|
On November 07 2011 21:38 Klystron wrote:
The ZvP winrates are kinda interesting. I think that this is mostly due to what has so far been a very stale metagame that Zergs have recently shaken up with increasing muta play.
The problem is that most ZvP's boil down to a FFE into double stargate, 6-8 gate, stargate into 6-8gate, or stargate into 2-base robo. These openings have been used for months now and most zerg players know the timings and exactly how to counter these plays.
On top of that Zerg players have discovered that Protoss players haven't figured out how to deal with mutas yet. I don't think that protoss lacks any ability to counter mutas, in fact they have some of the best counters to mutas in the game. The problem is that they don't quite know how to effectively split their army, when to start putting down cannons, how many cannons they need, and that colossi are not good against mutas. Once protoss players start to get a feel for the timings and the required responses to mutas I have a feeling that muta play in ZvP will largely disappear.
You really think protoss has some of the best counters to mutas in the game? I really think you should try playing protoss against muta ling just to see how frusterating it really is. Marines thors and turrets and ghosts with snipe are all better than anything protoss has to defend against mutas save maybe pheonix's , and id way prefer to have a marine, ghost or a thor against mutas because they are actually good units still if the zerg does a quick tech switch.
Once the muta size gets big enough, mutas have absolutely no problems taking on equal number of stalkers at all even with a few sentries with GS up (which usually doesnt happen since the only way you can catch a good muta player is with blink stalkers and sentries cant get there fast enough) Pheonix's are decent but you need a decent amount of them to deal with a big muta pack, and then you are left really vulnerable to a roach infestor (or something) tech switch which you are super vulnerable too after defending mutas. Then there is storm which any competent muta player should beable to avoid, mutas are one of the fastest air units in the game and should have no problem dodging storms, see a templar moving up? move your mutas, not to mention how easy it is to come behind the army and pick off templars as the protoss is moving across the map. Archons are decent but magic box negates their threat even more so then thors and they become pretty useless except for cleaning up lings.
Ive honestly had games where I am on equal bases equal upgrades (somehow i managed to get that far, with ridiculous amounts of cannons) and an equal size army comprised of 6-7 pheonix's, 20-30 stalkers, a few Ht's with storm, 4-6 archons, and a good number of zealots to soak up lings, and a sentry or 2 for gs. Seems pretty ideal for holding off muta ling right? nope. Although i lasted probably longer then i ever have going into the lalte game against muta ling, this player had a very good way of negating anything that could kill mutas quickly, usually when we engaged he would form a sort of singular circle around my army, makig it hard for storms to hit more than 1-3 mutas and for archons to hit more than 1 muta at a time, from there i would just get demolished as everything eventually fell with him having a decent number of mutas and no lings left at the end each time. After that game i switched to zerg  and i dont think i will ever go back ive told this muta ling story probably 5 times on the forums, i know i probably didnt play perfectly but a race should never feel like they have no options against a particular strategy when they have equal income , bases , upgrades which i did for a good portion of the game. Nothing is more frusterating playing a race where you know their are certain strategies that are really really difficult to beat and yoou will most likely have to vastly outplay your opponent to win.
Protoss is the race that has the problem of having strategies that are frusterating / really hard to beat. 1-1-1 and muta ling are both ones that come to mind off the top of my head. I cant really think of any strategies protoss has against terran or zerg where they simply have almost no options and they hope their opponent will make a mistake. I think it used to be like that with the protoss deathball in pvz though before infestor buffs and such. I know protoss has options in the early game against muta ling and thats not really the problem its when it gets into the late game where its just so difficult, it shouldnt have to be way harder to defend against mutas then to play as them (which it is) i play zerg now and although my muta micro isnt perfect I still have a pretty damn good win rate with muta ling in ZVP, and i know first hand how hard it is to defend that.
|
On November 09 2011 04:41 Executor1 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2011 21:38 Klystron wrote:
The ZvP winrates are kinda interesting. I think that this is mostly due to what has so far been a very stale metagame that Zergs have recently shaken up with increasing muta play.
The problem is that most ZvP's boil down to a FFE into double stargate, 6-8 gate, stargate into 6-8gate, or stargate into 2-base robo. These openings have been used for months now and most zerg players know the timings and exactly how to counter these plays.
On top of that Zerg players have discovered that Protoss players haven't figured out how to deal with mutas yet. I don't think that protoss lacks any ability to counter mutas, in fact they have some of the best counters to mutas in the game. The problem is that they don't quite know how to effectively split their army, when to start putting down cannons, how many cannons they need, and that colossi are not good against mutas. Once protoss players start to get a feel for the timings and the required responses to mutas I have a feeling that muta play in ZvP will largely disappear. You really think protoss has some of the best counters to mutas in the game? I really think you should try playing protoss against muta ling just to see how frusterating it really is. Marines thors and turrets and ghosts with snipe are all better than anything protoss has to defend against mutas save maybe pheonix's , and id way prefer to have a marine, ghost or a thor against mutas because they are actually good units still if the zerg does a quick tech switch. Once the muta size gets big enough, mutas have absolutely no problems taking on equal number of stalkers at all even with a few sentries with GS up (which usually doesnt happen since the only way you can catch a good muta player is with blink stalkers and sentries cant get there fast enough) Pheonix's are decent but you need a decent amount of them to deal with a big muta pack, and then you are left really vulnerable to a roach infestor (or something) tech switch which you are super vulnerable too after defending mutas. Then there is storm which any competent muta player should beable to avoid, mutas are one of the fastest air units in the game and should have no problem dodging storms, see a templar moving up? move your mutas, not to mention how easy it is to come behind the army and pick off templars as the protoss is moving across the map. Archons are decent but magic box negates their threat even more so then thors and they become pretty useless except for cleaning up lings. Ive honestly had games where I am on equal bases equal upgrades (somehow i managed to get that far, with ridiculous amounts of cannons) and an equal size army comprised of 6-7 pheonix's, 20-30 stalkers, a few Ht's with storm, 4-6 archons, and a good number of zealots to soak up lings, and a sentry or 2 for gs. Seems pretty ideal for holding off muta ling right? nope. Although i lasted probably longer then i ever have going into the lalte game against muta ling, this player had a very good way of negating anything that could kill mutas quickly, usually when we engaged he would form a sort of singular circle around my army, makig it hard for storms to hit more than 1-3 mutas and for archons to hit more than 1 muta at a time, from there i would just get demolished as everything eventually fell with him having a decent number of mutas and no lings left at the end each time. After that game i switched to zerg and i dont think i will ever go back ive told this muta ling story probably 5 times on the forums, i know i probably didnt play perfectly but a race should never feel like they have no options against a particular strategy when they have equal income , bases , upgrades which i did for a good portion of the game. Nothing is more frusterating playing a race where you know their are certain strategies that are really really difficult to beat. Protoss is the race that has the problem of having strategies that are frusterating / really hard to beat. 1-1-1 and muta ling are both ones that come to mind off the top of my head. I cant really think of any strategies protoss has against terran or zerg where they simply have almost no options and they hope their opponent will make a mistake. I think it used to be like that with the protoss deathball in pvz though before infestor buffs and such. I know protoss has options in the early game against muta ling and thats not really the problem its when it gets into the late game where its just so difficult, it shouldnt have to be way harder to defend against mutas then to play as them (which it is) i play zerg now and although my muta micro isnt perfect I still have a pretty damn good win rate with muta ling in ZVP, and i know first hand how hard it is to defend that.
The guy made a good point. Protoss have been doing the same thing for several months in PvZ. You can argue its cause they have to but there are 2 problems with that arguement:
1) You are bad at the game and thus dont know
2) Kiwikaki
If you want Marines and Thors well your just gonna have to play terran 
|
On November 09 2011 04:49 Techno wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 04:41 Executor1 wrote:On November 07 2011 21:38 Klystron wrote:
The ZvP winrates are kinda interesting. I think that this is mostly due to what has so far been a very stale metagame that Zergs have recently shaken up with increasing muta play.
The problem is that most ZvP's boil down to a FFE into double stargate, 6-8 gate, stargate into 6-8gate, or stargate into 2-base robo. These openings have been used for months now and most zerg players know the timings and exactly how to counter these plays.
On top of that Zerg players have discovered that Protoss players haven't figured out how to deal with mutas yet. I don't think that protoss lacks any ability to counter mutas, in fact they have some of the best counters to mutas in the game. The problem is that they don't quite know how to effectively split their army, when to start putting down cannons, how many cannons they need, and that colossi are not good against mutas. Once protoss players start to get a feel for the timings and the required responses to mutas I have a feeling that muta play in ZvP will largely disappear. You really think protoss has some of the best counters to mutas in the game? I really think you should try playing protoss against muta ling just to see how frusterating it really is. Marines thors and turrets and ghosts with snipe are all better than anything protoss has to defend against mutas save maybe pheonix's , and id way prefer to have a marine, ghost or a thor against mutas because they are actually good units still if the zerg does a quick tech switch. Once the muta size gets big enough, mutas have absolutely no problems taking on equal number of stalkers at all even with a few sentries with GS up (which usually doesnt happen since the only way you can catch a good muta player is with blink stalkers and sentries cant get there fast enough) Pheonix's are decent but you need a decent amount of them to deal with a big muta pack, and then you are left really vulnerable to a roach infestor (or something) tech switch which you are super vulnerable too after defending mutas. Then there is storm which any competent muta player should beable to avoid, mutas are one of the fastest air units in the game and should have no problem dodging storms, see a templar moving up? move your mutas, not to mention how easy it is to come behind the army and pick off templars as the protoss is moving across the map. Archons are decent but magic box negates their threat even more so then thors and they become pretty useless except for cleaning up lings. Ive honestly had games where I am on equal bases equal upgrades (somehow i managed to get that far, with ridiculous amounts of cannons) and an equal size army comprised of 6-7 pheonix's, 20-30 stalkers, a few Ht's with storm, 4-6 archons, and a good number of zealots to soak up lings, and a sentry or 2 for gs. Seems pretty ideal for holding off muta ling right? nope. Although i lasted probably longer then i ever have going into the lalte game against muta ling, this player had a very good way of negating anything that could kill mutas quickly, usually when we engaged he would form a sort of singular circle around my army, makig it hard for storms to hit more than 1-3 mutas and for archons to hit more than 1 muta at a time, from there i would just get demolished as everything eventually fell with him having a decent number of mutas and no lings left at the end each time. After that game i switched to zerg and i dont think i will ever go back ive told this muta ling story probably 5 times on the forums, i know i probably didnt play perfectly but a race should never feel like they have no options against a particular strategy when they have equal income , bases , upgrades which i did for a good portion of the game. Nothing is more frusterating playing a race where you know their are certain strategies that are really really difficult to beat. Protoss is the race that has the problem of having strategies that are frusterating / really hard to beat. 1-1-1 and muta ling are both ones that come to mind off the top of my head. I cant really think of any strategies protoss has against terran or zerg where they simply have almost no options and they hope their opponent will make a mistake. I think it used to be like that with the protoss deathball in pvz though before infestor buffs and such. I know protoss has options in the early game against muta ling and thats not really the problem its when it gets into the late game where its just so difficult, it shouldnt have to be way harder to defend against mutas then to play as them (which it is) i play zerg now and although my muta micro isnt perfect I still have a pretty damn good win rate with muta ling in ZVP, and i know first hand how hard it is to defend that. The guy made a good point. Protoss have been doing the same thing for several months in PvZ. You can argue its cause they have to but there are 2 problems with that arguement: 1) You are bad at the game and thus dont know 2) Kiwikaki If you want Marines and Thors well your just gonna have to play terran
lol we all know how well kiwikaki has been doing. and also mc (as said earlier in the thread) has probably created 10+ builds himself...
|
On November 09 2011 04:41 Executor1 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2011 21:38 Klystron wrote:
The ZvP winrates are kinda interesting. I think that this is mostly due to what has so far been a very stale metagame that Zergs have recently shaken up with increasing muta play.
The problem is that most ZvP's boil down to a FFE into double stargate, 6-8 gate, stargate into 6-8gate, or stargate into 2-base robo. These openings have been used for months now and most zerg players know the timings and exactly how to counter these plays.
On top of that Zerg players have discovered that Protoss players haven't figured out how to deal with mutas yet. I don't think that protoss lacks any ability to counter mutas, in fact they have some of the best counters to mutas in the game. The problem is that they don't quite know how to effectively split their army, when to start putting down cannons, how many cannons they need, and that colossi are not good against mutas. Once protoss players start to get a feel for the timings and the required responses to mutas I have a feeling that muta play in ZvP will largely disappear. You really think protoss has some of the best counters to mutas in the game? I really think you should try playing protoss against muta ling just to see how frusterating it really is. Marines thors and turrets and ghosts with snipe are all better than anything protoss has to defend against mutas save maybe pheonix's , and id way prefer to have a marine, ghost or a thor against mutas because they are actually good units still if the zerg does a quick tech switch. Once the muta size gets big enough, mutas have absolutely no problems taking on equal number of stalkers at all even with a few sentries with GS up (which usually doesnt happen since the only way you can catch a good muta player is with blink stalkers and sentries cant get there fast enough) Pheonix's are decent but you need a decent amount of them to deal with a big muta pack, and then you are left really vulnerable to a roach infestor (or something) tech switch which you are super vulnerable too after defending mutas. Then there is storm which any competent muta player should beable to avoid, mutas are one of the fastest air units in the game and should have no problem dodging storms, see a templar moving up? move your mutas, not to mention how easy it is to come behind the army and pick off templars as the protoss is moving across the map. Archons are decent but magic box negates their threat even more so then thors and they become pretty useless except for cleaning up lings. Ive honestly had games where I am on equal bases equal upgrades (somehow i managed to get that far, with ridiculous amounts of cannons) and an equal size army comprised of 6-7 pheonix's, 20-30 stalkers, a few Ht's with storm, 4-6 archons, and a good number of zealots to soak up lings, and a sentry or 2 for gs. Seems pretty ideal for holding off muta ling right? nope. Although i lasted probably longer then i ever have going into the lalte game against muta ling, this player had a very good way of negating anything that could kill mutas quickly, usually when we engaged he would form a sort of singular circle around my army, makig it hard for storms to hit more than 1-3 mutas and for archons to hit more than 1 muta at a time, from there i would just get demolished as everything eventually fell with him having a decent number of mutas and no lings left at the end each time. After that game i switched to zerg and i dont think i will ever go back ive told this muta ling story probably 5 times on the forums, i know i probably didnt play perfectly but a race should never feel like they have no options against a particular strategy when they have equal income , bases , upgrades which i did for a good portion of the game. Nothing is more frusterating playing a race where you know their are certain strategies that are really really difficult to beat and yoou will most likely have to vastly outplay your opponent to win. Protoss is the race that has the problem of having strategies that are frusterating / really hard to beat. 1-1-1 and muta ling are both ones that come to mind off the top of my head. I cant really think of any strategies protoss has against terran or zerg where they simply have almost no options and they hope their opponent will make a mistake. I think it used to be like that with the protoss deathball in pvz though before infestor buffs and such. I know protoss has options in the early game against muta ling and thats not really the problem its when it gets into the late game where its just so difficult, it shouldnt have to be way harder to defend against mutas then to play as them (which it is) i play zerg now and although my muta micro isnt perfect I still have a pretty damn good win rate with muta ling in ZVP, and i know first hand how hard it is to defend that.
HT. Just ht. Storm is awesome vs mutas because even if they "dodge" it, you still are hitting them at least a little and it makes them back up and have to heal... that's a big deal. At worst you're going to take like 10 - 20 hp off of all the mutas and at best you could take them down by like half or more. And, despite your bleak outlook on archons, they DESTROY mutas. It's not even close. The extremely high health, mixed with the bonus/splash dmg is just not even close. Storm/archons also happen to be the counter to the other half of the muta/ling combo as well.
The bottom line is they're new and protoss players aren't too familiar with how to defend against them and when to go put pressure once you have it decently under control.
|
Judging by profile pics (innacurate i know) no protoss players responded to my post. Every one knows muta ling is hard right now for protoss, and obviously its going to be harder for a diamond protoss player like myself then it is for a pro player. Regardless i have seen pro level players get owned by muta ling in recent weeks , it is gaining popularity and is an effective strategy. Not to mention blizzard even said themselves that protoss doesnt have a good answer to mutas in the late game.
This doesnt really effect me anymore as i play zerg, i was just reminiscing back on how frusterating it was for me when i was a protoss player + the recent resurgence of the strategy and how i have seen protoss's struggling against it.
That being said i think 1 effective way is to open stargate and pump a few pheonix to deter muta production and i have been seeing that gain popularity on the protoss side of things, but i still dont agree with the fact that mass muta doesnt really have a good counter end game for protoss, assuming equal economy , production , upgrades i think their always should be something a player can do (without having to drastically outplay their opponent) to counter a strategy, when a certain strategy doesnt have an effective counter at a point in the game assuming the things i stated above i think something needs to be looked at, and that is what i think blizzard realised and is potentially implementing in heart of the swarm.
For any not convinced go to unit tester and put 25 mutas against around 30 stalkers, both with 2 attack upgrade, the mutas win fairly convincingly if i recall, even with a sentry or 2 with guardian shield (dont quote me on this but i did tests with it a few months back where i was using more stalkers vs less mutas and the stalkers lost pretty bad, cant remember the exact numbers i used) Considering stalkers are the only effective ground anti air protoss has aside from the archon (which is too slow to deal with good harassment) it seems like they should do at least slightly better than they did
|
On November 09 2011 08:06 Executor1 wrote:
Judging by profile pics (innacurate i know) no protoss players responded to my post. Every one knows muta ling is hard right now for protoss, and obviously its going to be harder for a diamond protoss player like myself then it is for a pro player. Regardless i have seen pro level players get owned by muta ling in recent weeks , it is gaining popularity and is an effective strategy. Not to mention blizzard even said themselves that protoss doesnt have a good answer to mutas in the late game.
This doesnt really effect me anymore as i play zerg, i was just reminiscing back on how frusterating it was for me when i was a protoss player + the recent resurgence of the strategy and how i have seen protoss's struggling against it.
That being said i think 1 effective way is to open stargate and pump a few pheonix to deter muta production and i have been seeing that gain popularity on the protoss side of things, but i still dont agree with the fact that mass muta doesnt really have a good counter end game for protoss, assuming equal economy , production , upgrades i think their always should be something a player can do (without having to drastically outplay their opponent) to counter a strategy, when a certain strategy doesnt have an effective counter at a point in the game assuming the things i stated above i think something needs to be looked at, and that is what i think blizzard realised and is potentially implementing in heart of the swarm.
For any not convinced go to unit tester and put 25 mutas against around 30 stalkers, both with 2 attack upgrade, the mutas win fairly convincingly if i recall, even with a sentry or 2 with guardian shield (dont quote me on this but i did tests with it a few months back where i was using more stalkers vs less mutas and the stalkers lost pretty bad, cant remember the exact numbers i used) Considering stalkers are the only effective ground anti air protoss has aside from the archon (which is too slow to deal with good harassment) it seems like they should do at least slightly better than they did
Are you blinking? I just did a quick and dirty test of 25 on 25 NO upgrades (because it was just me in the unit tester map and could only generate an AI opponent, couldn't make it myself. And the 25 stalkers beat the 25 mutas with 6 stalkers left over. 25 stalkers + 1 sentry for GS vs 25 mutas left 16 stalkers left over.
And you're either misunderstanding what I'm saying or you weren't responding to me with your post. I'm not saying protoss players don't have trouble with mutas, I'm just saying it's not a problem with protoss as a race, it's the fact that they're not used to it. I think protoss is the most equipped race to deal with mutas.
|
On November 09 2011 08:28 Holophonist wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 08:06 Executor1 wrote:
Judging by profile pics (innacurate i know) no protoss players responded to my post. Every one knows muta ling is hard right now for protoss, and obviously its going to be harder for a diamond protoss player like myself then it is for a pro player. Regardless i have seen pro level players get owned by muta ling in recent weeks , it is gaining popularity and is an effective strategy. Not to mention blizzard even said themselves that protoss doesnt have a good answer to mutas in the late game.
This doesnt really effect me anymore as i play zerg, i was just reminiscing back on how frusterating it was for me when i was a protoss player + the recent resurgence of the strategy and how i have seen protoss's struggling against it.
That being said i think 1 effective way is to open stargate and pump a few pheonix to deter muta production and i have been seeing that gain popularity on the protoss side of things, but i still dont agree with the fact that mass muta doesnt really have a good counter end game for protoss, assuming equal economy , production , upgrades i think their always should be something a player can do (without having to drastically outplay their opponent) to counter a strategy, when a certain strategy doesnt have an effective counter at a point in the game assuming the things i stated above i think something needs to be looked at, and that is what i think blizzard realised and is potentially implementing in heart of the swarm.
For any not convinced go to unit tester and put 25 mutas against around 30 stalkers, both with 2 attack upgrade, the mutas win fairly convincingly if i recall, even with a sentry or 2 with guardian shield (dont quote me on this but i did tests with it a few months back where i was using more stalkers vs less mutas and the stalkers lost pretty bad, cant remember the exact numbers i used) Considering stalkers are the only effective ground anti air protoss has aside from the archon (which is too slow to deal with good harassment) it seems like they should do at least slightly better than they did Are you blinking? I just did a quick and dirty test of 25 on 25 NO upgrades (because it was just me in the unit tester map and could only generate an AI opponent, couldn't make it myself. And the 25 stalkers beat the 25 mutas with 6 stalkers left over. 25 stalkers + 1 sentry for GS vs 25 mutas left 16 stalkers left over. And you're either misunderstanding what I'm saying or you weren't responding to me with your post. I'm not saying protoss players don't have trouble with mutas, I'm just saying it's not a problem with protoss as a race, it's the fact that they're not used to it. I think protoss is the most equipped race to deal with mutas.
Also keep in mind that a protoss should always be ahead in upgrades in mutas vs stalkers.
|
On November 09 2011 07:08 Holophonist wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 04:41 Executor1 wrote:On November 07 2011 21:38 Klystron wrote:
The ZvP winrates are kinda interesting. I think that this is mostly due to what has so far been a very stale metagame that Zergs have recently shaken up with increasing muta play.
The problem is that most ZvP's boil down to a FFE into double stargate, 6-8 gate, stargate into 6-8gate, or stargate into 2-base robo. These openings have been used for months now and most zerg players know the timings and exactly how to counter these plays.
On top of that Zerg players have discovered that Protoss players haven't figured out how to deal with mutas yet. I don't think that protoss lacks any ability to counter mutas, in fact they have some of the best counters to mutas in the game. The problem is that they don't quite know how to effectively split their army, when to start putting down cannons, how many cannons they need, and that colossi are not good against mutas. Once protoss players start to get a feel for the timings and the required responses to mutas I have a feeling that muta play in ZvP will largely disappear. You really think protoss has some of the best counters to mutas in the game? I really think you should try playing protoss against muta ling just to see how frusterating it really is. Marines thors and turrets and ghosts with snipe are all better than anything protoss has to defend against mutas save maybe pheonix's , and id way prefer to have a marine, ghost or a thor against mutas because they are actually good units still if the zerg does a quick tech switch. Once the muta size gets big enough, mutas have absolutely no problems taking on equal number of stalkers at all even with a few sentries with GS up (which usually doesnt happen since the only way you can catch a good muta player is with blink stalkers and sentries cant get there fast enough) Pheonix's are decent but you need a decent amount of them to deal with a big muta pack, and then you are left really vulnerable to a roach infestor (or something) tech switch which you are super vulnerable too after defending mutas. Then there is storm which any competent muta player should beable to avoid, mutas are one of the fastest air units in the game and should have no problem dodging storms, see a templar moving up? move your mutas, not to mention how easy it is to come behind the army and pick off templars as the protoss is moving across the map. Archons are decent but magic box negates their threat even more so then thors and they become pretty useless except for cleaning up lings. Ive honestly had games where I am on equal bases equal upgrades (somehow i managed to get that far, with ridiculous amounts of cannons) and an equal size army comprised of 6-7 pheonix's, 20-30 stalkers, a few Ht's with storm, 4-6 archons, and a good number of zealots to soak up lings, and a sentry or 2 for gs. Seems pretty ideal for holding off muta ling right? nope. Although i lasted probably longer then i ever have going into the lalte game against muta ling, this player had a very good way of negating anything that could kill mutas quickly, usually when we engaged he would form a sort of singular circle around my army, makig it hard for storms to hit more than 1-3 mutas and for archons to hit more than 1 muta at a time, from there i would just get demolished as everything eventually fell with him having a decent number of mutas and no lings left at the end each time. After that game i switched to zerg and i dont think i will ever go back ive told this muta ling story probably 5 times on the forums, i know i probably didnt play perfectly but a race should never feel like they have no options against a particular strategy when they have equal income , bases , upgrades which i did for a good portion of the game. Nothing is more frusterating playing a race where you know their are certain strategies that are really really difficult to beat and yoou will most likely have to vastly outplay your opponent to win. Protoss is the race that has the problem of having strategies that are frusterating / really hard to beat. 1-1-1 and muta ling are both ones that come to mind off the top of my head. I cant really think of any strategies protoss has against terran or zerg where they simply have almost no options and they hope their opponent will make a mistake. I think it used to be like that with the protoss deathball in pvz though before infestor buffs and such. I know protoss has options in the early game against muta ling and thats not really the problem its when it gets into the late game where its just so difficult, it shouldnt have to be way harder to defend against mutas then to play as them (which it is) i play zerg now and although my muta micro isnt perfect I still have a pretty damn good win rate with muta ling in ZVP, and i know first hand how hard it is to defend that. HT. Just ht. Storm is awesome vs mutas because even if they "dodge" it, you still are hitting them at least a little and it makes them back up and have to heal... that's a big deal. At worst you're going to take like 10 - 20 hp off of all the mutas and at best you could take them down by like half or more. And, despite your bleak outlook on archons, they DESTROY mutas. It's not even close. The extremely high health, mixed with the bonus/splash dmg is just not even close. Storm/archons also happen to be the counter to the other half of the muta/ling combo as well. The bottom line is they're new and protoss players aren't too familiar with how to defend against them and when to go put pressure once you have it decently under control.
Templars have this huge mobility problem against mutalisks. Which is pretty much the same problem the entire protoss army has with mutas. They aren't dangerous because of their burst damage or their HP, or their splash. They're dangerous because of their crazy mobility. Normally, a zerg player can make it so protoss can NEVER get an all out engagement for an entire game.
Sure, if zerg sends his mutas head on against an Archon/Stalker/HT ball he'll get DESTROYED, but that's not the point. With a large mutalisk ball, zerg can pull a protoss players from one arm at a time, eventually ripping them off. This is not kratoss brutality, but rather a slower, more insidious but still huge amount of damage.
Watch Crazymoving vs Hero. Hero showed some AMAZING templar play, and still couldn't deal with mutas at all. Crazymoving just avoided archons, dodged storms, attacked at the natural, then the third, then the main, then the pylons, all while losing a few mutas which were quickly replaced. Eventually, Hero was starved. Had crazymoving been a better player, he'd have dealt the damage, then transitioned into infestor ling play and rolled way before what he did. Crazymoving even managed to just nosedive some templars and snipe them in the face of stalkers and receive almost no damage.
Archons do destroy mutas... if they can ever hit them... Storms do counter mutas, if mutas ever stop moving that is. You're putting it way too simple, like it's easy. It's tough as hell.
|
On November 09 2011 08:51 mordk wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 07:08 Holophonist wrote:On November 09 2011 04:41 Executor1 wrote:On November 07 2011 21:38 Klystron wrote:
The ZvP winrates are kinda interesting. I think that this is mostly due to what has so far been a very stale metagame that Zergs have recently shaken up with increasing muta play.
The problem is that most ZvP's boil down to a FFE into double stargate, 6-8 gate, stargate into 6-8gate, or stargate into 2-base robo. These openings have been used for months now and most zerg players know the timings and exactly how to counter these plays.
On top of that Zerg players have discovered that Protoss players haven't figured out how to deal with mutas yet. I don't think that protoss lacks any ability to counter mutas, in fact they have some of the best counters to mutas in the game. The problem is that they don't quite know how to effectively split their army, when to start putting down cannons, how many cannons they need, and that colossi are not good against mutas. Once protoss players start to get a feel for the timings and the required responses to mutas I have a feeling that muta play in ZvP will largely disappear. You really think protoss has some of the best counters to mutas in the game? I really think you should try playing protoss against muta ling just to see how frusterating it really is. Marines thors and turrets and ghosts with snipe are all better than anything protoss has to defend against mutas save maybe pheonix's , and id way prefer to have a marine, ghost or a thor against mutas because they are actually good units still if the zerg does a quick tech switch. Once the muta size gets big enough, mutas have absolutely no problems taking on equal number of stalkers at all even with a few sentries with GS up (which usually doesnt happen since the only way you can catch a good muta player is with blink stalkers and sentries cant get there fast enough) Pheonix's are decent but you need a decent amount of them to deal with a big muta pack, and then you are left really vulnerable to a roach infestor (or something) tech switch which you are super vulnerable too after defending mutas. Then there is storm which any competent muta player should beable to avoid, mutas are one of the fastest air units in the game and should have no problem dodging storms, see a templar moving up? move your mutas, not to mention how easy it is to come behind the army and pick off templars as the protoss is moving across the map. Archons are decent but magic box negates their threat even more so then thors and they become pretty useless except for cleaning up lings. Ive honestly had games where I am on equal bases equal upgrades (somehow i managed to get that far, with ridiculous amounts of cannons) and an equal size army comprised of 6-7 pheonix's, 20-30 stalkers, a few Ht's with storm, 4-6 archons, and a good number of zealots to soak up lings, and a sentry or 2 for gs. Seems pretty ideal for holding off muta ling right? nope. Although i lasted probably longer then i ever have going into the lalte game against muta ling, this player had a very good way of negating anything that could kill mutas quickly, usually when we engaged he would form a sort of singular circle around my army, makig it hard for storms to hit more than 1-3 mutas and for archons to hit more than 1 muta at a time, from there i would just get demolished as everything eventually fell with him having a decent number of mutas and no lings left at the end each time. After that game i switched to zerg and i dont think i will ever go back ive told this muta ling story probably 5 times on the forums, i know i probably didnt play perfectly but a race should never feel like they have no options against a particular strategy when they have equal income , bases , upgrades which i did for a good portion of the game. Nothing is more frusterating playing a race where you know their are certain strategies that are really really difficult to beat and yoou will most likely have to vastly outplay your opponent to win. Protoss is the race that has the problem of having strategies that are frusterating / really hard to beat. 1-1-1 and muta ling are both ones that come to mind off the top of my head. I cant really think of any strategies protoss has against terran or zerg where they simply have almost no options and they hope their opponent will make a mistake. I think it used to be like that with the protoss deathball in pvz though before infestor buffs and such. I know protoss has options in the early game against muta ling and thats not really the problem its when it gets into the late game where its just so difficult, it shouldnt have to be way harder to defend against mutas then to play as them (which it is) i play zerg now and although my muta micro isnt perfect I still have a pretty damn good win rate with muta ling in ZVP, and i know first hand how hard it is to defend that. HT. Just ht. Storm is awesome vs mutas because even if they "dodge" it, you still are hitting them at least a little and it makes them back up and have to heal... that's a big deal. At worst you're going to take like 10 - 20 hp off of all the mutas and at best you could take them down by like half or more. And, despite your bleak outlook on archons, they DESTROY mutas. It's not even close. The extremely high health, mixed with the bonus/splash dmg is just not even close. Storm/archons also happen to be the counter to the other half of the muta/ling combo as well. The bottom line is they're new and protoss players aren't too familiar with how to defend against them and when to go put pressure once you have it decently under control. Templars have this huge mobility problem against mutalisks. Which is pretty much the same problem the entire protoss army has with mutas. They aren't dangerous because of their burst damage or their HP, or their splash. They're dangerous because of their crazy mobility. Normally, a zerg player can make it so protoss can NEVER get an all out engagement for an entire game. Sure, if zerg sends his mutas head on against an Archon/Stalker/HT ball he'll get DESTROYED, but that's not the point. With a large mutalisk ball, zerg can pull a protoss players from one arm at a time, eventually ripping them off. This is not kratoss brutality, but rather a slower, more insidious but still huge amount of damage. Watch Crazymoving vs Hero. Hero showed some AMAZING templar play, and still couldn't deal with mutas at all. Crazymoving just avoided archons, dodged storms, attacked at the natural, then the third, then the main, then the pylons, all while losing a few mutas which were quickly replaced. Eventually, Hero was starved. Had crazymoving been a better player, he'd have dealt the damage, then transitioned into infestor ling play and rolled way before what he did. Crazymoving even managed to just nosedive some templars and snipe them in the face of stalkers and receive almost no damage. Archons do destroy mutas... if they can ever hit them... Storms do counter mutas, if mutas ever stop moving that is. You're putting it way too simple, like it's easy. It's tough as hell.
Well I'm assuming we're talking about the best players in the world here. And I don't think cannons + HT have any more of a mobility issue than turrets + marines/thors. Simply because storm has a longer range than marines and 1 HT can storm away mutas whereas it takes a bunch of marines to fend off mutas. Not to mention blink stalkers.
And like I said, casting storm on a ball of mutas is at least going to bring them into the light yellow, which is a big deal if you do it to the whole flock. And it will make them pull back which gives you more time for your stalkers to get there. I'm not saying it's easy, I'm just saying the reason they're having trouble is cause it's new.
|
On November 09 2011 03:25 iky43210 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 03:15 Teoita wrote:On November 09 2011 03:09 iky43210 wrote:On November 09 2011 02:59 SeaSwift wrote:On November 09 2011 02:54 iky43210 wrote:On November 09 2011 02:51 SeaSwift wrote:On November 09 2011 02:48 iky43210 wrote:On November 09 2011 01:41 Holophonist wrote:On November 08 2011 18:19 KingPwny wrote:there is always something I found funny in these imbalance issues, and that is if u have a problem with a race why don tu switch? Ur skillz ARE transferrable. There problem solved! According blizzard, the game is balanced on Bnet. I dont see more terrans winning tournaments than any other race. So maybe instead of crying of imbalance, it's time to do something about it?? The problem is starcraft 2 is an amazing game which offers 3 different race options that play out entirely different. I wouldn't find it fun to play terran or protoss because they don't fit my playstyle. last I remember flunctuation in sc1 isn't a month by month basis either, its usually over a long period of time. people needs to calm down I'll refer you to this post on the first page of this thread: On November 07 2011 04:25 ZenithM wrote:
Looking balanced to me.
And even if it was not, there is not enough data to conclude anything.
And stats don't mean anything.
And you have to actually look at the gameplay and not the results to form an opinion on balance.
And Terran players are just better.
Edit: Oh yeah I forgot that one: The difference is actually not that huge guys! The scale of the Y-axis is exagerated! Emphasis mine. Claiming that there isn't enough data has been done before, refuted before, and argued before. Like so many threads, this one is coming full circle. Nothing in my post claims or suggests there was not enough data, I have no idea where you even get that idea ...Yes you did. "last I remember flunctuation in sc1 isn't a month by month basis either, its usually over a long period of time." <- you said that. That is a different way of saying 'there isn't enough data to conclude anything'. Arguing the difference between the two is just absurd semantics. Obviously given the context what I meant was very different from what you're inferring, there is a difference between having the data to see current winrates and having one 6 months from now. Not having enough data to show full trends is not the same as not having enough data to make the statistics invalid It's been well over one year since release. When would you say we can draw conclusions? Two years? Three? Right before HotS is released? and within only a year time frame we have some drastic fluctuation, such as ZvP dynamics, and even TvP. Who to say it won't change to something completely different a year from now? Similar trends had happened in sc1 before
The big fluctuation in ZvP was not a metagame evolution, it was the infestor buff where fungal growth dps was increased by 160% against armored and by 100% against light. This turned the matchup around and caused zergs to have the upper hand in ZvP.
The big TvP fluctuation was also a patch change, the removal of KA, a major nerf to HTs.
Also protosses don't complain about zerg so much even though they PvZ is harder atm now because zergs haven't been winning the matchup so consistently, and are losing against terran at the same time. Terran though has been basically winning against everyone since day one and keeps winning one year later, which is a bit inexplicable for a game that is meant to be competitive.
|
On November 09 2011 19:59 Lothargr wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 03:25 iky43210 wrote:On November 09 2011 03:15 Teoita wrote:On November 09 2011 03:09 iky43210 wrote:On November 09 2011 02:59 SeaSwift wrote:On November 09 2011 02:54 iky43210 wrote:On November 09 2011 02:51 SeaSwift wrote:On November 09 2011 02:48 iky43210 wrote:On November 09 2011 01:41 Holophonist wrote:On November 08 2011 18:19 KingPwny wrote:there is always something I found funny in these imbalance issues, and that is if u have a problem with a race why don tu switch? Ur skillz ARE transferrable. There problem solved! According blizzard, the game is balanced on Bnet. I dont see more terrans winning tournaments than any other race. So maybe instead of crying of imbalance, it's time to do something about it?? The problem is starcraft 2 is an amazing game which offers 3 different race options that play out entirely different. I wouldn't find it fun to play terran or protoss because they don't fit my playstyle. last I remember flunctuation in sc1 isn't a month by month basis either, its usually over a long period of time. people needs to calm down I'll refer you to this post on the first page of this thread: On November 07 2011 04:25 ZenithM wrote:
Looking balanced to me.
And even if it was not, there is not enough data to conclude anything.
And stats don't mean anything.
And you have to actually look at the gameplay and not the results to form an opinion on balance.
And Terran players are just better.
Edit: Oh yeah I forgot that one: The difference is actually not that huge guys! The scale of the Y-axis is exagerated! Emphasis mine. Claiming that there isn't enough data has been done before, refuted before, and argued before. Like so many threads, this one is coming full circle. Nothing in my post claims or suggests there was not enough data, I have no idea where you even get that idea ...Yes you did. "last I remember flunctuation in sc1 isn't a month by month basis either, its usually over a long period of time." <- you said that. That is a different way of saying 'there isn't enough data to conclude anything'. Arguing the difference between the two is just absurd semantics. Obviously given the context what I meant was very different from what you're inferring, there is a difference between having the data to see current winrates and having one 6 months from now. Not having enough data to show full trends is not the same as not having enough data to make the statistics invalid It's been well over one year since release. When would you say we can draw conclusions? Two years? Three? Right before HotS is released? and within only a year time frame we have some drastic fluctuation, such as ZvP dynamics, and even TvP. Who to say it won't change to something completely different a year from now? Similar trends had happened in sc1 before The big fluctuation in ZvP was not a metagame evolution, it was the infestor buff where fungal growth dps was increased by 160% against armored and by 100% against light. This turned the matchup around and caused zergs to have the upper hand in ZvP. The big TvP fluctuation was also a patch change, the removal of KA, a major nerf to HTs. Also protosses don't complain about zerg so much even though they PvZ is harder atm now because zergs haven't been winning the matchup so consistently, and are losing against terran at the same time. Terran though has been basically winning against everyone since day one and keeps winning one year later, which is a bit inexplicable for a game that is meant to be competitive.
I guess the infestor nerf must mean protoss is going to come back, even slightly against zerg right?
I highly doubt the infestor buffed is truly the only reason for the fluctuation given that they don't really appear often in pro ZvP except in late game
|
Lol at the PVT win rates in Korea
|
|
|
On November 09 2011 20:06 iky43210 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 19:59 Lothargr wrote:On November 09 2011 03:25 iky43210 wrote:On November 09 2011 03:15 Teoita wrote:On November 09 2011 03:09 iky43210 wrote:On November 09 2011 02:59 SeaSwift wrote:On November 09 2011 02:54 iky43210 wrote:On November 09 2011 02:51 SeaSwift wrote:On November 09 2011 02:48 iky43210 wrote:On November 09 2011 01:41 Holophonist wrote:
[quote]
The problem is starcraft 2 is an amazing game which offers 3 different race options that play out entirely different. I wouldn't find it fun to play terran or protoss because they don't fit my playstyle. last I remember flunctuation in sc1 isn't a month by month basis either, its usually over a long period of time. people needs to calm down I'll refer you to this post on the first page of this thread: On November 07 2011 04:25 ZenithM wrote:
Looking balanced to me.
And even if it was not, there is not enough data to conclude anything.
And stats don't mean anything.
And you have to actually look at the gameplay and not the results to form an opinion on balance.
And Terran players are just better.
Edit: Oh yeah I forgot that one: The difference is actually not that huge guys! The scale of the Y-axis is exagerated! Emphasis mine. Claiming that there isn't enough data has been done before, refuted before, and argued before. Like so many threads, this one is coming full circle. Nothing in my post claims or suggests there was not enough data, I have no idea where you even get that idea ...Yes you did. "last I remember flunctuation in sc1 isn't a month by month basis either, its usually over a long period of time." <- you said that. That is a different way of saying 'there isn't enough data to conclude anything'. Arguing the difference between the two is just absurd semantics. Obviously given the context what I meant was very different from what you're inferring, there is a difference between having the data to see current winrates and having one 6 months from now. Not having enough data to show full trends is not the same as not having enough data to make the statistics invalid It's been well over one year since release. When would you say we can draw conclusions? Two years? Three? Right before HotS is released? and within only a year time frame we have some drastic fluctuation, such as ZvP dynamics, and even TvP. Who to say it won't change to something completely different a year from now? Similar trends had happened in sc1 before The big fluctuation in ZvP was not a metagame evolution, it was the infestor buff where fungal growth dps was increased by 160% against armored and by 100% against light. This turned the matchup around and caused zergs to have the upper hand in ZvP. The big TvP fluctuation was also a patch change, the removal of KA, a major nerf to HTs. Also protosses don't complain about zerg so much even though they PvZ is harder atm now because zergs haven't been winning the matchup so consistently, and are losing against terran at the same time. Terran though has been basically winning against everyone since day one and keeps winning one year later, which is a bit inexplicable for a game that is meant to be competitive. I guess the infestor nerf must mean protoss is going to come back, even slightly against zerg right? I highly doubt the infestor buffed is truly the only reason for the fluctuation given that they don't really appear often in pro ZvP except in late game
Well every buff helps obviously, even the upgrade cost reduction will help, but these are relatively small changes, so I don't expect to see any drastic results. 20% is a totally different scale of change compared to 160%.
Also the main problem zergs had pre infestor buff was that even though they took map control and were ahead in economy they didn't have a cost effective composition against the deathball and infestors gave them just that, both in the mid and late game. And actually we did see a lot of ling/infestor in the midgame at the pro level it was quite common for a long time.
|
Here are the winrates for Korea:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/bviP1.png)
Here, Terrans, I'll just say it for you so you can spare the effort:
"The sample size is too small, this graph is meaningless, PvT is balanced!"
|
Regarding the Muta vs Protoss discussion, the problem isn't a straight up fight. As noted, storm, archones and blink works quite well.
The problem is that it gets extremely hard to take and hold additional bases or attack the Zerg player. Typically the zerg will turtle a little with Spine Crawlers which works very nicely with Mutalisks so attacking isn't a good idea. In addition, if you leave your base all the probes die before you reach the zergs base, so it's an all-in attack.
The solution I have seen Protoss use against this is to pressure the Zerg before they get mutalisks so they have to use the gas for roaches, hydras or infestors.
There actually was a game in the GSL recently where a protoss player managed to beat a zerg who got the muta ball going (on crossfire), he did it by denying the extra expansions from the zerg so he was stuck at 2 bases and eventually mined out. The protoss didn't mine anything either (lost all but about 7 probes), but since the Zerg didn't mine from more than 1-2 patches at the end, it ended in a fight with Muta/(ling)/spinecrawler vs Stalker/Zealot/Archon with the Protoss winning. In other words, a base trade.
|
On November 09 2011 21:23 zanmat0 wrote:Here are the winrates for Korea: Here, Terrans, I'll just say it for you so you can spare the effort: "The sample size is too small, this graph is meaningless, PvT is balanced!"
Meanwhile in code S: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=283992
Stop this bullshit please, it's clearly that these stats are FISHY AS HELL and I hope that mods close this thread.
|
Switzerland2892 Posts
Post updated with korean graph
|
On November 09 2011 21:27 Snowbear wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 21:23 zanmat0 wrote:Here are the winrates for Korea: Here, Terrans, I'll just say it for you so you can spare the effort: "The sample size is too small, this graph is meaningless, PvT is balanced!" Meanwhile in code S: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=283992Stop this bullshit please, it's clearly that these stats are FISHY AS HELL and I hope that mods close this thread.
Oh please. So what if Clide, the only terran in his group didnt make it through? And are you saying these stats are fake? Please stop trying to give yourself excuses just cos you're getting your ass kicked in ladder even though you're terran. People have already stated that this graphs are for tournaments at the HIGHEST LVL of play, where terran is clearly OP at the moment.
|
On November 09 2011 21:41 ambrosiaa wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 21:27 Snowbear wrote:On November 09 2011 21:23 zanmat0 wrote:Here are the winrates for Korea: Here, Terrans, I'll just say it for you so you can spare the effort: "The sample size is too small, this graph is meaningless, PvT is balanced!" Meanwhile in code S: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=283992Stop this bullshit please, it's clearly that these stats are FISHY AS HELL and I hope that mods close this thread. Oh please. So what if Clide, the only terran in his group didnt make it through? And are you saying these stats are fake? Please stop trying to give yourself excuses just cos you're getting your ass kicked in ladder even though you're terran. People have already stated that this graphs are for tournaments at the HIGHEST LVL of play, where terran is clearly OP at the moment.
If you look at the HIGHEST LVL of play you will NOTICE that terrans are not doing that well. If you see these graphs you would expect alot of terrans in the top 8 of almost every tournament. Then you take a look here: http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/sc2-international/individual-leagues. Then you realise that these graphs are FISHY.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
