|
Netherlands5219 Posts
On March 28 2024 01:32 MeSaber wrote:
So if most choose P as easiest to play, how come its not easiest to win with?
What if we go back to say 2005 but we had 2024 strategy/micro? Would P be 100% winrate because maps being different?
Who said it is not easiest to win with? Protoss is the easiest to beat a player of higher skill with. Executing 1a2a3a and macro, thanks to auto-building and high psi units, is easy. Easier basic army control and macro than the other 2 races.
Luck is a thing, so 100% is already impossible.
|
Starcraft is very hard for all races
Protoss probably has the easiest learning curve top to bottom for new players.
I’d argue playing Zerg probably gives you the best chance of beating someone that is overall more skilled than you due to the all in potential it has early game.
Terran has vultures
|
United States10315 Posts
At the end of the day, we all suck. Realistically, if you lose, you just played worse. None of us can really balance whine.
|
On March 28 2024 04:28 Peeano wrote:Show nested quote +On March 28 2024 01:32 MeSaber wrote:
So if most choose P as easiest to play, how come its not easiest to win with?
What if we go back to say 2005 but we had 2024 strategy/micro? Would P be 100% winrate because maps being different? Who said it is not easiest to win with? Protoss is the easiest to beat a player of higher skill with. Executing 1a2a3a and macro, thanks to auto-building and high psi units, is easy. Easier basic army control and macro than the other 2 races. Luck is a thing, so 100% is already impossible.
You're talking about PvT, not Protoss. You don't beat Zerg and Protoss players of higher skills by 1a2a3a.
Zerg is probably the easiet to beat a player of higher skill with (9 Pool speed, regardless of matchup).
|
On March 28 2024 04:28 Peeano wrote:
Who said it is not easiest to win with? Protoss is the easiest to beat a player of higher skill with. Executing 1a2a3a and macro, thanks to auto-building and high psi units, is easy. Easier basic army control and macro than the other 2 races.
Luck is a thing, so 100% is already impossible.
Many people said that, including myself.
Please do not misunderstand us, though. When i implied 'toss are not the easiest to win with, i meant at _maximum_ fathomable performance done by both players in a game, each being top-notch master of the game. Only. When players' skills are far below humanly possible max efficiency play, then sure, up until certain amount of skill - protoss are easiest to win with; exactly because they are easiest to play.
Continuing my 1-string vs 6-string guitar analogy - this really makes it simple to understand right:
- when you and me both are shitty guitar players, the one who plays 1-string guitar can perform better, because it's easier to focus on playing some neat melody on just one string; while the other would try to do 6-string thing but fail miserably because he's not skilled enough;
- but when we both are world-best guitar players, the one who plays 1-string guitar stands no chance vs 6-string guitar: 6 strings just out-perform 1-string guitar, when played by skilled enough player.
That's how _both_ people who say 'toss are easiest to win with AND people who say 'toss suck - are BOTH right, you see. It just depends on what kind of players play it.
|
Protoss is the easiest race to play and I voted that way.
I'm taking this question literally as what is the easiest race to play mechanically. If that is indeed the question, it's undeniably Protoss.
I think Protoss is strategically harder than the other races, harder to win at the highest levels, less adaptable to maps than the other races, and overall the weakest race if everyone is playing properly. But at least we have that it's mechanically the easiest race to play. I'll take that and thank god for that fact.
|
On March 28 2024 10:31 G5 wrote:
Protoss is the easiest race to play and I voted that way.
I'm taking this question literally as what is the easiest race to play mechanically. If that is indeed the question, it's undeniably Protoss.
I think Protoss is strategically harder than the other races, harder to win at the highest levels, less adaptable to maps than the other races, and overall the weakest race if everyone is playing properly. But at least we have that it's mechanically the easiest race to play. I'll take that and thank god for that fact.
Exactly so, yes. Each point's true, afaict. Very well said! o7
|
I think the arguments going "easy to play, hard to win" are faulty thinking or rather are trying to say something that is better expressed in a different or more nuanced manner.
To illustrate, if the question truly is just "easy to play" with no further qualifiers, then the conclusion should be that all the races are equally easy to play: just boot up the client, start a game and then you're playing. Success.
If the question is "easiest to play well", then you'll have to answer what that means, and imho any reasonable definition of "doing X well" will have to include looking at outcomes, i.e. whether one is successful. In many human endeavours, what success means is a complicated question, because it is a question about ends and goals (if your goal is to play a chord, it is impossibly hard to be successful with a 1-string guitar). But in competitive gaming there's one pretty clear goal: Successful playing means winning (almost by definition).
So if "easy to play" is supposed to mean "easy to play well", and "easy to play well" means "easy to win", then "it's easy to play, but hard to win" is nonsensical.
|
On March 28 2024 17:00 sophisticated wrote:
I think the arguments going "easy to play, hard to win" are faulty thinking or rather are trying to say something that is better expressed in a different or more nuanced manner.
To illustrate, if the question truly is just "easy to play" with no further qualifiers, then the conclusion should be that all the races are equally easy to play: just boot up the client, start a game and then you're playing. Success.
If the question is "easiest to play well", then you'll have to answer what that means, and imho any reasonable definition of "doing X well" will have to include looking at outcomes, i.e. whether one is successful. In many human endeavours, what success means is a complicated question, because it is a question about ends and goals (if your goal is to play a chord, it is impossibly hard to be successful with a 1-string guitar). But in competitive gaming there's one pretty clear goal: Successful playing means winning (almost by definition).
So if "easy to play" is supposed to mean "easy to play well", and "easy to play well" means "easy to win", then "it's easy to play, but hard to win" is nonsensical.
You can be successful with Protoss even if you just have the knowledge of what to do without the mechanics
it's impossible to be good at Zerg without knowing how to micro mutas well, it's just not something you can reach S rank with
while I personally know an S rank player who can't even micro a probe to stay alive in someone's base (his apm is a blistering 120)
|
i dont know, i played toss alot till ~2010 and switch to t when remastered dropped.
first i thought, t rly might be harder but after learning a simple FD-Build i started winning against toss on a pretty regular basis and the goliath build fixed my mixed results in TvZ.
But dont worry fellow terrans, i wont repeat anything blasphemic like this ever again. Terran ofcourse is the weakest and hardest race at the same time and winning is impossible if you aren't leagues above your opponent skillwise.
|
On March 28 2024 21:24 [AS]Rattus wrote:
i dont know, i played toss alot till ~2010 and switch to t when remastered dropped.
first i thought, t rly might be harder but after learning a simple FD-Build i started winning against toss on a pretty regular basis and the goliath build fixed my mixed results in TvZ.
But dont worry fellow terrans, i wont repeat anything blasphemic like this ever again. Terran ofcourse is the weakest and hardest race at the same time and winning is impossible if you aren't leagues above your opponent skillwise.
goliath build is kinda cheating tho, it's essentially playing terran as if it was protoss. takes skill out of it and just hits a timing, do or die
|
On March 28 2024 17:00 sophisticated wrote:...
To illustrate, if the question truly is just "easy to play" with no further qualifiers, then the conclusion should be that all the races are equally easy to play: just boot up the client, start a game and then you're playing. Success.
...
Nope, not playing yet. If i pick up a table tennis racket and stand near the table - i'm not playing table tennis yet. If i pick up a golf club and walk into a golf course, i'm not playing golf yet. Gotta perform actions ("per minute") to play any game, and these actions must have meaning within game's rules. Ain't golf if instead of hitting the ball with the club - i kick it with my foot, right? Ain't a game of starcraft if all i do is running circles in my base with a single probe, right?
Rules and restrictions any game is defined by - can be easier or harder to understand and perform _any_ well. That's the meaning of the OP question to me: he asked which race' features and quirks is least difficult to understand and perform.
|
This poll is amusing and unsurprising.
|
Bisutopia19307 Posts
If you had to 1v5 comp stomp, you’d pick Terran and spam tanks right. What’s your comp stomp race? Cause then I think that answers the easiest question.
|
U click C, and click iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
|
|
|
So time passes faster for flash?
|
the graph represents 3 equally talented players who chose zerg, terran and protoss
but of course u're free to interpret it as you like!
|
On March 29 2024 00:50 Bonyth wrote:
the graph represents 3 equally talented players who chose zerg, terran and protoss
but of course u're free to interpret it as you like!
dont u think ur a good example of someone who wouldnt follow the path of that graph as basically 300 apm and multitask is required for the other races a lot more than clicking probes with mouse and sending them to minerals after you've accumulated 5 while microing zealots to the maximum of their potential (and being one of the best at it)
|
On March 29 2024 00:50 Bonyth wrote:
the graph represents 3 equally talented players who chose zerg, terran and protoss
but of course u're free to interpret it as you like!
Id place all three curves much closer near the end of that graph with protoss at top as SnOw.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://i.ibb.co/NT6VrN4/SC-graph.png)
