|
EDIT: Combatex nearly just defeated Parting 2-1 at WCG finals.... Adds to the discussion i think.
I know this post will probably draw a lot of flack but i hope you guys hear me out.
Once upon a time, PvP was a straight forward affair, a matchup where superior micro wins almost 100% of the time. One could say it was a test of APM and precision, with little else playing a role. It was boring to watch for many, and from a game design standpoint a mess.
However, from a competitive standpoint the 4 gate ensured one thing - the better player won almost 100% of the time. My proof for that is simple, top players like ogs.MC rocked 90%+ win rates (A lot of people challenging this number, i saw it on a GSL vod when he was being introduced by Korean announcers, if it wasn't 90%, I'm still pretty sure i remember the number being astronomically high), with no one able to touch him in a vast majority of games.
Fast forward through warp gate time nerfs, sentry build time buffs, a bevy of warping/vision ramp changes, the four gate is all but dead, but now more than ever we have a gamesmanship of rocks paper scissor, and more than ever i can't for the life of me find a single PvP expert.
Remember when OZ was 70%+ in GSTL in PvP? That dominance must've lasted less than a month, as he then proceeded to get rolled out by protoss players in multiple tournaments.
Who can dominate the matchup? is it even possible? I'm not sure the current meta game is better, i see top players get upset all the time by guys that they should beat in this matchup, something that happens much less in the non-mirrors involving protoss.
Why is the matchup so volatile, why do so many strategies hard counter one another? Will the inclusion of the new units solve these problems in HOTS?
|
no
User was warned for this post
|
combination of gimmicky tech trees and not beeing able to scout properly.
it just becomes more visible in the mirror matchup.
While i agree that during the 4gate era the one with better micro won, though is this what we only want?
I am for sure, that the current metagame leads to way more interesting games!
|
As a warcraft 3 player, PvP 4gate always was my favorite mirror to play 
|
With 4 Gate you have defense>offense>tech>defense rock paper scissor. Without 4 Gate you only have techroute rock paper scissor.
So its way better the way it is now.
|
in the 4gate days pvp took alot more skill and alot less luck sadly
|
4 gate era for pvp was by far the most interesting to watch for me. lategame pvp is also the most boring thing ever, even worse than lategame pvz.
|
United States23455 Posts
I don't believe that PvP was better with 4 Gate. One thing that you say is that it was all about micro, apm, and precision, which is true. A 4 Gate vs 4 Gate battle was all about who controlled better. However, was this really a good thing? Another aspect of SC2, and another way you can win, should always be out-strategizing your opponent.
Superior strategies is right up there with superior micro in reasons why a player should win. In general, Korean protosses (you mention MC and Oz) have foreigner crushing mechanics and precision. However, a foreigner can win in today's PvP against someone like that by practicing and formulating a better strategy.
4 Gate was a generic build that did not showcase player strategy or ingenuity. It required no scouting, planning, or on the fly decision making. Worst of all, it was god-awful for spectators who were forced to watch the same scenario play out over and over again in PvP.
I appreciate the points that you make in the OP, but I feel you leave out the benefits that come from the inclusion of different strategies in a matchup.
|
MC was never at 90% in PvP and PvP is far less volatile now than it was back then. I can only assume you made this topic because MC lost to Grubby which is a super dumb reason to think something like this. MC just hasn't performed well lately. He's had trouble in all 3 matchups.
|
I think PvP right now is actually one of the more skill based matchups. Sure 4gate vs 4gate lead to the better micro player winning a lot, but that doesn't mean he's the overall better player. I think games need to have a chance to enter the midgame to determine who is the victor.
In HotS PvP is a lot more interesting. There is a lot more Gateway usage and harassment due to the "death" of the Colossus in the matchup. Tempests are easily accessible and have pretty much made mass Colossi suicide. I think we'll see a lot more Gateway based armies supported by Immortals, Archons, and Tempests than the boring "war of the worlds" that we see in WoL PvP today.
|
On November 25 2012 08:19 RedZ wrote:
no
correct.
short games are boring. prefer longer games with lots of small micro battles over one micro battle that decides game in first 10 mins.
|
IMO it was far more interesting to watch when it was just 4 gate, even if it took less skill to play.
|
"the better player won almost 100% of the time."
Well, that's true a lot of the time, but what's more true is that the player who plays better in a given game will win. In PvP the player who defensive 4 gated won almost 100% of the time against the aggressive 4 gater, and the teching player won a lot of the time against the defensive 4 gater.
"why do so many strategies hard counter one another?"
That's the way it is in most matchups in the early game though, especially when considering 1, or early 2 base plays. Whether it's ZvZ, TvT, PvT, or TvZ, you can just draw circles of builds that hard counter one another. When you commit to a tech early on there isn't any going back, so if your opponent picks a tech that beats yours then you can very easily be in a tough spot.
EDIT: PvP sort of reminds me of BW ZvZ, where 90% of games didn't go very long because builds countered eachother, but the longer the game went the more likely it was that the better player won.
|
4gate PvP was really fun to play and watch now that I look back on it. It was pure micro and decision-making; the player with the better of those two traits always won.
Even though today's era of PvP has become more "standard" with Creator, Rain, and PartinG showing how late-game should be played, it's a lot less entertaining to watch, at least imo. Creator vs PartinG in WCS on Antiga was a pretty good example of why I don't like playing/watching late-game PvP. Creator attacks up the ramp at a bad angle, even though he had his attack upgrade advantage and superior army count/composition, and instantly loses half his army. The worst thing is playing it, when you don't know when you should attack.
|
On November 25 2012 08:20 mTwRINE wrote:
With 4 Gate you have defense>offense>tech>defense rock paper scissor. Without 4 Gate you only have techroute rock paper scissor.
So its way better the way it is now.
Nice thought process OP but as Rine said, it wasn´t "the better micro wins" it was more like the defensive 4 gate player wins. And if it was defensive vs defensive 4 gate and someone got blink and the other one comitted on his 4 gate it was also bullshit. I could continue here but i think everyone that read till here got the point.
|
Hell yes PvP was better back then.
|
On November 25 2012 08:27 dAPhREAk wrote:correct. short games are boring. prefer longer games with lots of small micro battles over one micro battle that decides game in first 10 mins.
show me a game of sc2 with a lot of small battles, sc2 is all about big endgame 200/200 battle -> end
4 gate was cool tool to test players micro, now its all about BO
maybe someone will develop "4 gate" for 2 bases?
|
On November 25 2012 08:27 Arco wrote:
In HotS PvP is a lot more interesting. There is a lot more Gateway usage and harassment due to the "death" of the Colossus in the matchup. Tempests are easily accessible and have pretty much made mass Colossi suicide. I think we'll see a lot more Gateway based armies supported by Immortals, Archons, and Tempests than the boring "war of the worlds" that we see in WoL PvP today.
Yes.
User was warned for this post
|
On November 25 2012 08:34 astor wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 08:27 dAPhREAk wrote:On November 25 2012 08:19 RedZ wrote:
no correct. short games are boring. prefer longer games with lots of small micro battles over one micro battle that decides game in first 10 mins. show me a game of sc2 with a lot of small battles, sc2 is all about big endgame 200/200 battle -> end
Jjakji vs Leenock on taldarim altar a year ago
|
Absolutely no...
Besides Colossi wars i think that PvP nowadays is getting more and more entertaining. I love the phoenix wars which somehow start to appear in professional games lately.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
