|
i find protoss easiest, and i've been playing zerg for months now
terran always seems easy when im not offracing as it, but damn that infantry takes good micro
On August 11 2011 17:37 aderum wrote:
So.. does people realize that larvae stack up? While if you miss to warp in /build a unit that unit is forever gone? So yeah, missing an inject might be more bad than missing an chrono/mule, but missing to build your units for a while(as zerg) is not at all as severe av missing a warp in or terran equal..
the base larvae aint spawning, and if your late on inject thats more youve missed
|
Wow...this thread got really dumb really fast.
Guess what. There is no easiest race. Because every person has a different style and different strengths. If you are good at certain things, and a race allows you to utilize these fortes of yours, then you will excel with it.
But regarding the argument here, I want to respond, not to prove Protoss is hardest but to point out why it is ridiculous to be saying "OMG I have to play perfect as terran/zerg and protoss just herpderps his deathball across the map and it's gg, wtf. I'm silver btw and Idra is god."
Regarding macro: Macro isn't exactly hard for any race and is certainly not the deciding factor for the difficulty of a race. It honestly isn't that different for any of the races. Unit production is probably most difficult for protoss (although not hard at all) because you actually have to go to the proxy pylon and click more to produce units rather than 2srrrrrrr or 3ddddaaaa. Regarding the macro mechanics, zerg's is probably the least forgiving (although still not difficult), followed by protoss, then terran. Zerg can stack larva but lose injects if not on time, Chrono gets wasted and doesn't stack but can be spent more quickly. Terran doesn't really lose much, just call down mules if you forgot. But still, forgetting to inject when great production capacity is your race's strength seems a bit counter-intuitive. Still, these are things that hurt you when you are playing poorly and don't matter too much.
Regarding micro: I honestly chose Protoss because I thought it was the most micro intensive. Positioning matters for all three races and is largely irrelevant. There is no notable gap in difficulty between sieging tanks, getting your zealots in front and your stalkers under your colossi, or staying out of chokes for zerg. Positioning (and flanking for that matter) is not always super easy but no race has it worse than any other. But considering I see my army get rolled if I don't split my casters up, blink my stalkers back constantly, throw down well placed storms, use force fields to fight on my terms, prevent my colossi from targeting something stupid, make archons at the right time, use phoenixes to lift tanks or infestors, and find the optimal time to drop back to my proxy pylon when I have to make reinforcements rather than doing it during battle, I don't think it's easiest. Yes, there are difficult aspects of micro with terran and zerg, I'm just pointing out why this EZ mode deathball myth that whiny Zergs created is absolute bullshit (I wish I saw more of this micro; everybody talks about marine splits like they're marineking and have to totally outplay their opponent when they either do nothing or just run past their tanks/thor. Or some burroach micro, when I saw Ret doing that so well last week I was very impressed. Still, at the high level, most players utilize all strengths derived from micro, so it's irrelevent).
Also, what do Protoss players complain the most about? What do they blame the most for their losses? EMP and Fungal. Two abilities that prevent Protoss from maximizing their chances with good micro. The loss of force fields, storms, and feedbacks from EMP and the loss of positioning, blink micro, and zealots and archons make our chances slim at best against a competent opponent.
Also, notice how many WC3 pros chose Protoss. I hardly think these players would have done this if they didn't think they could transfer their skills most with Protoss. Players with a WC3 background who chose Toss include:
Naniwa, Tod, Kalin, Cruncher, ZeeRax, Elfi, Wolf, Hasu, Insolence, Grubby, Verdi, Kiwikaki, Axslav, Agh and SaSe.
Damn it, why hasn't this been closed yet. At first it was just like "Eh whatever, balance thread on TL, it'll go away" and now it's 37 pages of the battlenet forums and it's like the day after Cruncher beat Idra in TSL.
|
Why do people say protoss is the easiest? A number of reasons I think.
One being their macro is a bit easier than the other races (and more forgiving). Another being that their race-specific macro mechanics can be used in various situations (also forgiving).
But personally, the biggest reason? Because when SC2 first came out, I (along with most other people) had a large amount of friends pick up the game all at once. And you know what? Most of the worst players of the group picked Protoss, and they were able to hang in many matches that they should have lost.
I personally went Zerg and my group of friends widely recognized I was the best player (as well as the highest ranked of all of them), not just mechanic-wise but I knew the strategies of all races much better, and the theory behind the game better. But does that mean I always whooped their ass? Nope. Sometimes I did, but those bastards pulled off wins sometimes. And even my other friends spectating said it was bullshit. Everyone in the group admitted they got lucky and did better than they should have just because of the race.
Fighting the lower ranked Terrans? Won some, lost some, but it was always either a close match or a solid win for one of the players. The "lucky win" bullshit that happened with the toss players was extremely rare.
One of my friends we knew was the worst of the group, he played Toss, but it was a joke between us that somehow that kid always managed to pull off a win when he shouldnt have. He didnt know the counters well, always used the same strategy, never even used a number of Protoss units, hell he didnt even have a real build order. But there was a number of times that we were doing a 3v3 and 2 of us leave thinking its a for sure loss, he stays and manages to win against all 3 opponents. Alone. And being the worst of the group, he had a higher rank than a decent amount of them.
He showed that Rank does not equal Skill. If it went by skill he would have been the bottom of the barrel.
So it's just experience, more than anything, that shows Protoss are easiest to play.
Mechanically, it's their macro that's most forgiving. Less units to make, being able to make units on the field, boosting being most forgiving - that makes a strong combination.
While they do arguably require more micro than the other races, it's high risk-high reward micro. They have a lot to risk but a lot to gain from proper micro. And let's be honest, unless your playing at an extremely high level, macro is much harder to get solid than micro because you have to be macroing non stop the entire game and it's much more open to "forgetting" something or making simple mistakes that can lose the game.
Being the most "micro-intensive" race is not a bad thing, because that means you have the most to gain from good micro. There were times that I would have gave anything to be able to turn fights around with good micro but it just isnt possible with the Zerg unit mixes that are required to battle the given strategy.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying protoss is the easiest to play at a PRO level - all races take a lot of dedication at that point. I'm just saying that in my experience they were the easiest to pick up and win with as a learning player. Forgiving macro goes a long way in a game thats often decided by macro, and they did not even have to learn much of the race to do good.
|
Too many people on this thread seems to have had a lobotomy in a not too distant past.
Ease of play has everything to do with preferred style of gaming.
Personally, I'm a Terran player, I often random and have started to embrace Zerg. I find it *much* easier. I've gone two days with no loses. Hell, I'm tempted to make it my main because I find it so relaxing and simple. Is Zerg the easiest race? No, of course not. I see most people on this thread saying it's the hardest.
And another thing: Whining about the race you play?
Zerg players saying larvae mechanics are hard? There's a warning to tell you when to do it, and with backspace it takes under a second.
Protoss players saying their micro is the hardest? Try splitting marines or dropping several places at once.
Terran players saying your macro is hard? Hotkeys. 4aaaadd5ss6dd is not too different from 7srrrrrrrhhhhhhhhh and w+shift+clickclickclick.
These threads make me sad because of how incredibly bias people are. I find Protoss mechanics *very* easy. And when I win I'm astounded and appalled with the simplicity of the race. I also, however, find the gameplay aspect (aside from one base all-ins) difficult. Marauders and most Zerg units ruin my day when my stalkers have a quota of two laser beams an hour. How can I as a player say Protoss is easy when I can't win with the race without all-ins?
Do you define difficulty on the APM and active, on the go, thinking required to win? Or rather the probability of success? That's the question you should begin with. My personal idea of the easiest race has changed countless times since I stated playing. It's painful to write 300 words and not actually whine about why everyone that plays the race I find easiest sucks shit and should die.
I thank the people that typed out a level headed answer and didn't bash on anyone. I mildly admire you.
I got frustrated over nothing.
I'm tempted to go on but it's past my beddy-bye time.
Good night TL
|
On August 11 2011 17:31 TERRANLOL wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2011 17:16 sceroh wrote:On August 11 2011 05:10 Xova wrote:
Protoss macro is a bit easier, and yes I do play protoss. I do not agree with that because if you forget to warp in a round of units after the cooldown you will lose a "round" of warpins forever;whereas terrans can queue up their unit productions and queens save up the energyfor more injects. I'm not saying that it's easier for T or Z but warping units optimally isn't easy. I'm going to have to disagree in a lot of different ways. You can't que up units. That's bad macro. Having one tank in production and two in que means you really have 300/250 unspent minerals and gas. In just one production facility. I'll tell you for a fact that that is actually too much to have in unspent cash at low master level. If you miss a production cycle as terran, you actually have to build more production facilities to spend that money. Also, Protoss production facilities are wherever the hell you want them to be. Wherever there is a pylon there is a production facility and you're always looking at them. it's easier to remember to macro because you're literally making the units as you're using them. Also, Protoss units are just flat out more expensive than units from other races. Warpgate cooldowns are low and chronoboost can make them even lower. It's pretty easy to dump your cash into warpgates. My friend, a protoss player, told me that vs bio after he put down his forcefields he went straight back to macro and stopped microing. Your units don't have to be kited like marauders and marines do from zealots. I think learning to macro those things isn't.... difficult for a mid master player, but I think making that jump to mid master from high diamond is more difficult for players that don't play protoss. EDIT: also the "saving up energy for injects" thing is just silly. Think about having one hatchery and one queen. The spawn larva mechanic finishes just when you reach 25 energy again. If you have 50 energy when the spawn larva mechanic finishes, you can still only spend 25.
Well if you move out as a terran there nothing bad about queuing like 2 or 3 units since you will be focusing on your micro.
Plus I'm not that saving energy for injects is good but from this perspective it's more forgiving than warping units.
Besides, I'm not saying that any race is easy to play.
|
this thread is filled with so much garbage arguments from both sides of the discussion its depressing
+ Show Spoiler +
|
Protoss have most intuitive teching - overall most versatile and strongest high tech units, which makes late game stages very intuitive.
T dont have that much of problems with this as they dont need tech that much, though when late game hits and you eventually might need some tech its really not easy to say what and when. But Z have most problems with this, since T2 units are really good for long portion of game while something that rarely allows you to finish game with, which makes figuring good timings for teching quite hard. Also they are, by far, not that versatile.
|
Slightly off-topic but, have anyone noticed how many protoss threads have been popping up the last month(s)?
We zergs used to be the crybabies and whiners, it was our pride, but after the infestor change, we could suddently deal with deathballs and decided to go back to play the game, the forums were now barren from balance whine.
The threads started popping up "Protoss performance in XXX tournament", the protoss players would hide their balance whine behind "Well, atleast we're better than zerg and won't complain about it"
But that all changed, protoss is the new whining race, with threads popping up daily, and this will probably continue until protoss is buffed in some way, like letting high templars auto-cast feedback or something so they can kill ghosts or infestors without micro, protoss is now feeling the wrath of powerful caster units, and while the other races are used to units like sentries or high templars, most protoss have decided to make blizzard nerf ghost and infestors instad of getting used to them.
When protoss finally get their buff, it's terrans time to whine, protoss has been going for a while now, i wanna see something new.
|
On August 11 2011 18:14 Bagonad wrote:
Slightly off-topic but, have anyone noticed how many protoss threads have been popping up the last month(s)?
We zergs used to be the crybabies and whiners, it was our pride, but after the infestor change, we could suddently deal with deathballs and decided to go back to play the game, the forums were now barren from balance whine.
The threads started popping up "Protoss performance in XXX tournament", the protoss players would hide their balance whine behind "Well, atleast we're better than zerg and won't complain about it"
But that all changed, protoss is the new whining race, with threads popping up daily, and this will probably continue until protoss is buffed in some way, like letting high templars auto-cast feedback or something so they can kill ghosts or infestors without micro, protoss is now feeling the wrath of powerful caster units, and while the other races are used to units like sentries or high templars, most protoss have decided to make blizzard nerf ghost and infestors instad of getting used to them.
When protoss finally get their buff, it's terrans time to whine, protoss has been going for a while now, i wanna see something new.
The problem is, as long as you have a somewhat decent win-rate, you accept being flamed every other game.
But when it becomes more and more obvious that your race struggles when the opponent knows what he is doing, insults for playing an "easy" race are really annoying. I definitely see where the OP is coming from, even on his silver level.
I mean, how would you zergs have felt if everyone had claimed that zerg would've been so super-easy to play the last year? Even while you were the least successful race? Would've sucked, no?
|
I'm honestly waiting for mirror Terran and Zerg threads to open up so we can see people start to rip on those races. Surely, there are people who think those races are also easy to play, or at least can find reasons to back up "Terran is easy" and "Zerg is easy" claims as well.
And just like in this thread, I'm sure a few responses would be productive, and the rest would be mind-numbingly terrible.
Protoss is easy because the people who BM me after my matches say so, regardless of all their mistakes.
|
People think Protoss is easier, because a lot of the time they don't really have to harass (not saying they can't, but if they don't they won't lose). They also have very simple macro mechanics, I mean the game tells you when you need to make things out of your gateways.
I do agree that Protoss has hard micro mechanics in battles, but a lot of the time that's eradicated by the fact Protoss can instantly warp in reinforcements, whereas Zerg and Terran have to wait for their army to build.
If I have left anything out, or am brutally wrong about anything please say ^^
|
As a mid-Master level Zerg playing off-race as Protoss I am still at a similar standard (low Masters), yet playing as Terran I am barely Diamond. This is with less than 5% of my games as Toss.
With that in mind, here is my justification as to why Protoss is an easier race to play (at least up until a very-high standard of play, at which point all races are similar):
- You are not required to routinely perform a function on your specific buildings (inject) to keep up with your opponent, furthermore, if you miss a warp-in you can simply chronoboost your gateways to 'catch-up'.
- You do not need to protect reinforcement paths as you can simply warp directly to where you require units (assuming that location has power).
- With decent forcefields you do not have to worry as much about where you engage the enemy. (as Zerg, if I don't set up a flank and engage in relatively open spaces I generally come out in a worse position, even with a higher unit count)
- The Stalker/Colossus/Void Ray composition is extremely effective in all match-ups, and has no real counter.
- Harrassment in the early/mid-game requires much more effort from the opponent to stop, i.e. sending DT's to different bases requires the opponent to get detection to each point to stop it, and when cannon rushing, if the Protoss player is able to pylon-block a ramp or get decent cannon placement in the enemy's mineral line they are in an excellent position, with very little effort required.
Anyway, this is just what I've noticed and is only an opinion - feel free to call me a 'moron' or whatever.
|
There's a difference between how hard a race is and how strong a race is.
This is what I think :
Terran is the strongest race because it is most flexible, but the mechanics needed to perfect Terran play are much greater than what you need for Zerg and Protoss. Therefore, Terran is the strongest race but also the hardest to play.
Protoss is the easiest race because you can achieve more with lesser mechanics compared to a Zerg or Terran player of the same level of mechanics. Whether Protoss is underpowered or not, that doesn't change the fact that it isn't hard to execute the strategies.
|
On August 11 2011 15:28 Vore210 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2011 15:08 figq wrote:On August 11 2011 14:52 maasai_ wrote:On August 11 2011 14:27 figq wrote:Two quick points:
1. Zerg has more bases -> more times must perform the macro mechanic.
2. Zerg can't "multi-inject" to catch up with missed injects, while terrans easily multi-mule, and protoss to a great extent can make use of multi-chrono.
I'm not saying Zerg is more difficult in general, only answering your specific question about the queens. 1. Mehhh, debateable. I thought I explained that well enough with my original post. D: I understood your original post, no need to repeat it. The point is: Terran and Protoss don't need to worry about spending their mule and chrono on time, which allows them to battle more easily. They can spend it later, without losing it. The unspent inject can't be "multi-spent" to catch up. And the zerg must have more bases to be equal. Don't know why after reading this, you again say 3-3-3. Again, not saying zerg is more difficult as a race, only answering about why people consider the queens to be the most difficult macro mechanic, compared to chrono and mules. I think the other guy makes a good point though. I always equated injects with chrono and mules simply because they are all from the hatcheries/nexi/CC's. But I see now that injects are FAR more like production cycles. They're short (only 32 seconds, which is a few more in game seconds), if you miss them you will have less units, and you can't make up for "unspent" unit cycles - same as missing injects. Unspent larvae are more like mules and chrono, because they pile up (3 limit for natural spawning larvae, 19 limit (?) for total including inject larvae) and can be spent all in one go. This has its advantages and disadvantages - con's being the short term gain of mules and chrono is really high in comparison (and they're free), but pro's being that you can remax an army swifter than any other race, or totally resaturating multiple bases (both obviously requiring the appropriate resources, but this is normal in late game) after losing lots of harvesters. You also have the ability to macro really, really hard with appropriate scouting of the opponent and gain a huge economic lead (see Nestea/Losira vs P). So in the end, zerg complaining about the inject mechanic would be equal to a terran complaining about having to keep up with the barracks/starport/factory production cycles, or a protoss complaining about missing their warp gate/stargate/robo cycles. Yes, due to a design flaw, you have to look at a hatchery rather than just having them all hotkeyed and being able to monitor what stage of the cycle they are at like a protoss or terran can (unless you hotkey one hatchery), but now that I think of it, zerg has less (different) production buildings to keybind than the other two races so being able to keybind a "watcher" hatchery instead of a factory/robo or stargate/starport should be no problem. And anyway, being able to remax/redrone so quickly is damn cool. Good post, agreed with this perspective. And as mentioned before, I don't consider zerg difficult in general, it's quite easy to play, especially semi-well. While, at the highest level, every race is difficult to master, in a different way.
To add to your comparison - there is actually a good "vision" balance here too (Blizzard considers vision as resource in RTS) - you have to switch vision to click the action for mule, for chrono, and for inject.
|
While I do think this is a bad idea for a thread (it can't end well) I'll just contribute to its slow death by saying that Protoss is the easiest race to get into a league like diamond and maybe even masters.
I'd go so far as to say that most diamond or master Zerg/Terran players could offrace as P and do nearly as well as they do with their main race due to the simplicity of playing P at that level. It's just not as difficult.
However I will say at yet higher levels of play, the mechanics required to do well as Protoss are just as difficult as T and Z.
|
There is far too much anecdotal evidence in this thread. Saying that 'I switch races to Protoss all the time and play flawlessly' is not an argument for Protoss being easier. All three races have to keep up with production cycles - warp-ins for Protoss, barracks/factory/starport production for Terran and injects for Zerg. Claiming that any of the three macro mechanics is objectively easier is utterly retarded.
|
How much skill you need to win with a race depends on the level of play. At very low levels of play Protoss is the easiest for sure. Once players start learning basic micro terran may be considered the easiest. At a higher level where players have a good understanding of the game, zerg may be considered the easiest.
In the end, all races take a considerable amount (and different types) of skill and practice to play well. So many of the arguments in this thread are terrible and most likely from players who don't actually have a good understanding of the game or are venting.
|
protoss is simply considered the easiest race in lower leagues
|
I saw a pic somewhere that explained this pretty well
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/lU5ap.png)
In all seriousness, I think that Toss got the reputation as the easiest race because it probably is at lower levels. Not using chrono boost is not as bad as not using larvae inject or mules. Not using force fields correctly is undeniably bad, but if you're opponents just A-move and do not micro, it's ok.
...but after you get to a certain level, this logic starts failing miserably. There is no such thing as an "easier" race in my opinion, and all who say it probably say so because they only play one race and don't have much to compare their own racial experience with.
|
lol toss easy....good one.... you no how micro intensive Terran is guys? especially if its a TvT.... judt wastch TLO vs BratOk...lol 300+ the whole game just to keep up and TLO still lost... toss easy lolz... cant 1A with HT in your army....
User was warned for this post
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
