|
Can we stop talking about nerfing things please? - 9:10 KST |
Coming from an amateur position, I am glad I now have an excuse at my PvT dropping from 60% to 30%.
|
I'm really surprised that no one has mentioned a quick scout and gas steal to throw off the 1/1/1 timing. The 1/1/1 is a tech build meaning that it is limited by gas with a marine mineral dump so anything you can do to delay said tech will put you in a better position to defend against it.
Also another thing to mention is that before stim or CS comes out stalkers pretty much have complete map control which allows great poke/harass. The reason this is important is because, from what I understand, the best way to hold off this push is to delay it as much as possible (hence gas steal in the first place) with something like a 1gate +robo FE (Cella). Correct me if I'm wrong but no variation of 1/1/1 includes marauders (with or w/o CS) or stim? And if they do come with CS or stim that means less tanks/banshees/raven i.e. support for the marines.
If you delay the T enough then robo tech gives you all you need to defend against the 1/1/1 variations. i.e. obs for cloak, immortals for tanks, colo for marines. Also 1gate robo allows you to scout which variation it will be quickly w/ obs.
Just some thoughts I had while reading this thread, criticism welcome.
|
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.
But bunkers and turrets can be incorporated smoothly into every build, and it seems defending these are immensely more simple than defending the 1/1/1. It seems to me that even if it can be held, the protoss has to do a build completely tailored to countering it, and can't be sure of the 1/1/1 until he gets an obs. If the best toss in the world can completely anticipate the 1/1/1 do what he thinks is optimal against it, and still be crushed, how will it ever be held consistently? Was that ever the case for 6gate or DT?
|
On August 22 2011 12:43 Greenduck wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 12:41 Azzur wrote: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.
Right, there should be a not all-in build that protoss can do, that terran can scout of course, that would make a 1-1-1ing terran go "No I shouldn't all in that" but there isn't.
|
On August 22 2011 12:16 kheldorin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 12:13 Haydin wrote:WOW. No clue if that's the only/optimal version of the anti 1-1-1 build but that was pretty sweet. I think Tyler called this one. More units/production structures early looks like it may be the way to go. Does anyone know who that korean protoss is? Watched it. No raven and PDD. Some of them don't even pull SCVs. The first game built a CC for goodness sake.
They were various examples. In the shattered temple game, would spending gas on a raven instead of a banshee really help? That was almost all zealot/colossus. And SCVs just melt to colossi, as you can see in the same game. The CC game was probably included to show that the build can actually go into a midgame, and isn't just an "I'm going to all-in him first" strat. I wouldn't be so quick as to outright dismiss a build that a korean GM is claiming works really well.
|
On August 22 2011 12:45 Finchy711 wrote:
I'm really surprised that no one has mentioned a quick scout and gas steal to throw off the 1/1/1 timing. The 1/1/1 is a tech build meaning that it is limited by gas with a marine mineral dump so anything you can do to delay said tech will put you in a better position to defend against it.
Also another thing to mention is that before stim or CS comes out stalkers pretty much have complete map control which allows great poke/harass. The reason this is important is because, from what I understand, the best way to hold off this push is to delay it as much as possible (hence gas steal in the first place) with something like a 1gate +robo FE (Cella). Correct me if I'm wrong but no variation of 1/1/1 includes marauders (with or w/o CS) or stim? And if they do come with CS or stim that means less tanks/banshees/raven i.e. support for the marines.
If you delay the T enough then robo tech gives you all you need to defend against the 1/1/1 variations. i.e. obs for cloak, immortals for tanks, colo for marines. Also 1gate robo allows you to scout which variation it will be quickly w/ obs.
Just some thoughts I had while reading this thread, criticism welcome.
The 1-1-1 is a very thick build. Stealing the gas not only doesn't stop it, it only slightly changes the outcome.
|
On August 22 2011 11:42 Jacobs Ladder wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 11:36 jimmyjingle wrote:On August 22 2011 11:33 Flonomenalz wrote:
MC held off the first push perfectly in Game 1, he chose the wrong tech path for the second push. He had just enough time (he stopped first push at 9:00 (and remade nexus soon after), second push hit at 11:40, this is youtube time btw) to get a robo facility, ETL, and one colossus, with another on the way. He didn't need zealot charge. just stalker/zealot/sentry/colossus. I believe that is how he should have held this off, and I think he would have done so. I think that that is the only transition that toss can do. Then it's down to Colossus/Stalker micro. Losing his obs is really bad too. Not to say I could have done anywhere close to the control he did, I play Zerg, but this is my sideline perspective.
I also think toss must be willing to sac natural to wait for reinforcements, just like MC did. But you cannot, you CANNOT one base this. You just die. Anyone else saying differently is blind, or knows something the pros don't, because you just cannot 1 base this.
he never pulled probes either, lol. MC was up 30 workers and didn't think to pull probes until he had 2 zealots and 35 workers. Pulling probes in PvT is suicide. The fact is, even if you hold the next wave will almost always kill you. Unless you manage to completely crush and then do counter damage the T player will have such an economy lead (even if you're even on bases) that its over. P players have learned from experience not to pull except in the most dire situations (such as bitbybit games)
like, fucking really. okay, let's do the math. at the game-ending push, MC has 35 workers, puma has 6 workers remaining at his one base with 4 near-empty mineral patches. puma has brought 6 workers to support his one base push and MC has 35 workers on one base, which is 10 workers past saturation. if you are really trying to say MC would be behind in income, or even sustainable income, i suggest you actually watch the replay being discussed.
|
On August 22 2011 12:39 Heavenly wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 12:34 Astro-Penguin wrote: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.
agreed i think most people are complaining because as a spectator its dumb to watch this build dominate the highest level games not because they are having difficulty against it themselves
|
On August 22 2011 12:48 Mike15xp wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 12:39 Heavenly wrote:On August 22 2011 12:34 Astro-Penguin wrote: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. agreed i think most people are complaining because as a spectator its dumb to watch this build dominate the highest level games not because they are having difficulty against it themselves
As an e-sport though, that matters. A lot.
|
On August 22 2011 12:18 Milkis wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 12:13 Haydin wrote:WOW. No clue if that's the only/optimal version of the anti 1-1-1 build but that was pretty sweet. Anyone know who this korean is? 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 think Tyler called this one :D Apparently the build doesn't work against good Terrans. Once the Terran knows what you're up to (scan, banshee scout, whatever) they'll just expand and come back with a bigger army. The build fails miserably against anything that's not 1/1/1.
Yeah you're exactly right. This build DOES stop the 1-1-1 push, but the banshee will see the support bay and prompt the terran to expand. With the raven, you will never see the CC, and you can't really all-in him with your colossi because he has tanks. If you expand yourself once you finally see it, you are behind. I already suspected this was the case, but I tried it vs. Rainbow on ladder a couple hours ago and he indeed just expanded and steamrolled me.
|
On August 22 2011 12:50 Medrea wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 12:48 Mike15xp wrote:On August 22 2011 12:39 Heavenly wrote:On August 22 2011 12:34 Astro-Penguin wrote: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. agreed i think most people are complaining because as a spectator its dumb to watch this build dominate the highest level games not because they are having difficulty against it themselves As an e-sport though, that matters. A lot.
yes exactly my point and why i have a problem with this build, PvT/TvP used to be my favorite matchup to watch and its really hurting my viewing experience
|
On August 22 2011 12:53 Mike15xp wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 12:50 Medrea wrote:On August 22 2011 12:48 Mike15xp wrote:On August 22 2011 12:39 Heavenly wrote:On August 22 2011 12:34 Astro-Penguin wrote: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:
[quote]
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. agreed i think most people are complaining because as a spectator its dumb to watch this build dominate the highest level games not because they are having difficulty against it themselves As an e-sport though, that matters. A lot. yes exactly my point and why i have a problem with this build, PvT/TvP used to be my favorite matchup to watch and its really hurting my viewing experience
Yup! 
David some do it. I'm the biggest anti-balance whiner youll ever see but watching this build destroy heaps of the best protoss in the game is not doing wonders for me.
|
hmmm this is really tough, I keep thinking about it more and more, and as a Z player (although I watch a TON of games from all races, it's still a poor substitute to actually playing them), this is SO hard for P to stop, especially on close positions or small 1v1 maps like xel naga. I dunno what they should even do... I calculated what would happen based off of MC's mining between the first and second push (a rough estimate, but pretty accurate) if he went colossus tech. He would have had 1 colossus with ETL just barely maybe finishing with (I'd assume he'd get more stalkers with this route for banshees/raven) around 10 stalkers, a few zealots, 2 sentries, and 3 immortals (left over from first push).
Do you guys think that would've held? I think he might've had to sac his nexus for ETL to finish, I'm not sure, it depends on when Puma attacked and how careful he was... damn this is so strong. Definitely a huge challenge for P, it'll be interesting to see if P can respond to this or if it needs a nerf somehow... idk how you would nerf it though.
However if I may say one thing, all the immature idiots just screaming and bitching OP need to calm down or get out of this thread. You're not helping anything, and NONE of you are going to ever face such a well executed 1/1/1 ever, so stop crying.
|
On August 22 2011 12:56 Flonomenalz wrote:
hmmm this is really tough, I keep thinking about it more and more, and as a Z player (although I watch a TON of games from all races, it's still a poor substitute to actually playing them), this is SO hard for P to stop, especially on close positions or small 1v1 maps like xel naga. I dunno what they should even do... I calculated what would happen based off of MC's mining between the first and second push (a rough estimate, but pretty accurate) if he went colossus tech. He would have had 1 colossus with ETL just barely maybe finishing with (I'd assume he'd get more stalkers with this route for banshees/raven) around 10 stalkers, a few zealots, 2 sentries, and 3 immortals (left over from first push).
Do you guys think that would've held? I think he might've had to sac his nexus for ETL to finish, I'm not sure, it depends on when Puma attacked and how careful he was... damn this is so strong. Definitely a huge challenge for P, it'll be interesting to see if P can respond to this or if it needs a nerf somehow... idk how you would nerf it though.
However if I may say one thing, all the immature idiots just screaming and bitching OP need to calm down or get out of this thread. You're not helping anything, and NONE of you are going to ever face such a well executed 1/1/1 ever, so stop crying.
Well executed 1-1-1's happen on the ladder all the time. The problem with that explicit situation you were describing is another problem with the 1-1-1, its not really an all in. Even if the push is held.... 1-1-1 take two can come down and kill you anyway.
And it's tough to ascertain if the terran is done with the first wave or is coming down with a second one.
|
the funniest part is in less than one month, not a single person will be arguing that 1/1/1 is broken, let alone impossible to stop.
|
While the gate-robo-gate is deemed by some to be "safe" against the 1/1/1 by getting fast information and react accodingly, the build started losing its popularity because it falls behind economically to the fast-expanding Terran, and Protoss can't punish Terran for being greedy since gate-robo-gate is "too safe." BO poker for the win.
|
On August 22 2011 05:52 Archs wrote:![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/pLEzA.jpg) User was warned for this postUser was banned for this post.
lol. can anyone enlighten someone who doesn't follow these troll pics about what it means? looks hilarious even though you cant read the small lettering.
On August 22 2011 12:46 Medrea wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 12:43 Greenduck wrote:On August 22 2011 12:41 Azzur wrote: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. Right, there should be a not all-in build that protoss can do, that terran can scout of course, that would make a 1-1-1ing terran go "No I shouldn't all in that" but there isn't.
Welcome to the same boat as zerg. nearly everything early/mid-game zerg does vs terran has to be tailored exquisitely, and even then we can be wrong. Hence why some people call early game ZvT coin flipping "at best".
There should be solutions to defend against all ins, but the trick is that this 1-1-1 is so versatile and so damaging all at once that the only solution is to all-in the direct early counter. I know people say the FE is important, but with 1-1-1, there's harass that comes into play, as well as a huge direct confrontation damage.
|
On August 22 2011 13:03 Truedot wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 05:52 Archs wrote:User was warned for this postUser was banned for this post. lol. can anyone enlighten someone who doesn't follow these troll pics about what it means? looks hilarious even though you cant read the small lettering. Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 12:46 Medrea wrote:On August 22 2011 12:43 Greenduck wrote:On August 22 2011 12:41 Azzur wrote: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. Right, there should be a not all-in build that protoss can do, that terran can scout of course, that would make a 1-1-1ing terran go "No I shouldn't all in that" but there isn't. Welcome to the same boat as zerg. nearly everything early/mid-game zerg does vs terran has to be tailored exquisitely, and even then we can be wrong. Hence why some people call early game ZvT coin flipping "at best". There should be solutions to defend against all ins, but the trick is that this 1-1-1 is so versatile and so damaging all at once that the only solution is to all-in the direct early counter. I know people say the FE is important, but with 1-1-1, there's harass that comes into play, as well as a huge direct confrontation damage.
I think it's supposed to be a bottle of Protoss tears.
|
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
Let's assume that everything you just said was true. I don't think it is, as others have pointed out. But let's assume that those changes were made specifically and solely to deal with the particular issues you identified above.
Each of those changes were targeted and focused. They changed a single, specific aspect of a race. They tried to affect a specific thing and nothing beyond that specific thing.
What targeted, focused change would you suggest to deal with 1/1/1? Nerfing MULEs? That's hardly a focused change, as it would affect the Terrans throughout mid and late game. Nerf Marines? Same problem. Nerf Tanks or Vikings? It's a staple unit; you can't just go around nerfing it, because then the Terrans will be vulnerable to something else.
If 1/1/1 is a problem, there is no simple single thing you can change that will fix everything without simultaneously breaking tons of other stuff. So even if Blizzard decides to fix it pre-HOTS, it's not going to be a quick, easy thing.
|
On August 22 2011 13:03 Truedot wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 05:52 Archs wrote:User was warned for this postUser was banned for this post. lol. can anyone enlighten someone who doesn't follow these troll pics about what it means? looks hilarious even though you cant read the small lettering. Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 12:46 Medrea wrote:On August 22 2011 12:43 Greenduck wrote:On August 22 2011 12:41 Azzur wrote: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. Right, there should be a not all-in build that protoss can do, that terran can scout of course, that would make a 1-1-1ing terran go "No I shouldn't all in that" but there isn't. Welcome to the same boat as zerg. nearly everything early/mid-game zerg does vs terran has to be tailored exquisitely, and even then we can be wrong. Hence why some people call early game ZvT coin flipping "at best". There should be solutions to defend against all ins, but the trick is that this 1-1-1 is so versatile and so damaging all at once that the only solution is to all-in the direct early counter. I know people say the FE is important, but with 1-1-1, there's harass that comes into play, as well as a huge direct confrontation damage.
Zerg also had like 5 balance patches that all eeked elements of that matchup in zergs favor slightly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
