|
On September 20 2011 04:24 silverdevilboy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2011 21:10 xzidez wrote:
silverdevilboy you are aware of that you cant fight roaches with storm?... If you go templar you wont have gas enough for anything else than zealots.
And roaches is the very "counter" as you would say, to that..... So going the worst possible build against zergs roach / infestor.. why do you even argue about it?
There is a reason why MC choosed to go colossi.. And that is probably not becuase of templars being awsome against roaches.
Edit: Storm vs roach is like storm in pvp.. Roaches are too tough and mobile to die to storm. Even if you somehow can afford both sentries and storm.. manages to trap the roaches in forcefields and land a perfect storm on top of that, roaches have enough health and speed to burrow and move under the forcefields before dying.. I am aware that you cannot fight mass roach with storm. In the scenario I'm talking about, HE DOESN'T HAVE ANY ROACH UPGRADES YET. You have scouted, you saw infestation pit, and you saw zerglings. If he then switches into mass roach production, you should be getting more gateway units, not more templar. Hell, get a few immortals. Play. Reactively. What *is* it with you guys and the 'oh if you go for this strat he can tech switch and win'. You can tech switch too. Do it. You most definitely should NOT have a single strategy that you can do that defeats any other strategy, you NEED to make the correct responses. And no, in one of the games he rushed colossi wayyy faster and only had zealots. In the other, he had it slightly later, and had gas for stalkers as well. Show nested quote +On September 19 2011 21:11 Dommk wrote:
Maybe, you should actually read the context. If he is going infestor AS HIS ONLY TECH and you know this cos you scouted it, why the hell not just hard counter him and have 4-5 templar waiting for them to poke out and get exploded. At the *very* least you force him to revert to roaches, and he has to play a little more passive or tech to something else, which would probably buy you the time to expand.
Because that isn't how Templars work. Just because you have them does not mean you just nullify infestors, especially when you have no storm. If it was as easy as that then Protoss wouldn't even be having that much trouble these days, but Zerg STILL keep making Infestors when there are Templars. You saw it in JYP vs Violet where JYP went early Templars but Violet still kept making Infestors... Then you have to look at the cost. MC had only enough gas for 5 Sentries and pure Zealots as he teched to Colossus for that push. Now, how exactly is he going to afford Templars in that short a period of time? You are looking at an alternate method of scouting if you go no Robo (i.e Hallucination, which is more gas cost and even less FF's to defend), 4-5 Templar, Storm won't be done in time, and no real way to take a third base after because early Templars leave you even more immobile (when you are on two bases) A better route would be maybe faster blink w/ weapon upgrades and a healthier gateway army but Zergs seem to be dealing with that pretty well too these days The way Templar tech is designed, you just aren't meant to be able to get them out early and be very safe, it is a late game tech Path. Really the only Protoss i've seen go Templars well is JYP, but he goes a lot of Stalkers with Blink into Templars I see it in PvT. You make Templar, and he keeps on making ghosts. Does that mean that templar are the wrong response to ghosts? Hell no. It means the fights are gonna be based mostly on unit control. MC had the gas to go colossi, after getting +2, a council, and hallucination. Robo bay = 200 gas. Colossus = 200 gas. Range = 200 gas. You could have 2 templar for the same gas cost. I never said go no robo. I said PLAY REACTIVELY. Once you have a robo and a council out, which he had, and once you scout infestors super fast, which he did, YOU SHOULD NOT GO COLOSSI. In other situations, GO COLOSSI. Templar are NOT a 'win anything' unit. They are a specific response to a specific situation. How is this such a hard concept. You do not play the same strategy in every situation. You can scout what they are doing, and respond appropriately. TvP. If they scout you going colossi, they make vikings. Would rushing vikings blindly be a good build? No, they'd die to gateway armies with storm. Is it still a good response to the tech that they SCOUT IN THIS GAME? Yes.
Jesus Christ, you are frustrating. How many times do I have to beat it into your head that colossi is the proper response and that MC didn't lose because he went colossi? Tell me what the two base infestor pushes did in any of the games that set MC behind? Absolutely nothing, they were deflected with minimal losses. Stop pretending you understand protoss when you don't even understand the basic reasons that MC lost which was irrelevant to his tech choice.
Here, let me make this clear. MC is a protoss player that plays at least 8+ hours a day in the most competitive scene in the world in a team house where he theorycrafts with other players all day. The 2 base infestor has become very popular nowadays in Korea, Cocoa uses it a lot for instance. You are a random person on teamliquid.net that doesn't even play the race and has never been in the situation.
Let me also make this clear: infestors had nothing to do with any of those games besides allowing Monster to be safe against any two base timing because he most likely doesn't have the macro and micro to be able to hold a fast third against MC if he goes aggressive. Because he went two base infestor he is safe to take a third, then the muta tech switch makes him safe against a reactive all-in from the protoss because it keeps him back. The layout of the map makes it so MC couldn't take a third and it's very limited what you can do on two base.
Your first templar with storm is 550 gas. He had to go blink stalker (150/150 and 125/50 per stalker) to be able to defend against mutas. Templar do not defend against mutas without blink stalker support and, if you storm them once or twice, mutas still live even if they bathe in a storm, and this is assuming that the zerg is too incompetent to spread them out. Mutas were used to pin MC back to delay any two base all-in and because of the map MC could never secure a third.
I don't tell you how to play your race because I don't know it intimately. Don't presume to theorycraft like you know more than MC.
|
^ There's been a huge amount of Zerg innovation. Protoss innovated a lot at the start of the year, with the deathball, sentries, blink, the 3 gate sentry expand, and how to properly FFE. Zerg really didn't innovate for a long time, and then partially innovated and was partially buffed.
We were buffed against stargate with root times, but at the same time we started to get much earlier evo chamber, sometimes double evo for upgrades, and learned to scout better against stargate (or more or less accepted it as something that wasn't cheesy). We got the infestor buff and realized roach/hydra/corruptor is actually stupidly bad and will never win, and that corruptors don't counter colossi, but at the same time we started doing baneling rain as a better counter.
We started using ultralisks a lot more in the match-up, and at the same time, the buff with infestors allowed for BL/infestor to be viable.
There's also the roach/ling timing, which I believe came out before warp gate nerf, but now is just better because of that nerf.
And the biggest reason Protoss have been losing, is that Zerg have now learned how to take a super fast third, with the Nestea fast third late lair build. Zerg even build lings to break rocks to take thirds, finding the 10 lings worth it at the start to do this, or know how to hold a faraway third even against stargate.
If you watch the losses in the GSL or that protoss have, it's not because of infestors, it's because of Zerg usually taking a super fast third. Also, protoss are losing a lot more when opening stargate. It really seems to me that the issue is the metagam - you don't have protoss losing to BL/Infestor, you don't have protoss losing to infestor timings, you have them losing when pushed back by a 3 base hatch tech zerg.
|
On September 20 2011 05:27 Belial88 wrote:
^ There's been a huge amount of Zerg innovation. Protoss innovated a lot at the start of the year, with the deathball, sentries, blink, the 3 gate sentry expand, and how to properly FFE. .
See, but basically every one of these other than the 3gate expand were solved for zerg by balance patches, not zerg innovation.
ed: although some of the explanation takes more than one step of logic, like: a fast third is safer because you can rule out 2 base blink stalkers with later infestors as long as FG prevents blink
|
As a Top 8 Master Terran, I'm afraid of what this next patch will bring. I don't mind how the mirror match up will change and how I will have to use marauder based armies instead of mech in TvT.
I don't even mind producing 1 viking and 1 medviac on my reactor starport to counter the beefed up warp prism. I don't mind the immortal range and am still comfortable defending.
What I don't like is the hellion and rax nerf for terran specifically in TvZ, as well as the ultralisk reduced build time by 25 seconds. Not to mention NP still operates and -2 range.
My problem is that Terran can still get +1 mech and 2 shot drones. The problem is Zerg will now opt for armor first to prevent this and hellions will be hugely negated. Even with hellions as they were, Zerg would completely own me in macro even with multi pronged drops and hellion harass.
I think they were necessary for the match up, as Zerg can produce drones so quickly as compared to Terran.
I also know at my level--Top Masters Terran, zergs float 2000+ minerals in mid-midlate game. This translates to 20 ultras popping to reinforce an attack and decimating Terran.
Infestors still kill marines in 2 fungals, vikings in 4.
I just don't understand how someone at my level is supposed to compete with the new Zerg. I'm a great player but only 100-120 avg apm and Terran requires adroit micro and apm (as awareness to utilize that micro) in all moments v Zerg.
|
Protoss is fucking ridicilous. How can it be so, that an 200/200 army of Protoss NEVER EVER FUCKING DIES? Last game, I tried broodlords, infestor, roach, sling, which didnt work. Then I ran out of money (Was 10k behind in units lost) and then FINALLY the protoss stepped out of her 3base. FUCKING RIDICILOUS!!!!!!!
User was warned for this post
|
And all I'm really saying is that it's too late to say "Let's just see how the metagame evolves" when they've already cast one race down and cast the other up.
(well, they actually just switched 2nd and 3rd)
|
Problem: Ghosts entirely eliminate HT tech with proper play (not even perfect play, and more important the outcome of HT vs. Ghost is entirely in the hands of the terran player; no matter how skilled the Protoss, EMP is just flat out superior to feedback in terms of caster control), and are far easier to tech to, actively or re-actively. They also devastate the Protoss army in a similar way that psionic storm does to a Terran one.
Solution: Nerf EMP range to 8 so that at maximum range it only barely out ranges feedback. Raise the cost of a ghost academy to 150/200 and make EMP a research for 200/200, 110 seconds. This equalizes the cost of teching, the cybercore and twilight would be tech labs on the terran side (which arguably is still faster than Protoss teching, but it's more expensive in terms of long-run infrastructure).
If this sounds like it would take forever to get to... well that's the point. If it's a collosus/viking style mid-game, ghosts can be acquired with 150 gas and 80 seconds, with EMP in another 44 (?) I believe. On the other hand, HTs can be acquired with 650 gas and 173 seconds with energy in another 44, assuming Templar are warped in and storm started as soon as the archives complete, and storm is constantly chrono'd.
On the point of "110 seconds is too long, Protoss has chrono": Well that's the Protoss advantage, they can research things more quickly. It wouldn't be an advantage if such research innately took longer. It'd be like SCVs producing in 19 seconds instead of 17. I understand SCVs have to actually build structures and you lose time on the Orbital construction, but the building time does not equalize the effects of mules and if Orbital build time was that bad no one would go for it. I believe mules give a slight advantage with the first one (anyone know for sure?), and a significant advantage at max saturation.
Side effects: I can't really think of anything this would effect aside from caster vs. caster situations. I suppose TvZ would be a "side-effect" but given the extensive infestor nerfs in the coming patch and the effectiveness of snipe against zerg t3 I don't foresee this being an issue.
|
On September 20 2011 05:32 zmansman17 wrote:
As a Top 8 Master Terran, I'm afraid of what this next patch will bring. I don't mind how the mirror match up will change and how I will have to use marauder based armies instead of mech in TvT.
[...]
I also know at my level--Top Masters Terran, zergs float 2000+ minerals in mid-midlate game. This translates to 20 ultras popping to reinforce an attack and decimating Terran.
No, it translates into 6 ultras if -- and only if -- he also had at least 36 supply and 1200+ gas floating.
20 ultras would require 6k minerals, 4k gas, and 120 free supply. But if you're top 8 master terran, you probably already know.
|
On September 20 2011 05:35 Pinna wrote:
Protoss is fucking ridicilous. How can it be so, that an 200/200 army of Protoss NEVER EVER FUCKING DIES? Last game, I tried broodlords, infestor, roach, sling, which didnt work. Then I ran out of money (Was 10k behind in units lost) and then FINALLY the protoss stepped out of her 3base. FUCKING RIDICILOUS!!!!!!!
Learn to play better? Ever consider that since you had equal MMR with the person that he was actually just better than you? Maybe he outupgraded you? Had more econ on that 3 base than you did on whatever amount of bases you had because you can only really saturate 3? Had higher tech units, better positioning? But no, any loss you have on ladder just means the race is ridiculous.
On September 20 2011 05:32 zmansman17 wrote:
As a Top 8 Master Terran, I'm afraid of what this next patch will bring. I don't mind how the mirror match up will change and how I will have to use marauder based armies instead of mech in TvT.
I don't even mind producing 1 viking and 1 medviac on my reactor starport to counter the beefed up warp prism. I don't mind the immortal range and am still comfortable defending.
What I don't like is the hellion and rax nerf for terran specifically in TvZ, as well as the ultralisk reduced build time by 25 seconds. Not to mention NP still operates and -2 range.
My problem is that Terran can still get +1 mech and 2 shot drones. The problem is Zerg will now opt for armor first to prevent this and hellions will be hugely negated. Even with hellions as they were, Zerg would completely own me in macro even with multi pronged drops and hellion harass.
I think they were necessary for the match up, as Zerg can produce drones so quickly as compared to Terran.
I also know at my level--Top Masters Terran, zergs float 2000+ minerals in mid-midlate game. This translates to 20 ultras popping to reinforce an attack and decimating Terran.
Infestors still kill marines in 2 fungals, vikings in 4.
I just don't understand how someone at my level is supposed to compete with the new Zerg. I'm a great player but only 100-120 avg apm and Terran requires adroit micro and apm (as awareness to utilize that micro) in all moments v Zerg.
A quick inbase third and defensive play seems to be the go-to for people like MVP who always crush in macro games.
|
I don't think the BFH nerf will change matchup all that much: maybe a boost in the popular of plain old reactor hellions. Bring an extra hellion along and they would still be very effective harassment tool.
@ultralisk:
The bulkiness of the unit is still its biggest flow. I would like to see other races turtle up a little behind a good layer of wall to funnel the ultralisks while getting the proper response (such as marauders/voidrays/immortals). Ultras without bane/infestor support also die easily to marine medivac +unsieged tanks: marines are surprisingly durable against ultralisks.
3k minerals only buy you 10 ultralisks. While they may look ever so fearsome: their looks are tougher than their bite.
|
On September 20 2011 05:35 Pinna wrote:
Protoss is fucking ridicilous. How can it be so, that an 200/200 army of Protoss NEVER EVER FUCKING DIES? Last game, I tried broodlords, infestor, roach, sling, which didnt work. Then I ran out of money (Was 10k behind in units lost) and then FINALLY the protoss stepped out of her 3base. FUCKING RIDICILOUS!!!!!!!
When he "steps out" run speedlings into his base and kill all his buildings while you hold him in place with infestors. Keep him from building a 200 death ball with decent harass. Take a ton of extra bases while he's just playing turtle toss, so when the push comes you have massive reinforce capacity and a much stronger income. Micro better. Maybe you just found a great new practice partner for PvZ.
|
On September 20 2011 05:30 Resistentialism wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2011 05:27 Belial88 wrote:
^ There's been a huge amount of Zerg innovation. Protoss innovated a lot at the start of the year, with the deathball, sentries, blink, the 3 gate sentry expand, and how to properly FFE. . See, but basically every one of these other than the 3gate expand were solved for zerg by balance patches, not zerg innovation. ed: although some of the explanation takes more than one step of logic, like: a fast third is safer because you can rule out 2 base blink stalkers with later infestors as long as FG prevents blink
Seriously? You are aware that a lot was figured out before the patches right? Like how korean Zerg figured out that deathballs are bad because of baneling rain, right before the infestor buff occurred? And Zerg still hasn't exactly figured out sentries.
And 2 base blink stalkers is still a threat, as blink will still arrive way before lair with the new fast third/late lair style that's dominating ZvP in the GSL. Huk got both DT and mass blink stalker before Nestea got lair.
It's a mix of patches and innovation. Protoss innovated a lot as well, it got them far and Protoss dominated the match up for a long time. Zerg just figured everything out and a series of buffs in recent patches has led to Protoss getting reemed this month. If you watch the games, it's clearly metagame issues, like super fast third vs FFE, or roach/ling all-in vs 1 gate expo on risky maps like XNC. None of the Protoss losses are apparently due to even economy but zerg had infestors, or mass roach, or anything like that.
So stop saying Zerg is OP v P, and maybe watch the damn games.
Protoss is fucking ridicilous. How can it be so, that an 200/200 army of Protoss NEVER EVER FUCKING DIES? Last game, I tried broodlords, infestor, roach, sling, which didnt work. Then I ran out of money (Was 10k behind in units lost) and then FINALLY the protoss stepped out of her 3base. FUCKING RIDICILOUS!!!!!!!
.....
When he "steps out" run speedlings into his base and kill all his buildings while you hold him in place with infestors. Keep him from building a 200 death ball with decent harass. Take a ton of extra bases while he's just playing turtle toss, so when the push comes you have massive reinforce capacity and a much stronger income. Micro better. Maybe you just found a great new practice partner for PvZ.
Usually you won't be able to run speedlings in, and Protoss won't care if you kill all his buildings if his army will roll anything and everything you'd ever make. You clearly don't know the frustration of someone who sits on 3 base, turtles, and then rolls out with some deathball. They can just kill everything and even if they don't win right there, they can back off and just take a fourth at the 40 minute mark if you don't have the *perfect* composition for it.
To the frustrated Zerg, I'd say you need infestors, and if you engage in anything less than a perfect concave, you'll die. If Protoss goes for Deathball/HT to FB your infestors, then you'll need lots of BL, otherwise just FG and NP all of it when they are out of position. Spend hours in the unit tester. I'd also recommend you avoid Hive tech until after the first engagement, which is the deadliest thing about this kind of play since that engagement won't ever occur. A Protoss can do a 3 base deathball before you have hive tech if no engagement occurs to slow them down.
|
I don't know if you noticed, but non of the koreans in that all-star series were playing seriously. Somehow the idea didn't get across to jinro and huk.
|
I don't understand everyone saying Protoss needs to play a reactive race. It's just not in the mechanics of the race to be reactive, same as Terran. Zerg is reactive because they have essentially made units sitting there (larva), so if they scout they can change their larva into what is necessary. The way larva inject works is that, for example, we all know if Protosses don't use their gateways immediately after the cooldown is over, they will gain an excess of minerals that they will be unable to spend without building more structures, we know this to be bad macro; the same thing exists with Terrans not making marines immediately. They both lose the opportunity of spending and creating a unit in that time and essentially create minerals that will be worthless for the remainder of the game, or at least until they were to save for something like an expansion or some tech.
IF, IF, IF (making sure understood hypothetical situation here) there were no fog of war, and each player could see what the other was doing, zerg would be, by far, the best race. This is why Zerg has horrible scouting methods, and why Zerg needs to maintain and dominate map control in order to win. If they could see when and if they were being attacked, they could drone up perfectly when needed and make all their units when they need an army, something Zerg players obviously try to do even without perfect scouting, which leads to those cheese losses or losses where they make a lot of drones at the wrong time. But, regardless, this is all reactive. They must know and understand the flow of the game, when they need units and when they can make more drones.
Terran, on the other hand, is a purely proactive race. Once they start building units, they can't change their mind or, as was mentioned earlier, they create lost opportunity to spend minerals/gas and create a surplus that is unable to be spent aka bad macro. Almost nothing Terrans do is reactive, they start the game off with a build order plan that almost always will be done accordingly, hence why Sjow doesn't even scout, because he says his build won't change anyways. If they're going to 2 rax pressure into expand against a Zerg, nothing, save a 6 pool, will stop that from changing. Blue flame hellions? That's what they're going. Banshees? Same thing. You might say, well they react with vikings to colossus and ghosts to HT's if they were originally going bio. I would agree, except for the most part, they influenced what they were going, unless you surprised them, they knew you were going to respond to bio in this way, so they reacted to your reaction. This is the most reactive that Terran players ever get, they react to a tech path choice that they have originally influenced. If there were map hacks like previously mentioned in the Zerg part, they would be the worst race, in my opinion, because they depend a lot on secrecy, and whether they're going to all-in or expo off pressure, and add-on switches would no longer be useful.
Now, Protoss. They aren't as proactive as Terran, but aren't as reactive as Zerg. They can't say before the game that they will go 2-base colossus, but they can't wait for information to be clear to them before they make a tech choice either. This is both the powerful, 'broken', deathball part of Protoss and the reason it's arguably the current worst race. Protoss must start the game one of a few ways against either race. Let's take, for example a standard PvZ on Tal'Darim Altar. So you start and think, 'Okay, what are my options.'
You can proxy gate, but you're not a cheeser, and that strategy is awful vs. Zerg at high levels
You move on to standard 12 or 13 gate. Well, the wall on this map is beyond awful because there's no ramp and the buildings fit extremely odd.
You look at the choke at the natural, realize its pretty skinny and come to the conclusion that a FFE would be the best (and practically only) choice.
So, now, you have 2 options on this map against a Zerg. You can Nexus first or you can forge first. You know nexus first loses to 6/7/8 pool, so you must gamble. You forge first to be safe. You scout him going hatch first, but he's ready for cannon wall-in, so the information is pretty irrelevant, aside from letting you know you don't need an immediate cannon.
He scouts your forge and nexus, telling him that you are unable to make any amount of units for a while, so he gets a extremely quick 3rd, essentially negating your quick natural that was designed to negate his quick natural.
So, here we have both players knowing what the other is doing. The Zerg scouts a quick expansion which denies the possibility of an army, the Protoss scouts a quick 3rd but does not know what he can do about it. So what are the options.
Another nexus? It would match the quick 3rd of the Zerg; however, Zerg's quick expansions do not slow his army producing capabilities, rather, they enhance them.
A lot of gateways. We've seen this in the form of 6 gate +1 timing attack, 8 gates, 10 gate all-in. Remember, the Protoss' tech is gateway, core, and a forge, the last providing the opportunity for some meaningful upgrades. How does this option fare? We've seen it be successful in the past, with San beating Nestea in a past code S using it (The push killed Nestea's 3rd, but the game itself was not decided, although it was influenced heavily by San's mid game victory) and a few other times, which I can't think about. However, recently, Zerg's have understood this push better and better, where they now can scout it fairly easily due to chrono on forge, and more units than if you were teching, and can easily prepare for it with spine crawlers and roaches, all the while droning to their heart's content.
This has fallen out of favor due to the ease which Zerg's have been destroying the push. Remember, Zerg's are the perfect reactive race, they lose to something they deem cheesy and bitch about it (you know it's true Zergs  ) because they have yet to see the timing which it happens. When they do, and can scout it, as they can so easily against Protoss FFE, they crush it. Zerg's might whine about DT rushes or void rays until they understand that the 2nd unit being a stalker means more gas was needed for tech, causing them to put a few spore crawlers up, which defend against either hidden tech path.
Tech. This is the last option. You have about 5 different tech paths as a Protoss: Robo, Stargate, Twilight-Storm, Twilight-DTs, and Twilight-Upgrades. Now, remember the Zerg is a completely reactive race, if they know what you are choosing, they can crush it with pure, hard counters. If they know you're going blink stalkers, and they go infestor ling, you CANT win, no matter how good you are, it's just too cost ineffective, but you beat roach easily. If you go archon-zealot, you lose to roaches, but beat muta-ling and infestor-ling. If you go Stargate, you can harass with phoenix and void rays, but lose to infestor play and hydras, so you normally go stargate for just a few units, in order to harass, as opposed to building them for a big army. DTs and Storm both can win, but DTs are usually more effective late game for some harass rather than mid-game when they are a significant investment and can be lost so easily to overseers and Storm is only effective against mutas lings infestors, but loses to roach. So, the last option is Robo, which beats roaches, hydras, loses to mutas, and can lose or can beat infestors, depending on micro.
Do you see the problem here? Every tech path is countered by something. But Zerg is supposed to counter what you're doing. Against Terran, Zerg can't just 'counter' tanks with marines. They can outplay tanks/marines with muta/ling/bling, but they can't pure counter them. Roaches counter hellions, but hellions can still harass and take map control. After your FFE, as Protoss, you HAVE to make a choice, you can't just sit there and drone and larva inject, waiting for information to tell you which path to choose, you don't have that option. On top of that, it's almost impossible to take a reasonably timed 3rd against Zerg because their mid-game is insane against Protoss. Every unit is precious for Protoss, while every unit is expendable for Zerg. If you lose a Colossus, you can't just make 4 at once, you have to wait for the one building to finish, which means you're always a colossus behind. If you build more robos, you lose resources doing so.
This is the problem. Protoss is not a reactive race, but it is not a proactive race either. The only units that force other units that then can be reasonably countered are void rays and phoenixs, which force hydras, which opens colossus up as an option. The problem is Zergs have learned how to deal with both air and the inevitable colossus switch. And this is why the games you watch protoss play are so boring; every other tech path is a gamble, it has hard counters and if the Zerg is scouting like he is supposed to be, those counters will come.
Protoss is too much of a linear race, it can't switch tech easily, it has trouble with securing expansions, and every tech it has has an equally efficient counter. The awkwardness of Protoss not being reactive nor proactive is the problem that you see in the GSL and why Protoss seem to be playing awful when they are the best at their race in the world.
|
I think I'm done with this game for now. I tried laddering today, and every single PvT I played, the Terran shows all signs of a 1/1/1, I 1 Gate FE, and then either they all-in and I usually hold, or they proceed with some sort of metagamey build designed to punish my 1 Gate FE, like hidden 2 rax, hellion drops, or marine/tank/medivac with stim. It's just not fun for me. It's like straight after release, with those stupid 1base vs 1base games on steppes of war.
Back then, I just told myself "It's ok, the game is young, the maps are terrible, it'll improve with patches, better maps and strategic development.". Yet here I am, more than a year later, spending most of my time on the ladder defending all-ins or all-ining myself in all three matchups. I guess I don't believe SC2 is a good game anymore, and watching OSL finals on Saturday made this really clear to me.
As my final contribution to this thread, and the failure of Protoss (and Zerg) design, which I have criticized way back when deathballs were a rollin', and even before MC's run in GSL 3, I'll submit the following:
1. Protoss has relatively crappy harass and no good means of establishing map control. Fine, buff the harass units then. I proposed making graviton beam cheaper, but any other Phoenix buff would be ok too. Remove Dark Shrine from the game, and make Templar Archives unlock DTs like in BW, so they can actually be used as a part of standard play, and not a cheese or lategame gimmick.
2. Protoss is very rigid, because the entry barrier into any tech path is very high. So, just make stuff cheaper. Why does Charge have to cost 200/200 and take 140 seconds to research, while a Ghost Academy costs 50 gas and builds in 50 seconds? Why does a Robo still cost 200/100 when Factories were reduced to 150/100? Why is Storm still 200/200 when EMP and Fungal don't even need research? Why does a Robo Bay cost 200 gas? Just make the stupid Colossus range upgrade more expensive if you must, but why do we have to spend so much gas just to access observer and warp prism speed? And so on... Seriously, just making shit cheaper would help Protoss so much.
3. Remove the additional 20 seconds from Warpgate Research. It's a stupid bandaid, but it helps solve almost all the problems Protoss is facing currently.
That all said, ladies and gentlemen, I'm off for greener pastures. Good luck, and have fun, if you still can.
|
I don't know if you noticed, but non of the koreans in that all-star series were playing seriously. Somehow the idea didn't get across to jinro and huk.
Fair enough, the Nestea vs Huk series doesn't count. But watch any of Nestea or Losira's ZvPs. They always take lair past 100 supply, and always hold the 2 base timing push from FFE with only hatch tech, using lings, roaches, spines, and queens. In other words, they never have lair, much less infestors, to deal with it.
You keep insisting that P is UP, but if you aren't even aware of what new builds Zerg has been doing against Protoss and how P has been losing :O
I don't understand everyone saying Protoss needs to play a reactive race. It's just not in the mechanics of the race to be reactive, same as Terran..............
You don't need to do a 6 gate +1 all-in every game. You can be perfectly fine doing a 5 gate robo or 1 gate starport into 5 gate starport. Even 5 gate robo will put a shitload of pressure on a Zerg going super fast third, and depending on what you scout and how you react to it (ie more stalkers or less, immortals or faster colossi, etc) you can take a third either sooner or later. From there, Zerg is forced to get hive and 4 bases, which is not a comfortable position when only on 4 bases, and when Protoss has 3 bases, Zerg is extremely uncomfortable because Protoss can max out on 3 bases on whatever they want.
I rarely see Protoss even try to get HT to FB infestors (FG vs FB aside, you only need 2-3 HT to put a 10+ infestor zerg in an extremely uncomfortable position), or change their composition to what Zerg has. Maybe Protoss units are 'jack-of-all-trades', as Protoss really can get away with just massing blink stalkers, go going mass VR/Colossi/HT or Stalker/Colossi/HT every game. But if you scout infestors, back off and expand and turtle until you can get either lots of colossi or HT for FB. If Zerg didn't grab a fast third, then don't do a 2 base all-in timing like 6 gate and just take a third.
I don't really know how to explain it to you, but watching a lot of Pro games, it's kind of sad how many Protoss just clearly have a game plan from the start and don't make a change all game long, they don't scout, and then they do their 2 base all-in timing and bash their head against Zerg until they die.
Obviously, there are design problems. But too often Protoss opt for continued 2 base aggression instead of securing a third. Everything has hard counters, but if a Protoss goes stalker/colossi, it's very stable much like Marine/Tank. With such a solid base army, you can at least grab a third and then react to what you scout.
|
On September 20 2011 05:58 bigbeau wrote:
I don't understand everyone saying Protoss needs to play a reactive race. It's just not in the mechanics of the race to be reactive, same as Terran. Zerg is reactive because they have essentially made units sitting there (larva), so if they scout they can change their larva into what is necessary. The way larva inject works is that, for example, we all know if Protosses don't use their gateways immediately after the cooldown is over, they will gain an excess of minerals that they will be unable to spend without building more structures, we know this to be bad macro; the same thing exists with Terrans not making marines immediately. They both lose the opportunity of spending and creating a unit in that time and essentially create minerals that will be worthless for the remainder of the game, or at least until they were to save for something like an expansion or some tech.
Uhhhh, I gotta disagree with most of what you are saying. But first of all let me say I don't even really think of Zerg as a "reactive" race and I think that's mostly a misconception that people keep saying over and over without it having any real validity. I mean, it's not like Zerg players can just sit there and stockpile larva, it's not practical and bad macro. Look at it this way, you say Protoss have to use their Gateways immediately after cooldown well guess what? Zergs have to spend their larva every time their injection cycles come up or else natural larva production stops, there is no difference.
It's not like Zerg is gonna see the enemy move out with a force and just be like "oh well now I know what I need to do, time to pop out the perfect unit composition! Sorry, but Zerg has to scout, see what tech path is coming and prepare their own tech accordingly. At least in terms of Gateways units they are at least as reactive, if not more reactive than Zerg, you just see what you need and warp in the composition you need on the fly. It's no harder for a Protoss to scout and see what kind of composition he needs any more than it is for Zerg.
|
Protoss can react faster and better than anyone else. If you have a robo and a twilight council, then every single one of your tech units can be produced by making 1 building.
The only one that takes any time further than that building are void rays or colossi.
Meanwhile, a Zerg needs to make the appropriate tech structure for tier 2, then start building them, and then get an upgrade. For Tier 3, they need to possibly make an infestation pit, make a hive, make the tech building, and then make the unit and the research.
Terran can switch between what they already have. However, to tech to Ghosts/Thors, which are their best 'counters' to a lot of things, they need to make a tech structure, and re-arrange all their addons.
Buuuut In order to be reactive, terran have to overproduce production structures. They need to have factories, barracks, and starports, and not all of them will be used. They have to pay for the ability to be reactive on any decent level.
|
^ Yea. At most Zerg is going to have 2 bases x 4 larva per inject = 8 roaches popping at once, but he has to have been making those roaches all the time beforehand. Right now Zerg isn't really a reactive race given that most units Zerg has are useless. Mutas have a place as a gamble, hydras are only useful as a 2 base all-in that works against an unprepared protoss who opened single stargate, and baneling rain is only useful against HT (but not archon) or mass gate.
|
I'm a reactive Zerg, I always gotta react to what my opponent does and make split second decisions on whether I want to Fungal, Neural, or spawn Infested Terrans.
:3
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
