|
On March 04 2014 11:31 vthree wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 10:44 Plansix wrote:On March 04 2014 10:36 pure.Wasted wrote:On March 04 2014 10:27 DinoMight wrote:On March 04 2014 10:12 TurboMaN wrote:Are you really arguing that Terran doesn't require more skill to play on the same level and that Protoss is as unforgiving as Terran? Made me laugh  At top level Terran is clearly the hardest race or why do you see so few non Korean Terrans? It's not because Terran is boring. It's because all the top Koreans are not afraid of cheesing (vs non Koreans who cheese less) and the combination of maps and cheese options for Protoss was very strong. It will be interesting to see how this changes going forward with the patches. Uh, Terran foreigners have been irrelevant for a lot longer than 6 months. I can't remember when Terran foreigners weren't irrelevant, in fact. It's going to take a lot more than a change in maps to make that not the case. I do not think that at the late stages of a macro PvT either side is advantaged. I've seen Taeja kill 29 observers in a single game vs Rain where it looked like there was literally nothing Rain could do to win. And then he whined about how Protoss is too strong. I've also seen Protoss players like Parting ANNIHILATE Terrans and make it look unlosable. In WOL, Terran had advantage in early and midgame, Protoss had advantage in late game. That's why Terrans tried to end the game in the midgame either through lots of econ harass or through powerful all in timings. Terrans lost their early and midgame advantage because of the MSC. Nothing changed to make Protoss lose their edge in the late game. Thats because top level terran foreigners are either predictable or whiney. I am a huge fan of Demuslim, but if I watched him fail to scout one more game I would rip my hair out. Korean players are not super human and if they were winning, foreign terrans could to. Obviously protoss has had the upper hand for a couple of months, but back when Korean terrans were crushing face, foreign terrans could too. Are you suggesting that foreign protosses and zergs aren't predictable or whiny? The reason that foreign terrans never did well was that they couldn't really replicate the mid game multitasking and pressure the koreans terrans were able to pull off. With zerg and protoss, this type of aggression wasn't really the focal point, that is why the foreign zergs and protosses did better.
If that's the case, why arent foreigners terran killing zergs with mech?
You can compare TvT too, think back on gomtvt era, it's not that foreigners are losing because a lack of multitasking.
It's day and night watching foreigner and Korean playing tvt ( there were exceptions but you get what I mean)
It's the army positioning and movement etc that were winning the game.
|
Canada393 Posts
On March 04 2014 11:19 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 11:08 NonY wrote:
Slowing down the speed at which protoss can tech (by making photon overcharge worthless) won't improve the game. Everyone (including most protosses) hated when the best protoss builds were warpgate rushes, whether defensive or offensive. And Blink/DT/Oracle rushes are better...? Protoss could play macro at end of WOL, and Protoss can play macro even better now, we see it any time Blink Stalker pressure fails and the Protoss easily transitions into zeal/HT/archon. Take any game from Polt vs. Classic series. It's not as though zeal/HT/archon would magically stop working if Terrans only had to build 2 Bunkers instead of 5 to hold off Blink pressure, or if a Protoss decided not to do any Blink pressure at all. You obviously know how the game feels a lot better than I do, but I just don't remember Protoss struggling in macro games in any way except options, and nerfing PO doesn't get rid of any non-extreme options, all it does is attach consequences to them. You fail, you lose.
classics build isn't designed to win, its designed to pressure. It's not like you can do a blink all in and then transition ezpz. He transitions before he even starts attacking. And polt won that series.
|
On March 04 2014 11:43 stuchiu wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 11:23 aZealot wrote:On March 04 2014 10:48 stuchiu wrote:
Just making sure, this patch went through before Zest vs Bbyong right? Nah, it wasn't a "I win" patch, you see. I'm being serious -_-
Lol! In that case, yes, it did.
And, I'm being serious too. But, I did misread your post. Sorry.
|
Protoss is definitely in a good spot because of the maps currently in the pool making blink all-ins extremely strong and its improved early/mid game. I was surprised that it took this long for people to realize how strong Protoss got with just the MSC. Now, 7-9 gate all ins are just really good because toss can easily deny scouting with the MSC and one stalker, as well as the overall fear of the million other all-ins/proxies Protoss can do viably.
However, the main issue is the fact that other races can't punish these risks without possibly losing the game outright. Coupling with the fact that Protoss has undeniably the best late game army (right compositions ofc), then a smart Protoss mixing cheese and macro should destroy everyone (think SoS at Blizzcon). IMHO, Protoss late game needs to be checked. There is just wayyyy too much AOE going on in late game fights for Protoss, that the other races can't keep up with. High Templars are slowly becoming WOL infestors. Nerfing Storm in some way or the splash damage from Archons might be a possible solution....
|
On March 04 2014 11:55 -HuShang- wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 11:19 pure.Wasted wrote:On March 04 2014 11:08 NonY wrote:
Slowing down the speed at which protoss can tech (by making photon overcharge worthless) won't improve the game. Everyone (including most protosses) hated when the best protoss builds were warpgate rushes, whether defensive or offensive. And Blink/DT/Oracle rushes are better...? Protoss could play macro at end of WOL, and Protoss can play macro even better now, we see it any time Blink Stalker pressure fails and the Protoss easily transitions into zeal/HT/archon. Take any game from Polt vs. Classic series. It's not as though zeal/HT/archon would magically stop working if Terrans only had to build 2 Bunkers instead of 5 to hold off Blink pressure, or if a Protoss decided not to do any Blink pressure at all. You obviously know how the game feels a lot better than I do, but I just don't remember Protoss struggling in macro games in any way except options, and nerfing PO doesn't get rid of any non-extreme options, all it does is attach consequences to them. You fail, you lose. classics build isn't designed to win, its designed to pressure.
And you don't see how that in itself is a problem?
It's what Tastosis would call a "bop" build, except bops aren't supposed to be plannable! They're accidental! "Oops, you forgot to build any units at all by 10 minutes, I guess my pressure just kills you." That's how bops work. In the case of Blink pressure, it's more like "Oops, you didn't scout this perfectly, build the perfect number of Bunkers in the perfect locations, and micro perfectly, I guess my pressure just kills you."
That's not OK.
It's not like you can do a blink all in and then transition ezpz. He transitions before he even starts attacking. And polt won that series.
Well I guess if Polt can do it and wow the entire SC2 watching world by doing it, the game is balanced?
|
On March 04 2014 12:21 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 11:55 -HuShang- wrote:On March 04 2014 11:19 pure.Wasted wrote:On March 04 2014 11:08 NonY wrote:
Slowing down the speed at which protoss can tech (by making photon overcharge worthless) won't improve the game. Everyone (including most protosses) hated when the best protoss builds were warpgate rushes, whether defensive or offensive. And Blink/DT/Oracle rushes are better...? Protoss could play macro at end of WOL, and Protoss can play macro even better now, we see it any time Blink Stalker pressure fails and the Protoss easily transitions into zeal/HT/archon. Take any game from Polt vs. Classic series. It's not as though zeal/HT/archon would magically stop working if Terrans only had to build 2 Bunkers instead of 5 to hold off Blink pressure, or if a Protoss decided not to do any Blink pressure at all. You obviously know how the game feels a lot better than I do, but I just don't remember Protoss struggling in macro games in any way except options, and nerfing PO doesn't get rid of any non-extreme options, all it does is attach consequences to them. You fail, you lose. classics build isn't designed to win, its designed to pressure. And you don't see how that in itself is a problem? It's what Tastosis would call a "bop" build, except bops aren't supposed to be plannable! They're accidental! "Oops, you forgot to build any units at all by 10 minutes, I guess my pressure just kills you." That's how bops work. In the case of Blink pressure, it's more like "Oops, you didn't scout this perfectly, build the perfect number of Bunkers in the perfect locations, and micro perfectly, I guess my pressure just kills you." That's not OK. Show nested quote + It's not like you can do a blink all in and then transition ezpz. He transitions before he even starts attacking. And polt won that series. Well I guess if Polt can do it and wow the entire SC2 watching world by doing it, the game is balanced?
Well he did do it against some really good players. And the new patch should make Polt even better.
And I love this mythical world of accidental wins with Blink All-Ins. I can just see MC going "Woops" and holding his hand over his mouth.
|
On March 04 2014 12:27 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 12:21 pure.Wasted wrote:On March 04 2014 11:55 -HuShang- wrote:On March 04 2014 11:19 pure.Wasted wrote:On March 04 2014 11:08 NonY wrote:
Slowing down the speed at which protoss can tech (by making photon overcharge worthless) won't improve the game. Everyone (including most protosses) hated when the best protoss builds were warpgate rushes, whether defensive or offensive. And Blink/DT/Oracle rushes are better...? Protoss could play macro at end of WOL, and Protoss can play macro even better now, we see it any time Blink Stalker pressure fails and the Protoss easily transitions into zeal/HT/archon. Take any game from Polt vs. Classic series. It's not as though zeal/HT/archon would magically stop working if Terrans only had to build 2 Bunkers instead of 5 to hold off Blink pressure, or if a Protoss decided not to do any Blink pressure at all. You obviously know how the game feels a lot better than I do, but I just don't remember Protoss struggling in macro games in any way except options, and nerfing PO doesn't get rid of any non-extreme options, all it does is attach consequences to them. You fail, you lose. classics build isn't designed to win, its designed to pressure. And you don't see how that in itself is a problem? It's what Tastosis would call a "bop" build, except bops aren't supposed to be plannable! They're accidental! "Oops, you forgot to build any units at all by 10 minutes, I guess my pressure just kills you." That's how bops work. In the case of Blink pressure, it's more like "Oops, you didn't scout this perfectly, build the perfect number of Bunkers in the perfect locations, and micro perfectly, I guess my pressure just kills you." That's not OK. It's not like you can do a blink all in and then transition ezpz. He transitions before he even starts attacking. And polt won that series. Well I guess if Polt can do it and wow the entire SC2 watching world by doing it, the game is balanced? Well he did do it against some really good players. And the new patch should make Polt even better. And I love this mythical world of accidental wins with Blink All-Ins. I can just see MC going "Woops" and holding his hand over his mouth.
Mythical? More like Bomber vs. Arthur.
But I would forgive MC anything.
|
United States7483 Posts
On March 04 2014 09:59 Waise wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 09:43 Advantageous wrote:
hydra buff is stupid op... especially when every single zerg goes for hydra-ling... ya sure rush for colossus, but cmon... zealots and stalkers melt way too fast... maybe your problem is you're fighting hydra-ling with literally the worst possible composition against it?? like if someone asked me for the perfect protoss army to fight with a bunch of hydra-ling i would probably say "zealots and stalkers." if you don't have good forcefield and sim city then it doesn't matter whether it's hydra-ling or 50 roaches, you're going to get rolled. force the hydra-ling to come to your base, then use photon overcharge + forcefields to trade acceptably while your tech comes out to push it away hydra ling is meta against p because of stargate play, you can't just complain that when you open phoenix or a greedy third base 9/10 games zerg is going to start going into games planning to counter that
What build can toss do that is safe against zerg who can counter anything or everything reactively after scouting? Stargate used to be the go-to opener because it was a safe way to harass and secure a third base, and then you could play from there. Zerg could defend well if he played very well, and could come out ahead if toss screwed up, or even if both players played correctly. If Protoss played better, toss could get ahead. This is a good dynamic, both players have opportunities for mistakes and both players can get ahead. If hydra/ling shuts down gateway and stargate play, and if you scout robo you just go spire and outright kill them with mutas because no phoenix, what can protoss do, exactly? 2 base all-in every game? If mutas didn't outright beat any protoss who can't get phoenix in time or can't beat you in a basetrade immediately, I'd agree with you that this is fine. The problem is that toss has to be prepared for mutas at all times.
A race like toss or terran that can't switch tech that quickly needs an all-around safe build that with proper and careful play breaks even with the zerg reactive counter, or they'll never beat zerg in a macro game, ever. It just so happens that terran has more options against zerg in that regard then protoss does because terran can deal with mutalisks a lot easier than protoss can, which they pre-empt with every standard build (bio/mine, just bio, mech, etc.) unless it's a weird all-in like marauder/hellbat. Protoss has only one way to deal with mutas: phoenix. If you don't have them, a muta switch kills you unless you can figure out how to stall for 2 minutes while you get them, and you're on 3 secured bases to have enough gas income, and you don't lose more than a few probes, which is nigh impossible.
Robo openers are dead in PvZ because of the buffed mutalisk: if it turns out that the hydra buff kills stargate openers into fast third, what macro build is protoss going to have? You'd better hope it doesn't kill that build, because it definitely kills gateway based play (hydra/ling was already the counter to pure gateway).
In short: zerg cannot have hard counters to every strategy the opposing race has: it can have soft counters and equivalent responses. Due to the ability to mass produce a new tech option explosively with injects, hard counter units would make zerg unbeatable.
|
On March 04 2014 12:27 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 12:21 pure.Wasted wrote:On March 04 2014 11:55 -HuShang- wrote:On March 04 2014 11:19 pure.Wasted wrote:On March 04 2014 11:08 NonY wrote:
Slowing down the speed at which protoss can tech (by making photon overcharge worthless) won't improve the game. Everyone (including most protosses) hated when the best protoss builds were warpgate rushes, whether defensive or offensive. And Blink/DT/Oracle rushes are better...? Protoss could play macro at end of WOL, and Protoss can play macro even better now, we see it any time Blink Stalker pressure fails and the Protoss easily transitions into zeal/HT/archon. Take any game from Polt vs. Classic series. It's not as though zeal/HT/archon would magically stop working if Terrans only had to build 2 Bunkers instead of 5 to hold off Blink pressure, or if a Protoss decided not to do any Blink pressure at all. You obviously know how the game feels a lot better than I do, but I just don't remember Protoss struggling in macro games in any way except options, and nerfing PO doesn't get rid of any non-extreme options, all it does is attach consequences to them. You fail, you lose. classics build isn't designed to win, its designed to pressure. And you don't see how that in itself is a problem? It's what Tastosis would call a "bop" build, except bops aren't supposed to be plannable! They're accidental! "Oops, you forgot to build any units at all by 10 minutes, I guess my pressure just kills you." That's how bops work. In the case of Blink pressure, it's more like "Oops, you didn't scout this perfectly, build the perfect number of Bunkers in the perfect locations, and micro perfectly, I guess my pressure just kills you." That's not OK. It's not like you can do a blink all in and then transition ezpz. He transitions before he even starts attacking. And polt won that series. Well I guess if Polt can do it and wow the entire SC2 watching world by doing it, the game is balanced? Well he did do it against some really good players. And the new patch should make Polt even better. And I love this mythical world of accidental wins with Blink All-Ins. I can just see MC going "Woops" and holding his hand over his mouth.
I've seen players do builds like oracle expands and get "whoops" kills cause Terrans either didn't scout it in time, or didn't have the right number of marines in place, or were just out of position.
Considering that's standard and doing no damage at all doesn't slow them down one bit, is that fair?
|
United States7483 Posts
On March 04 2014 13:40 Chaggi wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 12:27 Plansix wrote:On March 04 2014 12:21 pure.Wasted wrote:On March 04 2014 11:55 -HuShang- wrote:On March 04 2014 11:19 pure.Wasted wrote:On March 04 2014 11:08 NonY wrote:
Slowing down the speed at which protoss can tech (by making photon overcharge worthless) won't improve the game. Everyone (including most protosses) hated when the best protoss builds were warpgate rushes, whether defensive or offensive. And Blink/DT/Oracle rushes are better...? Protoss could play macro at end of WOL, and Protoss can play macro even better now, we see it any time Blink Stalker pressure fails and the Protoss easily transitions into zeal/HT/archon. Take any game from Polt vs. Classic series. It's not as though zeal/HT/archon would magically stop working if Terrans only had to build 2 Bunkers instead of 5 to hold off Blink pressure, or if a Protoss decided not to do any Blink pressure at all. You obviously know how the game feels a lot better than I do, but I just don't remember Protoss struggling in macro games in any way except options, and nerfing PO doesn't get rid of any non-extreme options, all it does is attach consequences to them. You fail, you lose. classics build isn't designed to win, its designed to pressure. And you don't see how that in itself is a problem? It's what Tastosis would call a "bop" build, except bops aren't supposed to be plannable! They're accidental! "Oops, you forgot to build any units at all by 10 minutes, I guess my pressure just kills you." That's how bops work. In the case of Blink pressure, it's more like "Oops, you didn't scout this perfectly, build the perfect number of Bunkers in the perfect locations, and micro perfectly, I guess my pressure just kills you." That's not OK. It's not like you can do a blink all in and then transition ezpz. He transitions before he even starts attacking. And polt won that series. Well I guess if Polt can do it and wow the entire SC2 watching world by doing it, the game is balanced? Well he did do it against some really good players. And the new patch should make Polt even better. And I love this mythical world of accidental wins with Blink All-Ins. I can just see MC going "Woops" and holding his hand over his mouth. I've seen players do builds like oracle expands and get "whoops" kills cause Terrans either didn't scout it in time, or didn't have the right number of marines in place, or were just out of position. Considering that's standard and doing no damage at all doesn't slow them down one bit, is that fair?
Doing no damage does slow them down, compared to where they would be if they hadn't done an oracle expand. So yeah, doing no damage puts them in a worse position compared to a more normal expand into roboo, and the lack of observers is very difficult to play with.
|
On March 04 2014 11:49 ETisME wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 11:31 vthree wrote:On March 04 2014 10:44 Plansix wrote:On March 04 2014 10:36 pure.Wasted wrote:On March 04 2014 10:27 DinoMight wrote:On March 04 2014 10:12 TurboMaN wrote:Are you really arguing that Terran doesn't require more skill to play on the same level and that Protoss is as unforgiving as Terran? Made me laugh At top level Terran is clearly the hardest race or why do you see so few non Korean Terrans? It's not because Terran is boring. It's because all the top Koreans are not afraid of cheesing (vs non Koreans who cheese less) and the combination of maps and cheese options for Protoss was very strong. It will be interesting to see how this changes going forward with the patches. Uh, Terran foreigners have been irrelevant for a lot longer than 6 months. I can't remember when Terran foreigners weren't irrelevant, in fact. It's going to take a lot more than a change in maps to make that not the case. I do not think that at the late stages of a macro PvT either side is advantaged. I've seen Taeja kill 29 observers in a single game vs Rain where it looked like there was literally nothing Rain could do to win. And then he whined about how Protoss is too strong. I've also seen Protoss players like Parting ANNIHILATE Terrans and make it look unlosable. In WOL, Terran had advantage in early and midgame, Protoss had advantage in late game. That's why Terrans tried to end the game in the midgame either through lots of econ harass or through powerful all in timings. Terrans lost their early and midgame advantage because of the MSC. Nothing changed to make Protoss lose their edge in the late game. Thats because top level terran foreigners are either predictable or whiney. I am a huge fan of Demuslim, but if I watched him fail to scout one more game I would rip my hair out. Korean players are not super human and if they were winning, foreign terrans could to. Obviously protoss has had the upper hand for a couple of months, but back when Korean terrans were crushing face, foreign terrans could too. Are you suggesting that foreign protosses and zergs aren't predictable or whiny? The reason that foreign terrans never did well was that they couldn't really replicate the mid game multitasking and pressure the koreans terrans were able to pull off. With zerg and protoss, this type of aggression wasn't really the focal point, that is why the foreign zergs and protosses did better. If that's the case, why arent foreigners terran killing zergs with mech? You can compare TvT too, think back on gomtvt era, it's not that foreigners are losing because a lack of multitasking. It's day and night watching foreigner and Korean playing tvt ( there were exceptions but you get what I mean) It's the army positioning and movement etc that were winning the game.
Multitasking doesn't just mean drops. Like you said, it is day and night watching Koreans playing TvT. There is constant movement of the army to poke for weakness in the defense WHILE macro'ing. This is also multitasking. Most foreign terrans go to 3 bases and just sit at their base and macro.
If you look at TvP, in the mid/late game, it is usually the terran that is moving around the map looking for holes. The protoss army isn't really built to be roaming around the map. You only really see P deathballs roam around in PvP. In vT and vZ, they usually sit at a central location and then send warp prism for harass.
|
On March 04 2014 13:43 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 13:40 Chaggi wrote:On March 04 2014 12:27 Plansix wrote:On March 04 2014 12:21 pure.Wasted wrote:On March 04 2014 11:55 -HuShang- wrote:On March 04 2014 11:19 pure.Wasted wrote:On March 04 2014 11:08 NonY wrote:
Slowing down the speed at which protoss can tech (by making photon overcharge worthless) won't improve the game. Everyone (including most protosses) hated when the best protoss builds were warpgate rushes, whether defensive or offensive. And Blink/DT/Oracle rushes are better...? Protoss could play macro at end of WOL, and Protoss can play macro even better now, we see it any time Blink Stalker pressure fails and the Protoss easily transitions into zeal/HT/archon. Take any game from Polt vs. Classic series. It's not as though zeal/HT/archon would magically stop working if Terrans only had to build 2 Bunkers instead of 5 to hold off Blink pressure, or if a Protoss decided not to do any Blink pressure at all. You obviously know how the game feels a lot better than I do, but I just don't remember Protoss struggling in macro games in any way except options, and nerfing PO doesn't get rid of any non-extreme options, all it does is attach consequences to them. You fail, you lose. classics build isn't designed to win, its designed to pressure. And you don't see how that in itself is a problem? It's what Tastosis would call a "bop" build, except bops aren't supposed to be plannable! They're accidental! "Oops, you forgot to build any units at all by 10 minutes, I guess my pressure just kills you." That's how bops work. In the case of Blink pressure, it's more like "Oops, you didn't scout this perfectly, build the perfect number of Bunkers in the perfect locations, and micro perfectly, I guess my pressure just kills you." That's not OK. It's not like you can do a blink all in and then transition ezpz. He transitions before he even starts attacking. And polt won that series. Well I guess if Polt can do it and wow the entire SC2 watching world by doing it, the game is balanced? Well he did do it against some really good players. And the new patch should make Polt even better. And I love this mythical world of accidental wins with Blink All-Ins. I can just see MC going "Woops" and holding his hand over his mouth. I've seen players do builds like oracle expands and get "whoops" kills cause Terrans either didn't scout it in time, or didn't have the right number of marines in place, or were just out of position. Considering that's standard and doing no damage at all doesn't slow them down one bit, is that fair? Doing no damage does slow them down, compared to where they would be if they hadn't done an oracle expand. So yeah, doing no damage puts them in a worse position compared to a more normal expand into roboo, and the lack of observers is very difficult to play with.
I guess if you lose the oracle, but doesn't an oracle kind of make up for the fact that you don't need detection?
|
United States7483 Posts
On March 04 2014 14:10 Chaggi wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 13:43 Whitewing wrote:On March 04 2014 13:40 Chaggi wrote:On March 04 2014 12:27 Plansix wrote:On March 04 2014 12:21 pure.Wasted wrote:On March 04 2014 11:55 -HuShang- wrote:On March 04 2014 11:19 pure.Wasted wrote:On March 04 2014 11:08 NonY wrote:
Slowing down the speed at which protoss can tech (by making photon overcharge worthless) won't improve the game. Everyone (including most protosses) hated when the best protoss builds were warpgate rushes, whether defensive or offensive. And Blink/DT/Oracle rushes are better...? Protoss could play macro at end of WOL, and Protoss can play macro even better now, we see it any time Blink Stalker pressure fails and the Protoss easily transitions into zeal/HT/archon. Take any game from Polt vs. Classic series. It's not as though zeal/HT/archon would magically stop working if Terrans only had to build 2 Bunkers instead of 5 to hold off Blink pressure, or if a Protoss decided not to do any Blink pressure at all. You obviously know how the game feels a lot better than I do, but I just don't remember Protoss struggling in macro games in any way except options, and nerfing PO doesn't get rid of any non-extreme options, all it does is attach consequences to them. You fail, you lose. classics build isn't designed to win, its designed to pressure. And you don't see how that in itself is a problem? It's what Tastosis would call a "bop" build, except bops aren't supposed to be plannable! They're accidental! "Oops, you forgot to build any units at all by 10 minutes, I guess my pressure just kills you." That's how bops work. In the case of Blink pressure, it's more like "Oops, you didn't scout this perfectly, build the perfect number of Bunkers in the perfect locations, and micro perfectly, I guess my pressure just kills you." That's not OK. It's not like you can do a blink all in and then transition ezpz. He transitions before he even starts attacking. And polt won that series. Well I guess if Polt can do it and wow the entire SC2 watching world by doing it, the game is balanced? Well he did do it against some really good players. And the new patch should make Polt even better. And I love this mythical world of accidental wins with Blink All-Ins. I can just see MC going "Woops" and holding his hand over his mouth. I've seen players do builds like oracle expands and get "whoops" kills cause Terrans either didn't scout it in time, or didn't have the right number of marines in place, or were just out of position. Considering that's standard and doing no damage at all doesn't slow them down one bit, is that fair? Doing no damage does slow them down, compared to where they would be if they hadn't done an oracle expand. So yeah, doing no damage puts them in a worse position compared to a more normal expand into roboo, and the lack of observers is very difficult to play with. I guess if you lose the oracle, but doesn't an oracle kind of make up for the fact that you don't need detection?
It's not about detection, it's about vision. You want to position observers around the map in key locations and you want it in the enemy base scouting as often as possible. The oracle can reveal the army which helps (and can see most of the base usually), but it can't see everything and it won't see as much as the observers will. Drops can and will still come at you that are not suffering a revelation. It is far more difficult to defend with an oracle or two for scouting compared to observers, but if you go into templar, you have to skip robo after an oracle opening (and oracle into colossus dies hardcore to scv pulls) or you won't have enough units to live. The oracle also requires much more multi-tasking to control and scout with, which makes doing other things more difficult. Many korean pros have difficulty making this style work: sOs seems the most successful with it.
The main advantage of the oracle opener is that you can play a little bit greedier at home for a short while because the terran has to play safer for a short while, making builds where you take a very fast third more viable. However, terrans in korea were already adding more mines into their builds, which punishes such play, and now the mine has been buffed, which makes it obliterate zealots. Terrans had already adapted reasonably well to this before the buff.
|
On March 04 2014 14:14 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 14:10 Chaggi wrote:On March 04 2014 13:43 Whitewing wrote:On March 04 2014 13:40 Chaggi wrote:On March 04 2014 12:27 Plansix wrote:On March 04 2014 12:21 pure.Wasted wrote:On March 04 2014 11:55 -HuShang- wrote:On March 04 2014 11:19 pure.Wasted wrote:On March 04 2014 11:08 NonY wrote:
Slowing down the speed at which protoss can tech (by making photon overcharge worthless) won't improve the game. Everyone (including most protosses) hated when the best protoss builds were warpgate rushes, whether defensive or offensive. And Blink/DT/Oracle rushes are better...? Protoss could play macro at end of WOL, and Protoss can play macro even better now, we see it any time Blink Stalker pressure fails and the Protoss easily transitions into zeal/HT/archon. Take any game from Polt vs. Classic series. It's not as though zeal/HT/archon would magically stop working if Terrans only had to build 2 Bunkers instead of 5 to hold off Blink pressure, or if a Protoss decided not to do any Blink pressure at all. You obviously know how the game feels a lot better than I do, but I just don't remember Protoss struggling in macro games in any way except options, and nerfing PO doesn't get rid of any non-extreme options, all it does is attach consequences to them. You fail, you lose. classics build isn't designed to win, its designed to pressure. And you don't see how that in itself is a problem? It's what Tastosis would call a "bop" build, except bops aren't supposed to be plannable! They're accidental! "Oops, you forgot to build any units at all by 10 minutes, I guess my pressure just kills you." That's how bops work. In the case of Blink pressure, it's more like "Oops, you didn't scout this perfectly, build the perfect number of Bunkers in the perfect locations, and micro perfectly, I guess my pressure just kills you." That's not OK. It's not like you can do a blink all in and then transition ezpz. He transitions before he even starts attacking. And polt won that series. Well I guess if Polt can do it and wow the entire SC2 watching world by doing it, the game is balanced? Well he did do it against some really good players. And the new patch should make Polt even better. And I love this mythical world of accidental wins with Blink All-Ins. I can just see MC going "Woops" and holding his hand over his mouth. I've seen players do builds like oracle expands and get "whoops" kills cause Terrans either didn't scout it in time, or didn't have the right number of marines in place, or were just out of position. Considering that's standard and doing no damage at all doesn't slow them down one bit, is that fair? Doing no damage does slow them down, compared to where they would be if they hadn't done an oracle expand. So yeah, doing no damage puts them in a worse position compared to a more normal expand into roboo, and the lack of observers is very difficult to play with. I guess if you lose the oracle, but doesn't an oracle kind of make up for the fact that you don't need detection? It's not about detection, it's about vision. You want to position observers around the map in key locations and you want it in the enemy base scouting as often as possible. The oracle can reveal the army which helps (and can see most of the base usually), but it can't see everything and it won't see as much as the observers will. Drops can and will still come at you that are not suffering a revelation. It is far more difficult to defend with an oracle or two for scouting compared to observers, but if you go into templar, you have to skip robo after an oracle opening (and oracle into colossus dies hardcore to scv pulls) or you won't have enough units to live. The oracle also requires much more multi-tasking to control and scout with, which makes doing other things more difficult. Many korean pros have difficulty making this style work: sOs seems the most successful with it. The main advantage of the oracle opener is that you can play a little bit greedier at home for a short while because the terran has to play safer for a short while, making builds where you take a very fast third more viable. However, terrans in korea were already adding more mines into their builds, which punishes such play, and now the mine has been buffed, which makes it obliterate zealots. Terrans had already adapted reasonably well to this before the buff.
Honestly if you lose the oracle early game your doing something wrong. If you lose cause you messed up with the oracle control that's entirely your fault. There's no reason why you should ever lose your oracles to marines so I would say that going an oracle opening has little downside to it other than the delay of the robo. Just the vision of the oracle alone forces the terran to put up missile turrets/position marines causing the 11 min push to be delayed which makes up for the delayed robo and theres always the possibility you just straight up kill the terran. I would say the oracle isn't even a risk to go for due to it forcing so many responses from the terran.
|
On March 04 2014 14:14 Whitewing wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 14:10 Chaggi wrote:On March 04 2014 13:43 Whitewing wrote:On March 04 2014 13:40 Chaggi wrote:On March 04 2014 12:27 Plansix wrote:On March 04 2014 12:21 pure.Wasted wrote:On March 04 2014 11:55 -HuShang- wrote:On March 04 2014 11:19 pure.Wasted wrote:On March 04 2014 11:08 NonY wrote:
Slowing down the speed at which protoss can tech (by making photon overcharge worthless) won't improve the game. Everyone (including most protosses) hated when the best protoss builds were warpgate rushes, whether defensive or offensive. And Blink/DT/Oracle rushes are better...? Protoss could play macro at end of WOL, and Protoss can play macro even better now, we see it any time Blink Stalker pressure fails and the Protoss easily transitions into zeal/HT/archon. Take any game from Polt vs. Classic series. It's not as though zeal/HT/archon would magically stop working if Terrans only had to build 2 Bunkers instead of 5 to hold off Blink pressure, or if a Protoss decided not to do any Blink pressure at all. You obviously know how the game feels a lot better than I do, but I just don't remember Protoss struggling in macro games in any way except options, and nerfing PO doesn't get rid of any non-extreme options, all it does is attach consequences to them. You fail, you lose. classics build isn't designed to win, its designed to pressure. And you don't see how that in itself is a problem? It's what Tastosis would call a "bop" build, except bops aren't supposed to be plannable! They're accidental! "Oops, you forgot to build any units at all by 10 minutes, I guess my pressure just kills you." That's how bops work. In the case of Blink pressure, it's more like "Oops, you didn't scout this perfectly, build the perfect number of Bunkers in the perfect locations, and micro perfectly, I guess my pressure just kills you." That's not OK. It's not like you can do a blink all in and then transition ezpz. He transitions before he even starts attacking. And polt won that series. Well I guess if Polt can do it and wow the entire SC2 watching world by doing it, the game is balanced? Well he did do it against some really good players. And the new patch should make Polt even better. And I love this mythical world of accidental wins with Blink All-Ins. I can just see MC going "Woops" and holding his hand over his mouth. I've seen players do builds like oracle expands and get "whoops" kills cause Terrans either didn't scout it in time, or didn't have the right number of marines in place, or were just out of position. Considering that's standard and doing no damage at all doesn't slow them down one bit, is that fair? Doing no damage does slow them down, compared to where they would be if they hadn't done an oracle expand. So yeah, doing no damage puts them in a worse position compared to a more normal expand into roboo, and the lack of observers is very difficult to play with. I guess if you lose the oracle, but doesn't an oracle kind of make up for the fact that you don't need detection? It's not about detection, it's about vision. You want to position observers around the map in key locations and you want it in the enemy base scouting as often as possible. The oracle can reveal the army which helps (and can see most of the base usually), but it can't see everything and it won't see as much as the observers will. Drops can and will still come at you that are not suffering a revelation. It is far more difficult to defend with an oracle or two for scouting compared to observers, but if you go into templar, you have to skip robo after an oracle opening (and oracle into colossus dies hardcore to scv pulls) or you won't have enough units to live. The oracle also requires much more multi-tasking to control and scout with, which makes doing other things more difficult. Many korean pros have difficulty making this style work: sOs seems the most successful with it. The main advantage of the oracle opener is that you can play a little bit greedier at home for a short while because the terran has to play safer for a short while, making builds where you take a very fast third more viable. However, terrans in korea were already adding more mines into their builds, which punishes such play, and now the mine has been buffed, which makes it obliterate zealots. Terrans had already adapted reasonably well to this before the buff.
For vision on drops, it depends on the map. In maps with lots of air space on the drop paths, oracles on patrol can spot drops just fine and they can actually cover more area. The down side is that the terran will see your oracles and take a different path where as with obs, the terrans will likely continue to drop.
But oracles also denies vision much better in TvP. For protoss that want to take early thirds, the oracle can be used to deny the marine or SCV scout forcing the terran to scan or move out with a sizeable army.
|
On March 04 2014 07:38 DinoMight wrote:
I mean, you can Stim Marines AND Marauders at the same time and when you do, all your medivacs immediately start healing them and following them around. What's the justification for that? Get my drift?
The justification is that 70% of protoss's army food (zeal, archon, colo) does not need to be microed. The inverse is true for terran.
It fascinates me that after 3 years it's the same 2-3 posters insisting that P army control requires the same mechanical ability. The fact is that a balanced game is HARD to design. Balance in every dimension is HARD. Almost every game, including most competitive ones, has massive glaring imbalances. Fighting games, have top tier characters with significant advantages. Different characters have significant advantages against others. Or take WC3, with 4 races. There were significantly broken matchups, such as Orc vs UD. Of course some of you probably would claim that Orc requires the same amount of skill as UD in that matchup.
It would be incredible if somehow the three races in SC were perfectly balanced in every dimension. That's certainly the goal, but it's obviously not the reality, and very unlikely to be the reality. Is it probably true that strategically the races are decently balanced? That given a decision tree, both players have reasonable reactions to understand and take? Yea I would say that's probably true, both players need to have the same understanding of the game. But it's a joke to claim that mechanically P is equivalent to T. It isn't. It hasn't been since SC1.
|
On March 04 2014 18:18 architecture wrote:
The justification is that 70% of protoss's army food (zeal, archon, colo) does not need to be microed.
I'm constantly amused by this myth that Protoss units do not benefit from microing them.
If you don't micro your Archons as battle is joined to created attack paths then you tend to end up blocking your Zealots and screwing yourself quite badly. If you don't micro your Colossi you lose a lot of efficiency and take massive unnecessary splash damage in PvP laser wars. Ideally you want to micro your Zealots too; but at this point you're looking at at least 4-6 different units needing different types of micro simultaneously whilst also controlling the overall engagement, so its not really feasible. At that point controlling your blob of mineral-only units (even if they're very EXPENSIVE mineral-only units) just isn't a priority.
Stop trying to make grandiose claims on how units are microd unless you actually have some evidence. And stop trying to apply Terran army control philosophy to a Protoss army, they get microd in totally different ways.
|
Every race has infinite micro potential in battle, the question is rather:
1. How strong is the army without micro?
2. How strong is the army with micro?
I think that for terran #1 is lower than protoss, and that when you add #2 terran has nearly caught up. This makes micro more important for terran and creates the perception that terran takes more skill.
|
You guys just don't *GET* protoss micro...
|
On March 04 2014 20:02 -Celestial- wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2014 18:18 architecture wrote:
The justification is that 70% of protoss's army food (zeal, archon, colo) does not need to be microed. I'm constantly amused by this myth that Protoss units do not benefit from microing them. If you don't micro your Archons as battle is joined to created attack paths then you tend to end up blocking your Zealots and screwing yourself quite badly. If you don't micro your Colossi you lose a lot of efficiency and take massive unnecessary splash damage in PvP laser wars. Ideally you want to micro your Zealots too; but at this point you're looking at at least 4-6 different units needing different types of micro simultaneously whilst also controlling the overall engagement, so its not really feasible. At that point controlling your blob of mineral-only units (even if they're very EXPENSIVE mineral-only units) just isn't a priority. Stop trying to make grandiose claims on how units are microd unless you actually have some evidence. And stop trying to apply Terran army control philosophy to a Protoss army, they get microd in totally different ways.
I think when people say "protoss requires no micro" its degree wise, not literally.
In general it doesnt take much micro for protoss. The skill ceiling aint very high/or fun to watch or play.
THAT is the core problem
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
