Protoss at the GSL - Page 23

On June 04 2011 23:23 aksfjh wrote:


On some level, he has a point. If MC was still in, this topic probably wouldn't be here.

On June 04 2011 23:33 crabz wrote:
mods must play protoss otherwise i see no reason why this bs topic filled with whine of bronze players would be still open

On June 04 2011 23:47 Iamyournoob wrote:


I don't know what you are talking about but the reason this thread is still open is that there is quite a good discussion going on here.

Protoss players have never really been satisfied with the design of their race - neither during the phases of P being so "ridiculously OP" nore right now where a lot of players are struggling.
At the core it all revolves around Warpgate and FF. So I would like some more Terrans and Zerg bitch and whine about FF so that it will get removed or completely reworked so that sentries will become a support unit rather than a core unit. In return Stalkers and Zealots should get useful without FF of course so that they can actually win in a straight up battle against Z and T Tier 1.

On June 04 2011 23:54 rpgalon wrote:


yeah, if they rework the sentry, (nerf FF), and make zealot stalker stronger, I can see protoss doing multi-pronged attacks, drops, moving arround, but the way it is now... they need to stick together with sentries to stand a chance. lol, even in the start of the game, protoss need balls to stand a chance.

On June 04 2011 23:57 tymt wrote:
"When zergs are losing all zergplayers cry, when toss players are losing we get back to the drawing board and work out new good strats" - Protoss player some weeks ago.

Clearly.

On June 05 2011 00:00 ForTheDr3am wrote:


4-Gate would be unstoppable though, unfortunately.

On June 05 2011 00:00 ForTheDr3am wrote:


4-Gate would be unstoppable though, unfortunately.

On June 04 2011 22:35 Rabiator wrote:

Greed isnt the same as taking a risk ... strategywise. I really meant they should stop thinking about "the death ball", because thats how Protoss operates nowadays. I just threw out some suggestions and they might be worth it, even though they dont seem to be that cost efficient (sniping a Spire / Infestation Pit before the Zerg can get a huge number of those units can be worth sacrificing two Immortals and a Warp Prism for example). I leave the details to the experts, but Zerg have stopped having one ball of units and started doing multi-pronged attacks and ling-run-bys and whatever and are successful just like Terrans always were with the multi-drops of Marauders / Marines.

Its time for Protoss to do it as well, but they might want to do it with a mix of non-standard units like their air units. Only a few Void Rays and Phoenix are enough to kill a WEAK air defense in a base and trigger a necessary powerful response. Yet another way to force your opponent to do things he didnt really want to do and maybe even a reason to finally get a Carrier or two ... Please dont whine about expensive techs, because Terrans have to get a Starport or two against Protoss and Zerg have to get their tech 3 as well ...

Its time for Protoss to build a spare Robo now ... and those Stargates to throw off the opponents by showing a handful of Void Rays inbetween battles and to force an excess of Vikings, Hydras or Corruptors. Chronoboost is an awesome tool to be able to switch fast enough between techs and to surprise your opponent.

On June 05 2011 00:16 MK_Shao wrote:
My solution to this problem to fix this match up is :

1) Make stalkers better : Lets be honest, they're terrible right now. Protoss pretty much keeps them in their army to shoot 'up' (which they're horrible AA but the best toss has beside phoenix) and to fodder behind FF, and to blink. Stalker cost an outragous 125-75 which is REALLY expensive, while roaches cost 75-25.... are you fucking serious?

Make stalkers stack better with Ug's along with roaches, so that even with blink micro, you may actually find them useful. Also, give stalkers +1 Attack right away (without UGs) This way, they might actually fight against mauraders (which they lose horribly to atm). This would make upgraded stalkers useful, without having a stupid reliance on force fields to pick off stray units because your stalkers cant engage directly. Lastly, because stalkers will be doing much more damage, sniping baneling overlords will be much easier.

On June 05 2011 00:16 MK_Shao wrote:
3) Make banelings costs 50-50 and 1 Supply : This fixes alot of problems in TvZ AND PvZ

I know all of us have been watching a stream, or gsl, and have been saying "Holy shit, thats way to many banelings to be appropiate". I believe making banelings 50-50 will make "baneling bombs" on mineral lines actually cost something. I mean right now 100-100 is Nothing for a zerg to have a chance to take out 20+ workers, especially if they bomb multiple places. This will affect the mid-game and late-game, and will number banelings accordingly. As it currently stands, zergs can 1a 100 CHEAP banelings, and hit tanks, thors, etc. and still win (GSL games show this ALL the time).

Banelings costing 1 supply and being more expensive will force zerg to play much more cost efficent, rather then just literally throwing banelings away while remaking lings so that after the battle they can make 60 more banelings. As it currently stands, banelings do a FUCK ton of damage for their cost. Including the cost of the ling, 37-25 to splash for over 40+. That seems really imbalanced when you put it like that. With banelings costing a supply, Zerg would have to micro properly and make sure not to just roll in 80 banelings in front of tanks.

Strange opinion. Stalkers are the most important part of PvZ right now. The colossi/HT etc. are the big damage dealers but the stalker backbone is the key part of the army. Currently there's tons of blink stalker play and delaying the big aoe units while relying on blink stalkers is quite common. The retention of the stalkers normally means a P army can get better and better as things go on. Stalkers aren't in the army PvZ just to shoot up. They are the most important units in a P army.

On June 05 2011 00:16 MK_Shao wrote:
1500 Masters Toss here; I believe now toss is just way to weak against zerg. This is because Roaches cost 33% of a stalker (Yes, if you convert gas) and a roach ALMOST can 1v1 a stalker. Next time you see a ball of roaches, take the number of roaches, and fight with a third of that many stalkers and see what happens

1 +1 Roach and 1 +1 stalker, the roach wins :/

This along with fungal being completely broken (For any lower league players, fungal is used in 99% of games in high masters/GM)

I was once 200/200 against a zerg max with 160/200, he had 2 brood lords, and I had like 3 cols, 4HT, 3 immortals alot of blink stalkers with a touch of sentries (standard army mix) He fungaled my group twice, so I couldnt move, or blink, or move cols, OR move up HT.

After 2-3 fungals my army was deead and I was at 90 supply, while he was at 140.... Even though I had more bases then him, I lost in the end.

My solution to this problem to fix this match up is :

1) Make stalkers better : Lets be honest, they're terrible right now. Protoss pretty much keeps them in their army to shoot 'up' (which they're horrible AA but the best toss has beside phoenix) and to fodder behind FF, and to blink. Stalker cost an outragous 125-75 which is REALLY expensive, while roaches cost 75-25.... are you fucking serious?

Make stalkers stack better with Ug's along with roaches, so that even with blink micro, you may actually find them useful. Also, give stalkers +1 Attack right away (without UGs) This way, they might actually fight against mauraders (which they lose horribly to atm). This would make upgraded stalkers useful, without having a stupid reliance on force fields to pick off stray units because your stalkers cant engage directly. Lastly, because stalkers will be doing much more damage, sniping baneling overlords will be much easier.

2) Make Fungal Growth SLOW not Immobile : You can move out of storm, and EMP doesnt cripple your army as much as fungal (although it still hurts). Being fungal does ridiculous damage to your army WHILE immobiling them... what the fuck!?

Storm only does 1 of those . With the cost effectiveness of roaches combined with the fact that fungal keep units from moving, blinking, or MICROING in general, toss has no chance. Fungal growth currently doesnt allow for micro, its saying your units are in this 1 spot, and cannot be microed any other way ( if the zerg is good they will do over 50% of your armies health before engaging. Now, when you combine, fungal growth and neural parasite, you get this thing called a raping. With your units locks at the front, roaches engaging you with neural parasite on cols. immortals, HT, etc. Your useless. Althought this is somewhat to do with stalker being bad, its mainly the ability.

What I propose is having fungal SLOW your army (maybe to 50%) and you can still micro. This way, it still slows down pushes, but toss can micro to counter attack it. Example, during a big battle, they fungal + neural parsite, you can blink stalkers up and snipe the neural parasiting infestors; or you can move your HT and feedback infestors.

3) Make banelings costs 50-50 and 1 Supply : This fixes alot of problems in TvZ AND PvZ

I know all of us have been watching a stream, or gsl, and have been saying "Holy shit, thats way to many banelings to be appropiate". I believe making banelings 50-50 will make "baneling bombs" on mineral lines actually cost something. I mean right now 100-100 is Nothing for a zerg to have a chance to take out 20+ workers, especially if they bomb multiple places. This will affect the mid-game and late-game, and will number banelings accordingly. As it currently stands, zergs can 1a 100 CHEAP banelings, and hit tanks, thors, etc. and still win (GSL games show this ALL the time).

Banelings costing 1 supply and being more expensive will force zerg to play much more cost efficent, rather then just literally throwing banelings away while remaking lings so that after the battle they can make 60 more banelings. As it currently stands, banelings do a FUCK ton of damage for their cost. Including the cost of the ling, 37-25 to splash for over 40+. That seems really imbalanced when you put it like that. With banelings costing a supply, Zerg would have to micro properly and make sure not to just roll in 80 banelings in front of tanks.

Let me know what you guys think of the changes, I know its a long read, but I feel its worth it!

Thanks

On June 05 2011 00:25 MK_Shao wrote:


GSL, hongun vs revival RO32 Super tournament

Hongun in game 2 tried for a 6 gate stalker push and got completely denied just wirh roaches and lings, when revival later transitioned into hydra's. Just roaches (with little ling support) beat upgraded AND blink stalkers. Arent stalker suppose to be good against roaches?

Its time for Protoss to build a spare Robo now ... and those Stargates to throw off the opponents by showing a handful of Void Rays inbetween battles and to force an excess of Vikings, Hydras or Corruptors. Chronoboost is an awesome tool to be able to switch fast enough between techs and to surprise your opponent.

On June 05 2011 00:26 K3Nyy wrote:


I think if they make Stalkers better, 4gate would be ridiculously overpowered. I dunno.. Protoss has been going through a rough time. We need a Bisu to show us the way!