Website Feedback
Closed Threads
IRC Chat
irc.quakenet.org #teamliquid
IRC Web ClientTeamSpeak 3 (57 users) | |
|
| FuRRyChoBo United States. May 04 2012 21:55. Posts 218 | Profile Blog # |
| I'm surprised nobody has brought up that MMM is basically all tier 1/2 and SHOULDN'T realistically compete with a maxed tier 3 Protoss army by the late game. |
|
|
| Noocta France. May 04 2012 21:56. Posts 8630 | Profile # |
On May 04 2012 21:55 FuRRyChoBo wrote:
I'm surprised nobody has brought up that MMM is basically all tier 1/2 and SHOULDN'T realistically compete with a maxed tier 3 Protoss army by the late game.
Sadly, it's all we have, the highter tech unit are even worse at fighting protoss. |
| | There are no secrets to success. It is the result of preparation, hard work, and learning from failure. |
|
|
| scypio Poland. May 04 2012 21:57. Posts 868 | Profile # |
On May 04 2012 21:55 FuRRyChoBo wrote:
I'm surprised nobody has brought up that MMM is basically all tier 1/2 and SHOULDN'T realistically compete with a maxed tier 3 Protoss army by the late game.
This is the same as "Terran T3 is worthless vs toss" which occurs on a number of occasions here. |
| | TLception: balance-whining-whining... and don't comment football games unless your in Champions League! |
|
|
| di3alot May 04 2012 21:57. Posts 172 | Profile # |
On May 04 2012 21:55 FuRRyChoBo wrote:
I'm surprised nobody has brought up that MMM is basically all tier 1/2 and SHOULDN'T realistically compete with a maxed tier 3 Protoss army by the late game.
yeah a marine with combat stim and madivac it still a tier one unit -.- |
|
|
| pOnarreT May 04 2012 21:57. Posts 153 | Profile # |
On May 04 2012 21:55 Alexstrasas wrote:
Show nested quote +On May 04 2012 21:39 A-p-p-l-e-s wrote:
Protoss does require a lot of micro too. What a lot of people here are saying is that terran has to micro and protoss just A attacks but in reality both races need to micro to win. You have to storm, move collusus back zealots to the front etc.
Bronze league alert |
|
|
| Noocta France. May 04 2012 21:58. Posts 8630 | Profile # |
On May 04 2012 21:57 di3alot wrote:
Show nested quote +On May 04 2012 21:55 FuRRyChoBo wrote:
I'm surprised nobody has brought up that MMM is basically all tier 1/2 and SHOULDN'T realistically compete with a maxed tier 3 Protoss army by the late game.
yeah a marine with combat stim and madivac it still a tier one unit -.-
There's this too yeah.
A fully upgraded and medivac supported marine is almost not the same unit as a 2min marine. |
| | There are no secrets to success. It is the result of preparation, hard work, and learning from failure. |
|
|
| mcc Czech Republic. May 04 2012 21:58. Posts 3762 | Profile # |
On May 04 2012 21:43 Destructicon wrote:
Show nested quote +On May 04 2012 21:21 mcc wrote:
On May 04 2012 21:03 Destructicon wrote:
On May 04 2012 20:55 Nightmarez wrote:
Saying that you have to all-in or kill the protoss in the early to midgame is absurd. You have to cripple him, to do damage, which frankly isn't very hard for a terran to do early on. So, just like you're saying that it's bad design that Terrans has to cripple him early to win, is the same thing as saying Protoss has to defend vs this pressure to win. It is the matchup, get over it.
-Over and Out
That's stupid, simplistic and single minded. I haven't seen a game where the terran crippled the protoss if the protoss was in a defensive posture or if the protoss hadn't commited some horrific and idiotic mistake till then. Quite frankly the MU is already dull given the fact that most protosses prefer in some way or another to turtle up until the point they feel they have an advantage, then press it. The game should be equally back and forth, the terran should have an option to turtle till he gets a strong comp and the protoss should feel the need to stop him somehow or have the choice to tech up as well. At the moment some of those options don't exist, and it makes the MU predictable, the question boils down to how will the terran try to cheese the protoss? Will it be a early game timing, a mid game timing, or an economic cheese? And for the protoss it boils down to, can he survive long enough to make use of his late game advantage? Just because the MU is the way it is now doesn't mean we can and should accept it, deal with it.
There is no economic cheese, it is called being greedy. Timings are also not cheese. And the rest is your opinions. Why should the game be back and forth equally, did you notice it is not a mirror matchup ? Matchup being dull has nothing to do with the supposedly too strong protoss lategame. It being dull has nothing to do with balance which is what Blizzard was talking about.
Making terran making 2 early CCs, sometimes an hidden one, you call it greed, I call it economic cheese, its basically the same thing, agreed timings aren't cheese, just trying to make the point that terran either tries to cut corners if possible or just tries to do damage. And it being dull has everything to do with balance. Notice how TvT is one of the most well liked of match ups. Yes it is a mirror match up, but it has a very wide array of possible strategies, one base play, or one base into two base play, macro games, different viable compositions, bio, bio-mech or mech, tons of different ways to harass, strong positional elements and very cool late game. Balance has everything to do with TvP also being dull, I'll say it again for the last time. If one race is forced into attacking or greed in the early and mid game to eek out an advantage and one race is forced in the defensive for the same duration so it can almost certainly win in the late game, then the game becomes dull and predictable. It becomes a question of "what cheese will the terran use, or what corner will he cut?", while for the protoss it becomes "how well can he deal with his greed/cheese to be able to survive relatively intact till the late game?". If you can't see the benefit and beauty of both players having near equal choices in both attack and defense in all stages of the game then you are hopeless. This has everything to do with balance, because balance, at any time of the game, dictates of people will play, and weather that play is fun or not.
That has nothing to do with balance, you are talking about game design in general. |
|
|
| Sadistx Zimbabwe. May 04 2012 22:03. Posts 5471 | Profile Blog # |
Asymmetric design is retarded, because if you play this game for a living, you should be able to win at any stage in the game if you were not at a disadvantage before.
What blizzard is telling terrans is that it's ok to have a 20% winrate lategame TvP, despite being on equal skill level with protoss, because hey, asymmetric game design is what we did and it's amazing and we won't take any criticism, regardless of how retarded the community thinks it is!
I'm glad I'm not a professional gamer that has to produce results. I would have switched from T to Z/P a long time ago. And the next time someone mentions korean terran results, i'm literally going to make a hole in my monitor. |
|
|
| setzer United States. May 04 2012 22:05. Posts 3271 | Profile # |
News flash: not every race is equal and races should be more powerful than others at different points in the game. Protoss being stronger late into the game is perfectly acceptable balance as long as terran is stronger at points earlier in the game. To not make protoss unbeatable lategame it is up to the terran to try and gain every advantage possible before that point.
Why can't the SC2 community just let the game develop on its own every once in a while? |
|
|
| SarcasmMonster May 04 2012 22:05. Posts 2897 | Profile # |
On May 04 2012 22:03 Sadistx wrote:
Asymmetric design is retarded, because if you play this game for a living, you should be able to win at any stage in the game if you were not at a disadvantage before.
What blizzard is telling terrans is that it's ok to have a 20% winrate lategame TvP, despite being on equal skill level with protoss, because hey, asymmetric game design is what we did and it's amazing and we won't take any criticism, regardless of how retarded the community thinks it is!
I'm glad I'm not a professional gamer that has to produce results. I would have switched from T to Z/P a long time ago. And the next time someone mentions korean terran results, i'm literally going to make a hole in my monitor.
So mirror matches all day and everyday? |
| | MMA: The true King of Wings |
|
|
| Badfatpanda United States. May 04 2012 22:07. Posts 9259 | Profile Blog # |
On May 04 2012 21:33 SarcasmMonster wrote:
Show nested quote +On May 04 2012 21:32 tomatriedes wrote:
On May 04 2012 21:29 InoyouS2 wrote:
I think that Terran should have another option other than MMM, that's one of the biggest problems in TvP I feel, that MMM is the ONLY composition you'll ever see because every other comp dies without a big lead in another area.
I hate watching TvP the most, the only exception is Marineking TvP, but when he loses it always feels a lot more sour, because he's been microing like a boss and still can't beat a-move zealots. In the current balance, Protoss is equal to Terran early-mid game and WAY better late-game, that is not balanced at all, because to fight early-mid game, Terran has to sacrifice a lot of economy.
More viable T3 units and a nerf to marauder would be a good patch to Terran for TvP IMO, and Zealots need some kind of nerf in TvP, as Protoss can just spawn 10+ zealots after an equal trade and win because the Terran has no splash.
Look at BW TvP. At pro level mech is pretty much the only option- bio is just used for all-ins very occasionally yet nobody says it is a bad match up.
It's startling how much the marauder changed the matchup.
Yeah I agree with this very much. Personally, I believe if the tank was tweaked a bit pre-HotS it might give viability to a unit comp that would end this late game problem. Having said that, I really don't think late game Protoss is too ridiculously scary, but there is a need for Terran players to assert their dominance in the early-midgame which creates ridiculously stale games to watch.
I mean take a look at Protoss, often times you see them allin a Terran and win with the push, whether it's off 1 or 2 bases, though right now it is more 2 base play. They have that option! That's all I want. You say that different races have different strengths and weaknesses, that's fine. But right now Protoss can make use of warpgate and early upgrades to straight up win a game <15min if they WANT and the Terran is either ill-defended or doesn't scout. Terran doesn't really have that option to compete in the late game with Protoss without dealing significant damage in the midgame. How about we work on giving Terran some option to either alleviate the problem by tweaking either side of the deathball scenario, or give mech viability.
I don't want to fucking watch 2 base allins or 1 short as fuck battle deciding the game after 25 minutes of non stop passivity. It's boring to watch, it's boring to play. If anyone thought that they honestly enjoyed any of the PvT's from the RO8 please enlighten me as to why, aside from the few glimmers of very cute play here and there. It's fine if you don't think SC2 should be balanced 100% for spectators, if it was it'd be a stupid game. But there is a problem, they acknowledge it by stating difference in races but they haven't even fucking tried to maybe
+ Show Spoiler +MAKE. MECH. VIABLE. Recent HotS changes kinda made the mech additions a washout, especially in the TvP matchup, which I was really looking forward to seeing. We'll see more at the beta in Anaheim, but until then... |
| | Music is a higher revelation than all wisdom and philosophy. -Beethoven | Mech isn't a build, it's a way of life. -MajOr | Charlie.Sheen: "What is sarcastic, kids who have no courage to fight?" | #TerranPride #yolo #swag -Naama after 2-0'ing MC at HSC VI |
|
|
| pOnarreT May 04 2012 22:08. Posts 153 | Profile # |
On May 04 2012 22:03 Sadistx wrote:
Asymmetric design is retarded, because if you play this game for a living, you should be able to win at any stage in the game if you were not at a disadvantage before.
What blizzard is telling terrans is that it's ok to have a 20% winrate lategame TvP, despite being on equal skill level with protoss, because hey, asymmetric game design is what we did and it's amazing and we won't take any criticism, regardless of how retarded the community thinks it is!
I'm glad I'm not a professional gamer that has to produce results. I would have switched from T to Z/P a long time ago. And the next time someone mentions korean terran results, i'm literally going to make a hole in my monitor.
If you don't like the game design (not the balance aspect) of being asymmetric, play a different gameLast edit: 2012-05-04 22:09:02 |
|
|
| Destructicon May 04 2012 22:08. Posts 1380 | Profile # |
On May 04 2012 21:39 A-p-p-l-e-s wrote:
Protoss does require a lot of micro too. What a lot of people here are saying is that terran has to micro and protoss just A attacks but in reality both races need to micro to win. You have to storm, move collusus back zealots to the front etc.
True, but only partially. Protoss does require micro, but the amount requires for the terran is greater.
Lets take a typical engagement with the standard composition for both race.
Zealots need to be in front, stalkers at the back, colossus at around the middle and HT scattered towards the mid flanks and back.
For terran, marauders more towards the front with marines mixed in, vikings hovering overhead, near cliffs or chasms and poking at colossus, ghosts near the front ready to cloak and EMP.
That is pre battle positional micro it should take some juggling of the control groups, both need to do this equally so no problem here, the real issue is in battle micro.
Terran has to constantly stutter step back, if they don't stutter step the army gets destroyed by zealots, and they take the full force of colossus and storm damage.
Zealots charge in then you forget about them, charge is auto-cast, once its done you don't need to insert additional micro for it to be successful. If you mess it up by having stalkers in front you can blink the stalkers back.
Protoss FF, and forgets about them. After protoss FF he doesn't need to do anything else with them, they are fire and forget, the terran on the other hand has to use some of his micro, while kiting to save his units, or sacrifice them.
Protoss uses Guardian shield. No additional input required, the spell is again fire and forget, it helps units around it and if you are chasing the opponents army your units will always be under it, not applicable for late game though.
Protoss storms and morphs HT into an archon. Storm is again fire and forget in some cases a single one can change the tide of a battle. After a storm lands however the terran must use more of his APM to also split or dodge, while he was already stutter stepping, managing ghosts, vikings and trying to save units from FF.
Terran EMPs. Not as big a problem as you might imagine, shields without upgrades actually don't give a lot of survivability, apart from the stalker and archon the other protoss units have a HP to Shield ratio of 2/3 to 1/3. So EMP has an effective limit, while storm deals damage directly to the HP and there is no limit to the terran eating storms one after another (don't stack on top of each other, but they do back to back).
While terran is EMPing he is also stutter stepping, splitting and moving vikings.
The crucial things EMP needs to hit are sentries and/or HT. Sentries should be in limited number in late game armies because FF at that point just messes zealots up more then it helps. So HT are the prio. From what I've seen if the toss splits his HT in 3-4 groups, comes in and storms after he engages, it becomes nearly impossible to prevent at least one storm from going off.
Terran uses vikings to snipe colossus, protoss responds by moving colossus back and focus firing with stalkers. This considering what little else the protoss has to do since most of his units or spells are fire and forget, then this shouldn't be too hard to do. Don't forget during this time the terran is still kiting, stutter stepping, splitting, trying to EMP and also manage his vikings.
Yes I agree protoss has things they need to do, but given how many fire and forget units/ abilities they have and given how APM intensive terran is during battles I hope you really don't believe they are equal.
Last edit: 2012-05-04 22:11:57 |
| | What am I without a challange? An opportunity to better myself? A chance to shoot for the stars? An struggle for perfection? I am nothing, I live for the challange. |
|
|
| tomatriedes New Zealand. May 04 2012 22:09. Posts 4895 | Profile Blog # |
On May 04 2012 22:03 Sadistx wrote:
Asymmetric design is retarded, because if you play this game for a living, you should be able to win at any stage in the game if you were not at a disadvantage before.
What blizzard is telling terrans is that it's ok to have a 20% winrate lategame TvP, despite being on equal skill level with protoss, because hey, asymmetric game design is what we did and it's amazing and we won't take any criticism, regardless of how retarded the community thinks it is!
I'm glad I'm not a professional gamer that has to produce results. I would have switched from T to Z/P a long time ago. And the next time someone mentions korean terran results, i'm literally going to make a hole in my monitor.
Where did you get the 20% figure from? |
| |
|
| mcc Czech Republic. May 04 2012 22:10. Posts 3762 | Profile # |
On May 04 2012 22:03 Sadistx wrote:
Asymmetric design is retarded, because if you play this game for a living, you should be able to win at any stage in the game if you were not at a disadvantage before.
What blizzard is telling terrans is that it's ok to have a 20% winrate lategame TvP, despite being on equal skill level with protoss, because hey, asymmetric game design is what we did and it's amazing and we won't take any criticism, regardless of how retarded the community thinks it is!
I'm glad I'm not a professional gamer that has to produce results. I would have switched from T to Z/P a long time ago. And the next time someone mentions korean terran results, i'm literally going to make a hole in my monitor.
Maybe you should read it again before misrepresenting what they are saying. I think you have no idea what they mean by asymmetric design. Are you going to complain that Protoss cannot win lategame TvP in BW, because that is perfect example of asymmetric design. |
|
|
| CDR Poland. May 04 2012 22:11. Posts 84 | Profile # |
On May 04 2012 22:03 Sadistx wrote:
Asymmetric design is retarded, because if you play this game for a living, you should be able to win at any stage in the game if you were not at a disadvantage before.
What blizzard is telling terrans is that it's ok to have a 20% winrate lategame TvP, despite being on equal skill level with protoss, because hey, asymmetric game design is what we did and it's amazing and we won't take any criticism, regardless of how retarded the community thinks it is!
I'm glad I'm not a professional gamer that has to produce results. I would have switched from T to Z/P a long time ago. And the next time someone mentions korean terran results, i'm literally going to make a hole in my monitor.
Yay, switch to P, complain about PvZ.
Any source of this numbers?
The community isn't the best place to look for balance feedback.
How about finding an in-game solution instead of crying and whining "protoss imba!!!11!!1!".
I am just curious: have we seen any top (and by top i mean top) level Terrans complaining about TvP?
|
|
|
| pOnarreT May 04 2012 22:11. Posts 153 | Profile # |
On May 04 2012 22:07 Badfatpanda wrote:
Show nested quote +On May 04 2012 21:33 SarcasmMonster wrote:
On May 04 2012 21:32 tomatriedes wrote:
On May 04 2012 21:29 InoyouS2 wrote:
I think that Terran should have another option other than MMM, that's one of the biggest problems in TvP I feel, that MMM is the ONLY composition you'll ever see because every other comp dies without a big lead in another area.
I hate watching TvP the most, the only exception is Marineking TvP, but when he loses it always feels a lot more sour, because he's been microing like a boss and still can't beat a-move zealots. In the current balance, Protoss is equal to Terran early-mid game and WAY better late-game, that is not balanced at all, because to fight early-mid game, Terran has to sacrifice a lot of economy.
More viable T3 units and a nerf to marauder would be a good patch to Terran for TvP IMO, and Zealots need some kind of nerf in TvP, as Protoss can just spawn 10+ zealots after an equal trade and win because the Terran has no splash.
Look at BW TvP. At pro level mech is pretty much the only option- bio is just used for all-ins very occasionally yet nobody says it is a bad match up.
It's startling how much the marauder changed the matchup.
Yeah I agree with this very much. Personally, I believe if the tank was tweaked a bit pre-HotS it might give viability to a unit comp that would end this late game problem. Having said that, I really don't think late game Protoss is too ridiculously scary, but there is a need for Terran players to assert their dominance in the early-midgame which creates ridiculously stale games to watch. I mean take a look at Protoss, often times you see them allin a Terran and win with the push, whether it's off 1 or 2 bases, though right now it is more 2 base play. They have that option! That's all I want. You say that different races have different strengths and weaknesses, that's fine. But right now Protoss can make use of warpgate and early upgrades to straight up win a game <15min if they WANT and the Terran is either ill-defended or doesn't scout. Terran doesn't really have that option to compete in the late game with Protoss without dealing significant damage in the midgame. How about we work on giving Terran some option to either alleviate the problem by tweaking either side of the deathball scenario, or give mech viability. I don't want to fucking watch 2 base allins or 1 short as fuck battle deciding the game after 25 minutes of non stop passivity. It's boring to watch, it's boring to play. If anyone thought that they honestly enjoyed any of the PvT's from the RO8 please enlighten me as to why, aside from the few glimmers of very cute play here and there. It's fine if you don't think SC2 should be balanced 100% for spectators, if it was it'd be a stupid game. But there is a problem, they acknowledge it by stating difference in races but they haven't even fucking tried to maybe + Show Spoiler +MAKE. MECH. VIABLE. Recent HotS changes kinda made the mech additions a washout, especially in the TvP matchup, which I was really looking forward to seeing. We'll see more at the beta in Anaheim, but until then...
You guys must not have yet heard of the 1/1/1 |
|
|
| DarkPlasmaBall United States. May 04 2012 22:12. Posts 19998 | Profile Blog # |
On May 04 2012 21:38 Mayd wrote:
Once all the protoss start mastering the Parting style I think pvt win ratio is going to be near 100 %.
Yeah, no. It's going to jump from 50% to 100%? (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=334576)
Anyways, I just think that Blizzard doesn't want to mess up the overall balance in winrates they've achieved by revamping both Protoss and Terran (as buffs or nerfs would have to be added to both to re-balance their respective early/ mid and late games) to make the match-up balanced all throughout the stages of the game. |
| | "Those who can, teach. Those who can't, whine about teachers." ~Me |
|
|
| TMOUllrich England. May 04 2012 22:14. Posts 49 | Profile # |
On May 04 2012 22:03 Sadistx wrote:
What blizzard is telling terrans is that it's ok to have a 20% winrate lategame TvP, despite being on equal skill level with protoss, because hey, asymmetric game design is what we did and it's amazing and we won't take any criticism, regardless of how retarded the community thinks it is!
This the problem with people reading blizzards statement about terran being stronger midgame and weaker lategame ... suddenly everyone makes up values in their head ... oh look they say it's ok to have a 20% winrate ! I think everyone agrees that 20% would be the most retarded percentage to aim for ... something like 48-49% against 51%-52% with the roles reversed in the midgame is perfectly fine.
But damn no, because I play terran it must be 20% ! not 49%, yup definetly 20%, that's totally what blizzard just said ... no question ...
|
|
|
| See.Blue United States. May 04 2012 22:17. Posts 2293 | Profile Blog # |
On May 04 2012 15:10 Jayson X wrote:
Show nested quote +On May 04 2012 14:44 GhettoSheep wrote:
Well then, if Blizzard says terran is the early/mid game race, then I'll just embrace that. I guess I'll just do 1-1-1 timings off 1 or 2 base every game now if that's what Blizzard says I should be doing.
Funny how the mind can twist statements to connect with what ever he believes to be the truth. Blizzard didn't say win before lategame it said act accordingly in midgame to enter said lategame in a favorable position. Oh shit. A concept that is true since 1998.
Oh man, somebody gets it. This is exactly it, and its totally OK. Honestly I think terran metagame has stagnated, and why should it have kept developing when they were so dominant for so long. Similar to how when the huge WG nerf hit, protoss had to go and reinvent their race's gameplay, terran may have some soul searching to do. That said, there are enough great terran pros I have faith. |
|
|
| Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 100 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 Next | |
|
|
|
| |
|
Sidebar Settings...
|
Store
