EPT[G] The Great Book of Protoss Bullshit - Page 13
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
redbean87
Sweden21 Posts
| ||
|
Ben...
Canada3485 Posts
| ||
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On April 02 2014 12:48 moofang wrote: The least you TL strategy writers (magnificent sons of a bitch) can do in penance for this great evil is to make a follow up "how to play against bullshit builds" thing  Even as protoss I'd kind of like to know how to optimally play against a 10-gate/3-gate, for eg, other than doing an even faster bullshit build x)Bullshit them before they bullshit you. | ||
|
AussieStarcraft
Australia31 Posts
| ||
|
Swwww
Switzerland812 Posts
| ||
|
linkhimura
Argentina231 Posts
The worst part is, this is actually true T_T | ||
|
wishr
Russian Federation262 Posts
| ||
|
DjayEl
France252 Posts
 | ||
|
tshi
United States2495 Posts
On April 02 2014 19:32 wishr wrote: Omg, more bullshit on ladder. Better make similar guide for T, because they are underrepresented... Good one lol | ||
|
gobbledydook
Australia2593 Posts
On April 02 2014 19:32 wishr wrote: Omg, more bullshit on ladder. Better make similar guide for T, because they are underrepresented... no need for guide, just make broodlord infestor! | ||
|
SinO[Ob]
France897 Posts
On April 02 2014 19:32 wishr wrote: Omg, more bullshit on ladder. Better make similar guide for T, because they are underrepresented... Here's the guide for T: Never go late game. <3 | ||
|
Waise
3165 Posts
On April 02 2014 14:58 Ben... wrote: because the risks they pulled were so stupid that you didn't think they would be dumb enough to do them classic excuse of someone who doesn't scout well | ||
|
DomeGetta
480 Posts
Anyways - I want to get on my soap box for just a few moments here about this type of play in general. Obviously it would be pretty rare for anyone from Blizz to read the comments on this post regardless of how glorious it is but I digress. All of these brutal timings that exist in the game - (to which protoss has an incredible sum, zerg slightly less and terran probably the least) should be eliminated via nerf! Speaking strictly to the good of the game and not at all to balance: The existence of these timings add chaos to the game and minimize the impact of the skill of the players on the outcome. The "standard" builds that develop now have to incorporate inefficient safe-guards against all of this (and yes people talk about scouting but scouting for every timing that can kill you is inefficient it is an investment and if your opponent chooses to ignore it you will be very behind). Now - if pro A chooses to scout for the timings and play safe and pro B chooses to say fuck it and greeds out pro B definitely wins all things equal. If pro A chooses to execute the timings and pro B chooses to say fuck it and greeds out pro A definitely wins. The outcome is predetermined and not at all in the spirit of the game imo. I understand the positive impact that early aggressive timings can have on the game and maybe not 100% of them should be nerfed out but there really shouldn't be so many. It really does take away the aspect that the better player wins more of the time (i.e. duckeduck / billowy type nonsense). In the spirit of competition don't we want the best player (macro / micro / multitask) to be the winner more of the time? Not just the player who guessed right 2 out of 3 times on that particular day?? Pls help Blizz QQ (;D) Anyways cool thread lol - having the knowledge of these builds will surely help my cheese defense but make my standard play safer / less efficient and winrate in macro games go down lol. | ||
|
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On April 02 2014 22:14 DomeGetta wrote: I just want to first open with this is an incredible thread lol! That picture is one of the best gifs I've seen lololol. Anyways - I want to get on my soap box for just a few moments here about this type of play in general. Obviously it would be pretty rare for anyone from Blizz to read the comments on this post regardless of how glorious it is but I digress. All of these brutal timings that exist in the game - (to which protoss has an incredible sum, zerg slightly less and terran probably the least) should be eliminated via nerf! Speaking strictly to the good of the game and not at all to balance: The existence of these timings add chaos to the game and minimize the impact of the skill of the players on the outcome. The "standard" builds that develop now have to incorporate inefficient safe-guards against all of this (and yes people talk about scouting but scouting for every timing that can kill you is inefficient it is an investment and if your opponent chooses to ignore it you will be very behind). Now - if pro A chooses to scout for the timings and play safe and pro B chooses to say fuck it and greeds out pro B definitely wins all things equal. If pro A chooses to execute the timings and pro B chooses to say fuck it and greeds out pro A definitely wins. The outcome is predetermined and not at all in the spirit of the game imo. I understand the positive impact that early aggressive timings can have on the game and maybe not 100% of them should be nerfed out but there really shouldn't be so many. It really does take away the aspect that the better player wins more of the time (i.e. duckeduck / billowy type nonsense). In the spirit of competition don't we want the best player (macro / micro / multitask) to be the winner more of the time? Not just the player who guessed right 2 out of 3 times on that particular day?? Pls help Blizz QQ (;D) Anyways cool thread lol - having the knowledge of these builds will surely help my cheese defense but make my standard play safer / less efficient and winrate in macro games go down lol. All of these builds can be scouted with appropriate play, they are not overpowered and broken, and good players who aren't playing too greedy can spot them coming and defend. | ||
|
EsportsJohn
United States4883 Posts
On April 02 2014 22:40 Whitewing wrote: All of these builds can be scouted with appropriate play, they are not overpowered and broken, and good players who aren't playing too greedy can spot them coming and defend. I think he's trying to say that your opponent can play high variance builds like sOs (AKA proxy void ray one game, nexus first the next) and win a majority of the time. In fact, he suggests it might be the best way to play Protoss. However, if this were true, Rain and Zest wouldn't be the best Protoss players in the world right now. Bluntly stated: as long as you have good macro and mechanics, you can play safe and beat noobs on ladder playing high variance builds. | ||
|
ypslala
Burma545 Posts
| ||
|
-HuShang-
Canada393 Posts
On April 02 2014 07:36 SC2John wrote: Unless otherwise noted, it's always 3 on gas. I've used that build several times and always hit the timing at 8:30 without any problems, so.....I don't know lol. Okay, you can keep doing it wrong but can you change the guide so everyone else can learn it properly ^^ | ||
|
DomeGetta
480 Posts
On April 02 2014 22:49 SC2John wrote: I think he's trying to say that your opponent can play high variance builds like sOs (AKA proxy void ray one game, nexus first the next) and win a majority of the time. In fact, he suggests it might be the best way to play Protoss. However, if this were true, Rain and Zest wouldn't be the best Protoss players in the world right now. Bluntly stated: as long as you have good macro and mechanics, you can play safe and beat noobs on ladder playing high variance builds. Yah let me clarify some. I am a semi active - mid-masters level player on NA. I actually watch a whole lot more starcraft than I play now days. What I'm really saying is that I (as a viewer and a player) am really tired of seeing game outcomes predetermined based on who had more balls / less balls (depending on scenario) I'm not saying you can't sniff out these builds and react appropriately but what I am saying is that it's actually pretty easy to straight up lose games to build order counters (Innovation vs TLhero IEM - 11/11 vs zerg on 4 player maps unscouted etc). I just really don't see what it is that we think they add to the game. Nobody wants to see a 15 minute 3-0 stomping with 3 build order wins..it's not impressive or entertaining. You can argue all day long that "if you play safe and perfectly you can win" but you can't argue that if you play safe and your opponent plays greedy that you should win - again that's more chaos and less skill based. I've seen plenty of pro games to that effect as well. To make my question more clear I guess - How exactly does having so many different plausable cheese game enders improve the over all state of the game? If someone has a good answer I'm a pretty open minded dude I just can't think of one. Obviously no one wants the game to be 45 minute turtle-fest and I really am ok with the idea of early game action I just feel like there shouldn't be so many ways to just straight up lose based on what build you chose - there should be safe macro oriented builds that don't get blown out of the water by incredible greed (which I'm not saying we are that far off I'm just saying I really don't understand the point of having 3/4 of these timings exist (roach/bane / 1 base blink 2 base blink / 1 base DT/ 11/11 / 6pool etc). To me personally it doesn't add anything positive to the game - the only thing it does do is allow much lesser skilled individuals to climb higher up on the ladder than they should be and create "meta battles" in the highest level pro games - the latter which I am sort of OK with but I wish it was less frequent. | ||
|
Kurte_Idumin
Australia22 Posts
Lately we have lots of good strategy posts but this would be the best. ..."In conclusion, Protoss is bullshit"( and the title, animated parts) I don't know if I should laugh out loud or feel disgusting lmao | ||
|
EsportsJohn
United States4883 Posts
On April 02 2014 23:22 DomeGetta wrote: Yah let me clarify some. I am a semi active - mid-masters level player on NA. I actually watch a whole lot more starcraft than I play now days. What I'm really saying is that I (as a viewer and a player) am really tired of seeing game outcomes predetermined based on who had more balls / less balls (depending on scenario) I'm not saying you can't sniff out these builds and react appropriately but what I am saying is that it's actually pretty easy to straight up lose games to build order counters (Innovation vs TLhero IEM - 11/11 vs zerg on 4 player maps unscouted etc). I just really don't see what it is that we think they add to the game. Nobody wants to see a 15 minute 3-0 stomping with 3 build order wins..it's not impressive or entertaining. You can argue all day long that "if you play safe and perfectly you can win" but you can't argue that if you play safe and your opponent plays greedy that you should win - again that's more chaos and less skill based. I've seen plenty of pro games to that effect as well. To make my question more clear I guess - How exactly does having so many different plausable cheese game enders improve the over all state of the game? If someone has a good answer I'm a pretty open minded dude I just can't think of one. Obviously no one wants the game to be 45 minute turtle-fest and I really am ok with the idea of early game action I just feel like there shouldn't be so many ways to just straight up lose based on what build you chose - there should be safe macro oriented builds that don't get blown out of the water by incredible greed (which I'm not saying we are that far off I'm just saying I really don't understand the point of having 3/4 of these timings exist (roach/bane / 1 base blink 2 base blink / 1 base DT/ 11/11 / 6pool etc). To me personally it doesn't add anything positive to the game - the only thing it does do is allow much lesser skilled individuals to climb higher up on the ladder than they should be and create "meta battles" in the highest level pro games - the latter which I am sort of OK with but I wish it was less frequent. I'm afraid there's no way to fix it other than to dynamically change the game design. Like, there's obviously these all-ins and such, but even if they somehow managed to remove them from the game while keeping the rest of the game balanced, there would still be the threat of other high variance builds. It's just how the game is constructed via the speed (of the game), the incredibly smooth pathing, the unit AI, mineral gathering, etc., etc. Without a complete overhaul of the core game mechanics, Blizzard can't do anything about high variance builds. We say that Protoss has the highest percentage of cheeses, but that's only because Protoss has more options available to them early on. If we go back to WoL, Protoss opened almost the same way every game. In fact, most matches looked identical, and the result was a very stale, boring game to watch. Certainly Blizzard needs to watch out and avoid creating too much early game variance, but the element of randomness is SC2 is somewhat a good thing. Like I said, though, I don't think we can completely eliminate the effects of randomness on the game because of the way SC2 is designed at its core. | ||
| ||
.
