|
On November 16 2010 22:22 Fzero wrote:
Surprise that Cool and Tester are worse players now than when they were with oGs? I guess practice really does make you better at SC2.
How is cool worse again? Because he played badly one fucking day after 2-0ing SlayersBoxer? Jesus Christ people are haters.
People in this thread need to realize how hard qualifiers can be without seeding. Tester may have gone up against the next GSL winner. You can't judge his capability based on the qualifiers.
I thought NEXGenius looked great last GSL, have high hopes for this new TSL guy, and oGsMC is fucking awesome when he doesn't do terrible builds. There's other names there that are very good players. I don't think they will do as badly as the first two, despite the lower amount of qualified players.
|
United States8477 Posts
I don't know if it's been said before, but a large reason tosses haven't qualified as much is because of the map pool. Scrap station PvZ is so hard difficult as well as Metal PvZ cross pos to a lesser extent.
|
There is also just a lower number of good Protoss players. Most of the high ranked ladder players got there doing cheesy/very typical stuff that is easy to use. So I just hope that we will start to see some more decent P players soon.
|
On November 16 2010 22:42 Cade wrote:
There is also just a lower number of good Protoss players. Most of the high ranked ladder players got there doing cheesy/very typical stuff that is easy to use. So I just hope that we will start to see some more decent P players soon.
You can say that about every single race, the real question is why there a fewer good Protoss players.
|
On November 16 2010 22:42 Cade wrote:
There is also just a lower number of good Protoss players. Most of the high ranked ladder players got there doing cheesy/very typical stuff that is easy to use. So I just hope that we will start to see some more decent P players soon.
Well thats awfully subjective and debatable.
|
On November 16 2010 22:42 Cade wrote:
There is also just a lower number of good Protoss players. Most of the high ranked ladder players got there doing cheesy/very typical stuff that is easy to use. So I just hope that we will start to see some more decent P players soon.
Then again, if so, why do all the "good" people not play Protoss?
|
On November 16 2010 22:47 Woony wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2010 22:42 Cade wrote:
There is also just a lower number of good Protoss players. Most of the high ranked ladder players got there doing cheesy/very typical stuff that is easy to use. So I just hope that we will start to see some more decent P players soon. Then again, if so, why do all the "good" people not play Protoss?
Probably because most of the BW Pros went to Zerg and some to Terran because they allow for more of the mechanics from BW to shine through. But I'm sure there are tons of reasons for this.
|
I would like to elaborate a bit more on why I never conceived Protoss lategame to be particularly strong, and always thought that the biggest threat they have are timing pushes.
The most obvious problems are lack of mobility, lack of harassment options and lack of any air control whatsoever. There are no good bread and butter ranged ground DPS units like Roaches, Hydras, Marines or Marauders, so Protoss can only compete by placing money forcefields for the Zealots and relying on the powerful splash damage of the colossus later. Phoenices are cute, but horribly inefficient at harassing and way too expensive. 4 Phoenices (I believe that is the number you need to kill a queen in one lift) are already 600/400 that can't really participate in a normal fight. Terran bio is just going to roll you over, and you can barely harass a Zerg's economy with them.
As for other harassment units, Dark Templars are pretty awesome units actually, as they are good at defending drops and harassing expansions. The problem is that they lie at the end of a stupidly long tech path, and are virtually useless in big battles as their 120 HP evaporate faster than you can say "For Aiur!"
Storm Drops are not viable because you are probably not killing enough workers with your storm and the HT is going to die together with the 150 gas it took to build him.
Speaking of HTs, I cannot really understand how they are supposed to be so overpowered. I have seen them only in very few replays, and usually the Protoss player lost if the opponent was smart enough to bait and dodge storms. Defending drops is not really that great either if the opponent has control. If you warp in a HT to defend against it, the harasser only needs to pick it off and the drop has already paid for itself. Spending 150 gas on a unit which is potentially useless if the storm doesn't hit / it gets EMP'd is not always the best choice.
The general lack of mobility is further augmented by the lack of base defence on the side of Aiur. Cannons are so much inferior in defending expansions than planetary fortresses + turrets, while the zerg usually are the ones with map control (creep + overlords) and ultra mobile units, making moving out a lot safer for them. On the other hand, Protoss basically has to commit or he can just stay in his base to begin with.
Another issue prevalent in the mid to late game is the difficulty of tech switching or even adjusting army composition. Zerg is obviously the king in this, and Terran can at least swap their reactors/tech-labs around depending on what they need. Protoss has to stick with their colossi because they don't really survive transitioning/switching to anything else. And losing that deathball of colossi means losing the game, as they can't replenish their army fast enough (and gateway units don't cut it, unless you have gotten templar tech already) and have no defences to fall back on.
The macro mechanics of Protoss also works in a way where they can't recover from a big worker loss, as chronoboosting probes means that you have to pay more for them now before their effect kicks in later.
All-in all, I think the standard play against both Zerg and Terran will be some kind of 1-2 base allin if nothing changes. Comparing GSL1 and GSL2 for instance, I feel that the terrans have gotten better with multipronged attacks and drops, while the Zergs are a lot better at spreading creep, things which makes them powerful in the later stages of the game. On the other hand, protoss doesn't really have anything in that regard where they could excel, as splitting army wrecks them and good forcefields/storms are already required.
I want to write more, but I think I have whined enough for now, sorry about that.
|
On November 16 2010 22:49 Cade wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2010 22:47 Woony wrote:On November 16 2010 22:42 Cade wrote:
There is also just a lower number of good Protoss players. Most of the high ranked ladder players got there doing cheesy/very typical stuff that is easy to use. So I just hope that we will start to see some more decent P players soon. Then again, if so, why do all the "good" people not play Protoss? Probably because most of the BW Pros went to Zerg and some to Terran because they allow for more of the mechanics from BW to shine through. But I'm sure there are tons of reasons for this.
Or perhaps its just that protoss don't stand a chance in a straightup game. That could be the reason all "high protoss" only cheese and all you see in gsl is cheese from protoss players. Just simply because without it they cant win.
I think its quite naive to think that all good players choose Zerg or Terran....
|
I honestly don't play protoss anymore and after i switched to random i went from 1000 diamond to 1700.
|
On November 16 2010 21:57 Meatnose wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2010 21:47 ForTheDr3am wrote:
I am wondering whether somebody could direct me to some high level replays where a Protoss player actually wins over his opponent in a long game. There seems to be the consensus that Protoss is very powerful in the lategame, but I have rarely seen any indication of that yet. The majority of wins I have seen were some 1 base/2 base borderline all-in pushes, 4-6 gate or Blink Stalkers vs Zerg and 2 base colossus vs Terran. I think you are right. The talk at Blizzcon was that Protoss was too strong late game and that Psi Storm needed a nerf. That seems ridiculous to me. I watch a lot of tournaments, GSL and NA/EU tournaments. It seems like if the Protoss doesn't win within the first 15-20 minutes, they lose the game.
From my experience as both a follow of the pro scene and a high diamond protoss player (not that its much of an achievement, high diamond is like c/c- Iccup);
(Also bare with me, its quite long but this isn't a balance whine)
Protoss generally dominates Terran if they can get into the late-midgame on an even or at least close to even footing with the Terran player, Psi Storm and/or Collosus with +2/+3 Chargelots dominate Bio Balls, even with Medivac/Viking Support, and Mech is from my experience relatively unexplored, though admittedly I don't see it being too viable in theory...
However, a Terran player on an equal skill level as the Protoss player will almost always be miles and miles ahead by this time, if the game isnt over already (and if they're not they either got really unlucky, or they're doing something very wrong). MnM with Stim is currently far more powerful than anything the Protoss player has until Tier 3 (Storm/Range Collosus), and depending on what the Protoss player is doing, the Terran just need to pick one of a plethora of different timing attacks that come before Tier 3 and A-move into the Protoss base, expand, and throw down 2-3 bunkers and even if they lose - they now have an extra expansion and the Protoss can't counter attack safely, especially if you add in a siege tank or two.
It may sound weird, but I dont really consider this too imbalanced. Sure, it *might* be, that remains to be seen, but It seems to me that protoss players (myself included obviously) haven't figured out a solid way to survive the early/mid timing attacks without 100% perfect scouting and micro vs a skilled Terran player (actually controlling his forces and macroing, not just A-moving and going to get a drink ^.^), we've seen players like SangHo (I believe it was SangHo, correct me if Im wrong) opt for Sentry-heavy expands like we used to see against Zerg, or players like Huk (and many others, but he springs to mind for some reason) use 1-base collosus expands, or we've seen variations of 1 gate core expands that Day[9] really made popular in his daily, all of which revolve around staying alive while getting an expansion and teching to Tier 3. All of which have had mixed success and depend a lot on what the Terran is blindly doing as each has 1 or 2 common openers that blindly counter it.
I can easily see, with the current state of the game (i.e. assuming nothing gets patched, which is how people should be thinking) PvT becoming a matchup of the Protoss barely holding off wave and wave of Terran Bio while teching to Tier 3 off 2 bases before coming out with one big counter attack to seal the game ala high level zerg players (building just enough to survive while continuing to drone, or in this case, Tech) - I just don't think anyone has come up with an effective way to do this yet that doesn't insta-lose to at least one or two common Terran opening variations.
Now, because of this, I think a lot of Protoss have resorted to crazy aggressive "borderline all-in" builds, because if they play for a macro game they fear they'll get crushed (and as I mentioned above, quite a valid concern) - the MnM ball gets exponentially more and more powerful the bigger that it gets, the idea being to kill the Terran before it gets too big. Obviously this isn't a stable way to play the game as its risky and quite all-in-ish and I can see it going away pretty quickly once Terrans figure out how to deal with more aggressive builds, such as quick 2 base collosus (as zerg did during the beta/release).
I won't talk too much about PvZ, since I already have written more than I planned and Plexa did an excellent write up of the state of PvZ, much of which I agree with. But just briefly, PvZ is possibly the most exciting and dynamic matchup at the moment, and also arguably the most balanced as the range upgrade to roaches really altered this matchup in a lot of subtle and not-so-subtle ways.
Assuming both players are fairly equal skill and no-ones really fucked up - both players should enter the midgame on a close to equal footing, the protoss harassing a bit and forcing the zerg to make more combat units than they would like, and the zerg counter attacking and threatening with speedling/roaches possibly forcing cannons and keeping the protoss army occupied running around while teching to lair. This is where the matchup really heats up and currently both sides have a lot of valid options... however the Protoss really really needs to end it in this phase. If the Zerg can survive to get a 3rd or even 4th and Tech to hive, the game is pretty much over.
Which is why you see a lot of all-in style builds, or delayed rushes like the 2 base 6/7 gate attack - much like you see in PvT matchup only reversed, protoss players generally havent figured out a stable late-game army since stalkers and sentries are so weak that late, they'd rather not have to deal with it and try to end the game early, rather than harassing and expanding/teching in the mid game while setting up for a strong late game.
Again, I wouldn't call this imbalanced and sooner or later Protoss will figure out how to deal with the new roach more effectively and more avenues of harassment in the mid game will open up, but until then a lot of the Protoss players seem content to just go for this all-in type builds and try to end the game there.
Sorry if I rambled a little, its close to midnight here and I havent really had much sleep past few days :S
TL;DR:
Currently;
PvT = Protoss weak early/mid, strong late
PvZ = Protoss strong early/mid, weak late
Protoss havent figured out good ways to get past this, so give up and just all-in or "borderline" all-in rush
|
I find it fascinating that people think protoss just needs to "adjust" or come up with new playstyles. Protoss has been the most populated race since release, giving them the potential to create a plethora of new strategies etc. One also must note how Protoss centric day[9]'s daily seems to be. This should hint that the Protoss think tank has been hard at work for some time since the last patch. The results, however, are dismal. Top level play has begun to stagnate for Protoss as they grasp for wacky new strats, because the standard play has been countered.
|
On November 16 2010 22:47 Woony wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2010 22:42 Cade wrote:
There is also just a lower number of good Protoss players. Most of the high ranked ladder players got there doing cheesy/very typical stuff that is easy to use. So I just hope that we will start to see some more decent P players soon. Then again, if so, why do all the "good" people not play Protoss?
while protoss does well against zerg PvT is a hilarious matchup and the probability that you wont meet and terran is quite low (im playing zerg so this is a pretty unbiased pov)
|
On November 16 2010 23:17 Alphasquad wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2010 22:47 Woony wrote:On November 16 2010 22:42 Cade wrote:
There is also just a lower number of good Protoss players. Most of the high ranked ladder players got there doing cheesy/very typical stuff that is easy to use. So I just hope that we will start to see some more decent P players soon. Then again, if so, why do all the "good" people not play Protoss? while protoss does well against zerg PvT is a hilarious matchup and the probability that you wont meet and terran is quite low (im playing zerg so this is a pretty unbiased pov)
PvZ is equally hilarious.
Every single PvX game feels like I have to make no mistakes while pressuring but also not dying until my t3 kicks in, and then desperately win the game with 1 push as I can't ever retreat with 2.25 units and before the other races' counters to my t3 arrive. I have lost uncounted games where the game is decided by a Z/T player just 1as into me with less army value and just plows through due to cost-effectiveness of every other T1.
Frustrating as fuck.
|
On November 16 2010 22:42 Cade wrote:
There is also just a lower number of good Protoss players. Most of the high ranked ladder players got there doing cheesy/very typical stuff that is easy to use. So I just hope that we will start to see some more decent P players soon.
I think when you watch SangHo, Tester, and Inca play, they are quite "good". Its mind boggling that the three best protoss players (IMO) did not qualify.
|
what defines "good players"?
is it how successful they are in tournaments?
if so, how can there be as many "good" protoss player as T/Z assuming there is something off with balance?
whenever i see games of topplayers it feels like the T has 5 ways to lose, Z has 15 ways to lose and P about 100...
|
It's so annoying to see that people are still dismissing the thought that Protoss might need help.
First of all, when Pros play to win. If there is a race with a distinct advantage they'll pick it. If there are no distinctive advantage to any given race then they will simply pick one that they like the most for whatever reason (play style, art, etc).
Given the fact that the Protoss is the most popular race in Starcraft 2 right now. It is only natural that Protoss is at least as represented as Zerg and Terran, if not more due to the popularity. However, this is not the case.
Second, the results of the GSL 3 Qualifier shows about twice as many Terran and Zerg versus Protoss, giving them roughly a 20% representation. That is extremely low. And before you give the counter of "well, the less-good people play Protoss". I highly doubt that this is within the "random" confidence interval, although I'll leave people that are better than me at applied mathematics to do the work. I can live with the argument that Optimusprime or Boxer or Nestea are better than Inca or Nexgenius or stuff. However, I can't live with the fact that 50% of the Terran/Zerg players are better than them, because that is just not true.
I think long-term evaluations should be given and no abrupt and stupid buffs should be given to the Protoss, but I think it's pretty ignorant to believe that Protoss are still fine at the moment and all the good Protoss players just need to l2p. That may be true for us non-2000+diamonds, but definitely not true for these players.
|
Idra put it well when he said Protoss is the easiest race to get good at, but the hardest race to get really good at.
|
On November 16 2010 22:42 Cade wrote:
There is also just a lower number of good Protoss players. Most of the high ranked ladder players got there doing cheesy/very typical stuff that is easy to use. So I just hope that we will start to see some more decent P players soon.
I don't know why you think Inca , Tester, Sangho, and all pro korean protosses spend 10 hours a day 4-gating of void ray cheesing.
Sure in diamond they do that, but GSL people? who are sponsored and have teams + coaches ??
|
On November 16 2010 23:39 saint_d wrote:
Idra put it well when he said Protoss is the easiest race to get good at, but the hardest race to get really good at.
What he did not include was the fact that you can be really really really really good at a race and still lose horribly due to (possible) imbalances.
Getting to god level with a race does not mean that the race has no inherent problems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
