Name 5 other Protoss players in Europe better than BabyK.
How is the only Protoss in the round of 8 in Europe NOT the best Protoss in Europe? I want to hear this.
mana grubby naniwa sase feast.
and yes of course stephano is a way better player than babyknight. how can you even doubt it? are you kidding me?
Mana loses in the group stages: better than BabyK. Grubby loses in the group stages: better than BabyK. Naniwa loses in the group stages: better than BabyK. Sase loses in the group stages: better than BabyK. Feast loses in the group stages: better than BabyK.
BabyK the only Protoss in Europe to get to ro8 = not top 5 EU Protoss.
How on Earth does that make any sense.
No, I'm not kidding you. I don't base Hots skill based off of the tail end of WoL when Zerg was blatantly overpowered and Protoss was blatantly underpowered and everyone knew it.
Stephano was in a slump at the end of Wol when all Zergs were overperforming . And implying Stephano only won stuff because Zerg was overpowered just shows your lack of game knowledge .
You might have a case if it wasn't for the fact that this is Stephano's first good result in hots. Stephano's "slump" has extended into hots, and even gotten worse until just now. Now he's "figuring out" just how good swarm hosts are.
top 16 @DH sure is bad result eh ? Did he used swarmhosts when he 2-0ed Kas (who looked on fire at the start of HOTS) and beat Thorzain (also one of the Terran hope for HOTS) back to back @DH and @WCS ?
Just watch the first game of the series between Babyk and Stephano . Stephano completely turned the game around after a poor start and a great hold by Babyk . Always taking better engagements , having the better micro and the better decision making (53 probes lost vs 1 ffs) . He outplayed him . It's just as simple as that .
And do you sincerely think a player that won 3 major tournament and made that much money on sc2 only did so because he was playing the good race ? I don't think so .
This has veered way off topic. Today definitely showed Stephano to be the better player (for today at least), and I can't see what anyone would deny that Stephano is probably the more talented player. It required a bit of a throw from babyknight in game 1, but he did exceedingly well to catch it. However, just because Stephano was the better player and deserved to win the series, and won a game with Swarm hosts, doesn't mean that swarm hosts are balanced. I'm not sure they are _really_ imba, since pros don't use them every game, but certainly they are strong to the point that it concerns me, not least because they require so little APM/skill.
Honestly, I've felt for a long time that zergs macro, mobility, scouting/map vision, and flexibility is so strong that zerg pro's haven't even had to squeeze out anything near the full potential of the race, it's units, or abilities. When I look at players like DRG, nestea, or leenock in their prime, the race just looks unstoppable. I feel like when HOTS get's closer to being "figured out" and a player comes along like savior did in bw, and pushes hard to squeeze out every drop of ability in his play and in the race, zerg can dominate more than anything we've seen in sc2.
We really haven't seen a zerg player that has all his boxes checked. Creep spread, injects, unpredictability, abusing burrow, counter attacks/runby's, tech switches, constant scouting, contaminate, corruption, infestor harassment, defense, and flawless macro. When a player rises up and is able to apply all of these qualities in a game, T and P will be left without an answer.
I feel like the race just hasn't had to struggle enough, and hasn't had the player with the right mix of skill/creativity to push zerg to its true potential. However, I do believe the day will come.
This is what happens when a race has to struggle and it's players are forced to squeeze every drop of potential out of a race. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=226236 Sc2 just hasn't had any zerg player who has pushed the race as hard as savior or jaedong did in their primes in BW. I believe the reason is because the need to doesn't exist.
Or for the fact that... you know... grabbing more than 3 mining bases in SC2 has no effect at all on your mineral income.
Everybody has flawless macro during the portions where it matters in SC2. It just so happens to be that macro doesn't matter very much in the lategame. There will be no saviors or jaedongs because SC2 is a wholly different game with a capped economic ceiling. There is no "drop" to be squeezed apart from squeezing the fullest amount of cost efficiency from your compositions.
Listen until about 08:00.
* Don't know what I'm even doing in this thread. Need to get out of here as fast as possible.
from my perspective as a theoretical physicist, people are far from having figured out late game at all. neither are they perfect at early nor midgame. but late game is the worst. there's so much more room for improvement. i'm even talking about very obvious stuff. people are floating so many ressources without using them, it's almost ridiculous.
i dont get your argument about economical ceiling. 4base is obviously much better than 3base (because of gas). if your argument would have been that faster 4base is impossible, it at least wouldnt have been completely wrong. it at least would have been up for discussion, but the way you say it i just cannot agree with you. it's just random whining from someone who misses BW.
if all current pros think like you, the next bonjwa will most likely be none of them. wait 5 years then let's discuss this again. the players in the future will prove you wrong. i promise.
What the fuck has theoretical physics got to do with anything apart from your personal need to namedrop/bragdrop something irrelevant into the conversation?
On May 26 2013 07:22 LaLuSh wrote: Or for the fact that... you know... grabbing more than 3 mining bases in SC2 has no effect at all on your mineral income.
This thread seems like a complete cesspool of people who most likely haven't even got the game installed on their computers, much less do they actually read eachothers' comments before responding.
On May 26 2013 07:39 beg wrote: i dont get your argument about economical ceiling. 4base is obviously much better than 3base (because of gas) [...] but the way you say it i just cannot agree with you. it's just random whining from someone who misses BW.
Thanks. I think I'll leave now and never come back, Stephen Hawking.
and yes of course stephano is a way better player than babyknight. how can you even doubt it? are you kidding me?
Mana loses in the group stages: better than BabyK. Grubby loses in the group stages: better than BabyK. Naniwa loses in the group stages: better than BabyK. Sase loses in the group stages: better than BabyK. Feast loses in the group stages: better than BabyK.
BabyK the only Protoss in Europe to get to ro8 = not top 5 EU Protoss.
How on Earth does that make any sense.
No, I'm not kidding you. I don't base Hots skill based off of the tail end of WoL when Zerg was blatantly overpowered and Protoss was blatantly underpowered and everyone knew it.
Stephano was in a slump at the end of Wol when all Zergs were overperforming . And implying Stephano only won stuff because Zerg was overpowered just shows your lack of game knowledge .
You might have a case if it wasn't for the fact that this is Stephano's first good result in hots. Stephano's "slump" has extended into hots, and even gotten worse until just now. Now he's "figuring out" just how good swarm hosts are.
top 16 @DH sure is bad result eh ? Did he used swarmhosts when he 2-0ed Kas (who looked on fire at the start of HOTS) and beat Thorzain (also one of the Terran hope for HOTS) back to back @DH and @WCS ?
Just watch the first game of the series between Babyk and Stephano . Stephano completely turned the game around after a poor start and a great hold by Babyk . Always taking better engagements , having the better micro and the better decision making (53 probes lost vs 1 ffs) . He outplayed him . It's just as simple as that .
And do you sincerely think a player that won 3 major tournament and made that much money on sc2 only did so because he was playing the good race ? I don't think so .
This has veered way off topic. Today definitely showed Stephano to be the better player (for today at least), and I can't see what anyone would deny that Stephano is probably the more talented player. It required a bit of a throw from babyknight in game 1, but he did exceedingly well to catch it. However, just because Stephano was the better player and deserved to win the series, and won a game with Swarm hosts, doesn't mean that swarm hosts are balanced. I'm not sure they are _really_ imba, since pros don't use them every game, but certainly they are strong to the point that it concerns me, not least because they require so little APM/skill.
Honestly, I've felt for a long time that zergs macro, mobility, scouting/map vision, and flexibility is so strong that zerg pro's haven't even had to squeeze out anything near the full potential of the race, it's units, or abilities. When I look at players like DRG, nestea, or leenock in their prime, the race just looks unstoppable. I feel like when HOTS get's closer to being "figured out" and a player comes along like savior did in bw, and pushes hard to squeeze out every drop of ability in his play and in the race, zerg can dominate more than anything we've seen in sc2.
We really haven't seen a zerg player that has all his boxes checked. Creep spread, injects, unpredictability, abusing burrow, counter attacks/runby's, tech switches, constant scouting, contaminate, corruption, infestor harassment, defense, and flawless macro. When a player rises up and is able to apply all of these qualities in a game, T and P will be left without an answer.
I feel like the race just hasn't had to struggle enough, and hasn't had the player with the right mix of skill/creativity to push zerg to its true potential. However, I do believe the day will come.
This is what happens when a race has to struggle and it's players are forced to squeeze every drop of potential out of a race. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=226236 Sc2 just hasn't had any zerg player who has pushed the race as hard as savior or jaedong did in their primes in BW. I believe the reason is because the need to doesn't exist.
Or for the fact that... you know... grabbing more than 3 mining bases in SC2 has no effect at all on your mineral income.
Everybody has flawless macro during the portions where it matters in SC2. It just so happens to be that macro doesn't matter very much in the lategame. There will be no saviors or jaedongs because SC2 is a wholly different game with a capped economic ceiling. There is no "drop" to be squeezed apart from squeezing the fullest amount of cost efficiency from your compositions.
* Don't know what I'm even doing in this thread. Need to get out of here as fast as possible.
from my perspective as a theoretical physicist, people are far from having figured out late game at all. neither are they perfect at early nor midgame. but late game is the worst. there's so much more room for improvement. i'm even talking about very obvious stuff. people are floating so many ressources without using them, it's almost ridiculous.
i dont get your argument about economical ceiling. 4base is obviously much better than 3base (because of gas). if your argument would have been that faster 4base is impossible, it at least wouldnt have been completely wrong. it at least would have been up for discussion, but the way you say it i just cannot agree with you. it's just random whining from someone who misses BW.
if all current pros think like you, the next bonjwa will most likely be none of them. wait 5 years then let's discuss this again. the players in the future will prove you wrong. i promise.
What the fuck has theoretical physics got to do with anything apart from your personal need to namedrop/bragdrop something irrelevant into the conversation?
On May 26 2013 07:22 LaLuSh wrote: Or for the fact that... you know... grabbing more than 3 mining bases in SC2 has no effect at all on your mineral income.
This thread seems like a complete cesspool of people who most likely haven't even got the game installed on their computers, much less do they actually read eachothers' comments before responding.
On May 26 2013 07:39 beg wrote: i dont get your argument about economical ceiling. 4base is obviously much better than 3base (because of gas) [...] but the way you say it i just cannot agree with you. it's just random whining from someone who misses BW.
Thanks. I think I'll leave now and never come back, Stephen Hawking.
my post was shit. i completely edited it like 5 times. read it again and then answer. thanks.
at my first attempt to write an answer, all i could think of was bragdropping, cause you seemed so full of wrong resentment. i seriously felt a little desperate. sorry for that. i edited it and am happy with my answer now (:
On May 26 2013 03:24 mistake wrote: Recently, watching liquid HerO play PvZ has impressed me beyond belief. The guy can play the match up despite having mixed results at times, but when his plans are executed smoothly, he makes PvZ look like a cakewalk. I would say keep your eyes out for HerO to show us how to play a new hyper aggressive multitask intensive harassment PvZ. I'm agreeing with a lot of the neutrals right now and saying give it time to play out, Protoss players must evolve, and frankly, I'm excited to see what some of the brilliant Protoss players will come up with. Definitely following liquid hero closely the next couple of months!
well to bad hero himself admitted that his harass based style got worked out and thus do not net any good results anymore and thus is forced to switch to a more standard gameplay style to maintain a good win ratio.
Just because his style worked earlier (because it was uncommon) doesn't mean it will be always as good ( = people can easily adapt to it).
Besides Tempest Protoss hasn't something solid in HotS, that helps Toss consistently in mid to late game. While the other races got several additions to both their (early,) mid and lategame arsenal.
So this is something that i have been giving a lot of thoughts lately. The fact that Protoss as a race seems to be overly reliant on gimmicks and hard counters, which is also why, atleast i belive so, no Protoss has ever managed to be as consistent as Terran or Zergs.
Dark Templars and Oracles are good examples of Protoss units that are both gimmicky and can potentially end a game if unscouted, while on the flip side deal next to zero damage if scouted. This is to the point where a game might just end right away, such as when Feast beat MMA in WCS EU RO32, simply because MMA did not have a turret, and had just used his last CC energy on a MULE.
I am a Terran myself, and my knowledge of PvZ is limited, but it seems to be that TvP atleast is a battle of hard counters, rather than a matter of skill. High Templars and Colossus will melt Bio units, but get countered hard by Vikings and Ghosts. Strong counters does not necessarily have to be a bad thing, but the problem in TvP is that Terran has to counter specific units, and not the composition as such, while Protoss units is designed to counter compositions. Colossi is good against most Terran units, but Vikings is needed solely to deal with Colossus, and are almost useless when the Colossi is dead. While Ghosts are always good against Protoss because of shields, the damage from EMP is almost nothing to well placed storms.
So back to Hero why he is not winning as much. Because Protoss is a race of hard counters, it is much more vulnerable to "being figured out", because a good respond to what ever Protoss does is much more effective than a good response to Terran or Zerg. I think this is why a player such as Naniwa can get 2nd place at Dreamhack, playing 2-3 against Leenock, and still go 0-4 in WCS EU RO16. Simply because he relies on build orders more than anything.
If i were to describe Protoss to someone new to SC2 is would compare Protoss to a loaded dice, only capable of landing 3,4 or 5. No matter what you do as Protoss it is hard to really screw up, but on the flip side you will never get a 6.
I know this may seem like a whine post (which is not entirely wrong) but i really think that it is a legitimate problem, because at this point MC is the only Protoss who have beaten a Terran or Zerg in a GSL final. Protoss also tends to produce far more boring games than Terran or Zerg. I can't think of any Protoss match up that is even remotely as entertaining as TvZ.
Also i want to apologize for spelling errors and so on, as i was very tired writing this long post.
On May 26 2013 02:54 Emzeeshady wrote: I would also like to say I am not insulting Protoss players by saying Stephano is far better then BabyK.
Stephano is the best Zerg in Europe (where they are lot of good Zergs) where as BabyK would be struggling to make top five Protoss players in Europe imo.
Name 5 other Protoss players in Europe better than BabyK.
How is the only Protoss in the round of 8 in Europe NOT the best Protoss in Europe? I want to hear this.
mana grubby naniwa sase feast.
and yes of course stephano is a way better player than babyknight. how can you even doubt it? are you kidding me?
Mana loses in the group stages: better than BabyK. Grubby loses in the group stages: better than BabyK. Naniwa loses in the group stages: better than BabyK. Sase loses in the group stages: better than BabyK. Feast loses in the group stages: better than BabyK.
BabyK the only Protoss in Europe to get to ro8 = not top 5 EU Protoss.
How on Earth does that make any sense.
No, I'm not kidding you. I don't base Hots skill based off of the tail end of WoL when Zerg was blatantly overpowered and Protoss was blatantly underpowered and everyone knew it.
Meanwhile every tournament in the world went almost ZvZ exclusive in the later rounds during the last ten months of WoL. Everyone knows Protoss win rates were only held together because of the immortal/sentry all-in and that Protoss didn't have a prayer against Zerg in a straight up game. Pretending that Zerg wasn't hilariously broken for an extended period of time at this point is just being completely dishonest with yourself.
I've said this for a long time but if you calculate win percentages based on standard macro play from both sides Protoss is always significantly behind Terran and Zerg, as many have noted this is because Protoss has a tendency to rely on cheese/gimmicks which is why they thrive so well in pro league. It's a funny thing where the tools Protoss have are so limited that it makes the race easy but ironically this makes it extremely hard to do well with simply because when you are given such little resources every mistake counts so much more.
as a Protoss player I no longer enjoy playing this game simply because I can't be that guy who just wins because he has better mechanics, instead I need to flip coins and hope my build gets me ahead so I can create an imaginary deathball that only ever works when you have inherent advantages. If you don't agree with what I say just look at the results of Protoss most renowned macro players (Creator, Rain, Squirtle, YongHwa, First, etc)
Now can we say Blizzard got the HOTS Voidray right and we were wrong?
Back then many (including me) said that the new Voidray in HOTS will be ridiculous. But as the meta evolves, the new Voidray shows clear weaknesses in all Protoss's matchups. It's used often but not the dominating style of Protoss play. And it is quite the necessity if the Zerg opponent goes for the turtle swarm host + air + static defense play.
On May 26 2013 13:06 larse wrote: Now can we say Blizzard got the HOTS Voidray right and we were wrong?
Back then many (including me) said that the new Voidray in HOTS will be ridiculous. But as the meta evolves, the new Voidray shows clear weaknesses in all Protoss's matchups. It's used often but not the dominating style of Protoss play. And it is quite the necessity if the Zerg opponent goes for the turtle swarm host + air + static defense play.
Are you fucking joking??!!!
It's one of the most imbalanced units right now. It's a horrible mess of a unit. There is no Zerg answer to Void Rays. None. If Protoss makes ANY they cannot be beaten without severe errors.
Scratch that, even if they royally fuck up there is still no way to for Zerg to engage Void Rays.
On May 26 2013 12:34 willstertben wrote: protoss can be pretty fun to play as an off race.
Yah, I like to fool around with weird DT and gateway timings. I can actually beat players at my level offracing as Protoss by doing a 1 base DT all in :p.
If you like to play only macro games it isn't much fun.
exactly. i seriously hope protoss will get a major rework in lov. making it take actual skill but also making it able to compete in straight up games not relying on stupid gimmicky shit.
On May 26 2013 02:54 Emzeeshady wrote: I would also like to say I am not insulting Protoss players by saying Stephano is far better then BabyK.
Stephano is the best Zerg in Europe (where they are lot of good Zergs) where as BabyK would be struggling to make top five Protoss players in Europe imo.
Name 5 other Protoss players in Europe better than BabyK.
How is the only Protoss in the round of 8 in Europe NOT the best Protoss in Europe? I want to hear this.
mana grubby naniwa sase feast.
and yes of course stephano is a way better player than babyknight. how can you even doubt it? are you kidding me?
Mana loses in the group stages: better than BabyK. Grubby loses in the group stages: better than BabyK. Naniwa loses in the group stages: better than BabyK. Sase loses in the group stages: better than BabyK. Feast loses in the group stages: better than BabyK.
BabyK the only Protoss in Europe to get to ro8 = not top 5 EU Protoss.
How on Earth does that make any sense.
No, I'm not kidding you. I don't base Hots skill based off of the tail end of WoL when Zerg was blatantly overpowered and Protoss was blatantly underpowered and everyone knew it.
not to mention in the last WOL GSL Toss had a positive PvZ win rate if I remember correctly. Would have to check though.
Actual stats: http://aligulac.com/reports/ Since march 2011 till now PvZ was above 50% once. That over 2 years of data. I would call it "Protoss having hard time againts Zerg".
On May 26 2013 02:54 Emzeeshady wrote: I would also like to say I am not insulting Protoss players by saying Stephano is far better then BabyK.
Stephano is the best Zerg in Europe (where they are lot of good Zergs) where as BabyK would be struggling to make top five Protoss players in Europe imo.
Name 5 other Protoss players in Europe better than BabyK.
How is the only Protoss in the round of 8 in Europe NOT the best Protoss in Europe? I want to hear this.
mana grubby naniwa sase feast.
and yes of course stephano is a way better player than babyknight. how can you even doubt it? are you kidding me?
Mana loses in the group stages: better than BabyK. Grubby loses in the group stages: better than BabyK. Naniwa loses in the group stages: better than BabyK. Sase loses in the group stages: better than BabyK. Feast loses in the group stages: better than BabyK.
BabyK the only Protoss in Europe to get to ro8 = not top 5 EU Protoss.
How on Earth does that make any sense.
No, I'm not kidding you. I don't base Hots skill based off of the tail end of WoL when Zerg was blatantly overpowered and Protoss was blatantly underpowered and everyone knew it.
On May 26 2013 02:54 Emzeeshady wrote: I would also like to say I am not insulting Protoss players by saying Stephano is far better then BabyK.
Stephano is the best Zerg in Europe (where they are lot of good Zergs) where as BabyK would be struggling to make top five Protoss players in Europe imo.
Name 5 other Protoss players in Europe better than BabyK.
How is the only Protoss in the round of 8 in Europe NOT the best Protoss in Europe? I want to hear this.
mana grubby naniwa sase feast.
and yes of course stephano is a way better player than babyknight. how can you even doubt it? are you kidding me?
Mana loses in the group stages: better than BabyK. Grubby loses in the group stages: better than BabyK. Naniwa loses in the group stages: better than BabyK. Sase loses in the group stages: better than BabyK. Feast loses in the group stages: better than BabyK.
BabyK the only Protoss in Europe to get to ro8 = not top 5 EU Protoss.
How on Earth does that make any sense.
No, I'm not kidding you. I don't base Hots skill based off of the tail end of WoL when Zerg was blatantly overpowered and Protoss was blatantly underpowered and everyone knew it.
Meanwhile every tournament in the world went almost ZvZ exclusive in the later rounds during the last ten months of WoL. Everyone knows Protoss win rates were only held together because of the immortal/sentry all-in and that Protoss didn't have a prayer against Zerg in a straight up game. Pretending that Zerg wasn't hilariously broken for an extended period of time at this point is just being completely dishonest with yourself.
Zerg was hilariously broken ... vs Terran
Protoss could all in Zerg everygame and still win half of them even though the Zerg knew it was coming. That was how broken that all in was. Yes, they couldn't win in a straight up game but they really didn't need to. Few people realize this but Protoss also won around the same amount of premier tournaments as Zerg in 2012. Yes, Zerg was far to good against Terran but beating Protoss was still incredibly hard.
This is true as well.
I agree that it was primarily because of ZvT balance insted of ZvP balance that Zerg dominated the scene at the end of WoL.
By that point though, it was Immo-sentry allin or die trying. With maybe a dusting of 3 base colossus allin before BL/Infestor. Still kinda balanced by winrate, but you gotta admit that gameplay and viewing wise, it was beyond terrible. Hell, even ZvZ got to the ludicrous point where free units were bashing away at each other.
On May 26 2013 21:20 hummingbird23 wrote: By that point though, it was Immo-sentry allin or die trying. With maybe a dusting of 3 base colossus allin before BL/Infestor. Still kinda balanced by winrate, but you gotta admit that gameplay and viewing wise, it was beyond terrible. Hell, even ZvZ got to the ludicrous point where free units were bashing away at each other.
Exactly, and this is also why 50% winrates does not equal a balanced game.
On May 26 2013 21:20 hummingbird23 wrote: By that point though, it was Immo-sentry allin or die trying. With maybe a dusting of 3 base colossus allin before BL/Infestor. Still kinda balanced by winrate, but you gotta admit that gameplay and viewing wise, it was beyond terrible. Hell, even ZvZ got to the ludicrous point where free units were bashing away at each other.
Exactly, and this is also why 50% winrates does not equal a balanced game.
That was precisely the problem, Protoss had a few brutal all-ins with high success rates but also had no chance in a mass BL/infestor lategame unless the Zerg made major errors. The numbers may have more or less evened out, but that doesn't mean the matchup achieved actual balance. Protoss actually looked even more helpless than Terran in those lategame situations because at least Terran could theoretically get these wonky raven/ghost/BC unit comps that had a chance, even if they were practically impossible to get to in a real game scenario. Protoss on the other hand just didn't have the units to compete.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/VyscC6V.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/AiUe97b.png)
