EPTedit: i love all these newbs talking about not being able to do ANYTHING as protoss, meanwhile oGsMC is on the cusp of winning GSL, and Hongun got 3rd/4th. I guess all these internet nerds are better than Hongun/MC. Also as I've said before, play the game to have FUN, 99.9% of you aren't going pro so there is NO reason to play ANY race for ANY reason but to have fun. If you aren't having fun with toss - switch or quit the game.
Is it too late to switch races? - Page 8
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
crms
United States11933 Posts
edit: i love all these newbs talking about not being able to do ANYTHING as protoss, meanwhile oGsMC is on the cusp of winning GSL, and Hongun got 3rd/4th. I guess all these internet nerds are better than Hongun/MC. Also as I've said before, play the game to have FUN, 99.9% of you aren't going pro so there is NO reason to play ANY race for ANY reason but to have fun. If you aren't having fun with toss - switch or quit the game. | ||
|
Lorken
New Zealand804 Posts
| ||
|
Abstinence
United States328 Posts
The thing with switching races is that you'll switch, then you'll realize "oh my god, this race wasn't as easy or as fun as I thought it would be", then you switch back. Most of the time. Unless you really dislike the race you play. | ||
|
AndAgain
United States2621 Posts
And he's also correct that protoss has the lowest skill cap. I don't know how anybody can argue against it. 1. Can't play reactionary (which is the theoretically superior style) because of restrictive tech tree. 2. Least harass options. 3. Can't take advantage of superior mechanics because you can't multitask as much as protoss or zerg given that you have to look at your base the most. 4. Gotta keep your army in a big ball and can't do multi-prong attacks as much as terran and zerg. | ||
|
Combine
United States812 Posts
| ||
|
Arkless
Canada1547 Posts
On December 09 2010 18:55 NearPerfection wrote:. I enjoy microing more than macroing but my macro is quite good anyway thanks to Wc3. Yeah....What?????? wc3 is a game of micro, not macro. And i'm saying this as a current A grade ICCup wc3 player. Also, you are in the top 200, but in platinum?????? I is confused | ||
|
WAAA
New Zealand291 Posts
On December 10 2010 13:01 Arkless wrote: Yeah....What?????? wc3 is a game of micro, not macro. And i'm saying this as a current A grade ICCup wc3 player. Also, you are in the top 200, but in platinum?????? I is confused No one cares about wc3-iccup sorry to burst your bubble.. it has been pretty dead right from the start. A grade in wc3 iccup is probably equivalent of top 10 on west or some other meaningless achievement. Wc3 macro is quite similar to sc2 just in sc2 there is alot more of it. | ||
|
Arkless
Canada1547 Posts
Also, everyone who is anyone in wc3, plays on ICCup | ||
|
pigtheman
United States333 Posts
| ||
|
CASLsoju
Canada253 Posts
1) Warping units, beast 2) Warp prism 3) Mass recall 4) The upgrades (zealot charge, blink, thermal lance). 5) Chrono boost 6) 1 worker can build any amount of buildings That combined just screams toss for me. Once you get toss in the mid and late game it's pretty hard to deal with. Chargelots/sentries/colosi are deadly combo especially when your colosi reach critical mass it's just super hard to deal with. Also a beast opening that I've been using lately is the 3gate - 8 stalkers, 5 zealots at around 6:25. On December 10 2010 12:50 AndAgain wrote: The point that the OP made about zealots is really key. Blizzard's balance stats showed that protoss has at least a 55% win ratio against terrans in plat and below. Hardly anybody at that level knows how to micro against zealots. And he's also correct that protoss has the lowest skill cap. I don't know how anybody can argue against it. 1. Can't play reactionary (which is the theoretically superior style) because of restrictive tech tree. 2. Least harass options. 3. Can't take advantage of superior mechanics because you can't multitask as much as protoss or zerg given that you have to look at your base the most. 4. Gotta keep your army in a big ball and can't do multi-prong attacks as much as terran and zerg. I agree. I've ever only had about 5 opponents that properly micro'd. | ||
|
KevinIX
United States2472 Posts
| ||
|
TheLonelyCarrier
United States36 Posts
I am not such a great multi-tasker mind you. This is problematic for competitive RTS no matter what game/race you play but it is simply an unaffordable weakness if you want to play Zerg to their potential. On the other hand, my micro is pretty solid and I was always good at managing mixed unit groups with lots of activated abilities in War3. I gave Protoss a try and haven't looked back. I'm still perpetually stuck in bronze, but I am having a more rewarding experience because the race I am playing doesn't expose my weaknesses so badly and allows me to utilize my strengths more. While Protoss might have that obvious allure to War3 vets, that fun/allure factor can be mis-leading in RTS. Just because it feels or seems familiar doesn't mean it's the best for you. It sounds like you need to just decide what strengths of yours you want to be rewarded for and pick a race accodingly. A player of your skill should be able to work out the rest after that. | ||
|
RexFTW
United States172 Posts
| ||
|
Sanguinarius
United States3427 Posts
| ||
|
hitman133
United States1425 Posts
| ||
|
NearPerfection
232 Posts
On December 10 2010 13:44 RexFTW wrote: Try Blink stalkers. They have a high skillcap IMO. Yeah, blink stalkers are what sold me that my wc3 micro would make Protoss ridiculously strong. This was definately true early on where 4 gate and 2 gate colossi all ins were very good and people didn't know how to defend against them. However here is an analysis of the stalker which makes me kinda sad. Stalker vs Roach: In lower numbers (1-8 or so) stalker can be very effective against roaches. The reason for this is is having 2 range advantage and a slight movement speed advantage off-creep. 1a vs 1a the roach are going to lay down the hurt because stat wise and cost wise 2 roach > 1 stalker. However, once Roach speed becomes available the tables turn pretty hard, The movement speed of the roach is now even faster than the stalker off-creep, this effectively makes kiting much much less effective. Another thing to look at is how Roaches deal their damage, they have an attack speed of 2, but in return have a base damage of 16. The stalker on the other hand has a modified base damage of 14 against the roach, and an attack speed of 1.44. This has several consequences, On paper you think to yourself hmm, i have .66 seconds to attack and get out of range to avoid the volley of the front row roaches. If stalkers behaved like marines this wouldn't be a problem. However the difference between the marine and the stalker is that the marines attack is instant, and the attack animation is very short. The problem here for me lies with the delayed attack animation of the stalker. While Marines only have to stop moving for a fraction of a second, the stalker must visibly stop for a longer duration in order for its attack animation to execute and then it can move once again. During this time a concussive shell from a Marauder could land, a Roach volley could go off. etc. Back on topic with the Roach, Zerg players have a very strong technique to deny blink stalker micro. Conventional wisdom says blink back shield depleted stalkers and let more stalker shields tank the damage. A micro technique Speed Roach users can do to deny this is to simply not attack with 1a. With 1a only the front roaches in an arc attack the stalker and you can simply blink back. The correct way in most situations is to run your roaches straight up to the front of the Stalker and then have several rows of Roach attack, the front 2 stalker lines or more will instantly die with no time to blink back shield depleted stalker because they are already dead. This isn't even taking into account that Stalker's 14 dmg is a modified attack, Zerg users can augment Roaches with speedlings (which again do very well per cost against blink stalker) while the Roaches damage is unmodified, its going to do 16 damage vs your sentry, 16 damage vs your zealot and 16 damage vs your stalker. Basically what I'm trying to say is even with perfect blink stalker micro, cost for cost the stalker is still going to lose to Speed Roach. Which i feel isn't very fair from a racial standpoint because the Protoss player is using very high level micro on each one of his units individually while the player controlling the Roach is simply running up and then 1a. I'm not saying Roach > Stalker so Roach is imbalanced, I'm saying that my extra skill that i put into the fight is not being rewarded, which as a player can be quite frustrating. | ||
|
RexFTW
United States172 Posts
He sent 5 stalkers vs 4 marauders *with conc shell* and a marine and lost 0 stalker. Thats gosu. Yes the Terran was focus firing. Yes 2 stalkers were at 5 hp or so. (no blink) He has won about 5 games in a row in <10 mins on just stalker micro. | ||
|
Wodenborn
United States15 Posts
First, HongUn has proved how dangerous Stalkers are in SC2; he's famous for spamming out just that unit and microing his way to victory - with or without blink. Second, you have shown no understanding of macro. Your summation of macro is "everyone has it." You severely overvalue harassment because of this. There are countless GSL games where devastating harassment means NOTHING because the enemy can make units faster than you can kill them. You do not need killer micro and harassment if you have solid defense and way more shit. I'm sure every micro player feels the same way you do, but everyone else knows players who rely on their micro to win have a poor grasp of unit composition and economy and will inevitably meet their doom where a comparatively easy to perform counter to their dance-move-centric offense is found. Such is the nature of the metagame. Third, your entire point is based on the false idea that melee units are designed solely to deal damage. They are there to tank. Stalkers plus zealots beats a superhuman kiting genius with just stalkers because while the his stalkers are picking off zealots without taking a hit, my stalkers are shooting his with complete protection. HongUn, to bring this full circle, lost to a small number of hydras with roach/ling support in just this fashion. | ||
|
RexFTW
United States172 Posts
I dont feel like stalkers are that amazing vs zerg. (Im a zerg player) You need to hit a timing with them and that is before speed. Once they have speed you need higher tech units to deal with roaches. | ||
|
Kyandid
Canada124 Posts
in Wc3 the grunt has 700 hp and the archer has 135 hp, the grunts damage is 18-21 with a 50% bonus vs medium armor (archer) the archer does 8-9 damage with slightly faster attack rate but no bonus. what fucking game where you playing | ||
| ||
