|
Can we stop talking about nerfing things please? - 9:10 KST |
On August 23 2011 10:56 sekritzzz wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 10:38 Techno 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'm just gonna routinely quote this for the crickets. Can we stop talking about nerfing things please? - 9:10 KST + Why 1/1/1 is considered to be imbalanced in Korea = Some sort of contradiction, no? Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 10:39 Razuik wrote:On August 23 2011 10:37 Doomwish wrote:On August 23 2011 10:35 ch33psh33p wrote:On August 23 2011 10:20 Doomwish wrote:
Maybe instead of getting like 3 immortals to be melted by marines MC should of just gotten 1-2 immortals and a 1-2 colossus+ range. MC didn't make colossus in a single one of those games. I heard colossus are pretty good against marines with no upgrades.
Do you think before you post? What makes you think changing 2 immortals equals getting 1-2 collosus + range? He would NEVER EVER have gotten collosi in time, much less range. The math has been done in this thread, it'd do you best to read them before posting blindly. You can get colossus if you 1 gate robo in time. Wait! Are you suggesting a safe and smart expand build based on good scouting and responding?! Bonjwa. No but seriously, this is the perfect opening vs 1-1-1. This has been said so many times in this thread on possibly every single page so i'll repeat it in underline and bold!!!!!!!
Building anything other than 15 Nexus or 1gate, Nexus will always lose you the game unless the terran is horrible and decides to give 3 banshees to charity by suicide. The problem is that protoss units are less effecient AND protoss gets less minerals/minute than the terran. The only solution to this is expanding but anything other than a 15 nexus or 1gate FE will die to this pushp.s. I respect Tyler but I honestly think he misunderstood the claims of the OP. I dont get how 3 gate robo is safe?
So you've thoroughly debunked Tyler's claims? Awesome, now just provide the link to all your games against pro gamers.
|
On August 23 2011 11:47 arbitrageur wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 10:56 sekritzzz wrote:On August 23 2011 10:38 Techno 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'm just gonna routinely quote this for the crickets. Can we stop talking about nerfing things please? - 9:10 KST + Why 1/1/1 is considered to be imbalanced in Korea = Some sort of contradiction, no? On August 23 2011 10:39 Razuik wrote:On August 23 2011 10:37 Doomwish wrote:On August 23 2011 10:35 ch33psh33p wrote:On August 23 2011 10:20 Doomwish wrote:
Maybe instead of getting like 3 immortals to be melted by marines MC should of just gotten 1-2 immortals and a 1-2 colossus+ range. MC didn't make colossus in a single one of those games. I heard colossus are pretty good against marines with no upgrades.
Do you think before you post? What makes you think changing 2 immortals equals getting 1-2 collosus + range? He would NEVER EVER have gotten collosi in time, much less range. The math has been done in this thread, it'd do you best to read them before posting blindly. You can get colossus if you 1 gate robo in time. Wait! Are you suggesting a safe and smart expand build based on good scouting and responding?! Bonjwa. No but seriously, this is the perfect opening vs 1-1-1. This has been said so many times in this thread on possibly every single page so i'll repeat it in underline and bold!!!!!!!
Building anything other than 15 Nexus or 1gate, Nexus will always lose you the game unless the terran is horrible and decides to give 3 banshees to charity by suicide. The problem is that protoss units are less effecient AND protoss gets less minerals/minute than the terran. The only solution to this is expanding but anything other than a 15 nexus or 1gate FE will die to this pushp.s. I respect Tyler but I honestly think he misunderstood the claims of the OP. I dont get how 3 gate robo is safe? So you've thoroughly debunked Tyler's claims? Awesome, now just provide the link to all your games against pro gamers.
The OP itself debunks Tyler's claims based on seeing the games played by people superior to Tyler on Gisado's stream. I would take SlayersAlicia's word alone over Tyler. Alicia practices with all the Slayers terrans, which sick Koran terrans does Tyler practice with all day every day? Just because he's Tyler doesn't mean he's correct (which all he said was "be safe into the midgame with proper scouting").
|
On August 23 2011 11:51 Heavenly wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 11:47 arbitrageur wrote:On August 23 2011 10:56 sekritzzz wrote:On August 23 2011 10:38 Techno 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'm just gonna routinely quote this for the crickets. Can we stop talking about nerfing things please? - 9:10 KST + Why 1/1/1 is considered to be imbalanced in Korea = Some sort of contradiction, no? On August 23 2011 10:39 Razuik wrote:On August 23 2011 10:37 Doomwish wrote:On August 23 2011 10:35 ch33psh33p wrote:On August 23 2011 10:20 Doomwish wrote:
Maybe instead of getting like 3 immortals to be melted by marines MC should of just gotten 1-2 immortals and a 1-2 colossus+ range. MC didn't make colossus in a single one of those games. I heard colossus are pretty good against marines with no upgrades.
Do you think before you post? What makes you think changing 2 immortals equals getting 1-2 collosus + range? He would NEVER EVER have gotten collosi in time, much less range. The math has been done in this thread, it'd do you best to read them before posting blindly. You can get colossus if you 1 gate robo in time. Wait! Are you suggesting a safe and smart expand build based on good scouting and responding?! Bonjwa. No but seriously, this is the perfect opening vs 1-1-1. This has been said so many times in this thread on possibly every single page so i'll repeat it in underline and bold!!!!!!!
Building anything other than 15 Nexus or 1gate, Nexus will always lose you the game unless the terran is horrible and decides to give 3 banshees to charity by suicide. The problem is that protoss units are less effecient AND protoss gets less minerals/minute than the terran. The only solution to this is expanding but anything other than a 15 nexus or 1gate FE will die to this pushp.s. I respect Tyler but I honestly think he misunderstood the claims of the OP. I dont get how 3 gate robo is safe? So you've thoroughly debunked Tyler's claims? Awesome, now just provide the link to all your games against pro gamers. The OP itself debunks Tyler's claims based on seeing the games played by people are superior to Tyler on Gisado's stream. I would take SlayersAlicia's word alone over Tyler. Alicia practices with all the Slayers terrans, which sick Koran terrans does Tyler practice with all day every day? Just because he's Tyler doesn't mean his claims (which all he said was "be safe into the midgame with proper scouting").
Yes, but the OP did not make any specifications on what type of 1-1-1 or the response after scouting the all-in. We even have no idea about any errors in execution. Until I know these very important details, I can't help but question the validity of the information.
|
Okay so people keep saying that the 1/1/1 build is beatable as per the MC vs Puma game 1, however after watching that replay, MC had nearly PERFECT micro in holding off the first engagement, it was superb. Now not everyone has such amazing micro against an a move all in, and why should protoss be forced to even have perfect micro...we all know that is ludicrous. People need to stop arguing against the fact that it is not imbalanced, the fact of the matter is it is, and the koreans (who this community loves to provide as the final trump all evidence yet in this case are disregarding it at times) even consider it imbalanced, yet we have people here who do not devote their lives to SC2 making very ignorant statements and assumptions about it being just another allin. Although I always thought this build was hard to beat as I lost to it pretty much every time i encountered it (before its usage spread like wildfire). In the end people watch that game's replay, on MC's camera view, you'll be amazed what MC did to hold the first instance off.
On a side note, people are making arguments about protoss having higher initial army values, protoss has mostly gas heavy units that cannot be replenished as is the case with marines, so please shut up about that.
|
On August 23 2011 12:01 Atasu wrote:
Okay so people keep saying that the 1/1/1 build is beatable as per the MC vs Puma game 1, however after watching that replay, MC had nearly PERFECT micro in holding off the first engagement, it was superb. Now not everyone has such amazing micro against an a move all in, and why should protoss be forced to even have perfect micro...we all know that is ludicrous. People need to stop arguing against the fact that it is not imbalanced, the fact of the matter is it is, and the koreans (who this community loves to provide as the final trump all evidence yet in this case are disregarding it at times) even consider it imbalanced, yet we have people here who do not devote their lives to SC2 making very ignorant statements and assumptions about it being just another allin. Although I always thought this build was hard to beat as I lost to it pretty much every time i encountered it (before its usage spread like wildfire). In the end people watch that game's replay, on MC's camera view, you'll be amazed what MC did to hold the first instance off.
On a side note, people are making arguments about protoss having higher initial army values, protoss has mostly gas heavy units that cannot be replenished as is the case with marines, so please shut up about that.
No offense, but can you shut up about it being imbalanced and read the posts that I made completely refuting everything you just said. MC had the completely wrong unit composition for that particular version of the 1-1-1 all-in. His micro is irrelevant against the heavy marine/ low tank count of Puma.
|
So you've thoroughly debunked Tyler's claims? Awesome, now just provide the link to all your games against pro gamers.
I'm a huge Tyler fan, but his post was just a very good general point about the game which he said seemed to apply to this situation, not a particular response to this issue based on exhaustive first-hand knowledge. So he can be wrong about this particular build (which he seems to be, based on the many experienced people who've chimed in) without being wrong about the more general point he was making. Or so it seems to me.
|
On August 23 2011 10:56 sekritzzz wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 10:38 Techno 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'm just gonna routinely quote this for the crickets. Can we stop talking about nerfing things please? - 9:10 KST + Why 1/1/1 is considered to be imbalanced in Korea = Some sort of contradiction, no? Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 10:39 Razuik wrote:On August 23 2011 10:37 Doomwish wrote:On August 23 2011 10:35 ch33psh33p wrote:On August 23 2011 10:20 Doomwish wrote:
Maybe instead of getting like 3 immortals to be melted by marines MC should of just gotten 1-2 immortals and a 1-2 colossus+ range. MC didn't make colossus in a single one of those games. I heard colossus are pretty good against marines with no upgrades.
Do you think before you post? What makes you think changing 2 immortals equals getting 1-2 collosus + range? He would NEVER EVER have gotten collosi in time, much less range. The math has been done in this thread, it'd do you best to read them before posting blindly. You can get colossus if you 1 gate robo in time. Wait! Are you suggesting a safe and smart expand build based on good scouting and responding?! Bonjwa. No but seriously, this is the perfect opening vs 1-1-1. This has been said so many times in this thread on possibly every single page so i'll repeat it in underline and bold!!!!!!!
Building anything other than 15 Nexus or 1gate, Nexus will always lose you the game unless the terran is horrible and decides to give 3 banshees to charity by suicide. The problem is that protoss units are less effecient AND protoss gets less minerals/minute than the terran. The only solution to this is expanding but anything other than a 15 nexus or 1gate FE will die to this pushp.s. I respect Tyler but I honestly think he misunderstood the claims of the OP. I dont get how 3 gate robo is safe?
Lol, writing something in bold and underlined font, doesn't make it true. How are people like this allowed to post? Seriously i think there should be some league requirement for posting, or there will be more and more people trying to convince others to their opinion by screaming lauder.
|
On August 22 2011 21:22 VirgilSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 21:18 Pl4t0 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. One of the smartest players to grace these forums speak, and hardly anybody listens. There are more posts on that stupid water bottle that MeanMike posted than Tyler's insight. Come on, people, we're better than this. Nobody is "listening" because there's nothing very insightful there. Paraphrased, this comes out at "Protoss is greedy in the current meta-game and this is a build meant to punish that. I think once a counter to 1-1-1 is discovered, it will be obsolete" He offers NO insight whatsoever on HOW to stop this build. In a sense, this post was completely and utterly useless. EDIT: I'd like to add a bit more here: In the middle of this post Tyler waxes on how 1 Gate Robo and 1 Gate Stargate provide scouting while allowing for an economically sound mid-game, which has NO POINT in this thread, as there is no midgame if you go 1 Gate Robo or 1 Gate Stargate against the build this thread is about. He then transitions into saying that "rushing for information remains the most reliable way to get to the midgame on even ground or to win outright against opponents not intending to enter the midgame" which is actually, completely wrong against this build, as even if you blind counter with the current supposed counters to this build, and he USES it, you still cannot hold if you are at equal skill level with your opponent UNLESS he makes grievous errors.
If you can't understand why people are calling you ignorant for "siding with Tyler" please read this.
|
On August 23 2011 10:56 sekritzzz wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 10:38 Techno 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'm just gonna routinely quote this for the crickets. Can we stop talking about nerfing things please? - 9:10 KST + Why 1/1/1 is considered to be imbalanced in Korea = Some sort of contradiction, no? Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 10:39 Razuik wrote:On August 23 2011 10:37 Doomwish wrote:On August 23 2011 10:35 ch33psh33p wrote:On August 23 2011 10:20 Doomwish wrote:
Maybe instead of getting like 3 immortals to be melted by marines MC should of just gotten 1-2 immortals and a 1-2 colossus+ range. MC didn't make colossus in a single one of those games. I heard colossus are pretty good against marines with no upgrades.
Do you think before you post? What makes you think changing 2 immortals equals getting 1-2 collosus + range? He would NEVER EVER have gotten collosi in time, much less range. The math has been done in this thread, it'd do you best to read them before posting blindly. You can get colossus if you 1 gate robo in time. Wait! Are you suggesting a safe and smart expand build based on good scouting and responding?! Bonjwa. No but seriously, this is the perfect opening vs 1-1-1. This has been said so many times in this thread on possibly every single page so i'll repeat it in underline and bold!!!!!!!
Building anything other than 15 Nexus or 1gate, Nexus will always lose you the game unless the terran is horrible and decides to give 3 banshees to charity by suicide. The problem is that protoss units are less effecient AND protoss gets less minerals/minute than the terran. The only solution to this is expanding but anything other than a 15 nexus or 1gate FE will die to this pushp.s. I respect Tyler but I honestly think he misunderstood the claims of the OP. I dont get how 3 gate robo is safe?
Tyler says 1 gate robo obs then 2nd gate and if scouting info is used and found that it's a 1-1-1 all in, that a third gate and colossus tech be placed. Straight up colossus tech beats the marine tank banshee all in. The point of what Tyler was saying is that 1 gate fe and nexus first reduce the Protoss's ability to scout the opponent, therefore making the 1-1-1 MUCH more powerful than it really is, because the Protoss has less time to prepare.
The argument that the fast expand "pays for itself and is therefore better than the massing of stronger tech" is pathetic, seeing as you must be perfect to hold the opponent's all in with such spare info. If the Terran is maximizing efficiency on one base, theory holds that Protoss should be able to do the same but with counter tech via strong scouting.
The argument that ravens and scans prevent scouting are nice, but if an obs sees a Raven you've already narrowed down what kind of 1-1-1 it is simply via seeing the raven/seeing what units killed your observer. Information protection is laughable when you go Tyler's other route, 1 gate star -> 2 gate star because phoenixes are so fast that withholding info with just marines is just about impossible.
If the Terran is being hyper efficient, be hyper efficient in counter against his composition. If a Protoss can legitimately not do this then the 1-1-1 is should be patched, but I seriously doubt that any Pro has definitive evidence that Protoss 1 base counter tech always loses/only breaks even with Terran 1 base tech.
Tyler won the shit out of this thread ages ago... I don't even know why I'm here... Think about it as a problem that can be solved... not.. not the Gordian Knot...
|
On August 23 2011 12:17 VirgilSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 22 2011 21:22 VirgilSC2 wrote:On August 22 2011 21:18 Pl4t0 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. One of the smartest players to grace these forums speak, and hardly anybody listens. There are more posts on that stupid water bottle that MeanMike posted than Tyler's insight. Come on, people, we're better than this. Nobody is "listening" because there's nothing very insightful there. Paraphrased, this comes out at "Protoss is greedy in the current meta-game and this is a build meant to punish that. I think once a counter to 1-1-1 is discovered, it will be obsolete" He offers NO insight whatsoever on HOW to stop this build. In a sense, this post was completely and utterly useless. EDIT: I'd like to add a bit more here: In the middle of this post Tyler waxes on how 1 Gate Robo and 1 Gate Stargate provide scouting while allowing for an economically sound mid-game, which has NO POINT in this thread, as there is no midgame if you go 1 Gate Robo or 1 Gate Stargate against the build this thread is about. He then transitions into saying that "rushing for information remains the most reliable way to get to the midgame on even ground or to win outright against opponents not intending to enter the midgame" which is actually, completely wrong against this build, as even if you blind counter with the current supposed counters to this build, and he USES it, you still cannot hold if you are at equal skill level with your opponent UNLESS he makes grievous errors. If you can't understand why people are calling you ignorant for "siding with Tyler" please read this.
The true ignorance is that I make countless posts expanding on what tyler said and people like you post balance suggestions instead of responding directly to my posts. That is the annoying part for me that keeps me coming back and arguing.
|
my question is, is this turning into the terran 4warp gate? i know the notes say don't talk about nerfs but if thats not the answer then i guess the only answer is proactively scout and ditch whatever build you had in mind once scouted and play like anti all in style?
im not too sure, i'm having difficulty with this too 
it hink some commentator said immortals and zealots with a few stalkers would win it idk.
|
On August 23 2011 12:23 ePBuckets wrote:my question is, is this turning into the terran 4warp gate? i know the notes say don't talk about nerfs but if thats not the answer then i guess the only answer is proactively scout and ditch whatever build you had in mind once scouted and play like anti all in style? im not too sure, i'm having difficulty with this too it hink some commentator said immortals and zealots with a few stalkers would win it idk.
It all depends on which version man. The most common style of the 1-1-1 all-in that we saw Puma do was the heavy marine/ low tank count version. If you face someone who is doing Puma's version and executes it perfectly, you MUST do a tech expand opening to stop it.
|
On August 23 2011 12:22 Razuik wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 12:17 VirgilSC2 wrote:On August 22 2011 21:22 VirgilSC2 wrote:On August 22 2011 21:18 Pl4t0 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. One of the smartest players to grace these forums speak, and hardly anybody listens. There are more posts on that stupid water bottle that MeanMike posted than Tyler's insight. Come on, people, we're better than this. Nobody is "listening" because there's nothing very insightful there. Paraphrased, this comes out at "Protoss is greedy in the current meta-game and this is a build meant to punish that. I think once a counter to 1-1-1 is discovered, it will be obsolete" He offers NO insight whatsoever on HOW to stop this build. In a sense, this post was completely and utterly useless. EDIT: I'd like to add a bit more here: In the middle of this post Tyler waxes on how 1 Gate Robo and 1 Gate Stargate provide scouting while allowing for an economically sound mid-game, which has NO POINT in this thread, as there is no midgame if you go 1 Gate Robo or 1 Gate Stargate against the build this thread is about. He then transitions into saying that "rushing for information remains the most reliable way to get to the midgame on even ground or to win outright against opponents not intending to enter the midgame" which is actually, completely wrong against this build, as even if you blind counter with the current supposed counters to this build, and he USES it, you still cannot hold if you are at equal skill level with your opponent UNLESS he makes grievous errors. If you can't understand why people are calling you ignorant for "siding with Tyler" please read this. The true ignorance is that I make countless posts expanding on what tyler said and people like you post balance suggestions instead of responding directly to my posts. That is the annoying part for me that keeps me coming back and arguing.
If i learned anything from posting yesterday its that people are convinced that 1-1-1 imbalanced and have little to no care of trying to find a solution, whether or not it is broken they will just conintue to respond to insightful theorycrafting with whines and quotes from pro players instead of offering any sort of knowledge in regards to the game itself. People will put down your ideas and will never say why, they will simply say it does not work because Alicia said 1-1-1 is broken (just one example) or base their information on pro games where a Protoss makes glaring errors.
This is nothing new though, people always love being able to hop on imbalance bandwagons in order to blame their own struggles with the game.
|
On August 23 2011 12:28 Astro-Penguin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 12:22 Razuik wrote:On August 23 2011 12:17 VirgilSC2 wrote:On August 22 2011 21:22 VirgilSC2 wrote:On August 22 2011 21:18 Pl4t0 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. One of the smartest players to grace these forums speak, and hardly anybody listens. There are more posts on that stupid water bottle that MeanMike posted than Tyler's insight. Come on, people, we're better than this. Nobody is "listening" because there's nothing very insightful there. Paraphrased, this comes out at "Protoss is greedy in the current meta-game and this is a build meant to punish that. I think once a counter to 1-1-1 is discovered, it will be obsolete" He offers NO insight whatsoever on HOW to stop this build. In a sense, this post was completely and utterly useless. EDIT: I'd like to add a bit more here: In the middle of this post Tyler waxes on how 1 Gate Robo and 1 Gate Stargate provide scouting while allowing for an economically sound mid-game, which has NO POINT in this thread, as there is no midgame if you go 1 Gate Robo or 1 Gate Stargate against the build this thread is about. He then transitions into saying that "rushing for information remains the most reliable way to get to the midgame on even ground or to win outright against opponents not intending to enter the midgame" which is actually, completely wrong against this build, as even if you blind counter with the current supposed counters to this build, and he USES it, you still cannot hold if you are at equal skill level with your opponent UNLESS he makes grievous errors. If you can't understand why people are calling you ignorant for "siding with Tyler" please read this. The true ignorance is that I make countless posts expanding on what tyler said and people like you post balance suggestions instead of responding directly to my posts. That is the annoying part for me that keeps me coming back and arguing. If i learned anything from posting yesterday its that people are convinced that 1-1-1 imbalanced and have little to no care of trying to find a solution, whether or not it is broken they will just conintue to respond to insightful theorycrafting with whines and quotes from pro players instead of offering any sort of knowledge in regards to the game itself. People will put down your ideas and will never say why, they will simply say it does not work because Alicia said 1-1-1 is broken (just one example) or base their information on pro games where a Protoss makes glaring errors.
I just hope Blizzard doesn't make the mistake nerfing something that is just not fully understood by everyone yet. Nobody wants to take time to learn things anymore. They just want it given to them.
|
On August 23 2011 12:28 Astro-Penguin wrote:
This is nothing new though, people always love being able to hop on imbalance bandwagons in order to blame their own struggles with the game.
Except many here don't play or at least not seriously. I don't like the 1/1/1 because it seems unfair to pro toss players who are trying to make a living and it undermines the results of tournaments. That's why people are quoting pro players, because they are the ones most affected.
|
On August 23 2011 12:32 Razuik wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 12:28 Astro-Penguin wrote:On August 23 2011 12:22 Razuik wrote:On August 23 2011 12:17 VirgilSC2 wrote:On August 22 2011 21:22 VirgilSC2 wrote:On August 22 2011 21:18 Pl4t0 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. One of the smartest players to grace these forums speak, and hardly anybody listens. There are more posts on that stupid water bottle that MeanMike posted than Tyler's insight. Come on, people, we're better than this. Nobody is "listening" because there's nothing very insightful there. Paraphrased, this comes out at "Protoss is greedy in the current meta-game and this is a build meant to punish that. I think once a counter to 1-1-1 is discovered, it will be obsolete" He offers NO insight whatsoever on HOW to stop this build. In a sense, this post was completely and utterly useless. EDIT: I'd like to add a bit more here: In the middle of this post Tyler waxes on how 1 Gate Robo and 1 Gate Stargate provide scouting while allowing for an economically sound mid-game, which has NO POINT in this thread, as there is no midgame if you go 1 Gate Robo or 1 Gate Stargate against the build this thread is about. He then transitions into saying that "rushing for information remains the most reliable way to get to the midgame on even ground or to win outright against opponents not intending to enter the midgame" which is actually, completely wrong against this build, as even if you blind counter with the current supposed counters to this build, and he USES it, you still cannot hold if you are at equal skill level with your opponent UNLESS he makes grievous errors. If you can't understand why people are calling you ignorant for "siding with Tyler" please read this. The true ignorance is that I make countless posts expanding on what tyler said and people like you post balance suggestions instead of responding directly to my posts. That is the annoying part for me that keeps me coming back and arguing. If i learned anything from posting yesterday its that people are convinced that 1-1-1 imbalanced and have little to no care of trying to find a solution, whether or not it is broken they will just conintue to respond to insightful theorycrafting with whines and quotes from pro players instead of offering any sort of knowledge in regards to the game itself. People will put down your ideas and will never say why, they will simply say it does not work because Alicia said 1-1-1 is broken (just one example) or base their information on pro games where a Protoss makes glaring errors. I just hope Blizzard doesn't make the mistake nerfing something that is just not fully understood by everyone yet. Nobody wants to take time to learn things anymore. They just want it given to them.
Yeah idk, as a Protoss player i can joust that 1-1-1 is very strong but not necessarily broke as we dont have to much experience with it, most of the games i've lost against it was due to my own greed, similarily to alot of the pro players making a few mistakes and losing to it, although the skill difference in defending and executing 1-1-1 may be a problem.
|
if this build was imba it never would have went out of fashion. it became so strong again because the PvT metagame turned into expand blindly as greedily as possible and have good forcefields. anyone saying toss nerfs are the reason why this build is strong again is just wrong. this hits way after the warpgate timing and obviously amulet has nothing to do with it. the notion that a very fast blind expo is required to stop it is comically wrong.
and lololol @ blaming flying buildings and mules
|
On August 23 2011 12:36 Astro-Penguin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 12:32 Razuik wrote:On August 23 2011 12:28 Astro-Penguin wrote:On August 23 2011 12:22 Razuik wrote:On August 23 2011 12:17 VirgilSC2 wrote:On August 22 2011 21:22 VirgilSC2 wrote:On August 22 2011 21:18 Pl4t0 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. One of the smartest players to grace these forums speak, and hardly anybody listens. There are more posts on that stupid water bottle that MeanMike posted than Tyler's insight. Come on, people, we're better than this. Nobody is "listening" because there's nothing very insightful there. Paraphrased, this comes out at "Protoss is greedy in the current meta-game and this is a build meant to punish that. I think once a counter to 1-1-1 is discovered, it will be obsolete" He offers NO insight whatsoever on HOW to stop this build. In a sense, this post was completely and utterly useless. EDIT: I'd like to add a bit more here: In the middle of this post Tyler waxes on how 1 Gate Robo and 1 Gate Stargate provide scouting while allowing for an economically sound mid-game, which has NO POINT in this thread, as there is no midgame if you go 1 Gate Robo or 1 Gate Stargate against the build this thread is about. He then transitions into saying that "rushing for information remains the most reliable way to get to the midgame on even ground or to win outright against opponents not intending to enter the midgame" which is actually, completely wrong against this build, as even if you blind counter with the current supposed counters to this build, and he USES it, you still cannot hold if you are at equal skill level with your opponent UNLESS he makes grievous errors. If you can't understand why people are calling you ignorant for "siding with Tyler" please read this. The true ignorance is that I make countless posts expanding on what tyler said and people like you post balance suggestions instead of responding directly to my posts. That is the annoying part for me that keeps me coming back and arguing. If i learned anything from posting yesterday its that people are convinced that 1-1-1 imbalanced and have little to no care of trying to find a solution, whether or not it is broken they will just conintue to respond to insightful theorycrafting with whines and quotes from pro players instead of offering any sort of knowledge in regards to the game itself. People will put down your ideas and will never say why, they will simply say it does not work because Alicia said 1-1-1 is broken (just one example) or base their information on pro games where a Protoss makes glaring errors. I just hope Blizzard doesn't make the mistake nerfing something that is just not fully understood by everyone yet. Nobody wants to take time to learn things anymore. They just want it given to them. Yeah idk, as a Protoss player i can joust that 1-1-1 is very strong but not necessarily broke as we dont have to much experience with it, most of the games i've lost against it was due to my own greed, similarily to alot of the pro players making a few mistakes and losing to it, although the skill difference in defending and executing 1-1-1 may be a problem.
Oh, no doubt it's a strong all-in, but I think it's far too early to be suggesting balance changes. Anyway, it's good to hear a similar opinion ^^. Maybe now this thread can die lol.
|
Would a rush to zealot charge work? Get sentries to spend gas, spend rest on zealots, after tanks are mopped up, warp stalkers to deal with the air. you'd have to engage as the Terran army is moving, so the zealots don't clump on the ramp. The problem with this is that zealots get messed up when workers are set to hold in front of the main army. Chargelots do brilliantly against 3rax opening too. Has any toss tried a chargelot rush?
|
On August 23 2011 12:36 ak1knight wrote:Show nested quote +On August 23 2011 12:28 Astro-Penguin wrote:
This is nothing new though, people always love being able to hop on imbalance bandwagons in order to blame their own struggles with the game. Except many here don't play or at least not seriously. I don't like the 1/1/1 because it seems unfair to pro toss players who are trying to make a living and it undermines the results of tournaments. That's why people are quoting pro players, because they are the ones most affected.
Key word in your post... SEEMS. It SEEMS unfair, so don't you think we should give it time instead of nerfing it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
