|
I just started playing SC2 a while ago, and I'm relatively new to the deeper intricacies of RTS games. I started with Protoss, and thanks to coaching from a few diamond league friends I can somewhat reliably 4 gate to win most bronze games.
My question though, is about the entire playstyle of Protoss. It seems like I only win when I 4 gate exactly the way my friends taught me. I can never ever match T or Z even slightly later in the game, for example if I try any kind of 3 gate opening. Their tech and numbers seem overwhelmingly more powerful than what P has, in the long run. Hell, I need a large investment just to make my colossi even usable, whereas they are extremely fragile compared to ultras or thors. I have no hard counter to ghosts, battlecruisers, or brood lords, and I have to confine myself to the robo tech tree just to get a detector. That's usually ok though, because my air units and tech are a joke. Thors and ultras are especially difficult to stop without an unlikely numbers advantage. I could go on and on about this.
I understand part of it is because T and Z can grab fast expos and I understand the economic analogy associated with that. The timing though, is a problem because I can't respond adequately in the window that I have given Blizzard designed P units to be slow building and individually strong (questionable). With their abilities it's like the Terran ghost embodies this motif moreso than any actual Protoss unit. 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.
In a general sense, what are Protoss strong in, and how are they supposed to play?
|
Depends on your style.
Protoss is strong depending on your execution. If you can't execute a build or things such as force fields correctly. It's going to be hard. Learn to macro into mid game and how to use good force field / build timings.
I suggest using a YABOT map aka build order tester to work on your timings. Search YABOT when making a custom game. This will help you learn new builds on your own and show you how to do different builds correctly.
One reason protoss is strong because it can reinforce units quickly using warp.
|
You have tons of incredibly devastating lategame units like colossi and high templar that are fragile but can deal insane amounts of damage. Protoss excels at applying and stopping early game pressure because of the sentry, which can force field to both deny enemy unit movement and prevent them from coming into your base. You need a rather large gateway army, however, to supplement your colossi and templar in order to tank damage for them, buying them time to destroy the opponents army. The general consensus on Protoss is almost completely opposite from your perspective: they have some of the scariest late game units, and once have a maxed-out army, can basically rofl-stomp anything Terran and Zerg has.
You state that every macro game is a battle to not fall behind in economy, tech, and army, but this really applies to any race; you must produce workers and units, expand, and tech up all the same whether you are zerg, terran, or protoss. This seems like more of an issue with your macro than any intrinsic defect of the protoss race. Alleviating this is simple: face your fears. Always produce workers, expand whenever you have the opportunity to, and keep producing structures and units to keep your money low. Get money and spend it.
|
I'd suggest you stop doing the 4 gate. You may win some games, but eventually you'll be placed in a league you shouldn't be in. Watch streams and replays of good Protoss like HuK, oGsMC, White-Ra, and I like watching HasuObz.
Protoss is a really solid race with lots of amazing units and mechanics, but I promise in bronze all you need to worry about is the fundamentals. Pylons, Probes, and Production.
If you can keep up with those three things, you'll be gold even if you Attack-Move.
Pylons - Make sure you don't supply cap yourself
Probes - Constantly build probes and transfer some over when you expo.
Production - Keep your minerals as low as possible by keeping up with your warp gate cycles and producing units. If you have lots of extra resources, Consider getting more production buildings (Gateways, Robos), Teching, and/or expanding.
|
Just trust me. You do those things and all the other bronze people will be in here "OMG, Protoss is so imba. C'mon Blizz NerfHammer!!" They'll be wondering how in the world you have so many units when they have so few.
|
On January 18 2011 14:54 lariat wrote:
You have tons of incredibly devastating lategame units[...]
Depends what you define as "devastating." The thor strike cannon deals far more damage than psi-storm, and to buildings as well, while the siege tank can splash even greater damage than an upgraded colossus from further range (I believe 9 vs 13?). The DPS may tell a different story but isn't spike damage that outright kills a clump of units desirable over the opposing player moving out of your AoE?
Let me clarify the macro game. It feels like I am at an inherent disadvantage in economy because I don't know how to respond adequately to the timing window when presented with a fast expansion and the subsequent attrition. Meanwhile, it feels like taking a fast expo is a bigger risk for me to take than for those of the other races, given that I have less efficient units only marginally more individually powerful than those of T and Z in the early game. It seems like without 4 gate, P plays a very responsive game as opposed to an aggressive one at all stages of the game, winning only by counter-push.
Thanks for the advice guys. I can also post replays. Many of them I've gone over with my friends who have also spoken about passivity and macro when I play.
|
t players fast expanding against Protoss is easily punishable by doing a 4gate, as much as I'd hate to recommend it. Z fast expanding (hatch before 18), is easily matched by doing a forge-first fast expand, where you throw your nexus down around 15-20 and your forge at 12-15, only mining minerals until you start your gateway (a bit late, around 18). to me, it seems more like problems with your fundamental mechanics than anything about the Protoss race itself.
|
On January 18 2011 15:18 Qynvee wrote:Show nested quote +On January 18 2011 14:54 lariat wrote:
You have tons of incredibly devastating lategame units[...] Depends what you define as "devastating." The thor strike cannon deals far more damage than psi-storm, and to buildings as well, while the siege tank can splash even greater damage than an upgraded colossus from further range (I believe 9 vs 13?). The DPS may tell a different story but isn't spike damage that outright kills a clump of units desirable over the opposing player moving out of your AoE? Let me clarify the macro game. It feels like I am at an inherent disadvantage in economy because I don't know how to respond adequately to the timing window when presented with a fast expansion and the subsequent attrition. Meanwhile, it feels like taking a fast expo is a bigger risk for me to take than for those of the other races, given that I have less efficient units only marginally more individually powerful than those of T and Z in the early game. It seems like without 4 gate, P plays a very responsive game as opposed to an aggressive one at all stages of the game, winning only by counter-push. Thanks for the advice guys. I can also post replays. Many of them I've gone over with my friends who have also spoken about passivity and macro when I play.
Strike cannons kills 1 units and make your thor useless for 6 seconds
The 'spike' in damage is acompanied my low fire rate yes your 1st 10 or so zealots die but who cares zealots are cheap and then move in and the tanks will die quickly or kill their own units with splash
yes the spike is there but it is there only once or twice the collosi does more damage (v non light) at a faster pace in a smaller area.
|
On January 18 2011 14:30 Qynvee wrote:
I just started playing SC2 a while ago, and I'm relatively new to the deeper intricacies of RTS games. I started with Protoss, and thanks to coaching from a few diamond league friends I can somewhat reliably 4 gate to win most bronze games.
My question though, is about the entire playstyle of Protoss. It seems like I only win when I 4 gate exactly the way my friends taught me. I can never ever match T or Z even slightly later in the game, for example if I try any kind of 3 gate opening. Their tech and numbers seem overwhelmingly more powerful than what P has, in the long run. Hell, I need a large investment just to make my colossi even usable, whereas they are extremely fragile compared to ultras or thors. I have no hard counter to ghosts, battlecruisers, or brood lords, and I have to confine myself to the robo tech tree just to get a detector. That's usually ok though, because my air units and tech are a joke. Thors and ultras are especially difficult to stop without an unlikely numbers advantage. I could go on and on about this.
I understand part of it is because T and Z can grab fast expos and I understand the economic analogy associated with that. The timing though, is a problem because I can't respond adequately in the window that I have given Blizzard designed P units to be slow building and individually strong (questionable). With their abilities it's like the Terran ghost embodies this motif moreso than any actual Protoss unit. 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.
In a general sense, what are Protoss strong in, and how are they supposed to play?
When you look at the replay, notice how inactive your warpgates are. Select one and just watch it on quadruple gamespeed. Notice how many times it is active and able to warp in, but doesn't. Those are missing units in your army. How often is your Nexus building probes? These two things contribute to doing a 3gate opening and realizing you are severely lacking in the midgame.
Develop a mindset for the match. PvZ eventually you will need splash units, because zerg armies become larger than Protoss midway through the game. Decide if you want to get a mix of Colossus/Stalker/Sentry for the midgame or High Templar/Immortal/Stalker (both mixes have something for mass roach). Aim for this while using all your warpgates to the fullest, and constantly building probes. Learn a build order that lets you put your expo down fairly quickly, like 3gate sentry expand.
PvT macro builds look sort of like 1gate expand 2gate robo expand or (my personal favorite) 3gate expand w/ some pressure (though the last one is by no means standard in the matchup). Is he massing bio? Aim for one of your splash units (Colossus/HT). Do you poke and see only a few marines and a factory building? Be prepared for cloaked banshees by dropping a robo. Just keeping flicking between your army and macro at the base (4 e build probes, 5 zzzs build up an army, 4 c chrono gates/robos/stargates) build more pylons. At the initial silver-gold level, proper macro and decision making will be practice you can take to the bank when you jump up to platinum.
|
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.
|
On January 18 2011 14:30 Qynvee wrote:
I just started playing SC2 a while ago, and I'm relatively new to the deeper intricacies of RTS games. I started with Protoss, and thanks to coaching from a few diamond league friends I can somewhat reliably 4 gate to win most bronze games.
My question though, is about the entire playstyle of Protoss. It seems like I only win when I 4 gate exactly the way my friends taught me. I can never ever match T or Z even slightly later in the game, for example if I try any kind of 3 gate opening. Their tech and numbers seem overwhelmingly more powerful than what P has, in the long run. Hell, I need a large investment just to make my colossi even usable, whereas they are extremely fragile compared to ultras or thors. I have no hard counter to ghosts, battlecruisers, or brood lords, and I have to confine myself to the robo tech tree just to get a detector. That's usually ok though, because my air units and tech are a joke. Thors and ultras are especially difficult to stop without an unlikely numbers advantage. I could go on and on about this.
I understand part of it is because T and Z can grab fast expos and I understand the economic analogy associated with that. The timing though, is a problem because I can't respond adequately in the window that I have given Blizzard designed P units to be slow building and individually strong (questionable). With their abilities it's like the Terran ghost embodies this motif moreso than any actual Protoss unit. 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.
In a general sense, what are Protoss strong in, and how are they supposed to play?
dropping some milestones which helped me a lot:
- macromechanics have highest priority (probe production, pylons, warpgates are allways in cooldown, minerals are low, using cronoboost as often as possible)
- a good protoss army is an allways moving protoss army. (scouting information, enemy unit mix information, forcing zergs into panic mode aka producing no drones). have an agressive mindset, 4gate is teaching this well.
- push and retreat, unless you will 100% win the battle, then dont retreat. dont sacrifice units!
- your goal is not to win the game and kill the enemies army. your goal is to take as many exes as possible and to deny the enemys exes. take your exes as often and as aggressively as possible. many lowleague players out there just play (sometimes very good) all-strategies but they have no clue about macro. dont get frustrated by them, dont follow their narrowminded path, dont think this game is about allin-openers. be a macro-beast!
|
You are right to some extent that early Protoss units are weak generally for their cost. The things that Protoss can use to turn the tide are their cool abilities. e.g. forecfields and guardian shields are incredibly powerful if used well. Later in the game, a few storms from high templar can obliterate your opponent's army in seconds. Also, once you get collossus and carriers out, your army is pretty damn strong.
However, others have already said this and I will repeat it. If you are new focus on organic macro play and not on strategy or pre-defined build orders like 4gate. I was pretty new to RTS games when I started. I was in Bronze but now in mid-diamond so I know how you feel at the moment. Even though early protoss units are weaker, I got from Bronze to Platinum through better macro. Zealots and stalkers are in theory weaker than Marine/marauder and roach ling but I could go head to head no problem once I got my macro down. Don't worry about expo timings. Just expand when you saturate your main (20-30 workers) or when you see your workers dancing around from patch to patch trying to find a spare one.
Watch a pro replay and just note the amount of stuff they have relative to you at a certain point in time. There's tonnes of resources out there especially good is Day9's Newbie Tuesday series which I highly recommend you watch. As a benchmark for you, I can max out at 200 supply plus a couple of upgrades by the 16 minute mark (in-game) using a standard build that I use vs zerg.
|
On January 18 2011 14:30 Qynvee wrote:
In a general sense, what are Protoss strong in, and how are they supposed to play?
Here is how I have figured it out:
Protoss can not fail in execution.
Generally this means that protoss can not replace its units easily. If you do enough damage sure you can recover from a unit loss, but colossus are a prime example of what I mean by "can't replace easily". If you only have 8 gateways, losing 100 supply worth of gateway units means 100/2/8 = 6,25 production cycles to replace it. That is at least 3 minute window when enemy can come up and kill you.
But this also means that tech choises are the most critical factors of your gameplay. Build dark templars and fail to do anything with them -> you die, for example. Anything you do is a significant investment and if you guess wrong, you are dead.
So this leads to a couple of guidelines I see in protoss gameplay:
-Protect your units alive like they were your children.
-SCOUT, SCOUT, SCOUT.
-Everything is aimed at building that critical mass and combination of units that lets you roll over the enemy. You can win by trickery but in a straight up macro game it goes like this. Sometimes it's early (xGate and/or robo/stargate -rushes), if you see an opening abuse it (harrassment/killing something and retreating), but in the end you aim for surviving long enough to obtain the Ball Of Death.
|
I personally would also like to know what the Protoss mentality should be.
|
Your friends taught you a 1 base strategy that can hurt you in situations where your opponents expand and stop your timing push. The "ideology" of the Protoss army is that there aren't many of them, but they are strong. With experience, you will be able to determine whether or not it is even worth attacking your opponent with a 4-gate timing push based on your scouting information. Against terran, it is generally not the greatest idea to 4-gate. Once terran get stimpacks, they can tear through your protoss army. With a 4-gate, you're vulnerable to certain strategies that exploit your lack of detection with stealth units. You're also more likely to dump everything into a single attack which has to succeed, or you lose. Sometimes, the impression that you are going to 4-gate is enough to scare your enemy into playing defensively, allowing you to expand to another base and double your production. Just try not to get the stalker syndrome, and end up with a mined out main base and no way to rebuild your army. Watching pro games with commentaries, like in the GSL, iCCup, etc will help you gain a better understanding of what works as protoss and what doesn't. 4 gate is very strong, though. I don't see any reason why you won't be able to get out of bronze using that strategy every game. Remember to build that close pylon and chronoboost the gates back at your base.
|
The way I feel about toss is it's all about getting to midgame with the strongest economy and tech possible. Toss T1 is ineffectually weak to attack an opponent's base unless you commit to an all-in-ish 4 gate with very poor midgame transition (except in PvP, where 4 gate is the dominant metagame, forcing both sides to do it). Beyond small skirmishes, Toss needs a tech tier above Terran and Zerg to compete.
If all you do is 4 gate, you will have to unlearn this mindset to adjust for a more macro-orientated game that fares better against better opponents.
|
This topic is subjective but in my mind the Protoss race utilizes units that must be used to their full effectiveness. Basically, you HAVE to make the most out of every unit you make or else you will definitely be at a disadvantage.
Take for example, the sentry; the only T1 caster unit in the game (so far.) Obviously, force fields have won/broken the game for many players since it's conception. Effective force fields can easily change the outcome of a critical battle, whether it be splitting their army in half or funneling their units into a choke, they are no doubt useful for many situations.
On the contrary, cheap speedlings can utilize a gap in a wall to run straight to the mineral line. Of course, they'll probably all die but you'll definitely get some worker kills. If you apply this mentality to zealots, or even any toss unit ("there's a chance of this paying off") you'll soon find if it doesn't pay off, you're a little bit more behind.
Dark Templars have been the bane of many players. And with good reason. However, they cost a hefty 125/125 and honestly can die quite easily once detected. The only way you can make them pay off is through harass, whether it be through warping in a couple of DTs on a terran, one to destroy the mineral line in the main and one in the expo, or to keep his army in his base. Like with sentries, if you don't do enough damage with them before they die, you've just lost your hefty investment into an affluent unit, and if you've opened with DTs, all the time and resources spent into obtaining that tech.
I realize this holds true for all of the races, but I think it's critically important for Protoss. Their units are just so expensive but can have so much potential for damage that you really need to understand each and every unit, how to micro and control them effectively, what they're good for and what they have good synergy with, and how you could use them in their current situation to utilize their maximum potential.
|
lol
Protoss can fast expand probably the safest in this game if i'm not mistaken. I still don't know how to punish a well executed 1 gate core FE in TvP. And forge FE is really safe aswell PvZ. Protoss has the strongest late game army. Everything from terran and zerg just melt to 200/200 toss. Thors, battle cruisers, ultras are all laughable bad against protoss. Yeah a gateway army is weak. But there is nothing a zerg can do about good forcefields and sentry's allow you to completely crush an atack from terran/zerg. There are also so many different all in's and one base plays toss can do.
You are bronze, learn the mechanics of this game first. Your macro is probably just extremely awfull and naturally you will fall behind. Thats what you get when you 4 gate every game.
Depends what you define as "devastating." The thor strike cannon deals far more damage than psi-storm, and to buildings as well, while the siege tank can splash even greater damage than an upgraded colossus from further range (I believe 9 vs 13?). The DPS may tell a different story but isn't spike damage that outright kills a clump of units desirable over the opposing player moving out of your AoE?
Let me clarify the macro game. It feels like I am at an inherent disadvantage in economy because I don't know how to respond adequately to the timing window when presented with a fast expansion and the subsequent attrition. Meanwhile, it feels like taking a fast expo is a bigger risk for me to take than for those of the other races, given that I have less efficient units only marginally more individually powerful than those of T and Z in the early game. It seems like without 4 gate, P plays a very responsive game as opposed to an aggressive one at all stages of the game, winning only by counter-push.
Thanks for the advice guys. I can also post replays. Many of them I've gone over with my friends who have also spoken about passivity and macro when I play.
This post made my day, thanks 
|
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 agree with this 100%.
After coaching a couple of friends up the league ranks, and reviewing many of their games... It seems like 90%+ of bronze level games aren't decided by strategy, build order, or micro. Just focus on the fundamentals and you will easily win all of your games in bronze league if you execute safe, standard builds correctly.
|
It definitely sounds like you're over thinking things. First off, that the Protoss has some inherent disadvantage as a result of their overall design. You have to get that thought out of your head, along with anything else you feel negative about your race. Thinking about how your race is weak at every stage in the game won't help you 1 bit
Having a list helps, and at your level it should be very simple. Ask yourself these 3 questions every 5 seconds while playing a game:
1. Am I building a probe right now? (Do this regardless of if you're in a fight)
2. Am I building army units right now? (Do this regardless of if you're in a fight)
3. Do I have enough supply?
Do those 3 things, and it will almost completely not matter what your opponent builds. You'll have so much more stuff that it truly won't matter. And once you practice to where you can do those 3 things perfectly, add 1 more thing: Is there anything on the minimap? Am I using Chronoboost all the time? Have I scouted in the last minute? Am I safe to expand? Do I need more gateways to be able to spend all my resources? Keeping adding 1 more thing at a time until they become habit, then add another.
When it comes to seeing your opponent expand, you have two options. Either attack, or expand yourself. If you feel you can't do either of those because your army is smaller than his, than you made a mistake somewhere else on your list.
I know as a newer player it can be a little frightening trying to apply early pressure. You think to yourself, "What happens if I run all the way across the map to attack, and he attacks my base just before I get to his. What will I do then"? Don't allow yourself to think like that. Until you develop some good instincts or find a reason to think you're about to be attacked, you cross that bridge if and when you get to it. You'll miss a lot of opportunities otherwise. Hopefully that should help with your passivity.
Lastly, watch your replays. Look at each critical point in the game and ask yourself questions about what you were doing at that time, what could you have done differently, how safe/exposed were you at certain points. 90% of learning will take place between games.
If you don't do anything but those first 3 items above, you will get into gold, I promise.
|
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
