Right now as I'm watching the GSL super tournament on GOMTV, it is depressing to see how the badly the protoss players are doing. Most of the protoss are losing left and right to other races, with only HuK and MC still playing decent. It was nice to see how Trickster played, but now, even he is out...
If you think zerg is more fun, then sure. you should play what you enjoy most as races are pretty well balanced and any race can really come far. so if u like protoss, why is this a reason to change? the race is obviously very strong, look at naniwa for example.
Also, I believe the reason protoss is losing right now is not because of balance but other races figuring out how to deal with most common protoss strategies and too many MAJOR balance changes to protoss, like increasing warp gate research time, etc.
It kinda sucks that 2 of the best protoss players had to face each other in the first round. No one else comes even close in skill level (no disrespect to Huk).
Oh yeah... I remember that. He outmicro'ed the c%$# out of him...
One tournament doesn't make me want to race change, but looking at the amount of medals protoss got in the past, and looking at how they are doing now in the GSL, does make me
Very constructive post m8, really gives you a lot to think about.
It's obvious that threads like this just promote people whining about how underpowered their race is (I play Protoss FWIW). Besides, why would you want to play Zerg because Protoss are doing badly in one tournament? What about the StarsWar where the final 4 players are all Protoss, does that make you want to play Protoss again?
i think toss is always doing the worst in tourneys and thats just a fact from recent events to old 1's. there are very minimal tosses with success but nu mores terran players with success and the top players who play zerg just rape so hard. I don't know why but the game still needs some things fixed there are still imbalancess, they've made zerg so much stronger and toss weaker and terran weaker, even though terran was just ridiculous to begin with.
its honestly sad to me, I stopped watching pro games that protoss were not in.
There are 2 things I could say about it, 1) passive macro games by protoss were being lost to dumb mistakes and risky pushes 2) all other games were lots out right to a timing attack made by protoss or taken by protoss.
Protoss are indeed having some issues vs zerg with taking an expansion safely but I would not swap yet. When Roche's had range increase from 3 to 4 I wanted to swap b/c I could not forge expand but in time we found that it was still an option. be patient and enjoy the GSL games im sure at least 1 protoss will make it to round of 4.
On June 04 2011 02:57 Joseph123 wrote: well protoss has never been doing well in the GSL only MC has did so..
This is generally pretty true.
Outside of MC, Alicia, and some flashes of brilliance from San, the korean scene does not have many consistent or interesting protoss players.
Ace and Squirtle have failed to make a splash in the korean scene thus far, Anypro Tester and SangHo have all been inconsistent in performance and rarely bring anything interesting to the table.
I think it's pretty safe to say there has been no Protoss "hero" akin to MVP or Nestea. Sure, MC is likely the most successful player(winning-wise) to come out of Korea, but he hasn't revolutionized the race so much as just doing everything better.
Tl;dr: OP, inconsistent protoss performance is business as usual in the GSL.
Very constructive post m8, really gives you a lot to think about.
It's obvious that threads like this just promote people whining about how underpowered their race is (I play Protoss FWIW). Besides, why would you want to play Zerg because Protoss are doing badly in one tournament? What about the StarsWar where the final 4 players are all Protoss, does that make you want to play Protoss again?
I'm not saying protoss are underpowered, but if most pros have such a hard time playing it then what chance do I have to get good at it :/ Maybe it's a race reserved for very few special ppl like HuK and some others that have quad core brains ^^
Tl;dr: OP, inconsistent protoss performance is business as usual in the GSL.
Lol funny thing, your post was actually longer.. (but I did read it (; dw)
Zergs getting owned in a tourny = zerg UP Terran getting owned in a tour.... oh lolol ya right Toss getting owned in a tourny = bad players.
halarious.
Every post in this thread about balance as well as every post sayign "well they just played bad" should have a signature with the race YOU play.. I wonder if we'll see a correllation?????
I am glad this thread hasn't degenerated into imbalance whine, it goes to show the integrity of protoss players.
Instead of using our race as an excuse, we must use it as motivation. Even though zerg and terran are winning most of the matches, we still believe in our hearts that protoss is the strongest race. And it is up to us to show the world.
tbh i find korean protosses very lackluster. They have great zerg and terran players, but the only really good protosses as of now in korea are MC and Alicia. Hongun, Anypro, San, they all seem very average at best. In comparison, protoss players have been getting much better results in foreign tournaments, also the chinese seem quite strong (Starswar Ro4 beeing 4 protoss)
Because people are finally learning when protoss is vulnerable. If you hit them in that minute or two, they are pretty much dead, but if you let them macro it can get hard to play against them.
On June 04 2011 03:01 ErikZerg wrote: Protoss is still the best race just bad players
It's been proven that Protoss is the worst race. If you use perfect micro AI (some guy who actually programmed it), Protoss finishes dead last. The real fact is that more QQ players play zerg.
The only thing preventing Protoss players right now from doing extremely bad is that players have not reached anywhere near the skill ceiling, but Protoss has been mostly figured out. (Essentially because the possibility branching tree for Protoss is always less deep than the other two races.)
On June 04 2011 03:09 kagemucha wrote: Has everyone forgot about Inca? GSL May finalist? I think he's up there with MC/Alicia as the Top 3.
And it's okay, MC will roll over everyone at MLG columbus, restoring faith in the protoss race.
Inca seems to be a one trick pony having excellent results in the vP matchup, mixed in vT, and terror in the vZ. He needs to chuck an MVP (so to speak) and become a more well rounded played (even if that means sacrificing some practice against other protoss players) to improve his game. Definitely not 'Top 3'.
On June 04 2011 03:10 Rasky wrote: Zerg is now the OP race if you ask me. Recently zergs have been doing very well protoss not so much.
Zerg is not OP, and never has or will be. I feel like there just aren't many great korean protoss besides MC and Alicia. Zerg has Nestea, July, Losira, and some great up-and-comers like DRG and Min. And there are just a dickload of terran players, all with great potential (slayers, anyone?) that it makes the rest of the toss seem comparatively lack-luster.
I dont think protoss is weak by any chance. One tournament doesnt tell much, but one thing we can see for certainly is that TERRAN is not atleast underpowered. If terrans QQ about balance is just lack of skill. And hongun's and genius' games were just horrible played by protoss, they could have held all the roach rushes by chronoing some immortals instead of teching straight to colossus. Maybe lack of scouting, i dont know.
Oh and btw, its just stupid argument that protoss players are generally worse than for example terran players. Maybe the reason is like you cant use skill mechanics such as good multitasking when playing protoss.
On June 04 2011 03:12 Slayth wrote: Because people are finally learning when protoss is vulnerable. If you hit them in that minute or two, they are pretty much dead, but if you let them macro it can get hard to play against them.
I'm not sure that's the problem. At least against zerg, it seems that zergs have figured out that if the protoss fast expands, the zerg is pretty safe from anything for a long long time, so they're able to expand and drone like crazy.
Eventually their economy is so big that they get a massive influx of supply that protoss hasn't been able to keep up with.
That's what seems to be happening when I watch the pros.
metagame is shitfting towards Zerg nowadays, this plus the Zerg-maps(Bel'Shir Beach is very zergy IMO).
I just wonder if this will last as long as the P dominance lasted...
BSB is getting voted out almost every time, sometimes even by zerg players. And I wouldn't say zerg have the upper hand, terran are doing quite nicely as well I think. It's just hard to see good protoss games right now at the GSL.
Like some people here have mentioned, the Korena scene does have very few good protoss players, maybe that will give HuK an advantage. I'm putting all my hopes in him and Alicia..
as a protoss player, all of the games i saw when a P was eliminated i felt like either the toss just played bad or got destroyed by a timing push that they couldnt scout. biggest example of playing bad would be killer, and the biggest example of getting destroyed due to being greedy (aka not teching to colossi/ht instantly) would be trickster who tried to fe vs 2rax pushes....which i find to be retarded...T can expand off of a 2rax push which kills the P's expansion if P is on less than 3 gates >.> granted trickster was trying to rely on sentries which got emp'd instantly
edit: im with the post above me, alicia and huk all the way :D
terran got stomped for some while after the stim nerf, warp gates are something pretty similar. consider that pros are way more perfect in timings and if those are thrown all your game sense is just wrong. What held before doesn't hold now. Just remember ~. After an early game nerf, do a normal timing push against the nerfed race that s considered holdable they will most likely lose too it hehe, the higher they are the longer it will take them to adjust (just because they need to get closer to perfection again then a lower player).
As for the gsl directly i think its a bit map related. At the start they looked toss imba, but i guess its a bit more difficult once it goes over the 3rd base ^^.
On June 04 2011 03:01 ErikZerg wrote: Protoss is still the best race just bad players
It's been proven that Protoss is the worst race. If you use perfect micro AI (some guy who actually programmed it), Protoss finishes dead last. The real fact is that more QQ players play zerg.
It's amazing to me that people can actually believe this. Do you think that the moment you click Zerg for the first time your personality suddenly takes a wild swing and you magically develop an inferiority complex? Just because Idra whines about balance doesn't mean you can lump thousands of other players with him.
Does anyone happen to know the race break down of the super tournament? Like the guy above me said, Protoss either got destroyed by a timing they didn't see coming or it was just terrible playing. I don't think it has to do with the race but rather the quality of players who play Protoss. We have seen what MC and Alicia can do.
On June 04 2011 03:18 fadestep wrote: Protoss is overpowered bro and every time they lose it is a case of a horrible, Bronze level player losing on an overpowered race.
Likewise, Zerg is ridiculously weak but is played by exclusively the most gosu of players and is therefore able to win at will.
/signed,
Idra
pretty much summed up 99% of people that play zerg, not only idra.
On June 04 2011 03:18 fadestep wrote: Protoss is overpowered bro and every time they lose it is a case of a horrible, Bronze level player losing on an overpowered race.
Likewise, Zerg is ridiculously weak but is played by exclusively the most gosu of players and is therefore able to win at will.
/signed,
Idra
pretty much summed up 99% of people that play zerg, not only idra.
Protoss is much stronger in late game, those gate pushes became counterable. I still think protoss late game is stronger than zerg, but as we seen not only I think this way. All ZvP ends rather quick, because if toss gets HT colosai or colosai voiderays in good numbers it's just 2 much dps for zerg units. That's why we want to end it rather quick. Anyway if you look at Revival v Hongun it's clear that he prepared exactly for him and he did exactly same strat that he always does. Ez win for Revival.
On June 04 2011 03:19 ChineseWife wrote: from personal experience, whenever i beat a zerg, its because they played terribly. i dont see how a skilled zerg can lose to a protoss anymore
Words of wisdom there m8... Words of wisdom I tell you.
I feel that protoss is still such a young race... the strategy's are very easy to execute for toss right now the only thing that makes things different with players is just mechanic's/micro.
I feel that maybe we will finally see Protoss having to use chrono boost now for the whole game.... I don't know about anyone else but I'm sick of watching pro games where the Protoss has a combined 400 energy on his nexi 20 min into a game....
Do switch to zerg. There is the unforgiving larva inject mechanism and the constant dilemma to drone or make army units, which tosses don't have to deal with. Switch and see how easy it is. As for me, whenever I get random protoss, all I have to do is turtle for 90% of the game and then a-move. Scouting - optional for protoss, necessary for zerg (or else you'll overdrone, underdrone, or make the wrong counters). It just takes half as much effort into the game whenever I roll terran or toss.
On June 04 2011 03:18 fadestep wrote: Protoss is overpowered bro and every time they lose it is a case of a horrible, Bronze level player losing on an overpowered race.
Likewise, Zerg is ridiculously weak but is played by exclusively the most gosu of players and is therefore able to win at will.
/signed,
Idra
pretty much summed up 99% of people that play zerg, not only idra.
they should make forcefield less of a centre-piece of all protoss play, it's ridiculously important for pretty much any protoss comp. and it isn't even a fun mechanic to watch/play...
edit: you accomplish this by nerfing FF and buffing some other aspect (gate units perhaps)
Protoss usually only wins when they get to the "deathball" army or when they 6gate blink or something.
Nowadays Terrans and Zergs have learned to stop Protoss from reaching critical mass by harassing and timing attacks. Without critical mass, Protoss units are quite weak.
It has nothing to do with bad players or whatever. The race is just very awkward to play.
I wonder when the community will learn that this is only temporary phenomenom, exactly like many others past.
The pro scene is full of people dedicating their full time analyzing and dissecting builds, timings etc... not rarely the balance of power shifts to one side or another, just to be undone after a couple of weeks. It repeats for many many times, and will eventually reach BW scene levels, where (almost) everything is known and accounted for, but I feel it's far from that stage yet.
Seriously, take a minute to look back and see what I'm talking about. Zerg macro, forcefields, Terran as a whole, protoss deathballs, so on... every one of those was considered overpowered once. Hell, go look at the GSL May group selection, no one wanted anything to do with any protoss, and look what happened a month later.
Look at that shit. One could think that patches were the driving force behind those graphs, but you can compare the patch release dates with the QQ rankings that the main shifts came from important, landscape-changing builds/strategies displayed by the pros, such as when MC first showed the power of forcefields, or when MKP made marines counter banelings, etc...
Stop complaining, go work on solutions, or if you won't/can't just give the scene some time.
well following the protoss nerf and infestor buff, zergs have realized that a huge portion of the early game they are not threatened by the toss, especially in the form of 4 gate which is practically useless now. Combine that with mass infestor follow-up to the mid and late game,and you got yourself a playstyle that's actually really effective against the protoss in all parts of the game.
As a protoss in this matchup your early aggro options are limited to a few timing attacks and gimmicky stargate play that's easily counterable by any decent zerg ( plus the spore buff ).
I'm really convinced that infestors are way too powerful, especially fungal growth that's spammable and effective like an immobilizing storm at this point, and you get a nice air counter with the spammable infested marines.
and the reason that no one is complaining is because there is so much hate against any further balance discussion, especially from the side of zerg players who are silent at this point, and I'm pretty sure a lot of the good zergs would agree with me.
On June 04 2011 03:23 julianto wrote: Do switch to zerg. There is the unforgiving larva inject mechanism and the constant dilemma to drone or make army units, which tosses don't have to deal with. Switch and see how easy it is. As for me, whenever I get random protoss, all I have to do is turtle for 90% of the game and then a-move. Scouting - optional for protoss, necessary for zerg (or else you'll overdrone, underdrone, or make the wrong counters). It just takes half as much effort into the game whenever I roll terran or toss.
this, why don't you just do it ? before posting a slightly disguised imba-whine thread?
As much as I really hate to quote IdrA, he made a similar remark about Terran ages ago that I think applies properly with Protoss nowadays.
Can't remember the exact words, but it had something to do with a lot of Terran (or in this case Protoss) players all around getting inflated results due to imbalance and people just not knowing how to deal with them at the moment. Once a mixture of people trying out new things (ex. more infestor/ling play) coupled with a few nerfs to Toss (ex. KA nerf) and things were bound to balance out eventually. (ie. It became possible to beat Protoss again)
The people who are switching from Protoss to another race were clearly riding the FOTM while it lasted, while the ones who actually like Protoss as a race are still around.
Again, having Toss lose shouldn't be a surprise. Every race is supposed to lose. It's balance.
its NOT imbalance its a result of people figuring out how to deal with protoss and many protoss are doing well its silly to bring up MC because + Show Spoiler +
he lost a PvP
You obviously don't watch GSL THAT OFTEN because you only mentioned HuK, MC, and Trickster, which are only a few and generally they perform mediocre in tournaments (yes this extends to MC, lately he hasn't been getting results, but I do acknowledge he's done very well in the past)
To conclude, yes it's a change in results, yes its good. Race distribution is about even now, showing that this game has matured beyond "imbalance"
On June 04 2011 03:01 ErikZerg wrote: Protoss is still the best race just bad players
It's been proven that Protoss is the worst race. If you use perfect micro AI (some guy who actually programmed it), Protoss finishes dead last. The real fact is that more QQ players play zerg.
The only thing preventing Protoss players right now from doing extremely bad is that players have not reached anywhere near the skill ceiling, but Protoss has been mostly figured out. (Essentially because the possibility branching tree for Protoss is always less deep than the other two races.)
Not really a valid argument. As far as I'm aware it is nigh-impossible to teach AI how to forcefields. Why? Because FF is situational, it requires judgement of when to be used that an algorithm just wouldn't cut it. You cannot program a perfect forcefield AI, you'll end up having random forcefields wasted more than you want, or almost nothing at all. And the protoss early/mid game often relies quite a lot on sentires.
Do switch to zerg. There is the unforgiving larva inject mechanism and the constant dilemma to drone or make army units, which tosses don't have to deal with. Switch and see how easy it is. As for me, whenever I get random protoss, all I have to do is turtle for 90% of the game and then a-move. Scouting - optional for protoss, necessary for zerg (or else you'll overdrone, underdrone, or make the wrong counters). It just takes half as much effort into the game whenever I roll terran or toss.
You must play some really bad players then m8, I tried turtling and got my rear kicked to the moon by zerg taking over 70% of the map. Not saying zerg is OP, but I'm saying that you shouldn't do balance talks based on bad players.
On June 04 2011 02:57 Joseph123 wrote: well protoss has never been doing well in the GSL only MC has did so..
This is generally pretty true.
Outside of MC, Alicia, and some flashes of brilliance from San, the korean scene does not have many consistent or interesting protoss players.
Ace and Squirtle have failed to make a splash in the korean scene thus far, Anypro Tester and SangHo have all been inconsistent in performance and rarely bring anything interesting to the table.
I think it's pretty safe to say there has been no Protoss "hero" akin to MVP or Nestea. Sure, MC is likely the most successful player(winning-wise) to come out of Korea, but he hasn't revolutionized the race so much as just doing everything better.
Tl;dr: OP, inconsistent protoss performance is business as usual in the GSL.
no this is not "pretty true" if u consider 3 out of 4 people (anypro san mc) in march gsl top4 being protoss for example, inca making the finals in the last gsl etc.
for the playerbase protoss has in gsl ( i think they suck mostly ) they are doing extremely well
On June 04 2011 02:57 Joseph123 wrote: well protoss has never been doing well in the GSL only MC has did so..
This is generally pretty true.
Outside of MC, Alicia, and some flashes of brilliance from San, the korean scene does not have many consistent or interesting protoss players.
Ace and Squirtle have failed to make a splash in the korean scene thus far, Anypro Tester and SangHo have all been inconsistent in performance and rarely bring anything interesting to the table.
I think it's pretty safe to say there has been no Protoss "hero" akin to MVP or Nestea. Sure, MC is likely the most successful player(winning-wise) to come out of Korea, but he hasn't revolutionized the race so much as just doing everything better.
Tl;dr: OP, inconsistent protoss performance is business as usual in the GSL.
This is so damn true, couldn't agree more.
Also OP if you would like to see better performance of protoss, check the starswar tournament. All semifinals is protoss. I believe the guy named XiaoT won like 2-0 against opponents like + Show Spoiler +
EGIdrA, MarineKingPrime.WE and San
. Chinese protoss scene seems much stronger than the Korean one, which only has aces like MC and Alicia mostly.
Protoss used to dominate, then Zerg figured out new things, now Zerg dominates, then Protoss will figure out new things and will dominate again and so on.
Until the game will be completely figured out, there will be shifts like this were races have higher win percentages over some short periods of time.
So op want to switch to zerg because protoss are doing badly at the moment? Zerg was doing badly a lot longer than the current trend of protoss doing it. It wasn't long ago since most post on these forums shouted imba whenever a protoss won (which they did a lot). I don't get the people that just want to switch race at every shift in the balance between the races. And to use the gsl as the main reason is just ridiculous unless you are actually near that level of play yourself.
protoss players are really really bad as far as I can tell. resorting to all ins/gimmicky plays and even going so far as to do the same strat 3 times in one bo7 series. (inca)
protoss needs a hero. A safe, macro oriented and reactionary, hero.
So here are some quantitative numbers: Since the Warp Nerf Protoss has a 13-28 record in the GSL vs other races. This means that a Toss that loses 1-2 is actually doing better than the average Toss.
Definitely Protoss is struggling right now, but it is not clear to me that this is a UP issue as much as a strain on players by forcing them to learn all new timings. If you forced all of the protoss players to switch races they would do even worse because they have more experience with Protoss, not for power reasons. For the same reason I think the warp nerf has undone many hours/months of work on the timings of various builds essentially leaving Toss players with less experience than the players of other races.
It may turn out that Toss is UP, but it is still too early to make any conclusions.
On June 04 2011 03:23 julianto wrote: Do switch to zerg. There is the unforgiving larva inject mechanism and the constant dilemma to drone or make army units, which tosses don't have to deal with. Switch and see how easy it is. As for me, whenever I get random protoss, all I have to do is turtle for 90% of the game and then a-move. Scouting - optional for protoss, necessary for zerg (or else you'll overdrone, underdrone, or make the wrong counters). It just takes half as much effort into the game whenever I roll terran or toss.
If something is harder to execute doesn't really have to do something with balance of the races. It's important that it is balnced, if you do everything you have to with that race.
protoss still wins 66% against zerg you retards. protoss is just a flawed race where the best zerg can't do anything but the protoss can't win against terran because protoss is so easy they can't find a way to improve their play. if anything blizzard needs to remove the race from the game because P matchups are always boring, so much so that T can only go MMM and Z can only make roaches, unless it's some cutesy timing push or coinflip strat
On June 04 2011 03:33 Ancient.sc wrote: It's just a phase of the game development.
Protoss used to dominate, then Zerg figured out new things, now Zerg dominates, then Protoss will figure out new things and will dominate again and so on.
Until the game will be completely figured out, there will be shifts like this were races have higher win percentages over some short periods of time.
Toss never dominated like zerg is, at least statistically, in Korea.
On June 04 2011 03:23 julianto wrote: Do switch to zerg. There is the unforgiving larva inject mechanism and the constant dilemma to drone or make army units, which tosses don't have to deal with. Switch and see how easy it is. As for me, whenever I get random protoss, all I have to do is turtle for 90% of the game and then a-move. Scouting - optional for protoss, necessary for zerg (or else you'll overdrone, underdrone, or make the wrong counters). It just takes half as much effort into the game whenever I roll terran or toss.
On June 04 2011 03:36 elitesniper420 wrote: protoss still wins 66% against zerg you retards. protoss is just a flawed race where the best zerg can't do anything but the protoss can't win against terran because protoss is so easy they can't find a way to improve their play. if anything blizzard needs to remove the race from the game because P matchups are always boring, so much so that T can only go MMM and Z can only make roaches, unless it's some cutesy timing push or coinflip strat
You heard it here first folks, remove Protoss, why aren't you working for blizzard with your ingenious solutions?
On June 04 2011 03:36 elitesniper420 wrote: protoss still wins 66% against zerg you retards. protoss is just a flawed race where the best zerg can't do anything but the protoss can't win against terran because protoss is so easy they can't find a way to improve their play. if anything blizzard needs to remove the race from the game because P matchups are always boring, so much so that T can only go MMM and Z can only make roaches, unless it's some cutesy timing push or coinflip strat
On June 04 2011 03:35 Let it Raine wrote: protoss players are really really bad as far as I can tell. resorting to all ins/gimmicky plays and even going so far as to do the same strat 3 times in one bo7 series. (inca)
protoss needs a hero. A safe, macro oriented and reactionary, hero.
Protoss is indeed looking like they're going through some trouble again. Though I think it's more a metagame thing. You guys will find the way soon. Zerg is not underpowered..don't listen to those whiners. Terran seems to be doing the best in Korea overall. Seems like koreans really know how to play that race to it's max potential
On June 04 2011 03:28 Atila wrote: its NOT imbalance its a result of people figuring out how to deal with protoss and many protoss are doing well its silly to bring up MC because + Show Spoiler +
he lost a PvP
You obviously don't watch GSL THAT OFTEN because you only mentioned HuK, MC, and Trickster, which are only a few and generally they perform mediocre in tournaments (yes this extends to MC, lately he hasn't been getting results, but I do acknowledge he's done very well in the past)
To conclude, yes it's a change in results, yes its good. Race distribution is about even now, showing that this game has matured beyond "imbalance"
Well both MC and Trickster are out... As I said, I'm putting my hopes in HuK and Alicia (in that order). Trickster's play style was far from good... And sadly MC got beat by Alicia in the PVP match up. HuK beat San, in yet another PvP... It's also lot of bad luck with the match making.
I can't believe some of the stuff I'm reading in this thread, some the comments would only make sense 6 months ago. With the buffs to zerg and nerfs to toss along with lingering undressed issues, protoss is not what it once was. I personally think that the nerfs designed to "fix" pvp, put protoss over the tipping point and have hurt toss greatly in every matchup. A 4 gate rush in pvp is still hard to stop if you don't have 4 gates, but in the other matchups I don't think it's that people can't win by 4 gating but that the threat isn't there. I loved 4 gating zergs, but it was razor thin whether or not it held and game deciding. With that threat being 20 seconds later, it is 2x easier for zerg to hold. Also, that 20 seconds also means that when a protoss 3gate expands against zerg they only have 3 or 4 units and warp isn't done when they want to put down the nexus. Just setting back every potential warp in 20 seconds has opened the door for zergs to deny the natural. Meanwhile zerg can expand at 15 food and toss can't do anything but try to force a few units early instead of drones.
Another issue for protoss in every matchup is that protoss is very reliant on FF's and Colossus. When zergs deal with FF's by doing bane drops or roach burrow, it looks like most protoss's (at least that I've seen) don't have any answer. Terrans are getting emp earlier and 1 good emp is GG, people say "spread out your units" but there are situations where you can't do that, like when defending a ramp or pretty much anytime you engage a bio ball early to mid game, if your army spreads out, it will get stim-a moved and evaporate. Colossus are getting hard countered by vikings, corruptors, and neural parasite. When a zerg fungals the death ball, there is nothing protoss can do but watch, it stops your air, your blink, pulling your colossus back.
Also, the cost to get blink and charge are absurd if you compare them to any other upgrades for zerg or terrans early units. For example the cost to get twilight and charge is the same as a terran getting a tech lab + stim + combat shield + concussive. The stalker is a huge issue too, toss has to use them, but their long cooldown combined with only getting +1 per upgrade means that the more upgrades terran or zerg gets the worse stalkers scale against them. When you realize that 1 stalker has a slightly lower dps than a single UNstimmed marine, and that they can afford almost 4 marines for the cost of 1 stalker, or that roaches can me made almost 2 to 1 for cost and scale better with upgrades it makes it clear that stalkers are terrible for their cost. Colossus have become a liability for protoss in many ways as well because of the continuing trend towards macro heavy play and macro maps. Colossus slow down the protoss army, and they must be protected, and for you opponent they are always expected. It gets very difficult to defend your bases after the 3rd because protoss can't just throw units away and it's very hard to split your army and deal with threats at multiple locations cost effectively.
Then there are issues with unit counters, hydras are excellent against zealots and stalkers, but they also rape immortals and voids. MM does great against zealots and stalkers, but marines also rape voids and immortals. But toss needs obs so the only safe and logical option is colossus.
As it is, protoss has to back its self into a corner or choke and use FF and Colossus so the range of its units can make its dps higher than the front line their opponents, but it has slowly been figured out how to deal with FF's and Colossus. The protoss army gets crushed $ for $ to almost anything without FF, and colossus.
I have little hope that any of this will be corrected until HOTS. I think there are core design issues with protoss that require the addition of units and abilities, or the removal of some from other races for the issue to be worked out.
FF are absolutely at the base of all the problems, they are too strong in some situations. But once the opponent has a tech to make them ineffective toss is really handicapped. I think the same is true for colossus.
BTW this whole argument that all the toss players are just not as good as the other races players is complete bullshit. It's just like how Terran has had better tourney results than toss and zerg combined and had 40-50% of the top 200 throughout Sc2's history and people say "well that just means that better players choose terran" If you honestly believe it works like that, your logic is so flawed it makes 99% of what you say worth ignoring.
On June 04 2011 03:33 Ancient.sc wrote: It's just a phase of the game development.
Protoss used to dominate, then Zerg figured out new things, now Zerg dominates, then Protoss will figure out new things and will dominate again and so on.
Until the game will be completely figured out, there will be shifts like this were races have higher win percentages over some short periods of time.
Toss never dominated like zerg is, at least statistically, in Korea.
protoss still wins 66% against zerg you retards. protoss is just a flawed race where the best zerg can't do anything but the protoss can't win against terran because protoss is so easy they can't find a way to improve their play. if anything blizzard needs to remove the race from the game because P matchups are always boring, so much so that T can only go MMM and Z can only make roaches, unless it's some cutesy timing push or coinflip stratLast edit: 2011-06-04 03:37:10
No they don't. There are no statistics that support the argument that at this point in the game Protoss is winning 2 out of 3 matches against Zerg. And your understanding of the diversity of P matchups is laughable. Any Terran who neglects Ghosts and Vikings will lose these days, end there are lots of builds that mix in some mech units to favorable results. Infestors and Corruptors are de rigueur in ZvP, and banelings are showing up more and more, and even the Roach-heaviest strats do eventually mix in some Hydras.
Protoss is not UP. Nor are they a "flawed" race with some sort of rock-paper-scissors dynamic with Z and T. Protoss is fully capable of beating the other two races, and the other two races are fully capable of beating Protoss, and in each matchup there are a number of viable builds and strats on each side.
Races have their ups and downs, and matchup balance swings on a pendulum. One side comes up with a new build or strat or playstyle that shifts the matchup in their favor for a bit, and then eventually the other side adapts and responds. Patches make things even more unstable as there is a period where players must adjust. Protoss had a while where they couldn't get past the Ro8, then MC won multiple championships, now they had a bad month. None of this means Protoss is OP, or UP, its just the normal ebb and flow of the game.
I think Protoss needs to mix in Archons, Immortals, and Voidrays into their composition. Colossus is getting too predictable. Zealot, Archons, Immortal, Templar, Stalker. And they need like 10 obs spread around the whole map so they can detect any movements.
I don't think I'm qualified to talk about balance... I do think however there are fluctuations in the metagame due to the balance patches. I don't think anything has been drastic enough to claim Protoss UP, so we should give it some time to stabilize.
However, I 100% agree that the whole Protoss OP sentiment was directly correlated with MC's rise. Apart from him, I think Alicia is great but overhyped, very similar to Losira in a sense. (Lost 7 of his last 10, huge weakness vs Terran).
It's going to be interesting at MLG to see if there is a new metagame twist to Protoss play.
I don't understand how you can make such a thread which is only based on a single tournament and then not even know which protoss is in or out. That means you don't even know how it happened. Also, choosing a race to play by looking at how they do in tournaments does not seem to be a clever way. Either play the race you like the most or the one you are best with and if you are lucky it is the same.
On June 04 2011 03:33 Ancient.sc wrote: It's just a phase of the game development.
Protoss used to dominate, then Zerg figured out new things, now Zerg dominates, then Protoss will figure out new things and will dominate again and so on.
Until the game will be completely figured out, there will be shifts like this were races have higher win percentages over some short periods of time.
Actually Protoss never dominated anything except for Idra.
I don't think any statistic showed that Protoss ever dominated Zergs the way Zergs are dominating Protoss now.
I think Mothership Templar would be good against a Terran in Midgame. But then again they can emp and reveal your units with scans... I was thinking it would force them into vikings.
One side of the fence we have the IdrA-infuenced zerg crowd, who have been whining about being UP since the game got into beta.
On the other side we have Protoss players who are fed up with being called skilless retards by angry zergs.
And sitting on the fence we have terrans, who are like "whatever we are the hardest race anyways"
Also if you are just to judge of tournament results you could say the game is pretty darned closed to balanced. In fact, as long as there is some players able to win tournamens with every race the game is fine.
I think Mothership Templar would be good against a Terran in Midgame. But then again they can emp and reveal your units with scans... I was thinking it would force them into vikings.
How did you think that was going to work out well?
its because slayers players dont have many tosses and they own GSL lol but take a look at ace for example, he did a pretty damn good job even tho fruitdealer played awesome
protoss is still good but their lack of creativity has caused them to fall behind in the metagame sort of like 2 months ago when terran could beat protoss. Except terran figured out how to win despite protoss getting buffed during that time -_-
As far as I am concerned there are only 6-7 amazing protoss in the world right now. (Mc, Ace, Naniwa, Squirtle, Alicia, Xaiot, Hasuobs, and Huk is close if he can show some good play against Polt)
Squirtle -> knocked out by marineking -> understandable
Ace -> has to play MarineKing next
MC -> knocked out by Alicia
Alicia -> has to play Byun next
SangHo, Genius, Tester, Huk, Choya, San, Inca, LegalMind, and anypro are all weak at some things and failed to impress me as a viewer. They either have a matchup they are terrible in or they rode their race to the top (Sorry San, after the amulet nerf you seem to have just completely fizzled...)
Zerg also lost Fruit, Moon, July, and Losira pretty early.
It just happens that some of the best players meet each other in the Ro64, especially the good protoss.
In the first game Genius tried a timing push but simply waited to long so min had roaches with speed and burrow. Once he defended the initial push he countered with mass roach and won. where is the roach timing push here exactly?
In game 2 it was 2base vs 5 of min where genius had an army but never attacked mins base since min always countered with muta's wich eventually became to much and it became a silly base trade where genius went back to his base and all he had were 2buildings and his army. There was not 1roach in that game.
On June 04 2011 02:57 Joseph123 wrote: well protoss has never been doing well in the GSL only MC has did so..
This is generally pretty true.
Outside of MC, Alicia, and some flashes of brilliance from San, the korean scene does not have many consistent or interesting protoss players.
Ace and Squirtle have failed to make a splash in the korean scene thus far, Anypro Tester and SangHo have all been inconsistent in performance and rarely bring anything interesting to the table.
I think it's pretty safe to say there has been no Protoss "hero" akin to MVP or Nestea. Sure, MC is likely the most successful player(winning-wise) to come out of Korea, but he hasn't revolutionized the race so much as just doing everything better.
Tl;dr: OP, inconsistent protoss performance is business as usual in the GSL.
Hmmm... Nothing innovative from MC? Yes he might not have the high round consistency of Nestea or MVP, he definitely has changed protoss completely. It went from the race of desperately trying to survive to collosus into high-templar or void ray cheeses to the race of void ray expands, 2 base gateway forcefield timing pushes, during GSL S3. In GSL March, he basically premiered the low-to-no collosus style of PvZ/T. Lately, vs. Ryung, he showed some dominating play with Templar.
So in consistency, I would say MC is behind MVP and Nestea, but I think he is definitely innovative, and at his peak, close or surpassing their level!
How does seeing Protoss players performing badly make you feel like you shouldn't be playing Protoss? If anything it should make you want to play it even more.
This would have been technically switched the week before since the Group B Toss players this is most focusing on went 3-0 in PvZ in the Ro64 (Ace over FD 2-1, Hongun over Moon 2-1, Tester over yugioh 2-0). It just happened that the three toss than lost to zergs...and TheBest...in the next round.
It's all about the time and context since everyone was still crying in the Round of 64 about the OP of toss. That being said, I agree with the points to actually watch the games...they were pretty terrible from both sides. It is true that Toss do pretty poorly in GSLs though with minor exceptions.
As someone who plays all three races, but especially protoss and zerg, I feel that protoss is kind of weak at the moment. It might be something we have not figured out yet, but regardless, it is incredibly hard and if the proper timings are abused, protoss has absolutely zero room to breathe and a big chance of losing.
Versus terran there are simply tons of stuff they can do, and you really have no idea which one, so you prepare for multiple. Scouting early is difficult and close to impossible once the marine comes out. Are they going fast ghost marauder marine? Are they doing the annoying tank banshee marine thing? Fast drops? Just marauder marine? Banshees? There are tons of possibilities. And with each build, tons of timings that can be used. The marauder and bunker generally prevents you from harassing, or doing anything that involves skill, unless you take a huge gamble, because there is no way that you can get behind-- then the timing pushes just kill you. You have to wait with taking your extra base till you know Terran takes it on most maps, this counts for your third as well. Its just very very difficult and if you want to play a tad safe, youre forced to play extremely reactive. One mistake and there are no units to get you back in to the game: the protoss units simply do not allow for a lot of skill input. They are kind of straight forward, attack move units, almost wc3esque with our a-click units as heroes (sup colossus).
Versus zerg, early harassment is also almost all-in. Either one base or two base. You get behind, then youre forced to turtle up and there's simply not much more to do than that. Wait till you have a huge army, defend, and move out. Zerg is just incredibly strong at the moment and the only way to deal with it is go (semi) all in with a huge push and pray that the opponent doesnt have the macro, or try to secure bases and move out when youre psy capped.
This is why I wished that I played terran. Its units are so mobile, so versatile, and the harass units mix into the regular army so incredibly well (sup banshee). You can come back from behind (see TvT and TvZ) because your units allow for a lot of skill input. And zergs can actually take expands on big maps agressively. Bleh.
In general, protoss is truly the practice race. It is kind of what zerg was before T_T. You play full reactionary, then every tiny mistake gets punished. You try to (somewhat) dicatate the game? then youre almost all-in.
Inside of korea protoss is really awkward. You have people like anypro and inca who have been in the gsl forever but are awful. You have people like hongun and sangho that are pretty bad but stick around somehow. You have MC who was unbeatable for a time just doing gimmicky builds. You have San who is trying to play macro games and having some success. Then you have Alicia who is the only one who has shown he is compentant at playing a macro game. Really, he is the only one I'd ever want to learn from.
It is weird because protosses in NA/EU win tournaments with builds that korean protosses do and get smashed. It makes me think it is game design rather than talent; any time a protoss has time to prepare for a gsl match what does he come up with? A gimmicky timing attack, most likely. If these are the players that are grinding double digit hours a day and that is the only thing they can come up with, I am very worried for protoss in the future.
On June 04 2011 03:54 skrzmark wrote: I think Mothership Templar would be good against a Terran in Midgame. But then again they can emp and reveal your units with scans... I was thinking it would force them into vikings.
they only need emp to both clear ur mana AND reveal ur units... emp has like 10 functions.
On June 04 2011 04:06 Alejandrisha wrote: Inside of korea protoss is really awkward. You have people like anypro and inca who have been in the gsl forever but are awful. You have people like hongun and sangho that are pretty bad but stick around somehow. You have MC who was unbeatable for a time just doing gimmicky builds. You have San who is trying to play macro games and having some success. Then you have Alicia who is the only one who has shown he is compentant at playing a macro game. Really, he is the only one I'd ever want to learn from.
It is weird because protosses in NA/EU win tournaments with builds that korean protosses do and get smashed. It makes me think it is game design rather than talent; any time a protoss has time to prepare for a gsl match what does he come up with? A gimmicky timing attack, most likely. If these are the players that are grinding double digit hours a day and that is the only thing they can come up with, I am very worried for protoss in the future.
I think protoss is quite easy to get good with as it does not allow for that much skill input. So al ot of practice pays off in that regard. But its insanely hard to get truly good with for that same reason. You simply can not do all that much with your units. Outmacroing is out of the question: you cant take bases ahead of your opponent. There's a reason they come up with gimmicky timing attacks.
Protosss is just the sad mix between sc2 and wc3, and therefore rarely, if ever, fun to watch T_T. Only maps can camouflage the sadness that is protoss. Some big maps produce fun situations (e.g. terrans running all over the place and protoss following, or protoss actually doing multi prong attacks).
Cant believe that the zergs are still whining nowadays. Zerg is sick strong atm :D
On June 04 2011 03:54 skrzmark wrote: I think Mothership Templar would be good against a Terran in Midgame. But then again they can emp and reveal your units with scans... I was thinking it would force them into vikings.
they only need emp to both clear ur mana AND reveal ur units... emp has like 10 functions.
There's absolutely NO WAY that you can get those units out. There are 10 different attacks that kill you.
It's just another shift in the game like a previous GSL when Protoss was steamrolling Zerg and Terran and a similar discussion was taking place. In general Protoss players were relying on Gateway/Colossus with 3/3 upgrades, so Terran adapted with double Starport and double Engineering Bay with at least 1 or 2 Armories. This will continue to be the case as the game matures, but if the OP wants to switch to Zerg go right ahead...or you could take this opportunity to be creative on ladder and see what you can come up with and stick to Protoss.
Even if no protoss gets into the Ro16, I don't think that's evidence enough to make a balance argument. The themes we see in the GSL is that the current playstyle seems fragile in the early game and powerful in the lategame. It's really up to us (and by us I mean protoss) to figure out how to adapt to overcome this problem. I'm sure in a couple months or less, someone will debut an entirely new opening and protoss will be back to being "OP" again.
The patch is new, the tactics are still fairly new, how can we possibly think we've already tried everything worth trying to overcome these problems?
That, and the fact that a lot of people are posting about things like how they want 4-gate to be good again. I don't think any progamer thus far has posted or spoken to the effect that they'd like to see 4-gate get stronger.
On June 04 2011 04:06 Alejandrisha wrote: Inside of korea protoss is really awkward. You have people like anypro and inca who have been in the gsl forever but are awful. You have people like hongun and sangho that are pretty bad but stick around somehow. You have MC who was unbeatable for a time just doing gimmicky builds. You have San who is trying to play macro games and having some success. Then you have Alicia who is the only one who has shown he is compentant at playing a macro game. Really, he is the only one I'd ever want to learn from.
It is weird because protosses in NA/EU win tournaments with builds that korean protosses do and get smashed. It makes me think it is game design rather than talent; any time a protoss has time to prepare for a gsl match what does he come up with? A gimmicky timing attack, most likely. If these are the players that are grinding double digit hours a day and that is the only thing they can come up with, I am very worried for protoss in the future.
I think protoss is quite easy to get good with as it does not allow for that much skill input. So al ot of practice pays off in that regard. But its insanely hard to get truly good with for that same reason. You simply can not do all that much with your units. Outmacroing is out of the question: you cant take bases ahead of your opponent. There's a reason they come up with gimmicky timing attacks.
Cant believe that the zergs are still whining nowadays. Zerg is sick strong atm :D
Dude zerg are not whining much. We are mad at protoss thinking zerg is strong vs protoss now because their weakest GSL players lost badly to zergs while the actually impressive ones like MC and Squirtle and Ace get knocked out by PvP and PvT
They see Inca getting smashed by NesTea an indicator that protoss are weak somehow..
On June 04 2011 04:06 Alejandrisha wrote: Inside of korea protoss is really awkward. You have people like anypro and inca who have been in the gsl forever but are awful. You have people like hongun and sangho that are pretty bad but stick around somehow. You have MC who was unbeatable for a time just doing gimmicky builds. You have San who is trying to play macro games and having some success. Then you have Alicia who is the only one who has shown he is compentant at playing a macro game. Really, he is the only one I'd ever want to learn from.
It is weird because protosses in NA/EU win tournaments with builds that korean protosses do and get smashed. It makes me think it is game design rather than talent; any time a protoss has time to prepare for a gsl match what does he come up with? A gimmicky timing attack, most likely. If these are the players that are grinding double digit hours a day and that is the only thing they can come up with, I am very worried for protoss in the future.
I think protoss is quite easy to get good with as it does not allow for that much skill input. So al ot of practice pays off in that regard. But its insanely hard to get truly good with for that same reason. You simply can not do all that much with your units. Outmacroing is out of the question: you cant take bases ahead of your opponent. There's a reason they come up with gimmicky timing attacks.
Cant believe that the zergs are still whining nowadays. Zerg is sick strong atm :D
Dude zerg are not whining much. We are mad at protoss thinking zerg is strong vs protoss now because their weakest GSL players lost badly to zergs while the actually impressive ones like MC and Squirtle and Ace get knocked out by PvP and PvT
They see Inca getting smashed by NesTea an indicator that protoss are weak somehow..
On June 04 2011 04:06 Alejandrisha wrote: Inside of korea protoss is really awkward. You have people like anypro and inca who have been in the gsl forever but are awful. You have people like hongun and sangho that are pretty bad but stick around somehow. You have MC who was unbeatable for a time just doing gimmicky builds. You have San who is trying to play macro games and having some success. Then you have Alicia who is the only one who has shown he is compentant at playing a macro game. Really, he is the only one I'd ever want to learn from.
It is weird because protosses in NA/EU win tournaments with builds that korean protosses do and get smashed. It makes me think it is game design rather than talent; any time a protoss has time to prepare for a gsl match what does he come up with? A gimmicky timing attack, most likely. If these are the players that are grinding double digit hours a day and that is the only thing they can come up with, I am very worried for protoss in the future.
I think protoss is quite easy to get good with as it does not allow for that much skill input. So al ot of practice pays off in that regard. But its insanely hard to get truly good with for that same reason. You simply can not do all that much with your units. Outmacroing is out of the question: you cant take bases ahead of your opponent. There's a reason they come up with gimmicky timing attacks.
Cant believe that the zergs are still whining nowadays. Zerg is sick strong atm :D
Dude zerg are not whining much. We are mad at protoss thinking zerg is strong vs protoss now because their weakness GSL players lost badly to zergs while the actually impressive ones like MC and Squirtle and Ace get knocked out by PvP and PvT
They see Inca getting smashed by NesTea an indicator that protoss are weak somehow..
You still see it all over the forums: zerg still feel misstreated, with Idra as their glorious imba whine leader. I actually think PvZ is still somewhat ok. PvT is...
On June 04 2011 03:23 julianto wrote: Do switch to zerg. There is the unforgiving larva inject mechanism and the constant dilemma to drone or make army units, which tosses don't have to deal with. Switch and see how easy it is. As for me, whenever I get random protoss, all I have to do is turtle for 90% of the game and then a-move. Scouting - optional for protoss, necessary for zerg (or else you'll overdrone, underdrone, or make the wrong counters). It just takes half as much effort into the game whenever I roll terran or toss.
I find it hilarious whenever someone talks about the larva mechanic.
Any decent level player can keep up with injects. Just because larva inject is harder than warping in a bunch of shit, it doesn't mean it's actually difficult to consistently execute. Stop throwing these platinum level arguments in.
As for droning, when to drone and when not to drone, it comes with experience. You'll get punished if you overdrone and underdrone, but you learn next time. Also, there are sooo many benefits to being able to make 10 workers at once compared to making 2 probes at a time. It benefits people with good decision making and punishes the weaker players.
Scouting is required for all races, especially if you want to play on a higher level. Zergs do have an inferior way of scouting, that I agree on, but it is definitely not true that Protoss (or even Terran) don't have to scout.
As for your other argument, since you can win so easily with Protoss, go ladder with Protoss and get to the top of the ladder. All you have to do is turtle 90% of the game and then a-move right? Doesn't seem so hard.
Seriously, I'm so fucking tired of seeing low level zergs complaining about balance. It's getting ridiculous.
On June 04 2011 04:06 Alejandrisha wrote: Inside of korea protoss is really awkward. You have people like anypro and inca who have been in the gsl forever but are awful. You have people like hongun and sangho that are pretty bad but stick around somehow. You have MC who was unbeatable for a time just doing gimmicky builds. You have San who is trying to play macro games and having some success. Then you have Alicia who is the only one who has shown he is compentant at playing a macro game. Really, he is the only one I'd ever want to learn from.
It is weird because protosses in NA/EU win tournaments with builds that korean protosses do and get smashed. It makes me think it is game design rather than talent; any time a protoss has time to prepare for a gsl match what does he come up with? A gimmicky timing attack, most likely. If these are the players that are grinding double digit hours a day and that is the only thing they can come up with, I am very worried for protoss in the future.
I think protoss is quite easy to get good with as it does not allow for that much skill input. So al ot of practice pays off in that regard. But its insanely hard to get truly good with for that same reason. You simply can not do all that much with your units. Outmacroing is out of the question: you cant take bases ahead of your opponent. There's a reason they come up with gimmicky timing attacks.
Cant believe that the zergs are still whining nowadays. Zerg is sick strong atm :D
Dude zerg are not whining much. We are mad at protoss thinking zerg is strong vs protoss now because their weakness GSL players lost badly to zergs while the actually impressive ones like MC and Squirtle and Ace get knocked out by PvP and PvT
They see Inca getting smashed by NesTea an indicator that protoss are weak somehow..
You still see it all over the forums: zerg still feel misstreated, with Idra as their glorious imba whine leader. I actually think PvZ is still somewhat ok. PvT is...
Have you not read the GSL threads since around the Ro8 of last GSL? It is consistantly more protoss complaining, especially about terrans. Very few zerg QQers are left.
If you want to see the last holdout, go read the Star Wars thread n___n
THOSE protoss, especially the chinese ones who actuall know how to blink and use FF are ones that are truly scary and impressive, not ones like anypro
On June 04 2011 04:05 Beyonder wrote: As someone who plays all three races, but especially protoss and zerg, I feel that protoss is kind of weak at the moment. It might be something we have not figured out yet, but regardless, it is incredibly hard and if the proper timings are abused, protoss has absolutely zero room to breathe and a big chance of losing.
Versus terran there are simply tons of stuff they can do, and you really have no idea which one, so you prepare for multiple. Scouting early is difficult and close to impossible once the marine comes out. Are they going fast ghost marauder marine? Are they doing the annoying tank banshee marine thing? Fast drops? Just marauder marine? Banshees? There are tons of possibilities. And with each build, tons of timings that can be used. The marauder and bunker generally prevents you from harassing, or doing anything that involves skill, unless you take a huge gamble, because there is no way that you can get behind-- then the timing pushes just kill you. You have to wait with taking your extra base till you know Terran takes it on most maps, this counts for your third as well. Its just very very difficult and if you want to play a tad safe, youre forced to play extremely reactive. One mistake and there are no units to get you back in to the game: the protoss units simply do not allow for a lot of skill input. They are kind of straight forward, attack move units, almost wc3esque with our a-click units as heroes (sup colossus).
Versus zerg, early harassment is also almost all-in. Either one base or two base. You get behind, then youre forced to turtle up and there's simply not much more to do than that. Wait till you have a huge army, defend, and move out. Zerg is just incredibly strong at the moment and the only way to deal with it is go (semi) all in with a huge push and pray that the opponent doesnt have the macro, or try to secure bases and move out when youre psy capped.
This is why I wished that I played terran. Its units are so mobile, so versatile, and the harass units mix into the regular army so incredibly well (sup banshee). You can come back from behind (see TvT and TvZ) because your units allow for a lot of skill input. And zergs can actually take expands on big maps agressively. Bleh.
In general, protoss is truly the practice race. It is kind of what zerg was before T_T. You play full reactionary, then every tiny mistake gets punished. You try to (somewhat) dicatate the game? then youre almost all-in.
feeling your pain played protoss until a week ago high master / gm level. now i'm trying to switch to terran, because you can actually do something with your skill. as a protoss you either go all-in with warpgates, or you turtle and try to get your most efficient unit mix. you don't really have harass units, phoenix / dts are very situational or a heavy tech requirement. as protoss there isn't really much that can you get back into a game, because the most efficient way to play protoss is to 1a and then show individual unit micro with storm, blink and force field.
against zerg you could at least turtle to 3 bases and then know you have a really efficient army, that's not the case anymore as zerg have figured out how to efficiently use their supply / ressources. bling are incredible supply efficient, lings are supply efficient harass units. infestor is the best caster in the game lol.
i don't want to say protoss is weak, but your pretty limited in the stuff you can do with your apm. it's really difficult as a protoss to set the pace of the game and be in charge of it unless you go warpgate or other gimmicky all-ins.
On June 04 2011 04:06 Alejandrisha wrote: Inside of korea protoss is really awkward. You have people like anypro and inca who have been in the gsl forever but are awful. You have people like hongun and sangho that are pretty bad but stick around somehow. You have MC who was unbeatable for a time just doing gimmicky builds. You have San who is trying to play macro games and having some success. Then you have Alicia who is the only one who has shown he is compentant at playing a macro game. Really, he is the only one I'd ever want to learn from.
It is weird because protosses in NA/EU win tournaments with builds that korean protosses do and get smashed. It makes me think it is game design rather than talent; any time a protoss has time to prepare for a gsl match what does he come up with? A gimmicky timing attack, most likely. If these are the players that are grinding double digit hours a day and that is the only thing they can come up with, I am very worried for protoss in the future.
I think protoss is quite easy to get good with as it does not allow for that much skill input. So al ot of practice pays off in that regard. But its insanely hard to get truly good with for that same reason. You simply can not do all that much with your units. Outmacroing is out of the question: you cant take bases ahead of your opponent. There's a reason they come up with gimmicky timing attacks.
Cant believe that the zergs are still whining nowadays. Zerg is sick strong atm :D
Dude zerg are not whining much. We are mad at protoss thinking zerg is strong vs protoss now because their weakness GSL players lost badly to zergs while the actually impressive ones like MC and Squirtle and Ace get knocked out by PvP and PvT
They see Inca getting smashed by NesTea an indicator that protoss are weak somehow..
Protoss don't whine because protosses are weak in the GSL. We know inca is terrible lol. For me it's more frustration that anything. The only way I can take wins off of good zergs is by doing stupid 2 base all ins or sitting there and doing nothing on 3-4 bases and trying to win the game with 1 push with some oppurtunities for DT harass. Zergs have gotten so solid in the middle game that you literally cannot do any damage unless you are cutting all econ and devoting everything to a timing- an all in, or amassing such an army that you force the zerg to have to reinforce to deal with your maxed army.
It just makes for a very stale game. I'm not sure. Maybe some one will find a style that allows you to do damage without going all in, but I haven't seen it yet.
On June 04 2011 04:05 Beyonder wrote: As someone who plays all three races, but especially protoss and zerg, I feel that protoss is kind of weak at the moment. It might be something we have not figured out yet, but regardless, it is incredibly hard and if the proper timings are abused, protoss has absolutely zero room to breathe and a big chance of losing. *snip*
The ironic thing is that this is what zerg was complaining about when their representation was through the floor.
I know I'm suggesting something radical here, but is it possible that - rather than one race or another being overpowered or underpowered - that it is the concept of playing for the lategame and being safe against early aggression itself which is underpowered, regardless of what race is doing it?
On June 04 2011 04:06 Alejandrisha wrote: Inside of korea protoss is really awkward. You have people like anypro and inca who have been in the gsl forever but are awful. You have people like hongun and sangho that are pretty bad but stick around somehow. You have MC who was unbeatable for a time just doing gimmicky builds. You have San who is trying to play macro games and having some success. Then you have Alicia who is the only one who has shown he is compentant at playing a macro game. Really, he is the only one I'd ever want to learn from.
It is weird because protosses in NA/EU win tournaments with builds that korean protosses do and get smashed. It makes me think it is game design rather than talent; any time a protoss has time to prepare for a gsl match what does he come up with? A gimmicky timing attack, most likely. If these are the players that are grinding double digit hours a day and that is the only thing they can come up with, I am very worried for protoss in the future.
I think protoss is quite easy to get good with as it does not allow for that much skill input. So al ot of practice pays off in that regard. But its insanely hard to get truly good with for that same reason. You simply can not do all that much with your units. Outmacroing is out of the question: you cant take bases ahead of your opponent. There's a reason they come up with gimmicky timing attacks.
Cant believe that the zergs are still whining nowadays. Zerg is sick strong atm :D
Dude zerg are not whining much. We are mad at protoss thinking zerg is strong vs protoss now because their weakness GSL players lost badly to zergs while the actually impressive ones like MC and Squirtle and Ace get knocked out by PvP and PvT
They see Inca getting smashed by NesTea an indicator that protoss are weak somehow..
You still see it all over the forums: zerg still feel misstreated, with Idra as their glorious imba whine leader. I actually think PvZ is still somewhat ok. PvT is...
Very constructive post m8, really gives you a lot to think about.
It's obvious that threads like this just promote people whining about how underpowered their race is (I play Protoss FWIW). Besides, why would you want to play Zerg because Protoss are doing badly in one tournament? What about the StarsWar where the final 4 players are all Protoss, does that make you want to play Protoss again?
Inferior tournament with inferior players doesn't mean much
On June 04 2011 03:10 Rasky wrote: Zerg is now the OP race if you ask me. Recently zergs have been doing very well protoss not so much.
Zerg is not OP, and never has or will be. I feel like there just aren't many great korean protoss besides MC and Alicia. Zerg has Nestea, July, Losira, and some great up-and-comers like DRG and Min. And there are just a dickload of terran players, all with great potential (slayers, anyone?) that it makes the rest of the toss seem comparatively lack-luster.
Coudln't we have said that about terran like several months ago when it was pretty much every one who was anyone was a terran player... I mean all bonjwas boxer & nada, highest percentage of old bw pros switching over as terran even rainbow who played protoss switched to terran. MVP was the highest ranking bw player to switch over and all this other stuff.
On June 04 2011 04:05 Beyonder wrote: As someone who plays all three races, but especially protoss and zerg, I feel that protoss is kind of weak at the moment. It might be something we have not figured out yet, but regardless, it is incredibly hard and if the proper timings are abused, protoss has absolutely zero room to breathe and a big chance of losing.
Versus terran there are simply tons of stuff they can do, and you really have no idea which one, so you prepare for multiple. Scouting early is difficult and close to impossible once the marine comes out. Are they going fast ghost marauder marine? Are they doing the annoying tank banshee marine thing? Fast drops? Just marauder marine? Banshees? There are tons of possibilities. And with each build, tons of timings that can be used. The marauder and bunker generally prevents you from harassing, or doing anything that involves skill, unless you take a huge gamble, because there is no way that you can get behind-- then the timing pushes just kill you. You have to wait with taking your extra base till you know Terran takes it on most maps, this counts for your third as well. Its just very very difficult and if you want to play a tad safe, youre forced to play extremely reactive. One mistake and there are no units to get you back in to the game: the protoss units simply do not allow for a lot of skill input. They are kind of straight forward, attack move units, almost wc3esque with our a-click units as heroes (sup colossus).
Versus zerg, early harassment is also almost all-in. Either one base or two base. You get behind, then youre forced to turtle up and there's simply not much more to do than that. Wait till you have a huge army, defend, and move out. Zerg is just incredibly strong at the moment and the only way to deal with it is go (semi) all in with a huge push and pray that the opponent doesnt have the macro, or try to secure bases and move out when youre psy capped.
This is why I wished that I played terran. Its units are so mobile, so versatile, and the harass units mix into the regular army so incredibly well (sup banshee). You can come back from behind (see TvT and TvZ) because your units allow for a lot of skill input. And zergs can actually take expands on big maps agressively. Bleh.
In general, protoss is truly the practice race. It is kind of what zerg was before T_T. You play full reactionary, then every tiny mistake gets punished. You try to (somewhat) dicatate the game? then youre almost all-in.
feeling your pain played protoss until a week ago high master / gm level. now i'm trying to switch to terran, because you can actually do something with your skill. as a protoss you either go all-in with warpgates, or you turtle and try to get your most efficient unit mix. you don't really have harass units, phoenix / dts are very situational or a heavy tech requirement. as protoss there isn't really much that can you get back into a game, because the most efficient way to play protoss is to 1a and then show individual unit micro with storm, blink and force field.
against zerg you could at least turtle to 3 bases and then know you have a really efficient army, that's not the case anymore as zerg have figured out how to efficiently use their supply / ressources. bling are incredible supply efficient, lings are supply efficient harass units. infestor is the best caster in the game lol.
i don't want to say protoss is weak, but your pretty limited in the stuff you can do with your apm. it's really difficult as a protoss to set the pace of the game and be in charge of it unless you go warpgate or other gimmicky all-ins.
Yep, well said. Thats why protosses are so damn boring to watch, and thats why players resort to all-ins. Its just all about unit mix in reaction to what your opponent does T_T.
There's really only blink stalkers, but versus terran they are generally not so great as a lot of micro is negated. And then there's force field, that pretty much negates micro from your opponent. There's a vicious cycle of micro destruction: of micro and skill being taken away from the battle. And I feel that protoss suffers most from this, and terran has the lead.
Very constructive post m8, really gives you a lot to think about.
It's obvious that threads like this just promote people whining about how underpowered their race is (I play Protoss FWIW). Besides, why would you want to play Zerg because Protoss are doing badly in one tournament? What about the StarsWar where the final 4 players are all Protoss, does that make you want to play Protoss again?
Inferior tournament with inferior players doesn't mean much
I really hope you're not talking about StarsWar as inferior.
Very constructive post m8, really gives you a lot to think about.
It's obvious that threads like this just promote people whining about how underpowered their race is (I play Protoss FWIW). Besides, why would you want to play Zerg because Protoss are doing badly in one tournament? What about the StarsWar where the final 4 players are all Protoss, does that make you want to play Protoss again?
Inferior tournament with inferior players doesn't mean much
On June 04 2011 04:06 Alejandrisha wrote: Inside of korea protoss is really awkward. You have people like anypro and inca who have been in the gsl forever but are awful. You have people like hongun and sangho that are pretty bad but stick around somehow. You have MC who was unbeatable for a time just doing gimmicky builds. You have San who is trying to play macro games and having some success. Then you have Alicia who is the only one who has shown he is compentant at playing a macro game. Really, he is the only one I'd ever want to learn from.
It is weird because protosses in NA/EU win tournaments with builds that korean protosses do and get smashed. It makes me think it is game design rather than talent; any time a protoss has time to prepare for a gsl match what does he come up with? A gimmicky timing attack, most likely. If these are the players that are grinding double digit hours a day and that is the only thing they can come up with, I am very worried for protoss in the future.
I think protoss is quite easy to get good with as it does not allow for that much skill input. So al ot of practice pays off in that regard. But its insanely hard to get truly good with for that same reason. You simply can not do all that much with your units. Outmacroing is out of the question: you cant take bases ahead of your opponent. There's a reason they come up with gimmicky timing attacks.
Cant believe that the zergs are still whining nowadays. Zerg is sick strong atm :D
Dude zerg are not whining much. We are mad at protoss thinking zerg is strong vs protoss now because their weakness GSL players lost badly to zergs while the actually impressive ones like MC and Squirtle and Ace get knocked out by PvP and PvT
They see Inca getting smashed by NesTea an indicator that protoss are weak somehow..
You still see it all over the forums: zerg still feel misstreated, with Idra as their glorious imba whine leader. I actually think PvZ is still somewhat ok. PvT is...
Protoss don't whine because protosses are weak in the GSL. We know inca is terrible lol. For me it's more frustration that anything. The only way I can take wins off of good zergs is by doing stupid 2 base all ins or sitting there and doing nothing on 3-4 bases and trying to win the game with 1 push with some oppurtunities for DT harass. Zergs have gotten so solid in the middle game that you literally cannot do any damage unless you are cutting all econ and devoting everything to a timing- an all in, or amassing such an army that you force the zerg to have to reinforce to deal with your maxed army.
It just makes for a very stale game. I'm not sure. Maybe some one will find a style that allows you to do damage without going all in, but I haven't seen it yet.
Funny enough, this is exactly what Idra whined about. You gamble. And in PvZ you either turtle up insanely and defend and try to take a base or you (semi)all-in and pray that the zerg is too bad to counter you. Theres nothing more to it >_>
There are a # of problems protoss has which makes them weak in certain situations.
1. Protoss units can't retreat. One of the major advantages of blink stalkers and collosus is that you can retreat with them, but zealots, immortals, void rays and to some extent HT and archons cannot retreat fast enough. if a terran is losing a battle, they can stim and run away. Zerg units are so fast they can just sprint away. Other than stalkers and collosus, once a protoss engages, they must commit or else be willing to lose all of their zealots. This was the problem with archons, but that changed in the patch. Marauders and infestors don't help the situation either.
2. Protoss can reinforce too quickly. When blizzard did balancing, they needed to consider the effect of reinforcement on the balance. Because protoss can warp in, the units are weaker by a large margin.
3. High dependance on spell casters and high dps units Terran can win games with marines and marauders only. Once terran has stim, protoss needs sentries (for guardian shields and forcefields), collosus (to do dps) or HT, and blink/charge and all high dps units from protoss are easily counterable. (vikings against collosus, ghosts against HT, concussive shells against charge/blink). If protoss wants to win, they need to win every single engagement.
4. No area controlling units. Dark templar can be considered area controlling to a tiny extent, but only lasts a short time. Tanks for terran, banelings and infestors for zerg, protoss literally has nothing. At one time, protoss could hold a position by having a pylon and being able to warp in a high templar with kydarian amulet, but no more. There is no risk advancing into a protoss base. This is the biggest reason why protoss is always in a ball.
5. Highly limited tech choice This somewhat opened up with the recent changes to archon, but most air builds are almost autolosses and warp prism play offers very limited reward with high risks. Obviously protoss hasn't explored EVERY single option, but it's not due to a lack of trying.
6. The cost of scouting is too high. A terran can scout with reapers or scans at almost any moment, a zerg can send an overlord , but a protoss must choose a specific tech pattern and sacrifice tech choices in order to scout. If the protoss gets hallucination, then that's 2 less forcefields and less tech. If the protoss gets an obs, that's 200m/100g followed by 25m/75g. And scouting makes protoss SUPER vulnerable to a fast timing attack. I think protoss need to get that super fast immortal to be safe followed by a chrono'd observer in order to be safe against dt builds, banshee builds, and burrowed roach. My guess is that blizzard designed protoss to always get a fast robo every game (considering all of the units like immortals, observers, and warp prisms), but the truth is that the investment makes it difficult to choose another tech path if you scout something that robo is not good against. Zerg can scout with a lair (a natural part of their tech path) and terran can scout with scans or reapers (a very natural part of the tech path). I still think this is something that can be explored. Maybe hallucination first builds or something would really go a long way to help out. Maybe 1 gate robo is the build of the future, something to be considered. This however I believe is the #1 problem protoss currently has.
I'm not saying protoss is UP, they still win a lot of games and each race has it's own problems, but that the problems for protoss make it difficult to show consistent results mostly because of the scouting problem. Naniwa did 4 gates in order to be the agressor (in which case you don't really need early scouting), but as 4 gates got nerfed, naniwa's build got weaker and I think MLG will show the results of the most recent patch.
Protoss goes through one patch where they cant 1-a, and suddenly all the tosses start whining.
Saying that they wanna switch to zerg, its really funny.. Because the style u have to play to beat a protoss is insanely hard. Requires a metric tonne of multitasking and lots and lots of bases. Constantly reinforcing with diffrent types of army etc.. Not as easy as it looks... Whereas protoss can still win 50% of their games with a 3 base turtle into deathball.
I dont blame them though, the collosus is basically the only t3 tech thats any good. Even though archons got slightly buffed.
protoss still wins 66% against zerg you retards. protoss is just a flawed race where the best zerg can't do anything but the protoss can't win against terran because protoss is so easy they can't find a way to improve their play. if anything blizzard needs to remove the race from the game because P matchups are always boring, so much so that T can only go MMM and Z can only make roaches, unless it's some cutesy timing push or coinflip stratLast edit: 2011-06-04 03:37:10
No they don't. There are no statistics that support the argument that at this point in the game Protoss is winning 2 out of 3 matches against Zerg. And your understanding of the diversity of P matchups is laughable. Any Terran who neglects Ghosts and Vikings will lose these days, end there are lots of builds that mix in some mech units to favorable results. Infestors and Corruptors are de rigueur in ZvP, and banelings are showing up more and more, and even the Roach-heaviest strats do eventually mix in some Hydras.
Protoss is not UP. Nor are they a "flawed" race with some sort of rock-paper-scissors dynamic with Z and T. Protoss is fully capable of beating the other two races, and the other two races are fully capable of beating Protoss, and in each matchup there are a number of viable builds and strats on each side.
Races have their ups and downs, and matchup balance swings on a pendulum. One side comes up with a new build or strat or playstyle that shifts the matchup in their favor for a bit, and then eventually the other side adapts and responds. Patches make things even more unstable as there is a period where players must adjust. Protoss had a while where they couldn't get past the Ro8, then MC won multiple championships, now they had a bad month. None of this means Protoss is OP, or UP, its just the normal ebb and flow of the game.
Unlike you I'm actually using evidence in my argument instead of delivering pointless anecdotes and clearly showing how much you misunderstand the matchups. When I said Terran only uses MMM and Zerg only uses Roaches I didn't mean to use some kind of bronze league logic where you see players going mass hellion and nothing else. Yes Terran uses Vikings and Ghosts, but they are support units. It's the same thing with Zerg where you mix in Infestors and Corrupters, but that is not a core of your army. However, that doesn't change the fact that against Protoss you have a large number of units that are simply not viable. In fact how often do you see Hydralisks used in ZvP anymore? Most GSL ZvP games are always almost 100% max Roach armies, and that's because Protoss has so many units that take minimal skill to use which hard counter them. Protoss is a hard counter race and it's why you see so many Zerg units and Mech never being used. This has always been the case, right from the beta. Maybe when I see mech actually being viable and not just being used in some specific build order designed to hit a timing, I'll believe what you said. For now you have no evidence to support you.
As for balance issues, many things are very clear with Protoss. Forge FE is impossible to pressure against competent Protoss that learn to deal with the attacks and don't get caught out of position, Protoss is too good defensively. Meanwhile there are also issues with PvT, and the issue behind that is Protoss can do absolutely nothing against a skilled player. Terran have kept on improving but Protoss have reached their skill ceiling. It's a fundamentally flawed race where macro and micro is so much more simplistic that the only thing you can improve upon is forcefields. Terrans at this stage of the game have improved their ghost usage immensely, and that's exactly why they aren't getting dominated by Protoss like they were before. This is also the reason why Terran does much worse at lower levels against Protoss, and it's simply because the race is harder. Once you get good enough however, it changes to the point where there is nothing that Protoss can do. And it's Blizzard's fault.
On June 04 2011 04:30 dan1mal wrote: Protoss goes through one patch where they cant 1-a, and suddenly all the tosses start whining.
Saying that they wanna switch to zerg, its really funny.. Because the style u have to play to beat a protoss is insanely hard. Requires a metric tonne of multitasking and lots and lots of bases. Constantly reinforcing with diffrent types of army etc.. Not as easy as it looks... Whereas protoss can still win 50% of their games with a 3 base turtle into deathball.
I dont blame them though, the collosus is basically the only t3 tech thats any good. Even though archons got slightly buffed.
But there is the beauty for you: you CAN actually do something with your skill. Protoss cant do anything with it. See above post for details.
Ive always whined about these points though. I dont care if protoss is good or bad, its just designed as the 5th wc3 race T_T
Just imagine if you could charge your zealots on your own units (blink back --> charge back).. stuff like that. Then you could actually use your skills and speed T_T
On June 04 2011 04:06 Alejandrisha wrote: Inside of korea protoss is really awkward. You have people like anypro and inca who have been in the gsl forever but are awful. You have people like hongun and sangho that are pretty bad but stick around somehow. You have MC who was unbeatable for a time just doing gimmicky builds. You have San who is trying to play macro games and having some success. Then you have Alicia who is the only one who has shown he is compentant at playing a macro game. Really, he is the only one I'd ever want to learn from.
It is weird because protosses in NA/EU win tournaments with builds that korean protosses do and get smashed. It makes me think it is game design rather than talent; any time a protoss has time to prepare for a gsl match what does he come up with? A gimmicky timing attack, most likely. If these are the players that are grinding double digit hours a day and that is the only thing they can come up with, I am very worried for protoss in the future.
I think protoss is quite easy to get good with as it does not allow for that much skill input. So al ot of practice pays off in that regard. But its insanely hard to get truly good with for that same reason. You simply can not do all that much with your units. Outmacroing is out of the question: you cant take bases ahead of your opponent. There's a reason they come up with gimmicky timing attacks.
Cant believe that the zergs are still whining nowadays. Zerg is sick strong atm :D
Dude zerg are not whining much. We are mad at protoss thinking zerg is strong vs protoss now because their weakness GSL players lost badly to zergs while the actually impressive ones like MC and Squirtle and Ace get knocked out by PvP and PvT
They see Inca getting smashed by NesTea an indicator that protoss are weak somehow..
You still see it all over the forums: zerg still feel misstreated, with Idra as their glorious imba whine leader. I actually think PvZ is still somewhat ok. PvT is...
Protoss don't whine because protosses are weak in the GSL. We know inca is terrible lol. For me it's more frustration that anything. The only way I can take wins off of good zergs is by doing stupid 2 base all ins or sitting there and doing nothing on 3-4 bases and trying to win the game with 1 push with some oppurtunities for DT harass. Zergs have gotten so solid in the middle game that you literally cannot do any damage unless you are cutting all econ and devoting everything to a timing- an all in, or amassing such an army that you force the zerg to have to reinforce to deal with your maxed army.
It just makes for a very stale game. I'm not sure. Maybe some one will find a style that allows you to do damage without going all in, but I haven't seen it yet.
Funny enough, this is exactly what Idra whined about. You gamble. And in PvZ you either turtle up insanely and defend and try to take a base or you (semi)all-in and pray that the zerg is too bad to counter you. Theres nothing more to it >_>
I ask me how Cartman would do as Carrier commander.
It's simple really... because Z has been getting destroyed for the past half year to a year, many new strategies (and failed attempts) have been made adapted with unique timings and to weak "holes" in the protoss build.
Has Protoss strategy changed in the past 5-6 months? Not really. Zergs at the moment plays a much more subtle game than protoss, relying on timing as well as builds. No Protoss at the moment really abuses the "time" aspect of the Z. There are (has to be) periods of time where Z is extremely vulnerable but protoss has not found that yet. That's really it.
Very constructive post m8, really gives you a lot to think about.
It's obvious that threads like this just promote people whining about how underpowered their race is (I play Protoss FWIW). Besides, why would you want to play Zerg because Protoss are doing badly in one tournament? What about the StarsWar where the final 4 players are all Protoss, does that make you want to play Protoss again?
Inferior tournament with inferior players doesn't mean much
But StarsWar had most of the top Koreans, Europeans and more?
I feel as though the things you're pointing out are more just features of the race than weaknesses. Zergs could equally point out that their race is the only race that's unable to drain energy from other units, but that doesn't make it an inherent weakness. And tell Terran players who are being Force Fielded up their main ramp that Protoss has no space control ;D
The biggest nerf wich allowed you good harassment was voidray speed remove . in any case it was never OP this is same like saying 40 muta ball is OP when u have only at 2 points hts infestors are the shit to stop this wich was back then very effitient used vs zerg. aswell vs Viking kiting voids wont do anything anymore .
Very constructive post m8, really gives you a lot to think about.
It's obvious that threads like this just promote people whining about how underpowered their race is (I play Protoss FWIW). Besides, why would you want to play Zerg because Protoss are doing badly in one tournament? What about the StarsWar where the final 4 players are all Protoss, does that make you want to play Protoss again?
Inferior tournament with inferior players doesn't mean much
But StarsWar had most of the top Koreans, Europeans and more?
First round of starswars was before warpgate nerf. Starswars is online and cross continent, hence less prestigious, less emphasis on practice.
On June 04 2011 04:06 Alejandrisha wrote: Inside of korea protoss is really awkward. You have people like anypro and inca who have been in the gsl forever but are awful. You have people like hongun and sangho that are pretty bad but stick around somehow. You have MC who was unbeatable for a time just doing gimmicky builds. You have San who is trying to play macro games and having some success. Then you have Alicia who is the only one who has shown he is compentant at playing a macro game. Really, he is the only one I'd ever want to learn from.
It is weird because protosses in NA/EU win tournaments with builds that korean protosses do and get smashed. It makes me think it is game design rather than talent; any time a protoss has time to prepare for a gsl match what does he come up with? A gimmicky timing attack, most likely. If these are the players that are grinding double digit hours a day and that is the only thing they can come up with, I am very worried for protoss in the future.
I think protoss is quite easy to get good with as it does not allow for that much skill input. So al ot of practice pays off in that regard. But its insanely hard to get truly good with for that same reason. You simply can not do all that much with your units. Outmacroing is out of the question: you cant take bases ahead of your opponent. There's a reason they come up with gimmicky timing attacks.
Cant believe that the zergs are still whining nowadays. Zerg is sick strong atm :D
Timing attacks are the strongest things at Protoss' disposal due to their warpgate mechanic, especially since I feel that Protoss doesn't have the tools for a widespread macrogame on big maps. As you said, taking a base before the Terran does is impossible and you need something to protect you from drops first anyway. To reliably take a third against Zerg you need to put so much into static defense and walling that Zerg is free to macro and tech to whatever, which is made worse by the fact that Infestors own any kind of deathball. Compared to that, the High Templar somehow turned from the best into the worst caster of the game. Harass options are all somewhere between inefficient, unreliable and expensive. Defending against harass is a pain unless you have constant 10 warpgates ready or 5 cannons at each expansion. Techswitching is the most inefficient for Protoss out of the three races.
Scouting works because you have invisible Observers, but you are never the one with mapcontrol, because everytime you move out it feels semi allin. Whatever you do, your army is slow as hell (even worse with HTs than with colossi) and the only units that can ever retreat are Blink Stalkers.
On June 04 2011 04:30 dan1mal wrote: Protoss goes through one patch where they cant 1-a, and suddenly all the tosses start whining.
Saying that they wanna switch to zerg, its really funny.. Because the style u have to play to beat a protoss is insanely hard. Requires a metric tonne of multitasking and lots and lots of bases. Constantly reinforcing with diffrent types of army etc.. Not as easy as it looks... Whereas protoss can still win 50% of their games with a 3 base turtle into deathball.
I dont blame them though, the collosus is basically the only t3 tech thats any good. Even though archons got slightly buffed.
But there is the beauty for you: you CAN actually do something with your skill. Protoss cant do anything with it. See above post for details.
Ive always whined about these points though. I dont care if protoss is good or bad, its just designed as the 5th wc3 race T_T
Just imagine if you could charge your zealots on your own units (blink back --> charge back).. stuff like that. Then you could actually use your skills and speed T_T
Yea personally I just feel Protoss was designed poorly. I don't think there's balance issues, it's just they are so limited in scope it's scary.
On June 04 2011 04:06 Alejandrisha wrote: Inside of korea protoss is really awkward. You have people like anypro and inca who have been in the gsl forever but are awful. You have people like hongun and sangho that are pretty bad but stick around somehow. You have MC who was unbeatable for a time just doing gimmicky builds. You have San who is trying to play macro games and having some success. Then you have Alicia who is the only one who has shown he is compentant at playing a macro game. Really, he is the only one I'd ever want to learn from.
It is weird because protosses in NA/EU win tournaments with builds that korean protosses do and get smashed. It makes me think it is game design rather than talent; any time a protoss has time to prepare for a gsl match what does he come up with? A gimmicky timing attack, most likely. If these are the players that are grinding double digit hours a day and that is the only thing they can come up with, I am very worried for protoss in the future.
I think protoss is quite easy to get good with as it does not allow for that much skill input. So al ot of practice pays off in that regard. But its insanely hard to get truly good with for that same reason. You simply can not do all that much with your units. Outmacroing is out of the question: you cant take bases ahead of your opponent. There's a reason they come up with gimmicky timing attacks.
Cant believe that the zergs are still whining nowadays. Zerg is sick strong atm :D
Dude zerg are not whining much. We are mad at protoss thinking zerg is strong vs protoss now because their weakness GSL players lost badly to zergs while the actually impressive ones like MC and Squirtle and Ace get knocked out by PvP and PvT
They see Inca getting smashed by NesTea an indicator that protoss are weak somehow..
You still see it all over the forums: zerg still feel misstreated, with Idra as their glorious imba whine leader. I actually think PvZ is still somewhat ok. PvT is...
The difference between you and Idra is that one makes valid points and the other player doesn't. Idra brings up accurate analogies of for example, Protoss being too good defensively and thus it's incredibly easy for them to turtle up to a cost-efficient army. Meanwhile there is absolutely nothing Zerg can do to beat the cost efficiency of Protoss. It doesn't matter if you outmacro a Protoss, as soon as they take the third base even if you have 6 bases you're on equal terms.
Now what is so different about Terran and Zerg? Well, Terran units actually ARE efficient
The Ro64 of a single tournament is hardly a lot of evidence. Especially when, if you look at the Ro32 of the same tournament, Zergs won 100% of their games against Protosses.
the mental gymnastics zerg players do over this subject really is a sight to see.
we had dummies saying korean protosses weren't good for the reason korean tosses were getting beaten pre-MC. that sentiment was laughable then. it is laughable now.
personally, i don't think it's a balance issue. keep in mind, we had this same thread before MC started doing so well.
lol it was pretty obvious to me a long time ago that protoss would have trouble winning stuff compared to the other races. and the zerg balance complaints were always dumb, especially the ones coming from idra. incredibly biased.
protoss has tools to win, its just FUCKING HARD unless they try to get lucky.
On June 04 2011 04:06 Alejandrisha wrote: Inside of korea protoss is really awkward. You have people like anypro and inca who have been in the gsl forever but are awful. You have people like hongun and sangho that are pretty bad but stick around somehow. You have MC who was unbeatable for a time just doing gimmicky builds. You have San who is trying to play macro games and having some success. Then you have Alicia who is the only one who has shown he is compentant at playing a macro game. Really, he is the only one I'd ever want to learn from.
It is weird because protosses in NA/EU win tournaments with builds that korean protosses do and get smashed. It makes me think it is game design rather than talent; any time a protoss has time to prepare for a gsl match what does he come up with? A gimmicky timing attack, most likely. If these are the players that are grinding double digit hours a day and that is the only thing they can come up with, I am very worried for protoss in the future.
All the Korean Protoss you mentioned have been consistently staying in Code S and you said they're awful.
Right now as I'm watching the GSL super tournament on GOMTV, it is depressing to see how the badly the protoss players are doing. Most of the protoss are losing left and right to other races, with only HuK and MC still playing decent. It was nice to see how Trickster played, but now, even he is out...
Makes me want to switch to zerg :/
What do you guys think?
I don't really think Huk plaid decent in his set against san... <.< Looking forward to Alicia, though! :D
Right now as I'm watching the GSL super tournament on GOMTV, it is depressing to see how the badly the protoss players are doing. Most of the protoss are losing left and right to other races, with only HuK and MC still playing decent. It was nice to see how Trickster played, but now, even he is out...
And as a former zerg I say to you don't switch to them... I won't say any more I just find them way more difficult to play as and playing against them I find them easy to punish.
The Ro64 of a single tournament is hardly a lot of evidence. Especially when, if you look at the Ro32 of the same tournament, Zergs won 100% of their games against Protosses.
It is when the thread says "Protoss in the GSL", and it's definitely stronger than the 2 sets you're bringing up.
And you know, there's one other thing. No up and coming player plays protoss. They all play either zerg or terran. That is something very interesting. There's some protosses we've seen done well (e.g., ImSeed), but they just cant get there. While zergs and especially terrans are just popping like flies. Protoss is easy to get (half)good with, but I think as players practice more and the skill cap becomes greater, zerg and terran will get more and more ahead.
For example, the baneling drop strategy versus protoss is insanely hard to use, it requires a lot of skill. But its a possibility, and its very very effective. So as players get more skilled, this gets stronger and stronger.
On June 04 2011 03:28 Atila wrote: its NOT imbalance its a result of people figuring out how to deal with protoss and many protoss are doing well its silly to bring up MC because + Show Spoiler +
he lost a PvP
You obviously don't watch GSL THAT OFTEN because you only mentioned HuK, MC, and Trickster, which are only a few and generally they perform mediocre in tournaments (yes this extends to MC, lately he hasn't been getting results, but I do acknowledge he's done very well in the past)
To conclude, yes it's a change in results, yes its good. Race distribution is about even now, showing that this game has matured beyond "imbalance"
Well both MC and Trickster are out... As I said, I'm putting my hopes in HuK and Alicia (in that order). Trickster's play style was far from good... And sadly MC got beat by Alicia in the PVP match up. HuK beat San, in yet another PvP... It's also lot of bad luck with the match making.
I concur, and I just read my post and it sounds pretty bm, so I'll apologize
In response to the PvZ discussion:
I think the whole P > Z discussion a month ago should shed some light on this:
ITS NOT A BALANCE PROBLEM, ITS THE METAGAME. And its still entirely possible to win a PvZ.
Furthermore, people are posting "oh Zerg is the op race now". its not. at all. shut up. it just feels that way because zergs have figured out how to win and win percentage is ABOUT equal.
On June 04 2011 04:42 Beyonder wrote: And you know, there's one other thing. No up and coming player plays protoss. They all play either zerg or terran. That is something very interesting. There's some protosses we've seen done well (e.g., ImSeed), but they just cant get there. While zergs and especially terrans are just popping like flies. Protoss is easy to get (half)good with, but I think as players practice more and the skill cap becomes greater, zerg and terran will get more and more ahead.
Yes, protoss is a fundamentally flawed race. They are stuck in the middle where a Zerg has to be much much better than the other player to beat one, but when it comes to Terrans, Protoss is simply unable to do anything.
Protoss requires the least micro and macro, and this is what happens when players actually get good.
On June 04 2011 04:06 Alejandrisha wrote: Inside of korea protoss is really awkward. You have people like anypro and inca who have been in the gsl forever but are awful. You have people like hongun and sangho that are pretty bad but stick around somehow. You have MC who was unbeatable for a time just doing gimmicky builds. You have San who is trying to play macro games and having some success. Then you have Alicia who is the only one who has shown he is compentant at playing a macro game. Really, he is the only one I'd ever want to learn from.
It is weird because protosses in NA/EU win tournaments with builds that korean protosses do and get smashed. It makes me think it is game design rather than talent; any time a protoss has time to prepare for a gsl match what does he come up with? A gimmicky timing attack, most likely. If these are the players that are grinding double digit hours a day and that is the only thing they can come up with, I am very worried for protoss in the future.
I think protoss is quite easy to get good with as it does not allow for that much skill input. So al ot of practice pays off in that regard. But its insanely hard to get truly good with for that same reason. You simply can not do all that much with your units. Outmacroing is out of the question: you cant take bases ahead of your opponent. There's a reason they come up with gimmicky timing attacks.
Cant believe that the zergs are still whining nowadays. Zerg is sick strong atm :D
Dude zerg are not whining much. We are mad at protoss thinking zerg is strong vs protoss now because their weakness GSL players lost badly to zergs while the actually impressive ones like MC and Squirtle and Ace get knocked out by PvP and PvT
They see Inca getting smashed by NesTea an indicator that protoss are weak somehow..
You still see it all over the forums: zerg still feel misstreated, with Idra as their glorious imba whine leader. I actually think PvZ is still somewhat ok. PvT is...
The difference between you and Idra is that one makes valid points and the other player doesn't. Idra brings up accurate analogies of for example, Protoss being too good defensively and thus it's incredibly easy for them to turtle up to a cost-efficient army. Meanwhile there is absolutely nothing Zerg can do to beat the cost efficiency of Protoss. It doesn't matter if you outmacro a Protoss, as soon as they take the third base even if you have 6 bases you're on equal terms.
Now what is so different about Terran and Zerg? Well, Terran units actually ARE efficient
Of course it matters. You have the best caster in the game that does heavy damage to armored (nearly every protoss unit in a ball is armored), you have the most supply efficient unit in the game (bling), you have the best harassing tool in the game (muta). On top of that you can easily drop zerglings, cheap supply units that deal ridiculous dmg upgraded (cracklings + 2 / +3 upgrade kill buildings so fast it's not even funny).
Of course if you go roach / hydra / corrupter it doesn't matter if you go 6 bases. Roaches / hydra aren't supply efficient. They are a good unit to transition from in the mid game. Once zergs gets 5 bases, infestor broodlord and many bling / lings it's insanely difficult to win. Watch hasuobs vs xlord from the eps semi-final for instance. There you see the power difference of macro zerg, and roach macro zerg (lol).
Idra is just bad at ZvP cause he builds roaches throughout the game and thinks he is the better player if he drops 2 overlords via minimap without even watching after them.
On June 04 2011 04:06 Alejandrisha wrote: Inside of korea protoss is really awkward. You have people like anypro and inca who have been in the gsl forever but are awful. You have people like hongun and sangho that are pretty bad but stick around somehow. You have MC who was unbeatable for a time just doing gimmicky builds. You have San who is trying to play macro games and having some success. Then you have Alicia who is the only one who has shown he is compentant at playing a macro game. Really, he is the only one I'd ever want to learn from.
It is weird because protosses in NA/EU win tournaments with builds that korean protosses do and get smashed. It makes me think it is game design rather than talent; any time a protoss has time to prepare for a gsl match what does he come up with? A gimmicky timing attack, most likely. If these are the players that are grinding double digit hours a day and that is the only thing they can come up with, I am very worried for protoss in the future.
I think protoss is quite easy to get good with as it does not allow for that much skill input. So al ot of practice pays off in that regard. But its insanely hard to get truly good with for that same reason. You simply can not do all that much with your units. Outmacroing is out of the question: you cant take bases ahead of your opponent. There's a reason they come up with gimmicky timing attacks.
Cant believe that the zergs are still whining nowadays. Zerg is sick strong atm :D
Dude zerg are not whining much. We are mad at protoss thinking zerg is strong vs protoss now because their weakness GSL players lost badly to zergs while the actually impressive ones like MC and Squirtle and Ace get knocked out by PvP and PvT
They see Inca getting smashed by NesTea an indicator that protoss are weak somehow..
You still see it all over the forums: zerg still feel misstreated, with Idra as their glorious imba whine leader. I actually think PvZ is still somewhat ok. PvT is...
The difference between you and Idra is that one makes valid points and the other player doesn't. Idra brings up accurate analogies of for example, Protoss being too good defensively and thus it's incredibly easy for them to turtle up to a cost-efficient army. Meanwhile there is absolutely nothing Zerg can do to beat the cost efficiency of Protoss. It doesn't matter if you outmacro a Protoss, as soon as they take the third base even if you have 6 bases you're on equal terms.
Now what is so different about Terran and Zerg? Well, Terran units actually ARE efficient
Uh.. I'm pretty sure Protoss units are expected to be more cost efficient vs Zerg units.
This is my conjecture regarding the shifting PVZ metagame from watching a lot of the pro games.
The now popular roach ling aggression early on forces a ton of forcefields, and depending on the circumstances (cannon position, attack angle, wall, army position) the toss may even lose a lot of sentries. It comes at a time when the toss army is composed primarily of sentries and lacks the DPS to wipe the floor with the enemy army. Even if the protoss holds, he's unable to do any form of aggression until FF recharges. If he loses sentries, then he may even have to sacrifice tech time to replenish them (100 gas per paper machentry isn't cheap).
Heavy sentry into expansion/tech was a popular and effective tactic before, but this now popularized "possibility of roach/lings" has instilled a sort of fear into the way protoss play their early game.
On June 04 2011 04:06 Alejandrisha wrote: Inside of korea protoss is really awkward. You have people like anypro and inca who have been in the gsl forever but are awful. You have people like hongun and sangho that are pretty bad but stick around somehow. You have MC who was unbeatable for a time just doing gimmicky builds. You have San who is trying to play macro games and having some success. Then you have Alicia who is the only one who has shown he is compentant at playing a macro game. Really, he is the only one I'd ever want to learn from.
It is weird because protosses in NA/EU win tournaments with builds that korean protosses do and get smashed. It makes me think it is game design rather than talent; any time a protoss has time to prepare for a gsl match what does he come up with? A gimmicky timing attack, most likely. If these are the players that are grinding double digit hours a day and that is the only thing they can come up with, I am very worried for protoss in the future.
All the Korean Protoss you mentioned have been consistently staying in Code S and you said they're awful.
Great logic there. lol
San was knocked down into Code A. Alicia's only been there for one season.
The Ro64 of a single tournament is hardly a lot of evidence. Especially when, if you look at the Ro32 of the same tournament, Zergs won 100% of their games against Protosses.
It is when the thread says "Protoss in the GSL", and it's definitely stronger than the 2 sets you're bringing up.
I only brought it up to demonstrate how stupid it was of you to bring the Ro64 alone up. You can't use one round of one tournament as your sole data for the PvZ winrate in Korea, especially when a later round of that same tournament has been played that reduces that winrate to 50%! Seriously, think about it for a minute.
Lets revisit this thread in the next GSL and see if the complaint is still valid. Let's be honest, people look at one tourny to deduce the strength/weakness of a race quite often, and it's such a small collection of data that it really has very little merit. If it were true for a bunch of tournies all at the same time you might have something, but as people mentioned, the final four of Star Wars? All Protoss.
On June 04 2011 04:35 branflakes14 wrote: @darmousseh
I feel as though the things you're pointing out are more just features of the race than weaknesses. Zergs could equally point out that their race is the only race that's unable to drain energy from other units, but that doesn't make it an inherent weakness. And tell Terran players who are being Force Fielded up their main ramp that Protoss has no space control ;D
Weaknesses are features?
Also zerg can mind-control instead of feedback. There are problems with zerg obviously (I also play zerg), but their problems are more related to larva mechanics/scouting.
Forcefield a ramp is a good way to get an expansion up, but it doesn't last very long and it costs forcefield energy.
This is actually very good for the game. You know how everyone hates the a-move protoss deathball? Well now they actually have incentive to try other things, not just an incentive but a need to. I think harass is going to be part of it, it just seems to make the most sense, especially against zerg. Harass is the best way to slow zerg down without risking an all-in, it's also more difficult to pull off against a good opponent, but that doesn't mean it cannot be done. Zerg already avoids clumping up units. Terran already avoids clumping up units. Maybe it is now toss's turn. Only time will tell, but I look forward to see some innovation from protoss, because for awhile now their play has been the most boring to watch (to me) largely because of how simple their strategies have been (build an army and win). Most people have blamed this on the design of the race itself, but the fact is while some people have called other methods "impossible", there has been little to no reason to spend hours and hours trying them. Perhaps it is time to problem solve and figure out ways to use that little warp prism, rather than complain about how useless it is.
I also want to address this comment "as a protoss you either go all-in with warpgates, or you turtle and try to get your most efficient unit mix". Well you're "masters / GM" (I didn't know you could be in 2 leagues at once lololol), well you're better than me, or at least higher ranked, but that doesn't mean you are correct - or that you can think better than me. Because you know what? What you said implies one thing, that you think protoss "has" to go all in or build a deathball, which means you got to your rank by doing such things, which means you don't know how to play with a different style on the level you've been playing on, which means you are likely going to lose a fuck ton of games before you you stumble on something amazing. Or you could just switch to terran, and ride the flavor of the month.
Yes I am a zerg player. Yes I am guilty of balance whine. But you know what? I was wrong, and a very, very glad I didn't race switch over it. You might not believe me when I say this change of attitude is NOT because of the current pro level change in the meta game, but I decided weeks ago to just try new things and look for solutions, and that was really all I needed - to try new things, and not be so arrogant to think that I already know the "best" way to play - while thinking the "best" way to play is also inferior and underpowered. There are other ways to win, find them.
I have faith in Alicia and Huk to keep holding the Protoss flag high. To be honest, we're probably seeing a little bit of a metagame shift right now. Zerg and Terran players are learning to deal with the deathball, and now Protoss players have to develop new styles around that. We'll see what happens.
On June 04 2011 03:54 Hypemeup wrote: One side of the fence we have the IdrA-infuenced zerg crowd, who have been whining about being UP since the game got into beta.
On the other side we have Protoss players who are fed up with being called skilless retards by angry zergs.
And sitting on the fence we have terrans, who are like "whatever we are the hardest race anyways"
Let's take a look at the PvZ and PvT played so far.
Warning: This spoiler is a short summary of every played game yet. The official report of the R64 is out. If you haven't seen them and don't want to get spoiled..you know what to do.
Round of 64 MVP vs Creator - Great series, Creator took a game off the amazing MVP so I don't think this says much about the state of the protoss. MVP > Creator so he won like it should be. Of course, this is based on past results, but you can't say that MVP is trash and that he didn't deserve the win. He played well. Inca vs Ryung - ....Terran is pretty good at stopping all-ins? Dumb series tbh. If you are mad because protoss all-ins aren't working anymore, don't switch to zerg you'll be disapointed. jookTo vs Anypro - G1 he wanted to hit a timing, and so did JookTo. Anypro turned around. When do you win when you turn around? Never. Poor decision making by Anypro. Game 2: Kind of like zerg vs 4gate, if you have no idea it's coming you're going to lose. Yet, we notice Protoss stopping a zerg all in with no units. I'd like to zerg stop 4gate with only spines The versatility of Protoss not matched by Zerg, so don't complain about that. Zerg one base SUCKS as seen in this game. Game 3: Interesting roach/baneling-centric style from jookto, Anypro not responding properly. He should of sit back, got collosi, got many forcefield and ROLLED over jookto. Again, Anypro didn't respond correctly to Jookto's unit composition. Imba? Then collosi/gatewayunits is imba because you can't kill roach hydra. Trickster vs Yugioh - Lol.Yugioh got rolled over, with non-standard play too. Protoss still has very many options.
Genius vs Boxer - Good series. Genius played well and Boxer did several mistakes, Genius won. Makes sense... Fruitdealer vs Ace - Good example of Protoss winning games they shouldn't. Fruitdealer didn't sniff out the all-ins properly and lost, like it should be. Squirtles vs Marineking - Squirtle scouted poorly and didn't see the timings coming. He wasn't prepared, he lost. End of story. How many times have Protoss been victor in these types of scenarios? Look at Ace. He won IEM with one build. Byun vs Legalmind - Should terrible players win? ...
Kyrix vs Vanvanth - read ^ Choya vs Zenio - Choya won doing allins.
Did you notice in the Round of 64 how many protoss players won with standard play? Those who played standard always did quite well. There's not many great standard protoss players. Are you mad because all-ins are so effective anymore?
Round of 32 TheBest vs Trickster - Nice all in from theBest. He got pretty lucky and I don't personally think he should of won but timings are timings and theBest had good micro while Trickster showed some poor decision making in G3 so it's a player thing not a race thing.
Genius vs Min - One of the best ZvP in this tournament so far. Game 1: Trickster got really greedy with his tech. He got a third base without robo = without scouting, and he lost. If protoss 6 gates and zerg doesn't get burrow and a lot of units zerg loses, so if roaches are imba, 6 gate is imba, 4 gate is imba, anything is. The point is, you can't just expand without tech and scouting information, especially when your opponent has the tech to punish it. Game 2: Genius lost too many probes to baneling drops, did some dumb moving around while Min got thousands of mutas. Interview with Min: Min said he the best way to beat Genius was with mutas. Did Genius know about this weakness? Did he adjust his play to Min's style? Doesn't look like it since he got ouplayed hard, I don't think the player didn't deserve to win. VERY DISAPOINTING pheonix control. Like masters player can outrun mutas I was laughing. Revival vs HongUn - Revival looked at HongUn's replays, which featured the same build over and over again. He found a weakness, exploited it. He deserved to win because HongUn changed nothing in his play, which was not that safe afterall.
Conclusion: I don't know what you're complaining about. It seems to me like you're complaining that those fucking terrible players who got past the round of 64 doing all-ins all the time are not winning anymore and so you're mad. Protoss players who played standard did great, the Creator vs MVP games were way too close in my opinion. Protoss is really strong race but the thing about all-ins is if they don't work you lose.
On June 04 2011 04:42 Beyonder wrote: And you know, there's one other thing. No up and coming player plays protoss. They all play either zerg or terran. That is something very interesting. There's some protosses we've seen done well (e.g., ImSeed), but they just cant get there. While zergs and especially terrans are just popping like flies. Protoss is easy to get (half)good with, but I think as players practice more and the skill cap becomes greater, zerg and terran will get more and more ahead.
Yes, protoss is a fundamentally flawed race. They are stuck in the middle where a Zerg has to be much much better than the other player to beat one, but when it comes to Terrans, Protoss is simply unable to do anything.
Protoss requires the least micro and macro, and this is what happens when players actually get good.
Wrong statement. Protoss requires the most micro to be on par with equal cost army for early game and mid game. Proven.
Also, zerg's have some insanely cost-efficient unit, namely the roach. And since Protoss units can't really deal with armies cost efficiently unless they're in a giant ball, it makes kinda bad. I mean, hell, it takes 8 supply of zealots vs marines for zealots to already lose their cost efficiency. Meanwhile, roaches in small to medium sizes counter both zealots and stalkers with a cheaper cost.
I'm both a Zerg and Protoss player. It's really true that Protoss is a weak race that relies on so many gimicks. If maps weren't made correctly with enough chokes, Protoss would die badly.
As for Terran ... you try to gimp mech with their lack of mobility, and gimp MMM with splash. Zerg has an answer to marine tank, but Protosses must wait until Collosus or storm to do so, unless you power through with lots of units.
Amazing how people think that PvT favours terran :o... You need to drop like a mad dogg and do a HUGE amount of damage before you can actually battle the protoss army. Collossus + HT is almost unbeatable and mech is still not possible. Voidray allins are VERY hard to hold and 6gate is ridicilous without 4+ bunkers. You need to put a turret early game or you die to DT players (I'm talking about FE tosses that go DT's around 9:00). EMP is strong, I agree, but I really saw 200/200 vs 200/200 fights where both players had 3-3 and where the terran emped every single protoss unit. Result: terran loses the battle, protoss warps in a new round and GG.
Am I the only one seeing TvP as balanced in EU and NA? It's different in Korea, I agree, but I feel like Europe and Korea have the same skill level.
On June 04 2011 04:06 Alejandrisha wrote: Inside of korea protoss is really awkward. You have people like anypro and inca who have been in the gsl forever but are awful. You have people like hongun and sangho that are pretty bad but stick around somehow. You have MC who was unbeatable for a time just doing gimmicky builds. You have San who is trying to play macro games and having some success. Then you have Alicia who is the only one who has shown he is compentant at playing a macro game. Really, he is the only one I'd ever want to learn from.
It is weird because protosses in NA/EU win tournaments with builds that korean protosses do and get smashed. It makes me think it is game design rather than talent; any time a protoss has time to prepare for a gsl match what does he come up with? A gimmicky timing attack, most likely. If these are the players that are grinding double digit hours a day and that is the only thing they can come up with, I am very worried for protoss in the future.
I think protoss is quite easy to get good with as it does not allow for that much skill input. So al ot of practice pays off in that regard. But its insanely hard to get truly good with for that same reason. You simply can not do all that much with your units. Outmacroing is out of the question: you cant take bases ahead of your opponent. There's a reason they come up with gimmicky timing attacks.
Cant believe that the zergs are still whining nowadays. Zerg is sick strong atm :D
Dude zerg are not whining much. We are mad at protoss thinking zerg is strong vs protoss now because their weakness GSL players lost badly to zergs while the actually impressive ones like MC and Squirtle and Ace get knocked out by PvP and PvT
They see Inca getting smashed by NesTea an indicator that protoss are weak somehow..
You still see it all over the forums: zerg still feel misstreated, with Idra as their glorious imba whine leader. I actually think PvZ is still somewhat ok. PvT is...
The difference between you and Idra is that one makes valid points and the other player doesn't. Idra brings up accurate analogies of for example, Protoss being too good defensively and thus it's incredibly easy for them to turtle up to a cost-efficient army. Meanwhile there is absolutely nothing Zerg can do to beat the cost efficiency of Protoss. It doesn't matter if you outmacro a Protoss, as soon as they take the third base even if you have 6 bases you're on equal terms.
Now what is so different about Terran and Zerg? Well, Terran units actually ARE efficient
Of course it matters. You have the best caster in the game that does heavy damage to armored (nearly every protoss unit in a ball is armored), you have the most supply efficient unit in the game (bling), you have the best harassing tool in the game (muta). On top of that you can easily drop zerglings, cheap supply units that deal ridiculous dmg upgraded (cracklings + 2 / +3 upgrade kill buildings so fast it's not even funny).
Of course if you go roach / hydra / corrupter it doesn't matter if you go 6 bases. Roaches / hydra aren't supply efficient. They are a good unit to transition from in the mid game. Once zergs gets 5 bases, infestor broodlord and many bling / lings it's insanely difficult to win. Watch hasuobs vs xlord from the eps semi-final for instance. There you see the power difference of macro zerg, and roach macro zerg (lol).
Idra is just bad at ZvP cause he builds roaches throughout the game and thinks he is the better player if he drops 2 overlords via minimap without even watching after them.
Let's see the points you listed:
1) Infestors: costs 100/150, and Fungal Growth is completely worthless against any Tier 3 unit Protoss has. Neural Parasite isn't but it isn't hard to deny a channeling ability. Blink Stalkers can snipe them, HT can kill them instantly, and Colossus can simply target them. Also useless until mid to lategame.
2) Banelings, which in terms of supply are more expensive than Ultralisks, are somehow efficient against armored units which size allows them to take much less splash damage than something like marines. Yes Baneling drops are good, but that efficiency is suddenly drastically reduced when *gasp* the Protoss splits his Stalkers.
3) Zergling drops? Well placed cannons completely get rid of Zerglings. It doesn't even matter how many minerals you spent on them, if you have at least 2-3 bases mining you can spend as much money as you want on cannons.
Also an Infestor/Brood Lord composition against Protoss compositions with heavy Tier 3 actually cost more by a huge margin, especially in gas. Therefore the only way Zerg can ever build a composition like this is if they literally never push out.
Look at how those protoss lost their matches before starting to cry!
They just played very allinish/risky strategies or did some huge mistakes. It's just those individuals playing bad, not the protoss race having a hard time!
I have no clue why this thread isn't closed yet. Shall everyone start a thread about switching the race when some players are doing poorly in a tournament?
On June 04 2011 04:52 Steel wrote: Let's take a look at the PvZ and PvT played so far.
Warning: This spoiler is a short summary of every played game yet. The official report of the R64 is out. If you haven't seen them and don't want to get spoiled..you know what to do.
MVP vs Creator - Great series, Creator took a game off the amazing MVP so I don't think this says much about the state of the protoss. MVP > Creator so he won like it should be. Of course, this is based on past results, but you can't say that MVP is trash and that he didn't deserve the win. He played well.
Inca vs Ryung - ....Terran is pretty good at stopping all-ins? Dumb series tbh. If you are mad because protoss all-ins aren't working anymore, don't switch to zerg you'll be disapointed.
jookTo vs Anypro - G1 he wanted to hit a timing, and so did JookTo. Anypro turned around. When do you win when you turn around? Never. Poor decision making by Anypro. Game 2: Kind of like zerg vs 4gate, if you have no idea it's coming you're going to lose. Yet, we notice Protoss stopping a zerg all in with no units. I'd like to zerg stop 4gate with only spines The versatility of Protoss not matched by Zerg, so don't complain about that. Zerg one base SUCKS as seen in this game. Game 3: Interesting roach/baneling-centric style from jookto, Anypro not responding properly. He should of sit back, got collosi, got many forcefield and ROLLED over jookto. Again, Anypro didn't respond correctly to Jookto's unit composition. Imba? Then collosi/gatewayunits is imba because you can't kill roach hydra.
Trickster vs Yugioh - Lol.Yugioh got rolled over, with non-standard play too. Protoss still has very many options.
Genius vs Boxer - Good series. Genius played well and Boxer did several mistakes, Genius won. Makes sense...
Fruitdealer vs Ace - Good example of Protoss winning games they shouldn't.
Squirtles vs Marineking - Squirtle scouted poorly and didn't see the timings coming. He wasn't prepared, he lost. End of story. How many times have Protoss been victor in these types of scenarios? Look at Ace. He won IEM with one build.
Byun vs Legalmind - Should terrible players win? ...
Kyrix vs Vanvanth - read ^
Choya vs Zenio - Choya won doing allins.
Did you notice in the Round of 64 how many protoss players won with standard play? Those who played standard always did quite well. There's not many great standard protoss players. Are you mad because all-ins are so effective anymore?
Round of 32
TheBest vs Trickster - Nice all in from theBest. He got pretty lucky and I don't personally think he should of won but timings are timings and theBest had good micro while Trickster showed some poor decision making in G3 so it's a player thing not a race thing.
Genius vs Min - One of the best ZvP in this tournament so far. Game 1: Trickster got really greedy with his tech. He got a third base without robo = without scouting, and he lost. If protoss 6 gates and zerg doesn't get burrow and a lot of units zerg loses, so if roaches are imba, 6 gate is imba, 4 gate is imba, anything is. The point is, you can't just expand without tech and scouting information, especially when your opponent has the tech to punish it. Game 2: Genius lost too many probes to baneling drops, did some dumb moving around while Min got thousands of mutas. Interview with Min: Min said he the best way to beat Genius was with mutas. Did Genius know about this weakness? Did he adjust his play to Min's style? Doesn't look like it since he got ouplayed hard, I don't think the player didn't deserve to win. VERY DISAPOINTING pheonix control. Like masters player can outrun mutas I was laughing.
Revival vs HongUn - Revival looked at HongUn's replays, which featured the same build over and over again. He found a weakness, exploited it. He deserved to win because HongUn changed nothing in his play, which was not that safe afterall.
Conclusion: I don't know what you're complaining about. It seems to me like you're complaining that those fucking terrible players who got past the round of 64 doing all-ins all the time are not winning anymore and so you're mad. Protoss players who played standard did great, the Creator vs MVP games were way too close in my opinion. Protoss is really strong race but the thing about all-ins is if they don't work you lose.
It's all Idra's fault IMO. Idra has so much fanboys that when he loses and cries OP, all his zerg follower goes along with it. As for Terran and Protoss, you don't see MC or MVP/Bomber or any top Terran complaining about OP after they lose.
id dare say that the same mistakes are made by zergs and terrans, but that protoss simply cannot recover (especialyl vs terran) and cannot retreat. Like zerg on small maps T_T
On June 04 2011 04:29 darmousseh wrote: There are a # of problems protoss has which makes them weak in certain situations.
1. Protoss units can't retreat. One of the major advantages of blink stalkers and collosus is that you can retreat with them, but zealots, immortals, void rays and to some extent HT and archons cannot retreat fast enough. if a terran is losing a battle, they can stim and run away. Zerg units are so fast they can just sprint away. Other than stalkers and collosus, once a protoss engages, they must commit or else be willing to lose all of their zealots. This was the problem with archons, but that changed in the patch. Marauders and infestors don't help the situation either.
2. Protoss can reinforce too quickly. When blizzard did balancing, they needed to consider the effect of reinforcement on the balance. Because protoss can warp in, the units are weaker by a large margin.
3. High dependance on spell casters and high dps units Terran can win games with marines and marauders only. Once terran has stim, protoss needs sentries (for guardian shields and forcefields), collosus (to do dps) or HT, and blink/charge and all high dps units from protoss are easily counterable. (vikings against collosus, ghosts against HT, concussive shells against charge/blink). If protoss wants to win, they need to win every single engagement.
4. No area controlling units. Dark templar can be considered area controlling to a tiny extent, but only lasts a short time. Tanks for terran, banelings and infestors for zerg, protoss literally has nothing. At one time, protoss could hold a position by having a pylon and being able to warp in a high templar with kydarian amulet, but no more. There is no risk advancing into a protoss base. This is the biggest reason why protoss is always in a ball.
5. Highly limited tech choice This somewhat opened up with the recent changes to archon, but most air builds are almost autolosses and warp prism play offers very limited reward with high risks. Obviously protoss hasn't explored EVERY single option, but it's not due to a lack of trying.
6. The cost of scouting is too high. A terran can scout with reapers or scans at almost any moment, a zerg can send an overlord , but a protoss must choose a specific tech pattern and sacrifice tech choices in order to scout. If the protoss gets hallucination, then that's 2 less forcefields and less tech. If the protoss gets an obs, that's 200m/100g followed by 25m/75g. And scouting makes protoss SUPER vulnerable to a fast timing attack. I think protoss need to get that super fast immortal to be safe followed by a chrono'd observer in order to be safe against dt builds, banshee builds, and burrowed roach. My guess is that blizzard designed protoss to always get a fast robo every game (considering all of the units like immortals, observers, and warp prisms), but the truth is that the investment makes it difficult to choose another tech path if you scout something that robo is not good against. Zerg can scout with a lair (a natural part of their tech path) and terran can scout with scans or reapers (a very natural part of the tech path). I still think this is something that can be explored. Maybe hallucination first builds or something would really go a long way to help out. Maybe 1 gate robo is the build of the future, something to be considered. This however I believe is the #1 problem protoss currently has.
I'm not saying protoss is UP, they still win a lot of games and each race has it's own problems, but that the problems for protoss make it difficult to show consistent results mostly because of the scouting problem. Naniwa did 4 gates in order to be the agressor (in which case you don't really need early scouting), but as 4 gates got nerfed, naniwa's build got weaker and I think MLG will show the results of the most recent patch.
On June 04 2011 04:54 ScythedBlade wrote: Wrong statement. Protoss requires the most micro to be on par with equal cost army for early game and mid game. Proven.
You can't be this delusional. Tell me: what units do you rely on the most? Colossus and Sentries. One unit is a-click and the other is F spam. Yes, Sentries actually do take some skill to use, but that is really the only thing you can improve upon as you get better and even then it's incredibly simplistic. The entire deathball mechanic also pretty much gets rid of any use for positioning apart from zealots at front at your one big control group.
On June 04 2011 04:47 Severian wrote: I only brought it up to demonstrate how stupid it was of you to bring the Ro64 alone up. You can't use one round of one tournament as your sole data for the PvZ winrate in Korea, especially when a later round of that same tournament has been played that reduces that winrate to 50%! Seriously, think about it for a minute.
I don't want to say this but it feels like you have some kind of mental problem when you find it amazing the winrate is decreased by 50% when you compare an entire round (and the biggest one at that), to two sets played in one day.
On June 04 2011 04:21 Cuiu wrote: Ro64 16 P Ro32 7 around 55%?are out
R64 29 T R32 17 P around 42%?are out
R 19 Z R 8 Z around 60%?are out
yeah protoss is soo bad in this tournament i think blizz ruined the game for toss player you should switch the game not the race...
look at the Ro16
z has 4 people already make it and there is a ZvZ that still needs to be played so thats minimum of 5/8 zergs making it. i doubt leenock will beat clide, so it will probably stay at 5/8, keep in mind the ZvZ means 1 Z has to lose so 7 is the maximum number of zergs that could advance.
P has 0 people to make it so far and there is no PvP. 3/7 protoss have already lost and the 4 remaining are ace, alicia huk and choya. ace plays MKP so his chances of winning are bleak. Huk plays polt who is solid against P, and huk has not done well in korea yet. choya plays top who is very solid and choya has not been doing well recently. Alicia is the only protoss hope. he plays byun and he should win that but i wouldnt be that surprised if byun won. so on a good day 2 protoss advance and on a bad day all of them are out by the Ro16
although im not going to say protoss is up. like others have said warp gate nerf screws with protoss's timings and they have to relearn all there timings. so with time P will start winning again and then it can be accessed if they are UP or not. also if the best 2 P did not play each other P would be sitting in a better position.
I think all protoss should do 1 of 2 things. Switch races and don't look back. Blizzard has nerfed protoss 2x more than zerg and terran combined. When protoss gets a buff it goes to archons and phoenix. Seriously, they nerfed zealots, what are the chances of marines or lings getting a build time nerf?
Or pretend you're zerg and go 15 nexus all day on ladder in every matchup, whine that is unfair that you can't be ahead all game long and when the statistics plummet for protoss even after buffs well just keep pluggin along with our 15 nexus until we get base units that aren't 2x the cost for less dmg.
On June 04 2011 04:54 Dente wrote: Amazing how people think that PvT favours terran :o... You need to drop like a mad dogg and do a HUGE amount of damage before you can actually battle the protoss army. Collossus + HT is almost unbeatable and mech is still not possible. Voidray allins are VERY hard to hold and 6gate is ridicilous without 4+ bunkers. You need to put a turret early game or you die to DT players (I'm talking about FE tosses that go DT's around 9:00). EMP is strong, I agree, but I really saw 200/200 vs 200/200 fights where both players had 3-3 and where the terran emped every single protoss unit. Result: terran loses the battle, protoss warps in a new round and GG.
Am I the only one seeing TvP as balanced in EU and NA? It's different in Korea, I agree, but I feel like Europe and Korea have the same skill level.
Maybe for the most part but n maps like Tal'darim altar terran have an unbelievable advantage in the late game, storms and forcefields and even colossi are much less effective because there's so much room, and drops and nukes are incredibly good also.
this kind of things happened alot in sc:bw, people find out new strategy and then metagame shifts dramatically. zerg find out the strategy, now it is protoss' turn to come out with new strat that can counter what zergs are doing.
ex. for several month protoss would have some where around 70~80% win rate against zerg and when zerg comes out with new strat (2 hatch build) then protoss win rate goes down to 20~30%.
but i highly doubt though. seem like this is an age of first bonjwa, Nestea. as long as Nestea is around, might be a while for protoss.
I fail to see how people can say things like this seriously. Squirtle and Ace are hands down leagues above you most likely, how can they be "not impressive"?
On topic. I agree with the majority of people in the thread, the results from one tournament aren't enough to jump to any major balance conclusions. Protoss seem to be doing drastically better in the foreign scene, maybe we should find out what's different?
PvZ I think zerg have learned how to be agressive without going all-in a lot better. The best recent example of this is the Genius vs Min game on Xel'Naga Fortress where Min did that really well timed baneling/hydra attack. Genius had up two colossus which a month ago would mean for any zerg "no more hydras, ever". But with baneling bomb support the attack did alot of damage, most importantly reducing the sentry count by a lot. The attack was extremely cost-efficient for Min, and he did it while securing a large economic lead as well. Of course when going against hydra/baneling the response demanded from Protoss is more collossi, but Zerg has the luxury of being able to tech switch so sharply that Min just went mass mass muta and Genius had no chance. It was an extremely intelligently played game by Min. People seem to think of matchups as unit composition vs unit composition wars, and so if collossi>>hydras hydras are useless, but honestly its all about the times at which you use your units, and those are a lot more subtle and take much longer to develop. A race doing poorly for a month, or even has long as two or three months, doesn't mean too much for such a new game with so much unexplored territory. I look forward to seeing what Protoss comes up with in the next few months.
Protoss is back to where they were back in GSL 1 - 2
there are 2 things that made Protoss win and seem Overpowered. a) Incontrol Sentry Style (helped PvZ tremendously) b) MC all-in timings
both have been figured out, which leaves Protoss with nothing else, to rely on. There are no safe builds in PvZ anymore, thanks to scouting issues.
Protoss units are the least costeffectiv, and no Z is not least cost effectiv. You have got Roaches one of the most cost effective unit in the Game early and midgame.
Zerg can now deny the economic gain of Protoss first expansion, which already seals the deal most of the time.
now T/Z evolved alittle (aka they stopped playing like retards) but P also got nerfed like alot. Now P has to find some other gimmicky strategys that are not solid to win some games.
It is the same as LiquidTyler said when those Gimmicky Styles get figured out everything be fixed, but of course the whole QQ fest the last 2-3 Months, resulted unneccessary huge P Nerfs and Zerg Buffs.
On June 04 2011 05:02 shire wrote: this kind of things happened alot in sc:bw, people find out new strategy and then metagame shifts dramatically. zerg find out the strategy, now it is protoss' turn to come out with new strat that can counter what zergs are doing.
ex. for several month protoss would have some where around 70~80% win rate against zerg and when zerg comes out with new strat (2 hatch build) then protoss win rate goes down to 20~30%.
but i highly doubt though. seem like this is an age of first bonjwa, Nestea. as long as Nestea is around, might be a while for protoss.
i don't understand all the nestea hype. he is not sweeping every one, cezanne had a chance to knock him out. the only thing different is he is the first person to win a gsl and then not suck the next one. i don't think he will win the super tourny.
On June 04 2011 04:29 darmousseh wrote: 3. High dependance on spell casters and high dps unitsTerran can win games with marines and marauders only.
This is so completely wrong and a total myth. Terran can't win with marines and marauders only. Terran needs to add: - vikings - ghosts - medivacs
to stand a CHANCE. That's not just marine marauder...
He means in terms of damage output from his units. Protoss is never going to win a TvP with zealot / stalker / sentry, because their damage output sucks. (of course if he has 2-2 and terran 0-0 that's another matter, but then the terran failed) While you can win your games as terrans with only Marine / Marauder as damage dealers, without the need for aoe.
I fail to see how people can say things like this seriously. Squirtle and Ace are hands down leagues above you most likely, how can they be "not impressive"?
On topic. I agree with the majority of people in the thread, the results from one tournament aren't enough to jump to any major balance conclusions. Protoss seem to be doing drastically better in the foreign scene, maybe we should find out what's different?
foreign scene doesn't have nestea, lol
no but in all seriousness, there are some pretty good foreign protoss. they actually seem to often demonstrate more solid play than their korean counterparts.
I fail to see how people can say things like this seriously. Squirtle and Ace are hands down leagues above you most likely, how can they be "not impressive"?
shawn bradley probably is a lot better than me in basketball but he's still not impressive compared to his peers, i believe that is the point xenocide was trying to make.
On June 04 2011 05:02 shire wrote: this kind of things happened alot in sc:bw, people find out new strategy and then metagame shifts dramatically. zerg find out the strategy, now it is protoss' turn to come out with new strat that can counter what zergs are doing.
ex. for several month protoss would have some where around 70~80% win rate against zerg and when zerg comes out with new strat (2 hatch build) then protoss win rate goes down to 20~30%.
but i highly doubt though. seem like this is an age of first bonjwa, Nestea. as long as Nestea is around, might be a while for protoss.
i don't understand all the nestea hype. he is not sweeping every one, cezanne had a chance to knock him out. the only thing different is he is the first person to win a gsl and then not suck the next one. i don't think he will win the super tourny.
dude have you watched nestea? he is freaking amazing!
On June 04 2011 04:47 Severian wrote: I only brought it up to demonstrate how stupid it was of you to bring the Ro64 alone up. You can't use one round of one tournament as your sole data for the PvZ winrate in Korea, especially when a later round of that same tournament has been played that reduces that winrate to 50%! Seriously, think about it for a minute.
I don't want to say this but it feels like you have some kind of mental problem when you find it amazing the winrate is decreased by 50% when you compare an entire round (and the biggest one at that), to two sets played in one day.
I'm not sure if you're trolling here. You've managed to mischaracterize what I said, misstate a fact, state something that doesn't make sense mathematically and call me mentally ill, all in the one sentence.
The winrate wasn't reduced by 50%. It was reduced to 50%.
I don't find that amazing. I find it pretty expected given that your statement that Protosses win 66% of PvZs is obviously a load of crap.
Logically, the winrate should drop by a relatively small amount in the second round as there are fewer games to influence the number (unless there were, due to luck of the draw, an abnormally small number of PvZs in the first round). 66%->50% isn't a large drop (even though Protosses didn't win any PvZs!), but it is a drop and it makes your number false. Accept that.
On June 04 2011 04:55 elitesniper420 wrote: 2) Banelings, which in terms of supply are more expensive than Ultralisks
Expand on this, please. Ultralisks cost 6 Banelings' worth of minerals, 8 Banelings' worth of gas, and 12 Banelings' worth of supply.
I fail to see how people can say things like this seriously. Squirtle and Ace are hands down leagues above you most likely, how can they be "not impressive"?
shawn bradley probably is a lot better than me in basketball but he's still not impressive compared to his peers, i believe that is the point xenocide was trying to make.
On June 04 2011 04:29 darmousseh wrote: 3. High dependance on spell casters and high dps unitsTerran can win games with marines and marauders only.
This is so completely wrong and a total myth. Terran can't win with marines and marauders only. Terran needs to add: - vikings - ghosts - medivacs
to stand a CHANCE. That's not just marine marauder...
He means in terms of damage output from his units. Protoss is never going to win a TvP with zealot / stalker / sentry, because their damage output sucks. (of course if he has 2-2 and terran 0-0 that's another matter, but then the terran failed) While you can win your games as terrans with only Marine / Marauder as damage dealers, without the need for aoe.
You can't just compare those things. As a terran MMM + V + G is the only thing that works. Mech is a complete joke against protoss. I know that some other styles had some success in the past, but that doesn't make those styles viable. Even when you EMP the whole protoss army, then it is still hard to win the battle. We have 2 damagedealers, but those are not always enough.
On June 04 2011 04:52 Steel wrote: Let's take a look at the PvZ and PvT played so far.
Warning: This spoiler is a short summary of every played game yet. The official report of the R64 is out. If you haven't seen them and don't want to get spoiled..you know what to do.
MVP vs Creator - Great series, Creator took a game off the amazing MVP so I don't think this says much about the state of the protoss. MVP > Creator so he won like it should be. Of course, this is based on past results, but you can't say that MVP is trash and that he didn't deserve the win. He played well.
Inca vs Ryung - ....Terran is pretty good at stopping all-ins? Dumb series tbh. If you are mad because protoss all-ins aren't working anymore, don't switch to zerg you'll be disapointed.
jookTo vs Anypro - G1 he wanted to hit a timing, and so did JookTo. Anypro turned around. When do you win when you turn around? Never. Poor decision making by Anypro. Game 2: Kind of like zerg vs 4gate, if you have no idea it's coming you're going to lose. Yet, we notice Protoss stopping a zerg all in with no units. I'd like to zerg stop 4gate with only spines The versatility of Protoss not matched by Zerg, so don't complain about that. Zerg one base SUCKS as seen in this game. Game 3: Interesting roach/baneling-centric style from jookto, Anypro not responding properly. He should of sit back, got collosi, got many forcefield and ROLLED over jookto. Again, Anypro didn't respond correctly to Jookto's unit composition. Imba? Then collosi/gatewayunits is imba because you can't kill roach hydra.
Trickster vs Yugioh - Lol.Yugioh got rolled over, with non-standard play too. Protoss still has very many options.
Genius vs Boxer - Good series. Genius played well and Boxer did several mistakes, Genius won. Makes sense...
Fruitdealer vs Ace - Good example of Protoss winning games they shouldn't.
Squirtles vs Marineking - Squirtle scouted poorly and didn't see the timings coming. He wasn't prepared, he lost. End of story. How many times have Protoss been victor in these types of scenarios? Look at Ace. He won IEM with one build.
Byun vs Legalmind - Should terrible players win? ...
Kyrix vs Vanvanth - read ^
Choya vs Zenio - Choya won doing allins.
Did you notice in the Round of 64 how many protoss players won with standard play? Those who played standard always did quite well. There's not many great standard protoss players. Are you mad because all-ins are so effective anymore?
Round of 32
TheBest vs Trickster - Nice all in from theBest. He got pretty lucky and I don't personally think he should of won but timings are timings and theBest had good micro while Trickster showed some poor decision making in G3 so it's a player thing not a race thing.
Genius vs Min - One of the best ZvP in this tournament so far. Game 1: Trickster got really greedy with his tech. He got a third base without robo = without scouting, and he lost. If protoss 6 gates and zerg doesn't get burrow and a lot of units zerg loses, so if roaches are imba, 6 gate is imba, 4 gate is imba, anything is. The point is, you can't just expand without tech and scouting information, especially when your opponent has the tech to punish it. Game 2: Genius lost too many probes to baneling drops, did some dumb moving around while Min got thousands of mutas. Interview with Min: Min said he the best way to beat Genius was with mutas. Did Genius know about this weakness? Did he adjust his play to Min's style? Doesn't look like it since he got ouplayed hard, I don't think the player didn't deserve to win. VERY DISAPOINTING pheonix control. Like masters player can outrun mutas I was laughing.
Revival vs HongUn - Revival looked at HongUn's replays, which featured the same build over and over again. He found a weakness, exploited it. He deserved to win because HongUn changed nothing in his play, which was not that safe afterall.
Conclusion: I don't know what you're complaining about. It seems to me like you're complaining that those fucking terrible players who got past the round of 64 doing all-ins all the time are not winning anymore and so you're mad. Protoss players who played standard did great, the Creator vs MVP games were way too close in my opinion. Protoss is really strong race but the thing about all-ins is if they don't work you lose.
TL;DR: Protoss is a great race just bad players.
annnnnd here we go.
I think it's kind of silly too look at the GSL since most Protoss players all-ined. Macro protosses are rare and those who exist have been doing quite well.
On June 04 2011 05:02 Reborn8u wrote: I think all protoss should do 1 of 2 things. Switch races and don't look back. Blizzard has nerfed protoss 2x more than zerg and terran combined. When protoss gets a buff it goes to archons and phoenix. Seriously, they nerfed zealots, what are the chances of marines or lings getting a build time nerf?
Or pretend you're zerg and go 15 nexus all day on ladder in every matchup, whine that is unfair that you can't be ahead all game long and when the statistics plummet for protoss even after buffs well just keep pluggin along with our 15 nexus until we get base units that aren't 2x the cost for less dmg.
1) You don't know anything about Zerg 2) You apparently don't know anything about patch notes. They buffed Zealots by making sure they land a hit on charge. And saying Protoss has been nerfed twice as much as Terrans? lol
On June 04 2011 04:52 Steel wrote: Let's take a look at the PvZ and PvT played so far.
Warning: This spoiler is a short summary of every played game yet. The official report of the R64 is out. If you haven't seen them and don't want to get spoiled..you know what to do.
MVP vs Creator - Great series, Creator took a game off the amazing MVP so I don't think this says much about the state of the protoss. MVP > Creator so he won like it should be. Of course, this is based on past results, but you can't say that MVP is trash and that he didn't deserve the win. He played well.
Inca vs Ryung - ....Terran is pretty good at stopping all-ins? Dumb series tbh. If you are mad because protoss all-ins aren't working anymore, don't switch to zerg you'll be disapointed.
jookTo vs Anypro - G1 he wanted to hit a timing, and so did JookTo. Anypro turned around. When do you win when you turn around? Never. Poor decision making by Anypro. Game 2: Kind of like zerg vs 4gate, if you have no idea it's coming you're going to lose. Yet, we notice Protoss stopping a zerg all in with no units. I'd like to zerg stop 4gate with only spines The versatility of Protoss not matched by Zerg, so don't complain about that. Zerg one base SUCKS as seen in this game. Game 3: Interesting roach/baneling-centric style from jookto, Anypro not responding properly. He should of sit back, got collosi, got many forcefield and ROLLED over jookto. Again, Anypro didn't respond correctly to Jookto's unit composition. Imba? Then collosi/gatewayunits is imba because you can't kill roach hydra.
Trickster vs Yugioh - Lol.Yugioh got rolled over, with non-standard play too. Protoss still has very many options.
Genius vs Boxer - Good series. Genius played well and Boxer did several mistakes, Genius won. Makes sense...
Fruitdealer vs Ace - Good example of Protoss winning games they shouldn't.
Squirtles vs Marineking - Squirtle scouted poorly and didn't see the timings coming. He wasn't prepared, he lost. End of story. How many times have Protoss been victor in these types of scenarios? Look at Ace. He won IEM with one build.
Byun vs Legalmind - Should terrible players win? ...
Kyrix vs Vanvanth - read ^
Choya vs Zenio - Choya won doing allins.
Did you notice in the Round of 64 how many protoss players won with standard play? Those who played standard always did quite well. There's not many great standard protoss players. Are you mad because all-ins are so effective anymore?
Round of 32
TheBest vs Trickster - Nice all in from theBest. He got pretty lucky and I don't personally think he should of won but timings are timings and theBest had good micro while Trickster showed some poor decision making in G3 so it's a player thing not a race thing.
Genius vs Min - One of the best ZvP in this tournament so far. Game 1: Trickster got really greedy with his tech. He got a third base without robo = without scouting, and he lost. If protoss 6 gates and zerg doesn't get burrow and a lot of units zerg loses, so if roaches are imba, 6 gate is imba, 4 gate is imba, anything is. The point is, you can't just expand without tech and scouting information, especially when your opponent has the tech to punish it. Game 2: Genius lost too many probes to baneling drops, did some dumb moving around while Min got thousands of mutas. Interview with Min: Min said he the best way to beat Genius was with mutas. Did Genius know about this weakness? Did he adjust his play to Min's style? Doesn't look like it since he got ouplayed hard, I don't think the player didn't deserve to win. VERY DISAPOINTING pheonix control. Like masters player can outrun mutas I was laughing.
Revival vs HongUn - Revival looked at HongUn's replays, which featured the same build over and over again. He found a weakness, exploited it. He deserved to win because HongUn changed nothing in his play, which was not that safe afterall.
Conclusion: I don't know what you're complaining about. It seems to me like you're complaining that those fucking terrible players who got past the round of 64 doing all-ins all the time are not winning anymore and so you're mad. Protoss players who played standard did great, the Creator vs MVP games were way too close in my opinion. Protoss is really strong race but the thing about all-ins is if they don't work you lose.
TL;DR: Protoss is a great race just bad players.
annnnnd here we go.
I think it's kind of silly too look at the GSL since most Protoss players all-ined. Macro protosses are rare and those who exist have been doing quite well.
On June 04 2011 05:02 shire wrote: this kind of things happened alot in sc:bw, people find out new strategy and then metagame shifts dramatically. zerg find out the strategy, now it is protoss' turn to come out with new strat that can counter what zergs are doing.
ex. for several month protoss would have some where around 70~80% win rate against zerg and when zerg comes out with new strat (2 hatch build) then protoss win rate goes down to 20~30%.
but i highly doubt though. seem like this is an age of first bonjwa, Nestea. as long as Nestea is around, might be a while for protoss.
i don't understand all the nestea hype. he is not sweeping every one, cezanne had a chance to knock him out. the only thing different is he is the first person to win a gsl and then not suck the next one. i don't think he will win the super tourny.
dude have you watched nestea? he is freaking amazing!
i actually have not, don't have a pass. =(
i do remember watching MVP vs MKP january finals and thinking MVP was unstoppable and then he goes and starts losing. i guess im just not going to declare a bonjwa untill we actually have one, and i still think someone will come along and beat nestea this season.
On June 04 2011 04:05 Beyonder wrote: As someone who plays all three races, but especially protoss and zerg, I feel that protoss is kind of weak at the moment. It might be something we have not figured out yet, but regardless, it is incredibly hard and if the proper timings are abused, protoss has absolutely zero room to breathe and a big chance of losing.
Versus terran there are simply tons of stuff they can do, and you really have no idea which one, so you prepare for multiple. Scouting early is difficult and close to impossible once the marine comes out. Are they going fast ghost marauder marine? Are they doing the annoying tank banshee marine thing? Fast drops? Just marauder marine? Banshees? There are tons of possibilities. And with each build, tons of timings that can be used. The marauder and bunker generally prevents you from harassing, or doing anything that involves skill, unless you take a huge gamble, because there is no way that you can get behind-- then the timing pushes just kill you. You have to wait with taking your extra base till you know Terran takes it on most maps, this counts for your third as well. Its just very very difficult and if you want to play a tad safe, youre forced to play extremely reactive. One mistake and there are no units to get you back in to the game: the protoss units simply do not allow for a lot of skill input. They are kind of straight forward, attack move units, almost wc3esque with our a-click units as heroes (sup colossus).
Versus zerg, early harassment is also almost all-in. Either one base or two base. You get behind, then youre forced to turtle up and there's simply not much more to do than that. Wait till you have a huge army, defend, and move out. Zerg is just incredibly strong at the moment and the only way to deal with it is go (semi) all in with a huge push and pray that the opponent doesnt have the macro, or try to secure bases and move out when youre psy capped.
This is why I wished that I played terran. Its units are so mobile, so versatile, and the harass units mix into the regular army so incredibly well (sup banshee). You can come back from behind (see TvT and TvZ) because your units allow for a lot of skill input. And zergs can actually take expands on big maps agressively. Bleh.
In general, protoss is truly the practice race. It is kind of what zerg was before T_T. You play full reactionary, then every tiny mistake gets punished. You try to (somewhat) dicatate the game? then youre almost all-in.
Again people figured out to how to play against protoss in terms of roach ling all ins vs the originally very very strong 3 gate sentry expand, mass ghosts and shizzle to destroy all shields and the horrifically immobile force that just encounters a terrible amount run bys when trying to push out vs zerg...
Personally I had to swap races after wanting to punch my screen continuously due to runbys and roach ling all ins, now I play zerg and have a massive troll face on every game I win vs protoss via run bys and roach ling all ins :D
The guy above summed it up pretty well why protoss is weak atm
On June 04 2011 05:14 Fleuria wrote: Again people figured out to how to play against protoss in terms of roach ling all ins vs the originally very very strong 3 gate sentry expand, mass ghosts and shizzle to destroy all shields and the horrifically immobile force that just encounters a terrible amount run bys when trying to push out vs zerg...
Personally I had to swap races after wanting to punch my screen continuously due to runbys and roach ling all ins, now I play zerg and have a massive troll face on every game I win vs protoss via run bys and roach ling all ins :D
The guy above summed it up pretty well why protoss is weak atm
I think we summed up how most protoss players are weak and that good ones are still showing good results, similar to every other race.
On June 04 2011 03:46 Reborn8u wrote: I can't believe some of the stuff I'm reading in this thread, some the comments would only make sense 6 months ago. With the buffs to zerg and nerfs to toss along with lingering undressed issues, protoss is not what it once was. I personally think that the nerfs designed to "fix" pvp, put protoss over the tipping point and have hurt toss greatly in every matchup. A 4 gate rush in pvp is still hard to stop if you don't have 4 gates, but in the other matchups I don't think it's that people can't win by 4 gating but that the threat isn't there. I loved 4 gating zergs, but it was razor thin whether or not it held and game deciding. With that threat being 20 seconds later, it is 2x easier for zerg to hold. Also, that 20 seconds also means that when a protoss 3gate expands against zerg they only have 3 or 4 units and warp isn't done when they want to put down the nexus. Just setting back every potential warp in 20 seconds has opened the door for zergs to deny the natural. Meanwhile zerg can expand at 15 food and toss can't do anything but try to force a few units early instead of drones.
Another issue for protoss in every matchup is that protoss is very reliant on FF's and Colossus. When zergs deal with FF's by doing bane drops or roach burrow, it looks like most protoss's (at least that I've seen) don't have any answer. Terrans are getting emp earlier and 1 good emp is GG, people say "spread out your units" but there are situations where you can't do that, like when defending a ramp or pretty much anytime you engage a bio ball early to mid game, if your army spreads out, it will get stim-a moved and evaporate. Colossus are getting hard countered by vikings, corruptors, and neural parasite. When a zerg fungals the death ball, there is nothing protoss can do but watch, it stops your air, your blink, pulling your colossus back.
Also, the cost to get blink and charge are absurd if you compare them to any other upgrades for zerg or terrans early units. For example the cost to get twilight and charge is the same as a terran getting a tech lab + stim + combat shield + concussive. The stalker is a huge issue too, toss has to use them, but their long cooldown combined with only getting +1 per upgrade means that the more upgrades terran or zerg gets the worse stalkers scale against them. When you realize that 1 stalker has a slightly lower dps than a single UNstimmed marine, and that they can afford almost 4 marines for the cost of 1 stalker, or that roaches can me made almost 2 to 1 for cost and scale better with upgrades it makes it clear that stalkers are terrible for their cost. Colossus have become a liability for protoss in many ways as well because of the continuing trend towards macro heavy play and macro maps. Colossus slow down the protoss army, and they must be protected, and for you opponent they are always expected. It gets very difficult to defend your bases after the 3rd because protoss can't just throw units away and it's very hard to split your army and deal with threats at multiple locations cost effectively.
Then there are issues with unit counters, hydras are excellent against zealots and stalkers, but they also rape immortals and voids. MM does great against zealots and stalkers, but marines also rape voids and immortals. But toss needs obs so the only safe and logical option is colossus.
As it is, protoss has to back its self into a corner or choke and use FF and Colossus so the range of its units can make its dps higher than the front line their opponents, but it has slowly been figured out how to deal with FF's and Colossus. The protoss army gets crushed $ for $ to almost anything without FF, and colossus.
I have little hope that any of this will be corrected until HOTS. I think there are core design issues with protoss that require the addition of units and abilities, or the removal of some from other races for the issue to be worked out.
FF are absolutely at the base of all the problems, they are too strong in some situations. But once the opponent has a tech to make them ineffective toss is really handicapped. I think the same is true for colossus.
BTW this whole argument that all the toss players are just not as good as the other races players is complete bullshit. It's just like how Terran has had better tourney results than toss and zerg combined and had 40-50% of the top 200 throughout Sc2's history and people say "well that just means that better players choose terran" If you honestly believe it works like that, your logic is so flawed it makes 99% of what you say worth ignoring.
On June 04 2011 04:47 Severian wrote: I only brought it up to demonstrate how stupid it was of you to bring the Ro64 alone up. You can't use one round of one tournament as your sole data for the PvZ winrate in Korea, especially when a later round of that same tournament has been played that reduces that winrate to 50%! Seriously, think about it for a minute.
I don't want to say this but it feels like you have some kind of mental problem when you find it amazing the winrate is decreased by 50% when you compare an entire round (and the biggest one at that), to two sets played in one day.
I'm not sure if you're trolling here. You've managed to mischaracterize what I said, misstate a fact, state something that doesn't make sense mathematically and call me mentally ill, all in the one sentence.
The winrate wasn't reduced by 50%. It was reduced to 50%.
I don't find that amazing. I find it pretty expected given that your statement that Protosses win 66% of PvZs is obviously a load of crap.
Logically, the winrate should drop by a relatively small amount in the second round as there are fewer games to influence the number (unless there were, due to luck of the draw, an abnormally small number of PvZs in the first round). 66%->50% isn't a large drop (even though Protosses didn't win any PvZs!), but it is a drop and it makes your number false. Accept that.
On June 04 2011 04:55 elitesniper420 wrote: 2) Banelings, which in terms of supply are more expensive than Ultralisks
Expand on this, please. Ultralisks cost 6 Banelings' worth of minerals, 8 Banelings' worth of gas, and 12 Banelings' worth of supply.
Maybe I will accept "that" when 2 magically becomes the same number as 6. For now I'm sticking with solid statistics and not kindergarten logic.
Also Banelings in terms of supply cost 100 gas more when 6 supply of Banelings is compared with Ultralisks. Hardly efficient against any Protoss that knows how to micro, this thread makes it seem like Protoss are entitled to never split their deathball.
On June 04 2011 05:26 elitesniper420 wrote:Also Banelings in terms of supply cost 100 gas more when 6 supply of Banelings is compared with Ultralisks. Hardly efficient against any Protoss that knows how to micro, this thread makes it seem like Protoss are entitled to never split their deathball.
That is not necessarily a slight on the Baneling, though. If the Ultralisk were 10 supply but otherwise the same, an equal supply of Banelings would cost 300 more gas, even though the utility of the Baneling has not changed at all.
IMO i think alot of the protosses in GSL are actually quite bad. MC who is far and away the best of them (results wise) is very risky in his play so its no surprise his play is inconsistent. But i think overall Korean protosses are worse than their NA or EU counterparts. idk players like Killer, Anypro, and Inca do nothing that is worth better results than they got this tournament. Protoss play in Korea is just stagnant, no real innovation going on in the matchups. Oh well, maybe in the next round of ex-BW pros to switch over we will have some good protoss players. For now MC stands alone on the throne of Protosses.
Its the Slayers team guys...they are super OP. Really though Slayers has been dominating but sadly it seems like the majority of their team is Terran . Yes I know there are protoss and zerg in that team I am just saying when I think of slayers right away I think of about all the terran players and than 1 zerg and 1 protoss. Don't really remember any other players after that @.@
Zerg players have just kinda figured out how to abuse protoss once again, i never believed there was an imbalance in the first place in ZvP so the changes made in last few patches may have been excessive. Although im sure protoss wil eventually get back in it there might be some stuff for blizzard to look into, most of all roach cost. As you pretty much require 1:1 ratio of stalker/sentries to roaches to be able to hold some of the 2 base pushes from zerg. While the roaches are a lot cheaper and are quite easy to power up as a 2 base zerg, even though most zerg players have tried to deny the fact zerg can power units from 2 bases just as well as the other races. Playing PvZ is like walking on a razors's edge, its so easy to get punished as protoss even when doing supposedly safe builds such as 3 gate expo. Meanwhile its quite hard to punish anything but hatch first, and on the maps seen at gsl its even harder.
On June 04 2011 04:52 Steel wrote: Let's take a look at the PvZ and PvT played so far.
Warning: This spoiler is a short summary of every played game yet. The official report of the R64 is out. If you haven't seen them and don't want to get spoiled..you know what to do.
MVP vs Creator - Great series, Creator took a game off the amazing MVP so I don't think this says much about the state of the protoss. MVP > Creator so he won like it should be. Of course, this is based on past results, but you can't say that MVP is trash and that he didn't deserve the win. He played well.
Inca vs Ryung - ....Terran is pretty good at stopping all-ins? Dumb series tbh. If you are mad because protoss all-ins aren't working anymore, don't switch to zerg you'll be disapointed.
jookTo vs Anypro - G1 he wanted to hit a timing, and so did JookTo. Anypro turned around. When do you win when you turn around? Never. Poor decision making by Anypro. Game 2: Kind of like zerg vs 4gate, if you have no idea it's coming you're going to lose. Yet, we notice Protoss stopping a zerg all in with no units. I'd like to zerg stop 4gate with only spines The versatility of Protoss not matched by Zerg, so don't complain about that. Zerg one base SUCKS as seen in this game. Game 3: Interesting roach/baneling-centric style from jookto, Anypro not responding properly. He should of sit back, got collosi, got many forcefield and ROLLED over jookto. Again, Anypro didn't respond correctly to Jookto's unit composition. Imba? Then collosi/gatewayunits is imba because you can't kill roach hydra.
Trickster vs Yugioh - Lol.Yugioh got rolled over, with non-standard play too. Protoss still has very many options.
Genius vs Boxer - Good series. Genius played well and Boxer did several mistakes, Genius won. Makes sense...
Fruitdealer vs Ace - Good example of Protoss winning games they shouldn't.
Squirtles vs Marineking - Squirtle scouted poorly and didn't see the timings coming. He wasn't prepared, he lost. End of story. How many times have Protoss been victor in these types of scenarios? Look at Ace. He won IEM with one build.
Byun vs Legalmind - Should terrible players win? ...
Kyrix vs Vanvanth - read ^
Choya vs Zenio - Choya won doing allins.
Did you notice in the Round of 64 how many protoss players won with standard play? Those who played standard always did quite well. There's not many great standard protoss players. Are you mad because all-ins are so effective anymore?
Round of 32
TheBest vs Trickster - Nice all in from theBest. He got pretty lucky and I don't personally think he should of won but timings are timings and theBest had good micro while Trickster showed some poor decision making in G3 so it's a player thing not a race thing.
Genius vs Min - One of the best ZvP in this tournament so far. Game 1: Trickster got really greedy with his tech. He got a third base without robo = without scouting, and he lost. If protoss 6 gates and zerg doesn't get burrow and a lot of units zerg loses, so if roaches are imba, 6 gate is imba, 4 gate is imba, anything is. The point is, you can't just expand without tech and scouting information, especially when your opponent has the tech to punish it. Game 2: Genius lost too many probes to baneling drops, did some dumb moving around while Min got thousands of mutas. Interview with Min: Min said he the best way to beat Genius was with mutas. Did Genius know about this weakness? Did he adjust his play to Min's style? Doesn't look like it since he got ouplayed hard, I don't think the player didn't deserve to win. VERY DISAPOINTING pheonix control. Like masters player can outrun mutas I was laughing.
Revival vs HongUn - Revival looked at HongUn's replays, which featured the same build over and over again. He found a weakness, exploited it. He deserved to win because HongUn changed nothing in his play, which was not that safe afterall.
Conclusion: I don't know what you're complaining about. It seems to me like you're complaining that those fucking terrible players who got past the round of 64 doing all-ins all the time are not winning anymore and so you're mad. Protoss players who played standard did great, the Creator vs MVP games were way too close in my opinion. Protoss is really strong race but the thing about all-ins is if they don't work you lose.
TL;DR: Protoss is a great race just bad players.
annnnnd here we go.
I think it's kind of silly too look at the GSL since most Protoss players all-ined. Macro protosses are rare and those who exist have been doing quite well.
Which macro protosses are you talking about?
Macro players in general are rare these days, most zerg wins have come from abusive timing pushes, and basically ALL terran wins nowadays come from abusive timing pushes (save from a couple players like nestea, mvp and etc). Protoss is actually the one that wins most "macro" matches with their "deathballs", idk what you're talking about
On June 04 2011 05:41 Reborn8u wrote: Well Artosis did switch to Protoss, so I guess they kind of have to be the worst race now. Sorry guys it's a long held starcraft tradition.
I totally forgot that artosis switched to protoss and he was the guy who was QQing the most in every single cast about terran timings and how if not taken proper precautions that they become so unbelievably unstoppable. Especially 2 rax which is pretty much a standard and laughable omg you loss to that build sort of thing..
Zergs, look at artosis and look back at yourself and smack yourself in the face and wake up from reality. You aren't special, and every race has its perks.
If protoss is clearly that easy then artosis shouldn't be doing so bad considering he is the "Zerg" who switched to "Protoss" scenario.
On June 04 2011 05:41 Reborn8u wrote: Well Artosis did switch to Protoss, so I guess they kind of have to be the worst race now. Sorry guys it's a long held starcraft tradition.
Ahaha!!! Point taken. For the longest time, I had a really hard time against protoss but now that the game has developed a little bit more, they are probably my best match up. ZvP used to be a nightmare but there are now so many ways to beat Protoss other than the old standard Roach/Hydra/Corruptor that it makes it harder for them to know what you are going to do. In the early days, they pretty much knew what you were going to do every game and it just came down to execution, now, since you have more options, it is harder for Protoss to just blindly follow their build order.
On June 04 2011 03:46 Reborn8u wrote: I can't believe some of the stuff I'm reading in this thread, some the comments would only make sense 6 months ago. With the buffs to zerg and nerfs to toss along with lingering undressed issues, protoss is not what it once was. I personally think that the nerfs designed to "fix" pvp, put protoss over the tipping point and have hurt toss greatly in every matchup. A 4 gate rush in pvp is still hard to stop if you don't have 4 gates, but in the other matchups I don't think it's that people can't win by 4 gating but that the threat isn't there. I loved 4 gating zergs, but it was razor thin whether or not it held and game deciding. With that threat being 20 seconds later, it is 2x easier for zerg to hold. Also, that 20 seconds also means that when a protoss 3gate expands against zerg they only have 3 or 4 units and warp isn't done when they want to put down the nexus. Just setting back every potential warp in 20 seconds has opened the door for zergs to deny the natural. Meanwhile zerg can expand at 15 food and toss can't do anything but try to force a few units early instead of drones.
Another issue for protoss in every matchup is that protoss is very reliant on FF's and Colossus. When zergs deal with FF's by doing bane drops or roach burrow, it looks like most protoss's (at least that I've seen) don't have any answer. Terrans are getting emp earlier and 1 good emp is GG, people say "spread out your units" but there are situations where you can't do that, like when defending a ramp or pretty much anytime you engage a bio ball early to mid game, if your army spreads out, it will get stim-a moved and evaporate. Colossus are getting hard countered by vikings, corruptors, and neural parasite. When a zerg fungals the death ball, there is nothing protoss can do but watch, it stops your air, your blink, pulling your colossus back.
Also, the cost to get blink and charge are absurd if you compare them to any other upgrades for zerg or terrans early units. For example the cost to get twilight and charge is the same as a terran getting a tech lab + stim + combat shield + concussive. The stalker is a huge issue too, toss has to use them, but their long cooldown combined with only getting +1 per upgrade means that the more upgrades terran or zerg gets the worse stalkers scale against them. When you realize that 1 stalker has a slightly lower dps than a single UNstimmed marine, and that they can afford almost 4 marines for the cost of 1 stalker, or that roaches can me made almost 2 to 1 for cost and scale better with upgrades it makes it clear that stalkers are terrible for their cost. Colossus have become a liability for protoss in many ways as well because of the continuing trend towards macro heavy play and macro maps. Colossus slow down the protoss army, and they must be protected, and for you opponent they are always expected. It gets very difficult to defend your bases after the 3rd because protoss can't just throw units away and it's very hard to split your army and deal with threats at multiple locations cost effectively.
Then there are issues with unit counters, hydras are excellent against zealots and stalkers, but they also rape immortals and voids. MM does great against zealots and stalkers, but marines also rape voids and immortals. But toss needs obs so the only safe and logical option is colossus.
As it is, protoss has to back its self into a corner or choke and use FF and Colossus so the range of its units can make its dps higher than the front line their opponents, but it has slowly been figured out how to deal with FF's and Colossus. The protoss army gets crushed $ for $ to almost anything without FF, and colossus.
I have little hope that any of this will be corrected until HOTS. I think there are core design issues with protoss that require the addition of units and abilities, or the removal of some from other races for the issue to be worked out.
FF are absolutely at the base of all the problems, they are too strong in some situations. But once the opponent has a tech to make them ineffective toss is really handicapped. I think the same is true for colossus.
BTW this whole argument that all the toss players are just not as good as the other races players is complete bullshit. It's just like how Terran has had better tourney results than toss and zerg combined and had 40-50% of the top 200 throughout Sc2's history and people say "well that just means that better players choose terran" If you honestly believe it works like that, your logic is so flawed it makes 99% of what you say worth ignoring.
perfect post. Also wanna add into it is Vikings and Corruptors own colossus, carriers and mothership so hard. That's why I don't want to use mothership and carriers at all. May be a buff for mothership's speed or carriers. Otherwise they're suck so bad, and everything have to come down to ground armies again.
As for all of those worrying about my MC note, I simply forgot about him getting beat by Alicia. As you can see a few posts after I described how Alicia outmicro'ed him to pieces.Clearly I've seen the match (:
Protoss just simply has too many design flaws. I don't think it's imbalanced, it's just that the early game in Starcraft 2 is stupi. The developers said that they are thinking about buffing tier 1 scouting options for Heart of the Swarm which is a big deal. People call MC greedy but he is the only protoss who does well. Why? Because protoss early game is a complete coin flip. Either you hard counter, counter decently, or outright lose to other build orders. If you play completely safe you are far, far behind if you two gate robo and your opponent 1 rax CC'd, which is impossible to scout after the first marine is out until an observer goes into their base (quite a long time inbetween). Sometimes MC plays "greedy" by going 1 gate fast expand and looks retarded against one base terran pressure that wipes him out, but that's no more greedy than a 1rax CC which is completely unpunishable if they have a bunker. But a marauder costs less than a stalker and destroys it absolutely, a zealot is worthless against anything but lings, and sentries have the damage output of a feather.
Protoss decides to go air? If the zerg made a couple queens and a spore or two your entire tech path has become a worthless gas heavy investment. Robo is required to move out against roaches due to tunneling claws, an amazing ability where a roach that costs literally half of a stalker but is almost as good (and scales better with upgrades) can pop up on your entire army and wipe it all away. Maybe reducing the build time for observer and boosting the speed would help? Because those things take forever to come out for literally NO reason and they're worthlessly slow, and no one gets the upgrade. Hallucination is a huge 100/100 early game investment and becomes completely obsolete once the robo is out anyway---and robo is absolutely necessary for detection.
I'm just hoping Heart of the Swarm makes this game less luck-based for everyone. Any mediocre player can get a build order win against an amazing player (no one would call Polt a top terran) due to all races being unable to scout.
On June 04 2011 06:02 Cthun wrote: As for all of those worrying about my MC note, I simply forgot about him getting beat by Alicia. As you can see a few posts after I described how Alicia outmicro'ed him to pieces.Clearly I've seen the match (:
Lol he didn't outmicro MC. He had complete build order wins, rewatch the videos. First game had nothign to do with micro, it was a build order loss and MC made a really bad decision to send his zealots way ahead of his stalkers. Second game he did an earlier gate/core than MC on his four gate so his warp ins were at least 10 seconds ahead, that's impossible to come back from.
Stop listening to casters who scream 'OH MY GOD HE BLOCKED A ZEALOT THAT WAS ALMOST DEAD WITH A PROBE BEFORE IT DID NOTHING, WHAT AMAZING MICRO THIS IS THE BEST THING I'VE EVER SEEN".
On June 04 2011 03:46 Reborn8u wrote: I can't believe some of the stuff I'm reading in this thread, some the comments would only make sense 6 months ago. With the buffs to zerg and nerfs to toss along with lingering undressed issues, protoss is not what it once was. I personally think that the nerfs designed to "fix" pvp, put protoss over the tipping point and have hurt toss greatly in every matchup. A 4 gate rush in pvp is still hard to stop if you don't have 4 gates, but in the other matchups I don't think it's that people can't win by 4 gating but that the threat isn't there. I loved 4 gating zergs, but it was razor thin whether or not it held and game deciding. With that threat being 20 seconds later, it is 2x easier for zerg to hold. Also, that 20 seconds also means that when a protoss 3gate expands against zerg they only have 3 or 4 units and warp isn't done when they want to put down the nexus. Just setting back every potential warp in 20 seconds has opened the door for zergs to deny the natural. Meanwhile zerg can expand at 15 food and toss can't do anything but try to force a few units early instead of drones.
Another issue for protoss in every matchup is that protoss is very reliant on FF's and Colossus. When zergs deal with FF's by doing bane drops or roach burrow, it looks like most protoss's (at least that I've seen) don't have any answer. Terrans are getting emp earlier and 1 good emp is GG, people say "spread out your units" but there are situations where you can't do that, like when defending a ramp or pretty much anytime you engage a bio ball early to mid game, if your army spreads out, it will get stim-a moved and evaporate. Colossus are getting hard countered by vikings, corruptors, and neural parasite. When a zerg fungals the death ball, there is nothing protoss can do but watch, it stops your air, your blink, pulling your colossus back.
Also, the cost to get blink and charge are absurd if you compare them to any other upgrades for zerg or terrans early units. For example the cost to get twilight and charge is the same as a terran getting a tech lab + stim + combat shield + concussive. The stalker is a huge issue too, toss has to use them, but their long cooldown combined with only getting +1 per upgrade means that the more upgrades terran or zerg gets the worse stalkers scale against them. When you realize that 1 stalker has a slightly lower dps than a single UNstimmed marine, and that they can afford almost 4 marines for the cost of 1 stalker, or that roaches can me made almost 2 to 1 for cost and scale better with upgrades it makes it clear that stalkers are terrible for their cost. Colossus have become a liability for protoss in many ways as well because of the continuing trend towards macro heavy play and macro maps. Colossus slow down the protoss army, and they must be protected, and for you opponent they are always expected. It gets very difficult to defend your bases after the 3rd because protoss can't just throw units away and it's very hard to split your army and deal with threats at multiple locations cost effectively.
Then there are issues with unit counters, hydras are excellent against zealots and stalkers, but they also rape immortals and voids. MM does great against zealots and stalkers, but marines also rape voids and immortals. But toss needs obs so the only safe and logical option is colossus.
As it is, protoss has to back its self into a corner or choke and use FF and Colossus so the range of its units can make its dps higher than the front line their opponents, but it has slowly been figured out how to deal with FF's and Colossus. The protoss army gets crushed $ for $ to almost anything without FF, and colossus.
I have little hope that any of this will be corrected until HOTS. I think there are core design issues with protoss that require the addition of units and abilities, or the removal of some from other races for the issue to be worked out.
FF are absolutely at the base of all the problems, they are too strong in some situations. But once the opponent has a tech to make them ineffective toss is really handicapped. I think the same is true for colossus.
BTW this whole argument that all the toss players are just not as good as the other races players is complete bullshit. It's just like how Terran has had better tourney results than toss and zerg combined and had 40-50% of the top 200 throughout Sc2's history and people say "well that just means that better players choose terran" If you honestly believe it works like that, your logic is so flawed it makes 99% of what you say worth ignoring.
perfect post. Also wanna add into it is Vikings and Corruptors own colossus, carriers and mothership so hard. That's why I don't want to use mothership and carriers at all. May be a buff for mothership's speed or carriers. Otherwise they're suck so bad, and everything have to come down to ground armies again.
Why thank you, if you liked that post you should check out this one http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=228320¤tpage=13#244 I basically explain to blizzard how to make this game into awesomecraft when hots comes out. (Some of it is repetitive between the two posts, I use many of the same examples and analogies.)
I think one important factor was that Blizzard nerfed protoss too quickly and too frequently. Most other strategies were nerfed to oblivion so that no we must rely on ff and colossus, and gimmicks here and there. Straight templar tech is weaker without the KA, stargate was a somewhat viable opening with void speed, but then that went out the window. Warpgate timing pushes to punish greedy openings, pushed back 20 seconds. In all honesty i feel like alot of there preemptive nerfs will lead to some serious consequences as Protoss keeps on running into brick walls when they try other strategies.
Protoss : GAMEPLAY No Harrassment early-mid game (Dts vs Zerg and Terran are a joke) No Pressure on a terran player once they have medivac. Very Fragile vs Cheese play, Terran all ins are way way stronger that protoss all ins and Zerg all ins are worst imo. Coming back in a game This doesnt exits being protoss player, u can come back in again when u are behind, mean while Zerg have injects and Zerglings, and Terran Mules + free Bunkers to defend cost effective while they macro up again.
ADAPTING Timmings u have to be good at MICRO, MACRO, TIMMING, SCOUTING, REACTING, , if u fail in one of those u lose. but in the other hand, Terran can fight with just MMM and Zerg with Pure Roaches or Zerglings + infestors
UNIT AND UPGRADES COST EFECTIVENESS Units U cant fight a Terran or Zerg without Collosus or Sentries at Mid-LateGame. Zealot speed Cost to much and Take for ever to be made.
BUILDS Openings Most of the protoss opening are way way figure out by this time 3Gate expo dies to Banshee or expo behind wall. 1Gate FE is very fragile to 2rax + 5scv. 20nexus (aka huk build) Same as 1Gate Fe but worst because if terran expo behind this pressure u way behind.
What i think can help protoss players?
For Protoss: Incresing the upgrade for the Stalkers +2 like Roaches, incresing the heath of the warp prism. +20shield
For Terran Make Medivacs heal or transport an ungrade Make marines like BW 4rage, a upgrade for 5rage Make marauders cost a little more like Stalkers Terran have to many ways to detect Cloak units, EMP should not be allow to see DT, Banshees or burroed units
For Zerg Infestor are so OP Larva from inject take 5sec longer.
UNIT AND UPGRADES COST EFECTIVENESS Units U cant fight a Terran or Zerg without Collosus or Sentries at Mid-LateGame. Zealot speed Cost to much and Take for ever to be made.
You can't fight protoss with mech. You have to go MMM + V + G or you die. Protoss players just seem to forget that... Do we terrans claim a sollution? No. Is it hard to win with MMM + V + G against a protoss deathball? Hell yes, even with mass emp's.
I can't believe some of the stuff I'm reading in this thread, some the comments would only make sense 6 months ago. With the buffs to zerg and nerfs to toss along with lingering undressed issues, protoss is not what it once was. I personally think that the nerfs designed to "fix" pvp, put protoss over the tipping point and have hurt toss greatly in every matchup. A 4 gate rush in pvp is still hard to stop if you don't have 4 gates, but in the other matchups I don't think it's that people can't win by 4 gating but that the threat isn't there. I loved 4 gating zergs, but it was razor thin whether or not it held and game deciding. With that threat being 20 seconds later, it is 2x easier for zerg to hold. Also, that 20 seconds also means that when a protoss 3gate expands against zerg they only have 3 or 4 units and warp isn't done when they want to put down the nexus. Just setting back every potential warp in 20 seconds has opened the door for zergs to deny the natural. Meanwhile zerg can expand at 15 food and toss can't do anything but try to force a few units early instead of drones.
Another issue for protoss in every matchup is that protoss is very reliant on FF's and Colossus. When zergs deal with FF's by doing bane drops or roach burrow, it looks like most protoss's (at least that I've seen) don't have any answer. Terrans are getting emp earlier and 1 good emp is GG, people say "spread out your units" but there are situations where you can't do that, like when defending a ramp or pretty much anytime you engage a bio ball early to mid game, if your army spreads out, it will get stim-a moved and evaporate. Colossus are getting hard countered by vikings, corruptors, and neural parasite. When a zerg fungals the death ball, there is nothing protoss can do but watch, it stops your air, your blink, pulling your colossus back.
Also, the cost to get blink and charge are absurd if you compare them to any other upgrades for zerg or terrans early units. For example the cost to get twilight and charge is the same as a terran getting a tech lab + stim + combat shield + concussive. The stalker is a huge issue too, toss has to use them, but their long cooldown combined with only getting +1 per upgrade means that the more upgrades terran or zerg gets the worse stalkers scale against them. When you realize that 1 stalker has a slightly lower dps than a single UNstimmed marine, and that they can afford almost 4 marines for the cost of 1 stalker, or that roaches can me made almost 2 to 1 for cost and scale better with upgrades it makes it clear that stalkers are terrible for their cost. Colossus have become a liability for protoss in many ways as well because of the continuing trend towards macro heavy play and macro maps. Colossus slow down the protoss army, and they must be protected, and for you opponent they are always expected. It gets very difficult to defend your bases after the 3rd because protoss can't just throw units away and it's very hard to split your army and deal with threats at multiple locations cost effectively.
Then there are issues with unit counters, hydras are excellent against zealots and stalkers, but they also rape immortals and voids. MM does great against zealots and stalkers, but marines also rape voids and immortals. But toss needs obs so the only safe and logical option is colossus.
As it is, protoss has to back its self into a corner or choke and use FF and Colossus so the range of its units can make its dps higher than the front line their opponents, but it has slowly been figured out how to deal with FF's and Colossus. The protoss army gets crushed $ for $ to almost anything without FF, and colossus.
I have little hope that any of this will be corrected until HOTS. I think there are core design issues with protoss that require the addition of units and abilities, or the removal of some from other races for the issue to be worked out.
FF are absolutely at the base of all the problems, they are too strong in some situations. But once the opponent has a tech to make them ineffective toss is really handicapped. I think the same is true for colossus.
BTW this whole argument that all the toss players are just not as good as the other races players is complete bullshit. It's just like how Terran has had better tourney results than toss and zerg combined and had 40-50% of the top 200 throughout Sc2's history and people say "well that just means that better players choose terran" If you honestly believe it works like that, your logic is so flawed it makes 99% of what you say worth ignoring.
On June 04 2011 06:27 thegamer wrote: Well once the other races started to figure out how to counter their a-moving, the protoss players couldn't do anything else.
For all the dirtbags in this thread saying protoss players blah blah a move, let me point some things out in the hope it will serve as the lube to pull your head out of your ass. Protoss is the only race that has to rely on casters ALL game, this takes good control. A single late or misplaced FF can cost you the game. The spells protoss all have to rely on all require placement, like FF , storm, feedback, blink. Protoss is the only race that has to move its screen location to macro units AND place every unit, on top of which we have the crono mechanic which must be utilized to keep up and is unforgiving, I can't double crono 1 thing to catch it up.
The warp in controls have been glitchy since beta, (this is not just in personal experience, every time I watch pro's play I see this) When you warp in (especially when your warp gate count get high) your gateways constantly get unselected in the middle of the process (this happens over and over in every game! You have your gates selected your holding S and clicking and all of the sudden after your first 4 stalkers you suddenly just have a pointer and you're like wtf I need to be managing my army not fighting the controls to macro) Also, the warp in size of the units is all screwed up, there are so many places you can't warp in that you should be able to. It is almost impossible to warp a stalker in on a ramp for example. With the pylon radius shrunk, it's even worse now. Zerg and Terran can just press 5 and hold a or r and be on full production.
When you combine all these factors (rely on spell casters all game, can't watch battle and micro while you macro, the need to crono and how most of the upgrades and spells for toss have to be contolled (we don't just have speed upgrades for every unit or fast units! We can't just press 1t and have our armies effectiveness doubled) To use protoss at very high levels takes serious multitasking, especially with the booming trend of both terrans and zergs attacking on multiple fronts.
Hopefully this has enlightened you. The whole "herp derp a move protoss" is a myth, an excuse, and flat out garbage.
We have this argument every 3 months and the race changes. Zerg 3 months ago, Terran a while back, Protoss now as well. I think we just need to wait to see how Pros work out the metagame and help us not so good players out with new strategies to mimic and play.
don't worry too much but its true that protoss isnt doing as well as protoss used to but not a big deal at the moment.
On June 04 2011 03:46 Reborn8u wrote: I can't believe some of the stuff I'm reading in this thread, some the comments would only make sense 6 months ago. With the buffs to zerg and nerfs to toss along with lingering undressed issues, protoss is not what it once was. I personally think that the nerfs designed to "fix" pvp, put protoss over the tipping point and have hurt toss greatly in every matchup. A 4 gate rush in pvp is still hard to stop if you don't have 4 gates, but in the other matchups I don't think it's that people can't win by 4 gating but that the threat isn't there. I loved 4 gating zergs, but it was razor thin whether or not it held and game deciding. With that threat being 20 seconds later, it is 2x easier for zerg to hold. Also, that 20 seconds also means that when a protoss 3gate expands against zerg they only have 3 or 4 units and warp isn't done when they want to put down the nexus. Just setting back every potential warp in 20 seconds has opened the door for zergs to deny the natural. Meanwhile zerg can expand at 15 food and toss can't do anything but try to force a few units early instead of drones.
Another issue for protoss in every matchup is that protoss is very reliant on FF's and Colossus. When zergs deal with FF's by doing bane drops or roach burrow, it looks like most protoss's (at least that I've seen) don't have any answer. Terrans are getting emp earlier and 1 good emp is GG, people say "spread out your units" but there are situations where you can't do that, like when defending a ramp or pretty much anytime you engage a bio ball early to mid game, if your army spreads out, it will get stim-a moved and evaporate. Colossus are getting hard countered by vikings, corruptors, and neural parasite. When a zerg fungals the death ball, there is nothing protoss can do but watch, it stops your air, your blink, pulling your colossus back.
Also, the cost to get blink and charge are absurd if you compare them to any other upgrades for zerg or terrans early units. For example the cost to get twilight and charge is the same as a terran getting a tech lab + stim + combat shield + concussive. The stalker is a huge issue too, toss has to use them, but their long cooldown combined with only getting +1 per upgrade means that the more upgrades terran or zerg gets the worse stalkers scale against them. When you realize that 1 stalker has a slightly lower dps than a single UNstimmed marine, and that they can afford almost 4 marines for the cost of 1 stalker, or that roaches can me made almost 2 to 1 for cost and scale better with upgrades it makes it clear that stalkers are terrible for their cost. Colossus have become a liability for protoss in many ways as well because of the continuing trend towards macro heavy play and macro maps. Colossus slow down the protoss army, and they must be protected, and for you opponent they are always expected. It gets very difficult to defend your bases after the 3rd because protoss can't just throw units away and it's very hard to split your army and deal with threats at multiple locations cost effectively.
Then there are issues with unit counters, hydras are excellent against zealots and stalkers, but they also rape immortals and voids. MM does great against zealots and stalkers, but marines also rape voids and immortals. But toss needs obs so the only safe and logical option is colossus.
As it is, protoss has to back its self into a corner or choke and use FF and Colossus so the range of its units can make its dps higher than the front line their opponents, but it has slowly been figured out how to deal with FF's and Colossus. The protoss army gets crushed $ for $ to almost anything without FF, and colossus.
I have little hope that any of this will be corrected until HOTS. I think there are core design issues with protoss that require the addition of units and abilities, or the removal of some from other races for the issue to be worked out.
FF are absolutely at the base of all the problems, they are too strong in some situations. But once the opponent has a tech to make them ineffective toss is really handicapped. I think the same is true for colossus.
BTW this whole argument that all the toss players are just not as good as the other races players is complete bullshit. It's just like how Terran has had better tourney results than toss and zerg combined and had 40-50% of the top 200 throughout Sc2's history and people say "well that just means that better players choose terran" If you honestly believe it works like that, your logic is so flawed it makes 99% of what you say worth ignoring.
I was almost crying reading this, thanks for putting this together. i hope blizzard can help our hopeless race!
Same thing all over again, just with a different race.
I think it's normal, players come with some unstoppable tactic, ppl copy it, that race owns all, players come up with a way to counter it and that race sucks. Soon some other race wil suck and other will have the upper hand. Give this game some time to grow up.
On June 04 2011 06:56 David Dark wrote: Same thing all over again, just with a different race.
I think it's normal, players come with some unstoppable tactic, ppl copy it, that race owns all, players come up with a way to counter it and that race sucks. Soon some other race wil suck and other will have the upper hand. Give this game some time to grow up.
Thing is, I feel like protoss is so limited as to what is viable (FF and colossus everytime) that the strategies protoss has been using most of sc2 were keeping them even. Or "unstoppable tactics" kept us competitive not dominant. But they've been figured out and there are almost 0 alternative.
A lot of people GREATLY underestimate protoss players in general, I've played many 100's of games with practice partners working on voidray/prism/immortal/archon/carrier/phoenix/non sentry based plays and you know that I've found, they all suck for the same reasons. Archons, immortals, voidrays get raped by MMM, phoenix can't do enough harass before turrets or spores go up to be cost effective, and if you make them early many times you will die to almost any significant pressure or all in attack unless you have amazing micro. early dt play is all in, carriers, prisms, voidrays, all get shit bagged by vikings, or hydras (which also rape your gateway units.
You have to get obs or youll get wrecked by burrow or banshee or just unscouted attacks, techs, or expansions, because with concussive and speedlings its hard to scout constantly with anything else (hallucinate is costly to get early, cost a lot of mana, and doesn't detect)
So you have 2 choices, psi storm or colossus, but you already have a robo, and storm takes forever to get and to charge energy, so colossus make the most sense for all these reasons. Colossus and storm are the only things that counter the units like MM and hydras that crush every other unit you can make.
Stalkers vs Roach needs to be fixed. There's no reason that Stalkers should cost almost twice as much as roaches for just the ability to hit air, where there aren't that many air units in the game that will bother you ... >=(
On June 04 2011 07:21 ScythedBlade wrote: Stalkers vs Roach needs to be fixed. There's no reason that Stalkers should cost almost twice as much as roaches for just the ability to hit air, where there aren't that many air units in the game that will bother you ... >=(
Lol doesn't the ability to hit air make them twice as useful :p
Yeah there aren't air units that can bother a zerg like voidrays for example they suck lol
The game is not broken protoss is just using outdated strategies.
in most of the games its the players that lose the game, not the race.... please dont make it seem as if Toss is weak. now u just inspired 50,000+ noobs to cry toss is weak.
in almost every game you watch in GSL, just note down WHY the toss lost.
its the players that lose games, and its players that win games. nothing more.
On June 04 2011 07:22 windsupernova wrote: *sigh* This happens every single time a race starts having trouble.
Strategies changed, now P need to adapt.
Sad thing is that every of this threads people claim that their race is badly designed and that they are not viable blah blah.
I never claimed that.
I am not talking about anyone in particular, but some of the comments here claim that P is badly designed blah...
As I said this is more of a metagame thing, Zergs started using infestors and bannelings more, they actually attack do timming pushes against P. Terran now use Ghosts and Vikings to complement their MMM blob.
This is like before the whole "P is OP" fad P were considered weak, and yeah while some things got buffed they found success by adapting. And P players are ballers, they are the ones who complain less(compared to how many nerfs they got in many patches compared to other races) and I know they will adapt.
I did. Roaches cost nearly half as much as stalkers which is perhaps one of the major points. Protoss isn't using outdated strategies. It's just there can't be any.
For example, Protoss drops are weak, simply because a) Warp prisms are horrible dropping machines vs ton of overlords at 200 HP and dropships which always have a heal and still are versatile.
Splitting Protoss armies are pretty bad too because other than most giant masses.
How about just writing down the graph of Protoss possibilities for strategies? You don't see many viable differences. =/
i dont understand the balance discussion in here. the obvious solution to this problem is protoss and terran needs a idra/destiny counterpart so all races can complain in a legit way. this makes everything even and the game is balanced. obvious.. omg guys i just solved the problem for everyone.. i feel like messiah right now.
for me i wont talk about balance until i play perfectly which is impossible so.. look at me. i solved the problem again! im so gooooood. i often ask myself how stupid people are - playing in my diamond level and come up with balance. its like 11 year olds cursing and dont know what the words mean. but when they hear those "words" they just repeat it so... i hope i get my point across and piss some people off.
now let the hate rain on me. i have thick skin (protoss shields) har har har har. and now im gonna 1A my deathball to the fridge and get another beer.
On June 04 2011 03:46 Reborn8u wrote: I can't believe some of the stuff I'm reading in this thread, some the comments would only make sense 6 months ago. With the buffs to zerg and nerfs to toss along with lingering undressed issues, protoss is not what it once was. I personally think that the nerfs designed to "fix" pvp, put protoss over the tipping point and have hurt toss greatly in every matchup. A 4 gate rush in pvp is still hard to stop if you don't have 4 gates, but in the other matchups I don't think it's that people can't win by 4 gating but that the threat isn't there. I loved 4 gating zergs, but it was razor thin whether or not it held and game deciding. With that threat being 20 seconds later, it is 2x easier for zerg to hold. Also, that 20 seconds also means that when a protoss 3gate expands against zerg they only have 3 or 4 units and warp isn't done when they want to put down the nexus. Just setting back every potential warp in 20 seconds has opened the door for zergs to deny the natural. Meanwhile zerg can expand at 15 food and toss can't do anything but try to force a few units early instead of drones.
Another issue for protoss in every matchup is that protoss is very reliant on FF's and Colossus. When zergs deal with FF's by doing bane drops or roach burrow, it looks like most protoss's (at least that I've seen) don't have any answer. Terrans are getting emp earlier and 1 good emp is GG, people say "spread out your units" but there are situations where you can't do that, like when defending a ramp or pretty much anytime you engage a bio ball early to mid game, if your army spreads out, it will get stim-a moved and evaporate. Colossus are getting hard countered by vikings, corruptors, and neural parasite. When a zerg fungals the death ball, there is nothing protoss can do but watch, it stops your air, your blink, pulling your colossus back.
Also, the cost to get blink and charge are absurd if you compare them to any other upgrades for zerg or terrans early units. For example the cost to get twilight and charge is the same as a terran getting a tech lab + stim + combat shield + concussive. The stalker is a huge issue too, toss has to use them, but their long cooldown combined with only getting +1 per upgrade means that the more upgrades terran or zerg gets the worse stalkers scale against them. When you realize that 1 stalker has a slightly lower dps than a single UNstimmed marine, and that they can afford almost 4 marines for the cost of 1 stalker, or that roaches can me made almost 2 to 1 for cost and scale better with upgrades it makes it clear that stalkers are terrible for their cost. Colossus have become a liability for protoss in many ways as well because of the continuing trend towards macro heavy play and macro maps. Colossus slow down the protoss army, and they must be protected, and for you opponent they are always expected. It gets very difficult to defend your bases after the 3rd because protoss can't just throw units away and it's very hard to split your army and deal with threats at multiple locations cost effectively.
Then there are issues with unit counters, hydras are excellent against zealots and stalkers, but they also rape immortals and voids. MM does great against zealots and stalkers, but marines also rape voids and immortals. But toss needs obs so the only safe and logical option is colossus.
As it is, protoss has to back its self into a corner or choke and use FF and Colossus so the range of its units can make its dps higher than the front line their opponents, but it has slowly been figured out how to deal with FF's and Colossus. The protoss army gets crushed $ for $ to almost anything without FF, and colossus.
I have little hope that any of this will be corrected until HOTS. I think there are core design issues with protoss that require the addition of units and abilities, or the removal of some from other races for the issue to be worked out.
FF are absolutely at the base of all the problems, they are too strong in some situations. But once the opponent has a tech to make them ineffective toss is really handicapped. I think the same is true for colossus.
BTW this whole argument that all the toss players are just not as good as the other races players is complete bullshit. It's just like how Terran has had better tourney results than toss and zerg combined and had 40-50% of the top 200 throughout Sc2's history and people say "well that just means that better players choose terran" If you honestly believe it works like that, your logic is so flawed it makes 99% of what you say worth ignoring.
I was almost crying reading this, thanks for putting this together. i hope blizzard can help our hopeless race!
we the warriors of aiur need so much aid its not even funny. this post also brought a tear to my eye.
Protoss..... Is now troubled by the supposed "lack of options" zerg had. Both terrans and zerg have developed new strategies and counters, and have figured out most things protoss can throw at them. Good micro like MC's can only take you so far, as strong strategies will always win.
There's, in my opinion, two truths in this issue.
1.- Protoss is using outdated strategies and needs to develop new ones. There's few to no real innovator in protoss rosters right now. So protoss downfall is likely to continue for a few more months.
2.- Protoss is the most non flexible race by far. Zerg has few unit choices, but multiple tactical and strategical decisions which change the game completely. Terran has by far the most variety and space for creativity. Protoss is right now stuck in a somewhat solid/consistent set of strategies, which if well executed can take a player far, but they're being figured out and countered effectively. The high templar nerf was probably the most important change in making this true. It makes robo the only real possibility for most of the game, which means terran and zerg know without a large error margin what they have to counter mid/late game. It's either robo or blink stalkers. All other strategies fail.
It's not that protoss is a bad race or the game is imbalanced. It's that it has the less space for creativity and BO variation. Which means protoss players rely solely on being superior macroers/microers, and since all races have good representatives in those areas, when a top zerg meets a top protoss, the most likely scenario is the zerg winning, same for terran.
The real weakness of the protoss is it very limited amount of options. Not only unit options but also usage options. The unit options are a complete joke! Carriers, Mothership, Warp Prisms are basicly all useless. DT is a dangerous unit to get because its countered really easy. This doesn't really leave a lot of units left considering that you always need zealots stalkers sentries and observers. You can then chose between HT, Voidray, Phoenixes, Immortal and Colosus. Phoenixes are only used in openings to ensure map control in the early game and very rarely in the late game . The same goes for voidrays although they sometimes get massed in the late game. This leaves you with only 3 options of which immortals are only viable against certain units.
The options for unit usage is the biggest problem. Protoss got no harass options but phoenixes which are so easily countered. Warp prisms are too dangerous to use because they get shot down instantly and got no futher usage like medivacs and overlords. Protoss can't attack at multiple places because their units are inefficient in small numbers and are slow. Protoss can't put pressure without risking the loss of their entire army. Their units are slow and can never retreat. Protoss only got 1 interesting mechanic: The forcefield. This ability makes the difference in every battle. And if you take it away (EMPS) ! You are basicly dead.
Due to this protoss is either forced to defend all game and make the feared deathball or they have to do some sort of timing/all in push.
On June 04 2011 03:01 ErikZerg wrote: Protoss is still the best race just bad players
It's been proven that Protoss is the worst race. If you use perfect micro AI (some guy who actually programmed it), Protoss finishes dead last. The real fact is that more QQ players play zerg.
The only thing preventing Protoss players right now from doing extremely bad is that players have not reached anywhere near the skill ceiling, but Protoss has been mostly figured out. (Essentially because the possibility branching tree for Protoss is always less deep than the other two races.)
So terran is OP, since with perfect micro they're unbeatable.
But nobody has 30k apm, so I don't think it matters much.
With that being said, I don't think protosses have had enough time after the WG nerf to refine everything. We've had stints in BW where one race did awful, honestly, as a random (although mainly zerg) player I've come to believe that sc2 is pretty much completely balanced, or at least close.
Zerg is not OP, and never has or will be. I feel like there just aren't many great korean protoss besides MC and Alicia. Zerg has Nestea, July, Losira, and some great up-and-comers like DRG and Min. And there are just a dickload of terran players, all with great potential (slayers, anyone?) that it makes the rest of the toss seem comparatively lack-luster.
if you look at results only it looks bad. but if you watched the games, they played horribly.
Protoss best race
the strategy's are very easy to execute for toss right now the only thing that makes things different with players is just mechanic's/micro.
Do switch to zerg. There is the unforgiving larva inject mechanism and the constant dilemma to drone or make army units, which tosses don't have to deal with. Switch and see how easy it is. As for me, whenever I get random protoss, all I have to do is turtle for 90% of the game and then a-move. Scouting - optional for protoss, necessary for zerg (or else you'll overdrone, underdrone, or make the wrong counters). It just takes half as much effort into the game whenever I roll terran or toss.
this, why don't you just do it ? before posting a slightly disguised imba-whine thread?
for the playerbase protoss has in gsl ( i think they suck mostly ) they are doing extremely well
protoss players are really really bad as far as I can tell. resorting to all ins/gimmicky plays
Well, don't tell me protoss don"'t have the tools to win. It's just, korean don't have a lot of good protoss in my opinion.
To me Korean toss players always seemed inferior to their terran and zerg brothers. So it's no wonder that they started to lose in the end.
protoss still wins 66% against zerg you retards. protoss is just a flawed race where the best zerg can't do anything but the protoss can't win against terran because protoss is so easy they can't find a way to improve their play. if anything blizzard needs to remove the race from the game because P matchups are always boring, so much so that T can only go MMM and Z can only make roaches, unless it's some cutesy timing push or coinflip strat
After someone said they wanted to switch to zerg:
Go ahead. You won't last 5 games.
Do it. You'll realise how good you Protoss have it and switch back.
Go ahead and do it, you still wont be playing the hardest race.
Protoss goes through one patch where they cant 1-a, and suddenly all the tosses start whining.
Saying that they wanna switch to zerg, its really funny.. Because the style u have to play to beat a protoss is insanely hard. Requires a metric tonne of multitasking and lots and lots of bases. Constantly reinforcing with diffrent types of army etc.. Not as easy as it looks... Whereas protoss can still win 50% of their games with a 3 base turtle into deathball.
what units do you rely on the most? Colossus and Sentries. One unit is a-click and the other is F spam. Yes, Sentries actually do take some skill to use, but that is really the only thing you can improve upon as you get better and even then it's incredibly simplistic. The entire deathball mechanic also pretty much gets rid of any use for positioning apart from zealots at front at your one big control group.
So what do I want? Forget the patches for the moment, I'm stick of being called unskilled by zerg players who have NO understanding whatsoever of protoss mechanics, and use Idra as their basis for claiming that they are underpowered. The best is that they talk about how easy force fielding is (im not saying it is hard, but one pixel left opened nullifies them) but then say that larva injecting is hard. Your race is not hard. Neither is mine, neither is terran.
And can we stop with the whole protoss players suck argument. It makes no sense.
And claiming that zergs stopped qqing is a joke. Scroll up.
Anytime a race appears weak, a million theoretical arguments can be made as to why that is, and how nothing can be done to get around these factors. We've seen this with Zerg, then with Protoss, then with Terran for a bit, Zerg again, and now with Protoss, yet again. I've always believed in players solving problems through innovation, rather than Blizzard doing it through patches, so I'm going to stick to my guns here, and say Protoss players just need to figure out new ways to play.
That said, I've always been of the opinion that Protoss design was garbage in general, and that it would be extremely easy to knock the race from perceived overpoweredness into the abyss of absolute crap, just by fiddling with the overpowered stuff that holds the race together - Warpgates, HTs, Sentries and Colossus. So, it wouldn't surprise me one bit if it turns out if Protoss is just completely shit now. I have no idea if that's true or not, but I wouldn't be surprised at all.
However, what is most worrying to me, is the apparent lack of up and coming Protoss players in Korea, where I can easily name at least 3 of promising Zerg/Terran players, some of which aren't even in Code A yet. I can also name quite a few "strong" Terran players, and same for Zerg. On the other hand, for Protoss, there's MC and Alicia, and then mostly mediocre players. Honestly, there's no Protoss players aside from Alicia that I'm looking forward to seeing play nowadays. :/
On June 04 2011 02:57 Joseph123 wrote: well protoss has never been doing well in the GSL only MC has did so..
This is generally pretty true.
Outside of MC, Alicia, and some flashes of brilliance from San, the korean scene does not have many consistent or interesting protoss players.
Ace and Squirtle have failed to make a splash in the korean scene thus far, Anypro Tester and SangHo have all been inconsistent in performance and rarely bring anything interesting to the table.
I think it's pretty safe to say there has been no Protoss "hero" akin to MVP or Nestea. Sure, MC is likely the most successful player(winning-wise) to come out of Korea, but he hasn't revolutionized the race so much as just doing everything better.
Tl;dr: OP, inconsistent protoss performance is business as usual in the GSL.
anypro>san imo, hes pretty consistent if not brilliant and nestea really had to work hard to beat him, which means a lot in my eyes considering how nestea rolled inca so easily. San had one lucky run thats it.
Korean protoss ranking by results I would say its probably
MC Inca Anypro San Hongun Tester Alicia Squirtle Ace
But if you by current skill I'd probably put it at
MC/Alicia (hard to tell whos better) Anypro Inca San Hongun Ace Squirtle Tester
(last 4 in no particular order, they are all pretty mediocre)
Zerg is not OP, and never has or will be. I feel like there just aren't many great korean protoss besides MC and Alicia. Zerg has Nestea, July, Losira, and some great up-and-comers like DRG and Min. And there are just a dickload of terran players, all with great potential (slayers, anyone?) that it makes the rest of the toss seem comparatively lack-luster.
Do switch to zerg. There is the unforgiving larva inject mechanism and the constant dilemma to drone or make army units, which tosses don't have to deal with. Switch and see how easy it is. As for me, whenever I get random protoss, all I have to do is turtle for 90% of the game and then a-move. Scouting - optional for protoss, necessary for zerg (or else you'll overdrone, underdrone, or make the wrong counters). It just takes half as much effort into the game whenever I roll terran or toss.
protoss still wins 66% against zerg you retards. protoss is just a flawed race where the best zerg can't do anything but the protoss can't win against terran because protoss is so easy they can't find a way to improve their play. if anything blizzard needs to remove the race from the game because P matchups are always boring, so much so that T can only go MMM and Z can only make roaches, unless it's some cutesy timing push or coinflip strat
Protoss goes through one patch where they cant 1-a, and suddenly all the tosses start whining.
Saying that they wanna switch to zerg, its really funny.. Because the style u have to play to beat a protoss is insanely hard. Requires a metric tonne of multitasking and lots and lots of bases. Constantly reinforcing with diffrent types of army etc.. Not as easy as it looks... Whereas protoss can still win 50% of their games with a 3 base turtle into deathball.
what units do you rely on the most? Colossus and Sentries. One unit is a-click and the other is F spam. Yes, Sentries actually do take some skill to use, but that is really the only thing you can improve upon as you get better and even then it's incredibly simplistic. The entire deathball mechanic also pretty much gets rid of any use for positioning apart from zealots at front at your one big control group.
So what do I want? Forget the patches for the moment, I'm stick of being called unskilled by zerg players who have NO understanding whatsoever of protoss mechanics, and use Idra as their basis for claiming that they are underpowered. The best is that they talk about how easy force fielding is (im not saying it is hard, but one pixel left opened nullifies them) but then say that larva injecting is hard. Your race is not hard. Neither is mine, neither is terran.
And can we stop with the whole protoss players suck argument. It makes no sense.
And claiming that zergs stopped qqing is a joke. Scroll up.
I've tried every race, but I could only play Zerg and keep my self respect. This is not a joke. Don't tell me I have no "understanding of Protoss mechanics". I was a P player, then a T player, then finally Z because I couldn't enjoy winning when I felt like a lameass.
And compared to P, Z is really fucking hard. Try Z and see for yourself.
On June 04 2011 07:47 HolyHenk wrote: The real weakness of the protoss is it very limited amount of options. Not only unit options but also usage options. The unit options are a complete joke! Carriers, Mothership, Warp Prisms are basicly all useless. DT is a dangerous unit to get because its countered really easy. This doesn't really leave a lot of units left considering that you always need zealots stalkers sentries and observers. You can then chose between HT, Voidray, Phoenixes, Immortal and Colosus. Phoenixes are only used in openings to ensure map control in the early game and very rarely in the late game . The same goes for voidrays although they sometimes get massed in the late game. This leaves you with only 3 options of which immortals are only viable against certain units.
The options for unit usage is the biggest problem. Protoss got no harass options but phoenixes which are so easily countered. Warp prisms are too dangerous to use because they get shot down instantly and got no futher usage like medivacs and overlords. Protoss can't attack at multiple places because their units are inefficient in small numbers and are slow. Protoss can't put pressure without risking the loss of their entire army. Their units are slow and can never retreat. Protoss only got 1 interesting mechanic: The forcefield. This ability makes the difference in every battle. And if you take it away (EMPS) ! You are basicly dead.
Due to this protoss is either forced to defend all game and make the feared deathball or they have to do some sort of timing/all in push.
I've never understood why protoss players seem to hate the warp prism, it's a very good unit, against zergs at least.
And, using your logic in ZvP, late game zerlings are bad, roaches are bad, hydras are bad, brood lords are bad, ultras are bad, which leaves infestors and maybe banelings/corruptors. You can always talk about how easily X units are countered, but that's not the way to judge a MU. You also completely forgot archons, which are great against zerg.
Zerg is not OP, and never has or will be. I feel like there just aren't many great korean protoss besides MC and Alicia. Zerg has Nestea, July, Losira, and some great up-and-comers like DRG and Min. And there are just a dickload of terran players, all with great potential (slayers, anyone?) that it makes the rest of the toss seem comparatively lack-luster.
if you look at results only it looks bad. but if you watched the games, they played horribly.
Protoss best race
the strategy's are very easy to execute for toss right now the only thing that makes things different with players is just mechanic's/micro.
Do switch to zerg. There is the unforgiving larva inject mechanism and the constant dilemma to drone or make army units, which tosses don't have to deal with. Switch and see how easy it is. As for me, whenever I get random protoss, all I have to do is turtle for 90% of the game and then a-move. Scouting - optional for protoss, necessary for zerg (or else you'll overdrone, underdrone, or make the wrong counters). It just takes half as much effort into the game whenever I roll terran or toss.
this, why don't you just do it ? before posting a slightly disguised imba-whine thread?
for the playerbase protoss has in gsl ( i think they suck mostly ) they are doing extremely well
protoss players are really really bad as far as I can tell. resorting to all ins/gimmicky plays
Well, don't tell me protoss don"'t have the tools to win. It's just, korean don't have a lot of good protoss in my opinion.
To me Korean toss players always seemed inferior to their terran and zerg brothers. So it's no wonder that they started to lose in the end.
protoss still wins 66% against zerg you retards. protoss is just a flawed race where the best zerg can't do anything but the protoss can't win against terran because protoss is so easy they can't find a way to improve their play. if anything blizzard needs to remove the race from the game because P matchups are always boring, so much so that T can only go MMM and Z can only make roaches, unless it's some cutesy timing push or coinflip strat
After someone said they wanted to switch to zerg:
Go ahead. You won't last 5 games.
Do it. You'll realise how good you Protoss have it and switch back.
Go ahead and do it, you still wont be playing the hardest race.
Protoss goes through one patch where they cant 1-a, and suddenly all the tosses start whining.
Saying that they wanna switch to zerg, its really funny.. Because the style u have to play to beat a protoss is insanely hard. Requires a metric tonne of multitasking and lots and lots of bases. Constantly reinforcing with diffrent types of army etc.. Not as easy as it looks... Whereas protoss can still win 50% of their games with a 3 base turtle into deathball.
what units do you rely on the most? Colossus and Sentries. One unit is a-click and the other is F spam. Yes, Sentries actually do take some skill to use, but that is really the only thing you can improve upon as you get better and even then it's incredibly simplistic. The entire deathball mechanic also pretty much gets rid of any use for positioning apart from zealots at front at your one big control group.
So what do I want? Forget the patches for the moment, I'm stick of being called unskilled by zerg players who have NO understanding whatsoever of protoss mechanics, and use Idra as their basis for claiming that they are underpowered. The best is that they talk about how easy force fielding is (im not saying it is hard, but one pixel left opened nullifies them) but then say that larva injecting is hard. Your race is not hard. Neither is mine, neither is terran.
And can we stop with the whole protoss players suck argument. It makes no sense.
And claiming that zergs stopped qqing is a joke. Scroll up.
I've tried every race, but I could only play Zerg and keep my self respect. This is not a joke. Don't tell me I have no "understanding of Protoss mechanics". I was a P player, then a T player, then finally Z because I couldn't enjoy winning when I felt like a lameass.
And compared to P, Z is really fucking hard. Try Z and see for yourself.
Thats kind of useless anecdotal evidence, and especially biased since you chose to play zerg. I play random and I think Darclite is right, zerg is no harder than the others. Which race you find hardest depends on your personal weakness. In my opinion its terran because micro is my weakness, but this assessment of difficulty is useless compared someone else who might not have difficulty with micro.
Also I always laugh at zergs complaining that all protoss does is a-move a deathball. If anything zerg is the a-move race, theres not very much micro involved with anything they do.
Zerg is not OP, and never has or will be. I feel like there just aren't many great korean protoss besides MC and Alicia. Zerg has Nestea, July, Losira, and some great up-and-comers like DRG and Min. And there are just a dickload of terran players, all with great potential (slayers, anyone?) that it makes the rest of the toss seem comparatively lack-luster.
if you look at results only it looks bad. but if you watched the games, they played horribly.
Protoss best race
the strategy's are very easy to execute for toss right now the only thing that makes things different with players is just mechanic's/micro.
Do switch to zerg. There is the unforgiving larva inject mechanism and the constant dilemma to drone or make army units, which tosses don't have to deal with. Switch and see how easy it is. As for me, whenever I get random protoss, all I have to do is turtle for 90% of the game and then a-move. Scouting - optional for protoss, necessary for zerg (or else you'll overdrone, underdrone, or make the wrong counters). It just takes half as much effort into the game whenever I roll terran or toss.
this, why don't you just do it ? before posting a slightly disguised imba-whine thread?
for the playerbase protoss has in gsl ( i think they suck mostly ) they are doing extremely well
protoss players are really really bad as far as I can tell. resorting to all ins/gimmicky plays
Well, don't tell me protoss don"'t have the tools to win. It's just, korean don't have a lot of good protoss in my opinion.
To me Korean toss players always seemed inferior to their terran and zerg brothers. So it's no wonder that they started to lose in the end.
protoss still wins 66% against zerg you retards. protoss is just a flawed race where the best zerg can't do anything but the protoss can't win against terran because protoss is so easy they can't find a way to improve their play. if anything blizzard needs to remove the race from the game because P matchups are always boring, so much so that T can only go MMM and Z can only make roaches, unless it's some cutesy timing push or coinflip strat
After someone said they wanted to switch to zerg:
Go ahead. You won't last 5 games.
Do it. You'll realise how good you Protoss have it and switch back.
Go ahead and do it, you still wont be playing the hardest race.
Protoss goes through one patch where they cant 1-a, and suddenly all the tosses start whining.
Saying that they wanna switch to zerg, its really funny.. Because the style u have to play to beat a protoss is insanely hard. Requires a metric tonne of multitasking and lots and lots of bases. Constantly reinforcing with diffrent types of army etc.. Not as easy as it looks... Whereas protoss can still win 50% of their games with a 3 base turtle into deathball.
what units do you rely on the most? Colossus and Sentries. One unit is a-click and the other is F spam. Yes, Sentries actually do take some skill to use, but that is really the only thing you can improve upon as you get better and even then it's incredibly simplistic. The entire deathball mechanic also pretty much gets rid of any use for positioning apart from zealots at front at your one big control group.
So what do I want? Forget the patches for the moment, I'm stick of being called unskilled by zerg players who have NO understanding whatsoever of protoss mechanics, and use Idra as their basis for claiming that they are underpowered. The best is that they talk about how easy force fielding is (im not saying it is hard, but one pixel left opened nullifies them) but then say that larva injecting is hard. Your race is not hard. Neither is mine, neither is terran.
And can we stop with the whole protoss players suck argument. It makes no sense.
And claiming that zergs stopped qqing is a joke. Scroll up.
I've tried every race, but I could only play Zerg and keep my self respect. This is not a joke. Don't tell me I have no "understanding of Protoss mechanics". I was a P player, then a T player, then finally Z because I couldn't enjoy winning when I felt like a lameass.
And compared to P, Z is really fucking hard. Try Z and see for yourself.
I quit toss some odd months ago and hardcore trained my Z. I played T in the beta. I've played all 3 races fluently - I returned to toss, not because it's easier, but because I prefer it over Z. Z isn't harder. It's different. Get out of here with that "I have self respect" shit. All 3 races are equally challenging but with different mechanics. Comparing Terran to Zerg and Zerg to Protoss and Protoss to Terran is like comparing apples, oranges, and pears.
This thread is a damn nightmare. It's a train wreck.. why the hell hasn't it been closed yet ;;
Zerg is not OP, and never has or will be. I feel like there just aren't many great korean protoss besides MC and Alicia. Zerg has Nestea, July, Losira, and some great up-and-comers like DRG and Min. And there are just a dickload of terran players, all with great potential (slayers, anyone?) that it makes the rest of the toss seem comparatively lack-luster.
if you look at results only it looks bad. but if you watched the games, they played horribly.
Protoss best race
the strategy's are very easy to execute for toss right now the only thing that makes things different with players is just mechanic's/micro.
Do switch to zerg. There is the unforgiving larva inject mechanism and the constant dilemma to drone or make army units, which tosses don't have to deal with. Switch and see how easy it is. As for me, whenever I get random protoss, all I have to do is turtle for 90% of the game and then a-move. Scouting - optional for protoss, necessary for zerg (or else you'll overdrone, underdrone, or make the wrong counters). It just takes half as much effort into the game whenever I roll terran or toss.
this, why don't you just do it ? before posting a slightly disguised imba-whine thread?
for the playerbase protoss has in gsl ( i think they suck mostly ) they are doing extremely well
protoss players are really really bad as far as I can tell. resorting to all ins/gimmicky plays
Well, don't tell me protoss don"'t have the tools to win. It's just, korean don't have a lot of good protoss in my opinion.
To me Korean toss players always seemed inferior to their terran and zerg brothers. So it's no wonder that they started to lose in the end.
protoss still wins 66% against zerg you retards. protoss is just a flawed race where the best zerg can't do anything but the protoss can't win against terran because protoss is so easy they can't find a way to improve their play. if anything blizzard needs to remove the race from the game because P matchups are always boring, so much so that T can only go MMM and Z can only make roaches, unless it's some cutesy timing push or coinflip strat
After someone said they wanted to switch to zerg:
Go ahead. You won't last 5 games.
Do it. You'll realise how good you Protoss have it and switch back.
Go ahead and do it, you still wont be playing the hardest race.
Protoss goes through one patch where they cant 1-a, and suddenly all the tosses start whining.
Saying that they wanna switch to zerg, its really funny.. Because the style u have to play to beat a protoss is insanely hard. Requires a metric tonne of multitasking and lots and lots of bases. Constantly reinforcing with diffrent types of army etc.. Not as easy as it looks... Whereas protoss can still win 50% of their games with a 3 base turtle into deathball.
what units do you rely on the most? Colossus and Sentries. One unit is a-click and the other is F spam. Yes, Sentries actually do take some skill to use, but that is really the only thing you can improve upon as you get better and even then it's incredibly simplistic. The entire deathball mechanic also pretty much gets rid of any use for positioning apart from zealots at front at your one big control group.
So what do I want? Forget the patches for the moment, I'm stick of being called unskilled by zerg players who have NO understanding whatsoever of protoss mechanics, and use Idra as their basis for claiming that they are underpowered. The best is that they talk about how easy force fielding is (im not saying it is hard, but one pixel left opened nullifies them) but then say that larva injecting is hard. Your race is not hard. Neither is mine, neither is terran.
And can we stop with the whole protoss players suck argument. It makes no sense.
And claiming that zergs stopped qqing is a joke. Scroll up.
I've tried every race, but I could only play Zerg and keep my self respect. This is not a joke. Don't tell me I have no "understanding of Protoss mechanics". I was a P player, then a T player, then finally Z because I couldn't enjoy winning when I felt like a lameass.
And compared to P, Z is really fucking hard. Try Z and see for yourself.
Thats kind of useless anecdotal evidence, and especially biased since you chose to play zerg. I play random and I think Darclite is right, zerg is no harder than the others. Which race you find hardest depends on your personal weakness. In my opinion its terran because micro is my weakness, but this assessment of difficulty is useless compared someone else who might not have difficulty with micro.
Also I always laugh at zergs complaining that all protoss does is a-move a deathball. If anything zerg is the a-move race, theres not very much micro involved with anything they do.
I'd disagree completely, Zerg doesn't require anywhere near as much micro as Terran, but it requires just as much, if not more, micro than toss. You have to be burrowing roaches, moving them under ffs, fungling, dropping banelings, making sure BLs are in safe positions, etc.
Although I'd agree that the "hardest" race depends completely on your weaknesses/strengths of the player.
On June 04 2011 08:05 Skwid1g wrote: I've never understood why protoss players seem to hate the warp prism, it's a very good unit, against zergs at least.
dude there is this unit. its like the warp prism but like static. only costs half the money. i see alot of protoss use it.
Zerg is not OP, and never has or will be. I feel like there just aren't many great korean protoss besides MC and Alicia. Zerg has Nestea, July, Losira, and some great up-and-comers like DRG and Min. And there are just a dickload of terran players, all with great potential (slayers, anyone?) that it makes the rest of the toss seem comparatively lack-luster.
if you look at results only it looks bad. but if you watched the games, they played horribly.
Protoss best race
the strategy's are very easy to execute for toss right now the only thing that makes things different with players is just mechanic's/micro.
Do switch to zerg. There is the unforgiving larva inject mechanism and the constant dilemma to drone or make army units, which tosses don't have to deal with. Switch and see how easy it is. As for me, whenever I get random protoss, all I have to do is turtle for 90% of the game and then a-move. Scouting - optional for protoss, necessary for zerg (or else you'll overdrone, underdrone, or make the wrong counters). It just takes half as much effort into the game whenever I roll terran or toss.
this, why don't you just do it ? before posting a slightly disguised imba-whine thread?
for the playerbase protoss has in gsl ( i think they suck mostly ) they are doing extremely well
protoss players are really really bad as far as I can tell. resorting to all ins/gimmicky plays
Well, don't tell me protoss don"'t have the tools to win. It's just, korean don't have a lot of good protoss in my opinion.
To me Korean toss players always seemed inferior to their terran and zerg brothers. So it's no wonder that they started to lose in the end.
protoss still wins 66% against zerg you retards. protoss is just a flawed race where the best zerg can't do anything but the protoss can't win against terran because protoss is so easy they can't find a way to improve their play. if anything blizzard needs to remove the race from the game because P matchups are always boring, so much so that T can only go MMM and Z can only make roaches, unless it's some cutesy timing push or coinflip strat
After someone said they wanted to switch to zerg:
Go ahead. You won't last 5 games.
Do it. You'll realise how good you Protoss have it and switch back.
Go ahead and do it, you still wont be playing the hardest race.
Protoss goes through one patch where they cant 1-a, and suddenly all the tosses start whining.
Saying that they wanna switch to zerg, its really funny.. Because the style u have to play to beat a protoss is insanely hard. Requires a metric tonne of multitasking and lots and lots of bases. Constantly reinforcing with diffrent types of army etc.. Not as easy as it looks... Whereas protoss can still win 50% of their games with a 3 base turtle into deathball.
what units do you rely on the most? Colossus and Sentries. One unit is a-click and the other is F spam. Yes, Sentries actually do take some skill to use, but that is really the only thing you can improve upon as you get better and even then it's incredibly simplistic. The entire deathball mechanic also pretty much gets rid of any use for positioning apart from zealots at front at your one big control group.
So what do I want? Forget the patches for the moment, I'm stick of being called unskilled by zerg players who have NO understanding whatsoever of protoss mechanics, and use Idra as their basis for claiming that they are underpowered. The best is that they talk about how easy force fielding is (im not saying it is hard, but one pixel left opened nullifies them) but then say that larva injecting is hard. Your race is not hard. Neither is mine, neither is terran.
And can we stop with the whole protoss players suck argument. It makes no sense.
And claiming that zergs stopped qqing is a joke. Scroll up.
I've tried every race, but I could only play Zerg and keep my self respect. This is not a joke. Don't tell me I have no "understanding of Protoss mechanics". I was a P player, then a T player, then finally Z because I couldn't enjoy winning when I felt like a lameass.
And compared to P, Z is really fucking hard. Try Z and see for yourself.
Zerg maybe somewhat hard, but you don't need to play perfectly to win. There are more Zergs than Terrans in Masters and they are reaching they point where they are equaling the Protoss in representation yet they are the least played race in this game.
I've never understood why protoss players seem to hate the warp prism, it's a very good unit, against zergs at least.
On June 04 2011 08:05 Skwid1g wrote: I've never understood why protoss players seem to hate the warp prism, it's a very good unit, against zergs at least.
dude there is this unit. its like the warp prism but like static. only costs half the money. i see alot of protoss use it.
Dude, the fact that it's static is like, the reason it's worse than a warp prism.
On June 04 2011 07:47 HolyHenk wrote: The real weakness of the protoss is it very limited amount of options. Not only unit options but also usage options. The unit options are a complete joke! Carriers, Mothership, Warp Prisms are basicly all useless. DT is a dangerous unit to get because its countered really easy. This doesn't really leave a lot of units left considering that you always need zealots stalkers sentries and observers. You can then chose between HT, Voidray, Phoenixes, Immortal and Colosus. Phoenixes are only used in openings to ensure map control in the early game and very rarely in the late game . The same goes for voidrays although they sometimes get massed in the late game. This leaves you with only 3 options of which immortals are only viable against certain units.
The options for unit usage is the biggest problem. Protoss got no harass options but phoenixes which are so easily countered. Warp prisms are too dangerous to use because they get shot down instantly and got no futher usage like medivacs and overlords. Protoss can't attack at multiple places because their units are inefficient in small numbers and are slow. Protoss can't put pressure without risking the loss of their entire army. Their units are slow and can never retreat. Protoss only got 1 interesting mechanic: The forcefield. This ability makes the difference in every battle. And if you take it away (EMPS) ! You are basicly dead.
Due to this protoss is either forced to defend all game and make the feared deathball or they have to do some sort of timing/all in push.
I've never understood why protoss players seem to hate the warp prism, it's a very good unit, against zergs at least.
And, using your logic in ZvP, late game zerlings are bad, roaches are bad, hydras are bad, brood lords are bad, ultras are bad, which leaves infestors and maybe banelings/corruptors. You can always talk about how easily X units are countered, but that's not the way to judge a MU. You also completely forgot archons, which are great against zerg.
Let me guess you are a zerg player? Every zerg player always goes but why don't protoss use warp prisms more??!?!?
Try it yourself, fail, and then you'll see that its made of glass, is expensive, wastes valuable robo production time and in 90% of cases a pylon is the cheaper alternative. Warp in mechanics make dropping gateway units unnecessary, which means its main use is dropping robo units, which honestly just isn't very effective for the risk you're taking.
On June 04 2011 07:47 HolyHenk wrote: The real weakness of the protoss is it very limited amount of options. Not only unit options but also usage options. The unit options are a complete joke! Carriers, Mothership, Warp Prisms are basicly all useless. DT is a dangerous unit to get because its countered really easy. This doesn't really leave a lot of units left considering that you always need zealots stalkers sentries and observers. You can then chose between HT, Voidray, Phoenixes, Immortal and Colosus. Phoenixes are only used in openings to ensure map control in the early game and very rarely in the late game . The same goes for voidrays although they sometimes get massed in the late game. This leaves you with only 3 options of which immortals are only viable against certain units.
The options for unit usage is the biggest problem. Protoss got no harass options but phoenixes which are so easily countered. Warp prisms are too dangerous to use because they get shot down instantly and got no futher usage like medivacs and overlords. Protoss can't attack at multiple places because their units are inefficient in small numbers and are slow. Protoss can't put pressure without risking the loss of their entire army. Their units are slow and can never retreat. Protoss only got 1 interesting mechanic: The forcefield. This ability makes the difference in every battle. And if you take it away (EMPS) ! You are basicly dead.
Due to this protoss is either forced to defend all game and make the feared deathball or they have to do some sort of timing/all in push.
I've never understood why protoss players seem to hate the warp prism, it's a very good unit, against zergs at least.
And, using your logic in ZvP, late game zerlings are bad, roaches are bad, hydras are bad, brood lords are bad, ultras are bad, which leaves infestors and maybe banelings/corruptors. You can always talk about how easily X units are countered, but that's not the way to judge a MU. You also completely forgot archons, which are great against zerg.
Let me guess you are a zerg player? Every zerg player always goes but why don't protoss use warp prisms more??!?!?
Try it yourself, fail, and then you'll see that its made of glass, is expensive, wastes valuable robo production time and in 90% of cases a pylon is the cheaper alternative. Warp in mechanics make dropping gateway units unnecessary, which means its main use is dropping robo units, which honestly just isn't very effective for the risk you're taking.
I play random and have success with warp prisms all the time, it costs 200 minerals, nothing more. And your opponent lets you get pylons in his base, wut?
Zerg is not OP, and never has or will be. I feel like there just aren't many great korean protoss besides MC and Alicia. Zerg has Nestea, July, Losira, and some great up-and-comers like DRG and Min. And there are just a dickload of terran players, all with great potential (slayers, anyone?) that it makes the rest of the toss seem comparatively lack-luster.
if you look at results only it looks bad. but if you watched the games, they played horribly.
Protoss best race
the strategy's are very easy to execute for toss right now the only thing that makes things different with players is just mechanic's/micro.
Do switch to zerg. There is the unforgiving larva inject mechanism and the constant dilemma to drone or make army units, which tosses don't have to deal with. Switch and see how easy it is. As for me, whenever I get random protoss, all I have to do is turtle for 90% of the game and then a-move. Scouting - optional for protoss, necessary for zerg (or else you'll overdrone, underdrone, or make the wrong counters). It just takes half as much effort into the game whenever I roll terran or toss.
this, why don't you just do it ? before posting a slightly disguised imba-whine thread?
for the playerbase protoss has in gsl ( i think they suck mostly ) they are doing extremely well
protoss players are really really bad as far as I can tell. resorting to all ins/gimmicky plays
Well, don't tell me protoss don"'t have the tools to win. It's just, korean don't have a lot of good protoss in my opinion.
To me Korean toss players always seemed inferior to their terran and zerg brothers. So it's no wonder that they started to lose in the end.
protoss still wins 66% against zerg you retards. protoss is just a flawed race where the best zerg can't do anything but the protoss can't win against terran because protoss is so easy they can't find a way to improve their play. if anything blizzard needs to remove the race from the game because P matchups are always boring, so much so that T can only go MMM and Z can only make roaches, unless it's some cutesy timing push or coinflip strat
After someone said they wanted to switch to zerg:
Go ahead. You won't last 5 games.
Do it. You'll realise how good you Protoss have it and switch back.
Go ahead and do it, you still wont be playing the hardest race.
Protoss goes through one patch where they cant 1-a, and suddenly all the tosses start whining.
Saying that they wanna switch to zerg, its really funny.. Because the style u have to play to beat a protoss is insanely hard. Requires a metric tonne of multitasking and lots and lots of bases. Constantly reinforcing with diffrent types of army etc.. Not as easy as it looks... Whereas protoss can still win 50% of their games with a 3 base turtle into deathball.
what units do you rely on the most? Colossus and Sentries. One unit is a-click and the other is F spam. Yes, Sentries actually do take some skill to use, but that is really the only thing you can improve upon as you get better and even then it's incredibly simplistic. The entire deathball mechanic also pretty much gets rid of any use for positioning apart from zealots at front at your one big control group.
So what do I want? Forget the patches for the moment, I'm stick of being called unskilled by zerg players who have NO understanding whatsoever of protoss mechanics, and use Idra as their basis for claiming that they are underpowered. The best is that they talk about how easy force fielding is (im not saying it is hard, but one pixel left opened nullifies them) but then say that larva injecting is hard. Your race is not hard. Neither is mine, neither is terran.
And can we stop with the whole protoss players suck argument. It makes no sense.
And claiming that zergs stopped qqing is a joke. Scroll up.
I've tried every race, but I could only play Zerg and keep my self respect. This is not a joke. Don't tell me I have no "understanding of Protoss mechanics". I was a P player, then a T player, then finally Z because I couldn't enjoy winning when I felt like a lameass.
And compared to P, Z is really fucking hard. Try Z and see for yourself.
I quit toss some odd months ago and hardcore trained my Z. I played T in the beta. I've played all 3 races fluently - I returned to toss, not because it's easier, but because I prefer it over Z. Z isn't harder. It's different. Get out of here with that "I have self respect" shit. All 3 races are equally challenging but with different mechanics. Comparing Terran to Zerg and Zerg to Protoss and Protoss to Terran is like comparing apples, oranges, and pears.
This thread is a damn nightmare. It's a train wreck.. why the hell hasn't it been closed yet ;;
T and Z are equally challenging but with difficult mechanics. P isn't. And my talk about self respect isn't bullshit, it's the truth. I played P in SC1 but I really can't enjoy it in SC2.
Zerg is not OP, and never has or will be. I feel like there just aren't many great korean protoss besides MC and Alicia. Zerg has Nestea, July, Losira, and some great up-and-comers like DRG and Min. And there are just a dickload of terran players, all with great potential (slayers, anyone?) that it makes the rest of the toss seem comparatively lack-luster.
if you look at results only it looks bad. but if you watched the games, they played horribly.
Protoss best race
the strategy's are very easy to execute for toss right now the only thing that makes things different with players is just mechanic's/micro.
Do switch to zerg. There is the unforgiving larva inject mechanism and the constant dilemma to drone or make army units, which tosses don't have to deal with. Switch and see how easy it is. As for me, whenever I get random protoss, all I have to do is turtle for 90% of the game and then a-move. Scouting - optional for protoss, necessary for zerg (or else you'll overdrone, underdrone, or make the wrong counters). It just takes half as much effort into the game whenever I roll terran or toss.
this, why don't you just do it ? before posting a slightly disguised imba-whine thread?
for the playerbase protoss has in gsl ( i think they suck mostly ) they are doing extremely well
protoss players are really really bad as far as I can tell. resorting to all ins/gimmicky plays
Well, don't tell me protoss don"'t have the tools to win. It's just, korean don't have a lot of good protoss in my opinion.
To me Korean toss players always seemed inferior to their terran and zerg brothers. So it's no wonder that they started to lose in the end.
protoss still wins 66% against zerg you retards. protoss is just a flawed race where the best zerg can't do anything but the protoss can't win against terran because protoss is so easy they can't find a way to improve their play. if anything blizzard needs to remove the race from the game because P matchups are always boring, so much so that T can only go MMM and Z can only make roaches, unless it's some cutesy timing push or coinflip strat
After someone said they wanted to switch to zerg:
Go ahead. You won't last 5 games.
Do it. You'll realise how good you Protoss have it and switch back.
Go ahead and do it, you still wont be playing the hardest race.
Protoss goes through one patch where they cant 1-a, and suddenly all the tosses start whining.
Saying that they wanna switch to zerg, its really funny.. Because the style u have to play to beat a protoss is insanely hard. Requires a metric tonne of multitasking and lots and lots of bases. Constantly reinforcing with diffrent types of army etc.. Not as easy as it looks... Whereas protoss can still win 50% of their games with a 3 base turtle into deathball.
what units do you rely on the most? Colossus and Sentries. One unit is a-click and the other is F spam. Yes, Sentries actually do take some skill to use, but that is really the only thing you can improve upon as you get better and even then it's incredibly simplistic. The entire deathball mechanic also pretty much gets rid of any use for positioning apart from zealots at front at your one big control group.
So what do I want? Forget the patches for the moment, I'm stick of being called unskilled by zerg players who have NO understanding whatsoever of protoss mechanics, and use Idra as their basis for claiming that they are underpowered. The best is that they talk about how easy force fielding is (im not saying it is hard, but one pixel left opened nullifies them) but then say that larva injecting is hard. Your race is not hard. Neither is mine, neither is terran.
And can we stop with the whole protoss players suck argument. It makes no sense.
And claiming that zergs stopped qqing is a joke. Scroll up.
I've tried every race, but I could only play Zerg and keep my self respect. This is not a joke. Don't tell me I have no "understanding of Protoss mechanics". I was a P player, then a T player, then finally Z because I couldn't enjoy winning when I felt like a lameass.
And compared to P, Z is really fucking hard. Try Z and see for yourself.
I quit toss some odd months ago and hardcore trained my Z. I played T in the beta. I've played all 3 races fluently - I returned to toss, not because it's easier, but because I prefer it over Z. Z isn't harder. It's different. Get out of here with that "I have self respect" shit. All 3 races are equally challenging but with different mechanics. Comparing Terran to Zerg and Zerg to Protoss and Protoss to Terran is like comparing apples, oranges, and pears.
This thread is a damn nightmare. It's a train wreck.. why the hell hasn't it been closed yet ;;
T and Z are equally challenging but with difficult mechanics. P isn't. And my talk about self respect isn't bullshit, it's the truth. I played P in SC1 but I really can't enjoy it in SC2.
no, it's bullshit. and what I quoted.. take a screen shot and take it to the doctor, you may need a cat scan. making bold statements with little evidence is a laughable response. after you get that cat scan i suggest you take up comedy
I think the lack of results is due to 4gate nerf and players have yet to figure themselves out. Players like MC got through on the power of 4gating alot....
I've tried every race, but I could only play Zerg and keep my self respect. This is not a joke. Don't tell me I have no "understanding of Protoss mechanics". I was a P player, then a T player, then finally Z because I couldn't enjoy winning when I felt like a lameass.
And compared to P, Z is really fucking hard. Try Z and see for yourself.
In my my humble mid-masters experience, ive found the exact opposite to be true. I think maybe its your playstyle that leads you to play a more turtle-based style. That's the sound of it anyways and thats what Ive found to be true of most zerg players ive had discussions with about PvZ/ZvP... Zerg players for a long time just concentrated on trying not to die and getting a shitload of bases, but that didnt work vs. the deathball. Now there is a sense of timing from zergs. You can check my posts from months ago ive always felt like zergs were just missing their timings and my first example of a zerg that actually nailed every ZvP timing in a tournament setting was a tournament morrow won about 5 months ago or so.. I want to say IEM or something... i cant remember don't care to really.
I think its a stylistic choice. If you aren't comfortable attacking and relying on timings, you can do quite well as protoss with a defensive style. Zerg kind of forces you to be out on the map. You CAN be out on the map as protoss, but its much more difficult because of the way protoss units dont work so well on their own. This is why you see protoss players playing defensively and gearing up for a big attack or an all-in. If we could run around with speedlings or had roaches that move faster than stalkers off creep and are very cheap to lose, protoss could move around more... but a protoss army doesnt reward the player for being out and about... in fact it punishes it.
I think perhaps the reason you feel zerg is so difficult is because you're not comfortable playing aggressive and zergs arent rewarded for turtling like they are with being active with their combat units. I have an 'out and about' protoss style, and by that i mean constant aggression (random aggression never works). So you should try being an active player... give it a shot... move around the map and dont turtle... you'll find your Z improves dramatically as well as your understanding of RTS games as that seems to be severely lacking based on your comments
Right now as I'm watching the GSL super tournament on GOMTV, it is depressing to see how the badly the protoss players are doing. Most of the protoss are losing left and right to other races, with only HuK and MC still playing decent. It was nice to see how Trickster played, but now, even he is out...
I've tried every race, but I could only play Zerg and keep my self respect. This is not a joke. Don't tell me I have no "understanding of Protoss mechanics". I was a P player, then a T player, then finally Z because I couldn't enjoy winning when I felt like a lameass.
And compared to P, Z is really fucking hard. Try Z and see for yourself.
In my my humble mid-masters experience, ive found the exact opposite to be true. I think maybe its your playstyle that leads you to play a more turtle-based style. That's the sound of it anyways and thats what Ive found to be true of most zerg players ive had discussions with about PvZ/ZvP... Zerg players for a long time just concentrated on trying not to die and getting a shitload of bases, but that didnt work vs. the deathball. Now there is a sense of timing from zergs. You can check my posts from months ago ive always felt like zergs were just missing their timings and my first example of a zerg that actually nailed every ZvP timing in a tournament setting was a tournament morrow won about 5 months ago or so.. I want to say IEM or something... i cant remember don't care to really.
I think its a stylistic choice. If you aren't comfortable attacking and relying on timings, you can do quite well as protoss with a defensive style. Zerg kind of forces you to be out on the map. You CAN be out on the map as protoss, but its much more difficult because of the way protoss units dont work so well on their own. This is why you see protoss players playing defensively and gearing up for a big attack or an all-in. If we could run around with speedlings or had roaches that move faster than stalkers off creep and are very cheap to lose, protoss could move around more... but a protoss army doesnt reward the player for being out and about... in fact it punishes it.
I think perhaps the reason you feel zerg is so difficult is because you're not comfortable playing aggressive and zergs arent rewarded for turtling like they are with being active with their combat units. I have an 'out and about' protoss style, and by that i mean constant aggression (random aggression never works). So you should try being an active player... give it a shot... move around the map and dont turtle... you'll find your Z improves dramatically as well as your understanding of RTS games as that seems to be severely lacking based on your comments
Actually, multitasking, multi-pronged attacks, and harassment is what I'm best at. And I don't think Z is that hard, I just think P is easy. Z and T seem about equal in difficulty, they're just hard at different things.
I'm a high masters protoss player (hover 900-1200 depending) and I feel the same way. Any aggression and I'm pretty much allin. I feel clunky and am forced to turtle and do a lil drop harass or catch players at ramps with forcefields.
I switched to zerg just for fun and not knowing any hotkeys or anything general strategy I've managed to win half my ladder games. Zerg macro is just easy, I place my overlords and drone til no tomorrow and react accordingly. Years of protoss and only a few days of zerg and my zerg is almost on par with my protoss play. I don't have to worry about forcefielding anything. I literally have to just keep tabs on my enemy and I can make units or workers. I don't ever feel like I lose the game over one mistake like I do with protoss.
On June 04 2011 08:05 Skwid1g wrote: I've never understood why protoss players seem to hate the warp prism, it's a very good unit, against zergs at least.
dude there is this unit. its like the warp prism but like static. only costs half the money. i see alot of protoss use it.
Dude, the fact that it's static is like, the reason it's worse than a warp prism.
dude, the static one gives like supply. the other one takes supply. oh boy im goood at balance discussion.
.......... im just talking shit but since everyone here is just writing shit without much to back it up ill keep trolling the shit out of this thread. where are all the sc1 veterans try to calm people down with stuff like "matchups change.. the game changes.. someday a player will pop out and change the match up"..
maybe i should go back to play fps´. calling other people fags is so much easier way to insult each other.
Did one of you (toss) ever tried to drop templars ? I ask a friend of mine (top eu master). He never did, because it's 'useless'. Same for Dark templars. As a zerg player, I love when a toss sticks to an outdated style and QQ after being crushed into oblivion.
On June 04 2011 08:31 Erasme wrote: Did one of you (toss) ever tried to drop templars ? I ask a friend of mine (top eu master). He never did, because it's 'useless'. Same for Dark templars. As a zerg player, I love when a toss sticks to an outdated style and QQ after being crushed into oblivion.
Storm drops aren't that good vs a player who has map awareness. The investment in gas is huge, and you are unlikely to kill many drones at all vs a good Zerg. He just has to move his drones.
On June 04 2011 08:31 Erasme wrote: Did one of you (toss) ever tried to drop templars ? I ask a friend of mine (top eu master). He never did, because it's 'useless'. Same for Dark templars. As a zerg player, I love when a toss sticks to an outdated style and QQ after being crushed into oblivion.
Storm drops aren't that good vs a player who has map awareness. The investment in gas is huge, and you are unlikely to kill many drones at all vs a good Zerg. He just has to move his drones.
His exact response. But you know you don't have to load your templars into your warp prism ? If it doesn't work, you lost 200minerals. So what ? But if it works, it's a mineral line cleared. With speed warp prism (100/100 upgrade), you can get aways easily. And no zerg can make banelings/bl/infestors/corruptors/muta.
On June 04 2011 08:31 Erasme wrote: Did one of you (toss) ever tried to drop templars ? I ask a friend of mine (top eu master). He never did, because it's 'useless'. Same for Dark templars. As a zerg player, I love when a toss sticks to an outdated style and QQ after being crushed into oblivion.
sure man i make a nonstatic pylon. then i fly it to an expansion. there i unload my templar. i give him a hustler magazine and a couple of beers so he is not bored while waiting for his mojo to go up. after 25 minutes my templar could storm the shit out of the workerline but he felt asleep.. stupid templars have no work ethic.
socke used alot of templar warpins but since amulet is removed you cant warp them im and instantly storm. so you talking about outdated styles while playing outdated styles. yo dawg.
On June 04 2011 08:31 Erasme wrote: Did one of you (toss) ever tried to drop templars ? I ask a friend of mine (top eu master). He never did, because it's 'useless'. Same for Dark templars. As a zerg player, I love when a toss sticks to an outdated style and QQ after being crushed into oblivion.
sure man i make a nonstatic pylon. then i fly it to an expansion. there i unload my templar. i give him a hustler magazine and a couple of beers so he is not bored while waiting for his mojo to go up. after 25 minutes my templar could storm the shit out of the workerline but he felt asleep.. stupid templars have no work ethic.
socke used alot of templar warpins but since amulet is removed you cant warp them im and instantly storm. so you talking about outdated styles while playing outdated styles. yo dawg.
Funny how people managed to stormdrop in Sc1, but its impossible in sc2 because of no Khaydarin ???????????????
On June 04 2011 08:31 Erasme wrote: Did one of you (toss) ever tried to drop templars ? I ask a friend of mine (top eu master). He never did, because it's 'useless'. Same for Dark templars. As a zerg player, I love when a toss sticks to an outdated style and QQ after being crushed into oblivion.
sure man i make a nonstatic pylon. then i fly it to an expansion. there i unload my templar. i give him a hustler magazine and a couple of beers so he is not bored while waiting for his mojo to go up. after 25 minutes my templar could storm the shit out of the workerline but he felt asleep.. stupid templars have no work ethic.
socke used alot of templar warpins but since amulet is removed you cant warp them im and instantly storm. so you talking about outdated styles while playing outdated styles. yo dawg.
Funny how people managed to stormdrop in Sc1, but its impossible in sc2 because of no Khaydarin ???????????????
you don't go fast storm in sc2. storm drop comes incredible late, you won't have templar / colossus tech before min 3 base gas
On June 04 2011 08:31 Erasme wrote: Did one of you (toss) ever tried to drop templars ? I ask a friend of mine (top eu master). He never did, because it's 'useless'. Same for Dark templars. As a zerg player, I love when a toss sticks to an outdated style and QQ after being crushed into oblivion.
sure man i make a nonstatic pylon. then i fly it to an expansion. there i unload my templar. i give him a hustler magazine and a couple of beers so he is not bored while waiting for his mojo to go up. after 25 minutes my templar could storm the shit out of the workerline but he felt asleep.. stupid templars have no work ethic.
socke used alot of templar warpins but since amulet is removed you cant warp them im and instantly storm. so you talking about outdated styles while playing outdated styles. yo dawg.
Funny how people managed to stormdrop in Sc1, but its impossible in sc2 because of no Khaydarin ???????????????
On June 04 2011 08:31 Erasme wrote: Did one of you (toss) ever tried to drop templars ? I ask a friend of mine (top eu master). He never did, because it's 'useless'. Same for Dark templars. As a zerg player, I love when a toss sticks to an outdated style and QQ after being crushed into oblivion.
sure man i make a nonstatic pylon. then i fly it to an expansion. there i unload my templar. i give him a hustler magazine and a couple of beers so he is not bored while waiting for his mojo to go up. after 25 minutes my templar could storm the shit out of the workerline but he felt asleep.. stupid templars have no work ethic.
socke used alot of templar warpins but since amulet is removed you cant warp them im and instantly storm. so you talking about outdated styles while playing outdated styles. yo dawg.
You need to wait 15sec. Wow. That's huge. Btw you don't have to make it where he can see it. But you're too smart for me. (And yes amulet was imba. Get over it.)
And I'm not talking about a fast tech to storm drop, but a lategame strat.
On June 04 2011 08:31 Erasme wrote: Did one of you (toss) ever tried to drop templars ? I ask a friend of mine (top eu master). He never did, because it's 'useless'. Same for Dark templars. As a zerg player, I love when a toss sticks to an outdated style and QQ after being crushed into oblivion.
Storm drops aren't that good vs a player who has map awareness. The investment in gas is huge, and you are unlikely to kill many drones at all vs a good Zerg. He just has to move his drones.
His exact response. But you know you don't have to load your templars into your warp prism ? If it doesn't work, you lost 200minerals. So what ? But if it works, it's a mineral line cleared. With speed warp prism (100/100 upgrade), you can get aways easily. And no zerg can make banelings/bl/infestors/corruptors/muta.
There has always been this problem with the way SC2 works.
1) Every strategy must be beatable if the other player knows it's coming, otherwise it's imbalanced.
2) Many strategies should be beatable even if the other player doesn't know for sure it's coming, because there are ways to deny scouting, and then it would be imbalanced.
3) Protoss relies on tight build orders and fixed timings.
4) A lot of SC2 is based on strategies winning other strategies many times without the possibility of other kind of skill to show within the confrontation, because a lot of times it revolves around one player making one strategy and the other countering it.
As zergs learn to scout and know toss timings, suddenly protoss gets beaten. This is nothing more than Blizzards' fault for making protoss so rigid. Most of the times, the counter of a strategy is so strong, that microing barely affects the outcome, specially how toss units aren't that micro intensive, for instance, compared to marine tank - bane micro involved.
Had Blizzard made so that all races had equally strong and viable strategies on their own, without having to rely so much on hard counter units / hard counter strategies / fixed timings for all ins / coin flip based strategies, we would see much less of this bs.
Really common that the weakest race in the game is doing the worst, and I do not see how HuK is doing good in the GSL right now, he is able to take games away from low-level Code-A players at most, but will never survive through the Round of 16 in Code S.
Protoss will lose any macro game against an EVENLY SKILLED player. If you watch SlayerS_Min games on Terminus, he used his 12 minute max-supply Roach w/ 1/1 and speed with burrow build two times while Protoss is only about 86 supply. Though our deathball is the second strongest compared to the unaffordable Ultralisk Infestor, it is technically an all-in style as there is no way to replace those Colossi and Void Rays, and Warp Gate units are trash by themselves. In StarCraft II the races rely on only one strategy, or cheese in the beginning, there are no alternatives to playing from the standard Deathball style. They tried to make Archons better, but honestly the Immortal is too weak of a unit to be useful in mid-game and further.
Just a side note, I know its not possible to discuss without it, but still if I did not watch the GSL, I would just assume almost every Protoss lost in their non-PvP matchups lol (without clicking on the spoiler).
On June 04 2011 08:31 Erasme wrote: Did one of you (toss) ever tried to drop templars ? I ask a friend of mine (top eu master). He never did, because it's 'useless'. Same for Dark templars. As a zerg player, I love when a toss sticks to an outdated style and QQ after being crushed into oblivion.
Storm drops aren't that good vs a player who has map awareness. The investment in gas is huge, and you are unlikely to kill many drones at all vs a good Zerg. He just has to move his drones.
His exact response. But you know you don't have to load your templars into your warp prism ? If it doesn't work, you lost 200minerals. So what ? But if it works, it's a mineral line cleared. With speed warp prism (100/100 upgrade), you can get aways easily. And no zerg can make banelings/bl/infestors/corruptors/muta.
OK, what then? Warp them in? ololololol
I don't know ... do you want a 'victory' button ? Seriously, I'm sick of that. I just throwed a viable idea, and every toss are 'lololol DOESNT WORK ! CUZ NEED MICRO/MAP AWARENESS'. Get your head of your ass and try to make it work.
Most of the times, the counter of a strategy is so strong, that microing barely affects the outcome, specially how toss units aren't that micro intensive, for instance, compared to marine - bane micro involved.
No one Protoss unit is as micro intensive, but the army as awhole is considerably more micro intensive. No other race has as many slow/vulnerable units, no other race has as many spells, no other race has the need to keep formation at the level Protoss does, no other race has to look away from the battle to build reinforcements.
On June 04 2011 08:31 Erasme wrote: Did one of you (toss) ever tried to drop templars ? I ask a friend of mine (top eu master). He never did, because it's 'useless'. Same for Dark templars. As a zerg player, I love when a toss sticks to an outdated style and QQ after being crushed into oblivion.
sure man i make a nonstatic pylon. then i fly it to an expansion. there i unload my templar. i give him a hustler magazine and a couple of beers so he is not bored while waiting for his mojo to go up. after 25 minutes my templar could storm the shit out of the workerline but he felt asleep.. stupid templars have no work ethic.
socke used alot of templar warpins but since amulet is removed you cant warp them im and instantly storm. so you talking about outdated styles while playing outdated styles. yo dawg.
You need to wait 15sec. Wow. That's huge. Btw you don't have to make it where he can see it. But you're too smart for me. (And yes amulet was imba. Get over it.)
And I'm not talking about a fast tech to storm drop, but a lategame strat.
you are talking about trends hence you mentioned "ZOMG I luuuv it when they go outdated". then i told you there is a very talented individual that did this when amulat still excisted.
i neither said i would warp in my templar where you could see it (why should i do that wtf) neither did i cry about not having amulet anymore. so basicly i have no clue what you are talking about.
P are just having a hard time in the patch metagame.
- Z's have learned the proper timmings to drone hard, abuse the mobility-cost/efficiency of roach/ling, take expos, or just defend until the muta ball is up; also the big maps favor all those facts, Z have time to stop droning once they see the protoss going out, also the bigger the distances, the bigger the benefit from fast movement units.
- T's just improved their usual play, AND added the insanity of the cheap ghost (tier 2 templar class spellcaster with stupidly micro-friendly spell mechanics).
P's must learn how to deal with this new meta, or just wait until a new balance patch (which will eventualy come out if P pros keep falling).
On June 04 2011 08:31 Erasme wrote: Did one of you (toss) ever tried to drop templars ? I ask a friend of mine (top eu master). He never did, because it's 'useless'. Same for Dark templars. As a zerg player, I love when a toss sticks to an outdated style and QQ after being crushed into oblivion.
sure man i make a nonstatic pylon. then i fly it to an expansion. there i unload my templar. i give him a hustler magazine and a couple of beers so he is not bored while waiting for his mojo to go up. after 25 minutes my templar could storm the shit out of the workerline but he felt asleep.. stupid templars have no work ethic.
socke used alot of templar warpins but since amulet is removed you cant warp them im and instantly storm. so you talking about outdated styles while playing outdated styles. yo dawg.
You need to wait 15sec. Wow. That's huge. Btw you don't have to make it where he can see it. But you're too smart for me. (And yes amulet was imba. Get over it.)
And I'm not talking about a fast tech to storm drop, but a lategame strat.
you are talking about trends hence you mentioned "ZOMG I luuuv it when they go outdated". then i told you there is a very talented individual that did this when amulat still excisted.
i neither said i would warp in my templar where you could see it (why should i do that wtf) neither did i cry about not having amulet anymore. so basicly i have no clue what you are talking about.
Seriously ? So it was legit but only Socke did it ? And now that there is no more instant storm, it's not viable anymore ? You have no clue because you're not good. You're not even good to try it. It's just sad.
Edit : And I'm saying that you should test new strats. I'm sorry if you're not happy about that.
On June 04 2011 03:10 Rasky wrote: Zerg is now the OP race if you ask me. Recently zergs have been doing very well protoss not so much.
Zerg is not OP, and never has or will be. I feel like there just aren't many great korean protoss besides MC and Alicia. Zerg has Nestea, July, Losira, and some great up-and-comers like DRG and Min. And there are just a dickload of terran players, all with great potential (slayers, anyone?) that it makes the rest of the toss seem comparatively lack-luster.
Not implying that Zerg is OP or not - but to definitively say the race will never be overpowered like a proven fact just goes to show how biased certain zerg players are unfortunately =/
It's funny that whenever Protoss seems weak, its always because of players and not the race - but if you really think about it, how come there are so few up and coming protoss players all these past months in GSL? It cannot just be because everyone who plays protoss is 'lack-luster'.. truth is that, its never been as strong of a race people believed it to be - its pretty much an illusion created by ogsMC (similar to how Moon made Nightelf in WC3).
Is protoss weak? Its hard to tell right now, but it cannot be denied its an extremely fragile race - thats why I think pro players generally don't pick/succeed much with the race because its a race that either punishes with certain timings, or gets punished, theres not much inbetween usually. If you look at the latest GSTL finals between Slayers & MVP, in a BO9 that went to the ace match, Cella couldn't even find a good time to send out Alicia - who is widely regarded as the teams best player. It just goes to show you they are fully aware of the risks of using a protoss player imo.
On June 04 2011 08:31 Erasme wrote: Did one of you (toss) ever tried to drop templars ? I ask a friend of mine (top eu master). He never did, because it's 'useless'. Same for Dark templars. As a zerg player, I love when a toss sticks to an outdated style and QQ after being crushed into oblivion.
sure man i make a nonstatic pylon. then i fly it to an expansion. there i unload my templar. i give him a hustler magazine and a couple of beers so he is not bored while waiting for his mojo to go up. after 25 minutes my templar could storm the shit out of the workerline but he felt asleep.. stupid templars have no work ethic.
socke used alot of templar warpins but since amulet is removed you cant warp them im and instantly storm. so you talking about outdated styles while playing outdated styles. yo dawg.
You need to wait 15sec. Wow. That's huge. Btw you don't have to make it where he can see it. But you're too smart for me. (And yes amulet was imba. Get over it.)
And I'm not talking about a fast tech to storm drop, but a lategame strat.
you are talking about trends hence you mentioned "ZOMG I luuuv it when they go outdated". then i told you there is a very talented individual that did this when amulat still excisted.
i neither said i would warp in my templar where you could see it (why should i do that wtf) neither did i cry about not having amulet anymore. so basicly i have no clue what you are talking about.
Seriously ? So it was legit but only Socke did it ? And now that there is no more instant storm, it's not viable anymore ? You have no clue because you're not good. You're not even good to try it. It's just sad.
The patch technically removed the High Templar bro, I would never go there except when I am at least on four bases and ahead, never at even footing. Warp Prisms have low HP and move slow as hell, and I really do not want to use gas on speed when I am going for High Templars under four bases.
High Templar drops depend on the map, it may be viable on maps such as Tal Darim Altar, but on maps such as Shattered Temple it is almost impossible to get a good storm against a decent player.
On June 04 2011 08:31 Erasme wrote: Did one of you (toss) ever tried to drop templars ? I ask a friend of mine (top eu master). He never did, because it's 'useless'. Same for Dark templars. As a zerg player, I love when a toss sticks to an outdated style and QQ after being crushed into oblivion.
sure man i make a nonstatic pylon. then i fly it to an expansion. there i unload my templar. i give him a hustler magazine and a couple of beers so he is not bored while waiting for his mojo to go up. after 25 minutes my templar could storm the shit out of the workerline but he felt asleep.. stupid templars have no work ethic.
socke used alot of templar warpins but since amulet is removed you cant warp them im and instantly storm. so you talking about outdated styles while playing outdated styles. yo dawg.
You need to wait 15sec. Wow. That's huge. Btw you don't have to make it where he can see it. But you're too smart for me. (And yes amulet was imba. Get over it.)
And I'm not talking about a fast tech to storm drop, but a lategame strat.
you are talking about trends hence you mentioned "ZOMG I luuuv it when they go outdated". then i told you there is a very talented individual that did this when amulat still excisted.
i neither said i would warp in my templar where you could see it (why should i do that wtf) neither did i cry about not having amulet anymore. so basicly i have no clue what you are talking about.
Seriously ? So it was legit but only Socke did it ? And now that there is no more instant storm, it's not viable anymore ? You have no clue because you're not good. You're not even good to try it. It's just sad.
Edit : And I'm saying that you should test new strats. I'm sorry if you're not happy about that.
you still dont get it on top you are making the claim i am a bad player. your opinion just became much more legit by calling me a bad player. sir i hope one day ill be as smart and good as you are lol.
Protoss is definitely not weak. I think the recent turn of events in the GSL is probably due more to bad luck than anything for the protosses. Great, it is refreshing to see other races do well for once
On June 04 2011 08:31 Erasme wrote: Did one of you (toss) ever tried to drop templars ? I ask a friend of mine (top eu master). He never did, because it's 'useless'. Same for Dark templars. As a zerg player, I love when a toss sticks to an outdated style and QQ after being crushed into oblivion.
sure man i make a nonstatic pylon. then i fly it to an expansion. there i unload my templar. i give him a hustler magazine and a couple of beers so he is not bored while waiting for his mojo to go up. after 25 minutes my templar could storm the shit out of the workerline but he felt asleep.. stupid templars have no work ethic.
socke used alot of templar warpins but since amulet is removed you cant warp them im and instantly storm. so you talking about outdated styles while playing outdated styles. yo dawg.
You need to wait 15sec. Wow. That's huge. Btw you don't have to make it where he can see it. But you're too smart for me. (And yes amulet was imba. Get over it.)
And I'm not talking about a fast tech to storm drop, but a lategame strat.
you are talking about trends hence you mentioned "ZOMG I luuuv it when they go outdated". then i told you there is a very talented individual that did this when amulat still excisted.
i neither said i would warp in my templar where you could see it (why should i do that wtf) neither did i cry about not having amulet anymore. so basicly i have no clue what you are talking about.
Seriously ? So it was legit but only Socke did it ? And now that there is no more instant storm, it's not viable anymore ? You have no clue because you're not good. You're not even good to try it. It's just sad.
The patch technically removed the High Templar bro, I would never go there except when I am at least on four bases and ahead, never at even footing. Warp Prisms have low HP and move slow as hell, and I really do not want to use gas on speed when I am going for High Templars under four bases.
High Templar drops depend on the map, it may be viable on maps such as Tal Darim Altar, but on maps such as Shattered Temple it is almost impossible to get a good storm against a decent player.
I said something about speed warp prism. 100/100. And the patch didn't 'technically removed the High Templar bro'. Ht is an amazing unit. My last post in this topic, it's a stupid one anyway.
These threads do not help at all, they state the obvious while everyone just says its balancy. I honestly do not know what the OP is looking for, there are two possible answers: 1) Bad players 2) Imbalancy
If it is the first one, this thread is pointless. If it is the second one, it just turns into another rant thread. I do not see the point of why moderators let this thread stay open, the reasons are obvious.
Oh your question was what do we think? Protoss Players: Imbalanced Zerg and Terrans: Lol Protoss ez race, bad players, good deal for once!
Not being biased at all, if you do not believe me scroll through the comments while looking at the race portraits.
Protoss is so bad all they can do is get second place in the last GSL, or get 1st,3rd and 4th in the previous one.
.. apparently now if Protoss isn't winning absolutely everything they're UP
On June 04 2011 04:29 darmousseh wrote: There are a # of problems protoss has which makes them weak in certain situations.
1. Protoss units can't retreat. One of the major advantages of blink stalkers and collosus is that you can retreat with them, but zealots, immortals, void rays and to some extent HT and archons cannot retreat fast enough. if a terran is losing a battle, they can stim and run away. Zerg units are so fast they can just sprint away. Other than stalkers and collosus, once a protoss engages, they must commit or else be willing to lose all of their zealots. This was the problem with archons, but that changed in the patch. Marauders and infestors don't help the situation either.
2. Protoss can reinforce too quickly. When blizzard did balancing, they needed to consider the effect of reinforcement on the balance. Because protoss can warp in, the units are weaker by a large margin.
3. High dependance on spell casters and high dps units Terran can win games with marines and marauders only. Once terran has stim, protoss needs sentries (for guardian shields and forcefields), collosus (to do dps) or HT, and blink/charge and all high dps units from protoss are easily counterable. (vikings against collosus, ghosts against HT, concussive shells against charge/blink). If protoss wants to win, they need to win every single engagement.
4. No area controlling units. Dark templar can be considered area controlling to a tiny extent, but only lasts a short time. Tanks for terran, banelings and infestors for zerg, protoss literally has nothing. At one time, protoss could hold a position by having a pylon and being able to warp in a high templar with kydarian amulet, but no more. There is no risk advancing into a protoss base. This is the biggest reason why protoss is always in a ball.
5. Highly limited tech choice This somewhat opened up with the recent changes to archon, but most air builds are almost autolosses and warp prism play offers very limited reward with high risks. Obviously protoss hasn't explored EVERY single option, but it's not due to a lack of trying.
6. The cost of scouting is too high. A terran can scout with reapers or scans at almost any moment, a zerg can send an overlord , but a protoss must choose a specific tech pattern and sacrifice tech choices in order to scout. If the protoss gets hallucination, then that's 2 less forcefields and less tech. If the protoss gets an obs, that's 200m/100g followed by 25m/75g. And scouting makes protoss SUPER vulnerable to a fast timing attack. I think protoss need to get that super fast immortal to be safe followed by a chrono'd observer in order to be safe against dt builds, banshee builds, and burrowed roach. My guess is that blizzard designed protoss to always get a fast robo every game (considering all of the units like immortals, observers, and warp prisms), but the truth is that the investment makes it difficult to choose another tech path if you scout something that robo is not good against. Zerg can scout with a lair (a natural part of their tech path) and terran can scout with scans or reapers (a very natural part of the tech path). I still think this is something that can be explored. Maybe hallucination first builds or something would really go a long way to help out. Maybe 1 gate robo is the build of the future, something to be considered. This however I believe is the #1 problem protoss currently has.
I'm not saying protoss is UP, they still win a lot of games and each race has it's own problems, but that the problems for protoss make it difficult to show consistent results mostly because of the scouting problem. Naniwa did 4 gates in order to be the agressor (in which case you don't really need early scouting), but as 4 gates got nerfed, naniwa's build got weaker and I think MLG will show the results of the most recent patch.
~Protoss Player, see what I mean now?
if you look at results only it looks bad. but if you watched the games, they played horribly.
My primary frustration with Protoss is the weakness of the Stargate path. Robo tech has always been strong, with utility units (Obs/Prism), a stop-gap unit (Immortal) in case you need quick meat, and a powerful capstone (Colossus). Templar tech (DT/HT) is a little messier, but between Warpgates, Feedback, and the recent Archon buff, is quite reasonable and threatening.
Stargates, by contrast, have two legitimate but very gas-expensive units, and nothing else. It's cheap to get +1 Air Weapons, but the defensive upgrades are insanely overpriced, and the Fleet Beacon does nothing for the two units you're actually going to use (since Mothership/Carrier are slow/expensive/weak/low DPS-per-supply) except unlock +2 and +3 air.
Put Tier 3 Protoss Air back into Starcraft, and you'll see some proper variety IMO. (Note: making Robo or Citadel tech paths imba will cover this problem up, but not fix it.)
On June 04 2011 08:31 Erasme wrote: Did one of you (toss) ever tried to drop templars ? I ask a friend of mine (top eu master). He never did, because it's 'useless'. Same for Dark templars. As a zerg player, I love when a toss sticks to an outdated style and QQ after being crushed into oblivion.
sure man i make a nonstatic pylon. then i fly it to an expansion. there i unload my templar. i give him a hustler magazine and a couple of beers so he is not bored while waiting for his mojo to go up. after 25 minutes my templar could storm the shit out of the workerline but he felt asleep.. stupid templars have no work ethic.
socke used alot of templar warpins but since amulet is removed you cant warp them im and instantly storm. so you talking about outdated styles while playing outdated styles. yo dawg.
Funny how people managed to stormdrop in Sc1, but its impossible in sc2 because of no Khaydarin ???????????????
Funny how Storm in Sc1 did more damage in a larger area, and it was more difficult to evacuate a mineral line due to the 12-unit selection limit???????????????
On June 04 2011 09:21 Severedevil wrote: My primary frustration with Protoss is the weakness of the Stargate path. Robo tech has always been strong, with utility units (Obs/Prism), a stop-gap unit (Immortal) in case you need quick meat, and a powerful capstone (Colossus). Templar tech (DT/HT) is a little messier, but between Warpgates, Feedback, and the recent Archon buff, is quite reasonable and threatening.
Stargates, by contrast, have two legitimate but very gas-expensive units, and nothing else. It's cheap to get +1 Air Weapons, but the defensive upgrades are insanely overpriced, and the Fleet Beacon does nothing for the two units you're actually going to use (since Mothership/Carrier are slow/expensive/weak/low DPS-per-supply) except unlock +2 and +3 air.
Put Tier 3 Protoss Air back into Starcraft, and you'll see some proper variety IMO. (Note: making Robo or Citadel tech paths imba will cover this problem up, but not fix it.)
On June 04 2011 08:31 Erasme wrote: Did one of you (toss) ever tried to drop templars ? I ask a friend of mine (top eu master). He never did, because it's 'useless'. Same for Dark templars. As a zerg player, I love when a toss sticks to an outdated style and QQ after being crushed into oblivion.
sure man i make a nonstatic pylon. then i fly it to an expansion. there i unload my templar. i give him a hustler magazine and a couple of beers so he is not bored while waiting for his mojo to go up. after 25 minutes my templar could storm the shit out of the workerline but he felt asleep.. stupid templars have no work ethic.
socke used alot of templar warpins but since amulet is removed you cant warp them im and instantly storm. so you talking about outdated styles while playing outdated styles. yo dawg.
Funny how people managed to stormdrop in Sc1, but its impossible in sc2 because of no Khaydarin ???????????????
Funny how Storm in Sc1 did more damage in a larger area, and it was more difficult to evacuate a mineral line due to the 12-unit selection limit???????????????
On June 04 2011 09:21 Severedevil wrote: My primary frustration with Protoss is the weakness of the Stargate path. Robo tech has always been strong, with utility units (Obs/Prism), a stop-gap unit (Immortal) in case you need quick meat, and a powerful capstone (Colossus). Templar tech (DT/HT) is a little messier, but between Warpgates, Feedback, and the recent Archon buff, is quite reasonable and threatening.
Stargates, by contrast, have two legitimate but very gas-expensive units, and nothing else. It's cheap to get +1 Air Weapons, but the defensive upgrades are insanely overpriced, and the Fleet Beacon does nothing for the two units you're actually going to use (since Mothership/Carrier are slow/expensive/weak/low DPS-per-supply) except unlock +2 and +3 air.
Put Tier 3 Protoss Air back into Starcraft, and you'll see some proper variety IMO. (Note: making Robo or Citadel tech paths imba will cover this problem up, but not fix it.)
On June 04 2011 08:40 Catch]22 wrote:
On June 04 2011 08:37 leecH wrote:
On June 04 2011 08:31 Erasme wrote: Did one of you (toss) ever tried to drop templars ? I ask a friend of mine (top eu master). He never did, because it's 'useless'. Same for Dark templars. As a zerg player, I love when a toss sticks to an outdated style and QQ after being crushed into oblivion.
sure man i make a nonstatic pylon. then i fly it to an expansion. there i unload my templar. i give him a hustler magazine and a couple of beers so he is not bored while waiting for his mojo to go up. after 25 minutes my templar could storm the shit out of the workerline but he felt asleep.. stupid templars have no work ethic.
socke used alot of templar warpins but since amulet is removed you cant warp them im and instantly storm. so you talking about outdated styles while playing outdated styles. yo dawg.
Funny how people managed to stormdrop in Sc1, but its impossible in sc2 because of no Khaydarin ???????????????
Funny how Storm in Sc1 did more damage in a larger area, and it was more difficult to evacuate a mineral line due to the 12-unit selection limit???????????????
On June 04 2011 09:21 Severedevil wrote: My primary frustration with Protoss is the weakness of the Stargate path. Robo tech has always been strong, with utility units (Obs/Prism), a stop-gap unit (Immortal) in case you need quick meat, and a powerful capstone (Colossus). Templar tech (DT/HT) is a little messier, but between Warpgates, Feedback, and the recent Archon buff, is quite reasonable and threatening.
Stargates, by contrast, have two legitimate but very gas-expensive units, and nothing else. It's cheap to get +1 Air Weapons, but the defensive upgrades are insanely overpriced, and the Fleet Beacon does nothing for the two units you're actually going to use (since Mothership/Carrier are slow/expensive/weak/low DPS-per-supply) except unlock +2 and +3 air.
Put Tier 3 Protoss Air back into Starcraft, and you'll see some proper variety IMO. (Note: making Robo or Citadel tech paths imba will cover this problem up, but not fix it.)
On June 04 2011 08:40 Catch]22 wrote:
On June 04 2011 08:37 leecH wrote:
On June 04 2011 08:31 Erasme wrote: Did one of you (toss) ever tried to drop templars ? I ask a friend of mine (top eu master). He never did, because it's 'useless'. Same for Dark templars. As a zerg player, I love when a toss sticks to an outdated style and QQ after being crushed into oblivion.
sure man i make a nonstatic pylon. then i fly it to an expansion. there i unload my templar. i give him a hustler magazine and a couple of beers so he is not bored while waiting for his mojo to go up. after 25 minutes my templar could storm the shit out of the workerline but he felt asleep.. stupid templars have no work ethic.
socke used alot of templar warpins but since amulet is removed you cant warp them im and instantly storm. so you talking about outdated styles while playing outdated styles. yo dawg.
Funny how people managed to stormdrop in Sc1, but its impossible in sc2 because of no Khaydarin ???????????????
Funny how Storm in Sc1 did more damage in a larger area, and it was more difficult to evacuate a mineral line due to the 12-unit selection limit???????????????
Actually SC2 storm does more DPS. You're welcome.
SC2 storm has slightly higher dps, but much less damage, in a much smaller area, and yeah, the 12 unit selection limit is important too so...maybe lose the "you're welcome." Even if you had a point, it's not nice.
On June 04 2011 09:21 Severedevil wrote: My primary frustration with Protoss is the weakness of the Stargate path. Robo tech has always been strong, with utility units (Obs/Prism), a stop-gap unit (Immortal) in case you need quick meat, and a powerful capstone (Colossus). Templar tech (DT/HT) is a little messier, but between Warpgates, Feedback, and the recent Archon buff, is quite reasonable and threatening.
Stargates, by contrast, have two legitimate but very gas-expensive units, and nothing else. It's cheap to get +1 Air Weapons, but the defensive upgrades are insanely overpriced, and the Fleet Beacon does nothing for the two units you're actually going to use (since Mothership/Carrier are slow/expensive/weak/low DPS-per-supply) except unlock +2 and +3 air.
Put Tier 3 Protoss Air back into Starcraft, and you'll see some proper variety IMO. (Note: making Robo or Citadel tech paths imba will cover this problem up, but not fix it.)
On June 04 2011 08:40 Catch]22 wrote:
On June 04 2011 08:37 leecH wrote:
On June 04 2011 08:31 Erasme wrote: Did one of you (toss) ever tried to drop templars ? I ask a friend of mine (top eu master). He never did, because it's 'useless'. Same for Dark templars. As a zerg player, I love when a toss sticks to an outdated style and QQ after being crushed into oblivion.
sure man i make a nonstatic pylon. then i fly it to an expansion. there i unload my templar. i give him a hustler magazine and a couple of beers so he is not bored while waiting for his mojo to go up. after 25 minutes my templar could storm the shit out of the workerline but he felt asleep.. stupid templars have no work ethic.
socke used alot of templar warpins but since amulet is removed you cant warp them im and instantly storm. so you talking about outdated styles while playing outdated styles. yo dawg.
Funny how people managed to stormdrop in Sc1, but its impossible in sc2 because of no Khaydarin ???????????????
Funny how Storm in Sc1 did more damage in a larger area, and it was more difficult to evacuate a mineral line due to the 12-unit selection limit???????????????
On June 04 2011 09:21 Severedevil wrote: My primary frustration with Protoss is the weakness of the Stargate path. Robo tech has always been strong, with utility units (Obs/Prism), a stop-gap unit (Immortal) in case you need quick meat, and a powerful capstone (Colossus). Templar tech (DT/HT) is a little messier, but between Warpgates, Feedback, and the recent Archon buff, is quite reasonable and threatening.
Stargates, by contrast, have two legitimate but very gas-expensive units, and nothing else. It's cheap to get +1 Air Weapons, but the defensive upgrades are insanely overpriced, and the Fleet Beacon does nothing for the two units you're actually going to use (since Mothership/Carrier are slow/expensive/weak/low DPS-per-supply) except unlock +2 and +3 air.
Put Tier 3 Protoss Air back into Starcraft, and you'll see some proper variety IMO. (Note: making Robo or Citadel tech paths imba will cover this problem up, but not fix it.)
On June 04 2011 08:40 Catch]22 wrote:
On June 04 2011 08:37 leecH wrote:
On June 04 2011 08:31 Erasme wrote: Did one of you (toss) ever tried to drop templars ? I ask a friend of mine (top eu master). He never did, because it's 'useless'. Same for Dark templars. As a zerg player, I love when a toss sticks to an outdated style and QQ after being crushed into oblivion.
sure man i make a nonstatic pylon. then i fly it to an expansion. there i unload my templar. i give him a hustler magazine and a couple of beers so he is not bored while waiting for his mojo to go up. after 25 minutes my templar could storm the shit out of the workerline but he felt asleep.. stupid templars have no work ethic.
socke used alot of templar warpins but since amulet is removed you cant warp them im and instantly storm. so you talking about outdated styles while playing outdated styles. yo dawg.
Funny how people managed to stormdrop in Sc1, but its impossible in sc2 because of no Khaydarin ???????????????
Funny how Storm in Sc1 did more damage in a larger area, and it was more difficult to evacuate a mineral line due to the 12-unit selection limit???????????????
Actually SC2 storm does more DPS. You're welcome.
SC2 storm has slightly higher dps, but much less damage, in a much smaller area, and yeah, the 12 unit selection limit is important too so...maybe lose the "you're welcome." Even if you had a point, it's not nice.
Lets just call it even, though the StarCraft 2 storm has higher DPS (Drones have 40 HP, the 120 thing isn't important), the area of effect takes it away since they can avoid the damage faster. So we call it even ok, though Warp Prisms < Shuttles.
On June 04 2011 09:21 Severedevil wrote: My primary frustration with Protoss is the weakness of the Stargate path. Robo tech has always been strong, with utility units (Obs/Prism), a stop-gap unit (Immortal) in case you need quick meat, and a powerful capstone (Colossus). Templar tech (DT/HT) is a little messier, but between Warpgates, Feedback, and the recent Archon buff, is quite reasonable and threatening.
Stargates, by contrast, have two legitimate but very gas-expensive units, and nothing else. It's cheap to get +1 Air Weapons, but the defensive upgrades are insanely overpriced, and the Fleet Beacon does nothing for the two units you're actually going to use (since Mothership/Carrier are slow/expensive/weak/low DPS-per-supply) except unlock +2 and +3 air.
Put Tier 3 Protoss Air back into Starcraft, and you'll see some proper variety IMO. (Note: making Robo or Citadel tech paths imba will cover this problem up, but not fix it.)
On June 04 2011 08:40 Catch]22 wrote:
On June 04 2011 08:37 leecH wrote:
On June 04 2011 08:31 Erasme wrote: Did one of you (toss) ever tried to drop templars ? I ask a friend of mine (top eu master). He never did, because it's 'useless'. Same for Dark templars. As a zerg player, I love when a toss sticks to an outdated style and QQ after being crushed into oblivion.
sure man i make a nonstatic pylon. then i fly it to an expansion. there i unload my templar. i give him a hustler magazine and a couple of beers so he is not bored while waiting for his mojo to go up. after 25 minutes my templar could storm the shit out of the workerline but he felt asleep.. stupid templars have no work ethic.
socke used alot of templar warpins but since amulet is removed you cant warp them im and instantly storm. so you talking about outdated styles while playing outdated styles. yo dawg.
Funny how people managed to stormdrop in Sc1, but its impossible in sc2 because of no Khaydarin ???????????????
Funny how Storm in Sc1 did more damage in a larger area, and it was more difficult to evacuate a mineral line due to the 12-unit selection limit???????????????
Actually SC2 storm does more DPS. You're welcome.
112 (scbw) vs 80 (sc2)
... do you know what DPS means?
112 * 2x the area = much higher dps despite less "damage per sec"
I don't see why we lower ourselves to the level of QQ Zergs and Terrans have been using. That self-righteousness is counter-productive and makes us look bad as a race.
On June 04 2011 09:34 Serdiuk wrote: I don't see why we lower ourselves to the level of QQ Zergs and Terrans have been using. That self-righteousness is counter-productive and makes us look bad as a race.
You are right. I for one dont think P are an UP race.
On June 04 2011 09:34 Serdiuk wrote: I don't see why we lower ourselves to the level of QQ Zergs and Terrans have been using. That self-righteousness is counter-productive and makes us look bad as a race.
Actually, if you look through the thread, there is a surprising number of people saying that we need to find new approaches, let the game develop, adapt to new WG time, or just say they are sick of hearing zergs and terrans complain that toss is OP. I think that's why it's still open.
On June 04 2011 09:34 Serdiuk wrote: I don't see why we lower ourselves to the level of QQ Zergs and Terrans have been using. That self-righteousness is counter-productive and makes us look bad as a race.
Actually, if you look through the thread, there is a surprising number of people saying that we need to find new approaches, let the game develop, adapt to new WG time, or just say they are sick of hearing zergs and terrans complain that toss is OP. I think that's why it's still open.
Yeah, I think we're handling it pretty well. It's just so easy to fall into the trap of complaining when being baited. I think we still have some potential, especially with DTs.
On June 04 2011 09:06 iTzAnglory wrote: These threads do not help at all, they state the obvious while everyone just says its balancy. I honestly do not know what the OP is looking for, there are two possible answers: 1) Bad players 2) Imbalancy
If it is the first one, this thread is pointless. If it is the second one, it just turns into another rant thread. I do not see the point of why moderators let this thread stay open, the reasons are obvious.
Oh your question was what do we think? Protoss Players: Imbalanced Zerg and Terrans: Lol Protoss ez race, bad players, good deal for once!
Not being biased at all, if you do not believe me scroll through the comments while looking at the race portraits.
On June 04 2011 04:29 darmousseh wrote: There are a # of problems protoss has which makes them weak in certain situations.
1. Protoss units can't retreat. One of the major advantages of blink stalkers and collosus is that you can retreat with them, but zealots, immortals, void rays and to some extent HT and archons cannot retreat fast enough. if a terran is losing a battle, they can stim and run away. Zerg units are so fast they can just sprint away. Other than stalkers and collosus, once a protoss engages, they must commit or else be willing to lose all of their zealots. This was the problem with archons, but that changed in the patch. Marauders and infestors don't help the situation either.
2. Protoss can reinforce too quickly. When blizzard did balancing, they needed to consider the effect of reinforcement on the balance. Because protoss can warp in, the units are weaker by a large margin.
3. High dependance on spell casters and high dps units Terran can win games with marines and marauders only. Once terran has stim, protoss needs sentries (for guardian shields and forcefields), collosus (to do dps) or HT, and blink/charge and all high dps units from protoss are easily counterable. (vikings against collosus, ghosts against HT, concussive shells against charge/blink). If protoss wants to win, they need to win every single engagement.
4. No area controlling units. Dark templar can be considered area controlling to a tiny extent, but only lasts a short time. Tanks for terran, banelings and infestors for zerg, protoss literally has nothing. At one time, protoss could hold a position by having a pylon and being able to warp in a high templar with kydarian amulet, but no more. There is no risk advancing into a protoss base. This is the biggest reason why protoss is always in a ball.
5. Highly limited tech choice This somewhat opened up with the recent changes to archon, but most air builds are almost autolosses and warp prism play offers very limited reward with high risks. Obviously protoss hasn't explored EVERY single option, but it's not due to a lack of trying.
6. The cost of scouting is too high. A terran can scout with reapers or scans at almost any moment, a zerg can send an overlord , but a protoss must choose a specific tech pattern and sacrifice tech choices in order to scout. If the protoss gets hallucination, then that's 2 less forcefields and less tech. If the protoss gets an obs, that's 200m/100g followed by 25m/75g. And scouting makes protoss SUPER vulnerable to a fast timing attack. I think protoss need to get that super fast immortal to be safe followed by a chrono'd observer in order to be safe against dt builds, banshee builds, and burrowed roach. My guess is that blizzard designed protoss to always get a fast robo every game (considering all of the units like immortals, observers, and warp prisms), but the truth is that the investment makes it difficult to choose another tech path if you scout something that robo is not good against. Zerg can scout with a lair (a natural part of their tech path) and terran can scout with scans or reapers (a very natural part of the tech path). I still think this is something that can be explored. Maybe hallucination first builds or something would really go a long way to help out. Maybe 1 gate robo is the build of the future, something to be considered. This however I believe is the #1 problem protoss currently has.
I'm not saying protoss is UP, they still win a lot of games and each race has it's own problems, but that the problems for protoss make it difficult to show consistent results mostly because of the scouting problem. Naniwa did 4 gates in order to be the agressor (in which case you don't really need early scouting), but as 4 gates got nerfed, naniwa's build got weaker and I think MLG will show the results of the most recent patch.
if you look at results only it looks bad. but if you watched the games, they played horribly.
Zerg Player
Protoss has and continues to do really well for a long time. Suddenly they look like they're going to do bad in the beginning rounds of one tournament and Protoss start complaining? Theres far greater evidence that says Protoss is strong than weak.
This thread doesn't deserve a long post explaining why it's stupid.
Right now as I'm watching the GSL super tournament on GOMTV, it is depressing to see how the badly the protoss players are doing. Most of the protoss are losing left and right to other races, with only HuK and MC still playing decent. It was nice to see how Trickster played, but now, even he is out...
Makes me want to switch to zerg :/
What do you guys think?
It's not about Protoss weakness but about Zerg strength. You will see these same Zerg beating the remaining Terran players by abusing superior macro mechanics and making muta, the same way they abused their superior macro mechanics and made roaches against Protoss.
Now that all timing pushes stim push/4gates etc... have been either nerfed, figured out, or both, the Zerg has a freeroad to the late game where they are at a systematical advantage now that kaldarim amulet is gone. Mechanically, the Zerg is ahead 30 to 40 food and by 15-20 drones if nothing happens in the early game and he will get maxed when the P or T will still be at 140 food.
Now I agree that Zerg army is slightly less cost-efficient, but the gap doesn't justify the current disparity in terms of macro which is quite frankly absolutely grotesque.
On June 04 2011 09:06 iTzAnglory wrote: These threads do not help at all, they state the obvious while everyone just says its balancy. I honestly do not know what the OP is looking for, there are two possible answers: 1) Bad players 2) Imbalancy
If it is the first one, this thread is pointless. If it is the second one, it just turns into another rant thread. I do not see the point of why moderators let this thread stay open, the reasons are obvious.
Oh your question was what do we think? Protoss Players: Imbalanced Zerg and Terrans: Lol Protoss ez race, bad players, good deal for once!
Not being biased at all, if you do not believe me scroll through the comments while looking at the race portraits.
Protoss is so bad all they can do is get second place in the last GSL, or get 1st,3rd and 4th in the previous one.
.. apparently now if Protoss isn't winning absolutely everything they're UP
On June 04 2011 04:29 darmousseh wrote: There are a # of problems protoss has which makes them weak in certain situations.
1. Protoss units can't retreat. One of the major advantages of blink stalkers and collosus is that you can retreat with them, but zealots, immortals, void rays and to some extent HT and archons cannot retreat fast enough. if a terran is losing a battle, they can stim and run away. Zerg units are so fast they can just sprint away. Other than stalkers and collosus, once a protoss engages, they must commit or else be willing to lose all of their zealots. This was the problem with archons, but that changed in the patch. Marauders and infestors don't help the situation either.
2. Protoss can reinforce too quickly. When blizzard did balancing, they needed to consider the effect of reinforcement on the balance. Because protoss can warp in, the units are weaker by a large margin.
3. High dependance on spell casters and high dps units Terran can win games with marines and marauders only. Once terran has stim, protoss needs sentries (for guardian shields and forcefields), collosus (to do dps) or HT, and blink/charge and all high dps units from protoss are easily counterable. (vikings against collosus, ghosts against HT, concussive shells against charge/blink). If protoss wants to win, they need to win every single engagement.
4. No area controlling units. Dark templar can be considered area controlling to a tiny extent, but only lasts a short time. Tanks for terran, banelings and infestors for zerg, protoss literally has nothing. At one time, protoss could hold a position by having a pylon and being able to warp in a high templar with kydarian amulet, but no more. There is no risk advancing into a protoss base. This is the biggest reason why protoss is always in a ball.
5. Highly limited tech choice This somewhat opened up with the recent changes to archon, but most air builds are almost autolosses and warp prism play offers very limited reward with high risks. Obviously protoss hasn't explored EVERY single option, but it's not due to a lack of trying.
6. The cost of scouting is too high. A terran can scout with reapers or scans at almost any moment, a zerg can send an overlord , but a protoss must choose a specific tech pattern and sacrifice tech choices in order to scout. If the protoss gets hallucination, then that's 2 less forcefields and less tech. If the protoss gets an obs, that's 200m/100g followed by 25m/75g. And scouting makes protoss SUPER vulnerable to a fast timing attack. I think protoss need to get that super fast immortal to be safe followed by a chrono'd observer in order to be safe against dt builds, banshee builds, and burrowed roach. My guess is that blizzard designed protoss to always get a fast robo every game (considering all of the units like immortals, observers, and warp prisms), but the truth is that the investment makes it difficult to choose another tech path if you scout something that robo is not good against. Zerg can scout with a lair (a natural part of their tech path) and terran can scout with scans or reapers (a very natural part of the tech path). I still think this is something that can be explored. Maybe hallucination first builds or something would really go a long way to help out. Maybe 1 gate robo is the build of the future, something to be considered. This however I believe is the #1 problem protoss currently has.
I'm not saying protoss is UP, they still win a lot of games and each race has it's own problems, but that the problems for protoss make it difficult to show consistent results mostly because of the scouting problem. Naniwa did 4 gates in order to be the agressor (in which case you don't really need early scouting), but as 4 gates got nerfed, naniwa's build got weaker and I think MLG will show the results of the most recent patch.
~Protoss Player, see what I mean now?
if you look at results only it looks bad. but if you watched the games, they played horribly.
Zerg Player
Protoss has and continues to do really well for a long time. Suddenly they look like they're going to do bad in the beginning rounds of one tournament and Protoss start complaining? Theres far greater evidence that says Protoss is strong than weak.
This thread doesn't deserve a long post explaining why it's stupid.
I don't know where the idea comes from about this domination by protoss at any point. Other than oGsMC's wins, we have 4 wins in major tournaments following the beta. Not even a qq, just sick of these protoss myths (i.e. people claiming they win all tournaments, have received too many buffs, even though every unit but the phoenix was nerfed, that they are so much easier than the other races, that their units are the most cost and supply efficient, etc.) http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Premier_Tournaments
On June 04 2011 09:06 iTzAnglory wrote: These threads do not help at all, they state the obvious while everyone just says its balancy. I honestly do not know what the OP is looking for, there are two possible answers: 1) Bad players 2) Imbalancy
If it is the first one, this thread is pointless. If it is the second one, it just turns into another rant thread. I do not see the point of why moderators let this thread stay open, the reasons are obvious.
Oh your question was what do we think? Protoss Players: Imbalanced Zerg and Terrans: Lol Protoss ez race, bad players, good deal for once!
Not being biased at all, if you do not believe me scroll through the comments while looking at the race portraits.
Protoss is so bad all they can do is get second place in the last GSL, or get 1st,3rd and 4th in the previous one.
.. apparently now if Protoss isn't winning absolutely everything they're UP
On June 04 2011 04:29 darmousseh wrote: There are a # of problems protoss has which makes them weak in certain situations.
1. Protoss units can't retreat. One of the major advantages of blink stalkers and collosus is that you can retreat with them, but zealots, immortals, void rays and to some extent HT and archons cannot retreat fast enough. if a terran is losing a battle, they can stim and run away. Zerg units are so fast they can just sprint away. Other than stalkers and collosus, once a protoss engages, they must commit or else be willing to lose all of their zealots. This was the problem with archons, but that changed in the patch. Marauders and infestors don't help the situation either.
2. Protoss can reinforce too quickly. When blizzard did balancing, they needed to consider the effect of reinforcement on the balance. Because protoss can warp in, the units are weaker by a large margin.
3. High dependance on spell casters and high dps units Terran can win games with marines and marauders only. Once terran has stim, protoss needs sentries (for guardian shields and forcefields), collosus (to do dps) or HT, and blink/charge and all high dps units from protoss are easily counterable. (vikings against collosus, ghosts against HT, concussive shells against charge/blink). If protoss wants to win, they need to win every single engagement.
4. No area controlling units. Dark templar can be considered area controlling to a tiny extent, but only lasts a short time. Tanks for terran, banelings and infestors for zerg, protoss literally has nothing. At one time, protoss could hold a position by having a pylon and being able to warp in a high templar with kydarian amulet, but no more. There is no risk advancing into a protoss base. This is the biggest reason why protoss is always in a ball.
5. Highly limited tech choice This somewhat opened up with the recent changes to archon, but most air builds are almost autolosses and warp prism play offers very limited reward with high risks. Obviously protoss hasn't explored EVERY single option, but it's not due to a lack of trying.
6. The cost of scouting is too high. A terran can scout with reapers or scans at almost any moment, a zerg can send an overlord , but a protoss must choose a specific tech pattern and sacrifice tech choices in order to scout. If the protoss gets hallucination, then that's 2 less forcefields and less tech. If the protoss gets an obs, that's 200m/100g followed by 25m/75g. And scouting makes protoss SUPER vulnerable to a fast timing attack. I think protoss need to get that super fast immortal to be safe followed by a chrono'd observer in order to be safe against dt builds, banshee builds, and burrowed roach. My guess is that blizzard designed protoss to always get a fast robo every game (considering all of the units like immortals, observers, and warp prisms), but the truth is that the investment makes it difficult to choose another tech path if you scout something that robo is not good against. Zerg can scout with a lair (a natural part of their tech path) and terran can scout with scans or reapers (a very natural part of the tech path). I still think this is something that can be explored. Maybe hallucination first builds or something would really go a long way to help out. Maybe 1 gate robo is the build of the future, something to be considered. This however I believe is the #1 problem protoss currently has.
I'm not saying protoss is UP, they still win a lot of games and each race has it's own problems, but that the problems for protoss make it difficult to show consistent results mostly because of the scouting problem. Naniwa did 4 gates in order to be the agressor (in which case you don't really need early scouting), but as 4 gates got nerfed, naniwa's build got weaker and I think MLG will show the results of the most recent patch.
~Protoss Player, see what I mean now?
if you look at results only it looks bad. but if you watched the games, they played horribly.
Zerg Player
Protoss has and continues to do really well for a long time. Suddenly they look like they're going to do bad in the beginning rounds of one tournament and Protoss start complaining? Theres far greater evidence that says Protoss is strong than weak.
This thread doesn't deserve a long post explaining why it's stupid.
I don't know where the idea comes from about this domination by protoss at any point. Other than oGsMC's wins, we have 4 wins in major tournaments following the beta. Not even a qq, just sick of these protoss myths (i.e. people claiming they win all tournaments, have received too many buffs, even though every unit but the phoenix was nerfed, that they are so much easier than the other races, that their units are the most cost and supply efficient, etc.) http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Premier_Tournaments
Most of those "myths" have nothing to do with major tournament wins. Protoss being the easiest race, for example, is something I'd agree with, but that wouldn't give them much of an advantage at the highest level (when race difficulty doesn't really matter).
The Protoss QQ really just escalated when the maps got larger / Protoss defended cheese better. Particularly between the introduction of large GSL maps, and before Khydarin Amulet was nerfed, they were at their strongest.
Glad to see most of the trash slumping now tbh (like HongUn, Anypro), the great players like Alicia will really start to stand out from the pack.
I don't think Protoss is in that bad of shape right now, but I am worried about the future of the race. Zerg have taken it upon themselves to be the aggressor and start to put the pain on very quickly and on some maps it can be much harder to defend aggression than to apply it given the mechanics of the races but really Zerg have always had options when they were considered the underdog--there were units that weren't being used, paths that weren't being taken and overall it is much easier to find a solution when your opponent is being passive as opposed to aggressive
The biggest issue right now though is finding a way to parry for aggressor but what exactly is left to explore for Protoss? Protoss in the last few months have virtually used every unit and opening for each tech tree against Zerg--Stargate, DT, Fast Colossus, Mass Blink, heavy Gateway aggression, Gateway/Rogo aggresion, Immortal/Stalker, Zealot/Archon, Nexus/Forge Expandsm, Sentry Expands--on top of this Protoss don't have upgrades to nullify this aggression like burrow does in a mass gateway and with so much tech already explored for Protoss, it is quite concerning when the answer isn't even close to being clear right now and it is even scarier that a lot of Zergs are having success without even working Infestors into their play yet
Blizzard are pretty good about balancing this game so if there is a need for buffs/nerfs then I have more than enough confidence that they will make the right decision considering they have done a great job so far.
---
There is obviously cognitive dissonance with the ridiculous arrangement that Protoss is easy yet has the least amount of top players playing it despite being the most played race in the game.
I can't help but think the very same people who are trying to argue an absurd point are the same type of people that watch the game more than they play, the race is much harder than what people give credit (or lack thereof) .
Especially the bullshit argument about lower levels. I mean, look at the European ladder. Overall, there the distribution of players for Zerg and Protoss within the population are 25% and 32.9%, respectively--but if you look at the representation of Zerg in Diamond/Masters and GradMasters-- the disparity in distribution is less than 1% in each league between Zerg and Protooss, which would suggest that Zerg "takes less skill"
Protoss has had a long period of time when they could rely on many of the same strategies in each matchup to be safe. With changes in every matchup (PvZ and PvP particularly but also some in PvT), they're now forced to find new ways to play the matchups, which can be tough after a long period of stagnation.
That's why I think they're not doing that well right now, but it's only a temporary thing.
Whats wrong with you protoss whiners. Admittedly, I'm a 1300 masters zerg with 200 bonus pool, but im also trying to be as non-biased as possible.
Honestly, I really don't see why so many protoss players are complaining about zerg vs protoss. What are you basing your whine on? That you cant stop roach ling with sentry expand on low level? Or on so called statistics? From what I know, in the first round of the GSL super tourney the ratio of Protoss falling out is LESS than zerg. Other words, P>Z in general AND PvZ. This has also been the case in TSL and even worse in Chinese Starleague where MOST top players joined and top4 were all P.
Want to base imbalance/whine on tournament performance? Im pretty sure T has the most overall achievements (tournament wins + runner ups) this is most likely because there are more high lvl terrans than other races but at the same time P has the worst win ratio against them. If you want to whine then why dont you whine on Terran because they have the biggest win% against P, oh I know why, because the flavour of the month zerg strat means we actually win some games against P nowadays (STILL LESS THAN 50% SETS) whereas before you were utterly destroying zergs.
If anything that GSL shows: There are less good protoss that play as well as Z but they still come ahead statistically. There are more great zergs falling in ro1 then protoss, because the great protoss happened to play PvP, still the lesser Protoss manage to secure a better win%.
Protoss needs to grow some balls and stop playing all in every game and instead learn to play reactionary. If you really believe P is UP then go find me some real statistics or ask Sen how easy it is to win as offrace P against pro Z's (see starleague where sen offraced P to beat a Z).
On June 04 2011 10:42 ruiyang wrote: Whats wrong with you protoss whiners. Admittedly, I'm a 1300 masters zerg with 200 bonus pool, but im also trying to be as non-biased as possible.
Honestly, I really don't see why so many protoss players are complaining about zerg vs protoss. What are you basing your whine on? That you cant stop roach ling with sentry expand on low level? Or on so called statistics? From what I know, in the first round of the GSL super tourney the ratio of Protoss falling out is LESS than zerg. Other words, P>Z in general AND PvZ. This has also been the case in TSL and even worse in Chinese Starleague where MOST top players joined and top4 were all P.
Want to base imbalance/whine on tournament performance? Im pretty sure T has the most overall achievements (tournament wins + runner ups) this is most likely because there are more high lvl terrans than other races but at the same time P has the worst win ratio against them. If you want to whine then why dont you whine on Terran because they have the biggest win% against P, oh I know why, because the flavour of the month zerg strat means we actually win some games against P nowadays (STILL LESS THAN 50% SETS) whereas before you were utterly destroying zergs.
If anything that GSL shows: There are less good protoss that play as well as Z but they still come ahead statistically. There are more great zergs falling in ro1 then protoss, because the great protoss happened to play PvP, still the lesser Protoss manage to secure a better win%.
Protoss needs to grow some balls and stop playing all in every game and instead learn to play reactionary. If you really believe P is UP then go find me some real statistics or ask Sen how easy it is to win as offrace P against pro Z's (see starleague where sen offraced P to beat a Z).
If you exclude Mirror matches, that shouldn't be the case for GSL Super tournament given:
Excluding Mirror matches, Zerg should have the highest retention in players, not the lowest.
And Sen likes to play different races, when he joined fnatic he said he played all three races and thought the idea of limiting yourself to one race was bad.
As far as I know, he only plays PvZ as Protoss on some maps, mostly because he understands Zerg pretty fucking well and he is a darn good player that can play multiple races.
Q. I’ve seen you play Protoss and Terran on your stream, why do you play the other races?
A. Starcraft 2 is a masterpiece, nobody has figured it out yet. If I only play Zerg, I'll be missing out on all the fun. I always enjoyed trying out different things
On June 04 2011 10:42 ruiyang wrote: Whats wrong with you protoss whiners. Admittedly, I'm a 1300 masters zerg with 200 bonus pool, but im also trying to be as non-biased as possible.
Honestly, I really don't see why so many protoss players are complaining about zerg vs protoss. What are you basing your whine on? That you cant stop roach ling with sentry expand on low level? Or on so called statistics? From what I know, in the first round of the GSL super tourney the ratio of Protoss falling out is LESS than zerg. Other words, P>Z in general AND PvZ. This has also been the case in TSL and even worse in Chinese Starleague where MOST top players joined and top4 were all P.
Want to base imbalance/whine on tournament performance? Im pretty sure T has the most overall achievements (tournament wins + runner ups) this is most likely because there are more high lvl terrans than other races but at the same time P has the worst win ratio against them. If you want to whine then why dont you whine on Terran because they have the biggest win% against P, oh I know why, because the flavour of the month zerg strat means we actually win some games against P nowadays (STILL LESS THAN 50% SETS) whereas before you were utterly destroying zergs.
If anything that GSL shows: There are less good protoss that play as well as Z but they still come ahead statistically. There are more great zergs falling in ro1 then protoss, because the great protoss happened to play PvP, still the lesser Protoss manage to secure a better win%.
Protoss needs to grow some balls and stop playing all in every game and instead learn to play reactionary. If you really believe P is UP then go find me some real statistics or ask Sen how easy it is to win as offrace P against pro Z's (see starleague where sen offraced P to beat a Z).
If you exclude Mirror matches, that shouldn't be the case for GSL Super tournament given:
Excluding Mirror matches, Zerg should have the highest retention in players, not the lowest.
And Sen likes to play different races, when he joined fnatic he said he played all three races and thought the idea of limiting yourself to one race was bad.
As far as I know, he only plays PvZ as Protoss on some maps, mostly because he understands Zerg pretty fucking well and he is a darn good player that can play multiple races.
Its obvious that hes a super good player but his main and best race stays zerg and he himself states that PvZ (on certain maps) is ridiculously easy. Lets not go into that further because its biased stuff and irrelevant. Sorry.
Back on topic. Im on my iphone so cant look up statistics as of date but why are your statistics diff than mine. The one i found is http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=228319 where it states that: -43% protoss advance to 42% zerg and 58% terran -PvZ 1: 66% protoss 4-2 set and PvZ 2: 56% 9-7 stats (??) -also important to note: most P non mirror match losses come by far from T
Zerg invents and innovate new ZvP and still lose more than win = QQ Protoss? Or are my sources wrong?
On June 04 2011 10:42 ruiyang wrote: Whats wrong with you protoss whiners. Admittedly, I'm a 1300 masters zerg with 200 bonus pool, but im also trying to be as non-biased as possible.
Honestly, I really don't see why so many protoss players are complaining about zerg vs protoss. What are you basing your whine on? That you cant stop roach ling with sentry expand on low level? Or on so called statistics? From what I know, in the first round of the GSL super tourney the ratio of Protoss falling out is LESS than zerg. Other words, P>Z in general AND PvZ. This has also been the case in TSL and even worse in Chinese Starleague where MOST top players joined and top4 were all P.
Want to base imbalance/whine on tournament performance? Im pretty sure T has the most overall achievements (tournament wins + runner ups) this is most likely because there are more high lvl terrans than other races but at the same time P has the worst win ratio against them. If you want to whine then why dont you whine on Terran because they have the biggest win% against P, oh I know why, because the flavour of the month zerg strat means we actually win some games against P nowadays (STILL LESS THAN 50% SETS) whereas before you were utterly destroying zergs.
If anything that GSL shows: There are less good protoss that play as well as Z but they still come ahead statistically. There are more great zergs falling in ro1 then protoss, because the great protoss happened to play PvP, still the lesser Protoss manage to secure a better win%.
Protoss needs to grow some balls and stop playing all in every game and instead learn to play reactionary. If you really believe P is UP then go find me some real statistics or ask Sen how easy it is to win as offrace P against pro Z's (see starleague where sen offraced P to beat a Z).
If you exclude Mirror matches, that shouldn't be the case for GSL Super tournament given:
Excluding Mirror matches, Zerg should have the highest retention in players, not the lowest.
And Sen likes to play different races, when he joined fnatic he said he played all three races and thought the idea of limiting yourself to one race was bad.
As far as I know, he only plays PvZ as Protoss on some maps, mostly because he understands Zerg pretty fucking well and he is a darn good player that can play multiple races.
Its obvious that hes a super good player but his main and best race stays zerg and he himself states that PvZ (on certain maps) is ridiculously easy. Lets not go into that further because its biased stuff and irrelevant. Sorry.
Back on topic. Im on my iphone so cant look up statistics as of date but why are your statistics diff than mine. The one i found is http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=228319 where it states that: -43% protoss advance to 42% zerg and 58% terran -PvZ 1: 66% protoss 4-2 set and PvZ 2: 56% 9-7 stats (??) -also important to note: most P non mirror match losses come by far from T
Zerg invents and innovate new ZvP and still lose more than win = QQ Protoss? Or are my sources wrong?
When has he admitted it to being ridiculously easy? He has said he found it easier for him, but then again this was when Protoss were considered to have a big advantage against Zerg, ever since he changed how he played against Protoss I've yet to see him play PvZ as Toss against a serious opponent. This goes without saying that he plays a beastly Protoss, when IdrA was streaming he ran into Sen playing Toss (awhile ago) a few times and lost everytime.
My stats are from the TLPD, not sure where yours are from
if you play protoss vs zerg you can try to turtle and get a deathball (not working anymore) or do an all in timing push (all figured out). I was hopping the pros would give some light...
On June 04 2011 10:42 ruiyang wrote: Whats wrong with you protoss whiners. Admittedly, I'm a 1300 masters zerg with 200 bonus pool, but im also trying to be as non-biased as possible.
Honestly, I really don't see why so many protoss players are complaining about zerg vs protoss. What are you basing your whine on? That you cant stop roach ling with sentry expand on low level? Or on so called statistics? From what I know, in the first round of the GSL super tourney the ratio of Protoss falling out is LESS than zerg. Other words, P>Z in general AND PvZ. This has also been the case in TSL and even worse in Chinese Starleague where MOST top players joined and top4 were all P.
Want to base imbalance/whine on tournament performance? Im pretty sure T has the most overall achievements (tournament wins + runner ups) this is most likely because there are more high lvl terrans than other races but at the same time P has the worst win ratio against them. If you want to whine then why dont you whine on Terran because they have the biggest win% against P, oh I know why, because the flavour of the month zerg strat means we actually win some games against P nowadays (STILL LESS THAN 50% SETS) whereas before you were utterly destroying zergs.
If anything that GSL shows: There are less good protoss that play as well as Z but they still come ahead statistically. There are more great zergs falling in ro1 then protoss, because the great protoss happened to play PvP, still the lesser Protoss manage to secure a better win%.
Protoss needs to grow some balls and stop playing all in every game and instead learn to play reactionary. If you really believe P is UP then go find me some real statistics or ask Sen how easy it is to win as offrace P against pro Z's (see starleague where sen offraced P to beat a Z).
If you exclude Mirror matches, that shouldn't be the case for GSL Super tournament given:
Excluding Mirror matches, Zerg should have the highest retention in players, not the lowest.
And Sen likes to play different races, when he joined fnatic he said he played all three races and thought the idea of limiting yourself to one race was bad.
As far as I know, he only plays PvZ as Protoss on some maps, mostly because he understands Zerg pretty fucking well and he is a darn good player that can play multiple races.
Q. I’ve seen you play Protoss and Terran on your stream, why do you play the other races?
A. Starcraft 2 is a masterpiece, nobody has figured it out yet. If I only play Zerg, I'll be missing out on all the fun. I always enjoyed trying out different things
Looking to the Super Tournament for stats is a terrible idea. A lot of the players who are playing in that tournament have fallen out of the pro scene and are not of the same caliber as current Code S and Code A players. A lot of the Protoss players we have seen have been absolutely terrible. Of course somebody like LegalMind should be expected to lose quickly.
On June 04 2011 10:42 ruiyang wrote: Whats wrong with you protoss whiners. Admittedly, I'm a 1300 masters zerg with 200 bonus pool, but im also trying to be as non-biased as possible.
Honestly, I really don't see why so many protoss players are complaining about zerg vs protoss. What are you basing your whine on? That you cant stop roach ling with sentry expand on low level? Or on so called statistics? From what I know, in the first round of the GSL super tourney the ratio of Protoss falling out is LESS than zerg. Other words, P>Z in general AND PvZ. This has also been the case in TSL and even worse in Chinese Starleague where MOST top players joined and top4 were all P.
Want to base imbalance/whine on tournament performance? Im pretty sure T has the most overall achievements (tournament wins + runner ups) this is most likely because there are more high lvl terrans than other races but at the same time P has the worst win ratio against them. If you want to whine then why dont you whine on Terran because they have the biggest win% against P, oh I know why, because the flavour of the month zerg strat means we actually win some games against P nowadays (STILL LESS THAN 50% SETS) whereas before you were utterly destroying zergs.
If anything that GSL shows: There are less good protoss that play as well as Z but they still come ahead statistically. There are more great zergs falling in ro1 then protoss, because the great protoss happened to play PvP, still the lesser Protoss manage to secure a better win%.
Protoss needs to grow some balls and stop playing all in every game and instead learn to play reactionary. If you really believe P is UP then go find me some real statistics or ask Sen how easy it is to win as offrace P against pro Z's (see starleague where sen offraced P to beat a Z).
If you exclude Mirror matches, that shouldn't be the case for GSL Super tournament given:
Excluding Mirror matches, Zerg should have the highest retention in players, not the lowest.
And Sen likes to play different races, when he joined fnatic he said he played all three races and thought the idea of limiting yourself to one race was bad.
As far as I know, he only plays PvZ as Protoss on some maps, mostly because he understands Zerg pretty fucking well and he is a darn good player that can play multiple races.
Its obvious that hes a super good player but his main and best race stays zerg and he himself states that PvZ (on certain maps) is ridiculously easy. Lets not go into that further because its biased stuff and irrelevant. Sorry.
Back on topic. Im on my iphone so cant look up statistics as of date but why are your statistics diff than mine. The one i found is http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=228319 where it states that: -43% protoss advance to 42% zerg and 58% terran -PvZ 1: 66% protoss 4-2 set and PvZ 2: 56% 9-7 stats (??) -also important to note: most P non mirror match losses come by far from T
Zerg invents and innovate new ZvP and still lose more than win = QQ Protoss? Or are my sources wrong?
lWhen has he admitted it to being ridiculously easy? He has said he found it easier for him, but then again this was when Protoss were considered to have a big advantage against Zerg, ever since he changed how he played against Protoss I've yet to see him play PvZ as Toss against a serious opponent
My stats are off TLPD, not sure where yours are from
Thanks for responding, lets cut this Sen thing cus its too biased and subjective.
Lets say your right about the stats and that PvZ isnt as easy as it sounds, why does every p whine over a 55% win of ZvP when theyr completely getting destroyed by T? PvZ sounds balanced compared to PvT statistics and everyone knows it might be a FOTM moment that Zerg is slightly coming ahead of P. The patch is new and maybe P will go back to rolling Z in a short while (I myself have found opponents that stop roach/ling on 1300+ high master, Im sure top protoss can stop top Z timing attacks in time aswell)
Next thing im gonna say is biased but i strongly believe that Protoss has huge potential and they are by no means UP. Here in Holland smaller tournaments are either won by terran/protoss high masters OR grandmaster zergs vs master T/P finals. Talking about 1000$ prizes where best of Benelux competes exclusing Ret and Grubby.
Very constructive post m8, really gives you a lot to think about.
alicia destroyed mc. So it is alicia and huk. there might be some more, but historically there haven't been many protoss in korea. It has just been that way for a while, not balance related but kind of interesting.
On June 04 2011 10:42 ruiyang wrote: If anything that GSL shows: There are less good protoss that play as well as Z but they still come ahead statistically. There are more great zergs falling in ro1 then protoss, because the great protoss happened to play PvP, still the lesser Protoss manage to secure a better win%.
Protoss needs to grow some balls and stop playing all in every game and instead learn to play reactionary. If you really believe P is UP then go find me some real statistics or ask Sen how easy it is to win as offrace P against pro Z's (see starleague where sen offraced P to beat a Z).
http://i.imgur.com/N36Xm.png
Thats based off of all GSL games if I'm not mistaken, and as you can see, in April ZvP was at a 70% win rate, and I'm quite certain the trend hasn't changed much for May either. If its multiple consecutive months of massive discrepancy, then there is perhaps something wrong with the matchup. Even during March when everybody complained about protoss being imbalanced over zerg, it was still a 55/45 split, which is considered acceptable by Blizzard balancing standards (within the +/- 5% range).
I love Sen, but the Sen offracing thing isn't really a valid point at all, ogsMC says he can easily beat protoss players using zerg also too, it just doesn't mean anything imho.
On June 04 2011 08:31 Erasme wrote: Did one of you (toss) ever tried to drop templars ? I ask a friend of mine (top eu master). He never did, because it's 'useless'. Same for Dark templars. As a zerg player, I love when a toss sticks to an outdated style and QQ after being crushed into oblivion.
sure man i make a nonstatic pylon. then i fly it to an expansion. there i unload my templar. i give him a hustler magazine and a couple of beers so he is not bored while waiting for his mojo to go up. after 25 minutes my templar could storm the shit out of the workerline but he felt asleep.. stupid templars have no work ethic.
socke used alot of templar warpins but since amulet is removed you cant warp them im and instantly storm. so you talking about outdated styles while playing outdated styles. yo dawg.
Funny how people managed to stormdrop in Sc1, but its impossible in sc2 because of no Khaydarin ???????????????
Storm did way more damage in sc1. Storm drops are okay but I'd only use them on maps with ledges like delta quadrant that are exploitable. Otherwise a good player will just run his workers before you can storm them.
Every single protoss unit has a hard, hard counter. Also, almost every single Protoss build has a HUGE weakness while terran or zerg have some builds that can work around many things.
I think Protoss is slowly fading away and if the new expansion doesn't bring some new units or new builds, Protoss will become very,very underpowered.
On June 04 2011 10:42 ruiyang wrote: Whats wrong with you protoss whiners. Admittedly, I'm a 1300 masters zerg with 200 bonus pool, but im also trying to be as non-biased as possible.
Honestly, I really don't see why so many protoss players are complaining about zerg vs protoss. What are you basing your whine on? That you cant stop roach ling with sentry expand on low level? Or on so called statistics? From what I know, in the first round of the GSL super tourney the ratio of Protoss falling out is LESS than zerg. Other words, P>Z in general AND PvZ. This has also been the case in TSL and even worse in Chinese Starleague where MOST top players joined and top4 were all P.
Want to base imbalance/whine on tournament performance? Im pretty sure T has the most overall achievements (tournament wins + runner ups) this is most likely because there are more high lvl terrans than other races but at the same time P has the worst win ratio against them. If you want to whine then why dont you whine on Terran because they have the biggest win% against P, oh I know why, because the flavour of the month zerg strat means we actually win some games against P nowadays (STILL LESS THAN 50% SETS) whereas before you were utterly destroying zergs.
If anything that GSL shows: There are less good protoss that play as well as Z but they still come ahead statistically. There are more great zergs falling in ro1 then protoss, because the great protoss happened to play PvP, still the lesser Protoss manage to secure a better win%.
Protoss needs to grow some balls and stop playing all in every game and instead learn to play reactionary. If you really believe P is UP then go find me some real statistics or ask Sen how easy it is to win as off race P against pro Z's (see starleague where sen offraced P to beat a Z).
2 protoss in top 4 is not most.. that is half.. And No, what are you talking about sentry expanding at low levels and all ining.. Protoss have been losing to all ins, which can be defended but most people do their sentry expand a little bit too greedily.. But no you can't say P>Z without it just being a blatant Balance whine, and with recent Korean statistics protoss are not dominating zerg anymore. Also back to your "low level" sentry expand comment, by that are you referring to protoss in the gsl/nasl "low level". but im also trying to be as non-biased as possible. But everything you said contradicts that, and so what if sen can offrace a person and win, Axslav Minigun and inca off race as terran.... Does that say anything... no. Naniwa played terran vs socke and won with his offrace, so by your method does that mean that Terran > protoss... Not at all, basing balance statements of simple results with no explanation of a game. Situational things could have occurred. Also telling protoss players to "grow balls" and to "not all in every game" is quite a funny thing to say if you ask me, because if you watch players like MC they do macro play mixed with timings in Box series. So while the op looked like a balance whine, doesn't mean that you need to say things about how protoss is actually a much better race, and if you ask me saying the race is better than x race just takes achievements away from players.
On June 04 2011 10:42 ruiyang wrote: Whats wrong with you protoss whiners. Admittedly, I'm a 1300 masters zerg with 200 bonus pool, but im also trying to be as non-biased as possible.
Honestly, I really don't see why so many protoss players are complaining about zerg vs protoss. What are you basing your whine on? That you cant stop roach ling with sentry expand on low level? Or on so called statistics? From what I know, in the first round of the GSL super tourney the ratio of Protoss falling out is LESS than zerg. Other words, P>Z in general AND PvZ. This has also been the case in TSL and even worse in Chinese Starleague where MOST top players joined and top4 were all P.
Want to base imbalance/whine on tournament performance? Im pretty sure T has the most overall achievements (tournament wins + runner ups) this is most likely because there are more high lvl terrans than other races but at the same time P has the worst win ratio against them. If you want to whine then why dont you whine on Terran because they have the biggest win% against P, oh I know why, because the flavour of the month zerg strat means we actually win some games against P nowadays (STILL LESS THAN 50% SETS) whereas before you were utterly destroying zergs.
If anything that GSL shows: There are less good protoss that play as well as Z but they still come ahead statistically. There are more great zergs falling in ro1 then protoss, because the great protoss happened to play PvP, still the lesser Protoss manage to secure a better win%.
Protoss needs to grow some balls and stop playing all in every game and instead learn to play reactionary. If you really believe P is UP then go find me some real statistics or ask Sen how easy it is to win as offrace P against pro Z's (see starleague where sen offraced P to beat a Z).
If you exclude Mirror matches, that shouldn't be the case for GSL Super tournament given:
Excluding Mirror matches, Zerg should have the highest retention in players, not the lowest.
And Sen likes to play different races, when he joined fnatic he said he played all three races and thought the idea of limiting yourself to one race was bad.
As far as I know, he only plays PvZ as Protoss on some maps, mostly because he understands Zerg pretty fucking well and he is a darn good player that can play multiple races.
Its obvious that hes a super good player but his main and best race stays zerg and he himself states that PvZ (on certain maps) is ridiculously easy. Lets not go into that further because its biased stuff and irrelevant. Sorry.
Back on topic. Im on my iphone so cant look up statistics as of date but why are your statistics diff than mine. The one i found is http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=228319 where it states that: -43% protoss advance to 42% zerg and 58% terran -PvZ 1: 66% protoss 4-2 set and PvZ 2: 56% 9-7 stats (??) -also important to note: most P non mirror match losses come by far from T
Zerg invents and innovate new ZvP and still lose more than win = QQ Protoss? Or are my sources wrong?
lWhen has he admitted it to being ridiculously easy? He has said he found it easier for him, but then again this was when Protoss were considered to have a big advantage against Zerg, ever since he changed how he played against Protoss I've yet to see him play PvZ as Toss against a serious opponent
My stats are off TLPD, not sure where yours are from
Thanks for responding, lets cut this Sen thing cus its too biased and subjective.
Lets say your right about the stats and that PvZ isnt as easy as it sounds, why does every p whine over a 55% win of ZvP when theyr completely getting destroyed by T? PvZ sounds balanced compared to PvT statistics and everyone knows it might be a FOTM moment that Zerg is slightly coming ahead of P. The patch is new and maybe P will go back to rolling Z in a short while (I myself have found opponents that stop roach/ling on 1300+ high master, Im sure top protoss can stop top Z timing attacks in time aswell)
Next thing im gonna say is biased but i strongly believe that Protoss has huge potential and they are by no means UP. Here in Holland smaller tournaments are either won by terran/protoss high masters OR grandmaster zergs vs master T/P finals. Talking about 1000$ prizes where best of Benelux competes exclusing Ret and Grubby.
This doesn't solely have to do with GSL, the majority of the discussion that has happened in this thread has little to do with the GSL but rather the current state of the game, far beyond simple Roach/Ling
Personally, I have enough faith in Blizzard to do the right thing that I don't care too much for the current state of balance, if something needs fixing then they will fix it. You had the Zerg community going nuts about Voidrays, Colossus and Forcefields and they didn't touch a thing, eventually Zergs found a solution, most likely something they already knew. What is more interesting is that you see a lot of Zergs having success without even using Infestors. It just goes to show how a lot of balance whine is often misplaced.
On June 04 2011 10:42 ruiyang wrote: If anything that GSL shows: There are less good protoss that play as well as Z but they still come ahead statistically. There are more great zergs falling in ro1 then protoss, because the great protoss happened to play PvP, still the lesser Protoss manage to secure a better win%.
Protoss needs to grow some balls and stop playing all in every game and instead learn to play reactionary. If you really believe P is UP then go find me some real statistics or ask Sen how easy it is to win as offrace P against pro Z's (see starleague where sen offraced P to beat a Z).
http://i.imgur.com/N36Xm.png
Thats based off of all GSL games if I'm not mistaken, and as you can see, in April ZvP was at a 70% win rate, and I'm quite certain the trend hasn't changed much for May either. If its multiple consecutive months of massive discrepancy, then there is perhaps something wrong with the matchup. Even during March when everybody complained about protoss being imbalanced over zerg, it was still a 55/45 split, which is considered acceptable by Blizzard balancing standards (within the +/- 5% range).
I love Sen, but the Sen offracing thing isn't really a valid point at all, ogsMC says he can easily beat protoss players using zerg also too, it just doesn't mean anything imho.
Sorry cant open the image as im on my iphone.. Anyway: For GSL may super tournament one says its 55:45 favour P Other says its 55:45 favour Zerg Now you say it cant be diff much than 70:30. What the... Im still sticking to my point that ZvP is quite balanced atm and that IF protoss needs to find an excuse for bad play, go blame Terrans for beating you in most tournaments. I agree that most P get upset if their hero (MC) gets knocked out, but even he lost in a non PvZ match this time. Most P that actually did lose against Z are semi great, their loss can be explained in their own play and if i have to believe the 45:55 ratio then I dont see any problems. Dont forget recent China starleague where you have 4 protoss on top.
On June 04 2011 10:42 ruiyang wrote: If anything that GSL shows: There are less good protoss that play as well as Z but they still come ahead statistically. There are more great zergs falling in ro1 then protoss, because the great protoss happened to play PvP, still the lesser Protoss manage to secure a better win%.
Protoss needs to grow some balls and stop playing all in every game and instead learn to play reactionary. If you really believe P is UP then go find me some real statistics or ask Sen how easy it is to win as offrace P against pro Z's (see starleague where sen offraced P to beat a Z).
http://i.imgur.com/N36Xm.png
Thats based off of all GSL games if I'm not mistaken, and as you can see, in April ZvP was at a 70% win rate, and I'm quite certain the trend hasn't changed much for May either. If its multiple consecutive months of massive discrepancy, then there is perhaps something wrong with the matchup. Even during March when everybody complained about protoss being imbalanced over zerg, it was still a 55/45 split, which is considered acceptable by Blizzard balancing standards (within the +/- 5% range).
I love Sen, but the Sen offracing thing isn't really a valid point at all, ogsMC says he can easily beat protoss players using zerg also too, it just doesn't mean anything imho.
Sorry cant open the image as im on my iphone.. Anyway: For GSL may super tournament one says its 55:45 favour P Other says its 55:45 favour Zerg Now you say it cant be diff much than 70:30. What the... Im still sticking to my point that ZvP is quite balanced atm and that IF protoss needs to find an excuse for bad play, go blame Terrans for beating you in most tournaments. I agree that most P get upset if their hero (MC) gets knocked out, but even he lost in a non PvZ match this time. Most P that actually did lose against Z are semi great, their loss can be explained in their own play and if i have to believe the 45:55 ratio then I dont see any problems. Dont forget recent China starleague where you have 4 protoss on top.
Isn't sc2 really new in China? If it is does that mean that their results are really accurate? not really.
Probably because the best protoss got knocked out by the other best protoss, and in general, korea has always been very weak protoss wise. (same as in BW)
@yamulo: maybe I was too harsh on my statements. I definetely didnt mean to say that P/Z or T is better than one another, i feel that the current statiscal differences can be explained w/o mentioning balance too much. but I still definetely dont believe that Protoss are having a big unfair disadvantage against Zerg, maybe against Terran but against zerg it doesnt seem that they are doing exceptionally bad relative to skill level of both players. Im not trying to discredit pros, what i meant is that non pros shouldnt whine about balance in PvZ because the imbalance is nonexistent on their level. Even at 1300+ masters its not very often a question of balance if I lose or win.
Edit: I believe that china starleague consisted of many invites of best ppl in the world. Alot of GSL top players joined and got rolled by Chinese ppl that played on other servers before
On June 04 2011 10:42 ruiyang wrote: If anything that GSL shows: There are less good protoss that play as well as Z but they still come ahead statistically. There are more great zergs falling in ro1 then protoss, because the great protoss happened to play PvP, still the lesser Protoss manage to secure a better win%.
Protoss needs to grow some balls and stop playing all in every game and instead learn to play reactionary. If you really believe P is UP then go find me some real statistics or ask Sen how easy it is to win as offrace P against pro Z's (see starleague where sen offraced P to beat a Z).
http://i.imgur.com/N36Xm.png
Thats based off of all GSL games if I'm not mistaken, and as you can see, in April ZvP was at a 70% win rate, and I'm quite certain the trend hasn't changed much for May either. If its multiple consecutive months of massive discrepancy, then there is perhaps something wrong with the matchup. Even during March when everybody complained about protoss being imbalanced over zerg, it was still a 55/45 split, which is considered acceptable by Blizzard balancing standards (within the +/- 5% range).
I love Sen, but the Sen offracing thing isn't really a valid point at all, ogsMC says he can easily beat protoss players using zerg also too, it just doesn't mean anything imho.
Sorry cant open the image as im on my iphone.. Anyway: For GSL may super tournament one says its 55:45 favour P Other says its 55:45 favour Zerg Now you say it cant be diff much than 70:30. What the... Im still sticking to my point that ZvP is quite balanced atm and that IF protoss needs to find an excuse for bad play, go blame Terrans for beating you in most tournaments. I agree that most P get upset if their hero (MC) gets knocked out, but even he lost in a non PvZ match this time. Most P that actually did lose against Z are semi great, their loss can be explained in their own play and if i have to believe the 45:55 ratio then I dont see any problems. Dont forget recent China starleague where you have 4 protoss on top.
Isn't sc2 really new in China? If it is does that mean that their results are really accurate? not really.
They've only had the game officially for a few months, but I think several players managed to secure an SEA/KR copy and bypass the Great Firewall of China.
On June 04 2011 11:38 ruiyang wrote: @yamulo: maybe I was too harsh on my statements. I definetely didnt mean to say that P/Z or T is better than one another, i feel that the current statiscal differences can be explained w/o mentioning balance too much. but I still definetely dont believe that Protoss are having a big unfair disadvantage against Zerg, maybe against Terran but against zerg it doesnt seem that they are doing exceptionally bad relative to skill level of both players. Im not trying to discredit pros, what i meant is that non pros shouldnt whine about balance in PvZ because the imbalance is nonexistent on their level. Even at 1300+ masters its not very often a question of balance if I lose or win.
Edit: I believe that china starleague consisted of many invites of best ppl in the world. Alot of GSL top players joined and got rolled by Chinese ppl that played on other servers before
If you watched how Nestea lost that tourney versus the toss, he made the mistake that mid level master players won't even make. Who on their right mind stays pure roach ling against mass blink stalkers....
Personally, Im fine with toss players losing. I just hate it when toss players aren't doing well and zerg players like Idra are winning tournies and still are whining about toss. It just seems like a low blow. And most people already stated, the only toss player to really do well is MC and he is just a bunch of mid game gateway+sentry timings and when he wins, instead of "AMAZING PLAY" we get 40 pages of Idra fan boys going imba FF imba FF. It just makes me sick inside.
Sorry, but a handful of GSL games does not an imbalance make. It's crazy to see protoss players now claiming that their race is fundamentally flawed. Just a couple of months ago, the very same mechanics were considered overpowered (see the many whines regarding warp gate mechanics, the power of protoss casters, and the protoss ball), and zergs were claiming their race was fundamentally flawed. Zerg has now finally developed some potent counters and timing attacks of their own in the PvZ match up. The games P have lost to Z in the GSL have been down to serious mistakes, not anything fundamentally broken. Get some perspective guys - this is the game evolving.
@yamulo again The tournament i was talking about is called StarsWar killer gigabyte tourney by china. Results: top 4 protoss Notible players: Every freaking single player is good Link:http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/StarsWar_Killer_6
Well no kidding Protoss are doing bad. They all play the SAME way, it's just whoever executes it the best (that being MC). Look at their PvZ, it's so predictable that Nestea completely exposed it - and it's not like he's the only one, a lot of other Zs say protoss play the same way.
In my honest opinion, there's nothing wrong with balance, I just think the top toss players aren't as good as the top T and Z players. I know a lot of MC fanboys will cry, but compared to MVP and NesTea, he's not any better than them.
Thing is in my opinion so many protoss are just in this phase of a meta game shift in that from oGsMC's purely abusive sentry bases timming attacks and i say abusive because to be far it was...
But coming from that, so many protoss were getting pretty much Free Wins vs Zerg so zerg whined for so long because its dam hard to be far for Zerg to deal with it unless they know exactly when the protoss moves out and even then people were loosing to crunchers abusive get collosus void ray and hit a timming across the map style. Now Zergs are playing the matchup ZvP more like ZvT where the Terran needs to apply pressure thoughout to control the zergs econ to get ahead.
But right now i dont see _any_ protoss play a pure passive macro style of game because protoss players just dont seem to realise how strong their units are and taking the map with protoss is a very real and good thing to do and +3 base protoss is extremely scary i would love to see someone actually do that as protoss because i personally feel its the way they should be played instead of purely abusive timming attacks
Personally i am sick of being a spectator and it was for soooo long that shoutcasters would be like "ohh the protoss moved out with some sentries and stalkers some roaches and zerglings should be enough... some really nice forcefields there from <insert name here>... oh the ramp has been FF i think the hatch will go down... now i wonder what the zerg will do.. and there we have it GG"
Or pretty much the same just put collosus in there.
And its just they all hit these absoluitle insane timmings and its taken an insanty amount of practice for people to respond well to this, because if you consider ZvT Banelings are _such_ a power unit in that a good marine tank timming all the zerg needs is 2 goo banelings hits and the zerg is safe you cant do that in zvt hydra roach or hydra ling etc for early timmings is hard to support properly early on and FF completely negates mellee units etc... but i think you see what i am getting at i still havent seen any macro orientated protoss players yet and i reckon thats the way they should be playing.
On June 04 2011 11:47 hahaimhenry wrote: Well no kidding Protoss are doing bad. They all play the SAME way, it's just whoever executes it the best (that being MC). Look at their PvZ, it's so predictable that Nestea completely exposed it - and it's not like he's the only one, a lot of other Zs say protoss play the same way.
In my honest opinion, there's nothing wrong with balance, I just think the top toss players aren't as good as the top T and Z players. I know a lot of MC fanboys will cry, but compared to MVP and NesTea, he's not any better than them.
you need to read around this thread so see some explanation why Protoss are doing the same b/c they don't have other choice. Air is terrible b/c marines/vikings/hydras/corruptors owns them so hard. So they have to use ground armies, and with the removal of KA, going early HTs is not an option anymore b/c too risky against ghost timing push and roaches/lings. so P has to use the last final unit and you know what it is.
On June 04 2011 10:42 ruiyang wrote: Whats wrong with you protoss whiners. Admittedly, I'm a 1300 masters zerg with 200 bonus pool, but im also trying to be as non-biased as possible.
Honestly, I really don't see why so many protoss players are complaining about zerg vs protoss. What are you basing your whine on? That you cant stop roach ling with sentry expand on low level? Or on so called statistics? From what I know, in the first round of the GSL super tourney the ratio of Protoss falling out is LESS than zerg. Other words, P>Z in general AND PvZ. This has also been the case in TSL and even worse in Chinese Starleague where MOST top players joined and top4 were all P.
Want to base imbalance/whine on tournament performance? Im pretty sure T has the most overall achievements (tournament wins + runner ups) this is most likely because there are more high lvl terrans than other races but at the same time P has the worst win ratio against them. If you want to whine then why dont you whine on Terran because they have the biggest win% against P, oh I know why, because the flavour of the month zerg strat means we actually win some games against P nowadays (STILL LESS THAN 50% SETS) whereas before you were utterly destroying zergs.
If anything that GSL shows: There are less good protoss that play as well as Z but they still come ahead statistically. There are more great zergs falling in ro1 then protoss, because the great protoss happened to play PvP, still the lesser Protoss manage to secure a better win%.
Protoss needs to grow some balls and stop playing all in every game and instead learn to play reactionary. If you really believe P is UP then go find me some real statistics or ask Sen how easy it is to win as offrace P against pro Z's (see starleague where sen offraced P to beat a Z).
The entire premiss of this thread is to figure out why protoss aren't doing well right now in GSL it's not whining so much about any particular race. If protoss players had all the statistics and hard facts to show you then there would be no need for this thread. Go troll some other thread if you can't offer any real insight as to why or why not from even a zerg perspective.
On June 04 2011 11:50 redbrain wrote: Thing is in my opinion so many protoss are just in this phase of a meta game shift in that from oGsMC's purely abusive sentry bases timming attacks and i say abusive because to be far it was...
But coming from that, so many protoss were getting pretty much Free Wins vs Zerg so zerg whined for so long because its dam hard to be far for Zerg to deal with it unless they know exactly when the protoss moves out and even then people were loosing to crunchers abusive get collosus void ray and hit a timming across the map style. Now Zergs are playing the matchup ZvP more like ZvT where the Terran needs to apply pressure thoughout to control the zergs econ to get ahead.
But right now i dont see _any_ protoss play a pure passive macro style of game because protoss players just dont seem to realise how strong their units are and taking the map with protoss is a very real and good thing to do and +3 base protoss is extremely scary i would love to see someone actually do that as protoss because i personally feel its the way they should be played instead of purely abusive timming attacks
Personally i am sick of being a spectator and it was for soooo long that shoutcasters would be like "ohh the protoss moved out with some sentries and stalkers some roaches and zerglings should be enough... some really nice forcefields there from <insert name here>... oh the ramp has been FF i think the hatch will go down... now i wonder what the zerg will do.. and there we have it GG"
Or pretty much the same just put collosus in there.
And its just they all hit these absoluitle insane timmings and its taken an insanty amount of practice for people to respond well to this, because if you consider ZvT Banelings are _such_ a power unit in that a good marine tank timming all the zerg needs is 2 goo banelings hits and the zerg is safe you cant do that in zvt hydra roach or hydra ling etc for early timmings is hard to support properly early on and FF completely negates mellee units etc... but i think you see what i am getting at i still havent seen any macro orientated protoss players yet and i reckon thats the way they should be playing.
Laser/macro oriented toss hasn't been doing well every since the infestor buff. When was the last GSL game you saw when toss went void+colossus. It just doesn't work anymore. What else does toss have in late game then? Bling bombs+infestor play+parasite is just disgusting to play against.
On June 04 2011 11:38 ruiyang wrote: @yamulo: maybe I was too harsh on my statements. I definetely didnt mean to say that P/Z or T is better than one another, i feel that the current statiscal differences can be explained w/o mentioning balance too much. but I still definetely dont believe that Protoss are having a big unfair disadvantage against Zerg, maybe against Terran but against zerg it doesnt seem that they are doing exceptionally bad relative to skill level of both players. Im not trying to discredit pros, what i meant is that non pros shouldnt whine about balance in PvZ because the imbalance is nonexistent on their level. Even at 1300+ masters its not very often a question of balance if I lose or win.
Edit: I believe that china starleague consisted of many invites of best ppl in the world. Alot of GSL top players joined and got rolled by Chinese ppl that played on other servers before
If you watched how Nestea lost that tourney versus the toss, he made the mistake that mid level master players won't even make. Who on their right mind stays pure roach ling against mass blink stalkers....
Personally, Im fine with toss players losing. I just hate it when toss players aren't doing well and zerg players like Idra are winning tournies and still are whining about toss. It just seems like a low blow. And most people already stated, the only toss player to really do well is MC and he is just a bunch of mid game gateway+sentry timings and when he wins, instead of "AMAZING PLAY" we get 40 pages of Idra fan boys going imba FF imba FF. It just makes me sick inside.
Sounds harsh but as a zerg player I'm inclined to say protoss played really abusive. We went from 4gate to cannon wall in, cannon behind mineral line to voidray rush, phoenix rush, DT rush, 6gate, mass sentry collosus deathbal, etc etc. Games against protoss who played either all in or 2 base timing attack all inn-ish was never fun for us. We would applaud protoss playing HT/immortal or mass blink stalker or any other kind of play revolving more than 2 base. After almost a year of being all inned 80% of our games we just became good at macroing and defending cheese, now its up to you to recover your lost year of abusing your wins, hence all the bad protoss in GSL etc thats losing. Ofc, discrediting ppl and having 40 pages of idra fanboy flame is just as bad, even worse, cus you dont get any better from that.
Also, honestly, i didnt see the match so maybe i shouldnt say too mucu but theres no way that nestea simply lost while a mid master couldve stopped mass blink stalker from that guy. I practice ZvP a lot, against one of the best players of benelux, and for some strange reason ling/roach tends to do beter than hydras against mass stalker. If you dont believe me: for reference, game 2 idra vs cruncher on shakuras in some tourney where idra lost with 40pop advantage and 1 base up roach/hydra vs mass blink stalker. I myself believe that the biggest reason why getting hydras is so hard is because theyr so gas intensive and a P can easily outmass/upgrade his stalkers. Not saying hydras are bad against stalkers, but its not always the obvious and right choice to swith from roach/ling to roach/hydra
Its just the maps, you shouldn't have open naturals, protoss should be able to 16 nexus or forge fe safely every game to allow for more builds. This would balance pvz.
If you dont believe me: for reference, game 2 idra vs cruncher on shakuras in some tourney where idra lost with 40pop advantage and 1 base up roach/hydra vs mass blink stalker. I myself believe that the biggest reason why getting hydras is so hard is because theyr so gas intensive and a P can easily outmass/upgrade his stalkers. Not saying hydras are bad against stalkers, but its not always the obvious and right choice to swith from roach/ling to roach/hydra
He lost because he failed his micro. Mass Blink Stalkers is a fairly micro intensive strat and a lot of the fight comes down to micro. Not to mention he had like 50 Drones on 3base, not exactly the biggest advantage. Cruncher did the same strat next game and got rolled
We would applaud protoss playing HT/immortal or mass blink stalker or any other kind of play revolving more than 2 base.
Like Cruncher vs Mondragon on Meta? He got applauded alright, applauded real good
If you dont believe me: for reference, game 2 idra vs cruncher on shakuras in some tourney where idra lost with 40pop advantage and 1 base up roach/hydra vs mass blink stalker. I myself believe that the biggest reason why getting hydras is so hard is because theyr so gas intensive and a P can easily outmass/upgrade his stalkers. Not saying hydras are bad against stalkers, but its not always the obvious and right choice to swith from roach/ling to roach/hydra
He lost because he failed his micro. Mass Blink Stalkers is a fairly micro intensive strat and a lot of the fight comes down to micro. Not to mention he had like 50 Drones on 3base, not exactly the biggest advantage. Cruncher did the same strat next game and got rolled
We would applaud protoss playing HT/immortal or mass blink stalker or any other kind of play revolving more than 2 base.
Like Cruncher vs Mondragon on Meta? He got applauded alright, applauded real good
True about game3 idra vs cruncher. Just saying that its not free win if you get some hydras vs stalkers. A big factor was that idra dropped some units and killed some probes. Also he was up a base. It was kind of a big advantage in game2 to be ahead 40pop or so and have 3 base mining instead of 2. (50drones on 3base is better than 100 on 2) i did find game2 very memorable because cruncher played like a beast with sick micro and above all: made idra rage hardcore :D
I forgot how the game went of mondragon vs cruncher and all the comments/critics/etc, but I do rember being sad he lost as he was a sparkle of light in dark zergy times. I do know that cruncher can be quite a beast and that he probably deserved the win. Played him multiple times on ladder and he played pretty damn strong.
IMO there are people of all races (Z, P, T) who prematurely whine about imbalance when they just need to do something different. The pattern goes,
(Person suggesting something different): Why don't you just try ____? (Person whining): No, that doesn't work. Z/P/T HAS to ____ or else _____ happens and they lose. ___ is impossible. (Person suggesting something different): *shrug* Well, I'm pretty sure people just need to change up what they're doing and innovate a bit. There's probably something out there. (Person whining): No! The game is broken! I've tried everything!
I've seen this discussion SO many times and it ALMOST ALWAYS turns out that innovation was, indeed, all that was needed. Granted, patches can change things, but IMO that all the more supports an argument for needing innovation. You can't just do the same thing after a patch change/metagame change and expect to win. It might seem like there aren't many options because there are very narrow, defined things that you're used to doing so it's hard to think outside the box - but, there is almost always a solution, as time has told again and again.
I say this as a Toss player, and I have faith that our players will innovate and figure stuff out again.
On June 04 2011 12:29 HolyArrow wrote: IMO there are people of all races (Z, P, T) who prematurely whine about imbalance when they just need to do something different. The pattern goes,
(Person suggesting something different): Why don't you just try ____? (Person whining): No, that doesn't work. Z/P/T HAS to ____ or else _____ happens and they lose. ___ is impossible. (Person suggesting something different): *shrug* Well, I'm pretty sure people just need to change up what they're doing and innovate a bit. There's probably something out there. (Person whining): No! The game is broken! I've tried everything!
I've seen this discussion SO many times and it ALMOST ALWAYS turns out that innovation was, indeed, all that was needed. Granted, patches can change things, but IMO that all the more supports an argument for needing innovation. You can't just do the same thing after a patch change/metagame change and expect to win. It might seem like there aren't many options because there are very narrow, defined things that you're used to doing so it's hard to think outside the box - but, there is almost always a solution, as time has told again and again.
I say this as a Toss player, and I have faith that our players will innovate and figure stuff out again.
Allowing pros to experiment in order to change the metagame rather than complaining about imbalance? Madness!
On June 04 2011 12:29 HolyArrow wrote: IMO there are people of all races (Z, P, T) who prematurely whine about imbalance when they just need to do something different. The pattern goes,
(Person suggesting something different): Why don't you just try ____? (Person whining): No, that doesn't work. Z/P/T HAS to ____ or else _____ happens and they lose. ___ is impossible. (Person suggesting something different): *shrug* Well, I'm pretty sure people just need to change up what they're doing and innovate a bit. There's probably something out there. (Person whining): No! The game is broken! I've tried everything!
I've seen this discussion SO many times and it ALMOST ALWAYS turns out that innovation was, indeed, all that was needed. Granted, patches can change things, but IMO that all the more supports an argument for needing innovation. You can't just do the same thing after a patch change/metagame change and expect to win. It might seem like there aren't many options because there are very narrow, defined things that you're used to doing so it's hard to think outside the box - but, there is almost always a solution, as time has told again and again.
I say this as a Toss player, and I have faith that our players will innovate and figure stuff out again.
Allowing pros to experiment in order to change the metagame rather than complaining about imbalance? Madness!
On June 04 2011 11:38 ruiyang wrote: @yamulo: maybe I was too harsh on my statements. I definetely didnt mean to say that P/Z or T is better than one another, i feel that the current statiscal differences can be explained w/o mentioning balance too much. but I still definetely dont believe that Protoss are having a big unfair disadvantage against Zerg, maybe against Terran but against zerg it doesnt seem that they are doing exceptionally bad relative to skill level of both players. Im not trying to discredit pros, what i meant is that non pros shouldnt whine about balance in PvZ because the imbalance is nonexistent on their level. Even at 1300+ masters its not very often a question of balance if I lose or win.
Edit: I believe that china starleague consisted of many invites of best ppl in the world. Alot of GSL top players joined and got rolled by Chinese ppl that played on other servers before
If you watched how Nestea lost that tourney versus the toss, he made the mistake that mid level master players won't even make. Who on their right mind stays pure roach ling against mass blink stalkers....
Personally, Im fine with toss players losing. I just hate it when toss players aren't doing well and zerg players like Idra are winning tournies and still are whining about toss. It just seems like a low blow. And most people already stated, the only toss player to really do well is MC and he is just a bunch of mid game gateway+sentry timings and when he wins, instead of "AMAZING PLAY" we get 40 pages of Idra fan boys going imba FF imba FF. It just makes me sick inside.
Sounds harsh but as a zerg player I'm inclined to say protoss played really abusive. We went from 4gate to cannon wall in, cannon behind mineral line to voidray rush, phoenix rush, DT rush, 6gate, mass sentry collosus deathbal, etc etc. Games against protoss who played either all in or 2 base timing attack all inn-ish was never fun for us. We would applaud protoss playing HT/immortal or mass blink stalker or any other kind of play revolving more than 2 base. After almost a year of being all inned 80% of our games we just became good at macroing and defending cheese, now its up to you to recover your lost year of abusing your wins, hence all the bad protoss in GSL etc thats losing. Ofc, discrediting ppl and having 40 pages of idra fanboy flame is just as bad, even worse, cus you dont get any better from that.
Also, honestly, i didnt see the match so maybe i shouldnt say too mucu but theres no way that nestea simply lost while a mid master couldve stopped mass blink stalker from that guy. I practice ZvP a lot, against one of the best players of benelux, and for some strange reason ling/roach tends to do beter than hydras against mass stalker. If you dont believe me: for reference, game 2 idra vs cruncher on shakuras in some tourney where idra lost with 40pop advantage and 1 base up roach/hydra vs mass blink stalker. I myself believe that the biggest reason why getting hydras is so hard is because theyr so gas intensive and a P can easily outmass/upgrade his stalkers. Not saying hydras are bad against stalkers, but its not always the obvious and right choice to swith from roach/ling to roach/hydra
I think something needs to be done regarding protoss's harrass options. Other than DTs, warp prism drops are mainly ineffective unless your carrying full energy HTs. I think right now protoss users are relying on the superior army of their death ball to roll their opponents. Once their opponent is able to defend with minimal losses they would win.
To be honest I always thought MC was slightly overrated, he seemed to rely on early 4/6 gate timing pushes, sometimes with the nexus cancel. Always seemed cheap to me. Not saying he isn't great, but people are correct when they say he isn't the hero that toss needs.
I think the point about the forge FE being difficult due to open naturals is a good one, BW the maps seemed to be designed so that this build could be done. In SC2 so many maps the forge FE is just too eaisly abused.
I think what we saw in SC2 was the first great transition from the original Blizz maps, ie Steppes etc into better maps like Tal'Darim etc. We are just waiting for the second generation to hit before we can see the game evolve further, at the mo it's just stagnant.
On June 04 2011 15:14 PeggyHill wrote: To be honest I always thought MC was slightly overrated, he seemed to rely on early 4/6 gate timing pushes, sometimes with the nexus cancel. Always seemed cheap to me. Not saying he isn't great, but people are correct when they say he isn't the hero that toss needs.
I think the point about the forge FE being difficult due to open naturals is a good one, BW the maps seemed to be designed so that this build could be done. In SC2 so many maps the forge FE is just too eaisly abused.
I think what we saw in SC2 was the first great transition from the original Blizz maps, ie Steppes etc into better maps like Tal'Darim etc. We are just waiting for the second generation to hit before we can see the game evolve further, at the mo it's just stagnant.
the most importent thing is that alot zergs still flame protoss as to strong and even lalush did flame white-ra when even lalush won 3-2 ... i never saw white-ra flame and be bm before but even he could not resist after lalushs imbalance protoss flames after he BEAT white-ra 3-2 ^^
The race that improves the most is always the one that is struggling.
Few months ago Protoss was clearly dominating, that's why they fell behind in strategies. The other races, especially zergs are using new strategies and Protoss still have to learn how to deal with it.
It's cleary not a balance issue, it's learning how to deal with new strategies.
The good news is that Protoss have so many options not fully explored yet.
Yes. Protoss seems to be the worst race in top level play, as of now. That's not really a big deal however as the metagame always keeps shifting and sometimes a race is just lagging behind the other two. In most likely scenario Protoss will perform poorly for the next month or two and then they will either get patched or more likely some new powerful strategies will emerge.
well mc is out and i o think zerg is more powerful than protoss right now but its not impossible i guess.
Protoss is still the best race just bad players
this guy is just an elitist zerg like idra.
but i'm not quite sure if its a balance issue yet. the roach is really strong though. like really strong. zergs mass roach and win all the time now.
but i think something will help protoss out soon. before a patch comes atleast, some new strategy will pop up and zergs will be QQing again in no time XD
Lol zergs have whined CONSTANTLY throughout the beta until now. They got buffed all the time and tons of things they considered imba was nerfed. Protoss had voidray speed removed, khydarian amulet removed, warp gate timings nerfed. Infestors were buffed to be able to decimate the voidray/colossi deathball which worked against zerg a-moving a maxed but half-the-cost-of-the-protoss-army roach/hydra ball into them. Infestors were also given the wonderful ability to destroy 25 marines that make up 95% of the terran army with one spell. IdrA has been the leading whiner even though he posts great results all the time and isn't even one of the top zergs anymore, he literally wants every single thing to be simple for zerg and wants to be able to 100% scout everything early game even though the other races can't do that either.
This allows him to use his "superior mechanics to win because he's better", except no other race can decide to just make 8-12 drones every cycle. MC has higher APM than IdrA, never spikes above the amount of money necessary to create his cycle of units, pylons, and upgrades, constantly produces probes and expands at the proper timings. Three seconds after one upgrade finishes the next one begins. But IdrA and other top zergs are "MACRO BEASTS!" because macroing for his race means injecting on time, avoiding getting supply blocked, and making as many drones as your situation permits. Brood War required mechanics, you had to have the speed to micro your units, put your newly created workers to the mineral line, etc. whereas the harder aspects of mechanics from Brood War were basically wiped out through shift-queue, worker rallies, and unlimited control groups. "Superior mechanics" means nothing at the top level. In Brood War it was the difference between Jaedong/Flash and a B-teamer like IdrA. In Starcraft 2 almost anyone can win with sticking to a build order and hoping they engage in a favorable position.
Now a protoss makes a thread discussing balance and those outspoken zergs that whined for a year and wrote angry emails to Blizzard are laughing at them. These elitist "high masters" zergs on the NA server think they can laugh at protoss because their "race is harder". What race is harder at the masters level is IRRELEVANT to how the top players perform. Protoss being "easy" at the middle level has nothing to do with them being impotent at the higher levels. The only top protosses are Naniwa (who lost to 2-1 to Slush today, no one would consider Slush a top zerg), MC (lost to IdrA 2-0 today even though I eagerly await a rematch with a well-rested MC), and Alicia (lost to Losira, again not even a top zerg), with maybe a couple others below them.
Protoss play is 100% rigid and our mechanics are basically "chronoboost". We can't make 12 probes at a time when we deem it safe. We can't just go "oh you know what, we've just been a-moving a 200/200 roach/hydra ball, maybe we should actually figure out timings that we can attack?" because any movement outside of turtling to max is almost all-in timing and every effective one has been figured out. The only viable tech path is robotics and adding templar late game. We have no multi-harass ability because our units are inefficient in small groups and the most we can do is pick off one building with blink stalkers before running away.
All we can do is a 1-3 gateway sentry expand versus zerg. All we can do is get a robotics to make sure we don't outright die to easily massable tunneling claws roaches. All we can do is get colossi/sentry because they are the only thing that defeats roach/hydra, both of which cost less than stalkers, scale better with upgrades, and can be infinitely massed off a superior economy.
If we choose to go stargate tech you can take a third base easily. IdrA managed to defend MC's voidray/phoenix pressure on his extremely quick third base. He did this by making about one extra queen and when the voidray was 10 seconds away from his base keeping his queen there and laying down 2 spore crawlers. Oops your tech path just became completely worthless and you cannot secure a third base. DT tech, not really even worth mentioning. Templar/immortal, immobile as fuck and still not good.
Any attempt to move out onto the field with our slow, expensive units leaves us wide open for that group being outright destroyed or a runby counterattack. Oops we have to now turtle on the number of bases we have because it is impossible for us to secure another base and our expensive army takes forever to rebuild. Any movement outside of our base has to be a timing push like a 6 gate, the only thing that can stop a zerg from going to four bases to our 2 and massing 75 drones by the time a protoss with non-stop probe production and spare chronoboost use will have around 45. If that 6 gate fails by you choosing to stop droning and instead crank out 15 roaches at a time we are completely dead.
EDIT: Yeah this probably seems like a massive imbalance whine but it's more like a whine about how low the protoss skill cap is and the easy-mode mechanics of the game.
On June 04 2011 16:57 shinyA wrote: ^ I agree with most of what you said except LosirA is probably the best zerg in the world
In what? Nestea is superior all around. LosirA's ZvZ is also pretty lackluster. I guess the "not a top zerg" thing was incorrect but Alicia is the second or third best protoss (even though he's barely even done anything, thats how unrepresented protoss are at the high level) and he still got wiped out.
On June 04 2011 03:07 W2 wrote: I am glad this thread hasn't degenerated into imbalance whine, it goes to show the integrity of protoss players.
Instead of using our race as an excuse, we must use it as motivation. Even though zerg and terran are winning most of the matches, we still believe in our hearts that protoss is the strongest race. And it is up to us to show the world.
best response in the thread <3
On June 04 2011 03:18 tehemperorer wrote: Protoss best race, people just know almost exactly how the P players play, it's really predictable I'm sure for pro players.
So toss is way WAY op but if the opponent knows your making collosi youre dead? Sounds a little up to me :p
On June 04 2011 03:19 ChineseWife wrote: from personal experience, whenever i beat a zerg, its because they played terribly. i dont see how a skilled zerg can lose to a protoss anymore
Words of wisdom there m8... Words of wisdom I tell you.
in my experience every time i win the other guy made a mistake, terran and protoss and zerg are way OP they just have to not make mistakes...
imo its just another metagame swing, like toss used to dominate zerg and terran used to dominate everything zerg is now dominating. Especially toss seems to struggle so id advice every protoss to try crazy stuff till something good comes from it
IdrA complains a lot about the other races and what he cant do and so on, but he always sounds like only Zerg have to take risks. Well that isnt the case and maybe Protoss have to realize this as well. With Forcefields and the ability to control the battlefield the Protoss have been playing it pretty safe, but maybe its time to adjust and take a little more risks.
Apart from DTs there are very very very few Protoss harasses going on. I am not talking about a bunch of Blink Stalkers jumping in and out of a base, because those are most likely about 90% of the Protoss units. I am more talking about using a Warp Prism to warp in just a few Zealots to disrupt mining and kill a few workers; I am talking about two Immortals in a Warp Prism which are used to snipe a Terrans addons while he is sieging your 3rd / 4th; I am talking about a small bunch of Void Rays (~3) to snipe air defense turrets late game ... there are loads of possibilities, but Protoss do even less harrass than Zerg in mid and late game and that is a key to success.
I don't think roaches are the problem, probably infestors are after buff imo. They removed khadarian amulet from protoss so no instant storms, I think this change was good and really needed. But the infestor energy thing for instant fungal should also be removed or changed damage or time stuck with fungal.
On June 04 2011 16:52 Heavenly wrote: Lol zergs have whined CONSTANTLY throughout the beta until now. They got buffed all the time and tons of things they considered imba was nerfed. Protoss had voidray speed removed, khydarian amulet removed, warp gate timings nerfed. Infestors were buffed to be able to decimate the voidray/colossi deathball which worked against zerg a-moving a maxed but half-the-cost-of-the-protoss-army roach/hydra ball into them. Infestors were also given the wonderful ability to destroy 25 marines that make up 95% of the terran army with one spell. IdrA has been the leading whiner even though he posts great results all the time and isn't even one of the top zergs anymore, he literally wants every single thing to be simple for zerg and wants to be able to 100% scout everything early game even though the other races can't do that either.
This allows him to use his "superior mechanics to win because he's better", except no other race can decide to just make 8-12 drones every cycle. MC has higher APM than IdrA, never spikes above the amount of money necessary to create his cycle of units, pylons, and upgrades, constantly produces probes and expands at the proper timings. Three seconds after one upgrade finishes the next one begins. But IdrA and other top zergs are "MACRO BEASTS!" because macroing for his race means injecting on time, avoiding getting supply blocked, and making as many drones as your situation permits. Brood War required mechanics, you had to have the speed to micro your units, put your newly created workers to the mineral line, etc. whereas the harder aspects of mechanics from Brood War were basically wiped out through shift-queue, worker rallies, and unlimited control groups. "Superior mechanics" means nothing at the top level.
Now a protoss makes a thread discussing balance and those outspoken zergs that whined for a year and wrote angry emails to Blizzard are laughing at them. These elitist "high masters" zergs on the NA server think they can laugh at protoss because their "race is harder". What race is harder at the masters level is IRRELEVANT to how the top players perform. Protoss being "easy" at the middle level has nothing to do with them being impotent at the higher levels. The only top protosses are Naniwa (who lost to 2-1 to Slush today, no one would consider Slush a top zerg), MC (lost to IdrA 2-0 today even though I eagerly await a rematch with a well-rested MC), and Alicia (lost to Losira, again not even a top zerg), with maybe a couple others below them.
Protoss play is 100% rigid and our mechanics are basically "chronoboost". We can't make 12 probes at a time when we deem it safe. We can't just go "oh you know what, we've just been a-moving a 200/200 roach/hydra ball, maybe we should actually figure out timings that we can attack?" because any movement outside of turtling to max is almost all-in timing and every effective one has been figured out. The only viable tech path is robotics and adding templar late game. We have no multi-harass ability because our units are inefficient in small groups and the most we can do is pick off one building with blink stalkers before running away.
All we can do is a 1-3 gateway sentry expand versus zerg. All we can do is get a robotics to make sure we don't outright die to easily massable tunneling claws roaches. All we can do is get colossi/sentry because they are the only thing that defeats roach/hydra, both of which cost less than stalkers, scale better with upgrades, and can be infinitely massed off a superior economy.
If we choose to go stargate tech you can take a third base easily. IdrA managed to defend MC's voidray/phoenix pressure on his extremely quick third base. He did this by making about one extra queen and when the voidray was 10 seconds away from his base keeping his queen there and laying down 2 spore crawlers. Oops your tech path just became completely worthless and you cannot secure a third base. DT tech, not really even worth mentioning. Templar/immortal, immobile as fuck and still not good.
Any attempt to move out onto the field with our slow, expensive units leaves us wide open for that group being outright destroyed or a runby counterattack. Oops we have to now turtle on the number of bases we have because it is impossible for us to secure another base and our expensive army takes forever to rebuild. Any movement outside of our base has to be a timing push like a 6 gate, the only thing that can stop a zerg from going to four bases to our 2 and massing 75 drones by the time a protoss with non-stop probe production and spare chronoboost use will have around 45. If that 6 gate fails by you choosing to stop droning and instead crank out 15 roaches at a time we are completely dead.
EDIT: Yeah this probably seems like a massive imbalance whine but it's more like a whine about how low the protoss skill cap is and the easy-mode mechanics of the game.
Congratz on summing up why most toss is annoyed atm.
On June 04 2011 17:07 Rabiator wrote: IdrA complains a lot about the other races and what he cant do and so on, but he always sounds like only Zerg have to take risks. Well that isnt the case and maybe Protoss have to realize this as well. With Forcefields and the ability to control the battlefield the Protoss have been playing it pretty safe, but maybe its time to adjust and take a little more risks.
Apart from DTs there are very very very few Protoss harasses going on. I am not talking about a bunch of Blink Stalkers jumping in and out of a base, because those are most likely about 90% of the Protoss units. I am more talking about using a Warp Prism to warp in just a few Zealots to disrupt mining and kill a few workers; I am talking about two Immortals in a Warp Prism which are used to snipe a Terrans addons while he is sieging your 3rd / 4th; I am talking about a small bunch of Void Rays (~3) to snipe air defense turrets late game ... there are loads of possibilities, but Protoss do even less harrass than Zerg in mid and late game and that is a key to success.
1.) Tons of protoss play greedy, MC is a prime example and EVERYONE says he either uses abusive timings or plays extremely greedy. Terran plays greedy behind bunkers and zergs play as greedy as humanly possible. Protoss playing greedy is the easiest to exploit in the early and mid game because beyond turtling or timings we are fragile to other race's timings.
2.) Warp prism zealot harass happens all the time. They disrupt mining yeah, at the cost of robo time, 200 mins for warp prism, 100 per zealot, and maybe 2-3 scv or drone deaths before an observant player pulls his scvs away and kills the zealots. Storm drops are still better but an aware player can still pull workers away quickly and you are putting 250 minerals and 300 gas into the hope of killing as many workers as possible. I do see storm drops in the late game even though its a large risk due to vikings and potential turrets up for deterring DTs. Killing 10 workers is nice but still not a huge game changer.
3.) Immortal drops are 700/300 to snipe addons, immortals as part of your army aren't especially great either compared to what could have been a colossi for a bit more time and an additional +50/50.
4.) Void rays aren't going to do anything? In the late game they'll be 0/0, are an expensive tech, worthless in a unit comp unless against zerg and in that case they are better in your army compared to risking them to a horde of corruptors meant for your colossi for the sake of sniping four drones and a couple spores.
On June 04 2011 15:50 Elean wrote: The race that improves the most is always the one that is struggling.
Few months ago Protoss was clearly dominating, that's why they fell behind in strategies. The other races, especially zergs are using new strategies and Protoss still have to learn how to deal with it.
It's cleary not a balance issue, it's learning how to deal with new strategies.
The good news is that Protoss have so many options not fully explored yet.
Possibly. Bliz was quick to use nontrivial nerfs. The loss of amulet was massive. Same with Giving chain storms to zerg. Toss had some fundamental issues that made it so fragile in the first few months. Better play compensated for that, but now a lot of options have been trimmed by nerfs. Still if it's like this in 2 months maybe there will be enough qq to revert some of the more silly changes.
I think Toss still needs easier/ more feasible harass options. We also need to see the development of newer more viable agro toss strategies. Deathball still seems the most solid strat in general. Aggression isn't rewarded.
Edit: Storm drops really? I am just going to assume people are confusing sc1 storm drops with sc2 ones and sc1 khaydran templar with simple storm sc2 templar. It's just lazy thinking. -.-
It kind of feels like Blizzard has been balancing Protoss around sentries and collosus, both units that have been complained about to death as being OP. It might make for a more robust race if collosus and forcefields were "nerfed" and balance the rest of the forces around that. When Blizzard said they felt collosus or HT were maybe both overpowered but didn't want to nerf both at the same time, I feel like the nerfed the wrong one; should have kept amulet and nerfed collosus.
But, it's true that it could just be a metagame thing that will get figured out with time.
I think this can be just a combination of coincidence and just how some strats are really strong right now and these really good toss players just need a little bit more time to solve them.
On June 04 2011 16:52 Heavenly wrote: Lol zergs have whined CONSTANTLY throughout the beta until now. They got buffed all the time and tons of things they considered imba was nerfed. Protoss had voidray speed removed, khydarian amulet removed, warp gate timings nerfed. Infestors were buffed to be able to decimate the voidray/colossi deathball which worked against zerg a-moving a maxed but half-the-cost-of-the-protoss-army roach/hydra ball into them. Infestors were also given the wonderful ability to destroy 25 marines that make up 95% of the terran army with one spell. IdrA has been the leading whiner even though he posts great results all the time and isn't even one of the top zergs anymore, he literally wants every single thing to be simple for zerg and wants to be able to 100% scout everything early game even though the other races can't do that either.
This allows him to use his "superior mechanics to win because he's better", except no other race can decide to just make 8-12 drones every cycle. MC has higher APM than IdrA, never spikes above the amount of money necessary to create his cycle of units, pylons, and upgrades, constantly produces probes and expands at the proper timings. Three seconds after one upgrade finishes the next one begins. But IdrA and other top zergs are "MACRO BEASTS!" because macroing for his race means injecting on time, avoiding getting supply blocked, and making as many drones as your situation permits. Brood War required mechanics, you had to have the speed to micro your units, put your newly created workers to the mineral line, etc. whereas the harder aspects of mechanics from Brood War were basically wiped out through shift-queue, worker rallies, and unlimited control groups. "Superior mechanics" means nothing at the top level. In Brood War it was the difference between Jaedong/Flash and a B-teamer like IdrA. In Starcraft 2 almost anyone can win with sticking to a build order and hoping they engage in a favorable position.
Now a protoss makes a thread discussing balance and those outspoken zergs that whined for a year and wrote angry emails to Blizzard are laughing at them. These elitist "high masters" zergs on the NA server think they can laugh at protoss because their "race is harder". What race is harder at the masters level is IRRELEVANT to how the top players perform. Protoss being "easy" at the middle level has nothing to do with them being impotent at the higher levels. The only top protosses are Naniwa (who lost to 2-1 to Slush today, no one would consider Slush a top zerg), MC (lost to IdrA 2-0 today even though I eagerly await a rematch with a well-rested MC), and Alicia (lost to Losira, again not even a top zerg), with maybe a couple others below them.
Protoss play is 100% rigid and our mechanics are basically "chronoboost". We can't make 12 probes at a time when we deem it safe. We can't just go "oh you know what, we've just been a-moving a 200/200 roach/hydra ball, maybe we should actually figure out timings that we can attack?" because any movement outside of turtling to max is almost all-in timing and every effective one has been figured out. The only viable tech path is robotics and adding templar late game. We have no multi-harass ability because our units are inefficient in small groups and the most we can do is pick off one building with blink stalkers before running away.
All we can do is a 1-3 gateway sentry expand versus zerg. All we can do is get a robotics to make sure we don't outright die to easily massable tunneling claws roaches. All we can do is get colossi/sentry because they are the only thing that defeats roach/hydra, both of which cost less than stalkers, scale better with upgrades, and can be infinitely massed off a superior economy.
If we choose to go stargate tech you can take a third base easily. IdrA managed to defend MC's voidray/phoenix pressure on his extremely quick third base. He did this by making about one extra queen and when the voidray was 10 seconds away from his base keeping his queen there and laying down 2 spore crawlers. Oops your tech path just became completely worthless and you cannot secure a third base. DT tech, not really even worth mentioning. Templar/immortal, immobile as fuck and still not good.
Any attempt to move out onto the field with our slow, expensive units leaves us wide open for that group being outright destroyed or a runby counterattack. Oops we have to now turtle on the number of bases we have because it is impossible for us to secure another base and our expensive army takes forever to rebuild. Any movement outside of our base has to be a timing push like a 6 gate, the only thing that can stop a zerg from going to four bases to our 2 and massing 75 drones by the time a protoss with non-stop probe production and spare chronoboost use will have around 45. If that 6 gate fails by you choosing to stop droning and instead crank out 15 roaches at a time we are completely dead.
EDIT: Yeah this probably seems like a massive imbalance whine but it's more like a whine about how low the protoss skill cap is and the easy-mode mechanics of the game.
QFT. what a 'heavenly' post
But what really is most annoying is how certain "leaders" of the zerg race keep complaining about balance even when they are already winning left and right.. Not just Idra but even players like Nestea who claim Protoss is too strong, then afterwards he reveals he has a 90% win rate against them.. its seriously mindboggling. I realize they have money on the line and thus they want whatever advantage they can get, but misleading the community just isn't the way to go about it - nobody likes sports players who flop to deceive referees. Sure it helps their team, but it surely doesn't help spectators enjoy the game. No difference here in my personal opinion.
On June 04 2011 16:52 Heavenly wrote: Lol zergs have whined CONSTANTLY throughout the beta until now. They got buffed all the time and tons of things they considered imba was nerfed. Protoss had voidray speed removed, khydarian amulet removed, warp gate timings nerfed. Infestors were buffed to be able to decimate the voidray/colossi deathball which worked against zerg a-moving a maxed but half-the-cost-of-the-protoss-army roach/hydra ball into them. Infestors were also given the wonderful ability to destroy 25 marines that make up 95% of the terran army with one spell. IdrA has been the leading whiner even though he posts great results all the time and isn't even one of the top zergs anymore, he literally wants every single thing to be simple for zerg and wants to be able to 100% scout everything early game even though the other races can't do that either.
This allows him to use his "superior mechanics to win because he's better", except no other race can decide to just make 8-12 drones every cycle. MC has higher APM than IdrA, never spikes above the amount of money necessary to create his cycle of units, pylons, and upgrades, constantly produces probes and expands at the proper timings. Three seconds after one upgrade finishes the next one begins. But IdrA and other top zergs are "MACRO BEASTS!" because macroing for his race means injecting on time, avoiding getting supply blocked, and making as many drones as your situation permits. Brood War required mechanics, you had to have the speed to micro your units, put your newly created workers to the mineral line, etc. whereas the harder aspects of mechanics from Brood War were basically wiped out through shift-queue, worker rallies, and unlimited control groups. "Superior mechanics" means nothing at the top level. In Brood War it was the difference between Jaedong/Flash and a B-teamer like IdrA. In Starcraft 2 almost anyone can win with sticking to a build order and hoping they engage in a favorable position.
Now a protoss makes a thread discussing balance and those outspoken zergs that whined for a year and wrote angry emails to Blizzard are laughing at them. These elitist "high masters" zergs on the NA server think they can laugh at protoss because their "race is harder". What race is harder at the masters level is IRRELEVANT to how the top players perform. Protoss being "easy" at the middle level has nothing to do with them being impotent at the higher levels. The only top protosses are Naniwa (who lost to 2-1 to Slush today, no one would consider Slush a top zerg), MC (lost to IdrA 2-0 today even though I eagerly await a rematch with a well-rested MC), and Alicia (lost to Losira, again not even a top zerg), with maybe a couple others below them.
Protoss play is 100% rigid and our mechanics are basically "chronoboost". We can't make 12 probes at a time when we deem it safe. We can't just go "oh you know what, we've just been a-moving a 200/200 roach/hydra ball, maybe we should actually figure out timings that we can attack?" because any movement outside of turtling to max is almost all-in timing and every effective one has been figured out. The only viable tech path is robotics and adding templar late game. We have no multi-harass ability because our units are inefficient in small groups and the most we can do is pick off one building with blink stalkers before running away.
All we can do is a 1-3 gateway sentry expand versus zerg. All we can do is get a robotics to make sure we don't outright die to easily massable tunneling claws roaches. All we can do is get colossi/sentry because they are the only thing that defeats roach/hydra, both of which cost less than stalkers, scale better with upgrades, and can be infinitely massed off a superior economy.
If we choose to go stargate tech you can take a third base easily. IdrA managed to defend MC's voidray/phoenix pressure on his extremely quick third base. He did this by making about one extra queen and when the voidray was 10 seconds away from his base keeping his queen there and laying down 2 spore crawlers. Oops your tech path just became completely worthless and you cannot secure a third base. DT tech, not really even worth mentioning. Templar/immortal, immobile as fuck and still not good.
Any attempt to move out onto the field with our slow, expensive units leaves us wide open for that group being outright destroyed or a runby counterattack. Oops we have to now turtle on the number of bases we have because it is impossible for us to secure another base and our expensive army takes forever to rebuild. Any movement outside of our base has to be a timing push like a 6 gate, the only thing that can stop a zerg from going to four bases to our 2 and massing 75 drones by the time a protoss with non-stop probe production and spare chronoboost use will have around 45. If that 6 gate fails by you choosing to stop droning and instead crank out 15 roaches at a time we are completely dead.
EDIT: Yeah this probably seems like a massive imbalance whine but it's more like a whine about how low the protoss skill cap is and the easy-mode mechanics of the game.
QFT. what a 'heavenly' post
But what really is most annoying is how certain "leaders" of the zerg race keep complaining about balance even when they are already winning left and right.. Not just Idra but even players like Nestea who claim Protoss is too strong, then afterwards he reveals he has a 90% win rate against them.. its seriously mindboggling. I realize they have money on the line and thus they want whatever advantage they can get, but misleading the community just isn't the way to go about it - nobody likes sports players who flop to deceive referees. Sure it helps their team, but it surely doesn't help spectators enjoy the game. No difference here in my personal opinion.
Hahaha, and MVP saying that he thinks terran is weak, then you look at the number of terrans in the GSL, a ton of which are just bad. IdrA argued on State of the Game that he can't scout what his opponent is doing and he wants spine crawler times reduced so that when he scouts an incoming push he can make them and hold anything off. So basically he wants to just be able to drone as hard as possible like he does already (if you watch any game he is exceptionally greedy, like only making 2 lings in the beginning) and then be able to throw down enough defenses to crush any push no matter what. I wouldn't be surprised if this happened too.
This thread is hard to read, it's filled with normal people, with normal people i mean people who wants to feel superior to others.
Every half post in this thread is about how protoss players are such good people, and how they'll never complain about their race, how protoss players are just moraly superior in every way to the whining zerg players, it is pretty easy to see through this "advanced" form of balance whine going on, but sure everybody wants their race buffed, protoss are no different, everyone just has their way of complaining.
In a game where you only have yourself to blame for a loss, no teammates to throw your blame on, it's obvious that your brain punishes you for losing, and makes you feel bad, and with no teammates to blame, you have to resort to racial imbalance, the same reason why we see players being offensive towards eachother when losing a fight, nobody wants to admit to being worse, they might even feel it's unfair, but what does an uneducated, biased opinion help anyone? Nothing.
On June 04 2011 11:47 hahaimhenry wrote: Well no kidding Protoss are doing bad. They all play the SAME way, it's just whoever executes it the best (that being MC). Look at their PvZ, it's so predictable that Nestea completely exposed it - and it's not like he's the only one, a lot of other Zs say protoss play the same way.
In my honest opinion, there's nothing wrong with balance, I just think the top toss players aren't as good as the top T and Z players. I know a lot of MC fanboys will cry, but compared to MVP and NesTea, he's not any better than them.
So you going by your logic ("toss has bad players lolx, terran and zerg pro"), it means that the good players automatically gravitate towards the races that provide them with the most opportunity to win tournaments and make full use of their multi tasking abilities. Did you think IdrA picked zerg due to some altruistic intention of letting other players win? He picked zerg because he thought it provided him the most opportunity to perform well, and CLEARLY this has been working for him based on his results (even though he cries non stop like a sissy girl). Honestly, its hard to take the balance whines of a guy seriously when he quits a game to a bunch of hallucinations.
All you zerg whiners have no locus standi to post about "metagame shift", when all you have been doing for the past 6 months is whine and cry and bitch and moan non stop about poor zerg. Where was this attitude 3 months ago when your superhero IdrA got torn a new one by Cruncher? That time it was "toss OP, IdrA is god he lost due to imbalance", when looking back now, its clear to see that his playstyle was clearly terrible, and Cruncher exploited it to the fullest extent.
On June 04 2011 18:31 Bagonad wrote: This thread is hard to read, it's filled with normal people, with normal people i mean people who wants to feel superior to others.
Every half post in this thread is about how protoss players are such good people, and how they'll never complain about their race, how protoss players are just moraly superior in every way to the whining zerg players, it is pretty easy to see through this "advanced" form of balance whine going on, but sure everybody wants their race buffed, protoss are no different, everyone just has their way of complaining.
In a game where you only have yourself to blame for a loss, no teammates to throw your blame on, it's obvious that your brain punishes you for losing, and makes you feel bad, and with no teammates to blame, you have to resort to racial imbalance, the same reason why we see players being offensive towards eachother when losing a fight, nobody wants to admit to being worse, they might even feel it's unfair, but what does an uneducated, biased opinion help anyone? Nothing.
This post is hard to read, it's created by a normal person, and by that I mean a person who looks at people who believe they are superior to others, then believes he is superior to those people.
Um, we are discussing protoss at the high level. None of us are MC or Alicia and very few people are complaining about personally losing games. Me and no other protoss player in this thread play at a level where the points brought up in this thread are 100% relevant to our losses. And I don't want protoss to be buffed whatsoever, I want its gameplay to be changed and possibly for certain tech paths to even be viable. I did give an educated post, feel free to give a counterargument to any single one of my points. Until then you look EXTREMELY arrogant with your strange, irrelevant finger wagging.
On June 04 2011 18:31 Bagonad wrote: This thread is hard to read, it's filled with normal people, with normal people i mean people who wants to feel superior to others.
Every half post in this thread is about how protoss players are such good people, and how they'll never complain about their race, how protoss players are just moraly superior in every way to the whining zerg players, it is pretty easy to see through this "advanced" form of balance whine going on, but sure everybody wants their race buffed, protoss are no different, everyone just has their way of complaining.
In a game where you only have yourself to blame for a loss, no teammates to throw your blame on, it's obvious that your brain punishes you for losing, and makes you feel bad, and with no teammates to blame, you have to resort to racial imbalance, the same reason why we see players being offensive towards eachother when losing a fight, nobody wants to admit to being worse, they might even feel it's unfair, but what does an uneducated, biased opinion help anyone? Nothing.
If I go through the thread the main thing the Protoss have been whining about is about how much Zerg players whine and how much they feel they feel superior. Then I see posts like these and it all makes sense.
On June 04 2011 18:31 Bagonad wrote: This thread is hard to read, it's filled with normal people, with normal people i mean people who wants to feel superior to others.
Every half post in this thread is about how protoss players are such good people, and how they'll never complain about their race, how protoss players are just moraly superior in every way to the whining zerg players, it is pretty easy to see through this "advanced" form of balance whine going on, but sure everybody wants their race buffed, protoss are no different, everyone just has their way of complaining.
In a game where you only have yourself to blame for a loss, no teammates to throw your blame on, it's obvious that your brain punishes you for losing, and makes you feel bad, and with no teammates to blame, you have to resort to racial imbalance, the same reason why we see players being offensive towards eachother when losing a fight, nobody wants to admit to being worse, they might even feel it's unfair, but what does an uneducated, biased opinion help anyone? Nothing.
This post is hard to read, it's created by a normal person, and by that I mean a person who looks at people who believe they are superior to others, then believes he is superior to those people.
Um, we are discussing protoss at the high level. None of us are MC or Alicia and very few people are complaining about personally losing games. Me and no other protoss player in this thread play at a level where the points brought up in this thread are 100% relevant to our losses. And I don't want protoss to be buffed whatsoever, I want its gameplay to be changed and possibly for certain tech paths to even be viable. I did give an educated post, feel free to give a counterargument to any single one of my points. Until then you look EXTREMELY arrogant with your strange, irrelevant finger wagging.
You start off by generalizing every zerg player just as i generalize every protoss player, truth is that everyone is the same, no matter which race i play, everyone whines about something, even other zerg players complain about "Stupid baneling busts every game" when i play them.
And i don't really care how many points you made in your long rant earlier, anyone could've made the same about terran and zerg, and probably has earlier, i'm a horrible diamond player, and has been for a long time, and all the way through, everyone, every race complains about something of the other race, i won't make a 5000 word rant abut forcefields and voidray/collosus deathball, though believe me i could, because that's the strength of protoss, like the strength of zerg is infestors and roaches at the current meta-game, and if any of of these are removed, we see a shift, like protoss had to change responding to drops against terran with the removal of amulet, and terran had to make up new early-agression techniques when they were forced to build a supply depot first.
I won't lie to you, i prefer zerg macro to protoss macro, because i don't like having a lot of different buildings hotkeyed, and if anything i feel protoss should atleast be able to active a "Auto-warpin" at a pylon, which would warp-in the units you produced from warpgates instantly at your pylon, instead of having to go back and click.
Just like people said when fruitdealer started losing terribly, and when there were no zerg in TSL ro8: It might just be the player, it might just be the meta-game, it might be imbalance, but we wouldn't know.
Being a skiller player is also a dicussion point, are you the most skilld for having higher apm? The most skilled for being most creative? Being a lucky guesser? Having lots of stretegies? Or perhaps just winning? We can't reliably determine who is skilled between races, Idra would probably be horrible with protoss, because he's played zerg for so long, and perhaps he chose zerg because he felt better with their mechanics, we can't punish terrans for having a more imbalanced race, while they may just have the better players.
Historically, Protoss has ALWAYS been weak in Korea. It took 3 seasons to even see a Protoss make it into the final 4. Even after that, though, they have had almost terrible showing. All "up and coming" Korean Protoss basically fade into obscurity before they get beyond that phase.
As for the complaints that "Protoss is OP" isn't so much about how much they do or don't win tournaments, but how far they've gotten in tournaments and in the scene "riding on the coattails" of their race. It's about how well the non-P pros feel how refined their P opponents are in their play. If they feel that their opponents are getting far without the effort or refinement of play they expect at their level, then they will say so. If they feel they are outplayed, they generally shut up.
On June 04 2011 16:52 Heavenly wrote: Lol zergs have whined CONSTANTLY throughout the beta until now. They got buffed all the time and tons of things they considered imba was nerfed. Protoss had voidray speed removed, khydarian amulet removed, warp gate timings nerfed. Infestors were buffed to be able to decimate the voidray/colossi deathball which worked against zerg a-moving a maxed but half-the-cost-of-the-protoss-army roach/hydra ball into them. Infestors were also given the wonderful ability to destroy 25 marines that make up 95% of the terran army with one spell. IdrA has been the leading whiner even though he posts great results all the time and isn't even one of the top zergs anymore, he literally wants every single thing to be simple for zerg and wants to be able to 100% scout everything early game even though the other races can't do that either.
This allows him to use his "superior mechanics to win because he's better", except no other race can decide to just make 8-12 drones every cycle. MC has higher APM than IdrA, never spikes above the amount of money necessary to create his cycle of units, pylons, and upgrades, constantly produces probes and expands at the proper timings. Three seconds after one upgrade finishes the next one begins. But IdrA and other top zergs are "MACRO BEASTS!" because macroing for his race means injecting on time, avoiding getting supply blocked, and making as many drones as your situation permits. Brood War required mechanics, you had to have the speed to micro your units, put your newly created workers to the mineral line, etc. whereas the harder aspects of mechanics from Brood War were basically wiped out through shift-queue, worker rallies, and unlimited control groups. "Superior mechanics" means nothing at the top level. In Brood War it was the difference between Jaedong/Flash and a B-teamer like IdrA. In Starcraft 2 almost anyone can win with sticking to a build order and hoping they engage in a favorable position.
Now a protoss makes a thread discussing balance and those outspoken zergs that whined for a year and wrote angry emails to Blizzard are laughing at them. These elitist "high masters" zergs on the NA server think they can laugh at protoss because their "race is harder". What race is harder at the masters level is IRRELEVANT to how the top players perform. Protoss being "easy" at the middle level has nothing to do with them being impotent at the higher levels. The only top protosses are Naniwa (who lost to 2-1 to Slush today, no one would consider Slush a top zerg), MC (lost to IdrA 2-0 today even though I eagerly await a rematch with a well-rested MC), and Alicia (lost to Losira, again not even a top zerg), with maybe a couple others below them.
Protoss play is 100% rigid and our mechanics are basically "chronoboost". We can't make 12 probes at a time when we deem it safe. We can't just go "oh you know what, we've just been a-moving a 200/200 roach/hydra ball, maybe we should actually figure out timings that we can attack?" because any movement outside of turtling to max is almost all-in timing and every effective one has been figured out. The only viable tech path is robotics and adding templar late game. We have no multi-harass ability because our units are inefficient in small groups and the most we can do is pick off one building with blink stalkers before running away.
All we can do is a 1-3 gateway sentry expand versus zerg. All we can do is get a robotics to make sure we don't outright die to easily massable tunneling claws roaches. All we can do is get colossi/sentry because they are the only thing that defeats roach/hydra, both of which cost less than stalkers, scale better with upgrades, and can be infinitely massed off a superior economy.
If we choose to go stargate tech you can take a third base easily. IdrA managed to defend MC's voidray/phoenix pressure on his extremely quick third base. He did this by making about one extra queen and when the voidray was 10 seconds away from his base keeping his queen there and laying down 2 spore crawlers. Oops your tech path just became completely worthless and you cannot secure a third base. DT tech, not really even worth mentioning. Templar/immortal, immobile as fuck and still not good.
Any attempt to move out onto the field with our slow, expensive units leaves us wide open for that group being outright destroyed or a runby counterattack. Oops we have to now turtle on the number of bases we have because it is impossible for us to secure another base and our expensive army takes forever to rebuild. Any movement outside of our base has to be a timing push like a 6 gate, the only thing that can stop a zerg from going to four bases to our 2 and massing 75 drones by the time a protoss with non-stop probe production and spare chronoboost use will have around 45. If that 6 gate fails by you choosing to stop droning and instead crank out 15 roaches at a time we are completely dead.
EDIT: Yeah this probably seems like a massive imbalance whine but it's more like a whine about how low the protoss skill cap is and the easy-mode mechanics of the game.
I wanted to say that since the beggining of the thread, but english is not my language... THANKS +1
Protoss player are used to win due to imbalance. Now that we may reach balance, Protoss has to learn how to fight. The last month was pain for zerg but it was good training. So good luck and have fun with training dear Protoss player
well, the sc2 balance design is pretty much all fallen apart now. what makes a great RTS is when its fair at all stages of the game. But sc2 was designed with complete tier imbalance. 100/25 marauder > stalker pre stim? seems fair? 2 roach >> 1 stalker almsot same cost? seems fair o.o? if units were balanced the better player would always win but sc2 is heavily build order luck based and racial imbalance.
To shed some honest truth on the situation because me and jinro were actually talking about this the other day walking to gym, when you think about a lot of the protoss players in code/a code s most of them are OLD as far as sc2 is concerned. Most of the player have been involved in the game since the beginning and have been consistently mediocre throughout. Unlike the other races... a lot of HOT new terran/zerg players have been constantly been coming up through code a/code s but almost no protoss players beside Alicia/creator that I can think of (and who are still in code a or code b i believe?). Also a lot of skill IS based on ladder, how much you play on it, your ranking in GM, and how many games you play. Although ladder definitely doesn't define a player you can still see a lot of good players raping the ladder before making some strong debut in GSL. There really hasn't been any strong protoss ladder players beside the already known. (as im writting this post in the top 20 or so of gm there are roughly 2 protoss , 2 zerg , and the rest terran)
so altho i agree the game isn't completely balanced the protoss players in korea aren't exactly the best ever either
On June 04 2011 21:21 Liquid`HuK wrote: To shed some honest truth on the situation because me and jinro were actually talking about this the other day walking to gym, when you think about a lot of the protoss players in code/a code s most of them are OLD as far as sc2 is concerned. Most of the player have been involved in the game since the beginning and have been consistently mediocre throughout. Unlike the other races... a lot of HOT new terran/zerg players have been constantly been coming up through code a/code s but almost no protoss players beside Alicia/creator that I can think of (and who are still in code a or code b i believe?). Also a lot of skill IS based on ladder, how much you play on it, your ranking in GM, and how many games you play. Although ladder definitely doesn't define a player you can still see a lot of good players raping the ladder before making some strong debut in GSL. There really hasn't been any strong protoss ladder players beside the already known. (as im writting this post in the top 20 or so of gm there are roughly 2 protoss , 2 zerg , and the rest terran)
so altho i agree the game isn't completely balanced the protoss players in korea aren't exactly the best ever either
Thanks for the insight HuK. Good luck next round of GSL. You've really impressed me with your improvement since release! I'll be rooting for you.
On June 04 2011 21:21 Liquid`HuK wrote: To shed some honest truth on the situation because me and jinro were actually talking about this the other day walking to gym, when you think about a lot of the protoss players in code/a code s most of them are OLD as far as sc2 is concerned. Most of the player have been involved in the game since the beginning and have been consistently mediocre throughout. Unlike the other races... a lot of HOT new terran/zerg players have been constantly been coming up through code a/code s but almost no protoss players beside Alicia/creator that I can think of (and who are still in code a or code b i believe?). Also a lot of skill IS based on ladder, how much you play on it, your ranking in GM, and how many games you play. Although ladder definitely doesn't define a player you can still see a lot of good players raping the ladder before making some strong debut in GSL. There really hasn't been any strong protoss ladder players beside the already known. (as im writting this post in the top 20 or so of gm there are roughly 2 protoss , 2 zerg , and the rest terran)
so altho i agree the game isn't completely balanced the protoss players in korea aren't exactly the best ever either
Do you think its only a coincidence that T and Z have more upcoming players? Or do you also feel that as a race, Protoss lacks the opportunity to showcase multitasking and the ability to attack multiple fronts to demonstrate clear multitasking superiority vs a person with lesser skills?
I dont know, when I play toss I feel the need to play defensively because of the lack of super fast/effective harass units like speedlings/hellions/banshees/mutas or just stimmed bio drops. DTs are costly investment that is incredibly easily countered. So even when I win I always get the feel that I just made a big ball while defending pressure and then a-moved to victory. I don't get the feel of exhilaration that I get when my hellion just roasted 8 probes in the enemy mineral line and got away safely into a waiting medivac, while simultaneously expanding and ramping up my production, and getting ready to drop my next round of units. Its just feels like there are so many options to do guaranteed damage as terran which are not available when playing toss.
On June 04 2011 21:21 Liquid`HuK wrote: To shed some honest truth on the situation because me and jinro were actually talking about this the other day walking to gym, when you think about a lot of the protoss players in code/a code s most of them are OLD as far as sc2 is concerned. Most of the player have been involved in the game since the beginning and have been consistently mediocre throughout. Unlike the other races... a lot of HOT new terran/zerg players have been constantly been coming up through code a/code s but almost no protoss players beside Alicia/creator that I can think of (and who are still in code a or code b i believe?). Also a lot of skill IS based on ladder, how much you play on it, your ranking in GM, and how many games you play. Although ladder definitely doesn't define a player you can still see a lot of good players raping the ladder before making some strong debut in GSL. There really hasn't been any strong protoss ladder players beside the already known. (as im writting this post in the top 20 or so of gm there are roughly 2 protoss , 2 zerg , and the rest terran)
so altho i agree the game isn't completely balanced the protoss players in korea aren't exactly the best ever either
Riveting discovery Dr. Watson. Looking at the Up and Down from this years GSLs only 4 Protoss's have been on the Top 8, BanBanth, Killer, Alicia, and yourself Huk (all of which made it into code S, but that's besides the point). BanBanth is also no longer in Code S. May GSL there was no Protoss in the UnD. Interesting stats indeed.
why do you switch because someone is not doing well? switch because YOU are not doing well, not them. for me, i've been playing protoss for the longest time ever. but i've not improved for a long time. so i'm switching to terran to try and adapt to it's stype, and hopefully i can improve at it better.
On June 04 2011 21:21 Liquid`HuK wrote: To shed some honest truth on the situation because me and jinro were actually talking about this the other day walking to gym, when you think about a lot of the protoss players in code/a code s most of them are OLD as far as sc2 is concerned. Most of the player have been involved in the game since the beginning and have been consistently mediocre throughout. Unlike the other races... a lot of HOT new terran/zerg players have been constantly been coming up through code a/code s but almost no protoss players beside Alicia/creator that I can think of (and who are still in code a or code b i believe?). Also a lot of skill IS based on ladder, how much you play on it, your ranking in GM, and how many games you play. Although ladder definitely doesn't define a player you can still see a lot of good players raping the ladder before making some strong debut in GSL. There really hasn't been any strong protoss ladder players beside the already known. (as im writting this post in the top 20 or so of gm there are roughly 2 protoss , 2 zerg , and the rest terran)
so altho i agree the game isn't completely balanced the protoss players in korea aren't exactly the best ever either
Hmm, that's definitely very interesting, thanks for the insight Huk!
What I really don't understand is, but why exactly do you think there are so little up and coming protoss players though? I really have a hard time believing that all the talented players just happen to be playing terran/zerg. I could be flat out wrong but its my personal opinion that its precisely because protoss have had so much trouble in general is why people are opting for terran and zerg (after all, surely a lot of top ladder players in Korea have interest in playing for like GSL right?)
On June 04 2011 21:21 Liquid`HuK wrote: To shed some honest truth on the situation because me and jinro were actually talking about this the other day walking to gym, when you think about a lot of the protoss players in code/a code s most of them are OLD as far as sc2 is concerned. Most of the player have been involved in the game since the beginning and have been consistently mediocre throughout. Unlike the other races... a lot of HOT new terran/zerg players have been constantly been coming up through code a/code s but almost no protoss players beside Alicia/creator that I can think of (and who are still in code a or code b i believe?). Also a lot of skill IS based on ladder, how much you play on it, your ranking in GM, and how many games you play. Although ladder definitely doesn't define a player you can still see a lot of good players raping the ladder before making some strong debut in GSL. There really hasn't been any strong protoss ladder players beside the already known. (as im writting this post in the top 20 or so of gm there are roughly 2 protoss , 2 zerg , and the rest terran)
so altho i agree the game isn't completely balanced the protoss players in korea aren't exactly the best ever either
What I would like to know from pro-toss players like you is, why you don't actually complaining about toss different tech trees besides robo->Colossi? IdrA always complains about Zergs Scouting abilities or Zerg Late game etc. but I haven' t heard a single Pro-toss raging about Carriers which are basicly useless at the higher level of gaming since the fucking beta. All I see is some stupid Mothership at the end, when the battle is already over or was build for a funny reason but complaining about the usefullness of Carriers is kinda non existent for Pro.toss players.
The main problem with Protoss I think is that their Tier 1/1.5 armies are so entirely dependent of Forcefeilds or Blink Micro and If you screw up either one of those (or run out of FF energy) then your Army just dies to Terran and Zerg T1/T,5.
This is I think due to the fundamental problem with the Stalker. If the Stalker was good as the Marauder or Roach then the Warp in Mechanics of Protoss + Blink would make them incredibly overpowered. Thus the protoss stalker has been reduced so badly that protoss does not have a "backbone" unit that it can rely on versus Zerg and Terran. Its also why protoss is also so reliant on Tier 3, which makes the protoss army extremely immobile and unable to harrass or defend efficiently. And By T3 I mean colosus. The other options are pretty crap and you essentially need robos for observers anyway.
Which is why the MKP ghost push and roach timing pushes are so powerful as if you remove the Forcefeilds that split up the opposing armies into manageable chunks ( as with Zerg Burrow + TCs and EMPs) then Protoss T1 just dies.
On June 04 2011 21:21 Liquid`HuK wrote: To shed some honest truth on the situation because me and jinro were actually talking about this the other day walking to gym, when you think about a lot of the protoss players in code/a code s most of them are OLD as far as sc2 is concerned. Most of the player have been involved in the game since the beginning and have been consistently mediocre throughout. Unlike the other races... a lot of HOT new terran/zerg players have been constantly been coming up through code a/code s but almost no protoss players beside Alicia/creator that I can think of (and who are still in code a or code b i believe?). Also a lot of skill IS based on ladder, how much you play on it, your ranking in GM, and how many games you play. Although ladder definitely doesn't define a player you can still see a lot of good players raping the ladder before making some strong debut in GSL. There really hasn't been any strong protoss ladder players beside the already known. (as im writting this post in the top 20 or so of gm there are roughly 2 protoss , 2 zerg , and the rest terran)
so altho i agree the game isn't completely balanced the protoss players in korea aren't exactly the best ever either
What I would like to know from pro-toss players like you is, why you don't actually complaining about toss different tech trees besides robo->Colossi? IdrA always complains about Zergs Scouting abilities or Zerg Late game etc. but I haven' t heard a single Pro-toss raging about Carriers which are basicly useless at the higher level of gaming since the fucking beta. All I see is some stupid Mothership at the end, when the battle is already over or was build for a funny reason but complaining about the usefullness of Carriers is kinda non existent for Pro.toss players.
Hope you will give me an answer about that.
Some people (or whole races) have class and try to figure things out / make things work / search for things / try to improve themselfes instead of whining and letting others do the work.
Well, as a protoss player, I can't say that the race is UP, or the rest are OP, the thing is toss openings and metagame haven't changed all that dramatically. I have been trying something different these days in each MU and the results are sad. Zerg's game has improved significantly, although it is still trendy for zerg players to whine. Btw is this hate towards toss considered as racism? ;D
On June 04 2011 21:21 Liquid`HuK wrote: To shed some honest truth on the situation because me and jinro were actually talking about this the other day walking to gym, when you think about a lot of the protoss players in code/a code s most of them are OLD as far as sc2 is concerned. Most of the player have been involved in the game since the beginning and have been consistently mediocre throughout. Unlike the other races... a lot of HOT new terran/zerg players have been constantly been coming up through code a/code s but almost no protoss players beside Alicia/creator that I can think of (and who are still in code a or code b i believe?). Also a lot of skill IS based on ladder, how much you play on it, your ranking in GM, and how many games you play. Although ladder definitely doesn't define a player you can still see a lot of good players raping the ladder before making some strong debut in GSL. There really hasn't been any strong protoss ladder players beside the already known. (as im writting this post in the top 20 or so of gm there are roughly 2 protoss , 2 zerg , and the rest terran)
so altho i agree the game isn't completely balanced the protoss players in korea aren't exactly the best ever either
Do you think its only a coincidence that T and Z have more upcoming players? Or do you also feel that as a race, Protoss lacks the opportunity to showcase multitasking and the ability to attack multiple fronts to demonstrate clear multitasking superiority vs a person with lesser skills?
I dont know, when I play toss I feel the need to play defensively because of the lack of super fast/effective harass units like speedlings/hellions/banshees/mutas or just stimmed bio drops. DTs are costly investment that is incredibly easily countered. So even when I win I always get the feel that I just made a big ball while defending pressure and then a-moved to victory. I don't get the feel of exhilaration that I get when my hellion just roasted 8 probes in the enemy mineral line and got away safely into a waiting medivac, while simultaneously expanding and ramping up my production, and getting ready to drop my next round of units. Its just feels like there are so many options to do guaranteed damage as terran which are not available when playing toss.
So the best player that posts in the entire thread says you are wrong and you still think you are right. Congrats T.T
On June 04 2011 21:21 Liquid`HuK wrote: To shed some honest truth on the situation because me and jinro were actually talking about this the other day walking to gym, when you think about a lot of the protoss players in code/a code s most of them are OLD as far as sc2 is concerned. Most of the player have been involved in the game since the beginning and have been consistently mediocre throughout. Unlike the other races... a lot of HOT new terran/zerg players have been constantly been coming up through code a/code s but almost no protoss players beside Alicia/creator that I can think of (and who are still in code a or code b i believe?). Also a lot of skill IS based on ladder, how much you play on it, your ranking in GM, and how many games you play. Although ladder definitely doesn't define a player you can still see a lot of good players raping the ladder before making some strong debut in GSL. There really hasn't been any strong protoss ladder players beside the already known. (as im writting this post in the top 20 or so of gm there are roughly 2 protoss , 2 zerg , and the rest terran)
so altho i agree the game isn't completely balanced the protoss players in korea aren't exactly the best ever either
i think a large issue as to why there aren't so many "young" protoss players is becasue the race itself has lost all appeal.
Lets say multi-tasking is ur strong suit. What is there to do for protoss but use multi-tasking to defend only cause our dt's don't fly and our immortals don't stim -.-.
Lets say ur strong suit is micro. Microing zealots - useless, perfectly microd blink stalker, still cost ineffecient, microing a ff'd colossus, that requires micro?
Lets say ur strong suit is macro. so ur zerg opponent can 14 hatch and u can't do anything about it but if u 15 nexus you die o.o? they 1 rax e and u 2 gate ur behind, u 1 gate fe and they 2 rax you die? macro definitely won't reward you here.
Lets say ur strong suit is inventing build orders (mc here). Seems to me like if detection being the robo wasn't convincing enough, the hardcore nerfs to the other tech trees sure put the nail in the coffin.
I only switched from terran to protoss (pre mc) because i felt that warp in storm had huge potential now in one bad patch after another all that potential seems gone, so why would any young person who wants to win a gsl (cause thats where the money is at) play a race with little to no potential cause as the skill cap gets higher the worse it is for you.
On June 04 2011 21:21 Liquid`HuK wrote: To shed some honest truth on the situation because me and jinro were actually talking about this the other day walking to gym, when you think about a lot of the protoss players in code/a code s most of them are OLD as far as sc2 is concerned. Most of the player have been involved in the game since the beginning and have been consistently mediocre throughout. Unlike the other races... a lot of HOT new terran/zerg players have been constantly been coming up through code a/code s but almost no protoss players beside Alicia/creator that I can think of (and who are still in code a or code b i believe?). Also a lot of skill IS based on ladder, how much you play on it, your ranking in GM, and how many games you play. Although ladder definitely doesn't define a player you can still see a lot of good players raping the ladder before making some strong debut in GSL. There really hasn't been any strong protoss ladder players beside the already known. (as im writting this post in the top 20 or so of gm there are roughly 2 protoss , 2 zerg , and the rest terran)
so altho i agree the game isn't completely balanced the protoss players in korea aren't exactly the best ever either
What I would like to know from pro-toss players like you is, why you don't actually complaining about toss different tech trees besides robo->Colossi? IdrA always complains about Zergs Scouting abilities or Zerg Late game etc. but I haven' t heard a single Pro-toss raging about Carriers which are basicly useless at the higher level of gaming since the fucking beta. All I see is some stupid Mothership at the end, when the battle is already over or was build for a funny reason but complaining about the usefullness of Carriers is kinda non existent for Pro.toss players.
Hope you will give me an answer about that.
Some people (or whole races) have class and try to figure things out / make things work / search for things / try to improve themselfes instead of whining and letting others do the work.
What ? So you are on of the players who actually think that HuK is a player who says: the Carrier is fine, people have just to figure it out, the game is new but somehow nobody uses them effectivley in the GSL or any big tournament ?
I guess now is time for protoss to develop new strategies. Zergs have already found the way how to counter all the protoss basic builds, against 3gate expand etc they usually do roach timing pushes which have been very successful @ GSL. Im really looking foward to see what kind of new strategies our protoss players are going to use in future. Protoss is NOT up, protoss players have just used the same strategies too much, while zerg and terran have made some crazy new builds. Its sad that MC drop in ro64 againist protoss.. he had some very nice strategies against IdrA and Ret yesterday @ MLG.
On June 04 2011 21:21 Liquid`HuK wrote: To shed some honest truth on the situation because me and jinro were actually talking about this the other day walking to gym, when you think about a lot of the protoss players in code/a code s most of them are OLD as far as sc2 is concerned. Most of the player have been involved in the game since the beginning and have been consistently mediocre throughout. Unlike the other races... a lot of HOT new terran/zerg players have been constantly been coming up through code a/code s but almost no protoss players beside Alicia/creator that I can think of (and who are still in code a or code b i believe?). Also a lot of skill IS based on ladder, how much you play on it, your ranking in GM, and how many games you play. Although ladder definitely doesn't define a player you can still see a lot of good players raping the ladder before making some strong debut in GSL. There really hasn't been any strong protoss ladder players beside the already known. (as im writting this post in the top 20 or so of gm there are roughly 2 protoss , 2 zerg , and the rest terran)
so altho i agree the game isn't completely balanced the protoss players in korea aren't exactly the best ever either
Do you think its only a coincidence that T and Z have more upcoming players? Or do you also feel that as a race, Protoss lacks the opportunity to showcase multitasking and the ability to attack multiple fronts to demonstrate clear multitasking superiority vs a person with lesser skills?
I dont know, when I play toss I feel the need to play defensively because of the lack of super fast/effective harass units like speedlings/hellions/banshees/mutas or just stimmed bio drops. DTs are costly investment that is incredibly easily countered. So even when I win I always get the feel that I just made a big ball while defending pressure and then a-moved to victory. I don't get the feel of exhilaration that I get when my hellion just roasted 8 probes in the enemy mineral line and got away safely into a waiting medivac, while simultaneously expanding and ramping up my production, and getting ready to drop my next round of units. Its just feels like there are so many options to do guaranteed damage as terran which are not available when playing toss.
I want to address this point of "Protoss have little or no harass potential." A lot of Protoss are under the perception that Terran and Zerg just DO these harassing maneuvers, and they always pay off. Even if they don't pay off, they are much easier to execute. Truthfully, though, there are tons of times where T and Z HAVE to harass just to keep up.
That's probably the biggest difference between Protoss and the other 2 races in regards to harassment. Since it becomes required in many ways, it becomes part of the path to getting better. When there is no other way to win in some cases with relatively similar builds and macro, that harassment becomes a requirement (from Z and T) in order to win.
This definitely doesn't mean that Protoss have fewer options or worse options for harassment, just that they aren't as well defined and explored. If you feel that you can comfortably win by simply defending until X occurs, then why take big risks with harassment? It's not that you or other Protoss consciously make the decision to develop harassment oriented builds, it's that you win without them and you don't see how to fit that into your current build.
On June 04 2011 21:49 Mairou wrote: I guess now is time for protoss to develop new strategies. Zergs have already found the way how to counter all the protoss basic builds, against 3gate expand etc they usually do roach timing pushes which have been very successful @ GSL. Im really looking foward to see what kind of new strategies our protoss players are going to use in future. Protoss is NOT up, protoss players have just used the same strategies too much, while zerg and terran have made some crazy new builds. Its sad that MC drop in ro64 againist protoss.. he had some very nice strategies against IdrA and Ret yesterday @ MLG.
Yes, this is what protoss players are doing, we're figuring out new builds (which coincidently I don't understand why we don't have a build order on the Slayers_Frozen 2 gas before core stargate pressure expand.)
We need to see what MC and Alicia do against these new builds.
On June 04 2011 21:21 Liquid`HuK wrote: To shed some honest truth on the situation because me and jinro were actually talking about this the other day walking to gym, when you think about a lot of the protoss players in code/a code s most of them are OLD as far as sc2 is concerned. Most of the player have been involved in the game since the beginning and have been consistently mediocre throughout. Unlike the other races... a lot of HOT new terran/zerg players have been constantly been coming up through code a/code s but almost no protoss players beside Alicia/creator that I can think of (and who are still in code a or code b i believe?). Also a lot of skill IS based on ladder, how much you play on it, your ranking in GM, and how many games you play. Although ladder definitely doesn't define a player you can still see a lot of good players raping the ladder before making some strong debut in GSL. There really hasn't been any strong protoss ladder players beside the already known. (as im writting this post in the top 20 or so of gm there are roughly 2 protoss , 2 zerg , and the rest terran)
so altho i agree the game isn't completely balanced the protoss players in korea aren't exactly the best ever either
What I would like to know from pro-toss players like you is, why you don't actually complaining about toss different tech trees besides robo->Colossi? IdrA always complains about Zergs Scouting abilities or Zerg Late game etc. but I haven' t heard a single Pro-toss raging about Carriers which are basicly useless at the higher level of gaming since the fucking beta. All I see is some stupid Mothership at the end, when the battle is already over or was build for a funny reason but complaining about the usefullness of Carriers is kinda non existent for Pro.toss players.
Hope you will give me an answer about that.
Some people (or whole races) have class and try to figure things out / make things work / search for things / try to improve themselfes instead of whining and letting others do the work.
What ? So you are on of the players who actually think that HuK is a player who says: the Carrier is fine, people have just to figure it out, the game is new but somehow nobody uses them effectivley in the GSL or any big tournament ?
Yeah he probably is. IdrA must be the only player in the world who doesn't try to figure stuff out. /s
On June 04 2011 21:21 Liquid`HuK wrote: To shed some honest truth on the situation because me and jinro were actually talking about this the other day walking to gym, when you think about a lot of the protoss players in code/a code s most of them are OLD as far as sc2 is concerned. Most of the player have been involved in the game since the beginning and have been consistently mediocre throughout. Unlike the other races... a lot of HOT new terran/zerg players have been constantly been coming up through code a/code s but almost no protoss players beside Alicia/creator that I can think of (and who are still in code a or code b i believe?). Also a lot of skill IS based on ladder, how much you play on it, your ranking in GM, and how many games you play. Although ladder definitely doesn't define a player you can still see a lot of good players raping the ladder before making some strong debut in GSL. There really hasn't been any strong protoss ladder players beside the already known. (as im writting this post in the top 20 or so of gm there are roughly 2 protoss , 2 zerg , and the rest terran)
so altho i agree the game isn't completely balanced the protoss players in korea aren't exactly the best ever either
What I would like to know from pro-toss players like you is, why you don't actually complaining about toss different tech trees besides robo->Colossi? IdrA always complains about Zergs Scouting abilities or Zerg Late game etc. but I haven' t heard a single Pro-toss raging about Carriers which are basicly useless at the higher level of gaming since the fucking beta. All I see is some stupid Mothership at the end, when the battle is already over or was build for a funny reason but complaining about the usefullness of Carriers is kinda non existent for Pro.toss players.
Hope you will give me an answer about that.
While i don't want to go much into racial imbalance, and while i'm certainly not Huk, i'd say that carriers suffer from the same problem that ultralisks do, they're a decent unit, but outclassed by units which are easier to get, the carrier might have the highest dps of all units in the game, but the tech path and the amount of resources you pour into it rarely makes it worth it, while the voidray dosen't require a fleet beacon, is faster, and isn't cursed with being massive, so basicly, they're a good unit, but they have no purpose when voidrays exist, neither does ultralisks have a purpose when brood lords exist, other than making a tech switch if the terran makes a lot of anti-air, or doing some funky strategy.
I never really understood the hatred towards the motherhship, it has a cloaking field, a mass recall, and the strongest spell in the game: "Vortex" which removes a large portion of the enemy army, letting your already very cost-effective protoss deathball roll over with ease, unless the enemy moves all his units into the vortex, in which case you set up for a conclave around the vortex and storm the shit out of it.
I do agree that carriers need some kind of niche to actually have a role in the game, but perhaps it should simply be removed, as protoss already have several units more than zerg.
Worst part is that people will never learn. Around the last mlg every other interview consisted of a "pros" blaming their losses on protoss being imba and the forums/reddit got swamped with pictures/comments of the same nature. Now im not even a protoss player myself, but attempting to reason with (mostly zerg) fanboys during that time got me flamed to oblivion by know-it-all's. Protoss never was overpowered, nor is zerg overpowered now - they simply had to evolve their metagame and it's obviously bearing fruits.
My guess is that protoss players will have to move away from fast expand turtling into a 200/200 coinflip battle and move towards something like 2 roaming/constant harrassing groups made up of blink stalkers and sentries/zealots/immortal. Also, i feel that the collosus will take on a more base-defensive role togheter with few cannons and a very small numbers of sentries. Occansional warp-prism drops will also be more common.
Again, this is just what i think it will eventually evolve into and i got no credentials or promising builds to back it up.
On June 04 2011 21:39 dooraven wrote: The main problem with Protoss I think is that their Tier 1/1.5 armies are so entirely dependent of Forcefeilds or Blink Micro and If you screw up either one of those (or run out of FF energy) then your Army just dies to Terran and Zerg T1/T,5.
This is I think due to the fundamental problem with the Stalker. If the Stalker was good as the Marauder or Roach then the Warp in Mechanics of Protoss + Blink would make them incredibly overpowered. Thus the protoss stalker has been reduced so badly that protoss does not have a "backbone" unit that it can rely on versus Zerg and Terran. Its also why protoss is also so reliant on Tier 3, which makes the protoss army extremely immobile and unable to harrass or defend efficiently. And By T3 I mean colosus. The other options are pretty crap and you essentially need robos for observers anyway.
Which is why the MKP ghost push and roach timing pushes are so powerful as if you remove the Forcefeilds that split up the opposing armies into manageable chunks ( as with Zerg Burrow + TCs and EMPs) then Protoss T1 just dies.
,
I guess this is what it is really about. No matter if Protoss were doing well or bad, I never had the feeling that any Protoss player really liked the way Protoss has to be played.
Protoss had some insanely strong early game power with Warpgate and FF abuse, but beyond that there was a vacuum in midgame where you had to survive and get Colossi or HT out. Once you did, you had what was called the deathball being able to steamroll anything in its path.
I really believe that no Protoss player liked this way of playing. No matter how strong the deathball is, its concept is retarded.
The situation now is that the early game of P has significantly been nerfed, it seems that Warpgate timings aren that scary anymore, which kinda let's T and Z control the game. Both and T and Z have pressure builds as well as econ builds that you as a Protoss have to be aware of. However with the buffs to Ghosts (EMP = energy draining psi storm) and infestors (work well with those low gas units like roaches) and the nerf to HT Protoss' late game has gotten way more difficult. Sure, now P has to figure stuff out and it will take time. But no matter what builds arise the core problem remains:
Crappy stalkers and zealots which are balanced around FF, Warpgate and Blink. Why is this bad? It makes matches with Protoss extremely volatile. P does good FFs and abuses them? P wins by a huge margin and crushes its opponent --> FF imba whine (justified I want to add). P messes up FF or gets caught off guard, misses some FF? --> P gets totally crushed. Colossi dead? ---> P gets crushed! 3 Colossi survive after a battle? ---> P rolls over their opponents.
HTs with Amulet were the only way to quickly reinforce cost efficiently for Protoss. If you had lost a battle, Amulet HT would help you stay in the game. But losing Colossi or HT is so unforgiving and will cost you the game if you are not able to win the battle by a huge margin and cripple your opponent.
On June 04 2011 21:52 crabz wrote: lololo again the whine begins
From what I've read, there actually isn't much stupid whining in here. But I bet you probably saw the topic title, saw the Protoss results at the GSL, and assumed that everyone in here was just whining about how Protoss is too weak. No, not really.
Everyone ridiculed me a month and a half ago when I said the tides were changing and Z and T were coming back in a big way. Stick with it Brotoss, most nerfs, smallest time on top, least QQ.
Beyonder's post about how it's terribly hard to scout for what Terran is doing as Protoss so you need to prepare for multiple possibly strategies made me wonder if anyone's had any success with earlygame hallucination scouting? Is viable? Can you get a good scout in and have time to react to most of the Terran strats?
On June 04 2011 22:16 spacemonkeyy wrote: Everyone ridiculed me a month and a half ago when I said the tides were changing and Z and T were coming back in a big way. Stick with it Brotoss, most nerfs, smallest time on top, least QQ.
Really? Least QQ? Apparently you missed the ~400 posts before yours. Almost ALL balance QQ on TL comes from PvZ discussion, from both ends.
Balance swings drastically back and forth all the time, what I think is that next season Protoss will figure out a new strategy (like the roach-ling attack that Z figured out this season) and a different race will make a very poor showing. The game is pretty balanced at the minute overall but that doesn't mean that performance has to be evenly distributed throughout each race
Watching the IdrA vs MC, it looked very tense and pretty much even most of the time.
From a Protoss point of view, though, ZvP has always been my worst match-up. This is because, as Protoss, you are locked into your base because otherwise Roaches or more recently Hydra/bling drops can destroy your whole base/army with ease, so Protoss has to focus on positioning to put down forcefields and have buildings in the way to protect them. Obviously, to have those units your opponent has to have two things: time, and fewer drones while those units are being produced. This means that as Protoss there are 2 ways to play:
1) Timing attack based play.
2) Scout constantly and attack when there are few units and Drones are being made.
________________________________________
1) Obviously, timing attacks eg 4gates, 6gates etc are all timing attacks. However, I would contend that the 200/200 deathball attack is also a timing attack: it relies on your enemy having maxed out on weaker units per supply, etc. If you miss the timing your opponent can get Broodlords etc and suddenly your units are less effective. If you go too early, you get crushed. However, it is also being destroyed by the new style of Zerg - the 'swarm' style, where Zerg switches from Drones to units instantly and suddenly you are being attacked from everywhere.
2) Scout constantly, defend when you can and attack when you see there are few units. This is just another version of the timing attack except rather than being based on a coinflip (did they prepare, which build they are going for) it is based on knowing what they have. Because you have to scout, you dedicate more resources to that so any attacks will be less strong, but it will be guaranteed damage. However, defending certain timing attacks from Zerg that come before you have scouting capabilities (such as Hallu research time or Robo coming up) will be near impossible. Look at PvZ games. Protoss will have zero map control until he goes on a timing attack, and then only for a brief period of time: Protoss will either win or lose there, unless something funky happens.
I also reckon that Colossi have gone past their sell-by-date in PvZ especially. I was never fond of them anyway. There is a window of opportunity where they are fragile and take too many resources to reach while having a great defence as well. They rely on Zerg not attacking at the right time, with the right units etc. If you instead decide to go for them slowly, you risk not having the right unit for dealing with Hydras etc, and it is easier to 'counter' them in the lategame where all the tech is there. I foresee IST (Immortal Stalker Templar) becoming more the standard in PvZ, with Templar to storm Hydras and Feedback Infestors, Stalkers to defend vs... well, pretty much anything early game and Immortals to defend vs Roaches.
On June 04 2011 22:16 spacemonkeyy wrote: Everyone ridiculed me a month and a half ago when I said the tides were changing and Z and T were coming back in a big way. Stick with it Brotoss, most nerfs, smallest time on top, least QQ.
Really? Least QQ? Apparently you missed the ~400 posts before yours. Almost ALL balance QQ on TL comes from PvZ discussion, from both ends.
Maybe you should read the thread instead of assuming it's all balance QQ. It's actually a pretty good discussion (as far as balance discussion threads go) and I really see the "Protoss loses, player is bad, Zerg loses, race is UP" double standard discussion more than balance QQ in the earlier posts in this thread.
Very constructive post m8, really gives you a lot to think about.
It's obvious that threads like this just promote people whining about how underpowered their race is (I play Protoss FWIW). Besides, why would you want to play Zerg because Protoss are doing badly in one tournament? What about the StarsWar where the final 4 players are all Protoss, does that make you want to play Protoss again?
I'm not saying protoss are underpowered, but if most pros have such a hard time playing it then what chance do I have to get good at it :/ Maybe it's a race reserved for very few special ppl like HuK and some others that have quad core brains ^^
On June 04 2011 17:07 Rabiator wrote: IdrA complains a lot about the other races and what he cant do and so on, but he always sounds like only Zerg have to take risks. Well that isnt the case and maybe Protoss have to realize this as well. With Forcefields and the ability to control the battlefield the Protoss have been playing it pretty safe, but maybe its time to adjust and take a little more risks.
Apart from DTs there are very very very few Protoss harasses going on. I am not talking about a bunch of Blink Stalkers jumping in and out of a base, because those are most likely about 90% of the Protoss units. I am more talking about using a Warp Prism to warp in just a few Zealots to disrupt mining and kill a few workers; I am talking about two Immortals in a Warp Prism which are used to snipe a Terrans addons while he is sieging your 3rd / 4th; I am talking about a small bunch of Void Rays (~3) to snipe air defense turrets late game ... there are loads of possibilities, but Protoss do even less harrass than Zerg in mid and late game and that is a key to success.
1.) Tons of protoss play greedy, MC is a prime example and EVERYONE says he either uses abusive timings or plays extremely greedy. Terran plays greedy behind bunkers and zergs play as greedy as humanly possible. Protoss playing greedy is the easiest to exploit in the early and mid game because beyond turtling or timings we are fragile to other race's timings.
2.) Warp prism zealot harass happens all the time. They disrupt mining yeah, at the cost of robo time, 200 mins for warp prism, 100 per zealot, and maybe 2-3 scv or drone deaths before an observant player pulls his scvs away and kills the zealots. Storm drops are still better but an aware player can still pull workers away quickly and you are putting 250 minerals and 300 gas into the hope of killing as many workers as possible. I do see storm drops in the late game even though its a large risk due to vikings and potential turrets up for deterring DTs. Killing 10 workers is nice but still not a huge game changer.
3.) Immortal drops are 700/300 to snipe addons, immortals as part of your army aren't especially great either compared to what could have been a colossi for a bit more time and an additional +50/50.
4.) Void rays aren't going to do anything? In the late game they'll be 0/0, are an expensive tech, worthless in a unit comp unless against zerg and in that case they are better in your army compared to risking them to a horde of corruptors meant for your colossi for the sake of sniping four drones and a couple spores.
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.
Very constructive post m8, really gives you a lot to think about.
It's obvious that threads like this just promote people whining about how underpowered their race is (I play Protoss FWIW). Besides, why would you want to play Zerg because Protoss are doing badly in one tournament? What about the StarsWar where the final 4 players are all Protoss, does that make you want to play Protoss again?
I'm not saying protoss are underpowered, but if most pros have such a hard time playing it then what chance do I have to get good at it :/ Maybe it's a race reserved for very few special ppl like HuK and some others that have quad core brains ^^
Tl;dr: OP, inconsistent protoss performance is business as usual in the GSL.
Lol funny thing, your post was actually longer.. (but I did read it (; dw)
and yet they remain overrepresented in all higher leagues with the exception of gm and dominate most tournaments outside korea..
Could be the fact that Non Korean players like to turtle up and rolling you with a 200/200 army instead of Korean players which like to demonstrate their skill by harassing the shit out of you , gaining little advantage with each step....but ooh Toss hasn' t a single cost efective harass unit and warp prism are kinda shit compared to proxy pylons.
My posts seems pretty dumb about this but I actually find some glimmer of true in that xD
Very constructive post m8, really gives you a lot to think about.
It's obvious that threads like this just promote people whining about how underpowered their race is (I play Protoss FWIW). Besides, why would you want to play Zerg because Protoss are doing badly in one tournament? What about the StarsWar where the final 4 players are all Protoss, does that make you want to play Protoss again?
I'm not saying protoss are underpowered, but if most pros have such a hard time playing it then what chance do I have to get good at it :/ Maybe it's a race reserved for very few special ppl like HuK and some others that have quad core brains ^^
Tl;dr: OP, inconsistent protoss performance is business as usual in the GSL.
Lol funny thing, your post was actually longer.. (but I did read it (; dw)
and yet they remain overrepresented in all higher leagues with the exception of gm and dominate most tournaments outside korea..
Not sure what overrepresentation in lower leagues has to do with anything, or why you can just sweep aside results from the epicenter of competitive SC2.
Something doesn't add up, and I think it's that the QQ about protoss is not dying down fast enough.
On June 04 2011 17:07 Rabiator wrote: IdrA complains a lot about the other races and what he cant do and so on, but he always sounds like only Zerg have to take risks. Well that isnt the case and maybe Protoss have to realize this as well. With Forcefields and the ability to control the battlefield the Protoss have been playing it pretty safe, but maybe its time to adjust and take a little more risks.
Apart from DTs there are very very very few Protoss harasses going on. I am not talking about a bunch of Blink Stalkers jumping in and out of a base, because those are most likely about 90% of the Protoss units. I am more talking about using a Warp Prism to warp in just a few Zealots to disrupt mining and kill a few workers; I am talking about two Immortals in a Warp Prism which are used to snipe a Terrans addons while he is sieging your 3rd / 4th; I am talking about a small bunch of Void Rays (~3) to snipe air defense turrets late game ... there are loads of possibilities, but Protoss do even less harrass than Zerg in mid and late game and that is a key to success.
1.) Tons of protoss play greedy, MC is a prime example and EVERYONE says he either uses abusive timings or plays extremely greedy. Terran plays greedy behind bunkers and zergs play as greedy as humanly possible. Protoss playing greedy is the easiest to exploit in the early and mid game because beyond turtling or timings we are fragile to other race's timings.
2.) Warp prism zealot harass happens all the time. They disrupt mining yeah, at the cost of robo time, 200 mins for warp prism, 100 per zealot, and maybe 2-3 scv or drone deaths before an observant player pulls his scvs away and kills the zealots. Storm drops are still better but an aware player can still pull workers away quickly and you are putting 250 minerals and 300 gas into the hope of killing as many workers as possible. I do see storm drops in the late game even though its a large risk due to vikings and potential turrets up for deterring DTs. Killing 10 workers is nice but still not a huge game changer.
3.) Immortal drops are 700/300 to snipe addons, immortals as part of your army aren't especially great either compared to what could have been a colossi for a bit more time and an additional +50/50.
4.) Void rays aren't going to do anything? In the late game they'll be 0/0, are an expensive tech, worthless in a unit comp unless against zerg and in that case they are better in your army compared to risking them to a horde of corruptors meant for your colossi for the sake of sniping four drones and a couple spores.
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.
Mc did said Stargate harass against Idra on Metalopolis in the MLG + Show Spoiler +
Didn't help, he was behind 120/130 to 180 supply i think it was.
I think especially in ZvP protoss needs a way to deny / delay the third from zerg as long as possible. Nearly every game i see a zerg gets an easy third (without protoss forge fe) he seems to get ahead so ridiculously fast. I think protoss needs to invent builds that go to snipe that third, be it blink stalkers, stargate or immortal drops. I think that's what we need to aim for at the moment, our builds are mostly safe if executed well, but we need to find something in the midgame. Our midgame is our biggest hole imo. Our current builds are either kill him midgame with a warpgate timing or turtle and surrender map control. We need something were we don't go all-in, yet remain present on the map and deal damage / show presence while taking a third and teching up. Seems hard, yet it's possible. In BW zerg managed to do it in ZvT as well.
Very constructive post m8, really gives you a lot to think about.
It's obvious that threads like this just promote people whining about how underpowered their race is (I play Protoss FWIW). Besides, why would you want to play Zerg because Protoss are doing badly in one tournament? What about the StarsWar where the final 4 players are all Protoss, does that make you want to play Protoss again?
I'm not saying protoss are underpowered, but if most pros have such a hard time playing it then what chance do I have to get good at it :/ Maybe it's a race reserved for very few special ppl like HuK and some others that have quad core brains ^^
Tl;dr: OP, inconsistent protoss performance is business as usual in the GSL.
Lol funny thing, your post was actually longer.. (but I did read it (; dw)
and yet they remain overrepresented in all higher leagues with the exception of gm and dominate most tournaments outside korea..
Not sure what overrepresentation in lower leagues has to do with anything, or why you can just sweep aside results from the epicenter of competitive SC2.
Something doesn't add up, and I think it's that the QQ about protoss is not dying down fast enough.
XD "epicenter." If you haven't noticed, the world is doing a damn good job of keeping the talent spread around on different continents, many of which have damn good Protoss. Korea is not one of those places with good Protoss.
Problem with Protoss is they are 100% dependent on Sentry,
You basically have one attack with sentry and you just gotta pick the timing right. If you push out a bit to force units rather than drones and he attacks you and kill your sentry you're dead. If you wait too much and he drones too hard and just outmacros you, he'll attack, kill sentry then remax and you're dead.
That said players have to find new ways to win games other than relying 100% on sentry. Maybe experimenting with HT Immortal army would be good, mix in DT and Blink stalkers too I guess.
It's possible to have a more mobile army than roach hydra and just deny expansion as well.
Also I think the biggest issue is Zerg looked for ways to beat protoss for like 3-4 months straight and now it's time for protoss to find ways to beat zerg. It's not all about the balance, but how you use your units and how you play the game overall.
Lotsof things in BW got figured out 10 years after the game got released.
See the problem with that is this harassment needs loads of gas. It'll work good enough but getting VR, Pheonix, A Robo, Immortals, etc requires loads of gas. Which means you'll need to be on 3+ bases and well.. a 3+ base protoss can do whatever he wants really.
Terran and Zerg drops are great because they load up their T1 units and attack with them (and even Terran Medivacs drops usually stop after mutalisks are out) and the fact that their drop ships are actually used for things other than drops.
Protoss can't really do this because as I stated our T1 pretty much is terrible without forcefeilds. Add to the fact that the warp prism is incredibly fragile, you'll see how hard it is for protoss to harass due to the lack of good T1 units.
On June 04 2011 17:07 Rabiator wrote: IdrA complains a lot about the other races and what he cant do and so on, but he always sounds like only Zerg have to take risks. Well that isnt the case and maybe Protoss have to realize this as well. With Forcefields and the ability to control the battlefield the Protoss have been playing it pretty safe, but maybe its time to adjust and take a little more risks.
Apart from DTs there are very very very few Protoss harasses going on. I am not talking about a bunch of Blink Stalkers jumping in and out of a base, because those are most likely about 90% of the Protoss units. I am more talking about using a Warp Prism to warp in just a few Zealots to disrupt mining and kill a few workers; I am talking about two Immortals in a Warp Prism which are used to snipe a Terrans addons while he is sieging your 3rd / 4th; I am talking about a small bunch of Void Rays (~3) to snipe air defense turrets late game ... there are loads of possibilities, but Protoss do even less harrass than Zerg in mid and late game and that is a key to success.
1.) Tons of protoss play greedy, MC is a prime example and EVERYONE says he either uses abusive timings or plays extremely greedy. Terran plays greedy behind bunkers and zergs play as greedy as humanly possible. Protoss playing greedy is the easiest to exploit in the early and mid game because beyond turtling or timings we are fragile to other race's timings.
2.) Warp prism zealot harass happens all the time. They disrupt mining yeah, at the cost of robo time, 200 mins for warp prism, 100 per zealot, and maybe 2-3 scv or drone deaths before an observant player pulls his scvs away and kills the zealots. Storm drops are still better but an aware player can still pull workers away quickly and you are putting 250 minerals and 300 gas into the hope of killing as many workers as possible. I do see storm drops in the late game even though its a large risk due to vikings and potential turrets up for deterring DTs. Killing 10 workers is nice but still not a huge game changer.
3.) Immortal drops are 700/300 to snipe addons, immortals as part of your army aren't especially great either compared to what could have been a colossi for a bit more time and an additional +50/50.
4.) Void rays aren't going to do anything? In the late game they'll be 0/0, are an expensive tech, worthless in a unit comp unless against zerg and in that case they are better in your army compared to risking them to a horde of corruptors meant for your colossi for the sake of sniping four drones and a couple spores.
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.
Greed is the same as taking a risk.
you want protoss to split his army and do multi-pronged, have you ever played protoss? that is what your enemy want you to do...
phoenix void rays and DT, are coin flips that only work when your opponent is bad. Spoiler alert + Show Spoiler +
game 1 mlg IdrA x MC, even MC catching the first idra drop, it was not enought to change the fact that he oppened stargate, and idra only saw the void ray when it was allready done and on the way, he put spore c on the last second and lost nothing, in the interview he said that the game was almost won when MC's stargate tech did nothing.
zerg's were buffed many times, and just learned how to do timming attacks that protoss was allready using long before. and zerg learned that 200 supply roachs only work when your opponent is not with 200 supply too...
On June 04 2011 23:16 Mercury- wrote: So... basically Protoss is the weakest race again because MC lost in the first round of the Super Tournament...
In a mirror matchup.
The discussion in this thread has evolved beyond that. But I guess you didn't read it. Quite educated, the problems of P are being discussed and yeah we will see how things will turn out.
LOL at all the people calling protoss players shit. I wont complain about balance but since the last patch its too soon to judge, the two best toss drew each other r1 but Alicia could still go on and win it. Lets just wait and see.
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
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 23:33 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
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.
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.
"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.
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
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.
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.
4-Gate would be unstoppable though, unfortunately.
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.
yeah, this thread not being closed yet, show they are doing better than zergs...
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
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.
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.
4-Gate would be unstoppable though, unfortunately.
remove warpgate and buff zealot stalker more... =P
PS: how you know? 4 gate only works when your opponent is greed (except PvP) and right now 4-gate can't even kill a greed zerg, it's an all win and I see no problem protoss being able to kill greed zergs (early expand, 0 units, no spine, etc).
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
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.
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.
4-Gate would be unstoppable though, unfortunately.
Hmm, not to sure about that. But hey, everyone from all races complains about Warpgate as well (defender's advantage and so on) I wouldn't mind any severe changes to it. There has been lots of discussion on what to do with Warpgates and maybe in HotS Blizz will put it to the Twilight council or whatever.
On June 04 2011 17:07 Rabiator wrote: IdrA complains a lot about the other races and what he cant do and so on, but he always sounds like only Zerg have to take risks. Well that isnt the case and maybe Protoss have to realize this as well. With Forcefields and the ability to control the battlefield the Protoss have been playing it pretty safe, but maybe its time to adjust and take a little more risks.
Apart from DTs there are very very very few Protoss harasses going on. I am not talking about a bunch of Blink Stalkers jumping in and out of a base, because those are most likely about 90% of the Protoss units. I am more talking about using a Warp Prism to warp in just a few Zealots to disrupt mining and kill a few workers; I am talking about two Immortals in a Warp Prism which are used to snipe a Terrans addons while he is sieging your 3rd / 4th; I am talking about a small bunch of Void Rays (~3) to snipe air defense turrets late game ... there are loads of possibilities, but Protoss do even less harrass than Zerg in mid and late game and that is a key to success.
1.) Tons of protoss play greedy, MC is a prime example and EVERYONE says he either uses abusive timings or plays extremely greedy. Terran plays greedy behind bunkers and zergs play as greedy as humanly possible. Protoss playing greedy is the easiest to exploit in the early and mid game because beyond turtling or timings we are fragile to other race's timings.
2.) Warp prism zealot harass happens all the time. They disrupt mining yeah, at the cost of robo time, 200 mins for warp prism, 100 per zealot, and maybe 2-3 scv or drone deaths before an observant player pulls his scvs away and kills the zealots. Storm drops are still better but an aware player can still pull workers away quickly and you are putting 250 minerals and 300 gas into the hope of killing as many workers as possible. I do see storm drops in the late game even though its a large risk due to vikings and potential turrets up for deterring DTs. Killing 10 workers is nice but still not a huge game changer.
3.) Immortal drops are 700/300 to snipe addons, immortals as part of your army aren't especially great either compared to what could have been a colossi for a bit more time and an additional +50/50.
4.) Void rays aren't going to do anything? In the late game they'll be 0/0, are an expensive tech, worthless in a unit comp unless against zerg and in that case they are better in your army compared to risking them to a horde of corruptors meant for your colossi for the sake of sniping four drones and a couple spores.
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.
What? Honestly, not trying to be rude, what level do you play at?
There won't be a necessary powerful response to void rays and phoenix. Phoenix themselves can't do much until there are a large amount of them. You say this as a late game strategy, they will be 0-0, upgraded marines or hydras will tear through them. DT is superior in all ways because you can make archons and get map control, and both die to the same thing (spores/turrets) so you might as well be getting the DTs. They will already have vikings and corruptors to deal with colossi and if you don't get those colossi you will get overrun. Why would you even get one or two carriers...seriously this post just doesn't make sense. There is no point to having one or two random carriers taking up minerals/gas because they get better as you get more and vikings will already be out to deal with colossi.
As for expensive techs and Terrans having to get a Starport or two...what? Are you serious? Do you have any idea how amazing medivacs are for the bioball? They are a complete game changer in TvP that pretty much signify the terran movement into mid-game. Those same reactored starports are later used to pump out vikings as well.
Sorry but I don't think this is the answer. Expensive stargate units that are useless in a real late game combat just to do a couple hundred minerals worth of damage?
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 125-50 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!
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.
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: 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.
This is also slightly odd. Baneling bombs on min lines aren't really an issue. Proper minimap attention and reaction time negates these so much. Banelings TvZ is also a non-issue. Current TvZ issues more revolve around the infestors ability to crush non split marines and deal with any form of mech. People are slowing getting better at dealing with them though.
Baneling bombing in PvZ has been around for awhile and it seems quite nice. Proper blink control, target firing and splitting negates them quite a lot. The combination of fungal and baneling bombs is quite effective though.
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.
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?
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
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!
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.
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.
First, stalkers cost 125/50, not 125/75. That said, they are bad units, until they get blink, then they become fantastic because of micro options. Their dps is god awful, their benefit is that they have a lot of health and armor so they just don't die rapidly.
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.
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?
There's more factors in a game then just "x is meant to counter y"
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.
This is already the case. If I'am playing ladder games and do a Forge+Expand build against a Zerg, he normally screw his game plan and try to stop me with an early Mass Roach Attack which is quite difficult to hold at a time where you just have a handful of Canons and some Sentry/Stalkers. At this stage of the game I go for a quick Stargate into Void Ray and Chronoboost the shit out of it, while delayings his attacks. Suddenly a Void Ray appears and the Zerg is doomed. The Zerg follows with Hydras and additional Queens in case of a Air counterattack but all I do now is going Mass Colossi and roflstomp him. The good thing about that strat is that you don't have to worry about Broodlords/Corruptors cuz you already can produce some Void Rays and nullify his counter to your Colossi.
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
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!
I don't think they should make stalkers better, they should make roaches slightly worse but I don't see it happening. Not even necessarily a nerf to their current state, but making their upgrades only make it +1 attack like stalkers. I think giving stalkers +2 for each upgrade would make them too powerful but roaches should never be able to just roflstomp over stalkers. Even if you made stalkers better they're still just laughable in the PvT matchup for anything but AA and being one of the only units that can actually kind of hit a kiting army. Marauder v. stalker makes roach v. stalker look reasonable.
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.
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: 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.
This is also slightly odd. Baneling bombs on min lines aren't really an issue. Proper minimap attention and reaction time negates these so much. Banelings TvZ is also a non-issue. Current TvZ issues more revolve around the infestors ability to crush non split marines and deal with any form of mech. People are slowing getting better at dealing with them though.
Baneling bombing in PvZ has been around for awhile and it seems quite nice. Proper blink control, target firing and splitting negates them quite a lot. The combination of fungal and baneling bombs is quite effective though.
But Stalkers really do suck against Roaches without forcefield to force some of the units to just sit there and not attack. The Stalker needs attack upgrades and blink to stay even with Roaches which cost 75-25 before you get AOE out.
On June 04 2011 17:07 Rabiator wrote: IdrA complains a lot about the other races and what he cant do and so on, but he always sounds like only Zerg have to take risks. Well that isnt the case and maybe Protoss have to realize this as well. With Forcefields and the ability to control the battlefield the Protoss have been playing it pretty safe, but maybe its time to adjust and take a little more risks.
Apart from DTs there are very very very few Protoss harasses going on. I am not talking about a bunch of Blink Stalkers jumping in and out of a base, because those are most likely about 90% of the Protoss units. I am more talking about using a Warp Prism to warp in just a few Zealots to disrupt mining and kill a few workers; I am talking about two Immortals in a Warp Prism which are used to snipe a Terrans addons while he is sieging your 3rd / 4th; I am talking about a small bunch of Void Rays (~3) to snipe air defense turrets late game ... there are loads of possibilities, but Protoss do even less harrass than Zerg in mid and late game and that is a key to success.
1.) Tons of protoss play greedy, MC is a prime example and EVERYONE says he either uses abusive timings or plays extremely greedy. Terran plays greedy behind bunkers and zergs play as greedy as humanly possible. Protoss playing greedy is the easiest to exploit in the early and mid game because beyond turtling or timings we are fragile to other race's timings.
2.) Warp prism zealot harass happens all the time. They disrupt mining yeah, at the cost of robo time, 200 mins for warp prism, 100 per zealot, and maybe 2-3 scv or drone deaths before an observant player pulls his scvs away and kills the zealots. Storm drops are still better but an aware player can still pull workers away quickly and you are putting 250 minerals and 300 gas into the hope of killing as many workers as possible. I do see storm drops in the late game even though its a large risk due to vikings and potential turrets up for deterring DTs. Killing 10 workers is nice but still not a huge game changer.
3.) Immortal drops are 700/300 to snipe addons, immortals as part of your army aren't especially great either compared to what could have been a colossi for a bit more time and an additional +50/50.
4.) Void rays aren't going to do anything? In the late game they'll be 0/0, are an expensive tech, worthless in a unit comp unless against zerg and in that case they are better in your army compared to risking them to a horde of corruptors meant for your colossi for the sake of sniping four drones and a couple spores.
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.
What? Honestly, not trying to be rude, what level do you play at?
There won't be a necessary powerful response to void rays and phoenix. Phoenix themselves can't do much until there are a large amount of them. You say this as a late game strategy, they will be 0-0, upgraded marines or hydras will tear through them. DT is superior in all ways because you can make archons and get map control, and both die to the same thing (spores/turrets) so you might as well be getting the DTs. They will already have vikings and corruptors to deal with colossi and if you don't get those colossi you will get overrun. Why would you even get one or two carriers...seriously this post just doesn't make sense. There is no point to having one or two random carriers taking up minerals/gas because they get better as you get more and vikings will already be out to deal with colossi.
As for expensive techs and Terrans having to get a Starport or two...what? Are you serious? Do you have any idea how amazing medivacs are for the bioball? They are a complete game changer in TvP that pretty much signify the terran movement into mid-game. Those same reactored starports are later used to pump out vikings as well.
Sorry but I don't think this is the answer. Expensive stargate units that are useless in a real late game combat just to do a couple hundred minerals worth of damage?
You didnt seem to think about what I wrote. Throw away your mantras and read again.
One of the key things is interrupting the rhythm of your opponent. Killing a Spire will require it to be rebuild and give you a window of opportunity to kill those pesky Mutalisks which are harrassing you all the time. Cost efficiency does not matter most of the time. Do you really think that rolling a ton of Banelings into a Planetary Fortress is "cost efficient"? It certainly isnt, but its still worth it because it removes part of the opponents economy and disrupts him. So get rid of that cost efficiency mantra and think how you could do the same to your opponents. Try how many Void Rays you need to kill a key building and support their number by a few hallucinations and / or Phoenixes to pick up 2-3 Queens who might be the only air defense the Zerg has. Be creative instead of a horse with blinkers and if you dont think you can afford it you need to work on your macro.
So Medivacs are awesome and Terrans always get them. Why dont Protoss mix in some Phoenix into their ball of death? Their main point isnt dealing damage but rather taking out key enemy units (and providing vision). In addition "just a few Phoenix" are needed to force your opponent to cover his bases with anti-air defense. Making an opponent spend additional resources is ALWAYS worth it, so stop the propaganda about it being too expensive.
So you dislike Medivacs and Vikings and dont think it is worth disrupting the Terran by killing off Reactors? They take 50 secs to build. Obviously its not worth killing a few of them, right? Wrong! Thats one of the worst things to do to a Terran late game. Since they only cost 50/50 you wont ever think about attacking them, but thats one of the achilles heels of Terran: you cant afford to lose your production facilities, because you cant afford to take off 10 SCVs to rebuild them and the addons. Terrans cant ever speed up their production as Zerg or Protoss can.
On June 05 2011 00:34 Binabik wrote: MC is going to win the MLG, he's playing insane at the moment.
I really want to see he play idra again, i hope he win, don't like idra. i think MC or MMA are the only ones that can defeat Idra (i don't see naniwa defeating idra)
This is also slightly odd. Baneling bombs on min lines aren't really an issue. Proper minimap attention and reaction time negates these so much. Banelings TvZ is also a non-issue. Current TvZ issues more revolve around the infestors ability to crush non split marines and deal with any form of mech. People are slowing getting better at dealing with them though.
Baneling bombing in PvZ has been around for awhile and it seems quite nice. Proper blink control, target firing and splitting negates them quite a lot. The combination of fungal and baneling bombs is quite effective though.
Sure baneling's on mineral lines arent an issue if your sitting in your base..... alot of people use them during battles, or while you out on the map, you cant ALWAYS be starring at your mini map, even pro players let banelings go off on min line, sometimes, its almost unavoidable.
Also, look at storm drop, if you lose that (which you probably will if they have air) Is a huge cost, while the current baneling drop cost can almost be as effective for almost 25% of the cost + tech.
MC is going to win the MLG, he's playing insane at the moment.
To bad MC is better then Idra, and MC got slapped like it's noones business. MC even had perfect FF in game 1 ANd denied a huge drop in the main, but the 1a of Idra was to strong!
This is also slightly odd. Baneling bombs on min lines aren't really an issue. Proper minimap attention and reaction time negates these so much. Banelings TvZ is also a non-issue. Current TvZ issues more revolve around the infestors ability to crush non split marines and deal with any form of mech. People are slowing getting better at dealing with them though.
Baneling bombing in PvZ has been around for awhile and it seems quite nice. Proper blink control, target firing and splitting negates them quite a lot. The combination of fungal and baneling bombs is quite effective though.
Sure baneling's on mineral lines arent an issue if your sitting in your base..... alot of people use them during battles, or while you out on the map, you cant ALWAYS be starring at your mini map, even pro players let banelings go off on min line, sometimes, its almost unavoidable.
Also, look at storm drop, if you lose that (which you probably will if they have air) Is a huge cost, while the current baneling drop cost can almost be as effective for almost 25% of the cost + tech.
MC is going to win the MLG, he's playing insane at the moment.
To bad MC is better then Idra, and MC got slapped like it's noones business. MC even had perfect FF in game 1 ANd denied a huge drop in the main, but the 1a of Idra was to strong!
So you are saying they don't have the multitasking in order to deal with something and thus that thing should be changed? You could make similar arguments for medivac drops mid battle.
as i said before, 1- blizzard needs to make Medivac heal or transport an upgrade option. 2- Banelings should cost more minerals 3- roaches should cost 90minerals not 75 or maybe makes them +1 instead of +2 4- infestor are so fu^$%* op 5- make stalkers have a change vs marauders and roaches
This slump of toss players has nothing to do with balance, I'm not going to talk about balance but I assure you protoss isn't on the short end of the stick. It's simply their players must be in a slump, or they aren't developing their race fast enough, maybe getting a deathball and push style should be changed up. In Broodwar protoss would be on the constant aggression, dropping reavers, hts, dts, harassing with corsairs. There are a ton of good underused units in the arsenal that protoss has.
On June 05 2011 00:38 Binabik wrote: Why would you ever compare Medivas and Phoenixes???
Its just an example how an AIR UNIT can add something new to the Protoss army .... just like the Medivacs add something new to the Terran bio army.
Just refuse to get Stargate units and be inable to kill Overlords who are scouting your base from cliffs OR who might be dropping your base. Its stupid to allow your opponent to have something for free like the vision a Zerg can get with Overlords. You cant follow them everywhere with your Gateway units and Phoenixes are the fastest Protoss units to control the map. If a Zerg has no Hydras / Infestors around you can pick up anything from his army. If a Terran likes his Marauders too much the Tanks and Medivacs are juicy targets to kill.
The whole point I am trying to make is to "forget everything you know and start from zero". Everything you have set in stone should always be questioned.
I don't know if unit tweaking is the right way to go. It has been done by Blizz in the past so many times changing things over and over again. I would lean a bit more towards making some stuff for Protoss more accessable.
I bet that getting rid of the darkshrine and make DTs available from the Archives could be one thing to work out pretty nicely. If you combine it with a Robo it would open up drop options and give Protoss a nice possibility to harass and control the map. Along with it you get Blink or charge and can research Psi-Storm. Might hurt PvT a lot though...
IdrA complains a lot about the other races and what he cant do and so on, but he always sounds like only Zerg have to take risks. Well that isnt the case and maybe Protoss have to realize this as well. With Forcefields and the ability to control the battlefield the Protoss have been playing it pretty safe, but maybe its time to adjust and take a little more risks.
Apart from DTs there are very very very few Protoss harasses going on. I am not talking about a bunch of Blink Stalkers jumping in and out of a base, because those are most likely about 90% of the Protoss units. I am more talking about using a Warp Prism to warp in just a few Zealots to disrupt mining and kill a few workers; I am talking about two Immortals in a Warp Prism which are used to snipe a Terrans addons while he is sieging your 3rd / 4th; I am talking about a small bunch of Void Rays (~3) to snipe air defense turrets late game ... there are loads of possibilities, but Protoss do even less harrass than Zerg in mid and late game and that is a key to success.
1.) Tons of protoss play greedy, MC is a prime example and EVERYONE says he either uses abusive timings or plays extremely greedy. Terran plays greedy behind bunkers and zergs play as greedy as humanly possible. Protoss playing greedy is the easiest to exploit in the early and mid game because beyond turtling or timings we are fragile to other race's timings.
2.) Warp prism zealot harass happens all the time. They disrupt mining yeah, at the cost of robo time, 200 mins for warp prism, 100 per zealot, and maybe 2-3 scv or drone deaths before an observant player pulls his scvs away and kills the zealots. Storm drops are still better but an aware player can still pull workers away quickly and you are putting 250 minerals and 300 gas into the hope of killing as many workers as possible. I do see storm drops in the late game even though its a large risk due to vikings and potential turrets up for deterring DTs. Killing 10 workers is nice but still not a huge game changer.
3.) Immortal drops are 700/300 to snipe addons, immortals as part of your army aren't especially great either compared to what could have been a colossi for a bit more time and an additional +50/50.
4.) Void rays aren't going to do anything? In the late game they'll be 0/0, are an expensive tech, worthless in a unit comp unless against zerg and in that case they are better in your army compared to risking them to a horde of corruptors meant for your colossi for the sake of sniping four drones and a couple spores.
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.
What? Honestly, not trying to be rude, what level do you play at?
There won't be a necessary powerful response to void rays and phoenix. Phoenix themselves can't do much until there are a large amount of them. You say this as a late game strategy, they will be 0-0, upgraded marines or hydras will tear through them. DT is superior in all ways because you can make archons and get map control, and both die to the same thing (spores/turrets) so you might as well be getting the DTs. They will already have vikings and corruptors to deal with colossi and if you don't get those colossi you will get overrun. Why would you even get one or two carriers...seriously this post just doesn't make sense. There is no point to having one or two random carriers taking up minerals/gas because they get better as you get more and vikings will already be out to deal with colossi.
As for expensive techs and Terrans having to get a Starport or two...what? Are you serious? Do you have any idea how amazing medivacs are for the bioball? They are a complete game changer in TvP that pretty much signify the terran movement into mid-game. Those same reactored starports are later used to pump out vikings as well.
Sorry but I don't think this is the answer. Expensive stargate units that are useless in a real late game combat just to do a couple hundred minerals worth of damage?
You didnt seem to think about what I wrote. Throw away your mantras and read again.
One of the key things is interrupting the rhythm of your opponent. Killing a Spire will require it to be rebuild and give you a window of opportunity to kill those pesky Mutalisks which are harrassing you all the time. Cost efficiency does not matter most of the time. Do you really think that rolling a ton of Banelings into a Planetary Fortress is "cost efficient"? It certainly isnt, but its still worth it because it removes part of the opponents economy and disrupts him. So get rid of that cost efficiency mantra and think how you could do the same to your opponents. Try how many Void Rays you need to kill a key building and support their number by a few hallucinations and / or Phoenixes to pick up 2-3 Queens who might be the only air defense the Zerg has. Be creative instead of a horse with blinkers and if you dont think you can afford it you need to work on your macro.
So Medivacs are awesome and Terrans always get them. Why dont Protoss mix in some Phoenix into their ball of death? Their main point isnt dealing damage but rather taking out key enemy units (and providing vision). In addition "just a few Phoenix" are needed to force your opponent to cover his bases with anti-air defense. Making an opponent spend additional resources is ALWAYS worth it, so stop the propaganda about it being too expensive.
So you dislike Medivacs and Vikings and dont think it is worth disrupting the Terran by killing off Reactors? They take 50 secs to build. Obviously its not worth killing a few of them, right? Wrong! Thats one of the worst things to do to a Terran late game. Since they only cost 50/50 you wont ever think about attacking them, but thats one of the achilles heels of Terran: you cant afford to lose your production facilities, because you cant afford to take off 10 SCVs to rebuild them and the addons. Terrans cant ever speed up their production as Zerg or Protoss can.
have u ever play Protoss? Protoss cant afford going Stargate play vs Terran, they will just all in u in the midgame un cant go stargate route cause protoss need AOE = Collosus we cant waste gas on other things.
Man, Terran tech path is Natural because Starport is part of their build, Zerg Tech path is Natural because lair = hydra,spire,infetor pit. Protoss have to go ROBO, STARGATE OR ARCHIVE OR DARKSHIRE. do u see the difference? and the best of them is ROBO so thats why u cant go Stargate
On June 04 2011 02:56 alone wrote: Its more like protoss players did not play their best...atleast in the games I watched (not every toss game)
when protoss loses, they are playing bad.
when zerg loses, its to imbalance.
TT
So true. Why is that that all zerg players do is complain about race imbalance when zerg pros do badly in a tournament, but when protoss players are being eliminated left and right, it is due to them "not playing well"?
And since when did MC "not play well"? He is undoubtedly one of the best players in the world atm.
On June 05 2011 00:38 Binabik wrote: Why would you ever compare Medivas and Phoenixes???
Its just an example how an AIR UNIT can add something new to the Protoss army .... just like the Medivacs add something new to the Terran bio army.
Just refuse to get Stargate units and be inable to kill Overlords who are scouting your base from cliffs OR who might be dropping your base. Its stupid to allow your opponent to have something for free like the vision a Zerg can get with Overlords. You cant follow them everywhere with your Gateway units and Phoenixes are the fastest Protoss units to control the map. If a Zerg has no Hydras / Infestors around you can pick up anything from his army. If a Terran likes his Marauders too much the Tanks and Medivacs are juicy targets to kill.
The whole point I am trying to make is to "forget everything you know and start from zero". Everything you have set in stone should always be questioned.
This approach seems reasonable. I am not a good player at all but I tried airplay and it is very situational.
First of all, I think it is only really viable if you go forge FE which is only possible on 2 ladder maps.
And even then you really have to do A LOT of damage to make it worth the investment since you will have to switch to HTs or Colossi. And I tell you: I have been punished really bad for going Stargate. Sure, sometimes you can really screw a Zerg but only if they actually did not prepare for it. That means that they invested in Roaches instead of queens or hive tech in time and have no evo chamber already up. So yeah, u might say: Well scout what he is going for. And ta-da: There you got the next problem: Scouting. When Zerglings are out and have speed, you can't scout until hallucination or an Obs is out. This is somehow a problem when it comes to applying pressure to a Zerg which you HAVE to do as a Protoss. Imagine you go 3gate expand. Zerg can respond in two different ways: Either drone or go for a roach/ling bust. If you go 3 gate expand you won't have Hallu or Obs in time to really see what Zerg is doing. So you as toss can do 2 things: Stay in your base and prepare for an all-in that might never come or move out and fake pressure, which is good when Zerg decides to drone, but which backfires pretty hard if Zerg goes for agression. Then you might actually lose your sentries or waste a ton of force fields. Coinflip scenario - you Zergs know this situation too well.
I don't have too much issues in PvZ if I can forge FE and delay a Zergs expansion a bit by blocking it, but other than that I am really clueless on finding a balance between staying alive and prevent the Zerg from droning like crazy.
Oh well, I will try some more DT action. 250 gas for a one purpose building aint that much of a deal
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
Incredibly constructive.
OT: I don't think it'll be impossible to balance but the mechanics are incredibly clunky so it'll be hard to balance fluently around - protoss revolves around a few huge mechanics like forcefields, colossi, etc. Any change to them is automatically pretty big in a balancing sense, so it'll always be a bit clunky design.
Honestly for HOTS I'd love if warpgates got redesigned, as well as forcefields/colossus.
IdrA complains a lot about the other races and what he cant do and so on, but he always sounds like only Zerg have to take risks. Well that isnt the case and maybe Protoss have to realize this as well. With Forcefields and the ability to control the battlefield the Protoss have been playing it pretty safe, but maybe its time to adjust and take a little more risks.
Apart from DTs there are very very very few Protoss harasses going on. I am not talking about a bunch of Blink Stalkers jumping in and out of a base, because those are most likely about 90% of the Protoss units. I am more talking about using a Warp Prism to warp in just a few Zealots to disrupt mining and kill a few workers; I am talking about two Immortals in a Warp Prism which are used to snipe a Terrans addons while he is sieging your 3rd / 4th; I am talking about a small bunch of Void Rays (~3) to snipe air defense turrets late game ... there are loads of possibilities, but Protoss do even less harrass than Zerg in mid and late game and that is a key to success.
1.) Tons of protoss play greedy, MC is a prime example and EVERYONE says he either uses abusive timings or plays extremely greedy. Terran plays greedy behind bunkers and zergs play as greedy as humanly possible. Protoss playing greedy is the easiest to exploit in the early and mid game because beyond turtling or timings we are fragile to other race's timings.
2.) Warp prism zealot harass happens all the time. They disrupt mining yeah, at the cost of robo time, 200 mins for warp prism, 100 per zealot, and maybe 2-3 scv or drone deaths before an observant player pulls his scvs away and kills the zealots. Storm drops are still better but an aware player can still pull workers away quickly and you are putting 250 minerals and 300 gas into the hope of killing as many workers as possible. I do see storm drops in the late game even though its a large risk due to vikings and potential turrets up for deterring DTs. Killing 10 workers is nice but still not a huge game changer.
3.) Immortal drops are 700/300 to snipe addons, immortals as part of your army aren't especially great either compared to what could have been a colossi for a bit more time and an additional +50/50.
4.) Void rays aren't going to do anything? In the late game they'll be 0/0, are an expensive tech, worthless in a unit comp unless against zerg and in that case they are better in your army compared to risking them to a horde of corruptors meant for your colossi for the sake of sniping four drones and a couple spores.
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.
What? Honestly, not trying to be rude, what level do you play at?
There won't be a necessary powerful response to void rays and phoenix. Phoenix themselves can't do much until there are a large amount of them. You say this as a late game strategy, they will be 0-0, upgraded marines or hydras will tear through them. DT is superior in all ways because you can make archons and get map control, and both die to the same thing (spores/turrets) so you might as well be getting the DTs. They will already have vikings and corruptors to deal with colossi and if you don't get those colossi you will get overrun. Why would you even get one or two carriers...seriously this post just doesn't make sense. There is no point to having one or two random carriers taking up minerals/gas because they get better as you get more and vikings will already be out to deal with colossi.
As for expensive techs and Terrans having to get a Starport or two...what? Are you serious? Do you have any idea how amazing medivacs are for the bioball? They are a complete game changer in TvP that pretty much signify the terran movement into mid-game. Those same reactored starports are later used to pump out vikings as well.
Sorry but I don't think this is the answer. Expensive stargate units that are useless in a real late game combat just to do a couple hundred minerals worth of damage?
You didnt seem to think about what I wrote. Throw away your mantras and read again.
One of the key things is interrupting the rhythm of your opponent. Killing a Spire will require it to be rebuild and give you a window of opportunity to kill those pesky Mutalisks which are harrassing you all the time. Cost efficiency does not matter most of the time. Do you really think that rolling a ton of Banelings into a Planetary Fortress is "cost efficient"? It certainly isnt, but its still worth it because it removes part of the opponents economy and disrupts him. So get rid of that cost efficiency mantra and think how you could do the same to your opponents. Try how many Void Rays you need to kill a key building and support their number by a few hallucinations and / or Phoenixes to pick up 2-3 Queens who might be the only air defense the Zerg has. Be creative instead of a horse with blinkers and if you dont think you can afford it you need to work on your macro.
So Medivacs are awesome and Terrans always get them. Why dont Protoss mix in some Phoenix into their ball of death? Their main point isnt dealing damage but rather taking out key enemy units (and providing vision). In addition "just a few Phoenix" are needed to force your opponent to cover his bases with anti-air defense. Making an opponent spend additional resources is ALWAYS worth it, so stop the propaganda about it being too expensive.
So you dislike Medivacs and Vikings and dont think it is worth disrupting the Terran by killing off Reactors? They take 50 secs to build. Obviously its not worth killing a few of them, right? Wrong! Thats one of the worst things to do to a Terran late game. Since they only cost 50/50 you wont ever think about attacking them, but thats one of the achilles heels of Terran: you cant afford to lose your production facilities, because you cant afford to take off 10 SCVs to rebuild them and the addons. Terrans cant ever speed up their production as Zerg or Protoss can.
have u ever play Protoss? Protoss cant afford going Stargate play vs Terran, they will just all in u in the midgame un cant go stargate route cause protoss need AOE = Collosus we cant waste gas on other things.
Man, Terran tech path is Natural because Starport is part of their build, Zerg Tech path is Natural because lair = hydra,spire,infetor pit. Protoss have to go ROBO, STARGATE OR ARCHIVE OR DARKSHIRE. do u see the difference? and the best of them is ROBO so thats why u cant go Stargate
You probably didnt realize that "Starport is part of their build" is a pretty stupid excuse. You could just as well make the Stargate part of your build. Bio-Terrans have to build a Factory just to be able to make a Starport, so stop the whine about the cost please ... its YOUR choice to make.
People have complained about the 1/1/1 build being so versatile from Terrans, but they refuse to do the same for their race. Zerg have refused to build Spine Crawlers and more Queens than they have hatcheries and it took Spanishiwa to convice a lot of people who were stuck in their mantras that it actually can work. IdrA claimed to have "tried everything" against Protoss death balls long ago, but still Zerg have figured out how to beat Protoss (even before the recent buffs). People who claim things not going to work just havent tried enough IMO ... or to quote Lawrence of Arabia: NOTHING is written!
Just as a suggestion you could even save some of your own Sentries from Banelings with your Phoenixes ... just to save your invested gas. Be creative ...
Nani came second in TSL only losing because he let nerves get to him, while ThorZain really played an A game. The fact that Nani even came close to beating ThorZain in the final game while he played like a mong shows that toss is fine right now.
IdrA complains a lot about the other races and what he cant do and so on, but he always sounds like only Zerg have to take risks. Well that isnt the case and maybe Protoss have to realize this as well. With Forcefields and the ability to control the battlefield the Protoss have been playing it pretty safe, but maybe its time to adjust and take a little more risks.
Apart from DTs there are very very very few Protoss harasses going on. I am not talking about a bunch of Blink Stalkers jumping in and out of a base, because those are most likely about 90% of the Protoss units. I am more talking about using a Warp Prism to warp in just a few Zealots to disrupt mining and kill a few workers; I am talking about two Immortals in a Warp Prism which are used to snipe a Terrans addons while he is sieging your 3rd / 4th; I am talking about a small bunch of Void Rays (~3) to snipe air defense turrets late game ... there are loads of possibilities, but Protoss do even less harrass than Zerg in mid and late game and that is a key to success.
1.) Tons of protoss play greedy, MC is a prime example and EVERYONE says he either uses abusive timings or plays extremely greedy. Terran plays greedy behind bunkers and zergs play as greedy as humanly possible. Protoss playing greedy is the easiest to exploit in the early and mid game because beyond turtling or timings we are fragile to other race's timings.
2.) Warp prism zealot harass happens all the time. They disrupt mining yeah, at the cost of robo time, 200 mins for warp prism, 100 per zealot, and maybe 2-3 scv or drone deaths before an observant player pulls his scvs away and kills the zealots. Storm drops are still better but an aware player can still pull workers away quickly and you are putting 250 minerals and 300 gas into the hope of killing as many workers as possible. I do see storm drops in the late game even though its a large risk due to vikings and potential turrets up for deterring DTs. Killing 10 workers is nice but still not a huge game changer.
3.) Immortal drops are 700/300 to snipe addons, immortals as part of your army aren't especially great either compared to what could have been a colossi for a bit more time and an additional +50/50.
4.) Void rays aren't going to do anything? In the late game they'll be 0/0, are an expensive tech, worthless in a unit comp unless against zerg and in that case they are better in your army compared to risking them to a horde of corruptors meant for your colossi for the sake of sniping four drones and a couple spores.
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.
What? Honestly, not trying to be rude, what level do you play at?
There won't be a necessary powerful response to void rays and phoenix. Phoenix themselves can't do much until there are a large amount of them. You say this as a late game strategy, they will be 0-0, upgraded marines or hydras will tear through them. DT is superior in all ways because you can make archons and get map control, and both die to the same thing (spores/turrets) so you might as well be getting the DTs. They will already have vikings and corruptors to deal with colossi and if you don't get those colossi you will get overrun. Why would you even get one or two carriers...seriously this post just doesn't make sense. There is no point to having one or two random carriers taking up minerals/gas because they get better as you get more and vikings will already be out to deal with colossi.
As for expensive techs and Terrans having to get a Starport or two...what? Are you serious? Do you have any idea how amazing medivacs are for the bioball? They are a complete game changer in TvP that pretty much signify the terran movement into mid-game. Those same reactored starports are later used to pump out vikings as well.
Sorry but I don't think this is the answer. Expensive stargate units that are useless in a real late game combat just to do a couple hundred minerals worth of damage?
You didnt seem to think about what I wrote. Throw away your mantras and read again.
One of the key things is interrupting the rhythm of your opponent. Killing a Spire will require it to be rebuild and give you a window of opportunity to kill those pesky Mutalisks which are harrassing you all the time. Cost efficiency does not matter most of the time. Do you really think that rolling a ton of Banelings into a Planetary Fortress is "cost efficient"? It certainly isnt, but its still worth it because it removes part of the opponents economy and disrupts him. So get rid of that cost efficiency mantra and think how you could do the same to your opponents. Try how many Void Rays you need to kill a key building and support their number by a few hallucinations and / or Phoenixes to pick up 2-3 Queens who might be the only air defense the Zerg has. Be creative instead of a horse with blinkers and if you dont think you can afford it you need to work on your macro.
So Medivacs are awesome and Terrans always get them. Why dont Protoss mix in some Phoenix into their ball of death? Their main point isnt dealing damage but rather taking out key enemy units (and providing vision). In addition "just a few Phoenix" are needed to force your opponent to cover his bases with anti-air defense. Making an opponent spend additional resources is ALWAYS worth it, so stop the propaganda about it being too expensive.
So you dislike Medivacs and Vikings and dont think it is worth disrupting the Terran by killing off Reactors? They take 50 secs to build. Obviously its not worth killing a few of them, right? Wrong! Thats one of the worst things to do to a Terran late game. Since they only cost 50/50 you wont ever think about attacking them, but thats one of the achilles heels of Terran: you cant afford to lose your production facilities, because you cant afford to take off 10 SCVs to rebuild them and the addons. Terrans cant ever speed up their production as Zerg or Protoss can.
have u ever play Protoss? Protoss cant afford going Stargate play vs Terran, they will just all in u in the midgame un cant go stargate route cause protoss need AOE = Collosus we cant waste gas on other things.
Man, Terran tech path is Natural because Starport is part of their build, Zerg Tech path is Natural because lair = hydra,spire,infetor pit. Protoss have to go ROBO, STARGATE OR ARCHIVE OR DARKSHIRE. do u see the difference? and the best of them is ROBO so thats why u cant go Stargate
You probably didnt realize that "Starport is part of their build" is a pretty stupid excuse. You could just as well make the Stargate part of your build. Bio-Terrans have to build a Factory just to be able to make a Starport, so stop the whine about the cost please ... its YOUR choice to make.
People have complained about the 1/1/1 build being so versatile from Terrans, but they refuse to do the same for their race. Zerg have refused to build Spine Crawlers and more Queens than they have hatcheries and it took Spanishiwa to convice a lot of people who were stuck in their mantras that it actually can work. IdrA claimed to have "tried everything" against Protoss death balls long ago, but still Zerg have figured out how to beat Protoss (even before the recent buffs). People who claim things not going to work just havent tried enough IMO ... or to quote Lawrence of Arabia: NOTHING is written!
Just as a suggestion you could even save some of your own Sentries from Banelings with your Phoenixes ... just to save your invested gas. Be creative ...
Actually logistically you cant go all the tech trees. Off one base you can support one stargate void ray and one robo immortal making only those two units and chronoboosting them if you make correct pylons. Once in a while you can warp One zealot. Thats not a good unit composition and is very small thanks to the high gas cost.
Just pointing out that I think everyone in this thread needs to sit back and take a breather and stop flaming eachother. Just theorycrafting "OMG! PPL SAY X ABOUT Z BUT ITS NOT TRUE NOW DO SOMETHING WITH TOSS LIKE THIS TERRAN BuiLD BUT THE PROTOSS EQUIVALENT!!!" Relax all reading this thread makes me sad since any real discussion about how toss is performing in the GSL has turned into QQ and flaming between the different races.
On June 04 2011 15:14 PeggyHill wrote: To be honest I always thought MC was slightly overrated, he seemed to rely on early 4/6 gate timing pushes, sometimes with the nexus cancel. Always seemed cheap to me. Not saying he isn't great, but people are correct when they say he isn't the hero that toss needs.
I think the point about the forge FE being difficult due to open naturals is a good one, BW the maps seemed to be designed so that this build could be done. In SC2 so many maps the forge FE is just too eaisly abused.
I think what we saw in SC2 was the first great transition from the original Blizz maps, ie Steppes etc into better maps like Tal'Darim etc. We are just waiting for the second generation to hit before we can see the game evolve further, at the mo it's just stagnant.
Too many toss died to roach bust with forge FE.
Same thing happens in BW with mass hydra busts. If you have a natural choke you can place all the cannons at the front and all the cannons will be doing damage. Problem with open naturals is that roaches can kite around the side, meaning you need twice as many cannons to defend your natural.
That means if Zerg is gonna do a roach bust, the more narrow the choke the more all-in the bust has to be. Meaning that pros are less inclined to do it, because defending it means free win for toss.
IdrA complains a lot about the other races and what he cant do and so on, but he always sounds like only Zerg have to take risks. Well that isnt the case and maybe Protoss have to realize this as well. With Forcefields and the ability to control the battlefield the Protoss have been playing it pretty safe, but maybe its time to adjust and take a little more risks.
Apart from DTs there are very very very few Protoss harasses going on. I am not talking about a bunch of Blink Stalkers jumping in and out of a base, because those are most likely about 90% of the Protoss units. I am more talking about using a Warp Prism to warp in just a few Zealots to disrupt mining and kill a few workers; I am talking about two Immortals in a Warp Prism which are used to snipe a Terrans addons while he is sieging your 3rd / 4th; I am talking about a small bunch of Void Rays (~3) to snipe air defense turrets late game ... there are loads of possibilities, but Protoss do even less harrass than Zerg in mid and late game and that is a key to success.
1.) Tons of protoss play greedy, MC is a prime example and EVERYONE says he either uses abusive timings or plays extremely greedy. Terran plays greedy behind bunkers and zergs play as greedy as humanly possible. Protoss playing greedy is the easiest to exploit in the early and mid game because beyond turtling or timings we are fragile to other race's timings.
2.) Warp prism zealot harass happens all the time. They disrupt mining yeah, at the cost of robo time, 200 mins for warp prism, 100 per zealot, and maybe 2-3 scv or drone deaths before an observant player pulls his scvs away and kills the zealots. Storm drops are still better but an aware player can still pull workers away quickly and you are putting 250 minerals and 300 gas into the hope of killing as many workers as possible. I do see storm drops in the late game even though its a large risk due to vikings and potential turrets up for deterring DTs. Killing 10 workers is nice but still not a huge game changer.
3.) Immortal drops are 700/300 to snipe addons, immortals as part of your army aren't especially great either compared to what could have been a colossi for a bit more time and an additional +50/50.
4.) Void rays aren't going to do anything? In the late game they'll be 0/0, are an expensive tech, worthless in a unit comp unless against zerg and in that case they are better in your army compared to risking them to a horde of corruptors meant for your colossi for the sake of sniping four drones and a couple spores.
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.
What? Honestly, not trying to be rude, what level do you play at?
There won't be a necessary powerful response to void rays and phoenix. Phoenix themselves can't do much until there are a large amount of them. You say this as a late game strategy, they will be 0-0, upgraded marines or hydras will tear through them. DT is superior in all ways because you can make archons and get map control, and both die to the same thing (spores/turrets) so you might as well be getting the DTs. They will already have vikings and corruptors to deal with colossi and if you don't get those colossi you will get overrun. Why would you even get one or two carriers...seriously this post just doesn't make sense. There is no point to having one or two random carriers taking up minerals/gas because they get better as you get more and vikings will already be out to deal with colossi.
As for expensive techs and Terrans having to get a Starport or two...what? Are you serious? Do you have any idea how amazing medivacs are for the bioball? They are a complete game changer in TvP that pretty much signify the terran movement into mid-game. Those same reactored starports are later used to pump out vikings as well.
Sorry but I don't think this is the answer. Expensive stargate units that are useless in a real late game combat just to do a couple hundred minerals worth of damage?
You didnt seem to think about what I wrote. Throw away your mantras and read again.
One of the key things is interrupting the rhythm of your opponent. Killing a Spire will require it to be rebuild and give you a window of opportunity to kill those pesky Mutalisks which are harrassing you all the time. Cost efficiency does not matter most of the time. Do you really think that rolling a ton of Banelings into a Planetary Fortress is "cost efficient"? It certainly isnt, but its still worth it because it removes part of the opponents economy and disrupts him. So get rid of that cost efficiency mantra and think how you could do the same to your opponents. Try how many Void Rays you need to kill a key building and support their number by a few hallucinations and / or Phoenixes to pick up 2-3 Queens who might be the only air defense the Zerg has. Be creative instead of a horse with blinkers and if you dont think you can afford it you need to work on your macro.
So Medivacs are awesome and Terrans always get them. Why dont Protoss mix in some Phoenix into their ball of death? Their main point isnt dealing damage but rather taking out key enemy units (and providing vision). In addition "just a few Phoenix" are needed to force your opponent to cover his bases with anti-air defense. Making an opponent spend additional resources is ALWAYS worth it, so stop the propaganda about it being too expensive.
So you dislike Medivacs and Vikings and dont think it is worth disrupting the Terran by killing off Reactors? They take 50 secs to build. Obviously its not worth killing a few of them, right? Wrong! Thats one of the worst things to do to a Terran late game. Since they only cost 50/50 you wont ever think about attacking them, but thats one of the achilles heels of Terran: you cant afford to lose your production facilities, because you cant afford to take off 10 SCVs to rebuild them and the addons. Terrans cant ever speed up their production as Zerg or Protoss can.
have u ever play Protoss? Protoss cant afford going Stargate play vs Terran, they will just all in u in the midgame un cant go stargate route cause protoss need AOE = Collosus we cant waste gas on other things.
Man, Terran tech path is Natural because Starport is part of their build, Zerg Tech path is Natural because lair = hydra,spire,infetor pit. Protoss have to go ROBO, STARGATE OR ARCHIVE OR DARKSHIRE. do u see the difference? and the best of them is ROBO so thats why u cant go Stargate
You probably didnt realize that "Starport is part of their build" is a pretty stupid excuse. You could just as well make the Stargate part of your build. Bio-Terrans have to build a Factory just to be able to make a Starport, so stop the whine about the cost please ... its YOUR choice to make.
People have complained about the 1/1/1 build being so versatile from Terrans, but they refuse to do the same for their race. Zerg have refused to build Spine Crawlers and more Queens than they have hatcheries and it took Spanishiwa to convice a lot of people who were stuck in their mantras that it actually can work. IdrA claimed to have "tried everything" against Protoss death balls long ago, but still Zerg have figured out how to beat Protoss (even before the recent buffs). People who claim things not going to work just havent tried enough IMO ... or to quote Lawrence of Arabia: NOTHING is written!
Just as a suggestion you could even save some of your own Sentries from Banelings with your Phoenixes ... just to save your invested gas. Be creative ...
Actually logistically you cant go all the tech trees. Off one base you can support one stargate void ray and one robo immortal making only those two units and chronoboosting them if you make correct pylons. Once in a while you can warp One zealot. Thats not a good unit composition and is very small thanks to the high gas cost.
Just pointing out that I think everyone in this thread needs to sit back and take a breather and stop flaming eachother. Just theorycrafting "OMG! PPL SAY X ABOUT Z BUT ITS NOT TRUE NOW DO SOMETHING WITH TOSS LIKE THIS TERRAN BuiLD BUT THE PROTOSS EQUIVALENT!!!" Relax all reading this thread makes me sad since any real discussion about how toss is performing in the GSL has turned into QQ and flaming between the different races.
:/
Indeed it has, this thread isn't going to get any better, it is just a shout box for gold league players right now. It is like those the threads on FF/Colossus, at the end of the day nothing has come of it and it is pretty evident that neither of those things are overpowered given the current state of this game.
Though it is amusing to watch how valiantly some people still want to keep their facade about Protoss alive, even trying to say that Terran and Zerg players are just better, which is hilarious, but it is starting to crumble If things don't get better for Protoss in the next month then I'm sure the topics about balance and zerg being "faceroll" will arise, it is going to be fun watching the people who screamed so loudly about Protoss being "OP" come to defend their own race ^^ Watching the shit storm when the tables have turned ain't so bad
IdrA complains a lot about the other races and what he cant do and so on, but he always sounds like only Zerg have to take risks. Well that isnt the case and maybe Protoss have to realize this as well. With Forcefields and the ability to control the battlefield the Protoss have been playing it pretty safe, but maybe its time to adjust and take a little more risks.
Apart from DTs there are very very very few Protoss harasses going on. I am not talking about a bunch of Blink Stalkers jumping in and out of a base, because those are most likely about 90% of the Protoss units. I am more talking about using a Warp Prism to warp in just a few Zealots to disrupt mining and kill a few workers; I am talking about two Immortals in a Warp Prism which are used to snipe a Terrans addons while he is sieging your 3rd / 4th; I am talking about a small bunch of Void Rays (~3) to snipe air defense turrets late game ... there are loads of possibilities, but Protoss do even less harrass than Zerg in mid and late game and that is a key to success.
1.) Tons of protoss play greedy, MC is a prime example and EVERYONE says he either uses abusive timings or plays extremely greedy. Terran plays greedy behind bunkers and zergs play as greedy as humanly possible. Protoss playing greedy is the easiest to exploit in the early and mid game because beyond turtling or timings we are fragile to other race's timings.
2.) Warp prism zealot harass happens all the time. They disrupt mining yeah, at the cost of robo time, 200 mins for warp prism, 100 per zealot, and maybe 2-3 scv or drone deaths before an observant player pulls his scvs away and kills the zealots. Storm drops are still better but an aware player can still pull workers away quickly and you are putting 250 minerals and 300 gas into the hope of killing as many workers as possible. I do see storm drops in the late game even though its a large risk due to vikings and potential turrets up for deterring DTs. Killing 10 workers is nice but still not a huge game changer.
3.) Immortal drops are 700/300 to snipe addons, immortals as part of your army aren't especially great either compared to what could have been a colossi for a bit more time and an additional +50/50.
4.) Void rays aren't going to do anything? In the late game they'll be 0/0, are an expensive tech, worthless in a unit comp unless against zerg and in that case they are better in your army compared to risking them to a horde of corruptors meant for your colossi for the sake of sniping four drones and a couple spores.
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.
What? Honestly, not trying to be rude, what level do you play at?
There won't be a necessary powerful response to void rays and phoenix. Phoenix themselves can't do much until there are a large amount of them. You say this as a late game strategy, they will be 0-0, upgraded marines or hydras will tear through them. DT is superior in all ways because you can make archons and get map control, and both die to the same thing (spores/turrets) so you might as well be getting the DTs. They will already have vikings and corruptors to deal with colossi and if you don't get those colossi you will get overrun. Why would you even get one or two carriers...seriously this post just doesn't make sense. There is no point to having one or two random carriers taking up minerals/gas because they get better as you get more and vikings will already be out to deal with colossi.
As for expensive techs and Terrans having to get a Starport or two...what? Are you serious? Do you have any idea how amazing medivacs are for the bioball? They are a complete game changer in TvP that pretty much signify the terran movement into mid-game. Those same reactored starports are later used to pump out vikings as well.
Sorry but I don't think this is the answer. Expensive stargate units that are useless in a real late game combat just to do a couple hundred minerals worth of damage?
You didnt seem to think about what I wrote. Throw away your mantras and read again.
One of the key things is interrupting the rhythm of your opponent. Killing a Spire will require it to be rebuild and give you a window of opportunity to kill those pesky Mutalisks which are harrassing you all the time. Cost efficiency does not matter most of the time. Do you really think that rolling a ton of Banelings into a Planetary Fortress is "cost efficient"? It certainly isnt, but its still worth it because it removes part of the opponents economy and disrupts him. So get rid of that cost efficiency mantra and think how you could do the same to your opponents. Try how many Void Rays you need to kill a key building and support their number by a few hallucinations and / or Phoenixes to pick up 2-3 Queens who might be the only air defense the Zerg has. Be creative instead of a horse with blinkers and if you dont think you can afford it you need to work on your macro.
So Medivacs are awesome and Terrans always get them. Why dont Protoss mix in some Phoenix into their ball of death? Their main point isnt dealing damage but rather taking out key enemy units (and providing vision). In addition "just a few Phoenix" are needed to force your opponent to cover his bases with anti-air defense. Making an opponent spend additional resources is ALWAYS worth it, so stop the propaganda about it being too expensive.
So you dislike Medivacs and Vikings and dont think it is worth disrupting the Terran by killing off Reactors? They take 50 secs to build. Obviously its not worth killing a few of them, right? Wrong! Thats one of the worst things to do to a Terran late game. Since they only cost 50/50 you wont ever think about attacking them, but thats one of the achilles heels of Terran: you cant afford to lose your production facilities, because you cant afford to take off 10 SCVs to rebuild them and the addons. Terrans cant ever speed up their production as Zerg or Protoss can.
have u ever play Protoss? Protoss cant afford going Stargate play vs Terran, they will just all in u in the midgame un cant go stargate route cause protoss need AOE = Collosus we cant waste gas on other things.
Man, Terran tech path is Natural because Starport is part of their build, Zerg Tech path is Natural because lair = hydra,spire,infetor pit. Protoss have to go ROBO, STARGATE OR ARCHIVE OR DARKSHIRE. do u see the difference? and the best of them is ROBO so thats why u cant go Stargate
You probably didnt realize that "Starport is part of their build" is a pretty stupid excuse. You could just as well make the Stargate part of your build. Bio-Terrans have to build a Factory just to be able to make a Starport, so stop the whine about the cost please ... its YOUR choice to make.
People have complained about the 1/1/1 build being so versatile from Terrans, but they refuse to do the same for their race. Zerg have refused to build Spine Crawlers and more Queens than they have hatcheries and it took Spanishiwa to convice a lot of people who were stuck in their mantras that it actually can work. IdrA claimed to have "tried everything" against Protoss death balls long ago, but still Zerg have figured out how to beat Protoss (even before the recent buffs). People who claim things not going to work just havent tried enough IMO ... or to quote Lawrence of Arabia: NOTHING is written!
Just as a suggestion you could even save some of your own Sentries from Banelings with your Phoenixes ... just to save your invested gas. Be creative ...
Gateway/stargate units are too weak and gas intense, you can't afford that vs Terran b/c Medic and Vikings cost just a few gas and marauders cost only 25 gas. See the differences yet ? Also you need units that has AOE, that is Templar or Colossus, and you know how much they cost.
Anyone else still encounter zerg on ladder, who say "Toss is Imba!"
SO MANY ZERGS, have the mindset, that protoss is completely overpowered, and when they mass roach infestors and win badly, they will blame the player; and if you try to explain the current state of the game, they still have the mindset from 2-3 months ago that "toss has forcefields so they're imbalanced"
IdrA complains a lot about the other races and what he cant do and so on, but he always sounds like only Zerg have to take risks. Well that isnt the case and maybe Protoss have to realize this as well. With Forcefields and the ability to control the battlefield the Protoss have been playing it pretty safe, but maybe its time to adjust and take a little more risks.
Apart from DTs there are very very very few Protoss harasses going on. I am not talking about a bunch of Blink Stalkers jumping in and out of a base, because those are most likely about 90% of the Protoss units. I am more talking about using a Warp Prism to warp in just a few Zealots to disrupt mining and kill a few workers; I am talking about two Immortals in a Warp Prism which are used to snipe a Terrans addons while he is sieging your 3rd / 4th; I am talking about a small bunch of Void Rays (~3) to snipe air defense turrets late game ... there are loads of possibilities, but Protoss do even less harrass than Zerg in mid and late game and that is a key to success.
1.) Tons of protoss play greedy, MC is a prime example and EVERYONE says he either uses abusive timings or plays extremely greedy. Terran plays greedy behind bunkers and zergs play as greedy as humanly possible. Protoss playing greedy is the easiest to exploit in the early and mid game because beyond turtling or timings we are fragile to other race's timings.
2.) Warp prism zealot harass happens all the time. They disrupt mining yeah, at the cost of robo time, 200 mins for warp prism, 100 per zealot, and maybe 2-3 scv or drone deaths before an observant player pulls his scvs away and kills the zealots. Storm drops are still better but an aware player can still pull workers away quickly and you are putting 250 minerals and 300 gas into the hope of killing as many workers as possible. I do see storm drops in the late game even though its a large risk due to vikings and potential turrets up for deterring DTs. Killing 10 workers is nice but still not a huge game changer.
3.) Immortal drops are 700/300 to snipe addons, immortals as part of your army aren't especially great either compared to what could have been a colossi for a bit more time and an additional +50/50.
4.) Void rays aren't going to do anything? In the late game they'll be 0/0, are an expensive tech, worthless in a unit comp unless against zerg and in that case they are better in your army compared to risking them to a horde of corruptors meant for your colossi for the sake of sniping four drones and a couple spores.
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.
What? Honestly, not trying to be rude, what level do you play at?
There won't be a necessary powerful response to void rays and phoenix. Phoenix themselves can't do much until there are a large amount of them. You say this as a late game strategy, they will be 0-0, upgraded marines or hydras will tear through them. DT is superior in all ways because you can make archons and get map control, and both die to the same thing (spores/turrets) so you might as well be getting the DTs. They will already have vikings and corruptors to deal with colossi and if you don't get those colossi you will get overrun. Why would you even get one or two carriers...seriously this post just doesn't make sense. There is no point to having one or two random carriers taking up minerals/gas because they get better as you get more and vikings will already be out to deal with colossi.
As for expensive techs and Terrans having to get a Starport or two...what? Are you serious? Do you have any idea how amazing medivacs are for the bioball? They are a complete game changer in TvP that pretty much signify the terran movement into mid-game. Those same reactored starports are later used to pump out vikings as well.
Sorry but I don't think this is the answer. Expensive stargate units that are useless in a real late game combat just to do a couple hundred minerals worth of damage?
You didnt seem to think about what I wrote. Throw away your mantras and read again.
One of the key things is interrupting the rhythm of your opponent. Killing a Spire will require it to be rebuild and give you a window of opportunity to kill those pesky Mutalisks which are harrassing you all the time. Cost efficiency does not matter most of the time. Do you really think that rolling a ton of Banelings into a Planetary Fortress is "cost efficient"? It certainly isnt, but its still worth it because it removes part of the opponents economy and disrupts him. So get rid of that cost efficiency mantra and think how you could do the same to your opponents. Try how many Void Rays you need to kill a key building and support their number by a few hallucinations and / or Phoenixes to pick up 2-3 Queens who might be the only air defense the Zerg has. Be creative instead of a horse with blinkers and if you dont think you can afford it you need to work on your macro.
So Medivacs are awesome and Terrans always get them. Why dont Protoss mix in some Phoenix into their ball of death? Their main point isnt dealing damage but rather taking out key enemy units (and providing vision). In addition "just a few Phoenix" are needed to force your opponent to cover his bases with anti-air defense. Making an opponent spend additional resources is ALWAYS worth it, so stop the propaganda about it being too expensive.
So you dislike Medivacs and Vikings and dont think it is worth disrupting the Terran by killing off Reactors? They take 50 secs to build. Obviously its not worth killing a few of them, right? Wrong! Thats one of the worst things to do to a Terran late game. Since they only cost 50/50 you wont ever think about attacking them, but thats one of the achilles heels of Terran: you cant afford to lose your production facilities, because you cant afford to take off 10 SCVs to rebuild them and the addons. Terrans cant ever speed up their production as Zerg or Protoss can.
have u ever play Protoss? Protoss cant afford going Stargate play vs Terran, they will just all in u in the midgame un cant go stargate route cause protoss need AOE = Collosus we cant waste gas on other things.
Man, Terran tech path is Natural because Starport is part of their build, Zerg Tech path is Natural because lair = hydra,spire,infetor pit. Protoss have to go ROBO, STARGATE OR ARCHIVE OR DARKSHIRE. do u see the difference? and the best of them is ROBO so thats why u cant go Stargate
You probably didnt realize that "Starport is part of their build" is a pretty stupid excuse. You could just as well make the Stargate part of your build. Bio-Terrans have to build a Factory just to be able to make a Starport, so stop the whine about the cost please ... its YOUR choice to make.
People have complained about the 1/1/1 build being so versatile from Terrans, but they refuse to do the same for their race. Zerg have refused to build Spine Crawlers and more Queens than they have hatcheries and it took Spanishiwa to convice a lot of people who were stuck in their mantras that it actually can work. IdrA claimed to have "tried everything" against Protoss death balls long ago, but still Zerg have figured out how to beat Protoss (even before the recent buffs). People who claim things not going to work just havent tried enough IMO ... or to quote Lawrence of Arabia: NOTHING is written!
Just as a suggestion you could even save some of your own Sentries from Banelings with your Phoenixes ... just to save your invested gas. Be creative ...
Actually logistically you cant go all the tech trees. Off one base you can support one stargate void ray and one robo immortal making only those two units and chronoboosting them if you make correct pylons. Once in a while you can warp One zealot. Thats not a good unit composition and is very small thanks to the high gas cost.
Just pointing out that I think everyone in this thread needs to sit back and take a breather and stop flaming eachother. Just theorycrafting "OMG! PPL SAY X ABOUT Z BUT ITS NOT TRUE NOW DO SOMETHING WITH TOSS LIKE THIS TERRAN BuiLD BUT THE PROTOSS EQUIVALENT!!!" Relax all reading this thread makes me sad since any real discussion about how toss is performing in the GSL has turned into QQ and flaming between the different races.
:/
Indeed it has, this thread isn't going to get any better, it is just a shout box for gold league players right now. It is like those the threads on FF/Colossus, at the end of the day nothing has come of it and it is pretty evident that neither of those things are overpowered given the current state of this game.
Though it is amusing to watch how valiantly some people still want to keep their facade about Protoss alive, even trying to say that Terran and Zerg players are just better, which is hilarious, but it is starting to crumble If things don't get better for Protoss in the next month then I'm sure the topics about balance and zerg being "faceroll" will arise, it is going to be fun watching the people who screamed so loudly about Protoss being "OP" come to defend their own race ^^ Watching the shit storm when the tables have turned ain't so bad
Well, the one that proposed specific changes and requested a baneling and infestor nerf was a master's league player...
Besides, I don't really see that much QQ in it. But in all honesty: Do you really believe that PvZ is the same? It has changed and it has gotten pretty difficult. I don't know why adressing this and debating what could be done about it is bad. But you are right in the matter that I don't really see anyone proposing an ingame solution to get this discussion forward.
The early collusus build doesn't seem like a viable strategy anymore. Don't get me wrong it is still good, but z and t are able to isolate it hard. The templar first into collusus seems like a more potent flavor of the month for toss.
You probably didnt realize that "Starport is part of their build" is a pretty stupid excuse. You could just as well make the Stargate part of your build. Bio-Terrans have to build a Factory just to be able to make a Starport, so stop the whine about the cost please ... its YOUR choice to make.
People have complained about the 1/1/1 build being so versatile from Terrans, but they refuse to do the same for their race. Zerg have refused to build Spine Crawlers and more Queens than they have hatcheries and it took Spanishiwa to convice a lot of people who were stuck in their mantras that it actually can work. IdrA claimed to have "tried everything" against Protoss death balls long ago, but still Zerg have figured out how to beat Protoss (even before the recent buffs). People who claim things not going to work just havent tried enough IMO ... or to quote Lawrence of Arabia: NOTHING is written!
Just as a suggestion you could even save some of your own Sentries from Banelings with your Phoenixes ... just to save your invested gas. Be creative ...
dont make nosense statement, what u get from Starport is way better than what u get from stargate Phoenix? loooool, terran just need to make more marines and do a timming push and phoenix wont save u, u havent play protoss man, why Pros dont make more phoenix? have u ever think on that? Why every player that switch race never go from Terran to P or Zerg to P??? is the other way arround, Protoss at high level is so difficult to win with them.
On June 05 2011 02:12 Catchafire2000 wrote: The early collusus build doesn't seem like a viable strategy anymore. Don't get me wrong it is still good, but z and t are able to isolate it hard. The templar first into collusus seems like a more potent flavor of the month for toss.
Thoughts?
Yes against Terran, no against Zerg.
Against Terran you can do a lot of containing using DTs and aggressively expanding until the T has a Raven or ghosts out. Terran units also aren't as mobile unless they stim so you get the map control. DTs and HTs are also great against drops.
Zerg units are too mobile and an overseer too easily accessible for early templar. Storm's AoE also doesn't cover an entire choke like it did in BW anymore to deter busts. Burrowed roaches are also too popular to not open robo. Without you cannot create (the illusion) of pressure.
On June 05 2011 01:52 MK_Shao wrote: Anyone else still encounter zerg on ladder, who say "Toss is Imba!"
SO MANY ZERGS, have the mindset, that protoss is completely overpowered, and when they mass roach infestors and win badly, they will blame the player; and if you try to explain the current state of the game, they still have the mindset from 2-3 months ago that "toss has forcefields so they're imbalanced"
This will never be change. Even Terrans insult me a lot for playing the "OP" or the "best" race. I think from their perspective its just easier to say "I am only not that good because I play the weaker race".
About the HT first. This is still risky and does only work like the most other things a Toss can do, you have to prevent the Zerg from scouting it. Because if the Zerg sees this, he just have to push with a lot of roaches and your screwed.
On June 05 2011 01:52 MK_Shao wrote: Anyone else still encounter zerg on ladder, who say "Toss is Imba!"
SO MANY ZERGS, have the mindset, that protoss is completely overpowered, and when they mass roach infestors and win badly, they will blame the player; and if you try to explain the current state of the game, they still have the mindset from 2-3 months ago that "toss has forcefields so they're imbalanced"
Same happend to me today. " I think Toss Lategame is so overpowered!"...after stomping the Zerg player with Mass Stalker /Sentry plus Colossi and Voids. His main failure: One failed early Roach attack at my ramp and then macro up like crazy but doesn't intend to attack me for 20 minutes.
On June 05 2011 01:52 MK_Shao wrote: Anyone else still encounter zerg on ladder, who say "Toss is Imba!"
SO MANY ZERGS, have the mindset, that protoss is completely overpowered, and when they mass roach infestors and win badly, they will blame the player; and if you try to explain the current state of the game, they still have the mindset from 2-3 months ago that "toss has forcefields so they're imbalanced"
They will keep doing it if you keep making a huge deal every time it happens.
IdrA complains a lot about the other races and what he cant do and so on, but he always sounds like only Zerg have to take risks. Well that isnt the case and maybe Protoss have to realize this as well. With Forcefields and the ability to control the battlefield the Protoss have been playing it pretty safe, but maybe its time to adjust and take a little more risks.
Apart from DTs there are very very very few Protoss harasses going on. I am not talking about a bunch of Blink Stalkers jumping in and out of a base, because those are most likely about 90% of the Protoss units. I am more talking about using a Warp Prism to warp in just a few Zealots to disrupt mining and kill a few workers; I am talking about two Immortals in a Warp Prism which are used to snipe a Terrans addons while he is sieging your 3rd / 4th; I am talking about a small bunch of Void Rays (~3) to snipe air defense turrets late game ... there are loads of possibilities, but Protoss do even less harrass than Zerg in mid and late game and that is a key to success.
1.) Tons of protoss play greedy, MC is a prime example and EVERYONE says he either uses abusive timings or plays extremely greedy. Terran plays greedy behind bunkers and zergs play as greedy as humanly possible. Protoss playing greedy is the easiest to exploit in the early and mid game because beyond turtling or timings we are fragile to other race's timings.
2.) Warp prism zealot harass happens all the time. They disrupt mining yeah, at the cost of robo time, 200 mins for warp prism, 100 per zealot, and maybe 2-3 scv or drone deaths before an observant player pulls his scvs away and kills the zealots. Storm drops are still better but an aware player can still pull workers away quickly and you are putting 250 minerals and 300 gas into the hope of killing as many workers as possible. I do see storm drops in the late game even though its a large risk due to vikings and potential turrets up for deterring DTs. Killing 10 workers is nice but still not a huge game changer.
3.) Immortal drops are 700/300 to snipe addons, immortals as part of your army aren't especially great either compared to what could have been a colossi for a bit more time and an additional +50/50.
4.) Void rays aren't going to do anything? In the late game they'll be 0/0, are an expensive tech, worthless in a unit comp unless against zerg and in that case they are better in your army compared to risking them to a horde of corruptors meant for your colossi for the sake of sniping four drones and a couple spores.
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.
What? Honestly, not trying to be rude, what level do you play at?
There won't be a necessary powerful response to void rays and phoenix. Phoenix themselves can't do much until there are a large amount of them. You say this as a late game strategy, they will be 0-0, upgraded marines or hydras will tear through them. DT is superior in all ways because you can make archons and get map control, and both die to the same thing (spores/turrets) so you might as well be getting the DTs. They will already have vikings and corruptors to deal with colossi and if you don't get those colossi you will get overrun. Why would you even get one or two carriers...seriously this post just doesn't make sense. There is no point to having one or two random carriers taking up minerals/gas because they get better as you get more and vikings will already be out to deal with colossi.
As for expensive techs and Terrans having to get a Starport or two...what? Are you serious? Do you have any idea how amazing medivacs are for the bioball? They are a complete game changer in TvP that pretty much signify the terran movement into mid-game. Those same reactored starports are later used to pump out vikings as well.
Sorry but I don't think this is the answer. Expensive stargate units that are useless in a real late game combat just to do a couple hundred minerals worth of damage?
You didnt seem to think about what I wrote. Throw away your mantras and read again.
One of the key things is interrupting the rhythm of your opponent. Killing a Spire will require it to be rebuild and give you a window of opportunity to kill those pesky Mutalisks which are harrassing you all the time. Cost efficiency does not matter most of the time. Do you really think that rolling a ton of Banelings into a Planetary Fortress is "cost efficient"? It certainly isnt, but its still worth it because it removes part of the opponents economy and disrupts him. So get rid of that cost efficiency mantra and think how you could do the same to your opponents. Try how many Void Rays you need to kill a key building and support their number by a few hallucinations and / or Phoenixes to pick up 2-3 Queens who might be the only air defense the Zerg has. Be creative instead of a horse with blinkers and if you dont think you can afford it you need to work on your macro.
So Medivacs are awesome and Terrans always get them. Why dont Protoss mix in some Phoenix into their ball of death? Their main point isnt dealing damage but rather taking out key enemy units (and providing vision). In addition "just a few Phoenix" are needed to force your opponent to cover his bases with anti-air defense. Making an opponent spend additional resources is ALWAYS worth it, so stop the propaganda about it being too expensive.
So you dislike Medivacs and Vikings and dont think it is worth disrupting the Terran by killing off Reactors? They take 50 secs to build. Obviously its not worth killing a few of them, right? Wrong! Thats one of the worst things to do to a Terran late game. Since they only cost 50/50 you wont ever think about attacking them, but thats one of the achilles heels of Terran: you cant afford to lose your production facilities, because you cant afford to take off 10 SCVs to rebuild them and the addons. Terrans cant ever speed up their production as Zerg or Protoss can.
have u ever play Protoss? Protoss cant afford going Stargate play vs Terran, they will just all in u in the midgame un cant go stargate route cause protoss need AOE = Collosus we cant waste gas on other things.
Man, Terran tech path is Natural because Starport is part of their build, Zerg Tech path is Natural because lair = hydra,spire,infetor pit. Protoss have to go ROBO, STARGATE OR ARCHIVE OR DARKSHIRE. do u see the difference? and the best of them is ROBO so thats why u cant go Stargate
You probably didnt realize that "Starport is part of their build" is a pretty stupid excuse. You could just as well make the Stargate part of your build. Bio-Terrans have to build a Factory just to be able to make a Starport, so stop the whine about the cost please ... its YOUR choice to make.
People have complained about the 1/1/1 build being so versatile from Terrans, but they refuse to do the same for their race. Zerg have refused to build Spine Crawlers and more Queens than they have hatcheries and it took Spanishiwa to convice a lot of people who were stuck in their mantras that it actually can work. IdrA claimed to have "tried everything" against Protoss death balls long ago, but still Zerg have figured out how to beat Protoss (even before the recent buffs). People who claim things not going to work just havent tried enough IMO ... or to quote Lawrence of Arabia: NOTHING is written!
Just as a suggestion you could even save some of your own Sentries from Banelings with your Phoenixes ... just to save your invested gas. Be creative ...
Subtle troll is subtle. You seem to purposefully ignore how many of the standard choices by the other races shape toss Tech decisions. 2 tech paths at once is very very expensive and very risky to go for. Partic because it really eats into the gateway count and gateway units require a lot of micro/spellcasters to come out ahead against masses of other race units.
The toss tech tree is not analogous to the Terran one.
And Hell we haven't even begun to discuss the upgrade battle and scaling...
On June 05 2011 00:50 Frequencyy wrote: This slump of toss players has nothing to do with balance, I'm not going to talk about balance but I assure you protoss isn't on the short end of the stick. It's simply their players must be in a slump, or they aren't developing their race fast enough, maybe getting a deathball and push style should be changed up. In Broodwar protoss would be on the constant aggression, dropping reavers, hts, dts, harassing with corsairs. There are a ton of good underused units in the arsenal that protoss has.
Well the boldfaced part doesn't really make much sense.
I like what you said about the aggression, and in the spirit of exploring rather than qqing, I think about new ways to pressure. But what possible ways can pressure be done that haven't been explored? Blink has been done and is handleable, warp prisms are rarely effective (zealots too inefficient, templar and immortal drops too expensive considering the risk), phoenixes are good if you have a lot of them and there isn't any static defense, but a couple of spores or turrets take them down, and it takes a while to get 6-8 phoenixes, void rays are a heavy commitment and have a similar problem to phoenixes, etc.)
As far as the "good underused units" that really isn't true imo. Units used the least are warp prisms, immortals, carriers, and motherships. Warp prisms are too expensive, take up robo time, and fail against an opponent with map awareness. Immortals are decent actually, something could be worked around them, i don't know what though (Blizzard even said that they didn't serve the purpose they were supposed to, tanking damage). Carriers...do I have to explain? Easily countered, late tech, expensive as hell, slow as hell, take forever to build, etc. Mothership isn't too good without vortex, mass recall is better in theory than in practice (because motherships aren't sneaky lol) and cloak is good, but still, slow, weird tech, long build time, expensive, etc.
On June 04 2011 17:07 Rabiator wrote: IdrA complains a lot about the other races and what he cant do and so on, but he always sounds like only Zerg have to take risks. Well that isnt the case and maybe Protoss have to realize this as well. With Forcefields and the ability to control the battlefield the Protoss have been playing it pretty safe, but maybe its time to adjust and take a little more risks.
Apart from DTs there are very very very few Protoss harasses going on. I am not talking about a bunch of Blink Stalkers jumping in and out of a base, because those are most likely about 90% of the Protoss units. I am more talking about using a Warp Prism to warp in just a few Zealots to disrupt mining and kill a few workers; I am talking about two Immortals in a Warp Prism which are used to snipe a Terrans addons while he is sieging your 3rd / 4th; I am talking about a small bunch of Void Rays (~3) to snipe air defense turrets late game ... there are loads of possibilities, but Protoss do even less harrass than Zerg in mid and late game and that is a key to success.
1.) Tons of protoss play greedy, MC is a prime example and EVERYONE says he either uses abusive timings or plays extremely greedy. Terran plays greedy behind bunkers and zergs play as greedy as humanly possible. Protoss playing greedy is the easiest to exploit in the early and mid game because beyond turtling or timings we are fragile to other race's timings.
2.) Warp prism zealot harass happens all the time. They disrupt mining yeah, at the cost of robo time, 200 mins for warp prism, 100 per zealot, and maybe 2-3 scv or drone deaths before an observant player pulls his scvs away and kills the zealots. Storm drops are still better but an aware player can still pull workers away quickly and you are putting 250 minerals and 300 gas into the hope of killing as many workers as possible. I do see storm drops in the late game even though its a large risk due to vikings and potential turrets up for deterring DTs. Killing 10 workers is nice but still not a huge game changer.
3.) Immortal drops are 700/300 to snipe addons, immortals as part of your army aren't especially great either compared to what could have been a colossi for a bit more time and an additional +50/50.
4.) Void rays aren't going to do anything? In the late game they'll be 0/0, are an expensive tech, worthless in a unit comp unless against zerg and in that case they are better in your army compared to risking them to a horde of corruptors meant for your colossi for the sake of sniping four drones and a couple spores.
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.
What? Honestly, not trying to be rude, what level do you play at?
There won't be a necessary powerful response to void rays and phoenix. Phoenix themselves can't do much until there are a large amount of them. You say this as a late game strategy, they will be 0-0, upgraded marines or hydras will tear through them. DT is superior in all ways because you can make archons and get map control, and both die to the same thing (spores/turrets) so you might as well be getting the DTs. They will already have vikings and corruptors to deal with colossi and if you don't get those colossi you will get overrun. Why would you even get one or two carriers...seriously this post just doesn't make sense. There is no point to having one or two random carriers taking up minerals/gas because they get better as you get more and vikings will already be out to deal with colossi.
As for expensive techs and Terrans having to get a Starport or two...what? Are you serious? Do you have any idea how amazing medivacs are for the bioball? They are a complete game changer in TvP that pretty much signify the terran movement into mid-game. Those same reactored starports are later used to pump out vikings as well.
Sorry but I don't think this is the answer. Expensive stargate units that are useless in a real late game combat just to do a couple hundred minerals worth of damage?
You didnt seem to think about what I wrote. Throw away your mantras and read again.
One of the key things is interrupting the rhythm of your opponent. Killing a Spire will require it to be rebuild and give you a window of opportunity to kill those pesky Mutalisks which are harrassing you all the time. Cost efficiency does not matter most of the time. Do you really think that rolling a ton of Banelings into a Planetary Fortress is "cost efficient"? It certainly isnt, but its still worth it because it removes part of the opponents economy and disrupts him. So get rid of that cost efficiency mantra and think how you could do the same to your opponents. Try how many Void Rays you need to kill a key building and support their number by a few hallucinations and / or Phoenixes to pick up 2-3 Queens who might be the only air defense the Zerg has. Be creative instead of a horse with blinkers and if you dont think you can afford it you need to work on your macro.
So Medivacs are awesome and Terrans always get them. Why dont Protoss mix in some Phoenix into their ball of death? Their main point isnt dealing damage but rather taking out key enemy units (and providing vision). In addition "just a few Phoenix" are needed to force your opponent to cover his bases with anti-air defense. Making an opponent spend additional resources is ALWAYS worth it, so stop the propaganda about it being too expensive.
So you dislike Medivacs and Vikings and dont think it is worth disrupting the Terran by killing off Reactors? They take 50 secs to build. Obviously its not worth killing a few of them, right? Wrong! Thats one of the worst things to do to a Terran late game. Since they only cost 50/50 you wont ever think about attacking them, but thats one of the achilles heels of Terran: you cant afford to lose your production facilities, because you cant afford to take off 10 SCVs to rebuild them and the addons. Terrans cant ever speed up their production as Zerg or Protoss can.
And Zergs were fine during the post-release 5 Rax Reaper era, they just needed to use more Nydus, right?
If you want to believe Protoss players aren't experimenting enough with harass-based play, that's fine. It's probably true to some extent. But seriously, just spare us these laughable suggestions. One some points you are simply wrong, on some you're arguing in favor of stuff that's already happening (Phoenix/Colossus), and the double Immortal Warp Prism drop to snipe reactors on Starports is just hilariously outlandish.
It's also kind of funny how the move you use as an example of your "cost-efficiency doesn't matter" idea, 24 banelings to bust a PF, is only really attempted when the Zerg is significantly ahead, and even then it's considered risky.
Well it will take some time for Z Players to get out of QQ Mode since they have been QQ for ever to realise that they are right now the strongest race due to unneccessary buffs.
Cause almost any strategy that changed the prior metagame wasn't effected from those changes at all. The Whole Buffs/Nerfs only adds up to that.
Protoss is alot weaker than it was some patches ago and people still are in bitching mode.
On June 04 2011 17:07 Rabiator wrote: IdrA complains a lot about the other races and what he cant do and so on, but he always sounds like only Zerg have to take risks. Well that isnt the case and maybe Protoss have to realize this as well. With Forcefields and the ability to control the battlefield the Protoss have been playing it pretty safe, but maybe its time to adjust and take a little more risks.
Apart from DTs there are very very very few Protoss harasses going on. I am not talking about a bunch of Blink Stalkers jumping in and out of a base, because those are most likely about 90% of the Protoss units. I am more talking about using a Warp Prism to warp in just a few Zealots to disrupt mining and kill a few workers; I am talking about two Immortals in a Warp Prism which are used to snipe a Terrans addons while he is sieging your 3rd / 4th; I am talking about a small bunch of Void Rays (~3) to snipe air defense turrets late game ... there are loads of possibilities, but Protoss do even less harrass than Zerg in mid and late game and that is a key to success.
1.) Tons of protoss play greedy, MC is a prime example and EVERYONE says he either uses abusive timings or plays extremely greedy. Terran plays greedy behind bunkers and zergs play as greedy as humanly possible. Protoss playing greedy is the easiest to exploit in the early and mid game because beyond turtling or timings we are fragile to other race's timings.
2.) Warp prism zealot harass happens all the time. They disrupt mining yeah, at the cost of robo time, 200 mins for warp prism, 100 per zealot, and maybe 2-3 scv or drone deaths before an observant player pulls his scvs away and kills the zealots. Storm drops are still better but an aware player can still pull workers away quickly and you are putting 250 minerals and 300 gas into the hope of killing as many workers as possible. I do see storm drops in the late game even though its a large risk due to vikings and potential turrets up for deterring DTs. Killing 10 workers is nice but still not a huge game changer.
3.) Immortal drops are 700/300 to snipe addons, immortals as part of your army aren't especially great either compared to what could have been a colossi for a bit more time and an additional +50/50.
4.) Void rays aren't going to do anything? In the late game they'll be 0/0, are an expensive tech, worthless in a unit comp unless against zerg and in that case they are better in your army compared to risking them to a horde of corruptors meant for your colossi for the sake of sniping four drones and a couple spores.
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.
What? Honestly, not trying to be rude, what level do you play at?
There won't be a necessary powerful response to void rays and phoenix. Phoenix themselves can't do much until there are a large amount of them. You say this as a late game strategy, they will be 0-0, upgraded marines or hydras will tear through them. DT is superior in all ways because you can make archons and get map control, and both die to the same thing (spores/turrets) so you might as well be getting the DTs. They will already have vikings and corruptors to deal with colossi and if you don't get those colossi you will get overrun. Why would you even get one or two carriers...seriously this post just doesn't make sense. There is no point to having one or two random carriers taking up minerals/gas because they get better as you get more and vikings will already be out to deal with colossi.
As for expensive techs and Terrans having to get a Starport or two...what? Are you serious? Do you have any idea how amazing medivacs are for the bioball? They are a complete game changer in TvP that pretty much signify the terran movement into mid-game. Those same reactored starports are later used to pump out vikings as well.
Sorry but I don't think this is the answer. Expensive stargate units that are useless in a real late game combat just to do a couple hundred minerals worth of damage?
You didnt seem to think about what I wrote. Throw away your mantras and read again.
One of the key things is interrupting the rhythm of your opponent. Killing a Spire will require it to be rebuild and give you a window of opportunity to kill those pesky Mutalisks which are harrassing you all the time. Cost efficiency does not matter most of the time. Do you really think that rolling a ton of Banelings into a Planetary Fortress is "cost efficient"? It certainly isnt, but its still worth it because it removes part of the opponents economy and disrupts him. So get rid of that cost efficiency mantra and think how you could do the same to your opponents. Try how many Void Rays you need to kill a key building and support their number by a few hallucinations and / or Phoenixes to pick up 2-3 Queens who might be the only air defense the Zerg has. Be creative instead of a horse with blinkers and if you dont think you can afford it you need to work on your macro.
So Medivacs are awesome and Terrans always get them. Why dont Protoss mix in some Phoenix into their ball of death? Their main point isnt dealing damage but rather taking out key enemy units (and providing vision). In addition "just a few Phoenix" are needed to force your opponent to cover his bases with anti-air defense. Making an opponent spend additional resources is ALWAYS worth it, so stop the propaganda about it being too expensive.
So you dislike Medivacs and Vikings and dont think it is worth disrupting the Terran by killing off Reactors? They take 50 secs to build. Obviously its not worth killing a few of them, right? Wrong! Thats one of the worst things to do to a Terran late game. Since they only cost 50/50 you wont ever think about attacking them, but thats one of the achilles heels of Terran: you cant afford to lose your production facilities, because you cant afford to take off 10 SCVs to rebuild them and the addons. Terrans cant ever speed up their production as Zerg or Protoss can.
Er...we'll see if this happens, something makes me doubt it though.
On June 05 2011 02:43 Shooks wrote: This thread is the reasons why Koreans will always be better than the foreigners, lulz.
TSL.
Bye.
Online tournaments mean nothing. Koreans are definitely better than foreigners. There is no competition.
How bout Idra at MLG, huh? 2-0 some rando Korean Protoss.
Oh. That was MC?
Well in pool play right now the koreans are: MC 2W 1L Moon 2W 1L MMA 3W 0L Losira 3W 0L
So in total in pool play the Koreans are 10 and 2. Not to mention July is crushing the open bracket. So you can't quite say they are doing bad.
They are also extremely jetlagged, MC worst of all. Of course every single person on this forum will call that a stupid excuse, but the korean translator has posted on this forum saying that they were all in pretty bad condition. We'll see how they do today since jetlag is not a good excuse anymore. IdrA isn't as amazing as everyone is screaming about, he's 7-1 against Minigun recently. Once you know his style he's fucked.
On June 05 2011 02:43 Shooks wrote: This thread is the reasons why Koreans will always be better than the foreigners, lulz.
TSL.
Bye.
Online tournaments mean nothing. Koreans are definitely better than foreigners. There is no competition.
How bout Idra at MLG, huh? 2-0 some rando Korean Protoss.
Oh. That was MC?
Well in pool play right now the koreans are: MC 2W 1L Moon 2W 1L MMA 3W 0L Losira 3W 0L
So in total in pool play the Koreans are 10 and 2. Not to mention July is crushing the open bracket. So you can't quite say they are doing bad.
They have yet to hit real big names though. I am surprised moon is doing good though considering he aint a huge player like the others.
Also if July, a golden mouse winner, was not demolishing the open bracket, this game would not be worth watching.
Also Major Looking strong!
They are also extremely jetlagged, MC worst of all. Of course every single person on this forum will call that a stupid excuse, but the korean translator has posted on this forum saying that they were all in pretty bad condition. We'll see how they do today since jetlag is not a good excuse anymore.
Yeah all other other players actually live and practice at the venue, its not like they also travel to get there!
On June 05 2011 02:43 Shooks wrote: This thread is the reasons why Koreans will always be better than the foreigners, lulz.
TSL.
Bye.
Online tournaments mean nothing. Koreans are definitely better than foreigners. There is no competition.
How bout Idra at MLG, huh? 2-0 some rando Korean Protoss.
Oh. That was MC?
Idra and Naniwa were already known as being the few foreigners who can keep up with koraen play. Not surprising at all. Take a look at Korean play in general after day 1, 10-2 record, jetlag included. Overall they're much better than foreigners. Of course there are a few who can keep up, but those are rare exceptions.
the difference between koreans and foreigners is that korean nonamers are pretty much on par with most of the foreign scene by virtue of mechanics alone, whereas foreigners only have a few players (who are very good) that can compete with top koreans.
Honestly, I believe the game is very close to balanced. I personally can't think of a single flaw in balance, however, I do believe Protoss need to be changed drastically because of their reliance on Colossus which is a unit that should be getting removed for having a stupid concept with no micro in the expansion. That obviously means other things need to be fixed to make up for it.
All 3 races have had the same Code S winners (minus Fruitdealer for Zerg), and each season, the winners looked absolutely invincible. To me, that tells me the game is pretty well balanced.
The only thing is, Terran have like 5 really good players, Zerg have 3 and Protoss have 3, that is why Terran usually look so good.
On June 05 2011 03:58 Consummate wrote: Honestly, I believe the game is very close to balanced. I personally can't think of a single flaw in balance, however, I do believe Protoss need to be changed drastically because of their reliance on Colossus which is a unit that should be getting removed for having a stupid concept with no micro in the expansion. That obviously means other things need to be fixed to make up for it.
All 3 races have had the same Code S winners (minus Fruitdealer for Zerg), and each season, the winners looked absolutely invincible. To me, that tells me the game is pretty well balanced.
The only thing is, Terran have like 5 really good players, Zerg have 3 and Protoss have 3, that is why Terran usually look so good.
The problem with any balance discussion is that we can't tell if SC2 was balanced or imbalanced at some point since release since there have been so many patches and changes. It might be true that it is balanced right now, but it is too early to tell, the same way it is too early to declare any form of imbalance.
However we have to ask ourselves what kind of balance we want. As Idra stated on - I believe - SotG balance could mean that we have just coinflip scenarios which allow both players to have equal chances of winning, but that is a state we don't want SC2 to be in. And one problem I and many others have with toss is their reliance on HT, Colossi and FF. One money EMP, a good Colossi snipe or a Protoss simply running out of FFand Protoss is doomed. Just losing your key units in a battle will result in a lost since you can't rebuild them quickly enough.
Apart from that I find it difficult to deal with Zerg and I believe players will have to come up with tactics and timings to beat them.
EMP is so retarded against protoss. 1 EMP can instantly shut down pretty much all your dps if you go ht. Does damage to both sheilds and energy, and is effectively T1.5/T2 tech. EMP in SC1 was great because it was attached to the science vessel which was t3 tech.
Personally I would like to see it changed to single cast or make it be a raven ability.
I would seriously like to know what the changes to Protoss were in the latest patches that inspired the creators and sustainers of this whine thread to post 26 pages of this?
There are many untapped strategies for protoss, ranging from Immortal/HT use, warp prism harrass, archons (which are now better), carriers: things can still evolve.
Of course I agree there is a design flaw regarding the protoss race. Hell there is a design flaw in the zerg race as well, and there might be one in terran for that matter. We can only hope that these things get solved in HOTS.
Bring KA back, and make so that HTs and DTs are unlocked by the same building. Voila, Protoss just became much more versatile. No longer colossus every single game.
But who am I kidding, Z/T would just stop bitching about the colossus and concentrate on Templar. The truth is, most ppl dont want balance. No, they just want a situation where it is easy to win against the other races, but the players of the other races are keeping their mouths shut. That's why it was bad for the protoss players to be quite after the release.
Protoss gamers, just keep complaining and Blizz will have to do something about it.
On June 05 2011 05:29 okrane wrote: I would seriously like to know what the changes to Protoss were in the latest patches that inspired the creators and sustainers of this whine thread to post 26 pages of this?
people don't realize how much nerfing 4 Gate effects overall Metagame. Protoss has almost no early Game threats, especially against Zerg. While Zerg has some good Options to pressure an Expansion.
While that it self doesn't mean something is imbalanced, what also comes in Play that Finally after Months uses some of their tools, after playing "wrong" for so long.
And considering the other Nerfs and Buffs overall Protoss Gameplay is alot weaker than some patches ago.
It will take some good creativity to create solid & effective Builds that doesn't die to Buildordere losses.
On June 05 2011 05:29 okrane wrote: I would seriously like to know what the changes to Protoss were in the latest patches that inspired the creators and sustainers of this whine thread to post 26 pages of this?
There are many untapped strategies for protoss, ranging from Immortal/HT use, warp prism harrass, archons (which are now better), carriers: things can still evolve.
Of course I agree there is a design flaw regarding the protoss race. Hell there is a design flaw in the zerg race as well, and there might be one in terran for that matter. We can only hope that these things get solved in HOTS.
You wanna know the changes that effect Protoss negatively towards other match-ups? Well, you asked for it:
- Amulet removed - warpgate research increased - Ghosts gas cost down to 100, let's terran sometimes get more ghosts than Protoss has HTs - Infestor buff
And those are recent ones.
Going back in the past:
- Roach range increase, made roaches pretty potent against cannon walls
Buffs for Protoss: - Phoenix production time shorter - observer a bit cheaper - Archon became good, but still a mere recycle than core unit - Sentry Gateway build time -5 seconds.
I hope you see why Protosses complain. Be it justified or not, times are pretty rough as a toss, I can tell you!
On June 05 2011 05:12 dooraven wrote: EMP is so retarded against protoss. 1 EMP can instantly shut down pretty much all your dps if you go ht. Does damage to both sheilds and energy, and is effectively T1.5/T2 tech. EMP in SC1 was great because it was attached to the science vessel which was t3 tech.
Personally I would like to see it changed to single cast or make it be a raven ability.
EMP doesnt remove all the energy, you can still storm if you get hit by 1 emp....
On June 05 2011 05:12 dooraven wrote: EMP is so retarded against protoss. 1 EMP can instantly shut down pretty much all your dps if you go ht. Does damage to both sheilds and energy, and is effectively T1.5/T2 tech. EMP in SC1 was great because it was attached to the science vessel which was t3 tech.
Personally I would like to see it changed to single cast or make it be a raven ability.
EMP doesnt remove all the energy, you can still storm if you get hit by 1 emp....
+you can always feedback ghosts
Yeah, if you have a high templar with full energy. Which never happens.
And EMP outranges feedback. Snipe outranges feedback as well.
He's right, giving ravens emp is a good idea, it doesn't belong in the hands of a low tech caster.
Aren't they both range 9? But yeah, ghosts with EMP is more than a little odd.
Apart from small buffs to gateway units, scaling upgrades to Stalkers (at least +1/+1), nerfing of FF/Colossus (I don't think either of these should be removed though, at least not the FF), tweaking of the WG mechanic, I'd also like to see the Immortal return to being a gateway unit. I don't think the Immortal should be directly accessible but probably unlocked through research at Core and maybe tweaked a little (hardened shield as a toggle-able/cooldown ability?). This would return the Immortal to a tanking and damage dealing unit around which Zealots and Stalkers could work around and give some real small unit efficiency and effectiveness to the Protoss army.
Its essentially because we really have only one viable tech path and that is Colosi and this revolves around an immobile ball of units due to the reliance on Colosi and FFs. We have to protect those units with the bulk of our army as if they die, the whole protoss army dies because our Stakler is so pathetic unlike the Roach and the Marauder which are backbone units
Zerg and Terran players have figured out how to beat this style with bane drops, mm drops, infestors and emps etc
Protoss has the least flexible tech options, if you build a robo you are commiting your self to robo in the midgame and hope to try get a transition,
Twilight Council was a worthwhile tech tree until nerf. Now essentaily you're just praying that EMPs don't get your Hts.
Stargate is unexplored but this is basically because if you go Air your army is pathetic as protoss and just dies to any push from terran/zerg.
EMP doesnt remove all the energy, you can still storm if you get hit by 1 emp....
+you can always feedback ghosts
Terrans just get a lot of ghosts now and can emp twice at the exact same spot. Feedback would work except it has a range of 9 and EMP has a range of 10.
Ideally the Feedback EMP war would decide who wins an Engagement in a HT/Ghost Battle but EMP is much better than storm and Terran T1 is much much better than T1 toss.
So yeah we protoss need to find better stargate builds and twilight council builds.
Well, Protoss Air is not really viable because of the 9 range on Vikings which they have because of the 9 range on Colossus. It would be nice to see a return of viable sky Toss against T although it's still viable, IMO, against Z.
All that said though, I don't think Protoss should QQ yet (and as a Toss player I do think that this is what this thread is mainly about despite all the denial) because I think Blizzard have been too trigger happy with patch changes. Let the game rest for a while and see what happens, and let top Toss players strategize and talk about and try different options. If after a few months, the same issues are still being confronted and Toss is still being carried (at tourney level) by a couple of exceptional players (Naniwa/MC for example) then patch changes will be warranted, and Toss players can then legitimately say so (even if it does mean a few months of pain).
I've played zerg before and it is nowhere near as hard as people make it out to be. I'm a mid master level toss and I played zerg for a very short time, but after I did I was already at diamond level for zerg. All those zergs that say that their race is so much harder bla bla actually takes skill bla bla toss ez zerg so hard are full of fkin bullshit. IMO zergs are inclined to think that their race is the hardest because it feeds their egos and makes them feel better when they lose. And finally when protoss is actually underpowered(now) they just say that its because protoss lack the skills of the other races. Protosses appear lackluster and unskilled right now such as san or anypro because their race itself is lackluster, its harder as a toss to show good play and win than with zerg. The fact of the matter is that right now protoss is doing terribly against both zergs and terrans, and they always didn't do that well against terrans but now they are doing bad as well against zergs, which brings up the protoss qq that is completely justified. I mean if a race as a whole is doing badly against both other races, that means that it is underpowered. Also, this is not reflected only by super tournament. I think it is pretty much established that protoss is weak at the moment, whether this will change because of new innovations or balance patches is yet to be resolved. However if zergs keep falsely qqing that their race takes skill while protoss doesn't and blizz listens to them, protoss will remain underpowered for a while.
On June 05 2011 07:42 bananaman533 wrote: I've played zerg before and it is nowhere near as hard as people make it out to be. I'm a mid master level toss and I played zerg for a very short time, but after I did I was already at diamond level for zerg. All those zergs that say that their race is so much harder bla bla actually takes skill bla bla toss ez zerg so hard are full of fkin bullshit. IMO zergs are inclined to think that their race is the hardest because it feeds their egos and makes them feel better when they lose. And finally when protoss is actually underpowered(now) they just say that its because protoss lack the skills of the other races. Protosses appear lackluster and unskilled right now such as san or anypro because their race itself is lackluster, its harder as a toss to show good play and win than with zerg. The fact of the matter is that right now protoss is doing terribly against both zergs and terrans, and they always didn't do that well against terrans but now they are doing bad as well against zergs, which brings up the protoss qq that is completely justified. I mean if a race as a whole is doing badly against both other races, that means that it is underpowered. Also, this is not reflected only by super tournament. I think it is pretty much established that protoss is weak at the moment, whether this will change because of new innovations or balance patches is yet to be resolved. However if zergs keep falsely qqing that their race takes skill while protoss doesn't and blizz listens to them, protoss will remain underpowered for a while.
Yep, I completely agree with you. Mid master protoss and zerg here. People blame inbalance instead of their skill but I am not sure if protoss underpowered, but they lack something, most likely new strategy.
Eh, let me see if I get this. You watch GSL --> see protoss players lose a lot --> wanna change race. Talking about fleeing from challenges. Don't see the point of this thread. Protoss has just been figured out and is forced to think new ideas on how to play. Not the worst thing that can happen.
I think we need to incorporate more pheonixes in our builds. They are tremendously useful in sniping medivacs and overlords but the stuff we need to work on is the timing so we don't die to pressures, also they tank vikings pretty well.
Yea. The only viable path for a new strategy is probably more phoenixes. Unfortunately, it doesn't stop mass roaches, and phoenixes are still WAY too expensive as paper planes.
The problem right here with people here thinking that Protoss's lack strategies is the fact Protoss units don't work so well unless they're in balls. You canno just mass one untis and expect protoss to be awesome.
First of all. Yes, its actually true. SOME protoss players have been lackluster performance wise.
Secondly, protoss players are sticking to strategies that made the race ridiculously strong over the past months. These strategies are now being figured out by Zerg players/Terran players.
Someone summed it up in one quote, which was right on the money. And I will repeat it for you;
When is protoss at its strongest? When it has the deathball. How do you avoid playing against the deathball? Kill them before they get it.
People will never learn. Recent sc2 history showed us that there is no such thing as imbalance (that's not entirely true, some things were really imba like reapers). Protosses have dominated zergs for months and months. It took a long time for zergs to learn to play against this (and patches are not the reason, just look at morrow ling banelings style vs P, it's a style that could have worked in beta but that just have been discovered). Now zergs knows how to play vs protosses, they have powerful new timings (ling roach 8 minutes bust), so it's protosses turn to invent new builds and new ways to play. That's the normal cycle of starcraft. Zergs were crying when protoss were killing them during months ; now we know that this whine was not justified, this was a "learn to play" case. Please protoss players, don't fall in the whine side.
It can be discouraging to be in the bottom of such a cycle, but blaming imbalance will just delay the discovery of new builds and unit compositions. Protoss have a tough time, this is true. But it has nothing to do with balance. It has everything to do with a recent patch that messed up their timings and all their builds. They have to relearn PvZ because of new zerg builds, PvT because terrans learned to play too (this is another long story but i'll just skip it), and even PvP because the patch opened up a lot of new viable paths. Having to relearn and rediscover all 3 matchups at once is the reason P players are struggling and why most pro P are slumping.
Just switch to zerg and go roaach ling(what I been doing every game on ladder lately against toss) until blizzard fix toss or a new toss hero comes out with some decent strategy.
Litterally it takes no skill just hotkey your hatch and do a 7-8 min roachling rush and1a and its gg. At Low level you don't even need to do creep spread.
On June 05 2011 09:31 xbankx wrote: Just switch to zerg and go roaach ling(what I been doing every game on ladder lately against toss) until blizzard fix toss or a new toss hero comes out with some decent strategy.
Litterally it takes no skill just hotkey your hatch and do a 7-8 min roachling rush and1a and its gg. At Low level you don't even need to do creep spread.
Hello 600 master. I'm 1500. On my level Protosses don't die to roach ling.
On June 05 2011 09:31 xbankx wrote: Just switch to zerg and go roaach ling(what I been doing every game on ladder lately against toss) until blizzard fix toss or a new toss hero comes out with some decent strategy.
Litterally it takes no skill just hotkey your hatch and do a 7-8 min roachling rush and1a and its gg. At Low level you don't even need to do creep spread.
Hello 600 master. I'm 1500. On my level Protosses don't die to roach ling.
Really? How's that possible, when even code s players die to that strategy?
On June 05 2011 08:52 MrCon wrote: People will never learn. Recent sc2 history showed us that there is no such thing as imbalance (that's not entirely true, some things were really imba like reapers). Protosses have dominated zergs for months and months. It took a long time for zergs to learn to play against this (and patches are not the reason, just look at morrow ling banelings style vs P, it's a style that could have worked in beta but that just have been discovered). Now zergs knows how to play vs protosses, they have powerful new timings (ling roach 8 minutes bust), so it's protosses turn to invent new builds and new ways to play. That's the normal cycle of starcraft. Zergs were crying when protoss were killing them during months ; now we know that this whine was not justified, this was a "learn to play" case. Please protoss players, don't fall in the whine side.
You're right, it's pretty cyclical
I'd say the MU was Zerg favoured until around november when Tyler made Mutaling nearly impossible with 6 gate (Gosucoaching showmatch where Tyler upset Idra). Then it was pretty even until late december when void ray colossus really came out. Since April the momentum is turning again with since the Losira build came out. Since then Z is putting up a clinic of creative build orders and Protoss is struggling a bit.
What amazes me though, is that the focus is always on PvZ/ZvP. Despite T generally having the highest representation and success.
Because Terran is a well rounded race that can easily be brought to a place of balance because it is solid, stable. Zerg and Protoss both feel like they are apt to bounce back and forth between UP/OP because of some of their mechanics/design.