|
To emphasize my point further, Protoss MUST expand for the following reasons:
To hold any all in from any race, you must have either an economic advantage or a tech advantage (or just having a better composition). The economic advantage is often guaranteed because the all inning player usually cuts workers and doesn't expand. However, mules mean that a 1 base Terran will always outproduce a 1 base Protoss or a 1 base Zerg. Look no further than the 7 rax on 1 base for evidence of this. Therefore, a Protoss needs to either expand or tech first to defeat a Terran 1 base all in, to achieve the respective economic or tech advantages. Against a bio allin, teching to colossus is an excellent way of stopping the all in as without Vikings, Terran is hopeless against so many colossus.
However, Protoss has no significant tech advantages vs the composition of marine/tank/banshee. Banshee laughs at robo tech, even though it is required in case of cloak, and tanks compliment the banshees job admirably. The other tech options are risky, because of cloacked banshees, and having 4 cloaked banshees shoot at your army is the worst feeling possible. The perfect synergy and mix of these units result in a Protoss not being able to defeat such a deadly composition with tech alone and therefore, must hold off the all in in some other way.
Clearly, the only other way is to expand and take the economic advantage. The attack from Terran only comes when the expansion has already payed for itself and Protoss can pump units off 5 gates + robo.
|
On August 08 2011 22:45 PanzerKing wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2011 22:35 Trowa127 wrote:On August 08 2011 22:30 Toadvine wrote:On August 08 2011 22:26 PanzerKing wrote:
Right, so because P are trying to one-gate FE and are losing to a one-base all-in that pulls workers, the all-in needs to be nerfed. Obviously something is just wrong with the game if a one-base all-in with workers pulled can beat a FE off of one unit-producing structure. Obviously. I really think someone needs to make an informative thread of some sort in General or Strategy, so we can educate the masses as to what actually works against this all-in. Although I suppose there were tons of Terrans telling Zergs to onebase against marine/scv all-ins, so the stupidity cannot be conquered so easily. I agree. Too many knuckle draggers like Panzerking with absolutely no idea what the all in even is, posting misleading bullshit. Really frustrating. Obviously I'm far less constructive than the legion of shitty P players who whine incessantly about basic logic. When 3-gate pressure roffles a one-rax expo at the nat (which is what happened to QXC at Anaheim, if I remember correctly) nobody complains because the logic of what happened is obvious. But when P try to expand off of a single unit-producing structure, they don't understand why they lose to an aggressive all-in. Even if your warpgates go up as the push starts, you silver-league mongoloid, you're still dead because you can't warp-in enough units to mount a meaningful defense until he's at your base and sieged in a good position. If you built the warpgates first and the expo later, you would have had enough units to poke at him and pick off marines and scvs during the duration of his push. That makes it harder to get into a good siege position. But because you tried to one-gate expo, you can't get a meaningful army out until he's already sieged outside the nat, and now you're dead.
Can someone report that?
|
On August 08 2011 22:45 PanzerKing wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2011 22:35 Trowa127 wrote:On August 08 2011 22:30 Toadvine wrote:On August 08 2011 22:26 PanzerKing wrote:
Right, so because P are trying to one-gate FE and are losing to a one-base all-in that pulls workers, the all-in needs to be nerfed. Obviously something is just wrong with the game if a one-base all-in with workers pulled can beat a FE off of one unit-producing structure. Obviously. I really think someone needs to make an informative thread of some sort in General or Strategy, so we can educate the masses as to what actually works against this all-in. Although I suppose there were tons of Terrans telling Zergs to onebase against marine/scv all-ins, so the stupidity cannot be conquered so easily. I agree. Too many knuckle draggers like Panzerking with absolutely no idea what the all in even is, posting misleading bullshit. Really frustrating. Obviously I'm far less constructive than the legion of shitty P players who whine incessantly about basic logic. When 3-gate pressure roffles a one-rax expo at the nat (which is what happened to QXC at Anaheim, if I remember correctly) nobody complains because the logic of what happened is obvious. But when P try to expand off of a single unit-producing structure, they don't understand why they lose to an aggressive all-in. Even if your warpgates go up as the push starts, you silver-league mongoloid, you're still dead because you can't warp-in enough units to mount a meaningful defense until he's at your base and sieged in a good position. If you built the warpgates first and the expo later, you would have had enough units to poke at him and pick off marines and scvs during the duration of his push. That makes it harder to get into a good siege position. But because you tried to one-gate expo, you can't get a meaningful army out until he's already sieged outside the nat, and now you're dead.
You just proved how stupid you are with this post, comparing an agressive 3 gate (hits at 6 minutes) to a 1-1-1 all in (hits an 9/10) when making an argument against it being too powerful. If you actually watched any starcraft instead of sitting their theory crafting all day you'd realise that the only way to have enough unit producing structures to stop the build in theory is with a 1 gate expand - and even that doesn't work.
So yeah, pretty rich calling me a 'silver league mongoloid' when you have no idea what you are talking about. Every single post by an informed player contradicts what you are saying.
But as Toadvine said, I'm not sure if you are trolling or not becuase really, you sound like someone from a WoW forum.
|
On August 08 2011 22:41 red4ce wrote:
Inca and Anypro out on the same day? A few months ago this would have made me giddy with happiness. Now? I'm not sad they're gone, but I do worry about the general state of protoss in Korea. It's not good when all protoss hopes rest on the shoulders of 1 man (MC).
Well actually thinking about it is pretty cool. Just makes MC even more of a badass. But yes I want to see more people tossing it up than just him.
|
On August 08 2011 22:45 PanzerKing wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2011 22:35 Trowa127 wrote:On August 08 2011 22:30 Toadvine wrote:On August 08 2011 22:26 PanzerKing wrote:
Right, so because P are trying to one-gate FE and are losing to a one-base all-in that pulls workers, the all-in needs to be nerfed. Obviously something is just wrong with the game if a one-base all-in with workers pulled can beat a FE off of one unit-producing structure. Obviously. I really think someone needs to make an informative thread of some sort in General or Strategy, so we can educate the masses as to what actually works against this all-in. Although I suppose there were tons of Terrans telling Zergs to onebase against marine/scv all-ins, so the stupidity cannot be conquered so easily. I agree. Too many knuckle draggers like Panzerking with absolutely no idea what the all in even is, posting misleading bullshit. Really frustrating. Obviously I'm far less constructive than the legion of shitty P players who whine incessantly about basic logic. When 3-gate pressure roffles a one-rax expo at the nat (which is what happened to QXC at Anaheim, if I remember correctly) nobody complains because the logic of what happened is obvious. But when P try to expand off of a single unit-producing structure, they don't understand why they lose to an aggressive all-in. Even if your warpgates go up as the push starts, you silver-league mongoloid, you're still dead because you can't warp-in enough units to mount a meaningful defense until he's at your base and sieged in a good position. If you built the warpgates first and the expo later, you would have had enough units to poke at him and pick off marines and scvs during the duration of his push. That makes it harder to get into a good siege position. But because you tried to one-gate expo, you can't get a meaningful army out until he's already sieged outside the nat, and now you're dead.
If this is a troll, then it's absolutely brilliant. I suppose it's the same effect as with creationists. You can never tell if it's a parody, because there's always someone out there who actually believes that nonsense.
On August 08 2011 22:45 sunman1g wrote:
i've seen ToD holding 1-1-1 build on EU ladder vs GM EU players
naniwa recently stopped it in b.net invitational and other times as well
i think korean protoss are not "that" good in the early game yet
edit: ofc it's super hard to stop, but it can be done and P just need to figure out what to do better
Dunno about ToD, but in the Blizzard Invitational Tarson forgot Siege Mode and sat in the middle of the map with his army and half his scvs, waiting for it to complete...
|
Dont forget HuK and Puzzle! Toss hwaiting!
|
On August 08 2011 22:50 Trowa127 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2011 22:45 PanzerKing wrote:On August 08 2011 22:35 Trowa127 wrote:On August 08 2011 22:30 Toadvine wrote:On August 08 2011 22:26 PanzerKing wrote:
Right, so because P are trying to one-gate FE and are losing to a one-base all-in that pulls workers, the all-in needs to be nerfed. Obviously something is just wrong with the game if a one-base all-in with workers pulled can beat a FE off of one unit-producing structure. Obviously. I really think someone needs to make an informative thread of some sort in General or Strategy, so we can educate the masses as to what actually works against this all-in. Although I suppose there were tons of Terrans telling Zergs to onebase against marine/scv all-ins, so the stupidity cannot be conquered so easily. I agree. Too many knuckle draggers like Panzerking with absolutely no idea what the all in even is, posting misleading bullshit. Really frustrating. Obviously I'm far less constructive than the legion of shitty P players who whine incessantly about basic logic. When 3-gate pressure roffles a one-rax expo at the nat (which is what happened to QXC at Anaheim, if I remember correctly) nobody complains because the logic of what happened is obvious. But when P try to expand off of a single unit-producing structure, they don't understand why they lose to an aggressive all-in. Even if your warpgates go up as the push starts, you silver-league mongoloid, you're still dead because you can't warp-in enough units to mount a meaningful defense until he's at your base and sieged in a good position. If you built the warpgates first and the expo later, you would have had enough units to poke at him and pick off marines and scvs during the duration of his push. That makes it harder to get into a good siege position. But because you tried to one-gate expo, you can't get a meaningful army out until he's already sieged outside the nat, and now you're dead. You just proved how stupid you are with this post, comparing an agressive 3 gate (hits at 6 minutes) to a 1-1-1 all in (hits an 9/10) when making an argument against it being too powerful. If you actually watched any starcraft instead of sitting their theory crafting all day you'd realise that the only way to have enough unit producing structures to stop the build in theory is with a 1 gate expand - and even that doesn't work. So yeah, pretty rich calling me a 'silver league mongoloid' when you have no idea what you are talking about.
It's basic logic - minutes and food counts are irrelevant. I'm sorry that basic logic is beyond you, but you're screaming and crying about a one-base all-in beating a very fast-expand when the logic of WHY it happens is blindingly obvious. Even if you have MORE warpgates up with the one-gate FE than you do with a 3-gate into expo, you have LESS units when the push starts and so you can't stop T from sieging up your nat, at which point you're fucked. Whether you understand it or not, it's common sense - it doesn't matter how many gates you're throwing down off of your FE if you can't stop him from positioning his army in a perfect spot right outside your base. Once you've conceded that position to his tanks, you're done.
"Every single post by an informed player" - what a joke. Just because a bunch of P players are whining alongside you doesn't make your opinion any less wrong.
|
The one thing most people don't see is the there is no cutting of SCV's the Terran will have enough SCV's that he can send like 10-15 with the Push and still have enough in most cases to (almost) saturate his mainbase. I just checked all the Games and the Terrans have 10-15 SCV's too much for one base , well besides Taeja but he just send 3-4 SCV's with the Push. They SCV's are specifically build as a buffer / fighting Units . There is no cutting of workers at all untill the Terrans moves out.
|
On August 08 2011 22:54 PanzerKing wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2011 22:50 Trowa127 wrote:On August 08 2011 22:45 PanzerKing wrote:On August 08 2011 22:35 Trowa127 wrote:On August 08 2011 22:30 Toadvine wrote:On August 08 2011 22:26 PanzerKing wrote:
Right, so because P are trying to one-gate FE and are losing to a one-base all-in that pulls workers, the all-in needs to be nerfed. Obviously something is just wrong with the game if a one-base all-in with workers pulled can beat a FE off of one unit-producing structure. Obviously. I really think someone needs to make an informative thread of some sort in General or Strategy, so we can educate the masses as to what actually works against this all-in. Although I suppose there were tons of Terrans telling Zergs to onebase against marine/scv all-ins, so the stupidity cannot be conquered so easily. I agree. Too many knuckle draggers like Panzerking with absolutely no idea what the all in even is, posting misleading bullshit. Really frustrating. Obviously I'm far less constructive than the legion of shitty P players who whine incessantly about basic logic. When 3-gate pressure roffles a one-rax expo at the nat (which is what happened to QXC at Anaheim, if I remember correctly) nobody complains because the logic of what happened is obvious. But when P try to expand off of a single unit-producing structure, they don't understand why they lose to an aggressive all-in. Even if your warpgates go up as the push starts, you silver-league mongoloid, you're still dead because you can't warp-in enough units to mount a meaningful defense until he's at your base and sieged in a good position. If you built the warpgates first and the expo later, you would have had enough units to poke at him and pick off marines and scvs during the duration of his push. That makes it harder to get into a good siege position. But because you tried to one-gate expo, you can't get a meaningful army out until he's already sieged outside the nat, and now you're dead. You just proved how stupid you are with this post, comparing an agressive 3 gate (hits at 6 minutes) to a 1-1-1 all in (hits an 9/10) when making an argument against it being too powerful. If you actually watched any starcraft instead of sitting their theory crafting all day you'd realise that the only way to have enough unit producing structures to stop the build in theory is with a 1 gate expand - and even that doesn't work. So yeah, pretty rich calling me a 'silver league mongoloid' when you have no idea what you are talking about. It's basic logic - minutes and food counts are irrelevant. I'm sorry that basic logic is beyond you, but you're screaming and crying about a one-base all-in beating a very fast-expand when the logic of WHY it happens is blindingly obvious. Even if you have MORE warpgates up with the one-gate FE than you do with a 3-gate into expo, you have LESS units when the push starts and so you can't stop T from sieging up your nat, at which point you're fucked. Whether you understand it or not, it's common sense - it doesn't matter how many gates you're throwing down off of your FE if you can't stop him from positioning his army in a perfect spot right outside your base. Once you've conceded that position to his tanks, you're done.
Its not a 6 minute all in you moron - You will have more gates up becuase your economy advantage of two bases should have kicked in by the time the push arrives. The issue is even with more units you still can't hold this, even if you engage in the middle of the map! How stupid are you? Then theres the fact that you can't hold this if you stay on one base? What exactly are you meant to do oh mighty one? If one base protoss doesn't hold it, and two base protoss doesn't hold it, how would you hold?
And sorry Panzer - you are obviously a better, more informed player than Puzzle, my mistake. Ignore everything I've said! This build has a 90% + win rate against Protoss in the GSL becuase they are all so much worse at theory than you!
Thank you mods..
|
The thing is Protoss Units don't kill the Terran Units fasst enough if you don't have Collossi / Charge / HT's or Archons. If you ever get enough of one of those things out the Terran composition will become pretty worthless. Before that it's hard to hold and on smaller Maps well thats pretty hard . But i think the issue is more with Protoss then with Terran here.
|
On August 08 2011 22:54 PanzerKing wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2011 22:50 Trowa127 wrote:On August 08 2011 22:45 PanzerKing wrote:On August 08 2011 22:35 Trowa127 wrote:On August 08 2011 22:30 Toadvine wrote:On August 08 2011 22:26 PanzerKing wrote:
Right, so because P are trying to one-gate FE and are losing to a one-base all-in that pulls workers, the all-in needs to be nerfed. Obviously something is just wrong with the game if a one-base all-in with workers pulled can beat a FE off of one unit-producing structure. Obviously. I really think someone needs to make an informative thread of some sort in General or Strategy, so we can educate the masses as to what actually works against this all-in. Although I suppose there were tons of Terrans telling Zergs to onebase against marine/scv all-ins, so the stupidity cannot be conquered so easily. I agree. Too many knuckle draggers like Panzerking with absolutely no idea what the all in even is, posting misleading bullshit. Really frustrating. Obviously I'm far less constructive than the legion of shitty P players who whine incessantly about basic logic. When 3-gate pressure roffles a one-rax expo at the nat (which is what happened to QXC at Anaheim, if I remember correctly) nobody complains because the logic of what happened is obvious. But when P try to expand off of a single unit-producing structure, they don't understand why they lose to an aggressive all-in. Even if your warpgates go up as the push starts, you silver-league mongoloid, you're still dead because you can't warp-in enough units to mount a meaningful defense until he's at your base and sieged in a good position. If you built the warpgates first and the expo later, you would have had enough units to poke at him and pick off marines and scvs during the duration of his push. That makes it harder to get into a good siege position. But because you tried to one-gate expo, you can't get a meaningful army out until he's already sieged outside the nat, and now you're dead. You just proved how stupid you are with this post, comparing an agressive 3 gate (hits at 6 minutes) to a 1-1-1 all in (hits an 9/10) when making an argument against it being too powerful. If you actually watched any starcraft instead of sitting their theory crafting all day you'd realise that the only way to have enough unit producing structures to stop the build in theory is with a 1 gate expand - and even that doesn't work. So yeah, pretty rich calling me a 'silver league mongoloid' when you have no idea what you are talking about. It's basic logic - minutes and food counts are irrelevant. I'm sorry that basic logic is beyond you, but you're screaming and crying about a one-base all-in beating a very fast-expand when the logic of WHY it happens is blindingly obvious. Even if you have MORE warpgates up with the one-gate FE than you do with a 3-gate into expo, you have LESS units when the push starts and so you can't stop T from sieging up your nat, at which point you're fucked. Whether you understand it or not, it's common sense - it doesn't matter how many gates you're throwing down off of your FE if you can't stop him from positioning his army in a perfect spot right outside your base. Once you've conceded that position to his tanks, you're done. "Every single post by an informed player" - what a joke. Just because a bunch of P players are whining alongside you doesn't make your opinion any less wrong.
It´s basic logic that a 1 base all in shouldn´t be able to beat a fast expand build when the expansion already payed for itself...
|
On August 08 2011 22:45 s3rp wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2011 22:39 ondik wrote:On August 08 2011 22:27 s3rp wrote:
Well you probably have to guess if its coming or not . If the Terran walls for example there's an extremely high chance of it coming . If you scout Gas ( which you will on Maps where it is used ) and the Terran walls he will do this push.
And btw it is possible to hold on 1 Base IF you can get out 2 Colossi and are careful with them. ( not easy to do though i give you that ) This is not how this (or any) game should be played..you can't just guess and either have 50 % chance of holding it or just get behind always when terran does some other build. And I wonder how you want to get 2 colossi out before the allin hits.. BansBans could have easily had 2 maybe even 3 but he just stoppd after he got one and i think with a second he would've held because all that Marines would've died before the Collosus get killed.
So what BO did he do? Because I just tried it and there's no way I could get 2 colossi before 9th minute AND be safe against an early attack. Even when I went for 2nd gas right after core I had to make only zealots and few stalkers (= no sentries) to be able to pump 2 colossi quickly, so any early attack would kill me.
|
poor protoss, all lost, expect in the PvP..
|
sweet 8/8 on my liquibet/code a bracket :D
odd to see inca completely out of code a. it's like it was yesterday he was DT expanding vs Nestea 
|
France12953 Posts
On August 08 2011 22:52 Toadvine wrote:Show nested quote +On August 08 2011 22:45 sunman1g wrote:
i've seen ToD holding 1-1-1 build on EU ladder vs GM EU players
naniwa recently stopped it in b.net invitational and other times as well
i think korean protoss are not "that" good in the early game yet
edit: ofc it's super hard to stop, but it can be done and P just need to figure out what to do better Dunno about ToD, but in the Blizzard Invitational Tarson forgot Siege Mode and sat in the middle of the map with his army and half his scvs, waiting for it to complete...
ToD held it against Sarens in the french WCG qualifiers, I think it was 1 gate expo but I'm not too sure, it was on xel'naga and he flanked + microed like a boss but it was well executed from SarenS too.
I think good protoss players can repell it "easily" if they were able to expo fast, and I think that's why terrans now do an early marine+medivac+hellions poke against early expo before a variation of the 1-1-1.
Watch vod or replay of MarineKing vs SaSe @CPL (xel'naga) and replay of MarineKing vs LoveCD on Shakuras.
|
1 gate robo > get and obs asap, scout their base. If you see a 1-1-1 allin comming, expand, add 2 more gates and a robofacility, if you see normal play just stick to what you know and like to play with. I know, may sound stupid, but it works for me in low masters anyway.
|
If you want a solid defense of the 1/1/1 all-in you should really watch Mkp vs Xiaot game 1. It should be up on youtube. xiaot does a 1 gate expand adds a quick robo with 4 gateways in total.
He uses a lot of stalkers and a few zealots and 2 immortals. The immortals and zealots go around of the terran army and attack the siege tanks from behind while the stalkers attack the marines. He also used a few probes to buffer the marine damage. I'm not sure if pulling probes is worth against so many marines but considering how hard this push is, it might be necessary.
|
On August 08 2011 22:45 sunman1g wrote:
i've seen ToD holding 1-1-1 build on EU ladder vs GM EU players
naniwa recently stopped it in b.net invitational and other times as well
i think korean protoss are not "that" good in the early game yet
edit: ofc it's super hard to stop, but it can be done and P just need to figure out what to do better
.....
it's not about korean protoss... lol. check all the games MKP played at CPL(which he won 3-0 over SaSe - someone mentioned in that Code A bracket thread that SaSe always defended 1-1-1 no probs) basically all of his games against protoss(LoveCD, Jim, SaSe) were 1-1-1 variations - althought he did 3rax a few times.
also if you want an example of how to do the worst 1-1-1 ever; you should refer to tarson's one that naniwa "defended" in the bnet invitational - get supply blocked, pull half your scv's, sit in middle of map with scv's for 3 minutes while you research siege mode because you forgot it. :|
|
once again a disappointing start for the new GSL season: Terran dominating, i'm slowly getting tired of that.
i'm not sure if i will buy a season ticket this time.
sigh.
|
Dammit 7/8 Miscalled the Tails/Anypro game 
Pretty much uneventful night then, no real upsets. And thank god Best is out
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
