Community
|
After reading the responses to the recently posted balance update, we’ve seen that a lot of players wanted us to elaborate on the current state of the terran versus protoss late game. Before we begin the longer explanation, it’s worth pointing out that we didn’t originally comment on TvP because, overall, this match up remains balanced according to the games we are seeing, tournament results and ladder data.
We do agree that if both sides take few to no losses going into the late game, protoss can have an advantage. That said, we also know that terran players have a lot of offensive capability and harassment options at their fingertips in the mid-game. If terran players press that mid-game advantage, then protoss can’t necessarily get into the late game at their full potential, which can nullify any advantage they might have had. So, pressing that mid-game advantage is important (just as it would be important for protoss players to mitigate mid-game damage so they can to move into the late game in the strongest possible position). Ultimately, each game plays out differently, and depending on how the two races enter the late game, each side has a fair chance to win. StarCraft II is designed with asymmetric design principles. We like having these differences between the races, as long as no one race or tactic offers a significant advantage. To put it another way, mirror matches already show us what StarCraft II looks like when both opposing forces have identical strengths at each stage of the game. In non-mirror matches we intentionally work to provide diverse strategies that make use of asymmetric design to produce varied, fun and interesting games, while maintaining excellent overall balance. That does mean that at different stages of the game, one race might have tools which represent an advantage against the others — though it’s important that those advantages can always be mitigated by good play. All of this comes with an important caveat. We are already keeping a close eye on things and observing all stages of the game. If we start seeing our global ladder results shift dramatically or TvP win/loss ratios start to heavily favor one side or the other in major tournaments, we will deal with the situation accordingly. |
#1
04/05/2012
|
|
What you are saying is absolute nonsence. TvP is not balanced, every1 (except for blizzard) , from like high platinum to GM (in bronze-gold it might be balanced as almost all games are all-ins for both sides)know that this matchup is broken. I've seen some people say that terran have started to go mass ghost/nuke vs toss in gsl and aswell ladder, which is showing that terran players are trying to adapt to the changes in the game. as far as protoss are concerned, you can see them doing same all-in - > expand tactics like 90% of all games. They mainly rely on blizz buffing their units instead of thinking about new tactics. And all those people saying that protoss doesn't have enough diversity, it is so not true, protoss have so many ways to harass/punish terran in both: early/mid game, aswell as in late game. And ofc every1 know that unless terran microes their units like mma/MKP in late game, Protoss player will basically a-move you(with some storms/FF in between a pressing).
Suddenly so many protoss players jumped into masters, aswell as in top GM spots after recent buffs, and every 2nd game(maybe even every game most of the time) for a terran player in against a Protoss player is just showing how strong P is. so, all in all, would be better to make a post "don't mention TvP matchup anymore, as we don't actually care" instead of saying you are looking into it carefully. |
|
On the surface of it this makes sense. The problem though is about options.
Protoss can and sometimes does go for strategies that give them a very strong mid game, designed to kill or cripple the opponent at that stage of the game. Protoss can also go for a defensive play to get that "race advantage" in the late game. Terran though, has only one choice: Do damage in mid game or play at a big disadvantage. The solution is simple, IMO: make mech viable, accessible, good, whatever you want to call it so terran has options. Go for an aggressive, stronger mid game but weaker late game (bio) or a more defensive, stronger late game (mech). The numbers now might say "balance" but the game play of this MU feel terrible both to watch and play. It's just to predictable and boring playing with a "time bomb" |
|
Edited by Spitfire on 04/05/12 10:57 (BST)
This makes sense I suppose - looking at the GSL the only terran to win in the quarter finals did so with two marine-SCV all ins, and it's helpful to know that this is how Blizzard intends the matchup to play out (in general terms).
One thing though - if terran are supposed to do 1 or 2 base attacks each game then I think you need to look at the maps. Bigger "tournament-style" maps with long rush distances and easy-to-defend natural and third expansions make it much easier for the protoss to hold us off with forcefields for example. It's hard to know how to balance the maps with the other matchups, where bigger maps are being introduced because players have said they like longer games. Maybe the answer is just to keep the big maps and for the terran to proxy their 2 rax all in every game? |
With this you're actually saying that Terran has to be offensive in the midgame (while Protoss can sit on his thumbs and just defend) to get into the lategame on even footing. If the Terran doesn't (or the Protoss just defends it too well), he can also just leave the game, because the Protoss will be inevitably ahead too far. Is that fair by any means? The other way around that would mean, you can't lose with Protoss, if you can turtle yourself into lategame. Now, it's all fine that races are different and have different phases where they're good, but it should all even out again in the end. Right now in TvP there are three phases. In earlygame both are kind of even (both have ways to cripple the other, try to get an eco advantage, turtle, tech, whatever). The midgame favours Terran more (as you said) and Protoss should quite much turtle to get to the lategame. In lategame the advantage lies clearly on Protoss side (if they turtled well in midgame). Now imo there's a phase missing. If Terrans manage to defend well in the lategame, they should be able to get on even footing with the Protoss again leading to the 4th phase, the late-lategame, where both races are even again. For that Terran lacks units though that would make a Terran army as powerful as a Protoss army in the late-lategame again. |
|
So many of the above posts seem like nonsense to me. Now, I am no expert, but I am also a zerg player, with little bias regarding PvT matches.
What the OP said was that if protoss get into the end game having taken no losses, they can have an advantage. In other words, they may have an advantage (possibly), and nowhere does he state that it is a heavy advantage that cannot be overcome. To my mind, this actually puts toss in a weaker position than terran - you can win a game without playing into the late game, you cant win without going through the early game (where terran have the advantage). I recognize that the match-up can be a little rigid, forcing players into set paths, but the idea that a TvP game that goes the distance is an auto-loss for the terran player is just silly. As usual, ideas/comments supporting varied strategies are welcome - yet more balance whining is not. The golden rule for this is - you may only say something is imbalanced if it is in favor of the race you play (for which I humbly nominate infestors, or fungal growth in specific). Anyway, peace and respect to all |
|
Edited by Weecka on 04/05/12 20:16 (BST)
So many of the above posts seem like nonsense to me. Now, I am no expert, but I am also a zerg player, with little bias regarding PvT matches. i don't think you understand the matchup very well. Defending is in most cases (not all of them) is easier than attacking, so for protoss staying in their base is not that hard. and when late game comes let's say 2 armies clash and end up with equal losses, protoss warp ins, then crono boost the cooldown on gates/robo or whatever he wants and warps in close to terran base again(it's so easy to get a pylon close to T base) while terran units are still building. So P has no travel distance, he can just out mass you, for defence he can build cannons/warp in aswell. Cannons take no supply (not like bunkers that have to be filled with units), and last, but not least, if P has decent map awareness he can just have 1 HT at most vulnerable spot (well might be 2 spots) 1 feedback can kill medivac, or deplete it's energy, then before mentioned warp in can easily clean it again. there's one absolutelly sick thing toss stared doing on ladder lately(or i should say started doing more frequently): warp prism with HT's in it, u can't emp them, so it's just a move ur army. unload ht's and storm, pretty much victory 99% of the time. Not saying that winning vs P is impossible, but is has come to a spot where it is veeeeeeery difficult. |
|
Edited by Yaxkin on 04/05/12 21:55 (BST)
What about giving the terran a late game tech, like needing a fusion core and then an upgrade for like 500/500 to give medivacs or marauders a shield vs. stalkers or colossus/templars to survive longer.
not much of a thought out concept, but the idea is, if you let the terran expand too much and turtle too much he may get strong enough to defeat your death ball with his units in play. it would add to the terrans versatility and could even be announced when started researching like the nuke when about to be launched. the protoss would be forced to attack earlier to deny the research´s completion. terran could then decide to push in mid-game as is or taking his chances with a risky tech in late-game. if protoss is smart he can deny the tech and keep the slighty upper hand in army composition. if both sides enter the late with only few forces, the tech would be to expensive to obtain. |
|
Exactly, imo Terran has nothing scary for the lategame right now.
Protoss Colossi, Archons and even Mothership, Zerg Broodlords and Ultras all have to be dealt with quite early in battle, some even with explicit counterunits, or they will decide the battle. Terran Thors and BCs are kind of not scary or dangerous to the other races at all (except for Mutas). In a big fight they will just be fought against like any other unit. That's why most Terrans just go with Tier1 units. They are for the same (or even higher) damage and/or versatility much easier and cheaper to build. |
|
Considering I'm just bronze my opinion might not be the most wanted, but here I go nonetheless.
When I play as Terran, I cringe when I have to face a Protoss player. The common Void Ray spam is defendable enough (if you are lucky to notice it early on, but hey that's what scouting is for I guess)- but when they start pumping out their death balls I might a well just gg right then and there. My macro isn't godly, but generally whenever an all-in happens, both of us lose our armies. While I continue to spam units while the all-in happens, I just can't seem to match the speed of Protoss re-maxing. Of course this might be just me in bronze, but I've heard people about it that go all the way up to master. Meanwhile I have tried Protoss for a bit and without really paying attention to build orders I managed to get my biggest win-streak up til now. I guess that adds to the whole thing that Protoss is easiest to get into. Move along now, nothing to see :) |
|
I dont understand why terran would have any advantage in the early/mid game. As terran we need to have like 3-6 bunkers with 10 scvs ready to repair to hold off a strong midgame push from toss. Sentrys at the ramp stops any early pressure from terran. Squirtly steamrolled 3-4 code-s terrans with 13 min colossi push. Only time protoss has to be on their toes (in the midgame) is when they play rly greedy.
|
|
I'd like to think Blizzard realizes the current situation is bad for terran players, but hard to change and balance without multiple changes during the course of the entire game.
So instead of fixing it now, they would rather focus on HOTS and intend to fix it then when the whole game gets essentially rebooted. |
Will all due respect, it was Blizzard who announced (at Blizzcon) the addition of the Battle Hellion in HotS as a response to the issue of 3/3 chargelots warp-ins in the late game of TvP. So the issue was officially acknowledged then. Or did the balance team change their mind? |
|
Edited by WifWaf on 05/05/12 19:56 (BST)
Regarding late game TvP and the progression towards it (in terms of trading). Some of the issues I find (mostly ht related):
|
|
This thread would actually make more sense if Vaneras would drop by on occasion and respond to some posts. Otherwise it is just like any other thread here, it will get out of control....
I for one, have a lot of questions about inconsistency in balancing principles and blizzard's approach to the game. I'm again mentioning the good old blizzcon 2010 where blizzard's employees admitted that terran has mid game advantage and protoss has late game advantage and that they want to make the matchup fun and balanced through all stages of the game. Now they are telling us, deal with it. Well it is actually hard to do anything even with drops against a decent protoss who doesn't just have all his stalkers in front but also has 4-5 stalkers in the back for drops. You are basically asking us to drop a two base turtling player while he has all units in his base and do decent enough damage just to be even in the late game. |
|
Edited by Niborsom on 06/05/12 14:34 (BST)
HT feedback outranges my ghosts, even if I am able to get off a few emps, generally, they are killed before getting in range as they need to be near the front of my army to have any chance, meaning they are easy picked off by zealots or restricted from moving Every tried sniping ht's instead of emp-ing? You can kill them without taking dmg. warp prisms die very fast in big fights because of the vikings, which is why warp prisms with ht's aren't used that often anymore. Morphing archons only take dmg when your units aren't in range of any of my attacking units (like with scv's on hold position). I personally have a very hard time vs terran as a diamond protoss, but I notice from both sides it's alot about macro and good scouting and countering that (vikings or ghosts mid game, both end-game). Once a terran gets enough ghosts with emp up, it's pretty much gg.. |
Every tried sniping ht's instead of emp-ing? You can kill them without taking dmg. warp prisms die very fast in big fights because of the vikings, which is why warp prisms with ht's aren't used that often anymore. feedback has bigger range then snipe or emp. Go in unit test map que the feedback cmd on a ghost and control the ghost to kill the ht. Try you'll see. Snipe has some delay before it hits the ht and there is animation to so feedback will allways hit first, same with emp. |
|
Edited by Buggy on 06/05/12 15:44 (BST)
Every tried sniping ht's instead of emp-ing? You can kill them without taking dmg. warp prisms die very fast in big fights because of the vikings, which is why warp prisms with ht's aren't used that often anymore. Are you trolling? EMP and snipe both have 1 range more than feedback does. The difficulty of successfully sniping stuff comes from needing 2 snipes instead of one, so you need to use 2 ghosts for each templar, and they need to be properly positioned to do it fast enough. One ghost cannot snipe twice fast enough and will end up getting feedbacked. |
Well, that is accurate enough - I am bronze league, I don't understand any match-up that well, least of all one I don't play.
This statement may be true, but I think defending against early terran aggression is one of the exceptions. Marine/marauder seriously roughs up gateway units - pushes with a few marines and marauders as soon as conc shells finishes can be pretty nasty, especially if you go for some sought of macca rax to hide your two-rax aggression.
Got to disagree with this as well. While HT do help defending drops, they are still potentially very scary. Marauder heavy drops in particular seem effective. They chew stalkers so badly that often it takes more than one round of warp-ins to clean up, and stalkers are not cheap. Plus the marauders can deal a phenomenal amount of damage to buildings, destroying pylons and powering down gateways. I can remember seeing this more than once in pro matches, recently I think it was MC vs Alive (and here the drop came before MC had HT). Overall though, I think the biggest trouble toss have is mobility. Many of their units are just slow, and terran and zerg constantly seem able to contain them and gain solid map control. Sure, toss units are very tough, they have good timing attacks and some pretty harsh cheese, but the more skilled the players, the more I think map control and mobility matter. I would also love to see some viable terran tier 3 - I don't understand why thors have an energy bar. I have never seen strike cannons used, and if the problem with removing the energy bar is the potential for rushed thor drops, just add another requirement for the strike cannon ability, or give it a longer research time. Then T may start using them more, especially against HT heavy builds. Anyway, hope terran players find a solution that lets them enjoy the match-up without making it imba |
