|
Can we stop talking about nerfing things please? - 9:10 KST |
On August 22 2011 07:19 paradox_ wrote:
When some of the best korean terrans in the world are saying its a little broken, why are people arguing so blindly. These are people who practice this stuff day in and out. This isn't some gold-low master level theorycrafting. The game has been out a lot longer than when 4gate was considered OP (which was nerfed anyways). There is a general consensus among those that practice 10-12 hours a day that 1-1-1 isn't right.
MC is considered to be one of the best toss (even if you disagree he comes in anyone's top 3-5 list) while someone like Puma wouldn't be considered the same league (from results). No doubt Puma is good and has potential but if some toss in Code B started destroyed MVP or NesTea 3-0 the way Puma did to MC today, there would be the same kind of crying going on if not worse.
There has been builds that were anti toss throughout the last 1 year but I don't think any of them made toss feel this helpless. Even during roach/ling allins, a lot of toss would say its holdable even though its very difficult. The solutions were there even at the peak of strength of roach/ling all-ins. The same has held true for all other builds. 4gate vs zerg etc. These builds also have the weakness of being screwed if it gets held off. No other build in the game for any race allows you to pull that many scvs and still be able to make a second or third push that strong. And even if it doesn't break the toss, if it denies the expo (by killing or cancelling whatever) long enough the terran can maintain the pushes indefinitely by simply flying their CC to expo. The only way the toss can put a stop to the build is to beat it super convincingly. Holding it off isn't enough. And as the OP linked, lack of information is an issue. If toss' had the option of throwing away 100-200 minerals to be able to scout the all-in coming at a reasonable time, they would. (e.g scan, saccing OL)
In my mind Puma is better than MC simply because of his BW background.
Speaking of BW, when Bisu PvZ came out, did blizzard give zerg a buff because Bisu and ensuing protosses used a new "imbalanced" (yes I remember DT/Sair balance whine) strategy that was dominant for a period of time? Fuck no.
|
On August 22 2011 06:50 Numy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 06:47 Jayrod wrote:On August 22 2011 06:42 Carbonthief wrote:
I have a question. Liquid'Tyler has stated his belief that the economic advantage of fast expanding is not incredibly necessary, and others have followed this statement up by basically saying the 111 is just Terran responding to Protoss FE metagame, and that maybe Protoss shouldn't FE.
Well. How does fast expanding hurt your chances of holding off a 111? It seems completely irrelevant to me to blame it on a Protoss FE. The 111 hits AFTER, long after, the FE has already kicked in and payed for itself. It seems like the FE can ONLY help. I don't understand what possible benefit you could reap by not FEing. you're 100% correct. That's why no one can back up the claim the 1 basing is the best response. Tyler says the economic advantage is not necessary... well lets see a high level even match where that is true and the terran hasnt gifted the game. I know he's never done it in a televised match. Maybe hes talking about ladder players? Or the CPUs he practices his 111 defense against. This sounds like a massive Tyler bash than anything else. Don't really understand it. Tyler is saying the lack of scouting information from such an early expand doesn't outweigh the economic advantage you could get. The whole OP is also talking about scouting information and how if you do fast expand you can deal with 1/1/1 but you could lose to other things hence you in this strange situation. Tyler says you can get that scouting information early and still be find on eco in midgame. Don't bash people so aggressively for absolutely no reason.
One of the many disadvantages of fast expanding that doesn't have anything to do with economy is that you invested money into tech later rather than earlier. All of your tech is delayed and you end up with more zealots and stalkers and less immortals, void rays, colossus... whatever.
|
IT IS NOT ABOUT INFORMATION AT ALL!
It is about information, because a lot of the "defenses" are very weak to other terran all-ins.
also because, as you said:
he could be doing a 1-1-1 but what if he doesnt?
I agree the first problem is something that actually counters it, regardless of how behind it puts you against every other build, and then work from there. But the rest of it is definitely a factor.
|
On August 22 2011 07:07 Meta wrote:I find it interesting that this strategy has been around since the beta and just now it's suddenly imbalanced. I guess more terran nerfs are in store  I think the reason why people are using this strat these days is that it's very hard to beat a good protoss with bio, it's impossible to beat any protoss with mech and banshee openings are highly variable. Mix in all three and you get a unit composition that's as diverse as the protoss army and equally hard to kill.
Incorporate ghosts into either mech or bio. Win.
|
On August 22 2011 07:22 Razuik wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 07:18 JackDanger wrote:On August 22 2011 07:14 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 07:10 JackDanger wrote:On August 22 2011 07:07 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 07:04 blooblooblahblah wrote:On August 22 2011 07:00 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 06:56 Medrea wrote:On August 22 2011 06:54 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 06:50 DooMDash wrote:
[quote]
But one or two specific matches through out the history of SC doesn't say much. It's always been around, but in the last few weeks its all of a sudden imba? I don't believe that, I believe Protoss players kept playing greedier and greedier and the meta game made 1-1-1 as effective as it is today. This is what I'm arguing. Until I see a very high level game where there is a 2gate robo opening and a successful and well executed 1-1-1 allin, I cannot really believe the OP. You can't say 1 gate FE is too greedy when it has the best chances of holding it off though. You really can't 1 base the terran back, you'll get choked out in the mid game. If you one base colossus , the terran will see it before committing to the 1-1-1 anyway. There does not have to be a mid game if you beat his push... You can just kill him outright. Even if you only come out a little ahead in the battle and cannot counter attack, you still have more workers and more units which can set you up for a better midgame. This would be true if there was a reactive 1base build tht could actually hold it off. I'm quite certain that 3-gate robo wrecks the 1-1-1 allin unless you engage in a TERRIBLE position or let him bunker up (which there is no reason you should let him). What exactly makes you so certain of this. Just from experience. Of course, nothing is so certain without a high level example. Since I haven't really seen any 2-gate robo builds at the highest level, we can just go back and fourth with no evidence. Which would be pointless. I would pose as evidence that this build has existed in some form since beta (though only in the forefront the last few months I suppose) and no viable counter, even blindly, has been successful. I would also say that 2-gate robo is/was a fairly standard build, and since it sounds good in theory, probably would have been one of the first responses attempted. There were many more robo openings in high level play about 5-6 months ago. The metagame then shifted to more FE openings for protoss. Terran have now realized this and are doing more 1-1-1 allins. Shouldn't the next shift in the metagame be robo openings?
Robo openings often lose to 1-1-1 anyway.
|
On August 22 2011 07:17 Tachion wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 07:15 Medrea wrote:On August 22 2011 07:14 Huntz wrote:
TBH i think the easiest fix would be to remove the banshee. obviously that's not going to happen but i don't think something like 40 hp marine with combat shields giving +15 would really fix it. worth a shot though, for sure. Gah too extreme. My idea was to tone down the damage of banshees and make there current damage only extend to light units. And thats IT. No more. That kinda screws up banshees in TvZ because then 1 queen will beat 1 banshee.
just as a fun fact, 1 queen also beats 1 void ray already, and toss still finds use for those regardless
|
On August 22 2011 07:22 illsick wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 07:07 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 07:04 blooblooblahblah wrote:On August 22 2011 07:00 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 06:56 Medrea wrote:On August 22 2011 06:54 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 06:50 DooMDash wrote:On August 22 2011 06:44 Jinivus wrote:On August 22 2011 06:41 DooMDash wrote:On August 22 2011 06:39 Jinivus wrote:
[quote]
The build has been owning MC and for a while now with no answers emerging. Time has told. Awhile now? How long is awhile to you? I don't remember this 1-1-1 non-sense going on for more than a month. NASL finals 1-1-1 wasn't even being used. puma vs squirtle. 1/1/1 all in, NASL finals. But one or two specific matches through out the history of SC doesn't say much. It's always been around, but in the last few weeks its all of a sudden imba? I don't believe that, I believe Protoss players kept playing greedier and greedier and the meta game made 1-1-1 as effective as it is today. This is what I'm arguing. Until I see a very high level game where there is a 2gate robo opening and a successful and well executed 1-1-1 allin, I cannot really believe the OP. You can't say 1 gate FE is too greedy when it has the best chances of holding it off though. You really can't 1 base the terran back, you'll get choked out in the mid game. If you one base colossus , the terran will see it before committing to the 1-1-1 anyway. There does not have to be a mid game if you beat his push... You can just kill him outright. Even if you only come out a little ahead in the battle and cannot counter attack, you still have more workers and more units which can set you up for a better midgame. This would be true if there was a reactive 1base build tht could actually hold it off. I'm quite certain that 3-gate robo wrecks the 1-1-1 allin unless you engage in a TERRIBLE position or let him bunker up (which there is no reason you should let him). the 1-1-1 build is not an early aggression build and the FE kicks in before the attack comes. What advantage does the 3-gate robo give a person when the 1-1-1 attack comes?
There are obviously many different forms of 1-1-1, so by determining it early you can defend it properly by knowing what form it is.
|
On August 22 2011 07:23 FrankWalls wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 07:17 Tachion wrote:On August 22 2011 07:15 Medrea wrote:On August 22 2011 07:14 Huntz wrote:
TBH i think the easiest fix would be to remove the banshee. obviously that's not going to happen but i don't think something like 40 hp marine with combat shields giving +15 would really fix it. worth a shot though, for sure. Gah too extreme. My idea was to tone down the damage of banshees and make there current damage only extend to light units. And thats IT. No more. That kinda screws up banshees in TvZ because then 1 queen will beat 1 banshee. just as a fun fact, 1 queen also beats 1 void ray already, and toss still finds use for those regardless
it most certainly does not ;p
|
I don't know what happened to the "no balance whine" policy of TL, but I miss it. Just because it's from a korean source doesn't make the discussion more interesting, or more likely to produce conclusions. What if a thread was called "Why 1/1/1 is considered to be imbalanced according to blizzard forums users" ?
|
On August 22 2011 07:23 FrankWalls wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 07:17 Tachion wrote:On August 22 2011 07:15 Medrea wrote:On August 22 2011 07:14 Huntz wrote:
TBH i think the easiest fix would be to remove the banshee. obviously that's not going to happen but i don't think something like 40 hp marine with combat shields giving +15 would really fix it. worth a shot though, for sure. Gah too extreme. My idea was to tone down the damage of banshees and make there current damage only extend to light units. And thats IT. No more. That kinda screws up banshees in TvZ because then 1 queen will beat 1 banshee. just as a fun fact, 1 queen also beats 1 void ray already, and toss still finds use for those regardless
mmmm, no it doesnt.
|
On August 22 2011 07:21 iamke55 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 07:17 Tachion wrote:On August 22 2011 07:15 Medrea wrote:On August 22 2011 07:14 Huntz wrote:
TBH i think the easiest fix would be to remove the banshee. obviously that's not going to happen but i don't think something like 40 hp marine with combat shields giving +15 would really fix it. worth a shot though, for sure. Gah too extreme. My idea was to tone down the damage of banshees and make there current damage only extend to light units. And thats IT. No more. That kinda screws up banshees in TvZ because then 1 queen will beat 1 banshee. I'm confused how this could possibly screw up TvZ. Does zerg have some all-in with 1 queen that is impossible to stop unless terran hits an exact timing to get 1 banshee out in time to defend it?
It wouldn't screw up the whole of TvZ, just the use of banshees. Pretty important distinction to make. There wouldn't be much point in banshee harrassing as you'd probably lose it or only get 1-2 kills before being chased away by the queen.
I think he is talking about harrassing witht he banshees in particular anyway
|
On August 22 2011 07:22 Razuik wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 07:18 JackDanger wrote:On August 22 2011 07:14 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 07:10 JackDanger wrote:On August 22 2011 07:07 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 07:04 blooblooblahblah wrote:On August 22 2011 07:00 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 06:56 Medrea wrote:On August 22 2011 06:54 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 06:50 DooMDash wrote:
[quote]
But one or two specific matches through out the history of SC doesn't say much. It's always been around, but in the last few weeks its all of a sudden imba? I don't believe that, I believe Protoss players kept playing greedier and greedier and the meta game made 1-1-1 as effective as it is today. This is what I'm arguing. Until I see a very high level game where there is a 2gate robo opening and a successful and well executed 1-1-1 allin, I cannot really believe the OP. You can't say 1 gate FE is too greedy when it has the best chances of holding it off though. You really can't 1 base the terran back, you'll get choked out in the mid game. If you one base colossus , the terran will see it before committing to the 1-1-1 anyway. There does not have to be a mid game if you beat his push... You can just kill him outright. Even if you only come out a little ahead in the battle and cannot counter attack, you still have more workers and more units which can set you up for a better midgame. This would be true if there was a reactive 1base build tht could actually hold it off. I'm quite certain that 3-gate robo wrecks the 1-1-1 allin unless you engage in a TERRIBLE position or let him bunker up (which there is no reason you should let him). What exactly makes you so certain of this. Just from experience. Of course, nothing is so certain without a high level example. Since I haven't really seen any 2-gate robo builds at the highest level, we can just go back and fourth with no evidence. Which would be pointless. I would pose as evidence that this build has existed in some form since beta (though only in the forefront the last few months I suppose) and no viable counter, even blindly, has been successful. I would also say that 2-gate robo is/was a fairly standard build, and since it sounds good in theory, probably would have been one of the first responses attempted. There were many more robo openings in high level play about 5-6 months ago. The metagame then shifted to more FE openings for protoss. Terran have now realized this and are doing more 1-1-1 allins. Shouldn't the next shift in the metagame be robo openings?
To what end? One of the biggest criticisms of MC's play in game 1 is that he overrmade immortals, and he would never have had collosus out in time for that push, much less with range.
|
1 gate FE into chargelot archon = 90% win rate
their banshees should have a lot of energy so you can feedback and morph archons and chargelot archon would beat marine tank, as long as you dont allow tons of bunkers to get up
it also allows for good counter after their 1/1/1 fails, no way the will have ghosts. you can expand again, get storm and drop robo etc but once the 1/1/1 fails it should be over
|
On August 22 2011 07:23 Medrea wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 07:22 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 07:18 JackDanger wrote:On August 22 2011 07:14 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 07:10 JackDanger wrote:On August 22 2011 07:07 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 07:04 blooblooblahblah wrote:On August 22 2011 07:00 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 06:56 Medrea wrote:On August 22 2011 06:54 Razuik wrote:
[quote]
This is what I'm arguing. Until I see a very high level game where there is a 2gate robo opening and a successful and well executed 1-1-1 allin, I cannot really believe the OP. You can't say 1 gate FE is too greedy when it has the best chances of holding it off though. You really can't 1 base the terran back, you'll get choked out in the mid game. If you one base colossus , the terran will see it before committing to the 1-1-1 anyway. There does not have to be a mid game if you beat his push... You can just kill him outright. Even if you only come out a little ahead in the battle and cannot counter attack, you still have more workers and more units which can set you up for a better midgame. This would be true if there was a reactive 1base build tht could actually hold it off. I'm quite certain that 3-gate robo wrecks the 1-1-1 allin unless you engage in a TERRIBLE position or let him bunker up (which there is no reason you should let him). What exactly makes you so certain of this. Just from experience. Of course, nothing is so certain without a high level example. Since I haven't really seen any 2-gate robo builds at the highest level, we can just go back and fourth with no evidence. Which would be pointless. I would pose as evidence that this build has existed in some form since beta (though only in the forefront the last few months I suppose) and no viable counter, even blindly, has been successful. I would also say that 2-gate robo is/was a fairly standard build, and since it sounds good in theory, probably would have been one of the first responses attempted. There were many more robo openings in high level play about 5-6 months ago. The metagame then shifted to more FE openings for protoss. Terran have now realized this and are doing more 1-1-1 allins. Shouldn't the next shift in the metagame be robo openings? Robo openings often lose to 1-1-1 anyway.
I dunno man, how many have we seen recently at the highest level? I can't even think of one. It's just the metagame.
|
On August 22 2011 07:23 LicH. wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 07:19 paradox_ wrote:
When some of the best korean terrans in the world are saying its a little broken, why are people arguing so blindly. These are people who practice this stuff day in and out. This isn't some gold-low master level theorycrafting. The game has been out a lot longer than when 4gate was considered OP (which was nerfed anyways). There is a general consensus among those that practice 10-12 hours a day that 1-1-1 isn't right.
MC is considered to be one of the best toss (even if you disagree he comes in anyone's top 3-5 list) while someone like Puma wouldn't be considered the same league (from results). No doubt Puma is good and has potential but if some toss in Code B started destroyed MVP or NesTea 3-0 the way Puma did to MC today, there would be the same kind of crying going on if not worse.
There has been builds that were anti toss throughout the last 1 year but I don't think any of them made toss feel this helpless. Even during roach/ling allins, a lot of toss would say its holdable even though its very difficult. The solutions were there even at the peak of strength of roach/ling all-ins. The same has held true for all other builds. 4gate vs zerg etc. These builds also have the weakness of being screwed if it gets held off. No other build in the game for any race allows you to pull that many scvs and still be able to make a second or third push that strong. And even if it doesn't break the toss, if it denies the expo (by killing or cancelling whatever) long enough the terran can maintain the pushes indefinitely by simply flying their CC to expo. The only way the toss can put a stop to the build is to beat it super convincingly. Holding it off isn't enough. And as the OP linked, lack of information is an issue. If toss' had the option of throwing away 100-200 minerals to be able to scout the all-in coming at a reasonable time, they would. (e.g scan, saccing OL)
In my mind Puma is better than MC simply because of his BW background. Speaking of BW, when Bisu PvZ came out, did blizzard give zerg a buff because Bisu and ensuing protosses used a new "imbalanced" (yes I remember DT/Sair balance whine) strategy that was dominant for a period of time? Fuck no.
lol...do you also consider puma and nada better than nestea simply because of their BW background? That is just silly.
|
On August 22 2011 06:15 Lordwar wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 06:14 Mungosh wrote:On August 22 2011 06:12 DooMDash wrote:
I think the counter to 1-1-1 is time. How many games have your Protoss players played against bio builds? How long did it take people to kind of quiet down about Marauders realizing they weren't the end all most imba unit in the world? Look at the drop in Terran win % when archons got changed. I think Terrans have been great at adapting to every patch change or meta game change, and this 1-1-1 stuff just came out and people seem so unwilling to continue trying for more than a month. It has been out since beta though. People still haven't found a solution. Why it is just now being complained about?
warpgate nerf, before it P was able to just barely hold it off with that extra warpin but now we really cant do that, also better control from the T
|
On August 22 2011 07:23 LicH. wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 07:19 paradox_ wrote:
When some of the best korean terrans in the world are saying its a little broken, why are people arguing so blindly. These are people who practice this stuff day in and out. This isn't some gold-low master level theorycrafting. The game has been out a lot longer than when 4gate was considered OP (which was nerfed anyways). There is a general consensus among those that practice 10-12 hours a day that 1-1-1 isn't right.
MC is considered to be one of the best toss (even if you disagree he comes in anyone's top 3-5 list) while someone like Puma wouldn't be considered the same league (from results). No doubt Puma is good and has potential but if some toss in Code B started destroyed MVP or NesTea 3-0 the way Puma did to MC today, there would be the same kind of crying going on if not worse.
There has been builds that were anti toss throughout the last 1 year but I don't think any of them made toss feel this helpless. Even during roach/ling allins, a lot of toss would say its holdable even though its very difficult. The solutions were there even at the peak of strength of roach/ling all-ins. The same has held true for all other builds. 4gate vs zerg etc. These builds also have the weakness of being screwed if it gets held off. No other build in the game for any race allows you to pull that many scvs and still be able to make a second or third push that strong. And even if it doesn't break the toss, if it denies the expo (by killing or cancelling whatever) long enough the terran can maintain the pushes indefinitely by simply flying their CC to expo. The only way the toss can put a stop to the build is to beat it super convincingly. Holding it off isn't enough. And as the OP linked, lack of information is an issue. If toss' had the option of throwing away 100-200 minerals to be able to scout the all-in coming at a reasonable time, they would. (e.g scan, saccing OL)
In my mind Puma is better than MC simply because of his BW background. Speaking of BW, when Bisu PvZ came out, did blizzard give zerg a buff because Bisu and ensuing protosses used a new "imbalanced" (yes I remember DT/Sair balance whine) strategy that was dominant for a period of time? Fuck no.
lol? MC beat Effort in a PvZ. Pretty sure that takes more skill than Puma's entire list of BW career wins. You can look at his TLPD page if you don't believe me.
|
On August 22 2011 07:24 Medrea wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 07:23 FrankWalls wrote:On August 22 2011 07:17 Tachion wrote:On August 22 2011 07:15 Medrea wrote:On August 22 2011 07:14 Huntz wrote:
TBH i think the easiest fix would be to remove the banshee. obviously that's not going to happen but i don't think something like 40 hp marine with combat shields giving +15 would really fix it. worth a shot though, for sure. Gah too extreme. My idea was to tone down the damage of banshees and make there current damage only extend to light units. And thats IT. No more. That kinda screws up banshees in TvZ because then 1 queen will beat 1 banshee. just as a fun fact, 1 queen also beats 1 void ray already, and toss still finds use for those regardless mmmm, no it doesnt.
well this is embarrassing then 
i think it USED to and i just havent heard anything different since
|
On August 22 2011 07:21 iamke55 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 07:17 Tachion wrote:On August 22 2011 07:15 Medrea wrote:On August 22 2011 07:14 Huntz wrote:
TBH i think the easiest fix would be to remove the banshee. obviously that's not going to happen but i don't think something like 40 hp marine with combat shields giving +15 would really fix it. worth a shot though, for sure. Gah too extreme. My idea was to tone down the damage of banshees and make there current damage only extend to light units. And thats IT. No more. That kinda screws up banshees in TvZ because then 1 queen will beat 1 banshee. I'm confused how this could possibly screw up TvZ. Does zerg have some all-in with 1 queen that is impossible to stop unless terran hits an exact timing to get 1 banshee out in time to defend it?
It'd pretty much make 2 port banshee extinct. Not that I'd mind, since I'm a zerg and I f'ing hate that build, but requiring more banshees than queens to do any sort of attack/harass will cripple them severely in TvZ.
|
On August 22 2011 07:22 Medrea wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 07:21 iamke55 wrote:On August 22 2011 07:17 Tachion wrote:On August 22 2011 07:15 Medrea wrote:On August 22 2011 07:14 Huntz wrote:
TBH i think the easiest fix would be to remove the banshee. obviously that's not going to happen but i don't think something like 40 hp marine with combat shields giving +15 would really fix it. worth a shot though, for sure. Gah too extreme. My idea was to tone down the damage of banshees and make there current damage only extend to light units. And thats IT. No more. That kinda screws up banshees in TvZ because then 1 queen will beat 1 banshee. I'm confused how this could possibly screw up TvZ. Does zerg have some all-in with 1 queen that is impossible to stop unless terran hits an exact timing to get 1 banshee out in time to defend it? It makes defending 2 port banshee really tricky since you need a LOT of queens and spores for that anyway. The spore unburrow and reburrow time helps though. Hmmmm.
Banshees doing less damage would in no way make it harder to defend...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
