|
On November 02 2010 04:42 Raiden X wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 03:31 Lucius2 wrote: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.
1basing as protoss is not nearly as popular in PvZ and PvT as you make it out to be. but to be fair 4warpgate PvP is standard play.
|
On November 02 2010 04:40 Numy wrote:Show nested quote +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.
If it were up to me i would make Warpgate have the slower cool time, and gateways the faster build one. This way it weakens all in pushes. Thus a player would want to constantly switch between warp gates and gateways.
Gateways for faster production, but warpgates for instant reinforcements, but longer cool downs. This would also make macroing with hotkeys easier for protoss.
|
On November 02 2010 03:23 Deadlyfish wrote:
There arent that many good protoss players, NEXgenious, Inca and HuK are the only ones i can think of (besides tester, but he didnt qualify iirc). Terran has so many famous people, Nada, Boxer, Foxer, HopeTorture, and i could name so many more. Same goes with Zerg. Idra, FD, Zenio, and i could name lots more.
So yea i think it's because there arent enough good players playing protoss, not because protoss isnt good enough.
Lets say you take the top 8 players in the world purely based on skill. And lets say these 8 players all make it to ro8 of the GSL. The chances that none of these players are protoss is actually quite high.
No you cannot name any more Zerg players than Protoss ones. Last GSL, it seemed only FD is the top player from Zerg when Terran were saying l2p. Suddenly, names like Zenio's and Nestea's and TheWind's pop up. Not because they suddenly became much better in GSL2, but because of patch.
After a patch, there might be people on here who sing praises of oGsMC, Inca, Tester, NexGenius, HongunPrime, Sangho etc. just similarly. They need a helping hand, protoss is terribly limited in number of strategies.
|
And I also QQed about Zerg being UP, so I think Zergs should offer a better argument than "there aren't many good protoss players" or "l2p". 1-2 months ago they were hearing it from terrans, now they are happily dishing it to protoss.
|
It's like in the last GSl, like 5 toss gets eliminated because they missed the forcefield on the 3rax push. I facepalmed every time.
|
protoss has always been this way, we never got a golden mouse. It isn't too hard to get really strong with protoss, but to reach the gigagosu level... well that is rare.
|
On November 02 2010 04:55 Dudemeister wrote:
It's like in the last GSl, like 5 toss gets eliminated because they missed the forcefield on the 3rax push. I facepalmed every time.
May be that's part of the problem? Because people complained that FF is OP, and rightly so, they made Protoss super weak early on, that Protoss has to rely on ideal FF placement?
The same is with storms. Because there are people who complain about HTs, they and the archons are much weaker now than in SC:BW.
|
On November 02 2010 04:51 Xxavi wrote:
And I also QQed about Zerg being UP, so I think Zergs should offer a better argument than "there aren't many good protoss players" or "l2p". 1-2 months ago they were hearing it from terrans, now they are happily dishing it to protoss.
Yeah... that argument is so terribly flawed. The best Zerg players who weren't "good enough" pre-patch are the very same top Zerg players right now...
|
On November 02 2010 04:55 Dudemeister wrote:
It's like in the last GSl, like 5 toss gets eliminated because they missed the forcefield on the 3rax push. I facepalmed every time.
That is actually the biggest problem for P. 1 unit or one click can change the outcome of the game. FF on the ramp is the most clear example but there are more subtle micro moves that need to be perfect too. And nobody is perfect which leads to a lot of losses to P.
|
As a Protoss player I feel its not really due to any imbalance. Its due to the nature of protoss and the game being young (metagame stability and skill level).
Generally getting too early collosus opens a timing window similar to expanding, 300-200 + 200-200 thermal lance is a huge initial investment. Its an easy timing to spot and exploit.
P needs to retain their gas heavy units as best as possible because they produce slower and are the defining element of their army. This should also be a priority when engaging battles. Every collosus lost means another investment for 75 seconds. Losing 2 collosi means 150s of vulnerability where the other player knows you wont be aggressive.
+ Show Spoiler +
In game 4 ITR vs genius
Genius' opening (void rays) -> expo -> collosi means his gateway ball is smaller, those mauraders will eat through the gateway units and get to the collosi before they can be cleaned up, thus collosi micro/positional awareness is more important.
Genius didnt micro his collosi well at all, Watch the first major battle again.
1. he had 2 with 1 fresh one entering the battle which he just A moved in and it died to marauders after attacking like once. (This wasnt that big a mistake as he was busy doing the forcefields which were more important)
2. Near the end of that battle he had 2 collosi, few stalkers/z and void rays vs mauraders and negligible marines.
He should have pulled the collosi back MUCH earlier and let the void rays clean up while the stalkers tank. but he just left them in the front.
He couldnt retain his collosi numbers and eventually got rolled over with infantry.
It seems genius has a weakness with collosi micro, saw it in the matches at blizzcon with loner but he macroed like a boss to get storm.
|
+ Show Spoiler + Did not watch a lot of P players went out in GSL but I saw Genius' games earlier and tbh he was pretty unlucky in game 2 and game 3. Game 2 his twilight build got blind countered by banshees. You can't get anymore unlucky than that. Had he gone for some popular robo based build he could have held it off. Game 3 is almost the same way though less severe. 2 gate robo would have helped him. They are basically BO loss. Game 4 he played well at the beginning but ITR got some good macro he put up a third operating 3rd base before Genius even started his and just outmassed him from there.
|
Protoss Early game is so unforgiving. Their units and abilities are so powerful, but having the right composition and spell usage is basically 100% essential to surviving the early game.
If you build one more Stalker when you could have used a Sentry, you lose. If you miss a forcefield by a quarter inch or a half second, you lose.
I don't think the race needs any kind of majro redesign though. Much like Zerg, I just think they need a moderate buff to a core unit to widen the number of viable builds, make surviving in the early game easier, and make early aggression out of a normal build (not an all-in) more viable.
I think the ideal unit in that regard would be the Stalker. A minor damage or range buff to Stalkers vs. armored (form example, if they went from being 10(+1) + 4 vs. armored, to being 10(+1) + 5(+1) vs. armored) would help with dealing with early aggression, especially from Marauders and Roaches. It would make Toss early game more forgiving, which would expand the number of viable openings. It would also open up PvP a bit by making Stalkers a bit more effective against Colossi.
If this happened, I think it would tremendously help Toss in feeling like a race with a wide array of viable openings that allowed for early aggression without going all-in, and would reduce some of the feeling Toss has of desperately holding on for T3.
|
As a ~1700 toss, TvP is SO CHALLENGING, if the terran knows what hes doing.
ya we can handle the regular 3rax, 1rax expand, thats all easy. i would say toss is even some what over powered since they can easily get into macro late game with storm / collosus...
BUT ! The "thor rush" "banshee raven marine" "any variation point defense drone" "any variation of banshee" that wrecks havoc on protoss.
Toss early game is jsut stretched SO THIN.
I have blizzard, high level 2300 toss agree wtih me on this.
Toss is under powered early game. This is a FACT.
|
I don't want to see a change to Stalkers, personally. They are used in every single protoss game now anyway, why make it them more powerful. I want to see more DT action like in SC:BW. That Bisu game where he solely survived the Zerg attack thanks to DTs was just amazing. In this game, DTs are much harder to get, and then, since they are such a big gamble, it becomes not a viable option for tourneys.
The same with carriers. I want to see more carrier action. Why are protoss so limited in SC2?
|
concerning the GSL I'd agree with this guy
On November 02 2010 03:14 ZeGzoR wrote:
Could just be a coincidence. My bet is on that.
Nevertheless protoss isn't doing "too" good at other tournaments either. Just yesterday in go4sc2 the top 4 were...yes...4 terrans. You simply can't justify this by saying "more good players play terran" that's quite some BS.
I think there are two main reasons:
1.) Pacemaking: Protoss is "the" reactionary race, Protoss always has to react to the stuff the opponent does. In PvT it has always been this way but also in PvZ Zerg dictates if he goes roach pressure, mutalisk-tech or even fast hydra. Yes Protoss "can" pressure Zerg and keep their macro down...but Protoss can NOT force a "tech" onto another race. Basicly the only exception is the Phoenix-opening vs Zerg from SangHo, which funnily just destroyed the opponent because he was obviously not used to Protoss "forcing" him into something. In PvT Protoss can't even really move out of its base before colossi are there. Yes immortals are cool but if you move out with them and terran has one medivac ready they'll just drop your poor ass while throwing up two bunkers at the front. You'll do some damage but your probes will be dead.
2.) Making Errors: Protoss is basicly the only race where players just die when they do MINOR mistakes early on. SangHo died because he missed ONE force-field. Yes that's bad on the pro-level, but cmon give me/us a break, one missed force-field and it's game...seriously? If you have watched Lzgamer vs Slush on Metalopolis, Slush was cheesed, barely defended and ended up winning. With the exception of Tester there simply doesn't seem to be a Protoss-player who can come back from an early disadvantage. If Terran manages to get up the ramp early they just win in 99% of the cases because of their overhelming cost-effectiveness. Also vs Zerg, one misplaced cannon and/or force-field early on and roaches will just roflstomp you in the ground (watch Kiwikaki vs Slush from the EG-tournament on this one). I don't really wanna shout "imbalance" on these issues since it's very possible to live and win. The problem lies within the fact that other races have a "disadvantage" when the player makes a mistake early. A Protoss-player making a mistake early mostly just dies, right there, right then.
|
Beyonder
Netherlands15103 Posts
On November 02 2010 05:06 Vz0 wrote:
As a ~1700 toss, TvP is SO CHALLENGING, if the terran knows what hes doing.
ya we can handle the regular 3rax, 1rax expand, thats all easy. i would say toss is even some what over powered since they can easily get into macro late game with storm / collosus...
BUT ! The "thor rush" "banshee raven marine" "any variation point defense drone" "any variation of banshee" that wrecks havoc on protoss.
Toss early game is jsut stretched SO THIN.
I have blizzard, high level 2300 toss agree wtih me on this.
Toss is under powered early game. This is a FACT.
Yep. You need the PERFECT unit mix to counter such stuff, and that's why Y say P is WC3. And it's really somewhat impossible to out-micro your opponent versus all their slowing and faster units. So it becomes a choice of where and when you fight 90%. Which again, is WC3.
|
My humble opinion as not a protoss player but thinking of switching to them is that the issue is with the zealot, as it has been since beta.
A zealot is an inigma for Blizzard to deal with balance wise. They are on paper the strongest tear 1 unit and at the terrible skill levels they decimate everything.
Now at the higher skill levels where people know how to micro they are the most worthless attack unit in the game if they don't have charge. They are more of a liability to make in the early game and are really only good as doors on stop command blocking a base. They cost alot, move way to slow, are easily picked off, and die easily.
How often do you see armies of zealots on the field in the early game with one or two stalkers to back them up? How often do you see armies of marines or zerglings with another unit to back it up?
|
On November 02 2010 04:58 Xxavi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2010 04:55 Dudemeister wrote:
It's like in the last GSl, like 5 toss gets eliminated because they missed the forcefield on the 3rax push. I facepalmed every time. May be that's part of the problem? Because people complained that FF is OP, and rightly so, they made Protoss super weak early on, that Protoss has to rely on ideal FF placement? The same is with storms. Because there are people who complain about HTs, they and the archons are much weaker now than in SC:BW.
smartcasting makes it so that templars HAVE to be weaker than they were in SC:BW
but i agree about the FF, it seems like even with decent FF a protoss can come out in a draw against an equally sized MMM/viking ball or roaches and hydras...
|
On November 02 2010 04:56 ERGO wrote:
protoss has always been this way, we never got a golden mouse. It isn't too hard to get really strong with protoss, but to reach the gigagosu level... well that is rare.
This.
Fortunately, TvZ is the best match up since BW.
|
Because lolrays were nerfed, and charge-up on rocks aint that special anymore ;D
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
