|
On November 02 2010 04:19 Beyonder wrote:
To me, protoss is just broken, totally broken. While T and Z alow for a great amount of variance in skill due to the design of the race (in other words, a good player will play much, much better than a bad player), for P I feel that this is not the case. Especially on the small maps, then it really becomes WC3 ("Should I build one sentry more?").
Being someone who's first RTS was WAR3 and plays protoss i can totally agree with this. I played random in beta and my play as protoss improved the fastest so i chose toss as my race. but when i hit the higher tier of play gameplay has become stale and i feel like i win because of what i make and not because i managed my economy well or had solid play. BO losses in all three MUs are the bane of my existance :/
Maybe people just need to discover more solid ways to play because alot of the toss losses i have seen in tourneys were BO losses or plain inexperience.
|
the way protoss is designed, it is the most attractive race to lesser players, and discourages improvement. there are a lot of super powerful builds that protoss can just mindlessly do and win with a lot. the players get highly ranked because of their builds. protoss seems like the most straight-forward race with the most straight-forward unit counters. it's not like zerg which doesn't have many "hard counter" units specifically designed to counter others (only 3 units do bonus damage vs certain unit types). it's all very basic, one-dimensional thinking. "if i execute this build, i win." "if he builds light units, i build colossi. if he builds armored units, i build immortals"
what happens is, while protoss certainly isn't one-dimensional, most protoss players treat it as such. and due to the way the race is designed, players can still become highly rated with that very basic thinking, but they don't become truly good players.
|
I really would like to hear what Tyler thinks about this.
In my bronze opinion , it looks like ; terran&zerg can easily trade armies , lower collosus count and push with a bigger amy ( thanks to better production ) 1-2 minutes later. ( exactly what happened today in a game at gsl )
It seems ; If you're not going for a pure gateway army ; you're not replenishing it in a minute or two , if it's a pure gateway army ; you're weak till HT.
|
I liked DJwheat / Day9's comments on how Protos is the race with the most undiscovered strats / late game options. And that could be a contributing factor to why we don't see so many in GSL later stages. - I believe it was during MSI / EG finals yesterday.
It could also be equated to Terran being very powerful at the launch of SC2, and as such a larger number of professionals playing that race. Now that zerg / terran has been rebalanced, more professionals playing zerg?
|
I think that protoss players feel uncomfortable on most of the currently used maps, hence they tend to cheese, resulting in unstable results. More specifically in PvT high skilled terran players don't hesitate to pressure all game long, which is quite deadly on closer spawn positions.
Also protoss does not have a real way of fast expanding; most builds are centered around starting the nexus before having enough scouting information and canceling it if needed. As most of the top sc2 players come from broodwar, they prefer picking a race that can transition into the macro game more smoothly, hence there are less high skilled protoss users.
|
On November 02 2010 04:23 DaRkFrosT wrote:
I don't think HuK will do very well in Korea, we've all seen how he plays compared to idrA, and idrA doesn't even make it to the Ro4.
1. IdrA easily has the ability to make it to the GSL RO4 currently. The fact he didn't actually succeed doesn't make him any worse as a player, just like not qualifying for GSL2 and not going very far in GSL1 doesn't make Tester a worse player. There's a reason nobody (even in Korea) wants to play a straight up game vs IdrA, they all attempt to exploit the one weakness he has at the moment.
2. HuK is a guy who trains from home, plays mostly on NA ladder and tournaments against NA players that he's obviously superior to. Nobody will ever get good enough to beat IdrA or top Koreans practicing in that kind of environment.
Give him a few months in a professional training environment and games against players on his level or better, and we'll see how bad he'll do in Korea.
|
On November 02 2010 04:14 NIIINO wrote:
Kiwikaki / HuK to GSL3 and we have PvP finals
Did you watch Idra vs HuK yesterday? If that's any sign of things to come in GSL, we will not have PvP finals.
Also, to reference the post above this one, I am very excited to see how well HuK adapts to the Korean envirement. He trains hard, has a very fun to watch style (heavy pressure, willingness to try different / odd / fan favorite tactics.) As soon as he's regularly playing with the top Korean players, we'll be able to see how high his skill ceiling is. I can't wait.
|
Protoss have the most potential, just because of Forcefield. Such a powerfull spell when used right. You can outright win or lose fights when used right or wrong. Tester imo is the only one that really knows how to use forcefield.
|
The problem with protoss has always been its early and midgame. In fact, the problem is even worse now with the nerf to zealot build time and the roach buff. This weakness has traditionally been offset by the strength of the toss late game (when tier 3 comes online), but zergs and terrans are getting good at exploiting the tier 1 and, especially, the tier 2 weaknesses of protoss with timing attacks.
|
On November 02 2010 04:32 deadjon wrote:
I liked DJwheat / Day9's comments on how Protos is the race with the most undiscovered strats / late game options. And that could be a contributing factor to why we don't see so many in GSL later stages. - I believe it was during MSI / EG finals yesterday.
It could also be equated to Terran being very powerful at the launch of SC2, and as such a larger number of professionals playing that race. Now that zerg / terran has been rebalanced, more professionals playing zerg? I agree on this.Also this reminds of the golden age of Starcraft where Zergs and mainly Savior was dominating.And one guy came and reinvented PvZ (Bisu).Protoss has unidentified potential I believe and also Starcraft2 is in a somewhat balanced state there should be some tweaks coming to Protoss whatever they should be.Protoss may as well wait for Bisu to switch to sc2 lol.
|
On November 02 2010 04:37 Sergeras wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 04:32 deadjon wrote:
I liked DJwheat / Day9's comments on how Protos is the race with the most undiscovered strats / late game options. And that could be a contributing factor to why we don't see so many in GSL later stages. - I believe it was during MSI / EG finals yesterday.
It could also be equated to Terran being very powerful at the launch of SC2, and as such a larger number of professionals playing that race. Now that zerg / terran has been rebalanced, more professionals playing zerg? I agree on this.Also this reminds of the golden age of Starcraft where Zergs and mainly Savior was dominating.And one guy came and reinvented PvZ (Bisu).Protoss has unidentified potential I believe and also Starcraft2 is in a somewhat balanced state there should be some tweaks coming to Protoss whatever they should be.Protoss may as well wait for Bisu to switch to sc2 lol.
lol forge fast expand into phoenix overlord harass into dt rush!!!
I'd love to see someone win a GSL game with that.
|
On November 02 2010 04:19 Beyonder wrote:
To me, protoss is just broken, totally broken. While T and Z alow for a great amount of variance in skill due to the design of the race (in other words, a good player will play much, much better than a bad player), for P I feel that this is not the case. Especially on the small maps, then it really becomes WC3 ("Should I build one sentry more?").
I agree with this wholeheartedly but there's something that needs to be addressed. Zerg not too long ago seemed to have the least flexibility and potential yet over the course of the last few months have really grown(with the help of some tweaking). Even TLO admitted he did not understand Zergs potential.
While I think that Protoss might need a complete overhaul I do think it's rather had to say that they must have one to fix issues without giving them time to adapt. It's possible that the race will change identity on their own.
|
I kinda agree with 100% with ppl are saying here. Even the biased xD
protoss is so more forgiving to errors that anyone can feel op with it, then hit and hit hard a wall where u cant win anymore ...
I think they should do a reboot for most units
not nerf or buff specifically just a reboot ...
|
The problem right now is that it is too risky for protoss to try anything new. A game without Robo against T is super risky; you have to cross your fingers and believe that you won't see a blur. As for Zerg, there is no safe FE build anymore, there is no zealot early pressure anymore and as a Protoss, you do not want zerg to drone up so you have to pressure either way.
|
Making that statement based on only 2 tournaments is just pointless imo.
|
On November 02 2010 03:31 Lucius2 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 03:25 Jerubaal wrote:
It does seem like Protoss commonly employs a very small number of build orders and this makes them predictable in the early game. The fascinating parts of a Protoss build order are where and how many gateways to build and when to make a robo. And is it just me or have HTs seen significantly less use lately? the part about going robo first is that u dont instant lose vs dts or banshees. if there would be some other kind of detection like sentry which can hallu some visible observer, then there even might be different builds. but as it is now, robo is a must have which is pretty stupid
Robo is the same price as Lair. Both offer detectors except the observer is invisible. Build the Robo, but don't commit to it, just like people did in BW.
The issue is that to many Protoss players are having to much success with 1 basing and All-ins to experiment. Further more the power of collosi over shadows their other units.
|
I think eventually there will be nerfs to:
zerg spawn larva ability
terran stim or mule
protoss warpgate ability
After those 3 the races will be less distinct but the balance will improve.
|
Oh, I just posted in a wrong thread. I will re-post it here.
It is clear that Protoss are at a huge disadvantage. I blame the fact that the units are most expensive and few, so it's a gamble at the highest level. If you go VR, you better make it work, or you are 90% dead. If you go DTs, you better get it right, or you are most likely dead.
If we said before that terran can do multiple mistakes and can still win, while the other races cannot afford that, it is time to say this about Protoss, I feel. DT is quite difficult to get, warp prism, DT, VR all are almost always a huge gamble. If you get it to work, it seems protoss is even overpowered, because you win thanks to very few units. But protoss cannot advance far in a tournament by taking so much risks.
I refuse to accept that there are few good protoss players. We didn't see Kyrix, Zenio, Nestea or TheWind last GSL either, look at them, it turns out they are great players. Players like Tester, Inca, oGsMC and NEXGenius are all good, but they cannot keep taking risks and getting it right every time.
My suggest is that DTs have to be less troublesome to get, or otherwise it is never a viable option at a high level tournament. Carrier is the same. Archons aren't as good as in SC:BW, which in turn makes HTs not as good as in SC:BW, besides the changes to HTs anyways. So we have about 3-4 very high level units that are basically useless. Colossi, immortals etc. are good, but Protoss need more options: DTs, carriers, archons...
|
It sort of seems like because of forcefields, protoss early games is more fragile that it needs to be. There is this delicate situation in early game for protoss where good forcefields means transitioning to mid game and bad forcefields = rolled over by superior terran/zerg armies. Just too much is left to luck which means that protoss have lower chances of succeeding.
Because of this also Blizz is afraid to make changes since buffing protoss ground army means that everyone would probably be 4 gated to oblivion. I think one of the possible solutions to this may be to make the forcefield a researchable spell for late game and just buff the ground units. This would make early game a lot more stable while providing for a nice tech path.
|
On November 02 2010 04:28 universalwill wrote:
the way protoss is designed, it is the most attractive race to lesser players, and discourages improvement. there are a lot of super powerful builds that protoss can just mindlessly do and win with a lot. the players get highly ranked because of their builds. protoss seems like the most straight-forward race with the most straight-forward unit counters. it's not like zerg which doesn't have many "hard counter" units specifically designed to counter others (only 3 units do bonus damage vs certain unit types). it's all very basic, one-dimensional thinking. "if i execute this build, i win." "if he builds light units, i build colossi. if he builds armored units, i build immortals"
what happens is, while protoss certainly isn't one-dimensional, most protoss players treat it as such. and due to the way the race is designed, players can still become highly rated with that very basic thinking, but they don't become truly good players.
I agree that is the most attractive Race but I don't think it discourages improvement. In what way? That powerful build being what? 4 gate? Thats it nothing else is a strong and stable and Time trusted as the 4 gate in the protoss build orders I would say next would be 2 gate robo as the other safe build.
Every race has powerful builds but how powerful the build is depends really on if it was scouted or not its only powerful if it wasn't scouted.
The only basic powerful build that you could be referring 2 is proxy 2 gate and thats only powerful at lower levels where scouting isn't as good as it could be.
Because the manual doesnt say this zerg unit - counters this protoss unit doesnt mean zerg has no counter units.
Lings counter immortals
Hydras counter Zealots
Roaches counter Zealots
Mutas counter zealots
You can't bring counters into the question here the problem is PvT not PvZ the PvZ builds are much more diverse compared to PvT. Zerg doesn't have the insta lose unit like a banshee that if goes unscouted can spell doom in 9 minutes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
