| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
r691175002
249 Posts
Many Protoss champions snuck by on a single clever build order or some lucky cheeses, but end up failing as soon as the meta shifts. The number of individual Protoss champions is dramatically higher than the number of individual Terran champions, and Protoss wins are far more widely distributed because of the lower "mechanical barrier to entry" of the race. | ||
|
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
On August 13 2014 22:41 Mojito99 wrote: Assuming the last sentence is correct. What is the conclusion? I'll answer these one by one because these are all valid interpretations. That terran players are superior RTS players and the fact that the top 100 world wide does not consist of 75% terran speaks to the imbalance of the game? Yes and no. Yes in that playing a mechanically demanding race for 4 years is obviously going to make someone more mechanically skilled than doing timing attacks for 4 years (and that's just as true of SCV pulls as it is of Roach busts). So if the question is really asking "if we forced all SC2 players to play a completely different RTS where mechanics are the most important factor, would former Terran pros start out being very dominant?" Then I think the answer has to be yes. That doesn't mean they are innately more skilled. But it seems sensible that Protoss and Zerg would attract a lot of innately less skilled players. That terran is more demanding in general and therefore people which play terran are handicapping themselves? Again, yes and no. It is more demanding, but that doesn't mean Terrans would have more success as Protoss or Zerg. It doesn't matter how good you are at the game mechanically if it comes down to Roach vs Roach war, or Oracle vs DT openings. Other skills come into play there. Skills that I think are less deserving of accolades and monetary compensation in a competition that wants (in the long run if not right this second) to be taken seriously. That terran needs to become less mechanical and/or Protoss needs to be more mechanically demanding? (The latter of which was hinted at by Blizz) Considering that Terran games frequently top "Best Games" lists, and the most loved PvPs in recent memory have all come from mechanically gifted players like Zest, Parting, Rain, and Classic, I think it's pretty clear that Protoss needs to be more mechanically demanding and not the other way around. So yes, "Blizzard is right" (finally), but saying and doing are two different things, and in typical Blizzard fashion they've said nothing about how much more mechanically demanding they want Protoss to be. It's possible they'll throw in another Oracle-esque unit and be satisfied with the results, when it's clear to me that that would have no significant effect whatsoever. That the game is imbalanced in favour of terran because the top protosses cannot even show how good they are because the race does not allow for it? Absolutely!!! This is one of the biggest problems, I think. Terran is the spectator-friendly race because they're the ones who have to get things done in a game. They're the ones who show "heart" by microing their units to achieve greatness. A Protoss player who turtles on a deathball for 20 minutes while preventing drops isn't showing heart, on a subconscious level he is the goliath whom David must defeat, so I firmly believe that a lot of viewers will identify with the Terran. That's bad. It divides the community in a way that's more fundamental than "Player X is better than Player Y!" I hate to see Rain struggle against mid-tier Terrans, not because I know for a fact that "in a fair universe" he's skilled enough to take them on, but because he eschews a lot of the trickery that lesser skilled Protoss get results with. He could be getting better results if he did more coin flippy builds, but he doesn't, so it's no wonder he thinks Terran is imbalanced while all the other Protoss are laughing to the bank for over half a year. I want to know what he's truly capable of, and I feel like the current design of the Protoss race isn't pushing him to his limits and giving him those opportunities at all. The skill ceiling for what he can do with his playstyle isn't limitless. There are diminishing returns to how much you can micro 3-base Colossi with Zealot runbys. I think that's bad for players like Rain, bad for Protoss, and bad for SC2 in general. I hope you find my stance reasonable enough to continue the discussion. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7028 Posts
| ||
|
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
On August 13 2014 23:10 Grumbels wrote: I can play the same piano piece at the same tempo as a professional player, and even not make any obvious mistakes in terms of wrong notes. Yet it will be obviously clear that one performance is better than the other. Mechanics is more than apm. Earlier, I divided up the primary categories of SC skill as mechanics, tactics, multitasking, and strategy. Do you really think that there's something more to mechanics than the physical action of clicking that isn't covered by tactics, multitasking, or strategy? If so, what is it? | ||
|
Morbidius
Brazil3449 Posts
On August 13 2014 23:16 pure.Wasted wrote: Earlier, I divided up the primary categories of SC skill as mechanics, tactics, multitasking, and strategy. Do you really think that there's something more to mechanics than the physical action of clicking that isn't covered by tactics, multitasking, or strategy? If so, what is it? I think multitasking is part of mechanics in the first place. Mechanics isn't just mindless clicking, it consists of sophisticated decisions and a lot of game knowledge, and it only comes with a lot of mastery over the game. There are players with 300 apm and terrible mechanics and players with 200 and amazing mechanics. | ||
|
pure.Wasted
Canada4701 Posts
On August 13 2014 23:30 Morbidius wrote: I think multitasking is part of mechanics in the first place. Mechanics isn't just mindless clicking, it consists of sophisticated decisions and a lot of game knowledge, and it only comes with a lot of mastery over the game. There are players with 300 apm and terrible mechanics and players with 200 and amazing mechanics. There is always going to be overlap between all the skills, that is inevitable. But I think there are sufficient differences between mechanics and multitasking to set them aside as separate skills. In the game between Zest and Maru, Zest was microing intensely during the fights, but failed to macro behind them. And although he won both engagements due, in part, to his unit control (mechanics), he still lost the game soon after. I don't think that a unified mechanics/multitasking theory would account for this. Multitasking is closer to willpower than it is to mechanics, I think. It comes from focus of the mind. When Innovation gets reverse swept by Soulkey or crumbles under the pressure of Maru's ridiculous all-ins, it's not his mechanics failing him, it's his ability to effectively parse the game for information while shit is goin down something fierce. | ||
|
Mojito99
Germany154 Posts
On August 13 2014 23:07 r691175002 wrote: It is clearly easier for skilled players to differentiate themselves when playing terran. The top terran players are consistently the best. Many Protoss champions snuck by on a single clever build order or some lucky cheeses, but end up failing as soon as the meta shifts. The number of individual Protoss champions is dramatically higher than the number of individual Terran champions, and Protoss wins are far more widely distributed because of the lower "mechanical barrier to entry" of the race. I think thats a bit unfair. I don't disagree but you can also look at this in another way: The protoss race is very much about "builds" and trying to confront your opponent with a scenario that they have to react to. This is an inherent race philosophy and not exactly a lucky cheese. At the same time, because of the variety of openings you have to throw at your opponent to be competitive, consistency is harder to acquire. | ||
|
Mojito99
Germany154 Posts
On August 13 2014 23:09 pure.Wasted wrote: I'll answer these one by one because these are all valid interpretations. Yes and no. Yes in that playing a mechanically demanding race for 4 years is obviously going to make someone more mechanically skilled than doing timing attacks for 4 years (and that's just as true of SCV pulls as it is of Roach busts). So if the question is really asking "if we forced all SC2 players to play a completely different RTS where mechanics are the most important factor, would former Terran pros start out being very dominant?" Then I think the answer has to be yes. That doesn't mean they are innately more skilled. But it seems sensible that Protoss and Zerg would attract a lot of innately less skilled players. Again, yes and no. It is more demanding, but that doesn't mean Terrans would have more success as Protoss or Zerg. It doesn't matter how good you are at the game mechanically if it comes down to Roach vs Roach war, or Oracle vs DT openings. Other skills come into play there. Skills that I think are less deserving of accolades and monetary compensation in a competition that wants (in the long run if not right this second) to be taken seriously. Considering that Terran games frequently top "Best Games" lists, and the most loved PvPs in recent memory have all come from mechanically gifted players like Zest, Parting, Rain, and Classic, I think it's pretty clear that Protoss needs to be more mechanically demanding and not the other way around. So yes, "Blizzard is right" (finally), but saying and doing are two different things, and in typical Blizzard fashion they've said nothing about how much more mechanically demanding they want Protoss to be. It's possible they'll throw in another Oracle-esque unit and be satisfied with the results, when it's clear to me that that would have no significant effect whatsoever. Absolutely!!! This is one of the biggest problems, I think. Terran is the spectator-friendly race because they're the ones who have to get things done in a game. They're the ones who show "heart" by microing their units to achieve greatness. A Protoss player who turtles on a deathball for 20 minutes while preventing drops isn't showing heart, on a subconscious level he is the goliath whom David must defeat, so I firmly believe that a lot of viewers will identify with the Terran. That's bad. It divides the community in a way that's more fundamental than "Player X is better than Player Y!" I hate to see Rain struggle against mid-tier Terrans, not because I know for a fact that "in a fair universe" he's skilled enough to take them on, but because he eschews a lot of the trickery that lesser skilled Protoss get results with. He could be getting better results if he did more coin flippy builds, but he doesn't, so it's no wonder he thinks Terran is imbalanced while all the other Protoss are laughing to the bank for over half a year. I want to know what he's truly capable of, and I feel like the current design of the Protoss race isn't pushing him to his limits and giving him those opportunities at all. The skill ceiling for what he can do with his playstyle isn't limitless. There are diminishing returns to how much you can micro 3-base Colossi with Zealot runbys. I think that's bad for players like Rain, bad for Protoss, and bad for SC2 in general. I hope you find my stance reasonable enough to continue the discussion. Yes i do find your responses reasonable. Despite arguing for the complexity of Protoss, i play random so I am not emotionally invested. I replied to another post on how it is more difficult to achieve consistency as protoss because the high win rates are distributed across the board and are due to meta shifts and - although not lucky - the unpredictability of BOs. PvZ best illustrates this point where, for the longest time, any scouted pressure immediately spells defeat for the protoss and any unscouted pressure results in a zerg loss. This is a bit different for pvt because of the way terran produced units, but the logic applies nonetheless. On an unrelated note: The recent changes have force protoss into a very predictable playstyle as certain compositions as well as all ins and pressure builds in general are significantly weaker. The effect of which is blatantly obvious. From GSL to the EPS finals that are going on right now where terran just goes 5 rax double starport and pulls SVS against a protoss on a) 2 base b) against a P which was not harassed before c) is on 2/2 vs Terran 1/1 and so far its 13 T vs 2 P wins in terms of the SCV pulls. The issue being here is not that the SCV pull is so incredibly strong and comparably easy to execute, but that the predictability of protoss now can be hard countered by a quick 2nd SP and the same SCV pull BO at all times. Not even taking balance into account. I would not be surprised if there was another patch adjustment announced this month to stop the SCV pull from being the exclusive pvt strategy. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland11915 Posts
On August 13 2014 23:09 pure.Wasted wrote: Absolutely!!! This is one of the biggest problems, I think. Terran is the spectator-friendly race because they're the ones who have to get things done in a game. They're the ones who show "heart" by microing their units to achieve greatness. My guess is terran was always the "spectator-friendly" race, whether it was dominant or underpowered, whether it had to do stuff or not. It's not really about having to overcome stuff, it's mostly the flashy micro (like you said) and the fact that it's little humans against little aliens, and we happen to be humans. Showing heart is a dangerous word choice in that context, I feel. | ||
|
Morbidius
Brazil3449 Posts
On August 13 2014 23:36 pure.Wasted wrote: There is always going to be overlap between all the skills, that is inevitable. But I think there are sufficient differences between mechanics and multitasking to set them aside as separate skills. In the game between Zest and Maru, Zest was microing intensely during the fights, but failed to macro behind them. And although he won both engagements due, in part, to his unit control (mechanics), he still lost the game soon after. I don't think that a unified mechanics/multitasking theory would account for this. Multitasking is closer to willpower than it is to mechanics, I think. It comes from focus of the mind. When Innovation gets reverse swept by Soulkey or crumbles under the pressure of Maru's ridiculous all-ins, it's not his mechanics failing him, it's his ability to effectively parse the game for information while shit is goin down something fierce. I'm not sure i watched the game you mentioned, but macro and micro are both part of mechanics. So in the situation you mentioned Zest lost because the macro part of his mechanics failed. Multitasking is merely the part where your mechanics are challenged to their extreme and even top tier players like Zest and Maru will make errors there. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
PvZ best illustrates this point where, for the longest time, any scouted pressure immediately spells defeat for the protoss and any unscouted pressure results in a zerg loss. This is a bit different for pvt because of the way terran produced units, but the logic applies nonetheless. I don't agree with this. Protoss in HotS - unlike WoL PvZ - does not rely on coinflipping and BO-diversion. You can play macro in PvZ while allowing the Zerg full information of what you are doing and you will still be fine for as long as you also acquire all the information about what the Zerg is doing. It's similar for PvT. However, I fully agree on the statement that Protoss players can and often do rely chances. Not because they must, but because they can. (Also in other matchups - especially ZvZ - such options exist) | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On August 14 2014 00:04 Nebuchad wrote: My guess is terran was always the "spectator-friendly" race, whether it was dominant or underpowered, whether it had to do stuff or not. It's not really about having to overcome stuff, it's mostly the flashy micro (like you said) and the fact that it's little humans against little aliens, and we happen to be humans. Showing heart is a dangerous word choice in that context, I feel. Yup, I agree. On the one hand, since most of Terran micro comes down to kiting or other visible movement-like action, it immidiatly looks flashy. Similarily , mutas, blinking stalkers, banelings and HT are seen as "micro-units", because you can clearly see what they are doing. While a roach can flank, kite-forwards and targetfire all you want, it's not going to look very distinct and the immidiate gameplay effects aren't very visual (even though the effect between roaches being stuck behind each other or behind forcefields, or being microed/positioned correctly can be immense). While on the flipside, a zergling does move regardless of being microed or not, so the difference between a microed and unmicroed zergling only becomes apparent if you additionally ask yourself, whether that Zergling hit certain targets or moved in certain ways. On the other hand, it's pretty easy to bond with "the guys" and "their cars", while some sci-fi space alien requires a specific lore and explanation to identify them as "your race". Also blizzard did an amazing job with differentiating Terran units visually from each other (especially units like tanks and marines or Thors and Marines are easy to distinguish), while I feel like many Z units are too similar in ingame looks and movement (think about how Zerg units always swarm towards an opponent, regardless of the unit; while with Terran there are often moving and standing parts of the army) and Protoss is a visual clusterfuck anyways due to the Colossus standing on top of the other units most of the time. | ||
|
Salient
United States876 Posts
On August 14 2014 00:20 Big J wrote: Yup, I agree. On the one hand, since most of Terran micro comes down to kiting or other visible movement-like action, it immidiatly looks flashy. While on the flipside, a zergling does move regardless of being microed or not, so the difference between a microed and unmicroed zergling only becomes apparent if you additionally ask yourself, whether that Zergling hit certain targets or moved in certain ways. On the other hand, it's pretty easy to bond with "the guys" and "their cars", while some sci-fi space alien requires a specific lore and explanation to identify them as "your race". Also blizzard did an amazing job with differentiating Terran units visually from each other (especially units like tanks and marines or Thors and Marines are easy to distinguish), while I feel like many Z units are too similar in ingame looks and movement (think about how Zerg units always swarm towards an opponent, regardless of the unit; while with Terran there are often moving and standing parts of the army) and Protoss is a visual clusterfuck anyways due to the Colossus standing on top of the other units most of the time. Terran has a lot of fans because it is by far the most noob-friendly race in the gutter leagues (Bronze to Gold). The race gets a get out of jail free card "with one click" for supply blocks and total lack of detection. Stimmed marines and marauders provide simple brute force power that is easy for novices to understand. I think Terran also probably has themost little kids for the same reason. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland23767 Posts
 Conversely, the weak period for Terrans still saw the big names performing well, and those are the guys who are doing well now. It's probably not even the case if you really analyse things, but it is the perception that gets formed and reinforced. There is to me a happy medium between a stagnant top level with the same few names winning everything, and something that feels very volatile and changeable, making it harder to really get behind and support certain players. It's also tough to figure out who is who if you were to watch unmarked VoDs, HerO perhaps with his wilful inefficient styles  | ||
|
Mojito99
Germany154 Posts
On August 14 2014 00:49 Wombat_NI wrote: I feel one of the annoyances for many about the strong Protoss period was also the sense that there was a different champion every other week, for reasons I don't fully understand there seemed to be a lot of peaks and subsequent troughs. Part is no doubt how Protoss functions as a race, but very few Protoss stick around at close to their peak level, it rotates a lot more. Rain and Zest are there, Parting is a baller and Dear is hanging in there just about. The most recent Code S champion is now out of the GSL for the season ffs why do you think this is though? | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On August 13 2014 23:47 Mojito99 wrote: On an unrelated note: The recent changes have force protoss into a very predictable playstyle as certain compositions as well as all ins and pressure builds in general are significantly weaker. The effect of which is blatantly obvious. From GSL to the EPS finals that are going on right now where terran just goes 5 rax double starport and pulls SVS against a protoss on a) 2 base b) against a P which was not harassed before c) is on 2/2 vs Terran 1/1 and so far its 13 T vs 2 P wins in terms of the SCV pulls. The issue being here is not that the SCV pull is so incredibly strong and comparably easy to execute, but that the predictability of protoss now can be hard countered by a quick 2nd SP and the same SCV pull BO at all times. Not even taking balance into account. I would not be surprised if there was another patch adjustment announced this month to stop the SCV pull from being the exclusive pvt strategy. 5 rax 2 port all-ins do not "hardcounter" Colossus openings at all, if only because Protoss is not at all forced to stay on the Colossus path after he opens that way… As for SCV pulls on 2 bases, they're bad and can be easily dealt with: - Stay on 2 bases yourself and tech switch to Storm: Bogus vs MaNa, King Sejong, ATC Finals. - Stay on 2 bases yourself and simply keep building units: Bbyong vs Stats, Merry, Code S. Patching SCV pulls (how would you even do that?) now would be a stupid decision because there is no evidence, so far, that they're a structural problem (= even given several months, Protoss players would be unable to find solutions). As usual people confuse what may be only a temporary trend (Terran metagaming Protoss' recent strategies after a major shift) with a structural problem. There was already a "SCV pull period" in the past that faded away after Protoss adapted. What symptoms do you see that a similar phenomenon is not going to happen again? You also have to be careful about what games you pick to analyze that. For example take the heroMarine vs Showtime series: Game 1 = Showtime opens gate 10 MSC pressure into Oracle expand, inflicts little damage and misreads the game after scouting heroMarine's fake third, going Dark shrine and warping a few DTs against a SCV pull. He also blunders away his MSC before the fight (no Overcharge at natural). He blocks heroMarine's army with Forcefields but then is left with no energy to cast Guardian Shield. He probably missclicked his Blink Stalkers, because he blinked towards the back of his natural exactly when heroMarine unleashed his Vikings on his Colossi. There were 9 Vikings left when all the Colossi fell. No way this is a normal scenario. Game 2 = heroMarine gets away with CC rax CC, the only build that allows Terran to hit at 13'30 with 170 supply. Again no Guardian Shield when the fight occurred. Game 3 = Showtime finally tries to adapt (it's only the 6th TvP in a row in which heroMarine plans to pull SCVs…) but loses his Nexus to a stim timing, so he could not have Storm ready in time. You can't evaluate SCV pulls based on that material. Protoss needs to be in an even game for that. I also don't know why you quote GSL for your "SCV pulls are too strong" argument since they're actually 1-3 there. Unless I forgot something we have: Reality vs Hush, King Sejong: Terran loses. Reality vs Hush, Merry: Terran wins. Bbyong vs Stats, King Sejong: Terran loses. Bbyong vs Stats, Merry: Terran loses. On August 14 2014 00:33 Salient wrote: Terran has a lot of fans because it is by far the most noob-friendly race in the gutter leagues (Bronze to Gold). The race gets a get out of jail free card "with one click" for supply blocks and total lack of detection. Stimmed marines and marauders provide simple brute force power that is easy for novices to understand. I think Terran also probably has themost little kids for the same reason. 9/10 would read again that delectable troll. I'll make a violent effort to ignore the fact you actually think every single of those words. | ||
|
Salient
United States876 Posts
On August 14 2014 01:21 TheDwf wrote: 5 rax 2 port all-ins do not "hardcounter" Colossus openings at all, if only because Protoss is not at all forced to stay on the Colossus path after he opens that way… As for SCV pulls on 2 bases, they're bad and can be easily dealt with: - Stay on 2 bases yourself and tech switch to Storm: Bogus vs MaNa, King Sejong, ATC Finals. - Stay on 2 bases yourself and simply keep building units: Bbyong vs Stats, Merry, Code S. Patching SCV pulls (how would you even do that?) now would be a stupid decision because there is no evidence, so far, that they're a structural problem (= even given several months, Protoss players would be unable to find solutions). As usual people confuse what may be only a temporary trend (Terran metagaming Protoss' recent strategies after a major shift) with a structural problem. There was already a "SCV pull period" in the past that faded away after Protoss adapted. What symptoms do you see that a similar phenomenon is not going to happen again? You also have to be careful about what games you pick to analyze that. For example take the heroMarine vs Showtime series: Game 1 = Showtime opens gate 10 MSC pressure into Oracle expand, inflicts little damage and misreads the game after scouting heroMarine's fake third, going Dark shrine and warping a few DTs against a SCV pull. He also blunders away his MSC before the fight (no Overcharge at natural). He blocks heroMarine's army with Forcefields but then is left with no energy to cast Guardian Shield. He probably missclicked his Blink Stalkers, because he blinked towards the back of his natural exactly when heroMarine unleashed his Vikings on his Colossi. There were 9 Vikings left when all the Colossi fell. No way this is a normal scenario. Game 2 = heroMarine gets away with CC rax CC, the only build that allows Terran to hit at 13'30 with 170 supply. Again no Guardian Shield when the fight occurred. Game 3 = Showtime finally tries to adapt (it's only the 6th TvP in a row in which heroMarine plans to pull SCVs…) but loses his Nexus to a stim timing, so he could not have Storm ready in time. You can't evaluate SCV pulls based on that material. Protoss needs to be in an even game for that. I also don't know why you quote GSL for your "SCV pulls are too strong" argument since they're actually 1-3 there. Unless I forgot something we have: Reality vs Hush, King Sejong: Terran loses. Reality vs Hush, Merry: Terran wins. Bbyong vs Stats, King Sejong: Terran loses. Bbyong vs Stats, Merry: Terran loses. 9/10 would read again that delectable troll. I'll make a violent effort to ignore the fact you actually think every single of those words. Are you a bot or just unemployed? You swoop in to argue with anyone who posts something that you feel threatens Terran in some way. It's pretty impressive. And you posted that big and admittedly biased article QQing about balance. The one that used a graphic from season 1 and old stats to argue for a Terran buff in season 3. And it worked! Avilo probably wishes he could be you. PS: I wasn't trolling the first time. | ||
|
Luolis
Finland7084 Posts
On August 14 2014 01:41 Salient wrote: Are you a bot or just unemployed? You swoop in to argue with anyone who posts something that you feel threatens Terran in some way. It's pretty impressive. And you posted that big and admittedly biased article QQing about balance. The one that used a graphic from season 1 and old stats to argue for a Terran buff in season 3. And it worked! Avilo probably wishes he could be you. PS: I wasn't trolling the first time. In the meantime youve called code S terrans patchterrans... I wonder if you have any bias at all lol. | ||
|
Salient
United States876 Posts
On August 14 2014 01:53 Luolis wrote: In the meantime youve called code S terrans patchterrans... I wonder if you have any bias at all lol. Everyone is biased to some extent, but we are all amatuers compared to the DWarF. He has been arguing about balance in this thread for years. It's really impressive. General Profile: User TheDwF Total Posts 10834 Average Posts Per Day 10.72 Average Posts Per Week 75.04 Posts made in the last week 347 User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
Mojito99
Germany154 Posts
On August 14 2014 01:21 TheDwf wrote: 5 rax 2 port all-ins do not "hardcounter" Colossus openings at all, if only because Protoss is not at all forced to stay on the Colossus path after he opens that way… As for SCV pulls on 2 bases, they're bad and can be easily dealt with: - Stay on 2 bases yourself and tech switch to Storm: Bogus vs MaNa, King Sejong, ATC Finals. - Stay on 2 bases yourself and simply keep building units: Bbyong vs Stats, Merry, Code S. Patching SCV pulls (how would you even do that?) now would be a stupid decision because there is no evidence, so far, that they're a structural problem (= even given several months, Protoss players would be unable to find solutions). As usual people confuse what may be only a temporary trend (Terran metagaming Protoss' recent strategies after a major shift) with a structural problem. There was already a "SCV pull period" in the past that faded away after Protoss adapted. What symptoms do you see that a similar phenomenon is not going to happen again? You also have to be careful about what games you pick to analyze that. For example take the heroMarine vs Showtime series: Game 1 = Showtime opens gate 10 MSC pressure into Oracle expand, inflicts little damage and misreads the game after scouting heroMarine's fake third, going Dark shrine and warping a few DTs against a SCV pull. He also blunders away his MSC before the fight (no Overcharge at natural). He blocks heroMarine's army with Forcefields but then is left with no energy to cast Guardian Shield. He probably missclicked his Blink Stalkers, because he blinked towards the back of his natural exactly when heroMarine unleashed his Vikings on his Colossi. There were 9 Vikings left when all the Colossi fell. No way this is a normal scenario. Game 2 = heroMarine gets away with CC rax CC, the only build that allows Terran to hit at 13'30 with 170 supply. Again no Guardian Shield when the fight occurred. Game 3 = Showtime finally tries to adapt (it's only the 6th TvP in a row in which heroMarine plans to pull SCVs…) but loses his Nexus to a stim timing, so he could not have Storm ready in time. You can't evaluate SCV pulls based on that material. Protoss needs to be in an even game for that. I also don't know why you quote GSL for your "SCV pulls are too strong" argument since they're actually 1-3 there. Unless I forgot something we have: Reality vs Hush, King Sejong: Terran loses. Reality vs Hush, Merry: Terran wins. Bbyong vs Stats, King Sejong: Terran loses. Bbyong vs Stats, Merry: Terran loses. 9/10 would read again that delectable troll. I'll make a violent effort to ignore the fact you actually think every single of those words. Can you provide an argument as to why double starport does not counter colossus play? Any reactionary tech transition to double starport will most likely run into either an 1/1 2 base SCV pull for which the transition will come to late. The other option of a 3 base SCV pull are specifically designed to counter the 3 colossus into storm transition. Admittedly this assumes that terran is able to scout the transition. But we are trying to discuss the standard playstyles here, not a fake out transition hidden tech kind of route. Again i feel you are cherry picking. An example you claim the most recent EPS Heromarine vs Showtime games cannot be used as an example because of essentially bad protoss play. You ignore the fact that for example on King Sejong, the Terran pulled SCVs 45 seconds after his 1/1 was done only do waste his entire SCV train in a chokepoint between nexus and ramp where they evaporated in a single colossus volley. I understand that there can be an argument made for why these games are a bad example, but you cannot blindly present only one side of the facts. The fact that SCV pulls are to powerful vs colossus openings is evident in almost every scenario. I am not saying that they provide an imbalanced game. I am saying they are an all in for every situation: Ahead? SCV pull Behind? SCV pull Tech transition of opponent? SCV pull 3 base protoss SCV pull It is the best option in every scenario. Another possible symptom that SCV pulls need to be adjusted would be that the answer to SCV pulls turned out to be a playstyle that terran had difficulty dealing with: The HT opening with mass zealots. Ironically enough, the SCV pull all in gave rise to a playstyle that gave terran so much trouble with that it was significantly nerfed. Arguably going HT again to avoid the SCV pull is not the way to go. On an unrelated note: The way you phrase your post you are more likely to alienate anyone not already convinced of your opinion. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
SOOP
SKillous vs Spirit
Tenacious Turtle Tussle
PiG Sty Festival
Serral vs TriGGeR
Cure vs SHIN
The PondCast
Replay Cast
PiG Sty Festival
Clem vs Bunny
Solar vs Zoun
Replay Cast
Korean StarCraft League
PiG Sty Festival
herO vs Rogue
ByuN vs SKillous
SC Evo Complete
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
