|
On November 09 2010 17:46 Darksoldierr wrote:
Actually Carriers are really good in PvT, and sometimes in a really long PvP. If you can get 5-6 Carrier, your carriers oneshotting vikings and void rays. Against a defense macro based terran player, getting up 2-3 Stargate somewhere and making carriers while still keeping ground army, just like how you did it in BW can work.
Yes carriers cost lot, and hard to get, but when you hit critical amount, you can start facerolling anything with ground support
Carriers are not got in PvT. By the time you get 6 of them, they would have scanned you or timing attacked or rolled. A Terran player who lets you get 6 carriers is probably in Gold league.
|
On November 09 2010 17:52 toadstool wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2010 17:46 Darksoldierr wrote:
Actually Carriers are really good in PvT, and sometimes in a really long PvP. If you can get 5-6 Carrier, your carriers oneshotting vikings and void rays. Against a defense macro based terran player, getting up 2-3 Stargate somewhere and making carriers while still keeping ground army, just like how you did it in BW can work.
Yes carriers cost lot, and hard to get, but when you hit critical amount, you can start facerolling anything with ground support Carriers are not got in PvT. By the time you get 6 of them, they would have scanned you or timing attacked or rolled. A Terran player who lets you get 6 carriers is probably in Gold league.
Who said, you supposed to get 6 carrier in the first 6 min? You are supposed to make stargates at around 3-4 exp, and i doubt there is a timing attack
If you would have read my post, as i said, its viabl in macro games
|
On November 09 2010 17:46 Darksoldierr wrote:
Actually Carriers are really good in PvT, and sometimes in a really long PvP. If you can get 5-6 Carrier, your carriers oneshotting vikings and void rays. Against a defense macro based terran player, getting up 2-3 Stargate somewhere and making carriers while still keeping ground army, just like how you did it in BW can work.
Yes carriers cost lot, and hard to get, but when you hit critical amount, you can start facerolling anything with ground support
If u have the economy (and u don't have terran pressure) to get a critical amount of carriers then u could probably just roftlstomp the terran by sending him infinite waves of gateway units lol.
Are u suggesting them PvT ? Marines completely own Carriers so hard that is not even funny. Go watch Day9 with Huk's game who plays against a much less skilled Terran and almost gets owned by making Carriers cuz a bunch of marines just deal so well with them.
|
As i said, with ground support, you not supposed to go for Carriers at all till 15-20 min into the game. And when you are there, you should have 3-4 exp and enough gas for either Colo or Templar support against mass marine
|
On November 09 2010 17:56 Darksoldierr wrote:
As i said, with ground support, you not supposed to go for Carriers at all till 15-20 min into the game. And when you are there, you should have 3-4 exp and enough gas for either Colo or Templar support against mass marine
What are you even talking about? None of the toss's have any problems late game vs terran. Its just getting to the lategame without being at a huge disadvantage is really really difficualt. If you're able to enter the late game on equal footing with terran, you basically have like a 70% chance of winning late game with collossi + templars as long as terran just keeps spamming MMM.
You're basically offering an endgame solution (carriers) to toss who have extreme trouble ENTERING the endgame on equal footing in the first place. At that point it doesnt matter if you get carriers and mothership or collossi + templars.
|
On November 09 2010 14:29 Subversion wrote:
i think the protoss play we've seen in mlg for example, and games like tyler 4-1'ing idra have shown that toss need to redesign the way they play and they can be very successful.
Idra stated that Tyler's strat has a glaring weakness and will never be able to beat him again if he tries it. Kinda sums up the state of Protoss metagame right now.
On November 09 2010 12:02 gorath wrote:
Even the Top100 look like this right now:
43 Terrans
32 Zerg
25 Protoss
What's stupid is that Protoss is the most popular race overall. The most played race is dead last. Obviously nothing is wrong.
|
On November 09 2010 18:14 Cloak wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2010 14:29 Subversion wrote:
i think the protoss play we've seen in mlg for example, and games like tyler 4-1'ing idra have shown that toss need to redesign the way they play and they can be very successful. Idra stated that Tyler's strat has a glaring weakness and will never be able to beat him again if he tries it. Kinda sums up the state of Protoss metagame right now. Show nested quote +On November 09 2010 12:02 gorath wrote:
Even the Top100 look like this right now:
43 Terrans
32 Zerg
25 Protoss
What's stupid is that Protoss is the most popular race overall. The most played race is dead last. Obviously nothing is wrong.
source? because i was under the imprssion that terran was the most popular race in this game.
|
On November 09 2010 19:08 zomgad wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2010 18:14 Cloak wrote:On November 09 2010 14:29 Subversion wrote:
i think the protoss play we've seen in mlg for example, and games like tyler 4-1'ing idra have shown that toss need to redesign the way they play and they can be very successful. Idra stated that Tyler's strat has a glaring weakness and will never be able to beat him again if he tries it. Kinda sums up the state of Protoss metagame right now. On November 09 2010 12:02 gorath wrote:
Even the Top100 look like this right now:
43 Terrans
32 Zerg
25 Protoss
What's stupid is that Protoss is the most popular race overall. The most played race is dead last. Obviously nothing is wrong. source? because i was under the imprssion that terran was the most popular race in this game.
http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/all
Terran's been OP but hardly the most played race..
|
On November 09 2010 19:18 QuantumTheory wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2010 19:08 zomgad wrote:On November 09 2010 18:14 Cloak wrote:On November 09 2010 14:29 Subversion wrote:
i think the protoss play we've seen in mlg for example, and games like tyler 4-1'ing idra have shown that toss need to redesign the way they play and they can be very successful. Idra stated that Tyler's strat has a glaring weakness and will never be able to beat him again if he tries it. Kinda sums up the state of Protoss metagame right now. On November 09 2010 12:02 gorath wrote:
Even the Top100 look like this right now:
43 Terrans
32 Zerg
25 Protoss
What's stupid is that Protoss is the most popular race overall. The most played race is dead last. Obviously nothing is wrong. source? because i was under the imprssion that terran was the most popular race in this game. http://www.sc2ranks.com/stats/league/all/1/allTerran's been OP but hardly the most played race..
Very interesting  Thanks for the source ... curious to the response now  There is something slightly wrong with protoss indeed and after nerfing storm these weaknesses will be more evident than ever I guess.
|
Protoss as a race just hasn't had a person to revolutionize how it's played. Until then (assuming it happens, never is a lot longer time than you or I know about) it'll be the same 4 gate/3 gate robo/etc to do their best to enter the late game in okay enough shape.
To those suggesting more carriers are missing the point of why protoss are struggling. Carriers are late game units, yet the problem is getting to late game, not necessarily how the later stages of the game balances out.
But really, though it's been said I feel I need to reiterate, 2 GSLs early on in the game's history are not convincing enough that protoss is as behind as everyone might suggest. All it takes is one protoss player to win a GSL and threads like these will be abandoned. Something makes me wonder that if the first two winners of GSL were protoss and terran, perhaps this thread would have more salty salty zerg tears in it.
|
Idk if anyone posted this but teh racerundown in RO64 of GSL 2 is as follows
15 Z
29 T
20 P
by RO32, there was only 8 protoss left
|
Can't say the Protoss play in GSL was particulary impressive compared to Zerg and Terran. Though a lot of it hinges on the binary nature of pvt. If you miss that crucial forcefield against a bio timing push it's over. Maka falcon punched a lot of Protoss out of the tourney by juking the forcefields.
|
i feel protoss is underpowered, but its too early to say. most of the games i saw in GSL where the toss lost (after RO 32) they just lost to better players/outplayed (well i guess i am thinking of sangho, nexgenius, iron from my memory) (i take nexgenius back i didnt watch that game)
|
On November 09 2010 03:32 Nazarid wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2010 22:33 Madkipz wrote:On November 08 2010 18:46 Hellye wrote:On November 08 2010 18:33 Jayson X wrote:People people! Common with the constant whining! What is this? On November 08 2010 16:25 andrewwiggin wrote:
Terran cried about roaches, and zerg roaches got nerfed in beta.
Zerg cried about being crap, and got buffed after beta.
Protoss cry about REAL ISSUES i.e. early units getting kited, least cost effective units of the game (cost-effective in an isolated UNIT TESTER maybe..) .. and what happens?
David Kim starts thinking about how to nerf Psi storm.
-_____- So this is how balance is approached now? "He got something and he got something, I want it too!!". This is exactly what I was worried before SC2 came out. This constant stream of venting without any proper suggestion but "make this or that stronger because I just got overrun by it". Meanwhile players like HuK and Socke maintain some of the highest win-percentages in the world. You can't just go on a rant and completely ignore how fragile balance is! Balance isn't about making it easier for you every time any time. And it certainly isn't about giving you a chance to stop strategies that perfectly hard counter yours. This is exactly why Blizzard is waiting and why it's necessary to let things roll by itself for a while. Timings have to evolve. Your job is to play the game and put your braincells to work. Which quite honestly I think some of you just refuse to do. And that is a shame because you miss out on evolving as a player... So the old L2p argument huh? I would love if these were thrown right before roach range when fruitdealer won the GSL... no roach range would have been so awesome ( they didnt need it, they just had to learn how to play without it off course ). Just because Huk gets some wins the game is fine??.... LOL... how about in korea where there are real terran pros who are agressive early enough to take most win percentages against protoss? This isnt just 1 player who noticed. There is a growing aware that something is wrong with the race. fruitdealer played terrans almost exclusively and you cry about zvp balance in relation to gsl before the patch? wtf? The amount of crying that goes on in this thread is staggering to say the least, yes protoss has issues, issues that wont be fixed before an expansion or two, Just like how zerg still has issues. Even so, protosses can take games of terran and zergs regardless of what level of skill they are at. NexGenius is a prime example on the state of protoss as a whole. Right up there with the other races, even when half their units never see play more than once or twice a year. If you are this unsatisfied with the reliance on robo play maybe play a different race while you wait for buffs? your right they can, this is due to late game collosi + HT being 100% unstoppable by the terran... gah maybe if you played in some high quality matches you might understand, just watching a highly skilled player doesn't give you first hand knowledge of how the game works. as it stands protoss have a slightly weak early game, but is made up for by their incredible ability to completly STOP all early aggression from an opponent by literally pressing F and selecting a location to drop a Force Field(rush stopped thank you for coming).. man i know that's pretty crazy in its awesomeness right?, mid game..well you have either collosi or working to templar or going phoenix with ground forces... all units that can defend very well..late game, this is where protoss becomes god... once youve reached late game and control 3 or more bases, you tech is full laid out, and you can now get Both Collosi(with range) and high templar with storm.. no what counters HT and Collosi together?, ghosts emp the templar right, well damn, that's 6 marauders i could have built instead, so now i have an army prolly 10-15+ Maraduers short cus i have a few ghosts =(... Even if i hit an EMP on every templar(thats most likely spread out to the point youll never get them all) it doesnt mean im going to win, now the collosi with range and their zealot wall and eating my entire army. and if i didnt get the Best emps you have ever seen in a game, then well my army is not only getting lazered up by the collosi it is get Stormed which forces my army to move WHILE the collosi are smashing my brains in.. awsome and then you storm agian and agian.. army is dead 100% win rate man amazing... fighting a zerg is prolly a little harder late game but still just as easy...you drop gateways get templar and collosi, and get enough sentries to keep the zerg from ever getting a surround on your army, and youve won the game agian with HT/Collosi..(roaches are not enough of a counter..ultras are their only hope vs protoss) same issue with the zerg as Terran have, if i counter the collosi by building alot of roaches you just mix in a couple immortals 1-3 and you own me, if i counter the HT by getting infestors, you just feed back them before i can fungal growth your HT...so my only options is to tech switch from a mass of mutalisks ive been using to harass you into a huge mass of roach/ultra to even stand a chance and you ask yourself why protoss needs a buff? and if they get a buff what is blizzard going to do about the strength of both HT and Collosi working together withen the late game?
tldr after the first paragraph of QQ, what's your rating in the league you're in, if you're even in diamond that is. As a 1900 protoss, getting pressured by a 3 racks push into an FE puts the toss at a huge disadvantage. Of course a toss will macro up hard if you don't harass him, ever heard of banshees? We literally have to make a robo in FEAR of that banshee, and if we do and you come at us instead with a MM ball push, well then, we're pretty much screwed and pressing that F key only buys time for the inevitable. You make it sound like protoss is as simple as Gw units, Col, HT, but it's not, there is a lot of things we have to worry about before we can tech that far and any decent or good player knows that the toss right now are weak against early pressure and basically take hold of the momentum of the game. Do you understand how gas heavy both those units are? Play protoss at a high level before writing a huge wall of text from your terran POV. Thank you.
|
There are a number of design choices for protoss that severely restrict the race's potential. Balance doesn't come into play however, you can have the worst designed race ever still be the most powerful simply by adjusting unit stats. For example, change stalker and zealot damage just a little bit and all of a sudden protoss might be the best race.
Somewhat wisely, Blizzard tends not to adjust actual unit stats too much. They changed them a lot during beta, but now that they feel the actual units of the game are in a good place, balance-wise, they can focus their attention on timing windows. If a terran is too strong vs protoss at an early part of the game, they can simply tweak marauder buildtime to give the defender just a little bit more time to prepare. It's a safer approach to balancing as well, because all you have to account for are various timing attacks that are too strong or too weak. Disparity between power in early- and lategame is a balance issue that often does need to be addressed by changing unit stats or costs.
Other issues might have to do with balance, but are also more of a design problem. Lack of strategic options for protoss, lack of safe economic builds, can all be adjusted by tweaking timings and stats. It doesn't necessarily help the balance, though (as in, winpercentages), but does create a better game. The warp prism for instance isn't too usable (I don't know this, but it's conventional wisdom) and it does restrict the protoss' options a bit to not have good drop harass available. A simple change such as increasing its speed can help them quite a lot then.
A problem with that approach is that a warp prism can't be changed that way, because then it will be overpowered in some instances. Perhaps being able to instantly reinforce an army in the main of the enemy is a too dangerous thing to just allow. Personally, I don't like the warp-in mechanic too much. It ensures the protoss army is always at its max power, always in one piece. It reduces the complexity of army management for one and more importantly, requires the units to be balanced around instant reinforcements. If the protoss attacks you, you have to be able to defend really well, because once they attack they can reinforce even quicker than you. Normally this is a critical advantage to the defender, but when protoss attacks you don't have it. Consequently, the race is balanced around not being able to attack properly.
To change the warp prism then, you could, say, switch the speed upgrade with a warpfield upgrade and take away the prism's innate ability to generate it. Better even might be to weaken warpgates in some way.
A lot of protoss units are hard to use because of some design flaw, though. Dark templars for example are just an archaic unit, transported straight from brood war into a new game not properly designed around it. They are hard to use as something other than two things: a unit to rush to, either as cheese, or to contain while you expand; as well a binary check on the other player that he should always be able to react quickly enough to ensure detection in later parts of the game. Harass with them is slightly dull as well, since they will get killed if the opponent reacts properly. I honestly would like to see them get an ability to make escaping easier, just so you'd feel safer harassing with them.
Motherships, carriers and void rays are of course somewhat gimmicky themselves and are unfortunately hard to integrate in protoss transitions too much.
|
On November 09 2010 20:19 Zdrastochye wrote:
Protoss as a race just hasn't had a person to revolutionize how it's played. Until then (assuming it happens, never is a lot longer time than you or I know about) it'll be the same 4 gate/3 gate robo/etc to do their best to enter the late game in okay enough shape.
To those suggesting more carriers are missing the point of why protoss are struggling. Carriers are late game units, yet the problem is getting to late game, not necessarily how the later stages of the game balances out.
But really, though it's been said I feel I need to reiterate, 2 GSLs early on in the game's history are not convincing enough that protoss is as behind as everyone might suggest. All it takes is one protoss player to win a GSL and threads like these will be abandoned. Something makes me wonder that if the first two winners of GSL were protoss and terran, perhaps this thread would have more salty salty zerg tears in it.
I don't see how anyone could revolitionize the way protoss earlygame is played. It's way too much restricted.
|
On November 08 2010 11:41 s4m222 wrote:not to a certain point, people had unit producing structures hotkeys to like 4-5-6-7-8-9-0 not necessarily all of these, and you do reach a point where you need to look back to produce from every building. Protoss, although warp in is cool and useful, it does require you to stop whatever your doing and find a pylon and warp, while terran can que up, focus on micro a little more. Zerg selects hatch ques up units resume micro. Protoss must look away warp warp warp (doesnt take more than 2 seconds) but you must look away unless your fighting by a pylon
From what larva does zerg queue units if he didn't look into his base and inject (several times at several places) ?
Only terran has that luxury.
|
On November 09 2010 17:52 toadstool wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2010 17:46 Darksoldierr wrote:
Actually Carriers are really good in PvT, and sometimes in a really long PvP. If you can get 5-6 Carrier, your carriers oneshotting vikings and void rays. Against a defense macro based terran player, getting up 2-3 Stargate somewhere and making carriers while still keeping ground army, just like how you did it in BW can work.
Yes carriers cost lot, and hard to get, but when you hit critical amount, you can start facerolling anything with ground support Carriers are not got in PvT. By the time you get 6 of them, they would have scanned you or timing attacked or rolled. A Terran player who lets you get 6 carriers is probably in Gold league.
Watch the day9 daily with carriers where Huk (?) won a game against bratok with a carrier rush. Naturally if players start to expect it it might not work, but there are ways to win high level games with carriers.
|
Honestly, it really boils down to Zergling/Roach and Marine/Marauder being much, much, much better units for early game. Speedlings gain automatic map control, cost no gas after the initial 100, and can contend with 4gate level production and afford to expand. Roaches are Roaches. If anyone's played a PvZ as of late, they know how great they are. As for Terran, there's no denying the strength of Marine/Marauder.
Even if Zerg or Terran fast expand, they can still pressure a Toss enough to slow down their expo or defend against any 1 base strat Protoss can throw at them. As of right now, there's no advantage given to Toss until T3. They can't outmuscle or outmacro a smart Zerg/Terran who knows their timings. Toss is pigeonholed into playing the safest of the safe builds (more like build) to have a chance.
|
On November 09 2010 21:57 Cloak wrote:
Honestly, it really boils down to Zergling/Roach and Marine/Marauder being much, much, much better units for early game. Speedlings gain automatic map control, cost no gas, and can contend with 4gate level production and afford to expand. Roaches are Roaches. If anyone's played a PvZ as of late, they know how great they are. As for Terran, there's no denying the strength of Marine/Marauder.
Even if Zerg or Terran fast expand, they can still pressure a Toss enough to slow down their expo or defend against any 1 base strat Protoss can throw at them. As of right now, there's no advantage given to Toss until T3. They can't outmuscle or outmacro a smart Zerg/Terran who knows their timings. Toss is pigeonholed into playing the safest of the safe builds (more like build) to have a chance.
In PvT I agree with you. It's turtle, tech and hope.
In PvZ however... you can't let him macro. When you watch a lot of high level PvZ, you realize that the protoss has to commit to a cheese/all in and hope to do a lot of damage. If he does not, gg, if he does the game is even. There is no way you can gain map control except if you all in. That is the main problem.
Idra says that when the protoss will figure out the timings it will be P>Z. I tend to think the opposite (I know this sounds cocky and I know it's surely because I lack some knowledge + I love Idra). When Z will figure out how to manage the 6gate/5gate +1 big push mid game, it will be gg no re.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
