|
On September 21 2012 10:33 monkybone wrote: Terran is the hardest race, thus underrepresented. But I believe it does have the same potential as the other races though, it's just harder to utilize.
I agree, not to say other races are easy, but less forgiving in some aspects and have the option of being passive vT, while T cannot be. IMHO, this is why NA/EU players gravitate away from T, while KR is much better represented - T just seems to require a bit more multitask than the other races.
|
On September 21 2012 19:00 kckkryptonite wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2012 10:33 monkybone wrote: Terran is the hardest race, thus underrepresented. But I believe it does have the same potential as the other races though, it's just harder to utilize. I agree, not to say other races are easy, but less forgiving in some aspects and have the option of being passive vT, while T cannot be. IMHO, this is why NA/EU players gravitate away from T, while KR is much better represented - T just seems to require a bit more multitask than the other races.
So the best thing to do would be to add multitask units to p/z and a move to t, which is partly what theyve done. It seems like so much of the games balancing is based on the marine, the colossi and force fields
|
its not a troll thread, this is a legitimate balance thread because STATISTICS DON'T LIE
when you have 2.5x more zergs than terran in GM, in a server that caters to the United States (and no, im not american), you undeniably have got a problem.
most of the hardcore fan base this game has got left are the masters and maybe diamonds, sectors in which terran is vastly underperforming, they are the ones who keep the game active.
thank god I quit for counterstike and wow a long time ago, games which you can enjoy when you have a job and college papers to go through, instead of having to read up on the new terran nerf after i get home.
|
If you use solid builds, do not mess up engagements and most importantly macro well, you will do fine, right? Well, for zerg and protoss you probably will. That goes for terran too, but as terran have to take charge of the game and make it go where you want it. That is at least my feeling as a random player, and is my reasoning why fewer terrans are at the top of the ladder, it is just hard to do that.
|
No one should be surprised, being highly ranked as Terran actually means something...
|
On September 21 2012 13:50 shadowboxer wrote: Really just has to do with Terran's lategame being wildly undiscovered.
Only a handful of Terrans are taking the time to learn the late-game as the only reason to with HotS coming out soon is if you have the potential to win a lot of tournaments before then and most players don't.
actaully I think late game Terran is all worked out by lots and lots of players pros and below the question is not what to do late game its how to get there
getting to a late game comp in TVT and TVZ is slow process
so many game you see atm Terran moves out about the 12 - 14 min mark vs zerg at which point the zerg if no real damage has been done to them which in most cases it has not are ready for BL or ultra's and are happy to give up supply while slowing the push by the time Terran gets to the base of the zerg with Bio or tank bio and finds BL infestor or ultra infestor and has to pull back or loses his army
switching early mid game army for late game army is hard to do for Terran in TvT and TvZ as you need lot of bases and it hard to defend them well if your trading supply for a later game units
in TvP I have no idea how you switch at all death balls are so scary
don't get me wrong I am not saying late game army is not good for Terran vs P or Z its just hard to get there without going super turtle on 3 base in which case they will both mass expand cause neither race has the fear that Terrans have late game of the other races and on 3 base Terran has pretty much a 1 time army once it dies thats game
|
Terran is not the hardest race to play, They just were so dominate in the beginning of the game the other races pretty much know how to counter all their builds. We haven't seen any real new interesting Terran play in the past couple months excluding Taeja.
I have noticed this as a big problem as well in the High Master area on NA I face no Terrans. 3 out of 50 games this season, I was waiting for a post like this because I found it quite alarming as well. Also hearing all the Current Terran players dislike for HOTS changes make me even more worried. Look at WCS world finals we have what 5 Terrans maybe 6 if a non Korean Terran can squeeze it out of WCS Asia finals.
Maybe it is balance or lack of innovation or a number of other things but something needs to be done. Kind of need 3 races in Starcraft.
|
On September 21 2012 19:17 shadymmj wrote: its not a troll thread, this is a legitimate balance thread because STATISTICS DON'T LIE
when you have 2.5x more zergs than terran in GM, in a server that caters to the United States (and no, im not american), you undeniably have got a problem.
most of the hardcore fan base this game has got left are the masters and maybe diamonds, sectors in which terran is vastly underperforming, they are the ones who keep the game active.
thank god I quit for counterstike and wow a long time ago, games which you can enjoy when you have a job and college papers to go through, instead of having to read up on the new terran nerf after i get home.
you need a subscription for WoW, and Counterstrike everyone plays the same race that's why it's balanced.
I used to play WoW too and there are classes that are certainly underpowered in PvP (shaman) so it's the same thing that plague all blizz games.
|
I didn't know that we measure game balance by how many are playing a specific race. Seems to me that people grab on to whatever they find to try to construct arguments about game balance. Why look at a derivative statistic (at best) of game balance when the cold data (win ratios) are publically available?
|
It was expected considering how many personalities for example zerg have compared to terran. Stephano, Idra, Destiny, Sheth, Ret... all with something special and good streams. Zerg was always dominating streams and popularity. Zerg was designed to be loved, winning came much later.
|
|
On September 21 2012 19:48 Tuczniak wrote: It was expected considering how many personalities for example zerg have compared to terran. Stephano, Idra, Destiny, Sheth, Ret... all with something special and good streams. Zerg was always dominating streams and popularity. Zerg was designed to be loved, winning came much later.
you mean it JUST so happens that those people picked Zerg and it JUST happens that they stream alot.
how was Zerg designed to be "loved"? cuter units? whattt?
|
I think terran is very unflexible race so it is very prone to being countered. This is the main reason why terran play requires timing pushes. And maps get bigger while players get better at reacting to timing pushes. Also allins and timing pushes are boring to use so terrans lose interest in the game.
|
I definitely believe Terran is the hardest race to play right now. Against toss, I feel like if I dont end the game before 12 minutes or so I have little chance unless the other guy screws up badly. P gets upgrades faster, then add in chronoboost and it is a huge hole to climb out of. Even starting upgrades earlier, and hitting one after the other, I am usually no better than even. Once P hits his 4-5 collosus and archon/storm (not hard to do if he turtles) he can just amove across the map while I need to be: stutter stepping bio, emp/snipe templar, maneuver vikings. Which is harder?
Against zerg, get fungal growthed once and lose your army to an amove. Worth noting is that since every terran unit except hellion has a special or spell that is essential to its proper use, controlling properly is more complicated than most z or p comps. This is compounded by terrans smaller margin of error. Make a single mistake, and huge chunks disappear for next to no gain.
Terran is slower to switch army comps, and so is very vulnerable to zergs 1 building hard tech switches (BL into ultra, vice versa) or protoss robo to templar, which also takes just one building (I dont count the twilight since you get it anyways). It is much harder, and takes much longer, for Terran to render a big chunk of a p or z army into dead supply (marauders v bls, viking v ultra, viking v archon/templar).
Mules are supposed to be so OP, but I would rather have faster, permanant workers, and earlier. Especially since some of those mules get burned as scans. Yeah, in the late game its a lot of minerals, but marines melt.
Its not impossible to win, and I dont necessarily think the game is imbalanced, but I dont think its far fetched to say that playing T well takes a bit more these days. I like the challenge, but it can be very frustrating to listen to shit talking when some guy barely holds on and gets his herp derp amove tech.
|
yeah, less terrans these days,. I am Dia in Kr, And I rarely get to fight terrans, many toss though
|
This thread again. :|
It's been like this for ages.
The only real question here is why you would play a bunch of boringass space marines when you can be races that represents the peak of physical or intellectual capability!
|
You just have to be "better" to compete with Terran against other races on a amateur level. You need better mechanics and the race is just the most unforgiving. It was the same in BW. You didn't see many really good foreign T's because you had to be so good to reach like ~B rank and higher, while it was alot easier with say Protoss because macro and hotkeying was really simple and just the overall mechanics was alot easier to get away with. And there was alooooooooot of Protoss players in the foreigner scene back then.
And just like in sc2 you would fear korean terrans and look at them like if they were gods because you knew the amount of skill they had to sit on if they were so high ranked and was part of famous clans, practice partners to Proleague teams or progamers.
|
Well, i'm sorry, but i consider imbalance at non-top level absurd. I consider terran to be the hardest race to be good at, but the best race when played well. Demanding that all races have the same 'overall skill'-'race skill' relation (something like that doesn't exist, but suppose overall skill was determinable and projectible to 1 dimension; same for race skill), is impossible without making the races the same. So i think you're whining in a way, namely when you connect the number of people playing a race to balance.
|
Maybe reduce bunker build time by 5 seconds, that should fix things. This would fix nothing, but it would make bunker rushes even more viable. It's not a good idea.
|
On September 21 2012 19:50 ref4 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2012 19:48 Tuczniak wrote: It was expected considering how many personalities for example zerg have compared to terran. Stephano, Idra, Destiny, Sheth, Ret... all with something special and good streams. Zerg was always dominating streams and popularity. Zerg was designed to be loved, winning came much later. you mean it JUST so happens that those people picked Zerg and it JUST happens that they stream alot. how was Zerg designed to be "loved"? cuter units? whattt? I don't know why Destiny chose Z, he doesn't play good, he doesn't win, but he is interesting personality. Why the most mannered guy (Sheth), the most BM/ragequit guy (IdrA) chose Z? who knows? They have chosen Z in beta or early start, no connection to balance today. Also reason for choosing race are usually very subjective and random.
Usually when someone new to SC2 or some child look at SC2, they like zerg. Especially banelings. Why? ask them.
|
|
|
|