EPT.. if your opponent is absurdly bad at this game.
Why is protoss considered to be the "easiest race" - Page 5
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Roeder
Denmark735 Posts
.. if your opponent is absurdly bad at this game. | ||
|
Willba
United Kingdom209 Posts
| ||
|
Nible
Sweden85 Posts
As many of you say, yes the macro might be easier as a protoss with the less diversity in tech and unit compositions. But as I said, the micro is harder, depending on playstyle, of course. And about Zerg having to be at one more base at all times I think can be fairly discussed. I don't think that it is necessary to be all of the time, but yes, it might be necessary to expand at least a little bit before your opponent. And I'd also like to add from my slightly biased perspective that expanding as zerg isn't quite as risky as with the other races. A zerg can almost instantly after the base is up increase their production. A protoss on 3 bases within 10 mins practically get raped by a zerg on 3 bases at 10 mins. Just saw it on WhiteRa's stream. It's not until later that a protoss or terran get use of their expansion. And just to make a point concerning the lack of multitasking requirements and map control, I think I can fairly effectively at least in Silver league take map control with phoenixes and which as a harrass unit requires a bit of multi tasking if you're going to macro at the same time, same as with blink stalker micro. As I stated in my original post. This thread didn't quite turn out as I wanted. :/ | ||
|
MenSol[ZerO]
Canada1134 Posts
but now its only 1a lolzz | ||
|
GTPGlitch
5061 Posts
There are hardly any *tricks* that a toss can do. And their harass is almost always not worth the results considering the money you put into it. Which leaves you with 2-3base robo/robo+stargate play to dominate. Cookie cutter builds. | ||
|
nt-rAven
Canada405 Posts
| ||
|
phyre112
United States3090 Posts
On August 11 2011 05:25 Sky0 wrote: Because you cant just a move into chargelots or collossi or ht ? but a toss army can definitely A move with chargelots and collossi and roll ur face. how does that not make sense? That's.... not what is being discussed at all. If a terran player is microing at all, a toss army cannot a-move into him and win. He can't. Show me a pro game played in the last three months where this happened. Micro is needed in EVERY race to be good. If you think I'm wrong, go practice more. | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On August 11 2011 05:29 Sky0 wrote: yeah try A moving viking marauder and A moving collossi chargelot see who has the better ground army at the end of that battle. well that would depend on the compositions of the armies. if you have collossi and chargelots and even a handful of stalkers and i have all marines and vikings i can 1a the vikings and then send the marines/marauders in after with a "t 1a" and it will definitely go well if you want to argue who wins in 1a battles then it's mostly about composition, and zerg definitely has the edge there out of the races because in head on battles without spells they are incredibly cost effective | ||
|
BlazeFury01
United States1460 Posts
Also, if a in bw protoss loses his force to an engagement, he can easily rebuild his army within a short amount of time. Whereas a terran would basically lose the game if put in that situation. | ||
|
Arisen
United States2382 Posts
On August 11 2011 05:31 Arisen wrote: Protoss units have a lot of synergy together to make them strong as a group of basic units. Stalker/Zeal/Sentry is potent in every matchup, and so is the "deathball". Protoss t3 has a lot of splash damage which synergizes extremely well with gateway units. Since protoss synergy is so high, just by having a big ball of units, you are extremly effective with minimal control. For these reasons, it's fairly easy to get your protoss to a reasonable level. The same thing happened in BW. It was much easier to get from D to C as protoss because it was much more forgiving on players with poorer unit control, macro, decision making, etc. However, much like BW, I think Protoss is very hard to go from "pretty good" to "damn good". How many protosses won Starleagues in comparison to Terran, the "hard race?", or even zerg? Not many. Protoss at the highest levels is unforgiving because their units are so expensive. SUre, at this early evolution of the game, protosses are basically dominating (with the exception of a few notable players), but as time goes on, protoss will become less and less effective at higher levels (imo), just like we saw in brood war. So, in short, Protoss is the easiest race (pretty unarguably) to pick up and play for a begineer. You'll therefore hear a lot about protoss being easy from other weaker players, and to be honest, that's a lot of the SCII community. However, at the highest levels they still have a tremendous amount of difficulty bridging the gap between good and great, like all the other races. | ||
|
nira
United States116 Posts
On August 11 2011 05:15 oskarla wrote: Macro is actually easiest with zerg imo. Larva stacks so if you miss using it it saves up unlike for Protoss or Terran. Those stacked larva could have been drones mining minerals. If a zerg gets to that point it is because of his poor mechanics. (assuming it isn't a macro hatch or he isn't maxed) I can't think of any way Protoss has it harder than the other two races other than how much harder it is becoming to safely turtle on 2 bases. Terran and Zerg have started doing multi-pronged attacks/harass/run-by's to constantly try and prevent the 1a deathball. If you attempt that as protoss, you just warp in a round of DT's and send them to each expo and go back to making probes. Talking about how Protoss can't tech switch makes me laugh after watching MC vs Sen | ||
|
ClanRH.TV
United States462 Posts
| ||
|
Sky0
United States214 Posts
On August 11 2011 05:30 Leyra wrote: Yeah, A-move a gateway army comp into stimmed MM and let me know how it goes pal. did i say gateway units? Im using a collossi supported army as an example which is prob the most common army toss uses? | ||
|
rarelyGG
United States19 Posts
| ||
|
Bambipwnsu
Canada698 Posts
There isn't droning management involved nor addon shenanigans. At amateur levels I think it might be the easiest per se since you don't necessarily need to harass or do anything other than gather that big army and attack at master and under levels. At a professional level though, I think P is very hard due to how the current ZvP and TvP are evolving. | ||
|
UniversalMind
United States326 Posts
On August 11 2011 05:14 HentaiPrime wrote: ![[image loading]](http://www.fohguild.org/forums/attachments/starcraft-ii/171927d1305652662-protoss-strategies-replays-protosskeyboardsmul4.jpg) and ![[image loading]](http://www.fohguild.org/forums/attachments/starcraft-ii/171928d1305652662-protoss-strategies-replays-forcefield.jpg) now you're set! that's why i play protoss, zerg is way too hard and u can't 1a seige tanks omg I laughed so hard xDDDDDD only thing that keyboard lax is the W key or else it would be perfect | ||
|
isM
United States735 Posts
| ||
|
Kammalleri
Canada613 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On August 11 2011 05:31 Willba wrote: I think Protoss micro is easier in terms of applying it, you forcefield/storm and your done, meanwhile a Terran will be kiting his heart out while getting his army picked apart. I played a game yesterday where I could see his units where pretty much following mine while I kited and used drop micro to barely survive. I think its just more forgiving of your mistakes as a race, at least at lower levels. You think this because you don't understand what it takes for protoss to win battles at a high level. I am not trying to marginalize what terran has to do but watch a player like huk and how much he constantly has to adjust his units and positioning. Both sides micro as much as they are able to in order to gain advantage, and just like terran if the protoss does a poor job of that he is likely to lose the battle. If the protoss doesn't micro against a good terran then the terran will tear him apart with his own micro. | ||
|
legaton
France1763 Posts
On August 11 2011 05:24 darkscream wrote: Protoss is the easiest race because the micro is easiest. The "Time to live" of your units is so much higher than other units, you get a little more time to react and micro effectively. Ever try to micro zergling on zergling battles in ZvZ? It's fucking impossible. Zealot on zealot though? Not as tough. It's true to some extent you "have" to micro since your units are so expensive, but so what? If you are protoss and you're playing against someone who doesn't have strong fundamentals, you can win just via micro. Terran can do it too, but Zerg does not have this option, as the "cost effective, long time to live" units for Zerg don't happen until tier 3. Easiest micro? What are you talking about? Phoenix and Stalkers are two of the most micro intensive units in the game, up there with marines. Positioning is also vital for a protoss army, you constantly have to reorganize your army not to get rolled over because of some stupid mistake (like zealots getting stuck in the back). There's no 1A in SC2. Most of the "easiness" reputation of protoss came back from Broodwar, when the Iccup server was infested with D+/C+ protoss players. At that time, protoss was easier at the low level because the uniits could tank more damage, but at a relatively good level (say B- in Iccup, that like high level masters now), there was no difference. Note: i'm terran | ||
| ||
