Why 1/1/1 is considered to be imbalanced in Korea - Page 86

On August 23 2011 11:11 sekritzzz wrote:

How can the OP being wrong when what he is saying is so simple?

Point 1: Terran makes more money than protoss per minute: Mules. This point doesn't even need arguing since is straight forward.
Point 2: Terran units are more cost-efficient than protoss units: You can test it if you want, but its almost common knowledge that Marines, tanks, and banshees are amongst the best dps units whilst stalkers/sentries are the worst whilst zealots barely touch the marines/tanks before dying. Protoss could camp in his base and get collusi with range but by that time the terran already has bunkers/vikings on the field. Any protoss knows its not wise to attack a bunker;d/sieged up line.
Point 3: Protoss cannot expand because terran will constantly deny it due to point 1/2. reasoning is mentioned above.



Its funny you mention'd the Puzzle game because that was the game his opponent played horribly and gave away 3 banshees.

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.

On August 23 2011 12:07 Razuik wrote:

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.

On August 23 2011 16:12 Truedot wrote:



what like sentry immortal phoenix zealot? could work..u want the phoenix for light damage and AA obviously, the immortals and zealots have the firepower to quickly take out marines and tanks. the sentry is there for the -2 damage bubble, keeping immortal alive that much longer vs rines. the immortal is a priority target due to its damage and fire rate, but banshee cant kill it quickly. The phoenix are priority for the marines, so you wont be taking hits on immortal from marines if they want to attack it. the zealots and immortals are thus free from being fired on by marines. the phoenix move fast enough (and lamely, or awesomely, depending on your view, fire while shooting), so can kite the marines around the immortallot ball while still killing the banshee, and the banshee can't cause greater than 10 damage to the immortal, and it does 8 damage as long as that bubble is up.

^Theorycraft.

As an aside, people don't really regard shield ups well. If your game strategy involves using immortals and archons, shield ups are completely scary for zerg. oh the zerganity!

On August 23 2011 19:21 IVN wrote:
MVP also said that this build is imbalanced. In fact he went that far as to suggest, that players who use it should be disqualified.

And the last time I checked MVP > you.

And since MVP is a terran player, there is no motivation for him lie, because his race would potentially get nerfed, and that is not in his interest. SO, he must firmly believe that this build is imbalanced.

On August 23 2011 12:36 ak1knight wrote:

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 19:29 Binabik wrote:
But a pro who reckons something his own race uses as imbalanced is an exception.

On August 23 2011 19:31 IVN wrote:Why should protoss players be required to "figure it out", when all the bitching of the terrans resulted in immediate nerfs, when a protoss push or all in was considered strong?