Website Feedback
Closed Threads
IRC Chat
irc.quakenet.org #teamliquid
IRC Web ClientTeamSpeak 3 (101 users) | |
|
| Braric Canada. May 05 2012 06:23. Posts 184 | Profile # |
On May 05 2012 06:16 Joedaddy wrote:
Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 05:47 yoigen wrote:
On May 05 2012 05:43 Joedaddy wrote:
My biggest and only complaint in TvP is that I dislike being forced into gimmicky 1 and 2 base all in type play. Why can't both races have an equal opportunity to win (when on equal footing) in the early, mid, and late game?
I guess that the common theme of "win before 15m or don't win at all" can't really be construed as balance whine now, can it?
You aren't. Try taking an early third and you are fine to go.
An early 3rd doesn't address anything I'm talking about. I should have put in bold text " when on equal footing." What you are suggesting is exactly what Blizzard has already said, and what most Terrans have known for months. You have to have an advantage going into the late game to win. An early 3rd is just another way to try and secure that advantage. What I believe should be the case is an equal opportunity for both races to win in all stages of the game *when both players are on equal footing. Also, on Fencer710's post. I personally haven't heard of him, but I do know who dde is (most everyone does). Him and a lot of other pro's all have similar feelings.
Show nested quote +if terran let protoss hit 200/200 and get all those crucial high templar counts and colossus counts. You should just gg out.
The only way not let that happen is a highly aggressive 1 or 2 base play. Taking an early 3rd and hoping Protoss doesn't scout it and do the same is not a very good solution.
Honestly the way I see it currently is either Terran are going into the late game with either a disadvantage or an advantage and never an in between. This is partially due to Protoss doing much more long term invested builds and Terran investing so heavily into needing to do damage in the early and mid game, I'm very curious to see what would happen if the Terran players would aim solely for a long game like Protoss have started doing.
I mean every PvT I play and see now a days on streams and tournaments is just the Terran doing a +1 Attack Bio and Medivac timing while taking a 3rd to try and punish a greedy Protoss and what either happens is the Terran trashes his opponent or the Protoss defends and proceeds to gain a momentous lead for the late game.
|
| |
|
| freetgy May 05 2012 06:27. Posts 1586 | Profile # |
On May 05 2012 06:02 NHL Fever wrote:
Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 05:19 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Just refuting your point that 1 ghost can't decide a battle as much as 1 high templar can, which is utterly ridiculous  Ghosts counter Protoss unit compositions easily as much as high templar counter Terran unit compositions.
As a random player, I find this argument pretty silly. It's pretty obvious templars are easier to you use and more effective than ghosts, at least in my experience. It's not hard to figure out why, but the basics are this: 1) Storm area is WAY bigger than emp. It is far harder to dodge a storm than an emp. Diameter is at least 2-3x larger, total area probably 6-7x or more. 2) Templar are overall cheaper. 3) There are multiple units that need specific and precise targeting by ghosts - sentries, templar, archon and depleting shields of stsrong units. This is hard to do on a busy battlefield, and it's very hard to pull of without dying, and useless if you screw it up even a little bit. For storm you just aim for any decent chunk of the army and it works, you are never confused as to what you aiming at. The only way storm is bad is if you completely miss everything. With ghosts you could hit large chunks of the toss army with emp but miss a couple key units, and you're dead. 4) Ghosts die after use. They need to be in front for range and get killed, and they can't run away cause their slow. Templar transform into a very strong unit after use = recyclable. 5) Ghosts take a long time to build, templar are insta-build from anywhere. Its much easier and faster to work templar into your composition when needed, as a result. 6) Templar are extremely good both in army, and defending in base. Ghosts not so. 7) Ghosts needs racks with tech lab, which will probably be 50-60% of players rax. Templar can be made from any available gate. 8) Ghosts also need obs to be killed, which is very hard to do when there are a ton of units around even if you have detection. Even pros seem to have trouble with this. I have been frustrated with T as P, and with P as T, I understand where you are coming from. But ghosts are as good as templar? No way. They are both not as good and harder to incorporate because of basic game mechanics.
so much fail in one post don't even know how to begin
1)
Storm has the same radius as EMP
Storm deals 80 damage over 4s
EMP does instant 100 DMG
Stimmed Bio is >> faster then Protoss units, thus dodging Storms is easier than a Protoss army dodging EMP.
Gas is the limiting ressource for P thus HT are harder to get for Protoss, compared the ressource investment into a Ghost which has still its use beside EMPLast edit: 2012-05-05 06:30:08 |
|
|
| Alejandrisha United States. May 05 2012 06:27. Posts 5003 | Profile Blog # |
stim pack and bunker nerfs... mid game nerfs...
sounds about right |
| | probes get rich or die mining. | |
|
|
| cmcaneff5502 United States. May 05 2012 06:29. Posts 114 | Profile # |
On May 04 2012 13:47 laharl23 wrote:
Show nested quote +On May 04 2012 13:43 SolidMoose wrote:
Wow that's awful. Regardless of advantages in early or mid game, every non mirror should push for each race to be viable in the late game no matter what. Otherwise games turn into 1-2 base allins. If that's their idea of balance, I'm disappointed.
You don't get the point do you? Terran is supposed to DO DAMAGE in the mid game for it to be equal, blizzard is basically saying if both races just sat there and maxed to 200/200 then yea protoss will have an advantage, so terran has to do mid-game pushes like drops/multiple attacks to get an advantage in the late game. Which is what every single terran does anyway so what they are saying is not really that ground-breaking. They are not saying that when it hits late game=protoss just wins, people are just reading it wrong.
How do you not see that exactly what you said is broken? You're saying that the protoss has to do nothing, while the terran needs to "DO DAMAGE." That is relying on the protoss player to make a mistake, as FF and a few stalkers can totally shut down early aggro and early drop harrass. It should never be entirely the responsibility of one race to multitask while the other has to literally do nothing to gain a late game advantage. That is broken |
|
|
| polysciguy United States. May 05 2012 06:29. Posts 482 | Profile # |
noone complains that in any vz matchup you are required to push out and force them to use larvae on units or else you have a zerg with a super strong economy that can remax on high tier/counter units faster than any race out there, this requires protoss to attack with an early push to deny the third and attempt to stay on even bases, and terran to drop harass as much as they can.
pvt is no different in this reguard, at 200/200 with perfect unit comps and ratios protoss will be stronger, so the solution is to prevent that from happening via harass, which terran is capable of doing so much easier than any other race, terran harrass is also much more powerful than the harass of any other race. That is the solution for terran, it isn't about devolving into a 15m or die attack, its about proper unit control, positioning, and harassment. if terran would drop a couple places at once, it forces the army back or into a base trade, whcih terran should almost always win since his buildings can float and all you need to do is get them out of rang of the stalkers.
that's what blizzard is saying |
| | glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever---napoleon |
|
|
| R3DT1D3 May 05 2012 06:30. Posts 204 | Profile # |
The problem isn't that Terran isn't good in late game it's that they have to no late game army vs Toss. The end of the Terran tech tree (which requires a ton of factories and starports) can be countered by chargelots, stalkers, and HT who will have higher upgrades and can be warped in at any time with less infrastructure investment.
There comes a time where MMMVG becomes unviable and in that time there's nowhere for Terran to go. |
|
|
| Cloud9157 United States. May 05 2012 06:33. Posts 1734 | Profile # |
On May 05 2012 06:29 cmcaneff5502 wrote:
Show nested quote +On May 04 2012 13:47 laharl23 wrote:
On May 04 2012 13:43 SolidMoose wrote:
Wow that's awful. Regardless of advantages in early or mid game, every non mirror should push for each race to be viable in the late game no matter what. Otherwise games turn into 1-2 base allins. If that's their idea of balance, I'm disappointed.
You don't get the point do you? Terran is supposed to DO DAMAGE in the mid game for it to be equal, blizzard is basically saying if both races just sat there and maxed to 200/200 then yea protoss will have an advantage, so terran has to do mid-game pushes like drops/multiple attacks to get an advantage in the late game. Which is what every single terran does anyway so what they are saying is not really that ground-breaking. They are not saying that when it hits late game=protoss just wins, people are just reading it wrong.
How do you not see that exactly what you said is broken? You're saying that the protoss has to do nothing, while the terran needs to "DO DAMAGE." That is relying on the protoss player to make a mistake, as FF and a few stalkers can totally shut down early aggro and early drop harrass. It should never be entirely the responsibility of one race to multitask while the other has to literally do nothing to gain a late game advantage. That is broken
So we should nerf Zerg then?
You clearly have never seen a ZvP match up before.Last edit: 2012-05-05 06:33:30 |
| | "Are you absolutely sure that armor only affects the health portion of a protoss army??? That doesn't sound right to me. source?" -Some idiot |
|
|
| SupLilSon Malaysia. May 05 2012 06:35. Posts 3166 | Profile # |
On May 05 2012 06:29 polysciguy wrote:
noone complains that in any vz matchup you are required to push out and force them to use larvae on units or else you have a zerg with a super strong economy that can remax on high tier/counter units faster than any race out there, this requires protoss to attack with an early push to deny the third and attempt to stay on even bases, and terran to drop harass as much as they can.
pvt is no different in this reguard, at 200/200 with perfect unit comps and ratios protoss will be stronger, so the solution is to prevent that from happening via harass, which terran is capable of doing so much easier than any other race, terran harrass is also much more powerful than the harass of any other race. That is the solution for terran, it isn't about devolving into a 15m or die attack, its about proper unit control, positioning, and harassment. if terran would drop a couple places at once, it forces the army back or into a base trade, whcih terran should almost always win since his buildings can float and all you need to do is get them out of rang of the stalkers.
that's what blizzard is saying
Tanks actually do something vsZ.
Plus TvZ is still fun to play. Last edit: 2012-05-05 06:37:47 |
|
|
| freetgy May 05 2012 06:35. Posts 1586 | Profile # |
On May 05 2012 06:30 R3DT1D3 wrote:
The problem isn't that Terran isn't good in late game it's that they have to no late game army vs Toss. The end of the Terran tech tree (which requires a ton of factories and starports) can be countered by chargelots, stalkers, and HT who will have higher upgrades and can be warped in at any time with less infrastructure investment.
There comes a time where MMMVG becomes unviable and in that time there's nowhere for Terran to go.
One reason for this is also that Terrans tech tree is to easily accessible.
It takes way longer for Protoss or Zerg to get high tech units then Terran also with a lot bigger risks involved for P and Z.Last edit: 2012-05-05 06:36:34 |
|
|
| yoigen Germany. May 05 2012 06:35. Posts 323 | Profile # |
Last edit: 2012-05-05 06:35:55 |
| | Today I didn't even have to use my AK, I gotta say it was a good day. |
|
|
| Dapper_Cad United Kingdom. May 05 2012 06:36. Posts 475 | Profile Blog # |
Hum, 8 points why unit A is >=< unit B, I see this thread is going well.
The OP misses the problem with the match up and his prejudice is showing. Daxxari's says "mid-game" 4 times in his post. OP says "early-mid game" twice and "early game" once and talks about one and two base all ins.
At the top level of TvP on the right maps and you see 2-4/5 base play in many TvP games and both races winning. The mid game pressure to stunt the tech of Toss features in games at 2 base+ only.
Some possible problems I think the the match up has... If indeed it has a problem the meta game can't solve... maybe that the final compositions of both races are predictable, they occur quite early and that the final strategic dynamic: That Protoss that have the last laugh with tech switches while the terran has incredible mobility through drops is a bit boring. Or maybe templar vs. ghost is just boring. That second point is pretty debatable though watching Parting.Last edit: 2012-05-05 06:37:25 |
| | But he is never making short-term prediction, everyone of his prediction are based on fundenmentals, but he doesn't exactly know when it will happen... So using these kind of narrowed "who-is-right" empirical analysis makes little sense. |
|
|
| Sadistx Zimbabwe. May 05 2012 06:36. Posts 5471 | Profile Blog # |
On May 05 2012 04:58 Aeres wrote:
I don't know why people are in such an uproar about this. Blizzard didn't say anything particularly new or groundbreaking; their statement can essentially be boiled down to, "Terran has an advantage versus Protoss in the mid-game, and vice versa in the late game. Therefore, both races should exploit their respective windows of opportunity in order to secure a victory."
... That's it.
Terran players already work under that basic rule, by doing all sorts of harassment and drops and such to slow the Protoss war machine before late-game. That's one of the unique aspects of Terran play, being able to disrupt the opponent's economy in a variety of effective ways before it spirals out of control. Protoss players already work under that basic rule, by mitigating the losses sustained by an actively harassing Terran player in order to steamroll the foe when the time is right. That's one of the unique aspects of Protoss play, being able to construct a cost-efficient brick wall of an army that can smash an opponent who does little to prevent its construction.
Blizzard said nothing new. We already knew all of this. We already do all of this.
So why are people angry?
Because mid game is 5 minutes, and lategame can be anywhere from 5 to 30 minutes, depending on match length. This means that protoss is, on average favored during a much longer period of time, which is a fundamental flaw in game design.
Brood war was much better because you had many more alternating timings for each race. For example, P was favored until T got siege mode and mines. Then T was favored until P got arbiters and zealot speed. Then P was favored until T got their 3rd/4th bases and started macroing off of 8-10 factories. And then LATE LATEgame was basically even.
How is this so hard to see? Late game is obviously much more important than one bullshit MMM allin timing with medivacs mid game that the entire race relies upon.
It's not very uncommon for terrans to go into lategame with a HUGE advantage (like killing off P's 3rd base and thus being a base ahead) and still lose 10 minutes later.
Proof? Recent replays of Jinro, MMAvs Feast at IEM, many many TvPs from MLG, and some replays from IPL 4. All very recent, latest patch replays. Unless the skill gap was too wide, protoss was the favorite to win late game in the overwhelming majority of cases.
|
|
|
| djdnt Bulgaria. May 05 2012 06:38. Posts 9 | Profile # |
On May 05 2012 06:27 freetgy wrote:
Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 06:02 NHL Fever wrote:
On May 05 2012 05:19 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Just refuting your point that 1 ghost can't decide a battle as much as 1 high templar can, which is utterly ridiculous Ghosts counter Protoss unit compositions easily as much as high templar counter Terran unit compositions.
As a random player, I find this argument pretty silly. It's pretty obvious templars are easier to you use and more effective than ghosts, at least in my experience. It's not hard to figure out why, but the basics are this: 1) Storm area is WAY bigger than emp. It is far harder to dodge a storm than an emp. Diameter is at least 2-3x larger, total area probably 6-7x or more. 2) Templar are overall cheaper. 3) There are multiple units that need specific and precise targeting by ghosts - sentries, templar, archon and depleting shields of stsrong units. This is hard to do on a busy battlefield, and it's very hard to pull of without dying, and useless if you screw it up even a little bit. For storm you just aim for any decent chunk of the army and it works, you are never confused as to what you aiming at. The only way storm is bad is if you completely miss everything. With ghosts you could hit large chunks of the toss army with emp but miss a couple key units, and you're dead. 4) Ghosts die after use. They need to be in front for range and get killed, and they can't run away cause their slow. Templar transform into a very strong unit after use = recyclable. 5) Ghosts take a long time to build, templar are insta-build from anywhere. Its much easier and faster to work templar into your composition when needed, as a result. 6) Templar are extremely good both in army, and defending in base. Ghosts not so. 7) Ghosts needs racks with tech lab, which will probably be 50-60% of players rax. Templar can be made from any available gate. 8) Ghosts also need obs to be killed, which is very hard to do when there are a ton of units around even if you have detection. Even pros seem to have trouble with this. I have been frustrated with T as P, and with P as T, I understand where you are coming from. But ghosts are as good as templar? No way. They are both not as good and harder to incorporate because of basic game mechanics.
so much fail in one post don't even know how to begin 1) Storm has the same radius as EMP Storm deals 80 damage over 4s EMP does instant 100 DMG Stimmed Bio is >> faster then Protoss units, thus dodging Storms is easier than a Protoss army dodging EMP. Gas is the limiting ressource for P thus HT are harder to get for Protoss, compared the ressource investment into a Ghost which has still its use beside EMP
Your argument is invalid because,
Storm can kill units
EMP CANT |
|
|
| Rye. United Kingdom. May 05 2012 06:39. Posts 82 | Profile Blog # |
On May 05 2012 06:19 Plansix wrote:
Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 05:49 Rye. wrote:I was a Plat Terran, but i havent played a game this season. BNet Profile - Rye My problem isnt balance. Its that I have to be the aggressor. It seemed every game i played last season was against a zerg or toss who sat in his base until tier 3. (there were only a few TvT games, felt like 5% of games) At plat level, Toss KNOW they will win if they sit on 2 bases and max with HT and Collosus and a nice mix of gateway and when they move out take another 2 bases. Turtling on 2 bases as toss isnt difficult; as someone stated earlier you just need your stalkers in your main and everything else at your nat. When you move out you will roll a terran, Super hard if you land a money storm. At plat level, we terrans just dont have the micro to get a decent engagement, (not for a lack of trying). Zerg are a whole new level of boring. Sit on 2 / 3 bases... never attacking... tech straight to infestors and try to catch the terran army unsieged as it moves across the map. Then get broodlords and a load more bases. Even though i actually won some TvZ, it was all about MY attacking. If i didnt attack /drop in my games i know there wouldnt be any engagements for 15+ mins. Boring Boring Boring. So i havent played 1v1 this season. Blizzard are so concerned with their stats and balance that they dont actually check if the games are fun/interesting. Terrans should just do what i've done and quit 1v1. Blizzards stats will then show that terrans are quitting and they'll be forced to act. Then again, maybe the reason for this whole balance test map and their comments about TvP was because terrans have already started to quit. (many of us have noticed lack of ladder T's) And blizzard want to fix things but they cant because it would require a HUGE patch that would completely shake the game up.
SC2 is not a game where you get to sit back and macro up to 200/200 armies. Protoss does not get to do it against zerg and terran doesn’t either. Aggression is key to winning any match up and people who don’t want to play that way should play a different race or game. Some races favor specific play styles and there is nothing wrong with looking for the one that suites you. Or you should look how to improve your play as terran and stop asking for the game to be changed to suite the style you wish to play. Also, Blizzard has come out and said that terrans are not leaving the ladder and there is not evidence to support that claim.
Yes but against terran, it suits both Z and P to turtle. I dont enjoy it hence i quit.
On May 05 2012 06:14 nkr wrote:
Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 05:49 Rye. wrote:I was a Plat Terran, but i havent played a game this season. BNet Profile - Rye My problem isnt balance. Its that I have to be the aggressor. It seemed every game i played last season was against a zerg or toss who sat in his base until tier 3. (there were only a few TvT games, felt like 5% of games) At plat level, Toss KNOW they will win if they sit on 2 bases and max with HT and Collosus and a nice mix of gateway and when they move out take another 2 bases. Turtling on 2 bases as toss isnt difficult; as someone stated earlier you just need your stalkers in your main and everything else at your nat. When you move out you will roll a terran, Super hard if you land a money storm. At plat level, we terrans just dont have the micro to get a decent engagement, (not for a lack of trying). Zerg are a whole new level of boring. Sit on 2 / 3 bases... never attacking... tech straight to infestors and try to catch the terran army unsieged as it moves across the map. Then get broodlords and a load more bases. Even though i actually won some TvZ, it was all about MY attacking. If i didnt attack /drop in my games i know there wouldnt be any engagements for 15+ mins. Boring Boring Boring. So i havent played 1v1 this season. Blizzard are so concerned with their stats and balance that they dont actually check if the games are fun/interesting. Terrans should just do what i've done and quit 1v1. Blizzards stats will then show that terrans are quitting and they'll be forced to act. Then again, maybe the reason for this whole balance test map and their comments about TvP was because terrans have already started to quit. (many of us have noticed lack of ladder T's) And blizzard want to fix things but they cant because it would require a HUGE patch that would completely shake the game up.
I hope you realize when you say that terran has to be the agressor, it's because zerg actually can't attack you before broods. At all. Unless it's some roach bane allin, in which case you would be complaining anyway.
I do realise it and I know zerg cant attack. Its not enjoyable for me which is why i quit.
Actually zerg can attack harass with mutas but i very rarely saw it, even to the point where i wouldnt need turrets. They just save the gas and hope mass mass ling can defend long enough for infestors/broods. Ive seen it too often.
I think blizzard CANT do anything about it because it would require a massive rework of all the races. So i'm waiting for HOTS really. I just wanted to put my thoughts down as someone who quit 1v1 in case anyone was interested. There was that thread about where did all the terrans go and this thread and many of the issues people have are linked to that.
The game is broken, not necessarily balance wise, but broken none the less. |
| |
|
| RyF Austria. May 05 2012 06:39. Posts 366 | Profile # |
well i think the blizz statement is pathetic. we terrans are really cursed to do dmg in the eary mid game or we loose in lategame.
as a high master player i win maybe 1 of 5 straight macro games even though i like to play long games. playing 2 rax every game gets boring. im no mkp and i dont have his apm and multitasking. even mvp relies on all ins in important games. but guess what? toss even gets observer buff. bahh |
|
|
| avilo United States. May 05 2012 06:40. Posts 3233 | Profile Blog # |
On May 05 2012 06:27 Alejandrisha wrote:
stim pack and bunker nerfs... mid game nerfs...
sounds about right
No need, protoss is already good in early/mid and lategame. Sentry related 2 base gateway all-ins end up being able to kill so many SCVS usually that the Protoss isn't even "all-in" anymore.
Not only that, but a lot of times you can just straight up die to these dice roll "force field the bunker" all-ins.
So no, it's a myth that Terran has some amazing early game, or a misconception carried over from beta when Terran did indeed have a lot of early game power/all-ins. They have already all been nerfed to smithereens or the other races have even been buffed to deal with these (immortal buff for 1/1/1).
People need to stop saying Terran is mega amazing early game/mid-game...they aren't anymore. TvP for the Terran is a huge guessing game in the mid-game as to whether the protoss is going to all-in them or if the protoss is actually just sitting there chronoboosting 2 forges. One requires Terran to blind build 50 bunkers, the other requires Terran to take an early third base to be able to have a chance for lategame, since Protoss will just sit inside their base till 3/0/3 is done and have a free advantage for lategame which they can force the game to go into nowadays.
And on top of that btw, stimpack already was nerfed. So was the bunker. So was every single other Terran unit, except the banshee so far. Even vikings were pre-emptively nerfed at some point. |
| |
|
| polysciguy United States. May 05 2012 06:40. Posts 482 | Profile # |
On May 05 2012 06:35 SupLilSon wrote:
Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 06:29 polysciguy wrote:
noone complains that in any vz matchup you are required to push out and force them to use larvae on units or else you have a zerg with a super strong economy that can remax on high tier/counter units faster than any race out there, this requires protoss to attack with an early push to deny the third and attempt to stay on even bases, and terran to drop harass as much as they can.
pvt is no different in this reguard, at 200/200 with perfect unit comps and ratios protoss will be stronger, so the solution is to prevent that from happening via harass, which terran is capable of doing so much easier than any other race, terran harrass is also much more powerful than the harass of any other race. That is the solution for terran, it isn't about devolving into a 15m or die attack, its about proper unit control, positioning, and harassment. if terran would drop a couple places at once, it forces the army back or into a base trade, whcih terran should almost always win since his buildings can float and all you need to do is get them out of rang of the stalkers.
that's what blizzard is saying
Tanks actually do something vsZ. Plus TvZ is still fun to play.
and ghosts do something to vs p, it just actually requires you have semi decent micro, unlike tanks which you can just mass and siege and watch everything die. also if you didn't notice, vs z you are still racing to hit them with a push before they can hit their late game comp. |
| | glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever---napoleon |
|
|
| SupLilSon Malaysia. May 05 2012 06:40. Posts 3166 | Profile # |
On May 05 2012 06:36 Sadistx wrote:
Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 04:58 Aeres wrote:
I don't know why people are in such an uproar about this. Blizzard didn't say anything particularly new or groundbreaking; their statement can essentially be boiled down to, "Terran has an advantage versus Protoss in the mid-game, and vice versa in the late game. Therefore, both races should exploit their respective windows of opportunity in order to secure a victory."
... That's it.
Terran players already work under that basic rule, by doing all sorts of harassment and drops and such to slow the Protoss war machine before late-game. That's one of the unique aspects of Terran play, being able to disrupt the opponent's economy in a variety of effective ways before it spirals out of control. Protoss players already work under that basic rule, by mitigating the losses sustained by an actively harassing Terran player in order to steamroll the foe when the time is right. That's one of the unique aspects of Protoss play, being able to construct a cost-efficient brick wall of an army that can smash an opponent who does little to prevent its construction.
Blizzard said nothing new. We already knew all of this. We already do all of this.
So why are people angry?
Because mid game is 5 minutes, and lategame can be anywhere from 5 to 30 minutes, depending on match length. This means that protoss is, on average favored during a much longer period of time, which is a fundamental flaw in game design. Brood war was much better because you had many more alternating timings for each race. For example, P was favored until T got siege mode and mines. Then T was favored until P got arbiters and zealot speed. Then P was favored until T got their 3rd/4th bases and started macroing off of 8-10 factories. And then LATE LATEgame was basically even. How is this so hard to see? Late game is obviously much more important than one bullshit MMM allin timing with medivacs mid game that the entire race relies upon. It's not very uncommon for terrans to go into lategame with a HUGE advantage (like killing off P's 3rd base and thus being a base ahead) and still lose 10 minutes later. Proof? Recent replays of Jinro, MMAvs Feast at IEM, many many TvPs from MLG, and some replays from IPL 4. All very recent, latest patch replays. Unless the skill gap was too wide, protoss was the favorite to win late game in the overwhelming majority of cases.
Not to mention, it's much worse being forced to attack by a deadline. Protoss will know Terran is going to attack within this time range and be able to prepare.. |
|
|
| freetgy May 05 2012 06:42. Posts 1586 | Profile # |
On May 05 2012 06:38 djdnt wrote:
Show nested quote +On May 05 2012 06:27 freetgy wrote:
On May 05 2012 06:02 NHL Fever wrote:
On May 05 2012 05:19 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Just refuting your point that 1 ghost can't decide a battle as much as 1 high templar can, which is utterly ridiculous Ghosts counter Protoss unit compositions easily as much as high templar counter Terran unit compositions.
As a random player, I find this argument pretty silly. It's pretty obvious templars are easier to you use and more effective than ghosts, at least in my experience. It's not hard to figure out why, but the basics are this: 1) Storm area is WAY bigger than emp. It is far harder to dodge a storm than an emp. Diameter is at least 2-3x larger, total area probably 6-7x or more. 2) Templar are overall cheaper. 3) There are multiple units that need specific and precise targeting by ghosts - sentries, templar, archon and depleting shields of stsrong units. This is hard to do on a busy battlefield, and it's very hard to pull of without dying, and useless if you screw it up even a little bit. For storm you just aim for any decent chunk of the army and it works, you are never confused as to what you aiming at. The only way storm is bad is if you completely miss everything. With ghosts you could hit large chunks of the toss army with emp but miss a couple key units, and you're dead. 4) Ghosts die after use. They need to be in front for range and get killed, and they can't run away cause their slow. Templar transform into a very strong unit after use = recyclable. 5) Ghosts take a long time to build, templar are insta-build from anywhere. Its much easier and faster to work templar into your composition when needed, as a result. 6) Templar are extremely good both in army, and defending in base. Ghosts not so. 7) Ghosts needs racks with tech lab, which will probably be 50-60% of players rax. Templar can be made from any available gate. 8) Ghosts also need obs to be killed, which is very hard to do when there are a ton of units around even if you have detection. Even pros seem to have trouble with this. I have been frustrated with T as P, and with P as T, I understand where you are coming from. But ghosts are as good as templar? No way. They are both not as good and harder to incorporate because of basic game mechanics.
so much fail in one post don't even know how to begin 1) Storm has the same radius as EMP Storm deals 80 damage over 4s EMP does instant 100 DMG Stimmed Bio is >> faster then Protoss units, thus dodging Storms is easier than a Protoss army dodging EMP. Gas is the limiting ressource for P thus HT are harder to get for Protoss, compared the ressource investment into a Ghost which has still its use beside EMP
Your argument is invalid because, Storm can kill units EMP CANT
yeah thats why your standing army is for. like 100dmg instant isn't already enough.
Have you ever tried lategame engagements without storm and colossus?
Terran army wouldn't even lose 20 supply.
Ghosts lategame are there to balance increase the initial dps output and give an option to negate splash.
If you negate splash you win 99 of 100 engagements because standard protoss armies suck.Last edit: 2012-05-05 06:44:40 |
|
|
| Torra Norway. May 05 2012 06:44. Posts 443 | Profile # |
| Basically, the window where terran has the advantage has become too small because of patch changes and map changes. |
|
|
| Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 100 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 Next | |
|
|
|
| |
|
Sidebar Settings...
|
Store
