, getting a critical amount of Mech out might be already the goal for such a TvP style... Phoenix, another unit that isn't really costefficient straight up countering Mech, and doesn't farwell against Thors, Vikings, Marines and Turrets. Colossi? Tanks, Vikings and Strike Canons...
on the "lost" 4th Mech unit: The Viking is maybe the best example how metagames can change. If you watch any streams/tournaments, in TvT you will see a lot of people going for an extreme mass of vkings right now. Why? Because Vikings on the ground are pretty good! Vikings in the air are pretty good! Vikings that control the map are pretty good! Vikings that harass bases are pretty good! TvT is maybe the most figuered matchup in the game, due to it being played the most on high level. Therefore we see metagame developments that people really haven't thought about until now. Maybe such things might completly change TvP, once it becomes a stable matchup. But right now we rather see Protoss' struggling to compete with the current Terran playstyle and 1-1-1 timings (a Biomech rush, that people considered bad for a long time, until the openings were so figuered out, that terrans realized, how much potential it had... maybe there are similar 2base timings? 3base timings/standard play?)
on "protoss being to mobile": I don't see this as a problem that might not get solved by metagame... Mutas can pin a superior terran army in its base, why shouldn't hellion drops/banshees/... be able to do the same? Small amounts of Stalkers/Zealots (for example warped in by warp prisms, proxy pylons) can be killed with hellions. Bigger attacks at unprotected positions might require counterattacks... Again, I'm not saying that this is how this might ever turn out. But I really don't see a lot of players on high level even trying to force making it work. Just imagine if IMMVP came out and barely beat "popular foreign Protoss" with Mech, due to being just 5times better generally. More People might just get inspired by this.
on Marines: I want to add here, that SC2 Marines are so insanely strong for their cost, that every other unit that doesn't overlap with it, just had to suffer by gamedesign to a certain degree in my eyes. This might result to Mech vs Protoss only being viable (if ever becoming viable) in combination with Marines.
On October 01 2011 06:16 Thorzain wrote: I feel that TvP IS really micro intensive. EMP everything, move your units out of storms, focus fire individual colossi with vikings and kite zealots if he's zealot heavy. And while you're kiting zealots you have to move back your ghosts so that they dont all get killed in the blink of an eye. All these things at the same time. It's freaking hard if you ask me!
The OP made sense to me when I read it initially, but what Thorzain said makes more sense. Apparently if you're not microing in TVP battles, you're doing it wrong?
But I fucking hate spamming the D key, I hate warp gates and stupid hard-hard counter units lik immortals - and I hate not being able to use tanks as the backbone of my army. It just doesn't feel right.
I love it when people call the Immortal a "hard-hard counter unit". As though SC1 didn't have the quintessential hard-counter unit.
Why don't Terrans go Bio in SC1 TvP? On the face of it, it seems like a good idea. Marines have lots of DPS. Dragoons only do half-damage to them. And so forth. Go ahead and try. Build up a nice force of M&M, then walk up to a Protoss and attack their natural. As you approach, a glowing orb of destruction will jump out of the fog of war, and all your units will die.
Reavers. Reavers are the primary reason SC1 Terrans cannot go M&M. The best you can do is go for some kind of Marine all-in before Robo-tech gets out. Because if even one Reaver hits the field, it's game over. They hard-counter everything that comes out of the Barracks. Quickly, easily, and far more cost-effectively than Immortals kill Siege Tanks. One Reaver can kill virtually unlimited numbers of Marines, even without a Shuttle. Two Immortals will eventually be brought down by STs.
The only reason Immortals get crap is because they dare to be designed to kill Siege Tanks, unlike Reavers who make those boring Marines obsolete. And Immortals have the gall to "cheat": they use a special ability to do it. Unlike Reavers who just do metric-assloads of AoE damage.
I love it when people talk about BW as if they know anything about it.
On October 01 2011 06:51 homeless_guy wrote: Fairly objective post (I play T too). One thing I think you didn't consider, especially in Part 1, is that Blizz wanted to make the game different enough from BW that there was a reason to play it, besides new graphics. IMO, the real shame is the marauder is basically a glorified marine, and it has been untouched, while interesting units e.g. reapers and tanks were nerfed.
agreed, as a matter of fact, how many units have been known to not have been changed?
as in, what units have have the exact same stats as they did the very first time any knowledge was released to the public?
as far as I know, these are the units that not been changed:
all races: workers
terran: marine (except for stim research) maruader (except for stim research) hellion (except for BF research) banshee ****************I think viking have had some change, but else this spot would say viking
zerg: overlords (except for speed research (cost 50/50 in early beta)) zergling baneling ****************queen have had changes to their air attack right? hydralisk
On October 01 2011 06:51 homeless_guy wrote: Fairly objective post (I play T too). One thing I think you didn't consider, especially in Part 1, is that Blizz wanted to make the game different enough from BW that there was a reason to play it, besides new graphics. IMO, the real shame is the marauder is basically a glorified marine, and it has been untouched, while interesting units e.g. reapers and tanks were nerfed.
agreed, as a matter of fact, how many units have been known to not have been changed?
as in, what units have have the exact same stats as they did the very first time any knowledge was released to the public?
as far as I know, these are the units that not been changed:
all races: workers
terran: marine (except for stim research) maruader (except for stim research) hellion (except for BF research) banshee ****************I think viking have had some change, but else this spot would say viking
zerg: overlords (except for speed research (cost 50/50 in early beta)) zergling baneling ****************queen have had changes to their air attack right? hydralisk
I'm entirely confused about why this thread is spotlighted for game analysis. The OP's post has exactly one source, which is Dustin Browder's interview where he talks about the design of the game and how it is balanced and so on and so forth. Its a good insight, that the PvT and PvZ matchups were balanced around the power of Colossus and all matchups suffered as a result. But I don't believe that new ground was covered here that deserved a spotlight. I'll go into detail on the OP, and then go on a huge rant on to the replies that have followed and as to why you should reconsider hitting the post button sometimes if you're not that great of a player. It will be glorious.
PredY - Summarizing PredY greatly dislikes the (lack of) unit diversity that is present in TvP, because he likes Tanks for their strategic play and hates Marauders because playing them is a bit like bashing your head against the wall (bashing your army into the Toss's base). The standard composition, MMM + Ghosts or Vikings, he feels, is forced when playing vs. P because its the best composition possible, even in endgame situations, because charge Zealots hard counter tanks and are available at all times, while a well-controlled Marauder-Ghost-Medivac-whatever ball can beat Charge Zeals extremely cost-effectively, and do bonus damage against everything else that P has. So MMM with subtle variations is VERY strong vs. P, because it can handle every composition thrown at it. Checklist?
Zealot - useless without excellent FFs or charge. Marauder-Ghost Stalker - only cost-effective vs vikings in the air. Marauder-anything Sentry - Does no damage and is countered by EMP, but early and seeing a lot of use makes it a good unit. Immortal - Deals bonus damage to Marauders! But gets bonus damage dealt to it by Marauders... countered by marines, doubly so because each Immortal made is not a colossus. Also countered by Ghosts. Phoenix/Void Ray/Carrier - Vikings, Marines, and Terran may choose to add Thors... overall just good for harassment. High Templar - Terran adds Ghosts. You get to play the Ghost vs. HT mini-game to see if you can land storms or not. Too many ghosts and you need Colossus. If anyone makes a major mistake the game ends. Colossus - Terran adds Vikings, both players take more bases and add Ghosts and HTs or Pheonix and continue to upgrade their ground army.
Therefore you can take on anything with with Bio vs. Protoss. There's no rock paper scissors but for the openings, and Bio FORCES High Templar or Colossus (and is still effective vs it). Also right now, P has no really valid timings against T that don't involve tier 3 tech, because they all got nerfed, so P can no longer do any kind of contain to force medivacs or tanks to bust.
There are some good arguments against this; Mech can hit pre-chargelot timings, 1/1/1 into contain, Goody argument, but basically what Predy wants is for positional, traditional tank-based PvT from broodwar. But that's just what Predy wants. At least 66% of the Starcraft II population doesn't care (P and Z players). And lot of T players like playing Bio. So why spotlight this thread?
On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote: I talked about TvZ and TvT. Do you know what those matchups have in common? Tanks. Tanks made BW so awesome. Tanks make TvZ and TvT in SC2 very fun to play/watch. You can control ground, abuse the terrain, siege. They take a lot of skill to play with but the reward is high, but not in TvP. It's quite sad but almost every protoss unit counters them. Do you remember when tanks did 60 damage? Good times. They were actually quite useful back then. Right now, i wanna cry every time i have 20 of them slaughtered in 10 seconds.
Wait, what? Tanks are what make the game good and tactical? You want to go mech vs. P ... just because its more fun? Then do it. Make it fun. Find ways to keep them tanks alive.
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups. Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
If you take away my warpgates you have to give me Blink Dragoons. Try to get tanks rolling then, bud! I'm sorry you got caught between my army and my base but you KNOW that I can do that and you STILL get bodied by it then you need to re-evaluate your strategy.
Another issue i have with TvP is there's minimum micro in fights, all you do is make concave before the fight them stim and run in. Cast some emps. Then you watch if you have enough or not. Theres no micro against banelings or infestors like in TvZ. Micro will never save your ass like in TvZ. Good position will never save your ass like in TvT, because you have no tanks, and warpgates are pretty good eh! Nothings angers me more than cutting off protoss expo from his main army and have 20 zealots warped in to my back, same with drops.
While TvZ and ZvZ are more micro intensive, TvP is not short on Micro by any stretch, and you can always improve your spreading, stutter stepping and multitasking with drops. Over-microing can be bad, which I'm fine with. If you want more "skill" units to be added to HoTS, that's fine and I'm all for it, but the micro in TvP is present and still developing.
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
What kind of paragraph is this? Did you think about using a scan? This isn't even true because you can hit marauder-medivac timings before 2 colossus or Templar have storm and do massive damage while getting the right tech online, or drop to delay pushes to get your tech online, or just go raw marauder and split the army with drops and try to snipe them. In order to make Vikings you have to SWAP A BUILDING. Ghost academy is a tier 1.5 building that costs 100gas and builds fairly quick. And you should have EMPs anyway. I'm sorry you can't counter my tier 3 AoE 150-200 gas units with just marines and marauders. I'm sorry Protoss doesn't have shots that you can dodge 100% of the time if your micro is amazing.
So tl;dr, Predy's post reads much more like a "Please bring back tanks to TvP" rant than a history, a balance discussion or anything else. I'm all for new strategies that raise the skill cap and input new units and builds into the scene, I think everyone is. But that doesn't make posts on the subject spotlight worthy. His replies, however, are quite good (about how Marauders decrease the skill cap, etc). But I think what he'll find is that we're not quite as deep into Starcraft II as he thinks we are.
On October 01 2011 06:51 homeless_guy wrote: Fairly objective post (I play T too). One thing I think you didn't consider, especially in Part 1, is that Blizz wanted to make the game different enough from BW that there was a reason to play it, besides new graphics. IMO, the real shame is the marauder is basically a glorified marine, and it has been untouched, while interesting units e.g. reapers and tanks were nerfed.
agreed, as a matter of fact, how many units have been known to not have been changed?
as in, what units have have the exact same stats as they did the very first time any knowledge was released to the public?
as far as I know, these are the units that not been changed:
all races: workers
terran: marine (except for stim research) maruader (except for stim research) hellion (except for BF research) banshee ****************I think viking have had some change, but else this spot would say viking
zerg: overlords (except for speed research (cost 50/50 in early beta)) zergling baneling ****************queen have had changes to their air attack right? hydralisk
protoss: carrier DT
correct me if im wrong
Marauders used to have their slow from the start of the game; hellions got +1/+1 damage upgrade instead of current just +1; hydralisk had 90 lIfe instead of 80
I'm not a terran so I can't comment too much but I do feel like the warpgate mechanic is somewhat broken. Mutalisk are essentially not viable vs protoss unless that have 3 warpgates and went for tech after that, but that never happens anymore. Ever. Warpgate mechanics makes it basically impossible to do small, cost efficient harassment whether it be with a run-by or a drop. If I want to make a drop cost efficient I need to at least drop 8 hydras which is a ridiculous investment that needs to do ridiculous damage.
As you said, there's also the micro aspect. I feel like protoss has it more than any other race. If I have broodlords, I should be able to win against blink stalkers, for the simple reason that Ultralisk are bad against blink stalkers and all other protoss units even coupled with infestors. But, with good micro, he could be able to clean me up. 'Micro' will never save me if he does a 2 base collosus timing and I don't have a much higher army value. I also NEED to engage at the right place to get stalled by force field for only a minute.
I'm really starting to dislike some of the basic mechanics of the game..hope they change!
Even if I totally aggree with the fact TvP is extremely boring, I don't understand at all why this post is featured O.O This is not even strategy, just some kind of complaining (totally understandable).
On October 01 2011 06:16 Thorzain wrote: I feel that TvP IS really micro intensive. EMP everything, move your units out of storms, focus fire individual colossi with vikings and kite zealots if he's zealot heavy. And while you're kiting zealots you have to move back your ghosts so that they dont all get killed in the blink of an eye. All these things at the same time. It's freaking hard if you ask me!
The OP made sense to me when I read it initially, but what Thorzain said makes more sense. Apparently if you're not microing in TVP battles, you're doing it wrong?
But Thorzain did not really address the OP's concerns. A lot of people take arguments too literally rather than trying to understand what the OP is trying to say.
TvP Bio may have a lot of micro, TvP Mech may not, but too many people justify current TvP by saying TvP Bio is micro intensive therefore good, well you can make things micro intensive and still be boring. ZvZ in BW is one of the most micro intensive yet most hated matchups.
The point about units like Tanks and Reavers is that they not only require micro, they also require strategy, positioning, and different kinds of micro depending on state (no shuttle reaver micro vs shuttle reaver micro, un-sieged attack micro vs sieging). Having area control allows players to make alternative tech patterns without getting destroyed before its even viable.
Marauder micro is always the same whether stimmed or not stimmed, engagements do not require much thought, Viking vs Colossus is a silly cat and mouse chase, etc.
MMMVG always devolves down to some predictable flowchart game, sure its micro intensive, just like ZvZ in BW or Ryu vs Ryu in SFII.
On October 03 2011 13:46 Caloreen wrote: If you are using mech, why not use sensor towers to detect pylons or probes moving out to set up proxy pylons? Another idea, using ravens to defend warp-ins with auto turrets/PDD while tanks hold the front line. Hell why not both of them together that way your ravens will have more time to get to the location before damage even occurs.
I realize that's a lot of gas being invested into just keeping yourself alive, but I'm just throwing ideas out there.
Ravens cant really do anything against Protoss units except stalkers, too vulnerable to phoenix and feedback to be moving about too much as well.
Ravens are still awesome, just not for the role you are suggesting.
Like someone said before, this thread seems to boil down to the OP's whim to use tanks in PvT, and how this game is broken because it isn't brood war. I personally am not one of the old guard weaned on brood war (started and was for a long time in the age of empires community), so I don't really understand how any of this is a criticism of the game's design.
In brood war or sc2, the game is to a large extent deterministic (in a theoretical sense, ignoring human error and unpredictability). The maps are fixed, the unit compositions and upgrades scale linearly for the most part, and certain positions and areas on the fixed maps will result in sure victory for particular unit combinations when microed to their theoretical optimum. This is different from the age series, in which some randomness was always inherent due to the random map mechanic, and other small game mechanics (not to say that this series did not suffer from the deterministic problem). I don't see why this thread is featured, since it doesn't really point out any deep flaws (non balance) in game design.
Chess is perfectly determined, yet our inability to comprehend the 'optimal' strategy in chess doesn't deprive us of perfectly entertaining games.
On October 03 2011 20:33 chestnutcc wrote: Like someone said before, this thread seems to boil down to the OP's whim to use tanks in PvT, and how this game is broken because it isn't brood war. I personally am not one of the old guard weaned on brood war (started and was for a long time in the age of empires community), so I don't really understand how any of this is a criticism of the game's design.
You are right in that the OP mourns the loss of tank play in TvP - but furthermore he critizises the central role of the marauder.
Meaning, not only are tanks pretty much gone, but they are replaced by the most boring unit imaginable. Terran can at least kite with them, but I, as protoss, have to spam chargelots that are un-micro-able by definition, once charge activates. Chargelot/templar vs marauder/ghost is a terrible, terrible set-up - the side that wins usually wins by a landslide and then continues to roflstomp through the remains. There is very little back and forth action in most (fortunately not all) games.
Compare this to TvZ, a match-up that could serve as basic definition of "back and forth" with marine/tank pushs.
On October 03 2011 10:41 Zealot Lord wrote: This is very well written - but I personally don't agree with some of the things. This: "unless we see a terran winning GSL/MLG/DH with mech in TvP" particularly bothers me, high level Korean terrans have been owning protoss players in GSL (aside from 1/1/1) with MMM+V/G for a while now, when you can consistently win with something, why would pro players, who play for money, bother to change with what works for no reason? Its so effective to the point that protoss players in code S are almost extinct. TvP in Korea at top levels has a win rate average of over 55+% the past five months - maybe someone like Huk/Jinro can shed some light on this, but I seriously doubt any of the top terrans in the OGS house would spend much of their time trying out new stuff as opposed to continually fine tuning their bio-centric play during practice.
It doesn't necessarily mean other unit compositions are unfeasible, I hate to bring up the points QQ'ers do, but there is some truth in that there isn't the incentive to innovate when you already dominate the matchup. I'm pretty sure that if marauders weren't so bloody good against protoss, you would have seen more players try to incorporate other units faster already.
Would it be any good? I don't know - point is, it takes time for metagame to develop, for instance blue flame hellions were sick good from release, however pretty much nobody used them in the first few seasons. They turned out to be so good that they had to be nerfed in the last patch, but it took almost a year for people to realize that. I definitely remember there used to be threads on TL complaining that bio was too good in TvT that the good ol' BW tank usage is all but gone in SC2, which clearly isn't the case anymore despite any significant patch changes regarding those units.
There is a ton of possibilities that haven't even been explored yet, to say that the game has already been completely figured out and that in TvP, bio is the only effective way you can play just can't be right. There are a lot of things which are heavily underused in TvP on GSL levels (such as sensor towers for one) which can definitely play a role in the usage of mech to help combat the loss in mobility in the matchup imo. But it won't happen anytime soon as long as Korean protoss players continue to struggle against existing terran builds.
i agree with you and i didn't really think about that before, but you're right there's no need to develop any new strategies since MMMGV works very well for the koreans. you know i was really happy when jinro used mech vs MC. i thought other koreans would build up on it. unfortunately that didn't happen. there's just no need to search for anything else besides MMMVG now.
yeah, I'm glad you also agree =) I mean I understand that as regular players, we all want to see different unit compositions being used, because its not just more fun to watch but to play yourself as well (we generally tend to only use units that pro's use afterall). I know a ton of non-protoss players who are hoping that carriers can one day be viable and such as well, so I can see what you are trying to get with your initial post - but give the game more time, I'm confident one day, sooner rather than later, we'll get to see more of Jinro like mech v MC lost temple type game.. hopefully :p
lol, the real point of OP isn't only "omg i want to go tanks in tvp!!!!!111!" No. He wants a unit that can control ground. Of course he is saying tanks, because they're the ONLY unit in the game that control ground. But if in HotS there's a non tank unit, I will be perfectly fine. Because at the actual state of the the game TvP doesn't really involve huge strategies. Yeah, there are many build orders to use, but Bo shouldn't be the only strategic component in a game. Basically (now I'm exaggerating a bit maybe) TvP is, after the opening phase, a race for eho build the most powerful ball, with the Terran player trying to drop (and hoping the Toss doesn't counter the drop). Then there's the big fight (with all the storming, EMPing and stutterstepping we know), and 95% of the case the winner of the battle have won, simply because he has much more unit than the loser, who has no time to rebuild his army. Ball vs ball fight it's not that strategic. No. The only strategic part of TvP actually is dropping maybe, besides the build orders. Ground controllin units allow for more strategies/tactics DURING the fight, They force the opponent to think how a general would think. Like, "Mmm this flank is very protected, but if I can distract the protecting units I can break his position"; the fights were more "extended" space-wise and time-wise. This kind of tactical thoughts are absent in the ball vs ball fight (no, stutterstepping isn't tactical ) Also, ground contolling units allow the player who has less units to even stall the attacker, giving time to reproduce units lost. Instead TvP at the moment is usually won by the player who has more supply, and once you lose supply it's very hard to comeback.
P.S. Notice how i didn't use the word BW in my post.
I can't remember the last thread with so many good players responding to it so frequently.
I have a simple question. Isn't Hellion/Tank/Thor + Ghosts aka ghostmech (cheers avilo) strong enough to stop this "1a into tanks" issue? I think I haven't seen a Protoss to 1a into this composition and walk away without heavy losses. With the ghost gas cost reduction and the fact you can allocate all your gas into armory upgrades I think its possible to get this army composition going relatively fast.
From a Protoss perspective either abusing immobility or some massive air switch is required.
While both scenarios seem viable, I see no problem with air play since a huge risk is involved here. So that leaves us with mobility as the remaining issue. And therefor I'm more concerned about Warp-in mechanic more than Zealots and Immortals being pretty good against siege tanks.
What I really hope for in Hots are upgrades for Terran mech units.
As it is now, most upgrades for Protoss units are insanely valuable against Terran mech units. Just think about it - there is not a single upgrade I can think of that is good for mech against Protoss. You have Charge, Blink, Thermal Lances, Hardened shields not even being an upgrade, Phoenixes lifting off sieged tanks. Then you have Infernal Preigniter, Seige, 250mm Cannon (?), HSM, Viking that can land..
your points about being dead if you don't have the counter to templars and collosus goes both ways. if the p doesnt have templars or collosus they get utterly wrecked by bio.
I agree the matchup there is something wrong with it but I'm not quite sure how to fix it.
The mechanics of the starcraft2 economy and resupply are to blame for the lack of back and forth in PvT. The presence of this in ZvT is more due to the structure of the zerg race imo. The concentration of workers in predictable locations, with predictable access routes (the maps are deterministic after all) makes harass play more and more difficult as the game progresses. Conversely a single successful drop or dt runby can end the game early on. The multitude of timing windows aside (1/1/1, immortal bust vs fe, 3 rax, 4 gate etc) macro games revolve around either side trying to have more and better than the other, and if they don't come the big engagement they lose right there, no matter what they did before that. Compared to this style of play, I prefer timing windows, which involve some amount of thought and guile to do and to counter. In my limited experience, mirror match ups also high light all these negative points (BO losses, timing windows etc)
I agree with the thread starter and almost every comment here. Thanks god some1 address this issue. TvZ n TvP is broken if you ask me. The only MU worthy to play now is TvT. Since the blue flame hellion nerf, Terran player would like to go for bio only. What the hell? That is so non-Terranish. The happy time of full mech just come and go in a short 1 month time. I'm pretty disappointed with how TvZ,TvP and TvT is evolving.
Agree with OP, but people have beeing crying out for the removal of marauders since beta and it hasn't happened, and if you listen to Browder talk you'd think it was the greatest unit in the world, so I don't expect to see it gone, ever. But jesus I hate it. And colos as well.
On October 03 2011 21:49 chestnutcc wrote: The concentration of workers in predictable locations, with predictable access routes (the maps are deterministic after all) makes harass play more and more difficult as the game progresses. Conversely a single successful drop or dt runby can end the game early on.
You are somewhat right on the harassment, but I would cite different reasons
the problem with protoss SC2 harassment is that the investment you make is huge and the damage you have to do must therefore also be huge; in BW, DT-openeres weren't "that" gimmicky...because you end up with templar-tech, after all. The only gimmick is that you, in fact, build DTs. And the "opposite-cost" of not being able to, say, reaver drop. In SC2 if you go DTs you better do some damage or you will be pretty dead.
That's the main reason why terran drops are so effective. They do "little but guaranteed" damage - even if the damage consists of pulling your opponent out of position, hampering his macro-consistency, etc. Because, even if you don't kill stuff, you want to have marines, marauders and medivacs anyways. Protoss on the other hand only has gimmicky harassment units. A buffed prism doesn't change that a bit.
This is yet another reason why bio is so strong - because not only is it very good in fights, but it poses a constant threat of drops.
To everyone that says "it's broke let's fix it" are ignoring the fundamental problem that the lead designer has already declared that Terran bio-balls vs Protoss are his choice for the state of the game.
Until he or his mind is changed, this is what'll be.
Everything in lore and ingame match, the state of the game as a result of the R&D from each races experience warring with the other two races:
- Protoss believes that tanks are OP and activate their ancient siege weapons, the colossi and rediscover ancient warp gate technology to level their mobility with the Terran and Zerg to be on par.
- Terran believe that Zealots are imba and develop the hellion to deal with their numbers and economise ghost development (lowered cost) to neutralise their shield advantage and HT storms.
- Zerg believe that marine and BC are OP and hence evolve the baneling (roach too) and corruptor/BL in response.
I like the backstory, it made sense, its the main reason why I'm in the "TvP is fine with bio-balls" camp. Edit: The story has still two more "expansions" to go, so it's not too late to convince Blizzard.
On October 03 2011 21:55 jeffvip wrote: I agree with the thread starter and almost every comment here. Thanks god some1 address this issue. TvZ n TvP is broken if you ask me. The only MU worthy to play now is TvT. Since the blue flame hellion nerf, Terran player would like to go for bio only. What the hell? That is so non-Terranish. The happy time of full mech just come and go in a short 1 month time. I'm pretty disappointed with how TvZ,TvP and TvT is evolving.
Wtf... In TvZ we see Koreans go for Full Mech styles for the first time now... TvZ has never been as Mech heavy as it is right now! In TvT we still see mostly mech (and a lot of airmech right now), but biomech and bio are at least available as openings right now.
Also neither TvP nor TvZ are broken right now. Slightly Terranfavored, yes. But thats just a phase of the metagame. CreatorPrime's build is catching on, and if PvZ ever stabilzes, both P and Z will have more solid players in Code S.
I really dont get those posts who want every Terran to play Mech-only in every MU.
Also I would like to add, that Zerg doesn't feel zergish at all. In every novel and every mission, Zerg is controlling whole planets. Why doesn't every game start with creep all over the map? Completly unzergish...
On October 03 2011 22:01 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: To everyone that says "it's broke let's fix it" are ignoring the fundamental problem that the lead designer has already declared that Terran bio-balls vs Protoss are his choice for the state of the game.
Until he or his mind is changed, this is what'll be.
Everything in lore and ingame match, the state of the game as a result of the R&D from each races experience warring with the other two races:
- Protoss believes that tanks are OP and activate their ancient siege weapons, the colossi and rediscover the warp gate technology to level their mobility with the Terran and Zerg
- Terran believe that Zealots are imba and develop the hellion to deal with their numbers and economise ghost development (lowered cost) to neutralise their shield advantage and HT.
- Zerg believe that marine and BC are OP and hence evolve the baneling (roach too) and corruptor/BL in response.
I like the backstory, it makes sense, its the main reason why I'm in the "TvP is fine with bio-balls" camp.
Yeah except the lore is flat-out retarded and doesn't follow from original Starcraft lore at all.
Protoss just unlocking their ancient weapons is such a lame plot device. For one the theme for their weapons was that they were unweildy but powerful, cmon swords against guns, micro-manufacturing plants converted to create WMD's, resurrected units that ooze blue goo. This is because Protoss was never really a gung-ho galactic superpower like Terran, instead they united and highly valued peace. This is why the mothership and colossus sound so stupid, they were technologically advanced, but not in the same way as War of the Worlds.
Terran reverts from jet hover-bikes with 3 mini-nukes to flaming go-karts, and at the same time up the cost.
Although 2 scourge can do 220 flat damage combined for 75/25, for some reason a baneling for the same price can only do 20+15 damage? Huh?
Yes the problem here is that this is really Predy's subjective point of view. I would also love tanks to be used by korean progamers so we get somewhat similar TvP feeling like we are used to from BW. God, I would pay them just to use them. But it's really their choice in the end.. So many new gamers enjoy playing with bioballs. How can you not like them.. If this is required for Starcraft to be mainstream or just a Dustin Browder's dream becoming true, no one knows..
Well, I think mech in pvt would be extremely boring to watch because the defenders advantage is so huge for t. There isn't any reason for Protoss to attack before they have a billion warp gates and mass econ, so it will just be big blob vs big blob only now with tanks.
Can't argue with OP, MMM is just an annoying unit composition with little deviations (aside from vikings and/or ghosts) And at the same time, the colossus is indeed pretty boring.
I think that the MMM being so efficient from early to late game, makes it useless for the terran to switch into something else. I don't think the tanks are too weak (though arguably they are too hard countered by the immortals), but MMM is just so efficient, so easy to play, MMM drops are deadly, MMM ball is fast and deadly while always regenerating, and a terran has no difficulty countering the P's counter to MMM, Vikings are very good against colossus, and ghosts are just better on all levels that high templars. So right now, except if someone comes up with a brilliant idea, i don't see the match up changing anytime soon. And the only way to change it, is to nerf MMM in mid/late game while buffing slightly tank play.
On October 03 2011 07:26 Dezire wrote: Oke i disagree with this one so hard.
First half of you're story is based on your poor opinion on marauders, and that youre facorite BW units cant be used (tank) which makes this 'complaining' about the matchup not based on facts but on your own opinion.
about ur warpgates, you might have a point there, heck i'd like as a protoss myself if i could make units as 'easy' as a terran can so i can focus more on the battle instead of having to look awway to warp in and keep my macro up.
but the micropart? you cannot be serious. first you are saying that its so awesome to micro against banes and fungles in tvz. but seriously you could do the same ammount of micro against storms as puma did amazingly here @ 26:05 or lifting up your units in ur medivacs to avoid FF's as select showcased in a match i cant remember on tal d'arim altar. or MKP in a match i can't remember either on crevasse where he one shotted units with marauders so they go slowed and couldnt get away.
about the micro in a general battle, well just read what thorzain said, seems pretty intense to me tbh.
and again the unitcomposition is biased by your opinion of not liking MM but using the argument "its basicly mmm viking ghost all the time" doesn't make much sens to me either as each matchup has a standard composition, that you dont like this one isnt the games fault.
well there's micro and i acknowledged that later on in the thread. you know i like going bio early on because it's safe and it can do alot of damage, pin P back to his base because of fear of the drops. early bio battles are pretty cool. but give me an option to transition out of it. add variety to that matchup so that you can do both bio or biomech builds.
oke i think that is a good point, would indeed be more interesting.
I think that the problem is space control. Every race has its units which restrict the movement of other units. For Zerg it's the infestor, for Protoss it's the sentry, and for Terran it's the siege tank. You'll note that the siege tank doesn't control space as directly as those other two. You'll also note that each of those units is used in every match up, except for the siege tank in TvP. Terran has no way to control or restrict the movement of his opponent in TvP.
Blizzard has balanced the game based around the idea that Terran should be unable to control space (without really understanding it), which has led to a relatively fair (by win percentages) TvP, but it hasn't led to an interesting match up.
On October 03 2011 22:01 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: To everyone that says "it's broke let's fix it" are ignoring the fundamental problem that the lead designer has already declared that Terran bio-balls vs Protoss are his choice for the state of the game.
Until he or his mind is changed, this is what'll be.
Everything in lore and ingame match, the state of the game as a result of the R&D from each races experience warring with the other two races:
- Protoss believes that tanks are OP and activate their ancient siege weapons, the colossi and rediscover the warp gate technology to level their mobility with the Terran and Zerg
- Terran believe that Zealots are imba and develop the hellion to deal with their numbers and economise ghost development (lowered cost) to neutralise their shield advantage and HT.
- Zerg believe that marine and BC are OP and hence evolve the baneling (roach too) and corruptor/BL in response.
I like the backstory, it makes sense, its the main reason why I'm in the "TvP is fine with bio-balls" camp.
Yeah except the lore is flat-out retarded and doesn't follow from original Starcraft lore at all.
Protoss just unlocking their ancient weapons is such a lame plot device. For one the theme for their weapons was that they were unweildy but powerful, cmon swords against guns, micro-manufacturing plants converted to create WMD's, resurrected units that ooze blue goo. This is because Protoss was never really a gung-ho galactic superpower like Terran, instead they united and highly valued peace. This is why the mothership and colossus sound so stupid, they were technologically advanced, but not in the same way as War of the Worlds.
Terran reverts from jet hover-bikes with 3 mini-nukes to flaming go-karts, and at the same time up the cost.
Although 2 scourge can do 220 flat damage combined for 75/25, for some reason a baneling for the same price can only do 20+15 damage? Huh?
I followed the 10 years worth of books (their synopsis) and no, it's not retarded if you've been following the plot.
Well... shooting flame probably destabilises the hovering, so it's back to wheels and wheels cost money.
Because one is capable of sub-light speeds and the other... rolls really fast. Doing the math (velocity/impact/kinetic energy + acid splash etc), its not hard to figure out why they'd do so much damage. Although, if scourges did learn to target ground units that'll be cool. (bye bye Thor)
I agree with the OP. Every TvP feels the same. It's just stale... dull... boring. Almost always it seems like it's just a turtlefest into a large army, and then one battle decides who wins or who loses (though from all the pro games I've seen P v. anything is like this). No fancy micro tricks, and many units for both races just don't seem to be viable at all. You also have terribly boring units like the marauder and the colossus (WHY did they replace the reaver with the colossus?) being staples in the matchup. Just boring all around.
On October 01 2011 06:42 GinDo wrote: That Idea about having to crush zerg before the 10 min mark is total b.s. Its a fib told by qqers. Terran can hold their own against Zerg in a long macro game. That is until BL infestor comes out. Then its gg. But thats around the 25 min mark.
On October 01 2011 08:07 Fission wrote: I'd really like to see a way to incorporate tanks into TvP. The problem is that pretty much every single toss unit is designed to be a counter to tanks, some more than others. I can't really forsee tvp moving away from pure bio tbh.
Basically, a tank heavy composition could beat, in theory, the standard "deathball" stalker/collo/immortal w/e if you had good upgrades, emps, and ravens to PDD or HSM. The problem is fighting mass chargelot. Tanks are just irredeemably bad against chargelots. Maybe a slow, slow push with +armor upgrade bunkers and banshees to force stalkers?
uh...hellions? The basic mech unit that you can pump out of a factory two at a time with a reactor?
Hellions are surprisingly awful against chargelots.
**imagining bw style mech w/ the cost of vultures being 75 minerals w/ mules+reactors, and the laying of mines w/ the shift+click mechanic. that would be fun i must admit
On October 03 2011 21:55 jeffvip wrote: I agree with the thread starter and almost every comment here. Thanks god some1 address this issue. TvZ n TvP is broken if you ask me. The only MU worthy to play now is TvT. Since the blue flame hellion nerf, Terran player would like to go for bio only. What the hell? That is so non-Terranish. The happy time of full mech just come and go in a short 1 month time. I'm pretty disappointed with how TvZ,TvP and TvT is evolving.
Wtf... In TvZ we see Koreans go for Full Mech styles for the first time now... TvZ has never been as Mech heavy as it is right now! In TvT we still see mostly mech (and a lot of airmech right now), but biomech and bio are at least available as openings right now.
Also neither TvP nor TvZ are broken right now. Slightly Terranfavored, yes. But thats just a phase of the metagame. CreatorPrime's build is catching on, and if PvZ ever stabilzes, both P and Z will have more solid players in Code S.
I really dont get those posts who want every Terran to play Mech-only in every MU.
Also I would like to add, that Zerg doesn't feel zergish at all. In every novel and every mission, Zerg is controlling whole planets. Why doesn't every game start with creep all over the map? Completly unzergish...
Simple, that's the reason why player choose Terran instead of Protoss or Zerg. If I want mobility I'll prefer playing as Zerg & to play as Protoss if I like high tech unit. Terran literary means dirty, slow, heavy metal, strong fire power and space control.
Personally, I've been caught off guard by unsieged tanks a few times. they do a LOT of damage fast to stalkers in particular. they're DPS is a lot better than they lead on.
mixing 2 or 3 in with your first 10 min timing push can be brutal. I have seen demuslim do this on many occasions.
The heavy bio play is starting to be figured out by high level toss. There is a new style of uber fast upgrading, so that toss can trade and out produce terran. Check out creator.prime and MVPgenius in the gstl matches from this month.
I think this will eventually lead to a shift in the TvP metagame. I'd like to see a more air-mech oriented style w/ a heavy focus on ravens.
On October 03 2011 21:55 jeffvip wrote: I agree with the thread starter and almost every comment here. Thanks god some1 address this issue. TvZ n TvP is broken if you ask me. The only MU worthy to play now is TvT. Since the blue flame hellion nerf, Terran player would like to go for bio only. What the hell? That is so non-Terranish. The happy time of full mech just come and go in a short 1 month time. I'm pretty disappointed with how TvZ,TvP and TvT is evolving.
Wtf... In TvZ we see Koreans go for Full Mech styles for the first time now... TvZ has never been as Mech heavy as it is right now! In TvT we still see mostly mech (and a lot of airmech right now), but biomech and bio are at least available as openings right now.
Also neither TvP nor TvZ are broken right now. Slightly Terranfavored, yes. But thats just a phase of the metagame. CreatorPrime's build is catching on, and if PvZ ever stabilzes, both P and Z will have more solid players in Code S.
I really dont get those posts who want every Terran to play Mech-only in every MU.
Also I would like to add, that Zerg doesn't feel zergish at all. In every novel and every mission, Zerg is controlling whole planets. Why doesn't every game start with creep all over the map? Completly unzergish...
Simple, that's the reason why player choose Terran instead of Protoss or Zerg. If I want mobility I'll prefer playing as Zerg & to play as Protoss if I like high tech unit. Terran literary means dirty, slow, heavy metal, strong fire power and space control.
no, I disagree. It never was that way. SK Terran, Tank/Marine/Medic combos... that's all part of broodwar. Lurkers, dark swarms controlled space for Zerg in broodwar. Shuttles, Science Vessels, Drops, Corsair, Vulture... you name the mobility of Terran and Protoss in broodwar.
People choose Terran out of various reasons. One might be MechPlay. Another one might be MMM. Another one drop. Another one the general feeling of fighting for mankind. Another one because of all races it felt best for them to play Terran.
On October 03 2011 23:12 Fides wrote: this shit makes me giggle @ the terran fanboys
I know you've got 5 posts and all that, but you do realize this thread is by pro players saying that Terran bio is too strong and as a result has by design limited the match-up?
On October 03 2011 22:01 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: To everyone that says "it's broke let's fix it" are ignoring the fundamental problem that the lead designer has already declared that Terran bio-balls vs Protoss are his choice for the state of the game.
Until he or his mind is changed, this is what'll be.
Everything in lore and ingame match, the state of the game as a result of the R&D from each races experience warring with the other two races:
- Protoss believes that tanks are OP and activate their ancient siege weapons, the colossi and rediscover the warp gate technology to level their mobility with the Terran and Zerg
- Terran believe that Zealots are imba and develop the hellion to deal with their numbers and economise ghost development (lowered cost) to neutralise their shield advantage and HT.
- Zerg believe that marine and BC are OP and hence evolve the baneling (roach too) and corruptor/BL in response.
I like the backstory, it makes sense, its the main reason why I'm in the "TvP is fine with bio-balls" camp.
Yeah except the lore is flat-out retarded and doesn't follow from original Starcraft lore at all.
Protoss just unlocking their ancient weapons is such a lame plot device. For one the theme for their weapons was that they were unweildy but powerful, cmon swords against guns, micro-manufacturing plants converted to create WMD's, resurrected units that ooze blue goo. This is because Protoss was never really a gung-ho galactic superpower like Terran, instead they united and highly valued peace. This is why the mothership and colossus sound so stupid, they were technologically advanced, but not in the same way as War of the Worlds.
Terran reverts from jet hover-bikes with 3 mini-nukes to flaming go-karts, and at the same time up the cost.
Although 2 scourge can do 220 flat damage combined for 75/25, for some reason a baneling for the same price can only do 20+15 damage? Huh?
I followed the 10 years worth of books (their synopsis) and no, it's not retarded if you've been following the plot.
Well... shooting flame probably destabilises the hovering, so it's back to wheels and wheels cost money.
Because one is capable of sub-light speeds and the other... rolls. Do the math (velocity/impact etc) , its not hard to figure out. Although, if scourges did learn to target ground units that'll be cool. (bye bye Thor)
egh, zergs should've better realised that tanks and vultures are OP rather than BCs lol aslo terran having problem with zealot is OMG :D i'd put carrier there instead for sure
also i've never seen hellions consistently being used in TvP to deal with the zealots anyways, don't u think that it sounds a bit of a selfpwn? ^^
On October 03 2011 22:01 Hattori_Hanzo wrote: To everyone that says "it's broke let's fix it" are ignoring the fundamental problem that the lead designer has already declared that Terran bio-balls vs Protoss are his choice for the state of the game.
Until he or his mind is changed, this is what'll be.
Everything in lore and ingame match, the state of the game as a result of the R&D from each races experience warring with the other two races:
- Protoss believes that tanks are OP and activate their ancient siege weapons, the colossi and rediscover the warp gate technology to level their mobility with the Terran and Zerg
- Terran believe that Zealots are imba and develop the hellion to deal with their numbers and economise ghost development (lowered cost) to neutralise their shield advantage and HT.
- Zerg believe that marine and BC are OP and hence evolve the baneling (roach too) and corruptor/BL in response.
I like the backstory, it makes sense, its the main reason why I'm in the "TvP is fine with bio-balls" camp.
Yeah except the lore is flat-out retarded and doesn't follow from original Starcraft lore at all.
Protoss just unlocking their ancient weapons is such a lame plot device. For one the theme for their weapons was that they were unweildy but powerful, cmon swords against guns, micro-manufacturing plants converted to create WMD's, resurrected units that ooze blue goo. This is because Protoss was never really a gung-ho galactic superpower like Terran, instead they united and highly valued peace. This is why the mothership and colossus sound so stupid, they were technologically advanced, but not in the same way as War of the Worlds.
Terran reverts from jet hover-bikes with 3 mini-nukes to flaming go-karts, and at the same time up the cost.
Although 2 scourge can do 220 flat damage combined for 75/25, for some reason a baneling for the same price can only do 20+15 damage? Huh?
I followed the 10 years worth of books (their synopsis) and no, it's not retarded if you've been following the plot.
Well... shooting flame probably destabilises the hovering, so it's back to wheels and wheels cost money.
Because one is capable of sub-light speeds and the other... rolls. Do the math (velocity/impact etc) , its not hard to figure out. Although, if scourges did learn to target ground units that'll be cool. (bye bye Thor)
egh, zergs should've better realised that tanks and vultures are OP rather than BCs lol aslo terran having problem with zealot is OMG :D i'd put carrier there instead for sure
also i've never seen hellions consistently being used in TvP to deal with the zealots anyways, don't u think that it sounds a bit of a selfpwn? ^^
Actually they did, hence they evolved wings to help run faster, theoretically overcoming the slow rate of fire (slow targeting) of the previous generation of siege tank and vulture.
Well, I'm quoting from memory and zealots are treated like walking tanks lore wise.
As for hellions not being used in TvP, 1) Thor/hellion was used very often in beta until their nerfs where they fell by the wayside compared to the bio heavy builds we see today. 2) as other posters have already mentioned, MMMG is much more efficient in despatching chargelots than hellions can past 3 on 3 base. 3) Hellion pretty much came out of nowhere lorewise.
I think a lot of you are missing the OP's point. Hes talking about how stale the MU has become and how P has a lot more options. Chargelot/archon timing, gateway colossi, gateway void ray timing, gateway immortal, gateway HT/DT>archon are all viable in some sense vs T. Terran HAS to go bio with ghosts or vikings. That's the way 95% of TvP's go. the other 5% is banshees sometimes, simply because theyre so good against stalkers/ and can do some good damage to colossi. but even if you get banshees, one observer and half of why the banshee was good is gone, or a HT feedback and half of your HP is gone. Personally, I LOVE going bio. I just like the way it works. But without being able to adapt or have any variation whatsoever is somewhat lame cause its so limiting.
predy, heaven forbid you should have to scout and counter an INCREDIBLY expensive tech choice that takes multiple minutes to begin paying for itself...Not to mention BOTH of which are not even choices from toss perspective...after 6 medivacs hit the field you NEED AOE. so NOT having ghosts AND vikings is just mind-numbing. Consider all of the aggressive options that terran has that are low risk but potentially yield game ending results if the toss doesn't scout and split and defend against them perfectly. how severe of a mistake do you feel like you need to make to lose the game?
On October 04 2011 00:55 Deadpoetic0077 wrote: I think a lot of you are missing the OP's point. Hes talking about how stale the MU has become and how P has a lot more options. Chargelot/archon timing, gateway colossi, gateway void ray timing, gateway immortal, gateway HT/DT>archon are all viable in some sense vs T. Terran HAS to go bio with ghosts or vikings. That's the way 95% of TvP's go. the other 5% is banshees sometimes, simply because theyre so good against stalkers/ and can do some good damage to colossi. but even if you get banshees, one observer and half of why the banshee was good is gone, or a HT feedback and half of your HP is gone. Personally, I LOVE going bio. I just like the way it works. But without being able to adapt or have any variation whatsoever is somewhat lame cause its so limiting.
High Diamond Terran here, I personally have been having success with hellion based builds (either straight mech or sky terran with a hellion base). Siege tanks also are strong in TvP, but in a different way than against the squishy races. Don't expect their units to evaporate, plan for that, and you'll be fine.
It seems difficult to complain about bio TvP when most people don't seem to be attempting anything else. Terran brothers, if you seek mech then develop it. If you seek the skies, take them. For those who prefer bio but are bored, use reapers mid-late game (they are wonderful).
koreans understand that its not the unit composition but how you use it. therefore bio can be fun as hell and not stale to play depending on how you like to play (multitask-heavy, upgrade-heavy, greedy, allin, etc)
On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote: How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs?
Are you kidding me with these ridiculous statements?? You are just picking any unit and saying if you don't have the counter, then you are in trouble. It's like saying, he has mass marines and you have no collosus, you lose! or He has ghosts you have no feedback, you lose!
On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote: How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs?
Are you kidding me with these ridiculous statements?? You are just picking any unit and saying if you don't have the counter, then you are in trouble. It's like saying, he has mass marines and you have no collosus, you lose! or He has ghosts you have no feedback, you lose!
no im not kidding. blings counter marines right? until people realized with good control you can split the marines and mitigate bling damage as much as possible. try that with tanks vs immortals. it's just the hard counter design which blizzard went for.
On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote: How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs?
Are you kidding me with these ridiculous statements?? You are just picking any unit and saying if you don't have the counter, then you are in trouble. It's like saying, he has mass marines and you have no collosus, you lose! or He has ghosts you have no feedback, you lose!
no im not kidding. blings counter marines right? until people realized with good control you can split the marines and mitigate bling damage as much as possible. try that with tanks vs immortals. it's just the hard counter design which blizzard went for.
I spent a good three hours yesterday messing with TvP mech and part of it trying to micro/kite immortals with tanks and it is the saddest thing I've ever seen. The turret turns around sooo slow...
On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote: How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs?
Are you kidding me with these ridiculous statements?? You are just picking any unit and saying if you don't have the counter, then you are in trouble. It's like saying, he has mass marines and you have no collosus, you lose! or He has ghosts you have no feedback, you lose!
no im not kidding. blings counter marines right? until people realized with good control you can split the marines and mitigate bling damage as much as possible. try that with tanks vs immortals. it's just the hard counter design which blizzard went for.
This is true except you have it backwards in this matchup. Protoss tier 1 gets smashed by Terran tier 1 so the burden is on the Protoss to tech and counter the Terran's barracks units. If a guy gets colossus out and you don't have vikings then it's just as much your fault as it would be the protoss' fault if he kept making nothing but gateway units vs. bio.
The main difference is that once the game advances to the MMMVG point where all Protoss aoe tech lines are countered the Terran simply wins the game. I agree with everything you said about Brood War but the reason BW was great was that each race was forced to play differently. Terran controlled space with tanks, Zerg did the same to some extent with lurker/ds but also had mobility for frontal attacks and Protoss was always mobile.
Now all 3 races play like Protoss did in Brood War so the major determining factor in who wins is just a checklist of stupid low level shit.
1. Do you have more surface area for your units? 2. Do your units hardcounter your opponent's? 3. Do you have more units?
That is all this game is about and simplifying this problem down to a rant against warpgates (which I agree should be gone from the game) or tech counters is a fundamental misreading of the factors that made BW great. Positioning, real map control and defender's advantage have all been removed with the nerf of tanks and the removal of the lurker and defiler and subsequent addition of pseudo-Protoss units like the marauder and roach. The problem with this game is a lot more complicated than one or two little things but I admire your thread and I think that a widespread discussion of these types of things is useful and necessary.
I talked about TvZ and TvT. Do you know what those matchups have in common? Tanks. Tanks made BW so awesome. Tanks make TvZ and TvT in SC2 very fun to play/watch. You can control ground, abuse the terrain, siege. They take a lot of skill to play with but the reward is high, but not in TvP. It's quite sad but almost every protoss unit counters them. Do you remember when tanks did 60 damage? Good times. They were actually quite useful back then. Right now, i wanna cry every time i have 20 of them slaughtered in 10 seconds.
I must admit, on some maps, tanks are quite viable. For example, on Shakuras, it's possible to play marine tank with support (ghost/banshee) - an example is a game from Shoutcraft 3 DDE vs Socke (VOD). Unfortunately, on most maps it's suicidide to go anything but bio (f.e. Taldarim). It works well on Shakuras because there's not much room to blink harass and 3base is quite safe, then split map situation favors terran.
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Another issue i have with TvP is there's minimum micro in fights, all you do is make concave before the fight them stim and run in. Cast some emps. Then you watch if you have enough or not. Theres no micro against banelings or infestors like in TvZ. Micro will never save your ass like in TvZ. Good position will never save your ass like in TvT, because you have no tanks, and warpgates are pretty good eh! Nothings angers me more than cutting off protoss expo from his main army and have 20 zealots warped in to my back, same with drops.
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
4 Conclusion
Thanks for reading!
Why is this thread features? It seems to me its just broodwar reminiscing disguised as what I consider poor theory crafting. Most of these statements arent even correct.
Minimum micro fights? All you do is concave? I dont know what matches you've been watching where are you do is that but with EMPs, focus fire, feedback, storms and stutter step that is a ton more than "just a concave". And whining about warpgates because you didnt scout a pylon while you contained him? Then you didnt contain him, simple as that. Its silly to think that protoss should just stay in their base if a terran is outside with units. Thats like saying you get frustrated because zerg can build 10 drones at a time. Complaining about the basic function of a race is pointless. And for the last part of not knowing what he has? Terrans have this thing called scan. It's free, there are quite a bit of them, and they scout a large area.
This really just seems like a way for the poster to show how he thinks broodwar is superior with poor arguments made to help hide that.
Am I the only one that sees these threads for what they really are? Really well concealed balance whines. "wow...tvp is not as fun as broodwars because I can't use tanks!" is exactly what it came down to. -tanks are useless -if they get collosi or templar, I die -it's so hard! -i don't want to play anymore!
I have to support thorzaine's comment that tvp does require a lot more micro than you give it credit for. And if you also retract your statements, you should include them in the OP, instead of telling people that you posted something later in the thread.
I think in the end, we could all look at one race's mechanic and say it "forces" you into a particular build like warpgates and colossus. However, at the same time, because of the power of the 1-1-1, it forces the protoss as well to go a certain tech route.
Terrans can to an extent skip air in favor of stronger ground army or get air or any mass units. The marines and marauders with stim can quickly demolish blink stalker play. The units caught in the marauders' concussive shells will die.
You mention warp mechanic being an issue, however, protoss units takes a lot more time to build than any other races in early game. Without warp mechanics, it would be near impossible for protoss to effectively push someone's army unless you have a definitive advantage over your opponent because of lack of creep speed or decent drop units (although warp prism boost might have changed this).
Protoss are not able to access all their tech paths like terrans can early on because their units are expansive and take quite some time to build. This can be somewhat worked out with chronoboost.
Personally, Id like to see more upgrades and buildings synergy (like PDD requiring an upgrade built from an armory or fusion core).
I agree that marauders and colossus are boring units but saying the match has no micro is unfair. Protoss has to make clever use of forcefields and other abilities to be able to live to the midgame. Its much easier to stim push your way up a ramp than to properly split/block with forcefields so zealots can dish some damage.
i agree with everything but the point that micro isnt a part of tvp
i mean its certainly not much micro involved for toss (guardian shield +a-move+storm) but for terran you have to do quite a lot of things if you dont want to get completely shredded (emp+focusfire with vikings+dodge remaining storms+stutterstep vs zealots)
also if you engage in a bad position with terran vs p ur sooooo dead since some ffs will just trap you and you will die horribly
I talked about TvZ and TvT. Do you know what those matchups have in common? Tanks. Tanks made BW so awesome. Tanks make TvZ and TvT in SC2 very fun to play/watch. You can control ground, abuse the terrain, siege. They take a lot of skill to play with but the reward is high, but not in TvP. It's quite sad but almost every protoss unit counters them. Do you remember when tanks did 60 damage? Good times. They were actually quite useful back then. Right now, i wanna cry every time i have 20 of them slaughtered in 10 seconds.
I must admit, on some maps, tanks are quite viable. For example, on Shakuras, it's possible to play marine tank with support (ghost/banshee) - an example is a game from Shoutcraft 3 DDE vs Socke (VOD). Unfortunately, on most maps it's suicidide to go anything but bio (f.e. Taldarim). It works well on Shakuras because there's not much room to blink harass and 3base is quite safe, then split map situation favors terran.
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Another issue i have with TvP is there's minimum micro in fights, all you do is make concave before the fight them stim and run in. Cast some emps. Then you watch if you have enough or not. Theres no micro against banelings or infestors like in TvZ. Micro will never save your ass like in TvZ. Good position will never save your ass like in TvT, because you have no tanks, and warpgates are pretty good eh! Nothings angers me more than cutting off protoss expo from his main army and have 20 zealots warped in to my back, same with drops.
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
4 Conclusion
Thanks for reading!
Why is this thread features? It seems to me its just broodwar reminiscing disguised as what I consider poor theory crafting. Most of these statements arent even correct.
Minimum micro fights? All you do is concave? I dont know what matches you've been watching where are you do is that but with EMPs, focus fire, feedback, storms and stutter step that is a ton more than "just a concave". And whining about warpgates because you didnt scout a pylon while you contained him? Then you didnt contain him, simple as that. Its silly to think that protoss should just stay in their base if a terran is outside with units. Thats like saying you get frustrated because zerg can build 10 drones at a time. Complaining about the basic function of a race is pointless. And for the last part of not knowing what he has? Terrans have this thing called scan. It's free, there are quite a bit of them, and they scout a large area.
This really just seems like a way for the poster to show how he thinks broodwar is superior with poor arguments made to help hide that.
why so mad? 1. he did probably not just talk about the matches he watched but also the ones he played since he is pretty high level as well 2.he didnt talk about him containing toss but about him cutting off toss' third and not being able to kill it because of warpin 3.why is it silly to say that the warpin mechanic is bad? ( i mean terrans dont have that either ) 4.you cant scan all the bases of toss twice every five minutes or you'll just die to everything since you wont have enough of an army 5.its not bad to make broodwar references is it?
On October 04 2011 02:03 sVnteen wrote: really awesome post
i agree with everything but the point that micro isnt a part of tvp
i mean its certainly not much micro involved for toss (guardian shield +a-move+storm) but for terran you have to do quite a lot of things if you dont want to get completely shredded (emp+focusfire with vikings+dodge remaining storms+stutterstep vs zealots)
also if you engage in a bad position with terran vs p ur sooooo dead since some ffs will just trap you and you will die horribly
Rofl, ok we'll just ignore the forcefields, storm, feedback, focus fire, and blink and call that A moving.
On October 04 2011 02:01 Apollo_Shards wrote: Why is this thread features? It seems to me its just broodwar reminiscing disguised as what I consider poor theory crafting. Most of these statements arent even correct.
Minimum micro fights? All you do is concave? I dont know what matches you've been watching where are you do is that but with EMPs, focus fire, feedback, storms and stutter step that is a ton more than "just a concave". And whining about warpgates because you didnt scout a pylon while you contained him? Then you didnt contain him, simple as that. Its silly to think that protoss should just stay in their base if a terran is outside with units. Thats like saying you get frustrated because zerg can build 10 drones at a time. Complaining about the basic function of a race is pointless. And for the last part of not knowing what he has? Terrans have this thing called scan. It's free, there are quite a bit of them, and they scout a large area.
This really just seems like a way for the poster to show how he thinks broodwar is superior with poor arguments made to help hide that.
What matches has he been watching? Probably some of the ones he's been playing in. http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Predy This isn't a thread about theorycrafting or balance or specific games. It's not featured for that. It's featured because a pro player made a well thought out thread about what many consider a design flaw in the game that effects this particular match up.
On October 04 2011 02:01 neoghaleon55 wrote: Am I the only one that sees these threads for what they really are? Really well concealed balance whines. "wow...tvp is not as fun as broodwars because I can't use tanks!" is exactly what it came down to. -tanks are useless -if they get collosi or templar, I die -it's so hard! -i don't want to play anymore!
I have to support thorzaine's comment that tvp does require a lot more micro than you give it credit for. And if you also retract your statements, you should include them in the OP, instead of telling people that you posted something later in the thread.
I don't understand how you can call this a balance whining thread. Nothing in OP or any of the pro/blue posters have said anything other then basicly that bio is actually too strong and it limits the DESIGN of the MU. Nothing about balance.
On October 04 2011 02:01 neoghaleon55 wrote: Am I the only one that sees these threads for what they really are? Really well concealed balance whines. "wow...tvp is not as fun as broodwars because I can't use tanks!" is exactly what it came down to. -tanks are useless -if they get collosi or templar, I die -it's so hard! -i don't want to play anymore!
I have to support thorzaine's comment that tvp does require a lot more micro than you give it credit for. And if you also retract your statements, you should include them in the OP, instead of telling people that you posted something later in the thread.
Yes, the rest of us aren't that dumb and realise what he is trying to say.
If your happy with the matchup then that's good. But alot of us aren't.
Title is a little misleading. It doesn't really have much to do with game design, other than saying the current design is a poor one. I'd tend to agree, but I just feel people haven't figured out how to use mech properly yet is all. That's just my opinion on the matter. If I were Terran I'd be meching in TvP trying to get it to work, much like how in PvP back in the day I never 4 Gated and ended up finding YongHwa's 3 Stalker opening.
I'd say I understand that there are frustrations about the Terran race, but I think it would be best to just wait and see how strategies evolve.
On October 04 2011 02:01 Apollo_Shards wrote: Why is this thread features? It seems to me its just broodwar reminiscing disguised as what I consider poor theory crafting. Most of these statements arent even correct.
Minimum micro fights? All you do is concave? I dont know what matches you've been watching where are you do is that but with EMPs, focus fire, feedback, storms and stutter step that is a ton more than "just a concave". And whining about warpgates because you didnt scout a pylon while you contained him? Then you didnt contain him, simple as that. Its silly to think that protoss should just stay in their base if a terran is outside with units. Thats like saying you get frustrated because zerg can build 10 drones at a time. Complaining about the basic function of a race is pointless. And for the last part of not knowing what he has? Terrans have this thing called scan. It's free, there are quite a bit of them, and they scout a large area.
This really just seems like a way for the poster to show how he thinks broodwar is superior with poor arguments made to help hide that.
What matches has he been watching? Probably some of the ones he's been playing in. http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Predy This isn't a thread about theorycrafting or balance or specific games. It's not featured for that. It's featured because a pro player made a well thought out thread about what many consider a design flaw in the game that effects this particular match up.
On October 04 2011 02:01 neoghaleon55 wrote: Am I the only one that sees these threads for what they really are? Really well concealed balance whines. "wow...tvp is not as fun as broodwars because I can't use tanks!" is exactly what it came down to. -tanks are useless -if they get collosi or templar, I die -it's so hard! -i don't want to play anymore!
I have to support thorzaine's comment that tvp does require a lot more micro than you give it credit for. And if you also retract your statements, you should include them in the OP, instead of telling people that you posted something later in the thread.
I don't understand how you can call this a balance whining thread. Nothing in OP or any of the pro/blue posters have said anything other then basicly that bio is actually too strong and it limits the DESIGN of the MU. Nothing about balance.
If he's playing in the matches then he should be even more aware that not dodging storms and feedback or getting off good emps will cost you the engagement. " It's featured because a pro player made a well thought out thread about what many consider a design flaw in the game that effects this particular match up. "
That is EXACTLY what theorycrafting and balance discussion is.
Edit: Checked your posting history. Dedicated this account to defending terrans in every balance discussion on this site I see. I also like this line "Imbalanced is a Zerg word. " Classy.
On October 04 2011 02:01 neoghaleon55 wrote: Am I the only one that sees these threads for what they really are? Really well concealed balance whines. "wow...tvp is not as fun as broodwars because I can't use tanks!" is exactly what it came down to. -tanks are useless -if they get collosi or templar, I die -it's so hard! -i don't want to play anymore!
I have to support thorzaine's comment that tvp does require a lot more micro than you give it credit for. And if you also retract your statements, you should include them in the OP, instead of telling people that you posted something later in the thread.
I think a lot of people think that it's a balance whine, which is why there are a lot of protoss players posting that it's fine. It might be a balance whine for some people but for a lot of us the it's not about who's favored at all, it's just that the matchup feels really degenerate. I think BW TvP was quite a bit harder especially if you weren't good at the game like me but at the same time I enjoyed it like 10x more than SC2 TvP. It's not that I HAVE to make tanks, bio play can be pretty fun against Terran or Zerg but against Protoss there aren't enough strategical options other than GET EM.
On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote: How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs?
Are you kidding me with these ridiculous statements?? You are just picking any unit and saying if you don't have the counter, then you are in trouble. It's like saying, he has mass marines and you have no collosus, you lose! or He has ghosts you have no feedback, you lose!
no im not kidding. blings counter marines right? until people realized with good control you can split the marines and mitigate bling damage as much as possible. try that with tanks vs immortals. it's just the hard counter design which blizzard went for.
Immortals harcounter Thors, until people realized, that strike canons are very good against them. Then blizzard nerfed them (because they are little MC fanboys), but they are still in the game. The strike canon still counters Immortals. Also TvT Marine/Tank was standard. Then people started to go pure Mech, because the hellion does so well against the marine. Then they started very early airmech & airbuilds, because the Viking counters hellions. The problem right now with TvP is not that Mech is unplayable. It's that there is little development in TvP, because it hasn't even stabilzed, so we still see plenty of 1base allins (1-1-1, blink stalkers) and mostly 2base timings (colossus rush, ghost rush...). And then IF it gets past 2base, Terran right now has a great time. Why on earth should anyone that earns money by playing not try to go MMM (+Viking/Ghost), when this led to 22 Code S Terrans, while Mech vs Protoss has hardly ever seen tournament play?
If you don't believe me, think about how many different openings we see in this MU, and how many different openings we see in ZvT. (Not saying Mech will be played in PvT, but theoretically Terran has a lot of good tank supporters against every Unit that is said to be a problem for Tanks and Thors, to make at least biomech playable... also seeing PvP often being a Colossus spamfest makes me wonder why the tank should be so much less efficient against protoss units, when in theory it has better dps cost/supplywise and a bigger range - yeah mobility, I get it, but terrans keep argumenting that protoss crushes mech straigt up...)
On October 04 2011 01:12 BADSMCGEE wrote: predy, heaven forbid you should have to scout and counter an INCREDIBLY expensive tech choice that takes multiple minutes to begin paying for itself...Not to mention BOTH of which are not even choices from toss perspective...after 6 medivacs hit the field you NEED AOE. so NOT having ghosts AND vikings is just mind-numbing. Consider all of the aggressive options that terran has that are low risk but potentially yield game ending results if the toss doesn't scout and split and defend against them perfectly. how severe of a mistake do you feel like you need to make to lose the game?
Um? Bio, Banshee into Bio and 1-1-1 into Bio? Did you miss the whole point of the OP?
On October 04 2011 02:03 sVnteen wrote: really awesome post
i agree with everything but the point that micro isnt a part of tvp
i mean its certainly not much micro involved for toss (guardian shield +a-move+storm) but for terran you have to do quite a lot of things if you dont want to get completely shredded (emp+focusfire with vikings+dodge remaining storms+stutterstep vs zealots)
also if you engage in a bad position with terran vs p ur sooooo dead since some ffs will just trap you and you will die horribly
Rofl, ok we'll just ignore the forcefields, storm, feedback, focus fire, and blink and call that A moving.
blink? are you telling me protossplayers blinkmicro in big fights? -no they arent (maybe blinking behind zealots but thats it) feedback on medivacs is not used very often in big fights either (only in small fights and when terran is retreating) feedback on ghosts is not used in the fight itself either most protoss armys dont have many sentries in lategame so they dont really forcefield much
i said strom i also mentioned guardian shield (probably forgot selecting stalkers and hitting "s" so they attack vikings)
i would be quite happy if i could do that with my terran army and sitll win and yes i call that a-moving
On October 03 2011 19:42 Deezl wrote: I'm entirely confused about why this thread is spotlighted for game analysis. The OP's post has exactly one source, which is Dustin Browder's interview where he talks about the design of the game and how it is balanced and so on and so forth. Its a good insight, that the PvT and PvZ matchups were balanced around the power of Colossus and all matchups suffered as a result. But I don't believe that new ground was covered here that deserved a spotlight. I'll go into detail on the OP, and then go on a huge rant on to the replies that have followed and as to why you should reconsider hitting the post button sometimes if you're not that great of a player. It will be glorious.
PredY - Summarizing PredY greatly dislikes the (lack of) unit diversity that is present in TvP, because he likes Tanks for their strategic play and hates Marauders because playing them is a bit like bashing your head against the wall (bashing your army into the Toss's base). The standard composition, MMM + Ghosts or Vikings, he feels, is forced when playing vs. P because its the best composition possible, even in endgame situations, because charge Zealots hard counter tanks and are available at all times, while a well-controlled Marauder-Ghost-Medivac-whatever ball can beat Charge Zeals extremely cost-effectively, and do bonus damage against everything else that P has. So MMM with subtle variations is VERY strong vs. P, because it can handle every composition thrown at it. Checklist?
Zealot - useless without excellent FFs or charge. Marauder-Ghost Stalker - only cost-effective vs vikings in the air. Marauder-anything Sentry - Does no damage and is countered by EMP, but early and seeing a lot of use makes it a good unit. Immortal - Deals bonus damage to Marauders! But gets bonus damage dealt to it by Marauders... countered by marines, doubly so because each Immortal made is not a colossus. Also countered by Ghosts. Phoenix/Void Ray/Carrier - Vikings, Marines, and Terran may choose to add Thors... overall just good for harassment. High Templar - Terran adds Ghosts. You get to play the Ghost vs. HT mini-game to see if you can land storms or not. Too many ghosts and you need Colossus. If anyone makes a major mistake the game ends. Colossus - Terran adds Vikings, both players take more bases and add Ghosts and HTs or Pheonix and continue to upgrade their ground army.
Therefore you can take on anything with with Bio vs. Protoss. There's no rock paper scissors but for the openings, and Bio FORCES High Templar or Colossus (and is still effective vs it). Also right now, P has no really valid timings against T that don't involve tier 3 tech, because they all got nerfed, so P can no longer do any kind of contain to force medivacs or tanks to bust.
There are some good arguments against this; Mech can hit pre-chargelot timings, 1/1/1 into contain, Goody argument, but basically what Predy wants is for positional, traditional tank-based PvT from broodwar. But that's just what Predy wants. At least 66% of the Starcraft II population doesn't care (P and Z players). And lot of T players like playing Bio. So why spotlight this thread?
On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote: I talked about TvZ and TvT. Do you know what those matchups have in common? Tanks. Tanks made BW so awesome. Tanks make TvZ and TvT in SC2 very fun to play/watch. You can control ground, abuse the terrain, siege. They take a lot of skill to play with but the reward is high, but not in TvP. It's quite sad but almost every protoss unit counters them. Do you remember when tanks did 60 damage? Good times. They were actually quite useful back then. Right now, i wanna cry every time i have 20 of them slaughtered in 10 seconds.
Wait, what? Tanks are what make the game good and tactical? You want to go mech vs. P ... just because its more fun? Then do it. Make it fun. Find ways to keep them tanks alive.
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups. Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
If you take away my warpgates you have to give me Blink Dragoons. Try to get tanks rolling then, bud! I'm sorry you got caught between my army and my base but you KNOW that I can do that and you STILL get bodied by it then you need to re-evaluate your strategy.
Another issue i have with TvP is there's minimum micro in fights, all you do is make concave before the fight them stim and run in. Cast some emps. Then you watch if you have enough or not. Theres no micro against banelings or infestors like in TvZ. Micro will never save your ass like in TvZ. Good position will never save your ass like in TvT, because you have no tanks, and warpgates are pretty good eh! Nothings angers me more than cutting off protoss expo from his main army and have 20 zealots warped in to my back, same with drops.
While TvZ and ZvZ are more micro intensive, TvP is not short on Micro by any stretch, and you can always improve your spreading, stutter stepping and multitasking with drops. Over-microing can be bad, which I'm fine with. If you want more "skill" units to be added to HoTS, that's fine and I'm all for it, but the micro in TvP is present and still developing.
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
What kind of paragraph is this? Did you think about using a scan? This isn't even true because you can hit marauder-medivac timings before 2 colossus or Templar have storm and do massive damage while getting the right tech online, or drop to delay pushes to get your tech online, or just go raw marauder and split the army with drops and try to snipe them. In order to make Vikings you have to SWAP A BUILDING. Ghost academy is a tier 1.5 building that costs 100gas and builds fairly quick. And you should have EMPs anyway. I'm sorry you can't counter my tier 3 AoE 150-200 gas units with just marines and marauders. I'm sorry Protoss doesn't have shots that you can dodge 100% of the time if your micro is amazing.
So tl;dr, Predy's post reads much more like a "Please bring back tanks to TvP" rant than a history, a balance discussion or anything else. I'm all for new strategies that raise the skill cap and input new units and builds into the scene, I think everyone is. But that doesn't make posts on the subject spotlight worthy. His replies, however, are quite good (about how Marauders decrease the skill cap, etc). But I think what he'll find is that we're not quite as deep into Starcraft II as he thinks we are.
I'm sorry that in your such a long post, u totally missed the idea OP trying to make. Coz positioning is indeed a joke for TvP right now, terran are forced to go Bio ball and use mobility to counter the mobility of protoss. Which is kind of sad that if both T and P dont make mistake, you will guarantee to see a 200 bioball v.s. 200 deathball. This lacks the basic fun of strategy game of map controlling, positioning, etc... Why TvZ is entertaining to watch now is because in late game on large map, you can see Terran trying to control several key position and Zerg use mobility to force Terran make holes in their defense line and the game is so much fun. But this doesnt happen in TvP right now coz u need 200 army to hold one spot otherwise, some random strategical positioning army are just free meal for the protoss.
You can claim that current TvP ball v.s. ball is fun to watch like some micro heavily WarCraft 3 games. But I agree with OP and prefer to see BW style strategy game.
Why is this thread featured? I'm terran but this thread is essentially brood war players complaining that sc2 is not broodwar with the added touch of balance complaints.
I sincerely think starcraft 2 is just too young yet, the mos developed meta game right now its tvt, they have so many opening and transitions is very fun to watch.
And there is one real reason to get colossi or Hight Templars, its becaus you as prottoss NEED splash damage of some kind, be it colossi, HT, or archons... There is no other way to deal with MMM in mid late game, you say tanks? i was so sick of tanks in BW, they drop near ur ep and can turtle for ever!, im glad toss has a counter to that now, we have inmortals you have marines...
On October 04 2011 02:01 Apollo_Shards wrote: Why is this thread features? It seems to me its just broodwar reminiscing disguised as what I consider poor theory crafting. Most of these statements arent even correct.
Minimum micro fights? All you do is concave? I dont know what matches you've been watching where are you do is that but with EMPs, focus fire, feedback, storms and stutter step that is a ton more than "just a concave". And whining about warpgates because you didnt scout a pylon while you contained him? Then you didnt contain him, simple as that. Its silly to think that protoss should just stay in their base if a terran is outside with units. Thats like saying you get frustrated because zerg can build 10 drones at a time. Complaining about the basic function of a race is pointless. And for the last part of not knowing what he has? Terrans have this thing called scan. It's free, there are quite a bit of them, and they scout a large area.
This really just seems like a way for the poster to show how he thinks broodwar is superior with poor arguments made to help hide that.
What matches has he been watching? Probably some of the ones he's been playing in. http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Predy This isn't a thread about theorycrafting or balance or specific games. It's not featured for that. It's featured because a pro player made a well thought out thread about what many consider a design flaw in the game that effects this particular match up.
On October 04 2011 02:01 neoghaleon55 wrote: Am I the only one that sees these threads for what they really are? Really well concealed balance whines. "wow...tvp is not as fun as broodwars because I can't use tanks!" is exactly what it came down to. -tanks are useless -if they get collosi or templar, I die -it's so hard! -i don't want to play anymore!
I have to support thorzaine's comment that tvp does require a lot more micro than you give it credit for. And if you also retract your statements, you should include them in the OP, instead of telling people that you posted something later in the thread.
I don't understand how you can call this a balance whining thread. Nothing in OP or any of the pro/blue posters have said anything other then basicly that bio is actually too strong and it limits the DESIGN of the MU. Nothing about balance.
If he's playing in the matches then he should be even more aware that not dodging storms and feedback or getting off good emps will cost you the engagement. " It's featured because a pro player made a well thought out thread about what many consider a design flaw in the game that effects this particular match up. "
That is EXACTLY what theorycrafting and balance discussion is.
Edit: Checked your posting history. Dedicated this account to defending terrans in every balance discussion on this site I see. I also like this line "Imbalanced is a Zerg word. " Classy.
It's actually the only account I have o_o
I just don't understand where you are coming from. The overriding consensus in this thread is "nerf bio"... how is it a balance whine? As for defending Terran... I also think bio should be nerfed in this match up? I'm not trying to defend Terran here. I'm trying to say that you have a bunch of pros weighing in on this thread, maybe you should heed what they say?
I think part of the problem in general is Blizzard's design for Protoss units in particular. You can see this quite obviously based on the progression path of development, but they had this idea that protoss units would have low DPS, high health, and their DPS would increase as the fight goes on. Units like the Soul Hunter and the Void Ray followed this progression. Only thing is, Blizzard later realized it was a terrible design and pulled the Soul Hunter (but kept the Void Ray?), but then never properly compensated Protoss for the roles these units were supposed to fill. The Soul Hunter, for example, was intended to be a bio ball killer that came out of the gateway that wasn't a caster, and was just a normal part of the army, and was ranged. In other words, they envisioned the Protoss gateway army being able to hold their own vs. the bioball when they came up with the original design for the game without needing colossi at all, even with ghosts. The unit attacked air and ground, but was bad vs. mech, very bad vs. mech. This is part of the reason the ghost seems so powerful with EMP and why it beats HT so easily: it was designed the way it is now when Protoss had a much stronger gateway army without tier 3, and hasn't been significantly changed since (only change IIRC is the cost change and the slight EMP nerf).
But warp gates made them nerf most of the gateway units, and much of what Protoss needed for strategy variety wasn't there anymore. In the original design, Protoss had much better defensive structures, which compensated for the power of cloaked banshees somewhat, for example. Their cannons could phase and move around to relocate inside of power fields like how spore and spine crawlers can. This was removed because cannon rushing was too good if you could leap frog the cannons, but they never compensated by weakening the enemy units which were originally designed with phase cannons in mind.
Out of all the races, Protoss feels the most incomplete. You can tell this very easily by examining the amount of upgrades each race has available that aren't just +1 weapons/armor/shield upgrades, upgrades that significantly affect the power/role of the unit. Now, they did have more, but for some weird reason, rather than balancing things by modifying upgrades, they just removed them flat out. It was still only two upgrades however. Hell, in the original game design, you could warp in every single protoss ground unit once you teched enough, including immortals and colossi. Just bad game design for the start, and it's catching up to toss.
Zerg: Spawning Pool - 2 Lair - 4 Roach Warren - 2 Baneling Nest - 2 Hydralisk Den - 1 Infestation Pit - 2 Ultralisk Cavern - 1 Total - 14
Protoss: Cybernetics Core - 2 Twilight Council - 2 Templar Archives - 1 Fleet Beacon - 1 Robotics Bay - 3 Total - 9
Now look at the units each race has that are made regularly in games:
Terran: Marine, Marauder, Ghost, Hellion, Siege Tank, Thor, Viking, Banshee, Raven, Medivac Units rarely seen at all: Reapers, Battlecruisers.
Zerg: Zergling, Roach, Baneling, Hydralisk, Infestor, Mutalisk, Corrupter, Brood Lord, Queen, Ultralisk Units rarely seen at all: ...? Maybe hydras and ultras count because they kind of suck?
Protoss: Zealot, Stalker, Sentry, High Templar, Dark Templar, Immortal, Observer, Colossus, Phoenix, Void Ray, Archon Units rarely seen at all: Warp Prism (this is starting to change), Carrier, Mothership.
Now look at that list and think about which units are actually good and more than just a couple are made when the player makes them, and you'll find the terran list stays about the same (thor goes down to the rarely used list), the zerg list stays about the same (queen goes down since you usually make just one per hatch), but the Protoss unit list loses Dark Templar, Phoenix, and Void Rays (and observers too I guess) from the list of units. DT's, Phoenix and Void Rays are only really useful right when they come out, and you make a few at most of each, trying to get as much use out of each of them as possible when you make them in a macro game. More than 6 phoenix is too much, and more than 3-4 void rays nowadays is suicide. If you make more than 2-4 DT's for harass, you're just HOPING he didn't get detection.
Terran has way more options for significant upgrades than both zerg and protoss, and zerg is way ahead of protoss. I hope we don't have to wait until legacy of the void to see an improvement here, but it seems likely that we will. Zerg is going to get the most attention in HotS, and terran got the most attention for WoL.
I think the matchup stagnated to just bio vs toss because Toss is a half-finished race. If Protoss had a better response to bio, we'd see more mech play (it's just plain beefier and stronger).
I think terran is 7/8 done as a race (minor tweaks), zerg is about 3/4 done (needs some small changes and maybe a major change or two like complete unit replacements), and Protoss is maybe halfway there. They only reason they win at all is that Blizzard overcompensated for the lack of Protoss variety by giving them some tier three units that are, frankly, too strong, but they have to be.
The TvP matchup got completely screwed up when Blizzard decided to lower the cost of ghosts. 90% of the game that go longer than the amount of time Terrans need to get 4 or 5 ghosts out are one-sided game. 2 good EMP are usually enough to decide a fight. One single and easy to land spell with ridiculous range can literally deal damage in the 3 digit category.
I feel like the reason why this OP is significant is because there has been enough time that has passed for us to begin to generalize the matchups. I do agree entirely with the OP in that TvT and TvZ and even ZvZ are the most exciting matches as a spectator but they do not play well with the Protoss design mechanic. PvZ can have some pretty excellent games, but yes PvT and PvP have some issues.
But most importantly I agree with the OP in that we should wait until HotS for answers to these larger issues. I cannot see a minor fix here or there aiding this game design issue.
I agree with this. I hate the marauder as well and I use every unit but that one. My main way to play TvP is mech style but you can and kind of need to use a lot of air units, early reapers and marines.
If protoss play well and if blue flames don't outright kill a shitload of probes etc it's really hard.
Right now I open reaper first and try to pin him to his base and scout and maybe snatch a probe kill. After a reaper reactor marines directly. Then I get fact asap armory asap and make 2 hellions when armory builds.
Then you have 2 hellions and a reaper to get some shit done while you build up thors and marines and gets a command center. If I spot a really early nexus I might try to bust it. The hellions and the reaper need to try to reduce the number of forward pylons as much as possible .
A late raven and thors need to block out obs and by then I deviate into something like a third, full switch to air, many tanks or whatever. Constantly need to try to do damage with hellions. When you move out be prepared for a base trade.
This style is really fun at least but I feel like I have to do so much shit and and against someone who knows my style i feel so insecure :/
On October 04 2011 03:24 Whitewing wrote: I think part of the problem in general is Blizzard's design for Protoss units in particular. You can see this quite obviously based on the progression path of development, but they had this idea that protoss units would have low DPS, high health, and their DPS would increase as the fight goes on. Units like the Soul Hunter and the Void Ray followed this progression. Only thing is, Blizzard later realized it was a terrible design and pulled the Soul Hunter (but kept the Void Ray?), but then never properly compensated Protoss for the roles these units were supposed to fill. The Soul Hunter, for example, was intended to be a bio ball killer that came out of the gateway that wasn't a caster, and was just a normal part of the army, and was ranged. In other words, they envisioned the Protoss gateway army being able to hold their own vs. the bioball when they came up with the original design for the game without needing colossi at all, even with ghosts. The unit attacked air and ground, but was bad vs. mech, very bad vs. mech. This is part of the reason the ghost seems so powerful with EMP and why it beats HT so easily: it was designed the way it is now when Protoss had a much stronger gateway army without tier 3, and hasn't been significantly changed since (only change IIRC is the cost change and the slight EMP nerf).
But warp gates made them nerf most of the gateway units, and much of what Protoss needed for strategy variety wasn't there anymore.
Out of all the races, Protoss feels the most incomplete. You can tell this very easily by examining the amount of upgrades each race has available that aren't just +1 weapons/armor/shield upgrades, upgrades that significantly affect the power/role of the unit. Now, they did have more, but for some weird reason, rather than balancing things by modifying upgrades, they just removed them flat out. It was still only two upgrades however.
Zerg: Spawning Pool - 2 Lair - 4 Roach Warren - 2 Baneling Nest - 2 Hydralisk Den - 1 Infestation Pit - 2 Ultralisk Cavern - 1 Total - 14
Protoss: Cybernetics Core - 2 Twilight Council - 2 Templar Archives - 1 Fleet Beacon - 1 Robotics Bay - 3 Total - 9
Terran has way more options for significant upgrades than both zerg and protoss, and zerg is way ahead of protoss. I hope we don't have to wait until legacy of the void to see an improvement here, but it seems likely that we will. Zerg is going to get the most attention in HotS, and terran got the most attention for WoL.
Zerg upgrades are mostly upgrades you need to make the unit playable at all. That goes by design of the Zerg race. (you get all units from hatch, but therefore the tech for a single unit is very expensive) -) zergling, roach, baneling speed are all required to make the units playable -) overlord speed was originally intentended to cost 50/50, so you would always get it once you have lair tech (as overlords already lost their detection tech)
Terran upgrades follow the same guidelines. Because Terran is so low tech generally, the units kind of need to need upgrades. Else early Terran play would be OP, or lategame Terran play UP.
Protoss is designed to have a complete techtree on the gateway. Upgrades should mostly provide options, rather than balancing the game. The focus for the upgrades is more on hightech units, because similar to terran, some of them were thought to be OP if they started with the upgrade. (Colossi, HTs, Carrier)
On October 04 2011 03:24 Whitewing wrote: I think part of the problem in general is Blizzard's design for Protoss units in particular. You can see this quite obviously based on the progression path of development, but they had this idea that protoss units would have low DPS, high health, and their DPS would increase as the fight goes on. Units like the Soul Hunter and the Void Ray followed this progression. Only thing is, Blizzard later realized it was a terrible design and pulled the Soul Hunter (but kept the Void Ray?), but then never properly compensated Protoss for the roles these units were supposed to fill. The Soul Hunter, for example, was intended to be a bio ball killer that came out of the gateway that wasn't a caster, and was just a normal part of the army, and was ranged. In other words, they envisioned the Protoss gateway army being able to hold their own vs. the bioball when they came up with the original design for the game without needing colossi at all, even with ghosts. The unit attacked air and ground, but was bad vs. mech, very bad vs. mech. This is part of the reason the ghost seems so powerful with EMP and why it beats HT so easily: it was designed the way it is now when Protoss had a much stronger gateway army without tier 3, and hasn't been significantly changed since (only change IIRC is the cost change and the slight EMP nerf).
But warp gates made them nerf most of the gateway units, and much of what Protoss needed for strategy variety wasn't there anymore.
Out of all the races, Protoss feels the most incomplete. You can tell this very easily by examining the amount of upgrades each race has available that aren't just +1 weapons/armor/shield upgrades, upgrades that significantly affect the power/role of the unit. Now, they did have more, but for some weird reason, rather than balancing things by modifying upgrades, they just removed them flat out. It was still only two upgrades however.
Zerg: Spawning Pool - 2 Lair - 4 Roach Warren - 2 Baneling Nest - 2 Hydralisk Den - 1 Infestation Pit - 2 Ultralisk Cavern - 1 Total - 14
Protoss: Cybernetics Core - 2 Twilight Council - 2 Templar Archives - 1 Fleet Beacon - 1 Robotics Bay - 3 Total - 9
Terran has way more options for significant upgrades than both zerg and protoss, and zerg is way ahead of protoss. I hope we don't have to wait until legacy of the void to see an improvement here, but it seems likely that we will. Zerg is going to get the most attention in HotS, and terran got the most attention for WoL.
Zerg upgrades are mostly upgrades you need to make the unit playable at all. That goes by design of the Zerg race. (you get all units from hatch, but therefore the tech for a single unit is very expensive) -) zergling, roach, baneling speed are all required to make the units playable -) overlord speed was originally intentended to cost 50/50, so you would always get it once you have lair tech (as overlords already lost their detection tech)
Terran upgrades follow the same guidelines. Because Terran is so low tech generally, the units kind of need to need upgrades. Else early Terran play would be OP, or lategame Terran play UP.
Protoss is designed to have a complete techtree on the gateway. Upgrades should mostly provide options, rather than balancing the game. The focus for the upgrades is more on hightech units, because similar to terran, some of them were thought to be OP if they started with the upgrade. (Colossi, HTs, Carrier)
I would disagree with this. Players use roaches all the time before they have speed or burrow (and often don't get roach burrow at all in a lot of games). Players make use of banelings defensively without getting speed as well, and then sometimes switch out of banelings instead of getting speed. You can make excellent use of most units without getting their major upgrade, as long as you aren't planning on basing your entire gameplan around that unit. Sure, some upgrades from each race are needed to really make those units shine, but you can make use of the units without the upgrade. People who play mech often open with a few marines to stop scouting and for some early defense and never get stim. Players don't always get blink for their stalkers, despite making stalkers. None of these upgrades, with the exception of warp gate is 100% required for every game regardless of strategy. They are options you can select to make a certain style of play significantly stronger. The fact that there are far fewer upgrades for Toss (and zerg to a lesser extent) speaks to the incompleteness of the races: it suggests flat out that they have fewer strategy options.
The amount of upgrades available is indicative of the amount of theoretical variety each race can have.
ok..i have read about 10 pages in this thread and i havent come across a single objective solution to the ´´problem´´ being discussed... so , what exactly is the point of this thread ?
On October 04 2011 03:27 kiy0 wrote: The TvP matchup got completely screwed up when Blizzard decided to lower the cost of ghosts. 90% of the game that go longer than the amount of time Terrans need to get 4 or 5 ghosts out are one-sided game. 2 good EMP are usually enough to decide a fight. One single and easy to land spell with ridiculous range can literally deal damage in the 3 digit category.
you see you are whats wrong with this forum, completely clueless people write garbage out of their ass (no wonder most pro players stopped to read it), fyi in tvp matchup gas is not a problem you always starve on minerals it was already said by many pro terrans so you would expect even bronze players by now to know that but no ...
while I agree that lategame protoss would benefit from more significant tech advanteges from upgrades, and more variety, protoss upgrades are meant to be more beneficial due to their timing. This makes even more sense when you analyze the chrono-boost mechanic. Simple upgrades from protoss are actually meant to be specifically gotten before other races in order to take advantage of timings. EX: (and here's something that not enough people take advantage of) the +1 armor upgrade on protoss gives zealots and sentries +2 armor. Do you know how significant that is? combined with guardian shield, that means a marine would do 2 damage per shot. This upgrade in this context is meant to give protoss a very specific advantage at a very specific time. Protoss upgrades do not fully contribute to their lategame potential like terran upgrades do. (ex: +2 structure armor? absurdly powerful upgrade! auto-tracker? Insanely useful!) The only lategame upgradse I would argue that contributes to protoss the same way that terran upgrades do are shield upgrades, and hallucination. The lack of depth in those upgrades is actually meant to encourage timings.
There is depth, but it requires a lot of thought to pinpoint.
I disagree that you can't counter collossi with "ungodly micro" like you could counter lurkers without tanks. In fact it's a very similar situation.
As far as not using mech goes, I think mech could be great vs toss, and the only reason we don't see it is because T wins more often than not by just going MMM/ghost viking. Sure it can burn them sometimes in the really late game, but looking at koreans it seems to be working very well for them. I'd love if they simply removed the maruder and then reduced the build time of siege tanks instead.
Or give back firebats, but give firebats the bonus to armor and be armored... that would make for some insanely interesting micro battles in all MUs.
Blitzing in with siege tanks and tactically sieging them was really cool in BW, the maruder has basically made unsieged tanks useless now.
On October 04 2011 04:07 jlips6 wrote: on the topic of protoss upgrades:
while I agree that lategame protoss would benefit from more significant tech advanteges from upgrades, and more variety, protoss upgrades are meant to be more beneficial due to their timing. This makes even more sense when you analyze the chrono-boost mechanic. Simple upgrades from protoss are actually meant to be specifically gotten before other races in order to take advantage of timings. EX: (and here's something that not enough people take advantage of) the +1 armor upgrade on protoss gives zealots and sentries +2 armor. Do you know how significant that is? combined with guardian shield, that means a marine would do 2 damage per shot. This upgrade in this context is meant to give protoss a very specific advantage at a very specific time. Protoss upgrades do not fully contribute to their lategame potential like terran upgrades do. (ex: +2 structure armor? absurdly powerful upgrade! auto-tracker? Insanely useful!) The only lategame upgradse I would argue that contributes to protoss the same way that terran upgrades do are shield upgrades, and hallucination. The lack of depth in those upgrades is actually meant to encourage timings.
There is depth, but it requires a lot of thought to pinpoint.
Right, this is why I didn't make any mention or comparison to the power of specific upgrades. I did not, for example, say that charge is weaker than stim. Rather, I was merely commenting on the amount of upgrades that exist, as it is a good indicator (although not sufficient in and of itself) of the level of the completeness of a race.
I also want to point out that these upgrades are intended, mostly, to give units an additional function, not just make the unit better in combat. Zergling speed, for example, takes zerglings which had only the function of early defense, and it gives them more combat power. But it does more than that, it also allows them to take map control, and it allows them to threaten and commit to counter attacks and backstabs. It also lets them defend multiple locations because of how fast they can bounce back and forth. Overlord speed allows overlords to become good scouts in addition to making them better dropships and lets them flee attackers more easily. Stim significantly beefs up the attack power of bio units, but it makes bio drops much more potent as well as allowing bio units to play defense better (see muta harass vs. defending marines for example). Blink also works out well here: it makes the stalker much more potent in combat due to blink micro, but also gives stalkers a semi-decent harass function as well as making them much better in a defensive role. But upgrades which do not, in any way, change the options that a unit gives you aren't nearly as powerful. Charge for zealots makes them much stronger in a straight up fight, but they can't fill any additional role than they did before. They can't defend multiple bases better, you can't take map control with just chargelots. They don't get any better at harass, they just get beefier. The same goes for upgrades like the catapult for carriers and hydra range for hydralisks. These are poorly designed upgrades (not bad upgrades to get, obviously they are good, but the design for them is bad).
For good game design, upgrades other than your standard +1 weapons or +1 armor should allow units to fill an additional function or give you more options for that unit, not just make them a little bit better at their existing function. Upgrades that just make units a little bit beefier aside from these +1 ups are badly designed.
With specific focus in the TvP matchup and upgrades that are generally obtained: Examples of badly designed upgrades might be concussive shells, combat shields, and charge. These do not add extra functions to the units they enhance, but just make them a little stronger in combat. Examples of well designed upgrades in this matchup would be stim, blink, siege mode, and cloak.
On October 01 2011 06:51 homeless_guy wrote: Fairly objective post (I play T too). One thing I think you didn't consider, especially in Part 1, is that Blizz wanted to make the game different enough from BW that there was a reason to play it, besides new graphics. IMO, the real shame is the marauder is basically a glorified marine, and it has been untouched, while interesting units e.g. reapers and tanks were nerfed.
agreed, as a matter of fact, how many units have been known to not have been changed?
as in, what units have have the exact same stats as they did the very first time any knowledge was released to the public?
as far as I know, these are the units that not been changed:
all races: workers
terran: marine (except for stim research) maruader (except for stim research) hellion (except for BF research) banshee ****************I think viking have had some change, but else this spot would say viking
zerg: overlords (except for speed research (cost 50/50 in early beta)) zergling baneling ****************queen have had changes to their air attack right? hydralisk
protoss: carrier DT
correct me if im wrong
None. Not "the very first time any knowledge was released to the public". All of those units had at least some changes.
Marines dithered between 40 and 45 base Hp. Marauders did different amounts of damage. The Hellion upgrade once made them attack faster. Banshees used to be AoE. Banelings once didn't have an anti-building attack. Vikings used to be built from the Factory (they were ground units that became air units, not vice-versa). Queens used to be radically different. Hydralisks and Roaches traded places between Tier 1 and Tier 2 a lot. Even SCVs got dropped by 15 Hp (they used to be 60 like SC1).
I don't have certain knowledge of the other three (Zerglings, Carriers, and DTs), but I seriously doubt that they never touched their stats or upgrades at all.
On October 03 2011 21:55 jeffvip wrote: I agree with the thread starter and almost every comment here. Thanks god some1 address this issue. TvZ n TvP is broken if you ask me. The only MU worthy to play now is TvT. Since the blue flame hellion nerf, Terran player would like to go for bio only. What the hell? That is so non-Terranish. The happy time of full mech just come and go in a short 1 month time. I'm pretty disappointed with how TvZ,TvP and TvT is evolving.
Wtf... In TvZ we see Koreans go for Full Mech styles for the first time now... TvZ has never been as Mech heavy as it is right now! In TvT we still see mostly mech (and a lot of airmech right now), but biomech and bio are at least available as openings right now.
Also neither TvP nor TvZ are broken right now. Slightly Terranfavored, yes. But thats just a phase of the metagame. CreatorPrime's build is catching on, and if PvZ ever stabilzes, both P and Z will have more solid players in Code S.
I really dont get those posts who want every Terran to play Mech-only in every MU.
Also I would like to add, that Zerg doesn't feel zergish at all. In every novel and every mission, Zerg is controlling whole planets. Why doesn't every game start with creep all over the map? Completly unzergish...
Simple, that's the reason why player choose Terran instead of Protoss or Zerg. If I want mobility I'll prefer playing as Zerg & to play as Protoss if I like high tech unit. Terran literary means dirty, slow, heavy metal, strong fire power and space control.
Then why have the Barracks at all? If you want every Terran game to be about what comes out of the Factory, then just take away the Barracks entirely. Get rid of the Starports too; no point in keeping them around. Those units are too mobile, what with their ability to fly. Nope, we need more Siege Tanks, Thors, and Hellions.
I just want one matchup where Terrans aren't just building Factory stuff. Just one matchup where they have to go with Bio or Air or something else. Just one. Is that really too much to ask?
I can understand if you want a unit more interesting than the Marauder, which is more or less point-and-click. But that should be done by making a unit that is more interesting, not by saying, "I want more Tanks!"
On October 04 2011 03:24 Whitewing wrote: I think part of the problem in general is Blizzard's design for Protoss units in particular. You can see this quite obviously based on the progression path of development, but they had this idea that protoss units would have low DPS, high health, and their DPS would increase as the fight goes on. Units like the Soul Hunter and the Void Ray followed this progression. Only thing is, Blizzard later realized it was a terrible design and pulled the Soul Hunter (but kept the Void Ray?), but then never properly compensated Protoss for the roles these units were supposed to fill. The Soul Hunter, for example, was intended to be a bio ball killer that came out of the gateway that wasn't a caster, and was just a normal part of the army, and was ranged. In other words, they envisioned the Protoss gateway army being able to hold their own vs. the bioball when they came up with the original design for the game without needing colossi at all, even with ghosts. The unit attacked air and ground, but was bad vs. mech, very bad vs. mech. This is part of the reason the ghost seems so powerful with EMP and why it beats HT so easily: it was designed the way it is now when Protoss had a much stronger gateway army without tier 3, and hasn't been significantly changed since (only change IIRC is the cost change and the slight EMP nerf).
But warp gates made them nerf most of the gateway units, and much of what Protoss needed for strategy variety wasn't there anymore.
Out of all the races, Protoss feels the most incomplete. You can tell this very easily by examining the amount of upgrades each race has available that aren't just +1 weapons/armor/shield upgrades, upgrades that significantly affect the power/role of the unit. Now, they did have more, but for some weird reason, rather than balancing things by modifying upgrades, they just removed them flat out. It was still only two upgrades however.
Zerg: Spawning Pool - 2 Lair - 4 Roach Warren - 2 Baneling Nest - 2 Hydralisk Den - 1 Infestation Pit - 2 Ultralisk Cavern - 1 Total - 14
Protoss: Cybernetics Core - 2 Twilight Council - 2 Templar Archives - 1 Fleet Beacon - 1 Robotics Bay - 3 Total - 9
Terran has way more options for significant upgrades than both zerg and protoss, and zerg is way ahead of protoss. I hope we don't have to wait until legacy of the void to see an improvement here, but it seems likely that we will. Zerg is going to get the most attention in HotS, and terran got the most attention for WoL.
Zerg upgrades are mostly upgrades you need to make the unit playable at all. That goes by design of the Zerg race. (you get all units from hatch, but therefore the tech for a single unit is very expensive) -) zergling, roach, baneling speed are all required to make the units playable -) overlord speed was originally intentended to cost 50/50, so you would always get it once you have lair tech (as overlords already lost their detection tech)
Terran upgrades follow the same guidelines. Because Terran is so low tech generally, the units kind of need to need upgrades. Else early Terran play would be OP, or lategame Terran play UP.
Protoss is designed to have a complete techtree on the gateway. Upgrades should mostly provide options, rather than balancing the game. The focus for the upgrades is more on hightech units, because similar to terran, some of them were thought to be OP if they started with the upgrade. (Colossi, HTs, Carrier)
I would disagree with this. Players use roaches all the time before they have speed or burrow (and often don't get roach burrow at all in a lot of games). Players make use of banelings defensively without getting speed as well, and then sometimes switch out of banelings instead of getting speed. You can make excellent use of most units without getting their major upgrade, as long as you aren't planning on basing your entire gameplan around that unit. Sure, some upgrades from each race are needed to really make those units shine, but you can make use of the units without the upgrade. People who play mech often open with a few marines to stop scouting and for some early defense and never get stim. Players don't always get blink for their stalkers, despite making stalkers. None of these upgrades, with the exception of warp gate is 100% required for every game regardless of strategy. They are options you can select to make a certain style of play significantly stronger. The fact that there are far fewer upgrades for Toss (and zerg to a lesser extent) speaks to the incompleteness of the races: it suggests flat out that they have fewer strategy options.
The amount of upgrades available is indicative of the amount of theoretical variety each race can have.
A simple count of upgrades has no bearing on the strategic options to a race. An upgrade is not a unit of "strategery" or something. It is simply an upgrade.
Some upgrades are pretty much necessary to extend the life of a unit. You will almost never build Hydralisks without getting range. You will almost never spend very long on Zerglings without speed. If you're going for Roaches at all, you will get speed as soon as conditions permit. Marauders without Concussive Shells aren't worth much. And can you even call them Siege Tanks without Siege Mode?
Notice how most of the Terran upgrades are of the "I need this in order to use this unit significantly" variety. You wouldn't dare invest heavily in Bio without getting Stim, Concussive Shells, and Combat Shields. You wouldn't dare invest heavily in Tanks without getting Siege Mode; that'd be stupid. And so forth. Oh sure, you might see a Zerg build a small group of Zerglings without speed, but they're only building those to defend or harass until they get the units that they want.
There are "necessary" upgrades and there are elective upgrades. The latter are the ones that you choose to use in order to cause some effect. You pick this as part of an overall strategy beyond "this unit is a big part of my unit composition."
There is also a third category of upgrades: useless ones. These are things you will never get. They're never worthwhile to even bother with. And a lot of the SC2 Terran upgrades are things you never bother with. When was the last time someone got the bunker upgrade or building armor or High-Sec Auto-tracking in a professional match? When was the last time you saw Strike Cannons? Seeker Missile is a bit more likely, but even it is still rather iffy.
Virtually every Zerg upgrade is useful. You won't necessarily always use it, but they are useful. So if you subtract, let's say 3, from the Terran count, you get 16.
The main reason that the Protoss have fewer upgrades is that their third spellcaster (Mothership, in case you forgot. Don't feel bad; it's easy to forget that thing exists) has no upgrades. It's too expensive, in both time and money, to add a bunch of upgrades onto its already high cost.
I'm not going to defend Blizzard on the Mothership thing; that is not how you design a unit that you can only build one of. So if there's a lack of strategic play around upgrades with the Protoss, you can point to the Mothership taking up valuable spellcaster space.
But a lack of Protoss upgrades is not an indication of them being unfinished. It's an indication of the Mothership's existence.
And if you want to count upgrades, here's how SC1 did it:
What does this tell us? The Protoss have 50% more upgrades than the Zerg; are the Zerg "unfinished" in SC1?
But look at what most of the Protoss upgrades are. The plurality of their upgrades are for spellcasters. Upgrades for HTs, Dark Archons, Arbiters, and Corsairs (which are in fact spellcasters) make up almost half of their upgrades. Did having those upgrades make them so much more "strategic" than the SC1 Zerg?
One thing that Blizzard did in SC2 was take away a lot of these upgrades. You don't have to tech to a Fleet Beacon and research something to give Phoenixes Graviton Beam; they come with it for free. If Corsairs came with D-Web, you can be sure that Corsairs would have been a much more frequently used unit. It wasn't that D-Web wasn't good; it was a good spell, and on a relatively cheap, semi-massable unit. But the tech investment was simply never worth it. Blizzard recognized a lot of these cases in SC2 and rightly removed them.
Similarly, Blizzard wanted early-game spellcasters in the game. The Sentry and the Ghosts (the Queen was supposed to be the Zerg equivalent, but she got stuck on Larva duty). Something low-tech and fairly heavy on the gas, but could make an immediate impact with proper micro. In order to do that, they had to give those units spells immediately. They still had some spells that would be upgraded. But the units both have two spells that require no research.
Upgrades, in and of themselves, don't mean anything for the available strategic options. You can't just count upgrades and say, "Race X is more strategic than Race Y". You have to look at the whole picture.
On October 01 2011 06:51 homeless_guy wrote: Fairly objective post (I play T too). One thing I think you didn't consider, especially in Part 1, is that Blizz wanted to make the game different enough from BW that there was a reason to play it, besides new graphics. IMO, the real shame is the marauder is basically a glorified marine, and it has been untouched, while interesting units e.g. reapers and tanks were nerfed.
agreed, as a matter of fact, how many units have been known to not have been changed?
as in, what units have have the exact same stats as they did the very first time any knowledge was released to the public?
as far as I know, these are the units that not been changed:
all races: workers
terran: marine (except for stim research) maruader (except for stim research) hellion (except for BF research) banshee ****************I think viking have had some change, but else this spot would say viking
zerg: overlords (except for speed research (cost 50/50 in early beta)) zergling baneling ****************queen have had changes to their air attack right? hydralisk
protoss: carrier DT
correct me if im wrong
None. Not "the very first time any knowledge was released to the public". All of those units had at least some changes.
Marines dithered between 40 and 45 base Hp. Marauders did different amounts of damage. The Hellion upgrade once made them attack faster. Banshees used to be AoE. Banelings once didn't have an anti-building attack. Vikings used to be built from the Factory (they were ground units that became air units, not vice-versa). Queens used to be radically different. Hydralisks and Roaches traded places between Tier 1 and Tier 2 a lot. Even SCVs got dropped by 15 Hp (they used to be 60 like SC1).
I don't have certain knowledge of the other three (Zerglings, Carriers, and DTs), but I seriously doubt that they never touched their stats or upgrades at all.
On October 03 2011 21:55 jeffvip wrote: I agree with the thread starter and almost every comment here. Thanks god some1 address this issue. TvZ n TvP is broken if you ask me. The only MU worthy to play now is TvT. Since the blue flame hellion nerf, Terran player would like to go for bio only. What the hell? That is so non-Terranish. The happy time of full mech just come and go in a short 1 month time. I'm pretty disappointed with how TvZ,TvP and TvT is evolving.
Wtf... In TvZ we see Koreans go for Full Mech styles for the first time now... TvZ has never been as Mech heavy as it is right now! In TvT we still see mostly mech (and a lot of airmech right now), but biomech and bio are at least available as openings right now.
Also neither TvP nor TvZ are broken right now. Slightly Terranfavored, yes. But thats just a phase of the metagame. CreatorPrime's build is catching on, and if PvZ ever stabilzes, both P and Z will have more solid players in Code S.
I really dont get those posts who want every Terran to play Mech-only in every MU.
Also I would like to add, that Zerg doesn't feel zergish at all. In every novel and every mission, Zerg is controlling whole planets. Why doesn't every game start with creep all over the map? Completly unzergish...
Simple, that's the reason why player choose Terran instead of Protoss or Zerg. If I want mobility I'll prefer playing as Zerg & to play as Protoss if I like high tech unit. Terran literary means dirty, slow, heavy metal, strong fire power and space control.
Then why have the Barracks at all? If you want every Terran game to be about what comes out of the Factory, then just take away the Barracks entirely. Get rid of the Starports too; no point in keeping them around. Those units are too mobile, what with their ability to fly. Nope, we need more Siege Tanks, Thors, and Hellions.
I just want one matchup where Terrans aren't just building Factory stuff. Just one matchup where they have to go with Bio or Air or something else. Just one. Is that really too much to ask?
I can understand if you want a unit more interesting than the Marauder, which is more or less point-and-click. But that should be done by making a unit that is more interesting, not by saying, "I want more Tanks!"
On October 04 2011 03:24 Whitewing wrote: I think part of the problem in general is Blizzard's design for Protoss units in particular. You can see this quite obviously based on the progression path of development, but they had this idea that protoss units would have low DPS, high health, and their DPS would increase as the fight goes on. Units like the Soul Hunter and the Void Ray followed this progression. Only thing is, Blizzard later realized it was a terrible design and pulled the Soul Hunter (but kept the Void Ray?), but then never properly compensated Protoss for the roles these units were supposed to fill. The Soul Hunter, for example, was intended to be a bio ball killer that came out of the gateway that wasn't a caster, and was just a normal part of the army, and was ranged. In other words, they envisioned the Protoss gateway army being able to hold their own vs. the bioball when they came up with the original design for the game without needing colossi at all, even with ghosts. The unit attacked air and ground, but was bad vs. mech, very bad vs. mech. This is part of the reason the ghost seems so powerful with EMP and why it beats HT so easily: it was designed the way it is now when Protoss had a much stronger gateway army without tier 3, and hasn't been significantly changed since (only change IIRC is the cost change and the slight EMP nerf).
But warp gates made them nerf most of the gateway units, and much of what Protoss needed for strategy variety wasn't there anymore.
Out of all the races, Protoss feels the most incomplete. You can tell this very easily by examining the amount of upgrades each race has available that aren't just +1 weapons/armor/shield upgrades, upgrades that significantly affect the power/role of the unit. Now, they did have more, but for some weird reason, rather than balancing things by modifying upgrades, they just removed them flat out. It was still only two upgrades however.
Zerg: Spawning Pool - 2 Lair - 4 Roach Warren - 2 Baneling Nest - 2 Hydralisk Den - 1 Infestation Pit - 2 Ultralisk Cavern - 1 Total - 14
Protoss: Cybernetics Core - 2 Twilight Council - 2 Templar Archives - 1 Fleet Beacon - 1 Robotics Bay - 3 Total - 9
Terran has way more options for significant upgrades than both zerg and protoss, and zerg is way ahead of protoss. I hope we don't have to wait until legacy of the void to see an improvement here, but it seems likely that we will. Zerg is going to get the most attention in HotS, and terran got the most attention for WoL.
Zerg upgrades are mostly upgrades you need to make the unit playable at all. That goes by design of the Zerg race. (you get all units from hatch, but therefore the tech for a single unit is very expensive) -) zergling, roach, baneling speed are all required to make the units playable -) overlord speed was originally intentended to cost 50/50, so you would always get it once you have lair tech (as overlords already lost their detection tech)
Terran upgrades follow the same guidelines. Because Terran is so low tech generally, the units kind of need to need upgrades. Else early Terran play would be OP, or lategame Terran play UP.
Protoss is designed to have a complete techtree on the gateway. Upgrades should mostly provide options, rather than balancing the game. The focus for the upgrades is more on hightech units, because similar to terran, some of them were thought to be OP if they started with the upgrade. (Colossi, HTs, Carrier)
I would disagree with this. Players use roaches all the time before they have speed or burrow (and often don't get roach burrow at all in a lot of games). Players make use of banelings defensively without getting speed as well, and then sometimes switch out of banelings instead of getting speed. You can make excellent use of most units without getting their major upgrade, as long as you aren't planning on basing your entire gameplan around that unit. Sure, some upgrades from each race are needed to really make those units shine, but you can make use of the units without the upgrade. People who play mech often open with a few marines to stop scouting and for some early defense and never get stim. Players don't always get blink for their stalkers, despite making stalkers. None of these upgrades, with the exception of warp gate is 100% required for every game regardless of strategy. They are options you can select to make a certain style of play significantly stronger. The fact that there are far fewer upgrades for Toss (and zerg to a lesser extent) speaks to the incompleteness of the races: it suggests flat out that they have fewer strategy options.
The amount of upgrades available is indicative of the amount of theoretical variety each race can have.
A simple count of upgrades has no bearing on the strategic options to a race. An upgrade is not a unit of "strategery" or something. It is simply an upgrade.
Some upgrades are pretty much necessary to extend the life of a unit. You will almost never build Hydralisks without getting range. You will almost never spend very long on Zerglings without speed. If you're going for Roaches at all, you will get speed as soon as conditions permit. Marauders without Concussive Shells aren't worth much. And can you even call them Siege Tanks without Siege Mode?
Notice how most of the Terran upgrades are of the "I need this in order to use this unit significantly" variety. You wouldn't dare invest heavily in Bio without getting Stim, Concussive Shells, and Combat Shields. You wouldn't dare invest heavily in Tanks without getting Siege Mode; that'd be stupid. And so forth. Oh sure, you might see a Zerg build a small group of Zerglings without speed, but they're only building those to defend or harass until they get the units that they want.
There are "necessary" upgrades and there are elective upgrades. The latter are the ones that you choose to use in order to cause some effect. You pick this as part of an overall strategy beyond "this unit is a big part of my unit composition."
There is also a third category of upgrades: useless ones. These are things you will never get. They're never worthwhile to even bother with. And a lot of the SC2 Terran upgrades are things you never bother with. When was the last time someone got the bunker upgrade or building armor or High-Sec Auto-tracking in a professional match? When was the last time you saw Strike Cannons? Seeker Missile is a bit more likely, but even it is still rather iffy.
Virtually every Zerg upgrade is useful. You won't necessarily always use it, but they are useful. So if you subtract, let's say 3, from the Terran count, you get 16.
The main reason that the Protoss have fewer upgrades is that their third spellcaster (Mothership, in case you forgot. Don't feel bad; it's easy to forget that thing exists) has no upgrades. It's too expensive, in both time and money, to add a bunch of upgrades onto its already high cost.
I'm not going to defend Blizzard on the Mothership thing; that is not how you design a unit that you can only build one of. So if there's a lack of strategic play around upgrades with the Protoss, you can point to the Mothership taking up valuable spellcaster space.
And if you want to count upgrades, here's how SC1 did it:
What does this tell us? The Protoss have 50% more upgrades than the Zerg; are the Zerg "unfinished" in SC1?
But look at what most of the Protoss upgrades are. The plurality of their upgrades are for spellcasters. Upgrades for HTs, Dark Archons, Arbiters, and Corsairs (which are in fact spellcasters) make up almost half of their upgrades. Did having those upgrades make them so much more "strategic" than the SC1 Zerg?
One thing that Blizzard did in SC2 was take away a lot of these upgrades. You don't have to tech to a Fleet Beacon and research something to give Phoenixes Graviton Beam; they come with it for free. If Corsairs came with D-Web, you can be sure that Corsairs would have been a much more frequently used unit. It wasn't that D-Web wasn't good; it was a good spell, and on a relatively cheap, semi-massable unit. But the tech investment was simply never worth it. Blizzard recognized a lot of these cases in SC2 and rightly removed them.
Similarly, Blizzard wanted early-game spellcasters in the game. The Sentry and the Ghosts (the Queen was supposed to be the Zerg equivalent, but she got stuck on Larva duty). Something low-tech and fairly heavy on the gas, but could make an immediate impact with proper micro. In order to do that, they had to give those units spells immediately. They still had some spells that would be upgraded. But the units both have two spells that require no research.
Upgrades, in and of themselves, don't mean anything for the available strategic options. You can't just count upgrades and say, "Race X is more strategic than Race Y". You have to look at the whole picture.
Well, there's a big difference between 21 vs. 15 upgrades and 19 vs. 9, but yeah, just the count in and of itself is insufficient, merely indicative. But you also made a point in the favor of what I'm talking about: SC2 got rid of a lot of those upgrades that existed in SC1, for all races.
But read what I wrote above about the purpose of upgrades: what is the purpose of upgrades specifically? Would marines be completely useless in the game if upgrades didn't exist? The purpose of upgrades is to give you additional uses for the units that you are upgrading. I would also say that some of the upgrades you listed aren't useless, against heavy muta play, every terran should get hi-sec auto-tracking and probably building armor too. It significantly weakens a massive investment from zerg with minimal expenditure from terran. The only upgrades terran has that I would consider to be worthless are the Cadeceus reactor and neosteel frames.
But my argument about the race being unfinished was based upon the entirety of the post above, which also included arguments around units that were removed during development, (all three races were designed in tandem with each other, but Blizzard failed to appropriately compensate for unit removal by balancing other races properly), a lack of ability to make use of entire trees of tech aside from specific timings in all matchups, and how much of the race is entirely unused due to design flaws.
IMO your argument about terran losing when the protoss has colosus and you have no vikings or when the protoss has templar and the terran has no ghosts is flawed.
That is like saying when the toss has no colosi or templar vs bio, toss is screwed. A race has those units at their disposal and if they opt not to use it and lose because of it that is their own fault.
I also disagree about the affectiveness of tanks. Protoss gets decimated when they attak into seiged tanks. The only time I would attack a decent amount of MMT is if the tanks were unseiged.
I agree that as far as army control goes, it is more tedious for the terran to position things, but it is also frustrating for protoss to have every unit in their arsenal be less cost effective with the exception of the colosus.
On October 01 2011 06:16 Thorzain wrote: I feel that TvP IS really micro intensive. EMP everything, move your units out of storms, focus fire individual colossi with vikings and kite zealots if he's zealot heavy. And while you're kiting zealots you have to move back your ghosts so that they dont all get killed in the blink of an eye. All these things at the same time. It's freaking hard if you ask me!
Also Thorzain, what about Terran macro....I think it's really hard trying to macro as terran kiting and everything else. But I still don't know how I feel about this match up. Maybe before engaging as toss, have a Warp prism in the main of the terrans base and warp in like 6 DT's and force him to engage your army....but over Idk just trying to throw some suggestions out there. GL HF GG's
Op did a lot of words, but really everything could be sumned down to: "Bio is boring to play/watch" "Tanks are fun".
OBv. i agree that from a game design perspective mech should be more viable vs toss. I dont mind opening bio, doing some dropping, establishing a 3rd while transiitoning into mech late game. This would require a complete redesign however (which I hope they will do in HOTS).
A solution could be like this: 1) Change the design og the collosus to make it worse vs mech and slightly stronger vs bio. However the mehanics required to use this unit optimal should be much much higher. 2) Combined with the collosus change, emp should be reworked. Let emp drain energy instant but do dmg to shield over a small time period (e.g. 2 secs). 3) Buff hellions to make them stronger vs protoss ground units, while unchanged in strenght vs zerg/terran. This will prob require that they become stronger vs non light armored units, or perhaps has a mechanic that make it harder for opp to use lack of mobility (like vultures had in bw with mines). Again this would require a somewhat rechange of the hellions.
IMO these 3 factors would together result in a much more entertaining and dynamic tvp.
How did a Brood War > SC2 Thread, and what is basically a hidden balance whine thread become a featured post?
He acknowledges that some players simply don't play the style he's complaining about, but then says he didn't bother to check if those guys were doing well.
Whole thing seems silly, 'We only play this style....except for 1/1/1 which is dominating the scene, and mech play which I'm ignoring'
If most people wrote this, it'd just be closed.
The bioball right now is pretty successful, so there's not a lot of incentive to move away from it. There was a time when mech was almost unstoppable, and 1/1/1 shows the ability to mix bio and mech early for amazing results.
There's a lot of options here and we see more all the time, I don't think its bad design that people use viable strategies.
I like TvP. Even though it has the same compositions most of the time you have so much that you can do with your units. You can pick off units/ do drops and micro/multitasking is pretty intense from early to late game unless they just sit around and build 200/200.
Actually there need only two changes to make mech a viable choice IMHO:
1) Tank dmg is changed from 35 (+15 vs armor) to 50 (-15 vs light). Shields take full dmg from tank shots (like in BW).
2) Remove 'Strike cannon' and give Thors ablative plating as an upgrade, that reduces splash dmg by a significant amount (say 70%). Give hellions a similar upgrade.
Optional: Revamp the thor anti-air. No more splash, but straight up dmg.
On October 04 2011 03:49 mr_chapy wrote: ok..i have read about 10 pages in this thread and i havent come across a single objective solution to the ´´problem´´ being discussed... so , what exactly is the point of this thread ?
well there've been some ideas, mostly not very good ones, besides one that cought my eye, and that is adding damage to massive for tanks, which would affect collosi and archons. it would also affect thors (not THAT big of a deal althought thors are useful for breaking siege lines) and ultras (well not sure how that would turn out)
but the most common attitude is to wait either for HoTS and new units being added in, or just wait for the metagame to shift (would have to be accompanied by a balance patch im sure, otherwise i don't see anything right now P can do to force T shift away from MMMVG). it's been over a year since the release (not counting the beta) and other matchups have evolved SO much besides tvp and pvp (tvp the only big change there was was P getting HTs and T respoing with ghosts). that what makes me think it's gonna take a looong time before that happens (a shift) tho (HoTS the earliest). hope im wrong tho!
(a thing i think is a bit funny i noticed in this thread. ppl with low counts usually don't agree with me and like bio a lot - and i don't take that away from them!, while ppl with high post count tend to agree with me (at least on the most parts), i assume those are former BW players so im glad im not alone on this one
On October 04 2011 04:41 Roxy wrote: IMO your argument about terran losing when the protoss has colosus and you have no vikings or when the protoss has templar and the terran has no ghosts is flawed. .
I would say it's more than just flawed, his point regarding the counters was just plain stupid.
Collosus don't appear out of thin air. If you are completely caught off guard, that means you have a critical failure in the scouting area before you even engage.
I agree with you 100%. I have four main concerns with this matchup that I think really makes it dull matchup to play and to watch. Also I play terran and I didn't play BW so I excuse for any sign of bias or bad spelling. + Show Spoiler +
1. Scouting + hard counters.
The main problem is how micro makes effect in the early to mid game, you can't really micro to such an extent that you're units will hold anything. Instead it comes down to scouting which is really fucking lame and retarded. I feel like it is very severe for both protoss and terran, but mostly for protoss since their most reliable scouting is very expensive (robo + obs) and it sets them back economically by a lot. The terran has a little bit of an easier time, scouting the front etc is a good way to figure out what the toss is doing, but there are still sooo many cookie cutting all-ins that just blows my mind every day I try to play this game. Furthermore BO advantages are really severe too, there just aren't that many ways you can "outplay" your opponent if you are at a BO disadvantage. Of course there are ways, but if you compare to another matchup like TvZ there really isn't like the MKP marine split against banelings you can do. I don't know though... I just feel like TvP is very dull and in the current metagame very boring. Lategame is a little bit funnier, but it's still meh with ghost vs HT battles and what not..
2. Health / mobility We can all agree upon giving the defender the advantage makes for interesting and clever games. Otherwise no one would really dare to get ahead and we would just do 1 base all ins all day which isn't interesting to play or to watch. What does health and mobility have to do with this? Well, protoss units are sturdy. They are sturdy and they are mobile. If a tvp was to turn into a positional wars it would just end with the toss having his cliff walking tanks kill isolated groups of tanks or ran past most defenses. Why? In a 3 base vs 3 base scenario where the terran goes mech for positional play and the protoss goes for lets say stalker colossi. The terran would have to foresee every single move the toss makes because their armies are probably even in a straight up fight and if the terran has to run around with unsieged tanks against blinking units + cliffwalking units... If think we all can conclude what's going to happen. Even though this was a very unlikely and biased scenario you hopefully get the point.
I just don't think the TvP matchup was so well thought out. It feels like its stepping towards this lame tug of war game where both sides build units and if one sides builds the wrong units he loses. Which is really poor game design.
3. Warp in
I think the warp in is a really cool mechanic, it gives the toss a lot of map control and mass speed prism play actually makes me not think of protoss as a despicable race. Although it destroys some of the basic elements necessary for a good game design. Gateway units NEED to be weaker than basic terran units, they really need to. Firstly map size is not an as important variable anymore and if stalkers were stronger warp gate rushes would be really strong on big maps if the terran went for a FE. If he didn't and instead went for a strong push the toss would be behind and it would create weird coinflip scenarios which aren't really that good. Also lategame it is realllllly strong already with insta reinforcements after a 200/200 battle where the terran has to wait for his units to build first. Also it is very strong defensively with mass exansions, remember amulet and that game with san against virus? on Terminus RE where the terran was ahead all the time, but couldn't push or harass due to HTs warping in. To conclude I think warpgate is a cool thing, but it makes it so that protoss units need to be weaker otherwise the game would be coinflippier and protoss would have an even stronger lategame.
Consistency 4. Protoss is a really fragile race in every aspect, why don't we see more tosses in code S? Are they worse or is terran imba? Maybe both, I although think it has to do with the design of the race, Naniwa said recently in an interview that he thinks protoss is a really fragile race where it is possible to beat anyone, but it is hard to do consistently. The solution? I think toss needs an early game scout which isn't the observer or hallucination. The problem with hallucination is that you become very exposed to banshee timings and you are forced to rely heavily on sentries if you want to have some forcefields available and robo is expensive and sets you back in the macro race. Unless you want to flip the coin, which is bad.
Solutions?
I am very unsure of this as I haven't been thinking about solutions too much since I don't develop games, but after reading this thread and done some thinking of my own I've come to this.
Early game scouting: Either make it possible to research hallucinate observer from the cybercore for the right amount of gas, this would make it possible for protoss to survive against banshees and what not without robotech, but it would cost a suitable energy count and I don't think the duration should be too long.
Warp ins: Use nexuses as the only place where you can warp in. This removes most aggresive use of the warp in really and would make warp prisms (which I love) worthless, so changing the warp prism to a shuttle would be more suitable, but the shuttle will have very low hull and very high shields for continous use instead of 1 big drop.
Regarding hard counters and micro and the real lack of punishment for a terran am I not sure about. Preferably I would love to remove some units from the game such as the marauder and the colossus as they are boring. What is feel is needed is something the protoss can use to harass with and kill big bioballs, I also think the unit should look like a worm and be retarded. Terran needs a good way to shutdown counter attacks, siegetanks just don't cut it. I could see mech working vs protoss on some maps where it,s only basicly one straight line, but I think that may be imbalanced in tvz and pvz ^___^. What the terran basicly needs is the spider mine or imba tanks, I just don't see any way around it. Most of protoss units don't actually die against mech which is what this matchup lacks to be interesting imo.
TL;DR for those of you who are not interested in reading my post 8 games lost against protoss today rant:
I want to play mech and think protoss is a poorly designed race.
On October 04 2011 05:02 EnderSword wrote: How did a Brood War > SC2 Thread, and what is basically a hidden balance whine thread become a featured post?
He acknowledges that some players simply don't play the style he's complaining about, but then says he didn't bother to check if those guys were doing well.
Whole thing seems silly, 'We only play this style....except for 1/1/1 which is dominating the scene, and mech play which I'm ignoring'
If most people wrote this, it'd just be closed.
The bioball right now is pretty successful, so there's not a lot of incentive to move away from it. There was a time when mech was almost unstoppable, and 1/1/1 shows the ability to mix bio and mech early for amazing results.
There's a lot of options here and we see more all the time, I don't think its bad design that people use viable strategies.
Yea, I agree. Because he's a pro player I think he got away with the Broodwar > SC2 and the balance complaining. But this shouldn't be featured because it has massive holes in it like you and other mentioned.
On October 04 2011 02:01 Apollo_Shards wrote: Why is this thread features? It seems to me its just broodwar reminiscing disguised as what I consider poor theory crafting. Most of these statements arent even correct.
Minimum micro fights? All you do is concave? I dont know what matches you've been watching where are you do is that but with EMPs, focus fire, feedback, storms and stutter step that is a ton more than "just a concave". And whining about warpgates because you didnt scout a pylon while you contained him? Then you didnt contain him, simple as that. Its silly to think that protoss should just stay in their base if a terran is outside with units. Thats like saying you get frustrated because zerg can build 10 drones at a time. Complaining about the basic function of a race is pointless. And for the last part of not knowing what he has? Terrans have this thing called scan. It's free, there are quite a bit of them, and they scout a large area.
This really just seems like a way for the poster to show how he thinks broodwar is superior with poor arguments made to help hide that.
What matches has he been watching? Probably some of the ones he's been playing in. http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Predy This isn't a thread about theorycrafting or balance or specific games. It's not featured for that. It's featured because a pro player made a well thought out thread about what many consider a design flaw in the game that effects this particular match up.
On October 04 2011 02:01 neoghaleon55 wrote: Am I the only one that sees these threads for what they really are? Really well concealed balance whines. "wow...tvp is not as fun as broodwars because I can't use tanks!" is exactly what it came down to. -tanks are useless -if they get collosi or templar, I die -it's so hard! -i don't want to play anymore!
I have to support thorzaine's comment that tvp does require a lot more micro than you give it credit for. And if you also retract your statements, you should include them in the OP, instead of telling people that you posted something later in the thread.
I don't understand how you can call this a balance whining thread. Nothing in OP or any of the pro/blue posters have said anything other then basicly that bio is actually too strong and it limits the DESIGN of the MU. Nothing about balance.
If he's playing in the matches then he should be even more aware that not dodging storms and feedback or getting off good emps will cost you the engagement. " It's featured because a pro player made a well thought out thread about what many consider a design flaw in the game that effects this particular match up. "
That is EXACTLY what theorycrafting and balance discussion is.
Edit: Checked your posting history. Dedicated this account to defending terrans in every balance discussion on this site I see. I also like this line "Imbalanced is a Zerg word. " Classy.
It's actually the only account I have o_o
I just don't understand where you are coming from. The overriding consensus in this thread is "nerf bio"... how is it a balance whine? As for defending Terran... I also think bio should be nerfed in this match up? I'm not trying to defend Terran here. I'm trying to say that you have a bunch of pros weighing in on this thread, maybe you should heed what they say?
Oh yea, just so many pro weighing in on this issue. Ive only seen two pros, and only one of them have notable championships and the credentials for me to respect their opinion. Pulling out the "well a guy's better then me said so, so it must be true" is stupid and isnt even an argument. And no, the overriding consensus how the heck did this post become featured. People have been complaining about bioballs for ages but this thread said specifically he wanted tanks to replace it, just because he liked TvP in broodwar better. I wasnt inferring you had multiple accounts, I just noted that you spend quite a bit of your posts defending Terran.
On October 04 2011 03:24 Whitewing wrote: I think part of the problem in general is Blizzard's design for Protoss units in particular. You can see this quite obviously based on the progression path of development, but they had this idea that protoss units would have low DPS, high health, and their DPS would increase as the fight goes on. Units like the Soul Hunter and the Void Ray followed this progression. Only thing is, Blizzard later realized it was a terrible design and pulled the Soul Hunter (but kept the Void Ray?), but then never properly compensated Protoss for the roles these units were supposed to fill. The Soul Hunter, for example, was intended to be a bio ball killer that came out of the gateway that wasn't a caster, and was just a normal part of the army, and was ranged. In other words, they envisioned the Protoss gateway army being able to hold their own vs. the bioball when they came up with the original design for the game without needing colossi at all, even with ghosts. The unit attacked air and ground, but was bad vs. mech, very bad vs. mech. This is part of the reason the ghost seems so powerful with EMP and why it beats HT so easily: it was designed the way it is now when Protoss had a much stronger gateway army without tier 3, and hasn't been significantly changed since (only change IIRC is the cost change and the slight EMP nerf).
But warp gates made them nerf most of the gateway units, and much of what Protoss needed for strategy variety wasn't there anymore.
Out of all the races, Protoss feels the most incomplete. You can tell this very easily by examining the amount of upgrades each race has available that aren't just +1 weapons/armor/shield upgrades, upgrades that significantly affect the power/role of the unit. Now, they did have more, but for some weird reason, rather than balancing things by modifying upgrades, they just removed them flat out. It was still only two upgrades however.
Zerg: Spawning Pool - 2 Lair - 4 Roach Warren - 2 Baneling Nest - 2 Hydralisk Den - 1 Infestation Pit - 2 Ultralisk Cavern - 1 Total - 14
Protoss: Cybernetics Core - 2 Twilight Council - 2 Templar Archives - 1 Fleet Beacon - 1 Robotics Bay - 3 Total - 9
Terran has way more options for significant upgrades than both zerg and protoss, and zerg is way ahead of protoss. I hope we don't have to wait until legacy of the void to see an improvement here, but it seems likely that we will. Zerg is going to get the most attention in HotS, and terran got the most attention for WoL.
Zerg upgrades are mostly upgrades you need to make the unit playable at all. That goes by design of the Zerg race. (you get all units from hatch, but therefore the tech for a single unit is very expensive) -) zergling, roach, baneling speed are all required to make the units playable -) overlord speed was originally intentended to cost 50/50, so you would always get it once you have lair tech (as overlords already lost their detection tech)
Terran upgrades follow the same guidelines. Because Terran is so low tech generally, the units kind of need to need upgrades. Else early Terran play would be OP, or lategame Terran play UP.
Protoss is designed to have a complete techtree on the gateway. Upgrades should mostly provide options, rather than balancing the game. The focus for the upgrades is more on hightech units, because similar to terran, some of them were thought to be OP if they started with the upgrade. (Colossi, HTs, Carrier)
I would disagree with this. Players use roaches all the time before they have speed or burrow (and often don't get roach burrow at all in a lot of games). Players make use of banelings defensively without getting speed as well, and then sometimes switch out of banelings instead of getting speed. You can make excellent use of most units without getting their major upgrade, as long as you aren't planning on basing your entire gameplan around that unit. Sure, some upgrades from each race are needed to really make those units shine, but you can make use of the units without the upgrade. People who play mech often open with a few marines to stop scouting and for some early defense and never get stim. Players don't always get blink for their stalkers, despite making stalkers. None of these upgrades, with the exception of warp gate is 100% required for every game regardless of strategy. They are options you can select to make a certain style of play significantly stronger. The fact that there are far fewer upgrades for Toss (and zerg to a lesser extent) speaks to the incompleteness of the races: it suggests flat out that they have fewer strategy options.
The amount of upgrades available is indicative of the amount of theoretical variety each race can have.
Thats pretty much what I wrote. Maybe my post about zerg upgrades sounded like the unit would be useless without it... which would just be wrong. But the keything to note here is, that Zerg upgrades are crucial when massing those unit and Terran upgrades are crucial when massing those units. For Protoss Upgrades that isn't true and that is simply meant that way by design. Terrans and Zergs have to decide which units to go for, and ergo try to make those specific units stronger. Protoss is meant to have Templar tech at some point of the game, so they can choose between 4-5units with each warp-in, depending on what they need (therefore upgrading the zealot with, zealot shields, zealot scythe and zealot jetpacks would destroy that design, as you would have to choose zealot with each warpin, to justify the costs of the upgrade) Charge and Blink are upgrades, that are not designed to strengthen Zealots and Stalkers. They should give them more uses.
I see what you mean with units being used before they have crucial upgrades. But note how they are used. a handful of banelings on creep against nonstim marines or to bust down a depot a handful or roaches to kill sentries/break a protoss wallin to let speedlings clean up the rest a bunch of marines to be safe before your mech comes out 4hellions to deny creep and mapcontrol and expand safely, to make the tank/marine push stronger
that's all just transitioning. Those units are used because they grant a role the other units can't fulfill, but they are not intended to be massed!
also I would mention, that especially Terran and Zerg had a lot of upgrades being created, after the unit was initially designed to have that ability from the start! (because as written, they turned out OP with them at the timing when the unit entered the battlefield) while I can't remember a single one for protoss...
esp with range 6 immortals now, tanks have really lost their place in tvp. however, its intended by blizzard as they've always envision tanks of taking more of a support role rather than being the main driving force of your army.
On October 04 2011 03:49 mr_chapy wrote: ok..i have read about 10 pages in this thread and i havent come across a single objective solution to the ´´problem´´ being discussed... so , what exactly is the point of this thread ?
well there've been some ideas, mostly not very good ones, besides one that cought my eye, and that is adding damage to massive for tanks, which would affect collosi and archons. it would also affect thors (not THAT big of a deal althought thors are useful for breaking siege lines) and ultras (well not sure how that would turn out)
but the most common attitude is to wait either for HoTS and new units being added in, or just wait for the metagame to shift (would have to be accompanied by a balance patch im sure, otherwise i don't see anything right now P can do to force T shift away from MMMVG). it's been over a year since the release (not counting the beta) and other matchups have evolved SO much besides tvp and pvp (tvp the only big change there was was P getting HTs and T respoing with ghosts). that what makes me think it's gonna take a looong time before that happens (a shift) tho (HoTS the earliest). hope im wrong tho!
(a thing i think is a bit funny i noticed in this thread. ppl with low counts usually don't agree with me and like bio a lot - and i don't take that away from them!, while ppl with high post count tend to agree with me (at least on the most parts), i assume those are former BW players so im glad im not alone on this one :)
Honest question. If broodwar was so much better then why not play or watch that? No one forces you to watch TvP without tanks.
On October 04 2011 03:49 mr_chapy wrote: ok..i have read about 10 pages in this thread and i havent come across a single objective solution to the ´´problem´´ being discussed... so , what exactly is the point of this thread ?
well there've been some ideas, mostly not very good ones, besides one that cought my eye, and that is adding damage to massive for tanks, which would affect collosi and archons. it would also affect thors (not THAT big of a deal althought thors are useful for breaking siege lines) and ultras (well not sure how that would turn out)
but the most common attitude is to wait either for HoTS and new units being added in, or just wait for the metagame to shift (would have to be accompanied by a balance patch im sure, otherwise i don't see anything right now P can do to force T shift away from MMMVG). it's been over a year since the release (not counting the beta) and other matchups have evolved SO much besides tvp and pvp (tvp the only big change there was was P getting HTs and T respoing with ghosts). that what makes me think it's gonna take a looong time before that happens (a shift) tho (HoTS the earliest). hope im wrong tho!
(a thing i think is a bit funny i noticed in this thread. ppl with low counts usually don't agree with me and like bio a lot - and i don't take that away from them!, while ppl with high post count tend to agree with me (at least on the most parts), i assume those are former BW players so im glad im not alone on this one :)
Honest question. If broodwar was so much better then why not play or watch that? No one forces you to watch TvP without tanks.
Maybe because BW has almost no sponsors in the foreign scene? One of the major reasons why almost every foreinger bw "pro" has switched to SC2 is because they can actually live by playing a game (SC2 brought a lot of sponsors)
On October 04 2011 03:49 mr_chapy wrote: ok..i have read about 10 pages in this thread and i havent come across a single objective solution to the ´´problem´´ being discussed... so , what exactly is the point of this thread ?
well there've been some ideas, mostly not very good ones, besides one that cought my eye, and that is adding damage to massive for tanks, which would affect collosi and archons. it would also affect thors (not THAT big of a deal althought thors are useful for breaking siege lines) and ultras (well not sure how that would turn out)
but the most common attitude is to wait either for HoTS and new units being added in, or just wait for the metagame to shift (would have to be accompanied by a balance patch im sure, otherwise i don't see anything right now P can do to force T shift away from MMMVG). it's been over a year since the release (not counting the beta) and other matchups have evolved SO much besides tvp and pvp (tvp the only big change there was was P getting HTs and T respoing with ghosts). that what makes me think it's gonna take a looong time before that happens (a shift) tho (HoTS the earliest). hope im wrong tho!
(a thing i think is a bit funny i noticed in this thread. ppl with low counts usually don't agree with me and like bio a lot - and i don't take that away from them!, while ppl with high post count tend to agree with me (at least on the most parts), i assume those are former BW players so im glad im not alone on this one :)
Honest question. If broodwar was so much better then why not play or watch that? No one forces you to watch TvP without tanks.
honest answer: because i love starcraft. i love playing it, watching it, thinking and talking about starcraft. i want sc2 to succeed like BW did in korea, but will it? why not build up on what we knew was working in BW - positional play, soft counters that encourages a lot of micro, decision making etc. you don't have to recreate BW but take inspiration from it, not just make a game with "cool" units like marauer and collosus and stamp Starcraft name on it. (i hope it doesn't sound too harsh, because i fucking respect blizzard and im happy they are trying to make it right)
On October 04 2011 03:49 mr_chapy wrote: ok..i have read about 10 pages in this thread and i havent come across a single objective solution to the ´´problem´´ being discussed... so , what exactly is the point of this thread ?
well there've been some ideas, mostly not very good ones, besides one that cought my eye, and that is adding damage to massive for tanks, which would affect collosi and archons. it would also affect thors (not THAT big of a deal althought thors are useful for breaking siege lines) and ultras (well not sure how that would turn out)
but the most common attitude is to wait either for HoTS and new units being added in, or just wait for the metagame to shift (would have to be accompanied by a balance patch im sure, otherwise i don't see anything right now P can do to force T shift away from MMMVG). it's been over a year since the release (not counting the beta) and other matchups have evolved SO much besides tvp and pvp (tvp the only big change there was was P getting HTs and T respoing with ghosts). that what makes me think it's gonna take a looong time before that happens (a shift) tho (HoTS the earliest). hope im wrong tho!
(a thing i think is a bit funny i noticed in this thread. ppl with low counts usually don't agree with me and like bio a lot - and i don't take that away from them!, while ppl with high post count tend to agree with me (at least on the most parts), i assume those are former BW players so im glad im not alone on this one :)
Honest question. If broodwar was so much better then why not play or watch that? No one forces you to watch TvP without tanks.
Maybe because BW has almost no sponsors in the foreign scene? One of the major reasons why almost every foreinger bw "pro" has switched to SC2 is because they can actually live by playing a game (SC2 brought a lot of sponsors)
Yea, but Im thinking that he is watching more than playing.
On October 04 2011 03:49 mr_chapy wrote: ok..i have read about 10 pages in this thread and i havent come across a single objective solution to the ´´problem´´ being discussed... so , what exactly is the point of this thread ?
well there've been some ideas, mostly not very good ones, besides one that cought my eye, and that is adding damage to massive for tanks, which would affect collosi and archons. it would also affect thors (not THAT big of a deal althought thors are useful for breaking siege lines) and ultras (well not sure how that would turn out)
but the most common attitude is to wait either for HoTS and new units being added in, or just wait for the metagame to shift (would have to be accompanied by a balance patch im sure, otherwise i don't see anything right now P can do to force T shift away from MMMVG). it's been over a year since the release (not counting the beta) and other matchups have evolved SO much besides tvp and pvp (tvp the only big change there was was P getting HTs and T respoing with ghosts). that what makes me think it's gonna take a looong time before that happens (a shift) tho (HoTS the earliest). hope im wrong tho!
(a thing i think is a bit funny i noticed in this thread. ppl with low counts usually don't agree with me and like bio a lot - and i don't take that away from them!, while ppl with high post count tend to agree with me (at least on the most parts), i assume those are former BW players so im glad im not alone on this one :)
Honest question. If broodwar was so much better then why not play or watch that? No one forces you to watch TvP without tanks.
honest answer: because i love starcraft. i love playing it, watching it, thinking and talking about starcraft. i want sc2 to succeed like BW did in korea, but will it? why not build up on what we knew was working in BW - positional play, soft counters that encourages a lot of micro, decision making etc. you don't have to recreate BW but take inspiration from it, not just make a game with "cool" units like marauer and collosus and stamp Starcraft name on it. (i hope it doesn't sound too harsh, because i fucking respect blizzard and im happy they are trying to make it right)
On October 04 2011 03:49 mr_chapy wrote: ok..i have read about 10 pages in this thread and i havent come across a single objective solution to the ´´problem´´ being discussed... so , what exactly is the point of this thread ?
well there've been some ideas, mostly not very good ones, besides one that cought my eye, and that is adding damage to massive for tanks, which would affect collosi and archons. it would also affect thors (not THAT big of a deal althought thors are useful for breaking siege lines) and ultras (well not sure how that would turn out)
but the most common attitude is to wait either for HoTS and new units being added in, or just wait for the metagame to shift (would have to be accompanied by a balance patch im sure, otherwise i don't see anything right now P can do to force T shift away from MMMVG). it's been over a year since the release (not counting the beta) and other matchups have evolved SO much besides tvp and pvp (tvp the only big change there was was P getting HTs and T respoing with ghosts). that what makes me think it's gonna take a looong time before that happens (a shift) tho (HoTS the earliest). hope im wrong tho!
(a thing i think is a bit funny i noticed in this thread. ppl with low counts usually don't agree with me and like bio a lot - and i don't take that away from them!, while ppl with high post count tend to agree with me (at least on the most parts), i assume those are former BW players so im glad im not alone on this one :)
Honest question. If broodwar was so much better then why not play or watch that? No one forces you to watch TvP without tanks.
he doesn't like experiencing the "balancing" (meaning everything is so hard to use, that how the game is played is not a matter of balance in the sense of how strong things are, but rather if you can control them. 2 control groups of tanks that are slowly pushed over the map, or 10control groups of marines running all over the place and never really showing their full fire power? Ofc everyone played Mech!)
On October 04 2011 02:13 CecilSunkure wrote: Title is a little misleading. It doesn't really have much to do with game design, other than saying the current design is a poor one. I'd tend to agree, but I just feel people haven't figured out how to use mech properly yet is all. That's just my opinion on the matter. If I were Terran I'd be meching in TvP trying to get it to work, much like how in PvP back in the day I never 4 Gated and ended up finding YongHwa's 3 Stalker opening.
I'd say I understand that there are frustrations about the Terran race, but I think it would be best to just wait and see how strategies evolve.
Eh, all the "good Terran mech players" have figured out that...it doesn't work. You get punished for building tanks against protosses that know what they are doing. It's not a matter of "making it work." It doesn't work.
Take it from someone who used to pure ghostmech every TvP in the beta, and has tried to make it work since - it doesn't work. It's not a matter of "figuring things out" - it's just not cost effective, and the protoss counters are 100% easier to pull off micro/macro-wise. And on top of that maps suck for mech as well, especially big maps.
Imagine in brood war you are crossing the map with a mech army, protoss suicides zealots/dragoons/templar storms into your army, but you hit off good science vessel emps and managed to survive with some units left to move on and punish the faraway expansions. Now imagine in brood war your protoss opponent has one pylon at that expansion and can instantly have an arbiter recall available at that pylon for no energy cost, and can constantly arbiter recall in to that 1 location.
You'll never kill that expansion. Welcome to SC2 tvp mech on large maps. That is just one example of why going mech is futile.
Sorta repeating myself, but in beta when tanks actually did brood war damage, you could cost effectively play late into the game, and that situation i just described, you would be left with a lot, a lot more instead of having 100% of your army evaporated.
It's not a matter of players "making it work" anymore. Blizzard actually has changed the game so much that it just does not work anymore. First tank damage nerfed. Then zealots made to be able to easily last through tank fire. Then the thor nerfed because of 1 series of MC vs thorzain. Now the hellion nerfed, so unlike with bio where there is a threat of drops, there is no more threat of hellion drops or runbys because they don't do shit.
Players have done everything they can to make mech viable, and anytime it showed signs of becoming able to be played, blizzard nerfed it to hell essentially saying to terran players "stop making tanks this is not broodwar this is SC2! If you ever make mech work again, we are going to get rid of it! Go make more marines and marauders like we told you to! We are SERIOUS! If you keep trying to make tanks work and eventually do you little bastards, we are going to make the armory cost 150 gas! MYAHAHAHA."
So yeah....at this point it is out of player's hands on making mech work.
PredY I don't think your TvP woes are a result of the current state of TvP in Sc2. Firstly you bring up alot of tank nostalgia from sc1. Sc2 is a different game and terran has new units that are good and older ones that aren't so good.
Theres no reason to spend lots of heartache and pain trying to make macro mech work when mmg+v is so successful. If your TvP winrate isn't high its because your missing essential skillsets to be successful in the MU and should be focusing on attaining those skills. Heres a list of the skills i'm talking about.
1. Stutter step technique 2. Unit Cascading - I'm not sure what the correct term is for this technique but understanding that Colossi splash in horizontal lines you can heavily reduce Colossus AoE by moving units forward and backward. This is why colossus are devastating at Master Level play but terrible at Pro level. 3. Ghost Control - EMP outranges everything, you mention if they have Psi Storm and you don't have Ghosts you lose. This is true but at the same time Ghosts prevent gaurdian shields and forcefields and do insane DPS to every Protoss unit, so why you would not tech up to ghosts in every TvP doesn't make a whole lot of sense. As an added bonus when you have enough ghosts you disable one of the most powerful protoss t3 units the Archon by triple emping and then 1 shotting them.
Learning new skillsets is not impossible, Wc3 players had to learn how to control income and production efficiently as well as not to pay too much attention to unit control when more important things need to happen, as well as adapt from the 1-2 cookie cutter builds per MU skill always wins to 12+ openings 4+ strats in every MU some builds free win other builds. I understand where your coming from but what of BW Protoss players decided, I don't like sentries i'm Protoss and my Zealots and Stalkers are powerful like in Sc1 so i'm going to mass Zealot/Stalker vs Roach/Ling and Marine/Marauder and be upset because these units are trash in Sc2 and I lose alot.
On October 04 2011 05:39 VTPerfect wrote: I understand where your coming from but what of BW Protoss players decided, I don't like sentries i'm Protoss and my Zealots and Stalkers are powerful like in Sc1 so i'm going to mass Zealot/Stalker vs Roach/Ling and Marine/Marauder and be upset because these units are trash in Sc2 and I lose alot.
Exactly how I used to play lol....... hated sentries.
On October 04 2011 03:50 humbre wrote: you see you are whats wrong with this forum, completely clueless people write garbage out of their ass (no wonder most pro players stopped to read it), fyi in tvp matchup gas is not a problem you always starve on minerals it was already said by many pro terrans so you would expect even bronze players by now to know that but no ...
Actually I think it's people like you that are a cancer to the community with their feisty attitudes. You could have just responded with a simple "I don't believe that to be true because..." but instead you go for the cheap insult and the wbGosu type of comments. Way to go pal!
Back on the subject, I believe that with Immortals having range 6, tanks might actually end up being used as they were originally intended to: a support role with benefits regarding positioning and AoE damage.
On October 04 2011 05:39 VTPerfect wrote: PredY I don't think your TvP woes are a result of the current state of TvP in Sc2. Firstly you bring up alot of tank nostalgia from sc1. Sc2 is a different game and terran has new units that are good and older ones that aren't so good.
Theres no reason to spend lots of heartache and pain trying to make macro mech work when mmg+v is so successful. If your TvP winrate isn't high its because your missing essential skillsets to be successful in the MU and should be focusing on attaining those skills. Heres a list of the skills i'm talking about.
1. Stutter step technique 2. Unit Cascading - I'm not sure what the correct term is for this technique but understanding that Colossi splash in horizontal lines you can heavily reduce Colossus AoE by moving units forward and backward. This is why colossus are devastating at Master Level play but terrible at Pro level. 3. Ghost Control - EMP outranges everything, you mention if they have Psi Storm and you don't have Ghosts you lose. This is true but at the same time Ghosts prevent gaurdian shields and forcefields and do insane DPS to every Protoss unit, so why you would not tech up to ghosts in every TvP doesn't make a whole lot of sense. As an added bonus when you have enough ghosts you disable one of the most powerful protoss t3 units the Archon by triple emping and then 1 shotting them.
Learning new skillsets is not impossible, Wc3 players had to learn how to control income and production efficiently as well as not to pay too much attention to unit control when more important things need to happen, as well as adapt from the 1-2 cookie cutter builds per MU skill always wins to 12+ openings 4+ strats in every MU some builds free win other builds. I understand where your coming from but what of BW Protoss players decided, I don't like sentries i'm Protoss and my Zealots and Stalkers are powerful like in Sc1 so i'm going to mass Zealot/Stalker vs Roach/Ling and Marine/Marauder and be upset because these units are trash in Sc2 and I lose alot.
This is the most condescending post I have seen in awhile. You seem to have completely missed the message of this thread or decided it was more about winrates than actual game. He and many others just want to be able to explore the other 50% of Terran instead of being limited to only bio in a matchup. If you want to tell him to shut up just go ahead and do it, don't slyly insult the man.
On October 04 2011 05:39 VTPerfect wrote: PredY I don't think your TvP woes are a result of the current state of TvP in Sc2. Firstly you bring up alot of tank nostalgia from sc1. Sc2 is a different game and terran has new units that are good and older ones that aren't so good.
Theres no reason to spend lots of heartache and pain trying to make macro mech work when mmg+v is so successful. If your TvP winrate isn't high its because your missing essential skillsets to be successful in the MU and should be focusing on attaining those skills. Heres a list of the skills i'm talking about.
1. Stutter step technique 2. Unit Cascading - I'm not sure what the correct term is for this technique but understanding that Colossi splash in horizontal lines you can heavily reduce Colossus AoE by moving units forward and backward. This is why colossus are devastating at Master Level play but terrible at Pro level. 3. Ghost Control - EMP outranges everything, you mention if they have Psi Storm and you don't have Ghosts you lose. This is true but at the same time Ghosts prevent gaurdian shields and forcefields and do insane DPS to every Protoss unit, so why you would not tech up to ghosts in every TvP doesn't make a whole lot of sense. As an added bonus when you have enough ghosts you disable one of the most powerful protoss t3 units the Archon by triple emping and then 1 shotting them.
Learning new skillsets is not impossible, Wc3 players had to learn how to control income and production efficiently as well as not to pay too much attention to unit control when more important things need to happen, as well as adapt from the 1-2 cookie cutter builds per MU skill always wins to 12+ openings 4+ strats in every MU some builds free win other builds. I understand where your coming from but what of BW Protoss players decided, I don't like sentries i'm Protoss and my Zealots and Stalkers are powerful like in Sc1 so i'm going to mass Zealot/Stalker vs Roach/Ling and Marine/Marauder and be upset because these units are trash in Sc2 and I lose alot.
This is the most condescending post I have seen in awhile. You seem to have completely missed the message of this thread or decided it was more about winrates than actual game. He and many others just want to be able to explore the other 50% of Terran instead of being limited to only bio in a matchup. If you want to tell him to shut up just go ahead and do it, don't slyly insult the man.
nope. they want to stop using 41,6% of the units (M,M,M,V,G) and want to use only 25% (H,T,T) instead, while wanting them to work just as well (or even better) as the other composition.
On October 04 2011 05:39 VTPerfect wrote: PredY I don't think your TvP woes are a result of the current state of TvP in Sc2. Firstly you bring up alot of tank nostalgia from sc1. Sc2 is a different game and terran has new units that are good and older ones that aren't so good.
Theres no reason to spend lots of heartache and pain trying to make macro mech work when mmg+v is so successful. If your TvP winrate isn't high its because your missing essential skillsets to be successful in the MU and should be focusing on attaining those skills. Heres a list of the skills i'm talking about.
1. Stutter step technique 2. Unit Cascading - I'm not sure what the correct term is for this technique but understanding that Colossi splash in horizontal lines you can heavily reduce Colossus AoE by moving units forward and backward. This is why colossus are devastating at Master Level play but terrible at Pro level. 3. Ghost Control - EMP outranges everything, you mention if they have Psi Storm and you don't have Ghosts you lose. This is true but at the same time Ghosts prevent gaurdian shields and forcefields and do insane DPS to every Protoss unit, so why you would not tech up to ghosts in every TvP doesn't make a whole lot of sense. As an added bonus when you have enough ghosts you disable one of the most powerful protoss t3 units the Archon by triple emping and then 1 shotting them.
Learning new skillsets is not impossible, Wc3 players had to learn how to control income and production efficiently as well as not to pay too much attention to unit control when more important things need to happen, as well as adapt from the 1-2 cookie cutter builds per MU skill always wins to 12+ openings 4+ strats in every MU some builds free win other builds. I understand where your coming from but what of BW Protoss players decided, I don't like sentries i'm Protoss and my Zealots and Stalkers are powerful like in Sc1 so i'm going to mass Zealot/Stalker vs Roach/Ling and Marine/Marauder and be upset because these units are trash in Sc2 and I lose alot.
This is the most condescending post I have seen in awhile. You seem to have completely missed the message of this thread or decided it was more about winrates than actual game. He and many others just want to be able to explore the other 50% of Terran instead of being limited to only bio in a matchup. If you want to tell him to shut up just go ahead and do it, don't slyly insult the man.
I think YOU missed the message. VTPerfect just offered a ton of PRO level insight on how he can play better.
I sure would love it if he woudl elaborate on some tips to keep in mind for protoss playing against terran.
IMHO, every terran unit is extermeely useful wheras protoss is stuck to using T1+col or T1+temp/archon
As he mentioned temp/archon can get annihilated by EMP (and I dont want to coinflip), so that just leaves me with colosus.
Protoss is the victim here
Also.. tanks and thors are wicked powerful vs toss. I dont understand the problem
On October 04 2011 05:39 VTPerfect wrote: PredY I don't think your TvP woes are a result of the current state of TvP in Sc2. Firstly you bring up alot of tank nostalgia from sc1. Sc2 is a different game and terran has new units that are good and older ones that aren't so good.
Theres no reason to spend lots of heartache and pain trying to make macro mech work when mmg+v is so successful. If your TvP winrate isn't high its because your missing essential skillsets to be successful in the MU and should be focusing on attaining those skills. Heres a list of the skills i'm talking about.
1. Stutter step technique 2. Unit Cascading - I'm not sure what the correct term is for this technique but understanding that Colossi splash in horizontal lines you can heavily reduce Colossus AoE by moving units forward and backward. This is why colossus are devastating at Master Level play but terrible at Pro level. 3. Ghost Control - EMP outranges everything, you mention if they have Psi Storm and you don't have Ghosts you lose. This is true but at the same time Ghosts prevent gaurdian shields and forcefields and do insane DPS to every Protoss unit, so why you would not tech up to ghosts in every TvP doesn't make a whole lot of sense. As an added bonus when you have enough ghosts you disable one of the most powerful protoss t3 units the Archon by triple emping and then 1 shotting them.
Learning new skillsets is not impossible, Wc3 players had to learn how to control income and production efficiently as well as not to pay too much attention to unit control when more important things need to happen, as well as adapt from the 1-2 cookie cutter builds per MU skill always wins to 12+ openings 4+ strats in every MU some builds free win other builds. I understand where your coming from but what of BW Protoss players decided, I don't like sentries i'm Protoss and my Zealots and Stalkers are powerful like in Sc1 so i'm going to mass Zealot/Stalker vs Roach/Ling and Marine/Marauder and be upset because these units are trash in Sc2 and I lose alot.
This is the most condescending post I have seen in awhile. You seem to have completely missed the message of this thread or decided it was more about winrates than actual game. He and many others just want to be able to explore the other 50% of Terran instead of being limited to only bio in a matchup. If you want to tell him to shut up just go ahead and do it, don't slyly insult the man.
I don't think his intention was to be condescending.. although it may come across that way.
It's good that T's want to be able to do different styles in TvP, I think there is just potential for alot of flaming from P players, who are currently struggling to find one style to play well in PvT.
On October 04 2011 05:39 VTPerfect wrote: PredY I don't think your TvP woes are a result of the current state of TvP in Sc2. Firstly you bring up alot of tank nostalgia from sc1. Sc2 is a different game and terran has new units that are good and older ones that aren't so good.
Theres no reason to spend lots of heartache and pain trying to make macro mech work when mmg+v is so successful. If your TvP winrate isn't high its because your missing essential skillsets to be successful in the MU and should be focusing on attaining those skills. Heres a list of the skills i'm talking about.
1. Stutter step technique 2. Unit Cascading - I'm not sure what the correct term is for this technique but understanding that Colossi splash in horizontal lines you can heavily reduce Colossus AoE by moving units forward and backward. This is why colossus are devastating at Master Level play but terrible at Pro level. 3. Ghost Control - EMP outranges everything, you mention if they have Psi Storm and you don't have Ghosts you lose. This is true but at the same time Ghosts prevent gaurdian shields and forcefields and do insane DPS to every Protoss unit, so why you would not tech up to ghosts in every TvP doesn't make a whole lot of sense. As an added bonus when you have enough ghosts you disable one of the most powerful protoss t3 units the Archon by triple emping and then 1 shotting them.
Learning new skillsets is not impossible, Wc3 players had to learn how to control income and production efficiently as well as not to pay too much attention to unit control when more important things need to happen, as well as adapt from the 1-2 cookie cutter builds per MU skill always wins to 12+ openings 4+ strats in every MU some builds free win other builds. I understand where your coming from but what of BW Protoss players decided, I don't like sentries i'm Protoss and my Zealots and Stalkers are powerful like in Sc1 so i'm going to mass Zealot/Stalker vs Roach/Ling and Marine/Marauder and be upset because these units are trash in Sc2 and I lose alot.
This is the most condescending post I have seen in awhile. You seem to have completely missed the message of this thread or decided it was more about winrates than actual game. He and many others just want to be able to explore the other 50% of Terran instead of being limited to only bio in a matchup. If you want to tell him to shut up just go ahead and do it, don't slyly insult the man.
I think YOU missed the message. VTPerfect just offered a ton of PRO level insight on how he can play better.
I sure would love it if he woudl elaborate on some tips to keep in mind for protoss playing against terran.
IMHO, every terran unit is extermeely useful wheras protoss is stuck to using T1+col or T1+temp/archon
As he mentioned temp/archon can get annihilated by EMP (and I dont want to coinflip), so that just leaves me with colosus.
Protoss is the victim here
Also.. tanks and thors are wicked powerful vs toss. I dont understand the problem
The whole point of this thread isn't to discuss how to TvP better, guys know to go bio and do xyz better. The whole point of this thread was the idea of bringing mech units back into the matchup and if it's possible without blizzard changing the game. Why would you talk about winrates and Bio? Bio works, no one is doubting that fact
So now tanks and thors and wicked powerful but the whole discussion in this thread is how Mech doesn't hold up in a macro game? I guess the discussion is void all along then.
This pretty well sums up why I will never switch races from zerg to terran. I just...hate the marauder and everything it represents. BW tvp was far more awesome. I think it's also the reason why players like idra, artosis and drg switched to zerg. Terran just doesn't feel like terran, at least in tvp.
On October 04 2011 03:49 mr_chapy wrote: ok..i have read about 10 pages in this thread and i havent come across a single objective solution to the ´´problem´´ being discussed... so , what exactly is the point of this thread ?
well there've been some ideas, mostly not very good ones, besides one that cought my eye, and that is adding damage to massive for tanks, which would affect collosi and archons. it would also affect thors (not THAT big of a deal althought thors are useful for breaking siege lines) and ultras (well not sure how that would turn out)
but the most common attitude is to wait either for HoTS and new units being added in, or just wait for the metagame to shift (would have to be accompanied by a balance patch im sure, otherwise i don't see anything right now P can do to force T shift away from MMMVG). it's been over a year since the release (not counting the beta) and other matchups have evolved SO much besides tvp and pvp (tvp the only big change there was was P getting HTs and T respoing with ghosts). that what makes me think it's gonna take a looong time before that happens (a shift) tho (HoTS the earliest). hope im wrong tho!
(a thing i think is a bit funny i noticed in this thread. ppl with low counts usually don't agree with me and like bio a lot - and i don't take that away from them!, while ppl with high post count tend to agree with me (at least on the most parts), i assume those are former BW players so im glad im not alone on this one
As someone with a low post count, I must object! I can understand and respect the point you and others are trying to make - that TvP (and any other MU for that matter) benefits in terms of innovative and exciting play when presented with more variety in both viable strategy and army composition. However, I don't believe that attempting to compare SC2 to BW is either fair or positive for the SC2 scene. SC2 is a vastly different game - indeed, designed and intended to be different. Aside from the basics (storyline, unit names, basic gameplay, etc.) Blizzard have attempted to create an RTS that, while generating nice feelings of nostalgia in those of us who played BW, will bring in a whole new group of fans - both players and esports watchers. Inevitably and sadly, BW will fall by the wayside - technology will overtake the game. How many kids and young adults could you interest in BW today? Not many, I reckon. But I'm getting off topic here - the point I'm trying to make is surely all of us can agree that to appeal to a modern esports fan and casual gamer, more action is better; drops, and storms, and EMPs, and stim - these game dynamics increase the tempo and viewable nature of a match. As professional players, surely you would support aspects of the game that attract more viewers and ultimately increase the marketability of esports. Now of course, that's not to say that the subtle positioning and palpable tension of a good mech TvT is not exciting. Of course it is! But not all MUs should be like that. There should be variety. Also, I'm going to reiterate what I mentioned before - be patient, and have faith that either players will cause a shift in the metagame, or Blizzard (as they inevitably do) will continue to refine gameplay. The (mostly) knee-jerk reactions in this thread, and the way the debate has devolved into (in some ways) a balance discussion, makes me sad for the SC2 community.
On October 04 2011 03:49 mr_chapy wrote: ok..i have read about 10 pages in this thread and i havent come across a single objective solution to the ´´problem´´ being discussed... so , what exactly is the point of this thread ?
well there've been some ideas, mostly not very good ones, besides one that cought my eye, and that is adding damage to massive for tanks, which would affect collosi and archons. it would also affect thors (not THAT big of a deal althought thors are useful for breaking siege lines) and ultras (well not sure how that would turn out)
but the most common attitude is to wait either for HoTS and new units being added in, or just wait for the metagame to shift (would have to be accompanied by a balance patch im sure, otherwise i don't see anything right now P can do to force T shift away from MMMVG). it's been over a year since the release (not counting the beta) and other matchups have evolved SO much besides tvp and pvp (tvp the only big change there was was P getting HTs and T respoing with ghosts). that what makes me think it's gonna take a looong time before that happens (a shift) tho (HoTS the earliest). hope im wrong tho!
(a thing i think is a bit funny i noticed in this thread. ppl with low counts usually don't agree with me and like bio a lot - and i don't take that away from them!, while ppl with high post count tend to agree with me (at least on the most parts), i assume those are former BW players so im glad im not alone on this one
Honestly I think we just need to wait and see if they add more units/upgrades to the Protoss for HotS. I think the main issue is that gateway unit DPS is just too low as a result of warp gates, so bio remains very effective against Protoss. Mech is a much more powerful ball that sacrifices mobility for strength, but if your weaker more mobile army has the required muscle, why would you sacrifice that mobility? Protoss has no strategy or style that actually beats bio easily (or even has a better than 50-50 chance against bio), so bio remains the #1 build style. Protoss needs to come up with a way to really crush bio before mech becomes a mainstay, and right now, ghosts just beat HT's too easily and colossi go down too easily to vikings and proper bio control.
A nerf to ghosts might weaken bio enough against HT play that mech becomes a good option. An alternative option that might make mech viable would be to give terran an upgrade of some kind to control space, like an upgrade that makes auto-turrets from the raven burrow or something abnormal like that.
I do think that mech can be extremely powerful if the terran builds lots of structures properly and controls things right, but it's very very hard to do and there's no reason to experiment with it and learn it right now. Planetary Fortresses in the right place, for example, with building armor and hi-sec auto-tracking with turrets can control space like nobody's business.
On October 03 2011 19:42 Deezl wrote: I'm entirely confused about why this thread is spotlighted for game analysis. The OP's post has exactly one source, which is Dustin Browder's interview where he talks about the design of the game and how it is balanced and so on and so forth. Its a good insight, that the PvT and PvZ matchups were balanced around the power of Colossus and all matchups suffered as a result. But I don't believe that new ground was covered here that deserved a spotlight. I'll go into detail on the OP, and then go on a huge rant on to the replies that have followed and as to why you should reconsider hitting the post button sometimes if you're not that great of a player. It will be glorious.
PredY - Summarizing PredY greatly dislikes the (lack of) unit diversity that is present in TvP, because he likes Tanks for their strategic play and hates Marauders because playing them is a bit like bashing your head against the wall (bashing your army into the Toss's base). The standard composition, MMM + Ghosts or Vikings, he feels, is forced when playing vs. P because its the best composition possible, even in endgame situations, because charge Zealots hard counter tanks and are available at all times, while a well-controlled Marauder-Ghost-Medivac-whatever ball can beat Charge Zeals extremely cost-effectively, and do bonus damage against everything else that P has. So MMM with subtle variations is VERY strong vs. P, because it can handle every composition thrown at it. Checklist?
Zealot - useless without excellent FFs or charge. Marauder-Ghost Stalker - only cost-effective vs vikings in the air. Marauder-anything Sentry - Does no damage and is countered by EMP, but early and seeing a lot of use makes it a good unit. Immortal - Deals bonus damage to Marauders! But gets bonus damage dealt to it by Marauders... countered by marines, doubly so because each Immortal made is not a colossus. Also countered by Ghosts. Phoenix/Void Ray/Carrier - Vikings, Marines, and Terran may choose to add Thors... overall just good for harassment. High Templar - Terran adds Ghosts. You get to play the Ghost vs. HT mini-game to see if you can land storms or not. Too many ghosts and you need Colossus. If anyone makes a major mistake the game ends. Colossus - Terran adds Vikings, both players take more bases and add Ghosts and HTs or Pheonix and continue to upgrade their ground army.
Therefore you can take on anything with with Bio vs. Protoss. There's no rock paper scissors but for the openings, and Bio FORCES High Templar or Colossus (and is still effective vs it). Also right now, P has no really valid timings against T that don't involve tier 3 tech, because they all got nerfed, so P can no longer do any kind of contain to force medivacs or tanks to bust.
There are some good arguments against this; Mech can hit pre-chargelot timings, 1/1/1 into contain, Goody argument, but basically what Predy wants is for positional, traditional tank-based PvT from broodwar. But that's just what Predy wants. At least 66% of the Starcraft II population doesn't care (P and Z players). And lot of T players like playing Bio. So why spotlight this thread?
On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote: I talked about TvZ and TvT. Do you know what those matchups have in common? Tanks. Tanks made BW so awesome. Tanks make TvZ and TvT in SC2 very fun to play/watch. You can control ground, abuse the terrain, siege. They take a lot of skill to play with but the reward is high, but not in TvP. It's quite sad but almost every protoss unit counters them. Do you remember when tanks did 60 damage? Good times. They were actually quite useful back then. Right now, i wanna cry every time i have 20 of them slaughtered in 10 seconds.
Wait, what? Tanks are what make the game good and tactical? You want to go mech vs. P ... just because its more fun? Then do it. Make it fun. Find ways to keep them tanks alive.
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups. Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
If you take away my warpgates you have to give me Blink Dragoons. Try to get tanks rolling then, bud! I'm sorry you got caught between my army and my base but you KNOW that I can do that and you STILL get bodied by it then you need to re-evaluate your strategy.
Another issue i have with TvP is there's minimum micro in fights, all you do is make concave before the fight them stim and run in. Cast some emps. Then you watch if you have enough or not. Theres no micro against banelings or infestors like in TvZ. Micro will never save your ass like in TvZ. Good position will never save your ass like in TvT, because you have no tanks, and warpgates are pretty good eh! Nothings angers me more than cutting off protoss expo from his main army and have 20 zealots warped in to my back, same with drops.
While TvZ and ZvZ are more micro intensive, TvP is not short on Micro by any stretch, and you can always improve your spreading, stutter stepping and multitasking with drops. Over-microing can be bad, which I'm fine with. If you want more "skill" units to be added to HoTS, that's fine and I'm all for it, but the micro in TvP is present and still developing.
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
What kind of paragraph is this? Did you think about using a scan? This isn't even true because you can hit marauder-medivac timings before 2 colossus or Templar have storm and do massive damage while getting the right tech online, or drop to delay pushes to get your tech online, or just go raw marauder and split the army with drops and try to snipe them. In order to make Vikings you have to SWAP A BUILDING. Ghost academy is a tier 1.5 building that costs 100gas and builds fairly quick. And you should have EMPs anyway. I'm sorry you can't counter my tier 3 AoE 150-200 gas units with just marines and marauders. I'm sorry Protoss doesn't have shots that you can dodge 100% of the time if your micro is amazing.
So tl;dr, Predy's post reads much more like a "Please bring back tanks to TvP" rant than a history, a balance discussion or anything else. I'm all for new strategies that raise the skill cap and input new units and builds into the scene, I think everyone is. But that doesn't make posts on the subject spotlight worthy. His replies, however, are quite good (about how Marauders decrease the skill cap, etc). But I think what he'll find is that we're not quite as deep into Starcraft II as he thinks we are.
I'm sorry that in your such a long post, u totally missed the idea OP trying to make. Coz positioning is indeed a joke for TvP right now, terran are forced to go Bio ball and use mobility to counter the mobility of protoss. Which is kind of sad that if both T and P dont make mistake, you will guarantee to see a 200 bioball v.s. 200 deathball. This lacks the basic fun of strategy game of map controlling, positioning, etc... Why TvZ is entertaining to watch now is because in late game on large map, you can see Terran trying to control several key position and Zerg use mobility to force Terran make holes in their defense line and the game is so much fun. But this doesnt happen in TvP right now coz u need 200 army to hold one spot otherwise, some random strategical positioning army are just free meal for the protoss.
You can claim that current TvP ball v.s. ball is fun to watch like some micro heavily WarCraft 3 games. But I agree with OP and prefer to see BW style strategy game.
The reason that its ball vs. ball is because there is no point to splitting your army. Blizzard is attempting to fix that with the warp prism patch, making it worthwhile for T to not just depot-wall his base and leave a bunker. And that's not even all that's going on or all that's possible. Players like Fenix have been using large drops and banshees to split the P army... and its very effective to push that way. On the other side of the coin, Blink Stalker mobility plays are becoming MUCH stronger, as demonstrated by Huk doing the most vs. NaDa last GSL. I'm sorry that Terran right now has the advantage and only needs to make creative plays to win if they get behind, but from the Protoss perspective, where you engage, how you engage and how both players micro the fight is incredibly important, and harassment and tactical play is getting better by the day.
the problem is that you see it to much from the way of sc1. this is a whole new game and the only persons i see talking about thit sproblems are old sc1 gamers.
accept that this is no sc1.1, its like playing c&c and then sc2 its a completely new game with new units new mechanic and you ahve to play it the way it is
and i prefer it more then i did sc1 and i played sc1 for over 10 years as well !
p whines about z and t to strong
t and z whines about p to easy
as long every race is whining, the game is nice and balanced (as we atm see terrans whine their race is to STRONG (polt mma ...) you see its start to be unbalanced) ^^ but dont give the mechanics the fault
its this game its like it works, no one want no warpgates and old sc1 units back expect some old sc1 gamers who cant life the new way sc2 is
No, SC2 isn't a "completely new game." At its core, SC2 is still an isometric, old school, economy based RTS that is heavily influenced by BW.
The biggest differences between BW and SC2 are related to graphics, AI and UI. There's very little in SC2 that, from a gameplay and unit design point of view, couldn't have been done in BW. So keeping all that in mind, it's perfectly fair to say that BW tvp played out in a much more interesting way than the blob vs blod, zero positional gameplay of SC2.
Basically, people who think that SC2 is hugely different from BW are fooling themselves.
On October 04 2011 08:02 Quotidian wrote: No, SC2 isn't a "completely new game." At its core, SC2 is still an isometric, old school, economy based RTS that is heavily influenced by BW.
The biggest differences between BW and SC2 are related to graphics, AI and UI. There's very little in SC2 that, from a gameplay and unit design point of view, couldn't have been done in BW. So keeping all that in mind, it's perfectly fair to say that BW tvp played out in a much more interesting way than the blob vs blod, zero positional gameplay of SC2.
Basically, people who think that SC2 is hugely different from BW are fooling themselves.
I agree with this, there is a reason this game is a sequel to Brood War and not a new franchise.
On October 04 2011 05:07 Thrombozyt wrote: Actually there need only two changes to make mech a viable choice IMHO:
1) Tank dmg is changed from 35 (+15 vs armor) to 50 (-15 vs light). Shields take full dmg from tank shots (like in BW).
2) Remove 'Strike cannon' and give Thors ablative plating as an upgrade, that reduces splash dmg by a significant amount (say 70%). Give hellions a similar upgrade.
Optional: Revamp the thor anti-air. No more splash, but straight up dmg.
I actually like this very much. Thors in TvZ can easily be replaced with Ravens HSM and PDD. Not only will it be more entertaining because their is the exciting factor of a HSM rather then oh he has thors now I can;t do crap with mutas. Yeah it will be harder, but I'm cool with that.
On October 04 2011 05:39 VTPerfect wrote: PredY I don't think your TvP woes are a result of the current state of TvP in Sc2. Firstly you bring up alot of tank nostalgia from sc1. Sc2 is a different game and terran has new units that are good and older ones that aren't so good.
Theres no reason to spend lots of heartache and pain trying to make macro mech work when mmg+v is so successful. If your TvP winrate isn't high its because your missing essential skillsets to be successful in the MU and should be focusing on attaining those skills. Heres a list of the skills i'm talking about.
1. Stutter step technique 2. Unit Cascading - I'm not sure what the correct term is for this technique but understanding that Colossi splash in horizontal lines you can heavily reduce Colossus AoE by moving units forward and backward. This is why colossus are devastating at Master Level play but terrible at Pro level. 3. Ghost Control - EMP outranges everything, you mention if they have Psi Storm and you don't have Ghosts you lose. This is true but at the same time Ghosts prevent gaurdian shields and forcefields and do insane DPS to every Protoss unit, so why you would not tech up to ghosts in every TvP doesn't make a whole lot of sense. As an added bonus when you have enough ghosts you disable one of the most powerful protoss t3 units the Archon by triple emping and then 1 shotting them.
Learning new skillsets is not impossible, Wc3 players had to learn how to control income and production efficiently as well as not to pay too much attention to unit control when more important things need to happen, as well as adapt from the 1-2 cookie cutter builds per MU skill always wins to 12+ openings 4+ strats in every MU some builds free win other builds. I understand where your coming from but what of BW Protoss players decided, I don't like sentries i'm Protoss and my Zealots and Stalkers are powerful like in Sc1 so i'm going to mass Zealot/Stalker vs Roach/Ling and Marine/Marauder and be upset because these units are trash in Sc2 and I lose alot.
This is the most condescending post I have seen in awhile. You seem to have completely missed the message of this thread or decided it was more about winrates than actual game. He and many others just want to be able to explore the other 50% of Terran instead of being limited to only bio in a matchup. If you want to tell him to shut up just go ahead and do it, don't slyly insult the man.
I think YOU missed the message. VTPerfect just offered a ton of PRO level insight on how he can play better.
I sure would love it if he woudl elaborate on some tips to keep in mind for protoss playing against terran.
IMHO, every terran unit is extermeely useful wheras protoss is stuck to using T1+col or T1+temp/archon
As he mentioned temp/archon can get annihilated by EMP (and I dont want to coinflip), so that just leaves me with colosus.
Protoss is the victim here
Also.. tanks and thors are wicked powerful vs toss. I dont understand the problem
Mech is only good TvP if Protoss doesn't know how to respond properly, but there's so many options that almost anything works like fast third + fourth mass gateway units (what Adelscott did a while back), 2 robo 1 immortal + 1 collo (Kiwikaki), fast carriers (like Hasuobs), fast blink stalkers and collosus and abuse cliffs (again like Hasuobs), and there's a bunch of other ways.
"i'd like to mention that i'm not gonna talk about balance. The purpose of this thread is to discuss the state of Terran, especially TvP matchup game-design and gameplay wise."
Ok. Nice.
Then i read this:
"How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose."
That is a balance whine. I can count a lot of T compositions that rape any Z or P army without the propper composition. But i'm not gonna fall on that.
Fix that disguised balance whine please, then it will be the excelent thread that is suposed to be.
On the topic, Sc2 compared to Bw, has tons of design flaws. Looks like they wanted to make a diferent game from bw, but then they started to patch it to make it like a 2.0 bw, but of curse is late, the design flaws are there. PvT is as you say, a totally flawed match up. Just look all the korean PvT's, are by far the most boring games to watch, you know what is comming almost every single game.
I believe that when designing a game there has to be a priority order list, which for me would come as follows: 1-balance 2-design 3-stilystic choices. If balance is not "fixed" any stylistic solution we may come on to the state of TvP will be irrelevant. (There would still be almost no way protoss could beat a very good microed MMMVG army, hence pros would still go for that, even if mech somehow magically becomes somehow viable)
This thread states that it’s about design and not balance, but that’s impossible. You have to address balance when you are changing (at least in theory) the way the game plays.
I feel like all this discussion will circle itself and archive nothing when even the hardcore balance issues have not been solved by blizzard(10 terrans 1 protoss in code S QQ ) We cannot certainly hope for them to make the game more enjoyable before they fix the most important issues ahead of themselves. And even then we would most likely have to wait sometime to appreciate how the metagame influx happens.
All in all, let’s all hope HotS solves most balance issues, and if LotV solves most stylistic issues, I will be a happy gamer... I would probably never stop playing starcraft if that were the case =)
On October 04 2011 09:40 mr_chapy wrote: I believe that when designing a game there has to be a priority order list, which for me would come as follows: 1-balance 2-design 3-stilystic choices. If balance is not "fixed" any stylistic solution we may come on to the state of TvP will be irrelevant. (There would still be almost no way protoss could beat a very good microed MMMVG army, hence pros would still go for that, even if mech somehow magically becomes somehow viable)
This thread states that it’s about design and not balance, but that’s impossible. You have to address balance when you are changing (at least in theory) the way the game plays.
I feel like all this discussion will circle itself and archive nothing when even the hardcore balance issues have not been solved by blizzard(10 terrans 1 protoss in code S QQ ) We cannot certainly hope for them to make the game more enjoyable before they fix the most important issues ahead of themselves. And even then we would most likely have to wait sometime to appreciate how the metagame influx happens.
All in all, let’s all hope HotS solves most balance issues, and if LotV solves most stylistic issues, I will be a happy gamer... I would probably never stop playing starcraft if that were the case =)
Heres the thing. If there is a fundamental design problem, then it wont matter how much you balance the game, there is always going to be a problem. Isn't this something that should be adressed first? After all, if you balance the game perfectly, and then decide to do some design changes, you will need to rebalance it anyways.
Blizzard could always just buff a random toss unit, and I'm sure they will. But that does not solve the fundamental underlying issue.
On October 04 2011 09:40 mr_chapy wrote: I believe that when designing a game there has to be a priority order list, which for me would come as follows: 1-balance 2-design 3-stilystic choices. If balance is not "fixed" any stylistic solution we may come on to the state of TvP will be irrelevant. (There would still be almost no way protoss could beat a very good microed MMMVG army, hence pros would still go for that, even if mech somehow magically becomes somehow viable)
This thread states that it’s about design and not balance, but that’s impossible. You have to address balance when you are changing (at least in theory) the way the game plays.
I feel like all this discussion will circle itself and archive nothing when even the hardcore balance issues have not been solved by blizzard(10 terrans 1 protoss in code S QQ ) We cannot certainly hope for them to make the game more enjoyable before they fix the most important issues ahead of themselves. And even then we would most likely have to wait sometime to appreciate how the metagame influx happens.
All in all, let’s all hope HotS solves most balance issues, and if LotV solves most stylistic issues, I will be a happy gamer... I would probably never stop playing starcraft if that were the case =)
Heres the thing. If there is a fundamental design problem, then it wont matter how much you balance the game, there is always going to be a problem. Isn't this something that should be adressed first? After all, if you balance the game perfectly, and then decide to do some design changes, you will need to rebalance it anyways.
Blizzard could always just buff a random toss unit, and I'm sure they will. But that does not solve the fundamental underlying issue.
i think yes and no yes there will be always problems if you balance the game but take design away, but its not as huge a problem. It would be way easier rebalancing when changing game design if there is balance from the start, for example if something goes wrong you can always revert. But balancing win % and design flaws at the same time involves allot of running in circles, trial and error, wasting time and basically getting lucky with the changes you make. Thats why broodwar took so long balance itself.
On October 04 2011 08:02 Quotidian wrote: No, SC2 isn't a "completely new game." At its core, SC2 is still an isometric, old school, economy based RTS that is heavily influenced by BW.
The biggest differences between BW and SC2 are related to graphics, AI and UI. There's very little in SC2 that, from a gameplay and unit design point of view, couldn't have been done in BW. So keeping all that in mind, it's perfectly fair to say that BW tvp played out in a much more interesting way than the blob vs blod, zero positional gameplay of SC2.
Basically, people who think that SC2 is hugely different from BW are fooling themselves.
Yes, I love how people are summarizing SC2 after what... 1-2 years? And comparing it to top level Brood War that has been evolving (and still is) for.... 10 years?
Yeah guys, whine about every single fucking thing that you don't like. TvP is being figured out. Terran has found a composition that completely destroys Protoss, we'll see how Protoss responds to it in time. But nooooo blizzard must PATCH! Tanks must be usable in all matchups because it FEELS right! Jesus...
You can immediately tell who the WoW forum babies are from the people who immediately think OP 'wants Protoss nerfed' and kneejerk reflex to their WoW forum days of defending their class from the evil nerfbat.
Replacing the colossus with the reaver would do so insanely much for the game... Would solve PvP 4 gate fest, would open up phoenix/reaver strats PvZ - reavers can actually help protoss help far flung expansions together with cannons until reinforcements come, unlike colossi - and most importantly, would make mech stronger TvP and bio weaker.
It would also let P defend vs 1-1-1 much, much more effectively.
OP seems to be making a very, very elementary point--which is that ideally TvP could stand to be more strategically diverse. On this point, I'm not sure how it's possible to disagree with him; strategic diversity is pretty much always a good thing, even if you like the matchup as it stands. But how to go about actually making the matchup more diverse, of course, is the part where it gets sticky.
I don't have too many brilliant suggestions for this, and it seems few people do. We'll have to wait and see what Blizzard comes up with for HotS; a strong Protoss harass unit and some more anti-Toss mech power could do a lot to shake up the matchup.
On something of a tangent, though, I have always, always, always opposed all attempts to neuter the Warp Gate mechanic and make Gateways the primary unit production structure for Toss. I think it would make the game much less interesting, and much less fun both to watch and to play; and like it or not, "fun" is a big part of the reason why both BW and SC2 are such a joy for spectators and players alike. Now, the mechanic can be tweaked if it really does break the game; but right now, it seems to work pretty well, and the interactions it has with units are legitimately interesting and versatile. I see little need to reinvent the entire game for Toss based on so little provocation.
On October 04 2011 12:25 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Replacing the colossus with the reaver would do so insanely much for the game... Would solve PvP 4 gate fest, would open up phoenix/reaver strats PvZ - reavers can actually help protoss help far flung expansions together with cannons until reinforcements come, unlike colossi - and most importantly, would make mech stronger TvP and bio weaker.
It would also let P defend vs 1-1-1 much, much more effectively.
it'd also make carriers something you could maybe get away with as well, because tech switching into them won't already be pre-countered by the vikings the terran made to deal with the colossi...
On October 04 2011 12:25 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Replacing the colossus with the reaver would do so insanely much for the game... Would solve PvP 4 gate fest, would open up phoenix/reaver strats PvZ - reavers can actually help protoss help far flung expansions together with cannons until reinforcements come, unlike colossi - and most importantly, would make mech stronger TvP and bio weaker.
It would also let P defend vs 1-1-1 much, much more effectively.
Yes, and it would also make playing protoss a much more enjoyable feeling. Because I personally really hate that unit, and I would love to see mech play work. Really well said, I hope blizzard does this in hots..
On October 04 2011 12:25 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Replacing the colossus with the reaver would do so insanely much for the game... Would solve PvP 4 gate fest, would open up phoenix/reaver strats PvZ - reavers can actually help protoss help far flung expansions together with cannons until reinforcements come, unlike colossi - and most importantly, would make mech stronger TvP and bio weaker.
It would also let P defend vs 1-1-1 much, much more effectively.
Definately, not to mention giving Toss an actual harassment option in TvP
How would a reaver work vs rauder tho???? Seems like it would get blasted to pieces in seconds without doing enough damage.
On October 04 2011 12:25 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Replacing the colossus with the reaver would do so insanely much for the game... Would solve PvP 4 gate fest, would open up phoenix/reaver strats PvZ - reavers can actually help protoss help far flung expansions together with cannons until reinforcements come, unlike colossi - and most importantly, would make mech stronger TvP and bio weaker.
It would also let P defend vs 1-1-1 much, much more effectively.
Definately, not to mention giving Toss an actual harassment option in TvP
How would a reaver work vs rauder tho???? Seems like it would get blasted to pieces in seconds without doing enough damage.
Just have the explosion do bonus damage vs. bio instead of against light or against armored, although that could screw up PvZ...... hrm. Maybe do really heavy normal damage but greatly reduced damage vs. massive?
On October 04 2011 12:25 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Replacing the colossus with the reaver would do so insanely much for the game... Would solve PvP 4 gate fest, would open up phoenix/reaver strats PvZ - reavers can actually help protoss help far flung expansions together with cannons until reinforcements come, unlike colossi - and most importantly, would make mech stronger TvP and bio weaker.
It would also let P defend vs 1-1-1 much, much more effectively.
IIRC the colossus WAS initially designed in a similar way....it must've been way back in beta, I'm not even sure anymore if the propositions made it in the beta or if it was just alpha.
But at some point a pretty long time ago the colossus did more damage with a higher cooldown and therefore functioned like a "mobile siegetank"....more mobile but less overall dps than a real terran tank. I honestly can't remember what the official reason was why it was reworked, maybe Blizz felt that the colossus-mobility was too high to allow for such a large initial damage
On October 04 2011 12:25 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Replacing the colossus with the reaver would do so insanely much for the game... Would solve PvP 4 gate fest, would open up phoenix/reaver strats PvZ - reavers can actually help protoss help far flung expansions together with cannons until reinforcements come, unlike colossi - and most importantly, would make mech stronger TvP and bio weaker.
It would also let P defend vs 1-1-1 much, much more effectively.
Definately, not to mention giving Toss an actual harassment option in TvP
How would a reaver work vs rauder tho???? Seems like it would get blasted to pieces in seconds without doing enough damage.
100 dmg per blast to any unit type and 8 range. Upgrade from robotics increased the dmg up to 125. I can't understand what will be the problem here.
What else is there to say in this thread? It's already clear that "we don't like the state of TvP." However, according to the OP we're not to talk about balance, and we're not to talk about strategies that help either side. Without talking about either of those things, how exactly are we supposed to talk about making tanks viable in TvP or how to improve the state of the matchup at all? Honestly, this thread sounds like alot of complaining about RTS games being difficult, which they are (and that is why they are fun!).
If you look at all the matchups, I don't think that it is the case in any of them that all units are equally viable in all matchups, that's just how the game works. If this was the case, the three races would end up being too similar and the game would end up looking like Age of Empires >.>.
Anyways, the whole intent of the game is to have certain units counter other units, etc. That's why unit composition is one of the key foundations of making RTS ...well RTS. If you just want to build your favorite units in each matchup and win solely with better micro then you shouldn't be playing this game.
This is what needs to happen to t v p. They need to lower the amount of viable all in strategies for both sides (Yes, I know, they've already nerfed like 500 all ins for both terran and toss since release) and instead increase the amount of viable MACRO strategies. As you said t v z is quite diverse for mid and late game play, it doesn't necessarily have to be only marine/tank/medi, there are quite a lot of options and timing attacks.
Massive rax play vs massive warp gate play + aoe are really the only viable options for both races if we're talking about mid and late game t v p. That said, watching some of the tip top tier koreans multi task and micro like crazy has made the match up grow on me. MMM + viking for collosus or emp for high temp CAN be entertaining because it's so action packed and filled with micro. I just wish there were more options mid and late game.
On October 01 2011 07:27 willsterben wrote: yeah and now compare those games to sc1 game 1 year after release. thanks though. will watch.
The thing is, that really isn't a good comparison. The reason I say that is because when Starcraft + BW came out there weren't any other games with a 3 way race dynamic. All the RTS games I can remember were basically 2 extremely similar races. The thing you have to realize is there has been over a decade of people figuring out RTS play, and some of the things that have been learned are almost universal. When Starcraft first came out the idea of transferring workers was revolutionary. People just didn't have experience with the kind of economy management and thought processes to figure the game out.
Sc2 is moving MUCH faster in terms of being figured out. The fundamentals of RTS and mechanics were already understood before the game was released. So they just had to be applied and slightly reworked to be fit onto Sc2. Seriously, we have had threads since beta scientifically analyzing the game and figuring out optimal income and worker saturation. This was unheard of when Starcraft vanilla was released.
I do believe there are things to be understood in the future about compositions and transitions for builds, but I doubt we will see anything as revolutionary as when Mech was first invented, muta stacking/harass, sk terran or the bisu build in BW.
Hopefully I'm wrong. Perhaps the expansions will provide more depth and allow for more to develop in the game. But if you look at BW today, the matchups are still evolving at the highest levels. I think a lot of what the OP presented is key to this. You need to have relatively weak tier one (that requires upgrades) and weak production capabilities in the early game. Strong flexible tier two (and sick upgrades) and insane tier 3.
This gives players more flexibility in the early game to set up for different builds.However in Sc2, because of the power of early units (marine,marauder,reaper,sentries, roaches banlings, ) and early production mechanics (addon swapping, reactors, warpgate, larva inject) the early game is basically a frenzy. Where you have to try and scout constantly so you don't die because of the ability for units to mass so early, or for a huge econ advantage to occur (think of a zerg who hatch firsts and drones up, a protoss who expands really fast and crono probes, or a terrans with mules). In a way a lot of things in SC2 are forced because of these concepts which prevents a lot of flexibility.
I hate to play bio in tvp so i try other techniques.
FE into mech with ghosts : If i win i win eZ, if i loose that means my army got demolished in 10 sec because of p good army composition or bad engagement. But i feel that when i win it's more because the p sux that me doing a good job.
111 into sky terran : this is fun to play, you just have to harass a lot with banshees and keep the stalker count in control. bring raven snipe obs with viking and cloack banshee target firing all the stalkers.
Now that i m in masters i have the feeling that those funny builds won t work anymore, so my only option is to go back to bio and fight vs p AOE units.
On October 04 2011 12:25 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Replacing the colossus with the reaver would do so insanely much for the game... Would solve PvP 4 gate fest, would open up phoenix/reaver strats PvZ - reavers can actually help protoss help far flung expansions together with cannons until reinforcements come, unlike colossi - and most importantly, would make mech stronger TvP and bio weaker.
It would also let P defend vs 1-1-1 much, much more effectively.
Or give DT Cleave. From D&D Wiki: "If you deal a creature enough damage to make it drop (typically by dropping it to below 0 hit points or killing it), you get an immediate, extra melee attack against another creature within reach. You cannot take a 5-foot step before making this extra attack. The extra attack is with the same weapon and at the same bonus as the attack that dropped the previous creature."
Edit: Basically gives DT a free hit if it kills the previous target (workers/marines/etc)
On October 04 2011 12:25 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Replacing the colossus with the reaver would do so insanely much for the game... Would solve PvP 4 gate fest, would open up phoenix/reaver strats PvZ - reavers can actually help protoss help far flung expansions together with cannons until reinforcements come, unlike colossi - and most importantly, would make mech stronger TvP and bio weaker.
It would also let P defend vs 1-1-1 much, much more effectively.
Or give DT Cleave. From D&D Wiki: "If you deal a creature enough damage to make it drop (typically by dropping it to below 0 hit points or killing it), you get an immediate, extra melee attack against another creature within reach. You cannot take a 5-foot step before making this extra attack. The extra attack is with the same weapon and at the same bonus as the attack that dropped the previous creature."
Edit: Basically gives DT a free hit if it kills the previous target (workers/marines/etc)
On October 04 2011 12:25 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Replacing the colossus with the reaver would do so insanely much for the game... Would solve PvP 4 gate fest, would open up phoenix/reaver strats PvZ - reavers can actually help protoss help far flung expansions together with cannons until reinforcements come, unlike colossi - and most importantly, would make mech stronger TvP and bio weaker.
It would also let P defend vs 1-1-1 much, much more effectively.
Or give DT Cleave. From D&D Wiki: "If you deal a creature enough damage to make it drop (typically by dropping it to below 0 hit points or killing it), you get an immediate, extra melee attack against another creature within reach. You cannot take a 5-foot step before making this extra attack. The extra attack is with the same weapon and at the same bonus as the attack that dropped the previous creature."
Edit: Basically gives DT a free hit if it kills the previous target (workers/marines/etc)
...
You want the DT dps to double? Im not 100% sure but that might give an invisible unit the highest dps in the game. 5 seconds to clear a whole min line.....
On October 04 2011 12:25 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Replacing the colossus with the reaver would do so insanely much for the game... Would solve PvP 4 gate fest, would open up phoenix/reaver strats PvZ - reavers can actually help protoss help far flung expansions together with cannons until reinforcements come, unlike colossi - and most importantly, would make mech stronger TvP and bio weaker.
It would also let P defend vs 1-1-1 much, much more effectively.
Or give DT Cleave. From D&D Wiki: "If you deal a creature enough damage to make it drop (typically by dropping it to below 0 hit points or killing it), you get an immediate, extra melee attack against another creature within reach. You cannot take a 5-foot step before making this extra attack. The extra attack is with the same weapon and at the same bonus as the attack that dropped the previous creature."
Edit: Basically gives DT a free hit if it kills the previous target (workers/marines/etc)
...
You want the DT dps to double? Im not 100% sure but that might give an invisible unit the highest dps in the game. 5 seconds to clear a whole min line.....
That was must have been a really small mineral line, since the DT would only get three attacks for up to 6 kills in 5 seconds.
Anyway I do feel that the DT has his niche as it is and is not the unit that should get changed for Protoss.
just read your article not the comments. Infact Thor + armor grades blueflame with viking/raven support was awesome. I played it alot and had like 80% winrate even if i also missed tanks but tanks are and were simply too bad. But ye, Thor got nerfed to death, blueflame even also in last patch so its not viable.
I agree 100% with you im very happy that you and many other topterrans feel the same way. I just want to play Tech or Tech bio mix to even the Tech ( Coloss ) Gate mix up abit, but its almost not possible.
Goodys ghostmech is strong but if you face an active and smart protoss there is no way to fight costeffective and even if you do, you cripple over the map and your army which is not remaxed in 2warpins will be crushed by 2 warpins since you rely on a strong lategame unit composition which takes ages to max out.
Despite that i was experimenting with lategame unit compositions as Terran and i found out that Battlecruiser are somewhat awesome vs Toss, but they rely on upgrades and since u wont have 2 armorys ull have to face coloss first so u grade vikings to atleast +2airgrade and then 1-2armor grade and 4base+ before u actually can switch effectivly to battlecruiser, the transition however can be hard to execute. But in Lategame ofc u dont wna have alot of marines or even no marines, maybe blueflame helions if theres a large number of chargezealots ( which is another viable unit BUT got hardcore nerfed and i dont even know how they can kill supertankszealots anymore ), so your unit composition would be like Battlecruiser/Marauder/ghost but ofc it costs alot of Gas so it must be a long macro game. Also HSM are pretty aswesome, the MOST annoying thing about Terrantech and protoss is just that HT's and feedback counter literally EVERYTHING.. I really want thors without energy and just 90sec cd on 250mm or smth back.. that change was just bad and only affected TvP and u were still pretty volnurable to blinkstalker aggression so imo there was just no need to change Thors. Back to HSM, its really hard to execute since feedback kills raven in an instant but if you play just massivly better than the protoss and can somewhat gain mapvision control and shut down observer play ( f.e. ) shak splittmap, have middle with 3 turrets+ and a planetary you can cloakghost emp everything if Toss engages or maybe with your own engagement and havin some EMP + HSM completly destroys. Also comming to HSM i feel like the Game itself besides cheeses, in every matchup relys on AOE dmg effects. Terrans have great but hard to use AOE dps units. Tanks and blueflame helions got nerfed and are very good in TvT, Ok'ish in TvZ and not good in TvP. EMP is just an aoe ( DPS ) spell against protoss which is somewhat of an trade for the shit helion/tank in that matchup and there is HSM which is maybe somewhat of underused, i think since the speed increase it will have some use in Late TvT/TvZ but also in TvP you must play perfectly to make the Gas worth it since one ht can kill like 600 gas in an instant which is retarded.
So yes i can only agree we need some changes, i think terran is the strongest Race but requires most skill, but despite that TvP is just stupid to play sometimes, if you trade of armys and make good dmg against toss they just have those SUPERSTRONG USEFULL AOE DPS UNITS and if you dont manage to kill them with or have their count reduced they will have so many timing where just Archons / Coloss / ht can destroy you so hard even with good positioning and engagement even if your the better player. Which is ok Because Tech should be better in 90% of the time, but we just have 1 AOE DPS Tech option which is an awesome spell ( EMP ) but thats it.
On October 04 2011 12:25 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Replacing the colossus with the reaver would do so insanely much for the game... Would solve PvP 4 gate fest, would open up phoenix/reaver strats PvZ - reavers can actually help protoss help far flung expansions together with cannons until reinforcements come, unlike colossi - and most importantly, would make mech stronger TvP and bio weaker.
It would also let P defend vs 1-1-1 much, much more effectively.
I would like to know how exactly the reaver is suppose to help vs 4gate? Can you even get it out in time?
But yes, please wreck the stupid stupid unit that is a collosus and bring us something aka reaver. And while we're at it, remove warpgate tech or make it slower than standard gateways.
To replace colossi with reavers would take several weeks of testing. First the reaver itself (armour type, speed, cost, building time) and imo more important the scarab. Can it move over your units? How about the travel speed, the damage to all kinds of armour types, the AoE range and so on.
To replace colossi with reavers would take several weeks of testing. First the reaver itself (armour type, speed, cost, building time) and imo more important the scarab. Can it move over your units? How about the travel speed, the damage to all kinds of armour types, the AoE range and so on.
imo the game passed testing stage a long time ago and right now they should not add anymore unit to the game.
if they want to add anything wait for hots to correct their mistake and balance the game with the current units.
To replace colossi with reavers would take several weeks of testing. First the reaver itself (armour type, speed, cost, building time) and imo more important the scarab. Can it move over your units? How about the travel speed, the damage to all kinds of armour types, the AoE range and so on.
imo the game passed testing stage a long time ago and right now they should not add anymore unit to the game.
if they want to add anything wait for hots to correct their mistake and balance the game with the current units.
On October 04 2011 12:25 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Replacing the colossus with the reaver would do so insanely much for the game... Would solve PvP 4 gate fest, would open up phoenix/reaver strats PvZ - reavers can actually help protoss help far flung expansions together with cannons until reinforcements come, unlike colossi - and most importantly, would make mech stronger TvP and bio weaker.
It would also let P defend vs 1-1-1 much, much more effectively.
Or give DT Cleave. From D&D Wiki: "If you deal a creature enough damage to make it drop (typically by dropping it to below 0 hit points or killing it), you get an immediate, extra melee attack against another creature within reach. You cannot take a 5-foot step before making this extra attack. The extra attack is with the same weapon and at the same bonus as the attack that dropped the previous creature."
Edit: Basically gives DT a free hit if it kills the previous target (workers/marines/etc)
...
You want the DT dps to double? Im not 100% sure but that might give an invisible unit the highest dps in the game. 5 seconds to clear a whole min line.....
It doesn't really double, cleave would basically allow the DT to act similar to a reaver scarab. There'll be some luck involved, as positioning the DT close enough to another drone/marine/ling for cleave to activate. However unlike the scarab, the DT is targetable with detection.
Edit: As another poster said, marauders would own reavers so hard.
On October 04 2011 12:25 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Replacing the colossus with the reaver would do so insanely much for the game... Would solve PvP 4 gate fest, would open up phoenix/reaver strats PvZ - reavers can actually help protoss help far flung expansions together with cannons until reinforcements come, unlike colossi - and most importantly, would make mech stronger TvP and bio weaker.
It would also let P defend vs 1-1-1 much, much more effectively.
Or give DT Cleave. From D&D Wiki: "If you deal a creature enough damage to make it drop (typically by dropping it to below 0 hit points or killing it), you get an immediate, extra melee attack against another creature within reach. You cannot take a 5-foot step before making this extra attack. The extra attack is with the same weapon and at the same bonus as the attack that dropped the previous creature."
Edit: Basically gives DT a free hit if it kills the previous target (workers/marines/etc)
...
You want the DT dps to double? Im not 100% sure but that might give an invisible unit the highest dps in the game. 5 seconds to clear a whole min line.....
It doesn't really double, cleave would basically allow the DT to act similar to a reaver scarab. There'll be some luck involved, as positioning the DT close enough to another drone/marine/ling for cleave to activate. However unlike the scarab, the DT is targetable with detection.
Edit: As another poster said, marauders would own reavers so hard.
I guess the Armaggeddon Tank would own everything in SC2... See what I did? I took a unit that's not in SC2, and compared its stats to units that are in SC2... Useless! A Reaver in SC2 would have a good Scarab AI and Autobuy for them. It also might have +dmg vs light/armored and it's splash radius and fire rate might be increased/decreased, depending on the damage. If its damage was kept the same (125 upgraded), it would oneshot a pack of stimmed marauders (and marines), which would just be completly broken in the current state of the game. (not only in TvP, but in PvP and PvZ aswell)
On October 04 2011 12:25 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Replacing the colossus with the reaver would do so insanely much for the game... Would solve PvP 4 gate fest, would open up phoenix/reaver strats PvZ - reavers can actually help protoss help far flung expansions together with cannons until reinforcements come, unlike colossi - and most importantly, would make mech stronger TvP and bio weaker.
It would also let P defend vs 1-1-1 much, much more effectively.
Or give DT Cleave. From D&D Wiki: "If you deal a creature enough damage to make it drop (typically by dropping it to below 0 hit points or killing it), you get an immediate, extra melee attack against another creature within reach. You cannot take a 5-foot step before making this extra attack. The extra attack is with the same weapon and at the same bonus as the attack that dropped the previous creature."
Edit: Basically gives DT a free hit if it kills the previous target (workers/marines/etc)
...
You want the DT dps to double? Im not 100% sure but that might give an invisible unit the highest dps in the game. 5 seconds to clear a whole min line.....
It doesn't really double, cleave would basically allow the DT to act similar to a reaver scarab. There'll be some luck involved, as positioning the DT close enough to another drone/marine/ling for cleave to activate. However unlike the scarab, the DT is targetable with detection.
Edit: As another poster said, marauders would own reavers so hard.
Build a shuttle.. Shoot 1 scarab (range 9 or so), stimmed units run in, you pick up reaver and move it behind your army.
Note that its not like terran can build mass vikings to deal with an army that is mostly gateway units + 1 or 2 reavers...
The problem is that protoss bassicly cant lose if both sides play a perfect game. There needs to be possibility for easier tech switching for terrans like predy said. Imho the best solution would be to join up terran upgrades under 1 tech tree like toss has it. so that when the times comes to switch to mech mid-late game your mech actually doesnt suck balls cause it is 0-0 ups 20 minutes into the game...
On October 05 2011 01:00 Svizcy wrote: The problem is that protoss bassicly cant lose if both sides play a perfect game. There needs to be possibility for easier tech switching for terrans like predy said. Imho the best solution would be to join up terran upgrades under 1 tech tree like toss has it. so that when the times comes to switch to mech mid-late game your mech actually doesnt suck balls cause it is 0-0 ups 20 minutes into the game...
good day, svizcy
You want to buff terran and let them get upgrades like protoss? I am confused, because protoss is not doing well at the moment, why would you want to buff terran? Simply because you have having difficultly with them?
Also, your baseless statement protoss auto win if "both sides play perfectly" has no basis in reality. There is no such thing as a perfect game and provide no evidence to support this statement.
On October 04 2011 12:25 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Replacing the colossus with the reaver would do so insanely much for the game... Would solve PvP 4 gate fest, would open up phoenix/reaver strats PvZ - reavers can actually help protoss help far flung expansions together with cannons until reinforcements come, unlike colossi - and most importantly, would make mech stronger TvP and bio weaker.
It would also let P defend vs 1-1-1 much, much more effectively.
Or give DT Cleave. From D&D Wiki: "If you deal a creature enough damage to make it drop (typically by dropping it to below 0 hit points or killing it), you get an immediate, extra melee attack against another creature within reach. You cannot take a 5-foot step before making this extra attack. The extra attack is with the same weapon and at the same bonus as the attack that dropped the previous creature."
Edit: Basically gives DT a free hit if it kills the previous target (workers/marines/etc)
...
You want the DT dps to double? Im not 100% sure but that might give an invisible unit the highest dps in the game. 5 seconds to clear a whole min line.....
It doesn't really double, cleave would basically allow the DT to act similar to a reaver scarab. There'll be some luck involved, as positioning the DT close enough to another drone/marine/ling for cleave to activate. However unlike the scarab, the DT is targetable with detection.
Edit: As another poster said, marauders would own reavers so hard.
Build a shuttle.. Shoot 1 scarab (range 9 or so), stimmed units run in, you pick up reaver and move it behind your army.
Note that its not like terran can build mass vikings to deal with an army that is mostly gateway units + 1 or 2 reavers...
I'd definitely be down for Reaver replacing the Colossus. It'd feel like I actually had a part to play in the battle for a change. (exaggeration obv, but I'm tired of mostly just sitting there and waiting to see if you have enough)
A reaver would be nice but its too late in the cycle to make huge changes like that. Here is one idea I was considering, instead of removing colossi make it more like the reaver. 1. Reduce movement speed of the colossus to about 50% of what it is and increase colossus damage/reduce attack speed to beta levels. 2. Make robotics bay a lot cheaper (150/100),like it was in BW, and build faster or remove the requirement of robo bay to build colossus. 3. Optionally add an upgrade in robo bay to increase movement speed of colossus (though I am not in favor of this).
Here are the implications of this 1. Colossus no longer able to keep up with protoss army which makes it more likely to need a transport enabling interesting drop ship play. Later in game thermal lance means toss can drop a colossi behind the army and roast them a bit but it still allows for z/t armies to run away. 2. Due its speed its more likely to be sniped by vikings/corruptors which makes having large colossi numbers kinda hard to support, which means they need damage upgrade to make them worth the cost. 3. Early colossi makes 1-1-1 useless since they will take out large numbers of marines with 1 swipe (45 dmgx2). Also speed shuttles + colossi = fried workers.
It basically would be interesting to test this out and see how things play out. Toss might have problems with terran 2+ base armies but they should have templars/archons by then to take care of that.
On October 04 2011 12:25 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Replacing the colossus with the reaver would do so insanely much for the game... Would solve PvP 4 gate fest, would open up phoenix/reaver strats PvZ - reavers can actually help protoss help far flung expansions together with cannons until reinforcements come, unlike colossi - and most importantly, would make mech stronger TvP and bio weaker.
It would also let P defend vs 1-1-1 much, much more effectively.
IIRC the colossus WAS initially designed in a similar way....it must've been way back in beta, I'm not even sure anymore if the propositions made it in the beta or if it was just alpha.
But at some point a pretty long time ago the colossus did more damage with a higher cooldown and therefore functioned like a "mobile siegetank"....more mobile but less overall dps than a real terran tank. I honestly can't remember what the official reason was why it was reworked, maybe Blizz felt that the colossus-mobility was too high to allow for such a large initial damage
Because collosus are so mobile, they used to be able to do a lot of front loaded damage so you would just send em in for 1 shot and retreat. You could wipe out an entire bio army with just a small group of collosus in 1 shot. Now it takes a few shots.
Since collosus don't do too much "overshooting" they are better than reavers in battle and have an infite supply of ammo.
The last thing protoss needs is another unit which can be emped. I don't know what the solution is, but i don't think it's reaver.
On October 04 2011 12:25 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Replacing the colossus with the reaver would do so insanely much for the game... Would solve PvP 4 gate fest, would open up phoenix/reaver strats PvZ - reavers can actually help protoss help far flung expansions together with cannons until reinforcements come, unlike colossi - and most importantly, would make mech stronger TvP and bio weaker.
It would also let P defend vs 1-1-1 much, much more effectively.
IIRC the colossus WAS initially designed in a similar way....it must've been way back in beta, I'm not even sure anymore if the propositions made it in the beta or if it was just alpha.
But at some point a pretty long time ago the colossus did more damage with a higher cooldown and therefore functioned like a "mobile siegetank"....more mobile but less overall dps than a real terran tank. I honestly can't remember what the official reason was why it was reworked, maybe Blizz felt that the colossus-mobility was too high to allow for such a large initial damage
Because collosus are so mobile, they used to be able to do a lot of front loaded damage so you would just send em in for 1 shot and retreat. You could wipe out an entire bio army with just a small group of collosus in 1 shot. Now it takes a few shots.
Since collosus don't do too much "overshooting" they are better than reavers in battle and have an infite supply of ammo.
The last thing protoss needs is another unit which can be emped. I don't know what the solution is, but i don't think it's reaver.
Reaver would fucking rape 1-1-1 though. That range/splash would be invaluable vs Marines and tank-positioning would be a struggle.
Also, what makes the Reaver more susceptible to EMP than the Colossus? Didn't understand that part..
On October 04 2011 12:25 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Replacing the colossus with the reaver would do so insanely much for the game... Would solve PvP 4 gate fest, would open up phoenix/reaver strats PvZ - reavers can actually help protoss help far flung expansions together with cannons until reinforcements come, unlike colossi - and most importantly, would make mech stronger TvP and bio weaker.
It would also let P defend vs 1-1-1 much, much more effectively.
IIRC the colossus WAS initially designed in a similar way....it must've been way back in beta, I'm not even sure anymore if the propositions made it in the beta or if it was just alpha.
But at some point a pretty long time ago the colossus did more damage with a higher cooldown and therefore functioned like a "mobile siegetank"....more mobile but less overall dps than a real terran tank. I honestly can't remember what the official reason was why it was reworked, maybe Blizz felt that the colossus-mobility was too high to allow for such a large initial damage
Because collosus are so mobile, they used to be able to do a lot of front loaded damage so you would just send em in for 1 shot and retreat. You could wipe out an entire bio army with just a small group of collosus in 1 shot. Now it takes a few shots.
Since collosus don't do too much "overshooting" they are better than reavers in battle and have an infite supply of ammo.
The last thing protoss needs is another unit which can be emped. I don't know what the solution is, but i don't think it's reaver.
Reaver would fucking rape 1-1-1 though. That range/splash would be invaluable vs Marines and tank-positioning would be a struggle.
Also, what makes the Reaver more susceptible to EMP than the Colossus? Didn't understand that part..
Actually now that you mention it, a reaver would be a good mid-game/harrass unit. I don't think it would solve the ball vs ball problem, but it would help in other areas. I agree with your statement.
On October 04 2011 12:25 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Replacing the colossus with the reaver would do so insanely much for the game... Would solve PvP 4 gate fest, would open up phoenix/reaver strats PvZ - reavers can actually help protoss help far flung expansions together with cannons until reinforcements come, unlike colossi - and most importantly, would make mech stronger TvP and bio weaker.
It would also let P defend vs 1-1-1 much, much more effectively.
IIRC the colossus WAS initially designed in a similar way....it must've been way back in beta, I'm not even sure anymore if the propositions made it in the beta or if it was just alpha.
But at some point a pretty long time ago the colossus did more damage with a higher cooldown and therefore functioned like a "mobile siegetank"....more mobile but less overall dps than a real terran tank. I honestly can't remember what the official reason was why it was reworked, maybe Blizz felt that the colossus-mobility was too high to allow for such a large initial damage
Because collosus are so mobile, they used to be able to do a lot of front loaded damage so you would just send em in for 1 shot and retreat. You could wipe out an entire bio army with just a small group of collosus in 1 shot. Now it takes a few shots.
Since collosus don't do too much "overshooting" they are better than reavers in battle and have an infite supply of ammo.
The last thing protoss needs is another unit which can be emped. I don't know what the solution is, but i don't think it's reaver.
Reaver would fucking rape 1-1-1 though. That range/splash would be invaluable vs Marines and tank-positioning would be a struggle.
Also, what makes the Reaver more susceptible to EMP than the Colossus? Didn't understand that part..
Actually now that you mention it, a reaver would be a good mid-game/harrass unit. I don't think it would solve the ball vs ball problem, but it would help in other areas. I agree with your statement.
Hmm yeah. Also, Jinro mentioned that it would push Terran away from Bio and towards Mech, which would be refreshing. The only thing I foresee as a huge problem is the Marauder. It would rape Reavers....
I agree, the only burst splash unit the Protoss have, colossi, was nerfed. This leaves the closest thing to a reaver drop is warp prism drop of 4 chargelots with a wave of warp-in. DTs completely fail in that department, squeezing off max of 3 kills per DT before any competent player will respond.
Edit: HT isn't really a cost effective solution compared to what a reaver & shuttle could do all game long.
On October 04 2011 12:25 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Replacing the colossus with the reaver would do so insanely much for the game... Would solve PvP 4 gate fest, would open up phoenix/reaver strats PvZ - reavers can actually help protoss help far flung expansions together with cannons until reinforcements come, unlike colossi - and most importantly, would make mech stronger TvP and bio weaker.
It would also let P defend vs 1-1-1 much, much more effectively.
IIRC the colossus WAS initially designed in a similar way....it must've been way back in beta, I'm not even sure anymore if the propositions made it in the beta or if it was just alpha.
But at some point a pretty long time ago the colossus did more damage with a higher cooldown and therefore functioned like a "mobile siegetank"....more mobile but less overall dps than a real terran tank. I honestly can't remember what the official reason was why it was reworked, maybe Blizz felt that the colossus-mobility was too high to allow for such a large initial damage
Because collosus are so mobile, they used to be able to do a lot of front loaded damage so you would just send em in for 1 shot and retreat. You could wipe out an entire bio army with just a small group of collosus in 1 shot. Now it takes a few shots.
Since collosus don't do too much "overshooting" they are better than reavers in battle and have an infite supply of ammo.
The last thing protoss needs is another unit which can be emped. I don't know what the solution is, but i don't think it's reaver.
Reaver would fucking rape 1-1-1 though. That range/splash would be invaluable vs Marines and tank-positioning would be a struggle.
Also, what makes the Reaver more susceptible to EMP than the Colossus? Didn't understand that part..
Actually now that you mention it, a reaver would be a good mid-game/harrass unit. I don't think it would solve the ball vs ball problem, but it would help in other areas. I agree with your statement.
Hmm yeah. Also, Jinro mentioned that it would push Terran away from Bio and towards Mech, which would be refreshing. The only thing I foresee as a huge problem is the Marauder. It would rape Reavers....
And the shuttle trying to save the reaver would be murdered by vikings.
I really really really like the idea of the presence of the Reaver forcing a shift from Bio. It wouldn't get raped by Vikings, so Terran's can't just add Vikings and to their MMM ball and stay on Bio production. In regards to the threat of the Marauder, Protoss can use Warp Prism micro. God I'm so excited just thinking about this. Too bad it will never happen lol.
On October 04 2011 12:25 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Replacing the colossus with the reaver would do so insanely much for the game... Would solve PvP 4 gate fest, would open up phoenix/reaver strats PvZ - reavers can actually help protoss help far flung expansions together with cannons until reinforcements come, unlike colossi - and most importantly, would make mech stronger TvP and bio weaker.
It would also let P defend vs 1-1-1 much, much more effectively.
IIRC the colossus WAS initially designed in a similar way....it must've been way back in beta, I'm not even sure anymore if the propositions made it in the beta or if it was just alpha.
But at some point a pretty long time ago the colossus did more damage with a higher cooldown and therefore functioned like a "mobile siegetank"....more mobile but less overall dps than a real terran tank. I honestly can't remember what the official reason was why it was reworked, maybe Blizz felt that the colossus-mobility was too high to allow for such a large initial damage
Because collosus are so mobile, they used to be able to do a lot of front loaded damage so you would just send em in for 1 shot and retreat. You could wipe out an entire bio army with just a small group of collosus in 1 shot. Now it takes a few shots.
Since collosus don't do too much "overshooting" they are better than reavers in battle and have an infite supply of ammo.
The last thing protoss needs is another unit which can be emped. I don't know what the solution is, but i don't think it's reaver.
Reaver would fucking rape 1-1-1 though. That range/splash would be invaluable vs Marines and tank-positioning would be a struggle.
Also, what makes the Reaver more susceptible to EMP than the Colossus? Didn't understand that part..
Actually now that you mention it, a reaver would be a good mid-game/harrass unit. I don't think it would solve the ball vs ball problem, but it would help in other areas. I agree with your statement.
Hmm yeah. Also, Jinro mentioned that it would push Terran away from Bio and towards Mech, which would be refreshing. The only thing I foresee as a huge problem is the Marauder. It would rape Reavers....
And the shuttle trying to save the reaver would be murdered by vikings.
Without the colossi there's no reason for Terrans to get vikings aside from actually killing air units, it also weakens their ground army. So the whole dynamic changes. Colossi basically deny protoss air tech since they are counted as them.
On October 04 2011 12:25 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Replacing the colossus with the reaver would do so insanely much for the game... Would solve PvP 4 gate fest, would open up phoenix/reaver strats PvZ - reavers can actually help protoss help far flung expansions together with cannons until reinforcements come, unlike colossi - and most importantly, would make mech stronger TvP and bio weaker.
It would also let P defend vs 1-1-1 much, much more effectively.
IIRC the colossus WAS initially designed in a similar way....it must've been way back in beta, I'm not even sure anymore if the propositions made it in the beta or if it was just alpha.
But at some point a pretty long time ago the colossus did more damage with a higher cooldown and therefore functioned like a "mobile siegetank"....more mobile but less overall dps than a real terran tank. I honestly can't remember what the official reason was why it was reworked, maybe Blizz felt that the colossus-mobility was too high to allow for such a large initial damage
Because collosus are so mobile, they used to be able to do a lot of front loaded damage so you would just send em in for 1 shot and retreat. You could wipe out an entire bio army with just a small group of collosus in 1 shot. Now it takes a few shots.
Since collosus don't do too much "overshooting" they are better than reavers in battle and have an infite supply of ammo.
The last thing protoss needs is another unit which can be emped. I don't know what the solution is, but i don't think it's reaver.
Reaver would fucking rape 1-1-1 though. That range/splash would be invaluable vs Marines and tank-positioning would be a struggle.
Also, what makes the Reaver more susceptible to EMP than the Colossus? Didn't understand that part..
Actually now that you mention it, a reaver would be a good mid-game/harrass unit. I don't think it would solve the ball vs ball problem, but it would help in other areas. I agree with your statement.
Hmm yeah. Also, Jinro mentioned that it would push Terran away from Bio and towards Mech, which would be refreshing. The only thing I foresee as a huge problem is the Marauder. It would rape Reavers....
And the shuttle trying to save the reaver would be murdered by vikings.
Maybe, but the Terran has to be slightly crazy to make a decent # of vikings to simply stop a shuttle. He will be taking away from Medivac production heavily. If the Vikings are unable to snipe the Warp Prism, the Bio army with reduced healing will get destroooyed by Scarabs. The Speed upgrade / increased HP of the Warp Prism is quite tanky.
On October 05 2011 01:50 WickedBit wrote: A reaver would be nice but its too late in the cycle to make huge changes like that. Here is one idea I was considering, instead of removing colossi make it more like the reaver. 1. Reduce movement speed of the colossus to about 50% of what it is and increase colossus damage/reduce attack speed to beta levels. 2. Make robotics bay a lot cheaper (150/100),like it was in BW, and build faster or remove the requirement of robo bay to build colossus. 3. Optionally add an upgrade in robo bay to increase movement speed of colossus (though I am not in favor of this).
Here are the implications of this 1. Colossus no longer able to keep up with protoss army which makes it more likely to need a transport enabling interesting drop ship play. Later in game thermal lance means toss can drop a colossi behind the army and roast them a bit but it still allows for z/t armies to run away. 2. Due its speed its more likely to be sniped by vikings/corruptors which makes having large colossi numbers kinda hard to support, which means they need damage upgrade to make them worth the cost. 3. Early colossi makes 1-1-1 useless since they will take out large numbers of marines with 1 swipe (45 dmgx2). Also speed shuttles + colossi = fried workers.
It basically would be interesting to test this out and see how things play out. Toss might have problems with terran 2+ base armies but they should have templars/archons by then to take care of that.
I would actually like a change that splits the tech path for protoss. Since Protoss already has heavy anti-armor unit in the Immortal, I think it would be awesome to adjust the Collosi to be a less durable mostly anti-light unit. Make the collosi cheaper, speedier, and cheaper to build, but majorly nerf its damage output against armored and reduce its splash radius and default attack range. Make the collosi unlockable at robo facility as well. This way, the protoss ball must be tailored against the composition of the enermy, so a mass marauder force would just completely roll a collosi based force, although I figure there might need to be some kind of AoE upgrade for the immortal at the robo bay to compensate for the reduced AoE output against armored targets.
Didn't read 28 pages but I agree with the OP. As a Potoss player, I really liked PvT in BW and I mostly dislike PvT in SC2. I feel like in SC2 PvT, there is too much mobility and too little defenders advantage. A terran doesn't have to push across the map. No seiging, unseiging, placing mines, building missile turrets along the way, etc.
Also I feel like battles are too fragile and quick in SC2 PvT. One or two mistakes can make battles REALLY lopsided even when both armies are close to 200/200. Combined with the lack of defenders advantage, this makes it hard to have back and forth games since whoever wins a big engagement will almost always capitalize on it. This makes the matchup boring IMO.
Edit: As I was reading the thread, a couple of more thoughts:
It is not that bio is really strong in TvP, it is that Protoss counters to bio are themselves fairly easily countered by either Vikings or emp. In BW, emp was much weaker and High Templar more powerful so M&M was almost never seen.
As a Protoss player, I would love to see a buff to Tanks or even Thors if HT's weren't so easily countered by Ghosts. If that were to happen, we might even see *gasp* Carriers from time to time in PvT.
On October 04 2011 12:25 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Replacing the colossus with the reaver would do so insanely much for the game... Would solve PvP 4 gate fest, would open up phoenix/reaver strats PvZ - reavers can actually help protoss help far flung expansions together with cannons until reinforcements come, unlike colossi - and most importantly, would make mech stronger TvP and bio weaker.
It would also let P defend vs 1-1-1 much, much more effectively.
Or give DT Cleave. From D&D Wiki: "If you deal a creature enough damage to make it drop (typically by dropping it to below 0 hit points or killing it), you get an immediate, extra melee attack against another creature within reach. You cannot take a 5-foot step before making this extra attack. The extra attack is with the same weapon and at the same bonus as the attack that dropped the previous creature."
Edit: Basically gives DT a free hit if it kills the previous target (workers/marines/etc)
this would make 1 DT attack kill an entire worker line.
On October 01 2011 06:17 Termit wrote: I agree with everything you say PredY. TvP is not good at all. I wonder how the matchup would look like in SC2 if there was no warpgates. What do you guys think?
I've been playing BW only the whole week and going mech and gaining mapcontrol and cover ground with tanks and mines is so beautiful <3.
Oh yeah the micro part I have to agree with Thorzain tho. Feels like you as a Terran have to do so much much more in the battles and you have to macro at the same too since you can't warpin 20 units when you lose your army, hehe.
I'll tell you how it would look like: it would be even more unbalanced. Face it, warpgates is the only thing toss has to defend against multidrops, and to have a fighting chance in the long run.
I don't see why terran has to make tanks, a stimmed marauder out-dps it by far, is easily dropped, and doesn't require much micro. This is one unit that should go out with HOTS, what was wrong with bio being the EARLY GAME defense until you get mech?
I watch BW streams from times to times and oh wow does tvp looks awesome! Toss early dragoon pressures, and terran has to hold until mines or tanks, toss then has to hold until zealot leg and obs. Then it's the whole Stasis vs EMP thing, where EMP isn't cast by a "hybrid unit" who in fact is great vs light units, and has 4 spells (cloak, emp, snipe, nuke).. you know, 2 more than a pure caster like a High Templar.......
Maybe ghosts shouldn't have emp (since snipe is already the anti-HT spell), or at least should be an upgrade. Maybe marauders shouldn't be as fast as a marine (or shouldn't exist) Maybe medivacs shouldn't be able to drop AND heal without an upgrade Maybe helions should have mines instead of doing high dps by attacking..
Maybe arbiters should make a comeback, and our almost-useless but original Mothership should have a more defensive role (in beta, it had a spell similar to PDD, didn't it?)
In BroodWar, the tvp matchup really felt like low tech vs high tech. Used mines and tanks to take out those lazer shooting robots, forget the marines, their guns don't do much. Even the goliath, similar in size to a Dragoon, was used only to take down air with very high range because they couldn't stand a fight vs the ground protoss army... now can Thors do? We don't see them much because a factory in tvp is only used to build a starport ( or to scout), but the thors have to be ganked by a whole protoss army to go down. What a joke matchup, not really from a balance perspective, but from a whole race design perspective. With Marauders, terrans can litterally attack a Protoss army head-on and win easily.. and here I thought protoss were the high tech aliens :/
I've been ranting about warpgates being "broken" (read: not overpowered) since beta. They remove so much of the push and pull dynamic of the game. In regards to mass bio play, I think the issue is from terran mechs inability to "zone" areas. Everyone knows the innate immobility caused by thors and siege tanks and without an ability such as spider mine to prevent highly mobile army flanking (stalker/zealot/colossus/warpgates). This makes actually forcing an engagement as mech quite difficult and additionally makes reinforcing with mech (due to build time + travel time, vs near instant warpgate mechanic) an uphill battle on most modern maps.
Is there a solution to this? I don't really think so, not without drastic changes to both races or narrower-path maps. Obviously the latter would cause imbalance in TvZ and TvT matchups. This is just a sad fact on how SC2 TvP will play out until unit/mechanics are changed, or new units are added.
I meched once and was up by 30 food and went into base race scenrios cause he just keep blinking into my base and running in collosi. Long story short, 1 void ray came in and obliterated everything cause he focus fire down all viking and chargelots caught me unseige....yup....up 40 food and lost in the blink of an eye. Never again will I mech and vowed to make more marauders.
Warpgate makes the immobility of Mech very very painful. Mix in Chargelots, Immortals, Blink Stalkers and the lack of any area denial like Spider Mines and Mech becomes extremely fragile. Tanks get murdered by Chargelots, which take 5-6 shots to kill per Chargelot, dealing friendly fire to the tank they are attacking. The Charge ability nullifies any distance between tanks.
Thors aren't much different, Chargelots can get a quick surround, Blink Stalkers can focus fire them and Void Rays deal double bonus damage to them.
Since Mech is slow and slow to rebuild, the Warpgate and mobility of Chargelots and Blink Stalkers tear Mech to pieces bit by bit.
Bio deals with this in the same way Protoss deals with Mech. Bio is fast (Chargelot/Blink Stalker), easy to rebuild (Warpgate), works amazingly well with drops (Protoss Air / Blink) and still deal a hefty amount of damage.
Tanks can deal well with massed units but not Chargelots. Against Zerg it works so well because the Chargelots are replaced by fragile Speedlings that die in one hit. Just Thor vs Zerg wouldn't work because of Speedling or Roach surrounds, which is where the Tank comes in, but it cannot fulfill that role against Protoss, leaving Tanks and Thors very vulnerable.
Too much in the Protoss arsenal devastates Tank/Thor for Mech to be viable, leaving Bio as the remaining option. Sky/Air Terran still needs to be discovered, perhaps a combination of Bio / Air is where the future is at?
On October 05 2011 03:44 Masq wrote: I've been ranting about warpgates being "broken" (read: not overpowered) since beta. They remove so much of the push and pull dynamic of the game. In regards to mass bio play, I think the issue is from terran mechs inability to "zone" areas. Everyone knows the innate immobility caused by thors and siege tanks and without an ability such as spider mine to prevent highly mobile army flanking (stalker/zealot/colossus/warpgates). This makes actually forcing an engagement as mech quite difficult and additionally makes reinforcing with mech (due to build time + travel time, vs near instant warpgate mechanic) an uphill battle on most modern maps.
Is there a solution to this? I don't really think so, not without drastic changes to both races or narrower-path maps. Obviously the latter would cause imbalance in TvZ and TvT matchups. This is just a sad fact on how SC2 TvP will play out until unit/mechanics are changed, or new units are added.
I really like what you said about push/pull. Perhaps this causes what many people see as the "One big fight" in TvP that always decides the game?
if the maurader was removed from the game, i would feel that the marine would need some sort of +1 range upgrade, sort of like in broodwar, easily obtainable like conc. shell to combat against the stalker early game... or faster tank build time perhaps?
On October 05 2011 04:12 TheOGBlitzKrieg wrote: if the maurader was removed from the game, i would feel that the marine would need some sort of +1 range upgrade, sort of like in broodwar, easily obtainable like conc. shell to combat against the stalker early game... or faster tank build time perhaps?
I'm pretty sure Zergs would lose their shit if the Marine was buffed. I just wish the Marauder didn't exist. It's whole role is... so.. not Terran? (As Artosis put it)
On October 05 2011 02:43 eugalp wrote: Didn't read 28 pages but I agree with the OP. As a Potoss player, I really liked PvT in BW and I mostly dislike PvT in SC2. I feel like in SC2 PvT, there is too much mobility and too little defenders advantage. A terran doesn't have to push across the map. No seiging, unseiging, placing mines, building missile turrets along the way, etc.
Also I feel like battles are too fragile and quick in SC2 PvT. One or two mistakes can make battles REALLY lopsided even when both armies are close to 200/200. Combined with the lack of defenders advantage, this makes it hard to have back and forth games since whoever wins a big engagement will almost always capitalize on it. This makes the matchup boring IMO.
Edit: As I was reading the thread, a couple of more thoughts:
It is not that bio is really strong in TvP, it is that Protoss counters to bio are themselves fairly easily countered by either Vikings or emp. In BW, emp was much weaker and High Templar more powerful so M&M was almost never seen.
As a Protoss player, I would love to see a buff to Tanks or even Thors if HT's weren't so easily countered by Ghosts. If that were to happen, we might even see *gasp* Carriers from time to time in PvT.
The is no defender's advantage in PvT because of the retarded warpgate mechanic....
On October 05 2011 02:43 eugalp wrote: Didn't read 28 pages but I agree with the OP. As a Potoss player, I really liked PvT in BW and I mostly dislike PvT in SC2. I feel like in SC2 PvT, there is too much mobility and too little defenders advantage. A terran doesn't have to push across the map. No seiging, unseiging, placing mines, building missile turrets along the way, etc.
Also I feel like battles are too fragile and quick in SC2 PvT. One or two mistakes can make battles REALLY lopsided even when both armies are close to 200/200. Combined with the lack of defenders advantage, this makes it hard to have back and forth games since whoever wins a big engagement will almost always capitalize on it. This makes the matchup boring IMO.
Edit: As I was reading the thread, a couple of more thoughts:
It is not that bio is really strong in TvP, it is that Protoss counters to bio are themselves fairly easily countered by either Vikings or emp. In BW, emp was much weaker and High Templar more powerful so M&M was almost never seen.
As a Protoss player, I would love to see a buff to Tanks or even Thors if HT's weren't so easily countered by Ghosts. If that were to happen, we might even see *gasp* Carriers from time to time in PvT.
The is no defender's advantage in PvT because of the retarded warpgate mechanic....
Maybe warpgate tech should be a 6-7 min research: it's a nerf to 4gate (so pvp gets less retarded), hallucinations would actually be researched BEFORE (more scouting), and warpgates would be a mid to late game gimmick (to counter drops).
On October 05 2011 04:02 Thezzy wrote: Warpgate makes the immobility of Mech very very painful. Mix in Chargelots, Immortals, Blink Stalkers and the lack of any area denial like Spider Mines and Mech becomes extremely fragile. Tanks get murdered by Chargelots, which take 5-6 shots to kill per Chargelot, dealing friendly fire to the tank they are attacking. The Charge ability nullifies any distance between tanks.
Thors aren't much different, Chargelots can get a quick surround, Blink Stalkers can focus fire them and Void Rays deal double bonus damage to them.
Since Mech is slow and slow to rebuild, the Warpgate and mobility of Chargelots and Blink Stalkers tear Mech to pieces bit by bit.
Bio deals with this in the same way Protoss deals with Mech. Bio is fast (Chargelot/Blink Stalker), easy to rebuild (Warpgate), works amazingly well with drops (Protoss Air / Blink) and still deal a hefty amount of damage.
Tanks can deal well with massed units but not Chargelots. Against Zerg it works so well because the Chargelots are replaced by fragile Speedlings that die in one hit. Just Thor vs Zerg wouldn't work because of Speedling or Roach surrounds, which is where the Tank comes in, but it cannot fulfill that role against Protoss, leaving Tanks and Thors very vulnerable.
Too much in the Protoss arsenal devastates Tank/Thor for Mech to be viable, leaving Bio as the remaining option. Sky/Air Terran still needs to be discovered, perhaps a combination of Bio / Air is where the future is at?
As a person who only mechs, I can say massing chargelots is actually pretty bad, even post 1.4. If they are literally just massing chargelots just get more hellions lol and play a bit more passive. Treat the chargelots like marines, they get worse as the game goes on and as you build up your mech the chargelots will evaporate.
If there is a big engagement and the only that is left are your tanks, reinforce with hellions! This was standard for broodwar as well. I'm not sure what else to say, its hard to talk about this stuff without the context of a game, if you have a rep that would help.
well its true in a sense that tvp there is something wrong with the terran side. It usuallly ends up MMVG and all that differs among players is how they open up their builds to reach the same end result or the control they use.
Mech isnt as viable to verse toss (Although i do wish it was) to the mid-late game. As of now most terrans use mech as all in or something.... kinda depressing. Its not like end game we can randomly add a banshee, raven, or battle cruiser verse protoss. To set up the tech path and divert away from making medivacs would only make bio weaker.
Surely this has already been stated but the reason why mech isn't viable in SC2 is largely because protoss army is just way too mobile. Warpgate is a bit troublesome but not the main problem imho. You can deny pylons and warp prisms. You can't however, stop the protoss from running them colossus and blink stalkers around your army and killing your expos/main. The fact that zealots are quite beastly vs tanks doesn't help much either. And of course then there are thors, banshees, ravens and BCs that all get raped by feedback.
On October 04 2011 12:25 Liquid`Jinro wrote: Replacing the colossus with the reaver would do so insanely much for the game... Would solve PvP 4 gate fest, would open up phoenix/reaver strats PvZ - reavers can actually help protoss help far flung expansions together with cannons until reinforcements come, unlike colossi - and most importantly, would make mech stronger TvP and bio weaker.
It would also let P defend vs 1-1-1 much, much more effectively.
It seems like overall it is a very good idea for TvP .But how about ZvP,how will zerg deal with the protoss deathball ? NP is useless to the point were we see players like Idra going back to roach/hydra/corruptor... reaver + forcefield sounds pretty imba to me
Totally agree, TvP is the matchup I feel the most frustration over. Partly because of the stale and limitied options of units, and also because terrans in general needs better micro to match the toss.
I agree with a lot of stuff you posted. But because Toss Gateway and Robo units scale up nicely together late game, transitioning into Mech as Terran isn't viable because you're always going to be behind on upgrades anyways.
Ok................................... I`ve read every single page since this thread started...
And there is only ONE ONE ONE thing I want to discuss regarding the match up....
Only a couple of people mentioned Sky terran.... We know, it`s not really developed nor will it be any time soon... But for instance...... Like an ultimate transition, in a game of many many bsaes, with sensorial towers and turrets and planetaries everywhere, you`d have upgraded ship stuff because of vikings...
What would happen if you, for instance put down 15 starports, a fusion core, get all your bio, load into 12 medivacs and drop 2 of them on each base, i dunno something like that, make a shitton of mules and sack svcs... then while this trade happens (drops, scvs, etc) reinforce with like 5 bcs, a couple of ravens, a shitload of banshees and some ghosts??
On October 05 2011 13:28 xTrim wrote: Ok................................... I`ve read every single page since this thread started...
And there is only ONE ONE ONE thing I want to discuss regarding the match up....
Only a couple of people mentioned Sky terran.... We know, it`s not really developed nor will it be any time soon... But for instance...... Like an ultimate transition, in a game of many many bsaes, with sensorial towers and turrets and planetaries everywhere, you`d have upgraded ship stuff because of vikings...
What would happen if you, for instance put down 15 starports, a fusion core, get all your bio, load into 12 medivacs and drop 2 of them on each base, i dunno something like that, make a shitton of mules and sack svcs... then while this trade happens (drops, scvs, etc) reinforce with like 5 bcs, a couple of ravens, a shitload of banshees and some ghosts??
Is it just NOT possible?
It's possible, but as with all SKY strategies (like carriers, BCs and Broodlords), there's a HUGE timing window where the opposing player can just push and destroy your entire economy and half of your starports too.
The OP mentioned "tanks" being what makes Terran exciting. I feel the complete opposite. I hate tanks. They make it virtually impossible to penetrate certain areas, the only unit in the game that does that actually. A tankless sc2 would be much more exciting, but maybe that's just me.
On October 05 2011 00:53 Swwww wrote: Main problem is that protoss is complimented far too much by the game engine itself.
EDIT: Yes I think they should buff DT"s they are not good enough atm.
Buff DTs? seriously? That would be like buffing the ghost.
I was being sarcastic. A DT with a DnD style cleave proc would literally break the game.
As was I, the Colossi drop filled that role well, since turrets could target them as well, but that was nerfed. Look at all the Protoss/Terran Patches, they were specific design decisions to make bio viable by the Lead designer himself!!
Thor Strike cannon nerf back to MP, Immortal range buff, ghost cost reduction, etc
This thread on design decisions (add new ability, bring back old units, etc) should have been dead since page 12. Lead designer, Dustin Browder specifically wants to bio viable in TvP. Why? Who knows? Change of pace from tanks everywhere? Make SC2 like Halo wars?
HeyJude, what you just said is a great example of strategy. With tanks, you have to choose what parts of the map you want to lock down. But they have to unsiege to move them.
The reason they were nerfed is that Z didnt have any really good answers against them, thus limiting their options and removing strategy. But now the P matchup suffers from 'useless' tanks. Bio is the way to go, thus again limiting strategy.
I disagree with the idea that tanks make games fun to watch. Personally, I prefer watching games where players are highly mobile. I agree that warp-in means that Protoss do not have a defender's advantage, which might be a problem.
On October 05 2011 14:54 Deezl wrote: HeyJude, what you just said is a great example of strategy. With tanks, you have to choose what parts of the map you want to lock down. But they have to unsiege to move them.
The reason they were nerfed is that Z didnt have any really good answers against them, thus limiting their options and removing strategy. But now the P matchup suffers from 'useless' tanks. Bio is the way to go, thus again limiting strategy.
You meant Z didn't have any answers for them...on steppes of war.
On October 05 2011 14:54 Deezl wrote: HeyJude, what you just said is a great example of strategy. With tanks, you have to choose what parts of the map you want to lock down. But they have to unsiege to move them.
The reason they were nerfed is that Z didnt have any really good answers against them, thus limiting their options and removing strategy. But now the P matchup suffers from 'useless' tanks. Bio is the way to go, thus again limiting strategy.
You meant Z didn't have any answers for them...on steppes of war.
Even still, 50 damage meant that way more Zerglings would die to splash. Nerfing Tanks also made Marines not shit versus Tank lines.
I think Tanks just need to do the full 50 damage to shields at the very least. Zealots just take way too many hits and Archons are better siege breakers than Immortals. That or Goliaths, because Thors just don't cut it at all. Not only do they move slower than Tanks, their anti air attack is horrible against non-clumped air.
On October 05 2011 00:53 Swwww wrote: Main problem is that protoss is complimented far too much by the game engine itself.
EDIT: Yes I think they should buff DT"s they are not good enough atm.
Buff DTs? seriously? That would be like buffing the ghost.
I was being sarcastic. A DT with a DnD style cleave proc would literally break the game.
As was I, the Colossi drop filled that role well, since turrets could target them as well, but that was nerfed. Look at all the Protoss/Terran Patches, they were specific design decisions to make bio viable by the Lead designer himself!!
Thor Strike cannon nerf back to MP, Immortal range buff, ghost cost reduction, etc
This thread on design decisions (add new ability, bring back old units, etc) should have been dead since page 12. Lead designer, Dustin Browder specifically wants to bio viable in TvP. Why? Who knows? Change of pace from tanks everywhere? Make SC2 like Halo wars?
Why are you bashing Halo Wars? Have you played the game? The two are incomparable anyway.
I don't know why this thread was highlighted. The OP is unfocused and has no coherent thesis. The issues being discussed were, I thought, obvious to any student of either game design or SC2-BW comparison, and you would only get the what the OP means to be saying if you already got it. At a certain point, there's no way to "solve" the perceived "problems" unless you overhaul the very initial premises. I don't know why you wouldn't address this, otherwise you're just mourning repetitively. I would have preferred much more discussion about modal units (tanks, lurkers) and how that creates a better game (opinion, possible valid point).
As a Protoss, I absolutely agree with everything except warp gates.
Don't blame warp gates for the shitty design of the colossus and marauder. Don't blame warp gates that tanks are too good with SC2 AI. Blizzard is trying to bring in totally new things while clinging on to the old and it's not working. Either scrap the old (or at least drastically change it) or bring in something new that COMPLEMENTS the old.
On October 05 2011 13:28 xTrim wrote: Ok................................... I`ve read every single page since this thread started...
And there is only ONE ONE ONE thing I want to discuss regarding the match up....
Only a couple of people mentioned Sky terran.... We know, it`s not really developed nor will it be any time soon... But for instance...... Like an ultimate transition, in a game of many many bsaes, with sensorial towers and turrets and planetaries everywhere, you`d have upgraded ship stuff because of vikings...
What would happen if you, for instance put down 15 starports, a fusion core, get all your bio, load into 12 medivacs and drop 2 of them on each base, i dunno something like that, make a shitton of mules and sack svcs... then while this trade happens (drops, scvs, etc) reinforce with like 5 bcs, a couple of ravens, a shitload of banshees and some ghosts??
Is it just NOT possible?
Sky terran play (is not viable btw, but this is not relevant for this discussion), is boring as well. Doesn't require any specific tactical mechanics like mech does.
On October 01 2011 06:16 Thorzain wrote: I feel that TvP IS really micro intensive. EMP everything, move your units out of storms, focus fire individual colossi with vikings and kite zealots if he's zealot heavy. And while you're kiting zealots you have to move back your ghosts so that they dont all get killed in the blink of an eye. All these things at the same time. It's freaking hard if you ask me!
On October 05 2011 17:49 PredY wrote: i think we can just wait till blizzcon when they reveal new hots multiplayer stuff and then we can get back to this discussion
It seems like it could be a more tanky bio unit. Which is the opposite of the ideology here
On October 05 2011 14:29 HeyJude wrote: The OP mentioned "tanks" being what makes Terran exciting. I feel the complete opposite. I hate tanks. They make it virtually impossible to penetrate certain areas, the only unit in the game that does that actually. A tankless sc2 would be much more exciting, but maybe that's just me.
I think that's only because you don't really understand the role properly. Many people want lurkers back for the exact reason you stated. Tanks/Lurkers etc. control space and allow for dynamic play to happen because you have this support in the back allowing you to be aggressive. TvP often lands up in a 200 vs 200 dance where neither player wants to engage or do anything since they don't have this support in the back allowing them to be aggressive. A tankless SC2 just be a dancing game.
On October 05 2011 13:28 xTrim wrote: Ok................................... I`ve read every single page since this thread started...
And there is only ONE ONE ONE thing I want to discuss regarding the match up....
Only a couple of people mentioned Sky terran.... We know, it`s not really developed nor will it be any time soon... But for instance...... Like an ultimate transition, in a game of many many bsaes, with sensorial towers and turrets and planetaries everywhere, you`d have upgraded ship stuff because of vikings...
What would happen if you, for instance put down 15 starports, a fusion core, get all your bio, load into 12 medivacs and drop 2 of them on each base, i dunno something like that, make a shitton of mules and sack svcs... then while this trade happens (drops, scvs, etc) reinforce with like 5 bcs, a couple of ravens, a shitload of banshees and some ghosts??
Is it just NOT possible?
You just described my lategame TvP. Not BCs, cos they're ridiculously slow/bad vs feedback/stalkers/everything - but 3/0 banshees are, yes, quite strong.
On October 05 2011 14:54 Deezl wrote: HeyJude, what you just said is a great example of strategy. With tanks, you have to choose what parts of the map you want to lock down. But they have to unsiege to move them.
The reason they were nerfed is that Z didnt have any really good answers against them, thus limiting their options and removing strategy. But now the P matchup suffers from 'useless' tanks. Bio is the way to go, thus again limiting strategy.
You meant Z didn't have any answers for them...on steppes of war.
Even still, 50 damage meant that way more Zerglings would die to splash. Nerfing Tanks also made Marines not shit versus Tank lines.
I think Tanks just need to do the full 50 damage to shields at the very least. Zealots just take way too many hits and Archons are better siege breakers than Immortals. That or Goliaths, because Thors just don't cut it at all. Not only do they move slower than Tanks, their anti air attack is horrible against non-clumped air.
I like the idea of tanks doing full 50 damage to all shields however i can see this just making the 1-1-1 way too powerful. However, if there was another upgrade that was similar cost/build time to seige mode upgrade, then this would be a very specific change that could make mech viable in TvP without affecting other match-ups! [immortals hardened shield would still come into effect, however good terrans would obviously just focus fire other units with their tanks]
It wouldn't be too difficult to work this kind of upgrade into the lore either, just make some stuff up about how terran has developed these new upgraded tank shells designed specifically to penetrate protoss shields blah blah.
On October 05 2011 01:00 Svizcy wrote: The problem is that protoss bassicly cant lose if both sides play a perfect game. There needs to be possibility for easier tech switching for terrans like predy said. Imho the best solution would be to join up terran upgrades under 1 tech tree like toss has it. so that when the times comes to switch to mech mid-late game your mech actually doesnt suck balls cause it is 0-0 ups 20 minutes into the game...
good day, svizcy
You want to buff terran and let them get upgrades like protoss? I am confused, because protoss is not doing well at the moment, why would you want to buff terran? Simply because you have having difficultly with them?
Also, your baseless statement protoss auto win if "both sides play perfectly" has no basis in reality. There is no such thing as a perfect game and provide no evidence to support this statement.
Did you actually read the whole thread or are you just attacking me, cause your borred or sommething? There has been a suggestion of nerfing bio multiple times in the thread, and the upgrade difference would make it possible to use more units in late game instead of just staying with bio all day long.
Yes your right about one thing, there is no such thing as perfect game, but the problem is that one race(terran) the way it is now, has to succesfully herras the other, to be able to win late game, while the other side (protoss) doesnt have to, can chose to, but doesnt have to. (see they have the possibility to chose how they want to play and terran has to go bio or die).
And i never stated that i have difficult time defeating tosses. It is my best matchup of the 3.
First of I am terran and i think developing a good mech style fot TvP is very hard. But i have developed my own and im playing top 10 master and I can say that I at least win 50% (might be even more) of my TvPs. For that style i do a litlle 2 base push likeweise Byun's but i get a raven and a Medivac to drop helions combined with a PDD ( for cannons and stalkers). Then i mostly retried and build up my maxed army. To succeed in the big ingagement i use one raven, 3 ghosts, 15-20 tanks, 3 thors and 3-6 vikings. while i push i build up a lot of turrets and barracks to get a good corner and be save against carrier. )
On October 05 2011 23:56 TrOn_sc2 wrote: First of I am terran and i think developing a good mech style fot TvP is very hard. But i have developed my own and im playing top 10 master and I can say that I at least win 50% (might be even more) of my TvPs. For that style i do a litlle 2 base push likeweise Byun's but i get a raven and a Medivac to drop helions combined with a PDD ( for cannons and stalkers). Then i mostly retried and build up my maxed army. To succeed in the big ingagement i use one raven, 3 ghosts, 15-20 tanks, 3 thors and 3-6 vikings. while i push i build up a lot of turrets and barracks to get a good corner and be save against carrier. )
is anyone else offended by people complaining terran requires too much micro ohave you ever tried protoss units LOL. to the op i think part of the problem is noones experimenting with diferent styles as terran because they dont need to yet also terran could use some creative innovative players like catZ machine and tt1.
i mostly hit something like a lot of blink stalker which i think are like marauders against mech in TvP in case of counter attacks and helion defense, a couple of immos (4-6), a view zealtos which are like zerglings against mech to me in big fights and in tightness they suck,but used in mass for reinforcements sometimes colossus and sometimes voidrays or pheonix in the combo. and in the very late game often carrier and i switch to mass air with bc,vikings and ravens.
I didn't play much broodwar at all so I dont know how it was back then, but I have to say, My favorite matchup to both play and watch is tvp, and my mainrace is zerg.
There are some contradictions in the OP considering unit composition. First there is a complaint that there are no unit compositions for specific matchups. Later on there is a complaint about tanks not being viable in TvP and being dead if you don't use vikings against collosi.
Aren't those the specific unit compositions that do not exist in SC2 ?
Seems like you're quite a siege tank fan and want to see the tank like the TvP of BW. Mind you I'd like to see the marauder disappear as well.....PvT will become so much easier
On October 06 2011 01:33 Eeevil wrote: There are some contradictions in the OP considering unit composition. First there is a complaint that there are no unit compositions for specific matchups. Later on there is a complaint about tanks not being viable in TvP and being dead if you don't use vikings against collosi.
Aren't those the specific unit compositions that do not exist in SC2 ?
Seems like you're quite a siege tank fan and want to see the tank like the TvP of BW. Mind you I'd like to see the marauder disappear as well.....PvT will become so much easier
Well it wouldnt just be *marauder removed* and everything would be all dandy and nice for protoss. If that were to happen terran would be needing spidermines or something to support the tanks
biggest problem with tvp is there are no units for terran that allow them to control space. tanks dont count. Either have your whole fucking army in this 1 place or else your fucked if he tries to attack while your split
On October 06 2011 00:45 Juanald wrote: is anyone else offended by people complaining terran requires too much micro ohave you ever tried protoss units LOL. to the op i think part of the problem is noones experimenting with diferent styles as terran because they dont need to yet also terran could use some creative innovative players like catZ machine and tt1.
No creativity?!
Haha that's what i usually think about Protoss players.
On October 01 2011 06:16 Thorzain wrote: I feel that TvP IS really micro intensive. EMP everything, move your units out of storms, focus fire individual colossi with vikings and kite zealots if he's zealot heavy. And while you're kiting zealots you have to move back your ghosts so that they dont all get killed in the blink of an eye. All these things at the same time. It's freaking hard if you ask me!
Ghosts don't die that easily they have enough hitpoints to survive quite a few hits aswell as not taking extra damage due to being neither light or heavy and when you add in cloak it increases their survivability even more.
Compared to the high templar which has lower health(especially after a emp) will run straight into battle since it doesn't have a ranged attack like the ghosts, they have to spread hts and dodge emps which doesn't mean waiting for an emp and moving like you can with storms but pre emptively moving your hts to places you think will be safe from emp and snipe.
I could go on and on but i feel it would just be me whining about ghosts compared to HTs even more.
In short Ghosts require some micro but they're much easier units to use than hts.
Wtf i cant understand him. Mech is viable. Take a quit look at GoOdy but i cant understand why some terrans do not play bio. It has by far more options to kill the protoss and is more viable than mec in lategame.
On October 06 2011 00:45 Juanald wrote: is anyone else offended by people complaining terran requires too much micro ohave you ever tried protoss units LOL. to the op i think part of the problem is noones experimenting with diferent styles as terran because they dont need to yet also terran could use some creative innovative players like catZ machine and tt1.
No creativity?!
Haha that's what i usually think about Protoss players.
How about TLO, do you find him creative enough?
I'd say Terran has tons of creativity.
well played. TLO is the most creative player, ever. and as a random player here is how the micro works...
Terran: Ghost EMP, Kite Marines and Maruaders, Focus fire vikings Toss: MASS STORM, (then make archons), guardian shield + FF's
so which sounds harder?
i feel like toss has to focus on micro that kills the enemy and terran is all about trying to counter the toss
Might be an interesting change for Vikings to be built out of the factory instead of the starport. TvP the factory is only used as a wall/add-on stamper unless your scouting with a hellion or going BFH drop. Raven would be a nice unit to have more of past early-mid game if Vikings didn't have to tie up Starport production.
On October 06 2011 07:45 itsMAHVELbaybee wrote: Might be an interesting change for Vikings to be built out of the factory instead of the starport. TvP the factory is only used as a wall/add-on stamper unless your scouting with a hellion or going BFH drop. Raven would be a nice unit to have more of past early-mid game if Vikings didn't have to tie up Starport production.
Same with Warp Prisms, if colossus production didn't tie up robo production =P
All joking aside, OP makes some good discussion. I've really gotta trust people like him, that tried to make tanks work coming from a BW background, and reluctantly gave it up. I'm coming at this from the Protoss perspective, having to quell my gut instinct about siege tanks. To wit, that they're extremely effective in the 1/1/1 allin--so what kind of factors make them unsuitable for longer games where they serve as a backbone of an army? Well, Protoss's mobility with a blinkstalker response, and ability to force an allin whenever a siege tank force moves out (typically). The resources are tied up in siege tanks and marines are incapable of responding effectively to a variety of threats (unlike marauders combined with marines in MMM).
So Protoss got mobility in SC2 and the old stalwart Terran unit suffered from it, AND Protoss players using ingenuity or abuse of mobility, depending on what side you stand on. Not convinced a new role or partnership will be discovered for siege tanks until fundamentals (or just-above-fundamentals) are able to be tweaked in HOTS. I'm also not a guy in a Terran suit trying out new mech forms. I still remember Jinro mech vs. oGsMC in TvP, it hasn't been too long for it to fade away. Are we waiting for a guy in SlayerS clan or a TLO or Jinro to come up with the breakthrough timings and execution needed to pull Tanks into ships-of-the-line for the TvP army? Or are we waiting in vain? I do have some Protoss units I wish could fit more regularly into a PvT army myself. Can tanks fill a situational role in this respect? I'm gonna leave those questions out around for another couple months of no patch to really see. The next stage of evolution of TvP may be right around the corner, similar to how blue flame hellions felt fine / went unnoticed until a certain MLG, and suddenly screams and cries from all sectors.
On October 06 2011 06:59 MooLen wrote: Wtf i cant understand him. Mech is viable. Take a quit look at GoOdy but i cant understand why some terrans do not play bio. It has by far more options to kill the protoss and is more viable than mec in lategame.
No, it isn't. Read the thread and ask pros yourself.
On October 06 2011 00:45 Juanald wrote: is anyone else offended by people complaining terran requires too much micro ohave you ever tried protoss units LOL. to the op i think part of the problem is noones experimenting with diferent styles as terran because they dont need to yet also terran could use some creative innovative players like catZ machine and tt1.
No creativity?!
Haha that's what i usually think about Protoss players.
How about TLO, do you find him creative enough?
I'd say Terran has tons of creativity.
well played. TLO is the most creative player, ever. and as a random player here is how the micro works...
Terran: Ghost EMP, Kite Marines and Maruaders, Focus fire vikings Toss: MASS STORM, (then make archons), guardian shield + FF's
so which sounds harder?
i feel like toss has to focus on micro that kills the enemy and terran is all about trying to counter the toss
Kind of. But the ghost acadamy costs practically nothing compared to templar archives, you don't have to get another tech building in between (twilight council), you don't have to upgrade EMP, you have the option to upgrade energy for ghosts, making you able to cast almost 2 EMPs for every 1 protoss storm, EMP has alot longer range than storm, EMP does more damage and cannot be avoided. Oh and I almost forgot... the ghost is cheaper, has more survivability, is faster and can cloak and snipe, which has longer range than feedback. And it can actually attack. I dunno what level you play on, but to me the ghost sounds better in theory. Avoiding damage my ass. EMP combined with stim fucking demolishes everything protoss.
Terran players are rolling and shitting all over Ps in high levels. I doubt they even practice TvP anymore. I don't understand where all this T whine is coming from O_O Look at the terran / protoss ratio in code S.
I skimmed through the reading(tired and getting late), but I definitely agree with most of the points you made.
As a spectator and fan, I also wanted to point out that I enjoyed watching siegetanks/vultures in Brood War. It was much more micro intensive and positioning as well as timing were very important. Even from the lore point of view, it made more sense to me that terrans would have to exclusively use mech against a race that is superior and more technologically advanced(Protoss). Seeing the marines over and over and over in all the terran matchups is getting really dull and boring.
On October 06 2011 13:32 Euronyme wrote: Terran players are rolling and shitting all over Ps in high levels. I doubt they even practice TvP anymore. I don't understand where all this T whine is coming from O_O Look at the terran / protoss ratio in code S.
This entire thread isnt about balance. The whole point of this thread was basically pointing out the piss poor state of TvP in terms of strategical variety which leads to the same old MMMVG in almost 99% of the game (+ the same old drops, the same ol blob dancing around til the big engagement). Ok I am exaggerating due to the 1/1/1 builds (+other unorthodox builds) but regardless, the fact that MMMVG since its just so good completely stops the matchup from evolving at all.
People argue about "let the game give time" or "people will indeed make it viable" etc.. well unlike the situation BW was in when it first came out where even the basic understanding of the fundamentals for a 3 race RTS game was completely missing, SC2 is ALOT different because the fundamentals have all been laid out before us i.e. players are left to do the more easy stuff. Its so ignorant to say SC:BW and SC2 is a different game (some people go far as to say its a completely different game) when the core of SC2 is based on SC:BW. I mean its STARCRAFT. They would have slapped something else if it was a completely new game. Going back to the state of TvP, you can see no one feels the need of going out of the norm and playing a different style other than MMMVG. There is NO need + the icying on the cake is that mech is NOT viable in TvP and barely holds a candle to MMMVG.
Alot of T players wants to bring back tanks being viable (ala mech being viable) because it brings back the sort of dynamics that make TvP so much more interesting (and alots more depth) due to the unit being able to zone control (something that made BW games alot more fun when spectating due to the tensions and strategies it brought out). The whole matchup for Terran AND i believe for Protoss becomes much much more strategical + alot of pros for spectators.
Like for example: -Unit positioning requires actual thought (much more depth compared to MMMVG). Both for T and P since the wrong angle or flank could have an entire P army evaporate OR completely catch off the T etc, it creates tension. +1 for spectators, +1 for rewarding players who fight strategically by effectively using the map terrain. -Fights last longer and continual fights can happen since T has to siege/unsiege + repositioning while P gathers for another attack. No more landslide victories resulting in the game being over unless its at the very end of a 50min game. -Map control requires thought. Since T is immobile and P mobile, we see ways for both to cover up its weakness (T) + abuse its strength (P). Brings more depth to TvP as we see players finding ways to limiting each others strength instead of trying to outdo one's total DPS. -Still as micro intensive but more than just unit micro. Positioning of tanks, hellions, knowing when to siege and unsiege etc, I also think P will have to start microing there units to avoid as less splash as possible when rushing into the tank lines or defend positions. Hell even warp prism drops during the attack on tanks could be entertaining to watch. -It will bring P to use a variety of different units and new builds, for instance carriers when used vs mech can be really good. Motherships might be used like an arbiter, it makes the P players come up with ways either punch through the tank line (Reminds me of the nada/jangbi game where mass storms, stasis fields punched through a heavily fortified tank line) or abuse its immobility by going around etc.
Simply put short, it brings more depth to the matchup compared to what it is now which is pretty much the same thing over and over again. But if mech was to be viable, along with BIO it opens up so much potential to a dull, grey matchup that i think could be more than what it is now. It also opens up potentially new builds for P who doesn't have to either all in or go cols/HTs every game due to bio.
On October 04 2011 05:02 EnderSword wrote: How did a Brood War > SC2 Thread, and what is basically a hidden balance whine thread become a featured post?
He acknowledges that some players simply don't play the style he's complaining about, but then says he didn't bother to check if those guys were doing well.
Whole thing seems silly, 'We only play this style....except for 1/1/1 which is dominating the scene, and mech play which I'm ignoring'
If most people wrote this, it'd just be closed.
The bioball right now is pretty successful, so there's not a lot of incentive to move away from it. There was a time when mech was almost unstoppable, and 1/1/1 shows the ability to mix bio and mech early for amazing results.
There's a lot of options here and we see more all the time, I don't think its bad design that people use viable strategies.
1-1-1 is a build order, not a play style. You can't continue to make tanks and banshees all throughout the game against a Tournament level player, eventually you will transition into lots of Marines and Marauders and Medivacs once you get to late game. Even mech will eventually have to transition into bio, because once you are on more than 2 bases your defenses will be far too weak and immobile. Which is why mech always results in 2 base timing attack, win or lose.
Also a couple people have mentioned the 1-1-1 being too powerful. Tanks have a lot of dps un-sieged and that is part of the problem. When a siege tank does just as much damaged seiged as unsieged wheres the dynamics, theres no timing protoss can exploit to snipe the tanks and slow the army down.
The second problem is clumping. In BW you would always get straggling units that would get sniped if you didn't pay attention to you army, this means good players could continuously harass the back of a moving army in order to weaken it and slow it down, so that by the time they reach your base they only have half the original power and you have double.
The third problem is PDD (dark swarm) being available to Terran in such an early stage of the game. Dark Swarm was hive tech in BW and was only really viable after researching consume. Now you have it at Starport Tech wtf. This is coupled with the fact that Siege Tanks are already a perfect unit for controlling space. PDD is also more powerful than Dark Swarm because it can't be used against you.
Dark Swarm was an ability Zerg needed to make lings and ultralisks viable lategame, why Terran has it now, I have no freaking clue.
On October 04 2011 05:02 EnderSword wrote: How did a Brood War > SC2 Thread, and what is basically a hidden balance whine thread become a featured post?
He acknowledges that some players simply don't play the style he's complaining about, but then says he didn't bother to check if those guys were doing well.
Whole thing seems silly, 'We only play this style....except for 1/1/1 which is dominating the scene, and mech play which I'm ignoring'
If most people wrote this, it'd just be closed.
The bioball right now is pretty successful, so there's not a lot of incentive to move away from it. There was a time when mech was almost unstoppable, and 1/1/1 shows the ability to mix bio and mech early for amazing results.
There's a lot of options here and we see more all the time, I don't think its bad design that people use viable strategies.
1-1-1 is a build order, not a play style. You can't continue to make tanks and banshees all throughout the game against a Tournament level player, eventually you will transition into lots of Marines and Marauders and Medivacs once you get to late game. Even mech will eventually have to transition into bio, because once you are on more than 2 bases your defenses will be far too weak and immobile. Which is why mech always results in 2 base timing attack, win or lose.
Also a couple people have mentioned the 1-1-1 being too powerful. Tanks have a lot of dps un-sieged and that is part of the problem. When a siege tank does just as much damaged seiged as unsieged wheres the dynamics, theres no timing protoss can exploit to snipe the tanks and slow the army down.
The second problem is clumping. In BW you would always get straggling units that would get sniped if you didn't pay attention to you army, this means good players could continuously harass the back of a moving army in order to weaken it and slow it down, so that by the time they reach your base they only have half the original power and you have double.
The third problem is PDD (dark swarm) being available to Terran in such an early stage of the game. Dark Swarm was hive tech in BW and was only really viable after researching consume. Now you have it at Starport Tech wtf. This is coupled with the fact that Siege Tanks are already a perfect unit for controlling space. PDD is also more powerful than Dark Swarm because it can't be used against you.
Dark Swarm was an ability Zerg needed to make lings and ultralisks viable lategame, why Terran has it now, I have no freaking clue.
Umm...you are pretty wrong. The root cause is that you're speaking in absolutes. Mech certainly does not always result in a 1-2 base timing... It is sustainable through the late game (very map dependant however, any map that can be split in half, Shakuras for example is a great map for mech).
I'm not going to bother talking about 1-1-1 allin, other than this small suggestion, try flanking- use your army as if they were your hands and the terran army were silly putty. Pull that shit apart in different directions. Much of the time it isn't the units you make but how you use them.
I mostly agree with you there PredY, and I think all of us can trust in your views as you are a Grandmaster level player. TvP was one of my favourite matchups to play, but as I climbed the ladder with Terran I started to get the feeling that Protoss lategame is too strong for me. Unless I got to win the game before the Protoss had too many colossi, I was doomed. And adding HT's into the mix just makes it worse as a Terran player.
Bio is still fun to play though, and I definitely do not want to play mech vs Protoss. Hopefully Blizzard will make some informative changes with the coming of HotS.
About the topic on TvP. From an avid observer, TvP is very interesting and entertaining, i can go all the way in fact to say that I bought sc2 just because I love that matchup. Yes, I do watch broodwar TvP where its Mech Pushes. But from an observer point of view its kind of blend, its just moving tanks forward and I do not understand much of it. Maybe Blizzard wanted to get more people to watch sc2 because fragile play is what makes it sooo nice to watch. Mech is definitely viable, sure its not fully developed but there are players who are always adding tanks into the mix. Pure mech is a viable BUT you must stop being arrogant and think that all you need is tanks tanks and more tanks and hellions and thors. Sc2 does not work that way, Ghosts are the key to mech. Ghost Mech is a style that makes Mech viable. I hope after this thread every T player would continue to look into Mech. But if they were to buff mech, imagine BioMech 0.0
On October 04 2011 05:02 EnderSword wrote: How did a Brood War > SC2 Thread, and what is basically a hidden balance whine thread become a featured post?
He acknowledges that some players simply don't play the style he's complaining about, but then says he didn't bother to check if those guys were doing well.
Whole thing seems silly, 'We only play this style....except for 1/1/1 which is dominating the scene, and mech play which I'm ignoring'
If most people wrote this, it'd just be closed.
The bioball right now is pretty successful, so there's not a lot of incentive to move away from it. There was a time when mech was almost unstoppable, and 1/1/1 shows the ability to mix bio and mech early for amazing results.
There's a lot of options here and we see more all the time, I don't think its bad design that people use viable strategies.
1-1-1 is a build order, not a play style. You can't continue to make tanks and banshees all throughout the game against a Tournament level player, eventually you will transition into lots of Marines and Marauders and Medivacs once you get to late game. Even mech will eventually have to transition into bio, because once you are on more than 2 bases your defenses will be far too weak and immobile. Which is why mech always results in 2 base timing attack, win or lose.
Also a couple people have mentioned the 1-1-1 being too powerful. Tanks have a lot of dps un-sieged and that is part of the problem. When a siege tank does just as much damaged seiged as unsieged wheres the dynamics, theres no timing protoss can exploit to snipe the tanks and slow the army down.
The second problem is clumping. In BW you would always get straggling units that would get sniped if you didn't pay attention to you army, this means good players could continuously harass the back of a moving army in order to weaken it and slow it down, so that by the time they reach your base they only have half the original power and you have double.
The third problem is PDD (dark swarm) being available to Terran in such an early stage of the game. Dark Swarm was hive tech in BW and was only really viable after researching consume. Now you have it at Starport Tech wtf. This is coupled with the fact that Siege Tanks are already a perfect unit for controlling space. PDD is also more powerful than Dark Swarm because it can't be used against you.
Dark Swarm was an ability Zerg needed to make lings and ultralisks viable lategame, why Terran has it now, I have no freaking clue.
Umm...you are pretty wrong. The root cause is that you're speaking in absolutes. Mech certainly does not always result in a 1-2 base timing... It is sustainable through the late game (very map dependant however, any map that can be split in half, Shakuras for example is a great map for mech).
I'm not going to bother talking about 1-1-1 allin, other than this small suggestion, try flanking- use your army as if they were your hands and the terran army were silly putty. Pull that shit apart in different directions. Much of the time it isn't the units you make but how you use them.
It shouldn't be map dependent.
Statistically it doesn't make sense to be on more than 2 bases as a meching Terran, you only ever really needed 3 bases in BW TvP on Fighting Spirit of which is a very open map. Now you don't have spider-mines and siege tanks are 3 supply and Protoss has recall in mid-game practically for free, there's simply no point in having more than 2 bases because your attack will come later but Protoss will be so much more powerful.
I used to play Mech Terran against Top Master/GM Protoss's on NA. I attempted many times to play a 3 base mech but 2 base is just so much more powerful for many reasons. The point of early 3 base mech is that you use the extra-economy to come out with a more powerful timing attack without needing to harass that much if at all. Toss can get 6 bases and go carriers it doesn't really matter, you can still win in BW.
However this doesn't work in SC2, for the following reasons. - Toss can have the same amount of bases and completely destroy you and cost-effectively. - Because of immobility, Mech requires being able to harass very effectively with a minimal amount of units, this is usually a 1 tank 2 vulture or 4 vulture drop. However because Toss doesn't need as many bases against mech Terran, it means Toss can just surround his 3 bases with cannons. Which means you have to do very powerful drops with lots of units, only MMMVG can do this. - Toss now has recall in early-mid game instead of lategame, recall was the bane of all Terrans in BW and it required a TON of tech. The way Terrans deal with recall these days is by putting spider mines everywhere in their main, because they are unable to move their army back in time and would simply lose otherwise. SC2 Terran does not have spidermines, if they put turrets everywhere then their timing attack will be many times weaker.
Conclusion, why go Mech when MMMVG is just so much better equipped to handle anything Protoss can do? simply there is no point going Mech unless you are just doing it for fun. But no-one is going to do that when money is on the line.
I played mech today because of this threat. One of my problem in MECH tvp is the mobility. I was in lost temple ( the new version, i forget always the name). I was doing masstank+marine+ghost+vicking+bunker+turret+walling with supply and i had cut the map in middle. What the toss did ? he just attack my base! T_T
I don'T know how to stop run by with slow tank. Maybe planetary fortress but honestly in lategame toss army destroy fortress in 1 sec.
On October 07 2011 02:16 Gyro_SC2 wrote: I played mech today because of this threat. One of my problem in MECH tvp is the mobility. I was in lost temple ( the new version, i forget always the name). I was doing masstank+marine+ghost+vicking+bunker+turret+walling with supply and i had cut the map in middle. What the toss did ? he just attack my base! T_T
I don'T know how to stop run by with slow tank. Maybe planetary fortress but honestly in lategame toss army destroy fortress in 1 sec.
that's what i was thinking about "ground control"... how about... hmm... sensorial towers + 2 planetaries in the runby path?? we know toss army destorys PFs in seconds, BUT!!!! thahts the needed seconds to unsiege, TRAP THE TOSS ARMY and siege in a way that toss has nowhere to go...
On October 06 2011 22:48 Keilah wrote: Marauders, fungal, warpgates, and all the pointless macro mechanics - the game would be better without them.
To clarify, anything that makes retreat impossible turns the game into 'oh Fux I lost a battle, that's game'
warpgate sucks, I like prisms but removing the ability from pylons (with a sight buff to gate units to make up for that) would improve the game.
Mules, chrono, spawn larva... do nothing to make the game more fun and make it tougher to balance. Why?
I also really miss the high ground advantage, high ground now does nothing but force a way to get vision.
i agree with almost everything.
in addition i'd give coloxen a fully ground unit status, nerf their mobility somehow, increase their damage but nerf their attack rate.
The Colossus is the only ranged mobile massive unit that deals high splash damage. (tanks arent massive and need to siege/unsiege) The Ultralisk is only melee and requires Hive tech and the Thor has only range 7 and no splash at all. Colossi need to be air-targetable for balance sake, otherwise mass Colossi would faceroll over any ground composition with impunity. The damage/rate of fire should not be touched, otherwise you one shot stuff in between volleys far too easily.
On October 06 2011 22:48 Keilah wrote: make emp researchable and remove +25 energy research from ghosts.
Colossi that cant be targetted by air plus this? Any sort of Immortal or Colossus push would 100% finish Terran, no contest. Snipe can only be used against Zealots and Templar (one of which is cloaked and has 120hp and the other you want to EMP) and Nukes and Cloak are far too situational. It would also mean Ghosts would have no less than three upgrades only for the Ghost itself, which is too much.
On October 06 2011 22:48 Keilah wrote: give ultralisks the ability to walk over zerlings and make them a bit smaller.
Ultralisk are already highly mobile, on creep they nearly have 4 speed, close to a Hellion, with 500 HP and 6 armor. If they can walk over the lings it would make Ling/Ultra swamp anything on the ground outside of your modified Colossi deathball.
On October 06 2011 22:48 Keilah wrote: make overlord speed a tier 1 upgrade.
Would give Zerg too much map vision early game. Zerg already possess very powerful early map presence, giving them fast overlords from Hatch tech is not needed.
On October 06 2011 22:48 Keilah wrote: and somehow give protoss the ability to effectively secure a 3rd expo.
Completely random statement that makes no sense. Protoss can take a 3rd just as easily as a Terran or a Zerg. Add in a pylon and you can warp in immediate reinforcements against any harass.
On October 04 2011 05:02 EnderSword wrote: How did a Brood War > SC2 Thread, and what is basically a hidden balance whine thread become a featured post?
He acknowledges that some players simply don't play the style he's complaining about, but then says he didn't bother to check if those guys were doing well.
Whole thing seems silly, 'We only play this style....except for 1/1/1 which is dominating the scene, and mech play which I'm ignoring'
If most people wrote this, it'd just be closed.
The bioball right now is pretty successful, so there's not a lot of incentive to move away from it. There was a time when mech was almost unstoppable, and 1/1/1 shows the ability to mix bio and mech early for amazing results.
There's a lot of options here and we see more all the time, I don't think its bad design that people use viable strategies.
1-1-1 is a build order, not a play style. You can't continue to make tanks and banshees all throughout the game against a Tournament level player, eventually you will transition into lots of Marines and Marauders and Medivacs once you get to late game. Even mech will eventually have to transition into bio, because once you are on more than 2 bases your defenses will be far too weak and immobile. Which is why mech always results in 2 base timing attack, win or lose.
Also a couple people have mentioned the 1-1-1 being too powerful. Tanks have a lot of dps un-sieged and that is part of the problem. When a siege tank does just as much damaged seiged as unsieged wheres the dynamics, theres no timing protoss can exploit to snipe the tanks and slow the army down.
The second problem is clumping. In BW you would always get straggling units that would get sniped if you didn't pay attention to you army, this means good players could continuously harass the back of a moving army in order to weaken it and slow it down, so that by the time they reach your base they only have half the original power and you have double.
The third problem is PDD (dark swarm) being available to Terran in such an early stage of the game. Dark Swarm was hive tech in BW and was only really viable after researching consume. Now you have it at Starport Tech wtf. This is coupled with the fact that Siege Tanks are already a perfect unit for controlling space. PDD is also more powerful than Dark Swarm because it can't be used against you.
Dark Swarm was an ability Zerg needed to make lings and ultralisks viable lategame, why Terran has it now, I have no freaking clue.
Umm...you are pretty wrong. The root cause is that you're speaking in absolutes. Mech certainly does not always result in a 1-2 base timing... It is sustainable through the late game (very map dependant however, any map that can be split in half, Shakuras for example is a great map for mech).
I'm not going to bother talking about 1-1-1 allin, other than this small suggestion, try flanking- use your army as if they were your hands and the terran army were silly putty. Pull that shit apart in different directions. Much of the time it isn't the units you make but how you use them.
It shouldn't be map dependent.
Statistically it doesn't make sense to be on more than 2 bases as a meching Terran, you only ever really needed 3 bases in BW TvP on Fighting Spirit of which is a very open map. Now you don't have spider-mines and siege tanks are 3 supply and Protoss has recall in mid-game practically for free, there's simply no point in having more than 2 bases because your attack will come later but Protoss will be so much more powerful.
I used to play Mech Terran against Top Master/GM Protoss's on NA. I attempted many times to play a 3 base mech but 2 base is just so much more powerful for many reasons. The point of early 3 base mech is that you use the extra-economy to come out with a more powerful timing attack without needing to harass that much if at all. Toss can get 6 bases and go carriers it doesn't really matter, you can still win in BW.
However this doesn't work in SC2, for the following reasons. - Toss can have the same amount of bases and completely destroy you and cost-effectively. - Because of immobility, Mech requires being able to harass very effectively with a minimal amount of units, this is usually a 1 tank 2 vulture or 4 vulture drop. However because Toss doesn't need as many bases against mech Terran, it means Toss can just surround his 3 bases with cannons. Which means you have to do very powerful drops with lots of units, only MMMVG can do this. - Toss now has recall in early-mid game instead of lategame, recall was the bane of all Terrans in BW and it required a TON of tech. The way Terrans deal with recall these days is by putting spider mines everywhere in their main, because they are unable to move their army back in time and would simply lose otherwise. SC2 Terran does not have spidermines, if they put turrets everywhere then their timing attack will be many times weaker.
Conclusion, why go Mech when MMMVG is just so much better equipped to handle anything Protoss can do? simply there is no point going Mech unless you are just doing it for fun. But no-one is going to do that when money is on the line.
True.
Those were the good old days of TvP in BW I really wish SC2 would be some kind of similar. Hopefully they include some kind of Vulture Mine with one of the next Addons.
On October 07 2011 03:54 FinestHour wrote: The only change that I think would be reasonable is making emp researchable to stop the exploit of certain timings.
I facepalm so hard when any terran says they have a hard time dealing with protoss. Please watch TSL3 finals. Naniwa should have won, and only lost because of the marauder imbalance. Marauders were, and still are, too strong vs. warpgate units. That means any early timing attack that involves marauders will be fatal to any protoss who doesn't have godly micro or scouts for it intensely. I literally rely on seven gateways to defend a 3rax push when I do a 1gate/2gate expand. You NEED seven gateways, or six with +1 armor. If you don't have it, marauders will tear you to shreds at the 10 minute mark. Off of one base. Tell me how this is not imba?
Now I'm hearing you cry about how hard it is for terran to win in the late game? Or how bored you are of marauders? I'm bored of losing to them because they do so much damage, bro.
I think Terran has many options, just not options that make sense against what Protoss has to make. Protoss can add some spice to the MU with alittle variance of units but for the most part it is static.
No one seems to be saying the MU isn't balanced, just that there is no variety. I think Protoss needs to be given the option to switch into something strong against bio but weak against mech. I like the idea of giving Protoss the option of a tech switch out of Warpgate that changes the attributes of already existing units, possibly even incorporating chrono boost in a different way. Not sure what those attributes would be, but it allows for the current balanced MU while allowing for alot more variety to unfold in MUs like PvT and PvP.
The last couple of days I've been playing Terran and going marine-tank (+ a couple of ghosts) vs Protoss. It's absolutely BRUTAL. Demolishes Stalker+Colossi based armies (Immortals don't even get to shoot if Protoss leads with them, btw) for cost as far as I can tell (way less gas cost for sure). The problem of course is getting the Protoss to engage on your terms which makes this decidedly NOT n00b friendly. The other problem is getting enough tanks to be scary and securing bases (you are stupidly immobile with a tank-based army). What I'm trying to say is that in straight-up encounters I think Mech (with marine-ghost support) rapes Protoss uber-hard, but I have no idea how to make it actually work (because I'm not good enough). I think that like in broodwar, it's something that is possible but so very hard to pull off. And with the extreme power of MMM the correct way to do it might never be discovered.
I find it bizarre that the OP claims TVP lacks unit variability. Lets take a look at the matchups:
Tvp: MMM into viking/ghost, situationally banshee and helion
Tvz: MM tank into viking/ghost, situationally banshee and helion
TVT: MM Tank or helion/tank/viking into, very rarely, raven/viking/bc/ghost odd combinations in the super late game.
Basically the same unit comps. If were talking strategical variability, I still dont get it. TVZ and TVP are replete with pressure timings, fast expansion builds, fast drops, standard push-out timings and the like. I just cant see how TVP is magically stale relative to the other match ups. It has everything the "ideal" rts match up has. The only thing it lacks, the thing the OP fixates on due to his nostalgia for the past [something I share but can have the objectivity to realize its a different game] is mech play.
Not much else to say. For all the length of his post the OP really never gets off the ground in making any sense because, as far as I can see, he just has no valid criticisms.
Forgive a newbie if what he says is crazy, but if the problem is that the PvT matchup has no zone-control of the type provided in other matchups by the Siege Tank, does the solution actually require making the Siege Tank work, or would any means of zone-control be adequate to improve the matchup?
Because, and correct me if my understanding is flawed, but it seems that this is what Khaydarin Amulet High Templar provided, isn't it? The ability for warp-in Storms would make the Protoss very strong defensively, but because High Templar are exceedingly vulnerable, slow and incapable of prolonged combat (due to running out of energy) they cannot push as strongly as, say, Colossi. And the warping in of Pylons would be a period of vulnerability, much like Tanks sieging/unsieging, allowing for Pylon pushes.
I mean, I am just a low-Diamond newbie and understand little of such things, but that sounds reasonable to me.
Honestly the Marauders only uses are in TvT and TvP. In TvZ sometimes yous ee them late game vs Ultras but that really not very necessary as fully upgraded tanks and marines with ghosts support are better anyways.
If the Marauder was removed( (^_^)!!!!!!) and Tanks were buffed to compensate (ie: deal full damage to shields or something) TvP would be a WAAAAAAAY better matchup to watch and why? because then you could truly appreciate the skills of both players instead of being oh herpderp Terran made marauders and Protoss made collosus and tried to 1a into each other el oh el another TvP in the books.
I seriously find it impossible to actually enjoy a TvP in this game.
And for the person who said Mech would be invincible because Carriers were what you got in BW and they are useless now.... they are only useless now because in TvP right now Terran is going vikings anyways and also has stim Marines with them. When Meching you aren't going to have the marines and you are going to run on as few vikings as possible to maintain a potent ground army and if you overcompensate...just like in current TvP it would mean Protoss ground could walk over them even if the Carriers got taken out.
lizzard_warish i think you got tvp correct but when you say "situationally banshee and hellion" for tvz maybe you should leave hellion as one of the "core" units in TvZ as i think they are very very frequently used and even opened with, also lets not forget thors in both TvZ and TvT, i think it would be better to sum up units that are viable/situational/mostly nonviable in every match up
NOTE: these terms are refer to units that are feasible army composition units
situtional: banshee (im tempted to put marauders here but i feel they are a pretty smooth transition against ultras once you have upgraded marines)
mostly nonviable: reapers battlecruisers
TvT
every unit has been used in TvT alot and the match up still changes with mass marine being a popular new strat by pros for instance
situational: reaper
on a sidenote i believe the design of the reaper to be a failure. i remember videos pre beta where they showed reapers doing raids on an enemy base while your enemy was away, currently i feel the reaper has been reduced to an early game scout/gimick unit, the production time and fragility of this unit does not allow for it to be part of an army, and they are too much of an investment to make a solid "enemy base raid" past 10:00 especially in TvP where one critical engagement usually decides the game (due to retreating being nearly impossible in sc2) wasting precious resources and time on reapers is going to make you that much weaker.
Mech will never be viable or used ever unless there is some incentive or strength to using Mech instead of Bio. As of right now Bio is A)more mobile B) more cost efficient C) easier to use
Unless the Marauder is removed this will never occur and most Classic Terran haters will probably go Sky Terran anyways if that were the case.
On October 07 2011 13:07 Raiznhell wrote: Mech will never be viable or used ever unless there is some incentive or strength to using Mech instead of Bio. As of right now Bio is A)more mobile B) more cost efficient C) easier to use
agreed. In most cases bio is really more cost effective than mech (late game TvZ bio vs utras; TvP) which is complete nonsense.
Good post. I view the main problems as being marauders + collossi (especially colossi.) They make the match boring to watch and boring to play.
Also the ball movement mechanics in sc2 mean splash damage is far more powerful than it should be. This leads me to the final problem in my eyes, hard counters. Counters should exist in sc but nothing that makes entire tech trees obsolete, makes the game stagnant.
On October 07 2011 12:57 NaturalHacks wrote: lizzard_warish i think you got tvp correct but when you say "situationally banshee and hellion" for tvz maybe you should leave hellion as one of the "core" units in TvZ as i think they are very very frequently used and even opened with, also lets not forget thors in both TvZ and TvT, i think it would be better to sum up units that are viable/situational/mostly nonviable in every match up
NOTE: these terms are refer to units that are feasible army composition units
situtional: banshee (im tempted to put marauders here but i feel they are a pretty smooth transition against ultras once you have upgraded marines)
mostly nonviable: reapers battlecruisers
TvT
every unit has been used in TvT alot and the match up still changes with mass marine being a popular new strat by pros for instance
situational: reaper
on a sidenote i believe the design of the reaper to be a failure. i remember videos pre beta where they showed reapers doing raids on an enemy base while your enemy was away, currently i feel the reaper has been reduced to an early game scout/gimick unit, the production time and fragility of this unit does not allow for it to be part of an army, and they are too much of an investment to make a solid "enemy base raid" past 10:00 especially in TvP where one critical engagement usually decides the game (due to retreating being nearly impossible in sc2) wasting precious resources and time on reapers is going to make you that much weaker.
Im not sure why you say reapers are not viable. Delayed reapers scouts are both common and good. Apart from that nice post.
On October 07 2011 12:07 Fanatic-Templar wrote: Forgive a newbie if what he says is crazy, but if the problem is that the PvT matchup has no zone-control of the type provided in other matchups by the Siege Tank, does the solution actually require making the Siege Tank work, or would any means of zone-control be adequate to improve the matchup?
Because, and correct me if my understanding is flawed, but it seems that this is what Khaydarin Amulet High Templar provided, isn't it? The ability for warp-in Storms would make the Protoss very strong defensively, but because High Templar are exceedingly vulnerable, slow and incapable of prolonged combat (due to running out of energy) they cannot push as strongly as, say, Colossi. And the warping in of Pylons would be a period of vulnerability, much like Tanks sieging/unsieging, allowing for Pylon pushes.
I mean, I am just a low-Diamond newbie and understand little of such things, but that sounds reasonable to me.
I agree. Protoss has very little in the way of a defender's advantage without a massive mineral sink into cannons against Terran (which just isn't viable TvP unless you are on 4++ bases, and even then its only effective against small numbers of bio units) or pre-emptive camping of HT that have been gathering energy since the Amulet nerf. Being able to warp in a HT with storm made some very crafty and elusive play possible that is simply not viable anymore. Though I admit it did seem overpowered at times to have warp in storms, I don't think there is any denying that it made mass expansions and more fluid non-death-ball type play from Protoss waaaay more viable. It is very nearly suicidal to split one's army TvP these days, as the cost effectiveness of small bio groups with a medivac against a roughly equal number of stalkers/zealots/sentries is pretty staggering. Some way of getting back the capacity to defend one's bases TvP without hurling twice as many units as have been dropped by the Terran (or having made precautionary HT sitting around in your base indefinitely, which is a somewhat ugly and inefficient way to solve the problem) would improve the matchup, I think.
On October 04 2011 05:02 EnderSword wrote: How did a Brood War > SC2 Thread, and what is basically a hidden balance whine thread become a featured post?
He acknowledges that some players simply don't play the style he's complaining about, but then says he didn't bother to check if those guys were doing well.
Whole thing seems silly, 'We only play this style....except for 1/1/1 which is dominating the scene, and mech play which I'm ignoring'
If most people wrote this, it'd just be closed.
The bioball right now is pretty successful, so there's not a lot of incentive to move away from it. There was a time when mech was almost unstoppable, and 1/1/1 shows the ability to mix bio and mech early for amazing results.
There's a lot of options here and we see more all the time, I don't think its bad design that people use viable strategies.
1-1-1 is a build order, not a play style. You can't continue to make tanks and banshees all throughout the game against a Tournament level player, eventually you will transition into lots of Marines and Marauders and Medivacs once you get to late game. Even mech will eventually have to transition into bio, because once you are on more than 2 bases your defenses will be far too weak and immobile. Which is why mech always results in 2 base timing attack, win or lose.
Also a couple people have mentioned the 1-1-1 being too powerful. Tanks have a lot of dps un-sieged and that is part of the problem. When a siege tank does just as much damaged seiged as unsieged wheres the dynamics, theres no timing protoss can exploit to snipe the tanks and slow the army down.
The second problem is clumping. In BW you would always get straggling units that would get sniped if you didn't pay attention to you army, this means good players could continuously harass the back of a moving army in order to weaken it and slow it down, so that by the time they reach your base they only have half the original power and you have double.
The third problem is PDD (dark swarm) being available to Terran in such an early stage of the game. Dark Swarm was hive tech in BW and was only really viable after researching consume. Now you have it at Starport Tech wtf. This is coupled with the fact that Siege Tanks are already a perfect unit for controlling space. PDD is also more powerful than Dark Swarm because it can't be used against you.
Dark Swarm was an ability Zerg needed to make lings and ultralisks viable lategame, why Terran has it now, I have no freaking clue.
Umm...you are pretty wrong. The root cause is that you're speaking in absolutes. Mech certainly does not always result in a 1-2 base timing... It is sustainable through the late game (very map dependant however, any map that can be split in half, Shakuras for example is a great map for mech).
I'm not going to bother talking about 1-1-1 allin, other than this small suggestion, try flanking- use your army as if they were your hands and the terran army were silly putty. Pull that shit apart in different directions. Much of the time it isn't the units you make but how you use them.
It shouldn't be map dependent.
Statistically it doesn't make sense to be on more than 2 bases as a meching Terran, you only ever really needed 3 bases in BW TvP on Fighting Spirit of which is a very open map. Now you don't have spider-mines and siege tanks are 3 supply and Protoss has recall in mid-game practically for free, there's simply no point in having more than 2 bases because your attack will come later but Protoss will be so much more powerful.
I used to play Mech Terran against Top Master/GM Protoss's on NA. I attempted many times to play a 3 base mech but 2 base is just so much more powerful for many reasons. The point of early 3 base mech is that you use the extra-economy to come out with a more powerful timing attack without needing to harass that much if at all. Toss can get 6 bases and go carriers it doesn't really matter, you can still win in BW.
However this doesn't work in SC2, for the following reasons. - Toss can have the same amount of bases and completely destroy you and cost-effectively. - Because of immobility, Mech requires being able to harass very effectively with a minimal amount of units, this is usually a 1 tank 2 vulture or 4 vulture drop. However because Toss doesn't need as many bases against mech Terran, it means Toss can just surround his 3 bases with cannons. Which means you have to do very powerful drops with lots of units, only MMMVG can do this. - Toss now has recall in early-mid game instead of lategame, recall was the bane of all Terrans in BW and it required a TON of tech. The way Terrans deal with recall these days is by putting spider mines everywhere in their main, because they are unable to move their army back in time and would simply lose otherwise. SC2 Terran does not have spidermines, if they put turrets everywhere then their timing attack will be many times weaker.
Conclusion, why go Mech when MMMVG is just so much better equipped to handle anything Protoss can do? simply there is no point going Mech unless you are just doing it for fun. But no-one is going to do that when money is on the line.
If protoss stays on the ground (never going air tech) that is an easy win for you on maps that can be split in half. I mech exclusively too against the same set of players you did. I mean it is very difficult to talk about this stuff without the context of the game but it sounds like you made some postioning errors or micro errors. Mech is stronger than protoss ground armies when controll properly.
Agree with Predy. I find problem is something to do with overall game design (multiplayer mostly). Bliz made some terrible decisions trying to put cool features in a high competitve rts-game. And made everything very fast and do terrible damage, which basically omitted any strategic play and good decision making. Then they dismissed such fundamental things as defender's advantage and unit training time. I don't think Dustin B and David K doing a great job, I really hope bliz hired better game designers, someone younger and fresher (like icefrog).
scbw's last patch was 1.16, wc3's last patch was 1.25, sc2 is already 1.41 (in one year!!!). Something is fundamentally wrong with the game.
On October 05 2011 13:28 xTrim wrote: Ok................................... I`ve read every single page since this thread started...
And there is only ONE ONE ONE thing I want to discuss regarding the match up....
Only a couple of people mentioned Sky terran.... We know, it`s not really developed nor will it be any time soon... But for instance...... Like an ultimate transition, in a game of many many bsaes, with sensorial towers and turrets and planetaries everywhere, you`d have upgraded ship stuff because of vikings...
What would happen if you, for instance put down 15 starports, a fusion core, get all your bio, load into 12 medivacs and drop 2 of them on each base, i dunno something like that, make a shitton of mules and sack svcs... then while this trade happens (drops, scvs, etc) reinforce with like 5 bcs, a couple of ravens, a shitload of banshees and some ghosts??
Is it just NOT possible?
It's possible, but as with all SKY strategies (like carriers, BCs and Broodlords), there's a HUGE timing window where the opposing player can just push and destroy your entire economy and half of your starports too.
I dunno, thats way too far into the late game. Think about it, if you do manage to bring out BC, viking, banshee, raven combo.... pheonix + void rays can take it down pretty easily. In the end, its the raven that truely helps win the battle for sky terran.
I feel raven is the biggest key to change TvP but i really dont see that much to the extent yet. Most people rather pump out more medivacs or ghosts, so the use of raven due to cost to performance in comparison to ghost or medivacs will remain bad.
On October 08 2011 04:09 bokeevboke wrote: And made everything very fast and do terrible damage, which basically omitted any strategic play and good decision making.
I've always thought it was the opposite, hence why I never particularly enjoyed WarCraft III. If speed were the problem, we could simply make tournaments play on Normal or slower speeds, rather than Faster.
On October 08 2011 04:09 bokeevboke wrote: scbw's last patch was 1.16, wc3's last patch was 1.25, sc2 is already 1.41 (in one year!!!). Something is fundamentally wrong with the game.
By your reckoning, Brood War is on patch 1.161.
Actually, it's patch 1.4.1. Or patch 1.041 to Brood War's patch 1.16.1 or 1.161.
And, for comparison's sake, Brood War's patch 1.4 came out in December 1998.
Also for comparison's sake, here's the balance changes from Brood War's patch 1.4:
Wraith: Decreased cost to 150 minerals, 100 gas. Increased cooldown rate of ground attack. Increased air to air damage to 20. Dropship: Increased speed slightly. Science Vessel: Decreased cost to 100 minerals, 225 gas. Increased acceleration Increased overall damage of Irradiate Increased sight radius Battlecruiser: Increased starting armor to 3 Increased Yamato Cannon damage to 260 Goliath: Increased ground damage to 12 Increased effectiveness of weapon upgrade on ground to air weapon system Nuke: Nuclear Missiles build faster ComSat: Decreased energy cost to 50 Starport: Decrease cost of Starport to 150 minerals, 100 gas Decreased add-on cost of Control Tower to 50 minerals, 50 gas Decreased build time
Archon: Increased acceleration Dragoon: Decreased cost to 125 minerals, 50 gas Decreased build time Increased range upgrade (Singularity Charge) by 1 High Templar: Decreased energy cost of Hallucination to 100 Scout: Increased Air to Air damage to 28 Base Armor of Scout changed from 1 to 0 Increased shields to 100 and hit points to 150 Increased cooldown rate of ground attack Carrier: Changed build cost to 350 minerals, and 250 gas Increased hit points of Carrier to 300 Increased starting armor of Carrier to 4 Increased Interceptor shields and hitpoints to 40 Increased Interceptor damage to 6 Decreased Interceptor cost to 25 Arbiter: Decreased cost to 100 minerals, 350 gas Shuttle: Increased build time Reaver: Increased build time Templar Archives: Increased cost to 150 minerals, 200 gas. Citadel of Adun: Decreased cost to 150 minerals, 100 gas. Stargate: Decreased cost to 150 minerals, 150 gas Decreased build time Robotics Facility: Increased build time Robotics Support Bay: Increased cost to 150 minerals, 100 gas Observatory: Decreased cost to 50 minerals, 100 gas Forge: Decreased cost to 150 minerals Photon Cannon: Decreased build time Fleet Beacon: Decreased cost of "Increased Carrier capacity" upgrade to 100 minerals, 100 gas Decreased research time of "Increased Carrier capacity" upgrade Shield Battery: Increased starting energy to 100 Increased effective range of “Recharge Shields” ability
Overlord: Increased speed bonus for "Pneumatized Carapace" upgrade Decreased research time of "Ventral Sacs" upgrade Scourge: Increase hit points to 25 Hydralisk: Increased build time Queen: Increased range of Broodling by 1 Increase energy cost of Parasite to 75 Decreased Parasite casting range to 12 Defiler: Increased cost to 50 minerals, 150 gas Hatchery: Decreased the speed at which the Hatchery/Lair/Hive spawn new larva Decreased build cost to 300 minerals Increased build time Sunken Colony: Decreased cost of Sunken Colony upgrade to 50 minerals Decreased build time Increased attack rate of Sunken Colony Increased damage to 40 Spore Colony: Decreased build time Changed damage type to normal Greater Spire: Increased build time
Stylistically it seems kind of weird to see guys in space suits taking on giant robots and psychic energy things. Is this Starcraft or Warhammer 40K?
Also one thing I noticed about TvZ in SC2 is that you always have to run away from banelings. In SC1 you could run towards lurkers in certain situations, but with banelings you have to retreat.
One more thing I just thought of: It was pretty amazing how good SC1 terrans were at cleaning up recalls, but in SC2 if you have 8 marauders in your base and your army isn't right there to deal with it you're going to lose half of your buildings in seconds.
@op nice read, and in most parts i agree with you. while i am most of the time a bad player (platinum) and only recently began watching starcraft 1, i noticed that i enjoy watching zerg and especially terran way more in sc1 than in sc2. personally i dont like terran in sc2 at all, neither to see, nor to play, in difference to sc1.
i think the main reason is bio. if i think of a future terrean army, i imagine something like the sc1 army, like the more upgraded modern military that learned some tricks, a mixture of foot soldiers and tanks or tanks and buggys and defensive mines. i cant really imagine a bunch of guys in armored suits with a small spaceshuttle flying above them that heals them with a ray faster than a zealot or a zergling can kill them. especially not a guy in a heavy armored suit who takes drugs to be faster than everything except a speedling. he should be a human. it just sounds wrong.
apart from that bio feels way less strategic, while i think that micro plays a bigger role, positioning and terrain become less important. i think that the fight is pretty boring because of that.
On October 08 2011 12:39 BrosephBrostar wrote: Stylistically it seems kind of weird to see guys in space suits taking on giant robots and psychic energy things. Is this Starcraft or Warhammer 40K?
Also one thing I noticed about TvZ in SC2 is that you always have to run away from banelings. In SC1 you could run towards lurkers in certain situations, but with banelings you have to retreat.
stylistically it's even worse, starcraft 2 takes itself serious while not having guys who are genetic breeded super-soldiers with special anti-vehicle-equipment but only normal criminals who shoot the robots with machine-guns and grenade-launchers.
i think the loss of e.g. reaver drops is more sad. but i also think that sc1 had more different micro-situations than sc2 where it's pretty much about kiting and splitting all the time.
The Colossus is the only ranged mobile massive unit that deals high splash damage. (tanks arent massive and need to siege/unsiege) The Ultralisk is only melee and requires Hive tech and the Thor has only range 7 and no splash at all. Colossi need to be air-targetable for balance sake, otherwise mass Colossi would faceroll over any ground composition with impunity. The damage/rate of fire should not be touched, otherwise you one shot stuff in between volleys far too easily.
you are talking about something you imagined, not what i wrote. colossus with nerfed mobility wouldn't be viable. there was a reason mass reaver wasn't a good strategy in bw. what i suggested was to make the colossus more reaver-like- maybe the mobility and attack rate wouldn't be enough.
Colossi that cant be targetted by air plus this? Any sort of Immortal or Colossus push would 100% finish Terran, no contest. Snipe can only be used against Zealots and Templar (one of which is cloaked and has 120hp and the other you want to EMP) and Nukes and Cloak are far too situational. It would also mean Ghosts would have no less than three upgrades only for the Ghost itself, which is too much.
amulet was removed after a semi-balanced period when protoss started to win more vs terran in korea. but it wasn't near the 70% winrate as it is in tvp now. and they removed amulet. now protoss sucks ass vs terran and they changed basically nothing that effects the matchup. but i guess you love your favorite race too much to comprehend this. ghost is already like the strongest unit in game vs protoss and vs a nerfed colossus it would be even more powerful.
Ultralisk are already highly mobile, on creep they nearly have 4 speed, close to a Hellion, with 500 HP and 6 armor. If they can walk over the lings it would make Ling/Ultra swamp anything on the ground outside of your modified Colossi deathball.
ultralisks are only mobile on creep, they are dancing around retardedly whenever they don't have full open ground. i don't even play zerg, it's just painful how 10 ultras look like attacking in any kind of non-open terrain. they are the clumsiest unit in game, easily countered by terrans. but i guess you are too much in love with your favorite race to even imagine something that barely effects the matchups
Would give Zerg too much map vision early game. Zerg already possess very powerful early map presence, giving them fast overlords from Hatch tech is not needed.
maybe it's not needed, but a 100/100 upgrade that takes time to research makes it easier to scout with zerg. zerg has got the clumsiest ways to scout a base. if they adjust the research time properly, this would only mean that where a zerg sends a sac overlord to scout the p/t base it wouldn't necessarily die half way through when it didn't see any information.
Completely random statement that makes no sense. Protoss can take a 3rd just as easily as a Terran or a Zerg. Add in a pylon and you can warp in immediate reinforcements against any harass.
it's primarily meant for the pvz matchup and obviously it's a complex question. but based on your last sentence you're simply not able to comprehend that protoss has the hardest time securing a new base, so your comment is 100% worthless.
The Colossus is the only ranged mobile massive unit that deals high splash damage. (tanks arent massive and need to siege/unsiege) The Ultralisk is only melee and requires Hive tech and the Thor has only range 7 and no splash at all. Colossi need to be air-targetable for balance sake, otherwise mass Colossi would faceroll over any ground composition with impunity. The damage/rate of fire should not be touched, otherwise you one shot stuff in between volleys far too easily.
you are talking about something you imagined, not what i wrote. colossus with nerfed mobility wouldn't be viable. there was a reason mass reaver wasn't a good strategy in bw. what i suggested was to make the colossus more reaver-like- maybe the mobility and attack rate wouldn't be enough.
Your modified not-air-targettable Colossi, even with some reduced mobility would still be nothing more than tanks with slightly less range that don't need to siege up to do their splash damage. If you go for Colossi, you already sacrifice some mobility as the Colossi don't make for a good defense against being dropped and the like, that wouldn't change. But the deathball would be a lot stronger, even it was a little slower. The only unit Terran would have that could effectively target a Colossus that cannot be targetted by air are Siege Tanks, and those are rather crap against Protoss for several reasons. Zerg would have no ranged unit at all, Infestors with Neural Parasite at range 7 would not be able to help out either.
On October 07 2011 03:21 Thezzy wrote: Colossi that cant be targetted by air plus this? Any sort of Immortal or Colossus push would 100% finish Terran, no contest. Snipe can only be used against Zealots and Templar (one of which is cloaked and has 120hp and the other you want to EMP) and Nukes and Cloak are far too situational. It would also mean Ghosts would have no less than three upgrades only for the Ghost itself, which is too much.
amulet was removed after a semi-balanced period when protoss started to win more vs terran in korea. but it wasn't near the 70% winrate as it is in tvp now. and they removed amulet. now protoss sucks ass vs terran and they changed basically nothing that effects the matchup. but i guess you love your favorite race too much to comprehend this. ghost is already like the strongest unit in game vs protoss and vs a nerfed colossus it would be even more powerful.
Amulet was removed because warp-in storms were overpowered. Storms themselves were fine, Amulet itself was fine and HT themselves were fine, it was the combination of the three that was overpowered. You could instantly drop any Storm on the map in the lategame, whereever and whenever. Imagine Terran being able to call in a Ghost from the air (like a MULE) to insta EMP anywhere. I actually partially disagreed with the complete removal of Amulet, I would've found it better if Amulet would have remained in effect for any High Templar produced out of a Gateway instead of a Warpgate. (and then the upgrade cost could be reduced as well).
Ghosts are something Protoss seem to think is nearly free when Ghosts are actually very expensive and the only reason Terran really gets them, is for EMP. Just two Ghosts, with the Academy and the Moebius Reactor cost a grand total of 650 minerals and 350 gas. That is a large amount of marines and/or marauders Terran won't have. The Ghosts themselves, outside of EMP aren't that great, early to mid game Snipe is mostly wasted as you need energy for EMP and just two Ghosts mean just two EMPs and that's it.
Ghosts suck against Colossi, the 100 shields you can take off is meaningless compared to its 9 range, 150 shields and the fact that EMP is far better spent on the Protoss main army. Going Colossi against a Terran who is Ghost heavy is highly effective because Colossi straight up kill them, EMP or not.
Ultralisk are already highly mobile, on creep they nearly have 4 speed, close to a Hellion, with 500 HP and 6 armor. If they can walk over the lings it would make Ling/Ultra swamp anything on the ground outside of your modified Colossi deathball.
ultralisks are only mobile on creep, they are dancing around retardedly whenever they don't have full open ground. i don't even play zerg, it's just painful how 10 ultras look like attacking in any kind of non-open terrain. they are the clumsiest unit in game, easily countered by terrans. but i guess you are too much in love with your favorite race to even imagine something that barely effects the matchups
Ultralisks still have nearly 3 speed off creep, equal to a Stalker and they cannot be slowed. I have seen plenty of Ultralisk hordes rampaging through the map and dealing a huge amount of damage. Yeah if Zerg throws them into a Mech deathball with Sieged up tanks they die horribly, the same goes for many things. As for clumsy, they are melee and thus have trouble surrounding a target but that applies to all melee units, not just the UItralisk. Have you ever seen mass Thor trying to kill something? Is it painful to look at given their slow mobility and how their size makes for a terrible concave. Ultralisk mobility (lets not forget Nydus and Overlord drops) is not an issue I've seen Zergs struggle with at all.
On October 07 2011 03:21 Thezzy wrote: Would give Zerg too much map vision early game. Zerg already possess very powerful early map presence, giving them fast overlords from Hatch tech is not needed.
maybe it's not needed, but a 100/100 upgrade that takes time to research makes it easier to scout with zerg. zerg has got the clumsiest ways to scout a base. if they adjust the research time properly, this would only mean that where a zerg sends a sac overlord to scout the p/t base it wouldn't necessarily die half way through when it didn't see any information.
Zerg can somewhat get garantueed information when saccing an Overlord, why else are so many Zergs purposefully saccing Overlords. It's not that there are better alternatives but how early Overlords can scout. Even with their current speed, especially in ZvZ or on close positions that first Overlord can see everything until you kill it. When a Zerg decides to send an early Overlord to scout the enemy base and is willing to sac it, the Zerg will run the risk of losing the Overlord without seeing anything, this applies to all scouting. I could send in a Reaper instead of a costly scan, only for it to jump straight into a bunch of Stalkers and Protoss could end up sending an Observer straight into a Spore Crawler.
On October 07 2011 03:21 Thezzy wrote: Completely random statement that makes no sense. Protoss can take a 3rd just as easily as a Terran or a Zerg. Add in a pylon and you can warp in immediate reinforcements against any harass.
it's primarily meant for the pvz matchup and obviously it's a complex question. but based on your last sentence you're simply not able to comprehend that protoss has the hardest time securing a new base, so your comment is 100% worthless.
As far as I know this is a TvP discussion, why bring up something from PvZ like this? Taking a 3rd is just as risky for Terran until that Planetary goes up (and a Planetary is only useful when attacked) and if you snipe the SCV the whole CC stops building until you get another one over there. Zerg may have it a little easier for a 3rd but Zerg revolves around getting more expansions than their opponent as Zerg units are not as cost effective. Ofcourse a Protoss taking a 3rd is taking a risk, this applies to all races, however, compared to the other two races, you can warp in instant reinforcements (if the harassing force is not too large) to defend it with a Pylon. If the harassing force is too large, you would lose the 3rd, same as Terran or Zerg would. Now I don't play PvZ (obviously) so there may or may not be an issue with Protoss taking a third against Zerg, but such a discussion has little relevance in a TvP discussion.
People that claim that Z has the most "clumsy" scouting are absolutely clueless and should be discredited with that single statement.
Z has by far the best scouting and map control. All races have to play blind to some degree, but OL saccing and OL/ling map control is far superior to everything, until maybe sensor towers late game.
Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
Master T here as well
To add, anything that requires a high degree of micro will also add that much more to your "macro" Through anaylsis of my TvP's I realize my scv production/supp depot is no where near my TvZ's because dropping/stutter stepping and always roaming the map is very micro intensive that it kills my macro.
I've been trying and trying mech and man, it's depressing. It's sad to say but absolutely true; mech is utterly inferior in TvP.
You trade away mobility but don't really gain anything from it. You're forced to build Vikings because you have no other mobile anti-air option. You can lose to almost any Protoss unit combination/strategy late game. Ever see an immortal drop on a siege line? It's disgusting. Me and a friend got something like 8 Immortals dropped out of a prism with no micro killing 18+ spread siege tanks while losing 1 or 2 Immortals.
With no ability to zone out areas of the map to force engagement (like spider mines) and no ability to have built in anti-air (goliaths) I just can't see pure mech (or ghost mech) being viable. I've won some games with it, but it's if something silly happens like I kill every probe they have with BFH or they all-in me.
If you actually play against someone who knows how to deal with mech, it's actually just kind of a joke.
Marine/hellion/tank style may have some potential but it's conceptually difficult to imagine needing 2 tech trees of upgrades to stay even with a chrono'd forge being a good idea. And with any mech play you still need to build Vikings and Ghosts, so what's the point? You trade all the advantages of MMM bio play away and gain literally nothing.
On October 09 2011 16:16 MLG_Wiggin wrote: I've been trying and trying mech and man, it's depressing. It's sad to say but absolutely true; mech is utterly inferior in TvP.
You trade away mobility but don't really gain anything from it. You're forced to build Vikings because you have no other mobile anti-air option. You can lose to almost any Protoss unit combination/strategy late game. Ever see an immortal drop on a siege line? It's disgusting. Me and a friend got something like 8 Immortals dropped out of a prism with no micro killing 18+ spread siege tanks while losing 1 or 2 Immortals.
With no ability to zone out areas of the map to force engagement (like spider mines) and no ability to have built in anti-air (goliaths) I just can't see pure mech (or ghost mech) being viable. I've won some games with it, but it's if something silly happens like I kill every probe they have with BFH or they all-in me.
If you actually play against someone who knows how to deal with mech, it's actually just kind of a joke.
Marine/hellion/tank style may have some potential but it's conceptually difficult to imagine needing 2 tech trees of upgrades to stay even with a chrono'd forge being a good idea. And with any mech play you still need to build Vikings and Ghosts, so what's the point? You trade all the advantages of MMM bio play away and gain literally nothing.
Yea, but at this point i win about 10% of my bio TvP's so i figure i might as well do mech and have fun while i lose. I think the MU is decently balanced but im just forced into a style i hate.
I mean, c'mon, I can't build a SINGLE unit out of my robo bay that can shoot up! It's disgusting. With no ability to fire at the sky, thinking inside my box is useless!
On October 09 2011 16:57 Itrees wrote: I'm just sad I can't play pure robo in PvT!
I mean, c'mon, I can't build a SINGLE unit out of my robo bay that can shoot up! It's disgusting. With no ability to fire at the sky, thinking inside my box is useless!
Thread is about how stagnated TvP match up has come in terms of strategy and unit compositions. Not whining about robo units that can't shoot up.
On October 09 2011 16:57 Itrees wrote: I'm just sad I can't play pure robo in PvT!
I mean, c'mon, I can't build a SINGLE unit out of my robo bay that can shoot up! It's disgusting. With no ability to fire at the sky, thinking inside my box is useless!
On October 09 2011 16:57 Itrees wrote: I'm just sad I can't play pure robo in PvT!
I mean, c'mon, I can't build a SINGLE unit out of my robo bay that can shoot up! It's disgusting. With no ability to fire at the sky, thinking inside my box is useless!
You never played brood war did you....?
more like, u never make an effort to think, don't u? it's been written bizzillion of times that Terran isn't Toss. Terran's rax and factory tech paths were supposed to be self-sufficient, while having limited synergy possibilities.
Blizzard tried to fuck up this concept and turn T into P by raising the correlation of these two paths but making mech only armies less independent.
On October 08 2011 18:53 Thezzy wrote: Your modified not-air-targettable Colossi, even with some reduced mobility would still be nothing more than tanks with slightly less range that don't need to siege up to do their splash damage. If you go for Colossi, you already sacrifice some mobility as the Colossi don't make for a good defense against being dropped and the like, that wouldn't change. But the deathball would be a lot stronger, even it was a little slower. The only unit Terran would have that could effectively target a Colossus that cannot be targetted by air are Siege Tanks, and those are rather crap against Protoss for several reasons. Zerg would have no ranged unit at all, Infestors with Neural Parasite at range 7 would not be able to help out either.
Coloxen are probably the most mobile of the siege units with cliffwalking and walking over units. i think the reaver was a good example- it was the slowest unit ever, still siege range and splash slow rate big damage. they were nowhere near overpowered. it's just a question of tweaking the nerfs/changes
however this was only an idea so don't get all serious about it
Amulet was removed because warp-in storms were overpowered. Storms themselves were fine, Amulet itself was fine and HT themselves were fine, it was the combination of the three that was overpowered. You could instantly drop any Storm on the map in the lategame, whereever and whenever. Imagine Terran being able to call in a Ghost from the air (like a MULE) to insta EMP anywhere. I actually partially disagreed with the complete removal of Amulet, I would've found it better if Amulet would have remained in effect for any High Templar produced out of a Gateway instead of a Warpgate. (and then the upgrade cost could be reduced as well).
Ghosts are something Protoss seem to think is nearly free when Ghosts are actually very expensive and the only reason Terran really gets them, is for EMP. Just two Ghosts, with the Academy and the Moebius Reactor cost a grand total of 650 minerals and 350 gas. That is a large amount of marines and/or marauders Terran won't have. The Ghosts themselves, outside of EMP aren't that great, early to mid game Snipe is mostly wasted as you need energy for EMP and just two Ghosts mean just two EMPs and that's it.
Ghosts suck against Colossi, the 100 shields you can take off is meaningless compared to its 9 range, 150 shields and the fact that EMP is far better spent on the Protoss main army. Going Colossi against a Terran who is Ghost heavy is highly effective because Colossi straight up kill them, EMP or not.
yeah instant storm like that was maybe a bit too much, but terran was behind in the metagame at that point, and protoss is like 3x as much behind now with worse rates. that argument that ghost is expensive/etc is not valid because it's a spellcaster that counters basically every protoss unit, it's also more resilient than other spellcasters and is faster, can cloak, and has an attack.
ofc they suck vs colossi 1vs1. they're however invaluable in a terran composition (which to your surprise might have vikings vs coloxen;)- 1 emp can be worth more than 10 marauders, blanket emping any kind of protoss army makes them like 30-40% weaker in a second
Ultralisks still have nearly 3 speed off creep, equal to a Stalker and they cannot be slowed. I have seen plenty of Ultralisk hordes rampaging through the map and dealing a huge amount of damage. Yeah if Zerg throws them into a Mech deathball with Sieged up tanks they die horribly, the same goes for many things. As for clumsy, they are melee and thus have trouble surrounding a target but that applies to all melee units, not just the UItralisk. Have you ever seen mass Thor trying to kill something? Is it painful to look at given their slow mobility and how their size makes for a terrible concave. Ultralisk mobility (lets not forget Nydus and Overlord drops) is not an issue I've seen Zergs struggle with at all.
they have decent run speed, but they have incredible troubles surrounding anything or attacking in tight places. thor is clumsy too but they have range so they don't need to run that close, it's like 100 times easier to attack with them just because they're ranged. it's just painful to watch anytime someone goes ultras and has most of them dancing around like retards, it reminds me of dragoons in bw
this issue couldn't be solved with just tweaking some numbers though, so probably it'd be too hard to balance
Zerg can somewhat get garantueed information when saccing an Overlord, why else are so many Zergs purposefully saccing Overlords. It's not that there are better alternatives but how early Overlords can scout. Even with their current speed, especially in ZvZ or on close positions that first Overlord can see everything until you kill it. When a Zerg decides to send an early Overlord to scout the enemy base and is willing to sac it, the Zerg will run the risk of losing the Overlord without seeing anything, this applies to all scouting. I could send in a Reaper instead of a costly scan, only for it to jump straight into a bunch of Stalkers and Protoss could end up sending an Observer straight into a Spore Crawler.
Overlord w/o speed is the slowest unit in game. not really comparable to reaper/observer/halu phx/scan- zerg has got the clumsiest way to scout in early game/midgame, that's kind of obvious
ofc everything can be shut down, that's a banality. mirror matchups also don't matter cuz they're obviously 100% balanced
i'm not playing zerg btw it just always disturbed me
As far as I know this is a TvP discussion, why bring up something from PvZ like this? Taking a 3rd is just as risky for Terran until that Planetary goes up (and a Planetary is only useful when attacked) and if you snipe the SCV the whole CC stops building until you get another one over there. Zerg may have it a little easier for a 3rd but Zerg revolves around getting more expansions than their opponent as Zerg units are not as cost effective. Ofcourse a Protoss taking a 3rd is taking a risk, this applies to all races, however, compared to the other two races, you can warp in instant reinforcements (if the harassing force is not too large) to defend it with a Pylon. If the harassing force is too large, you would lose the 3rd, same as Terran or Zerg would. Now I don't play PvZ (obviously) so there may or may not be an issue with Protoss taking a third against Zerg, but such a discussion has little relevance in a TvP discussion.
yea this is a tvp discussion i just wrote down some random ideas
anyways i know how a 3rd can be defended but it's much easier to secure as z/t (super mobile units, PF+repair, bunkers). warp in is nice but arguably it's still harder to defend vs harass as p and it's not just about harass
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
What if you open with a tank or two to secure your FFE? I do this on occasion when I practice with a friend of mine it seems to hold gateway based armies with only a few immortals. It is a shame you can't keep making them but the niche of early defense is better than nothing I guess.
On October 09 2011 20:42 tokicheese wrote: What if you open with a tank or two to secure your FFE? I do this on occasion when I practice with a friend of mine it seems to hold gateway based armies with only a few immortals. It is a shame you can't keep making them but the niche of early defense is better than nothing I guess.
wouldn't more bio with bunkers/repair just easier then? tanks are best vs stalkers and bio is already good vs stalkers, and by getting bio u wouldn't invest in a tech that won't be of much use later on
On October 08 2011 18:53 Thezzy wrote: Amulet was removed because warp-in storms were overpowered. Storms themselves were fine, Amulet itself was fine and HT themselves were fine, it was the combination of the three that was overpowered. You could instantly drop any Storm on the map in the lategame, whereever and whenever. Imagine Terran being able to call in a Ghost from the air (like a MULE) to insta EMP anywhere. I actually partially disagreed with the complete removal of Amulet, I would've found it better if Amulet would have remained in effect for any High Templar produced out of a Gateway instead of a Warpgate. (and then the upgrade cost could be reduced as well).
Ghosts are something Protoss seem to think is nearly free when Ghosts are actually very expensive and the only reason Terran really gets them, is for EMP. Just two Ghosts, with the Academy and the Moebius Reactor cost a grand total of 650 minerals and 350 gas. That is a large amount of marines and/or marauders Terran won't have. The Ghosts themselves, outside of EMP aren't that great, early to mid game Snipe is mostly wasted as you need energy for EMP and just two Ghosts mean just two EMPs and that's it.
Ghosts suck against Colossi, the 100 shields you can take off is meaningless compared to its 9 range, 150 shields and the fact that EMP is far better spent on the Protoss main army. Going Colossi against a Terran who is Ghost heavy is highly effective because Colossi straight up kill them, EMP or not.
yeah instant storm like that was maybe a bit too much, but terran was behind in the metagame at that point, and protoss is like 3x as much behind now with worse rates. that argument that ghost is expensive/etc is not valid because it's a spellcaster that counters basically every protoss unit, it's also more resilient than other spellcasters and is faster, can cloak, and has an attack.
ofc they suck vs colossi 1vs1. they're however invaluable in a terran composition (which to your surprise might have vikings vs coloxen;)- 1 emp can be worth more than 10 marauders, blanket emping any kind of protoss army makes them like 30-40% weaker in a second
Storm similarly weakens a Bio ball. However, a Storm forces the ball to run to stay alive or get vaporized. Whilst running, Stim is running out and no damage is dealt vs the Protoss army. EMP may not be dodgeable, but it also means all your units can freely keep shooting. There is also the big difference that EMP cannot kill and is thus worthless to spam after throwing 2-3 EMPs to blanket the army, whereas Storm blankets can demolish everything.
Ghost cost is still a valid argument, no matter how invaluable they are. Each one is 200 minerals and 100 gas, which is equal to bunch of Bio units or Vikings you don't get, mostly just for the EMP. Even if you need to get them 100% of the time, the resources you put it into them could be used somewhere else. The Ghost hardly counters every unit, it is merely able to deal significant damage to any shielded unit. The other spells on the Ghost aren't all that great, yes you can snipe a Zealot or High Templar but you need to be in range and 3 snipes cost as much as an EMP. Cloak is generally only used in combination with EMP to ensure they land and don't get Feedbacked. Nukes are highly situational, I'd probably only use them on a Pylon farm.
EMP may nullify a HTs energy, but if a Terran engages a Protoss ball with Storms and has no EMP it can be pretty much GG right there. I don't like how EMP is nearly mandatory to prevent that, it sometimes feels like a bit of a coin flip. A similar occurence is with Vikings vs Colossi with range 9. Without Vikings, the bio ball can vaporize amazingly fast. With Vikings, it can be the opposite.
Ghosts are faster than HTs, and I do admit I'm puzzled why Blizzard made HTs so slow, but the main attack auto from a Ghost is hardly worth mentioning as you'll rarely have more than 5-8 Ghosts on the field. Two marines with stim do more damage to a Ghost, only one marine vs non-light targets.
I dont know why some people like mech. Its composition which makes game really boring for me. Mech vs mech in tvt is 40 min mining and and then big battle (its deathball vs deathball situation and mech vs toss would be same situation). Also i consider mech strategy which prefer low-apm players (goody) because you just dont need too much multitasking do siege tanks and wait wait wait siege more tanks. When you go bio you need great micro, macro and multitasking to win on top level.
emp vs storm has been discussed countless of times here- emp pros: has longer range, larger area of effect, deals damage instantly, and is useful vs every single p unit, also longer range than feedback
storm pros: can kill
there is a reason you don't see games where a bunch of templars run in front of the toss army and storm all the terran army and then the terran loses. the opposite happens in every 2nd tvp game
if you dodge a storm with 1 sec reaction time, your army took 20 damage, that's 1000 damage for 50 units in 1 second (a bit less in reality)
the emp removes at least 2-3 times, at most 7,5 times of that damage in an instant, makes immortals useless and archons plain dead
so is that 1 seconds of running away worth more, or 3 times as much damage in a milisecond?
snipe is also ridiculous sometimes, not really in tvp, but i remember that game when MVP got like 20 ghosts vs july and sniped a huge number of ultras, so its definitely good if you get a good mass of ghosts
and even while spells vs spells is arguable the unit itself is like 10 times better than ht cuz it can attack and moves faster. the attack is also very good against certain units- i remember Thorzain used like 12 ghosts in a game to clear out like 40 zerglings in 3 seconds, theyre also great vs banshee/muta/phoenix
so the cost is very justified. not a good argument since every fucking tech unit requires money... ht with storm requires 2 tech buildings and 200/200 research which together is like 3 times the ghost academys cost.
i don't say it needs to be nerfed but it's strange design to me that 10 supply of the terrans 200 is able to wipe out effectively 30-40% of the toss army in a second with one instant cast aoe spell. so if i could adjust things i would tweak the ghost a little.
emp vs storm has been discussed countless of times here- emp pros: has longer range, larger area of effect, deals damage instantly, and is useful vs every single p unit, also longer range than feedback
storm pros: can kill
there is a reason you don't see games where a bunch of templars run in front of the toss army and storm all the terran army and then the terran loses. the opposite happens in every 2nd tvp game
if you dodge a storm with 1 sec reaction time, your army took 20 damage, that's 1000 damage for 50 units in 1 second (a bit less in reality)
the emp removes at least 2-3 times, at most 7,5 times of that damage in an instant, makes immortals useless and archons plain dead
so is that 1 seconds of running away worth more, or 3 times as much damage in a milisecond?
snipe is also ridiculous sometimes, not really in tvp, but i remember that game when MVP got like 20 ghosts vs july and sniped a huge number of ultras, so its definitely good if you get a good mass of ghosts
and even while spells vs spells is arguable the unit itself is like 10 times better than ht cuz it can attack and moves faster. the attack is also very good against certain units- i remember Thorzain used like 12 ghosts in a game to clear out like 40 zerglings in 3 seconds, theyre also great vs banshee/muta/phoenix
so the cost is very justified. not a good argument since every fucking tech unit requires money... ht with storm requires 2 tech buildings and 200/200 research which together is like 3 times the ghost academys cost.
i don't say it needs to be nerfed but it's strange design to me that 10 supply of the terrans 200 is able to wipe out effectively 30-40% of the toss army in a second with one instant cast aoe spell. so if i could adjust things i would tweak the ghost a little.
Don't forget you have to run from the Storm and even if you have split second movement, if you land the storm in the middle of the bioball, half of it will take a lot more than 20 damage. Whilst moving, no damage is put on the Protoss army.
Snipe is highly effective against lategame Zerg, agreed, but lategame Zerg against Terran is just a nightmare, Zerg can instantly reinforce a whole new 200 food army from saving up larva whilst the Terran can't reproduce an army that fast. Perhaps Ultra vs Ghost does need looking at, but given how powerful Zerg is in the lategame I wouldn't call it either way just yet.
Of course 12 ghosts (2400 minerals, 1200 gas) will decimate 40 zerglings (1000 minerals), the numbers alone justify this. Against Phoenixes they are actually not too good as they can get lifted and picked off very quickly, although this depends highly on marine/ghost count vs phoenix count. Against Mutas it's a bit off, Mutas rarely fight Ghosts as Ghosts are not as cost efficient against them as just getting more Marines.
HTs should move faster as I mentioned, not sure why Blizzard made them this slow. Storm takes longer to get (and most costly to get) than Ghosts with EMP as early Storms are far more devastating to Terran than early EMPs are to Protoss. In the early game, those 650 minerals and 350 gas required to get two Ghosts with EMP can mean about 6-7 marauders with additional upgrades. Early game, that might make up a third of half or the Terrans army. Even if the EMPs do land perfectly in the early game, the army that can take advantage of it will be a lot smaller.
10 supply of the Protoss army can equally decimate a lot more than 40% of the Terran's army if you land the Storms and Forcefields properly. It all depends on positioning, micro and the like.
There are so many shit arguments being thrown about from people that have 0 critical thinking ability.
Before you make your point, take a step back and think about the whole picture of the matchup.
Great ghost is OK vs broodlord/infestor, but think about how you get to that point. You have to put down 4-5 TL rax of infrastructure, spend 3 production cycles in ADVANCE of the broodlord switch, and then still positioning impeccably while setting up drops (since ghosts are only viable in a defensive position). AND, if your ghosts are lost while Z still has gas, good luck dealing with the next wave of BL because of larva mechanics.
The races _are_ asymmetric, they have different strengths. T has two options vs endgame Z: keep him starved and in lockstep, OR get tons of caster units that build strength over time. Z has mobility options to force T mistakes and escape lockstep, and a stronger direct army+production. If there were no superstrong casters for T, there would only be the first option, and the moment Z threw off T's game control, the game would be over. You'd see one timing attack, and the success and failure of that would be it.
AND, the templar vs ghost arguments are equivalently a joke. The T army's HP IS the EMPed P army's HP. Stim marauder: 105hp, stim marines: 90HP. The difference is that, if you don't have AOE, then you won't outdps stim. BUT, in survivability, we're on an even play field IF every EMP is hit. Also, EMP is poor against the mineral sink + tank of the P army, while storm destroys stimmed marines. When EMP kills your mineral sink in 2 ticks, then maybe the comparison will be more apt.
Again, the races are different, and the requirements for combat success are very different. EMP is mandatory, Storm is bonus.
It's entertaining/sad how this has turned into a Terran QQ/ appreciation for how hard it is to play Terran thread.
I think the op would be better if it acknowledged some of the other changes that might need to happen to replicate broodwar. i.e. zealot bombs and the way the armies are composed with marines making those zel bombs or reaver shennanigans harder to pull off. It's definitely impossible/ not a good idea to use mech in this game because of the opportunity costs (and how they dont melt zels like they should -.-), but high powered tanks would be devastating with the current synergy of marines/lack of Dark swarm or effective tank killers.
Really though, someone needs to go put a sad tank at the front of this thread.
On October 10 2011 02:10 zdragon wrote: There are so many shit arguments being thrown about from people that have 0 critical thinking ability.
Before you make your point, take a step back and think about the whole picture of the matchup.
Great ghost is OK vs broodlord/infestor, but think about how you get to that point. You have to put down 4-5 TL rax of infrastructure, spend 3 production cycles in ADVANCE of the broodlord switch, and then still positioning impeccably while setting up drops (since ghosts are only viable in a defensive position). AND, if your ghosts are lost while Z still has gas, good luck dealing with the next wave of BL because of larva mechanics.
The races _are_ asymmetric, they have different strengths. T has two options vs endgame Z: keep him starved and in lockstep, OR get tons of caster units that build strength over time. Z has mobility options to force T mistakes and escape lockstep, and a stronger direct army+production. If there were no superstrong casters for T, there would only be the first option, and the moment Z threw off T's game control, the game would be over. You'd see one timing attack, and the success and failure of that would be it.
AND, the templar vs ghost arguments are equivalently a joke. The T army's HP IS the EMPed P army's HP. Stim marauder: 105hp, stim marines: 90HP. The difference is that, if you don't have AOE, then you won't outdps stim. BUT, in survivability, we're on an even play field IF every EMP is hit. Also, EMP is poor against the mineral sink + tank of the P army, while storm destroys stimmed marines. When EMP kills your mineral sink in 2 ticks, then maybe the comparison will be more apt.
Again, the races are different, and the requirements for combat success are very different. EMP is mandatory, Storm is bonus.
Ghosts are not required vs Broodlord/Infestor, if you have built up enough tank/marine/viking. However, if you rather like to push 5times of 2bases, I guess you won't get the critical tank count that keeps marines safe from infestors and therefore vikings safe from infestor/mutalisk. Just watch Code S. The last few times Zergs went Broodlord/Infestor without being terribly ahead already, they just got roflstomped...
Also having storm or colossi in TvP is mandatory, else Terran can go heavy marine which counters every nonsplash/nonflaggship unit in the game.
On October 10 2011 02:10 zdragon wrote: There are so many shit arguments being thrown about from people that have 0 critical thinking ability.
Before you make your point, take a step back and think about the whole picture of the matchup.
Great ghost is OK vs broodlord/infestor, but think about how you get to that point. You have to put down 4-5 TL rax of infrastructure, spend 3 production cycles in ADVANCE of the broodlord switch, and then still positioning impeccably while setting up drops (since ghosts are only viable in a defensive position). AND, if your ghosts are lost while Z still has gas, good luck dealing with the next wave of BL because of larva mechanics.
The races _are_ asymmetric, they have different strengths. T has two options vs endgame Z: keep him starved and in lockstep, OR get tons of caster units that build strength over time. Z has mobility options to force T mistakes and escape lockstep, and a stronger direct army+production. If there were no superstrong casters for T, there would only be the first option, and the moment Z threw off T's game control, the game would be over. You'd see one timing attack, and the success and failure of that would be it.
AND, the templar vs ghost arguments are equivalently a joke. The T army's HP IS the EMPed P army's HP. Stim marauder: 105hp, stim marines: 90HP. The difference is that, if you don't have AOE, then you won't outdps stim. BUT, in survivability, we're on an even play field IF every EMP is hit. Also, EMP is poor against the mineral sink + tank of the P army, while storm destroys stimmed marines. When EMP kills your mineral sink in 2 ticks, then maybe the comparison will be more apt.
Again, the races are different, and the requirements for combat success are very different. EMP is mandatory, Storm is bonus.
Completely agreed. EMP is mandatory. Without EMP, you are guaranteed a loss with same army sizes (mineral and gas cost).
With perfect EMPs, you still may lose and this has happened to me many times over. I've landed perfect and multiple EMPs, micro'ed my units, tried to dodge storms and I still lose to a Toss army (that in my opinion did not take any micro).
I think if you ask any Terran, we would gladly exchange Ghosts for HTs any day. I don't think any other race would be happy to trade their spellcaster for the ghost.
I don't know why people think that battles need to be ball vs ball and techswitches are impossible.
Battlecruisers are still DEVASTATINGLY powerful against protoss. In ways you can't even imagine. The problem is that people haven't really given them a good lookover yet. EMP your own BC's and have an early lategame push, and he won't have an answer.
Drop. Everywhere. protoss who go colossus are begging to be picked apart at the seams. Utilize that drop micro. 4 stalkers ruining your day? drop a thor on them instead. problem solved.
Thors are still pretty darn good, situationally. Not for their damage, but for their ability to just make speedlots AI freak the heck out while your squishy damage dealers rape them.
Mid/lategame reaper transition. QXC did it and he vaporized entire worker lines in a half-second. Those reapers get mondo bonus from upgrades, and if you're going bio, only 1-2 rax cycles are needed anyways (the long time they take to build in relation to their super low cost is also a good time to start establishing another techswitch or expand.) They can also skirt around and keep scouting/map control up, snipe pylons, kite zealots, etc.
Nukes. Nukes are too underused. Force engagements, prevent engagements, that little red dot may not do damage but it freaks people out hard.
Ravens are still good. HSM is a bit faster, and usable on deathballs. auto turrets can still harass, and PDD still nullifies stalkers instantly.
You don't need to mech to have five blueflame hellions. Five hellions positioned a little bit back kills infinity zealots.
Building chokes. This is important in tvp AND tvz. People who make supply depot chokes that zealots/zerglings have to squeeze into almost ALWAYS win the engagement.
Banshees. Mid/lategame, if you keep periodically sniping his observers, a random banshee here or there can own. Even in main battles, scan his army, snipe the observer with vikings (if he's going collo) and then your cloaked banshee or two will just have a hayday.
Bunker upgrades. Neosteel plating and the bunker space upgrade make a bunker line as much of a hard contain as a line of pre-nerf tanks ever was. Bunkers with six marines or three marauders apiece and 2 extra armor at the top of a ramp, fuggedabout.
The problem I see a lot of is that terrans are unwilling to transition into units that have little to no upgrades, get unorthodox upgrades (seriously, bunker capacity + armor is insane) or be truly mobile. They treat bio like a deathball and major engagements need to be done in order to win.
Be sneaky and clever, that's what being terran is all about. We have very complex units and strategies at our disposal and we just make a buttload of ghosts to EMP everything? For shame.
Turrets in key places are a little more important now to stop warp prisms.
But yes, tanks are garbage in TvP. Zealots are just as sturdy, they can chew up the distance instantly, immortals can snipe them easily, tanks are just not a reasonable unit.
On October 10 2011 02:10 zdragon wrote: There are so many shit arguments being thrown about from people that have 0 critical thinking ability.
Before you make your point, take a step back and think about the whole picture of the matchup.
Great ghost is OK vs broodlord/infestor, but think about how you get to that point. You have to put down 4-5 TL rax of infrastructure, spend 3 production cycles in ADVANCE of the broodlord switch, and then still positioning impeccably while setting up drops (since ghosts are only viable in a defensive position). AND, if your ghosts are lost while Z still has gas, good luck dealing with the next wave of BL because of larva mechanics.
The races _are_ asymmetric, they have different strengths. T has two options vs endgame Z: keep him starved and in lockstep, OR get tons of caster units that build strength over time. Z has mobility options to force T mistakes and escape lockstep, and a stronger direct army+production. If there were no superstrong casters for T, there would only be the first option, and the moment Z threw off T's game control, the game would be over. You'd see one timing attack, and the success and failure of that would be it.
AND, the templar vs ghost arguments are equivalently a joke. The T army's HP IS the EMPed P army's HP. Stim marauder: 105hp, stim marines: 90HP. The difference is that, if you don't have AOE, then you won't outdps stim. BUT, in survivability, we're on an even play field IF every EMP is hit. Also, EMP is poor against the mineral sink + tank of the P army, while storm destroys stimmed marines. When EMP kills your mineral sink in 2 ticks, then maybe the comparison will be more apt.
Again, the races are different, and the requirements for combat success are very different. EMP is mandatory, Storm is bonus.
Completely agreed. EMP is mandatory. Without EMP, you are guaranteed a loss with same army sizes (mineral and gas cost).
With perfect EMPs, you still may lose and this has happened to me many times over. I've landed perfect and multiple EMPs, micro'ed my units, tried to dodge storms and I still lose to a Toss army (that in my opinion did not take any micro).
I think if you ask any Terran, we would gladly exchange Ghosts for HTs any day. I don't think any other race would be happy to trade their spellcaster for the ghost.
ar you kidding me? T2 "Ghost pit" as zerg? Hell yeah I would love that! Mass ghosts is brutal enough once terran gets it up, think about how crazy imbalanced it would be if you could just start massing them with larva mechanism after 10mins... You want to contain me? NUKE: You unsiege and I'll be like BANELINGS BANELINGS BANELINGS... Forcefield? I don't think so: EMP! (note that forcefield is way more important in PvZ as in PvT, due to zerg units having such low range) You want to banshee/void ray cheese me? Nope my all purpose Ghosts will be out at a hydratiming, but won't be useless afterwards!
I don't get why Terrans whine about their units... Due to having inferior production, all those units are just straight up stronger (ofc with some major disadvantages, like the marine being just 5-10times stronger than any other unit costwise, but also completly useless against a lot of splash)
ar you kidding me? T2 "Ghost pit" as zerg? Hell yeah I would love that! Mass ghosts is brutal enough once terran gets it up, think about how crazy imbalanced it would be if you could just start massing them with larva mechanism after 10mins... You want to contain me? NUKE: You unsiege and I'll be like BANELINGS BANELINGS BANELINGS... Forcefield? I don't think so: EMP! (note that forcefield is way more important in PvZ as in PvT, due to zerg units having such low range) You want to banshee/void ray cheese me? Nope my all purpose Ghosts will be out at a hydratiming, but won't be useless afterwards!
I don't get why Terrans whine about their units... Due to having inferior production, all those units are just straight up stronger (ofc with some major disadvantages, like the marine being just 5-10times stronger than any other unit costwise, but also completly useless against a lot of splash)
Everyone just whines. Gamers are the group that loves nothing more than to hate their hobby.
On October 10 2011 02:10 zdragon wrote: There are so many shit arguments being thrown about from people that have 0 critical thinking ability.
Before you make your point, take a step back and think about the whole picture of the matchup.
Great ghost is OK vs broodlord/infestor, but think about how you get to that point. You have to put down 4-5 TL rax of infrastructure, spend 3 production cycles in ADVANCE of the broodlord switch, and then still positioning impeccably while setting up drops (since ghosts are only viable in a defensive position). AND, if your ghosts are lost while Z still has gas, good luck dealing with the next wave of BL because of larva mechanics.
The races _are_ asymmetric, they have different strengths. T has two options vs endgame Z: keep him starved and in lockstep, OR get tons of caster units that build strength over time. Z has mobility options to force T mistakes and escape lockstep, and a stronger direct army+production. If there were no superstrong casters for T, there would only be the first option, and the moment Z threw off T's game control, the game would be over. You'd see one timing attack, and the success and failure of that would be it.
AND, the templar vs ghost arguments are equivalently a joke. The T army's HP IS the EMPed P army's HP. Stim marauder: 105hp, stim marines: 90HP. The difference is that, if you don't have AOE, then you won't outdps stim. BUT, in survivability, we're on an even play field IF every EMP is hit. Also, EMP is poor against the mineral sink + tank of the P army, while storm destroys stimmed marines. When EMP kills your mineral sink in 2 ticks, then maybe the comparison will be more apt.
Again, the races are different, and the requirements for combat success are very different. EMP is mandatory, Storm is bonus.
Completely agreed. EMP is mandatory. Without EMP, you are guaranteed a loss with same army sizes (mineral and gas cost).
With perfect EMPs, you still may lose and this has happened to me many times over. I've landed perfect and multiple EMPs, micro'ed my units, tried to dodge storms and I still lose to a Toss army (that in my opinion did not take any micro).
I think if you ask any Terran, we would gladly exchange Ghosts for HTs any day. I don't think any other race would be happy to trade their spellcaster for the ghost.
I never thought I would see the day when Terrans would complain about Ghosts. And bringing in your own personal ladder experience means nothing. What could be more helpful would be looking at the pro games between PvT and seeing the winrates and how effective EMP is. Or does that not suit your argument?
On October 10 2011 02:10 zdragon wrote: There are so many shit arguments being thrown about from people that have 0 critical thinking ability.
Before you make your point, take a step back and think about the whole picture of the matchup.
Great ghost is OK vs broodlord/infestor, but think about how you get to that point. You have to put down 4-5 TL rax of infrastructure, spend 3 production cycles in ADVANCE of the broodlord switch, and then still positioning impeccably while setting up drops (since ghosts are only viable in a defensive position). AND, if your ghosts are lost while Z still has gas, good luck dealing with the next wave of BL because of larva mechanics.
The races _are_ asymmetric, they have different strengths. T has two options vs endgame Z: keep him starved and in lockstep, OR get tons of caster units that build strength over time. Z has mobility options to force T mistakes and escape lockstep, and a stronger direct army+production. If there were no superstrong casters for T, there would only be the first option, and the moment Z threw off T's game control, the game would be over. You'd see one timing attack, and the success and failure of that would be it.
AND, the templar vs ghost arguments are equivalently a joke. The T army's HP IS the EMPed P army's HP. Stim marauder: 105hp, stim marines: 90HP. The difference is that, if you don't have AOE, then you won't outdps stim. BUT, in survivability, we're on an even play field IF every EMP is hit. Also, EMP is poor against the mineral sink + tank of the P army, while storm destroys stimmed marines. When EMP kills your mineral sink in 2 ticks, then maybe the comparison will be more apt.
Again, the races are different, and the requirements for combat success are very different. EMP is mandatory, Storm is bonus.
Completely agreed. EMP is mandatory. Without EMP, you are guaranteed a loss with same army sizes (mineral and gas cost).
With perfect EMPs, you still may lose and this has happened to me many times over. I've landed perfect and multiple EMPs, micro'ed my units, tried to dodge storms and I still lose to a Toss army (that in my opinion did not take any micro).
I think if you ask any Terran, we would gladly exchange Ghosts for HTs any day. I don't think any other race would be happy to trade their spellcaster for the ghost.
I never thought I would see the day when Terrans would complain about Ghosts. And bringing in your own personal ladder experience means nothing. What could be more helpful would be looking at the pro games between PvT and seeing the winrates and how effective EMP is. Or does that not suit your argument?
trade you infestors for ghosts anyday... instantly nullifies spellcaster units with basic gold micro
I agree totally with the OP, and with Artosis's rant about the Marauder on SOTG a few episodes ago, which expressed the same sentiments as the OP.
I'm not so much concerned about the 'balance' aspect, I cant be really since I'm only gold level. This is more from a spectators perspective, and about the 'feel' of the races. In Brood War each race had a distinctive character to it, and for Terran the siege tank felt like a definitive element in the make-up of the race.
The Marauder doesnt feel 'Terran', and TvP is the match-up most in need of development. This Bio playing-style is dull, cheesy and doesn't feel suited to Terran. Swarming your opponent with Bio is something more appropriate for Zerg, it fits the characteristics of the Zerg race.
Its different from Broodwar where terran has stronger army than the protoss. In SC2 its the opposite. But protoss deathball in SC2 can kill a maxed marine marauder army with loosing 25 supply at most. Tanks were never imba. Its just the fresh SC2 players whining about tanks. They have no idea of positioning and running around like in Broodwar.
All and all tanks don't do shit in SC2 for their cost. The most cost and strategically ineffective unit. And for those who say tank bio ghost (nothing personal ThisGS) i have tried different ways to do it but by the time you even make tank bio the protoss can outexpand you and roll you with whatever unit he likes.
And an advice to protosses - whenever you see a siege tank and expansion early game you expand once more.
On October 11 2011 09:00 Nakata wrote: Its different from Broodwar where terran has stronger army than the protoss. In SC2 its the opposite. But protoss deathball in SC2 can kill a maxed marine marauder army with loosing 25 supply at most. Tanks were never imba. Its just the fresh SC2 players whining about tanks. They have no idea of positioning and running around like in Broodwar.
All and all tanks don't do shit in SC2 for their cost. The most cost and strategically ineffective unit. And for those who say tank bio ghost (nothing personal ThisGS) i have tried different ways to do it but by the time you even make tank bio the protoss can outexpand you and roll you with whatever unit he likes.
And an advice to protosses - whenever you see a siege tank and expansion early game you expand once more.
Thats not true, tanks are a staple in TvZ, youve got the problem mixed up. Tanks are bad because of blink/every protoss unit countering them.
Tank Bio is terrible, once the toss gets charge, your tanks end up splashing your bio so fast that they help the toss more than they help you.
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
im a diamond scrub but can someone show me how a terran 100 supply army beats a toss 100 supply army in micro test arena i will play as toss. i need to learn please toss rapes my superior army all the time
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
Really, all I want is reliable scouting in the first 7-9 minutes of the game. So many terran builds rely on protoss not being able to figure out exactly what the terran is doing. That and the ghost to be looked at, because those bastards do not die.
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
Really, all I want is reliable scouting in the first 7-9 minutes of the game. So many terran builds rely on protoss not being able to figure out exactly what the terran is doing. That and the ghost to be looked at, because those bastards do not die.
I want a way to scout Protoss without giving up the economy race...
As a Terran player, I can buy that the match-up needs to be looked at, The stats at GSL don't lie.
But here is my issue, everyone wants to change the ghost. Now minor tweaks to cost and build time might be ok, but you really can't screw with EMP, without also having some large game changes. At the moment Ghost is the only real counter to both Archons and High Templar. Storm wrecks bio ball like nobodies business - it only takes two or three to completely destroy a Terran army completely. Relative to EMP, it is a much more powerful spell (as it should be, with HTs being T3 casters without Khaydarin and Ghosts being T1.5). Archons are similar, theeir shield points is ridiculous, can't kite them, and they deal very good AOE damage. The only good way to deal with them is to EMP the crap out of them.
So I'm not opposed to major ghost changes, but I need some way to deal with High Templar and I need some way to deal with Archons, and I need to be able to do both at the same time.
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
Really, all I want is reliable scouting in the first 7-9 minutes of the game. So many terran builds rely on protoss not being able to figure out exactly what the terran is doing. That and the ghost to be looked at, because those bastards do not die.
I want a way to scout Protoss without giving up the economy race...
I have no sympathy for terrans who are unable to drop one mule to scan and get nearly perfect scouting information. The information that provides make your economy and timing that much more efficient. The protoss has to work off imperfect information until they spend gas to get an observer out and into the terran base.
It may seem minor, but it is one of the main tactics korean terrans are using. Posturing a 1-1-1 while going fast expand and vice versa. That with the Ghost, which only get better the more of them that are on the field, the PvT match up is brutal.
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
Really, all I want is reliable scouting in the first 7-9 minutes of the game. So many terran builds rely on protoss not being able to figure out exactly what the terran is doing. That and the ghost to be looked at, because those bastards do not die.
How does Terran have reliable scouting those first 7-9 minutes? No race has 100% reliable scouting. That's part of the game.
I wish people would stop bringing up this point.
If anything Protoss has the _most_ reliable scouting, but they also need it the most.
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
oh come on, stop the sarcasm. yes, all these things are necessary for terrans! this sounds ridiculous at first, but its the logical consequence of the fact that tier 1 units are the only viable option we terrans have for our army backbone in this matchup, while these unit compositions get completely demolished by the AoE-overkill you tosses got at your disposal in the lategame.
yes, we might have medivacs, vikings and ghosts as support and these are not tier 1, but the main damage dealers are still the marines and marauders. and they get eaten alive by your main damage dealers, colossi and hts, tier 3 units btw.
basically, the lack of alternatives to bio that is criticized in this thread is the exact reason why lategame tvp against a toss of equal skill level can only be won as terran if both player's skill levels are so insanely high that the gosu toss cant put all his skill to use due to the innate limitations of the protoss race, while the gosu terran can. on all other skill levels, lategame situations between equally skilled players severly favor toss.
and yes, game balance should be based around the highest level of competition, but it should still be acknowledged that the vast majority of us ordinary players, with our limited play time and talent, dont have the slighest chance of ever reaching the skill level of thorzain or mma. at the same time, it should of course also be acknowledged that tvp is broken in T's favor on this highest level of play.
the fact that lategame tvp is broken in P's favor for players with mortal skill level is the exact reason why we terrans resort to all the early aggression and timing pushes and all the sneaky, from your point of view, gay stuff. this stuff is the only thing that keeps the overall winrates of the matchup at a somewhat tolerable level for the lower echolons of play. yes, many of our early game stuff is overpowered in a certain sense, but this is the result of balance adjusting to a matchup that in its very core is flawed.
in my opinion, tvp in its current state is a fundamentally broken matchup: it lacks strategical variety, its metagame is evolving far slower than that of most other matchups and in its current form, it will always be imbalanced one way or the other. if, for example, toss gets buffed more to make top korean tosses able to fight top korean terrans on even grounds, then the matchup will become completely unplayable for us casual folks. if they buff terran to make it more balanced for the lower leagues, then toss becomes completely extinct in the gsl.
the main reason for all this "screwdness" (is this a legit word?) is that terran has no other option in terms of unit compositions than to stick with bio all game long. the massive AoE-options of toss lategame armies, on the other hand, yields an extremely high innate fragility of terran armies that can only be circumvented by multi-pronged attacks and 300 apm korean progamer micro.
what you tosses in this thread seem to not understand is that the matchup could become more pleasing for both sides if we terrans are given other viable unit compositions. once we have other viable lategame options that dont get wtfowned by splash, the early game can be adjusted in your favor as we would no longer depend on entering the mid- and lategame with an advantage. once we have other viable lategame options, you can have a method for earlier detection, you can have the marauder nerf, the ghost nerf and so on.
if things remain the same like they are, both sides will continue to whine and claim that the other side has it so much better. as i described earlier, i think that the tvp matchup is fundamentally screwed - and i believe that both sides need to stop being selfish and ignorant and acknowledge the mutual phases of over-/underpoweredness. if both sides come to the same conclusions about what has to be done to fix the matchup, it would be so so much easier to convince blizzard to act. if we dont, Protoss will remain extinct in the gsl, gold- to masters-terrans are gonna continue to despair over lategame tvp while you tosses go slit against all the early game shennanigans we throw at you. is this really how it should be?
On October 11 2011 13:09 Icekommander wrote: As a Terran player, I can buy that the match-up needs to be looked at, The stats at GSL don't lie.
But here is my issue, everyone wants to change the ghost. Now minor tweaks to cost and build time might be ok, but you really can't screw with EMP, without also having some large game changes. At the moment Ghost is the only real counter to both Archons and High Templar. Storm wrecks bio ball like nobodies business - it only takes two or three to completely destroy a Terran army completely. Relative to EMP, it is a much more powerful spell (as it should be, with HTs being T3 casters without Khaydarin and Ghosts being T1.5). Archons are similar, theeir shield points is ridiculous, can't kite them, and they deal very good AOE damage. The only good way to deal with them is to EMP the crap out of them.
So I'm not opposed to major ghost changes, but I need some way to deal with High Templar and I need some way to deal with Archons, and I need to be able to do both at the same time.
Ghosts are teir 3 units, despite their place in the tech tree(which I think is totally messed up, FYI). They are messed up on so many levels, but the worst part is that they never die. If you look at Puma vs Mana in IEM, Puma lead with his ghosts. He charged them right at Mana's 200/200 Protoss army. Why, because he knew they would not be killed. Ghosts have better vision and range than any Protoss unit, so there is no risk of them getting the drop on you. With the 100 health and no bonus damage from any attack type, ghosts are impossible to pick off before they land their spells.
I can deal with them doing shield damage. Hell, it can do bonus damage to archons if necessary. But the ghost needs to be brought in line with the rest SC2. It is this messed up unit left over from beta that terran can get at almost any point in the game. It has a low initial cost, comes with spells and only gets better as the game goes on.
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
Really, all I want is reliable scouting in the first 7-9 minutes of the game. So many terran builds rely on protoss not being able to figure out exactly what the terran is doing. That and the ghost to be looked at, because those bastards do not die.
I want a way to scout Protoss without giving up the economy race...
I have no sympathy for terrans who are unable to drop one mule to scan and get nearly perfect scouting information. The information that provides make your economy and timing that much more efficient. The protoss has to work off imperfect information until they spend gas to get an observer out and into the terran base.
It may seem minor, but it is one of the main tactics korean terrans are using. Posturing a 1-1-1 while going fast expand and vice versa. That with the Ghost, which only get better the more of them that are on the field, the PvT match up is brutal.
Yea, that super effective scan which misses 50% of the time. Good thing I saw those 3 gates when you're on 2 bases, I'm sure that's all the Protoss has...
Maybe if you stopped depriving yourself of sleep and watched players who aren't in the GSL, you'd see a lot of Terrans have tons of trouble in TvP. Even IF we know the tech, many times it requires an exact response for a rather malleable composition. Pumping colossi out like mad? I better be double pumping vikings. Light on colossi, heavy on twilight+upgrades (but still have the colossus tech mind you)? I better bend over because I can't drop against the mobility, can't go for an upgrade timing push, kiting is pretty much ineffective, and EMP takes away less than 1/3 of the health of one of the most basic, powerful units in the game. Start the game with marauder heavy comp against proxy stargate? Might as well GG right there.
Face it. 9 times out of 10, if you're losing to EMPs it's because you're losing for some other reason. Or you're laughing maniacally while massing archons. Either way, there's a lot going for Protoss right now outside the pitiable 4-5 games we see in GSL every month.
On October 11 2011 13:24 Black Gun wrote: if things remain the same like they are, both sides will continue to whine and claim that the other side has it so much better. as i described earlier, i think that the tvp matchup is fundamentally screwed - and i believe that both sides need to stop being selfish and ignorant and acknowledge the mutual phases of over-/underpoweredness. if both sides come to the same conclusions about what has to be done to fix the matchup, it would be so so much easier to convince blizzard to act. if we dont, Protoss will remain extinct in the gsl, gold- to masters-terrans are gonna continue to despair over lategame tvp while you tosses go slit against all the early game shennanigans we throw at you. is this really how it should be?
Late game? I can't even find an opening before the 10 minute mark against most common P builds.
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
Really, all I want is reliable scouting in the first 7-9 minutes of the game. So many terran builds rely on protoss not being able to figure out exactly what the terran is doing. That and the ghost to be looked at, because those bastards do not die.
I want a way to scout Protoss without giving up the economy race...
I have no sympathy for terrans who are unable to drop one mule to scan and get nearly perfect scouting information. The information that provides make your economy and timing that much more efficient. The protoss has to work off imperfect information until they spend gas to get an observer out and into the terran base.
It may seem minor, but it is one of the main tactics korean terrans are using. Posturing a 1-1-1 while going fast expand and vice versa. That with the Ghost, which only get better the more of them that are on the field, the PvT match up is brutal.
how is dropping 1 scan reliable scouting?
most protoss i vs in diamond hide their tech especially when you scan the army at the natural, there is never any collosus or high templar, those are tucked away...
the point is BOTH races can deny scouting, stalkers at the towers tech hidden and army tucked away, the only way to be guaranteed to spot it is to attack and draw out their forces which can be too late.
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
Really, all I want is reliable scouting in the first 7-9 minutes of the game. So many terran builds rely on protoss not being able to figure out exactly what the terran is doing. That and the ghost to be looked at, because those bastards do not die.
How does Terran have reliable scouting those first 7-9 minutes? No race has 100% reliable scouting. That's part of the game.
I wish people would stop bringing up this point.
If anything Protoss has the _most_ reliable scouting, but they also need it the most.
By reliable, I mean scouting that cannot be denied and provides information on exactly what the terran is doing. The scan is the most reliable scouting in the game and cannot be stopped. All other forms, observers, overseers, stalker pokes and the like can be denied. And the cost of scan scouting is potential income, while both protoss and zerg have to pay up front from their scouting. It may seem minor, but this is what makes 1-1-1 so powerful. One of the main reasons is that it looks like a 2 or 1 rax fast expand. If the protoss can't get into your main, they are flying blind until you expand or push out with a ton of units. Or they can spend a lot of gas and get an observer.
A lot of pros have talked about this. Idra, Painuser, Liquid Tyler and other have all wanted ways to "pay for information". Right now, terran appears to have the best option because they do not need to spend or harvest gas get this scouting information. It doesn't have to be prefect information, only the kind that you can rely on.
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
Really, all I want is reliable scouting in the first 7-9 minutes of the game. So many terran builds rely on protoss not being able to figure out exactly what the terran is doing. That and the ghost to be looked at, because those bastards do not die.
How does Terran have reliable scouting those first 7-9 minutes? No race has 100% reliable scouting. That's part of the game.
I wish people would stop bringing up this point.
If anything Protoss has the _most_ reliable scouting, but they also need it the most.
By reliable, I mean scouting that cannot be denied and provides information on exactly what the terran is doing. The scan is the most reliable scouting in the game and cannot be stopped. All other forms, observers, overseers, stalker pokes and the like can be denied. And the cost of scan scouting is potential income, while both protoss and zerg have to pay up front from their scouting. It may seem minor, but this is what makes 1-1-1 so powerful. One of the main reasons is that it looks like a 2 or 1 rax fast expand. If the protoss can't get into your main, they are flying blind until you expand or push out with a ton of units. Or they can spend a lot of gas and get an observer.
A lot of pros have talked about this. Idra, Painuser, Liquid Tyler and other have all wanted ways to "pay for information". Right now, terran appears to have the best option because they do not need to spend or harvest gas get this scouting information. It doesn't have to be prefect information, only the kind that you can rely on.
but you cant rely on the information of one single scan. he can have hidden buildings anywhere. yes, it is information and i totally agree that its better than the scouting options P or Z have at this point in the game, but it's still far from reliable...
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
Really, all I want is reliable scouting in the first 7-9 minutes of the game. So many terran builds rely on protoss not being able to figure out exactly what the terran is doing. That and the ghost to be looked at, because those bastards do not die.
I want a way to scout Protoss without giving up the economy race...
I have no sympathy for terrans who are unable to drop one mule to scan and get nearly perfect scouting information. The information that provides make your economy and timing that much more efficient. The protoss has to work off imperfect information until they spend gas to get an observer out and into the terran base.
It may seem minor, but it is one of the main tactics korean terrans are using. Posturing a 1-1-1 while going fast expand and vice versa. That with the Ghost, which only get better the more of them that are on the field, the PvT match up is brutal.
how is dropping 1 scan reliable scouting?
most protoss i vs in diamond hide their tech especially when you scan the army at the natural, there is never any collosus or high templar, those are tucked away...
the point is BOTH races can deny scouting, stalkers at the towers tech hidden and army tucked away, the only way to be guaranteed to spot it is to attack and draw out their forces which can be too late.
But we are talking about a very limited period of time here. The first 7-9 minutes. That's when most all-ins push out. It is also when the fast expand builds decide to go down the ramp and set up some bunkers. As a terran you are asking "did he expand or did he get a lot of production buildings?" If your worried about a push, drop more bunkers. If it looks like the protoss is in full macro mode, a few less.
My worst fear in PvT is scouting them last and being unable to get into their main. If I don't in, I feel forced to go one gate-robo. The stalker push poke is not good enough.
On October 11 2011 13:24 Black Gun wrote: if things remain the same like they are, both sides will continue to whine and claim that the other side has it so much better. as i described earlier, i think that the tvp matchup is fundamentally screwed - and i believe that both sides need to stop being selfish and ignorant and acknowledge the mutual phases of over-/underpoweredness. if both sides come to the same conclusions about what has to be done to fix the matchup, it would be so so much easier to convince blizzard to act. if we dont, Protoss will remain extinct in the gsl, gold- to masters-terrans are gonna continue to despair over lategame tvp while you tosses go slit against all the early game shennanigans we throw at you. is this really how it should be?
While this is a nice idea, I don't think it's realistic or particularly useful. I'm happy to acknowledge that the lategame deathball is difficult to deal with if you don't have MVP's ghost control, but I don't think that's a fixable issue.
Balancing at the top level is evidently hard enough; balancing all the way down is exponentially more difficult, to the point of being outright impossible. What you're basically asking for is for everyone to: 1) get along, so far so good 2) appreciate the other race's difficulties, at every level of play 3) come up with ways to alleviate/balance those infinitely varied and contradictory difficulties, sometimes to the detriment of their own race 4) agree on 3, again sometimes to the detriment of their own race 5) submit it to blizzard.
It's a good dream, but... dude... lol.
Sure, I'm a protoss, so I'm biased, but at the same time I feel like our problems are the ones that are most apparent at the level where blizzard should be balancing, and that's about as much as you're ever going to get out of the discussion.
On October 11 2011 13:24 Black Gun wrote: if things remain the same like they are, both sides will continue to whine and claim that the other side has it so much better. as i described earlier, i think that the tvp matchup is fundamentally screwed - and i believe that both sides need to stop being selfish and ignorant and acknowledge the mutual phases of over-/underpoweredness. if both sides come to the same conclusions about what has to be done to fix the matchup, it would be so so much easier to convince blizzard to act. if we dont, Protoss will remain extinct in the gsl, gold- to masters-terrans are gonna continue to despair over lategame tvp while you tosses go slit against all the early game shennanigans we throw at you. is this really how it should be?
While this is a nice idea, I don't think it's realistic or particularly useful. I'm happy to acknowledge that the lategame deathball is difficult to deal with if you don't have MVP's ghost control, but I don't think that's a fixable issue.
Balancing at the top level is evidently hard enough; balancing all the way down is exponentially more difficult, to the point of being outright impossible. What you're basically asking for is for everyone to: 1) get along, so far so good 2) appreciate the other race's difficulties, at every level of play 3) come up with ways to alleviate/balance those infinitely varied and contradictory difficulties, sometimes to the detriment of their own race 4) agree on 3, again sometimes to the detriment of their own race 5) submit it to blizzard.
It's a good dream, but... dude... lol.
Sure, I'm a protoss, so I'm biased, but at the same time I feel like our problems are the ones that are most apparent at the level where blizzard should be balancing, and that's about as much as you're ever going to get out of the discussion.
i think i didnt make the main point of my lengthy post clear: i believe that giving terran other lategame options in tvp than MMMVG would make it much easier to find a good balance for the top level of play while simultaneously not fucking over one of the races on lower levels. i agree with you that is is probably impossible to achieve a good balance for both skill regions in MMMVG vs deathball tvp.
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
Really, all I want is reliable scouting in the first 7-9 minutes of the game. So many terran builds rely on protoss not being able to figure out exactly what the terran is doing. That and the ghost to be looked at, because those bastards do not die.
I want a way to scout Protoss without giving up the economy race...
I have no sympathy for terrans who are unable to drop one mule to scan and get nearly perfect scouting information. The information that provides make your economy and timing that much more efficient. The protoss has to work off imperfect information until they spend gas to get an observer out and into the terran base.
It may seem minor, but it is one of the main tactics korean terrans are using. Posturing a 1-1-1 while going fast expand and vice versa. That with the Ghost, which only get better the more of them that are on the field, the PvT match up is brutal.
how is dropping 1 scan reliable scouting?
most protoss i vs in diamond hide their tech especially when you scan the army at the natural, there is never any collosus or high templar, those are tucked away...
the point is BOTH races can deny scouting, stalkers at the towers tech hidden and army tucked away, the only way to be guaranteed to spot it is to attack and draw out their forces which can be too late.
But we are talking about a very limited period of time here. The first 7-9 minutes. That's when most all-ins push out. It is also when the fast expand builds decide to go down the ramp and set up some bunkers. As a terran you are asking "did he expand or did he get a lot of production buildings?" If your worried about a push, drop more bunkers. If it looks like the protoss is in full macro mode, a few less.
My worst fear in PvT is scouting them last and being unable to get into their main. If I don't in, I feel forced to go one gate-robo. The stalker push poke is not good enough.
You obviously have never been on the receiving end of forcefields. I'm pretty much convinced that bunkers aren't even useful as a structure in TvP anymore.
if things remain the same like they are, both sides will continue to whine and claim that the other side has it so much better. as i described earlier, i think that the tvp matchup is fundamentally screwed - and i believe that both sides need to stop being selfish and ignorant and acknowledge the mutual phases of over-/underpoweredness. if both sides come to the same conclusions about what has to be done to fix the matchup, it would be so so much easier to convince blizzard to act. if we dont, Protoss will remain extinct in the gsl, gold- to masters-terrans are gonna continue to despair over lategame tvp while you tosses go slit against all the early game shennanigans we throw at you. is this really how it should be?
THIS guy gets it. Couldnt of said it better. The MU is so screwed fundamentally and on so many differant levels. Great post.
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
Really, all I want is reliable scouting in the first 7-9 minutes of the game. So many terran builds rely on protoss not being able to figure out exactly what the terran is doing. That and the ghost to be looked at, because those bastards do not die.
How does Terran have reliable scouting those first 7-9 minutes? No race has 100% reliable scouting. That's part of the game.
I wish people would stop bringing up this point.
If anything Protoss has the _most_ reliable scouting, but they also need it the most.
By reliable, I mean scouting that cannot be denied and provides information on exactly what the terran is doing. The scan is the most reliable scouting in the game and cannot be stopped. All other forms, observers, overseers, stalker pokes and the like can be denied. And the cost of scan scouting is potential income, while both protoss and zerg have to pay up front from their scouting. It may seem minor, but this is what makes 1-1-1 so powerful. One of the main reasons is that it looks like a 2 or 1 rax fast expand. If the protoss can't get into your main, they are flying blind until you expand or push out with a ton of units. Or they can spend a lot of gas and get an observer.
A lot of pros have talked about this. Idra, Painuser, Liquid Tyler and other have all wanted ways to "pay for information". Right now, terran appears to have the best option because they do not need to spend or harvest gas get this scouting information. It doesn't have to be prefect information, only the kind that you can rely on.
All the races have literally all the scouting options they did in BW, actually the scan in SC2 is actually even worse than the scan option in BW. Zergs were whining awhile ago about lack of scouting options being why they weren't winning (when they actually were....) and yet now they stand with 2 straight tournaments in a row and a 3 time GSL champion among other accomplishments and nothing was changed about how a zerg scouts.
Plus Protoss have it waaaaaaaaaaay easier than Zerg as far as scouting goes. They have a mobile scouting tool that isn't easy to deny completely. You can have multiple and can move them around wherever you want granted there's no turrets there. And if the Terran has his base completely surrounded by turrets by the time you get an observer out then you obviously need to reassess your priorities on when you get your robo. Ultimately the choice comes down to whether you want to play greedy or safe which is the same choice any race has. Risk taking is apart of the game.
Whatever this "problem" is with TvP (which is probably just a meta problem anyways as Terran has been nothing but nerfed for the past few months and yet our win rate gradually rose due to problem solving) it doesn't rest in scouting issues for Protoss....
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
Really, all I want is reliable scouting in the first 7-9 minutes of the game. So many terran builds rely on protoss not being able to figure out exactly what the terran is doing. That and the ghost to be looked at, because those bastards do not die.
How does Terran have reliable scouting those first 7-9 minutes? No race has 100% reliable scouting. That's part of the game.
I wish people would stop bringing up this point.
If anything Protoss has the _most_ reliable scouting, but they also need it the most.
By reliable, I mean scouting that cannot be denied and provides information on exactly what the terran is doing. The scan is the most reliable scouting in the game and cannot be stopped. All other forms, observers, overseers, stalker pokes and the like can be denied. And the cost of scan scouting is potential income, while both protoss and zerg have to pay up front from their scouting. It may seem minor, but this is what makes 1-1-1 so powerful. One of the main reasons is that it looks like a 2 or 1 rax fast expand. If the protoss can't get into your main, they are flying blind until you expand or push out with a ton of units. Or they can spend a lot of gas and get an observer.
A lot of pros have talked about this. Idra, Painuser, Liquid Tyler and other have all wanted ways to "pay for information". Right now, terran appears to have the best option because they do not need to spend or harvest gas get this scouting information. It doesn't have to be prefect information, only the kind that you can rely on.
All the races have literally all the scouting options they did in BW, actually the scan in SC2 is actually even worse than the scan option in BW. Zergs were whining awhile ago about lack of scouting options being why they weren't winning (when they actually were....) and yet now they stand with 2 straight tournaments in a row and a 3 time GSL champion among other accomplishments and nothing was changed about how a zerg scouts.
Plus Protoss have it waaaaaaaaaaay easier than Zerg as far as scouting goes. They have a mobile scouting tool that isn't easy to deny completely. You can have multiple and can move them around wherever you want granted there's no turrets there. And if the Terran has his base completely surrounded by turrets by the time you get an observer out then you obviously need to reassess your priorities on when you get your robo. Ultimately the choice comes down to whether you want to play greedy or safe which is the same choice any race has. Risk taking is apart of the game.
Whatever this "problem" is with TvP (which is probably just a meta problem anyways as Terran has been nothing but nerfed for the past few months and yet our win rate gradually rose due to problem solving) it doesn't rest in scouting issues for Protoss....
The scouting problem he's talking about is the one that occurs too early for observers to be relevant, when the terran has a wall with a few marines behind it, and the toss's last intel was two minutes ago when he saw 1gas, 1rax and a marine that chased him out.
That pokerface can be anything from 3rax to 1-1-1 to 6rax rine to 1rax CC. We can't have an observer by that point, but we need to make critical and fundamentally different decisions based on the terran's invisible build.
Now, there are ways to get a little more information, like pressuring with zealot-stalker, and sometimes when you do that the terran is stupid and shows you a marauder or far too many rines and you find out what's up. But often they don't.
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
Really, all I want is reliable scouting in the first 7-9 minutes of the game. So many terran builds rely on protoss not being able to figure out exactly what the terran is doing. That and the ghost to be looked at, because those bastards do not die.
How does Terran have reliable scouting those first 7-9 minutes? No race has 100% reliable scouting. That's part of the game.
I wish people would stop bringing up this point.
If anything Protoss has the _most_ reliable scouting, but they also need it the most.
By reliable, I mean scouting that cannot be denied and provides information on exactly what the terran is doing. The scan is the most reliable scouting in the game and cannot be stopped. All other forms, observers, overseers, stalker pokes and the like can be denied. And the cost of scan scouting is potential income, while both protoss and zerg have to pay up front from their scouting. It may seem minor, but this is what makes 1-1-1 so powerful. One of the main reasons is that it looks like a 2 or 1 rax fast expand. If the protoss can't get into your main, they are flying blind until you expand or push out with a ton of units. Or they can spend a lot of gas and get an observer.
A lot of pros have talked about this. Idra, Painuser, Liquid Tyler and other have all wanted ways to "pay for information". Right now, terran appears to have the best option because they do not need to spend or harvest gas get this scouting information. It doesn't have to be prefect information, only the kind that you can rely on.
All the races have literally all the scouting options they did in BW, actually the scan in SC2 is actually even worse than the scan option in BW. Zergs were whining awhile ago about lack of scouting options being why they weren't winning (when they actually were....) and yet now they stand with 2 straight tournaments in a row and a 3 time GSL champion among other accomplishments and nothing was changed about how a zerg scouts.
Plus Protoss have it waaaaaaaaaaay easier than Zerg as far as scouting goes. They have a mobile scouting tool that isn't easy to deny completely. You can have multiple and can move them around wherever you want granted there's no turrets there. And if the Terran has his base completely surrounded by turrets by the time you get an observer out then you obviously need to reassess your priorities on when you get your robo. Ultimately the choice comes down to whether you want to play greedy or safe which is the same choice any race has. Risk taking is apart of the game.
Whatever this "problem" is with TvP (which is probably just a meta problem anyways as Terran has been nothing but nerfed for the past few months and yet our win rate gradually rose due to problem solving) it doesn't rest in scouting issues for Protoss....
The scouting problem he's talking about is the one that occurs too early for observers to be relevant, when the terran has a wall with a few marines behind it, and the toss's last intel was two minutes ago when he saw 1gas, 1rax and a marine that chased him out.
That pokerface can be anything from 3rax to 1-1-1 to 6rax rine to 1rax CC. We can't have an observer by that point, but we need to make critical and fundamentally different decisions based on the terran's invisible build.
Now, there are ways to get a little more information, like pressuring with zealot-stalker, and sometimes when you do that the terran is stupid and shows you a marauder or far too many rines and you find out what's up. But often they don't.
Ok if you want to explain it that way; Terran scouts 2 gas gate and cybo, it can be 4 gate, 3 gate stargate, DTS, 3 gate contain. We can't spend scans at the point, but we need to make critical and fundamentally difference decisions based on protoss invisible build..
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
Really, all I want is reliable scouting in the first 7-9 minutes of the game. So many terran builds rely on protoss not being able to figure out exactly what the terran is doing. That and the ghost to be looked at, because those bastards do not die.
How does Terran have reliable scouting those first 7-9 minutes? No race has 100% reliable scouting. That's part of the game.
I wish people would stop bringing up this point.
If anything Protoss has the _most_ reliable scouting, but they also need it the most.
By reliable, I mean scouting that cannot be denied and provides information on exactly what the terran is doing. The scan is the most reliable scouting in the game and cannot be stopped. All other forms, observers, overseers, stalker pokes and the like can be denied. And the cost of scan scouting is potential income, while both protoss and zerg have to pay up front from their scouting. It may seem minor, but this is what makes 1-1-1 so powerful. One of the main reasons is that it looks like a 2 or 1 rax fast expand. If the protoss can't get into your main, they are flying blind until you expand or push out with a ton of units. Or they can spend a lot of gas and get an observer.
A lot of pros have talked about this. Idra, Painuser, Liquid Tyler and other have all wanted ways to "pay for information". Right now, terran appears to have the best option because they do not need to spend or harvest gas get this scouting information. It doesn't have to be prefect information, only the kind that you can rely on.
All the races have literally all the scouting options they did in BW, actually the scan in SC2 is actually even worse than the scan option in BW. Zergs were whining awhile ago about lack of scouting options being why they weren't winning (when they actually were....) and yet now they stand with 2 straight tournaments in a row and a 3 time GSL champion among other accomplishments and nothing was changed about how a zerg scouts.
Plus Protoss have it waaaaaaaaaaay easier than Zerg as far as scouting goes. They have a mobile scouting tool that isn't easy to deny completely. You can have multiple and can move them around wherever you want granted there's no turrets there. And if the Terran has his base completely surrounded by turrets by the time you get an observer out then you obviously need to reassess your priorities on when you get your robo. Ultimately the choice comes down to whether you want to play greedy or safe which is the same choice any race has. Risk taking is apart of the game.
Whatever this "problem" is with TvP (which is probably just a meta problem anyways as Terran has been nothing but nerfed for the past few months and yet our win rate gradually rose due to problem solving) it doesn't rest in scouting issues for Protoss....
The scouting problem he's talking about is the one that occurs too early for observers to be relevant, when the terran has a wall with a few marines behind it, and the toss's last intel was two minutes ago when he saw 1gas, 1rax and a marine that chased him out.
That pokerface can be anything from 3rax to 1-1-1 to 6rax rine to 1rax CC. We can't have an observer by that point, but we need to make critical and fundamentally different decisions based on the terran's invisible build.
Now, there are ways to get a little more information, like pressuring with zealot-stalker, and sometimes when you do that the terran is stupid and shows you a marauder or far too many rines and you find out what's up. But often they don't.
Ok if you want to explain it that way; Terran scouts 2 gas gate and cybo, it can be 4 gate, 3 gate stargate, DTS, 3 gate contain. We can't spend scans at the point, but we need to make critical and fundamentally difference decisions based on protoss invisible build..
yeah it applys to both sides bro
No it doesn't, not to the same extent. You have the flexibility to respond to all of those on imperfect information from a safe build. You also have a much greater ability to deny and obfuscate your opponent's T1 intel. Sure, there are risky things you can do which might lose to a 4gate, or that could exploit a toss you know has no robo, but you're certainly not at risk of ending up in an unwinnable position if you don't have that information at the four minute mark.
Comparatively, to beat 1-1-1 - and this can be a seperate balance issue regarding the 1-1-1 itself, but scouting is a fundamental part of that issue - to beat 1-1-1, protoss need to commit to an early expansion on the information they see at that point, before they have any way of knowing if they'll eat a 3rax in doing so.
And as a side-note, you absolutely can spend scans. You always can, just like zerg can always sac overlords. It's just that it's not convenient for your build, costs you money and might not net you anything useful if toss has hidden his buildings... and so you make the decision to call a mule instead. That's not the same can't as "protoss can't have an observer at 4 minutes" can't.
as a response to JUST the OP, i like how there arent tanks in TvP. i love watching TvP simply because seeing bio-mech/mech constantly as a zerg player is annoying. when terrans go all bio against Zerg i laugh because all the zerg needs are banelings and its usually GG. (on ladder anyways, im only a plat player). terran have some of the best, well rounded units in the game(while i personally think eh ghost is imba, but thats an entire different thread), and i think seeing a change from mech based play in at least 1 matchup is pretty awesome. finally being able to see a match where the entire strategy doesnt revolve around BFH is quite enjoyable.
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
Really, all I want is reliable scouting in the first 7-9 minutes of the game. So many terran builds rely on protoss not being able to figure out exactly what the terran is doing. That and the ghost to be looked at, because those bastards do not die.
How does Terran have reliable scouting those first 7-9 minutes? No race has 100% reliable scouting. That's part of the game.
I wish people would stop bringing up this point.
If anything Protoss has the _most_ reliable scouting, but they also need it the most.
By reliable, I mean scouting that cannot be denied and provides information on exactly what the terran is doing. The scan is the most reliable scouting in the game and cannot be stopped. All other forms, observers, overseers, stalker pokes and the like can be denied. And the cost of scan scouting is potential income, while both protoss and zerg have to pay up front from their scouting. It may seem minor, but this is what makes 1-1-1 so powerful. One of the main reasons is that it looks like a 2 or 1 rax fast expand. If the protoss can't get into your main, they are flying blind until you expand or push out with a ton of units. Or they can spend a lot of gas and get an observer.
A lot of pros have talked about this. Idra, Painuser, Liquid Tyler and other have all wanted ways to "pay for information". Right now, terran appears to have the best option because they do not need to spend or harvest gas get this scouting information. It doesn't have to be prefect information, only the kind that you can rely on.
Are you incapable of any critical thought? You really have no clue what you are talking about.
Terran scan is worthless for 6-9m scouting. Can you think of why (hint: it's not very hard)?
Congratulations: any build that Z/P do, can and should be hidden! Stargate/shrine/blink proxied/hidden. 2base 7 gate push - gates hidden/proxied.
The _one_ piece of reliable information T can get is basically whether or not P expanded and what timings P has chosen to miss. If you spent any time playing T, you would understand and grasp how EQUIVALENTLY in the dark T is. You know how in GSL games, you see top T's placing down multiple bunkers in anticipation of something and suddenly canceling at 70%? That's because they are anticipating timings - they CAN'T scout.
Now, as I was saying, P has the best scouting because it's mobile and mostly undeniable. Obs or phoenix SHOULD see everything. But that also goes hand in hand with the time/expense of P tech switches, so whatever P sees, he still has to react perfectly.
So stop. Every race is blind. Part of the game is understanding when you are blind, and how the builds you are doing interact with potential enemy builds that you have not eliminated.
It's unclear whether or not there exists a 1 base play or 2 base play that is best against it. Both, if adapted correctly, should have some viable response.
But you are completely off the mark on almost every idea. Protoss is going to eat a 3rax if he FEs? What is this, gold league? 3rax hasn't been viable against anything for 3/4 of a year.
Let me educate you on the problem, since you are so misinformed. There are two major vulnerabilities of a P FE. First is 2rax on small maps. This will cancel the nexus every time with proper control. So there needs to viable 1 base play on small maps, or small maps need to be removed. 2rax, however, is completely shit on a large map, and is mediocre against most other builds.
The other vulnerability is a tailored 111 that hits at 7-8m instead. This can be with hellion marine dropship, or marine tank. I'm not sure what the balance is and if FE can hold this, or if this is dependent on the execution.
It doesn't matter that any of this can't be directly scouted. It should be apparent by 6m that this is what the T is doing - no CC on low ground despite seeing your FE, no marauders either. You have the same information as the T when the timings hit. Scouting doesn't need to be fixed - what needs to be fixed is for there to be a viable general response. There still may exist such a response that isn't discovered. But if it doesn't exist, that's what the expansion + new units needs to fix, not scouting.
In any system as complex as a modern RTS game it is difficult to reduce things to simple cause and effect, so obviously TvP is a complex system and any analysis of this type is going to be oversimplified unless it's a multi-page treatise. It's almost unfortunate TL doesn't have a forum for players to submit such lengthy expositions where they can stand alone, without spawning a thread, with other players responding likewise. I think such a system would be far more productive for a discussion like this one.
Anyway, the core problem with TvP, oversimplified, is as follows. Spoiler to reduce length.
Firstly, Warp Gate. There is a tremendous difference in the strength of Protoss before and after this upgrade finishes because it makes every gateway produce units faster. It can also, coincidentally (and less significantly) allow them to be warped in anywhere. As a result, the gateway units must be balanced for both build times, which is categorically impossible. Remedy: Make warp gates have a longer cooldown than the corresponding unit's gateway build time, but they can be warped in anywhere. This also creates tension between warp gates and gateways, and gives Protoss players a reason to switch back and forth.
Secondly, the Marauder. Blizzard has claimed they intend the Marauder to be "a barracks unit that does not immediately die to splash damage" which is an acceptable objective. However, much as they did for the Immortal, they gave this unit a tremendous amount of damage, which actually overshadows its original function. A comparison of the numbers of Marauders and Siege Tanks will demonstrate very obviously why all Terrans will prefer the marauder over the tank. Even ignoring all its secondary advantages, such as their mobility, more efficient transportation and healing with medivacs, cheaper production facility which also has an anti air unit, and general cost-efficiency against all units, they are simply cheaper and have better damage and durability. Until the siege tank actually outperforms the marauder when sieged, it will never be used, as it has a huge array of penalties; cost and fragility to say nothing of the requirement of a 4 second siege/unsiege. Remedy: Straight up Marauder nerf (a deep one too) and a correspondingly significant Siege Tank buff. They need to get the power to justify their vulnerabilities and especially siege mode. The correct nerf to apply is probably a damage nerf. Reduce Marauder damage to 8 (+8 Armored), and increase Siege Tank damage to 35 (+35 Armored). It may also be worthwhile to pursue the possibility of modifying the way Siege Tanks deal damage if the splash damage at this level is unacceptable, by giving the siege tank additional single target damage instead, which is not dealt to every unit in the splash radius.
Thirdly, the Colossus. This unit is an extremely mobile form of siege-tank level splash damage. As long as it remains as it stands, it will be an extremely potent unit to the point that it is race-defining in all matchups. The "weakness" that Protoss players claim of gateway units can be traced directly to this unit. An army of Marauder-comparable Dragoons with Colossi behind them would be completely unstoppable. Unfortunately most of the Colossus' abilities come from its core role, and its core mechanics, so I see no easy way to adjust the Colossus itself. Reducing its movement speed and making it a bit more fragile could be a start, but the real problem is its role as splash dealer combined with its free-fire and cliff walk/vision. Remedy: Do nothing. Adjust other aspects of the game around the Colossus, ideally adding counters to the Colossus on the ground to remove the need to invoke air units as an explicit counter. Siege Tanks or Thors are excellent possible candidates, although a completely new unit, custom-built for the purpose might serve better.
To completely wax creative, what about a Goliath that can deploy into a static mode like a siege tank which gives it a single target, long range anti air attack with an extremely lengthy cooldown? Leaving the topic momentarily, the Colossus is exactly the sort of beasty a unit like the zerg Scourge would be ideal to kill, since Corruptors frequently can't take them down fast enough to save their army, but a couple connects with Scourge take such threats down instantly if unprotected.
Blizzard has taken a page out of Command & Conquer and has incorporated mechanics that are strictly dominant. Furthermore, as a significant special case of this syndrome they have included units that are simply dominant on the ground, but cannot attack air. The Marauder and Colossus being the relevant examples in TvP. This is a huge mistake- the ground game needs to be a complete system without invoking air units, and additionally the air game should be a complete system. The crossover between ground and air should be a meshing of two complete, stable systems where the air system is generally weaker, but more mobile and impossible to attack with some weaponry. Therefore air units must be extremely inefficient against units which can attack air, since many attacks are ground-to-ground and are therefore completely ineffective.
The reason why we have to invoke air units in a discussion of Marauders and Colossi is because Blizzard falsely believes air units can factor into this comparison. Neither Marauders nor Colossi can attack air. In fact, Colossi can even be targeted by anti air weaponry- which is peculiar because anti air in this game is actually quite pathetic compared to the power of air units, despite their high cost. The correct way to balance air units is to have expensive air units LOSE when massed to extremely cost-effective anti air, even if that anti air is only a fraction of the cost and supply.
Invoking air units as a required counter to a strong ground unit is the height of foolishness. This is NOT Supreme Commander 2 with experimentals. The poor Thor and Mothership can go cry in their corner- strategy games are more interesting with a larger number of units with fixed roles, rather than fewer units which are weakly generalist, like the high supply cost Thor.
In summary, the Warp Gate technology, the Marauder, and the Colossus are all strictly dominant choices given the way the game is currently set up. Significant revision regarding ground mechanics is necessary to remove air units from the "required counter" tables before we can actually start balancing the game.
I don't see what's wrong with the marauder. You understand that the reason there has been such a large trend to zeal archon compositions, and skipping colo, is the strength of chargelot against mara?
Mara are a comparable unit to the zeal. It is inferior in both direct survival and damage, but as long as there is critical mass mara + medivacs + EMPs, then mara can deal with zeal. Also at midgame timings if the bio ball faces no AOE and can wedge itself to reduce surface area, then mara can deal with zeal. In all other parameters, zeal is slightly superior, and forces a significant vulnerable marine count.
The problem, as said at the very start of this thread, is that there is no strong defender's advantage for either race. There is no way to hold parts of the map with a small handful of units, since both races require critical mass to fight.
Zdragon, that is true of the entire game. The lack of defender's advantage is a result of a lot of different factors in Starcraft 2 at the moment. The lack of force multipliers, area control abilities, and micro-intensive spells, coupled with the improved AI and increased game speed, have together made the game about armies clashing rather than positional control. It is much faster, much looser, and far, far more aggressive.
When players speak of "defender's advantage" what you are actually referring to is "local advantage" which means a smaller army has some feature that makes it more effective than a bigger army, not even necessarily a defensive advantage. Features like the high ground in your base confer a natural local advantage when you are defending that area. However we want every race to have a variety of options for local advantages, since this means it is to your advantage to split your army up. For example, Dark Swarm is a spell which can make a small army extremely effective, to the point that it can defeat or at least stave off a much larger enemy force.
Area control also confers a local advantage, such as force fields. Abilities like spider mines can deny your opponent access to an area without using troops. Three lurkers can essentially hold a ramp forever against marines. This emergent behavior is actually quite important, since it means having more than three lurkers stacked up on one ramp is INEFFICIENT.
I do think I need to reiterate about the high supply cost. A brood war game simply has more STUFF in play at once. There are just more pieces to move. Whether that's 1 supply hydralisks or 2 supply siege tanks, or spider mines which don't even use supply, there is more stuff out on the map in a brood war game, which gives more options for how to split them up. You cannot split a thor, no matter what, but the three goliaths that cost the same supply can either be together or apart as required, or simply not even built if you need exactly one.
The higher supply cost of units, and the improved AI allowing units to be stacked together so tightly means they can all fight at once. So whoever has the bigger ball has a much larger advantage than they did in brood war, even if their troop advantage is actually not that great. Also the importance of splash damage is greatly exaggerated to deal with these tight armies, since there is essentially no reason to avoid a single cohesive ball army. Strategically spacing your army about the map is just begging to get obliterated by an opponent who does ball their forces together.
The lack of area control has caused players to conceptualize "map control" as a discrete thing. Which is sad because whoever has the stronger army almost always has "map control." Ideally we want both players to control some of the map. One player controls an area, and the other controls this other area. And ideally the degree of area control is not uniform- some areas are more heavily controlled than others.
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
Really, all I want is reliable scouting in the first 7-9 minutes of the game. So many terran builds rely on protoss not being able to figure out exactly what the terran is doing. That and the ghost to be looked at, because those bastards do not die.
I want a way to scout Protoss without giving up the economy race...
I have no sympathy for terrans who are unable to drop one mule to scan and get nearly perfect scouting information. The information that provides make your economy and timing that much more efficient. The protoss has to work off imperfect information until they spend gas to get an observer out and into the terran base.
It may seem minor, but it is one of the main tactics korean terrans are using. Posturing a 1-1-1 while going fast expand and vice versa. That with the Ghost, which only get better the more of them that are on the field, the PvT match up is brutal.
If a protoss player is stupid enough to have his tech or gateways all in one place he shouldnt be fucking allowed to play starcraft 2 -__-
You can literally put all your tech and gateways ANYWHERE, why would you put them in a way that 1 scan can tell fuck all about what you are doing -.-?
Plus, robo builds are awesome, and most expo -> robo builds are safe except vs fringe cases.
The problems in the matchup, for the protoss side anyway, is not in scouting anymore... The matchup needs work but not in that regard.
Also ledarsi's post is awesome. Zdragon's posts too.
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
Really, all I want is reliable scouting in the first 7-9 minutes of the game. So many terran builds rely on protoss not being able to figure out exactly what the terran is doing. That and the ghost to be looked at, because those bastards do not die.
I want a way to scout Protoss without giving up the economy race...
I have no sympathy for terrans who are unable to drop one mule to scan and get nearly perfect scouting information. The information that provides make your economy and timing that much more efficient. The protoss has to work off imperfect information until they spend gas to get an observer out and into the terran base.
It may seem minor, but it is one of the main tactics korean terrans are using. Posturing a 1-1-1 while going fast expand and vice versa. That with the Ghost, which only get better the more of them that are on the field, the PvT match up is brutal.
how is dropping 1 scan reliable scouting?
most protoss i vs in diamond hide their tech especially when you scan the army at the natural, there is never any collosus or high templar, those are tucked away...
the point is BOTH races can deny scouting, stalkers at the towers tech hidden and army tucked away, the only way to be guaranteed to spot it is to attack and draw out their forces which can be too late.
But we are talking about a very limited period of time here. The first 7-9 minutes. That's when most all-ins push out. It is also when the fast expand builds decide to go down the ramp and set up some bunkers. As a terran you are asking "did he expand or did he get a lot of production buildings?" If your worried about a push, drop more bunkers. If it looks like the protoss is in full macro mode, a few less.
My worst fear in PvT is scouting them last and being unable to get into their main. If I don't in, I feel forced to go one gate-robo. The stalker push poke is not good enough.
You obviously have never been on the receiving end of forcefields. I'm pretty much convinced that bunkers aren't even useful as a structure in TvP anymore.
Yeah I really dont see a reason why it should be so easy for protoss to stop you from repairing bunkers. Yeah, if we removed that, terrans winrate would go waaaaaaaaay up, but dont you think thats retarded? That a big reason protoss wins games is because of retarded allin builds.......?
Matchup needs total overhaul. Protoss allins are *way* too easy to do and get lucky with, ghosts are a joke that counter everything and marauders ruin both TvP and TvT.
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
Really, all I want is reliable scouting in the first 7-9 minutes of the game. So many terran builds rely on protoss not being able to figure out exactly what the terran is doing. That and the ghost to be looked at, because those bastards do not die.
I want a way to scout Protoss without giving up the economy race...
I have no sympathy for terrans who are unable to drop one mule to scan and get nearly perfect scouting information. The information that provides make your economy and timing that much more efficient. The protoss has to work off imperfect information until they spend gas to get an observer out and into the terran base.
It may seem minor, but it is one of the main tactics korean terrans are using. Posturing a 1-1-1 while going fast expand and vice versa. That with the Ghost, which only get better the more of them that are on the field, the PvT match up is brutal.
If a protoss player is stupid enough to have his tech or gateways all in one place he shouldnt be fucking allowed to play starcraft 2 -__-
You can literally put all your tech and gateways ANYWHERE, why would you put them in a way that 1 scan can tell fuck all about what you are doing -.-?
Plus, robo builds are awesome, and most expo -> robo builds are safe except vs fringe cases.
The problems in the matchup, for the protoss side anyway, is not in scouting anymore... The matchup needs work but not in that regard.
Also ledarsi's post is awesome. Zdragon's posts too.
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
Really, all I want is reliable scouting in the first 7-9 minutes of the game. So many terran builds rely on protoss not being able to figure out exactly what the terran is doing. That and the ghost to be looked at, because those bastards do not die.
I want a way to scout Protoss without giving up the economy race...
I have no sympathy for terrans who are unable to drop one mule to scan and get nearly perfect scouting information. The information that provides make your economy and timing that much more efficient. The protoss has to work off imperfect information until they spend gas to get an observer out and into the terran base.
It may seem minor, but it is one of the main tactics korean terrans are using. Posturing a 1-1-1 while going fast expand and vice versa. That with the Ghost, which only get better the more of them that are on the field, the PvT match up is brutal.
how is dropping 1 scan reliable scouting?
most protoss i vs in diamond hide their tech especially when you scan the army at the natural, there is never any collosus or high templar, those are tucked away...
the point is BOTH races can deny scouting, stalkers at the towers tech hidden and army tucked away, the only way to be guaranteed to spot it is to attack and draw out their forces which can be too late.
But we are talking about a very limited period of time here. The first 7-9 minutes. That's when most all-ins push out. It is also when the fast expand builds decide to go down the ramp and set up some bunkers. As a terran you are asking "did he expand or did he get a lot of production buildings?" If your worried about a push, drop more bunkers. If it looks like the protoss is in full macro mode, a few less.
My worst fear in PvT is scouting them last and being unable to get into their main. If I don't in, I feel forced to go one gate-robo. The stalker push poke is not good enough.
You obviously have never been on the receiving end of forcefields. I'm pretty much convinced that bunkers aren't even useful as a structure in TvP anymore.
Yeah I really dont see a reason why it should be so easy for protoss to stop you from repairing bunkers. Yeah, if we removed that, terrans winrate would go waaaaaaaaay up, but dont you think thats retarded? That a big reason protoss wins games is because of retarded allin builds.......?
Matchup needs total overhaul. Protoss allins are *way* too easy to do and get lucky with, ghosts are a joke that counter everything and marauders ruin both TvP and TvT.
Why are you so sexy? but yeah I agree, the TvP matchup is really really strange and pretty much hasn't changed much since beta except for a brief 1 week experimentation with Mech that happened during MC's rise and a stint of heavy marine ghost instead of heavy marauder. In beta TvP was actually fun because weird strats worked like Marine banshee and sky terran and stuff like that as well as mech actually being scary for protoss.
All we need is a way to make Protoss fear mech without changing TvZ in any way.
(Maybe by making Mechanical units do their bonus damage to all Protoss shields as well as their base damage but move EMP to require a fusion core to be upgraded and the Marauder to be removed.)
I find the Marauder doesn't co-exist well with the Siege Tank anyways despite how well rounded people think the Terran army is. They both are just ground damage vs armored except one is mobile cheap and one is immobile but splashes. Just doesn't make sense to me.
What Terran really needs is Ground to Armored Air and not depend on vikings because right now vikings are the reason most people hate Mech vs Mech because it's all a fight for air control unlike in BW where there was many different ways to gain spotting or to break a position with use of mass drops on a sieged position which made the matchup fun because there was always constant action despite both armies being "immobile". Also needing Vikings to deal with VR and Carriers in sc2 sucks because it takes away from your ground army so even if you can manage to kill the air your just left with nothing to counter a mass warp in of ground units.
I've been playing Mech in TvP from mid beta till the last nerf to hellions because I finally said that was the last straw and switched to bio. So I have TONS of experience when it comes to Mech TvP although not at the highest of levels unfortunately. high diamond - mid/high master league.
You obviously have never been on the receiving end of forcefields. I'm pretty much convinced that bunkers aren't even useful as a structure in TvP anymore.
Yeah I really dont see a reason why it should be so easy for protoss to stop you from repairing bunkers. Yeah, if we removed that, terrans winrate would go waaaaaaaaay up, but dont you think thats retarded? That a big reason protoss wins games is because of retarded allin builds.......?
Matchup needs total overhaul. Protoss allins are *way* too easy to do and get lucky with, ghosts are a joke that counter everything and marauders ruin both TvP and TvT.
To kinda tie in this thought with the OP, if we could actually use tanks as an effective means of defense in TvP, the match up might be a bit more stable. It would greatly reduce the window in which bunkers become "useless," while discouraging the "deathball" tactic by making a pure frontal assault suicidal without a huge economic lead (like in PvZ). However, I don't think this is an option until P gets slightly better/reliable harass unit.
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
Really, all I want is reliable scouting in the first 7-9 minutes of the game. So many terran builds rely on protoss not being able to figure out exactly what the terran is doing. That and the ghost to be looked at, because those bastards do not die.
I want a way to scout Protoss without giving up the economy race...
I have no sympathy for terrans who are unable to drop one mule to scan and get nearly perfect scouting information. The information that provides make your economy and timing that much more efficient. The protoss has to work off imperfect information until they spend gas to get an observer out and into the terran base.
It may seem minor, but it is one of the main tactics korean terrans are using. Posturing a 1-1-1 while going fast expand and vice versa. That with the Ghost, which only get better the more of them that are on the field, the PvT match up is brutal.
If a protoss player is stupid enough to have his tech or gateways all in one place he shouldnt be fucking allowed to play starcraft 2 -__-
You can literally put all your tech and gateways ANYWHERE, why would you put them in a way that 1 scan can tell fuck all about what you are doing -.-?
Plus, robo builds are awesome, and most expo -> robo builds are safe except vs fringe cases.
The problems in the matchup, for the protoss side anyway, is not in scouting anymore... The matchup needs work but not in that regard.
Also ledarsi's post is awesome. Zdragon's posts too.
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
Really, all I want is reliable scouting in the first 7-9 minutes of the game. So many terran builds rely on protoss not being able to figure out exactly what the terran is doing. That and the ghost to be looked at, because those bastards do not die.
I want a way to scout Protoss without giving up the economy race...
I have no sympathy for terrans who are unable to drop one mule to scan and get nearly perfect scouting information. The information that provides make your economy and timing that much more efficient. The protoss has to work off imperfect information until they spend gas to get an observer out and into the terran base.
It may seem minor, but it is one of the main tactics korean terrans are using. Posturing a 1-1-1 while going fast expand and vice versa. That with the Ghost, which only get better the more of them that are on the field, the PvT match up is brutal.
how is dropping 1 scan reliable scouting?
most protoss i vs in diamond hide their tech especially when you scan the army at the natural, there is never any collosus or high templar, those are tucked away...
the point is BOTH races can deny scouting, stalkers at the towers tech hidden and army tucked away, the only way to be guaranteed to spot it is to attack and draw out their forces which can be too late.
But we are talking about a very limited period of time here. The first 7-9 minutes. That's when most all-ins push out. It is also when the fast expand builds decide to go down the ramp and set up some bunkers. As a terran you are asking "did he expand or did he get a lot of production buildings?" If your worried about a push, drop more bunkers. If it looks like the protoss is in full macro mode, a few less.
My worst fear in PvT is scouting them last and being unable to get into their main. If I don't in, I feel forced to go one gate-robo. The stalker push poke is not good enough.
You obviously have never been on the receiving end of forcefields. I'm pretty much convinced that bunkers aren't even useful as a structure in TvP anymore.
Yeah I really dont see a reason why it should be so easy for protoss to stop you from repairing bunkers. Yeah, if we removed that, terrans winrate would go waaaaaaaaay up, but dont you think thats retarded? That a big reason protoss wins games is because of retarded allin builds.......?
Matchup needs total overhaul. Protoss allins are *way* too easy to do and get lucky with, ghosts are a joke that counter everything and marauders ruin both TvP and TvT.
To be respectful, I agree with you that letting everything be revealed in one scan is likely bad on the protoss part. However, if you place tech structures on the outskirts of our base, you are risking losing them to drops later on. There is nothing worse than having 4 marauders drop, snipe your robo and leave as your stalkers kill one of them. I try to play for the long term game and avoid placements like this. Also with really small mains, like xel'naga caverns to tuck the tech away and keep it safe.
So in short, I know its going to be scanned, but I would rather that than risk losing is to a well timed drop eight minutes later.
But I agree with you one the rest. I just didn't think I was going to get far with the argument "nerf the marauder and ghost". I was advocating for smaller changes, rather than a complete overhaul.
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
Really, all I want is reliable scouting in the first 7-9 minutes of the game. So many terran builds rely on protoss not being able to figure out exactly what the terran is doing. That and the ghost to be looked at, because those bastards do not die.
I want a way to scout Protoss without giving up the economy race...
I have no sympathy for terrans who are unable to drop one mule to scan and get nearly perfect scouting information. The information that provides make your economy and timing that much more efficient. The protoss has to work off imperfect information until they spend gas to get an observer out and into the terran base.
It may seem minor, but it is one of the main tactics korean terrans are using. Posturing a 1-1-1 while going fast expand and vice versa. That with the Ghost, which only get better the more of them that are on the field, the PvT match up is brutal.
If a protoss player is stupid enough to have his tech or gateways all in one place he shouldnt be fucking allowed to play starcraft 2 -__-
You can literally put all your tech and gateways ANYWHERE, why would you put them in a way that 1 scan can tell fuck all about what you are doing -.-?
Plus, robo builds are awesome, and most expo -> robo builds are safe except vs fringe cases.
The problems in the matchup, for the protoss side anyway, is not in scouting anymore... The matchup needs work but not in that regard.
Also ledarsi's post is awesome. Zdragon's posts too.
On October 11 2011 14:03 aksfjh wrote:
On October 11 2011 13:51 Plansix wrote:
On October 11 2011 13:36 NaturalHacks wrote:
On October 11 2011 13:20 Plansix wrote:
On October 11 2011 13:09 aksfjh wrote:
On October 11 2011 12:41 Plansix wrote:
On October 11 2011 10:15 Belisarius wrote:
On October 09 2011 20:33 humbre wrote: [quote] pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
Really, all I want is reliable scouting in the first 7-9 minutes of the game. So many terran builds rely on protoss not being able to figure out exactly what the terran is doing. That and the ghost to be looked at, because those bastards do not die.
I want a way to scout Protoss without giving up the economy race...
I have no sympathy for terrans who are unable to drop one mule to scan and get nearly perfect scouting information. The information that provides make your economy and timing that much more efficient. The protoss has to work off imperfect information until they spend gas to get an observer out and into the terran base.
It may seem minor, but it is one of the main tactics korean terrans are using. Posturing a 1-1-1 while going fast expand and vice versa. That with the Ghost, which only get better the more of them that are on the field, the PvT match up is brutal.
how is dropping 1 scan reliable scouting?
most protoss i vs in diamond hide their tech especially when you scan the army at the natural, there is never any collosus or high templar, those are tucked away...
the point is BOTH races can deny scouting, stalkers at the towers tech hidden and army tucked away, the only way to be guaranteed to spot it is to attack and draw out their forces which can be too late.
But we are talking about a very limited period of time here. The first 7-9 minutes. That's when most all-ins push out. It is also when the fast expand builds decide to go down the ramp and set up some bunkers. As a terran you are asking "did he expand or did he get a lot of production buildings?" If your worried about a push, drop more bunkers. If it looks like the protoss is in full macro mode, a few less.
My worst fear in PvT is scouting them last and being unable to get into their main. If I don't in, I feel forced to go one gate-robo. The stalker push poke is not good enough.
You obviously have never been on the receiving end of forcefields. I'm pretty much convinced that bunkers aren't even useful as a structure in TvP anymore.
Yeah I really dont see a reason why it should be so easy for protoss to stop you from repairing bunkers. Yeah, if we removed that, terrans winrate would go waaaaaaaaay up, but dont you think thats retarded? That a big reason protoss wins games is because of retarded allin builds.......?
Matchup needs total overhaul. Protoss allins are *way* too easy to do and get lucky with, ghosts are a joke that counter everything and marauders ruin both TvP and TvT.
To be respectful, I agree with you that letting everything be revealed in one scan is likely bad on the protoss part. However, if you place tech structures on the outskirts of our base, you are risking losing them to drops later on. There is nothing worse than having 4 marauders drop, snipe your robo and leave as your stalkers kill one of them. I try to play for the long term game and avoid placements like this. Also with really small mains, like xel'naga caverns to tuck the tech away and keep it safe.
So in short, I know its going to be scanned, but I would rather that than risk losing is to a well timed drop eight minutes later.
But I agree with you one the rest. I just didn't think I was going to get far with the argument "nerf the marauder and ghost". I was advocating for smaller changes, rather than a complete overhaul.
Or Protoss could put important tech buildings where the army normally is, around the natural. Even so, there's a lot of ways to spread out tech or to hide it from scans. If your goal is to surprise your opponent, the long term game isn't something you're worried about (as far as your clutch hidden tech is concerned).
Or you could split the tech between the main and the natural. Put the Robotics Facility in the main and the Robo Bay in the natural. Still, a good build should not rely a lot on not having the tech structures scouted by the opponent.
On October 11 2011 20:12 Thezzy wrote: Or you could split the tech between the main and the natural. Put the Robotics Facility in the main and the Robo Bay in the natural. Still, a good build should not rely a lot on not having the tech structures scouted by the opponent.
that's actually kinkda more of a risk as far as scouting goes, as scanning the robo at a time where it is normally inactive means that if you scan either the main or the nat you read colo.
It is however better to spread tech against drops, so 1 dropship can't kill all ur tech at once.
On October 09 2011 13:01 zmansman17 wrote: Top 8 master Terran here and playing mech against Toss is like quitting the game before it starts.
Granted, SCWarden uses a Bio/mech mix, I don't know any other pros that play this way. Perhaps you could win a few games because Toss may not know how to respond. But grinding away with mech, you will quickly realize mech is inferior in TvP
CoLTrimaster experimented with mech versus one of his Toss friends with 200 army to 200 army. The seige spread was great, bunkers and turrets were in place, upgrades were the same, and the Toss lost 40 army.
The Terran lost everything.
The reason Koreans use Bio is because Koreans have superior mechanics and adroit micro. The reason Americans or Europeans do not have the same success with Terran is because Terran bio requires a very high level of micro and skill.
If a player has this degree of skill, they can reap small advantages and make their units many times more cost efficient.
For noobs like myself who are only Top 6 Master, I do not have the micro to make my units super cost efficient versus Storms, Collosi and many other Toss units that don't require the same micro. (I also practice micro tournament like every day).
The reality is that Terran is a race that mandates high degree of micro. Mech not only cannot be microed well against Toss, but on their own, they are just not strong units v Toss. If any Toss is bashing Terran, I suggest you attempt to play Terran at my level, watch pro streams of many terrans complaining about Toss, before commenting on why Terran do or do not do certain builds.
pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
Really, all I want is reliable scouting in the first 7-9 minutes of the game. So many terran builds rely on protoss not being able to figure out exactly what the terran is doing. That and the ghost to be looked at, because those bastards do not die.
I want a way to scout Protoss without giving up the economy race...
I have no sympathy for terrans who are unable to drop one mule to scan and get nearly perfect scouting information. The information that provides make your economy and timing that much more efficient. The protoss has to work off imperfect information until they spend gas to get an observer out and into the terran base.
It may seem minor, but it is one of the main tactics korean terrans are using. Posturing a 1-1-1 while going fast expand and vice versa. That with the Ghost, which only get better the more of them that are on the field, the PvT match up is brutal.
If a protoss player is stupid enough to have his tech or gateways all in one place he shouldnt be fucking allowed to play starcraft 2 -__-
You can literally put all your tech and gateways ANYWHERE, why would you put them in a way that 1 scan can tell fuck all about what you are doing -.-?
Plus, robo builds are awesome, and most expo -> robo builds are safe except vs fringe cases.
The problems in the matchup, for the protoss side anyway, is not in scouting anymore... The matchup needs work but not in that regard.
Also ledarsi's post is awesome. Zdragon's posts too.
On October 11 2011 14:03 aksfjh wrote:
On October 11 2011 13:51 Plansix wrote:
On October 11 2011 13:36 NaturalHacks wrote:
On October 11 2011 13:20 Plansix wrote:
On October 11 2011 13:09 aksfjh wrote:
On October 11 2011 12:41 Plansix wrote:
On October 11 2011 10:15 Belisarius wrote:
On October 09 2011 20:33 humbre wrote: [quote] pretty much nailed it, i played both toss and terran same amout of games and P players who claim T is just 1a need a reality check and switch races for once to actually see how hard it is even vs 1a colo/ht army.
I can't... I don't... whatisthisidon'teven....
I can't believe I ever dared call T a 1a race when I myself can just 1a my caster-based composition and roll terrans left and right...
Don't even try man, don't even try. There is no reasoning with them. The terrans are legion and they will convince us that the reason Protoss is doing poorly is because we are all doing it wrong. Seriously, the mule, ghost, marauder, EMP, flying builds and scan are all necessary to make terran a valid race. Without those things.....the win rate might be like....50%.
Really, all I want is reliable scouting in the first 7-9 minutes of the game. So many terran builds rely on protoss not being able to figure out exactly what the terran is doing. That and the ghost to be looked at, because those bastards do not die.
I want a way to scout Protoss without giving up the economy race...
I have no sympathy for terrans who are unable to drop one mule to scan and get nearly perfect scouting information. The information that provides make your economy and timing that much more efficient. The protoss has to work off imperfect information until they spend gas to get an observer out and into the terran base.
It may seem minor, but it is one of the main tactics korean terrans are using. Posturing a 1-1-1 while going fast expand and vice versa. That with the Ghost, which only get better the more of them that are on the field, the PvT match up is brutal.
how is dropping 1 scan reliable scouting?
most protoss i vs in diamond hide their tech especially when you scan the army at the natural, there is never any collosus or high templar, those are tucked away...
the point is BOTH races can deny scouting, stalkers at the towers tech hidden and army tucked away, the only way to be guaranteed to spot it is to attack and draw out their forces which can be too late.
But we are talking about a very limited period of time here. The first 7-9 minutes. That's when most all-ins push out. It is also when the fast expand builds decide to go down the ramp and set up some bunkers. As a terran you are asking "did he expand or did he get a lot of production buildings?" If your worried about a push, drop more bunkers. If it looks like the protoss is in full macro mode, a few less.
My worst fear in PvT is scouting them last and being unable to get into their main. If I don't in, I feel forced to go one gate-robo. The stalker push poke is not good enough.
You obviously have never been on the receiving end of forcefields. I'm pretty much convinced that bunkers aren't even useful as a structure in TvP anymore.
Yeah I really dont see a reason why it should be so easy for protoss to stop you from repairing bunkers. Yeah, if we removed that, terrans winrate would go waaaaaaaaay up, but dont you think thats retarded? That a big reason protoss wins games is because of retarded allin builds.......?
Matchup needs total overhaul. Protoss allins are *way* too easy to do and get lucky with, ghosts are a joke that counter everything and marauders ruin both TvP and TvT.
Why are you so sexy? but yeah I agree, the TvP matchup is really really strange and pretty much hasn't changed much since beta except for a brief 1 week experimentation with Mech that happened during MC's rise and a stint of heavy marine ghost instead of heavy marauder. In beta TvP was actually fun because weird strats worked like Marine banshee and sky terran and stuff like that as well as mech actually being scary for protoss.
All we need is a way to make Protoss fear mech without changing TvZ in any way.
(Maybe by making Mechanical units do their bonus damage to all Protoss shields as well as their base damage but move EMP to require a fusion core to be upgraded and the Marauder to be removed.)
I find the Marauder doesn't co-exist well with the Siege Tank anyways despite how well rounded people think the Terran army is. They both are just ground damage vs armored except one is mobile cheap and one is immobile but splashes. Just doesn't make sense to me.
What Terran really needs is Ground to Armored Air and not depend on vikings because right now vikings are the reason most people hate Mech vs Mech because it's all a fight for air control unlike in BW where there was many different ways to gain spotting or to break a position with use of mass drops on a sieged position which made the matchup fun because there was always constant action despite both armies being "immobile". Also needing Vikings to deal with VR and Carriers in sc2 sucks because it takes away from your ground army so even if you can manage to kill the air your just left with nothing to counter a mass warp in of ground units.
I've been playing Mech in TvP from mid beta till the last nerf to hellions because I finally said that was the last straw and switched to bio. So I have TONS of experience when it comes to Mech TvP although not at the highest of levels unfortunately. high diamond - mid/high master league.
Wow I'm so happy I found this post. I completely agree with you, awesome post! I really, really, really hope Blizzard reads this post, so they know what to do --> Completely overhaul TvP match up, make mech viable and PLEASE REMOVE THE MARAUDER AND VIKING.
When people say they enjoy TvT, because it looks so much like chess, I get really pissed off. TvT in Starcraft 2 is just two sieged up lines and a fight about air control, hardly anyone makes a move. Sometimes the Korean Terrans play sexy styles to mix it up and that makes it entertaining, but for most games, especially on ladder, TvT is a boring standoff between two siege tank lines with Viking support. Because of Vikings and towers, it's hard to pull off drops and because you can't drop, it's all about breaking eachother's siege lines, but nobody wants to take the risk, so you get a sit and wait. TvT in Brood War was far more entertaining and you had to make far more strategic decisions (that's real chess for you!), you could force your opponent to move his ground army with strategic drops, allowing you to place your army at a strategic position, etc. The Viking should be removed and replaced with a ground unit that has good anti-air, kind of like the Goliath in Brood War.
I really hope Blizzard reads your post mate! Great work on your awesome post! +1
killing lurkers without tanks is now nothing hard to do, and the vultures have an anti goon weapon, but to use it you have to be sneaky or suicidal. And why should the terran play t3 heavy if the toss plays t1+t3 ? For me it totally sounds like bio with t3 support what the toss is doing, so just like the terran.
And the tank nerf by the way was because of tvt to make marines more viable, so it wouldn't be tank viking anymore. But i agree that it made chargelots to strong against tanks, but they are terrible strong against marauders aswell even stronger, but they don't deal friendly fire.
Mech only is like playing robo only or t2 only as zerg (hydra muta corrupter ). But yeah mech can work its just totally different from the terran play people used like beta, so you would start from 0. A zerg switching to terran probably have better chances on being successful with mech, then a terran. But Blizzard wanted to encourage multiple units use, thats why there are conters to every production facility so to say. Thats why the xvz matchups are so well liked, as zerg units are usally good against everything if the position is in their favor.
Anyway tryed mech for 100 wins (i switch race every 100 wins hehe). Its really hard in the early game. But once you have your composition it works fairly nice. (its nothing for below 3 base though you need the 6 gas) My biggest problem was the eco mode the other races could go into. And to learn that i have to take workers with my army as i don't need them mining minerals.
Fighting against a toss works pretty much like in bw, just that you don't have spidermines and the tanks are 50% weaker, and the goons can teleport, but the toss doesn't have stasis and that a ht put 4 of your goliath to 50% healths fpr 50 energy. Basically you want the science vessel for defense matrix and emp. Or in sc2 words, the raven and the ghost. And with 1 raven and 3 ghosts i would say a 150 supply army (well 5-10 workers in it) is still considered mech . And with those 2 + the workers saying mech doesn't need micro is just wrong.
Anyway have fun trying out mech it works against every race, but you might need 100-300 wins before you are at your old level. (i actually got better with terran with mech only) And remember mech didn't mean factory only units in bw.
@Raiznhell you missed some bw tvt changes lately, they mostly copy the tank viking style now . (well it was used before sc2 came out, but not as regularly as it is now)
On October 11 2011 16:41 ledarsi wrote: Firstly, Warp Gate. There is a tremendous difference in the strength of Protoss before and after this upgrade finishes because it makes every gateway produce units faster. It can also, coincidentally (and less significantly) allow them to be warped in anywhere. As a result, the gateway units must be balanced for both build times, which is categorically impossible. Remedy: Make warp gates have a longer cooldown than the corresponding unit's gateway build time, but they can be warped in anywhere. This also creates tension between warp gates and gateways, and gives Protoss players a reason to switch back and forth.
While I can see what you're getting at let me just run through a few numbers: Reactor - 50/50 50 seconds (requires just a barracks I believe, at least according to liquipedia, no additional tech structures) Warp Gate tech - 50/50 160 seconds (requires a 150/0 50 second cybernetics core to research)
Marine - 45HP, 50/0, 25 seconds, 1 supply, ranged attack, can be built 2 at a time with reactor Zealot - 100HP/50 Shield, 100/0, 38 seconds (28 second cooldown on warpgate), 2 supply, melee attack, built 1 at a time but can be built anywhere
Quick comparison of speed upgrades: Stimpack - 100/100, 170 seconds, researched from a 50/25, 25 second tech lab with same requirements as reactor. Increases speed of marine by 1.125 for 15 seconds at a cost of 10HP. Standard early part of build. Charge - 200/200, 140 seconds, researched from a 150/100 50 second Twilight Council which requires the aforementioned 150/0 50 second cybernetics core. Increases speed base by 0.5 and adds charge ability, 3.5 second speed boost to 6.05. However less utility for map movement than stim, essentially a combat upgrade. Not as standard early on as alternatives are Robotics facility or Stargate, distinct tech paths.
This is just an example. My point is that I would guess that if you do too much to warp gates its going to be absurdly hard for a Protoss to not be overwhelmingly out-produced early game by a Terran whose base units have a ranged attack rather than melee. Reactors already out-produce Warpgate Protoss in terms of raw supply by three seconds unless the Protoss blows all his chrono on his gates; which means less probes and you get out-incomed by a MULEing Terran. If you just start extending the cool-down even further on Warpgates to beyond that of a basic Gateway then you're going to be looking towards a situation where a Terran will be approaching four marines in output per barracks for every zealot you warp in.
I doubt thats what we want considering the current problem seems to be "Terran is really strong early on and hard to hold but Protoss dominates late game".
Disclosure: Above is all theorycrafting based on figures from liquipedia.
someone earlier was saying it is hard to balance for the top-teir only, let alone everyone, I agree, however
is making protoss more difficult to play (apm wise) not a good way of implementing more difficulty at the lower end of the protoss skill spectrum without effecting the higher teirs? for example someone was saying charge could be casted like stim, you could buff it a bit aswell but it would require protoss to constantly micro like the terran has to with MM (vs chargelots) tieng up both players apm rather than zealots being able to be essentially (dont burn me here!) 1-a'd while the terran has to continuosly kite.
maybe have charge hit for double damage but it needs to be c-clicked individually on units and grabbing the whole ball and charging 1 unit would blow your cool-down and be overkill
now that could lead to some MKP-esk WOW micro as players a-move the zealots then grab chunks at a time and charge individual units in a fashion similar to marine splitting
im sure there is a way to buff protoss at the highest teir while implementing more apm/skill/multitasking into protoss play. they sound like they go well together
all and all i think the best route is,
protoss buff's but more skill required to use them and nerf of a-move god-units (collosus, chargelots). i think it can be done and is not unreasonable
On October 12 2011 02:22 NaturalHacks wrote: someone earlier was saying it is hard to balance for the top-teir only, let alone everyone, I agree, however
is making protoss more difficult to play (apm wise) not a good way of implementing more difficulty at the lower end of the protoss skill spectrum without effecting the higher teirs? for example someone was saying charge could be casted like stim, you could buff it a bit aswell but it would require protoss to constantly micro like the terran has to with MM (vs chargelots) tieng up both players apm rather than zealots being able to be essentially (dont burn me here!) 1-a'd while the terran has to continuosly kite.
maybe have charge hit for double damage but it needs to be c-clicked individually on units and grabbing the whole ball and charging 1 unit would blow your cool-down and be overkill
now that could lead to some MKP-esk WOW micro as players a-move the zealots then grab chunks at a time and charge individual units in a fashion similar to marine splitting
im sure there is a way to buff protoss at the highest teir while implementing more apm/skill/multitasking into protoss play. they sound like they go well together
all and all i think the best route is,
protoss buff's but more skill required to use them and nerf of a-move god-units (collosus, chargelots). i think it can be done and is not unreasonable
I would be far happier with chargelots if they just had a raw speed upgrade or an ability that simply made them go faster for a set period of time. You are correct that they are simply an A move unit and once charge pops, they are off to do their own thing. Worse off, if you attempt to micro them after charge pops, it cancels out the charge and they move at normal speed. It would reward the player who controls them better, must like zerglings. It would also keep them from charging off single file as they see the terran units, getting focused down one at a time by the unit AI.
And to be clear, I don't want them to go the same speed as charge. Just slightly faster than a stim marine for a period of time. Just enough to punch them in the face with laser-fists.
I've recently switched from Terran to Random, and I gotta say, after getting my Protoss feet back under me (Was mid masters 4-5 months ago as strictly toss), I have found 20 nexus->4-gate robo or 20 nexus->5-6 gate w/charge has been doing beautifully against the 1/1/1 composition. With good pokes with your first stalkers, it is also easy to see early aggression coming, and cut probes and build more units. Just my thoughts, PvT is my favorite of the nine matchups right now, little difficult, but so rewarding!
On October 11 2011 16:41 ledarsi wrote: Firstly, Warp Gate. There is a tremendous difference in the strength of Protoss before and after this upgrade finishes because it makes every gateway produce units faster. It can also, coincidentally (and less significantly) allow them to be warped in anywhere. As a result, the gateway units must be balanced for both build times, which is categorically impossible. Remedy: Make warp gates have a longer cooldown than the corresponding unit's gateway build time, but they can be warped in anywhere. This also creates tension between warp gates and gateways, and gives Protoss players a reason to switch back and forth.
While I can see what you're getting at let me just run through a few numbers: Reactor - 50/50 50 seconds (requires just a barracks I believe, at least according to liquipedia, no additional tech structures) Warp Gate tech - 50/50 160 seconds (requires a 150/0 50 second cybernetics core to research)
Marine - 45HP, 50/0, 25 seconds, 1 supply, ranged attack, can be built 2 at a time with reactor Zealot - 100HP/50 Shield, 100/0, 38 seconds (28 second cooldown on warpgate), 2 supply, melee attack, built 1 at a time but can be built anywhere
Quick comparison of speed upgrades: Stimpack - 50/25, 170 seconds, researched from a 50/25, 25 second tech lab with same requirements as reactor. Increases speed of marine by 1.125 for 15 seconds at a cost of 10HP. Standard early part of build. Charge - 200/200, 140 seconds, researched from a 150/100 50 second Twilight Council which requires the aforementioned 150/0 50 second cybernetics core. Increases speed base by 0.5 and adds charge ability, 3.5 second speed boost to 6.05. However less utility for map movement than stim, essentially a combat upgrade. Not as standard early on as alternatives are Robotics facility or Stargate, distinct tech paths.
This is just an example. My point is that I would guess that if you do too much to warp gates its going to be absurdly hard for a Protoss to not be overwhelmingly out-produced early game by a Terran whose base units have a ranged attack rather than melee. Reactors already out-produce Warpgate Protoss in terms of raw supply by three seconds unless the Protoss blows all his chrono on his gates; which means less probes and you get out-incomed by a MULEing Terran. If you just start extending the cool-down even further on Warpgates to beyond that of a basic Gateway then you're going to be looking towards a situation where a Terran will be approaching four marines in output per barracks for every zealot you warp in.
I doubt thats what we want considering the current problem seems to be "Terran is really strong early on and hard to hold but Protoss dominates late game".
Disclosure: Above is all theorycrafting based on figures from liquipedia.
First of all, stim is 100/100. Second of all, late game terran is still favored because of ghosts and the strength of vikings against colossi.
On October 01 2011 06:06 Reborn8u wrote: I totally agree with the op. I play quite a bit of terran and toss, and the match up is barely a shadow of how cool it was in BW. Putting any balance talk aside, the fact that everything from protoss counters tanks (charge,blink,immortals,voids) and the synergy of MMM, your right that it is very unlikely we'll see anything different in the near future. From the protoss point of view, I really miss arbiters and reavers. But yea the warp gate and the poopy tanks in sc2 definitely ruined such a beautiful match up.
Like the op, I sincerely hope we get a severe overhaul of the races. But honestly, I really don't like TvZ in sc2 either. The matchup seems ridiculous, 9 out of 10 times it comes down to either rushing the zergs fast expand (bunker, hellion or some other all in), or doing a 2 base tank marine timing push.
The results of these pretty much decide the game. It may go on for 15 more minutes, but was decided when these things either succeeded or failed. The zerg either defends well and gets out of control macro wise, or crippled by the 10-12 minute mark.
God your view completely echoes my own.
TvP is boring and then Protoss complain that Terran only use MM.... well what else is there?
On October 01 2011 06:06 Reborn8u wrote: I totally agree with the op. I play quite a bit of terran and toss, and the match up is barely a shadow of how cool it was in BW. Putting any balance talk aside, the fact that everything from protoss counters tanks (charge,blink,immortals,voids) and the synergy of MMM, your right that it is very unlikely we'll see anything different in the near future. From the protoss point of view, I really miss arbiters and reavers. But yea the warp gate and the poopy tanks in sc2 definitely ruined such a beautiful match up.
Like the op, I sincerely hope we get a severe overhaul of the races. But honestly, I really don't like TvZ in sc2 either. The matchup seems ridiculous, 9 out of 10 times it comes down to either rushing the zergs fast expand (bunker, hellion or some other all in), or doing a 2 base tank marine timing push.
The results of these pretty much decide the game. It may go on for 15 more minutes, but was decided when these things either succeeded or failed. The zerg either defends well and gets out of control macro wise, or crippled by the 10-12 minute mark.
God your view completely echoes my own.
TvP is boring and then Protoss complain that Terran only use MM.... well what else is there? ^ yesssss i totally agree.
the people who disagree with King Jinro and the OP are most likely people who never played BW or never make workers such that every game they play is just a blindly hitting a timing.
Tanks are super awful vs protoss at the moment the base dmg is so low and i belive the tank nerf was mostly around the fact the game was balanced around maps like steps of war which is just wrong.
If tanks did a touch more dmg then banelings might become very useless is probably the worry then in the end people might need lurkers back to deal with bio and the colosus is such a stupid unit it rewards people who have no skill so much so think about it siege tanks take quite alot of understanding and experience to use tbh well to use well.
Collosus you just right click super easy to micro.
Helions - maruders and banshees seriously need to be looked at if not removed and bring back the vulture. i would love to see the maruder and banshee removed from the game so bad and i am a Terran player!!
Colosus - void ray may need looked at and i personally dont understand why stalkers have blink why not just have the dragoon back and maybe the corseer to deal with broodlords or something maybe red archons with malestorm It feels like immortals are only there because of roaches for me sometimes and to some extend wierd maruder all ins. where you FF your ramp to get an immortal out but they stupidly hard counter mech and if they go immortal void ray speed lot its painful you just _need_ emp or you loose your army for frree but they can hit so many timmings where you just cant afford them properly without sacing alot of stuff.
banelings and roaches / hydras and infestors might need looked at
i dont think the game really has a solid meta game
TvZ is by far the most interesting and best matchup in the game at the moment
TvT is broken by marauders at the momennt the smallest part of being unsiged you loose and viking wars are increibly irritating.
TvP is so stupidly lame at the moment. I dont understand why protoss complain about imba recently they are super strong they have got super greedy as artosis says and complain about 111 all the time. The amount of protoss 1 gate expo vs zerg confueses me recently.
I don't even know why anyone would want to play mech against toss PERIOD. You're basically putting yourself at a disadvantage at the beginning of the game. Everything about mech in sc2 just seems so freaking fragile. Tanks feel like poop, immobility strength with no other pay off. I've played mech in tvp for the longest time; 1500 masters for anyone curious and it just doesn't work against TOSS that know how to abuse the immobility of mech. Everything about protoss counters tanks, which essentially is the backbone of your army.
Ever tried defending more then 3 bases against blinkstalker collosus? They dont even have to attack your main army. The only map I would EVER EVER play mech on is shakarus and even then you're putting yourself at a disadvantage.
I started playing bio again and its like night and day how far more effective BIO is. Bio is a bit harder to play but why play mech?
makes me : (
if you really want someone's opinion on mech try talking to avilo. I'm pretty sure he played mech in all matchups way before goody or koreans did
On October 13 2011 08:05 ChrisGraphex wrote: I don't even know why anyone would want to play mech against toss PERIOD. You're basically putting yourself at a disadvantage at the beginning of the game. Everything about mech in sc2 just seems so freaking fragile. Tanks feel like poop, immobility strength with no other pay off. I've played mech in tvp for the longest time; 1500 masters for anyone curious and it just doesn't work against TOSS that know how to abuse the immobility of mech. Everything about protoss counters tanks, which essentially is the backbone of your army.
Ever tried defending more then 3 bases against blinkstalker collosus? They dont even have to attack your main army. The only map I would EVER EVER play mech on is shakarus and even then you're putting yourself at a disadvantage.
I started playing bio again and its like night and day how far more effective BIO is. Bio is a bit harder to play but why play mech?
makes me : (
if you really want someone's opinion on mech try talking to avilo. I'm pretty sure he played mech in all matchups way before goody or koreans did
You missed the point of the thread, we all know that Mech is god awful in that MU right now.
THe point of the thread is to say Blizz needs to rehaul the MU with balance changes to make for a more interesting MU. One of the possible ways of doing this is to make the Tank useful in TvP again.
On October 13 2011 02:22 crocodile wrote:First of all, stim is 100/100.
My mistake, I clicked on the wrong window when I was copying down the figures. I'll edit it in a moment.
Second of all, late game terran is still favored because of ghosts and the strength of vikings against colossi.
I quite agree, however I wasn't stating my opinion; I was attempting to summarise overall the general arguments of the two sides that I've seen looking through this thread (i.e. Protoss saying that the likes of 1/1/1 are incredibly strong against early protoss whilst Terrans are citing the power of the Colossus and HT storms in late-game compositions).
Both sides dislike the current state of affairs, but I don't think anyone who understands the game believes it is imbalanced per se, since both sides are more or less equal in probability to win. The problem is that some terrans want to play long games, and some protosses want to play it fast. Both sides also want more than one strictly dominant strategy to choose from.
On October 15 2011 05:12 ledarsi wrote: Both sides dislike the current state of affairs, but I don't think anyone who understands the game believes it is imbalanced per se, since both sides are more or less equal in probability to win. The problem is that some terrans want to play long games, and some protosses want to play it fast. Both sides also want more than one strictly dominant strategy to choose from.
I think plenty of people who understand the game think there is a problem. And all of the statistics point to it as well. Edit:typo
Too long to read every post so sorry if I repeat..
For me its an issue that mech counters bio (read zerg) and bio counters, well, toss (at least early-mid). Limits Ts options in either matchup. I think the two most interesting matchups currently are ZvP (lots of early builds available to both players) and TvT (T has very interesting units, just hard to balance in all matchups).
Watching MLG and or any high level SC2 Makes this thread stand out so much
Watching ZvP and TvZ was 10x as entertaining as any TvP. TvP is just so dry its unbelievable you could even tell in the casters, theres literally nothing to cast. Until one big engagement. Theres so many all ins that end the game so fast as well.
TvP definitely needs looking into with the mass amounts of base races and allins happening in the matchup and the sheer fact that it's all bio all the time every time UNLESS it's some sort of thor or 1/1/1 allin. Even if it's not pure mech that comes out, Just something that isn't massed marauder with EMP and viking support all the time.
Like Thorzains Thor strategy was cool and whatever MMA was going for against Killer in Code A awhile back before team league march was pretty awesome as well although it failed.
I just want to watch something that is "TERRAN" not "marauders".
I must have odd taste, but personally I've always loved TvP. It's definitely the most changed match up comparing from BW days going from a very defensive game on terrans part to more of a slugfest. While I do miss tanks being part of the equation in TvP, I'm not sure if I necessarily miss the old style.
On October 17 2011 14:22 Raiznhell wrote: TvP definitely needs looking into with the mass amounts of base races and allins happening in the matchup and the sheer fact that it's all bio all the time every time UNLESS it's some sort of thor or 1/1/1 allin. Even if it's not pure mech that comes out, Just something that isn't massed marauder with EMP and viking support all the time.
Like Thorzains Thor strategy was cool and whatever MMA was going for against Killer in Code A awhile back before team league march was pretty awesome as well although it failed.
I just want to watch something that is "TERRAN" not "marauders".
Maybe if the thor and BC nerfs to make them have energy were removed... I still cant believe they nerfed that, they didn't even give it a chance to deveolp...
On October 17 2011 14:22 Raiznhell wrote: TvP definitely needs looking into with the mass amounts of base races and allins happening in the matchup and the sheer fact that it's all bio all the time every time UNLESS it's some sort of thor or 1/1/1 allin. Even if it's not pure mech that comes out, Just something that isn't massed marauder with EMP and viking support all the time.
Like Thorzains Thor strategy was cool and whatever MMA was going for against Killer in Code A awhile back before team league march was pretty awesome as well although it failed.
I just want to watch something that is "TERRAN" not "marauders".
Maybe if the thor and BC nerfs to make them have energy were removed... I still cant believe they nerfed that, they didn't even give it a chance to deveolp...
Yeah the Thor nerf practically immediately after the strategy got popular at all was definitely a piss off for sure.
Main issue with Thors is lack of range vs Colossi (7 vs 9 and Thors have an attack delay so they cant stutter step like Colossi) and that Void Rays (double bonus damage) and Chargelots tear them to pieces. Immortals could be dealt with by Marines (Thors cost too much gas to get EMP) but mass Chargelot would do so much damage to a Thor build since the Thors cant kite the Chargelots.
Maybe if the Strike Cannon range was increased to 9 so that Thors could engage Colossi equally at range, it would make Marines with large amounts of BFHs a viable option with the Thors. Currently I think the Colossi would just vaporize the Marines and Hellions with ease, leaving the Chargelots to mop up the Thors.
On October 17 2011 14:22 Raiznhell wrote: TvP definitely needs looking into with the mass amounts of base races and allins happening in the matchup and the sheer fact that it's all bio all the time every time UNLESS it's some sort of thor or 1/1/1 allin. Even if it's not pure mech that comes out, Just something that isn't massed marauder with EMP and viking support all the time.
Like Thorzains Thor strategy was cool and whatever MMA was going for against Killer in Code A awhile back before team league march was pretty awesome as well although it failed.
I just want to watch something that is "TERRAN" not "marauders".
Maybe if the thor and BC nerfs to make them have energy were removed... I still cant believe they nerfed that, they didn't even give it a chance to deveolp...
Yeah the Thor nerf practically immediately after the strategy got popular at all was definitely a piss off for sure.
Indeed. What pissed me off most about that change was the reason blizzard gave:
First, we definitely don’t like seeing Thors en masse. Due to the visual size of the unit, as well as a small pathing radius, Thors can obscure the other units in your army too easily. This can be problematic because it's important to know roughly how many units an opponent has when scouting. We want the Thor to be the type of unit that you add to your main army, and we definitely don’t want them to be the core of your army to the point where you strive to build as many as possible.
I mean - wtf? This is basically saying, 'we don't want anything but MM to be the core of terran army in TvP'.
On October 17 2011 14:22 Raiznhell wrote: TvP definitely needs looking into with the mass amounts of base races and allins happening in the matchup and the sheer fact that it's all bio all the time every time UNLESS it's some sort of thor or 1/1/1 allin. Even if it's not pure mech that comes out, Just something that isn't massed marauder with EMP and viking support all the time.
Like Thorzains Thor strategy was cool and whatever MMA was going for against Killer in Code A awhile back before team league march was pretty awesome as well although it failed.
I just want to watch something that is "TERRAN" not "marauders".
Maybe if the thor and BC nerfs to make them have energy were removed... I still cant believe they nerfed that, they didn't even give it a chance to deveolp...
Yeah the Thor nerf practically immediately after the strategy got popular at all was definitely a piss off for sure.
Indeed. What pissed me off most about that change was the reason blizzard gave:
First, we definitely don’t like seeing Thors en masse. Due to the visual size of the unit, as well as a small pathing radius, Thors can obscure the other units in your army too easily. This can be problematic because it's important to know roughly how many units an opponent has when scouting. We want the Thor to be the type of unit that you add to your main army, and we definitely don’t want them to be the core of your army to the point where you strive to build as many as possible.
I mean - wtf? This is basically saying, 'we don't want anything but MM to be the core of terran army in TvP'.
That really was a trash reason, as if looking at colossus vs vikings is visually appealing...
I can't remember which episode of SoTG it was, but Incontrol described the marauder perfectly when he talked about these guys in power suits taking out these lumbering beasts dozens of feet tall going "phew, that was close guys!"
yeah first thoughts are the mech is getting to be buffed still gotta wait for the actual prezentation for changes to current unit and spells etc, but im excited. since carriers will be gone, only voidrays will actually be a worry for the terran and that shouldn't be THAT big of a deal. can't wait
On October 01 2011 06:16 Thorzain wrote: I feel that TvP IS really micro intensive. EMP everything, move your units out of storms, focus fire individual colossi with vikings and kite zealots if he's zealot heavy. And while you're kiting zealots you have to move back your ghosts so that they dont all get killed in the blink of an eye. All these things at the same time. It's freaking hard if you ask me!
You two aren't really playing the same game even if what's on the screen looks very similar ;-)
thing is warhound apparently has small range (cant kill collo) and poor AA attack (cant kill voidrays) so it may not be that big of a buff still gotta get vikings etc. hopefully shredder will be good!
On October 22 2011 05:35 PredY wrote: thing is warhound apparently has small range (cant kill collo) and poor AA attack (cant kill voidrays) so it may not be that big of a buff still gotta get vikings etc. hopefully shredder will be good!
On October 22 2011 05:35 PredY wrote: thing is warhound apparently has small range (cant kill collo) and poor AA attack (cant kill voidrays) so it may not be that big of a buff still gotta get vikings etc. hopefully shredder will be good!
GAH! How do you know this?
i've read it...somewhere in the hots threads but it's most certainly not final we're gonna have a lot of changes
On October 22 2011 05:35 PredY wrote: thing is warhound apparently has small range (cant kill collo) and poor AA attack (cant kill voidrays) so it may not be that big of a buff still gotta get vikings etc. hopefully shredder will be good!
GAH! How do you know this?
i've read it...somewhere in the hots threads but it's most certainly not final we're gonna have a lot of changes
I read that warhound also has bonus damage against mech units (or something?) which means if you get them up to the colo somehow you can kill them easily.
On October 22 2011 05:35 PredY wrote: thing is warhound apparently has small range (cant kill collo) and poor AA attack (cant kill voidrays) so it may not be that big of a buff still gotta get vikings etc. hopefully shredder will be good!
GAH! How do you know this?
i've read it...somewhere in the hots threads but it's most certainly not final we're gonna have a lot of changes
I read that warhound also has bonus damage against mech units (or something?) which means if you get them up to the colo somehow you can kill them easily.
On October 22 2011 05:35 PredY wrote: thing is warhound apparently has small range (cant kill collo) and poor AA attack (cant kill voidrays) so it may not be that big of a buff still gotta get vikings etc. hopefully shredder will be good!
GAH! How do you know this?
i've read it...somewhere in the hots threads but it's most certainly not final we're gonna have a lot of changes
I read that warhound also has bonus damage against mech units (or something?) which means if you get them up to the colo somehow you can kill them easily.
yep that's why they have small range most likely
Well the warhound is a big bonus to TvZ mech since you can have a chance with tanks and muta balls along with hellions and some viking support. However, I can't help but feel that TvP mech is much worse without the Thor unless that spider mine 2.0 is really good.
Stupid Blizzard and Hero units. :| If the Thor is just a ground BC though that'd be an epic late game transition. Mass late game Thor and vikings.
Some other thoughts include: Terran has no FF crusher anymore. Cone Hellion could kill probes much better than like hellions if you can drop them right. I really hope the Protoss late game units aren't final the Mothership and Carriers were just getting good. Hopefully a lot of the crazier stuff get unretarded like SCII alpha.
I'm still annoyed that there is no respite from bio ball.
You know the shredder could be deployed in the middle of your bio ball so if it you lose a fight and are forced to retreat it'd keep Protoss away/hurt them. Kinda like a repeatable defensive nuke. No more across the map rout anymore.
The thor limit 1 is the most jaw-droppingly stupid change I think I've ever seen Blizzard make. "Well, it didn't work with the Mothership, but it'll definitely work this time, right guys?"
Here is the reason why hero units do not work in starcraft- using a flat purchase system, a very expensive unit represents a disproportionately large investment compared to a larger number of smaller units. Even if that unit is comparatively very strong, it is disproportionately expensive. Consider that a Battlecruiser actually only costs as many minerals as 8 marines. If it cost 2000 minerals it would simply be unbuildable, even if it was suitably strong to justify that cost.
Blizzard, I am really starting to believe you need to fire Browder. Seriously. The man does not know what he is doing. If EVERY unit is a big "cool" monster unit with huge stats, then that just means there are fewer units in play, and the big numbers cancel out.
The Warhound is a step in the right direction in that it is a smaller, cheaper walker unit with an anti air attack. Most likely it will be a much better goliath substitute than the Thor. However you intend to make a unit like THAT the counter to siege tanks? Are you completely mad? It is an ANTI AIR walker, right? Why does Browder have to overcomplicate shit with transforming units and everything must have an activated ability? Why can't we just have nice, simple, reasonably priced units with normal attacks that do reasonable amounts of damage? The special units are like icing on the cake. If every core unit is carrying all this baggage it just gets dumb since nothing is good at its core role, but it sure can screw in lightbulbs and fix your sink.
I mean damn, if you're really strapped for "redundancy" how about making one unit have one role, and then just have one unit for each role? There's a bloody idea. You might even find you actually need more units per race to get a complete set if the anti air isn't supposed to break tank lines, and the air superiority fighter isn't supposed to land, and so on. Sure it's less "coooool" but it is such better game design. I mean, honestly, Blizzard.
a bit of theorycrafting here: as it stands right now, warhound is basically a smaller thor which means there's still the issue of poor AA vs voidrays (and tempest). it also has 7 range which is not very usefull vs 9range collo, so next problem still stays - collo pretty good vs mech. although i feel the combination of battle hellions + tanks + warhound will be better than what we currently have (hellion tank thor) because battle hellions look they will do fairly well vs mass zealots unlike standart hellions. still will need to add ghosts (which are obviously super good vs toss, mass nukes in late game) and some vikings vs collo i guess.
the shredder (omg i love the shredder looks very good tho because you can move it and set it up in your army so when you start losing it activates and does good dmg, or im sure there will be plenty of use for it. controlling space which we missed A LOT (hello blink stalkers). it might be very good for harassment too. i think shredders will be crucial. hopefully they wont be too easy to snipe
im certain a lot of stuff will change though but as i said, these are my first thoughts.
On October 22 2011 17:56 PredY wrote: a bit of theorycrafting here: as it stands right now, warhound is basically a smaller thor which means there's still the issue of poor AA vs voidrays (and tempest). it also has 7 range which is not very usefull vs 9range collo, so next problem still stays - collo pretty good vs mech. although i feel the combination of battle hellions + tanks + warhound will be better than what we currently have (hellion tank thor) because battle hellions look they will do fairly well vs mass zealots unlike standart hellions. still will need to add ghosts (which are obviously super good vs toss, mass nukes in late game) and some vikings vs collo i guess.
the shredder (omg i love the shredder looks very good tho because you can move it and set it up in your army so when you start losing it activates and does good dmg, or im sure there will be plenty of use for it. controlling space which we missed A LOT (hello blink stalkers). it might be very good for harassment too. i think shredders will be crucial. hopefully they wont be too easy to snipe
im certain a lot of stuff will change though but as i said, these are my first thoughts.
i agree
Also, warhound does bonus dmg against mech units (stalker, immortal too). We have to see how well will warhound battle protoss air with fast upgrades (think about flash build ) and maybe with viking support in can be really good.
Battle helions + shredder should take care of zealots. EMP will be very useful and as you say nukes in late game, and with vikings along and tanks in the back i think it will be very very good composition.
Also using shredders to defend expansions against harras and drops will be so awesome(stalker blinking and colossus cliff walking) ahh so sick <3
On October 22 2011 17:56 PredY wrote: a bit of theorycrafting here: as it stands right now, warhound is basically a smaller thor which means there's still the issue of poor AA vs voidrays (and tempest). it also has 7 range which is not very usefull vs 9range collo, so next problem still stays - collo pretty good vs mech. although i feel the combination of battle hellions + tanks + warhound will be better than what we currently have (hellion tank thor) because battle hellions look they will do fairly well vs mass zealots unlike standart hellions. still will need to add ghosts (which are obviously super good vs toss, mass nukes in late game) and some vikings vs collo i guess.
the shredder (omg i love the shredder looks very good tho because you can move it and set it up in your army so when you start losing it activates and does good dmg, or im sure there will be plenty of use for it. controlling space which we missed A LOT (hello blink stalkers). it might be very good for harassment too. i think shredders will be crucial. hopefully they wont be too easy to snipe
im certain a lot of stuff will change though but as i said, these are my first thoughts.
Honestly I think the shredder is the most important new unit. If it synergises well with tanks you can effectively zone out areas with a few units unlike what you can do now. The other two units might make a straight up fight a bit better but I think space control will play the biggest role.
On October 22 2011 05:35 PredY wrote: thing is warhound apparently has small range (cant kill collo) and poor AA attack (cant kill voidrays) so it may not be that big of a buff still gotta get vikings etc. hopefully shredder will be good!
it has a range 7 anti mech attack, so it'll probably be ok against colossi if there aren't too many of them. But if you have enough tanks, colossi aren't really that big of a problem - or you can at least reduce the amount of vikings you need. So the question is, how good is the battle hellion going to be?
edit: I'm hoping the shredder is reasonably priced and that you can get it from a reactor. Cutting production of other units to get static defenses is kind of harsh, but if you can get 1 hellion and 1 shredder for a few rounds of production, that would be very nice
On October 22 2011 17:56 PredY wrote: a bit of theorycrafting here: as it stands right now, warhound is basically a smaller thor which means there's still the issue of poor AA vs voidrays (and tempest). it also has 7 range which is not very usefull vs 9range collo, so next problem still stays - collo pretty good vs mech. although i feel the combination of battle hellions + tanks + warhound will be better than what we currently have (hellion tank thor) because battle hellions look they will do fairly well vs mass zealots unlike standart hellions. still will need to add ghosts (which are obviously super good vs toss, mass nukes in late game) and some vikings vs collo i guess.
the shredder (omg i love the shredder looks very good tho because you can move it and set it up in your army so when you start losing it activates and does good dmg, or im sure there will be plenty of use for it. controlling space which we missed A LOT (hello blink stalkers). it might be very good for harassment too. i think shredders will be crucial. hopefully they wont be too easy to snipe
im certain a lot of stuff will change though but as i said, these are my first thoughts.
Honestly I think the shredder is the most important new unit. If it synergises well with tanks you can effectively zone out areas with a few units unlike what you can do now. The other two units might make a straight up fight a bit better but I think space control will play the biggest role.
I agree. You can "block" alternate attack paths with shredder's, where people normally might had done something like building PF's.
I think the battle hellions will help tremendously as zealots with speed imo is one of the main reasons why tanks don't work in TvP.
I don't know how the new protoss air will be like, but removal of the carrier might be a welcome change for mech users as well.
All in all, I think the changes look promising hopefully they'll bring a little variation and new strategies to TvP
Why has this thread not been closed? Im disgusted with the TL mods for such blatant bias on their part. This thread has absolutely no strategic merit; its just a bunch of QQ from a retarded noob who goes MMMVG every game and cries that it doesn't work.
This thread is a disgrace to TL and should be deleted immediately.
On October 23 2011 00:40 VPlilky wrote: Why has this thread not been closed? Im disgusted with the TL mods for such blatant bias on their part. This thread has absolutely no strategic merit; its just a bunch of QQ from a retarded noob who goes MMMVG every game and cries that it doesn't work.
This thread is a disgrace to TL and should be deleted immediately.
What an ignorant post without a mark of judgment from a guy with 12 posts - probably equals your age.. Do you really think this is the way you contribute to a thread that has been here for a long time and to which a lot of good players responded? Just grow up, little kid..
On October 23 2011 01:21 GinDo wrote: As much as I want to rejoice I feel Terran has to many options now. The race just seems far too crowded. Hopefully it won't be.
I'm sure they will be adjusting bio to be less powerful.
On October 23 2011 01:21 GinDo wrote: As much as I want to rejoice I feel Terran has to many options now. The race just seems far too crowded. Hopefully it won't be.
I dunno, HotS Terran is basically Terran from BroodWar with just a few things jumbled around and smaller max army sizes.
Only thing I wonder about the shredder is how much supply it takes. If it is just 2 supply you could find yourself cutting your army size a lot in bigger maps. Not sure how I feel about it if it were just 1 supply either, The thing might not even kill anything, which would mean you invested on something that would do pretty much same as couple of PF does already and you can repair them, which doesn't stop them from firing.
On October 23 2011 09:06 Mehukannu wrote: Only thing I wonder about the shredder is how much supply it takes. If it is just 2 supply you could find yourself cutting your army size a lot in bigger maps. Not sure how I feel about it if it were just 1 supply either, The thing might not even kill anything, which would mean you invested on something that would do pretty much same as couple of PF does already and you can repair them, which doesn't stop them from firing.
I think the biggest obstacle to getting them would be the build time, with a small concern for how much damage they do. If I have to make 6 of them to make it a big deal for Protoss to move across their space, then making 6 of them shouldn't completely throw a wrench in my army creation. Even if they cost a lot of supply, at the very least they'd be useful early/mid game to discourage sneaky flanks.
As for the warhound, I don't think they'll find their way too much into TvP. However, if tanks turn out to do too much damage to the battle hellion with their splash to the point where we can't use as many, I guess the army composition would shift to more warhounds. Hopefully, though, tanks will be preferred against both stalkers and colossi while battle hellions deal with chargelots. Ghosts will obviously be needed for HTs, and viking + mech for stargate.
On October 23 2011 01:21 GinDo wrote: As much as I want to rejoice I feel Terran has to many options now. The race just seems far too crowded. Hopefully it won't be.
I'm sure they will be adjusting bio to be less powerful.
Are you kidding me?
1. Blizzard has already stated the Toss Deathball is strong enough and that they didn't want to add in units that would increase it's strength.
From that statement, what makes you think Terran bio is so strong? Keep in mind this is coming from the developers of the game.
2. The only thing that gives Terran a chance to win in the T v Z matchup is their bio. You nerf that and say goodbye to T v Z.
I highly doubt we will see a nerf to Terran bio now. IMO, the way things look on paper... it seems to look as if Zerg is going to be OP, especially in the late game... It's already hard enough for Terran to play zerg in the late game, let alone also having to deal with all the zerg new units. I don't want to speculate, but thats just how it seems to me. Zerg pretty much has 2 siege units now, and 3 units that have the ability to swarm your army... infestor, broodlord and the dark swarm unit or whatever its called. I can see many Terrans doing more all-inish timings attacks on zerg now... because who in the world wants to deal with that imba crap?!?!?!
In regards to the shredder, I feel this is something Terran really needed in the T v Z matchup to actually give Terran a chance to get an expansion up! How often have you seen in Pro T v Z matches where Terran struggles soooo much to get an expansion because his units are spread sooo thin accross the map! I welcome the shredder.... However, I'm not sure if it will get much use in T v P, remember...protoss has shields that regenerate. The only thing we'll see different in the T v P MU, is mech "could" now be viable.
I think the biggest impact to the late game TvP from HoTS will be the fact that protoss can now make ghosts.... Now if you make ghosts, they can just do the same and then you have to deal with feedback + emp + snipe + blink stalkers + immortals.....
It's obvious that a lot of things will change before HotS is released. I think tempest + colossus would straight up be overpowered if TvP stays on MMMVG. I think the change to the helion is a step in the right direction if mech wants to become viable, and in turn that could make the matchup better.
I'm wondering just how viable pure factory is in hots. You have the new transforming hellion, old siege tank, new warhound that beats mech and is Anti-air, then you have the new shredder (best T change imo). Will it really become like BW tvp? I think Blizzard is really pushing it in the good old SC1 direction now in tvp. 1. Marauders will be gone (I'm pretty sure of this. Correct me if I'm wrong) 2. Warhound supposedly beats mech really well, so it fills in for the marauder? 3. Shredder will act as a reusable spider mine. Is it burrowed or is it out in the open? If it's the former great, if the latter it could still be workable 4. Battle hellions I guess. I personally think marines would be a better mineral sink in this case. The thing that hurts the most is the decision to make thor a one-on-the-field-only hero unit.
...
really? A HERO UNIT ASLDKFJASLKDFJASLDKFJASDKLFJ THIS IS NOT WAR3 OR OTHER RTS GAMES WITH BIG FLASHY SPECIAL UNITS THAT COME OUT AND DOMINATE. THIS IS SC. YOU GET A GOOD UNIT COMP AND MICRO AND MAKE GREAT GAMES.
... sorry about that
So, I can't wait for mech terran in HotS. I like tanks much more as a core unit than marines. Yes, they make for drawn out games, but positioning tanks is so much more interesting than stimming and stutter stepping things to death.
On October 23 2011 17:21 CatNzHat wrote: I think the biggest impact to the late game TvP from HoTS will be the fact that protoss can now make ghosts.... Now if you make ghosts, they can just do the same and then you have to deal with feedback + emp + snipe + blink stalkers + immortals.....
Keep in mind you will be paying 200/200 to replicate that ghost, not exactly cost effecient. As a terran, I don't mind it tbh. What are you going to emp in my bio ball? My emp would've gone off before you would have replicated it, so your not really going to drain my ghosts energy. I wonder what the range on the replicator is, surely you would be able to micro ghosts away from it.
The only thing I can see worth replicating is siege tanks and ravens. But how many ppl used tanks and ravens against toss?
On October 23 2011 09:06 Mehukannu wrote: Only thing I wonder about the shredder is how much supply it takes. If it is just 2 supply you could find yourself cutting your army size a lot in bigger maps. Not sure how I feel about it if it were just 1 supply either, The thing might not even kill anything, which would mean you invested on something that would do pretty much same as couple of PF does already and you can repair them, which doesn't stop them from firing.
i haven't seen its cost but they are gonna be usefull especially early on when you can't afford expensive static defence so they will do just fine
On October 23 2011 17:45 Kid-Fox wrote: I'm wondering just how viable pure factory is in hots. You have the new transforming hellion, old siege tank, new warhound that beats mech and is Anti-air, then you have the new shredder (best T change imo). Will it really become like BW tvp? I think Blizzard is really pushing it in the good old SC1 direction now in tvp. 1. Marauders will be gone (I'm pretty sure of this. Correct me if I'm wrong) 2. Warhound supposedly beats mech really well, so it fills in for the marauder? 3. Shredder will act as a reusable spider mine. Is it burrowed or is it out in the open? If it's the former great, if the latter it could still be workable 4. Battle hellions I guess. I personally think marines would be a better mineral sink in this case. The thing that hurts the most is the decision to make thor a one-on-the-field-only hero unit.
...
really? A HERO UNIT ASLDKFJASLKDFJASLDKFJASDKLFJ THIS IS NOT WAR3 OR OTHER RTS GAMES WITH BIG FLASHY SPECIAL UNITS THAT COME OUT AND DOMINATE. THIS IS SC. YOU GET A GOOD UNIT COMP AND MICRO AND MAKE GREAT GAMES.
... sorry about that
So, I can't wait for mech terran in HotS. I like tanks much more as a core unit than marines. Yes, they make for drawn out games, but positioning tanks is so much more interesting than stimming and stutter stepping things to death.
marauders ares till in the game i agree about the thor and even though it would be useful it midlate game i hope they remove it completely
On October 23 2011 01:21 GinDo wrote: As much as I want to rejoice I feel Terran has to many options now. The race just seems far too crowded. Hopefully it won't be.
I'm sure they will be adjusting bio to be less powerful.
Are you kidding me?
1. Blizzard has already stated the Toss Deathball is strong enough and that they didn't want to add in units that would increase it's strength.
From that statement, what makes you think Terran bio is so strong? Keep in mind this is coming from the developers of the game.
2. The only thing that gives Terran a chance to win in the T v Z matchup is their bio. You nerf that and say goodbye to T v Z.
I highly doubt we will see a nerf to Terran bio now. IMO, the way things look on paper... it seems to look as if Zerg is going to be OP, especially in the late game... It's already hard enough for Terran to play zerg in the late game, let alone also having to deal with all the zerg new units. I don't want to speculate, but thats just how it seems to me. Zerg pretty much has 2 siege units now, and 3 units that have the ability to swarm your army... infestor, broodlord and the dark swarm unit or whatever its called. I can see many Terrans doing more all-inish timings attacks on zerg now... because who in the world wants to deal with that imba crap?!?!?!
In regards to the shredder, I feel this is something Terran really needed in the T v Z matchup to actually give Terran a chance to get an expansion up! How often have you seen in Pro T v Z matches where Terran struggles soooo much to get an expansion because his units are spread sooo thin accross the map! I welcome the shredder.... However, I'm not sure if it will get much use in T v P, remember...protoss has shields that regenerate. The only thing we'll see different in the T v P MU, is mech "could" now be viable.
i'm pretty sure zerg are gonna do really well vs terran after the release, since their new units are gonna change the matchup so match, terran will need some time to figure it out. i'm still hoping they are gonna buff HSM or give the raven irradiate spell
I think Seeker missile is actually very good after the last patch.. at least in a mech comp vs zerg, especially since a lot of zerg seem to go mass roach vs mech for some weird reason. 2-3 seeker missiles while the zerg is engaging your thors simply wipes out the zerg army. Ravens still get feedbacked to shit against toss though.
On October 23 2011 01:21 GinDo wrote: As much as I want to rejoice I feel Terran has to many options now. The race just seems far too crowded. Hopefully it won't be.
I'm sure they will be adjusting bio to be less powerful.
Are you kidding me?
1. Blizzard has already stated the Toss Deathball is strong enough and that they didn't want to add in units that would increase it's strength.
From that statement, what makes you think Terran bio is so strong? Keep in mind this is coming from the developers of the game.
2. The only thing that gives Terran a chance to win in the T v Z matchup is their bio. You nerf that and say goodbye to T v Z.
I highly doubt we will see a nerf to Terran bio now. IMO, the way things look on paper... it seems to look as if Zerg is going to be OP, especially in the late game... It's already hard enough for Terran to play zerg in the late game, let alone also having to deal with all the zerg new units. I don't want to speculate, but thats just how it seems to me. Zerg pretty much has 2 siege units now, and 3 units that have the ability to swarm your army... infestor, broodlord and the dark swarm unit or whatever its called. I can see many Terrans doing more all-inish timings attacks on zerg now... because who in the world wants to deal with that imba crap?!?!?!
In regards to the shredder, I feel this is something Terran really needed in the T v Z matchup to actually give Terran a chance to get an expansion up! How often have you seen in Pro T v Z matches where Terran struggles soooo much to get an expansion because his units are spread sooo thin accross the map! I welcome the shredder.... However, I'm not sure if it will get much use in T v P, remember...protoss has shields that regenerate. The only thing we'll see different in the T v P MU, is mech "could" now be viable.
Geezlike talk about overreaction. One of the reasons mech isn't really tried out is because bio is so good. Hence why I said maybe bio will be slightly adjusted to not just be far better than mech. Stop thinking about balance in a game noone has seen.
Well, all we can do is to wait for beta to test stuff out. But, right now I was thinking of containing your opponent with shredders and tanks. =P Also at the viper, doesn't zerg already have stuff that can break through siege lines like broodlords and for some extent the infestors throwing infested terrans and doing fungal growths. =S EDIT: Just remembered that ultras can break those siege lines too since it seems they have that burrow charge ability.
On October 23 2011 19:55 Mehukannu wrote: Well, all we can do is to wait for beta to test stuff out. But, right now I was thinking of containing your opponent with shredders and tanks. =P Also at the viper, doesn't zerg already have stuff that can break through siege lines like broodlords and for some extent the infestors throwing infested terrans and doing fungal growths. =S EDIT: Just remembered that ultras can break those siege lines too since it seems they have that burrow charge ability.
Not only that, but burrowed banelings can move underground now. So now zerg has three options with the banelings unit;
1. General bane bust.
2. bane traps
3. Burrowed banes which can now pretty much just a move to your army.... this ability is going to take heaps of skill........
On October 23 2011 19:55 Mehukannu wrote: Well, all we can do is to wait for beta to test stuff out. But, right now I was thinking of containing your opponent with shredders and tanks. =P Also at the viper, doesn't zerg already have stuff that can break through siege lines like broodlords and for some extent the infestors throwing infested terrans and doing fungal growths. =S EDIT: Just remembered that ultras can break those siege lines too since it seems they have that burrow charge ability.
Not only that, but burrowed banelings can move underground now. So now zerg has three options with the banelings unit;
1. General bane bust.
2. bane traps
3. Burrowed banes which can now pretty much just a move to your army.... this ability is going to take heaps of skill........
I fear blizzard might be overlapping some unit roles for zerg units. =/ But still, I don't know how I feel about the baneling burrow movement ability, since they can get it at hive tech only, which by then you should have turrets and/or ravens for detection, and well you have scans too. Basically it could be totally useless ability to have against terran, but I guess it might be good against protoss, because viper can just give detection to some corruptors and snipe any observers and order his burrow moving banelings to go under the protoss army and explode. :S
On October 23 2011 17:21 CatNzHat wrote: I think the biggest impact to the late game TvP from HoTS will be the fact that protoss can now make ghosts.... Now if you make ghosts, they can just do the same and then you have to deal with feedback + emp + snipe + blink stalkers + immortals.....
Keep in mind you will be paying 200/200 to replicate that ghost, not exactly cost effecient. As a terran, I don't mind it tbh. What are you going to emp in my bio ball? My emp would've gone off before you would have replicated it, so your not really going to drain my ghosts energy. I wonder what the range on the replicator is, surely you would be able to micro ghosts away from it.
The only thing I can see worth replicating is siege tanks and ravens. But how many ppl used tanks and ravens against toss?
AND that ghost replica is gonna cost them 4 supply
This is why I all-in Protoss every game. MMM Viking Ghost herp derp got boring the 90,000th time, takes too much micro compared to Protoss (who just has to A-move), and is extremely unforgiving.
On October 23 2011 23:55 Diabolegal wrote: This is why I all-in Protoss every game. MMM Viking Ghost herp derp got boring the 90,000th time, takes too much micro compared to Protoss (who just has to A-move), and is extremely unforgiving.
Your sig says it all, no reason to actually respond further.
I think the new changes in HOTS are clearly gearing up to make mech viable again, which is great. Can't wait to see some good tank play.
On October 23 2011 09:06 Mehukannu wrote: Only thing I wonder about the shredder is how much supply it takes. If it is just 2 supply you could find yourself cutting your army size a lot in bigger maps. Not sure how I feel about it if it were just 1 supply either, The thing might not even kill anything, which would mean you invested on something that would do pretty much same as couple of PF does already and you can repair them, which doesn't stop them from firing.
i haven't seen its cost but they are gonna be usefull especially early on when you can't afford expensive static defence so they will do just fine
On October 23 2011 17:45 Kid-Fox wrote: I'm wondering just how viable pure factory is in hots. You have the new transforming hellion, old siege tank, new warhound that beats mech and is Anti-air, then you have the new shredder (best T change imo). Will it really become like BW tvp? I think Blizzard is really pushing it in the good old SC1 direction now in tvp. 1. Marauders will be gone (I'm pretty sure of this. Correct me if I'm wrong) 2. Warhound supposedly beats mech really well, so it fills in for the marauder? 3. Shredder will act as a reusable spider mine. Is it burrowed or is it out in the open? If it's the former great, if the latter it could still be workable 4. Battle hellions I guess. I personally think marines would be a better mineral sink in this case. The thing that hurts the most is the decision to make thor a one-on-the-field-only hero unit.
...
really? A HERO UNIT ASLDKFJASLKDFJASLDKFJASDKLFJ THIS IS NOT WAR3 OR OTHER RTS GAMES WITH BIG FLASHY SPECIAL UNITS THAT COME OUT AND DOMINATE. THIS IS SC. YOU GET A GOOD UNIT COMP AND MICRO AND MAKE GREAT GAMES.
... sorry about that
So, I can't wait for mech terran in HotS. I like tanks much more as a core unit than marines. Yes, they make for drawn out games, but positioning tanks is so much more interesting than stimming and stutter stepping things to death.
marauders ares till in the game i agree about the thor and even though it would be useful it midlate game i hope they remove it completely
On October 23 2011 01:21 GinDo wrote: As much as I want to rejoice I feel Terran has to many options now. The race just seems far too crowded. Hopefully it won't be.
I'm sure they will be adjusting bio to be less powerful.
Are you kidding me?
1. Blizzard has already stated the Toss Deathball is strong enough and that they didn't want to add in units that would increase it's strength.
From that statement, what makes you think Terran bio is so strong? Keep in mind this is coming from the developers of the game.
2. The only thing that gives Terran a chance to win in the T v Z matchup is their bio. You nerf that and say goodbye to T v Z.
I highly doubt we will see a nerf to Terran bio now. IMO, the way things look on paper... it seems to look as if Zerg is going to be OP, especially in the late game... It's already hard enough for Terran to play zerg in the late game, let alone also having to deal with all the zerg new units. I don't want to speculate, but thats just how it seems to me. Zerg pretty much has 2 siege units now, and 3 units that have the ability to swarm your army... infestor, broodlord and the dark swarm unit or whatever its called. I can see many Terrans doing more all-inish timings attacks on zerg now... because who in the world wants to deal with that imba crap?!?!?!
In regards to the shredder, I feel this is something Terran really needed in the T v Z matchup to actually give Terran a chance to get an expansion up! How often have you seen in Pro T v Z matches where Terran struggles soooo much to get an expansion because his units are spread sooo thin accross the map! I welcome the shredder.... However, I'm not sure if it will get much use in T v P, remember...protoss has shields that regenerate. The only thing we'll see different in the T v P MU, is mech "could" now be viable.
i'm pretty sure zerg are gonna do really well vs terran after the release, since their new units are gonna change the matchup so match, terran will need some time to figure it out. i'm still hoping they are gonna buff HSM or give the raven irradiate spell
If you can't go mass Thor/Hellion, massed tank with 1/2 sieged and 1/2 unsieged is quite good and has similar ground DPS with splash. Battle hellions would then be quite the clunky space blocker. The only question is if the Warhound is useful GtA.