|
Can we stop talking about nerfing things please? - 9:10 KST |
Only question is how do we make Blizzard change Terran so they aren't so strong with these all-ins and even if Terran is changed what changes can be made to fix 1/1/1 but not weaken other Terran builds.
|
After Milkis' translations. I am pretty much convinced that the Korean community is no less susceptible to knee-jerk reactions as the 'Foreigner' community. :\ It seems like whenever there is a precieved imbalanced, everyone whines to Blizzard to fix it for them. How many times did Blizzard tweak balance in Brood War again? I'll honestly like to know..
|
Tyler is right, 1 gate Stargate is economically viable plus Phoenixes counter Terran air and lift tanks.
|
On August 22 2011 07:49 Razuik wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 07:47 tomatriedes wrote:On August 22 2011 07:06 hugman wrote:
Even if Tyler isn't among the top pros he's still better than anyone else in this thread so why even begin to question his knowledge? If he can't debate then no one else can Tyler is a great player, no doubt, but I still hold the opinions of IMMvp, Alicia, Killer and the other Code S/A players who have said this build needs patching over his. Okay, just to lay to rest the IMMvp response to the allin. He is the terran that does it probably the least in Korea, so how does that give him the authority to comment on its balance? Little experience with the build usually results in rash conclusions about it.
He does it the least precisely because he thinks it's broken and terran players shouldn't use it. Can you really not understand that?
|
On August 22 2011 08:01 Razuik wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 07:58 mcc wrote:On August 22 2011 07:52 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 07:49 mcc wrote:On August 22 2011 07:40 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 07:37 mcc wrote:On August 22 2011 07:25 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 07:23 Medrea wrote:On August 22 2011 07:22 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 07:18 JackDanger wrote:
[quote]
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. We do not see them most likely because they were thrown out in practice by the Koreans already. Do you think they would not try such a simple thing ? We have no way of knowing that. All we know is 5-6 months ago when robo builds were popular, there were wayyy less 1-1-1 allins. That says something. No it actually does not say anything else than that they were not used. It was also a time when wg reasearch was shorter. Also since you responded before my edit, i will repeat. Why did you ignore this piece of information: On August 22 2011 06:23 CryingPoo wrote:On August 22 2011 06:18 Razuik 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. I completely agree with this. There is no need to take such a huge economic risk as protoss. Artosis constantly explains how great safe builds like 2gate-robo are. I have not seen a 2gate-robo in GSL for a very long time. The metagame in TvP is FE protoss atm.. Terran is simply abusing that fact. In my opinion, Protoss players just need to develop more safe builds in the matchup. I will be suggesting GomTV to have an Artosis on Star2 Ready Action Program. Korean SC2 caster who claimed that 1/1/1 is dependable against Protoss with the exact build that Artosis claimed got BEATEN 5 times in a row by ST_SuperStar (also known as Random King) It was beaten by ST_SuperStar vs who? This is such vague information lol. How can you argue off that? The point was that it was tried on that show that OP takes his info from, so it is not like people forgot about robo play, which was your argument. Frankly it seems more and more like you ever read the OP even. Like I said before, seeing is believing. I won't believe that a 2-gate robo or 1-gate robo cannot beat it until I see that it cannot. This is considering that the protoss uses the scouting from the robo and responds correctly.
Well in the same vein I can say that I won't believe that mothership rush cannot beat it, because no pro on TV did it and it worked in bronze.
|
When one build skews a matchup too much in favor of one race, and is used/abused for a long enough time (arbitrary) Blizz should step in to fix it.
They did with 5 rax reaper.
|
On August 22 2011 08:03 Bagi wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 07:59 DertoQq wrote:On August 22 2011 07:57 ProxyKnoxy wrote:
The Korean Protosses are probably getting Terrans to do this over and over to them in practice games.. I'm sure that soon enough they will find an answer answer found by MC : go DTs on 1 base, try to force a base trade, snipe the raven and win the game. Great hu ? : D I can't be the only one who though MC responded kinda badly in game 3? He had every possible tech by the end of it, but barely any units.
ofc he responded badly lol, but I think he was pretty pissed and had no idea what else to do, which is kinda sad for a players who probably tried every single way to beat 1-1-1.
|
illsick
United States1770 Posts
On August 22 2011 08:01 Razuik wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 07:58 mcc wrote:On August 22 2011 07:52 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 07:49 mcc wrote:On August 22 2011 07:40 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 07:37 mcc wrote:On August 22 2011 07:25 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 07:23 Medrea wrote:On August 22 2011 07:22 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 07:18 JackDanger wrote:
[quote]
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. We do not see them most likely because they were thrown out in practice by the Koreans already. Do you think they would not try such a simple thing ? We have no way of knowing that. All we know is 5-6 months ago when robo builds were popular, there were wayyy less 1-1-1 allins. That says something. No it actually does not say anything else than that they were not used. It was also a time when wg reasearch was shorter. Also since you responded before my edit, i will repeat. Why did you ignore this piece of information: On August 22 2011 06:23 CryingPoo wrote:On August 22 2011 06:18 Razuik 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. I completely agree with this. There is no need to take such a huge economic risk as protoss. Artosis constantly explains how great safe builds like 2gate-robo are. I have not seen a 2gate-robo in GSL for a very long time. The metagame in TvP is FE protoss atm.. Terran is simply abusing that fact. In my opinion, Protoss players just need to develop more safe builds in the matchup. I will be suggesting GomTV to have an Artosis on Star2 Ready Action Program. Korean SC2 caster who claimed that 1/1/1 is dependable against Protoss with the exact build that Artosis claimed got BEATEN 5 times in a row by ST_SuperStar (also known as Random King) It was beaten by ST_SuperStar vs who? This is such vague information lol. How can you argue off that? The point was that it was tried on that show that OP takes his info from, so it is not like people forgot about robo play, which was your argument. Frankly it seems more and more like you ever read the OP even. Like I said before, seeing is believing. I won't believe that a 2-gate robo or 1-gate robo cannot beat it until I see that it cannot. This is considering that the protoss uses the scouting from the robo and responds correctly.
I don't get what you are trying to say with this scouting thing. Say you know that the 1-1-1 is coming, what ways can you "respond" correctly. Keep in mind that the terran will have a raven so that the obs will either get sniped or not see the exact composition of army.
|
Ok... people who are talking about how it's BS that the 1-1-1 build all-in is unstoppable NEED TO READ THE OP because the OP lists the strats where the build can be defeated yet still continues on to as to why it's considered imbalanced DESPITE it being beatable.
|
The main problem is that the only 100% counter right now is a 15 nexus, but then that's sort of counter intuitive because this all-in is gonna happen on smaller maps and if they scout you they can just switch into a 3 rax marine all-in or they might just open up with another popular build like 2 rax marine/marauder.
If you go 1 gate expand which seems to be the only other viable option then you can still hold it, but I'd still give the advantage to the terran player as long as it's not one of the large maps.
An all-in of this caliber just shouldn't be this strong in the metagame and it's the only one that's this strong. Is there gonna be a different build that might take it out? Eh, maybe, but realize that this is a 1 base build and it shouldn't be this difficult to figure out a counter. The best counter might be 2 years from now when everyone has perfect unit control, but that might be asking too much.
|
Words of wisdom from Tyler.
Beyond this, we might point out to Blizzard that making gateway cooldown a bit faster than warpgates would be exciting! More choices, more excitement!
|
On August 22 2011 08:05 tomatriedes wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 07:49 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 07:47 tomatriedes wrote:On August 22 2011 07:06 hugman wrote:
Even if Tyler isn't among the top pros he's still better than anyone else in this thread so why even begin to question his knowledge? If he can't debate then no one else can Tyler is a great player, no doubt, but I still hold the opinions of IMMvp, Alicia, Killer and the other Code S/A players who have said this build needs patching over his. Okay, just to lay to rest the IMMvp response to the allin. He is the terran that does it probably the least in Korea, so how does that give him the authority to comment on its balance? Little experience with the build usually results in rash conclusions about it. He does it the least precisely because he thinks it's broken and terran players shouldn't use it. Can you really not understand that?
If he does it the least precisely, how is he the authority on it's balance though. He does it least precisely because he's a more macro player... meaning he has the least experience with it... meaning he's not the go-to-guy to determine how imbalanced it is.
|
On August 22 2011 08:07 wklbishop wrote:
Ok... people who are talking about how it's BS that the 1-1-1 build all-in is unstoppable NEED TO READ THE OP because the OP lists the strats where the build can be defeated yet still continues on to as to why it's considered imbalanced DESPITE it being beatable.
isn't the title of the thread : "Why 1/1/1 is considered to be imbalanced in Korea" ? What else do you want people to talk about ?
|
On August 22 2011 08:06 Zdrastochye wrote:
When one build skews a matchup too much in favor of one race, and is used/abused for a long enough time (arbitrary) Blizz should step in to fix it.
They did with 5 rax reaper.
5 rax reaper hit much earlier = much less options and variability
The later something hits the harder it is to establish that it's broken. An all-in that destroys Protosses isn't bad, it's just bad if it never gets figured out and that's still way too early to tell.
Generally though SC2 seems to allow for a bit too many all-ins IMO
|
What is frustrating is the complete inconsistency in how everything is being handled. Everyone said warp in storms are way too strong and that was nerfed (all other casters can insta use their aoe spells with upgrades except HT) etc. Toss all-in is too strong (4gate), WG timing gets nerfed. Terran all-ins keep coming up in the metagame (reaper rushes, marine-scv etc) in many different variations and nothing should be done about that? Zerg really hasn't ever had any all-ins that were impossible to hold if scouted. Same goes for Toss. All-ins once scouted early enough generally get stopped or atleast it goes down to who executes better. In the case of 111, MC and other toss' has had multiple games where they see it and still cant hold it off (not just talking about 1 engagement).
Edit: Also for Tyler's comments. I love Tyler and have learnt a lot from him. I understand what he is saying and it is absolutely rude for anyone to question his expertise by pointing out silly things he has already openly accepted and admitted (lack of practice etc). Having said that, isn't it a little odd for any pro to say every other pro who is out in the field and practising 10-12 hours a day are somehow completely wrong when you have Terrans and Toss at the highest levels saying 111 is broken? That's similar to us average to above average players questioning Tyler blindly without considering what he is saying out of his experience to be true. Tyler should respect other professional's expertise if he expects us to do the same (which we should).
|
On August 22 2011 08:05 Galaxy613 wrote:
After Milkis' translations. I am pretty much convinced that the Korean community is no less susceptible to knee-jerk reactions as the 'Foreigner' community. :\ It seems like whenever there is a precieved imbalanced, everyone whines to Blizzard to fix it for them. How many times did Blizzard tweak balance in Brood War again? I'll honestly like to know..
what if by the luck of some coinflip they balanced brood war with fewer patches than they would need for sc2? The argument is fallacious. They simply may have needed less time to get it closer to right. There was a time period when they were approaching balance. PvT was close to 50%, slightly protoss favored... at that time TvZ was pretty far from 50/50...then they removed KA and made the wg changes and now PvT looks like the TvZ of old and TvZ is right around 50%. If terran needs a nerf it'd be a tiny one that would only affect 1 or 2 builds. We all thought the protoss scouting buff patch was going to make everything better (i consider phoenix reduced build time, halluc build time, and cheaper observer the scouting patch), but as it turns out by the time you get the information you need you are committed and toss tech switches are too clunky to use the info. To be sure, the only thing it feels like toss has an innate advantage on is defending against hellion harass with forcefield... not that many people build bfh's against toss.
|
On August 22 2011 08:09 Razuik wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 08:05 tomatriedes wrote:On August 22 2011 07:49 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 07:47 tomatriedes wrote:On August 22 2011 07:06 hugman wrote:
Even if Tyler isn't among the top pros he's still better than anyone else in this thread so why even begin to question his knowledge? If he can't debate then no one else can Tyler is a great player, no doubt, but I still hold the opinions of IMMvp, Alicia, Killer and the other Code S/A players who have said this build needs patching over his. Okay, just to lay to rest the IMMvp response to the allin. He is the terran that does it probably the least in Korea, so how does that give him the authority to comment on its balance? Little experience with the build usually results in rash conclusions about it. He does it the least precisely because he thinks it's broken and terran players shouldn't use it. Can you really not understand that? If he does it the least precisely, how is he the authority on it's balance though. He does it least precisely because he's a more macro player... meaning he has the least experience with it... meaning he's not the go-to-guy to determine how imbalanced it is.
just because hes never shown it in televised games doesnt mean he hasnt used it in practice and THEN concluded its imbalance. i would assume MVP (probably the #1 terran in the world) would know what hes talking about
|
On August 22 2011 08:07 illsick wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 08:01 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 07:58 mcc wrote:On August 22 2011 07:52 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 07:49 mcc wrote:On August 22 2011 07:40 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 07:37 mcc wrote:On August 22 2011 07:25 Razuik wrote:On August 22 2011 07:23 Medrea wrote:On August 22 2011 07:22 Razuik wrote:
[quote]
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. We do not see them most likely because they were thrown out in practice by the Koreans already. Do you think they would not try such a simple thing ? We have no way of knowing that. All we know is 5-6 months ago when robo builds were popular, there were wayyy less 1-1-1 allins. That says something. No it actually does not say anything else than that they were not used. It was also a time when wg reasearch was shorter. Also since you responded before my edit, i will repeat. Why did you ignore this piece of information: On August 22 2011 06:23 CryingPoo wrote:On August 22 2011 06:18 Razuik 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. I completely agree with this. There is no need to take such a huge economic risk as protoss. Artosis constantly explains how great safe builds like 2gate-robo are. I have not seen a 2gate-robo in GSL for a very long time. The metagame in TvP is FE protoss atm.. Terran is simply abusing that fact. In my opinion, Protoss players just need to develop more safe builds in the matchup. I will be suggesting GomTV to have an Artosis on Star2 Ready Action Program. Korean SC2 caster who claimed that 1/1/1 is dependable against Protoss with the exact build that Artosis claimed got BEATEN 5 times in a row by ST_SuperStar (also known as Random King) It was beaten by ST_SuperStar vs who? This is such vague information lol. How can you argue off that? The point was that it was tried on that show that OP takes his info from, so it is not like people forgot about robo play, which was your argument. Frankly it seems more and more like you ever read the OP even. Like I said before, seeing is believing. I won't believe that a 2-gate robo or 1-gate robo cannot beat it until I see that it cannot. This is considering that the protoss uses the scouting from the robo and responds correctly. I don't get what you are trying to say with this scouting thing. Say you know that the 1-1-1 is coming, what ways can you "respond" correctly. Keep in mind that the terran will have a raven so that the obs will either get sniped or not see the exact composition of army.
Scout, Add 2 gates, deny bunkers, defensive concave. Expand AFTER you kill the push. I've explained this before.
|
didn't MC go phoenix vs Puma and still get rolled in game 3 earlier today in IEM ?
If P goes phoenix they have so much less of everything else and a later expo so T can just sit and wait for more marines before pushing...
|
If you actually watched the IEM and didn't just tune in for the Koreans, you'd have seen Socke go nexus first - on TDA no less - and get annihilated by Kas' 4rax. Nexus first is a highly, HIGHLY dubious opening that is easily punishable by any sort of aggression.
This leaves us with 1gate FE variations - 1gate nexus (including Huk's 20 nex), 1gate robo nexus, and 1gate stargate nexus. Issue with pretty much all of these is that you will be put severely behind by a NON-ALLIN 2rax pressure. The terran takes a few scvs, his 2rax army, goes into your nat, puts some bunkers up and you just die. He expands while doing all this. There's no way around it. Huk himself said that 20nex was figured out and that he got 12-16raxed every game on Korean ladder when he did it. Yes, it's uncommon at lower levels, but this isn't diamond league we're talking about here.
So could everyone please stop derailing the thread with puma skill discussion and get to the point: 1basing isn't viable; 2+gate expansions aren't viable; nexus first isn't viable; 1gate expos are at a danger of simply being killed without resorting to the 1-1-1.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
