|
On August 09 2011 23:24 Talin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2011 23:21 Heavenly wrote:On August 09 2011 23:19 Olsson wrote:On August 09 2011 23:10 Stijx wrote:
Now see, this kind of leaves me stumped too... Zerg used to be the "QQ" race and now that they're all using infestors they tell everyone else "well work it out"...
Now Zerg changed their position by using a previously unused unit (and still have a couple of unused utilities), but here I can't help but feel that Protoss actually doesn't have anything unexplored. The only way I've been beating Ghosts and Infestors recently is by putting my HTs in a warp prism and bringing them in from a different angle...
I think about our other units (Carriers and the Mothership) and they are just not worth the investment. In long macro games I only seem to win because an opponent messes up or forgets to inject larvae for ever and ever...
I think Protoss needs a new utility, something more efficient for harass, or maybe just give the Warp Prism some more health. Speed-Prisms are pretty boss. Oh cry. Zerg had months of issues against both terran and protosses. It wasn't until the infestor buff they figured it out and even then they had to start using and experimenting with infestors for a month or so. Terrans rarely use ghosts even now same goes with Protoss. T and P have anti-casters with feedback/emp but zerg doesn't. Use your anti-casters. One HT can take care of four infestors, EMP, Feedback, Fungal all have the same range. Zerg had months of a-moving roach/hydra into stalker/colossi. True. And Protoss had (and still has) months of extremely passive turtling, not contesting air control or utilizing harassment, and a one-army syndrome. It's just as fundamentally wrong as what Zergs were doing.
Because winning against zerg was easy doing it that way, because zergs refused to change so why would we? Plenty of protoss do stuff like that all the time now that zergs have changed their style. Like I said earlier, the problem is completely in the early game. Mid and late game in the matchups are mostly skill reliant (though zerg turtling with mass infestor/spines into mass infestor/broodlord/corruptor late game versus protoss is also completely ridiculous, Morrow 6-1'd Huk that way and the 1 loss came from Morrow not building any lings until full three base saturation verus Huk going 10 gate zealot/sentry)
|
On August 09 2011 23:27 Knutzi wrote:
i feel its very easy to just die because of things you have very little control over, for instances you just warped in a round of units and right after you spot 2 medivacs on its way to your base, you will lose alot before your army can get there.
That's not a valid argument. Thousands of Zergs have lost in the same way because we've made drones instead of units and the Terran or Protoss pushes out 5 seconds later.
|
On August 09 2011 23:25 Joey Wheeler wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2011 23:24 Talin wrote:On August 09 2011 23:21 Heavenly wrote:On August 09 2011 23:19 Olsson wrote:On August 09 2011 23:10 Stijx wrote:
Now see, this kind of leaves me stumped too... Zerg used to be the "QQ" race and now that they're all using infestors they tell everyone else "well work it out"...
Now Zerg changed their position by using a previously unused unit (and still have a couple of unused utilities), but here I can't help but feel that Protoss actually doesn't have anything unexplored. The only way I've been beating Ghosts and Infestors recently is by putting my HTs in a warp prism and bringing them in from a different angle...
I think about our other units (Carriers and the Mothership) and they are just not worth the investment. In long macro games I only seem to win because an opponent messes up or forgets to inject larvae for ever and ever...
I think Protoss needs a new utility, something more efficient for harass, or maybe just give the Warp Prism some more health. Speed-Prisms are pretty boss. Oh cry. Zerg had months of issues against both terran and protosses. It wasn't until the infestor buff they figured it out and even then they had to start using and experimenting with infestors for a month or so. Terrans rarely use ghosts even now same goes with Protoss. T and P have anti-casters with feedback/emp but zerg doesn't. Use your anti-casters. One HT can take care of four infestors, EMP, Feedback, Fungal all have the same range. Zerg had months of a-moving roach/hydra into stalker/colossi. True. And Protoss had (and still has) months of extremely passive turtling, not contesting air control or utilizing harassment, and a one-army syndrome. It's just as fundamentally wrong as what Zergs were doing. Extremely passive turtling is still the ideal way for Protoss to play.
Right now, it's only the ideal way to get ripped apart the moment you poke out.
|
Haven't people been practicing sentry drops with zealots or dts? (2 or 3 ff's by a good player) and you basically have a fence and tons of scv or drone kills. I thought I had heard something about that in a thread.
Edit: in regards to early hurassment.
|
On August 09 2011 23:26 Krehlmar wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2011 23:22 lunchforthesky wrote:On August 09 2011 23:20 Krehlmar wrote:
Truth be told hardly any protoss other than White-Ra is any "good" and I'll tell you why:
Analyze MC's style and you'll hardly notice any of the innovation that BoxeR, White-Ra and NesTea uses, MC is all about crisp micro+builds+aggression. Most of his games are actually just standard protoss but his opponents get so stressed out that they lose the game for him rather than MC winning it.
My point is; MC Is kind of like MarineKingPrime... once people realize he's just offensive and has some tricks up his sleeve there isn't much to it.
White-Ra on the other hand is a huge innovator and ALWAYS finds way to use his units to the fullest, be it running the first colossus across the map to a semi-contained terran and just sniping 4 marines and 2 depots; He used the colossus as a mobile tank... why don't any other protoss do that? He uses dark templars as blitz soldiers, he uses warp prism, he uses alot of funny but also useful tricks much like BoxeR's infinate drops and NesTea's spinecrawler rush etc.
Now I know people will argue and say MC and HuK are great, of which I don't agree of. I think they're good players and have practiced alot, but I think given the same time AND (and this is VERY important) confidence, BoxeR, Jinro and others would be much MUCH better.
Yeah forcefield micro is great and all but it is hardly the NesTea level of play that'll put a protoss up there alongside him.
EDIT: Also thanks for spoilering. White Ra isn't even the best foreign Protoss. What a dumb post, MC's won 2 GSL's and several foreign tournaments. Huk has won three major foreign tournament. Just all round wrong post. White Ra's special tactics almost always fail. And so did Fruitdealer and Marinekingprime until people learned how to beat them. Shut up with the attitude when you're "facts" are just player statistics that prove nothing. Europa has the most sprinting wins in the olympics, does that mean we're better runners than most african nations that are now dominating it? No. God when will fanboys learn that wins do not equal to proven skill.My point is that White-Ra does not have half the training regiment of MC or HuK yet holds almost the same standard. You can notice it under the surface, the innovation and play, much like you can notice how BoxeR is a godamn baller but his mechanics are just lacking to much, he hasn't practiced the cores enough for his innovation to put him over the edge over people who HAVE practiced as much. Also according to your logic I win because MC is in code B. Suck it 
LOL what the fuck? MC isn't even out of code S yet, code B what the fuck? Whitera better than MC?? you best be trollin. Whitera can't even compete with the medicore foreigners MC dismantles every time.
|
On August 09 2011 23:20 Denzil wrote: Carrier harass?
That makes 0 sense. Think about what makes a good harass unit. Speed, Expendability/Survivability, DPS, and ability to function in small numbers.
Carriers are slow, expensive (in resources, tech, and time), easily destroyed when alone, and require some degree of mass and upgrades to be effective. This is like recommending BC harass.
|
On August 09 2011 23:19 TheSubtleArt wrote:This seems contradictory. So? MVP has dropped to Code A before. I'm for reasonable balance discussions as much as anybody but this is such a horrible and insufficient basis for one. I mean I could just as easily counter your argument with the fact that Tassadar won Code A... If you really want to have a discussion, bring up winrates, compare winrates now to win rates before, mention some relevant patch changes that might have caused the problem, look at matchup statistics, etc. Is Protoss realy broken? Or is PvT broken? Or is one particular PvT all in broken?
Umm, someone did this just yesterday.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=252090
shows how badly protosses are doing
|
On August 09 2011 23:28 mrsaturn wrote:
Metagame shift.
protoss need immortals to hold early game attacks. going straight to colsi is a punishable cheese. toss have been getting away with it for a long time with pro usage of forcefields, but people have figured out how to punish protoss and exploit their gateway only units.
the game was balanced with every unit in mind and protoss think they can ignore a core unit of their race, the immortal. this is what is holding them back.
Immortals have 5 range and most of the time are stucked behind your army because units clump really bad?
And dont say micro cos 99% of the times there's a chokepoint that fucks u up
Immortal is also reall yslow
|
On August 09 2011 23:26 Krehlmar wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2011 23:22 lunchforthesky wrote:On August 09 2011 23:20 Krehlmar wrote:
Truth be told hardly any protoss other than White-Ra is any "good" and I'll tell you why:
Analyze MC's style and you'll hardly notice any of the innovation that BoxeR, White-Ra and NesTea uses, MC is all about crisp micro+builds+aggression. Most of his games are actually just standard protoss but his opponents get so stressed out that they lose the game for him rather than MC winning it.
My point is; MC Is kind of like MarineKingPrime... once people realize he's just offensive and has some tricks up his sleeve there isn't much to it.
White-Ra on the other hand is a huge innovator and ALWAYS finds way to use his units to the fullest, be it running the first colossus across the map to a semi-contained terran and just sniping 4 marines and 2 depots; He used the colossus as a mobile tank... why don't any other protoss do that? He uses dark templars as blitz soldiers, he uses warp prism, he uses alot of funny but also useful tricks much like BoxeR's infinate drops and NesTea's spinecrawler rush etc.
Now I know people will argue and say MC and HuK are great, of which I don't agree of. I think they're good players and have practiced alot, but I think given the same time AND (and this is VERY important) confidence, BoxeR, Jinro and others would be much MUCH better.
Yeah forcefield micro is great and all but it is hardly the NesTea level of play that'll put a protoss up there alongside him.
EDIT: Also thanks for spoilering. White Ra isn't even the best foreign Protoss. What a dumb post, MC's won 2 GSL's and several foreign tournaments. Huk has won three major foreign tournament. Just all round wrong post. White Ra's special tactics almost always fail. And so did Fruitdealer and Marinekingprime until people learned how to beat them. Shut up with the attitude when you're "facts" are just player statistics that prove nothing. Europa has the most sprinting wins in the olympics, does that mean we're better runners than most african nations that are now dominating it? No. God when will fanboys learn that wins do not equal to proven skill.My point is that White-Ra does not have half the training regiment of MC or HuK yet holds almost the same standard. You can notice it under the surface, the innovation and play, much like you can notice how BoxeR is a godamn baller but his mechanics are just lacking to much, he hasn't practiced the cores enough for his innovation to put him over the edge over people who HAVE practiced as much. Also according to your logic I win because MC is in code B. Suck it
wins are the SOLE indicator of proven skill.
|
On August 09 2011 23:26 Denzil wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2011 23:25 Dfgj wrote:On August 09 2011 23:20 Denzil wrote:
Use your options more, when Zerg were whining we were told to use Nydus more, use drops more use burrow more.
How many of you guys regularly use Warp prisms to harass? Use carriers more try I don't know Carrier harass? How many of you use Immortal drops to pick off important tech structures? Or colossus drops to roast workers from afar? Every game I get the chance, in GM. Storm drops are fantastic lategame, but that's lategame. There's a lack of reliable midgame harassment options that don't require extreme tech rushing, which means P's midgame is very fragile and cannot afford mistakes or they will fall behind (barring some sort of timing all-in). Protoss lacks a unit that can clear out workers/kill tech quickly in the midgame (yeah you can DT drop rush but that build is incredibly fragile and greedy). Dropping 2 immortals is kind of cute but also slower than dropping 8 marines, and more expensive. Choya v Qxc in the GSTL showed Warp prism speed + Colossus drops and while Choya was blatantly intended it to be cute it also showed potiential.
The 500-200 drop + 100/100 upgrade died when one viking appeared on the field. It didn't come close to paying for itself.
Part of the issue there is that you can drop 8 marines or 4 hellions or 8 lings and hightail it out, making it harder to catch the drop. You can't leave a colossus, or immortals, behind - P doesn't have a really viable unit that is both expendable on harass and capable of dealing damage quickly.
I guess the exception there is the HT, sort of, but that's not a midgame tool.
|
I think the discussion will go downhill fast, but alas...
Undoutibly, I think the biggest "problem" that Protoss are facing nowadays is early game PvT. Is it imbalanced? I don't know... Is it hard as hell to survive into the mid game? Recent results sure say so.
So that brings the next question, which is what I think you want this thread to mostly be about. How should this problem be addressed? I think it's hard to argue that the metagame isn't in favor of Terran at the moment. That's not to say that it's *impossible* to hold off a 1-1-1 allin or various other allins (without doing an allin of your own). QTIP's guide to holding off a 1-1-1 is reasonably good IF you can scout a 1-1-1. Unfortunately, it dies pretty hard to just about everything else (2rax pressure/3rax allin come to mind). Does the solution lie in "better scouting"? Perhaps. As metagame evolves, better responses will be developed, that much is for sure. MC today showed some awfully non-innovative ways to play vs terran, unfortunately.
As for the rest of "State of the Protoss", PvT late-game is incredibly fun to watch from a spectator standpoint, and (for my diamond level nooby skills) extrememly fun to play. The balancing act/tech switches between Collousi/HT and Viking/ghost make it such an interesting matchup. At both my noob level, and at a professional level, it seems reasonably well balanced.
PvP is slowly evolving past 4gate vs 4gate on non-TA maps, which looks promissing. It's nice to see a 2nd base in PvP from time to time =P.
PvZ early/mid game appears to be reasonable, too. I have a mild problem with PvZ late game Infestor/BL, though. Unlike PvT where there's a nice balance between Collousi/HT and Viking/Ghost, there's no parity in PvZ. HT provide a *reasonable* answer to infestors, but the range of BL + the swarm of broodlings make it impossibly hard to feedback the infestors. Not to mention, the effective range of fungal (that is, range + radius) is greater than the range of feedback. Using stalkers versus the BL only works if you can blink under them when there's not a bunch of other stuff there. Blinking under the BL to meet a swarm of 40 lings (which isn't too unusual, until you get to super late game) isn't fun. Trying to answer with voidrays is difficult, since they'll get fungal'd if they stack, and neural'd if they stray too far. I once thought carriers were an OK response, but with neural + corruptor (it's hard to get BL without corruptors, after all), they just get owned too.
So to reduce the wall-of-text effect, I added a paragraph break. I just feel like PvZ late-game would be more exciting (and, more balanced) if there was a nice parity between Collousi/HT and BL/Ultralisk. As I see it now, there's almost no reason for a zerg player to switch from BL/Infestor to Ultra/X (probably Ultra/Ling? Ultra/Roach?) because the Infestor is so damn good at handling almost everything the protoss can throw at it. If you're using lots of low-cost gateway units, then fungal deals with them effectively. If you're using high-cost robo/stargate units, neural does a more-than-fantastic job.
One thought I had about PvZ late-game was to make it so that infestors could not neural massive units (like how they can't neural ultras, but for all massive units). This would make the collousi and carrier reasonable responses to infestors, while still allowing infestors to neural immortals/voidrays, if they get out of position. Likewise, I feel this would shift the late-game away from all Infestor/BL and encourage more ultralisk play (since ultralisk deal reasonably well with collousi), and we'd once again have that nice rock-paper-scizzors effect with late-game units in the matchup.
Just my $0.02. If you disagree, more power to you.
|
On August 09 2011 23:29 Jacobs Ladder wrote:That makes 0 sense. Think about what makes a good harass unit. Speed, Expendability/Survivability, DPS, and ability to function in small numbers. Carriers are slow, expensive (in resources, tech, and time), easily destroyed when alone, and require some degree of mass and upgrades to be effective. This is like recommending BC harass.
Broodlord harass works in the same way.
|
On August 09 2011 23:04 Crying wrote:Hello TL, This is not a balance whine,its a pure discussion on what should be doneIts been along time since this was discussed and i though i can give it a try,seeing that protoss isn't doing great at all,and also seeing + Show Spoiler +MC goes in Up&Down (what)?? Does the protoss need a metagame shift?Or we don't have a good smart player that will lead us to better presentation? What do you guys think?What should be done?I hope that thread will be a good discussion on what we should do and what we should improve or see.. Please NO FLAMING in my thread and the bashing will also be forbidden. This is not a balance whine its just a discussion on what we should do. Admins,please let us discuss that state of the protoss that we are in and don't close the thread. Thanks if its fulfilled International WinRate% ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/CPVub.png) Korean WinRate% ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/bdP2e.png) Also: Some other stats here: + Show Spoiler +On August 09 2011 06:35 stormfoxSC wrote:
I went through the international individual leagues, for the sake of augmenting the OP with a larger data set. Korea is good to look at, but the data set is very small (and only incorporates the Korean state of the game, so to speak).
Individual League Winners & Runner-Ups (1061 events):
First Place
Terran - 498 (46.94%)
Zerg - 263 (24.79%)
Protoss - 264 (24.88%)
Unknown - 36 (3.39%)
Second Place
Terran - 433 (40.81%)
Zerg - 299 (28.18%)
Protoss - 290 (27.33%)
Unknown - 39 (3.68%)*
Total Finals Appearances (1st + 2nd combined)
Terran - 931 (43.87%)
Zerg - 562 (26.48%)
Protoss - 552 (26.11%)
Unknown - 75 (3.53%)*
Bonus! Since we know that the balance of the game has changed radically between 2010 and 2011 thanks to the great patches Blizzard has released, let's break down the data between these two years.
Individual League Winners & Runner-Ups for 2010 (358 events):
First Place
Terran - 206 (57.54%)
Zerg - 49 (13.69%)
Protoss - 88 (24.58%)
Unknown - 15 (4.19%)
Second Place
Terran - 159 (44.41%)
Zerg - 91 (25.42%)
Protoss - 93 (25.98%)
Unknown - 15 (4.19%)*
Total Finals Appearances (1st + 2nd combined)
Terran - 365 (50.98%)
Zerg - 140 (19.55%)
Protoss - 181 (25.28%)
Unknown - 30 (4.19%)*
Individual League Winners & Runner-Ups for 2011 (703 events):
First Place
Terran - 292 (41.54%)
Zerg - 214 (30.44%)
Protoss - 176 (25.04%)
Unknown - 21 (2.99%)
Second Place
Terran - 274 (38.98%)
Zerg - 208 (29.59%)
Protoss - 197 (28.02%)
Unknown - 24 (3.41%)*
Total Finals Appearances (1st + 2nd combined)
Terran - 566 (40.26%)
Zerg - 422 (30.01%)
Protoss - 373 (26.53%)
Unknown - 45 (3.20%)*
And of course, SC2Statistics!
[image loading]
Non-mirror winrates by race for July:
Terran: 54.2%
Zerg: 48.6%
Protoss: 46.7%
Winrates by matchup for July:
TvZ: 55.4%
PvT: 47.2%
ZvP: 53.8%
Average winrates by race (overall):
Terran: 53.1%
Zerg: 47.1%
Protoss: 48.9%
Average winrates by matchup (overall):
TvZ: 54.8%
PvT: 48.4%
ZvP: 49.7%
Average winrates by race (2010):
Terran: 54.4%
Zerg: 45.8%
Protoss: 48.4%
Average winrates by matchup (2010):
TvZ: 55.5%
PvT: 46.6%
ZvP: 47.9%
Average winrates by race (2011):
Terran: 52.3%
Zerg: 47.9%
Protoss: 49.2%
Average winrates by matchup (2011):
TvZ: 54.4%
PvT: 49.4%
ZvP: 50.8%
-------------------
* Random finals appearances are included in the Unknown column, since I was too lazy to make an entirely new column of data for a few data points (<5) that only appear for runner-up (there were no random 1st place wins).
Regarding your comment about + Show Spoiler +
+ Show Spoiler +
A good first step is to not try breaking siege lines that have ravens by using hallucinated immortals.
|
On August 09 2011 23:24 Denzil wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2011 23:22 Proko wrote:On August 09 2011 23:20 Denzil wrote:
Use your options more, when Zerg were whining we were told to use Nydus more, use drops more use burrow more.
How many of you guys regularly use Warp prisms to harass? Use carriers more try I don't know Carrier harass? How many of you use Immortal drops to pick off important tech structures? Or colossus drops to roast workers from afar? I open with a warp prism build vT and vZ whenever I get close air. it's not as strong as you think it would be. Well do you use it when they're in their base? Or do you use it when they move out to attack? It can be like Ling backstabs, pulling the Terran army back.
I use it when they're out but it's not a simple matter of out or in. SCVs and drones die very slowly to stalkers and sentries and can run away easily from zealots. Also any reduction to your army size to harass makes defense much harder. This is especially true early game for toss when our armies our most fragile.
|
On August 09 2011 23:28 mrsaturn wrote:
Metagame shift.
protoss need immortals to hold early game attacks. going straight to colsi is a punishable cheese. toss have been getting away with it for a long time with pro usage of forcefields, but people have figured out how to punish protoss and exploit their gateway only units.
the game was balanced with every unit in mind and protoss think they can ignore a core unit of their race, the immortal. this is what is holding them back.
Immortals suck so hard it's not even funny.
You have to micro them seperately while controlling the rest of ur units + there is no possible way to retreat with them.
|
Carriers aside, Protoss employ every pretty much every unit in every matchup currently. If there is going to be a 'metagame' shift then it will almost certainly be timing based.
That's what has kept Protoss competitive for the past couple months as is. 6/7 gate timings, +2 blink all ins, etc. It's not as if Protoss has been floating on the back of awesome or overpowered units and not innovating. I'd argue that these guys have pushed the race pretty near to the edge of what's possible in terms of unit composition, expansion timing and build orders.
|
Def not imba, it's just zerg and terran learned to use Infestors and ghosts at the same time and we're struggling to solve that problem. I have faith in our toss leaders to lead us out of this.
|
On August 09 2011 23:26 Krehlmar wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2011 23:22 lunchforthesky wrote:On August 09 2011 23:20 Krehlmar wrote:
Truth be told hardly any protoss other than White-Ra is any "good" and I'll tell you why:
Analyze MC's style and you'll hardly notice any of the innovation that BoxeR, White-Ra and NesTea uses, MC is all about crisp micro+builds+aggression. Most of his games are actually just standard protoss but his opponents get so stressed out that they lose the game for him rather than MC winning it.
My point is; MC Is kind of like MarineKingPrime... once people realize he's just offensive and has some tricks up his sleeve there isn't much to it.
White-Ra on the other hand is a huge innovator and ALWAYS finds way to use his units to the fullest, be it running the first colossus across the map to a semi-contained terran and just sniping 4 marines and 2 depots; He used the colossus as a mobile tank... why don't any other protoss do that? He uses dark templars as blitz soldiers, he uses warp prism, he uses alot of funny but also useful tricks much like BoxeR's infinate drops and NesTea's spinecrawler rush etc.
Now I know people will argue and say MC and HuK are great, of which I don't agree of. I think they're good players and have practiced alot, but I think given the same time AND (and this is VERY important) confidence, BoxeR, Jinro and others would be much MUCH better.
Yeah forcefield micro is great and all but it is hardly the NesTea level of play that'll put a protoss up there alongside him.
EDIT: Also thanks for spoilering. White Ra isn't even the best foreign Protoss. What a dumb post, MC's won 2 GSL's and several foreign tournaments. Huk has won three major foreign tournament. Just all round wrong post. White Ra's special tactics almost always fail. And so did Fruitdealer and Marinekingprime until people learned how to beat them. Shut up with the attitude when you're "facts" are just player statistics that prove nothing. Europa has the most sprinting wins in the olympics, does that mean we're better runners than most african nations that are now dominating it? No. God when will fanboys learn that wins do not equal to proven skill. My point is that White-Ra does not have half the training regiment of MC or HuK yet holds almost the same standard. You can notice it under the surface, the innovation and play, much like you can notice how BoxeR is a godamn baller but his mechanics are just lacking to much, he hasn't practiced the cores enough for his innovation to put him over the edge over people who HAVE practiced as much. Also according to your logic I win because MC is in code B. Suck it
Firstly MC is still Code S....he's just in up and downs.
Secondly Huk and MC are infinitely superior to White Ra in all match ups. Massive LOL at the idea that winning is not skill. Winning is all that matters ever.
White Ra is a mediocre foreign Toss with gimmicky play who has a lot of fans because he speaks in broken English and is a 'character'. That's fine, but as a player he's nothing special and gets slapped down really fast by solid players and has no major tournament results to his name since people actually learnt how to play the game in the last six months.
In the words of Tyler:
"You can be creative but I will crush it under the iron fist of my conservative play." - Liquid`Tyler
|
On August 09 2011 23:29 Talin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2011 23:25 Joey Wheeler wrote:On August 09 2011 23:24 Talin wrote:On August 09 2011 23:21 Heavenly wrote:On August 09 2011 23:19 Olsson wrote:On August 09 2011 23:10 Stijx wrote:
Now see, this kind of leaves me stumped too... Zerg used to be the "QQ" race and now that they're all using infestors they tell everyone else "well work it out"...
Now Zerg changed their position by using a previously unused unit (and still have a couple of unused utilities), but here I can't help but feel that Protoss actually doesn't have anything unexplored. The only way I've been beating Ghosts and Infestors recently is by putting my HTs in a warp prism and bringing them in from a different angle...
I think about our other units (Carriers and the Mothership) and they are just not worth the investment. In long macro games I only seem to win because an opponent messes up or forgets to inject larvae for ever and ever...
I think Protoss needs a new utility, something more efficient for harass, or maybe just give the Warp Prism some more health. Speed-Prisms are pretty boss. Oh cry. Zerg had months of issues against both terran and protosses. It wasn't until the infestor buff they figured it out and even then they had to start using and experimenting with infestors for a month or so. Terrans rarely use ghosts even now same goes with Protoss. T and P have anti-casters with feedback/emp but zerg doesn't. Use your anti-casters. One HT can take care of four infestors, EMP, Feedback, Fungal all have the same range. Zerg had months of a-moving roach/hydra into stalker/colossi. True. And Protoss had (and still has) months of extremely passive turtling, not contesting air control or utilizing harassment, and a one-army syndrome. It's just as fundamentally wrong as what Zergs were doing. Extremely passive turtling is still the ideal way for Protoss to play. Right now, it's only the ideal way to get ripped apart the moment you poke out.
At least make an argument instead of stating your opinion.
|
On August 09 2011 23:29 Heavenly wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2011 23:24 Talin wrote:On August 09 2011 23:21 Heavenly wrote:On August 09 2011 23:19 Olsson wrote:On August 09 2011 23:10 Stijx wrote:
Now see, this kind of leaves me stumped too... Zerg used to be the "QQ" race and now that they're all using infestors they tell everyone else "well work it out"...
Now Zerg changed their position by using a previously unused unit (and still have a couple of unused utilities), but here I can't help but feel that Protoss actually doesn't have anything unexplored. The only way I've been beating Ghosts and Infestors recently is by putting my HTs in a warp prism and bringing them in from a different angle...
I think about our other units (Carriers and the Mothership) and they are just not worth the investment. In long macro games I only seem to win because an opponent messes up or forgets to inject larvae for ever and ever...
I think Protoss needs a new utility, something more efficient for harass, or maybe just give the Warp Prism some more health. Speed-Prisms are pretty boss. Oh cry. Zerg had months of issues against both terran and protosses. It wasn't until the infestor buff they figured it out and even then they had to start using and experimenting with infestors for a month or so. Terrans rarely use ghosts even now same goes with Protoss. T and P have anti-casters with feedback/emp but zerg doesn't. Use your anti-casters. One HT can take care of four infestors, EMP, Feedback, Fungal all have the same range. Zerg had months of a-moving roach/hydra into stalker/colossi. True. And Protoss had (and still has) months of extremely passive turtling, not contesting air control or utilizing harassment, and a one-army syndrome. It's just as fundamentally wrong as what Zergs were doing. Because winning against zerg was easy doing it that way, because zergs refused to change so why would we? Plenty of protoss do stuff like that all the time now that zergs have changed their style.
Well... now they changed and so should we. 
On August 09 2011 23:32 Joey Wheeler wrote:Show nested quote +On August 09 2011 23:29 Talin wrote:On August 09 2011 23:25 Joey Wheeler wrote:On August 09 2011 23:24 Talin wrote:On August 09 2011 23:21 Heavenly wrote:On August 09 2011 23:19 Olsson wrote:On August 09 2011 23:10 Stijx wrote:
Now see, this kind of leaves me stumped too... Zerg used to be the "QQ" race and now that they're all using infestors they tell everyone else "well work it out"...
Now Zerg changed their position by using a previously unused unit (and still have a couple of unused utilities), but here I can't help but feel that Protoss actually doesn't have anything unexplored. The only way I've been beating Ghosts and Infestors recently is by putting my HTs in a warp prism and bringing them in from a different angle...
I think about our other units (Carriers and the Mothership) and they are just not worth the investment. In long macro games I only seem to win because an opponent messes up or forgets to inject larvae for ever and ever...
I think Protoss needs a new utility, something more efficient for harass, or maybe just give the Warp Prism some more health. Speed-Prisms are pretty boss. Oh cry. Zerg had months of issues against both terran and protosses. It wasn't until the infestor buff they figured it out and even then they had to start using and experimenting with infestors for a month or so. Terrans rarely use ghosts even now same goes with Protoss. T and P have anti-casters with feedback/emp but zerg doesn't. Use your anti-casters. One HT can take care of four infestors, EMP, Feedback, Fungal all have the same range. Zerg had months of a-moving roach/hydra into stalker/colossi. True. And Protoss had (and still has) months of extremely passive turtling, not contesting air control or utilizing harassment, and a one-army syndrome. It's just as fundamentally wrong as what Zergs were doing. Extremely passive turtling is still the ideal way for Protoss to play. Right now, it's only the ideal way to get ripped apart the moment you poke out. At least make an argument instead of stating your opinion.
I haven't seen any arguments you made in your reply to me, so I just responded in kind.
You won't be able to hold and defend a 3rd base long enough against a good dynamic T/Z player to even get to the deathball stage of the game. On most maps (and especially newer/bigger ones) you just can't and won't passively defend 3 bases with one army and zero map control any more.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
