|
Can we stop talking about nerfing things please? - 9:10 KST |
On August 24 2011 04:54 Blazinghand wrote:
Oh, lol I use this build as my standard TvP. 2 Rax Pressure Expo! It lets you scout and do fun army trading and sometime some minor damage against an aggressively expanding protoss, and gets fair number of marines in case of Void Rays. I could see how this could be dangerous for a 16-nexusing or 1gate eco-FEing protoss to deal with if they're made their build with a 1-1-1 in mind.
Yup  Nothing new or anything. You can hold it when you chrono units and drop more gates fast etc, but then you don't have the eco for the 1/1/1...if you chrono probes and delay the gates..death by 2rax pressure. I don't really see a solution here sadly. And maybe there shouldn't be one. The kind of 1gateFE you have to get away with to hold a 1/1/1 is *very* greedy. Toss just shouldn't *have* to resort to such desperate greed to hold an allin.
Actually, interestingly enough, historically 45-50% of GSL Code S has been terran all the way back through January I think. And, interestingly enough, it always equalizies by the time you get to the Ro8. This is because, I think, there are a lot of "mid-level" professional terran players who aren't as good as the gods (MC, Nestea) but are still extremely good. Players like NaDa come to mind... often... <3
Also, last time I checked, 50% of Korean Pros in GSL DO play Terran-- assuming your numbers are on the mark.
Yeah, in GSL. But not in Code B/GM. I think it's mostly to do with how resilient they are against cheeses though. So many top notch non-terrans just fall to that one cheese they don't handle perfectly or w/e.
|
On August 24 2011 04:48 Aletheia27 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 04:44 w_Ender_w wrote:On August 24 2011 04:43 Blazinghand wrote:
When we talk about 2 rax, are we saying 2 rax marine scv allin, or are there marauders with concussive as well? can I get a description of the build order? sorry ._. I think he means the 12/16 reactor/tech lab pressure. It usually has 2 marauders and concussive, along with a handful of marines and a couple of SCVs depending on how the guy wants to do it. It's designed to cancel the Nexus if the Protoss player does a particularly greedy expand. I meant this particular build. It's hard for me to identify with a lot of players here as my go to PvT build has almost always been 1 gate FE except for the occasional 2 gate robo and 1 gate stargate plays. But those were more...map specific. With 1 Gate FE, I've found I've almost always been able to handle the 12/16 pressure adequately with chronoed units and good ffs and positioning. But perhaps my opponents were not up to par. 650 masters.
It's fairly easy to hold a 1gate FE against pure units. It's when he brings 5+ scv's that it gets extremely hard on every map save shakuras, and in most cases I just cancel rather than dealing with it. And then on tal'darim....let's not talk about what happens when you 1gate expo and he pulls 15scv's+2rax X.x I personally find 2rax 12/16 reactor techlab much, much harder to deal with after a 1gate FE than a 3rax though.
From my testing a "safer" 1gate FE breaks even mineral-wise at the 9 minute mark going up to 34 probes. I suppose if you took time to stack all probes at the natural and the main it would probably break even around 8:40 though. Looking at most VOD's, in most cases you have until 10:00 or s.
The only advantage 1basing has over a 1gate FE is gas mined. If you have full intentions to 1base from the start, you could probably get somewhere in the area of 250-300 gas mined extra,
|
^ well yeah I can see that too.
Possible buff to give immortals splash damage or something..need to get that AoE somehow!
|
On August 24 2011 04:54 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 04:44 w_Ender_w wrote:On August 24 2011 04:43 Blazinghand wrote:
When we talk about 2 rax, are we saying 2 rax marine scv allin, or are there marauders with concussive as well? can I get a description of the build order? sorry ._. I think he means the 12/16 reactor/tech lab pressure. It usually has 2 marauders and concussive, along with a handful of marines and a couple of SCVs depending on how the guy wants to do it. It's designed to cancel the Nexus if the Protoss player does a particularly greedy expand. Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 04:45 Yaotzin wrote:
Usually people mean 12/16 reactor/tech lab 2rax, sometimes with a few SCVs. It would be dumb of them to allin completely as you can then sac the expo and be fine anyway. Oh, lol I use this build as my standard TvP. 2 Rax Pressure Expo! It lets you scout and do fun army trading and sometime some minor damage against an aggressively expanding protoss, and gets fair number of marines in case of Void Rays. I could see how this could be dangerous for a 16-nexusing or 1gate eco-FEing protoss to deal with if they're made their build with a 1-1-1 in mind.
Yeah, it's basicly a free-win against Nexus first and can be really good close positions against 1 gate FEs. It's a little vulnerable to 6 gates if you can't cancel his nexus when he 1 gate FEs, and can be weak to certain all-ins. Also DTs, because it can be difficult to sneak in an engineering bay at the proper timing if you're trying to get Medivacs out at a decent time.
|
On August 24 2011 04:54 Blazinghand wrote:
I actually have a huge blog post in the work about this. It's basically the former; terran has a lot of allins, and unless you're like, NesTea or Losira or something it's hard to deal with. There are a lot of terran players who are great but not NesTier.
If that is in fact the case, then it's a major imbalance. It means that high-level Zerg and Protoss players suffer immensely against Terran, discouraging them and limiting their ability to enter the ranks of the top-tier. There shouldn't be that kind of barrier for competitive play.
|
Russian Federation266 Posts
On August 24 2011 04:37 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 04:33 n0btozz wrote:On August 22 2011 06:03 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
Something like this was a possibility ever since so many protoss players began to rely on 15nexus and 1gate expand. I've never understood the economic necessity of expanding so soon. 1gate robo and 1gate star (for phoenix) builds can yield economically sound mid games without sacrificing early game information. I don't think there is such an economic necessity. I think protoss players saw that they could get away with really early expansions and so they did it. Now it's back to being a coinflip like it ought to be. Rushing to gather information remains the most reliable way to get to mid game on even ground or to win outright against opponents not intending to enter mid game. Of course, this requires perfect use of the information, so it is a more difficult way to play until all the necessary knowledge has been discovered, at which point it makes all the things it counters absolutely obsolete. I imagine 1-1-1 is one such thing. Plus, although it seems that TL is very much against any comments on balance. Look at code S Ro16. MC is out due to getting cheesed by a terran, So what´s the race distribution? 4 protosses - 3 zergs - 9 terrans. Don´t really need to say anything about it. Code A Ro16: 2 protosses, 7 zergs and 7 terrans Terrans also seem to be dominating in numbers on the highest tier...I wonder if that is only because the people who play terran are so much better then all the people who play zerg and protoss...Maybe, just maybe, race has something to do with it? And please, don´t ban me just for stating facts above... You have not done any research, have you? Let me show you something interesting, and open your mind about the state of code S: GSL July: Ro16: 7 terran Ro8: 2 terran GSL May: Ro16: 7 terran Ro8: 3 terran GSL March Ro16: 7 terran Ro8: 3 terran It looks to me that Terran might have large numbers in the Ro16, but looking at the Ro8, it seems that these large numbers of terran are losing and it's equalizing usually to a 3/3/2 split of races in the Ro8. Prettttty normal. I left out the ST and WC in this analysis due to lack of a Code S. If you're going to cry "imbalance" based on tournament standings, do some in-depth research first-- sometimes these things can be deceiving, and there are hidden trends in the data.
This statistic is somewhat deceiving, GSL March and even GSL May are too outdated (for this discussion it's important that they were played before 1.3.3 and WG research time nerf). Also you left out ST where there were 6 terrans in Ro8 and 4 terrans in Ro4 and only 1 protoss since Ro16. The "lack of Code S" doesn't mean much for balance discussion, the tournament was still played by top Koreans.
|
On August 24 2011 05:00 malaan wrote:
^ well yeah I can see that too.
Possible buff to give immortals splash damage or something..need to get that AoE somehow!
I'm not sure giving Protoss players even more AoE is really what needs to be done here. Protoss players having an abundance of late game AoE is part of the reason it's really hard to balance early game Protoss.
|
Rereading this thread, I think a lot of people have been derailed. The issue here is 1/1/1 in CLOSE POSITIONS. Specifically because in close positions, it's difficult to defend a 2 rax play from terran and so it's hard for one to gain the economic advantage necessary to beat the 1-1-1 without a somewhat risky ploy. But I still contend that with proper scouting, a 2 rax can be defended by a 1 gate FE on the toss part equalizing the matchup....
Or you can use the close positions to your advantage and all in. Either way... I feel like this thread has spiraled quite far. A lot of people are quoting statistics of terran beating protoss, but as far as I'm aware, most of those games are on larger maps and the losses aren't from the 1-1-1 but rather the difficult of the toss endgame dealing with emp. A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT MATTER. I may be misinformed here...so if someone would correct me if I'm wrong, it would be much appreciated.
As far as the MC vs Puma game, in my mind, MC teched too quickly and lost to the second wave because of that.
also: @doler: 1 gate into super fast colossus I think would leave you incredibly vulnerable to a 1-1-1 play as your ground army would be very sparce and you most likely wouldn't have thermal lances by the timing.
|
On August 24 2011 04:54 Blazinghand wrote:
I actually have a huge blog post in the work about this. It's basically the former; terran has a lot of allins, and unless you're like, NesTea or Losira or something it's hard to deal with. There are a lot of terran players who are great but not NesTier.
Terrans are not 50% of all players trying to make it into code A/code S. Just look it up
Also, now it´s not equalizing, Terrans are winning the Up/down matches more an more, so you are stacking Code S more and more-pro with (sadly) mediocre terrans. Also, people dropping from Code A are more and more Protosses/zergs. Terrans are also starting to stack up Code A more and more. So, terrans moving higher and higher and the zergs/protosses are getting knocked down except the very very best ones, who hang on.
Also, imbalance is different between matchups. Zergs are currently not in as big of a trouble as Protosses, simply because of one matchup.
|
I don't really see any way to "fix" this supposed 1/1/1 problem by changing units. All of the units in that push suddenly become relatively easy to deal with for protoss once the game gets to a certain stage. But it's not like terran isn't forced to go for mmm based comps lategame anyway.
I think this might actually be a map problem more than anything else...
|
On August 24 2011 04:58 rdr wrote:
How about a mass probe chargelot archon all in as an answer? I have done it when i have been contained by a terran.
Part of the issue is that a lot of terran players are active with the initial banshee or two, and it's hard to deal with that sort of harass without dumping resources into a couple stalkers.
Yes but the archons take care of that if this works. the question is if it works dps wise. The tanks to frendly fire against the marines when you charge with probes
|
Blazinghand
United States25552 Posts
On August 24 2011 05:01 Acritter wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 04:54 Blazinghand wrote:
I actually have a huge blog post in the work about this. It's basically the former; terran has a lot of allins, and unless you're like, NesTea or Losira or something it's hard to deal with. There are a lot of terran players who are great but not NesTier. If that is in fact the case, then it's a major imbalance. It means that high-level Zerg and Protoss players suffer immensely against Terran, discouraging them and limiting their ability to enter the ranks of the top-tier. There shouldn't be that kind of barrier for competitive play.
It's actually only one of two factors; the other factor is that TvT is the least coinflippy mirror matchup, and ZvP has gone through a lot of HUGE metagame shifts this year, which means that of the "mid-level" Code S pros, more Zergs and Protosses get sent to the up/down matches than Terrans; the Terrans sent to the up/down deserve to go there because they lost in a non-volatile matchup, but it's entirely possible that a Protoss player in group play could get derped by some wierd PvP stuff and just lose for no good reason. On average, the accumulates to more mid-level terrans and fewer mid-level zergs and protoss (though the high-level ones are completely safe) in the GSL. This is only really an issue for now, though; once ZvP and PvP settle down things should work out better.
On August 24 2011 05:03 Evilmystic wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 04:37 Blazinghand wrote:On August 24 2011 04:33 n0btozz wrote:On August 22 2011 06:03 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
Something like this was a possibility ever since so many protoss players began to rely on 15nexus and 1gate expand. I've never understood the economic necessity of expanding so soon. 1gate robo and 1gate star (for phoenix) builds can yield economically sound mid games without sacrificing early game information. I don't think there is such an economic necessity. I think protoss players saw that they could get away with really early expansions and so they did it. Now it's back to being a coinflip like it ought to be. Rushing to gather information remains the most reliable way to get to mid game on even ground or to win outright against opponents not intending to enter mid game. Of course, this requires perfect use of the information, so it is a more difficult way to play until all the necessary knowledge has been discovered, at which point it makes all the things it counters absolutely obsolete. I imagine 1-1-1 is one such thing. Plus, although it seems that TL is very much against any comments on balance. Look at code S Ro16. MC is out due to getting cheesed by a terran, So what´s the race distribution? 4 protosses - 3 zergs - 9 terrans. Don´t really need to say anything about it. Code A Ro16: 2 protosses, 7 zergs and 7 terrans Terrans also seem to be dominating in numbers on the highest tier...I wonder if that is only because the people who play terran are so much better then all the people who play zerg and protoss...Maybe, just maybe, race has something to do with it? And please, don´t ban me just for stating facts above... You have not done any research, have you? Let me show you something interesting, and open your mind about the state of code S: GSL July: Ro16: 7 terran Ro8: 2 terran GSL May: Ro16: 7 terran Ro8: 3 terran GSL March Ro16: 7 terran Ro8: 3 terran It looks to me that Terran might have large numbers in the Ro16, but looking at the Ro8, it seems that these large numbers of terran are losing and it's equalizing usually to a 3/3/2 split of races in the Ro8. Prettttty normal. I left out the ST and WC in this analysis due to lack of a Code S. If you're going to cry "imbalance" based on tournament standings, do some in-depth research first-- sometimes these things can be deceiving, and there are hidden trends in the data. This statistic is somewhat deceiving, GSL March and even GSL May are too outdated (for this discussion it's important that they were played before 1.3.3 and WG research time nerf). Also you left out ST where there were 6 terrans in Ro8 and 4 terrans in Ro4 and only 1 protoss since Ro16. The "lack of Code S" doesn't mean much for balance discussion, the tournament was still played by top Koreans.
I left out ST because it didn't use "group stage" format in the same way, making it a less accurate descriptor; Code S tournaments use group stage.
March, May, and July are the three most recent standard GSL events which is why I used them.
On August 24 2011 05:04 n0btozz wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 04:54 Blazinghand wrote:On August 24 2011 04:44 w_Ender_w wrote:On August 24 2011 04:43 Blazinghand wrote:
When we talk about 2 rax, are we saying 2 rax marine scv allin, or are there marauders with concussive as well? can I get a description of the build order? sorry ._. I think he means the 12/16 reactor/tech lab pressure. It usually has 2 marauders and concussive, along with a handful of marines and a couple of SCVs depending on how the guy wants to do it. It's designed to cancel the Nexus if the Protoss player does a particularly greedy expand. On August 24 2011 04:45 Yaotzin wrote:
Usually people mean 12/16 reactor/tech lab 2rax, sometimes with a few SCVs. It would be dumb of them to allin completely as you can then sac the expo and be fine anyway. Oh, lol I use this build as my standard TvP. 2 Rax Pressure Expo! It lets you scout and do fun army trading and sometime some minor damage against an aggressively expanding protoss, and gets fair number of marines in case of Void Rays. I could see how this could be dangerous for a 16-nexusing or 1gate eco-FEing protoss to deal with if they're made their build with a 1-1-1 in mind. On August 24 2011 04:47 n0btozz wrote:On August 24 2011 04:37 Blazinghand wrote:On August 24 2011 04:33 n0btozz wrote:On August 22 2011 06:03 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
Something like this was a possibility ever since so many protoss players began to rely on 15nexus and 1gate expand. I've never understood the economic necessity of expanding so soon. 1gate robo and 1gate star (for phoenix) builds can yield economically sound mid games without sacrificing early game information. I don't think there is such an economic necessity. I think protoss players saw that they could get away with really early expansions and so they did it. Now it's back to being a coinflip like it ought to be. Rushing to gather information remains the most reliable way to get to mid game on even ground or to win outright against opponents not intending to enter mid game. Of course, this requires perfect use of the information, so it is a more difficult way to play until all the necessary knowledge has been discovered, at which point it makes all the things it counters absolutely obsolete. I imagine 1-1-1 is one such thing. Plus, although it seems that TL is very much against any comments on balance. Look at code S Ro16. MC is out due to getting cheesed by a terran, So what´s the race distribution? 4 protosses - 3 zergs - 9 terrans. Don´t really need to say anything about it. Code A Ro16: 2 protosses, 7 zergs and 7 terrans Terrans also seem to be dominating in numbers on the highest tier...I wonder if that is only because the people who play terran are so much better then all the people who play zerg and protoss...Maybe, just maybe, race has something to do with it? And please, don´t ban me just for stating facts above... You have not done any research, have you? Let me show you something interesting, and open your mind about the state of code S: GSL July: Ro16: 7 terran Ro8: 2 terran GSL May: Ro16: 7 terran Ro8: 3 terran GSL March Ro16: 7 terran Ro8: 3 terran It looks to me that Terran might have large numbers in the Ro16, but looking at the Ro8, it seems that these large numbers of terran are losing and it's equalizing usually to a 3/3/2 split of races in the Ro8. Prettttty normal. I left out the ST and WC in this analysis due to lack of a Code S. If you're going to cry "imbalance" based on tournament standings, do some in-depth research first-- sometimes these things can be deceiving, and there are hidden trends in the data. Why does terran have the numbers in Ro16? Why is it that terrans seem to be getting up to code A and then Code S around the same rate as the other 2 races are getting there put together? Then they are almost always in dominating numbers in both groups, and later stages. Why is that? Btw, July Code S Terrans just all-killed each other out of the tournament. Also, a big spokesperson for removing the blue flame upgrade, it´s going to show itself to be the biggest remaining imbalance in the game I think. Eventually at least. Also, talk about doing my homework: 50% of the players of this GSL were Terran as there were 32 of them in the 64 players of both Code A and Code S.Now...Last time I checked, 50% of Korean Pro´s did not play Terran...I guess, just maybe, there is another reason for that statistic... Actually, interestingly enough, historically 45-50% of GSL Code S has been terran all the way back through January I think. And, interestingly enough, it always equalizies by the time you get to the Ro8. This is because, I think, there are a lot of "mid-level" professional terran players who aren't as good as the gods (MC, Nestea) but are still extremely good. Players like NaDa come to mind... often... <3 Also, last time I checked, 50% of Korean Pros in GSL DO play Terran-- assuming your numbers are on the mark. On August 24 2011 04:48 Acritter wrote:On August 24 2011 04:37 Blazinghand wrote:On August 24 2011 04:33 n0btozz wrote:On August 22 2011 06:03 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
Something like this was a possibility ever since so many protoss players began to rely on 15nexus and 1gate expand. I've never understood the economic necessity of expanding so soon. 1gate robo and 1gate star (for phoenix) builds can yield economically sound mid games without sacrificing early game information. I don't think there is such an economic necessity. I think protoss players saw that they could get away with really early expansions and so they did it. Now it's back to being a coinflip like it ought to be. Rushing to gather information remains the most reliable way to get to mid game on even ground or to win outright against opponents not intending to enter mid game. Of course, this requires perfect use of the information, so it is a more difficult way to play until all the necessary knowledge has been discovered, at which point it makes all the things it counters absolutely obsolete. I imagine 1-1-1 is one such thing. Plus, although it seems that TL is very much against any comments on balance. Look at code S Ro16. MC is out due to getting cheesed by a terran, So what´s the race distribution? 4 protosses - 3 zergs - 9 terrans. Don´t really need to say anything about it. Code A Ro16: 2 protosses, 7 zergs and 7 terrans Terrans also seem to be dominating in numbers on the highest tier...I wonder if that is only because the people who play terran are so much better then all the people who play zerg and protoss...Maybe, just maybe, race has something to do with it? And please, don´t ban me just for stating facts above... You have not done any research, have you? Let me show you something interesting, and open your mind about the state of code S: GSL July: Ro16: 7 terran Ro8: 2 terran GSL May: Ro16: 7 terran Ro8: 3 terran GSL March Ro16: 7 terran Ro8: 3 terran It looks to me that Terran might have large numbers in the Ro16, but looking at the Ro8, it seems that these large numbers of terran are losing and it's equalizing usually to a 3/3/2 split of races in the Ro8. Prettttty normal. I left out the ST and WC in this analysis due to lack of a Code S. If you're going to cry "imbalance" based on tournament standings, do some in-depth research first-- sometimes these things can be deceiving, and there are hidden trends in the data. That piece of data is more interesting than you let on. It means that there are consistently a lot of Terran players between the top 16 and the top 8. Is it just chance that so many Terrans are getting that high and then losing, or is there something about that precise tiering of skill that makes Terran strong? I'm going to posit two hypotheses to explain this: one, that Terran is capable of highly aggressive play that requires an opponent to be of absolutely top caliber to survive it, or two, that Terran's play is very inconsistent and players who get to the Ro16 have a very high chance of dropping out on account of their builds being countered. I don't have a lot of data to back these up, but they're something. I actually have a huge blog post in the work about this. It's basically the former; terran has a lot of allins, and unless you're like, NesTea or Losira or something it's hard to deal with. There are a lot of terran players who are great but not NesTier. Terrans are not 50% of all players trying to make it into code A/code S. Just look it up Also, now it´s not equalizing, Terrans are winning the Up/down matches more an more, so you are stacking Code S more and more-pro with (sadly) mediocre terrans. Also, people dropping from Code A are more and more Protosses/zergs. Terrans are also starting to stack up Code A more and more. So, terrans moving higher and higher and the zergs/protosses are getting knocked down except the very very best ones, who hang on. Also, imbalance is different between matchups. Zergs are currently not in as big of a trouble as Protosses, simply because of one matchup.
There's no "making it into" Code S, there's up/down matches. The fact of the matter is, code S is determined in the long run by who loses in the group stages and gets sent to up/downs. Mirror matchups are at fault for their volatility (ZvZ and PvZ) and ZvP for the big metagame shifts.
EDIT: you know what? I DID LOOK IT UP, and clearly you didn't.
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2011_Global_StarCraft_II_League_July/Up_and_Down
of the 16 up/down players, 10 are terran.
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2011_LG_Cinema_3D_Global_StarCraft_II_League_May/Up_and_Down
Of the 24 up/down players, 13 are terran.
Are you kidding me? did you think i wouldn't check?
On August 24 2011 05:05 rdr wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 04:58 rdr wrote:
How about a mass probe chargelot archon all in as an answer? I have done it when i have been contained by a terran. Show nested quote +
Part of the issue is that a lot of terran players are active with the initial banshee or two, and it's hard to deal with that sort of harass without dumping resources into a couple stalkers.
Yes but the archons take care of that if this works. the question is if it works dps wise. The tanks to frendly fire against the marines when you charge with probes
Archons come out pretty slow, and have like 3 range; against like 1-2 archons a couple of banshees will do just fine, and with cliff abuse will either kill the archons or get plenty of probe shots. Try it yourself if you'd like; Archons are not good anti-banshee defense by mineral lines.
|
On August 24 2011 04:37 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 04:33 n0btozz wrote:On August 22 2011 06:03 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
Something like this was a possibility ever since so many protoss players began to rely on 15nexus and 1gate expand. I've never understood the economic necessity of expanding so soon. 1gate robo and 1gate star (for phoenix) builds can yield economically sound mid games without sacrificing early game information. I don't think there is such an economic necessity. I think protoss players saw that they could get away with really early expansions and so they did it. Now it's back to being a coinflip like it ought to be. Rushing to gather information remains the most reliable way to get to mid game on even ground or to win outright against opponents not intending to enter mid game. Of course, this requires perfect use of the information, so it is a more difficult way to play until all the necessary knowledge has been discovered, at which point it makes all the things it counters absolutely obsolete. I imagine 1-1-1 is one such thing. Plus, although it seems that TL is very much against any comments on balance. Look at code S Ro16. MC is out due to getting cheesed by a terran, So what´s the race distribution? 4 protosses - 3 zergs - 9 terrans. Don´t really need to say anything about it. Code A Ro16: 2 protosses, 7 zergs and 7 terrans Terrans also seem to be dominating in numbers on the highest tier...I wonder if that is only because the people who play terran are so much better then all the people who play zerg and protoss...Maybe, just maybe, race has something to do with it? And please, don´t ban me just for stating facts above... You have not done any research, have you? Let me show you something interesting, and open your mind about the state of code S: GSL July: Ro16: 7 terran Ro8: 2 terran GSL May: Ro16: 7 terran Ro8: 3 terran GSL March Ro16: 7 terran Ro8: 3 terran It looks to me that Terran might have large numbers in the Ro16, but looking at the Ro8, it seems that these large numbers of terran are losing and it's equalizing usually to a 3/3/2 split of races in the Ro8. Prettttty normal. I left out the ST and WC in this analysis due to lack of a Code S. If you're going to cry "imbalance" based on tournament standings, do some in-depth research first-- sometimes these things can be deceiving, and there are hidden trends in the data.
This is really poor reasoning, all numbers of races are going to drop if they are close to or greater than half the player pool as they will inevitably play against each other in subsequent rounds. You can't just pretend that Code A Ro32 is the starting point of skill, you're looking at less than a tenth of a percent of Korean players in Code B alone. It really doesn't matter who ends up in the Ro16 or Ro8 or Ro4 as it's an absurdly small sample size in a game with a lot of volatility. If you want to glean any information from those games it has to be by watching them and even then requires expert knowledge to form a remotely relevant subjective point of view.
What IS relevant is the fact that so many Terrans are in Code A and Code S to begin with, the Code B qualifiers are a grueling elimination system of a much larger size that pools players from the top of the Korean ladder. So we already have a good sample of the top korean players then going through a huge tournament giving us a decent sample size and real data about the overall trend of which races are faring best. Terran started off the strong and has been creeping up in numbers in GSL every season. It's undeniable that Terrans are doing the best and getting further ahead.
|
What about this gate-core-robo-ob build Artosis is talking about... seems like KNOWING this is coming doesn't help in holding it off...
|
Blazinghand
United States25552 Posts
On August 24 2011 05:11 Ziggitz wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 04:37 Blazinghand wrote:On August 24 2011 04:33 n0btozz wrote:On August 22 2011 06:03 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
Something like this was a possibility ever since so many protoss players began to rely on 15nexus and 1gate expand. I've never understood the economic necessity of expanding so soon. 1gate robo and 1gate star (for phoenix) builds can yield economically sound mid games without sacrificing early game information. I don't think there is such an economic necessity. I think protoss players saw that they could get away with really early expansions and so they did it. Now it's back to being a coinflip like it ought to be. Rushing to gather information remains the most reliable way to get to mid game on even ground or to win outright against opponents not intending to enter mid game. Of course, this requires perfect use of the information, so it is a more difficult way to play until all the necessary knowledge has been discovered, at which point it makes all the things it counters absolutely obsolete. I imagine 1-1-1 is one such thing. Plus, although it seems that TL is very much against any comments on balance. Look at code S Ro16. MC is out due to getting cheesed by a terran, So what´s the race distribution? 4 protosses - 3 zergs - 9 terrans. Don´t really need to say anything about it. Code A Ro16: 2 protosses, 7 zergs and 7 terrans Terrans also seem to be dominating in numbers on the highest tier...I wonder if that is only because the people who play terran are so much better then all the people who play zerg and protoss...Maybe, just maybe, race has something to do with it? And please, don´t ban me just for stating facts above... You have not done any research, have you? Let me show you something interesting, and open your mind about the state of code S: GSL July: Ro16: 7 terran Ro8: 2 terran GSL May: Ro16: 7 terran Ro8: 3 terran GSL March Ro16: 7 terran Ro8: 3 terran It looks to me that Terran might have large numbers in the Ro16, but looking at the Ro8, it seems that these large numbers of terran are losing and it's equalizing usually to a 3/3/2 split of races in the Ro8. Prettttty normal. I left out the ST and WC in this analysis due to lack of a Code S. If you're going to cry "imbalance" based on tournament standings, do some in-depth research first-- sometimes these things can be deceiving, and there are hidden trends in the data. This is really poor reasoning, all numbers of races are going to drop if they are close to or greater than half the player pool as they will inevitably play against each other in subsequent rounds. You can't just pretend that Code A Ro32 is the starting point of skill, you're looking at less than a tenth of a percent of Korean players in Code B alone. It really doesn't matter who ends up in the Ro16 or Ro8 or Ro4 as it's an absurdly small sample size in a game with a lot of volatility. If you want to glean any information from those games it has to be by watching them and even then requires expert knowledge to form a remotely relevant subjective point of view. What IS relevant is the fact that so many Terrans are in Code A and Code S to begin with, the Code B qualifiers are a grueling elimination system of a much larger size that pools players from the top of the Korean ladder. So we already have a good sample of the top korean players then going through a huge tournament giving us a decent sample size and real data about the overall trend of which races are faring best. Terran started off the strong and has been creeping up in numbers in GSL every season. It's undeniable that Terrans are doing the best and getting further ahead.
On the other hand, it's also possible that Terran started off strong, then, due to a non-coin-flippy mirror match, the skilled terrans were less likely to get knocked out of CodeA/CodeS, and the weak terrans were culled, leaving a core group of terrans in Code S who are Ro16ers but not Ro8ers; who get past and/or don't have to go the up/down stage but aren't legendary (Clide comes to mind).
On August 24 2011 05:14 sjperera wrote:
What about this gate-core-robo-ob build Artosis is talking about... seems like KNOWING this is coming doesn't help in holding it off...
Knowing it's coming helps, but by the time you really know, it's too late to adapt to a build (eco 1 gate FE) that can overcome it. Protoss scout tech is delayed, it's hard to tell what's going on when there's a high-ground bunker and depot wall.
|
On August 24 2011 05:08 Blazinghand wrote:
There's no "making it into" Code S, there's up/down matches. The fact of the matter is, code S is determined in the long run by who loses in the group stages and gets sent to up/downs. Mirror matchups are at fault for their volatility (ZvZ and PvZ) and ZvP for the big metagame shifts.
The only flaw with your logic is that ZvZ and PvP send down just as many P´s and Z´s as TvT´s send down T´s, no matter how "volatile" the matchup is.
Also, there is "making it" into Code S. You do that by finishing high in Code A and going straight up or going through the up/down matches.
And maybe you don´t understand what I wrote above, but the thing is that Terrans are increasing in numbers in Code S. So that means they are making it through the up/down matches. That is what "terrans stacking in code S" means.
Also, they ain´t losing numbers as much in Code A as they should be because of so many players making it to Code S. Why you might ask, well it´s because Terrans are also making it into Code A pretty hard.
So again...why is that? It´s not because of some made up bs about the mirror matchups. The answer is obvious to anyone except for Blizzard and a Terran or two.
|
On August 24 2011 05:05 rdr wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 04:58 rdr wrote:
How about a mass probe chargelot archon all in as an answer? I have done it when i have been contained by a terran. Show nested quote +
Part of the issue is that a lot of terran players are active with the initial banshee or two, and it's hard to deal with that sort of harass without dumping resources into a couple stalkers.
Yes but the archons take care of that if this works. the question is if it works dps wise. The tanks to frendly fire against the marines when you charge with probes
Archons come out pretty slow, and have like 3 range; against like 1-2 archons a couple of banshees will do just fine, and with cliff abuse will either kill the archons or get plenty of probe shots. Try it yourself if you'd like; Archons are not good anti-banshee defense by mineral lines.
I know archons are good against plat level all ins and banshees arent really common there. With good micro i can imagine that this build maybe is unstoppable. But haven seen it so much yet i dont know whats going on in the gsl eathier.
|
Am I the only terran who first off can't even do the 1/1/1 raven all-in and on top of that hates doing it? I absolutely despise doing it after having tried it, just opening banshee, 1 raxFE or 2rax pressure is soooooooo much more fun than just building a couple of each unit, pulling scvs and hoping it will win you the game.
The problem I suppose is the fact that it can't really be nerfed, all these units are pretty essential to terran and can't be mixtured with, buffing protoss early game will essentially just force terran to go 1rax FE every game as protoss already have pretty good early game defense (don't argue on this on).
|
Blazinghand
United States25552 Posts
On August 24 2011 05:17 rdr wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 05:05 rdr wrote:On August 24 2011 04:58 rdr wrote:
How about a mass probe chargelot archon all in as an answer? I have done it when i have been contained by a terran.
Part of the issue is that a lot of terran players are active with the initial banshee or two, and it's hard to deal with that sort of harass without dumping resources into a couple stalkers.
Yes but the archons take care of that if this works. the question is if it works dps wise. The tanks to frendly fire against the marines when you charge with probes Show nested quote +
Archons come out pretty slow, and have like 3 range; against like 1-2 archons a couple of banshees will do just fine, and with cliff abuse will either kill the archons or get plenty of probe shots. Try it yourself if you'd like; Archons are not good anti-banshee defense by mineral lines.
I know archons are good against plat level all ins and banshees arent really common there. With good micro i can imagine that this build maybe is unstoppable. But haven seen it so much yet i dont know whats going on in the gsl eathier.
that's fair to say; but I think that this thread is expressly looking to deal against a well-controlled version of this build played at a master league, or even professional level. Archons are actually great, and if it weren't for banshee harass before the push, they'd be ideal.
On August 24 2011 05:17 n0btozz wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2011 05:08 Blazinghand wrote:
There's no "making it into" Code S, there's up/down matches. The fact of the matter is, code S is determined in the long run by who loses in the group stages and gets sent to up/downs. Mirror matchups are at fault for their volatility (ZvZ and PvZ) and ZvP for the big metagame shifts.
The only flaw with your logic is that ZvZ and PvP send down just as many P´s and Z´s as TvT´s send down T´s, no matter how "volatile" the matchup is. Also, there is "making it" into Code S. You do that by finishing high in Code A and going straight up or going through the up/down matches. And maybe you don´t understand what I wrote above, but the thing is that Terrans are increasing in numbers in Code S. So that means they are making it through the up/down matches. That is what "terrans stacking in code S" means. Also, they ain´t losing numbers as much in Code A as they should be because of so many players making it to Code S. Why you might ask, well it´s because Terrans are also making it into Code A pretty hard. So again...why is that? It´s not because of some made up bs about the mirror matchups. The answer is obvious to anyone except for Blizzard and a Terran or two.
There's been about 50% terrans in Code S since january. The number is not increasing. In January, March, and July there were 15 Terrans in Code S. In August there are 17. This doesn't seem like much of a trend to me.
EDIT: It's pretty clear to me, nobtozz, that you aren't actually engaging my arguments in a reasonable fashion or presenting evidence. You reference evidence that turns out to actually be supporting my argument, not yours, and you don't address me when I point this out. I'm done discussing this with you. Thanks for your time.
|
On August 24 2011 05:04 Aletheia27 wrote:
Rereading this thread, I think a lot of people have been derailed. The issue here is 1/1/1 in CLOSE POSITIONS. Specifically because in close positions, it's difficult to defend a 2 rax play from terran and so it's hard for one to gain the economic advantage necessary to beat the 1-1-1 without a somewhat risky ploy. But I still contend that with proper scouting, a 2 rax can be defended by a 1 gate FE on the toss part equalizing the matchup....
Or you can use the close positions to your advantage and all in. Either way... I feel like this thread has spiraled quite far. A lot of people are quoting statistics of terran beating protoss, but as far as I'm aware, most of those games are on larger maps and the losses aren't from the 1-1-1 but rather the difficult of the toss endgame dealing with emp. A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT MATTER. I may be misinformed here...so if someone would correct me if I'm wrong, it would be much appreciated.
As far as the MC vs Puma game, in my mind, MC teched too quickly and lost to the second wave because of that.
also: @doler: 1 gate into super fast colossus I think would leave you incredibly vulnerable to a 1-1-1 play as your ground army would be very sparce and you most likely wouldn't have thermal lances by the timing.
So what you're saying is. Terran is imbalanced in close positions and close positions are stupid... Now there's a shocker!
On August 24 2011 05:21 Confuzzled wrote:
Am I the only terran who first off can't even do the 1/1/1 raven all-in and on top of that hates doing it? I absolutely despise doing it after having tried it, just opening banshee, 1 raxFE or 2rax pressure is soooooooo much more fun than just building a couple of each unit, pulling scvs and hoping it will win you the game.
The problem I suppose is the fact that it can't really be nerfed, all these units are pretty essential to terran and can't be mixtured with, buffing protoss early game will essentially just force terran to go 1rax FE every game as protoss already have pretty good early game defense (don't argue on this on).
Banshee nerf ftw! And make DT/HT tech on the same building gogo! proxy HT snipe raven then lolol dts. Sounds good to me !
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
