Basically it comes down to the deathball problem again. All matchups including protoss end up in one huge fight (or in a PvZ including muta in a basetrade) if it is going into a macro game. Otherwise it's about defending all-ins. But this one huge fight is the no1 problem which has to be faced. I'm not so sure if the problem really is the lack of early game aggressions protoss can utilize. I think it's also a problem of how protoss units are designed to be moved and be used in a ball. Because if protoss splits up it's units they become weak after all. The best example is the colossus. It can walk on top of the ball and is terribly weak if not supported by more units. Same goes for all the air units, which can ball up like crazy as there is no collision in air and ofc ground units can ball up under the. (what's also interesting is that pretty much all Protoss units have the exact same speed, once balled up and moved the whole army including every unit except Phoenixes will stay in the ball forever) I also feel like Protoss the smallest possibilities of microing in these huge lategame engagements. A mass air protoss army can't do alot else then attacking and pulling back. The problem is: I just don't see how to address these problems. It would take a major redesign of this race to make it more enjoyable to watch. The question is what is the real focus of this race? Zerg had been the macro race (kinda developed from Swarm->Positioning->Swarm again), Terran was kind of the all-rounder race where everything is theoretically possible but not easy to pull off, but what's protoss? Some incredibly strong all-ins, and deathballs. Actually things that doesn't even fit together and both aren't very cool to watch.
On April 12 2013 16:10 DarkLordOlli wrote: This, this, this. One hundred times this. The only reason why protoss is not more successful in tournaments is exactly this. You have to rely on somewhat-gimmicks like forcefield, etc. to both defend and attack and only players who have that stuff down perfectly and rely manage to FF perfectly, storm perfectly, etc. a whole tournament long will have success as protoss. And that's hard as hell to do because you have to forcefield, storm, etc. reactionary. It's super easy to make mistakes with forcefielding (overlap, holes between the FFs, blocking your own units, forcefielding in too much army, wasting forcefields, ETC) and lose a game that way. It's gimmicky, no other word to describe it.
+1 for stronger gateway units and less relying on gimmicks to survive/win.
Edit: this is not about protoss being too weak. Protoss is looking very strong in HotS if played well. It's just overall the most fragile race in the early to midgame imo and the easiest to mess up with and lose a game due to that.
This is so ridiculous. Force-fielding is one of the easiest mechanics in the entire game. It's point and click. The only hard part about force-fields is the so-called "wasting" them, but that is true for pretty much any energy based ability in the game.
To call protoss reactionary is pretty silly as well, at least in the PvT matchup. Terran doesn't "go vikings" against protoss, they build vikings in reaction to colossus, because if terran doesn't have vikings vs colossus then it is insta-GG. In WOL protoss even went so far as to build a single colossus without upgrading thermal lance and deliberately show it then proceed to go for high templar in order to mind game the terran into overproducing vikings because they were otherwise useless in the matchup. If protoss don't want to use colossus then they can use HT which again requires a REACTION from the terran in the form of ghosts. The only terran strategies that protoss has to play "reactionary" to are ultra gimmicky strategies that don't work on the professional scene.
Calling protoss gimmicky compared to terran is just SOOO silly when the empirical evidence shows just the opposite. Protoss players almost always want to play a super macro style, whereas terrans are forced to proxy 2 racks in game 7's or build entire strategies around clever ways to never actually engage the protoss army. I shouldn't even need to talk about PvZ having the most codified idea of "standard" in all of sc2...
Impressive how you managed to completely misunderstand and make a whole post around it.
What I meant with forcefields/storms being reactionary is that if say a terran decides to stim up your ramp, you have to have a split second reaction to forcefield perfectly or you lose the game. That's what I meant, nothing else. You can't compare that to reactive macro, that's apples and oranges. That split second perfect forcefielding is the part that's super easy to mess up. If I have time to forcefield, yeah no shit it's easy. But most of the time that's not what happens.
And the last paragraph is nothing but your opinion and terran whine. Don't care about that at all.
I do like the mothership core though, it's powerful but not too gimmicky and it allows for a number of different uses. The decisionmaking behind those is super important.
I agree with OP to some extent but I think as HoTS progresses people will figure out the MSC a little bit more. The threat of Oracles at least forces defensive widow mines or ebay + turrets and them to be defensive for a bit.
I never really understood why Warp Tech was placed as a basic tech literally an ALWAYS have tech. For such a sophisticated, game changing mechanic which strenght rellied on either covert action (cheese) or strong timing (bypassing rally) its given a passive "macro" bonus so its still a no-brainer.
Its the lack of choice that irks me, what if warp tech was an actual optional choice that gave different incentives (like warp tech and gateway tech both having its strenghts) and required a specific scout from opponent to determine protoss intent. Because so far scouting your opponents warp tech just gives you an idea of getting 4gated, and thats it. Because every protoss on the planet will research it anyway.
If the protoss wants to be defensive, he will still research it, because he wants to have faster unit production, so the intent for choosing it was not its design but this silly macro boost tied to it. So why is it there ? -_-
Good read indeed. I also was thinking whats need to be done to make protoss finally an interesting race to play. In my opinion it would be nice if all protoss units turn s to at least 3 food (so they can match their few but strong background) und must be balanced around that. Also what if Warptech can be changed to an mid-end game research? Major changes which will need much work, but maybe worth it.
PS: Hate hero units in RTS games. MS and MSC definitely need to go.
I can only agree for the most part. I dont think z or t should be changed, other than some minor tweaks maybe, but protoss could definatly use a big overhaul. I dont believe Blizzard will make the change we are all waiting for however. There have already been threads like this before, hell people have even made mods to make some of the changes you suggested. Im not going to suggest anything myself, but I can honestly say ZvP is my least favorite matchup, just because theres always that chance you'll face some kind of cheesy allin or end up screwing up 1 fight against a deathball and lose, and it's just not fun, wether you win or lose. When you win its more of a 'you got what you deserved, dirty cheeser'. I even prefer ZvZ over that, or all-inning the protoss myself. If it has come that far, I really think this will hurt our precious esports in the long run. (hehe)
After seeing the ZvT between Fantasy and TRUE, I really wish anything involving protoss could become similar, because the series was just so darn entertaining. But protoss in its current state? It's going to be a rare sight.
Sentries become more powerful as they gather energy. Therefore it allows for timing attacks with sentries that you build early on and let gather energy. The immortal sentry all-in is a natural consequence, it doesn't necessarily have to do with forcefield being broken.
On April 12 2013 19:05 []Phase[] wrote: After seeing the ZvT between Fantasy and TRUE, I really wish anything involving protoss could become similar, because the series was just so darn entertaining. But protoss in its current state? It's going to be a rare sight.
ZvP right now can be a lot like that if Protoss doesnt turtle to airtosslike flying vs DRG on akilon flats.
On April 12 2013 19:05 []Phase[] wrote: After seeing the ZvT between Fantasy and TRUE, I really wish anything involving protoss could become similar, because the series was just so darn entertaining. But protoss in its current state? It's going to be a rare sight.
ZvP right now can be a lot like that if Protoss doesnt turtle to airtosslike flying vs DRG on akilon flats.
Oh, but im sure there will be some fun games every now and then. I just think they are a lot more rare due to some of the issues that the OP stated.
OP is a bunch of (slanted) observations and a few non sequitur conclusions. I don't agree at all.
Most of my games involve using the MSC to do attacks I could never have done in WoL, with the safety of recall in a bad fight or to get home because harass landed while I was moving out, or even just time warp to get away.
I wonder how much the OP has actually tried to play strategies that aren't based on passive deathball plans.
On April 12 2013 19:05 []Phase[] wrote: After seeing the ZvT between Fantasy and TRUE, I really wish anything involving protoss could become similar, because the series was just so darn entertaining. But protoss in its current state? It's going to be a rare sight.
ZvP right now can be a lot like that if Protoss doesnt turtle to airtosslike flying vs DRG on akilon flats.
Oh, but im sure there will be some fun games every now and then. I just think they are a lot more rare due to some of the issues that the OP stated.
Well, I disagree with the problems. Like warpgates are a great thing for Protoss units that are designed as rather slow and therefore passive. Same with recall. And sentries actually allow Protoss to dedicate ressources to aggression and investments, rather than to low tier unit massing. (i dislike the sentiment of low tier spamming being interesting play.)
Unlike the OP I believe those tools were added because Protoss needed them after blizzard decided to cut the 12selection limit. Not that the units were tuned down because of the tools. It's rather that Protoss still suffers too much from "big and beefy" design ideas (which wirked better in BW due to pathing/selection limits, unavailability of bio...) with too little mobile glasscanons or tools to turn it's units into such. (zealot warpin, blink, recall, phoenix kind of being the only ones)
Back in 2010, Tester did the forcefield whole army split, everyone was in awe, months later when macro play stabilized it alraedy became a necessary skill to offset a macro /unit power differance (in straight clash) . ZvP in SC2 is almost never a tug of war, becasue zerg knows that he cannot engage because of forcefields, it makes it a do or die decision, and because logically we prefer to value consistancy over risk zerg falls back into defensive hive which gives him an option to fight protoss without sentry being the equalizer anymore (ironically making it into another do or die situation, vortex vs BLs) End of Wol.
Well, i didnt watch almost any of Hots PvZ (actually i dont watch much protoss, as terran seem to be 90% of all fun), and there are certainly few ideas and units that work as half-measures for a workaround. Viper pulling, muta buff, oracle and all that jazz. Yet apparently we see mass voidrays. I just cannot accept this matchup, its trivial.
Examples of the aforementioned tug of war in ZvP in BW:
+1, nice read. I am mid Master Protoss too. I have wondered this same question and I feel at least PvT could be fixed with 1 simple tweak on medivacs. I am not sure how medivacs could be changed but at the moment medivacs deny everything other protoss style than aoe. To hold medivac-bio army protoss needs either colossi or templars with storm. This simple thing is 1 of the problems in P matchups.
1 thing i would like to see games in maps that have only 1 gas per base (rich gas ofc) and 6 gold minerals per base. I dont know how it would change things but i would like to see games on them.
On April 12 2013 14:11 erin[go]bragh wrote: Unfortunately the only way to fix the race is to do things Blizzard will never ever do.
Warpgate needs to be removed. The entire race is balanced around this tech. Removing it would allow Gateway units to be rebalanced and give you less reliance on later tech or gimmicky "keep me safe in the early game" units like the MSC. If it needs be kept (and it will) I think it really needs to undergo changes, like instead of warping in on power grids, have it warp in proximity to a Nexus instead. It'll keep its powerful defensive advantages but wouldn't be so OP as a reinforcement mechanic as to rape the balance of Gateway units. As a bonus, Nexuses are much harder/easier to scout/bigger of a commit to proxy in the early game (i.e retarded) but would be a feasible part of a push in the late game. Not much different from PF spam. But eh, thats off the top of my head.
Colossus needs to be removed. My god it's been beaten to death, but this unit is the epitome of boring. Its too powerful, too easy to micro, too boring to watch, and too crippling to lose as a toss player. Without Colossi dependance, other units/tech can be buffed. And just because its required when talking about the colossus: replace it with the reaver. Theres your harass/heavy hitting unit thats more fun for spectators and isn't as unforgiving for players.
These are things that won't change though because Blizzard is simply unwilling to and I'm sure noobs and casuals would cry without Warpgate. But seriously, its just one or two root things that are keeping the race down, everything else is just by proxy.
Very much agree with this post... they aren't the perfect solution but they would help a lot and they would at least have some chance of being implemented as they aren't too radical a departure.
I wouldn't "replace" the Collosus overtly though. I'd keep the unit but just change it's movement speed and the way its damage mechanic works to be more similar to the Reaver.
On April 12 2013 20:03 Plansix wrote: This has all be discussed before and all will be discussed again. Nothing will change, as protoss is pretty great as is.
Depends on expectations, seeing how so many fans want to see protoss champions that define the meta-game beyond CHOO CHOO train.
On April 12 2013 15:22 PandaTank wrote: Protoss will always be the gimmick race because of the design you have mentioned. Throughout the evolution of the metagame they will have small successes due to new strategies that can not yet be identified. But once all of the builds have been discovered and the appropriate scouting + responses have been established, they stand no chance. Especially against zerg, due to the massive disparity in macro mechanics. I personally find it sad that one of the few ways a Protoss can consistently win is by only tricking their opponents.
I agree so much, basically if you know what build a protoss is doing you can just counter him so bad, while other races are more reactionary and more standard.
On April 12 2013 16:10 DarkLordOlli wrote: This, this, this. One hundred times this. The only reason why protoss is not more successful in tournaments is exactly this. You have to rely on somewhat-gimmicks like forcefield, etc. to both defend and attack and only players who have that stuff down perfectly and rely manage to FF perfectly, storm perfectly, etc. a whole tournament long will have success as protoss. And that's hard as hell to do because you have to forcefield, storm, etc. reactionary. It's super easy to make mistakes with forcefielding (overlap, holes between the FFs, blocking your own units, forcefielding in too much army, wasting forcefields, ETC) and lose a game that way. It's gimmicky, no other word to describe it.
+1 for stronger gateway units and less relying on gimmicks to survive/win.
Edit: this is not about protoss being too weak. Protoss is looking very strong in HotS if played well. It's just overall the most fragile race in the early to midgame imo and the easiest to mess up with and lose a game due to that.
This is so ridiculous. Force-fielding is one of the easiest mechanics in the entire game. It's point and click. The only hard part about force-fields is the so-called "wasting" them, but that is true for pretty much any energy based ability in the game.
To call protoss reactionary is pretty silly as well, at least in the PvT matchup. Terran doesn't "go vikings" against protoss, they build vikings in reaction to colossus, because if terran doesn't have vikings vs colossus then it is insta-GG. In WOL protoss even went so far as to build a single colossus without upgrading thermal lance and deliberately show it then proceed to go for high templar in order to mind game the terran into overproducing vikings because they were otherwise useless in the matchup. If protoss don't want to use colossus then they can use HT which again requires a REACTION from the terran in the form of ghosts. The only terran strategies that protoss has to play "reactionary" to are ultra gimmicky strategies that don't work on the professional scene.
Calling protoss gimmicky compared to terran is just SOOO silly when the empirical evidence shows just the opposite. Protoss players almost always want to play a super macro style, whereas terrans are forced to proxy 2 racks in game 7's or build entire strategies around clever ways to never actually engage the protoss army. I shouldn't even need to talk about PvZ having the most codified idea of "standard" in all of sc2...
Have you even played/watched HotS? This is 100% not true at all anymore.
I do wish that Protoss could be the aggressor in matchups more without having to feel so all in. Mothership Core does an okish (not really) job of this, but I don't know. It just feels like you have to play passive until you get storm, basically. Especially with the buffs to Mutas and medivacs.
IMO, the problem is not that protoss does not have an early game - they indeed do if they whish so, gateway units are pretty strong in the beginning, especially against T; the problem is that protoss does not have a midgame (aside from allins, and I'm only talking about non-mirror matches). In midgame, a protoss usually sits in his base and tries to get up Colossus and HT tech, while trying to defend and get away with a third.
To me, the problem seems to be that overcommitting to gateway units in the midgame usually means that the protoss is very weak once the opponent's army reaches a critical size or the opponent reaches some critical technology (and this is much more the case than for T and Z). On the other side, a protoss does not have the production to build up an agressive midgame army without a lot of gateway units.
That makes Warpgates feel like a promise that is not kept: Warping in units feels dynamic and agressive, but what you have to do when playing protoss is teching up defensively. This in mind, I would nevertheless abandon protoss and switch to zerg the instant warpgate tech is removed from the game - I love how this mechanic feels, and I won't go back to building queues.
Anyway, to be honest, while we are still running the very first version of HotS after release, I think balance is currently in kind of a good shape. Especially in comparison to WoL we are playing fairly fair matches so far. Funny to me is the fact that we start to see more and more stuff from BW times return to the metagame. Remember lurker contains where you had to wait 'til that observer is ready before moving out? Those swarm hosts contains strongly remind me of that. Not to discuss the strength of locusts right now, but things like that and the increasing number of harass and drop play in current pro games is a sign of the game going into the right direction if you ask me. It will still take some time until we see play like above in SC2 but I feel we are getting closer and closer to it. I mean, BW was like almost a a decade old back then and comparatively figured out at that point. So it came down to a lot of skill and mechanics in the beginning instead of deathball and build wins. Give it some time and mass games ;-)
EPT
