On September 28 2011 12:23 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On September 28 2011 08:06 Apollo_Shards wrote:
On September 28 2011 06:13 SeaSwift wrote:
On September 28 2011 03:00 StatikKhaos wrote: this is unnecessary, Protoss just got a buff, just because you can't adapt doesnt mean you should be sad!
Right... because that +1 range to Immortals and the extra Warp Prism shields have completely solved Terran 1-1-1, Ghosts, Infestors and Zerg's insane macro.
Sad Zealot still sad. :'(
Balance complaints wont solve the protoss decline. Blizzard will do what it wants. Maybe they are telling Protoss to do Immortal drops?
But seriously we need a Nestea for protoss. MC was a great player but he didn't innovate quite as much as his Zerg counterpart.
The reason why MC fell to Code B was that he tried to innovate. The problem is that there's few things Protoss can do that is effective, while there it is the complete opposite with Terran, and Zerg even has more options than Toss that kick ass. The thing is that Protoss isn't designed well, especially compared to Terran that was designed way too well, as even admitted by DB.
Immortal drops? Can Immortals kill 20 workers in a microsecond like hellions, mutas, and stimrines can? I don't think so. You don't think pros haven't tried that and seen it is not efficient nor effective? Of course they have. Protoss is by far the most innovative and explored, because Protoss has always had to adapt to the slightest discovery like Terran actually using Ghosts, or Zergs actually learning what Infestors are. When Zerg has trouble, they get HUGE buffs from Blizzard. When Protoss has trouble? They have to be as creative and bold as Nikola Tesla and get shit done like real men.
Again, I wasnt being too serious about the immortal drops. Although I did see Opitkzero use it last night. What did MC innovate on?
And can we not make balance complaints in this thread :/. It gets tiresome to read and I really dont think this particular thread is the place to do it.
What did MC innovate on...are you serious? It's clear you've never even watched an MC game so why even bother debating you about it.
lol. I'm not debating, that is an honest question.
Umm..in PvT : 6 gate timing, he helped popularize chargelot archon play, Phoenix play in PvT, beating players like Select with it. He was also the first Protoss to consistently utilize heavy sentry play in PvZ and PvT. Even in IEM he beat Select using Warp prism/HT drops.
Basically created Stargate play in PvZ: Using a stargate after expand to be safe from all ins, and using Phoenix void harass. Other timings like Nexus cancel 4 gate as well. Phoenix Chargelot on Tal'darim is his build as well.
Even in PvP he has begun to make expansion builds work like in his series vs MaNa.
How you can describe Nestea as more innovative than MC is beyond me, the only build you could even call his is the spinecrawler rush, which he used like ONE time. That's not innovation, that's a neat trick. MC has been driving the protoss metagame for months.
I was in agreement with your post until you mentioned NesTea. Sure MC is innovative, but don't be suicidal and compare anyone to NesTea. He is practically the godfather of zerg. Whatever he uses in his recent ZvZ match becomes the ladder metagame for the next month. He is a pioneer of a dull, variety-less race.
Hey now, Zerg is hardly dull to play or to watch. So many new strategies have come out since the Ling/Bling/Muta v Terran and the Roach/Hydra/Corrupter v Protoss.
Nydus worms, creep, banelingdrops, ultras (not as much as I would like) and infestors are all being utlized much more and in different ways then before.
I'm as big a Nestea fan as any sane person, but I don't think it's fair to compare the pioneers of different races. As far as I'm concerned, MC and Nestea have both shown brilliant innovations with their respective races. It's just that in the end, it's evident that MC's various innovations just weren't enough to compensate for the inherent weaknesses in Protoss design.
On September 28 2011 13:45 aZealot wrote: That's not a valid comparison based on my understanding of SC2 lore. Zealots now return as Immortals while Dark Templar return as Stalkers. Immortals are cool, IMO, although a little uni-dimensional and situational, but I think a Zealot would not mind returning as an Immortal, at all.
It's not dead Protoss that get put in Dragoons/Immortals or Stalkers, it's crippled Protoss. [/lore geek]
Dragoons are simply Protoss wheelchairs .
Oh? But why are they called Immortals then? Wouldn't that imply that they overcame their mortal death, in order to become even more powerful? Also, "I return to serve" seems like something they'd say if they were ressurected.
Did they return to serve from the protoss hospital? :O
ALSO, GOOD SIR, In the SC1 campaign Fenix died straight up as far as I can recall, but they ressurected him through means of dragoon-ing.
don't take what I say too seriously in this case please ^^
You're quite correct about Fenix, good sir. The game does tell us he was killed in battle before we leave Aiur. However, this contradicts our other sources, so the most reasonable assumption is either this was changed somewhere along StarCraft's development, or that we were intended to believe that Fenix was dead, whereas he was simply mortally wounded. After all, Tassadar expresses surprise at seeing Fenix again because he was believed dead. If Dragoons were resurrected Templar, then surely as an Executor Tassadar wouldn't be too surprised.
Praetor Fenix was a such a badass. He was the ultimate Zealot and then became the ultimate Dragoon. I for one was pretty happy to see him return at the end of SC1 and believe that accounts of his death (to Hydras) were exaggerated. I do have to say though, that I found the BW mission where you have to kill him incredibly difficult. I got close to the end and then entered cheat codes to skip the level and go to the next one - I just could not make myself kill the old Protoss warrior.
On September 28 2011 12:23 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On September 28 2011 08:06 Apollo_Shards wrote:
On September 28 2011 06:13 SeaSwift wrote:
On September 28 2011 03:00 StatikKhaos wrote: this is unnecessary, Protoss just got a buff, just because you can't adapt doesnt mean you should be sad!
Right... because that +1 range to Immortals and the extra Warp Prism shields have completely solved Terran 1-1-1, Ghosts, Infestors and Zerg's insane macro.
Sad Zealot still sad. :'(
Balance complaints wont solve the protoss decline. Blizzard will do what it wants. Maybe they are telling Protoss to do Immortal drops?
But seriously we need a Nestea for protoss. MC was a great player but he didn't innovate quite as much as his Zerg counterpart.
The reason why MC fell to Code B was that he tried to innovate. The problem is that there's few things Protoss can do that is effective, while there it is the complete opposite with Terran, and Zerg even has more options than Toss that kick ass. The thing is that Protoss isn't designed well, especially compared to Terran that was designed way too well, as even admitted by DB.
Immortal drops? Can Immortals kill 20 workers in a microsecond like hellions, mutas, and stimrines can? I don't think so. You don't think pros haven't tried that and seen it is not efficient nor effective? Of course they have. Protoss is by far the most innovative and explored, because Protoss has always had to adapt to the slightest discovery like Terran actually using Ghosts, or Zergs actually learning what Infestors are. When Zerg has trouble, they get HUGE buffs from Blizzard. When Protoss has trouble? They have to be as creative and bold as Nikola Tesla and get shit done like real men.
Again, I wasnt being too serious about the immortal drops. Although I did see Opitkzero use it last night. What did MC innovate on?
And can we not make balance complaints in this thread :/. It gets tiresome to read and I really dont think this particular thread is the place to do it.
What did MC innovate on...are you serious? It's clear you've never even watched an MC game so why even bother debating you about it.
lol. I'm not debating, that is an honest question.
Umm..in PvT : 6 gate timing, he helped popularize chargelot archon play, Phoenix play in PvT, beating players like Select with it. He was also the first Protoss to consistently utilize heavy sentry play in PvZ and PvT. Even in IEM he beat Select using Warp prism/HT drops.
Basically created Stargate play in PvZ: Using a stargate after expand to be safe from all ins, and using Phoenix void harass. Other timings like Nexus cancel 4 gate as well. Phoenix Chargelot on Tal'darim is his build as well.
Even in PvP he has begun to make expansion builds work like in his series vs MaNa.
How you can describe Nestea as more innovative than MC is beyond me, the only build you could even call his is the spinecrawler rush, which he used like ONE time. That's not innovation, that's a neat trick. MC has been driving the protoss metagame for months.
I was in agreement with your post until you mentioned NesTea. Sure MC is innovative, but don't be suicidal and compare anyone to NesTea. He is practically the godfather of zerg. Whatever he uses in his recent ZvZ match becomes the ladder metagame for the next month. He is a pioneer of a dull, variety-less race.
NesTea is the best zerg but like I said before innovative isn't the word I'd use to describe him. Look at it this way, without NesTea, ZvT would still be Muta Ling, ZvP would still be relatively the same, I guess you could argue he had a large impact on ZvZ. But without MC, who knows where Protoss would be? They might not have even had a good few months. Seriously there are like 10 builds that he created/popularized. You can't say that about any other player.
I am not willing to wait another minute to thank Bumblebee for the most inspired bit of theatrical theft I have read this year. Adapting Pacino's Any Given Sunday speech - well, I didn't laugh out loud (people that know me know that I only type LOL when I am mocking something), but my soul was giggling.
Imagining a zealot saying "I chased off everyone who has ever loved us" is just too much.
I really wanted to start practicing again instead of giving up and not playing till patch comes. But sorry Blizzard, +1 range on a unit that is good in some situations and useless in others that should have had 6 range from release, and increasing warp prism shield by 60 isn't going to make up for the fact that gateway units are severely underpowered on top of a warpgate nerf on top of an amulet nerf. Maybe now that all Warpgate timings are useless you should consider making gateway worth warping and HT vs Ghost actually fair.
Until then im a very Sad Zealot because Protoss hard work and innovation goes unrewarded while terrans don't even care about PvT anymore because its so ez.
On September 28 2011 13:45 aZealot wrote: That's not a valid comparison based on my understanding of SC2 lore. Zealots now return as Immortals while Dark Templar return as Stalkers. Immortals are cool, IMO, although a little uni-dimensional and situational, but I think a Zealot would not mind returning as an Immortal, at all.
It's not dead Protoss that get put in Dragoons/Immortals or Stalkers, it's crippled Protoss. [/lore geek]
Dragoons are simply Protoss wheelchairs .
Oh? But why are they called Immortals then? Wouldn't that imply that they overcame their mortal death, in order to become even more powerful? Also, "I return to serve" seems like something they'd say if they were ressurected.
Did they return to serve from the protoss hospital? :O
ALSO, GOOD SIR, In the SC1 campaign Fenix died straight up as far as I can recall, but they ressurected him through means of dragoon-ing.
don't take what I say too seriously in this case please ^^
You're quite correct about Fenix, good sir. The game does tell us he was killed in battle before we leave Aiur. However, this contradicts our other sources, so the most reasonable assumption is either this was changed somewhere along StarCraft's development, or that we were intended to believe that Fenix was dead, whereas he was simply mortally wounded. After all, Tassadar expresses surprise at seeing Fenix again because he was believed dead. If Dragoons were resurrected Templar, then surely as an Executor Tassadar wouldn't be too surprised.
Praetor Fenix was a such a badass. He was the ultimate Zealot and then became the ultimate Dragoon. I for one was pretty happy to see him return at the end of SC1 and believe that accounts of his death (to Hydras) were exaggerated. I do have to say though, that I found the BW mission where you have to kill him incredibly difficult. I got close to the end and then entered cheat codes to skip the level and go to the next one - I just could not make myself kill the old Protoss warrior.
Dark Swarm + Cracklings. You dishonour him by not killing him, its all he wanted - to die a glorious death in battle.
EPT
.
