EPTOn November 10 2010 05:25 Apolo wrote:
Worked fine in SC1.
[D] Why is protoss doing so bad in the GSL? - Page 69
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Cloak
United States816 Posts
Worked fine in SC1. | ||
|
Treehead
999 Posts
They also only have a range of 2, so against a stutter-stepping terran force being pursued by charge zealots, their chances of getting into range is reasonably small. I'd like to add something here regarding some of the terran complains about toss's "late game deathball". What happened to said late game deathball when Socke used it against Jinro's MMM/Tank army? It sure looked to me as though Jinro stopped it dead in its' tracks, despite being a battle which was near max food for both sides the entire time for something like 20 minutes at MLG Dallas. I could insert "maybe you should use tanks and MMM against toss late game" here, but really - my point is quite simply that even in the hands of ridiculously skilled players, the match is at least even - no more, no less. Or perhaps Socke was doing it wrong? I think in practice, you may find that you don't even really need to tech all the way to BCs/Thors to find a way to deal with gateway + colo + HTs. T2 with upgrades did the trick for Jinro. I'm not saying this match proves anything definitively, but I am saying that at the top level of play, your statement that it is near impossible to beat a late-game toss's army is not really reflected in the games I've been watching. | ||
|
Grond
599 Posts
Top 5000 Protoss 30.4% Top 2500 Protoss 30.2% Top 1000 Protoss 29.7% Top 500 Protoss 29.4% Top 250 Protoss 30.8% Top 100 Protoss 25.0% It's pretty consistent until you get to the Top100 then there is a large drop off. | ||
|
Treehead
999 Posts
On November 09 2010 23:41 gorath wrote: Honestly, if you read the thread its all there. Or google it. I hate when people try to make a point by just questioning everything that doesn´t go along with their own opinion. So, again, the link: http://sc2ranks.com/stats If you browse through you will see, that Protoss has the most players overall (last time I checked: P/T/Z was 2,9/2,8/1,6 million players), that Zerg has by far the most players in Diamond relative to their player base (P/T/Z 3,5%/3,4%/5%) and by far the most average points per player in Diamond. Even the Top100 are extremely weak for Protoss (P/T/Z 25 vs. 43 vs. 32) and the trend goes on. These stats reflect millions of games played and tens of thousands of players. To suggest that the overall skill level of all these players just differs so significantly from race to race is just stupid. Based on the above information, it seems likely that something like 40% (2.9/7.3, rounding some) of all players play protoss. The information in the previous post implies that protoss is underrepresented in all of the categories shown, and that this underrepresentation becomes more peaked at the top. It would take a pretty major shift in the current fotm protoss styles to make up a 10% gap, don't you agree? | ||
|
Proximo
38 Posts
Toss are obviously the most OP race in SC2. However, the simple, mere mortal players that choose to play Protoss obviously don't have have the cognitive, mental and gaming abilities to play Protoss correctly. Therefore a preemptive nerf is necessary IMO, to prepare for the eventual arrival of the Protoss messiah, who shall one day show us the light and teach us how to play properly. In conclusion, I would like thank all the Zerg and Terran players, who have taken time out of their busy schedules pwning n00bs and winning tournaments, to come here and enlighten us simple Toss players with their uber theorycrafting. Much appreciated, my friends. | ||
|
gorath
Germany19 Posts
People honestly think that somehow the 3 million Protoss players are just significantly inferior to all the other players and that all the patches that consistently buffed Zerg and nerfed Protoss in some way have nothing to do with all these facts. | ||
|
Nazarid
United States445 Posts
On November 10 2010 05:49 Treehead wrote: They also only have a range of 2, so against a stutter-stepping terran force being pursued by charge zealots, their chances of getting into range is reasonably small. I'd like to add something here regarding some of the terran complains about toss's "late game deathball". What happened to said late game deathball when Socke used it against Jinro's MMM/Tank army? It sure looked to me as though Jinro stopped it dead in its' tracks, despite being a battle which was near max food for both sides the entire time for something like 20 minutes at MLG Dallas. I could insert "maybe you should use tanks and MMM against toss late game" here, but really - my point is quite simply that even in the hands of ridiculously skilled players, the match is at least even - no more, no less. Or perhaps Socke was doing it wrong? I think in practice, you may find that you don't even really need to tech all the way to BCs/Thors to find a way to deal with gateway + colo + HTs. T2 with upgrades did the trick for Jinro. I'm not saying this match proves anything definitively, but I am saying that at the top level of play, your statement that it is near impossible to beat a late-game toss's army is not really reflected in the games I've been watching. I'd like to add something here regarding some of the terran complains about toss's "late game deathball". What happened to said late game deathball when Socke used it against Jinro's MMM/Tank army? It sure looked to me as though Jinro stopped it dead in its' tracks, despite being a battle which was near max food for both sides the entire time for something like 20 minutes at MLG Dallas. I could insert "maybe you should use tanks and MMM against toss late game" here, but really - my point is quite simply that even in the hands of ridiculously skilled players, the match is at least even - no more, no less. yes socke made micro mistakes in that fight, and thats what it comes down to TvP its a micro fight late game, but even micro cannot save you from the death composition with HT AND Collosi! I am a random player and love it when i roll Protoss V terran atm because my win % is over 95% vs terran i have had many posts on this topic already the fact is, once its late game Protoss cannot be beaten very easily by a terran army, if you screw up your micro in a huge 200/200 food fight then yea your gonna lose that army .... but the thing is many protoss are falling to simple mechanic mistakes(even the pros make mistakes) but as a Terran i should not have to be FORCED into constant aggression or lose the game guaranteed I should not be FORCED to drop in multiple places at once during the entire game...why can i not just turtle like i do with zerg/toss and take small advantages(killing off small armies) | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On November 10 2010 05:49 Treehead wrote: They also only have a range of 2, so against a stutter-stepping terran force being pursued by charge zealots, their chances of getting into range is reasonably small. I'd like to add something here regarding some of the terran complains about toss's "late game deathball". What happened to said late game deathball when Socke used it against Jinro's MMM/Tank army? It sure looked to me as though Jinro stopped it dead in its' tracks, despite being a battle which was near max food for both sides the entire time for something like 20 minutes at MLG Dallas. I could insert "maybe you should use tanks and MMM against toss late game" here, but really - my point is quite simply that even in the hands of ridiculously skilled players, the match is at least even - no more, no less. Or perhaps Socke was doing it wrong? balance talk aside all the statements of "protoss unbeatable army late game" really is massive bullshit lol nazarid: I am a random player and love it when i roll Protoss V terran atm because my win % is over 95% vs terran this immediately shows how ridiculous any opinion you post is. if that actually is your win %, then congrats, you are decent at the matchup and play MASSIVELY INFERIOR OPPONENTS | ||
|
.Carnage
United States99 Posts
| ||
|
schiznak
Australia258 Posts
On November 10 2010 06:18 Grond wrote: Its been mentioned many times before but you can't use win percentage because of how the matchmaking system works. Looking at points is much more useful. Top 5000 Protoss 30.4% Top 2500 Protoss 30.2% Top 1000 Protoss 29.7% Top 500 Protoss 29.4% Top 250 Protoss 30.8% Top 100 Protoss 25.0% It's pretty consistent until you get to the Top100 then there is a large drop off. that is so statistically insignifigant its not even funny. it hovers at around ~30% for every measure until you get to 100, which is only 5% lower and is most likely an outlier considering the tiny number of 100 players. | ||
|
Treehead
999 Posts
On November 10 2010 07:22 .Carnage wrote: Protoss players think protoss takes the most skill and is the most dynamic when it isn't. I think people are playing it in a fashion that is kind of wonky Personally, I do not believe that it has been shown that Protoss takes "the most skill" to succeed with. I think it has been shown that they are underrepresented. Whether or not that is because more skill is required takes a massive argument to get to, and personally, I don't think data is even possible to obtain which can show this is true or false, unless there was emprical game data which shows that directly comparing units results in other races being strictly superior (which isn't the case). I do believe that DPS stats and survival stats are probably being poorly weighted (especially in short range units) by Blizzard right now, and that the protoss race is having difficulty as a result. I think it has been said (and if it hasn't, I'll say it) that Protoss definitely is not the most dynamic in regards to army building (i.e. macro, army usage is another discussion). When Terran needs to go from making vikings to banshees, they can do that by swapping a tech lab with another building. But after doing so, they may only make one unit at a time (though they can swap on a reactor to make two). When zerg needs to go from making Hydralisk to making Mutalisk, they need to make another building, but once that building is finished can immediately dump all their resources into that unit (making many units at a time). Protoss, on the other hand, if asked to go from Immortals to Phoenixes (same tier unit), must not only build another building but must also make units from that building one at a time. For this reason, Protoss must often premeditate their tech swaps, and hope their opponent either falls to the opening push or plays along. To compensate for that, protoss may warp certain units into the battlefield instantly. These units (not so coincidentally) are almost always 90%+ of a protoss army. Now, this is not a complaint at all (as I rather like the ability to have the units I want instantly, with the wait time backloaded), but if there is one word for this type of playstyle it is definitely not dynamic. On November 10 2010 07:26 schiznak wrote: that is so statistically insignifigant its not even funny. it hovers at around ~30% for every measure until you get to 100, which is only 5% lower and is most likely an outlier considering the tiny number of 100 players. I would agree with you if 30% of all players played protoss. The real number is about 40%. See the problem? | ||
|
UberThing
Great Britain410 Posts
| ||
|
Nazarid
United States445 Posts
On November 10 2010 07:20 travis wrote: balance talk aside all the statements of "protoss unbeatable army late game" really is massive bullshit lol nazarid: this immediately shows how ridiculous any opinion you post is. if that actually is your win %, then congrats, you are decent at the matchup and play MASSIVELY INFERIOR OPPONENTS lol =( but yea seriously its sad thou and its not inferior opponents at least i don't see them as such, its the ladder so im sure ive played quite a few players that 4 gated their way to diamond or some other gimmicky timing push they saw on some casted game. I will go thrue my replays tonight and give an Accurate % of my PvT games w/l i am pretty sure its over atleast 90% for me rolling Protoss in PvT games, in every game ive won I have always made it to the late game and have very few players that actually harass me at all, maybe 1900ish diamond is too low for getting the "good" players but i am sure one or 2 pop into my ques randomly i mean if they didn't then the ladder is def the worst spot to base my info off of =(, but hey ladder is all i play i just dont have the time for tournaments in SC2 but honestly the game cant be that far different from ladder play to tournament play(at least in concept) | ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
Also toss rarely use harassement, because the warp prism is so weak. But in bw that didn't hurt the toss to use shuttles carriying their high damage weapons. Maybe a speed upgrade in the support dock could help to motivate toss player try out some harassements. Double immortal into the supply depot farm of a terra, right when he moves out xD, even able to warp in zealots to harass the worker line and scout a bit for enemy reinforcements, to save the immortals. Have some more observers to scout drops. Result should be if he attacks he wouldn't be able to reinforce his army for some time, while chrono boost and warp gates + mobile pylon makes it really easy to use that advantage. Would like to see some phenix map control stuff against the zerg and then just using a warp prism + colossi for the ground damage. (no idea if this works way to much micro for me and hydras are prolly to fast on creep for the prism, so go prism speed upgrade in the robo support (dunno if there is an upgrade in the fleet beacon for it or for the observer or something completly different hehe)) well can just hope for some cute protoss play like in the bw days, i mean marines had stim there as well, and the wraith was an even better shuttle hunter, but the reaver storm drop was a standart move, forcing so much ressources into anti drop. But i really like the pvz aggressiv play, where its always a back and force between stalkers zealots sentrys vs roaches lings banelings ^^. Really like it when the toss who mostly have more survivors anticipate what the zerg is building and counters it before its out. Damn want to try out the double immortal drop + zealot warp in now, looked so awesome in the games i saw. edit: harassment against randoms seems to be non existent (can't tell you why), even when i got zerg and had a terran opponent. Also there is way less cheese play when you are random. My guess is its because people decide this in the first workers, and since they don't know what race they are up against they don't decide on cheese or harrass. | ||
|
Grond
599 Posts
On November 10 2010 07:26 schiznak wrote: that is so statistically insignifigant its not even funny. it hovers at around ~30% for every measure until you get to 100, which is only 5% lower and is most likely an outlier considering the tiny number of 100 players. It's a 25% less compared to other brackets once you start looking at the worlds best. Seems pretty significant to me. | ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
| ||
|
jaeds
United States106 Posts
On November 10 2010 08:27 Grond wrote: It's a 25% less compared to other brackets once you start looking at the worlds best. Seems pretty significant to me. i think that the percent change comes down to player preference based on play-styles and race enjoyment. i imagine that while there are fewer represented protoss in the top 100 ladder that at least 20-40 of the top 100 players could switch races from terran or zerg and practice/play protoss ...and still be in the top 100 in a short time. it's not the race allowing them to be in the top 100. it's the player's skill | ||
|
gorath
Germany19 Posts
Its getting ridiculous. | ||
|
jaeds
United States106 Posts
On November 10 2010 09:17 gorath wrote: How stupid does one have to be to honestly believe that in some weird way all probabilities and statistics just don´t mean anything?! Its getting ridiculous. statistics that would matter more than the 4% change from 30% -> 25% representation within top 100: 1. how many pro BW players went: zerg, terran, protoss 2. how many pro wc3 players went: zerg, terran, protoss 3. how many professional players have played in tournaments as protoss initially and switched to zerg or terran because of a belief that their race is imbalanced/unable to be successful at higher levels 4. same as 3 above, but started as zerg or terran and switched to a different race. which race | ||
|
Satire
Canada295 Posts
On November 10 2010 06:32 Proximo wrote: I have read this entire thread, weighed the different arguments and have concluded that Protoss should definitely be nerfed even more. Toss are obviously the most OP race in SC2. However, the simple, mere mortal players that choose to play Protoss obviously don't have have the cognitive, mental and gaming abilities to play Protoss correctly. Therefore a preemptive nerf is necessary IMO, to prepare for the eventual arrival of the Protoss messiah, who shall one day show us the light and teach us how to play properly. In conclusion, I would like thank all the Zerg and Terran players, who have taken time out of their busy schedules pwning n00bs and winning tournaments, to come here and enlighten us simple Toss players with their uber theorycrafting. Much appreciated, my friends. I, for one, would like to be among the first to welcome our future Protoss overlords. | ||
| ||
