After having very long time of Toss never winning anything Trap finally got some victories. And Zest has gone berserk during his last year before military, playing ANYTHING and EVERYTHING.
But. That was just them and not any way a domination of Toss or Trap.
I fear the younger players will mostly not choose toss as a race when they look at the last years. Maxpax is very good, but he is not near being a contender to any title (big titles, that is). And for the older players... it feels like you have to be like PartinG that is a legend and a successful streamer and earn some money of of that.
Toss has always been the punching bag as the OP race because of the effect that a disruptor shot can have or a storm (and other units). This has been a tradition in sc2 as long as I have followed the scene. Toss for sure has many strong units, and strong timings (ridiculous even) over the years I do not deny that.
Showtime seems focused and hardworking and one of the absolut best toss in EU but is not making much. Goblin showed some progress but ended up being not as motivated.
Will it end with the occasional decent run from some toss making some great play and having some luck, but mostly have to rely on being a streamer?
I fear it will still have some players left being decent, still playing cause they are good at the game and they do not have any other better options at the time.
How do you think Toss will manage in the future? As a person who love sc2 and toss mostly (but not only ofc), i am biased, but also very frustrated by the situation.
if you ask me, as the easiest race this is exactly what they deserve.. easier/less stressful wins against the vast majority of starcraft players but hitting a wall at the tippity top
What future? When the pros who are still playing now retire, only amateur tournaments from time to time and battle. net will be left. All races are fine there
According to this, Korean protoss has never won a tier 1 tournament since 2017 and since K-protoss are mostly better than foreignors I think there's really no hope. And as far as I remember yes I don't even remember the last time protoss won a tier 1 tournament. As a protoss fan who doesn't play anymore and just watch pro scenes I'm so over watching SC2 in which I know my favourite race will never win anything above tier 2 and it's been years. I think protoss fans at this point are entitled to a bit of complaining for balance that will likely never be updated.
With Zest going to the army and trap aging, I think the answer to your question is no. For at least 4 years protoss has never and will never win anything tier 1. Personally I've given up and just decided to move onto AOE4 scene. I'm so tired of rooting for a team protoss that will never win in a tournament supposedly with 33% of winning. Just wondering how other protoss fans cope with this. I think the balance overall is good enough but at the top level of tier 1 I haven't seen protoss winning anything at all.
According to this, Korean protoss has never won a tier 1 tournament since 2017 and since K-protoss are mostly better than foreignors I think there's really no hope. And as far as I remember yes I don't even remember the last time protoss won a tier 1 tournament. As a protoss fan who doesn't play anymore and just watch pro scenes I'm so over watching SC2 in which I know my favourite race will never win anything above tier 2 and it's been years. I think protoss fans at this point are entitled to a bit of complaining for balance that will likely never be updated.
With Zest going to the army and trap aging, I think the answer to your question is no. For at least 4 years protoss has never and will never win anything tier 1. Personally I've given up and just decided to move onto AOE4 scene. I'm so tired of rooting for a team protoss that will never win in a tournament supposedly with 33% of winning. Just wondering how other protoss fans cope with this.
According to this, Korean protoss has never won a tier 1 tournament since 2017 and since K-protoss are mostly better than foreignors I think there's really no hope. And as far as I remember yes I don't even remember the last time protoss won a tier 1 tournament. As a protoss fan who doesn't play anymore and just watch pro scenes I'm so over watching SC2 in which I know my favourite race will never win anything above tier 2 and it's been years. I think protoss fans at this point are entitled to a bit of complaining for balance that will likely never be updated.
With Zest going to the army and trap aging, I think the answer to your question is no. For at least 4 years protoss has never and will never win anything tier 1. Personally I've given up and just decided to move onto AOE4 scene. I'm so tired of rooting for a team protoss that will never win in a tournament supposedly with 33% of winning. Just wondering how other protoss fans cope with this.
With the GM ladder so full of protoss...why are we surprised by this disparity? If Serral logs on and plays 10 games, 7 zvp 1 zvz 2 zvt I'd expect him to be much better vp than the other two races just based on practice. Could the relative low-level ease of protoss be punishing the upper tier Ps?
I mean there isn't really a question that protoss is underperforming, the question is just whether they're underperforming because they're bad or because their race is bad. I again want to stress that it's totally possible that protoss players are just worse than other players, and if Maxpax keeps improving that will demonstrate this.
From our perspective as protoss supporters the difference between the two doesn't really matter, the end result is just that we don't get to enjoy watching the game as often as you guys do, so we end up watching it less and less. And that's fine too.
There is always a weakest race at the top level of play, it's just like in Brood War where Terran was beyond a doubt the strongest race at the top level of play and Protoss was the weakest, I guess Starcraft 2 is kinda the same in that regard.
On November 14 2021 09:44 Nebuchad wrote: I mean there isn't really a question that protoss is underperforming, the question is just whether they're underperforming because they're bad or because their race is bad. I again want to stress that it's totally possible that protoss players are just worse than other players, and if Maxpax keeps improving that will demonstrate this.
From our perspective as protoss supporters the difference between the two doesn't really matter, the end result is just that we don't get to enjoy watching the game as often as you guys do, so we end up watching it less and less. And that's fine too.
It's almost ALWAYS the case of balance(at a particular level, not overall balance because P is undoubtedly the strongest race at amateur levels) because there isn't really anything stacked against playing protoss as opposed to other races when people choose a race to play. Statistically there are more protoss players at GM level which means they should have a larger top player pool. "It's not the balance. Your player just sucks" has been thrown around for 22 years since SC1 release and everytime there's a balance shifts those supposedly 'sheer skillz' race gets decimated when given a nerf at the top level time and time again. I'm amazed the argument didn't die yet when there are so many counter examples against it.
If protoss is great at GM level and low to mid pro but sucks at top it simply means it's strong at mid-high level and sucks at the very top level. Easy to learn, hard to master or easy to play, hard to optimize are valid arguments here.
As a protoss fan I'm watching fewer and fewer tournaments since I feel like there's no hope for P to win top tier tournaments these days, no, these years.
On November 14 2021 11:25 Beelzebub1 wrote: There is always a weakest race at the top level of play, it's just like in Brood War where Terran was beyond a doubt the strongest race at the top level of play and Protoss was the weakest, I guess Starcraft 2 is kinda the same in that regard.
Post-KeSPA Starleague - Zerg dominating for last 3-5 years, Flash the Tesagi Terran hope, mini just won ASL and fulfilling the Legend of the Fall.
Toss is always the third wheel in BW. But not as bad as SC2 LoTV.
I'm curious what the whiners here think about what the reason is why Protoss can win tier 2 tournaments but not tier 1 ones. Zergs and Terrans don't try as hard for tier 2 tournaments? they purposely lose them so Protoss doesn't get buffed?
A lot of them had the same player pool as tier 1 tournaments so it seems like a weird thing to complain about that Protoss doesn't win this specific kind of tournaments.
Especially when you look past the winner list on liquipedia and actually watch those tournaments and realize Protoss could've easily won a couple of those. They have reached the finals often so I guess the Protoss imbalance only activates once a Protoss reaches the final of a tier 1 tournament?
To me it just seems like a coincidence that Protoss hasn't won one in so long, no statistic except the winrate of Protoss in tier 1 tournament finals supports the claim that Protoss is weak.
On November 14 2021 09:44 Nebuchad wrote: I mean there isn't really a question that protoss is underperforming, the question is just whether they're underperforming because they're bad or because their race is bad. I again want to stress that it's totally possible that protoss players are just worse than other players, and if Maxpax keeps improving that will demonstrate this.
From our perspective as protoss supporters the difference between the two doesn't really matter, the end result is just that we don't get to enjoy watching the game as often as you guys do, so we end up watching it less and less. And that's fine too.
How are Protoss underperforming though? They won 6/15 premier tournaments in EPT Tour 21/22 season (40%, zerg won 6 as well so 40%, terran won 3 so 20%). They won the most money in 2021; they are ahead in balance reports on aligulac afaik; the GM being full of Protoss. This narrative of Protoss underperforming is hilariously false. Granted, maybe on new maps + players figuring them out might have nerfed Protoss compared to the early part of the year, but even that is not clear. Edit: since it’s a T/Z winner protoss will be 6/16, zerg 6 or 7/16 and Terran 3 or 4/16 after this DH Season Finals. That’s still far from underperforming, especially considering other points Sources:ESL Pro Tour/2021/22 (list of premier tournaments winners for this season) Winnings/2021 (winnings in 2021, protoss is still comfortably ahead, especially in Korea where the top 2 spots are taken by Zest and Trap far ahead of the #3) No sources for GM but it's easily found / heard already Aligulac balance report showing protoss is in a good spot since a long time: http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/
On November 14 2021 19:32 Charoisaur wrote: I'm curious what the whiners here think about what the reason is why Protoss can win tier 2 tournaments but not tier 1 ones. Zergs and Terrans don't try as hard for tier 2 tournaments?
? That seems like an obvious question.
In the scenario where protoss players are bad, it's just because there aren't any good tier 1 protoss players.
In the scenario where the race is bad, it's because what you need to do to be able to beat protoss is quite hard to pull off, and so only a few people in the game can master it.
On November 14 2021 09:44 Nebuchad wrote: I mean there isn't really a question that protoss is underperforming, the question is just whether they're underperforming because they're bad or because their race is bad. I again want to stress that it's totally possible that protoss players are just worse than other players, and if Maxpax keeps improving that will demonstrate this.
From our perspective as protoss supporters the difference between the two doesn't really matter, the end result is just that we don't get to enjoy watching the game as often as you guys do, so we end up watching it less and less. And that's fine too.
How are Protoss underperforming though? They won 6/15 premier tournaments in EPT Tour 21/22 season (40%, zerg won 6 as well so 40%, terran won 3 so 20%). They won the most money in 2021; they are ahead in balance reports on aligulac afaik; the GM being full of Protoss. This narrative of Protoss underperforming is hilariously false. Granted, maybe on new maps + players figuring them out might have nerfed Protoss compared to the early part of the year, but even that is not clear. Edit: since it’s a T/Z winner protoss will be 6/16, zerg 6 or 7/16 and Terran 3 or 4/16 after this DH Season Finals. That’s still far from underperforming, especially considering other points Sources:ESL Pro Tour/2021/22 (list of premier tournaments winners for this season) Winnings/2021 (winnings in 2021, protoss is still comfortably ahead, especially in Korea where the top 2 spots are taken by Zest and Trap far ahead of the #3) No sources for GM but it's easily found / heard already Aligulac balance report showing protoss is in a good spot since a long time: http://aligulac.com/misc/balance/
Let's bet on Katowice friend, if a terran or a zerg wins you give me 50$, if a protoss wins I give you 500$, you're up?
On November 14 2021 19:32 Charoisaur wrote: I'm curious what the whiners here think about what the reason is why Protoss can win tier 2 tournaments but not tier 1 ones. Zergs and Terrans don't try as hard for tier 2 tournaments?
? That seems like an obvious question.
In the scenario where protoss players are bad, it's just because there aren't any good tier 1 protoss players.
In the scenario where the race is bad, it's because what you need to do to be able to beat protoss is quite hard to pull off, and so only a few people in the game can master it.
Why anytime there is a discussion about protoss underperforming at the top level someone brings this useless stat? Aligulac balance report is based on every recorded match result, wast majority of which are games played between amateur or semi-pro players. The actually useful stat in that case on the other hand gets conviniently ignored. I'm talking about leading/lagging stat which takes into account performance of the top 5 players of each race: http://aligulac.com/periods/ As you can easily see, the data speaks for itself.
Why anytime there is a discussion about protoss underperforming at the top level someone brings this useless stat? Aligulac balance report is based on every recorded match result, wast majority of which are games played between amateur or semi-pro players. The actually useful stat in that case on the other hand gets conviniently ignored. I'm talking about leading/lagging stat which takes into account performance of the top 5 players of each race: http://aligulac.com/periods/ As you can easily see, the data speaks for itself.
Seems to coincide with protoss underperforming in tier 1 tournament. They've been the lagging race since 2018 nonstop. I wish the game was balanced around top players so that I can see each race taking about 1/3 of trophies in the end.
As for why protoss does well in low tier tournament, my guess is that protoss is strong in a matchup where games are less prepared and uses fewer counter builds. Or it could simply mean at lower levels (which would be the case if top players prepare less than usual) protoss is strong.
As for why protoss does well in low tier tournament, my guess is that protoss is strong in a matchup where games are less prepared and uses fewer counter builds. Or it could simply mean at lower levels (which would be the case if top players prepare less than usual) protoss is strong.
The problem here is that a lot of the time these "tier 2" tournaments have the same players. Trap beats Dark 3-1 in a tier 2 tournament and it doesn't count, but Trap loses to Dark 1-4 and "only" comes in second at the GSL, and it's proof Protoss is underpowered at the top level.
The thing to remember about analyzing statistics from the highest level of play is that the sample sizes are outrageously low--we don't have even 10 players total that can play at Serral's level consistently.
As for why protoss does well in low tier tournament, my guess is that protoss is strong in a matchup where games are less prepared and uses fewer counter builds. Or it could simply mean at lower levels (which would be the case if top players prepare less than usual) protoss is strong.
The problem here is that a lot of the time these "tier 2" tournaments have the same players. Trap beats Dark 3-1 in a tier 2 tournament and it doesn't count, but Trap loses to Dark 1-4 and "only" comes in second at the GSL, and it's proof Protoss is underpowered at the top level.
The thing to remember about analyzing statistics from the highest level of play is that the sample sizes are outrageously low--we don't have even 10 players total that can play at Serral's level consistently.
What a low sample size does is it increases volatility. You have a larger chance of beating a superior player in one game than you do in ten games.
Here we have a situation where there is no volatility at all despite the small sample size. The five best protoss underperform consistently since 2018 against the best five zergs or terrans. There is very little statistical merit to the idea that if we roll 36 more months suddenly protoss will stop underperforming and get back to even. That is not what the data trend indicates.
On November 15 2021 00:50 Nebuchad wrote: What a low sample size does is it increases volatility. You have a larger chance of beating a superior player in one game than you do in ten games.
Here we have a situation where there is no volatility at all despite the small sample size. The five best protoss underperform consistently since 2018 against the best five zergs or terrans. There is very little statistical merit to the idea that if we roll 36 more months suddenly protoss will stop underperforming and get back to even. That is not what the data trend indicates.
I'm not talking about sample size of games played, I'm talking about the number of players. When we look at a tiny pool of players (top 5 of each race), there will be a great deal of variance in our estimate of race balance. This becomes especially relevant when we note that the top 5 over the course of the last 3 years has seen very little change. It's also problematic insofar as their is no a priori meaning to "top 5" that makes it more relevant than "top 2" or "top 16".
You can actually see how much variance is caused by this low sample size by directly looking at the performance of the individual players. Between the end of last year and the present, out of the Top 5 Protoss players, Stats left for military service, and Trap is the only player whose rank and MMR as calculated by Aligulac depreciated. The other three players--showtime, parting, and zest--all improved in MMR. Showtime and Parting maintained their exact same rank in the top players, 13th and 16th, and Zest improved from rank 11 to 7. Yet during this same time period, Protoss Top 5 went from lagging 5% to lagging 17%. This 12% change is accounted for entirely from the loss of Stats and the relative underperformance of a single player, Trap.
In this case you're just saying that the best protoss happen to suck at the game in comparison to the best zergs and terrans, and that is fine, I acknowledge that this is entirely a possibility, and if that is the case it makes sense that they don't win as many tournaments as the other races. But then we don't need to bring any statistical analysis into it, and in the context of this thread it doesn't change much since either way I don't see any reason for me to continue watching the game.
On November 15 2021 01:32 Nebuchad wrote: In this case you're just saying that the best protoss happen to suck at the game in comparison to the best zergs and terrans, and that is fine, I acknowledge that this is entirely a possibility, and if that is the case it makes sense that they don't win as many tournaments as the other races. But then we don't need to bring any statistical analysis into it, and in the context of this thread it doesn't change much since either way I don't see any reason for me to continue watching the game.
I don't understand the hyperbole. Protoss pros don't "suck", they slightly underperform. They take second place in premier tournaments, beating many former champions, and they win so-called "tier 2" tournaments (where the champions of "tier 1" tournaments lose to them), and they show up in droves in the top-8. If a single new player like MaxPax turns out to be really good, it would be enough to push Protoss out of the slump, because we have a very small pool of top players and very few new people entering over the years.
Okay so since Poopi isn't answering maybe you'll be the one taking me on on the bet? If a protoss doesn't win Katowice you give me 50$, if a protoss wins Katowice I give you 500$.
On November 15 2021 01:39 Nebuchad wrote: Okay so since Poopi isn't answering maybe you'll be the one taking me on on the bet? If a protoss doesn't win Katowice you give me 50$, if a protoss wins Katowice I give you 500$.
I don’t take bets, and taking such a weird bet would be foolish given that the best performing protoss is going to military service supposedly before Katowice (Zest). Do you want to bet for free that Protoss will become the least earning race in 2021 though? Because if they keep being the most winning race $ wise I fail to see how their situation is as terrible as you say.
I would be interested to see what the Protoss win rate is as a function of series duration.I wouldn't be surprised if it went from being pretty good in Bo3s (we can always open the Great Book in a pinch), to average in Bo5s, to pretty crap in Bo7s.
In general, I feel like if you take a given map Protoss is kind of always fine (regardless of player skill), but when you add the extra layer of players figuring out each other's style, Protoss becomes more exploitable than either Terran or Zerg. If that were true, that would easily explain why Protoss does so well in ladder (it's all an isolated Bo1), can actually get to the end of tournaments more or less, but then just consistently falls apart in finals.
On November 15 2021 01:39 Nebuchad wrote: Okay so since Poopi isn't answering maybe you'll be the one taking me on on the bet? If a protoss doesn't win Katowice you give me 50$, if a protoss wins Katowice I give you 500$.
I don’t take bets, and taking such a weird bet would be foolish given that the best performing protoss is going to military service supposedly before Katowice (Zest). Do you want to bet for free that Protoss will become the least earning race in 2021 though? Because if they keep being the most winning race $ wise I fail to see how their situation is as terrible as you say.
No I don't want to bet this because I don't know how much money protoss players will win in 2021. I do know that we aren't winning Katowice though. I like to bet when I'm going to win rather than when I don't know what will happen lol. The bet I offered was probably slightly ev- for me since a protoss wins Katowice something like 1 in 8 times I would imagine, but that doesn't really matter.
I don't want to bet. I said Protoss players underperform, and I said that Trap (their best player for a while) in particular has gotten a little worse. My point is about race balance. If instead of looking at the single best player who wins the tournament, we looked at the top 16, top 8, and top 4, do you think Protoss will be underrepresented?
On November 15 2021 01:49 DaveyJosiah wrote: I don't want to bet. I said Protoss players underperform, and I said that Trap (their best player for a while) in particular has gotten a little worse. My point is about race balance. If instead of looking at the single best player who wins the tournament, we looked at the top 16, top 8, and top 4, do you think Protoss will be underrepresented?
Do you think we enjoy watching a bunch of protoss qualify for the Ro32 of stuff and then lose 80% of the games because the other people are better than them?
Also you said that protoss players "slightly underperform" and I gave you 10 to 1 on a 2 to 1 situation lol
On November 15 2021 01:49 DaveyJosiah wrote: I don't want to bet. I said Protoss players underperform, and I said that Trap (their best player for a while) in particular has gotten a little worse. My point is about race balance. If instead of looking at the single best player who wins the tournament, we looked at the top 16, top 8, and top 4, do you think Protoss will be underrepresented?
Do you think we enjoy watching a bunch of protoss qualify for the Ro32 of stuff and then lose 80% of the games because the other people are better than them?
They don't really underperform at any level of play though. They win tier 2 tournaments that have the same players as tier 1 tournaments. This is why I don't understand why you want to make it into a balance problem when they underperform only at one specific stage (tier 1 tournament finals). It indicates more a mental problem from the players, bad luck, etc.
On November 15 2021 01:52 Nebuchad wrote: Do you think we enjoy watching a bunch of protoss qualify for the Ro32 of stuff and then lose 80% of the games because the other people are better than them?
Also you said that protoss players "slightly underperform" and I gave you 10 to 1 on a 2 to 1 situation lol
Where does this 80% number come from? Look at the bracket for the last GSL.
On November 15 2021 01:49 DaveyJosiah wrote: I don't want to bet. I said Protoss players underperform, and I said that Trap (their best player for a while) in particular has gotten a little worse. My point is about race balance. If instead of looking at the single best player who wins the tournament, we looked at the top 16, top 8, and top 4, do you think Protoss will be underrepresented?
Do you think we enjoy watching a bunch of protoss qualify for the Ro32 of stuff and then lose 80% of the games because the other people are better than them?
They don't really underperform at any level of play though. They win tier 2 tournaments that have the same players as tier 1 tournaments. This is why I don't understand why you want to make it into a balance problem when they underperform only at one specific stage (tier 1 tournament finals). It indicates more a mental problem from the players, bad luck, etc.
I do not want to make this into a balance problem. I acknowledge that it's very possible that your players are just better.
I don't think that the status of Protoss will improve any time soon. Zest going to military will be the nail in the coffin. Only Trap may occasionally appear in the Global Finals Playoff or IEM quarterfinals. My opinion is that there are two reasons why Protoss hasn't win one of the biggest tournaments in years (by the way, those are a regular GSL, a dreamhack, WESG or IEM Katowice, no matter what Liquipedía says): - "Bad luck" - ZvP The Bad Luck is somewhat real, but is also related to how unforgiving the race is to errors. Top pros make few errors, but those few have worse consequences if you are Protoss. In lower levels, the number of errors is higher for all races and that equals the field. ZvP has been in a terrible status for years, and it probably still is. Currently there is no strong ground composition for Protoss, and a-move air compositions are lame. They have very low micro potential and top zergs can always counter them with excellent macro and good micro. Meanwhille, a-move is so powerful below pro level that GM is empty of Zergs. The sensibility to errors cannot be changed, it is in the design of the race. ZvP could be patched to return to viable robo or twilight compisitions, but I don't hold my breath...even if it happens, once Trap wins a couple of majors the community will start shouting Protoss Imba again and the nerfs will come again. Meanwhile yes, I watch less the big tornaments if there are no P left, and that happens often. You can say "but Protoss still wins a lot of money in lesser tournaments" but nobody really (emotionally) cares about those. Sadly I predict P fans abandoning watching SC2 in the future, more and more.
In the last year, Trap has won TSL 7, Next S1, 2021 GSL Super Tournament 1, DH Last Chance 2021, 2021 GSL Super Tournament 2, 2020 GSL Super Tournament 2, and Next 2020 Winter. That’s 7 prestigious tournaments that Trap has won.
And TSL 7, DH Last Chance 2021, 2021 GSL Super Tournament 2, 2020 GSL Super Tournament 2, were widely watched by the SC2 community.
Also, Protoss is killing EU GM ladder. 50% of EU GM is Protoss now, and EU ESL Cups usually have 50% Protoss, while the rest are Terran and Zerg. That's not good for upcoming Terran and Zerg players in the EU.
The design of the race was garbage from the start (warping at the start, hero unit like mothership, gateway units are garbage in late game etc). The game is fun and interesting when there is a lot of interaction between players. When there is a interaction in tvz players can choose to engage or to retreat (medivac, zergling running away on creep) and there are margin (small at the pro level, maybe too small in fact) for errors (trading worse, failed run by) that allow multiple engagements even if someone make mistakes. I see none of that in P v Z the protoss are not allowed to loose units besides zealots so they camp hoping to reach carreirs stage (the least interesting stage is always T3 and flying units in all matchups compared to the early / mid game).
Its simple, just ask Maru to switch race to Protoss, thats your hope. The man literally fight Lurker Lingbane with Bio Mines, theres nothing else he cannot do. On a serious note, I think its coming down to PvZ and how top Protoss seems to grossly under-perform at that matchup in the Grand Final series. We have seen Protoss taken series off Serral/Reynor/Rogue/Dark before, but they just cant re-produce that in the most important match. Probably a mental thing, and how Zerg players are just more prepared for Bo7 and the Protoss ran out of trick.
On November 14 2021 08:14 feardragon wrote: No there is no hope for Protoss. If you do the research there is a swedish Zerg named hOpe and a Korean Terran named HOpe.
On November 14 2021 09:44 Nebuchad wrote: I mean there isn't really a question that protoss is underperforming, the question is just whether they're underperforming because they're bad or because their race is bad. I again want to stress that it's totally possible that protoss players are just worse than other players, and if Maxpax keeps improving that will demonstrate this.
From our perspective as protoss supporters the difference between the two doesn't really matter, the end result is just that we don't get to enjoy watching the game as often as you guys do, so we end up watching it less and less. And that's fine too.
No dude, saying all the players of a certain race are just worse is one of the dumbest arguments possible. There are plenty of extremely skilled protoss players just like the other 2 races. It just doesn't work like that, overall skill levels of the players averages out pretty closely between each race. And if it did work like that it would probably be because that race is the weakest, cause there needs to be a strong force pulling the good players away from choosing that race.
As a former protoss main for years I think if the opponent really knows what they're doing and looking for it should be too easy for them to sniff out what the protoss is doing and counter it versus most builds. And protoss is very inflexible you have to commit to a build and it takes forever to transition out of it if you can at all, I guess that's because the units/tech are extra expensive and slow to build. So the opponent has tons of opportunity to counter you, zerg is super adaptable and can transition to whatever at will with sufficient funds, terran is way more flexible and uncommitted etc... I think toss is too gimmicky and relies on the opponent to mess up their reaction to what you're doing.
EDIT: Noticed the guy above me after posting this, I completely agree. It's very hard to be consistent as a protoss, why is that? It's because as I said it's too gimmicky and relies on the opponent to not understand what you're doing, if they do it's too easy to shut down your play.
On November 15 2021 15:40 NinjaNight wrote: No dude, saying all the players of a certain race are just worse is one of the dumbest arguments possible.
Why is EU GM, about 50% Protoss then? If EU players across all races are equally skilled, you would expect 1/3 to be Terran, 1/3 to be Zerg, and 1/3 to be Protoss.
Mind you, EU GM was quite balanced before the last patch. After the last patch, the number of Protoss players getting into EU GM increased, while Terran and Zerg players making it into EU GM decreased.
On November 14 2021 09:44 Nebuchad wrote: I mean there isn't really a question that protoss is underperforming, the question is just whether they're underperforming because they're bad or because their race is bad. I again want to stress that it's totally possible that protoss players are just worse than other players, and if Maxpax keeps improving that will demonstrate this.
From our perspective as protoss supporters the difference between the two doesn't really matter, the end result is just that we don't get to enjoy watching the game as often as you guys do, so we end up watching it less and less. And that's fine too.
No dude, saying all the players of a certain race are just worse is one of the dumbest arguments possible. There are plenty of extremely skilled protoss players just like the other 2 races. It just doesn't work like that, overall skill levels of the players averages out pretty closely between each race. And if it did work like that it would probably be because that race is the weakest, cause there needs to be a strong force pulling the good players away from choosing that race.
As a former protoss main for years I think if the opponent really knows what they're doing and looking for it should be too easy for them to sniff out what the protoss is doing and counter it versus most builds. And protoss is very inflexible you have to commit to a build and it takes forever to transition out of it if you can at all, I guess that's because the units/tech are extra expensive and slow to build. So the opponent has tons of opportunity to counter you, zerg is super adaptable and can transition to whatever at will with sufficient funds, terran is way more flexible and uncommitted etc... I think toss is too gimmicky and relies on the opponent to mess up their reaction to what you're doing.
EDIT: Noticed the guy above me after posting this, I completely agree. It's very hard to be consistent as a protoss, why is that? It's because as I said it's too gimmicky and relies on the opponent to not understand what you're doing, if they do it's too easy to shut down your play.
There's nothing wrong with the idea that the top 7-8 players in terms of skill just happen not to have picked a particular race. It is possible. There's also nothing wrong with the idea that there is a balance issue with this race. Here we're dealing with people who pretend to believe that it's bad luck if protoss just don't win that often, which is obviously silly. This is the non-starter option.
In a thread about hope for protoss in the future, it doesn't really matter if it's option A or option B, in both cases there is not very much hope, and my advice for myself and any other people rooting for protoss is to not watch a ton of Starcraft as you're not going to have a good experience. If it was option C there would be no reason to stop watching.
On November 14 2021 09:44 Nebuchad wrote: I mean there isn't really a question that protoss is underperforming, the question is just whether they're underperforming because they're bad or because their race is bad. I again want to stress that it's totally possible that protoss players are just worse than other players, and if Maxpax keeps improving that will demonstrate this.
From our perspective as protoss supporters the difference between the two doesn't really matter, the end result is just that we don't get to enjoy watching the game as often as you guys do, so we end up watching it less and less. And that's fine too.
No dude, saying all the players of a certain race are just worse is one of the dumbest arguments possible. There are plenty of extremely skilled protoss players just like the other 2 races. It just doesn't work like that, overall skill levels of the players averages out pretty closely between each race. And if it did work like that it would probably be because that race is the weakest, cause there needs to be a strong force pulling the good players away from choosing that race.
As a former protoss main for years I think if the opponent really knows what they're doing and looking for it should be too easy for them to sniff out what the protoss is doing and counter it versus most builds. And protoss is very inflexible you have to commit to a build and it takes forever to transition out of it if you can at all, I guess that's because the units/tech are extra expensive and slow to build. So the opponent has tons of opportunity to counter you, zerg is super adaptable and can transition to whatever at will with sufficient funds, terran is way more flexible and uncommitted etc... I think toss is too gimmicky and relies on the opponent to mess up their reaction to what you're doing.
EDIT: Noticed the guy above me after posting this, I completely agree. It's very hard to be consistent as a protoss, why is that? It's because as I said it's too gimmicky and relies on the opponent to not understand what you're doing, if they do it's too easy to shut down your play.
There's nothing wrong with the idea that the top 7-8 players in terms of skill just happen not to have picked a particular race. It is possible. There's also nothing wrong with the idea that there is a balance issue with this race. Here we're dealing with people who pretend to believe that it's bad luck if protoss just don't win that often, which is obviously silly. This is the non-starter option.
In a thread about hope for protoss in the future, it doesn't really matter if it's option A or option B, in both cases there is not very much hope, and my advice for myself and any other people rooting for protoss is to not watch a ton of Starcraft as you're not going to have a good experience. If it was option C there would be no reason to stop watching.
It has been said multiple times by now and you continue to ignore that point / change the subject. PROTOSS WINS PLENTY OF TOURNAMENTS WITH ALL TOP PLAYERS ATTENDING. they just don't win the ones with the highest stakes / prizepool. But given they are played on the same balance patch and with the same player pool, the logical conclusion is that their players just have bad luck in "tier 1" tournaments or some kind of mental problem. Unless you think Zergs and Terrans take it easy in tier 2 tournaments or throw their games so Protoss doesn't get buffed.
You're not going to gaslight me into thinking that protoss is doing well, I've been watching tournaments. I find that giving 10-1 odds to people who insist that they believe protoss is roughly 33% to win, and seeing them refuse those odds, is a much better argument than anything where I address nonsense more directly.
Do you think if I offered 500$ against 50$ on terran or zerg winning Katowice, no one would take it?
On November 15 2021 20:24 Nebuchad wrote: You're not going to gaslight me into thinking that protoss is doing well, I've been watching tournaments. I find that giving 10-1 odds to people who insist that they believe protoss is roughly 33% to win, and seeing them refuse those odds, is a much better argument than anything where I address nonsense more directly.
Do you think if I offered 500$ against 50$ on terran or zerg winning Katowice, no one would take it?
That's a silly bet though, if I were to take bets, I would not take a bet: 50$ that a zerg or protoss wins katowice, or 500$ that a terran wins (with Maru not participating in it because of military service) either. Since I would not take that bet either, and it seems it's your only argument for protoss not doing well, does that mean by your logic terran does not do well either? Then if it works for both races, your argument is void.
On November 15 2021 20:24 Nebuchad wrote: You're not going to gaslight me into thinking that protoss is doing well, I've been watching tournaments. I find that giving 10-1 odds to people who insist that they believe protoss is roughly 33% to win, and seeing them refuse those odds, is a much better argument than anything where I address nonsense more directly.
Do you think if I offered 500$ against 50$ on terran or zerg winning Katowice, no one would take it?
That's a silly bet though, if I were to take bets, I would not take a bet: 50$ that a zerg or protoss wins katowice, or 500$ that a terran wins (with Maru not participating in it because of military service) either. Since I would not take that bet either, and it seems it's your only argument for protoss not doing well, does that mean by your logic terran does not do well either? Then if it works for both races, your argument is void.
You would not take a bet where you give 50$ if terran doesn't win Katowice and you win 500$ if they do?
That's extremely conservative. You're getting 11 to 1, you need to win that bet 8% of the time in order to be profitable. Terran will win Katowice much more often than 8% of the time, something like 40% of the time I would imagine. Maybe less if Maru isn't there so let's say 30%. It is an immensely profitable bet.
On November 15 2021 20:24 Nebuchad wrote: You're not going to gaslight me into thinking that protoss is doing well, I've been watching tournaments. I find that giving 10-1 odds to people who insist that they believe protoss is roughly 33% to win, and seeing them refuse those odds, is a much better argument than anything where I address nonsense more directly.
Do you think if I offered 500$ against 50$ on terran or zerg winning Katowice, no one would take it?
People ignoring a bet that was proposed in an attempt to prove a point is not proving the point. There are a number of explanation as to why that is, including, but not limited to, the way you proposed the bet made it seem like a personal bet initially making any subsequent proposal seem a bit odd; people genuinly don't want to bet, period; and the discussion is disrupted by your persistent proposals making people dislike them because of that.
Your arguments are heard, they have been confronted and alternative arguments have been made. You do not show that you have listened and accommodated those argument. This thread is discussing with arguments. You are reducing yourself to "wanna bet that I can ignore what you wrote and pester you with a nonsensical bet?" It's as if you want to be treated as a lesser intellectual and then make yourself a victim. Confront the arguments instead of ignoring/minimizing them!
We are not trying to gaslight you. It may seem that way because, as Chairozard tried in 2 separate messages, YOU are the one not showing that you are acknowledging the arguments. If you ignore the arguments, they will be rephrased. This is probably why you feel gaslighted.
On November 15 2021 20:24 Nebuchad wrote: You're not going to gaslight me into thinking that protoss is doing well, I've been watching tournaments. I find that giving 10-1 odds to people who insist that they believe protoss is roughly 33% to win, and seeing them refuse those odds, is a much better argument than anything where I address nonsense more directly.
Do you think if I offered 500$ against 50$ on terran or zerg winning Katowice, no one would take it?
That's a silly bet though, if I were to take bets, I would not take a bet: 50$ that a zerg or protoss wins katowice, or 500$ that a terran wins (with Maru not participating in it because of military service) either. Since I would not take that bet either, and it seems it's your only argument for protoss not doing well, does that mean by your logic terran does not do well either? Then if it works for both races, your argument is void.
You would not take a bet where you give 50$ if terran doesn't win Katowice and you win 500$ if they do?
That's extremely conservative. You're getting 11 to 1, you need to win that bet 8% of the time in order to be profitable. Terran will win Katowice much more often than 8% of the time, something like 40% of the time I would imagine. It is an immensely profitable bet.
Terran without Maru. And no that bet is insanely stupid, since it happens only once and your estimated probabilities are false (see the aligulac prediction about Serral winning it all 40% of the time yesterday) + even if the probabilities were somehow true, it does not happen multiple times so you won't necessarily obtain the average outcome. However, if the probabilities were true and at your advantage, and that you could roll the bet a sufficiently high number of times, yeah it would become free money. But as we say in France, "avec des si on mettrait Paris dans une bouteille" (with if, you could put Paris in a bottle) edit: plus I wouldn't take that bet for zerg either. There are more zergs to retrieve from the pool of players to compare it with Zest not participating in Katowice, but even if we let all zergs in, it would hugely depends on bracket. Maru can probably beat them all (although he might choke vs a Rogue in finals), and would just need to avoid Trap.
Whether I think Protoss wins Katowice or not has nothing to do with the arguments I presented and how it is a balance problem that they can't win tier 1 tournaments but win other tournaments with the same player pool. So I don't see the point of this bet and how it proves any point. That you don't have any arguments except offering this weird bet over and over is pretty telling I think.
Also I don't think Protoss have 33% to win especially with Zest going to military and Trap seemingly having mental problems in higher stakes tournaments. I could theoretically take the bet as 10-1 odds are still pretty good but I won't because I don't bet and because I don't see how taking or not taking the bet proves any point.
On November 15 2021 20:24 Nebuchad wrote: You're not going to gaslight me into thinking that protoss is doing well, I've been watching tournaments. I find that giving 10-1 odds to people who insist that they believe protoss is roughly 33% to win, and seeing them refuse those odds, is a much better argument than anything where I address nonsense more directly.
Do you think if I offered 500$ against 50$ on terran or zerg winning Katowice, no one would take it?
People ignoring a bet that was proposed in an attempt to prove a point is not proving the point. There are a number of explanation as to why that is, including, but not limited to, the way you proposed the bet made it seem like a personal bet initially making any subsequent proposal seem a bit odd; people genuinly don't want to bet, period; and the discussion is disrupted by your persistent proposals making people dislike them because of that.
Your arguments are heard, they have been confronted and alternative arguments have been made. You do not show that you have listened and accommodated those argument. This thread is discussing with arguments. You are reducing yourself to "wanna bet that I can ignore what you wrote and pester you with a nonsensical bet?" It's as if you want to be treated as a lesser intellectual and then make yourself a victim. Confront the arguments instead of ignoring/minimizing them!
We are not trying to gaslight you. It may seem that way because, as Chairozard tried in 2 separate messages, YOU are the one not showing that you are acknowledging the arguments. If you ignore the arguments, they will be rephrased. This is probably why you feel gaslighted.
Sorry I might need to be a little clearer: I think people are lying about what they believe.
On November 15 2021 20:24 Nebuchad wrote: You're not going to gaslight me into thinking that protoss is doing well, I've been watching tournaments. I find that giving 10-1 odds to people who insist that they believe protoss is roughly 33% to win, and seeing them refuse those odds, is a much better argument than anything where I address nonsense more directly.
Do you think if I offered 500$ against 50$ on terran or zerg winning Katowice, no one would take it?
That's a silly bet though, if I were to take bets, I would not take a bet: 50$ that a zerg or protoss wins katowice, or 500$ that a terran wins (with Maru not participating in it because of military service) either. Since I would not take that bet either, and it seems it's your only argument for protoss not doing well, does that mean by your logic terran does not do well either? Then if it works for both races, your argument is void.
You would not take a bet where you give 50$ if terran doesn't win Katowice and you win 500$ if they do?
That's extremely conservative. You're getting 11 to 1, you need to win that bet 8% of the time in order to be profitable. Terran will win Katowice much more often than 8% of the time, something like 40% of the time I would imagine. It is an immensely profitable bet.
Terran without Maru. And no that bet is insanely stupid, since it happens only once and your estimated probabilities are false (see the aligulac prediction about Serral winning it all 40% of the time yesterday) + even if the probabilities were somehow true, it does not happen multiple times so you won't necessarily obtain the average outcome. However, if the probabilities were true and at your advantage, and that you could roll the bet a sufficiently high number of times, yeah it would become free money. But as we say in France, "avec des si on mettrait Paris dans une bouteille" (with if, you could put Paris in a bottle) edit: plus I wouldn't take that bet for zerg either. There are more zergs to retrieve from the pool of players to compare it with Zest not participating in Katowice, but even if we let all zergs in, it would hugely depends on bracket. Maru can probably beat them all (although he might choke vs a Rogue in finals), and would just need to avoid Trap.
This is just betting illiteracy, which is fine, not everyone has to be good at betting.
When considering whether a bet is profitable you don't have to look at whether it happens multiple times or not. It's a bet, it never happens multiple times. You just need to look at the probabilities and see if they meet the odds you've been given. If you're given 11 to 1 as is the case here, you have to win the bet 8,33% of the time in order to be profitable. If terran wins Katowice more than 8,33% of the time, it's a profitable bet. This is obviously the case, so the idea that this bet would be "insanely stupid" is completely silly. I would imagine that even protoss wins Katowice more than 8,33% of the time, let alone terran.
On November 15 2021 20:24 Nebuchad wrote: You're not going to gaslight me into thinking that protoss is doing well, I've been watching tournaments. I find that giving 10-1 odds to people who insist that they believe protoss is roughly 33% to win, and seeing them refuse those odds, is a much better argument than anything where I address nonsense more directly.
Do you think if I offered 500$ against 50$ on terran or zerg winning Katowice, no one would take it?
That's a silly bet though, if I were to take bets, I would not take a bet: 50$ that a zerg or protoss wins katowice, or 500$ that a terran wins (with Maru not participating in it because of military service) either. Since I would not take that bet either, and it seems it's your only argument for protoss not doing well, does that mean by your logic terran does not do well either? Then if it works for both races, your argument is void.
You would not take a bet where you give 50$ if terran doesn't win Katowice and you win 500$ if they do?
That's extremely conservative. You're getting 11 to 1, you need to win that bet 8% of the time in order to be profitable. Terran will win Katowice much more often than 8% of the time, something like 40% of the time I would imagine. It is an immensely profitable bet.
Terran without Maru. And no that bet is insanely stupid, since it happens only once and your estimated probabilities are false (see the aligulac prediction about Serral winning it all 40% of the time yesterday) + even if the probabilities were somehow true, it does not happen multiple times so you won't necessarily obtain the average outcome. However, if the probabilities were true and at your advantage, and that you could roll the bet a sufficiently high number of times, yeah it would become free money. But as we say in France, "avec des si on mettrait Paris dans une bouteille" (with if, you could put Paris in a bottle) edit: plus I wouldn't take that bet for zerg either. There are more zergs to retrieve from the pool of players to compare it with Zest not participating in Katowice, but even if we let all zergs in, it would hugely depends on bracket. Maru can probably beat them all (although he might choke vs a Rogue in finals), and would just need to avoid Trap.
This is just betting illiteracy, which is fine, not everyone has to be good at betting.
When considering whether a bet is profitable you don't have to look at whether it happens multiple times or not. It's a bet, it never happens multiple times. You just need to look at the probabilities and see if they meet the odds you've been given. If you're given 11 to 1 as is the case here, you have to win the bet 8,33% of the time in order to be profitable. If terran wins Katowice more than 8,33% of the time, it's a profitable bet. This is obviously the case, so the idea that this bet would be "insanely stupid" is completely silly. I would imagine that even protoss wins Katowice more than 8,33% of the time, let alone terran.
Well I guess I have to give you an example then .
Consider this bet: You have 0.01% chances of winning 20.000.000$ (20 million dollars), and 99.9% chances of losing 1000$. Then we compute the "espérance" (should be expected value in English): 20 000 000 * 0.01% - 1000 * 99.9% = 100100 / 100 = 1001 edit: Do you take the bet if you have only one shot to take it? It's "profitable" according to the expected value.
Then I offer you the same bet, but you have a lot of $$ to try it, and you can try as many times as you want. Do you take the bet?
On November 15 2021 20:24 Nebuchad wrote: You're not going to gaslight me into thinking that protoss is doing well, I've been watching tournaments. I find that giving 10-1 odds to people who insist that they believe protoss is roughly 33% to win, and seeing them refuse those odds, is a much better argument than anything where I address nonsense more directly.
Do you think if I offered 500$ against 50$ on terran or zerg winning Katowice, no one would take it?
That's a silly bet though, if I were to take bets, I would not take a bet: 50$ that a zerg or protoss wins katowice, or 500$ that a terran wins (with Maru not participating in it because of military service) either. Since I would not take that bet either, and it seems it's your only argument for protoss not doing well, does that mean by your logic terran does not do well either? Then if it works for both races, your argument is void.
You would not take a bet where you give 50$ if terran doesn't win Katowice and you win 500$ if they do?
That's extremely conservative. You're getting 11 to 1, you need to win that bet 8% of the time in order to be profitable. Terran will win Katowice much more often than 8% of the time, something like 40% of the time I would imagine. It is an immensely profitable bet.
Terran without Maru. And no that bet is insanely stupid, since it happens only once and your estimated probabilities are false (see the aligulac prediction about Serral winning it all 40% of the time yesterday) + even if the probabilities were somehow true, it does not happen multiple times so you won't necessarily obtain the average outcome. However, if the probabilities were true and at your advantage, and that you could roll the bet a sufficiently high number of times, yeah it would become free money. But as we say in France, "avec des si on mettrait Paris dans une bouteille" (with if, you could put Paris in a bottle) edit: plus I wouldn't take that bet for zerg either. There are more zergs to retrieve from the pool of players to compare it with Zest not participating in Katowice, but even if we let all zergs in, it would hugely depends on bracket. Maru can probably beat them all (although he might choke vs a Rogue in finals), and would just need to avoid Trap.
This is just betting illiteracy, which is fine, not everyone has to be good at betting.
When considering whether a bet is profitable you don't have to look at whether it happens multiple times or not. It's a bet, it never happens multiple times. You just need to look at the probabilities and see if they meet the odds you've been given. If you're given 11 to 1 as is the case here, you have to win the bet 8,33% of the time in order to be profitable. If terran wins Katowice more than 8,33% of the time, it's a profitable bet. This is obviously the case, so the idea that this bet would be "insanely stupid" is completely silly. I would imagine that even protoss wins Katowice more than 8,33% of the time, let alone terran.
Well I guess I have to give you an example then .
Consider this bet: You have 0.01% chances of winning 20.000.000$ (20 million dollars), and 99.9% chances of losing 1000$. Then we compute the "espérance" (should be expected value in English): 20 000 000 * 0.01 - 1000 * 99.9 = 100100. Do you take the bet if you have only one shot to take it? It's "profitable" according to the expected value.
Then I offer you the same bet, but you have a lot of $$ to try it, and you can try as many times as you want. Do you take the bet?
On November 15 2021 20:24 Nebuchad wrote: You're not going to gaslight me into thinking that protoss is doing well, I've been watching tournaments. I find that giving 10-1 odds to people who insist that they believe protoss is roughly 33% to win, and seeing them refuse those odds, is a much better argument than anything where I address nonsense more directly.
Do you think if I offered 500$ against 50$ on terran or zerg winning Katowice, no one would take it?
That's a silly bet though, if I were to take bets, I would not take a bet: 50$ that a zerg or protoss wins katowice, or 500$ that a terran wins (with Maru not participating in it because of military service) either. Since I would not take that bet either, and it seems it's your only argument for protoss not doing well, does that mean by your logic terran does not do well either? Then if it works for both races, your argument is void.
You would not take a bet where you give 50$ if terran doesn't win Katowice and you win 500$ if they do?
That's extremely conservative. You're getting 11 to 1, you need to win that bet 8% of the time in order to be profitable. Terran will win Katowice much more often than 8% of the time, something like 40% of the time I would imagine. It is an immensely profitable bet.
Terran without Maru. And no that bet is insanely stupid, since it happens only once and your estimated probabilities are false (see the aligulac prediction about Serral winning it all 40% of the time yesterday) + even if the probabilities were somehow true, it does not happen multiple times so you won't necessarily obtain the average outcome. However, if the probabilities were true and at your advantage, and that you could roll the bet a sufficiently high number of times, yeah it would become free money. But as we say in France, "avec des si on mettrait Paris dans une bouteille" (with if, you could put Paris in a bottle) edit: plus I wouldn't take that bet for zerg either. There are more zergs to retrieve from the pool of players to compare it with Zest not participating in Katowice, but even if we let all zergs in, it would hugely depends on bracket. Maru can probably beat them all (although he might choke vs a Rogue in finals), and would just need to avoid Trap.
This is just betting illiteracy, which is fine, not everyone has to be good at betting.
When considering whether a bet is profitable you don't have to look at whether it happens multiple times or not. It's a bet, it never happens multiple times. You just need to look at the probabilities and see if they meet the odds you've been given. If you're given 11 to 1 as is the case here, you have to win the bet 8,33% of the time in order to be profitable. If terran wins Katowice more than 8,33% of the time, it's a profitable bet. This is obviously the case, so the idea that this bet would be "insanely stupid" is completely silly. I would imagine that even protoss wins Katowice more than 8,33% of the time, let alone terran.
Well I guess I have to give you an example then .
Consider this bet: You have 0.01% chances of winning 20.000.000$ (20 million dollars), and 99.9% chances of losing 1000$. Then we compute the "espérance" (should be expected value in English): 20 000 000 * 0.01 - 1000 * 99.9 = 100100. Do you take the bet if you have only one shot to take it? It's "profitable" according to the expected value.
Then I offer you the same bet, but you have a lot of $$ to try it, and you can try as many times as you want. Do you take the bet?
Your calculations are wrong. You said the probabilities are 0.01% and 99.99%, but you calculated with 1% and 99%. The correct expected value would be 20 000 000 * 0.0001 - 1000 * 0.9999 = 1000.10
On November 15 2021 20:24 Nebuchad wrote: You're not going to gaslight me into thinking that protoss is doing well, I've been watching tournaments. I find that giving 10-1 odds to people who insist that they believe protoss is roughly 33% to win, and seeing them refuse those odds, is a much better argument than anything where I address nonsense more directly.
Do you think if I offered 500$ against 50$ on terran or zerg winning Katowice, no one would take it?
That's a silly bet though, if I were to take bets, I would not take a bet: 50$ that a zerg or protoss wins katowice, or 500$ that a terran wins (with Maru not participating in it because of military service) either. Since I would not take that bet either, and it seems it's your only argument for protoss not doing well, does that mean by your logic terran does not do well either? Then if it works for both races, your argument is void.
You would not take a bet where you give 50$ if terran doesn't win Katowice and you win 500$ if they do?
That's extremely conservative. You're getting 11 to 1, you need to win that bet 8% of the time in order to be profitable. Terran will win Katowice much more often than 8% of the time, something like 40% of the time I would imagine. It is an immensely profitable bet.
Terran without Maru. And no that bet is insanely stupid, since it happens only once and your estimated probabilities are false (see the aligulac prediction about Serral winning it all 40% of the time yesterday) + even if the probabilities were somehow true, it does not happen multiple times so you won't necessarily obtain the average outcome. However, if the probabilities were true and at your advantage, and that you could roll the bet a sufficiently high number of times, yeah it would become free money. But as we say in France, "avec des si on mettrait Paris dans une bouteille" (with if, you could put Paris in a bottle) edit: plus I wouldn't take that bet for zerg either. There are more zergs to retrieve from the pool of players to compare it with Zest not participating in Katowice, but even if we let all zergs in, it would hugely depends on bracket. Maru can probably beat them all (although he might choke vs a Rogue in finals), and would just need to avoid Trap.
This is just betting illiteracy, which is fine, not everyone has to be good at betting.
When considering whether a bet is profitable you don't have to look at whether it happens multiple times or not. It's a bet, it never happens multiple times. You just need to look at the probabilities and see if they meet the odds you've been given. If you're given 11 to 1 as is the case here, you have to win the bet 8,33% of the time in order to be profitable. If terran wins Katowice more than 8,33% of the time, it's a profitable bet. This is obviously the case, so the idea that this bet would be "insanely stupid" is completely silly. I would imagine that even protoss wins Katowice more than 8,33% of the time, let alone terran.
Well I guess I have to give you an example then .
Consider this bet: You have 0.01% chances of winning 20.000.000$ (20 million dollars), and 99.9% chances of losing 1000$. Then we compute the "espérance" (should be expected value in English): 20 000 000 * 0.01 - 1000 * 99.9 = 100100. Do you take the bet if you have only one shot to take it? It's "profitable" according to the expected value.
Then I offer you the same bet, but you have a lot of $$ to try it, and you can try as many times as you want. Do you take the bet?
Your calculations are wrong. You said the probabilities are 0.01% and 99.99%, but you calculated with 1% and 99%. The correct expected value would be 20 000 000 * 0.0001 - 1000 * 0.9999 = 1000.10
Yes it is 0.0001 and 0.999 (not 0.9999) so it is 1001, thanks for pointing it out, edited the original post
Protoss currently has the problem zerg had in thw past in korea where there aren't enough top protoss players to do well and even the two we have are not what you call consistent (also to me it looks like being consistent is the biggest hurdle for protoss success), but back then zerg did at least well in foreignlands. protoss isn't really currently because there aint a protoss like serral/clem/reynor right now, hwich leads to these discussions.
In the end i'd say the biggest problems for tosses rn is being consistent.
On one hand, Protoss is the race with the lowest skill ceiling, and there just arent as many top Protosses as there are Zergs. Situation wont improve with Zest leaving, but Classic has the potential to replace him at least.
On the other hand, Protoss is really doing well in many tournaments with the same top player pool as GSL or Katowice. The fact they seem to struggle in bo7 format specifically I think has 2 factors. The bigger one is the way the race works, the bags of tricks which are necessary to consistently beat especially Zergs (and Terrans to some extent) just run out by the time the Protoss gets through such a long tough drawn out brackets. And another issue is that by now, its probably also a mental problem. Top Protosses apparently just stopped believing they could win in these scenarios or they have the low probability of win in their heads which is affecting their play.
Nevertheless as long as Protoss still win tournaments and are doing good in prize money and are well represented in the brackets overall thorough the year, think we can conclude that Protoss is fine.
On November 15 2021 01:47 Teoita wrote: I would be interested to see what the Protoss win rate is as a function of series duration.I wouldn't be surprised if it went from being pretty good in Bo3s (we can always open the Great Book in a pinch), to average in Bo5s, to pretty crap in Bo7s.
In general, I feel like if you take a given map Protoss is kind of always fine (regardless of player skill), but when you add the extra layer of players figuring out each other's style, Protoss becomes more exploitable than either Terran or Zerg. If that were true, that would easily explain why Protoss does so well in ladder (it's all an isolated Bo1), can actually get to the end of tournaments more or less, but then just consistently falls apart in finals.
It’s long been my base hypothesis and well, belief that this is the case.
I’d love to see the data, although I think you’d have to filter out ESL weeklies, where it’s a total marathon and the stakes aren’t quite so high and the top players use it as much to stay in shape
‘Wombat’s Law’ held for quite some time in which depending on the bracket if a Protoss defeats a Zerg in a Bo5+, in a big weekend tournament, they will lose to the next Zerg they play if that happens.
A lot of caveats to be a law, but I think it speaks to Protoss having to scrape everything they can from their builds and strats, and that being pretty exploitable by the next Zerg.
If you’re the race that is most reliant on tight builds and subterfuge, it would stand to reason that the more builds you have to keep tight, the harder it gets as the number of sets increase. Likewise revealing your hand and bottoming out trying to get through a Ro8/Ro4 and the next opponent has a fair idea of your hand.
Not impossible, and PvT isn’t quite the same dynamic, Protoss have some of the flexibility there, but against the super Zergs of Serral/Dark/Rogue etc calibre it is bloody difficult for any Protoss to run a PvZ gauntlet if it comes up .
There are a couple of "reasons" in this thread that do not make any sense. Some saying that P do not win tournaments because they are not consistent when in fact it is the other way: they are defined as non-consistent because they cannot win big tournaments. And other saying that Trap or whoever are known to crack under pressure in finals and loose when it is also the other way around: you see them loose and deduct they must be cracking under pressure when stakes are high because it happens to them often.
I am going off of assumptions since googling failed me. Also, spoiler warning. I use data from last week's tourney.
1. Which are the tier 1 tournaments?
Classifying tier 1 tournaments seem very hard. Looks to me as a totally arbitrary choice. I will focus on individual tournaments only. Am I correct in assuming that the tier 1 tournaments are GSL code S, DH season finals and IEM Katowice? Do we have 3 code S, 3 Masters and one global final, summing to 7 tier 1 tournaments in a year? That gives us at most 7 different winners. For racial balance, that's 2 wins each + a wild card.
2. Which are the tier 2 tournaments?
Are they the premier tournaments that aren't tier 1? I assume so. liquipedia is showing 18 premier events already done in 2021, 7 of which are tier 1. We have had 11 tier 2 tournaments this year, with 3 more to come, assuming nothing else comes up. 11 tournaments gives a bit less than 4 wins per race.
3. What is the racial distribution of winners in t1 and t2 tournaments respectively?
For tier 1 we have 5 Zergs and 2 Terrans. Terran has the expected amount while Zerg took all of the Protoss wins. For tier 2 we have 2 Zergs, 2 Terrans, and 7 Protoss. Protoss is overrepresenting in t2. Collectively for premier tournaments we hav 7 Zerg wins, 4 Terran, and 7 Protoss wins. Protoss is still overrepresenting. 7 is more than the expected 6.
4. Do we only care about the winners?
The individual winners of the tier 1 tournaments are Maru, Cure, Dark, Rogue, Serral and Reynor(2). The winners of tier 2 tournaments are Scarlett, Serral, Neeb(2), Clem(2), and Trap(5). Maru lost vs Serral on his way to win. Maru and Serral lost an equal amount of matches, but Serral didn't make it into top 4 while Maru won. Cure did a similar thing, losing to Rogue early on. Rogue was beaten in the semifinal. Rogue and Serral won vs the eventual winner. Doesn't this mean that they are better? Not necessarily because we have a lot of single and double eliminations in our tournaments. If we truly want to know who are the best we should do a round robin that lets everyone play everyone else. This is not feasible for weekenders. We let stability go to the wayside and let volatility come in order to be both entertaining and save a lot of time and effort. The sport is only professional because it has entertainment value. But this does lead to a winner-take-all mentality. The winner won because they didn't lose (even though the winner did lose in some cases). Winning without losing means they are the best.
5. With the mindset "the winner is the best," how do we account for everyone that was defeated by the winner before the grand final?
Some people only lose vs the winner. Are the ones losing early worse players than the ones who lose later on? Herd mentality says YES. Stats was worse than Maru in IEM Katowice 2021. Stats didn't get to the ro8 while Maru got to the semifinals. Both lost a single elimination bo5 vs Reynor 3-2. I'd argue that since Stats lost vs the winner and Maru lost vs the winner, and (if we ignore the way to get there, as we do with the winners e.g. Cure and Maru) they won all the way to Reynor. Therefore, Stats and Maru did equally well.
If the amount of wins matters, then Maru did do better than Stats. But we'd also get the neat features of double elimination brackets. Feature 1: If you lose the first match and advance through the ranks in the lower bracket and lose in the Ro4 you'd have won more matches than the player that was in the winners bracket and lost in the Ro4. Both players are losing in the Ro4 but the lower bracket hero has won more matches while the upper bracket elite won fewer. Feature 2: There will be an upper bracket finals. If the loser wins in the lower bracket and advances to the grand finals and wins it, then the 1st place and 2nd place player will have both lost vs each other and nobody else. There isn't a strong argument for why the runner up is worse than the winner. We've had the runner up with a 7-4 win ratio vs the winner, losing 3-4 in the grand finals but winning 4-0 in the upper bracket.
6. What was the racial distribution of top 8 in all tier 1 tournaments?
The balanced outcome is that Ro8 has 3 players each of two races and 2 players of the third race. That happened twice, with Summer finals being the biggest deviant, having no Protoss players. Code S seasons 1 and 2 had a single player for one of the races. That's a notable deviation as well.
For Ro4 it should be a 2/1/1 ratio. Summer finals and Winter finals are the only ones deviating there.
There were no mirror match grand finals. Balanced distribution.
Summing up all the ratios we get Ro8: 16P, 22T, 18Z Ro4: 9P, 10T, 9Z Ro2: 4P, 4T, 6Z Ro1: 2T, 5Z
The distribution is fairly even until the winners. In Ro8 we had 3 too many Terrans and 2 too few Protoss. Ro4 had perfect distribution, while the semifinals had 1 too many Zergs. Protoss is only lagging in winning tier 1 tournaments, not really in any other placement.
7. Why do we differentiate between tier 1 and tier 2 tournaments?
Liquipedia is big and is often referenced by various members of the SC2 community. This is what they say about premier tournaments.
Premier Tournaments offer an outstanding prize pool, are frequently played out offline, and feature the best players from all over the world. They are commonly held by well-established franchises and are considered especially prestigious amongst the community.
Looking at the price pools of tier 1 and tier 2 tournaments indicate that it's generally higher for tier 1, but not necessarily. E.g. EU seasonal DH Masters give more money than the season's global finals.
The other thing is the players. What is the difference between the player pool of tier 1 and tier 2 tournaments? Since only the two tournaments held by GSL are fairly regional I decided to compare them. Code S has 16 players and Super tournament has got 16 players. Looking at ST1 players not in Code S S1 we have ST1 Protoss: Stats and PartinG ST1 Terran: ByuN and SpeCial ST1 Zerg: - The other way round, Code S players not in ST1 are Code S Protoss: Hurricane Code S Terran: Maru and TY Code S Zerg: Rogue There was a 4 player difference between the tier 1 and tier 2 tournament. 12 players were the same. 3 month passed between the tournaments. What are the differences between Code S S1 and ST2, which only were 1 month apart? ST2 Protoss: - ST2 Terran: ByuN and SpeCial ST2 Zerg: RagnaroK Players in Code S season 1 that wasn't in ST2 were Code S Protoss: Hurricane and Zest Code S Terran: - Code S Zerg: DongRaeGu That is only a 3 player difference. The 3 player difference held strong in Ro8, where it is a bigger disparity. 3/16 is not as much as 3/8. In the Ro4 we had 50% difference Rogue and Dream were semi finalists in Code S but got knocked out in the Ro8 by Zoun and sOs respectively. All 4 of those players played in both tournaments.
The player pool difference in the tournaments aren't that big. The money is a difference. Is there anything else? The amount of games in a match can differ, as can the way to qualify and the amount of matches in the tournament bracket. GSL has more games and matches in tier 1 than tier 2. The top players of one tournament are qualified for the other. Tier 1 has got a double qualifying round, where the last is televised. This pattern does not hold true for the DH Masters. EU has got more matches, same amount of games, and is the qualifying tournament for the season finals. The stand alone tier 2 tournaments vary between more/fewer games, more/fewer matches. The only true pattern is that every premier tournament is qualifying players into a tier 1 tournament, the global finals at IEM Katowice.
8. Why is a win in tier 1 worth more, skill wise, than a tier 2 tournament?
With basically the same players playing in tier 1 and tier 2 tournaments, the expected outcome is that the same players should win. That is not happening. Protoss is winning tier 2 tournaments while Zerg is winning tier 1 tournaments. Arguments: Some people say that it is a mentality thing that keeps some player from performing in tier 1 tournaments. This works as an argument against using tier 1 tournaments as a basis to judge skill. If people are performing worse, then that is not their peak. argument is countering itself The argument that tier 1 tournaments have more games in a match i.e. longer series, also fails. Both tier 1 and tier 2 tournaments are using long series. TSL7 used only long series, and that was won by a Protoss. argument is null I want to highlight three more arguments. They overlap a bit. Players care more about tier 1 tournaments, players are strategic with making and hiding builds for tier 1 tournaments, and Code S is a preparation tournament. The former two fall under the category that more effort is put into a tier 1 tournament. The latter two are about preparation. Summing it up to tier 1 tournaments are getting a different kind of preparation and players are putting more effort into winning tier 1 tournaments than they put into anything else. strong argument A corollary to that strong triple argument is that a player that can win with a small amount of preparation, with their playbook wide open, is deemed less skilled. Even if they win over and over again, e.g. Trap.
9. Attempted summary to a point.
You need to nitpick in order to say that Protoss is doomed. You also need to greatly value tier 1 tournaments over tier 2 tournaments. Looking at premier tournament wins Terran is lagging. Looking at tier 1 tournaments below the first place, Protoss is like the other races. Zerg has a large pool of winners, while Terran and Protoss have few. It feels as if the strongest argument for imbalance I can make out of my findings is that Zerg is peaking higher. The Aligulac leading/lagging algorithm is the only strong argument for Protoss being weaker.
But this thread was started as question about the future. There aren't that many young players that are performing extremely well. Reynor and Clem are the youngsters. Maxpax isn't there yet, nor is Percival. I believe we have to look at longer term in order to find the "hope". Classic is performing well, but he is older. herO is sort of stabilizing at B-tier. We have Showtime, Zoun, Neeb etc. They are to pick up the mantle when Zest leaves Trap alone as the Protoss elite. Maybe PartinG will make his third comeback, but he is 27 and are due for the mandatory service in a couple of years.
On November 14 2021 07:12 Woosixion wrote: if you ask me, as the easiest race this is exactly what they deserve.. easier/less stressful wins against the vast majority of starcraft players but hitting a wall at the tippity top
Could not have said this better myself. This is the truth.
Am I correct in assuming that the tier 1 tournaments are GSL code S, DH season finals and IEM Katowice?
I don't think so. Trap won the Last Chance tournament last year which had a higher prize pool and harder player pool than this years DH season finals and apparently that doesn't count as a Protoss tier 1 win, so the season finals aren't one either
Im going to be really controversial and say... Maybe theres a chance that protoss is much easier to play than zerg or terran; so a player that plays only protoss for years does not become as strong of a player as someone who plays terran and zerg for years.
I know this sounds bad, but when you think about it....
We should have a tournament where each round players have to play each other in each matchups (all races included) to advance to next round.
I wouldnt be surprised if terran and zerg would completely dominate protoss.
On November 16 2021 04:39 Snakestyle11 wrote: Im going to be really controversial and say... Maybe theres a chance that protoss is much easier to play than zerg or terran; so a player that plays only protoss for years does not become as strong of a player as someone who plays terran and zerg for years.
I know this sounds bad, but when you think about it....
We should have a tournament where each round players have to play each other in each matchups (all races included) to advance to next round.
I wouldnt be surprised if terran and zerg would completely dominate protoss.
It's not controversial at all. A ton of people believe this. They just feel like they shouldn't say it, which makes discussions tedious.
I've thought about this tournament as I believe it would be really interesting but it would demand a lot of time from the players, so it would probably have to happen after next year if the circuit is not renewed and not at any other point. I'd be willing to throw some money into it.
One example - many people in this thread are calling Zest the best Protoss recently.
Not that this alone is the mark of a great player, but watch a Zest v Serral lategame and look at how they control their armies.
Zest uses 2 control groups max while Serral and most Zergs use at least 4 if not more lategame army control groups for all the different unit types and multiple spell casters.
So many Protoss players can get away with stuff like this whereas it's simply not possible with Zerg (at least for lategame army control). It's no wonder Serral dominates >90% of lategame ZvP.
It's the same as it has always been: Protoss core units are shit, only balanced out by a few AoE Units. If the enemy manages to play around them or force protoss into multiple small engagements then terrans and zergs always win.
Because they can scale with skill. Terran scales insanely with micro and late game mule and perma scan gives them a huge bonus.
Zerg is a bit harder but appears to scale strongly if you can correctly predict enemy actions to squeeze out eco at the right times and then quickly produce or switch to whatever units you need at the last moment. Also they have very cost efficient core fighting units plus specialized spell casters and cloaked AoE.
Protosss basically has AoE and a very strong airforce. None of that gets much more efficient with skill. Blink stalkers and adepts and warp prism micro is really all I can think of. Of those only blink stalkers can be used on a larger scale and they mostly lose vs equal tier, equal cost armies of other races in direct battles.
If the enemy shows up at your door you mostly die if you only have blink stalkers, same goes for tempests btw. Super supply inefficient, if you build them and don't win fast you will lose because your army is just too small.
Most of the protoss stuff has a low skill ceiling. And because the core units are so bad you can't even really apply skills like strategical and tactical army maneuvers because in small packs protoss units will just lose.
On November 16 2021 05:55 starvingbox1 wrote: One example - many people in this thread are calling Zest the best Protoss recently.
Not that this alone is the mark of a great player, but watch a Zest v Serral lategame and look at how they control their armies.
Zest uses 2 control groups max while Serral and most Zergs use at least 4 if not more lategame army control groups for all the different unit types and multiple spell casters.
So many Protoss players can get away with stuff like this whereas it's simply not possible with Zerg (at least for lategame army control). It's no wonder Serral dominates >90% of lategame ZvP.
Smart guy: did you ever stop to think that because of protoss over reliance on AoE and it's overwhelmingly slower units it just doesn't make sense to split your army?
It's also funny how people keep saying protoss is easier, what exactly is easier? Every good thing they have is paid for by heavy drawbacks.
Any intelligent person watchin the highest level of zvp or tvp is going to get frustrated. At a certain level protoss can only win by relying on their opponents mistakes.
To be fair: I believe it requires a lot of effort for a terran to defeat protoss at higher levels, but it seems to me that if the terran reaches that level of peak performance he wins. Protoss in contrast, wins when the terrans slack off.
With zerg it's even worse, without crazy damage or surprises into mass air protoss will almost always just lose. You are basically on a timer. With the improval of protoss air, the quick mass air switch seems to be the safest option as any other strat combined with failure to do massive damage will always result in being overwhelmed by faster cheaper units with a better economy behind them.
On November 16 2021 05:55 starvingbox1 wrote: One example - many people in this thread are calling Zest the best Protoss recently.
Not that this alone is the mark of a great player, but watch a Zest v Serral lategame and look at how they control their armies.
Zest uses 2 control groups max while Serral and most Zergs use at least 4 if not more lategame army control groups for all the different unit types and multiple spell casters.
So many Protoss players can get away with stuff like this whereas it's simply not possible with Zerg (at least for lategame army control). It's no wonder Serral dominates >90% of lategame ZvP.
Apparently there is no kind of trickery the apologists of the "protoss players are just worse" theory won't resort to.
First of all, Trap being the best protoss player out there is community consensus. It's also proven by his recent year achievements. Watching Trap replays u can see, he uses up to 4 army control groups. Most top protoss players use control groups for different unit types. Neeb uses like 5 army hotkeys, Showtime said he uses up to 7 for late game. But you've cherry-picked Zest just to make that dumb argument, because he in fact uses only 2, but he does it super efficiently. By the way, Maru and Clem also use 2 control groups, does this make them bad and, say, inferior to Serral?
On November 15 2021 01:47 Teoita wrote: I would be interested to see what the Protoss win rate is as a function of series duration.I wouldn't be surprised if it went from being pretty good in Bo3s (we can always open the Great Book in a pinch), to average in Bo5s, to pretty crap in Bo7s.
In general, I feel like if you take a given map Protoss is kind of always fine (regardless of player skill), but when you add the extra layer of players figuring out each other's style, Protoss becomes more exploitable than either Terran or Zerg. If that were true, that would easily explain why Protoss does so well in ladder (it's all an isolated Bo1), can actually get to the end of tournaments more or less, but then just consistently falls apart in finals.
When I was still interested and kept numbers Protoss was the most represented race in the finals but won the least amount of the finals of premier tournaments(yeah, NA counted ). To me it always seemed that Protoss were the kongs. Because even if you check the GSL - you have BO7 in the semis, right? But many Protosses were able to punch through to be humiliated in the finals, right? So it's not about BO7 if they can win convincingly semis and then lose horribly in the finals. It's just that Zest and Trap were not the championship material like Classic, sOs or herO were. So while the latter three have the mentality ,they no longer posses the skill(at least for now) while Zest and Trap may have the skills, but not the mentality. Heck, just look at soO. Playing the best games of his life until the finals....
On November 15 2021 20:24 Nebuchad wrote: You're not going to gaslight me into thinking that protoss is doing well, I've been watching tournaments. I find that giving 10-1 odds to people who insist that they believe protoss is roughly 33% to win, and seeing them refuse those odds, is a much better argument than anything where I address nonsense more directly.
Do you think if I offered 500$ against 50$ on terran or zerg winning Katowice, no one would take it?
That's a silly bet though, if I were to take bets, I would not take a bet: 50$ that a zerg or protoss wins katowice, or 500$ that a terran wins (with Maru not participating in it because of military service) either. Since I would not take that bet either, and it seems it's your only argument for protoss not doing well, does that mean by your logic terran does not do well either? Then if it works for both races, your argument is void.
You would not take a bet where you give 50$ if terran doesn't win Katowice and you win 500$ if they do?
That's extremely conservative. You're getting 11 to 1, you need to win that bet 8% of the time in order to be profitable. Terran will win Katowice much more often than 8% of the time, something like 40% of the time I would imagine. Maybe less if Maru isn't there so let's say 30%. It is an immensely profitable bet.
You do realize that the last 3 IEMs were won by a Zerg? That's one of the reason why we didn't have a WC who's not a Zerg for some time now
On November 16 2021 07:31 deacon.frost wrote: You do realize that the last 3 IEMs were won by a Zerg? That's one of the reason why we didn't have a WC who's not a Zerg for some time now
Okay if you guys ever have something important to do in your life that involves odds or statistics PLEASE PLEASE DM me before you make a decision I'll be happy to help.
Betting is one of the best ways to test how we objectively feel about something. Money over mouth. Objective rationality over subjective rationalisation.
You can theorise with statistics all you want here all day. But unless someone takes up Nebuchad's offer, the unspoken and uneasy truth remians that Toss are underwhelming underdogs at top tier competitions. Whether it's due to Toss being an ez race, suffer from an difficult matchup (PvZ), or played by Kongs - that's subject to debate. The more probable reason is that the current game design is loaded against Toss.
SC2 and BW are assymmetrical games. There's nothing wrong in accepting that some races are slightly less playable than others, at lower or higher levels. There's a presumption that the game is not equal. The burden lies on proving the ideal that the game is balanced, rather than the game is imbalanced.
On November 14 2021 07:12 Woosixion wrote: if you ask me, as the easiest race this is exactly what they deserve.. easier/less stressful wins against the vast majority of starcraft players but hitting a wall at the tippity top
Do you realize the stupidity of what you just said? Protoss is the most difficult unforgiving fickle race of all 3 races in the "tippity top" one tiny mistake as Protoss and enemy snowballs ahead so quickly closing down games safely is extremely easy.
Both Zerg and Terran can be a lot more careless with their units and they get more chances for comebacks.
Perfect example is TVP where Terran just keeps throwing widowmine drops at the Protoss,Protoss deflects 4 drops perfectly, 5th one he spots a millisecond to late and the game is basically over and anyone who knows Protoss knows if Terran goes for any sort of all inn you need to know exactly which one because its requires very specific responses. Meanwhile in Terran and Zerg world a standard macro build with good scouting you can make the same units every game without a single thought just don't be 2 greedy and you are fine.
As for losing workers in any part of the game both Terran and Zerg can take worker loss way better.
Specifically in mid-late game Zerg can a lot of the time instantly replace a worker line in 1 production cycle, Terran can spam a few more mules at cost of less scans to get over the hump without it affecting the economy to badly. Meanwhile protoss must wait for individual production cycle of the probes, then the probes must mine for a while before you are back to normal, but end result is still the same, on the graph you will see protoss gets hurt way more from worker loss. In these scenario Terran and Zerg has a nearly instant fix for the problem just from better race design, its just flat stronger. What Protoss gets in exchange for this I would love to know, I am waiting.
The funniest thing I read people cry about protoss is their recall.
How many times does medivac pickup save a terrans ass pr game on avarage you think?
Zerg out of position? do you know how fast Zerg units run from your third into your main on creep if you were not paying attention?
I could go on forever I am just getting to the point where the delusion in sc2 community makes me not want to watch competitive starcraft anymore, it's just painful watching Protoss players struggle for 10 years now with consistency just because of how poor the race design is.
The metric I use for balance is the race distribution of the Top 8 in GSL proper. Over the years when you look at the GSL top 8 the balance of the races is INSANE.
To answer the OP then; the future of Protoss is only as good as the future of Zerg and Terran and therefore of SC2.
On November 14 2021 07:12 Woosixion wrote: if you ask me, as the easiest race this is exactly what they deserve.. easier/less stressful wins against the vast majority of starcraft players but hitting a wall at the tippity top
Do you realize the stupidity of what you just said? Protoss is the most difficult unforgiving fickle race of all 3 races in the "tippity top" one tiny mistake as Protoss and enemy snowballs ahead so quickly closing down games safely is extremely easy.
Both Zerg and Terran can be a lot more careless with their units and they get more chances for comebacks.
Perfect example is TVP where Terran just keeps throwing widowmine drops at the Protoss,Protoss deflects 4 drops perfectly, 5th one he spots a millisecond to late and the game is basically over and anyone who knows Protoss knows if Terran goes for any sort of all inn you need to know exactly which one because its requires very specific responses. Meanwhile in Terran and Zerg world a standard macro build with good scouting you can make the same units every game without a single thought just don't be 2 greedy and you are fine.
As for losing workers in any part of the game both Terran and Zerg can take worker loss way better.
Specifically in mid-late game Zerg can a lot of the time instantly replace a worker line in 1 production cycle, Terran can spam a few more mules at cost of less scans to get over the hump without it affecting the economy to badly. Meanwhile protoss must wait for individual production cycle of the probes, then the probes must mine for a while before you are back to normal, but end result is still the same, on the graph you will see protoss gets hurt way more from worker loss. In these scenario Terran and Zerg has a nearly instant fix for the problem just from better race design, its just flat stronger. What Protoss gets in exchange for this I would love to know, I am waiting.
The funniest thing I read people cry about protoss is their recall.
How many times does medivac pickup save a terrans ass pr game on avarage you think?
Zerg out of position? do you know how fast Zerg units run from your third into your main on creep if you were not paying attention?
I could go on forever I am just getting to the point where the delusion in sc2 community makes me not want to watch competitive starcraft anymore, it's just painful watching Protoss players struggle for 10 years now with consistency just because of how poor the race design is.
Protoss hardest race at the top level.
IF it brings you that much pain to watch the "unbalance", then just quit following the scence, SC2 still doing well without guys like you who believe your own version is "the truth" and everyone else are dis-illusioned. You do sound like a troll and a sour-grape at the same time. I guess Maru beating Zest/Stats/Classic during his 4-peat GSL final run is just a product of poor design then. And Serral/Rogue/Dark smashing Protoss in IEM/WCS finals are also not from them being better but because the Zerg race propping them up or something. Protoss has made MULTIPLE final appearance in GSL/WCS/IEM global final, but they just lost to better opponent or having self-implosion in Bo7.
On November 14 2021 07:12 Woosixion wrote: if you ask me, as the easiest race this is exactly what they deserve.. easier/less stressful wins against the vast majority of starcraft players but hitting a wall at the tippity top
Do you realize the stupidity of what you just said? Protoss is the most difficult unforgiving fickle race of all 3 races in the "tippity top" one tiny mistake as Protoss and enemy snowballs ahead so quickly closing down games safely is extremely easy.
Both Zerg and Terran can be a lot more careless with their units and they get more chances for comebacks.
Perfect example is TVP where Terran just keeps throwing widowmine drops at the Protoss,Protoss deflects 4 drops perfectly, 5th one he spots a millisecond to late and the game is basically over and anyone who knows Protoss knows if Terran goes for any sort of all inn you need to know exactly which one because its requires very specific responses. Meanwhile in Terran and Zerg world a standard macro build with good scouting you can make the same units every game without a single thought just don't be 2 greedy and you are fine.
As for losing workers in any part of the game both Terran and Zerg can take worker loss way better.
Specifically in mid-late game Zerg can a lot of the time instantly replace a worker line in 1 production cycle, Terran can spam a few more mules at cost of less scans to get over the hump without it affecting the economy to badly. Meanwhile protoss must wait for individual production cycle of the probes, then the probes must mine for a while before you are back to normal, but end result is still the same, on the graph you will see protoss gets hurt way more from worker loss. In these scenario Terran and Zerg has a nearly instant fix for the problem just from better race design, its just flat stronger. What Protoss gets in exchange for this I would love to know, I am waiting.
The funniest thing I read people cry about protoss is their recall.
How many times does medivac pickup save a terrans ass pr game on avarage you think?
Zerg out of position? do you know how fast Zerg units run from your third into your main on creep if you were not paying attention?
I could go on forever I am just getting to the point where the delusion in sc2 community makes me not want to watch competitive starcraft anymore, it's just painful watching Protoss players struggle for 10 years now with consistency just because of how poor the race design is.
Protoss hardest race at the top level.
IF it brings you that much pain to watch the "unbalance", then just quit following the scence, SC2 still doing well without guys like you who believe your own version is "the truth" and everyone else are dis-illusioned. You do sound like a troll and a sour-grape at the same time. I guess Maru beating Zest/Stats/Classic during his 4-peat GSL final run is just a product of poor design then. And Serral/Rogue/Dark smashing Protoss in IEM/WCS finals are also not from them being better but because the Zerg race propping them up or something. Protoss has made MULTIPLE final appearance in GSL/WCS/IEM global final, but they just lost to better opponent or having self-implosion in Bo7.
Very much agree, this is an excellent time to quit following the scene as a protoss supporter. But if you think it's easy to do something consistently for 10 years and stop...
As much as I like to meme about Protoss never winning top-tier tournaments, and as much as I'd love to balance whine, I think the main problem is this:
On November 16 2021 20:38 MJG wrote: As much as I like to meme about Protoss never winning top-tier tournaments, and as much as I'd love to balance whine, I think the main problem is this:
Trap is a choker.
For real Trap has become worse player in a last couple of months. Watching his last series against Clem was so weird because Trap looked so slow in a situations where he did perfectly before.
On November 16 2021 20:38 MJG wrote: As much as I like to meme about Protoss never winning top-tier tournaments, and as much as I'd love to balance whine, I think the main problem is this:
Trap is a choker.
For real Trap has become worse player in a last couple of months. Watching his last series against Clem was so weird because Trap looked so slow in a situations where he did perfectly before.
It only seems to be in big tournaments. His play in the group stage was also very spotty.
So there are still people out there who think that the game design is balanced? Lol.
There were countless arguments presented by now that its not the case, but since we are talking about Protoss here, just one thing. Toss is the easiest race on lower/mid level and the hardest at the top level. Zerg is the opposite. That is because each race has a certain skill line and the ceiling of Protoss just does not reach that of the Zerg or Terran. It has always been like this, its the core design of the game we can do nothing about.
Does not mean that the pro scene and the matches itself cannot be balanced or fun though. Balance patches, META changes and maps do balance out the game quite nicely, despite the asymmetrical game design. Lets just once and for all accept this fact and move on and enjoy the game while its still alive.
And please stop with the trolling about Toss being the easiest race. No one cares about your mid tier ladder woes and random cheesy tosses destroying you with the book of bullshit. The PROs literally handicap themselves only by choosing to play Protoss, lets just be glad they do otherwise the scene would be boring...
On November 14 2021 07:12 Woosixion wrote: if you ask me, as the easiest race this is exactly what they deserve.. easier/less stressful wins against the vast majority of starcraft players but hitting a wall at the tippity top
Do you realize the stupidity of what you just said? Protoss is the most difficult unforgiving fickle race of all 3 races in the "tippity top" one tiny mistake as Protoss and enemy snowballs ahead so quickly closing down games safely is extremely easy.
Both Zerg and Terran can be a lot more careless with their units and they get more chances for comebacks.
Perfect example is TVP where Terran just keeps throwing widowmine drops at the Protoss,Protoss deflects 4 drops perfectly, 5th one he spots a millisecond to late and the game is basically over and anyone who knows Protoss knows if Terran goes for any sort of all inn you need to know exactly which one because its requires very specific responses. Meanwhile in Terran and Zerg world a standard macro build with good scouting you can make the same units every game without a single thought just don't be 2 greedy and you are fine.
As for losing workers in any part of the game both Terran and Zerg can take worker loss way better.
Specifically in mid-late game Zerg can a lot of the time instantly replace a worker line in 1 production cycle, Terran can spam a few more mules at cost of less scans to get over the hump without it affecting the economy to badly. Meanwhile protoss must wait for individual production cycle of the probes, then the probes must mine for a while before you are back to normal, but end result is still the same, on the graph you will see protoss gets hurt way more from worker loss. In these scenario Terran and Zerg has a nearly instant fix for the problem just from better race design, its just flat stronger. What Protoss gets in exchange for this I would love to know, I am waiting.
The funniest thing I read people cry about protoss is their recall.
How many times does medivac pickup save a terrans ass pr game on avarage you think?
Zerg out of position? do you know how fast Zerg units run from your third into your main on creep if you were not paying attention?
I could go on forever I am just getting to the point where the delusion in sc2 community makes me not want to watch competitive starcraft anymore, it's just painful watching Protoss players struggle for 10 years now with consistency just because of how poor the race design is.
Protoss hardest race at the top level.
IF it brings you that much pain to watch the "unbalance", then just quit following the scence, SC2 still doing well without guys like you who believe your own version is "the truth" and everyone else are dis-illusioned. You do sound like a troll and a sour-grape at the same time. I guess Maru beating Zest/Stats/Classic during his 4-peat GSL final run is just a product of poor design then. And Serral/Rogue/Dark smashing Protoss in IEM/WCS finals are also not from them being better but because the Zerg race propping them up or something. Protoss has made MULTIPLE final appearance in GSL/WCS/IEM global final, but they just lost to better opponent or having self-implosion in Bo7.
I think sc2 community would be better of without elitist people like you rather, never actually making any good arguments just pointing out silly winratios to make your points. You have absolutely no clue of what you are talking about because you have no counter arguments to what I am saying like 99% of people in the sc2 community, I welcome being wrong if someone could actually bring some dialog on the table with some legit arguments instead of these empty personal attacks everytime you come short.
Oh I should just add, why is it then that the common theme among every single Protoss player in sc2 history has been the inability to deliver consistent results? Every Protoss over the past 10+ years are just all chokers when it comes to big tournaments?
On November 14 2021 07:12 Woosixion wrote: if you ask me, as the easiest race this is exactly what they deserve.. easier/less stressful wins against the vast majority of starcraft players but hitting a wall at the tippity top
Do you realize the stupidity of what you just said? Protoss is the most difficult unforgiving fickle race of all 3 races in the "tippity top" one tiny mistake as Protoss and enemy snowballs ahead so quickly closing down games safely is extremely easy.
Both Zerg and Terran can be a lot more careless with their units and they get more chances for comebacks.
Perfect example is TVP where Terran just keeps throwing widowmine drops at the Protoss,Protoss deflects 4 drops perfectly, 5th one he spots a millisecond to late and the game is basically over and anyone who knows Protoss knows if Terran goes for any sort of all inn you need to know exactly which one because its requires very specific responses. Meanwhile in Terran and Zerg world a standard macro build with good scouting you can make the same units every game without a single thought just don't be 2 greedy and you are fine.
As for losing workers in any part of the game both Terran and Zerg can take worker loss way better.
Specifically in mid-late game Zerg can a lot of the time instantly replace a worker line in 1 production cycle, Terran can spam a few more mules at cost of less scans to get over the hump without it affecting the economy to badly. Meanwhile protoss must wait for individual production cycle of the probes, then the probes must mine for a while before you are back to normal, but end result is still the same, on the graph you will see protoss gets hurt way more from worker loss. In these scenario Terran and Zerg has a nearly instant fix for the problem just from better race design, its just flat stronger. What Protoss gets in exchange for this I would love to know, I am waiting.
The funniest thing I read people cry about protoss is their recall.
How many times does medivac pickup save a terrans ass pr game on avarage you think?
Zerg out of position? do you know how fast Zerg units run from your third into your main on creep if you were not paying attention?
I could go on forever I am just getting to the point where the delusion in sc2 community makes me not want to watch competitive starcraft anymore, it's just painful watching Protoss players struggle for 10 years now with consistency just because of how poor the race design is.
Protoss hardest race at the top level.
IF it brings you that much pain to watch the "unbalance", then just quit following the scence, SC2 still doing well without guys like you who believe your own version is "the truth" and everyone else are dis-illusioned. You do sound like a troll and a sour-grape at the same time. I guess Maru beating Zest/Stats/Classic during his 4-peat GSL final run is just a product of poor design then. And Serral/Rogue/Dark smashing Protoss in IEM/WCS finals are also not from them being better but because the Zerg race propping them up or something. Protoss has made MULTIPLE final appearance in GSL/WCS/IEM global final, but they just lost to better opponent or having self-implosion in Bo7.
Oh I should just add, why is it then that the common theme among every single Protoss player in sc2 history has been the inability to deliver consistent results? Every Protoss over the past 10+ years are just all chokers when it comes to big tournaments?
Except Protoss was actually the best performing race during HotS. Don't make up shit to prove your point please
I think people are right the design means they're limited. If you look at the micro potential for units it's pretty low for P. Stalkers and Phoenix are the only real contenders here (edit disrupter). After blink stalkers are massively microable, a lot of the other units are not, at least to the extent that MMM or Roach Hydra Ling are.
It would be nice to see sentries used more, always liked the unit.
Most of the units are: slow to fire, slow to move, expensive.
Protoss couldn't deliver - Stats, Classic, sOs, MC, Parting(although), Rain... if you wanna do big Protoss claim, lower it to the last 3 years, please. Zest, Neeb... c'mon.
On November 14 2021 07:12 Woosixion wrote: if you ask me, as the easiest race this is exactly what they deserve.. easier/less stressful wins against the vast majority of starcraft players but hitting a wall at the tippity top
Do you realize the stupidity of what you just said? Protoss is the most difficult unforgiving fickle race of all 3 races in the "tippity top" one tiny mistake as Protoss and enemy snowballs ahead so quickly closing down games safely is extremely easy.
Both Zerg and Terran can be a lot more careless with their units and they get more chances for comebacks.
Perfect example is TVP where Terran just keeps throwing widowmine drops at the Protoss,Protoss deflects 4 drops perfectly, 5th one he spots a millisecond to late and the game is basically over and anyone who knows Protoss knows if Terran goes for any sort of all inn you need to know exactly which one because its requires very specific responses. Meanwhile in Terran and Zerg world a standard macro build with good scouting you can make the same units every game without a single thought just don't be 2 greedy and you are fine.
As for losing workers in any part of the game both Terran and Zerg can take worker loss way better.
Specifically in mid-late game Zerg can a lot of the time instantly replace a worker line in 1 production cycle, Terran can spam a few more mules at cost of less scans to get over the hump without it affecting the economy to badly. Meanwhile protoss must wait for individual production cycle of the probes, then the probes must mine for a while before you are back to normal, but end result is still the same, on the graph you will see protoss gets hurt way more from worker loss. In these scenario Terran and Zerg has a nearly instant fix for the problem just from better race design, its just flat stronger. What Protoss gets in exchange for this I would love to know, I am waiting.
The funniest thing I read people cry about protoss is their recall.
How many times does medivac pickup save a terrans ass pr game on avarage you think?
Zerg out of position? do you know how fast Zerg units run from your third into your main on creep if you were not paying attention?
I could go on forever I am just getting to the point where the delusion in sc2 community makes me not want to watch competitive starcraft anymore, it's just painful watching Protoss players struggle for 10 years now with consistency just because of how poor the race design is.
Protoss hardest race at the top level.
IF it brings you that much pain to watch the "unbalance", then just quit following the scence, SC2 still doing well without guys like you who believe your own version is "the truth" and everyone else are dis-illusioned. You do sound like a troll and a sour-grape at the same time. I guess Maru beating Zest/Stats/Classic during his 4-peat GSL final run is just a product of poor design then. And Serral/Rogue/Dark smashing Protoss in IEM/WCS finals are also not from them being better but because the Zerg race propping them up or something. Protoss has made MULTIPLE final appearance in GSL/WCS/IEM global final, but they just lost to better opponent or having self-implosion in Bo7.
I welcome being wrong if someone could actually bring some dialog on the table with some legit arguments instead of these empty personal attacks everytime you come short.
Also you're the one doing this. I haven't heard a single person explain how it is a balance problem that Protoss doesn't win tier 1 tournaments when they can win tier 2 tournaments with the same player pool and also reach the finals of tier 1 tournaments with no problem.
As other posters have said here, Protoss is the most unforgiving race. 1 bad fight, one missed ff, one wall slightly out of line, 1 out of position battle, or some economic damage and the Protoss takes the most time out of any race to recover.
This, alongside the increased speed of lotv makes every mistake even more unforgiving.
Then there is the fact that lotv nerfed protoss into the ground, particularly warp gate, which although many here would argue it wasn't good for the game, Protoss was designed around it. They buffed the stalker at first to counter that, and then reverted (mostly) the changes, and nerfed the zealot as well.
Finally, due to LotV speeding things up you don't see many strategies you used to see, like the Amazing Blink stalker micro strategies. Go take a look at any modern blink stalker game and any blink stalker game in WoL and HosT and you'll see blink is mostly used to blink away and escape or blink in and kill a bunker or some important unit. Long gone are the days of large drawn out battles with blink micro, and this is because the game was speed up so much the window where stalkers are usefull that way is too short now, so you're better off just teching instead of trying to be fancy.
On November 15 2021 01:47 Teoita wrote: I would be interested to see what the Protoss win rate is as a function of series duration.I wouldn't be surprised if it went from being pretty good in Bo3s (we can always open the Great Book in a pinch), to average in Bo5s, to pretty crap in Bo7s.
In general, I feel like if you take a given map Protoss is kind of always fine (regardless of player skill), but when you add the extra layer of players figuring out each other's style, Protoss becomes more exploitable than either Terran or Zerg. If that were true, that would easily explain why Protoss does so well in ladder (it's all an isolated Bo1), can actually get to the end of tournaments more or less, but then just consistently falls apart in finals.
I agree with this completely as well, would be interesting to see the stats.
On November 17 2021 05:56 Sprog wrote: I think people are right the design means they're limited. If you look at the micro potential for units it's pretty low for P. Stalkers and Phoenix are the only real contenders here (edit disrupter). After blink stalkers are massively microable, a lot of the other units are not, at least to the extent that MMM or Roach Hydra Ling are.
It would be nice to see sentries used more, always liked the unit.
Most of the units are: slow to fire, slow to move, expensive.
Indeed, there’s only so much you can squeeze from the race.
Terran has a core of incredibly microable units, Zerg has a macro/inject/spread creep and ovies cycle that scales up really well with skill. I think you could retool chronoboost to scale better in the hands of elite players, but much of the rest you’d need a pretty fundamental redesign.
Legacy exacerbated this yet further, you almost skip out the phase of the game where gateway units benefit a lot from micro, the little skirmishes you’d see early game where small numbers of gateway units with high HP/low damage were still competitive vs low hp/high damage units.
Ultimately I think it was a bad decision to give Terran units such high micro ceilings and DPS, to the degree they did.
I think you can pursue a policy of a bunch of ranged glass cannons in other settings, Nelf in WC3 work pretty well, but there’s fewer units, more HP across the board and melee counter micro is way more effective.
As I said earlier, Protoss is definitely the weakest race at the top level of play, anything below that and they are arguably stronger with easier to execute mechanics and a large list of effective builds that are both offensive and defensive in nature. Protoss I think suffered a bit from power creep as the expansions went on, Zerg got a massive buff on the ground with the addition of the Lurker, and it's combination and power spike when supported by Vipers is obvious to anyone with eyes.
I would really enjoy some Lurker nerfs (HP or Adaptive Talons) but what I think I would like even more is perhaps very very cautious and minor buffs to gateway units in general, Protoss doesn't really have alot of ways to apply any meaningful pressure to Zerg early on outside of Oracles, I think if Stalkers/Sentries and Adepts were a little more resilient or just plain scaled better, it could allow Protoss to slow down the Zerg economy and enter the mid game on a more even footing. Gateway units being more or less irrelevant past the early game is kind of baffling, considering Zergling run byes and marine drops are staple moves and are routinely devastating.
Protoss seems like just a small tiny balance patch away from being on even footing with Zerg at the pro level, too bad Blizzard couldn't give a rat's ass about this game anymore, I think SC2 could have many many more years of life left in it if it had a balance and design team that were passionate about the game and adamant about making small tweaks to improve it.
Protoss benefits most from changes, since there are no more patches from blizzard, these changes are gonna come from map makers. So maybe in the future if we bring back 3 player or 4 player maps and protoss can get build order edges from not being instant scouted there could be repeating protoss champions.
The design of Stalker is excellent, probably the best unit design in WoL but with the addition of HotS and LotV, Stalker is a little bit weird. Toss has excellent units and except one or two long range units, i feel that this race lack of a constant damage dealer at distance while terran is strongly supported by medivacs and zerg reproduce enought faster to contain Protoss (only from a macro-strategy point of view).
Stalkers isn t a consistent unit, in the past Yes, but only in WoL.
To resume, the blink ability doesn t fit for a base unit and for now, Stalkers doesn t hold his role of a base unit. Why not imagine Stalkers in a slow-SC2-like ? Very difficult, but to be honest this isn t the kind of unit which help the overall balance.
On November 17 2021 05:56 Sprog wrote: I think people are right the design means they're limited. If you look at the micro potential for units it's pretty low for P. Stalkers and Phoenix are the only real contenders here (edit disrupter). After blink stalkers are massively microable, a lot of the other units are not, at least to the extent that MMM or Roach Hydra Ling are.
It would be nice to see sentries used more, always liked the unit.
Most of the units are: slow to fire, slow to move, expensive.
Ultimately I think it was a bad decision to give Terran units such high micro ceilings and DPS, to the degree they did.
This kind of feature is not so hard to balance provided that Blizzard promote a community patch.
For now Stimpack do +50% dmg and +50% speed, it could nerf to +30% both (which is -15% decreasing his final damage), then Banelings has to be equal to 1 supply cost with correct balance tweaks. Then all units who are directly less or more implicated against marines decrease their fire-rate of 15% (for a first batch of tests).
I would be glad to see Blizzard form a group of known members to work on a patch aside the ladder going on. Seriously, we only need promises of getting our work not salvaged, and playable inside battle.net with publicity and a transition test ladder.
I don t think it s hard for Blizzard to allow because it s what their employees have done before.
Protoss has had much improved balance since the patch at the end of 2019 (or whenever that infestor patch hit). Prior to that, it was really unfun to watch PvZ and TvZ. After that patch hit is when I think that it's completely on the current pool of Protoss players to win tournaments. Based on that, there's only been a two year drought in GSL Protoss victors, which isn't really a big deal when you look at Protoss winners in the ASL for SC1.
On November 17 2021 22:21 BisuDagger wrote: Protoss has had much improved balance since the patch at the end of 2019 (or whenever that infestor patch hit). Prior to that, it was really unfun to watch PvZ and TvZ. After that patch hit is when I think that it's completely on the current pool of Protoss players to win tournaments. Based on that, there's only been a two year drought in GSL Protoss victors, which isn't really a big deal when you look at Protoss winners in the ASL for SC1.
No offense, but I want to see Protoss victories in SC2 and I don't care for SC1.
At the same time when Classic went to the army I accepted the fate that we have only Stats, Zest and Trap. Who were/are great players, but Stats was more about 2nd places, Trap as well and Zest was as unstable as me in a traffic jam.
Edit> Maybe some time in the future we will get Zoun titles. Or Classic will be back to his former self.
On November 17 2021 22:21 BisuDagger wrote: Protoss has had much improved balance since the patch at the end of 2019 (or whenever that infestor patch hit). Prior to that, it was really unfun to watch PvZ and TvZ. After that patch hit is when I think that it's completely on the current pool of Protoss players to win tournaments. Based on that, there's only been a two year drought in GSL Protoss victors, which isn't really a big deal when you look at Protoss winners in the ASL for SC1.
No offense, but I want to see Protoss victories in SC2 and I don't care for SC1.
At the same time when Classic went to the army I accepted the fate that we have only Stats, Zest and Trap. Who were/are great players, but Stats was more about 2nd places, Trap as well and Zest was as unstable as me in a traffic jam.
Edit> Maybe some time in the future we will get Zoun titles. Or Classic will be back to his former self.
The point is that even with a game like SC1 where balance is pretty much settled, a race will struggle to win tournaments if the top talent of that race isn't as good as the talent of the other races. Since I view the balance is pretty good for SC2, I'm applying the same thought process. I believe the talent for SC2 protoss is just a tad below the talent for the other races.
On November 17 2021 22:21 BisuDagger wrote: Protoss has had much improved balance since the patch at the end of 2019 (or whenever that infestor patch hit). Prior to that, it was really unfun to watch PvZ and TvZ. After that patch hit is when I think that it's completely on the current pool of Protoss players to win tournaments. Based on that, there's only been a two year drought in GSL Protoss victors, which isn't really a big deal when you look at Protoss winners in the ASL for SC1.
No offense, but I want to see Protoss victories in SC2 and I don't care for SC1.
At the same time when Classic went to the army I accepted the fate that we have only Stats, Zest and Trap. Who were/are great players, but Stats was more about 2nd places, Trap as well and Zest was as unstable as me in a traffic jam.
Edit> Maybe some time in the future we will get Zoun titles. Or Classic will be back to his former self.
The point is that even with a game like SC1 where balance is pretty much settled, a race will struggle to win tournaments if the top talent of that race isn't as good as the talent of the other races. Since I view the balance is pretty good for SC2, I'm applying the same thought process. I believe the talent for SC2 protoss is just a tad below the talent for the other races.
A surprising thing to say given your nickname!
But no I agree, not that the talent isn’t there but there isn’t enough of it, currently.
Conversely, HoTs where Protoss did very well you had Rain for a period, peak Zest, peak sOs, Stats, herO Classic and Protoss did well in tournaments and Proleague.
You basically had all of SC2’s Protoss GOATs, all in consistently good shape, minus MC for WoL and Trap for his outstanding last few years in Legacy
My argument at the time when people were complaining about Protoss being too good, was that the race had an atypical amount of real S class players, who were better than most of the opposition, and there were fewer equivalent players from the other races.
Now that’s really shifted around, even from tournament to tournament.
A Korean tournament has 2 Zergs in their top tier, an international has 4. I would fancy a Protoss to win a Code S before a Katowice
If Classic and herO can get back to their peak forms this could change pretty quickly, Cure’s fantastic victory aside Terran is absolutely carried by Maru these days, and Gumiho hasn’t been returning to shape as quick as his Protoss counterparts. Can Cure keep up his momentum, can Trap keep up his stirling efforts of the past few years? Does Zoun keep progressing?
Based on that I think it’s quite up in the air as to whether it’ll be Z > P > T / T > P just based on the talent level
There are so few players in that genuine (albeit subjective) S class at this point that a few players dropping out via slumps or leaving the scene has a huge impact on a race’s ability to win top tournaments.
If Dark and Rogue retired tomorrow, and neither of Reynor or Serral wanted to play Code S, could anyone honestly see Zerg winning a Code S in the foreseeable future? There’s very, very good Zerg talent below them but of that level?
Cutting out racial stuff, there’s a really, really small number of players who literally win every tournament going. There clearly is both a top tier of players who win things, regardless of race, and it’s not a high number of players of that level.
On November 14 2021 07:12 Woosixion wrote: if you ask me, as the easiest race this is exactly what they deserve.. easier/less stressful wins against the vast majority of starcraft players but hitting a wall at the tippity top
Do you realize the stupidity of what you just said? Protoss is the most difficult unforgiving fickle race of all 3 races in the "tippity top" one tiny mistake as Protoss and enemy snowballs ahead so quickly closing down games safely is extremely easy.
Both Zerg and Terran can be a lot more careless with their units and they get more chances for comebacks.
Perfect example is TVP where Terran just keeps throwing widowmine drops at the Protoss,Protoss deflects 4 drops perfectly, 5th one he spots a millisecond to late and the game is basically over and anyone who knows Protoss knows if Terran goes for any sort of all inn you need to know exactly which one because its requires very specific responses. Meanwhile in Terran and Zerg world a standard macro build with good scouting you can make the same units every game without a single thought just don't be 2 greedy and you are fine.
As for losing workers in any part of the game both Terran and Zerg can take worker loss way better.
Specifically in mid-late game Zerg can a lot of the time instantly replace a worker line in 1 production cycle, Terran can spam a few more mules at cost of less scans to get over the hump without it affecting the economy to badly. Meanwhile protoss must wait for individual production cycle of the probes, then the probes must mine for a while before you are back to normal, but end result is still the same, on the graph you will see protoss gets hurt way more from worker loss. In these scenario Terran and Zerg has a nearly instant fix for the problem just from better race design, its just flat stronger. What Protoss gets in exchange for this I would love to know, I am waiting.
The funniest thing I read people cry about protoss is their recall.
How many times does medivac pickup save a terrans ass pr game on avarage you think?
Zerg out of position? do you know how fast Zerg units run from your third into your main on creep if you were not paying attention?
I could go on forever I am just getting to the point where the delusion in sc2 community makes me not want to watch competitive starcraft anymore, it's just painful watching Protoss players struggle for 10 years now with consistency just because of how poor the race design is.
Protoss hardest race at the top level.
IF it brings you that much pain to watch the "unbalance", then just quit following the scence, SC2 still doing well without guys like you who believe your own version is "the truth" and everyone else are dis-illusioned. You do sound like a troll and a sour-grape at the same time. I guess Maru beating Zest/Stats/Classic during his 4-peat GSL final run is just a product of poor design then. And Serral/Rogue/Dark smashing Protoss in IEM/WCS finals are also not from them being better but because the Zerg race propping them up or something. Protoss has made MULTIPLE final appearance in GSL/WCS/IEM global final, but they just lost to better opponent or having self-implosion in Bo7.
Oh I should just add, why is it then that the common theme among every single Protoss player in sc2 history has been the inability to deliver consistent results? Every Protoss over the past 10+ years are just all chokers when it comes to big tournaments?
Except Protoss was actually the best performing race during HotS. Don't make up shit to prove your point please
Sounds like you just made up shit to prove your point there mate
On November 14 2021 07:12 Woosixion wrote: if you ask me, as the easiest race this is exactly what they deserve.. easier/less stressful wins against the vast majority of starcraft players but hitting a wall at the tippity top
Do you realize the stupidity of what you just said? Protoss is the most difficult unforgiving fickle race of all 3 races in the "tippity top" one tiny mistake as Protoss and enemy snowballs ahead so quickly closing down games safely is extremely easy.
Both Zerg and Terran can be a lot more careless with their units and they get more chances for comebacks.
Perfect example is TVP where Terran just keeps throwing widowmine drops at the Protoss,Protoss deflects 4 drops perfectly, 5th one he spots a millisecond to late and the game is basically over and anyone who knows Protoss knows if Terran goes for any sort of all inn you need to know exactly which one because its requires very specific responses. Meanwhile in Terran and Zerg world a standard macro build with good scouting you can make the same units every game without a single thought just don't be 2 greedy and you are fine.
As for losing workers in any part of the game both Terran and Zerg can take worker loss way better.
Specifically in mid-late game Zerg can a lot of the time instantly replace a worker line in 1 production cycle, Terran can spam a few more mules at cost of less scans to get over the hump without it affecting the economy to badly. Meanwhile protoss must wait for individual production cycle of the probes, then the probes must mine for a while before you are back to normal, but end result is still the same, on the graph you will see protoss gets hurt way more from worker loss. In these scenario Terran and Zerg has a nearly instant fix for the problem just from better race design, its just flat stronger. What Protoss gets in exchange for this I would love to know, I am waiting.
The funniest thing I read people cry about protoss is their recall.
How many times does medivac pickup save a terrans ass pr game on avarage you think?
Zerg out of position? do you know how fast Zerg units run from your third into your main on creep if you were not paying attention?
I could go on forever I am just getting to the point where the delusion in sc2 community makes me not want to watch competitive starcraft anymore, it's just painful watching Protoss players struggle for 10 years now with consistency just because of how poor the race design is.
Protoss hardest race at the top level.
IF it brings you that much pain to watch the "unbalance", then just quit following the scence, SC2 still doing well without guys like you who believe your own version is "the truth" and everyone else are dis-illusioned. You do sound like a troll and a sour-grape at the same time. I guess Maru beating Zest/Stats/Classic during his 4-peat GSL final run is just a product of poor design then. And Serral/Rogue/Dark smashing Protoss in IEM/WCS finals are also not from them being better but because the Zerg race propping them up or something. Protoss has made MULTIPLE final appearance in GSL/WCS/IEM global final, but they just lost to better opponent or having self-implosion in Bo7.
Oh I should just add, why is it then that the common theme among every single Protoss player in sc2 history has been the inability to deliver consistent results? Every Protoss over the past 10+ years are just all chokers when it comes to big tournaments?
Except Protoss was actually the best performing race during HotS. Don't make up shit to prove your point please
Sounds like you just made up shit to prove your point there mate
Proleague was a big factor in HoTS and Protoss did extremely well there, as well as doing pretty well in individual tournaments
I couldn't 100% say they were the best performing race from memory, but it wouldn't surprise me
On November 14 2021 07:12 Woosixion wrote: if you ask me, as the easiest race this is exactly what they deserve.. easier/less stressful wins against the vast majority of starcraft players but hitting a wall at the tippity top
Do you realize the stupidity of what you just said? Protoss is the most difficult unforgiving fickle race of all 3 races in the "tippity top" one tiny mistake as Protoss and enemy snowballs ahead so quickly closing down games safely is extremely easy.
Both Zerg and Terran can be a lot more careless with their units and they get more chances for comebacks.
Perfect example is TVP where Terran just keeps throwing widowmine drops at the Protoss,Protoss deflects 4 drops perfectly, 5th one he spots a millisecond to late and the game is basically over and anyone who knows Protoss knows if Terran goes for any sort of all inn you need to know exactly which one because its requires very specific responses. Meanwhile in Terran and Zerg world a standard macro build with good scouting you can make the same units every game without a single thought just don't be 2 greedy and you are fine.
As for losing workers in any part of the game both Terran and Zerg can take worker loss way better.
Specifically in mid-late game Zerg can a lot of the time instantly replace a worker line in 1 production cycle, Terran can spam a few more mules at cost of less scans to get over the hump without it affecting the economy to badly. Meanwhile protoss must wait for individual production cycle of the probes, then the probes must mine for a while before you are back to normal, but end result is still the same, on the graph you will see protoss gets hurt way more from worker loss. In these scenario Terran and Zerg has a nearly instant fix for the problem just from better race design, its just flat stronger. What Protoss gets in exchange for this I would love to know, I am waiting.
The funniest thing I read people cry about protoss is their recall.
How many times does medivac pickup save a terrans ass pr game on avarage you think?
Zerg out of position? do you know how fast Zerg units run from your third into your main on creep if you were not paying attention?
I could go on forever I am just getting to the point where the delusion in sc2 community makes me not want to watch competitive starcraft anymore, it's just painful watching Protoss players struggle for 10 years now with consistency just because of how poor the race design is.
Protoss hardest race at the top level.
IF it brings you that much pain to watch the "unbalance", then just quit following the scence, SC2 still doing well without guys like you who believe your own version is "the truth" and everyone else are dis-illusioned. You do sound like a troll and a sour-grape at the same time. I guess Maru beating Zest/Stats/Classic during his 4-peat GSL final run is just a product of poor design then. And Serral/Rogue/Dark smashing Protoss in IEM/WCS finals are also not from them being better but because the Zerg race propping them up or something. Protoss has made MULTIPLE final appearance in GSL/WCS/IEM global final, but they just lost to better opponent or having self-implosion in Bo7.
Oh I should just add, why is it then that the common theme among every single Protoss player in sc2 history has been the inability to deliver consistent results? Every Protoss over the past 10+ years are just all chokers when it comes to big tournaments?
Except Protoss was actually the best performing race during HotS. Don't make up shit to prove your point please
Sounds like you just made up shit to prove your point there mate
You're just here to troll, aren't you? Protoss won 4 out of 5 World Championships, 4 out of 8 GSLs (those are the only tournaments that are relevant I've been told) and were the best performing race in Proleague during HotS. You made shit up.
On November 17 2021 22:21 BisuDagger wrote: Protoss has had much improved balance since the patch at the end of 2019 (or whenever that infestor patch hit). Prior to that, it was really unfun to watch PvZ and TvZ. After that patch hit is when I think that it's completely on the current pool of Protoss players to win tournaments. Based on that, there's only been a two year drought in GSL Protoss victors, which isn't really a big deal when you look at Protoss winners in the ASL for SC1.
No offense, but I want to see Protoss victories in SC2 and I don't care for SC1.
At the same time when Classic went to the army I accepted the fate that we have only Stats, Zest and Trap. Who were/are great players, but Stats was more about 2nd places, Trap as well and Zest was as unstable as me in a traffic jam.
Edit> Maybe some time in the future we will get Zoun titles. Or Classic will be back to his former self.
The point is that even with a game like SC1 where balance is pretty much settled, a race will struggle to win tournaments if the top talent of that race isn't as good as the talent of the other races. Since I view the balance is pretty good for SC2, I'm applying the same thought process. I believe the talent for SC2 protoss is just a tad below the talent for the other races.
Well, I wanted to stay out of SC1 for the reason that I am under the impression that SC1 balance isn't actually any good considering all the top tier players were Terrans and, uh, one Zerg we don't talk about. As I don't know SC1(because I watch it only in clips where Artosis rages about Terran being unplayable race while Flash is laughing his ass off) I wanted to stay away from it cause maybe my information is wrong =)
But yeah, obviously if the talent is not there they cannot win, ironically the talent is there but as would soO fans say - the talent cannot win anything big. The said talent is Trap. Well, probably was, again, not following SC2 anymore. But gonna bitch and moan about it as sometimes I'm bored
Long story short - then we agreed with each other xD
On November 17 2021 22:21 BisuDagger wrote: Protoss has had much improved balance since the patch at the end of 2019 (or whenever that infestor patch hit). Prior to that, it was really unfun to watch PvZ and TvZ. After that patch hit is when I think that it's completely on the current pool of Protoss players to win tournaments. Based on that, there's only been a two year drought in GSL Protoss victors, which isn't really a big deal when you look at Protoss winners in the ASL for SC1.
No offense, but I want to see Protoss victories in SC2 and I don't care for SC1.
At the same time when Classic went to the army I accepted the fate that we have only Stats, Zest and Trap. Who were/are great players, but Stats was more about 2nd places, Trap as well and Zest was as unstable as me in a traffic jam.
Edit> Maybe some time in the future we will get Zoun titles. Or Classic will be back to his former self.
The point is that even with a game like SC1 where balance is pretty much settled, a race will struggle to win tournaments if the top talent of that race isn't as good as the talent of the other races. Since I view the balance is pretty good for SC2, I'm applying the same thought process. I believe the talent for SC2 protoss is just a tad below the talent for the other races.
A surprising thing to say given your nickname!
But no I agree, not that the talent isn’t there but there isn’t enough of it, currently.
Conversely, HoTs where Protoss did very well you had Rain for a period, peak Zest, peak sOs, Stats, herO Classic and Protoss did well in tournaments and Proleague.
You basically had all of SC2’s Protoss GOATs, all in consistently good shape, minus MC for WoL and Trap for his outstanding last few years in Legacy
My argument at the time when people were complaining about Protoss being too good, was that the race had an atypical amount of real S class players, who were better than most of the opposition, and there were fewer equivalent players from the other races.
Now that’s really shifted around, even from tournament to tournament.
A Korean tournament has 2 Zergs in their top tier, an international has 4. I would fancy a Protoss to win a Code S before a Katowice
If Classic and herO can get back to their peak forms this could change pretty quickly, Cure’s fantastic victory aside Terran is absolutely carried by Maru these days, and Gumiho hasn’t been returning to shape as quick as his Protoss counterparts. Can Cure keep up his momentum, can Trap keep up his stirling efforts of the past few years? Does Zoun keep progressing?
Based on that I think it’s quite up in the air as to whether it’ll be Z > P > T / T > P just based on the talent level
There are so few players in that genuine (albeit subjective) S class at this point that a few players dropping out via slumps or leaving the scene has a huge impact on a race’s ability to win top tournaments.
If Dark and Rogue retired tomorrow, and neither of Reynor or Serral wanted to play Code S, could anyone honestly see Zerg winning a Code S in the foreseeable future? There’s very, very good Zerg talent below them but of that level?
Cutting out racial stuff, there’s a really, really small number of players who literally win every tournament going. There clearly is both a top tier of players who win things, regardless of race, and it’s not a high number of players of that level.
I am offended that neither you nor I remembered Dear who was on fire until ... let's not talk about that.
For some reason many zergs just disappeared. Unfortunately.
The fact that Toss dominated HoTS and dropped off the cliff in LoTV simply proves the point that Toss players didn't just all slumped overnight.
Whether Terran and Zerg deserve their shot at glory by benefiting more from LoTV drastic design revamp doesn't detract from the fact that Toss as a whole has been left behind.
In such an assymmetrical game with volatile changes, it's more likely than not that abnormal statistical success rates is due to racial imbalances, rather than player skill.
Anyway, my concern is more about ensuring diversity in the game. SC2 and BW being reduced to a one or two race game would be less fun to watch.
On November 17 2021 18:15 Vision_ wrote: I think stalker isn t enought good.
The design of Stalker is excellent, probably the best unit design in WoL but with the addition of HotS and LotV, Stalker is a little bit weird. Toss has excellent units and except one or two long range units, i feel that this race lack of a constant damage dealer at distance while terran is strongly supported by medivacs and zerg reproduce enought faster to contain Protoss (only from a macro-strategy point of view).
Stalkers isn t a consistent unit, in the past Yes, but only in WoL.
To resume, the blink ability doesn t fit for a base unit and for now, Stalkers doesn t hold his role of a base unit. Why not imagine Stalkers in a slow-SC2-like ? Very difficult, but to be honest this isn t the kind of unit which help the overall balance.
What do you think about that ?
I think a Stalker buff would be good, but how do you buff it against Zerg without making it broken vs Terran? I see Parting do alot of early Stalker play vs Terran and with good micro it already looks potent.
On November 15 2021 15:40 NinjaNight wrote: No dude, saying all the players of a certain race are just worse is one of the dumbest arguments possible.
Why is EU GM, about 50% Protoss then? If EU players across all races are equally skilled, you would expect 1/3 to be Terran, 1/3 to be Zerg, and 1/3 to be Protoss.
Mind you, EU GM was quite balanced before the last patch. After the last patch, the number of Protoss players getting into EU GM increased, while Terran and Zerg players making it into EU GM decreased.
Not sure how you think that logic works, a race was strengthened by a patch and you still expect it to be perfect one thirds?
On November 17 2021 18:15 Vision_ wrote: I think stalker isn t enought good.
The design of Stalker is excellent, probably the best unit design in WoL but with the addition of HotS and LotV, Stalker is a little bit weird. Toss has excellent units and except one or two long range units, i feel that this race lack of a constant damage dealer at distance while terran is strongly supported by medivacs and zerg reproduce enought faster to contain Protoss (only from a macro-strategy point of view).
Stalkers isn t a consistent unit, in the past Yes, but only in WoL.
To resume, the blink ability doesn t fit for a base unit and for now, Stalkers doesn t hold his role of a base unit. Why not imagine Stalkers in a slow-SC2-like ? Very difficult, but to be honest this isn t the kind of unit which help the overall balance.
What do you think about that ?
I think a Stalker buff would be good, but how do you buff it against Zerg without making it broken vs Terran? I see Parting do alot of early Stalker play vs Terran and with good micro it already looks potent.
I'd use a stalker buff through the use of sentries. The sentry unit should be able to transform into a Energizer variant like it is used in the campaign. It can be like the hellbat where it becomes available if there is a robo or robo support bay. This would help add some much needed healing to stalkers. I think there are some other really cool ideas in the coop missions and main campaign that would be really fun to have in 1v1 too.
On November 17 2021 18:15 Vision_ wrote: I think stalker isn t enought good.
The design of Stalker is excellent, probably the best unit design in WoL but with the addition of HotS and LotV, Stalker is a little bit weird. Toss has excellent units and except one or two long range units, i feel that this race lack of a constant damage dealer at distance while terran is strongly supported by medivacs and zerg reproduce enought faster to contain Protoss (only from a macro-strategy point of view).
Stalkers isn t a consistent unit, in the past Yes, but only in WoL.
To resume, the blink ability doesn t fit for a base unit and for now, Stalkers doesn t hold his role of a base unit. Why not imagine Stalkers in a slow-SC2-like ? Very difficult, but to be honest this isn t the kind of unit which help the overall balance.
What do you think about that ?
I think a Stalker buff would be good, but how do you buff it against Zerg without making it broken vs Terran? I see Parting do alot of early Stalker play vs Terran and with good micro it already looks potent.
I'd use a stalker buff through the use of sentries. The sentry unit should be able to transform into a Energizer variant like it is used in the campaign. It can be like the hellbat where it becomes available if there is a robo or robo support bay. This would help add some much needed healing to stalkers. I think there are some other really cool ideas in the coop missions and main campaign that would be really fun to have in 1v1 too.
Yea I kind of wish they would remove FF at this point (since it's kind of useless vs Zerg anyways) and replace it with something that gave early GW units a bit more punch and mobility early on, obviously this would let Protoss apply a bit of aggression/scouting whilst limiting the Zerg's economy.
Something for sure, but aye we all know Blizzard looks at SC2 and says, "No monthly subscription? Throw it in the trash!"
On November 17 2021 18:15 Vision_ wrote: I think stalker isn t enought good.
The design of Stalker is excellent, probably the best unit design in WoL but with the addition of HotS and LotV, Stalker is a little bit weird. Toss has excellent units and except one or two long range units, i feel that this race lack of a constant damage dealer at distance while terran is strongly supported by medivacs and zerg reproduce enought faster to contain Protoss (only from a macro-strategy point of view).
Stalkers isn t a consistent unit, in the past Yes, but only in WoL.
To resume, the blink ability doesn t fit for a base unit and for now, Stalkers doesn t hold his role of a base unit. Why not imagine Stalkers in a slow-SC2-like ? Very difficult, but to be honest this isn t the kind of unit which help the overall balance.
What do you think about that ?
I think a Stalker buff would be good, but how do you buff it against Zerg without making it broken vs Terran? I see Parting do alot of early Stalker play vs Terran and with good micro it already looks potent.
I'd use a stalker buff through the use of sentries. The sentry unit should be able to transform into a Energizer variant like it is used in the campaign. It can be like the hellbat where it becomes available if there is a robo or robo support bay. This would help add some much needed healing to stalkers. I think there are some other really cool ideas in the coop missions and main campaign that would be really fun to have in 1v1 too.
Yea I kind of wish they would remove FF at this point (since it's kind of useless vs Zerg anyways) and replace it with something that gave early GW units a bit more punch and mobility early on, obviously this would let Protoss apply a bit of aggression/scouting whilst limiting the Zerg's economy.
Something for sure, but aye we all know Blizzard looks at SC2 and says, "No monthly subscription? Throw it in the trash!"
First of all, bane busts still exist. Second of all - how the fuck would sentry, which is a slow unit, gave a mobility boost? oO
On November 18 2021 10:03 RKC wrote: The fact that Toss dominated HoTS and dropped off the cliff in LoTV simply proves the point that Toss players didn't just all slumped overnight.
Whether Terran and Zerg deserve their shot at glory by benefiting more from LoTV drastic design revamp doesn't detract from the fact that Toss as a whole has been left behind.
In such an assymmetrical game with volatile changes, it's more likely than not that abnormal statistical success rates is due to racial imbalances, rather than player skill.
Anyway, my concern is more about ensuring diversity in the game. SC2 and BW being reduced to a one or two race game would be less fun to watch.
in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing fine with 3 Starleague victories. In 2018 Maru and Serral won everything and 2019 had undeniably atrocious balance. But from 2020 on the balance is fine imo, Toss won a lot of tier 2 events (Trap) and reached numerous finals in tier 1 events, despite a lot of their top players leaving for military (herO, Classic and now Stats)
Really I don't get how someone can watch the tournaments these past 2 years and come to the conclusion: "yep, Protoss is unplayable garbage, no point watching this" !!??
On November 17 2021 18:15 Vision_ wrote: I think stalker isn t enought good.
The design of Stalker is excellent, probably the best unit design in WoL but with the addition of HotS and LotV, Stalker is a little bit weird. Toss has excellent units and except one or two long range units, i feel that this race lack of a constant damage dealer at distance while terran is strongly supported by medivacs and zerg reproduce enought faster to contain Protoss (only from a macro-strategy point of view).
Stalkers isn t a consistent unit, in the past Yes, but only in WoL.
To resume, the blink ability doesn t fit for a base unit and for now, Stalkers doesn t hold his role of a base unit. Why not imagine Stalkers in a slow-SC2-like ? Very difficult, but to be honest this isn t the kind of unit which help the overall balance.
What do you think about that ?
I think a Stalker buff would be good, but how do you buff it against Zerg without making it broken vs Terran? I see Parting do alot of early Stalker play vs Terran and with good micro it already looks potent.
I'd use a stalker buff through the use of sentries. The sentry unit should be able to transform into a Energizer variant like it is used in the campaign. It can be like the hellbat where it becomes available if there is a robo or robo support bay. This would help add some much needed healing to stalkers. I think there are some other really cool ideas in the coop missions and main campaign that would be really fun to have in 1v1 too.
Yea I kind of wish they would remove FF at this point (since it's kind of useless vs Zerg anyways) and replace it with something that gave early GW units a bit more punch and mobility early on, obviously this would let Protoss apply a bit of aggression/scouting whilst limiting the Zerg's economy.
Something for sure, but aye we all know Blizzard looks at SC2 and says, "No monthly subscription? Throw it in the trash!"
First of all, bane busts still exist. Second of all - how the fuck would sentry, which is a slow unit, gave a mobility boost? oO
Boosts targeted allied unit attack and movement speed by 50%. Can be set to autocast; when set to autocast, the energizer will only target units in combat.
On November 17 2021 18:15 Vision_ wrote: I think stalker isn t enought good.
The design of Stalker is excellent, probably the best unit design in WoL but with the addition of HotS and LotV, Stalker is a little bit weird. Toss has excellent units and except one or two long range units, i feel that this race lack of a constant damage dealer at distance while terran is strongly supported by medivacs and zerg reproduce enought faster to contain Protoss (only from a macro-strategy point of view).
Stalkers isn t a consistent unit, in the past Yes, but only in WoL.
To resume, the blink ability doesn t fit for a base unit and for now, Stalkers doesn t hold his role of a base unit. Why not imagine Stalkers in a slow-SC2-like ? Very difficult, but to be honest this isn t the kind of unit which help the overall balance.
What do you think about that ?
I think a Stalker buff would be good, but how do you buff it against Zerg without making it broken vs Terran? I see Parting do alot of early Stalker play vs Terran and with good micro it already looks potent.
I'd use a stalker buff through the use of sentries. The sentry unit should be able to transform into a Energizer variant like it is used in the campaign. It can be like the hellbat where it becomes available if there is a robo or robo support bay. This would help add some much needed healing to stalkers. I think there are some other really cool ideas in the coop missions and main campaign that would be really fun to have in 1v1 too.
Yea I kind of wish they would remove FF at this point (since it's kind of useless vs Zerg anyways) and replace it with something that gave early GW units a bit more punch and mobility early on, obviously this would let Protoss apply a bit of aggression/scouting whilst limiting the Zerg's economy.
Something for sure, but aye we all know Blizzard looks at SC2 and says, "No monthly subscription? Throw it in the trash!"
First of all, bane busts still exist. Second of all - how the fuck would sentry, which is a slow unit, gave a mobility boost? oO
Boosts targeted allied unit attack and movement speed by 50%. Can be set to autocast; when set to autocast, the energizer will only target units in combat.
Nearby allied units gain +2 range to their attacks. Usage v • e TargetLock SC2-LotV Icon1.jpg Target Lock
Increases damage dealt to target enemy unit by 30%. Effect lasts as long as the Havoc remains locked onto the target. Can be set to autocast.
Was the campaign imbasentry moving faster than regular sentry? Which was my issue with that. Also I don't like this honestly, if anything Protoss needs less casters and more microable units. And mah banebusts
On November 17 2021 18:15 Vision_ wrote: I think stalker isn t enought good.
The design of Stalker is excellent, probably the best unit design in WoL but with the addition of HotS and LotV, Stalker is a little bit weird. Toss has excellent units and except one or two long range units, i feel that this race lack of a constant damage dealer at distance while terran is strongly supported by medivacs and zerg reproduce enought faster to contain Protoss (only from a macro-strategy point of view).
Stalkers isn t a consistent unit, in the past Yes, but only in WoL.
To resume, the blink ability doesn t fit for a base unit and for now, Stalkers doesn t hold his role of a base unit. Why not imagine Stalkers in a slow-SC2-like ? Very difficult, but to be honest this isn t the kind of unit which help the overall balance.
What do you think about that ?
I think a Stalker buff would be good, but how do you buff it against Zerg without making it broken vs Terran? I see Parting do alot of early Stalker play vs Terran and with good micro it already looks potent.
I'd use a stalker buff through the use of sentries. The sentry unit should be able to transform into a Energizer variant like it is used in the campaign. It can be like the hellbat where it becomes available if there is a robo or robo support bay. This would help add some much needed healing to stalkers. I think there are some other really cool ideas in the coop missions and main campaign that would be really fun to have in 1v1 too.
Yea I kind of wish they would remove FF at this point (since it's kind of useless vs Zerg anyways) and replace it with something that gave early GW units a bit more punch and mobility early on, obviously this would let Protoss apply a bit of aggression/scouting whilst limiting the Zerg's economy.
Something for sure, but aye we all know Blizzard looks at SC2 and says, "No monthly subscription? Throw it in the trash!"
First of all, bane busts still exist. Second of all - how the fuck would sentry, which is a slow unit, gave a mobility boost? oO
Boosts targeted allied unit attack and movement speed by 50%. Can be set to autocast; when set to autocast, the energizer will only target units in combat.
Nearby allied units gain +2 range to their attacks. Usage v • e TargetLock SC2-LotV Icon1.jpg Target Lock
Increases damage dealt to target enemy unit by 30%. Effect lasts as long as the Havoc remains locked onto the target. Can be set to autocast.
Was the campaign imbasentry moving faster than regular sentry? Which was my issue with that. Also I don't like this honestly, if anything Protoss needs less casters and more microable units. And mah banebusts
I want Protoss to have less casters and more micro friendly units as well. The Sentry is a unit that has aged poorly, FF is a shadow of it's former effectiveness and Guardian Shield has always been uninteresting and limited in effectiveness. Why not just turn a caster they already have into something that can bolster mobility and boost the effectiveness of micro? Kind of a two birds with one stone effect.
Guardian Shield - Damage decrease removed, new function = all units inside of Guardian Shield receive a 15% movement speed buff and a 15% attack speed increase.
Obviously this idea is only for examples sake. At least it would allow Blink Stalkers to actually do some damage and Zealots and Adepts to be more nimbly micro managed away, just something along those lines. This would still fit well with the core design archetype of the Protoss army which is heavy robotics support units.
On November 18 2021 10:03 RKC wrote: The fact that Toss dominated HoTS and dropped off the cliff in LoTV simply proves the point that Toss players didn't just all slumped overnight.
Whether Terran and Zerg deserve their shot at glory by benefiting more from LoTV drastic design revamp doesn't detract from the fact that Toss as a whole has been left behind.
In such an assymmetrical game with volatile changes, it's more likely than not that abnormal statistical success rates is due to racial imbalances, rather than player skill.
Anyway, my concern is more about ensuring diversity in the game. SC2 and BW being reduced to a one or two race game would be less fun to watch.
in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing fine with 3 Starleague victories. In 2018 Maru and Serral won everything and 2019 had undeniably atrocious balance. But from 2020 on the balance is fine imo, Toss won a lot of tier 2 events (Trap) and reached numerous finals in tier 1 events, despite a lot of their top players leaving for military (herO, Classic and now Stats)
Really I don't get how someone can watch the tournaments these past 2 years and come to the conclusion: "yep, Protoss is unplayable garbage, no point watching this" !!??
Your issue is that you're trying to have a balance conversation so you need to defend your race, but again the people who are serious aren't talking about balance.
It is super obvious to everyone, including you, that the best protoss players right now are the least likely to win a tournament against the best terrans and the best zergs, and this by a large margin. You can obtain that knowledge in any number of ways, you can watch tournaments, you can hear casters talking about the players, you can check statistical results of the best players of each race...
This doesn't demonstrate that the game has to change in any way. You're taking a larger conversation and you're trying to fit it into your "don't nerf my race" agenda where it doesn't belong.
On November 18 2021 10:03 RKC wrote: The fact that Toss dominated HoTS and dropped off the cliff in LoTV simply proves the point that Toss players didn't just all slumped overnight.
Whether Terran and Zerg deserve their shot at glory by benefiting more from LoTV drastic design revamp doesn't detract from the fact that Toss as a whole has been left behind.
In such an assymmetrical game with volatile changes, it's more likely than not that abnormal statistical success rates is due to racial imbalances, rather than player skill.
Anyway, my concern is more about ensuring diversity in the game. SC2 and BW being reduced to a one or two race game would be less fun to watch.
in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing fine with 3 Starleague victories. In 2018 Maru and Serral won everything and 2019 had undeniably atrocious balance. But from 2020 on the balance is fine imo, Toss won a lot of tier 2 events (Trap) and reached numerous finals in tier 1 events, despite a lot of their top players leaving for military (herO, Classic and now Stats)
Really I don't get how someone can watch the tournaments these past 2 years and come to the conclusion: "yep, Protoss is unplayable garbage, no point watching this" !!??
Your issue is that you're trying to have a balance conversation so you need to defend your race, but again the people who are serious aren't talking about balance.
It is super obvious to everyone, including you, that the best protoss players right now are the least likely to win a tournament against the best terrans and the best zergs, and this by a large margin. You can obtain that knowledge in any number of ways, you can watch tournaments, you can hear casters talking about the players, you can check statistical results of the best players of each race...
This doesn't demonstrate that the game has to change in any way. You're taking a larger conversation and you're trying to fit it into your "don't nerf my race" agenda where it doesn't belong.
I'm not the one who makes it into a balance discussion!!?? I try to understand the people thinking it's a balance problem, as I don't see it.
Also you can stop your attempts trying to discredit me by claiming I'm biased, I don't even have a race, I'm playing random for the last 3-4 years already. Can we stop the unnecessary ad hominems and focus on the arguments?
On November 18 2021 10:03 RKC wrote: The fact that Toss dominated HoTS and dropped off the cliff in LoTV simply proves the point that Toss players didn't just all slumped overnight.
Whether Terran and Zerg deserve their shot at glory by benefiting more from LoTV drastic design revamp doesn't detract from the fact that Toss as a whole has been left behind.
In such an assymmetrical game with volatile changes, it's more likely than not that abnormal statistical success rates is due to racial imbalances, rather than player skill.
Anyway, my concern is more about ensuring diversity in the game. SC2 and BW being reduced to a one or two race game would be less fun to watch.
in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing fine with 3 Starleague victories. In 2018 Maru and Serral won everything and 2019 had undeniably atrocious balance. But from 2020 on the balance is fine imo, Toss won a lot of tier 2 events (Trap) and reached numerous finals in tier 1 events, despite a lot of their top players leaving for military (herO, Classic and now Stats)
Really I don't get how someone can watch the tournaments these past 2 years and come to the conclusion: "yep, Protoss is unplayable garbage, no point watching this" !!??
Your issue is that you're trying to have a balance conversation so you need to defend your race, but again the people who are serious aren't talking about balance.
It is super obvious to everyone, including you, that the best protoss players right now are the least likely to win a tournament against the best terrans and the best zergs, and this by a large margin. You can obtain that knowledge in any number of ways, you can watch tournaments, you can hear casters talking about the players, you can check statistical results of the best players of each race...
This doesn't demonstrate that the game has to change in any way. You're taking a larger conversation and you're trying to fit it into your "don't nerf my race" agenda where it doesn't belong.
I'm not the one who makes it into a balance discussion!!?? I try to understand the people thinking it's a balance problem, as I don't see it.
Also you can stop your attempts trying to discredit me by claiming I'm biased, I don't even have a race, I'm playing random for the last 3-4 years already. Can we stop the unnecessary ad hominems and focus on the arguments?
A bunch of people came into this thread to say that the best protoss players were weaker in skill than the best zergs and the best terrans. You had no issue with any of their posts. I said it could be that or it could be balance. You had issue with my posts. Some other people are convinced that it's balance. You had issue with their posts.
Sure sounds like your issue is people who talk about balance.
On November 18 2021 10:03 RKC wrote: The fact that Toss dominated HoTS and dropped off the cliff in LoTV simply proves the point that Toss players didn't just all slumped overnight.
Whether Terran and Zerg deserve their shot at glory by benefiting more from LoTV drastic design revamp doesn't detract from the fact that Toss as a whole has been left behind.
In such an assymmetrical game with volatile changes, it's more likely than not that abnormal statistical success rates is due to racial imbalances, rather than player skill.
Anyway, my concern is more about ensuring diversity in the game. SC2 and BW being reduced to a one or two race game would be less fun to watch.
in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing fine with 3 Starleague victories. In 2018 Maru and Serral won everything and 2019 had undeniably atrocious balance. But from 2020 on the balance is fine imo, Toss won a lot of tier 2 events (Trap) and reached numerous finals in tier 1 events, despite a lot of their top players leaving for military (herO, Classic and now Stats)
Really I don't get how someone can watch the tournaments these past 2 years and come to the conclusion: "yep, Protoss is unplayable garbage, no point watching this" !!??
Your issue is that you're trying to have a balance conversation so you need to defend your race, but again the people who are serious aren't talking about balance.
It is super obvious to everyone, including you, that the best protoss players right now are the least likely to win a tournament against the best terrans and the best zergs, and this by a large margin. You can obtain that knowledge in any number of ways, you can watch tournaments, you can hear casters talking about the players, you can check statistical results of the best players of each race...
This doesn't demonstrate that the game has to change in any way. You're taking a larger conversation and you're trying to fit it into your "don't nerf my race" agenda where it doesn't belong.
I'm not the one who makes it into a balance discussion!!?? I try to understand the people thinking it's a balance problem, as I don't see it.
Also you can stop your attempts trying to discredit me by claiming I'm biased, I don't even have a race, I'm playing random for the last 3-4 years already. Can we stop the unnecessary ad hominems and focus on the arguments?
A bunch of people came into this thread to say that the best protoss players were weaker in skill than the best zergs and the best terrans. You had no issue with any of their posts. I said it could be that or it could be balance. You had issue with my posts. Some other people are convinced that it's balance. You had issue with their posts.
Sure sounds like your issue is people who talk about balance.
Spot on.
I'm not sure what exactly is the cause of the problem. But the problem is there - Toss has been struggling to win top tier competitions in LoTV. Like you, I'm concerned about the diversity of the game. Balance is not the focus here.
I'm also frustrated as you are why some people seem to be denying that there is actually a problem at all (or trying to shift the focus to some other problem).
(I don't care about low level ladder stats, or lower tier competitions. That's not the problem - or may be a different problem altogether.)
On November 18 2021 10:03 RKC wrote: The fact that Toss dominated HoTS and dropped off the cliff in LoTV simply proves the point that Toss players didn't just all slumped overnight.
Whether Terran and Zerg deserve their shot at glory by benefiting more from LoTV drastic design revamp doesn't detract from the fact that Toss as a whole has been left behind.
In such an assymmetrical game with volatile changes, it's more likely than not that abnormal statistical success rates is due to racial imbalances, rather than player skill.
Anyway, my concern is more about ensuring diversity in the game. SC2 and BW being reduced to a one or two race game would be less fun to watch.
in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing fine with 3 Starleague victories. In 2018 Maru and Serral won everything and 2019 had undeniably atrocious balance. But from 2020 on the balance is fine imo, Toss won a lot of tier 2 events (Trap) and reached numerous finals in tier 1 events, despite a lot of their top players leaving for military (herO, Classic and now Stats)
Really I don't get how someone can watch the tournaments these past 2 years and come to the conclusion: "yep, Protoss is unplayable garbage, no point watching this" !!??
Your issue is that you're trying to have a balance conversation so you need to defend your race, but again the people who are serious aren't talking about balance.
It is super obvious to everyone, including you, that the best protoss players right now are the least likely to win a tournament against the best terrans and the best zergs, and this by a large margin. You can obtain that knowledge in any number of ways, you can watch tournaments, you can hear casters talking about the players, you can check statistical results of the best players of each race...
This doesn't demonstrate that the game has to change in any way. You're taking a larger conversation and you're trying to fit it into your "don't nerf my race" agenda where it doesn't belong.
I'm not the one who makes it into a balance discussion!!?? I try to understand the people thinking it's a balance problem, as I don't see it.
Also you can stop your attempts trying to discredit me by claiming I'm biased, I don't even have a race, I'm playing random for the last 3-4 years already. Can we stop the unnecessary ad hominems and focus on the arguments?
A bunch of people came into this thread to say that the best protoss players were weaker in skill than the best zergs and the best terrans. You had no issue with any of their posts. I said it could be that or it could be balance. You had issue with my posts. Some other people are convinced that it's balance. You had issue with their posts.
Sure sounds like your issue is people who talk about balance.
Yeah that's what I said, my issue is people who want to make it into a balance problem
On November 18 2021 10:03 RKC wrote: The fact that Toss dominated HoTS and dropped off the cliff in LoTV simply proves the point that Toss players didn't just all slumped overnight.
Whether Terran and Zerg deserve their shot at glory by benefiting more from LoTV drastic design revamp doesn't detract from the fact that Toss as a whole has been left behind.
In such an assymmetrical game with volatile changes, it's more likely than not that abnormal statistical success rates is due to racial imbalances, rather than player skill.
Anyway, my concern is more about ensuring diversity in the game. SC2 and BW being reduced to a one or two race game would be less fun to watch.
in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing fine with 3 Starleague victories. In 2018 Maru and Serral won everything and 2019 had undeniably atrocious balance. But from 2020 on the balance is fine imo, Toss won a lot of tier 2 events (Trap) and reached numerous finals in tier 1 events, despite a lot of their top players leaving for military (herO, Classic and now Stats)
Really I don't get how someone can watch the tournaments these past 2 years and come to the conclusion: "yep, Protoss is unplayable garbage, no point watching this" !!??
Your issue is that you're trying to have a balance conversation so you need to defend your race, but again the people who are serious aren't talking about balance.
It is super obvious to everyone, including you, that the best protoss players right now are the least likely to win a tournament against the best terrans and the best zergs, and this by a large margin. You can obtain that knowledge in any number of ways, you can watch tournaments, you can hear casters talking about the players, you can check statistical results of the best players of each race...
This doesn't demonstrate that the game has to change in any way. You're taking a larger conversation and you're trying to fit it into your "don't nerf my race" agenda where it doesn't belong.
I'm not the one who makes it into a balance discussion!!?? I try to understand the people thinking it's a balance problem, as I don't see it.
Also you can stop your attempts trying to discredit me by claiming I'm biased, I don't even have a race, I'm playing random for the last 3-4 years already. Can we stop the unnecessary ad hominems and focus on the arguments?
A bunch of people came into this thread to say that the best protoss players were weaker in skill than the best zergs and the best terrans. You had no issue with any of their posts. I said it could be that or it could be balance. You had issue with my posts. Some other people are convinced that it's balance. You had issue with their posts.
Sure sounds like your issue is people who talk about balance.
Spot on.
I'm not sure what exactly is the cause of the problem. But the problem is there - Toss has been struggling to win top tier competitions in LoTV. Like you, I'm concerned about the diversity of the game. Balance is not the focus here.
I'm also frustrated as you are why some people seem to be denying that there is actually a problem at all (or trying to shift the focus to some other problem).
(I don't care about low level ladder stats, or lower tier competitions. That's not the problem - or may be a different problem altogether.)
What kind of problem are we talking about? Was soO getting into finals and not winning a race problem? Balance problem? Are Protoss players who get to the finals and can't win them if their lives depend on it a problem we can solve?
Out of the 3 Code S tournaments this year Protoss was in the 2 finals. IEM Katowice - Protoss was in the finals.
If we count only these "top tier tournaments" - we had 4 of them, 3 zergs, 3 protosses and 2 terrans in the finals
"But what about BO7 and Protoss?!" - well, you see, GSL semis are BO7 so if they can get pass that, they're not so bad in BO7-ing.
Let's ignore that Trap actually really won some tournaments this year, he has what, 5 titles? Let's check this years premier tournaments (yes, NA included) Trap - 7 appearances, 5 victories (0 Tier 1) Reynor - 4, 2 (IEM) Serral - 4, 2 (0) Neeb - 3, 2 (0) and yes, all NA Clem - 3, 2 (0) Scarlett - 3, 1 (0) and yes, all NA Maru - 3, 1 (0) Rogue - 2, 1 (GSL) Zoun - 2, 0 (0) Zest - 2, 0 (0) Cure - 1, 1 (GSL) Dark - 1, 1 (GSL) Solar - 1, 0 (0)
Totally per race Protoss: 11, 5 with NA +3, 2 Zerg: 12, 6 (IEM, Code S, Code S) with NA +3, 1 Terran: 7, 4 (Code S)
I don't know, to me it seems we have a Terran problem. The least amount of victories in the premier tournaments, the least amount of presence in the finals. FFS with the NA they have half the finals.
Also out of 4 tier 1 tournaments(how you people here call it) 3 were taken by zergs, so to me it seems that Protoss is fine, Zergs too stronk and Terran not stronk enough.
Edit> Back, when I was tracking this since the "Patch Zerg era", I used to say that Protoss is the race of Kongs, the most finals, the worst w/r. Terrans are Yoda race - do or do not. You either win or don't bother to the finals at all. And Zergs take the most important titles while being good at winning elsewhere as well.
On November 18 2021 10:03 RKC wrote: The fact that Toss dominated HoTS and dropped off the cliff in LoTV simply proves the point that Toss players didn't just all slumped overnight.
Whether Terran and Zerg deserve their shot at glory by benefiting more from LoTV drastic design revamp doesn't detract from the fact that Toss as a whole has been left behind.
In such an assymmetrical game with volatile changes, it's more likely than not that abnormal statistical success rates is due to racial imbalances, rather than player skill.
Anyway, my concern is more about ensuring diversity in the game. SC2 and BW being reduced to a one or two race game would be less fun to watch.
in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing fine with 3 Starleague victories. In 2018 Maru and Serral won everything and 2019 had undeniably atrocious balance. But from 2020 on the balance is fine imo, Toss won a lot of tier 2 events (Trap) and reached numerous finals in tier 1 events, despite a lot of their top players leaving for military (herO, Classic and now Stats)
Really I don't get how someone can watch the tournaments these past 2 years and come to the conclusion: "yep, Protoss is unplayable garbage, no point watching this" !!??
Your issue is that you're trying to have a balance conversation so you need to defend your race, but again the people who are serious aren't talking about balance.
It is super obvious to everyone, including you, that the best protoss players right now are the least likely to win a tournament against the best terrans and the best zergs, and this by a large margin. You can obtain that knowledge in any number of ways, you can watch tournaments, you can hear casters talking about the players, you can check statistical results of the best players of each race...
This doesn't demonstrate that the game has to change in any way. You're taking a larger conversation and you're trying to fit it into your "don't nerf my race" agenda where it doesn't belong.
I'm not the one who makes it into a balance discussion!!?? I try to understand the people thinking it's a balance problem, as I don't see it.
Also you can stop your attempts trying to discredit me by claiming I'm biased, I don't even have a race, I'm playing random for the last 3-4 years already. Can we stop the unnecessary ad hominems and focus on the arguments?
A bunch of people came into this thread to say that the best protoss players were weaker in skill than the best zergs and the best terrans. You had no issue with any of their posts. I said it could be that or it could be balance. You had issue with my posts. Some other people are convinced that it's balance. You had issue with their posts.
Sure sounds like your issue is people who talk about balance.
Spot on.
I'm not sure what exactly is the cause of the problem. But the problem is there - Toss has been struggling to win top tier competitions in LoTV. Like you, I'm concerned about the diversity of the game. Balance is not the focus here.
I'm also frustrated as you are why some people seem to be denying that there is actually a problem at all (or trying to shift the focus to some other problem).
(I don't care about low level ladder stats, or lower tier competitions. That's not the problem - or may be a different problem altogether.)
What kind of problem are we talking about? Was soO getting into finals and not winning a race problem? Balance problem? Are Protoss players who get to the finals and can't win them if their lives depend on it a problem we can solve?
If you had read the thread you would have seen that we are way ahead of you. Since there's a decent likelihood that the problem can't be solved, my advice for people who enjoy protoss is to not watch a lot of SC2. Seems like a decent solution for our problem.
On November 18 2021 10:03 RKC wrote: The fact that Toss dominated HoTS and dropped off the cliff in LoTV simply proves the point that Toss players didn't just all slumped overnight.
Whether Terran and Zerg deserve their shot at glory by benefiting more from LoTV drastic design revamp doesn't detract from the fact that Toss as a whole has been left behind.
In such an assymmetrical game with volatile changes, it's more likely than not that abnormal statistical success rates is due to racial imbalances, rather than player skill.
Anyway, my concern is more about ensuring diversity in the game. SC2 and BW being reduced to a one or two race game would be less fun to watch.
in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing fine with 3 Starleague victories. In 2018 Maru and Serral won everything and 2019 had undeniably atrocious balance. But from 2020 on the balance is fine imo, Toss won a lot of tier 2 events (Trap) and reached numerous finals in tier 1 events, despite a lot of their top players leaving for military (herO, Classic and now Stats)
Really I don't get how someone can watch the tournaments these past 2 years and come to the conclusion: "yep, Protoss is unplayable garbage, no point watching this" !!??
Your issue is that you're trying to have a balance conversation so you need to defend your race, but again the people who are serious aren't talking about balance.
It is super obvious to everyone, including you, that the best protoss players right now are the least likely to win a tournament against the best terrans and the best zergs, and this by a large margin. You can obtain that knowledge in any number of ways, you can watch tournaments, you can hear casters talking about the players, you can check statistical results of the best players of each race...
This doesn't demonstrate that the game has to change in any way. You're taking a larger conversation and you're trying to fit it into your "don't nerf my race" agenda where it doesn't belong.
I'm not the one who makes it into a balance discussion!!?? I try to understand the people thinking it's a balance problem, as I don't see it.
Also you can stop your attempts trying to discredit me by claiming I'm biased, I don't even have a race, I'm playing random for the last 3-4 years already. Can we stop the unnecessary ad hominems and focus on the arguments?
A bunch of people came into this thread to say that the best protoss players were weaker in skill than the best zergs and the best terrans. You had no issue with any of their posts. I said it could be that or it could be balance. You had issue with my posts. Some other people are convinced that it's balance. You had issue with their posts.
Sure sounds like your issue is people who talk about balance.
Spot on.
I'm not sure what exactly is the cause of the problem. But the problem is there - Toss has been struggling to win top tier competitions in LoTV. Like you, I'm concerned about the diversity of the game. Balance is not the focus here.
I'm also frustrated as you are why some people seem to be denying that there is actually a problem at all (or trying to shift the focus to some other problem).
(I don't care about low level ladder stats, or lower tier competitions. That's not the problem - or may be a different problem altogether.)
What kind of problem are we talking about? Was soO getting into finals and not winning a race problem? Balance problem? Are Protoss players who get to the finals and can't win them if their lives depend on it a problem we can solve?
If you had read the thread you would have seen that we are way ahead of you. Since there's a decent likelihood that the problem can't be solved, my advice for people who enjoy protoss is to not watch a lot of SC2. Seems like a decent solution for our problem.
Protoss is winning left and right so I hope people will keep watching if they enjoy protoss. Bet Gemini is kinda happy this year since he is a big Trap fan
On November 18 2021 10:03 RKC wrote: The fact that Toss dominated HoTS and dropped off the cliff in LoTV simply proves the point that Toss players didn't just all slumped overnight.
Whether Terran and Zerg deserve their shot at glory by benefiting more from LoTV drastic design revamp doesn't detract from the fact that Toss as a whole has been left behind.
In such an assymmetrical game with volatile changes, it's more likely than not that abnormal statistical success rates is due to racial imbalances, rather than player skill.
Anyway, my concern is more about ensuring diversity in the game. SC2 and BW being reduced to a one or two race game would be less fun to watch.
in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing fine with 3 Starleague victories. In 2018 Maru and Serral won everything and 2019 had undeniably atrocious balance. But from 2020 on the balance is fine imo, Toss won a lot of tier 2 events (Trap) and reached numerous finals in tier 1 events, despite a lot of their top players leaving for military (herO, Classic and now Stats)
Really I don't get how someone can watch the tournaments these past 2 years and come to the conclusion: "yep, Protoss is unplayable garbage, no point watching this" !!??
Your issue is that you're trying to have a balance conversation so you need to defend your race, but again the people who are serious aren't talking about balance.
It is super obvious to everyone, including you, that the best protoss players right now are the least likely to win a tournament against the best terrans and the best zergs, and this by a large margin. You can obtain that knowledge in any number of ways, you can watch tournaments, you can hear casters talking about the players, you can check statistical results of the best players of each race...
This doesn't demonstrate that the game has to change in any way. You're taking a larger conversation and you're trying to fit it into your "don't nerf my race" agenda where it doesn't belong.
I'm not the one who makes it into a balance discussion!!?? I try to understand the people thinking it's a balance problem, as I don't see it.
Also you can stop your attempts trying to discredit me by claiming I'm biased, I don't even have a race, I'm playing random for the last 3-4 years already. Can we stop the unnecessary ad hominems and focus on the arguments?
A bunch of people came into this thread to say that the best protoss players were weaker in skill than the best zergs and the best terrans. You had no issue with any of their posts. I said it could be that or it could be balance. You had issue with my posts. Some other people are convinced that it's balance. You had issue with their posts.
Sure sounds like your issue is people who talk about balance.
Spot on.
I'm not sure what exactly is the cause of the problem. But the problem is there - Toss has been struggling to win top tier competitions in LoTV. Like you, I'm concerned about the diversity of the game. Balance is not the focus here.
I'm also frustrated as you are why some people seem to be denying that there is actually a problem at all (or trying to shift the focus to some other problem).
(I don't care about low level ladder stats, or lower tier competitions. That's not the problem - or may be a different problem altogether.)
What kind of problem are we talking about? Was soO getting into finals and not winning a race problem? Balance problem? Are Protoss players who get to the finals and can't win them if their lives depend on it a problem we can solve?
If you had read the thread you would have seen that we are way ahead of you. Since there's a decent likelihood that the problem can't be solved, my advice for people who enjoy protoss is to not watch a lot of SC2. Seems like a decent solution for our problem.
Yeah, I don't get the thread. Out of 30 finalists of the premier tournament in the 2020 (NOT counting NA) we saw 5 Protoss victories coming from 11 times having a Protoss player in the finals. 7 with NA
If anyone should stop watching - it's Terrans. Out of 15 finals 4 victories and grand 7 appearances. What. A. Joy.
On November 18 2021 10:03 RKC wrote: The fact that Toss dominated HoTS and dropped off the cliff in LoTV simply proves the point that Toss players didn't just all slumped overnight.
Whether Terran and Zerg deserve their shot at glory by benefiting more from LoTV drastic design revamp doesn't detract from the fact that Toss as a whole has been left behind.
In such an assymmetrical game with volatile changes, it's more likely than not that abnormal statistical success rates is due to racial imbalances, rather than player skill.
Anyway, my concern is more about ensuring diversity in the game. SC2 and BW being reduced to a one or two race game would be less fun to watch.
in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing fine with 3 Starleague victories. In 2018 Maru and Serral won everything and 2019 had undeniably atrocious balance. But from 2020 on the balance is fine imo, Toss won a lot of tier 2 events (Trap) and reached numerous finals in tier 1 events, despite a lot of their top players leaving for military (herO, Classic and now Stats)
Really I don't get how someone can watch the tournaments these past 2 years and come to the conclusion: "yep, Protoss is unplayable garbage, no point watching this" !!??
Your issue is that you're trying to have a balance conversation so you need to defend your race, but again the people who are serious aren't talking about balance.
It is super obvious to everyone, including you, that the best protoss players right now are the least likely to win a tournament against the best terrans and the best zergs, and this by a large margin. You can obtain that knowledge in any number of ways, you can watch tournaments, you can hear casters talking about the players, you can check statistical results of the best players of each race...
This doesn't demonstrate that the game has to change in any way. You're taking a larger conversation and you're trying to fit it into your "don't nerf my race" agenda where it doesn't belong.
I'm not the one who makes it into a balance discussion!!?? I try to understand the people thinking it's a balance problem, as I don't see it.
Also you can stop your attempts trying to discredit me by claiming I'm biased, I don't even have a race, I'm playing random for the last 3-4 years already. Can we stop the unnecessary ad hominems and focus on the arguments?
A bunch of people came into this thread to say that the best protoss players were weaker in skill than the best zergs and the best terrans. You had no issue with any of their posts. I said it could be that or it could be balance. You had issue with my posts. Some other people are convinced that it's balance. You had issue with their posts.
Sure sounds like your issue is people who talk about balance.
Spot on.
I'm not sure what exactly is the cause of the problem. But the problem is there - Toss has been struggling to win top tier competitions in LoTV. Like you, I'm concerned about the diversity of the game. Balance is not the focus here.
I'm also frustrated as you are why some people seem to be denying that there is actually a problem at all (or trying to shift the focus to some other problem).
(I don't care about low level ladder stats, or lower tier competitions. That's not the problem - or may be a different problem altogether.)
What kind of problem are we talking about? Was soO getting into finals and not winning a race problem? Balance problem? Are Protoss players who get to the finals and can't win them if their lives depend on it a problem we can solve?
If you had read the thread you would have seen that we are way ahead of you. Since there's a decent likelihood that the problem can't be solved, my advice for people who enjoy protoss is to not watch a lot of SC2. Seems like a decent solution for our problem.
Yeah, I don't get the thread. Out of 30 finalists of the premier tournament in the 2020 (NOT counting NA) we saw 5 Protoss victories coming from 11 times having a Protoss player in the finals. 7 with NA
If anyone should stop watching - it's Terrans. Out of 15 finals 4 victories and grand 7 appearances. What. A. Joy.
Can I interest you in a bet that terran will win more of the next few (let's say 5 or 10?) premier tournaments than protoss will?
On November 18 2021 10:03 RKC wrote: The fact that Toss dominated HoTS and dropped off the cliff in LoTV simply proves the point that Toss players didn't just all slumped overnight.
Whether Terran and Zerg deserve their shot at glory by benefiting more from LoTV drastic design revamp doesn't detract from the fact that Toss as a whole has been left behind.
In such an assymmetrical game with volatile changes, it's more likely than not that abnormal statistical success rates is due to racial imbalances, rather than player skill.
Anyway, my concern is more about ensuring diversity in the game. SC2 and BW being reduced to a one or two race game would be less fun to watch.
in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing fine with 3 Starleague victories. In 2018 Maru and Serral won everything and 2019 had undeniably atrocious balance. But from 2020 on the balance is fine imo, Toss won a lot of tier 2 events (Trap) and reached numerous finals in tier 1 events, despite a lot of their top players leaving for military (herO, Classic and now Stats)
Really I don't get how someone can watch the tournaments these past 2 years and come to the conclusion: "yep, Protoss is unplayable garbage, no point watching this" !!??
Your issue is that you're trying to have a balance conversation so you need to defend your race, but again the people who are serious aren't talking about balance.
It is super obvious to everyone, including you, that the best protoss players right now are the least likely to win a tournament against the best terrans and the best zergs, and this by a large margin. You can obtain that knowledge in any number of ways, you can watch tournaments, you can hear casters talking about the players, you can check statistical results of the best players of each race...
This doesn't demonstrate that the game has to change in any way. You're taking a larger conversation and you're trying to fit it into your "don't nerf my race" agenda where it doesn't belong.
I'm not the one who makes it into a balance discussion!!?? I try to understand the people thinking it's a balance problem, as I don't see it.
Also you can stop your attempts trying to discredit me by claiming I'm biased, I don't even have a race, I'm playing random for the last 3-4 years already. Can we stop the unnecessary ad hominems and focus on the arguments?
A bunch of people came into this thread to say that the best protoss players were weaker in skill than the best zergs and the best terrans. You had no issue with any of their posts. I said it could be that or it could be balance. You had issue with my posts. Some other people are convinced that it's balance. You had issue with their posts.
Sure sounds like your issue is people who talk about balance.
Spot on.
I'm not sure what exactly is the cause of the problem. But the problem is there - Toss has been struggling to win top tier competitions in LoTV. Like you, I'm concerned about the diversity of the game. Balance is not the focus here.
I'm also frustrated as you are why some people seem to be denying that there is actually a problem at all (or trying to shift the focus to some other problem).
(I don't care about low level ladder stats, or lower tier competitions. That's not the problem - or may be a different problem altogether.)
What kind of problem are we talking about? Was soO getting into finals and not winning a race problem? Balance problem? Are Protoss players who get to the finals and can't win them if their lives depend on it a problem we can solve?
If you had read the thread you would have seen that we are way ahead of you. Since there's a decent likelihood that the problem can't be solved, my advice for people who enjoy protoss is to not watch a lot of SC2. Seems like a decent solution for our problem.
Yeah, I don't get the thread. Out of 30 finalists of the premier tournament in the 2020 (NOT counting NA) we saw 5 Protoss victories coming from 11 times having a Protoss player in the finals. 7 with NA
If anyone should stop watching - it's Terrans. Out of 15 finals 4 victories and grand 7 appearances. What. A. Joy.
Can I interest you in a bet that terran will win more of the next few (let's say 5 or 10?) premier tournaments than protoss will?
No, I don't bet. But if I would my bet would be PvP finals of the ST Zerg wins the IEM in a PvZ finals The next Code S champion is Zerg and wins in a nonMirror finals, I'm inclining towards PvZ. One of the TSL finalists will be Protoss while the victor will be either Zerg or Terran. My gut says Zerg.
All depends if Trap finds his lost mojo, or Classic harnesses the power of Protoss a little bit more. Actually if Classic gets really good I would bet on a Protoss victory in Code S. (if it happens after the IEM)
Edit> to answer your question. I would bet on Zerg > Protoss >= Terran titles. But I don't bet
Edit 2> If Zest goes to the military soon enough then Zerg > Terran >= Protoss. While Trap can be good, he needs the help of others and it doesn't seem herO or Classic will be that top tier soon enough.
On November 18 2021 10:03 RKC wrote: The fact that Toss dominated HoTS and dropped off the cliff in LoTV simply proves the point that Toss players didn't just all slumped overnight.
Whether Terran and Zerg deserve their shot at glory by benefiting more from LoTV drastic design revamp doesn't detract from the fact that Toss as a whole has been left behind.
In such an assymmetrical game with volatile changes, it's more likely than not that abnormal statistical success rates is due to racial imbalances, rather than player skill.
Anyway, my concern is more about ensuring diversity in the game. SC2 and BW being reduced to a one or two race game would be less fun to watch.
in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing fine with 3 Starleague victories. In 2018 Maru and Serral won everything and 2019 had undeniably atrocious balance. But from 2020 on the balance is fine imo, Toss won a lot of tier 2 events (Trap) and reached numerous finals in tier 1 events, despite a lot of their top players leaving for military (herO, Classic and now Stats)
Really I don't get how someone can watch the tournaments these past 2 years and come to the conclusion: "yep, Protoss is unplayable garbage, no point watching this" !!??
Your issue is that you're trying to have a balance conversation so you need to defend your race, but again the people who are serious aren't talking about balance.
It is super obvious to everyone, including you, that the best protoss players right now are the least likely to win a tournament against the best terrans and the best zergs, and this by a large margin. You can obtain that knowledge in any number of ways, you can watch tournaments, you can hear casters talking about the players, you can check statistical results of the best players of each race...
This doesn't demonstrate that the game has to change in any way. You're taking a larger conversation and you're trying to fit it into your "don't nerf my race" agenda where it doesn't belong.
I'm not the one who makes it into a balance discussion!!?? I try to understand the people thinking it's a balance problem, as I don't see it.
Also you can stop your attempts trying to discredit me by claiming I'm biased, I don't even have a race, I'm playing random for the last 3-4 years already. Can we stop the unnecessary ad hominems and focus on the arguments?
A bunch of people came into this thread to say that the best protoss players were weaker in skill than the best zergs and the best terrans. You had no issue with any of their posts. I said it could be that or it could be balance. You had issue with my posts. Some other people are convinced that it's balance. You had issue with their posts.
Sure sounds like your issue is people who talk about balance.
Spot on.
I'm not sure what exactly is the cause of the problem. But the problem is there - Toss has been struggling to win top tier competitions in LoTV. Like you, I'm concerned about the diversity of the game. Balance is not the focus here.
I'm also frustrated as you are why some people seem to be denying that there is actually a problem at all (or trying to shift the focus to some other problem).
(I don't care about low level ladder stats, or lower tier competitions. That's not the problem - or may be a different problem altogether.)
What kind of problem are we talking about? Was soO getting into finals and not winning a race problem? Balance problem? Are Protoss players who get to the finals and can't win them if their lives depend on it a problem we can solve?
If you had read the thread you would have seen that we are way ahead of you. Since there's a decent likelihood that the problem can't be solved, my advice for people who enjoy protoss is to not watch a lot of SC2. Seems like a decent solution for our problem.
Yeah, I don't get the thread. Out of 30 finalists of the premier tournament in the 2020 (NOT counting NA) we saw 5 Protoss victories coming from 11 times having a Protoss player in the finals. 7 with NA
If anyone should stop watching - it's Terrans. Out of 15 finals 4 victories and grand 7 appearances. What. A. Joy.
Well protoss lose some finals and they complain hard enough to make a thread about hope. Meanwhile we had IEM without any terran in the ro8, and only one in the ro12, despite all top KR terrans participating. Thankfully Blizzard was still active with the game back then and patched things up quickly, but the contrast is hilarious. IEM Season XIII - Katowice There is even Neeb in the ro8 :x. The equivalent would be having a ro8 without any protoss in but a terran like uThermal or Spirit in the top 8. In 2021 though, the game has been relatively well balanced although the ZvP meta is quite horrible to watch as a spectator, and TvP is a bit too coin-flippy / BO oriented for most pros.
On November 19 2021 21:50 Nebuchad wrote: Man I wish I lived in the reality that terran supporters see x)
(But of course I know they don't really see it)
Yeah, numbers are evil and it's better to not see them, right? Contradict the numbers =) and I didn't include NA to the totals for a reason
The numbers aren't on your side, as has already been posted earlier in the thread. The top 5 protoss players have been performing worse than the top 5 best zergs and best terrans for every single period since march 2018. There hasn't been a single period in Legacy of the Void where the top 5 protoss were leading against the other two.
On November 19 2021 21:50 Nebuchad wrote: Man I wish I lived in the reality that terran supporters see x)
(But of course I know they don't really see it)
Yeah, numbers are evil and it's better to not see them, right? Contradict the numbers =) and I didn't include NA to the totals for a reason
The numbers aren't on your side, as has already been posted earlier in the thread. The top 5 protoss players have been performing worse than the top 5 best zergs and best terrans for every single period since march 2018. There hasn't been a single period in Legacy of the Void where the top 5 protoss were leading against the other two.
But again, you know that.
You do realize that protoss players on aligulac got their overall rating diminished because of PvP, right? http://aligulac.com/periods/307/?page=1&race=p&nats=all&sort=vp Top 5 PvP players got between 2710 points and 3041 points, while top 5 ZvZ players got between 2905 and 3178 points (http://aligulac.com/periods/307/?page=1&race=z&nats=all&sort=vz) . Top 5 TvT players have between 2871 and 3305 points (http://aligulac.com/periods/307/?page=1&race=t&nats=all&sort=vt).
Having your mirror with that much variance will lower your rating altogether, so of course they will seem to "lag" behind with such a criteria. That's why overall prize money / race (it's limited to top 10 players of each race on liquipedia but that's still pretty accurate) is a far better indicator of the well being of the race. Indeed, the latest period of BIG imbalance (similar to broodlord infestor, with many analysts / casters / players / spectators agreeing on the thing) was zerg in 2019. Wanna see how it was reflected in the earnings? Winnings/2019 Zerg: 1.510.435$, Protoss: 982.290$, Terran: 868.249$. That's what imbalance looks like. That's also what most progamers care about (and prestige is usually correlated with the prize money of the tournament anyways, except in some odd cases like WESG). Do you think Rogue cares that Cure has a better aligulac rating than him? He won more prize money in 2021 (and even a GSL as well the same year). Same with Trap who has a lower aligulac rating than Bunny, winning "tier 2" events is still far better than what Bunny accomplished in 2021, and that's very obvious when looking at their earnings that year: 90k$ vs 33k$. Winnings/2021
So if people still believe protoss is not doing well at the top level despite earning the most money so far in 2021, they are being delusional.
On November 19 2021 21:50 Nebuchad wrote: Man I wish I lived in the reality that terran supporters see x)
(But of course I know they don't really see it)
Yeah, numbers are evil and it's better to not see them, right? Contradict the numbers =) and I didn't include NA to the totals for a reason
The numbers aren't on your side, as has already been posted earlier in the thread. The top 5 protoss players have been performing worse than the top 5 best zergs and best terrans for every single period since march 2018. There hasn't been a single period in Legacy of the Void where the top 5 protoss were leading against the other two.
But again, you know that.
You do realize that protoss players on aligulac got their overall rating diminished because of PvP, right? http://aligulac.com/periods/307/?page=1&race=p&nats=all&sort=vp Top 5 PvP players got between 2710 points and 3041 points, while top 5 ZvZ players got between 2905 and 3178 points (http://aligulac.com/periods/307/?page=1&race=z&nats=all&sort=vz) . Top 5 TvT players have between 2871 and 3305 points (http://aligulac.com/periods/307/?page=1&race=t&nats=all&sort=vt).
Having your mirror with that much variance will lower your rating altogether, so of course they will seem to "lag" behind with such a criteria.
In that set 307 that you mention, the average TvP is at 3059. The average PvT is at 2927.6. The best PvT is at 3025, below the average TvP.
Average PvZ is at 2990. Zerg is a 3123.2.
The mirror matchups are at 3029.6 (TvT) 2845.2 (PvP) 3028.2 (ZvZ)
It's a difference of 183 for mirror, 131 for TvP and 133 for PvZ. 50 elo is definitely statistically significant, but not enough that it accounts for overall performance. Unless this set is an outlier? But I don't think you think it is.
The argument is also silly on its face. If PvP was the only factor in protoss underperforming vs the other races, it wouldn't suddenly not be an underperformance. The end result is the same: the best protoss perform less well.
this is a funny thread to read bc it seems to go in continual circles, but at this point it seems like the basic data has been hashed over to the point that pretty much everyone agrees that (1) there's a real trend of top Protoss players not winning the biggest tournaments (imo the GSL title drought is the real story here and significant in itself, though it seems that something analogous may be starting to happen in the foreign scene), and (2) it's not a straightforward balance problem since Protoss still wins pretty big tournaments and keeps getting into the finals of the biggest tournaments also.
At that point the question becomes what other factors may be at play. IMO the argument that it's "just luck" seems pretty silly.
One the one hand, there's probably something to the argument that Protoss at the very highest levels is slightly more volatile by design. On the other hand, though, there are almost certainly more "subjective," psychological, social, etc factors having an effect.
I actually think it would be very interesting to study in more depth how certain personality traits correlate with playing different races. IIRC in the big BW match-fixing scandal there were 0 Protoss among the convicted match-fixers, which is pretty remarkable and always stuck with me. I think that's still true in SC2? The biggest Kongs in BW were also Protoss (in SC2 SoO kind of overshadows everyone, but there's still an argument to be made). In both games though you can pretty clearly think about different types of players with different types of personalities that are characteristically associated with playing particular races.
While a big part of the story of Protoss in the last few years is just Trap, it is becoming somewhat of a remarkable trend to see multiple Protoss continually lose GSL finals in a fairly similar way (playing in a more "nervous" way with uncharacteristic mistakes). It feels to me, after watching the scene for many years, that there is somewhat of a social, psychological imitative "Kongy" thing happening.
This isn't mutually exclusive with the thesis that Protoss at the highest levels is slightly more unforgiving of mistakes; in fact, the two arguably go together if the problem is top Protoss players playing "nervous."
If all that's true, though, the most likely answer is just a new Protoss champion coming to the fore who has a bit more killer instinct. Or because it's partly a social/psychological, thing, an existing top Protoss just winning one big tournament could make a big difference to the population at large.
IMO it's fun to have these sorts of storylines in SC2, even if as a Protoss I don't like this one that much. But we are the race (even in the lore!) of nobly defeated lost-causers, so it's okay.
The most notable kongs are from the three races: MarineKing was the first kong, soO the second one (haha) yet the most prominent, and Trap is the latest. Stats has several 2nd place finishes but winning a SSL and a GSL prevent you for being a Kong. Zest also lost several GSL finals recently but he won 2 so not really a kong.
On November 20 2021 00:49 Poopi wrote: The most notable kongs are from the three races: MarineKing was the first kong, soO the second one (haha) yet the most prominent, and Trap is the latest. Stats has several 2nd place finishes but winning a SSL and a GSL prevent you for being a Kong. Zest also lost several GSL finals recently but he won 2 so not really a kong.
Trap is not a kong by any mean, even if you disregard online competitions he won three Super Tournaments. Seven titles and eight second places is not that bad of a record; the problem, however, is that he failed hard in Code S. The one he lost against Rogue was doomed by atrocious balance but when Trap lost the first time against Dark the matchup was even, probably he hadn't spiked yet; the second time was even worse, Trap's shape was decent and the matchup too.
Every successful Protoss player has transitioned to a kong in the last years, for various reasons. Balance played a role in late 2019, Serral's and Maru's godlike forms in 2018 stopped them but after that it was down to unfortunate pairings or amazing displays of choking. I am convinced that, for the level of play they were showing at the time they lost the finals, at the very least Trap and Zest should have won a Code S each and Stats an IEM Katowice trophy(still can't understand how he lost to soO).
It seems to me that Protoss never completely recovered from being capable of abusing Prisms and Chargelots, Skytoss looked like a dominant strategy in PvZ at a certain point but it was shown that at the highest level it can be countered efficiently. It might be that the race struggles to be sufficiently adaptable to give its top players enough options to reliably win a bo7, I suspect we would see more Protoss victories in a bo5 format.
Is there hope for Protoss? Yes, MaxPax could follow Serral, Reynor and Clem's footsteps as he is already doing, Zoun could improve further or Afreeca could find a good mental coach for Trap so that he could eventually overcome the mental block he evidently has when he finds himself in Code S finals.
To me personally it just ain't much fun to cheer for tosses rn as you never know in what shape they show up, sometimes you have these Super tournaments with 7/8 in ro8 then you have none in ro4. Sometimes they play great and defeat the best players of other races then they look hopeless vs players you'd rate below em. Variance just feels bigger to me than for the top Terran/Zerg, also pvz and pvp aren't mus i really like to watch currently. Exception was when trap had his streak.
Edit: at the same time you get all of these morons who permanently complain about toss being op/easy with voids etc. Makes these discussions always funny when ppl discredit you all the time while toss ain't doing exceptionally well in tournaments and maybe also a reason these threads plop up more
On November 19 2021 21:50 Nebuchad wrote: Man I wish I lived in the reality that terran supporters see x)
(But of course I know they don't really see it)
Yeah, numbers are evil and it's better to not see them, right? Contradict the numbers =) and I didn't include NA to the totals for a reason
The numbers aren't on your side, as has already been posted earlier in the thread. The top 5 protoss players have been performing worse than the top 5 best zergs and best terrans for every single period since march 2018. There hasn't been a single period in Legacy of the Void where the top 5 protoss were leading against the other two.
But again, you know that.
You do realize that protoss players on aligulac got their overall rating diminished because of PvP, right? http://aligulac.com/periods/307/?page=1&race=p&nats=all&sort=vp Top 5 PvP players got between 2710 points and 3041 points, while top 5 ZvZ players got between 2905 and 3178 points (http://aligulac.com/periods/307/?page=1&race=z&nats=all&sort=vz) . Top 5 TvT players have between 2871 and 3305 points (http://aligulac.com/periods/307/?page=1&race=t&nats=all&sort=vt).
Having your mirror with that much variance will lower your rating altogether, so of course they will seem to "lag" behind with such a criteria. That's why overall prize money / race (it's limited to top 10 players of each race on liquipedia but that's still pretty accurate) is a far better indicator of the well being of the race. Indeed, the latest period of BIG imbalance (similar to broodlord infestor, with many analysts / casters / players / spectators agreeing on the thing) was zerg in 2019. Wanna see how it was reflected in the earnings? Winnings/2019 Zerg: 1.510.435$, Protoss: 982.290$, Terran: 868.249$. That's what imbalance looks like. That's also what most progamers care about (and prestige is usually correlated with the prize money of the tournament anyways, except in some odd cases like WESG). Do you think Rogue cares that Cure has a better aligulac rating than him? He won more prize money in 2021 (and even a GSL as well the same year). Same with Trap who has a lower aligulac rating than Bunny, winning "tier 2" events is still far better than what Bunny accomplished in 2021, and that's very obvious when looking at their earnings that year: 90k$ vs 33k$. Winnings/2021
So if people still believe protoss is not doing well at the top level despite earning the most money so far in 2021, they are being delusional.
You are delusional mate if you believe tournament winnings is enough to determine race balance, it's like I've made a point that you can't just look at pure win rates across the board when you judge balance.
The pro player base in SC2 is SO SMALL you can't use data like that when talking about balance because there is to few players who are 100% hardcore pro full time and at equal skill and the difference in winnings is not big at all to begin with.
Using your logic you should look at the best players we have across the world that are close in skill and then tell me who is winning the most cash, If you look at Europe Top 10 players you have 2 Protoss out of 10, Maxpax and Showtime.
NA is a freak region where you have only 3 legit fulltime pro's Astrea,Scarlett and Neeb this region is also giving you bad numbers if you follow your logic because the only Protoss fulltime pro's in NA happen to be Neeb and Astrea which would skew your numbers if you used winnings as a indicator of balance. To much individual skill and few full time pro's in this region.
South Korea which has always had the best Protoss representation in terms of individual skill, this is where the majority of tournament winnings are made, Zest, Trap , Parting and Zoun these have all pulled inn good amount of money for they are all remarkable players, although they don't really win anything except Trap who had a spike in tournament wins but has never been consistent. Which is the common theme among all protoss that I have pointed out in other posts on TL that because of Protoss poor race design they cannot deliver consistent results because the race is to volatile at the very top.
So in short difference in individual skill + the small player base will make using winnings as a way to judge protoss performance in terms of balance invalid.
You can only use this logic if you pool all the pro players that are at close skill level at the very top, then look at winrates, winnings over a long time on current patch and you will get somewhat an indication of balance, and if you look up this number you will see protoss IS VASTLY UNDERPERFORMING AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL.
On November 21 2021 11:59 Snakestyle11 wrote: How to kill Starcraft 2 :
Keep buffing Protoss until protoss top pros are as dominant as zerg pros.
Watch GM be 75% protoss, 4% zerg.
Wonder what went wrong.
How to actually fix protoss:
Nerf easy to use things (voidrays, recall, canon/battery), buff harder to use things (nothing comes to mind sadly LOL maybe stalkers).
Nerf lurkers. Buff hydras vs air. Remove abduct. Buff broodlord range by 1 , and buff its speed a little bit.
Obviously im just brain storming, but i feel like ideas like this is how you fix protoss and ZvP in particular.
I feel like a buff to the Stalker may make a nerf to Lurkers non essential. I would prefer to also see the, "easy things" like you said toned down and high skill cap units like Phoenix and Stalkers to be buffed.
Reavers in BW are awesome. But I just don't like disruptors in SC2. Feels too gimmicky, and allows Toss too much zoning power (which leads to boring late game stale mates). One Hail Mary comeback unit is enough ('When behind, Dark Shrine'). Disruptors just adds another layer to the "go hard or go home" design of Protoss overall.
Again, this is not so much of balance but the volatile nature of Toss playstyle design.
On November 21 2021 11:59 Snakestyle11 wrote: How to kill Starcraft 2 :
Keep buffing Protoss until protoss top pros are as dominant as zerg pros.
Watch GM be 75% protoss, 4% zerg.
Wonder what went wrong.
How to actually fix protoss:
Nerf easy to use things (voidrays, recall, canon/battery), buff harder to use things (nothing comes to mind sadly LOL maybe stalkers).
Nerf lurkers. Buff hydras vs air. Remove abduct. Buff broodlord range by 1 , and buff its speed a little bit.
Obviously im just brain storming, but i feel like ideas like this is how you fix protoss and ZvP in particular.
I think reverting the unnecessary Warpprism nerfs (especially cost) would be quite good. It got stupidly nerfed after 1 ST with high Protoss represantion and I think that hurt Protoss quite a bit. Also the Warpprism is a skill unit so promoting its usage would be good for the game
On November 21 2021 23:56 Xamo wrote: Just went in an saw that KOB has no Protoss in RO8... seems that we slowly need to speak about the present of Protoss and not the future.
No Trap or Zoun no Protoss, as was stated before, Zest isn't very reliable.
On November 21 2021 23:56 Xamo wrote: Just went in an saw that KOB has no Protoss in RO8... seems that we slowly need to speak about the present of Protoss and not the future.
No Trap or Zoun no Protoss, as was stated before, Zest isn't very reliable.
Why are you acting like Trap or Zoun would have won this thing lol.
Edit: sorry I don't want to get back into this nvm. Let's just say that I don't regret my decision not to watch the King of Battles. Maybe it's just your stream of bad luck that continues!
On November 21 2021 23:56 Xamo wrote: Just went in an saw that KOB has no Protoss in RO8... seems that we slowly need to speak about the present of Protoss and not the future.
No Trap or Zoun no Protoss, as was stated before, Zest isn't very reliable.
Why are you acting like Trap or Zoun would have won this thing lol.
Edit: sorry I don't want to get back into this nvm. Let's just say that I don't regret my decision not to watch the King of Battles. Maybe it's just your stream of bad luck that continues!
On November 21 2021 23:56 Xamo wrote: Just went in an saw that KOB has no Protoss in RO8... seems that we slowly need to speak about the present of Protoss and not the future.
No Trap or Zoun no Protoss, as was stated before, Zest isn't very reliable.
Why are you acting like Trap or Zoun would have won this thing lol.
Edit: sorry I don't want to get back into this nvm. Let's just say that I don't regret my decision not to watch the King of Battles. Maybe it's just your stream of bad luck that continues!
I thought tier 2 tournaments aren't relevant?
You caught me in a lie! You win this argument. I am now super engaged in Starcraft 2, and think that protoss has a good chance of winning the next tournament that involves the top players. You have convinced me.
Tier 2 competitions aren't relevant to the perspective of those only interested in Tier 1 competitions.
But Tier 2 competitions are relevant to the perspective of those claiming that Tier 2 competitions should also be considered when evaluating how well Toss fares competitively.
On November 22 2021 01:08 RKC wrote: Tier 2 competitions aren't relevant to the perspective of those only interested in Tier 1 competitions.
But Tier 2 competitions are relevant to the perspective of those claiming that Tier 2 competitions should also be considered when evaluating how well Toss fares competitively.
If there are tier 2 competitions where all the top players are playing then the Tiers are not very interesting. The idea that someone would care about seeing the best players but only when they play in specific tournaments and not in others is a bit silly.
Of course I've never mentioned the distinction between Tier 2 and Tier 1 once, and Charoisaur is just trying to score some gotcha because he's mad at me for not ignoring the observable fact that protoss is extremely unlikely to win a tournament in the current state of Starcraft 2 for some weird reason.
On November 22 2021 01:08 RKC wrote: Tier 2 competitions aren't relevant to the perspective of those only interested in Tier 1 competitions.
But Tier 2 competitions are relevant to the perspective of those claiming that Tier 2 competitions should also be considered when evaluating how well Toss fares competitively.
If there are tier 2 competitions where all the top players are playing then the Tiers are not very interesting. The idea that someone would care about seeing the best players but only when they play in specific tournaments and not in others is a bit silly.
Of course I've never mentioned the distinction between Tier 2 and Tier 1 once, and Charoisaur is just trying to score some gotcha because he's mad at me for not ignoring the observable fact that protoss is extremely unlikely to win a tournament in the current state of Starcraft 2 for some weird reason.
Maybe I have confused you with some of the other Protoss complainers, apologies then. However the main argument for Protoss weakness was directed at their underperformance at tier 1 tournament specificially while admitting that they (previously) did fine at tier 2 tournaments. This tournament doesn't really add to that point as it's a bit of an outlier for tier 2 tournaments.
On November 21 2021 23:56 Xamo wrote: Just went in an saw that KOB has no Protoss in RO8... seems that we slowly need to speak about the present of Protoss and not the future.
No Trap or Zoun no Protoss, as was stated before, Zest isn't very reliable.
Why are you acting like Trap or Zoun would have won this thing lol.
Edit: sorry I don't want to get back into this nvm. Let's just say that I don't regret my decision not to watch the King of Battles. Maybe it's just your stream of bad luck that continues!
I thought tier 2 tournaments aren't relevant?
The tier 1 and tier 2 are still premier events. King of Battles is a major event, so it fails to qualify as a tier 2 event. I believe that the prize pool is too small even if the player pool is top tier.
But it is a great moment to get an example of poor Protoss representation. 3 out of 16 is really bad. My long post had 1 tournament with bad Protoss representation. We now have 2 examples. I didn't bother looking at most tournaments when I compared race representation. Can we find more?
On November 21 2021 23:56 Xamo wrote: Just went in an saw that KOB has no Protoss in RO8... seems that we slowly need to speak about the present of Protoss and not the future.
No Trap or Zoun no Protoss, as was stated before, Zest isn't very reliable.
Why are you acting like Trap or Zoun would have won this thing lol.
Edit: sorry I don't want to get back into this nvm. Let's just say that I don't regret my decision not to watch the King of Battles. Maybe it's just your stream of bad luck that continues!
Nobody was saying anything about winning, read the " thread". OMG
Protoss players say their race is unusable, premier tournament data is provided showing the race is fine, they ask for wider data. Ladder data is provided, they say its irrelevant. No, your race won't EVER get a buff while it has 50% of GM.ladder and blizzard can put 2 and 2 together. Its absurd as it is, any devs of a game that want to keep players would nerf your race further.
On November 22 2021 18:53 Morbidius wrote: Protoss players say their race is unusable, premier tournament data is provided showing the race is fine, they ask for wider data. Ladder data is provided, they say its irrelevant. No, your race won't EVER get a buff while it has 50% of GM.ladder and blizzard can put 2 and 2 together. Its absurd as it is, any devs of a game that want to keep players would nerf your race further.
I hope the main takeaway for protoss from this thread isn't that we should buff protoss, since that's unlikely to happen in the first place and we can't even prove that it's needed, but rather that we should just stop watching this game and hurting ourselves.
Some more good news: in a group with 2 zergs and 2 protoss in NEXT, the 2 protoss advanced!
to be fair one of those protoss is Zoun, a particularly skilled player at this time while the other is Classic which bodes well for his post military career
and to also be fair the 2 zergs were Solar and DRG, both decent, but not associated to be the problem zergs i.e. dark, rogue, serral, reynor
On November 25 2021 02:17 Cold-Blood wrote: Some more good news: in a group with 2 zergs and 2 protoss in NEXT, the 2 protoss advanced!
to be fair one of those protoss is Zoun, a particularly skilled player at this time while the other is Classic which bodes well for his post military career
and to also be fair the 2 zergs were Solar and DRG, both decent, but not associated to be the problem zergs i.e. dark, rogue, serral, reynor
Yea it's nice to see Classic doing well, Creator played a series vs Dark recently as well and he looked pretty competitive, I'm glad we are getting some strong Protoss players back in the fold.
Is reynor really a problem Zerg though? He's top tier for sure but idk if he's at the same level as Serral/Dark/Rogue.
On November 25 2021 02:17 Cold-Blood wrote: Some more good news: in a group with 2 zergs and 2 protoss in NEXT, the 2 protoss advanced!
to be fair one of those protoss is Zoun, a particularly skilled player at this time while the other is Classic which bodes well for his post military career
and to also be fair the 2 zergs were Solar and DRG, both decent, but not associated to be the problem zergs i.e. dark, rogue, serral, reynor
Yea it's nice to see Classic doing well, Creator played a series vs Dark recently as well and he looked pretty competitive, I'm glad we are getting some strong Protoss players back in the fold.
Is reynor really a problem Zerg though? He's top tier for sure but idk if he's at the same level as Serral/Dark/Rogue.
Well, just ask yourself who won the last Katowice. Reynor's shape is currently inferior to that of the other top Zerg but surely not worse than Rogue's at his lowest or Dark's mid 2020.
On November 25 2021 02:17 Cold-Blood wrote: Some more good news: in a group with 2 zergs and 2 protoss in NEXT, the 2 protoss advanced!
to be fair one of those protoss is Zoun, a particularly skilled player at this time while the other is Classic which bodes well for his post military career
and to also be fair the 2 zergs were Solar and DRG, both decent, but not associated to be the problem zergs i.e. dark, rogue, serral, reynor
Is reynor really a problem Zerg though? He's top tier for sure but idk if he's at the same level as Serral/Dark/Rogue.
Reynor is one of the problem Zergs but yeah he is definitely not in the same category as the top 3. He won last Katowice, but we all know that was 70% luck. He is a strong Zerg for sure, but Dark, Rogue and Serral are quite a lot better
On November 25 2021 02:17 Cold-Blood wrote: Some more good news: in a group with 2 zergs and 2 protoss in NEXT, the 2 protoss advanced!
to be fair one of those protoss is Zoun, a particularly skilled player at this time while the other is Classic which bodes well for his post military career
and to also be fair the 2 zergs were Solar and DRG, both decent, but not associated to be the problem zergs i.e. dark, rogue, serral, reynor
Is reynor really a problem Zerg though? He's top tier for sure but idk if he's at the same level as Serral/Dark/Rogue.
Reynor is one of the problem Zergs but yeah he is definitely not in the same category as the top 3. He won last Katowice, but we all know that was 70% luck. He is a strong Zerg for sure, but Dark, Rogue and Serral are quite a lot better
A Reynor in shape is as least as strong as they are; he totally deserved to win Katowice, not to mention he has been top tier for almost two years now.
In previous post i talked about his design, which is great but lost his strenght during the addition of new expansion (HotS and LotV). Also said it s hard to balance this unit because of his ability, which give to stalkers (afterall) a snowballing utility, but that s all.
In fact, it s ridiculous. A Medivac, which hasn t collision box (as flying unit) can heal 12.7 hp per second while a single stalker can only do 9.7 damage per second. So Medivacs are far better than stalkers and they can positionning itself above the bio-ball (which helps in term of army deplacement and allow Terrans to focus his power into a small area, thus Marines have a really small collision box).
In this term, Protoss haven t two base units, they have Zealots and a snowballing unit (and adepts which doesn t scale so well).
It s hard to find a new place for the stalkers, i only can imagine some tricks like remove completely the armor tag (neither light or armored !!! like DT)
- Bonus against armored becomes a bonus against light (to help against Zerglings and Marines) - Push Blizzard way in decreasing a littlle bit his fire speed rate ex for 2xshots a zergling : 13 + 5ar >> 15 + 5lgt cooldown 1.34 >> 1.42
- Probably decrease Medivacs spell ability (which are clearly too strong in many cases) - Increase his production time (downside)
On November 26 2021 05:52 Vision_ wrote: I want to talk again a little bit about stalkers.
In previous post i talked about his design, which is great but lost his strenght during the addition of new expansion (HotS and LotV). Also said it s hard to balance this unit because of his ability, which give to stalkers (afterall) a snowballing utility, but that s all.
In fact, it s ridiculous. A Medivac, which hasn t collision box (as flying unit) can heal 12.7 hp per second while a single stalker can only do 9.7 damage per second. So Medivacs are far better than stalkers and they can positionning itself above the bio-ball (which helps in term of army deplacement and allow Terrans to focus his power into a small area, thus Marines have a really small collision box).
In this term, Protoss haven t two base units, they have Zealots and a snowballing unit (and adepts which doesn t scale so well).
It s hard to find a new place for the stalkers, i only can imagine some tricks like remove completely the armor tag (neither light or armored !!! like DT)
- Bonus against armored becomes a bonus against light (to help against Zerglings and Marines) - Push Blizzard way in decreasing a littlle bit his fire speed rate ex for 2xshots a zergling : 13 + 5ar >> 15 + 7lgt cooldown 1.34 >> 1.42
- Probably decrease Medivacs spell ability (which are clearly too strong in many cases) - Increase his production time (downside)
I do think a Stalker buff would be a big boon, plus, it's a high skill cap micro friendly unit that is fun to watch, Gateway units as a whole could probably do a look over. The Zealot is strong but Adepts feel very weak outside the early game, also the Sentry feels a bit outdated with Corrosive Bile being in the game.
It might not even be too unreasonable to consider slight buffs to both units, if Protoss was able to put a bit more pressure on Zerg in the early game, it would probably be healthy for the metagame.
Maybe also it s necessary to imagine Stalkers scaling damage with (+2) instead of only (+1). It s reasonnable as Stalkers are garbage against a bio ball. Notes, Roaches scale with (+2) damage (and Marauders scales with (+1))
On November 26 2021 21:50 Vision_ wrote: Maybe also it s necessary to imagine Stalkers scaling damage with (+2) instead of only (+1). It s reasonnable as Stalkers are garbage against a bio ball. Notes, Roaches scale with (+2) damage (and Marauders scales with (+1))
I guess that could actually work nicely! As a T, I'm scared of any flat buff to the stalker - proxy gate or blink all-in look powerful enough to me. I'd rather see the power increase only in the later stages of the game. And upgrades scaling could be a simple way to achieve that.
On November 26 2021 05:52 Vision_ wrote: I want to talk again a little bit about stalkers.
In previous post i talked about his design, which is great but lost his strenght during the addition of new expansion (HotS and LotV). Also said it s hard to balance this unit because of his ability, which give to stalkers (afterall) a snowballing utility, but that s all.
In fact, it s ridiculous. A Medivac, which hasn t collision box (as flying unit) can heal 12.7 hp per second while a single stalker can only do 9.7 damage per second. So Medivacs are far better than stalkers and they can positionning itself above the bio-ball (which helps in term of army deplacement and allow Terrans to focus his power into a small area, thus Marines have a really small collision box).
In this term, Protoss haven t two base units, they have Zealots and a snowballing unit (and adepts which doesn t scale so well).
It s hard to find a new place for the stalkers, i only can imagine some tricks like remove completely the armor tag (neither light or armored !!! like DT)
- Bonus against armored becomes a bonus against light (to help against Zerglings and Marines) - Push Blizzard way in decreasing a littlle bit his fire speed rate ex for 2xshots a zergling : 13 + 5ar >> 15 + 7lgt cooldown 1.34 >> 1.42
- Probably decrease Medivacs spell ability (which are clearly too strong in many cases) - Increase his production time (downside)
I do think a Stalker buff would be a big boon, plus, it's a high skill cap micro friendly unit that is fun to watch, Gateway units as a whole could probably do a look over. The Zealot is strong but Adepts feel very weak outside the early game, also the Sentry feels a bit outdated with Corrosive Bile being in the game.
It might not even be too unreasonable to consider slight buffs to both units, if Protoss was able to put a bit more pressure on Zerg in the early game, it would probably be healthy for the metagame.
I think it is a pretty bad idea, if they do this everyone will 1 base allin. Stalkers are cool and stuff but maybe massing 1 unit isant that "fun". They can use a late game upgrade but nothing early/mid.
On November 26 2021 05:52 Vision_ wrote: I want to talk again a little bit about stalkers.
In previous post i talked about his design, which is great but lost his strenght during the addition of new expansion (HotS and LotV). Also said it s hard to balance this unit because of his ability, which give to stalkers (afterall) a snowballing utility, but that s all.
In fact, it s ridiculous. A Medivac, which hasn t collision box (as flying unit) can heal 12.7 hp per second while a single stalker can only do 9.7 damage per second. So Medivacs are far better than stalkers and they can positionning itself above the bio-ball (which helps in term of army deplacement and allow Terrans to focus his power into a small area, thus Marines have a really small collision box).
In this term, Protoss haven t two base units, they have Zealots and a snowballing unit (and adepts which doesn t scale so well).
It s hard to find a new place for the stalkers, i only can imagine some tricks like remove completely the armor tag (neither light or armored !!! like DT)
- Bonus against armored becomes a bonus against light (to help against Zerglings and Marines) - Push Blizzard way in decreasing a littlle bit his fire speed rate ex for 2xshots a zergling : 13 + 5ar >> 15 + 7lgt cooldown 1.34 >> 1.42
- Probably decrease Medivacs spell ability (which are clearly too strong in many cases) - Increase his production time (downside)
I do think a Stalker buff would be a big boon, plus, it's a high skill cap micro friendly unit that is fun to watch, Gateway units as a whole could probably do a look over. The Zealot is strong but Adepts feel very weak outside the early game, also the Sentry feels a bit outdated with Corrosive Bile being in the game.
It might not even be too unreasonable to consider slight buffs to both units, if Protoss was able to put a bit more pressure on Zerg in the early game, it would probably be healthy for the metagame.
I think it is a pretty bad idea, if they do this everyone will 1 base allin. Stalkers are cool and stuff but maybe massing 1 unit isant that "fun". They can use a late game upgrade but nothing early/mid.
If you wanna to make stalkers competitive for casual gamers or GM, there s only one way because in a strategy game, "all units have to be consistent between them" but the blink ability is so unique and particular that something else must be remove. Looking at stalkers, i would say their bonus damage against armored is a little bit overlapping with Zealots which are good against heavy armored units. So the question i m wondering isn t concerning their role but their place in the meta actually.
I agree, There s a potential risk to see stalkers all-ins with this kind of buff (admitting you only modify the upgrade weapons to +2) that s why i proposed before to remove the tag armor. In this way, Stalkers become good against many more expensive units as Immortal, Void Ray, Marauder, Siege Tank, Viking (in Fighter Mode), Ultralisk, Spine Crawler and Lurkers. But my feeling would be to give them a bonus against light armor instead of armored in order to increase the emphasis of the unit, becoming good against bio (if medivacs are a nerf) and kind of bad against armored but with more sustain.
Because Stalkers have such particular ability, you have to give them a pretty big disadvantage against one type of unit, Then if you look closer it s a direction to nerf the overall threat of air unit (which isn t a fun part of strategy as many of you consider like me that air units must be spells casters or versatile units like Mutalisks or Vikings)
For sentries, i would say interactions with their force fields should remove seconds from their 11s duration. Ravagers Biles remove 'X' seconds, then it s a lot of changes because massive units have to remove 'X' seconds per hit instead of deal damage.
After losing to maru today I got my worst fears confirmed. PvT lategame is actually unwinnable. Maru and myself are really close in skill and achievements, but sadly I can't even get close to him in lategame TvP.
If I can't even beat someone like maru I don't think there is any hope left for protoss... IF you are a new player do not make the same mistake I made. Pick a race with a future and protoss doesn't have a future...
On November 27 2021 04:36 Harstem wrote: After losing to maru today I got my worst fears confirmed. PvT lategame is actually unwinnable. Maru and myself are really close in skill and achievements, but sadly I can't even get close to him in lategame TvP.
If I can't even beat someone like maru I don't think there is any hope left for protoss... IF you are a new player do not make the same mistake I made. Pick a race with a future and protoss doesn't have a future...
I would advice you to create a tournament playing in fast-mode instead of very-fast in order to point out the problem of the protoss race. Then only a community project could save the game
On November 27 2021 04:36 Harstem wrote: After losing to maru today I got my worst fears confirmed. PvT lategame is actually unwinnable. Maru and myself are really close in skill and achievements, but sadly I can't even get close to him in lategame TvP.
If I can't even beat someone like maru I don't think there is any hope left for protoss... IF you are a new player do not make the same mistake I made. Pick a race with a future and protoss doesn't have a future...
For IEM Katowice we have 1 confirmed protoss, 6 terrans and 4 zergs. In top EPT points standings, TRAP is the only protss at top 15. We will likely end up with 1 protoss in the tournament out of 16.
At this point I don't even care if protoss players suck balls and are untalened. Yeah, whatever you talents rhetoric arguers say. I just want more protoss representations at the top levels and protoss buffed to achieve it.
On November 29 2021 00:21 highsis wrote: For IEM Katowice we have 1 confirmed protoss, 6 terrans and 4 zergs. In top EPT points standings, TRAP is the only protss at top 15. We will likely end up with 1 protoss in the tournament out of 16.
At this point I don't even care if protoss players suck balls and are untalened. Yeah, whatever you talents rhetoric arguers say. I just want more protoss representations at the top levels and protoss buffed to achieve it.
So you want the game to die? Can you imagine what will happen to ladder if they buff protoss even more with no other changes? I know most ppl who watch this game dont play, but damn dude. More protoss buff, and GM will be 60% protoss or more.
On November 29 2021 00:21 highsis wrote: For IEM Katowice we have 1 confirmed protoss, 6 terrans and 4 zergs. In top EPT points standings, TRAP is the only protss at top 15. We will likely end up with 1 protoss in the tournament out of 16.
At this point I don't even care if protoss players suck balls and are untalened. Yeah, whatever you talents rhetoric arguers say. I just want more protoss representations at the top levels and protoss buffed to achieve it.
So you want the game to die? Can you imagine what will happen to ladder if they buff protoss even more with no other changes? I know most ppl who watch this game dont play, but damn dude. More protoss buff, and GM will be 60% protoss or more.
Not necessarily. I'm sure something like making mothership immune to a viper abduct can go a long way in the late protoss vs zerg as protoss is often less efficient in resources loss at the top levels; with zerg having easier defense, resources gathered and map control the result is rather skewed. I don't think it will affect amateur games too much as games don't drag that long in most cases.
SC2 balance has never been focused on ladder, has it? Why should it be specifically balanced at GM? How about masters, diamond, gold, etc? Also at this point the pro scene is pretty much dead if you think 60% GM protoss is bad, IEM has 1 protoss out of 16 and unless protoss wins dreamhack last chance (protoss has been barrent with tier 1 victory for years) that's confirmed.
On November 29 2021 00:21 highsis wrote: For IEM Katowice we have 1 confirmed protoss, 6 terrans and 4 zergs. In top EPT points standings, TRAP is the only protss at top 15. We will likely end up with 1 protoss in the tournament out of 16.
At this point I don't even care if protoss players suck balls and are untalened. Yeah, whatever you talents rhetoric arguers say. I just want more protoss representations at the top levels and protoss buffed to achieve it.
I guess Zest, Parting and Zoun are not Protoss then? This is just a "weak" EPT year for the KR Protoss player pool because of military service. Stats and Zest and Parting are already or likely to be gone, while Classic and Hero are only back at the later half of the year and cant get enough points (yet) for IEM.
On November 29 2021 00:21 highsis wrote: For IEM Katowice we have 1 confirmed protoss, 6 terrans and 4 zergs. In top EPT points standings, TRAP is the only protss at top 15. We will likely end up with 1 protoss in the tournament out of 16.
At this point I don't even care if protoss players suck balls and are untalened. Yeah, whatever you talents rhetoric arguers say. I just want more protoss representations at the top levels and protoss buffed to achieve it.
It's an unreasonable request, if the top protoss just happen to be worse than the top zergs and top terrans you don't get to demand that they win an equal amount of representation, that would be silly.
On November 27 2021 04:35 Vision_ wrote: [...]I proposed [...] to remove the tag armor. In this way, Stalkers become good against many more expensive units as Immortal, Void Ray, Marauder, Siege Tank, Viking (in Fighter Mode), Ultralisk, Spine Crawler and Lurkers.
Two issues with this list: 1. Fighter mode Vikings only hit air units. Stalkers are not air units. Assault mode Vikings are the ones that can hit Stalkers, but they do not have a bonus vs armored. They have bonus vs mechanical. 2. Ultralisks have no bonus damage. They deal a flat 35 to everything. So neither Vikings nor Ultralisks would be affected by removing the armored tag from Stalkers.
Well, technically, in team games a Phoenix can lift up a Stalker for a Viking to hit in Fighter mode. That way the armored tag matters.
On November 29 2021 00:21 highsis wrote: For IEM Katowice we have 1 confirmed protoss, 6 terrans and 4 zergs. In top EPT points standings, TRAP is the only protss at top 15. We will likely end up with 1 protoss in the tournament out of 16.
At this point I don't even care if protoss players suck balls and are untalened. Yeah, whatever you talents rhetoric arguers say. I just want more protoss representations at the top levels and protoss buffed to achieve it.
We have 2 confirmed Protosses, Neeb and Trap. Sure, Neeb won't probably qualify for the main event as he's starting at the RO36 but still, we have 2 confirmed. At this moment we have Zest and Zoun close to go and for example recently retired Parting is still at #10 of the Korean EPT standings, sOs is 12th. And the fact Protoss will suck heavily was known almost 3 years ago. Do you remember when Classic went into the army? Some people were already claiming the doom & gloom of Protoss, because Stats was closely the next one. We were left with Trap, Zest and Zoun and of this trio it looks like Zest entered the pre-army Stats phase (playing for the lulz).
Edit> Also Maxpax, Showtime and Astrea are near being fully qualified.
On November 29 2021 00:21 highsis wrote: For IEM Katowice we have 1 confirmed protoss, 6 terrans and 4 zergs. In top EPT points standings, TRAP is the only protss at top 15. We will likely end up with 1 protoss in the tournament out of 16.
At this point I don't even care if protoss players suck balls and are untalened. Yeah, whatever you talents rhetoric arguers say. I just want more protoss representations at the top levels and protoss buffed to achieve it.
It's an unreasonable request, if the top protoss just happen to be worse than the top zergs and top terrans you don't get to demand that they win an equal amount of representation, that would be silly.
I think this whole "protoss players suck" argument is a baseless BS. Buff protoss and I will start saying Terran & Zerg players suck and it's not not their race in the exactly same logic. If that BS justify protoss' current state, might as well buff protoss so I can sprout the same rhetoric of how untalented Z&T players are and they need to work harder while protoss comfortably wins tournaments. I was being sarcastic.
On November 29 2021 00:21 highsis wrote: For IEM Katowice we have 1 confirmed protoss, 6 terrans and 4 zergs. In top EPT points standings, TRAP is the only protss at top 15. We will likely end up with 1 protoss in the tournament out of 16.
At this point I don't even care if protoss players suck balls and are untalened. Yeah, whatever you talents rhetoric arguers say. I just want more protoss representations at the top levels and protoss buffed to achieve it.
It's an unreasonable request, if the top protoss just happen to be worse than the top zergs and top terrans you don't get to demand that they win an equal amount of representation, that would be silly.
I think this whole "protoss players suck" argument is a baseless BS. Buff protoss and I will start saying Terran & Zerg players suck and it's not not their race in the exactly same logic. If that BS justify protoss' current state, might as well buff protoss so I can sprout the same rhetoric of how untalented Z&T players are and they need to work harder while protoss comfortably wins tournaments. I was being sarcastic.
It's not like apart from Clem in Europe and Maru in his waves Terrans have so many finalists or titles either. Currently the only race which has more top players are Zergs with Reynor, Rogue, Dark and Serral, followed by Scarlett, DRG and Solar. Name 7 Terrans where 4 of them are contenders for a title. Well, we can stay with - name 7 Terran who are this good Protoss is at the same stage, but with Zoun not being the toppest top and Trap being in bad form. Imagine if Maru was at bad form - who would have Terrans then? Clem when the road is TvZ only or Cure when the road is TvP only?
On November 29 2021 00:21 highsis wrote: For IEM Katowice we have 1 confirmed protoss, 6 terrans and 4 zergs. In top EPT points standings, TRAP is the only protss at top 15. We will likely end up with 1 protoss in the tournament out of 16.
At this point I don't even care if protoss players suck balls and are untalened. Yeah, whatever you talents rhetoric arguers say. I just want more protoss representations at the top levels and protoss buffed to achieve it.
It's an unreasonable request, if the top protoss just happen to be worse than the top zergs and top terrans you don't get to demand that they win an equal amount of representation, that would be silly.
I think this whole "protoss players suck" argument is a baseless BS. Buff protoss and I will start saying Terran & Zerg players suck and it's not not their race in the exactly same logic. If that BS justify protoss' current state, might as well buff protoss so I can sprout the same rhetoric of how untalented Z&T players are and they need to work harder while protoss comfortably wins tournaments. I was being sarcastic.
I don't think top level Protoss players suck, but I can't think of a single foreign Protoss player that could realistically take Serral down.
I know it isn't the supreme gospel of anything, but for October, Aligulac has Protoss at 49.5 % vs. Terran, and 54% vs. Zerg. Quite frankly I don't think balance is an issue, out of all the premier tournaments where Protoss didn't take 1st place, they took 2nd place 5 times, the 6th time they took 2nd was because a Protoss took first, so while I would be in favor of a very slight Stalker buff and or Adept change, is Protoss really so weak?
I know it's dealing in what ifs and make believes, but I firmly believe that if Serral was playing Protoss right now, he would still be crushing, and the topic would be, "Is Protoss overpowered or is Serral just better then everyone?"
On November 29 2021 00:21 highsis wrote: For IEM Katowice we have 1 confirmed protoss, 6 terrans and 4 zergs. In top EPT points standings, TRAP is the only protss at top 15. We will likely end up with 1 protoss in the tournament out of 16.
At this point I don't even care if protoss players suck balls and are untalened. Yeah, whatever you talents rhetoric arguers say. I just want more protoss representations at the top levels and protoss buffed to achieve it.
It's an unreasonable request, if the top protoss just happen to be worse than the top zergs and top terrans you don't get to demand that they win an equal amount of representation, that would be silly.
I think this whole "protoss players suck" argument is a baseless BS. Buff protoss and I will start saying Terran & Zerg players suck and it's not not their race in the exactly same logic. If that BS justify protoss' current state, might as well buff protoss so I can sprout the same rhetoric of how untalented Z&T players are and they need to work harder while protoss comfortably wins tournaments. I was being sarcastic.
Ok then you don't think it's the case; that doesn't really matter to me. It's a possibility, so we can't exclude it when talking about the situation.
On November 29 2021 00:21 highsis wrote: For IEM Katowice we have 1 confirmed protoss, 6 terrans and 4 zergs. In top EPT points standings, TRAP is the only protss at top 15. We will likely end up with 1 protoss in the tournament out of 16.
At this point I don't even care if protoss players suck balls and are untalened. Yeah, whatever you talents rhetoric arguers say. I just want more protoss representations at the top levels and protoss buffed to achieve it.
It's an unreasonable request, if the top protoss just happen to be worse than the top zergs and top terrans you don't get to demand that they win an equal amount of representation, that would be silly.
I think this whole "protoss players suck" argument is a baseless BS. Buff protoss and I will start saying Terran & Zerg players suck and it's not not their race in the exactly same logic. If that BS justify protoss' current state, might as well buff protoss so I can sprout the same rhetoric of how untalented Z&T players are and they need to work harder while protoss comfortably wins tournaments. I was being sarcastic.
Ok then you don't think it's the case; that doesn't really matter to me. It's a possibility, so we can't exclude it when talking about the situation.
Except it's not really a possibility. If you look at mid to high level there's, if anything, a disproportionately high number of Protoss players in basically every scene except EU. Even then, look at those endless round robins for the regionals—tons of Protoss. But none of them can get anything done, and that seems to be the case over all, even in refine with strong pros.
Just saying "oh, they're all just bad" is, beyond being more than a little insulting, not something that lines up with the evidence. Since they have more pro and semi pro players, they have more chances to get strong players, and they indeed have had a ton of strong players. Even just in the past couple years you've got Trap, Stats, Zest, Parting, Classic, herO, Zoun, etc. Players who can win series against the best in the world, repeatedly. They're also world class. It's just that the closest one to really getting the results you'd expect from his calibre is Trap and even he gets called the king of tier 2 because he can't seem to win a Code S or Global Finals.
There are a lot of reasons this might be. But if you want to argue that this is because Trap and every other Protoss is secretly bad, it's on you to prove that. It's not something suggested by any evidence though, as there's more Protoss playing than the other races and the best ones have proved themselves repeatedly.
I don't want to argue that. I want to argue that it can either be balance/design or that the top 7-8 best players who play this game just happened to choose other races. Can I prove that if Serral had picked protoss instead of zerg a few years ago he wouldn't be dominating right now, no I can't, so I won't attempt to. All I'm saying is that it's obviously not just bad luck on the protoss side, and therefore, in the context of this thread, I can state that there isn't much hope.
Based on that, yesterday instead of watching the TSL, I watched Wheel of Time! Cool show, didn't make me angry or sad. Today at work I would usually have watched the Ro8 of the Super Tournament! But I didn't, instead I played all 5 of the daily killer sudoku. Didn't make me angry or sad either. Good choices on my part.
On November 30 2021 02:38 Nebuchad wrote: I don't want to argue that. I want to argue that it can either be balance/design or that the top 7-8 best players who play this game just happened to choose other races. Can I prove that if Serral had picked protoss instead of zerg a few years ago he wouldn't be dominating right now, no I can't, so I won't attempt to. All I'm saying is that it's obviously not just bad luck on the protoss side, and therefore, in the context of this thread, I can state that there isn't much hope.
Based on that, yesterday instead of watching the TSL, I watched Wheel of Time! Cool show, didn't make me angry or sad. Today at work I would usually have watched the Ro8 of the Super Tournament! But I didn't, instead I played all 5 of the daily killer sudoku. Didn't make me angry or sad either. Good choices on my part.
If it makes you feel any better, I also stopped watching due to protoss.
I guess a lot of players also stopped playing because of Protoss. Way less anger / impression of wasting your time against skytoss and cheeses, although the new maps seemed to alleviate the proxy issues by a lot
And there we have the actual reason for the asisine side quests in this thread, without the obfuscating bullshit: "There is no hope for protoss, but we think it's a good thing, because we hate you."
No one's talking about the topic because none of the stats support it. Just look at the open cups - 111 wins for protoss. Same as terran, 40 more than zerg.
It's a sample size of 295 tournaments, every week for nearly 2 years. Protoss is fine.
On November 29 2021 00:21 highsis wrote: For IEM Katowice we have 1 confirmed protoss, 6 terrans and 4 zergs. In top EPT points standings, TRAP is the only protss at top 15. We will likely end up with 1 protoss in the tournament out of 16.
At this point I don't even care if protoss players suck balls and are untalened. Yeah, whatever you talents rhetoric arguers say. I just want more protoss representations at the top levels and protoss buffed to achieve it.
So you want the game to die? Can you imagine what will happen to ladder if they buff protoss even more with no other changes? I know most ppl who watch this game dont play, but damn dude. More protoss buff, and GM will be 60% protoss or more.
SC2 balance has never been focused on ladder, has it? Why should it be specifically balanced at GM? How about masters, diamond, gold, etc? Also at this point the pro scene is pretty much dead if you think 60% GM protoss is bad, IEM has 1 protoss out of 16 and unless protoss wins dreamhack last chance (protoss has been barrent with tier 1 victory for years) that's confirmed.
Do you think a pro scene can survive with 5000 viewers average on twitch for biggest tournament? If the population keeps dying, this is where we are heading. Bad balance on ladder level means more ppl quitting (mostly zergs, terran and protoss will follow when they can only play vs toss). Less ppl playing, means less ppl watching.
I am pretty sure pros would rather have 50 000 viewers watching events with a game balance that cares about ladder players more, than to have 10 000 viewers on a good day for the biggest events.
Money talks, and with low viewer count, the scene wont live as long as you think it would if they only balance for the pros. Right now protoss is making so many ppl quit, and you want them to become even stronger, which is insane. Look at top EU pros, they only play vs toss already. Look at top GM of NA. 1 zerg in top 20, a million toss.
You make this even worse and the game is officially dead. IF you played in masters/GM you would know that.
On November 29 2021 00:21 highsis wrote: For IEM Katowice we have 1 confirmed protoss, 6 terrans and 4 zergs. In top EPT points standings, TRAP is the only protss at top 15. We will likely end up with 1 protoss in the tournament out of 16.
At this point I don't even care if protoss players suck balls and are untalened. Yeah, whatever you talents rhetoric arguers say. I just want more protoss representations at the top levels and protoss buffed to achieve it.
So you want the game to die? Can you imagine what will happen to ladder if they buff protoss even more with no other changes? I know most ppl who watch this game dont play, but damn dude. More protoss buff, and GM will be 60% protoss or more.
SC2 balance has never been focused on ladder, has it? Why should it be specifically balanced at GM? How about masters, diamond, gold, etc? Also at this point the pro scene is pretty much dead if you think 60% GM protoss is bad, IEM has 1 protoss out of 16 and unless protoss wins dreamhack last chance (protoss has been barrent with tier 1 victory for years) that's confirmed.
Do you think a pro scene can survive with 5000 viewers average on twitch for biggest tournament? If the population keeps dying, this is where we are heading. Bad balance on ladder level means more ppl quitting (mostly zergs, terran and protoss will follow when they can only play vs toss). Less ppl playing, means less ppl watching.
I am pretty sure pros would rather have 50 000 viewers watching events with a game balance that cares about ladder players more, than to have 10 000 viewers on a good day for the biggest events.
Money talks, and with low viewer count, the scene wont live as long as you think it would if they only balance for the pros. Right now protoss is making so many ppl quit, and you want them to become even stronger, which is insane. Look at top EU pros, they only play vs toss already. Look at top GM of NA. 1 zerg in top 20, a million toss.
You make this even worse and the game is officially dead. IF you played in masters/GM you would know that.
Do you think Blizzard will touch this game and miraculously fixes the issues? Most of the issues has been identified as being design flaws, so my bet is that no matter what they do (and mind you, they said they will not touch this game) other issues arise.
On November 29 2021 00:21 highsis wrote: For IEM Katowice we have 1 confirmed protoss, 6 terrans and 4 zergs. In top EPT points standings, TRAP is the only protss at top 15. We will likely end up with 1 protoss in the tournament out of 16.
At this point I don't even care if protoss players suck balls and are untalened. Yeah, whatever you talents rhetoric arguers say. I just want more protoss representations at the top levels and protoss buffed to achieve it.
So you want the game to die? Can you imagine what will happen to ladder if they buff protoss even more with no other changes? I know most ppl who watch this game dont play, but damn dude. More protoss buff, and GM will be 60% protoss or more.
SC2 balance has never been focused on ladder, has it? Why should it be specifically balanced at GM? How about masters, diamond, gold, etc? Also at this point the pro scene is pretty much dead if you think 60% GM protoss is bad, IEM has 1 protoss out of 16 and unless protoss wins dreamhack last chance (protoss has been barrent with tier 1 victory for years) that's confirmed.
Do you think a pro scene can survive with 5000 viewers average on twitch for biggest tournament? If the population keeps dying, this is where we are heading. Bad balance on ladder level means more ppl quitting (mostly zergs, terran and protoss will follow when they can only play vs toss). Less ppl playing, means less ppl watching.
I am pretty sure pros would rather have 50 000 viewers watching events with a game balance that cares about ladder players more, than to have 10 000 viewers on a good day for the biggest events.
Money talks, and with low viewer count, the scene wont live as long as you think it would if they only balance for the pros. Right now protoss is making so many ppl quit, and you want them to become even stronger, which is insane. Look at top EU pros, they only play vs toss already. Look at top GM of NA. 1 zerg in top 20, a million toss.
You make this even worse and the game is officially dead. IF you played in masters/GM you would know that.
(and mind you, they said they will not touch this game)
Yeah that's another thing that I don't get, isn't it quite obvious that there won't be any more patches? Why are so many people crying about this, you've already won that battle
On November 30 2021 08:07 Poopi wrote: Well some pros seemed to hint at another patch, but it’s not sure anything will come at all. It’s not 0% chance though, I guess?
Oh I missed that, do you have a link or something?
At this point it seems clear that Skytoss is hard to beat for Zerg who don't have godlike control of their spellcasters or are capable of executing a Queen Walk perfectly; it is also clear that, at the highest level, Skytoss is far from being dominant and, worse, it looks like the only logical option if you are not capable of taking out the Zerg early. Lurkers shut down ground options too efficiently it seems.
It would be definitely possible to limit the power of Skytoss, limiting the overrepresantation of Protoss in GM and below, AND make the race more competitive at the highest level by adding some strong high skill ceiling option; Warp Prism's pickup range seemed oppressive for a while but it gave top tier players a way to outmicro their opponents in a way your average Master wouldn't have been able to(it had to be nerfed but Blizzard went too far).
On November 30 2021 08:07 Poopi wrote: Well some pros seemed to hint at another patch, but it’s not sure anything will come at all. It’s not 0% chance though, I guess?
Oh I missed that, do you have a link or something?
https://www.reddit.com/r/allthingszerg/comments/otai15/apparently_there_is_a_new_patch_coming_what_would/ From what I heard recently on a French stream, this thing from three months ago probably happened. But since we don’t really hear about it anymore hard to know how serious this might be. My bet would be that if they want to patch things out, we should be hearing about it publicly, probably after Katowice / start of the new season.
On November 30 2021 04:20 Poopi wrote: I guess a lot of players also stopped playing because of Protoss. Way less anger / impression of wasting your time against skytoss and cheeses, although the new maps seemed to alleviate the proxy issues by a lot
I'm sorry for killing the game by having fun doing things that the game allows you to do.
On November 30 2021 17:56 Drahkn wrote: So fun to watch across the community Terran and Zerg apologists going hard trying to explain why Protoss representation is getting worse and worse.
"There just happens to be no world class protoss players atm" or "They have all gone to military"
"Europe GM is flooded with Protoss players" ( as if it is an indicator of ANYTHING about pro level )
Dark, Rogue, Serral and Reynor Name 4 similarily skilled Terrans or Protosses. Maru, Clem, Cure(on a good day) Trap, Zest(when he's not being Zest)
That's my 4 for each race. Your turn.
Zerg has 4 top class players and several good players. Terran has 3 when really try to justify Clem and Cure and Protoss has 2 when you ignore Zest's recent record.
But I dare you to name the players. If the players are good, than it shouldn't be hard to name 4 world class top tier players for Protoss.
Edit> I place Zoun on a lower level. IMO he's not at the very top, but he may get there. At least I hope. Similarly Classic, herO or GumiGod.
If Zerg or Terran was bad would we necessarily call their top players top players though? If Protoss was better it may have more top players than just Trap.
A list of "top players" not having many easy Protoss answers doesn't necessarily say anything about the pool of Protoss players, especially given how many have retired, which strips the pool of players of many of it's pedigreed players who you can assign top tier status to based on prior accomplishment (I remember that stretch of the TL power rankings putting Maru at the top almost exclusively for prior feats when he wasnt winning things but other players were, lol)
If Protoss was stronger would we have Zest, Trap, and Zoun as more firmly "top tier" Protosses? Its hard to say obviously because its all what-ifs, but I'm very skeptical of the idea that it just so happens that Protoss has almost no good players.
Zest is still the top protoss, he made it to GSL finals beating the seemingly invincible offline bo7 Rogue. It’s just that he has to go to the military and we aren’t sure when, if he will be able to go to Katowice, etc. Since his loss, his results have worsened for unknown reasons. Could be taking it easy after a hard fought GSL run like Cure, or could be because military approaches… So yeah, Zest has had a better year than Trap in the big tournaments, with Katowice and code S finals, but less successful in the smaller tournaments.
On November 30 2021 20:44 Zambrah wrote: If Zerg or Terran was bad would we necessarily call their top players top players though? If Protoss was better it may have more top players than just Trap.
A list of "top players" not having many easy Protoss answers doesn't necessarily say anything about the pool of Protoss players, especially given how many have retired, which strips the pool of players of many of it's pedigreed players who you can assign top tier status to based on prior accomplishment (I remember that stretch of the TL power rankings putting Maru at the top almost exclusively for prior feats when he wasnt winning things but other players were, lol)
If Protoss was stronger would we have Zest, Trap, and Zoun as more firmly "top tier" Protosses? Its hard to say obviously because its all what-ifs, but I'm very skeptical of the idea that it just so happens that Protoss has almost no good players.
Protoss just got hit hardest by the military drafts. Stats and Classic were the best Protoss players in LotV and are now gone (yeah Classic is back but not at his old level) so it's not surprising that Protoss is underperforming. That would be like Rogue and Dark going to the military or Maru on top of TY.
On November 30 2021 20:44 Zambrah wrote: If Zerg or Terran was bad would we necessarily call their top players top players though? If Protoss was better it may have more top players than just Trap.
A list of "top players" not having many easy Protoss answers doesn't necessarily say anything about the pool of Protoss players, especially given how many have retired, which strips the pool of players of many of it's pedigreed players who you can assign top tier status to based on prior accomplishment (I remember that stretch of the TL power rankings putting Maru at the top almost exclusively for prior feats when he wasnt winning things but other players were, lol)
If Protoss was stronger would we have Zest, Trap, and Zoun as more firmly "top tier" Protosses? Its hard to say obviously because its all what-ifs, but I'm very skeptical of the idea that it just so happens that Protoss has almost no good players.
Protoss just got hit hardest by the military drafts. Stats and Classic were the best Protoss players in LotV and are now gone (yeah Classic is back but not at his old level) so it's not surprising that Protoss is underperforming. That would be like Rogue and Dark going to the military or Maru on top of TY.
The sample size of what I’ll call S class players is that small that, yes as much as people are sniffy about this analysis it’s basically correct.
Especially at this phase of the game too. Things could flip really quickly. Let’s say herO and Classic get back to their top shape and a Maru, or one of Rogue/Dark have to be out of the game for whatever reason, there could be a pretty sizeable shift in racial performance to the degree Protoss is the strongest race in Korea for a period.
Zerg have done a lot in Code S for a while now, but it’s exclusively been on the back of Dark and Rogue
On November 30 2021 21:24 Poopi wrote: Zest is still the top protoss, he made it to GSL finals beating the seemingly invincible offline bo7 Rogue. It’s just that he has to go to the military and we aren’t sure when, if he will be able to go to Katowice, etc. Since his loss, his results have worsened for unknown reasons. Could be taking it easy after a hard fought GSL run like Cure, or could be because military approaches… So yeah, Zest has had a better year than Trap in the big tournaments, with Katowice and code S finals, but less successful in the smaller tournaments.
Zest reaching the finals at Katowice was an isolated result while Trap performed terribly; outside of that, Trap reached the semifinals twice in Code S and the final once compared to Zest reaching the finals once, the ro8 once and outright failing to qualify once. I would say those are comparable results.
Trap won five "smaller" tournaments, including two GSL Super Tournaments, this year, compared to Zest bringing home zero. Trap also had an impressive streak, looking like the best player in the world at a certain point and surely the best Protoss for months whereas Zest looked superior for maybe one month around his successful Code S run.
Trap has been the top Protoss in 2021, there is no contest.
I see I see here we've again got a classic "best players just happened to not choose protoss". Somehow this logic never worked in favor of protoss when they managed to win one or two tournaments, always leading to toss nerfs.
On November 30 2021 21:24 Poopi wrote: Zest is still the top protoss, he made it to GSL finals beating the seemingly invincible offline bo7 Rogue. It’s just that he has to go to the military and we aren’t sure when, if he will be able to go to Katowice, etc. Since his loss, his results have worsened for unknown reasons. Could be taking it easy after a hard fought GSL run like Cure, or could be because military approaches… So yeah, Zest has had a better year than Trap in the big tournaments, with Katowice and code S finals, but less successful in the smaller tournaments.
Zest reaching the finals at Katowice was an isolated result while Trap performed terribly; outside of that, Trap reached the semifinals twice in Code S and the final once compared to Zest reaching the finals once, the ro8 once and outright failing to qualify once. I would say those are comparable results.
Trap won five "smaller" tournaments, including two GSL Super Tournaments, this year, compared to Zest bringing home zero. Trap also had an impressive streak, looking like the best player in the world at a certain point and surely the best Protoss for months whereas Zest looked superior for maybe one month around his successful Code S run.
Trap has been the top Protoss in 2021, there is no contest.
If you only consider the average level across the entire year, Trap has been superior indeed. But when you consider who had the most impact in 2021 among protosses, it's Zest for sure: reaching the finals by beating Rogue in offline bo7 showed everyone that it was possible. Since players know about Trap and tier 2 events, I'm pretty sure they knew about Rogue insane streak. Therefore, breaking that streak allows other protosses and players in general in the future to perform in similar situations. In the same way, reaching two consecutive Katowice finals shows other protosses that they have a shot. Zest brought more hope than Trap
On November 30 2021 21:24 Poopi wrote: Zest is still the top protoss, he made it to GSL finals beating the seemingly invincible offline bo7 Rogue. It’s just that he has to go to the military and we aren’t sure when, if he will be able to go to Katowice, etc. Since his loss, his results have worsened for unknown reasons. Could be taking it easy after a hard fought GSL run like Cure, or could be because military approaches… So yeah, Zest has had a better year than Trap in the big tournaments, with Katowice and code S finals, but less successful in the smaller tournaments.
Zest reaching the finals at Katowice was an isolated result while Trap performed terribly; outside of that, Trap reached the semifinals twice in Code S and the final once compared to Zest reaching the finals once, the ro8 once and outright failing to qualify once. I would say those are comparable results.
Trap won five "smaller" tournaments, including two GSL Super Tournaments, this year, compared to Zest bringing home zero. Trap also had an impressive streak, looking like the best player in the world at a certain point and surely the best Protoss for months whereas Zest looked superior for maybe one month around his successful Code S run.
Trap has been the top Protoss in 2021, there is no contest.
If you only consider the average level across the entire year, Trap has been superior indeed. But when you consider who had the most impact in 2021 among protosses, it's Zest for sure: reaching the finals by beating Rogue in offline bo7 showed everyone that it was possible. Since players know about Trap and tier 2 events, I'm pretty sure they knew about Rogue insane streak. Therefore, breaking that streak allows other protosses and players in general in the future to perform in similar situations. In the same way, reaching two consecutive Katowice finals shows other protosses that they have a shot. Zest brought more hope than Trap
I’m not sure what hope Zest’s runs instilled, if anything it’s a showcase of why Protoss struggle at that level.
You can prep some really refined stuff for a weekend tournament and take some scalps, and still end up falling short once you’ve shown the new stuff in your locker.
Rogue absolutely smacked Zest in the final the year before, last time it was more of a contest but Reynor was still reasonably comfortable.
Trap’s been consistently good, for the most part until very recently at basically every tournament, Zest’s had two great Katowice runs where he clearly prepared and refined builds specifically for those two tournaments, and still ultimately lost.
Perhaps I’m overly pessimistic, at Katowice level Zergs are like the Borg, you craft some new weapon or strategem to defeat them, and it works but the next Borg are immune and smack you around mercilessly.
On November 30 2021 23:01 Elantris wrote: I see I see here we've again got a classic "best players just happened to not choose protoss". Somehow this logic never worked in favor of protoss when they managed to win one or two tournaments, always leading to toss nerfs.
Name me 1 foreign Protoss player who can beat Serral in a BO5 lol
On November 30 2021 23:01 Elantris wrote: I see I see here we've again got a classic "best players just happened to not choose protoss". Somehow this logic never worked in favor of protoss when they managed to win one or two tournaments, always leading to toss nerfs.
Name me 1 foreign Protoss player who can beat Serral in a BO5 lol
On November 30 2021 23:01 Elantris wrote: I see I see here we've again got a classic "best players just happened to not choose protoss". Somehow this logic never worked in favor of protoss when they managed to win one or two tournaments, always leading to toss nerfs.
Name me 1 foreign Protoss player who can beat Serral in a BO5 lol
Of course you can say that zerg has more top players.. or maybe those players are top because they play this specific race that lets them have a better chance in the biggest tournaments. I'm thinking its closer to the latter. Maxpax would probably already be regarded as a top player like if he had chosen zerg.
On December 01 2021 01:26 TheCheapSkate wrote: Of course you can say that zerg has more top players.. or maybe those players are top because they play this specific race that lets them have a better chance in the biggest tournaments. I'm thinking its closer to the latter. Maxpax would probably already be regarded as a top player like if he had chosen zerg.
Sure, because all the 2nd places of Trap and some trophies are just him being lucky. And Zoun, Zoun's lucky too!
Protoss didn t benefit so much of new units in extensions.
The race haven t a single unit with 1 supply army (while Zerg can produce a mass of Zergling (0.5 supply) and Terran has Marines). Maybe they need units to serve as a cannon fodder.
On November 30 2021 23:01 Elantris wrote: I see I see here we've again got a classic "best players just happened to not choose protoss". Somehow this logic never worked in favor of protoss when they managed to win one or two tournaments, always leading to toss nerfs.
Name me 1 foreign Protoss player who can beat Serral in a BO5 lol
In a balanced game Showtime would have been on par with Clem, Serral and Reynor for years already but we are in a different timeline.
On November 30 2021 23:01 Elantris wrote: I see I see here we've again got a classic "best players just happened to not choose protoss". Somehow this logic never worked in favor of protoss when they managed to win one or two tournaments, always leading to toss nerfs.
Name me 1 foreign Protoss player who can beat Serral in a BO5 lol
In a balanced game Showtime would have been on par with Clem, Serral and Reynor for years already but we are in a different timeline.
Clem would have been on par with Reynor in 2019 as well, but he was not. ShowTimE is far older than Clem/Reynor ; the better comparison would probably be MaxPax but he is younger than Clem/Reynor and not yet at "peak" age which is probably between 19-24. And ShoWTimE was better than Reynor/Clem for a looong time (friendly reminder that even though these two are young, they are playing since a super long time)
On November 29 2021 00:21 highsis wrote: For IEM Katowice we have 1 confirmed protoss, 6 terrans and 4 zergs. In top EPT points standings, TRAP is the only protss at top 15. We will likely end up with 1 protoss in the tournament out of 16.
At this point I don't even care if protoss players suck balls and are untalened. Yeah, whatever you talents rhetoric arguers say. I just want more protoss representations at the top levels and protoss buffed to achieve it.
It's an unreasonable request, if the top protoss just happen to be worse than the top zergs and top terrans you don't get to demand that they win an equal amount of representation, that would be silly.
I think this whole "protoss players suck" argument is a baseless BS. Buff protoss and I will start saying Terran & Zerg players suck and it's not not their race in the exactly same logic. If that BS justify protoss' current state, might as well buff protoss so I can sprout the same rhetoric of how untalented Z&T players are and they need to work harder while protoss comfortably wins tournaments. I was being sarcastic.
Ok then you don't think it's the case; that doesn't really matter to me. It's a possibility, so we can't exclude it when talking about the situation.
Except it's not really a possibility. If you look at mid to high level there's, if anything, a disproportionately high number of Protoss players in basically every scene except EU. Even then, look at those endless round robins for the regionals—tons of Protoss. But none of them can get anything done, and that seems to be the case over all, even in refine with strong pros.
Just saying "oh, they're all just bad" is, beyond being more than a little insulting, not something that lines up with the evidence. Since they have more pro and semi pro players, they have more chances to get strong players, and they indeed have had a ton of strong players. Even just in the past couple years you've got Trap, Stats, Zest, Parting, Classic, herO, Zoun, etc. Players who can win series against the best in the world, repeatedly. They're also world class. It's just that the closest one to really getting the results you'd expect from his calibre is Trap and even he gets called the king of tier 2 because he can't seem to win a Code S or Global Finals.
There are a lot of reasons this might be. But if you want to argue that this is because Trap and every other Protoss is secretly bad, it's on you to prove that. It's not something suggested by any evidence though, as there's more Protoss playing than the other races and the best ones have proved themselves repeatedly.
Indeed. The most logical conclusion drawn from this and how protoss are performing well at GM and low to mid tier pro scene must be "Protoss is a race that is stronger in a mid to low pro levels(and top amateur levels) but weaker at the top levels," not "protoss players are not as good as Z or T players." If the trend has been there for years and you don't see it, you are biased, period.
And I think something should be done at the top levels so tier 1 tourneys can be divided more evenly while minimizing its impact in lower levels. Alienating potentially 1/3 of the viewer base(especially those who only watch the scene) doesn't seem like a bright idea and I'm very frustrated as a protoss fan for the race not winning anything significant for 4 years and people think it's still fine.
If you want proof at how bad protoss is just look at the forced gimmick builds they have to do, or the insane gambles they do to be able to compete with the very best players in SC2, its completely unacceptable. You must constantly reinvent the protoss playstyle because the moment you don't the top players will read your like a open book and you can't win because by default you are at disadvantage.
Protoss is insanely predictable.
It's okay that Zerg can even have kinda sloppy defense vs Protoss and lose large amounts of drones but still be in a playable position ?
While if you flip the coin if Protoss takes even the slightest damage the comeback seems almost impossible?
As an example, I just watch a PVT in the most recent super tournament, Cure loses 11 SCV in the early game vs Trap and the CASTERS DO NOT EVEN GIVE IT A MENTION, like yeah he just lost 11 SCV but its no big deal right?
Turn it on its head, Terran suicides units to trade for 11 probe kills that early in the game THE GAME IS OVER.
The funny part? Defending it is easier for TERRAN, and Terran can do the same damage Protoss did without even having to trade large amounts of army just send in a few lucky hellions or WM and its G FUCKING G NEXT GAME.
On November 30 2021 23:01 Elantris wrote: I see I see here we've again got a classic "best players just happened to not choose protoss". Somehow this logic never worked in favor of protoss when they managed to win one or two tournaments, always leading to toss nerfs.
Name me 1 foreign Protoss player who can beat Serral in a BO5 lol
In a balanced game Showtime would have been on par with Clem, Serral and Reynor for years already but we are in a different timeline.
Complete nonsense, Aligulac has (as of November) TvZ at 54 % and PvZ at 54.7%, and PvT at 46.5%, a bit rough on that front.
Despite Protoss's recent struggles against Terran, their win rates in tournaments this year seems just fine.
P = 7 first place and 7 second place Z = 7 first place and 7 second place T = 4 first place and 3 second place
Honestly, how bad is balance for Protoss really? If Protoss took 1st place in just 2 more premier tournaments they would be winning a solid 50% of the time with Terran by far struggling the most.
On November 27 2021 04:35 Vision_ wrote: [...]I proposed [...] to remove the tag armor. In this way, Stalkers become good against many more expensive units as Immortal, Void Ray, Marauder, Siege Tank, Viking (in Fighter Mode), Ultralisk, Spine Crawler and Lurkers.
Two issues with this list: 1. Fighter mode Vikings only hit air units. Stalkers are not air units. Assault mode Vikings are the ones that can hit Stalkers, but they do not have a bonus vs armored. They have bonus vs mechanical. 2. Ultralisks have no bonus damage. They deal a flat 35 to everything. So neither Vikings nor Ultralisks would be affected by removing the armored tag from Stalkers.
Well, technically, in team games a Phoenix can lift up a Stalker for a Viking to hit in Fighter mode. That way the armored tag matters.
Vikings is the only one unit with a mechanical bonus. Blizzard probably decided to buff vikings without affecting Zerg, Indeed Roachs DPS would have been very very low against Vikings, for the same supply cost ( 2.5 factor = insanity ) I desinstalled my video card and my main fan since a long time and i don t want to make tests again.
Some dps stats without tag armored :
Immortal -10% Void Ray -38% Marauder -50% Siege Tank -40% Viking (IF bonus against armored) -40% Spine Crawler -33% Lurkers -33%
In the case of a removal of his armor tag, only marauders worry me in perspective of an overall balance (Stalkers DPS is tweaked, not even sure you have to give them a bonus against light because of their flat damage would be increased a little bit / enought / in return of remove their bonus against armored).
It could be hard for tanks too, but after that it s possible to up their fire rate in order to balance their damage against light armored units and heavy armored units (which have slower fire-rate) or tweak a little bit their health points. In a design perspective, it helps players in micro-blinking, because stalkers would gain a lot of sustain
On December 01 2021 16:33 Elantris wrote: Imagine thinking that pvz isn't incredibly zerg favored at relevant pro level.
I know I'm arguing against this notion with you, but fwiw, just because I disagree that top level tournaments are unwinnable for Protoss doesn't mean that I and I'm sure a reasonable part of the community don't disagree that Protoss is the weakest race in general at the top level of play, and could probably use a few quality of life buffs to keep up with power creep.
Honestly I think that Stalkers, Sentries AND Adepts could use scaling buffs at the bare minimum, if not outright stat and/or damage changes. I really think if Gateway units started a wee bit stronger and scaled a bit better into the mid game that Protoss would both look and play profoundly different.
On December 02 2021 00:09 Beelzebub1 wrote: I really think if Gateway units started a wee bit stronger and scaled a bit better into the mid game that Protoss would both look and play profoundly different.
We had that but terrans were too salty that protoss can succesfully play with tier 1 units too just like them so we got forge upgrades nerfs, unspeakably huge emp buff and eventually dps nerf of zealot. The last one was truly crazy but starcraft people hate toss too much. Just think about the idea of nerfing damage output of marine or zergling? This would never go through.
Well, the issue is and always will be, that stronger gateway units mean stronger warp ins and proxies. And because the maps are big and 1 probe can proxy 5 things while Terran needs 5 SCVs, it got reverted/nerfed.
The issue basically is that even if you introduce upgrades, we still get to the issue of good ol' +1 chargelot all in(e.g.).
Long story short, the issue of Protoss is mostly the design of Protoss and the stubborness of Blizzard to change warpgate.
On December 02 2021 00:50 deacon.frost wrote: Well, the issue is and always will be, that stronger gateway units mean stronger warp ins and proxies. And because the maps are big and 1 probe can proxy 5 things while Terran needs 5 SCVs, it got reverted/nerfed.
That's not true because before emp buff main terran issue was 2/2 midgame timings with gateway army.
i can't help to think about a way to buff gateway via twilight in a way that upgrades would synergize, a late game ground toss would require to research all 3 twilight upgrades, and each upgrade would greatly affect all basic gateway units
for example
- blink would add some extra (10) hp to zealot and adept - charge would reduce blink ability cooldown (7->5s) and give higher vision radius for adept shade - talons would decrease attack cooldown of stalker and zealot as well (by ~5%)
blink would serve as the defense, charge as the trick, talons as the attack upgrade for the other units.
I think at this point (no real dev team behind sc2) it would be really difficult to buff protoss. I would try, to nerf individual units, just to affect one matchup. Like, i would nerf ghost's EMP against protoss shield. I think one of the main problem with PvT at pro level is the strenght of ghost's EMP. A couple of ghost EMP can take basically half of the protoss health.. EMP would deal half shield "damage", and it would not affect ZvT at all. However it would not solve my problem with ZvP... Such a boring meta right now.
On December 02 2021 00:09 Beelzebub1 wrote: I really think if Gateway units started a wee bit stronger and scaled a bit better into the mid game that Protoss would both look and play profoundly different.
We had that but terrans were too salty that protoss can succesfully play with tier 1 units too just like them so we got forge upgrades nerfs, unspeakably huge emp buff and eventually dps nerf of zealot. The last one was truly crazy but starcraft people hate toss too much. Just think about the idea of nerfing damage output of marine or zergling? This would never go through.
This is a weird take Terrans weren't salty about gateway units being good out of principle lol. Protoss had a tempo advantage the entire game because early game their units beat T's until Stim/Medivacs, and P was getting a much earlier 3rd than Terran could. Not to mention the blink meta (Heavy Rain etc.) and other times that matchup was terrible.
The problem is, at least imo, buffing Protoss to deal with Zerg while not making TvP a terrible matchup for Terrans. I feel like Toss could use some more tools to be aggressive vs Zerg like revert the WP changes or the upgrade time changes. Or Toss needs a better way to break Lurkers.
Maybe slightly buffing gateway units and making warp gate require a twilight council would be a simple and effective solution. Probably need something to encourage more ground armies against Zerg late game, though.
What I want to know is, who are the best Protoss players in the world anymore?
Trap is the only one that is a clear answer since Zest is slumping so bad right now and isn't he leaving to the military soon too? Parting would have been a clear answer too, but as everyone should know by now he too is leaving to do his military service.
So who else other than Trap is an elite Protoss? None of the Protoss from Europe have EVER demonstrated that they are anywhere close to the level of the elite Zergs or Terran from that region.
Astrea is hands down the best Protoss in NA, but does anyone really think he's on the same level as a GSL Code S player or the elite of Europe?
Who exactly are the good Protoss players that SHOULD be winning tournaments right now, because I honestly only see Trap as a contender and he's a very inconsistent shaky player that has nerves that will fail him in big games. Who else is out there?
There are 5 players right now that keep winning everything. They are Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral and Reynor. Is there any Protoss player out there that you can say with a straight face that SHOULD be beating these 5 but game balance is getting in the way? Seriously?
I just don't see it. I don't see a balance issue so much as I just see these 5 dominating everything.
On December 02 2021 08:40 Vindicare605 wrote: What I want to know is, who are the best Protoss players in the world anymore?
Trap is the only one that is a clear answer since Zest is slumping so bad right now and isn't he leaving to the military soon too? Parting would have been a clear answer too, but as everyone should know by now he too is leaving to do his military service.
So who else other than Trap is an elite Protoss? None of the Protoss from Europe have EVER demonstrated that they are anywhere close to the level of the elite Zergs or Terran from that region.
Astrea is hands down the best Protoss in NA, but does anyone really think he's on the same level as a GSL Code S player or the elite of Europe?
Who exactly are the good Protoss players that SHOULD be winning tournaments right now, because I honestly only see Trap as a contender and he's a very inconsistent shaky player that has nerves that will fail him in big games. Who else is out there?
There are 5 players right now that keep winning everything. They are Maru, Dark, Solar, Serral and Reynor. Is there any Protoss player out there that you can say with a straight face that SHOULD be beating these 5 but game balance is getting in the way? Seriously?
I just don't see it. I don't see a balance issue so much as I just see these 5 dominating everything.
I think that's a valid position, but from the perspective of this thread it doesn't change a ton. Whether it's because of balance or because there are no good players, we just aren't winning. And therefore there's not much hope.
On November 30 2021 23:01 Elantris wrote: I see I see here we've again got a classic "best players just happened to not choose protoss". Somehow this logic never worked in favor of protoss when they managed to win one or two tournaments, always leading to toss nerfs.
Name me 1 foreign Protoss player who can beat Serral in a BO5 lol
In a balanced game Showtime would have been on par with Clem, Serral and Reynor for years already but we are in a different timeline.
...
Despite Protoss's recent struggles against Terran, their win rates in tournaments this year seems just fine.
P = 7 first place and 7 second place Z = 7 first place and 7 second place T = 4 first place and 3 second place
...
This.
Looks like Protoss fans got a small taste of what it feels like being a Terran fan. Yeah, the sky is falling. Okay.
On December 02 2021 08:40 Vindicare605 wrote: What I want to know is, who are the best Protoss players in the world anymore?
Trap is the only one that is a clear answer since Zest is slumping so bad right now and isn't he leaving to the military soon too? Parting would have been a clear answer too, but as everyone should know by now he too is leaving to do his military service.
So who else other than Trap is an elite Protoss? None of the Protoss from Europe have EVER demonstrated that they are anywhere close to the level of the elite Zergs or Terran from that region.
Astrea is hands down the best Protoss in NA, but does anyone really think he's on the same level as a GSL Code S player or the elite of Europe?
Who exactly are the good Protoss players that SHOULD be winning tournaments right now, because I honestly only see Trap as a contender and he's a very inconsistent shaky player that has nerves that will fail him in big games. Who else is out there?
There are 5 players right now that keep winning everything. They are Maru, Dark, Solar, Serral and Reynor. Is there any Protoss player out there that you can say with a straight face that SHOULD be beating these 5 but game balance is getting in the way? Seriously?
I just don't see it. I don't see a balance issue so much as I just see these 5 dominating everything.
I think that's a valid position, but from the perspective of this thread it doesn't change a ton. Whether it's because of balance or because there are no good players, we just aren't winning. And therefore there's not much hope.
Balance is indeed playing a factor, but it's not as overwhelming as this thread is making it. I've already posted the results from this years premier tournaments and the numbers simply do not back up the theory that Protoss can't win at the highest level of play.
But, it's also definitely because of lack of talent. The Korean Protoss players are all retiring or doing military stuff and honestly, foreign Protoss players are just not as good as their Zerg and Terran counterparts. If Showtime was truly as good as Serral, the last time he beat him would have been alot more recent then last year or whenever he last defeated Serral, Serral is the superior player.
This all being said, I've said it once and I'll say it again...
We can probably start thinking about small quality of life adjustments on Gateway units, and/or a potential nerf to EMP radius and either a range or burrow speed reduction for Lurkers, or maybe a HP reduction so Storm deals with them better. It's probably time for Protoss to get a little bit of love, but ya know since ActiBlizzard is crashing and burning this is all wishful thinking.
Blizzard does not give a damn about this game and they haven't for years.
On December 02 2021 08:40 Vindicare605 wrote: What I want to know is, who are the best Protoss players in the world anymore?
Trap is the only one that is a clear answer since Zest is slumping so bad right now and isn't he leaving to the military soon too? Parting would have been a clear answer too, but as everyone should know by now he too is leaving to do his military service.
So who else other than Trap is an elite Protoss? None of the Protoss from Europe have EVER demonstrated that they are anywhere close to the level of the elite Zergs or Terran from that region.
Astrea is hands down the best Protoss in NA, but does anyone really think he's on the same level as a GSL Code S player or the elite of Europe?
Who exactly are the good Protoss players that SHOULD be winning tournaments right now, because I honestly only see Trap as a contender and he's a very inconsistent shaky player that has nerves that will fail him in big games. Who else is out there?
There are 5 players right now that keep winning everything. They are Maru, Dark, Solar, Serral and Reynor. Is there any Protoss player out there that you can say with a straight face that SHOULD be beating these 5 but game balance is getting in the way? Seriously?
I just don't see it. I don't see a balance issue so much as I just see these 5 dominating everything.
I think that's a valid position, but from the perspective of this thread it doesn't change a ton. Whether it's because of balance or because there are no good players, we just aren't winning. And therefore there's not much hope.
Balance is indeed playing a factor, but it's not as overwhelming as this thread is making it. I've already posted the results from this years premier tournaments and the numbers simply do not back up the theory that Protoss can't win at the highest level of play.
But, it's also definitely because of lack of talent. The Korean Protoss players are all retiring or doing military stuff and honestly, foreign Protoss players are just not as good as their Zerg and Terran counterparts. If Showtime was truly as good as Serral, the last time he beat him would have been alot more recent then last year or whenever he last defeated Serral, Serral is the superior player.
This all being said, I've said it once and I'll say it again...
We can probably start thinking about small quality of life adjustments on Gateway units, and/or a potential nerf to EMP radius and either a range or burrow speed reduction for Lurkers, or maybe a HP reduction so Storm deals with them better. It's probably time for Protoss to get a little bit of love, but ya know since ActiBlizzard is crashing and burning this is all wishful thinking.
Blizzard does not give a damn about this game and they haven't for years.
Ah how convenient, a bunch of buffs to Protoss in PvT when the much bigger problem match up is PvZ where Protoss feel if they aren't turtling to Skytoss then they have no chance of winning.
But yea let's make TvP broken again, that will solve the issue.
On December 02 2021 08:40 Vindicare605 wrote: What I want to know is, who are the best Protoss players in the world anymore?
Trap is the only one that is a clear answer since Zest is slumping so bad right now and isn't he leaving to the military soon too? Parting would have been a clear answer too, but as everyone should know by now he too is leaving to do his military service.
So who else other than Trap is an elite Protoss? None of the Protoss from Europe have EVER demonstrated that they are anywhere close to the level of the elite Zergs or Terran from that region.
Astrea is hands down the best Protoss in NA, but does anyone really think he's on the same level as a GSL Code S player or the elite of Europe?
Who exactly are the good Protoss players that SHOULD be winning tournaments right now, because I honestly only see Trap as a contender and he's a very inconsistent shaky player that has nerves that will fail him in big games. Who else is out there?
There are 5 players right now that keep winning everything. They are Maru, Dark, Solar, Serral and Reynor. Is there any Protoss player out there that you can say with a straight face that SHOULD be beating these 5 but game balance is getting in the way? Seriously?
I just don't see it. I don't see a balance issue so much as I just see these 5 dominating everything.
I think that's a valid position, but from the perspective of this thread it doesn't change a ton. Whether it's because of balance or because there are no good players, we just aren't winning. And therefore there's not much hope.
Balance is indeed playing a factor, but it's not as overwhelming as this thread is making it. I've already posted the results from this years premier tournaments and the numbers simply do not back up the theory that Protoss can't win at the highest level of play.
But, it's also definitely because of lack of talent. The Korean Protoss players are all retiring or doing military stuff and honestly, foreign Protoss players are just not as good as their Zerg and Terran counterparts. If Showtime was truly as good as Serral, the last time he beat him would have been alot more recent then last year or whenever he last defeated Serral, Serral is the superior player.
This all being said, I've said it once and I'll say it again...
We can probably start thinking about small quality of life adjustments on Gateway units, and/or a potential nerf to EMP radius and either a range or burrow speed reduction for Lurkers, or maybe a HP reduction so Storm deals with them better. It's probably time for Protoss to get a little bit of love, but ya know since ActiBlizzard is crashing and burning this is all wishful thinking.
Blizzard does not give a damn about this game and they haven't for years.
Ah how convenient, a bunch of buffs to Protoss in PvT when the much bigger problem match up is PvZ where Protoss feel if they aren't turtling to Skytoss then they have no chance of winning.
But yea let's make TvP broken again, that will solve the issue.
I mean, it's not like I'm advocating for all of those ideas to be implemented simultaneously or anything. The Lurker has needed to be toned down for awhile, and there is a bunch of easy ways to nerf that unit imo
It's also possible that Toss is a volatile race by nature. Wins secured by outrageous pimpest plays, losses due to facepalm bloopers. Middle-ground solid play is rarely good enough to win championships.
Think of all the Toss legends - sOs, Zest, Classic, MC. Incredible highs, but also laughable lows.
Now think of solid players - Trap and Stats. Still worthy greats, but still fall short by rookie errors (eg Stats dying to early Ling runby to Rogue). Maybe Toss playstyle is just so unforgiving than it's more optimal to go wild and force mistakes out of your opponents rather than to play more reactive and eliminate mistakes of your own.
It's a pity that Rain dropped out so soon. He's probably the closest player that may could've charted a new destiny for Toss based on solid macro play. Unfortunately, we'll never know how this alternative timeline would've worked out. Right now, we are just left with Trap and Stats being living proof that such playstyle is doomed to the pathway of Kong...
On December 02 2021 13:46 RKC wrote: It's also possible that Toss is a volatile race by nature. Wins secured by outrageous pimpest plays, losses due to facepalm bloopers. Middle-ground solid play is rarely good enough to win championships.
Think of all the Toss legends - sOs, Zest, Classic, MC. Incredible highs, but also laughable lows.
Now think of solid players - Trap and Stats. Still worthy greats, but still fall short by rookie errors (eg Stats dying to early Ling runby to Rogue). Maybe Toss playstyle is just so unforgiving than it's more optimal to go wild and force mistakes out of your opponents rather than to play more reactive and eliminate mistakes of your own.
It's a pity that Rain dropped out so soon. He's probably the closest player that may could've charted a new destiny for Toss based on solid macro play. Unfortunately, we'll never know how this alternative timeline would've worked out. Right now, we are just left with Trap and Stats being living proof that such playstyle is doomed to the pathway of Kong...
Definitely agree on the Rain part. Felt Rain's playstyle would have answered, for me at least, if Toss is just lacking a truly fundamentally sound player.
On December 02 2021 13:46 RKC wrote: It's also possible that Toss is a volatile race by nature. Wins secured by outrageous pimpest plays, losses due to facepalm bloopers. Middle-ground solid play is rarely good enough to win championships.
Think of all the Toss legends - sOs, Zest, Classic, MC. Incredible highs, but also laughable lows.
Now think of solid players - Trap and Stats. Still worthy greats, but still fall short by rookie errors (eg Stats dying to early Ling runby to Rogue). Maybe Toss playstyle is just so unforgiving than it's more optimal to go wild and force mistakes out of your opponents rather than to play more reactive and eliminate mistakes of your own.
It's a pity that Rain dropped out so soon. He's probably the closest player that may could've charted a new destiny for Toss based on solid macro play. Unfortunately, we'll never know how this alternative timeline would've worked out. Right now, we are just left with Trap and Stats being living proof that such playstyle is doomed to the pathway of Kong...
I was reading your post and was about to type "but then there's Rain" and then you mentioned Rain.
Rain is such an enigma in the world of SC2. He's the only Protoss player in the history of the game that had everything from my eye test. He had the mechanics, he had the builds, he had the stamina, the mental fortitude, the game sense, the everything.
Rain was a complete player. He made Protoss look like the way Maru makes Terran look. (And that makes the fact that Maru beat him in the finals all the more impressive btw) or someone like Life made Zerg look.
I've never seen a Protoss to date have the kind of aura that Rain had. Everyone has been as you've said one of two varieties. Classic in his first and last championship run looked like he COULD have had that. Parting at times looked like he could escape the "Micro and Cheesy" stereotype for a moment but then would revert to the mean.
But no one has had the kind of pure SOLID play that Rain had. I wish he had stayed. Protoss really needs a player like him. Trap isn't it, he has too many nerves issues and he falls apart when he's behind. The other Protoss greats are all leaving or going into the military at the moment.
It is a dark time for Protoss. But I do not think game balance is why it's happening.
Protoss is just too reliant on volatility, it doesn’t reward extremely solid mechanical play like Terran or Zerg. Protoss champions have had to be mind game cheese types because that’s what Protoss rewards you for doing, which means the longer the game goes the less cheesy shit will work and the less Protoss will win. Once the Book has been read then Protoss isn’t left with many other strengths.
On December 02 2021 13:46 RKC wrote: It's also possible that Toss is a volatile race by nature. Wins secured by outrageous pimpest plays, losses due to facepalm bloopers. Middle-ground solid play is rarely good enough to win championships.
Think of all the Toss legends - sOs, Zest, Classic, MC. Incredible highs, but also laughable lows.
Now think of solid players - Trap and Stats. Still worthy greats, but still fall short by rookie errors (eg Stats dying to early Ling runby to Rogue). Maybe Toss playstyle is just so unforgiving than it's more optimal to go wild and force mistakes out of your opponents rather than to play more reactive and eliminate mistakes of your own.
It's a pity that Rain dropped out so soon. He's probably the closest player that may could've charted a new destiny for Toss based on solid macro play. Unfortunately, we'll never know how this alternative timeline would've worked out. Right now, we are just left with Trap and Stats being living proof that such playstyle is doomed to the pathway of Kong...
I was reading your post and was about to type "but then there's Rain" and then you mentioned Rain.
Rain is such an enigma in the world of SC2. He's the only Protoss player in the history of the game that had everything from my eye test. He had the mechanics, he had the builds, he had the stamina, the mental fortitude, the game sense, the everything.
Rain was a complete player. He made Protoss look like the way Maru makes Terran look. (And that makes the fact that Maru beat him in the finals all the more impressive btw) or someone like Life made Zerg look.
I've never seen a Protoss to date have the kind of aura that Rain had. Everyone has been as you've said one of two varieties. Classic in his first and last championship run looked like he COULD have had that. Parting at times looked like he could escape the "Micro and Cheesy" stereotype for a moment but then would revert to the mean.
But no one has had the kind of pure SOLID play that Rain had. I wish he had stayed. Protoss really needs a player like him. Trap isn't it, he has too many nerves issues and he falls apart when he's behind. The other Protoss greats are all leaving or going into the military at the moment.
It is a dark time for Protoss. But I do not think game balance is why it's happening.
Yes, I feel Classic was the closest successor to Rain. Then he took a bit of a dark Templar turn before he went to military (but gave us an epic show vs Rogue at Blizzcon - no complaints for that!). Haven't seen much of his games since his return though. Not sure which side of the Toss-up coin he will fall now...
What about Dear? Admittedly I didn't really follow much of his championship run. But his plays during his twilight years has really been sub-par and uninspiring to watch.
On December 02 2021 13:46 RKC wrote: It's also possible that Toss is a volatile race by nature. Wins secured by outrageous pimpest plays, losses due to facepalm bloopers. Middle-ground solid play is rarely good enough to win championships.
Think of all the Toss legends - sOs, Zest, Classic, MC. Incredible highs, but also laughable lows.
Now think of solid players - Trap and Stats. Still worthy greats, but still fall short by rookie errors (eg Stats dying to early Ling runby to Rogue). Maybe Toss playstyle is just so unforgiving than it's more optimal to go wild and force mistakes out of your opponents rather than to play more reactive and eliminate mistakes of your own.
It's a pity that Rain dropped out so soon. He's probably the closest player that may could've charted a new destiny for Toss based on solid macro play. Unfortunately, we'll never know how this alternative timeline would've worked out. Right now, we are just left with Trap and Stats being living proof that such playstyle is doomed to the pathway of Kong...
I was reading your post and was about to type "but then there's Rain" and then you mentioned Rain.
Rain is such an enigma in the world of SC2. He's the only Protoss player in the history of the game that had everything from my eye test. He had the mechanics, he had the builds, he had the stamina, the mental fortitude, the game sense, the everything.
Rain was a complete player. He made Protoss look like the way Maru makes Terran look. (And that makes the fact that Maru beat him in the finals all the more impressive btw) or someone like Life made Zerg look.
I've never seen a Protoss to date have the kind of aura that Rain had. Everyone has been as you've said one of two varieties. Classic in his first and last championship run looked like he COULD have had that. Parting at times looked like he could escape the "Micro and Cheesy" stereotype for a moment but then would revert to the mean.
But no one has had the kind of pure SOLID play that Rain had. I wish he had stayed. Protoss really needs a player like him. Trap isn't it, he has too many nerves issues and he falls apart when he's behind. The other Protoss greats are all leaving or going into the military at the moment.
It is a dark time for Protoss. But I do not think game balance is why it's happening.
Yes, I feel Classic was the closest successor to Rain. Then he took a bit of a dark Templar turn before he went to military (but gave us an epic show vs Rogue at Blizzcon - no complaints for that!). Haven't seen much of his games since his return though. Not sure which side of the Toss-up coin he will fall now...
What about Dear? Admittedly I didn't really follow much of his championship run. But his plays during his twilight years has really been sub-par and uninspiring to watch.
But yes, I miss Rain - both in SC2 and BW
When Dear won GSL and Season finals he looked like that elusive defensive Protoss player. Great defence, great gamesense and knew when to attack. Why he crashed and burned after Blizzcon remains one of the biggest enigmas of Starcraft 2, every other Royal Roader(Zest, Life, Maru) went on to be the greatest of their race. Or maybe its not an enigma, Protoss is not meant to be played as a defensive macro race, its meant to abuse one of the many proxy/cannon/warpgate/DT bullshit. Its why there is no consensus GOAT Protoss, all the good ones come pretty close to each other, because the race allows you to just win a tournament even against better opposition, but it doesn't allow domination.
On December 02 2021 13:46 RKC wrote: It's also possible that Toss is a volatile race by nature. Wins secured by outrageous pimpest plays, losses due to facepalm bloopers. Middle-ground solid play is rarely good enough to win championships.
Think of all the Toss legends - sOs, Zest, Classic, MC. Incredible highs, but also laughable lows.
Now think of solid players - Trap and Stats. Still worthy greats, but still fall short by rookie errors (eg Stats dying to early Ling runby to Rogue). Maybe Toss playstyle is just so unforgiving than it's more optimal to go wild and force mistakes out of your opponents rather than to play more reactive and eliminate mistakes of your own.
It's a pity that Rain dropped out so soon. He's probably the closest player that may could've charted a new destiny for Toss based on solid macro play. Unfortunately, we'll never know how this alternative timeline would've worked out. Right now, we are just left with Trap and Stats being living proof that such playstyle is doomed to the pathway of Kong...
I was reading your post and was about to type "but then there's Rain" and then you mentioned Rain.
Rain is such an enigma in the world of SC2. He's the only Protoss player in the history of the game that had everything from my eye test. He had the mechanics, he had the builds, he had the stamina, the mental fortitude, the game sense, the everything.
Rain was a complete player. He made Protoss look like the way Maru makes Terran look. (And that makes the fact that Maru beat him in the finals all the more impressive btw) or someone like Life made Zerg look.
I've never seen a Protoss to date have the kind of aura that Rain had. Everyone has been as you've said one of two varieties. Classic in his first and last championship run looked like he COULD have had that. Parting at times looked like he could escape the "Micro and Cheesy" stereotype for a moment but then would revert to the mean.
But no one has had the kind of pure SOLID play that Rain had. I wish he had stayed. Protoss really needs a player like him. Trap isn't it, he has too many nerves issues and he falls apart when he's behind. The other Protoss greats are all leaving or going into the military at the moment.
It is a dark time for Protoss. But I do not think game balance is why it's happening.
Yes, I feel Classic was the closest successor to Rain. Then he took a bit of a dark Templar turn before he went to military (but gave us an epic show vs Rogue at Blizzcon - no complaints for that!). Haven't seen much of his games since his return though. Not sure which side of the Toss-up coin he will fall now...
What about Dear? Admittedly I didn't really follow much of his championship run. But his plays during his twilight years has really been sub-par and uninspiring to watch.
But yes, I miss Rain - both in SC2 and BW
When Dear won GSL and Season finals he looked like that elusive defensive Protoss player. Great defence, great gamesense and knew when to attack. Why he crashed and burned after Blizzcon remains one of the biggest enigmas of Starcraft 2, every other Royal Roader(Zest, Life, Maru) went on to be the greatest of their race. Or maybe its not an enigma, Protoss is not meant to be played as a defensive macro race, its meant to abuse one of the many proxy/cannon/warpgate/DT bullshit. Its why there is no consensus GOAT Protoss, all the good ones come pretty close to each other, because the race allows you to just win a tournament even against better opposition, but it doesn't allow domination.
Good insights.
Maybe the difference is that Terran and Zerg can be played offensively and defensively rather seamlessly. Maru, Rogue, and Dark excel due to their killer instincts. But they also have great defensive resilience which allows them to comeback from early game deficits.
Maybe there's something about Toss that makes it difficult for top players to switch between both styles. Personally, as a viewer, Toss under attack just feels under severe intense stress and pressure (remember the time when Zest and Stats just struggled so much against Maru's widow mines drop in HoTS?). Zerg used to suffer a lot, until Queens came to the rescue. So it's not so much of imbalance, but it just takes a very mentally strong player to take the beating and abuse that Toss suffers from Terran and Zerg. So to relieve the stress in a long series against a top class opponent, Toss just has to take the initiative and play funky. Go hard or go home!
Rain seems to have a special Zen-like mindset that plays solid defensive Toss well. But he's really one of a kind...
Rain is one of my absolute GOATs, but one has to remember he played in a less fleshed out era. He laid the groundwork for a solid reactive, complete Protoss, but I don’t think Stats or Classic were really a step down in quality having inherited that kind of mantle.
Us Protoss weren’t exactly spoiled for quality players, we had some of the better BW pros in the Kespa era, so methinks weren’t deficient in players with the mechanical chops to play macro/lategame focused styles.
Parting burst on to prominence with a really hyped macro PvT, before eventually morphing into the Parting of the Soul TrainTM. Creator showed tons of promise and results early as a more cautious player before being on a seemingly endless slump.
Protoss only ever seem to have a build in a matchup for periods, well PvZ especially, not a general approach that they make little tweaks around. Until they’re figured out anyway
Zerg and Terran have builds too of course, but they pull them into a general, more flexible overall game plan that makes use of their stock units.
In a crude sense for Protoss their builds often are the strategy, the other races they’re facilitating the strategy.
I’m unsure how you fix that without a real ground-up redesign.
Terran has the most stable unit composition from WoL to LoTV - marines, medics, tanks.
Zerg is focused on droning and expanding.
Protoss... just seems to be left with 'flavour of the week' builds dependent on meta (if someone did a montage of all top Toss games every expansion, the games would look so different).
So maybe the trouble with Toss players is that they have to keep evolving with the meta and coming up with new strats, which takes up a lot of precious practice time which could be spent simply optimising mechanics.
(But this is not to say that Terran and Zerg players don't need to and can't be as creative as well. The point is that their baseline strategy is rather solid from the start. So when the likes of Maru, Rogue and Dark get creative, it's even harder for Toss to catch up.)
No, its delusion because they didn't win the exact tournaments they wanted, followed by a tantrum because they broke the super tournament Protoss spree. Zerg also spent 4 years without a code S trophy(6 if you follow the official narrative). The race has major design problems, undeniable, but its more than well represented at the top.
Kind of looks like Trap carrying Protoss to me. How many wins does Protoss have without Trap, lol. One NA tournament.
If we exclude the NA stuff because NA is a joke region,
We have Maru, Clem, Cure representing Terran wins,
We have Rogue, Dark, Serral, and Reynor representing Zerg wins,
We have Trap representing Protoss wins.
Thinking Protoss is doing well because the best Protoss player wins is delusional.
Ah yes, welcome to the 2018 Serral discussion
2018 zergs did place well in every foireign tournament even without serral he often went through zvzs alot to win his titles, not the same. Also imagine what would have happened if we had 3 tournaments where in one no terran would have made ro8 and in the other 2 none would have made ro4
edit: more like the 2018 maru discussion where this could be more akin to.
No, its delusion because they didn't win the exact tournaments they wanted, followed by a tantrum because they broke the super tournament Protoss spree. Zerg also spent 4 years without a code S trophy(6 if you follow the official narrative). The race has major design problems, undeniable, but its more than well represented at the top.
I think many (most?) of us are sick of the major design problems and how they manifest. Most visibly in almost any Bo7 with Zerg where the shortcomings of the race are frequently exposed in brutal beat downs.
Some of those smackings still haunt my dreams (poor Trap), and linger beyond the pure numbers, where the Protoss collective hasn’t had too terrible a year.
I don’t like Skytoss either, which has been pretty successful for us, but I don’t really enjoy. So even wins in PvZ are frequently pretty sucky.
I have consistently thought PvT has been a decent matchup for ages, not everyone shares that opinion but regardless who wins the game quality is so much higher than PvZ
Protoss I think to a minor degree struggle in that PvP is a bit more volatile than the other mirrors. The 4 top Zergs are basically the 4 best ZvZ players, Maru and TY before were pre-eminent TvTers. Protoss the best players tend to also be good at PvP, but perhaps don’t have quite the same gap to the tiers below.
I'm looking at the bracket for the ongoing NeXT S2 (Netease Esports X Tournaments/2021/2) and it's amazing to see how from one tournament to the next things can change quickly.
Two weeks ago it was nothing but doom and gloom for Protoss, but now every Protoss rep finishes top of their groups with only one Terran player making it into the Top 8 at all Maru even lost in qualifiers).
It's a good lesson that things can turn around pretty quickly and we should be wary to panic.
And yes, lots of Zergs in this tournament, but notice that the each Protoss group winner had to go through multiple Zergs.
Now...with that all being said...do I have any belief in the world that Serral will lose a ZvP this tournament? No, not at all. Serral v P is absolutely disgusting and I fear the Protoss will almost surely not win the whole thing.
No, its delusion because they didn't win the exact tournaments they wanted, followed by a tantrum because they broke the super tournament Protoss spree. Zerg also spent 4 years without a code S trophy(6 if you follow the official narrative). The race has major design problems, undeniable, but its more than well represented at the top.
I think many (most?) of us are sick of the major design problems and how they manifest. Most visibly in almost any Bo7 with Zerg where the shortcomings of the race are frequently exposed in brutal beat downs.
If that's the case then we need to return to the ultimate actual problem with Protoss.
Warp Gate.
As long as that mechanic exists. Protoss will be an all in or nothing race. That mechanic is holding the race back because it creates so many fucking problems and it always has. Gateway units CANT be what they should be because you can reinforce from anywhere on the map EN MASSE.
If Protoss players ever want to EVER get serious about redesigning their race and to have Gateway units become better and more self sufficient then Warp Gate HAS to go. It's a bad mechanic. I've been saying it for literally 10 years.
We got rid of the Mothership Core because THAT was a horrible crutch that the race depended on way too much and all of the problems that it created. We need to do the same thing with Warp Gate.
Just because it's "cool" doesn't justify keeping it. As an RTS mechanic it is horrible. You cannot just take everything that matters in map design and throw it out the window because you can reinforce from anywhere on the map with as many units as you have Gateways for. You can't just let a race attack you from anywhere because they have a Pylon somewhere.
Gateway units are balanced around all of the bullshit you can do with the Warp Gate mechanic. That means they will ALWAYS be weaker in a straight up fight with the other races unless backed up with support units that come from traditional structures. This is the way that Protoss is designed. This is the reason Protoss has always had this problem in the midgame.
Warp Gate is the problem. It has ALWAYS been the problem. Blizzard even acknowledged as much when they put a heavy nerf on it via the "Gateway or Nexus near it" solution, but that didn't fix it. It couldn't fix it. The mechanic itself is what needs to be overhauled. It needs to function more similar to what the Nydus Worm is. You can still use it with the Warp Prism but not the way it exists now.
No, its delusion because they didn't win the exact tournaments they wanted, followed by a tantrum because they broke the super tournament Protoss spree. Zerg also spent 4 years without a code S trophy(6 if you follow the official narrative). The race has major design problems, undeniable, but its more than well represented at the top.
I think many (most?) of us are sick of the major design problems and how they manifest. Most visibly in almost any Bo7 with Zerg where the shortcomings of the race are frequently exposed in brutal beat downs.
If that's the case then we need to return to the ultimate actual problem with Protoss.
Warp Gate.
As long as that mechanic exists. Protoss will be an all in or nothing race. That mechanic is holding the race back because it creates so many fucking problems and it always has. Gateway units CANT be what they should be because you can reinforce from anywhere on the map EN MASSE.
If Protoss players ever want to EVER get serious about redesigning their race and to have Gateway units become better and more self sufficient then Warp Gate HAS to go. It's a bad mechanic. I've been saying it for literally 10 years.
We got rid of the Mothership Core because THAT was a horrible crutch that the race depended on way too much and all of the problems that it created. We need to do the same thing with Warp Gate.
Just because it's "cool" doesn't justify keeping it. As an RTS mechanic it is horrible. You cannot just take everything that matters in map design and throw it out the window because you can reinforce from anywhere on the map with as many units as you have Gateways for. You can't just let a race attack you from anywhere because they have a Pylon somewhere.
Gateway units are balanced around all of the bullshit you can do with the Warp Gate mechanic. That means they will ALWAYS be weaker in a straight up fight with the other races unless backed up with support units that come from traditional structures. This is the way that Protoss is designed. This is the reason Protoss has always had this problem in the midgame.
Warp Gate is the problem. It has ALWAYS been the problem. Blizzard even acknowledged as much when they put a heavy nerf on it via the "Gateway or Nexus near it" solution, but that didn't fix it. It couldn't fix it. The mechanic itself is what needs to be overhauled. It needs to function more similar to what the Nydus Worm is. You can still use it with the Warp Prism but not the way it exists now.
100% this, been on that train myself for said same decade.
It also is a big part of the frustration other races, especially lower down in level have in playing the race.
I mean it’s not a cool mechanic, it restricts the race’s freedoms in all sorts of ways, but also makes Protoss bloody annoying to face on ladder
If even warp gate existed, but there was a big trade-off like mobility vs production against gateways, of some kind you could have it in some form, or it being tied to the lategame or some combination of both.
Instead it’s outright better than gates, in every way to a baffling degree.
No, its delusion because they didn't win the exact tournaments they wanted, followed by a tantrum because they broke the super tournament Protoss spree. Zerg also spent 4 years without a code S trophy(6 if you follow the official narrative). The race has major design problems, undeniable, but its more than well represented at the top.
I think many (most?) of us are sick of the major design problems and how they manifest. Most visibly in almost any Bo7 with Zerg where the shortcomings of the race are frequently exposed in brutal beat downs.
If that's the case then we need to return to the ultimate actual problem with Protoss.
Warp Gate.
As long as that mechanic exists. Protoss will be an all in or nothing race. That mechanic is holding the race back because it creates so many fucking problems and it always has. Gateway units CANT be what they should be because you can reinforce from anywhere on the map EN MASSE.
If Protoss players ever want to EVER get serious about redesigning their race and to have Gateway units become better and more self sufficient then Warp Gate HAS to go. It's a bad mechanic. I've been saying it for literally 10 years.
We got rid of the Mothership Core because THAT was a horrible crutch that the race depended on way too much and all of the problems that it created. We need to do the same thing with Warp Gate.
Just because it's "cool" doesn't justify keeping it. As an RTS mechanic it is horrible. You cannot just take everything that matters in map design and throw it out the window because you can reinforce from anywhere on the map with as many units as you have Gateways for. You can't just let a race attack you from anywhere because they have a Pylon somewhere.
Gateway units are balanced around all of the bullshit you can do with the Warp Gate mechanic. That means they will ALWAYS be weaker in a straight up fight with the other races unless backed up with support units that come from traditional structures. This is the way that Protoss is designed. This is the reason Protoss has always had this problem in the midgame.
Warp Gate is the problem. It has ALWAYS been the problem. Blizzard even acknowledged as much when they put a heavy nerf on it via the "Gateway or Nexus near it" solution, but that didn't fix it. It couldn't fix it. The mechanic itself is what needs to be overhauled. It needs to function more similar to what the Nydus Worm is. You can still use it with the Warp Prism but not the way it exists now.
100% this, been on that train myself for said same decade.
It also is a big part of the frustration other races, especially lower down in level have in playing the race.
I mean it’s not a cool mechanic, it restricts the race’s freedoms in all sorts of ways, but also makes Protoss bloody annoying to face on ladder
If even warp gate existed, but there was a big trade-off like mobility vs production against gateways, of some kind you could have it in some form, or it being tied to the lategame or some combination of both.
Instead it’s outright better than gates, in every way to a baffling degree.
It also removed the Amulet, which makes templars worse considering the other spellcasters(looking at them bugs especially). Like I get it, warp in - storm - storm, bye bye mineral line, wasn't funny, but ... let's move on xD
No, its delusion because they didn't win the exact tournaments they wanted, followed by a tantrum because they broke the super tournament Protoss spree. Zerg also spent 4 years without a code S trophy(6 if you follow the official narrative). The race has major design problems, undeniable, but its more than well represented at the top.
I think many (most?) of us are sick of the major design problems and how they manifest. Most visibly in almost any Bo7 with Zerg where the shortcomings of the race are frequently exposed in brutal beat downs.
If that's the case then we need to return to the ultimate actual problem with Protoss.
Warp Gate.
As long as that mechanic exists. Protoss will be an all in or nothing race. That mechanic is holding the race back because it creates so many fucking problems and it always has. Gateway units CANT be what they should be because you can reinforce from anywhere on the map EN MASSE.
If Protoss players ever want to EVER get serious about redesigning their race and to have Gateway units become better and more self sufficient then Warp Gate HAS to go. It's a bad mechanic. I've been saying it for literally 10 years.
We got rid of the Mothership Core because THAT was a horrible crutch that the race depended on way too much and all of the problems that it created. We need to do the same thing with Warp Gate.
Just because it's "cool" doesn't justify keeping it. As an RTS mechanic it is horrible. You cannot just take everything that matters in map design and throw it out the window because you can reinforce from anywhere on the map with as many units as you have Gateways for. You can't just let a race attack you from anywhere because they have a Pylon somewhere.
Gateway units are balanced around all of the bullshit you can do with the Warp Gate mechanic. That means they will ALWAYS be weaker in a straight up fight with the other races unless backed up with support units that come from traditional structures. This is the way that Protoss is designed. This is the reason Protoss has always had this problem in the midgame.
Warp Gate is the problem. It has ALWAYS been the problem. Blizzard even acknowledged as much when they put a heavy nerf on it via the "Gateway or Nexus near it" solution, but that didn't fix it. It couldn't fix it. The mechanic itself is what needs to be overhauled. It needs to function more similar to what the Nydus Worm is. You can still use it with the Warp Prism but not the way it exists now.
100% this, been on that train myself for said same decade.
It also is a big part of the frustration other races, especially lower down in level have in playing the race.
I mean it’s not a cool mechanic, it restricts the race’s freedoms in all sorts of ways, but also makes Protoss bloody annoying to face on ladder
If even warp gate existed, but there was a big trade-off like mobility vs production against gateways, of some kind you could have it in some form, or it being tied to the lategame or some combination of both.
Instead it’s outright better than gates, in every way to a baffling degree.
It also removed the Amulet, which makes templars worse considering the other spellcasters(looking at them bugs especially). Like I get it, warp in - storm - storm, bye bye mineral line, wasn't funny, but ... let's move on xD
If you got rid of Warp Gate I would HAPPILY support bringing back Khaydarian Amulet. I would be supportive of a list of different buffs you could give to Gateway units especially at the Twighlight Council or Templar Archives level.
But as long as Warp Gate exists. You just can't do it.
No, its delusion because they didn't win the exact tournaments they wanted, followed by a tantrum because they broke the super tournament Protoss spree. Zerg also spent 4 years without a code S trophy(6 if you follow the official narrative). The race has major design problems, undeniable, but its more than well represented at the top.
You were having such a cool conversation and now you just feel the need to lie about this, I don't understand why.
Yes Warp Gate has fundamentally been an issue with Protoss design since it's beginnings, and of course, Blizzard always knew best so we never got any meaningful overhauls.
Alot of Protoss's current weakness at the top is power creep though imo. Colossus deathballs were standard and powerful, Vipers came out and Zergs became very skilled with using them. Skytoss deathballs were and still are very strong, but Vipers also possess strong counters to it, along with Microbial Shroud. Chargelot/Immortal/Archon was a staple, but then Zerg got Lurkers.
That's why I in all my diamond Zerg meta knowledge, really think a Lurker nerf would be healthy for the game.
#1. Nerf the Lurker, it's too dominant in all the match ups anyways. Reduce it's HP so that storms can deal with them better on the Protoss end, or potentially remove Adaptive Talons from the game entirely. I don't like upgrades that give such volatile power spikes, seems like with Lurkers it's..
#1. The lurkers are out but Protoss doesn't have to be too worried
#2. Okay now they have range so Protoss actually has to respect this
#3. There is now mass Lurkers with Adaptive Talons, if the Protoss isn't on Skytoss his ground army will now proceed to melt.
Probably time for the one guy updating the map pool at Blizzard for SC2 to consider this. I would prefer buffs to Protoss, buffs are always more fun and more invigorating then nerfs, but TvP balance is very delicate, so Blizzard would have to be target down a change that predominantly alters the ZvP match up.
This wouldn't be a balance change as much as a metagame health change.
On December 02 2021 22:57 starvingbox1 wrote: I'm looking at the bracket for the ongoing NeXT S2 (Netease Esports X Tournaments/2021/2) and it's amazing to see how from one tournament to the next things can change quickly.
Two weeks ago it was nothing but doom and gloom for Protoss, but now every Protoss rep finishes top of their groups with only one Terran player making it into the Top 8 at all Maru even lost in qualifiers).
It's a good lesson that things can turn around pretty quickly and we should be wary to panic.
And yes, lots of Zergs in this tournament, but notice that the each Protoss group winner had to go through multiple Zergs.
Now...with that all being said...do I have any belief in the world that Serral will lose a ZvP this tournament? No, not at all. Serral v P is absolutely disgusting and I fear the Protoss will almost surely not win the whole thing.
Kinda fast on the trigger here. There is a very good chance there will be no protoss in the finals.
On December 03 2021 00:13 Beelzebub1 wrote: Yes Warp Gate has fundamentally been an issue with Protoss design since it's beginnings, and of course, Blizzard always knew best so we never got any meaningful overhauls.
Alot of Protoss's current weakness at the top is power creep though imo. Colossus deathballs were standard and powerful, Vipers came out and Zergs became very skilled with using them. Skytoss deathballs were and still are very strong, but Vipers also possess strong counters to it, along with Microbial Shroud. Chargelot/Immortal/Archon was a staple, but then Zerg got Lurkers.
That's why I in all my diamond Zerg meta knowledge, really think a Lurker nerf would be healthy for the game.
#1. Nerf the Lurker, it's too dominant in all the match ups anyways. Reduce it's HP so that storms can deal with them better on the Protoss end, or potentially remove Adaptive Talons from the game entirely. I don't like upgrades that give such volatile power spikes, seems like with Lurkers it's..
#1. The lurkers are out but Protoss doesn't have to be too worried
#2. Okay now they have range so Protoss actually has to respect this
#3. There is now mass Lurkers with Adaptive Talons, if the Protoss isn't on Skytoss his ground army will now proceed to melt.
Probably time for the one guy updating the map pool at Blizzard for SC2 to consider this. I would prefer buffs to Protoss, buffs are always more fun and more invigorating then nerfs, but TvP balance is very delicate, so Blizzard would have to be target down a change that predominantly alters the ZvP match up.
This wouldn't be a balance change as much as a metagame health change.
The Viper exists to counter deathballs. That is what its entire purpose is.
The bigger problem for Protoss is its reliance on death balls in the first place. That's because Gateway units NEED Robotic Bay support to be effective. That reliance on Death Balls is also the main reason Lurkers are so devastating against Protoss in the first place (well that and the way Protoss detection works).
That's because of Warp Gate.
It all goes back to Warp Gate. Warp Gate NEEDS to change if Protoss is going to ever have a chance of being what it can be.
All you have to do is watch a few matches of Brood War to see the difference between a race that has auxiliary units that can be a bonus to its core army, and a race that has an early game army, a midgame army and a late game army with little to no flexibility between them. Warp Gate forces Protoss into predictable unit combinations that has to stay together once they are out of the early game.
If you got rid of Warp Gate you could do so many things to make Protoss better and more versatile.
Really dont think fundamentally changing Protoss as a race at this point is on the cards (removing WG). If it didnt happen at HotS or LotV release it's not going to happen now especially given the lack of investment into the game. Not to mention without a doubt sweeping changes would be imba for a while.
On December 03 2021 01:37 Moonerz wrote: Really dont think fundamentally changing Protoss as a race at this point is on the cards (removing WG). If it didnt happen at HotS or LotV release it's not going to happen now especially given the lack of investment into the game. Not to mention without a doubt sweeping changes would be imba for a while.
I agree, but that isn't the point.
If this thread wants to talk about Protoss as a whole, this topic NEEDS to be a part of it. We can't forget that Warp Gate is a problem just because Blizzard is unlikely to do anything about it.
Maybe now that David Kim is no longer the main balance designer, and maybe now that the game is only in the hands of a handful of interns that we actually have a chance it MIGHT happen.
Either way. The point stands. Warp Gate is a key reason why Protoss has this dillemna of being overpowered on the ladder and lackluster at the pro level. That isn't going to change whether or not Blizzard does anything about it.
On December 03 2021 01:37 Moonerz wrote: Really dont think fundamentally changing Protoss as a race at this point is on the cards (removing WG). If it didnt happen at HotS or LotV release it's not going to happen now especially given the lack of investment into the game. Not to mention without a doubt sweeping changes would be imba for a while.
I agree, but that isn't the point.
If this thread wants to talk about Protoss as a whole, this topic NEEDS to be a part of it. We can't forget that Warp Gate is a problem just because Blizzard is unlikely to do anything about it.
Maybe now that David Kim is no longer the main balance designer, and maybe now that the game is only in the hands of a handful of interns that we actually have a chance it MIGHT happen.
Either way. The point stands. Warp Gate is a key reason why Protoss has this dillemna of being overpowered on the ladder and lackluster at the pro level. That isn't going to change whether or not Blizzard does anything about it.
It's not going to happen. I don't get why people are still hoping some miracle will happen. And even if it happens it is the same Blizzard which gave us this.
Also stop blaming David, he's gone for such a long time now it's not even funny.
On December 03 2021 01:37 Moonerz wrote: Really dont think fundamentally changing Protoss as a race at this point is on the cards (removing WG). If it didnt happen at HotS or LotV release it's not going to happen now especially given the lack of investment into the game. Not to mention without a doubt sweeping changes would be imba for a while.
I agree, but that isn't the point.
If this thread wants to talk about Protoss as a whole, this topic NEEDS to be a part of it. We can't forget that Warp Gate is a problem just because Blizzard is unlikely to do anything about it.
Maybe now that David Kim is no longer the main balance designer, and maybe now that the game is only in the hands of a handful of interns that we actually have a chance it MIGHT happen.
Either way. The point stands. Warp Gate is a key reason why Protoss has this dillemna of being overpowered on the ladder and lackluster at the pro level. That isn't going to change whether or not Blizzard does anything about it.
It's not going to happen. I don't get why people are still hoping some miracle will happen. And even if it happens it is the same Blizzard which gave us this.
Also stop blaming David, he's gone for such a long time now it's not even funny.
He still was a huge part of the team that built the game
Neither me, nor I believe Vindicare believe they’ll ever touch warp gate, doesn’t mean that it’s not at the core of the fundamental problems of the race.
I’ve never played another RTS where as a core production mechanic you can teleport your forces anywhere on the map provided you have one structure/unit there
There is a good, good reason for that.
I’m personally of the opinion that SC2’s balance team have done the greatest job of any RTS balance team ever because they’ve made a game that’s basically balanced with such a fundamentally broken mechanic at its core.
Whether the core design is good or not, (it’s not) the actual balance of SC2 is absolutely miraculous
On December 03 2021 01:37 Moonerz wrote: Really dont think fundamentally changing Protoss as a race at this point is on the cards (removing WG). If it didnt happen at HotS or LotV release it's not going to happen now especially given the lack of investment into the game. Not to mention without a doubt sweeping changes would be imba for a while.
I agree, but that isn't the point.
If this thread wants to talk about Protoss as a whole, this topic NEEDS to be a part of it. We can't forget that Warp Gate is a problem just because Blizzard is unlikely to do anything about it.
Maybe now that David Kim is no longer the main balance designer, and maybe now that the game is only in the hands of a handful of interns that we actually have a chance it MIGHT happen.
Either way. The point stands. Warp Gate is a key reason why Protoss has this dillemna of being overpowered on the ladder and lackluster at the pro level. That isn't going to change whether or not Blizzard does anything about it.
It's not going to happen. I don't get why people are still hoping some miracle will happen. And even if it happens it is the same Blizzard which gave us this.
Also stop blaming David, he's gone for such a long time now it's not even funny.
No I will continue blaming David Kim because he was the one that said that Warp Gate was "too cool" of a mechanic to ever get rid of.
That was HIS design philosophy. He was the lead fucking balance designer for christ's sake, and he decided that something that looked cool was worth keeping just because it looked cool even though it was even more obvious in WoL than it is now that it was a MASSIVE fucking problem.
No, he doesn't get to escape blame just because he's gone now. This is still HIS mess that HE should have fixed, not left it to others to fix for him.
If I took a shit on the lawn of someone else's house. I don't get to just say that it's not my problem anymore just because I'm 2 blocks away now. I was the one that made the mess. I'm the one that deserves the blame for it. David Kim is the same way.
Was templars throwing storm on workers really that big of a problem? I can't really remember complaints about that. Baneling rollins are instant and probably what is the most difficult to react to for all races, except perhaps zerg thanks to creep.
On December 03 2021 00:13 Beelzebub1 wrote: Yes Warp Gate has fundamentally been an issue with Protoss design since it's beginnings, and of course, Blizzard always knew best so we never got any meaningful overhauls.
Alot of Protoss's current weakness at the top is power creep though imo. Colossus deathballs were standard and powerful, Vipers came out and Zergs became very skilled with using them. Skytoss deathballs were and still are very strong, but Vipers also possess strong counters to it, along with Microbial Shroud. Chargelot/Immortal/Archon was a staple, but then Zerg got Lurkers.
That's why I in all my diamond Zerg meta knowledge, really think a Lurker nerf would be healthy for the game.
#1. Nerf the Lurker, it's too dominant in all the match ups anyways. Reduce it's HP so that storms can deal with them better on the Protoss end, or potentially remove Adaptive Talons from the game entirely. I don't like upgrades that give such volatile power spikes, seems like with Lurkers it's..
#1. The lurkers are out but Protoss doesn't have to be too worried
#2. Okay now they have range so Protoss actually has to respect this
#3. There is now mass Lurkers with Adaptive Talons, if the Protoss isn't on Skytoss his ground army will now proceed to melt.
Probably time for the one guy updating the map pool at Blizzard for SC2 to consider this. I would prefer buffs to Protoss, buffs are always more fun and more invigorating then nerfs, but TvP balance is very delicate, so Blizzard would have to be target down a change that predominantly alters the ZvP match up.
This wouldn't be a balance change as much as a metagame health change.
But that is always the crux in asymetrical race design. SC2 is pretty much the only RTS with such unique races, which is especially apparent once you compare it to AOE 4. It is actually amazing that the balance is this good, where all races win approximately the same premier tournaments and the winners and runner ups are similar among all races (Premier Tournaments; 3T 4P 6Z distinct players and 4T 7P 8Z wins).
Warpgates are something easy to fixate on. Personally I think it's a cool mechanic especially after the fast warp in change. I think one of the biggest issues is that Toss was hurt the most by the LotV mineral patch changes requiring them to spread themselves thinner than before (which we all know Toss struggles when they need to split their army). I dont think this was ever really addressed. Not to mention the anti death ball tech Viper and Lurker.
I'm sure people have and still do think the larva mechanic is imba for example but thats a defining characteristic of zerg.
For example Sentries are something I would love to see get re-worked or even replaced with another unit.
On December 03 2021 03:34 Calliope wrote: Was templars throwing storm on workers really that big of a problem? I can't really remember complaints about that. Baneling rollins are instant and probably what is the most difficult to react to for all races, except perhaps zerg thanks to creep.
Yes. Albeit not so much on workers as well, on everything.
Be it flanks, backstabs or just generally reinforcing pushes, being able to spawn a Templar with energy for a storm, anywhere you had a pylon/prism was broken enough when players were relatively bad, god knows how broken it would be now.
Baneling runbys are borderline instant they still take time to move across the map, you can track movement.
Especially for Terran, trying to traverse the map where Templar can be warped in, basically anywhere in the shadows and storm you is an experience in horrific tension and dread like you’d see in a Vietnam war film.
People already (sometimes rightly) complain about how frustrating it is tracking Disruptors and having 10 range death balls emerge through the fog. Disruptors are at least big, slow and rally from a robo. Now imagine you can teleport multiple units with storm into the front lines, or in flanking positions, or ready to drop workers.
The Amulet of Electrical Death was considered broken in an era where Protoss barely used Warp Prisms, some may think I’m being hyperbolic but now prisms are standard, as well as generally bigger maps spread out across more fronts I think a Protoss with amulet again would be up there with the most broken/absolutely frustrating things to play against SC2 has ever seen
On December 03 2021 03:55 Moonerz wrote: Warpgates are something easy to fixate on. Personally I think it's a cool mechanic especially after the fast warp in change. I think one of the biggest issues is that Toss was hurt the most by the LotV mineral patch changes requiring them to spread themselves thinner than before (which we all know Toss struggles when they need to split their army). I dont think this was ever really addressed. Not to mention the anti death ball tech Viper and Lurker.
I'm sure people have and still do think the larva mechanic is imba for example but thats a defining characteristic of zerg.
For example Sentries are something I would love to see get re-worked or even replaced with another unit.
I also would like for Sentries to be reworked, something that bolsters the overall effectiveness of gateway armies. Something along the lines of boosting Guardian Shield, which was an awesome idea 8 years ago but I think it's just kind of in need of a tune up.
Guardian shield say, also boosting movement speed and/or attack speed of gateway units?
I still think big ambitious changes like that are more or less off the table, I think for now a slight nerf to the Lurker would probably just be easier to implement and would be healthier overall for the state of the game.
Sentries having a new better Guardian Shield would be nice, only works on ground units, maybe just make it reduce all incomes attacks by two instead of only ranged ones. Maybe have it let shields regen in combat while its active or something. I dunno, its an interesting avenue to theorycraft ideas for though. I like the idea of having a core unit that can be shot down to earn an advantage in the middle of a fight as opposed to units that front load their utility at the start like Ghosts or Templar. The pre-fight caster dancing is fun and all but it makes the fights themselves worse.
On December 03 2021 12:34 Zambrah wrote: Sentries having a new better Guardian Shield would be nice, only works on ground units, maybe just make it reduce all incomes attacks by two instead of only ranged ones. Maybe have it let shields regen in combat while its active or something. I dunno, its an interesting avenue to theorycraft ideas for though. I like the idea of having a core unit that can be shot down to earn an advantage in the middle of a fight as opposed to units that front load their utility at the start like Ghosts or Templar. The pre-fight caster dancing is fun and all but it makes the fights themselves worse.
I think it's pretty fair considering force field is more or less obsolete. I mean I know every once in awhile we still get sick force fields but now with Bile it's few and far between compared to the past expansions were force fields were a massive part of high level Protoss play.
It would be a nice entirely targetted vs Zerg Protoss buff to have Guardian Shield work against non ranged attacks too now that I think about it. Maybe too strong against Zerglings though?
On December 03 2021 12:34 Zambrah wrote: Sentries having a new better Guardian Shield would be nice, only works on ground units, maybe just make it reduce all incomes attacks by two instead of only ranged ones. Maybe have it let shields regen in combat while its active or something. I dunno, its an interesting avenue to theorycraft ideas for though. I like the idea of having a core unit that can be shot down to earn an advantage in the middle of a fight as opposed to units that front load their utility at the start like Ghosts or Templar. The pre-fight caster dancing is fun and all but it makes the fights themselves worse.
since when? It works on air, it used to be a thing to warp in a sentry in phoenix v phoenix and fight over it. The issue is that sentry is instantly dead against anything air that makes sense to counter, in this case mostly BC and Carrier, costs 100 gas, is slow and is ground.
But I may have missed the change, wouldn't be first time xD
I meant if Guardian Shield was changed to only work on ground units. I'm tired of Protoss air, I don't want any excuses for a buffed Sentry to promote more air-ballin'
On December 03 2021 03:34 Calliope wrote: Was templars throwing storm on workers really that big of a problem? I can't really remember complaints about that. Baneling rollins are instant and probably what is the most difficult to react to for all races, except perhaps zerg thanks to creep.
The Khaydarin Amulet upgrade meant that Protoss could easily defend Terran drops by warping in High Templar that could immediately cast Psionic Storm. This made it much harder for Terran to abuse the immobility of the Protoss deathball because it essentially meant that it was impossible for Protoss to be out-of-position.
On December 03 2021 03:34 Calliope wrote: Was templars throwing storm on workers really that big of a problem? I can't really remember complaints about that. Baneling rollins are instant and probably what is the most difficult to react to for all races, except perhaps zerg thanks to creep.
It was during beta IIRC and it was so much broken it wasn't even funny. It was one of those stupid things you already forgot. Similar to high ground warp ins or ramps to main wider than 1 force field. Or 1-supply roach.
No, its delusion because they didn't win the exact tournaments they wanted, followed by a tantrum because they broke the super tournament Protoss spree. Zerg also spent 4 years without a code S trophy(6 if you follow the official narrative). The race has major design problems, undeniable, but its more than well represented at the top.
You were having such a cool conversation and now you just feel the need to lie about this, I don't understand why.
I really don't think Protoss had a bad year, if you look only at first places, sure, but the race seems well represented at the top. It has massive design problems, it has advantages and struggles no other race has, but do i think its bad enough to warrant a thread asking if there's hope? No. Does it have hope to win a Katowice or GSL? Absolutely. Not so much hope on the race having a stable standard playstyle or getting reworked.
Not so much hope on the race having a stable standard playstyle or getting reworked.
This is basically the problem.
As mentioned much earlier in the thread by Teoita:
I would be interested to see what the Protoss win rate is as a function of series duration.I wouldn't be surprised if it went from being pretty good in Bo3s (we can always open the Great Book in a pinch), to average in Bo5s, to pretty crap in Bo7s.
No, its delusion because they didn't win the exact tournaments they wanted, followed by a tantrum because they broke the super tournament Protoss spree. Zerg also spent 4 years without a code S trophy(6 if you follow the official narrative). The race has major design problems, undeniable, but its more than well represented at the top.
You were having such a cool conversation and now you just feel the need to lie about this, I don't understand why.
I really don't think Protoss had a bad year, if you look only at first places, sure, but the race seems well represented at the top. It has massive design problems, it has advantages and struggles no other race has, but do i think its bad enough to warrant a thread asking if there's hope? No. Does it have hope to win a Katowice or GSL? Absolutely. Not so much hope on the race having a stable standard playstyle or getting reworked.
I mean... Trap is well represented at the top anyways.
I would be interested to see what the Protoss win rate is as a function of series duration.I wouldn't be surprised if it went from being pretty good in Bo3s (we can always open the Great Book in a pinch), to average in Bo5s, to pretty crap in Bo7s.
That's doubtful. There's plenty of 2nd places from Korea where usually you have BO7 semis and finals. It won't look as bad especially for the whole LotV era because we had some Protoss success there. But I don't have the data for it as I am really lazy to do that manually
No, its delusion because they didn't win the exact tournaments they wanted, followed by a tantrum because they broke the super tournament Protoss spree. Zerg also spent 4 years without a code S trophy(6 if you follow the official narrative). The race has major design problems, undeniable, but its more than well represented at the top.
You were having such a cool conversation and now you just feel the need to lie about this, I don't understand why.
I really don't think Protoss had a bad year, if you look only at first places, sure, but the race seems well represented at the top. It has massive design problems, it has advantages and struggles no other race has, but do i think its bad enough to warrant a thread asking if there's hope? No. Does it have hope to win a Katowice or GSL? Absolutely. Not so much hope on the race having a stable standard playstyle or getting reworked.
I mean... Trap is well represented at the top anyways.
Neeb has 2 premier titles and one 2nd place. Zest has 2 premier 2nd places as does Zoun.
Sure, Trap is miles ahead this year thanks to his 5 titles and 2 2nd places, but it's not like other Protosses doesn't exist. Especially when two finals were PvP. And when Zest got the 2nd place at IEM.
Are we really going to count NA though? Neeb winning NA isn't really indicative of anything because NA is a pretty low-skill region.
I think its telling that Protoss is the only race with all of one player that actually manages to win tournaments, Zerg and Terran each have at least three winning players.
On December 03 2021 20:58 Zambrah wrote: Are we really going to count NA though? Neeb winning NA isn't really indicative of anything because NA is a pretty low-skill region.
I think its telling that Protoss is the only race with all of one player that actually manages to win tournaments, Zerg and Terran each have at least three winning players.
Counterpoing - Scarlett got recently a nice top4 placement in the Winter finals.
As long as it is in the premier tournament category it has to be counted.
Edit> ah, the 2nd part of the problem. Stats, Classic, Zest had some great results in the past. Then the army called and Zest started being even more random in being Zest.
While the most of the Terran success lies on the back of Maru. IF you remove Maru from the equation you have the EU success of Clem(how often does he win the international tournaments?) and occassional Cure. The only race who has true several champions at this moment are Zergs.
EU as a region is good enough to warrant inclusion though, Serral, Clem, and Reynor are all international quality players, they can and do win/go deep, whereas like Neeb isn't really a contender, Scarlett kind of sometimes goes slightly deep but shes not a Reynor, Clem or Serral quality player.
I disagree with including any primarily NA tournaments, the skill level is just not in the realm of KR/EU.
On December 03 2021 21:17 Zambrah wrote: EU as a region is good enough to warrant inclusion though, Serral, Clem, and Reynor are all international quality players, they can and do win/go deep, whereas like Neeb isn't really a contender, Scarlett kind of sometimes goes slightly deep but shes not a Reynor, Clem or Serral quality player.
I disagree with including any primarily NA tournaments, the skill level is just not in the realm of KR/EU.
King of Battles 2 was a major tournament while it had bigger competition level than premier EU. Deal with it.
On December 03 2021 20:58 Zambrah wrote: Are we really going to count NA though? Neeb winning NA isn't really indicative of anything because NA is a pretty low-skill region.
I think its telling that Protoss is the only race with all of one player that actually manages to win tournaments, Zerg and Terran each have at least three winning players.
Counterpoing - Scarlett got recently a nice top4 placement in the Winter finals.
As long as it is in the premier tournament category it has to be counted.
Edit> ah, the 2nd part of the problem. Stats, Classic, Zest had some great results in the past. Then the army called and Zest started being even more random in being Zest.
While the most of the Terran success lies on the back of Maru. IF you remove Maru from the equation you have the EU success of Clem(how often does he win the international tournaments?) and occassional Cure. The only race who has true several champions at this moment are Zergs.
If you wanna argue for toss doing well counting NA is just weakening your arguments substantially, a region with 3 competitve players and 2 of them are protoss, protoss has to do well. Counting NA is not smth worthwhile for the discussion.
On December 03 2021 20:58 Zambrah wrote: Are we really going to count NA though? Neeb winning NA isn't really indicative of anything because NA is a pretty low-skill region.
I think its telling that Protoss is the only race with all of one player that actually manages to win tournaments, Zerg and Terran each have at least three winning players.
Counterpoing - Scarlett got recently a nice top4 placement in the Winter finals.
As long as it is in the premier tournament category it has to be counted.
Edit> ah, the 2nd part of the problem. Stats, Classic, Zest had some great results in the past. Then the army called and Zest started being even more random in being Zest.
While the most of the Terran success lies on the back of Maru. IF you remove Maru from the equation you have the EU success of Clem(how often does he win the international tournaments?) and occassional Cure. The only race who has true several champions at this moment are Zergs.
If you wanna argue for toss doing well counting NA is just weakening your arguments substantially, a region with 3 competitve players and 2 of them are protoss, protoss has to do well. Counting NA is not smth worthwhile for the discussion.
Whut? Notice, that when I argue that Protoss does well I rarely mention Neeb. This is not what I am doing. What I am saying is that both Terran and Protoss are FUBAR and Zergs are much stronger. Terran has the worst numbers and everybody is crazy about Protoss, because fuck Terrans, right? They have Maru.
On December 03 2021 20:58 Zambrah wrote: Are we really going to count NA though? Neeb winning NA isn't really indicative of anything because NA is a pretty low-skill region.
I think its telling that Protoss is the only race with all of one player that actually manages to win tournaments, Zerg and Terran each have at least three winning players.
Counterpoing - Scarlett got recently a nice top4 placement in the Winter finals.
As long as it is in the premier tournament category it has to be counted.
Edit> ah, the 2nd part of the problem. Stats, Classic, Zest had some great results in the past. Then the army called and Zest started being even more random in being Zest.
While the most of the Terran success lies on the back of Maru. IF you remove Maru from the equation you have the EU success of Clem(how often does he win the international tournaments?) and occassional Cure. The only race who has true several champions at this moment are Zergs.
If you wanna argue for toss doing well counting NA is just weakening your arguments substantially, a region with 3 competitve players and 2 of them are protoss, protoss has to do well. Counting NA is not smth worthwhile for the discussion.
Whut? Notice, that when I argue that Protoss does well I rarely mention Neeb. This is not what I am doing. What I am saying is that both Terran and Protoss are FUBAR and Zergs are much stronger. Terran has the worst numbers and everybody is crazy about Protoss, because fuck Terrans, right? They have Maru.
Well discussion was about counting NA, which is what my statement was about. I don't think most tosses wanna argue about Terran numbers. But they have more than Maru too with Clem performing well in eu + season finals, Heromarine doing some good runs and cure winning GSL etc.
Edit: fwiw I don't think the game is too unbalanced ATM, just some problematic interactions in the mus make it less enjoyable currently. Doesn't help that the last events tosses underperformed a bit.
On December 03 2021 21:17 Zambrah wrote: EU as a region is good enough to warrant inclusion though, Serral, Clem, and Reynor are all international quality players, they can and do win/go deep, whereas like Neeb isn't really a contender, Scarlett kind of sometimes goes slightly deep but shes not a Reynor, Clem or Serral quality player.
I disagree with including any primarily NA tournaments, the skill level is just not in the realm of KR/EU.
King of Battles 2 was a major tournament while it had bigger competition level than premier EU. Deal with it.
Sure if you want to look at Major events this year I see all of... one Zerg winner, and man what a talent pool, we can't count out the likes of Seither, and Cyan when it comes to being able to take a high stakes international tournament. I mean really, who doesn't count Oceania, LA, HK/TW, and China as absolute bastions of skill, lol.
So lets cut the obvious chaf regions and look at tournaments that garner some level of actual respect based on the players involved (aka a decent quantity of Korean or high tier EU players)
King of Battles 2, 1st Terran, 2nd Zerg PiG Sty Festival, 1st Zerg, 2nd Zerg StayAtHomeStory Cup 4, 1st Terran, 2nd Zerg ASUS ROG Fall 2021, 1st Terran, 2nd Zerg WardiTV Spring Championship 2021, 1st Protoss, 2nd Terran StayAtHomeStory Cup 3, 1st Protoss, 2nd Zerg Cheeseadelphia Winter Championship 2021, 1st Terran, 2nd Zerg
Pulled from Liquipedia,
Zest is the lone Protoss winner here (also the only one to appear in any of these finals), Terran has three winners in Maru, ByuN, and Clem, and Zerg has all of one winner in Serral.
Expanding to respectable major tournament doesn't really paint a great picture for Protoss either, it leaves us with
Zest and Trap for Protoss,
Maru, ByuN, Clem, and Cure for Terran,
Serral, Reynor, Rogue, and Dark for Zerg,
Protoss is clearly experiencing some sort of issue here. If you look at the situation right now its clear if at least one of their two top players isnt in peak form Protoss is basically a non-factor.
Lets not fuckin' pretend like Maru is carrying Terran, bare assed minimum Cure is actively playing at a high level and is capable of winning tournaments, he didnt slump into oblivion after losing like Zest.
On December 03 2021 21:17 Zambrah wrote: EU as a region is good enough to warrant inclusion though, Serral, Clem, and Reynor are all international quality players, they can and do win/go deep, whereas like Neeb isn't really a contender, Scarlett kind of sometimes goes slightly deep but shes not a Reynor, Clem or Serral quality player.
I disagree with including any primarily NA tournaments, the skill level is just not in the realm of KR/EU.
King of Battles 2 was a major tournament while it had bigger competition level than premier EU. Deal with it.
Sure if you want to look at Major events this year I see all of... one Zerg winner, and man what a talent pool, we can't count out the likes of Seither, and Cyan when it comes to being able to take a high stakes international tournament. I mean really, who doesn't count Oceania, LA, HK/TW, and China as absolute bastions of skill, lol.
So lets cut the obvious chaf regions and look at tournaments that garner some level of actual respect based on the players involved (aka a decent quantity of Korean or high tier EU players)
King of Battles 2, 1st Terran, 2nd Zerg PiG Sty Festival, 1st Zerg, 2nd Zerg StayAtHomeStory Cup 4, 1st Terran, 2nd Zerg ASUS ROG Fall 2021, 1st Terran, 2nd Zerg WardiTV Spring Championship 2021, 1st Protoss, 2nd Terran StayAtHomeStory Cup 3, 1st Protoss, 2nd Zerg Cheeseadelphia Winter Championship 2021, 1st Terran, 2nd Zerg
Pulled from Liquipedia,
Zest is the lone Protoss winner here (also the only one to appear in any of these finals), Terran has three winners in Maru, ByuN, and Clem, and Zerg has all of one winner in Serral.
Expanding to respectable major tournament doesn't really paint a great picture for Protoss either, it leaves us with
Zest and Trap for Protoss,
Maru, ByuN, Clem, and Cure for Terran,
Serral, Reynor, Rogue, and Dark for Zerg,
Protoss is clearly experiencing some sort of issue here. If you look at the situation right now its clear if at least one of their two top players isnt in peak form Protoss is basically a non-factor.
Lets not fuckin' pretend like Maru is carrying Terran, bare assed minimum Cure is actively playing at a high level and is capable of winning tournaments, he didnt slump into oblivion after losing like Zest.
Protoss is not experiencing a balance issue and most of the Terran victories from the current years is on Maru, some TY, casually Cure and Clem in EU. Most of the protoss wins were done by players in the military or recently returned. That's the Protoss situation. yes, it's bad, because Classic, Stats and herO got interrupted by the military. Thus we got left with Trap, Zoun and Zest.
Edit> And you missed the point by a mile, that KOB2 is major and NA is premier. Deal with it or change categories. And read what I reply to.
No, its delusion because they didn't win the exact tournaments they wanted, followed by a tantrum because they broke the super tournament Protoss spree. Zerg also spent 4 years without a code S trophy(6 if you follow the official narrative). The race has major design problems, undeniable, but its more than well represented at the top.
You were having such a cool conversation and now you just feel the need to lie about this, I don't understand why.
I really don't think Protoss had a bad year, if you look only at first places, sure, but the race seems well represented at the top. It has massive design problems, it has advantages and struggles no other race has, but do i think its bad enough to warrant a thread asking if there's hope? No. Does it have hope to win a Katowice or GSL? Absolutely. Not so much hope on the race having a stable standard playstyle or getting reworked.
The top 5 of protoss has literally never been the best top 5 of the three races in all of LotV. It has been the weakest of the three races for every period since 2018. Sometimes it was the weakest by 5%, in the last few ones we're more around 20%.
My expectation is that in the biggest tournaments, the people who are going to win are likely to be in the top 5 of their race. Arguably in the top 3. This should lead you to draw some conclusions.
Just hear players talk about the game. Rogue was interviewed about who he was fearful of and he said Maru, Serral, Reynor, and... Clem I think? Not sure about the 4th one but it wasn't a protoss. Why doesn't Rogue fear protoss, is he some sort of idiot that can't tell who is likely to win?
Just hear casters talk about the game. Sometimes you have someone up 2-0 against Clem or Serral in a Bo5 and you can still get from their commentary that they think Serral or Clem is something like 55-60% to win the series. When Maxpax is down 0-2 vs Heromarine, they're at like 10%.
Just hear this thread talk about the game. Everyone is like "oh yeah there's hope for protoss, however I won't bet with you that they'll win Katowice (or a string of tournaments) while getting 10 to 1".
I honestly believe that a bunch of you think any terran/zerg is deserving of winning against any protoss, and so you see stuff like Marinelord losing against Showtime and there's this anger about better tools that overtakes you and makes you think protoss wins more often than it does. It doesn't.
Protoss is not experiencing a balance issue and most of the Terran victories from the current years is on Maru, some TY, casually Cure and Clem in EU. Most of the protoss wins were done by players in the military or recently returned. That's the Protoss situation. yes, it's bad, because Classic, Stats and herO got interrupted by the military. Thus we got left with Trap, Zoun and Zest.
Edit> And you missed the point by a mile, that KOB2 is major and NA is premier. Deal with it or change categories. And read what I reply to.
What are you saying there?
What does King of Battles 2 having a stacked roster have to do with EU premier tournaments? Are you trying to say that EU is a low skill region and is invalid because that would be fucking stupid.
Premiers are discussed because theyre considered the pinnacle of tournaments, what is your point exactly? "Change categories," you mean like listing the Major tournaments with respectable rosters? That doesn't make Protoss look good, Terran did better than Protoss in Majors and Premiers, lol.
The only thing Protoss excels at is winning in the low-level regions like NA/TW/HK/Oceania, etc.
On December 03 2021 20:58 Zambrah wrote: Are we really going to count NA though? Neeb winning NA isn't really indicative of anything because NA is a pretty low-skill region.
I think its telling that Protoss is the only race with all of one player that actually manages to win tournaments, Zerg and Terran each have at least three winning players.
Counterpoing - Scarlett got recently a nice top4 placement in the Winter finals.
As long as it is in the premier tournament category it has to be counted.
Edit> ah, the 2nd part of the problem. Stats, Classic, Zest had some great results in the past. Then the army called and Zest started being even more random in being Zest.
While the most of the Terran success lies on the back of Maru. IF you remove Maru from the equation you have the EU success of Clem(how often does he win the international tournaments?) and occassional Cure. The only race who has true several champions at this moment are Zergs.
If you wanna argue for toss doing well counting NA is just weakening your arguments substantially, a region with 3 competitve players and 2 of them are protoss, protoss has to do well. Counting NA is not smth worthwhile for the discussion.
Whut? Notice, that when I argue that Protoss does well I rarely mention Neeb. This is not what I am doing. What I am saying is that both Terran and Protoss are FUBAR and Zergs are much stronger. Terran has the worst numbers and everybody is crazy about Protoss, because fuck Terrans, right? They have Maru.
In the period where Trap has been the only Protoss to get wins, not just Maru, but also Cure and Ty have won tournaments. That's two more champions for the "carried by Maru" race, what are you talking about?
On December 03 2021 20:58 Zambrah wrote: Are we really going to count NA though? Neeb winning NA isn't really indicative of anything because NA is a pretty low-skill region.
I think its telling that Protoss is the only race with all of one player that actually manages to win tournaments, Zerg and Terran each have at least three winning players.
Counterpoing - Scarlett got recently a nice top4 placement in the Winter finals.
As long as it is in the premier tournament category it has to be counted.
To clarify, Maru has been carrying the Terran banner for a very, very long time. TY and Cure are very recent compared to how long Maru has been carrying Terrans.
Edit> ah, the 2nd part of the problem. Stats, Classic, Zest had some great results in the past. Then the army called and Zest started being even more random in being Zest.
While the most of the Terran success lies on the back of Maru. IF you remove Maru from the equation you have the EU success of Clem(how often does he win the international tournaments?) and occassional Cure. The only race who has true several champions at this moment are Zergs.
If you wanna argue for toss doing well counting NA is just weakening your arguments substantially, a region with 3 competitve players and 2 of them are protoss, protoss has to do well. Counting NA is not smth worthwhile for the discussion.
Whut? Notice, that when I argue that Protoss does well I rarely mention Neeb. This is not what I am doing. What I am saying is that both Terran and Protoss are FUBAR and Zergs are much stronger. Terran has the worst numbers and everybody is crazy about Protoss, because fuck Terrans, right? They have Maru.
In the period where Trap has been the only Protoss to get wins, not just Maru, but also Cure and Ty have won tournaments. That's two more champions for the "carried by Maru" race, what are you talking about?
Talking about a period that goes beyond where Trap was the Maru for your race. I presume.
I dont see the problem with wanting the race to do good in the tournaments with the HIGHEST stakes and MOST viewers not just some 2nd tier tournaments.
On December 04 2021 22:33 deacon.frost wrote: Everybody be like - we want Protoss win a premier trophy. Look at NA. NOT THAT KIND OF PREMIER TROPHY. ST1 and 2? NOT THAT KIND OF PREMIER TROPHY.
Kinda reminds me spoiled children. I would want to see a different world champion than a zerg and hey, tough luck, huh?
Trap is carrying Protoss. Deal with it.
EDIT: Sorry, WAS carrying Protoss, noone is carrying Protoss right now.
On December 04 2021 22:33 deacon.frost wrote: Kinda reminds me spoiled children. I would want to see a different world champion than a zerg and hey, tough luck, huh?
You realize last time protoss won blizzcon in HotS?
Protoss is not experiencing a balance issue and most of the Terran victories from the current years is on Maru, some TY, casually Cure and Clem in EU. Most of the protoss wins were done by players in the military or recently returned. That's the Protoss situation. yes, it's bad, because Classic, Stats and herO got interrupted by the military. Thus we got left with Trap, Zoun and Zest.
Edit> And you missed the point by a mile, that KOB2 is major and NA is premier. Deal with it or change categories. And read what I reply to.
What are you saying there?
What does King of Battles 2 having a stacked roster have to do with EU premier tournaments? Are you trying to say that EU is a low skill region and is invalid because that would be fucking stupid.
Premiers are discussed because theyre considered the pinnacle of tournaments, what is your point exactly? "Change categories," you mean like listing the Major tournaments with respectable rosters? That doesn't make Protoss look good, Terran did better than Protoss in Majors and Premiers, lol.
The only thing Protoss excels at is winning in the low-level regions like NA/TW/HK/Oceania, etc.
the point is that the liquipedia "premier" tournament categorization is incredibly arbitrary and it's questionable to refer to it when making balance claims. Do you think DH NA is the pinnacle of tournaments and KOB2 is not?
While you were watching the protoss hopes, Zoun and Maxpax, get "really unlucky" and lose to decent zergs and terrans in the early rounds of a loser bracket, I was watching this video about french politics (in french). Honestly it wasn't the most interesting thing I've ever watched, not sure I'd recommend, but at least it didn't make me angry or sad.
The idea that maybe all pro protoss players just suck compared to z and t pros, is so dumb you can't even argue against it.
There are no stable protosses, because the race itself is unstable. This should really be obvious by now.
At this point it would be better to gimp the AoE options totally and boost the combat units in exchange. Also fuck forcefields. Literally remove everything that can be a reason for keeping the core combat units weak. Protoss armies need to be able to trade cost efficiently in small numbers and have sufficient mobile army composition options.
There are lots of cool options to make protoss better if the AoE & FF is weakened:
Zealots could have more movement speed and maybe a lategame upgrade that turns charge into blink.
Archons just need to be faster and maybe have an upgrade for +1 range.
Immortals could build faster and be made cheaper again. And their barrier can prevent emp from draining their shields.
Stalkers can do more damage in exchange for less health. There can be a late game upgrade changing their damage type to full damage vs all making them useful lategame units vs zergling runbys and marine drops. If stalkers get a smaller frame that will also make them more massable and give them higher damage output per space they cover (making them scale better with numbers) while making them weaker vs things like fungals and tank shots.
Adepts can have +1 base armor and have their light tag removed. (better vs lings/marine, hellion/bane). Health can be raised and shields reduced, this will make them even more tanky, emphasizing the armor raise and enduring emps better.
Sentries are mostly useless anyway but with a stronger guardian shield, cheaper hallucinations or just a much lower pricetag they could be ok. Example: no forcefield but half price and half supply cost -> good support unit. Another good option: guardian shield blocks the emps shield reduction effect (energy may be drained any way).
Oracles could have their beam not be energy based but doing less (+light?) damage -> more consistent.
Tempests should be 3 supply, max 4 to make them useful lategame without vastly lowering your maxed out armies fighting ability.
Templars psi storm could do much much less damage but slow enemies under it's effect, and feedback range could be increased and/or it's damage nerf be reverted. Focus on feedback and support.
Disruptor nova should not do damage but instead disable all enemy abilities and possibly also attacks and could also reveal cloaked units, unburrow lurkers unsiege tanks etc. -> pure support. They can build a bit faster and be a bit cheaper (less minerals?). +1 Range might be good too or just faster nova speed. Numbers can always be tweaked to make them somewhat useful as a support.
Colossus should be single target beams with high +light damage. But they can probably also stay the same, they really don't seem much too strong in terms of AoE.
Void rays can stay the same but I would love to see the overcharge changed in two ways: - it is powered by shield energy, it drains the shields and stops when no shields. - it does not do +armor damage but increases overall damage and range (by 1 or two). They could become stationary when it's active or be slowed a bit more. With shield batteries they can be great on the defensive.
Okay I'll stop here. All I'm saying is that protoss is still pretty lame and it's time to remove that all or nothing AoE playstyle and open up more strategic options with smaller armies trading efficiently and non AoE based army compositions being viable. The current protoss battle interaction can be summed up like this: Does Protoss have sufficient AoE & manages to hit with the AoE (largely up to the opponents, protoss can not do much micro here) ? Yes -> protoss crushes. No -> protoss gets crushed.
No I don't think so anymore. You can credit whatever reason you want for it (not enough truly top level tosses, the top tosses we have are inconsistent/slumping atm, balance) but especially once Zest goes to the military all Protoss hopes are *only* going to be in Trap.
On December 05 2021 04:37 Freeborn wrote: The idea that maybe all pro protoss players just suck compared to z and t pros, is so dumb you can't even argue against it.
There are no stable protosses, because the race itself is unstable. This should really be obvious by now.
At this point it would be better to gimp the AoE options totally and boost the combat units in exchange. Also fuck forcefields. Literally remove everything that can be a reason for keeping the core combat units weak. Protoss armies need to be able to trade cost efficiently in small numbers and have sufficient mobile army composition options.
There are lots of cool options to make protoss better if the AoE & FF is weakened:
Zealots could have more movement speed and maybe a lategame upgrade that turns charge into blink.
Archons just need to be faster and maybe have an upgrade for +1 range.
Immortals could build faster and be made cheaper again. And their barrier can prevent emp from draining their shields.
Stalkers can do more damage in exchange for less health. There can be a late game upgrade changing their damage type to full damage vs all making them useful lategame units vs zergling runbys and marine drops. If stalkers get a smaller frame that will also make them more massable and give them higher damage output per space they cover (making them scale better with numbers) while making them weaker vs things like fungals and tank shots.
Adepts can have +1 base armor and have their light tag removed. (better vs lings/marine, hellion/bane). Health can be raised and shields reduced, this will make them even more tanky, emphasizing the armor raise and enduring emps better.
Sentries are mostly useless anyway but with a stronger guardian shield, cheaper hallucinations or just a much lower pricetag they could be ok. Example: no forcefield but half price and half supply cost -> good support unit. Another good option: guardian shield blocks the emps shield reduction effect (energy may be drained any way).
Oracles could have their beam not be energy based but doing less (+light?) damage -> more consistent.
Tempests should be 3 supply, max 4 to make them useful lategame without vastly lowering your maxed out armies fighting ability.
Templars psi storm could do much much less damage but slow enemies under it's effect, and feedback range could be increased and/or it's damage nerf be reverted. Focus on feedback and support.
Disruptor nova should not do damage but instead disable all enemy abilities and possibly also attacks and could also reveal cloaked units, unburrow lurkers unsiege tanks etc. -> pure support. They can build a bit faster and be a bit cheaper (less minerals?). +1 Range might be good too or just faster nova speed. Numbers can always be tweaked to make them somewhat useful as a support.
Colossus should be single target beams with high +light damage. But they can probably also stay the same, they really don't seem much too strong in terms of AoE.
Void rays can stay the same but I would love to see the overcharge changed in two ways: - it is powered by shield energy, it drains the shields and stops when no shields. - it does not do +armor damage but increases overall damage and range (by 1 or two). They could become stationary when it's active or be slowed a bit more. With shield batteries they can be great on the defensive.
Okay I'll stop here. All I'm saying is that protoss is still pretty lame and it's time to remove that all or nothing AoE playstyle and open up more strategic options with smaller armies trading efficiently and non AoE based army compositions being viable. The current protoss battle interaction can be summed up like this: Does Protoss have sufficient AoE & manages to hit with the AoE (largely up to the opponents, protoss can not do much micro here) ? Yes -> protoss crushes. No -> protoss gets crushed.
i strongly strongly hate this idea as a protoss fan. The whole point of protoss is that their units SHOULD have the worst dps in exchange for tankiness, and very powerful spellcasters / aoe that make up for them. This has been true since brood war.
I think pvt is completely balanced: there is basically no reason to doubt this. Trap just has been off form while Maru has been surging.
Pvz is currently frustrating in that it's a high variance match up with both sides going for sneak moves or else ending in a stale drawn out lategame that favors zerg (only with Serral, Dark imo).
i'd love to see a nerf to lurkers in exchange for a nerf to void rays, thus incentivizing ground vs ground late game.
all talk about change is irrelevant, because there will not be any change.
Toss as a race seems to have been doomed from the start. It can be ridiculously strong during some periods, but if that is the case the nerf is nearby (zerg do NOT have this problem). And as a race, when all is executed perfectly it LOOKs ridiculous, alongside with all the cheesy aspect. So it is a race everyone loves to hate. And looking through the comments, a general remark is the fact that toss suffers from the fact the it HAS (yeah yeah Has is cheesy ahhahaha) to be cheesy and is very rigid in its core, so when it comes to the best of 7. Toss is fucked, as it requires SLIGHTLY more to win. But in a b03... ey! Then it might be a different story.
To talk about toss players as a whole for many years to be choking is nonsens. If it was during a year.... yeah. It is relevant in that case. But considering that it seems slightly less to choke because of the significance of a small error, it can also be understandable that players make a snowballing mistake for P (yes yes, this is a fact for all races, but it for SURE seems like toss can evaporate more easily in more situation than T and Z).
So. No, there is no (almost no) hope when it comes to winners in big tourneys in the more competitive regions. Yes, there is some hope, toss is not completely extinct when it comes to squeezing through some player to top 4.
But then again. No, there is no hope. A fair amount of the best Toss will, and have been, recruited to the army. Apart from Maxpax, who, so far, is not close to be a winner in bigger tourneys, no new toss has emerged. Toss has Trap, he might reach far again in the future, maybe, if he has the motivation. Creator has shown some good performances, but he is (as is often the case) just missing the mark (so close to beating Dark recently for example)
It is what is is now. A few toss fans will stop watching, or watching and consider a top 4 a victory. Lets go Frost Giants!
Nothing more to be said in this thread. But interesting to see the discussions.
On December 04 2021 22:33 deacon.frost wrote: Kinda reminds me spoiled children. I would want to see a different world champion than a zerg and hey, tough luck, huh?
You realize last time protoss won blizzcon in HotS?
Blizzcon doesn't exist anymore. Protoss was in the finals of IEM(Zest) and GSL twice (Zest and Trap) this year alone. Yeah they did not win, but its not like those finals could have gone differently and this entire debate would be meaningless. Lately a couple tournaments have been bad for protoss, but its not like they do not have representation.
On December 04 2021 22:33 deacon.frost wrote: Kinda reminds me spoiled children. I would want to see a different world champion than a zerg and hey, tough luck, huh?
You realize last time protoss won blizzcon in HotS?
Blizzcon doesn't exist anymore. Protoss was in the finals of IEM(Zest) and GSL twice (Zest and Trap) this year alone. Yeah they did not win, but its not like those finals could have gone differently and this entire debate would be meaningless. Lately a couple tournaments have been bad for protoss, but its not like they do not have representation.
well, the whole point of this discussion is the long time of toss being a non-winner in bigger tourneys. Trap has been a short exception. Its not just blizzcon or IEM final. However, it is just these kind of finals toss will not win in the future. b07. No chance a toss will win if there is a lot to gain from it.
On December 04 2021 22:33 deacon.frost wrote: Kinda reminds me spoiled children. I would want to see a different world champion than a zerg and hey, tough luck, huh?
You realize last time protoss won blizzcon in HotS?
Blizzcon doesn't exist anymore. Protoss was in the finals of IEM(Zest) and GSL twice (Zest and Trap) this year alone. Yeah they did not win, but its not like those finals could have gone differently and this entire debate would be meaningless. Lately a couple tournaments have been bad for protoss, but its not like they do not have representation.
well, the whole point of this discussion is the long time of toss being a non-winner in bigger tourneys. Trap has been a short exception. Its not just blizzcon or IEM final. However, it is just these kind of finals toss will not win in the future. b07. No chance a toss will win if there is a lot to gain from it.
Yeah. The two most prestigious tournaments are the Season Finals (formerly WCS Global Finals) and Code S. Protoss has not won a Season Final since sOs in 2015 and it's been more than four years for Code S. Saying "lately a couple tournaments have been bad for protoss" is deliberately misrepresenting reality and ignoring what people have actually been talking about for pages.
I don't know. If we take last GSL Finals as example, Zest didn't lose because of his race. He had bad decisions, and bad unit control troughout the match. He could have won, but failed to execute his strategies. Or if we take Trap's final or semifinal losses, how many times did he lose because his race is underpowered and not simply because Maru/Rogue/Dark/Serral/Reynor was the better player that day?
On December 04 2021 22:33 deacon.frost wrote: Kinda reminds me spoiled children. I would want to see a different world champion than a zerg and hey, tough luck, huh?
You realize last time protoss won blizzcon in HotS?
Blizzcon doesn't exist anymore. Protoss was in the finals of IEM(Zest) and GSL twice (Zest and Trap) this year alone. Yeah they did not win, but its not like those finals could have gone differently and this entire debate would be meaningless. Lately a couple tournaments have been bad for protoss, but its not like they do not have representation.
well, the whole point of this discussion is the long time of toss being a non-winner in bigger tourneys. Trap has been a short exception. Its not just blizzcon or IEM final. However, it is just these kind of finals toss will not win in the future. b07. No chance a toss will win if there is a lot to gain from it.
Yeah. The two most prestigious tournaments are the Season Finals (formerly WCS Global Finals) and Code S. Protoss has not won a Season Final since sOs in 2015 and it's been more than four years for Code S. Saying "lately a couple tournaments have been bad for protoss" is deliberately misrepresenting reality and ignoring what people have actually been talking about for pages.
But Zest and Trap came close to it this year and imo did not lose the bo7 due to balance. Zest did beat Rogue in a bo7 on his way to the GSL finals, so it is definitely possible. He actually also beat cure this year in a bo7 (TSL 7), but could not deliver for the GSL final. I do not see the reason to include data from before the latest balance patch if we talk about balance.
"Lately a couple tournaments have been bad for protoss" means that the last 3-4 tournaments have been atrocious for protoss representation ( no protoss in the final 4), which is more worrysome compared to protoss losing in the finals in the biggest tournaments of the year time and time again.
On December 07 2021 17:24 kajtarp wrote: I don't know. If we take last GSL Finals as example, Zest didn't lose because of his race. He had bad decisions, and bad unit control troughout the match. He could have won, but failed to execute his strategies. Or if we take Trap's final or semifinal losses, how many times did he lose because his race is underpowered and not simply because Maru/Rogue/Dark/Serral/Reynor was the better player that day?
Many other have tried but failed. They just want to hear Protoss weak, Terran and Zerg stronk.
On December 07 2021 17:24 kajtarp wrote: I don't know. If we take last GSL Finals as example, Zest didn't lose because of his race. He had bad decisions, and bad unit control troughout the match. He could have won, but failed to execute his strategies. Or if we take Trap's final or semifinal losses, how many times did he lose because his race is underpowered and not simply because Maru/Rogue/Dark/Serral/Reynor was the better player that day?
Many other have tried but failed. They just want to hear Protoss weak, Terran and Zerg stronk.
I mean you can always say the other player just played better, let's take e.g. 2018 when terran outside of maru didn't do well i guess the other players just always played better
On December 07 2021 17:24 kajtarp wrote: I don't know. If we take last GSL Finals as example, Zest didn't lose because of his race. He had bad decisions, and bad unit control troughout the match. He could have won, but failed to execute his strategies. Or if we take Trap's final or semifinal losses, how many times did he lose because his race is underpowered and not simply because Maru/Rogue/Dark/Serral/Reynor was the better player that day?
Many other have tried but failed. They just want to hear Protoss weak, Terran and Zerg stronk.
I mean you can always say the other player just played better, let's take e.g. 2018 when terran outside of maru didn't do well i guess the other players just always played better
Protoss has statistically similar data to Terran over the last 4-ish years. So if Protoss is in a bad state, so is Terran and vice versa. If Terran is fine, then Protoss with MORE finals must be even better. Yes, Terran has more titles though, so they have ot be fine.
I mean Zerg has more titles, more final appearances, more top players. You name it, they have it. And yet somehow Terran is fine to everybody while Protoss is basically dead.
I honestly think that it's because PvZ is such an unwatchable pathetic mess.
On December 07 2021 17:24 kajtarp wrote: I don't know. If we take last GSL Finals as example, Zest didn't lose because of his race. He had bad decisions, and bad unit control troughout the match. He could have won, but failed to execute his strategies. Or if we take Trap's final or semifinal losses, how many times did he lose because his race is underpowered and not simply because Maru/Rogue/Dark/Serral/Reynor was the better player that day?
Many other have tried but failed. They just want to hear Protoss weak, Terran and Zerg stronk.
I mean you can always say the other player just played better, let's take e.g. 2018 when terran outside of maru didn't do well i guess the other players just always played better
Protoss has statistically similar data to Terran over the last 4-ish years. So if Protoss is in a bad state, so is Terran and vice versa. If Terran is fine, then Protoss with MORE finals must be even better. Yes, Terran has more titles though, so they have ot be fine.
I mean Zerg has more titles, more final appearances, more top players. You name it, they have it. And yet somehow Terran is fine to everybody while Protoss is basically dead.
I honestly think that it's because PvZ is such an unwatchable pathetic mess.
I think it's more that perception is different from stats, with terran we had multiple good runs recently with maru wining clem doing great in eu or cure winning the gsl etc. Meanwhile recently protoss managed to miss out some ro4s or ro8s in one case, obv that makes protoss fans unhappy especially when at the same time you always get to hear how easy your race is , protossed etc.
On December 07 2021 17:24 kajtarp wrote: I don't know. If we take last GSL Finals as example, Zest didn't lose because of his race. He had bad decisions, and bad unit control troughout the match. He could have won, but failed to execute his strategies. Or if we take Trap's final or semifinal losses, how many times did he lose because his race is underpowered and not simply because Maru/Rogue/Dark/Serral/Reynor was the better player that day?
Kinda a big coincidence how zerg/terran player always happen to be the 'better player' don't you think? Easy to point out the mistakes, but players from other races make them to, its just that protoss is the most unforgiving race where one second of distraction can cost you the game (ling runby, 2+ banes one shoting probes, widow mine drops).
On December 07 2021 17:24 kajtarp wrote: I don't know. If we take last GSL Finals as example, Zest didn't lose because of his race. He had bad decisions, and bad unit control troughout the match. He could have won, but failed to execute his strategies. Or if we take Trap's final or semifinal losses, how many times did he lose because his race is underpowered and not simply because Maru/Rogue/Dark/Serral/Reynor was the better player that day?
Many other have tried but failed. They just want to hear Protoss weak, Terran and Zerg stronk.
I mean you can always say the other player just played better, let's take e.g. 2018 when terran outside of maru didn't do well i guess the other players just always played better
Protoss has statistically similar data to Terran over the last 4-ish years. So if Protoss is in a bad state, so is Terran and vice versa. If Terran is fine, then Protoss with MORE finals must be even better. Yes, Terran has more titles though, so they have ot be fine.
I mean Zerg has more titles, more final appearances, more top players. You name it, they have it. And yet somehow Terran is fine to everybody while Protoss is basically dead.
I honestly think that it's because PvZ is such an unwatchable pathetic mess.
I think it's more that perception is different from stats, with terran we had multiple good runs recently with maru wining clem doing great in eu or cure winning the gsl etc. Meanwhile recently protoss managed to miss out some ro4s or ro8s in one case, obv that makes protoss fans unhappy especially when at the same time you always get to hear how easy your race is , protossed etc.
Maybe. But to me it seems the obsession with PvZ (as seen in the otherthread) may come from the PvZ state. Every time Protoss loses to a Zerg I just want to scream - and what the fuck was he supposed to do against this? And every time a Protoss wins it just feels like he made it to the Mars with a biplane.
It just feels like Zerg starts with a huge advantage and it's a Protoss uphill battle. But at the same time pro Protoss players say it's "just" unwatchable and unfunny, but otherwise fine. Not sure if they're just polite or what.
On December 07 2021 17:24 kajtarp wrote: I don't know. If we take last GSL Finals as example, Zest didn't lose because of his race. He had bad decisions, and bad unit control troughout the match. He could have won, but failed to execute his strategies. Or if we take Trap's final or semifinal losses, how many times did he lose because his race is underpowered and not simply because Maru/Rogue/Dark/Serral/Reynor was the better player that day?
Many other have tried but failed. They just want to hear Protoss weak, Terran and Zerg stronk.
I mean you can always say the other player just played better, let's take e.g. 2018 when terran outside of maru didn't do well i guess the other players just always played better
Protoss has statistically similar data to Terran over the last 4-ish years. So if Protoss is in a bad state, so is Terran and vice versa. If Terran is fine, then Protoss with MORE finals must be even better. Yes, Terran has more titles though, so they have ot be fine.
I mean Zerg has more titles, more final appearances, more top players. You name it, they have it. And yet somehow Terran is fine to everybody while Protoss is basically dead.
I honestly think that it's because PvZ is such an unwatchable pathetic mess.
I think it's more that perception is different from stats, with terran we had multiple good runs recently with maru wining clem doing great in eu or cure winning the gsl etc. Meanwhile recently protoss managed to miss out some ro4s or ro8s in one case, obv that makes protoss fans unhappy especially when at the same time you always get to hear how easy your race is , protossed etc.
Maybe. But to me it seems the obsession with PvZ (as seen in the otherthread) may come from the PvZ state. Every time Protoss loses to a Zerg I just want to scream - and what the fuck was he supposed to do against this? And every time a Protoss wins it just feels like he made it to the Mars with a biplane.
It just feels like Zerg starts with a huge advantage and it's a Protoss uphill battle. But at the same time pro Protoss players say it's "just" unwatchable and unfunny, but otherwise fine. Not sure if they're just polite or what.
Trap’s first two GSL final losses felt borderline unwinnable, I don’t think Trap even played that badly
Trap’s third loss I don’t think he played as well, but on a less oppressive PvZ meta, he could conceivably have won if he’d brought his A game
As well as Cure played, Trap especially played below his PvT best, and Zest made some really baffling errors. Was frustrating to see, but Protoss absolutely could have, arguably should have taken this season’s GSL.
A different kind of frustration from Rogue/Dark curbstomping Trap, where like yourself I’m going ‘how the fuck do you win a series against this?’
I think our collective perception is shaped by PvZ and how it plays and feels. Regardless of whose supported race wins, TvZ delivers frequently excellent matches that have a good flow.
As a Protoss watching PvZ worst case your lad gets crushed in a manner that makes the matchup seem broken, best case your player scrapes through with either a series of tight builds, or grinding it out with Skytoss which isn’t exactly entertaining
On December 07 2021 17:24 kajtarp wrote: I don't know. If we take last GSL Finals as example, Zest didn't lose because of his race. He had bad decisions, and bad unit control troughout the match. He could have won, but failed to execute his strategies. Or if we take Trap's final or semifinal losses, how many times did he lose because his race is underpowered and not simply because Maru/Rogue/Dark/Serral/Reynor was the better player that day?
Many other have tried but failed. They just want to hear Protoss weak, Terran and Zerg stronk.
I mean you can always say the other player just played better, let's take e.g. 2018 when terran outside of maru didn't do well i guess the other players just always played better
Protoss has statistically similar data to Terran over the last 4-ish years. So if Protoss is in a bad state, so is Terran and vice versa. If Terran is fine, then Protoss with MORE finals must be even better. Yes, Terran has more titles though, so they have ot be fine.
I mean Zerg has more titles, more final appearances, more top players. You name it, they have it. And yet somehow Terran is fine to everybody while Protoss is basically dead.
I honestly think that it's because PvZ is such an unwatchable pathetic mess.
I think it's more that perception is different from stats, with terran we had multiple good runs recently with maru wining clem doing great in eu or cure winning the gsl etc. Meanwhile recently protoss managed to miss out some ro4s or ro8s in one case, obv that makes protoss fans unhappy especially when at the same time you always get to hear how easy your race is , protossed etc.
Maybe. But to me it seems the obsession with PvZ (as seen in the otherthread) may come from the PvZ state. Every time Protoss loses to a Zerg I just want to scream - and what the fuck was he supposed to do against this? And every time a Protoss wins it just feels like he made it to the Mars with a biplane.
It just feels like Zerg starts with a huge advantage and it's a Protoss uphill battle. But at the same time pro Protoss players say it's "just" unwatchable and unfunny, but otherwise fine. Not sure if they're just polite or what.
I agree, even as a person who's biased for Terran. It's heart-wrenching to watch PvZ so much since against most zergs it's practically a foregone conclusion. Serral is facing Trap in TSL as well as Zest in NeXT in both semis and I think a majority of people will give it to Serral taking both protoss down. I'd be surprised if either Protoss can even bring to close in and get a couple wins in both best of 5's.
PvZ feels like it's in a state where even the top protoss get punished too heavily for making a mistake or two and it'll cost them games quite easily.
Nobody is going to talk about how MaxPax, our beloved Danish Prince of Protoss, just took down Lambo and Reynor 6-0 to win the 100th ESL EU Weekly? A remarkable performance from our best foreign hope.
On December 07 2021 22:49 starvingbox1 wrote: Nobody is going to talk about how MaxPax, our beloved Danish Prince of Protoss, just took down Lambo and Reynor 6-0 to win the 100th ESL EU Weekly? A remarkable performance from our best foreign hope.
I don't think it's going to change anyones sentiment that Protoss is underpowered against Zerg at the top level..
That being said..
MAXPAX FIGHTING! Sweeping Reynor is no small feat :O
On December 07 2021 22:49 starvingbox1 wrote: Nobody is going to talk about how MaxPax, our beloved Danish Prince of Protoss, just took down Lambo and Reynor 6-0 to win the 100th ESL EU Weekly? A remarkable performance from our best foreign hope.
Once he gets to the finals/semis of something big people will start talking more seriously. So far he reminds Cure who was beast online but offline...
On December 07 2021 17:24 kajtarp wrote: I don't know. If we take last GSL Finals as example, Zest didn't lose because of his race. He had bad decisions, and bad unit control troughout the match. He could have won, but failed to execute his strategies. Or if we take Trap's final or semifinal losses, how many times did he lose because his race is underpowered and not simply because Maru/Rogue/Dark/Serral/Reynor was the better player that day?
Many other have tried but failed. They just want to hear Protoss weak, Terran and Zerg stronk.
I mean you can always say the other player just played better, let's take e.g. 2018 when terran outside of maru didn't do well i guess the other players just always played better
Note also that when people say "in 2018 outside of Maru Terran didn't do well" nobody jumps in to say "ACTUALLY Ty and Innovation got to the finals so Terran was doing fine" or "GSL S3 was TvT so even without Maru Terran still would have won" or "half of the players in S2 Round of 8 were Terrans so they're actually performing above average" and all that nonsense.
And at least if you play like Maru you actually win. Try having to play like Trap.
Protoss is always the lagging race at top level for years. So its a valid point.
As a Protoss fan when a big tournament starts you just hope that at least one Protoss is left in the semis, you dont even dream about winning.
Many others have tried to make this point but it doesn't register. They don't really care.
Careful using aligulac to support your hypothesis - it's also reporting toss is favored in pvz
That doesn't contradict my hypothesis. I think protoss is favoured against zerg when players aren't playing extremely well. Which is why the GM ladder is full of protoss for example.
On December 07 2021 17:24 kajtarp wrote: I don't know. If we take last GSL Finals as example, Zest didn't lose because of his race. He had bad decisions, and bad unit control troughout the match. He could have won, but failed to execute his strategies. Or if we take Trap's final or semifinal losses, how many times did he lose because his race is underpowered and not simply because Maru/Rogue/Dark/Serral/Reynor was the better player that day?
Kinda a big coincidence how zerg/terran player always happen to be the 'better player' don't you think? Easy to point out the mistakes, but players from other races make them to, its just that protoss is the most unforgiving race where one second of distraction can cost you the game (ling runby, 2+ banes one shoting probes, widow mine drops).
I agree, Zest deciding to attack into a turtling 2-base terran while on 4 base with a huge eco lead was an incredibly minor mistake but due to his race it lost him the game.
On December 07 2021 17:24 kajtarp wrote: I don't know. If we take last GSL Finals as example, Zest didn't lose because of his race. He had bad decisions, and bad unit control troughout the match. He could have won, but failed to execute his strategies. Or if we take Trap's final or semifinal losses, how many times did he lose because his race is underpowered and not simply because Maru/Rogue/Dark/Serral/Reynor was the better player that day?
Kinda a big coincidence how zerg/terran player always happen to be the 'better player' don't you think? Easy to point out the mistakes, but players from other races make them to, its just that protoss is the most unforgiving race where one second of distraction can cost you the game (ling runby, 2+ banes one shoting probes, widow mine drops).
I agree, Zest deciding to attack into a turtling 2-base terran while on 4 base with a huge eco lead was an incredibly minor mistake but due to his race it lost him the game.
Grand-finals nerves also don't exist. Protoss has no hope.
On December 07 2021 17:24 kajtarp wrote: I don't know. If we take last GSL Finals as example, Zest didn't lose because of his race. He had bad decisions, and bad unit control troughout the match. He could have won, but failed to execute his strategies. Or if we take Trap's final or semifinal losses, how many times did he lose because his race is underpowered and not simply because Maru/Rogue/Dark/Serral/Reynor was the better player that day?
Many other have tried but failed. They just want to hear Protoss weak, Terran and Zerg stronk.
I mean you can always say the other player just played better, let's take e.g. 2018 when terran outside of maru didn't do well i guess the other players just always played better
Note also that when people say "in 2018 outside of Maru Terran didn't do well" nobody jumps in to say "ACTUALLY Ty and Innovation got to the finals so Terran was doing fine" or "GSL S3 was TvT so even without Maru Terran still would have won" or "half of the players in S2 Round of 8 were Terrans so they're actually performing above average" and all that nonsense.
And at least if you play like Maru you actually win. Try having to play like Trap.
2018 Premier tournaments: 9 zerg titles, 2 2nd places -> 11 zergs in the finals 4 Terran titles, 2 2nd places -> 6 terrans in the finals 2 Protoss titles ,10 2nd places -> 12 Protoss in the finals
I wonder why people felt Terran was weak, when the finals representation was 11:6:12 (Z : T : P)
2021 Premier tournaments: 5 Protoss titles, 6 2nd places (+2/1 if NA) 6 Zerg titles, 6 2nd places (+1/2 if NA) 4 Terran titles, 4 2nd places 12:8:11 Z/T/P
I wonder why I state that Terran is as bad if not in worse situation. That's without NA, with NA it's 15:8:14
Edit 2> But it's all Trap!!!! OK, let's remove the most represented players of each race Trap has 7 finals(5/2) -> 12:8:4 Maru has 4 finas(1/3) -> 12:4:4 Reynor has 4 finals(or Serral) -> 8:4:4
On December 07 2021 17:24 kajtarp wrote: I don't know. If we take last GSL Finals as example, Zest didn't lose because of his race. He had bad decisions, and bad unit control troughout the match. He could have won, but failed to execute his strategies. Or if we take Trap's final or semifinal losses, how many times did he lose because his race is underpowered and not simply because Maru/Rogue/Dark/Serral/Reynor was the better player that day?
Many other have tried but failed. They just want to hear Protoss weak, Terran and Zerg stronk.
I mean you can always say the other player just played better, let's take e.g. 2018 when terran outside of maru didn't do well i guess the other players just always played better
Note also that when people say "in 2018 outside of Maru Terran didn't do well" nobody jumps in to say "ACTUALLY Ty and Innovation got to the finals so Terran was doing fine" or "GSL S3 was TvT so even without Maru Terran still would have won" or "half of the players in S2 Round of 8 were Terrans so they're actually performing above average" and all that nonsense.
And at least if you play like Maru you actually win. Try having to play like Trap.
2018 Premier tournaments: 9 zerg titles, 2 2nd places -> 11 zergs in the finals 4 Terran titles, 2 2nd places -> 6 terrans in the finals 2 Protoss titles ,10 2nd places -> 12 Protoss in the finals
I wonder why people felt Terran was weak, when the finals representation was 11:6:12 (Z : T : P)
2021 Premier tournaments: 5 Protoss titles, 6 2nd places (+2/1 if NA) 6 Zerg titles, 6 2nd places (+1/2 if NA) 4 Terran titles, 4 2nd places 12:8:11 Z/T/P
I wonder why I state that Terran is as bad if not in worse situation. That's without NA, with NA it's 15:8:14
Edit 2> But it's all Trap!!!! OK, let's remove the most represented players of each race Trap has 7 finals(5/2) -> 12:8:4 Maru has 4 finas(1/3) -> 12:4:4 Reynor has 4 finals(or Serral) -> 8:4:4
8:4:4 Without NA. Damn it.
It kinda is "all Trap" when it comes to toss premier wins. IF we exclude NA. Trap is the ONLY toss who have won a premier the last TWO years. Wheras Terrans has Cure, TY, Clem, Maru.
On December 07 2021 17:24 kajtarp wrote: I don't know. If we take last GSL Finals as example, Zest didn't lose because of his race. He had bad decisions, and bad unit control troughout the match. He could have won, but failed to execute his strategies. Or if we take Trap's final or semifinal losses, how many times did he lose because his race is underpowered and not simply because Maru/Rogue/Dark/Serral/Reynor was the better player that day?
Many other have tried but failed. They just want to hear Protoss weak, Terran and Zerg stronk.
I mean you can always say the other player just played better, let's take e.g. 2018 when terran outside of maru didn't do well i guess the other players just always played better
Note also that when people say "in 2018 outside of Maru Terran didn't do well" nobody jumps in to say "ACTUALLY Ty and Innovation got to the finals so Terran was doing fine" or "GSL S3 was TvT so even without Maru Terran still would have won" or "half of the players in S2 Round of 8 were Terrans so they're actually performing above average" and all that nonsense.
And at least if you play like Maru you actually win. Try having to play like Trap.
2018 Premier tournaments: 9 zerg titles, 2 2nd places -> 11 zergs in the finals 4 Terran titles, 2 2nd places -> 6 terrans in the finals 2 Protoss titles ,10 2nd places -> 12 Protoss in the finals
I wonder why people felt Terran was weak, when the finals representation was 11:6:12 (Z : T : P)
2021 Premier tournaments: 5 Protoss titles, 6 2nd places (+2/1 if NA) 6 Zerg titles, 6 2nd places (+1/2 if NA) 4 Terran titles, 4 2nd places 12:8:11 Z/T/P
I wonder why I state that Terran is as bad if not in worse situation.
No one's wondering why people felt Terran was weak in 2018, I'm wondering why people won't acknowledge Protoss is weak now.
I noticed you didn't count the titles separately in your non Trap/Maru column. Didn't like what it showed?
Incidentally, using only 2021 stats is also misrepresenting how long Protoss has sucked.
2019-2021 non foreigner only Premier tournaments: 8 Protoss titles 9 Terran titles 20 Zerg titles
Pretty even, right? But that's entirely carried by Trap's monstrous early 2021 performance. So here's without that Trap/Maru carry factor (not even going to bother with Zerg, they've got a billion champions):
2 Protoss titles 5 Terran titles
Trap represents 3/4 of all Protoss titles for the period, Maru not even half of Terran's.
But you may consider this unfair, since I stopped just before 2018, Maru's obvious carry year. I did this because summer 2019 is how far back you have to go to include any not-Trap Protoss champions, but let's keep it going up to 2017, winter 2017 being the last time Protoss won an actual GSL, so that I don't unfairly misrepresent Maru's Terran dominance.
2017-2021 non foreigner only Premier tournaments:
14 Protoss titles 19 Terran titles 28 Zerg titles
Without Trap/Maru
8 Protoss titles 11 Terran titles
So even including Maru's best year, and two years where Trap won literally nothing, they come out mostly even carrying around 42% of their race's titles, and with Terran performing better on either end: Maru did better than Trap, and non-Maru Terran did better than non-Trap Protoss.
I would certainly say that thanks to Trap's amazing performance, Protoss had a better year than Terran in 2021, but it's an outlier. Protoss has been consistently doing the worst for half of StarCraft II's existence. That's not having a bad year or individual variance among players.
Protoss is probably weak now due to several reasons :
- The lack of top players : previous messages evoke that there is only Trap, but with stats gone it's quite logical that only trap carry the race (and for a long time during peak sc2 trap was not at the top) ; Terran have : Maru (always belong in the top 3 terrans), Cure (TY GONE), clem (young and insane mechanically), zerg has rogue, dark, serral, reynor. Zoon is not really an elite player for most of his carreer he was on bench with SKT1 and was certainly not at the top (think zest in prime, stats, rain, sos in prime) he improove a bit but he's not maru or stats sorry to say.Creator was never really an elite player to begin with. Maxpax is upcoming but not quite there. Other foreigners like harstem, mana are good players but were never at the top and probably never will. Showtime is a solid player but missing something not sure what is it. Zest is on the go and past his prime like SOS, he can still generate incidents with build orders but that's it.
- Race design : - gateway units are garbage thanks to warp gate there protoss need to rely on expensive units, if you loose these units without killing the opponent / trading really well it's likely insta GG in PvZ you can just trade zealots otherwise you overrun, no trading = boring game. - Hero units like mothership are dumb as hell and should not exist in a RTS game - In general flying units are boring, flying units should be support / caster units (raven, phoenix arbiters, corsairs in broodwar), void rays will always be lame
When you think about it there is quite a gap when you watch a maru / clem with good terrans (uthermal etc), same with zerg, but with protoss not so much.A player with better mechanics playing protoss does not gain much compared to terran or zerg.
On December 09 2021 01:04 sim999999 wrote: When you think about it there is quite a gap when you watch a maru / clem with good terrans (uthermal etc), same with zerg, but with protoss not so much.A player with better mechanics playing protoss does not gain much compared to terran or zerg.
I see why you would think that but it's too harsh a statement imo. There are a few things that only Parting does (the famous Flash moment years ago, and I'm thinking of a game against Heromarine recently where he outplayed the fuck out of him - but also it's Parting so like it happens quite often). Maxpax has his moments, and when Neeb was the best he had his moments as well.
The potential is there, it's just that when you mess up with protoss you're dead in the next five minutes, while with terran you can fail like five times in a row and the game is about even because your units are more expendable, and as a result you have more opportunities to try cute shit.
The potential is there, it's just that when you mess up with protoss you're dead in the next five minutes, while with terran you can fail like five times in a row and the game is about even because your units are more expendable, and as a result you have more opportunities to try cute shit.
I agree completely, that's on race design the margin for error in protoss is too small, in P v Z you just can't disengage property you loose all your robo units, with terran you can pick up and retreat drop else where etc but the blame is not on terran it's on protoss design. 80% of the games we already know who's is alive and who's dead after on battle in P v X (if there is a battle, currently it is a camping fiesta)
On December 09 2021 01:04 sim999999 wrote: When you think about it there is quite a gap when you watch a maru / clem with good terrans (uthermal etc), same with zerg, but with protoss not so much.A player with better mechanics playing protoss does not gain much compared to terran or zerg.
I see why you would think that but it's too harsh a statement imo. There are a few things that only Parting does (the famous Flash moment years ago, and I'm thinking of a game against Heromarine recently where he outplayed the fuck out of him - but also it's Parting so like it happens quite often). Maxpax has his moments, and when Neeb was the best he had his moments as well.
The potential is there, it's just that when you mess up with protoss you're dead in the next five minutes, while with terran you can fail like five times in a row and the game is about even because your units are more expendable, and as a result you have more opportunities to try cute shit.
Unfortunately its the truth. The way the races are designed Zerg has the highest skill ceiling, then Terran, then Protoss. So even if Trap was as good of a player as lets say Serral (and I think they are actually quite close), he would never achieve that level of success because he plays toss. He is still good enough to win here and there but not that consistently and on the biggest stages. He would have to be a better player than Serral overall to compensate for his race disadvantage.
The other part you stated depends on the matchup. In PvZ, yes, if P screwes up the game is usually over immediately while Zerg can make several mistakes and take more risks and be fine (again, race design). But in PvT its definitely not the case. Protoss can vary their playstyle more in this matchup and I would say its kinda even more both races in terms of forgiveness for mistakes
On December 09 2021 01:04 sim999999 wrote: When you think about it there is quite a gap when you watch a maru / clem with good terrans (uthermal etc), same with zerg, but with protoss not so much.A player with better mechanics playing protoss does not gain much compared to terran or zerg.
I see why you would think that but it's too harsh a statement imo. There are a few things that only Parting does (the famous Flash moment years ago, and I'm thinking of a game against Heromarine recently where he outplayed the fuck out of him - but also it's Parting so like it happens quite often). Maxpax has his moments, and when Neeb was the best he had his moments as well.
The potential is there, it's just that when you mess up with protoss you're dead in the next five minutes, while with terran you can fail like five times in a row and the game is about even because your units are more expendable, and as a result you have more opportunities to try cute shit.
The other part you stated depends on the matchup. In PvZ, yes, if P screwes up the game is usually over immediately while Zerg can make several mistakes and take more risks and be fine (again, race design). But in PvT its definitely not the case. Protoss can vary their playstyle more in this matchup and I would say its kinda even more both races in terms of forgiveness for mistakes
I think the opposite. In PvZ, especially air play, usually the decision will be reached a lot later in the game and there are very few opportunities to kill your opponent, so there's more room to make a mistake and be in a decent position later (of course sometimes there are long death animations but that happens in every match-up). In PvT the terran is in your face for the entirety of the midgame, and you rely on very specific things to defend the attacks. So you could have a colossus misplaced at some point, the terran kills it and you're instantly dead. Or you don't have enough map vision and the terran surprises you with a big drop, you're instantly dead.
I tend to agree with you that there is a bigger skill ceiling for terran and especially for zerg, but this isn't exactly what was said. In my opinion there are many instances where you can tell the difference in skill between a very good protoss and one of the best protosses, in the same way that you can tell the difference in skill between a very good terran and one of the best terrans.
On December 09 2021 01:04 sim999999 wrote: When you think about it there is quite a gap when you watch a maru / clem with good terrans (uthermal etc), same with zerg, but with protoss not so much.A player with better mechanics playing protoss does not gain much compared to terran or zerg.
I see why you would think that but it's too harsh a statement imo. There are a few things that only Parting does (the famous Flash moment years ago, and I'm thinking of a game against Heromarine recently where he outplayed the fuck out of him - but also it's Parting so like it happens quite often). Maxpax has his moments, and when Neeb was the best he had his moments as well.
The potential is there, it's just that when you mess up with protoss you're dead in the next five minutes, while with terran you can fail like five times in a row and the game is about even because your units are more expendable, and as a result you have more opportunities to try cute shit.
The other part you stated depends on the matchup. In PvZ, yes, if P screwes up the game is usually over immediately while Zerg can make several mistakes and take more risks and be fine (again, race design). But in PvT its definitely not the case. Protoss can vary their playstyle more in this matchup and I would say its kinda even more both races in terms of forgiveness for mistakes
I think the opposite. In PvZ, especially air play, usually the decision will be reached a lot later in the game and there are very few opportunities to kill your opponent, so there's more room to make a mistake and be in a decent position later (of course sometimes there are long death animations but that happens in every match-up). In PvT the terran is in your face for the entirety of the midgame, and you rely on very specific things to defend the attacks. So you could have a colossus misplaced at some point, the terran kills it and you're instantly dead. Or you don't have enough map vision and the terran surprises you with a big drop, you're instantly dead.
I tend to agree with you that there is a bigger skill ceiling for terran and especially for zerg, but this isn't exactly what was said. In my opinion there are many instances where you can tell the difference in skill between a very good protoss and one of the best protosses, in the same way that you can tell the difference in skill between a very good terran and one of the best terrans.
It’s a different skillset, one that seems a tad under appreciated with Protoss players.
Being consistently in great defensive positions, managing tech transitions smoothly, pouncing on a weakness in defence etc.
It’s been a decade but there are still folks who don’t seem to understand the game in terms beyond ‘their micro and stutterstep is harder so they’re better’, which is just beyond ridiculous.
Protoss is a race that sits on a razor’s edge of precision, ok they have plenty of bullshit builds in their armoury. They can’t just bludgeon you with crazy mechanics and a giant economical hammer like the real top Zergs can, or the huge micro potential that the top Terrans can make use of.
If there’s a problem with racial asymmetry, it’s that the racial niches aren’t equivalently potent across all matchups.
We’re zoning back into PvZ, as I don’t think PvT has been grossly unbalanced in either direction for ages. Honestly I don’t think the matchup is a particular issue at all.
In PvZ though, generally is the tricky/strategic race’s tools equivalent to the best exponents of reactive defensive play?
They’re just not. Zest and Trap are the best PvZers we’ve got and their miles behind their Z counterparts. And most of those Zerg counterparts don’t even regularly play EPT cups to inflate their rating.
So god knows what those numbers look like if the likes of Serral, Dark, Rogue regularly played weeklies. As it is they gap the best PvZers without padding their stats
One thing i really dislike is the comments that have the flavour of "meh, toss players choke in finals".
If there was ONE person who was in a final and repeatedly made weird stuff and lost, then yes, That person might have been choking in stressful moments. However, this is not the explanation of the Toss not winning in the bigger tourneys (except from Trap and NA). Logically, it would be VERY strange if a race who is very well represented in tourneys and in GM ladder consists of people who choke, as a whole. The most logical and easy explanation is most often the most closest to the truth and that is that in a bo7, in a tournament everyone wants to win, toss suffers. It is a race that is VERY unforgiving of mistakes, and this is NOT a sign of choke (in general), even though it can look like that if you do not think. I remember many finals where the casters (and chat, oh the amazing twitch chat) pointed out mistakes from BOTH persons. I cannot recall what final, but i remember, for example, the casters mentioning a lot about serrals mistake. BUT, in the end he won. No problem there.
The problem for toss, is that a mistake can completely evaporate the army, or is reduced a little big too much and requires a little bit too long to regain its strength - and this looks like a big mistake since it a bad engagement ended the game, more or less.
Another problem is that, yes, toss has a pretty solid amount of units that can make A LOT of damage. Every change in the meta has required some new adaption for toss. And because of the strength in those units, a new strategy can look ridiculous, but as time moves on, and also because of the fact that many people run into toss in ladder and in the early stages of tournaments, T and Z figur P out. And when P, with all its cheese and strong units are figured out, they are doomed. And in the end of a big final this is most likely the case why toss so seldom manages to win the biggest titles.
And we all know Terran fans are from the beginning the most whiny people (no, not all ofc), its been a constant that is almost comforting. But what if Terran is the choking race? I mean, it could also be that Terran is OP but they do not win more because of terran players are choking. I have a hard time imagine that someone can show me finals or ro4 when a terran lost, when they played a perfect game. Not a misclick, not a bad decision, not floating minerals for a second unnecessary. I doubt this is the case.
So, no, the reason why toss players are not winning premier tournaments is NOT because it is a race with choking players.
So, no, the reason why toss players are not winning premier tournaments is NOT because it is a race with choking players.
Race with choking players, that sounds ridiculously funny :D Did someone actually suggest that?
I mean Trap is a massive choker, and being the best protoss it tends to be more visible because he is in the spotlight, but suggesting toss as race are chokers is dumb lol
So, no, the reason why toss players are not winning premier tournaments is NOT because it is a race with choking players.
Race with choking players, that sounds ridiculously funny :D Did someone actually suggest that?
I mean Trap is a massive choker, and being the best protoss it tends to be more visible because he is in the spotlight, but suggesting toss as race are chokers is dumb lol
Nah, noone have said it inherently a fact, ofc. But, some people have pointed out that trap and zest, for example, made some mistakes. My main point was that it is very much possible to find errors in ANY final. And also, that some sligtht mistakes for toss, is more common to escalate into a substantial deficit, compared to a slight mistake of Z or T. In general, on average!
So, no, the reason why toss players are not winning premier tournaments is NOT because it is a race with choking players.
Race with choking players, that sounds ridiculously funny :D Did someone actually suggest that?
I mean Trap is a massive choker, and being the best protoss it tends to be more visible because he is in the spotlight, but suggesting toss as race are chokers is dumb lol
He won how many tournaments, has the record for consecutive GSL Ro8s+ and outside of a bad last Katowice he’s mostly carried Protoss results wise for what, 2 years now?
Outside of that Katowice, and some underwhelming results recently I can’t think of much choking he did outside of against Cure last GSL season, where the world’s best PvT player 100% didn’t show it, and played badly.
He’s won more tournaments in 2 years than most outside the absolute elite have won in their whole careers, he’s never bombed out in GSL groups, he’s clutched reverse sweeps in finals.
I don’t think this choker tag stands up to scrutiny whatsoever. If anything, if not 100% of the time he’s been pretty damn clutch the last 2 years.
If folks want to argue he’s not as good as the usual Zerg suspects or Maru, well that’s another argument. Not even channelling my inner Gemini but his performance the last 2 years are just not indicative of a choker at all
So, no, the reason why toss players are not winning premier tournaments is NOT because it is a race with choking players.
Race with choking players, that sounds ridiculously funny :D Did someone actually suggest that?
I mean Trap is a massive choker, and being the best protoss it tends to be more visible because he is in the spotlight, but suggesting toss as race are chokers is dumb lol
Trap was a choker 5 years ago. Is there anything suggesting his mistakes now are chokes? They seem so small and not clumped up. Trap isn't missing shade cancel on 10+ adepts scouting opponent's army twice in a series (vs TY in 2016). He isn't flying 3 oracles into the same mine (don't remember who he played), isn't move commanding 2 scouting stalkers past the opponent's stalker, losing them, and moving the sentry instead of the hallucination to the opponent's base (vs Stats in 2017 iirc). Trap was great then, if you removed all his major mistakes. He stopped choking and became great. At least that's how I see it.
So, no, the reason why toss players are not winning premier tournaments is NOT because it is a race with choking players.
Race with choking players, that sounds ridiculously funny :D Did someone actually suggest that?
I mean Trap is a massive choker, and being the best protoss it tends to be more visible because he is in the spotlight, but suggesting toss as race are chokers is dumb lol
Trap was a choker 5 years ago. Is there anything suggesting his mistakes now are chokes? They seem so small and not clumped up. Trap isn't missing shade cancel on 10+ adepts scouting opponent's army twice in a series (vs TY in 2016). He isn't flying 3 oracles into the same mine (don't remember who he played), isn't move commanding 2 scouting stalkers past the opponent's stalker, losing them, and moving the sentry instead of the hallucination to the opponent's base (vs Stats in 2017 iirc). Trap was great then, if you removed all his major mistakes. He stopped choking and became great. At least that's how I see it.
What do you see as signs of choking from Trap?
I say he's a choker because he plays vastly better in tier 2 tournaments than in tier 1 tournaments. In tier 2 tournaments he beat Serral and Reynor both in bo7s, also beat Dark multiple times in bo5s and did well against anybody else but he just couldn't bring it at the biggest stage. Like the last GSL finals vs Dark where he overcommitted in one game and lost everything, unnecessarily lost a game to scouted Nydus because he missed a changeling in another. You will probably say 'yeah Protoss is just more unforgiving' but then why did this only happen to him in the GSL and in other tournaments he looked almost invincible?
IEM Katowice and the series vs Cure are two other examples. The GSL finals he played in 2019 though probably weren't his fault as ZvP really was broken back then
So, no, the reason why toss players are not winning premier tournaments is NOT because it is a race with choking players.
Race with choking players, that sounds ridiculously funny :D Did someone actually suggest that?
I mean Trap is a massive choker, and being the best protoss it tends to be more visible because he is in the spotlight, but suggesting toss as race are chokers is dumb lol
Trap was a choker 5 years ago. Is there anything suggesting his mistakes now are chokes? They seem so small and not clumped up. Trap isn't missing shade cancel on 10+ adepts scouting opponent's army twice in a series (vs TY in 2016). He isn't flying 3 oracles into the same mine (don't remember who he played), isn't move commanding 2 scouting stalkers past the opponent's stalker, losing them, and moving the sentry instead of the hallucination to the opponent's base (vs Stats in 2017 iirc). Trap was great then, if you removed all his major mistakes. He stopped choking and became great. At least that's how I see it.
What do you see as signs of choking from Trap?
I say he's a choker because he plays vastly better in tier 2 tournaments than in tier 1 tournaments. In tier 2 tournaments he beat Serral and Reynor both in bo7s, also beat Dark multiple times in bo5s and did well against anybody else but he just couldn't bring it at the biggest stage. Like the last GSL finals vs Dark where he overcommitted in one game and lost everything, unnecessarily lost a game to scouted Nydus because he missed a changeling in another. You will probably say 'yeah Protoss is just more unforgiving' but then why did this only happen to him in the GSL and in other tournaments he looked almost invincible?
It’s a GSL finals, you still have to make it through the gauntlet. Taking out Maru in playoffs isn’t something you can do without some mental fortitude.
His first two I think he performed fine, he just got brutalised, I don’t think he played well against Dark last time granted.
I don’t really buy the tier 1/2 distinction outside of Katowice, and outside of latency considerations.
Especially for a Protoss player, it’s harder to push through a bracket with Serral and Reynor added than not.
Added Terrans are basically immaterial, they’re not going to be better than Maru (or Cure recently) TvP. Added Zergs well Serral especially is an absolute ZvP monster
Field and bracket dependent of course, but especially for Protoss given PvZ issues. Serral and Reynor are leagues above the rest of Korea unless you’re called Dark or Rogue.
I’d rate both Katowice and international tournaments above Code S at present. If we’re purely talking TvZ Clem is one of the absolute best outside of maybe Maru, and Reynor and Serral are a tier above every other Zerg outside of Rogue and Dark
It’s not peak Kespa era where international players were filling the spots of better players at international tournaments, Code S is missing some of the best talent in the scene.
Zerg is designed to have better economy and production than the other two races (through larva mechanics). So for Terran and Protoss to beat zerg, they have to deal meaningful early game damage, otherwise, zerg will be ahead in economy and units, which eventually snowballs into a victory for them. Even at max supply, I can't argue that Terran and Protoss have better compositions than zerg (zerg has strong tier 3 units like viper, swarmhost, lurkers).
With the current meta already figured out, all possible early game harassment strategies against zerg are figured out and can be defended. What this means is that, top zergs these days will come out on top into the mid game and snowball into victory unless they make a big mistake from defending the early game harassments (the top ones pretty much don't). This also means that even at the highest skill level, a Terran or Protoss unfortunately still has to rely on Zerg to make mistakes in order to win - just executing your strategy close to perfection does not lead to victory since you will be behind if zerg defends it properly (which is likely since meta is figured out). This is why top zergs like Serral who has fantastic mechanics and have memorized the protoss and terran playbook have a close to 100% (I remember its 90+%) win-rate against protoss for example.
In fact, diving deeper into this, even with a new patch that changes up the dynamics and introduces new harassment timings etc, the meta must eventually come to a point where zerg is able to defend every possible harassment, otherwise terran / protoss who play perfectly can keep abusing the strategy and always win out, which I'm sure Blizzard won't allow to happen. Blizzard also unlikely will allow the existance of a strategy that can only be defended non-deterministically (based on luck). So if the eventual state of stability for the game is such that every strategy can be defended by zerg in some deterministic way, then zerg will always have the advantage against the other two races via the observation stated above, which is what we are seeing right now.
TLDR you don’t win what, 6 tournaments the last 2 years with a bunch of silvers and top 4s, set a record for consecutive Code S round of 8s with a reverse sweep in there to win a tournament if you are a ‘choker’
It’s silly. It’s a framing that doesn’t correlate with reality.
Trap’s 2019-21 results are outstanding by any metric. He’s been by a distance the best Protoss player.
If Trap is getting bodied in GSL finals he’s either fucked up or the matchup is just brutal when it hits Bo7
I don’t think incidentally that Trap is quite at his level now, perhaps he’s dispirited or something, but he’s not playing as cleanly.
So, no, the reason why toss players are not winning premier tournaments is NOT because it is a race with choking players.
Race with choking players, that sounds ridiculously funny :D Did someone actually suggest that?
I mean Trap is a massive choker, and being the best protoss it tends to be more visible because he is in the spotlight, but suggesting toss as race are chokers is dumb lol
Trap was a choker 5 years ago. Is there anything suggesting his mistakes now are chokes? They seem so small and not clumped up. Trap isn't missing shade cancel on 10+ adepts scouting opponent's army twice in a series (vs TY in 2016). He isn't flying 3 oracles into the same mine (don't remember who he played), isn't move commanding 2 scouting stalkers past the opponent's stalker, losing them, and moving the sentry instead of the hallucination to the opponent's base (vs Stats in 2017 iirc). Trap was great then, if you removed all his major mistakes. He stopped choking and became great. At least that's how I see it.
What do you see as signs of choking from Trap?
I say he's a choker because he plays vastly better in tier 2 tournaments than in tier 1 tournaments. In tier 2 tournaments he beat Serral and Reynor both in bo7s, also beat Dark multiple times in bo5s and did well against anybody else but he just couldn't bring it at the biggest stage. Like the last GSL finals vs Dark where he overcommitted in one game and lost everything, unnecessarily lost a game to scouted Nydus because he missed a changeling in another. You will probably say 'yeah Protoss is just more unforgiving' but then why did this only happen to him in the GSL and in other tournaments he looked almost invincible?
It’s a GSL finals, you still have to make it through the gauntlet. Taking out Maru in playoffs isn’t something you can do without some mental fortitude.
His first two I think he performed fine, he just got brutalised, I don’t think he played well against Dark last time granted.
I don’t really buy the tier 1/2 distinction outside of Katowice, and outside of latency considerations.
Especially for a Protoss player, it’s harder to push through a bracket with Serral and Reynor added than not.
Added Terrans are basically immaterial, they’re not going to be better than Maru (or Cure recently) TvP. Added Zergs well Serral especially is an absolute ZvP monster
Field and bracket dependent of course, but especially for Protoss given PvZ issues. Serral and Reynor are leagues above the rest of Korea unless you’re called Dark or Rogue.
I’d rate both Katowice and international tournaments above Code S at present. If we’re purely talking TvZ Clem is one of the absolute best outside of maybe Maru, and Reynor and Serral are a tier above every other Zerg outside of Rogue and Dark
It’s not peak Kespa era where international players were filling the spots of better players at international tournaments, Code S is missing some of the best talent in the scene.
not sure what your point is, I didn't differentiate between Code S and IEM Katowice? The complain by Protoss players is that they haven't won a 'tier 1' tournament (more specifically Code S and Katowice) in forever and I think one of the reasons for that is that Trap in particular chokes quite a lot in those two tournament circuits while he for a while dominated the field in any other tournament. Especially in the last finals vs Dark and his series vs Cure it was apparent that he didn't play at his usual skill level
But Trap is basically losing every true premier final the same way that other top Toss pros like Stats and Zest have for the last 3 or so years - collapsing in epic tragic fashion (eg dying to ling runby).
The reality is that this type of losing by 'choking' almost always happens to Toss. So either all Toss are 'chokers', or there's something inherent in the game design that makes Toss players more likely to 'choke' than other races.
I do see Terran players also capable of 'choking' in their own way. But it's quite clear (to me, at least) that Zergs have many failsafes against 'choking' or more opportunities to comeback from 'choking'.
(Also, I feel that people tend to overstate Zest not playing to his usual skill level. Zest usual level is clown fiesta and chaos mode. Zest winning Bo7 against Rogue is an outlier result, not the norm. The way that Zest lost against Cure is typical Zest playing in a premier final rather than Zest 'choking'. And I'm saying this as a semi Zest fan. The larger point here is that people tend to pick outlier Toss wins as the norm and Toss 'choking' as an exception, where the opposite is closer to reality.)
On December 09 2021 10:13 RKC wrote: Not sure what 'choking' here means.
But Trap is basically losing every true premier final the same way that other top Toss pros like Stats and Zest have for the last 3 or so years - collapsing in epic tragic fashion (eg dying to ling runby).
The reality is that this type of losing by 'choking' almost always happens to Toss. So either all Toss are 'chokers', or there's something inherent in the game design that makes Toss players more likely to 'choke' than other races.
I do see Terran players also capable of 'choking' in their own way. But it's quite clear (to me, at least) that Zergs have many failsafes against 'choking' or more opportunities to comeback from 'choking'.
(Also, I feel that people tend to overstate Zest not playing to his usual skill level. Zest usual level is clown fiesta and chaos mode. Zest winning Bo7 against Rogue is an outlier result, not the norm. The way that Zest lost against Cure is typical Zest playing in a premier final rather than Zest 'choking'. And I'm saying this as a semi Zest fan.)
An alternative is that they aren’t choking and are the underdog in every finals. Therefore the results meet the expected outcome of the matchup. I believe this to be true so Trap hasn’t choked in the finals because him winning would have been an upset.
With the current meta already figured out, all possible early game harassment strategies against zerg are figured out and can be defended.
Cannons are a good option. Pylon, Forge, block nat, cannon their next expo (nat placed at third.) Delay your own gas hope they dont go roaches/ravagers It would be really nice if there were some decent ways to put pressure on greedy zergs early.
There isn't a single factor for which Protoss haven't won a "tier 1" tournament since 2017.
An undeniable fact is that all of the top Protoss players(but Trap) saw their record in Premier finals(which I guess, include t1 and t2 tournaments following the nomenclature you have been using) definitely worsened since the last Code S won by Stats. sOs was 5-2 before that and went 0-2, Zest was 6-2 and went 0-4, Stats was 4-4 and went 1-6, Classic was 3-0 and went 2-2 whereas Trap was 0-2 and went 6-6(with his amazing streak of six consecutive wins from December 2021 to June 2020); it's definitely not Trap's fault and it can't also be said that the players I am listing are not same tier as those of the other races. Curiously, since that last Code S triumph, the same Protoss player performed well in finals of tournaments labeled as Major on Liquipedia(I guess we could call them tier 3): Zest went 6-1, Classic won two of those, Trap and Stats won one.
It's true that PvZ, the matchup that was played the most in Premier finals, has been favourable to Zerg at the highest level more often than not during the period we are looking at, being borderline unplayable in the second half of 2019. It's also true that in these last four years the Zerg race has been gifted with the birth of three new top tier Zerg contenders, Rogue, Serral and Reynor while seeing Dark transition from Kong(2-8 in Premier finals) to champion(5-1 after that date winning a BlizzCon and a Code S). Something similar has occurred to Maru for Terran from 2018 onwards as previously discussed.
Bisudagger suggested that Protoss were the underdogs in almost every final they played and, while form isn't stable in Sc2, I beg to differ. Classic looked like the best player in the world in January 2018 and was crushed by Rogue who, while being the reigning BlizzCon champ at the time, wasn't expected to win; sOs was taken down by Scarlett at IEM Pyeongchang shortly after, an upset again. While Stats had the misfortune of being repeatedly stopped in 2018 by Serral and Maru enjoying the best year of their careers in series in which he performed very well, he ultimately choked at Katowice in 2019 when he was smashing Zerg left and right and the matchup was even(even if Nydus spam was being used awfully too often), getting swept by soO, the prince of kongs in Sc2, after being ahead 2-0. Trap lost his first Code S final at the end of the Protoss spring in 2019, he was on the rise but hadn't really transitioned yet to a top player entirely, he played well but Dark played slightly better; however, his third and most recent loss(skipping the horrendous abuse Rogue perpetrated in Trap's second final) took place when Trap's streak of victories was still open and Dark far from being the terror he was at the end of 2019. Trap played awfully, much below the standards he had set just few months before, and we could safely say he choked that day(so sad...). Zest has been a very unstable player since his Code S title in 2016 and he wasn't really supposed to reach the Code S final in which Maru destroyed him or the last two finals at Katowice. In 2021 he showed more consistency and, just as Trap's form waned, became the best Protoss in the world, leading him to break Rogue's offline bo7 streak and rightfully earning a place in Code S S3 finals only to play uninspiringly and be unexpectedly defeated by Cure(who, has to be said, was looking sharp in TvP).
I would say that after all only unfortunate coincidences kept Protoss from winning a t1 tournament recently, I think they should have won at least Code S and Katowice once in these last four years. With korean army being preying so heavily on Protoss' top players, ZvP looking Zerg favoured again and balance udpates posponed indefinitely I think it will be harder than ever for Protoss to win in 2022; an appropriate set of maps could help, the biggest hope is the rise of MaxPax(who is a very young and rapidly improving player, no wonder he hasn't been in a final yet) but we could also be surprised by Zoun's growth or herO's(Classic's, maybe?) return to greatness.
On December 09 2021 10:13 RKC wrote: Not sure what 'choking' here means.
But Trap is basically losing every true premier final the same way that other top Toss pros like Stats and Zest have for the last 3 or so years - collapsing in epic tragic fashion (eg dying to ling runby).
The reality is that this type of losing by 'choking' almost always happens to Toss.
Not really, Maru for example choked the same way in the GSL finals vs Rogue.
On December 09 2021 10:13 RKC wrote: Not sure what 'choking' here means.
But Trap is basically losing every true premier final the same way that other top Toss pros like Stats and Zest have for the last 3 or so years - collapsing in epic tragic fashion (eg dying to ling runby).
The reality is that this type of losing by 'choking' almost always happens to Toss. So either all Toss are 'chokers', or there's something inherent in the game design that makes Toss players more likely to 'choke' than other races.
I do see Terran players also capable of 'choking' in their own way. But it's quite clear (to me, at least) that Zergs have many failsafes against 'choking' or more opportunities to comeback from 'choking'.
(Also, I feel that people tend to overstate Zest not playing to his usual skill level. Zest usual level is clown fiesta and chaos mode. Zest winning Bo7 against Rogue is an outlier result, not the norm. The way that Zest lost against Cure is typical Zest playing in a premier final rather than Zest 'choking'. And I'm saying this as a semi Zest fan.)
An alternative is that they aren’t choking and are the underdog in every finals. Therefore the results meet the expected outcome of the matchup. I believe this to be true so Trap hasn’t choked in the finals because him winning would have been an upset.
True for some cases but I think at least Zest's GSL finals vs Cure and Stats' Katowice finals vs soO SHOULD 100% have been won by them and they can only blame themselves for losing. Also Trap should have done a lot better in the last GSL finals vs Dark. If those 2 or 3 tournaments went to Protoss we may not even have this discussion here. So I don't really agree with the premise that Toss can never win a tier 1 tournament
There's also the elephant in the room that is getting lost in this noise. Protoss is dominating GM league in all 3 regions at the moment (slightly less so in Korea.) So do we really WANT to just start handing them buffs when they are already the most represented race (by pure numbers) in most major or premier tournaments and are dominating the ladder?
Doesn't make sense to me that that would be a good solution.
I think the problems are more A: Players that have never distinguished themselves as clear cut frontrunners of the race and B: inherent design problems like Warp Gate that haven't been properly addressed over the years.
In all of this noise about how Protoss isn't winning anything, we can't forget that Protoss is absolutely crushing the ladder at the moment. That speaks to a more specific issue than "Protoss is weak" or whatever. It makes the problem a lot more subtle and specific in how it needs to be approached.
If the opposite of 'choking' means losing 3-4 in a finals with all long macro games without being mind-gamed, letting a build order lead slip, take on a bad engagement or two... then basically every runners-up is a choker...
On December 09 2021 22:32 Vindicare605 wrote: There's also the elephant in the room that is getting lost in this noise. Protoss is dominating GM league in all 3 regions at the moment (slightly less so in Korea.) So do we really WANT to just start handing them buffs when they are already the most representated race (by pure numbers) in most major or premier tournaments and are dominating the ladder?
Doesn't make sense to me that that would be a good solution.
I think the problems are more A: Players that have never distinguished themselves as clear cut frontrunners of the race and B: inherent design problems like Warp Gate that haven't been properly addressed over the years.
In all of this noise about how Protoss isn't winning anything, we can't forget that Protoss is absolutely crushing the ladder at the moment. That speaks to a more specific issue than "Protoss is weak" or whatever. It makes the problem a lot more subtle and specific in how it needs to be approached.
Even with the information that there might be another patch there is no particular reason to expect that "the problem" is going to be approached. All this dancing around is just giving hope to people that probably shouldn't have any, apart from an hypothetical godlike Maxpax in a few months/years.
On December 09 2021 22:32 Vindicare605 wrote: There's also the elephant in the room that is getting lost in this noise. Protoss is dominating GM league in all 3 regions at the moment (slightly less so in Korea.) So do we really WANT to just start handing them buffs when they are already the most representated race (by pure numbers) in most major or premier tournaments and are dominating the ladder?
Doesn't make sense to me that that would be a good solution.
I think the problems are more A: Players that have never distinguished themselves as clear cut frontrunners of the race and B: inherent design problems like Warp Gate that haven't been properly addressed over the years.
In all of this noise about how Protoss isn't winning anything, we can't forget that Protoss is absolutely crushing the ladder at the moment. That speaks to a more specific issue than "Protoss is weak" or whatever. It makes the problem a lot more subtle and specific in how it needs to be approached.
Even at pro level, they made the most money so buffing them would only propel them to 2019 zerg status. The real problem is design wise, especially in PvZ (the PvT issues with void rays seem to be solved with big maps, but that’s also a problem in itself to have such big maps).
Let’s just hope Blizzard ends up patching the game after Katowice. EPT seems to be doing well and now that AoE4 is there, they should reconsider their investment to remain the top RTS title
On December 09 2021 22:32 Vindicare605 wrote: There's also the elephant in the room that is getting lost in this noise. Protoss is dominating GM league in all 3 regions at the moment (slightly less so in Korea.) So do we really WANT to just start handing them buffs when they are already the most representated race (by pure numbers) in most major or premier tournaments and are dominating the ladder?
I did a quick google and the only result I got says that Terran is more represented in Grandmasters globally, as well as NA and Korea specifically?
It also indicated Terran to be the most represented race in every league below Masters by far, so since you don't believe in balancing at the highest level, maybe we need to nerf Terran for the benefit of all these ladder players?
On December 09 2021 22:32 Vindicare605 wrote: There's also the elephant in the room that is getting lost in this noise. Protoss is dominating GM league in all 3 regions at the moment (slightly less so in Korea.) So do we really WANT to just start handing them buffs when they are already the most representated race (by pure numbers) in most major or premier tournaments and are dominating the ladder?
Doesn't make sense to me that that would be a good solution.
I think the problems are more A: Players that have never distinguished themselves as clear cut frontrunners of the race and B: inherent design problems like Warp Gate that haven't been properly addressed over the years.
In all of this noise about how Protoss isn't winning anything, we can't forget that Protoss is absolutely crushing the ladder at the moment. That speaks to a more specific issue than "Protoss is weak" or whatever. It makes the problem a lot more subtle and specific in how it needs to be approached.
There is also this.
One suggestion I did like was raiseable/or phasing in/out of existence batteries.
The amount of frustrating losses caused by ling runbys in big finals, sometimes adepts being pushed out of seemingly solid wall offs was a little annoying over the last while.
I couldn’t see this bumping the level of the average ladder Toss, but it could make them a little more reliable against frustrating losses at the highest level.
I can’t think of many other tweaks that wouldn’t augment Toss at at lower levels.
I can’t really think of many ways to make Protoss’ ceiling higher and the floor lower, short of wholesale ambitious redesigns, and ultimately that seems to be what most people would want m.
On December 09 2021 23:41 datastuff wrote: Blizzard api is fucked and apparently it's above the intern's pay grade to fix it. Use starcraft2.com
Ok, thanks.
Damn thanks for this I knew Protoss was the most populous ladder race but good lord look at those EU numbers :O
I don't think any of this invalidates the primary topic though, which is (correct me if I'm mistaken) that while Protoss remains strong and well balanced/maybe a tad OP in certain specific scenarios at the casual level of play they are the weakest race at the tip top level of play.
To which, I repeat a sentiment that I think holds at least a small amount of merit
# 1. Perfect balance at the top is hard to achieve, there will always be a dominant race and a weakest race as evidenced by Brood War where I do believe that Protoss is also a bit of an underperformer in at the highest level.
# 2. Power creep has finally caught up, and the highest level Zergs are using their full arsenal at the highest level. Deathballs were a problem back in the day, now we've had years to perfect Viper usage to fight them. Lurkers were at first under utilized when LOTV dropped, but those days are long gone and pretty much the end game go to and reigns supreme.
My solutions are simple, and could be easily implemented by Blizzard in a variety of ways that people who are much better at crunching fine numbers then me could figure out.
- Nerf Lurker HP so that Psi Storm and Immortals can deal with them more reliably. I think this nerf would be a more ZvP centric change because for the most part Terrans engage Lurkers with Liberators, Ghost snipe, and Siege Tanks. I don't know the exact numbers on the tank shots but I'm pretty sure an HP reduction wouldn't affect the way snipe interacts with the Lurker because the damage is instant and ability damage. Feel free to correct me on this though.
- Remove Adaptive Talons from the game entirely so that Zergs must take a risk when deciding to burrow Lurkers, fwiw I think back in the day it was okay to have this upgrade in the game but not anymore, this could be a riskier way to nerf the Lurker though because then Ghosts will potentially become very dominant against them.
I don't think you can remove or nerf Subterranean Spines though, it would change the way the unit itself works too much, I think a targeted ZvP nerf is in order.
On December 09 2021 22:32 Vindicare605 wrote: There's also the elephant in the room that is getting lost in this noise. Protoss is dominating GM league in all 3 regions at the moment (slightly less so in Korea.) So do we really WANT to just start handing them buffs when they are already the most representated race (by pure numbers) in most major or premier tournaments and are dominating the ladder?
Doesn't make sense to me that that would be a good solution.
I think the problems are more A: Players that have never distinguished themselves as clear cut frontrunners of the race and B: inherent design problems like Warp Gate that haven't been properly addressed over the years.
In all of this noise about how Protoss isn't winning anything, we can't forget that Protoss is absolutely crushing the ladder at the moment. That speaks to a more specific issue than "Protoss is weak" or whatever. It makes the problem a lot more subtle and specific in how it needs to be approached.
There is also this.
One suggestion I did like was raiseable/or phasing in/out of existence batteries.
The amount of frustrating losses caused by ling runbys in big finals, sometimes adepts being pushed out of seemingly solid wall offs was a little annoying over the last while.
I couldn’t see this bumping the level of the average ladder Toss, but it could make them a little more reliable against frustrating losses at the highest level.
I can’t think of many other tweaks that wouldn’t augment Toss at at lower levels.
I can’t really think of many ways to make Protoss’ ceiling higher and the floor lower, short of wholesale ambitious redesigns, and ultimately that seems to be what most people would want m.
We watched Maru die to ling/bane runbys in GSL ST finals. It happens. Sometimes players make the decision to prioritize units over defenses at the third to keep the Zerg honest.
Frankly, Zerg's larva and creep mechanics were designed for the era of early WoL. Capping the number of Queens is needed. A supply increase would be a good start to create a soft cap.
Queens are out of control. I don't completely hate it because Toss air is also out-of-control without the threat of queen walks.
But game shouldn't be in a state where the most effective strategy is to walk "defensive" queens up to the enemy base. This is similar to cannon rush being the best strategy. It's cheesy at best.
On December 09 2021 23:41 datastuff wrote: Blizzard api is fucked and apparently it's above the intern's pay grade to fix it. Use starcraft2.com
Ok, thanks.
Damn thanks for this I knew Protoss was the most populous ladder race but good lord look at those EU numbers :O
I don't think any of this invalidates the primary topic though, which is (correct me if I'm mistaken) that while Protoss remains strong and well balanced/maybe a tad OP in certain specific scenarios at the casual level of play they are the weakest race at the tip top level of play.
To which, I repeat a sentiment that I think holds at least a small amount of merit
# 1. Perfect balance at the top is hard to achieve, there will always be a dominant race and a weakest race as evidenced by Brood War where I do believe that Protoss is also a bit of an underperformer in at the highest level.
# 2. Power creep has finally caught up, and the highest level Zergs are using their full arsenal at the highest level. Deathballs were a problem back in the day, now we've had years to perfect Viper usage to fight them. Lurkers were at first under utilized when LOTV dropped, but those days are long gone and pretty much the end game go to and reigns supreme.
My solutions are simple, and could be easily implemented by Blizzard in a variety of ways that people who are much better at crunching fine numbers then me could figure out.
- Nerf Lurker HP so that Psi Storm and Immortals can deal with them more reliably. I think this nerf would be a more ZvP centric change because for the most part Terrans engage Lurkers with Liberators, Ghost snipe, and Siege Tanks. I don't know the exact numbers on the tank shots but I'm pretty sure an HP reduction wouldn't affect the way snipe interacts with the Lurker because the damage is instant and ability damage. Feel free to correct me on this though.
- Remove Adaptive Talons from the game entirely so that Zergs must take a risk when deciding to burrow Lurkers, fwiw I think back in the day it was okay to have this upgrade in the game but not anymore, this could be a riskier way to nerf the Lurker though because then Ghosts will potentially become very dominant against them.
I don't think you can remove or nerf Subterranean Spines though, it would change the way the unit itself works too much, I think a targeted ZvP nerf is in order.
1 and 2 I largely agree.
Perfect balance with genuinely different races is impossible. Even at the highest level, but especially when we consider both all levels of play, as well as things like being equally fun/rewarding to play too.
I don’t think there necessarily has to be a dominant race though, Protoss can end up the whipping boys for a variety of factors. Probably more so in BW than SC2
I’m speaking in rough generalisations so, don’t slaughter me folks! You have 3 matchups to play. At the very tip top level PvT feels pretty even, PvZ a little in the Zerg’s favour perhaps. Then add in the most volatile mirror, although it’s not so bad overall. Numbers probably don’t back this up, going from the eye test and the very, very best. Zerg have a good matchup in ZvP and an even matchup in ZvT, Terrans have two pretty even matchups. Generally in ZvZ and TvT the top Zergs reliably win their mirrors two.
With a pretty small scene and matchup variance brackets end up being pretty important, probably why last GSL was so disappointing, the stage very much felt set for Trap or Zest to take it.
A scenario where P>T>Z>P could be considerably less balanced than what we have now, and probably not as fun, but you’d cut out there being a dominant and a lagging race in a rock/paper/scissor sense
Bisu flipped the switch for a while in BW and won quite a lot by turning PvZ on its head for a while, and being solid in the other two matchups. Periods previous and subsequently where things were more solidly Z>P it’s difficult
On lurker nerfs, someone more diligent than me would need to crunch the numbers on interactions, but adaptive talons feels too potent and I just don’t like a siege type unit having so little setup time.
If anything default burrow is maybe a bit slow, talons are way too fast. Perhaps make their passive burrow just a little speedier and remove talons?
I agree that adaptive talons is a bit much. I forget what game it was but I believe Zest had some zealots that he was going to use in a run by, saw the lurkers and ran the zealots away but the lurkers just chased after them burrowed and killed them. If nothing else that is just a silly looking interaction to see a siege unit chase down what are intended to be fairly mobile units lol.
On December 10 2021 01:33 Moonerz wrote: I agree that adaptive talons is a bit much. I forget what game it was but I believe Zest had some zealots that he was going to use in a run by, saw the lurkers and ran the zealots away but the lurkers just chased after them burrowed and killed them. If nothing else that is just a silly looking interaction to see a siege unit chase down what are intended to be fairly mobile units lol.
It's even stupider in the TvZ. Oh, look, tanks on high ground, let's run into them and speed burrow. And it works When I saw Dark doing this I was questioning everything. No Vipers, just mass of lurkers burrowing next to tanks. Mostly because lurkers are siege units like the tanks, but unlike tanks they have godlike siege speed upgrade.
On December 10 2021 00:24 Beelzebub1 wrote: - Nerf Lurker HP so that Psi Storm and Immortals can deal with them more reliably. I think this nerf would be a more ZvP centric change because for the most part Terrans engage Lurkers with Liberators, Ghost snipe, and Siege Tanks. I don't know the exact numbers on the tank shots but I'm pretty sure an HP reduction wouldn't affect the way snipe interacts with the Lurker because the damage is instant and ability damage. Feel free to correct me on this though.
Lurker has got 200 hp, 1 armour. Attribute biological and armored.
Liberator does 75 damage per shot unupgraded, maximum 90 damage per shot. Steady targeting (Ghosts "snipe") deals 175 damage. Siege tank deals 70 damage per shot without upgrades, maximum 85 damage per shot.
Psionic storm deals 80 damage per storm. Immortal deals 50 damage per shot, 65 with full upgrades. Purification nova (Disruptor) deal 145 damage.
3 shots from an Immortal with full upgrades, and no armour upgrades for the Lurker, deals 192 damage. This is the only break point that exists earlier for Protoss than for Terran. Unupgraded Terran units are slightly worse, but upgraded units are better than the Psionic storm.
This is only considering an isolated Lurker, not any AoE or splash damage. Storm has got the widest area, while Liberator Concord Cannon is single target attack.
Generally, reducing Lurker HP is greatly helping Terran (one Snipe or 2 normal attacks) while Protoss gets a slight boost (need 2 full time Storms, 5.7 seconds, or 3 Immortal attacks). It has the opposite effect from what you intended.
On December 10 2021 00:24 Beelzebub1 wrote: - Nerf Lurker HP so that Psi Storm and Immortals can deal with them more reliably. I think this nerf would be a more ZvP centric change because for the most part Terrans engage Lurkers with Liberators, Ghost snipe, and Siege Tanks. I don't know the exact numbers on the tank shots but I'm pretty sure an HP reduction wouldn't affect the way snipe interacts with the Lurker because the damage is instant and ability damage. Feel free to correct me on this though.
Lurker has got 200 hp, 1 armour. Attribute biological and armored.
Liberator does 75 damage per shot unupgraded, maximum 90 damage per shot. Steady targeting (Ghosts "snipe") deals 175 damage. Siege tank deals 70 damage per shot without upgrades, maximum 85 damage per shot.
Psionic storm deals 80 damage per storm. Immortal deals 50 damage per shot, 65 with full upgrades. Purification nova (Disruptor) deal 145 damage.
3 shots from an Immortal with full upgrades, and no armour upgrades for the Lurker, deals 192 damage. This is the only break point that exists earlier for Protoss than for Terran. Unupgraded Terran units are slightly worse, but upgraded units are better than the Psionic storm.
This is only considering an isolated Lurker, not any AoE or splash damage. Storm has got the widest area, while Liberator Concord Cannon is single target attack.
Generally, reducing Lurker HP is greatly helping Terran (one Snipe or 2 normal attacks) while Protoss gets a slight boost (need 2 full time Storms, 5.7 seconds, or 3 Immortal attacks). It has the opposite effect from what you intended.
I appreciate you posting this, perhaps removal of Adaptive Talons would be the best way to go. I dislike the upgrade even as a Zerg player, I don't care for upgrades that remove key weaknesses from strong units resulting in a gigantic power spike.
On December 10 2021 00:24 Beelzebub1 wrote: - Nerf Lurker HP so that Psi Storm and Immortals can deal with them more reliably. I think this nerf would be a more ZvP centric change because for the most part Terrans engage Lurkers with Liberators, Ghost snipe, and Siege Tanks. I don't know the exact numbers on the tank shots but I'm pretty sure an HP reduction wouldn't affect the way snipe interacts with the Lurker because the damage is instant and ability damage. Feel free to correct me on this though.
Lurker has got 200 hp, 1 armour. Attribute biological and armored.
Liberator does 75 damage per shot unupgraded, maximum 90 damage per shot. Steady targeting (Ghosts "snipe") deals 175 damage. Siege tank deals 70 damage per shot without upgrades, maximum 85 damage per shot.
Psionic storm deals 80 damage per storm. Immortal deals 50 damage per shot, 65 with full upgrades. Purification nova (Disruptor) deal 145 damage.
3 shots from an Immortal with full upgrades, and no armour upgrades for the Lurker, deals 192 damage. This is the only break point that exists earlier for Protoss than for Terran. Unupgraded Terran units are slightly worse, but upgraded units are better than the Psionic storm.
This is only considering an isolated Lurker, not any AoE or splash damage. Storm has got the widest area, while Liberator Concord Cannon is single target attack.
Generally, reducing Lurker HP is greatly helping Terran (one Snipe or 2 normal attacks) while Protoss gets a slight boost (need 2 full time Storms, 5.7 seconds, or 3 Immortal attacks). It has the opposite effect from what you intended.
I appreciate you posting this, perhaps removal of Adaptive Talons would be the best way to go. I dislike the upgrade even as a Zerg player, I don't care for upgrades that remove key weaknesses from strong units resulting in a gigantic power spike.
Without talons, lurkers are terrible against terran. It just becomes a worse, more expensive, later game siege tank that can be sniped.
On December 09 2021 07:33 WombaT wrote: TLDR you don’t win what, 6 tournaments the last 2 years with a bunch of silvers and top 4s, set a record for consecutive Code S round of 8s with a reverse sweep in there to win a tournament if you are a ‘choker’
It’s silly. It’s a framing that doesn’t correlate with reality.
Trap’s 2019-21 results are outstanding by any metric. He’s been by a distance the best Protoss player.
If Trap is getting bodied in GSL finals he’s either fucked up or the matchup is just brutal when it hits Bo7
I don’t think incidentally that Trap is quite at his level now, perhaps he’s dispirited or something, but he’s not playing as cleanly.
You do realize Code S RO4 is BO7 either, right?
Edit> Also Terran is fine in the TSL8 while Protoss is dead, right? What did I tell you! But Terrans still have the hero marine they need!
I don't think Protoss is as unplayable as some people here say (the reasons have been explained thoroughly) But a small buff to boost their performance a bit would probably be appropiate like Warpprism cost -50 (which was a stupid thing to increase anyway after 1 tournament in which Zerg struggled with Immortal allins). Massive changes like Lurker nerfs etc are absolutely not needed imo
Edit> Also Terran is fine in the TSL8 while Protoss is dead, right? What did I tell you! But Terrans still have the hero marine they need!
Oh has Protoss sucked for five years? Well, Terran has not done well in this one tournament! It's been a full four weeks since Maru won Dreamhack Masters, two months since Cure won GSL!
Not even getting into how many top Terrans got their losses in TvT in that tournament either. Maru and Cure both got knocked out of the upper bracket in TvT upsets, and along with Clem that makes every Terran to win a Premier in 2021 got put in the same corner of the lower bracket and had to knock each other out (along with Dream and Special).
Edit> Also Terran is fine in the TSL8 while Protoss is dead, right? What did I tell you! But Terrans still have the hero marine they need!
Oh has Protoss sucked for five years? Well, Terran has not done well in this one tournament! It's been a full four weeks since Maru won Dreamhack Masters, two months since Cure won GSL!
Not even getting into how many top Terrans got their losses in TvT in that tournament either. Maru and Cure both got knocked out of the upper bracket in TvT upsets, and along with Clem that makes every Terran to win a Premier in 2021 got put in the same corner of the lower bracket and had to knock each other out (along with Dream and Special).
On November 18 2021 10:03 RKC wrote: The fact that Toss dominated HoTS and dropped off the cliff in LoTV simply proves the point that Toss players didn't just all slumped overnight.
Whether Terran and Zerg deserve their shot at glory by benefiting more from LoTV drastic design revamp doesn't detract from the fact that Toss as a whole has been left behind.
In such an assymmetrical game with volatile changes, it's more likely than not that abnormal statistical success rates is due to racial imbalances, rather than player skill.
Anyway, my concern is more about ensuring diversity in the game. SC2 and BW being reduced to a one or two race game would be less fun to watch.
in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing fine with 3 Starleague victories. In 2018 Maru and Serral won everything and 2019 had undeniably atrocious balance. But from 2020 on the balance is fine imo, Toss won a lot of tier 2 events (Trap) and reached numerous finals in tier 1 events, despite a lot of their top players leaving for military (herO, Classic and now Stats)
Really I don't get how someone can watch the tournaments these past 2 years and come to the conclusion: "yep, Protoss is unplayable garbage, no point watching this" !!??
Your issue is that you're trying to have a balance conversation so you need to defend your race, but again the people who are serious aren't talking about balance.
It is super obvious to everyone, including you, that the best protoss players right now are the least likely to win a tournament against the best terrans and the best zergs, and this by a large margin. You can obtain that knowledge in any number of ways, you can watch tournaments, you can hear casters talking about the players, you can check statistical results of the best players of each race...
This doesn't demonstrate that the game has to change in any way. You're taking a larger conversation and you're trying to fit it into your "don't nerf my race" agenda where it doesn't belong.
I'm not the one who makes it into a balance discussion!!?? I try to understand the people thinking it's a balance problem, as I don't see it.
Also you can stop your attempts trying to discredit me by claiming I'm biased, I don't even have a race, I'm playing random for the last 3-4 years already. Can we stop the unnecessary ad hominems and focus on the arguments?
A bunch of people came into this thread to say that the best protoss players were weaker in skill than the best zergs and the best terrans. You had no issue with any of their posts. I said it could be that or it could be balance. You had issue with my posts. Some other people are convinced that it's balance. You had issue with their posts.
Sure sounds like your issue is people who talk about balance.
Spot on.
I'm not sure what exactly is the cause of the problem. But the problem is there - Toss has been struggling to win top tier competitions in LoTV. Like you, I'm concerned about the diversity of the game. Balance is not the focus here.
I'm also frustrated as you are why some people seem to be denying that there is actually a problem at all (or trying to shift the focus to some other problem).
(I don't care about low level ladder stats, or lower tier competitions. That's not the problem - or may be a different problem altogether.)
What kind of problem are we talking about? Was soO getting into finals and not winning a race problem? Balance problem? Are Protoss players who get to the finals and can't win them if their lives depend on it a problem we can solve?
Out of the 3 Code S tournaments this year Protoss was in the 2 finals. IEM Katowice - Protoss was in the finals.
If we count only these "top tier tournaments" - we had 4 of them, 3 zergs, 3 protosses and 2 terrans in the finals
"But what about BO7 and Protoss?!" - well, you see, GSL semis are BO7 so if they can get pass that, they're not so bad in BO7-ing.
Let's ignore that Trap actually really won some tournaments this year, he has what, 5 titles? Let's check this years premier tournaments (yes, NA included) Trap - 7 appearances, 5 victories (0 Tier 1) Reynor - 4, 2 (IEM) Serral - 4, 2 (0) Neeb - 3, 2 (0) and yes, all NA Clem - 3, 2 (0) Scarlett - 3, 1 (0) and yes, all NA Maru - 3, 1 (0) Rogue - 2, 1 (GSL) Zoun - 2, 0 (0) Zest - 2, 0 (0) Cure - 1, 1 (GSL) Dark - 1, 1 (GSL) Solar - 1, 0 (0)
Totally per race Protoss: 11, 5 with NA +3, 2 Zerg: 12, 6 (IEM, Code S, Code S) with NA +3, 1 Terran: 7, 4 (Code S)
I don't know, to me it seems we have a Terran problem. The least amount of victories in the premier tournaments, the least amount of presence in the finals. FFS with the NA they have half the finals.
Also out of 4 tier 1 tournaments(how you people here call it) 3 were taken by zergs, so to me it seems that Protoss is fine, Zergs too stronk and Terran not stronk enough.
Edit> Back, when I was tracking this since the "Patch Zerg era", I used to say that Protoss is the race of Kongs, the most finals, the worst w/r. Terrans are Yoda race - do or do not. You either win or don't bother to the finals at all. And Zergs take the most important titles while being good at winning elsewhere as well.
As it seems valid for 2021.
AND NO ONE REPLIED TO THIS POST IN A MEANINGFUL WAY. You whiners are a fucking joke.
On December 11 2021 02:58 Charoisaur wrote: I don't think Protoss is as unplayable as some people here say (the reasons have been explained thoroughly) But a small buff to boost their performance a bit would probably be appropiate like Warpprism cost -50 (which was a stupid thing to increase anyway after 1 tournament in which Zerg struggled with Immortal allins). Massive changes like Lurker nerfs etc are absolutely not needed imo
I agree that Protoss is playable (at least for Trap) BUT a buff is needed at top pro level, because Aligulac shows clearly that top protosses have been struggling throughout LotV. WarpPrism is the obvious target here, I would revert both the cost nerf and the pickup range nerf. I'd like the Archon opening to be viable again in PvZ. Removing Flux Vanes (or however it is written) at the same time would be nice, specially for below-pro players. Void Rays should not have a late-game buff.
Well I think someone should close this thread everything has been said, anyways there is no patch incoming and even if there's one after katowice it will not change the world, Blizzard can't even fix the damn ladder, it makes no sense to discuss about all of this. Move on the game was great but it's probably the end it was still a great run.
On December 09 2021 07:33 WombaT wrote: TLDR you don’t win what, 6 tournaments the last 2 years with a bunch of silvers and top 4s, set a record for consecutive Code S round of 8s with a reverse sweep in there to win a tournament if you are a ‘choker’
It’s silly. It’s a framing that doesn’t correlate with reality.
Trap’s 2019-21 results are outstanding by any metric. He’s been by a distance the best Protoss player.
If Trap is getting bodied in GSL finals he’s either fucked up or the matchup is just brutal when it hits Bo7
I don’t think incidentally that Trap is quite at his level now, perhaps he’s dispirited or something, but he’s not playing as cleanly.
You do realize Code S RO4 is BO7 either, right?
Edit> Also Terran is fine in the TSL8 while Protoss is dead, right? What did I tell you! But Terrans still have the hero marine they need!
Needs more smilies.
And yes I’m well aware, as I should have made clear by referring to the finals I am referring to Bo7s against Rogue and Dark.
Protoss and getting dumpstered in big PvZ finals is fast turning into an iconic combination.
Edit> Also Terran is fine in the TSL8 while Protoss is dead, right? What did I tell you! But Terrans still have the hero marine they need!
Oh has Protoss sucked for five years? Well, Terran has not done well in this one tournament! It's been a full four weeks since Maru won Dreamhack Masters, two months since Cure won GSL!
Not even getting into how many top Terrans got their losses in TvT in that tournament either. Maru and Cure both got knocked out of the upper bracket in TvT upsets, and along with Clem that makes every Terran to win a Premier in 2021 got put in the same corner of the lower bracket and had to knock each other out (along with Dream and Special).
On November 18 2021 10:03 RKC wrote: The fact that Toss dominated HoTS and dropped off the cliff in LoTV simply proves the point that Toss players didn't just all slumped overnight.
Whether Terran and Zerg deserve their shot at glory by benefiting more from LoTV drastic design revamp doesn't detract from the fact that Toss as a whole has been left behind.
In such an assymmetrical game with volatile changes, it's more likely than not that abnormal statistical success rates is due to racial imbalances, rather than player skill.
Anyway, my concern is more about ensuring diversity in the game. SC2 and BW being reduced to a one or two race game would be less fun to watch.
in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing fine with 3 Starleague victories. In 2018 Maru and Serral won everything and 2019 had undeniably atrocious balance. But from 2020 on the balance is fine imo, Toss won a lot of tier 2 events (Trap) and reached numerous finals in tier 1 events, despite a lot of their top players leaving for military (herO, Classic and now Stats)
Really I don't get how someone can watch the tournaments these past 2 years and come to the conclusion: "yep, Protoss is unplayable garbage, no point watching this" !!??
Your issue is that you're trying to have a balance conversation so you need to defend your race, but again the people who are serious aren't talking about balance.
It is super obvious to everyone, including you, that the best protoss players right now are the least likely to win a tournament against the best terrans and the best zergs, and this by a large margin. You can obtain that knowledge in any number of ways, you can watch tournaments, you can hear casters talking about the players, you can check statistical results of the best players of each race...
This doesn't demonstrate that the game has to change in any way. You're taking a larger conversation and you're trying to fit it into your "don't nerf my race" agenda where it doesn't belong.
I'm not the one who makes it into a balance discussion!!?? I try to understand the people thinking it's a balance problem, as I don't see it.
Also you can stop your attempts trying to discredit me by claiming I'm biased, I don't even have a race, I'm playing random for the last 3-4 years already. Can we stop the unnecessary ad hominems and focus on the arguments?
A bunch of people came into this thread to say that the best protoss players were weaker in skill than the best zergs and the best terrans. You had no issue with any of their posts. I said it could be that or it could be balance. You had issue with my posts. Some other people are convinced that it's balance. You had issue with their posts.
Sure sounds like your issue is people who talk about balance.
Spot on.
I'm not sure what exactly is the cause of the problem. But the problem is there - Toss has been struggling to win top tier competitions in LoTV. Like you, I'm concerned about the diversity of the game. Balance is not the focus here.
I'm also frustrated as you are why some people seem to be denying that there is actually a problem at all (or trying to shift the focus to some other problem).
(I don't care about low level ladder stats, or lower tier competitions. That's not the problem - or may be a different problem altogether.)
What kind of problem are we talking about? Was soO getting into finals and not winning a race problem? Balance problem? Are Protoss players who get to the finals and can't win them if their lives depend on it a problem we can solve?
Out of the 3 Code S tournaments this year Protoss was in the 2 finals. IEM Katowice - Protoss was in the finals.
If we count only these "top tier tournaments" - we had 4 of them, 3 zergs, 3 protosses and 2 terrans in the finals
"But what about BO7 and Protoss?!" - well, you see, GSL semis are BO7 so if they can get pass that, they're not so bad in BO7-ing.
Let's ignore that Trap actually really won some tournaments this year, he has what, 5 titles? Let's check this years premier tournaments (yes, NA included) Trap - 7 appearances, 5 victories (0 Tier 1) Reynor - 4, 2 (IEM) Serral - 4, 2 (0) Neeb - 3, 2 (0) and yes, all NA Clem - 3, 2 (0) Scarlett - 3, 1 (0) and yes, all NA Maru - 3, 1 (0) Rogue - 2, 1 (GSL) Zoun - 2, 0 (0) Zest - 2, 0 (0) Cure - 1, 1 (GSL) Dark - 1, 1 (GSL) Solar - 1, 0 (0)
Totally per race Protoss: 11, 5 with NA +3, 2 Zerg: 12, 6 (IEM, Code S, Code S) with NA +3, 1 Terran: 7, 4 (Code S)
I don't know, to me it seems we have a Terran problem. The least amount of victories in the premier tournaments, the least amount of presence in the finals. FFS with the NA they have half the finals.
Also out of 4 tier 1 tournaments(how you people here call it) 3 were taken by zergs, so to me it seems that Protoss is fine, Zergs too stronk and Terran not stronk enough.
Edit> Back, when I was tracking this since the "Patch Zerg era", I used to say that Protoss is the race of Kongs, the most finals, the worst w/r. Terrans are Yoda race - do or do not. You either win or don't bother to the finals at all. And Zergs take the most important titles while being good at winning elsewhere as well.
As it seems valid for 2021.
AND NO ONE REPLIED TO THIS POST IN A MEANINGFUL WAY. You whiners are a fucking joke.
I did actually. Stats of top 5 per race + offer of bet for next tournaments.
Edit> Also Terran is fine in the TSL8 while Protoss is dead, right? What did I tell you! But Terrans still have the hero marine they need!
Oh has Protoss sucked for five years? Well, Terran has not done well in this one tournament! It's been a full four weeks since Maru won Dreamhack Masters, two months since Cure won GSL!
Not even getting into how many top Terrans got their losses in TvT in that tournament either. Maru and Cure both got knocked out of the upper bracket in TvT upsets, and along with Clem that makes every Terran to win a Premier in 2021 got put in the same corner of the lower bracket and had to knock each other out (along with Dream and Special).
On November 18 2021 10:03 RKC wrote: The fact that Toss dominated HoTS and dropped off the cliff in LoTV simply proves the point that Toss players didn't just all slumped overnight.
Whether Terran and Zerg deserve their shot at glory by benefiting more from LoTV drastic design revamp doesn't detract from the fact that Toss as a whole has been left behind.
In such an assymmetrical game with volatile changes, it's more likely than not that abnormal statistical success rates is due to racial imbalances, rather than player skill.
Anyway, my concern is more about ensuring diversity in the game. SC2 and BW being reduced to a one or two race game would be less fun to watch.
in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing fine with 3 Starleague victories. In 2018 Maru and Serral won everything and 2019 had undeniably atrocious balance. But from 2020 on the balance is fine imo, Toss won a lot of tier 2 events (Trap) and reached numerous finals in tier 1 events, despite a lot of their top players leaving for military (herO, Classic and now Stats)
Really I don't get how someone can watch the tournaments these past 2 years and come to the conclusion: "yep, Protoss is unplayable garbage, no point watching this" !!??
Your issue is that you're trying to have a balance conversation so you need to defend your race, but again the people who are serious aren't talking about balance.
It is super obvious to everyone, including you, that the best protoss players right now are the least likely to win a tournament against the best terrans and the best zergs, and this by a large margin. You can obtain that knowledge in any number of ways, you can watch tournaments, you can hear casters talking about the players, you can check statistical results of the best players of each race...
This doesn't demonstrate that the game has to change in any way. You're taking a larger conversation and you're trying to fit it into your "don't nerf my race" agenda where it doesn't belong.
I'm not the one who makes it into a balance discussion!!?? I try to understand the people thinking it's a balance problem, as I don't see it.
Also you can stop your attempts trying to discredit me by claiming I'm biased, I don't even have a race, I'm playing random for the last 3-4 years already. Can we stop the unnecessary ad hominems and focus on the arguments?
A bunch of people came into this thread to say that the best protoss players were weaker in skill than the best zergs and the best terrans. You had no issue with any of their posts. I said it could be that or it could be balance. You had issue with my posts. Some other people are convinced that it's balance. You had issue with their posts.
Sure sounds like your issue is people who talk about balance.
Spot on.
I'm not sure what exactly is the cause of the problem. But the problem is there - Toss has been struggling to win top tier competitions in LoTV. Like you, I'm concerned about the diversity of the game. Balance is not the focus here.
I'm also frustrated as you are why some people seem to be denying that there is actually a problem at all (or trying to shift the focus to some other problem).
(I don't care about low level ladder stats, or lower tier competitions. That's not the problem - or may be a different problem altogether.)
What kind of problem are we talking about? Was soO getting into finals and not winning a race problem? Balance problem? Are Protoss players who get to the finals and can't win them if their lives depend on it a problem we can solve?
Out of the 3 Code S tournaments this year Protoss was in the 2 finals. IEM Katowice - Protoss was in the finals.
If we count only these "top tier tournaments" - we had 4 of them, 3 zergs, 3 protosses and 2 terrans in the finals
"But what about BO7 and Protoss?!" - well, you see, GSL semis are BO7 so if they can get pass that, they're not so bad in BO7-ing.
Let's ignore that Trap actually really won some tournaments this year, he has what, 5 titles? Let's check this years premier tournaments (yes, NA included) Trap - 7 appearances, 5 victories (0 Tier 1) Reynor - 4, 2 (IEM) Serral - 4, 2 (0) Neeb - 3, 2 (0) and yes, all NA Clem - 3, 2 (0) Scarlett - 3, 1 (0) and yes, all NA Maru - 3, 1 (0) Rogue - 2, 1 (GSL) Zoun - 2, 0 (0) Zest - 2, 0 (0) Cure - 1, 1 (GSL) Dark - 1, 1 (GSL) Solar - 1, 0 (0)
Totally per race Protoss: 11, 5 with NA +3, 2 Zerg: 12, 6 (IEM, Code S, Code S) with NA +3, 1 Terran: 7, 4 (Code S)
I don't know, to me it seems we have a Terran problem. The least amount of victories in the premier tournaments, the least amount of presence in the finals. FFS with the NA they have half the finals.
Also out of 4 tier 1 tournaments(how you people here call it) 3 were taken by zergs, so to me it seems that Protoss is fine, Zergs too stronk and Terran not stronk enough.
Edit> Back, when I was tracking this since the "Patch Zerg era", I used to say that Protoss is the race of Kongs, the most finals, the worst w/r. Terrans are Yoda race - do or do not. You either win or don't bother to the finals at all. And Zergs take the most important titles while being good at winning elsewhere as well.
As it seems valid for 2021.
AND NO ONE REPLIED TO THIS POST IN A MEANINGFUL WAY. You whiners are a fucking joke.
Ah, its alway fun to see someone whining and crying about other not reading the thread and then obviously have not comprehended or not read the thread. Funny. Tragic, but funny.
Edit> Also Terran is fine in the TSL8 while Protoss is dead, right? What did I tell you! But Terrans still have the hero marine they need!
Oh has Protoss sucked for five years? Well, Terran has not done well in this one tournament! It's been a full four weeks since Maru won Dreamhack Masters, two months since Cure won GSL!
Not even getting into how many top Terrans got their losses in TvT in that tournament either. Maru and Cure both got knocked out of the upper bracket in TvT upsets, and along with Clem that makes every Terran to win a Premier in 2021 got put in the same corner of the lower bracket and had to knock each other out (along with Dream and Special).
Are you even fucking reading the thread?
I am. Did you have an issue you wanted to bring up?
On November 18 2021 10:03 RKC wrote: The fact that Toss dominated HoTS and dropped off the cliff in LoTV simply proves the point that Toss players didn't just all slumped overnight.
Whether Terran and Zerg deserve their shot at glory by benefiting more from LoTV drastic design revamp doesn't detract from the fact that Toss as a whole has been left behind.
In such an assymmetrical game with volatile changes, it's more likely than not that abnormal statistical success rates is due to racial imbalances, rather than player skill.
Anyway, my concern is more about ensuring diversity in the game. SC2 and BW being reduced to a one or two race game would be less fun to watch.
in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing fine with 3 Starleague victories. In 2018 Maru and Serral won everything and 2019 had undeniably atrocious balance. But from 2020 on the balance is fine imo, Toss won a lot of tier 2 events (Trap) and reached numerous finals in tier 1 events, despite a lot of their top players leaving for military (herO, Classic and now Stats)
Really I don't get how someone can watch the tournaments these past 2 years and come to the conclusion: "yep, Protoss is unplayable garbage, no point watching this" !!??
Your issue is that you're trying to have a balance conversation so you need to defend your race, but again the people who are serious aren't talking about balance.
It is super obvious to everyone, including you, that the best protoss players right now are the least likely to win a tournament against the best terrans and the best zergs, and this by a large margin. You can obtain that knowledge in any number of ways, you can watch tournaments, you can hear casters talking about the players, you can check statistical results of the best players of each race...
This doesn't demonstrate that the game has to change in any way. You're taking a larger conversation and you're trying to fit it into your "don't nerf my race" agenda where it doesn't belong.
I'm not the one who makes it into a balance discussion!!?? I try to understand the people thinking it's a balance problem, as I don't see it.
Also you can stop your attempts trying to discredit me by claiming I'm biased, I don't even have a race, I'm playing random for the last 3-4 years already. Can we stop the unnecessary ad hominems and focus on the arguments?
A bunch of people came into this thread to say that the best protoss players were weaker in skill than the best zergs and the best terrans. You had no issue with any of their posts. I said it could be that or it could be balance. You had issue with my posts. Some other people are convinced that it's balance. You had issue with their posts.
Sure sounds like your issue is people who talk about balance.
Spot on.
I'm not sure what exactly is the cause of the problem. But the problem is there - Toss has been struggling to win top tier competitions in LoTV. Like you, I'm concerned about the diversity of the game. Balance is not the focus here.
I'm also frustrated as you are why some people seem to be denying that there is actually a problem at all (or trying to shift the focus to some other problem).
(I don't care about low level ladder stats, or lower tier competitions. That's not the problem - or may be a different problem altogether.)
What kind of problem are we talking about? Was soO getting into finals and not winning a race problem? Balance problem? Are Protoss players who get to the finals and can't win them if their lives depend on it a problem we can solve?
Out of the 3 Code S tournaments this year Protoss was in the 2 finals. IEM Katowice - Protoss was in the finals.
If we count only these "top tier tournaments" - we had 4 of them, 3 zergs, 3 protosses and 2 terrans in the finals
"But what about BO7 and Protoss?!" - well, you see, GSL semis are BO7 so if they can get pass that, they're not so bad in BO7-ing.
Let's ignore that Trap actually really won some tournaments this year, he has what, 5 titles? Let's check this years premier tournaments (yes, NA included) Trap - 7 appearances, 5 victories (0 Tier 1) Reynor - 4, 2 (IEM) Serral - 4, 2 (0) Neeb - 3, 2 (0) and yes, all NA Clem - 3, 2 (0) Scarlett - 3, 1 (0) and yes, all NA Maru - 3, 1 (0) Rogue - 2, 1 (GSL) Zoun - 2, 0 (0) Zest - 2, 0 (0) Cure - 1, 1 (GSL) Dark - 1, 1 (GSL) Solar - 1, 0 (0)
Totally per race Protoss: 11, 5 with NA +3, 2 Zerg: 12, 6 (IEM, Code S, Code S) with NA +3, 1 Terran: 7, 4 (Code S)
I don't know, to me it seems we have a Terran problem. The least amount of victories in the premier tournaments, the least amount of presence in the finals. FFS with the NA they have half the finals.
Also out of 4 tier 1 tournaments(how you people here call it) 3 were taken by zergs, so to me it seems that Protoss is fine, Zergs too stronk and Terran not stronk enough.
Edit> Back, when I was tracking this since the "Patch Zerg era", I used to say that Protoss is the race of Kongs, the most finals, the worst w/r. Terrans are Yoda race - do or do not. You either win or don't bother to the finals at all. And Zergs take the most important titles while being good at winning elsewhere as well.
As it seems valid for 2021.
AND NO ONE REPLIED TO THIS POST IN A MEANINGFUL WAY. You whiners are a fucking joke.
Thank you for your non-whiny, meaningful response, not-a-fucking-joke person.
As annoying as the ‘just play like Maru’ meme could be at times, there was at least a grain of truth and visible evidence in it.
I don’t think one player having to hard carry is necessarily reflective of a healthy game at all, but they at least provide tangible evidence that certain things are possible.
Protoss seem to lack a ‘just play like x’ equivalent, people may have different ideas as to why that is.
I don’t think balance is all that off, but small margins. For the big, big tournies I think much of the discrepancy is the chances of avoiding Bo7s in PvZ get quite slim.
Some Aligulac whiz probably has numbers to prove me categorically wrong but Protoss seem to do fine in the matchup up to Bo5s, and get routinely stomped in Bo7s
Last Code S not so much, Trap and Zest really flubbed their lines against Cure, not to take away from his performance.
Edit> Also Terran is fine in the TSL8 while Protoss is dead, right? What did I tell you! But Terrans still have the hero marine they need!
Oh has Protoss sucked for five years? Well, Terran has not done well in this one tournament! It's been a full four weeks since Maru won Dreamhack Masters, two months since Cure won GSL!
Not even getting into how many top Terrans got their losses in TvT in that tournament either. Maru and Cure both got knocked out of the upper bracket in TvT upsets, and along with Clem that makes every Terran to win a Premier in 2021 got put in the same corner of the lower bracket and had to knock each other out (along with Dream and Special).
Are you even fucking reading the thread?
I am. Did you have an issue you wanted to bring up?
On November 18 2021 10:03 RKC wrote: The fact that Toss dominated HoTS and dropped off the cliff in LoTV simply proves the point that Toss players didn't just all slumped overnight.
Whether Terran and Zerg deserve their shot at glory by benefiting more from LoTV drastic design revamp doesn't detract from the fact that Toss as a whole has been left behind.
In such an assymmetrical game with volatile changes, it's more likely than not that abnormal statistical success rates is due to racial imbalances, rather than player skill.
Anyway, my concern is more about ensuring diversity in the game. SC2 and BW being reduced to a one or two race game would be less fun to watch.
in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing fine with 3 Starleague victories. In 2018 Maru and Serral won everything and 2019 had undeniably atrocious balance. But from 2020 on the balance is fine imo, Toss won a lot of tier 2 events (Trap) and reached numerous finals in tier 1 events, despite a lot of their top players leaving for military (herO, Classic and now Stats)
Really I don't get how someone can watch the tournaments these past 2 years and come to the conclusion: "yep, Protoss is unplayable garbage, no point watching this" !!??
Your issue is that you're trying to have a balance conversation so you need to defend your race, but again the people who are serious aren't talking about balance.
It is super obvious to everyone, including you, that the best protoss players right now are the least likely to win a tournament against the best terrans and the best zergs, and this by a large margin. You can obtain that knowledge in any number of ways, you can watch tournaments, you can hear casters talking about the players, you can check statistical results of the best players of each race...
This doesn't demonstrate that the game has to change in any way. You're taking a larger conversation and you're trying to fit it into your "don't nerf my race" agenda where it doesn't belong.
I'm not the one who makes it into a balance discussion!!?? I try to understand the people thinking it's a balance problem, as I don't see it.
Also you can stop your attempts trying to discredit me by claiming I'm biased, I don't even have a race, I'm playing random for the last 3-4 years already. Can we stop the unnecessary ad hominems and focus on the arguments?
A bunch of people came into this thread to say that the best protoss players were weaker in skill than the best zergs and the best terrans. You had no issue with any of their posts. I said it could be that or it could be balance. You had issue with my posts. Some other people are convinced that it's balance. You had issue with their posts.
Sure sounds like your issue is people who talk about balance.
Spot on.
I'm not sure what exactly is the cause of the problem. But the problem is there - Toss has been struggling to win top tier competitions in LoTV. Like you, I'm concerned about the diversity of the game. Balance is not the focus here.
I'm also frustrated as you are why some people seem to be denying that there is actually a problem at all (or trying to shift the focus to some other problem).
(I don't care about low level ladder stats, or lower tier competitions. That's not the problem - or may be a different problem altogether.)
What kind of problem are we talking about? Was soO getting into finals and not winning a race problem? Balance problem? Are Protoss players who get to the finals and can't win them if their lives depend on it a problem we can solve?
Out of the 3 Code S tournaments this year Protoss was in the 2 finals. IEM Katowice - Protoss was in the finals.
If we count only these "top tier tournaments" - we had 4 of them, 3 zergs, 3 protosses and 2 terrans in the finals
"But what about BO7 and Protoss?!" - well, you see, GSL semis are BO7 so if they can get pass that, they're not so bad in BO7-ing.
Let's ignore that Trap actually really won some tournaments this year, he has what, 5 titles? Let's check this years premier tournaments (yes, NA included) Trap - 7 appearances, 5 victories (0 Tier 1) Reynor - 4, 2 (IEM) Serral - 4, 2 (0) Neeb - 3, 2 (0) and yes, all NA Clem - 3, 2 (0) Scarlett - 3, 1 (0) and yes, all NA Maru - 3, 1 (0) Rogue - 2, 1 (GSL) Zoun - 2, 0 (0) Zest - 2, 0 (0) Cure - 1, 1 (GSL) Dark - 1, 1 (GSL) Solar - 1, 0 (0)
Totally per race Protoss: 11, 5 with NA +3, 2 Zerg: 12, 6 (IEM, Code S, Code S) with NA +3, 1 Terran: 7, 4 (Code S)
I don't know, to me it seems we have a Terran problem. The least amount of victories in the premier tournaments, the least amount of presence in the finals. FFS with the NA they have half the finals.
Also out of 4 tier 1 tournaments(how you people here call it) 3 were taken by zergs, so to me it seems that Protoss is fine, Zergs too stronk and Terran not stronk enough.
Edit> Back, when I was tracking this since the "Patch Zerg era", I used to say that Protoss is the race of Kongs, the most finals, the worst w/r. Terrans are Yoda race - do or do not. You either win or don't bother to the finals at all. And Zergs take the most important titles while being good at winning elsewhere as well.
As it seems valid for 2021.
AND NO ONE REPLIED TO THIS POST IN A MEANINGFUL WAY. You whiners are a fucking joke.
Thank you for your non-whiny, meaningful response, not-a-fucking-joke person.
You still don't have a reply to the post I quoted. Thank you for your waste of our time.
To the mods, I apologize for my outburst. You do see this guy isn't replying to meaningful posts in the thread either. I am upset because our standard for discourse is circumvented with cheap weasel tricks.
There is no strawman narrative that Protoss are "simply not as good". To argue this existence is to acknowledge a small minority, if any. NO REASONABLE SC2 FAN ARGUES THIS. Again, another outburst.
Protoss are getting bum-rushed by Queen walks. Simply that.
But, Protoss are still well represented despite this agonizing plea that there is "simply no hope". Maru was called the "Terran hope" because it was only Maru. Yes, TY and Cure have followed up. But before that, there was no other hope for Terrans. If Maru got injured like Byun and so many other Terran pros, would you see this thread?
And I include foreign Terran's alopecia as a a form of injury.
No, we simply learned to count our blessings. So understand why I have no sympathy for those who cry about a lack of hope when they get a slightest hint that their race can be struggling. Welcome to Terran. Welcome to SC2. Count your blessings in your HIGH REPRESENTATION IN ALL OTHER LEVELS OF PLAY, INCLUDING GRAND FINALS.
Sorry you won't have a fucking Gold medal with a million (exaggeration) silvers and bronzes.
Edit> Also Terran is fine in the TSL8 while Protoss is dead, right? What did I tell you! But Terrans still have the hero marine they need!
Oh has Protoss sucked for five years? Well, Terran has not done well in this one tournament! It's been a full four weeks since Maru won Dreamhack Masters, two months since Cure won GSL!
Not even getting into how many top Terrans got their losses in TvT in that tournament either. Maru and Cure both got knocked out of the upper bracket in TvT upsets, and along with Clem that makes every Terran to win a Premier in 2021 got put in the same corner of the lower bracket and had to knock each other out (along with Dream and Special).
Are you even fucking reading the thread?
I am. Did you have an issue you wanted to bring up?
On December 11 2021 03:31 Pentarp wrote:
On November 19 2021 21:11 deacon.frost wrote:
On November 19 2021 18:16 RKC wrote:
On November 19 2021 18:06 Nebuchad wrote:
On November 19 2021 15:28 Charoisaur wrote:
On November 19 2021 06:40 Nebuchad wrote:
On November 19 2021 04:07 Charoisaur wrote:
On November 18 2021 10:03 RKC wrote: The fact that Toss dominated HoTS and dropped off the cliff in LoTV simply proves the point that Toss players didn't just all slumped overnight.
Whether Terran and Zerg deserve their shot at glory by benefiting more from LoTV drastic design revamp doesn't detract from the fact that Toss as a whole has been left behind.
In such an assymmetrical game with volatile changes, it's more likely than not that abnormal statistical success rates is due to racial imbalances, rather than player skill.
Anyway, my concern is more about ensuring diversity in the game. SC2 and BW being reduced to a one or two race game would be less fun to watch.
in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing fine with 3 Starleague victories. In 2018 Maru and Serral won everything and 2019 had undeniably atrocious balance. But from 2020 on the balance is fine imo, Toss won a lot of tier 2 events (Trap) and reached numerous finals in tier 1 events, despite a lot of their top players leaving for military (herO, Classic and now Stats)
Really I don't get how someone can watch the tournaments these past 2 years and come to the conclusion: "yep, Protoss is unplayable garbage, no point watching this" !!??
Your issue is that you're trying to have a balance conversation so you need to defend your race, but again the people who are serious aren't talking about balance.
It is super obvious to everyone, including you, that the best protoss players right now are the least likely to win a tournament against the best terrans and the best zergs, and this by a large margin. You can obtain that knowledge in any number of ways, you can watch tournaments, you can hear casters talking about the players, you can check statistical results of the best players of each race...
This doesn't demonstrate that the game has to change in any way. You're taking a larger conversation and you're trying to fit it into your "don't nerf my race" agenda where it doesn't belong.
I'm not the one who makes it into a balance discussion!!?? I try to understand the people thinking it's a balance problem, as I don't see it.
Also you can stop your attempts trying to discredit me by claiming I'm biased, I don't even have a race, I'm playing random for the last 3-4 years already. Can we stop the unnecessary ad hominems and focus on the arguments?
A bunch of people came into this thread to say that the best protoss players were weaker in skill than the best zergs and the best terrans. You had no issue with any of their posts. I said it could be that or it could be balance. You had issue with my posts. Some other people are convinced that it's balance. You had issue with their posts.
Sure sounds like your issue is people who talk about balance.
Spot on.
I'm not sure what exactly is the cause of the problem. But the problem is there - Toss has been struggling to win top tier competitions in LoTV. Like you, I'm concerned about the diversity of the game. Balance is not the focus here.
I'm also frustrated as you are why some people seem to be denying that there is actually a problem at all (or trying to shift the focus to some other problem).
(I don't care about low level ladder stats, or lower tier competitions. That's not the problem - or may be a different problem altogether.)
What kind of problem are we talking about? Was soO getting into finals and not winning a race problem? Balance problem? Are Protoss players who get to the finals and can't win them if their lives depend on it a problem we can solve?
Out of the 3 Code S tournaments this year Protoss was in the 2 finals. IEM Katowice - Protoss was in the finals.
If we count only these "top tier tournaments" - we had 4 of them, 3 zergs, 3 protosses and 2 terrans in the finals
"But what about BO7 and Protoss?!" - well, you see, GSL semis are BO7 so if they can get pass that, they're not so bad in BO7-ing.
Let's ignore that Trap actually really won some tournaments this year, he has what, 5 titles? Let's check this years premier tournaments (yes, NA included) Trap - 7 appearances, 5 victories (0 Tier 1) Reynor - 4, 2 (IEM) Serral - 4, 2 (0) Neeb - 3, 2 (0) and yes, all NA Clem - 3, 2 (0) Scarlett - 3, 1 (0) and yes, all NA Maru - 3, 1 (0) Rogue - 2, 1 (GSL) Zoun - 2, 0 (0) Zest - 2, 0 (0) Cure - 1, 1 (GSL) Dark - 1, 1 (GSL) Solar - 1, 0 (0)
Totally per race Protoss: 11, 5 with NA +3, 2 Zerg: 12, 6 (IEM, Code S, Code S) with NA +3, 1 Terran: 7, 4 (Code S)
I don't know, to me it seems we have a Terran problem. The least amount of victories in the premier tournaments, the least amount of presence in the finals. FFS with the NA they have half the finals.
Also out of 4 tier 1 tournaments(how you people here call it) 3 were taken by zergs, so to me it seems that Protoss is fine, Zergs too stronk and Terran not stronk enough.
Edit> Back, when I was tracking this since the "Patch Zerg era", I used to say that Protoss is the race of Kongs, the most finals, the worst w/r. Terrans are Yoda race - do or do not. You either win or don't bother to the finals at all. And Zergs take the most important titles while being good at winning elsewhere as well.
As it seems valid for 2021.
AND NO ONE REPLIED TO THIS POST IN A MEANINGFUL WAY. You whiners are a fucking joke.
Thank you for your non-whiny, meaningful response, not-a-fucking-joke person.
You still don't have a reply to the post I quoted. Thank you for your waste of our time.
To the mods, I apologize for my outburst. You do see this guy isn't replying to meaningful posts in the thread either. I am upset because our standard for discourse is circumvented with cheap weasel tricks.
There is no strawman narrative that Protoss are "simply not as good". To argue this existence is to acknowledge a small minority, if any. NO REASONABLE SC2 FAN ARGUES THIS. Again, another outburst.
Protoss are getting bum-rushed by Queen walks. Simply that.
But, Protoss are still well represented despite this agonizing plea that there is "simply no hope". Maru was called the "Terran hope" because it was only Maru. Yes, TY and Cure have followed up. But before that, there was no other hope for Terrans. If Maru got injured like Byun and so many other Terran pros, would you see this thread?
And I include foreign Terran's alopecia as a a form of injury.
No, we simply learned to count our blessings. So understand why I have no sympathy for those who cry about a lack of hope when they get a slightest hint that their race can be struggling. Welcome to Terran. Welcome to SC2. Count your blessings in your HIGH REPRESENTATION IN ALL OTHER LEVELS OF PLAY, INCLUDING GRAND FINALS.
Sorry you won't have a fucking Gold medal with a million (exaggeration) silvers and bronzes.
Well, its its almost impressive that a person who seems to be utterly filled with frustration and rage, and who complains about people not reading the thread, obviously have missed the major part of what this thread consists of. Either you havent read the thread, or you havent understood the comments. Either way its almost comical.
I haven´t read the whole thread, But I think there is definitely Hope for Protoss! I am not GM but looking at top PvT it seems ok. Harstem beating Maru in the TSL8 Qualifiers, and ShowTime going toe to toe with Maru in a macro game at the DH Winter finals is just two examples that come´s to my mind right now. Protoss can compete with the top terrans.
Looking at PvZ though it looks more volatile.The Queen(walk) seems very strong, and it's just insane how much you get for 150 minerals. Changing the Queen in some way would be good imo. Maybe change Transfuse to 75 Energy or lower the HP?
Edit> Also Terran is fine in the TSL8 while Protoss is dead, right? What did I tell you! But Terrans still have the hero marine they need!
Oh has Protoss sucked for five years? Well, Terran has not done well in this one tournament! It's been a full four weeks since Maru won Dreamhack Masters, two months since Cure won GSL!
Not even getting into how many top Terrans got their losses in TvT in that tournament either. Maru and Cure both got knocked out of the upper bracket in TvT upsets, and along with Clem that makes every Terran to win a Premier in 2021 got put in the same corner of the lower bracket and had to knock each other out (along with Dream and Special).
Are you even fucking reading the thread?
I am. Did you have an issue you wanted to bring up?
On December 11 2021 03:31 Pentarp wrote:
On November 19 2021 21:11 deacon.frost wrote:
On November 19 2021 18:16 RKC wrote:
On November 19 2021 18:06 Nebuchad wrote:
On November 19 2021 15:28 Charoisaur wrote:
On November 19 2021 06:40 Nebuchad wrote:
On November 19 2021 04:07 Charoisaur wrote:
On November 18 2021 10:03 RKC wrote: The fact that Toss dominated HoTS and dropped off the cliff in LoTV simply proves the point that Toss players didn't just all slumped overnight.
Whether Terran and Zerg deserve their shot at glory by benefiting more from LoTV drastic design revamp doesn't detract from the fact that Toss as a whole has been left behind.
In such an assymmetrical game with volatile changes, it's more likely than not that abnormal statistical success rates is due to racial imbalances, rather than player skill.
Anyway, my concern is more about ensuring diversity in the game. SC2 and BW being reduced to a one or two race game would be less fun to watch.
in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing fine with 3 Starleague victories. In 2018 Maru and Serral won everything and 2019 had undeniably atrocious balance. But from 2020 on the balance is fine imo, Toss won a lot of tier 2 events (Trap) and reached numerous finals in tier 1 events, despite a lot of their top players leaving for military (herO, Classic and now Stats)
Really I don't get how someone can watch the tournaments these past 2 years and come to the conclusion: "yep, Protoss is unplayable garbage, no point watching this" !!??
Your issue is that you're trying to have a balance conversation so you need to defend your race, but again the people who are serious aren't talking about balance.
It is super obvious to everyone, including you, that the best protoss players right now are the least likely to win a tournament against the best terrans and the best zergs, and this by a large margin. You can obtain that knowledge in any number of ways, you can watch tournaments, you can hear casters talking about the players, you can check statistical results of the best players of each race...
This doesn't demonstrate that the game has to change in any way. You're taking a larger conversation and you're trying to fit it into your "don't nerf my race" agenda where it doesn't belong.
I'm not the one who makes it into a balance discussion!!?? I try to understand the people thinking it's a balance problem, as I don't see it.
Also you can stop your attempts trying to discredit me by claiming I'm biased, I don't even have a race, I'm playing random for the last 3-4 years already. Can we stop the unnecessary ad hominems and focus on the arguments?
A bunch of people came into this thread to say that the best protoss players were weaker in skill than the best zergs and the best terrans. You had no issue with any of their posts. I said it could be that or it could be balance. You had issue with my posts. Some other people are convinced that it's balance. You had issue with their posts.
Sure sounds like your issue is people who talk about balance.
Spot on.
I'm not sure what exactly is the cause of the problem. But the problem is there - Toss has been struggling to win top tier competitions in LoTV. Like you, I'm concerned about the diversity of the game. Balance is not the focus here.
I'm also frustrated as you are why some people seem to be denying that there is actually a problem at all (or trying to shift the focus to some other problem).
(I don't care about low level ladder stats, or lower tier competitions. That's not the problem - or may be a different problem altogether.)
What kind of problem are we talking about? Was soO getting into finals and not winning a race problem? Balance problem? Are Protoss players who get to the finals and can't win them if their lives depend on it a problem we can solve?
Out of the 3 Code S tournaments this year Protoss was in the 2 finals. IEM Katowice - Protoss was in the finals.
If we count only these "top tier tournaments" - we had 4 of them, 3 zergs, 3 protosses and 2 terrans in the finals
"But what about BO7 and Protoss?!" - well, you see, GSL semis are BO7 so if they can get pass that, they're not so bad in BO7-ing.
Let's ignore that Trap actually really won some tournaments this year, he has what, 5 titles? Let's check this years premier tournaments (yes, NA included) Trap - 7 appearances, 5 victories (0 Tier 1) Reynor - 4, 2 (IEM) Serral - 4, 2 (0) Neeb - 3, 2 (0) and yes, all NA Clem - 3, 2 (0) Scarlett - 3, 1 (0) and yes, all NA Maru - 3, 1 (0) Rogue - 2, 1 (GSL) Zoun - 2, 0 (0) Zest - 2, 0 (0) Cure - 1, 1 (GSL) Dark - 1, 1 (GSL) Solar - 1, 0 (0)
Totally per race Protoss: 11, 5 with NA +3, 2 Zerg: 12, 6 (IEM, Code S, Code S) with NA +3, 1 Terran: 7, 4 (Code S)
I don't know, to me it seems we have a Terran problem. The least amount of victories in the premier tournaments, the least amount of presence in the finals. FFS with the NA they have half the finals.
Also out of 4 tier 1 tournaments(how you people here call it) 3 were taken by zergs, so to me it seems that Protoss is fine, Zergs too stronk and Terran not stronk enough.
Edit> Back, when I was tracking this since the "Patch Zerg era", I used to say that Protoss is the race of Kongs, the most finals, the worst w/r. Terrans are Yoda race - do or do not. You either win or don't bother to the finals at all. And Zergs take the most important titles while being good at winning elsewhere as well.
As it seems valid for 2021.
AND NO ONE REPLIED TO THIS POST IN A MEANINGFUL WAY. You whiners are a fucking joke.
Thank you for your non-whiny, meaningful response, not-a-fucking-joke person.
You still don't have a reply to the post I quoted. Thank you for your waste of our time.
To the mods, I apologize for my outburst. You do see this guy isn't replying to meaningful posts in the thread either. I am upset because our standard for discourse is circumvented with cheap weasel tricks.
There is no strawman narrative that Protoss are "simply not as good". To argue this existence is to acknowledge a small minority, if any. NO REASONABLE SC2 FAN ARGUES THIS. Again, another outburst.
Protoss are getting bum-rushed by Queen walks. Simply that.
But, Protoss are still well represented despite this agonizing plea that there is "simply no hope". Maru was called the "Terran hope" because it was only Maru. Yes, TY and Cure have followed up. But before that, there was no other hope for Terrans. If Maru got injured like Byun and so many other Terran pros, would you see this thread?
And I include foreign Terran's alopecia as a a form of injury.
No, we simply learned to count our blessings. So understand why I have no sympathy for those who cry about a lack of hope when they get a slightest hint that their race can be struggling. Welcome to Terran. Welcome to SC2. Count your blessings in your HIGH REPRESENTATION IN ALL OTHER LEVELS OF PLAY, INCLUDING GRAND FINALS.
Sorry you won't have a fucking Gold medal with a million (exaggeration) silvers and bronzes.
Ty didn't follow up, he was winning premiers before Maru started dominating. He was there the whole time. Before Maru you also had Innovation, and Byun. Even Gumiho won a GSL in 2017. 2018 is literally the only year where Maru had to carry Terran. Trap is the only Protoss to have won in more than two. And mind you, that 2018 is what you Terran call your worst year. 2021, the year carried by Trap, is our best, and he's not even winning GSLs. Protoss is doing bad enough that I'd be ecstatic to have a bit of "Terran suffering". Get to "count my blessings" where those blessings are 4 GSLs. Our worst year was between August 2019 to December 2020 - where Protoss won nothing.
As for Protoss managing to lose at high levels, so what? If you think winning and losing are equivalent, then every matchup is perfectly balanced at 50% "participation rate". I don't. The race that wins is performing better than the race that doesn't win.
I mean numbers don't lie, numbers have not lied since SC2 was launched in 2010.
The top Protoss players in the world are not stupid, they are crazy intelligent because that's the only way you win with Protoss, outsmarting your opponent followed by the sickest micro you ever seen to compensate for shitty units that can't do anything unless you micro the living shit out of them. All this so you can have worse macro and have casters and sc2 community make fun of you for it.
Then ask yourself why then do Protosses go for stupid risky all inn builds that are forced to do insane damage or kill almost every single game, especially vs zerg?
Because protoss race design and weak units ( for cost ) have forced them to add a super gimmick suprise strategy that will get them ahead somehow so they THEN can play a god damn macro game and have a chance.
Protoss winrates playing defensive at the highest level has never been successful. The only player to somewhat pull it of is Stats who is in my opinion the best player to ever touch SC2 but will never be recognized as such because Protoss is by design the most VOLATILE and UNFORGIVING RACE of them all.
If Protoss macro was legit Stats would be the GOAT of SC2, and Rain probably never would have gone to BW because he coulda won heaps of money on SC2 but he knew what some of us know and most of you refuse to see.
Protoss is absolute trash at high level and players like Trap and Showtime are paying dearly for it in tournament winnings. GZ on playing Zerg
Edit> Also Terran is fine in the TSL8 while Protoss is dead, right? What did I tell you! But Terrans still have the hero marine they need!
Oh has Protoss sucked for five years? Well, Terran has not done well in this one tournament! It's been a full four weeks since Maru won Dreamhack Masters, two months since Cure won GSL!
Not even getting into how many top Terrans got their losses in TvT in that tournament either. Maru and Cure both got knocked out of the upper bracket in TvT upsets, and along with Clem that makes every Terran to win a Premier in 2021 got put in the same corner of the lower bracket and had to knock each other out (along with Dream and Special).
Are you even fucking reading the thread?
I am. Did you have an issue you wanted to bring up?
On December 11 2021 03:31 Pentarp wrote:
On November 19 2021 21:11 deacon.frost wrote:
On November 19 2021 18:16 RKC wrote:
On November 19 2021 18:06 Nebuchad wrote:
On November 19 2021 15:28 Charoisaur wrote:
On November 19 2021 06:40 Nebuchad wrote:
On November 19 2021 04:07 Charoisaur wrote:
On November 18 2021 10:03 RKC wrote: The fact that Toss dominated HoTS and dropped off the cliff in LoTV simply proves the point that Toss players didn't just all slumped overnight.
Whether Terran and Zerg deserve their shot at glory by benefiting more from LoTV drastic design revamp doesn't detract from the fact that Toss as a whole has been left behind.
In such an assymmetrical game with volatile changes, it's more likely than not that abnormal statistical success rates is due to racial imbalances, rather than player skill.
Anyway, my concern is more about ensuring diversity in the game. SC2 and BW being reduced to a one or two race game would be less fun to watch.
in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing fine with 3 Starleague victories. In 2018 Maru and Serral won everything and 2019 had undeniably atrocious balance. But from 2020 on the balance is fine imo, Toss won a lot of tier 2 events (Trap) and reached numerous finals in tier 1 events, despite a lot of their top players leaving for military (herO, Classic and now Stats)
Really I don't get how someone can watch the tournaments these past 2 years and come to the conclusion: "yep, Protoss is unplayable garbage, no point watching this" !!??
Your issue is that you're trying to have a balance conversation so you need to defend your race, but again the people who are serious aren't talking about balance.
It is super obvious to everyone, including you, that the best protoss players right now are the least likely to win a tournament against the best terrans and the best zergs, and this by a large margin. You can obtain that knowledge in any number of ways, you can watch tournaments, you can hear casters talking about the players, you can check statistical results of the best players of each race...
This doesn't demonstrate that the game has to change in any way. You're taking a larger conversation and you're trying to fit it into your "don't nerf my race" agenda where it doesn't belong.
I'm not the one who makes it into a balance discussion!!?? I try to understand the people thinking it's a balance problem, as I don't see it.
Also you can stop your attempts trying to discredit me by claiming I'm biased, I don't even have a race, I'm playing random for the last 3-4 years already. Can we stop the unnecessary ad hominems and focus on the arguments?
A bunch of people came into this thread to say that the best protoss players were weaker in skill than the best zergs and the best terrans. You had no issue with any of their posts. I said it could be that or it could be balance. You had issue with my posts. Some other people are convinced that it's balance. You had issue with their posts.
Sure sounds like your issue is people who talk about balance.
Spot on.
I'm not sure what exactly is the cause of the problem. But the problem is there - Toss has been struggling to win top tier competitions in LoTV. Like you, I'm concerned about the diversity of the game. Balance is not the focus here.
I'm also frustrated as you are why some people seem to be denying that there is actually a problem at all (or trying to shift the focus to some other problem).
(I don't care about low level ladder stats, or lower tier competitions. That's not the problem - or may be a different problem altogether.)
What kind of problem are we talking about? Was soO getting into finals and not winning a race problem? Balance problem? Are Protoss players who get to the finals and can't win them if their lives depend on it a problem we can solve?
Out of the 3 Code S tournaments this year Protoss was in the 2 finals. IEM Katowice - Protoss was in the finals.
If we count only these "top tier tournaments" - we had 4 of them, 3 zergs, 3 protosses and 2 terrans in the finals
"But what about BO7 and Protoss?!" - well, you see, GSL semis are BO7 so if they can get pass that, they're not so bad in BO7-ing.
Let's ignore that Trap actually really won some tournaments this year, he has what, 5 titles? Let's check this years premier tournaments (yes, NA included) Trap - 7 appearances, 5 victories (0 Tier 1) Reynor - 4, 2 (IEM) Serral - 4, 2 (0) Neeb - 3, 2 (0) and yes, all NA Clem - 3, 2 (0) Scarlett - 3, 1 (0) and yes, all NA Maru - 3, 1 (0) Rogue - 2, 1 (GSL) Zoun - 2, 0 (0) Zest - 2, 0 (0) Cure - 1, 1 (GSL) Dark - 1, 1 (GSL) Solar - 1, 0 (0)
Totally per race Protoss: 11, 5 with NA +3, 2 Zerg: 12, 6 (IEM, Code S, Code S) with NA +3, 1 Terran: 7, 4 (Code S)
I don't know, to me it seems we have a Terran problem. The least amount of victories in the premier tournaments, the least amount of presence in the finals. FFS with the NA they have half the finals.
Also out of 4 tier 1 tournaments(how you people here call it) 3 were taken by zergs, so to me it seems that Protoss is fine, Zergs too stronk and Terran not stronk enough.
Edit> Back, when I was tracking this since the "Patch Zerg era", I used to say that Protoss is the race of Kongs, the most finals, the worst w/r. Terrans are Yoda race - do or do not. You either win or don't bother to the finals at all. And Zergs take the most important titles while being good at winning elsewhere as well.
As it seems valid for 2021.
AND NO ONE REPLIED TO THIS POST IN A MEANINGFUL WAY. You whiners are a fucking joke.
Thank you for your non-whiny, meaningful response, not-a-fucking-joke person.
You still don't have a reply to the post I quoted. Thank you for your waste of our time.
To the mods, I apologize for my outburst. You do see this guy isn't replying to meaningful posts in the thread either. I am upset because our standard for discourse is circumvented with cheap weasel tricks.
There is no strawman narrative that Protoss are "simply not as good". To argue this existence is to acknowledge a small minority, if any. NO REASONABLE SC2 FAN ARGUES THIS. Again, another outburst.
Protoss are getting bum-rushed by Queen walks. Simply that.
But, Protoss are still well represented despite this agonizing plea that there is "simply no hope". Maru was called the "Terran hope" because it was only Maru. Yes, TY and Cure have followed up. But before that, there was no other hope for Terrans. If Maru got injured like Byun and so many other Terran pros, would you see this thread?
And I include foreign Terran's alopecia as a a form of injury.
No, we simply learned to count our blessings. So understand why I have no sympathy for those who cry about a lack of hope when they get a slightest hint that their race can be struggling. Welcome to Terran. Welcome to SC2. Count your blessings in your HIGH REPRESENTATION IN ALL OTHER LEVELS OF PLAY, INCLUDING GRAND FINALS.
Sorry you won't have a fucking Gold medal with a million (exaggeration) silvers and bronzes.
The post you said nobody replied to in a meaningful way was discussed some days later by the very person you lashed out against:
On December 07 2021 17:24 kajtarp wrote: I don't know. If we take last GSL Finals as example, Zest didn't lose because of his race. He had bad decisions, and bad unit control troughout the match. He could have won, but failed to execute his strategies. Or if we take Trap's final or semifinal losses, how many times did he lose because his race is underpowered and not simply because Maru/Rogue/Dark/Serral/Reynor was the better player that day?
Many other have tried but failed. They just want to hear Protoss weak, Terran and Zerg stronk.
I mean you can always say the other player just played better, let's take e.g. 2018 when terran outside of maru didn't do well i guess the other players just always played better
Note also that when people say "in 2018 outside of Maru Terran didn't do well" nobody jumps in to say "ACTUALLY Ty and Innovation got to the finals so Terran was doing fine" or "GSL S3 was TvT so even without Maru Terran still would have won" or "half of the players in S2 Round of 8 were Terrans so they're actually performing above average" and all that nonsense.
And at least if you play like Maru you actually win. Try having to play like Trap.
2018 Premier tournaments: 9 zerg titles, 2 2nd places -> 11 zergs in the finals 4 Terran titles, 2 2nd places -> 6 terrans in the finals 2 Protoss titles ,10 2nd places -> 12 Protoss in the finals
I wonder why people felt Terran was weak, when the finals representation was 11:6:12 (Z : T : P)
2021 Premier tournaments: 5 Protoss titles, 6 2nd places (+2/1 if NA) 6 Zerg titles, 6 2nd places (+1/2 if NA) 4 Terran titles, 4 2nd places 12:8:11 Z/T/P
I wonder why I state that Terran is as bad if not in worse situation.
No one's wondering why people felt Terran was weak in 2018, I'm wondering why people won't acknowledge Protoss is weak now.
I noticed you didn't count the titles separately in your non Trap/Maru column. Didn't like what it showed?
Incidentally, using only 2021 stats is also misrepresenting how long Protoss has sucked.
2019-2021 non foreigner only Premier tournaments: 8 Protoss titles 9 Terran titles 20 Zerg titles
Pretty even, right? But that's entirely carried by Trap's monstrous early 2021 performance. So here's without that Trap/Maru carry factor (not even going to bother with Zerg, they've got a billion champions):
2 Protoss titles 5 Terran titles
Trap represents 3/4 of all Protoss titles for the period, Maru not even half of Terran's.
But you may consider this unfair, since I stopped just before 2018, Maru's obvious carry year. I did this because summer 2019 is how far back you have to go to include any not-Trap Protoss champions, but let's keep it going up to 2017, winter 2017 being the last time Protoss won an actual GSL, so that I don't unfairly misrepresent Maru's Terran dominance.
2017-2021 non foreigner only Premier tournaments:
14 Protoss titles 19 Terran titles 28 Zerg titles
Without Trap/Maru
8 Protoss titles 11 Terran titles
So even including Maru's best year, and two years where Trap won literally nothing, they come out mostly even carrying around 42% of their race's titles, and with Terran performing better on either end: Maru did better than Trap, and non-Maru Terran did better than non-Trap Protoss.
I would certainly say that thanks to Trap's amazing performance, Protoss had a better year than Terran in 2021, but it's an outlier. Protoss has been consistently doing the worst for half of StarCraft II's existence. That's not having a bad year or individual variance among players.
As you say, "Damn it".
It didn't quote the post you highlighted, but the content is overlapping.
"We have a Terran problem" got countered with "Protoss has been carried by Trap". 2017-2021, titles for Terrans 11, and titles for Protoss 8 (Maru and Trap excluded). Maru had 8 and Trap had 6 in that time period. Protss had fewer titles and Trap had a bigger percentage of Protoss titles than Maru had of Terran titles. This statistic included the latest code S win by a Protoss. It did not, however, include 2nd places.
The post you quoted also discussed hypocrisy of not crying imbalance when soO was a repeat 2nd place. I can discuss that here. Big tournaments soO didn't get to the finals had Zerg winners. Life won, Solar won, and Dark won Starleagues. I think even soulkey won a few months before soO rose up. Why cry "Zerg is weak!" when Zerg is winning?
Regarding the Maru carry and being the hope of Terran: Maru has been the Last Terran (TM) since PvProleague, when Maru was the only Terran in Code S ro16. The Blink era and 10 sight range on Mothership core, that is the start of "play like Maru". This was before LotV, years before 2018. The old meme was that Maru only played well when other Terran players struggled, thus he either got knocked out early or was the Last Terran (TM).
Protoss has struggled for several years in a row. Terran has had bad times this year and long ago in the past. Recently ByuN won Blizzcon in 2016. That year had several Terran players doing well. The four horsemen started there. INno fell of a bit but TIME rose up as a real contender. GumiHo was playing mech vs Protoss and Bunny experimented with aggro builds. TY was nearly a dominating force that other Terran players could copy. There were several years of great Terran hope. There was such a long period of good Terran play that GumiHo and ByuN have manage to leave and come back from mandatory service. Dream has been great in team leagues, SpeCiaL has performed well in code S, Clem appeared, Big Gabe weekly is a thing. Terran has had hope for several years. That both Terran and Protoss are struggling this year can be coincidence. Terrans have more represented champions and Protoss have, well, Trap.
The frustration you seem to have about Terran is likely similar to the reason for this thread to be started.
Protoss winrates playing defensive at the highest level has never been successful. The only player to somewhat pull it of is Stats who is in my opinion the best player to ever touch SC2 but will never be recognized as such because Protoss is by design the most VOLATILE and UNFORGIVING RACE of them all.
This is absolute bullshit, FFE was a very strong and viable way to play for years and years. Turtle into deathball was pretty much the gold standard for a huge chunk of SC2's lifespan, just because those days are in the past doesn't mean they didn't happen.
I'm not disagreeing with the premise of this thread (even though some of you are blowing Protoss top level weakness quite out of proportion) but saying things that are blatantly false is just not going to help your case.
Protoss is absolute trash at high level and players like Trap and Showtime are paying dearly for it in tournament winnings. GZ on playing Zerg
Protoss is suffering against Zerg right now, but TvP looks pretty balanced, the whole race is trash because one match up is skewed at the highest level of play? See this is what I'm talking about, blowing things that there ARE kernels of truth out of proportion with dramatic, emotionally charged statements.
I'm not saying that the match up probably couldn't use a tweak like either a small QoL buff on Stalkers/Sentries or a slight nerf to the power of the Lurker, but come on man.
Fwiw (can't escape these without a good ol' Aligulac balance quote)
PvZ - 55% (lmfao) TvZ - 54% PvT - 46.6%
So is Protoss doing bad because their winrates are bad or because their number of championship finishes are lower then Zerg and Terran? Because I just watched Trap dominate Ragnarok 3 - 0 in Bo5 and it looked like Protoss still has plenty of ways to win outside of this, "Oh no I NEED to sit here and turtle to 200/200 Skytoss because Lurkers."
The answer to your question is there. Protoss is doing bad at the best level because the top 5 of the race has done consistently worse than the top 5 of the other two races since 2018.
You obviously don't care about that, but it's getting tiresome that you guys keep pretending you don't know what you're talking about.
The answer to your question is there. Protoss is doing bad at the best level because the top 5 of the race has done consistently worse than the top 5 of the other two races since 2018.
You obviously don't care about that, but it's getting tiresome that you guys keep pretending you don't know what you're talking about.
I believe it, I already said that ZvP is Zerg favored and that Protoss could probably used a QoL adjustment vs. Zerg. I'm just saying, Protoss can and does still win against Zerg. You can more or less see the Protoss lag increase as Zerg figured out how to utilize the Lurker more efficiently over time. If you kept up and read these posts (which clearly you do) you'd know that I'm a huge advocate of Lurker nerfs even as a Zerg player myself.
I just watched Trap dismantle Ragnarok 3 - 0, obviously when Protoss is played superior they can and DO win. I'm nitpicking because people here are making it seem like it's an auto lose against Zerg at the highest level of play which I'm sorry that's just bullshit.
Is that not high level enough because it's not vs Serral or something?
Or does it not matter because it's not GSL finals?
"You obviously don't care about that"
I love SC2 and have watched it from day 1 all those years ago, stop making ridiculous generalizations lol obviously I do care or why would I be consistently posting here?
Well, I wouldn't say that Rag is "the highest level of play", he's #9 Zerg in the world right now, according to Aligulac. Whereas Trap is #3 Protoss right now behind MaxPax and ShoWTimE (and we know who the best of those three is...). How can a #9 Zerg match affect the top 5 Aligulac stat post that you are quoting?
The answer to your question is there. Protoss is doing bad at the best level because the top 5 of the race has done consistently worse than the top 5 of the other two races since 2018.
You obviously don't care about that, but it's getting tiresome that you guys keep pretending you don't know what you're talking about.
I think the problem for protoss is just being bad against zerg... its fine vs terran if not better, but I think very few people who believe the race is strong enough versus zerg play protoss at a high level. Also the fast expanding nature of LOTV just helps zerg imo thats what the race is designed to do.
Serral for example almost never loses to protoss and usually demolishes them, thats because if you play correctly protoss is pretty helpless.
The answer to your question is there. Protoss is doing bad at the best level because the top 5 of the race has done consistently worse than the top 5 of the other two races since 2018.
You obviously don't care about that, but it's getting tiresome that you guys keep pretending you don't know what you're talking about.
I believe it, I already said that ZvP is Zerg favored and that Protoss could probably used a QoL adjustment vs. Zerg. I'm just saying, Protoss can and does still win against Zerg. You can more or less see the Protoss lag increase as Zerg figured out how to utilize the Lurker more efficiently over time. If you kept up and read these posts (which clearly you do) you'd know that I'm a huge advocate of Lurker nerfs even as a Zerg player myself.
I just watched Trap dismantle Ragnarok 3 - 0, obviously when Protoss is played superior they can and DO win. I'm nitpicking because people here are making it seem like it's an auto lose against Zerg at the highest level of play which I'm sorry that's just bullshit.
Is that not high level enough because it's not vs Serral or something?
Or does it not matter because it's not GSL finals?
"You obviously don't care about that"
I love SC2 and have watched it from day 1 all those years ago, stop making ridiculous generalizations lol obviously I do care or why would I be consistently posting here?
Edited for grammar and to tone it down a bit
We already know Toss can beat Zerg, the 7 or so tournaments Trap won prove this. The only stage where Protoss is struggling is bo7 finals of a GSL Code S or a World Championship specificially
The answer to your question is there. Protoss is doing bad at the best level because the top 5 of the race has done consistently worse than the top 5 of the other two races since 2018.
You obviously don't care about that, but it's getting tiresome that you guys keep pretending you don't know what you're talking about.
I think the problem for protoss is just being bad against zerg... its fine vs terran if not better, but I think very few people who believe the race is strong enough versus zerg play protoss at a high level. Also the fast expanding nature of LOTV just helps zerg imo thats what the race is designed to do.
There's not even enough data to say that. It could also be that the very top of zerg players is just better than the very top of protoss players at the game. We cannot positively state that if Serral had chosen protoss instead of zerg he wouldn't be dominating, there's no direct evidence of that.
All we can state is that there's not a ton of hope and that we should behave accordingly.
The answer to your question is there. Protoss is doing bad at the best level because the top 5 of the race has done consistently worse than the top 5 of the other two races since 2018.
You obviously don't care about that, but it's getting tiresome that you guys keep pretending you don't know what you're talking about.
I think the problem for protoss is just being bad against zerg... its fine vs terran if not better, but I think very few people who believe the race is strong enough versus zerg play protoss at a high level. Also the fast expanding nature of LOTV just helps zerg imo thats what the race is designed to do.
There's not even enough data to say that. It could also be that the very top of zerg players is just better than the very top of protoss players at the game. We cannot positively state that if Serral had chosen protoss instead of zerg he wouldn't be dominating, there's no direct evidence of that.
All we can state is that there's not a ton of hope and that we should behave accordingly.
Thats why observation, logic, and actual in game experience with the races at a high level are important instead of just being a pure data nerd. You hear that all the time there's not enough data to tell this, not enough data to claim that...
The answer to your question is there. Protoss is doing bad at the best level because the top 5 of the race has done consistently worse than the top 5 of the other two races since 2018.
You obviously don't care about that, but it's getting tiresome that you guys keep pretending you don't know what you're talking about.
I think the problem for protoss is just being bad against zerg... its fine vs terran if not better, but I think very few people who believe the race is strong enough versus zerg play protoss at a high level. Also the fast expanding nature of LOTV just helps zerg imo thats what the race is designed to do.
There's not even enough data to say that. It could also be that the very top of zerg players is just better than the very top of protoss players at the game. We cannot positively state that if Serral had chosen protoss instead of zerg he wouldn't be dominating, there's no direct evidence of that.
All we can state is that there's not a ton of hope and that we should behave accordingly.
Thats why observation, logic, and actual in game experience with the races at a high level are important instead of just being a pure data nerd. You hear that all the time there's not enough data to tell this, not enough data to claim that...
There's no level of observation or logic that will allow you to answer this type of question, and if you've ever heard 80% of pros talk you know that in game experience increases your bias rather than the quality of your data.
The answer to your question is there. Protoss is doing bad at the best level because the top 5 of the race has done consistently worse than the top 5 of the other two races since 2018.
You obviously don't care about that, but it's getting tiresome that you guys keep pretending you don't know what you're talking about.
I think the problem for protoss is just being bad against zerg... its fine vs terran if not better, but I think very few people who believe the race is strong enough versus zerg play protoss at a high level. Also the fast expanding nature of LOTV just helps zerg imo thats what the race is designed to do.
There's not even enough data to say that. It could also be that the very top of zerg players is just better than the very top of protoss players at the game. We cannot positively state that if Serral had chosen protoss instead of zerg he wouldn't be dominating, there's no direct evidence of that.
All we can state is that there's not a ton of hope and that we should behave accordingly.
This could be true, as you say I don’t think there’s enough data to say, intuition tends to fill in the gaps.
It seems unlikely, to me anyway. Different games don’t get me wrong, and doesn’t always translate but Stats and Classic especially were pretty damn good at BW. At least mechanically they should have the chops.
My personal opinion is they can’t extract as much mileage from that than folks playing the other races. Which isn’t necessarily bad if you can compensate with your additional skillsets and take advantage of other things.
I don’t personally think Serral would be a good Protoss player (at elite level, I’m sure his off race is still scary), even amongst the elite 4 Zerg players he’s the most cautious and the one who relies on good defensive reads and grinding people down in lategame.
Again I don’t think this is necessarily a bad thing, people have different psyches and ways of playing games, indeed I think it’s actively a good thing. Some want safety, control and trusting in their ability to play the percentages, some want to mindgame, take big risks and get into a knife fight.
Again it’s mostly an eye test thing, specifically in PvZ and specifically in big tournaments when it gets to Bo7, the knife fighting trickster doesn’t quite have enough in the locker to overcome the stable macro play, especially when Zerg have had their own strong gambits to also play (nydus swarmhost at one stage, I guess Queenwalks are the current equivalent)
What I would posit is, who in the scene is a PvZ monster? Or has been for a while, even at a lower level?
While not rounded in the last few years, you get folks like DRG having a ZvT that’s really good, obviously Clem in TvZ but he’s been improving all-round.
Just a throwaway idea really but it did come to me that there isn’t really a scary Protoss Zerg specialist out there, which seems odd given I can think of matchup specialists for every other matchup/the dominant racial players just being excellent in all 3.
With Protoss it feels Trap and Zest are all round just very good and decent vZ.
The answer to your question is there. Protoss is doing bad at the best level because the top 5 of the race has done consistently worse than the top 5 of the other two races since 2018.
You obviously don't care about that, but it's getting tiresome that you guys keep pretending you don't know what you're talking about.
I think the problem for protoss is just being bad against zerg... its fine vs terran if not better, but I think very few people who believe the race is strong enough versus zerg play protoss at a high level. Also the fast expanding nature of LOTV just helps zerg imo thats what the race is designed to do.
There's not even enough data to say that. It could also be that the very top of zerg players is just better than the very top of protoss players at the game. We cannot positively state that if Serral had chosen protoss instead of zerg he wouldn't be dominating, there's no direct evidence of that.
All we can state is that there's not a ton of hope and that we should behave accordingly.
It's impossible to definitely say it, but there's more than enough justification to believe it. Mostly, that's why I keep insisting on looking at the results throughout the entire LotV period. Even with the decreased competitiveness of the scene, it's unbelievable that such widespread and consistent underperformance would be attributed to individual quirks. People who claim this is because of the current lack of top Protoss are kinda ignoring that Protoss weren't winning much even when other top players were around.
Stats is probably the best performing Protoss of Legacy of the Void, but he hadn't won anything in two years by the time he went to the military. Classic went out on a high note, in that he won the two preceding Super Tournaments, Together, they won four Premier tournaments over the course of 2018-2019, which are also the only Premier tournaments Protoss won in those years, and would continue to be the only Premier tournaments Protoss would win until Trap's heroic surge.
The Legacy of the Void period is longer than both Wings of Liberty and Heart of the Swarm combined. The consistent underperformance of Protoss across this entire period can hardly be attributed to individual performance, especially given that actual Protoss representation is not showing a corresponding decrease. People still play Protoss, they just don't win.
And the most damning evidence against this individual performance notion? Just before the six years of consistent Protoss underperformance was 2015 Heart of the Swarm. Look at those results. Innovation, Life, a few outliers and foreign tournaments and then just this massive wall of Protoss. Protoss dominated 2015, and then they all decided to just individually become incapable of winning tournaments again for personal reasons? Changing the game from Heart of the Swarm to Legacy of the Void turned Protoss from the winningest race to the losingest one, and if you want to believe that this is just a coincidence caused by a simultaneous, coincidentally timed changes in the individual top players, I cannot definitively say that it's impossible, but it's not credible.
On December 12 2021 03:30 Poopi wrote: So who opens a sad marine thread to counter this elaborate troll thread after TSL8?
Sad marine thread has existed since before 2008 and has been paid to cast GSL for the past eleven years.
Yes there is hope. It's called Trap. Until he chokes yet again, probably the next match.. But he is in the top 3 at least that is achievement itself in these times
I think the root of this issue, ultimately, is Blizzards complete disregard for this game.
Which honestly is a shame, Starcraft 2 is awesome from both a playing and watching stand point, the community deserves better and has for a long time. This game not having it's own dedicated balance team that engages the community and actively seeks to tune towards a healthier metagame is quite frankly bullshit.
Threads like these I think are a testament to the passion of the community. Not sure why that isn't enough for Blizzard, I mean does their PR issues really prevent them from having 2 people on a balance team or something?
I haven't read the entire thread, so this might already have been brought up: I get the feeling Protoss is struggling because it can't skirmish with fast units in early-mid. Terran can run around with stimmed bio and pick em up with boosted medivacs, Zerg can run around with speedlings or speed roach/ravager. Both T and Z can disengage with no or minimal losses, P can't (recall is slow and costs a lot of energy). This means P leaving their base is a commitment. The result of this is that P has fewer OPPORTUNITIES to inflict damage in the mid game - instead it comes down to committed timing attacks (in particular in PvZ) where a bad engagement = loss.
In short: Gateway units offer less opportunities for mid game damage compared to T/Z. The mid game offensive that does exist - adept glaives v Z, blink stalker v T - relies on specific timings and is not equivalent to Z/T's sustained opportunities.
Edit> Also Terran is fine in the TSL8 while Protoss is dead, right? What did I tell you! But Terrans still have the hero marine they need!
Oh has Protoss sucked for five years? Well, Terran has not done well in this one tournament! It's been a full four weeks since Maru won Dreamhack Masters, two months since Cure won GSL!
Not even getting into how many top Terrans got their losses in TvT in that tournament either. Maru and Cure both got knocked out of the upper bracket in TvT upsets, and along with Clem that makes every Terran to win a Premier in 2021 got put in the same corner of the lower bracket and had to knock each other out (along with Dream and Special).
Are you even fucking reading the thread?
I am. Did you have an issue you wanted to bring up?
On December 11 2021 03:31 Pentarp wrote:
On November 19 2021 21:11 deacon.frost wrote:
On November 19 2021 18:16 RKC wrote:
On November 19 2021 18:06 Nebuchad wrote:
On November 19 2021 15:28 Charoisaur wrote:
On November 19 2021 06:40 Nebuchad wrote:
On November 19 2021 04:07 Charoisaur wrote: [quote] in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing fine with 3 Starleague victories. In 2018 Maru and Serral won everything and 2019 had undeniably atrocious balance. But from 2020 on the balance is fine imo, Toss won a lot of tier 2 events (Trap) and reached numerous finals in tier 1 events, despite a lot of their top players leaving for military (herO, Classic and now Stats)
Really I don't get how someone can watch the tournaments these past 2 years and come to the conclusion: "yep, Protoss is unplayable garbage, no point watching this" !!??
Your issue is that you're trying to have a balance conversation so you need to defend your race, but again the people who are serious aren't talking about balance.
It is super obvious to everyone, including you, that the best protoss players right now are the least likely to win a tournament against the best terrans and the best zergs, and this by a large margin. You can obtain that knowledge in any number of ways, you can watch tournaments, you can hear casters talking about the players, you can check statistical results of the best players of each race...
This doesn't demonstrate that the game has to change in any way. You're taking a larger conversation and you're trying to fit it into your "don't nerf my race" agenda where it doesn't belong.
I'm not the one who makes it into a balance discussion!!?? I try to understand the people thinking it's a balance problem, as I don't see it.
Also you can stop your attempts trying to discredit me by claiming I'm biased, I don't even have a race, I'm playing random for the last 3-4 years already. Can we stop the unnecessary ad hominems and focus on the arguments?
A bunch of people came into this thread to say that the best protoss players were weaker in skill than the best zergs and the best terrans. You had no issue with any of their posts. I said it could be that or it could be balance. You had issue with my posts. Some other people are convinced that it's balance. You had issue with their posts.
Sure sounds like your issue is people who talk about balance.
Spot on.
I'm not sure what exactly is the cause of the problem. But the problem is there - Toss has been struggling to win top tier competitions in LoTV. Like you, I'm concerned about the diversity of the game. Balance is not the focus here.
I'm also frustrated as you are why some people seem to be denying that there is actually a problem at all (or trying to shift the focus to some other problem).
(I don't care about low level ladder stats, or lower tier competitions. That's not the problem - or may be a different problem altogether.)
What kind of problem are we talking about? Was soO getting into finals and not winning a race problem? Balance problem? Are Protoss players who get to the finals and can't win them if their lives depend on it a problem we can solve?
Out of the 3 Code S tournaments this year Protoss was in the 2 finals. IEM Katowice - Protoss was in the finals.
If we count only these "top tier tournaments" - we had 4 of them, 3 zergs, 3 protosses and 2 terrans in the finals
"But what about BO7 and Protoss?!" - well, you see, GSL semis are BO7 so if they can get pass that, they're not so bad in BO7-ing.
Let's ignore that Trap actually really won some tournaments this year, he has what, 5 titles? Let's check this years premier tournaments (yes, NA included) Trap - 7 appearances, 5 victories (0 Tier 1) Reynor - 4, 2 (IEM) Serral - 4, 2 (0) Neeb - 3, 2 (0) and yes, all NA Clem - 3, 2 (0) Scarlett - 3, 1 (0) and yes, all NA Maru - 3, 1 (0) Rogue - 2, 1 (GSL) Zoun - 2, 0 (0) Zest - 2, 0 (0) Cure - 1, 1 (GSL) Dark - 1, 1 (GSL) Solar - 1, 0 (0)
Totally per race Protoss: 11, 5 with NA +3, 2 Zerg: 12, 6 (IEM, Code S, Code S) with NA +3, 1 Terran: 7, 4 (Code S)
I don't know, to me it seems we have a Terran problem. The least amount of victories in the premier tournaments, the least amount of presence in the finals. FFS with the NA they have half the finals.
Also out of 4 tier 1 tournaments(how you people here call it) 3 were taken by zergs, so to me it seems that Protoss is fine, Zergs too stronk and Terran not stronk enough.
Edit> Back, when I was tracking this since the "Patch Zerg era", I used to say that Protoss is the race of Kongs, the most finals, the worst w/r. Terrans are Yoda race - do or do not. You either win or don't bother to the finals at all. And Zergs take the most important titles while being good at winning elsewhere as well.
As it seems valid for 2021.
AND NO ONE REPLIED TO THIS POST IN A MEANINGFUL WAY. You whiners are a fucking joke.
Thank you for your non-whiny, meaningful response, not-a-fucking-joke person.
You still don't have a reply to the post I quoted. Thank you for your waste of our time.
To the mods, I apologize for my outburst. You do see this guy isn't replying to meaningful posts in the thread either. I am upset because our standard for discourse is circumvented with cheap weasel tricks.
There is no strawman narrative that Protoss are "simply not as good". To argue this existence is to acknowledge a small minority, if any. NO REASONABLE SC2 FAN ARGUES THIS. Again, another outburst.
Protoss are getting bum-rushed by Queen walks. Simply that.
But, Protoss are still well represented despite this agonizing plea that there is "simply no hope". Maru was called the "Terran hope" because it was only Maru. Yes, TY and Cure have followed up. But before that, there was no other hope for Terrans. If Maru got injured like Byun and so many other Terran pros, would you see this thread?
And I include foreign Terran's alopecia as a a form of injury.
No, we simply learned to count our blessings. So understand why I have no sympathy for those who cry about a lack of hope when they get a slightest hint that their race can be struggling. Welcome to Terran. Welcome to SC2. Count your blessings in your HIGH REPRESENTATION IN ALL OTHER LEVELS OF PLAY, INCLUDING GRAND FINALS.
Sorry you won't have a fucking Gold medal with a million (exaggeration) silvers and bronzes.
The post you said nobody replied to in a meaningful way was discussed some days later by the very person you lashed out against:
On December 07 2021 17:24 kajtarp wrote: I don't know. If we take last GSL Finals as example, Zest didn't lose because of his race. He had bad decisions, and bad unit control troughout the match. He could have won, but failed to execute his strategies. Or if we take Trap's final or semifinal losses, how many times did he lose because his race is underpowered and not simply because Maru/Rogue/Dark/Serral/Reynor was the better player that day?
Many other have tried but failed. They just want to hear Protoss weak, Terran and Zerg stronk.
I mean you can always say the other player just played better, let's take e.g. 2018 when terran outside of maru didn't do well i guess the other players just always played better
Note also that when people say "in 2018 outside of Maru Terran didn't do well" nobody jumps in to say "ACTUALLY Ty and Innovation got to the finals so Terran was doing fine" or "GSL S3 was TvT so even without Maru Terran still would have won" or "half of the players in S2 Round of 8 were Terrans so they're actually performing above average" and all that nonsense.
And at least if you play like Maru you actually win. Try having to play like Trap.
2018 Premier tournaments: 9 zerg titles, 2 2nd places -> 11 zergs in the finals 4 Terran titles, 2 2nd places -> 6 terrans in the finals 2 Protoss titles ,10 2nd places -> 12 Protoss in the finals
I wonder why people felt Terran was weak, when the finals representation was 11:6:12 (Z : T : P)
2021 Premier tournaments: 5 Protoss titles, 6 2nd places (+2/1 if NA) 6 Zerg titles, 6 2nd places (+1/2 if NA) 4 Terran titles, 4 2nd places 12:8:11 Z/T/P
I wonder why I state that Terran is as bad if not in worse situation.
No one's wondering why people felt Terran was weak in 2018, I'm wondering why people won't acknowledge Protoss is weak now.
I noticed you didn't count the titles separately in your non Trap/Maru column. Didn't like what it showed?
Incidentally, using only 2021 stats is also misrepresenting how long Protoss has sucked.
2019-2021 non foreigner only Premier tournaments: 8 Protoss titles 9 Terran titles 20 Zerg titles
Pretty even, right? But that's entirely carried by Trap's monstrous early 2021 performance. So here's without that Trap/Maru carry factor (not even going to bother with Zerg, they've got a billion champions):
2 Protoss titles 5 Terran titles
Trap represents 3/4 of all Protoss titles for the period, Maru not even half of Terran's.
But you may consider this unfair, since I stopped just before 2018, Maru's obvious carry year. I did this because summer 2019 is how far back you have to go to include any not-Trap Protoss champions, but let's keep it going up to 2017, winter 2017 being the last time Protoss won an actual GSL, so that I don't unfairly misrepresent Maru's Terran dominance.
2017-2021 non foreigner only Premier tournaments:
14 Protoss titles 19 Terran titles 28 Zerg titles
Without Trap/Maru
8 Protoss titles 11 Terran titles
So even including Maru's best year, and two years where Trap won literally nothing, they come out mostly even carrying around 42% of their race's titles, and with Terran performing better on either end: Maru did better than Trap, and non-Maru Terran did better than non-Trap Protoss.
I would certainly say that thanks to Trap's amazing performance, Protoss had a better year than Terran in 2021, but it's an outlier. Protoss has been consistently doing the worst for half of StarCraft II's existence. That's not having a bad year or individual variance among players.
As you say, "Damn it".
It didn't quote the post you highlighted, but the content is overlapping.
"We have a Terran problem" got countered with "Protoss has been carried by Trap". 2017-2021, titles for Terrans 11, and titles for Protoss 8 (Maru and Trap excluded). Maru had 8 and Trap had 6 in that time period. Protss had fewer titles and Trap had a bigger percentage of Protoss titles than Maru had of Terran titles. This statistic included the latest code S win by a Protoss. It did not, however, include 2nd places.
The post you quoted also discussed hypocrisy of not crying imbalance when soO was a repeat 2nd place. I can discuss that here. Big tournaments soO didn't get to the finals had Zerg winners. Life won, Solar won, and Dark won Starleagues. I think even soulkey won a few months before soO rose up. Why cry "Zerg is weak!" when Zerg is winning?
Regarding the Maru carry and being the hope of Terran: Maru has been the Last Terran (TM) since PvProleague, when Maru was the only Terran in Code S ro16. The Blink era and 10 sight range on Mothership core, that is the start of "play like Maru". This was before LotV, years before 2018. The old meme was that Maru only played well when other Terran players struggled, thus he either got knocked out early or was the Last Terran (TM).
Protoss has struggled for several years in a row. Terran has had bad times this year and long ago in the past. Recently ByuN won Blizzcon in 2016. That year had several Terran players doing well. The four horsemen started there. INno fell of a bit but TIME rose up as a real contender. GumiHo was playing mech vs Protoss and Bunny experimented with aggro builds. TY was nearly a dominating force that other Terran players could copy. There were several years of great Terran hope. There was such a long period of good Terran play that GumiHo and ByuN have manage to leave and come back from mandatory service. Dream has been great in team leagues, SpeCiaL has performed well in code S, Clem appeared, Big Gabe weekly is a thing. Terran has had hope for several years. That both Terran and Protoss are struggling this year can be coincidence. Terrans have more represented champions and Protoss have, well, Trap.
The frustration you seem to have about Terran is likely similar to the reason for this thread to be started.
His post was never made in a direct reply to the post I quoted. Why? Because those numbers don't fit his finely manicured stats. Instead of debating those numbers, he went on and made his own post with "non foreigner only premier tournament" stats. Classic confirmation bias. Keep cutting the data until it fits your agenda.
in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing more than fine though with 3 Starleague wins and lots of other wins and even a foreogner (Neeb) winning a korean cup. The Protoss underperformance started in 2018 when Maru and Serral won everything, then continued into 2019 when PvZ was massively imbalanced and then in 2020 lots of the top Protoss players were in military (Classic and herO with Stats soon to follow)
Also I did a quick count and noticed that in the finals of tier 1 tournaments (GSL Code S and World Championships) Protoss is currently on a 14 (!!) match losing streak, which is honestly insane but also shows that they have absolutely no problem reaching the finals. So the question is, how do you fix that they are struggling at that one specific stage only? without turning everything into PvP and forcing a Protoss winner via a PvP finals?
Like BisuDagger said, it could be that Toss pros are overperforming despite being underdogs. The fact that only Trap can really roll with the punches adds weight to this theory.
The final is the stage that really matters in any sport or competition. If you're not first, you're good as last.
Terran may well be struggling as well, and their success is down to also one player (Maru). But I think most people will agree that PvZ is tougher than TvZ, so the dominance of Zergs makes it even harder for Toss than Terran.
Anyway, all this is theorycrafting. I'm not sure what theory to believe, but the problem is not as clear-cut to dismiss Toss as being an underdog in LoTV (due to game design, meta, or whatever immutable race-based reason). After all, this is an assymmetrical game, so there shouldn't be any surprise if some races have it easier than others.
On December 12 2021 13:55 Seacow wrote: I haven't read the entire thread, so this might already have been brought up: I get the feeling Protoss is struggling because it can't skirmish with fast units in early-mid. Terran can run around with stimmed bio and pick em up with boosted medivacs, Zerg can run around with speedlings or speed roach/ravager. Both T and Z can disengage with no or minimal losses, P can't (recall is slow and costs a lot of energy). This means P leaving their base is a commitment. The result of this is that P has fewer OPPORTUNITIES to inflict damage in the mid game - instead it comes down to committed timing attacks (in particular in PvZ) where a bad engagement = loss.
In short: Gateway units offer less opportunities for mid game damage compared to T/Z. The mid game offensive that does exist - adept glaives v Z, blink stalker v T - relies on specific timings and is not equivalent to Z/T's sustained opportunities.
What do you think about this reasoning?
I think it’s a pretty solid line of reasoning. I wish it weren’t the case but I think to create that state would take the kind of radical changes that just seem extremely unlikely given the stage we’re at.
It’s less of an issue in PvT, it can still be risky to poke and shark but Terran doesn’t have the sustained speed Zerg do. They can and do pounce with stim/medivac boost but they have to pick their moments.
Plus as the game stretches out Protoss can end up with a mobility advantage as with more bases to defend Zealots and blink DTs can be giant pains in the arse.
Zerg on the other hand basically everything is faster than Toss units, a good player has great map vision with creep, which makes units even faster. In addition, unlike PvT a Zerg can have a much superior eco too and just outright more stuff on the map.
It’s both super risky to be out on the map doing anything bar committed pressure, and Protoss tend not to have the spare cash to send waves and waves of manlots and DTs that may trade inefficiently like they can in PvT where they can keep incomes even or in their favour
On December 12 2021 18:19 Charoisaur wrote: @fanatic templar
in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing more than fine though with 3 Starleague wins and lots of other wins and even a foreogner (Neeb) winning a korean cup.
Yes, in 2016 and 2017, Protoss did fine. Well within the range of expectations. I was there, and I was certainly not complaining at the time. Worse than Terran though so I don't know what you mean by "more than fine", and by the end of 2017 you see Rogue's emergence as well. Anyway, you're right that taking these years in isolation does not support the notion that Protoss is too weak, but since I'm arguing that Protoss has underperformed over the whole of Legacy of the Void, I have to include them, and including them validates my position, because as one would expect, there has been variance in metagame and individual performance over the six years of LotV. And these? These years up Protoss doing fine? These are the higher end of that variance.
The Protoss underperformance started in 2018 when Maru and Serral won everything, then continued into 2019 when PvZ was massively imbalanced and then in 2020 lots of the top Protoss players were in military (Classic and herO with Stats soon to follow)
We agree on the pattern, but disagree on where the baseline is. Also, why are you including "soon to follow" Stats as an excuse for Protoss doing terrible in 2020? He was there and playing for the whole of 2020, made some of those final losses that you're fond of.
Edit> Also Terran is fine in the TSL8 while Protoss is dead, right? What did I tell you! But Terrans still have the hero marine they need!
Oh has Protoss sucked for five years? Well, Terran has not done well in this one tournament! It's been a full four weeks since Maru won Dreamhack Masters, two months since Cure won GSL!
Not even getting into how many top Terrans got their losses in TvT in that tournament either. Maru and Cure both got knocked out of the upper bracket in TvT upsets, and along with Clem that makes every Terran to win a Premier in 2021 got put in the same corner of the lower bracket and had to knock each other out (along with Dream and Special).
Are you even fucking reading the thread?
I am. Did you have an issue you wanted to bring up?
On December 11 2021 03:31 Pentarp wrote:
On November 19 2021 21:11 deacon.frost wrote:
On November 19 2021 18:16 RKC wrote:
On November 19 2021 18:06 Nebuchad wrote:
On November 19 2021 15:28 Charoisaur wrote:
On November 19 2021 06:40 Nebuchad wrote: [quote]
Your issue is that you're trying to have a balance conversation so you need to defend your race, but again the people who are serious aren't talking about balance.
It is super obvious to everyone, including you, that the best protoss players right now are the least likely to win a tournament against the best terrans and the best zergs, and this by a large margin. You can obtain that knowledge in any number of ways, you can watch tournaments, you can hear casters talking about the players, you can check statistical results of the best players of each race...
This doesn't demonstrate that the game has to change in any way. You're taking a larger conversation and you're trying to fit it into your "don't nerf my race" agenda where it doesn't belong.
I'm not the one who makes it into a balance discussion!!?? I try to understand the people thinking it's a balance problem, as I don't see it.
Also you can stop your attempts trying to discredit me by claiming I'm biased, I don't even have a race, I'm playing random for the last 3-4 years already. Can we stop the unnecessary ad hominems and focus on the arguments?
A bunch of people came into this thread to say that the best protoss players were weaker in skill than the best zergs and the best terrans. You had no issue with any of their posts. I said it could be that or it could be balance. You had issue with my posts. Some other people are convinced that it's balance. You had issue with their posts.
Sure sounds like your issue is people who talk about balance.
Spot on.
I'm not sure what exactly is the cause of the problem. But the problem is there - Toss has been struggling to win top tier competitions in LoTV. Like you, I'm concerned about the diversity of the game. Balance is not the focus here.
I'm also frustrated as you are why some people seem to be denying that there is actually a problem at all (or trying to shift the focus to some other problem).
(I don't care about low level ladder stats, or lower tier competitions. That's not the problem - or may be a different problem altogether.)
What kind of problem are we talking about? Was soO getting into finals and not winning a race problem? Balance problem? Are Protoss players who get to the finals and can't win them if their lives depend on it a problem we can solve?
Out of the 3 Code S tournaments this year Protoss was in the 2 finals. IEM Katowice - Protoss was in the finals.
If we count only these "top tier tournaments" - we had 4 of them, 3 zergs, 3 protosses and 2 terrans in the finals
"But what about BO7 and Protoss?!" - well, you see, GSL semis are BO7 so if they can get pass that, they're not so bad in BO7-ing.
Let's ignore that Trap actually really won some tournaments this year, he has what, 5 titles? Let's check this years premier tournaments (yes, NA included) Trap - 7 appearances, 5 victories (0 Tier 1) Reynor - 4, 2 (IEM) Serral - 4, 2 (0) Neeb - 3, 2 (0) and yes, all NA Clem - 3, 2 (0) Scarlett - 3, 1 (0) and yes, all NA Maru - 3, 1 (0) Rogue - 2, 1 (GSL) Zoun - 2, 0 (0) Zest - 2, 0 (0) Cure - 1, 1 (GSL) Dark - 1, 1 (GSL) Solar - 1, 0 (0)
Totally per race Protoss: 11, 5 with NA +3, 2 Zerg: 12, 6 (IEM, Code S, Code S) with NA +3, 1 Terran: 7, 4 (Code S)
I don't know, to me it seems we have a Terran problem. The least amount of victories in the premier tournaments, the least amount of presence in the finals. FFS with the NA they have half the finals.
Also out of 4 tier 1 tournaments(how you people here call it) 3 were taken by zergs, so to me it seems that Protoss is fine, Zergs too stronk and Terran not stronk enough.
Edit> Back, when I was tracking this since the "Patch Zerg era", I used to say that Protoss is the race of Kongs, the most finals, the worst w/r. Terrans are Yoda race - do or do not. You either win or don't bother to the finals at all. And Zergs take the most important titles while being good at winning elsewhere as well.
As it seems valid for 2021.
AND NO ONE REPLIED TO THIS POST IN A MEANINGFUL WAY. You whiners are a fucking joke.
Thank you for your non-whiny, meaningful response, not-a-fucking-joke person.
You still don't have a reply to the post I quoted. Thank you for your waste of our time.
To the mods, I apologize for my outburst. You do see this guy isn't replying to meaningful posts in the thread either. I am upset because our standard for discourse is circumvented with cheap weasel tricks.
There is no strawman narrative that Protoss are "simply not as good". To argue this existence is to acknowledge a small minority, if any. NO REASONABLE SC2 FAN ARGUES THIS. Again, another outburst.
Protoss are getting bum-rushed by Queen walks. Simply that.
But, Protoss are still well represented despite this agonizing plea that there is "simply no hope". Maru was called the "Terran hope" because it was only Maru. Yes, TY and Cure have followed up. But before that, there was no other hope for Terrans. If Maru got injured like Byun and so many other Terran pros, would you see this thread?
And I include foreign Terran's alopecia as a a form of injury.
No, we simply learned to count our blessings. So understand why I have no sympathy for those who cry about a lack of hope when they get a slightest hint that their race can be struggling. Welcome to Terran. Welcome to SC2. Count your blessings in your HIGH REPRESENTATION IN ALL OTHER LEVELS OF PLAY, INCLUDING GRAND FINALS.
Sorry you won't have a fucking Gold medal with a million (exaggeration) silvers and bronzes.
The post you said nobody replied to in a meaningful way was discussed some days later by the very person you lashed out against:
On December 08 2021 23:46 Fanatic-Templar wrote:
On December 08 2021 19:20 deacon.frost wrote:
On December 08 2021 03:45 Fanatic-Templar wrote:
On December 07 2021 19:17 darklycid wrote:
On December 07 2021 19:14 deacon.frost wrote:
On December 07 2021 17:24 kajtarp wrote: I don't know. If we take last GSL Finals as example, Zest didn't lose because of his race. He had bad decisions, and bad unit control troughout the match. He could have won, but failed to execute his strategies. Or if we take Trap's final or semifinal losses, how many times did he lose because his race is underpowered and not simply because Maru/Rogue/Dark/Serral/Reynor was the better player that day?
Many other have tried but failed. They just want to hear Protoss weak, Terran and Zerg stronk.
I mean you can always say the other player just played better, let's take e.g. 2018 when terran outside of maru didn't do well i guess the other players just always played better
Note also that when people say "in 2018 outside of Maru Terran didn't do well" nobody jumps in to say "ACTUALLY Ty and Innovation got to the finals so Terran was doing fine" or "GSL S3 was TvT so even without Maru Terran still would have won" or "half of the players in S2 Round of 8 were Terrans so they're actually performing above average" and all that nonsense.
And at least if you play like Maru you actually win. Try having to play like Trap.
2018 Premier tournaments: 9 zerg titles, 2 2nd places -> 11 zergs in the finals 4 Terran titles, 2 2nd places -> 6 terrans in the finals 2 Protoss titles ,10 2nd places -> 12 Protoss in the finals
I wonder why people felt Terran was weak, when the finals representation was 11:6:12 (Z : T : P)
2021 Premier tournaments: 5 Protoss titles, 6 2nd places (+2/1 if NA) 6 Zerg titles, 6 2nd places (+1/2 if NA) 4 Terran titles, 4 2nd places 12:8:11 Z/T/P
I wonder why I state that Terran is as bad if not in worse situation.
No one's wondering why people felt Terran was weak in 2018, I'm wondering why people won't acknowledge Protoss is weak now.
I noticed you didn't count the titles separately in your non Trap/Maru column. Didn't like what it showed?
Incidentally, using only 2021 stats is also misrepresenting how long Protoss has sucked.
2019-2021 non foreigner only Premier tournaments: 8 Protoss titles 9 Terran titles 20 Zerg titles
Pretty even, right? But that's entirely carried by Trap's monstrous early 2021 performance. So here's without that Trap/Maru carry factor (not even going to bother with Zerg, they've got a billion champions):
2 Protoss titles 5 Terran titles
Trap represents 3/4 of all Protoss titles for the period, Maru not even half of Terran's.
But you may consider this unfair, since I stopped just before 2018, Maru's obvious carry year. I did this because summer 2019 is how far back you have to go to include any not-Trap Protoss champions, but let's keep it going up to 2017, winter 2017 being the last time Protoss won an actual GSL, so that I don't unfairly misrepresent Maru's Terran dominance.
2017-2021 non foreigner only Premier tournaments:
14 Protoss titles 19 Terran titles 28 Zerg titles
Without Trap/Maru
8 Protoss titles 11 Terran titles
So even including Maru's best year, and two years where Trap won literally nothing, they come out mostly even carrying around 42% of their race's titles, and with Terran performing better on either end: Maru did better than Trap, and non-Maru Terran did better than non-Trap Protoss.
I would certainly say that thanks to Trap's amazing performance, Protoss had a better year than Terran in 2021, but it's an outlier. Protoss has been consistently doing the worst for half of StarCraft II's existence. That's not having a bad year or individual variance among players.
As you say, "Damn it".
It didn't quote the post you highlighted, but the content is overlapping.
"We have a Terran problem" got countered with "Protoss has been carried by Trap". 2017-2021, titles for Terrans 11, and titles for Protoss 8 (Maru and Trap excluded). Maru had 8 and Trap had 6 in that time period. Protss had fewer titles and Trap had a bigger percentage of Protoss titles than Maru had of Terran titles. This statistic included the latest code S win by a Protoss. It did not, however, include 2nd places.
The post you quoted also discussed hypocrisy of not crying imbalance when soO was a repeat 2nd place. I can discuss that here. Big tournaments soO didn't get to the finals had Zerg winners. Life won, Solar won, and Dark won Starleagues. I think even soulkey won a few months before soO rose up. Why cry "Zerg is weak!" when Zerg is winning?
Regarding the Maru carry and being the hope of Terran: Maru has been the Last Terran (TM) since PvProleague, when Maru was the only Terran in Code S ro16. The Blink era and 10 sight range on Mothership core, that is the start of "play like Maru". This was before LotV, years before 2018. The old meme was that Maru only played well when other Terran players struggled, thus he either got knocked out early or was the Last Terran (TM).
Protoss has struggled for several years in a row. Terran has had bad times this year and long ago in the past. Recently ByuN won Blizzcon in 2016. That year had several Terran players doing well. The four horsemen started there. INno fell of a bit but TIME rose up as a real contender. GumiHo was playing mech vs Protoss and Bunny experimented with aggro builds. TY was nearly a dominating force that other Terran players could copy. There were several years of great Terran hope. There was such a long period of good Terran play that GumiHo and ByuN have manage to leave and come back from mandatory service. Dream has been great in team leagues, SpeCiaL has performed well in code S, Clem appeared, Big Gabe weekly is a thing. Terran has had hope for several years. That both Terran and Protoss are struggling this year can be coincidence. Terrans have more represented champions and Protoss have, well, Trap.
The frustration you seem to have about Terran is likely similar to the reason for this thread to be started.
His post was never made in a direct reply to the post I quoted. Why? Because those numbers don't fit his finely manicured stats. Instead of debating those numbers, he went on and made his own post with "non foreigner only premier tournament" stats. Classic confirmation bias. Keep cutting the data until it fits your agenda.
Is this a joke? The fact that I have addressed everything in that post doesn't count because I haven't done it in a DIRECT REPLY?
On November 19 2021 21:11 deacon.frost wrote: What kind of problem are we talking about? Was soO getting into finals and not winning a race problem? Balance problem? Are Protoss players who get to the finals and can't win them if their lives depend on it a problem we can solve?
Out of the 3 Code S tournaments this year Protoss was in the 2 finals. IEM Katowice - Protoss was in the finals.
If we count only these "top tier tournaments" - we had 4 of them, 3 zergs, 3 protosses and 2 terrans in the finals
"But what about BO7 and Protoss?!" - well, you see, GSL semis are BO7 so if they can get pass that, they're not so bad in BO7-ing.
Let's ignore that Trap actually really won some tournaments this year, he has what, 5 titles? Let's check this years premier tournaments (yes, NA included) Trap - 7 appearances, 5 victories (0 Tier 1) Reynor - 4, 2 (IEM) Serral - 4, 2 (0) Neeb - 3, 2 (0) and yes, all NA Clem - 3, 2 (0) Scarlett - 3, 1 (0) and yes, all NA Maru - 3, 1 (0) Rogue - 2, 1 (GSL) Zoun - 2, 0 (0) Zest - 2, 0 (0) Cure - 1, 1 (GSL) Dark - 1, 1 (GSL) Solar - 1, 0 (0)
Totally per race Protoss: 11, 5 with NA +3, 2 Zerg: 12, 6 (IEM, Code S, Code S) with NA +3, 1 Terran: 7, 4 (Code S)
I don't know, to me it seems we have a Terran problem. The least amount of victories in the premier tournaments, the least amount of presence in the finals. FFS with the NA they have half the finals.
Also out of 4 tier 1 tournaments(how you people here call it) 3 were taken by zergs, so to me it seems that Protoss is fine, Zergs too stronk and Terran not stronk enough.
Edit> Back, when I was tracking this since the "Patch Zerg era", I used to say that Protoss is the race of Kongs, the most finals, the worst w/r. Terrans are Yoda race - do or do not. You either win or don't bother to the finals at all. And Zergs take the most important titles while being good at winning elsewhere as well.
As it seems valid for 2021.
So, allow me to repeat all the tings I have already said as a DIRECT REPLY for the benefits to Pentarp's personal needs.
Soo and the entire Protoss race are different because Soo is an individual and the entire Protoss race is not. Therefore it is reasonable to conclude that an individual has individual problems, and a race has racial problems. This is furthered by the sheer number of individuals in the entire Protoss race over the past five years who would need to have coincidentally simultaneous individual problems.
Yes, if we count winning and losing to be equal, Protoss has been doing fine. However, we do not. We count winning to be superior to losing. So Protoss' great performance in losing tournaments does not compensate for their terrible performance at winning them. There is really no reason to count tournament wins and "finals appearances" as the same thing, except as an attempt to pad Protoss stats.
The claim that Terran has the least amount of tournament victories is false, see spoilered quote. Protoss has in fact won around 3/4 of Terran's titles. This does not grow better by the inclusion of 2016 either.
On December 07 2021 17:24 kajtarp wrote: I don't know. If we take last GSL Finals as example, Zest didn't lose because of his race. He had bad decisions, and bad unit control troughout the match. He could have won, but failed to execute his strategies. Or if we take Trap's final or semifinal losses, how many times did he lose because his race is underpowered and not simply because Maru/Rogue/Dark/Serral/Reynor was the better player that day?
Many other have tried but failed. They just want to hear Protoss weak, Terran and Zerg stronk.
I mean you can always say the other player just played better, let's take e.g. 2018 when terran outside of maru didn't do well i guess the other players just always played better
Note also that when people say "in 2018 outside of Maru Terran didn't do well" nobody jumps in to say "ACTUALLY Ty and Innovation got to the finals so Terran was doing fine" or "GSL S3 was TvT so even without Maru Terran still would have won" or "half of the players in S2 Round of 8 were Terrans so they're actually performing above average" and all that nonsense.
And at least if you play like Maru you actually win. Try having to play like Trap.
2018 Premier tournaments: 9 zerg titles, 2 2nd places -> 11 zergs in the finals 4 Terran titles, 2 2nd places -> 6 terrans in the finals 2 Protoss titles ,10 2nd places -> 12 Protoss in the finals
I wonder why people felt Terran was weak, when the finals representation was 11:6:12 (Z : T : P)
2021 Premier tournaments: 5 Protoss titles, 6 2nd places (+2/1 if NA) 6 Zerg titles, 6 2nd places (+1/2 if NA) 4 Terran titles, 4 2nd places 12:8:11 Z/T/P
I wonder why I state that Terran is as bad if not in worse situation.
No one's wondering why people felt Terran was weak in 2018, I'm wondering why people won't acknowledge Protoss is weak now.
I noticed you didn't count the titles separately in your non Trap/Maru column. Didn't like what it showed?
Incidentally, using only 2021 stats is also misrepresenting how long Protoss has sucked.
2019-2021 non foreigner only Premier tournaments: 8 Protoss titles 9 Terran titles 20 Zerg titles
Pretty even, right? But that's entirely carried by Trap's monstrous early 2021 performance. So here's without that Trap/Maru carry factor (not even going to bother with Zerg, they've got a billion champions):
2 Protoss titles 5 Terran titles
Trap represents 3/4 of all Protoss titles for the period, Maru not even half of Terran's.
But you may consider this unfair, since I stopped just before 2018, Maru's obvious carry year. I did this because summer 2019 is how far back you have to go to include any not-Trap Protoss champions, but let's keep it going up to 2017, winter 2017 being the last time Protoss won an actual GSL, so that I don't unfairly misrepresent Maru's Terran dominance.
2017-2021 non foreigner only Premier tournaments:
14 Protoss titles 19 Terran titles 28 Zerg titles
Without Trap/Maru
8 Protoss titles 11 Terran titles
So even including Maru's best year, and two years where Trap won literally nothing, they come out mostly even carrying around 42% of their race's titles, and with Terran performing better on either end: Maru did better than Trap, and non-Maru Terran did better than non-Trap Protoss.
I would certainly say that thanks to Trap's amazing performance, Protoss had a better year than Terran in 2021, but it's an outlier. Protoss has been consistently doing the worst for half of StarCraft II's existence. That's not having a bad year or individual variance among players.
As you say, "Damn it".
As for Zerg doing better than Terrans and Protoss both, yes, that is correct.
Now that I have repeated all these arguments as a DIRECT REPLY, I look forward to the dramatic change this will have on the conversation happening in this thread.
On December 12 2021 18:19 Charoisaur wrote: @fanatic templar
in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing more than fine though with 3 Starleague wins and lots of other wins and even a foreogner (Neeb) winning a korean cup.
Yes, in 2016 and 2017, Protoss did fine. Well within the range of expectations. I was there, and I was certainly not complaining at the time. Worse than Terran though so I don't know what you mean by "more than fine", and by the end of 2017 you see Rogue's emergence as well. Anyway, you're right that taking these years in isolation does not support the notion that Protoss is too weak, but since I'm arguing that Protoss has underperformed over the whole of Legacy of the Void, I have to include them, and including them validates my position, because as one would expect, there has been variance in metagame and individual performance over the six years of LotV. And these? These years up Protoss doing fine? These are the higher end of that variance.
The Protoss underperformance started in 2018 when Maru and Serral won everything, then continued into 2019 when PvZ was massively imbalanced and then in 2020 lots of the top Protoss players were in military (Classic and herO with Stats soon to follow)
We agree on the pattern, but disagree on where the baseline is. Also, why are you including "soon to follow" Stats as an excuse for Protoss doing terrible in 2020? He was there and playing for the whole of 2020, made some of those final losses that you're fond of.
On December 12 2021 18:19 Charoisaur wrote: @fanatic templar
in 2016 and 2017 Toss was still doing more than fine though with 3 Starleague wins and lots of other wins and even a foreogner (Neeb) winning a korean cup.
Yes, in 2016 and 2017, Protoss did fine. Well within the range of expectations. I was there, and I was certainly not complaining at the time. Worse than Terran though so I don't know what you mean by "more than fine", and by the end of 2017 you see Rogue's emergence as well. Anyway, you're right that taking these years in isolation does not support the notion that Protoss is too weak, but since I'm arguing that Protoss has underperformed over the whole of Legacy of the Void, I have to include them, and including them validates my position, because as one would expect, there has been variance in metagame and individual performance over the six years of LotV. And these? These years up Protoss doing fine? These are the higher end of that variance.
The Protoss underperformance started in 2018 when Maru and Serral won everything, then continued into 2019 when PvZ was massively imbalanced and then in 2020 lots of the top Protoss players were in military (Classic and herO with Stats soon to follow)
We agree on the pattern, but disagree on where the baseline is. Also, why are you including "soon to follow" Stats as an excuse for Protoss doing terrible in 2020? He was there and playing for the whole of 2020, made some of those final losses that you're fond of.
Edit> Also Terran is fine in the TSL8 while Protoss is dead, right? What did I tell you! But Terrans still have the hero marine they need!
Oh has Protoss sucked for five years? Well, Terran has not done well in this one tournament! It's been a full four weeks since Maru won Dreamhack Masters, two months since Cure won GSL!
Not even getting into how many top Terrans got their losses in TvT in that tournament either. Maru and Cure both got knocked out of the upper bracket in TvT upsets, and along with Clem that makes every Terran to win a Premier in 2021 got put in the same corner of the lower bracket and had to knock each other out (along with Dream and Special).
Are you even fucking reading the thread?
I am. Did you have an issue you wanted to bring up?
On December 11 2021 03:31 Pentarp wrote:
On November 19 2021 21:11 deacon.frost wrote:
On November 19 2021 18:16 RKC wrote:
On November 19 2021 18:06 Nebuchad wrote:
On November 19 2021 15:28 Charoisaur wrote: [quote] I'm not the one who makes it into a balance discussion!!?? I try to understand the people thinking it's a balance problem, as I don't see it.
Also you can stop your attempts trying to discredit me by claiming I'm biased, I don't even have a race, I'm playing random for the last 3-4 years already. Can we stop the unnecessary ad hominems and focus on the arguments?
A bunch of people came into this thread to say that the best protoss players were weaker in skill than the best zergs and the best terrans. You had no issue with any of their posts. I said it could be that or it could be balance. You had issue with my posts. Some other people are convinced that it's balance. You had issue with their posts.
Sure sounds like your issue is people who talk about balance.
Spot on.
I'm not sure what exactly is the cause of the problem. But the problem is there - Toss has been struggling to win top tier competitions in LoTV. Like you, I'm concerned about the diversity of the game. Balance is not the focus here.
I'm also frustrated as you are why some people seem to be denying that there is actually a problem at all (or trying to shift the focus to some other problem).
(I don't care about low level ladder stats, or lower tier competitions. That's not the problem - or may be a different problem altogether.)
What kind of problem are we talking about? Was soO getting into finals and not winning a race problem? Balance problem? Are Protoss players who get to the finals and can't win them if their lives depend on it a problem we can solve?
Out of the 3 Code S tournaments this year Protoss was in the 2 finals. IEM Katowice - Protoss was in the finals.
If we count only these "top tier tournaments" - we had 4 of them, 3 zergs, 3 protosses and 2 terrans in the finals
"But what about BO7 and Protoss?!" - well, you see, GSL semis are BO7 so if they can get pass that, they're not so bad in BO7-ing.
Let's ignore that Trap actually really won some tournaments this year, he has what, 5 titles? Let's check this years premier tournaments (yes, NA included) Trap - 7 appearances, 5 victories (0 Tier 1) Reynor - 4, 2 (IEM) Serral - 4, 2 (0) Neeb - 3, 2 (0) and yes, all NA Clem - 3, 2 (0) Scarlett - 3, 1 (0) and yes, all NA Maru - 3, 1 (0) Rogue - 2, 1 (GSL) Zoun - 2, 0 (0) Zest - 2, 0 (0) Cure - 1, 1 (GSL) Dark - 1, 1 (GSL) Solar - 1, 0 (0)
Totally per race Protoss: 11, 5 with NA +3, 2 Zerg: 12, 6 (IEM, Code S, Code S) with NA +3, 1 Terran: 7, 4 (Code S)
I don't know, to me it seems we have a Terran problem. The least amount of victories in the premier tournaments, the least amount of presence in the finals. FFS with the NA they have half the finals.
Also out of 4 tier 1 tournaments(how you people here call it) 3 were taken by zergs, so to me it seems that Protoss is fine, Zergs too stronk and Terran not stronk enough.
Edit> Back, when I was tracking this since the "Patch Zerg era", I used to say that Protoss is the race of Kongs, the most finals, the worst w/r. Terrans are Yoda race - do or do not. You either win or don't bother to the finals at all. And Zergs take the most important titles while being good at winning elsewhere as well.
As it seems valid for 2021.
AND NO ONE REPLIED TO THIS POST IN A MEANINGFUL WAY. You whiners are a fucking joke.
Thank you for your non-whiny, meaningful response, not-a-fucking-joke person.
You still don't have a reply to the post I quoted. Thank you for your waste of our time.
To the mods, I apologize for my outburst. You do see this guy isn't replying to meaningful posts in the thread either. I am upset because our standard for discourse is circumvented with cheap weasel tricks.
There is no strawman narrative that Protoss are "simply not as good". To argue this existence is to acknowledge a small minority, if any. NO REASONABLE SC2 FAN ARGUES THIS. Again, another outburst.
Protoss are getting bum-rushed by Queen walks. Simply that.
But, Protoss are still well represented despite this agonizing plea that there is "simply no hope". Maru was called the "Terran hope" because it was only Maru. Yes, TY and Cure have followed up. But before that, there was no other hope for Terrans. If Maru got injured like Byun and so many other Terran pros, would you see this thread?
And I include foreign Terran's alopecia as a a form of injury.
No, we simply learned to count our blessings. So understand why I have no sympathy for those who cry about a lack of hope when they get a slightest hint that their race can be struggling. Welcome to Terran. Welcome to SC2. Count your blessings in your HIGH REPRESENTATION IN ALL OTHER LEVELS OF PLAY, INCLUDING GRAND FINALS.
Sorry you won't have a fucking Gold medal with a million (exaggeration) silvers and bronzes.
The post you said nobody replied to in a meaningful way was discussed some days later by the very person you lashed out against:
On December 08 2021 23:46 Fanatic-Templar wrote:
On December 08 2021 19:20 deacon.frost wrote:
On December 08 2021 03:45 Fanatic-Templar wrote:
On December 07 2021 19:17 darklycid wrote:
On December 07 2021 19:14 deacon.frost wrote:
On December 07 2021 17:24 kajtarp wrote: I don't know. If we take last GSL Finals as example, Zest didn't lose because of his race. He had bad decisions, and bad unit control troughout the match. He could have won, but failed to execute his strategies. Or if we take Trap's final or semifinal losses, how many times did he lose because his race is underpowered and not simply because Maru/Rogue/Dark/Serral/Reynor was the better player that day?
Many other have tried but failed. They just want to hear Protoss weak, Terran and Zerg stronk.
I mean you can always say the other player just played better, let's take e.g. 2018 when terran outside of maru didn't do well i guess the other players just always played better
Note also that when people say "in 2018 outside of Maru Terran didn't do well" nobody jumps in to say "ACTUALLY Ty and Innovation got to the finals so Terran was doing fine" or "GSL S3 was TvT so even without Maru Terran still would have won" or "half of the players in S2 Round of 8 were Terrans so they're actually performing above average" and all that nonsense.
And at least if you play like Maru you actually win. Try having to play like Trap.
2018 Premier tournaments: 9 zerg titles, 2 2nd places -> 11 zergs in the finals 4 Terran titles, 2 2nd places -> 6 terrans in the finals 2 Protoss titles ,10 2nd places -> 12 Protoss in the finals
I wonder why people felt Terran was weak, when the finals representation was 11:6:12 (Z : T : P)
2021 Premier tournaments: 5 Protoss titles, 6 2nd places (+2/1 if NA) 6 Zerg titles, 6 2nd places (+1/2 if NA) 4 Terran titles, 4 2nd places 12:8:11 Z/T/P
I wonder why I state that Terran is as bad if not in worse situation.
No one's wondering why people felt Terran was weak in 2018, I'm wondering why people won't acknowledge Protoss is weak now.
I noticed you didn't count the titles separately in your non Trap/Maru column. Didn't like what it showed?
Incidentally, using only 2021 stats is also misrepresenting how long Protoss has sucked.
2019-2021 non foreigner only Premier tournaments: 8 Protoss titles 9 Terran titles 20 Zerg titles
Pretty even, right? But that's entirely carried by Trap's monstrous early 2021 performance. So here's without that Trap/Maru carry factor (not even going to bother with Zerg, they've got a billion champions):
2 Protoss titles 5 Terran titles
Trap represents 3/4 of all Protoss titles for the period, Maru not even half of Terran's.
But you may consider this unfair, since I stopped just before 2018, Maru's obvious carry year. I did this because summer 2019 is how far back you have to go to include any not-Trap Protoss champions, but let's keep it going up to 2017, winter 2017 being the last time Protoss won an actual GSL, so that I don't unfairly misrepresent Maru's Terran dominance.
2017-2021 non foreigner only Premier tournaments:
14 Protoss titles 19 Terran titles 28 Zerg titles
Without Trap/Maru
8 Protoss titles 11 Terran titles
So even including Maru's best year, and two years where Trap won literally nothing, they come out mostly even carrying around 42% of their race's titles, and with Terran performing better on either end: Maru did better than Trap, and non-Maru Terran did better than non-Trap Protoss.
I would certainly say that thanks to Trap's amazing performance, Protoss had a better year than Terran in 2021, but it's an outlier. Protoss has been consistently doing the worst for half of StarCraft II's existence. That's not having a bad year or individual variance among players.
As you say, "Damn it".
It didn't quote the post you highlighted, but the content is overlapping.
"We have a Terran problem" got countered with "Protoss has been carried by Trap". 2017-2021, titles for Terrans 11, and titles for Protoss 8 (Maru and Trap excluded). Maru had 8 and Trap had 6 in that time period. Protss had fewer titles and Trap had a bigger percentage of Protoss titles than Maru had of Terran titles. This statistic included the latest code S win by a Protoss. It did not, however, include 2nd places.
The post you quoted also discussed hypocrisy of not crying imbalance when soO was a repeat 2nd place. I can discuss that here. Big tournaments soO didn't get to the finals had Zerg winners. Life won, Solar won, and Dark won Starleagues. I think even soulkey won a few months before soO rose up. Why cry "Zerg is weak!" when Zerg is winning?
Regarding the Maru carry and being the hope of Terran: Maru has been the Last Terran (TM) since PvProleague, when Maru was the only Terran in Code S ro16. The Blink era and 10 sight range on Mothership core, that is the start of "play like Maru". This was before LotV, years before 2018. The old meme was that Maru only played well when other Terran players struggled, thus he either got knocked out early or was the Last Terran (TM).
Protoss has struggled for several years in a row. Terran has had bad times this year and long ago in the past. Recently ByuN won Blizzcon in 2016. That year had several Terran players doing well. The four horsemen started there. INno fell of a bit but TIME rose up as a real contender. GumiHo was playing mech vs Protoss and Bunny experimented with aggro builds. TY was nearly a dominating force that other Terran players could copy. There were several years of great Terran hope. There was such a long period of good Terran play that GumiHo and ByuN have manage to leave and come back from mandatory service. Dream has been great in team leagues, SpeCiaL has performed well in code S, Clem appeared, Big Gabe weekly is a thing. Terran has had hope for several years. That both Terran and Protoss are struggling this year can be coincidence. Terrans have more represented champions and Protoss have, well, Trap.
The frustration you seem to have about Terran is likely similar to the reason for this thread to be started.
His post was never made in a direct reply to the post I quoted. Why? Because those numbers don't fit his finely manicured stats. Instead of debating those numbers, he went on and made his own post with "non foreigner only premier tournament" stats. Classic confirmation bias. Keep cutting the data until it fits your agenda.
Is this a joke? The fact that I have addressed everything in that post doesn't count because I haven't done it in a DIRECT REPLY?
On November 19 2021 21:11 deacon.frost wrote: What kind of problem are we talking about? Was soO getting into finals and not winning a race problem? Balance problem? Are Protoss players who get to the finals and can't win them if their lives depend on it a problem we can solve?
Out of the 3 Code S tournaments this year Protoss was in the 2 finals. IEM Katowice - Protoss was in the finals.
If we count only these "top tier tournaments" - we had 4 of them, 3 zergs, 3 protosses and 2 terrans in the finals
"But what about BO7 and Protoss?!" - well, you see, GSL semis are BO7 so if they can get pass that, they're not so bad in BO7-ing.
Let's ignore that Trap actually really won some tournaments this year, he has what, 5 titles? Let's check this years premier tournaments (yes, NA included) Trap - 7 appearances, 5 victories (0 Tier 1) Reynor - 4, 2 (IEM) Serral - 4, 2 (0) Neeb - 3, 2 (0) and yes, all NA Clem - 3, 2 (0) Scarlett - 3, 1 (0) and yes, all NA Maru - 3, 1 (0) Rogue - 2, 1 (GSL) Zoun - 2, 0 (0) Zest - 2, 0 (0) Cure - 1, 1 (GSL) Dark - 1, 1 (GSL) Solar - 1, 0 (0)
Totally per race Protoss: 11, 5 with NA +3, 2 Zerg: 12, 6 (IEM, Code S, Code S) with NA +3, 1 Terran: 7, 4 (Code S)
I don't know, to me it seems we have a Terran problem. The least amount of victories in the premier tournaments, the least amount of presence in the finals. FFS with the NA they have half the finals.
Also out of 4 tier 1 tournaments(how you people here call it) 3 were taken by zergs, so to me it seems that Protoss is fine, Zergs too stronk and Terran not stronk enough.
Edit> Back, when I was tracking this since the "Patch Zerg era", I used to say that Protoss is the race of Kongs, the most finals, the worst w/r. Terrans are Yoda race - do or do not. You either win or don't bother to the finals at all. And Zergs take the most important titles while being good at winning elsewhere as well.
As it seems valid for 2021.
So, allow me to repeat all the tings I have already said as a DIRECT REPLY for the benefits to Pentarp's personal needs.
Soo and the entire Protoss race are different because Soo is an individual and the entire Protoss race is not. Therefore it is reasonable to conclude that an individual has individual problems, and a race has racial problems. This is furthered by the sheer number of individuals in the entire Protoss race over the past five years who would need to have coincidentally simultaneous individual problems.
Yes, if we count winning and losing to be equal, Protoss has been doing fine. However, we do not. We count winning to be superior to losing. So Protoss' great performance in losing tournaments does not compensate for their terrible performance at winning them. There is really no reason to count tournament wins and "finals appearances" as the same thing, except as an attempt to pad Protoss stats.
The claim that Terran has the least amount of tournament victories is false, see spoilered quote. Protoss has in fact won around 3/4 of Terran's titles. This does not grow better by the inclusion of 2016 either.
On December 07 2021 17:24 kajtarp wrote: I don't know. If we take last GSL Finals as example, Zest didn't lose because of his race. He had bad decisions, and bad unit control troughout the match. He could have won, but failed to execute his strategies. Or if we take Trap's final or semifinal losses, how many times did he lose because his race is underpowered and not simply because Maru/Rogue/Dark/Serral/Reynor was the better player that day?
Many other have tried but failed. They just want to hear Protoss weak, Terran and Zerg stronk.
I mean you can always say the other player just played better, let's take e.g. 2018 when terran outside of maru didn't do well i guess the other players just always played better
Note also that when people say "in 2018 outside of Maru Terran didn't do well" nobody jumps in to say "ACTUALLY Ty and Innovation got to the finals so Terran was doing fine" or "GSL S3 was TvT so even without Maru Terran still would have won" or "half of the players in S2 Round of 8 were Terrans so they're actually performing above average" and all that nonsense.
And at least if you play like Maru you actually win. Try having to play like Trap.
2018 Premier tournaments: 9 zerg titles, 2 2nd places -> 11 zergs in the finals 4 Terran titles, 2 2nd places -> 6 terrans in the finals 2 Protoss titles ,10 2nd places -> 12 Protoss in the finals
I wonder why people felt Terran was weak, when the finals representation was 11:6:12 (Z : T : P)
2021 Premier tournaments: 5 Protoss titles, 6 2nd places (+2/1 if NA) 6 Zerg titles, 6 2nd places (+1/2 if NA) 4 Terran titles, 4 2nd places 12:8:11 Z/T/P
I wonder why I state that Terran is as bad if not in worse situation.
No one's wondering why people felt Terran was weak in 2018, I'm wondering why people won't acknowledge Protoss is weak now.
I noticed you didn't count the titles separately in your non Trap/Maru column. Didn't like what it showed?
Incidentally, using only 2021 stats is also misrepresenting how long Protoss has sucked.
2019-2021 non foreigner only Premier tournaments: 8 Protoss titles 9 Terran titles 20 Zerg titles
Pretty even, right? But that's entirely carried by Trap's monstrous early 2021 performance. So here's without that Trap/Maru carry factor (not even going to bother with Zerg, they've got a billion champions):
2 Protoss titles 5 Terran titles
Trap represents 3/4 of all Protoss titles for the period, Maru not even half of Terran's.
But you may consider this unfair, since I stopped just before 2018, Maru's obvious carry year. I did this because summer 2019 is how far back you have to go to include any not-Trap Protoss champions, but let's keep it going up to 2017, winter 2017 being the last time Protoss won an actual GSL, so that I don't unfairly misrepresent Maru's Terran dominance.
2017-2021 non foreigner only Premier tournaments:
14 Protoss titles 19 Terran titles 28 Zerg titles
Without Trap/Maru
8 Protoss titles 11 Terran titles
So even including Maru's best year, and two years where Trap won literally nothing, they come out mostly even carrying around 42% of their race's titles, and with Terran performing better on either end: Maru did better than Trap, and non-Maru Terran did better than non-Trap Protoss.
I would certainly say that thanks to Trap's amazing performance, Protoss had a better year than Terran in 2021, but it's an outlier. Protoss has been consistently doing the worst for half of StarCraft II's existence. That's not having a bad year or individual variance among players.
As you say, "Damn it".
As for Zerg doing better than Terrans and Protoss both, yes, that is correct.
Now that I have repeated all these arguments as a DIRECT REPLY, I look forward to the dramatic change this will have on the conversation happening in this thread.
That's why I don't focus only at titles, that brings only the victor and it doesn't care about the runner up. it's very shortsighted. And statistically it would be better to compare it against BO7/5/3 and against RO8/4 too. if you focus just at the titles calling 8vs11 (if no Maru/Trap) not even when zergs have double that is pathetic excuse to focus only at Protoss. yet again I will reinforce what I say.
It is not just Protoss being FUBAR, it's Terran as well. Only Zergs are fine.
The answer to your question is there. Protoss is doing bad at the best level because the top 5 of the race has done consistently worse than the top 5 of the other two races since 2018.
You obviously don't care about that, but it's getting tiresome that you guys keep pretending you don't know what you're talking about.
I think the problem for protoss is just being bad against zerg... its fine vs terran if not better, but I think very few people who believe the race is strong enough versus zerg play protoss at a high level. Also the fast expanding nature of LOTV just helps zerg imo thats what the race is designed to do.
There's not even enough data to say that. It could also be that the very top of zerg players is just better than the very top of protoss players at the game. We cannot positively state that if Serral had chosen protoss instead of zerg he wouldn't be dominating, there's no direct evidence of that.
All we can state is that there's not a ton of hope and that we should behave accordingly.
Thats why observation, logic, and actual in game experience with the races at a high level are important instead of just being a pure data nerd. You hear that all the time there's not enough data to tell this, not enough data to claim that...
There's no level of observation or logic that will allow you to answer this type of question, and if you've ever heard 80% of pros talk you know that in game experience increases your bias rather than the quality of your data.
That I can't agree with, there's almost always a way to answer anything correctly that we can directly experience. Wombat and Fanatic Templar had very good posts to counter you.
Also the simplest strong evidence of protoss's weakness in this matchup is Serral. I'm watching him 4-0 Trap right now in TSL 8, the only protoss who has been very successful this year. Serral almost always absolutely demolishes protoss in particular while he struggles plenty vs terran and zerg. He shows just how helpless protoss is when zerg plays correctly.
On December 13 2021 01:01 deacon.frost wrote: That's why I don't focus only at titles, that brings only the victor and it doesn't care about the runner up.
Uh, yeah? That's why I focus only at the titles? Not caring about the runner-up is deliberate, because winning and losing is not equal performance.
On December 13 2021 01:01 deacon.frost wrote: it's very shortsighted. And statistically it would be better to compare it against BO7/5/3 and against RO8/4 too. if you focus just at the titles calling 8vs11 (if no Maru/Trap) not even when zergs have double that is pathetic excuse to focus only at Protoss. yet again I will reinforce what I say.
It is not just Protoss being FUBAR, it's Terran as well. Only Zergs are fine.
Is it really that hard to understand that?
No? I literally said that Zerg was doing better than both? So if Terran is FUBAR, what does it mean that Protoss is doing considerably worse than Terran?
The answer to your question is there. Protoss is doing bad at the best level because the top 5 of the race has done consistently worse than the top 5 of the other two races since 2018.
You obviously don't care about that, but it's getting tiresome that you guys keep pretending you don't know what you're talking about.
I think the problem for protoss is just being bad against zerg... its fine vs terran if not better, but I think very few people who believe the race is strong enough versus zerg play protoss at a high level. Also the fast expanding nature of LOTV just helps zerg imo thats what the race is designed to do.
There's not even enough data to say that. It could also be that the very top of zerg players is just better than the very top of protoss players at the game. We cannot positively state that if Serral had chosen protoss instead of zerg he wouldn't be dominating, there's no direct evidence of that.
All we can state is that there's not a ton of hope and that we should behave accordingly.
Thats why observation, logic, and actual in game experience with the races at a high level are important instead of just being a pure data nerd. You hear that all the time there's not enough data to tell this, not enough data to claim that...
There's no level of observation or logic that will allow you to answer this type of question, and if you've ever heard 80% of pros talk you know that in game experience increases your bias rather than the quality of your data.
That I can't agree with, there's almost always a way to answer anything correctly that we can directly experience. Wombat and Fanatic Templar had very good posts to counter you.
Also the simplest strong evidence of protoss's weakness in this matchup is Serral. I'm watching him 4-0 Trap right now in TSL 8, the only protoss who has been very successful this year. Serral almost always absolutely demolishes protoss in particular while he struggles plenty vs terran and zerg. He shows just how helpless protoss is when zerg plays correctly.
I don't know what argument you think you're answering but it's not the argument I have. It is obvious that protoss is by miles the weakest race at the very highest level of play. This doesn't answer the question of whether it happens because protoss is weak or because the few people who have enough skill to be at the highest level of play, let's say 5 or 6 people, just coincidentally all happened to not pick protoss at the start of the game years ago.
This is a question that can't be answered. We cannot directly experience a world in which Serral chose to play protoss instead of zerg. That's the entirety of the issue. Maybe if Serral was protoss and Trap was zerg Serral would still have 4-0ed in this match, and we would be having a thread about how zerg can't win at the top level. Or maybe not. It's impossible to say.
We don't have to say it, however, since either way the end result is that protoss is not winning, and you and I are rooting for protoss. As a consequence, I once again did the sane thing this afternoon and I didn't watch Trap play vs Serral, which means I had a much happier afternoon than you
Yea Serral just obliterated Trap, it didn't even look close in any of the matches. It honestly looked like Serral was playing against some B level EU Protoss, not the best current Protoss in the world.
On December 12 2021 13:55 Seacow wrote: I haven't read the entire thread, so this might already have been brought up: I get the feeling Protoss is struggling because it can't skirmish with fast units in early-mid. Terran can run around with stimmed bio and pick em up with boosted medivacs, Zerg can run around with speedlings or speed roach/ravager. Both T and Z can disengage with no or minimal losses, P can't (recall is slow and costs a lot of energy). This means P leaving their base is a commitment. The result of this is that P has fewer OPPORTUNITIES to inflict damage in the mid game - instead it comes down to committed timing attacks (in particular in PvZ) where a bad engagement = loss.
In short: Gateway units offer less opportunities for mid game damage compared to T/Z. The mid game offensive that does exist - adept glaives v Z, blink stalker v T - relies on specific timings and is not equivalent to Z/T's sustained opportunities.
What do you think about this reasoning?
I think it’s a pretty solid line of reasoning. I wish it weren’t the case but I think to create that state would take the kind of radical changes that just seem extremely unlikely given the stage we’re at.
It’s less of an issue in PvT, it can still be risky to poke and shark but Terran doesn’t have the sustained speed Zerg do. They can and do pounce with stim/medivac boost but they have to pick their moments.
Plus as the game stretches out Protoss can end up with a mobility advantage as with more bases to defend Zealots and blink DTs can be giant pains in the arse.
Zerg on the other hand basically everything is faster than Toss units, a good player has great map vision with creep, which makes units even faster. In addition, unlike PvT a Zerg can have a much superior eco too and just outright more stuff on the map.
It’s both super risky to be out on the map doing anything bar committed pressure, and Protoss tend not to have the spare cash to send waves and waves of manlots and DTs that may trade inefficiently like they can in PvT where they can keep incomes even or in their favour
I wonder if it'd be a good buff to increase the carrying capacity for warp prisms, or reduce their build time
On December 12 2021 13:55 Seacow wrote: I haven't read the entire thread, so this might already have been brought up: I get the feeling Protoss is struggling because it can't skirmish with fast units in early-mid. Terran can run around with stimmed bio and pick em up with boosted medivacs, Zerg can run around with speedlings or speed roach/ravager. Both T and Z can disengage with no or minimal losses, P can't (recall is slow and costs a lot of energy). This means P leaving their base is a commitment. The result of this is that P has fewer OPPORTUNITIES to inflict damage in the mid game - instead it comes down to committed timing attacks (in particular in PvZ) where a bad engagement = loss.
In short: Gateway units offer less opportunities for mid game damage compared to T/Z. The mid game offensive that does exist - adept glaives v Z, blink stalker v T - relies on specific timings and is not equivalent to Z/T's sustained opportunities.
What do you think about this reasoning?
I think it’s a pretty solid line of reasoning. I wish it weren’t the case but I think to create that state would take the kind of radical changes that just seem extremely unlikely given the stage we’re at.
It’s less of an issue in PvT, it can still be risky to poke and shark but Terran doesn’t have the sustained speed Zerg do. They can and do pounce with stim/medivac boost but they have to pick their moments.
Plus as the game stretches out Protoss can end up with a mobility advantage as with more bases to defend Zealots and blink DTs can be giant pains in the arse.
Zerg on the other hand basically everything is faster than Toss units, a good player has great map vision with creep, which makes units even faster. In addition, unlike PvT a Zerg can have a much superior eco too and just outright more stuff on the map.
It’s both super risky to be out on the map doing anything bar committed pressure, and Protoss tend not to have the spare cash to send waves and waves of manlots and DTs that may trade inefficiently like they can in PvT where they can keep incomes even or in their favour
I wonder if it'd be a good buff to increase the carrying capacity for warp prisms, or reduce their build time
why get fancy and not just revert the unnecessary cost increase they got?
The answer to your question is there. Protoss is doing bad at the best level because the top 5 of the race has done consistently worse than the top 5 of the other two races since 2018.
You obviously don't care about that, but it's getting tiresome that you guys keep pretending you don't know what you're talking about.
I think the problem for protoss is just being bad against zerg... its fine vs terran if not better, but I think very few people who believe the race is strong enough versus zerg play protoss at a high level. Also the fast expanding nature of LOTV just helps zerg imo thats what the race is designed to do.
There's not even enough data to say that. It could also be that the very top of zerg players is just better than the very top of protoss players at the game. We cannot positively state that if Serral had chosen protoss instead of zerg he wouldn't be dominating, there's no direct evidence of that.
All we can state is that there's not a ton of hope and that we should behave accordingly.
Thats why observation, logic, and actual in game experience with the races at a high level are important instead of just being a pure data nerd. You hear that all the time there's not enough data to tell this, not enough data to claim that...
There's no level of observation or logic that will allow you to answer this type of question, and if you've ever heard 80% of pros talk you know that in game experience increases your bias rather than the quality of your data.
That I can't agree with, there's almost always a way to answer anything correctly that we can directly experience. Wombat and Fanatic Templar had very good posts to counter you.
Also the simplest strong evidence of protoss's weakness in this matchup is Serral. I'm watching him 4-0 Trap right now in TSL 8, the only protoss who has been very successful this year. Serral almost always absolutely demolishes protoss in particular while he struggles plenty vs terran and zerg. He shows just how helpless protoss is when zerg plays correctly.
I don't know what argument you think you're answering but it's not the argument I have. It is obvious that protoss is by miles the weakest race at the very highest level of play. This doesn't answer the question of whether it happens because protoss is weak or because the few people who have enough skill to be at the highest level of play, let's say 5 or 6 people, just coincidentally all happened to not pick protoss at the start of the game years ago.
This is a question that can't be answered. We cannot directly experience a world in which Serral chose to play protoss instead of zerg. That's the entirety of the issue. Maybe if Serral was protoss and Trap was zerg Serral would still have 4-0ed in this match, and we would be having a thread about how zerg can't win at the top level. Or maybe not. It's impossible to say.
We don't have to say it, however, since either way the end result is that protoss is not winning, and you and I are rooting for protoss. As a consequence, I once again did the sane thing this afternoon and I didn't watch Trap play vs Serral, which means I had a much happier afternoon than you
Well, what changed since the first half of the year?
Maps, the form of Protoss, the form of everybody else. Nothing else did change since Trap was winning everything left and right, with Zoun and Zest close to win shit either(remember, Zest got the 2nd place of IEM). So what has changed? Honestly?
I think the maps are better for zergs than the previous map pool, even if it doesn't seem like it.
Maybe protoss was figured out?
But saying after 2021 that Protoss is the weakest is a good one.
To the zerg fanbois who say that the problem with protoss being so bad at the top level is not the race but the players:
Perhaps its the other way around: BECAUSE protoss as a race is so bad at the highest level, the best players (Parting, Stats etc) are slowly leaving the scene for better opportunities (they prob would do something else after military), so protoss has no more talent left.
Talent and the power of a race have a reflexive relationship. If a race is stronger than others, its best players will stay on and it will continue to attract the best new talent. Conversely, if a race is weak, their players leave and new talent will hesitate to join.
I mean think about it, if you are a super talented gamer, why on earth would you spend your best professional years playing protoss!? Come on, lets be real here. You know that: 1) in this meta (and likely the rest of SC2's future because blizzard won't patch the game anymore) you will never ever beat a top zerg in a best of 7 no matter how much you practice (the matchup is just rediculously broken) 2) you can't make a healthy living by always being outside of top 4 in all tournaments (you make like couple thousand dollars for each big tournament, and there are only a couple big tournaments).
A talented gamer with at least an average IQ will probably not be playing protoss in starcraft. Just doesn't make any sense. If you are that talented, you can easily make 1000x playing LOL or some other popular esports game. As for the top zergs, it makes sense monetarily to stay in the scene, i mean its basically Rogue, Serral and Dark splitting the starcraft 2 tournament winnings 3 ways between them (sorry and Maru). Even if thats not a lot of money, that is still mildly sustainable as a source of income for them to keep their talent in starcraft.
I just don't understand why a talented gamer would waste his best professional years playing protoss...
On December 13 2021 05:20 Poopi wrote: Why has Serral disappeared from these rankings? Winnings/2021 He was punished for losing TSL8 so they removed him from liquipedia DB? :o
On December 13 2021 07:54 kingism wrote: To the zerg fanbois who say that the problem with protoss being so bad at the top level is not the race but the players:
Perhaps its the other way around: BECAUSE protoss as a race is so bad at the highest level, the best players (Parting, Stats etc) are slowly leaving the scene for better opportunities (they prob would do something else after military), so protoss has no more talent left.
Talent and the power of a race have a reflexive relationship. If a race is stronger than others, its best players will stay on and it will continue to attract the best new talent. Conversely, if a race is weak, their players leave and new talent will hesitate to join.
I mean think about it, if you are a super talented gamer, why on earth would you spend your best professional years playing protoss!? Come on, lets be real here. You know that: 1) in this meta (and likely the rest of SC2's future because blizzard won't patch the game anymore) you will never ever beat a top zerg in a best of 7 no matter how much you practice (the matchup is just rediculously broken) 2) you can't make a healthy living by always being outside of top 4 in all tournaments (you make like couple thousand dollars for each big tournament, and there are only a couple big tournaments).
A talented gamer with at least an average IQ will probably not be playing protoss in starcraft. Just doesn't make any sense. If you are that talented, you can easily make 1000x playing LOL or some other popular esports game. As for the top zergs, it makes sense monetarily to stay in the scene, i mean its basically Rogue, Serral and Dark splitting the starcraft 2 tournament winnings 3 ways between them (sorry and Maru). Even if thats not a lot of money, that is still mildly sustainable as a source of income for them to keep their talent in starcraft.
I just don't understand why a talented gamer would waste his best professional years playing protoss...
eh, this has so many wrong statements it can qualify as a false flag operation
e.g. Zest and Parting won pretty nice sum of monies this year. Zest is around 92k USD and Parting 46k USD.
On December 13 2021 05:20 Poopi wrote: Why has Serral disappeared from these rankings? Winnings/2021 He was punished for losing TSL8 so they removed him from liquipedia DB? :o
together with Maru, Rogue and Trap. But who cares about those damn pesky Koreans, right?
On December 13 2021 07:54 kingism wrote: To the zerg fanbois who say that the problem with protoss being so bad at the top level is not the race but the players:
Perhaps its the other way around: BECAUSE protoss as a race is so bad at the highest level, the best players (Parting, Stats etc) are slowly leaving the scene for better opportunities (they prob would do something else after military), so protoss has no more talent left.
Talent and the power of a race have a reflexive relationship. If a race is stronger than others, its best players will stay on and it will continue to attract the best new talent. Conversely, if a race is weak, their players leave and new talent will hesitate to join.
I mean think about it, if you are a super talented gamer, why on earth would you spend your best professional years playing protoss!? Come on, lets be real here. You know that: 1) in this meta (and likely the rest of SC2's future because blizzard won't patch the game anymore) you will never ever beat a top zerg in a best of 7 no matter how much you practice (the matchup is just rediculously broken) 2) you can't make a healthy living by always being outside of top 4 in all tournaments (you make like couple thousand dollars for each big tournament, and there are only a couple big tournaments).
A talented gamer with at least an average IQ will probably not be playing protoss in starcraft. Just doesn't make any sense. If you are that talented, you can easily make 1000x playing LOL or some other popular esports game. As for the top zergs, it makes sense monetarily to stay in the scene, i mean its basically Rogue, Serral and Dark splitting the starcraft 2 tournament winnings 3 ways between them (sorry and Maru). Even if thats not a lot of money, that is still mildly sustainable as a source of income for them to keep their talent in starcraft.
I just don't understand why a talented gamer would waste his best professional years playing protoss...
On December 13 2021 07:54 kingism wrote: To the zerg fanbois who say that the problem with protoss being so bad at the top level is not the race but the players:
Perhaps its the other way around: BECAUSE protoss as a race is so bad at the highest level, the best players (Parting, Stats etc) are slowly leaving the scene for better opportunities (they prob would do something else after military), so protoss has no more talent left.
Talent and the power of a race have a reflexive relationship. If a race is stronger than others, its best players will stay on and it will continue to attract the best new talent. Conversely, if a race is weak, their players leave and new talent will hesitate to join.
I mean think about it, if you are a super talented gamer, why on earth would you spend your best professional years playing protoss!? Come on, lets be real here. You know that: 1) in this meta (and likely the rest of SC2's future because blizzard won't patch the game anymore) you will never ever beat a top zerg in a best of 7 no matter how much you practice (the matchup is just rediculously broken) 2) you can't make a healthy living by always being outside of top 4 in all tournaments (you make like couple thousand dollars for each big tournament, and there are only a couple big tournaments).
A talented gamer with at least an average IQ will probably not be playing protoss in starcraft. Just doesn't make any sense. If you are that talented, you can easily make 1000x playing LOL or some other popular esports game. As for the top zergs, it makes sense monetarily to stay in the scene, i mean its basically Rogue, Serral and Dark splitting the starcraft 2 tournament winnings 3 ways between them (sorry and Maru). Even if thats not a lot of money, that is still mildly sustainable as a source of income for them to keep their talent in starcraft.
I just don't understand why a talented gamer would waste his best professional years playing protoss...
This post is dumb af lol
Bit harsh/rude. Whether the central premise is accurate is another thing, I’m not sure it is, for the record.
But the logical follow-through is solid. In a competitive field if your faction sucks you’re more likely to depart, and others are less likely to follow in your footsteps.
Any argument to the contrary would be counter intuitive to the point of being contrarian for contrariness’ sake.
They struck the odd big blow, but pre-military Classic, Stats. sOs, Zest and herO couldn’t break the best Zergs where it counted in the biggest tournaments, and weren’t able to for years.
So now the hope is that these players, who couldn’t manage it before a military-enforced break, can manage it afterwards?
There’s nothing close to that talent emerging either, it’s just Trap. Zoun is very good, he may get better but he’s not a Stats or a Classic
If I’m a good Protoss amateur player in Korea, I’m staying an amateur player. There’s not enough money in the Korean scene to make the necessary transition possible. Indeed if I’m a good amateur of any race.
To close the gap with 6-10 year veteran pro gamers, you need a Ro24 or an early exit in Super Tournament to pay the bills, which it just doesn’t, you have to immediately be good enough to make consistent deep runs or it’s not economically viable, and no amateur prospect is that good off the bat.
Zoun is the closest we have to a ‘new’ player in that respect but he’s played full time in Kespa houses, and chose to go to military early which is why we didn’t see him break through, he’s still a graduate of the Kespa system.
On December 13 2021 07:54 kingism wrote: To the zerg fanbois who say that the problem with protoss being so bad at the top level is not the race but the players:
Perhaps its the other way around: BECAUSE protoss as a race is so bad at the highest level, the best players (Parting, Stats etc) are slowly leaving the scene for better opportunities (they prob would do something else after military), so protoss has no more talent left.
Talent and the power of a race have a reflexive relationship. If a race is stronger than others, its best players will stay on and it will continue to attract the best new talent. Conversely, if a race is weak, their players leave and new talent will hesitate to join.
I mean think about it, if you are a super talented gamer, why on earth would you spend your best professional years playing protoss!? Come on, lets be real here. You know that: 1) in this meta (and likely the rest of SC2's future because blizzard won't patch the game anymore) you will never ever beat a top zerg in a best of 7 no matter how much you practice (the matchup is just rediculously broken) 2) you can't make a healthy living by always being outside of top 4 in all tournaments (you make like couple thousand dollars for each big tournament, and there are only a couple big tournaments).
A talented gamer with at least an average IQ will probably not be playing protoss in starcraft. Just doesn't make any sense. If you are that talented, you can easily make 1000x playing LOL or some other popular esports game. As for the top zergs, it makes sense monetarily to stay in the scene, i mean its basically Rogue, Serral and Dark splitting the starcraft 2 tournament winnings 3 ways between them (sorry and Maru). Even if thats not a lot of money, that is still mildly sustainable as a source of income for them to keep their talent in starcraft.
I just don't understand why a talented gamer would waste his best professional years playing protoss...
This post is dumb af lol
Bit harsh/rude. Whether the central premise is accurate is another thing, I’m not sure it is, for the record.
But the logical follow-through is solid. In a competitive field if your faction sucks you’re more likely to depart, and others are less likely to follow in your footsteps.
Any argument to the contrary would be counter intuitive to the point of being contrarian for contrariness’ sake.
They struck the odd big blow, but pre-military Classic, Stats. sOs, Zest and herO couldn’t break the best Zergs where it counted in the biggest tournaments, and weren’t able to for years.
So now the hope is that these players, who couldn’t manage it before a military-enforced break, can manage it afterwards?
There’s nothing close to that talent emerging either, it’s just Trap. Zoun is very good, he may get better but he’s not a Stats or a Classic
If I’m a good Protoss amateur player in Korea, I’m staying an amateur player. There’s not enough money in the Korean scene to make the necessary transition possible. Indeed if I’m a good amateur of any race.
To close the gap with 6-10 year veteran pro gamers, you need a Ro24 or an early exit in Super Tournament to pay the bills, which it just doesn’t, you have to immediately be good enough to make consistent deep runs or it’s not economically viable, and no amateur prospect is that good off the bat.
Zoun is the closest we have to a ‘new’ player in that respect but he’s played full time in Kespa houses, and chose to go to military early which is why we didn’t see him break through, he’s still a graduate of the Kespa system.
Is it really harsh or rude though? Deacon already highlighted exactly why this post is dumb and I agree with him, the top 2 Protoss players have definitely made some cash this year. Honestly man you take Serral's or Rogue's final wins out of the picture and instantly the balance picture looks alot more reasonable.
Since both of them have taken 3 out of the 21, that's 6 1st place finishes between 2 people, if you take either one of them out, Zerg took a total of 6 out of 21 first place finishes, less then even 33%.
I've already stated countless times that I believe a QoL change is in order for PvZ, but to sit there and say that all Protoss players are wasting their time because they'll never beat Serral or Rogue (2 of the quite literal best players of all time) because of racial imbalance or that Zerg is just hopelessly unbeatable is just stupid.
Rogue and Serral look unbeatable, compare even Dark and Reynor and they are not on their level. If Dark and Reynor were the poster children for the Zerg race right now this thread would probably not even exist because there would be 6 less Zerg finishes, bringing the total down for 2021 to 3 out of 21 tournaments and everyone would say, "Well nobody can reliably beat Trap or Maru so Zerg MUST be weak."
It's like saying Brood War was hopelessly imbalanced because flash had a 71 % win rate vs. Protoss and Zerg and Terrans had all the legitimate bonjwas. We all know that Terran was in fact the strongest race at the highest level of BW, but only Flash made Terran look actually imbalanced. Look at Bisu? Everyone at the time thought Protoss was trash, then Bisu comes in and plays at a higher level and flips the match up completely on it's head. Was Protoss really that weak? Or was Bisu simply that good?
On December 13 2021 07:54 kingism wrote: To the zerg fanbois who say that the problem with protoss being so bad at the top level is not the race but the players:
Perhaps its the other way around: BECAUSE protoss as a race is so bad at the highest level, the best players (Parting, Stats etc) are slowly leaving the scene for better opportunities (they prob would do something else after military), so protoss has no more talent left.
Talent and the power of a race have a reflexive relationship. If a race is stronger than others, its best players will stay on and it will continue to attract the best new talent. Conversely, if a race is weak, their players leave and new talent will hesitate to join.
I mean think about it, if you are a super talented gamer, why on earth would you spend your best professional years playing protoss!? Come on, lets be real here. You know that: 1) in this meta (and likely the rest of SC2's future because blizzard won't patch the game anymore) you will never ever beat a top zerg in a best of 7 no matter how much you practice (the matchup is just rediculously broken) 2) you can't make a healthy living by always being outside of top 4 in all tournaments (you make like couple thousand dollars for each big tournament, and there are only a couple big tournaments).
A talented gamer with at least an average IQ will probably not be playing protoss in starcraft. Just doesn't make any sense. If you are that talented, you can easily make 1000x playing LOL or some other popular esports game. As for the top zergs, it makes sense monetarily to stay in the scene, i mean its basically Rogue, Serral and Dark splitting the starcraft 2 tournament winnings 3 ways between them (sorry and Maru). Even if thats not a lot of money, that is still mildly sustainable as a source of income for them to keep their talent in starcraft.
I just don't understand why a talented gamer would waste his best professional years playing protoss...
This post is dumb af lol
Bit harsh/rude. Whether the central premise is accurate is another thing, I’m not sure it is, for the record.
But the logical follow-through is solid. In a competitive field if your faction sucks you’re more likely to depart, and others are less likely to follow in your footsteps.
Any argument to the contrary would be counter intuitive to the point of being contrarian for contrariness’ sake.
They struck the odd big blow, but pre-military Classic, Stats. sOs, Zest and herO couldn’t break the best Zergs where it counted in the biggest tournaments, and weren’t able to for years.
So now the hope is that these players, who couldn’t manage it before a military-enforced break, can manage it afterwards?
There’s nothing close to that talent emerging either, it’s just Trap. Zoun is very good, he may get better but he’s not a Stats or a Classic
If I’m a good Protoss amateur player in Korea, I’m staying an amateur player. There’s not enough money in the Korean scene to make the necessary transition possible. Indeed if I’m a good amateur of any race.
To close the gap with 6-10 year veteran pro gamers, you need a Ro24 or an early exit in Super Tournament to pay the bills, which it just doesn’t, you have to immediately be good enough to make consistent deep runs or it’s not economically viable, and no amateur prospect is that good off the bat.
Zoun is the closest we have to a ‘new’ player in that respect but he’s played full time in Kespa houses, and chose to go to military early which is why we didn’t see him break through, he’s still a graduate of the Kespa system.
Is it really harsh or rude though? Deacon already highlighted exactly why this post is dumb and I agree with him, the top 2 Protoss players have definitely made some cash this year. Honestly man you take Serral's or Rogue's final wins out of the picture and instantly the balance picture looks alot more reasonable.
Since both of them have taken 3 out of the 21, that's 6 1st place finishes between 2 people, if you take either one of them out, Zerg took a total of 6 out of 21 first place finishes, less then even 33%.
I've already stated countless times that I believe a QoL change is in order for PvZ, but to sit there and say that all Protoss players are wasting their time because they'll never beat Serral or Rogue (2 of the quite literal best players of all time) because of racial imbalance or that Zerg is just hopelessly unbeatable is just stupid.
Rogue and Serral look unbeatable, compare even Dark and Reynor and they are not on their level. If Dark and Reynor were the poster children for the Zerg race right now this thread would probably not even exist because there would be 6 less Zerg finishes, bringing the total down for 2021 to 3 out of 21 tournaments and everyone would say, "Well nobody can reliably beat Trap or Maru so Zerg MUST be weak."
It's like saying Brood War was hopelessly imbalanced because flash had a 71 % win rate vs. Protoss and Zerg and Terrans had all the legitimate bonjwas. We all know that Terran was in fact the strongest race at the highest level of BW, but only Flash made Terran look actually imbalanced. Look at Bisu? Everyone at the time thought Protoss was trash, then Bisu comes in and plays at a higher level and flips the match up completely on it's head. Was Protoss really that weak? Or was Bisu simply that good?
The top 2, who have Kespa backgrounds etc
My only point was it I’m an amateur of Code S level I have to both compete with all that rigorous training, racial imbalance (if it exists) etc, it’s a waste of time.
If Protoss players in Korea especially can earn a living without having to beat Rogue/Dark etc that’s another thing
GSL and ST especially have disgustingly low prize pools considering the quality of participants
On December 13 2021 07:54 kingism wrote: To the zerg fanbois who say that the problem with protoss being so bad at the top level is not the race but the players:
Perhaps its the other way around: BECAUSE protoss as a race is so bad at the highest level, the best players (Parting, Stats etc) are slowly leaving the scene for better opportunities (they prob would do something else after military), so protoss has no more talent left.
Talent and the power of a race have a reflexive relationship. If a race is stronger than others, its best players will stay on and it will continue to attract the best new talent. Conversely, if a race is weak, their players leave and new talent will hesitate to join.
I mean think about it, if you are a super talented gamer, why on earth would you spend your best professional years playing protoss!? Come on, lets be real here. You know that: 1) in this meta (and likely the rest of SC2's future because blizzard won't patch the game anymore) you will never ever beat a top zerg in a best of 7 no matter how much you practice (the matchup is just rediculously broken) 2) you can't make a healthy living by always being outside of top 4 in all tournaments (you make like couple thousand dollars for each big tournament, and there are only a couple big tournaments).
A talented gamer with at least an average IQ will probably not be playing protoss in starcraft. Just doesn't make any sense. If you are that talented, you can easily make 1000x playing LOL or some other popular esports game. As for the top zergs, it makes sense monetarily to stay in the scene, i mean its basically Rogue, Serral and Dark splitting the starcraft 2 tournament winnings 3 ways between them (sorry and Maru). Even if thats not a lot of money, that is still mildly sustainable as a source of income for them to keep their talent in starcraft.
I just don't understand why a talented gamer would waste his best professional years playing protoss...
This post is dumb af lol
Bit harsh/rude. Whether the central premise is accurate is another thing, I’m not sure it is, for the record.
But the logical follow-through is solid. In a competitive field if your faction sucks you’re more likely to depart, and others are less likely to follow in your footsteps.
Any argument to the contrary would be counter intuitive to the point of being contrarian for contrariness’ sake.
They struck the odd big blow, but pre-military Classic, Stats. sOs, Zest and herO couldn’t break the best Zergs where it counted in the biggest tournaments, and weren’t able to for years.
So now the hope is that these players, who couldn’t manage it before a military-enforced break, can manage it afterwards?
There’s nothing close to that talent emerging either, it’s just Trap. Zoun is very good, he may get better but he’s not a Stats or a Classic
If I’m a good Protoss amateur player in Korea, I’m staying an amateur player. There’s not enough money in the Korean scene to make the necessary transition possible. Indeed if I’m a good amateur of any race.
To close the gap with 6-10 year veteran pro gamers, you need a Ro24 or an early exit in Super Tournament to pay the bills, which it just doesn’t, you have to immediately be good enough to make consistent deep runs or it’s not economically viable, and no amateur prospect is that good off the bat.
Zoun is the closest we have to a ‘new’ player in that respect but he’s played full time in Kespa houses, and chose to go to military early which is why we didn’t see him break through, he’s still a graduate of the Kespa system.
Is it really harsh or rude though? Deacon already highlighted exactly why this post is dumb and I agree with him, the top 2 Protoss players have definitely made some cash this year. Honestly man you take Serral's or Rogue's final wins out of the picture and instantly the balance picture looks alot more reasonable.
Since both of them have taken 3 out of the 21, that's 6 1st place finishes between 2 people, if you take either one of them out, Zerg took a total of 6 out of 21 first place finishes, less then even 33%.
I've already stated countless times that I believe a QoL change is in order for PvZ, but to sit there and say that all Protoss players are wasting their time because they'll never beat Serral or Rogue (2 of the quite literal best players of all time) because of racial imbalance or that Zerg is just hopelessly unbeatable is just stupid.
Rogue and Serral look unbeatable, compare even Dark and Reynor and they are not on their level. If Dark and Reynor were the poster children for the Zerg race right now this thread would probably not even exist because there would be 6 less Zerg finishes, bringing the total down for 2021 to 3 out of 21 tournaments and everyone would say, "Well nobody can reliably beat Trap or Maru so Zerg MUST be weak."
It's like saying Brood War was hopelessly imbalanced because flash had a 71 % win rate vs. Protoss and Zerg and Terrans had all the legitimate bonjwas. We all know that Terran was in fact the strongest race at the highest level of BW, but only Flash made Terran look actually imbalanced. Look at Bisu? Everyone at the time thought Protoss was trash, then Bisu comes in and plays at a higher level and flips the match up completely on it's head. Was Protoss really that weak? Or was Bisu simply that good?
The top 2, who have Kespa backgrounds etc
My only point was it I’m an amateur of Code S level I have to both compete with all that rigorous training, racial imbalance (if it exists) etc, it’s a waste of time.
If Protoss players in Korea especially can earn a living without having to beat Rogue/Dark etc that’s another thing
GSL and ST especially have disgustingly low prize pools considering the quality of participants
Let's digest it then, shall we?
Perhaps its the other way around: BECAUSE protoss as a race is so bad at the highest level, the best players (Parting, Stats etc) are slowly leaving the scene for better opportunities (they prob would do something else after military), so protoss has no more talent left. Best Protosses are leaving for greener pastures. Sure, military calling is super greener. Especially when you're one of the top dogs in this game. Double especially if you're Classic or Stats who wasn't hit as much with this shitty meta. But mentioned were Parting, Stats and etc., whoever that is. Both Parting and Zest made solid amount of money THIS year. This year, which is so bad for Protoss(and remember - Trap won everything). So that's directly false, they're not leaving this game because it doesn't pay. If you're at the top and you can deliver solid results it pays - case in point Parting or Zoun.
Now the bullshit that if the race is strong, it attracts talent while the weak race attracts no one. Well, I would dare to say that current SC2 system is attracting barely anyone, because - to put it simply - you don't have much chances to get any good money. Why? Why oh why are the RO8 almost identical across all regions, I wonder? Unless you can pay your bills via streaming, team and RO16 money, you should not go into SC2.
Now to the - mean think about it, if you are a super talented gamer, why on earth would you spend your best professional years playing protoss!? Come on, lets be real here. - well, they're right. But not in the point that why would you play Protoss. But why would you play SC2? If you're supertalented there are better playing games. This isn't about Protoss, to get to the top in this game you have to sunk in months of preparations to get to the top so your "spidey senses" are tingeling at the right time. So you know shit just from how much gas was mined and how many workers are at the base. This isn't easy and requires some time. If you're that good that time is better invested in another game, because you won't just beat Maru, Reynor, Trap or Scarlett just because you're a miraculously good player. Talent isn't everything, especially in this game.
you can't make a healthy living by always being outside of top 4 in all tournaments (you make like couple thousand dollars for each big tournament, and there are only a couple big tournaments). Already covered, bullshit.
A talented gamer with at least an average IQ will probably not be playing protoss in starcraft. Just doesn't make any sense. If you are that talented, you can easily make 1000x playing LOL or some other popular esports game. As for the top zergs, it makes sense monetarily to stay in the scene, i mean its basically Rogue, Serral and Dark splitting the starcraft 2 tournament winnings 3 ways between them (sorry and Maru). Even if thats not a lot of money, that is still mildly sustainable as a source of income for them to keep their talent in starcraft. Can you ask Lilbow how this worked? IIRC he returned to the SC2. FFS they mention Parting who returned from LoL to SC2. The post mentions both Parting and LoL and they won't realize that he returned.
I just don't understand why a talented gamer would waste his best professional years playing protoss... Again, it's not about Protoss, if you;re good you will make enough money. It's about SC2 itself. The future is uncertain and if you're a talented gamer, you should look elsewhere as the time investment to get to the top may be invalid in 2 years.
Anyway, that post is garbage. And that's a praise
Edit> this isn't to say the game is dead. The future is uncertain, maybe in 2023 ESL will lower the budget to 70 % and it will be much harder to pay the bills from SC2. I don't want it to happen, maybe it won't happen, but unless the game is really great fun for the "new talent" they should change the game while they can Unfortunately for the poster it's usually the other way around. Holy shit, I'm good, hey, some team is contacting me, wicked sick!
Also would love to know if the Protoss dominance in the GM is that "Protoss bad = no new talent" shift. Because to me it seems, that if anything, Protoss talent is the biggest in years.And yeah, I realize that GM ladder isn't pro talent, but these people are legit good and can be low tier pros... which is exactly the counter point to that nonsense.
Edit 2> And yes, because the top players are so fucking good and you need so much time to get to the results which pay money, we see barely any new talent for ANY race. Be it Terran, ZergStronkFanboi!, Protoss or Random. Imagine who you have to face to get money in Korea or Europe... the entering barrier is so big it cannot be hidden in the Marian Trench. (or w/e its English name is )
On December 14 2021 03:50 Beelzebub1 wrote: Since both of them have taken 3 out of the 21, that's 6 1st place finishes between 2 people, if you take either one of them out, Zerg took a total of 6 out of 21 first place finishes, less then even 33%.
Mate, if you take out 3 tournaments from 21, you have 18 left, not 21.
And I count 10 Zerg wins in that Premier list so you end up with 7/18 if you remove one top Zerg, not 6/21, or close to 40%. That's right, even taking out Zerg wins arbitrarily for no logical reason, Zerg is still overperforming.
Also, if you remove the top Terran you get 2 out of 19, and if you take out the top Protoss you get 2 out of 16 (by your count here, obviously I do not include Neeb and Clem's foreigner-exclusive championships in my own accounts)
What are you trying to argue here? Taking out the top performers of each race still shows Zerg to be performing best, so nothing's changed.
Why are you trying to remove Rogue or Serral's wins unilaterally? If you don't apply the modification evenly across the data, obviously you're going to end up with nonsense results. I don't even understand why you're treating them like massive outliers? They're not.
This year, Serral and Rogue have won 30% of their race's premier championships. Clem has won 50% of his. Trap has won over 70% of his.
Serral and Rogue combine to be less of an outlier than Trap.
And that's, again, including foreigner-exclusive tournament data, which I wouldn't.
Zerg is doing plenty fine without its biggest names. Reynor, Dark and Scarlett combine for as many premiers as the entire Terran race in 2021.
Your post is not just illogical, it contains a lot of fundamental errors.
My apologies if this has been mentioned in this thread, I haven't read every post, but the metas where Protoss are favored tend to be...not all that fun. The blink all-in meta might have been even worse than infestor-brood lord. Protoss turtling up and destroying Terran in the late-game because ghosts were radically underpowered compared to templars, causing the "pull the boys" meta, wasn't that fun. The Soul Train meta -- well, I actually kinda enjoyed that, but any meta built around one build is going to either get patched or figured out eventually. Until not too long ago, PvZ was an awful meta because Protoss essentially had to find a timing.
I'll come out and admit it -- Protoss is my least favorite race to watch. A tricky Protoss early-game strategy or a late-game deathball with storm (maybe the least interesting spell in the game) just isn't as fun to watch as a Terran hitting a perfectly-executed tank push or dropping all over the place and killing their opponent with 1,000 cuts, or even a Zerg parrying attacks, expanding, and hitting their opponent with runbys until they become too big to fail.
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I've been watching this game for a long time and it sure feels like the skill gap between Protoss players doing the same build and Terrans or Zergs doing the same build is smaller -- the "fun" thing about Protoss is that they have way more tools in their toolbox than any other race, while Terran and Zerg have to work within a relatively thin amount of strategies. And when a specific Protoss strategy is strong enough to take the race to the top, more often than not the game just seems less fun to watch than something like Marine/Medivac/Marauder/Mine or Muta/Ling/Bane. This is why the best Protoss players have consistently been on the cutting edge of the meta or masters of the early-game push (Zest, sOs, Parting/MC), stacking up more wins than the "macro" protosses such as Rain (who I would have liked to see in LoTV,) Stats, and now Trap.
TL;DR -- the race was designed in such a way that when its players have a clear path to the top, the game becomes less fun to watch and a patch usually follows quickly after. Also, I do agree with the sentiment on here that Protoss is easier to "master" than the other 2 races, but has a lower overall skill ceiling when playing a straight-up game.
Protoss isn'T weak. Zerg is just overally better than two races and has more alternative.
when zerg plays vs terran , terran players are getting exhausted . then their performance and shape are getting decrease and they play worse and worse. They can't be in the same level normally they do. because for terrran playing tvz is much mor tiring for terran then zerg.
when zerg plays vs protoss escipally in late game zerg is one step ahead. you cant explain serral 4-0 trap results with only serral is better. i would understand 4-2 or 4-3 . they are quite similar level players. this 4-0 is points something.
if it would be reverse for example final was pvp and in semi trap would beat very very easy to serral 4-0 i would think the same way. i have watched the series . trap was even never close to win a game.
On December 13 2021 07:54 kingism wrote: To the zerg fanbois who say that the problem with protoss being so bad at the top level is not the race but the players:
Perhaps its the other way around: BECAUSE protoss as a race is so bad at the highest level, the best players (Parting, Stats etc) are slowly leaving the scene for better opportunities (they prob would do something else after military), so protoss has no more talent left.
Talent and the power of a race have a reflexive relationship. If a race is stronger than others, its best players will stay on and it will continue to attract the best new talent. Conversely, if a race is weak, their players leave and new talent will hesitate to join.
I mean think about it, if you are a super talented gamer, why on earth would you spend your best professional years playing protoss!? Come on, lets be real here. You know that: 1) in this meta (and likely the rest of SC2's future because blizzard won't patch the game anymore) you will never ever beat a top zerg in a best of 7 no matter how much you practice (the matchup is just rediculously broken) 2) you can't make a healthy living by always being outside of top 4 in all tournaments (you make like couple thousand dollars for each big tournament, and there are only a couple big tournaments).
A talented gamer with at least an average IQ will probably not be playing protoss in starcraft. Just doesn't make any sense. If you are that talented, you can easily make 1000x playing LOL or some other popular esports game. As for the top zergs, it makes sense monetarily to stay in the scene, i mean its basically Rogue, Serral and Dark splitting the starcraft 2 tournament winnings 3 ways between them (sorry and Maru). Even if thats not a lot of money, that is still mildly sustainable as a source of income for them to keep their talent in starcraft.
I just don't understand why a talented gamer would waste his best professional years playing protoss...
This post is dumb af lol
Bit harsh/rude. Whether the central premise is accurate is another thing, I’m not sure it is, for the record.
But the logical follow-through is solid. In a competitive field if your faction sucks you’re more likely to depart, and others are less likely to follow in your footsteps.
Any argument to the contrary would be counter intuitive to the point of being contrarian for contrariness’ sake.
They struck the odd big blow, but pre-military Classic, Stats. sOs, Zest and herO couldn’t break the best Zergs where it counted in the biggest tournaments, and weren’t able to for years.
So now the hope is that these players, who couldn’t manage it before a military-enforced break, can manage it afterwards?
There’s nothing close to that talent emerging either, it’s just Trap. Zoun is very good, he may get better but he’s not a Stats or a Classic
If I’m a good Protoss amateur player in Korea, I’m staying an amateur player. There’s not enough money in the Korean scene to make the necessary transition possible. Indeed if I’m a good amateur of any race.
To close the gap with 6-10 year veteran pro gamers, you need a Ro24 or an early exit in Super Tournament to pay the bills, which it just doesn’t, you have to immediately be good enough to make consistent deep runs or it’s not economically viable, and no amateur prospect is that good off the bat.
Zoun is the closest we have to a ‘new’ player in that respect but he’s played full time in Kespa houses, and chose to go to military early which is why we didn’t see him break through, he’s still a graduate of the Kespa system.
Is it really harsh or rude though? Deacon already highlighted exactly why this post is dumb and I agree with him, the top 2 Protoss players have definitely made some cash this year. Honestly man you take Serral's or Rogue's final wins out of the picture and instantly the balance picture looks alot more reasonable.
Since both of them have taken 3 out of the 21, that's 6 1st place finishes between 2 people, if you take either one of them out, Zerg took a total of 6 out of 21 first place finishes, less then even 33%.
I've already stated countless times that I believe a QoL change is in order for PvZ, but to sit there and say that all Protoss players are wasting their time because they'll never beat Serral or Rogue (2 of the quite literal best players of all time) because of racial imbalance or that Zerg is just hopelessly unbeatable is just stupid.
Rogue and Serral look unbeatable, compare even Dark and Reynor and they are not on their level. If Dark and Reynor were the poster children for the Zerg race right now this thread would probably not even exist because there would be 6 less Zerg finishes, bringing the total down for 2021 to 3 out of 21 tournaments and everyone would say, "Well nobody can reliably beat Trap or Maru so Zerg MUST be weak."
It's like saying Brood War was hopelessly imbalanced because flash had a 71 % win rate vs. Protoss and Zerg and Terrans had all the legitimate bonjwas. We all know that Terran was in fact the strongest race at the highest level of BW, but only Flash made Terran look actually imbalanced. Look at Bisu? Everyone at the time thought Protoss was trash, then Bisu comes in and plays at a higher level and flips the match up completely on it's head. Was Protoss really that weak? Or was Bisu simply that good?
The top 2, who have Kespa backgrounds etc
My only point was it I’m an amateur of Code S level I have to both compete with all that rigorous training, racial imbalance (if it exists) etc, it’s a waste of time.
If Protoss players in Korea especially can earn a living without having to beat Rogue/Dark etc that’s another thing
GSL and ST especially have disgustingly low prize pools considering the quality of participants
Let's digest it then, shall we?
Perhaps its the other way around: BECAUSE protoss as a race is so bad at the highest level, the best players (Parting, Stats etc) are slowly leaving the scene for better opportunities (they prob would do something else after military), so protoss has no more talent left. Best Protosses are leaving for greener pastures. Sure, military calling is super greener. Especially when you're one of the top dogs in this game. Double especially if you're Classic or Stats who wasn't hit as much with this shitty meta. But mentioned were Parting, Stats and etc., whoever that is. Both Parting and Zest made solid amount of money THIS year. This year, which is so bad for Protoss(and remember - Trap won everything). So that's directly false, they're not leaving this game because it doesn't pay. If you're at the top and you can deliver solid results it pays - case in point Parting or Zoun.
Now the bullshit that if the race is strong, it attracts talent while the weak race attracts no one. Well, I would dare to say that current SC2 system is attracting barely anyone, because - to put it simply - you don't have much chances to get any good money. Why? Why oh why are the RO8 almost identical across all regions, I wonder? Unless you can pay your bills via streaming, team and RO16 money, you should not go into SC2.
Now to the - mean think about it, if you are a super talented gamer, why on earth would you spend your best professional years playing protoss!? Come on, lets be real here. - well, they're right. But not in the point that why would you play Protoss. But why would you play SC2? If you're supertalented there are better playing games. This isn't about Protoss, to get to the top in this game you have to sunk in months of preparations to get to the top so your "spidey senses" are tingeling at the right time. So you know shit just from how much gas was mined and how many workers are at the base. This isn't easy and requires some time. If you're that good that time is better invested in another game, because you won't just beat Maru, Reynor, Trap or Scarlett just because you're a miraculously good player. Talent isn't everything, especially in this game.
you can't make a healthy living by always being outside of top 4 in all tournaments (you make like couple thousand dollars for each big tournament, and there are only a couple big tournaments). Already covered, bullshit.
A talented gamer with at least an average IQ will probably not be playing protoss in starcraft. Just doesn't make any sense. If you are that talented, you can easily make 1000x playing LOL or some other popular esports game. As for the top zergs, it makes sense monetarily to stay in the scene, i mean its basically Rogue, Serral and Dark splitting the starcraft 2 tournament winnings 3 ways between them (sorry and Maru). Even if thats not a lot of money, that is still mildly sustainable as a source of income for them to keep their talent in starcraft. Can you ask Lilbow how this worked? IIRC he returned to the SC2. FFS they mention Parting who returned from LoL to SC2. The post mentions both Parting and LoL and they won't realize that he returned.
I just don't understand why a talented gamer would waste his best professional years playing protoss... Again, it's not about Protoss, if you;re good you will make enough money. It's about SC2 itself. The future is uncertain and if you're a talented gamer, you should look elsewhere as the time investment to get to the top may be invalid in 2 years.
Anyway, that post is garbage. And that's a praise
Edit> this isn't to say the game is dead. The future is uncertain, maybe in 2023 ESL will lower the budget to 70 % and it will be much harder to pay the bills from SC2. I don't want it to happen, maybe it won't happen, but unless the game is really great fun for the "new talent" they should change the game while they can Unfortunately for the poster it's usually the other way around. Holy shit, I'm good, hey, some team is contacting me, wicked sick!
Also would love to know if the Protoss dominance in the GM is that "Protoss bad = no new talent" shift. Because to me it seems, that if anything, Protoss talent is the biggest in years.And yeah, I realize that GM ladder isn't pro talent, but these people are legit good and can be low tier pros... which is exactly the counter point to that nonsense.
Edit 2> And yes, because the top players are so fucking good and you need so much time to get to the results which pay money, we see barely any new talent for ANY race. Be it Terran, ZergStronkFanboi!, Protoss or Random. Imagine who you have to face to get money in Korea or Europe... the entering barrier is so big it cannot be hidden in the Marian Trench. (or w/e its English name is )
Couple things: 1) I find lots of issues with wt you wrote here, but hey nothing wrong with having your own (typical zerg boi) opinion. I stand by every word I wrote in my original post.
2) To the zerg bois who got offended and called me and my post dumb af and bullshit, I'll just say that you all might be way smarter than me, but having watched starcraft for 10+ years, experienced many cycles in the meta + having gone to a certain university called Stanford, i would hope that some of wt i wrote make at least a little bit of sense lol
3) I stand by my conviction that, to put it bluntly, in the current meta protoss playing to his fullest ability will not be able to beat a top zerg in a best of 7 if the zerg doesnt make enough mistakes. Protoss NEEDS zerg to make enough mistakes to win. This is a huge turn off for anyone playing protoss wanting to turn pro. Basically, u can't win no matter how good you are and how much u practice unless your opponent makes enough mistakes. You can read the earlier comments in this thread to understand why I think so. To earn a living completely dependent on other's mistakes instead of your own ability? Hmm no thanks lol.
4) Serral and Rogue are great players + them playing the best race => Serral and Rogue keep on winning and look invincible. The key point here is that they are playing the strongest race. They will definitely be far less dominant if they played as protoss. I am convinced that, even with years of practice, Serral or Rogue playing as protoss would 100% lose to Serral or Rogue playing as zerg in a bo7 in the current meta. Again, reasons are given in 3) and the earlier parts of the thread.
5) What I think is impossible to live off of might be a decent amount of money for someone without aspirations, not for me to judge. But don't forget, these players have to split their tournament winnings with the team too, which makes the already low and unattractive amount of earnings from finishes outside of top 4 at most premier tournaments even less so at the end of the day.
2) To the zerg bois who got offended and called me and my post dumb af and bullshit, I'll just say that you all might be way smarter than me, but having watched starcraft for 10+ years, experienced many cycles in the meta + having gone to a certain university called Stanford, i would hope that some of wt i wrote make at least a little bit of sense lol
Your post was dumb because it came off as a shameless cry fest, not because it didn't have a single merit to it. I also probably could have said something more polite if I disagreed as well so apologies, he who throws gas on the fire is also guilty.
I've been in the scene since day 1 too man, you aren't the only one who cares about the health of the meta game. The situation with Protoss is tough right now, it's hard to buff a race that's hugely represented below the tip top level of play but weak at the very highest level. You run the risk of evening out the win rates for 0.01 % of people who play SC2 in exchange for making Protoss even more dominant on ladder.
Not that I think that's fair at all, that's why I think it's a tough situation even if there was someone in charge of balancing SC2 that had the qualifications to do so (at least GM level random play imo)
Then again, it's hard for anything to get done when the room that has access to the Starcraft 2 servers has had the doors locked with a, "do not disturb" sign on the door knob for over a year now. Still amazes me that Blizzard hasn't even released any form of a comment or statement to the community regarding their thoughts on ZvP at the top level.
On December 12 2021 13:55 Seacow wrote: I haven't read the entire thread, so this might already have been brought up: I get the feeling Protoss is struggling because it can't skirmish with fast units in early-mid. Terran can run around with stimmed bio and pick em up with boosted medivacs, Zerg can run around with speedlings or speed roach/ravager. Both T and Z can disengage with no or minimal losses, P can't (recall is slow and costs a lot of energy). This means P leaving their base is a commitment. The result of this is that P has fewer OPPORTUNITIES to inflict damage in the mid game - instead it comes down to committed timing attacks (in particular in PvZ) where a bad engagement = loss.
In short: Gateway units offer less opportunities for mid game damage compared to T/Z. The mid game offensive that does exist - adept glaives v Z, blink stalker v T - relies on specific timings and is not equivalent to Z/T's sustained opportunities.
What do you think about this reasoning?
I think thats extremely good reasoning, precisely puts into words what I felt when I played protoss at a high mmr. And there's another huge consequence that this causes... since protoss is very limited by this its much easier for zerg to scout and prepare properly in advance and abuse droning up heavily at times when the protoss is incapable of seriously attacking. Then you add in lurkers being sick against protoss ground...
I feel this may be by far the largest design flaw that causes protoss to be the weakest race at high level play
The answer to your question is there. Protoss is doing bad at the best level because the top 5 of the race has done consistently worse than the top 5 of the other two races since 2018.
You obviously don't care about that, but it's getting tiresome that you guys keep pretending you don't know what you're talking about.
I think the problem for protoss is just being bad against zerg... its fine vs terran if not better, but I think very few people who believe the race is strong enough versus zerg play protoss at a high level. Also the fast expanding nature of LOTV just helps zerg imo thats what the race is designed to do.
There's not even enough data to say that. It could also be that the very top of zerg players is just better than the very top of protoss players at the game. We cannot positively state that if Serral had chosen protoss instead of zerg he wouldn't be dominating, there's no direct evidence of that.
All we can state is that there's not a ton of hope and that we should behave accordingly.
Thats why observation, logic, and actual in game experience with the races at a high level are important instead of just being a pure data nerd. You hear that all the time there's not enough data to tell this, not enough data to claim that...
There's no level of observation or logic that will allow you to answer this type of question, and if you've ever heard 80% of pros talk you know that in game experience increases your bias rather than the quality of your data.
That I can't agree with, there's almost always a way to answer anything correctly that we can directly experience. Wombat and Fanatic Templar had very good posts to counter you.
Also the simplest strong evidence of protoss's weakness in this matchup is Serral. I'm watching him 4-0 Trap right now in TSL 8, the only protoss who has been very successful this year. Serral almost always absolutely demolishes protoss in particular while he struggles plenty vs terran and zerg. He shows just how helpless protoss is when zerg plays correctly.
I don't know what argument you think you're answering but it's not the argument I have. It is obvious that protoss is by miles the weakest race at the very highest level of play. This doesn't answer the question of whether it happens because protoss is weak or because the few people who have enough skill to be at the highest level of play, let's say 5 or 6 people, just coincidentally all happened to not pick protoss at the start of the game years ago.
This is a question that can't be answered. We cannot directly experience a world in which Serral chose to play protoss instead of zerg. That's the entirety of the issue. Maybe if Serral was protoss and Trap was zerg Serral would still have 4-0ed in this match, and we would be having a thread about how zerg can't win at the top level. Or maybe not. It's impossible to say.
We don't have to say it, however, since either way the end result is that protoss is not winning, and you and I are rooting for protoss. As a consequence, I once again did the sane thing this afternoon and I didn't watch Trap play vs Serral, which means I had a much happier afternoon than you
First of all if a race is strong enough its extremely unlikely the good people just decided not to pick it, generally player strength will average out pretty closely with similarly strong races. There's too large of a player pool for that.
We don't need to directly experience such a world, the player who is taking 70% of protoss tournament wins (Trap) consistently being crushed like a bronze league noob demonstrates the race is just bad.
On December 12 2021 13:55 Seacow wrote: I haven't read the entire thread, so this might already have been brought up: I get the feeling Protoss is struggling because it can't skirmish with fast units in early-mid. Terran can run around with stimmed bio and pick em up with boosted medivacs, Zerg can run around with speedlings or speed roach/ravager. Both T and Z can disengage with no or minimal losses, P can't (recall is slow and costs a lot of energy). This means P leaving their base is a commitment. The result of this is that P has fewer OPPORTUNITIES to inflict damage in the mid game - instead it comes down to committed timing attacks (in particular in PvZ) where a bad engagement = loss.
In short: Gateway units offer less opportunities for mid game damage compared to T/Z. The mid game offensive that does exist - adept glaives v Z, blink stalker v T - relies on specific timings and is not equivalent to Z/T's sustained opportunities.
What do you think about this reasoning?
I think thats extremely good reasoning, precisely puts into words what I felt when I played protoss at a high mmr. And there's another huge consequence that this causes... since protoss is very limited by this its much easier for zerg to scout and prepare properly in advance and abuse droning up heavily at times when the protoss is incapable of seriously attacking. Then you add in lurkers being sick against protoss ground...
I feel this may be by far the largest design flaw that causes protoss to be the weakest race at high level play
Well, duh! Gateway is the biggest issue of Protoss. It's been discussed on multiple ocassions even in this thread
On December 13 2021 07:54 kingism wrote: To the zerg fanbois who say that the problem with protoss being so bad at the top level is not the race but the players:
Perhaps its the other way around: BECAUSE protoss as a race is so bad at the highest level, the best players (Parting, Stats etc) are slowly leaving the scene for better opportunities (they prob would do something else after military), so protoss has no more talent left.
Talent and the power of a race have a reflexive relationship. If a race is stronger than others, its best players will stay on and it will continue to attract the best new talent. Conversely, if a race is weak, their players leave and new talent will hesitate to join.
I mean think about it, if you are a super talented gamer, why on earth would you spend your best professional years playing protoss!? Come on, lets be real here. You know that: 1) in this meta (and likely the rest of SC2's future because blizzard won't patch the game anymore) you will never ever beat a top zerg in a best of 7 no matter how much you practice (the matchup is just rediculously broken) 2) you can't make a healthy living by always being outside of top 4 in all tournaments (you make like couple thousand dollars for each big tournament, and there are only a couple big tournaments).
A talented gamer with at least an average IQ will probably not be playing protoss in starcraft. Just doesn't make any sense. If you are that talented, you can easily make 1000x playing LOL or some other popular esports game. As for the top zergs, it makes sense monetarily to stay in the scene, i mean its basically Rogue, Serral and Dark splitting the starcraft 2 tournament winnings 3 ways between them (sorry and Maru). Even if thats not a lot of money, that is still mildly sustainable as a source of income for them to keep their talent in starcraft.
I just don't understand why a talented gamer would waste his best professional years playing protoss...
This post is dumb af lol
Bit harsh/rude. Whether the central premise is accurate is another thing, I’m not sure it is, for the record.
But the logical follow-through is solid. In a competitive field if your faction sucks you’re more likely to depart, and others are less likely to follow in your footsteps.
Any argument to the contrary would be counter intuitive to the point of being contrarian for contrariness’ sake.
They struck the odd big blow, but pre-military Classic, Stats. sOs, Zest and herO couldn’t break the best Zergs where it counted in the biggest tournaments, and weren’t able to for years.
So now the hope is that these players, who couldn’t manage it before a military-enforced break, can manage it afterwards?
There’s nothing close to that talent emerging either, it’s just Trap. Zoun is very good, he may get better but he’s not a Stats or a Classic
If I’m a good Protoss amateur player in Korea, I’m staying an amateur player. There’s not enough money in the Korean scene to make the necessary transition possible. Indeed if I’m a good amateur of any race.
To close the gap with 6-10 year veteran pro gamers, you need a Ro24 or an early exit in Super Tournament to pay the bills, which it just doesn’t, you have to immediately be good enough to make consistent deep runs or it’s not economically viable, and no amateur prospect is that good off the bat.
Zoun is the closest we have to a ‘new’ player in that respect but he’s played full time in Kespa houses, and chose to go to military early which is why we didn’t see him break through, he’s still a graduate of the Kespa system.
Is it really harsh or rude though? Deacon already highlighted exactly why this post is dumb and I agree with him, the top 2 Protoss players have definitely made some cash this year. Honestly man you take Serral's or Rogue's final wins out of the picture and instantly the balance picture looks alot more reasonable.
Since both of them have taken 3 out of the 21, that's 6 1st place finishes between 2 people, if you take either one of them out, Zerg took a total of 6 out of 21 first place finishes, less then even 33%.
I've already stated countless times that I believe a QoL change is in order for PvZ, but to sit there and say that all Protoss players are wasting their time because they'll never beat Serral or Rogue (2 of the quite literal best players of all time) because of racial imbalance or that Zerg is just hopelessly unbeatable is just stupid.
Rogue and Serral look unbeatable, compare even Dark and Reynor and they are not on their level. If Dark and Reynor were the poster children for the Zerg race right now this thread would probably not even exist because there would be 6 less Zerg finishes, bringing the total down for 2021 to 3 out of 21 tournaments and everyone would say, "Well nobody can reliably beat Trap or Maru so Zerg MUST be weak."
It's like saying Brood War was hopelessly imbalanced because flash had a 71 % win rate vs. Protoss and Zerg and Terrans had all the legitimate bonjwas. We all know that Terran was in fact the strongest race at the highest level of BW, but only Flash made Terran look actually imbalanced. Look at Bisu? Everyone at the time thought Protoss was trash, then Bisu comes in and plays at a higher level and flips the match up completely on it's head. Was Protoss really that weak? Or was Bisu simply that good?
The top 2, who have Kespa backgrounds etc
My only point was it I’m an amateur of Code S level I have to both compete with all that rigorous training, racial imbalance (if it exists) etc, it’s a waste of time.
If Protoss players in Korea especially can earn a living without having to beat Rogue/Dark etc that’s another thing
GSL and ST especially have disgustingly low prize pools considering the quality of participants
Let's digest it then, shall we?
Perhaps its the other way around: BECAUSE protoss as a race is so bad at the highest level, the best players (Parting, Stats etc) are slowly leaving the scene for better opportunities (they prob would do something else after military), so protoss has no more talent left. Best Protosses are leaving for greener pastures. Sure, military calling is super greener. Especially when you're one of the top dogs in this game. Double especially if you're Classic or Stats who wasn't hit as much with this shitty meta. But mentioned were Parting, Stats and etc., whoever that is. Both Parting and Zest made solid amount of money THIS year. This year, which is so bad for Protoss(and remember - Trap won everything). So that's directly false, they're not leaving this game because it doesn't pay. If you're at the top and you can deliver solid results it pays - case in point Parting or Zoun.
Now the bullshit that if the race is strong, it attracts talent while the weak race attracts no one. Well, I would dare to say that current SC2 system is attracting barely anyone, because - to put it simply - you don't have much chances to get any good money. Why? Why oh why are the RO8 almost identical across all regions, I wonder? Unless you can pay your bills via streaming, team and RO16 money, you should not go into SC2.
Now to the - mean think about it, if you are a super talented gamer, why on earth would you spend your best professional years playing protoss!? Come on, lets be real here. - well, they're right. But not in the point that why would you play Protoss. But why would you play SC2? If you're supertalented there are better playing games. This isn't about Protoss, to get to the top in this game you have to sunk in months of preparations to get to the top so your "spidey senses" are tingeling at the right time. So you know shit just from how much gas was mined and how many workers are at the base. This isn't easy and requires some time. If you're that good that time is better invested in another game, because you won't just beat Maru, Reynor, Trap or Scarlett just because you're a miraculously good player. Talent isn't everything, especially in this game.
you can't make a healthy living by always being outside of top 4 in all tournaments (you make like couple thousand dollars for each big tournament, and there are only a couple big tournaments). Already covered, bullshit.
A talented gamer with at least an average IQ will probably not be playing protoss in starcraft. Just doesn't make any sense. If you are that talented, you can easily make 1000x playing LOL or some other popular esports game. As for the top zergs, it makes sense monetarily to stay in the scene, i mean its basically Rogue, Serral and Dark splitting the starcraft 2 tournament winnings 3 ways between them (sorry and Maru). Even if thats not a lot of money, that is still mildly sustainable as a source of income for them to keep their talent in starcraft. Can you ask Lilbow how this worked? IIRC he returned to the SC2. FFS they mention Parting who returned from LoL to SC2. The post mentions both Parting and LoL and they won't realize that he returned.
I just don't understand why a talented gamer would waste his best professional years playing protoss... Again, it's not about Protoss, if you;re good you will make enough money. It's about SC2 itself. The future is uncertain and if you're a talented gamer, you should look elsewhere as the time investment to get to the top may be invalid in 2 years.
Anyway, that post is garbage. And that's a praise
Edit> this isn't to say the game is dead. The future is uncertain, maybe in 2023 ESL will lower the budget to 70 % and it will be much harder to pay the bills from SC2. I don't want it to happen, maybe it won't happen, but unless the game is really great fun for the "new talent" they should change the game while they can Unfortunately for the poster it's usually the other way around. Holy shit, I'm good, hey, some team is contacting me, wicked sick!
Also would love to know if the Protoss dominance in the GM is that "Protoss bad = no new talent" shift. Because to me it seems, that if anything, Protoss talent is the biggest in years.And yeah, I realize that GM ladder isn't pro talent, but these people are legit good and can be low tier pros... which is exactly the counter point to that nonsense.
Edit 2> And yes, because the top players are so fucking good and you need so much time to get to the results which pay money, we see barely any new talent for ANY race. Be it Terran, ZergStronkFanboi!, Protoss or Random. Imagine who you have to face to get money in Korea or Europe... the entering barrier is so big it cannot be hidden in the Marian Trench. (or w/e its English name is )
Couple things: 1) I find lots of issues with wt you wrote here, but hey nothing wrong with having your own (typical zerg boi) opinion. I stand by every word I wrote in my original post.
2) To the zerg bois who got offended and called me and my post dumb af and bullshit, I'll just say that you all might be way smarter than me, but having watched starcraft for 10+ years, experienced many cycles in the meta + having gone to a certain university called Stanford, i would hope that some of wt i wrote make at least a little bit of sense lol
3) I stand by my conviction that, to put it bluntly, in the current meta protoss playing to his fullest ability will not be able to beat a top zerg in a best of 7 if the zerg doesnt make enough mistakes. Protoss NEEDS zerg to make enough mistakes to win. This is a huge turn off for anyone playing protoss wanting to turn pro. Basically, u can't win no matter how good you are and how much u practice unless your opponent makes enough mistakes. You can read the earlier comments in this thread to understand why I think so. To earn a living completely dependent on other's mistakes instead of your own ability? Hmm no thanks lol.
4) Serral and Rogue are great players + them playing the best race => Serral and Rogue keep on winning and look invincible. The key point here is that they are playing the strongest race. They will definitely be far less dominant if they played as protoss. I am convinced that, even with years of practice, Serral or Rogue playing as protoss would 100% lose to Serral or Rogue playing as zerg in a bo7 in the current meta. Again, reasons are given in 3) and the earlier parts of the thread.
5) What I think is impossible to live off of might be a decent amount of money for someone without aspirations, not for me to judge. But don't forget, these players have to split their tournament winnings with the team too, which makes the already low and unattractive amount of earnings from finishes outside of top 4 at most premier tournaments even less so at the end of the day.
Oh noez, imma zerg boi while playing Protoss(or random) and being a Maru fanboy. DAMN, that personal attack broke my heart. Didn't read after that, as if the first thing you need to address is to name your discussing opponent, well, why discuss, right?
Edit> also about the "players will choose zerg because it's stronk" - to my knowledge the only rece changers were Gumiho - Random -> Terran and Classic - Terran -> Protoss. All the best Zergs started playing the race before it was stronk.
I'll come out and admit it -- Protoss is my least favorite race to watch. A tricky Protoss early-game strategy or a late-game deathball with storm (maybe the least interesting spell in the game) just isn't as fun to watch as a Terran hitting a perfectly-executed tank push
This is so fucking hypocritical to say with straight face that terran cheese/allins are more enjoyable than protoss cheese/allins.
The answer to your question is there. Protoss is doing bad at the best level because the top 5 of the race has done consistently worse than the top 5 of the other two races since 2018.
You obviously don't care about that, but it's getting tiresome that you guys keep pretending you don't know what you're talking about.
I think the problem for protoss is just being bad against zerg... its fine vs terran if not better, but I think very few people who believe the race is strong enough versus zerg play protoss at a high level. Also the fast expanding nature of LOTV just helps zerg imo thats what the race is designed to do.
There's not even enough data to say that. It could also be that the very top of zerg players is just better than the very top of protoss players at the game. We cannot positively state that if Serral had chosen protoss instead of zerg he wouldn't be dominating, there's no direct evidence of that.
All we can state is that there's not a ton of hope and that we should behave accordingly.
Thats why observation, logic, and actual in game experience with the races at a high level are important instead of just being a pure data nerd. You hear that all the time there's not enough data to tell this, not enough data to claim that...
There's no level of observation or logic that will allow you to answer this type of question, and if you've ever heard 80% of pros talk you know that in game experience increases your bias rather than the quality of your data.
That I can't agree with, there's almost always a way to answer anything correctly that we can directly experience. Wombat and Fanatic Templar had very good posts to counter you.
Also the simplest strong evidence of protoss's weakness in this matchup is Serral. I'm watching him 4-0 Trap right now in TSL 8, the only protoss who has been very successful this year. Serral almost always absolutely demolishes protoss in particular while he struggles plenty vs terran and zerg. He shows just how helpless protoss is when zerg plays correctly.
I don't know what argument you think you're answering but it's not the argument I have. It is obvious that protoss is by miles the weakest race at the very highest level of play. This doesn't answer the question of whether it happens because protoss is weak or because the few people who have enough skill to be at the highest level of play, let's say 5 or 6 people, just coincidentally all happened to not pick protoss at the start of the game years ago.
This is a question that can't be answered. We cannot directly experience a world in which Serral chose to play protoss instead of zerg. That's the entirety of the issue. Maybe if Serral was protoss and Trap was zerg Serral would still have 4-0ed in this match, and we would be having a thread about how zerg can't win at the top level. Or maybe not. It's impossible to say.
We don't have to say it, however, since either way the end result is that protoss is not winning, and you and I are rooting for protoss. As a consequence, I once again did the sane thing this afternoon and I didn't watch Trap play vs Serral, which means I had a much happier afternoon than you
First of all if a race is strong enough its extremely unlikely the good people just decided not to pick it, generally player strength will average out pretty closely with similarly strong races. There's too large of a player pool for that.
We don't need to directly experience such a world, the player who is taking 70% of protoss tournament wins (Trap) consistently being crushed like a bronze league noob demonstrates the race is just bad.
Not really true, because we're talking about a very limited sample size of players. But again I'm not sure why you're so invested in the difference between the two, it weakens your argument for no discernable gain.
The answer to your question is there. Protoss is doing bad at the best level because the top 5 of the race has done consistently worse than the top 5 of the other two races since 2018.
You obviously don't care about that, but it's getting tiresome that you guys keep pretending you don't know what you're talking about.
I think the problem for protoss is just being bad against zerg... its fine vs terran if not better, but I think very few people who believe the race is strong enough versus zerg play protoss at a high level. Also the fast expanding nature of LOTV just helps zerg imo thats what the race is designed to do.
There's not even enough data to say that. It could also be that the very top of zerg players is just better than the very top of protoss players at the game. We cannot positively state that if Serral had chosen protoss instead of zerg he wouldn't be dominating, there's no direct evidence of that.
All we can state is that there's not a ton of hope and that we should behave accordingly.
Thats why observation, logic, and actual in game experience with the races at a high level are important instead of just being a pure data nerd. You hear that all the time there's not enough data to tell this, not enough data to claim that...
There's no level of observation or logic that will allow you to answer this type of question, and if you've ever heard 80% of pros talk you know that in game experience increases your bias rather than the quality of your data.
That I can't agree with, there's almost always a way to answer anything correctly that we can directly experience. Wombat and Fanatic Templar had very good posts to counter you.
Also the simplest strong evidence of protoss's weakness in this matchup is Serral. I'm watching him 4-0 Trap right now in TSL 8, the only protoss who has been very successful this year. Serral almost always absolutely demolishes protoss in particular while he struggles plenty vs terran and zerg. He shows just how helpless protoss is when zerg plays correctly.
I don't know what argument you think you're answering but it's not the argument I have. It is obvious that protoss is by miles the weakest race at the very highest level of play. This doesn't answer the question of whether it happens because protoss is weak or because the few people who have enough skill to be at the highest level of play, let's say 5 or 6 people, just coincidentally all happened to not pick protoss at the start of the game years ago.
This is a question that can't be answered. We cannot directly experience a world in which Serral chose to play protoss instead of zerg. That's the entirety of the issue. Maybe if Serral was protoss and Trap was zerg Serral would still have 4-0ed in this match, and we would be having a thread about how zerg can't win at the top level. Or maybe not. It's impossible to say.
We don't have to say it, however, since either way the end result is that protoss is not winning, and you and I are rooting for protoss. As a consequence, I once again did the sane thing this afternoon and I didn't watch Trap play vs Serral, which means I had a much happier afternoon than you
First of all if a race is strong enough its extremely unlikely the good people just decided not to pick it, generally player strength will average out pretty closely with similarly strong races. There's too large of a player pool for that.
We don't need to directly experience such a world, the player who is taking 70% of protoss tournament wins (Trap) consistently being crushed like a bronze league noob demonstrates the race is just bad.
Not really true, because we're talking about a very limited sample size of players. But again I'm not sure why you're so invested in the difference between the two, it weakens your argument for no discernable gain.
Isn't there at least some merit to what he's saying though? Yea Rogue, Serral and Dark are crushing but it's not like any of them switched to Zerg because they suddenly realized Zerg is so dominant at the top, they've all been playing Zerg since the beginning.
The majority of this issue doesn't stem from Warp Gate (which I hate from a design stand point) it stems from Blizzard not leaving one damn person in charge of implementing simple/common sense balance patches even twice a year. Not that I think buffing Protoss or nerfing Zerg would be easy, this games top level of balance is imo balanced on the razor edge of a knife.
Not saying that invalidates this discussion but it does kind of put a dent in the, "Well all the pro players will clearly choose to play X race because it's stronger vs. Y race because that would be a waste of their time."
1st edit just to take out meaningless statements like Zerg wasn't always dominant not really relevant after rereading
Actually if blizzard left someone to patch after 2020 then protoss would be in even worse shape now because for sure voids or something would have get nerfs after a couple of Trap wins and with deeply fueled hate for toss in this community.
Of course there's some merit to what he's saying, it's one of the possibilities. That possibility has a certain percentage chance of being true, I would say over 50% for sure, in my heart it's like 90% or something but we don't care about my estimation since I root for protoss and I'm biased in favor of protoss players. In the context of this thread eliminating the distinction between the two allows us to remove our bias from the equation and look at the hope of protoss in the future based on the data alone, and that's what we should be doing.
Contrast that with other people in the thread (some of them dishonest, sure) who think we've just been unlucky, or that terran is the weakest race because Elusory lost to Byul 0-3 today or whatever. We don't need to know why we're weak in order to estimate our hope for the future.
The answer to your question is there. Protoss is doing bad at the best level because the top 5 of the race has done consistently worse than the top 5 of the other two races since 2018.
You obviously don't care about that, but it's getting tiresome that you guys keep pretending you don't know what you're talking about.
I think the problem for protoss is just being bad against zerg... its fine vs terran if not better, but I think very few people who believe the race is strong enough versus zerg play protoss at a high level. Also the fast expanding nature of LOTV just helps zerg imo thats what the race is designed to do.
There's not even enough data to say that. It could also be that the very top of zerg players is just better than the very top of protoss players at the game. We cannot positively state that if Serral had chosen protoss instead of zerg he wouldn't be dominating, there's no direct evidence of that.
All we can state is that there's not a ton of hope and that we should behave accordingly.
Thats why observation, logic, and actual in game experience with the races at a high level are important instead of just being a pure data nerd. You hear that all the time there's not enough data to tell this, not enough data to claim that...
There's no level of observation or logic that will allow you to answer this type of question, and if you've ever heard 80% of pros talk you know that in game experience increases your bias rather than the quality of your data.
That I can't agree with, there's almost always a way to answer anything correctly that we can directly experience. Wombat and Fanatic Templar had very good posts to counter you.
Also the simplest strong evidence of protoss's weakness in this matchup is Serral. I'm watching him 4-0 Trap right now in TSL 8, the only protoss who has been very successful this year. Serral almost always absolutely demolishes protoss in particular while he struggles plenty vs terran and zerg. He shows just how helpless protoss is when zerg plays correctly.
I don't know what argument you think you're answering but it's not the argument I have. It is obvious that protoss is by miles the weakest race at the very highest level of play. This doesn't answer the question of whether it happens because protoss is weak or because the few people who have enough skill to be at the highest level of play, let's say 5 or 6 people, just coincidentally all happened to not pick protoss at the start of the game years ago.
This is a question that can't be answered. We cannot directly experience a world in which Serral chose to play protoss instead of zerg. That's the entirety of the issue. Maybe if Serral was protoss and Trap was zerg Serral would still have 4-0ed in this match, and we would be having a thread about how zerg can't win at the top level. Or maybe not. It's impossible to say.
We don't have to say it, however, since either way the end result is that protoss is not winning, and you and I are rooting for protoss. As a consequence, I once again did the sane thing this afternoon and I didn't watch Trap play vs Serral, which means I had a much happier afternoon than you
First of all if a race is strong enough its extremely unlikely the good people just decided not to pick it, generally player strength will average out pretty closely with similarly strong races. There's too large of a player pool for that.
We don't need to directly experience such a world, the player who is taking 70% of protoss tournament wins (Trap) consistently being crushed like a bronze league noob demonstrates the race is just bad.
Not really true, because we're talking about a very limited sample size of players. But again I'm not sure why you're so invested in the difference between the two, it weakens your argument for no discernable gain.
Isn't there at least some merit to what he's saying though? Yea Rogue, Serral and Dark are crushing but it's not like any of them switched to Zerg because they suddenly realized Zerg is so dominant at the top, they've all been playing Zerg since the beginning.
I think we all have to remember that Zerg is dominant now, not always. The majority of this issue doesn't stem from Warp Gate (which I hate from a design stand point) it stems from Blizzard not leaving one damn person in charge of implementing simple/common sense balance patches even twice a year. Not that I think buffing Protoss or nerfing Zerg would be easy, this games top level of balance is imo balanced on the razor edge of a knife.
Not saying that invalidates this discussion but it does kind of put a dent in the, "Well all the pro players will clearly choose to play X race because it's stronger vs. Y race because that would be a waste of their time."
I think neglected in the conversation is that races play differently and suit differing skill sets, plus they’re pretty aesthetically different so plenty of folks will play the race that suits how they want to play, or simply for coolness.
I could envisage Stats, if he’d wanted being a very good Zerg player, given how he tries to play Protoss. Whereas I don’t think herO’s strengths would suit playing them. Conversely, I don’t think Serral stylistically would mesh that well with Protoss
I don’t think a race’s strength is that big an influence in terms of who plays what race.
Where I think it maybe would be a factor is when a gifted amateur playing at a level where transitioning to going full-time professional is on the cards, and whether they choose to do that or not, especially in a scene where the future is uncertain
The answer to your question is there. Protoss is doing bad at the best level because the top 5 of the race has done consistently worse than the top 5 of the other two races since 2018.
You obviously don't care about that, but it's getting tiresome that you guys keep pretending you don't know what you're talking about.
I think the problem for protoss is just being bad against zerg... its fine vs terran if not better, but I think very few people who believe the race is strong enough versus zerg play protoss at a high level. Also the fast expanding nature of LOTV just helps zerg imo thats what the race is designed to do.
There's not even enough data to say that. It could also be that the very top of zerg players is just better than the very top of protoss players at the game. We cannot positively state that if Serral had chosen protoss instead of zerg he wouldn't be dominating, there's no direct evidence of that.
All we can state is that there's not a ton of hope and that we should behave accordingly.
Thats why observation, logic, and actual in game experience with the races at a high level are important instead of just being a pure data nerd. You hear that all the time there's not enough data to tell this, not enough data to claim that...
There's no level of observation or logic that will allow you to answer this type of question, and if you've ever heard 80% of pros talk you know that in game experience increases your bias rather than the quality of your data.
That I can't agree with, there's almost always a way to answer anything correctly that we can directly experience. Wombat and Fanatic Templar had very good posts to counter you.
Also the simplest strong evidence of protoss's weakness in this matchup is Serral. I'm watching him 4-0 Trap right now in TSL 8, the only protoss who has been very successful this year. Serral almost always absolutely demolishes protoss in particular while he struggles plenty vs terran and zerg. He shows just how helpless protoss is when zerg plays correctly.
I don't know what argument you think you're answering but it's not the argument I have. It is obvious that protoss is by miles the weakest race at the very highest level of play. This doesn't answer the question of whether it happens because protoss is weak or because the few people who have enough skill to be at the highest level of play, let's say 5 or 6 people, just coincidentally all happened to not pick protoss at the start of the game years ago.
This is a question that can't be answered. We cannot directly experience a world in which Serral chose to play protoss instead of zerg. That's the entirety of the issue. Maybe if Serral was protoss and Trap was zerg Serral would still have 4-0ed in this match, and we would be having a thread about how zerg can't win at the top level. Or maybe not. It's impossible to say.
We don't have to say it, however, since either way the end result is that protoss is not winning, and you and I are rooting for protoss. As a consequence, I once again did the sane thing this afternoon and I didn't watch Trap play vs Serral, which means I had a much happier afternoon than you
First of all if a race is strong enough its extremely unlikely the good people just decided not to pick it, generally player strength will average out pretty closely with similarly strong races. There's too large of a player pool for that.
We don't need to directly experience such a world, the player who is taking 70% of protoss tournament wins (Trap) consistently being crushed like a bronze league noob demonstrates the race is just bad.
Not really true, because we're talking about a very limited sample size of players. But again I'm not sure why you're so invested in the difference between the two, it weakens your argument for no discernable gain.
Isn't there at least some merit to what he's saying though? Yea Rogue, Serral and Dark are crushing but it's not like any of them switched to Zerg because they suddenly realized Zerg is so dominant at the top, they've all been playing Zerg since the beginning.
I think we all have to remember that Zerg is dominant now, not always. The majority of this issue doesn't stem from Warp Gate (which I hate from a design stand point) it stems from Blizzard not leaving one damn person in charge of implementing simple/common sense balance patches even twice a year. Not that I think buffing Protoss or nerfing Zerg would be easy, this games top level of balance is imo balanced on the razor edge of a knife.
Not saying that invalidates this discussion but it does kind of put a dent in the, "Well all the pro players will clearly choose to play X race because it's stronger vs. Y race because that would be a waste of their time."
Dude, we can't even come to terms on a single change and you expect one random dude doing sensible changes? Seriously?
If you fuck up the basic principles of a building no matter how many small repairs you do, it will still be fucked up. What we needed was the identification of all the biggest design flaws and their change. If you keep warp gate as an early game tech, you cannot boost gateway units, you have to keep very strong tech units in robo and SG and as such it's hard to break some stereotypes. E.g. people don't like deathballs. Well, suck it up, because to undeathball Protoss, you have to give power to other units than the chosen few. And that's the issue. Most of the gateway units are support units and meatshields for the tech units which do the damage. Now imagine bio being just a meatshield for tanks... but that's not how it works, bio does shitload of damage, tanks support bio. bio doesn't support liberators or medevacs, they support bio. It's all about these low tech units being supported by tech units. Protoss is the other way around. If you look at the Zerg it's the same way. Zerg doesn't have a designated power units like Protoss, all the casters are supports for the main army(and Queens ) to do the damage.
Protoss is like a dam with holes which were fixed with bandaids. Now some of them are simply not holding because they got too wet and are peeling off. Aplying another bandaid requires a person with them bandaids to check the dam regurarly and re-apply the "fixes". But we both know this is a vitious circle and eventually the damn will collapse.
Edit> Also we need to find a fix which is suited for the top 20 players, because the ladder is full of Protosses. Which makes it even harder, because what the community right now wants is to nerf and buff Protoss at the same time. Good luck with that.
Edit> Also we need to find a fix which is suited for the top 20 players, because the ladder is full of Protosses. Which makes it even harder, because what the community right now wants is to nerf and buff Protoss at the same time. Good luck with that.
This is definitely a difficult spot I've already harped on a bit. It would be pretty tough to find an acceptable set of balance changes that would only impact the power of Protoss at the top level of play and not make Protoss even more dominant on the ladder.
I disagree that there couldn't be some common sense changes, the person in charge would just have to actually do their job properly, not just sit there and make changes at random. Get lots of pro player feedback, community feedback as well, test maps, actually watch the games consistently.
Imo Adaptive Talons is a perfect example. Back when LoTV first dropped, nobody touched Lurkers, and when they did it looked bad. There needed to be an incentive to play with Lurkers, something to make them feel strong. So back in the day, Adaptive Talons were pretty balanced.
Now you can just watch really any series of Zerg vs. anything (even Zerg) and unless you are blind you would be able to see that the Lurker simply does it's job too well, and it's ability to be hyper mobile whilst holding ground like a champion is obviously not very balanced. There is to me at least, no real reason that such a powerful positional unit needs to be so nimble, not anymore at least.
You shouldn't have to be some mathematician/meta knowledge wizard to see obvious things such as that.
Edit> Also we need to find a fix which is suited for the top 20 players, because the ladder is full of Protosses. Which makes it even harder, because what the community right now wants is to nerf and buff Protoss at the same time. Good luck with that.
This is definitely a difficult spot I've already harped on a bit. It would be pretty tough to find an acceptable set of balance changes that would only impact the power of Protoss at the top level of play and not make Protoss even more dominant on the ladder.
I disagree that there couldn't be some common sense changes, the person in charge would just have to actually do their job properly, not just sit there and make changes at random. Get lots of pro player feedback, community feedback as well, test maps, actually watch the games consistently.
Imo Adaptive Talons is a perfect example. Back when LoTV first dropped, nobody touched Lurkers, and when they did it looked bad. There needed to be an incentive to play with Lurkers, something to make them feel strong. So back in the day, Adaptive Talons were pretty balanced.
Now you can just watch really any series of Zerg vs. anything (even Zerg) and unless you are blind you would be able to see that the Lurker simply does it's job too well, and it's ability to be hyper mobile whilst holding ground like a champion is obviously not very balanced. There is to me at least, no real reason that such a powerful positional unit needs to be so nimble, not anymore at least.
You shouldn't have to be some mathematician/meta knowledge wizard to see obvious things such as that.
Back when adaptive talons dropped it was balanced, because Lurkers had 9 max range and not 10
Edit> Also we need to find a fix which is suited for the top 20 players, because the ladder is full of Protosses. Which makes it even harder, because what the community right now wants is to nerf and buff Protoss at the same time. Good luck with that.
This is definitely a difficult spot I've already harped on a bit. It would be pretty tough to find an acceptable set of balance changes that would only impact the power of Protoss at the top level of play and not make Protoss even more dominant on the ladder.
I disagree that there couldn't be some common sense changes, the person in charge would just have to actually do their job properly, not just sit there and make changes at random. Get lots of pro player feedback, community feedback as well, test maps, actually watch the games consistently.
Imo Adaptive Talons is a perfect example. Back when LoTV first dropped, nobody touched Lurkers, and when they did it looked bad. There needed to be an incentive to play with Lurkers, something to make them feel strong. So back in the day, Adaptive Talons were pretty balanced.
Now you can just watch really any series of Zerg vs. anything (even Zerg) and unless you are blind you would be able to see that the Lurker simply does it's job too well, and it's ability to be hyper mobile whilst holding ground like a champion is obviously not very balanced. There is to me at least, no real reason that such a powerful positional unit needs to be so nimble, not anymore at least.
You shouldn't have to be some mathematician/meta knowledge wizard to see obvious things such as that.
Back when adaptive talons dropped it was balanced, because Lurkers had 9 max range and not 10
Wow I did not know that, good knowledge!
I actually wouldn't mind something like Lurker range being nerfed, but I still think the bigger issue is how positionally forgiving the Lurker is because of Talons. They should be able to hold ground strongly, it's part of their unit identity. Being able to move and reposition fast however? Not so much, takes alot of the skill out of the unit.
Edit> Also we need to find a fix which is suited for the top 20 players, because the ladder is full of Protosses. Which makes it even harder, because what the community right now wants is to nerf and buff Protoss at the same time. Good luck with that.
This is definitely a difficult spot I've already harped on a bit. It would be pretty tough to find an acceptable set of balance changes that would only impact the power of Protoss at the top level of play and not make Protoss even more dominant on the ladder.
I disagree that there couldn't be some common sense changes, the person in charge would just have to actually do their job properly, not just sit there and make changes at random. Get lots of pro player feedback, community feedback as well, test maps, actually watch the games consistently.
Imo Adaptive Talons is a perfect example. Back when LoTV first dropped, nobody touched Lurkers, and when they did it looked bad. There needed to be an incentive to play with Lurkers, something to make them feel strong. So back in the day, Adaptive Talons were pretty balanced.
Now you can just watch really any series of Zerg vs. anything (even Zerg) and unless you are blind you would be able to see that the Lurker simply does it's job too well, and it's ability to be hyper mobile whilst holding ground like a champion is obviously not very balanced. There is to me at least, no real reason that such a powerful positional unit needs to be so nimble, not anymore at least.
You shouldn't have to be some mathematician/meta knowledge wizard to see obvious things such as that.
Back when adaptive talons dropped it was balanced, because Lurkers had 9 max range and not 10
Back then maybe, nowadays it would most probably ruin the TvZ lategame. Which is the issue. Ironically I think this needs to go as it makes lurkers insanely fast and if a siege unit is chasing a retreating army. It. Is. Wrong. But then we can talk about the fact that Queens are marching across the map so it seems like Zerg is the stereotype breaker anyway
The point I'm trying to make is - it's not an easy balance fix/update. The easieast solution would be to buff some Protoss units via a cyber core upgrade. Thus Protoss has to choose between stronger units and delayed warp gate, or warp gate and stronger units later. It doesn't have to be anything big - slight movement speed bonus so Protoss actually can micro them units and can be aggressive at early game while not forced to glaves. I would even go as far as making the phase mode of warp prism an upgrade. Which would delay any strong timing pushes with warpgate AND strong warp gate units.
There are options to do stuff, also there's a reason why BW has some of them upgrades on the CC =)
Just gonna throw this one out there, not super well thought out but what if storm just did 2x damage to burrowed units or something. It would really only touch this particular interaction HT vs Lurker and make it so lurkers actually die to storm in a reasonable time frame.
On December 15 2021 09:17 Moonerz wrote: Just gonna throw this one out there, not super well thought out but what if storm just did 2x damage to burrowed units or something. It would really only touch this particular interaction HT vs Lurker and make it so lurkers actually die to storm in a reasonable time frame.
It's not elegant but at this point man I would take any balance change lol
On December 15 2021 09:17 Moonerz wrote: Just gonna throw this one out there, not super well thought out but what if storm just did 2x damage to burrowed units or something. It would really only touch this particular interaction HT vs Lurker and make it so lurkers actually die to storm in a reasonable time frame.
It's not elegant but at this point man I would take any balance change lol
Needs some lore explanation why being underground gets more damaged by an aerial attack. Maybe because of soil erosion and collapsing debris...
On December 15 2021 09:17 Moonerz wrote: Just gonna throw this one out there, not super well thought out but what if storm just did 2x damage to burrowed units or something. It would really only touch this particular interaction HT vs Lurker and make it so lurkers actually die to storm in a reasonable time frame.
It's not elegant but at this point man I would take any balance change lol
Needs some lore explanation why being underground gets more damaged by an aerial attack. Maybe because of soil erosion and collapsing debris...
Well, electricity is attracted to the ground, thus if you're underground you enjoy it more
Also would make more damage to mines
Edit> just to be clear - one of the issues of lurkers isn't that storm doesn't kill them, but that they're bulky like queens and storm doesn't hit enough of them at the same time. Also with double damage it leaves them with 40 HP? It would be an interesting thing to try.
Edit edit> also gimme a lore explanation for burrow roached and infestor burrowing through lowered depot while leaving a trail on the ground. While my grounding exaplantion is top level nonsense, it's still better than roach not headbutting the lowered depot
Edit> Also we need to find a fix which is suited for the top 20 players, because the ladder is full of Protosses. Which makes it even harder, because what the community right now wants is to nerf and buff Protoss at the same time. Good luck with that.
This is definitely a difficult spot I've already harped on a bit. It would be pretty tough to find an acceptable set of balance changes that would only impact the power of Protoss at the top level of play and not make Protoss even more dominant on the ladder.
I disagree that there couldn't be some common sense changes, the person in charge would just have to actually do their job properly, not just sit there and make changes at random. Get lots of pro player feedback, community feedback as well, test maps, actually watch the games consistently.
Imo Adaptive Talons is a perfect example. Back when LoTV first dropped, nobody touched Lurkers, and when they did it looked bad. There needed to be an incentive to play with Lurkers, something to make them feel strong. So back in the day, Adaptive Talons were pretty balanced.
Now you can just watch really any series of Zerg vs. anything (even Zerg) and unless you are blind you would be able to see that the Lurker simply does it's job too well, and it's ability to be hyper mobile whilst holding ground like a champion is obviously not very balanced. There is to me at least, no real reason that such a powerful positional unit needs to be so nimble, not anymore at least.
You shouldn't have to be some mathematician/meta knowledge wizard to see obvious things such as that.
Protoss isn't dominant on ladder, if anything more people just play protoss compared to Terran and Zerg.
With your logic you could would nerf something because more people play 1 race.
It's similar situation in league where people play a champ called Darius for example because he REKS noobs and you can abuse his power in 1v1 lane, but as soon as you get to a certain level people don't pick him anymore because he is easily countered and his silly shenanigan's dont work anymore.
So you all hate on Protoss because well lets be honest YOU CAN'T PLAY THE GOD DAMN GAME WELL.
Edit> Also we need to find a fix which is suited for the top 20 players, because the ladder is full of Protosses. Which makes it even harder, because what the community right now wants is to nerf and buff Protoss at the same time. Good luck with that.
This is definitely a difficult spot I've already harped on a bit. It would be pretty tough to find an acceptable set of balance changes that would only impact the power of Protoss at the top level of play and not make Protoss even more dominant on the ladder.
I disagree that there couldn't be some common sense changes, the person in charge would just have to actually do their job properly, not just sit there and make changes at random. Get lots of pro player feedback, community feedback as well, test maps, actually watch the games consistently.
Imo Adaptive Talons is a perfect example. Back when LoTV first dropped, nobody touched Lurkers, and when they did it looked bad. There needed to be an incentive to play with Lurkers, something to make them feel strong. So back in the day, Adaptive Talons were pretty balanced.
Now you can just watch really any series of Zerg vs. anything (even Zerg) and unless you are blind you would be able to see that the Lurker simply does it's job too well, and it's ability to be hyper mobile whilst holding ground like a champion is obviously not very balanced. There is to me at least, no real reason that such a powerful positional unit needs to be so nimble, not anymore at least.
You shouldn't have to be some mathematician/meta knowledge wizard to see obvious things such as that.
Protoss isn't dominant on ladder, if anything more people just play protoss compared to Terran and Zerg.
With your logic you could would nerf something because more people play 1 race.
It's similar situation in league where people play a champ called Darius for example because he REKS noobs and you can abuse his power in 1v1 lane, but as soon as you get to a certain level people don't pick him anymore because he is easily countered and his silly shenanigan's dont work anymore.
So you all hate on Protoss because well lets be honest YOU CAN'T PLAY THE GOD DAMN GAME WELL.
Is this a trolling post? You do realize there's like 100 Protoss accounts in the EU GM? I would say that GM players are pretty good in the game consideirng they're the top players in the region. Sure, plenty of them aren't nowhere near the best players, but they're still pretty good.
Edit> Also we need to find a fix which is suited for the top 20 players, because the ladder is full of Protosses. Which makes it even harder, because what the community right now wants is to nerf and buff Protoss at the same time. Good luck with that.
This is definitely a difficult spot I've already harped on a bit. It would be pretty tough to find an acceptable set of balance changes that would only impact the power of Protoss at the top level of play and not make Protoss even more dominant on the ladder.
I disagree that there couldn't be some common sense changes, the person in charge would just have to actually do their job properly, not just sit there and make changes at random. Get lots of pro player feedback, community feedback as well, test maps, actually watch the games consistently.
Imo Adaptive Talons is a perfect example. Back when LoTV first dropped, nobody touched Lurkers, and when they did it looked bad. There needed to be an incentive to play with Lurkers, something to make them feel strong. So back in the day, Adaptive Talons were pretty balanced.
Now you can just watch really any series of Zerg vs. anything (even Zerg) and unless you are blind you would be able to see that the Lurker simply does it's job too well, and it's ability to be hyper mobile whilst holding ground like a champion is obviously not very balanced. There is to me at least, no real reason that such a powerful positional unit needs to be so nimble, not anymore at least.
You shouldn't have to be some mathematician/meta knowledge wizard to see obvious things such as that.
Protoss isn't dominant on ladder, if anything more people just play protoss compared to Terran and Zerg.
With your logic you could would nerf something because more people play 1 race.
It's similar situation in league where people play a champ called Darius for example because he REKS noobs and you can abuse his power in 1v1 lane, but as soon as you get to a certain level people don't pick him anymore because he is easily countered and his silly shenanigan's dont work anymore.
So you all hate on Protoss because well lets be honest YOU CAN'T PLAY THE GOD DAMN GAME WELL.
Is this a trolling post? You do realize there's like 100 Protoss accounts in the EU GM? I would say that GM players are pretty good in the game consideirng they're the top players in the region. Sure, plenty of them aren't nowhere near the best players, but they're still pretty good.
GM players are pretty good at abusing some sort of 1 trick pony builds, then you have a small group of GMS who can stay GM while practicing macro games and stopping all the bullshit that gets thrown at you at GM level. Protoss has very good one trick pony playstyles that work great in BO1s, powered even more by barcodes. This is how a lot of people like to get their GM title, abuse a Protoss 1 trick pony build. Add on top of this the amount of Pro's in europe that play protoss and the amount of smurfs GM accounts they have because they cant practise builds on ladder if people know who they are cause you get predictable in tournaments.
We have quite a few protoss pro's in Europe, they are all nicely tucked underneath all the Zergs and Terrans of the region go figure.
Edit> Also we need to find a fix which is suited for the top 20 players, because the ladder is full of Protosses. Which makes it even harder, because what the community right now wants is to nerf and buff Protoss at the same time. Good luck with that.
This is definitely a difficult spot I've already harped on a bit. It would be pretty tough to find an acceptable set of balance changes that would only impact the power of Protoss at the top level of play and not make Protoss even more dominant on the ladder.
I disagree that there couldn't be some common sense changes, the person in charge would just have to actually do their job properly, not just sit there and make changes at random. Get lots of pro player feedback, community feedback as well, test maps, actually watch the games consistently.
Imo Adaptive Talons is a perfect example. Back when LoTV first dropped, nobody touched Lurkers, and when they did it looked bad. There needed to be an incentive to play with Lurkers, something to make them feel strong. So back in the day, Adaptive Talons were pretty balanced.
Now you can just watch really any series of Zerg vs. anything (even Zerg) and unless you are blind you would be able to see that the Lurker simply does it's job too well, and it's ability to be hyper mobile whilst holding ground like a champion is obviously not very balanced. There is to me at least, no real reason that such a powerful positional unit needs to be so nimble, not anymore at least.
You shouldn't have to be some mathematician/meta knowledge wizard to see obvious things such as that.
Protoss isn't dominant on ladder, if anything more people just play protoss compared to Terran and Zerg.
With your logic you could would nerf something because more people play 1 race.
It's similar situation in league where people play a champ called Darius for example because he REKS noobs and you can abuse his power in 1v1 lane, but as soon as you get to a certain level people don't pick him anymore because he is easily countered and his silly shenanigan's dont work anymore.
So you all hate on Protoss because well lets be honest YOU CAN'T PLAY THE GOD DAMN GAME WELL.
Is this a trolling post? You do realize there's like 100 Protoss accounts in the EU GM? I would say that GM players are pretty good in the game consideirng they're the top players in the region. Sure, plenty of them aren't nowhere near the best players, but they're still pretty good.
GM players are pretty good at abusing some sort of 1 trick pony builds, then you have a small group of GMS who can stay GM while practicing macro games and stopping all the bullshit that gets thrown at you at GM level. Protoss has very good one trick pony playstyles that work great in BO1s, powered even more by barcodes. This is how a lot of people like to get their GM title, abuse a Protoss 1 trick pony build. Add on top of this the amount of Pro's in europe that play protoss and the amount of smurfs GM accounts they have because they cant practise builds on ladder if people know who they are cause you get predictable in tournaments.
We have quite a few protoss pro's in Europe, they are all nicely tucked underneath all the Zergs and Terrans of the region go figure.
That's not the case though? When you watch uThermal ladder statistics, he played like 40-50 games against Z/T and 150 games against protoss. Despite getting far more practice against protoss, his TvP winrate is still below his other winrates. The simple fact that there are more protoss in GM is a proof that they are successful on ladder -> they take spots from others with higher MMR. You could also see over the months some protoss spiking in MMR.
Edit> Also we need to find a fix which is suited for the top 20 players, because the ladder is full of Protosses. Which makes it even harder, because what the community right now wants is to nerf and buff Protoss at the same time. Good luck with that.
This is definitely a difficult spot I've already harped on a bit. It would be pretty tough to find an acceptable set of balance changes that would only impact the power of Protoss at the top level of play and not make Protoss even more dominant on the ladder.
I disagree that there couldn't be some common sense changes, the person in charge would just have to actually do their job properly, not just sit there and make changes at random. Get lots of pro player feedback, community feedback as well, test maps, actually watch the games consistently.
Imo Adaptive Talons is a perfect example. Back when LoTV first dropped, nobody touched Lurkers, and when they did it looked bad. There needed to be an incentive to play with Lurkers, something to make them feel strong. So back in the day, Adaptive Talons were pretty balanced.
Now you can just watch really any series of Zerg vs. anything (even Zerg) and unless you are blind you would be able to see that the Lurker simply does it's job too well, and it's ability to be hyper mobile whilst holding ground like a champion is obviously not very balanced. There is to me at least, no real reason that such a powerful positional unit needs to be so nimble, not anymore at least.
You shouldn't have to be some mathematician/meta knowledge wizard to see obvious things such as that.
Protoss isn't dominant on ladder, if anything more people just play protoss compared to Terran and Zerg.
With your logic you could would nerf something because more people play 1 race.
It's similar situation in league where people play a champ called Darius for example because he REKS noobs and you can abuse his power in 1v1 lane, but as soon as you get to a certain level people don't pick him anymore because he is easily countered and his silly shenanigan's dont work anymore.
So you all hate on Protoss because well lets be honest YOU CAN'T PLAY THE GOD DAMN GAME WELL.
Is this a trolling post? You do realize there's like 100 Protoss accounts in the EU GM? I would say that GM players are pretty good in the game consideirng they're the top players in the region. Sure, plenty of them aren't nowhere near the best players, but they're still pretty good.
GM players are pretty good at abusing some sort of 1 trick pony builds, then you have a small group of GMS who can stay GM while practicing macro games and stopping all the bullshit that gets thrown at you at GM level. Protoss has very good one trick pony playstyles that work great in BO1s, powered even more by barcodes. This is how a lot of people like to get their GM title, abuse a Protoss 1 trick pony build. Add on top of this the amount of Pro's in europe that play protoss and the amount of smurfs GM accounts they have because they cant practise builds on ladder if people know who they are cause you get predictable in tournaments.
We have quite a few protoss pro's in Europe, they are all nicely tucked underneath all the Zergs and Terrans of the region go figure.
So what you say Protoss dominates the ladder with abusing BO1 builds? So you contradict yourself about "protoss isn't dominating the ladder, more people play it"? I just want to be clear, are Protoss dominating or not? xD Please check your posts before answering xD
I agree with the lurkers being pretty bulky so storm isnt as effective, regardless of damage, as it is against like marines or banes for example. But i struggle to think of another toss unit (besides maybe a sentry rework or something.) that is even moderately equipped to deal with lurkers. Archon/Immortal reminds me of the Broodlord vs Thor interaction, theoretically Archon/Immortal should be able to somewhat deal with them but theyre just too bulky and slow.
People don't really seem to like air toss but unless something on the ground can deal with lurkers there really isn't an alternative.
Ps; only took us about 20 pages to get to the true degen balance whines
Edit> Also we need to find a fix which is suited for the top 20 players, because the ladder is full of Protosses. Which makes it even harder, because what the community right now wants is to nerf and buff Protoss at the same time. Good luck with that.
This is definitely a difficult spot I've already harped on a bit. It would be pretty tough to find an acceptable set of balance changes that would only impact the power of Protoss at the top level of play and not make Protoss even more dominant on the ladder.
I disagree that there couldn't be some common sense changes, the person in charge would just have to actually do their job properly, not just sit there and make changes at random. Get lots of pro player feedback, community feedback as well, test maps, actually watch the games consistently.
Imo Adaptive Talons is a perfect example. Back when LoTV first dropped, nobody touched Lurkers, and when they did it looked bad. There needed to be an incentive to play with Lurkers, something to make them feel strong. So back in the day, Adaptive Talons were pretty balanced.
Now you can just watch really any series of Zerg vs. anything (even Zerg) and unless you are blind you would be able to see that the Lurker simply does it's job too well, and it's ability to be hyper mobile whilst holding ground like a champion is obviously not very balanced. There is to me at least, no real reason that such a powerful positional unit needs to be so nimble, not anymore at least.
You shouldn't have to be some mathematician/meta knowledge wizard to see obvious things such as that.
Protoss isn't dominant on ladder, if anything more people just play protoss compared to Terran and Zerg.
With your logic you could would nerf something because more people play 1 race.
It's similar situation in league where people play a champ called Darius for example because he REKS noobs and you can abuse his power in 1v1 lane, but as soon as you get to a certain level people don't pick him anymore because he is easily countered and his silly shenanigan's dont work anymore.
So you all hate on Protoss because well lets be honest YOU CAN'T PLAY THE GOD DAMN GAME WELL.
You didn't even read my post did you? You just saw the words nerf and Protoss in the same post and flipped your shit hu?
Why would you even care about GM ladder population? This is a problem for a very small amount of people meanwhile protoss tournament perfomance problems affect all the viewers.
I tell you why. Because this absolutely irrelevant GM ladder distribution is last resort for toss haters.
On December 16 2021 00:46 Elantris wrote: Why would you even care about GM ladder population? This is a problem for a very small amount of people meanwhile protoss tournament perfomance problems affect all the viewers.
I tell you why. Because this absolutely irrelevant GM ladder distribution is last resort for toss haters.
Protoss tournament results affect even smaller amount of players. Sorry for me playing the game and not just watching and wanting to have a better ladder experience. (fun fact, I main Protoss)
On December 15 2021 23:34 Moonerz wrote: I agree with the lurkers being pretty bulky so storm isnt as effective, regardless of damage, as it is against like marines or banes for example. But i struggle to think of another toss unit (besides maybe a sentry rework or something.) that is even moderately equipped to deal with lurkers. Archon/Immortal reminds me of the Broodlord vs Thor interaction, theoretically Archon/Immortal should be able to somewhat deal with them but theyre just too bulky and slow.
People don't really seem to like air toss but unless something on the ground can deal with lurkers there really isn't an alternative.
Ps; only took us about 20 pages to get to the true degen balance whines
We can always create a new one Or some buff that would, I don't know, strengthen the shields so you can attack into the lurkers. This wouldn't affect TvP because EMP and in PvP both races have it. The issue of lurkers is they shred ground Protoss to pieces so you have to go air. Protoss needs a reliable anti lurker weapon - like tank, ghost or liberator. Launching a ball of fire every 20 seconds doesn't kinda cut it, especially when you have to aim the damn ball.
On December 16 2021 00:46 Elantris wrote: Why would you even care about GM ladder population? This is a problem for a very small amount of people meanwhile protoss tournament perfomance problems affect all the viewers.
I tell you why. Because this absolutely irrelevant GM ladder distribution is last resort for toss haters.
Protoss tournament results affect even smaller amount of players. Sorry for me playing the game and not just watching and wanting to have a better ladder experience. (fun fact, I main Protoss)
Filthy Protoss race traitor how dare you disagree with that man's rage post!
On December 16 2021 00:46 Elantris wrote: Why would you even care about GM ladder population? This is a problem for a very small amount of people meanwhile protoss tournament perfomance problems affect all the viewers.
I tell you why. Because this absolutely irrelevant GM ladder distribution is last resort for toss haters.
Protoss tournament results affect even smaller amount of players. Sorry for me playing the game and not just watching and wanting to have a better ladder experience. (fun fact, I main Protoss)
On December 16 2021 00:46 Elantris wrote: Why would you even care about GM ladder population? This is a problem for a very small amount of people meanwhile protoss tournament perfomance problems affect all the viewers.
I tell you why. Because this absolutely irrelevant GM ladder distribution is last resort for toss haters.
Toss is frequently bullshit on ladder, considerably below that GM level and endlessly frustrating to play against
Some people will post endlessly on TL and follow the scene having long ceased playing, like myself.
I’m sure it’s a sizeable chunk of viewers, but long-term I don’t think a scene can be healthy if it haemorrhages players
Protoss can dominate the ‘pretty bloody good at the game’ high master/GM level and be impotent at the very highest level of the game at the same time, it’s not a deflection to acknowledge one while pointing the other out.
Trap just got skewered 7-1 by Serral and looked completely powerless, the difficult trick is to give tools that a player like his calibre can use to bridge that gap without making players at a lower level better by default.
On December 15 2021 23:34 Moonerz wrote: I agree with the lurkers being pretty bulky so storm isnt as effective, regardless of damage, as it is against like marines or banes for example. But i struggle to think of another toss unit (besides maybe a sentry rework or something.) that is even moderately equipped to deal with lurkers. Archon/Immortal reminds me of the Broodlord vs Thor interaction, theoretically Archon/Immortal should be able to somewhat deal with them but theyre just too bulky and slow.
People don't really seem to like air toss but unless something on the ground can deal with lurkers there really isn't an alternative.
Ps; only took us about 20 pages to get to the true degen balance whines
Disruptors maybe? Yeah Vipers counter them but if you get like 10 Disruptors it becomes hard to abduct every single one. Problem is that when Zerg transitions to Broodlords those become pretty much useless
honestly the best solution would just be to buff Protoss midgame so they can apply more pressure to Zerg and they can't transition as easily to Hive-upgraded Lurkers
Protoss can dominate the ‘pretty bloody good at the game’ high master/GM level and be impotent at the very highest level of the game at the same time, it’s not a deflection to acknowledge one while pointing the other out.
Trap just got skewered 7-1 by Serral and looked completely powerless, the difficult trick is to give tools that a player like his calibre can use to bridge that gap without making players at a lower level better by default.
On December 15 2021 23:34 Moonerz wrote: I agree with the lurkers being pretty bulky so storm isnt as effective, regardless of damage, as it is against like marines or banes for example. But i struggle to think of another toss unit (besides maybe a sentry rework or something.) that is even moderately equipped to deal with lurkers. Archon/Immortal reminds me of the Broodlord vs Thor interaction, theoretically Archon/Immortal should be able to somewhat deal with them but theyre just too bulky and slow.
People don't really seem to like air toss but unless something on the ground can deal with lurkers there really isn't an alternative.
Ps; only took us about 20 pages to get to the true degen balance whines
Disruptors maybe? Yeah Vipers counter them but if you get like 10 Disruptors it becomes hard to abduct every single one. Problem is that when Zerg transitions to Broodlords those become pretty much useless
honestly the best solution would just be to buff Protoss midgame so they can apply more pressure to Zerg and they can't transition as easily to Hive-upgraded Lurkers
Protoss ground imo needs to become more attractive to play while obv voids need to become less easy to play would prolly help both sides.
On December 15 2021 23:34 Moonerz wrote: I agree with the lurkers being pretty bulky so storm isnt as effective, regardless of damage, as it is against like marines or banes for example. But i struggle to think of another toss unit (besides maybe a sentry rework or something.) that is even moderately equipped to deal with lurkers. Archon/Immortal reminds me of the Broodlord vs Thor interaction, theoretically Archon/Immortal should be able to somewhat deal with them but theyre just too bulky and slow.
People don't really seem to like air toss but unless something on the ground can deal with lurkers there really isn't an alternative.
Ps; only took us about 20 pages to get to the true degen balance whines
Disruptors maybe? Yeah Vipers counter them but if you get like 10 Disruptors it becomes hard to abduct every single one. Problem is that when Zerg transitions to Broodlords those become pretty much useless
honestly the best solution would just be to buff Protoss midgame so they can apply more pressure to Zerg and they can't transition as easily to Hive-upgraded Lurkers
Well yeah besides HT I think Disruptor is the other option. I don't really play Protoss except when I goof around playing random and end up getting P. But I would imagine 10 ruptors would just leave a huge hole in terms of supporting units but I might be wrong. In addition to that Vipers just whittle down that number and run back consume evos and come right back.
Gateway units dont seem good enough. Robo units seem to take too long to build up and are too easily defeated. Which leaves Stargate as the only viable option.
On December 15 2021 23:34 Moonerz wrote: I agree with the lurkers being pretty bulky so storm isnt as effective, regardless of damage, as it is against like marines or banes for example. But i struggle to think of another toss unit (besides maybe a sentry rework or something.) that is even moderately equipped to deal with lurkers. Archon/Immortal reminds me of the Broodlord vs Thor interaction, theoretically Archon/Immortal should be able to somewhat deal with them but theyre just too bulky and slow.
People don't really seem to like air toss but unless something on the ground can deal with lurkers there really isn't an alternative.
Ps; only took us about 20 pages to get to the true degen balance whines
Disruptors maybe? Yeah Vipers counter them but if you get like 10 Disruptors it becomes hard to abduct every single one. Problem is that when Zerg transitions to Broodlords those become pretty much useless
honestly the best solution would just be to buff Protoss midgame so they can apply more pressure to Zerg and they can't transition as easily to Hive-upgraded Lurkers
Disruptors become exponentially harder to control the more of them you have. You’ve got to keep them at optimal range, direct their shots manually and manage cooldowns for 10 units
Thrown into a really technical lategame army and it becomes basically impractical to do, if you’re controlling your air, tagging with oracles, pushing Templars up and back to feedback vipers etc
If you’re playing Archon and someone is babysitting Disruptors they’d be hugely potent I believe, I think the limitation is on what one player can realistically control
There are scenarios where this is less difficult and you see a lot of disruptors, PvP you’re basically just controlling stalkers and disruptors, and PvT you frequently see 4-5+, but Terran lack abilities such as abduct and the comps are a little less technical than super lategame against Zerg
Zerg lategame armies are also pretty damn technical to control, which is why there’s only a pretty slim number of players who can reliably beat the best Protoss players out there, it’s much less easy than it looks.
Protoss at times I’ve seen experimenting with super technical comps and they haven’t managed to make it work, whether that’s them not being viable I don’t know
If Protoss has more midgame tools, yeah I agree that would be super helpful, and probably the route that needs to be taken.
What about a sentry upgrade that adds a (small) damage AoE? Maybe gate it behind Templar tech
It wouldn’t shred lings, banes or broodlings in seconds, but it’d do a bit of damage so you could pick them off quicker and limit their damage.
It’d also be useful in defending outlying expansions potentially, the upgraded sentry field wouldn’t wipe them out quickly, but in an extended runby scenario it would be something to think about
On December 16 2021 00:46 Elantris wrote: Why would you even care about GM ladder population? This is a problem for a very small amount of people meanwhile protoss tournament perfomance problems affect all the viewers.
I tell you why. Because this absolutely irrelevant GM ladder distribution is last resort for toss haters.
the difficult trick is to give tools that a player like his calibre can use to bridge that gap without making players at a lower level better by default.
This will never work. This is delusional logic that just gaslighting toss weakness.
Blink stalker is one of the most skillbased units in the game yet this community went completely nuts demanding nerfs during blink era of HotS.
On December 16 2021 00:46 Elantris wrote: Why would you even care about GM ladder population? This is a problem for a very small amount of people meanwhile protoss tournament perfomance problems affect all the viewers.
I tell you why. Because this absolutely irrelevant GM ladder distribution is last resort for toss haters.
the difficult trick is to give tools that a player like his calibre can use to bridge that gap without making players at a lower level better by default.
This will never work. This is delusional logic that just gaslighting toss weakness.
Blink stalker is one of the most skillbased units in the game yet this community went completely nuts demanding nerfs during blink era of HotS.
Did you play during that era? It was really insane. Go back and look at some of the maps too like Heavy Rain. The entire main was blinkable it was so much surface area to try to defend.
Protoss can be weak now and have been OP at certain points in the past. That has nothing to do with the current state of Protoss
On December 16 2021 00:46 Elantris wrote: Why would you even care about GM ladder population? This is a problem for a very small amount of people meanwhile protoss tournament perfomance problems affect all the viewers.
I tell you why. Because this absolutely irrelevant GM ladder distribution is last resort for toss haters.
the difficult trick is to give tools that a player like his calibre can use to bridge that gap without making players at a lower level better by default.
This will never work. This is delusional logic that just gaslighting toss weakness.
Blink stalker is one of the most skillbased units in the game yet this community went completely nuts demanding nerfs during blink era of HotS.
Can people stop misusing the word gaslighting? I literally said Protoss are struggling at the very highest level.
They’re also not struggling, whatsoever on ladder. If you buff something outside of the parameters of ‘only a Trap level player can make use of this’, you make Protoss even more dominant on ladder. I’m not sure why I’m typing this because I pretty clearly said it last post
Blakers are strong unit in the hands of a skilled player, there’s a clear gap between a great stalker user like Parting or herO, they don’t scale.
Bio and big Zerg balls melt them no matter how good you are with them, they’ve only ever been potent in dedicated timing attacks, or as a good complement to a composition/having defensive utility.
Blink allins basically suck in PvZ now given the LoTV economy changes.
They’re a big skill/finesse unit, Protoss aren’t lacking in those. Phoenixes reward skill highly, Templars and Disruptors as well, sentries as well
The PvT blink era was shit, maps played a factor too, but the problem was Toss could tech hard behind feigned stalker pressure or just kill you with a stalker all-in and it was really hard to pick what they were doing. Just made for bad Starcraft, was rightly nerfed.
Know what almost doesn’t matter? How good you are with finesse units like stalkers or phoenixes in a high level lategame, because they don’t feature
In a crude sense given how the race works the problem is the mechanically demanding units where skill really makes a difference falls off, and you have to transition to comps where it’s more A-move focused, and the best players can’t make as much extra use of them.
Be it Reynors lings vs Trap’s zealots or whatever. Partings stalkers will be like 15x better than mine but when it gets to lategame I don’t think his zealots will be all that superior
On December 16 2021 03:37 LSN wrote: Give stalkers a new upgrade: - increased attack & movement speed (7-8% maybe?) - available at citadel when templar archives is built - cost 150/250
Would that help anything?
Alternatively you could give them a shield regen boost post blinking, you could really boost sustain a little
I think one of the factions in campaign has this
It has the ‘advantage’ of only being useful in the hands of someone who’s really good at blink micro and it’s not an outright boost to A-moving
Also would have a muscle memory advantage. We’ve all got the stalker stutter step and attack speed down, it’ll take a while to adjust to an upgrade if they’re moving/attacking faster
On December 16 2021 00:46 Elantris wrote: Why would you even care about GM ladder population? This is a problem for a very small amount of people meanwhile protoss tournament perfomance problems affect all the viewers.
I tell you why. Because this absolutely irrelevant GM ladder distribution is last resort for toss haters.
the difficult trick is to give tools that a player like his calibre can use to bridge that gap without making players at a lower level better by default.
This will never work. This is delusional logic that just gaslighting toss weakness.
Blink stalker is one of the most skillbased units in the game yet this community went completely nuts demanding nerfs during blink era of HotS.
Not only is that not what gaslighting is but your example isn't even relevant to what you're quoting. The blink era dominance needed a nerf absolutely and the community was right to demand it, but that has nothing to do with saying that Protoss need a very specific/targeted buff against Zerg that doesn't make ladder Protoss even stronger/more versatile.
99.99% of the Zerg population isn't Serral, fighting Skytoss below the highest level is incredibly micro intensive and unforgiving while requiring very low APM on the Protoss. Serral makes dominating Protoss in the late game look way easier then it is for us mere mortals.
The answer to your question is there. Protoss is doing bad at the best level because the top 5 of the race has done consistently worse than the top 5 of the other two races since 2018.
You obviously don't care about that, but it's getting tiresome that you guys keep pretending you don't know what you're talking about.
I think the problem for protoss is just being bad against zerg... its fine vs terran if not better, but I think very few people who believe the race is strong enough versus zerg play protoss at a high level. Also the fast expanding nature of LOTV just helps zerg imo thats what the race is designed to do.
There's not even enough data to say that. It could also be that the very top of zerg players is just better than the very top of protoss players at the game. We cannot positively state that if Serral had chosen protoss instead of zerg he wouldn't be dominating, there's no direct evidence of that.
All we can state is that there's not a ton of hope and that we should behave accordingly.
Thats why observation, logic, and actual in game experience with the races at a high level are important instead of just being a pure data nerd. You hear that all the time there's not enough data to tell this, not enough data to claim that...
There's no level of observation or logic that will allow you to answer this type of question, and if you've ever heard 80% of pros talk you know that in game experience increases your bias rather than the quality of your data.
That I can't agree with, there's almost always a way to answer anything correctly that we can directly experience. Wombat and Fanatic Templar had very good posts to counter you.
Also the simplest strong evidence of protoss's weakness in this matchup is Serral. I'm watching him 4-0 Trap right now in TSL 8, the only protoss who has been very successful this year. Serral almost always absolutely demolishes protoss in particular while he struggles plenty vs terran and zerg. He shows just how helpless protoss is when zerg plays correctly.
I don't know what argument you think you're answering but it's not the argument I have. It is obvious that protoss is by miles the weakest race at the very highest level of play. This doesn't answer the question of whether it happens because protoss is weak or because the few people who have enough skill to be at the highest level of play, let's say 5 or 6 people, just coincidentally all happened to not pick protoss at the start of the game years ago.
This is a question that can't be answered. We cannot directly experience a world in which Serral chose to play protoss instead of zerg. That's the entirety of the issue. Maybe if Serral was protoss and Trap was zerg Serral would still have 4-0ed in this match, and we would be having a thread about how zerg can't win at the top level. Or maybe not. It's impossible to say.
We don't have to say it, however, since either way the end result is that protoss is not winning, and you and I are rooting for protoss. As a consequence, I once again did the sane thing this afternoon and I didn't watch Trap play vs Serral, which means I had a much happier afternoon than you
First of all if a race is strong enough its extremely unlikely the good people just decided not to pick it, generally player strength will average out pretty closely with similarly strong races. There's too large of a player pool for that.
We don't need to directly experience such a world, the player who is taking 70% of protoss tournament wins (Trap) consistently being crushed like a bronze league noob demonstrates the race is just bad.
Not really true, because we're talking about a very limited sample size of players. But again I'm not sure why you're so invested in the difference between the two, it weakens your argument for no discernable gain.
I think you're looking at only the small amount of top pros in saying very limited sample size of players? But there are millions of players who have played this game and any one of them could've decided to pursue tournament winnings or a pro career which must inevitably be narrowed down to a small amount of players at the highest level. So yes if a race isn't too weak the players who chose it won't be abnormally unskilled. There are clearly lots of high level protoss players on the ladder yet the race gets crushed against a zerg who can play quite correctly.
It doesn't matter anyway, even the fact that this thread is so active right now with so many people discussing what problems make this race the weakest in the game shows that its not an issue of the best players happening to not choose protoss. If that was the case it would be clear that the race is fine but its players are just getting outplayed. That is not the case, again Trap should not be constantly getting roflstomped by Serral like he's nothing.
The answer to your question is there. Protoss is doing bad at the best level because the top 5 of the race has done consistently worse than the top 5 of the other two races since 2018.
You obviously don't care about that, but it's getting tiresome that you guys keep pretending you don't know what you're talking about.
I think the problem for protoss is just being bad against zerg... its fine vs terran if not better, but I think very few people who believe the race is strong enough versus zerg play protoss at a high level. Also the fast expanding nature of LOTV just helps zerg imo thats what the race is designed to do.
There's not even enough data to say that. It could also be that the very top of zerg players is just better than the very top of protoss players at the game. We cannot positively state that if Serral had chosen protoss instead of zerg he wouldn't be dominating, there's no direct evidence of that.
All we can state is that there's not a ton of hope and that we should behave accordingly.
Thats why observation, logic, and actual in game experience with the races at a high level are important instead of just being a pure data nerd. You hear that all the time there's not enough data to tell this, not enough data to claim that...
There's no level of observation or logic that will allow you to answer this type of question, and if you've ever heard 80% of pros talk you know that in game experience increases your bias rather than the quality of your data.
That I can't agree with, there's almost always a way to answer anything correctly that we can directly experience. Wombat and Fanatic Templar had very good posts to counter you.
Also the simplest strong evidence of protoss's weakness in this matchup is Serral. I'm watching him 4-0 Trap right now in TSL 8, the only protoss who has been very successful this year. Serral almost always absolutely demolishes protoss in particular while he struggles plenty vs terran and zerg. He shows just how helpless protoss is when zerg plays correctly.
I don't know what argument you think you're answering but it's not the argument I have. It is obvious that protoss is by miles the weakest race at the very highest level of play. This doesn't answer the question of whether it happens because protoss is weak or because the few people who have enough skill to be at the highest level of play, let's say 5 or 6 people, just coincidentally all happened to not pick protoss at the start of the game years ago.
This is a question that can't be answered. We cannot directly experience a world in which Serral chose to play protoss instead of zerg. That's the entirety of the issue. Maybe if Serral was protoss and Trap was zerg Serral would still have 4-0ed in this match, and we would be having a thread about how zerg can't win at the top level. Or maybe not. It's impossible to say.
We don't have to say it, however, since either way the end result is that protoss is not winning, and you and I are rooting for protoss. As a consequence, I once again did the sane thing this afternoon and I didn't watch Trap play vs Serral, which means I had a much happier afternoon than you
First of all if a race is strong enough its extremely unlikely the good people just decided not to pick it, generally player strength will average out pretty closely with similarly strong races. There's too large of a player pool for that.
We don't need to directly experience such a world, the player who is taking 70% of protoss tournament wins (Trap) consistently being crushed like a bronze league noob demonstrates the race is just bad.
Not really true, because we're talking about a very limited sample size of players. But again I'm not sure why you're so invested in the difference between the two, it weakens your argument for no discernable gain.
I think you're looking at only the small amount of top pros in saying very limited sample size of players? But there are millions of players who have played this game and any one of them could've decided to pursue tournament winnings or a pro career which must inevitably be narrowed down to a small amount of players at the highest level. So yes if a race isn't too weak the players who chose it won't be abnormally unskilled. There are clearly lots of high level protoss players on the ladder yet the race gets crushed against a zerg who can play quite correctly.
It doesn't matter anyway, even the fact that this thread is so active right now with so many people discussing what problems make this race the weakest in the game shows that its not an issue of the best players happening to not choose protoss. If that was the case it would be clear that the race is fine but its players are just getting outplayed. That is not the case, again Trap should not be constantly getting roflstomped by Serral like he's nothing.
No the fact that many people are posting in this thread isn't evidence of anything, you're getting desperate to prove something that you don't need to prove and I don't know why you're doing it.
Clearly there is a disconnect between Protoss as a ladder race and as a competitive race. Looking at Aligulac, it's frequently the lagging race (consistently since the March 28, 2018 stat update and for long periods before that), yet has the highest percentage of mirror matches indicating a large portion of active players that are able to make it to a high level of play with them. This would seem to speak to them being easier to play at a high level but falling off at the highest level, so what's going on with them? Like I'm sure everyone else here, I have some thoughts
Macro Protoss base building is more forgiving. A single Probe can set an entire base to be built in seconds and then return to mining. Zerg loses workers to build a structure and requires use of Queens' abilities to maximize territory where something can be built and having larva to actually use for building. Terran is in between with each structure concurrently built eating up worker time, but ultimately the SCV returns to the active and available population. If you fall behind, a Probe can quickly spend your money, it's harder for Terran or Zerg to similarly rapidly build structures without harming economy or army in the event you fell behind.
Similarly, unit production requires less effort for Toss thanks to warpgate allowing money to quickly be spent at the cost of building some excess gateways and a pylon somewhere on the map. They are also the weakest with their tech/power units building out slowly from structures that are normally quite limited in total amount available at any given time. While Zerg has the most powerful production capability, it requires a player to be good with their injects to get the most benefit. Terran is again somewhere in the middle balancing out reactors vs tech labs and how many of each production structure. So at low levels a Protoss can spend money faster to get units on the field and at less effort than their opponents, while at high levels and the relative weakness of those same units they fall behind, being limited by the production of more powerful units, DTs and HTs the obvious exception.
So, overall weaker players have more leeway with Protoss to build bases and get an army onto the field. At the highest level where these strengths really don't matter as the limitations for Terran and Zerg macro don't really factor due to strong player mechanics the more flexible production of the other two races provides them more options
Micro: Terran bio and basically all Zerg composition benefit from player control. Even when the composition used by Zerg relies more on slow or by nature static units (Brood Lords, Lurkers) the need to pair them with spell casters to maximize efficiency keeps micro requirements throughout. Terran mech is more about positioning with the units needing less babying in combat and is different skill set to learn.
Protoss meanwhile, Zealots are dumbfire missiles, particularly after charge. DTs can micro some but really it's just about closing the distance and then running away as they lack the agility of Speedlings. Blink Stalkers can be very micro intensive but the gains are limited due to the inherent lack of power of the unit, meaning it's best to either use blink to pounce on or run away from an army. Since Barrier is not on demand Immortals lack options, Colossi have never particularly required micro. Prism juggling introduces some micro, but with the range nerf and cost increase it also creates a lot of vulnerability. The spell casters of course do require micro but since storm doesn't stack, feedback doesn't kill anything, Terran units are all ranged and Zerg has Ravagers, and disruptors become prohibitive at large numbers you just expend your abilities at the start of a fight and then try to pick good targets thereafter. There's also the fact that the core of the Protoss army is weak and the race is entirely dependent on splash, so unlike Terran and Zerg small detachment forces can't really do that much versus the cost of the units in that force.
Again we're in a situation where at lower levels, Protoss works better with limited control and benefits less from improved mechanics as you skill up
Decision making/Tech: Zerg is incredibly flexible. Terran has rigid tracks but it's not too costly to switch between them and you can dip in between them to mix things up. Protoss tech is expensive, rigid, and easily scoutable the better you get. At low levels the power of Protoss splash evaporates armies and being able to scout is a skill people are trying to learn so being scoutable isn't really an issue. At high levels you can open up the Book, but at the highest level the other races have seen the tricks and learned the counters, additionally you have limited ability to really switch it up.
Taking everything together, Protoss is more forgiving on errors in macro, does better with poorer micro, and the rigid decision making makes it more straightforward to learn and play while learning granting ladder players many advantages over the other races. As you get better all of these things don't really matter and become more limitations, showing weaknesses at the highest level since the things that made the other races appear weaker at lower level don't matter at the highest level due to the increase in player skill and ability
On December 12 2021 02:33 NinjaNight wrote: [quote]
I think the problem for protoss is just being bad against zerg... its fine vs terran if not better, but I think very few people who believe the race is strong enough versus zerg play protoss at a high level. Also the fast expanding nature of LOTV just helps zerg imo thats what the race is designed to do.
There's not even enough data to say that. It could also be that the very top of zerg players is just better than the very top of protoss players at the game. We cannot positively state that if Serral had chosen protoss instead of zerg he wouldn't be dominating, there's no direct evidence of that.
All we can state is that there's not a ton of hope and that we should behave accordingly.
Thats why observation, logic, and actual in game experience with the races at a high level are important instead of just being a pure data nerd. You hear that all the time there's not enough data to tell this, not enough data to claim that...
There's no level of observation or logic that will allow you to answer this type of question, and if you've ever heard 80% of pros talk you know that in game experience increases your bias rather than the quality of your data.
That I can't agree with, there's almost always a way to answer anything correctly that we can directly experience. Wombat and Fanatic Templar had very good posts to counter you.
Also the simplest strong evidence of protoss's weakness in this matchup is Serral. I'm watching him 4-0 Trap right now in TSL 8, the only protoss who has been very successful this year. Serral almost always absolutely demolishes protoss in particular while he struggles plenty vs terran and zerg. He shows just how helpless protoss is when zerg plays correctly.
I don't know what argument you think you're answering but it's not the argument I have. It is obvious that protoss is by miles the weakest race at the very highest level of play. This doesn't answer the question of whether it happens because protoss is weak or because the few people who have enough skill to be at the highest level of play, let's say 5 or 6 people, just coincidentally all happened to not pick protoss at the start of the game years ago.
This is a question that can't be answered. We cannot directly experience a world in which Serral chose to play protoss instead of zerg. That's the entirety of the issue. Maybe if Serral was protoss and Trap was zerg Serral would still have 4-0ed in this match, and we would be having a thread about how zerg can't win at the top level. Or maybe not. It's impossible to say.
We don't have to say it, however, since either way the end result is that protoss is not winning, and you and I are rooting for protoss. As a consequence, I once again did the sane thing this afternoon and I didn't watch Trap play vs Serral, which means I had a much happier afternoon than you
First of all if a race is strong enough its extremely unlikely the good people just decided not to pick it, generally player strength will average out pretty closely with similarly strong races. There's too large of a player pool for that.
We don't need to directly experience such a world, the player who is taking 70% of protoss tournament wins (Trap) consistently being crushed like a bronze league noob demonstrates the race is just bad.
Not really true, because we're talking about a very limited sample size of players. But again I'm not sure why you're so invested in the difference between the two, it weakens your argument for no discernable gain.
I think you're looking at only the small amount of top pros in saying very limited sample size of players? But there are millions of players who have played this game and any one of them could've decided to pursue tournament winnings or a pro career which must inevitably be narrowed down to a small amount of players at the highest level. So yes if a race isn't too weak the players who chose it won't be abnormally unskilled. There are clearly lots of high level protoss players on the ladder yet the race gets crushed against a zerg who can play quite correctly.
It doesn't matter anyway, even the fact that this thread is so active right now with so many people discussing what problems make this race the weakest in the game shows that its not an issue of the best players happening to not choose protoss. If that was the case it would be clear that the race is fine but its players are just getting outplayed. That is not the case, again Trap should not be constantly getting roflstomped by Serral like he's nothing.
No the fact that many people are posting in this thread isn't evidence of anything, you're getting desperate to prove something that you don't need to prove and I don't know why you're doing it.
He was right in his last post though. There is clear evidence that at the highest level, specifically talking about ZvP if both play perfectly, there is not chance for Protoss to win, no matter how they play. Toss can only rely on the Zerg to make a mistake in the perception of the game. Take Trap vs Reynor and Trap vs Serral as examples I think that tells the whole story. Trap won against Reynor because he caught him off guard with timing attacks which the Zerg didnt anticipate properly = Zergs mistake, well punished. But against Serral, a lot more solid player with perfect game awareness, he looked like a diamond scrub, and he didnt necesarily even have to play trash, just he didnt manage to outsmart the Zerg. Is this how they game is supposed to be? When both players play solid one race is clearly superior by design so they auto-win if they other race does not surprise them? Its bullshit, but its how it is. I remember times in SC2 when even ZvT was eft up... Just get them before ultras or get them before brood/infestor. Those kind of things are just unfair because on the highest level where least mistakes are made they always favor the race which is the most forgiving and with the most macro potential. Now in current state of the game ZvT is okay, but ZvP is a joke and everyone sees that. There is no protoss in the world who can beat a Zerg if both are highest level and both play an even game, no one. And its not like Serral is unbeatable, its just that in ZvP by design and macro mechanics its a requirement for Protoss to surprise this kind of player because they are playing at a disadvantage for most of the game. Its stupid. Will it ever change? No, but why close our eyes against it?
To sum it up in RTS I think that on the highest level if one player has better tools at their disposal then the other, its a problem and clear inbalance and its what ZvP has been for ages. Those two races are polar opposites and while there are tactics the Protoss can use to exploit this in their advantages, they are less and less effective the higher level your opponent is. That is why there is such a huge discrepancy between standard ladder and top players. The skill cap of the Zerg is just too high compared to Protoss....
There's not even enough data to say that. It could also be that the very top of zerg players is just better than the very top of protoss players at the game. We cannot positively state that if Serral had chosen protoss instead of zerg he wouldn't be dominating, there's no direct evidence of that.
All we can state is that there's not a ton of hope and that we should behave accordingly.
Thats why observation, logic, and actual in game experience with the races at a high level are important instead of just being a pure data nerd. You hear that all the time there's not enough data to tell this, not enough data to claim that...
There's no level of observation or logic that will allow you to answer this type of question, and if you've ever heard 80% of pros talk you know that in game experience increases your bias rather than the quality of your data.
That I can't agree with, there's almost always a way to answer anything correctly that we can directly experience. Wombat and Fanatic Templar had very good posts to counter you.
Also the simplest strong evidence of protoss's weakness in this matchup is Serral. I'm watching him 4-0 Trap right now in TSL 8, the only protoss who has been very successful this year. Serral almost always absolutely demolishes protoss in particular while he struggles plenty vs terran and zerg. He shows just how helpless protoss is when zerg plays correctly.
I don't know what argument you think you're answering but it's not the argument I have. It is obvious that protoss is by miles the weakest race at the very highest level of play. This doesn't answer the question of whether it happens because protoss is weak or because the few people who have enough skill to be at the highest level of play, let's say 5 or 6 people, just coincidentally all happened to not pick protoss at the start of the game years ago.
This is a question that can't be answered. We cannot directly experience a world in which Serral chose to play protoss instead of zerg. That's the entirety of the issue. Maybe if Serral was protoss and Trap was zerg Serral would still have 4-0ed in this match, and we would be having a thread about how zerg can't win at the top level. Or maybe not. It's impossible to say.
We don't have to say it, however, since either way the end result is that protoss is not winning, and you and I are rooting for protoss. As a consequence, I once again did the sane thing this afternoon and I didn't watch Trap play vs Serral, which means I had a much happier afternoon than you
First of all if a race is strong enough its extremely unlikely the good people just decided not to pick it, generally player strength will average out pretty closely with similarly strong races. There's too large of a player pool for that.
We don't need to directly experience such a world, the player who is taking 70% of protoss tournament wins (Trap) consistently being crushed like a bronze league noob demonstrates the race is just bad.
Not really true, because we're talking about a very limited sample size of players. But again I'm not sure why you're so invested in the difference between the two, it weakens your argument for no discernable gain.
I think you're looking at only the small amount of top pros in saying very limited sample size of players? But there are millions of players who have played this game and any one of them could've decided to pursue tournament winnings or a pro career which must inevitably be narrowed down to a small amount of players at the highest level. So yes if a race isn't too weak the players who chose it won't be abnormally unskilled. There are clearly lots of high level protoss players on the ladder yet the race gets crushed against a zerg who can play quite correctly.
It doesn't matter anyway, even the fact that this thread is so active right now with so many people discussing what problems make this race the weakest in the game shows that its not an issue of the best players happening to not choose protoss. If that was the case it would be clear that the race is fine but its players are just getting outplayed. That is not the case, again Trap should not be constantly getting roflstomped by Serral like he's nothing.
No the fact that many people are posting in this thread isn't evidence of anything, you're getting desperate to prove something that you don't need to prove and I don't know why you're doing it.
He was right in his last post though. There is clear evidence that at the highest level, specifically talking about ZvP if both play perfectly, there is not chance for Protoss to win, no matter how they play. Toss can only rely on the Zerg to make a mistake in the perception of the game. Take Trap vs Reynor and Trap vs Serral as examples I think that tells the whole story. Trap won against Reynor because he caught him off guard with timing attacks which the Zerg didnt anticipate properly = Zergs mistake, well punished. But against Serral, a lot more solid player with perfect game awareness, he looked like a diamond scrub, and he didnt necesarily even have to play trash, just he didnt manage to outsmart the Zerg. Is this how they game is supposed to be? When both players play solid one race is clearly superior by design so they auto-win if they other race does not surprise them? Its bullshit, but its how it is. I remember times in SC2 when even ZvT was eft up... Just get them before ultras or get them before brood/infestor. Those kind of things are just unfair because on the highest level where least mistakes are made they always favor the race which is the most forgiving and with the most macro potential. Now in current state of the game ZvT is okay, but ZvP is a joke and everyone sees that. There is no protoss in the world who can beat a Zerg if both are highest level and both play an even game, no one. And its not like Serral is unbeatable, its just that in ZvP by design and macro mechanics its a requirement for Protoss to surprise this kind of player because they are playing at a disadvantage for most of the game. Its stupid. Will it ever change? No, but why close our eyes against it?
To sum it up in RTS I think that on the highest level if one player has better tools at their disposal then the other, its a problem and clear inbalance and its what ZvP has been for ages. Those two races are polar opposites and while there are tactics the Protoss can use to exploit this in their advantages, they are less and less effective the higher level your opponent is. That is why there is such a huge discrepancy between standard ladder and top players. The skill cap of the Zerg is just too high compared to Protoss....
That is exactly correct I just have no idea how to convince that guy of it. It's not acceptable for any race in this game to have such a problem.
Yes, we need a buff for protoss that only affects top tier matchups such as Trap vs Serral, without affecting the general balance of the ladder or lower tier matchups such as Trap vs Reynor.
On December 16 2021 17:11 Ronski wrote: Yes, we need a buff for protoss that only affects top tier matchups such as Trap vs Serral, without affecting the general balance of the ladder or lower tier matchups such as Trap vs Reynor.
It's not about buffing you troll.
It's about replacing mechanics that are easy to use and powerful but rely on the enemy messing up with mechanics that are more solid, maybe a bit weaker but with higher skill ceiling.
Simple examples again: weaken AoE and forcefield, increase mobility and core fighting unit strength.
With mobility and gateway units that don't have to run away from fights without AoE the natural skill ceiling is already much higher, because army movement alone and the ability to not having to micro every single squad and still have them trade somewhat effectively will enable players to try and outsmart their opponents using those tools.
On December 16 2021 00:46 Elantris wrote: Why would you even care about GM ladder population? This is a problem for a very small amount of people meanwhile protoss tournament perfomance problems affect all the viewers.
I tell you why. Because this absolutely irrelevant GM ladder distribution is last resort for toss haters.
Protoss tournament results affect even smaller amount of players. Sorry for me playing the game and not just watching and wanting to have a better ladder experience. (fun fact, I main Protoss)
You enjoy protoss ladder experience?
No? But at the same time I see who I am able to defeat just by marching across the map. which is the issue - yes, top level Protoss require buff, FFS don't buff Protoss on the ladder.
On December 16 2021 10:08 xPrimuSx wrote: Clearly there is a disconnect between Protoss as a ladder race and as a competitive race. Looking at Aligulac, it's frequently the lagging race (consistently since the March 28, 2018 stat update and for long periods before that), yet has the highest percentage of mirror matches indicating a large portion of active players that are able to make it to a high level of play with them. This would seem to speak to them being easier to play at a high level but falling off at the highest level, so what's going on with them? Like I'm sure everyone else here, I have some thoughts
Macro Protoss base building is more forgiving. A single Probe can set an entire base to be built in seconds and then return to mining. Zerg loses workers to build a structure and requires use of Queens' abilities to maximize territory where something can be built and having larva to actually use for building. Terran is in between with each structure concurrently built eating up worker time, but ultimately the SCV returns to the active and available population. If you fall behind, a Probe can quickly spend your money, it's harder for Terran or Zerg to similarly rapidly build structures without harming economy or army in the event you fell behind.
Similarly, unit production requires less effort for Toss thanks to warpgate allowing money to quickly be spent at the cost of building some excess gateways and a pylon somewhere on the map. They are also the weakest with their tech/power units building out slowly from structures that are normally quite limited in total amount available at any given time. While Zerg has the most powerful production capability, it requires a player to be good with their injects to get the most benefit. Terran is again somewhere in the middle balancing out reactors vs tech labs and how many of each production structure. So at low levels a Protoss can spend money faster to get units on the field and at less effort than their opponents, while at high levels and the relative weakness of those same units they fall behind, being limited by the production of more powerful units, DTs and HTs the obvious exception.
So, overall weaker players have more leeway with Protoss to build bases and get an army onto the field. At the highest level where these strengths really don't matter as the limitations for Terran and Zerg macro don't really factor due to strong player mechanics the more flexible production of the other two races provides them more options
Micro: Terran bio and basically all Zerg composition benefit from player control. Even when the composition used by Zerg relies more on slow or by nature static units (Brood Lords, Lurkers) the need to pair them with spell casters to maximize efficiency keeps micro requirements throughout. Terran mech is more about positioning with the units needing less babying in combat and is different skill set to learn.
Protoss meanwhile, Zealots are dumbfire missiles, particularly after charge. DTs can micro some but really it's just about closing the distance and then running away as they lack the agility of Speedlings. Blink Stalkers can be very micro intensive but the gains are limited due to the inherent lack of power of the unit, meaning it's best to either use blink to pounce on or run away from an army. Since Barrier is not on demand Immortals lack options, Colossi have never particularly required micro. Prism juggling introduces some micro, but with the range nerf and cost increase it also creates a lot of vulnerability. The spell casters of course do require micro but since storm doesn't stack, feedback doesn't kill anything, Terran units are all ranged and Zerg has Ravagers, and disruptors become prohibitive at large numbers you just expend your abilities at the start of a fight and then try to pick good targets thereafter. There's also the fact that the core of the Protoss army is weak and the race is entirely dependent on splash, so unlike Terran and Zerg small detachment forces can't really do that much versus the cost of the units in that force.
Again we're in a situation where at lower levels, Protoss works better with limited control and benefits less from improved mechanics as you skill up
Decision making/Tech: Zerg is incredibly flexible. Terran has rigid tracks but it's not too costly to switch between them and you can dip in between them to mix things up. Protoss tech is expensive, rigid, and easily scoutable the better you get. At low levels the power of Protoss splash evaporates armies and being able to scout is a skill people are trying to learn so being scoutable isn't really an issue. At high levels you can open up the Book, but at the highest level the other races have seen the tricks and learned the counters, additionally you have limited ability to really switch it up.
Taking everything together, Protoss is more forgiving on errors in macro, does better with poorer micro, and the rigid decision making makes it more straightforward to learn and play while learning granting ladder players many advantages over the other races. As you get better all of these things don't really matter and become more limitations, showing weaknesses at the highest level since the things that made the other races appear weaker at lower level don't matter at the highest level due to the increase in player skill and ability
Protoss macro is actually less forgiving, yes, sure, you can easily build buildings, but the issue is you have to use chrono properly, you have to evaluate the time of robo/stargate properly. It is way more punishing because these structures produce the key units, other races don't have such key units. If you properly macroed from the rest of the buildings you still have strong bio - sure, without tanks/medevacs it's less viable but it works. FFS 3-rax push works while gateway push is like - sure, uh, yeah, i need a robo unit there.
Also you don't have any "catch up" mechanic in the terms of workers. If zerg loses 20 drones, they can rebuild them most of the time right away. Probes? Nah. SCVs? Terran goes MULEs. Protoss economic is the most weak to the harassment.
Obviously some of these won't apply to the top level, but saying Protoss macro is the least (yea, i'm an idiot) most forgiving isn't exactly true. Especially when you go as general as you go.
Edit> similarly zerg macro is more and less forgiving - depends how you look at it. You can easily tech switch, you can build shitload of units at a time, you can replace workers quickly. At the same time the most valuable resource of Zerg is larvae. If you don't have any when you need to produce units(be it attacking/workers/support) then you're most probably dead as 1 queen per hatchery won't be sufficient(meaning the production of queens).
Every race has its own pros and cons and you can't say that Protoss macro is the most forgiving when there are aspects of it which makes it the opposite.
Disagree about Protoss micro. Zerg definitely requires less micro than Protoss. Zerg is mostly about setting up good engagements and multitasking but there's very little actual unit micro compared to Protoss.
There's not even enough data to say that. It could also be that the very top of zerg players is just better than the very top of protoss players at the game. We cannot positively state that if Serral had chosen protoss instead of zerg he wouldn't be dominating, there's no direct evidence of that.
All we can state is that there's not a ton of hope and that we should behave accordingly.
Thats why observation, logic, and actual in game experience with the races at a high level are important instead of just being a pure data nerd. You hear that all the time there's not enough data to tell this, not enough data to claim that...
There's no level of observation or logic that will allow you to answer this type of question, and if you've ever heard 80% of pros talk you know that in game experience increases your bias rather than the quality of your data.
That I can't agree with, there's almost always a way to answer anything correctly that we can directly experience. Wombat and Fanatic Templar had very good posts to counter you.
Also the simplest strong evidence of protoss's weakness in this matchup is Serral. I'm watching him 4-0 Trap right now in TSL 8, the only protoss who has been very successful this year. Serral almost always absolutely demolishes protoss in particular while he struggles plenty vs terran and zerg. He shows just how helpless protoss is when zerg plays correctly.
I don't know what argument you think you're answering but it's not the argument I have. It is obvious that protoss is by miles the weakest race at the very highest level of play. This doesn't answer the question of whether it happens because protoss is weak or because the few people who have enough skill to be at the highest level of play, let's say 5 or 6 people, just coincidentally all happened to not pick protoss at the start of the game years ago.
This is a question that can't be answered. We cannot directly experience a world in which Serral chose to play protoss instead of zerg. That's the entirety of the issue. Maybe if Serral was protoss and Trap was zerg Serral would still have 4-0ed in this match, and we would be having a thread about how zerg can't win at the top level. Or maybe not. It's impossible to say.
We don't have to say it, however, since either way the end result is that protoss is not winning, and you and I are rooting for protoss. As a consequence, I once again did the sane thing this afternoon and I didn't watch Trap play vs Serral, which means I had a much happier afternoon than you
First of all if a race is strong enough its extremely unlikely the good people just decided not to pick it, generally player strength will average out pretty closely with similarly strong races. There's too large of a player pool for that.
We don't need to directly experience such a world, the player who is taking 70% of protoss tournament wins (Trap) consistently being crushed like a bronze league noob demonstrates the race is just bad.
Not really true, because we're talking about a very limited sample size of players. But again I'm not sure why you're so invested in the difference between the two, it weakens your argument for no discernable gain.
I think you're looking at only the small amount of top pros in saying very limited sample size of players? But there are millions of players who have played this game and any one of them could've decided to pursue tournament winnings or a pro career which must inevitably be narrowed down to a small amount of players at the highest level. So yes if a race isn't too weak the players who chose it won't be abnormally unskilled. There are clearly lots of high level protoss players on the ladder yet the race gets crushed against a zerg who can play quite correctly.
It doesn't matter anyway, even the fact that this thread is so active right now with so many people discussing what problems make this race the weakest in the game shows that its not an issue of the best players happening to not choose protoss. If that was the case it would be clear that the race is fine but its players are just getting outplayed. That is not the case, again Trap should not be constantly getting roflstomped by Serral like he's nothing.
No the fact that many people are posting in this thread isn't evidence of anything, you're getting desperate to prove something that you don't need to prove and I don't know why you're doing it.
He was right in his last post though. There is clear evidence that at the highest level, specifically talking about ZvP if both play perfectly, there is not chance for Protoss to win, no matter how they play. Toss can only rely on the Zerg to make a mistake in the perception of the game. Take Trap vs Reynor and Trap vs Serral as examples I think that tells the whole story. Trap won against Reynor because he caught him off guard with timing attacks which the Zerg didnt anticipate properly = Zergs mistake, well punished. But against Serral, a lot more solid player with perfect game awareness, he looked like a diamond scrub, and he didnt necesarily even have to play trash, just he didnt manage to outsmart the Zerg. Is this how they game is supposed to be? When both players play solid one race is clearly superior by design so they auto-win if they other race does not surprise them? Its bullshit, but its how it is. I remember times in SC2 when even ZvT was eft up... Just get them before ultras or get them before brood/infestor. Those kind of things are just unfair because on the highest level where least mistakes are made they always favor the race which is the most forgiving and with the most macro potential. Now in current state of the game ZvT is okay, but ZvP is a joke and everyone sees that. There is no protoss in the world who can beat a Zerg if both are highest level and both play an even game, no one. And its not like Serral is unbeatable, its just that in ZvP by design and macro mechanics its a requirement for Protoss to surprise this kind of player because they are playing at a disadvantage for most of the game. Its stupid. Will it ever change? No, but why close our eyes against it?
To sum it up in RTS I think that on the highest level if one player has better tools at their disposal then the other, its a problem and clear inbalance and its what ZvP has been for ages. Those two races are polar opposites and while there are tactics the Protoss can use to exploit this in their advantages, they are less and less effective the higher level your opponent is. That is why there is such a huge discrepancy between standard ladder and top players. The skill cap of the Zerg is just too high compared to Protoss....
It is extremely obvious that at the top level of play protoss doesn't win, I've been saying that throughout the thread and it's the reason why I'm not watching Starcraft. This guy is trying to demonstrate to me that this can only be due to race and not to the fact that 5 or 6 people at the highest level are just better than the rest and happen to not play protoss, which he doesn't need to do and he obviously doesn't have evidence for because there's no way to have evidence for that.
I think almost every single one of my posts in this thread contains the idea that protoss is weak at top level, it is kind of impressive that you would manage to miss that.
On December 16 2021 21:19 Charoisaur wrote: Disagree about Protoss micro. Zerg definitely requires less micro than Protoss. Zerg is mostly about setting up good engagements and multitasking but there's very little actual unit micro compared to Protoss.
True for the midgame (well except maybe the void styles), but i'd say the lategame caster army from zerg does require more than a little :D
As much as I'm glad that protoss weakness is finally being address after like 4 years here on TL instead of being frowned upon as a balance whining, this is all moot since Blizzard will never patch the game again. PvZ will remain as a broken matchup at the top competitive levels for good.
All I am seeing in this thread is people showing evidence again and again to support that protoss is too weak against zerg in the highest level, but zerg fan bois just completely evade the issue (we all know why) and instead argue that buffs and changes cannot be made because it will affect the balance in the lower tiers ("OMG...TOO MANY PROTOSSES IN EUROPE GOLD LEAGUE!"), like anyone f cares 😂 let's just all leave the game and let starcraft be a zvz fest.
On November 14 2021 07:12 Woosixion wrote: if you ask me, as the easiest race this is exactly what they deserve.. easier/less stressful wins against the vast majority of starcraft players but hitting a wall at the tippity top
So you just want one of the three races to simply not be viable at the top? That's a weird way of looking at things.
On December 12 2021 02:42 NinjaNight wrote: [quote]
Thats why observation, logic, and actual in game experience with the races at a high level are important instead of just being a pure data nerd. You hear that all the time there's not enough data to tell this, not enough data to claim that...
There's no level of observation or logic that will allow you to answer this type of question, and if you've ever heard 80% of pros talk you know that in game experience increases your bias rather than the quality of your data.
That I can't agree with, there's almost always a way to answer anything correctly that we can directly experience. Wombat and Fanatic Templar had very good posts to counter you.
Also the simplest strong evidence of protoss's weakness in this matchup is Serral. I'm watching him 4-0 Trap right now in TSL 8, the only protoss who has been very successful this year. Serral almost always absolutely demolishes protoss in particular while he struggles plenty vs terran and zerg. He shows just how helpless protoss is when zerg plays correctly.
I don't know what argument you think you're answering but it's not the argument I have. It is obvious that protoss is by miles the weakest race at the very highest level of play. This doesn't answer the question of whether it happens because protoss is weak or because the few people who have enough skill to be at the highest level of play, let's say 5 or 6 people, just coincidentally all happened to not pick protoss at the start of the game years ago.
This is a question that can't be answered. We cannot directly experience a world in which Serral chose to play protoss instead of zerg. That's the entirety of the issue. Maybe if Serral was protoss and Trap was zerg Serral would still have 4-0ed in this match, and we would be having a thread about how zerg can't win at the top level. Or maybe not. It's impossible to say.
We don't have to say it, however, since either way the end result is that protoss is not winning, and you and I are rooting for protoss. As a consequence, I once again did the sane thing this afternoon and I didn't watch Trap play vs Serral, which means I had a much happier afternoon than you
First of all if a race is strong enough its extremely unlikely the good people just decided not to pick it, generally player strength will average out pretty closely with similarly strong races. There's too large of a player pool for that.
We don't need to directly experience such a world, the player who is taking 70% of protoss tournament wins (Trap) consistently being crushed like a bronze league noob demonstrates the race is just bad.
Not really true, because we're talking about a very limited sample size of players. But again I'm not sure why you're so invested in the difference between the two, it weakens your argument for no discernable gain.
I think you're looking at only the small amount of top pros in saying very limited sample size of players? But there are millions of players who have played this game and any one of them could've decided to pursue tournament winnings or a pro career which must inevitably be narrowed down to a small amount of players at the highest level. So yes if a race isn't too weak the players who chose it won't be abnormally unskilled. There are clearly lots of high level protoss players on the ladder yet the race gets crushed against a zerg who can play quite correctly.
It doesn't matter anyway, even the fact that this thread is so active right now with so many people discussing what problems make this race the weakest in the game shows that its not an issue of the best players happening to not choose protoss. If that was the case it would be clear that the race is fine but its players are just getting outplayed. That is not the case, again Trap should not be constantly getting roflstomped by Serral like he's nothing.
No the fact that many people are posting in this thread isn't evidence of anything, you're getting desperate to prove something that you don't need to prove and I don't know why you're doing it.
He was right in his last post though. There is clear evidence that at the highest level, specifically talking about ZvP if both play perfectly, there is not chance for Protoss to win, no matter how they play. Toss can only rely on the Zerg to make a mistake in the perception of the game. Take Trap vs Reynor and Trap vs Serral as examples I think that tells the whole story. Trap won against Reynor because he caught him off guard with timing attacks which the Zerg didnt anticipate properly = Zergs mistake, well punished. But against Serral, a lot more solid player with perfect game awareness, he looked like a diamond scrub, and he didnt necesarily even have to play trash, just he didnt manage to outsmart the Zerg. Is this how they game is supposed to be? When both players play solid one race is clearly superior by design so they auto-win if they other race does not surprise them? Its bullshit, but its how it is. I remember times in SC2 when even ZvT was eft up... Just get them before ultras or get them before brood/infestor. Those kind of things are just unfair because on the highest level where least mistakes are made they always favor the race which is the most forgiving and with the most macro potential. Now in current state of the game ZvT is okay, but ZvP is a joke and everyone sees that. There is no protoss in the world who can beat a Zerg if both are highest level and both play an even game, no one. And its not like Serral is unbeatable, its just that in ZvP by design and macro mechanics its a requirement for Protoss to surprise this kind of player because they are playing at a disadvantage for most of the game. Its stupid. Will it ever change? No, but why close our eyes against it?
To sum it up in RTS I think that on the highest level if one player has better tools at their disposal then the other, its a problem and clear inbalance and its what ZvP has been for ages. Those two races are polar opposites and while there are tactics the Protoss can use to exploit this in their advantages, they are less and less effective the higher level your opponent is. That is why there is such a huge discrepancy between standard ladder and top players. The skill cap of the Zerg is just too high compared to Protoss....
It is extremely obvious that at the top level of play protoss doesn't win, I've been saying that throughout the thread and it's the reason why I'm not watching Starcraft. This guy is trying to demonstrate to me that this can only be due to race and not to the fact that 5 or 6 people at the highest level are just better than the rest and happen to not play protoss, which he doesn't need to do and he obviously doesn't have evidence for because there's no way to have evidence for that.
I think almost every single one of my posts in this thread contains the idea that protoss is weak at top level, it is kind of impressive that you would manage to miss that.
Your refusal to accept anything as evidence doesn't mean evidence doesn't exist. You always ignore the Trap vs Serral conundrum for instance and cherry pick anything else to detract from the overall idea. Here you have a similarly skilled player getting demolished, it IS evidence even if its not perfect proof. Evidence doesn't mean the same thing as complete proof maybe thats your problem. As he said there's plenty of clear evidence that protoss relies on the zerg to make major mistakes in perception otherwise zerg will pretty much always win.
On December 16 2021 19:30 deacon.frost wrote: Protoss macro is actually less forgiving, yes, sure, you can easily build buildings, but the issue is you have to use chrono properly, you have to evaluate the time of robo/stargate properly. It is way more punishing because these structures produce the key units, other races don't have such key units. If you properly macroed from the rest of the buildings you still have strong bio - sure, without tanks/medevacs it's less viable but it works. FFS 3-rax push works while gateway push is like - sure, uh, yeah, i need a robo unit there.
Also you don't have any "catch up" mechanic in the terms of workers. If zerg loses 20 drones, they can rebuild them most of the time right away. Probes? Nah. SCVs? Terran goes MULEs. Protoss economic is the most weak to the harassment.
Obviously some of these won't apply to the top level, but saying Protoss macro is the least (yea, i'm an idiot) most forgiving isn't exactly true. Especially when you go as general as you go.
Edit> similarly zerg macro is more and less forgiving - depends how you look at it. You can easily tech switch, you can build shitload of units at a time, you can replace workers quickly. At the same time the most valuable resource of Zerg is larvae. If you don't have any when you need to produce units(be it attacking/workers/support) then you're most probably dead as 1 queen per hatchery won't be sufficient(meaning the production of queens).
Every race has its own pros and cons and you can't say that Protoss macro is the most forgiving when there are aspects of it which makes it the opposite.
I feel I wasn't fully clear in my post, I'm talking about the game as a whole trying to look at how Protoss can dominate the ladder (looking at all players) and have favorable odds in match-ups (looking at the top several hundred players) yet still be the consistent lagging race (looking only at the top 5 players of each race) for years. For players of lower skill level Protoss has a much more straightforward economy and macro mechanics that hurt you less for not keeping up with. Even pros will have Nexuses with tons of energy and no one really makes a big deal of it. If you're floating a ton of resources Protoss has an easier time dumping it into infrastructure and units that can quickly be on the battlefield across most skill levels.
If you don't chrono something you're a lot less behind then missing injects or not using MULEs. Of course, as you get higher in skill the weaknesses of Protoss macro become more apparent since players for the other races aren't making those kinds of errors, I stated as much at the end of what I wrote. Still, even for the highest end of the ladder there is still a large difference between them and pros, just take a look at any of PiGs "pro player does something stupid on the ladder" videos where due to superior mechanics and decision making the pro still wins a good chunk of the time despite doing a bunch of stupid stuff and playing with an assortment of limitations.
On December 16 2021 21:19 Charoisaur wrote: Disagree about Protoss micro. Zerg definitely requires less micro than Protoss. Zerg is mostly about setting up good engagements and multitasking but there's very little actual unit micro compared to Protoss.
Already commented on darklycid with regards to late game PvZ, but even in early or midgame plays Queen transfusion, Muta-Ling-Bling style compositions require effort to control and move around, just like MMM because if you're not keeping them on the move and forcing the opponent to have to be everywhere too, you're losing out on a lot of the power of the army. Protoss units mostly get micro from spell usage which is going to have a hard limit in a battle because energy eventually runs out. How many times have we seen Toss armies evaporate once they're out of storms and forcefields? Other ways of micro have been nerfed considerably, Blink, Prism juggling, etc. Again, my general point that at lower skills levels Protoss tends to have higher power with less control, making Protoss feel a lot stronger until you get to the highest skill levels were everyone has good control so the over reliance Protoss has on power units makes them more vulnerable.
It's that general reason why though I liked the idea as suggested a few times in this thread of something like making Guardian Shield reduce melee damage too, ultimately I feel it's a bad idea because it's another binary skill that will help pros but likely disproportionately help ladder players generating more "Protoss OP, must nerf!" whining.
There's no level of observation or logic that will allow you to answer this type of question, and if you've ever heard 80% of pros talk you know that in game experience increases your bias rather than the quality of your data.
That I can't agree with, there's almost always a way to answer anything correctly that we can directly experience. Wombat and Fanatic Templar had very good posts to counter you.
Also the simplest strong evidence of protoss's weakness in this matchup is Serral. I'm watching him 4-0 Trap right now in TSL 8, the only protoss who has been very successful this year. Serral almost always absolutely demolishes protoss in particular while he struggles plenty vs terran and zerg. He shows just how helpless protoss is when zerg plays correctly.
I don't know what argument you think you're answering but it's not the argument I have. It is obvious that protoss is by miles the weakest race at the very highest level of play. This doesn't answer the question of whether it happens because protoss is weak or because the few people who have enough skill to be at the highest level of play, let's say 5 or 6 people, just coincidentally all happened to not pick protoss at the start of the game years ago.
This is a question that can't be answered. We cannot directly experience a world in which Serral chose to play protoss instead of zerg. That's the entirety of the issue. Maybe if Serral was protoss and Trap was zerg Serral would still have 4-0ed in this match, and we would be having a thread about how zerg can't win at the top level. Or maybe not. It's impossible to say.
We don't have to say it, however, since either way the end result is that protoss is not winning, and you and I are rooting for protoss. As a consequence, I once again did the sane thing this afternoon and I didn't watch Trap play vs Serral, which means I had a much happier afternoon than you
First of all if a race is strong enough its extremely unlikely the good people just decided not to pick it, generally player strength will average out pretty closely with similarly strong races. There's too large of a player pool for that.
We don't need to directly experience such a world, the player who is taking 70% of protoss tournament wins (Trap) consistently being crushed like a bronze league noob demonstrates the race is just bad.
Not really true, because we're talking about a very limited sample size of players. But again I'm not sure why you're so invested in the difference between the two, it weakens your argument for no discernable gain.
I think you're looking at only the small amount of top pros in saying very limited sample size of players? But there are millions of players who have played this game and any one of them could've decided to pursue tournament winnings or a pro career which must inevitably be narrowed down to a small amount of players at the highest level. So yes if a race isn't too weak the players who chose it won't be abnormally unskilled. There are clearly lots of high level protoss players on the ladder yet the race gets crushed against a zerg who can play quite correctly.
It doesn't matter anyway, even the fact that this thread is so active right now with so many people discussing what problems make this race the weakest in the game shows that its not an issue of the best players happening to not choose protoss. If that was the case it would be clear that the race is fine but its players are just getting outplayed. That is not the case, again Trap should not be constantly getting roflstomped by Serral like he's nothing.
No the fact that many people are posting in this thread isn't evidence of anything, you're getting desperate to prove something that you don't need to prove and I don't know why you're doing it.
He was right in his last post though. There is clear evidence that at the highest level, specifically talking about ZvP if both play perfectly, there is not chance for Protoss to win, no matter how they play. Toss can only rely on the Zerg to make a mistake in the perception of the game. Take Trap vs Reynor and Trap vs Serral as examples I think that tells the whole story. Trap won against Reynor because he caught him off guard with timing attacks which the Zerg didnt anticipate properly = Zergs mistake, well punished. But against Serral, a lot more solid player with perfect game awareness, he looked like a diamond scrub, and he didnt necesarily even have to play trash, just he didnt manage to outsmart the Zerg. Is this how they game is supposed to be? When both players play solid one race is clearly superior by design so they auto-win if they other race does not surprise them? Its bullshit, but its how it is. I remember times in SC2 when even ZvT was eft up... Just get them before ultras or get them before brood/infestor. Those kind of things are just unfair because on the highest level where least mistakes are made they always favor the race which is the most forgiving and with the most macro potential. Now in current state of the game ZvT is okay, but ZvP is a joke and everyone sees that. There is no protoss in the world who can beat a Zerg if both are highest level and both play an even game, no one. And its not like Serral is unbeatable, its just that in ZvP by design and macro mechanics its a requirement for Protoss to surprise this kind of player because they are playing at a disadvantage for most of the game. Its stupid. Will it ever change? No, but why close our eyes against it?
To sum it up in RTS I think that on the highest level if one player has better tools at their disposal then the other, its a problem and clear inbalance and its what ZvP has been for ages. Those two races are polar opposites and while there are tactics the Protoss can use to exploit this in their advantages, they are less and less effective the higher level your opponent is. That is why there is such a huge discrepancy between standard ladder and top players. The skill cap of the Zerg is just too high compared to Protoss....
It is extremely obvious that at the top level of play protoss doesn't win, I've been saying that throughout the thread and it's the reason why I'm not watching Starcraft. This guy is trying to demonstrate to me that this can only be due to race and not to the fact that 5 or 6 people at the highest level are just better than the rest and happen to not play protoss, which he doesn't need to do and he obviously doesn't have evidence for because there's no way to have evidence for that.
I think almost every single one of my posts in this thread contains the idea that protoss is weak at top level, it is kind of impressive that you would manage to miss that.
Your refusal to accept anything as evidence doesn't mean evidence doesn't exist. You always ignore the Trap vs Serral conundrum for instance and cherry pick anything else to detract from the overall idea. Here you have a similarly skilled player getting demolished, it IS evidence even if its not perfect proof. Evidence doesn't mean the same thing as complete proof maybe thats your problem. As he said there's plenty of clear evidence that protoss relies on the zerg to make major mistakes in perception otherwise zerg will pretty much always win.
If you don't have complete proof do you acknowledge that there's a possibility that the other scenario is right?
On November 14 2021 07:12 Woosixion wrote: if you ask me, as the easiest race this is exactly what they deserve.. easier/less stressful wins against the vast majority of starcraft players but hitting a wall at the tippity top
So you just want one of the three races to simply not be viable at the top? That's a weird way of looking at things.
How could protoss not be viable at the top when the top made more money than the other races this year though? The premise that protoss are not successful at the top level while still being too present in GM / ladder is false. That does not mean that balance / design can't be improved though, it is true that the PvZ match-up has become painful to watch (and probably play) although it's somewhat balanced
On November 14 2021 07:12 Woosixion wrote: if you ask me, as the easiest race this is exactly what they deserve.. easier/less stressful wins against the vast majority of starcraft players but hitting a wall at the tippity top
So you just want one of the three races to simply not be viable at the top? That's a weird way of looking at things.
How could protoss not be viable at the top when the top made more money than the other races this year though? The premise that protoss are not successful at the top level while still being too present in GM / ladder is false. That does not mean that balance / design can't be improved though, it is true that the PvZ match-up has become painful to watch (and probably play) although it's somewhat balanced
Not commenting on any of that, merely the fact that he doesn't want one of the 3 core races of a video game to be viable at the top, which is a really weird thing to want. "I wish this game had less variety"
On December 13 2021 01:13 NinjaNight wrote: [quote]
That I can't agree with, there's almost always a way to answer anything correctly that we can directly experience. Wombat and Fanatic Templar had very good posts to counter you.
Also the simplest strong evidence of protoss's weakness in this matchup is Serral. I'm watching him 4-0 Trap right now in TSL 8, the only protoss who has been very successful this year. Serral almost always absolutely demolishes protoss in particular while he struggles plenty vs terran and zerg. He shows just how helpless protoss is when zerg plays correctly.
I don't know what argument you think you're answering but it's not the argument I have. It is obvious that protoss is by miles the weakest race at the very highest level of play. This doesn't answer the question of whether it happens because protoss is weak or because the few people who have enough skill to be at the highest level of play, let's say 5 or 6 people, just coincidentally all happened to not pick protoss at the start of the game years ago.
This is a question that can't be answered. We cannot directly experience a world in which Serral chose to play protoss instead of zerg. That's the entirety of the issue. Maybe if Serral was protoss and Trap was zerg Serral would still have 4-0ed in this match, and we would be having a thread about how zerg can't win at the top level. Or maybe not. It's impossible to say.
We don't have to say it, however, since either way the end result is that protoss is not winning, and you and I are rooting for protoss. As a consequence, I once again did the sane thing this afternoon and I didn't watch Trap play vs Serral, which means I had a much happier afternoon than you
First of all if a race is strong enough its extremely unlikely the good people just decided not to pick it, generally player strength will average out pretty closely with similarly strong races. There's too large of a player pool for that.
We don't need to directly experience such a world, the player who is taking 70% of protoss tournament wins (Trap) consistently being crushed like a bronze league noob demonstrates the race is just bad.
Not really true, because we're talking about a very limited sample size of players. But again I'm not sure why you're so invested in the difference between the two, it weakens your argument for no discernable gain.
I think you're looking at only the small amount of top pros in saying very limited sample size of players? But there are millions of players who have played this game and any one of them could've decided to pursue tournament winnings or a pro career which must inevitably be narrowed down to a small amount of players at the highest level. So yes if a race isn't too weak the players who chose it won't be abnormally unskilled. There are clearly lots of high level protoss players on the ladder yet the race gets crushed against a zerg who can play quite correctly.
It doesn't matter anyway, even the fact that this thread is so active right now with so many people discussing what problems make this race the weakest in the game shows that its not an issue of the best players happening to not choose protoss. If that was the case it would be clear that the race is fine but its players are just getting outplayed. That is not the case, again Trap should not be constantly getting roflstomped by Serral like he's nothing.
No the fact that many people are posting in this thread isn't evidence of anything, you're getting desperate to prove something that you don't need to prove and I don't know why you're doing it.
He was right in his last post though. There is clear evidence that at the highest level, specifically talking about ZvP if both play perfectly, there is not chance for Protoss to win, no matter how they play. Toss can only rely on the Zerg to make a mistake in the perception of the game. Take Trap vs Reynor and Trap vs Serral as examples I think that tells the whole story. Trap won against Reynor because he caught him off guard with timing attacks which the Zerg didnt anticipate properly = Zergs mistake, well punished. But against Serral, a lot more solid player with perfect game awareness, he looked like a diamond scrub, and he didnt necesarily even have to play trash, just he didnt manage to outsmart the Zerg. Is this how they game is supposed to be? When both players play solid one race is clearly superior by design so they auto-win if they other race does not surprise them? Its bullshit, but its how it is. I remember times in SC2 when even ZvT was eft up... Just get them before ultras or get them before brood/infestor. Those kind of things are just unfair because on the highest level where least mistakes are made they always favor the race which is the most forgiving and with the most macro potential. Now in current state of the game ZvT is okay, but ZvP is a joke and everyone sees that. There is no protoss in the world who can beat a Zerg if both are highest level and both play an even game, no one. And its not like Serral is unbeatable, its just that in ZvP by design and macro mechanics its a requirement for Protoss to surprise this kind of player because they are playing at a disadvantage for most of the game. Its stupid. Will it ever change? No, but why close our eyes against it?
To sum it up in RTS I think that on the highest level if one player has better tools at their disposal then the other, its a problem and clear inbalance and its what ZvP has been for ages. Those two races are polar opposites and while there are tactics the Protoss can use to exploit this in their advantages, they are less and less effective the higher level your opponent is. That is why there is such a huge discrepancy between standard ladder and top players. The skill cap of the Zerg is just too high compared to Protoss....
It is extremely obvious that at the top level of play protoss doesn't win, I've been saying that throughout the thread and it's the reason why I'm not watching Starcraft. This guy is trying to demonstrate to me that this can only be due to race and not to the fact that 5 or 6 people at the highest level are just better than the rest and happen to not play protoss, which he doesn't need to do and he obviously doesn't have evidence for because there's no way to have evidence for that.
I think almost every single one of my posts in this thread contains the idea that protoss is weak at top level, it is kind of impressive that you would manage to miss that.
Your refusal to accept anything as evidence doesn't mean evidence doesn't exist. You always ignore the Trap vs Serral conundrum for instance and cherry pick anything else to detract from the overall idea. Here you have a similarly skilled player getting demolished, it IS evidence even if its not perfect proof. Evidence doesn't mean the same thing as complete proof maybe thats your problem. As he said there's plenty of clear evidence that protoss relies on the zerg to make major mistakes in perception otherwise zerg will pretty much always win.
If you don't have complete proof do you acknowledge that there's a possibility that the other scenario is right?
Yes I wouldn't say its impossible but it should be very unlikely, and if you understand the game well you can tell from watching high level PvZs that its not purely inferior player skill and zerg truly does have the advantage.
On November 14 2021 07:12 Woosixion wrote: if you ask me, as the easiest race this is exactly what they deserve.. easier/less stressful wins against the vast majority of starcraft players but hitting a wall at the tippity top
siriously? in late game, protoss is the hardest to handle, while Zerg basically A move and terran only manage marines and some passive units, protoss needs to handle so much fine unit micro (disruptors, storms, forcefields etc).
On November 14 2021 07:12 Woosixion wrote: if you ask me, as the easiest race this is exactly what they deserve.. easier/less stressful wins against the vast majority of starcraft players but hitting a wall at the tippity top
siriously? in late game, protoss is the hardest to handle, while Zerg basically A move and terran only manage marines and some passive units, protoss needs to handle so much fine unit micro (disruptors, storms, forcefields etc).
yea seems about right that's why i love to watch zergs no one a-moves like a top pro elite zerg
I don't know what argument you think you're answering but it's not the argument I have. It is obvious that protoss is by miles the weakest race at the very highest level of play. This doesn't answer the question of whether it happens because protoss is weak or because the few people who have enough skill to be at the highest level of play, let's say 5 or 6 people, just coincidentally all happened to not pick protoss at the start of the game years ago.
This is a question that can't be answered. We cannot directly experience a world in which Serral chose to play protoss instead of zerg. That's the entirety of the issue. Maybe if Serral was protoss and Trap was zerg Serral would still have 4-0ed in this match, and we would be having a thread about how zerg can't win at the top level. Or maybe not. It's impossible to say.
We don't have to say it, however, since either way the end result is that protoss is not winning, and you and I are rooting for protoss. As a consequence, I once again did the sane thing this afternoon and I didn't watch Trap play vs Serral, which means I had a much happier afternoon than you
First of all if a race is strong enough its extremely unlikely the good people just decided not to pick it, generally player strength will average out pretty closely with similarly strong races. There's too large of a player pool for that.
We don't need to directly experience such a world, the player who is taking 70% of protoss tournament wins (Trap) consistently being crushed like a bronze league noob demonstrates the race is just bad.
Not really true, because we're talking about a very limited sample size of players. But again I'm not sure why you're so invested in the difference between the two, it weakens your argument for no discernable gain.
I think you're looking at only the small amount of top pros in saying very limited sample size of players? But there are millions of players who have played this game and any one of them could've decided to pursue tournament winnings or a pro career which must inevitably be narrowed down to a small amount of players at the highest level. So yes if a race isn't too weak the players who chose it won't be abnormally unskilled. There are clearly lots of high level protoss players on the ladder yet the race gets crushed against a zerg who can play quite correctly.
It doesn't matter anyway, even the fact that this thread is so active right now with so many people discussing what problems make this race the weakest in the game shows that its not an issue of the best players happening to not choose protoss. If that was the case it would be clear that the race is fine but its players are just getting outplayed. That is not the case, again Trap should not be constantly getting roflstomped by Serral like he's nothing.
No the fact that many people are posting in this thread isn't evidence of anything, you're getting desperate to prove something that you don't need to prove and I don't know why you're doing it.
He was right in his last post though. There is clear evidence that at the highest level, specifically talking about ZvP if both play perfectly, there is not chance for Protoss to win, no matter how they play. Toss can only rely on the Zerg to make a mistake in the perception of the game. Take Trap vs Reynor and Trap vs Serral as examples I think that tells the whole story. Trap won against Reynor because he caught him off guard with timing attacks which the Zerg didnt anticipate properly = Zergs mistake, well punished. But against Serral, a lot more solid player with perfect game awareness, he looked like a diamond scrub, and he didnt necesarily even have to play trash, just he didnt manage to outsmart the Zerg. Is this how they game is supposed to be? When both players play solid one race is clearly superior by design so they auto-win if they other race does not surprise them? Its bullshit, but its how it is. I remember times in SC2 when even ZvT was eft up... Just get them before ultras or get them before brood/infestor. Those kind of things are just unfair because on the highest level where least mistakes are made they always favor the race which is the most forgiving and with the most macro potential. Now in current state of the game ZvT is okay, but ZvP is a joke and everyone sees that. There is no protoss in the world who can beat a Zerg if both are highest level and both play an even game, no one. And its not like Serral is unbeatable, its just that in ZvP by design and macro mechanics its a requirement for Protoss to surprise this kind of player because they are playing at a disadvantage for most of the game. Its stupid. Will it ever change? No, but why close our eyes against it?
To sum it up in RTS I think that on the highest level if one player has better tools at their disposal then the other, its a problem and clear inbalance and its what ZvP has been for ages. Those two races are polar opposites and while there are tactics the Protoss can use to exploit this in their advantages, they are less and less effective the higher level your opponent is. That is why there is such a huge discrepancy between standard ladder and top players. The skill cap of the Zerg is just too high compared to Protoss....
It is extremely obvious that at the top level of play protoss doesn't win, I've been saying that throughout the thread and it's the reason why I'm not watching Starcraft. This guy is trying to demonstrate to me that this can only be due to race and not to the fact that 5 or 6 people at the highest level are just better than the rest and happen to not play protoss, which he doesn't need to do and he obviously doesn't have evidence for because there's no way to have evidence for that.
I think almost every single one of my posts in this thread contains the idea that protoss is weak at top level, it is kind of impressive that you would manage to miss that.
Your refusal to accept anything as evidence doesn't mean evidence doesn't exist. You always ignore the Trap vs Serral conundrum for instance and cherry pick anything else to detract from the overall idea. Here you have a similarly skilled player getting demolished, it IS evidence even if its not perfect proof. Evidence doesn't mean the same thing as complete proof maybe thats your problem. As he said there's plenty of clear evidence that protoss relies on the zerg to make major mistakes in perception otherwise zerg will pretty much always win.
If you don't have complete proof do you acknowledge that there's a possibility that the other scenario is right?
Yes I wouldn't say its impossible but it should be very unlikely, and if you understand the game well you can tell from watching high level PvZs that its not purely inferior player skill and zerg truly does have the advantage.
I see, so in summary when I said it was possible and you went after me for saying that for several pages, I was right and you were wrong?
On November 14 2021 07:12 Woosixion wrote: if you ask me, as the easiest race this is exactly what they deserve.. easier/less stressful wins against the vast majority of starcraft players but hitting a wall at the tippity top
siriously? in late game, protoss is the hardest to handle, while Zerg basically A move and terran only manage marines and some passive units, protoss needs to handle so much fine unit micro (disruptors, storms, forcefields etc).
yea seems about right that's why i love to watch zergs no one a-moves like a top pro elite zerg
Hahaha yup we all know what an a move noob Serral is with his 400 APM obvious patch Zerg.
On December 14 2021 16:53 NinjaNight wrote: [quote]
First of all if a race is strong enough its extremely unlikely the good people just decided not to pick it, generally player strength will average out pretty closely with similarly strong races. There's too large of a player pool for that.
We don't need to directly experience such a world, the player who is taking 70% of protoss tournament wins (Trap) consistently being crushed like a bronze league noob demonstrates the race is just bad.
Not really true, because we're talking about a very limited sample size of players. But again I'm not sure why you're so invested in the difference between the two, it weakens your argument for no discernable gain.
I think you're looking at only the small amount of top pros in saying very limited sample size of players? But there are millions of players who have played this game and any one of them could've decided to pursue tournament winnings or a pro career which must inevitably be narrowed down to a small amount of players at the highest level. So yes if a race isn't too weak the players who chose it won't be abnormally unskilled. There are clearly lots of high level protoss players on the ladder yet the race gets crushed against a zerg who can play quite correctly.
It doesn't matter anyway, even the fact that this thread is so active right now with so many people discussing what problems make this race the weakest in the game shows that its not an issue of the best players happening to not choose protoss. If that was the case it would be clear that the race is fine but its players are just getting outplayed. That is not the case, again Trap should not be constantly getting roflstomped by Serral like he's nothing.
No the fact that many people are posting in this thread isn't evidence of anything, you're getting desperate to prove something that you don't need to prove and I don't know why you're doing it.
He was right in his last post though. There is clear evidence that at the highest level, specifically talking about ZvP if both play perfectly, there is not chance for Protoss to win, no matter how they play. Toss can only rely on the Zerg to make a mistake in the perception of the game. Take Trap vs Reynor and Trap vs Serral as examples I think that tells the whole story. Trap won against Reynor because he caught him off guard with timing attacks which the Zerg didnt anticipate properly = Zergs mistake, well punished. But against Serral, a lot more solid player with perfect game awareness, he looked like a diamond scrub, and he didnt necesarily even have to play trash, just he didnt manage to outsmart the Zerg. Is this how they game is supposed to be? When both players play solid one race is clearly superior by design so they auto-win if they other race does not surprise them? Its bullshit, but its how it is. I remember times in SC2 when even ZvT was eft up... Just get them before ultras or get them before brood/infestor. Those kind of things are just unfair because on the highest level where least mistakes are made they always favor the race which is the most forgiving and with the most macro potential. Now in current state of the game ZvT is okay, but ZvP is a joke and everyone sees that. There is no protoss in the world who can beat a Zerg if both are highest level and both play an even game, no one. And its not like Serral is unbeatable, its just that in ZvP by design and macro mechanics its a requirement for Protoss to surprise this kind of player because they are playing at a disadvantage for most of the game. Its stupid. Will it ever change? No, but why close our eyes against it?
To sum it up in RTS I think that on the highest level if one player has better tools at their disposal then the other, its a problem and clear inbalance and its what ZvP has been for ages. Those two races are polar opposites and while there are tactics the Protoss can use to exploit this in their advantages, they are less and less effective the higher level your opponent is. That is why there is such a huge discrepancy between standard ladder and top players. The skill cap of the Zerg is just too high compared to Protoss....
It is extremely obvious that at the top level of play protoss doesn't win, I've been saying that throughout the thread and it's the reason why I'm not watching Starcraft. This guy is trying to demonstrate to me that this can only be due to race and not to the fact that 5 or 6 people at the highest level are just better than the rest and happen to not play protoss, which he doesn't need to do and he obviously doesn't have evidence for because there's no way to have evidence for that.
I think almost every single one of my posts in this thread contains the idea that protoss is weak at top level, it is kind of impressive that you would manage to miss that.
Your refusal to accept anything as evidence doesn't mean evidence doesn't exist. You always ignore the Trap vs Serral conundrum for instance and cherry pick anything else to detract from the overall idea. Here you have a similarly skilled player getting demolished, it IS evidence even if its not perfect proof. Evidence doesn't mean the same thing as complete proof maybe thats your problem. As he said there's plenty of clear evidence that protoss relies on the zerg to make major mistakes in perception otherwise zerg will pretty much always win.
If you don't have complete proof do you acknowledge that there's a possibility that the other scenario is right?
Yes I wouldn't say its impossible but it should be very unlikely, and if you understand the game well you can tell from watching high level PvZs that its not purely inferior player skill and zerg truly does have the advantage.
I see, so in summary when I said it was possible and you went after me for saying that for several pages, I was right and you were wrong?
No I'm still saying we can tell its clearly not just player skill making it the weakest race, that doesn't mean it was impossible for that to happen. I'm just saying it is possible to see that this is not what's happening. And I don't mean to go after you I just strongly disagree with your viewpoint and enjoy discussing it.
Not really true, because we're talking about a very limited sample size of players. But again I'm not sure why you're so invested in the difference between the two, it weakens your argument for no discernable gain.
I think you're looking at only the small amount of top pros in saying very limited sample size of players? But there are millions of players who have played this game and any one of them could've decided to pursue tournament winnings or a pro career which must inevitably be narrowed down to a small amount of players at the highest level. So yes if a race isn't too weak the players who chose it won't be abnormally unskilled. There are clearly lots of high level protoss players on the ladder yet the race gets crushed against a zerg who can play quite correctly.
It doesn't matter anyway, even the fact that this thread is so active right now with so many people discussing what problems make this race the weakest in the game shows that its not an issue of the best players happening to not choose protoss. If that was the case it would be clear that the race is fine but its players are just getting outplayed. That is not the case, again Trap should not be constantly getting roflstomped by Serral like he's nothing.
No the fact that many people are posting in this thread isn't evidence of anything, you're getting desperate to prove something that you don't need to prove and I don't know why you're doing it.
He was right in his last post though. There is clear evidence that at the highest level, specifically talking about ZvP if both play perfectly, there is not chance for Protoss to win, no matter how they play. Toss can only rely on the Zerg to make a mistake in the perception of the game. Take Trap vs Reynor and Trap vs Serral as examples I think that tells the whole story. Trap won against Reynor because he caught him off guard with timing attacks which the Zerg didnt anticipate properly = Zergs mistake, well punished. But against Serral, a lot more solid player with perfect game awareness, he looked like a diamond scrub, and he didnt necesarily even have to play trash, just he didnt manage to outsmart the Zerg. Is this how they game is supposed to be? When both players play solid one race is clearly superior by design so they auto-win if they other race does not surprise them? Its bullshit, but its how it is. I remember times in SC2 when even ZvT was eft up... Just get them before ultras or get them before brood/infestor. Those kind of things are just unfair because on the highest level where least mistakes are made they always favor the race which is the most forgiving and with the most macro potential. Now in current state of the game ZvT is okay, but ZvP is a joke and everyone sees that. There is no protoss in the world who can beat a Zerg if both are highest level and both play an even game, no one. And its not like Serral is unbeatable, its just that in ZvP by design and macro mechanics its a requirement for Protoss to surprise this kind of player because they are playing at a disadvantage for most of the game. Its stupid. Will it ever change? No, but why close our eyes against it?
To sum it up in RTS I think that on the highest level if one player has better tools at their disposal then the other, its a problem and clear inbalance and its what ZvP has been for ages. Those two races are polar opposites and while there are tactics the Protoss can use to exploit this in their advantages, they are less and less effective the higher level your opponent is. That is why there is such a huge discrepancy between standard ladder and top players. The skill cap of the Zerg is just too high compared to Protoss....
It is extremely obvious that at the top level of play protoss doesn't win, I've been saying that throughout the thread and it's the reason why I'm not watching Starcraft. This guy is trying to demonstrate to me that this can only be due to race and not to the fact that 5 or 6 people at the highest level are just better than the rest and happen to not play protoss, which he doesn't need to do and he obviously doesn't have evidence for because there's no way to have evidence for that.
I think almost every single one of my posts in this thread contains the idea that protoss is weak at top level, it is kind of impressive that you would manage to miss that.
Your refusal to accept anything as evidence doesn't mean evidence doesn't exist. You always ignore the Trap vs Serral conundrum for instance and cherry pick anything else to detract from the overall idea. Here you have a similarly skilled player getting demolished, it IS evidence even if its not perfect proof. Evidence doesn't mean the same thing as complete proof maybe thats your problem. As he said there's plenty of clear evidence that protoss relies on the zerg to make major mistakes in perception otherwise zerg will pretty much always win.
If you don't have complete proof do you acknowledge that there's a possibility that the other scenario is right?
Yes I wouldn't say its impossible but it should be very unlikely, and if you understand the game well you can tell from watching high level PvZs that its not purely inferior player skill and zerg truly does have the advantage.
I see, so in summary when I said it was possible and you went after me for saying that for several pages, I was right and you were wrong?
No I'm still saying we can tell its clearly not just player skill making it the weakest race, that doesn't mean it was impossible for that to happen. I'm just saying it is possible to see that this is not what's happening. And I don't mean to go after you I just strongly disagree with your viewpoint and enjoy discussing it.
You're trying to have it both ways, arguing that we can clearly tell one is the correct answer and also that the other answer could be the correct one at the same time.
A simpler way of describing this is just that both are possible and you think one is more likely than the other. I don't know why you take issue with this.
On November 14 2021 07:12 Woosixion wrote: if you ask me, as the easiest race this is exactly what they deserve.. easier/less stressful wins against the vast majority of starcraft players but hitting a wall at the tippity top
siriously? in late game, protoss is the hardest to handle, while Zerg basically A move and terran only manage marines and some passive units, protoss needs to handle so much fine unit micro (disruptors, storms, forcefields etc).
yea seems about right that's why i love to watch zergs no one a-moves like a top pro elite zerg
Hahaha yup we all know what an a move noob Serral is with his 400 APM obvious patch Zerg.
Arguing with the APM is just wrong. That's what got us to the stupid arguments about "look at my APM, it's amazin and this noob with 60 APM just beat me, the game's broken".
Especially considering zerg has naturally bigger APM thanks to how the mechanics works.
Little bit offtopic..what i really like about this thread is, that we actually see a discussion about sc2. I know it is somehow stupid since there were thousands of threads like this, But to me it visualised that there are still people caring about the game and really think about improvements instead of resignating. All comments below tournaments barely reach column 2 and most other threads are empty and here suddenly it keeps going (again not judging if its meaningful or not :D).
DHLC, 1 toss has qualified out of 12 (EU and asia qualifers).... and that toss is Zest. THe future does NOT look especially bright. But maybe all toss fans can join in happiness over how strong toss can be in ladder.
On November 14 2021 07:12 Woosixion wrote: if you ask me, as the easiest race this is exactly what they deserve.. easier/less stressful wins against the vast majority of starcraft players but hitting a wall at the tippity top
So you just want one of the three races to simply not be viable at the top? That's a weird way of looking at things.
How could protoss not be viable at the top when the top made more money than the other races this year though? The premise that protoss are not successful at the top level while still being too present in GM / ladder is false. That does not mean that balance / design can't be improved though, it is true that the PvZ match-up has become painful to watch (and probably play) although it's somewhat balanced
I have seen this info repeated several times in TL and it is simply false. Top Zergs have overall won more money in 2021, no matter how many players you define as "top" in earnings: Top 1: Z>P>T Top 2: Z>P>T Top 3: Z>P>T Top 4: Z>P>T Top 5: Z>P>T Top 6: Z>T>P ... and so on. Source: aligulac.com
Not that I agree with using this metric, but the truth is that Zerg is way ahead of Protoss and Terran, with P above T in the Top 5, and below if you consider more players.
The biggest problem with the design of starcraft is that zerg is supposed to be reactive and protoss the active one who decides the flow of the game. However, blizzard also decided that there shouldn't be a strategy by protoss (or terran) which is not deterministically defendable by zerg, meaning that, there MUST always be a way to defend a certain protoss attack strategy, otherwise protoss will be considered OP (and zerg bois will be crying OP).
The flipside of this is that the top zergs (who can always scout perfectly by sending in a few speed overlords) will always be able to defend wtever comes their way. Given that zerg's economy and production is miles ahead of protoss, I would argue then that if any strategy, if scouted, can always be defended, then protoss is underpowered and zerg is overpowered, at least in the highest level where no mistakes are made, unfortunately.
Zerg fanbois, stop giving us the bullsh*t about some scrub league's protoss representation being higher than zerg. Seriously no one gives a crap about Europe's gold league noobs playing protoss more than zerg. Zerg fanbois who keep saying that zerg is not OP and that Trap is just pure trash in talent comparing to Serral or Rogue, how about you tell us a build order, that even when scouted, can still deterministically beat someone like Serral? Write it down please? Because if you can't, that means that zerg is actually OP, because someone like Serral and Rogue, who has the protoss' playbook memorized, can then always defend the early and midgame attacks and come out ahead, given zerg's far superior economy (we all know how rediculous larva mechanics and zerg economy is, if you can't deal damage and slow them down early game, its game over).
Stop falttering yourselves that whenever Serral / Rogue or whichever bullsh*t zerg wins a game, its because they r supremely talented, instead of the obvious fact that zerg is just rediculuously overpowered. Honestly, you should just turn starcraft into a zvz game - how fun is it to see two players spamming larva and queens going at it against each other LOL woohoooo 200 supply vs 200 supply in 8 minutes, queens can defend everything early game, lets spam vipers and lurkersss, wt a joke of a race
Please, I would love a reply from a zerg fanboi. I bet you again hes gonna avoid the topic head on, and say that OHH BUT EUROPE GM IS FULL OF PROTOSS lol, like anyone of us f cares. Just turn professional strarcraft into zvz already yea
On December 19 2021 04:28 InfCereal wrote: So to clarify, you want protoss to have attacks that can't be defended?
Zerg bois, like this guy above, complain and complain until every possible build can be easily defended (which is fine IF the economy of both sides are the same, but its not), but they also don't tell you that, by being able to defend every possible build, zerg will always come out miles ahead by mid game because of their ridiculous economy coming from larva mechanics. Blizzard got tricked.
The issue is again and again in zerg's far superior economy and unit production. If protoss can't deal significant damage in early to mid game (and I mean significant, killing 5-6 drones don't even cut it), it's game over. If you guys want to be able to defend every possible build by protoss, then the economy and unit productions of protoss have to be on par with zerg (they have something ridiculous called larva mechanics), otherwise its not a fair game.
Just look at every pvz game at the highest level. If protoss doesn't deal big damage early to mid game, its 200 supply zerg versus 130 supply protoss with zerg taking every single base in the map, then we all know wt happens next.
Lets turn starcraft into zvz already. Clearly starcraft doesn't need any other race than zerg.
Zerg economy >>>> Protoss economy, and zerg bois still want every protoss build to deal 0 damage if scouted (which they always do at the highest level, thanks to some stupid thing called speed overlord). Wt does this mean? Zerg always wins lol
On December 19 2021 03:48 kingism wrote: The biggest problem with the design of starcraft is that zerg is supposed to be reactive and protoss the active one who decides the flow of the game. However, blizzard also decided that there shouldn't be a strategy by protoss (or terran) which is not deterministically defendable by zerg, meaning that, there MUST always be a way to defend a certain protoss attack strategy, otherwise protoss will be considered OP (and zerg bois will be crying OP).
The flipside of this is that the top zergs (who can always scout perfectly by sending in a few speed overlords) will always be able to defend wtever comes their way. Given that zerg's economy and production is miles ahead of protoss, I would argue then that if any strategy, if scouted, can always be defended, then protoss is underpowered and zerg is overpowered, at least in the highest level where no mistakes are made, unfortunately.
Zerg fanbois, stop giving us the bullsh*t about some scrub league's protoss representation being higher than zerg. Seriously no one gives a crap about Europe's gold league noobs playing protoss more than zerg. Zerg fanbois who keep saying that zerg is not OP and that Trap is just pure trash in talent comparing to Serral or Rogue, how about you tell us a build order, that even when scouted, can still deterministically beat someone like Serral? Write it down please? Because if you can't, that means that zerg is actually OP, because someone like Serral and Rogue, who has the protoss' playbook memorized, can then always defend the early and midgame attacks and come out ahead, given zerg's far superior economy (we all know how rediculous larva mechanics and zerg economy is, if you can't deal damage and slow them down early game, its game over).
Stop falttering yourselves that whenever Serral / Rogue or whichever bullsh*t zerg wins a game, its because they r supremely talented, instead of the obvious fact that zerg is just rediculuously overpowered. Honestly, you should just turn starcraft into a zvz game - how fun is it to see two players spamming larva and queens going at it against each other LOL woohoooo 200 supply vs 200 supply in 8 minutes, queens can defend everything early game, lets spam vipers and lurkersss, wt a joke of a race
Please, I would love a reply from a zerg fanboi. I bet you again hes gonna avoid the topic head on, and say that OHH BUT EUROPE GM IS FULL OF PROTOSS lol, like anyone of us f cares. Just turn professional strarcraft into zvz already yea
GM being absolutely chock full of Protoss players isn’t a good thing, at all. You might not care, but it doesn’t change that
It genuinely baffles me that anyone posting in this thread can view either Protoss sucking at winning big tournaments or dominating ladder numbers as good/bad in isolation.
They’re both bad, in an ideal world close to parity is the idea.
The scene is a whole ecosystem, and yes some people may only post on TL/watch premier tournaments, like myself. Some play the game for a living, some play for pure fun.
Anyone who says ‘fuck ladder/fuck tournament results I don’t care’ is being, in my less than humble opinion, a complete myopic idiot. It’s not 2010 anymore, there’s still a pretty healthy scene but if this is to be the last real patch, the scene withers if it’s grossly imbalanced.
As to the specific reasons why, let’s have some debate sure. Or how pronounced issues are but people saying such daft things confuses me.
Serral and Rogue are supremely talented, but so are players from all the factions. We’re not really close to Zerg dominance we’ve seen in other eras, BL/Infestor was a dominant comp both in vP and vT
At least at the very top I’m not seeing much evidence that Zerg is an issue outside of vP. Maru’s just won Super Tournament and broke Rogue’s Bo7 mastery, Clem’s went from competing solidly with Serral and Reynor to trading wins with regularity and beating them.
I know that @deacon but I was responding to this lol
Oh I know, it's just that APM isn't everything xD
True, Serral and Maru are the most mechanically clean players in the whole scene, IMO
I dunno if their APM reflects this at all, but watching their FPVs, it’s a thing of beauty.
They do exactly what they’re trying to do, with no sloppiness, like their mind and KBM are linked. Others can get similar results but there’s always some spam or some redundancy there.
When GSL (and to my eternal frustration this isn’t a standard for every tournament) did FP streams, Dark was blazingly, ridiculously fast but it felt a little more chaotic.
On December 16 2021 06:12 NinjaNight wrote: [quote]
I think you're looking at only the small amount of top pros in saying very limited sample size of players? But there are millions of players who have played this game and any one of them could've decided to pursue tournament winnings or a pro career which must inevitably be narrowed down to a small amount of players at the highest level. So yes if a race isn't too weak the players who chose it won't be abnormally unskilled. There are clearly lots of high level protoss players on the ladder yet the race gets crushed against a zerg who can play quite correctly.
It doesn't matter anyway, even the fact that this thread is so active right now with so many people discussing what problems make this race the weakest in the game shows that its not an issue of the best players happening to not choose protoss. If that was the case it would be clear that the race is fine but its players are just getting outplayed. That is not the case, again Trap should not be constantly getting roflstomped by Serral like he's nothing.
No the fact that many people are posting in this thread isn't evidence of anything, you're getting desperate to prove something that you don't need to prove and I don't know why you're doing it.
He was right in his last post though. There is clear evidence that at the highest level, specifically talking about ZvP if both play perfectly, there is not chance for Protoss to win, no matter how they play. Toss can only rely on the Zerg to make a mistake in the perception of the game. Take Trap vs Reynor and Trap vs Serral as examples I think that tells the whole story. Trap won against Reynor because he caught him off guard with timing attacks which the Zerg didnt anticipate properly = Zergs mistake, well punished. But against Serral, a lot more solid player with perfect game awareness, he looked like a diamond scrub, and he didnt necesarily even have to play trash, just he didnt manage to outsmart the Zerg. Is this how they game is supposed to be? When both players play solid one race is clearly superior by design so they auto-win if they other race does not surprise them? Its bullshit, but its how it is. I remember times in SC2 when even ZvT was eft up... Just get them before ultras or get them before brood/infestor. Those kind of things are just unfair because on the highest level where least mistakes are made they always favor the race which is the most forgiving and with the most macro potential. Now in current state of the game ZvT is okay, but ZvP is a joke and everyone sees that. There is no protoss in the world who can beat a Zerg if both are highest level and both play an even game, no one. And its not like Serral is unbeatable, its just that in ZvP by design and macro mechanics its a requirement for Protoss to surprise this kind of player because they are playing at a disadvantage for most of the game. Its stupid. Will it ever change? No, but why close our eyes against it?
To sum it up in RTS I think that on the highest level if one player has better tools at their disposal then the other, its a problem and clear inbalance and its what ZvP has been for ages. Those two races are polar opposites and while there are tactics the Protoss can use to exploit this in their advantages, they are less and less effective the higher level your opponent is. That is why there is such a huge discrepancy between standard ladder and top players. The skill cap of the Zerg is just too high compared to Protoss....
It is extremely obvious that at the top level of play protoss doesn't win, I've been saying that throughout the thread and it's the reason why I'm not watching Starcraft. This guy is trying to demonstrate to me that this can only be due to race and not to the fact that 5 or 6 people at the highest level are just better than the rest and happen to not play protoss, which he doesn't need to do and he obviously doesn't have evidence for because there's no way to have evidence for that.
I think almost every single one of my posts in this thread contains the idea that protoss is weak at top level, it is kind of impressive that you would manage to miss that.
Your refusal to accept anything as evidence doesn't mean evidence doesn't exist. You always ignore the Trap vs Serral conundrum for instance and cherry pick anything else to detract from the overall idea. Here you have a similarly skilled player getting demolished, it IS evidence even if its not perfect proof. Evidence doesn't mean the same thing as complete proof maybe thats your problem. As he said there's plenty of clear evidence that protoss relies on the zerg to make major mistakes in perception otherwise zerg will pretty much always win.
If you don't have complete proof do you acknowledge that there's a possibility that the other scenario is right?
Yes I wouldn't say its impossible but it should be very unlikely, and if you understand the game well you can tell from watching high level PvZs that its not purely inferior player skill and zerg truly does have the advantage.
I see, so in summary when I said it was possible and you went after me for saying that for several pages, I was right and you were wrong?
No I'm still saying we can tell its clearly not just player skill making it the weakest race, that doesn't mean it was impossible for that to happen. I'm just saying it is possible to see that this is not what's happening. And I don't mean to go after you I just strongly disagree with your viewpoint and enjoy discussing it.
You're trying to have it both ways, arguing that we can clearly tell one is the correct answer and also that the other answer could be the correct one at the same time.
A simpler way of describing this is just that both are possible and you think one is more likely than the other. I don't know why you take issue with this.
Basically I don't see it as contradictory because I believe its possible but it doesn't matter that its possible because its clearly not what's really happening. I said I think it should be very unlikely but my reasoning isn't just based on that, also by observation we can use reality to confirm thats not whats happening. I only take issue with the concept that its impossible for anyone to see if protoss weakness is caused by lack of player skill or not, I don't think it is anywhere near impossible. You probably think so just because there's no obvious way to concretely measure that.
Anyone who says ‘fuck ladder/fuck tournament results I don’t care’ is being, in my less than humble opinion, a complete myopic idiot.
Nice, now you are straight up offending people who, unlike you, don't live in delusional world where perfect balance can be achieved on every level of play. It simply can't and blizzard couldn't do that even when they really tried.
Anyone who says ‘fuck ladder/fuck tournament results I don’t care’ is being, in my less than humble opinion, a complete myopic idiot.
Nice, now you are straight up offending people who, unlike you, don't live in delusional world where perfect balance can be achieved on every level of play. It simply can't and blizzard couldn't do that even when they really tried.
There's a big difference between `achieving balance' and `having 3 races in GM' Which the balance team managed for pretty much every patch except the literal last one.
On December 19 2021 03:48 kingism wrote: The biggest problem with the design of starcraft is that zerg is supposed to be reactive and protoss the active one who decides the flow of the game. However, blizzard also decided that there shouldn't be a strategy by protoss (or terran) which is not deterministically defendable by zerg, meaning that, there MUST always be a way to defend a certain protoss attack strategy, otherwise protoss will be considered OP (and zerg bois will be crying OP).
The flipside of this is that the top zergs (who can always scout perfectly by sending in a few speed overlords) will always be able to defend wtever comes their way. Given that zerg's economy and production is miles ahead of protoss, I would argue then that if any strategy, if scouted, can always be defended, then protoss is underpowered and zerg is overpowered, at least in the highest level where no mistakes are made, unfortunately.
Zerg fanbois, stop giving us the bullsh*t about some scrub league's protoss representation being higher than zerg. Seriously no one gives a crap about Europe's gold league noobs playing protoss more than zerg. Zerg fanbois who keep saying that zerg is not OP and that Trap is just pure trash in talent comparing to Serral or Rogue, how about you tell us a build order, that even when scouted, can still deterministically beat someone like Serral? Write it down please? Because if you can't, that means that zerg is actually OP, because someone like Serral and Rogue, who has the protoss' playbook memorized, can then always defend the early and midgame attacks and come out ahead, given zerg's far superior economy (we all know how rediculous larva mechanics and zerg economy is, if you can't deal damage and slow them down early game, its game over).
Stop falttering yourselves that whenever Serral / Rogue or whichever bullsh*t zerg wins a game, its because they r supremely talented, instead of the obvious fact that zerg is just rediculuously overpowered. Honestly, you should just turn starcraft into a zvz game - how fun is it to see two players spamming larva and queens going at it against each other LOL woohoooo 200 supply vs 200 supply in 8 minutes, queens can defend everything early game, lets spam vipers and lurkersss, wt a joke of a race
Please, I would love a reply from a zerg fanboi. I bet you again hes gonna avoid the topic head on, and say that OHH BUT EUROPE GM IS FULL OF PROTOSS lol, like anyone of us f cares. Just turn professional strarcraft into zvz already yea
GM being absolutely chock full of Protoss players isn’t a good thing, at all. You might not care, but it doesn’t change that
It genuinely baffles me that anyone posting in this thread can view either Protoss sucking at winning big tournaments or dominating ladder numbers as good/bad in isolation.
They’re both bad, in an ideal world close to parity is the idea.
The scene is a whole ecosystem, and yes some people may only post on TL/watch premier tournaments, like myself. Some play the game for a living, some play for pure fun.
Anyone who says ‘fuck ladder/fuck tournament results I don’t care’ is being, in my less than humble opinion, a complete myopic idiot. It’s not 2010 anymore, there’s still a pretty healthy scene but if this is to be the last real patch, the scene withers if it’s grossly imbalanced.
As to the specific reasons why, let’s have some debate sure. Or how pronounced issues are but people saying such daft things confuses me.
Serral and Rogue are supremely talented, but so are players from all the factions. We’re not really close to Zerg dominance we’ve seen in other eras, BL/Infestor was a dominant comp both in vP and vT
At least at the very top I’m not seeing much evidence that Zerg is an issue outside of vP. Maru’s just won Super Tournament and broke Rogue’s Bo7 mastery, Clem’s went from competing solidly with Serral and Reynor to trading wins with regularity and beating them.
Regarding you comment about that Zerg dominance... i think it says a lot when one have to write something like that as a positive thing, since the essence is, sort of, "Sure, Zerg is dominating, but at least zerg is not a complete op-joke"...
I think this is the problem when looking ahead, As some people have pointed out before, toss has suffered alot when there has been balance patches. A lot of tweaking in the strategy has been forced upon toss more than the other races, and that, after a while, T and in particular Z, toss is being understood and T and Z have less problem with toss. Which is a huge issue now since there will by no serious patching. So, slowly, from a position when toss only have had Trap, and zest in a way, the last period as the only serious contenders, toss will have even more problem in the future. I fear the dominance of Z in ZvP will be even greater in the future.
No the fact that many people are posting in this thread isn't evidence of anything, you're getting desperate to prove something that you don't need to prove and I don't know why you're doing it.
He was right in his last post though. There is clear evidence that at the highest level, specifically talking about ZvP if both play perfectly, there is not chance for Protoss to win, no matter how they play. Toss can only rely on the Zerg to make a mistake in the perception of the game. Take Trap vs Reynor and Trap vs Serral as examples I think that tells the whole story. Trap won against Reynor because he caught him off guard with timing attacks which the Zerg didnt anticipate properly = Zergs mistake, well punished. But against Serral, a lot more solid player with perfect game awareness, he looked like a diamond scrub, and he didnt necesarily even have to play trash, just he didnt manage to outsmart the Zerg. Is this how they game is supposed to be? When both players play solid one race is clearly superior by design so they auto-win if they other race does not surprise them? Its bullshit, but its how it is. I remember times in SC2 when even ZvT was eft up... Just get them before ultras or get them before brood/infestor. Those kind of things are just unfair because on the highest level where least mistakes are made they always favor the race which is the most forgiving and with the most macro potential. Now in current state of the game ZvT is okay, but ZvP is a joke and everyone sees that. There is no protoss in the world who can beat a Zerg if both are highest level and both play an even game, no one. And its not like Serral is unbeatable, its just that in ZvP by design and macro mechanics its a requirement for Protoss to surprise this kind of player because they are playing at a disadvantage for most of the game. Its stupid. Will it ever change? No, but why close our eyes against it?
To sum it up in RTS I think that on the highest level if one player has better tools at their disposal then the other, its a problem and clear inbalance and its what ZvP has been for ages. Those two races are polar opposites and while there are tactics the Protoss can use to exploit this in their advantages, they are less and less effective the higher level your opponent is. That is why there is such a huge discrepancy between standard ladder and top players. The skill cap of the Zerg is just too high compared to Protoss....
It is extremely obvious that at the top level of play protoss doesn't win, I've been saying that throughout the thread and it's the reason why I'm not watching Starcraft. This guy is trying to demonstrate to me that this can only be due to race and not to the fact that 5 or 6 people at the highest level are just better than the rest and happen to not play protoss, which he doesn't need to do and he obviously doesn't have evidence for because there's no way to have evidence for that.
I think almost every single one of my posts in this thread contains the idea that protoss is weak at top level, it is kind of impressive that you would manage to miss that.
Your refusal to accept anything as evidence doesn't mean evidence doesn't exist. You always ignore the Trap vs Serral conundrum for instance and cherry pick anything else to detract from the overall idea. Here you have a similarly skilled player getting demolished, it IS evidence even if its not perfect proof. Evidence doesn't mean the same thing as complete proof maybe thats your problem. As he said there's plenty of clear evidence that protoss relies on the zerg to make major mistakes in perception otherwise zerg will pretty much always win.
If you don't have complete proof do you acknowledge that there's a possibility that the other scenario is right?
Yes I wouldn't say its impossible but it should be very unlikely, and if you understand the game well you can tell from watching high level PvZs that its not purely inferior player skill and zerg truly does have the advantage.
I see, so in summary when I said it was possible and you went after me for saying that for several pages, I was right and you were wrong?
No I'm still saying we can tell its clearly not just player skill making it the weakest race, that doesn't mean it was impossible for that to happen. I'm just saying it is possible to see that this is not what's happening. And I don't mean to go after you I just strongly disagree with your viewpoint and enjoy discussing it.
You're trying to have it both ways, arguing that we can clearly tell one is the correct answer and also that the other answer could be the correct one at the same time.
A simpler way of describing this is just that both are possible and you think one is more likely than the other. I don't know why you take issue with this.
Basically I don't see it as contradictory because I believe its possible but it doesn't matter that its possible because its clearly not what's really happening. I said I think it should be very unlikely but my reasoning isn't just based on that, also by observation we can use reality to confirm thats not whats happening. I only take issue with the concept that its impossible for anyone to see if protoss weakness is caused by lack of player skill or not, I don't think it is anywhere near impossible. You probably think so just because there's no obvious way to concretely measure that.
There's no real way to "use reality" to confirm that's not what's happening, and there's also no "we". Zergs probably think that zerg is slightly too strong right now but it's not a big deal, and remember that terrans think terran is underpowered every single time any terran loses any game.
Also if we could use reality to confirm that's not what's happening, then it would follow that it is impossible :p that's how words work. What we're saying is very similar but you insist on using a weaker framing for it.
On December 19 2021 03:48 kingism wrote: The biggest problem with the design of starcraft is that zerg is supposed to be reactive and protoss the active one who decides the flow of the game. However, blizzard also decided that there shouldn't be a strategy by protoss (or terran) which is not deterministically defendable by zerg, meaning that, there MUST always be a way to defend a certain protoss attack strategy, otherwise protoss will be considered OP (and zerg bois will be crying OP).
The flipside of this is that the top zergs (who can always scout perfectly by sending in a few speed overlords) will always be able to defend wtever comes their way. Given that zerg's economy and production is miles ahead of protoss, I would argue then that if any strategy, if scouted, can always be defended, then protoss is underpowered and zerg is overpowered, at least in the highest level where no mistakes are made, unfortunately.
Zerg fanbois, stop giving us the bullsh*t about some scrub league's protoss representation being higher than zerg. Seriously no one gives a crap about Europe's gold league noobs playing protoss more than zerg. Zerg fanbois who keep saying that zerg is not OP and that Trap is just pure trash in talent comparing to Serral or Rogue, how about you tell us a build order, that even when scouted, can still deterministically beat someone like Serral? Write it down please? Because if you can't, that means that zerg is actually OP, because someone like Serral and Rogue, who has the protoss' playbook memorized, can then always defend the early and midgame attacks and come out ahead, given zerg's far superior economy (we all know how rediculous larva mechanics and zerg economy is, if you can't deal damage and slow them down early game, its game over).
Stop falttering yourselves that whenever Serral / Rogue or whichever bullsh*t zerg wins a game, its because they r supremely talented, instead of the obvious fact that zerg is just rediculuously overpowered. Honestly, you should just turn starcraft into a zvz game - how fun is it to see two players spamming larva and queens going at it against each other LOL woohoooo 200 supply vs 200 supply in 8 minutes, queens can defend everything early game, lets spam vipers and lurkersss, wt a joke of a race
Please, I would love a reply from a zerg fanboi. I bet you again hes gonna avoid the topic head on, and say that OHH BUT EUROPE GM IS FULL OF PROTOSS lol, like anyone of us f cares. Just turn professional strarcraft into zvz already yea
Seriously no one gives a crap about Europe's gold league noobs playing protoss more than zerg.
It isn't gold league that is the problem, it is the highest possible ladder. The new pro players are to come from that Protoss filled mess. The Protoss oversaturation makes the ladder experience less enjoyable for everyone. A variation is needed for the players to enjoy playing a lot. If ladder is not fun, players will play less. This is detrimental in several ways. - less engagement in the community - longer wait times when playing ladder, which also leads to bigger discrepancies in skill level in ladder games - fewer players practicing enough to go pro, which leads to fewer new players on the pro scene
Having a lot of 1 race in GM is bad. It doesn't matter which race it is that dominates. The above is true nonetheless.
I would argue then that if any strategy, if scouted, can always be defended, then protoss is underpowered and zerg is overpowered
I suspect that you do not mean what you wrote since the corollary of this is that there should exist a strategy that protoss can use which wins even if the zerg make all preparations they can.
People complained about the soul train that PartinG used to win. That was a build that won even if the Zerg knew it was coming (fitting that it was a PvZ build). The soul train fits your indicated wish. PartinG won more than he lost with the soul train, so that build was used by him vs every Zerg because it was better than having variety.
Another example is less general and more map dependent, but sOs was winning every PvZ in Proleague for quite some time. He cannon rushed every game. After a while the Zergs started blind countering, but he kept winning. He had 100% wins PvZ on a few maps. This also fits the "Zerg can know but not defend".
You are mentioning that Zerg can scout everything. To me, this makes it more likely that the ability to scout is too easily available rather than the ability to adapt to the scouting information being the issue. If you know everything and you do everything correctly you should be able to defend an attack every time. Attacks are investments. They are losing you something in exchange for damage to your opponent. If the opponent know everything and do everything correctly then they have both defenders advantage and the ability to make units that counter the units of the attacker. My opinion is that there should be builds and strategies that are hard to scout and the response should be costly for the Zerg. This would disallow the Zerg from cutting corners and invest a lot into macro.
You lift the ladder and say it isn't an issue. This is flat out, objectively wrong. It is an issue, but it is not the same issue as Protoss being weak in the absolute top.
You also mention Zerg ability to defend, and I disagree with your assessment. I think that scouting is the issue, not the adapting to the scouting. How to adress scouting is not something I know how to do. Slower Overlords? Stronger Stalkers vs Overlords? Different map layout to help hiding? Different map layout to aide variance in Protoss attacks? Please help with this!
On December 16 2021 10:57 MarianoSC2 wrote: [quote]
He was right in his last post though. There is clear evidence that at the highest level, specifically talking about ZvP if both play perfectly, there is not chance for Protoss to win, no matter how they play. Toss can only rely on the Zerg to make a mistake in the perception of the game. Take Trap vs Reynor and Trap vs Serral as examples I think that tells the whole story. Trap won against Reynor because he caught him off guard with timing attacks which the Zerg didnt anticipate properly = Zergs mistake, well punished. But against Serral, a lot more solid player with perfect game awareness, he looked like a diamond scrub, and he didnt necesarily even have to play trash, just he didnt manage to outsmart the Zerg. Is this how they game is supposed to be? When both players play solid one race is clearly superior by design so they auto-win if they other race does not surprise them? Its bullshit, but its how it is. I remember times in SC2 when even ZvT was eft up... Just get them before ultras or get them before brood/infestor. Those kind of things are just unfair because on the highest level where least mistakes are made they always favor the race which is the most forgiving and with the most macro potential. Now in current state of the game ZvT is okay, but ZvP is a joke and everyone sees that. There is no protoss in the world who can beat a Zerg if both are highest level and both play an even game, no one. And its not like Serral is unbeatable, its just that in ZvP by design and macro mechanics its a requirement for Protoss to surprise this kind of player because they are playing at a disadvantage for most of the game. Its stupid. Will it ever change? No, but why close our eyes against it?
To sum it up in RTS I think that on the highest level if one player has better tools at their disposal then the other, its a problem and clear inbalance and its what ZvP has been for ages. Those two races are polar opposites and while there are tactics the Protoss can use to exploit this in their advantages, they are less and less effective the higher level your opponent is. That is why there is such a huge discrepancy between standard ladder and top players. The skill cap of the Zerg is just too high compared to Protoss....
It is extremely obvious that at the top level of play protoss doesn't win, I've been saying that throughout the thread and it's the reason why I'm not watching Starcraft. This guy is trying to demonstrate to me that this can only be due to race and not to the fact that 5 or 6 people at the highest level are just better than the rest and happen to not play protoss, which he doesn't need to do and he obviously doesn't have evidence for because there's no way to have evidence for that.
I think almost every single one of my posts in this thread contains the idea that protoss is weak at top level, it is kind of impressive that you would manage to miss that.
Your refusal to accept anything as evidence doesn't mean evidence doesn't exist. You always ignore the Trap vs Serral conundrum for instance and cherry pick anything else to detract from the overall idea. Here you have a similarly skilled player getting demolished, it IS evidence even if its not perfect proof. Evidence doesn't mean the same thing as complete proof maybe thats your problem. As he said there's plenty of clear evidence that protoss relies on the zerg to make major mistakes in perception otherwise zerg will pretty much always win.
If you don't have complete proof do you acknowledge that there's a possibility that the other scenario is right?
Yes I wouldn't say its impossible but it should be very unlikely, and if you understand the game well you can tell from watching high level PvZs that its not purely inferior player skill and zerg truly does have the advantage.
I see, so in summary when I said it was possible and you went after me for saying that for several pages, I was right and you were wrong?
No I'm still saying we can tell its clearly not just player skill making it the weakest race, that doesn't mean it was impossible for that to happen. I'm just saying it is possible to see that this is not what's happening. And I don't mean to go after you I just strongly disagree with your viewpoint and enjoy discussing it.
You're trying to have it both ways, arguing that we can clearly tell one is the correct answer and also that the other answer could be the correct one at the same time.
A simpler way of describing this is just that both are possible and you think one is more likely than the other. I don't know why you take issue with this.
Basically I don't see it as contradictory because I believe its possible but it doesn't matter that its possible because its clearly not what's really happening. I said I think it should be very unlikely but my reasoning isn't just based on that, also by observation we can use reality to confirm thats not whats happening. I only take issue with the concept that its impossible for anyone to see if protoss weakness is caused by lack of player skill or not, I don't think it is anywhere near impossible. You probably think so just because there's no obvious way to concretely measure that.
There's no real way to "use reality" to confirm that's not what's happening, and there's also no "we". Zergs probably think that zerg is slightly too strong right now but it's not a big deal, and remember that terrans think terran is underpowered every single time any terran loses any game.
Also if we could use reality to confirm that's not what's happening, then it would follow that it is impossible :p that's how words work. What we're saying is very similar but you insist on using a weaker framing for it.
No they don't. Go on reddit.
All Zergs do is complain about how "skytoss is too strong!!!!" "the game needs a balance patch to fix how broken Protoss is!!!"
Zergs are used to being overpowered. They aren't happy unless they stay that way in really blatant and obvious ways.
It isn't obvious except on TL.net that Protoss is struggling at the pro level. The rest of the community either doesn't notice or doesn't care.
Since this thread is about 2 weeks old, the balance whine posts have gotten rightfully downvoted but I was commenting when this thread was brand new and I got to see all sorts of dumb shit that was just Zergs whining that about Skytoss on ladder; ignoring what was the bigger picture in the pro scene.
I'm sure there are still a lot of Terrans who hate shit like the Void Ray/Battery all in (rightfully so IMO, that build is bullshit), but they aren't as active on reddit.
On December 19 2021 23:18 Drfilip wrote: Entire quote: + Show Spoiler +
On December 19 2021 03:48 kingism wrote: The biggest problem with the design of starcraft is that zerg is supposed to be reactive and protoss the active one who decides the flow of the game. However, blizzard also decided that there shouldn't be a strategy by protoss (or terran) which is not deterministically defendable by zerg, meaning that, there MUST always be a way to defend a certain protoss attack strategy, otherwise protoss will be considered OP (and zerg bois will be crying OP).
The flipside of this is that the top zergs (who can always scout perfectly by sending in a few speed overlords) will always be able to defend wtever comes their way. Given that zerg's economy and production is miles ahead of protoss, I would argue then that if any strategy, if scouted, can always be defended, then protoss is underpowered and zerg is overpowered, at least in the highest level where no mistakes are made, unfortunately.
Zerg fanbois, stop giving us the bullsh*t about some scrub league's protoss representation being higher than zerg. Seriously no one gives a crap about Europe's gold league noobs playing protoss more than zerg. Zerg fanbois who keep saying that zerg is not OP and that Trap is just pure trash in talent comparing to Serral or Rogue, how about you tell us a build order, that even when scouted, can still deterministically beat someone like Serral? Write it down please? Because if you can't, that means that zerg is actually OP, because someone like Serral and Rogue, who has the protoss' playbook memorized, can then always defend the early and midgame attacks and come out ahead, given zerg's far superior economy (we all know how rediculous larva mechanics and zerg economy is, if you can't deal damage and slow them down early game, its game over).
Stop falttering yourselves that whenever Serral / Rogue or whichever bullsh*t zerg wins a game, its because they r supremely talented, instead of the obvious fact that zerg is just rediculuously overpowered. Honestly, you should just turn starcraft into a zvz game - how fun is it to see two players spamming larva and queens going at it against each other LOL woohoooo 200 supply vs 200 supply in 8 minutes, queens can defend everything early game, lets spam vipers and lurkersss, wt a joke of a race
Please, I would love a reply from a zerg fanboi. I bet you again hes gonna avoid the topic head on, and say that OHH BUT EUROPE GM IS FULL OF PROTOSS lol, like anyone of us f cares. Just turn professional strarcraft into zvz already yea
Seriously no one gives a crap about Europe's gold league noobs playing protoss more than zerg.
It isn't gold league that is the problem, it is the highest possible ladder. The new pro players are to come from that Protoss filled mess. The Protoss oversaturation makes the ladder experience less enjoyable for everyone. A variation is needed for the players to enjoy playing a lot. If ladder is not fun, players will play less. This is detrimental in several ways. - less engagement in the community - longer wait times when playing ladder, which also leads to bigger discrepancies in skill level in ladder games - fewer players practicing enough to go pro, which leads to fewer new players on the pro scene
Having a lot of 1 race in GM is bad. It doesn't matter which race it is that dominates. The above is true nonetheless.
I would argue then that if any strategy, if scouted, can always be defended, then protoss is underpowered and zerg is overpowered
I suspect that you do not mean what you wrote since the corollary of this is that there should exist a strategy that protoss can use which wins even if the zerg make all preparations they can.
People complained about the soul train that PartinG used to win. That was a build that won even if the Zerg knew it was coming (fitting that it was a PvZ build). The soul train fits your indicated wish. PartinG won more than he lost with the soul train, so that build was used by him vs every Zerg because it was better than having variety.
Another example is less general and more map dependent, but sOs was winning every PvZ in Proleague for quite some time. He cannon rushed every game. After a while the Zergs started blind countering, but he kept winning. He had 100% wins PvZ on a few maps. This also fits the "Zerg can know but not defend".
You are mentioning that Zerg can scout everything. To me, this makes it more likely that the ability to scout is too easily available rather than the ability to adapt to the scouting information being the issue. If you know everything and you do everything correctly you should be able to defend an attack every time. Attacks are investments. They are losing you something in exchange for damage to your opponent. If the opponent know everything and do everything correctly then they have both defenders advantage and the ability to make units that counter the units of the attacker. My opinion is that there should be builds and strategies that are hard to scout and the response should be costly for the Zerg. This would disallow the Zerg from cutting corners and invest a lot into macro.
You lift the ladder and say it isn't an issue. This is flat out, objectively wrong. It is an issue, but it is not the same issue as Protoss being weak in the absolute top.
You also mention Zerg ability to defend, and I disagree with your assessment. I think that scouting is the issue, not the adapting to the scouting. How to adress scouting is not something I know how to do. Slower Overlords? Stronger Stalkers vs Overlords? Different map layout to help hiding? Different map layout to aide variance in Protoss attacks? Please help with this!
I think the problem is that with many of the toss attacks on the highest level it feels like the outcome is mostly in the zergs hand, if the zerg doesnt react well he loses, and if he does he wins. With the soul train if the toss was really good at it (like parting) the zerg would lose even if he scouted it because the toss also has an effect on the outcome, with stuff like adept pushes etc it doesn't seem like that.
On December 19 2021 23:18 Drfilip wrote: Entire quote: + Show Spoiler +
On December 19 2021 03:48 kingism wrote: The biggest problem with the design of starcraft is that zerg is supposed to be reactive and protoss the active one who decides the flow of the game. However, blizzard also decided that there shouldn't be a strategy by protoss (or terran) which is not deterministically defendable by zerg, meaning that, there MUST always be a way to defend a certain protoss attack strategy, otherwise protoss will be considered OP (and zerg bois will be crying OP).
The flipside of this is that the top zergs (who can always scout perfectly by sending in a few speed overlords) will always be able to defend wtever comes their way. Given that zerg's economy and production is miles ahead of protoss, I would argue then that if any strategy, if scouted, can always be defended, then protoss is underpowered and zerg is overpowered, at least in the highest level where no mistakes are made, unfortunately.
Zerg fanbois, stop giving us the bullsh*t about some scrub league's protoss representation being higher than zerg. Seriously no one gives a crap about Europe's gold league noobs playing protoss more than zerg. Zerg fanbois who keep saying that zerg is not OP and that Trap is just pure trash in talent comparing to Serral or Rogue, how about you tell us a build order, that even when scouted, can still deterministically beat someone like Serral? Write it down please? Because if you can't, that means that zerg is actually OP, because someone like Serral and Rogue, who has the protoss' playbook memorized, can then always defend the early and midgame attacks and come out ahead, given zerg's far superior economy (we all know how rediculous larva mechanics and zerg economy is, if you can't deal damage and slow them down early game, its game over).
Stop falttering yourselves that whenever Serral / Rogue or whichever bullsh*t zerg wins a game, its because they r supremely talented, instead of the obvious fact that zerg is just rediculuously overpowered. Honestly, you should just turn starcraft into a zvz game - how fun is it to see two players spamming larva and queens going at it against each other LOL woohoooo 200 supply vs 200 supply in 8 minutes, queens can defend everything early game, lets spam vipers and lurkersss, wt a joke of a race
Please, I would love a reply from a zerg fanboi. I bet you again hes gonna avoid the topic head on, and say that OHH BUT EUROPE GM IS FULL OF PROTOSS lol, like anyone of us f cares. Just turn professional strarcraft into zvz already yea
Seriously no one gives a crap about Europe's gold league noobs playing protoss more than zerg.
It isn't gold league that is the problem, it is the highest possible ladder. The new pro players are to come from that Protoss filled mess. The Protoss oversaturation makes the ladder experience less enjoyable for everyone. A variation is needed for the players to enjoy playing a lot. If ladder is not fun, players will play less. This is detrimental in several ways. - less engagement in the community - longer wait times when playing ladder, which also leads to bigger discrepancies in skill level in ladder games - fewer players practicing enough to go pro, which leads to fewer new players on the pro scene
Having a lot of 1 race in GM is bad. It doesn't matter which race it is that dominates. The above is true nonetheless.
I would argue then that if any strategy, if scouted, can always be defended, then protoss is underpowered and zerg is overpowered
I suspect that you do not mean what you wrote since the corollary of this is that there should exist a strategy that protoss can use which wins even if the zerg make all preparations they can.
People complained about the soul train that PartinG used to win. That was a build that won even if the Zerg knew it was coming (fitting that it was a PvZ build). The soul train fits your indicated wish. PartinG won more than he lost with the soul train, so that build was used by him vs every Zerg because it was better than having variety.
Another example is less general and more map dependent, but sOs was winning every PvZ in Proleague for quite some time. He cannon rushed every game. After a while the Zergs started blind countering, but he kept winning. He had 100% wins PvZ on a few maps. This also fits the "Zerg can know but not defend".
You are mentioning that Zerg can scout everything. To me, this makes it more likely that the ability to scout is too easily available rather than the ability to adapt to the scouting information being the issue. If you know everything and you do everything correctly you should be able to defend an attack every time. Attacks are investments. They are losing you something in exchange for damage to your opponent. If the opponent know everything and do everything correctly then they have both defenders advantage and the ability to make units that counter the units of the attacker. My opinion is that there should be builds and strategies that are hard to scout and the response should be costly for the Zerg. This would disallow the Zerg from cutting corners and invest a lot into macro.
You lift the ladder and say it isn't an issue. This is flat out, objectively wrong. It is an issue, but it is not the same issue as Protoss being weak in the absolute top.
You also mention Zerg ability to defend, and I disagree with your assessment. I think that scouting is the issue, not the adapting to the scouting. How to adress scouting is not something I know how to do. Slower Overlords? Stronger Stalkers vs Overlords? Different map layout to help hiding? Different map layout to aide variance in Protoss attacks? Please help with this!
I think the problem is that with many of the toss attacks on the highest level it feels like the outcome is mostly in the zergs hand, if the zerg doesnt react well he loses, and if he does he wins. With the soul train if the toss was really good at it (like parting) the zerg would lose even if he scouted it because the toss also has an effect on the outcome, with stuff like adept pushes etc it doesn't seem like that.
Rather than making timing pushes stronger/undefendable I'd prefer to see Toss being able to going toe to toe with Zerg in macro. Which they sometimes can, it's a hyperbole to say Protoss can never touch Zerg in a macrogame, they just need a little boost to make it a more regular occurence imo
On December 19 2021 23:18 Drfilip wrote: Entire quote: + Show Spoiler +
On December 19 2021 03:48 kingism wrote: The biggest problem with the design of starcraft is that zerg is supposed to be reactive and protoss the active one who decides the flow of the game. However, blizzard also decided that there shouldn't be a strategy by protoss (or terran) which is not deterministically defendable by zerg, meaning that, there MUST always be a way to defend a certain protoss attack strategy, otherwise protoss will be considered OP (and zerg bois will be crying OP).
The flipside of this is that the top zergs (who can always scout perfectly by sending in a few speed overlords) will always be able to defend wtever comes their way. Given that zerg's economy and production is miles ahead of protoss, I would argue then that if any strategy, if scouted, can always be defended, then protoss is underpowered and zerg is overpowered, at least in the highest level where no mistakes are made, unfortunately.
Zerg fanbois, stop giving us the bullsh*t about some scrub league's protoss representation being higher than zerg. Seriously no one gives a crap about Europe's gold league noobs playing protoss more than zerg. Zerg fanbois who keep saying that zerg is not OP and that Trap is just pure trash in talent comparing to Serral or Rogue, how about you tell us a build order, that even when scouted, can still deterministically beat someone like Serral? Write it down please? Because if you can't, that means that zerg is actually OP, because someone like Serral and Rogue, who has the protoss' playbook memorized, can then always defend the early and midgame attacks and come out ahead, given zerg's far superior economy (we all know how rediculous larva mechanics and zerg economy is, if you can't deal damage and slow them down early game, its game over).
Stop falttering yourselves that whenever Serral / Rogue or whichever bullsh*t zerg wins a game, its because they r supremely talented, instead of the obvious fact that zerg is just rediculuously overpowered. Honestly, you should just turn starcraft into a zvz game - how fun is it to see two players spamming larva and queens going at it against each other LOL woohoooo 200 supply vs 200 supply in 8 minutes, queens can defend everything early game, lets spam vipers and lurkersss, wt a joke of a race
Please, I would love a reply from a zerg fanboi. I bet you again hes gonna avoid the topic head on, and say that OHH BUT EUROPE GM IS FULL OF PROTOSS lol, like anyone of us f cares. Just turn professional strarcraft into zvz already yea
Seriously no one gives a crap about Europe's gold league noobs playing protoss more than zerg.
It isn't gold league that is the problem, it is the highest possible ladder. The new pro players are to come from that Protoss filled mess. The Protoss oversaturation makes the ladder experience less enjoyable for everyone. A variation is needed for the players to enjoy playing a lot. If ladder is not fun, players will play less. This is detrimental in several ways. - less engagement in the community - longer wait times when playing ladder, which also leads to bigger discrepancies in skill level in ladder games - fewer players practicing enough to go pro, which leads to fewer new players on the pro scene
Having a lot of 1 race in GM is bad. It doesn't matter which race it is that dominates. The above is true nonetheless.
I would argue then that if any strategy, if scouted, can always be defended, then protoss is underpowered and zerg is overpowered
I suspect that you do not mean what you wrote since the corollary of this is that there should exist a strategy that protoss can use which wins even if the zerg make all preparations they can.
People complained about the soul train that PartinG used to win. That was a build that won even if the Zerg knew it was coming (fitting that it was a PvZ build). The soul train fits your indicated wish. PartinG won more than he lost with the soul train, so that build was used by him vs every Zerg because it was better than having variety.
Another example is less general and more map dependent, but sOs was winning every PvZ in Proleague for quite some time. He cannon rushed every game. After a while the Zergs started blind countering, but he kept winning. He had 100% wins PvZ on a few maps. This also fits the "Zerg can know but not defend".
You are mentioning that Zerg can scout everything. To me, this makes it more likely that the ability to scout is too easily available rather than the ability to adapt to the scouting information being the issue. If you know everything and you do everything correctly you should be able to defend an attack every time. Attacks are investments. They are losing you something in exchange for damage to your opponent. If the opponent know everything and do everything correctly then they have both defenders advantage and the ability to make units that counter the units of the attacker. My opinion is that there should be builds and strategies that are hard to scout and the response should be costly for the Zerg. This would disallow the Zerg from cutting corners and invest a lot into macro.
You lift the ladder and say it isn't an issue. This is flat out, objectively wrong. It is an issue, but it is not the same issue as Protoss being weak in the absolute top.
You also mention Zerg ability to defend, and I disagree with your assessment. I think that scouting is the issue, not the adapting to the scouting. How to adress scouting is not something I know how to do. Slower Overlords? Stronger Stalkers vs Overlords? Different map layout to help hiding? Different map layout to aide variance in Protoss attacks? Please help with this!
I think the problem is that with many of the toss attacks on the highest level it feels like the outcome is mostly in the zergs hand, if the zerg doesnt react well he loses, and if he does he wins. With the soul train if the toss was really good at it (like parting) the zerg would lose even if he scouted it because the toss also has an effect on the outcome, with stuff like adept pushes etc it doesn't seem like that.
Rather than making timing pushes stronger/undefendable I'd prefer to see Toss being able to going toe to toe with Zerg in macro. Which they sometimes can, it's a hyperbole to say Protoss can never touch Zerg in a macrogame, they just need a little boost to make it a more regular occurence imo
The problem is always the same.
How do you make Protoss better in a macro game without making them broken when they are in an All In?
The problem there is Warp Gate.
It really is the root of all of Protoss' problems. I've been saying it for years. You can't just leave a nearly instant distanceless reinforcement mechanic like that exist if you want a race to have a regular macro game.
On December 19 2021 23:18 Drfilip wrote: Entire quote: + Show Spoiler +
On December 19 2021 03:48 kingism wrote: The biggest problem with the design of starcraft is that zerg is supposed to be reactive and protoss the active one who decides the flow of the game. However, blizzard also decided that there shouldn't be a strategy by protoss (or terran) which is not deterministically defendable by zerg, meaning that, there MUST always be a way to defend a certain protoss attack strategy, otherwise protoss will be considered OP (and zerg bois will be crying OP).
The flipside of this is that the top zergs (who can always scout perfectly by sending in a few speed overlords) will always be able to defend wtever comes their way. Given that zerg's economy and production is miles ahead of protoss, I would argue then that if any strategy, if scouted, can always be defended, then protoss is underpowered and zerg is overpowered, at least in the highest level where no mistakes are made, unfortunately.
Zerg fanbois, stop giving us the bullsh*t about some scrub league's protoss representation being higher than zerg. Seriously no one gives a crap about Europe's gold league noobs playing protoss more than zerg. Zerg fanbois who keep saying that zerg is not OP and that Trap is just pure trash in talent comparing to Serral or Rogue, how about you tell us a build order, that even when scouted, can still deterministically beat someone like Serral? Write it down please? Because if you can't, that means that zerg is actually OP, because someone like Serral and Rogue, who has the protoss' playbook memorized, can then always defend the early and midgame attacks and come out ahead, given zerg's far superior economy (we all know how rediculous larva mechanics and zerg economy is, if you can't deal damage and slow them down early game, its game over).
Stop falttering yourselves that whenever Serral / Rogue or whichever bullsh*t zerg wins a game, its because they r supremely talented, instead of the obvious fact that zerg is just rediculuously overpowered. Honestly, you should just turn starcraft into a zvz game - how fun is it to see two players spamming larva and queens going at it against each other LOL woohoooo 200 supply vs 200 supply in 8 minutes, queens can defend everything early game, lets spam vipers and lurkersss, wt a joke of a race
Please, I would love a reply from a zerg fanboi. I bet you again hes gonna avoid the topic head on, and say that OHH BUT EUROPE GM IS FULL OF PROTOSS lol, like anyone of us f cares. Just turn professional strarcraft into zvz already yea
Seriously no one gives a crap about Europe's gold league noobs playing protoss more than zerg.
It isn't gold league that is the problem, it is the highest possible ladder. The new pro players are to come from that Protoss filled mess. The Protoss oversaturation makes the ladder experience less enjoyable for everyone. A variation is needed for the players to enjoy playing a lot. If ladder is not fun, players will play less. This is detrimental in several ways. - less engagement in the community - longer wait times when playing ladder, which also leads to bigger discrepancies in skill level in ladder games - fewer players practicing enough to go pro, which leads to fewer new players on the pro scene
Having a lot of 1 race in GM is bad. It doesn't matter which race it is that dominates. The above is true nonetheless.
I would argue then that if any strategy, if scouted, can always be defended, then protoss is underpowered and zerg is overpowered
I suspect that you do not mean what you wrote since the corollary of this is that there should exist a strategy that protoss can use which wins even if the zerg make all preparations they can.
People complained about the soul train that PartinG used to win. That was a build that won even if the Zerg knew it was coming (fitting that it was a PvZ build). The soul train fits your indicated wish. PartinG won more than he lost with the soul train, so that build was used by him vs every Zerg because it was better than having variety.
Another example is less general and more map dependent, but sOs was winning every PvZ in Proleague for quite some time. He cannon rushed every game. After a while the Zergs started blind countering, but he kept winning. He had 100% wins PvZ on a few maps. This also fits the "Zerg can know but not defend".
You are mentioning that Zerg can scout everything. To me, this makes it more likely that the ability to scout is too easily available rather than the ability to adapt to the scouting information being the issue. If you know everything and you do everything correctly you should be able to defend an attack every time. Attacks are investments. They are losing you something in exchange for damage to your opponent. If the opponent know everything and do everything correctly then they have both defenders advantage and the ability to make units that counter the units of the attacker. My opinion is that there should be builds and strategies that are hard to scout and the response should be costly for the Zerg. This would disallow the Zerg from cutting corners and invest a lot into macro.
You lift the ladder and say it isn't an issue. This is flat out, objectively wrong. It is an issue, but it is not the same issue as Protoss being weak in the absolute top.
You also mention Zerg ability to defend, and I disagree with your assessment. I think that scouting is the issue, not the adapting to the scouting. How to adress scouting is not something I know how to do. Slower Overlords? Stronger Stalkers vs Overlords? Different map layout to help hiding? Different map layout to aide variance in Protoss attacks? Please help with this!
I think the problem is that with many of the toss attacks on the highest level it feels like the outcome is mostly in the zergs hand, if the zerg doesnt react well he loses, and if he does he wins. With the soul train if the toss was really good at it (like parting) the zerg would lose even if he scouted it because the toss also has an effect on the outcome, with stuff like adept pushes etc it doesn't seem like that.
Rather than making timing pushes stronger/undefendable I'd prefer to see Toss being able to going toe to toe with Zerg in macro. Which they sometimes can, it's a hyperbole to say Protoss can never touch Zerg in a macrogame, they just need a little boost to make it a more regular occurence imo
The problem is always the same.
How do you make Protoss better in a macro game without making them broken when they are in an All In?
The problem there is Warp Gate.
It really is the root of all of Protoss' problems. I've been saying it for years. You can't just leave a nearly instant distanceless reinforcement mechanic like that exist if you want a race to have a regular macro game.
I'd guess some late game ground upgrades locked behind later tech or smth.
On December 19 2021 23:18 Drfilip wrote: Entire quote: + Show Spoiler +
On December 19 2021 03:48 kingism wrote: The biggest problem with the design of starcraft is that zerg is supposed to be reactive and protoss the active one who decides the flow of the game. However, blizzard also decided that there shouldn't be a strategy by protoss (or terran) which is not deterministically defendable by zerg, meaning that, there MUST always be a way to defend a certain protoss attack strategy, otherwise protoss will be considered OP (and zerg bois will be crying OP).
The flipside of this is that the top zergs (who can always scout perfectly by sending in a few speed overlords) will always be able to defend wtever comes their way. Given that zerg's economy and production is miles ahead of protoss, I would argue then that if any strategy, if scouted, can always be defended, then protoss is underpowered and zerg is overpowered, at least in the highest level where no mistakes are made, unfortunately.
Zerg fanbois, stop giving us the bullsh*t about some scrub league's protoss representation being higher than zerg. Seriously no one gives a crap about Europe's gold league noobs playing protoss more than zerg. Zerg fanbois who keep saying that zerg is not OP and that Trap is just pure trash in talent comparing to Serral or Rogue, how about you tell us a build order, that even when scouted, can still deterministically beat someone like Serral? Write it down please? Because if you can't, that means that zerg is actually OP, because someone like Serral and Rogue, who has the protoss' playbook memorized, can then always defend the early and midgame attacks and come out ahead, given zerg's far superior economy (we all know how rediculous larva mechanics and zerg economy is, if you can't deal damage and slow them down early game, its game over).
Stop falttering yourselves that whenever Serral / Rogue or whichever bullsh*t zerg wins a game, its because they r supremely talented, instead of the obvious fact that zerg is just rediculuously overpowered. Honestly, you should just turn starcraft into a zvz game - how fun is it to see two players spamming larva and queens going at it against each other LOL woohoooo 200 supply vs 200 supply in 8 minutes, queens can defend everything early game, lets spam vipers and lurkersss, wt a joke of a race
Please, I would love a reply from a zerg fanboi. I bet you again hes gonna avoid the topic head on, and say that OHH BUT EUROPE GM IS FULL OF PROTOSS lol, like anyone of us f cares. Just turn professional strarcraft into zvz already yea
Seriously no one gives a crap about Europe's gold league noobs playing protoss more than zerg.
It isn't gold league that is the problem, it is the highest possible ladder. The new pro players are to come from that Protoss filled mess. The Protoss oversaturation makes the ladder experience less enjoyable for everyone. A variation is needed for the players to enjoy playing a lot. If ladder is not fun, players will play less. This is detrimental in several ways. - less engagement in the community - longer wait times when playing ladder, which also leads to bigger discrepancies in skill level in ladder games - fewer players practicing enough to go pro, which leads to fewer new players on the pro scene
Having a lot of 1 race in GM is bad. It doesn't matter which race it is that dominates. The above is true nonetheless.
I would argue then that if any strategy, if scouted, can always be defended, then protoss is underpowered and zerg is overpowered
I suspect that you do not mean what you wrote since the corollary of this is that there should exist a strategy that protoss can use which wins even if the zerg make all preparations they can.
People complained about the soul train that PartinG used to win. That was a build that won even if the Zerg knew it was coming (fitting that it was a PvZ build). The soul train fits your indicated wish. PartinG won more than he lost with the soul train, so that build was used by him vs every Zerg because it was better than having variety.
Another example is less general and more map dependent, but sOs was winning every PvZ in Proleague for quite some time. He cannon rushed every game. After a while the Zergs started blind countering, but he kept winning. He had 100% wins PvZ on a few maps. This also fits the "Zerg can know but not defend".
You are mentioning that Zerg can scout everything. To me, this makes it more likely that the ability to scout is too easily available rather than the ability to adapt to the scouting information being the issue. If you know everything and you do everything correctly you should be able to defend an attack every time. Attacks are investments. They are losing you something in exchange for damage to your opponent. If the opponent know everything and do everything correctly then they have both defenders advantage and the ability to make units that counter the units of the attacker. My opinion is that there should be builds and strategies that are hard to scout and the response should be costly for the Zerg. This would disallow the Zerg from cutting corners and invest a lot into macro.
You lift the ladder and say it isn't an issue. This is flat out, objectively wrong. It is an issue, but it is not the same issue as Protoss being weak in the absolute top.
You also mention Zerg ability to defend, and I disagree with your assessment. I think that scouting is the issue, not the adapting to the scouting. How to adress scouting is not something I know how to do. Slower Overlords? Stronger Stalkers vs Overlords? Different map layout to help hiding? Different map layout to aide variance in Protoss attacks? Please help with this!
I think the problem is that with many of the toss attacks on the highest level it feels like the outcome is mostly in the zergs hand, if the zerg doesnt react well he loses, and if he does he wins. With the soul train if the toss was really good at it (like parting) the zerg would lose even if he scouted it because the toss also has an effect on the outcome, with stuff like adept pushes etc it doesn't seem like that.
Rather than making timing pushes stronger/undefendable I'd prefer to see Toss being able to going toe to toe with Zerg in macro. Which they sometimes can, it's a hyperbole to say Protoss can never touch Zerg in a macrogame, they just need a little boost to make it a more regular occurence imo
The problem is always the same.
How do you make Protoss better in a macro game without making them broken when they are in an All In?
The problem there is Warp Gate.
It really is the root of all of Protoss' problems. I've been saying it for years. You can't just leave a nearly instant distanceless reinforcement mechanic like that exist if you want a race to have a regular macro game.
I'd guess some late game ground upgrades locked behind later tech or smth.
Yea, that's what I would do, that's what any REASONABLE person would do.
But Warp Gate as it exists now is locked behind the fucking Cybernetics Core. It's as high tech as fucking Stim Pack for Terran. Think about that. Stim Pack vs Warp Gate, think how important one is for one race vs the other. And then realize that Warp Gate research time has been nerfed like 5 times because of the OTHER Protoss mechanic: Chronoboost.
It's completely ridiculous.
If Warp Gate was locked the way Arbiters used to be, then it would make so much more sense. You could make Gateway units so much stronger because the reinforcement of them would be so much more late game and difficult. But as it is now, the game is STILL balanced around the oldest of Protoss builds which is the 4 gate. Once an attack starts from a Protoss it never stops. The units are instantly in your face and you can reinforce onto high ground or behind you or anything.
It's such a powerful mechanic, that it makes you think, NO WONDER pure Gateway armies are garbage if the enemy has a real army to defend you. No WONDER that's how it works. Protoss armies NEED support from Robotics or Stargates because those units can't be reinforced that way. It all makes sense when you realize that, that is the fundamental mechanic that guides everything that they do. If you moved that deeper into their tech tree which is where it SHOULD be both lore wise and gameplay wise, you could make Protoss units what they were in Brood War which would open the race to so many things that currently they are locked to because of that ONE mechanic.
I've been saying it for years. I will keep saying it. Warp Gate is the problem.
I'm fine with every protoss build, if scouted, deals 0 damage to zerg, IF zerg and protoss have the same level economy and unit production. At the moment, zerg's economy and unit production is far stronger than protoss. If protoss doesn't deal enough damage to zerg early to mid game, zerg will get to 200 supply with a disgusting number of drones and 6+ bases when protoss is still at 130 supply and 3 bases. We all know what happens next lol.
So zerg bois want 1) to have far superior economy and unit production 2) to easily defend every possible protoss attack. LOL why don't you guys just turn starcraft into a zvz already. What a joke.
On December 20 2021 03:57 kingism wrote: I'm fine with every protoss build, if scouted, deals 0 damage to zerg, IF zerg and protoss have the same level economy and unit production. At the moment, zerg's economy and unit production is far stronger than protoss. If protoss doesn't deal enough damage to zerg early to mid game, zerg will get to 200 supply with a disgusting number of drones and 6+ bases when protoss is still at 130 supply and 3 bases. We all know what happens next lol.
So zerg bois want 1) to have far superior economy and unit production 2) to easily defend every possible protoss attack. LOL why don't you guys just turn starcraft into a zvz already. What a joke.
I am glad that you loosened the hyperbole somewhat. A lot of the discussion in this thread is about what is making ZvP imbalanced at top level (and why the imbalance is opposite at slightly lower level). Letting Protoss have a strong army that is a threat (via a warp gate nerf to stymie early game all ins) is one repeated argument. With a stronger Protoss army the Zerg would be forced to invest more into army and less into economy. The Protoss unit production is unchanged, but the Zerg economy is heavily affected.
My suggestion of making scouting weaker to empower Protoss attacking potential would give a similar effect, with the downside of more "1 fight to end it all" games. Rather than raising the skill ceiling of Protoss this would lower the skill ceiling of Zerg. My suggestion was more bad than good in retrospect.
You keep saying "zerg bois" or something similar. Who are they? The opinions you attribute to them are not opinions I've seen being used by more than you. Are you building a straw man in order to be upset or are they hiding some other place than this thread?
On December 20 2021 03:57 kingism wrote: I'm fine with every protoss build, if scouted, deals 0 damage to zerg, IF zerg and protoss have the same level economy and unit production. At the moment, zerg's economy and unit production is far stronger than protoss. If protoss doesn't deal enough damage to zerg early to mid game, zerg will get to 200 supply with a disgusting number of drones and 6+ bases when protoss is still at 130 supply and 3 bases. We all know what happens next lol.
So zerg bois want 1) to have far superior economy and unit production 2) to easily defend every possible protoss attack. LOL why don't you guys just turn starcraft into a zvz already. What a joke.
I am glad that you loosened the hyperbole somewhat. A lot of the discussion in this thread is about what is making ZvP imbalanced at top level (and why the imbalance is opposite at slightly lower level). Letting Protoss have a strong army that is a threat (via a warp gate nerf to stymie early game all ins) is one repeated argument. With a stronger Protoss army the Zerg would be forced to invest more into army and less into economy. The Protoss unit production is unchanged, but the Zerg economy is heavily affected.
My suggestion of making scouting weaker to empower Protoss attacking potential would give a similar effect, with the downside of more "1 fight to end it all" games. Rather than raising the skill ceiling of Protoss this would lower the skill ceiling of Zerg. My suggestion was more bad than good in retrospect.
You keep saying "zerg bois" or something similar. Who are they? The opinions you attribute to them are not opinions I've seen being used by more than you. Are you building a straw man in order to be upset or are they hiding some other place than this thread?
Zerg bois is everybody who disaggrees with this poster. I would ignore him if I were you
On December 20 2021 03:57 kingism wrote: I'm fine with every protoss build, if scouted, deals 0 damage to zerg, IF zerg and protoss have the same level economy and unit production. At the moment, zerg's economy and unit production is far stronger than protoss. If protoss doesn't deal enough damage to zerg early to mid game, zerg will get to 200 supply with a disgusting number of drones and 6+ bases when protoss is still at 130 supply and 3 bases. We all know what happens next lol.
So zerg bois want 1) to have far superior economy and unit production 2) to easily defend every possible protoss attack. LOL why don't you guys just turn starcraft into a zvz already. What a joke.
I am glad that you loosened the hyperbole somewhat. A lot of the discussion in this thread is about what is making ZvP imbalanced at top level (and why the imbalance is opposite at slightly lower level). Letting Protoss have a strong army that is a threat (via a warp gate nerf to stymie early game all ins) is one repeated argument. With a stronger Protoss army the Zerg would be forced to invest more into army and less into economy. The Protoss unit production is unchanged, but the Zerg economy is heavily affected.
My suggestion of making scouting weaker to empower Protoss attacking potential would give a similar effect, with the downside of more "1 fight to end it all" games. Rather than raising the skill ceiling of Protoss this would lower the skill ceiling of Zerg. My suggestion was more bad than good in retrospect.
You keep saying "zerg bois" or something similar. Who are they? The opinions you attribute to them are not opinions I've seen being used by more than you. Are you building a straw man in order to be upset or are they hiding some other place than this thread?
Zerg bois is everybody who disaggrees with this poster. I would ignore him if I were you
Imo posters like this is what you get when the general protoss hostility meets the results protoss are producing recently.
The "maybe protoss players are just worse" or "protoss just doesn't have a strong top contender right now" arguments just don't hold, and it's baffling that this rhetoric keeps coming up after all this time. If protoss are underrepresented at the highest level of play then that is a very strong indication that something is not right.
Yeah sure Protoss has less mechanically demanding compositions which means that below pro level protoss will be more popular but I don't see why this somehow makes it fair that stronger players should have less tools? Like it's some sort of "ladder revenge".
Why are gateway units (barring early game trickery?) still garbage? Sure people like to whine about protoss aoe and mass air but what other options do they have since "midgame" is barely a thing anymore?
On December 20 2021 11:50 WaesumNinja wrote: The "maybe protoss players are just worse" or "protoss just doesn't have a strong top contender right now" arguments just don't hold, and it's baffling that this rhetoric keeps coming up after all this time. If protoss are underrepresented at the highest level of play then that is a very strong indication that something is not right.
Yeah sure Protoss has less mechanically demanding compositions which means that below pro level protoss will be more popular but I don't see why this somehow makes it fair that stronger players should have less tools? Like it's some sort of "ladder revenge".
Why are gateway units (barring early game trickery?) still garbage? Sure people like to whine about protoss aoe and mass air but what other options do they have since "midgame" is barely a thing anymore?
Go ahead and name a Protoss player that you think is as skilled as Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral or Reynor?
Go ahead and name someone that is consistently a top performer as those 5 are.
Trap is the only name that comes close and he has nerves that are made of glass. He's demonstrated that in tournament after tournament.
Zest is the only champion caliber Protoss out there and even a casual fan can tell that he is in a horrific slump right now because that's what he does. He is a feast or famine streaky player.
Protoss DOES NOT have a consistent performer right now. They just don't. You can't name a player that you can say without embarassing yourself that has shown to have the same level of skill that those 5 players I mentioned have.
On December 20 2021 11:50 WaesumNinja wrote: The "maybe protoss players are just worse" or "protoss just doesn't have a strong top contender right now" arguments just don't hold, and it's baffling that this rhetoric keeps coming up after all this time. If protoss are underrepresented at the highest level of play then that is a very strong indication that something is not right.
Yeah sure Protoss has less mechanically demanding compositions which means that below pro level protoss will be more popular but I don't see why this somehow makes it fair that stronger players should have less tools? Like it's some sort of "ladder revenge".
Why are gateway units (barring early game trickery?) still garbage? Sure people like to whine about protoss aoe and mass air but what other options do they have since "midgame" is barely a thing anymore?
Go ahead and name a Protoss player that you think is as skilled as Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral or Reynor?
Go ahead and name someone that is consistently a top performer as those 5 are.
Trap is the only name that comes close and he has nerves that are made of glass. He's demonstrated that in tournament after tournament.
Zest is the only champion caliber Protoss out there and even a casual fan can tell that he is in a horrific slump right now because that's what he does. He is a feast or famine streaky player.
Protoss DOES NOT have a consistent performer right now. They just don't. You can't name a player that you can say without embarassing yourself that has shown to have the same level of skill that those 5 players I mentioned have.
I think this is half of the problem, the other problem is power creep. Simply put, Zerg got alot of new tools as time went on while Protoss were kind of limited long term due to Warp Gate.
I still think a targeted nerf of the Lurker would go a long way to improving ZvP as a whole. A smart poster in here recommended Psi Storm doing extra damage to burrowed units, and while I think it's an inelegant solution, I think the Lurker is specifically overpowered vs. Protoss compared to Terran.
Lurkers are powerful in ZvT as well, but they don't seem to put Terran on a timer the way they do to Protoss, Terran has at least semi consistent ways of dealing with them, even if using mass snipe is an APM/mechanical nightmare.
On December 20 2021 11:50 WaesumNinja wrote: The "maybe protoss players are just worse" or "protoss just doesn't have a strong top contender right now" arguments just don't hold, and it's baffling that this rhetoric keeps coming up after all this time. If protoss are underrepresented at the highest level of play then that is a very strong indication that something is not right.
Yeah sure Protoss has less mechanically demanding compositions which means that below pro level protoss will be more popular but I don't see why this somehow makes it fair that stronger players should have less tools? Like it's some sort of "ladder revenge".
Why are gateway units (barring early game trickery?) still garbage? Sure people like to whine about protoss aoe and mass air but what other options do they have since "midgame" is barely a thing anymore?
Go ahead and name a Protoss player that you think is as skilled as Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral or Reynor?
Go ahead and name someone that is consistently a top performer as those 5 are.
Trap is the only name that comes close and he has nerves that are made of glass. He's demonstrated that in tournament after tournament.
Zest is the only champion caliber Protoss out there and even a casual fan can tell that he is in a horrific slump right now because that's what he does. He is a feast or famine streaky player.
Protoss DOES NOT have a consistent performer right now. They just don't. You can't name a player that you can say without embarassing yourself that has shown to have the same level of skill that those 5 players I mentioned have.
I think this is half of the problem, the other problem is power creep. Simply put, Zerg got alot of new tools as time went on while Protoss were kind of limited long term due to Warp Gate.
I still think a targeted nerf of the Lurker would go a long way to improving ZvP as a whole. A smart poster in here recommended Psi Storm doing extra damage to burrowed units, and while I think it's an inelegant solution, I think the Lurker is specifically overpowered vs. Protoss compared to Terran.
Lurkers are powerful in ZvT as well, but they don't seem to put Terran on a timer the way they do to Protoss, Terran has at least semi consistent ways of dealing with them, even if using mass snipe is an APM/mechanical nightmare.
Protoss obviously has MANY design problems, I've mentioned the big one that I haven't shut up about since 2010 but there are others.
But that's not to say that Protoss as a race is WEAK by any means in the current meta because it's not. Protoss dominates the ladder in EU and NA and is even with Terran in Korea when Terran has ruled Korea in virtually every meta since 2010.
Protoss is doing just fine. They aren't showing results because the pool of TOP level talent for Protoss is weaker than it ever has been before and those 5 players plus a little bit of Cure thrown in are the ones winning literally everything right now. There is no Protoss on the level of those elite 5 right now. There just isn't.
On December 20 2021 11:50 WaesumNinja wrote: The "maybe protoss players are just worse" or "protoss just doesn't have a strong top contender right now" arguments just don't hold, and it's baffling that this rhetoric keeps coming up after all this time. If protoss are underrepresented at the highest level of play then that is a very strong indication that something is not right.
Yeah sure Protoss has less mechanically demanding compositions which means that below pro level protoss will be more popular but I don't see why this somehow makes it fair that stronger players should have less tools? Like it's some sort of "ladder revenge".
Why are gateway units (barring early game trickery?) still garbage? Sure people like to whine about protoss aoe and mass air but what other options do they have since "midgame" is barely a thing anymore?
Go ahead and name a Protoss player that you think is as skilled as Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral or Reynor?
Go ahead and name someone that is consistently a top performer as those 5 are.
Protoss DOES NOT have a consistent performer right now. They just don't. You can't name a player that you can say without embarassing yourself that has shown to have the same level of skill that those 5 players I mentioned have.
That's a bit of a catch-22 though, isn't it? You can't deflect "there is a problem with high level play" with "there just aren't any top protoss players" because "the top protoss players don't perform as well".
With what metric do you measure someone's skill/performance? Wins, right? Because there are inherent problems saying things like "Maru demolished Zest, but Zest is actually more skilled". You just couldn't tell unless he starts consistently beating him, right? We have only one indisputable metric, and everything else is just theorycrafters saying things like "he has more control groups, so he's better" and other nonsense.
This argument has been shit since people started using it in the GomTvT days. Yeah, we can't name any "top performers", that's what we are talking about.
On December 20 2021 11:50 WaesumNinja wrote: The "maybe protoss players are just worse" or "protoss just doesn't have a strong top contender right now" arguments just don't hold, and it's baffling that this rhetoric keeps coming up after all this time. If protoss are underrepresented at the highest level of play then that is a very strong indication that something is not right.
Yeah sure Protoss has less mechanically demanding compositions which means that below pro level protoss will be more popular but I don't see why this somehow makes it fair that stronger players should have less tools? Like it's some sort of "ladder revenge".
Why are gateway units (barring early game trickery?) still garbage? Sure people like to whine about protoss aoe and mass air but what other options do they have since "midgame" is barely a thing anymore?
Go ahead and name a Protoss player that you think is as skilled as Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral or Reynor?
Go ahead and name someone that is consistently a top performer as those 5 are.
Trap is the only name that comes close and he has nerves that are made of glass. He's demonstrated that in tournament after tournament.
Zest is the only champion caliber Protoss out there and even a casual fan can tell that he is in a horrific slump right now because that's what he does. He is a feast or famine streaky player.
Protoss DOES NOT have a consistent performer right now. They just don't. You can't name a player that you can say without embarassing yourself that has shown to have the same level of skill that those 5 players I mentioned have.
I think this is half of the problem, the other problem is power creep. Simply put, Zerg got alot of new tools as time went on while Protoss were kind of limited long term due to Warp Gate.
I still think a targeted nerf of the Lurker would go a long way to improving ZvP as a whole. A smart poster in here recommended Psi Storm doing extra damage to burrowed units, and while I think it's an inelegant solution, I think the Lurker is specifically overpowered vs. Protoss compared to Terran.
Lurkers are powerful in ZvT as well, but they don't seem to put Terran on a timer the way they do to Protoss, Terran has at least semi consistent ways of dealing with them, even if using mass snipe is an APM/mechanical nightmare.
Protoss obviously has MANY design problems, I've mentioned the big one that I haven't shut up about since 2010 but there are others.
But that's not to say that Protoss as a race is WEAK by any means in the current meta because it's not. Protoss dominates the ladder in EU and NA and is even with Terran in Korea when Terran has ruled Korea in virtually every meta since 2010.
Protoss is doing just fine. They aren't showing results because the pool of TOP level talent for Protoss is weaker than it ever has been before and those 5 players plus a little bit of Cure thrown in are the ones winning literally everything right now. There is no Protoss on the level of those elite 5 right now. There just isn't.
No definitely not, like I said I think you're at least half right here. I know that the Protoss players here refuse to take this as anything other then anecdotal evidence but when you really ask yourself, "Whos the top 3 Protoss in the world?" and stack them against the top 3 Zerg in the world the talent disparity seems pretty apparent.
However, Trap played a series against Serral recently and even I had to admit that Protoss looks kind of...slow...compared to modern Zerg. Then again, I just saw Hero and Solar play and it looked very competitive, went down to the last match.
On December 20 2021 11:50 WaesumNinja wrote: The "maybe protoss players are just worse" or "protoss just doesn't have a strong top contender right now" arguments just don't hold, and it's baffling that this rhetoric keeps coming up after all this time. If protoss are underrepresented at the highest level of play then that is a very strong indication that something is not right.
Yeah sure Protoss has less mechanically demanding compositions which means that below pro level protoss will be more popular but I don't see why this somehow makes it fair that stronger players should have less tools? Like it's some sort of "ladder revenge".
Why are gateway units (barring early game trickery?) still garbage? Sure people like to whine about protoss aoe and mass air but what other options do they have since "midgame" is barely a thing anymore?
Go ahead and name a Protoss player that you think is as skilled as Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral or Reynor?
Go ahead and name someone that is consistently a top performer as those 5 are.
Protoss DOES NOT have a consistent performer right now. They just don't. You can't name a player that you can say without embarassing yourself that has shown to have the same level of skill that those 5 players I mentioned have.
That's a bit of a catch-22 though, isn't it? You can't deflect "there is a problem with high level play" with "there just aren't any top protoss players" because "the top protoss players don't perform as well".
With what metric do you measure someone's skill/performance? Wins, right? Because there are inherent problems saying things like "Maru demolished Zest, but Zest is actually more skilled". You just couldn't tell unless he starts consistently beating him, right? We have only one indisputable metric, and everything else is just theorycrafters saying things like "he has more control groups, so he's better" and other nonsense.
This argument has been shit since people started using it in the GomTvT days. Yeah, we can't name any "top performers", that's what we are talking about.
No. That's a bunch of crap. I don't judge skill based on only results and anyone that does is wrong to do so. It's the same as when people treat aligulac as anything other than just a tool in a toolkit. Its rankings are not law and they never have ever been.
I judge skill based on what I see. On mechanics, on timings, on strategies, on executions, on decision making while under pressure etc. etc.
I judge that and then I compare it to results and I use the aggregate to judge how good someone is at the top level. Trap really is the best Protoss player in the world, WHEN he is playing well, but he's not consistent and that has more to do with his fragile nerves than anything that has to do with the race. I haven't seen any Protoss player currently playing that is not in the South Korean army at the moment that has anything close to level of skill that Trap does. Nowhere close. And Trap just is not as good as any of the elite 5 players I mentioned before.
Trap isn't as good as Maru, he isn't as good as Rogue, he isn't as good as Dark. He just isn't.
And there is no other Protoss player that can measure up to the level of skill that Trap has. Try and name one. You can't do it because one doesn't exist. Not right now anyway. I'm hoping that Classic or HerO (who just got BACK from the South Korean army) can get back into shape soon and I hope players like Maxpax or Goblin develop (unlikely) the way that Reynor or Clem did but aside from those things happening I just do not see any big influx of skilled Protoss players coming to the scene anytime soon.
Trap is the best they have and he just isn't as good as the elite 5 are.
On December 20 2021 11:50 WaesumNinja wrote: The "maybe protoss players are just worse" or "protoss just doesn't have a strong top contender right now" arguments just don't hold, and it's baffling that this rhetoric keeps coming up after all this time. If protoss are underrepresented at the highest level of play then that is a very strong indication that something is not right.
Yeah sure Protoss has less mechanically demanding compositions which means that below pro level protoss will be more popular but I don't see why this somehow makes it fair that stronger players should have less tools? Like it's some sort of "ladder revenge".
Why are gateway units (barring early game trickery?) still garbage? Sure people like to whine about protoss aoe and mass air but what other options do they have since "midgame" is barely a thing anymore?
Go ahead and name a Protoss player that you think is as skilled as Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral or Reynor?
Go ahead and name someone that is consistently a top performer as those 5 are.
Trap is the only name that comes close and he has nerves that are made of glass. He's demonstrated that in tournament after tournament.
Zest is the only champion caliber Protoss out there and even a casual fan can tell that he is in a horrific slump right now because that's what he does. He is a feast or famine streaky player.
Protoss DOES NOT have a consistent performer right now. They just don't. You can't name a player that you can say without embarassing yourself that has shown to have the same level of skill that those 5 players I mentioned have.
I think this is half of the problem, the other problem is power creep. Simply put, Zerg got alot of new tools as time went on while Protoss were kind of limited long term due to Warp Gate.
I still think a targeted nerf of the Lurker would go a long way to improving ZvP as a whole. A smart poster in here recommended Psi Storm doing extra damage to burrowed units, and while I think it's an inelegant solution, I think the Lurker is specifically overpowered vs. Protoss compared to Terran.
Lurkers are powerful in ZvT as well, but they don't seem to put Terran on a timer the way they do to Protoss, Terran has at least semi consistent ways of dealing with them, even if using mass snipe is an APM/mechanical nightmare.
Protoss obviously has MANY design problems, I've mentioned the big one that I haven't shut up about since 2010 but there are others.
But that's not to say that Protoss as a race is WEAK by any means in the current meta because it's not. Protoss dominates the ladder in EU and NA and is even with Terran in Korea when Terran has ruled Korea in virtually every meta since 2010.
Protoss is doing just fine. They aren't showing results because the pool of TOP level talent for Protoss is weaker than it ever has been before and those 5 players plus a little bit of Cure thrown in are the ones winning literally everything right now. There is no Protoss on the level of those elite 5 right now. There just isn't.
No definitely not, like I said I think you're at least half right here. I know that the Protoss players here refuse to take this as anything other then anecdotal evidence but when you really ask yourself, "Whos the top 3 Protoss in the world?" and stack them against the top 3 Zerg in the world the talent disparity seems pretty apparent.
I've been having the reverse conversation but this is also not something you can state lol. It could also be that the reason why the top 3 protoss looks way worse than the top 3 zerg is because zerg is far superior to protoss and has been for a while, so they win more often and you associate that with talent.
On December 20 2021 11:50 WaesumNinja wrote: The "maybe protoss players are just worse" or "protoss just doesn't have a strong top contender right now" arguments just don't hold, and it's baffling that this rhetoric keeps coming up after all this time. If protoss are underrepresented at the highest level of play then that is a very strong indication that something is not right.
Yeah sure Protoss has less mechanically demanding compositions which means that below pro level protoss will be more popular but I don't see why this somehow makes it fair that stronger players should have less tools? Like it's some sort of "ladder revenge".
Why are gateway units (barring early game trickery?) still garbage? Sure people like to whine about protoss aoe and mass air but what other options do they have since "midgame" is barely a thing anymore?
Go ahead and name a Protoss player that you think is as skilled as Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral or Reynor?
Go ahead and name someone that is consistently a top performer as those 5 are.
Trap is the only name that comes close and he has nerves that are made of glass. He's demonstrated that in tournament after tournament.
Zest is the only champion caliber Protoss out there and even a casual fan can tell that he is in a horrific slump right now because that's what he does. He is a feast or famine streaky player.
Protoss DOES NOT have a consistent performer right now. They just don't. You can't name a player that you can say without embarassing yourself that has shown to have the same level of skill that those 5 players I mentioned have.
I think this is half of the problem, the other problem is power creep. Simply put, Zerg got alot of new tools as time went on while Protoss were kind of limited long term due to Warp Gate.
I still think a targeted nerf of the Lurker would go a long way to improving ZvP as a whole. A smart poster in here recommended Psi Storm doing extra damage to burrowed units, and while I think it's an inelegant solution, I think the Lurker is specifically overpowered vs. Protoss compared to Terran.
Lurkers are powerful in ZvT as well, but they don't seem to put Terran on a timer the way they do to Protoss, Terran has at least semi consistent ways of dealing with them, even if using mass snipe is an APM/mechanical nightmare.
Protoss obviously has MANY design problems, I've mentioned the big one that I haven't shut up about since 2010 but there are others.
But that's not to say that Protoss as a race is WEAK by any means in the current meta because it's not. Protoss dominates the ladder in EU and NA and is even with Terran in Korea when Terran has ruled Korea in virtually every meta since 2010.
Protoss is doing just fine. They aren't showing results because the pool of TOP level talent for Protoss is weaker than it ever has been before and those 5 players plus a little bit of Cure thrown in are the ones winning literally everything right now. There is no Protoss on the level of those elite 5 right now. There just isn't.
No definitely not, like I said I think you're at least half right here. I know that the Protoss players here refuse to take this as anything other then anecdotal evidence but when you really ask yourself, "Whos the top 3 Protoss in the world?" and stack them against the top 3 Zerg in the world the talent disparity seems pretty apparent.
I've been having the reverse conversation but this is also not something you can state lol. It could also be that the reason why the top 3 protoss looks way worse than the top 3 zerg is because zerg is far superior to protoss and has been for a while, so they win more often and you associate that with talent.
That might be true except it's the same Zergs that keep winning and the field of Protoss players that show up just to be eaten in tournaments gets wider and wider.
Like I can't even remember the latest new Zerg player to come onto the scene. Reynor was legit the last one and the pace at which he shot to the top was incredible. It was OBVIOUS that he was something special.
I just don't remember the last time I saw that same thing from a Protoss player. I see loads of names I don't recognize qualifying. I see loads of green in the TL tournament brackets. I just don't see anyone separating themselves from the pack.
On December 20 2021 11:50 WaesumNinja wrote: The "maybe protoss players are just worse" or "protoss just doesn't have a strong top contender right now" arguments just don't hold, and it's baffling that this rhetoric keeps coming up after all this time. If protoss are underrepresented at the highest level of play then that is a very strong indication that something is not right.
Yeah sure Protoss has less mechanically demanding compositions which means that below pro level protoss will be more popular but I don't see why this somehow makes it fair that stronger players should have less tools? Like it's some sort of "ladder revenge".
Why are gateway units (barring early game trickery?) still garbage? Sure people like to whine about protoss aoe and mass air but what other options do they have since "midgame" is barely a thing anymore?
Go ahead and name a Protoss player that you think is as skilled as Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral or Reynor?
Go ahead and name someone that is consistently a top performer as those 5 are.
Trap is the only name that comes close and he has nerves that are made of glass. He's demonstrated that in tournament after tournament.
Zest is the only champion caliber Protoss out there and even a casual fan can tell that he is in a horrific slump right now because that's what he does. He is a feast or famine streaky player.
Protoss DOES NOT have a consistent performer right now. They just don't. You can't name a player that you can say without embarassing yourself that has shown to have the same level of skill that those 5 players I mentioned have.
I think this is half of the problem, the other problem is power creep. Simply put, Zerg got alot of new tools as time went on while Protoss were kind of limited long term due to Warp Gate.
I still think a targeted nerf of the Lurker would go a long way to improving ZvP as a whole. A smart poster in here recommended Psi Storm doing extra damage to burrowed units, and while I think it's an inelegant solution, I think the Lurker is specifically overpowered vs. Protoss compared to Terran.
Lurkers are powerful in ZvT as well, but they don't seem to put Terran on a timer the way they do to Protoss, Terran has at least semi consistent ways of dealing with them, even if using mass snipe is an APM/mechanical nightmare.
Protoss obviously has MANY design problems, I've mentioned the big one that I haven't shut up about since 2010 but there are others.
But that's not to say that Protoss as a race is WEAK by any means in the current meta because it's not. Protoss dominates the ladder in EU and NA and is even with Terran in Korea when Terran has ruled Korea in virtually every meta since 2010.
Protoss is doing just fine. They aren't showing results because the pool of TOP level talent for Protoss is weaker than it ever has been before and those 5 players plus a little bit of Cure thrown in are the ones winning literally everything right now. There is no Protoss on the level of those elite 5 right now. There just isn't.
No definitely not, like I said I think you're at least half right here. I know that the Protoss players here refuse to take this as anything other then anecdotal evidence but when you really ask yourself, "Whos the top 3 Protoss in the world?" and stack them against the top 3 Zerg in the world the talent disparity seems pretty apparent.
I've been having the reverse conversation but this is also not something you can state lol. It could also be that the reason why the top 3 protoss looks way worse than the top 3 zerg is because zerg is far superior to protoss and has been for a while, so they win more often and you associate that with talent.
That might be true except it's the same Zergs that keep winning and the field of Protoss players that show up just to be eaten in tournaments gets wider and wider.
Like I can't even remember the latest new Zerg player to come onto the scene. Reynor was legit the last one and the pace at which he shot to the top was incredible. It was OBVIOUS that he was something special.
I just don't remember the last time I saw that same thing from a Protoss player. I see loads of names I don't recognize qualifying. I see loads of green in the TL tournament brackets. I just don't see anyone separating themselves from the pack.
On December 20 2021 11:50 WaesumNinja wrote: The "maybe protoss players are just worse" or "protoss just doesn't have a strong top contender right now" arguments just don't hold, and it's baffling that this rhetoric keeps coming up after all this time. If protoss are underrepresented at the highest level of play then that is a very strong indication that something is not right.
Yeah sure Protoss has less mechanically demanding compositions which means that below pro level protoss will be more popular but I don't see why this somehow makes it fair that stronger players should have less tools? Like it's some sort of "ladder revenge".
Why are gateway units (barring early game trickery?) still garbage? Sure people like to whine about protoss aoe and mass air but what other options do they have since "midgame" is barely a thing anymore?
Go ahead and name a Protoss player that you think is as skilled as Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral or Reynor?
Go ahead and name someone that is consistently a top performer as those 5 are.
Trap is the only name that comes close and he has nerves that are made of glass. He's demonstrated that in tournament after tournament.
Zest is the only champion caliber Protoss out there and even a casual fan can tell that he is in a horrific slump right now because that's what he does. He is a feast or famine streaky player.
Protoss DOES NOT have a consistent performer right now. They just don't. You can't name a player that you can say without embarassing yourself that has shown to have the same level of skill that those 5 players I mentioned have.
I think this is half of the problem, the other problem is power creep. Simply put, Zerg got alot of new tools as time went on while Protoss were kind of limited long term due to Warp Gate.
I still think a targeted nerf of the Lurker would go a long way to improving ZvP as a whole. A smart poster in here recommended Psi Storm doing extra damage to burrowed units, and while I think it's an inelegant solution, I think the Lurker is specifically overpowered vs. Protoss compared to Terran.
Lurkers are powerful in ZvT as well, but they don't seem to put Terran on a timer the way they do to Protoss, Terran has at least semi consistent ways of dealing with them, even if using mass snipe is an APM/mechanical nightmare.
Protoss obviously has MANY design problems, I've mentioned the big one that I haven't shut up about since 2010 but there are others.
But that's not to say that Protoss as a race is WEAK by any means in the current meta because it's not. Protoss dominates the ladder in EU and NA and is even with Terran in Korea when Terran has ruled Korea in virtually every meta since 2010.
Protoss is doing just fine. They aren't showing results because the pool of TOP level talent for Protoss is weaker than it ever has been before and those 5 players plus a little bit of Cure thrown in are the ones winning literally everything right now. There is no Protoss on the level of those elite 5 right now. There just isn't.
No definitely not, like I said I think you're at least half right here. I know that the Protoss players here refuse to take this as anything other then anecdotal evidence but when you really ask yourself, "Whos the top 3 Protoss in the world?" and stack them against the top 3 Zerg in the world the talent disparity seems pretty apparent.
I've been having the reverse conversation but this is also not something you can state lol. It could also be that the reason why the top 3 protoss looks way worse than the top 3 zerg is because zerg is far superior to protoss and has been for a while, so they win more often and you associate that with talent.
That might be true except it's the same Zergs that keep winning and the field of Protoss players that show up just to be eaten in tournaments gets wider and wider.
Like I can't even remember the latest new Zerg player to come onto the scene. Reynor was legit the last one and the pace at which he shot to the top was incredible. It was OBVIOUS that he was something special.
I just don't remember the last time I saw that same thing from a Protoss player. I see loads of names I don't recognize qualifying. I see loads of green in the TL tournament brackets. I just don't see anyone separating themselves from the pack.
Maxpax?
But is he ready to be anything other than a small speed bump to the elite 5? I don't think so. I'd give him 25 to 1 odds at best to take a 5 game series in a major tournament off of one of them.
Hell I don't even have him as a hands down favorite in PvP from the rest of the pack of EU Protoss at the moment.
On December 20 2021 11:50 WaesumNinja wrote: The "maybe protoss players are just worse" or "protoss just doesn't have a strong top contender right now" arguments just don't hold, and it's baffling that this rhetoric keeps coming up after all this time. If protoss are underrepresented at the highest level of play then that is a very strong indication that something is not right.
Yeah sure Protoss has less mechanically demanding compositions which means that below pro level protoss will be more popular but I don't see why this somehow makes it fair that stronger players should have less tools? Like it's some sort of "ladder revenge".
Why are gateway units (barring early game trickery?) still garbage? Sure people like to whine about protoss aoe and mass air but what other options do they have since "midgame" is barely a thing anymore?
Go ahead and name a Protoss player that you think is as skilled as Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral or Reynor?
Go ahead and name someone that is consistently a top performer as those 5 are.
Trap is the only name that comes close and he has nerves that are made of glass. He's demonstrated that in tournament after tournament.
Zest is the only champion caliber Protoss out there and even a casual fan can tell that he is in a horrific slump right now because that's what he does. He is a feast or famine streaky player.
Protoss DOES NOT have a consistent performer right now. They just don't. You can't name a player that you can say without embarassing yourself that has shown to have the same level of skill that those 5 players I mentioned have.
I think this is half of the problem, the other problem is power creep. Simply put, Zerg got alot of new tools as time went on while Protoss were kind of limited long term due to Warp Gate.
I still think a targeted nerf of the Lurker would go a long way to improving ZvP as a whole. A smart poster in here recommended Psi Storm doing extra damage to burrowed units, and while I think it's an inelegant solution, I think the Lurker is specifically overpowered vs. Protoss compared to Terran.
Lurkers are powerful in ZvT as well, but they don't seem to put Terran on a timer the way they do to Protoss, Terran has at least semi consistent ways of dealing with them, even if using mass snipe is an APM/mechanical nightmare.
Protoss obviously has MANY design problems, I've mentioned the big one that I haven't shut up about since 2010 but there are others.
But that's not to say that Protoss as a race is WEAK by any means in the current meta because it's not. Protoss dominates the ladder in EU and NA and is even with Terran in Korea when Terran has ruled Korea in virtually every meta since 2010.
Protoss is doing just fine. They aren't showing results because the pool of TOP level talent for Protoss is weaker than it ever has been before and those 5 players plus a little bit of Cure thrown in are the ones winning literally everything right now. There is no Protoss on the level of those elite 5 right now. There just isn't.
No definitely not, like I said I think you're at least half right here. I know that the Protoss players here refuse to take this as anything other then anecdotal evidence but when you really ask yourself, "Whos the top 3 Protoss in the world?" and stack them against the top 3 Zerg in the world the talent disparity seems pretty apparent.
I've been having the reverse conversation but this is also not something you can state lol. It could also be that the reason why the top 3 protoss looks way worse than the top 3 zerg is because zerg is far superior to protoss and has been for a while, so they win more often and you associate that with talent.
That might be true except it's the same Zergs that keep winning and the field of Protoss players that show up just to be eaten in tournaments gets wider and wider.
Like I can't even remember the latest new Zerg player to come onto the scene. Reynor was legit the last one and the pace at which he shot to the top was incredible. It was OBVIOUS that he was something special.
I just don't remember the last time I saw that same thing from a Protoss player. I see loads of names I don't recognize qualifying. I see loads of green in the TL tournament brackets. I just don't see anyone separating themselves from the pack.
Maxpax?
But is he ready to be anything other than a small speed bump to the elite 5? I don't think so. I'd give him 25 to 1 odds at best to take a 5 game series in a major tournament off of one of them.
Hell I don't even have him as a hands down favorite in PvP from the rest of the pack of EU Protoss at the moment.
Well that's just dumb, his pvp is pretty much above all eu toss but showtime right now from the looks (esp if you factor in the randomness pvp has). And while not on the level of the top 5, his improvements are massive and he has separated himself from the pack. Edit: also depends on what you mean by the pack, but at least in eu he has imo.
On December 20 2021 11:50 WaesumNinja wrote: The "maybe protoss players are just worse" or "protoss just doesn't have a strong top contender right now" arguments just don't hold, and it's baffling that this rhetoric keeps coming up after all this time. If protoss are underrepresented at the highest level of play then that is a very strong indication that something is not right.
Yeah sure Protoss has less mechanically demanding compositions which means that below pro level protoss will be more popular but I don't see why this somehow makes it fair that stronger players should have less tools? Like it's some sort of "ladder revenge".
Why are gateway units (barring early game trickery?) still garbage? Sure people like to whine about protoss aoe and mass air but what other options do they have since "midgame" is barely a thing anymore?
Go ahead and name a Protoss player that you think is as skilled as Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral or Reynor?
Go ahead and name someone that is consistently a top performer as those 5 are.
Trap is the only name that comes close and he has nerves that are made of glass. He's demonstrated that in tournament after tournament.
Zest is the only champion caliber Protoss out there and even a casual fan can tell that he is in a horrific slump right now because that's what he does. He is a feast or famine streaky player.
Protoss DOES NOT have a consistent performer right now. They just don't. You can't name a player that you can say without embarassing yourself that has shown to have the same level of skill that those 5 players I mentioned have.
I think this is half of the problem, the other problem is power creep. Simply put, Zerg got alot of new tools as time went on while Protoss were kind of limited long term due to Warp Gate.
I still think a targeted nerf of the Lurker would go a long way to improving ZvP as a whole. A smart poster in here recommended Psi Storm doing extra damage to burrowed units, and while I think it's an inelegant solution, I think the Lurker is specifically overpowered vs. Protoss compared to Terran.
Lurkers are powerful in ZvT as well, but they don't seem to put Terran on a timer the way they do to Protoss, Terran has at least semi consistent ways of dealing with them, even if using mass snipe is an APM/mechanical nightmare.
Protoss obviously has MANY design problems, I've mentioned the big one that I haven't shut up about since 2010 but there are others.
But that's not to say that Protoss as a race is WEAK by any means in the current meta because it's not. Protoss dominates the ladder in EU and NA and is even with Terran in Korea when Terran has ruled Korea in virtually every meta since 2010.
Protoss is doing just fine. They aren't showing results because the pool of TOP level talent for Protoss is weaker than it ever has been before and those 5 players plus a little bit of Cure thrown in are the ones winning literally everything right now. There is no Protoss on the level of those elite 5 right now. There just isn't.
No definitely not, like I said I think you're at least half right here. I know that the Protoss players here refuse to take this as anything other then anecdotal evidence but when you really ask yourself, "Whos the top 3 Protoss in the world?" and stack them against the top 3 Zerg in the world the talent disparity seems pretty apparent.
I've been having the reverse conversation but this is also not something you can state lol. It could also be that the reason why the top 3 protoss looks way worse than the top 3 zerg is because zerg is far superior to protoss and has been for a while, so they win more often and you associate that with talent.
That might be true except it's the same Zergs that keep winning and the field of Protoss players that show up just to be eaten in tournaments gets wider and wider.
Like I can't even remember the latest new Zerg player to come onto the scene. Reynor was legit the last one and the pace at which he shot to the top was incredible. It was OBVIOUS that he was something special.
I just don't remember the last time I saw that same thing from a Protoss player. I see loads of names I don't recognize qualifying. I see loads of green in the TL tournament brackets. I just don't see anyone separating themselves from the pack.
Maxpax?
But is he ready to be anything other than a small speed bump to the elite 5? I don't think so. I'd give him 25 to 1 odds at best to take a 5 game series in a major tournament off of one of them.
Hell I don't even have him as a hands down favorite in PvP from the rest of the pack of EU Protoss at the moment.
Well that's just dumb, his pvp is pretty much above all eu toss but showtime right now from the looks (esp if you factor in the randomness pvp has). And while not on the level of the top 5, his improvements are massive and he has separated himself from the pack. Edit: also depends on what you mean by the pack, but at least in eu he has imo.
I could be convinced of that, I haven't seen enough of him in the smaller tournaments to really tell. But he hasn't shown me that in any of the big events.
Either way though, we can't seriously be comparing his "separating" from the pack to what Clem or Reynor did. That's the kind of separation I'm talking about. I don't see that from any Protoss players right now. If Maxpax is the latest we have, it's still a very tame rise compared to what those 2 did, and they are just the most recent of the bunch. Serral had a similar meteoric rise to the top as did other Zergs I can think of.
On December 20 2021 11:58 Vindicare605 wrote: [quote]
Go ahead and name a Protoss player that you think is as skilled as Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral or Reynor?
Go ahead and name someone that is consistently a top performer as those 5 are.
Trap is the only name that comes close and he has nerves that are made of glass. He's demonstrated that in tournament after tournament.
Zest is the only champion caliber Protoss out there and even a casual fan can tell that he is in a horrific slump right now because that's what he does. He is a feast or famine streaky player.
Protoss DOES NOT have a consistent performer right now. They just don't. You can't name a player that you can say without embarassing yourself that has shown to have the same level of skill that those 5 players I mentioned have.
I think this is half of the problem, the other problem is power creep. Simply put, Zerg got alot of new tools as time went on while Protoss were kind of limited long term due to Warp Gate.
I still think a targeted nerf of the Lurker would go a long way to improving ZvP as a whole. A smart poster in here recommended Psi Storm doing extra damage to burrowed units, and while I think it's an inelegant solution, I think the Lurker is specifically overpowered vs. Protoss compared to Terran.
Lurkers are powerful in ZvT as well, but they don't seem to put Terran on a timer the way they do to Protoss, Terran has at least semi consistent ways of dealing with them, even if using mass snipe is an APM/mechanical nightmare.
Protoss obviously has MANY design problems, I've mentioned the big one that I haven't shut up about since 2010 but there are others.
But that's not to say that Protoss as a race is WEAK by any means in the current meta because it's not. Protoss dominates the ladder in EU and NA and is even with Terran in Korea when Terran has ruled Korea in virtually every meta since 2010.
Protoss is doing just fine. They aren't showing results because the pool of TOP level talent for Protoss is weaker than it ever has been before and those 5 players plus a little bit of Cure thrown in are the ones winning literally everything right now. There is no Protoss on the level of those elite 5 right now. There just isn't.
No definitely not, like I said I think you're at least half right here. I know that the Protoss players here refuse to take this as anything other then anecdotal evidence but when you really ask yourself, "Whos the top 3 Protoss in the world?" and stack them against the top 3 Zerg in the world the talent disparity seems pretty apparent.
I've been having the reverse conversation but this is also not something you can state lol. It could also be that the reason why the top 3 protoss looks way worse than the top 3 zerg is because zerg is far superior to protoss and has been for a while, so they win more often and you associate that with talent.
That might be true except it's the same Zergs that keep winning and the field of Protoss players that show up just to be eaten in tournaments gets wider and wider.
Like I can't even remember the latest new Zerg player to come onto the scene. Reynor was legit the last one and the pace at which he shot to the top was incredible. It was OBVIOUS that he was something special.
I just don't remember the last time I saw that same thing from a Protoss player. I see loads of names I don't recognize qualifying. I see loads of green in the TL tournament brackets. I just don't see anyone separating themselves from the pack.
Maxpax?
But is he ready to be anything other than a small speed bump to the elite 5? I don't think so. I'd give him 25 to 1 odds at best to take a 5 game series in a major tournament off of one of them.
Hell I don't even have him as a hands down favorite in PvP from the rest of the pack of EU Protoss at the moment.
Well that's just dumb, his pvp is pretty much above all eu toss but showtime right now from the looks (esp if you factor in the randomness pvp has). And while not on the level of the top 5, his improvements are massive and he has separated himself from the pack. Edit: also depends on what you mean by the pack, but at least in eu he has imo.
I could be convinced of that, I haven't seen enough of him in the smaller tournaments to really tell. But he hasn't shown me that in any of the big events.
Either way though, we can't seriously be comparing his "separating" from the pack to what Clem or Reynor did. That's the kind of separation I'm talking about. I don't see that from any Protoss players right now. If Maxpax is the latest we have, it's still a very tame rise compared to what those 2 did, and they are just the most recent of the bunch. Serral had a similar meteoric rise to the top as did other Zergs I can think of.
Then you remember their rise wrong,clems rise wasn't as fast as you remember but reynor i give to you he was rising pretty darn fast.
On December 20 2021 11:50 WaesumNinja wrote: The "maybe protoss players are just worse" or "protoss just doesn't have a strong top contender right now" arguments just don't hold, and it's baffling that this rhetoric keeps coming up after all this time. If protoss are underrepresented at the highest level of play then that is a very strong indication that something is not right.
Yeah sure Protoss has less mechanically demanding compositions which means that below pro level protoss will be more popular but I don't see why this somehow makes it fair that stronger players should have less tools? Like it's some sort of "ladder revenge".
Why are gateway units (barring early game trickery?) still garbage? Sure people like to whine about protoss aoe and mass air but what other options do they have since "midgame" is barely a thing anymore?
Go ahead and name a Protoss player that you think is as skilled as Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral or Reynor?
Go ahead and name someone that is consistently a top performer as those 5 are.
Protoss DOES NOT have a consistent performer right now. They just don't. You can't name a player that you can say without embarassing yourself that has shown to have the same level of skill that those 5 players I mentioned have.
That's a bit of a catch-22 though, isn't it? You can't deflect "there is a problem with high level play" with "there just aren't any top protoss players" because "the top protoss players don't perform as well".
With what metric do you measure someone's skill/performance? Wins, right? Because there are inherent problems saying things like "Maru demolished Zest, but Zest is actually more skilled". You just couldn't tell unless he starts consistently beating him, right? We have only one indisputable metric, and everything else is just theorycrafters saying things like "he has more control groups, so he's better" and other nonsense.
This argument has been shit since people started using it in the GomTvT days. Yeah, we can't name any "top performers", that's what we are talking about.
No. That's a bunch of crap. I don't judge skill based on only results and anyone that does is wrong to do so. It's the same as when people treat aligulac as anything other than just a tool in a toolkit. Its rankings are not law and they never have ever been.
I judge skill based on what I see. On mechanics, on timings, on strategies, on executions, on decision making while under pressure etc. etc.
I judge that and then I compare it to results and I use the aggregate to judge how good someone is at the top level. Trap really is the best Protoss player in the world, WHEN he is playing well, but he's not consistent and that has more to do with his fragile nerves than anything that has to do with the race. I haven't seen any Protoss player currently playing that is not in the South Korean army at the moment that has anything close to level of skill that Trap does. Nowhere close. And Trap just is not as good as any of the elite 5 players I mentioned before.
Trap isn't as good as Maru, he isn't as good as Rogue, he isn't as good as Dark. He just isn't.
And there is no other Protoss player that can measure up to the level of skill that Trap has. Try and name one. You can't do it because one doesn't exist. Not right now anyway. I'm hoping that Classic or HerO (who just got BACK from the South Korean army) can get back into shape soon and I hope players like Maxpax or Goblin develop (unlikely) the way that Reynor or Clem did but aside from those things happening I just do not see any big influx of skilled Protoss players coming to the scene anytime soon.
Trap is the best they have and he just isn't as good as the elite 5 are.
Maru: 1 Premier tournament win in 2021. Dark: 1 Premier tournament win in 2021. Rogue: 3 Premier tournament wins in 2021. Serral: 3 Premier tournament wins in 2021. Reynor: 2 Premier tournament wins in 2021.
And these guys are in a completely different class than Trap, who... won 5 Premier tournaments in 2021? Why? How?
For a follow up question: Do you know how to count? Why exactly do you think that arguing Protoss players can't consistently compete at high levels is any sort of evidence against Protoss bring weaker, balance-wise?
On December 20 2021 12:18 Beelzebub1 wrote: [quote]
I think this is half of the problem, the other problem is power creep. Simply put, Zerg got alot of new tools as time went on while Protoss were kind of limited long term due to Warp Gate.
I still think a targeted nerf of the Lurker would go a long way to improving ZvP as a whole. A smart poster in here recommended Psi Storm doing extra damage to burrowed units, and while I think it's an inelegant solution, I think the Lurker is specifically overpowered vs. Protoss compared to Terran.
Lurkers are powerful in ZvT as well, but they don't seem to put Terran on a timer the way they do to Protoss, Terran has at least semi consistent ways of dealing with them, even if using mass snipe is an APM/mechanical nightmare.
Protoss obviously has MANY design problems, I've mentioned the big one that I haven't shut up about since 2010 but there are others.
But that's not to say that Protoss as a race is WEAK by any means in the current meta because it's not. Protoss dominates the ladder in EU and NA and is even with Terran in Korea when Terran has ruled Korea in virtually every meta since 2010.
Protoss is doing just fine. They aren't showing results because the pool of TOP level talent for Protoss is weaker than it ever has been before and those 5 players plus a little bit of Cure thrown in are the ones winning literally everything right now. There is no Protoss on the level of those elite 5 right now. There just isn't.
No definitely not, like I said I think you're at least half right here. I know that the Protoss players here refuse to take this as anything other then anecdotal evidence but when you really ask yourself, "Whos the top 3 Protoss in the world?" and stack them against the top 3 Zerg in the world the talent disparity seems pretty apparent.
I've been having the reverse conversation but this is also not something you can state lol. It could also be that the reason why the top 3 protoss looks way worse than the top 3 zerg is because zerg is far superior to protoss and has been for a while, so they win more often and you associate that with talent.
That might be true except it's the same Zergs that keep winning and the field of Protoss players that show up just to be eaten in tournaments gets wider and wider.
Like I can't even remember the latest new Zerg player to come onto the scene. Reynor was legit the last one and the pace at which he shot to the top was incredible. It was OBVIOUS that he was something special.
I just don't remember the last time I saw that same thing from a Protoss player. I see loads of names I don't recognize qualifying. I see loads of green in the TL tournament brackets. I just don't see anyone separating themselves from the pack.
Maxpax?
But is he ready to be anything other than a small speed bump to the elite 5? I don't think so. I'd give him 25 to 1 odds at best to take a 5 game series in a major tournament off of one of them.
Hell I don't even have him as a hands down favorite in PvP from the rest of the pack of EU Protoss at the moment.
Well that's just dumb, his pvp is pretty much above all eu toss but showtime right now from the looks (esp if you factor in the randomness pvp has). And while not on the level of the top 5, his improvements are massive and he has separated himself from the pack. Edit: also depends on what you mean by the pack, but at least in eu he has imo.
I could be convinced of that, I haven't seen enough of him in the smaller tournaments to really tell. But he hasn't shown me that in any of the big events.
Either way though, we can't seriously be comparing his "separating" from the pack to what Clem or Reynor did. That's the kind of separation I'm talking about. I don't see that from any Protoss players right now. If Maxpax is the latest we have, it's still a very tame rise compared to what those 2 did, and they are just the most recent of the bunch. Serral had a similar meteoric rise to the top as did other Zergs I can think of.
Then you remember their rise wrong,clems rise wasn't as fast as you remember but reynor i give to you he was rising pretty darn fast.
I shouldn't be comparing Clem to what Reynor did, that was truly special.
But Clem is at least a respectable world class, at least in one match up. Even Dark and Rogue have to give him due respect in TvZ.
So it's that kind of level I want to see from a new Protoss player. Even if it's slower than what Reynor did. I at least want to see it.
On December 20 2021 11:50 WaesumNinja wrote: The "maybe protoss players are just worse" or "protoss just doesn't have a strong top contender right now" arguments just don't hold, and it's baffling that this rhetoric keeps coming up after all this time. If protoss are underrepresented at the highest level of play then that is a very strong indication that something is not right.
Yeah sure Protoss has less mechanically demanding compositions which means that below pro level protoss will be more popular but I don't see why this somehow makes it fair that stronger players should have less tools? Like it's some sort of "ladder revenge".
Why are gateway units (barring early game trickery?) still garbage? Sure people like to whine about protoss aoe and mass air but what other options do they have since "midgame" is barely a thing anymore?
Go ahead and name a Protoss player that you think is as skilled as Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral or Reynor?
Go ahead and name someone that is consistently a top performer as those 5 are.
Protoss DOES NOT have a consistent performer right now. They just don't. You can't name a player that you can say without embarassing yourself that has shown to have the same level of skill that those 5 players I mentioned have.
That's a bit of a catch-22 though, isn't it? You can't deflect "there is a problem with high level play" with "there just aren't any top protoss players" because "the top protoss players don't perform as well".
With what metric do you measure someone's skill/performance? Wins, right? Because there are inherent problems saying things like "Maru demolished Zest, but Zest is actually more skilled". You just couldn't tell unless he starts consistently beating him, right? We have only one indisputable metric, and everything else is just theorycrafters saying things like "he has more control groups, so he's better" and other nonsense.
This argument has been shit since people started using it in the GomTvT days. Yeah, we can't name any "top performers", that's what we are talking about.
No. That's a bunch of crap. I don't judge skill based on only results and anyone that does is wrong to do so. It's the same as when people treat aligulac as anything other than just a tool in a toolkit. Its rankings are not law and they never have ever been.
I judge skill based on what I see. On mechanics, on timings, on strategies, on executions, on decision making while under pressure etc. etc.
I judge that and then I compare it to results and I use the aggregate to judge how good someone is at the top level. Trap really is the best Protoss player in the world, WHEN he is playing well, but he's not consistent and that has more to do with his fragile nerves than anything that has to do with the race. I haven't seen any Protoss player currently playing that is not in the South Korean army at the moment that has anything close to level of skill that Trap does. Nowhere close. And Trap just is not as good as any of the elite 5 players I mentioned before.
Trap isn't as good as Maru, he isn't as good as Rogue, he isn't as good as Dark. He just isn't.
And there is no other Protoss player that can measure up to the level of skill that Trap has. Try and name one. You can't do it because one doesn't exist. Not right now anyway. I'm hoping that Classic or HerO (who just got BACK from the South Korean army) can get back into shape soon and I hope players like Maxpax or Goblin develop (unlikely) the way that Reynor or Clem did but aside from those things happening I just do not see any big influx of skilled Protoss players coming to the scene anytime soon.
Trap is the best they have and he just isn't as good as the elite 5 are.
Maru: 1 Premier tournament win in 2021. Dark: 1 Premier tournament win in 2021. Rogue: 3 Premier tournament wins in 2021. Serral: 3 Premier tournament wins in 2021. Reynor: 2 Premier tournament wins in 2021.
And these guys are in a completely different class than Trap, who... won 5 Premier tournaments in 2021? Why? How?
For a follow up question: Do you know how to count? Why exactly do you think that arguing Protoss players can't consistently compete at high levels is any sort of evidence against Protoss bring weaker, balance-wise?
Because it has ALWAYS been that way except in metas where Protoss is CLEARLY broken in some way or another.
Protoss hasn't produced many consistent players that stay relevant in several metas, and most of the ones they HAVE produced are either currently in or just coming back from the South Korean army. Trap and Zest are the only remainders.
In every meta we've seen since LotV how many EU Protoss players can you say have been consistently relevant at the top level? I can name one, Showtime. That's literally it. And he hasn't looked that hot lately.
When Terran or Zerg players are good they STAY good, regardless of what the meta looks like. It's been like that for a long time. That's a design issue with the race but it's not a balance issue because even during eras where Protoss is dominating it's a revolving door of players. The only time there's been a solid case of "1" Protoss champ has been when Rain was playing and now when Trap is pretty much all that's left.
Even if Trap won more than any other Protoss this year. I still don't say he's anywhere on the level of the elite 5. And I think you'd have a hard time convincing most dedicated SC2 fans that he is.
On December 20 2021 12:36 Vindicare605 wrote: [quote]
Protoss obviously has MANY design problems, I've mentioned the big one that I haven't shut up about since 2010 but there are others.
But that's not to say that Protoss as a race is WEAK by any means in the current meta because it's not. Protoss dominates the ladder in EU and NA and is even with Terran in Korea when Terran has ruled Korea in virtually every meta since 2010.
Protoss is doing just fine. They aren't showing results because the pool of TOP level talent for Protoss is weaker than it ever has been before and those 5 players plus a little bit of Cure thrown in are the ones winning literally everything right now. There is no Protoss on the level of those elite 5 right now. There just isn't.
No definitely not, like I said I think you're at least half right here. I know that the Protoss players here refuse to take this as anything other then anecdotal evidence but when you really ask yourself, "Whos the top 3 Protoss in the world?" and stack them against the top 3 Zerg in the world the talent disparity seems pretty apparent.
I've been having the reverse conversation but this is also not something you can state lol. It could also be that the reason why the top 3 protoss looks way worse than the top 3 zerg is because zerg is far superior to protoss and has been for a while, so they win more often and you associate that with talent.
That might be true except it's the same Zergs that keep winning and the field of Protoss players that show up just to be eaten in tournaments gets wider and wider.
Like I can't even remember the latest new Zerg player to come onto the scene. Reynor was legit the last one and the pace at which he shot to the top was incredible. It was OBVIOUS that he was something special.
I just don't remember the last time I saw that same thing from a Protoss player. I see loads of names I don't recognize qualifying. I see loads of green in the TL tournament brackets. I just don't see anyone separating themselves from the pack.
Maxpax?
But is he ready to be anything other than a small speed bump to the elite 5? I don't think so. I'd give him 25 to 1 odds at best to take a 5 game series in a major tournament off of one of them.
Hell I don't even have him as a hands down favorite in PvP from the rest of the pack of EU Protoss at the moment.
Well that's just dumb, his pvp is pretty much above all eu toss but showtime right now from the looks (esp if you factor in the randomness pvp has). And while not on the level of the top 5, his improvements are massive and he has separated himself from the pack. Edit: also depends on what you mean by the pack, but at least in eu he has imo.
I could be convinced of that, I haven't seen enough of him in the smaller tournaments to really tell. But he hasn't shown me that in any of the big events.
Either way though, we can't seriously be comparing his "separating" from the pack to what Clem or Reynor did. That's the kind of separation I'm talking about. I don't see that from any Protoss players right now. If Maxpax is the latest we have, it's still a very tame rise compared to what those 2 did, and they are just the most recent of the bunch. Serral had a similar meteoric rise to the top as did other Zergs I can think of.
Then you remember their rise wrong,clems rise wasn't as fast as you remember but reynor i give to you he was rising pretty darn fast.
I shouldn't be comparing Clem to what Reynor did, that was truly special.
But Clem is at least a respectable world class, at least in one match up. Even Dark and Rogue have to give him due respect in TvZ.
So it's that kind of level I want to see from a new Protoss player. Even if it's slower than what Reynor did. I at least want to see it.
That is a bit too much to expect already the reynor level, i think maxpax looks like clem did around 2018 or so before he started to peak so imo he could vbery well become similar if he continues tro improve like he did (and i say that while not liking maxpax playstyle too much).
On December 20 2021 11:50 WaesumNinja wrote: The "maybe protoss players are just worse" or "protoss just doesn't have a strong top contender right now" arguments just don't hold, and it's baffling that this rhetoric keeps coming up after all this time. If protoss are underrepresented at the highest level of play then that is a very strong indication that something is not right.
Yeah sure Protoss has less mechanically demanding compositions which means that below pro level protoss will be more popular but I don't see why this somehow makes it fair that stronger players should have less tools? Like it's some sort of "ladder revenge".
Why are gateway units (barring early game trickery?) still garbage? Sure people like to whine about protoss aoe and mass air but what other options do they have since "midgame" is barely a thing anymore?
Go ahead and name a Protoss player that you think is as skilled as Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral or Reynor?
Go ahead and name someone that is consistently a top performer as those 5 are.
Protoss DOES NOT have a consistent performer right now. They just don't. You can't name a player that you can say without embarassing yourself that has shown to have the same level of skill that those 5 players I mentioned have.
That's a bit of a catch-22 though, isn't it? You can't deflect "there is a problem with high level play" with "there just aren't any top protoss players" because "the top protoss players don't perform as well".
With what metric do you measure someone's skill/performance? Wins, right? Because there are inherent problems saying things like "Maru demolished Zest, but Zest is actually more skilled". You just couldn't tell unless he starts consistently beating him, right? We have only one indisputable metric, and everything else is just theorycrafters saying things like "he has more control groups, so he's better" and other nonsense.
This argument has been shit since people started using it in the GomTvT days. Yeah, we can't name any "top performers", that's what we are talking about.
let me introduce you to Clasic, sOs and herO. All 3 players have what many call a killer mentality. Both Classic and herO showed on multiple occassions they have the top mechanics and they can win. OTOH both Stats and Trap showed on multiple occasions they have top notch mechanics but they cannot win anything. Let's call it soO effect. soO had one of the best mechanics Zerg could have had, especially in HOTS. Yet he didn't win anything, how so? Was that balance? Or was that something else?
Another great killer was Parting or MC.
Is Protoss the weaker race at the top level? Maybe? I honestly cannot tell, Protoss certainly is designed awfully. Does Protoss have a proper consistent championship material? At this moment - nope. At least not until herO and Classic get to their top level(and considering herO wasn't the top pre-military it's more a hopeful wish).
BUT YOU FORGOT ZEST!@#!!! Zest used to be a consistent Protoss. Nowadays he's more of a random result generator than anything else. And if nothing else Zest macro makes him impossible to put in the category of the top notch mechanical players anyway.
And again, both Stats and Trap had many opportunities to win shit and they rarely did. It's not that they haven't, it's the amount of 2nd places...
BUT BO7 AND PROTOSS!@#!!! Remember that in Korea most semis are BO7 and all the 2nd places finishing Protoss had to win a BO7 to get to the losing BO7 in the finals.
Edt> FYI I think zerg needs a nerf as both Terran and Protoss is weaker than the Zerg
On December 20 2021 11:50 WaesumNinja wrote: The "maybe protoss players are just worse" or "protoss just doesn't have a strong top contender right now" arguments just don't hold, and it's baffling that this rhetoric keeps coming up after all this time. If protoss are underrepresented at the highest level of play then that is a very strong indication that something is not right.
Yeah sure Protoss has less mechanically demanding compositions which means that below pro level protoss will be more popular but I don't see why this somehow makes it fair that stronger players should have less tools? Like it's some sort of "ladder revenge".
Why are gateway units (barring early game trickery?) still garbage? Sure people like to whine about protoss aoe and mass air but what other options do they have since "midgame" is barely a thing anymore?
Go ahead and name a Protoss player that you think is as skilled as Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral or Reynor?
Go ahead and name someone that is consistently a top performer as those 5 are.
Protoss DOES NOT have a consistent performer right now. They just don't. You can't name a player that you can say without embarassing yourself that has shown to have the same level of skill that those 5 players I mentioned have.
That's a bit of a catch-22 though, isn't it? You can't deflect "there is a problem with high level play" with "there just aren't any top protoss players" because "the top protoss players don't perform as well".
With what metric do you measure someone's skill/performance? Wins, right? Because there are inherent problems saying things like "Maru demolished Zest, but Zest is actually more skilled". You just couldn't tell unless he starts consistently beating him, right? We have only one indisputable metric, and everything else is just theorycrafters saying things like "he has more control groups, so he's better" and other nonsense.
This argument has been shit since people started using it in the GomTvT days. Yeah, we can't name any "top performers", that's what we are talking about.
No. That's a bunch of crap. I don't judge skill based on only results and anyone that does is wrong to do so. It's the same as when people treat aligulac as anything other than just a tool in a toolkit. Its rankings are not law and they never have ever been.
I judge skill based on what I see. On mechanics, on timings, on strategies, on executions, on decision making while under pressure etc. etc.
I judge that and then I compare it to results and I use the aggregate to judge how good someone is at the top level. Trap really is the best Protoss player in the world, WHEN he is playing well, but he's not consistent and that has more to do with his fragile nerves than anything that has to do with the race. I haven't seen any Protoss player currently playing that is not in the South Korean army at the moment that has anything close to level of skill that Trap does. Nowhere close. And Trap just is not as good as any of the elite 5 players I mentioned before.
Trap isn't as good as Maru, he isn't as good as Rogue, he isn't as good as Dark. He just isn't.
And there is no other Protoss player that can measure up to the level of skill that Trap has. Try and name one. You can't do it because one doesn't exist. Not right now anyway. I'm hoping that Classic or HerO (who just got BACK from the South Korean army) can get back into shape soon and I hope players like Maxpax or Goblin develop (unlikely) the way that Reynor or Clem did but aside from those things happening I just do not see any big influx of skilled Protoss players coming to the scene anytime soon.
Trap is the best they have and he just isn't as good as the elite 5 are.
Maru: 1 Premier tournament win in 2021. Dark: 1 Premier tournament win in 2021. Rogue: 3 Premier tournament wins in 2021. Serral: 3 Premier tournament wins in 2021. Reynor: 2 Premier tournament wins in 2021.
And these guys are in a completely different class than Trap, who... won 5 Premier tournaments in 2021? Why? How?
For a follow up question: Do you know how to count? Why exactly do you think that arguing Protoss players can't consistently compete at high levels is any sort of evidence against Protoss bring weaker, balance-wise?
Because it has ALWAYS been that way except in metas where Protoss is CLEARLY broken in some way or another.
Protoss hasn't produced many consistent players that stay relevant in several metas, and most of the ones they HAVE produced are either currently in or just coming back from the South Korean army. Trap and Zest are the only remainders.
In every meta we've seen since LotV how many EU Protoss players can you say have been consistently relevant at the top level? I can name one, Showtime. That's literally it. And he hasn't looked that hot lately.
When Terran or Zerg players are good they STAY good, regardless of what the meta looks like. It's been like that for a long time. That's a design issue with the race but it's not a balance issue because even during eras where Protoss is dominating it's a revolving door of players. The only time there's been a solid case of "1" Protoss champ has been when Rain was playing and now when Trap is pretty much all that's left.
Even if Trap won more than any other Protoss this year. I still don't say he's anywhere on the level of the elite 5. And I think you'd have a hard time convincing most dedicated SC2 fans that he is.
OK, this is nonsense. MC was good throughout the whole WOL, multiple metas, BLinfestor included.
But let's move to more current players.
Classic, Stats, herO, the old Zest, hots sOs. Like I get the shitting over Protoss but forgetting about Stats and Classic is just wrong on so many levels...
On December 20 2021 11:50 WaesumNinja wrote: The "maybe protoss players are just worse" or "protoss just doesn't have a strong top contender right now" arguments just don't hold, and it's baffling that this rhetoric keeps coming up after all this time. If protoss are underrepresented at the highest level of play then that is a very strong indication that something is not right.
Yeah sure Protoss has less mechanically demanding compositions which means that below pro level protoss will be more popular but I don't see why this somehow makes it fair that stronger players should have less tools? Like it's some sort of "ladder revenge".
Why are gateway units (barring early game trickery?) still garbage? Sure people like to whine about protoss aoe and mass air but what other options do they have since "midgame" is barely a thing anymore?
Go ahead and name a Protoss player that you think is as skilled as Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral or Reynor?
Go ahead and name someone that is consistently a top performer as those 5 are.
Protoss DOES NOT have a consistent performer right now. They just don't. You can't name a player that you can say without embarassing yourself that has shown to have the same level of skill that those 5 players I mentioned have.
That's a bit of a catch-22 though, isn't it? You can't deflect "there is a problem with high level play" with "there just aren't any top protoss players" because "the top protoss players don't perform as well".
With what metric do you measure someone's skill/performance? Wins, right? Because there are inherent problems saying things like "Maru demolished Zest, but Zest is actually more skilled". You just couldn't tell unless he starts consistently beating him, right? We have only one indisputable metric, and everything else is just theorycrafters saying things like "he has more control groups, so he's better" and other nonsense.
This argument has been shit since people started using it in the GomTvT days. Yeah, we can't name any "top performers", that's what we are talking about.
No. That's a bunch of crap. I don't judge skill based on only results and anyone that does is wrong to do so. It's the same as when people treat aligulac as anything other than just a tool in a toolkit. Its rankings are not law and they never have ever been.
I judge skill based on what I see. On mechanics, on timings, on strategies, on executions, on decision making while under pressure etc. etc.
I judge that and then I compare it to results and I use the aggregate to judge how good someone is at the top level. Trap really is the best Protoss player in the world, WHEN he is playing well, but he's not consistent and that has more to do with his fragile nerves than anything that has to do with the race. I haven't seen any Protoss player currently playing that is not in the South Korean army at the moment that has anything close to level of skill that Trap does. Nowhere close. And Trap just is not as good as any of the elite 5 players I mentioned before.
Trap isn't as good as Maru, he isn't as good as Rogue, he isn't as good as Dark. He just isn't.
And there is no other Protoss player that can measure up to the level of skill that Trap has. Try and name one. You can't do it because one doesn't exist. Not right now anyway. I'm hoping that Classic or HerO (who just got BACK from the South Korean army) can get back into shape soon and I hope players like Maxpax or Goblin develop (unlikely) the way that Reynor or Clem did but aside from those things happening I just do not see any big influx of skilled Protoss players coming to the scene anytime soon.
Trap is the best they have and he just isn't as good as the elite 5 are.
Maru: 1 Premier tournament win in 2021. Dark: 1 Premier tournament win in 2021. Rogue: 3 Premier tournament wins in 2021. Serral: 3 Premier tournament wins in 2021. Reynor: 2 Premier tournament wins in 2021.
And these guys are in a completely different class than Trap, who... won 5 Premier tournaments in 2021? Why? How?
For a follow up question: Do you know how to count? Why exactly do you think that arguing Protoss players can't consistently compete at high levels is any sort of evidence against Protoss bring weaker, balance-wise?
About Trap, its clearly a matter of consistency. I mean, what was the difference between when he won those Premiere tournament and when he get eliminated early in other tournaments, other than himself? Trap plays a style of "Modern Protoss" that rely heavily on his early game micro with the Stargate opening. He needs to get his early Oracle/Phoenix build to deal worker damage and snowball that into a win. And when it doesnt work, either from Trap making mistake or his opponent play clean defense, Trap just couldnt get the advantage he wanted and eventually die out every time.
On December 20 2021 18:47 deacon.frost wrote: Classic, Stats, herO, the old Zest, hots sOs. Like I get the shitting over Protoss but forgetting about Stats and Classic is just wrong on so many levels...
Reread my post again please.
Stats is in the military. Classic just got back, herO just back, Zest I mentioned already, and sOs is hardly what I think ANYONE in their right mind would call consistent. He's a tremendous player with an awesome legacy but he won that off of being very streaky and with a playstyle that speaks for itself. It's not the kind of consistent success we've seen from players of the other two races.
You also forgot Parting who ALSO is in the military btw.
In HotS Protoss won the most championships and Zerg was the Kong race (soO, Jaedong, ByuL). With LotV that flipped and the top Zergs (yeah I know, different ones) suddenly became stone cold killers and the top Protoss players (even champions like Zest, sOs and Classic) suddenly turned from champions to 2nd place finishers with fragile nerves.
On December 20 2021 18:47 deacon.frost wrote: Classic, Stats, herO, the old Zest, hots sOs. Like I get the shitting over Protoss but forgetting about Stats and Classic is just wrong on so many levels...
Reread my post again please.
Stats is in the military. Classic just got back, herO just back, Zest I mentioned already, and sOs is hardly what I think ANYONE in their right mind would call consistent. He's a tremendous player with an awesome legacy but he won that off of being very streaky and with a playstyle that speaks for itself. It's not the kind of consistent success we've seen from players of the other two races.
You also forgot Parting who ALSO is in the military btw.
Asking to rereading your post when you missed me writing about hots sOs who was pretty consistent for the style he played.
On December 20 2021 21:15 Charoisaur wrote: In HotS Protoss won the most championships and Zerg was the Kong race (soO, Jaedong, ByuL). With LotV that flipped and the top Zergs (yeah I know, different ones) suddenly became stone cold killers and the top Protoss players (even champions like Zest, sOs and Classic) suddenly turned from champions to 2nd place finishers with fragile nerves.
the case of sOs is ezpz to explain. sOs was mindgaming masterming with rather bad mechanics(I mean for the top championship level). LOTV increased the importance of mechanics and the mastermind wasn't enough, so the more the game was thought out the more sOs has fallen. Rewatch some of his game, he wasn't that good mechanically. LOTV was basically created as anti-sOs.
The case of Zest is the same. Zest plays this game in a turn based style. He has his macro turns and then his micro turns. So again - the lack of mechanics means the lack of Zest stability.
Classic was a top notch contender for every title until his military departure, I don't think anyone menioned him as the nervous one. The nervous ones are usually Trap and Stats(and nobody said they cannot win, it's just they need many tries)
Edit> Also the fun part is that in hots we knew several things * there will be regural patches * there's one more expansion to go * there will be frequent map updates
We can't rely on any of these points. The map updates are still a thing but I wouldn't call them frequent or reliable
I'm really hoping that there will eventually be a balance patch, not that I necessarily expect it. There's never consensus on anything in terms of SC2 balance, but it feels like many of us agree that it would be nice if PvZ at the top level wasn't divided basically into adept all-ins with decreasing success rates or turtling into skytoss in order to create either a boring knife's edge standoff that is maybe their best chance at winning, or an instant zerg all-in. Balance issues aside, it's not a very dynamic meta.
Ideally, if it were possible without breaking all sorts of other things, I'd like to see protoss have more early game play, protoss ground being more viable against lurkers, and skytoss being a more situational niche strategy instead of a default.
I, for one, miss archon drops. I'd like to see prism range increased again so that queens alone can't easily defend archon harass.
I'd also like to see protoss-specific weakening of hive-tech lurkers. Here are some random probably bad ideas that could be considered: Give the colossus a second range upgrade to outrange lurkers that's gated by fleet beacon (after all, colossus have lots of counters and they're partially air units anyway). Make HT and archons immune to lurker spines because they hover, sort of like how vultures and workers aren't attacked by spider mines in brood war. Make force fields block lurker attacks, so that sentries and FF have a late game use to try to break the zerg lines.
Yeah, those are probably all dumb, but I'd like to see a dynamic more similar to TvZ, where the protoss will basically win a siege fight unless the zerg swarms out or flanks. I love that dramatic tension in TvZ, with the terran positioning and pushing while the zerg prepares to flood in and try to beat them back.
If we could get that dynamic right, where protoss armies could effectively push zerg positions under favorable circumstances in the late game, I think we would see more dynamic play from zerg earlier in the game and less skytoss stalemates. Obviously it might be accompanied by a nerf to voids or some such thing.
On December 16 2021 10:57 MarianoSC2 wrote: [quote]
He was right in his last post though. There is clear evidence that at the highest level, specifically talking about ZvP if both play perfectly, there is not chance for Protoss to win, no matter how they play. Toss can only rely on the Zerg to make a mistake in the perception of the game. Take Trap vs Reynor and Trap vs Serral as examples I think that tells the whole story. Trap won against Reynor because he caught him off guard with timing attacks which the Zerg didnt anticipate properly = Zergs mistake, well punished. But against Serral, a lot more solid player with perfect game awareness, he looked like a diamond scrub, and he didnt necesarily even have to play trash, just he didnt manage to outsmart the Zerg. Is this how they game is supposed to be? When both players play solid one race is clearly superior by design so they auto-win if they other race does not surprise them? Its bullshit, but its how it is. I remember times in SC2 when even ZvT was eft up... Just get them before ultras or get them before brood/infestor. Those kind of things are just unfair because on the highest level where least mistakes are made they always favor the race which is the most forgiving and with the most macro potential. Now in current state of the game ZvT is okay, but ZvP is a joke and everyone sees that. There is no protoss in the world who can beat a Zerg if both are highest level and both play an even game, no one. And its not like Serral is unbeatable, its just that in ZvP by design and macro mechanics its a requirement for Protoss to surprise this kind of player because they are playing at a disadvantage for most of the game. Its stupid. Will it ever change? No, but why close our eyes against it?
To sum it up in RTS I think that on the highest level if one player has better tools at their disposal then the other, its a problem and clear inbalance and its what ZvP has been for ages. Those two races are polar opposites and while there are tactics the Protoss can use to exploit this in their advantages, they are less and less effective the higher level your opponent is. That is why there is such a huge discrepancy between standard ladder and top players. The skill cap of the Zerg is just too high compared to Protoss....
It is extremely obvious that at the top level of play protoss doesn't win, I've been saying that throughout the thread and it's the reason why I'm not watching Starcraft. This guy is trying to demonstrate to me that this can only be due to race and not to the fact that 5 or 6 people at the highest level are just better than the rest and happen to not play protoss, which he doesn't need to do and he obviously doesn't have evidence for because there's no way to have evidence for that.
I think almost every single one of my posts in this thread contains the idea that protoss is weak at top level, it is kind of impressive that you would manage to miss that.
Your refusal to accept anything as evidence doesn't mean evidence doesn't exist. You always ignore the Trap vs Serral conundrum for instance and cherry pick anything else to detract from the overall idea. Here you have a similarly skilled player getting demolished, it IS evidence even if its not perfect proof. Evidence doesn't mean the same thing as complete proof maybe thats your problem. As he said there's plenty of clear evidence that protoss relies on the zerg to make major mistakes in perception otherwise zerg will pretty much always win.
If you don't have complete proof do you acknowledge that there's a possibility that the other scenario is right?
Yes I wouldn't say its impossible but it should be very unlikely, and if you understand the game well you can tell from watching high level PvZs that its not purely inferior player skill and zerg truly does have the advantage.
I see, so in summary when I said it was possible and you went after me for saying that for several pages, I was right and you were wrong?
No I'm still saying we can tell its clearly not just player skill making it the weakest race, that doesn't mean it was impossible for that to happen. I'm just saying it is possible to see that this is not what's happening. And I don't mean to go after you I just strongly disagree with your viewpoint and enjoy discussing it.
You're trying to have it both ways, arguing that we can clearly tell one is the correct answer and also that the other answer could be the correct one at the same time.
A simpler way of describing this is just that both are possible and you think one is more likely than the other. I don't know why you take issue with this.
Basically I don't see it as contradictory because I believe its possible but it doesn't matter that its possible because its clearly not what's really happening. I said I think it should be very unlikely but my reasoning isn't just based on that, also by observation we can use reality to confirm thats not whats happening. I only take issue with the concept that its impossible for anyone to see if protoss weakness is caused by lack of player skill or not, I don't think it is anywhere near impossible. You probably think so just because there's no obvious way to concretely measure that.
There's no real way to "use reality" to confirm that's not what's happening, and there's also no "we". Zergs probably think that zerg is slightly too strong right now but it's not a big deal, and remember that terrans think terran is underpowered every single time any terran loses any game.
Also if we could use reality to confirm that's not what's happening, then it would follow that it is impossible :p that's how words work. What we're saying is very similar but you insist on using a weaker framing for it.
Well... it would be incredibly difficult and impractical to come up with a very precise way to thoroughly prove its not, but it is possible to intuitively see and understand that its not imo. I meant we as in anyone who puts aside their racial bias and objectively evaluates the situation.
It took me a couple minutes staring to understand what you meant on the second part cause it made no sense? Just because reality confirms its not happening obviously doesn't mean it was impossible or are you trying to say something else? Things can be possible but still not happen.
Yea I guess we agree overall but just disagree on some specifics of how things work haha
Maybe its better to turn our attention to what exactly is going wrong with specific matchups like PvZ
On December 21 2021 00:49 irvnasty wrote: I'm really hoping that there will eventually be a balance patch, not that I necessarily expect it. There's never consensus on anything in terms of SC2 balance, but it feels like many of us agree that it would be nice if PvZ at the top level wasn't divided basically into adept all-ins with decreasing success rates or turtling into skytoss in order to create either a boring knife's edge standoff that is maybe their best chance at winning, or an instant zerg all-in. Balance issues aside, it's not a very dynamic meta.
Ideally, if it were possible without breaking all sorts of other things, I'd like to see protoss have more early game play, protoss ground being more viable against lurkers, and skytoss being a more situational niche strategy instead of a default.
I, for one, miss archon drops. I'd like to see prism range increased again so that queens alone can't easily defend archon harass.
I'd also like to see protoss-specific weakening of hive-tech lurkers. Here are some random probably bad ideas that could be considered: Give the colossus a second range upgrade to outrange lurkers that's gated by fleet beacon (after all, colossus have lots of counters and they're partially air units anyway). Make HT and archons immune to lurker spines because they hover, sort of like how vultures and workers aren't attacked by spider mines in brood war. Make force fields block lurker attacks, so that sentries and FF have a late game use to try to break the zerg lines.
Yeah, those are probably all dumb, but I'd like to see a dynamic more similar to TvZ, where the protoss will basically win a siege fight unless the zerg swarms out or flanks. I love that dramatic tension in TvZ, with the terran positioning and pushing while the zerg prepares to flood in and try to beat them back.
If we could get that dynamic right, where protoss armies could effectively push zerg positions under favorable circumstances in the late game, I think we would see more dynamic play from zerg earlier in the game and less skytoss stalemates. Obviously it might be accompanied by a nerf to voids or some such thing.
I think at the very least by far most people can see Lurkers being too effective vs protoss ground for this matchup to work properly is a problem.
It is extremely obvious that at the top level of play protoss doesn't win, I've been saying that throughout the thread and it's the reason why I'm not watching Starcraft. This guy is trying to demonstrate to me that this can only be due to race and not to the fact that 5 or 6 people at the highest level are just better than the rest and happen to not play protoss, which he doesn't need to do and he obviously doesn't have evidence for because there's no way to have evidence for that.
I think almost every single one of my posts in this thread contains the idea that protoss is weak at top level, it is kind of impressive that you would manage to miss that.
Your refusal to accept anything as evidence doesn't mean evidence doesn't exist. You always ignore the Trap vs Serral conundrum for instance and cherry pick anything else to detract from the overall idea. Here you have a similarly skilled player getting demolished, it IS evidence even if its not perfect proof. Evidence doesn't mean the same thing as complete proof maybe thats your problem. As he said there's plenty of clear evidence that protoss relies on the zerg to make major mistakes in perception otherwise zerg will pretty much always win.
If you don't have complete proof do you acknowledge that there's a possibility that the other scenario is right?
Yes I wouldn't say its impossible but it should be very unlikely, and if you understand the game well you can tell from watching high level PvZs that its not purely inferior player skill and zerg truly does have the advantage.
I see, so in summary when I said it was possible and you went after me for saying that for several pages, I was right and you were wrong?
No I'm still saying we can tell its clearly not just player skill making it the weakest race, that doesn't mean it was impossible for that to happen. I'm just saying it is possible to see that this is not what's happening. And I don't mean to go after you I just strongly disagree with your viewpoint and enjoy discussing it.
You're trying to have it both ways, arguing that we can clearly tell one is the correct answer and also that the other answer could be the correct one at the same time.
A simpler way of describing this is just that both are possible and you think one is more likely than the other. I don't know why you take issue with this.
Basically I don't see it as contradictory because I believe its possible but it doesn't matter that its possible because its clearly not what's really happening. I said I think it should be very unlikely but my reasoning isn't just based on that, also by observation we can use reality to confirm thats not whats happening. I only take issue with the concept that its impossible for anyone to see if protoss weakness is caused by lack of player skill or not, I don't think it is anywhere near impossible. You probably think so just because there's no obvious way to concretely measure that.
There's no real way to "use reality" to confirm that's not what's happening, and there's also no "we". Zergs probably think that zerg is slightly too strong right now but it's not a big deal, and remember that terrans think terran is underpowered every single time any terran loses any game.
Also if we could use reality to confirm that's not what's happening, then it would follow that it is impossible :p that's how words work. What we're saying is very similar but you insist on using a weaker framing for it.
It took me a couple minutes staring to understand what you meant on the second part cause it made no sense? Just because reality confirms its not happening obviously doesn't mean it was impossible or are you trying to say something else? Things can be possible but still not happen.
When something is possible and it doesn't happen, we cannot use reality to determine it's not happening, since it could happen within the context of reality
If you have Aces vs Kings, you cannot use reality to determine that you're going to win this time, since it's also possible that you don't win. What we can do is use what we know of reality to determine the likelihood of it happening, in this case 82%. It's only when something is impossible that we can use reality to determine that it isn't happening.
On December 20 2021 11:50 WaesumNinja wrote: The "maybe protoss players are just worse" or "protoss just doesn't have a strong top contender right now" arguments just don't hold, and it's baffling that this rhetoric keeps coming up after all this time. If protoss are underrepresented at the highest level of play then that is a very strong indication that something is not right.
Yeah sure Protoss has less mechanically demanding compositions which means that below pro level protoss will be more popular but I don't see why this somehow makes it fair that stronger players should have less tools? Like it's some sort of "ladder revenge".
Why are gateway units (barring early game trickery?) still garbage? Sure people like to whine about protoss aoe and mass air but what other options do they have since "midgame" is barely a thing anymore?
Go ahead and name a Protoss player that you think is as skilled as Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral or Reynor?
Go ahead and name someone that is consistently a top performer as those 5 are.
Protoss DOES NOT have a consistent performer right now. They just don't. You can't name a player that you can say without embarassing yourself that has shown to have the same level of skill that those 5 players I mentioned have.
That's a bit of a catch-22 though, isn't it? You can't deflect "there is a problem with high level play" with "there just aren't any top protoss players" because "the top protoss players don't perform as well".
With what metric do you measure someone's skill/performance? Wins, right? Because there are inherent problems saying things like "Maru demolished Zest, but Zest is actually more skilled". You just couldn't tell unless he starts consistently beating him, right? We have only one indisputable metric, and everything else is just theorycrafters saying things like "he has more control groups, so he's better" and other nonsense.
This argument has been shit since people started using it in the GomTvT days. Yeah, we can't name any "top performers", that's what we are talking about.
No. That's a bunch of crap. I don't judge skill based on only results and anyone that does is wrong to do so. It's the same as when people treat aligulac as anything other than just a tool in a toolkit. Its rankings are not law and they never have ever been.
I judge skill based on what I see. On mechanics, on timings, on strategies, on executions, on decision making while under pressure etc. etc.
I judge that and then I compare it to results and I use the aggregate to judge how good someone is at the top level. Trap really is the best Protoss player in the world, WHEN he is playing well, but he's not consistent and that has more to do with his fragile nerves than anything that has to do with the race. I haven't seen any Protoss player currently playing that is not in the South Korean army at the moment that has anything close to level of skill that Trap does. Nowhere close. And Trap just is not as good as any of the elite 5 players I mentioned before.
Trap isn't as good as Maru, he isn't as good as Rogue, he isn't as good as Dark. He just isn't.
And there is no other Protoss player that can measure up to the level of skill that Trap has. Try and name one. You can't do it because one doesn't exist. Not right now anyway. I'm hoping that Classic or HerO (who just got BACK from the South Korean army) can get back into shape soon and I hope players like Maxpax or Goblin develop (unlikely) the way that Reynor or Clem did but aside from those things happening I just do not see any big influx of skilled Protoss players coming to the scene anytime soon.
Trap is the best they have and he just isn't as good as the elite 5 are.
Maru: 1 Premier tournament win in 2021. Dark: 1 Premier tournament win in 2021. Rogue: 3 Premier tournament wins in 2021. Serral: 3 Premier tournament wins in 2021. Reynor: 2 Premier tournament wins in 2021.
And these guys are in a completely different class than Trap, who... won 5 Premier tournaments in 2021? Why? How?
For a follow up question: Do you know how to count? Why exactly do you think that arguing Protoss players can't consistently compete at high levels is any sort of evidence against Protoss bring weaker, balance-wise?
About Trap, its clearly a matter of consistency. I mean, what was the difference between when he won those Premiere tournament and when he get eliminated early in other tournaments, other than himself? Trap plays a style of "Modern Protoss" that rely heavily on his early game micro with the Stargate opening. He needs to get his early Oracle/Phoenix build to deal worker damage and snowball that into a win. And when it doesnt work, either from Trap making mistake or his opponent play clean defense, Trap just couldnt get the advantage he wanted and eventually die out every time.
So Trap is not top tier because he's inconsistent whereas players like Rogue, Dark, and Reynor are top tier because they're so consistent?
Also, Protoss basically always has to get damage done early, at least against Zerg. It's one of the main things that's been discussed ad nauseum in this thread. So I'm not sure why "Trap can't always pull out worker damage his opponents know must be coming" is really a strike against him.
There really is nothing to be discussed with zerg bois who, after watching top level starcraft for so long, still think zvp is a balanced matchup. In case it isn't obvious enough, many others and myself have explained why earlier in this thread. Yet all we get back from zerg boiiiis are them avoiding the issues head on and saying retarded things like OH THERE JUST ARENT ANY GD PROTOSS PLAYERS or NOTHING SHOULD BE CHANGED BECAUSE GOLD LEAGUE WILL HAVE TOO MANY PROTOSSES.
Honestly, even if protoss started with just 1 worker and had all units cost twice the amount, zerg bois are so blinded they will still believe that zvp is a balanced matchup.
Keep kidding yourself that Serral's ridiculously high win rate against any protoss in a best of 5 is because he is technically and strategically soo much better than any koreans who train many hours more and have far better players to practice with.
For the zerg boiiis who plan on replying to my post (and someone please do reply, because if no one replies, I will assume I am correct), but this time, instead of focusing on something irrelevant ("Who are the zerg bois you are referring to", "Why use hyberbole" etc lol), just cut the crap and go straight to the heart of the matter: how on earth do you still think zvp at the highest level is a balanced matchup? I'm genuinely very curious to see your reasoning because otherwise we must be playing and watching two different versions of starcraft.
On December 20 2021 11:50 WaesumNinja wrote: The "maybe protoss players are just worse" or "protoss just doesn't have a strong top contender right now" arguments just don't hold, and it's baffling that this rhetoric keeps coming up after all this time. If protoss are underrepresented at the highest level of play then that is a very strong indication that something is not right.
Yeah sure Protoss has less mechanically demanding compositions which means that below pro level protoss will be more popular but I don't see why this somehow makes it fair that stronger players should have less tools? Like it's some sort of "ladder revenge".
Why are gateway units (barring early game trickery?) still garbage? Sure people like to whine about protoss aoe and mass air but what other options do they have since "midgame" is barely a thing anymore?
Go ahead and name a Protoss player that you think is as skilled as Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral or Reynor?
Go ahead and name someone that is consistently a top performer as those 5 are.
Protoss DOES NOT have a consistent performer right now. They just don't. You can't name a player that you can say without embarassing yourself that has shown to have the same level of skill that those 5 players I mentioned have.
That's a bit of a catch-22 though, isn't it? You can't deflect "there is a problem with high level play" with "there just aren't any top protoss players" because "the top protoss players don't perform as well".
With what metric do you measure someone's skill/performance? Wins, right? Because there are inherent problems saying things like "Maru demolished Zest, but Zest is actually more skilled". You just couldn't tell unless he starts consistently beating him, right? We have only one indisputable metric, and everything else is just theorycrafters saying things like "he has more control groups, so he's better" and other nonsense.
This argument has been shit since people started using it in the GomTvT days. Yeah, we can't name any "top performers", that's what we are talking about.
No. That's a bunch of crap. I don't judge skill based on only results and anyone that does is wrong to do so. It's the same as when people treat aligulac as anything other than just a tool in a toolkit. Its rankings are not law and they never have ever been.
I judge skill based on what I see. On mechanics, on timings, on strategies, on executions, on decision making while under pressure etc. etc.
I judge that and then I compare it to results and I use the aggregate to judge how good someone is at the top level. Trap really is the best Protoss player in the world, WHEN he is playing well, but he's not consistent and that has more to do with his fragile nerves than anything that has to do with the race. I haven't seen any Protoss player currently playing that is not in the South Korean army at the moment that has anything close to level of skill that Trap does. Nowhere close. And Trap just is not as good as any of the elite 5 players I mentioned before.
Trap isn't as good as Maru, he isn't as good as Rogue, he isn't as good as Dark. He just isn't.
And there is no other Protoss player that can measure up to the level of skill that Trap has. Try and name one. You can't do it because one doesn't exist. Not right now anyway. I'm hoping that Classic or HerO (who just got BACK from the South Korean army) can get back into shape soon and I hope players like Maxpax or Goblin develop (unlikely) the way that Reynor or Clem did but aside from those things happening I just do not see any big influx of skilled Protoss players coming to the scene anytime soon.
Trap is the best they have and he just isn't as good as the elite 5 are.
Maru: 1 Premier tournament win in 2021. Dark: 1 Premier tournament win in 2021. Rogue: 3 Premier tournament wins in 2021. Serral: 3 Premier tournament wins in 2021. Reynor: 2 Premier tournament wins in 2021.
And these guys are in a completely different class than Trap, who... won 5 Premier tournaments in 2021? Why? How?
For a follow up question: Do you know how to count? Why exactly do you think that arguing Protoss players can't consistently compete at high levels is any sort of evidence against Protoss bring weaker, balance-wise?
About Trap, its clearly a matter of consistency. I mean, what was the difference between when he won those Premiere tournament and when he get eliminated early in other tournaments, other than himself? Trap plays a style of "Modern Protoss" that rely heavily on his early game micro with the Stargate opening. He needs to get his early Oracle/Phoenix build to deal worker damage and snowball that into a win. And when it doesnt work, either from Trap making mistake or his opponent play clean defense, Trap just couldnt get the advantage he wanted and eventually die out every time.
So Trap is not top tier because he's inconsistent whereas players like Rogue, Dark, and Reynor are top tier because they're so consistent?
Also, Protoss basically always has to get damage done early, at least against Zerg. It's one of the main things that's been discussed ad nauseum in this thread. So I'm not sure why "Trap can't always pull out worker damage his opponents know must be coming" is really a strike against him.
Yeah, isnt that how you differentiate top of the world athlete from others? They show up when it matter most. Trap had no business losing to Cure in GSL S3 after beating Maru, but he did, and in a pretty sad fashion as well. Rogue can be a duds in many smaller tournaments, but when he shows up on the biggest stage, he just murdering everyone in cold blood. As for the other part, I dont feel you need to deal major early worker damage to opponent to win as Protoss. Sure picking off a couple units here and there with some Adept and/or Oracle is nice, but I have seen Protoss players won without it. I just dont feel it with Trap often enough, like he either crush his opponent after getting that early attack and kill many workers, or he would die because it doesnt work and the opponent counter. Look at Zest, he mix in shitload of build from extreme pressure, to defensive build, to harassments build, to cheese build and it works for him well enough. That is not to say Trap doesnt try to mix in build, but he just doesnt do it often enough, and has clear favor-ism toward certain opening (glaive Adept in PvZ and Stargate Phoenix/Oracle in PvT) that doesnt work because his opponent knew it and defended it well.
On December 21 2021 15:34 kingism wrote: There really is nothing to be discussed with zerg bois who, after watching top level starcraft for so long, still think zvp is a balanced matchup. In case it isn't obvious enough, many others and myself have explained why earlier in this thread. Yet all we get back from zerg boiiiis are them avoiding the issues head on and saying retarded things like OH THERE JUST ARENT ANY GD PROTOSS PLAYERS or NOTHING SHOULD BE CHANGED BECAUSE GOLD LEAGUE WILL HAVE TOO MANY PROTOSSES.
Honestly, even if protoss started with just 1 worker and had all units cost twice the amount, zerg bois are so blinded they will still believe that zvp is a balanced matchup.
Keep kidding yourself that Serral's ridiculously high win rate against any protoss in a best of 5 is because he is technically and strategically soo much better than any koreans who train many hours more and have far better players to practice with.
For the zerg boiiis who plan on replying to my post (and someone please do reply, because if no one replies, I will assume I am correct), but this time, instead of focusing on something irrelevant ("Who are the zerg bois you are referring to", "Why use hyberbole" etc lol), just cut the crap and go straight to the heart of the matter: how on earth do you still think zvp at the highest level is a balanced matchup? I'm genuinely very curious to see your reasoning because otherwise we must be playing and watching two different versions of starcraft.
Since you used only my criticism of you in this post, that would imply that I am the Zerg boy. If I am the Zerg boy and I am writing about ways to aid Protoss in PvZ, what are you even on about? It seems to me that you are either a troll, you do not understand what people are writing about, or you are ignoring the discussion in order to simply complain. If it is the middle option, please say so. Ask for clarification of arguments. You can use the quote funtion and single out the parts that are confusing like this:
how on earth do you still think zvp at the highest level is a balanced matchup?
This is a part that seems central to your beliefs, that there is a large amount of people who think PvZ is balanced on the highest level. There is discussion going on about part of this in a comment thread with Waesum, Vindicare and tigera6, among others. Jump into that discussion specifically and you may find an answer. Posting the question deep down in a stand-alone comment that starts with a rant, continuing with a hyperbole/something objectively wrong, and a defensive paragraph ahead of the actual content of your post is not helpful for your cause. You antagonize nearly everyone with that start. No one will want to discuss with you.
This is about you and how nobody has taught you how to have a discussion. -You need some sort of etiquette to be included. -You also need to formulate your points clearly. This mean that a lot of your thoughts have to be put aside in order for the true content to show. -Lastly, your text need to relate to the people you are discussing with. Case in point: what I started this comment with. You related the text to me, but asked about something else. I'll clarify with an allegory: The Queen of England said that we needed patience. Why does she want us to rush? I am on the team of PvZ is not balanced on the highest level (the Queen wants patience). You ask why I think PvZ is balanced (why does she want to rush?). It is not making sense. I urge you to read and understand what others are writing, and reread your own post before submitting it.
However, if it isn't about a lack on your part but a willful thing then you should just stop. You do not add anything to the discussion. The only thing you contribute is negativity. I tried finding a forum rule that you would be breaking. I found this:
Terms of use, prohibited conduct Duplicate or excessively repeated submissions in one or more areas
This isn't your first post with basically the same content. Is it duplicate? Yes. Is it excessive? Yes. Is it grounds for a warning? I do not know where the mods draw the line, but I think it is. I have not reported you because I believe that you can do better.
Note that I didn't discuss with you at all. Your start is dissuading me from doing that.
On December 20 2021 11:50 WaesumNinja wrote: The "maybe protoss players are just worse" or "protoss just doesn't have a strong top contender right now" arguments just don't hold, and it's baffling that this rhetoric keeps coming up after all this time. If protoss are underrepresented at the highest level of play then that is a very strong indication that something is not right.
Yeah sure Protoss has less mechanically demanding compositions which means that below pro level protoss will be more popular but I don't see why this somehow makes it fair that stronger players should have less tools? Like it's some sort of "ladder revenge".
Why are gateway units (barring early game trickery?) still garbage? Sure people like to whine about protoss aoe and mass air but what other options do they have since "midgame" is barely a thing anymore?
Go ahead and name a Protoss player that you think is as skilled as Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral or Reynor?
Go ahead and name someone that is consistently a top performer as those 5 are.
Protoss DOES NOT have a consistent performer right now. They just don't. You can't name a player that you can say without embarassing yourself that has shown to have the same level of skill that those 5 players I mentioned have.
That's a bit of a catch-22 though, isn't it? You can't deflect "there is a problem with high level play" with "there just aren't any top protoss players" because "the top protoss players don't perform as well".
With what metric do you measure someone's skill/performance? Wins, right? Because there are inherent problems saying things like "Maru demolished Zest, but Zest is actually more skilled". You just couldn't tell unless he starts consistently beating him, right? We have only one indisputable metric, and everything else is just theorycrafters saying things like "he has more control groups, so he's better" and other nonsense.
This argument has been shit since people started using it in the GomTvT days. Yeah, we can't name any "top performers", that's what we are talking about.
No. That's a bunch of crap. I don't judge skill based on only results and anyone that does is wrong to do so. It's the same as when people treat aligulac as anything other than just a tool in a toolkit. Its rankings are not law and they never have ever been.
I judge skill based on what I see. On mechanics, on timings, on strategies, on executions, on decision making while under pressure etc. etc.
I judge that and then I compare it to results and I use the aggregate to judge how good someone is at the top level. Trap really is the best Protoss player in the world, WHEN he is playing well, but he's not consistent and that has more to do with his fragile nerves than anything that has to do with the race. I haven't seen any Protoss player currently playing that is not in the South Korean army at the moment that has anything close to level of skill that Trap does. Nowhere close. And Trap just is not as good as any of the elite 5 players I mentioned before.
Trap isn't as good as Maru, he isn't as good as Rogue, he isn't as good as Dark. He just isn't.
And there is no other Protoss player that can measure up to the level of skill that Trap has. Try and name one. You can't do it because one doesn't exist. Not right now anyway. I'm hoping that Classic or HerO (who just got BACK from the South Korean army) can get back into shape soon and I hope players like Maxpax or Goblin develop (unlikely) the way that Reynor or Clem did but aside from those things happening I just do not see any big influx of skilled Protoss players coming to the scene anytime soon.
Trap is the best they have and he just isn't as good as the elite 5 are.
Maru: 1 Premier tournament win in 2021. Dark: 1 Premier tournament win in 2021. Rogue: 3 Premier tournament wins in 2021. Serral: 3 Premier tournament wins in 2021. Reynor: 2 Premier tournament wins in 2021.
And these guys are in a completely different class than Trap, who... won 5 Premier tournaments in 2021? Why? How?
For a follow up question: Do you know how to count? Why exactly do you think that arguing Protoss players can't consistently compete at high levels is any sort of evidence against Protoss bring weaker, balance-wise?
About Trap, its clearly a matter of consistency. I mean, what was the difference between when he won those Premiere tournament and when he get eliminated early in other tournaments, other than himself? Trap plays a style of "Modern Protoss" that rely heavily on his early game micro with the Stargate opening. He needs to get his early Oracle/Phoenix build to deal worker damage and snowball that into a win. And when it doesnt work, either from Trap making mistake or his opponent play clean defense, Trap just couldnt get the advantage he wanted and eventually die out every time.
So Trap is not top tier because he's inconsistent whereas players like Rogue, Dark, and Reynor are top tier because they're so consistent?
Also, Protoss basically always has to get damage done early, at least against Zerg. It's one of the main things that's been discussed ad nauseum in this thread. So I'm not sure why "Trap can't always pull out worker damage his opponents know must be coming" is really a strike against him.
Yeah, isnt that how you differentiate top of the world athlete from others? They show up when it matter most.
If that was all then the USA is using a very strange method to chose with athletes are going to the Olympics. Athletes that are to compete in hurdles, pole vault, javelin etc. have a competition before the Olympics to decide. It is called the United States Olympic qualifier. This means that the US athletes need to perform better than the rest before the Olympics. With how form works in the athletics world is that you can not be in top form for both events. Their physique cannot optimized for both. The athletes have to choose when to perform their best. Do they want to make sure that they get to compete in the Olympics at all, or are they confident enough that they'll qualify and can perform their best at the Olympics. I may be wrong about this, but I think a world record has been broken in the US Olympic qualifiers without an Olympic medal, not even bronze, for that athlete.
I just wanted to both give an example of the difficulty of knowing what matters and to make a point that it isn't always the best player that wins a match. Upsets happen often. MeomaikA vs Maru, 2-0, with a prize of $150 000 for winning the tournament; Scarlett vs Rogue in code S, a tournament Rogue should advance far in if he was a consistent player (according to your metric); ShoWTimE vs the ByuN man army at WCS Global finals, 2-0 in ShoWTimE's favour with a possibility of ByuN being eliminated before the ro8 at Blizzcon in 2016.
Arguing that the best players are best when it matters says more about your view of what it means to be best than the actual ability of the players. Only 1 player can win. If that is the best player, then it is impossible to say who the second best player is since there are several players that only lost vs the winner. A ro8 finish is therefore identical to a ro2 exit, with that metric. We can take the extreme example of 2016 GSL season 1. Zest won. Maru was a favourite to go far and he only lost to Zest. Maru lost the code A match. That was a 60 player code A, with 2 players already qualified to code S. Is that a ro60 or a ro62 finish? Maru, like TY, only lost vs Zest. One was a ro62, the other a ro2.
The metric of winning when it matters is very strange. You need way more to gauge ability.
On December 20 2021 11:50 WaesumNinja wrote: The "maybe protoss players are just worse" or "protoss just doesn't have a strong top contender right now" arguments just don't hold, and it's baffling that this rhetoric keeps coming up after all this time. If protoss are underrepresented at the highest level of play then that is a very strong indication that something is not right.
Yeah sure Protoss has less mechanically demanding compositions which means that below pro level protoss will be more popular but I don't see why this somehow makes it fair that stronger players should have less tools? Like it's some sort of "ladder revenge".
Why are gateway units (barring early game trickery?) still garbage? Sure people like to whine about protoss aoe and mass air but what other options do they have since "midgame" is barely a thing anymore?
Go ahead and name a Protoss player that you think is as skilled as Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral or Reynor?
Go ahead and name someone that is consistently a top performer as those 5 are.
Protoss DOES NOT have a consistent performer right now. They just don't. You can't name a player that you can say without embarassing yourself that has shown to have the same level of skill that those 5 players I mentioned have.
That's a bit of a catch-22 though, isn't it? You can't deflect "there is a problem with high level play" with "there just aren't any top protoss players" because "the top protoss players don't perform as well".
With what metric do you measure someone's skill/performance? Wins, right? Because there are inherent problems saying things like "Maru demolished Zest, but Zest is actually more skilled". You just couldn't tell unless he starts consistently beating him, right? We have only one indisputable metric, and everything else is just theorycrafters saying things like "he has more control groups, so he's better" and other nonsense.
This argument has been shit since people started using it in the GomTvT days. Yeah, we can't name any "top performers", that's what we are talking about.
No. That's a bunch of crap. I don't judge skill based on only results and anyone that does is wrong to do so. It's the same as when people treat aligulac as anything other than just a tool in a toolkit. Its rankings are not law and they never have ever been.
I judge skill based on what I see. On mechanics, on timings, on strategies, on executions, on decision making while under pressure etc. etc.
I judge that and then I compare it to results and I use the aggregate to judge how good someone is at the top level. Trap really is the best Protoss player in the world, WHEN he is playing well, but he's not consistent and that has more to do with his fragile nerves than anything that has to do with the race. I haven't seen any Protoss player currently playing that is not in the South Korean army at the moment that has anything close to level of skill that Trap does. Nowhere close. And Trap just is not as good as any of the elite 5 players I mentioned before.
Trap isn't as good as Maru, he isn't as good as Rogue, he isn't as good as Dark. He just isn't.
And there is no other Protoss player that can measure up to the level of skill that Trap has. Try and name one. You can't do it because one doesn't exist. Not right now anyway. I'm hoping that Classic or HerO (who just got BACK from the South Korean army) can get back into shape soon and I hope players like Maxpax or Goblin develop (unlikely) the way that Reynor or Clem did but aside from those things happening I just do not see any big influx of skilled Protoss players coming to the scene anytime soon.
Trap is the best they have and he just isn't as good as the elite 5 are.
Maru: 1 Premier tournament win in 2021. Dark: 1 Premier tournament win in 2021. Rogue: 3 Premier tournament wins in 2021. Serral: 3 Premier tournament wins in 2021. Reynor: 2 Premier tournament wins in 2021.
And these guys are in a completely different class than Trap, who... won 5 Premier tournaments in 2021? Why? How?
For a follow up question: Do you know how to count? Why exactly do you think that arguing Protoss players can't consistently compete at high levels is any sort of evidence against Protoss bring weaker, balance-wise?
About Trap, its clearly a matter of consistency. I mean, what was the difference between when he won those Premiere tournament and when he get eliminated early in other tournaments, other than himself? Trap plays a style of "Modern Protoss" that rely heavily on his early game micro with the Stargate opening. He needs to get his early Oracle/Phoenix build to deal worker damage and snowball that into a win. And when it doesnt work, either from Trap making mistake or his opponent play clean defense, Trap just couldnt get the advantage he wanted and eventually die out every time.
So Trap is not top tier because he's inconsistent whereas players like Rogue, Dark, and Reynor are top tier because they're so consistent?
Also, Protoss basically always has to get damage done early, at least against Zerg. It's one of the main things that's been discussed ad nauseum in this thread. So I'm not sure why "Trap can't always pull out worker damage his opponents know must be coming" is really a strike against him.
Yeah, isnt that how you differentiate top of the world athlete from others? They show up when it matter most.
If that was all then the USA is using a very strange method to chose with athletes are going to the Olympics. Athletes that are to compete in hurdles, pole vault, javelin etc. have a competition before the Olympics to decide. It is called the United States Olympic qualifier. This means that the US athletes need to perform better than the rest before the Olympics. With how form works in the athletics world is that you can not be in top form for both events. Their physique cannot optimized for both. The athletes have to choose when to perform their best. Do they want to make sure that they get to compete in the Olympics at all, or are they confident enough that they'll qualify and can perform their best at the Olympics. I may be wrong about this, but I think a world record has been broken in the US Olympic qualifiers without an Olympic medal, not even bronze, for that athlete.
I just wanted to both give an example of the difficulty of knowing what matters and to make a point that it isn't always the best player that wins a match. Upsets happen often. MeomaikA vs Maru, 2-0, with a prize of $150 000 for winning the tournament; Scarlett vs Rogue in code S, a tournament Rogue should advance far in if he was a consistent player (according to your metric); ShoWTimE vs the ByuN man army at WCS Global finals, 2-0 in ShoWTimE's favour with a possibility of ByuN being eliminated before the ro8 at Blizzcon in 2016.
Arguing that the best players are best when it matters says more about your view of what it means to be best than the actual ability of the players. Only 1 player can win. If that is the best player, then it is impossible to say who the second best player is since there are several players that only lost vs the winner. A ro8 finish is therefore identical to a ro2 exit, with that metric. We can take the extreme example of 2016 GSL season 1. Zest won. Maru was a favourite to go far and he only lost to Zest. Maru lost the code A match. That was a 60 player code A, with 2 players already qualified to code S. Is that a ro60 or a ro62 finish? Maru, like TY, only lost vs Zest. One was a ro62, the other a ro2.
The metric of winning when it matters is very strange. You need way more to gauge ability.
Using Meomaika vs MAru is dumb. Despite the loss Maru ended first in the group and later on was defeated in semis by Inno. So while he lost to a much weaker player, at the same time he delivered when it mattered. Using the Byun loss at Blizzcon he won is bad as well. because he then delivered. And while yes, Rogue lost to Scarlett, in the other times he delivered. His trophey case is by far the most packed one and most of it was done in the past 7 years, actually majority in the past 4 or so.
If you want to use sport analogy, let's use it. Check how good German national football team was in the past 10 years. And while they were the favorite to win anything they entered, they had some hiccups.
Nobody can deliver all the time. The issue with Trap or Zest is, they don't deliver most of the time. This is the issue which Stats or Classic didn't face. And mind you many Code S champs were defeated the next season of the Code S
Edit> Actually this is new for Zest. He used to deliver in the past. He used to be a very solid player, for some reason this doesn't apply nowadays. We can ask what happened, if he has fallen, has form swings or if the game progressed so far the #ZestMacro suddenly matters more.
Edit 2> And to be fair the non top Trap comment comes mostly in comparison to the top vs the hardest tournaments where for some reason Trap couldn't win a title. Trap v Maru -> Trap v Cure is the best example we have of this. The best PvT player just beat the best Terran to have a really bad day in finals. WHY? PvZ wasn't the issue, BO7 wasn't the issue(he did beat Maru in a BO7 ) and that's why so many people blame his nerves. ALthough I wouldn't say Trap is not the top or not consistent, unless you compare it to the real top players, who simply win the big games.
On December 20 2021 11:50 WaesumNinja wrote: The "maybe protoss players are just worse" or "protoss just doesn't have a strong top contender right now" arguments just don't hold, and it's baffling that this rhetoric keeps coming up after all this time. If protoss are underrepresented at the highest level of play then that is a very strong indication that something is not right.
Yeah sure Protoss has less mechanically demanding compositions which means that below pro level protoss will be more popular but I don't see why this somehow makes it fair that stronger players should have less tools? Like it's some sort of "ladder revenge".
Why are gateway units (barring early game trickery?) still garbage? Sure people like to whine about protoss aoe and mass air but what other options do they have since "midgame" is barely a thing anymore?
Go ahead and name a Protoss player that you think is as skilled as Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral or Reynor?
Go ahead and name someone that is consistently a top performer as those 5 are.
Protoss DOES NOT have a consistent performer right now. They just don't. You can't name a player that you can say without embarassing yourself that has shown to have the same level of skill that those 5 players I mentioned have.
That's a bit of a catch-22 though, isn't it? You can't deflect "there is a problem with high level play" with "there just aren't any top protoss players" because "the top protoss players don't perform as well".
With what metric do you measure someone's skill/performance? Wins, right? Because there are inherent problems saying things like "Maru demolished Zest, but Zest is actually more skilled". You just couldn't tell unless he starts consistently beating him, right? We have only one indisputable metric, and everything else is just theorycrafters saying things like "he has more control groups, so he's better" and other nonsense.
This argument has been shit since people started using it in the GomTvT days. Yeah, we can't name any "top performers", that's what we are talking about.
No. That's a bunch of crap. I don't judge skill based on only results and anyone that does is wrong to do so. It's the same as when people treat aligulac as anything other than just a tool in a toolkit. Its rankings are not law and they never have ever been.
I judge skill based on what I see. On mechanics, on timings, on strategies, on executions, on decision making while under pressure etc. etc.
I judge that and then I compare it to results and I use the aggregate to judge how good someone is at the top level. Trap really is the best Protoss player in the world, WHEN he is playing well, but he's not consistent and that has more to do with his fragile nerves than anything that has to do with the race. I haven't seen any Protoss player currently playing that is not in the South Korean army at the moment that has anything close to level of skill that Trap does. Nowhere close. And Trap just is not as good as any of the elite 5 players I mentioned before.
Trap isn't as good as Maru, he isn't as good as Rogue, he isn't as good as Dark. He just isn't.
And there is no other Protoss player that can measure up to the level of skill that Trap has. Try and name one. You can't do it because one doesn't exist. Not right now anyway. I'm hoping that Classic or HerO (who just got BACK from the South Korean army) can get back into shape soon and I hope players like Maxpax or Goblin develop (unlikely) the way that Reynor or Clem did but aside from those things happening I just do not see any big influx of skilled Protoss players coming to the scene anytime soon.
Trap is the best they have and he just isn't as good as the elite 5 are.
Maru: 1 Premier tournament win in 2021. Dark: 1 Premier tournament win in 2021. Rogue: 3 Premier tournament wins in 2021. Serral: 3 Premier tournament wins in 2021. Reynor: 2 Premier tournament wins in 2021.
And these guys are in a completely different class than Trap, who... won 5 Premier tournaments in 2021? Why? How?
For a follow up question: Do you know how to count? Why exactly do you think that arguing Protoss players can't consistently compete at high levels is any sort of evidence against Protoss bring weaker, balance-wise?
About Trap, its clearly a matter of consistency. I mean, what was the difference between when he won those Premiere tournament and when he get eliminated early in other tournaments, other than himself? Trap plays a style of "Modern Protoss" that rely heavily on his early game micro with the Stargate opening. He needs to get his early Oracle/Phoenix build to deal worker damage and snowball that into a win. And when it doesnt work, either from Trap making mistake or his opponent play clean defense, Trap just couldnt get the advantage he wanted and eventually die out every time.
So Trap is not top tier because he's inconsistent whereas players like Rogue, Dark, and Reynor are top tier because they're so consistent?
Also, Protoss basically always has to get damage done early, at least against Zerg. It's one of the main things that's been discussed ad nauseum in this thread. So I'm not sure why "Trap can't always pull out worker damage his opponents know must be coming" is really a strike against him.
Yeah, isnt that how you differentiate top of the world athlete from others? They show up when it matter most. Trap had no business losing to Cure in GSL S3 after beating Maru, but he did, and in a pretty sad fashion as well. Rogue can be a duds in many smaller tournaments, but when he shows up on the biggest stage, he just murdering everyone in cold blood. As for the other part, I dont feel you need to deal major early worker damage to opponent to win as Protoss. Sure picking off a couple units here and there with some Adept and/or Oracle is nice, but I have seen Protoss players won without it. I just dont feel it with Trap often enough, like he either crush his opponent after getting that early attack and kill many workers, or he would die because it doesnt work and the opponent counter. Look at Zest, he mix in shitload of build from extreme pressure, to defensive build, to harassments build, to cheese build and it works for him well enough. That is not to say Trap doesnt try to mix in build, but he just doesnt do it often enough, and has clear favor-ism toward certain opening (glaive Adept in PvZ and Stargate Phoenix/Oracle in PvT) that doesnt work because his opponent knew it and defended it well.
This presumes Maru is a better TvP player and that Maru hasnt had historical problems facing JinAir alumni. Trap beating Maru isnt really all that special, and doesn't really say much about either's form imo. Cure also basically TvPed his way to a win, I think its fair to say that at the time Cure's PvT was better than Maru's.
Also Zest is not an example of thinks working well, the dude is wildly inconsistent in basically every fathomable way, lol. The problem isn't that Protoss isnt mixing it up enough, its that you have to basically mix it up like Zest and pray it just so happens to work because Zests games and his record don't indicate to me hes some master-planner so much as pulling things out and hoping they work due to sheer unpredictability. Its not a reliable way to win, which is Protoss' problem, they don't have strong reliable ways to win, it either relies on Trap being in God Mode or a series of lucky die rolls, usually from Zest.
Protoss shouldnt have to basically pray their unpredictability lines up against their opponent, 1. its awful to watch, a player being blindsided is usually a crappy game, 2. it prevents top tier players from being able to truly compete, we can't have players like Maru or Serral who can win off raw ability consistently because Protoss is too unstable.
They should really (serious wishful thinking here) rearrange Protoss so Air Death Balls are worse, gateway units are better, and tech units are a little worse but reward micro more. Stalkers should be the Protoss marine, a great all-arounder unit that rewards micro (via Blink as opposed to splits, etc.) that can let a truly excellent player like Trap really differentiate himself.
And nerf Lurkers (Adaptive Talons is bad and it should feel bad), and maybe Queens in some small way (spread their healing out more, less immediate heal, more DoT or something?) because Zerg is also just flat out too good.
On December 20 2021 11:50 WaesumNinja wrote: The "maybe protoss players are just worse" or "protoss just doesn't have a strong top contender right now" arguments just don't hold, and it's baffling that this rhetoric keeps coming up after all this time. If protoss are underrepresented at the highest level of play then that is a very strong indication that something is not right.
Yeah sure Protoss has less mechanically demanding compositions which means that below pro level protoss will be more popular but I don't see why this somehow makes it fair that stronger players should have less tools? Like it's some sort of "ladder revenge".
Why are gateway units (barring early game trickery?) still garbage? Sure people like to whine about protoss aoe and mass air but what other options do they have since "midgame" is barely a thing anymore?
Go ahead and name a Protoss player that you think is as skilled as Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral or Reynor?
Go ahead and name someone that is consistently a top performer as those 5 are.
Protoss DOES NOT have a consistent performer right now. They just don't. You can't name a player that you can say without embarassing yourself that has shown to have the same level of skill that those 5 players I mentioned have.
That's a bit of a catch-22 though, isn't it? You can't deflect "there is a problem with high level play" with "there just aren't any top protoss players" because "the top protoss players don't perform as well".
With what metric do you measure someone's skill/performance? Wins, right? Because there are inherent problems saying things like "Maru demolished Zest, but Zest is actually more skilled". You just couldn't tell unless he starts consistently beating him, right? We have only one indisputable metric, and everything else is just theorycrafters saying things like "he has more control groups, so he's better" and other nonsense.
This argument has been shit since people started using it in the GomTvT days. Yeah, we can't name any "top performers", that's what we are talking about.
No. That's a bunch of crap. I don't judge skill based on only results and anyone that does is wrong to do so. It's the same as when people treat aligulac as anything other than just a tool in a toolkit. Its rankings are not law and they never have ever been.
I judge skill based on what I see. On mechanics, on timings, on strategies, on executions, on decision making while under pressure etc. etc.
I judge that and then I compare it to results and I use the aggregate to judge how good someone is at the top level. Trap really is the best Protoss player in the world, WHEN he is playing well, but he's not consistent and that has more to do with his fragile nerves than anything that has to do with the race. I haven't seen any Protoss player currently playing that is not in the South Korean army at the moment that has anything close to level of skill that Trap does. Nowhere close. And Trap just is not as good as any of the elite 5 players I mentioned before.
Trap isn't as good as Maru, he isn't as good as Rogue, he isn't as good as Dark. He just isn't.
And there is no other Protoss player that can measure up to the level of skill that Trap has. Try and name one. You can't do it because one doesn't exist. Not right now anyway. I'm hoping that Classic or HerO (who just got BACK from the South Korean army) can get back into shape soon and I hope players like Maxpax or Goblin develop (unlikely) the way that Reynor or Clem did but aside from those things happening I just do not see any big influx of skilled Protoss players coming to the scene anytime soon.
Trap is the best they have and he just isn't as good as the elite 5 are.
Maru: 1 Premier tournament win in 2021. Dark: 1 Premier tournament win in 2021. Rogue: 3 Premier tournament wins in 2021. Serral: 3 Premier tournament wins in 2021. Reynor: 2 Premier tournament wins in 2021.
And these guys are in a completely different class than Trap, who... won 5 Premier tournaments in 2021? Why? How?
For a follow up question: Do you know how to count? Why exactly do you think that arguing Protoss players can't consistently compete at high levels is any sort of evidence against Protoss bring weaker, balance-wise?
About Trap, its clearly a matter of consistency. I mean, what was the difference between when he won those Premiere tournament and when he get eliminated early in other tournaments, other than himself? Trap plays a style of "Modern Protoss" that rely heavily on his early game micro with the Stargate opening. He needs to get his early Oracle/Phoenix build to deal worker damage and snowball that into a win. And when it doesnt work, either from Trap making mistake or his opponent play clean defense, Trap just couldnt get the advantage he wanted and eventually die out every time.
So Trap is not top tier because he's inconsistent whereas players like Rogue, Dark, and Reynor are top tier because they're so consistent?
Also, Protoss basically always has to get damage done early, at least against Zerg. It's one of the main things that's been discussed ad nauseum in this thread. So I'm not sure why "Trap can't always pull out worker damage his opponents know must be coming" is really a strike against him.
Yeah, isnt that how you differentiate top of the world athlete from others? They show up when it matter most.
If that was all then the USA is using a very strange method to chose with athletes are going to the Olympics. Athletes that are to compete in hurdles, pole vault, javelin etc. have a competition before the Olympics to decide. It is called the United States Olympic qualifier. This means that the US athletes need to perform better than the rest before the Olympics. With how form works in the athletics world is that you can not be in top form for both events. Their physique cannot optimized for both. The athletes have to choose when to perform their best. Do they want to make sure that they get to compete in the Olympics at all, or are they confident enough that they'll qualify and can perform their best at the Olympics. I may be wrong about this, but I think a world record has been broken in the US Olympic qualifiers without an Olympic medal, not even bronze, for that athlete.
I just wanted to both give an example of the difficulty of knowing what matters and to make a point that it isn't always the best player that wins a match. Upsets happen often. MeomaikA vs Maru, 2-0, with a prize of $150 000 for winning the tournament; Scarlett vs Rogue in code S, a tournament Rogue should advance far in if he was a consistent player (according to your metric); ShoWTimE vs the ByuN man army at WCS Global finals, 2-0 in ShoWTimE's favour with a possibility of ByuN being eliminated before the ro8 at Blizzcon in 2016.
Arguing that the best players are best when it matters says more about your view of what it means to be best than the actual ability of the players. Only 1 player can win. If that is the best player, then it is impossible to say who the second best player is since there are several players that only lost vs the winner. A ro8 finish is therefore identical to a ro2 exit, with that metric. We can take the extreme example of 2016 GSL season 1. Zest won. Maru was a favourite to go far and he only lost to Zest. Maru lost the code A match. That was a 60 player code A, with 2 players already qualified to code S. Is that a ro60 or a ro62 finish? Maru, like TY, only lost vs Zest. One was a ro62, the other a ro2.
The metric of winning when it matters is very strange. You need way more to gauge ability.
Edit 2> And to be fair the non top Trap comment comes mostly in comparison to the top vs the hardest tournaments where for some reason Trap couldn't win a title. Trap v Maru -> Trap v Cure is the best example we have of this. The best PvT player just beat the best Terran to have a really bad day in finals. WHY? PvZ wasn't the issue, BO7 wasn't the issue(he did beat Maru in a BO7 ) and that's why so many people blame his nerves. ALthough I wouldn't say Trap is not the top or not consistent, unless you compare it to the real top players, who simply win the big games.
small correction: Trap beat Maru in the ro8 in a bo5, then lost to Cure in the ro4 who beat Zest in the finals.
But yeah - I think everyone agrees that Trap and Zest can only blame themselves for not winning that season.
On December 20 2021 11:50 WaesumNinja wrote: The "maybe protoss players are just worse" or "protoss just doesn't have a strong top contender right now" arguments just don't hold, and it's baffling that this rhetoric keeps coming up after all this time. If protoss are underrepresented at the highest level of play then that is a very strong indication that something is not right.
Yeah sure Protoss has less mechanically demanding compositions which means that below pro level protoss will be more popular but I don't see why this somehow makes it fair that stronger players should have less tools? Like it's some sort of "ladder revenge".
Why are gateway units (barring early game trickery?) still garbage? Sure people like to whine about protoss aoe and mass air but what other options do they have since "midgame" is barely a thing anymore?
Go ahead and name a Protoss player that you think is as skilled as Maru, Dark, Rogue, Serral or Reynor?
Go ahead and name someone that is consistently a top performer as those 5 are.
Protoss DOES NOT have a consistent performer right now. They just don't. You can't name a player that you can say without embarassing yourself that has shown to have the same level of skill that those 5 players I mentioned have.
That's a bit of a catch-22 though, isn't it? You can't deflect "there is a problem with high level play" with "there just aren't any top protoss players" because "the top protoss players don't perform as well".
With what metric do you measure someone's skill/performance? Wins, right? Because there are inherent problems saying things like "Maru demolished Zest, but Zest is actually more skilled". You just couldn't tell unless he starts consistently beating him, right? We have only one indisputable metric, and everything else is just theorycrafters saying things like "he has more control groups, so he's better" and other nonsense.
This argument has been shit since people started using it in the GomTvT days. Yeah, we can't name any "top performers", that's what we are talking about.
No. That's a bunch of crap. I don't judge skill based on only results and anyone that does is wrong to do so. It's the same as when people treat aligulac as anything other than just a tool in a toolkit. Its rankings are not law and they never have ever been.
I judge skill based on what I see. On mechanics, on timings, on strategies, on executions, on decision making while under pressure etc. etc.
I judge that and then I compare it to results and I use the aggregate to judge how good someone is at the top level. Trap really is the best Protoss player in the world, WHEN he is playing well, but he's not consistent and that has more to do with his fragile nerves than anything that has to do with the race. I haven't seen any Protoss player currently playing that is not in the South Korean army at the moment that has anything close to level of skill that Trap does. Nowhere close. And Trap just is not as good as any of the elite 5 players I mentioned before.
Trap isn't as good as Maru, he isn't as good as Rogue, he isn't as good as Dark. He just isn't.
And there is no other Protoss player that can measure up to the level of skill that Trap has. Try and name one. You can't do it because one doesn't exist. Not right now anyway. I'm hoping that Classic or HerO (who just got BACK from the South Korean army) can get back into shape soon and I hope players like Maxpax or Goblin develop (unlikely) the way that Reynor or Clem did but aside from those things happening I just do not see any big influx of skilled Protoss players coming to the scene anytime soon.
Trap is the best they have and he just isn't as good as the elite 5 are.
Maru: 1 Premier tournament win in 2021. Dark: 1 Premier tournament win in 2021. Rogue: 3 Premier tournament wins in 2021. Serral: 3 Premier tournament wins in 2021. Reynor: 2 Premier tournament wins in 2021.
And these guys are in a completely different class than Trap, who... won 5 Premier tournaments in 2021? Why? How?
For a follow up question: Do you know how to count? Why exactly do you think that arguing Protoss players can't consistently compete at high levels is any sort of evidence against Protoss bring weaker, balance-wise?
About Trap, its clearly a matter of consistency. I mean, what was the difference between when he won those Premiere tournament and when he get eliminated early in other tournaments, other than himself? Trap plays a style of "Modern Protoss" that rely heavily on his early game micro with the Stargate opening. He needs to get his early Oracle/Phoenix build to deal worker damage and snowball that into a win. And when it doesnt work, either from Trap making mistake or his opponent play clean defense, Trap just couldnt get the advantage he wanted and eventually die out every time.
So Trap is not top tier because he's inconsistent whereas players like Rogue, Dark, and Reynor are top tier because they're so consistent?
Also, Protoss basically always has to get damage done early, at least against Zerg. It's one of the main things that's been discussed ad nauseum in this thread. So I'm not sure why "Trap can't always pull out worker damage his opponents know must be coming" is really a strike against him.
Yeah, isnt that how you differentiate top of the world athlete from others? They show up when it matter most.
If that was all then the USA is using a very strange method to chose with athletes are going to the Olympics. Athletes that are to compete in hurdles, pole vault, javelin etc. have a competition before the Olympics to decide. It is called the United States Olympic qualifier. This means that the US athletes need to perform better than the rest before the Olympics. With how form works in the athletics world is that you can not be in top form for both events. Their physique cannot optimized for both. The athletes have to choose when to perform their best. Do they want to make sure that they get to compete in the Olympics at all, or are they confident enough that they'll qualify and can perform their best at the Olympics. I may be wrong about this, but I think a world record has been broken in the US Olympic qualifiers without an Olympic medal, not even bronze, for that athlete.
I just wanted to both give an example of the difficulty of knowing what matters and to make a point that it isn't always the best player that wins a match. Upsets happen often. MeomaikA vs Maru, 2-0, with a prize of $150 000 for winning the tournament; Scarlett vs Rogue in code S, a tournament Rogue should advance far in if he was a consistent player (according to your metric); ShoWTimE vs the ByuN man army at WCS Global finals, 2-0 in ShoWTimE's favour with a possibility of ByuN being eliminated before the ro8 at Blizzcon in 2016.
Arguing that the best players are best when it matters says more about your view of what it means to be best than the actual ability of the players. Only 1 player can win. If that is the best player, then it is impossible to say who the second best player is since there are several players that only lost vs the winner. A ro8 finish is therefore identical to a ro2 exit, with that metric. We can take the extreme example of 2016 GSL season 1. Zest won. Maru was a favourite to go far and he only lost to Zest. Maru lost the code A match. That was a 60 player code A, with 2 players already qualified to code S. Is that a ro60 or a ro62 finish? Maru, like TY, only lost vs Zest. One was a ro62, the other a ro2.
The metric of winning when it matters is very strange. You need way more to gauge ability.
Using Meomaika vs MAru is dumb. Despite the loss Maru ended first in the group and later on was defeated in semis by Inno. So while he lost to a much weaker player, at the same time he delivered when it mattered. Using the Byun loss at Blizzcon he won is bad as well. because he then delivered. And while yes, Rogue lost to Scarlett, in the other times he delivered. His trophey case is by far the most packed one and most of it was done in the past 7 years, actually majority in the past 4 or so.
If you want to use sport analogy, let's use it. Check how good German national football team was in the past 10 years. And while they were the favorite to win anything they entered, they had some hiccups.
Nobody can deliver all the time. The issue with Trap or Zest is, they don't deliver most of the time. This is the issue which Stats or Classic didn't face. And mind you many Code S champs were defeated the next season of the Code S
Edit> Actually this is new for Zest. He used to deliver in the past. He used to be a very solid player, for some reason this doesn't apply nowadays. We can ask what happened, if he has fallen, has form swings or if the game progressed so far the #ZestMacro suddenly matters more.
Edit 2> And to be fair the non top Trap comment comes mostly in comparison to the top vs the hardest tournaments where for some reason Trap couldn't win a title. Trap v Maru -> Trap v Cure is the best example we have of this. The best PvT player just beat the best Terran to have a really bad day in finals. WHY? PvZ wasn't the issue, BO7 wasn't the issue(he did beat Maru in a BO7 ) and that's why so many people blame his nerves. ALthough I wouldn't say Trap is not the top or not consistent, unless you compare it to the real top players, who simply win the big games.
[/QUOTE] I know that you are not the primary target that I am trying to reach with this, deacon.frost. You seem to be more about being good when it matters. That was not the part I was trying to argue. Although, you had a line that can aid in another thing that I would like to argue.
Nobody can deliver all the time. The issue with Trap or Zest is, they don't deliver most of the time. This is the issue which Stats or Classic didn't face. And mind you many Code S champs were defeated the next season of the Code S
Not everyone can deliver all the time and many code S champs fell off the following season. What does that say about players who consistently place high in code S? Trap has the best track record in code S for the last 3 years. Everyone else has placed lower than 5-8th, but not Trap. Trap beats all Koreans, even those that are supposed to be more consistent. That is a top tier tournament that Trap is performing in while everyone else fails. Trap is performing year after year no matter what season. I know that he isn't winning code S, but he is consistent. He is a top player.
Arguing that Trap isn't consistent implies that it is you that have an odd meaning of the word "consistent". In recent times Trap has won the most premier tournaments and he has placed best in code S for even longer. He is consistently good in a way that only Serral can compete with. Rogue is having major ups and downs. Dark is swaying less wildly than Rogue, but he has had a long period of being just below the top. Maru can have major lows for a few matches between his excellent games in the same day/week. Reynor had a very high peak but had a long period of showing lower skill level after that. When the others are missing a code S here or there by failing to qualify, Trap is there. He qualified and he gets past a lot of the supposed elite.
On December 21 2021 15:34 kingism wrote: There really is nothing to be discussed with zerg bois who, after watching top level starcraft for so long, still think zvp is a balanced matchup. In case it isn't obvious enough, many others and myself have explained why earlier in this thread. Yet all we get back from zerg boiiiis are them avoiding the issues head on and saying retarded things like OH THERE JUST ARENT ANY GD PROTOSS PLAYERS or NOTHING SHOULD BE CHANGED BECAUSE GOLD LEAGUE WILL HAVE TOO MANY PROTOSSES.
Honestly, even if protoss started with just 1 worker and had all units cost twice the amount, zerg bois are so blinded they will still believe that zvp is a balanced matchup.
Keep kidding yourself that Serral's ridiculously high win rate against any protoss in a best of 5 is because he is technically and strategically soo much better than any koreans who train many hours more and have far better players to practice with.
For the zerg boiiis who plan on replying to my post (and someone please do reply, because if no one replies, I will assume I am correct), but this time, instead of focusing on something irrelevant ("Who are the zerg bois you are referring to", "Why use hyberbole" etc lol), just cut the crap and go straight to the heart of the matter: how on earth do you still think zvp at the highest level is a balanced matchup? I'm genuinely very curious to see your reasoning because otherwise we must be playing and watching two different versions of starcraft.
Since you used only my criticism of you in this post, that would imply that I am the Zerg boy. If I am the Zerg boy and I am writing about ways to aid Protoss in PvZ, what are you even on about? It seems to me that you are either a troll, you do not understand what people are writing about, or you are ignoring the discussion in order to simply complain. If it is the middle option, please say so. Ask for clarification of arguments. You can use the quote funtion and single out the parts that are confusing like this:
how on earth do you still think zvp at the highest level is a balanced matchup?
This is a part that seems central to your beliefs, that there is a large amount of people who think PvZ is balanced on the highest level. There is discussion going on about part of this in a comment thread with Waesum, Vindicare and tigera6, among others. Jump into that discussion specifically and you may find an answer. Posting the question deep down in a stand-alone comment that starts with a rant, continuing with a hyperbole/something objectively wrong, and a defensive paragraph ahead of the actual content of your post is not helpful for your cause. You antagonize nearly everyone with that start. No one will want to discuss with you.
This is about you and how nobody has taught you how to have a discussion. -You need some sort of etiquette to be included. -You also need to formulate your points clearly. This mean that a lot of your thoughts have to be put aside in order for the true content to show. -Lastly, your text need to relate to the people you are discussing with. Case in point: what I started this comment with. You related the text to me, but asked about something else. I'll clarify with an allegory: The Queen of England said that we needed patience. Why does she want us to rush? I am on the team of PvZ is not balanced on the highest level (the Queen wants patience). You ask why I think PvZ is balanced (why does she want to rush?). It is not making sense. I urge you to read and understand what others are writing, and reread your own post before submitting it.
However, if it isn't about a lack on your part but a willful thing then you should just stop. You do not add anything to the discussion. The only thing you contribute is negativity. I tried finding a forum rule that you would be breaking. I found this:
Terms of use, prohibited conduct Duplicate or excessively repeated submissions in one or more areas
This isn't your first post with basically the same content. Is it duplicate? Yes. Is it excessive? Yes. Is it grounds for a warning? I do not know where the mods draw the line, but I think it is. I have not reported you because I believe that you can do better.
Note that I didn't discuss with you at all. Your start is dissuading me from doing that.
Hey Doc, a word of advice (since you seem to LOVE giving advice) after reading another post from you that is 99% meaningless and a waste of time towards the discussion of pvz balance: less is more.
Oh also, just because your username is Doc doesn't mean you can take the high ground of lecturing someone here lolz. fyi, I got a 2350 in my SATs and went to the best college in the States (Sorry Harvard), I would say that I know a thing or two about debates and discussions.
Still waiting for a zerg boiii to explain to me how on earth he believes that zvp is balanced at the moment. Tick Tok.
Fyi, If you can't formulate your view in a sentence or two and instead tell me to read older threads, all that proves is that you are totally clueless / unable to defend your view (Bamm! Here goes another great piece of advice for you Doc. Alright, I'll stop here with the "giving out advice" thing, since you are most likely a very sensitive being IRL lol).
I have been watching Trap and before him Stats play like a god sometimes and then lose like a noob. For years I hoped and waited for a great consistent protoss champion to rise. But it never happened.
If you watch the game a lot and play some protoss it's pretty easy to understand why:
Protoss is not consistent, the basic core protoss army is trash, it's mobility is shit too. It always has to be tricks and surprises, early game damage or dangerous defending miracles until you get enough AoE tools. And it's still a constant gamble of being in position with an army that always has to have a good composition with enough splash and is also very slow (will die on retreat) and cannot be split up. I can go on but the smart readers will catch the drift. One thing to note is that early damage is required vs zerg not necessarily vs terran.But I think a terran in peak form with peak micro will always beat the protoss, because in the end protoss units are just too slow and weak to keep up in multipronged battles or pure macro games (without landing great Storms or Novas which again depends on the terran messing up).
It's not Stats or Trap that are inconsistent, it's the race that lacks a stable playing style which will keep you safe from most threats while not making you autolose in the late game.
I got a 2350 in my SATs and went to the best college in the States (Sorry Harvard), I would say that I know a thing or two about debates and discussions.
Wow, you sure don't type like you do. I expected more from someone who only associated with the highest of the intellectual elites during his formative years.
Still waiting for a zerg boiii to explain to me how on earth he believes that zvp is balanced at the moment. Tick Tok.
Can't speak for everyone but is anyone here actually implying that they think ZvP is balanced at the highest level? All I see is reasons why people think Protoss is a bit UP or Zerg a bit OP then there is the fringe people on this thread like you that seem to just be accusing everyone of not agreeing with you as, "Zerg boiis" despite at least one of them explicitly stating that he's a Protoss player himself.
edit because now I realize reading the post that made you make sure we all knew you were good at math and english was in fact written by a guy who admits that even he doesn't think PvZ is balanced at the highest level lol
Bring back Mothership Core, make 3rd bases with chokes, eliminate negative space behind main bases. The balance is so easy. As a BW player, I'm so sick of every SC2 map feeling the exact same for 5 years
BW map makers solved all these problems back in 2007
Is 2350 a good score? I’m not from the States so I’m not super familiar what scores correlate with what, but from what I’m reading here it seems 2350 indicates an inability to read and form responses to what other people are actually saying.
Do SATs measure obnoxiousness?
@drFilip, 100%, I don’t understand why Trap is tagged as inconsistent, or what would possibly be considered consistent given the last few years he’s put together.
Doesn’t mean he’s the best necessarily, I can’t think of anyone besides Serral who’s been as consistent in maintaining a certain level over this 3 year span.
Before this sparks any ‘but x are better than Trap and Serral’ that’s not what I said.
In terms of relative level of ability and coming close to hitting it most times is what I’m talking about. I’d put Heromarine as a similarly very consistent player
On December 22 2021 07:15 neveranexit wrote: Bring back Mothership Core, make 3rd bases with chokes, eliminate negative space behind main bases. The balance is so easy. As a BW player, I'm so sick of every SC2 map feeling the exact same for 5 years
BW map makers solved all these problems back in 2007
No it isn’t some trivial thing
It’s a different game, there are lessons to be learned from how maps are designed and rolled out.
If SC2 has a problem it’s that maps are samey, which is a consequence of the general mapmaking philosophy that every map has to be balanced across all the interracial matchups.
In this regard SC2 map makers have done a rather good job, albeit it’s very monotonous.
BW has had the benefit of third party ladders and integrating all sorts of interesting maps, SC2 has one ladder where outside of custom practices I would assume 99%+ of competitively minded players play their games.
If mapmakers got their shackles loosened from trying to design a standard SC2 map that attempts to be balanced in all matchups, I’m certain we’d see some great maps and it would freshen things up.
I’d like to see what a specialist PvZ/TvZ/TvP map would look like but as of now there’s no actual pipeline to get such a project much playtime with a ladder that’s under lock and key by Blizz
In general I’m pretty sure, may be corrected by someone more knowledgable, SC2 maps are better balanced across matchups than in either BW or WC3. The flip side of that coin is maps being extremely similar which breeds fatigue
On December 22 2021 07:21 WombaT wrote: Is 2350 a good score? I’m not from the States so I’m not super familiar what scores correlate with what, but from what I’m reading here it seems 2350 indicates an inability to read and form responses to what other people are actually saying.
Do SATs measure obnoxiousness?
@drFilip, 100%, I don’t understand why Trap is tagged as inconsistent, or what would possibly be considered consistent given the last few years he’s put together.
Doesn’t mean he’s the best necessarily, I can’t think of anyone besides Serral who’s been as consistent in maintaining a certain level over this 3 year span.
Before this sparks any ‘but x are better than Trap and Serral’ that’s not what I said.
In terms of relative level of ability and coming close to hitting it most times is what I’m talking about. I’d put Heromarine as a similarly very consistent player
In terms of results Trap is surely consistent but he also sometimes has series where he just can't deliver and makes a lot of unforced errors. Whether that's because of his race or not I don't know, but the other top players don't really have that.
On December 22 2021 07:21 WombaT wrote: Is 2350 a good score? I’m not from the States so I’m not super familiar what scores correlate with what, but from what I’m reading here it seems 2350 indicates an inability to read and form responses to what other people are actually saying.
Do SATs measure obnoxiousness?
@drFilip, 100%, I don’t understand why Trap is tagged as inconsistent, or what would possibly be considered consistent given the last few years he’s put together.
Doesn’t mean he’s the best necessarily, I can’t think of anyone besides Serral who’s been as consistent in maintaining a certain level over this 3 year span.
Before this sparks any ‘but x are better than Trap and Serral’ that’s not what I said.
In terms of relative level of ability and coming close to hitting it most times is what I’m talking about. I’d put Heromarine as a similarly very consistent player
In terms of results Trap is surely consistent but he also sometimes has series where he just can't deliver and makes a lot of unforced errors. Whether that's because of his race or not I don't know, but the other top players don't really have that.
I'd be a little more cautious on that, you may be right but it's also true that protoss errors are often much easier to spot than terran or zerg errors.
I watched the ESL cup finals where Maxpax 3-0ed Reynor recently, it was commented by Lambo on Rotti's stream, and during the airtoss game Lambo pointed out that at one point Reynor took a very bad fight at his triangle base that ultimately allowed Maxpax to win this game. I could not tell you what was bad about that fight (Lambo didn't specify). I also watched it on o'gaming's stream out of curiosity and they didn't make any relevant comments about the fight outside of play by play.
On December 22 2021 07:21 WombaT wrote: Is 2350 a good score? I’m not from the States so I’m not super familiar what scores correlate with what, but from what I’m reading here it seems 2350 indicates an inability to read and form responses to what other people are actually saying.
Do SATs measure obnoxiousness?
@drFilip, 100%, I don’t understand why Trap is tagged as inconsistent, or what would possibly be considered consistent given the last few years he’s put together.
Doesn’t mean he’s the best necessarily, I can’t think of anyone besides Serral who’s been as consistent in maintaining a certain level over this 3 year span.
Before this sparks any ‘but x are better than Trap and Serral’ that’s not what I said.
In terms of relative level of ability and coming close to hitting it most times is what I’m talking about. I’d put Heromarine as a similarly very consistent player
In terms of results Trap is surely consistent but he also sometimes has series where he just can't deliver and makes a lot of unforced errors. Whether that's because of his race or not I don't know, but the other top players don't really have that.
Maru and Rogue winning a lot of tier 2 events lately on top of their feats in the big leagues kind of masks that historically they’ve frequently bombed out early in smaller tournies, or even had the odd flub in Code S
They’ve (recently) added relentless consistency, but prior to that they’ve been characterised as much by baffling lows as soaring highs, especially Rogue
Trap has, iirc by a few seasons the record for consecutive GSL playoffs, he’s won what 5 tournaments this year, he’s made 3 GSL finals
His first two GSL finals I think he plays them 10 times over and doesn’t win, Dark and Rogue are great players and they had a litany of tools in that meta. I think Trap played considerably better in some of those games than his third loss, in a less brutal meta.
Last Katowice was a big failure and he didn’t show up against Cure last GSL, with a non-Zerg bracket that was a great opportunity for him. Aside from that I can’t recall many instances of Trap just failing in a tournament, and we’re talking a few years
Because he’s Protoss people maybe don’t recognise it/respect it, I don’t know. He’s stylistically a lot like Maru, especially his PvT. He lives on the razor’s edge and pulling off miracles with judgement and crazy execution. He gets an edge by really pushing it, and if he executes well no non-Zerg can live with it. Like Maru he can accomplish miracles with weird, technical to control unit sets and just pounce when he scents blood.
I’ve seen him deflect an attack and then move out on the map with a handful of gateway units, a prism and one immortal with my head in my hands going ‘this is stupid’ with 100% knows be of the game state only for him to encounter the bio squad and, somehow kill it.
In PvZ I don’t think a Protoss can really prosper in the same way. There’s a relatively even eco/supply in early to mid game PvT and winning an early/midgame technical skirmish can snowball, which is where Trap gets a lot of joy.
You don’t get that so much in PvZ, it’s commitment into pressure from a numbers deficit, or playing for the late game. Or resolutely defending
Speaking broad brush but you get me, Trap gets a lot of wins from turning an even game into a favoured game with solid defence and midgame small skirmishes and riding that advantage out. It’s really kind of hard to skirmish a Zerg into a real deficit in which you can quickly kill them.
This isn’t to say PvZ is unwinnable or crazy unfair, I don’t think it suits Trap’s primarily skillset even though he has great scalps to his name
Maru’s chops, or Clem’s chops in the same domain of snowballing advantages via risk and execution absolutely does transfer over to TvZ because you can consistently trade well and wear them down in a way Protoss cannot do
On December 22 2021 07:15 neveranexit wrote: Bring back Mothership Core, make 3rd bases with chokes, eliminate negative space behind main bases. The balance is so easy. As a BW player, I'm so sick of every SC2 map feeling the exact same for 5 years
BW map makers solved all these problems back in 2007
No it isn’t some trivial thing
It’s a different game, there are lessons to be learned from how maps are designed and rolled out.
If SC2 has a problem it’s that maps are samey, which is a consequence of the general mapmaking philosophy that every map has to be balanced across all the interracial matchups.
In this regard SC2 map makers have done a rather good job, albeit it’s very monotonous.
BW has had the benefit of third party ladders and integrating all sorts of interesting maps, SC2 has one ladder where outside of custom practices I would assume 99%+ of competitively minded players play their games.
If mapmakers got their shackles loosened from trying to design a standard SC2 map that attempts to be balanced in all matchups, I’m certain we’d see some great maps and it would freshen things up.
I’d like to see what a specialist PvZ/TvZ/TvP map would look like but as of now there’s no actual pipeline to get such a project much playtime with a ladder that’s under lock and key by Blizz
In general I’m pretty sure, may be corrected by someone more knowledgable, SC2 maps are better balanced across matchups than in either BW or WC3. The flip side of that coin is maps being extremely similar which breeds fatigue
but the maps are not balanced though. that's the problem. all SC2 maps are Z/T favored. It's really that simple imo. If you elevate the 3rd base location with a ramp or create a wall with a tight choke entering the 3rd base, Protoss winrates would increase immediately. Similar situation with the negative space designed for widow mine drops/liberators.
On December 22 2021 07:15 neveranexit wrote: Bring back Mothership Core, make 3rd bases with chokes, eliminate negative space behind main bases. The balance is so easy. As a BW player, I'm so sick of every SC2 map feeling the exact same for 5 years
BW map makers solved all these problems back in 2007
No it isn’t some trivial thing
It’s a different game, there are lessons to be learned from how maps are designed and rolled out.
If SC2 has a problem it’s that maps are samey, which is a consequence of the general mapmaking philosophy that every map has to be balanced across all the interracial matchups.
In this regard SC2 map makers have done a rather good job, albeit it’s very monotonous.
BW has had the benefit of third party ladders and integrating all sorts of interesting maps, SC2 has one ladder where outside of custom practices I would assume 99%+ of competitively minded players play their games.
If mapmakers got their shackles loosened from trying to design a standard SC2 map that attempts to be balanced in all matchups, I’m certain we’d see some great maps and it would freshen things up.
I’d like to see what a specialist PvZ/TvZ/TvP map would look like but as of now there’s no actual pipeline to get such a project much playtime with a ladder that’s under lock and key by Blizz
In general I’m pretty sure, may be corrected by someone more knowledgable, SC2 maps are better balanced across matchups than in either BW or WC3. The flip side of that coin is maps being extremely similar which breeds fatigue
but the maps are not balanced though. that's the problem. all SC2 maps are Z/T favored. It's really that simple imo. If you elevate the 3rd base location with a ramp or create a wall with a tight choke entering the 3rd base, Protoss winrates would increase immediately. Similar situation with the negative space designed for widow mine drops/liberators.
Not perfectly they’re pretty good, across the board you’re talking 2-3% differentials, for the most part. A really, really race favoured map in a particular matchup is hitting like, 55% tops
A third base choke may have some benefits for Protoss, it’s not all good. I could see it being purely beneficial PvZ, in PvT depending on where it’s located and whatnot a third base choke sounds a nice invitation to nasty Terran tank timings being better.
How do you clear a tank push to the third, which is common enough and effective enough even with a third that’s relatively open now, if your Zealots are getting funnelled into a choke it’s trickier
Likewise dead air space is actually 100% good for Protoss in PvZ who are going for committed oracle openers, also decent for void ray pokes, also gives extra space for prisms to manoeuvre
In PvZ it’s a negative against mutas but generally you either have picked it and have counter-measures in place, or you don’t, so the dead space is not a huge factor
You say it’s simple but IMO you’re neglecting a ton of stuff
On December 22 2021 07:15 neveranexit wrote: Bring back Mothership Core, make 3rd bases with chokes, eliminate negative space behind main bases. The balance is so easy. As a BW player, I'm so sick of every SC2 map feeling the exact same for 5 years
BW map makers solved all these problems back in 2007
No it isn’t some trivial thing
It’s a different game, there are lessons to be learned from how maps are designed and rolled out.
If SC2 has a problem it’s that maps are samey, which is a consequence of the general mapmaking philosophy that every map has to be balanced across all the interracial matchups.
In this regard SC2 map makers have done a rather good job, albeit it’s very monotonous.
BW has had the benefit of third party ladders and integrating all sorts of interesting maps, SC2 has one ladder where outside of custom practices I would assume 99%+ of competitively minded players play their games.
If mapmakers got their shackles loosened from trying to design a standard SC2 map that attempts to be balanced in all matchups, I’m certain we’d see some great maps and it would freshen things up.
I’d like to see what a specialist PvZ/TvZ/TvP map would look like but as of now there’s no actual pipeline to get such a project much playtime with a ladder that’s under lock and key by Blizz
In general I’m pretty sure, may be corrected by someone more knowledgable, SC2 maps are better balanced across matchups than in either BW or WC3. The flip side of that coin is maps being extremely similar which breeds fatigue
but the maps are not balanced though. that's the problem. all SC2 maps are Z/T favored. It's really that simple imo. If you elevate the 3rd base location with a ramp or create a wall with a tight choke entering the 3rd base, Protoss winrates would increase immediately. Similar situation with the negative space designed for widow mine drops/liberators.
Not perfectly they’re pretty good, across the board you’re talking 2-3% differentials, for the most part. A really, really race favoured map in a particular matchup is hitting like, 55% tops
A third base choke may have some benefits for Protoss, it’s not all good. I could see it being purely beneficial PvZ, in PvT depending on where it’s located and whatnot a third base choke sounds a nice invitation to nasty Terran tank timings being better.
How do you clear a tank push to the third, which is common enough and effective enough even with a third that’s relatively open now, if your Zealots are getting funnelled into a choke it’s trickier
Likewise dead air space is actually 100% good for Protoss in PvZ who are going for committed oracle openers, also decent for void ray pokes, also gives extra space for prisms to manoeuvre
In PvZ it’s a negative against mutas but generally you either have picked it and have counter-measures in place, or you don’t, so the dead space is not a huge factor
You say it’s simple but IMO you’re neglecting a ton of stuff
Completely agree with this, I'm not sold on this, "maps are bad for Protoss" theory at all. I would need to see proof in the numbers before I got on board with that.
On December 22 2021 07:15 neveranexit wrote: Bring back Mothership Core, make 3rd bases with chokes, eliminate negative space behind main bases. The balance is so easy. As a BW player, I'm so sick of every SC2 map feeling the exact same for 5 years
BW map makers solved all these problems back in 2007
No it isn’t some trivial thing
It’s a different game, there are lessons to be learned from how maps are designed and rolled out.
If SC2 has a problem it’s that maps are samey, which is a consequence of the general mapmaking philosophy that every map has to be balanced across all the interracial matchups.
In this regard SC2 map makers have done a rather good job, albeit it’s very monotonous.
BW has had the benefit of third party ladders and integrating all sorts of interesting maps, SC2 has one ladder where outside of custom practices I would assume 99%+ of competitively minded players play their games.
If mapmakers got their shackles loosened from trying to design a standard SC2 map that attempts to be balanced in all matchups, I’m certain we’d see some great maps and it would freshen things up.
I’d like to see what a specialist PvZ/TvZ/TvP map would look like but as of now there’s no actual pipeline to get such a project much playtime with a ladder that’s under lock and key by Blizz
In general I’m pretty sure, may be corrected by someone more knowledgable, SC2 maps are better balanced across matchups than in either BW or WC3. The flip side of that coin is maps being extremely similar which breeds fatigue
but the maps are not balanced though. that's the problem. all SC2 maps are Z/T favored. It's really that simple imo. If you elevate the 3rd base location with a ramp or create a wall with a tight choke entering the 3rd base, Protoss winrates would increase immediately. Similar situation with the negative space designed for widow mine drops/liberators.
Not perfectly they’re pretty good, across the board you’re talking 2-3% differentials, for the most part. A really, really race favoured map in a particular matchup is hitting like, 55% tops
A third base choke may have some benefits for Protoss, it’s not all good. I could see it being purely beneficial PvZ, in PvT depending on where it’s located and whatnot a third base choke sounds a nice invitation to nasty Terran tank timings being better.
How do you clear a tank push to the third, which is common enough and effective enough even with a third that’s relatively open now, if your Zealots are getting funnelled into a choke it’s trickier
Likewise dead air space is actually 100% good for Protoss in PvZ who are going for committed oracle openers, also decent for void ray pokes, also gives extra space for prisms to manoeuvre
In PvZ it’s a negative against mutas but generally you either have picked it and have counter-measures in place, or you don’t, so the dead space is not a huge factor
You say it’s simple but IMO you’re neglecting a ton of stuff
Completely agree with this, I'm not sold on this, "maps are bad for Protoss" theory at all. I would need to see proof in the numbers before I got on board with that.
I’ve said that I would like map pools that have specific maps for matchups, many times.
I’m honestly not sure what a good PvZ map even looks like. Outside of exploitable cannon/battery positions.
The WoL/HoTS rule of thumb was chokes, or at least tight enough areas that forcefields can carve up further, with ravagers that’s way less of a factor
Big maps = Zerg just explodes with expansions and creep. Small maps don’t really favour Protoss either. Scouting what they’re doing is easier and for all the flaws of warp gate and how it impacts other things, shrinking the map doesn’t really affect Protoss pushing in the same way as the other two races. Their pushes can hit quicker on smaller maps, Protoss it’s reasonably similar
I think a good PvZ map would consist of various paths, the quicker paths being relatively large, open areas and begging for a Zerg surround, and the slower paths would be tighter, travel distance being unnecessarily elongated
As Protoss is on something of a timer on hitting Zergs at certain points, you could create an interesting dynamic between pushing quickly and risking, or safely and a bit slower
You could also introduce some defensive/retreat potential if you could navigate back after seeing your push won’t work through Protoss favoured terrain
A map with this architecture though would be basically broken in PvT, if you’re forcing bio through all sorts of chokes or tight areas against AoE
Hence my advocacy for more experimentation and matchup specific maps, it opens a lot of scope for experimentation
On December 22 2021 07:21 WombaT wrote: Is 2350 a good score? I’m not from the States so I’m not super familiar what scores correlate with what, but from what I’m reading here it seems 2350 indicates an inability to read and form responses to what other people are actually saying.
Do SATs measure obnoxiousness?
@drFilip, 100%, I don’t understand why Trap is tagged as inconsistent, or what would possibly be considered consistent given the last few years he’s put together.
Doesn’t mean he’s the best necessarily, I can’t think of anyone besides Serral who’s been as consistent in maintaining a certain level over this 3 year span.
Before this sparks any ‘but x are better than Trap and Serral’ that’s not what I said.
In terms of relative level of ability and coming close to hitting it most times is what I’m talking about. I’d put Heromarine as a similarly very consistent player
In terms of results Trap is surely consistent but he also sometimes has series where he just can't deliver and makes a lot of unforced errors. Whether that's because of his race or not I don't know, but the other top players don't really have that.
Maru and Rogue winning a lot of tier 2 events lately on top of their feats in the big leagues kind of masks that historically they’ve frequently bombed out early in smaller tournies, or even had the odd flub in Code S
They’ve (recently) added relentless consistency, but prior to that they’ve been characterised as much by baffling lows as soaring highs, especially Rogue
Trap has, iirc by a few seasons the record for consecutive GSL playoffs, he’s won what 5 tournaments this year, he’s made 3 GSL finals
His first two GSL finals I think he plays them 10 times over and doesn’t win, Dark and Rogue are great players and they had a litany of tools in that meta. I think Trap played considerably better in some of those games than his third loss, in a less brutal meta.
Last Katowice was a big failure and he didn’t show up against Cure last GSL, with a non-Zerg bracket that was a great opportunity for him. Aside from that I can’t recall many instances of Trap just failing in a tournament, and we’re talking a few years
Because he’s Protoss people maybe don’t recognise it/respect it, I don’t know. He’s stylistically a lot like Maru, especially his PvT. He lives on the razor’s edge and pulling off miracles with judgement and crazy execution. He gets an edge by really pushing it, and if he executes well no non-Zerg can live with it. Like Maru he can accomplish miracles with weird, technical to control unit sets and just pounce when he scents blood.
I’ve seen him deflect an attack and then move out on the map with a handful of gateway units, a prism and one immortal with my head in my hands going ‘this is stupid’ with 100% knows be of the game state only for him to encounter the bio squad and, somehow kill it.
In PvZ I don’t think a Protoss can really prosper in the same way. There’s a relatively even eco/supply in early to mid game PvT and winning an early/midgame technical skirmish can snowball, which is where Trap gets a lot of joy.
You don’t get that so much in PvZ, it’s commitment into pressure from a numbers deficit, or playing for the late game. Or resolutely defending
Speaking broad brush but you get me, Trap gets a lot of wins from turning an even game into a favoured game with solid defence and midgame small skirmishes and riding that advantage out. It’s really kind of hard to skirmish a Zerg into a real deficit in which you can quickly kill them.
This isn’t to say PvZ is unwinnable or crazy unfair, I don’t think it suits Trap’s primarily skillset even though he has great scalps to his name
Maru’s chops, or Clem’s chops in the same domain of snowballing advantages via risk and execution absolutely does transfer over to TvZ because you can consistently trade well and wear them down in a way Protoss cannot do
Maybe you're right and I'm overexaggerating his inconsistency but that's just what sticks out to me when I think of him. Stats and Classic didn't really have such poor performances when they were the best Protoss players. You can also add his latest GSL finals vs Dark to the series where he didn't deliver (overcommited for no reason in one game, lost vs a Nydus he had all the tools to defend and knew it was coming because he missed a changeling) and in TSL 6 he also lost in the first round vs Ragnarok.
yeah and for Rogue you're right that he's incosistent but he delivered when it really counted so it seemed to be more of a motivational thing than a mental thing and Maru only really had those poor performances in foreign tournaments because he struggles with adapting to jetlag/travelling
On December 22 2021 07:21 WombaT wrote: Is 2350 a good score? I’m not from the States so I’m not super familiar what scores correlate with what, but from what I’m reading here it seems 2350 indicates an inability to read and form responses to what other people are actually saying.
Do SATs measure obnoxiousness?
@drFilip, 100%, I don’t understand why Trap is tagged as inconsistent, or what would possibly be considered consistent given the last few years he’s put together.
Doesn’t mean he’s the best necessarily, I can’t think of anyone besides Serral who’s been as consistent in maintaining a certain level over this 3 year span.
Before this sparks any ‘but x are better than Trap and Serral’ that’s not what I said.
In terms of relative level of ability and coming close to hitting it most times is what I’m talking about. I’d put Heromarine as a similarly very consistent player
In terms of results Trap is surely consistent but he also sometimes has series where he just can't deliver and makes a lot of unforced errors. Whether that's because of his race or not I don't know, but the other top players don't really have that.
Maru and Rogue winning a lot of tier 2 events lately on top of their feats in the big leagues kind of masks that historically they’ve frequently bombed out early in smaller tournies, or even had the odd flub in Code S
They’ve (recently) added relentless consistency, but prior to that they’ve been characterised as much by baffling lows as soaring highs, especially Rogue
Trap has, iirc by a few seasons the record for consecutive GSL playoffs, he’s won what 5 tournaments this year, he’s made 3 GSL finals
His first two GSL finals I think he plays them 10 times over and doesn’t win, Dark and Rogue are great players and they had a litany of tools in that meta. I think Trap played considerably better in some of those games than his third loss, in a less brutal meta.
Last Katowice was a big failure and he didn’t show up against Cure last GSL, with a non-Zerg bracket that was a great opportunity for him. Aside from that I can’t recall many instances of Trap just failing in a tournament, and we’re talking a few years
Because he’s Protoss people maybe don’t recognise it/respect it, I don’t know. He’s stylistically a lot like Maru, especially his PvT. He lives on the razor’s edge and pulling off miracles with judgement and crazy execution. He gets an edge by really pushing it, and if he executes well no non-Zerg can live with it. Like Maru he can accomplish miracles with weird, technical to control unit sets and just pounce when he scents blood.
I’ve seen him deflect an attack and then move out on the map with a handful of gateway units, a prism and one immortal with my head in my hands going ‘this is stupid’ with 100% knows be of the game state only for him to encounter the bio squad and, somehow kill it.
In PvZ I don’t think a Protoss can really prosper in the same way. There’s a relatively even eco/supply in early to mid game PvT and winning an early/midgame technical skirmish can snowball, which is where Trap gets a lot of joy.
You don’t get that so much in PvZ, it’s commitment into pressure from a numbers deficit, or playing for the late game. Or resolutely defending
Speaking broad brush but you get me, Trap gets a lot of wins from turning an even game into a favoured game with solid defence and midgame small skirmishes and riding that advantage out. It’s really kind of hard to skirmish a Zerg into a real deficit in which you can quickly kill them.
This isn’t to say PvZ is unwinnable or crazy unfair, I don’t think it suits Trap’s primarily skillset even though he has great scalps to his name
Maru’s chops, or Clem’s chops in the same domain of snowballing advantages via risk and execution absolutely does transfer over to TvZ because you can consistently trade well and wear them down in a way Protoss cannot do
Maybe you're right and I'm overexaggerating his inconsistency but that's just what sticks out to me when I think of him. Stats and Classic didn't really have such poor performances when they were the best Protoss players. You can also add his latest GSL finals vs Dark to the series where he didn't deliver (overcommited for no reason in one game, lost vs a Nydus he had all the tools to defend and knew it was coming because he missed a changeling) and in TSL 6 he also lost in the first round vs Ragnarok.
yeah and for Rogue you're right that he's incosistent but he delivered when it really counted so it seemed to be more of a motivational thing than a mental thing and Maru only really had those poor performances in foreign tournaments because he struggles with adapting to jetlag/travelling
He’s not inconsistent :p I will die on this hill!
Now Zest, on the other hand mixes pretty mediocre results with making Katowice finals and a GSL finals, I’d say of the two players who’ve been carrying Protoss he’s the dazzling highs and the crushing lows player, and Trap is the guy who keeps to a high baseline without much deviation.
Note this consistency works in both the under AND over performing directions, it doesn’t mean they’re a better player. Heromarine is an example of a player who is resolutely consistent, he beats the players he should, he rarely beats the players above him in the pecking order.
Outside of Gemini, and I’m a fan too, does anyone have Trap as anything other than an underdog against a Rogue or a Dark?
Be it due to perceptions of the player skill, or the state of PvZ, or a combination thereof.
If Trap isn’t consistent basically nobody in the scene is, or has ever been. He is missing a big prestige prize, whether that’s due to a mentality problem and not performing, or him just not quite being of that level, or his race being a ceiling. That is certainly true, but that’s more in the realm of stepping into being a great versus being a consistently excellent player
On December 22 2021 07:21 WombaT wrote: Is 2350 a good score? I’m not from the States so I’m not super familiar what scores correlate with what, but from what I’m reading here it seems 2350 indicates an inability to read and form responses to what other people are actually saying.
Do SATs measure obnoxiousness?
@drFilip, 100%, I don’t understand why Trap is tagged as inconsistent, or what would possibly be considered consistent given the last few years he’s put together.
Doesn’t mean he’s the best necessarily, I can’t think of anyone besides Serral who’s been as consistent in maintaining a certain level over this 3 year span.
Before this sparks any ‘but x are better than Trap and Serral’ that’s not what I said.
In terms of relative level of ability and coming close to hitting it most times is what I’m talking about. I’d put Heromarine as a similarly very consistent player
In terms of results Trap is surely consistent but he also sometimes has series where he just can't deliver and makes a lot of unforced errors. Whether that's because of his race or not I don't know, but the other top players don't really have that.
Maru and Rogue winning a lot of tier 2 events lately on top of their feats in the big leagues kind of masks that historically they’ve frequently bombed out early in smaller tournies, or even had the odd flub in Code S
They’ve (recently) added relentless consistency, but prior to that they’ve been characterised as much by baffling lows as soaring highs, especially Rogue
Trap has, iirc by a few seasons the record for consecutive GSL playoffs, he’s won what 5 tournaments this year, he’s made 3 GSL finals
His first two GSL finals I think he plays them 10 times over and doesn’t win, Dark and Rogue are great players and they had a litany of tools in that meta. I think Trap played considerably better in some of those games than his third loss, in a less brutal meta.
Last Katowice was a big failure and he didn’t show up against Cure last GSL, with a non-Zerg bracket that was a great opportunity for him. Aside from that I can’t recall many instances of Trap just failing in a tournament, and we’re talking a few years
Because he’s Protoss people maybe don’t recognise it/respect it, I don’t know. He’s stylistically a lot like Maru, especially his PvT. He lives on the razor’s edge and pulling off miracles with judgement and crazy execution. He gets an edge by really pushing it, and if he executes well no non-Zerg can live with it. Like Maru he can accomplish miracles with weird, technical to control unit sets and just pounce when he scents blood.
I’ve seen him deflect an attack and then move out on the map with a handful of gateway units, a prism and one immortal with my head in my hands going ‘this is stupid’ with 100% knows be of the game state only for him to encounter the bio squad and, somehow kill it.
In PvZ I don’t think a Protoss can really prosper in the same way. There’s a relatively even eco/supply in early to mid game PvT and winning an early/midgame technical skirmish can snowball, which is where Trap gets a lot of joy.
You don’t get that so much in PvZ, it’s commitment into pressure from a numbers deficit, or playing for the late game. Or resolutely defending
Speaking broad brush but you get me, Trap gets a lot of wins from turning an even game into a favoured game with solid defence and midgame small skirmishes and riding that advantage out. It’s really kind of hard to skirmish a Zerg into a real deficit in which you can quickly kill them.
This isn’t to say PvZ is unwinnable or crazy unfair, I don’t think it suits Trap’s primarily skillset even though he has great scalps to his name
Maru’s chops, or Clem’s chops in the same domain of snowballing advantages via risk and execution absolutely does transfer over to TvZ because you can consistently trade well and wear them down in a way Protoss cannot do
Maybe you're right and I'm overexaggerating his inconsistency but that's just what sticks out to me when I think of him. Stats and Classic didn't really have such poor performances when they were the best Protoss players. You can also add his latest GSL finals vs Dark to the series where he didn't deliver (overcommited for no reason in one game, lost vs a Nydus he had all the tools to defend and knew it was coming because he missed a changeling) and in TSL 6 he also lost in the first round vs Ragnarok.
yeah and for Rogue you're right that he's incosistent but he delivered when it really counted so it seemed to be more of a motivational thing than a mental thing and Maru only really had those poor performances in foreign tournaments because he struggles with adapting to jetlag/travelling
Outside of Gemini, and I’m a fan too, does anyone have Trap as anything other than an underdog against a Rogue or a Dark?
During his title winning streak I would've picked him as the favourite against anyone. In a tier 2 tournament at least.
I have two comments. The first is that this problem is really just a very top of the pro scene problem.
The second is that many people are completely underestimating the scale of the problem at the top.
On Aligulac Serral is currently sitting at 404 ELO points ahead of MaxPax, who is currently the highest ranked Protoss.
To put that in perspective, according to ELO Rattata is more likely to beat MaxPax than MaxPax is to beat Serral. So if you are a Zerg trying to understand why Protosses are whining, imagine if you were told that Rattatta was your great hope for beating MaxPax, Trap and Zest and then you would understand the despair that the Protoss fans have.
At the same time we need to recognize that by the time you start comparing the 5th best Protoss to the 5th best Zerg and Terran then everyone is within 100 ELO so the problem is greatly diminished.
Rattatta is the 11th best Zerg, but there are 12 Protosses ahead of him so once you get out of top 30 in the world, then Protoss is actually even or slightly better than Zerg. So we are not losing on ladder because Protoss is underpowered.
This is purely a viewership problem at the very top of professional Starcraft 2.
Comparing MaxPax to serral is disingenuous. Serral is much better than MaxPax.
When you make the comparison to solar, reynor, etc. It's much more comparable. I can see MaxPax taking series off of them, even rogue/dark depending on the day. (and I say "even", because rogue/dark have a history of overperforming. If they played 100 series, I don't think the win/loss would be more than 5-8% in either direction)
I'd be a little more cautious on that, you may be right but it's also true that protoss errors are often much easier to spot than terran or zerg errors.
I watched the ESL cup finals where Maxpax 3-0ed Reynor recently, it was commented by Lambo on Rotti's stream, and during the airtoss game Lambo pointed out that at one point Reynor took a very bad fight at his triangle base that ultimately allowed Maxpax to win this game. I could not tell you what was bad about that fight (Lambo didn't specify). I also watched it on o'gaming's stream out of curiosity and they didn't make any relevant comments about the fight outside of play by play.
Interesting point, BUT if protoss mistakes are so easy to notice, shouldn't that mean that protoss players have easier time to fix them.
I'd be a little more cautious on that, you may be right but it's also true that protoss errors are often much easier to spot than terran or zerg errors.
I watched the ESL cup finals where Maxpax 3-0ed Reynor recently, it was commented by Lambo on Rotti's stream, and during the airtoss game Lambo pointed out that at one point Reynor took a very bad fight at his triangle base that ultimately allowed Maxpax to win this game. I could not tell you what was bad about that fight (Lambo didn't specify). I also watched it on o'gaming's stream out of curiosity and they didn't make any relevant comments about the fight outside of play by play.
Interesting point, BUT if protoss mistakes are so easy to notice, shouldn't that mean that protoss players have easier time to fix them.
Not really imo. At high level you don't really make mistakes because you don't know that you shouldn't be doing something, you make mistakes because a lot of things happen at the same time and it's hard.
I'd be a little more cautious on that, you may be right but it's also true that protoss errors are often much easier to spot than terran or zerg errors.
I watched the ESL cup finals where Maxpax 3-0ed Reynor recently, it was commented by Lambo on Rotti's stream, and during the airtoss game Lambo pointed out that at one point Reynor took a very bad fight at his triangle base that ultimately allowed Maxpax to win this game. I could not tell you what was bad about that fight (Lambo didn't specify). I also watched it on o'gaming's stream out of curiosity and they didn't make any relevant comments about the fight outside of play by play.
Interesting point, BUT if protoss mistakes are so easy to notice, shouldn't that mean that protoss players have easier time to fix them.
I don't think he means easier for players to spot but rather for viewers. A pro will know they made a mistake in a situation where most of us wouldn't recognize one.
Also just because a mistake is easy to spot doesn't mean its easy to correct. For example zealot moving out of the wall to let robo units through and then going back but not on hold position or whatever the case might be. Easy to spot, but that doesn't mean that it's any easier to correct. Every toss knows how bad that can be but you can get caught up in the game and just miss it once and its gg even if you did it correctly 10 other times in that same game.
On December 23 2021 05:33 Moonerz wrote: For example zealot moving out of the wall to let robo units through and then going back but not on hold position or whatever the case might be. Easy to spot, but that doesn't mean that it's any easier to correct. Every toss knows how bad that can be but you can get caught up in the game and just miss it once and its gg even if you did it correctly 10 other times in that same game.
On December 23 2021 04:24 InfCereal wrote: Comparing MaxPax to serral is disingenuous. Serral is much better than MaxPax.
When you make the comparison to solar, reynor, etc. It's much more comparable. I can see MaxPax taking series off of them, even rogue/dark depending on the day. (and I say "even", because rogue/dark have a history of overperforming. If they played 100 series, I don't think the win/loss would be more than 5-8% in either direction)
Serral is genuinely an outlier.
You think Serral is outlier because he is 150 ELO ahead of Reynor but he is over 400 ELO ahead of anyone playing the Protoss race. Even Reynor is 254 ELO higher than any Protoss player.
Dark is 228 ELO higher than any Protoss player.
Rogue is 197 ELO higher than any Protoss player.
Do you see the problem here? What you call an outlier is actually the entirety of high level professional ZvP right now.
If you don't like me comparing to MaxPax I can compare to someone else.
Trap is 442 ELO behind Serral. If you drop down another 442 ELO you get to Cham.
If someone told you it was balanced and not to worry because Cham is the great hope to beat MaxPax, Zest, Parting and Trap would you feel like there was something wrong? Would you lack confidence that Cham would take that best of 7 off of Trap? Would lack hope that it even might happen?
That is what it is like to watch high level ZvP right now.
On December 23 2021 04:24 InfCereal wrote: Comparing MaxPax to serral is disingenuous. Serral is much better than MaxPax.
When you make the comparison to solar, reynor, etc. It's much more comparable. I can see MaxPax taking series off of them, even rogue/dark depending on the day. (and I say "even", because rogue/dark have a history of overperforming. If they played 100 series, I don't think the win/loss would be more than 5-8% in either direction)
Serral is genuinely an outlier.
You think Serral is outlier because he is 150 ELO ahead of Reynor but he is over 400 ELO ahead of anyone playing the Protoss race. Even Reynor is 254 ELO higher than any Protoss player.
Dark is 228 ELO higher than any Protoss player.
Rogue is 197 ELO higher than any Protoss player.
Do you see the problem here? What you call an outlier is actually the entirety of high level professional ZvP right now.
If you don't like me comparing to MaxPax I can compare to someone else.
Trap is 442 ELO behind Serral. If you drop down another 442 ELO you get to Cham.
If someone told you it was balanced and not to worry because Cham is the great hope to beat MaxPax, Zest, Parting and Trap would you feel like there was something wrong? Would you lack confidence that Cham would take that best of 7 off of Trap? Would lack hope that it even might happen?
That is what it is like to watch high level ZvP right now.
So I suggested not comparing people to serral, and your brilliant retort is to compare everyone to serral?
I don't know how to break this to you, but Rogue vs MaxPax statically gives Rogue a 1.59% advantage over maxpax. Their ZvP ratings are 23 apart.
What was that? Dark vs MaxPax? 4.55% in favor of Dark. 68 Rating difference.
The highest rated ZvP players are
Serral (3468) Reynor (3173) Dark (3135) Rogue (3090)
These are almost identical, because Serral is an anomaly. You _can_ say zerg has an advantage. You absolutely can. The best zergs are rated higher than the best protosses in the matchup, by like 5%.
But you can't use serral as the comparison. He's not even in the same realm.
My dude meadbert is there saying "Okay we have no hope look at Serral's mmr" and the dude who stopped watching the game because protoss was too OP for zerg answers "You can't compare anyone to Serral he has too much MMR" That's literally the reason why meadbert is saying there is no hope Poopi can you follow this reasoning it seems quite simple I think you ought to be able to follow it
The statistics are, odd, as good a job as the Aligulac crew do, disparate regions and the added complication of weeklies adding a lot of noise.
Just in terms of the eye test Rogue and Dark feel a little deflated rating wise, Maxpax and Showtime a little inflated.
I shudder to think what Serral’s ELO would look like if he took a mind to try-harding the EU weeklies.
I think you have a combination of factors at play, Serral does the Serral thing and basically shows up at tournaments with tough opposition, brings his A game or close to it and
Dark and Rogue too, mostly.
I imagine the GSL format drags ELO down versus WCS, whether Serral actually needs it to progress to playoffs, he’s usually going 6-1 or 7-0 or whatever every group phase, and sweep a fair amount of those.
Assuming Rogue and Dark don’t actually lose, which does happen on occasion you can make playoffs going 2-1 in matches and 4-4 in sets, and just double that in the old Ro32 format.
I imagine participating regularly in weeklies can have an inflating/deflating effect depending on if they’re your primary focus or not too.
An neeb probably won more than all the other zergs in 2017 too still nobody thought the mu was fine
No Rogue and soO won more than Neeb that year but what is your point about 2017? The thing is that while Serral has a very high aligulac rating, it does not necessarily translates into tournaments wins / placings. And that's the case for several players on aligulac: Rogue wins more than his rating suggests, etc. We are running circles but if you only want to watch starcraft 2 if your race wins BlizzCon/Katowice, then even terrans would not watch since those tournaments have been dominated by zergs for years. Sc2 is still worth watching though
An neeb probably won more than all the other zergs in 2017 too still nobody thought the mu was fine
No Rogue and soO won more than Neeb that year but what is your point about 2017? The thing is that while Serral has a very high aligulac rating, it does not necessarily translates into tournaments wins / placings. And that's the case for several players on aligulac: Rogue wins more than his rating suggests, etc. We are running circles but if you only want to watch starcraft 2 if your race wins BlizzCon/Katowice, then even terrans would not watch since those tournaments have been dominated by zergs for years. Sc2 is still worth watching though
Because there are two terrans who have a reasonable shot of winning any tournament they enter.
An neeb probably won more than all the other zergs in 2017 too still nobody thought the mu was fine
No Rogue and soO won more than Neeb that year but what is your point about 2017? The thing is that while Serral has a very high aligulac rating, it does not necessarily translates into tournaments wins / placings. And that's the case for several players on aligulac: Rogue wins more than his rating suggests, etc. We are running circles but if you only want to watch starcraft 2 if your race wins BlizzCon/Katowice, then even terrans would not watch since those tournaments have been dominated by zergs for years. Sc2 is still worth watching though
Because there are two terrans who have a reasonable shot of winning any tournament they enter.
Pretty much recently watching as toss isnt fun, also because pvz is garbage af to watch currently.
On December 24 2021 01:29 InfCereal wrote: I don't know how to break this to you, but Rogue vs MaxPax statically gives Rogue a 1.59% advantage over maxpax. Their ZvP ratings are 23 apart.
Yes, I am aware that the 4th best Zerg is favored over the best Protoss. I am also aware that the 5th best Zerg (Solar) is also favored over the best Protoss as well. I realize you see this as a feature and not a bug, but to most of us, this is the bug!
If Serral were head and shoulders above everyone and then Maru was 2nd and Trap was 3rd then we would have a Serral problem. That is not what is going on here.
When there are 5 Zergs better than the best Protoss then it is not just a Serral problem. It is a Protoss is underpowered at the highest levels problem.
On December 24 2021 01:29 InfCereal wrote: I don't know how to break this to you, but Rogue vs MaxPax statically gives Rogue a 1.59% advantage over maxpax. Their ZvP ratings are 23 apart.
Yes, I am aware that the 4th best Zerg is favored over the best Protoss. I am also aware that the 5th best Zerg (Solar) is also favored over the best Protoss as well. I realize you see this as a feature and not a bug, but to most of us, this is the bug!
If Serral were head and shoulders above everyone and then Maru was 2nd and Trap was 3rd then we would have a Serral problem. That is not what is going on here.
When there are 5 Zergs better than the best Protoss then it is not just a Serral problem. It is a Protoss is underpowered at the highest levels problem.
MaxPax is not the best protoss though. Zest and Trap still are, and since Zest will go to the military this could become problematic in 2022 but Classic / herO are back and improving very rapidly
On December 24 2021 05:00 Elantris wrote: Implying that koreans can return form after military is so pathetic. It literally never happened and shows your lack of arguments.
Did I hallucinate ByuN beating Serral and Maru after returning from the military? If a guy who had bad wrists can do it I think more healthy players can do that as well
An neeb probably won more than all the other zergs in 2017 too still nobody thought the mu was fine
No Rogue and soO won more than Neeb that year but what is your point about 2017? The thing is that while Serral has a very high aligulac rating, it does not necessarily translates into tournaments wins / placings. And that's the case for several players on aligulac: Rogue wins more than his rating suggests, etc. We are running circles but if you only want to watch starcraft 2 if your race wins BlizzCon/Katowice, then even terrans would not watch since those tournaments have been dominated by zergs for years. Sc2 is still worth watching though
Because there are two terrans who have a reasonable shot of winning any tournament they enter.
2? Cure winning GSL was a pretty big surprise and Clem has never won an international tournament. Which one are you talking about in addition to Maru?
In either case, I don't think they have a better shot at winning a big tournament than Zest/Trap
On December 24 2021 03:31 WombaT wrote: The statistics are, odd, as good a job as the Aligulac crew do, disparate regions and the added complication of weeklies adding a lot of noise.
Aligulac is useless and will remain useless as long as they treat the ESL Weeklies as if they matter.
GSL players are consistently under ranked on Aligulac, European players are consistently over ranked, Chinese players are not even represented at all.
Aligulac is useless. It's not even worth paying attention to. Saying their team does a good job is a joke. Their methods are not good.
An neeb probably won more than all the other zergs in 2017 too still nobody thought the mu was fine
No Rogue and soO won more than Neeb that year but what is your point about 2017? The thing is that while Serral has a very high aligulac rating, it does not necessarily translates into tournaments wins / placings. And that's the case for several players on aligulac: Rogue wins more than his rating suggests, etc. We are running circles but if you only want to watch starcraft 2 if your race wins BlizzCon/Katowice, then even terrans would not watch since those tournaments have been dominated by zergs for years. Sc2 is still worth watching though
Aligulac, like ladder MMR rewards a high level and consistency.
Makes 100% sense Serral has giant ratings in both given he’s relentlessly consistent, and at a very high skill level.
I think ladder is a tad underrated in terms of looking at how the different races function.
Unfortunately I don’t think people have logged ladder records and notable achievements anywhere so I’m going off memory.
Serral obtained some truly preposterous highest ever ladder MMR, I’ve definitely seen Maru over 7k on Korea
Frequently, again this is just mostly from memory even the Protoss greats seem to cap out at 6.7/.8 for, the most part anyway. Korean server anyway. I’m sure some have pushed higher
It’s clearly not an impediment to Protoss winning tournaments, but I wonder if it does reveal at least, something that’s pertinent in analysing some of the race’s (relative) woes.
If anything, assuming barcodes are in place, a series of Bo1s against lots of different opponents is the Protoss format, we do see this reflected with the GM distribution, especially in Europe.
But yet at the top, top end Protoss can’t get near some of the peak MMRs other races have delivered, despite seemingly having an advantage here.
I believe Serral (I’m overly focusing on him mostly as I’m more familiar) has had higher MMR, by a distance even playing under the Serral name than Protoss players have managed playing under barcodes.
Serral has, considerably more success putting his name out there and having the kitchen sink thrown at him than a Protoss who should benefit from their stylistic traits not being known.
Or even the ‘shit it’s Serral I 100% can’t win with a macro game I’ll throw something ridiculous out. And Serral can deflect that.
Before I give my theory/conclusion, I’m 100% sure one of you is going to pull numbers and MMRs that completely demolish the central tenet of this point, so I look forward to that :p
If you’re as good as a Serral, your toolset is just better than what Protoss have, I’m not sure what other conclusion one can reach
If the build order/timing attack race can’t keep up with what the Zerg passive/reactive in terms of what is possible on ladder, in what environment are they going to prosper at the top tournament level outside of preparation for specific opponents?
Yes ladder is only ladder, but I feel it does give some insight into how top pros just playing a bunch of games casually perform.
On December 24 2021 03:31 WombaT wrote: The statistics are, odd, as good a job as the Aligulac crew do, disparate regions and the added complication of weeklies adding a lot of noise.
Aligulac is useless and will remain useless as long as they treat the ESL Weeklies as if they matter.
GSL players are consistently under ranked on Aligulac, European players are consistently over ranked, Chinese players are not even represented at all.
Aligulac is useless. It's not even worth paying attention to. Saying their team does a good job is a joke. Their methods are not good.
I don't think it's useless, it just shouldn't be treated as the holy measurement of player skill.
Saying Serral vs Maxpax is equal to Maxpax vs Rattata because their aligulac difference is equal is stupid. Worrying that 4 Zerg players are significantly higher ranked than the best Protoss player in ZvP by Aligulac numbers is legitimate though as this also somewhat confirms what we're seeing in the games.
On December 24 2021 03:31 WombaT wrote: The statistics are, odd, as good a job as the Aligulac crew do, disparate regions and the added complication of weeklies adding a lot of noise.
Aligulac is useless and will remain useless as long as they treat the ESL Weeklies as if they matter.
GSL players are consistently under ranked on Aligulac, European players are consistently over ranked, Chinese players are not even represented at all.
Aligulac is useless. It's not even worth paying attention to. Saying their team does a good job is a joke. Their methods are not good.
I don't think it's useless, it just shouldn't be treated as the holy measurement of player skill.
Saying Serral vs Maxpax is equal to Maxpax vs Rattata because their aligulac difference is equal is stupid. Worrying that 4 Zerg players are significantly higher ranked than the best Protoss player in ZvP by Aligulac numbers is legitimate though as this also somewhat confirms what we're seeing in the games.
Yea sure, if you want to make Aligulac rankings in context with actual analysis then ok it can be a tool in the toolbox.
But when people want to say "but Aligulac" or start their argument with "Aligulac says" then it's useless.
It's a very imperfect model, and it should not be treated as anything other than.
On December 24 2021 03:31 WombaT wrote: The statistics are, odd, as good a job as the Aligulac crew do, disparate regions and the added complication of weeklies adding a lot of noise.
Aligulac is useless and will remain useless as long as they treat the ESL Weeklies as if they matter.
GSL players are consistently under ranked on Aligulac, European players are consistently over ranked, Chinese players are not even represented at all.
Aligulac is useless. It's not even worth paying attention to. Saying their team does a good job is a joke. Their methods are not good.
I don't think it's useless, it just shouldn't be treated as the holy measurement of player skill.
Saying Serral vs Maxpax is equal to Maxpax vs Rattata because their aligulac difference is equal is stupid. Worrying that 4 Zerg players are significantly higher ranked than the best Protoss player in ZvP by Aligulac numbers is legitimate though as this also somewhat confirms what we're seeing in the games.
Yea sure, if you want to make Aligulac rankings in context with actual analysis then ok it can be a tool in the toolbox.
But when people want to say "but Aligulac" or start their argument with "Aligulac says" then it's useless.
It's a very imperfect model, and it should not be treated as anything other than.
Agreed but I don't think that's the fault of their team. How would a better system look like? I don't think there's a way to 100% accurately rank player skill as different players thrive in different environment (Rogue becomes almost unbeatable in high stake bo7s, Maru worse in overseas tournament, online Cure/online Stats etc)
treating every match the same as they do it is the most neutral/objective approach imo
On December 24 2021 03:31 WombaT wrote: The statistics are, odd, as good a job as the Aligulac crew do, disparate regions and the added complication of weeklies adding a lot of noise.
Aligulac is useless and will remain useless as long as they treat the ESL Weeklies as if they matter.
GSL players are consistently under ranked on Aligulac, European players are consistently over ranked, Chinese players are not even represented at all.
Aligulac is useless. It's not even worth paying attention to. Saying their team does a good job is a joke. Their methods are not good.
I don't think it's useless, it just shouldn't be treated as the holy measurement of player skill.
Saying Serral vs Maxpax is equal to Maxpax vs Rattata because their aligulac difference is equal is stupid. Worrying that 4 Zerg players are significantly higher ranked than the best Protoss player in ZvP by Aligulac numbers is legitimate though as this also somewhat confirms what we're seeing in the games.
Yea sure, if you want to make Aligulac rankings in context with actual analysis then ok it can be a tool in the toolbox.
But when people want to say "but Aligulac" or start their argument with "Aligulac says" then it's useless.
It's a very imperfect model, and it should not be treated as anything other than.
Agreed but I don't think that's the fault of their team. How would a better system look like? I don't think there's a way to 100% accurately rank player skill as different players thrive in different environment (Rogue becomes almost unbeatable in high stake bo7s, Maru worse in overseas tournament, online Cure/online Stats etc)
My issue is more of the way they present themselves but maybe that isn't their fault. But it is something they could do something about if they actually wanted to.
It's like in sports, when ESPN or Skip Bayless makes a claim and people take them seriously and use them as their basis for their argument. In Sports it's fucking OBVIOUS that they should not be taken that seriously.
Aligulac is the same way except there are Starcraft fans that ACTUALLY DO take them seriously. They shouldn't. They are as legitimate as Skip Bayless is. But the optics are different, and THAT is what I want to change. Aligulac is flawed and should be treated as such. It shouldn't be considered by even a single fan as being a catch all ranking for any player.
On December 24 2021 03:31 WombaT wrote: The statistics are, odd, as good a job as the Aligulac crew do, disparate regions and the added complication of weeklies adding a lot of noise.
Aligulac is useless and will remain useless as long as they treat the ESL Weeklies as if they matter.
GSL players are consistently under ranked on Aligulac, European players are consistently over ranked, Chinese players are not even represented at all.
Aligulac is useless. It's not even worth paying attention to. Saying their team does a good job is a joke. Their methods are not good.
They should exclude weeklies, 100% agreed.
It’s frustrating because they do a good job otherwise. I don’t understand why weeklies factor in. It’s still a great repository of all sorts of stats, comparisons and is a great archive, people work hard on it and I don’t want to shit on them.
It’s pretty obvious that the likes of Zest and Trap play weeklies for practice and a bit of extra cash, and the EU pros who aren’t Serral/Reynor treat them considerably more seriously because they’re realistically gated out of consistently placing highly in WCS by the aforementioned, and in international tournies by Korea’s best
Aligulac’s latter processes seem fine to me, but in terms of data well, garbage in, garbage out.
Trap’s won how many tournaments in the past year? He’s beaten Serral and Reynor in premier tournaments. He’s got the best PvT in the world, he’s put Maru out of Code S on, I believe more than one occasion
How the fuck is he worse at PvZ than Maxpax and Showtime? How is the player who’s won the most tournaments this year not even top 10 ELO?
I can’t think of any other reason other than including weeklies in the stats. Serral and Reynor and to a degree Clem will IMO still have a (slightly) inflated if weeklies were expunged just from playing WCS EU, but I don’t think it’d be too distorting.
The data is all there, I assume it would be possible to go back years and restart the rankings with excluding weeklies etc
On December 24 2021 03:31 WombaT wrote: The statistics are, odd, as good a job as the Aligulac crew do, disparate regions and the added complication of weeklies adding a lot of noise.
Aligulac is useless and will remain useless as long as they treat the ESL Weeklies as if they matter.
GSL players are consistently under ranked on Aligulac, European players are consistently over ranked, Chinese players are not even represented at all.
Aligulac is useless. It's not even worth paying attention to. Saying their team does a good job is a joke. Their methods are not good.
They should exclude weeklies, 100% agreed.
It’s pretty obvious that the likes of Zest and Trap play weeklies for practice and a bit of extra cash,
Oh my god though when I state this OBVIOUS fact on reddit how downvoted I get.
People want so badly for Aligulac to be law, because Aligulac says that Europeans are better than they actually are. It's the same shit that it always has been.
I'm totally down to give foreigner players the respect they have EARNED, but thanks to sites like Aligulac there is so much empty calories that people that want Koreans to not be as good as they are, to eat up.
The Aliglulac team have pointed out on many occasions that their system (or any rating system) doesn't do a good job of rating players between different regions that don't mix often enough. There's nothing they can do about it unless the different regions start mixing more regularly.
If anything, this thread has convinced me that the main problem isn't protoss, it's zerg. Looks like the future of SC2 is going to be the top zergs trading wins amongst each other until the game dies, exciting!
On December 26 2021 04:39 Athenau wrote: If anything, this thread has convinced me that the main problem isn't protoss, it's zerg. Looks like the future of SC2 is going to be the top zergs trading wins amongst each other until the game dies, exciting!
Pretty much this, but any nerfs to Zerg would have to be specifically targeted for the match up, it can't hobble TvZ which is still as far as I know pretty balanced.
I think a poster somewhere a few pages back had the idea to make Storm do bonus damage against burrowed units to let Protoss ground armies push out/break out of Lurker contains. Honestly I think it's a really good idea, it's not elegant but I think it would be effective.
The real solution would be to buff Gateway units to allow them to pressure Zerg more in the early/mid game, but if Blizzard won't even put in band-aid fixes like the + burrowed damage, there is no way in hell they would ever do an in depth change like that.
Why will Blizzard not hear our cries? How does Heroes of the Storm get routine balance patches and hero reworks while having no competitive scene to speak of while Starcraft 2 and Brood War still have thriving (relatively) pro scenes and active player bases?
On December 26 2021 04:39 Athenau wrote: If anything, this thread has convinced me that the main problem isn't protoss, it's zerg. Looks like the future of SC2 is going to be the top zergs trading wins amongst each other until the game dies, exciting!
Pretty much this, but any nerfs to Zerg would have to be specifically targeted for the match up, it can't hobble TvZ which is still as far as I know pretty balanced.
I think a poster somewhere a few pages back had the idea to make Storm do bonus damage against burrowed units to let Protoss ground armies push out/break out of Lurker contains. Honestly I think it's a really good idea, it's not elegant but I think it would be effective.
The real solution would be to buff Gateway units to allow them to pressure Zerg more in the early/mid game, but if Blizzard won't even put in band-aid fixes like the + burrowed damage, there is no way in hell they would ever do an in depth change like that.
Why will Blizzard not hear our cries? How does Heroes of the Storm get routine balance patches and hero reworks while having no competitive scene to speak of while Starcraft 2 and Brood War still have thriving (relatively) pro scenes and active player bases?
Maybe TvZ was semi-balanced on the previous map-pool, but not on this one. As of this writing, TvZ on the new maps (https://liquipedia.net/starcraft2/Maps): Berlingrad: 45.3% Curious Minds: 47.0% Glittering Ashes: 46.7% Hardwire: 42.3% Pride of Altaris: 45.6%
The problem in both match-ups is the lurker. Lurkers in their current form are completely degenerate. A lurker with adaptive talons burrows in 0.7 seconds. To give you an idea of how absurd this is, siege tanks were nerfed to take 1.43 seconds before firing when dropped from a medivac, and this was still considered bad enough for the game that Blizzard later removed tankivacs altogether. And when tankivacs were a thing tanks were way weaker than they were now (this was when they had 160 hp and did 35+15 damage instead of 40+30).
The lurker is a 200 hp, 10 range "siege unit" that moves faster than a stalker off-creep, burrows faster than a drilling-claw widow-mine, and deals full splash damage to anything along the line of its attack. And Blizzard, in their infinite wisdom, saw fit to give this tool to the race whose production is limited only by money and larva.
Nerfing Adaptive Talons is the one thing I can say in a vacuum is a good idea. There is no reason a Siege Unit should be anywhere near as mobile as the Lurker is, ESPECIALLY when Zerg already has access to 5 other forms of splash damage.
The problem I really have with doing that is that I think the Lurker is a good thing for making ZvZ watchable, and that if Lurkers are nerfed we'd have to take a second look at Skytoss because Skytoss IS a thing because of Lurkers making late game Protoss ground less effective. If Lurkers are toned back we don't know if that small change will cause of a cascade of problems that ends with Protoss being OP in the match up. It's something that needs to be delicately adjusted, you can't just use a sledgehammer on this.
TvZ is actually the least of my concerns when it comes to Lurkers. Terran can already handle them anyway, it's actually a harder style to play than just abusing Banelings all the time.
On December 26 2021 09:30 Vindicare605 wrote: Terran can already handle them anyway, it's actually a harder style to play than just abusing Banelings all the time.
Half the time they're used like giant banelings anyway. How many times have you seen pro-zergs take their ball of lurkers and burrow them right in front of their opponent's army?
I've been a proponent of removing Adaptive Talons entirely for a long time. It was an ability that was needed when the Lurker was first introduced into SC2 but times have changed, sometimes things that are good and undiscovered become overpowered when fleshed out and that's exactly what happened with the Lurker.
On December 26 2021 12:29 Beelzebub1 wrote: I've been a proponent of removing Adaptive Talons entirely for a long time. It was an ability that was needed when the Lurker was first introduced into SC2 but times have changed, sometimes things that are good and undiscovered become overpowered when fleshed out and that's exactly what happened with the Lurker.
Well let's not forget, Lurkers got 10 range in a balance update and it was THAT change that when mixed with Adaptive Talons is how we get the modern Lurker we have now.
It's just that it's obvious that for a siege unit like the Lurker, upping their range makes more sense than making them faster. I mean for crying out loud they are faster than fucking Hydralisks on creep. How does that make any sense?
So yea, with their additional range included they are a very powerful Siege Unit that Protoss has a hard time dealing with because Protoss' only detection options are very easy to snipe down and when mixed with Vipers, Lurkers are a nightmare for Protoss to deal with on the ground because of how strong Vipers counter their "death bally" style, a style they are dependent on because Warp Gate... but I've made this argument enough already in this thread.
Point being. Lurkers got buffed with more than just Adaptive Talons. It was that combo buff that led to them being how they are now.
I'm not a fan of the +Burrow damage for storm because it does make killing things easier. If Adaptive Talons was slowed I think that would make a big change, possibly also splitting up the burrow speed upgrade, like it's faster burrowing on creep. Some alternative changes for Protoss I've been mulling are giving Storm detection to bring it in line with EMP and Fungal so it reveals cloaked and burrowed units. The other playing on forcefield's ability to push away units to let it force burrowed units to unburrow, giving Toss counter play with Lurkers as they otherwise outrange everything
On December 26 2021 12:59 xPrimuSx wrote: I'm not a fan of the +Burrow damage for storm because it does make killing things easier. If Adaptive Talons was slowed I think that would make a big change, possibly also splitting up the burrow speed upgrade, like it's faster burrowing on creep. Some alternative changes for Protoss I've been mulling are giving Storm detection to bring it in line with EMP and Fungal so it reveals cloaked and burrowed units. The other playing on forcefield's ability to push away units to let it force burrowed units to unburrow, giving Toss counter play with Lurkers as they otherwise outrange everything
Storm revealing burrowed units was a very creative idea. Storm reveals burrowed, EMP reveals cloak and Fungal Growth reveals every invisible unit. The storm moving earth around and making the holes in the ground bigger is a fairly straight forward lore description.
But the idea I liked even more was the force field pushing burrowed units as well. That fits so well with the force field mechanic that I got surprised that the force field didn't already do that, now that I started thinking about it.
The only thing affected outside of PvZ is in PvT. The Widow Mines burrow. Burrowed mines already die to a single Psionic Storm, so that isn't changing much. The mines might die a bit faster because of Zealots swiping them 1 time, but that is such a small timing window that I think it's negligible. Using Force Fields to deburrow Widow Mines might affect a bit. The Protoss player will get another tool to defend Widow Mine drops. If the Force Field only pushed burrowed units instead of forcing them to deburrow the counterplay vs Mines gets a lot weaker. The counterplay vs Lurkers will also be changed a lot, but walling out burrowed Roaches and Infestors will still work.
However, these changes would make a huge difference for the PvZ matches between players that are not the top 15 in the world. The Protoss filled GM would get even more Protoss players. How does that affect the joy of playing the game for those people?
On December 26 2021 12:59 xPrimuSx wrote: I'm not a fan of the +Burrow damage for storm because it does make killing things easier. If Adaptive Talons was slowed I think that would make a big change, possibly also splitting up the burrow speed upgrade, like it's faster burrowing on creep. Some alternative changes for Protoss I've been mulling are giving Storm detection to bring it in line with EMP and Fungal so it reveals cloaked and burrowed units. The other playing on forcefield's ability to push away units to let it force burrowed units to unburrow, giving Toss counter play with Lurkers as they otherwise outrange everything
Storm revealing burrowed units was a very creative idea. Storm reveals burrowed, EMP reveals cloak and Fungal Growth reveals every invisible unit. The storm moving earth around and making the holes in the ground bigger is a fairly straight forward lore description.
But the idea I liked even more was the force field pushing burrowed units as well. That fits so well with the force field mechanic that I got surprised that the force field didn't already do that, now that I started thinking about it.
The only thing affected outside of PvZ is in PvT. The Widow Mines burrow. Burrowed mines already die to a single Psionic Storm, so that isn't changing much. The mines might die a bit faster because of Zealots swiping them 1 time, but that is such a small timing window that I think it's negligible. Using Force Fields to deburrow Widow Mines might affect a bit. The Protoss player will get another tool to defend Widow Mine drops. If the Force Field only pushed burrowed units instead of forcing them to deburrow the counterplay vs Mines gets a lot weaker. The counterplay vs Lurkers will also be changed a lot, but walling out burrowed Roaches and Infestors will still work.
However, these changes would make a huge difference for the PvZ matches between players that are not the top 15 in the world. The Protoss filled GM would get even more Protoss players. How does that affect the joy of playing the game for those people?
Mine has 90 hp, storm does 80 damage. Explain how mine dies to a single storm.
However, these changes would make a huge difference for the PvZ matches between players that are not the top 15 in the world. The Protoss filled GM would get even more Protoss players. How does that affect the joy of playing the game for those people?
Honestly man I'm on your side here, and I play Zerg.
But tough shit, Starcraft 2 is supposed to be balanced at the highest level of play and then it trickles down to everyone else. I see no genuine reason why that philosophy was abandoned by Blizzard, especially considering that HOTS gets regular balance patches AND reworks, so the whole, "Well there is nobody to do it" just strikes me as more Activision nonsense.
I love SC2 and BW, but I can't wait until Frost Giant releases their RTS and puts SC2 to bed. Brood War at this point I think might truly be immortal, Jaedong has like 25K people watching him every day lately.
Well, to be fair the game is probably in it's most balanced state currently.
I agree that adaptive talons could be removed or reduced to work only on creep maybe.
Regarding Storm... more damage to burrowed units could be a bandaid fix.
A more sensible change is to decloak units under storm and if one would be ready for more drastic changes: 1. slow down units hit by storm 2. make storm do less damage per second but last longer
However, these changes would make a huge difference for the PvZ matches between players that are not the top 15 in the world. The Protoss filled GM would get even more Protoss players. How does that affect the joy of playing the game for those people?
Honestly man I'm on your side here, and I play Zerg.
But tough shit, Starcraft 2 is supposed to be balanced at the highest level of play and then it trickles down to everyone else. I see no genuine reason why that philosophy was abandoned by Blizzard, especially considering that HOTS gets regular balance patches AND reworks, so the whole, "Well there is nobody to do it" just strikes me as more Activision nonsense.
I love SC2 and BW, but I can't wait until Frost Giant releases their RTS and puts SC2 to bed. Brood War at this point I think might truly be immortal, Jaedong has like 25K people watching him every day lately.
This confuses me too, perhaps HoTS is more monetisible, I’m not too familiar.
It seems odd the game Blizz abandoned as a competitive game gets patches, and the one they continue to support professionally doesn’t
BW doesn’t count, it’s a crazy outlier. It’s a great, great game don’t get me wrong but those have always been Korean specific numbers. Lightning in a bottle there and years of legacy.
Balancing for the highest level makes more sense when it’s stuff only the elite can pull off. A decent GM Zerg isn’t having to play against Maru’s lategame control or Clem’s crazy splitting, a decent GM Terran isn’t playing a Serral/Reynor who nail every inject and push creep relentlessly, so good fun can be had.
The equivalent level of PvZ Skytoss is relatively easier to do than kill, or holding a Queen Walk is bloody difficult to hold.
A decent GM Toss’ Skytoss will be worse than an elite player’s, but not to the same degree a Zerg will be worse than a Dark or a Serral’s control of technical casting armies.
It’s a tricky balancing act, and I agree balancing from the top is sensible, but it has to scale downwards properly too.
Purely hypothetical as one can’t really define such things, but a player 75% as good as Maru should be as good as a player who’s 75% as good as Rogue if they face off in ZvT
If we take say Trap as probably the best Protoss, it feels he’s (at least reasonably) unfavoured against the top Zergs, it’s not super balanced up there. But simultaneously it feels the folks who are 75/80% as good as Trap are pretty damn favoured vs their Zerg counterparts.
As I said it’s something that’s difficult to achieve. But if changes merely enable a Trap to achieve parity with other Zergs, but aren’t changes only a player of Trap’s level can make full use of, ladder is going to be brutal for Zergs
I don't understand why people are proposing such convoluted solutions. Remove adaptive talons, roll back some of the void ray buffs, and call it a day.
On December 26 2021 04:39 Athenau wrote: If anything, this thread has convinced me that the main problem isn't protoss, it's zerg. Looks like the future of SC2 is going to be the top zergs trading wins amongst each other until the game dies, exciting!
Pretty much this, but any nerfs to Zerg would have to be specifically targeted for the match up, it can't hobble TvZ which is still as far as I know pretty balanced.
I think a poster somewhere a few pages back had the idea to make Storm do bonus damage against burrowed units to let Protoss ground armies push out/break out of Lurker contains. Honestly I think it's a really good idea, it's not elegant but I think it would be effective.
The real solution would be to buff Gateway units to allow them to pressure Zerg more in the early/mid game, but if Blizzard won't even put in band-aid fixes like the + burrowed damage, there is no way in hell they would ever do an in depth change like that.
Why will Blizzard not hear our cries? How does Heroes of the Storm get routine balance patches and hero reworks while having no competitive scene to speak of while Starcraft 2 and Brood War still have thriving (relatively) pro scenes and active player bases?
I don't think Blizzard will actively patch sc2 anymore. Their last patch was in April and it was just cosmetics.
On December 26 2021 12:59 xPrimuSx wrote: I'm not a fan of the +Burrow damage for storm because it does make killing things easier. If Adaptive Talons was slowed I think that would make a big change, possibly also splitting up the burrow speed upgrade, like it's faster burrowing on creep. Some alternative changes for Protoss I've been mulling are giving Storm detection to bring it in line with EMP and Fungal so it reveals cloaked and burrowed units. The other playing on forcefield's ability to push away units to let it force burrowed units to unburrow, giving Toss counter play with Lurkers as they otherwise outrange everything
Storm revealing burrowed units was a very creative idea. Storm reveals burrowed, EMP reveals cloak and Fungal Growth reveals every invisible unit. The storm moving earth around and making the holes in the ground bigger is a fairly straight forward lore description.
But the idea I liked even more was the force field pushing burrowed units as well. That fits so well with the force field mechanic that I got surprised that the force field didn't already do that, now that I started thinking about it.
The only thing affected outside of PvZ is in PvT. The Widow Mines burrow. Burrowed mines already die to a single Psionic Storm, so that isn't changing much. The mines might die a bit faster because of Zealots swiping them 1 time, but that is such a small timing window that I think it's negligible. Using Force Fields to deburrow Widow Mines might affect a bit. The Protoss player will get another tool to defend Widow Mine drops. If the Force Field only pushed burrowed units instead of forcing them to deburrow the counterplay vs Mines gets a lot weaker. The counterplay vs Lurkers will also be changed a lot, but walling out burrowed Roaches and Infestors will still work.
However, these changes would make a huge difference for the PvZ matches between players that are not the top 15 in the world. The Protoss filled GM would get even more Protoss players. How does that affect the joy of playing the game for those people?
Mine has 90 hp, storm does 80 damage. Explain how mine dies to a single storm.
My bad. For some reason I was sure that it had 75 hp.
Since mines have more than 80 hp, the change of revealing burrowed units would have a much bigger impact in PvT.
On December 26 2021 04:39 Athenau wrote: If anything, this thread has convinced me that the main problem isn't protoss, it's zerg. Looks like the future of SC2 is going to be the top zergs trading wins amongst each other until the game dies, exciting!
Pretty much this, but any nerfs to Zerg would have to be specifically targeted for the match up, it can't hobble TvZ which is still as far as I know pretty balanced.
I think a poster somewhere a few pages back had the idea to make Storm do bonus damage against burrowed units to let Protoss ground armies push out/break out of Lurker contains. Honestly I think it's a really good idea, it's not elegant but I think it would be effective.
The real solution would be to buff Gateway units to allow them to pressure Zerg more in the early/mid game, but if Blizzard won't even put in band-aid fixes like the + burrowed damage, there is no way in hell they would ever do an in depth change like that.
Why will Blizzard not hear our cries? How does Heroes of the Storm get routine balance patches and hero reworks while having no competitive scene to speak of while Starcraft 2 and Brood War still have thriving (relatively) pro scenes and active player bases?
I don't think Blizzard will actively patch sc2 anymore. Their last patch was in April and it was just cosmetics.
Which is utter horse shit, like I said in the post, how the hell are you going to not even apply very small balance tweaks (imo all SC2 even needs) to a game with a still living competitive scene when HOTS has their dev team that..
Sits down and takes data...
Watches their extremely limited pro scene along with compiling ladder statistics...
Not only makes the changes, but also usually has 1 - 2 paragraphs on why they made the changes in the first place, usually all of them that I read are in the interest of buffing older heroes that have suffered due to power creep.
Seriously it just makes no sense, why couldn't the same team that does HOTS do SC2 as well? The complete lack of blue posts even regarding SC2 is an insult to the community.
On December 26 2021 04:39 Athenau wrote: If anything, this thread has convinced me that the main problem isn't protoss, it's zerg. Looks like the future of SC2 is going to be the top zergs trading wins amongst each other until the game dies, exciting!
Pretty much this, but any nerfs to Zerg would have to be specifically targeted for the match up, it can't hobble TvZ which is still as far as I know pretty balanced.
I think a poster somewhere a few pages back had the idea to make Storm do bonus damage against burrowed units to let Protoss ground armies push out/break out of Lurker contains. Honestly I think it's a really good idea, it's not elegant but I think it would be effective.
The real solution would be to buff Gateway units to allow them to pressure Zerg more in the early/mid game, but if Blizzard won't even put in band-aid fixes like the + burrowed damage, there is no way in hell they would ever do an in depth change like that.
Why will Blizzard not hear our cries? How does Heroes of the Storm get routine balance patches and hero reworks while having no competitive scene to speak of while Starcraft 2 and Brood War still have thriving (relatively) pro scenes and active player bases?
I don't think Blizzard will actively patch sc2 anymore. Their last patch was in April and it was just cosmetics.
Which is utter horse shit, like I said in the post, how the hell are you going to not even apply very small balance tweaks (imo all SC2 even needs) to a game with a still living competitive scene when HOTS has their dev team that..
Sits down and takes data...
Watches their extremely limited pro scene along with compiling ladder statistics...
Not only makes the changes, but also usually has 1 - 2 paragraphs on why they made the changes in the first place, usually all of them that I read are in the interest of buffing older heroes that have suffered due to power creep.
Seriously it just makes no sense, why couldn't the same team that does HOTS do SC2 as well? The complete lack of blue posts even regarding SC2 is an insult to the community.
I understand how you feel. I'm sort of in the same shoes as well. Blizzard killed sc2 for me when they silently increased 1vs1 masters 3 mmr in EU from ~4400 to 4650 which used to be masters 2 as far as I remember. That was a year ago. I've been experiencing random disconnects since last December, and Blizzard support always brushes it off by saying that it's my ISP when my ISP actually denies that. In fact, I don't experience any disconnect from any other service at time of sc2 disconnect. It's never happened in other games so far unless the whole internet service was gone.
Having said that, I'm not a financial expert by any means but judging by these:
Twitch viewers (SC + SC2 = 3k viewers during holiday season...) + Show Spoiler +
I'm not really optimistic that Blizzard will suddenly decide to focus on StarCraft since it's not where viewership is. If we compare like for like (Blizzard only games), it makes more sense if they focus more on WoW which they probably do...
On topic: I don't feel any significant change/issues as a protoss at lower levels than pros. However, watching ShoWTimE's stream today, disruptor shots really feel gimmicky. Terrans have learnt how to snipe disruptors just in time in some situations... In my opinion, as someone who has played StarCraft since 2006 and SC2 since beta, problem with Protoss in sc2 is it has too many spellcasters. It's so easy to mess up and lose the game if casters aren't played right. If Protoss is changed in such a way to rely slightly less on cast abilities, then it may be all we need for Protoss.
The MMR boundaries are adjusted automatically IIRC. That's why they always freak out at the start of the season - not enough players playing, so they go out of wack for a week. They eventually even out, but never the same as the season before.
The fuck does this have to do with anything? There are no EVENTS happening right now. SC2 hasn't been a major player in day to day casual viewership in years. Tournaments drive viewers in this game. It's been that way for 10 years. December-January leading up to Katowice has been the SLOW period of SC2 ever since Blizzcon ending in November was a thing.
I'm not disagreeing with your overall point, but I HATE when people plug random out of context twitch numbers as if they matter for anything. The most asinine metric possible.
On December 26 2021 04:39 Athenau wrote: If anything, this thread has convinced me that the main problem isn't protoss, it's zerg. Looks like the future of SC2 is going to be the top zergs trading wins amongst each other until the game dies, exciting!
Pretty much this, but any nerfs to Zerg would have to be specifically targeted for the match up, it can't hobble TvZ which is still as far as I know pretty balanced.
I think a poster somewhere a few pages back had the idea to make Storm do bonus damage against burrowed units to let Protoss ground armies push out/break out of Lurker contains. Honestly I think it's a really good idea, it's not elegant but I think it would be effective.
The real solution would be to buff Gateway units to allow them to pressure Zerg more in the early/mid game, but if Blizzard won't even put in band-aid fixes like the + burrowed damage, there is no way in hell they would ever do an in depth change like that.
Why will Blizzard not hear our cries? How does Heroes of the Storm get routine balance patches and hero reworks while having no competitive scene to speak of while Starcraft 2 and Brood War still have thriving (relatively) pro scenes and active player bases?
I don't think Blizzard will actively patch sc2 anymore. Their last patch was in April and it was just cosmetics.
Which is utter horse shit, like I said in the post, how the hell are you going to not even apply very small balance tweaks (imo all SC2 even needs) to a game with a still living competitive scene when HOTS has their dev team that..
Sits down and takes data...
Watches their extremely limited pro scene along with compiling ladder statistics...
Not only makes the changes, but also usually has 1 - 2 paragraphs on why they made the changes in the first place, usually all of them that I read are in the interest of buffing older heroes that have suffered due to power creep.
Seriously it just makes no sense, why couldn't the same team that does HOTS do SC2 as well? The complete lack of blue posts even regarding SC2 is an insult to the community.
I understand how you feel. I'm sort of in the same shoes as well. Blizzard killed sc2 for me when they silently increased 1vs1 masters 3 mmr in EU from ~4400 to 4650 which used to be masters 2 as far as I remember. That was a year ago. I've been experiencing random disconnects since last December, and Blizzard support always brushes it off by saying that it's my ISP when my ISP actually denies that. In fact, I don't experience any disconnect from any other service at time of sc2 disconnect. It's never happened in other games so far unless the whole internet service was gone.
Having said that, I'm not a financial expert by any means but judging by these:
Twitch viewers (SC + SC2 = 3k viewers during holiday season...) + Show Spoiler +
I'm not really optimistic that Blizzard will suddenly decide to focus on StarCraft since it's not where viewership is. If we compare like for like (Blizzard only games), it makes more sense if they focus more on WoW which they probably do...
On topic: I don't feel any significant change/issues as a protoss at lower levels than pros. However, watching ShoWTimE's stream today, disruptor shots really feel gimmicky. Terrans have learnt how to snipe disruptors just in time in some situations... In my opinion, as someone who has played StarCraft since 2006 and SC2 since beta, problem with Protoss in sc2 is it has too many spellcasters. It's so easy to mess up and lose the game if casters aren't played right. If Protoss is changed in such a way to rely slightly less on cast abilities, then it may be all we need for Protoss.
Not sure why you're lumping in SC with SC2. SC is getting 300k viewers on really good days and avg of 30k~80k on afreeca
The fuck does this have to do with anything? There are no EVENTS happening right now. SC2 hasn't been a major player in day to day casual viewership in years. Tournaments drive viewers in this game. It's been that way for 10 years. December-January leading up to Katowice has been the SLOW period of SC2 ever since Blizzcon ending in November was a thing.
I'm not disagreeing with your overall point, but I HATE when people plug random out of context twitch numbers as if they matter for anything. The most asinine metric possible.
Of course Twitch viewership matters. How else do streamers earn a living apart from tournaments or when there is no active one yet? Otherwise, why stream..? For fun and for pros to expose their strategies publicly? In addition, Twitch views = game is exposed to wider audience to attract new players. I said at no point that this is typical sc2, but I'd lie if I say that I didn't expect MORE activity during a holiday period when people get free time to play. Remember, the game is not just played by 14-16 years old kids.
Let's not make up excuses please. A few years ago, sc2 tournament had 40k viewers online and I heard no complaints back then.
Edit: Here is an example: Forgg relies on Twitch views and subscribers: + Show Spoiler +
The Holiday season is the slow season for SC2. Has been forever. The fact you're choosing to highlight IT as some kind of ridiculous metric just weakens the hell out of your argument to anyone that actually watches Starcraft 2.
The fuck does this have to do with anything? There are no EVENTS happening right now. SC2 hasn't been a major player in day to day casual viewership in years. Tournaments drive viewers in this game. It's been that way for 10 years. December-January leading up to Katowice has been the SLOW period of SC2 ever since Blizzcon ending in November was a thing.
I'm not disagreeing with your overall point, but I HATE when people plug random out of context twitch numbers as if they matter for anything. The most asinine metric possible.
Of course Twitch viewership matters. How else do streamers earn a living apart from tournaments or when there is no active one yet? Otherwise, why stream..? For fun and for pros to expose their strategies publicly? In addition, Twitch views = game is exposed to wider audience to attract new players. I said at no point that this is typical sc2, but I'd lie if I say that I didn't expect MORE activity during a holiday period when people get free time to play. Remember, the game is not just played by 14-16 years old kids.
Let's not make up excuses please. A few years ago, sc2 tournament had 40k viewers online and I heard no complaints back then.
Edit: Here is an example: Forgg relies on Twitch views and subscribers: + Show Spoiler +
Blizzard stopped patching SC2 because simply at some point you have to end supporting your product. The issue is that Blizzard left us with one of the worst viewership states possible.
To be fair Blizzard poured pretty big money into the game even while not touching it so you can't just say "it just requires a small team" when Blizzard is literally keeping the game relevant by spending their money on the tournaments.
The main problem in SC2 remains the same that his brother,... you haven t to travel for gather ressources, in other words you can gather ressources near your bases, that s why strategy doesn t evolved so much since SC:WoL
On December 31 2021 16:48 Vindicare605 wrote: The Holiday season is the slow season for SC2. Has been forever. The fact you're choosing to highlight IT as some kind of ridiculous metric just weakens the hell out of your argument to anyone that actually watches Starcraft 2.
I don't think you're entirely correct to support the idea that sc2 is just what it is December-January for X amount of years. That's not healthy for the scene. As a spectator you may not care, but these people (pros) pay bills, rents, etc. Only so few earn enough from a tournament to pay costs for >1 month imho. In other words, won amount of money entirely depends on how far they go into the tournament as I'm sure we all know. In the meantime, they need another income and what is better than stream? So I'll reiterate with my thoughts. Twitch viewership: - additional money into the scene to keep pros motivated - "free" ad for a game to be picked up by someone casually browsing Twitch - keeps viewers engaged in discussions / game itself
Let's just agree to disagree. This discussion is already offtopic...
The fuck does this have to do with anything? There are no EVENTS happening right now. SC2 hasn't been a major player in day to day casual viewership in years. Tournaments drive viewers in this game. It's been that way for 10 years. December-January leading up to Katowice has been the SLOW period of SC2 ever since Blizzcon ending in November was a thing.
I'm not disagreeing with your overall point, but I HATE when people plug random out of context twitch numbers as if they matter for anything. The most asinine metric possible.
Of course Twitch viewership matters. How else do streamers earn a living apart from tournaments or when there is no active one yet? Otherwise, why stream..? For fun and for pros to expose their strategies publicly? In addition, Twitch views = game is exposed to wider audience to attract new players. I said at no point that this is typical sc2, but I'd lie if I say that I didn't expect MORE activity during a holiday period when people get free time to play. Remember, the game is not just played by 14-16 years old kids.
Let's not make up excuses please. A few years ago, sc2 tournament had 40k viewers online and I heard no complaints back then.
Edit: Here is an example: Forgg relies on Twitch views and subscribers: + Show Spoiler +
40k viewers a few years ago? is that aggregate? the first sc2 TSL had ~55k tops
after the bl-infestor disaster in Wings, viewership never recovered
The fuck does this have to do with anything? There are no EVENTS happening right now. SC2 hasn't been a major player in day to day casual viewership in years. Tournaments drive viewers in this game. It's been that way for 10 years. December-January leading up to Katowice has been the SLOW period of SC2 ever since Blizzcon ending in November was a thing.
I'm not disagreeing with your overall point, but I HATE when people plug random out of context twitch numbers as if they matter for anything. The most asinine metric possible.
Of course Twitch viewership matters. How else do streamers earn a living apart from tournaments or when there is no active one yet? Otherwise, why stream..? For fun and for pros to expose their strategies publicly? In addition, Twitch views = game is exposed to wider audience to attract new players. I said at no point that this is typical sc2, but I'd lie if I say that I didn't expect MORE activity during a holiday period when people get free time to play. Remember, the game is not just played by 14-16 years old kids.
Let's not make up excuses please. A few years ago, sc2 tournament had 40k viewers online and I heard no complaints back then.
Edit: Here is an example: Forgg relies on Twitch views and subscribers: + Show Spoiler +
40k viewers a few years ago? is that aggregate? the first sc2 TSL had ~55k tops
after the bl-infestor disaster in Wings, viewership never recovered
Viewership never reached the best numbers of WoL again, yes, but it's far from true that it never recovered. It went better after the game became free to play in LoTV and it kept growing at least until BlizzCon 2018, which had a massive peak.
Although performances and numbers of protoss have been weak, I don't think there's no chance. I honestly feel like PartinG leaving for military service hurts, but Trap is the man. I think Trap has a chance of winning a GSL in the current state of the game.
On January 03 2022 01:57 reps)squishy wrote: Although performances and numbers of protoss have been weak, I don't think there's no chance. I honestly feel like PartinG leaving for military service hurts, but Trap is the man. I think Trap has a chance of winning a GSL in the current state of the game.
Trap won't win a GSL title unless he gets like 10 tries. The only chance is that he will be there against even worse choker. There's a reason why Trap has so many of the top tier titles. FFS how long it took to Cure to win a GSL title and for the last 4 years every GSL started with Cure demolishing everybody in the lesser tournaments and everybody calling Cure to be a serious contender. And then what? Then nothing. (also known as the online Cure)
On January 03 2022 01:57 reps)squishy wrote: Although performances and numbers of protoss have been weak, I don't think there's no chance. I honestly feel like PartinG leaving for military service hurts, but Trap is the man. I think Trap has a chance of winning a GSL in the current state of the game.
Trap won't win a GSL title unless he gets like 10 tries. The only chance is that he will be there against even worse choker. There's a reason why Trap has so many of the top tier titles. FFS how long it took to Cure to win a GSL title and for the last 4 years every GSL started with Cure demolishing everybody in the lesser tournaments and everybody calling Cure to be a serious contender. And then what? Then nothing. (also known as the online Cure)
Edit> TBH it may have been longer than 4 years.
Worse players than Trap have won GSLs, better players than him arguably have not, soO for example.
As underwhelming as Trap’s efforts in finals have been, he’s made three in a relatively short span of time, and won or finished high in a ton of Premier tournaments.
Cure’s a very good player and pulled it off, he doesn’t have close to Trap’s general body of accomplishments and if Trap is flakey Cure is many times so. Even with Covid reshaping the scene the fabled power of online Cure hasn’t measured up to what Trap’s pulled off. Indeed, a GSL silver and gold are big prestige placings that Cure pulled off offline.
If there’s a huge obstacle in Trap’s path, I just don’t see him beating Dark or Rogue in a GSL finals, he dodged that last season, beat Maru only to perform badly against Cure, a real missed opportunity. One of his worst showings in quite some time.
Even if we have a mere 3 GSLs left, Trap has been a lock for Ro8 forever, if he can show up all he needs is a good bracket for a mere 2 matches following and could quite conceivably take one home.
If his level drops, or he gets tough brackets each time then, maybe he doesn’t get to add the GSL cap to his collection.
Zest will be gone, Classic and herO while improving aren’t quite on that level again yet. Maru is Maru but they trade about 50/50 and Rogue and Dark are there. Cure has joined the champions’s club, but isn’t exactly Mr Consistent, and I’d favour Trap’s best PvT form against Cure’s best Tvp
Easier said than done but if you can negotiate the group phase safely, which Trap routinely does, there aren’t a massive amount of real threats left these days.
On January 03 2022 01:57 reps)squishy wrote: Although performances and numbers of protoss have been weak, I don't think there's no chance. I honestly feel like PartinG leaving for military service hurts, but Trap is the man. I think Trap has a chance of winning a GSL in the current state of the game.
Trap won't win a GSL title unless he gets like 10 tries. The only chance is that he will be there against even worse choker. There's a reason why Trap has so many of the top tier titles. FFS how long it took to Cure to win a GSL title and for the last 4 years every GSL started with Cure demolishing everybody in the lesser tournaments and everybody calling Cure to be a serious contender. And then what? Then nothing. (also known as the online Cure)
Edit> TBH it may have been longer than 4 years.
Worse players than Trap have won GSLs, better players than him arguably have not, soO for example.
As underwhelming as Trap’s efforts in finals have been, he’s made three in a relatively short span of time, and won or finished high in a ton of Premier tournaments.
Cure’s a very good player and pulled it off, he doesn’t have close to Trap’s general body of accomplishments and if Trap is flakey Cure is many times so. Even with Covid reshaping the scene the fabled power of online Cure hasn’t measured up to what Trap’s pulled off. Indeed, a GSL silver and gold are big prestige placings that Cure pulled off offline.
If there’s a huge obstacle in Trap’s path, I just don’t see him beating Dark or Rogue in a GSL finals, he dodged that last season, beat Maru only to perform badly against Cure, a real missed opportunity. One of his worst showings in quite some time.
Even if we have a mere 3 GSLs left, Trap has been a lock for Ro8 forever, if he can show up all he needs is a good bracket for a mere 2 matches following and could quite conceivably take one home.
If his level drops, or he gets tough brackets each time then, maybe he doesn’t get to add the GSL cap to his collection.
Zest will be gone, Classic and herO while improving aren’t quite on that level again yet. Maru is Maru but they trade about 50/50 and Rogue and Dark are there. Cure has joined the champions’s club, but isn’t exactly Mr Consistent, and I’d favour Trap’s best PvT form against Cure’s best Tvp
Easier said than done but if you can negotiate the group phase safely, which Trap routinely does, there aren’t a massive amount of real threats left these days.
Trap doesn't choke, Trap plays Protoss, and like most other Protoss players when faced with the top of the food chain of the two other races lose in finals. Trap has some of the most insane comebacks he is stonecold. Just s omething people need to start to understand, if a top tier Zerg or Terran knows whats coming you in big trouble as protoss and at the highest tier of SC2 people know how to read Protoss and they make Protosses look silly. Because Protoss is weakest race by far
I'm not entirely disagreeing with what you're saying, but this is just plain wrong. Don't get me wrong nothing but respect for Trap he's top tier no doubt, but I've seen his level of competitive form fluctuate alot over the years so to say he doesn't choke is a total fallacy.
I'm not entirely disagreeing with what you're saying, but this is just plain wrong. Don't get me wrong nothing but respect for Trap he's top tier no doubt, but I've seen his level of competitive form fluctuate alot over the years so to say he doesn't choke is a total fallacy.
He has had a fair few chokes, equally he’s had his fair share of clutching series out too.
He’s not a relentless stone cold killer like Rogue when he reaches the playoffs of a tournament, or peak Serral.
But few are up at that bar.
I’d say Trap’s mental toughness isn’t notably below or above the average decent pro gamer’s, and he’s just better at the game than almost everyone in the scene, so it’s sufficient for him to keep Protoss at least winning some tournaments regularly.
I realise for regulars in this thread I must be sounding like a broken record on this particular point by now :p
I'm not entirely disagreeing with what you're saying, but this is just plain wrong. Don't get me wrong nothing but respect for Trap he's top tier no doubt, but I've seen his level of competitive form fluctuate alot over the years so to say he doesn't choke is a total fallacy.
He has had a fair few chokes, equally he’s had his fair share of clutching series out too.
He’s not a relentless stone cold killer like Rogue when he reaches the playoffs of a tournament, or peak Serral.
But few are up at that bar.
I’d say Trap’s mental toughness isn’t notably below or above the average decent pro gamer’s, and he’s just better at the game than almost everyone in the scene, so it’s sufficient for him to keep Protoss at least winning some tournaments regularly.
I realise for regulars in this thread I must be sounding like a broken record on this particular point by now :p
I don't even blame Trap at all, he's been playing for a long time, dips in form/strength happens to everyone, even Serral and Maru.
I'm not entirely disagreeing with what you're saying, but this is just plain wrong. Don't get me wrong nothing but respect for Trap he's top tier no doubt, but I've seen his level of competitive form fluctuate alot over the years so to say he doesn't choke is a total fallacy.
He has had a fair few chokes, equally he’s had his fair share of clutching series out too.
He’s not a relentless stone cold killer like Rogue when he reaches the playoffs of a tournament, or peak Serral.
But few are up at that bar.
I’d say Trap’s mental toughness isn’t notably below or above the average decent pro gamer’s, and he’s just better at the game than almost everyone in the scene, so it’s sufficient for him to keep Protoss at least winning some tournaments regularly.
I realise for regulars in this thread I must be sounding like a broken record on this particular point by now :p
I don't even blame Trap at all, he's been playing for a long time, dips in form/strength happens to everyone, even Serral and Maru.
Yeah, if you play the SC2 games long enough professionally, you will have disappointment result in some way. We all want Trap to win a GSL, or get a deep run into Blizzon/IEM/WESG type tournament, but that has not happened yet. Thats quite sad for Trap and his fans, and surely affect his overall legacy as an all-time great. That still not to say Trap is not a top level player but hes not catching the other top players career wise, and time is running out for him
Since Zest is supposedly going to Katowice, I am hopeful because he seems more capable than Trap to win the event. He made two Katowice finals in a row, so it should be interesting
On January 28 2022 23:57 Waradmiral wrote: lets see zest against serral then we talk.
Well in Katowice 2020 he crushed Serral to go to the finals before losing to Rogue ran out of builds, might happen again. Although truth be told the game had a new patch and was not as figured out as ZvP currently is but who knows
If zest learns to use his full potential, like not losing 8 stalkers to widow mine because of mismicro that made a game that was more than over exciting for a few minutes he should get unstoppable but he still seems to be not consistent enough. But his peaks are very nice to see, even as a terran player.
On January 28 2022 23:57 Waradmiral wrote: lets see zest against serral then we talk.
If he outplays Serral, then he'll win. Zest doesn't deserve to win against Serral just because he's playing Protoss and Serral plays Zerg.
Pure ass kicking by Parting, fantastic use of force fields that you just don't see too often anymore.
Now with Zest taking down Dark and taking home the gold, I think we could be on the cusp of seeing a PvZ powershift slightly back into Protoss favor.
Protoss seem to be getting cleaner at holding Queen walks, Blink Stalkers are also shockingly making their way back into the PvZ meta and they haven't been meta in a long time.
Still think Lurkers give Zerg the edge in the late late game when all their upgrades hit though.
Pure ass kicking by Parting, fantastic use of force fields that you just don't see too often anymore.
Now with Zest taking down Dark and taking home the gold, I think we could be on the cusp of seeing a PvZ powershift slightly back into Protoss favor.
Protoss seem to be getting cleaner at holding Queen walks, Blink Stalkers are also shockingly making their way back into the PvZ meta and they haven't been meta in a long time.
Still think Lurkers give Zerg the edge in the late late game when all their upgrades hit though.
I'd feel a little more optimistic about that if both the protoss players you mentioned weren't set to retire in the coming months
Pure ass kicking by Parting, fantastic use of force fields that you just don't see too often anymore.
Now with Zest taking down Dark and taking home the gold, I think we could be on the cusp of seeing a PvZ powershift slightly back into Protoss favor.
Protoss seem to be getting cleaner at holding Queen walks, Blink Stalkers are also shockingly making their way back into the PvZ meta and they haven't been meta in a long time.
Still think Lurkers give Zerg the edge in the late late game when all their upgrades hit though.
I'd feel a little more optimistic about that if both the protoss players you mentioned weren't set to retire in the coming months
I see what you're saying, but the same could easily be said about Terran and even Zerg to a certain extent. Solar. Rogue, Maru, Dark, they won't be able to stave off military service forever. I mean hell, if Maru weren't playing Terran wins at the top level would be pretty low I think (someone correct me on this if I'm wrong)
At that point honestly I think it's going to be the EU scene that dominates with Serral, MaxPax, Reynor, and Clem.
I am too pessimistic... and even though it was very nice to see Zest win the ST, that tourney is not the highest focus for most players, since Katowice is coming up. I mean, Maru, for example, was NOT playing his highest level.... I would actually be in chock if a toss wins.
We'll see what happens. If toss becomes the new 1st place race in the premier tourneys i will write a new post talking about how hard it is to understand this game even though there are no patches, and also label myself as a whiny pessimistic person =)
Pure ass kicking by Parting, fantastic use of force fields that you just don't see too often anymore.
Now with Zest taking down Dark and taking home the gold, I think we could be on the cusp of seeing a PvZ powershift slightly back into Protoss favor.
Protoss seem to be getting cleaner at holding Queen walks, Blink Stalkers are also shockingly making their way back into the PvZ meta and they haven't been meta in a long time.
Still think Lurkers give Zerg the edge in the late late game when all their upgrades hit though.
I'd feel a little more optimistic about that if both the protoss players you mentioned weren't set to retire in the coming months
I see what you're saying, but the same could easily be said about Terran and even Zerg to a certain extent. Solar. Rogue, Maru, Dark, they won't be able to stave off military service forever. I mean hell, if Maru weren't playing Terran wins at the top level would be pretty low I think (someone correct me on this if I'm wrong)
At that point honestly I think it's going to be the EU scene that dominates with Serral, MaxPax, Reynor, and Clem.
Yes, Maxpax is a promising championship contender, but Maxpax also wants to preserve his anonymity and just dropped out of an offline tournament to do so. As more premier tournaments return to an offline setting, Maxpax will have fewer and fewer opportunities to be a real championship contender if he continues to choose privacy over playing offline (which, if that's what he wants, more power to him!). And while EU might have a lot of mid to low level protoss pros, the list of protosses who could win or are close to that level is incredibly short.
I just realized that the Liberator is what Protoss has been begging for since WoL- an early game harass/pressure unit that doesn't then become completely useless.
A few months ago, I was going to make a quick write up about how every single unit in the Protoss roster is one-dimensional and lacking in strategic or tactical flexibility. Then the phoenix and void ray builds rose from the ashes. I'm not sure they've saved Protoss and they've lost their luster a bit because queens. Maybe we've met a happy medium.
On January 29 2022 04:33 Jerubaal wrote: I just realized that the Liberator is what Protoss has been begging for since WoL- an early game harass/pressure unit that doesn't then become completely useless.
Oracle? Phoenix? DT? okay Phoenix is arguable if it's still useful later - only in specific situations
I think Zest has a very low chance against Serral. Serral is just an unstoppable protoss killer, and he won't bother with all the timings against Zest that Dark tried.
However, Serral can totally get knocked out of the tournament by Maru or any strong zerg, so he's definitely not a shoe-in to win this.
For everyone else, I think its really hard to give zest anything out side of a 35 -- 65 percent chance of winning a match against anyone not Serral. You can never be too confident in him but you definitely cannot count him out.
On January 29 2022 06:08 angry_maia wrote: I think Zest has a very low chance against Serral. Serral is just an unstoppable protoss killer, and he won't bother with all the timings against Zest that Dark tried.
However, Serral can totally get knocked out of the tournament by Maru or any strong zerg, so he's definitely not a shoe-in to win this.
For everyone else, I think its really hard to give zest anything out side of a 35 -- 65 percent chance of winning a match against anyone not Serral. You can never be too confident in him but you definitely cannot count him out.
I feel like alot of people underestimate the prowess of bonjwa level players in their prime.
Flash, Jaedong, Bisu, Maru, these are all players that have been absurdly dominant at certain points, especially so in their best match ups.
Flashes TvZ and TvP are both at 72%, both of the match ups aren't broken, Flash is broken.
On January 29 2022 04:33 Jerubaal wrote: I just realized that the Liberator is what Protoss has been begging for since WoL- an early game harass/pressure unit that doesn't then become completely useless.
Oracle? Phoenix? DT? okay Phoenix is arguable if it's still useful later - only in specific situations
I mean, it is kind of funny how, as you point out, phoenix loses its utility later in the game compared to corrupto. The viking is so good that it stops protoss from making colossus entirely. We'd see more of it if Protoss kept making colossus after the initial few.
I don't know if you can really classify DT as early game harass. It's an extremely cheesy all-in, at best. Oracles are paperweights. They have the minor, niche use of keeping Revelation on Corruptor/Viper armies.
DT rushes should not be all-ins, according to pros. Oracles are very strong and Creator even said they are the only good thing about Protoss when he was asked what's good about Protoss.
On January 29 2022 04:33 Jerubaal wrote: I just realized that the Liberator is what Protoss has been begging for since WoL- an early game harass/pressure unit that doesn't then become completely useless.
Oracle? Phoenix? DT? okay Phoenix is arguable if it's still useful later - only in specific situations
I mean, it is kind of funny how, as you point out, phoenix loses its utility later in the game compared to corrupto. The viking is so good that it stops protoss from making colossus entirely. We'd see more of it if Protoss kept making colossus after the initial few.
I don't know if you can really classify DT as early game harass. It's an extremely cheesy all-in, at best. Oracles are paperweights. They have the minor, niche use of keeping Revelation on Corruptor/Viper armies.
Yeah DT openings are not necessarily allins, especially not with the follow-up Archon harass. I wouldn't call Revelation a "minor, niche" use as it's extremely good and important in the later game
The oracle is pretty nifty, I just wish it had more health, or maybe the cloack ability from HotS. The problem is that it comes too early and oracle rushes were too strong, so they can't make it have much health and they had to create a band-aid thing making the ability cost 25 energy during activation.
As for the Dts I'd say they are either a cheese/all in or a lategame harass option. If they don't deal damage the enemy just goes and kills you, even with archons. Maybe saying all in is wrong since you don't necessarily need to kill the opponent, but you cannot just kill 3 workers and call it succesful either. I think blink definitely helped them not be hard countered lategame (and maybe too strong in certain situations).
If I could change protoss some way is to make stargate more useful vs terran in non-cheese situations. Terran just straight up counters stargate tech if they decide to atack. Phoenix play relies on keeping the terran in it's base and cutting off reinforcements.
In general I just don't like Protoss over reliance on AoE and key units and feel that's why they suffer in pro play. Makes it the most punishing race.
You played great but you lost your Aoe? be prepred to just die in the next wave of atack, nothing you can do about it. I feel Terran and Zerg can afford more mistakes in general, Though obviously when you "complete the puzzle" as tasstosis say, Protoss is indeed very strong
On January 30 2022 04:26 [Phantom] wrote: The oracle is pretty nifty, I just wish it had more health, or maybe the cloack ability from HotS. The problem is that it comes too early and oracle rushes were too strong, so they can't make it have much health and they had to create a band-aid thing making the ability cost 25 energy during activation.
As for the Dts I'd say they are either a cheese/all in or a lategame harass option. If they don't deal damage the enemy just goes and kills you, even with archons. Maybe saying all in is wrong since you don't necessarily need to kill the opponent, but you cannot just kill 3 workers and call it succesful either. I think blink definitely helped them not be hard countered lategame (and maybe too strong in certain situations).
If I could change protoss some way is to make stargate more useful vs terran in non-cheese situations. Terran just straight up counters stargate tech if they decide to atack. Phoenix play relies on keeping the terran in it's base and cutting off reinforcements.
In general I just don't like Protoss over reliance on AoE and key units and feel that's why they suffer in pro play. Makes it the most punishing race.
You played great but you lost your Aoe? be prepred to just die in the next wave of atack, nothing you can do about it. I feel Terran and Zerg can afford more mistakes in general, Though obviously when you "complete the puzzle" as tasstosis say, Protoss is indeed very strong
I think it's safe to say, at this point, that Protoss is the easiest race to play below the top level, but definitely the hardest at the top.
At the lower levels Protoss just have so much flexibility and build variety, as well as powerful AoE that without god tier micro you just get melted.
Disruptors and Templar are insanely strong, until you're playing at 350 + apm and can reliably micro out of them, then they suck. Pro players are also experts at scouting and reads, so the odds of catching someone like Serral off guard with a timing is slim to none. He scouts, he counts gas, gateways, he instantly knows what he's doing.
Compare that to me, Mr. lowbie diamond league. I go in and scout, make the wrong read, get DESTROYED.
On January 30 2022 04:26 [Phantom] wrote: The oracle is pretty nifty, I just wish it had more health, or maybe the cloack ability from HotS. The problem is that it comes too early and oracle rushes were too strong, so they can't make it have much health and they had to create a band-aid thing making the ability cost 25 energy during activation.
As for the Dts I'd say they are either a cheese/all in or a lategame harass option. If they don't deal damage the enemy just goes and kills you, even with archons. Maybe saying all in is wrong since you don't necessarily need to kill the opponent, but you cannot just kill 3 workers and call it succesful either. I think blink definitely helped them not be hard countered lategame (and maybe too strong in certain situations).
If I could change protoss some way is to make stargate more useful vs terran in non-cheese situations. Terran just straight up counters stargate tech if they decide to atack. Phoenix play relies on keeping the terran in it's base and cutting off reinforcements.
In general I just don't like Protoss over reliance on AoE and key units and feel that's why they suffer in pro play. Makes it the most punishing race.
You played great but you lost your Aoe? be prepred to just die in the next wave of atack, nothing you can do about it. I feel Terran and Zerg can afford more mistakes in general, Though obviously when you "complete the puzzle" as tasstosis say, Protoss is indeed very strong
I think it's safe to say, at this point, that Protoss is the easiest race to play below the top level, but definitely the hardest at the top.
At the lower levels Protoss just have so much flexibility and build variety, as well as powerful AoE that without god tier micro you just get melted.
Disruptors and Templar are insanely strong, until you're playing at 350 + apm and can reliably micro out of them, then they suck. Pro players are also experts at scouting and reads, so the odds of catching someone like Serral off guard with a timing is slim to none. He scouts, he counts gas, gateways, he instantly knows what he's doing.
Compare that to me, Mr. lowbie diamond league. I go in and scout, make the wrong read, get DESTROYED.
With stargate styles i'd agree, i dont think the ground styles are that much easier (if talking pvz).
On January 30 2022 04:26 [Phantom] wrote: The oracle is pretty nifty, I just wish it had more health, or maybe the cloack ability from HotS. The problem is that it comes too early and oracle rushes were too strong, so they can't make it have much health and they had to create a band-aid thing making the ability cost 25 energy during activation.
As for the Dts I'd say they are either a cheese/all in or a lategame harass option. If they don't deal damage the enemy just goes and kills you, even with archons. Maybe saying all in is wrong since you don't necessarily need to kill the opponent, but you cannot just kill 3 workers and call it succesful either. I think blink definitely helped them not be hard countered lategame (and maybe too strong in certain situations).
If I could change protoss some way is to make stargate more useful vs terran in non-cheese situations. Terran just straight up counters stargate tech if they decide to atack. Phoenix play relies on keeping the terran in it's base and cutting off reinforcements.
In general I just don't like Protoss over reliance on AoE and key units and feel that's why they suffer in pro play. Makes it the most punishing race.
You played great but you lost your Aoe? be prepred to just die in the next wave of atack, nothing you can do about it. I feel Terran and Zerg can afford more mistakes in general, Though obviously when you "complete the puzzle" as tasstosis say, Protoss is indeed very strong
I think it's safe to say, at this point, that Protoss is the easiest race to play below the top level, but definitely the hardest at the top.
At the lower levels Protoss just have so much flexibility and build variety, as well as powerful AoE that without god tier micro you just get melted.
Disruptors and Templar are insanely strong, until you're playing at 350 + apm and can reliably micro out of them, then they suck. Pro players are also experts at scouting and reads, so the odds of catching someone like Serral off guard with a timing is slim to none. He scouts, he counts gas, gateways, he instantly knows what he's doing.
Compare that to me, Mr. lowbie diamond league. I go in and scout, make the wrong read, get DESTROYED.
With stargate styles i'd agree, i dont think the ground styles are that much easier (if talking pvz).
No they really aren't much easier. Here's to hoping that Microsoft puts the AoE team on SC2 and we can get a few minor little balance tweaks.
I seriously think SC2 balance is like, 95% perfect. That 5% to me goes for things like what we are talking about, Zerg being a bit OP vs. Protoss.
Funnily enough, both of the last 2 real balance patches included nerfs to Zerg and buffs to Protoss :O Been so long since we've had a patch I didn't even realize.
On January 30 2022 04:26 [Phantom] wrote: The oracle is pretty nifty, I just wish it had more health, or maybe the cloack ability from HotS. The problem is that it comes too early and oracle rushes were too strong, so they can't make it have much health and they had to create a band-aid thing making the ability cost 25 energy during activation.
As for the Dts I'd say they are either a cheese/all in or a lategame harass option. If they don't deal damage the enemy just goes and kills you, even with archons. Maybe saying all in is wrong since you don't necessarily need to kill the opponent, but you cannot just kill 3 workers and call it succesful either. I think blink definitely helped them not be hard countered lategame (and maybe too strong in certain situations).
If I could change protoss some way is to make stargate more useful vs terran in non-cheese situations. Terran just straight up counters stargate tech if they decide to atack. Phoenix play relies on keeping the terran in it's base and cutting off reinforcements.
In general I just don't like Protoss over reliance on AoE and key units and feel that's why they suffer in pro play. Makes it the most punishing race.
You played great but you lost your Aoe? be prepred to just die in the next wave of atack, nothing you can do about it. I feel Terran and Zerg can afford more mistakes in general, Though obviously when you "complete the puzzle" as tasstosis say, Protoss is indeed very strong
I think it's safe to say, at this point, that Protoss is the easiest race to play below the top level, but definitely the hardest at the top.
At the lower levels Protoss just have so much flexibility and build variety, as well as powerful AoE that without god tier micro you just get melted.
Disruptors and Templar are insanely strong, until you're playing at 350 + apm and can reliably micro out of them, then they suck. Pro players are also experts at scouting and reads, so the odds of catching someone like Serral off guard with a timing is slim to none. He scouts, he counts gas, gateways, he instantly knows what he's doing.
Compare that to me, Mr. lowbie diamond league. I go in and scout, make the wrong read, get DESTROYED.
Eh, IMO that's not exactly correct. Protoss is the best race for a BO1 style competition. That's why Protoss dominates the ladder, it's because the Big Book of Protoss Bullshit. as a random I would say the easiest race at diamond-ish level is zerg. The issue is if you play turtle and let Protoss get their air army, otherwise zerg rox. (my Protoss is like D2, Zerg P1/D3 and I don't wanna know how bad the Terran is xD)
Exactly the reason you described - you go in, you see, you can't tell. Because you don't have all the builds in your head and at the same time by being worse your opponents throw off every timing you may know from watching GM players
Edit> TBF as I mained Protoss for years I don't have issues with the reading. And honestly, I think that Zerg is just Protoss on steroids in the lower leagues. You have observers around your bases(tumors) and if they start clearing them - you get a warning! You have flying spotter pylons. You can mass produce all your units and workers! You have shitload of hard to counter AoEs where you don't have to press too many buttons. FFS when I play a TvZ against bio i just make ling/bane and amove it and forget. And it's a race if I run out of larvae before the enemy runs out of tanks. You can't do this with Protoss. And instaburrow lurkers against observer based land armies xD That's like the joke of the year. Hey, so I just rushed hive, build 6 corruptors and 3 overseers and now you just die to this invisible spiny tickly thingy. Protoss players are like - oooh, lookie, the lurkers disappeared thus they have to be dead!
On January 30 2022 07:02 Beelzebub1 wrote: I think it's safe to say, at this point, that Protoss is the easiest race to play below the top level
Is it? I've seen low level players, and they absolutely cannot handle Planetary Fortresses. Completely lose their minds to them. Every time I've checked, the lower leagues have been swamped with Terrans.
On January 30 2022 07:02 Beelzebub1 wrote: I think it's safe to say, at this point, that Protoss is the easiest race to play below the top level
Is it? I've seen low level players, and they absolutely cannot handle Planetary Fortresses. Completely lose their minds to them. Every time I've checked, the lower leagues have been swamped with Terrans.
I mean, "low level" is a pretty broad term in Starcraft 2. But yes, I would say that Protoss below the top level is at least, the least mechanically demanding of the races.
But it completely flips at the top level, Protoss have to macro and micro flawlessly to beat a similar skilled Zerg.
On January 30 2022 01:27 honorablemacroterran wrote: DT rushes should not be all-ins, according to pros. Oracles are very strong and Creator even said they are the only good thing about Protoss when he was asked what's good about Protoss.
Oracles are strong in their position, but not in the way I was describing.
On January 30 2022 07:02 Beelzebub1 wrote: I think it's safe to say, at this point, that Protoss is the easiest race to play below the top level
Is it? I've seen low level players, and they absolutely cannot handle Planetary Fortresses. Completely lose their minds to them. Every time I've checked, the lower leagues have been swamped with Terrans.
I mean, "low level" is a pretty broad term in Starcraft 2. But yes, I would say that Protoss below the top level is at least, the least mechanically demanding of the races.
But it completely flips at the top level, Protoss have to macro and micro flawlessly to beat a similar skilled Zerg.
The problem with this argument surfaces when you realize people think DNS and Serral are equally skilled
On January 30 2022 07:02 Beelzebub1 wrote: I think it's safe to say, at this point, that Protoss is the easiest race to play below the top level
Is it? I've seen low level players, and they absolutely cannot handle Planetary Fortresses. Completely lose their minds to them. Every time I've checked, the lower leagues have been swamped with Terrans.
I mean, "low level" is a pretty broad term in Starcraft 2. But yes, I would say that Protoss below the top level is at least, the least mechanically demanding of the races.
But it completely flips at the top level, Protoss have to macro and micro flawlessly to beat a similar skilled Zerg.
The problem with this argument surfaces when you realize people think DNS and Serral are equally skilled
On January 30 2022 07:02 Beelzebub1 wrote: I think it's safe to say, at this point, that Protoss is the easiest race to play below the top level
Is it? I've seen low level players, and they absolutely cannot handle Planetary Fortresses. Completely lose their minds to them. Every time I've checked, the lower leagues have been swamped with Terrans.
I mean, "low level" is a pretty broad term in Starcraft 2. But yes, I would say that Protoss below the top level is at least, the least mechanically demanding of the races.
But it completely flips at the top level, Protoss have to macro and micro flawlessly to beat a similar skilled Zerg.
Bellow the top level means also bellow masters. And I dare to say that the least mechanically demanding is mech. These generalisations are kinda pointless, especially because bellow mid masters you can play anything and it's generally about "who does less mistakes and gets less supply blocked".
On January 31 2022 09:43 Comedy wrote: i think it's fine to have protoss be this really easy to use race and execute few good strats with and easily get grandmaster.
but you can't have that keep working all the way up to the top cuz it would be ridiculously imbalanced.
it's really difficult to balance how easy protoss is to use and beat players with that are much better at multitask/micro/macro, at the top level,
even now it still happens. people like maxpax just use clever builds and make voidrays but have no real army control or micro, but get great results
First off, MaxPax definitely has good army control and micro, honestly I don't even see how that's debatable. No he's not as good as Serral but who is besides Maru?
Second, I do agree that Protoss is hard to balance. I think that in the lower levels, Protoss AoE is devastating when you lack the micro and APM to play against it, but at the top level it flips on it's own head and the reliance on AoE becomes a liability instead.
In a perfect world, I would nerf the Carrier and Void Ray, nerf Oracle damage, and give Adepts, Sentries and Stalkers a serious look over. Adepts are just trash, marketed as a core unit but fills the role that the Reaper does, ie obsolete after the first 5 minutes of the game. Stalkers scale horribly past the mid game and the Sentry just...well....is an old unit. Old units just suffer from power creep over time.
Look at HoTS, they have to keep giving Raynor raw stat and talent buffs every so often just because he's so old and vanilla that the new hero's just kind of innately outclass him.
On January 30 2022 07:02 Beelzebub1 wrote: I think it's safe to say, at this point, that Protoss is the easiest race to play below the top level
Is it? I've seen low level players, and they absolutely cannot handle Planetary Fortresses. Completely lose their minds to them. Every time I've checked, the lower leagues have been swamped with Terrans.
I mean, "low level" is a pretty broad term in Starcraft 2. But yes, I would say that Protoss below the top level is at least, the least mechanically demanding of the races.
But it completely flips at the top level, Protoss have to macro and micro flawlessly to beat a similar skilled Zerg.
The problem with this argument surfaces when you realize people think DNS and Serral are equally skilled
I would be shocked if I saw someone say that lol
I mean, they do say this. The flipside of this thread is the people saying that there are too many Protoss in GM and the early rounds of tournaments. If anybody makes a balance complaint based around skill levels in from Bronze to Masters, they get told to get better and rise above it. For some reason, though, the low GM players feel like they've crossed the threshold and now we do have to fix their problems. And I think that the additions that Protoss are asking for are for more micro/skill based strategies that wouldn't necessarily effect lower leagues.
On January 31 2022 12:36 BonitiilloO wrote: i have q honest question, when SC2 gonna received another balance patch?
There are strong hints that they will release a balance patch AFTER Katowice (it's too late now anyways even if they had finalized it), when exactly? I dunno. Latest "source" about it: https://www.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/s98utw/wardiii_confirms_that_we_will_have_balance_patch/ dunno why the clip does not exist anymore though Some other sources like French casters also spoke about it (that there should be a balance patch in the work) during different streams tl;dr: no official confirmation (nor denial ) but a patch should happen in 2022
On January 31 2022 12:36 BonitiilloO wrote: i have q honest question, when SC2 gonna received another balance patch?
There are strong hints that they will release a balance patch AFTER Katowice (it's too late now anyways even if they had finalized it), when exactly? I dunno. Latest "source" about it: https://www.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/s98utw/wardiii_confirms_that_we_will_have_balance_patch/ dunno why the clip does not exist anymore though Some other sources like French casters also spoke about it (that there should be a balance patch in the work) during different streams tl;dr: no official confirmation (nor denial ) but a patch should happen in 2022
Insanely stoked about this. SC2 has a small but strong scene, and if HoTS can get frequent balance patches AND hero redesigns, it honestly makes no sense that SC2 can't at least get small QoL balance patches.
In my opinion, SC2 does need a balance patch, badly, but not anything huge or sweeping. Balance honestly isn't that bad, the only match up that seems to need a bit of help is ZvP and it's already kind of balanced on a knifes edge. I mean, Zest did just beat Dark in a BO7, so even though ZvP does seem kind of Zerg favored at the moment, Protoss can still win in long series against Zerg.
I mean, Dark is pretty top tier, his vP is definitely not weak.
I'm hoping for very small nerfs on the Lurker (unambitious change), a reversal of Protoss upgrades and Warp Prism leash/cost, or for very small QoL buffs to maybe the Gateway units (ambitious change) because Gateway units seem to be suffering from a bit of power creep weakness. Adepts in particular just seem like a trash unit that either needs to move faster, hit harder, or be cheaper.
The game feels very close to perfectly balanced, ZvP has kind of always been the red headed step child match up that tends to swing in one races favor.
On January 31 2022 12:36 BonitiilloO wrote: i have q honest question, when SC2 gonna received another balance patch?
There are strong hints that they will release a balance patch AFTER Katowice (it's too late now anyways even if they had finalized it), when exactly? I dunno. Latest "source" about it: https://www.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/s98utw/wardiii_confirms_that_we_will_have_balance_patch/ dunno why the clip does not exist anymore though Some other sources like French casters also spoke about it (that there should be a balance patch in the work) during different streams tl;dr: no official confirmation (nor denial ) but a patch should happen in 2022
Insanely stoked about this. SC2 has a small but strong scene, and if HoTS can get frequent balance patches AND hero redesigns, it honestly makes no sense that SC2 can't at least get small QoL balance patches.
In my opinion, SC2 does need a balance patch, badly, but not anything huge or sweeping. Balance honestly isn't that bad, the only match up that seems to need a bit of help is ZvP and it's already kind of balanced on a knifes edge. I mean, Zest did just beat Dark in a BO7, so even though ZvP does seem kind of Zerg favored at the moment, Protoss can still win in long series against Zerg.
I mean, Dark is pretty top tier, his vP is definitely not weak.
I'm hoping for very small nerfs on the Lurker (unambitious change), a reversal of Protoss upgrades and Warp Prism leash/cost, or for very small QoL buffs to maybe the Gateway units (ambitious change) because Gateway units seem to be suffering from a bit of power creep weakness. Adepts in particular just seem like a trash unit that either needs to move faster, hit harder, or be cheaper.
The game feels very close to perfectly balanced, ZvP has kind of always been the red headed step child match up that tends to swing in one races favor.
Perhaps remove the gas requirements?
I'm more concerned what happens if the patch ends after 3 months in a dire state.
On January 31 2022 12:36 BonitiilloO wrote: i have q honest question, when SC2 gonna received another balance patch?
There are strong hints that they will release a balance patch AFTER Katowice (it's too late now anyways even if they had finalized it), when exactly? I dunno. Latest "source" about it: https://www.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/s98utw/wardiii_confirms_that_we_will_have_balance_patch/ dunno why the clip does not exist anymore though Some other sources like French casters also spoke about it (that there should be a balance patch in the work) during different streams tl;dr: no official confirmation (nor denial ) but a patch should happen in 2022
Insanely stoked about this. SC2 has a small but strong scene, and if HoTS can get frequent balance patches AND hero redesigns, it honestly makes no sense that SC2 can't at least get small QoL balance patches.
In my opinion, SC2 does need a balance patch, badly, but not anything huge or sweeping. Balance honestly isn't that bad, the only match up that seems to need a bit of help is ZvP and it's already kind of balanced on a knifes edge. I mean, Zest did just beat Dark in a BO7, so even though ZvP does seem kind of Zerg favored at the moment, Protoss can still win in long series against Zerg.
I mean, Dark is pretty top tier, his vP is definitely not weak.
I'm hoping for very small nerfs on the Lurker (unambitious change), a reversal of Protoss upgrades and Warp Prism leash/cost, or for very small QoL buffs to maybe the Gateway units (ambitious change) because Gateway units seem to be suffering from a bit of power creep weakness. Adepts in particular just seem like a trash unit that either needs to move faster, hit harder, or be cheaper.
The game feels very close to perfectly balanced, ZvP has kind of always been the red headed step child match up that tends to swing in one races favor.
Perhaps remove the gas requirements?
imo all that is needed is a reversal of Voidray cost or buildtime and Warpprism cost. Don't really think Lurkers are too strong tbh. Ghost/Tank and Immortal/Carrier seem to counter them just fine
On January 31 2022 12:36 BonitiilloO wrote: i have q honest question, when SC2 gonna received another balance patch?
There are strong hints that they will release a balance patch AFTER Katowice (it's too late now anyways even if they had finalized it), when exactly? I dunno. Latest "source" about it: https://www.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/s98utw/wardiii_confirms_that_we_will_have_balance_patch/ dunno why the clip does not exist anymore though Some other sources like French casters also spoke about it (that there should be a balance patch in the work) during different streams tl;dr: no official confirmation (nor denial ) but a patch should happen in 2022
Insanely stoked about this. SC2 has a small but strong scene, and if HoTS can get frequent balance patches AND hero redesigns, it honestly makes no sense that SC2 can't at least get small QoL balance patches.
In my opinion, SC2 does need a balance patch, badly, but not anything huge or sweeping. Balance honestly isn't that bad, the only match up that seems to need a bit of help is ZvP and it's already kind of balanced on a knifes edge. I mean, Zest did just beat Dark in a BO7, so even though ZvP does seem kind of Zerg favored at the moment, Protoss can still win in long series against Zerg.
I mean, Dark is pretty top tier, his vP is definitely not weak.
I'm hoping for very small nerfs on the Lurker (unambitious change), a reversal of Protoss upgrades and Warp Prism leash/cost, or for very small QoL buffs to maybe the Gateway units (ambitious change) because Gateway units seem to be suffering from a bit of power creep weakness. Adepts in particular just seem like a trash unit that either needs to move faster, hit harder, or be cheaper.
The game feels very close to perfectly balanced, ZvP has kind of always been the red headed step child match up that tends to swing in one races favor.
Perhaps remove the gas requirements?
imo all that is needed is a reversal of Voidray cost or buildtime and Warpprism cost. Don't really think Lurkers are too strong tbh. Ghost/Tank and Immortal/Carrier seem to counter them just fine
Sorry but the reason Protoss goes air is because they can't beat lurkers on the ground , lurkers when they reach a certain number just demolishes any protoss ground army. Lurkers is one of the main reasons skytoss is the meta right now for macro games. Lurkers are like siege tanks, if you get enough of them immortals don't counter them WHATSOEVER. Protoss is forced to all inn or go skytoss basically and as has always been the problem for Protoss since the launch of the game. predictable race. Which is funny considering they are built around deception so hats off to pro's who actually succeed with this race.
On January 31 2022 12:36 BonitiilloO wrote: i have q honest question, when SC2 gonna received another balance patch?
There are strong hints that they will release a balance patch AFTER Katowice (it's too late now anyways even if they had finalized it), when exactly? I dunno. Latest "source" about it: https://www.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/s98utw/wardiii_confirms_that_we_will_have_balance_patch/ dunno why the clip does not exist anymore though Some other sources like French casters also spoke about it (that there should be a balance patch in the work) during different streams tl;dr: no official confirmation (nor denial ) but a patch should happen in 2022
Insanely stoked about this. SC2 has a small but strong scene, and if HoTS can get frequent balance patches AND hero redesigns, it honestly makes no sense that SC2 can't at least get small QoL balance patches.
In my opinion, SC2 does need a balance patch, badly, but not anything huge or sweeping. Balance honestly isn't that bad, the only match up that seems to need a bit of help is ZvP and it's already kind of balanced on a knifes edge. I mean, Zest did just beat Dark in a BO7, so even though ZvP does seem kind of Zerg favored at the moment, Protoss can still win in long series against Zerg.
I mean, Dark is pretty top tier, his vP is definitely not weak.
I'm hoping for very small nerfs on the Lurker (unambitious change), a reversal of Protoss upgrades and Warp Prism leash/cost, or for very small QoL buffs to maybe the Gateway units (ambitious change) because Gateway units seem to be suffering from a bit of power creep weakness. Adepts in particular just seem like a trash unit that either needs to move faster, hit harder, or be cheaper.
The game feels very close to perfectly balanced, ZvP has kind of always been the red headed step child match up that tends to swing in one races favor.
Perhaps remove the gas requirements?
imo all that is needed is a reversal of Voidray cost or buildtime and Warpprism cost. Don't really think Lurkers are too strong tbh. Ghost/Tank and Immortal/Carrier seem to counter them just fine
Sorry but the reason Protoss goes air is because they can't beat lurkers on the ground , lurkers when they reach a certain number just demolishes any protoss ground army. Lurkers is one of the main reasons skytoss is the meta right now for macro games. Lurkers are like siege tanks, if you get enough of them immortals don't counter them WHATSOEVER. Protoss is forced to all inn or go skytoss basically and as has always been the problem for Protoss since the launch of the game. predictable race. Which is funny considering they are built around deception so hats off to pro's who actually succeed with this race.
It's pretty obvious that skytoss should be nerfed and ground toss should be buffed. You can pretend the lurker is the only thing that causes skytoss, but if it was only the lurker that was nerfed then nothing would change. Protoss would still go for skytoss.
On January 31 2022 12:36 BonitiilloO wrote: i have q honest question, when SC2 gonna received another balance patch?
There are strong hints that they will release a balance patch AFTER Katowice (it's too late now anyways even if they had finalized it), when exactly? I dunno. Latest "source" about it: https://www.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/s98utw/wardiii_confirms_that_we_will_have_balance_patch/ dunno why the clip does not exist anymore though Some other sources like French casters also spoke about it (that there should be a balance patch in the work) during different streams tl;dr: no official confirmation (nor denial ) but a patch should happen in 2022
Insanely stoked about this. SC2 has a small but strong scene, and if HoTS can get frequent balance patches AND hero redesigns, it honestly makes no sense that SC2 can't at least get small QoL balance patches.
In my opinion, SC2 does need a balance patch, badly, but not anything huge or sweeping. Balance honestly isn't that bad, the only match up that seems to need a bit of help is ZvP and it's already kind of balanced on a knifes edge. I mean, Zest did just beat Dark in a BO7, so even though ZvP does seem kind of Zerg favored at the moment, Protoss can still win in long series against Zerg.
I mean, Dark is pretty top tier, his vP is definitely not weak.
I'm hoping for very small nerfs on the Lurker (unambitious change), a reversal of Protoss upgrades and Warp Prism leash/cost, or for very small QoL buffs to maybe the Gateway units (ambitious change) because Gateway units seem to be suffering from a bit of power creep weakness. Adepts in particular just seem like a trash unit that either needs to move faster, hit harder, or be cheaper.
The game feels very close to perfectly balanced, ZvP has kind of always been the red headed step child match up that tends to swing in one races favor.
Perhaps remove the gas requirements?
imo all that is needed is a reversal of Voidray cost or buildtime and Warpprism cost. Don't really think Lurkers are too strong tbh. Ghost/Tank and Immortal/Carrier seem to counter them just fine
Sorry but the reason Protoss goes air is because they can't beat lurkers on the ground , lurkers when they reach a certain number just demolishes any protoss ground army. Lurkers is one of the main reasons skytoss is the meta right now for macro games. Lurkers are like siege tanks, if you get enough of them immortals don't counter them WHATSOEVER. Protoss is forced to all inn or go skytoss basically and as has always been the problem for Protoss since the launch of the game. predictable race. Which is funny considering they are built around deception so hats off to pro's who actually succeed with this race.
I only think it's Adaptive Talons that make Lurkers look dominant, Immortals do well against them in low to medium numbers, Disruptors are actually what should be countering big Lurker balls but the issue is that the top players are so quick with their micro that they just reposition their Lurkers so rapidly that it really nullifies things like Purification Nova and Psi Storms.
I think if Lurkers didn't burrow so quickly, they would be alot less powerful. I feel like when Lurkers first hit the field, Protoss can still kind of walk through them. Then they get spines, and Protoss have to respect them, THEN they get Adaptive Talons and they just run the show at that point.
On January 31 2022 12:36 BonitiilloO wrote: i have q honest question, when SC2 gonna received another balance patch?
According to the last Blizzard update about this - never. The exception being a huge imbalance like WoL BL/infestor
that is hilarious the game needs some tweak where and there not major balance changes but it need some work, like viper from zerg pulling any key units with no drawback.
On February 02 2022 11:44 OmniSkeptic wrote: Problem is also with the viper. Just abducting the disruptors/ whatever other unit you try to build to counter them is pretty broken.
I mean...do you guys just want to delete Zerg from the game while you're at it? Nerf Lurkers, nerf Queens, nerf Vipers lol you are aware that a Protoss just won the GSL super tournament right?
On February 02 2022 11:44 OmniSkeptic wrote: Problem is also with the viper. Just abducting the disruptors/ whatever other unit you try to build to counter them is pretty broken.
I mean...do you guys just want to delete Zerg from the game while you're at it? Nerf Lurkers, nerf Queens, nerf Vipers lol you are aware that a Protoss just won the GSL super tournament right?
Quite frankly, every single one of Dark's losses was very silly. He handed Zest two games with very silly Queen walks. In another he went broodlord after defeating the Carriers. In Game 7 he does a 4 min ling/ravager/roach timing that somehow fails to take the main while allowing Zest to take the gold. I know we shouldn't say anything based on a single series, but this felt a lot more like a Dark loss.
Moroever, the series showcased a lot of the points we've made here. Queens are really strong. Nerfing them might stop Dark from jebaiting himself in the future. Vipers are really strong. Carriers are good but for how much work they take to get to strategically, you'd think they'd be damn near invincible. They aren't.
On February 02 2022 11:44 OmniSkeptic wrote: Problem is also with the viper. Just abducting the disruptors/ whatever other unit you try to build to counter them is pretty broken.
I mean...do you guys just want to delete Zerg from the game while you're at it? Nerf Lurkers, nerf Queens, nerf Vipers lol you are aware that a Protoss just won the GSL super tournament right?
Quite frankly, every single one of Dark's losses was very silly. He handed Zest two games with very silly Queen walks. In another he went broodlord after defeating the Carriers. In Game 7 he does a 4 min ling/ravager/roach timing that somehow fails to take the main while allowing Zest to take the gold. I know we shouldn't say anything based on a single series, but this felt a lot more like a Dark loss.
Moroever, the series showcased a lot of the points we've made here. Queens are really strong. Nerfing them might stop Dark from jebaiting himself in the future. Vipers are really strong. Carriers are good but for how much work they take to get to strategically, you'd think they'd be damn near invincible. They aren't.
Reynor vs. Trap, people crying their eyes out about balance despite Trap making several idiotic mistakes that cost him the game.
Zest vs. Solar, once again, people crying their eyes out but Zest made several rookie moves that Solar took advantage of and won the series.
I mean, where do we draw the line between picking out examples of Zerg losing because of silly mistakes not backing up Zerg being OP against Protoss and Protoss making silly mistakes and losing against Zerg backing up Protoss being UP against Zerg?
Bit of a word salad there but I'm not sure how else to word it.
I'll be honest with you, most games I see Serral stomping Korean Protoss in it really doesn't look like he makes a singular mistake in almost any ZvP. Perfect scouting, perfect reads, perfect positioning and definitely perfect spellcaster micro.
Because there is no way in hell Zerg would be competitive if you simultaneously nerfed Lurkers, Queens, and Vipers, that's just asinine. If Zerg were really that OP in ZvP then Dark could easily afford a foolish mistake here and there. The fact that he can't afford a foolish mistake or two at the top level without Zest/Zoun being able to exploiting it for a win doesn't do your argument any favors.
And for posterities sake, I'm going to say it again that way nobody reads what I'm saying and calls me a Zerg apologist or whatever. Zerg does imo have an edge in the match up with the strength of Lurkers, Adaptive Talons needs to be removed to not put Protoss ground armies on such an unforgiving timer, even though I think if Lurkers get the nerf bat it's not going to stop a single Protoss from going Stargate tech because Stargate tech is just plain strong af.
On February 02 2022 11:44 OmniSkeptic wrote: Problem is also with the viper. Just abducting the disruptors/ whatever other unit you try to build to counter them is pretty broken.
I mean...do you guys just want to delete Zerg from the game while you're at it? Nerf Lurkers, nerf Queens, nerf Vipers lol you are aware that a Protoss just won the GSL super tournament right?
Quite frankly, every single one of Dark's losses was very silly. He handed Zest two games with very silly Queen walks. In another he went broodlord after defeating the Carriers. In Game 7 he does a 4 min ling/ravager/roach timing that somehow fails to take the main while allowing Zest to take the gold. I know we shouldn't say anything based on a single series, but this felt a lot more like a Dark loss.
Moroever, the series showcased a lot of the points we've made here. Queens are really strong. Nerfing them might stop Dark from jebaiting himself in the future. Vipers are really strong. Carriers are good but for how much work they take to get to strategically, you'd think they'd be damn near invincible. They aren't.
Zest vs. Solar, once again, people crying their eyes out but Zest made several rookie moves that Solar took advantage of and won the series.
I mean, where do we draw the line between picking out examples of Zerg losing because of silly mistakes not backing up Zerg being OP against Protoss and Protoss making silly mistakes and losing against Zerg backing up Protoss being UP against Zerg?
Bit of a word salad there but I'm not sure how else to word it.
I'll be honest with you, most games I see Serral stomping Korean Protoss in it really doesn't look like he makes a singular mistake in almost any ZvP. Perfect scouting, perfect reads, perfect positioning and definitely perfect spellcaster micro.
Because there is no way in hell Zerg would be competitive if you simultaneously nerfed Lurkers, Queens, and Vipers, that's just asinine. If Zerg were really that OP in ZvP then Dark could easily afford a foolish mistake here and there. The fact that he can't afford a foolish mistake or two at the top level without Zest/Zoun being able to exploiting it for a win doesn't do your argument any favors.
And for posterities sake, I'm going to say it again that way nobody reads what I'm saying and calls me a Zerg apologist or whatever. Zerg does imo have an edge in the match up with the strength of Lurkers, Adaptive Talons needs to be removed to not put Protoss ground armies on such an unforgiving timer, even though I think if Lurkers get the nerf bat it's not going to stop a single Protoss from going Stargate tech because Stargate tech is just plain strong af.
I think this is a great point. In fact, in MOST ZvPs that don't involve Serral, you can usually point out a few key mistakes the loser made. I also think that balance aside, the void ray needs some kind of nerf. Having voids early in PvZ are part of what makes the match-up so stale -- both sides become hard to attack for a while and often just go into single player mode.
I think this is a great point. In fact, in MOST ZvPs that don't involve Serral, you can usually point out a few key mistakes the loser made. I also think that balance aside, the void ray needs some kind of nerf. Having voids early in PvZ are part of what makes the match-up so stale -- both sides become hard to attack for a while and often just go into single player mode.
Not sure you can realistically nerf the Void Ray without giving Protoss some significant compensation elsewhere, even even though if I had a personal balance wish list, it would be to nerf the power of both the Void Ray and Carrier in exchange for some unknown buff to Protoss ground units.
I kind of wish the Stalker was a more central unit in the match up. Watching Blink Stalkers is just fun, and it's a totally skill/micro based unit, they just get wrecked soooo soo hard by Lings, Hydras, Infestors, Lurkers, how would you possibly buff the unit to be less crappy against those common Zerg units without just making it ludicrously broken?
I think if we are actually going to get this patch, MS should keep it simple.
I think this is a great point. In fact, in MOST ZvPs that don't involve Serral, you can usually point out a few key mistakes the loser made. I also think that balance aside, the void ray needs some kind of nerf. Having voids early in PvZ are part of what makes the match-up so stale -- both sides become hard to attack for a while and often just go into single player mode.
Not sure you can realistically nerf the Void Ray without giving Protoss some significant compensation elsewhere, even even though if I had a personal balance wish list, it would be to nerf the power of both the Void Ray and Carrier in exchange for some unknown buff to Protoss ground units.
I kind of wish the Stalker was a more central unit in the match up. Watching Blink Stalkers is just fun, and it's a totally skill/micro based unit, they just get wrecked soooo soo hard by Lings, Hydras, Infestors, Lurkers, how would you possibly buff the unit to be less crappy against those common Zerg units without just making it ludicrously broken?
I think if we are actually going to get this patch, MS should keep it simple.
Nerf the Void Ray cost/damage whatever
Remove Adaptive Talons from the game
and revert Prism cost. That nerf was totally unnecessary and made all Protoss ground aggression weaker and Zerg too safe in the early game
I think this is a great point. In fact, in MOST ZvPs that don't involve Serral, you can usually point out a few key mistakes the loser made. I also think that balance aside, the void ray needs some kind of nerf. Having voids early in PvZ are part of what makes the match-up so stale -- both sides become hard to attack for a while and often just go into single player mode.
Not sure you can realistically nerf the Void Ray without giving Protoss some significant compensation elsewhere, even even though if I had a personal balance wish list, it would be to nerf the power of both the Void Ray and Carrier in exchange for some unknown buff to Protoss ground units.
I kind of wish the Stalker was a more central unit in the match up. Watching Blink Stalkers is just fun, and it's a totally skill/micro based unit, they just get wrecked soooo soo hard by Lings, Hydras, Infestors, Lurkers, how would you possibly buff the unit to be less crappy against those common Zerg units without just making it ludicrously broken?
I think if we are actually going to get this patch, MS should keep it simple.
Nerf the Void Ray cost/damage whatever
Remove Adaptive Talons from the game
and revert Prism cost. That nerf was totally unnecessary and made all Protoss ground aggression weaker and Zerg too safe in the early game
Seems reasonable, probably time to revert those upgrade nerfs as well.
The prism/upgrade nerfs were fine for their time but things have definitely changed over the years.
I think this is a great point. In fact, in MOST ZvPs that don't involve Serral, you can usually point out a few key mistakes the loser made. I also think that balance aside, the void ray needs some kind of nerf. Having voids early in PvZ are part of what makes the match-up so stale -- both sides become hard to attack for a while and often just go into single player mode.
Not sure you can realistically nerf the Void Ray without giving Protoss some significant compensation elsewhere, even even though if I had a personal balance wish list, it would be to nerf the power of both the Void Ray and Carrier in exchange for some unknown buff to Protoss ground units.
I kind of wish the Stalker was a more central unit in the match up. Watching Blink Stalkers is just fun, and it's a totally skill/micro based unit, they just get wrecked soooo soo hard by Lings, Hydras, Infestors, Lurkers, how would you possibly buff the unit to be less crappy against those common Zerg units without just making it ludicrously broken?
I think if we are actually going to get this patch, MS should keep it simple.
Nerf the Void Ray cost/damage whatever
Remove Adaptive Talons from the game
and revert Prism cost. That nerf was totally unnecessary and made all Protoss ground aggression weaker and Zerg too safe in the early game
The prism nerfs were fine for their time
Disagree, it was nerfed after just 1 Super Tournament with high Protoss representation, in an era that was otherwise dominated by Zerg and Maru
I think this is a great point. In fact, in MOST ZvPs that don't involve Serral, you can usually point out a few key mistakes the loser made. I also think that balance aside, the void ray needs some kind of nerf. Having voids early in PvZ are part of what makes the match-up so stale -- both sides become hard to attack for a while and often just go into single player mode.
Not sure you can realistically nerf the Void Ray without giving Protoss some significant compensation elsewhere, even even though if I had a personal balance wish list, it would be to nerf the power of both the Void Ray and Carrier in exchange for some unknown buff to Protoss ground units.
I kind of wish the Stalker was a more central unit in the match up. Watching Blink Stalkers is just fun, and it's a totally skill/micro based unit, they just get wrecked soooo soo hard by Lings, Hydras, Infestors, Lurkers, how would you possibly buff the unit to be less crappy against those common Zerg units without just making it ludicrously broken?
I think if we are actually going to get this patch, MS should keep it simple.
Nerf the Void Ray cost/damage whatever
Remove Adaptive Talons from the game
and revert Prism cost. That nerf was totally unnecessary and made all Protoss ground aggression weaker and Zerg too safe in the early game
The prism nerfs were fine for their time
Disagree, it was nerfed after just 1 Super Tournament with high Protoss representation, in an era that was otherwise dominated by Zerg and Maru
I mean whatever the semantics, it didn't seem like this, "Protoss being UP" issue was as prominent back in 2019 as it is now.
Regardless, both nerfs should be removed. Probably better to do that then see how Protoss starts faring in most ZvP then perhaps a more targeted Lurker nerf.
I'm sure most people agree that buffs are always more fun then nerfs when you can get away with them in most games.
lol, protosses pointing out possibly broken units in other races only to distract attention from fact that 60% of GMs are tosses while mostly at third of the APM of other races
@Beelzebub1 @angry_maia Hey, you brought up the single series, so I'm within my rights to analyze that one. Yes, the health of balance should be assessed on overall results and not the peculiarities of one series or tournament. But that includes the result of the tournament and not just an analysis of it. So don't try to reverse uno card me. :p
The complaints about queens, vipers and lurkers are quite specific and design oriented. The complaints about skytoss are "you know how skytoss is really good and it's basically the only thing that makes them relevant? Let's make it unusable. And then we'll hope that they figure something out. "
On February 04 2022 12:47 Jerubaal wrote: @Beelzebub1 @angry_maia Hey, you brought up the single series, so I'm within my rights to analyze that one. Yes, the health of balance should be assessed on overall results and not the peculiarities of one series or tournament. But that includes the result of the tournament and not just an analysis of it. So don't try to reverse uno card me. :p
The complaints about queens, vipers and lurkers are quite specific and design oriented. The complaints about skytoss are "you know how skytoss is really good and it's basically the only thing that makes them relevant? Let's make it unusable. And then we'll hope that they figure something out. "
I'm not reversing anything, and I didn't say you weren't in your rights in anyway to analyze those. All I'm saying is that you guys have to be reasonable and digress at least here and there concerning the state of Protoss in ZvP.
Every time a Zerg loses in ZvP can't just be chalked up to, "He threw" where every time a Protoss player loses in ZvP it's chalked up to Protoss being underpowered, that's all I meant.
And 'm assuming the Skytoss nerf thing must be directed at Maia because I didn't say anything about nerfing Skytoss, at least not without significant concessions in other areas like a reverting of the Warp Prism and upgrade nerfs at the bare minimum, a nerf to the Lurker preferred.
Trying to be civil with you man all I want is for there to be a balance patch lol I really don't care about the semantics, like they interest me but I'm not like frothing at the mouth on why or what is imbalanced in ZvP, there has already been quite alot of good points brought up both ends I think.
On February 04 2022 11:36 TLN00 wrote: lol, protosses pointing out possibly broken units in other races only to distract attention from fact that 60% of GMs are tosses while mostly at third of the APM of other races
From my qwikmaffs scrolling through the b.net leaderboard, EU GM is 46% P and Asia (which is presumably mostly Korea) is 41%.
On February 04 2022 11:36 TLN00 wrote: lol, protosses pointing out possibly broken units in other races only to distract attention from fact that 60% of GMs are tosses while mostly at third of the APM of other races
Literally no one denies that protoss is the easiest race to get Gm with. All of this balance discussion is regarding pro players.
On February 04 2022 11:36 TLN00 wrote: lol, protosses pointing out possibly broken units in other races only to distract attention from fact that 60% of GMs are tosses while mostly at third of the APM of other races
From my qwikmaffs scrolling through the b.net leaderboard, EU GM is 46% P and Asia (which is presumably mostly Korea) is 41%.
When you respond to hyperbole with "Well, we are overrepresented by 8-13% in a 3 race game," it doesn't really sell the story that Protoss needs buffs.
What I would be in favor of, and will never happen, is a reworking of Protoss to make it more challenging and APM intensive at lower levels and with a higher skill cap at the pro level, but I don't think most Protoss would like that either .
I don't think there's any changes that will solve the problem you are describing, though, because Protoss was seemingly intentionally designed to be the way it is over many years, and almost everything about it would have to be changed. I think having an easier time at lower levels with also a lower skill cap at the pro level is just what Protoss players are signing onto.
Also, all hope is not lost because rarely can a Terran or Zerg play perfectly to the extent that this conceptually lower skill cap actually is causing the Protoss player to lose an otherwise perfect game. Let me reiterate that Protoss have won 4 out of 5 of the most recent GSL ST.
On February 04 2022 11:36 TLN00 wrote: lol, protosses pointing out possibly broken units in other races only to distract attention from fact that 60% of GMs are tosses while mostly at third of the APM of other races
From my qwikmaffs scrolling through the b.net leaderboard, EU GM is 46% P and Asia (which is presumably mostly Korea) is 41%.
When you respond to hyperbole with "Well, we are overrepresented by 8-13% in a 3 race game," it doesn't really sell the story that Protoss needs buffs.
What I would be in favor of, and will never happen, is a reworking of Protoss to make it more challenging and APM intensive at lower levels and with a higher skill cap at the pro level, but I don't think most Protoss would like that either .
I don't think there's any changes that will solve the problem you are describing, though, because Protoss was seemingly intentionally designed to be the way it is over many years, and almost everything about it would have to be changed. I think having an easier time at lower levels with also a lower skill cap at the pro level is just what Protoss players are signing onto.
Also, all hope is not lost because rarely can a Terran or Zerg play perfectly to the extent that this conceptually lower skill cap actually is causing the Protoss player to lose an otherwise perfect game. Let me reiterate that Protoss have won 4 out of 5 of the most recent GSL ST.
I think basically no protoss players are complaining because they feel like P is underpowered in their own games -- this is strictly a discussion of pro level play. The ideal change you are proposing IS a buff for pro level players.
Finally, even at pro level play, I do'nt think PvT is actually unbalanced. Early games are incredibly complex on both sides and there is tons of room for strategy and micro. I think the real problem is PvZ which just suffers from the sky-toss meta that is partially brought on by lurkers, but also partially brought on by the void ray buffs. Imo, nerfing lurkers and ALSO nerfing void rays could really improve the match-up by brining back ground based protoss macro games in pvz.
On February 05 2022 00:55 honorablemacroterran wrote:
On February 04 2022 13:15 Jerubaal wrote:
On February 04 2022 11:36 TLN00 wrote: lol, protosses pointing out possibly broken units in other races only to distract attention from fact that 60% of GMs are tosses while mostly at third of the APM of other races
From my qwikmaffs scrolling through the b.net leaderboard, EU GM is 46% P and Asia (which is presumably mostly Korea) is 41%.
When you respond to hyperbole with "Well, we are overrepresented by 8-13% in a 3 race game," it doesn't really sell the story that Protoss needs buffs.
What I would be in favor of, and will never happen, is a reworking of Protoss to make it more challenging and APM intensive at lower levels and with a higher skill cap at the pro level, but I don't think most Protoss would like that either .
I don't think there's any changes that will solve the problem you are describing, though, because Protoss was seemingly intentionally designed to be the way it is over many years, and almost everything about it would have to be changed. I think having an easier time at lower levels with also a lower skill cap at the pro level is just what Protoss players are signing onto.
Also, all hope is not lost because rarely can a Terran or Zerg play perfectly to the extent that this conceptually lower skill cap actually is causing the Protoss player to lose an otherwise perfect game. Let me reiterate that Protoss have won 4 out of 5 of the most recent GSL ST.
I think basically no protoss players are complaining because they feel like P is underpowered in their own games -- this is strictly a discussion of pro level play. The ideal change you are proposing IS a buff for pro level players.
Finally, even at pro level play, I do'nt think PvT is actually unbalanced. Early games are incredibly complex on both sides and there is tons of room for strategy and micro. I think the real problem is PvZ which just suffers from the sky-toss meta that is partially brought on by lurkers, but also partially brought on by the void ray buffs. Imo, nerfing lurkers and ALSO nerfing void rays could really improve the match-up by brining back ground based protoss macro games in pvz.
Bingo, a Void Ray and Lurker nerf I think would just put the match up in a healthier place.
If Protoss continues to struggle after that, revert the upgrade nerfs, if they still struggle after that, nerf the Warp Prism changes.
I still think the imbalance needs to be tackled with very small changes, ZvP has kind of always been balanced on a knife's edge.
I see we got some new analysts in here so my offer is still up, if anyone wants to bet 50$ to my 500$ that protoss is going to win less of the 10 next premier tournaments than the other two races, hit me up
On February 05 2022 09:23 Nebuchad wrote: I see we got some new analysts in here so my offer is still up, if anyone wants to bet 50$ to my 500$ that protoss is going to win less of the 10 next premier tournaments than the other two races, hit me up
Well, Zest just won the last one.
Sorry for intruding on the permanent whine thread.
On February 05 2022 09:23 Nebuchad wrote: I see we got some new analysts in here so my offer is still up, if anyone wants to bet 50$ to my 500$ that protoss is going to win less of the 10 next premier tournaments than the other two races, hit me up
It's such a false premise.
Recently, 2 Protoss made it to GSL ST RO4 and 1 won the championship.
Winning grand finals is a smaller fraction of a a small sample size of population. It's the best of the best. Nerves also play a huge factor. Others will see "silly mistakes" that Dark made. But that shows how intense and volatile grand finals can be.
Representation at RO4 is what matters. And Protoss does not struggle there.
On February 05 2022 09:23 Nebuchad wrote: I see we got some new analysts in here so my offer is still up, if anyone wants to bet 50$ to my 500$ that protoss is going to win less of the 10 next premier tournaments than the other two races, hit me up
It's such a false premise.
Recently, 2 Protoss made it to GSL ST RO4 and 1 won the championship.
Winning grand finals is a smaller fraction of a a small sample size of population. It's the best of the best. Nerves also play a huge factor. Others will see "silly mistakes" that Dark made. But that shows how intense and volatile grand finals can be.
Representation at RO4 is what matters. And Protoss does not struggle there.
It's a false premise for what lol. People are in this thread pretending that they don't think protoss is getting trounced at the highest level, I offer them 10 to 1 that protoss wins the least amount of tournaments in the future and they refuse to take it. My premise is true: they don't really believe the shit they say.
On February 05 2022 09:23 Nebuchad wrote: I see we got some new analysts in here so my offer is still up, if anyone wants to bet 50$ to my 500$ that protoss is going to win less of the 10 next premier tournaments than the other two races, hit me up
It's such a false premise.
Recently, 2 Protoss made it to GSL ST RO4 and 1 won the championship.
Winning grand finals is a smaller fraction of a a small sample size of population. It's the best of the best. Nerves also play a huge factor. Others will see "silly mistakes" that Dark made. But that shows how intense and volatile grand finals can be.
Representation at RO4 is what matters. And Protoss does not struggle there.
It's a false premise for what lol. People are in this thread pretending that they don't think protoss is getting trounced at the highest level, I offer them 10 to 1 that protoss wins the least amount of tournaments in the future and they refuse to take it. My premise is true: they don't really believe the shit they say.
Yea Protoss already doing semi poorly on paper in 2022, but really it's just because between Rogue, Serral and Maru the 1st place prizes are already spoken for.
Good on Zest for taking two first places, I don't know if even a Warp Prism/upgrade buff will make up the disparity though I mean Serral and Maru just look practically unbeatable in Bo7 formats.
On February 05 2022 09:23 Nebuchad wrote: I see we got some new analysts in here so my offer is still up, if anyone wants to bet 50$ to my 500$ that protoss is going to win less of the 10 next premier tournaments than the other two races, hit me up
It's such a false premise.
Recently, 2 Protoss made it to GSL ST RO4 and 1 won the championship.
Winning grand finals is a smaller fraction of a a small sample size of population. It's the best of the best. Nerves also play a huge factor. Others will see "silly mistakes" that Dark made. But that shows how intense and volatile grand finals can be.
Representation at RO4 is what matters. And Protoss does not struggle there.
It's a false premise for what lol. People are in this thread pretending that they don't think protoss is getting trounced at the highest level, I offer them 10 to 1 that protoss wins the least amount of tournaments in the future and they refuse to take it. My premise is true: they don't really believe the shit they say.
RO4 in GSL is the highest level. They are the top 4 players in the toughest SC2 tournament in the world.
The premise that grand finals is indicative of balance, while turning a blind eye on RO4 and RO8 representation, is such a joke.
On February 05 2022 09:23 Nebuchad wrote: I see we got some new analysts in here so my offer is still up, if anyone wants to bet 50$ to my 500$ that protoss is going to win less of the 10 next premier tournaments than the other two races, hit me up
It's such a false premise.
Recently, 2 Protoss made it to GSL ST RO4 and 1 won the championship.
Winning grand finals is a smaller fraction of a a small sample size of population. It's the best of the best. Nerves also play a huge factor. Others will see "silly mistakes" that Dark made. But that shows how intense and volatile grand finals can be.
Representation at RO4 is what matters. And Protoss does not struggle there.
It's a false premise for what lol. People are in this thread pretending that they don't think protoss is getting trounced at the highest level, I offer them 10 to 1 that protoss wins the least amount of tournaments in the future and they refuse to take it. My premise is true: they don't really believe the shit they say.
RO4 in GSL is the highest level. They are the top 4 players in the toughest SC2 tournament in the world.
The premise that grand finals is indicative of balance, while turning a blind eye on RO4 and RO8 representation, is such a joke.
On February 05 2022 09:23 Nebuchad wrote: I see we got some new analysts in here so my offer is still up, if anyone wants to bet 50$ to my 500$ that protoss is going to win less of the 10 next premier tournaments than the other two races, hit me up
I might actually be interested in this. However I'll need some details:
1. What constitutes a premier tournament? Does GSL Super tournament count? What about TSL. 2. What happens on ties: say P and T both won 3 tourneys and Z won 4. Would this be me winning or you?
On February 05 2022 09:23 Nebuchad wrote: I see we got some new analysts in here so my offer is still up, if anyone wants to bet 50$ to my 500$ that protoss is going to win less of the 10 next premier tournaments than the other two races, hit me up
I might actually be interested in this. However I'll need some details:
1. What constitutes a premier tournament? Does GSL Super tournament count? What about TSL. 2. What happens on ties: say P and T both won 3 tourneys and Z won 4. Would this be me winning or you?
Could say something like
Tournaments where 6 or more of the 10 top ranked players on Aligulac played (as I'm writing this, Maru Serral Reynor Dark Rogue Zest Clem Cure Solar Showtime)
Not sure what we do on ties, maybe you win 250 instead of 500?
One more issue is if it's true that there's a patch after Katowice, it could change the situation in a way that's problematic for either side of the bet.
I don't know about anyone else, but I'm here for the ideas. The discussion about what constitutes imbalance or UP/OP.
I feel like some of the people here have forgotten about very similar narratives in the past: That Terran players were just better and that's why they did so well. That Zerg was way harder and weaker and that's why the endless deluge of Zerg tears was justified.
It's also insteresting that this conversation is a continuation of the same conversation from BW.
On February 05 2022 09:23 Nebuchad wrote: I see we got some new analysts in here so my offer is still up, if anyone wants to bet 50$ to my 500$ that protoss is going to win less of the 10 next premier tournaments than the other two races, hit me up
It's such a false premise.
Recently, 2 Protoss made it to GSL ST RO4 and 1 won the championship.
Winning grand finals is a smaller fraction of a a small sample size of population. It's the best of the best. Nerves also play a huge factor. Others will see "silly mistakes" that Dark made. But that shows how intense and volatile grand finals can be.
Representation at RO4 is what matters. And Protoss does not struggle there.
It's a false premise for what lol. People are in this thread pretending that they don't think protoss is getting trounced at the highest level, I offer them 10 to 1 that protoss wins the least amount of tournaments in the future and they refuse to take it. My premise is true: they don't really believe the shit they say.
I just think that the best players are Terrans and Zerg. That doesn't mean Protoss can't win anything, though. Why would you take this bet if you thought that Maru and Rogue are the most skilled players, but Protoss isn't underpowered? Your argument doesn't make any sense because that is exactly what most people who will reject your whine will believe.
On February 06 2022 15:17 Jerubaal wrote: I don't know about anyone else, but I'm here for the ideas. The discussion about what constitutes imbalance or UP/OP.
I feel like some of the people here have forgotten about very similar narratives in the past: That Terran players were just better and that's why they did so well. That Zerg was way harder and weaker and that's why the endless deluge of Zerg tears was justified.
It's also insteresting that this conversation is a continuation of the same conversation from BW.
Have you considered that these things get said so much because they are true and passage of time doesn't change the fact that Protoss was designed to be easier for new players from the beginning?
Can anyone even explain why you would assume that when you get down to the handful of players who even have a shot at winning premier tournaments that who's winning comes down to race and not exceptional skill, while ignoring GM statistics? Maybe you'd like to explain what was so awful about Maru and Dark's play in the Super Tournament that Zest managed to win despite the odds being stacked against him because of his race?
On February 06 2022 15:17 Jerubaal wrote: I don't know about anyone else, but I'm here for the ideas. The discussion about what constitutes imbalance or UP/OP.
I feel like some of the people here have forgotten about very similar narratives in the past: That Terran players were just better and that's why they did so well. That Zerg was way harder and weaker and that's why the endless deluge of Zerg tears was justified.
It's also insteresting that this conversation is a continuation of the same conversation from BW.
Have you considered that these things get said so much because they are true and passage of time doesn't change the fact that Protoss was designed to be easier for new players from the beginning?
Is it a fact that Protoss was designed to be easier for new players from the beginning? If yes, I really would love to read the source. However, this wouldn't surprise me very much either.
In this context i find it really interesting that people use the term beginner or new player as if it doesn't need further explanation. Is a beginner someone who hasn't touched a game before sc2? Or is a beginner someone who starts to play sc2 for the first time.
I suppose most people refer to a beginner of sc2 as someone who starts to play sc2 (and probably isn't totally new to gaming or even rts). In this case, I would argue which race is the most difficult or easiest to get into sc2 depends more on the individual skills and experience of the beginner in question than on the designs of the races. (For Example think of a strong bw amateur switching to sc2 or, like me, an experienced wc3 player switching to sc2. Do you think the race you played in bw or wc3 has no influence on how easy or hard you find a race in sc2?)
In this case also the discussion what in general is the easiest or hardest race to get into sc2 becomes irrelevant because it cannot sensible be anwsered.
On February 06 2022 18:13 honorablemacroterran wrote: Can anyone even explain why you would assume that when you get down to the handful of players who even have a shot at winning premier tournaments that who's winning comes down to race and not exceptional skill, while ignoring GM statistics? Maybe you'd like to explain what was so awful about Maru and Dark's play in the Super Tournament that Zest managed to win despite the odds being stacked against him because of his race?
I think you're totally right in this regard. sc2 progaming comes down to so few players and each race is present at the absolute highest level of play. Therefore, it is not at all surprising that there are fluctuations in which race wins how many tournaments. I think in the current meta, the races are balanced to the point where day shape/shapes have a bigger impact on winning a series/tournament than the balance of the game.
On February 05 2022 09:23 Nebuchad wrote: I see we got some new analysts in here so my offer is still up, if anyone wants to bet 50$ to my 500$ that protoss is going to win less of the 10 next premier tournaments than the other two races, hit me up
It's such a false premise.
Recently, 2 Protoss made it to GSL ST RO4 and 1 won the championship.
Winning grand finals is a smaller fraction of a a small sample size of population. It's the best of the best. Nerves also play a huge factor. Others will see "silly mistakes" that Dark made. But that shows how intense and volatile grand finals can be.
Representation at RO4 is what matters. And Protoss does not struggle there.
It's a false premise for what lol. People are in this thread pretending that they don't think protoss is getting trounced at the highest level, I offer them 10 to 1 that protoss wins the least amount of tournaments in the future and they refuse to take it. My premise is true: they don't really believe the shit they say.
I just think that the best players are Terrans and Zerg. That doesn't mean Protoss can't win anything, though. Why would you take this bet if you thought that Maru and Rogue are the most skilled players, but Protoss isn't underpowered? Your argument doesn't make any sense because that is exactly what most people who will reject your whine will believe.
This is a thread about protoss hope. If the problem is that all protoss players suck and the best terrans and zergs are superior, this is worse. You do get that this is worse, right?
My contribution to this thread is and has always been: no, there is no hope, I don't know if it's because other players are better or because of balance and I don't care which one it is, what we should do is stop having hope and therefore stop watching the game.
If you think that other players are better and should win in a fair world, then you agree that there is no hope. So I'm not sure what you're doing in the thread? You're here to tell us to stick around because you want to have someone there to laugh at when your guys win? That's not healthy.
On February 06 2022 20:56 Nebuchad wrote: [...] So I'm not sure what you're doing in the thread?
Reading this:
On February 06 2022 20:56 Nebuchad wrote: [...] what we should do is stop having hope and therefore stop watching the game.
i really don't understand why you are in this thread. You state: There is no hope for protoss and so we should stop watching the game. Obviously other people disagree with your opinion, either think there is hope or there's no need for hope because everything is fine the way it is, and enjoy watching the game. I'm sorry that you feel that way about SC2. But why do you care that other people still enjoy watching sc2, think there's hope for protoss or don't even feel like there's anything wrong with the state of the game. More importantly, why are you trying to change other people's positive opinions about sc2 to your negative ones?
On February 06 2022 21:15 jodljodl wrote: Obviously other people disagree with your opinion
I don't think a lot of people disagree with my opinion. I think people are lying to us.
To answer the question, I'm in the thread because when I first stated the obvious that protoss was going to continue to get destroyed in the near future, some people insisted that they didn't see any issue whatsoever and that actually it was terran that was weak using some nonsense fringe stats. Here's an example of the predictions that happened here:
On November 19 2021 21:48 someone very wrong wrote: No, I don't bet. But if I would my bet would be PvP finals of the ST Zerg wins the IEM in a PvZ finals The next Code S champion is Zerg and wins in a nonMirror finals, I'm inclining towards PvZ. One of the TSL finalists will be Protoss while the victor will be either Zerg or Terran. My gut says Zerg.
When someone is wrong on the internet I don't tend to let it go easily, that's just where I'm at with my life
On February 06 2022 18:13 honorablemacroterran wrote:
On February 05 2022 23:03 Nebuchad wrote:
On February 05 2022 13:52 Pentarp wrote:
On February 05 2022 09:23 Nebuchad wrote: I see we got some new analysts in here so my offer is still up, if anyone wants to bet 50$ to my 500$ that protoss is going to win less of the 10 next premier tournaments than the other two races, hit me up
It's such a false premise.
Recently, 2 Protoss made it to GSL ST RO4 and 1 won the championship.
Winning grand finals is a smaller fraction of a a small sample size of population. It's the best of the best. Nerves also play a huge factor. Others will see "silly mistakes" that Dark made. But that shows how intense and volatile grand finals can be.
Representation at RO4 is what matters. And Protoss does not struggle there.
It's a false premise for what lol. People are in this thread pretending that they don't think protoss is getting trounced at the highest level, I offer them 10 to 1 that protoss wins the least amount of tournaments in the future and they refuse to take it. My premise is true: they don't really believe the shit they say.
I just think that the best players are Terrans and Zerg. That doesn't mean Protoss can't win anything, though. Why would you take this bet if you thought that Maru and Rogue are the most skilled players, but Protoss isn't underpowered? Your argument doesn't make any sense because that is exactly what most people who will reject your whine will believe.
This is a thread about protoss hope. If the problem is that all protoss players suck and the best terrans and zergs are superior, this is worse. You do get that this is worse, right?
My contribution to this thread is and has always been: no, there is no hope, I don't know if it's because other players are better or because of balance and I don't care which one it is, what we should do is stop having hope and therefore stop watching the game.
If you think that other players are better and should win in a fair world, then you agree that there is no hope. So I'm not sure what you're doing in the thread? You're here to tell us to stick around because you want to have someone there to laugh at when your guys win? That's not healthy.
So believing that Maru and Rogue are the best players means that all Protoss players suck? So in your opinion there are 2 good players in the world and the rest sucks?
And that we should stop watching the game because Protoss wins fewer premier tournaments than the other races (remember: Zest just won ST) is a weird hill to die on
On February 06 2022 18:13 honorablemacroterran wrote:
On February 05 2022 23:03 Nebuchad wrote:
On February 05 2022 13:52 Pentarp wrote:
On February 05 2022 09:23 Nebuchad wrote: I see we got some new analysts in here so my offer is still up, if anyone wants to bet 50$ to my 500$ that protoss is going to win less of the 10 next premier tournaments than the other two races, hit me up
It's such a false premise.
Recently, 2 Protoss made it to GSL ST RO4 and 1 won the championship.
Winning grand finals is a smaller fraction of a a small sample size of population. It's the best of the best. Nerves also play a huge factor. Others will see "silly mistakes" that Dark made. But that shows how intense and volatile grand finals can be.
Representation at RO4 is what matters. And Protoss does not struggle there.
It's a false premise for what lol. People are in this thread pretending that they don't think protoss is getting trounced at the highest level, I offer them 10 to 1 that protoss wins the least amount of tournaments in the future and they refuse to take it. My premise is true: they don't really believe the shit they say.
I just think that the best players are Terrans and Zerg. That doesn't mean Protoss can't win anything, though. Why would you take this bet if you thought that Maru and Rogue are the most skilled players, but Protoss isn't underpowered? Your argument doesn't make any sense because that is exactly what most people who will reject your whine will believe.
This is a thread about protoss hope. If the problem is that all protoss players suck and the best terrans and zergs are superior, this is worse. You do get that this is worse, right?
My contribution to this thread is and has always been: no, there is no hope, I don't know if it's because other players are better or because of balance and I don't care which one it is, what we should do is stop having hope and therefore stop watching the game.
If you think that other players are better and should win in a fair world, then you agree that there is no hope. So I'm not sure what you're doing in the thread? You're here to tell us to stick around because you want to have someone there to laugh at when your guys win? That's not healthy.
So believing that Maru and Rogue are the best players means that all Protoss players suck? So in your opinion there are 2 good players in the world and the rest sucks?
And that we should stop watching the game because Protoss wins fewer premier tournaments than the other races (remember: Zest just won ST) is a weird hill to die on
You obviously shouldn't stop watching the game. It's going in a great direction for you.
I seriously don't understand your angle. You said there is no hope and we should stop watching the game... but why if you think it's not necessarily a balance problem? I'd understand if you want others to stop watching as protest to get Blizzard to patch the game - but apparently that's not the case so why are you so invested in other peoples enjoyment of the game??
also great way to not answer any arguments anyone presents to you and instead just try to start fights
On February 06 2022 21:49 Charoisaur wrote: I seriously don't understand your angle. You said there is no hope and we should stop watching the game... but why if you think it's not necessarily a balance problem? I'd understand if you want others to stop watching as protest to get Blizzard to patch the game - but apparently that's not the case so why are you so invested in other peoples enjoyment of the game??
Because when you watch a game rooting for protoss and protoss never wins, it's not good for you. It increases your negativity, provides bad experiences and turns you into a worse person. Especially when it's been years. It is hard to stop doing something you've done for years, even when that thing is bad for you. At least it's hard for me. So I understand. But I still drew the conclusions I drew about the future, and if you're rooting for protoss, you should consider drawing the same conclusions. Your life will improve.
Well, other peoples enjoyment of the game is not solely dependant on how many tournaments Protoss wins. That doesn't mean we want Protoss to underperform or are happy with the current state, but most people won't stop watching the game just because 1 race doesn't win the amount of tournaments they'd like them to win
On February 06 2022 21:56 Charoisaur wrote: Well, other peoples enjoyment of the game is not solely dependant on how many tournaments Protoss wins. That doesn't mean we want Protoss to underperform or are happy with the current state, but most people won't stop watching the game just because 1 race doesn't win the amount of tournaments they'd like them to win
Then those people aren't part of the "we" I was referring to, people who like protoss, and they have no reason to stop watching the game.
On February 06 2022 21:56 Charoisaur wrote: Well, other peoples enjoyment of the game is not solely dependant on how many tournaments Protoss wins. That doesn't mean we want Protoss to underperform or are happy with the current state, but most people won't stop watching the game just because 1 race doesn't win the amount of tournaments they'd like them to win
Then those people aren't part of the "we" I was referring to, people who like protoss, and they have no reason to stop watching the game.
Yea but the top tournament results as of right now are like right on the edge of Protoss taking a proportionate amount of wins.
10 major tournaments, 2 Protoss winners both from Zest, 3 Maru 1st prizes, 2 Rogue and 2 Serral 1st places. If Protoss had taken even 1 more tournament win it would be Protoss 3/10, how much do you think Protoss should win exactly Neb? If Rogue and Maru were retired, that would take out five non Protoss first place victories.
Maru is probably the current best player in the world, followed very closely by Serral, and combined between the 2 they would constitute 50% of major tournament wins. I'm pretty sure we can all agree that Zerg is favored against Protoss at the top level, but by this, "Protoss not winning enough" mentality would you say that Terran is OP too?
Pretty sure we getting a balance patch anyways in the near future, hopefully that can smooth out ZvP a bit.
Simply believing that Maru and Rogue are the favorites does not preclude Protoss from winning premier tournaments. Maybe you should spend your time supporting Protoss pros instead of telling people not to watch the game. Obviously Maru at least can lose to Protoss in a premier tournament as Zest proved in the Super Tournament.
To probably close to 2/3 of the rest of us who like Terran or Zerg, it sounds like you want to buff Protoss so heavily that the best players are no longer favorites to win tournaments just to make sure that Protoss has more victories. That sounds insane.
On February 06 2022 21:56 Charoisaur wrote: Well, other peoples enjoyment of the game is not solely dependant on how many tournaments Protoss wins. That doesn't mean we want Protoss to underperform or are happy with the current state, but most people won't stop watching the game just because 1 race doesn't win the amount of tournaments they'd like them to win
Then those people aren't part of the "we" I was referring to, people who like protoss, and they have no reason to stop watching the game.
Yea but the top tournament results as of right now are like right on the edge of Protoss taking a proportionate amount of wins.
10 major tournaments, 2 Protoss winners both from Zest, 3 Maru 1st prizes, 2 Rogue and 2 Serral 1st places. If Protoss had taken even 1 more tournament win it would be Protoss 3/10, how much do you think Protoss should win exactly Neb? If Rogue and Maru were retired, that would take out five non Protoss first place victories.
Maru is probably the current best player in the world, followed very closely by Serral, and combined between the 2 they would constitute 50% of major tournament wins. I'm pretty sure we can all agree that Zerg is favored against Protoss at the top level, but by this, "Protoss not winning enough" mentality would you say that Terran is OP too?
Pretty sure we getting a balance patch anyways in the near future, hopefully that can smooth out ZvP a bit.
You're free to take me on my bet if you think I'm wrong. I didn't think I was wrong when I made the bet back then, and reality matched my expectations. Maybe I got very lucky!
And yes I look forward to this patch but like it's still Blizzard for all I know they might nerf the voidray and nerf the swarmhost as a compensation =)
On February 07 2022 04:43 honorablemacroterran wrote: Simply believing that Maru and Rogue are the favorites does not preclude Protoss from winning premier tournaments. Maybe you should spend your time supporting Protoss pros instead of telling people not to watch the game. Obviously Maru at least can lose to Protoss in a premier tournament as Zest proved in the Super Tournament.
To probably close to 2/3 of the rest of us who like Terran or Zerg, it sounds like you want to buff Protoss so heavily that the best players are no longer favorites to win tournaments just to make sure that Protoss has more victories. That sounds insane.
Yes my bad that's a good plan Trap was just waiting for me to cheer him on that's why he's in a slump you are really convincing. I swear there's some sort of contract that terran players have to sign about the amount of nonsense they have to write per day before they are allowed to play the race.
On February 07 2022 04:43 honorablemacroterran wrote: Simply believing that Maru and Rogue are the favorites does not preclude Protoss from winning premier tournaments. Maybe you should spend your time supporting Protoss pros instead of telling people not to watch the game. Obviously Maru at least can lose to Protoss in a premier tournament as Zest proved in the Super Tournament.
To probably close to 2/3 of the rest of us who like Terran or Zerg, it sounds like you want to buff Protoss so heavily that the best players are no longer favorites to win tournaments just to make sure that Protoss has more victories. That sounds insane.
When was the last time Protoss was a favorite to win a Code S or an IEM? We have 4-year streak of zergs winning the world championship (IEM/Blizzcon), we have how long exactly without a Protoss victor of the Code S? 4 years now?
I dare to say that in the last 3 years there was NONE protoss favorite to win ANY of these.
Especially after Maru dismantled both Stats and Zest in the Code S in two speedruns.
The only tournamnets where Protoss are favorites are meme ones - GSL ST for some reason is Protoss favorite and WCS NA.
Edit> In 4 years we have no other World Champion than Zerg and no other Code S champion than a Zerg or a Terran. So tell me, mighty TL user, why is that? Protoss players can win "lower" tournaments, so what keeps them from winning what most consider the top tournaments? And it's not just Trap. This period covers Parting(although...), Classic and Stats too
edit2> WCS NA is a meme and Protoss being the champion for ST is a meme considering they're not champion favorites for anything else besides WCS NA.
Or maybe there's nothing fundamentally different between the Super Tournament and Code S except preparation time and the fact that Protoss wins Super Tournament but not Code S is because of either preparation time or random chance? In that regard, it's actually closer to the non-Code S premiers, though. I don't understand why Protoss think that Super Tournament is so fundamentally different from other premier tournaments that it shouldn't count as evidence of capability to win a premier tournament.
My humble opinion is based upon some changes and achievements by pro-s through the last few years. And I do agree that protoss suffer. I watch GSL Code S from the very start from 2010. For a first time in 2021 I lost some interest and missed many games watching them. Byun has won a GSL in 2016. This changed the entire e-sport I think. He was the first teamless player who did that and congrats to him. A year later all the korean teams were disbanded except JinAir. Also there is no newcomming players who can reach the top tier tournamens. The only new name is Zoun. Nothing has changed from 2012-2013 since Kespa new wave players invaded the SC2 scene. In conclusion, there is no diversity, no quality of players prepared for pro-s since back the old Broodwar days when they had lived in houses and etc. etc., the day when you get 22 years old, you should retire cause your hands are already slow. In the current situation, players like Maru and Rogue feel extremelly comfortable. Their super talent is non-questionable. But the level of competition is so low since the old Kespa teams were closed. No new young faces, just battles agains old veterans who know each other pretty well. And most of the players go military. Dark, Maru and Rouge still are staying and dominate. If TY would stayed playing, he would continue to dominate among with the rest (I woudn't mind cause I'm a TY and Dark fanboy). Also, Best of 7 format matches make protoss suffer a lot for the last years. Not just against Rogue only. In General protosses don't stand well in statistics with major titles. But there were always some strong protoss seasons in all eras of SC1 and 2. But since e 2017 there is no major title at all and that is a disturbing fact.
Even as a protoss myself, my favorite competitive SC2 era remains 2013-2015 with HotS. There were plenty of tournaments in and outside Korea, and plenty of champions from all three races. I also miss the old PvZ ZvP from that era. I like GSL ST, but for me it is not a marathon major tournament from that calliber.
I don't think Byun winning Code S is what made the teams disband. The reason the teams disbanded was the falling popularity of RTS relative to MOBAs in Korea and was especially catalyzed by the Life matchfixing scandal, which was more scandalous in Korea than I think a lot of foreigners realize. Most of the sponsors wanted nothing to do with the scene after that. The reason why there isn't as much new blood is because of the relative lack of funding after all this.
My source on this is an interview I saw with Stats and TY at a Korean barbecue that I can't find atm.
On February 07 2022 04:43 honorablemacroterran wrote: Simply believing that Maru and Rogue are the favorites does not preclude Protoss from winning premier tournaments. Maybe you should spend your time supporting Protoss pros instead of telling people not to watch the game. Obviously Maru at least can lose to Protoss in a premier tournament as Zest proved in the Super Tournament.
To probably close to 2/3 of the rest of us who like Terran or Zerg, it sounds like you want to buff Protoss so heavily that the best players are no longer favorites to win tournaments just to make sure that Protoss has more victories. That sounds insane.
When was the last time Protoss was a favorite to win a Code S or an IEM? We have 4-year streak of zergs winning the world championship (IEM/Blizzcon), we have how long exactly without a Protoss victor of the Code S? 4 years now?
I dare to say that in the last 3 years there was NONE protoss favorite to win ANY of these.
Especially after Maru dismantled both Stats and Zest in the Code S in two speedruns.
The only tournamnets where Protoss are favorites are meme ones - GSL ST for some reason is Protoss favorite and WCS NA.
Edit> In 4 years we have no other World Champion than Zerg and no other Code S champion than a Zerg or a Terran. So tell me, mighty TL user, why is that? Protoss players can win "lower" tournaments, so what keeps them from winning what most consider the top tournaments? And it's not just Trap. This period covers Parting(although...), Classic and Stats too
edit2> WCS NA is a meme and Protoss being the champion for ST is a meme considering they're not champion favorites for anything else besides WCS NA.
Trap was considered by most people to be the #1 favourite for last years Katowice as he was in insane form back then. But we all know how that ended...
On February 07 2022 05:30 honorablemacroterran wrote: Or maybe there's nothing fundamentally different between the Super Tournament and Code S except preparation time and the fact that Protoss wins Super Tournament but not Code S is because of either preparation time or random chance? In that regard, it's actually closer to the non-Code S premiers, though. I don't understand why Protoss think that Super Tournament is so fundamentally different from other premier tournaments that it shouldn't count as evidence of capability to win a premier tournament.
Nobody says that Protoss cannot win premier tournaments, WCS NA is in that category People say that the highest tier - nowadays the IEM and the Code S hasn't been won by Protoss for ages and that's weird considering everybody is saying Protoss is fine. IN a balanced game we should have other races winning the WC title not just zergs and especially the Code S considering it's more often. But yet here we are, they take just 2nd places, I wonder why. (Trap is kong, Zest not)
On February 07 2022 04:43 honorablemacroterran wrote: Simply believing that Maru and Rogue are the favorites does not preclude Protoss from winning premier tournaments. Maybe you should spend your time supporting Protoss pros instead of telling people not to watch the game. Obviously Maru at least can lose to Protoss in a premier tournament as Zest proved in the Super Tournament.
To probably close to 2/3 of the rest of us who like Terran or Zerg, it sounds like you want to buff Protoss so heavily that the best players are no longer favorites to win tournaments just to make sure that Protoss has more victories. That sounds insane.
When was the last time Protoss was a favorite to win a Code S or an IEM? We have 4-year streak of zergs winning the world championship (IEM/Blizzcon), we have how long exactly without a Protoss victor of the Code S? 4 years now?
I dare to say that in the last 3 years there was NONE protoss favorite to win ANY of these.
Especially after Maru dismantled both Stats and Zest in the Code S in two speedruns.
The only tournamnets where Protoss are favorites are meme ones - GSL ST for some reason is Protoss favorite and WCS NA.
Edit> In 4 years we have no other World Champion than Zerg and no other Code S champion than a Zerg or a Terran. So tell me, mighty TL user, why is that? Protoss players can win "lower" tournaments, so what keeps them from winning what most consider the top tournaments? And it's not just Trap. This period covers Parting(although...), Classic and Stats too
edit2> WCS NA is a meme and Protoss being the champion for ST is a meme considering they're not champion favorites for anything else besides WCS NA.
Trap was considered by most people to be the #1 favourite for last years Katowice as he was in insane form back then. But we all know how that ended...
On February 07 2022 05:30 honorablemacroterran wrote: Or maybe there's nothing fundamentally different between the Super Tournament and Code S except preparation time and the fact that Protoss wins Super Tournament but not Code S is because of either preparation time or random chance? In that regard, it's actually closer to the non-Code S premiers, though. I don't understand why Protoss think that Super Tournament is so fundamentally different from other premier tournaments that it shouldn't count as evidence of capability to win a premier tournament.
Nobody says that Protoss cannot win premier tournaments, WCS NA is in that category People say that the highest tier - nowadays the IEM and the Code S hasn't been won by Protoss for ages and that's weird considering everybody is saying Protoss is fine. IN a balanced game we should have other races winning the WC title not just zergs and especially the Code S considering it's more often. But yet here we are, they take just 2nd places, I wonder why. (Trap is kong, Zest not)
On February 07 2022 04:43 honorablemacroterran wrote: Simply believing that Maru and Rogue are the favorites does not preclude Protoss from winning premier tournaments. Maybe you should spend your time supporting Protoss pros instead of telling people not to watch the game. Obviously Maru at least can lose to Protoss in a premier tournament as Zest proved in the Super Tournament.
To probably close to 2/3 of the rest of us who like Terran or Zerg, it sounds like you want to buff Protoss so heavily that the best players are no longer favorites to win tournaments just to make sure that Protoss has more victories. That sounds insane.
When was the last time Protoss was a favorite to win a Code S or an IEM? We have 4-year streak of zergs winning the world championship (IEM/Blizzcon), we have how long exactly without a Protoss victor of the Code S? 4 years now?
I dare to say that in the last 3 years there was NONE protoss favorite to win ANY of these.
Especially after Maru dismantled both Stats and Zest in the Code S in two speedruns.
The only tournamnets where Protoss are favorites are meme ones - GSL ST for some reason is Protoss favorite and WCS NA.
Edit> In 4 years we have no other World Champion than Zerg and no other Code S champion than a Zerg or a Terran. So tell me, mighty TL user, why is that? Protoss players can win "lower" tournaments, so what keeps them from winning what most consider the top tournaments? And it's not just Trap. This period covers Parting(although...), Classic and Stats too
edit2> WCS NA is a meme and Protoss being the champion for ST is a meme considering they're not champion favorites for anything else besides WCS NA.
Trap was considered by most people to be the #1 favourite for last years Katowice as he was in insane form back then. But we all know how that ended...
And I laughed myself to falling of the chair
Are you laughing because of how hard he failed at that Katowice or because you don't think he was the favourite? If it's the latter then your memory might be failing you and in hindsight he maybe shouldn't have been considered the favourite but back then he wasn't known as a tier 1 tournament choker yet and he was the player in the best form. Before that Katowice casters considered him the favourite, players considered him the favourite (sometimes along with Serral or Rogue but everyone also mentioned Trap when asked)
On February 07 2022 05:30 honorablemacroterran wrote: Or maybe there's nothing fundamentally different between the Super Tournament and Code S except preparation time and the fact that Protoss wins Super Tournament but not Code S is because of either preparation time or random chance? In that regard, it's actually closer to the non-Code S premiers, though. I don't understand why Protoss think that Super Tournament is so fundamentally different from other premier tournaments that it shouldn't count as evidence of capability to win a premier tournament.
Nobody says that Protoss cannot win premier tournaments, WCS NA is in that category People say that the highest tier - nowadays the IEM and the Code S hasn't been won by Protoss for ages and that's weird considering everybody is saying Protoss is fine. IN a balanced game we should have other races winning the WC title not just zergs and especially the Code S considering it's more often. But yet here we are, they take just 2nd places, I wonder why. (Trap is kong, Zest not)
On February 07 2022 07:35 Charoisaur wrote:
On February 07 2022 05:07 deacon.frost wrote:
On February 07 2022 04:43 honorablemacroterran wrote: Simply believing that Maru and Rogue are the favorites does not preclude Protoss from winning premier tournaments. Maybe you should spend your time supporting Protoss pros instead of telling people not to watch the game. Obviously Maru at least can lose to Protoss in a premier tournament as Zest proved in the Super Tournament.
To probably close to 2/3 of the rest of us who like Terran or Zerg, it sounds like you want to buff Protoss so heavily that the best players are no longer favorites to win tournaments just to make sure that Protoss has more victories. That sounds insane.
When was the last time Protoss was a favorite to win a Code S or an IEM? We have 4-year streak of zergs winning the world championship (IEM/Blizzcon), we have how long exactly without a Protoss victor of the Code S? 4 years now?
I dare to say that in the last 3 years there was NONE protoss favorite to win ANY of these.
Especially after Maru dismantled both Stats and Zest in the Code S in two speedruns.
The only tournamnets where Protoss are favorites are meme ones - GSL ST for some reason is Protoss favorite and WCS NA.
Edit> In 4 years we have no other World Champion than Zerg and no other Code S champion than a Zerg or a Terran. So tell me, mighty TL user, why is that? Protoss players can win "lower" tournaments, so what keeps them from winning what most consider the top tournaments? And it's not just Trap. This period covers Parting(although...), Classic and Stats too
edit2> WCS NA is a meme and Protoss being the champion for ST is a meme considering they're not champion favorites for anything else besides WCS NA.
Trap was considered by most people to be the #1 favourite for last years Katowice as he was in insane form back then. But we all know how that ended...
And I laughed myself to falling of the chair
Are you laughing because of how hard he failed at that Katowice or because you don't think he was the favourite? If it's the latter then your memory might be failing you and in hindsight he maybe shouldn't have been considered the favourite but back then he wasn't known as a tier 1 tournament choker yet and he was the player in the best form. Before that Katowice casters considered him the favourite, players considered him the favourite (sometimes along with Serral or Rogue but everyone also mentioned Trap when asked)
Trap is a little bit better version of Clem. Everybody considers him being a favorite for almost everything while him not being able to win anything relevant. As an example - Clem has never won an international tournament(in other words with Koreans in it). Yet he was among favorites even though he never delivered. Trap was a favorite - sure, why not. But he NEVER won any of these high tier tournaments. A dark horse? Sure, why not. But a clear favorite? Sorry not sorry, it's not just about form but about the ability to deliver and Trap is missing this in the Code S and WC. An older example can be Cure - every time we heard how Cure dominates the online competition and how he's among the favorites of the Code S. And every time he failed. That's why we had the online Cure and offline Cure (edit> I am aware that he finally delivered the Code S title after years of this)
And sure, I don't think players would say - hey, look ,Trap has one of the best forms possible, but his mind will fail him horribly and he won't win the IEM because of this. Who would have the balls to say this?
there's a difference between never having won an international tournament at all and just not having won the highest tier of tournaments but tournaments with the same player pool. Also my point is that back then he wasn't known as a tier 1 tournament choker yet so it was expected he would perform as well as in the tier 2 tournaments he won
On February 05 2022 09:23 Nebuchad wrote: I see we got some new analysts in here so my offer is still up, if anyone wants to bet 50$ to my 500$ that protoss is going to win less of the 10 next premier tournaments than the other two races, hit me up
It's such a false premise.
Recently, 2 Protoss made it to GSL ST RO4 and 1 won the championship.
Winning grand finals is a smaller fraction of a a small sample size of population. It's the best of the best. Nerves also play a huge factor. Others will see "silly mistakes" that Dark made. But that shows how intense and volatile grand finals can be.
Representation at RO4 is what matters. And Protoss does not struggle there.
It's a false premise for what lol. People are in this thread pretending that they don't think protoss is getting trounced at the highest level, I offer them 10 to 1 that protoss wins the least amount of tournaments in the future and they refuse to take it. My premise is true: they don't really believe the shit they say.
RO4 in GSL is the highest level. They are the top 4 players in the toughest SC2 tournament in the world.
The premise that grand finals is indicative of balance, while turning a blind eye on RO4 and RO8 representation, is such a joke.
I have made no comment regarding balance.
You've only whined incessantly about the performance"of Protoss at your arbitrary definition of "highest level" that excludes Top4 placement in GSLs.
If it's not about balance, what do you want to achieve from your posts?
On February 05 2022 09:23 Nebuchad wrote: I see we got some new analysts in here so my offer is still up, if anyone wants to bet 50$ to my 500$ that protoss is going to win less of the 10 next premier tournaments than the other two races, hit me up
It's such a false premise.
Recently, 2 Protoss made it to GSL ST RO4 and 1 won the championship.
Winning grand finals is a smaller fraction of a a small sample size of population. It's the best of the best. Nerves also play a huge factor. Others will see "silly mistakes" that Dark made. But that shows how intense and volatile grand finals can be.
Representation at RO4 is what matters. And Protoss does not struggle there.
It's a false premise for what lol. People are in this thread pretending that they don't think protoss is getting trounced at the highest level, I offer them 10 to 1 that protoss wins the least amount of tournaments in the future and they refuse to take it. My premise is true: they don't really believe the shit they say.
RO4 in GSL is the highest level. They are the top 4 players in the toughest SC2 tournament in the world.
The premise that grand finals is indicative of balance, while turning a blind eye on RO4 and RO8 representation, is such a joke.
I have made no comment regarding balance.
You've only whined incessantly about the performance"of Protoss at your arbitrary definition of "highest level" that excludes Top4 placement in GSLs.
If it's not about balance, what do you want to achieve from your posts?
I have this thing where I'm annoyed when people are wrong on the internet. I'd rather they wouldn't say things that are obviously untrue.
In this case, it is super obvious that protoss is doing poorly at the highest level. It is not obvious that this is due to balance, it could be for a number of reasons. But we're not even at that stage because half this thread pretends to see some other reality, presumably not because they're silly but more likely because they have ulterior motives.
Look, guys, honorablemacro terran has already figured out what our level of analysis should be, and it's obviously GM (don't look at top 10, though, that would be rude plzkthxbye), Ro48 invitationals and Ro4 of the GSL. Any other level of analysis, be it statistical or design, are just made by whiny baby butts.
On February 10 2022 08:25 Jerubaal wrote: Look, guys, honorablemacro terran has already figured out what our level of analysis should be, and it's obviously GM (don't look at top 10, though, that would be rude plzkthxbye), Ro48 invitationals and Ro4 of the GSL. Any other level of analysis, be it statistical or design, are just made by whiny baby butts.
You sound like you want to balance the game off a sample of 10 players.
On February 10 2022 08:25 Jerubaal wrote: Look, guys, honorablemacro terran has already figured out what our level of analysis should be, and it's obviously GM (don't look at top 10, though, that would be rude plzkthxbye), Ro48 invitationals and Ro4 of the GSL. Any other level of analysis, be it statistical or design, are just made by whiny baby butts.
You sound like you want to balance the game off a sample of 10 players.
Not that I don't think his post wasn't shameless crying but shouldn't this game be balanced around the very top and trickle down to us?
On February 10 2022 08:34 honorablemacroterran wrote:
On February 10 2022 08:25 Jerubaal wrote: Look, guys, honorablemacro terran has already figured out what our level of analysis should be, and it's obviously GM (don't look at top 10, though, that would be rude plzkthxbye), Ro48 invitationals and Ro4 of the GSL. Any other level of analysis, be it statistical or design, are just made by whiny baby butts.
You sound like you want to balance the game off a sample of 10 players.
Not that I don't think his post wasn't shameless crying but shouldn't this game be balanced around the very top and trickle down to us?
No because you are assuming the top 10 players in the world are all of equal skill which is a ridiculous assumption. I'd argue that there is more variance in skill the higher you go up, and small samples are very bad for figuring these things out. It's better to rely on a large sample size so you have something closer to a normal distribution.
On February 10 2022 08:34 honorablemacroterran wrote:
On February 10 2022 08:25 Jerubaal wrote: Look, guys, honorablemacro terran has already figured out what our level of analysis should be, and it's obviously GM (don't look at top 10, though, that would be rude plzkthxbye), Ro48 invitationals and Ro4 of the GSL. Any other level of analysis, be it statistical or design, are just made by whiny baby butts.
You sound like you want to balance the game off a sample of 10 players.
Not that I don't think his post wasn't shameless crying but shouldn't this game be balanced around the very top and trickle down to us?
No because you are assuming the top 10 players in the world are all of equal skill which is a ridiculous assumption. I'd argue that there is more variance in skill the higher you go up, and small samples are very bad for figuring these things out. It's better to rely on a large sample size so you have something closer to a normal distribution.
I don't know, I mean yea a part of me wants to agree that maybe out of the top you have Rogue, Serral and Maru who really stand at the top top and regularly beat up on everyone else. Everyone else in the top 15 I think can all take a series off of each other on any given day, really it's whoever is in better form at the moment.
I don't really want the game balanced around lowbie level play, even if that represents the majority of the player base. I'm in Diamond, I am a lowbie I have no problem admitting that there shouldn't be balance patches around my skill level or even well into mid GM because we can always micro, scout, react and macro better.
On February 10 2022 08:49 honorablemacroterran wrote:
On February 10 2022 08:42 jpg06051992 wrote:
On February 10 2022 08:34 honorablemacroterran wrote:
On February 10 2022 08:25 Jerubaal wrote: Look, guys, honorablemacro terran has already figured out what our level of analysis should be, and it's obviously GM (don't look at top 10, though, that would be rude plzkthxbye), Ro48 invitationals and Ro4 of the GSL. Any other level of analysis, be it statistical or design, are just made by whiny baby butts.
You sound like you want to balance the game off a sample of 10 players.
Not that I don't think his post wasn't shameless crying but shouldn't this game be balanced around the very top and trickle down to us?
No because you are assuming the top 10 players in the world are all of equal skill which is a ridiculous assumption. I'd argue that there is more variance in skill the higher you go up, and small samples are very bad for figuring these things out. It's better to rely on a large sample size so you have something closer to a normal distribution.
I don't know, I mean yea a part of me wants to agree that maybe out of the top you have Rogue, Serral and Maru who really stand at the top top and regularly beat up on everyone else. Everyone else in the top 15 I think can all take a series off of each other on any given day, really it's whoever is in better form at the moment.
I don't really want the game balanced around lowbie level play, even if that represents the majority of the player base. I'm in Diamond, I am a lowbie I have no problem admitting that there shouldn't be balance patches around my skill level or even well into mid GM because we can always micro, scout, react and macro better.
no one said to balance it off lowbie level though. In Brood War there is a problem where the final state of balance was based off of Flash who was the greatest player to ever play the game. Balancing Terran off of Maru would be ridiculous. It's basically forcing the best player to no longer be the favorite. If you balance it off of GM or the top 200 players worldwide you would have a large enough sample size, and not just forcing Maru to no longer be a favorite despite being the best player. If I were that guy who likes attributing sinister motives to people who disagree with him I might surmise that is exactly the outcome certain people want despite knowing he's the best player.
On February 05 2022 09:23 Nebuchad wrote: I see we got some new analysts in here so my offer is still up, if anyone wants to bet 50$ to my 500$ that protoss is going to win less of the 10 next premier tournaments than the other two races, hit me up
It's such a false premise.
Recently, 2 Protoss made it to GSL ST RO4 and 1 won the championship.
Winning grand finals is a smaller fraction of a a small sample size of population. It's the best of the best. Nerves also play a huge factor. Others will see "silly mistakes" that Dark made. But that shows how intense and volatile grand finals can be.
Representation at RO4 is what matters. And Protoss does not struggle there.
It's a false premise for what lol. People are in this thread pretending that they don't think protoss is getting trounced at the highest level, I offer them 10 to 1 that protoss wins the least amount of tournaments in the future and they refuse to take it. My premise is true: they don't really believe the shit they say.
RO4 in GSL is the highest level. They are the top 4 players in the toughest SC2 tournament in the world.
The premise that grand finals is indicative of balance, while turning a blind eye on RO4 and RO8 representation, is such a joke.
I have made no comment regarding balance.
You've only whined incessantly about the performance"of Protoss at your arbitrary definition of "highest level" that excludes Top4 placement in GSLs.
If it's not about balance, what do you want to achieve from your posts?
I have this thing where I'm annoyed when people are wrong on the internet. I'd rather they wouldn't say things that are obviously untrue.
In this case, it is super obvious that protoss is doing poorly at the highest level. It is not obvious that this is due to balance, it could be for a number of reasons. But we're not even at that stage because half this thread pretends to see some other reality, presumably not because they're silly but more likely because they have ulterior motives.
You don't contest that Protoss is well represented in RO4 in GSL.
You keep saying Protoss is "doing poorly at the highest level".
I think you're the one seeing some "other reality" where Top4 in the toughest SC2 tournament is not the highest level.
The game should be balanced to make the competitive playing field as level as possible for anyone who plays this game for a living (i.e, full time pros).
As such, a reasonable floor for balance would be the players qualifying for mainline ESL tournaments (i.e the regionals, season finals, dreamhacks) and other major or premiere international events.
That said, the ceiling is important too, you can't balance solely around GSL winners, but you can certainly make qualitative assessments of what's going at the highest level to identify problems with both balance and design.
On February 11 2022 03:42 Athenau wrote: The game should be balanced to make the competitive playing field as level as possible for anyone who plays this game for a living (i.e, full time pros).
As such, a reasonable floor for balance would be the players qualifying for mainline ESL tournaments (i.e the regionals, season finals, dreamhacks) and other major or premiere international events.
That said, the ceiling is important too, you can't balance solely around GSL winners, but you can certainly make qualitative assessments of what's going at the highest level to identify problems with both balance and design.
This is probably the best wording of it, and I agree completely.
The game doesn't have to be just balanced around Serral and Maru and Zest, I think even the top 30 - 50 players that represent the highest level are still affected by game balance.
Yea Lambo isn't on Maru's level, but he's still a high level player no doubt. Same could be said for other mid tier pro's like Heromarine, Showtime, Ragnarok ect.
The price you pay for a diverse race game is that it'll never be perfectly balanced even "near the top level of play". Furthermore, the level of "Near The Top Level of Play" is changing year to year... season to season.. and sometimes even month to month.
For me, its close enough to balanced. I'm enjoying the GSL this year.
Throughout the decades I've played competitive EA NHL '94 and Super Tecmo Bowl. The respective competitive communities know the games are not perfectly balanced; we play for the pure fun of it.
Seeing as the Olympics are on... guys relax and just play with the amateur spirit!
On February 11 2022 08:11 JimmyJRaynor wrote: The price you pay for a diverse race game is that it'll never be perfectly balanced even "near the top level of play". Furthermore, the level of "Near The Top Level of Play" is changing year to year... season to season.. and sometimes even month to month.
For me, its close enough to balanced. I'm enjoying the GSL this year.
Throughout the decades I've played competitive EA NHL '94 and Super Tecmo Bowl. The respective competitive communities know the games are not perfectly balanced; we play for the pure fun of it.
Seeing as the Olympics are on... guys relax and just play with the amateur spirit!
I think it’s borderline impossible to have factions that stylistically and strategically play differently, cater to different strengths and be totally balanced.
It would be relatively trivial to do so with monotone factions with minor differences, but Starcraft doesn’t do that.
Design qualms aside, being as well balanced as it is is borderline miraculous.
On February 10 2022 08:34 honorablemacroterran wrote:
On February 10 2022 08:25 Jerubaal wrote: Look, guys, honorablemacro terran has already figured out what our level of analysis should be, and it's obviously GM (don't look at top 10, though, that would be rude plzkthxbye), Ro48 invitationals and Ro4 of the GSL. Any other level of analysis, be it statistical or design, are just made by whiny baby butts.
You sound like you want to balance the game off a sample of 10 players.
Not that I don't think his post wasn't shameless crying but shouldn't this game be balanced around the very top and trickle down to us?
You know how satire works? I am embellishing HIS argument. He has argued for the last page (and confirmed by his subsequent post) that he is the decider of what statistics are important. The idea that we have sets of stats that are allowable and subsets of those stats are not allowable is asinine. And, mind you, I'm not saying these aren't valuable stats, just that they aren't THE ONLY stats.
@honorablemacroterran
You seem to be arguing that we shouldn't look at them at all. It should at least be interesting even if the conclusion isn't one of UP/OPness. By your own arguments, isn't it just as reasonable of an analysis to say "GM statistics clearly say that Protoss players are better! Therefore, the lack of equal representation the the very top is indicative of bad design!". I mean, that's the logic of most workplace bias claims.
I've been edging towards this argument for a while, but it should be pretty clear by now that this needs to be a design question and not a 'balance' question. Numerical balance can be achieved by tweaking numbers. We could raise Terans winrate by improving the bunker. We could lower Zerg's by reducing Viper speed. These aren't fundamental, for the most part, to the overall race design.
I agree that Protoss design is bad, but do you really think it can fundamentally change at this point? One of my first posts in this thread made this point, but I think most Protoss players actually don't want that at all because they like it for what it is.
On November 14 2021 07:12 Woosixion wrote: if you ask me, as the easiest race this is exactly what they deserve.. easier/less stressful wins against the vast majority of starcraft players but hitting a wall at the tippity top
what utter bs did i just read... every race should be able to win at the "tippity top". Everything else like "easier races shouldn't be able to win" at this lvl, is just mindblowing nonsense.
On February 12 2022 00:02 honorablemacroterran wrote: I agree that Protoss design is bad, but do you really think it can fundamentally change at this point? One of my first posts in this thread made this point, but I think most Protoss players actually don't want that at all because they like it for what it is.
Hey I recognize your name from the Wardii stream, awesome of you to donate man
I think people blow Protoss's bad design issues way out of proportion. Protoss is suffering from power creep, particularly Gateway units. Over time Zerg has just had to much practice dealing with Zealots, Stalkers, Adepts, and obviously Sentries which imo have suffered the most because of Ravagers coming into play.
The high level games of ZvP that I watch (literally every video on Cranky Ducklings which is all the Asia ESL matches, everything on Alpha X and when Wardii decides he's done posting ZvT and mirror matches) Gateway units still play a critical role, especially force fields, but they just seem lack luster to what's able to be put on the field right away.
I think if Gateway units received some minor buffs it would make a world of difference. Obviously the simple solution for ZvP is to nerf the Lurker in any manner of meaningful and already proposed ways. All from removing Talons (my choice) to a different poster here saying that maybe Storm should be buffed against Burrowed units which while I don't think it's an elegant change, I actually really like it because it's very ZvP targeted.
I'm really hoping we get the balance patch after IEM, and I'm really hoping that Protoss get's some good QoL buffs or even just some nerf reversals. If the upgrade and Prism nerfs were reverted I think that would really help out alot. Those were knee jerk reaction nerfs anyways.
On February 12 2022 00:02 honorablemacroterran wrote: I agree that Protoss design is bad, but do you really think it can fundamentally change at this point? One of my first posts in this thread made this point, but I think most Protoss players actually don't want that at all because they like it for what it is.
I'm really hoping we get the balance patch after IEM, and I'm really hoping that Protoss get's some good QoL buffs or even just some nerf reversals. If the upgrade and Prism nerfs were reverted I think that would really help out alot. Those were knee jerk reaction nerfs anyways.
Protoss is the last race in need of QoL buffs. They're already easier to play.
Any protoss changes at this point should be a net benefit the players with top 10 control and spending, and no-one else, unless you want to see nearly every early match in every single cup be PvP.
Shifting power from sky + storm to ground armies that require more serious positioning is IMO a pretty necessary step for this.
On February 12 2022 00:02 honorablemacroterran wrote: I agree that Protoss design is bad, but do you really think it can fundamentally change at this point? One of my first posts in this thread made this point, but I think most Protoss players actually don't want that at all because they like it for what it is.
I'm really hoping we get the balance patch after IEM, and I'm really hoping that Protoss get's some good QoL buffs or even just some nerf reversals. If the upgrade and Prism nerfs were reverted I think that would really help out alot. Those were knee jerk reaction nerfs anyways.
Protoss is the last race in need of QoL buffs. They're already easier to play.
Any protoss changes at this point should be a net benefit the players with top 10 control and spending, and no-one else, unless you want to see nearly every early match in every single cup be PvP.
Shifting power from sky + storm to ground armies that require more serious positioning is IMO a pretty necessary step for this.
Be careful when you talk about, "easier to play" because that's really an eye of the beholder type of statement. I'll be the first one to admit that in terms of sheer APM/mechanical requirements, Protoss has a bit less to do, but I would argue that at the top 10 level Protoss is even harder to play because Protoss get less value out of their APM then Zerg and less value from their micro then Terran.
I mean, as far as QoL buffs are concerned, I'm pretty much only talking about small things like undoing the Warp Prism and upgrade nerf, just to give Protoss some additional ground harassment options and maybe some slightly sharper upgrade timings.
Massive redesigns I think are off the table forever, time to stop beating that dead horse about fundamentally altering Skytoss vs. Groundtoss or Warp Gate. Like yea I want them changed too but that ship has sailed and even if this magical balance patch does happen (please God let it happen..) I don't think that the current team will be even remotely capable of implementing such radical design changes.
Changes like that would take multitudes of patches and a year or more or high level play to flesh out. Alot of people don't remember back in the days of yore when Roaches were considered one of the worst units in the game. Then they got a +1 range buff and became a staple unit in all match ups. Starcraft 2 doesn't even need radical redesigns at this point.
By your own logic, why would Skytoss get power shifted away from it when concerning the top 10 players they make it look very manageable to deal with it, Serral makes it look just plain easy.
I think some people are missing something fundamental about this problem. I agree that it's harder for high level protoss players to differentiate themselves from less skilled Protoss players because quite frankly there is a limit to micro on a lot of their units. Let's say each race has a "power function" that is determined by the stats of its units and abilities, etc. as well as the individual players' skills. The "shape" of this function is determined by the actual game design, but you can tweak the values assigned to units and abilities, with player skill being exogeneous from this. I think what we're dealing with is something like the below.
The problem is with the design of Protoss, which causes the power curve to have the shape it does. The question is if you want to shift that green line up even higher just so the best players in the world no longer have an advantage when you get to the top ten players. Does that seem fair to you? That is what just buffing Protoss without reworking it would do.
Can't wait for katowice playoffs being even more zergy than blizzcon 2019 but toss haters here still will talk about some fairy design flaws! No my guys, it's very simple protoss is the most underpowered and hard to play race.
On February 12 2022 04:27 Elantris wrote: Can't wait for katowice playoffs being even more zergy than blizzcon 2019 but toss haters here still will talk about some fairy design flaws! No my guys, it's very simple protoss is the most underpowered and hard to play race.
It is not the hardest race to play.
Most allusions to Protoss design flaws are very much with a mind of increasing the potential for skilled players to get the most mileage out of their skills.
What makes the race relatively easier to play at lower levels is precisely what makes it harder at S tier competition. It’s A-move friendly and its AoE shreds, until you’re playing a Maru or a Serral with a bunch of units you can only A-move with and they can dodge your AoE or snipe your casters reliably.
On February 12 2022 04:02 honorablemacroterran wrote: I think some people are missing something fundamental about this problem. I agree that it's harder for high level protoss players to differentiate themselves from less skilled Protoss players because quite frankly there is a limit to micro on a lot of their units. Let's say each race has a "power function" that is determined by the stats of its units and abilities, etc. as well as the individual players' skills. The "shape" of this function is determined by the actual game design, but you can tweak the values assigned to units and abilities, with player skill being exogeneous from this. I think what we're dealing with is something like the below.
The problem is with the design of Protoss, which causes the power curve to have the shape it does. The question is if you want to shift that green line up even higher just so the best players in the world no longer have an advantage when you get to the top ten players. Does that seem fair to you? That is what just buffing Protoss without reworking it would do.
Yes it does seem fair, it's fair in the sense that all balance for the game is derived from players who are playing as close as possible to perfection. Everything below that can be countered by increased player skill.
If I have to clean my macro up a bit or play less greedy because Warp Prisms go back to 6 range and 200 minerals or whatever or because Gateway timings are stronger because the upgrade nerfs were reverted then why is that a bad thing? Taking away an unfair advantage for Zerg doesn't mean that you're giving Protoss an unfair advantage, it just levels the playing field.
This is just pure conjecture on my end, but If it positively impacts the pro scene, that means that tournaments stay stronger and retain stronger viewership. Protoss struggling to win major tournaments means more ZvZ and TvT in the later stages of tournament finals, more people are going to tune in for a greater variety of game types. I personally think that ZvT is the zenith of top level SC2 play but even sometimes I get a little irritated at Wardii for having 10 + ZvT on his Youtube and no ZvP.
If you buff Protoss across the board at all skill levels it will do more harm than good. They should have to micro like everyone else and then they can get the benefit of micro like everyone else.
Also, as I said before, to make Protoss more competitive with Maru the way the race currently is, it wouldn't just be unfair for lower levels, it would also be unfair for Maru because he actually has to control his units much more intensively than his Protoss opponents do.
On February 12 2022 07:34 honorablemacroterran wrote: If you buff Protoss across the board at all skill levels it will do more harm than good. They should have to micro like everyone else and then they can get the benefit of micro like everyone else.
Also, as I said before, to make Protoss more competitive with Maru the way the race currently is, it wouldn't just be unfair for lower levels, it would also be unfair for Maru because he actually has to control his units much more intensively than his Protoss opponents do.
Protoss can do some great things micro and control wise, it’s just a shame it doesn’t really scale as armies get bigger.
Phoenixes and blink stalkers are real finesse units, you can really see the skill of a Trap or a Parting in those 60-90 supply skirmishes. Some folks get crazy stuff done with only a warp prism and a prayer.
And even if it’s technically as difficult, controlling those technical lategame armies is never as visually impressive as Terran’s base unit micro, unless you’re watching from a player’s view. Same with lategame Zerg comps.
Even Maru‘s mastery of defensive play with really technical armies is probably actually more impressive than some of his feats with bio, but it sure as hell isn’t as fun.
There is also the whole strategy aspect to the game as well. Which for some reason is frequently neglected in talking about player skill. Maru is without peer mechanically, or that’s close to being the case, but a Zest can still be competitive by being a wizard at making builds and reading games well and by being tactically pretty darn good.
I like how generally the game can accommodate different skillsets, albeit not perfectly.
On February 12 2022 07:34 honorablemacroterran wrote: If you buff Protoss across the board at all skill levels it will do more harm than good. They should have to micro like everyone else and then they can get the benefit of micro like everyone else.
Also, as I said before, to make Protoss more competitive with Maru the way the race currently is, it wouldn't just be unfair for lower levels, it would also be unfair for Maru because he actually has to control his units much more intensively than his Protoss opponents do.
Protoss can do some great things micro and control wise, it’s just a shame it doesn’t really scale as armies get bigger.
Phoenixes and blink stalkers are real finesse units, you can really see the skill of a Trap or a Parting in those 60-90 supply skirmishes. Some folks get crazy stuff done with only a warp prism and a prayer.
And even if it’s technically as difficult, controlling those technical lategame armies is never as visually impressive as Terran’s base unit micro, unless you’re watching from a player’s view. Same with lategame Zerg comps.
Even Maru‘s mastery of defensive play with really technical armies is probably actually more impressive than some of his feats with bio, but it sure as hell isn’t as fun.
There is also the whole strategy aspect to the game as well. Which for some reason is frequently neglected in talking about player skill. Maru is without peer mechanically, or that’s close to being the case, but a Zest can still be competitive by being a wizard at making builds and reading games well and by being tactically pretty darn good.
I like how generally the game can accommodate different skillsets, albeit not perfectly.
The reason it comes up is that all races require strategy but some require more micro than others. That is the thing that's different. Are you really suggesting that Maru has weaker strategy when he is the top Terran and the top Protoss on the ladder?
On February 12 2022 07:34 honorablemacroterran wrote: If you buff Protoss across the board at all skill levels it will do more harm than good. They should have to micro like everyone else and then they can get the benefit of micro like everyone else.
Also, as I said before, to make Protoss more competitive with Maru the way the race currently is, it wouldn't just be unfair for lower levels, it would also be unfair for Maru because he actually has to control his units much more intensively than his Protoss opponents do.
Protoss can do some great things micro and control wise, it’s just a shame it doesn’t really scale as armies get bigger.
Phoenixes and blink stalkers are real finesse units, you can really see the skill of a Trap or a Parting in those 60-90 supply skirmishes. Some folks get crazy stuff done with only a warp prism and a prayer.
And even if it’s technically as difficult, controlling those technical lategame armies is never as visually impressive as Terran’s base unit micro, unless you’re watching from a player’s view. Same with lategame Zerg comps.
Even Maru‘s mastery of defensive play with really technical armies is probably actually more impressive than some of his feats with bio, but it sure as hell isn’t as fun.
There is also the whole strategy aspect to the game as well. Which for some reason is frequently neglected in talking about player skill. Maru is without peer mechanically, or that’s close to being the case, but a Zest can still be competitive by being a wizard at making builds and reading games well and by being tactically pretty darn good.
I like how generally the game can accommodate different skillsets, albeit not perfectly.
The reason it comes up is that all races require strategy but some require more micro than others. That is the thing that's different. Are you really suggesting that Maru has weaker strategy when he is the top Terran and the top Protoss on the ladder?
Ladder is ladder. It’s a whole bunch of blind 1v1s, it’s rather different from even weekender tournament play, even more different from GSL’s prep format.
Maru is not weak strategically/tactically, merely others are better in this domain. Quite a lot of players.
Considering Maru is the best, or close to the best in all mechanical aspects of the game, if he was similarly gifted in that domain he’d have ground the competition into dust.
Unless you’re doing the usual Terran martyr crap of ‘omg my stutter step micro’ despite making terrible strategic decisions.
TY was a better strategic/tactical player, who was worse mechanically. Rogue is better in that domain, Zest is better, sOS is better but so deficient mechanically it’s not super important. Dark is better, IMO. Serral is probably better.
None of those players are better than Maru IMO, they’re just stronger in that aspect of the game.
On February 12 2022 09:47 honorablemacroterran wrote:
On February 12 2022 08:48 WombaT wrote:
On February 12 2022 07:34 honorablemacroterran wrote: If you buff Protoss across the board at all skill levels it will do more harm than good. They should have to micro like everyone else and then they can get the benefit of micro like everyone else.
Also, as I said before, to make Protoss more competitive with Maru the way the race currently is, it wouldn't just be unfair for lower levels, it would also be unfair for Maru because he actually has to control his units much more intensively than his Protoss opponents do.
Protoss can do some great things micro and control wise, it’s just a shame it doesn’t really scale as armies get bigger.
Phoenixes and blink stalkers are real finesse units, you can really see the skill of a Trap or a Parting in those 60-90 supply skirmishes. Some folks get crazy stuff done with only a warp prism and a prayer.
And even if it’s technically as difficult, controlling those technical lategame armies is never as visually impressive as Terran’s base unit micro, unless you’re watching from a player’s view. Same with lategame Zerg comps.
Even Maru‘s mastery of defensive play with really technical armies is probably actually more impressive than some of his feats with bio, but it sure as hell isn’t as fun.
There is also the whole strategy aspect to the game as well. Which for some reason is frequently neglected in talking about player skill. Maru is without peer mechanically, or that’s close to being the case, but a Zest can still be competitive by being a wizard at making builds and reading games well and by being tactically pretty darn good.
I like how generally the game can accommodate different skillsets, albeit not perfectly.
The reason it comes up is that all races require strategy but some require more micro than others. That is the thing that's different. Are you really suggesting that Maru has weaker strategy when he is the top Terran and the top Protoss on the ladder?
Ladder is ladder. It’s a whole bunch of blind 1v1s, it’s rather different from even weekender tournament play, even more different from GSL’s prep format.
Maru is not weak strategically/tactically, merely others are better in this domain. Quite a lot of players.
Considering Maru is the best, or close to the best in all mechanical aspects of the game, if he was similarly gifted in that domain he’d have ground the competition into dust.
Unless you’re doing the usual Terran martyr crap of ‘omg my stutter step micro’ despite making terrible strategic decisions.
TY was a better strategic/tactical player, who was worse mechanically. Rogue is better in that domain, Zest is better, sOS is better but so deficient mechanically it’s not super important. Dark is better, IMO. Serral is probably better.
None of those players are better than Maru IMO, they’re just stronger in that aspect of the game.
On February 12 2022 09:47 honorablemacroterran wrote:
On February 12 2022 08:48 WombaT wrote:
On February 12 2022 07:34 honorablemacroterran wrote: If you buff Protoss across the board at all skill levels it will do more harm than good. They should have to micro like everyone else and then they can get the benefit of micro like everyone else.
Also, as I said before, to make Protoss more competitive with Maru the way the race currently is, it wouldn't just be unfair for lower levels, it would also be unfair for Maru because he actually has to control his units much more intensively than his Protoss opponents do.
Protoss can do some great things micro and control wise, it’s just a shame it doesn’t really scale as armies get bigger.
Phoenixes and blink stalkers are real finesse units, you can really see the skill of a Trap or a Parting in those 60-90 supply skirmishes. Some folks get crazy stuff done with only a warp prism and a prayer.
And even if it’s technically as difficult, controlling those technical lategame armies is never as visually impressive as Terran’s base unit micro, unless you’re watching from a player’s view. Same with lategame Zerg comps.
Even Maru‘s mastery of defensive play with really technical armies is probably actually more impressive than some of his feats with bio, but it sure as hell isn’t as fun.
There is also the whole strategy aspect to the game as well. Which for some reason is frequently neglected in talking about player skill. Maru is without peer mechanically, or that’s close to being the case, but a Zest can still be competitive by being a wizard at making builds and reading games well and by being tactically pretty darn good.
I like how generally the game can accommodate different skillsets, albeit not perfectly.
The reason it comes up is that all races require strategy but some require more micro than others. That is the thing that's different. Are you really suggesting that Maru has weaker strategy when he is the top Terran and the top Protoss on the ladder?
Ladder is ladder. It’s a whole bunch of blind 1v1s, it’s rather different from even weekender tournament play, even more different from GSL’s prep format.
Maru is not weak strategically/tactically, merely others are better in this domain. Quite a lot of players.
Considering Maru is the best, or close to the best in all mechanical aspects of the game, if he was similarly gifted in that domain he’d have ground the competition into dust.
Unless you’re doing the usual Terran martyr crap of ‘omg my stutter step micro’ despite making terrible strategic decisions.
TY was a better strategic/tactical player, who was worse mechanically. Rogue is better in that domain, Zest is better, sOS is better but so deficient mechanically it’s not super important. Dark is better, IMO. Serral is probably better.
None of those players are better than Maru IMO, they’re just stronger in that aspect of the game.
On February 12 2022 11:40 WombaT wrote: Maru is the greatest player in SC2’s history at executing things properly, he can be beaten by smart plays by people with greater strategic nous.
If that’s ‘outrageous’ it’s the Terran martyr complex in a nutshell.
On February 12 2022 09:47 honorablemacroterran wrote:
On February 12 2022 08:48 WombaT wrote:
On February 12 2022 07:34 honorablemacroterran wrote: If you buff Protoss across the board at all skill levels it will do more harm than good. They should have to micro like everyone else and then they can get the benefit of micro like everyone else.
Also, as I said before, to make Protoss more competitive with Maru the way the race currently is, it wouldn't just be unfair for lower levels, it would also be unfair for Maru because he actually has to control his units much more intensively than his Protoss opponents do.
Protoss can do some great things micro and control wise, it’s just a shame it doesn’t really scale as armies get bigger.
Phoenixes and blink stalkers are real finesse units, you can really see the skill of a Trap or a Parting in those 60-90 supply skirmishes. Some folks get crazy stuff done with only a warp prism and a prayer.
And even if it’s technically as difficult, controlling those technical lategame armies is never as visually impressive as Terran’s base unit micro, unless you’re watching from a player’s view. Same with lategame Zerg comps.
Even Maru‘s mastery of defensive play with really technical armies is probably actually more impressive than some of his feats with bio, but it sure as hell isn’t as fun.
There is also the whole strategy aspect to the game as well. Which for some reason is frequently neglected in talking about player skill. Maru is without peer mechanically, or that’s close to being the case, but a Zest can still be competitive by being a wizard at making builds and reading games well and by being tactically pretty darn good.
I like how generally the game can accommodate different skillsets, albeit not perfectly.
The reason it comes up is that all races require strategy but some require more micro than others. That is the thing that's different. Are you really suggesting that Maru has weaker strategy when he is the top Terran and the top Protoss on the ladder?
Ladder is ladder. It’s a whole bunch of blind 1v1s, it’s rather different from even weekender tournament play, even more different from GSL’s prep format.
Maru is not weak strategically/tactically, merely others are better in this domain. Quite a lot of players.
Considering Maru is the best, or close to the best in all mechanical aspects of the game, if he was similarly gifted in that domain he’d have ground the competition into dust.
Unless you’re doing the usual Terran martyr crap of ‘omg my stutter step micro’ despite making terrible strategic decisions.
TY was a better strategic/tactical player, who was worse mechanically. Rogue is better in that domain, Zest is better, sOS is better but so deficient mechanically it’s not super important. Dark is better, IMO. Serral is probably better.
None of those players are better than Maru IMO, they’re just stronger in that aspect of the game.
I think you underrate his stratetical/tactical prowess - he's stubborn sometimes yes, but he also has a great range of strategies and knows when to mix it up and go for proxys, and during his 4-peat run had excellent series planning. Not to mention those 30 minute lategames where he just makes correct decision after correct decision and knows exactly when to attack and when to defend, perfectly adapts his unit composition at all times etc.
I can see TY, Rogue and sOs being strategically better but hard disagree on the other players you mentioned
I wonder if terrans in general are under the impression that terran requires strategy or if it's just this guy. The relationship is basically the same as micro but in reverse.
On February 12 2022 09:47 honorablemacroterran wrote:
On February 12 2022 08:48 WombaT wrote:
On February 12 2022 07:34 honorablemacroterran wrote: If you buff Protoss across the board at all skill levels it will do more harm than good. They should have to micro like everyone else and then they can get the benefit of micro like everyone else.
Also, as I said before, to make Protoss more competitive with Maru the way the race currently is, it wouldn't just be unfair for lower levels, it would also be unfair for Maru because he actually has to control his units much more intensively than his Protoss opponents do.
Protoss can do some great things micro and control wise, it’s just a shame it doesn’t really scale as armies get bigger.
Phoenixes and blink stalkers are real finesse units, you can really see the skill of a Trap or a Parting in those 60-90 supply skirmishes. Some folks get crazy stuff done with only a warp prism and a prayer.
And even if it’s technically as difficult, controlling those technical lategame armies is never as visually impressive as Terran’s base unit micro, unless you’re watching from a player’s view. Same with lategame Zerg comps.
Even Maru‘s mastery of defensive play with really technical armies is probably actually more impressive than some of his feats with bio, but it sure as hell isn’t as fun.
There is also the whole strategy aspect to the game as well. Which for some reason is frequently neglected in talking about player skill. Maru is without peer mechanically, or that’s close to being the case, but a Zest can still be competitive by being a wizard at making builds and reading games well and by being tactically pretty darn good.
I like how generally the game can accommodate different skillsets, albeit not perfectly.
The reason it comes up is that all races require strategy but some require more micro than others. That is the thing that's different. Are you really suggesting that Maru has weaker strategy when he is the top Terran and the top Protoss on the ladder?
Ladder is ladder. It’s a whole bunch of blind 1v1s, it’s rather different from even weekender tournament play, even more different from GSL’s prep format.
Maru is not weak strategically/tactically, merely others are better in this domain. Quite a lot of players.
Considering Maru is the best, or close to the best in all mechanical aspects of the game, if he was similarly gifted in that domain he’d have ground the competition into dust.
Unless you’re doing the usual Terran martyr crap of ‘omg my stutter step micro’ despite making terrible strategic decisions.
TY was a better strategic/tactical player, who was worse mechanically. Rogue is better in that domain, Zest is better, sOS is better but so deficient mechanically it’s not super important. Dark is better, IMO. Serral is probably better.
None of those players are better than Maru IMO, they’re just stronger in that aspect of the game.
I think you underrate his stratetical/tactical prowess - he's stubborn sometimes yes, but he also has a great range of strategies and knows when to mix it up and go for proxys, and during his 4-peat run had excellent series planning. Not to mention those 30 minute lategames where he just makes correct decision after correct decision and knows exactly when to attack and when to defend, perfectly adapts his unit composition at all times etc.
I can see TY, Rogue and sOs being strategically better but hard disagree on the other players you mentioned
He’s still very good, amongst the very best. Some of his lategames are a series of perfect adaptations and positioning as you say.
His overall power hexagon is more well-rounded than basically anyone’s, but a few will have him beat on those specific stats. And it is a few.
The last player I think who was simultaneously the best mechanically and strategically/tactically was arguably Mvp, and that’s a bloody long time ago.
Innovation in his latter years, or Byun frequently these days are players who try to brute force it with mechanics than Maru would be.
Bit of a tangent but hey! Ultimately I think Protoss players may have to be stronger in planning series, and arguably tactically.
PvZ at the highest level is the most build/prep reliant matchup in the game, from one direction. ZvP and TvZ from either direction it’s a bonus to have tricky, smart builds but you can turn up and play a similar gameplan every set if you’re a Maru/Rogue calibre player.
PvP is the most see-sawing, technical mirror at times, and it’s the least liable to be brute-forced by better mechanics.
I quite like the idea that a race in an asymmetric strategy game is the tactical/decision race, one race is more micro mechanical focused and the other is more macro mechanic focused. That’s a reasonable template for a 3 faction strategy game, provided the divergence isn’t too extreme. The alternative is for each faction to have similar demands and rewards in all these areas while still being distinct flavour wise, which is also a fine template.
SC2 has some of the worst of both worlds. Terran requires both good unit control, but good macro and really good reads to boot.
Protoss has a niche as the build race but is so dependent on hiding intentions and gambling rather than doing it in a more flexible dynamic manner.
On February 12 2022 07:34 honorablemacroterran wrote: If you buff Protoss across the board at all skill levels it will do more harm than good. They should have to micro like everyone else and then they can get the benefit of micro like everyone else.
Also, as I said before, to make Protoss more competitive with Maru the way the race currently is, it wouldn't just be unfair for lower levels, it would also be unfair for Maru because he actually has to control his units much more intensively than his Protoss opponents do.
I think Protoss is actaully reasonably competitive with Maru. Zest just beat him 3-1, and while Maru is def a favorite in a rematch, Zest is a live dog.
I think even at pro levels it's hard to argue that T is really favored over P, and I agree that just buffing P here would be totally unfair.
I think the only thing worth considering are Z nerfs AND P nerfs in a way that
1. makes ground based toss armies viable. I think this will just make better games. 2. not affect ZvT or PvT
A possible example is void rays require fleet beacon, and lurker unborrow speed is increased. The effect would be that disruptors can now fight lurkers better, at pro level play. I think ZvT is unaffected since i don't think unburrow helps you dodge snipe or tank shots very much. PvT is probably positively effected since we get rid of those disgusting void ray all-ins.
Finally, while I agree with your graph, I think it's exaggerated. I think there is a clear difference between top Protosses and the next 10. Like Zest, Showtime, Maxpax, and Trap (when he's on) are just CLEARLY better than the other protosses in the top 50. The graph you drew would suggest very little difference in their "power", but this is not the case as Zest and Trap hold the vast vast vast majority of Toss tournament wins.
On November 14 2021 07:12 Woosixion wrote: if you ask me, as the easiest race this is exactly what they deserve.. easier/less stressful wins against the vast majority of starcraft players but hitting a wall at the tippity top
what utter bs did i just read... every race should be able to win at the "tippity top". Everything else like "easier races shouldn't be able to win" at this lvl, is just mindblowing nonsense.
The last few pages have been very productive in my opinion. It's been filled with so many self-reports.
On February 19 2022 04:32 Charoisaur wrote: Yeah what Lambo says confirms what I already thought, not sure where the myth that Lurkers are the reason Toss opens Skytoss comes from
It's also while I do think that the Lurker is too strong vs. Protoss ground armies, nerfing the Lurker is not going to make Protoss stop opening Stargate every ZvP.
Just watched the HeroMarine vs Showtime series. There were two instances where HM ignored the Oracles in his base and they just ran out of energy and sadly went home.
On February 20 2022 14:14 Jerubaal wrote: Just watched the HeroMarine vs Showtime series. There were two instances where HM ignored the Oracles in his base and they just ran out of energy and sadly went home.
I think you're misinterpreting why people might "ignore" Oracles.
I'm saying that the Terran can look at the one or two oracles going to their base and calculate the damage. I believe that HeroMarine lost 8 SCVs to one Oracle and 13 to two. HM decided that the damage he was doing was worth more than those SCVs and he didn't need to do anything. You can't do that with hellions and lings. You can't just ignore them and then eventually the problem goes away. They will continue doing damage at a steady rate. Oracles do a certain amount of damage and then do nothing for a while afterward.
And I think that for some reason the Blizz devs got it into their heads that they need to make every single Protoss unit do a very specific amount of damage in a very specific role.
On February 21 2022 11:16 Jerubaal wrote: I'm saying that the Terran can look at the one or two oracles going to their base and calculate the damage. I believe that HeroMarine lost 8 SCVs to one Oracle and 13 to two. HM decided that the damage he was doing was worth more than those SCVs and he didn't need to do anything. You can't do that with hellions and lings. You can't just ignore them and then eventually the problem goes away. They will continue doing damage at a steady rate. Oracles do a certain amount of damage and then do nothing for a while afterward.
And I think that for some reason the Blizz devs got it into their heads that they need to make every single Protoss unit do a very specific amount of damage in a very specific role.
Oracles also fly, have shield regen, 2-shot workers, and have two other spells. Maybe it's more that a flying early game unit with lots of utility being able to snowball into unlimited damage is just terrible design that Blizzard rightly avoided?
And it's not like you can just leave adepts or zealots unattended. They too will do limitless damage unless you stop them.
If you haven't put it together yet, the only reason anyone ever "ignores" oracles killing their workers is that oracles are such a good unit that there's nothing they can actually do about it before the oracle uses its energy, which would mean a ton of damage. If oracles get past widow mines and Terran unborrows them the oracles will just focus them down. By the time Terran moves marines from the natural into the main the oracles are already done. The only unit that can respond fast enough that Terran could have early game is a cyclone, but cyclones are generally not good in TvP so you get situations where the best response is to just ignore it because there's nothing you can even do about it. And you are trying to say this unit is underpowered?
If you think any Terran pro gamer would just lose SCVs to oracles because they don't care about the damage, you're a clown.
The unit you are talking about is absolutely one of the best opening units for Protoss in PvT and indeed it is a good opening unit in every Protoss matchup. So underpowered!
On February 21 2022 11:16 Jerubaal wrote: I'm saying that the Terran can look at the one or two oracles going to their base and calculate the damage. I believe that HeroMarine lost 8 SCVs to one Oracle and 13 to two. HM decided that the damage he was doing was worth more than those SCVs and he didn't need to do anything. You can't do that with hellions and lings. You can't just ignore them and then eventually the problem goes away. They will continue doing damage at a steady rate. Oracles do a certain amount of damage and then do nothing for a while afterward.
And I think that for some reason the Blizz devs got it into their heads that they need to make every single Protoss unit do a very specific amount of damage in a very specific role.
uhmm yes you can. If for example you nydus allin you can just ignore the hellions killing your drones because you will do more damage across the map. It's the same situation. Usually, if you aren't attacking with hellions across the map, losing 8 Scvs to Oracles is game over.
Oracles have become pretty trash at killing SCV after terrans successfully whined for that 3-shot nerf for literally no reason. This nerf is on par with obs speed nerf just because terran feelings.
On February 21 2022 11:16 Jerubaal wrote: I'm saying that the Terran can look at the one or two oracles going to their base and calculate the damage. I believe that HeroMarine lost 8 SCVs to one Oracle and 13 to two. HM decided that the damage he was doing was worth more than those SCVs and he didn't need to do anything. You can't do that with hellions and lings. You can't just ignore them and then eventually the problem goes away. They will continue doing damage at a steady rate. Oracles do a certain amount of damage and then do nothing for a while afterward.
And I think that for some reason the Blizz devs got it into their heads that they need to make every single Protoss unit do a very specific amount of damage in a very specific role.
Oracles also fly, have shield regen, 2-shot workers, and have two other spells. Maybe it's more that a flying early game unit with lots of utility being able to snowball into unlimited damage is just terrible design that Blizzard rightly avoided?
And it's not like you can just leave adepts or zealots unattended. They too will do limitless damage unless you stop them.
I can see what you're doing here, but you're answering the wrong question. Considering we're debating removing the Carrier because "muh design", I really don't think you can make worse design than looking at a unit in your mineral line and going "eh that's fine".
@honorablemacroterran >If you haven't put it together yet, the only reason anyone ever "ignores" oracles killing their workers >If you think any Terran pro gamer would just lose SCVs to oracles because they don't care about the damage
I think these two statements speak for themselves.
On February 25 2022 22:47 TheCheapSkate wrote: Welp looks like the chance of protoss winning Katowice is basically gone already
Don't see any issue, there's a protoss in the Ro8, don't you know that there are one or two zergs and hundreds and hundreds of terrans who would have been more deserving
Imagine only Maru or only Serral would be in the RO12. And second-liners as Creator or Hurricane would be taking the spots of Dark, Rogue, Cure or Clem. There would be riots all over TL and Reddit. But as it is Protoss, it is their fault. If you select Protoss as race it is because you secretly will be bad when it matters. But of course, as Lambo insists, nerf carriers "and start from there". This is killing the joy of SC2 for me... I need someone to cheer for, or I just prefer watching other things, like it sadly will happen this weekend.
Protoss does look pretty pathetic against Zerg. At this point Protoss can be even on army supply with Zerg and somehow still trade badly.
Probably time for Queens to get yet another nerf, they just seem way too hardy and versatile for costing only minerals. The amount of game ending pressure that they can put onto a Protoss player so early on just seems a bit broken.
Thankfully I think the Queen is so versatile and strong that even with a nerf it would probably still be a good unit and there is probably a host of good ways to nerf the unit while still keeping it viable.
-Transfuse nerf -Armored or light tag added -Damage or HP nerf
Not sure, but something probably needs to be done via a patch at this point, Protoss just looking anemic. No bite in their ground play anymore and Stargate play looks more or less completely figured out at this point, not sure a meta shift is going to be too helpful.
The saddest thing is that a large portion of the SC2 community still think Protoss needs to be nerfed due to their personal ladder experience even after abysmal results like this.
On February 26 2022 22:31 JJH777 wrote: The saddest thing is that a large portion of the SC2 community still think Protoss needs to be nerfed due to their personal ladder experience even after abysmal results like this.
I dunno man Maru is the ultimate pinnacle of SC2 and Zoun beat him in a Bo3, Im pretty certain that means Protoss is overpowered.
On February 27 2022 05:37 CaRn1FeX wrote: Is there any hint that a balance patch is indeed considered? My understanding was that Blizzard does not patch SC2 any more
You think you want patch now but as a protoss fan you actually don't since 100% patch would have just a couple of nerfs for toss because it would be based on a results and meta from first half of 2021 or even late 2020.
Lol; it's one tournament. Yeah, Zest and Trap lost; boohoo. Understand that Zest is going into military, as is Parting and maybe another one or two are leaving as well or something, Idk. Maybe wait and see some other major tourney results before complaining. Keep in mind, there has been a toss in the finals for the last 3 times in a row...
On February 27 2022 07:11 Phattyasmo wrote: Lol; it's one tournament. Yeah, Zest and Trap lost; boohoo. Understand that Zest is going into military, as is Parting and maybe another one or two are leaving as well or something, Idk. Maybe wait and see some other major tourney results before complaining. Keep in mind, there has been a toss in the finals for the last 3 times in a row...
Remember that single super tournament after that toss got nerfed into ground because of one good tourney?
On February 27 2022 07:11 Phattyasmo wrote: Lol; it's one tournament. Yeah, Zest and Trap lost; boohoo. Understand that Zest is going into military, as is Parting and maybe another one or two are leaving as well or something, Idk. Maybe wait and see some other major tourney results before complaining. Keep in mind, there has been a toss in the finals for the last 3 times in a row...
On February 27 2022 07:11 Phattyasmo wrote: Lol; it's one tournament. Yeah, Zest and Trap lost; boohoo. Understand that Zest is going into military, as is Parting and maybe another one or two are leaving as well or something, Idk. Maybe wait and see some other major tourney results before complaining. Keep in mind, there has been a toss in the finals for the last 3 times in a row...
It's four months of absymal results.
Indeed, Toss feels quite dead right now. It's a mix of players leaving for military and balance imo... The top Toss players are leaving one after another and since balance does not really favor toss by any means, there is nobody following those either
On February 27 2022 05:37 CaRn1FeX wrote: Is there any hint that a balance patch is indeed considered? My understanding was that Blizzard does not patch SC2 any more
Nerf shield batteries, nerf Void Rays, merge lurker upgrades, nerf ravens and give infestors a spell which buffs range damage.
I think it's clear that if any balance changes are necessary, there should be a focus on nerfing Zerg after they have been winning all the world championships for so long.
Let's just nerf protoss all across board and be done with it. This result of IEM has been obvious prediction for years now since the last balance patch. Better marking protoss as the official weak race rather than hearing incessant, never ending zerg & terran apologists making excuses why protoss isn't weak but performing badly.
If you just are looking at the results of IEM and World Championships the thing that stands out the most is that Zerg have won all IEMs since TY in 2017 and all World Championships since Byun. I think before we go and buff Protoss it wouldn't hurt to nerf Zerg. I mean, if you just want to look at the very top level for balance then here it is.
On February 27 2022 14:28 honorablemacroterran wrote:
If you just are looking at the results of IEM and World Championships the thing that stands out the most is that Zerg have won all IEMs since TY in 2017 and all World Championships since Byun. I think before we go and buff Protoss it wouldn't hurt to nerf Zerg. I mean, if you just want to look at the very top level for balance then here it is.
There's a reason why Serral is getting wins and easy groups
On February 27 2022 14:28 honorablemacroterran wrote:
If you just are looking at the results of IEM and World Championships the thing that stands out the most is that Zerg have won all IEMs since TY in 2017 and all World Championships since Byun. I think before we go and buff Protoss it wouldn't hurt to nerf Zerg. I mean, if you just want to look at the very top level for balance then here it is.
Terrans eliminated protosses in the qualifiers, where TvP was 7-3 in series score. In the main event, not one protoss ended with a positive map score against terran. Neeb 2-5 Showtime 4-4 Trap 3-3 Zest 2-2 Astrea 1-4 Zoun 5-6
It is not just one tournament either. Cure is the reigning Code S champion because of his TvP. He beat Parting, Trap, and Zest in the playoffs. I agree that zerg is strongest now but terran is definitely second ahead of protoss.
On February 27 2022 14:28 honorablemacroterran wrote:
If you just are looking at the results of IEM and World Championships the thing that stands out the most is that Zerg have won all IEMs since TY in 2017 and all World Championships since Byun. I think before we go and buff Protoss it wouldn't hurt to nerf Zerg. I mean, if you just want to look at the very top level for balance then here it is.
Terrans eliminated protosses in the qualifiers, where TvP was 7-3 in series score. In the main event, not one protoss ended with a positive map score against terran. Neeb 2-5 Showtime 4-4 Trap 3-3 Zest 2-2 Astrea 1-4 Zoun 5-6
It is not just one tournament either. Cure is the reigning Code S champion because of his TvP. He beat Parting, Trap, and Zest in the playoffs. I agree that zerg is strongest now but terran is definitely second ahead of protoss.
PvT is quite swingy, it doesn't need balance changes like PvZ does but could use some nudges here and there to reduce volatility I feel. Meanwhile PvZ is just garbage and drains the fun out of watching.
It's kind of interesting, looking back, at the perception during WoL that Zerg just didn't have good units. In the two expansions afterwards, they've gotten so many goodies: ravager, viper, lurker. And you're seeing these units being used to great effect. Zerg has so many options for what they want to do. Terran was a little hit or miss (Hellbat and cyclone) but Liberator and widow mine were definitely good additions. Watching TvZ feels like you're watching the same game as in WoL but evolved, with more wrinkles.
Protoss was appraised and Blizz thought, "eh, they're fine, let's just patch a few small holes." So Protoss got Reaper and a Banshee/Observer hybrid. And no matter how well you think they perform those roles, they don't change how Protoss plays or much strategically beyond the openings. The Disruptor was a welcome addition, but it was just a replacement after the colossus got completely gutted. Oh, yeah. I guess the Tempest is a thing.
Do you think there is a chance of pressure we can send to get these game a patch or do we have to wait until if Blizzard-Microsoft makes a StarCraft III ?
On February 27 2022 14:28 honorablemacroterran wrote:
If you just are looking at the results of IEM and World Championships the thing that stands out the most is that Zerg have won all IEMs since TY in 2017 and all World Championships since Byun. I think before we go and buff Protoss it wouldn't hurt to nerf Zerg. I mean, if you just want to look at the very top level for balance then here it is.
Terrans eliminated protosses in the qualifiers, where TvP was 7-3 in series score. In the main event, not one protoss ended with a positive map score against terran. Neeb 2-5 Showtime 4-4 Trap 3-3 Zest 2-2 Astrea 1-4 Zoun 5-6
It is not just one tournament either. Cure is the reigning Code S champion because of his TvP. He beat Parting, Trap, and Zest in the playoffs. I agree that zerg is strongest now but terran is definitely second ahead of protoss.
PvT is quite swingy, it doesn't need balance changes like PvZ does but could use some nudges here and there to reduce volatility I feel. Meanwhile PvZ is just garbage and drains the fun out of watching.
Agreed.
PvT is volatile, but in both directions and it can swing both ways very easily, especially within the space of one tournament.
You can take the best PvT/TvP player and while you might favour them going in, it’s never a huge surprise if they lose to a player considerably worse than them.
I like it to watch at times and there’s a lot of compositional and opening variety. It feels/numbers seem to indicate balance is alright, it doesn’t feel super stable either. A matchup should absolutely have upset potential, not feel that any top 10 player has a close to even shot at smacking the other race’s best matchup specialists depending on how build choices and how the early game snowballs.
Upsets can still happen but they’re so much less likely, or the base level of the player has to be that much higher if you look at the best TvZ/ZvT/ZvP
PvZ is neither in a good state enjoyment wise, nor particularly balance wise.
On February 27 2022 22:06 Pandemona wrote: Do you think there is a chance of pressure we can send to get these game a patch or do we have to wait until if Blizzard-Microsoft makes a StarCraft III ?
There was rumors of a patch after IEM.
I hope for the sake of Protoss going forward it's true because as match up diversity suffers, so will viewership, and I really don't want the game to decline more rapidly because the game couldn't get a few reasonable balance changes.
I've said it a hundred times, theres no rationale behind HoTS having such a puny competitive scene whilst having such a puny ranked ladder population and still getting not just hero balance changes, but entire hero reworks, while SC2 just get's left behind despite having a more popular and profitable pro scene.
On February 27 2022 22:06 Pandemona wrote: Do you think there is a chance of pressure we can send to get these game a patch or do we have to wait until if Blizzard-Microsoft makes a StarCraft III ?
There was rumors of a patch after IEM.
I hope for the sake of Protoss going forward it's true because as match up diversity suffers, so will viewership, and I really don't want the game to decline more rapidly because the game couldn't get a few reasonable balance changes.
I've said it a hundred times, theres no rationale behind HoTS having such a puny competitive scene whilst having such a puny ranked ladder population and still getting not just hero balance changes, but entire hero reworks, while SC2 just get's left behind despite having a more popular and profitable pro scene.
You can just make random changes to mobas, balance is not that important with bans, on the other hand it's hard to make a change improving an RTS in an already pretty good state.
On February 27 2022 22:06 Pandemona wrote: Do you think there is a chance of pressure we can send to get these game a patch or do we have to wait until if Blizzard-Microsoft makes a StarCraft III ?
There was rumors of a patch after IEM.
I hope for the sake of Protoss going forward it's true because as match up diversity suffers, so will viewership, and I really don't want the game to decline more rapidly because the game couldn't get a few reasonable balance changes.
I've said it a hundred times, theres no rationale behind HoTS having such a puny competitive scene whilst having such a puny ranked ladder population and still getting not just hero balance changes, but entire hero reworks, while SC2 just get's left behind despite having a more popular and profitable pro scene.
Would be nice just helps keep the game going right, everyone always come back for a new patch and the pros we have now would love to try new things and use different units / build orders.
On February 27 2022 22:06 Pandemona wrote: Do you think there is a chance of pressure we can send to get these game a patch or do we have to wait until if Blizzard-Microsoft makes a StarCraft III ?
There was rumors of a patch after IEM.
I hope for the sake of Protoss going forward it's true because as match up diversity suffers, so will viewership, and I really don't want the game to decline more rapidly because the game couldn't get a few reasonable balance changes.
I've said it a hundred times, theres no rationale behind HoTS having such a puny competitive scene whilst having such a puny ranked ladder population and still getting not just hero balance changes, but entire hero reworks, while SC2 just get's left behind despite having a more popular and profitable pro scene.
You can just make random changes to mobas, balance is not that important with bans, on the other hand it's hard to make a change improving an RTS in an already pretty good state.
I dare to say that many people would disagree that SC 2 is in a good state. I mean - LOOK AT THIS THREAD.
Edit> Also check how many balance suggestions are just on this page. And most of them are about Zerg and Protoss, funni.
More important than "just" balance, the game design / game being fun, across all levels of plays, with still means to display skills and separate the good from the great at the top level. PvZ is probably not too horrible balance wise, but zergs hate it, protoss hate it, viewers hate it. It has to change. TvZ is still relatively loved but you feel that once lurkers are out it's just an uphill battle, and that queens basically counter everything which is also relatively bad design wise. If the rumors are true, this could be very good. Starcraft still has a bright future, be it BW or Starcraft 2
On February 27 2022 14:28 honorablemacroterran wrote:
If you just are looking at the results of IEM and World Championships the thing that stands out the most is that Zerg have won all IEMs since TY in 2017 and all World Championships since Byun. I think before we go and buff Protoss it wouldn't hurt to nerf Zerg. I mean, if you just want to look at the very top level for balance then here it is.
Terrans eliminated protosses in the qualifiers, where TvP was 7-3 in series score. In the main event, not one protoss ended with a positive map score against terran. Neeb 2-5 Showtime 4-4 Trap 3-3 Zest 2-2 Astrea 1-4 Zoun 5-6
It is not just one tournament either. Cure is the reigning Code S champion because of his TvP. He beat Parting, Trap, and Zest in the playoffs. I agree that zerg is strongest now but terran is definitely second ahead of protoss.
If you want to make this case you have to look at who eliminated Protoss from every points event and why the seeding was the way it was to begin with.
On February 28 2022 00:52 Poopi wrote: TvZ is still relatively loved but you feel that once lurkers are out it's just an uphill battle, and that queens basically counter everything which is also relatively bad design wise.
Feels like you could easily replace with P and the statement is still valid to some degree. Lurkers make it very hard to play for both, Toss and Terran. Toss needs to switch to Skytoss to have a chance. Queens feel too strong and multi-purpose as well in PvZ
On February 27 2022 20:38 Jerubaal wrote: It's kind of interesting, looking back, at the perception during WoL that Zerg just didn't have good units. In the two expansions afterwards, they've gotten so many goodies: ravager, viper, lurker. And you're seeing these units being used to great effect. Zerg has so many options for what they want to do. Terran was a little hit or miss (Hellbat and cyclone) but Liberator and widow mine were definitely good additions. Watching TvZ feels like you're watching the same game as in WoL but evolved, with more wrinkles.
Protoss was appraised and Blizz thought, "eh, they're fine, let's just patch a few small holes." So Protoss got Reaper and a Banshee/Observer hybrid. And no matter how well you think they perform those roles, they don't change how Protoss plays or much strategically beyond the openings. The Disruptor was a welcome addition, but it was just a replacement after the colossus got completely gutted. Oh, yeah. I guess the Tempest is a thing.
The baneling buff patch after ByuN victory was HUGE. It should not be forgotten. I agree with removing tankivacs, and making reapers less strong than they were, but buffing a core unit like that "lasts forever".
On February 28 2022 00:52 Poopi wrote: TvZ is still relatively loved but you feel that once lurkers are out it's just an uphill battle, and that queens basically counter everything which is also relatively bad design wise.
Feels like you could easily replace with P and the statement is still valid to some degree. Lurkers make it very hard to play for both, Toss and Terran. Toss needs to switch to Skytoss to have a chance. Queens feel too strong and multi-purpose as well in PvZ
Yeah, lurkers are a problem in PvZ too and they decided to fix that by buffing voidrays etc but air units being too strong usually make for horrible games in Starcraft 2, so this was probably a very bad solution.
The good thing though, is that we have really seen how the map pool can hugely affect balance, since TvZ was in a good spot on the previous mappool, suggesting that balance was kinda fine, but it got really bad on the new map pool. Clem who was super dominant in TvZ got nerfed and other terrans as well. Maru being godlike made it look like it was somewhat balanced by beating good zergs, but he was still saying TvZ was difficult in his interview, and we saw in the most important tournament that zergs indeed adapted. If balance can swing that much with maps, that means that we can make a fun / good design game, try to tune it to be relatively balanced / change things up if necessary, and use maps very carefully as a way to balance things out even more.
TL;DR: if Blizzard / whoever has the power keep investing a bit into the game (and not just financially), this could be promising.
On February 27 2022 20:38 Jerubaal wrote: It's kind of interesting, looking back, at the perception during WoL that Zerg just didn't have good units. In the two expansions afterwards, they've gotten so many goodies: ravager, viper, lurker. And you're seeing these units being used to great effect. Zerg has so many options for what they want to do. Terran was a little hit or miss (Hellbat and cyclone) but Liberator and widow mine were definitely good additions. Watching TvZ feels like you're watching the same game as in WoL but evolved, with more wrinkles.
Protoss was appraised and Blizz thought, "eh, they're fine, let's just patch a few small holes." So Protoss got Reaper and a Banshee/Observer hybrid. And no matter how well you think they perform those roles, they don't change how Protoss plays or much strategically beyond the openings. The Disruptor was a welcome addition, but it was just a replacement after the colossus got completely gutted. Oh, yeah. I guess the Tempest is a thing.
The baneling buff patch after ByuN victory was HUGE. It should not be forgotten. I agree with removing tankivacs, and making reapers less strong than they were, but buffing a core unit like that "lasts forever".
On February 28 2022 00:52 Poopi wrote: TvZ is still relatively loved but you feel that once lurkers are out it's just an uphill battle, and that queens basically counter everything which is also relatively bad design wise.
Feels like you could easily replace with P and the statement is still valid to some degree. Lurkers make it very hard to play for both, Toss and Terran. Toss needs to switch to Skytoss to have a chance. Queens feel too strong and multi-purpose as well in PvZ
Yeah, lurkers are a problem in PvZ too and they decided to fix that by buffing voidrays etc but air units being too strong usually make for horrible games in Starcraft 2, so this was probably a very bad solution.
The good thing though, is that we have really seen how the map pool can hugely affect balance, since TvZ was in a good spot on the previous mappool, suggesting that balance was kinda fine, but it got really bad on the new map pool. Clem who was super dominant in TvZ got nerfed and other terrans as well. Maru being godlike made it look like it was somewhat balanced by beating good zergs, but he was still saying TvZ was difficult in his interview, and we saw in the most important tournament that zergs indeed adapted. If balance can swing that much with maps, that means that we can make a fun / good design game, try to tune it to be relatively balanced / change things up if necessary, and use maps very carefully as a way to balance things out even more.
TL;DR: if Blizzard / whoever has the power keep investing a bit into the game (and not just financially), this could be promising.
Lots of map makers don't think balance is their problem. It's much easier to just nerf zerg than try to get them to make maps a certain way to make the game balanced. Don't forget that the dominance of Zerg in premier tournaments and world championships has been 5 years at this point so it's not just this one map pool.
On February 27 2022 20:38 Jerubaal wrote: It's kind of interesting, looking back, at the perception during WoL that Zerg just didn't have good units. In the two expansions afterwards, they've gotten so many goodies: ravager, viper, lurker. And you're seeing these units being used to great effect. Zerg has so many options for what they want to do. Terran was a little hit or miss (Hellbat and cyclone) but Liberator and widow mine were definitely good additions. Watching TvZ feels like you're watching the same game as in WoL but evolved, with more wrinkles.
Protoss was appraised and Blizz thought, "eh, they're fine, let's just patch a few small holes." So Protoss got Reaper and a Banshee/Observer hybrid. And no matter how well you think they perform those roles, they don't change how Protoss plays or much strategically beyond the openings. The Disruptor was a welcome addition, but it was just a replacement after the colossus got completely gutted. Oh, yeah. I guess the Tempest is a thing.
The baneling buff patch after ByuN victory was HUGE. It should not be forgotten. I agree with removing tankivacs, and making reapers less strong than they were, but buffing a core unit like that "lasts forever".
On February 28 2022 03:45 CaRn1FeX wrote:
On February 28 2022 00:52 Poopi wrote: TvZ is still relatively loved but you feel that once lurkers are out it's just an uphill battle, and that queens basically counter everything which is also relatively bad design wise.
Feels like you could easily replace with P and the statement is still valid to some degree. Lurkers make it very hard to play for both, Toss and Terran. Toss needs to switch to Skytoss to have a chance. Queens feel too strong and multi-purpose as well in PvZ
Yeah, lurkers are a problem in PvZ too and they decided to fix that by buffing voidrays etc but air units being too strong usually make for horrible games in Starcraft 2, so this was probably a very bad solution.
The good thing though, is that we have really seen how the map pool can hugely affect balance, since TvZ was in a good spot on the previous mappool, suggesting that balance was kinda fine, but it got really bad on the new map pool. Clem who was super dominant in TvZ got nerfed and other terrans as well. Maru being godlike made it look like it was somewhat balanced by beating good zergs, but he was still saying TvZ was difficult in his interview, and we saw in the most important tournament that zergs indeed adapted. If balance can swing that much with maps, that means that we can make a fun / good design game, try to tune it to be relatively balanced / change things up if necessary, and use maps very carefully as a way to balance things out even more.
TL;DR: if Blizzard / whoever has the power keep investing a bit into the game (and not just financially), this could be promising.
Lots of map makers don't think balance is their problem. It's much easier to just nerf zerg than try to get them to make maps a certain way to make the game balanced. Don't forget that the dominance of Zerg in premier tournaments and world championships has been 5 years at this point so it's not just this one map pool.
At the same time basically every map pool had one of the "zerg" maps which was widely accepted as a goto veto in XvZ where X is P or T, so while you're right, having 1:0 lead in a BO7 is big. Also forcing your opponent to veto 1 map otherwise they most probably lose it is big too.
The map pool is too small for how long it’s in rotation. I think it’s too small in general but given how long the pool is the pool it really exacerbates things.
For one, blatant examples, or obvious flaws are one thing. Over time as players grind out on the maps, new metas evolved even the initially balanced maps can flip out and be skewed. But you’re stuck on that pool for ages.
Secondly with so few maps, players are going to have to play on outright bad maps for matchups, frequently. There aren’t enough maps to veto all the bad ones out. I still don’t know what the fuck Maru was thinking not vetoing Pride of Altaris, but case in point if he’d have made grand finals in the year’s biggest tournament, well Bo7 bro you’ve gotta play it.
Thirdly, this absurdly small pool completely destroys experimentation. It’s not the mapmaker’s fault. The playerbase is extremely risk averse so stock standard cookie cutter variants that are meant to be OK in all matchups is what gets picked. Also not the voting public’s fault because you’re getting a small pool for months and months, so even a few dud maps bring much pain.
I wasn’t even shitting on Pride earlier, it’s actually a good map but borderline unplayable at the elite level in TvZ
Some of the map architecture to make for a map that’s good for non-Skytoss PvZ, namely a lot of relatively closed areas to manouvere around and shark within reach of bases. Well you can’t really experiment with that, because such a map will just equal death to tank pushes in PvT
Hell even cool maps like Golden Wall get kicked out for yet another similar-ish map
The mapmakers can actually deliver but they’re not given the chance through this baffling approach to maps.
-Double the pool -Double vetos -Keep one non-standard build in the rotation -Have a map specifically built for PvZ -Have a map specifically built for TvZ -Have a map specifically built for PvT -Rest of maps can follow the relative standard template, with the same ratio of macro/rush variants
You still keep stability, but you create space for both genuine variety too. You can also experiment, with useful data on how the patch values/map design is impacting or can be used to rebalance.
Yea maps kind of suck but what really sucks more then that is how terrible Gateway units are. Probably time to start really considering buffing the Adept or changing the stats to make it not instant kill workers but needs 35 fucking shots to kill a singular roach despite costing 25 minerals more.
Zealots seem okay even though Zealot Speed would probably make them a bit more micro friendly and not just widow mine fodder.
Stalkers still seem....also okay, kind of shitty before Blink but they do get a pretty big power spike after that.
Sentries, ehh they haven't aged well but Guardian Shield is still potent and force fields still seem at least mildly usable.
Adepts? They cost 25 gas (1 vespene = 4 minerals) so that means they cost 200 minerals all together, that means that 1 Adept must kill 4 drones to even break even, and I cannot even remember the last time that happened.
They should shift the stats of the Adept, make it a more general purpose unit that kind of bridges the gap between Zealots for meat shield and Stalkers for precision blink strikes/AA. Shift the damage to be stronger vs. Roaches and Queens but weaker against Zerglings and Drones.
Zealots already deal with Zerglings just fine, so why would the only unit in the Zerg arsenal that the Adept be good against be the Zergling? Stalkers trade terrible with Roaches before Blink and Zealots can be kited, maybe make the Adept so that a pure Gateway force can actually launch an assault on a Zerg and not be shit kicked in by pure Roach.
On February 28 2022 00:52 Poopi wrote: More important than "just" balance, the game design / game being fun, across all levels of plays, with still means to display skills and separate the good from the great at the top level.
True. And in my opinion, SC2 is a very very high skill ceiling, hardcore and very very difficult to play game, with a lot of irritating and difficult to counter mechanics. The end result is that while I love to watch the game, there is no fucking way you are going to entice me to play the 1v1 competitive version of the game. Imo, the major problem is that the game is just not fun competitively.
On February 28 2022 08:34 Beelzebub1 wrote: Yea maps kind of suck but what really sucks more then that is how terrible Gateway units are. Probably time to start really considering buffing the Adept or changing the stats to make it not instant kill workers but needs 35 fucking shots to kill a singular roach despite costing 25 minerals more.
Zealots seem okay even though Zealot Speed would probably make them a bit more micro friendly and not just widow mine fodder.
Stalkers still seem....also okay, kind of shitty before Blink but they do get a pretty big power spike after that.
Sentries, ehh they haven't aged well but Guardian Shield is still potent and force fields still seem at least mildly usable.
Adepts? They cost 25 gas (1 vespene = 4 minerals) so that means they cost 200 minerals all together, that means that 1 Adept must kill 4 drones to even break even, and I cannot even remember the last time that happened.
They should shift the stats of the Adept, make it a more general purpose unit that kind of bridges the gap between Zealots for meat shield and Stalkers for precision blink strikes/AA. Shift the damage to be stronger vs. Roaches and Queens but weaker against Zerglings and Drones.
Zealots already deal with Zerglings just fine, so why would the only unit in the Zerg arsenal that the Adept be good against be the Zergling? Stalkers trade terrible with Roaches before Blink and Zealots can be kited, maybe make the Adept so that a pure Gateway force can actually launch an assault on a Zerg and not be shit kicked in by pure Roach.
Normalizing Adept damage and then giving them upgrades/changing their upgrades in order to make them legitimate fighting units would be lovely. Maybe make Adepts require Twilight Council. Muta style bounce damage. Whatever needs to be done to see Gateway units be worthwhile on their own.
Maybe give them a Marine-style damage profile of fast attack speed low damage.
What aspects of maps do you think would make balance better? I'm not sure what would help protoss. It used to be the prevailing wisdom that wider spread out bases were better for zerg, but close bases makes the Queen brigade that much more effective. And spread out bases make terran drops better.
On February 28 2022 08:34 Beelzebub1 wrote: Yea maps kind of suck but what really sucks more then that is how terrible Gateway units are. Probably time to start really considering buffing the Adept or changing the stats to make it not instant kill workers but needs 35 fucking shots to kill a singular roach despite costing 25 minerals more.
Zealots seem okay even though Zealot Speed would probably make them a bit more micro friendly and not just widow mine fodder.
Stalkers still seem....also okay, kind of shitty before Blink but they do get a pretty big power spike after that.
Sentries, ehh they haven't aged well but Guardian Shield is still potent and force fields still seem at least mildly usable.
Adepts? They cost 25 gas (1 vespene = 4 minerals) so that means they cost 200 minerals all together, that means that 1 Adept must kill 4 drones to even break even, and I cannot even remember the last time that happened.
They should shift the stats of the Adept, make it a more general purpose unit that kind of bridges the gap between Zealots for meat shield and Stalkers for precision blink strikes/AA. Shift the damage to be stronger vs. Roaches and Queens but weaker against Zerglings and Drones.
Zealots already deal with Zerglings just fine, so why would the only unit in the Zerg arsenal that the Adept be good against be the Zergling? Stalkers trade terrible with Roaches before Blink and Zealots can be kited, maybe make the Adept so that a pure Gateway force can actually launch an assault on a Zerg and not be shit kicked in by pure Roach.
Normalizing Adept damage and then giving them upgrades/changing their upgrades in order to make them legitimate fighting units would be lovely. Maybe make Adepts require Twilight Council. Muta style bounce damage. Whatever needs to be done to see Gateway units be worthwhile on their own.
Maybe give them a Marine-style damage profile of fast attack speed low damage.
Shade can go, or be changed, or what have you.
I think there is alot of ways to change the Adept to make it stronger, I don't mind their slow ponderous attack with a speed upgrade at Twilight but the attack should probably be tuned towards being more effective at killing things other then just drones and zerlings and to be honest, Adepts don't even do a great job at killing lings in the first place. The only time I see Adepts trade decently vs. lings is when they're in between mineral patches which is just another thing that limits their overall effectiveness.
"Whatever needs to be done to see Gateway units be worthwhile on their own."
See there is the thing, I don't think that Gateway units will ever or should ever be designed to be worthwhile on their own. But you should be able to mix and match them in different proportions and be allowed to have some type of a presence on the map. Zealots and Sentries should need Adepts to enable them (make Adepts more adept at killing Roaches) just like Adepts should need Zealots up front tanking zergling damage (Zealots and Sentries already good at killing lings).
I'm not insinuating that we should turn the Adept into the next marine which we all know is probably the strongest and most versatile tier 1 unit in the game, but it should at LEAST be good enough to let Protoss actually get out there and make some non Stargate action happen.
If Protoss was able to pressure Zerg effectively on the ground, then Zerg wouldn't be able to rush straight into Hive and Lurkers in the first place. I think alot of the reason that Lurkers seem so damn strong besides their damage is just how fast a greedy Zerg can tech up to them. If the Zerg's tech and economy were able to be checked more reliably by early/mid game Gateway armies ie. they would have to invest more in defense then just mass Queen with some lings and roaches sprinkled in, Lurkers would at least hit the field later, giving Protoss more time to tech to mass Immortal/Templar/Skytoss/whatever.
It's why Hellion/Banshee is so standard in TvZ, it let's the Terran get out on the map and exert control. Currently, Protoss has no way to accomplish this, allowing the Zerg to grow their economy relatively unchecked. Fixing the Adept could fix this problem without even necessitating a Queen nerf.
Protoss Gateway units should be as viable as Marines Marauders Zerglings Roaches and Ravagets, Protoss can’t escape being sharp and brittle without having a base of reliable core units, if the flashy tech AoE needs to go down Im good for that, but I firmly believe that Protoss needs to not be dead in the water without it’s expensive tech units and I don’t see how that’s possible without a Gateway backbone being less impotent on its own
I see Protoss Gateway being more about having a good mix like with Marines and Marauders, striking a balance between Adepts, Stalkers, and Zealots as suits your opponents army, how to balance to make that happen I don’t strictly know, but my initial thought is to have a medium core unit that’s always pretty okay and then two more specialized units that compliment the medium core unit.
I’m not saying Protoss Gateway should be an entirely viable strategy on its own (before HT anyways) but it should be good through til that stage of tech is reached and Gateway armies definitely shouldn’t be so weak when their tech units are dead, if the Gateway core is fundamentally feasible if not amazing then that lets the Protoss roam more without having to retreat and turtle because half the Colossi are down
So i'm wondering -- does anyone here think PvT is imbalanced? I don't think it is honestly, like in lategame PvT even against Maru it always feels like the toss has a decent chance to win.
Meanwhile lategame PvZ against Serral just feels completely doomed.
i personally think the charge upgrade is super stupid. It basically takes zealots, which in brood war had pretty decent amounts of micro potential (especially against zerglings and hydras), and removes ALL MICRO.
it seems like pros have decided that the best thing to do with zealots is just a-move them and maybe shift click on targets, nothing more.
On February 28 2022 14:53 angry_maia wrote: Another question: what about reworking charge?
i personally think the charge upgrade is super stupid. It basically takes zealots, which in brood war had pretty decent amounts of micro potential (especially against zerglings and hydras), and removes ALL MICRO.
it seems like pros have decided that the best thing to do with zealots is just a-move them and maybe shift click on targets, nothing more.
Well, the issue is that Marauders and their shells exist.
On February 28 2022 11:41 Jerubaal wrote: What aspects of maps do you think would make balance better? I'm not sure what would help protoss. It used to be the prevailing wisdom that wider spread out bases were better for zerg, but close bases makes the Queen brigade that much more effective. And spread out bases make terran drops better.
Not building maps for all matchups, IMO.
How the bases are laid out I’m not sure, a good Protoss Non-Skytoss map you’re probably talking multiple paths, with some paths being tighter and chokier, so Protoss can shark across the map into decent positions
Maybe make the safe paths have the slower routes and wind a bit vs the more open fields, so there’s a risk-reward there.
Maybe you lay the natural third base in such a location that it’s nested back away from your opponent, and not expanding closer towards your opponent.
It could still be as open to regular pushes and runbys as a standard third location, but you could buy even a little time in travel distance. That’s basically an arbitrary specifically anti-Queen walk measure.
I’m not a mapmaker, decent player or sensible human being though, so take these with a pinch of salt.
As I alluded to, while I’m not sure what a good PvZ map looks like, I think we’re hamstrung by maps having to be good XvX maps. A map that has sufficient nooks and crannies for Protoss ground to roam slightly more safely is going to have tons of potential for fiendish tank setups, so might be a bad PvT map at the same time, or be too good for TvZ.
The middle of the road map design we have now is probably going to slightly favour Zerg almost by default. They want open spaces and a longer rush distance most of the time in both matchups.
Depending on the matchup and game state Terran/Protoss will want both open/closed areas and short/long rush or large/small maps.
TvPs a good example of the swings here. Terran enjoys tight spaces to funnel Toss into and Protoss bases being split far apart in the midgame push/harassment phase, so they can pick them apart when Toss have limited units to defend 3/4 bases.
This rather flips when lategame kicks in and Protoss have money to burn. Splitting against AoE and setting up surrounds suddenly more open arenas are preferable, and Terran is now the race subject to being pulled apart by harassment on the periphery.
I’m rambling a bit but what’s good in a map’s for ZvT is generally speaking good for ZvP. I think in a manner that’s not quite the same with P and Ts matchups
On February 28 2022 14:53 angry_maia wrote: Another question: what about reworking charge?
i personally think the charge upgrade is super stupid. It basically takes zealots, which in brood war had pretty decent amounts of micro potential (especially against zerglings and hydras), and removes ALL MICRO.
it seems like pros have decided that the best thing to do with zealots is just a-move them and maybe shift click on targets, nothing more.
Well, the issue is that Marauders and their shells exist.
On February 28 2022 14:53 angry_maia wrote: Another question: what about reworking charge?
i personally think the charge upgrade is super stupid. It basically takes zealots, which in brood war had pretty decent amounts of micro potential (especially against zerglings and hydras), and removes ALL MICRO.
it seems like pros have decided that the best thing to do with zealots is just a-move them and maybe shift click on targets, nothing more.
Well, the issue is that Marauders and their shells exist.
On February 28 2022 14:53 angry_maia wrote: Another question: what about reworking charge?
i personally think the charge upgrade is super stupid. It basically takes zealots, which in brood war had pretty decent amounts of micro potential (especially against zerglings and hydras), and removes ALL MICRO.
it seems like pros have decided that the best thing to do with zealots is just a-move them and maybe shift click on targets, nothing more.
Well, the issue is that Marauders and their shells exist.
Also stim and stutter step.
I don’t think most Terrans will ever concede that having insanely microable, high DPS stock units is a part of SC2’s base design issues.
On February 28 2022 14:53 angry_maia wrote: Another question: what about reworking charge?
i personally think the charge upgrade is super stupid. It basically takes zealots, which in brood war had pretty decent amounts of micro potential (especially against zerglings and hydras), and removes ALL MICRO.
it seems like pros have decided that the best thing to do with zealots is just a-move them and maybe shift click on targets, nothing more.
Well, the issue is that Marauders and their shells exist.
Also stim and stutter step.
I don’t think most Terrans will ever concede that having insanely microable, high DPS stock units is a part of SC2’s base design issues.
It may be tricker to balance a game with such units but to be frank marine and ling really feel great and relevant whole game long. It would be awesome to have similarly strong and versatile and easily available unit in protoss Arsenal. The staple zealot nor stalker cut it.
On February 28 2022 14:53 angry_maia wrote: Another question: what about reworking charge?
i personally think the charge upgrade is super stupid. It basically takes zealots, which in brood war had pretty decent amounts of micro potential (especially against zerglings and hydras), and removes ALL MICRO.
it seems like pros have decided that the best thing to do with zealots is just a-move them and maybe shift click on targets, nothing more.
IMHO charge should work like blink, castable on the ground instead of attacking the units. You could get zealots faster into good positions and micro them from that point.
On February 28 2022 14:53 angry_maia wrote: Another question: what about reworking charge?
i personally think the charge upgrade is super stupid. It basically takes zealots, which in brood war had pretty decent amounts of micro potential (especially against zerglings and hydras), and removes ALL MICRO.
it seems like pros have decided that the best thing to do with zealots is just a-move them and maybe shift click on targets, nothing more.
Well, the issue is that Marauders and their shells exist.
Also stim and stutter step.
I don’t think most Terrans will ever concede that having insanely microable, high DPS stock units is a part of SC2’s base design issues.
It may be tricker to balance a game with such units but to be frank marine and ling really feel great and relevant whole game long. It would be awesome to have similarly strong and versatile and easily available unit in protoss Arsenal. The staple zealot nor stalker cut it.
The issue is with stock/basic units past a certain phase of the game there is no counter micro to well-microed bio, these things are interlinked.
I enjoy bio micro immensely, it’s fun to do. I’ll load up baneling splitting maps and grind them and yeah, it feels good.
Historically PvT and TvP are by far my best matchups, on both sides of certain interactions. Kiting pure Zealot indefinitely can definitely feel great, but from the Protoss perspective it’s an interaction I can’t really do anything about.
It’s partly how the game clumps things too, it’s highly concentrated, balled DPS, so as the game scales there’s fewer and fewer opportunities for melee micro. WC3 had smaller armies and tankier units in general, so there’s a bit more room there. BW has its UI considerations that split armies up more so speedy melee units can get into good engagements.
I’d like to see experimentation in removing concussive shells and charge for one thing.
Charge feels a necessary evil currently but it takes a lot of control out of a player’s hands, even faster Zealots might give more options on how to engage.
I think we’ve all seen flanks set up and depending where the Zealots charge in it can be the difference between a Protoss army cleaning house, or getting wiped
On February 28 2022 14:53 angry_maia wrote: Another question: what about reworking charge?
i personally think the charge upgrade is super stupid. It basically takes zealots, which in brood war had pretty decent amounts of micro potential (especially against zerglings and hydras), and removes ALL MICRO.
it seems like pros have decided that the best thing to do with zealots is just a-move them and maybe shift click on targets, nothing more.
Well, the issue is that Marauders and their shells exist.
Also stim and stutter step.
I don’t think most Terrans will ever concede that having insanely microable, high DPS stock units is a part of SC2’s base design issues.
It may be tricker to balance a game with such units but to be frank marine and ling really feel great and relevant whole game long. It would be awesome to have similarly strong and versatile and easily available unit in protoss Arsenal. The staple zealot nor stalker cut it.
The issue is with stock/basic units past a certain phase of the game there is no counter micro to well-microed bio, these things are interlinked.
I enjoy bio micro immensely, it’s fun to do. I’ll load up baneling splitting maps and grind them and yeah, it feels good.
Historically PvT and TvP are by far my best matchups, on both sides of certain interactions. Kiting pure Zealot indefinitely can definitely feel great, but from the Protoss perspective it’s an interaction I can’t really do anything about.
It’s partly how the game clumps things too, it’s highly concentrated, balled DPS, so as the game scales there’s fewer and fewer opportunities for melee micro. WC3 had smaller armies and tankier units in general, so there’s a bit more room there. BW has its UI considerations that split armies up more so speedy melee units can get into good engagements.
I’d like to see experimentation in removing concussive shells and charge for one thing.
Charge feels a necessary evil currently but it takes a lot of control out of a player’s hands, even faster Zealots might give more options on how to engage.
I think we’ve all seen flanks set up and depending where the Zealots charge in it can be the difference between a Protoss army cleaning house, or getting wiped
+1 for going back to speedlots instead of chargelots! Zealots would need a bit of a buff, since they'll take longer to close the distance, but it'll reward pre-engagement positioning much more I think.
I also feel like the blink + charge comp is extremely one-dimensional: you need some amazing game sense to figure out when to fight, but the actual fight is quite micro-independent. You just blink your stalkers out of the way of your zealots & into range of the opposing army, then make small incremental adjustments. Flanks are trivialized too: you don't need a zealot concave, since charge will get them on top of the enemy tanks/bio anyway. Very visually exciting, but not actually as micro-dependent as even like, roach v roach, which still rewards good positioning