EPTOn July 28 2013 10:30 Plansix wrote:
Because a Protoss a 1 fax fe before with just two gates.
Because a Protoss a 1 fax fe before with just two gates.
I don't know what you're saying. Explain.
Interview of David Kim about Balance in IEM - Page 20
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
::Rhapsody
Canada124 Posts
I don't know what you're saying. Explain. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 28 2013 10:33 ::Rhapsody wrote: I feel like in TvP, terran has to do early game damage in order to fight equally in a 200/200 army situation. Oracles are game ending when you choose to go reaper on 1;1 maps. Idk, maybe it's just me, but protoss is not even played to it's full extent. No usage of warp prisms on most pro games, no storm drops, nothing. Although this is mostly because they want just straight up win an engagement without harrass. What a load of crap. Crank uses WP all the time. So does grubby and other high level players. And they lose straight up engagements too if they are don't have the control to keep up. Stop blaming the game for your worst match up. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 28 2013 10:34 ::Rhapsody wrote: I don't know what you're saying. Explain. Sorry, punish a 1 fax fe with just two gates. It's not an option. | ||
|
::Rhapsody
Canada124 Posts
On July 28 2013 10:37 Plansix wrote: What a load of crap. Crank uses WP all the time. So does grubby and other high level players. And they lose straight up engagements too if they are don't have the control to keep up. Stop blaming the game for your worst match up. I play Random. This isn't my worst matchup, TvT and PvZ are. No need to attack me personally. | ||
|
Sated
England4983 Posts
| ||
|
::Rhapsody
Canada124 Posts
On July 28 2013 10:39 Plansix wrote: Sorry, punish a 1 fax fe with just two gates. It's not an option. I still don't know what you're talking about. What I said is: Nathanias said something about it being bullshit that Terran cannot punish Protoss with a 2 Rax, not the other way around. You might have misread. | ||
|
::Rhapsody
Canada124 Posts
On July 28 2013 10:41 Sated wrote: David Kim is using the "Protoss players are worse than Zerg and Terran players, it's not a balance issue" excuse... Are you fucking serious? Either Protoss is heavily underplayed [not] or Protoss has design issues [probably] or Protoss is weak [a bit unlikely]. The relience on FF and gimmicks make protoss really weird compared to T and Z. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 28 2013 10:43 ::Rhapsody wrote: I still don't know what you're talking about. What I said is: Nathanias said something about it being bullshit that Terran cannot punish Protoss with a 2 Rax, not the other way around. You might have misread. Sorry, typing on a Ipad. Its not like a protoss could punish a 1 rax FE with 2 gates anyways. The era of building a bunch of marines off of 300 minerals worth of production and walking them across the map to do damage to a protoss fast expand is over. The builds are slightly more complicated that than now. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25128 Posts
On July 28 2013 10:43 ::Rhapsody wrote: I still don't know what you're talking about. What I said is: Nathanias said something about it being bullshit that Terran cannot punish Protoss with a 2 Rax, not the other way around. You might have misread. As a Protoss player I share his feelings on this. I am not against safe openers, but to me it seems HoTs has really given Protoss tools to make what SHOULD be easy-to-punish greed, be perfectly safe. Reminds me of a similar time that Terrans were struggling against Queen-heavy openers after that patch. I feel whining about enabling 'macro games' has really homogenised certain aspects of the game. Now, in the overall scheme of things I am probably slightly behind Artosis, and far beyond everybody else in terms of my love of 'safe' builds so perhaps I am biased. That said, I feel more reactionary, calculated defensive play is more interesting and more fair than blind play that is incredibly hard to punish reactively. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25128 Posts
On July 28 2013 10:48 Plansix wrote: Sorry, typing on a Ipad. Its not like a protoss could punish a 1 rax FE with 2 gates anyways. The era of building a bunch of marines off of 300 minerals worth of production and walking them across the map to do damage to a protoss fast expand is over. The builds are slightly more complicated that than now. There was actually some subtlety in such moveouts, occasionally you would see seemingly random hitsquads of marines take really weird routes and hit the Protoss at specific timings, solely with the aim of say, sniping sentries. That mineral-only investment would then force the Protoss player to have to make a calculated decision, replace those lost sentries and sink that gas to be more defensively solid, or cut that defensive corner to push up the tech tree? | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 28 2013 10:49 Wombat_NI wrote: As a Protoss player I share his feelings on this. I am not against safe openers, but to me it seems HoTs has really given Protoss tools to make what SHOULD be easy-to-punish greed, be perfectly safe. Reminds me of a similar time that Terrans were struggling against Queen-heavy openers after that patch. I feel whining about enabling 'macro games' has really homogenised certain aspects of the game. Now, in the overall scheme of things I am probably slightly behind Artosis, and far beyond everybody else in terms of my love of 'safe' builds so perhaps I am biased. That said, I feel more reactionary, calculated defensive play is more interesting and more fair than blind play that is incredibly hard to punish reactively. I don't know, a lot of these new hellion opener we have been seeing are giving the fast expand builds a run for their money. I saw several in the recent WCS and did some reasonable damage with the risk of doing a lot more if the protoss hadn't been on the ball. I think stuff is to safe until people figure out how to make it not safe. | ||
|
::Rhapsody
Canada124 Posts
On July 28 2013 10:49 Wombat_NI wrote: As a Protoss player I share his feelings on this. I am not against safe openers, but to me it seems HoTs has really given Protoss tools to make what SHOULD be easy-to-punish greed, be perfectly safe. Reminds me of a similar time that Terrans were struggling against Queen-heavy openers after that patch. I feel whining about enabling 'macro games' has really homogenised certain aspects of the game. Now, in the overall scheme of things I am probably slightly behind Artosis, and far beyond everybody else in terms of my love of 'safe' builds so perhaps I am biased. That said, I feel more reactionary, calculated defensive play is more interesting and more fair than blind play that is incredibly hard to punish reactively. Yes! Exactly what I was saying in much better wording! Thank you, I always get flamed at for having poor choice of words. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 28 2013 10:51 Wombat_NI wrote: There was actually some subtlety in such moveouts, occasionally you would see seemingly random hitsquads of marines take really weird routes and hit the Protoss at specific timings, solely with the aim of say, sniping sentries. That mineral-only investment would then force the Protoss player to have to make a calculated decision, replace those lost sentries and sink that gas to be more defensively solid, or cut that defensive corner to push up the tech tree? The problem I had with that was the terran never had to spend any gas to get this stuff, except maybe on reactors. They would just march their marine hit squad across the map and the protoss would pray they had enough FF to hold out until the production kicked in. And the terran could do this off of no gas and the back of a bunch of mules. I like the new era where the marine is useful, but not the snowball unit of choice for the early game. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25128 Posts
 Plansix, any games in particular to check out? My incessant Starcraft watching has taken a momentary hit, I pretty much have a gap for this entire WCS Kr season to fill up, having only really seen the current IEM tournament of recent top-tier action. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 28 2013 10:56 Wombat_NI wrote: Thank you rhapsody, I suffer too on TL, getting ignored for using too many words Plansix, any games in particular to check out? My incessant Starcraft watching has taken a momentary hit, I pretty much have a gap for this entire WCS Kr season to fill up, having only really seen the current IEM tournament of recent top-tier action. Demuslims games in WCS this week had some good hellion usage against crank. I also think he used them against Huk I think. They still take 5 shots from a Nexus cannon and put the fear in protoss of a run by. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25128 Posts
On July 28 2013 10:54 Plansix wrote: The problem I had with that was the terran never had to spend any gas to get this stuff, except maybe on reactors. They would just march their marine hit squad across the map and the protoss would pray they had enough FF to hold out until the production kicked in. And the terran could do this off of no gas and the back of a bunch of mules. I like the new era where the marine is useful, but not the snowball unit of choice for the early game. I'm not talking about any kind of kill-move, but really specific timings that are designed to punish certain builds. The old WoL CreatorPrime PvT stuck rigidly to 4 sentries as the best balance between defensive solidity, and achieving the tech goals of the overall build schematic. You would see smart players adjusting to target that specific element of the build, which I quite enjoyed seeing. You could also deny such moveouts with good stalker positioning, and small scale stalker vs naked marine micro battles were some of my favourite aspects of the PvT of old. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 28 2013 10:59 Wombat_NI wrote: I'm not talking about any kind of kill-move, but really specific timings that are designed to punish certain builds. The old WoL CreatorPrime PvT stuck rigidly to 4 sentries as the best balance between defensive solidity, and achieving the tech goals of the overall build schematic. You would see smart players adjusting to target that specific element of the build, which I quite enjoyed seeing. You could also deny such moveouts with good stalker positioning, and small scale stalker vs naked marine micro battles were some of my favourite aspects of the PvT of old. The problem I had with that was it was one way. The terran could 1 rax FE back in WoL and there was shit all a protoss could do about it without all inning or dumping a shit ton of gas. But the terran could just build 2 raxes, not take any gasses and march across the map and try to do some damage. Maybe he wouldn't or maybe the protoss would fuck up, their timing would be off and it was game over. I like this new era where the terran has to invest in some sort of gas, rather than just living off of mules until its time to get upgrades. | ||
|
::Rhapsody
Canada124 Posts
On July 28 2013 11:02 Plansix wrote: The problem I had with that was it was one way. The terran could 1 rax FE back in WoL and there was shit all a protoss could do about it without all inning or dumping a shit ton of gas. But the terran could just build 2 raxes, not take any gasses and march across the map and try to do some damage. Maybe he wouldn't or maybe the protoss would fuck up, their timing would be off and it was game over. I like this new era where the terran has to invest in some sort of gas, rather than just living off of mules until its time to get upgrades. But you see.. say I go 1rax reaper fe. Get 1-4 probe kills (usually), or not any. Then I'm forced to either go for another reaper, go for fact. or go for reactor, or go for reactor @50gas and stop mining gas. Then, if the protoss scouts that I'm making a reaper, a stargate follow up is incredibly dangerous for the terran, or if he scouts that I'm going reactor, he can play safely. Terran has to put a bit off pressure simply because of game design. It's slightly easier to get the terran offguard than cornering the protoss offguard simply because of aoe, and such. I know this comes all in all into skill level, but it's mostly the Protoss' army design that is so flawed. Costly units, they don't scale well, colossus is really strong, stalker is super strong early game, and sucks late game. Protoss units don't have any consistency. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25128 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 28 2013 11:07 ::Rhapsody wrote: But you see.. say I go 1rax reaper fe. Get 1-4 probe kills (usually), or not any. Then I'm forced to either go for another reaper, go for fact. or go for reactor, or go for reactor @50gas and stop mining gas. Then, if the protoss scouts that I'm making a reaper, a stargate follow up is incredibly dangerous for the terran, or if he scouts that I'm going reactor, he can play safely. Terran has to put a bit off pressure simply because of game design. It's slightly easier to get the terran offguard than cornering the protoss offguard simply because of aoe, and such. I know this comes all in all into skill level, but it's mostly the Protoss' army design that is so flawed. Costly units, they don't scale well, colossus is really strong, stalker is super strong early game, and sucks late game. Protoss units don't have any consistency. Why are you trying for probe kills with your reaper? You should be using it for scouting and maybe light harassment, rather than trying to get a lead that early. I don't know why you think you should be able to do tons of damage by building a single unit and moving it across map. | ||
| ||
