|
[B]On October 14 2009 22:
so if this will be the next trend of building 9 muta to snipe the templars why not let the zerg waste them on hallucinated templars ???]
Because burning the templars mana on hallu kinda defeats the purpose of keeping them alive... I think a build similar to bisus build 1st game is the answer + Show Spoiler +corsair heavy relatively early
|
10387 Posts
On October 14 2009 22:55 Ftrunkz wrote:Show nested quote +[B]On October 14 2009 22:
so if this will be the next trend of building 9 muta to snipe the templars why not let the zerg waste them on hallucinated templars ???] Because burning the templars mana on hallu kinda defeats the purpose of keeping them alive... I think a build similar to bisus build 1st game is the answer + Show Spoiler +corsair heavy relatively early that or what has been theory crafted a zillion times, DAs.
+ Show Spoiler +I might be wrong, but corsair heavy builds come in the cost of army size, which is what we saw in game 1, Bisu's rather tiny army (plus no templars)
I really think a game patch that allows you to unwarp templars from archons while it's still building would help a LOT.
|
On September 30 2009 20:17 nonduc wrote:
Jaedong vs Protosses
Total 156 games: 102–54 (65.4%)
Best Streak — 10 wins (2008.07.05–29)
Worst Streak — 4 losses (2006.12.07–2007.02.05)
Current — 3 losses
Notes — Bo3 in (round parenthesis), Bo5 in [square parenthesis]
2006.02—2006.07 / 8 games: 6–2 (84.6%) (WW) (WW) L W W L
2006.08—2007.03 / 17 games: 10–7 (58.8%) (WW) (WW) W (WLW) (LWW) L L (LL) W L
2006 Season / 25 games: 16–9 (64%)
2007.04—2007.08 27 games: 16–11 (59.3%) (LWL) W L (LWW) W W W L W W [LLWL] (WLW) (LWW) (WLW)
2007.09—2008.03 / 21 games: 15–6 (71.4%) L W L (WW) (WW) W [LWWW] W W L W L [LWWW]
2007 Season / 48 games: 31–17 (64.6%)
2008.03—2008.09 / 28 games: 23–5 (82.1%) L W W (WW) (WW) L W W [WWW] [WWW] (WW) (LWL) (WW) (WLW) (WW)
2008 Season (st half) / 28 games: 23–5 (82.1%)
2008.09—2009.03 / 34 games: 20–14 (58.8%) W L (LWL) (WW) (WLL) W L (LWL) W W L (WW) W L W W W L [LWLWW] (LWW)
2009.03—2009.09 / 21 games: 12–9 (57.1%) L (LWW) W (LWW) W L L W (WW) W L (WW) (LL) L
2008-09 Season / 55 games: 32–23 (58.2%)
Nice post, glad someone goes to stats instead of hilariously contradictory ICCUP stories from angry players.
|
muta stacking.. changed everything
|
|
|
On October 14 2009 22:16 JWD wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2009 22:08 Camlito wrote:
Ok everyone saying it's imbalanced - yes - let's say it is.
What would YOU do to change zerg that can not effect ZvT or change protoss that can not Effect PvT? Change storm to kill lurker in 1 hit? I think you're taking a much too liberal interpretation of "imbalanced", as it's used in this thread. The rational people who are saying ZvP is imbalanced right now aren't referring to some serious defect in BW (come on, everyone knows the game has great balance) but rather somewhere in the current maps, Protoss's strategic arsenal, and/or Protoss's talent pool. Nobody can deny that ZvP is extremely imbalanced right now—in the sense that Zergs are winning over 60% of their games against Protoss and dominating in all leagues. The obvious solution, as HB posted out way earlier in this thread and I'm sure has been beaten into the ground by now, is to change the maps to restore balance to the matchup. But it doesn't look like that will happen for at least another few months.
I don't think it needs patching either.
Also - 4 posts above mine was a subtle jab at a patch needed for ZvP lol.
|
konadora
Singapore66145 Posts
Protoss needs to learn that dark archons are actually effective in saving their HTs.
|
Braavos36373 Posts
Proleague 2007-2009
Race Stats (non-mirrors):
TvZ: 248-200
ZvP: 216-200
PvT: 268-235
According to this, we should be complaining about TvZ and PvT more right? But those threads don't get made because guess what, Z and T players aren't whiney emos. Amirite!!?!?
|
Russian Federation4235 Posts
On October 14 2009 22:24 d_so wrote:
i have a slightly off topic question: why did pro toss players stop using disruption web? it used to be really popular with sair reaver but even when we do see sair reaver these days there is no web
Most people use sair/reaver as an opening nowadays, not as a game model. You open sair/reaver, do some harass and then proceed with a ground army. In that scenario, wasting 500/300 to get a single upgrade isn't very economical, you could get 4 zeals and an archon for that money.
If you play sair/reaver with a dedication eventually getting carriers well then the fleet beacon is 100% justified, but with a ground switch it's in a huge question.
Now as I think about it more, getting a defensive 3rd with sair/reaver with a fast carrier switch later is not that a crazy idea considering that zergs get later and later Hive in ZvP.
|
On October 14 2009 23:19 Hot_Bid wrote:
because guess what, Z and T players aren't whiney emos. Amirite!!?!?
ZING!
Tassadar, more like TEARsadar if you ask me
|
On October 14 2009 23:05 ArvickHero wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2009 22:55 Ftrunkz wrote:[B]On October 14 2009 22:
so if this will be the next trend of building 9 muta to snipe the templars why not let the zerg waste them on hallucinated templars ???] Because burning the templars mana on hallu kinda defeats the purpose of keeping them alive... I think a build similar to bisus build 1st game is the answer + Show Spoiler +corsair heavy relatively early that or what has been theory crafted a zillion times, DAs. + Show Spoiler +I might be wrong, but corsair heavy builds come in the cost of army size, which is what we saw in game 1, Bisu's rather tiny army (plus no templars) I really think a game patch that allows you to unwarp templars from archons while it's still building would help a LOT.
+ Show Spoiler +
well considering u know the muta is coming and u cant prevent it why not out of 6 templars use 4 for hallucination and form archons make the fake move out return to base after muta engagement and rejoins with templars..... forget it i'm convinced lol
|
wait... how many protosses were in the Ro8 of GOM S2? And of the Clubday MSL Ro8?
|
On October 14 2009 23:48 Sunyveil wrote:
wait... how many protosses were in the Ro8 of GOM S2? And of the Clubday MSL Ro8?
Yes, there's been a sharp decline now that 3hatch spire --> 5hatch hydra can handle timing attacks.
|
GOM S2 and Clubday was a long time ago, man.
|
On October 14 2009 23:19 Hot_Bid wrote:
Proleague 2007-2009
Race Stats (non-mirrors):
TvZ: 248-200
ZvP: 216-200
PvT: 268-235
According to this, we should be complaining about TvZ and PvT more right? But those threads don't get made because guess what, Z and T players aren't whiney emos. Amirite!!?!?
Actually, we should only look at the most recent games. The time fram you gave is large enough and I do remember Protosses dominating everything for a while which affects the statistics.
If it was 216-160 (made up this numbers now) and now it's 216-200 for example then it might seem like P's are doing fine while in reality they don't.
We have to wait a month or two to get to any real conclusions. All the maps and meta-game must pass the "beginning of a season" unpredictability and when it goes stable we'll be able to gather enough data.
|
Braavos36373 Posts
On October 15 2009 00:03 Manit0u wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2009 23:19 Hot_Bid wrote:
Proleague 2007-2009
Race Stats (non-mirrors):
TvZ: 248-200
ZvP: 216-200
PvT: 268-235
According to this, we should be complaining about TvZ and PvT more right? But those threads don't get made because guess what, Z and T players aren't whiney emos. Amirite!!?!? Actually, we should only look at the most recent games. The time fram you gave is large enough and I do remember Protosses dominating everything for a while which affects the statistics. If it was 216-160 (made up this numbers now) and now it's 216-200 for example then it might seem like P's are doing fine while in reality they don't. We have to wait a month or two to get to any real conclusions. All the maps and meta-game must pass the "beginning of a season" unpredictability and when it goes stable we'll be able to gather enough data.
Well, we all know it goes in cycles, if it comes out even after 2 years, doesn't that support the idea that the recent Z>P trend is just temporary?
|
United States10774 Posts
On October 14 2009 23:25 keV. wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2009 23:19 Hot_Bid wrote:
because guess what, Z and T players aren't whiney emos. Amirite!!?!? ZING! Tassadar, more like TEARsadar if you ask me
ZING terran and zerg players cry the most
|
It most likely is. Never said anything else.
Some people just panic too much ^_^
Edit: In reply to Hot_Bid.
|
On September 30 2009 16:04 MaGic~PhiL wrote:
The statement ZvP is imbalanced is plain and simply wrong.
Everyone who played this game long enough and has a clue about it knows: A match up is never imbalanced. It is never the match up.
Its always the map. You can create maps where P>>Z and maps where Z>>P. The problem is, to get a map that brings u equally good results in terms of balance with all three match ups. A map that is fair in PvT and TvZ often lacks in PvZ and vice versa..
So i can always laugh and will always laugh about the people who say Z>>P or PvZ is a hard match up...
It depends on the maps. It might be a fact that the maps right now are favouring zerg, or that the maps suite the style of the modern zergs better ect..
It might be close to impossible to make balanced maps for each match up but it sometimes happens..
Additionally u would have to look at much much more pro games to be able to analyze if Z>P. Even if u had a big enoug samplesize it would still be almost impossible to clearly say a match up favours a certain race, because every gamer is so individual and even though not many can play PvZ like e.g. Bisu can its still a fact that PvZ CAN BE PLAYED THAT GOOD / THAT WAY. So basicaly all the imbalance talk is bull shit.
1) How hard a match up is, has always depended on the maps and always will
2) We have by far too few games played on maps to make a certain statement
3) Most people not being capable of winning PvZ on Iccup and losing this mu most of the time
--> does not <-- make it imabalanced
4) You would need both players to play the perfect game to be able to analyze wether its balanced or not.. thats impossible..
all about maps, individual style and certain players, coincidence, ect...
not imbalance..
!
since it was the last post of a page and many might have missed it..
a match up IS NOT IMBALANCED
|
On October 14 2009 23:05 ArvickHero wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2009 22:55 Ftrunkz wrote:[B]On October 14 2009 22:
so if this will be the next trend of building 9 muta to snipe the templars why not let the zerg waste them on hallucinated templars ???] Because burning the templars mana on hallu kinda defeats the purpose of keeping them alive... I think a build similar to bisus build 1st game is the answer + Show Spoiler +corsair heavy relatively early that or what has been theory crafted a zillion times, DAs. + Show Spoiler +I might be wrong, but corsair heavy builds come in the cost of army size, which is what we saw in game 1, Bisu's rather tiny army (plus no templars) I really think a game patch that allows you to unwarp templars from archons while it's still building would help a LOT.
You can't? Since people have been glitching DTs through by morphing them. Or is this only for DA but not for Archon? In this case, that's quite dumb.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
