|
On September 09 2011 07:35 flodeskum wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 06:14 Belial88 wrote:On September 08 2011 22:14 Salteador Neo wrote:On September 08 2011 18:42 Belial88 wrote:On September 08 2011 17:22 Joseph123 wrote:On September 08 2011 13:37 darkness wrote:
Can we all agree that Protoss' late game is strong, but its mid (or early) game is weak? If yes, should it be fixed? Well, of course the early game is weak, blizz nerfed all good 1 base strategies to the point they almost never work. Basically, to win in PvT and PvZ you need to have at least 2 bases. Protoss late game is strong, so is terran and zerg lategame? The difference is that protoss has 2 LATE game units that are useless and the other 2 races don't. Whereas Zerg needs at least 3 bases to win in ZvT or ZvP, and if don't make a huge mistake in early game ZvZ, it's all about who gets a third running safely, first. And that's not a bad thing if Blizz is nerfing 1 base strats. There's also still DT rushes, stargate rushes, and 4 gate, 5 gate, 2 gate, and cannon rushing. Most Protoss don't do these rushes, but instead of a FE (which makes it a minute longer at least), but Zerg has a pretty hard time in regards to scouting such 1 base play. Are you trolling or you just don't play this game at all? Half the PvZ ladder games a few months ago were speedling roach or 7 roach rushes. Even 6pool wins you more than 50% games. Just check July's last games for more examples. Anyway... With today's Up&Down games I would like to know the code S race distribution. I feel it's not gonna be too balanced. First off, a code s gsl player losing to 6 pool is a joke. We saw how that 'top tier protoss player' threw away that game by playing bad. You tell me he's on the same level as bomber, and then say balance is why Protoss are losing, not bad play.Secondly, roach/ling aggression and july's baneling/roach 1 base are pretty flimsy, as we all know now. Oh no, build a 2nd cannon, Zerg's complete all-in is suddenly denied. It was all the rage 2 months ago, it gave Zerg some wins, and now, it's outdated. It has it's place still, but most Protoss now know how to handle it. Just like Zerg now know how to handle stargate and FFE. When I saw bomber lose to destiny I too made sweeping generalizations about his skill level... Hongun didn't lose to july's 6 pool, he held that off easily and was way ahead. He lost because july showed him 5 lings and then ran in with 20 and hongun couldn't forcefield in time. Missing forcefields happens to everyone, you can't spend all of your time staring at your sentries.
Even better, he lost a macro game against 6 pool. Wow. And hongun can't forcefield in time, that's pretty embarrassing. Missing forcefields does not exactly happen to everyone, and if it does, you deserve to lose your set. There's a difference between a 2nd best like Hongun, and THE best like MC or Nestea, who would never make such a mistake. You never see Nestea float a flock of mutas into marines, you never see MC miss forcefields.
I mean to be over 50% win rate and one of the top 5 protoss in the world, you just have to miss forcefields only sometimes, and lose macro games to 6 pool? And then people cry that Protoss is broken when all the Protoss finally fall to Code B like they should have months ago? Huk, MC, and Alicia are performing extremely well in tournament play, besides losing a game here or there in Up/Down after coming in 2nd at IEM or getting to quarterfinals in GSL to lose to someone of the same race.
And what does Destiny/Bomber have to do with anything? Destiny played a unique, innovative style that Bomber clearly had no idea how to deal with. If Bomber had prepared for it or experienced it before, he would have crushed it, just like every Terran crushes Destiny when they are familiar with infestors (like Rainbow, who is far worse than Bomber, toying with Destiny and crushing him consistently with things from mass BC to bio to mech).
While Protoss are definitely losing in the metagame right now (Zerg knowing how to 'counter' stargate and FFE now, 111), it's also true that so many Protoss just don't deserve to be in the GSL at all, and now we are finally seeing them fall out. San and Anypro are bad, Hongun and Inca are nowhere near the skill level of, say, TOP or Nada or Polt or MVP.
|
On September 09 2011 02:21 Vardant wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 01:32 Rorschach wrote:On September 09 2011 01:29 Itsmedudeman wrote:On September 08 2011 23:34 Rorschach wrote:On September 08 2011 22:55 ForTheDr3am wrote:On September 08 2011 22:44 Theovide wrote:On September 08 2011 21:18 ForTheDr3am wrote:On September 08 2011 17:25 Dommk wrote:On September 08 2011 13:37 darkness wrote:
Can we all agree that Protoss' late game is strong, but its mid (or early) game is weak? If yes, should it be fixed? Is this even true anymore? You see Mass Ghost late game roll Protoss all the time these days, I can count more games where a Terran has won in the late game in recent tournaments than a Protoss.. I don't see why that surprises anyone. The lategame was reasonably well balanced with 150/150 Ghosts and Amulet Templars (there was like one month where Protoss got over 55% winrate in GSL in PvT), now we have 200/100 Ghosts and no amulet templars. Which is why nearly all PvT lategame wins are by switching to Colossi with the Terran not building vikings fast enough. Though the 200/100 ghost change was a nerf in TvP, as the rest of your army is so mineral intensive. I don't agree to that the amulet was balanced either. In late game it was ridicilous to deal with, you could win a 200/200 food fight decesively, be on like 170 food vs 110, then lose your entire army to warped in HT's and be back to equal. The high win ratio terrans have right now in TvP I wouldn't say is because TvP is imba in anyway in lategame, it's more about the early game and especially the 1-1-1. Because 1-1-1 basically affects all games where a terran goes anything but gasless expand as protoss then has to prepare for on possible 1-1-1. Though the 1-1-1's popularity is still kind of new, so I'd actually prefer if the waited a bit more before changing anything, just to give players a chance to figure it out themselves. (The 1.4 patch will be good, it will help protoss players slightly to deal with 1-1-1, and I really think that's all that is needed.) That's like saying HTs with 100/100 or 150/50 would be "nerfing" them because the Zealots are so mineral-intensive. Cheaper (on gas) Ghosts mean that Terran can get additional Medivacs/Vikings with the gas, it's in no way a nerf. While warpin Storms were strong, Terrans barely built any Ghosts back then, and if they did they still did well. If you are 170 vs 110 food back then the best idea would be pulling back until you have EMPs available again if the army is too low health to survive Storms. Without warpin Storms, there are now situations where MC is 200 vs 170 food ahead, but loses the battle decisively simply because he lost 3 Templars. Or where Protoss loses the game against a single double-medivac drop because he has just used the majority of his warpgates elsewhere. I stand by my opinion that amulet would be perfectly balanced now, seeing that T finally started to build more than just 2-3 Ghosts. They would not make it possible to make ridiculous comebacks like you claim they do because T will just snipe/EMP them or box 2-3 units forwards to attack them, but they would help with drop defence and prevent Protoss from losing to massed Ghosts too easily, as well as making Storm drops more viable and expansions more defendable. Edit: But in all fairness I don't actually care, at least in comparision to what 1-1-1 does to Protoss progamers nowadays. You make some excellent points. I think the whole EMP vs Storm debate could rage on for ever but the fact is Terran weren't building ghosts as much at the time. EMP requires a lot less skill and is nearly always guaranteed damage due to range and templar mobility. Once shields are depleted and/or HTs are sniped/EMP the toss gateway units just melt. Storm does not have near the momentum that EMP can get you. Compared to Fungal/EMP research is needed for storm and now there is no energy upgrade. IMHO Toss has just sustained too many nerfs the past year due to the perception that they are OP as a race. The game was brand new and Terran/Zerg took some time to figure out and received some substantial buffs along the way. Its a long shot but I hope the WP buff helps even the playing field in the HT vs Ghost relationship. Pretty sure terran never really received any buffs but rather nerfs all the way through. I think HTs do need some sort of buff, perhaps in unit speed, but bringing back KA is just dumb and it was downright abusive. Warp in HT, no chance to emp, then morph into archon. Since when is a decrease in gas cost for a caster not a buff eh? I was thinking about this, when I saw Mvp with his mass ghost strategy. The point some Terran players were making was, that Ghosts are too expensive. The change wasn't that big, but suddenly, they can be the main unit in their composition? They are just too versatile for their cost in both TvZ and TvP.
Every unit can be the core if you play for it to be. Like mutalisks for example. 3000 gas in mutalisks, wayyy more than in banelings.
|
Belial88 I can't believe that you are still running with the argument that Protoss players are just bad. These are Korean pros that are dedicating more time to the game than any of us. They are better on their worst day than any of us. If there were new strategies to use in PvT and PvZ, these are the guys who would have it figured out by now, especially since the last patch with balance changes came out months ago.
Whether you want to accept it or not, there are balance issues with the game that need to get sorted out. This isn't news to anyone who plays the game. A few months ago this same debate was going on with zerg players. Now that it's protoss players complaining, we're getting ridiculed and called whiners.
|
On September 09 2011 10:12 Belial88 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 07:35 flodeskum wrote:On September 09 2011 06:14 Belial88 wrote:On September 08 2011 22:14 Salteador Neo wrote:On September 08 2011 18:42 Belial88 wrote:On September 08 2011 17:22 Joseph123 wrote:On September 08 2011 13:37 darkness wrote:
Can we all agree that Protoss' late game is strong, but its mid (or early) game is weak? If yes, should it be fixed? Well, of course the early game is weak, blizz nerfed all good 1 base strategies to the point they almost never work. Basically, to win in PvT and PvZ you need to have at least 2 bases. Protoss late game is strong, so is terran and zerg lategame? The difference is that protoss has 2 LATE game units that are useless and the other 2 races don't. Whereas Zerg needs at least 3 bases to win in ZvT or ZvP, and if don't make a huge mistake in early game ZvZ, it's all about who gets a third running safely, first. And that's not a bad thing if Blizz is nerfing 1 base strats. There's also still DT rushes, stargate rushes, and 4 gate, 5 gate, 2 gate, and cannon rushing. Most Protoss don't do these rushes, but instead of a FE (which makes it a minute longer at least), but Zerg has a pretty hard time in regards to scouting such 1 base play. Are you trolling or you just don't play this game at all? Half the PvZ ladder games a few months ago were speedling roach or 7 roach rushes. Even 6pool wins you more than 50% games. Just check July's last games for more examples. Anyway... With today's Up&Down games I would like to know the code S race distribution. I feel it's not gonna be too balanced. First off, a code s gsl player losing to 6 pool is a joke. We saw how that 'top tier protoss player' threw away that game by playing bad. You tell me he's on the same level as bomber, and then say balance is why Protoss are losing, not bad play.Secondly, roach/ling aggression and july's baneling/roach 1 base are pretty flimsy, as we all know now. Oh no, build a 2nd cannon, Zerg's complete all-in is suddenly denied. It was all the rage 2 months ago, it gave Zerg some wins, and now, it's outdated. It has it's place still, but most Protoss now know how to handle it. Just like Zerg now know how to handle stargate and FFE. When I saw bomber lose to destiny I too made sweeping generalizations about his skill level... Hongun didn't lose to july's 6 pool, he held that off easily and was way ahead. He lost because july showed him 5 lings and then ran in with 20 and hongun couldn't forcefield in time. Missing forcefields happens to everyone, you can't spend all of your time staring at your sentries. + Show Spoiler +
Even better, he lost a macro game against 6 pool. Wow. And hongun can't forcefield in time, that's pretty embarrassing. Missing forcefields does not exactly happen to everyone, and if it does, you deserve to lose your set. There's a difference between a 2nd best like Hongun, and THE best like MC or Nestea, who would never make such a mistake. You never see Nestea float a flock of mutas into marines, you never see MC miss forcefields.
I mean to be over 50% win rate and one of the top 5 protoss in the world, you just have to miss forcefields only sometimes, and lose macro games to 6 pool? And then people cry that Protoss is broken when all the Protoss finally fall to Code B like they should have months ago? Huk, MC, and Alicia are performing extremely well in tournament play, besides losing a game here or there in Up/Down after coming in 2nd at IEM or getting to quarterfinals in GSL to lose to someone of the same race.
And what does Destiny/Bomber have to do with anything? Destiny played a unique, innovative style that Bomber clearly had no idea how to deal with. If Bomber had prepared for it or experienced it before, he would have crushed it, just like every Terran crushes Destiny when they are familiar with infestors (like Rainbow, who is far worse than Bomber, toying with Destiny and crushing him consistently with things from mass BC to bio to mech).
While Protoss are definitely losing in the metagame right now (Zerg knowing how to 'counter' stargate and FFE now, 111), it's also true that so many Protoss just don't deserve to be in the GSL at all, and now we are finally seeing them fall out. San and Anypro are bad, Hongun and Inca are nowhere near the skill level of, say, TOP or Nada or Polt or MVP.
I can't believe that you're not already banned for your constant balance whining and protoss bashing, it's hilarious and embarrassing at the same time.
|
On September 09 2011 05:10 Percutio wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 05:06 Brotocol wrote:
I think MC vs. Puma at IEM should be required viewing before discussing balance right now. It represents the "what if?" of theorycraft actually happening. Prior to this series, it was a nebulous claim to say that ghost was overpowered, and it was easy to brush it off as "just theorycrafting."
Puma showed it could play out as many theorized. Ghosts are simply superior in every possible way if you look at the numbers. And going beyond the numbers - if we are to remove casters from the equation, gateway units lose to MM[M]. So Ghosts are actually an overkill unit in a sense, as psionic storm can at least be mitigated without EMP (as proven in the past, when Terrans rarely made ghost - and winrates were not so lopsided). MMM should die to big quantities of high upgrade zealot/archon off a strong economy and lots of gates (Still easier said than done haha). There would also still be Colossi which wreck bio in the face even if Vikings are super good against them.
... and to which Terran / Zerg combination should that Protoss stuff be dying? Immobile Tanks, Battlecruisers, Broodlords?
MMM DOES die to well played Protoss Gateway army OR NOT if you play badly ... and thats the point. There should be no hard counters in the game like you suggest and the success or failure depends on the map and your ability to micro.
-----
Too many specific posts in here who just whine about "detail X" of "unit Y". People need to look at the big picture more. Which parts of the game make balancing hard?
|
On September 09 2011 10:39 Elefanto wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 10:12 Belial88 wrote:On September 09 2011 07:35 flodeskum wrote:On September 09 2011 06:14 Belial88 wrote:On September 08 2011 22:14 Salteador Neo wrote:On September 08 2011 18:42 Belial88 wrote:On September 08 2011 17:22 Joseph123 wrote:On September 08 2011 13:37 darkness wrote:
Can we all agree that Protoss' late game is strong, but its mid (or early) game is weak? If yes, should it be fixed? Well, of course the early game is weak, blizz nerfed all good 1 base strategies to the point they almost never work. Basically, to win in PvT and PvZ you need to have at least 2 bases. Protoss late game is strong, so is terran and zerg lategame? The difference is that protoss has 2 LATE game units that are useless and the other 2 races don't. Whereas Zerg needs at least 3 bases to win in ZvT or ZvP, and if don't make a huge mistake in early game ZvZ, it's all about who gets a third running safely, first. And that's not a bad thing if Blizz is nerfing 1 base strats. There's also still DT rushes, stargate rushes, and 4 gate, 5 gate, 2 gate, and cannon rushing. Most Protoss don't do these rushes, but instead of a FE (which makes it a minute longer at least), but Zerg has a pretty hard time in regards to scouting such 1 base play. Are you trolling or you just don't play this game at all? Half the PvZ ladder games a few months ago were speedling roach or 7 roach rushes. Even 6pool wins you more than 50% games. Just check July's last games for more examples. Anyway... With today's Up&Down games I would like to know the code S race distribution. I feel it's not gonna be too balanced. First off, a code s gsl player losing to 6 pool is a joke. We saw how that 'top tier protoss player' threw away that game by playing bad. You tell me he's on the same level as bomber, and then say balance is why Protoss are losing, not bad play.Secondly, roach/ling aggression and july's baneling/roach 1 base are pretty flimsy, as we all know now. Oh no, build a 2nd cannon, Zerg's complete all-in is suddenly denied. It was all the rage 2 months ago, it gave Zerg some wins, and now, it's outdated. It has it's place still, but most Protoss now know how to handle it. Just like Zerg now know how to handle stargate and FFE. When I saw bomber lose to destiny I too made sweeping generalizations about his skill level... Hongun didn't lose to july's 6 pool, he held that off easily and was way ahead. He lost because july showed him 5 lings and then ran in with 20 and hongun couldn't forcefield in time. Missing forcefields happens to everyone, you can't spend all of your time staring at your sentries. + Show Spoiler +
Even better, he lost a macro game against 6 pool. Wow. And hongun can't forcefield in time, that's pretty embarrassing. Missing forcefields does not exactly happen to everyone, and if it does, you deserve to lose your set. There's a difference between a 2nd best like Hongun, and THE best like MC or Nestea, who would never make such a mistake. You never see Nestea float a flock of mutas into marines, you never see MC miss forcefields.
I mean to be over 50% win rate and one of the top 5 protoss in the world, you just have to miss forcefields only sometimes, and lose macro games to 6 pool? And then people cry that Protoss is broken when all the Protoss finally fall to Code B like they should have months ago? Huk, MC, and Alicia are performing extremely well in tournament play, besides losing a game here or there in Up/Down after coming in 2nd at IEM or getting to quarterfinals in GSL to lose to someone of the same race.
And what does Destiny/Bomber have to do with anything? Destiny played a unique, innovative style that Bomber clearly had no idea how to deal with. If Bomber had prepared for it or experienced it before, he would have crushed it, just like every Terran crushes Destiny when they are familiar with infestors (like Rainbow, who is far worse than Bomber, toying with Destiny and crushing him consistently with things from mass BC to bio to mech).
While Protoss are definitely losing in the metagame right now (Zerg knowing how to 'counter' stargate and FFE now, 111), it's also true that so many Protoss just don't deserve to be in the GSL at all, and now we are finally seeing them fall out. San and Anypro are bad, Hongun and Inca are nowhere near the skill level of, say, TOP or Nada or Polt or MVP.
I can't believe that you're not already banned for your constant balance whining and protoss bashing, it's hilarious and embarrassing at the same time.
This is the designated balance thread. I don't constantly whine about balance anywhere except in this thread... and I don't bash Protoss, I bash people who say Protoss is UP and doing oh so badly, when in reality there's a few good Protoss doing fine, and a bunch of bad protoss being put in their place.
Belial88 I can't believe that you are still running with the argument that Protoss players are just bad. These are Korean pros that are dedicating more time to the game than any of us. They are better on their worst day than any of us. If there were new strategies to use in PvT and PvZ, these are the guys who would have it figured out by now, especially since the last patch with balance changes came out months ago.
Whether you want to accept it or not, there are balance issues with the game that need to get sorted out. This isn't news to anyone who plays the game. A few months ago this same debate was going on with zerg players. Now that it's protoss players complaining, we're getting ridiculed and called whiners.
I'm not saying Protoss in general are bad, I'm saying Anypro, Hongun, San, Inca, are bad players, compared to the not-quite-#1 Terran like TOP, Nada, MKP, SC, MMA, Ganzi, Taeja. MC, Genius, Alicia, Puzzle, are great Protoss, and they did fairly well this season, only to suffer in the up and down matches or lose a critical game in a tight series after doing a failed aggressive opening.
You can be the best player in the world, but if MVP opens banshees with cloak against Terran every game (like P going stargate), and then Zerg found a way to not only defend it but turn it into a 20 supply lead, when a month ago it was considered a safe and conservative opening, then Zerg will always win. You can be the best player in the world, but any Master player will win if you open DTs and do absolutely zero damage with it.
There may be balance issues, but I have not heard any Protoss say anything besides "Look Protoss are out of GSL, this is clearly imbalanced!" We didn't hear Terran say this game was imbalanced in GSL S3 when a bunch of Terrans got knocked out of the GSL after getting to the RO16 in GSL S2, but that was because those Terran were trash and the metagame figured them out (BitbyBit, Golden, SCV all ins, etc).
I already said, 111 is something I'm not really talking about, so maybe T is broken, whatever.
But as for ZvP, and P saying Zerg is OP, is just ridiculous. None of the GSL games where Protoss lost, were lost because of infestors. They all lost because they went FFE, and Zerg took a fast third, and held the 2 base timing. They lost because they opened DTs or Stargate, and Zerg took it as an opportunity to drone up, take a third, and win the macro game. They did not lose, because of infestors, or broodlords, or mass roaches.
|
On September 08 2011 23:14 beute wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2011 22:34 cordlc wrote:On September 08 2011 22:24 pAzand wrote:
I think Blizz has to try out Amulet again.. Game wasn't even imba then and now Terran and Zergs are starting to use their casters, guess what, they're pretty damn strong. The problem with Khaydarin Amulet isn't whether or not it'd balance the game, it's that the design is stupid. Warp-in storms were retarded, whether the game was balanced with it or not. The problem is they never compensated for it. Fix other areas of the game, and when Protoss is back to feeling balanced, the KA change won't be brought up again. warping in a unit that cant do shit for 40 seconds is stupid... yeah blabla, ghost/infestor have to be trained, blabla... not an argument, it's one of protoss' core design to be able to warp in units on demand. Marines also need to be trained, while stalkers do not. should stalkers now be unable to attack for 30 seconds after every warp in? no, it's intended, it's the core of the protoss race, that's how protoss is designed. units pops = unit useful. if that is true for every other unit in the game, then it should be true for templars as well.
well said.
the removing of khaldarin also removed the ability for toss to comeback, an ability that all races have.
terran can come back with mules, zerg with larvainject and massing eco. once toss gets behind, its pretty much over.
khaldarin was a way to defend when behind and not get roflstomped immediately.
|
United States7483 Posts
On September 09 2011 12:35 Belial88 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 10:39 Elefanto wrote:On September 09 2011 10:12 Belial88 wrote:On September 09 2011 07:35 flodeskum wrote:On September 09 2011 06:14 Belial88 wrote:On September 08 2011 22:14 Salteador Neo wrote:On September 08 2011 18:42 Belial88 wrote:On September 08 2011 17:22 Joseph123 wrote:On September 08 2011 13:37 darkness wrote:
Can we all agree that Protoss' late game is strong, but its mid (or early) game is weak? If yes, should it be fixed? Well, of course the early game is weak, blizz nerfed all good 1 base strategies to the point they almost never work. Basically, to win in PvT and PvZ you need to have at least 2 bases. Protoss late game is strong, so is terran and zerg lategame? The difference is that protoss has 2 LATE game units that are useless and the other 2 races don't. Whereas Zerg needs at least 3 bases to win in ZvT or ZvP, and if don't make a huge mistake in early game ZvZ, it's all about who gets a third running safely, first. And that's not a bad thing if Blizz is nerfing 1 base strats. There's also still DT rushes, stargate rushes, and 4 gate, 5 gate, 2 gate, and cannon rushing. Most Protoss don't do these rushes, but instead of a FE (which makes it a minute longer at least), but Zerg has a pretty hard time in regards to scouting such 1 base play. Are you trolling or you just don't play this game at all? Half the PvZ ladder games a few months ago were speedling roach or 7 roach rushes. Even 6pool wins you more than 50% games. Just check July's last games for more examples. Anyway... With today's Up&Down games I would like to know the code S race distribution. I feel it's not gonna be too balanced. First off, a code s gsl player losing to 6 pool is a joke. We saw how that 'top tier protoss player' threw away that game by playing bad. You tell me he's on the same level as bomber, and then say balance is why Protoss are losing, not bad play.Secondly, roach/ling aggression and july's baneling/roach 1 base are pretty flimsy, as we all know now. Oh no, build a 2nd cannon, Zerg's complete all-in is suddenly denied. It was all the rage 2 months ago, it gave Zerg some wins, and now, it's outdated. It has it's place still, but most Protoss now know how to handle it. Just like Zerg now know how to handle stargate and FFE. When I saw bomber lose to destiny I too made sweeping generalizations about his skill level... Hongun didn't lose to july's 6 pool, he held that off easily and was way ahead. He lost because july showed him 5 lings and then ran in with 20 and hongun couldn't forcefield in time. Missing forcefields happens to everyone, you can't spend all of your time staring at your sentries. + Show Spoiler +
Even better, he lost a macro game against 6 pool. Wow. And hongun can't forcefield in time, that's pretty embarrassing. Missing forcefields does not exactly happen to everyone, and if it does, you deserve to lose your set. There's a difference between a 2nd best like Hongun, and THE best like MC or Nestea, who would never make such a mistake. You never see Nestea float a flock of mutas into marines, you never see MC miss forcefields.
I mean to be over 50% win rate and one of the top 5 protoss in the world, you just have to miss forcefields only sometimes, and lose macro games to 6 pool? And then people cry that Protoss is broken when all the Protoss finally fall to Code B like they should have months ago? Huk, MC, and Alicia are performing extremely well in tournament play, besides losing a game here or there in Up/Down after coming in 2nd at IEM or getting to quarterfinals in GSL to lose to someone of the same race.
And what does Destiny/Bomber have to do with anything? Destiny played a unique, innovative style that Bomber clearly had no idea how to deal with. If Bomber had prepared for it or experienced it before, he would have crushed it, just like every Terran crushes Destiny when they are familiar with infestors (like Rainbow, who is far worse than Bomber, toying with Destiny and crushing him consistently with things from mass BC to bio to mech).
While Protoss are definitely losing in the metagame right now (Zerg knowing how to 'counter' stargate and FFE now, 111), it's also true that so many Protoss just don't deserve to be in the GSL at all, and now we are finally seeing them fall out. San and Anypro are bad, Hongun and Inca are nowhere near the skill level of, say, TOP or Nada or Polt or MVP.
I can't believe that you're not already banned for your constant balance whining and protoss bashing, it's hilarious and embarrassing at the same time. This is the designated balance thread. I don't constantly whine about balance anywhere except in this thread... and I don't bash Protoss, I bash people who say Protoss is UP and doing oh so badly, when in reality there's a few good Protoss doing fine, and a bunch of bad protoss being put in their place. Show nested quote +Belial88 I can't believe that you are still running with the argument that Protoss players are just bad. These are Korean pros that are dedicating more time to the game than any of us. They are better on their worst day than any of us. If there were new strategies to use in PvT and PvZ, these are the guys who would have it figured out by now, especially since the last patch with balance changes came out months ago.
Whether you want to accept it or not, there are balance issues with the game that need to get sorted out. This isn't news to anyone who plays the game. A few months ago this same debate was going on with zerg players. Now that it's protoss players complaining, we're getting ridiculed and called whiners. I'm not saying Protoss in general are bad, I'm saying Anypro, Hongun, San, Inca, are bad players, compared to the not-quite-#1 Terran like TOP, Nada, MKP, SC, MMA, Ganzi, Taeja. MC, Genius, Alicia, Puzzle, are great Protoss, and they did fairly well this season, only to suffer in the up and down matches or lose a critical game in a tight series after doing a failed aggressive opening. You can be the best player in the world, but if MVP opens banshees with cloak against Terran every game (like P going stargate), and then Zerg found a way to not only defend it but turn it into a 20 supply lead, when a month ago it was considered a safe and conservative opening, then Zerg will always win. You can be the best player in the world, but any Master player will win if you open DTs and do absolutely zero damage with it. There may be balance issues, but I have not heard any Protoss say anything besides "Look Protoss are out of GSL, this is clearly imbalanced!" We didn't hear Terran say this game was imbalanced in GSL S3 when a bunch of Terrans got knocked out of the GSL after getting to the RO16 in GSL S2, but that was because those Terran were trash and the metagame figured them out (BitbyBit, Golden, SCV all ins, etc). I already said, 111 is something I'm not really talking about, so maybe T is broken, whatever. But as for ZvP, and P saying Zerg is OP, is just ridiculous. None of the GSL games where Protoss lost, were lost because of infestors. They all lost because they went FFE, and Zerg took a fast third, and held the 2 base timing. They lost because they opened DTs or Stargate, and Zerg took it as an opportunity to drone up, take a third, and win the macro game. They did not lose, because of infestors, or broodlords, or mass roaches.
Getting knocked out in the round of 32 and then losing in the up and down matches is not my definition of doing "fairly well this season". Oh, and tons of protoss players have been talking in this thread about their other issues besides just losing in the GSL, that's just what they point to for their evidence. Protoss has no good early aggression due to a ridiculously slow warp gate timing from the nerf. Against terran, we can't pressure or scout until after robo, so it's a guessing game if we live to that point. Against zerg, we had no good way of dealing with mass infested terran spam and neural parasite on our colossi, allowing the infested terrans to demolish us. That part is getting fixed next patch.
You keep saying how bad these builds protoss player use are, but how many options do you think they have? Do you think they can just go 3 gate expand every game and still hold up in a tournament? If they do that all the time, the opposing player will just 15 CC or something, protoss will get rolled. You have to mix it up. What variety does toss really have? Toss can't outmacro zerg or terran. Toss can't attack zerg or terran early at high levels without getting rolled. Thus, Toss has to fall back and rely on gimmicky play like DT openers to keep their opponents on their toes and force them to incorporate turrets every game or spore crawlers just to stay even and even have a chance.
Protoss does those shitty builds because protoss has to. It's not strong enough to play straight up every game and win despite the opponent knowing what's coming.
Protoss also has no comeback ability in games at high levels either. If they lose their tech units, they are dead unless they did way more damage than they should have. If you fall behind, good luck catching up.
|
Protoss has no good early aggression due to a ridiculously slow warp gate timing from the nerf. Against terran, we can't pressure or scout until after robo, so it's a guessing game if we live to that point.
i won't argue with that, sounds reasonable and I already said I don't talk about TvP.
Against zerg, we had no good way of dealing with mass infested terran spam and neural parasite on our colossi, allowing the infested terrans to demolish us. That part is getting fixed next patch.
Aoe? Storm and colossi rapes infested terran spam. You could also just build HT, which is the counter, that costs way less, comes out much much faster, and kills lings (which come naturally with infestors). Infestors as an opening can be extremely deadly, but that's just the same as any opening. You can counter it, or you can handle it, or you can lose to it. It's easy to scout for (4 gas, mass lings, no roaches). HT just completely BO wins against infestors, and any regular play can handle infestors very easily.
What it owns, is stargate and DT play though. As well as blink.
You keep saying how bad these builds protoss player use are, but how many options do you think they have? Do you think they can just go 3 gate expand every game and still hold up in a tournament? If they do that all the time, the opposing player will just 15 CC or something, protoss will get rolled. You have to mix it up. What variety does toss really have? Toss can't outmacro zerg or terran. Toss can't attack zerg or terran early at high levels without getting rolled. Thus, Toss has to fall back and rely on gimmicky play like DT openers to keep their opponents on their toes and force them to incorporate turrets every game or spore crawlers just to stay even and even have a chance.
3 gate sentry is an extremely safe build vZ, you can easily do it every game. Toss has a lot of deadly timing attacks, like 3 gate sentry pressure, that isn't all in at all.
And Zerg macro play is very safe. There is nothing wrong with 5 gate robo or 5 gate twilight, apply pressure without heavy commitment, and take a 3rd. Protoss macro game is extremely hard for Zerg to deal with, the difference is it takes longer to buid up, but when P has 3 bases, it's nearly impossible for Zerg to deal with. It's not like Zerg can saturate more than 3 bases themselves.
|
Aha, there it is. The argument that it's okay to leave zerg eco completely unchecked.
Btw, even if you don't go for more than 3 bases worth of mineral drones, 5 hatches worth of gas is completely reasonable, and devestating.
|
On September 09 2011 13:12 Belial88 wrote:Show nested quote + Protoss has no good early aggression due to a ridiculously slow warp gate timing from the nerf. Against terran, we can't pressure or scout until after robo, so it's a guessing game if we live to that point. i won't argue with that, sounds reasonable and I already said I don't talk about TvP. Show nested quote +Against zerg, we had no good way of dealing with mass infested terran spam and neural parasite on our colossi, allowing the infested terrans to demolish us. That part is getting fixed next patch. Aoe? Storm and colossi rapes infested terran spam. You could also just build HT, which is the counter, that costs way less, comes out much much faster, and kills lings (which come naturally with infestors). Infestors as an opening can be extremely deadly, but that's just the same as any opening. You can counter it, or you can handle it, or you can lose to it. It's easy to scout for (4 gas, mass lings, no roaches). HT just completely BO wins against infestors, and any regular play can handle infestors very easily. What it owns, is stargate and DT play though. As well as blink. Show nested quote +You keep saying how bad these builds protoss player use are, but how many options do you think they have? Do you think they can just go 3 gate expand every game and still hold up in a tournament? If they do that all the time, the opposing player will just 15 CC or something, protoss will get rolled. You have to mix it up. What variety does toss really have? Toss can't outmacro zerg or terran. Toss can't attack zerg or terran early at high levels without getting rolled. Thus, Toss has to fall back and rely on gimmicky play like DT openers to keep their opponents on their toes and force them to incorporate turrets every game or spore crawlers just to stay even and even have a chance. 3 gate sentry is an extremely safe build vZ, you can easily do it every game. Toss has a lot of deadly timing attacks, like 3 gate sentry pressure, that isn't all in at all. And Zerg macro play is very safe. There is nothing wrong with 5 gate robo or 5 gate twilight, apply pressure without heavy commitment, and take a 3rd. Protoss macro game is extremely hard for Zerg to deal with, the difference is it takes longer to buid up, but when P has 3 bases, it's nearly impossible for Zerg to deal with. It's not like Zerg can saturate more than 3 bases themselves.
You must have woke up today, looked at yourself in the mirror, and said "I'm going to talk shit about protoss all day today."
I've seen you in three threads saying the same stuff. We get it. You think protoss players are awful and zerg and terran players are gods among men and deserve everything they have won and protoss players outside of MC are garbage and deserve absolutely nothing. And that's fine that you think that. But it doesn't give you the right to spout this incorrect nonsense:
"You could also just build HT, which is the counter, that costs way less, comes out much much faster, and kills lings"
Yeah. Every protoss should have thought of that. It's too bad they're so stupid.
|
United States7483 Posts
On September 09 2011 13:12 Belial88 wrote:Show nested quote + Protoss has no good early aggression due to a ridiculously slow warp gate timing from the nerf. Against terran, we can't pressure or scout until after robo, so it's a guessing game if we live to that point. i won't argue with that, sounds reasonable and I already said I don't talk about TvP. Show nested quote +Against zerg, we had no good way of dealing with mass infested terran spam and neural parasite on our colossi, allowing the infested terrans to demolish us. That part is getting fixed next patch. Aoe? Storm and colossi rapes infested terran spam. You could also just build HT, which is the counter, that costs way less, comes out much much faster, and kills lings (which come naturally with infestors). Infestors as an opening can be extremely deadly, but that's just the same as any opening. You can counter it, or you can handle it, or you can lose to it. It's easy to scout for (4 gas, mass lings, no roaches). HT just completely BO wins against infestors, and any regular play can handle infestors very easily. What it owns, is stargate and DT play though. As well as blink. Show nested quote +You keep saying how bad these builds protoss player use are, but how many options do you think they have? Do you think they can just go 3 gate expand every game and still hold up in a tournament? If they do that all the time, the opposing player will just 15 CC or something, protoss will get rolled. You have to mix it up. What variety does toss really have? Toss can't outmacro zerg or terran. Toss can't attack zerg or terran early at high levels without getting rolled. Thus, Toss has to fall back and rely on gimmicky play like DT openers to keep their opponents on their toes and force them to incorporate turrets every game or spore crawlers just to stay even and even have a chance. 3 gate sentry is an extremely safe build vZ, you can easily do it every game. Toss has a lot of deadly timing attacks, like 3 gate sentry pressure, that isn't all in at all. And Zerg macro play is very safe. There is nothing wrong with 5 gate robo or 5 gate twilight, apply pressure without heavy commitment, and take a 3rd. Protoss macro game is extremely hard for Zerg to deal with, the difference is it takes longer to buid up, but when P has 3 bases, it's nearly impossible for Zerg to deal with. It's not like Zerg can saturate more than 3 bases themselves.
Storm does well vs. infested terrans yes, but you can't have a HT/colossi army quickly enough to deal with the timings a lot of zergs have been using. If you go for quick infestors and spam those bad boys on the 3rd or natural of a protoss before colossi are out (or neural the 1-2 colossi they have), protoss kinda just dies. High templar also do not cost *way less*, do not come out faster than infestor tech, and they certainly can't storm the moment they are made. Lol @ a unit that sits around for 40 seconds before being able to do anything, and is slower than molasses.
3 Gate sentry is a good build, but you can't do it in a tournament every single game without a player going "Oh look, he's going to go 3 gate expand slowly, and then put sentry pressure on. I'm just going to do this build that stomps that". You have to mix it up, and protoss has no good ways of putting on early aggression to keep zerg/terran honest other than DT and stargate tech. With infestors the way they are now, protoss macro game isn't that good, because they counter everything protoss has by themselves. With neural gone, the matchup will become more fair because zerg will actually have to make other units.
|
Are baneling bombs too strong vs worker lines? I just saw minigun lose 60+ (that's sixty, not six or sixteen - sixty) workers to just a few banelings in 2 overlords in seconds while being distracted during a battle. It is not like baneling bombs are so hard to do or require a huge amount of skill to pull off and yet they are absolutely devastating and frequently game-ending. Thoughts?
|
On September 09 2011 13:12 Belial88 wrote:
3 gate sentry is an extremely safe build vZ, you can easily do it every game. Toss has a lot of deadly timing attacks, like 3 gate sentry pressure, that isn't all in at all.
And Zerg macro play is very safe. There is nothing wrong with 5 gate robo or 5 gate twilight, apply pressure without heavy commitment, and take a 3rd. Protoss macro game is extremely hard for Zerg to deal with, the difference is it takes longer to buid up, but when P has 3 bases, it's nearly impossible for Zerg to deal with. It's not like Zerg can saturate more than 3 bases themselves.
...You don't know anything about PvZ do you? Don't you think that maybe, just maybe, there's a reason no Protoss players, ever, do the 3 gate sentry expand in the GSL anymore? I'm seriously baffled here.
|
United States7483 Posts
On September 09 2011 13:35 eugalp wrote:
Are baneling bombs too strong vs worker lines? I just saw minigun lose 60+ (that's sixty, not six or sixteen - sixty) workers to just a few banelings in 2 overlords in seconds while being distracted during a battle. It is not like baneling bombs are so hard to do or require a huge amount of skill to pull off and yet they are absolutely devastating and frequently game-ending. Thoughts?
I don't think that particular tactic is overpowered, I remember watching a game between Hasuobs and I think Machine during the NASL where the zerg did that like 8 times during the match and Hasuobs just pulled his probes away every time perfectly, no problem, not a single probe lost to it.
It's not overpowered if it can be beaten with quick reaction time and paying attention, just a good tactic. The only dangerous part is that once you try it a few times, you can just fake baneling drops by having an empty overlord move in and make them run their probes away and stop mining.
|
It's not protosses' fault that they're doing so badly, yes it does have to do with their mindset and how they invested their time, but it's shaped by their race. Look at the GSL, the game in its infant stages is introduced to a huge open tournament with an 80k prize pool. Fuck the long term, fuck figuring out solid play, I'm gonna do whatever I can to win THIS tournament. As big as the prize pool has been for new competitor and mostly BW wash outs, players always looked at refining the short and sweet timing attack based plays.
the problem is that with a lot of metagame shifts and little bit of patch love Zerg has figured out and is dealing with all the timing based attacks. Now these pros who have invested all their time into perfecting these shallow timing attacks and all ins are now having to deal with the fact that their metagame is obsolete. Terran does this all the time, however the Terran race is far far more complete and mostly unexplored in comparison to Zerg and Protoss, which is why we see Terran dominate for a time, get figured out after a long period, and then next week they pull a new build out of their asses and are fine again. Zerg overall have been forced to play the long game for much longer than Protoss or Terran have in order to win and are much more comfortable with it.
I am somewhat sympathetic to the Protoss plight, but I do not agree with their consensus on what has taken place. Protoss should hopefully get a much needed overhaul in HotS and hopefully given more options to explore. At the same time they do need to recognize and change their mindset.
|
As a Terran player I think ghosts are too powerful. More specifically, EMP is too good against Protoss, and Snipe is too good against Zerg, in both cases because they're extremely good against too many units. What I would do to fix it is pick one unit of each race and give it a resistance % to the ability. For example, give the Ultralisk a 50% resistance to Snipe (so it takes 24 snipes to kill it rather than 12), and the give the Archon a 50% resistance to EMP (so it takes 7 EMPs to drain its shields rather than 4).
|
On September 09 2011 13:39 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 13:35 eugalp wrote:
Are baneling bombs too strong vs worker lines? I just saw minigun lose 60+ (that's sixty, not six or sixteen - sixty) workers to just a few banelings in 2 overlords in seconds while being distracted during a battle. It is not like baneling bombs are so hard to do or require a huge amount of skill to pull off and yet they are absolutely devastating and frequently game-ending. Thoughts? I don't think that particular tactic is overpowered, I remember watching a game between Hasuobs and I think Machine during the NASL where the zerg did that like 8 times during the match and Hasuobs just pulled his probes away every time perfectly, no problem, not a single probe lost to it. It's not overpowered if it can be beaten with quick reaction time and paying attention, just a good tactic. The only dangerous part is that once you try it a few times, you can just fake baneling drops by having an empty overlord move in and make them run their probes away and stop mining.
From what I've seen, even most pros don't watch the minimap ALL the time, especially when they are distracted (which is easy to do with a frontal attack). It seems to me like bling bombs are an especially unforgiving tactic given how little skill it takes to pull off and it is kind of sad when they decide games.
|
On September 09 2011 12:37 ypslala wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2011 23:14 beute wrote:On September 08 2011 22:34 cordlc wrote:On September 08 2011 22:24 pAzand wrote:
I think Blizz has to try out Amulet again.. Game wasn't even imba then and now Terran and Zergs are starting to use their casters, guess what, they're pretty damn strong. The problem with Khaydarin Amulet isn't whether or not it'd balance the game, it's that the design is stupid. Warp-in storms were retarded, whether the game was balanced with it or not. The problem is they never compensated for it. Fix other areas of the game, and when Protoss is back to feeling balanced, the KA change won't be brought up again. warping in a unit that cant do shit for 40 seconds is stupid... yeah blabla, ghost/infestor have to be trained, blabla... not an argument, it's one of protoss' core design to be able to warp in units on demand. Marines also need to be trained, while stalkers do not. should stalkers now be unable to attack for 30 seconds after every warp in? no, it's intended, it's the core of the protoss race, that's how protoss is designed. units pops = unit useful. if that is true for every other unit in the game, then it should be true for templars as well. well said. the removing of khaldarin also removed the ability for toss to comeback, an ability that all races have. terran can come back with mules, zerg with larvainject and massing eco. once toss gets behind, its pretty much over. khaldarin was a way to defend when behind and not get roflstomped immediately.
I disagree.
I find Zerg to be the race that has hardest time to come back.
When you get behind at some point, you either need to do an all in, or mass economy and die to a well timed push by T/P. Doing it 50/50 doesn't work because you will stay behind economicly AND usually won't be able to stop the push. However, it can sometimes be rly hard to identify when to do a timing...
Protoss i can sometimes take 3ed and turtle up to 200/200 and try to roll T/Z/P. It has a better chance of working...at least for me.
P.S Also, Infestors have to wait to be able to use NP as well.
|
On September 09 2011 13:36 Vaporak wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 13:12 Belial88 wrote:
3 gate sentry is an extremely safe build vZ, you can easily do it every game. Toss has a lot of deadly timing attacks, like 3 gate sentry pressure, that isn't all in at all.
And Zerg macro play is very safe. There is nothing wrong with 5 gate robo or 5 gate twilight, apply pressure without heavy commitment, and take a 3rd. Protoss macro game is extremely hard for Zerg to deal with, the difference is it takes longer to buid up, but when P has 3 bases, it's nearly impossible for Zerg to deal with. It's not like Zerg can saturate more than 3 bases themselves. ...You don't know anything about PvZ do you? Don't you think that maybe, just maybe, there's a reason no Protoss players, ever, do the 3 gate sentry expand in the GSL anymore? I'm seriously baffled here.
They do it because FFE is much more greedy and up until last month, FFE stargate denied Zerg's third base.
I'm a Master Zerg, so I guess you could just insult me about not knowing anything about PvZ.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
