|
On November 03 2010 06:35 emc wrote:
Toss:
observer = cloaked unit, very hard to spot even with keen eyes
Terran:
Raven = easy to spot, very expensive and late game
Scan = terran loses mule ability with this
Zerg:
Overseer = has to give up gas and also risk losing supply
I don't see how toss can complain, an observer will generally stay alive longer and can scout in bases without risk of dying (most of the time). It can also follow armies and watch chokes, something ravens and overseers cannot do. Zerg has to risk losing supply for sending out overseers, they have changelings to follow armies but any competent player will see if they can't control the unit then it's fake. Terran probably has it the worst, they have an easy scan but at the cost of mules which are the equivalent of larve injects and chrono boosts, something you can't waste. Toss has the best detection unit (and also the best static D, photon cannons which shoot air and ground and detects) that is more than just detection, it can cloak and follow armies and do everything the terran and zerg can but all in one.
Maybe that was a balance discussion, but think of it as a rant.
wait what? Terran has the easiest time since they can just make a rax and float it over your base if they don't want to "waste" OC energy. Zerg is next with changeling and sac'ing an overlord. Toss has it worst since your only option is observer. Obs are slow and expensive. A lot of timing pushes come earlier than the scouting information you get from a obs, especially on maps like Shakuras and cross Metalopolis.
The bigger problem is that playing safe as Protoss requires competing interests. You need DPS(eg immortals/colossus/templar), you also need anti-air (stalkers) and detection (observers) and need to upgrade gateway units so that they aren't horrible (charge/blink). Zerg/Terran can play it safe because they have better scouting as well as more generalist units.
The problem, IMO, is the stalker is either too expensive or too weak. There are very few units the stalker beats for cost and those units aren't meant for frontline combat. It's the worst harasser in the game. Take 8 stalkers and attack a mineral line. Now take 8 stimmed marines and attack a mineral line. It has good mobility, but that same mobility ends up blocking immortals and zealots from getting into the fight. Blizzard needs to pick a role and stick with it. The dragoon was a strictly meat unit. The stalker is a hellion/roach rolled into one, except with all the disadvantages and none of the advantages.
|
Protoss's main problem is a lack of mobility. Zerg has very fast mobile units (speedlings, mutas) as well as easily available dropships and Nydus. Terran has stim and good dropships. Protoss just has nothing except warp prisms, blink stalkers, and I guess pheonixes.
Blink stalkers are pretty good and many pros rely on them, but you can only do so much by massing 1 unit. Their large size means they can't concentrate DPS the way marines or mutas can. Warp prisms are awesome in theory but are almost never used, I guess they need more health. Pheonixes are super fast and good at sniping single units like queens, but once they run out of energy you just have a useless low DPS expensive aerial scout.
Anyway, pro level tactics and micro depends on mobility, so the slowest race is usually going to be at a disadvantage.
|
someone mentioned the idea of 100 energy scan type ability for the sentry. i like that idea a lot as this would allow quicker templar tech route instead of having to go the robo build all the time.
|
On November 03 2010 06:35 emc wrote:
Toss:
observer = cloaked unit, very hard to spot even with keen eyes
Terran:
Raven = easy to spot, very expensive and late game
Scan = terran loses mule ability with this
Zerg:
Overseer = has to give up gas and also risk losing supply
I don't see how toss can complain, an observer will generally stay alive longer and can scout in bases without risk of dying (most of the time). It can also follow armies and watch chokes, something ravens and overseers cannot do. Zerg has to risk losing supply for sending out overseers, they have changelings to follow armies but any competent player will see if they can't control the unit then it's fake. Terran probably has it the worst, they have an easy scan but at the cost of mules which are the equivalent of larve injects and chrono boosts, something you can't waste. Toss has the best detection unit (and also the best static D, photon cannons which shoot air and ground and detects) that is more than just detection, it can cloak and follow armies and do everything the terran and zerg can but all in one.
Maybe that was a balance discussion, but think of it as a rant.
Nobody has said the observer is a bad unit in comparison with the other scouts/abilities? The problem (as has been said countless times if you read the post) is the tech tree in which it's located. It's not easy to get Robotics then swap to SG or Templar without chasing the game for its entirety.
|
On November 03 2010 06:34 Darksoldierr wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2010 05:58 Raiden X wrote:On November 03 2010 05:47 Grond wrote:On November 03 2010 05:38 Endorsed wrote:
Seriously? There were certain impossible to stop void ray timing pushes. Even if you blindly prepared for them, void ray got nerfed. 2/4 gate is one of the easiest things to do to get you in diamond. Learn other builds.. By the way, they are going to nerf storm. $20 they nerf Stim first. Stim was already nerfed since BW. Look it up So does storm since BW. Look it up
1) What does that have to do with Stim?
2) The nerf was needed because BW storm made bio un viable(Which if it were un nerfed Terran would have nothing because Protoss are the anti-mech race). Plus units clump more so the radius isn't really that huge of a deal since you killing more then you would in BW. If you actually played BW. 
|
Correlation =/= causation.
False logic: "If Protoss are not winning matches in high-level tournaments, it must be because of race imbalance."
In actuality it can be any number of things, right down to the Protoss player forgetting to eat his Wheaties that day. If you want to blame something, blame NEXGenius for being an arrogant prick and not practicing like he should be.
+ Show Spoiler +He claimed that Protoss was the best race and that he only had to play 20 games a day to beat his opponents. He was promptly roflstomped by a player who had actually practiced for his match.
|
On November 03 2010 06:54 Archduke wrote:Correlation =/= causation. False logic: "If Protoss are not winning matches in high-level tournaments, it must be because of race imbalance." In actuality it can be any number of things, right down to the Protoss player forgetting to eat his Wheaties that day. If you want to blame something, blame NEXGenius for being an arrogant prick and not practicing like he should be. + Show Spoiler +He claimed that Protoss was the best race and that he only had to play 20 games a day to beat his opponents. He was promptly roflstomped by a player who had actually practiced for his match.
It may be false logic, but it may also be a truthful claim. Can you disprove it?
Is it logical that if a race was underpowered it might underperform at top level tournaments where it's imbalances might be exploited the most?
It also just shows how misinformed genius is/was. He won a blizzcon and thought he was unstoppable, if i recall he also said something like that he would show the world protoss isn't underpowered. Then he got stomped into the ground....
That's the difference between a top caliber player and a solid player though, nexgenius wins some games and goes "protoss is fine" but he doesn't actually look at the mechanics and who he is playing.
Fruitdealer was winning by outplaying people, but he understood his race was still hurting from a balance perspective, and when he lost to fakeboxer he probably also didn't jump to the conclusion that zerg is still UP vs terran. These ex-bw pros have a ton of experience and understand to analyze the game for what it is, win or loss.
|
On November 03 2010 06:54 Archduke wrote:Correlation =/= causation. False logic: "If Protoss are not winning matches in high-level tournaments, it must be because of race imbalance." In actuality it can be any number of things, right down to the Protoss player forgetting to eat his Wheaties that day. If you want to blame something, blame NEXGenius for being an arrogant prick and not practicing like he should be. + Show Spoiler +He claimed that Protoss was the best race and that he only had to play 20 games a day to beat his opponents. He was promptly roflstomped by a player who had actually practiced for his match.
+ Show Spoiler +He also said that ITR won't be "any trouble" and that no one can stop him anyway. After winning the first match he proceeded to waggle his finger in front of ITR, mocking him further. Then he got roflstomped and humiliated.
|
On November 03 2010 06:54 Archduke wrote:Correlation =/= causation. False logic: "If Protoss are not winning matches in high-level tournaments, it must be because of race imbalance." In actuality it can be any number of things, right down to the Protoss player forgetting to eat his Wheaties that day. If you want to blame something, blame NEXGenius for being an arrogant prick and not practicing like he should be. + Show Spoiler +He claimed that Protoss was the best race and that he only had to play 20 games a day to beat his opponents. He was promptly roflstomped by a player who had actually practiced for his match.
that's why you need things like confidence interval. I am too busy to perform a statistical test at the moment but we might be getting close to a 95% confidence interval.
|
It wouldn't surprise me a bit if GSL3 with the current state of the game had 4 P:s in the semi finals.
It wouldn't? Who are these protoss saviors? Do you really think inca, genius, tester, and sangho are going to all take down the likes of boxer, nada, idra, hopetorture, and fruit dealer? I don't think theres a chance in hell.
|
they should buff warp prisms, the mothership, carriers and perhaps revert voids bck to the way they were, or buff them but make them less gimmicky.
problem solved
|
On November 03 2010 05:43 Endorsed wrote:Show nested quote +One button and all your energy and 100 shields (which is shields gone from all Gateway units) gone. GG. One button. Shields have been worthless since SC1 and ironically cost the most to upgrade as well lol. Like anyone upgrades shields...ZzZzZz. You really shouldn't be worrying about ghosts. If you lose to them in the early game/mid game it's because it's your own fault for heaving the wrong unit composition to deal with them, dont spread your units well. If he has ghosts early on it means he will have less medivacs/vikings. So adjusts your unit composition accordingly. Late game you have storm + HT's. Wich with amulet makes the matchup rediculous late game. There are no good timings to atack anymore because of the way warpgates and amulet HT's work. I always like how protoss player clump up all their HT's and then cry. Difference between EMP and Storm. 4 storms and the MMM ball is dead. 4 EMP's and the protoss army lost all their shields.
Look where Ghosts are in the tech tree, now look at where amulet/storm upgraded HTs are in the tech tree, now look back again at Ghosts. I'm on a Horse
User was warned for this post
|
|
|
As for GSL1, I believe Protoss really doesn't have an excuse there.
For GSL2, I feel that the Protoss players have not kept up in skill with the Terran and Zerg counterparts. Take a look at the amazingly intense marine/baneling micro we've seen here this season, with 5-way splits in fractions of a second taxing the limits of 400 APM kept up for extended periods of time throughout games. This season hasn't just been a few "pimpest plays" of unit micro, but it's been an ongoing festival of amazing micro.
When I watch my fellow Protoss play, however, I still see mediocre play and unit balls with very little micro - why are Zealots still wrapped in the middle of balls instead of at the front? Why are stalker surrounds not occurring fast enough when MM surrounds are better than ever?
I think really the key lies in better individual unit micromanagement, and I feel that mid/late game Protoss aren't performing the same level of jaw dropping micro that Terran and Zerg have been.
|
|
|
On November 03 2010 07:07 Polatrite wrote:
As for GSL1, I believe Protoss really doesn't have an excuse there.
For GSL2, I feel that the Protoss players have not kept up in skill with the Terran and Zerg counterparts. Take a look at the amazingly intense marine/baneling micro we've seen here this season, with 5-way splits in fractions of a second taxing the limits of 400 APM kept up for extended periods of time throughout games. This season hasn't just been a few "pimpest plays" of unit micro, but it's been an ongoing festival of amazing micro.
When I watch my fellow Protoss play, however, I still see mediocre play and unit balls with very little micro - why are Zealots still wrapped in the middle of balls instead of at the front? Why are stalker surrounds not occurring fast enough when MM surrounds are better than ever?
I think really the key lies in better individual unit micromanagement, and I feel that mid/late game Protoss aren't performing the same level of jaw dropping micro that Terran and Zerg have been.
Didn't zealot build time get nerfed during GSL1?
That made things a lot easier for zvp, and it made the early marine marauder push more dangerous tvp.
Plus it generally made toss armies a little smaller since you are not bringing in zealots as quickly.
|
As for GSL1, I believe Protoss really doesn't have an excuse there.
For GSL2, I feel that the Protoss players have not kept up in skill with the Terran and Zerg counterparts. Take a look at the amazingly intense marine/baneling micro we've seen here this season, with 5-way splits in fractions of a second taxing the limits of 400 APM kept up for extended periods of time throughout games. This season hasn't just been a few "pimpest plays" of unit micro, but it's been an ongoing festival of amazing micro.
When I watch my fellow Protoss play, however, I still see mediocre play and unit balls with very little micro - why are Zealots still wrapped in the middle of balls instead of at the front? Why are stalker surrounds not occurring fast enough when MM surrounds are better than ever?
I think really the key lies in better individual unit micromanagement, and I feel that mid/late game Protoss aren't performing the same level of jaw dropping micro that Terran and Zerg have been.
Please teach me how to produce unit at the same time a battle goes on. It is impossible for protoss. In that case, the only choice is to forgot some micro in order to get some units out. Protoss micro will be lower than the other races' simple because warp gate; you can not queue unit up, you must go to a pylon and place each units individually.
|
On November 03 2010 07:10 dragonblade369 wrote:Show nested quote +As for GSL1, I believe Protoss really doesn't have an excuse there.
For GSL2, I feel that the Protoss players have not kept up in skill with the Terran and Zerg counterparts. Take a look at the amazingly intense marine/baneling micro we've seen here this season, with 5-way splits in fractions of a second taxing the limits of 400 APM kept up for extended periods of time throughout games. This season hasn't just been a few "pimpest plays" of unit micro, but it's been an ongoing festival of amazing micro.
When I watch my fellow Protoss play, however, I still see mediocre play and unit balls with very little micro - why are Zealots still wrapped in the middle of balls instead of at the front? Why are stalker surrounds not occurring fast enough when MM surrounds are better than ever?
I think really the key lies in better individual unit micromanagement, and I feel that mid/late game Protoss aren't performing the same level of jaw dropping micro that Terran and Zerg have been. Please teach me how to produce unit at the same time a battle goes on. It is impossible for protoss. In that case, the only choice is to forgot some micro in order to get some units out. Protoss micro will be lower than the other races' simple because warp gate; you can not queue unit up, you must go to a pylon and place each units individually.
So experiment with not using warp gates o_O, whats stopping you from instead of getting that warpgate, to use the minerals you are saving from not using warpgates, to build a couple more gateways.
I mean you make it look out like such a big problem instead of a boon to be able to warp in units on demand anywhere you have power, so dont use them. Warpgates are a boon to protoss, kinda seems dumb to complain about them like you are.
I think protoss can be strong, but the quality of players playing protoss does not match that of terran and zerg.
Terran and zerg both have several SC1 legends and former proleague A-teamers on it.
The only player who has any kind of notable BW rep currently playing Protoss that I know off the top of my head is SangHo.
Tester as far as I know, was mostly a 2v2 player and accomplished little in his BW career, same with most other ex-SC1 turned SC2 Protoss players.
So what do you expect when you have SC1 Proleague B-teamers playing with SC1 Legends and A team players? Obviously a race balance issue.
|
On November 03 2010 07:17 Seide wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2010 07:10 dragonblade369 wrote:As for GSL1, I believe Protoss really doesn't have an excuse there.
For GSL2, I feel that the Protoss players have not kept up in skill with the Terran and Zerg counterparts. Take a look at the amazingly intense marine/baneling micro we've seen here this season, with 5-way splits in fractions of a second taxing the limits of 400 APM kept up for extended periods of time throughout games. This season hasn't just been a few "pimpest plays" of unit micro, but it's been an ongoing festival of amazing micro.
When I watch my fellow Protoss play, however, I still see mediocre play and unit balls with very little micro - why are Zealots still wrapped in the middle of balls instead of at the front? Why are stalker surrounds not occurring fast enough when MM surrounds are better than ever?
I think really the key lies in better individual unit micromanagement, and I feel that mid/late game Protoss aren't performing the same level of jaw dropping micro that Terran and Zerg have been. Please teach me how to produce unit at the same time a battle goes on. It is impossible for protoss. In that case, the only choice is to forgot some micro in order to get some units out. Protoss micro will be lower than the other races' simple because warp gate; you can not queue unit up, you must go to a pylon and place each units individually. So experiment with not using warp gates o_O, whats stopping you from instead of getting that warpgate, to use the minerals you are saving from not using warpgates, to build a couple more gateways. I mean you make it look out like such a big problem instead of a boon to be able to warp in units on demand anywhere you have power, so dont use them. Warpgates are a boon to protoss, kinda seems dumb to complain about them like you are. The thing is with micro, protoss doesnt have that many heavily microable units outside of the stalker and voidray(discounting phoenix, because comeon it shoots as it moves, not much effort involved). There is the whole thing of you want to send in zealot first, followed by stalker, but actual combat micro... there is very little of it, its very much about pre fight positioning then a-moving while trying to pull back an injured stalker or collosus back. I think protoss can be strong, but the quality of players playing protoss does not match that of terran and zerg. Terran and zerg both have several SC1 legends and former proleague A-teamers on it. The only player who has any kind of notable BW rep currently playing Protoss is SangHo.
A name is only a name... julyzerg is recognizable, he hasn't done anything for the zerg race yet. You could have flash and jaedong go protoss in sc2, it wouldn't actually change whether protoss is underpowered or overpowered or balanced or not. They may play it better than other people play the game, but then that would be their skill, not the race itself.
|
On November 03 2010 06:57 robertdinh wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2010 06:54 Archduke wrote:Correlation =/= causation. False logic: "If Protoss are not winning matches in high-level tournaments, it must be because of race imbalance." In actuality it can be any number of things, right down to the Protoss player forgetting to eat his Wheaties that day. If you want to blame something, blame NEXGenius for being an arrogant prick and not practicing like he should be. + Show Spoiler +He claimed that Protoss was the best race and that he only had to play 20 games a day to beat his opponents. He was promptly roflstomped by a player who had actually practiced for his match. It may be false logic, but it may also be a truthful claim. Can you disprove it? Is it logical that if a race was underpowered it might underperform at top level tournaments where it's imbalances might be exploited the most? It also just shows how misinformed genius is/was. He won a blizzcon and thought he was unstoppable, if i recall he also said something like that he would show the world protoss isn't underpowered. Then he got stomped into the ground.... That's the difference between a top caliber player and a solid player though, nexgenius wins some games and goes "protoss is fine" but he doesn't actually look at the mechanics and who he is playing. Fruitdealer was winning by outplaying people, but he understood his race was still hurting from a balance perspective, and when he lost to fakeboxer he probably also didn't jump to the conclusion that zerg is still UP vs terran. These ex-bw pros have a ton of experience and understand to analyze the game for what it is, win or loss.
See, in this case, the onus of proof is on he who makes the claim. If you claim that Protoss vs. Terran is imbalanced, then you'd better have some evidence to back that up, otherwise you're just flapping your mouth and deserve to be ignored.
That being said, I wasn't commenting on the balance of the Protoss vs. Terran match-up. I was merely commenting on the flawed logic that many use to justify their preconceived biases. There is a reason that the Blizzard balance teams DO NOT use tournament results as an input to their balance decisions: There are simply too many factors going into the results of a tournament match and too small a sample of games played.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
