|
On October 19 2009 09:34 Noah wrote:
ZvP isn't imbalanced, the current map pool is.
The metagame changes constantly, a year ago Protoss was dominating everything. It's inevitably that one day a Protoss will find a good counter to the mass hydras followed by the HT sniping.
Everyone crying about this has no sense of Starcraft history.
What map elements make it imbalanced then? And why exactly are they losing on EVERY map? Its been shown by stats that a previously considered 'balanced' map such as Destination has got just as bad stats for PvZ for the last few months as everything else. Its not the maps. Theres no sign of a metagame change happening yet although its possible maybe with the help of DAs like people have been saying. History doesn't matter because there is not unlimited innovation possible in the game.
You know it is infact possible, although nobody likes to hear it, that 5hatch hydra with HT sniping is slightly imbalanced and overly difficult to stop in a straight-up game (at this very high pro level of course). I know people will immediately get defensive about it insisting the game will always be balanced but it IS POSSIBLE. Keep in mind when they balanced the game they probably didn't have in mind Zerg players who would have such high skill levels in the future and be able to do what they are doing now. We are reaching high level play by many Zergs that has not been before, prehaps excluding a few brilliant games by certain players.
|
Personally, I see a lot of potential in the "Forge FE into 2-gate Speedlots" build. It seems to hit the vulnerable point in the 3-hatch Spire/5-hatch Hydra build and buys the Protoss valuable time. However, it is possible I am overestimating the build or that the build is still not refined since Protoss are still losing in general.
|
10387 Posts
On October 19 2009 11:15 infinity2k9 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2009 09:34 Noah wrote:
ZvP isn't imbalanced, the current map pool is.
The metagame changes constantly, a year ago Protoss was dominating everything. It's inevitably that one day a Protoss will find a good counter to the mass hydras followed by the HT sniping.
Everyone crying about this has no sense of Starcraft history. What map elements make it imbalanced then? And why exactly are they losing on EVERY map? Its been shown by stats that a previously considered 'balanced' map such as Destination has got just as bad stats for PvZ for the last few months as everything else. Its not the maps. Theres no sign of a metagame change happening yet although its possible maybe with the help of DAs like people have been saying. History doesn't matter because there is not unlimited innovation possible in the game. You know it is infact possible, although nobody likes to hear it, that 5hatch hydra with HT sniping is slightly imbalanced and overly difficult to stop in a straight-up game (at this very high pro level of course). I know people will immediately get defensive about it insisting the game will always be balanced but it IS POSSIBLE. Keep in mind when they balanced the game they probably didn't have in mind Zerg players who would have such high skill levels in the future and be able to do what they are doing now. We are reaching high level play by many Zergs that has not been before, prehaps excluding a few brilliant games by certain players.
Take note that of the current map pool its Match Point that has the most balanced PvZ, due to the third being taken is a mineral expo instead of a gas expo. Zergs have learned to abuse the easy third gas with an excellent BO and good simcities, with the easy third giving them enough excess gas to trade a group of mutas for several high templars while still having a huge hydra/lurker/ling army that just rolls over the Protoss army.
|
Zergs got really good at using mutas. Even after the sim-city use, it was still okay, but recently the mutas have been nonstop. Silver lining, when the protoss negates muta use, zerg almost always loses.
|
I've noticed that going lurker first has become popular lately too. They drone up more than usual and then bust out with an ungodly amount of hydras with a control group of mutas.
|
On October 19 2009 11:15 infinity2k9 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2009 09:34 Noah wrote:
ZvP isn't imbalanced, the current map pool is.
The metagame changes constantly, a year ago Protoss was dominating everything. It's inevitably that one day a Protoss will find a good counter to the mass hydras followed by the HT sniping.
Everyone crying about this has no sense of Starcraft history. What map elements make it imbalanced then? And why exactly are they losing on EVERY map? Its been shown by stats that a previously considered 'balanced' map such as Destination has got just as bad stats for PvZ for the last few months as everything else. Its not the maps. Theres no sign of a metagame change happening yet although its possible maybe with the help of DAs like people have been saying. History doesn't matter because there is not unlimited innovation possible in the game. You know it is infact possible, although nobody likes to hear it, that 5hatch hydra with HT sniping is slightly imbalanced and overly difficult to stop in a straight-up game (at this very high pro level of course). I know people will immediately get defensive about it insisting the game will always be balanced but it IS POSSIBLE. Keep in mind when they balanced the game they probably didn't have in mind Zerg players who would have such high skill levels in the future and be able to do what they are doing now. We are reaching high level play by many Zergs that has not been before, prehaps excluding a few brilliant games by certain players.
Right now you are assuming that we've reached the peak of the ZvP metagame, which is something I strongly disagree on. There's been so extremely many changes to the metagame that it's just dumb to consider the metagame we have today to be final. I admit that right now Zerg is one step ahead due to a brilliant BO, but there is no way in hell I see this situation being the same in 6 months. All it takes is for one person to spot a well concealed weakness in the currently "overpowered" Zerg tactic, and then Protoss will for sure start to give it back to the Zerg players.
The main reason for Zergs spell of dominance on this newer map pool is that almost every single map has easily taken third gas expansions for both players. This is something that the Zerg can capitalize on more than Protoss.
|
United States11393 Posts
On October 19 2009 12:12 koreasilver wrote:
I've noticed that going lurker first has become popular lately too. They drone up more than usual and then bust out with an ungodly amount of hydras with a control group of mutas.
I think that's just more due to predictability of most P's only making 1-2 sairs early game though. There's no fear of going lurker first if the P barely makes any sairs.
|
On October 15 2009 14:15 blue_arrow wrote:
i don't know if anyone has brought this up yet, but i remember reading in some coach/player interviews a couple months back about how the toss player has to prepare more than a zerg player in PvZ, so wouldn't this definately imply imbalance? unless, of course, the zerg doesn't gain anything from preparing as much as the toss, but i just don't see why that would be.
so yeah, could someone respond to this please?
also i think i found one of the interviews, it's the 08-09 PL Playoffs Winners' Coaches Interview for Samsung vs STX Day 2 (Coach January):
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=98281
Specifically these responses, including the one I mentioned, are of interest to me:
What's the reason for Jangbi and not Stork?
I was very certain STX will send Calm. Even though we have many choices for Ace, I feel he's their only Ace against us. In PvZ, the protoss has to prepare quite heavily. For this reason, I chose Jangbi. Plus Coliseum is a map Jangbi prepared for.
The maps seem to be zerg-favored
The maps last PL season were all zerg-favored. This is our biggest obstacle, because protoss is our best race. This is what I knew even when facing STX, because we're fighting an uphill battle relying on protosses.
Even though he lost yesterday, Stork came back and won today.
Even in yesterday's match, he would've won if the Nexus didn't get taken down. Of course, this is his fault. But he is in shape. And he's very important for us. Protoss players tend to be very picky about maps. But Stork isn't. This is very helpful for me as a coach.
I'm fairly certain that I've read other similar responses (also stating that toss has to prepare more than zerg in PvZ) in some other coach interview and at least 1 other player interview.
I'm not sure how much validity can be placed into a coach's/players statements regarding these issues, especially considering their positions.
Also I remember a recent WCG Stork interview which mentioned something about a (joking?) discussion with Bisu about how zerg is difficult to play against. That interview I would definately consider as lacking in validity though.
Just something to add: I personally understand that the main thing that determines racial dominance in a matchup are the trends in strategies and the condition of the race's players in a given timeframe, however, I still believe that Protoss players have a harder time maintaining and developing this dominance, especially in PvZ.
For example, Bisu's reign as best player following Savior didn't last very long, the Six dragons didn't last very long either and quickly devolved into the 'Taek-Bang Era', which now itself has seemed to have died with Stork not doing that great.
Why is this?
Is it because of a relative lack of the number/quality of Protoss strategists/innovators? (i would define july, savior?, jaedong, oov, boxer, fantasy?, flash, bisu, stork? as the capable and current strategy-makers and innovators) or do toss players just not try as hard?
Do map-makers just dislike toss dominance and thus alter maps ASAP to fit zerg and terran players whilst be slow to alter maps in favor of toss players?
Also I want to take into account that because the maps are so new, maybe the balances simply have yet to settle. Maybe the need for innovation simply hasn't been enough so far? Is PvZ actually imbalanced to the point that zerg players really can prepare less than toss players for an equal chance at winning? I don't know. Who knows?
/disunified rant
|
sc2 is almost out, lets hope its more balanced -.-
|
Yeah, because SC2 is going to be balanced as all hell when it comes out, right?
|
SC2 isn't almost out, unless you mean beta?
|
On October 19 2009 14:34 below66 wrote:
sc2 is almost out, lets hope its more balanced -.-
Beta isn't even out, and after Beta its like another 6 months or more until actual release, then another few months to balance it for professional play. since a season lasts ~3 months there are easily 3-4 more OSL's/MSL's left before SC2.
|
On October 19 2009 11:55 ArvickHero wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2009 11:15 infinity2k9 wrote:On October 19 2009 09:34 Noah wrote:
ZvP isn't imbalanced, the current map pool is.
The metagame changes constantly, a year ago Protoss was dominating everything. It's inevitably that one day a Protoss will find a good counter to the mass hydras followed by the HT sniping.
Everyone crying about this has no sense of Starcraft history. What map elements make it imbalanced then? And why exactly are they losing on EVERY map? Its been shown by stats that a previously considered 'balanced' map such as Destination has got just as bad stats for PvZ for the last few months as everything else. Its not the maps. Theres no sign of a metagame change happening yet although its possible maybe with the help of DAs like people have been saying. History doesn't matter because there is not unlimited innovation possible in the game. You know it is infact possible, although nobody likes to hear it, that 5hatch hydra with HT sniping is slightly imbalanced and overly difficult to stop in a straight-up game (at this very high pro level of course). I know people will immediately get defensive about it insisting the game will always be balanced but it IS POSSIBLE. Keep in mind when they balanced the game they probably didn't have in mind Zerg players who would have such high skill levels in the future and be able to do what they are doing now. We are reaching high level play by many Zergs that has not been before, prehaps excluding a few brilliant games by certain players. Take note that of the current map pool its Match Point that has the most balanced PvZ, due to the third being taken is a mineral expo instead of a gas expo. Zergs have learned to abuse the easy third gas with an excellent BO and good simcities, with the easy third giving them enough excess gas to trade a group of mutas for several high templars while still having a huge hydra/lurker/ling army that just rolls over the Protoss army.
I think given the current meta-game of PvZ, a hard to defend 3rd gas for zerg will definitely turn the tide. Right now, zergs can literally get away with a few lings and a sunken to defend the 3rd, using sim city to protect against the first wave of speedlots. If the 3rd gas can't easily be walled off, I'd expect zergs to be less greedy mid-game in terms of economy and play more honest.
|
Lol I missed this.
+ Show Spoiler +
But so is BeSt at PvZ. And in that case, shouldn't (from the thread's generalized point of view) FireFist have won?
|
You want us to play off 2 bases? Or 2 gases?
|
United States10774 Posts
On October 19 2009 15:05 vx70GTOJudgexv wrote:Lol I missed this. + Show Spoiler +
But so is BeSt at PvZ. And in that case, shouldn't (from the thread's generalized point of view) FireFist have won?
wait you are not serious are you lol
|
Three base Zerg appears to be stronger than two base Protoss, unless the Protoss can harass/attack to keep the drone count down... and most of the recent Zerg advancements seem to be about shutting down the timing attacks and harassment efforts. It seems to be very difficult for Protoss to move out and establish a third once the Zerg has hydra+lurker+muta with fast overlords.
So... can Protoss take their own fast third to counter the Zerg's? (Triggered upon scouting three hatch spire with the corsair, probably.)
|
United States47024 Posts
On October 19 2009 15:06 Avidkeystamper wrote:
You want us to play off 2 bases? Or 2 gases?
I'm assuming it's 2 gases. The example used was Match Point, which has a reasonable min-only 3rd, but a harder to hold 3rd gas.
|
10387 Posts
On October 19 2009 16:07 Severedevil wrote:
Three base Zerg appears to be stronger than two base Protoss, unless the Protoss can harass/attack to keep the drone count down... and most of the recent Zerg advancements seem to be about shutting down the timing attacks and harassment efforts. It seems to be very difficult for Protoss to move out and establish a third once the Zerg has hydra+lurker+muta with fast overlords.
So... can Protoss take their own fast third to counter the Zerg's? (Triggered upon scouting three hatch spire with the corsair, probably.)
fast third = dead protoss in most cases
|
With modern corsair, shuttle control, and high templar and arbiter accuracy, it seems unlikely that protoss will ever lose again. quote from chill.
as you can see the obvious mentality of modern PvZ ( in my opinion of course ) is reliant on Micro, macro, and multitasking.
templar = micro
temp drop= micro and luck
reaver sair= a butt load of multitasking
corsair = multitasking
shuttle control = micro and macro because you need stuff to up in it.
hmm micro, macro, and multitasking. well thats Bisu. now we understand PvZ. good Ps need a inherit talent not based on the game balance but the individual skill of the player in those certain KEY areas. NOT just some skill btw the ammount of skill needed will need to be a overwhelming amount of it. saying that you need a overwhelming amount of skill in those certain areas because, you need more multitasking skills than your opponent because if you both multitask at the same rate of course it will be a draw =P
therefore, it is freaking obvious why Bisu and stork are the only really well preforming protoss atm (stork is iff atm ) and the new Protoss players are looking shakeey.
Because as we all should realize talent like Bisu doesnt come around very often.
NOW on the other hand. there are far more promising players from both T and Z.
calm effort kwanro zero and RorO ( why RorO? because that son of a muta already got my anti team - 14 points are you freaking serious!!!! )
skyhigh, Canata HiyA go.go.
not saying Z and T is easier. however i am saying to play P at the highest level with the current "standard build" ( cannon FE ) it requires a extremely talented person to pull off.
Now with that out of the way. with the current maps and Builds. ( good sim city and build order ) 3 base Z is slightly stronger than 2 base P.
we can debate this all we want however at the current pro statistics i think Z has some push over the match up. due to a lot of factors.
P needs a whole new build. like the bisu build that will revolutionize the match up. in the Bisu build, it has exhausted its tech tree. DT tired it , revers tried it, scouts tried it, scouts laff, archon zealot tried it, goom temp tried it. can you name any more? carriers? thats expensive never tried it tho =) ( however plague, hydra and a butt load of scourge makes it not so favorable ) arbiters? never tried it ( takes a lot of gas which you NEED to spend on temps, they have overlords and recall is the only real advantage i see )
what i am thinking is a whole new build entirely OR making the maps P favored with a harder third, to even out the inherit 3baseZ > 2base P ( even if it is a slight > by .05% or ever .1% stronger it still counts especially with peopel with equal skill ) this is my opinion that 3 base Z is stronger than 2 base P however i think it holds some water, even itf it is very little water, or a whole damn dam.
theorycraft at its most general. fantastic aint it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
