The way I see it, protoss players at the middle-to-top end tend to be spoiled by the fact that they have a noticably easier time getting to a decently high rank than the other two races. As a result of that there may well be a survivorship bias going on, like for example protoss being more likely to draw in players who are less likely to put in the same additional effort to reach the top ranks as compared to terran and zerg players. With such a trend in the average mindset it wouldn't be surprising if the average skill level of the top ranked protoss players was actually slightly lower than that of terran and zerg players at the same top ranks. All of this is pure speculation, but it makes intuitive sense. Point being there's certainly room for bias that can skew the results against top protoss players.
This idea isn't exclusive to SC either, it also exists in combat sports and martial arts. Overperformers who are naturally gifted might be at a slight mindset disadvantage due to not having to work as hard to reach the top. Eventually some of their sparring partners catch up and even overtake them, and the mindset and expertise of those people would expectedly exceed that of the naturally gifted fighters.
On October 09 2021 03:47 TT1 wrote: If you want perfect balance you need to follow 1v1 sports/games like tennis etc.
Perfect balance is impossible to achieve in a multi race game like BW. It's common sense because there's various units which add different variables depending on the maps etc. If you wanted perfect balance the game would have to be mirrors only but that would obviously be boring as fuck to watch/play.
The reason why BW is the best game ever made is because the difference in balance isn't massive, it's marginal for the game quality that we get to enjoy. On top of that the skill cap is unlimited which allows players to overcome balance issues by putting in the work, which is extremely gratifying to ppl who enjoy competing.
Long story short, you're wasting your brain cells thinking about these type of things. Excuses don't work in a game like BW, when you lose it's 100% on you, accept it and move on. If you can't then you're probably better off playing a different game or just being a viewer.. for the sake of your sanity.
There are plenty of things I disagree with in this statement but none is higher than "when you lose it's 100% on you". That 100% isn't true with BW and a player as experienced as you should know that.
ok, such as?
Because you asked:
- The difference in balance isn't massive (it is depending on the map).
- Mirrors are a perfect balance (they're map and FOW BO dependent).
- The skill cap is unlimited (there is a skill cap although it's relatively high).
- BW is the greatest game ever made (that's just an opinion, of which I personally disagree with).
But I honestly don't care about all of that as much as I think people should understand that you 100% can lose and it not be your fault. Any game with fog of war, miss-chance, and pathing bugs will result in games where you played the odds exceptionally well and still lose because of factors outside of your control. Fog of war being the most influential in that list. Just as you can't predict when a car will decide to just go crazy and turn right into you on the highway and cause a crash, you can't predict certain plays crazy people will do in StarCraft and despite your best efforts to play within the meta and within the odds, you will lose to some crazy shit because it would literally be irresponsible and a bad play for you to account for such nonsense. Just as the car accident wasn't your fault, a SC loss to something like that isn't your fault either. Just part of the game. SC and ANY fog of war game relies on players playing odds to a certain degree and that's why a 70% win rate at the pro level gets you to top in the world. FlaSh isn't the best ever because he won 100% of the time, it's because he was a genius gambler whom would study the meta and his current BO win odds and if they dropped at all in practice he knew he had to adapt and change.
Those are just my thoughts though and aren't meant as an attack on you. You and no one else has to agree with them.
On October 09 2021 03:47 TT1 wrote: If you want perfect balance you need to follow 1v1 sports/games like tennis etc.
Perfect balance is impossible to achieve in a multi race game like BW. It's common sense because there's various units which add different variables depending on the maps etc. If you wanted perfect balance the game would have to be mirrors only but that would obviously be boring as fuck to watch/play.
The reason why BW is the best game ever made is because the difference in balance isn't massive, it's marginal for the game quality that we get to enjoy. On top of that the skill cap is unlimited which allows players to overcome balance issues by putting in the work, which is extremely gratifying to ppl who enjoy competing.
Long story short, you're wasting your brain cells thinking about these type of things. Excuses don't work in a game like BW, when you lose it's 100% on you, accept it and move on. If you can't then you're probably better off playing a different game or just being a viewer.. for the sake of your sanity.
There are plenty of things I disagree with in this statement but none is higher than "when you lose it's 100% on you". That 100% isn't true with BW and a player as experienced as you should know that.
ok, such as?
Because you asked:
- The difference in balance isn't massive (it is depending on the map).
- Mirrors are a perfect balance (they're map and FOW BO dependent).
- The skill cap is unlimited (there is a skill cap although it's relatively high).
- BW is the greatest game ever made (that's just an opinion, of which I personally disagree with).
But I honestly don't care about all of that as much as I think people should understand that you 100% can lose and it not be your fault. Any game with fog of war, miss-chance, and pathing bugs will result in games where you played the odds exceptionally well and still lose because of factors outside of your control. Fog of war being the most influential in that list. Just as you can't predict when a car will decide to just go crazy and turn right into you on the highway and cause a crash, you can't predict certain plays crazy people will do in StarCraft and despite your best efforts to play within the meta and within the odds, you will lose to some crazy shit because it would literally be irresponsible and a bad play for you to account for such nonsense. Just as the car accident wasn't your fault, a SC loss to something like that isn't your fault either. Just part of the game. SC and ANY fog of war game relies on players playing odds to a certain degree and that's why a 70% win rate at the pro level gets you to top in the world. FlaSh isn't the best ever because he won 100% of the time, it's because he was a genius gambler whom would study the meta and his current BO win odds and if they dropped at all in practice he knew he had to adapt and change.
Those are just my thoughts though and aren't meant as an attack on you. You and no one else has to agree with them.
Most of the things you mention are nitpicky and meaningless to me, it's part of the variance of the game which evens out with sample size. I mentally write off factors outside my control because they're exactly that, outside my control. It's pointless to think/worry about them because everyone has to deal with the same stuff anyways (perspective matters a lot here). Instead, look at them as challenges and try to overcome them, nothing applies more to this than 9p vs 12h for example, or proxy 2g vs 12h etc.
Losing to people who do bad/crazy stuff that catches you off guard is nothing more than a mechanics issue imo, it happens to all of us. With enough execution and practice/experience you limit and learn how to react properly to those scenarios, there's levels to every competitive game. For example, what you view as being bad AI/pathing a progamer views as an opportunity to differentiate himself from other players by working on his micro/movement.
Instead of blaming your opponent for doing something dumb look internally instead of externally, your time/energy is better spent looking for answers. Like i said, to me that's nothing more than an excuse. But i guess this is all a matter of perspective anyways, imo the setting of the game matters as well. My mindset for ladder and tourneys is that anything goes, you're in the jungle (as opposed to playing customs/practice games).
On October 09 2021 06:22 Magic Powers wrote: The way I see it, protoss players at the middle-to-top end tend to be spoiled by the fact that they have a noticably easier time getting to a decently high rank than the other two races. As a result of that there may well be a survivorship bias going on, like for example protoss being more likely to draw in players who are less likely to put in the same additional effort to reach the top ranks as compared to terran and zerg players. With such a trend in the average mindset it wouldn't be surprising if the average skill level of the top ranked protoss players was actually slightly lower than that of terran and zerg players at the same top ranks. All of this is pure speculation, but it makes intuitive sense. Point being there's certainly room for bias that can skew the results against top protoss players.
This idea isn't exclusive to SC either, it also exists in combat sports and martial arts. Overperformers who are naturally gifted might be at a slight mindset disadvantage due to not having to work as hard to reach the top. Eventually some of their sparring partners catch up and even overtake them, and the mindset and expertise of those people would expectedly exceed that of the naturally gifted fighters.
This almost makes sense until you actually think about it. Protoss players are doing comparable numbers of sponsored matches and, more importantly, people who have been on the top for years (in some cases more like a decade) aren't going to be impacted by having an easier time at B rank.
On October 09 2021 03:47 TT1 wrote: If you want perfect balance you need to follow 1v1 sports/games like tennis etc.
Perfect balance is impossible to achieve in a multi race game like BW. It's common sense because there's various units which add different variables depending on the maps etc. If you wanted perfect balance the game would have to be mirrors only but that would obviously be boring as fuck to watch/play.
The reason why BW is the best game ever made is because the difference in balance isn't massive, it's marginal for the game quality that we get to enjoy. On top of that the skill cap is unlimited which allows players to overcome balance issues by putting in the work, which is extremely gratifying to ppl who enjoy competing.
Long story short, you're wasting your brain cells thinking about these type of things. Excuses don't work in a game like BW, when you lose it's 100% on you, accept it and move on. If you can't then you're probably better off playing a different game or just being a viewer.. for the sake of your sanity.
There are plenty of things I disagree with in this statement but none is higher than "when you lose it's 100% on you". That 100% isn't true with BW and a player as experienced as you should know that.
ok, such as?
Because you asked:
- The difference in balance isn't massive (it is depending on the map).
- Mirrors are a perfect balance (they're map and FOW BO dependent).
- The skill cap is unlimited (there is a skill cap although it's relatively high).
- BW is the greatest game ever made (that's just an opinion, of which I personally disagree with).
But I honestly don't care about all of that as much as I think people should understand that you 100% can lose and it not be your fault. Any game with fog of war, miss-chance, and pathing bugs will result in games where you played the odds exceptionally well and still lose because of factors outside of your control. Fog of war being the most influential in that list. Just as you can't predict when a car will decide to just go crazy and turn right into you on the highway and cause a crash, you can't predict certain plays crazy people will do in StarCraft and despite your best efforts to play within the meta and within the odds, you will lose to some crazy shit because it would literally be irresponsible and a bad play for you to account for such nonsense. Just as the car accident wasn't your fault, a SC loss to something like that isn't your fault either. Just part of the game. SC and ANY fog of war game relies on players playing odds to a certain degree and that's why a 70% win rate at the pro level gets you to top in the world. FlaSh isn't the best ever because he won 100% of the time, it's because he was a genius gambler whom would study the meta and his current BO win odds and if they dropped at all in practice he knew he had to adapt and change.
Those are just my thoughts though and aren't meant as an attack on you. You and no one else has to agree with them.
Most of the things you mention are nitpicky and meaningless to me, it's part of the variance of the game which evens out with sample size. I mentally write off factors outside my control because they're exactly that, outside my control. It's pointless to think/worry about them because everyone has to deal with the same stuff anyways (perspective matters a lot here).
Losing to people who do bad/crazy stuff that catches you off guard is nothing more than a mechanics issue imo, it happens to all of us. With enough execution and practice you limit and learn how to react properly to those scenarios, there's levels to every competitive game.
Instead of blaming your opponent for doing something dumb look internally instead of externally. Like i said, to me that's nothing more than an excuse. But i guess this is all a matter of perspective anyways, imo the setting of the game also matters. My mindset for ladder and tourneys is that anything goes, you're in the jungle (as opposed to playing customs/practice games). If you want to play kosher games then stick to customs with ppl you know.
That's your approach to the game which is not the same with saying that 100% of the losses in this game should be considered as your own mistake. That's the most egregious thing said in this thread by far.
You could argue that Chess is like that but even in chess at the highest level there are other factors than often decide games. Like being a fast player and forcing your opponent of equal skill into an odd mig-game to gain an extra edge late-game.
On October 07 2021 13:53 Magic Powers wrote: If people spent as much time and energy studying and practicing [insert matchup] as they do complaining about the matchup being imbalanced, they could actually become quite a lot better in that matchup.
Have you actually addressed the points or arguments or are you just making ad hominems? By your logic, unless you are the level of a progamer, you shouldn't be able to analyze any situation at all. Which means artosis or any other caster who is less skilled than a progamer doesn't have any relevant opinion to cast about. The point being is, you don't necessarily have to be as a high ranked player to notice the faults. You simply have to address the principle at play here, which is apparent, but nobody is challenging me on.
Astute observation. Some form of expert insight is required for an accurate understanding of the current state of the game. In my understanding you lack expertise, and thus - since you haven't provided any other form of evidence - your ideas can be dismissed.
Not necessarily. Truth is objective no matter who states it. If a Progamer says something about the game, is it right because they are a high level progamer, or is it right because it was objectively right and they happen to be closer to the truth? Sometimes it takes someone who has a fresh set of eyes of perspective, who isn't blinded by dogma or has set patterned thinking or been trained by the echo chambers of the common wisdom on TL. You can argue that I most likely don't have the truth by arguing based on credentials because yes, more often than not someone who has credentials can be right more often than not, but you're not claiming anything objective here. You're resorting to argument from authority.
On October 09 2021 06:22 Magic Powers wrote: The way I see it, protoss players at the middle-to-top end tend to be spoiled by the fact that they have a noticably easier time getting to a decently high rank than the other two races. As a result of that there may well be a survivorship bias going on, like for example protoss being more likely to draw in players who are less likely to put in the same additional effort to reach the top ranks as compared to terran and zerg players. With such a trend in the average mindset it wouldn't be surprising if the average skill level of the top ranked protoss players was actually slightly lower than that of terran and zerg players at the same top ranks. All of this is pure speculation, but it makes intuitive sense. Point being there's certainly room for bias that can skew the results against top protoss players.
This idea isn't exclusive to SC either, it also exists in combat sports and martial arts. Overperformers who are naturally gifted might be at a slight mindset disadvantage due to not having to work as hard to reach the top. Eventually some of their sparring partners catch up and even overtake them, and the mindset and expertise of those people would expectedly exceed that of the naturally gifted fighters.
This almost makes sense until you actually think about it. Protoss players are doing comparable numbers of sponsored matches and, more importantly, people who have been on the top for years (in some cases more like a decade) aren't going to be impacted by having an easier time at B rank.
Couldn't agree more.
Let's take the current top 5 protoss players: Mini, Snow, Best, Free, Shuttle.
Out of those I would consider the first 3 as the Tier 1 players. I think each time ASL rolls around no one thinks in terms: "Hey, I hope that I can win 80% of my games against 2300 MMR players on ASL maps on ladder, that should give me the extra confidence going into the tournament".
Everyone's thoughts is:
1. Avoid Zerg in Bo1s. 2. Get a favorable map pool so you don't have to play the Benzene's of the world in crucial games. 3. Practice as much as possible against other Pros to cover as many of the strategies in the new map pool. 4. No bo1 PvPs.
Basically minimizing variance and playing enough on the maps to understand optimal strategies.
On October 07 2021 14:32 sas.Sziky wrote: Mr. Moopower. It is difficult to remain diplomatic after these nonsense but i try. Who is just cry '' Zerg easy '' '' Protoss easy '' '' Terran op '' and continue. Easier to cry right (working and training and better like the other Hard Yes i know. ) U said Progamer what say.... don't say that( see Bonyth great interview with Mini ) put something on the table ( not even then u change '' balance and other '' Who are you to suggest this? For me it is very sad that there are such.
So any attempts to discuss opinions of balance is translated as whining? If it's true, it's true, doesn't matter if you think it's whining. If a sports team cheats in a game, and they call it out, does that mean they are "whining"? Or is it legitimate? You need to find that out by reason and argument rather than just calling it "whining". All you folks seem to be doing is resorting to argument from authority rather from a game theory perspective which I believe is the only objective way to discuss and reason through the balance argument.
On October 07 2021 22:16 EndingLife wrote: There's no problem with protoss scouting or imbalance with 9-7-3. Your scouting probe should not die until there's zergling speed. With gate expand you can very often scout while harassing with zealots. I think the recent maps have been pretty bad for PvZ in general. Mineral only 3rd bases really hurt the protoss mid/early late game. Protoss needs that gas to compete with 4 gas zerg when they take the natural of another main, then the main for free.
Your scouting probe will die before hydra if the zerg is competent in denying scouting. Speedlings will be deny probe scouting, and if you try to zealot pressure as a form of scouting, zerg can easily whip up more speedlings, and in an open area, zealots trade inefficiently before +1. So once your zealots die, you have even less to get in the way of hydra bust and all this could happen with zerg still hiding intel from you whether you're going hydra bust or muta. We saw this with Rain and JD's game in one ASL season. Rain was trying to move out with 5 zealots to try to get a sense for either muta tech or hydra, and I will admit that Rain did make a mistake by not plugging the wall so that forced Rain to get his cannon's delayed because of speedling dmg. JD essentially spiraled overwhelming econ advantage after the hydra bust, because of the delayed cannons, Rain was forced into a lose-lose scenario where he couldn't just scout with his zealots unless he wanted to throw them away and the hydra bust did so much dmg to Rain's economy he just couldn't catch up after that. So yes in a nutshell Rain did make some mistakes, but does it deserve such small margin for error? Why does Zerg have to have such big potential gains for little to no risk while Protoss gets stuck with all the risk? From a game theory perspective, that's not a winnable position long term. Protoss might get lucky with winning in some streaks but over the long haul, the player with more options and better risk/benefit ratio will statistically be ahead. Think game theory from poker perspective.
How often do you see Protoss making a comeback in ZvP where they are down 10-20 supply? How often do you see Zerg making an easier comeback down 40 supply?
On October 09 2021 03:47 TT1 wrote: If you want perfect balance you need to follow 1v1 sports/games like tennis etc.
Perfect balance is impossible to achieve in a multi race game like BW. It's common sense because there's various units which add different variables depending on the maps etc. If you wanted perfect balance the game would have to be mirrors only but that would obviously be boring as fuck to watch/play.
The reason why BW is the best game ever made is because the difference in balance isn't massive, it's marginal for the game quality that we get to enjoy. On top of that the skill cap is unlimited which allows players to overcome balance issues by putting in the work, which is extremely gratifying to ppl who enjoy competing.
Long story short, you're wasting your brain cells thinking about these type of things. Excuses don't work in a game like BW, when you lose it's 100% on you, accept it and move on. If you can't then you're probably better off playing a different game or just being a viewer.. for the sake of your sanity.
There are plenty of things I disagree with in this statement but none is higher than "when you lose it's 100% on you". That 100% isn't true with BW and a player as experienced as you should know that.
ok, such as?
Because you asked:
- The difference in balance isn't massive (it is depending on the map).
- Mirrors are a perfect balance (they're map and FOW BO dependent).
- The skill cap is unlimited (there is a skill cap although it's relatively high).
- BW is the greatest game ever made (that's just an opinion, of which I personally disagree with).
But I honestly don't care about all of that as much as I think people should understand that you 100% can lose and it not be your fault. Any game with fog of war, miss-chance, and pathing bugs will result in games where you played the odds exceptionally well and still lose because of factors outside of your control. Fog of war being the most influential in that list. Just as you can't predict when a car will decide to just go crazy and turn right into you on the highway and cause a crash, you can't predict certain plays crazy people will do in StarCraft and despite your best efforts to play within the meta and within the odds, you will lose to some crazy shit because it would literally be irresponsible and a bad play for you to account for such nonsense. Just as the car accident wasn't your fault, a SC loss to something like that isn't your fault either. Just part of the game. SC and ANY fog of war game relies on players playing odds to a certain degree and that's why a 70% win rate at the pro level gets you to top in the world. FlaSh isn't the best ever because he won 100% of the time, it's because he was a genius gambler whom would study the meta and his current BO win odds and if they dropped at all in practice he knew he had to adapt and change.
Those are just my thoughts though and aren't meant as an attack on you. You and no one else has to agree with them.
Most of the things you mention are nitpicky and meaningless to me, it's part of the variance of the game which evens out with sample size. I mentally write off factors outside my control because they're exactly that, outside my control. It's pointless to think/worry about them because everyone has to deal with the same stuff anyways (perspective matters a lot here). Instead, look at them as challenges and try to overcome them (nothing applies more to this than 9p vs 12h for example, or proxy 2g vs 12h etc).
Losing to people who do bad/crazy stuff that catches you off guard is nothing more than a mechanics issue imo, it happens to all of us. With enough execution and practice/experience you limit and learn how to react properly to those scenarios, there's levels to every competitive game.
Instead of blaming your opponent for doing something dumb look internally instead of externally. Like i said, to me that's nothing more than an excuse. But i guess this is all a matter of perspective anyways, imo the setting of the game also matters. My mindset for ladder and tourneys is that anything goes, you're in the jungle (as opposed to playing customs/practice games).
Both can be true to be fair.
Personally I’m pretty hardwired with the ‘get good’ mentality, rather to my detriment sometimes as I apply it to basically everything.
There could be some hypothetical game, indeed they probably exist where my character/faction choice requires stellar, as close to human level perfection to have utility, matching up against an equivalent that doesn’t require anyway near that technical proficiency.
So I could play at 90%, lose and it’s both my fault for not playing at 100%, but equally whether that’s a reasonable expectation if my opponent is making big errors left right and centre can also be worthy of consideration.
Brood War isn’t grossly broken of course, and it’s long-standing combination of general balance as well as genuinely distinctive factions is borderline miraculous.
Mess with that at our peril, although I do still enjoy the ultimately fruitless theorycrafting.
On October 07 2021 22:16 EndingLife wrote: There's no problem with protoss scouting or imbalance with 9-7-3. Your scouting probe should not die until there's zergling speed. With gate expand you can very often scout while harassing with zealots. I think the recent maps have been pretty bad for PvZ in general. Mineral only 3rd bases really hurt the protoss mid/early late game. Protoss needs that gas to compete with 4 gas zerg when they take the natural of another main, then the main for free.
Your scouting probe will die before hydra if the zerg is competent in denying scouting. Speedlings will be deny probe scouting, and if you try to zealot pressure as a form of scouting, zerg can easily whip up more speedlings, and in an open area, zealots trade inefficiently before +1. So once your zealots die, you have even less to get in the way of hydra bust and all this could happen with zerg still hiding intel from you whether you're going hydra bust or muta. We saw this with Rain and JD's game in one ASL season. Rain was trying to move out with 5 zealots to try to get a sense for either muta tech or hydra, and I will admit that Rain did make a mistake by not plugging the wall so that forced Rain to get his cannon's delayed because of speedling dmg. JD essentially spiraled overwhelming econ advantage after the hydra bust, because of the delayed cannons, Rain was forced into a lose-lose scenario where he couldn't just scout with his zealots unless he wanted to throw them away and the hydra bust did so much dmg to Rain's economy he just couldn't catch up after that.
How often do you see Protoss making a comeback in ZvP where they are down 10-20 supply? How often do you see Zerg making an easier comeback down 40 supply?
play and study the game more instead of talking, you're wrong with your timings, link the game that you're talking about
if z shows you speed at x timing that means hydras aren't likely unless it's a mindgame build, but by then the hydras will be so delayed that you'll be able to scout and react to them with your sair scout (and add cannons)
instead of looking for people to feed you answers shouldn't you take the time to learn the game properly before whining? you seem very entitled
On October 07 2021 22:16 EndingLife wrote: There's no problem with protoss scouting or imbalance with 9-7-3. Your scouting probe should not die until there's zergling speed. With gate expand you can very often scout while harassing with zealots. I think the recent maps have been pretty bad for PvZ in general. Mineral only 3rd bases really hurt the protoss mid/early late game. Protoss needs that gas to compete with 4 gas zerg when they take the natural of another main, then the main for free.
Your scouting probe will die before hydra if the zerg is competent in denying scouting. Speedlings will be deny probe scouting, and if you try to zealot pressure as a form of scouting, zerg can easily whip up more speedlings, and in an open area, zealots trade inefficiently before +1. So once your zealots die, you have even less to get in the way of hydra bust and all this could happen with zerg still hiding intel from you whether you're going hydra bust or muta. We saw this with Rain and JD's game in one ASL season. Rain was trying to move out with 5 zealots to try to get a sense for either muta tech or hydra, and I will admit that Rain did make a mistake by not plugging the wall so that forced Rain to get his cannon's delayed because of speedling dmg. JD essentially spiraled overwhelming econ advantage after the hydra bust, because of the delayed cannons, Rain was forced into a lose-lose scenario where he couldn't just scout with his zealots unless he wanted to throw them away and the hydra bust did so much dmg to Rain's economy he just couldn't catch up after that.
How often do you see Protoss making a comeback in ZvP where they are down 10-20 supply? How often do you see Zerg making an easier comeback down 40 supply?
play and study the game more instead of talking, you're wrong with your timings, link the game that you're talking about
if z shows you speed at x timing that means hydras aren't likely unless it's a mindgame build, but by then the hydras will be so delayed that you'll be able to scout and react to them with your sair scout (and add cannons)
instead of looking for people to feed you answers shouldn't you take the time to learn the game properly before whining? you seem very entitled
I find plenty of games where you're wrong. Just because you see speed at x timing doesn't rule out hydra timing. I understand every choice in bw has a cost, which can further eliminate possibilities of what your opp is doing. However, if you assume too many things without a good enough justification to rule something out, you will get caught with your pants down eventually. You're just wrong about the timing of the sairs and cannons. If you were correct, we would see more games where sair scout would enable protoss to punish the zerg with a superior macro and econ mid game, but Zerg is the more flexible race in this match up. Any variation or deviation is on Zerg's court, so if Protoss tries to make any fine tuning builds, Zerg can much more easily find a countering build, since Protoss is a much more rigid race.
This is why the argument about how Protoss should just come up with new innovations and meta builds is just missing the point. The point is and has been shown throughout bw history is that any innovation from the Protoss does get solved rather quickly. Whereas Protoss is still struggling against hydra bust timings and variations of it 10-15 years since. Imagine a world where Corsairs weren't in the game, and people like you are arguing that the game hasn't been changed since forever. If in our hypothetical that sairs weren't in the game, and protoss players just adapt by playing goons, hts, and dark archons does that mean we are in an equitable game? What if we are in one of those scenarios right now? Just with this advantage that zerg has with protoss with the hydra bust timings? So again, arguments about how things haven't changed or how you think blizzard wont change things, doesn't address the argument. It's just a comment of the state of things.
On October 07 2021 22:16 EndingLife wrote: There's no problem with protoss scouting or imbalance with 9-7-3. Your scouting probe should not die until there's zergling speed. With gate expand you can very often scout while harassing with zealots. I think the recent maps have been pretty bad for PvZ in general. Mineral only 3rd bases really hurt the protoss mid/early late game. Protoss needs that gas to compete with 4 gas zerg when they take the natural of another main, then the main for free.
Your scouting probe will die before hydra if the zerg is competent in denying scouting. Speedlings will be deny probe scouting, and if you try to zealot pressure as a form of scouting, zerg can easily whip up more speedlings, and in an open area, zealots trade inefficiently before +1. So once your zealots die, you have even less to get in the way of hydra bust and all this could happen with zerg still hiding intel from you whether you're going hydra bust or muta. We saw this with Rain and JD's game in one ASL season. Rain was trying to move out with 5 zealots to try to get a sense for either muta tech or hydra, and I will admit that Rain did make a mistake by not plugging the wall so that forced Rain to get his cannon's delayed because of speedling dmg. JD essentially spiraled overwhelming econ advantage after the hydra bust, because of the delayed cannons, Rain was forced into a lose-lose scenario where he couldn't just scout with his zealots unless he wanted to throw them away and the hydra bust did so much dmg to Rain's economy he just couldn't catch up after that.
How often do you see Protoss making a comeback in ZvP where they are down 10-20 supply? How often do you see Zerg making an easier comeback down 40 supply?
play and study the game more instead of talking, you're wrong with your timings, link the game that you're talking about
if z shows you speed at x timing that means hydras aren't likely unless it's a mindgame build, but by then the hydras will be so delayed that you'll be able to scout and react to them with your sair scout (and add cannons)
instead of looking for people to feed you answers shouldn't you take the time to learn the game properly before whining? you seem very entitled
I find plenty of games where you're wrong. Just because you see speed at x timing doesn't rule out hydra timing. I understand every choice in bw has a cost, which can further eliminate possibilities of what your opp is doing. However, if you assume too many things without a good enough justification to rule something out, you will get caught with your pants down eventually. You're just wrong about the timing of the sairs and cannons. If you were correct, we would see more games where sair scout would enable protoss to punish the zerg with a superior macro and econ mid game, but Zerg is the more flexible race in this match up. Any variation or deviation is on Zerg's court, so if Protoss tries to make any fine tuning builds, Zerg can much more easily find a countering build, since Protoss is a much more rigid race.
let's talk factually instead of trying to brute force through your biased/flawed perspective, link me games and ask questions about what you deem as being OP, i'll try to give you answers
On October 07 2021 22:16 EndingLife wrote: There's no problem with protoss scouting or imbalance with 9-7-3. Your scouting probe should not die until there's zergling speed. With gate expand you can very often scout while harassing with zealots. I think the recent maps have been pretty bad for PvZ in general. Mineral only 3rd bases really hurt the protoss mid/early late game. Protoss needs that gas to compete with 4 gas zerg when they take the natural of another main, then the main for free.
Your scouting probe will die before hydra if the zerg is competent in denying scouting. Speedlings will be deny probe scouting, and if you try to zealot pressure as a form of scouting, zerg can easily whip up more speedlings, and in an open area, zealots trade inefficiently before +1. So once your zealots die, you have even less to get in the way of hydra bust and all this could happen with zerg still hiding intel from you whether you're going hydra bust or muta. We saw this with Rain and JD's game in one ASL season. Rain was trying to move out with 5 zealots to try to get a sense for either muta tech or hydra, and I will admit that Rain did make a mistake by not plugging the wall so that forced Rain to get his cannon's delayed because of speedling dmg. JD essentially spiraled overwhelming econ advantage after the hydra bust, because of the delayed cannons, Rain was forced into a lose-lose scenario where he couldn't just scout with his zealots unless he wanted to throw them away and the hydra bust did so much dmg to Rain's economy he just couldn't catch up after that.
How often do you see Protoss making a comeback in ZvP where they are down 10-20 supply? How often do you see Zerg making an easier comeback down 40 supply?
play and study the game more instead of talking, you're wrong with your timings, link the game that you're talking about
if z shows you speed at x timing that means hydras aren't likely unless it's a mindgame build, but by then the hydras will be so delayed that you'll be able to scout and react to them with your sair scout (and add cannons)
instead of looking for people to feed you answers shouldn't you take the time to learn the game properly before whining? you seem very entitled
I find plenty of games where you're wrong. Just because you see speed at x timing doesn't rule out hydra timing. I understand every choice in bw has a cost, which can further eliminate possibilities of what your opp is doing. However, if you assume too many things without a good enough justification to rule something out, you will get caught with your pants down eventually. You're just wrong about the timing of the sairs and cannons. If you were correct, we would see more games where sair scout would enable protoss to punish the zerg with a superior macro and econ mid game, but Zerg is the more flexible race in this match up. Any variation or deviation is on Zerg's court, so if Protoss tries to make any fine tuning builds, Zerg can much more easily find a countering build, since Protoss is a much more rigid race.
let's talk factually instead of trying to brute force through your biased/flawed perspective, link me games and ask questions about what you deem as being OP, i'll try to give you answers
Facts and figures aren't the only to reason. I'm discussing game theory arguments. You clearly aren't addressing them. You can utilize stats all you want, but it doesn't negate my points anyways.
Just answer me this, how from a game theory perspective is Protoss going to be able to overcome the gap in PvZ? When Zerg has all the benefits of potential game ending hydra busts, while Protoss if they make a mistake, they'll either lose or be zoned out of the game.
Philosophy is how you interpret data, and what I'm doing is addressing the root cause of certain concepts. Just talking about data is surface level thinking. How is it fair that one race has all the high rewards/low risk benefit ratio and more options to a greater degree than other race match ups? In poker, the one who can feign a certain range of playable hands to fool their opponent or try to deceive them has the upper hand. Same game theory.
On October 07 2021 22:16 EndingLife wrote: There's no problem with protoss scouting or imbalance with 9-7-3. Your scouting probe should not die until there's zergling speed. With gate expand you can very often scout while harassing with zealots. I think the recent maps have been pretty bad for PvZ in general. Mineral only 3rd bases really hurt the protoss mid/early late game. Protoss needs that gas to compete with 4 gas zerg when they take the natural of another main, then the main for free.
Your scouting probe will die before hydra if the zerg is competent in denying scouting. Speedlings will be deny probe scouting, and if you try to zealot pressure as a form of scouting, zerg can easily whip up more speedlings, and in an open area, zealots trade inefficiently before +1. So once your zealots die, you have even less to get in the way of hydra bust and all this could happen with zerg still hiding intel from you whether you're going hydra bust or muta. We saw this with Rain and JD's game in one ASL season. Rain was trying to move out with 5 zealots to try to get a sense for either muta tech or hydra, and I will admit that Rain did make a mistake by not plugging the wall so that forced Rain to get his cannon's delayed because of speedling dmg. JD essentially spiraled overwhelming econ advantage after the hydra bust, because of the delayed cannons, Rain was forced into a lose-lose scenario where he couldn't just scout with his zealots unless he wanted to throw them away and the hydra bust did so much dmg to Rain's economy he just couldn't catch up after that.
How often do you see Protoss making a comeback in ZvP where they are down 10-20 supply? How often do you see Zerg making an easier comeback down 40 supply?
play and study the game more instead of talking, you're wrong with your timings, link the game that you're talking about
if z shows you speed at x timing that means hydras aren't likely unless it's a mindgame build, but by then the hydras will be so delayed that you'll be able to scout and react to them with your sair scout (and add cannons)
instead of looking for people to feed you answers shouldn't you take the time to learn the game properly before whining? you seem very entitled
I find plenty of games where you're wrong. Just because you see speed at x timing doesn't rule out hydra timing. I understand every choice in bw has a cost, which can further eliminate possibilities of what your opp is doing. However, if you assume too many things without a good enough justification to rule something out, you will get caught with your pants down eventually. You're just wrong about the timing of the sairs and cannons. If you were correct, we would see more games where sair scout would enable protoss to punish the zerg with a superior macro and econ mid game, but Zerg is the more flexible race in this match up. Any variation or deviation is on Zerg's court, so if Protoss tries to make any fine tuning builds, Zerg can much more easily find a countering build, since Protoss is a much more rigid race.
let's talk factually instead of trying to brute force through your biased/flawed perspective, link me games and ask questions about what you deem as being OP, i'll try to give you answers
Facts and figures aren't the only to reason. I'm discussing game theor arguments. You clearly aren't addressing them. You can utilize stats all you want, but it doesn't negate my points anyways.
Buddy, the reason why you're hard stuck on your view is that you lack perspective. You don't understand the fundamentals of the game enough to be theorycrafting, that's the issue. The funniest part is the way you went all about this, you talk about authority but that's the position you're taking.. without having any of the knowledge to back it up.
On October 07 2021 22:16 EndingLife wrote: There's no problem with protoss scouting or imbalance with 9-7-3. Your scouting probe should not die until there's zergling speed. With gate expand you can very often scout while harassing with zealots. I think the recent maps have been pretty bad for PvZ in general. Mineral only 3rd bases really hurt the protoss mid/early late game. Protoss needs that gas to compete with 4 gas zerg when they take the natural of another main, then the main for free.
Your scouting probe will die before hydra if the zerg is competent in denying scouting. Speedlings will be deny probe scouting, and if you try to zealot pressure as a form of scouting, zerg can easily whip up more speedlings, and in an open area, zealots trade inefficiently before +1. So once your zealots die, you have even less to get in the way of hydra bust and all this could happen with zerg still hiding intel from you whether you're going hydra bust or muta. We saw this with Rain and JD's game in one ASL season. Rain was trying to move out with 5 zealots to try to get a sense for either muta tech or hydra, and I will admit that Rain did make a mistake by not plugging the wall so that forced Rain to get his cannon's delayed because of speedling dmg. JD essentially spiraled overwhelming econ advantage after the hydra bust, because of the delayed cannons, Rain was forced into a lose-lose scenario where he couldn't just scout with his zealots unless he wanted to throw them away and the hydra bust did so much dmg to Rain's economy he just couldn't catch up after that.
How often do you see Protoss making a comeback in ZvP where they are down 10-20 supply? How often do you see Zerg making an easier comeback down 40 supply?
play and study the game more instead of talking, you're wrong with your timings, link the game that you're talking about
if z shows you speed at x timing that means hydras aren't likely unless it's a mindgame build, but by then the hydras will be so delayed that you'll be able to scout and react to them with your sair scout (and add cannons)
instead of looking for people to feed you answers shouldn't you take the time to learn the game properly before whining? you seem very entitled
I find plenty of games where you're wrong. Just because you see speed at x timing doesn't rule out hydra timing. I understand every choice in bw has a cost, which can further eliminate possibilities of what your opp is doing. However, if you assume too many things without a good enough justification to rule something out, you will get caught with your pants down eventually. You're just wrong about the timing of the sairs and cannons. If you were correct, we would see more games where sair scout would enable protoss to punish the zerg with a superior macro and econ mid game, but Zerg is the more flexible race in this match up. Any variation or deviation is on Zerg's court, so if Protoss tries to make any fine tuning builds, Zerg can much more easily find a countering build, since Protoss is a much more rigid race.
let's talk factually instead of trying to brute force through your biased/flawed perspective, link me games and ask questions about what you deem as being OP, i'll try to give you answers
Facts and figures aren't the only to reason. I'm discussing game theor arguments. You clearly aren't addressing them. You can utilize stats all you want, but it doesn't negate my points anyways.
Buddy, the reason why you're hard stuck on your view is that you lack perspective. You don't understand the fundamentals of the game enough to be theorycrafting, that's the issue.
The reason you're hard stuck on your views is because you subscribe to the dogma that the game is balanced enough to where it doesn't matter. I'm telling you at the highest levels it does. I'm not talking about my personal games or lower tiered games. So my skill has nothing to do with the discussion. You simply lack the perspective to get your head out of the hive mind that bw is as close to balance as it could get. Just address the game theory argument or don't bother.
We learn that the scientific method is to gather data and then draw a conclusion. Who is being more scientific about the way we reach our conclusion? Someone who has already came to a conclusion and then is reasoning back to it? Or one who makes observations about the game, and then comes to a conclusion?
Again, all you're doing is resorting to argument from authority. So unless you have a good reasoned argument that isn't along the lines, "you don't know enough, git gud" dismissive statements like that aren't going to be considered.
On October 07 2021 22:16 EndingLife wrote: There's no problem with protoss scouting or imbalance with 9-7-3. Your scouting probe should not die until there's zergling speed. With gate expand you can very often scout while harassing with zealots. I think the recent maps have been pretty bad for PvZ in general. Mineral only 3rd bases really hurt the protoss mid/early late game. Protoss needs that gas to compete with 4 gas zerg when they take the natural of another main, then the main for free.
Your scouting probe will die before hydra if the zerg is competent in denying scouting. Speedlings will be deny probe scouting, and if you try to zealot pressure as a form of scouting, zerg can easily whip up more speedlings, and in an open area, zealots trade inefficiently before +1. So once your zealots die, you have even less to get in the way of hydra bust and all this could happen with zerg still hiding intel from you whether you're going hydra bust or muta. We saw this with Rain and JD's game in one ASL season. Rain was trying to move out with 5 zealots to try to get a sense for either muta tech or hydra, and I will admit that Rain did make a mistake by not plugging the wall so that forced Rain to get his cannon's delayed because of speedling dmg. JD essentially spiraled overwhelming econ advantage after the hydra bust, because of the delayed cannons, Rain was forced into a lose-lose scenario where he couldn't just scout with his zealots unless he wanted to throw them away and the hydra bust did so much dmg to Rain's economy he just couldn't catch up after that.
How often do you see Protoss making a comeback in ZvP where they are down 10-20 supply? How often do you see Zerg making an easier comeback down 40 supply?
play and study the game more instead of talking, you're wrong with your timings, link the game that you're talking about
if z shows you speed at x timing that means hydras aren't likely unless it's a mindgame build, but by then the hydras will be so delayed that you'll be able to scout and react to them with your sair scout (and add cannons)
instead of looking for people to feed you answers shouldn't you take the time to learn the game properly before whining? you seem very entitled
I find plenty of games where you're wrong. Just because you see speed at x timing doesn't rule out hydra timing. I understand every choice in bw has a cost, which can further eliminate possibilities of what your opp is doing. However, if you assume too many things without a good enough justification to rule something out, you will get caught with your pants down eventually. You're just wrong about the timing of the sairs and cannons. If you were correct, we would see more games where sair scout would enable protoss to punish the zerg with a superior macro and econ mid game, but Zerg is the more flexible race in this match up. Any variation or deviation is on Zerg's court, so if Protoss tries to make any fine tuning builds, Zerg can much more easily find a countering build, since Protoss is a much more rigid race.
let's talk factually instead of trying to brute force through your biased/flawed perspective, link me games and ask questions about what you deem as being OP, i'll try to give you answers
Facts and figures aren't the only to reason. I'm discussing game theor arguments. You clearly aren't addressing them. You can utilize stats all you want, but it doesn't negate my points anyways.
Buddy, the reason why you're hard stuck on your view is that you lack perspective. You don't understand the fundamentals of the game enough to be theorycrafting, that's the issue.
The reason you're hard stuck on your views is because you subscribe to the dogma that the game is balanced enough to where it doesn't matter. I'm telling you at the highest levels it does. I'm not talking about my personal games or lower tiered games. So my skill has nothing to do with the discussion. You simply lack the perspective to get your head out of the hive mind that bw is as close to balance as it could get. Just address the game theory argument or don't bother.
We learn that the scientific method is to gather data and then draw a conclusion. Who is being more scientific about the way we reach our conclusion? Someone who has already came to a conclusion and then is reasoning back to it? Or one who makes observations about the game, and then comes to a conclusion?
YES, I'M ASKING YOU TO POST VODS OF THE HIGHEST LEVEL ZVPs SO WE CAN ADDRESS YOUR QUESTIONS!!
On October 07 2021 22:16 EndingLife wrote: There's no problem with protoss scouting or imbalance with 9-7-3. Your scouting probe should not die until there's zergling speed. With gate expand you can very often scout while harassing with zealots. I think the recent maps have been pretty bad for PvZ in general. Mineral only 3rd bases really hurt the protoss mid/early late game. Protoss needs that gas to compete with 4 gas zerg when they take the natural of another main, then the main for free.
Your scouting probe will die before hydra if the zerg is competent in denying scouting. Speedlings will be deny probe scouting, and if you try to zealot pressure as a form of scouting, zerg can easily whip up more speedlings, and in an open area, zealots trade inefficiently before +1. So once your zealots die, you have even less to get in the way of hydra bust and all this could happen with zerg still hiding intel from you whether you're going hydra bust or muta. We saw this with Rain and JD's game in one ASL season. Rain was trying to move out with 5 zealots to try to get a sense for either muta tech or hydra, and I will admit that Rain did make a mistake by not plugging the wall so that forced Rain to get his cannon's delayed because of speedling dmg. JD essentially spiraled overwhelming econ advantage after the hydra bust, because of the delayed cannons, Rain was forced into a lose-lose scenario where he couldn't just scout with his zealots unless he wanted to throw them away and the hydra bust did so much dmg to Rain's economy he just couldn't catch up after that.
How often do you see Protoss making a comeback in ZvP where they are down 10-20 supply? How often do you see Zerg making an easier comeback down 40 supply?
play and study the game more instead of talking, you're wrong with your timings, link the game that you're talking about
if z shows you speed at x timing that means hydras aren't likely unless it's a mindgame build, but by then the hydras will be so delayed that you'll be able to scout and react to them with your sair scout (and add cannons)
instead of looking for people to feed you answers shouldn't you take the time to learn the game properly before whining? you seem very entitled
I find plenty of games where you're wrong. Just because you see speed at x timing doesn't rule out hydra timing. I understand every choice in bw has a cost, which can further eliminate possibilities of what your opp is doing. However, if you assume too many things without a good enough justification to rule something out, you will get caught with your pants down eventually. You're just wrong about the timing of the sairs and cannons. If you were correct, we would see more games where sair scout would enable protoss to punish the zerg with a superior macro and econ mid game, but Zerg is the more flexible race in this match up. Any variation or deviation is on Zerg's court, so if Protoss tries to make any fine tuning builds, Zerg can much more easily find a countering build, since Protoss is a much more rigid race.
let's talk factually instead of trying to brute force through your biased/flawed perspective, link me games and ask questions about what you deem as being OP, i'll try to give you answers
Facts and figures aren't the only to reason. I'm discussing game theor arguments. You clearly aren't addressing them. You can utilize stats all you want, but it doesn't negate my points anyways.
Buddy, the reason why you're hard stuck on your view is that you lack perspective. You don't understand the fundamentals of the game enough to be theorycrafting, that's the issue.
The reason you're hard stuck on your views is because you subscribe to the dogma that the game is balanced enough to where it doesn't matter. I'm telling you at the highest levels it does. I'm not talking about my personal games or lower tiered games. So my skill has nothing to do with the discussion. You simply lack the perspective to get your head out of the hive mind that bw is as close to balance as it could get. Just address the game theory argument or don't bother.
We learn that the scientific method is to gather data and then draw a conclusion. Who is being more scientific about the way we reach our conclusion? Someone who has already came to a conclusion and then is reasoning back to it? Or one who makes observations about the game, and then comes to a conclusion?
YES, I'M ASKING YOU TO POST VODS OF THE HIGHEST LEVEL ZVPs SO WE CAN ADDRESS YOUR QUESTIONS!!
Address the 973 hydra bust argument. I've posted about it several times now. How is it fair that one race gets all the potential benefits while the other race is stuck with massive risk?
On October 07 2021 22:16 EndingLife wrote: There's no problem with protoss scouting or imbalance with 9-7-3. Your scouting probe should not die until there's zergling speed. With gate expand you can very often scout while harassing with zealots. I think the recent maps have been pretty bad for PvZ in general. Mineral only 3rd bases really hurt the protoss mid/early late game. Protoss needs that gas to compete with 4 gas zerg when they take the natural of another main, then the main for free.
Your scouting probe will die before hydra if the zerg is competent in denying scouting. Speedlings will be deny probe scouting, and if you try to zealot pressure as a form of scouting, zerg can easily whip up more speedlings, and in an open area, zealots trade inefficiently before +1. So once your zealots die, you have even less to get in the way of hydra bust and all this could happen with zerg still hiding intel from you whether you're going hydra bust or muta. We saw this with Rain and JD's game in one ASL season. Rain was trying to move out with 5 zealots to try to get a sense for either muta tech or hydra, and I will admit that Rain did make a mistake by not plugging the wall so that forced Rain to get his cannon's delayed because of speedling dmg. JD essentially spiraled overwhelming econ advantage after the hydra bust, because of the delayed cannons, Rain was forced into a lose-lose scenario where he couldn't just scout with his zealots unless he wanted to throw them away and the hydra bust did so much dmg to Rain's economy he just couldn't catch up after that.
How often do you see Protoss making a comeback in ZvP where they are down 10-20 supply? How often do you see Zerg making an easier comeback down 40 supply?
play and study the game more instead of talking, you're wrong with your timings, link the game that you're talking about
if z shows you speed at x timing that means hydras aren't likely unless it's a mindgame build, but by then the hydras will be so delayed that you'll be able to scout and react to them with your sair scout (and add cannons)
instead of looking for people to feed you answers shouldn't you take the time to learn the game properly before whining? you seem very entitled
I find plenty of games where you're wrong. Just because you see speed at x timing doesn't rule out hydra timing. I understand every choice in bw has a cost, which can further eliminate possibilities of what your opp is doing. However, if you assume too many things without a good enough justification to rule something out, you will get caught with your pants down eventually. You're just wrong about the timing of the sairs and cannons. If you were correct, we would see more games where sair scout would enable protoss to punish the zerg with a superior macro and econ mid game, but Zerg is the more flexible race in this match up. Any variation or deviation is on Zerg's court, so if Protoss tries to make any fine tuning builds, Zerg can much more easily find a countering build, since Protoss is a much more rigid race.
let's talk factually instead of trying to brute force through your biased/flawed perspective, link me games and ask questions about what you deem as being OP, i'll try to give you answers
Facts and figures aren't the only to reason. I'm discussing game theor arguments. You clearly aren't addressing them. You can utilize stats all you want, but it doesn't negate my points anyways.
Buddy, the reason why you're hard stuck on your view is that you lack perspective. You don't understand the fundamentals of the game enough to be theorycrafting, that's the issue.
The reason you're hard stuck on your views is because you subscribe to the dogma that the game is balanced enough to where it doesn't matter. I'm telling you at the highest levels it does. I'm not talking about my personal games or lower tiered games. So my skill has nothing to do with the discussion. You simply lack the perspective to get your head out of the hive mind that bw is as close to balance as it could get. Just address the game theory argument or don't bother.
We learn that the scientific method is to gather data and then draw a conclusion. Who is being more scientific about the way we reach our conclusion? Someone who has already came to a conclusion and then is reasoning back to it? Or one who makes observations about the game, and then comes to a conclusion?
YES, I'M ASKING YOU TO POST VODS OF THE HIGHEST LEVEL ZVPs SO WE CAN ADDRESS YOUR QUESTIONS!!
Address the 973 hydra bust argument. I've posted about it several times now. How is it fair that one race gets all the potential benefits while the other race is stuck with massive risk?
It's situational, depends on execution and scouting info (yes even at the highest lvl) but yes it's a strong build to hold and macro out of in certain scenarios. Keyword is situational, BW isn't black or white, it's grey.
If P manages to block a 973 perfectly they're in a strong position, you can capitalize on it by hitting certain timings (zeal ht to punish late lair, you can go into a DA instead of sairs if you scout a late spire because you have the time to do so, that lets you power up your ground army faster) but you need to execute properly.
The reason why Bisu had the best PvZ is because he had the best multitask/execution. Those traits are extremely important in PvZ in particular (relative to PvT for example where they're much less important, which is why historically Bisu has always had way better PvZ relative to his PvT, it's the opposite for someone like Snow).
Also in some scenarios where you scout well enough you can hard counter with b.os like this:
Your scouting probe will die before hydra if the zerg is competent in denying scouting. Speedlings will be deny probe scouting, and if you try to zealot pressure as a form of scouting, zerg can easily whip up more speedlings, and in an open area, zealots trade inefficiently before +1. So once your zealots die, you have even less to get in the way of hydra bust and all this could happen with zerg still hiding intel from you whether you're going hydra bust or muta. We saw this with Rain and JD's game in one ASL season. Rain was trying to move out with 5 zealots to try to get a sense for either muta tech or hydra, and I will admit that Rain did make a mistake by not plugging the wall so that forced Rain to get his cannon's delayed because of speedling dmg. JD essentially spiraled overwhelming econ advantage after the hydra bust, because of the delayed cannons, Rain was forced into a lose-lose scenario where he couldn't just scout with his zealots unless he wanted to throw them away and the hydra bust did so much dmg to Rain's economy he just couldn't catch up after that.
How often do you see Protoss making a comeback in ZvP where they are down 10-20 supply? How often do you see Zerg making an easier comeback down 40 supply?
play and study the game more instead of talking, you're wrong with your timings, link the game that you're talking about
if z shows you speed at x timing that means hydras aren't likely unless it's a mindgame build, but by then the hydras will be so delayed that you'll be able to scout and react to them with your sair scout (and add cannons)
instead of looking for people to feed you answers shouldn't you take the time to learn the game properly before whining? you seem very entitled
I find plenty of games where you're wrong. Just because you see speed at x timing doesn't rule out hydra timing. I understand every choice in bw has a cost, which can further eliminate possibilities of what your opp is doing. However, if you assume too many things without a good enough justification to rule something out, you will get caught with your pants down eventually. You're just wrong about the timing of the sairs and cannons. If you were correct, we would see more games where sair scout would enable protoss to punish the zerg with a superior macro and econ mid game, but Zerg is the more flexible race in this match up. Any variation or deviation is on Zerg's court, so if Protoss tries to make any fine tuning builds, Zerg can much more easily find a countering build, since Protoss is a much more rigid race.
let's talk factually instead of trying to brute force through your biased/flawed perspective, link me games and ask questions about what you deem as being OP, i'll try to give you answers
Facts and figures aren't the only to reason. I'm discussing game theor arguments. You clearly aren't addressing them. You can utilize stats all you want, but it doesn't negate my points anyways.
Buddy, the reason why you're hard stuck on your view is that you lack perspective. You don't understand the fundamentals of the game enough to be theorycrafting, that's the issue.
The reason you're hard stuck on your views is because you subscribe to the dogma that the game is balanced enough to where it doesn't matter. I'm telling you at the highest levels it does. I'm not talking about my personal games or lower tiered games. So my skill has nothing to do with the discussion. You simply lack the perspective to get your head out of the hive mind that bw is as close to balance as it could get. Just address the game theory argument or don't bother.
We learn that the scientific method is to gather data and then draw a conclusion. Who is being more scientific about the way we reach our conclusion? Someone who has already came to a conclusion and then is reasoning back to it? Or one who makes observations about the game, and then comes to a conclusion?
YES, I'M ASKING YOU TO POST VODS OF THE HIGHEST LEVEL ZVPs SO WE CAN ADDRESS YOUR QUESTIONS!!
Address the 973 hydra bust argument. I've posted about it several times now. How is it fair that one race gets all the potential benefits while the other race is stuck with massive risk?
it's situational, depends on execution and scouting info but yes it's a strong build to hold and macro out of in certain scenarios keyword is situational, BW isn't black or white, it's grey
if p manages to block a 973 perfectly they're in a strong position, you can capitalize on it by hitting certain timings but you need to execute properly
I know it's situational and dependent on the skill differences of each user. My point being is Protoss has to be playing at a much higher level relative to the zerg to win more consistently due to the game theory options that Protoss and Zerg have against each other. A competent zerg would deny scouting. So if Protoss gets a sneak peek at the hydra bust, then that's zerg's mismicro fail on him, but still he isn't punished heavily for such a high reward type play. If you scout a 4 pool in time, that's a death sentence for the Zerg, if someone scouts a cheese build and blocks it successfully the other player who did the riskier strat gets punished. But Zerg has little to no viable builds that get punished as heavily relative to other match ups.
If hydra den gets scouted early, zerg might see that as a smaller setback and then zerg can just do some macro cycles and fake a hydra bust. There are so many avenues and routes zerg can alternatively fall back on, where as the same cannot be said for Protoss.
That game of Snow vs JD is a terrible example. First off, JD mismicroed his lings and allowed the probe to get in, if Snow hadn't gotten that intel early with the probe, he would've had a late sair and would've either died to hydra bust or lose a lot of econ and probes/cannons. His core timing was slow. Secondly, it seems JD doesn't have the same drone macro cycle that modern top zergs have, like Hero, Queen,etc. He should've had a lot more hydras pumped out and should've sniped forge, gateway, and forced a lot more cannons.
A more recent game would be Snow vs Queen in ASL 12
EPT![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/f8FolI5.jpg)
