EPTI know he's a controversial figure here but I remember an old interview where LastShadow was talking about Bisu and he said something along the lines of "it's a shame that he wasn't a Terran", referring to how many more tourney he "could have won". All speculation, but still.
Why protoss always underperforms on pro level? - Page 7
| Forum Index > BW General |
|
Akio
Finland1838 Posts
I know he's a controversial figure here but I remember an old interview where LastShadow was talking about Bisu and he said something along the lines of "it's a shame that he wasn't a Terran", referring to how many more tourney he "could have won". All speculation, but still. | ||
|
Giovanni8
57 Posts
| ||
|
Severedevil
United States4839 Posts
| ||
|
TMNT
3112 Posts
It's a PvZ that Soulkey opens with 9 pool and Snow not only holds it perfectly with just zealots, but also is able to delay his cannon until after 5 mins. In other matchups if you have something equivalent to that, the leading player should be able to comfortably cruise through. But not in PvZ. What follows up is Snow hanging on by a thread with probes being pulled left and right, while Soulkey attempts multiple semi all-ins and switches back and forth between Hydras and Mutas at will, to the point that Snow falls behind in supplies at multiple points. And it's not like Snow makes some cheap mistakes (like losing corsairs or zealots for free) to let the game go to that point. Of course in doing so, Soulkey's econ is not the healthiest. But the fact that he could have won the game if not for some clutch defending from Snow, and after that opening, highlights how the flexibility of Zerg's BO in this matchup (and the lack of information for Protoss) makes it the most problematic matchup in the game. | ||
|
mtcn77
Turkey645 Posts
On January 16 2025 05:06 TMNT wrote: Saw the last game of Major Proleague today and thought about this topic. It's a PvZ that Soulkey opens with 9 pool and Snow not only holds it perfectly with just zealots, but also is able to delay his cannon until after 5 mins. In other matchups if you have something equivalent to that, the leading player should be able to comfortably cruise through. But not in PvZ. What follows up is Snow hanging on by a thread with probes being pulled left and right, while Soulkey attempts multiple semi all-ins and switches back and forth between Hydras and Mutas at will, to the point that Snow falls behind in supplies at multiple points. And it's not like Snow makes some cheap mistakes (like losing corsairs or zealots for free) to let the game go to that point. Of course in doing so, Soulkey's econ is not the healthiest. But the fact that he could have won the game if not for some clutch defending from Snow, and after that opening, highlights how the flexibility of Zerg's BO in this matchup (and the lack of information for Protoss) makes it the most problematic matchup in the game. I think this point is understated. In high level ZvP once protoss starts playing safe, it is the zerg's prerogative to mix up the balance by coordinating hydralisks and mutalisks while the dragoons are distracted by mutalisks to attack with the hydralisks. Mutalisks take much more shots than hydralisks since they have twice the health pool vs dragoons(120*2 vs 80*1.5) eventhough hydralisks deal twice the damage. It can even be stated it is slightly disadvantaged to engage the protoss with hydralisks alone since they don't tank well. | ||
|
Severedevil
United States4839 Posts
Terran can defend itself and threaten Zerg with just academy+ebay, using medic/marine/turret/upgrade. This early strength restricts the Zerg's growth and provides safety against Zerg all-ins. (Terran eventually needs higher-tech units, but not until much later.) The Protoss equivalent is zealot/dragoon/cannon/upgrade, which is not effective since dragoon DPS is so low against zerg's light/medium units. Protoss has to tech higher to compete, leaving a wider window where Zerg can attack or power. Protoss also has to buy anti-muta and anti-hydra units separately since the dragoon is trash at both roles, leaving Protoss vulnerable to Zerg's ability to rapidly shift composition. | ||
|
mtcn77
Turkey645 Posts
On January 17 2025 12:54 Severedevil wrote: The dragoon is trash in PvZ and it leaves a gaping hole in Protoss's early game. Terran can defend itself and threaten Zerg with just academy+ebay, using medic/marine/turret/upgrade. This early strength restricts the Zerg's growth and provides safety against Zerg all-ins. (Terran eventually needs higher-tech units, but not until much later.) The Protoss equivalent is zealot/dragoon/cannon/upgrade, which is not effective since dragoon DPS is so low against zerg's light/medium units. Protoss has to tech higher to compete, leaving a wider window where Zerg can attack or power. Protoss also has to buy anti-muta and anti-hydra units separately since the dragoon is trash at both roles, leaving Protoss vulnerable to Zerg's ability to rapidly shift composition. I think we are talking about the midgame since you need a heavy investment to make hydralisks work. We are talking about gas harvesting for one thing. I think there is more to rapid shifting compositions. The protoss is behind in expansions when playing against zerg. That should cause a divide how protoss and zerg plays out the game while expanding. I was thinking this morning - what are the opportunity costs to an expansion and how does it translate to a fully developed expansion and I got some numbers extrapolating from the ideal mining thread, as I usually do. So, in order to fully mine a base near ~3x saturation, the number I go for that really simplifies the control count is 25 drones from 1 hatchery and 3 Overlords. That gives 1.5 units of mineral harvesting. 2x saturation, about 17 drones for 9 mineral patches, gives '1' unit of mining(which is equal to 799-800 mineral/m) and single unit saturation is 9 drones equal to 0.75 units of mining. The jist of it is how many expansions that have 3x 2x and x many drones have equal harvesting rate and that number comes down to three 3x expansions are equal to four 2x expansions which are themselves equal to six 1x expansions. I really didn't think anybody would need so many expansions since we are human, but from a 'digital perspective' if you are going to mine minerals with 75 drones, it is better to do it from 6 bases since they cost less. That is right: 75 drones, 9 overlords, 3 hatcheries cost 5700 minerals to set up three fully mining(3x) expansions whereas four 2x expansions cost 5600 while 6 1x expansions cost 5400. 10 mineral patch bases fix this since they take less to make up for the cost when every bit counts. I think terrans and protoss have it easy to produce more SCVs and probes in their bases while zerg needs more time to make drones. Therefore it fits into the protoss strategy to fully saturate bases while zerg should take risks and expand more. All this to say, if both sides are playing accordingly, I think the zerg should be exposed, not the other way around. There have been disbelief I said 2 gate is the way, but never intended it as a single path to victory. The zerg has to slip up, you don't always face rapidly expanding zerg, nor are the maps so small, but when the opportunity is there I think protoss should play micro and not dismiss it when to play aggressive. Let's not forget the balance of power between different strategies - aggressive>economy>defensive>aggressive... PS: I just noticed Protoss Nexus comes with a higher supply count effectively costing the Protoss 1 pylon less. Therefore three 3x expansions cost 5550, four 2x expansions cost 5400, six 1x expansions costs 5100! The same can be said for Terrans, too. PS2: I thought about terrans some more. I think the extra supply is for the SCV catching up with the supply depots requirement. I really missed the call when I said nobody would need so many expansions. I thought you could keep up with 5 factories with much less. Apparently you need 1678 minerals per minute and I didn't add the cost of the SCV making the supply depots, although I added the cost of the supply depots. I did the calculation: if you are Flash, you can command the same SCV making supply depots keep up with 5 Factories making nothing but siege tanks. So, 1728 minerals per minute is required for committed 5 factory play. Two 17 SCV expansions are needed at the minimum. | ||
|
HolySmokes
56 Posts
On January 15 2025 02:26 Akio wrote: I have nothing to offer in terms of balance discussions, but I think the topic of which race is chosen when starting out to play seriously for these pros is interesting. The kids that started out and had good mechanics might have been more incentivized to play Terran rather than Protoss. I mean, the top dogs were usually Terrans in BoxeR, Nada, oov, etc. I always saw Zerg as kind of its own category because it plays out so differently than the other two. I know he's a controversial figure here but I remember an old interview where LastShadow was talking about Bisu and he said something along the lines of "it's a shame that he wasn't a Terran", referring to how many more tourney he "could have won". All speculation, but still. This is an interesting topic I never saw being talked about...a selection bias between the races and players that maybe in some way affects what kinds of players end up playing each race, and how that might shape the success each race sees. I mean, no doubt people are different, and the races are different such that some things about one race will make it more attractive to a player than another. I wonder if players with certain skillsets tend to gravitate to a certain race as a result. If for example Terran indeed attracts a certain type of player, then it can be understood why Terran has had a lot of successful players. | ||
|
Severedevil
United States4839 Posts
On January 10 2025 08:29 mtcn77 wrote: I just wanted to point out, there is an inconsistency. 2 gate is a response to hatchery first, not 9 pool. 2 gate is stronger against 9 pool than against 12 hatch 11 pool. 2 gate isn't fast enough to break a 12 hatch before the second hatch kicks in, and the 12 hatch's extra production is a bigger threat than the 9 pool's earlier Zerglings. 2 gate 1 nexus will outproduce and out-mine a single hatchery, but two hatcheries will outproduce and out-mine 2 gate 1 nexus if the Zerg gets any space. (A 9 pool's early 6 Zerglings will of course eat Protoss's 1 zealot if the Protoss tries attacking with the first zealot, but if the Protoss instead builds up 3-5 zealots before attacking then the 9 pool Zerg will struggle to keep up with the 2 gate 1 nexus's greater production.) | ||
|
mtcn77
Turkey645 Posts
On January 18 2025 19:11 Severedevil wrote: 2 gate is stronger against 9 pool than against 12 hatch 11 pool. 2 gate isn't fast enough to break a 12 hatch before the second hatch kicks in, and the 12 hatch's extra production is a bigger threat than the 9 pool's earlier Zerglings. 2 gate 1 nexus will outproduce and out-mine a single hatchery, but two hatcheries will outproduce and out-mine 2 gate 1 nexus if the Zerg gets any space. (A 9 pool's early 6 Zerglings will of course eat Protoss's 1 zealot if the Protoss tries attacking with the first zealot, but if the Protoss instead builds up 3-5 zealots before attacking then the 9 pool Zerg will struggle to keep up with the 2 gate 1 nexus's greater production.) Well, if you are not going to use the gateways, you should FE, of course. I still don't get it. Hatcheries produce larvae at every 12.6 second interval. Gateways make zealots every 25.2 seconds. Nexuses are the same as a hatchery. How can the zerg outproduce the protoss? Suppose zerg makes 12 hatch 11 pool - there is a 75 second build time until he can use the second hatchery. Any protoss can make two gateways before that which complete in half the time. You really don't need more than 11 probes to stick it to the zerg. | ||
|
Severedevil
United States4839 Posts
Hatcheries produce larvae at every 12.6 second interval. Gateways make zealots every 25.2 seconds. Nexuses are the same as a hatchery. How can the zerg outproduce the protoss? A hatchery produces four zerglings in the time a gate produces one zealot. Four zerglings is stronger than one zealot in a direct fight (except in tight spaces) and is far more maneuverable (can cut off reinforcements or counter). Additionally, a 12 hatch opening has extra minerals to spend on sunkens or a third hatch or on tech. The Zerg doesn't stall out at two hatch slowling vs two gate slowlot. | ||
|
mtcn77
Turkey645 Posts
On January 19 2025 07:09 Severedevil wrote: Gateways come online faster than the hatch/pool, but the gateways aren't at the Zerg's base. If Protoss wants to attack, those slowlots have to slowly cross the map, which gives Zerg (and defenders in general) significant extra time to build units. I agree that 12 hatch would die to 2 gate on a map with no travel distance. A hatchery produces four zerglings in the time a gate produces one zealot. Four zerglings is stronger than one zealot in a direct fight (except in tight spaces) and is far more maneuverable (can cut off reinforcements or counter). Additionally, a 12 hatch opening has extra minerals to spend on sunkens or a third hatch or on tech. The Zerg doesn't stall out at two hatch slowling vs two gate slowlot. I don't know the exact timing, but suppose the protoss makes 2 gateways at 11 and zerg makes hatchery at 12 and swarming pool at 11 - there is a 12.6+75-38-25.2=24.4 seconds delay until the second hatchery is laid until which the zerg just sits and waits the zealots to arrive. They travel 72 units distance during this time. Also the first zergling can only be spawned 12.6+50-38-25.2=-0.6 seconds before the first zealots. However there is a catch, the protoss only has to invest 500 for 2 zealots included. The zerg has to invest 600 AND pay for the larvae from the hatchery to make zerglings with time away from droning. That is by itself the economic defeat protoss wants to entrap the zerg in order to win in the early game - do you recall the recent Queen vs Flash game? Queen used zerglings to corner the terran and while Flash was making bunkers, rapidly shifted to economy behind closed doors and that developed into a massive advantage. Only in this case the protoss doesn't even have to expand to get ahead. Zerg making zerglings from a single base vs 2gate is THE death spiral, even zerg from two bases vs 2gate is still THE death spiral since the zerg cannot drone during this time while the protoss can. The protoss should intimidate, but never engage the zerg. The goal is to force zerglings, never to force engagements because engagements limit how many zerglings ultimately need to be made. Remember zerg has to make 18 drones while protoss just has to make 11 probes... | ||
|
Soulforged
Latvia935 Posts
| ||
Peeano
Netherlands5198 Posts
1. The general consensus is that Protoss has an uphill battle vs Zerg because Zerg has an easier time to ramp-up. 2. Lack of info and Dragoons, slow Zealots and Cannons suck too hard vs Zerg. Now if I further dumb down the match up: How can Protoss reach mid game without dying? Snowball early or have intel to tech safely. What does Protoss need to survive? Intel. How does Protoss get intel? Probe scout, pressure, sair, (leg zeal, obs) Why is reaching mid game key? This is where Protoss has a short but big power spike. \What happens after? The graphs swings the other way again until late late game* where IMHO it depends a lot on the experience and intelligence of the players who wins a game of starvation. Why was Bisu the best PvZer ever? He was the best at keeping his probe/sair alive and multi-task. Why does multi-task matter here? Ultimately it's all about getting the better trade offs where you can survive a counterattack whilst keeping the advantage gained. Continue/repeat this process until you win or are far enough ahead where you can brute force a victory. How do we get better trade offs more easily? Create distraction. How do we get faster trade offs? DPS. What DPS do we have? Zealots with +1 attack advantage over carapace melt zerglings. DT 1 swipes drones/larva/lings (without alerting Zerg!) Splash (Storm/Archon/Reaver) can be completely nuts. 1 Sair flok can melt zerg air. What do we need to get DPS? Tech. What do we need for Tech? Resources. How do we get more resources? Expand. Now why was  Bisu more successful at PvZ than other Protosses?On top of understanding the match up really well, he was the best at multi-task. This allowed him to get Intel, to tech safely, to use DPS efficiently. Bisu is old. Why is MIni (arguably) better at PvZ than Snow?Mini has better multitask and his unpredictability and willingness to take risk in cutting corners can help a lot in best ofs. Because Mini's willingness to use various build orders and cut corners he also has a better understanding of when he can get away with it. This playstyle has a turn side as it can make him completely crumble late game when his mind set is all in on finishing before the power spike moment drops off. This mid game power spike is what? https://tl.net/forum/brood-war/617209-data-analysis-on-8-million-games If Z>P then why do a lot of foreign Zergs keep crying about PvZ? It really sucks to get owned by DPS. Closing thoughts: *I'm much interested seeing combined graphs of several high MMR players who defy the PvZ graph and all have good winrate after 20 minutes. How do they transition after the powerspike? Does their graph even have the general power spike? Also how do the graphs of the last 100 PvZ vs proplayers of Bisu, Snow & Mini look side by side. Finally I've conditioned myself to believe the following, but I have no facts to back it up so it may be complete bs lol. - Bisu is weak to by.hero because he doesn't punish his early greed. - Mini on the other hand is not, because he punishes early greed like no other. | ||
|
Bonyth
Poland593 Posts
mtcn77, you are not right. | ||
|
sas.Sziky
Hungary331 Posts
On January 20 2025 23:10 Bonyth wrote: damn Peeano, conceptual MMR easily 2500+ mtcn77, you are not right. anyone is right in this topic ? or basically? :D | ||
|
Peeano
Netherlands5198 Posts
On January 20 2025 23:10 Bonyth wrote: damn Peeano, conceptual MMR easily 2500+ Forever conceptual. I'm happy enough believing if I had time to play BW I can at least reach S rank Protoss and beat a certain conceptual 2400 T player, so I'm glad you believe that too. | ||
|
mtcn77
Turkey645 Posts
On January 20 2025 23:10 Bonyth wrote: damn Peeano, conceptual MMR easily 2500+ mtcn77, you are not right. Hold on, I'm trying to find the jinjin5000 video of Bisu explaining why you play protoss. It is some sort of zealot rush PvZ. Why am I so forgetful... Edit: I found it. Why do you play protoss questions Bisu laughing hysterically while bullying zerg into submission. Also, if you watch Bisu play against Terror, the second game is literally the same game plan. He doesn't even proxy gate and zerg only digs a bigger hole by making zerglings, like I said. Roll to 3:15. | ||
|
mtcn77
Turkey645 Posts
First, 9 probe bases are 850. No other race starts a new expansion for 850. The terran has to occupy an SCV, the zerg has to give up a drone to make a hatchery. Only the Protoss. Second, zerg is touted as the fastest expanding race. That is because they are the SLOWEST economically scaling race if you don't get the expansions. I did the calculation. In order to mine 3200 minerals per minute(least common multiple), zerg has to pay 5400 for 6 hatcheries with 9 drones. Guess how much it is for protoss, 5100! There is no way you guys are playing protoss as bisu and mini are intended to play. Just think out of the box. The recent Rich vs Flash victory should give you all the stimulus, just play to the terrain(albeit Artosis was calling it a protoss favoured map, though nobody forced Flash to pursue a flaunting attack). | ||
|
QRCode
United States36 Posts
Terran and Zerg don't have units as stupid as the dragoon and reaver/scarab. You got marines and hydras that get straight to business with their shots, then dumbass goons that can't walk around and throw snowballs that are constantly wasted. Or a stupid ass tech tree with a horribly designed unit in the scout with a literal useless upgrade. It's painfully obvious Protoss is the least fully fleshed out in their design. Just scratching the surface. Anything else is just bias and exercise of delusion. It's not a "skill issue." Anyone thinking they would be just as successful if they played Protoss probably likes the smell of their own farts as well. Flash, the egotistical liar, claiming Protoss never had a bonjwa because of "skill." Switch to Protoss, not random, like a real man and prove it. Oh wait, you're too busy lying about your crypto and blaming your mom. Lol. Light also said something similar. He'd switch to Protoss and do well. Hmm, hadn't seen that happen. I think we all know why. | ||
| ||
