| Forum Index > Closed |
|
H0i
Netherlands484 Posts
On November 11 2010 02:26 Flummie wrote: Like in BW you mean? So you still have to build a robo fac and need a observatory after your robotics facility is finished so it takes even longer to build? Not a good idea imo  No, if you read my post you can see the idea is to get it after the cyber core | ||
|
Barook
Germany143 Posts
On November 11 2010 02:19 ckcornflake wrote: I think one small change that blizzard can make that would at least make P harassment more viable is reducing the cost of the Warp prism. I honestly think that Blizzard decided on 200 minerals is because it's protoss unit, and protoss units are supposed to be expensive. It really doesn't have the dual purpose of a medevac or an overlord. The ability to warp in units is pretty cool, but it's almost always a suicide mission because there isn't a enough room in the warp prism, or converting it back to flying mode takes too long. Harassment is pretty pointless if the death of your harassing units are guaranteed. I'd say 150 minerals for the warp prism would make more sense. Shuttles did cost 200 minerals in BW as well. Only difference: In BW, P had a unit that was worth dropping, the Reaver. In SC2, P doesn't have such luxury. Neither Colossi nor Immortals are really worth dropping. And the Warp-In ability is hardly worth it. Pylons do a better job for less minerals and additional benefits most of the time. Warping in DTs in the enemy base (as seen in GSL) is cute, but is stifled by the already mentioned horrible tech requirements. Other warped-in units rarely survive long enough to do enough damage to justify the wasted resources. | ||
|
ziteNiA
Sweden73 Posts
On November 11 2010 02:54 Barook wrote: Shuttles did cost 200 minerals in BW as well. Only difference: In BW, P had a unit that was worth dropping, the Reaver. In SC2, P doesn't have such luxury. Neither Colossi nor Immortals are really worth dropping. And the Warp-In ability is hardly worth it. Pylons do a better job for less minerals and additional benefits most of the time. Warping in DTs in the enemy base (as seen in GSL) is cute, but is stifled by the already mentioned horrible tech requirements. Other warped-in units rarely survive long enough to do enough damage to justify the wasted resources. +1 Reaver back would be sweet. and corsair | ||
|
Techno
1900 Posts
Taking the banshee's viability away from Terran is not the answer. | ||
|
Chronicle
161 Posts
Zerg/Terran can get rid of scouts for 50 min with ling/marine. Toss has to invest in a cybercore then the more expensive stalker unless they are "lucky" and the scouting worker leaves of its own accord. Terran gets its cheap t1 upgrades (stim/concusive/shields) from its tech lab that it will get anyway and can swap. Zerg can get lingspeed second it finishes pool. Toss requires Twlight council investment ontop of their tech, which is also twice as expensive. Basic defensive structure (spine/bunker) is "free" for Terran/Zerg as they unlock it from normally. Protoss has to invest in a forge, to unlock them ontop of placing a pylon and they have no "future". Spines can relocate, bunkers can be salvaged, cannons once they have been made are a waste of minerals when you have no further use for them. I could go on but I wont but this is the reason why Robo tech is safe. Its the only way Protoss can get reliable detection/scouting, and goes into colossi tech which is needed for aoe, as templar is too expensive for what it does, and archons are just 3 range mini thors that cannot be repaired but slowed. Keep in mind that the above is just "some" of the Issues. TLDR - What Protoss has is fine, Process of getting it is too expensive and not worth its cost. Charge is way more situational and has fewer uses than lingspeed/stim, so why is it 3x more expensive and take 3x longer to get? Protoss earlygame sucks, they are fine if they survive it for the most part but having todo X to not die does not make for good gameplay or allow for tactical decision making. Everything you do is a blind hope until you can get observers. WTLDR - Their earlygame sucks in both tech, options and scouting. Chronoboost is not that amazing either compared to inject/mule if you think about it. All chronoboost does is knock off 10 game seconds of a tech/unit per use, But whats the reason it has come to this? Why has Protoss an uncalled for nerf after nerf when they have so many numerous problems? Simple. Mass Forcefield is too damn strong, but due to the current state of the race they have to depend on it in every battle. It also fits in with their "must go robo to not die" gameplay, as Colossi are deadly against trapped units. | ||
|
Techno
1900 Posts
On November 11 2010 02:54 Barook wrote: Shuttles did cost 200 minerals in BW as well. Only difference: In BW, P had a unit that was worth dropping, the Reaver. In SC2, P doesn't have such luxury. Neither Colossi nor Immortals are really worth dropping. And the Warp-In ability is hardly worth it. Pylons do a better job for less minerals and additional benefits most of the time. Warping in DTs in the enemy base (as seen in GSL) is cute, but is stifled by the already mentioned horrible tech requirements. Other warped-in units rarely survive long enough to do enough damage to justify the wasted resources. High templars are pretty awesome in drops. @Chronicle, I heavily disagree. Your making it sound like protoss is generally underpowered, but from a Terran perspective, if I throw my ball of units at his ball of units and we are above 50 food. I am likely to lose the battle. EDIT: I am going to try and get my thoughts across in such a way as to not incite hatred or flaming. Heres how I play TvP: I get 3 baracks' with addons quickly and macro an army up to 50 food as fast as I can. I scout. If he has 4 warp gates, I throw down at least 1 bunker and take scvs off the line. If he has a robo I push immediatly. When I get near his base I split my army into 2 hotkeys, 1 is most of the army and 2 is a small group that pushes forward and gets the zealots to chase them. After killing the zealots, I either run away, snipe a few stalkers or try and get behind the collossus that is likely to come out. I should have an expansion up by now. Usually now I get 2 drop ships and attack in multiple positions and retreat the force that the protoss responds to. Then I have to take map control so that when the protoss moves out I can bait him forward with a small force and get behind him with a larger one to snipe the collossus. ......... My feelings are: A stable build against protoss requires the pumping of units early because of 4 warp gate builds. I can't play a passive game against protoss like I can against zerg, if left to their own macroing, a protoss player will beat me If and when I win its a complete domination of beautiful dropship micro or a super early attack. If I don't do anything "baller" I lose | ||
|
mormes
Brazil13 Posts
Protoss have to go back to the base or the pylon to make units, the other races dont, and this make ALL THE DIFFERENCE in hight level play. u can't micro properly in batles, and protoss have to micro better couse there are few units. sorry 4 the bad english | ||
|
Techno
1900 Posts
On November 11 2010 03:20 mormes wrote: The players are good, and the race too, the problam is on the mechanics. Protoss have to go back to the base or the pylon to make units, the other races dont, and this make ALL THE DIFFERENCE in hight level play. u can't micro properly in batles, and protoss have to micro better couse there are few units. sorry 4 the bad english Maybe. Probably not. It's my opinion that APM is not a deciding factor in high level play. | ||
|
Chronicle
161 Posts
On November 11 2010 03:12 Techno wrote: @Chronicle, I heavily disagree. Your making it sound like protoss is generally underpowered, but from a Terran perspective, if I throw my ball of units at his ball of units and we are above 50 food. I am likely to lose the battle. Protoss generally are underpowered, heavily. Have been for awhile BUT Forcefields are just that good. Even though protoss has the weaker army in both tech/units at most points of the game in any given matchup good forcefields can make all the difference. Yeah 50 food vs 50 food TvP T might loose it bad. Why? Forcefields cutting your army in 1/2 but even with that it would prob be a close fight. However if their are no Forcefields or ineffective ones P will just get rolled hard, won't even be a close contest and thats the problem with the race. Everything they have is an expensive gimick and not worth the investment and the cheapest gimmick (Forcefield) turns out to be the best one. | ||
|
Techno
1900 Posts
On November 11 2010 03:27 Chronicle wrote: Protoss generally are underpowered, heavily. Have been for awhile BUT Forcefields are just that good. Even though protoss has the weaker army in both tech/units at most points of the game in any given matchup good forcefields can make all the difference. Yeah 50 food vs 50 food TvP T might loose it bad. Why? Forcefields cutting your army in 1/2 but even with that it would prob be a close fight. However if their are no Forcefields or ineffective ones P will just get rolled hard, won't even be a close contest and thats the problem with the race. Everything they have is an expensive gimick and not worth the investment and the cheapest gimmick (Forcefield) turns out to be the best one. I disagree with this. Adding heavily bodes poorly for your objectivity. What say you to the win rates released by Blizzard? BAM Diamond: Protoss 49.6% Against Terran Protoss 52.8% against Zerg Platinum: Protoss 56% against Terran Protoss 47% against Zerg 61% PvT in Gold 63% PvT in Silver What can we infer from these results? That Brotosses are winning on the ladder, especially in lower levels. But in diamond the win rates can be said to be even, considering +-1% as a margin of error. If that's not balance (in Diamond) I don't know what is. Surely you could change your thoughts to "Perhaps there are a few aspects of protoss that are underpowered in certain situations". | ||
|
dragonblade369
Canada464 Posts
On November 11 2010 03:42 Techno wrote: I disagree with this. Adding heavily bodes poorly for your objectivity. What say you to the win rates released by Blizzard? BAM What can we infer from these results? That Brotosses are winning on the ladder. If that's not balance I don't know what is. Surely you could change your thoughts to "Perhaps there are a few aspects of protoss that are underpowered in certain situations". You are stating statistics when you don't know how blizz do the matchmaking. The system is made such that the player will win around 50% of the time. You cannot interpret balance from such statistics. Also, equal supply of gateway units and equal supply of barrack units are going to fight, the barrack units are going to win... and hard. If you don't believe me, test it out yourself. | ||
|
Protoss_Carrier
414 Posts
On November 11 2010 03:42 Techno wrote: I disagree with this. Adding heavily bodes poorly for your objectivity. What say you to the win rates released by Blizzard? BAM What can we infer from these results? That Brotosses are winning on the ladder, especially in lower levels. But in diamond the win rates can be said to be even, considering +-1% as a margin of error. If that's not balance (in Diamond) I don't know what is. Surely you could change your thoughts to "Perhaps there are a few aspects of protoss that are underpowered in certain situations". you should look at PvT win rate in korean diamond and GSL, where it matters. You aren't suggesting that we balance base on gold and silver, aren't you? | ||
|
Chronicle
161 Posts
On November 11 2010 03:42 Techno wrote: I disagree with this. Adding heavily bodes poorly for your objectivity. What say you to the win rates released by Blizzard? BAM What can we infer from these results? That Brotosses are winning on the ladder. If that's not balance I don't know what is. Surely you could change your thoughts to "Perhaps there are a few aspects of protoss that are underpowered in certain situations". Your not the sharpest tool in the toolbox. Protoss are heavily unpowered as a whole because Forcefield is insanely good and "almost" balances it out. Yeah protoss are not helpless atm even though they are heavily unpowered overall, they can still win games. Why? THEY HAVE FORCEFIELDS Any protoss army, no matter what it is comprised of will loose to any composition of a Terran/Zerg army of equal cost without alot of sentry's spamming forcefields. Protoss have been balanced around the forcefield since the beta, and its about time that was changed. | ||
|
Treehead
999 Posts
On November 11 2010 03:12 Techno wrote: High templars are pretty awesome in drops. @Chronicle, I heavily disagree. Your making it sound like protoss is generally underpowered, but from a Terran perspective, if I throw my ball of units at his ball of units and we are above 50 food. I am likely to lose the battle. EDIT: I am going to try and get my thoughts across in such a way as to not incite hatred or flaming. Heres how I play TvP: I get 3 baracks' with addons quickly and macro an army up to 50 food as fast as I can. I scout. If he has 4 warp gates, I throw down at least 1 bunker and take scvs off the line. If he has a robo I push immediatly. When I get near his base I split my army into 2 hotkeys, 1 is most of the army and 2 is a small group that pushes forward and gets the zealots to chase them. After killing the zealots, I either run away, snipe a few stalkers or try and get behind the collossus that is likely to come out. I should have an expansion up by now. Usually now I get 2 drop ships and attack in multiple positions and retreat the force that the protoss responds to. Then I have to take map control so that when the protoss moves out I can bait him forward with a small force and get behind him with a larger one to snipe the collossus. ......... My feelings are: A stable build against protoss requires the pumping of units early because of 4 warp gate builds. I can't play a passive game against protoss like I can against zerg, if left to their own macroing, a protoss player will beat me If and when I win its a complete domination of beautiful dropship micro or a super early attack. If I don't do anything "baller" I lose 1. A heavily macroing zerg is far more threatening than a heavily macroing protoss. Reason: they can saturate bases much, much faster. 2. I would watch some replays of the pros (MLG Dallas is a good place to start). Clearly, they are able to engage stable builds that don't involve consistent pumping out of 3 barracks. If you can't against opponents your level, you need to practice more, not use a different build. 3. You sound like you're focusing a lot on micro, is it possible that while you're doing this the protoss is just macroing more efficiently than you are? Are you always making SCVs? Check the "spending" tab in your replays, are all of his numbers higher? If so, the specifics of what he is building and what his race has to offer is a sidenote. If he just has more stuff, he's going to win most of the time. On November 11 2010 03:11 Techno wrote: Perhaps banshees are something protoss has to think about and be aware of. Consider getting a cannon if you don't want to get a fast observer. Also, consider attacking the enemy at the time his banshee comes out so you can force him to defend. Taking the banshee's viability away from Terran is not the answer. Perhaps they are something we have to think about. Or, perhaps they completely define our early game tech choices. I'd like to see a single replay from any league where "a cannon" was enough to hold off a rush to banshee. Regarding pressure, if we don't get the observer, we don't know they're going banshees, therefore for this tactic to be useful, we must pressure every Terran at around that time. Considering many Terran build for early pressure, this would place us at their base with about the same size of force and yielding the defender's advantage. We also haven't expanded (unless the idea is to simultaneously pressure, expand and tech). | ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
And while terran and zerg give away their tech way earlier, the toss won't because core can mean almost everything except of early canons or upgrades. So the first worker pretty much gives information if you will get an early attack or not, or if your opponents goes for a heavy tech. (2 gas etc) about the banshee. hm did hold it of with canons some times, its just a bit annoying sim city. (no replays i think so didn't happened) Though robo + observer doesn't interfere much with teching, since the obsevers gives such a nice advantage for voidrays or phenix play. Also a fast phenix can force an early cloak, so the energie is out when it reaches your base. you should have either a smith or a robo anyway, if you want to go for either ground upgrades or drop/colossi. *remembers bw, even having to build a special building and making 2 upgrades for the observers, along side with the robo and not using it for something else* And wraith was even easier to research cloak and could snipe the observers. Though the dragoon push would destroy a terran if you didn't go for tank or spidermines. And even with that you could end up getting your tank sniped. Just get over it that you need the observer ... i mean in bw it was more then 3 times the gas you needed for it. | ||
|
Treehead
999 Posts
On November 11 2010 03:50 Chronicle wrote: Your not the sharpest tool in the toolbox. Protoss are heavily unpowered as a whole because Forcefield is insanely good and "almost" balances it out. Yeah protoss are not helpless atm even though they are heavily unpowered overall, they can still win games. Why? THEY HAVE FORCEFIELDS Any protoss army, no matter what it is comprised of will loose to any composition of a Terran/Zerg army of equal cost without alot of sentry's spamming forcefields. Protoss have been balanced around the forcefield since the beta, and its about time that was changed. This really isn't the case. I need only point out a few games from MLG Dallas to prove that it is possible for a high-level protoss to beat a high-level Zerg or Terran without using forcefield. | ||
|
Barook
Germany143 Posts
On November 11 2010 03:12 Techno wrote: High templars are pretty awesome in drops. And that's why HT drops are so common, especially in high level play - oh, wait, nevermind, they aren't. HT doesn't have the sheer effectiveness of stimmed Marauder drops. Plus, the best thing they could do is kill some workers if you can sneak them near the mineral line (e.g. cliffs) somehow. And again, lots of expensive tech for to little benefit in that regard. | ||
|
Chronicle
161 Posts
On November 11 2010 04:02 Treehead wrote: This really isn't the case. I need only point out a few games from MLG Dallas to prove that it is possible for a high-level protoss to beat a high-level Zerg or Terran without using forcefield. Not after the earlygame its not. Example if them games Naz did vs Idra lasted to the 80-100 food mark, you would of seen alot of forcefields from Naz. Hell the only reason he won game 1 was because of using the "Natural" forcefield of the Wolf Statue. If IdrA had destroyed that statue in advance (for watever reason) they stalkers would of most likely died in a similar fashion to what happened in game 2. | ||
|
HuHEN
United Kingdom514 Posts
On November 11 2010 03:42 Techno wrote: I disagree with this. Adding heavily bodes poorly for your objectivity. What say you to the win rates released by Blizzard? BAM What can we infer from these results? That Brotosses are winning on the ladder, especially in lower levels. But in diamond the win rates can be said to be even, considering +-1% as a margin of error. If that's not balance (in Diamond) I don't know what is. Surely you could change your thoughts to "Perhaps there are a few aspects of protoss that are underpowered in certain situations". Moot point, I dont care if the game is perfectly balanced across most levels, if pro(tosses) cant win tournaments then the success of mid/low level diamond players is no consolation. | ||
|
Treehead
999 Posts
On November 11 2010 04:01 FeyFey wrote: About the scouting, marines or lings (except on creep) can't get your probe, you would at least need two marines, and shield recharge can make the probe survive even 2 marines. (stalker on the other hand is a save worker kill because of its speed) Just because everyone wants to save their worker and run out as soon as the racks is blinking, doesn't mean that you can't stay for way longer. And while terran and zerg give away their tech way earlier, the toss won't because core can mean almost everything except of early canons or upgrades. So the first worker pretty much gives information if you will get an early attack or not, or if your opponents goes for a heavy tech. (2 gas etc) So, let's say we see two gas. This means he's probably doing more than just M&M. But does that mean MMM, or does it mean banshees, or does it mean fast thors? Heck, maybe he's 1-rax expanding, and just taking the extra gas for his 6 barracks once he has his natural saturated. Seeing that they are willing to spend 150 minerals on refineries only tells us a couple of things they aren't doing, and it certainly doesn't preclude them from having enough resources to have a solid Marine/Marauder army before we can get a colossus or HT. | ||
| ||
|
|
RotterdaM Event
The PiG Daily
CranKy Ducklings
WardiTV Invitational
Cure vs Zoun
SHIN vs Classic
ByuN vs MaxPax
Percival vs YoungYakov
OSC
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV Invitational
Shopify Rebellion Sundays
Spirit vs Mixu
Clem vs TBD
RSL Revival
Serral vs Rogue
BlizzCon
IdrA vs MC
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
