EPT[D] Why is protoss doing so bad in the GSL? - Page 86
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Darksoldierr
Hungary2012 Posts
| ||
|
metalsonic
Netherlands95 Posts
| ||
|
RockshellGW
93 Posts
Instead of thinking of protoss as "easy" we should be thinking of it as having a "low skill cap." Yes it may seem that protoss has macro and micro that may or may not be easier for lower skilled players, BUT what happens when you get a player that is extremely high skilled playing the race? What more can he do? All he can do is the blink stalker micro, have good FFs, etc. and high toss players already have used that and mastered it. Where does toss go now? I think this is why zerg will have the advantage at extremely high levels of play, because zerg has the highest skill cap, because its the "hardest." Also think of our friend TLO, who has played professionally as Terran and then Zerg, as soon as people stopped QQing about Terran after the patches, he switches to Zerg? I dont think he's necessarily bandwagoning and i dont know this for a fact, but when picking your race at a high level you want to play one that has a very high skill cap so that you can always be improving. I see people say that the Koreans say protoss is "easy" but i think its just a bad definition and they all really mean that it has a low skill cap and is useless in competitive play. Being EASY is not the same as being OVERPOWERED | ||
|
Bull-Demon
United States582 Posts
On November 12 2010 20:59 TeWy wrote: This is such a blatant lie. Zerg has been dominating this game (in south korea at least) since beta day 1. I can remind me off Artosis posting a thread (during late beta) explaining why every single Korean tournament had a Zerg winner, and most of the times a 2nd Zerg as well. At the time it was because Zerg had fewer units that the other race thus was easier to figure out. Right now, still according to Zerg players, t's because terrans and protosses simply aren't good enough lolmao. There's always another explanation to the Zerg domination, I wonder what will come next. The only moment where they didn't dominate was the 2 months after terran mech had been buffed for terran (siege tanks AI), but eventually, it just got nerfed into oblivion after Zerg complained about it (people always talk about reapers, what about siege tanks core dmg 60 to 35 lolmao) so we're back to beta minus roach at 1 food, but well, they've 4 range now so it's a good trade. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=164129 That is POST BUFF. It's not all Korean tournaments though so feel free to disregard it to make your life easier. Saying zerg was OP before they got nerfed to prove they are somehow OP now is beyond me, you'll have to explain that one. Referencing BETA to somehow prove zerg is OP now is another one you'll have to explain. Zerg had won exactly JACK SHIT post release and before Fruitdealer became everyone's savior. It was Terrancraft and if you look at everything else besides the two GSL final results, it still is. There has pretty much been a Terran finalist in any tournament with a moderate prize pool (MLG DC and Dallas, GSL, IEM, Blizzcon). MLG raleigh was the exception where neither Zerg nor terran got into the finals. Saying they buffed siege tank AI when it has never been altered in any way? Mech died when magic boxed became widespread, terran was forced to make marines to deal with mutas, and then muta/ling/bling was born. It's a metagame shift. Any nerfs to terran mech came after the fact. | ||
|
busdriver
United States49 Posts
Compounding this is the inability of protoss to scout to assess the odds of early pressure. As soon as a marine or zergling pops, protoss scouting is done until robotics bay + observer (i.e. mid-game or so). I think this lack of ability to set the tone of the match early makes protoss feel like they're at the mercy of their opponents. Huk-style probe pressure is nice and all, but really doesn't do much. Because of this most Protoss feel the need to do 4-gate pushes or wait for Collosus, which may work well for timing pushes, but due to delayed scouting (due to the observer issue so many have mentioned) may prove to be the wrong strategy depending on opponents build. In conclusion I think this comes down to the chronoboost issue brought up over the last few pages. If protoss could do early pressure well, then they could utilize chronoboost to really abuse early pressure. And this applies to any real strategy. If protoss has a strategy that works well - than chronoboost can make it OP. So Blizzard has had to make everything expensive + time consuming so that chronoboost isn't OP. I believe that chronoboost has to be nerfed somehow and gateway units buffed. As it is now, I think that protoss needs a way to fast expand so that chronoboost really can be used on everything (due to 2 nexus energy). Unfortunately fast expanding is really hard as protoss. | ||
|
Protoss_Carrier
414 Posts
GSL3 qualifier results, note the lack of protoss players. | ||
|
Tuneful
United States327 Posts
| ||
|
Fa1nT
United States3423 Posts
On November 16 2010 02:55 Tuneful wrote: 7 of 32.. that looks pretty familliar. Yeah. Like zerg the last 2 GSLs. | ||
|
Lucius2
Germany548 Posts
| ||
|
darmousseh
United States3437 Posts
1. Scouting. Scouting is infinitely harder for protoss than a terran. Protoss have about 1 option of scouting with observer, however, this is tough scouting. If the terran is good they will see the observer and immediately snipe it off. It is possible to scout with sentries, but their energy is better suited for forcefields and guardian shield. Terran can scout with reapers, scans and floating factories. In almost all games i watch PvT, terran almost always has the upper hand in scouting 2. Gateway units don't do so well in mid game. Ok well, stalkers are great if you don't lose any, but if you just go in a head to head battle cost for cost, protoss always loses (I've tried many many times to find a good counter for a bioball in the unit tester using simple micro, but the only thing i could find that works is a heavy immortal zealot build, but in real battle terran will just micro back. Once protoss gets 2-3 high tech units like collosus or high templars, the battle shifts in the opposite direction. 3. Ghosts and vikings. For about 3 weeks now i've yet to play a game where a terran doesn't get a ghost on 2 bases. Ghosts when used effectively, destroy clumping protoss units along with having excellent dps. Now, when if i go 2 base collosus, maybe about 30 seconds before i push out with 2 collosus, i get scanned and i say to myself "FRACK". Usually i have an observer and watch as the starport suddenly has a reactor on it and then when i finally engage there are 3-4 vikings waiting to pick off those collosus. On certain maps this isn't a problem since it's easy to find a cliff that i can stick my collosus on, but on maps like jungle basin, it is impossible to take out a planetary fortress on their 3rd. In the middle of the map are some trees that are impassable for collosus, however vikings can just sit there waiting. Also there are only 4 small choke points so if the terran sits there he can mine all day long, but getting my own expansion is risky since there isn't a cliff in the middle of the map where i can sit my collosus and the side expansions are too far from my main and i risk losing my main base. HT then would seem the better choice, but because of the scouting problem terran will always get ghosts. The only listed counter to the ghost is zealots. 4. Tech switching. Ghosts and vikings are the proper responses to HT or collosus, so terran has to decide how and when to switch. Almost all terrans build 1 reactor which can be instantly moved to the starport. Approximate time to tech switch is the amount of time it takes to lift your starport. Ghosts on the other hand do take an extra building. Since Mech is sometimes not a great choice against protoss, most terran will use the factory for scouting and building a starport. The ghost academy costs 150m50g and takes 40seconds to build, so it takes approximately 40 seconds to tech switch to add 1-2 ghosts into your army. Protoss against terran almost always builds a robo in fear of the banshee unless scouting tells them otherwise, so assuming that protoss always gets a robo it costs 200m200g and 60 seconds to get a robo bay. and a fully chrono boosted collosus takes 38 seconds. Technically it takes 60 seconds to get this tech, but to get the magical number of collosus (2-3) it takes about 140 seconds. Terran can produce vikings 2 at a time so it takes 42 seconds to get every 2 vikings. If the terran scans the robo bay right away, this means they *can* have 4 vikings out right as your collosus hits. 4 vikings = 600m300g + no tech cost 1 collosus = 300m200g + 200m200g = 500m400g tech cost. If terran can take out the collosus even if sacrificing the 4 vikings it usually is a good investment. There are plenty of ways protoss can handle each of the situations above and come out ahead. Protoss can make 2-3 observers and almost have vision the entire game. Some awesome forcefields can cut the opposing army in half letting protoss get free kills. If unchecked, high templar can absolutely rape the terran army (which is why they are being looked at by blizzard) and finally protoss can get blink to try to snipe all the vikings if on favorable ground, so this is not a situation that is impossible, but it tends to make PvT an uphill battle in the mid-game. | ||
|
Wrongspeedy
United States1655 Posts
| ||
|
darmousseh
United States3437 Posts
On November 16 2010 05:18 Wrongspeedy wrote: For the love of god close this thread. Can't you see all the dead horses! This is the thread that never ends, yes it goes on and on my friends  | ||
|
Corvette
United States433 Posts
| ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On November 16 2010 05:12 darmousseh wrote: 2. Gateway units don't do so well in mid game. Ok well, stalkers are great if you don't lose any, but if you just go in a head to head battle cost for cost, protoss always loses (I've tried many many times to find a good counter for a bioball in the unit tester using simple micro, but the only thing i could find that works is a heavy immortal zealot build, but in real battle terran will just micro back. Once protoss gets 2-3 high tech units like collosus or high templars, the battle shifts in the opposite direction. Ding ding ding! When one race's tier 2 demonstrably sucks compared to the other races, it's not hard for those other races to figure out how to exploit it. None of this is new, and I can't believe that Blizzard hasn't addressed it yet. | ||
|
Uncultured
United States1340 Posts
| ||
|
darmousseh
United States3437 Posts
On November 16 2010 05:25 Uncultured wrote: Personally I think it has something do do with, when we go our safest most standard build, one bad FF is enough to kill us outright. Personally what i've done is stopped worrying about my macro as much. By constantly staring at the mini map and clicking to my army, i've had better success at forcefielding. I've lost this way too many times. However, this problem comes up in other MU's as well. If zerg builds drones instead of units they can suddenly lose the game, and 1 baneling can blow up your army, but yes it does feel very harsh. | ||
|
darmousseh
United States3437 Posts
On November 16 2010 05:23 xDaunt wrote: Ding ding ding! When one race's tier 2 demonstrably sucks compared to the other races, it's not hard for those other races to figure out how to exploit it. None of this is new, and I can't believe that Blizzard hasn't addressed it yet. One thing i also found was that a fast +1 armor and a good guardian shield (so that zealots don't run out) can often make a huge difference in the battle, but only if you have charge and they don't have concussive shells. With concussive shells terran can micro back like 1 second, kill all the zealots before the stalkers get in range again and then fight the stalkers in a head to head battle, so good forcefield placement is needed to prevent this, but if the forcefields (you need about 3 minimum) are even 1 second late, suddenly you will find yourself with no zealots. | ||
|
darmousseh
United States3437 Posts
 | ||
|
Jayrod
1820 Posts
I think the power of the 4 gate makes protoss hard to balance. Alot of people think with 4 gate you have to all in and go for the win. TT1 in the latest MLG showed another way of using 4 gate: to create a crapload of units that both prevent a fast expanding terran and help secure your own. Having a strong mid-game followup with a 4gate on the table could completely break the balance in all matchups. I would be for them nerfing 4 gate a little in exchange for some fluidity in the mid-game. Right now im not beating any zergs without blink stalkers or just being extremely aggressive and risky in the first 5 minutes. Versus really good terrans im struggling getting to the essential units in a way that doesnt leave me compeletely open for several minutes. Forcefields certainly are the key to not dying midgame, but the investment in sentries basically eliminates your hopes of doing any type of clever harassment strategies/tactics because all the non- one dimensional harassment play needs the gas | ||
|
darmousseh
United States3437 Posts
| ||
| ||
