|
Can we stop talking about nerfing things please? - 9:10 KST |
On August 22 2011 12:28 Brian333 wrote:
I think the most frustrating thing is the general community response to this entire debacle.
Zergs have problems with 5-rax reaper rush -- Reapers are nerfed hard.
Zergs have problems with 2-rax openings -- Bunkers are nerfed.
Zergs have problems with air-openings -- Spore Crawler root timing is decreased.
Zergs have problems with 2-gate openings -- Zealot build time nerfed.
Zergs have problems with Blink-Stalker all-ins -- Fungal Growth changed to stop Blink.
Zergs have problems with various early-game pressure / all-ins -- Roach range increased to 4.
Terrans have problems with Voidray harass / contain / all-in builds -- Voidrays are nerfed hard.
Protoss have problems with 4-gate v 4-gate in PvP -- Warp-gate nerfed, Pylon power range nerfed.
Protoss / Zerg have problems with stim-timing pushes -- Stim research nerfed.
Blizzard has shown time and time again that in a game that has yet to reach meta-game stability and strategic maturity that if the margin of error is too thin on the defender's side and the execution too easy on the aggressor's side, adjustments are made. Yet...
Protoss have problems with 1/1/1 -- DEAL WITH IT
Nope, the most frustating thing is that they don't even remember those changes. They think they actually solved it.
|
On August 22 2011 12:30 Astro-Penguin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 12:16 Reborn58 wrote:On August 22 2011 11:58 Astro-Penguin wrote:On August 22 2011 11:52 CryingPoo wrote:On August 22 2011 11:44 Astro-Penguin wrote:
I dont know why i even bother to post in these threads, everyone just cries instead of looking on mistakes they make and how they can fix it. People dont seem to understand reactive play nor taking advantage of pre emptive timings, apparently to 85% of this thread there is no good unit composition avaliable to deal with 1-1-1 (These are probably the guys letting them siege in their nautral and then proceeding to attack down a small ramp then complaining)
1-1-1 is definently a strong build, maybe a bit to strong but far from unbeatable, speaking as a high masters Protoss I can say that this build really isent as bad as this thread is making it out to be. People seem to forget that all inning is always easier for the attacker in most cases, and honestly when you do 1 Base to defend this the terrans mistakes are suddenly alot more damaging to his game due to the fact that you are limiting his chance of success.
It seems people love to cling to flavor of the month imbalances just to satisfy their inflated egos and hop on the bandwagon base said imbalance of sloppy games by pro Protoss players. Masters Protoss in NA is only diamond level protoss in Korea. I am happy to arrange a Master level Korean Terran player while it is being streamed you and him can have multiple matches. If you are willing to call my efforts to translate, which would have of helped some people to gain insights of Korean ladder, an inflated ego - you are pretty disrespectful. If you really wish to do so im down for it, Im not disagreeing that Korea is a much higher skill level overall but it dosen't change the fact that whinning about a build being easier to execute accomplishes nothing, the only reason people think its easier to execute is because they are trying to play against the odds by doing risky expansions. I mean both Wolf and have Artosis have clearly stated that if you build a Nexus against this build you will lose unless you play perfectly and hope that the terran messes up. Ok, seriously....did anyone that is posting in this thread even read the OP? The OP clearly and correctly states that the EARLIER THE EXPAND THE BETTER CHANCE OF HOLDING AGAINST THIS PUSH. There is little to know way to hold this push by one basing if the terran executes properly. And if you 2 gate robo, or stargate open then you are so far behind on the expand that you cannot expand and hold the nexus. That is what Artosis is referring to. Ive read the op, I disagree with it, and i stated why, just because its in the "op" dosent make it right, perhaps you are right perhaps your wrong, im just arguing my point and trying to articulate it to the best of my ability. My personal belief/preference is that 1 Base is more strongly suited to defending it, by expoing you are forced into an Immortal/Gateway composition which I feel dosen't work very well against a properly executed 1-1-1, by doing 1 Base you are on even footing and are able to push his force back and take it into a macro game. Perhaps I should elbaroate, with 1 base colossi you can stall his push out by engaging him before he gets to your base, force him to siege up consistantly and try to force a PDD, it buys you alot of time for more colossi and stalkers and ETL, if you simply let him come to your ramp then you will be in an unfavourable position if you try to move out at later point and thus you will get the bad end of the trade.
Are you going to accept the OPs offer to play a Korean masters terran doing this build? He said he'd stream it, I'd be interested to watch it.
|
"Korean pro's should stop whining and learn to play "
- Everyone but Protoss in this thread.
jk, jk, but seriously this build gives me a very large headache.
Just got to keep trying stuff and loose alot to it. It'll get worked out eventually.
I feel the best way this is going to be beaten after scouting could be some kind of an attack .. or even a reverse contain ( Aggressive 3 gate expo ??). The times I've held, I've aggressive 3 gate expo'd and managed to delay the push a significant amount, to get enough to win, by keeping the Terran in their base. Expo while moving out and get a fast robo for Obs.
However I've probably only won because the Terran fucked up, rather than me working it out.
Will keep tryin' ^_^
|
On August 22 2011 12:24 Thorzain wrote:
Regarding the games between MC and Puma yesterday (Since I think that many people saw that and went "IMBA!!", I think that MC should have won both games. The first game he lost because he lost his initial observer and hence wasn't aware that Puma did not fall back on an expand but rather wanted to do a 2nd push. MC made probes and started teching instead of making units.
In the 3rd game, Phoenix chargelots are regarded a pretty good counter to 1-1-1. But instead, MC decided to go for phoenix + mass stalkers with blink and aim for a base race scenario with a hidden expansion. Stalkers are shit vs 1-1-1 all in. He also invested a lot of resources in DTs.
1-1-1 is definitely strong but it is holdable with other builds than 1 base, 1 gate expo or nexus first if you play it correctly. In fact, nexus first is pretty bad against it in my opinion, unless the map is huge. If the Terran scouts it he can make a super fast tank + 8 marines or so and 3-4 scvs and attack right when you get warp gates (protoss will have like 4 stalkers 1 zealot and 30 seconds until more units because warp gate will be so delayed). Terran builds bunkers and reinforces.
I think that 1-1-1 all in will work as 4 gate /DTs / 6 gate eventually when Protoss players knows the best ways to fend it off. It's a strat that you always have to keep in mind. If you prepare against it you'll most likely defend it, but you can't be sure if it's coming so if it's not coming you have invested resources in the wrong area.
Terran needs to build bunkers and turrets whenever we're expanding just in case 4 gate, DTs or whatever comes our way.
You are quite right. The problem lies where a protoss player can invest in a wrong tech tree. Opportunity cost of going up a one tech for Protoss is other two possible techs. Teching up simultaneously from one base gives you not enough units. So with no means of scouting apart from Robo or Hallucination which could be turned into a useless investment, Terran has a dominant strategy. As for Terran, switching tech is flexible as Starport tech is a must tech anyways in PvT (Factory is a must built). With already built tech labs and reactors - terran has much lower opportunity cost of teching up compared to Protoss. This is where I was getting at. As for 4 gate, a bunker which is 1.5 less marines (as you get it back) and turret isnt necessary as you will have a raven for 1/1/1. As long as a Terran has this current 1/1/1 build (which doesnt have to be an all in as can be seen from MVP vs MC in the recent GSL), terran has a dominant strategy in the games theory (economics term)
|
what about 2 gate robo standard obs rush. then go for warp prism harass, even if you can manage to pick of 2 or 3 scvs, it will be worth it when going against a 1 baser.
|
On August 22 2011 12:24 Thorzain wrote:
Regarding the games between MC and Puma yesterday (Since I think that many people saw that and went "IMBA!!", I think that MC should have won both games. The first game he lost because he lost his initial observer and hence wasn't aware that Puma did not fall back on an expand but rather wanted to do a 2nd push. MC made probes and started teching instead of making units.
In the 3rd game, Phoenix chargelots are regarded a pretty good counter to 1-1-1. But instead, MC decided to go for phoenix + mass stalkers with blink and aim for a base race scenario with a hidden expansion. Stalkers are shit vs 1-1-1 all in. He also invested a lot of resources in DTs.
1-1-1 is definitely strong but it is holdable with other builds than 1 base, 1 gate expo or nexus first if you play it correctly. In fact, nexus first is pretty bad against it in my opinion, unless the map is huge. If the Terran scouts it he can make a super fast tank + 8 marines or so and 3-4 scvs and attack right when you get warp gates (protoss will have like 4 stalkers 1 zealot and 30 seconds until more units because warp gate will be so delayed). Terran builds bunkers and reinforces.
I think that 1-1-1 all in will work as 4 gate /DTs / 6 gate eventually when Protoss players knows the best ways to fend it off. It's a strat that you always have to keep in mind. If you prepare against it you'll most likely defend it, but you can't be sure if it's coming so if it's not coming you have invested resources in the wrong area.
Terran needs to build bunkers and turrets whenever we're expanding just in case 4 gate, DTs or whatever comes our way.
I don't know. You are obviously way better than me but the 1-1-1 has the luxury of being the one push that I can scout from the beginning and still have a very good chance of being killed by it. It has so many variants and possibilites.
In the case of 4 gate, early roach rush, or 3 rax all in I can almost always hold it off if I don't make any major errors and I scout it early. With the 1-1-1 push though it has so many different variants, all of which are small but cause me to have a drastically different unit composistion.
|
On August 22 2011 12:31 Heavenly wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 12:30 Astro-Penguin wrote:On August 22 2011 12:16 Reborn58 wrote:On August 22 2011 11:58 Astro-Penguin wrote:On August 22 2011 11:52 CryingPoo wrote:On August 22 2011 11:44 Astro-Penguin wrote:
I dont know why i even bother to post in these threads, everyone just cries instead of looking on mistakes they make and how they can fix it. People dont seem to understand reactive play nor taking advantage of pre emptive timings, apparently to 85% of this thread there is no good unit composition avaliable to deal with 1-1-1 (These are probably the guys letting them siege in their nautral and then proceeding to attack down a small ramp then complaining)
1-1-1 is definently a strong build, maybe a bit to strong but far from unbeatable, speaking as a high masters Protoss I can say that this build really isent as bad as this thread is making it out to be. People seem to forget that all inning is always easier for the attacker in most cases, and honestly when you do 1 Base to defend this the terrans mistakes are suddenly alot more damaging to his game due to the fact that you are limiting his chance of success.
It seems people love to cling to flavor of the month imbalances just to satisfy their inflated egos and hop on the bandwagon base said imbalance of sloppy games by pro Protoss players. Masters Protoss in NA is only diamond level protoss in Korea. I am happy to arrange a Master level Korean Terran player while it is being streamed you and him can have multiple matches. If you are willing to call my efforts to translate, which would have of helped some people to gain insights of Korean ladder, an inflated ego - you are pretty disrespectful. If you really wish to do so im down for it, Im not disagreeing that Korea is a much higher skill level overall but it dosen't change the fact that whinning about a build being easier to execute accomplishes nothing, the only reason people think its easier to execute is because they are trying to play against the odds by doing risky expansions. I mean both Wolf and have Artosis have clearly stated that if you build a Nexus against this build you will lose unless you play perfectly and hope that the terran messes up. Ok, seriously....did anyone that is posting in this thread even read the OP? The OP clearly and correctly states that the EARLIER THE EXPAND THE BETTER CHANCE OF HOLDING AGAINST THIS PUSH. There is little to know way to hold this push by one basing if the terran executes properly. And if you 2 gate robo, or stargate open then you are so far behind on the expand that you cannot expand and hold the nexus. That is what Artosis is referring to. Ive read the op, I disagree with it, and i stated why, just because its in the "op" dosent make it right, perhaps you are right perhaps your wrong, im just arguing my point and trying to articulate it to the best of my ability. My personal belief/preference is that 1 Base is more strongly suited to defending it, by expoing you are forced into an Immortal/Gateway composition which I feel dosen't work very well against a properly executed 1-1-1, by doing 1 Base you are on even footing and are able to push his force back and take it into a macro game. Perhaps I should elbaroate, with 1 base colossi you can stall his push out by engaging him before he gets to your base, force him to siege up consistantly and try to force a PDD, it buys you alot of time for more colossi and stalkers and ETL, if you simply let him come to your ramp then you will be in an unfavourable position if you try to move out at later point and thus you will get the bad end of the trade. Are you going to accept the OPs offer to play a Korean masters terran doing this build? He said he'd stream it, I'd be interested to watch it.
I already said I would for the sole experience of being able to try and refine a defence against it, No doubt he will probably outclass me with superior mechanics and unit control but I would enjoy being able to try and showcase what im trying to explain, from there maybe people would understand my pov better and understand where im comming from.
|
On August 22 2011 12:24 Thorzain wrote:
Regarding the games between MC and Puma yesterday (Since I think that many people saw that and went "IMBA!!", I think that MC should have won both games. The first game he lost because he lost his initial observer and hence wasn't aware that Puma did not fall back on an expand but rather wanted to do a 2nd push. MC made probes and started teching instead of making units.
In the 3rd game, Phoenix chargelots are regarded a pretty good counter to 1-1-1. But instead, MC decided to go for phoenix + mass stalkers with blink and aim for a base race scenario with a hidden expansion. Stalkers are shit vs 1-1-1 all in. He also invested a lot of resources in DTs.
1-1-1 is definitely strong but it is holdable with other builds than 1 base, 1 gate expo or nexus first if you play it correctly. In fact, nexus first is pretty bad against it in my opinion, unless the map is huge. If the Terran scouts it he can make a super fast tank + 8 marines or so and 3-4 scvs and attack right when you get warp gates (protoss will have like 4 stalkers 1 zealot and 30 seconds until more units because warp gate will be so delayed). Terran builds bunkers and reinforces.
I think that 1-1-1 all in will work as 4 gate /DTs / 6 gate eventually when Protoss players knows the best ways to fend it off. It's a strat that you always have to keep in mind. If you prepare against it you'll most likely defend it, but you can't be sure if it's coming so if it's not coming you have invested resources in the wrong area.
Terran needs to build bunkers and turrets whenever we're expanding just in case 4 gate, DTs or whatever comes our way.
Whats MVP's deal with it then? He won't even do it as he sees the attack as unfair play. I mean there's gotta be more to it than that.
Also, pro players see this this build coming, but can't hold it off anyway? It's not even a rush. Its just a unit composition and timing attack, and it doesn't even have to be all in. In previous cases, the only thing that has changed 1 base play like this, is a patch. Why would this time be so different?
|
illsick
United States1770 Posts
???
that was a standard game where the terran expanded and had vikings out, not banshees. The terran moved out at 13:30 mark of the game. Do you even know what 1-1-1 timing people are talking about here?
|
On August 22 2011 12:21 Greenduck wrote:
The problem I have with saying that the 1-1-1 is a reaction to a toss FE is that it seems to be more effective if the toss doesn't FE. When the 1-1-1 finally hits the toss is relying on the ability to quickly warp in more troops as quickly as possible and he needs the extra base to get those troops and keep immortal production up.
Also if I don't FE I'm almost inviting the terran to try botteling me up inside my main with his tanks. I'd rather take my chances with a FE and hope I can just out produce him as we go on. From a personal standpoint, I play in low masters and this build has completely scared me off the ladder. There is always room to improve and get better but I never feel safe at any point when I see the wall off start. Even if I scout it early I still know it has a very good chance of killing me.
Its not a reaction to FE. Its a build that can be used constantly as your "standard" play, and it switches its form in many different ways in response to what protoss does.
|
the 1/1/1 build is not one amazing thing that makes it a great build. it's many smaller additives that make it "overpowered." For example:
-mules allow for 15 (x amount etc etc...) scvs to be pulled and auto repair while still making units.
-limited scouting time by toss.
-and the unknown of what units are being made more of whether it is s tanks, marines, banshees, or a raven.
This is just my two cents about the topic. Hopefully we can find a build that defends it very well without crippling ourselves too much.
|
On August 22 2011 12:37 DragonDefonce wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 12:21 Greenduck wrote:
The problem I have with saying that the 1-1-1 is a reaction to a toss FE is that it seems to be more effective if the toss doesn't FE. When the 1-1-1 finally hits the toss is relying on the ability to quickly warp in more troops as quickly as possible and he needs the extra base to get those troops and keep immortal production up.
Also if I don't FE I'm almost inviting the terran to try botteling me up inside my main with his tanks. I'd rather take my chances with a FE and hope I can just out produce him as we go on. From a personal standpoint, I play in low masters and this build has completely scared me off the ladder. There is always room to improve and get better but I never feel safe at any point when I see the wall off start. Even if I scout it early I still know it has a very good chance of killing me. Its not a reaction to FE. Its a build that can be used constantly as your "standard" play, and it switches its form in many different ways in response to what protoss does.
I know, that is why I said I have a problem with the idea that it is a reaction to a FE as proposed by Tyler. It might have been developed in it's present form to deal with toss FE but it currently is far more than just a reactionary build.
|
On August 22 2011 12:34 Astro-Penguin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 12:31 Heavenly wrote:On August 22 2011 12:30 Astro-Penguin wrote:On August 22 2011 12:16 Reborn58 wrote:On August 22 2011 11:58 Astro-Penguin wrote:On August 22 2011 11:52 CryingPoo wrote:On August 22 2011 11:44 Astro-Penguin wrote:
I dont know why i even bother to post in these threads, everyone just cries instead of looking on mistakes they make and how they can fix it. People dont seem to understand reactive play nor taking advantage of pre emptive timings, apparently to 85% of this thread there is no good unit composition avaliable to deal with 1-1-1 (These are probably the guys letting them siege in their nautral and then proceeding to attack down a small ramp then complaining)
1-1-1 is definently a strong build, maybe a bit to strong but far from unbeatable, speaking as a high masters Protoss I can say that this build really isent as bad as this thread is making it out to be. People seem to forget that all inning is always easier for the attacker in most cases, and honestly when you do 1 Base to defend this the terrans mistakes are suddenly alot more damaging to his game due to the fact that you are limiting his chance of success.
It seems people love to cling to flavor of the month imbalances just to satisfy their inflated egos and hop on the bandwagon base said imbalance of sloppy games by pro Protoss players. Masters Protoss in NA is only diamond level protoss in Korea. I am happy to arrange a Master level Korean Terran player while it is being streamed you and him can have multiple matches. If you are willing to call my efforts to translate, which would have of helped some people to gain insights of Korean ladder, an inflated ego - you are pretty disrespectful. If you really wish to do so im down for it, Im not disagreeing that Korea is a much higher skill level overall but it dosen't change the fact that whinning about a build being easier to execute accomplishes nothing, the only reason people think its easier to execute is because they are trying to play against the odds by doing risky expansions. I mean both Wolf and have Artosis have clearly stated that if you build a Nexus against this build you will lose unless you play perfectly and hope that the terran messes up. Ok, seriously....did anyone that is posting in this thread even read the OP? The OP clearly and correctly states that the EARLIER THE EXPAND THE BETTER CHANCE OF HOLDING AGAINST THIS PUSH. There is little to know way to hold this push by one basing if the terran executes properly. And if you 2 gate robo, or stargate open then you are so far behind on the expand that you cannot expand and hold the nexus. That is what Artosis is referring to. Ive read the op, I disagree with it, and i stated why, just because its in the "op" dosent make it right, perhaps you are right perhaps your wrong, im just arguing my point and trying to articulate it to the best of my ability. My personal belief/preference is that 1 Base is more strongly suited to defending it, by expoing you are forced into an Immortal/Gateway composition which I feel dosen't work very well against a properly executed 1-1-1, by doing 1 Base you are on even footing and are able to push his force back and take it into a macro game. Perhaps I should elbaroate, with 1 base colossi you can stall his push out by engaging him before he gets to your base, force him to siege up consistantly and try to force a PDD, it buys you alot of time for more colossi and stalkers and ETL, if you simply let him come to your ramp then you will be in an unfavourable position if you try to move out at later point and thus you will get the bad end of the trade. Are you going to accept the OPs offer to play a Korean masters terran doing this build? He said he'd stream it, I'd be interested to watch it. I already said I would for the sole experience of being able to try and refine a defence against it, No doubt he will probably outclass me with superior mechanics and unit control but I would enjoy being able to try and showcase what im trying to explain, from there maybe people would understand my pov better and understand where im comming from.
I'm curious about why you are theorycrafting when you don't have the mechanics and unit control to be able to say whether or not what you're saying works at the high levels then? I don't think too many people mind facing people in their own diamond or master skill level doing it, but watching very high level games can be pretty frustrating when the terran is capable of proper focus firing and squeezing out every possible unit. As a player I don't really give a shit, half the people that use it against me either have half the units of the Korean pros or drop an expo behind them when attacking for some reason. As a spectator it is just stupid to watch.
|
On August 22 2011 12:37 infinity. wrote:
the 1/1/1 build is not one amazing thing that makes it a great build. it's many smaller additives that make it "overpowered." For example:
-mules allow for 15 (x amount etc etc...) scvs to be pulled and auto repair while still making units.
-limited scouting time by toss.
-and the unknown of what units are being made more of whether it is s tanks, marines, banshees, or a raven.
This is just my two cents about the topic. Hopefully we can find a build that defends it very well without crippling ourselves too much.
I think I could take the banshee and tweak its damage output. Say retain its current damage only to light units. And that would tone down the build a lot without sacrificing anything else for it.
The 1-1-1 will still be there, as it should. And it will still kill people, as it should. But then at least players can react to it, rather than all the chips being in the hand of one side.
|
As a Protoss player there are two possible ways to hold off 1/1/1.
1. 15 Nexus
2. 1 Gate into an expo
My issue with the OP is this statement - which is claimed as "fact", rather than "theory". As Tyler explained a few posts later, he considers the economic advantage unnecessary and that the 1-gate expo is done because protosses felt that they can get away with it.
Several months ago, there was a similar claim by the zergs that hatch-first is superior to pool-first in holding the 2-rax. While this is still possibly true, there are enough zergs doing pool-first to suggest that the hatch-first is not "definitely better".
Similarly, I would like to see investigation by the protoss in exploring other safer openings (e.g. 1-gate robo or 2-gate robo) rather than just people saying, "the pros say this, so it must be better". Granted, they may be correct, but I hardly see 2-gate robo nowadays in televised play.
|
On August 22 2011 12:30 kheldorin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 12:28 Brian333 wrote:
I think the most frustrating thing is the general community response to this entire debacle.
Zergs have problems with 5-rax reaper rush -- Reapers are nerfed hard.
Zergs have problems with 2-rax openings -- Bunkers are nerfed.
Zergs have problems with air-openings -- Spore Crawler root timing is decreased.
Zergs have problems with 2-gate openings -- Zealot build time nerfed.
Zergs have problems with Blink-Stalker all-ins -- Fungal Growth changed to stop Blink.
Zergs have problems with various early-game pressure / all-ins -- Roach range increased to 4.
Terrans have problems with Voidray harass / contain / all-in builds -- Voidrays are nerfed hard.
Protoss have problems with 4-gate v 4-gate in PvP -- Warp-gate nerfed, Pylon power range nerfed.
Protoss / Zerg have problems with stim-timing pushes -- Stim research nerfed.
Blizzard has shown time and time again that in a game that has yet to reach meta-game stability and strategic maturity that if the margin of error is too thin on the defender's side and the execution too easy on the aggressor's side, adjustments are made. Yet...
Protoss have problems with 1/1/1 -- DEAL WITH IT Nope, the most frustating thing is that they don't even remember those changes. They think they actually solved it.
Yeah thats real frustrating. Im sure if we were allowed to we would all be watching 6 rax reapers destroy zerg game after game.
|
On August 22 2011 12:35 Medrea wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 12:24 Thorzain wrote:
Regarding the games between MC and Puma yesterday (Since I think that many people saw that and went "IMBA!!", I think that MC should have won both games. The first game he lost because he lost his initial observer and hence wasn't aware that Puma did not fall back on an expand but rather wanted to do a 2nd push. MC made probes and started teching instead of making units.
In the 3rd game, Phoenix chargelots are regarded a pretty good counter to 1-1-1. But instead, MC decided to go for phoenix + mass stalkers with blink and aim for a base race scenario with a hidden expansion. Stalkers are shit vs 1-1-1 all in. He also invested a lot of resources in DTs.
1-1-1 is definitely strong but it is holdable with other builds than 1 base, 1 gate expo or nexus first if you play it correctly. In fact, nexus first is pretty bad against it in my opinion, unless the map is huge. If the Terran scouts it he can make a super fast tank + 8 marines or so and 3-4 scvs and attack right when you get warp gates (protoss will have like 4 stalkers 1 zealot and 30 seconds until more units because warp gate will be so delayed). Terran builds bunkers and reinforces.
I think that 1-1-1 all in will work as 4 gate /DTs / 6 gate eventually when Protoss players knows the best ways to fend it off. It's a strat that you always have to keep in mind. If you prepare against it you'll most likely defend it, but you can't be sure if it's coming so if it's not coming you have invested resources in the wrong area.
Terran needs to build bunkers and turrets whenever we're expanding just in case 4 gate, DTs or whatever comes our way. Whats MVP's deal with it then? He won't even do it as he sees the attack as unfair play. I mean there's gotta be more to it than that. Also, pro players see this this build coming, but can't hold it off anyway? It's not even a rush. Its just a unit composition and timing attack, and it doesn't even have to be all in. In previous cases, the only thing that has changed 1 base play like this, is a patch. Why would this time be so different?
Pro players are holding it off, but it's not with safe builds. The way pro's are holding it off are either nexus first or 1gate FE, both of which give enough of an economic boost to allow a surge of units.
1gate FE gives 4gates + robo with 1 more gate on the way by the time the push hits(probe cut 32-34)
nexus first gives 5(6?)gates + robo and should steamroll the 1/1/1 every time if you can delay the push at all.
The thing is, the other most common Terran builds can both put nexus first/1gate FE very, very far behind if they know proper responses. 2rax will deny the expo/put protoss behind or even kill protoss if they 1gate FE, and nexus first can die to 4rax marine+scv allin if T went gasless, and 2rax puts heavy, heavy pressure onto a nexus first, and just plain denies it if he pulls enough scv's.
|
On August 22 2011 12:41 Azzur wrote:Show nested quote +As a Protoss player there are two possible ways to hold off 1/1/1.
1. 15 Nexus
2. 1 Gate into an expo My issue with the OP is this statement - which is claimed as "fact", rather than "theory". As Tyler explained a few posts later, he considers the economic advantage unnecessary and that the 1-gate expo is done because protosses felt that they can get away with it. Several months ago, there was a similar claim by the zergs that hatch-first is superior to pool-first in holding the 2-rax. While this is still possibly true, there are enough zergs doing pool-first to suggest that the hatch-first is not "definitely better". Similarly, I would like to see investigation by the protoss in exploring other safer openings (e.g. 1-gate robo or 2-gate robo) rather than just people saying, "the pros say this, so it must be better". Granted, they may be correct, but I hardly see 2-gate robo nowadays in televised play.
My problem with your argument is that terran already have a perfectly good way to punish a toss that expands too quick. He can either allin with a 3 rax if he scouts it early enough or poke with some early units and a few scvs. There is a timing window where he will most likely be able to outright kill the toss or get him to cancel the expansion.
The 1-1-1 is an all around killer that works well vs any toss standard opening.
|
On August 22 2011 12:42 Amui wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 12:35 Medrea wrote:On August 22 2011 12:24 Thorzain wrote:
Regarding the games between MC and Puma yesterday (Since I think that many people saw that and went "IMBA!!", I think that MC should have won both games. The first game he lost because he lost his initial observer and hence wasn't aware that Puma did not fall back on an expand but rather wanted to do a 2nd push. MC made probes and started teching instead of making units.
In the 3rd game, Phoenix chargelots are regarded a pretty good counter to 1-1-1. But instead, MC decided to go for phoenix + mass stalkers with blink and aim for a base race scenario with a hidden expansion. Stalkers are shit vs 1-1-1 all in. He also invested a lot of resources in DTs.
1-1-1 is definitely strong but it is holdable with other builds than 1 base, 1 gate expo or nexus first if you play it correctly. In fact, nexus first is pretty bad against it in my opinion, unless the map is huge. If the Terran scouts it he can make a super fast tank + 8 marines or so and 3-4 scvs and attack right when you get warp gates (protoss will have like 4 stalkers 1 zealot and 30 seconds until more units because warp gate will be so delayed). Terran builds bunkers and reinforces.
I think that 1-1-1 all in will work as 4 gate /DTs / 6 gate eventually when Protoss players knows the best ways to fend it off. It's a strat that you always have to keep in mind. If you prepare against it you'll most likely defend it, but you can't be sure if it's coming so if it's not coming you have invested resources in the wrong area.
Terran needs to build bunkers and turrets whenever we're expanding just in case 4 gate, DTs or whatever comes our way. Whats MVP's deal with it then? He won't even do it as he sees the attack as unfair play. I mean there's gotta be more to it than that. Also, pro players see this this build coming, but can't hold it off anyway? It's not even a rush. Its just a unit composition and timing attack, and it doesn't even have to be all in. In previous cases, the only thing that has changed 1 base play like this, is a patch. Why would this time be so different? Pro players are holding it off, but it's not with safe builds. The way pro's are holding it off are either nexus first or 1gate FE, both of which give enough of an economic boost to allow a surge of units. 1gate FE gives 4gates + robo with 1 more gate on the way by the time the push hits(probe cut 32-34) nexus first gives 5(6?)gates + robo and should steamroll the 1/1/1 every time if you can delay the push at all. The thing is, the other most common Terran builds can both put nexus first/1gate FE very, very far behind if they know proper responses. 2rax will deny the expo/put protoss behind or even kill protoss if they 1gate FE, and nexus first can die to 4rax marine+scv allin if T went gasless, and 2rax puts heavy, heavy pressure onto a nexus first, and just plain denies it if he pulls enough scv's.
In GSL they haven't been holding off 1-1-1. The only times I see protoss holding off 1-1-1 are the times they are voidray rushing.
Or when terran forgets siege mode, or doesnt siege there tanks, or don't fire them. or builds the units competely out of order.
|
On August 22 2011 12:28 Brian333 wrote:
I think the most frustrating thing is the general community response to this entire debacle.
Zergs have problems with 5-rax reaper rush -- Reapers are nerfed hard.
Zergs have problems with 2-rax openings -- Bunkers are nerfed.
Zergs have problems with air-openings -- Spore Crawler root timing is decreased.
Zergs have problems with 2-gate openings -- Zealot build time nerfed.
Zergs have problems with Blink-Stalker all-ins -- Fungal Growth changed to stop Blink.
Zergs have problems with various early-game pressure / all-ins -- Roach range increased to 4.
Terrans have problems with Voidray harass / contain / all-in builds -- Voidrays are nerfed hard.
Protoss have problems with 4-gate v 4-gate in PvP -- Warp-gate nerfed, Pylon power range nerfed.
Protoss / Zerg have problems with stim-timing pushes -- Stim research nerfed.
Blizzard has shown time and time again that in a game that has yet to reach meta-game stability and strategic maturity that if the margin of error is too thin on the defender's side and the execution too easy on the aggressor's side, adjustments are made. Yet...
Protoss have problems with 1/1/1 -- DEAL WITH IT
1) 5rax reaper was nerfed incredibly quickly.
2) 2rax was overcome through drone micro and larva management. All bunker changes to date are negligible.
3) Stargate openings were never OP, the root timing decrease was a negligible change.
4) 2gate was an obvious and ANCIENT overpowered strat, just like 5rax.
5) Zerg overcame blink stalker all-ins without any fungal change. As a matter of fact, you don't use infestors to counter blink stalker all ins at all. FURTHERMORE, fungal growth was changed to stop protoss deathballs.
6) Roach range increased to 4 was a much needed change. It took yet another patch to stabilize PvZ.
7) Void rays were nerfed not because of pro matches, but because of low level ladder.
8) 4gating for over a year is different than a FOTM 1-1-1 strat. It's putting life into a boring matchup rather than anything being OP (especially in a mirror match, wtf?)
9) If I remember correctly stim research time was also a low level problem fix.
10) There's a bunch of builds you don't mention because of people learning how to counter them.
1/1/1 has just reached FOTM climax. It's still too soon to jump to any conclusions of OP or not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
