|
Its not so much the race as this game in general. You can do the exact same build as a top player against the exact same build of the opponent, but if you do it 30 seconds slower, you could lose. Protoss might seem amplified because you just have fewer total units than the other races, but what you're discovering is the RTS definition of 'timing'. 4 Gate has a specific timing, but its been laid out for you already and it beats a ton of other timings. The higher you get on the ladder the better people get at countering the 4 gate and the bigger the difference there is between one that hits at 6:30 and one that hits at 7:00. This goes for any build but the 4 gate is a common example and a build that can work at any skill level (it only requires more perfection the higher you get).
Also, 4 gate is not a cheese build, its actually quite powerful on some maps and should be used. Its also the safest PvP build so you better make sure you keep your 4 gating skills sharp while you add to your repertoire.
I suggest adopting 1 gate (vs. T) or 3 gate (vs. Z) expands to grow as a player. I find PvZ my most difficult matchup, but the past few days it has been getting better because im starting to understand more the relationship between the units they have built and the effect it has on their economy and vice versa. I recommend watching that video posted on these strat forums called something like PvZ Coaching Session with InControl. Its quite valuable.
|
On January 18 2011 16:10 goldenwitch wrote:
You are thinking too much for a low level player. This sounds harsh, but just put your head down and play 200 games and try to keep your gateways off cd and make pylons and probes. Strategy is severely limited by execution. In other words, if you can't execute it well, it doesn't matter what your strategy is.
I have to disagree with this logic. I strongly believe that you can improve tremendously, especially in the areas you want help, without actually playing at all. If you make for a good student you will learn more from watching others and reading than you will over your first 200, unguided ladder games. For reference, back in SC1 there was a european pro player that was winning some tournaments that did not have an active internet connection. He played vs. the AI and his macro became top notch and he was able to compete. I feel massing up ladder games is slower learning than doing less ladder and more analysis. Ladder is okay for learning through trial and error, but 99% of the time trial by error is not the best way to learn. Take Trump for instance.... The guy is pretty good, but he could be alot better if he did retrospective analysis rather than real time analysis of his play. His monologuing is some of the most misleading stuff imaginable, but its how he learns.
YABOT is your friend.
|
On January 19 2011 02:54 Jayrod wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2011 16:10 goldenwitch wrote:
You are thinking too much for a low level player. This sounds harsh, but just put your head down and play 200 games and try to keep your gateways off cd and make pylons and probes. Strategy is severely limited by execution. In other words, if you can't execute it well, it doesn't matter what your strategy is. I have to disagree with this logic. I strongly believe that you can improve tremendously, especially in the areas you want help, without actually playing at all. If you make for a good student you will learn more from watching others and reading than you will over your first 200, unguided ladder games. For reference, back in SC1 there was a european pro player that was winning some tournaments that did not have an active internet connection. He played vs. the AI and his macro became top notch and he was able to compete. I feel massing up ladder games is slower learning than doing less ladder and more analysis. Ladder is okay for learning through trial and error, but 99% of the time trial by error is not the best way to learn. Take Trump for instance.... The guy is pretty good, but he could be alot better if he did retrospective analysis rather than real time analysis of his play. His monologuing is some of the most misleading stuff imaginable, but its how he learns. YABOT is your friend.
He isn't jsut saying "blindly play 200 ladder games" he is saying "Play 200 ladder gams where you gateways are always being used, you are always making probes, and you are never supply blocked"
THAT is a worthwhile goal. You don't need to be fiddling with YABOT for that. YABOT is great for figuring out for fiddling with builds and getting your timing down, but those things are WAY less important than just learning to macro right.
I literally did that all the way to diamond from silver in 2 months with really never having played an RTS seriously before SC2. Pretty much straight gateway units(not any fancy build orders that rely especially on specific timings), try really hard to not get supply blocked, build workers, expand when I have the money, keep my money very low at all times. It honestly wasn't until I reached diamond did I start worrying about timings and stuff like that, and I won a huge amount of games just purely by having lots more units than the other guy and a-moving into his base.
|
Add me Ill help you wardamnska.359
|
On January 19 2011 03:06 SnuggleZhenya wrote:Show nested quote +On January 19 2011 02:54 Jayrod wrote:On January 18 2011 16:10 goldenwitch wrote:
You are thinking too much for a low level player. This sounds harsh, but just put your head down and play 200 games and try to keep your gateways off cd and make pylons and probes. Strategy is severely limited by execution. In other words, if you can't execute it well, it doesn't matter what your strategy is. I have to disagree with this logic. I strongly believe that you can improve tremendously, especially in the areas you want help, without actually playing at all. If you make for a good student you will learn more from watching others and reading than you will over your first 200, unguided ladder games. For reference, back in SC1 there was a european pro player that was winning some tournaments that did not have an active internet connection. He played vs. the AI and his macro became top notch and he was able to compete. I feel massing up ladder games is slower learning than doing less ladder and more analysis. Ladder is okay for learning through trial and error, but 99% of the time trial by error is not the best way to learn. Take Trump for instance.... The guy is pretty good, but he could be alot better if he did retrospective analysis rather than real time analysis of his play. His monologuing is some of the most misleading stuff imaginable, but its how he learns. YABOT is your friend. He isn't jsut saying "blindly play 200 ladder games" he is saying "Play 200 ladder gams where you gateways are always being used, you are always making probes, and you are never supply blocked" THAT is a worthwhile goal. You don't need to be fiddling with YABOT for that. YABOT is great for figuring out for fiddling with builds and getting your timing down, but those things are WAY less important than just learning to macro right. I literally did that all the way to diamond from silver in 2 months with really never having played an RTS seriously before SC2. Pretty much straight gateway units(not any fancy build orders that rely especially on specific timings), try really hard to not get supply blocked, build workers, expand when I have the money, keep my money very low at all times. It honestly wasn't until I reached diamond did I start worrying about timings and stuff like that, and I won a huge amount of games just purely by having lots more units than the other guy and a-moving into his base.
YABOT or even just custom games against the AI are also good tools for practicing exactly the sort of macro techniques you're suggesting. The ladder (or any situation where your goal is simply to win the game) isn't a particularly good place to do that. Many ladder games, especially at the lower levels, will be over before you've got two bases up and running, and you'll rarely find yourself on three or more. YABOT is especially good for repetition of early game macro since you can quickly and easily restart the "game" without having to waste time navigating through score screens and battle.net menus. AI games on the other hand are great for late game macro practice, as they allow you to artificially extend the game in a situation where there's no need to think about winning or losing so you can practice macro (or any particular aspect of the game) as much as you like.
For instance, one of my favorite exercises is to play a custom game against the AI where I only defend until I've got three fully functional bases. Is it unreasonable to play a game like that against a human opponent where you're actively trying to win the game? Absolutely, but it puts the focus where I want it to be for that more technical practice.
Of course, I'm also not saying to never ladder or never play against human opponents, because that's the absolute best way to develop your game sense once you have the mechanics down. I'm simply suggesting that getting the mechanics down first so they're almost instinctual by playing tons against AI opponents or using YABOT will make those ladder games much more fruitful from a learning perspective since you'll be freeing up mental energy to focus on other aspects of the game.
|
If you want to get a good feel for the game try playing some of the other 2 races for a bit and see what Protoss does against you and what you have problems dealing with. This way when you go back to playing Protoss you can do some of the same things that owned you when you were playing Zerg/Terran.
|
Every game I don't use a cheese strat is simply a battle not to fall too far behind on economy, tech, and army, and to delay the inevitable loss.
The reason for this might be very simple:
BECAUSE you used cheese strats too much you are ranked above your actual skill level. Therefore, you are matched against better players and lose conventional games.
Obviously it is not a race issue since protoss players are represented throughout all leagues and rankings.
PS:
Cheese is a way to cheat the system that, by the very nature of cheese, only works in an open environment. In the sense that your opponent doesn't learn, since it is a different one for every match.
To resist the temptation, try playing the same player several times in a row.
|
use the korean 4 gate if you're so worried about the late game. i assure you you'll win convincingly every time. understand that you are wrong in your assumptions and the "inherent disadvantage" you have comes from your lack of skill/macro while playing. you probably rush to collosus most games and that's why you lose.
void ray/collosus/gateway units crushes zerg easily. high templar/chargelots stomps terran. watch pro protoss and you'll see both of these to be true.
|
Protoss take longer to replace dead units than the other two races - they make up for this by having the most powerful late game army, and that each individual unit is fairly strong. The Protoss race therefore favours players who can a) maintain good warpgate production, especially during battles and b) micro to keep individual units alive as long as possible.
However, from Bronze all the way to Diamond (my league) being able to macro (i.e. constantly build probes, never get supply capped, keep all your production buildings busy) better than the other guy will get you a win. My macro is no where NEAR the pro gamers, and that's if I ignore my army and just 1a. Concentrate on getting your production sorted before any fancypants micro, and then remember protoss players do not like to trade armies.
|
The Fundamental Problem
You're not a diamond player. That's really all it is.
In Starcraft (and any RTS), there are two things that matter. Execution, and Strategy. Basically this amounts to "How many units you have" and "What you do with them."
Example One
In PvP, having a 4 gate blocked by a 2gate core on Jungle Basin who has enough Sentries to constantly forcefield you out is a pain in the ass. If you had a pylon at his backdoor and warped in those units there, it would be much better, no?
Now think of it this way: what if you did that same strategic play, placing the pylon in his backdoor to warp in unnoticed, but you only EVER built 10 probes. Suddenly the size of your army is cut in half (or worse), and your attack, though it gets to your opponent, is laughably killed.
That's the difference between having perfect macro and NOT having perfect macro. When your macro improves, you will just simply have more STUFF. Dark Templar counter anyone without detection, but if you have perfect macro and your opponent straight-up rushes to DTs without good macro, you can probably just go kill his whole base faster than he can kill yours. Your "stuff" isn't affected by his hard counter, because you have so damn much of it.
Example two
You enter a long macro game in PvZ, split map, and your opponent chooses heavy roach/broodlord play and you fail to transition to more high templar and blink stalkers from your colossi ball.
You will lose, because your opponent had a better strategy. However, now let's imagine your opponent has been missing every other inject cycle. Now your opponent's army is halved, and even though his strategy is counter to yours (you silly goose you, research that khaydarin amulet!), you have enough "stuff" to just power through and win.
The bottom line in strategy games is that the stuff you have is more important than the way you use that stuff. The only way the strategy angle comes into play at all is when both players have as MUCH stuff as they can, and every little advantage matters! What you said in your OP about it being a fight to keep from falling behind in econ/tech/army is true at every level of play, and you're not doing anything mentally wrong! However, right now you're struggling to keep up with players with imperfect macro. Someday you're going to be struggling to keep up with players with perfect macro, and will need some other form of advantage.
Please note I'm not talking about APM here. 50 APM is about all you need to play at a very high level if you know the right things to do with those actions. I'm not talking about micro, because at the end of the day kiting a zealot around with a stalker so you keep one stalker probably isn't worth the hit in macro you'll be taking as a result. Micro is important once you get better, because again: every little advantage matters.
What To Do In Bronze
Right now you should LEARN the little advantages, and LEARN how to micro and properly control your army, but you should FOCUS on your execution. If a warpgate sits idle for more than two seconds, that's one less unit in your army that has nothing at all to do with your strategy. If your strategy is kiwikaki super gosu times two, but you don't have enough units to pull it off with, you will lose.
However, it's much easier to sit down at a low level of play, watch a few VODs of strong players and go "Oh, that's really awesome" than it is to mass 200 games until your macro is perfect! I don't know about you, but my gaming time is limited per day, so I have to spend it in the best way possible. When I was in bronze, I picked ONE build per matchup (as per TL's advice, thank you folks), played it every single game, until I was good enough at it that I didn't have to think about it anymore. I didn't have to think "build drones to 15 then make an overlord" because my hands could do that while my brain thought about what it meant when the Terran had two barracks and no refineries yet (ah the good old days before 2rax was standard TvZ). That's the kind of proficiency that you get by massing games, but without some kind of strategic underpinning, you'll just be 4gating 'till Master League without ever being decent at the game.
Play the game, learn the advanced stuff, but when you get in game all you should be focusing on is the basics.
What To Do in Silver and Gold
Ask yourself general questions about your gameplay. At what point should you stop building probes? Do you know? If you don't know, then NEVER STOP. Eventually you'll play five games in a row where you'll think "Hey, I think this is just too damn many probes, I have so much supply tied up in them I can't form an effective army", and then you make fewer probes. Maybe five games after that you realize you can't keep your economy as strong as it was before with that few probes, and you'll realize a happy medium. For me, I like 60 probes -- two bases and a few extra. How many gateways can each base support? Well it depends on your unit composition. Pure stalker means fewer gates than pure zealot. Zealot/Sentry can probably support an extra gate if your macro is good. How early should I expand? I dunno, just DO IT for five games. Tell yourself "Every time I see a zerg fast expand, I'm going to drop my Nexus on 18." How'd that work out for you? Did you like the way it felt to have a more econ-centered game? If you did, do you think you could squeeze that nexus in sooner? Would it be better to get a few more probes out first so you can maynard enough to keep from saturating your main? Do you need a few more units to hold off that early push? The important thing is to make a decision, then do it several times until you feel you need to tweak it.
What To Do in Platinum
This is where the major improvements actually happened in my gameplay. In Platinum the word of the day is scouting. I want you to stop focusing on your basics once you get here (and only once you get here) and start focusing on your opponent's basics. This is the only point I feel that you need to start watching your replays of losses. This is where you should be trying other races to get a feel for them and their timings. This is where the real learning of the game begins.
Again, the two halves of the game are summarized as "How much stuff you got" and "What you do with that stuff." At this level, players are starting to get AS MUCH stuff as they can get, so the strategy becomes important. The difference, macro-wise, between Platinum players and pro gamers is that the pros can macro while other stuff is happening, and Platinum players get distracted. However, since this applies to you too, it can hardly be exploited.
Example
Using super gosu warp prisms, you harass all three of his bases forcing him to lose concentration and miss two production cycles from his rax/fact/starport. As a result, his army is smaller than it could have been.
Unfortunately, while making sure your warp prism harass went off without a hitch, you've missed three warp gate cycles, and your army is smaller than it could have been. Result: whatever damage you did with your harass is ALL the damage you did, because the loss of concentration hurt you and he equally.
Once you get better, that kind of stuff will come naturally. Don't worry about improving it, because it kind of takes care of itself once you've got it in your head. That's why I told you to stop focusing on the basics at Platinum. They're no less important, but hopefully you've played enough games with proper fundamentals that your hands are taking care of it on their own.
Your goal in Platinum is to outmaneuver your opponent. Imagine a Terran delays his gas early on in the game. Is that because he wants to pump tons of marines, or because he wants to get an early expansion and knows how much it costs? Imagine he gets double gas after rax. Does that mean very fast ghosts or cloak banshees? Is an attack coming soon? Am I safe to expand? There's a lot of fear at this level, because suddenly you have to actually outplay your opponents instead of just having more stuff. On top of it, they're starting to get good enough that you'll face That One Guy who should be Master League but keeps offracing for fun and keeps himself back, so your 4gate will be summarily stopped, then he'll push back at you with a 700 food army at the 8 minute mark and you'll uninstall the game out of humiliation. It's okay, it happens, but it's not the norm and honestly everyone faces someone ridiculously better than them. Focus on beating players at your level consistently by using the techniques of players better than you, and you'll become a better player seemingly magically.
What To Do in Diamond
Man, fuck the Master League, this is as good as most people will ever get. Absolutely everyone ever will get to diamond league with enough practice, even without any sort of talent at all. At this level, everyone should be making as much stuff as possible in their build and even starting to strategically react pretty darn well. In ZvP if I see a forge first I start searching for hidden pylons, then when I see that nexus go down I drop ANOTHER damn hatch. Screw fast expanding, I'm fast DOUBLE expanding and let's see you stop me with your one gateway worth of units. When I see a fast starport or double gas, I get that lair on the double, and if I think I can't make it in time I'll drop an evo chamber and spore colonies. You can't put it in your "to-do" list, you have to make these decisions NOW.
Remember when I said back in the Silver-Gold section that the important part is making decisions? That's even more true now. Right now, your opponent's army will pretty much always be as big as yours, so the decisions you make at this point matter more than ever. That's not to say you should avoid the wrong decisions at all costs -- no no, in fact the wrong decision will probably be the best way to learn. Making absolutely dumb choices like attacking with pure marines on creep against speed banelings will teach you to, well, NOT. The next step in Diamond play is to take that lesson and absorb it into a strategy or tactic that will ALLOW you to sidestep whatever is killing you.
Example One
After patch 1.1.2, Reapers lost their early speed upgrade and Zerg learned how to open hatch first in ZvT on every map without fear. For several weeks, Terran was crying imba and couldn't match Zerg's early economic boost because they had to completely cut units to do so, which lead them to a weak mid-game army that the zerg could just roll over.
Then someone had the bright idea to side-step the problem of the weak mid-game army due to matching the fast expand (or being behind an expansion) by trying to do enough damage to zerg to equalize so early on that Z couldn't benefit from their expansion yet, and devised the 2rax+scv all-in
Example Two
Before Patch 1.2 removed this, Zergs constantly complained about Protoss players pylon blocking the Zerg ramp and cannoning behind to kill their FE natural.
Even before the patch, however, Zerg learned that a FE meant that Protoss would almost always try and disrupt you in some way to keep you from getting that advantage, and pylon blocking was quite popular. Patrolling one drone at the bottom of your ramp was an annoying but necessary precaution if there were any chance of probes nearby. Alternatively, many Zerg (like myself) transitioned from 15 hatch in ZvP to a strong one-base roach burrow push that allowed me to take my expansion at my leisure around 24 food.
Corollary to this example is the opposite matchup, PvZ, where now that the patch is released and P can't pylon block the ramp to screw up Z's play, I've seen more forge first FE than ever before. Somewhere along the way, P learned that they can wall the choke in front of their natural on most maps and forge FE with a cannon or two behind to keep up economically with Zerg's fast expand without, y'know, DYING.
The problem in each of these examples is side-stepped by smart strategic play. Terran didn't necessarily see the timing first, they saw their mid-game army being CRUSHED by superior numbers, and looked back to derive the timing. Zerg didn't try to find a way to kill those pylons to get out, or kill the probe so they couldn't be placed, they just make P waste his time by either A) not allowing a pylon to be dropped or B) not caring if one was or not! Protoss didn't try and get more tech to outdo Zerg's econ, or even try and just go kill him with a fast 4gate that might be able to be held off. Instead they're taking a different tack by letting the Zerg know "I'm just as well defended as you, have just as good an econ as you, so if you wanna win you gotta do it legitimately."
This is your goal as a Diamond player. Your goal is to be able to play anyone in the world, from schmo to pro, and make them have to play to beat you. I saw a post someone made comparing MMR to ELO in chess, and saying that once the game evens out a bit, a Top 200 player will beat a low diamond 97% of the time. I guarantee you that even if that is the case, those 97% wins will not be "lolol1a2a3a afk" wins. No matter if you lose 25%, 50%, or 75% of your matches, if you're making your opponent work for his wins then you're doing what you're supposed to be doing in that league.
In Conclusion
The game really begins once you hit Diamond. Everything before then is gearing you up to be a good player when you get there. If you 4gate every game, you will not be a strong Diamond player. If you fail to learn strong strategy or micro techniques, you will not be a strong Diamond player. However, if you fail to learn proper mechanics and fundamentals, you will never BECOME a Diamond player.
|
It's really all about being clean with your timings. oGsMC can do anything. Why? Because he does them perfectly. Do something and do it well. That's what makes a strategy viable. 4 Gate is easy to do well, so that's why you're having success with it. So try 1 Gate/FE and 2 Gate Robo and 3 Gate Stargate, or DTs. They all have pros and cons and different windows where they excel and are weak. You minimize the cons and maximize the pros just by doing them fluidly. The true ideology of Protoss, though, is to never go Carriers. Ever.
I wanted to be slightly more helpful and say that you need a proper mindset to what doing well actually means. Try to minimize downtime between building necessary tech structures and pylons. Always build Probes in excess. Learn to find safe expansion timings by gauging how aggressive your opponent is. These are all macro things that get you in the right mindset. Then you a-move your way to victory.
|
I would say, since your bronze, just try anything. Experiment around. For instance, go an entire game going phoenix/zealot, or try fast expanding. Try and challenge yourself to try new things, not just what you were taught. In bronze, losing doesn't really do much, it's more of a learning stage. You should also watch your replays, and correlate your timings with their timings and see what you could not make, and make something else faster.
|
probably was stated all the time here hehe. If you play something all the time you get better with it. Using 4 gate will not rise your overall protoss skills though. So its natural that you lose with the ladder system. (unless you know every single bit about sc2) as the ladder system is giving you stronger opponents, and if their general skill is higher they tend to outmacro you.
I would probably lose hardcore if i tryed 4 gating, as i play a harassiv style with warp prism or phoenix. And tend to use t2 toss units more heavily then most tosses i ever saw.
If you really play alot and have fun at getting better. Its important to learn more standard openings.(unless you are a creativ and flexible player then micro macro training should be more important as you will conter your opponents build and exploit any weakness)
So select one of the standard bos and play it until you are where you have been before in rank.
|
I started using Zealot/Archon/Templar (3 bases, 3rd gold usually) against zerg late-game, and that composition is not to be messed with.
Against Z you always want higher upgrades, including shield. +3 weapons Archon are so devastating (47vsbio with splash, and zerg is all bio), and they're actually almost as fast as stalkers (2.81). With storm + charge, this build is very gas intensive, but you can support 7 gateways with this by getting double gas on 3rd right away. Zealots help as a mineral sink, and as a tank for the already tanky archon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
