|
On April 05 2012 23:23 huehuehuehue wrote:
I think most Terrans here just play macro all the time, get into the lategame and die. Korean Terrans use a LOOOT of allins and a lot of pressure before 15 mins to kill the Protoss. I think people here need to get out of the mindset that doing risky/allinish builds is bad.
This is true. I guess I'm just a baby because I care too much about getting bm'd every time I do a one base attack. Most people, myself included, enjoy going into a longer macro game off of 3 bases or more. But you are absolutely right about Korean Terrans doing more all-ins, and that was my experience on the Chinese server as well. Maybe I should just suck it up and be a one base player for a while.
|
On April 05 2012 23:22 Horseballs wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2012 23:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:13 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:04 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 22:57 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 21:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 21:18 caretony wrote:This is how most of my TvPs look like, watch this replay if you want to see a 2 base turtling protoss beat a terran whos constantly ahead on eco, earlier third base and 4th earlier than toss has his third. (low masters lvl) http://replayfu.com/download/NgRR5fYea I made some mistakes but still, I'm harassing constantly trading evenly and killing probes while he is turtling on 2 base often floating 1k+ minerals and then decides to pretty much a move into me when he's done turtling and has his upgrades. I'm not saying this is imbalanced but I do personally believe it is, can anyone link me a replay of a 2 base terran doing this to a protoss? Anyone else thinks its ridiculous gateways cost less than barracks yet fewer gateways can outproduce alot more rax? Wow. Just... wow. Did you even bother to watch your own replay? (First of all, gateways = 150 minerals and barracks = 150 minerals too and I hear reactors are pretty good.) But your replay: @10:50- You a-move half your army up his ramp, which gets forcefielded and killed off incredibly easy. Very dumb move on your part. You accomplished nothing but lost a lot of units. You tried being cute by simultaneously dropping in his main with a very small force, but you didn't even try to do any damage with it. @14:20- You drop again with a slightly larger force, but you still don't focus down anything. It's like you drop units and then focus on your base and assume your bio will harrass the Protoss by themselves. You killed a few workers and Protoss defender units but again, minimal losses from the Protoss. @17:00- The big engagement. Protoss pushes out to you now. You have 5 medivacs and 2 ghosts! And guess what? You don't use them for this battle. Your medivacs aren't even with your army, and your ghosts don't use any spells. This battle ends up being chargelot archon vs. the same supply of marine marauder. And let's not forget that the Protoss has 3-2, while you only have 1-2 too. And then the best part of all is when you BM your opponent at the end and talk about how bad of a player he is, which is exactly why I'm taking this tone with you and not more of an optimistic one. Quite frankly, you acted like a jerk. And you certainly deserved to lose that game. The Protoss played decent defense. You harrassed incredibly poorly. And you couldn't keep your key units together during engagements. Your replay certainly doesn't show any imbalance in TvP. Here's the thing that bothers me about when people demand replays and analyze them like this: I know what I need to do. I know where I've gone wrong. I know that I need to control my army better. But knowing those things is a lot different than doing those things; it is really, really hard to properly control a terran bio army and keep macroing behind it. I've known what to do for a year know, and after a year with much trying I am not much better at controlling vs protoss as I was when I started . It is a lot easier to control the protoss blob, and that is where the problem is. Please note that my criticisms of his performance are not exactly things like "omg you didn't have MKP-level micro? you're terrible!" and "your resources weren't always at 0/0? noob!" These are what the biggest ones were: 1. He threw away units into a choke point without scouting (or I think he did scout with a factory first, and saw sentries with energy, which makes his decision even worse). 2. He occasionally dropped units into his opponent's base, but didn't actually harrass or deal significant damage with them. Then he just picked up and flew off. 3. During his final engagement, his ghosts and medivacs weren't used at all. His medivacs were somewhere else on the map, and his two ghosts were just using their regular attack (as opposed to EMP). And against chargelot archon, that's not gonna cut it. Those are key mistakes. And also, those are things I think a player of his caliber can certainly fix. You don't need 100 more APM to do those things better, and I think that's important and constructive feedback. The point of it isn't this analysis, or any analysis in particular. The point is I can know what I need to do and can still have room to fix it and it can still be unfair. Go back to the five rax reaper era. Zergs knew what they had to do to stop it, and they did, but that didn't stop blizzard from patching the game. Honestly, I don't see the connection between an old broken strategy that required patching, and this guy just not keeping his important units together and suiciding half his army. They're on entirely different levels >.> I don't see this critique as unfair, because I think what I'm asking him to do is not something only pro players can do. It isn't that this critique is unfair. It is that the amount of effort required to get the same result is disproportionate between terran and protoss. A typical analysis will say: well you need to do this here, this there and control better and then you could have won this game. That means that the game isn't unfair!!! See - you can stop it! I'm saying that it is like back around release when you'd tell a zerg: you need to get either quick speed and a couple of spines or open roach. That means 5 rax reaper isn't unbalanced!!! See - you can stop it! Just because you can identify room for improvement and places to get better doesn't mean that the game isn't fundamentally flawed.
1. Him keeping his army together and not suiciding units are not indicators that the match-up is fundamentally flawed. It's an indicator that he has reasonable room for improvement.
2. His replay is not an indicator that the match-up is fundamentally flawed.
3. His replay does not show the Protoss exploiting a key broken strategy in PvT in the same way that a fast mass reaper rush in the fucking beta did in TvZ.
4. If he's going to post a flawed game showing how a match-up is imbalanced, instead of analyzing it to look for improvement, then he's not approaching the game correctly.
There's really nothing else to say here, and I need to go do work. Have a wonderful day 
|
On April 05 2012 23:27 malaan wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2012 23:23 huehuehuehue wrote:
I think most Terrans here just play macro all the time, get into the lategame and die. Korean Terrans use a LOOOT of allins and a lot of pressure before 15 mins to kill the Protoss. I think people here need to get out of the mindset that doing risky/allinish builds is bad. Don't be stupid. Risky / allin builds ARE bad. The whole concept of them will eventually phase out as players get better at the game, thus making your cheese play obsolete to the strong macro style that ultimately becomes dominant in strategy games. The game is barely over it's first year of age... by the time the new expansion comes out this entire thread will be irrelevant.
No, cheese/allins will always be around and will always be viable. Obviously you can't do those builds every game, but you definetly need to have these builds. If Korean terrans just went 1rax fe every game their winrate would be terrible.
Edit:// Cakesauce, how do you care about BM if you win games? I laugh at BM when im winning, for me it's only annoying when i'm losing and the opponent offensive gg's or types "get out" or whatever. And allins don't have to be 1base  .
|
On April 05 2012 23:30 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2012 23:22 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:13 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:04 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 22:57 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 21:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 21:18 caretony wrote:This is how most of my TvPs look like, watch this replay if you want to see a 2 base turtling protoss beat a terran whos constantly ahead on eco, earlier third base and 4th earlier than toss has his third. (low masters lvl) http://replayfu.com/download/NgRR5fYea I made some mistakes but still, I'm harassing constantly trading evenly and killing probes while he is turtling on 2 base often floating 1k+ minerals and then decides to pretty much a move into me when he's done turtling and has his upgrades. I'm not saying this is imbalanced but I do personally believe it is, can anyone link me a replay of a 2 base terran doing this to a protoss? Anyone else thinks its ridiculous gateways cost less than barracks yet fewer gateways can outproduce alot more rax? Wow. Just... wow. Did you even bother to watch your own replay? (First of all, gateways = 150 minerals and barracks = 150 minerals too and I hear reactors are pretty good.) But your replay: @10:50- You a-move half your army up his ramp, which gets forcefielded and killed off incredibly easy. Very dumb move on your part. You accomplished nothing but lost a lot of units. You tried being cute by simultaneously dropping in his main with a very small force, but you didn't even try to do any damage with it. @14:20- You drop again with a slightly larger force, but you still don't focus down anything. It's like you drop units and then focus on your base and assume your bio will harrass the Protoss by themselves. You killed a few workers and Protoss defender units but again, minimal losses from the Protoss. @17:00- The big engagement. Protoss pushes out to you now. You have 5 medivacs and 2 ghosts! And guess what? You don't use them for this battle. Your medivacs aren't even with your army, and your ghosts don't use any spells. This battle ends up being chargelot archon vs. the same supply of marine marauder. And let's not forget that the Protoss has 3-2, while you only have 1-2 too. And then the best part of all is when you BM your opponent at the end and talk about how bad of a player he is, which is exactly why I'm taking this tone with you and not more of an optimistic one. Quite frankly, you acted like a jerk. And you certainly deserved to lose that game. The Protoss played decent defense. You harrassed incredibly poorly. And you couldn't keep your key units together during engagements. Your replay certainly doesn't show any imbalance in TvP. Here's the thing that bothers me about when people demand replays and analyze them like this: I know what I need to do. I know where I've gone wrong. I know that I need to control my army better. But knowing those things is a lot different than doing those things; it is really, really hard to properly control a terran bio army and keep macroing behind it. I've known what to do for a year know, and after a year with much trying I am not much better at controlling vs protoss as I was when I started . It is a lot easier to control the protoss blob, and that is where the problem is. Please note that my criticisms of his performance are not exactly things like "omg you didn't have MKP-level micro? you're terrible!" and "your resources weren't always at 0/0? noob!" These are what the biggest ones were: 1. He threw away units into a choke point without scouting (or I think he did scout with a factory first, and saw sentries with energy, which makes his decision even worse). 2. He occasionally dropped units into his opponent's base, but didn't actually harrass or deal significant damage with them. Then he just picked up and flew off. 3. During his final engagement, his ghosts and medivacs weren't used at all. His medivacs were somewhere else on the map, and his two ghosts were just using their regular attack (as opposed to EMP). And against chargelot archon, that's not gonna cut it. Those are key mistakes. And also, those are things I think a player of his caliber can certainly fix. You don't need 100 more APM to do those things better, and I think that's important and constructive feedback. The point of it isn't this analysis, or any analysis in particular. The point is I can know what I need to do and can still have room to fix it and it can still be unfair. Go back to the five rax reaper era. Zergs knew what they had to do to stop it, and they did, but that didn't stop blizzard from patching the game. Honestly, I don't see the connection between an old broken strategy that required patching, and this guy just not keeping his important units together and suiciding half his army. They're on entirely different levels >.> I don't see this critique as unfair, because I think what I'm asking him to do is not something only pro players can do. It isn't that this critique is unfair. It is that the amount of effort required to get the same result is disproportionate between terran and protoss. A typical analysis will say: well you need to do this here, this there and control better and then you could have won this game. That means that the game isn't unfair!!! See - you can stop it! I'm saying that it is like back around release when you'd tell a zerg: you need to get either quick speed and a couple of spines or open roach. That means 5 rax reaper isn't unbalanced!!! See - you can stop it! Just because you can identify room for improvement and places to get better doesn't mean that the game isn't fundamentally flawed. 1. Him keeping his army together and not suiciding units are not indicators that the match-up is fundamentally flawed. It's an indicator that he has reasonable room for improvement. 2. His replay is not an indicator that the match-up is fundamentally flawed. 3. His replay does not show the Protoss exploiting a key broken strategy in PvT in the same way that a fast mass reaper rush in the fucking beta did in TvZ. 4. If he's going to post a flawed game showing how a match-up is imbalanced, instead of analyzing it to look for improvement, then he's not approaching the game correctly. There's really nothing else to say here, and I need to go do work. Have a wonderful day
You are missing the point. If you want to have a useful discussion and not talk past me with your politically correct language, go back and read what I wrote. Otherwise, stop wasting time. I clearly explained what I meant and you ignored it.
|
On April 05 2012 23:21 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2012 23:15 Sphen5117 wrote:On April 05 2012 23:04 Bagi wrote:On April 05 2012 22:48 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
You needed to harrass more and pick off units, imho. I think most lower level (even low masters) terrans find this the most problematic, because protoss does not need to do either of these things. Being constantly active and effective with your units while keeping up with your macro is one of the hardest things in this game. Yet its basically a requirement for any terran player once their opponent has decent enough macro. The protoss can't do this harass thing because their harassment drops are much less effective. Medvac with any mix of marine/marauder is MUCH greater than a warp prism with any gateway tech. Not only in terms of dps when harassing workers, etc, but also in terms of fighting power. Bio just shreds Gateway tech in equal cost/supply. But back on point, yes, harassing is very effective against toss. In general, no matter the race, players all the way up through diamond will simply fall apart to a basic 2-pronged attack. Drop 1 medvac in mineral line, wait five seconds, then press front. Or Press the front, wait five seconds, drop mineral line. Either of these situations will net you either a very powerful attack at the front, or tons of shit killed in the back, nine times out of ten. Also, as terran, don't neglect your vikings or your ghosts. Both sides of the PvT matchup revolve around trying to stay 1 step ahead in composition than your opponent. Use those scans of yours. If you see a Robo BAY, but no colossi yet, start making vikings in preparation. As a protoss, after each engagement, I always gauge how many medvacs/vikings that my Terran opponent was able to keep alive. If I was able to pick of a large number, I feel safe making more colossi. If not, I move into templar/archons before the next engagement (if I can avoid fighting till then) Make sure you don't neglect upgrades as well, Terran BIO scales the hardest with upgrade of any army in the game. (not a whine, just an observation). Also, I can't stress this enough, you should be stim-kiting. Sure you can win fights without doing it. But you will DEMOLISH everything that isn't a colossi if you do. Chargelots will get one hit then spend like ten seconds doing NO dmg. You'll eat all his zealots, and then you will get to see the massacre that is Marauders vs Stalkers. No matter your league, just working on basic macro and army/control positioning are the best ways to improve rather than learning fancy tricks or sneaky attacks. This is especially true in PvT on both sides, in my opinion. It is a matchup that is very unforgiving for whichever player stops controlling their army properly. Both armies can do decently without being controlled, but both can be put into tons of situations if they're controlled properly. If you neglect to do so, and the other player does, you will simply lose everything. (no matter whether you're the terran or the toss) this is a pretty large misconception, warp prism harass is one of the deadliest in the game. Most cost efficient as well, drop 2 zeals in a terrans mineral line when he moves out, (main with warp prism and nat with proxy pylon). And since you can keep warping in its basically a sustained harass. If you go for a heavy gateway style play, warping in mass zeals on terran production is brutal as well. Late game terran cannot devote any amount of units to drops unless its some sort of doom drop, because they have to have EVERY unit possible for the 200/200 fight. However this is not the case for protoss, because 2 zealots can be warped in anywhere and shut down exterior expansions before they even go up. It is very very hard for terran to defend when they are out of position, so well timed harass is deadly even if it is simply 2 or more zealots
2 zealots in cost and supply is equal to 4 marines. I'd much rather drop 4 marines in a mineral line. Also, you speak of constantly warping in from your prism, but then that just becomes a bunch of units that you WILL lose. No saving them. There is nothing more cost efficient for damage than Terran Bio when it comes to drops. Let alone the fact that those 2 zealots can be stopped easily buy just a couple bio units. I'm not arguing that protoss drop harass isn't effective, but if you're terran, you have the best drops in the game, and therefore using them isn't a bad idea. Too many times I see a prism drop do next to no dmg, because zealots land as the terran is already pulling his workers, and since they're melee they get maybe 2-3 kills before there's nothing left for them to attack and either have to leave or get murdered. The ranged bio drop of equal supply will kill more workers given that the workers are pulled at the exact same time. Stim only compounds this.
|
On April 05 2012 23:33 Horseballs wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2012 23:30 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:22 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:13 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:04 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 22:57 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 21:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 21:18 caretony wrote:This is how most of my TvPs look like, watch this replay if you want to see a 2 base turtling protoss beat a terran whos constantly ahead on eco, earlier third base and 4th earlier than toss has his third. (low masters lvl) http://replayfu.com/download/NgRR5fYea I made some mistakes but still, I'm harassing constantly trading evenly and killing probes while he is turtling on 2 base often floating 1k+ minerals and then decides to pretty much a move into me when he's done turtling and has his upgrades. I'm not saying this is imbalanced but I do personally believe it is, can anyone link me a replay of a 2 base terran doing this to a protoss? Anyone else thinks its ridiculous gateways cost less than barracks yet fewer gateways can outproduce alot more rax? Wow. Just... wow. Did you even bother to watch your own replay? (First of all, gateways = 150 minerals and barracks = 150 minerals too and I hear reactors are pretty good.) But your replay: @10:50- You a-move half your army up his ramp, which gets forcefielded and killed off incredibly easy. Very dumb move on your part. You accomplished nothing but lost a lot of units. You tried being cute by simultaneously dropping in his main with a very small force, but you didn't even try to do any damage with it. @14:20- You drop again with a slightly larger force, but you still don't focus down anything. It's like you drop units and then focus on your base and assume your bio will harrass the Protoss by themselves. You killed a few workers and Protoss defender units but again, minimal losses from the Protoss. @17:00- The big engagement. Protoss pushes out to you now. You have 5 medivacs and 2 ghosts! And guess what? You don't use them for this battle. Your medivacs aren't even with your army, and your ghosts don't use any spells. This battle ends up being chargelot archon vs. the same supply of marine marauder. And let's not forget that the Protoss has 3-2, while you only have 1-2 too. And then the best part of all is when you BM your opponent at the end and talk about how bad of a player he is, which is exactly why I'm taking this tone with you and not more of an optimistic one. Quite frankly, you acted like a jerk. And you certainly deserved to lose that game. The Protoss played decent defense. You harrassed incredibly poorly. And you couldn't keep your key units together during engagements. Your replay certainly doesn't show any imbalance in TvP. Here's the thing that bothers me about when people demand replays and analyze them like this: I know what I need to do. I know where I've gone wrong. I know that I need to control my army better. But knowing those things is a lot different than doing those things; it is really, really hard to properly control a terran bio army and keep macroing behind it. I've known what to do for a year know, and after a year with much trying I am not much better at controlling vs protoss as I was when I started . It is a lot easier to control the protoss blob, and that is where the problem is. Please note that my criticisms of his performance are not exactly things like "omg you didn't have MKP-level micro? you're terrible!" and "your resources weren't always at 0/0? noob!" These are what the biggest ones were: 1. He threw away units into a choke point without scouting (or I think he did scout with a factory first, and saw sentries with energy, which makes his decision even worse). 2. He occasionally dropped units into his opponent's base, but didn't actually harrass or deal significant damage with them. Then he just picked up and flew off. 3. During his final engagement, his ghosts and medivacs weren't used at all. His medivacs were somewhere else on the map, and his two ghosts were just using their regular attack (as opposed to EMP). And against chargelot archon, that's not gonna cut it. Those are key mistakes. And also, those are things I think a player of his caliber can certainly fix. You don't need 100 more APM to do those things better, and I think that's important and constructive feedback. The point of it isn't this analysis, or any analysis in particular. The point is I can know what I need to do and can still have room to fix it and it can still be unfair. Go back to the five rax reaper era. Zergs knew what they had to do to stop it, and they did, but that didn't stop blizzard from patching the game. Honestly, I don't see the connection between an old broken strategy that required patching, and this guy just not keeping his important units together and suiciding half his army. They're on entirely different levels >.> I don't see this critique as unfair, because I think what I'm asking him to do is not something only pro players can do. It isn't that this critique is unfair. It is that the amount of effort required to get the same result is disproportionate between terran and protoss. A typical analysis will say: well you need to do this here, this there and control better and then you could have won this game. That means that the game isn't unfair!!! See - you can stop it! I'm saying that it is like back around release when you'd tell a zerg: you need to get either quick speed and a couple of spines or open roach. That means 5 rax reaper isn't unbalanced!!! See - you can stop it! Just because you can identify room for improvement and places to get better doesn't mean that the game isn't fundamentally flawed. 1. Him keeping his army together and not suiciding units are not indicators that the match-up is fundamentally flawed. It's an indicator that he has reasonable room for improvement. 2. His replay is not an indicator that the match-up is fundamentally flawed. 3. His replay does not show the Protoss exploiting a key broken strategy in PvT in the same way that a fast mass reaper rush in the fucking beta did in TvZ. 4. If he's going to post a flawed game showing how a match-up is imbalanced, instead of analyzing it to look for improvement, then he's not approaching the game correctly. There's really nothing else to say here, and I need to go do work. Have a wonderful day You are missing the point. If you want to have a useful discussion and not talk past me with your politically correct language, go back and read what I wrote. Otherwise, stop wasting time. I clearly explained what I meant and you ignored it.
For fuck's sake, you have no point.
How on Earth do you come up with the claim that "It is that the amount of effort required to get the same result is disproportionate between terran and protoss" based on this replay and the analysis that comes with it? As a Protoss player, if my high templar and sentries and colossi are out of position (in the same way that his ghosts and medivacs were) I will get steamrolled. And rightly so! And so I just make sure I keep tabs on all my units (especially the spellcasters), especially when it comes time to engage in battle. And I make sure not to get half my army cut off from the rest (in the same way that he suicided half his guys). And when I analyze my replays and see that I made those stupid mistakes, I learn from them. Both of those errors can be fixed quite quickly, and they're important for any race.
Go play 100 games as Terran and then play 100 games as Protoss and post your win percentages. Don't make claims without evidence.
|
On April 05 2012 23:33 Horseballs wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2012 23:30 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:22 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:13 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:04 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 22:57 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 21:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 21:18 caretony wrote:This is how most of my TvPs look like, watch this replay if you want to see a 2 base turtling protoss beat a terran whos constantly ahead on eco, earlier third base and 4th earlier than toss has his third. (low masters lvl) http://replayfu.com/download/NgRR5fYea I made some mistakes but still, I'm harassing constantly trading evenly and killing probes while he is turtling on 2 base often floating 1k+ minerals and then decides to pretty much a move into me when he's done turtling and has his upgrades. I'm not saying this is imbalanced but I do personally believe it is, can anyone link me a replay of a 2 base terran doing this to a protoss? Anyone else thinks its ridiculous gateways cost less than barracks yet fewer gateways can outproduce alot more rax? Wow. Just... wow. Did you even bother to watch your own replay? (First of all, gateways = 150 minerals and barracks = 150 minerals too and I hear reactors are pretty good.) But your replay: @10:50- You a-move half your army up his ramp, which gets forcefielded and killed off incredibly easy. Very dumb move on your part. You accomplished nothing but lost a lot of units. You tried being cute by simultaneously dropping in his main with a very small force, but you didn't even try to do any damage with it. @14:20- You drop again with a slightly larger force, but you still don't focus down anything. It's like you drop units and then focus on your base and assume your bio will harrass the Protoss by themselves. You killed a few workers and Protoss defender units but again, minimal losses from the Protoss. @17:00- The big engagement. Protoss pushes out to you now. You have 5 medivacs and 2 ghosts! And guess what? You don't use them for this battle. Your medivacs aren't even with your army, and your ghosts don't use any spells. This battle ends up being chargelot archon vs. the same supply of marine marauder. And let's not forget that the Protoss has 3-2, while you only have 1-2 too. And then the best part of all is when you BM your opponent at the end and talk about how bad of a player he is, which is exactly why I'm taking this tone with you and not more of an optimistic one. Quite frankly, you acted like a jerk. And you certainly deserved to lose that game. The Protoss played decent defense. You harrassed incredibly poorly. And you couldn't keep your key units together during engagements. Your replay certainly doesn't show any imbalance in TvP. Here's the thing that bothers me about when people demand replays and analyze them like this: I know what I need to do. I know where I've gone wrong. I know that I need to control my army better. But knowing those things is a lot different than doing those things; it is really, really hard to properly control a terran bio army and keep macroing behind it. I've known what to do for a year know, and after a year with much trying I am not much better at controlling vs protoss as I was when I started . It is a lot easier to control the protoss blob, and that is where the problem is. Please note that my criticisms of his performance are not exactly things like "omg you didn't have MKP-level micro? you're terrible!" and "your resources weren't always at 0/0? noob!" These are what the biggest ones were: 1. He threw away units into a choke point without scouting (or I think he did scout with a factory first, and saw sentries with energy, which makes his decision even worse). 2. He occasionally dropped units into his opponent's base, but didn't actually harrass or deal significant damage with them. Then he just picked up and flew off. 3. During his final engagement, his ghosts and medivacs weren't used at all. His medivacs were somewhere else on the map, and his two ghosts were just using their regular attack (as opposed to EMP). And against chargelot archon, that's not gonna cut it. Those are key mistakes. And also, those are things I think a player of his caliber can certainly fix. You don't need 100 more APM to do those things better, and I think that's important and constructive feedback. The point of it isn't this analysis, or any analysis in particular. The point is I can know what I need to do and can still have room to fix it and it can still be unfair. Go back to the five rax reaper era. Zergs knew what they had to do to stop it, and they did, but that didn't stop blizzard from patching the game. Honestly, I don't see the connection between an old broken strategy that required patching, and this guy just not keeping his important units together and suiciding half his army. They're on entirely different levels >.> I don't see this critique as unfair, because I think what I'm asking him to do is not something only pro players can do. It isn't that this critique is unfair. It is that the amount of effort required to get the same result is disproportionate between terran and protoss. A typical analysis will say: well you need to do this here, this there and control better and then you could have won this game. That means that the game isn't unfair!!! See - you can stop it! I'm saying that it is like back around release when you'd tell a zerg: you need to get either quick speed and a couple of spines or open roach. That means 5 rax reaper isn't unbalanced!!! See - you can stop it! Just because you can identify room for improvement and places to get better doesn't mean that the game isn't fundamentally flawed. 1. Him keeping his army together and not suiciding units are not indicators that the match-up is fundamentally flawed. It's an indicator that he has reasonable room for improvement. 2. His replay is not an indicator that the match-up is fundamentally flawed. 3. His replay does not show the Protoss exploiting a key broken strategy in PvT in the same way that a fast mass reaper rush in the fucking beta did in TvZ. 4. If he's going to post a flawed game showing how a match-up is imbalanced, instead of analyzing it to look for improvement, then he's not approaching the game correctly. There's really nothing else to say here, and I need to go do work. Have a wonderful day You are missing the point. If you want to have a useful discussion and not talk past me with your politically correct language, go back and read what I wrote. Otherwise, stop wasting time. I clearly explained what I meant and you ignored it.
hes not missing the point. hes dodging it like a succesful troll. he knows damn well what you mean.
i agree with your sentiment regarding the disproportionate micro effort.
|
Thats a great observation my Merz!
|
On April 05 2012 23:08 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2012 22:59 MetalSlug wrote:On April 05 2012 22:48 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 21:59 xTrim wrote:http://drop.sc/143521how about this one then? win every single engagement and not being able to do absolutely nothing after them Then lose ONE engagement and lose the game :D masters level as well I noticed four engagements: @16:30- You sacrificed vikings for colossi (fair enough), but you never did any harrassment at all. It's fine; you guys are both macroing and powering. This attack ends up being negligible, as you both just re-make your units. @20:00- You kill off his colossi with your vikings but oh my god your units are all sitting in his (somewhat poorly placed) storms x.x If you just moved your army back a few feet they would all be green instead of red. You just sat there and took it. You were so worried about taking out his colossi that you sacrificed most of your army's health, which allowed reinforcements to clean you up (you had no medivacs left). @26:00- You have a lot of ghosts and you EMP most of his army, but you still miss some HTs and he still hits some key storms, which equalizes the damage. The colossi/ HT/ ghost/ viking count are all pretty much reduced to zero, and so the game resets and stabilizes. @32:00- The final engagement, once you guys are all powered and maxed again. You run up and EMP all his high templars (well done) but apparently don't consider that now he's got a fuckton of colossi and archons (merged high templar) and you end up being backed into a wall/ don't micro effectively and you get rolled this time around. It also didn't help that a lot of your vikings got erased by archon splash damage before they could take out the mass colossi. You should have sniped colossi with your vikings (you can at least 2-shot them with that many vikings) since he had no more storms, and then after that harrassment just split your army so that your pile of bio doesnt get hit by multiple archons at the same time. And then you BM ::shrugs:: It really all came down to that last engagement. You tried engaging max archon, colossi, chargelot head on, and that shouldn't work, considering your unit composition of... bio and vikings (because the ghosts and HTs and medivacs were gone at that point) is so much cheaper and weaker. You needed to harrass more and pick off units, imho. So basicly what you trying to say is that while Terran is not allowed to make any mistakes its totaly normal that protoss come back from anything and mob the floor ? Because you are analysing this replay by pro/semi-pro standarts... If he can snipe high templar with ghosts (and he can- he does in the replay), then he can certainly hit colossi with vikings out on the field before an engagement starts. Allowing the area of effect waves of both mass colossi and mass archon to annihilate his ground army (leaving only a few vikings left and his trickle of reinforcements) is what lost him the game. A lot of the engagements that happened previously were sparked by the Terran player and then eventually reset due to banked money (on both sides) and a few minutes. They didn't even necessarily have to happen, and they weren't really game-changing.
I'm at work so didn't get a chance to watch the replay, but let me ask you, lets say he played better and was able to snipe a couple colossi etc. Do you think the battle would have gone hugely in Terrans favor, because thats the only way Terran can push after an engagement like that or else warpgate mechanic will come to haunt you. I have no doubt that in situations the Terran army can win a battle, but thats when the reinforcement mechanic comes into play and with maps getting bigger and bigger its just making it that much more difficult for Terran armies to keep up in that aspect. I find myself in these situations alot where I feel like I do alot of damage to them only to realize they have a even army by the time i get to their base. Again it comes down to what the terran has to do in a fight vs what the protoss has to do and i think thats what makes the whole thing frustrating analyzing your own replay and watching the toss not have to do nearly as much. (Man the first person view annoys the shit out of me watching the lack of things toss has to do, don't even get me started on watching Z a move army after army at your base LOL )
|
On April 05 2012 23:41 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2012 23:33 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:30 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:22 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:13 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:04 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 22:57 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 21:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 21:18 caretony wrote:This is how most of my TvPs look like, watch this replay if you want to see a 2 base turtling protoss beat a terran whos constantly ahead on eco, earlier third base and 4th earlier than toss has his third. (low masters lvl) http://replayfu.com/download/NgRR5fYea I made some mistakes but still, I'm harassing constantly trading evenly and killing probes while he is turtling on 2 base often floating 1k+ minerals and then decides to pretty much a move into me when he's done turtling and has his upgrades. I'm not saying this is imbalanced but I do personally believe it is, can anyone link me a replay of a 2 base terran doing this to a protoss? Anyone else thinks its ridiculous gateways cost less than barracks yet fewer gateways can outproduce alot more rax? Wow. Just... wow. Did you even bother to watch your own replay? (First of all, gateways = 150 minerals and barracks = 150 minerals too and I hear reactors are pretty good.) But your replay: @10:50- You a-move half your army up his ramp, which gets forcefielded and killed off incredibly easy. Very dumb move on your part. You accomplished nothing but lost a lot of units. You tried being cute by simultaneously dropping in his main with a very small force, but you didn't even try to do any damage with it. @14:20- You drop again with a slightly larger force, but you still don't focus down anything. It's like you drop units and then focus on your base and assume your bio will harrass the Protoss by themselves. You killed a few workers and Protoss defender units but again, minimal losses from the Protoss. @17:00- The big engagement. Protoss pushes out to you now. You have 5 medivacs and 2 ghosts! And guess what? You don't use them for this battle. Your medivacs aren't even with your army, and your ghosts don't use any spells. This battle ends up being chargelot archon vs. the same supply of marine marauder. And let's not forget that the Protoss has 3-2, while you only have 1-2 too. And then the best part of all is when you BM your opponent at the end and talk about how bad of a player he is, which is exactly why I'm taking this tone with you and not more of an optimistic one. Quite frankly, you acted like a jerk. And you certainly deserved to lose that game. The Protoss played decent defense. You harrassed incredibly poorly. And you couldn't keep your key units together during engagements. Your replay certainly doesn't show any imbalance in TvP. Here's the thing that bothers me about when people demand replays and analyze them like this: I know what I need to do. I know where I've gone wrong. I know that I need to control my army better. But knowing those things is a lot different than doing those things; it is really, really hard to properly control a terran bio army and keep macroing behind it. I've known what to do for a year know, and after a year with much trying I am not much better at controlling vs protoss as I was when I started . It is a lot easier to control the protoss blob, and that is where the problem is. Please note that my criticisms of his performance are not exactly things like "omg you didn't have MKP-level micro? you're terrible!" and "your resources weren't always at 0/0? noob!" These are what the biggest ones were: 1. He threw away units into a choke point without scouting (or I think he did scout with a factory first, and saw sentries with energy, which makes his decision even worse). 2. He occasionally dropped units into his opponent's base, but didn't actually harrass or deal significant damage with them. Then he just picked up and flew off. 3. During his final engagement, his ghosts and medivacs weren't used at all. His medivacs were somewhere else on the map, and his two ghosts were just using their regular attack (as opposed to EMP). And against chargelot archon, that's not gonna cut it. Those are key mistakes. And also, those are things I think a player of his caliber can certainly fix. You don't need 100 more APM to do those things better, and I think that's important and constructive feedback. The point of it isn't this analysis, or any analysis in particular. The point is I can know what I need to do and can still have room to fix it and it can still be unfair. Go back to the five rax reaper era. Zergs knew what they had to do to stop it, and they did, but that didn't stop blizzard from patching the game. Honestly, I don't see the connection between an old broken strategy that required patching, and this guy just not keeping his important units together and suiciding half his army. They're on entirely different levels >.> I don't see this critique as unfair, because I think what I'm asking him to do is not something only pro players can do. It isn't that this critique is unfair. It is that the amount of effort required to get the same result is disproportionate between terran and protoss. A typical analysis will say: well you need to do this here, this there and control better and then you could have won this game. That means that the game isn't unfair!!! See - you can stop it! I'm saying that it is like back around release when you'd tell a zerg: you need to get either quick speed and a couple of spines or open roach. That means 5 rax reaper isn't unbalanced!!! See - you can stop it! Just because you can identify room for improvement and places to get better doesn't mean that the game isn't fundamentally flawed. 1. Him keeping his army together and not suiciding units are not indicators that the match-up is fundamentally flawed. It's an indicator that he has reasonable room for improvement. 2. His replay is not an indicator that the match-up is fundamentally flawed. 3. His replay does not show the Protoss exploiting a key broken strategy in PvT in the same way that a fast mass reaper rush in the fucking beta did in TvZ. 4. If he's going to post a flawed game showing how a match-up is imbalanced, instead of analyzing it to look for improvement, then he's not approaching the game correctly. There's really nothing else to say here, and I need to go do work. Have a wonderful day You are missing the point. If you want to have a useful discussion and not talk past me with your politically correct language, go back and read what I wrote. Otherwise, stop wasting time. I clearly explained what I meant and you ignored it. For fuck's sake, you have no point. How on Earth do you come up with the claim that "It is that the amount of effort required to get the same result is disproportionate between terran and protoss" based on this replay and the analysis that comes with it? As a Protoss player, if my high templar and sentries and colossi are out of position (in the same way that his ghosts and medivacs were) I will get steamrolled. And rightly so! And so I just make sure I keep tabs on all my units (especially the spellcasters), especially when it comes time to engage in battle. And I make sure not to get half my army cut off from the rest (in the same way that he suicided half his guys). And when I analyze my replays and see that I made those stupid mistakes, I learn from them. Both of those errors can be fixed quite quickly, and they're important for any race. Go play 100 games as Terran and then play 100 games as Protoss and post your win percentages. Don't make claims without evidence.
Sorry to barge in, but could it be...a clash of balls?
|
On April 05 2012 23:41 GrandSmurf wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2012 23:33 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:30 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:22 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:13 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:04 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 22:57 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 21:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 21:18 caretony wrote:This is how most of my TvPs look like, watch this replay if you want to see a 2 base turtling protoss beat a terran whos constantly ahead on eco, earlier third base and 4th earlier than toss has his third. (low masters lvl) http://replayfu.com/download/NgRR5fYea I made some mistakes but still, I'm harassing constantly trading evenly and killing probes while he is turtling on 2 base often floating 1k+ minerals and then decides to pretty much a move into me when he's done turtling and has his upgrades. I'm not saying this is imbalanced but I do personally believe it is, can anyone link me a replay of a 2 base terran doing this to a protoss? Anyone else thinks its ridiculous gateways cost less than barracks yet fewer gateways can outproduce alot more rax? Wow. Just... wow. Did you even bother to watch your own replay? (First of all, gateways = 150 minerals and barracks = 150 minerals too and I hear reactors are pretty good.) But your replay: @10:50- You a-move half your army up his ramp, which gets forcefielded and killed off incredibly easy. Very dumb move on your part. You accomplished nothing but lost a lot of units. You tried being cute by simultaneously dropping in his main with a very small force, but you didn't even try to do any damage with it. @14:20- You drop again with a slightly larger force, but you still don't focus down anything. It's like you drop units and then focus on your base and assume your bio will harrass the Protoss by themselves. You killed a few workers and Protoss defender units but again, minimal losses from the Protoss. @17:00- The big engagement. Protoss pushes out to you now. You have 5 medivacs and 2 ghosts! And guess what? You don't use them for this battle. Your medivacs aren't even with your army, and your ghosts don't use any spells. This battle ends up being chargelot archon vs. the same supply of marine marauder. And let's not forget that the Protoss has 3-2, while you only have 1-2 too. And then the best part of all is when you BM your opponent at the end and talk about how bad of a player he is, which is exactly why I'm taking this tone with you and not more of an optimistic one. Quite frankly, you acted like a jerk. And you certainly deserved to lose that game. The Protoss played decent defense. You harrassed incredibly poorly. And you couldn't keep your key units together during engagements. Your replay certainly doesn't show any imbalance in TvP. Here's the thing that bothers me about when people demand replays and analyze them like this: I know what I need to do. I know where I've gone wrong. I know that I need to control my army better. But knowing those things is a lot different than doing those things; it is really, really hard to properly control a terran bio army and keep macroing behind it. I've known what to do for a year know, and after a year with much trying I am not much better at controlling vs protoss as I was when I started . It is a lot easier to control the protoss blob, and that is where the problem is. Please note that my criticisms of his performance are not exactly things like "omg you didn't have MKP-level micro? you're terrible!" and "your resources weren't always at 0/0? noob!" These are what the biggest ones were: 1. He threw away units into a choke point without scouting (or I think he did scout with a factory first, and saw sentries with energy, which makes his decision even worse). 2. He occasionally dropped units into his opponent's base, but didn't actually harrass or deal significant damage with them. Then he just picked up and flew off. 3. During his final engagement, his ghosts and medivacs weren't used at all. His medivacs were somewhere else on the map, and his two ghosts were just using their regular attack (as opposed to EMP). And against chargelot archon, that's not gonna cut it. Those are key mistakes. And also, those are things I think a player of his caliber can certainly fix. You don't need 100 more APM to do those things better, and I think that's important and constructive feedback. The point of it isn't this analysis, or any analysis in particular. The point is I can know what I need to do and can still have room to fix it and it can still be unfair. Go back to the five rax reaper era. Zergs knew what they had to do to stop it, and they did, but that didn't stop blizzard from patching the game. Honestly, I don't see the connection between an old broken strategy that required patching, and this guy just not keeping his important units together and suiciding half his army. They're on entirely different levels >.> I don't see this critique as unfair, because I think what I'm asking him to do is not something only pro players can do. It isn't that this critique is unfair. It is that the amount of effort required to get the same result is disproportionate between terran and protoss. A typical analysis will say: well you need to do this here, this there and control better and then you could have won this game. That means that the game isn't unfair!!! See - you can stop it! I'm saying that it is like back around release when you'd tell a zerg: you need to get either quick speed and a couple of spines or open roach. That means 5 rax reaper isn't unbalanced!!! See - you can stop it! Just because you can identify room for improvement and places to get better doesn't mean that the game isn't fundamentally flawed. 1. Him keeping his army together and not suiciding units are not indicators that the match-up is fundamentally flawed. It's an indicator that he has reasonable room for improvement. 2. His replay is not an indicator that the match-up is fundamentally flawed. 3. His replay does not show the Protoss exploiting a key broken strategy in PvT in the same way that a fast mass reaper rush in the fucking beta did in TvZ. 4. If he's going to post a flawed game showing how a match-up is imbalanced, instead of analyzing it to look for improvement, then he's not approaching the game correctly. There's really nothing else to say here, and I need to go do work. Have a wonderful day You are missing the point. If you want to have a useful discussion and not talk past me with your politically correct language, go back and read what I wrote. Otherwise, stop wasting time. I clearly explained what I meant and you ignored it. hes not missing the point. hes dodging it like a succesful troll. he knows damn well what you mean. i agree with your sentiment regarding the disproportionate micro effort.
Great contribution.
Especially since the problems with this TvP replay had nothing to do with micro, and all to do with decision making (which, I'll repeat for the last time, can be improved at any level, regardless of your APM):
1. The decision to run into a chokepoint and lose half your units
2. The decision to drop into an opponent's base (and so... make sure you actually focus down an important structure or units!)
3. The decision to spread out your important units so thin that you lose track of them at the most critical times
The Terran's micro was fine. I didn't tell him he needed better micro.
GrandSmurf and Horseballs, I'd love for you to actually watch the replay and then provide your own analysis of why the Terran lost the game (besides the expected 1.5 words of "Protoss imba").
|
On April 05 2012 23:04 Bagi wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2012 22:48 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
You needed to harrass more and pick off units, imho. I think most lower level (even low masters) terrans find this the most problematic, because protoss does not need to do either of these things. Being constantly active and effective with your units while keeping up with your macro is one of the hardest things in this game. Yet its basically a requirement for any terran player once their opponent has decent enough macro.
And by "does not need to do either of these things", you mean "has little ability to do these things". The discrepancy in effectiveness between dropping 8 marines from a medivac and dropping 4 zealots from a warp prism is noticeable. The marines deal a lot more damage a lot faster and are harder to remove from your mineral line.
Unless you mean DTs? In which case I may as well ask you why you don't tech to cloaked banshees while making MMM for your army - the answer is the same: detection is plenty available, and the tech to get there (as well as the units made) are expensive.
I'd like to hear this poster's explanation as to why it is so much easier for a protoss to defend the drops than it is for a terran to execute them. The basic commands "go here, attack this" are the same. The interaction between the players is the same (as dropship approaches - "are there units here? if yes, go elsewhere", as the drop is happening "are units there to defend? if no, send defenders there" - you have to react to his defense and then he has to react to your attack).
You may recall that pros like Huk have lost tournaments due to insufficient drop defense, so it isn't like it's something where you can just sit three stalkers in the back of your base and your opponents medivacs become useless.
On April 05 2012 23:41 GrandSmurf wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2012 23:33 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:30 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:22 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:13 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:04 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 22:57 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 21:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 21:18 caretony wrote:This is how most of my TvPs look like, watch this replay if you want to see a 2 base turtling protoss beat a terran whos constantly ahead on eco, earlier third base and 4th earlier than toss has his third. (low masters lvl) http://replayfu.com/download/NgRR5fYea I made some mistakes but still, I'm harassing constantly trading evenly and killing probes while he is turtling on 2 base often floating 1k+ minerals and then decides to pretty much a move into me when he's done turtling and has his upgrades. I'm not saying this is imbalanced but I do personally believe it is, can anyone link me a replay of a 2 base terran doing this to a protoss? Anyone else thinks its ridiculous gateways cost less than barracks yet fewer gateways can outproduce alot more rax? Wow. Just... wow. Did you even bother to watch your own replay? (First of all, gateways = 150 minerals and barracks = 150 minerals too and I hear reactors are pretty good.) But your replay: @10:50- You a-move half your army up his ramp, which gets forcefielded and killed off incredibly easy. Very dumb move on your part. You accomplished nothing but lost a lot of units. You tried being cute by simultaneously dropping in his main with a very small force, but you didn't even try to do any damage with it. @14:20- You drop again with a slightly larger force, but you still don't focus down anything. It's like you drop units and then focus on your base and assume your bio will harrass the Protoss by themselves. You killed a few workers and Protoss defender units but again, minimal losses from the Protoss. @17:00- The big engagement. Protoss pushes out to you now. You have 5 medivacs and 2 ghosts! And guess what? You don't use them for this battle. Your medivacs aren't even with your army, and your ghosts don't use any spells. This battle ends up being chargelot archon vs. the same supply of marine marauder. And let's not forget that the Protoss has 3-2, while you only have 1-2 too. And then the best part of all is when you BM your opponent at the end and talk about how bad of a player he is, which is exactly why I'm taking this tone with you and not more of an optimistic one. Quite frankly, you acted like a jerk. And you certainly deserved to lose that game. The Protoss played decent defense. You harrassed incredibly poorly. And you couldn't keep your key units together during engagements. Your replay certainly doesn't show any imbalance in TvP. Here's the thing that bothers me about when people demand replays and analyze them like this: I know what I need to do. I know where I've gone wrong. I know that I need to control my army better. But knowing those things is a lot different than doing those things; it is really, really hard to properly control a terran bio army and keep macroing behind it. I've known what to do for a year know, and after a year with much trying I am not much better at controlling vs protoss as I was when I started . It is a lot easier to control the protoss blob, and that is where the problem is. Please note that my criticisms of his performance are not exactly things like "omg you didn't have MKP-level micro? you're terrible!" and "your resources weren't always at 0/0? noob!" These are what the biggest ones were: 1. He threw away units into a choke point without scouting (or I think he did scout with a factory first, and saw sentries with energy, which makes his decision even worse). 2. He occasionally dropped units into his opponent's base, but didn't actually harrass or deal significant damage with them. Then he just picked up and flew off. 3. During his final engagement, his ghosts and medivacs weren't used at all. His medivacs were somewhere else on the map, and his two ghosts were just using their regular attack (as opposed to EMP). And against chargelot archon, that's not gonna cut it. Those are key mistakes. And also, those are things I think a player of his caliber can certainly fix. You don't need 100 more APM to do those things better, and I think that's important and constructive feedback. The point of it isn't this analysis, or any analysis in particular. The point is I can know what I need to do and can still have room to fix it and it can still be unfair. Go back to the five rax reaper era. Zergs knew what they had to do to stop it, and they did, but that didn't stop blizzard from patching the game. Honestly, I don't see the connection between an old broken strategy that required patching, and this guy just not keeping his important units together and suiciding half his army. They're on entirely different levels >.> I don't see this critique as unfair, because I think what I'm asking him to do is not something only pro players can do. It isn't that this critique is unfair. It is that the amount of effort required to get the same result is disproportionate between terran and protoss. A typical analysis will say: well you need to do this here, this there and control better and then you could have won this game. That means that the game isn't unfair!!! See - you can stop it! I'm saying that it is like back around release when you'd tell a zerg: you need to get either quick speed and a couple of spines or open roach. That means 5 rax reaper isn't unbalanced!!! See - you can stop it! Just because you can identify room for improvement and places to get better doesn't mean that the game isn't fundamentally flawed. 1. Him keeping his army together and not suiciding units are not indicators that the match-up is fundamentally flawed. It's an indicator that he has reasonable room for improvement. 2. His replay is not an indicator that the match-up is fundamentally flawed. 3. His replay does not show the Protoss exploiting a key broken strategy in PvT in the same way that a fast mass reaper rush in the fucking beta did in TvZ. 4. If he's going to post a flawed game showing how a match-up is imbalanced, instead of analyzing it to look for improvement, then he's not approaching the game correctly. There's really nothing else to say here, and I need to go do work. Have a wonderful day You are missing the point. If you want to have a useful discussion and not talk past me with your politically correct language, go back and read what I wrote. Otherwise, stop wasting time. I clearly explained what I meant and you ignored it. hes not missing the point. hes dodging it like a succesful troll. he knows damn well what you mean. i agree with your sentiment regarding the disproportionate micro effort.
Look at this another way. Pretend it's TvT and he scouted tanks and then ran half his army up there to die to them anyway, thinking that dropping his marines (without control) in the back of the main would be worth the lost resources. Would your commentary on this be "tanks are imba - I always need to build tanks in TvT now"? It shouldn't be. It should be "I really should stop trying to push tanks THAT I KNEW WERE THERE with marines. Maybe I can find something different to do with them, or maybe I can make different units to deal with that..."
Now note that sentries actually require spellcasting to use, where tanks would just kill stuff without any control, and ask again - why does this replay tell you anything at all other than the poster made a bad choice?
Edit: For that matter, try engaging bio with zealot archon at choke points. You'll notice you die a lot. But that's why when zealots run up a ramp and see a walloff of buildings, they walk away. That doesn't make zealots garbage - it just means you have to know where they're useful and where they're going to die needlessly. You don't have to have MKP level micro to stutter step and you don't need MKP level decision making to look at a ramp with sentries on the other side and say "maybe I should engage elsewhere". You've got medivacs in your build to do just that.
|
On April 05 2012 23:48 ZenithM wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2012 23:41 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:33 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:30 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:22 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:13 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:04 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 22:57 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 21:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
[quote]
Wow. Just... wow.
Did you even bother to watch your own replay?
(First of all, gateways = 150 minerals and barracks = 150 minerals too and I hear reactors are pretty good.)
But your replay:
@10:50- You a-move half your army up his ramp, which gets forcefielded and killed off incredibly easy. Very dumb move on your part. You accomplished nothing but lost a lot of units. You tried being cute by simultaneously dropping in his main with a very small force, but you didn't even try to do any damage with it.
@14:20- You drop again with a slightly larger force, but you still don't focus down anything. It's like you drop units and then focus on your base and assume your bio will harrass the Protoss by themselves. You killed a few workers and Protoss defender units but again, minimal losses from the Protoss.
@17:00- The big engagement. Protoss pushes out to you now. You have 5 medivacs and 2 ghosts! And guess what? You don't use them for this battle. Your medivacs aren't even with your army, and your ghosts don't use any spells. This battle ends up being chargelot archon vs. the same supply of marine marauder. And let's not forget that the Protoss has 3-2, while you only have 1-2 too.
And then the best part of all is when you BM your opponent at the end and talk about how bad of a player he is, which is exactly why I'm taking this tone with you and not more of an optimistic one. Quite frankly, you acted like a jerk. And you certainly deserved to lose that game. The Protoss played decent defense. You harrassed incredibly poorly. And you couldn't keep your key units together during engagements. Your replay certainly doesn't show any imbalance in TvP. Here's the thing that bothers me about when people demand replays and analyze them like this: I know what I need to do. I know where I've gone wrong. I know that I need to control my army better. But knowing those things is a lot different than doing those things; it is really, really hard to properly control a terran bio army and keep macroing behind it. I've known what to do for a year know, and after a year with much trying I am not much better at controlling vs protoss as I was when I started . It is a lot easier to control the protoss blob, and that is where the problem is. Please note that my criticisms of his performance are not exactly things like "omg you didn't have MKP-level micro? you're terrible!" and "your resources weren't always at 0/0? noob!" These are what the biggest ones were: 1. He threw away units into a choke point without scouting (or I think he did scout with a factory first, and saw sentries with energy, which makes his decision even worse). 2. He occasionally dropped units into his opponent's base, but didn't actually harrass or deal significant damage with them. Then he just picked up and flew off. 3. During his final engagement, his ghosts and medivacs weren't used at all. His medivacs were somewhere else on the map, and his two ghosts were just using their regular attack (as opposed to EMP). And against chargelot archon, that's not gonna cut it. Those are key mistakes. And also, those are things I think a player of his caliber can certainly fix. You don't need 100 more APM to do those things better, and I think that's important and constructive feedback. The point of it isn't this analysis, or any analysis in particular. The point is I can know what I need to do and can still have room to fix it and it can still be unfair. Go back to the five rax reaper era. Zergs knew what they had to do to stop it, and they did, but that didn't stop blizzard from patching the game. Honestly, I don't see the connection between an old broken strategy that required patching, and this guy just not keeping his important units together and suiciding half his army. They're on entirely different levels >.> I don't see this critique as unfair, because I think what I'm asking him to do is not something only pro players can do. It isn't that this critique is unfair. It is that the amount of effort required to get the same result is disproportionate between terran and protoss. A typical analysis will say: well you need to do this here, this there and control better and then you could have won this game. That means that the game isn't unfair!!! See - you can stop it! I'm saying that it is like back around release when you'd tell a zerg: you need to get either quick speed and a couple of spines or open roach. That means 5 rax reaper isn't unbalanced!!! See - you can stop it! Just because you can identify room for improvement and places to get better doesn't mean that the game isn't fundamentally flawed. 1. Him keeping his army together and not suiciding units are not indicators that the match-up is fundamentally flawed. It's an indicator that he has reasonable room for improvement. 2. His replay is not an indicator that the match-up is fundamentally flawed. 3. His replay does not show the Protoss exploiting a key broken strategy in PvT in the same way that a fast mass reaper rush in the fucking beta did in TvZ. 4. If he's going to post a flawed game showing how a match-up is imbalanced, instead of analyzing it to look for improvement, then he's not approaching the game correctly. There's really nothing else to say here, and I need to go do work. Have a wonderful day You are missing the point. If you want to have a useful discussion and not talk past me with your politically correct language, go back and read what I wrote. Otherwise, stop wasting time. I clearly explained what I meant and you ignored it. For fuck's sake, you have no point. How on Earth do you come up with the claim that "It is that the amount of effort required to get the same result is disproportionate between terran and protoss" based on this replay and the analysis that comes with it? As a Protoss player, if my high templar and sentries and colossi are out of position (in the same way that his ghosts and medivacs were) I will get steamrolled. And rightly so! And so I just make sure I keep tabs on all my units (especially the spellcasters), especially when it comes time to engage in battle. And I make sure not to get half my army cut off from the rest (in the same way that he suicided half his guys). And when I analyze my replays and see that I made those stupid mistakes, I learn from them. Both of those errors can be fixed quite quickly, and they're important for any race. Go play 100 games as Terran and then play 100 games as Protoss and post your win percentages. Don't make claims without evidence. Sorry to barge in, but could it be...a clash of balls?
I have a feeling I'm being trolled lol. Especially since I was just accused of being a troll after watching the whole game and posting an analysis... and then Horseballs starts talking about completely irrelevant nonsense (like reapers and roaches).
|
On April 05 2012 23:48 ZenithM wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2012 23:41 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:33 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:30 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:22 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:13 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:04 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 22:57 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 21:45 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
[quote]
Wow. Just... wow.
Did you even bother to watch your own replay?
(First of all, gateways = 150 minerals and barracks = 150 minerals too and I hear reactors are pretty good.)
But your replay:
@10:50- You a-move half your army up his ramp, which gets forcefielded and killed off incredibly easy. Very dumb move on your part. You accomplished nothing but lost a lot of units. You tried being cute by simultaneously dropping in his main with a very small force, but you didn't even try to do any damage with it.
@14:20- You drop again with a slightly larger force, but you still don't focus down anything. It's like you drop units and then focus on your base and assume your bio will harrass the Protoss by themselves. You killed a few workers and Protoss defender units but again, minimal losses from the Protoss.
@17:00- The big engagement. Protoss pushes out to you now. You have 5 medivacs and 2 ghosts! And guess what? You don't use them for this battle. Your medivacs aren't even with your army, and your ghosts don't use any spells. This battle ends up being chargelot archon vs. the same supply of marine marauder. And let's not forget that the Protoss has 3-2, while you only have 1-2 too.
And then the best part of all is when you BM your opponent at the end and talk about how bad of a player he is, which is exactly why I'm taking this tone with you and not more of an optimistic one. Quite frankly, you acted like a jerk. And you certainly deserved to lose that game. The Protoss played decent defense. You harrassed incredibly poorly. And you couldn't keep your key units together during engagements. Your replay certainly doesn't show any imbalance in TvP. Here's the thing that bothers me about when people demand replays and analyze them like this: I know what I need to do. I know where I've gone wrong. I know that I need to control my army better. But knowing those things is a lot different than doing those things; it is really, really hard to properly control a terran bio army and keep macroing behind it. I've known what to do for a year know, and after a year with much trying I am not much better at controlling vs protoss as I was when I started . It is a lot easier to control the protoss blob, and that is where the problem is. Please note that my criticisms of his performance are not exactly things like "omg you didn't have MKP-level micro? you're terrible!" and "your resources weren't always at 0/0? noob!" These are what the biggest ones were: 1. He threw away units into a choke point without scouting (or I think he did scout with a factory first, and saw sentries with energy, which makes his decision even worse). 2. He occasionally dropped units into his opponent's base, but didn't actually harrass or deal significant damage with them. Then he just picked up and flew off. 3. During his final engagement, his ghosts and medivacs weren't used at all. His medivacs were somewhere else on the map, and his two ghosts were just using their regular attack (as opposed to EMP). And against chargelot archon, that's not gonna cut it. Those are key mistakes. And also, those are things I think a player of his caliber can certainly fix. You don't need 100 more APM to do those things better, and I think that's important and constructive feedback. The point of it isn't this analysis, or any analysis in particular. The point is I can know what I need to do and can still have room to fix it and it can still be unfair. Go back to the five rax reaper era. Zergs knew what they had to do to stop it, and they did, but that didn't stop blizzard from patching the game. Honestly, I don't see the connection between an old broken strategy that required patching, and this guy just not keeping his important units together and suiciding half his army. They're on entirely different levels >.> I don't see this critique as unfair, because I think what I'm asking him to do is not something only pro players can do. It isn't that this critique is unfair. It is that the amount of effort required to get the same result is disproportionate between terran and protoss. A typical analysis will say: well you need to do this here, this there and control better and then you could have won this game. That means that the game isn't unfair!!! See - you can stop it! I'm saying that it is like back around release when you'd tell a zerg: you need to get either quick speed and a couple of spines or open roach. That means 5 rax reaper isn't unbalanced!!! See - you can stop it! Just because you can identify room for improvement and places to get better doesn't mean that the game isn't fundamentally flawed. 1. Him keeping his army together and not suiciding units are not indicators that the match-up is fundamentally flawed. It's an indicator that he has reasonable room for improvement. 2. His replay is not an indicator that the match-up is fundamentally flawed. 3. His replay does not show the Protoss exploiting a key broken strategy in PvT in the same way that a fast mass reaper rush in the fucking beta did in TvZ. 4. If he's going to post a flawed game showing how a match-up is imbalanced, instead of analyzing it to look for improvement, then he's not approaching the game correctly. There's really nothing else to say here, and I need to go do work. Have a wonderful day You are missing the point. If you want to have a useful discussion and not talk past me with your politically correct language, go back and read what I wrote. Otherwise, stop wasting time. I clearly explained what I meant and you ignored it. For fuck's sake, you have no point. How on Earth do you come up with the claim that "It is that the amount of effort required to get the same result is disproportionate between terran and protoss" based on this replay and the analysis that comes with it? As a Protoss player, if my high templar and sentries and colossi are out of position (in the same way that his ghosts and medivacs were) I will get steamrolled. And rightly so! And so I just make sure I keep tabs on all my units (especially the spellcasters), especially when it comes time to engage in battle. And I make sure not to get half my army cut off from the rest (in the same way that he suicided half his guys). And when I analyze my replays and see that I made those stupid mistakes, I learn from them. Both of those errors can be fixed quite quickly, and they're important for any race. Go play 100 games as Terran and then play 100 games as Protoss and post your win percentages. Don't make claims without evidence. Sorry to barge in, but could it be...a clash of balls?
Oh well done sir. That was worth clicking on the thread for that one.
Five rax reaper was beyond busted and compairing it to PvT now, is to be frank, stupid. There are better arguments and things to compair it to that the what is accepted to be a total imbalance from when the game was released. You know what else was removed? KA. We remember the days of instant storms poorly, because they were dumb.
|
A former high diamond (when diamond was the highest rank in season1) played terran after more than 1 year and all he said was `wtf ? how come terran got so hard to play ?` I couldn't answer properly, but it surely did ....
|
On April 05 2012 23:47 Superneenja wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2012 23:08 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 22:59 MetalSlug wrote:On April 05 2012 22:48 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 21:59 xTrim wrote:http://drop.sc/143521how about this one then? win every single engagement and not being able to do absolutely nothing after them Then lose ONE engagement and lose the game :D masters level as well I noticed four engagements: @16:30- You sacrificed vikings for colossi (fair enough), but you never did any harrassment at all. It's fine; you guys are both macroing and powering. This attack ends up being negligible, as you both just re-make your units. @20:00- You kill off his colossi with your vikings but oh my god your units are all sitting in his (somewhat poorly placed) storms x.x If you just moved your army back a few feet they would all be green instead of red. You just sat there and took it. You were so worried about taking out his colossi that you sacrificed most of your army's health, which allowed reinforcements to clean you up (you had no medivacs left). @26:00- You have a lot of ghosts and you EMP most of his army, but you still miss some HTs and he still hits some key storms, which equalizes the damage. The colossi/ HT/ ghost/ viking count are all pretty much reduced to zero, and so the game resets and stabilizes. @32:00- The final engagement, once you guys are all powered and maxed again. You run up and EMP all his high templars (well done) but apparently don't consider that now he's got a fuckton of colossi and archons (merged high templar) and you end up being backed into a wall/ don't micro effectively and you get rolled this time around. It also didn't help that a lot of your vikings got erased by archon splash damage before they could take out the mass colossi. You should have sniped colossi with your vikings (you can at least 2-shot them with that many vikings) since he had no more storms, and then after that harrassment just split your army so that your pile of bio doesnt get hit by multiple archons at the same time. And then you BM ::shrugs:: It really all came down to that last engagement. You tried engaging max archon, colossi, chargelot head on, and that shouldn't work, considering your unit composition of... bio and vikings (because the ghosts and HTs and medivacs were gone at that point) is so much cheaper and weaker. You needed to harrass more and pick off units, imho. So basicly what you trying to say is that while Terran is not allowed to make any mistakes its totaly normal that protoss come back from anything and mob the floor ? Because you are analysing this replay by pro/semi-pro standarts... If he can snipe high templar with ghosts (and he can- he does in the replay), then he can certainly hit colossi with vikings out on the field before an engagement starts. Allowing the area of effect waves of both mass colossi and mass archon to annihilate his ground army (leaving only a few vikings left and his trickle of reinforcements) is what lost him the game. A lot of the engagements that happened previously were sparked by the Terran player and then eventually reset due to banked money (on both sides) and a few minutes. They didn't even necessarily have to happen, and they weren't really game-changing. I'm at work so didn't get a chance to watch the replay, but let me ask you, lets say he played better and was able to snipe a couple colossi etc. Do you think the battle would have gone hugely in Terrans favor, because thats the only way Terran can push after an engagement like that or else warpgate mechanic will come to haunt you. I have no doubt that in situations the Terran army can win a battle, but thats when the reinforcement mechanic comes into play and with maps getting bigger and bigger its just making it that much more difficult for Terran armies to keep up in that aspect. I find myself in these situations alot where I feel like I do alot of damage to them only to realize they have a even army by the time i get to their base. Again it comes down to what the terran has to do in a fight vs what the protoss has to do and i think thats what makes the whole thing frustrating analyzing your own replay and watching the toss not have to do nearly as much. (Man the first person view annoys the shit out of me watching the lack of things toss has to do, don't even get me started on watching Z a move army after army at your base LOL )
I forget exactly how many colossi the Protoss had (~8 maybe? so it was a pretty significant size), but I agree with you that the Terran needs to really win big time or else the Protoss warpgate can clean up a small force trying to do damage after the main battle is over. I think that's why Terran is more mobile than Protoss (so harrassment is easier to do throughout the game, especially to snipe new bases and tech structures), so they don't have to try and go up the gut after a big battle ends *only slightly in Terran's favor*.
That being said, I often see final engagements end in a huge roflstomp (not always in Protoss's favor, mind you). It often comes down to those key spellcaster units.
|
On April 06 2012 00:07 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2012 23:48 ZenithM wrote:On April 05 2012 23:41 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:33 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:30 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:22 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:13 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:04 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 22:57 Horseballs wrote:
[quote]
Here's the thing that bothers me about when people demand replays and analyze them like this: I know what I need to do. I know where I've gone wrong. I know that I need to control my army better. But knowing those things is a lot different than doing those things; it is really, really hard to properly control a terran bio army and keep macroing behind it. I've known what to do for a year know, and after a year with much trying I am not much better at controlling vs protoss as I was when I started . It is a lot easier to control the protoss blob, and that is where the problem is.
Please note that my criticisms of his performance are not exactly things like "omg you didn't have MKP-level micro? you're terrible!" and "your resources weren't always at 0/0? noob!" These are what the biggest ones were: 1. He threw away units into a choke point without scouting (or I think he did scout with a factory first, and saw sentries with energy, which makes his decision even worse). 2. He occasionally dropped units into his opponent's base, but didn't actually harrass or deal significant damage with them. Then he just picked up and flew off. 3. During his final engagement, his ghosts and medivacs weren't used at all. His medivacs were somewhere else on the map, and his two ghosts were just using their regular attack (as opposed to EMP). And against chargelot archon, that's not gonna cut it. Those are key mistakes. And also, those are things I think a player of his caliber can certainly fix. You don't need 100 more APM to do those things better, and I think that's important and constructive feedback. The point of it isn't this analysis, or any analysis in particular. The point is I can know what I need to do and can still have room to fix it and it can still be unfair. Go back to the five rax reaper era. Zergs knew what they had to do to stop it, and they did, but that didn't stop blizzard from patching the game. Honestly, I don't see the connection between an old broken strategy that required patching, and this guy just not keeping his important units together and suiciding half his army. They're on entirely different levels >.> I don't see this critique as unfair, because I think what I'm asking him to do is not something only pro players can do. It isn't that this critique is unfair. It is that the amount of effort required to get the same result is disproportionate between terran and protoss. A typical analysis will say: well you need to do this here, this there and control better and then you could have won this game. That means that the game isn't unfair!!! See - you can stop it! I'm saying that it is like back around release when you'd tell a zerg: you need to get either quick speed and a couple of spines or open roach. That means 5 rax reaper isn't unbalanced!!! See - you can stop it! Just because you can identify room for improvement and places to get better doesn't mean that the game isn't fundamentally flawed. 1. Him keeping his army together and not suiciding units are not indicators that the match-up is fundamentally flawed. It's an indicator that he has reasonable room for improvement. 2. His replay is not an indicator that the match-up is fundamentally flawed. 3. His replay does not show the Protoss exploiting a key broken strategy in PvT in the same way that a fast mass reaper rush in the fucking beta did in TvZ. 4. If he's going to post a flawed game showing how a match-up is imbalanced, instead of analyzing it to look for improvement, then he's not approaching the game correctly. There's really nothing else to say here, and I need to go do work. Have a wonderful day You are missing the point. If you want to have a useful discussion and not talk past me with your politically correct language, go back and read what I wrote. Otherwise, stop wasting time. I clearly explained what I meant and you ignored it. For fuck's sake, you have no point. How on Earth do you come up with the claim that "It is that the amount of effort required to get the same result is disproportionate between terran and protoss" based on this replay and the analysis that comes with it? As a Protoss player, if my high templar and sentries and colossi are out of position (in the same way that his ghosts and medivacs were) I will get steamrolled. And rightly so! And so I just make sure I keep tabs on all my units (especially the spellcasters), especially when it comes time to engage in battle. And I make sure not to get half my army cut off from the rest (in the same way that he suicided half his guys). And when I analyze my replays and see that I made those stupid mistakes, I learn from them. Both of those errors can be fixed quite quickly, and they're important for any race. Go play 100 games as Terran and then play 100 games as Protoss and post your win percentages. Don't make claims without evidence. Sorry to barge in, but could it be...a clash of balls? I have a feeling I'm being trolled lol. Especially since I was just accused of being a troll after watching the whole game and posting an analysis... and then Horseballs starts talking about completely irrelevant nonsense (like reapers and roaches).
You completely miss the point of my argument. It has nothing to do with that one replay, or any given replay. Itt has everything to do with the prevailing attitude that if you can get better, then the matchup is fine. I used the reaper example to demonstrate an example where through a disproportionate amount of effort a zerg player could overcome something, and yet the game was patched to fix it. Similarly, it takes a disproportionate amount of effort to control a terran ball compared to a protoss ball. It can be overcome, but that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be changed or can't be changed.
Again, it has nothing to do with that replay or any specific replay. My argument was clearly laid out and easily understandable, but you've chosen to ignore it.
|
On April 05 2012 23:47 Superneenja wrote:I'm at work so didn't get a chance to watch the replay, but let me ask you, lets say he played better and was able to snipe a couple colossi etc. Do you think the battle would have gone hugely in Terrans favor, because thats the only way Terran can push after an engagement like that or else warpgate mechanic will come to haunt you. I have no doubt that in situations the Terran army can win a battle, but thats when the reinforcement mechanic comes into play and with maps getting bigger and bigger its just making it that much more difficult for Terran armies to keep up in that aspect. I find myself in these situations alot where I feel like I do alot of damage to them only to realize they have a even army by the time i get to their base. Again it comes down to what the terran has to do in a fight vs what the protoss has to do and i think thats what makes the whole thing frustrating analyzing your own replay and watching the toss not have to do nearly as much. (Man the first person view annoys the shit out of me watching the lack of things toss has to do, don't even get me started on watching Z a move army after army at your base LOL )
At least when a T plays vs. a Z, we know that they're putting in as much effort macroing as we are into microing. It's a different mechanic, but both are damn difficult to do. Spreading creep, hitting injects, setting up flanks, keeping map vision, readying counterattacks -- there's a lot of effort that goes into a Zerg trying to beat a Terran, and there's just as much effort the Terran has to put in to keep the Zerg in check and running roughshod across the map.
There's nothing mechanically difficult about what a protoss has to do to win a PvT game (Note to prevent flames: good mechanics are important in general for all 3 races, but by design, there's no micro that a protoss can do that makes a Diamond league viewer think, "wow, there's no way I could pull that off." -- you can blame the Colossus for most of this. I also couldn't tell you the last game I saw where a protoss's nexii didn't all hit 100 energy at some point, plus with how forgiving the warp gate mechanic is, there's no way for a Protoss to wow you with macro either like a Zerg does.), and that's where the disparity starts coming in. At an "equal" skill level (which is theoretically anyone I meet on the ladder, which should have my MMR fairly spot on after 3000 or so 1s games), the amount of effort expended by a protoss to win is FAR less than what I'm expending to win. For a P to win vs a T, it's simply a matter of setting up enough FFs to survive the midgame, secure a 3rd, then 2 cannons and a templar in each base to prevent drops. Then put your zealots in the front of your army, build your AoE units, 1a, and randomly storm to keep the Bio army moving instead of firing. I've played 1s from both sides (I don't play Zerg b/c I'm terrible at it, much respect to all those Zergs who can keep all those macro mechanics flowing all game and not just die to early timings x.x), and once I've secured a 3rd as P, I feel like there's actually no way to lose vs. a T without a glaring error on my side.
The rest of the TvP complaints have been made throughout the thread, but one bears repeating -- the one-sided domino effect. When it gets past about the 15 minute mark, when the T army is broken by a P, with any number of units leftover, the zealot warp-in and 1a ends the game, or at the very least causes significant economic damage and makes the next push the game-ender. When the P army is broken by the T, you're lucky to get any damage done at all before the next zealot warp-in, or even a single templar stationed at the base storms your already damaged army and ends your push.
There's a reason that the current best Terrans in the world (read: Koreans) are all of the 1-base and 2-base timing specialists, and our macro heroes are all falling out of Code S. Terran early game and midgame play are extremely strong, and our late game play is very lacking. So the Terrans who want to win are focusing on hitting strong midgame timings that force massive reactions or just kill the opponent outright, and the Terrans who spent their time learning late-game focused macro styles are really struggling. The macro heroes are performing well in TvT, but not making much of a splash in the other 2 MUs.
Now, what's the fix to this? Remove the Colossus in HotS and make something they're being given useful (HotS units for Protoss, though they're very likely to change, at the reveal looked like utter shit -- except the Tempest of course, which is ANOTHER massive AoE no-micro unit....seriously blizzard, stop with the terrible, terrible damage already...), change how the warp gate mechanic works so that the choice between regular gateway and warp gate is a significant one (such as: make the gateway produce faster, but warp gate can do long-distance reinforcement on a longer CD) and rebalance the game around the idea that something that does a HUGE amount of damage should take at least some effort to maximize its effectiveness. I'm fine with Templar doing a ton of damage, because they take at least some effort to position and use correctly. Colossi are the #1 reason for Protoss being given the "herp derp 1a" stigma, which isn't really deserved, and is detrimental to the game as a whole. And yes, I'm totally for an early game nerf (marine DPS?) if it would get our late game to a usable state.
|
On April 06 2012 00:07 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2012 23:48 ZenithM wrote:On April 05 2012 23:41 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:33 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:30 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:22 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:13 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:04 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 22:57 Horseballs wrote:
[quote]
Here's the thing that bothers me about when people demand replays and analyze them like this: I know what I need to do. I know where I've gone wrong. I know that I need to control my army better. But knowing those things is a lot different than doing those things; it is really, really hard to properly control a terran bio army and keep macroing behind it. I've known what to do for a year know, and after a year with much trying I am not much better at controlling vs protoss as I was when I started . It is a lot easier to control the protoss blob, and that is where the problem is.
Please note that my criticisms of his performance are not exactly things like "omg you didn't have MKP-level micro? you're terrible!" and "your resources weren't always at 0/0? noob!" These are what the biggest ones were: 1. He threw away units into a choke point without scouting (or I think he did scout with a factory first, and saw sentries with energy, which makes his decision even worse). 2. He occasionally dropped units into his opponent's base, but didn't actually harrass or deal significant damage with them. Then he just picked up and flew off. 3. During his final engagement, his ghosts and medivacs weren't used at all. His medivacs were somewhere else on the map, and his two ghosts were just using their regular attack (as opposed to EMP). And against chargelot archon, that's not gonna cut it. Those are key mistakes. And also, those are things I think a player of his caliber can certainly fix. You don't need 100 more APM to do those things better, and I think that's important and constructive feedback. The point of it isn't this analysis, or any analysis in particular. The point is I can know what I need to do and can still have room to fix it and it can still be unfair. Go back to the five rax reaper era. Zergs knew what they had to do to stop it, and they did, but that didn't stop blizzard from patching the game. Honestly, I don't see the connection between an old broken strategy that required patching, and this guy just not keeping his important units together and suiciding half his army. They're on entirely different levels >.> I don't see this critique as unfair, because I think what I'm asking him to do is not something only pro players can do. It isn't that this critique is unfair. It is that the amount of effort required to get the same result is disproportionate between terran and protoss. A typical analysis will say: well you need to do this here, this there and control better and then you could have won this game. That means that the game isn't unfair!!! See - you can stop it! I'm saying that it is like back around release when you'd tell a zerg: you need to get either quick speed and a couple of spines or open roach. That means 5 rax reaper isn't unbalanced!!! See - you can stop it! Just because you can identify room for improvement and places to get better doesn't mean that the game isn't fundamentally flawed. 1. Him keeping his army together and not suiciding units are not indicators that the match-up is fundamentally flawed. It's an indicator that he has reasonable room for improvement. 2. His replay is not an indicator that the match-up is fundamentally flawed. 3. His replay does not show the Protoss exploiting a key broken strategy in PvT in the same way that a fast mass reaper rush in the fucking beta did in TvZ. 4. If he's going to post a flawed game showing how a match-up is imbalanced, instead of analyzing it to look for improvement, then he's not approaching the game correctly. There's really nothing else to say here, and I need to go do work. Have a wonderful day You are missing the point. If you want to have a useful discussion and not talk past me with your politically correct language, go back and read what I wrote. Otherwise, stop wasting time. I clearly explained what I meant and you ignored it. For fuck's sake, you have no point. How on Earth do you come up with the claim that "It is that the amount of effort required to get the same result is disproportionate between terran and protoss" based on this replay and the analysis that comes with it? As a Protoss player, if my high templar and sentries and colossi are out of position (in the same way that his ghosts and medivacs were) I will get steamrolled. And rightly so! And so I just make sure I keep tabs on all my units (especially the spellcasters), especially when it comes time to engage in battle. And I make sure not to get half my army cut off from the rest (in the same way that he suicided half his guys). And when I analyze my replays and see that I made those stupid mistakes, I learn from them. Both of those errors can be fixed quite quickly, and they're important for any race. Go play 100 games as Terran and then play 100 games as Protoss and post your win percentages. Don't make claims without evidence. Sorry to barge in, but could it be...a clash of balls? I have a feeling I'm being trolled lol. Especially since I was just accused of being a troll after watching the whole game and posting an analysis... and then Horseballs starts talking about completely irrelevant nonsense (like reapers and roaches).
I really admire your perseverance in this thread to stay constructive and add a sensible basis for discussion - but then again, with all the whiners here you might miss the point of this thread, like entirely and fundamentally
You obviously found a weak spot in the "TvP imba" thingy going on here which has been reproduced numerous times - even without replays. This thread is funny to read but unfortunately not created to achieve anything at all - apart from lower tier terrans letting off steam.
|
On April 06 2012 00:21 Horseballs wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2012 00:07 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:48 ZenithM wrote:On April 05 2012 23:41 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:33 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:30 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:22 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:17 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 05 2012 23:13 Horseballs wrote:On April 05 2012 23:04 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
[quote]
Please note that my criticisms of his performance are not exactly things like "omg you didn't have MKP-level micro? you're terrible!" and "your resources weren't always at 0/0? noob!"
These are what the biggest ones were:
1. He threw away units into a choke point without scouting (or I think he did scout with a factory first, and saw sentries with energy, which makes his decision even worse).
2. He occasionally dropped units into his opponent's base, but didn't actually harrass or deal significant damage with them. Then he just picked up and flew off.
3. During his final engagement, his ghosts and medivacs weren't used at all. His medivacs were somewhere else on the map, and his two ghosts were just using their regular attack (as opposed to EMP). And against chargelot archon, that's not gonna cut it.
Those are key mistakes. And also, those are things I think a player of his caliber can certainly fix. You don't need 100 more APM to do those things better, and I think that's important and constructive feedback. The point of it isn't this analysis, or any analysis in particular. The point is I can know what I need to do and can still have room to fix it and it can still be unfair. Go back to the five rax reaper era. Zergs knew what they had to do to stop it, and they did, but that didn't stop blizzard from patching the game. Honestly, I don't see the connection between an old broken strategy that required patching, and this guy just not keeping his important units together and suiciding half his army. They're on entirely different levels >.> I don't see this critique as unfair, because I think what I'm asking him to do is not something only pro players can do. It isn't that this critique is unfair. It is that the amount of effort required to get the same result is disproportionate between terran and protoss. A typical analysis will say: well you need to do this here, this there and control better and then you could have won this game. That means that the game isn't unfair!!! See - you can stop it! I'm saying that it is like back around release when you'd tell a zerg: you need to get either quick speed and a couple of spines or open roach. That means 5 rax reaper isn't unbalanced!!! See - you can stop it! Just because you can identify room for improvement and places to get better doesn't mean that the game isn't fundamentally flawed. 1. Him keeping his army together and not suiciding units are not indicators that the match-up is fundamentally flawed. It's an indicator that he has reasonable room for improvement. 2. His replay is not an indicator that the match-up is fundamentally flawed. 3. His replay does not show the Protoss exploiting a key broken strategy in PvT in the same way that a fast mass reaper rush in the fucking beta did in TvZ. 4. If he's going to post a flawed game showing how a match-up is imbalanced, instead of analyzing it to look for improvement, then he's not approaching the game correctly. There's really nothing else to say here, and I need to go do work. Have a wonderful day You are missing the point. If you want to have a useful discussion and not talk past me with your politically correct language, go back and read what I wrote. Otherwise, stop wasting time. I clearly explained what I meant and you ignored it. For fuck's sake, you have no point. How on Earth do you come up with the claim that "It is that the amount of effort required to get the same result is disproportionate between terran and protoss" based on this replay and the analysis that comes with it? As a Protoss player, if my high templar and sentries and colossi are out of position (in the same way that his ghosts and medivacs were) I will get steamrolled. And rightly so! And so I just make sure I keep tabs on all my units (especially the spellcasters), especially when it comes time to engage in battle. And I make sure not to get half my army cut off from the rest (in the same way that he suicided half his guys). And when I analyze my replays and see that I made those stupid mistakes, I learn from them. Both of those errors can be fixed quite quickly, and they're important for any race. Go play 100 games as Terran and then play 100 games as Protoss and post your win percentages. Don't make claims without evidence. Sorry to barge in, but could it be...a clash of balls? I have a feeling I'm being trolled lol. Especially since I was just accused of being a troll after watching the whole game and posting an analysis... and then Horseballs starts talking about completely irrelevant nonsense (like reapers and roaches). You completely miss the point of my argument. It has nothing to do with that one replay, or any given replay. Itt has everything to do with the prevailing attitude that if you can get better, then the matchup is fine. I used the reaper example to demonstrate an example where through a disproportionate amount of effort a zerg player could overcome something, and yet the game was patched to fix it. Similarly, it takes a disproportionate amount of effort to control a terran ball compared to a protoss ball. It can be overcome, but that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be changed or can't be changed. Again, it has nothing to do with that replay or any specific replay. My argument was clearly laid out and easily understandable, but you've chosen to ignore it.
I never once said that TvP is balanced simply by virtue of the fact that Terrans should just *get better* to keep up with the Protoss.
However, this thread was created for Terrans and by Terrans to demonstrate that lower-level imbalance does indeed exist, and so the onus is on them to show that. I was refuting this replay as imbalance evidence by demonstrating that the game was not lost by the Terran due to Protoss being overpowered, but instead by fundamental decision-making flaws that the Terran should already know at his level and league. Therefore, it is not evidence that the TvP match-up is broken. And I explicitly outline them, and you would see them too if you cared to watch the replay and analyze it as I did.
Also, you in particular have done nothing to support your claims that TvP is broken, or that superior mechanics and control are required for Terran, or anything else. I don't go around spouting out arguments if I can't back them up. So since you're not contributing anything as evidence (e.g. replays that defend your case) for us to talk about, you're just a bandwagoner.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
