|
On September 27 2009 02:44 dhe95 wrote:
If you FE and just go pure ht/zealot, you will max with about 10 hts at around 11 minutes. At 11 minutes for a standard zerg, they'd be at about 130 pop.
Then mutalisk come and rape you for making no anti air and lurkers rape you behind contain and you realiz your maxed out zealot/ht combo is complete shit. Then you rage and come to TL.
|
Lately, Terran are getting stomp by Protoss in TvP except for a selected few (Flash, Fantasy, Leta).
T>Z>P>T
It usually always been that way, but now it seems more apparent than before.
|
On September 27 2009 04:07 spinesheath wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2009 02:58 OneOther wrote:On September 27 2009 01:56 spinesheath wrote:On September 26 2009 22:44 .risingdragoon wrote:On September 26 2009 22:33 monolith94 wrote:
I agree with the poster who mentioned Movie's very cool game vs. Jaedong. A dragoon rush? Dragoons have very solid hp relative to the damage lings and hydralisks can put out in the earlly game, giving them a nice durability. Sure they may not be completely cost effective, but if you can out-micro in the critical early game, sometimes a technically non cost effective unit can be strategically effective. the only reason that worked is cus nobody's used it in ages, the possibility didn't enter jaedong's mind so he never upgraded ling speed as soon as it gets used more it becomes obsolete, cus it's too damn easy to scout and counter At least it would give zerg players more to think about. They also might have to spend money just to be prepared or to actually scout it. And it also allows you to fake that rush if it was used more often. it's just not viable if it starts to be used more than once every ten games or whatever. too easy to scout, too easy to counter. not effective. I wouldn't trash the concept that easily. Of course the build might require refinement, army composition / unit control might need adjustments, some tricks might have to be applied. I wouldn't be surprised if a decent all-in could be evolved from that. Protosses need some variations in their play, or else they WILL lose.
Overlords.
Zerg all-ins have a better success rate, due to denying the Protoss scout. Overlords can fly. You can't get rid of an overlord until you have a Dragoon, and by that time the zerg sees that you went 1gate, and won't spread himself too thin.
|
Mystlord
United States10264 Posts
On September 27 2009 04:03 Avidkeystamper wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2009 02:38 closed wrote:
Hey protoss players - let mi remind you of one thing.
There was one very successful protoss progamer who used to post at this site.
He was from Australia.
What was the main source of his sucess both PvT and PvZ? HT/reaver drops on workers! Yeah, I rarely see worker raids by the protoss anymore. No pressure whatsoever on the zerg. Never forces them to multitask.
True. Storm drops have gone out of style or something. However, I think this is primarily because the focus has shifted from late game ZvP to midgame ZvP.
When late game ZvP does happen though, it has become much more action packed. What's happened is that Protoss generally needs all of their templar for either Archons or to defend expansions, and they don't have any to send out to storm drop.
Another problem is that a lot of maps nowadays aren't conducive to storm drops. If you think about Desti and HBR, the mains are big enough such that a storm drop can be seen coming from a mile away. Compare this to Python where the mineral line is much closer to the cliff, and the natural borders unbuildable area. Outsider is an obvious exception, but you've seen storm drops (or natural denial) more often on that map.
|
I believe in the pro-scene that not only the predictability of protoss builds but also the inability to harass early game for toss because of the ease of sunkening up...
So the zerg ability to transition extremely fast makes it very difficult for toss to respond.
For instance, the zerg player doen't see a starport going up, makes mutas and does damage and mantains map control for a while against the toss. On the other hand, the zerg player sees a starport and has a overlord attacked by a corsair, he switches to 4 hatch hydra instead, making the toss's investment in a starport pretty useless.
|
On September 27 2009 04:21 [X]Ken_D wrote:
Lately, Terran are getting stomp by Protoss in TvP except for a selected few (Flash, Fantasy, Leta).
T>Z>P≥T
It usually always been that way, but now it seems more apparent than before.
Fixed
|
Sickest and PvZ i´ve seen in a while, also very innovative: Shauni vs iNcontrol. The game is amazing i recommend it: GeT.Shauni (tasukete) vs EG.iNcontrol
I´d love to see more builds like that being used at pro lvl. = )
|
Mystlord
United States10264 Posts
On September 27 2009 12:52 Traveler wrote:
I believe in the pro-scene that not only the predictability of protoss builds but also the inability to harass early game for toss because of the ease of sunkening up...
So the zerg ability to transition extremely fast makes it very difficult for toss to respond.
For instance, the zerg player doen't see a starport going up, makes mutas and does damage and mantains map control for a while against the toss. On the other hand, the zerg player sees a starport and has a overlord attacked by a corsair, he switches to 4 hatch hydra instead, making the toss's investment in a starport pretty useless.
That's not really a proper example. If Protoss doesn't get a Stargate, then Protoss would have to be going for a +1 speedlot rush, which means that Zerg needs to keep his Mutalisks at home to fend the Speedlots off unless he wants to lose all of his Drones. If Zerg sees a Starport, then you'd need a spire for Scourge anyway unless you want to reduce your Hydralisk army by 6 to defend your Overlords.
|
Part of the problem with Protoss economy harass is that over the years T and Z pro players have gotten too good at microing their workers away from both storms and scarabs, so P harass has been getting less and less effectual over time. Meanwhile, muta control has only gotten better and better.
|
On September 27 2009 15:06 gravity wrote:
Part of the problem with Protoss economy harass is that over the years T and Z pro players have gotten too good at microing their workers away from both storms and scarabs, so P harass has been getting less and less effectual over time. Meanwhile, muta control has only gotten better and better.
lol I just read this in my Zerg bias as "protoss players havent gotten any better over the years while Zerg have just gotten better and better."
|
On September 27 2009 14:04 Mystlord wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2009 12:52 Traveler wrote:
I believe in the pro-scene that not only the predictability of protoss builds but also the inability to harass early game for toss because of the ease of sunkening up...
So the zerg ability to transition extremely fast makes it very difficult for toss to respond.
For instance, the zerg player doen't see a starport going up, makes mutas and does damage and mantains map control for a while against the toss. On the other hand, the zerg player sees a starport and has a overlord attacked by a corsair, he switches to 4 hatch hydra instead, making the toss's investment in a starport pretty useless. That's not really a proper example. If Protoss doesn't get a Stargate, then Protoss would have to be going for a +1 speedlot rush, which means that Zerg needs to keep his Mutalisks at home to fend the Speedlots off unless he wants to lose all of his Drones. If Zerg sees a Starport, then you'd need a spire for Scourge anyway unless you want to reduce your Hydralisk army by 6 to defend your Overlords.
I'm not convinced +1 speedlot is the only option. Skipping stargate puts Protoss at risk of aggressive mutalisk play (or 3hatch hydra, because it's harder to scout it) but it strengthens any early push.
On September 27 2009 15:22 Ideas wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2009 15:06 gravity wrote:
Part of the problem with Protoss economy harass is that over the years T and Z pro players have gotten too good at microing their workers away from both storms and scarabs, so P harass has been getting less and less effectual over time. Meanwhile, muta control has only gotten better and better. lol I just read this in my Zerg bias as "protoss players havent gotten any better over the years while Zerg have just gotten better and better."
Come to think of it, maybe Protoss should start dropping one worker-killer near the maynard-escape route when they raid a mineral patch. Also, instead of shooting at workers, the Protoss might consider bringing a speedlot to shoot a scarab at, and run it into position. (This puts scarab AI in the Protoss's control, instead of his opponent's control, and depending how much freedom you have with your shuttles, the unit could even be picked back up.)
|
The problem with storm drops in PvZ in general is that it's way too gas intensive. You need corsair numbers, speed shuttle, templar tech, all while trying to have enough gas units to fight the zerg army straight up. Not to metion obs if the zerg goes lurkers.
If only scarabs didn't have the most retarded AI in existence...
|
On September 27 2009 16:12 baubo wrote:
The problem with storm drops in PvZ in general is that it's way too gas intensive. You need corsair numbers, speed shuttle, templar tech, all while trying to have enough gas units to fight the zerg army straight up. Not to metion obs if the zerg goes lurkers.
If only scarabs didn't have the most retarded AI in existence...
Everything has problems. Protoss used to worker drop. Now they don't.
|
Mystlord
United States10264 Posts
On September 27 2009 15:55 Severedevil wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2009 14:04 Mystlord wrote:On September 27 2009 12:52 Traveler wrote:
I believe in the pro-scene that not only the predictability of protoss builds but also the inability to harass early game for toss because of the ease of sunkening up...
So the zerg ability to transition extremely fast makes it very difficult for toss to respond.
For instance, the zerg player doen't see a starport going up, makes mutas and does damage and mantains map control for a while against the toss. On the other hand, the zerg player sees a starport and has a overlord attacked by a corsair, he switches to 4 hatch hydra instead, making the toss's investment in a starport pretty useless. That's not really a proper example. If Protoss doesn't get a Stargate, then Protoss would have to be going for a +1 speedlot rush, which means that Zerg needs to keep his Mutalisks at home to fend the Speedlots off unless he wants to lose all of his Drones. If Zerg sees a Starport, then you'd need a spire for Scourge anyway unless you want to reduce your Hydralisk army by 6 to defend your Overlords. I'm not convinced +1 speedlot is the only option. Skipping stargate puts Protoss at risk of aggressive mutalisk play (or 3hatch hydra, because it's harder to scout it) but it strengthens any early push.
What else are you going to do that puts the initiative on the Zerg? If you don't attack the Zerg with something before Mutalisks are out, then you're pretty much stuck in your base trying to fend off Mutalisks. Although I guess 4 Gate Zealot 2 Archon might work. Just anything that pushes out fast enough to force the Zerg to stay at home with his Mutas rather than harass.
Show nested quote +On September 27 2009 15:22 Ideas wrote:On September 27 2009 15:06 gravity wrote:
Part of the problem with Protoss economy harass is that over the years T and Z pro players have gotten too good at microing their workers away from both storms and scarabs, so P harass has been getting less and less effectual over time. Meanwhile, muta control has only gotten better and better. lol I just read this in my Zerg bias as "protoss players havent gotten any better over the years while Zerg have just gotten better and better." Come to think of it, maybe Protoss should start dropping one worker-killer near the maynard-escape route when they raid a mineral patch. Also, instead of shooting at workers, the Protoss might consider bringing a speedlot to shoot a scarab at, and run it into position. (This puts scarab AI in the Protoss's control, instead of his opponent's control, and depending how much freedom you have with your shuttles, the unit could even be picked back up.)
Yeah that would be a good idea. It's just that many times that would place the shuttle at risk of detection from either camped units or the unit might just get hit by static defense. It also might alert the enemy earlier to your plan. And bringing a speedlot with the reaver requires too much micro. In fact, there's still the chance that the scarab can become a dud if it gets stuck in the workers while chasing your speedlot.
On September 27 2009 16:12 baubo wrote:
The problem with storm drops in PvZ in general is that it's way too gas intensive. You need corsair numbers, speed shuttle, templar tech, all while trying to have enough gas units to fight the zerg army straight up. Not to metion obs if the zerg goes lurkers.
If only scarabs didn't have the most retarded AI in existence...
You only need 2 templar per shuttle to get the most bang for your buck. Why do you need corsairs? Economic harassment is not a midgame tactic. It should primarily be done in the late game since you definitely shouldn't have the units to do it midgame.
|
Because any decent zerg has ovis around map + sgoures to kill shuttles. So basicly it wont work.
|
That's it im going to start making scouts to kill off overlords so they don't get free maphack. I only need G5's skill in scout control.
|
Overlords.
Zerg all-ins have a better success rate, due to denying the Protoss scout. Overlords can fly. You can't get rid of an overlord until you have a Dragoon, and by that time the zerg sees that you went 1gate, and won't spread himself too thin.
This. I have had a great success with all-in builds (smth like 16-3) this season @ Iccup. If you see toss going FE and bad simcity -> all-in -> EZ win. Why not end the game fast if you see and opportunity? I've used build that I find most succesfull to adapt in every situation depending on what my opponent does, and prevent scouting. Also I don't consider myself as a good player, by that i mean i'm not mechanically good enough to play competitively in mid- or late-game.
That's why I have to use my strategic sight early game and I find it best to do with Z. vs P it's pretty easy early game IMO.
|
On September 25 2009 17:12 motbob wrote:
ZvP is seriously imbalanced at the pro and semi-pro level. It's remarkable how that fact has sort of snuck up on us over the past few months, but it's absolutely true.
On September 25 2009 17:12 motbob wrote:
Destination used to be balanced ZvP (56-54 before Mar 1 2009). Now it is not (61-44 after).
On September 25 2009 17:12 motbob wrote:
Why is this matchup suddenly so drastically imbalanced?
First of all I don't know where you are getting your stats from, according to TLPD;
Destination is 53-52 ZvP overall
Stats from when it was first played until 2009-03-01: 32-32
From 3/1 until now: 23-20
Heartbreak is 22-19 overall for ZvP
RTOK is is 8-11 ZvP
Stats aside, assuming there really has been a 7% shift after 3/1/09, I have absolutely no idea why you would describe it as "imbalance." You don't think there has been similar trends in the past over similar sample sizes with different matchups in 10 years of progaming? Wouldn't it be infinitely more reasonable to attribute a shift as small as this to something like, new build orders or change in skill level of players? When you can find some real trends that can support your claim for imbalance, not this pussy 7% shit you're putting up right now from an unknown sample then you can speak the word "imbalance." And I really hope that goes for everyone who actually takes this issue seriously.
|
imo kespa making tons of map with a protected 3rd gas which is really lame since thats all a zerg needs while a protoss dosent need the base as bad until later on
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
On September 30 2009 13:44 zulu_nation8 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 25 2009 17:12 motbob wrote:
ZvP is seriously imbalanced at the pro and semi-pro level. It's remarkable how that fact has sort of snuck up on us over the past few months, but it's absolutely true. Show nested quote +On September 25 2009 17:12 motbob wrote:
Destination used to be balanced ZvP (56-54 before Mar 1 2009). Now it is not (61-44 after). Show nested quote +On September 25 2009 17:12 motbob wrote:
Why is this matchup suddenly so drastically imbalanced? First of all I don't know where you are getting your stats from, according to TLPD; Destination is 53-52 ZvP overall Stats from when it was first played until 2009-03-01: 32-32From 3/1 until now: 23-20 Heartbreak is 22-19 overall for ZvP RTOK is is 8-11 ZvP
I got the stats by taking all of the games from TLPD, not just the "official" ones used in TLPD statistics, but also games such as prelim or minor league games.
Stats aside, assuming there really has been a 7% shift after 3/1/09, I have absolutely no idea why you would describe it as "imbalance." You don't think there has been similar trends in the past over similar sample sizes with different matchups in 10 years of progaming? Wouldn't it be infinitely more reasonable to attribute a shift as small as this to something like, new build orders or change in skill level of players? When you can find some real trends that can support your claim for imbalance, not this pussy 7% shit you're putting up right now from an unknown sample then you can speak the word "imbalance." And I really hope that goes for everyone who actually takes this issue seriously.
This is sort of my main point. I'm trying to find the factors that might have shifted the stats 7%.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
