| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
AsianEcksDragon
United States1036 Posts
On August 07 2011 13:08 skrzmark wrote: Bane-drops more infestor usage, and roach-ling all-in became quite popular. I'm sorry. I was not aware that Terran could make banelings, infestors, roaches and lings. | ||
|
Deleted User 61629
1664 Posts
| ||
|
fadestep
United States605 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + trolling. but really, as P is still bitched at by pros and random ladder kids alike for being easy and OP it always makes me laughs to see stuff like this. yes, i know my race is OP and all i do is a move, now can you GG out and move on to your next 60+% winrate matchup against me? | ||
|
babysimba
10466 Posts
On August 07 2011 12:59 HolyArrow wrote: Yeah, I wish that mindset was used when we got KA taken out of the game following a period of comparable Protoss dominance a while back... -_-;; Regardless of balance, KA was just bad game design. It totally removes the need for positional awareness for toss. To some extent, warp-ins are the same. I believe this is what generates the hate for toss race, toss with no game sense can still do reasonably well. Just compare the skill level of toss vs zerg/terran in GSL, you can tell that playing toss doesn't really require a large skill set (you just need to be very good at certain stuffs). I hope HOTS can solve this issue though, making toss less of a "ball of army" race by giving them units with higher efficiency in low numbers. | ||
|
Xxavi
United States1248 Posts
On August 07 2011 10:06 Stress wrote: Keep in mind the Protoss in Korea only have a few outstanding players, unlike the other 2 races, and the marine/tank/raven timing is ridiculously good. I also think that the longer games in TvP are decide by good EMPs, wouldn't be surprised if there was some sort of change to it. I am tired of hearing about the player skills. Every fucking time there is a clear evidence that Protoss sucks, it's because players are shit. Every time Protoss perform well, it's because Protoss is OP. How retarded is that argument? If the statistics show more than 800 games, how can you talk about outstanding players? Isn't this stats for all games? Truly terrible argument. PS MC is better than Polt. Period. | ||
|
Dommk
Australia4865 Posts
On August 07 2011 13:23 babysimba wrote: Regardless of balance, KA was just bad game design. It totally removes the need for positional awareness for toss. To some extent, warp-ins are the same. I believe this is what generates the hate for toss race, toss with no game sense can still do reasonably well. Just compare the skill level of toss vs zerg/terran in GSL, you can tell that playing toss doesn't really require a large skill set (you just need to be very good at certain stuffs). I hope HOTS can solve this issue though, making toss less of a "ball of army" race by giving them units with higher efficiency in low numbers. Then why are they still losing? And why are there so few Protoss in GSL? I hate this argument, apparently the "easiest" race is the least represented and does the worst...because..."just case" Or maybe it is just because you have no idea what "Game sense" actually is and vastly underestimating what it takes to play Toss at a high level | ||
|
fadestep
United States605 Posts
On August 07 2011 13:23 babysimba wrote: Regardless of balance, KA was just bad game design. It totally removes the need for positional awareness for toss. To some extent, warp-ins are the same. I believe this is what generates the hate for toss race, toss with no game sense can still do reasonably well. Just compare the skill level of toss vs zerg/terran in GSL, you can tell that playing toss doesn't really require a large skill set (you just need to be very good at certain stuffs). I hope HOTS can solve this issue though, making toss less of a "ball of army" race by giving them units with higher efficiency in low numbers. This is mindless drivel. Toss with no game sense can still do reasonably well because of warp in? That makes so little sense it hurts my brain. The ability to make small sets of units instantly doesn't allow you to have no game sense in any fashion. Like, none. The Zerg mechanic actually lends itself a lot better to this argument, as popping 30 roaches when you have no army and you see an attack coming seems to show a lack of game sense more than warping in a pair of stalkers and a pair of Zealots to try and beat off a drop. I don't think Zerg takes no game sense, just saying the conclusion you are trying to draw is easier to do with Zerg than Protoss and Zerg is super-duper hard right? | ||
|
AsianEcksDragon
United States1036 Posts
On August 07 2011 13:23 babysimba wrote: Regardless of balance, KA was just bad game design. It totally removes the need for positional awareness for toss. To some extent, warp-ins are the same. I believe this is what generates the hate for toss race, toss with no game sense can still do reasonably well. Just compare the skill level of toss vs zerg/terran in GSL, you can tell that playing toss doesn't really require a large skill set (you just need to be very good at certain stuffs). I hope HOTS can solve this issue though, making toss less of a "ball of army" race by giving them units with higher efficiency in low numbers. You still need very solid mechanics and control to play a high level whether it is to hold off a roach/ling attack or using high temps against ghost and infestors. But you're right about the lack of game sense requirement. | ||
|
HolyArrow
United States7116 Posts
On August 07 2011 13:23 babysimba wrote: Regardless of balance, KA was just bad game design. It totally removes the need for positional awareness for toss. To some extent, warp-ins are the same. I believe this is what generates the hate for toss race, toss with no game sense can still do reasonably well. Just compare the skill level of toss vs zerg/terran in GSL, you can tell that playing toss doesn't really require a large skill set (you just need to be very good at certain stuffs). I hope HOTS can solve this issue though, making toss less of a "ball of army" race by giving them units with higher efficiency in low numbers. You can theorycraft to get around the hypocrisy all you want. I can complain about other supposedly negative aspects of game design all day, some that, if fixed, would actually benefit Toss. For example, why do bunkers get a refund at all? Doesn't that eliminate the need for good game sense as well, since a Terran can just make bunkers whenever he feels he might be unsafe, at relatively little cost if his game sense is off? Are Blue Flame Hellions, a unit that can end a game with one good shot, good game design? I could go on and on, but whatever. The fact is that people are being all careful and intelligent about balance now saying "Now, now, let's let the game develop before calling for a nerf", when a while ago the moment KA seemed to make PvT imba in favor of Protoss, everyone was crying for the KA nerf. | ||
|
FredSuceBats
Canada12 Posts
| ||
|
VTPerfect
United States487 Posts
On August 07 2011 13:23 babysimba wrote: Regardless of balance, KA was just bad game design. It totally removes the need for positional awareness for toss. To some extent, warp-ins are the same. I believe this is what generates the hate for toss race, toss with no game sense can still do reasonably well. Just compare the skill level of toss vs zerg/terran in GSL, you can tell that playing toss doesn't really require a large skill set (you just need to be very good at certain stuffs). I hope HOTS can solve this issue though, making toss less of a "ball of army" race by giving them units with higher efficiency in low numbers. careful what you wish for, you'de be surprised the lengths certain protoss players are going right now to make 1.3.6 protoss work. give protoss an equal opportunity unit and u may find yourself severely lacking in the skill department. | ||
|
skrzmark
United States1528 Posts
On August 07 2011 13:21 AsianEcksDragon wrote: I'm sorry. I was not aware that Terran could make banelings, infestors, roaches and lings. My bad I thought they were saying ZvP. | ||
|
Kammalleri
Canada613 Posts
People complain because protoss are OP late game, but until 10-15 minutes you make a mistake you're dead. | ||
|
Chargelot
2275 Posts
On August 07 2011 13:04 MayorITC wrote: That's funny. High Templars got nerfed cause Terrans complained. That's funny. High Templars got nerfed because Blizzard didn't want Protoss to be able to instantly kill anything in range of a pylon. And really, you brought up the colossus? Something that hasn't changed since beta? I mean shit, I'm going to start complaining that Protoss players whined and my Concussive Shells now require an upgrade. | ||
|
RaiKageRyu
Canada4773 Posts
| ||
|
Xxavi
United States1248 Posts
Remember, players like Rain, BitByBitPrime weren't Protoss. They got where they got not because of their skill, but Terran being so flexible with their strategies. They have a lot of units that could be genuinely good. Forget about the helions, they still have a lot of other units which will be further explored. PS It's interesting that both Artosis and Idra played as Protoss (in their spare time?), yet besides the complaining, non of them switched. If the race is so OP, just switch it and destroy nerds everywhere. No, it turns out it isn't that easy. The only memorable product of that BS is the famous "the Artosis pylon" =) | ||
|
lizzard_warish
589 Posts
On August 07 2011 12:26 awesomoecalypse wrote: Thats why I said analysis, at the very least they can make reasoned arguments which we can half understand [and hopefully pick up some tips on our play]. Thats a discussion worth having, stats... not so much.Yeah cause pros are totally unbiased and always agree with each other, right? | ||
|
Amui
Canada10567 Posts
On August 07 2011 13:32 Kammalleri wrote: Terran early pushes vs Protoss are ridiculous. Ghost marine push, MTB, MTBR MTR. The last three pretty much looks the same until you get it in your face and they require completely different composition. People complain because protoss are OP late game, but until 10-15 minutes you make a mistake you're dead. Protoss are stronger late game. That's just a fact because otherwise we'd have shitty early, mid and late game. They aren't OP until they get around 12+gates, 3 robos, 2 stargates, a huge bank to spend and are making 3 colossus 2 voids and warping in 30 supply a cycle. | ||
|
Serpico
4285 Posts
On August 07 2011 13:34 Xxavi wrote: In general though, when will people stop calling Protoss players shit? Does Idra need to change race and then whine about it? Or Bisu to come to SC2 and lose to some random Polt? Remember, players like Rain, BitByBitPrime weren't Protoss. They got where they got not because of their skill, but Terran being so flexible with their strategies. They have a lot of units that could be genuinely good. Forget about the helions, they still have a lot of other units which will be further explored. PS It's interesting that both Artosis and Idra played as Protoss (in their spare time?), yet besides the complaining, non of them switched. If the race is so OP, just switch it and destroy nerds everywhere. No, it turns out it isn't that easy. The only memorable product of that BS is the famous "the Artosis pylon" =) Are you done being mad? Switching races at the pro level is extremely difficult and balance changes could occur anyways during that time. It isnt worth it unless you hate the play style of a race. | ||
|
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
On August 07 2011 13:35 Amui wrote: Protoss are strong late game. They aren't OP until they get around 12+gates, 3 robos, 2 stargates, a huge bank to spend and are making 3 colossus 2 voids and warping in 30 supply a cycle. Who lets a protoss do that? Serious question. | ||
| ||
|
|
BSL
Bonyth vs Doodle
Dewalt vs TerrOr
Patches Events
GSL
Cure vs herO
SHIN vs Maru
IPSL
Bonyth vs Napoleon
G5 vs JDConan
BSL
OyAji vs JDConan
DragOn vs TBD
Replay Cast
Monday Night Weeklies
Replay Cast
The PondCast
Kung Fu Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
