The Code S round-of-eight concluded with Cure and Dark coming out of Group B at the expense of herO and TY.
Cure built on his strong 4-0 performance from the RO16, again advancing in first place with a 2-0 win against herO and 2-1 win against Dark. Second place went to Dark, who denied the possibility of another all-Terran top four by advancing.
Unfortunately, last remaining Protoss hope herO gave yet another poor performance, finishing in third place after making several noticeable errors. Recent military returnee and surprise RO8 entrant TY finished in last place without a map win.
Code S will conclude on Thursday, Jul 27 9:00am GMT (GMT+00:00) with GuMiho, Dark, Cure, and Maru playing in semifinals and grand final.
Match Recaps
Initial Match #1: Dark [2-0] TY
Game One - Royal Blood (Dark win): Dark took an easy win in game one, blind-countering everything TY cooked up. His Pool-first build negated TY's proxy 2-Barracks, and his quick Roach follow-up punished TY's attempt to go for a greedy expansion + factory. With an enormous advantage in hand, Dark ended the game with Roach-Ravager-Ling at around the 7:00 mark.
Game Two - NeoHumanity (Dark win): Dark opened Pool-first again while TY looked to go for a fast 3-CC strategy with defensive Cyclones. TY defended against Dark's attempt at early Roach pressure fairly well, putting himself in a very good economic position.
Unfortunately for TY, his rustiness was apparent as he couldn't smoothly convert his strong economy into unit production. Dark battered TY with waves of Roach-Ravager, refusing to let the Terran forces reach critical mass. Eventually, the TY's defense fell apart, and Dark collected a second GG.
Initial Match #2: Cure [2-0] herO
Game One - Gresvan (Cure win): Cure played things safe with a 1/1/1 Cyclone start, while herO gambled by building a proxy-Dark Shrine and Gateway on Cure's side of the map. Diligent Reaper scouting uncovered the proxy at just the right moment for Cure, leaving herO massively behind due to his useless early investment.
Amazingly enough, herO actually dealt a bit of damage with a much-delayed DT drop, but the game was still heavily in Cure's favor. herO valiantly tried to fight on—going down over 60 supply at some points—but he accepted his fate in the end.
Game Two - Dragon Scales (Cure win): herO went for a conventional Stargate-Phoenix opener this time around, while Cure again went for a Cyclone expansion. Cure went on the offensive once he had a Cyclone and Medivac out, combining them with a trickle of Marines from a Reactor-Barracks. herO engaged with his Adepts and Phoenixes, but got shellacked due to good micro from Cure and some underestimation of the Terran forces. herO ended up having to sacrifice Probes to stop this Marine-Cyclone push and fell massively behind.
A wasteful and ineffective Cloak-Banshee follow-up from Cure gave herO a slight reprieve, but didn't really change the overall situation. Cure refrained from any drastic measures, compounding his lead by securing bases and denying herO's. With Cure refusing to give him a GG-timing, herO made one for himself by going for a doomed, last ditch attack.
Winners' Match: Cure [2-1] Dark
Game One - Gresvan (Cure win): Cure took a page out of ByuN's book, opening with 2-Barracks Reapers. He put his own spin on it, going for fast 3-CC and double Engineering Bays behind it. Cure got away with this greedy play, as Dark opted to play defensive early and go for Muta-Ling-Bane in the mid-game.
Cure's build allowed him to quickly amass a huge Marine-Marauder-Hellbat army and hit at a very fast 2/2 upgrade timing. Dark decided to try and defend at home with Ling-Bane while sending his Mutalisks off to backdoor Cure's main. Unfortunately, the 'defend at home' part didn't go according to plan, and he GG'd out to Cure's rampaging infantry.
Game Two - Royal Blood (Dark win): Cure went ByuN-mode again with 2-Rax Reapers, this time following up with Cloaked Banshees. While Cure's Banshees couldn't inflict much damage, Dark found a lot more success with his own harassment—double-Overlord Baneling drops into Cure's mineral lines. Combined with a reasonable hold against Cure's Marine-Tank push at the front, this put Dark in a solid mid-game position.
Still, Cure was far from out of the game, and he had the infrastructure to take a few cracks at breaking Dark's defense with maxed out Marine-Tank armies. He played it by the book, setting up near the Zerg expansion with the least Creep spread where he tried to goad his opponent into a disastrous engagement. However, Dark had his own textbook response, keeping the Terran forces just out of siege range with measured fights, while sending backdoor Baneling attacks to chip at the Terran economy.
In hindsight, Cure's push probably should have worked, but he made the unfortunate error of trapping many of his key Siege Tanks due to poor building placement. This would have been alleviated by simply lowering a Depot (it wasn't one of those cases where you have to lift a Factory and rebuild the Tech Lab), but he only noticed his blunder after six Tanks were trapped. That gave Dark more than enough time to end the Terran siege and put himself in a very good position with seven bases.
From there, Dark was able to engage in true Swarm tactics to end the game, combining drops and ground attacks to overwhelm the Terran defenses.
Game Three - NeoHumanity (Cure win): Both players decided to keep things simple on NeoHumanity, going for a passive build up into the late-game. Dark settled on a Ultra-Ling-Bane-Viper army, while Cure went for your usual Tank-Ghost turtle strategy. Unfortunately for Dark, this turned into a pretty straight-forward 'Ultras into lose' game. His attempts to break the Terran defenses went very poorly, with hundreds of Zerg units being sent haplessly to their deaths. A belated switch to Brood Lords didn't change the situation, and Dark GG'd out against the Terran slow-push of doom.
Losers' Match: herO [2-0] TY
Game One - Altitude (herO win): herO started out with a Robotics opener while TY tried to put on some pressure early with 1 Tank, 1 Medivac and some Marines. herO's fast Observer was his best defensive tool, as he detected the attack early and defended against it easily with well-positioned troops. TY's follow-up Liberator didn't do much either, and it seemed like TY was headed to an inevitable defeat.
Indeed, that ended up being TY's fate, although it took herO longer to win than expected due to a late mine drop, a desperate base trade from TY, and an abrupt disconnect + restart from replay.
Game Two - Gresvan (herO win): herO went for Blink-Robo this time around, while TY went for a 4 Hellion drop with a proxy Starport. Despite having his proxy discovered, TY managed to sacrifice four Hellions to kill seven Probes. This ended up being a good trade due to herO's counter-harass with Blink Stalkers being largely ineffectual.
Despite being behind, herO went for a frontal attack with Storm which was equal parts disastrous and disrespectful. TY mangled the Protoss forces, and leapt ahead to an even bigger lead than he had in game two against Dark, going up by over 40 supply. TY played his lead extremely passively, staying in a defensive stance until he had a fully maxed out army of Bio, Tanks, and Ghosts. However, that also let herO take expansions unimpeded and catch up significantly.
TY's first major push on a maxed army went very poorly, with herO drawing him in and soundly beating him in the field. herO then launched a series of counterattacks on TY's expansions, hamstringing the Terran economy and taking back the lead.
What seemed like a routine clean-up from herO was interrupted by a brief scare as his overconfidence led him to take some calamitous fights. However, the situation never got as bad as it did against NightMare in the RO16 (where he nearly gave up an embarrassing comeback victory), and herO eventually used his superior economy to bludgeon TY to death.
Decider Match: Dark [2-0] herO
Game One - Dark (herO win): herO went old school in game one, going for a DT/Archon-drop macro opener. However, he ended up committing a terrible micro error, losing a Warp Prism with three DT's in it. Meanwhile, Dark went for a Ling-Bane timing off of around 40 Drones, which successfully tore down herO's third base.
Dark's heavy investment in the Ling-Bane attack meant herO wasn't TOTALLY dead, leaving him with enough in the tank for a semi-credible two-base all-in. However, Dark knew better than to greed too hard, and had plenty of Roaches on hand to repel the attack. After that, herO was truly doomed, and he GG'd out to a big Roach-Ravager attack.
Game Two - Royal Blood (Dark win): herO switched to his iconic Oracle-Stalker strategy for game two. Things seemed to go poorly at first, with his early Adept-Oracle pressure unable to inflict much damage. However, he was gifted a reprieve from Dark, who tried to hit a pre-Blink timing with Queens, Banelings, and Zerglings. However, his off-Creep Queens took ages to arrive at the Protoss base, and by then, herO's defenses were already solid. Dark basically had to retreat the second he arrived, which let herO take a fourth base and put himself in an amazing position.
Unfortunately for herO, the poor play he showed since the RO16 persisted. On the Zerg side of the map, his insistence on going pure Stalker let Dark fight him efficiently with Queens and well-upgraded Zerglings. On the other end of the map, Dark cut into herO's economic lead with a Baneling run-by. By the time herO realized he needed Oracle and Zealot support to fight Zerglings, Dark had already set himself up nicely on five bases and was well on his way to Adrenal Glands and Ultralisk tech.
herO was better about preemptively countering the Ultralisks, going for 2-robo Immortals. However his army positioning left much to be desired when waves of Ultra-Ling-Bane started crashing in. The sheer damage output of the Zerg swarm punished herO anywhere he wasn't ready with defenders, and Dark was able to take out many key bases. Defeat was basically inevitable from there on out, and herO stuck around for a few more minutes before finally surrendering the last GG.
I gotta be honest. After watching herO try and force DTs multiple games in a row in this group I have to ask the question. Do we REALLY want more Protoss in the later rounds of GSL?
On July 22 2023 14:46 Vindicare605 wrote: I gotta be honest. After watching herO try and force DTs multiple games in a row in this group I have to ask the question. Do we REALLY want more Protoss in the later rounds of GSL?
Making DTs good skill toi have
I dunno it feels the Protoss contingent are having to delve pretty deep into the Protoss Book of BullshitTM for a good chunk of this season
As to whether that’s due to perceived necessity or trying to nab cheap wins I don’t know personally, I’d err towards the latter
Even herO’s much vaunted new PvZ style which personally I love seems to be relatively figured out already by the top Zergs
On July 22 2023 14:46 Vindicare605 wrote: I gotta be honest. After watching herO try and force DTs multiple games in a row in this group I have to ask the question. Do we REALLY want more Protoss in the later rounds of GSL?
The problem is DTs are the only really dangerous early game on offer for Protoss. Oracles are pretty easy to shut down, and the shield battery nerfs (and, to a lesser extent, void prism nerfs) have made most anything else super aggressive bad. I mean, when's the last time you saw a cannon rush? On the other hand, greedy macro openings are also much worse, with shield battery and void ray nerfs making Protoss less stable in early defenses. So it's either DTs or try to hit a timing, which hasn't been working very well either.
On July 22 2023 14:46 Vindicare605 wrote: I gotta be honest. After watching herO try and force DTs multiple games in a row in this group I have to ask the question. Do we REALLY want more Protoss in the later rounds of GSL?
The problem is DTs are the only really dangerous early game on offer for Protoss. Oracles are pretty easy to shut down, and the shield battery nerfs (and, to a lesser extent, void prism nerfs) have made most anything else super aggressive bad. I mean, when's the last time you saw a cannon rush? On the other hand, greedy macro openings are also much worse, with shield battery and void ray nerfs making Protoss less stable in early defenses. So it's either DTs or try to hit a timing, which hasn't been working very well either.
So the logic is that we're not going to attempt anything we KNOW isn't going to cause the damage we want so we're instead going to gamble on the riskiest thing we can try because it MIGHT catch our opponent off guard even though it becomes less and less effective the more they expect us to be desperate enough to try it?
Brilliant logic. This is how we end up with a stagnant meta. I guarantee you if someone like Gumiho was playing Protoss he'd at least attempt something different even if it didn't work than keep doing the same tired shit over and over again.
Relying on DT's isn't new. It's as old as SC2 itself or older.
On July 22 2023 14:46 Vindicare605 wrote: I gotta be honest. After watching herO try and force DTs multiple games in a row in this group I have to ask the question. Do we REALLY want more Protoss in the later rounds of GSL?
The problem is DTs are the only really dangerous early game on offer for Protoss. Oracles are pretty easy to shut down, and the shield battery nerfs (and, to a lesser extent, void prism nerfs) have made most anything else super aggressive bad. I mean, when's the last time you saw a cannon rush? On the other hand, greedy macro openings are also much worse, with shield battery and void ray nerfs making Protoss less stable in early defenses. So it's either DTs or try to hit a timing, which hasn't been working very well either.
So the logic is that we're not going to attempt anything we KNOW isn't going to cause the damage we want so we're instead going to gamble on the riskiest thing we can try because it MIGHT catch our opponent off guard even though it becomes less and less effective the more they expect us to be desperate enough to try it?
Brilliant logic. This is how we end up with a stagnant meta. I guarantee you if someone like Gumiho was playing Protoss he'd at least attempt something different even if it didn't work than keep doing the same tired shit over and over again.
Relying on DT's isn't new. It's as old as SC2 itself or older.
Maybe Protoss just isn’t very good currently, and doesn’t have a huge capacity for improvement?
Classic had more success with incredibly gimmicky builds than anything standard this season. I’m including games he basically threw off a big advantage, where his initial gambit was successful.
Nothing really works. Gumi is one of my favourite players but he hasn’t really done a huge amount of meta pushing lately, he’s thrown in some off-meta builds but some of his most notable funkiness has been in TvT
Top Zergs seem to have already figured out the new herO PvZ style, which is the biggest overall meta innovation in the past 6 months across the races.
So we’re back to where we’ve often been at for seemingly ages and Protoss are just gambling on unstable builds that rely on an opponent missing a scout or misreading.
We’ve seen a temporary resurgence in Protoss results with a legitimate bug buffing Collosus range but hey, it’s confirmed not meant to be there so will be reverted shortly
On July 22 2023 14:46 Vindicare605 wrote: I gotta be honest. After watching herO try and force DTs multiple games in a row in this group I have to ask the question. Do we REALLY want more Protoss in the later rounds of GSL?
The problem is DTs are the only really dangerous early game on offer for Protoss. Oracles are pretty easy to shut down, and the shield battery nerfs (and, to a lesser extent, void prism nerfs) have made most anything else super aggressive bad. I mean, when's the last time you saw a cannon rush? On the other hand, greedy macro openings are also much worse, with shield battery and void ray nerfs making Protoss less stable in early defenses. So it's either DTs or try to hit a timing, which hasn't been working very well either.
So the logic is that we're not going to attempt anything we KNOW isn't going to cause the damage we want so we're instead going to gamble on the riskiest thing we can try because it MIGHT catch our opponent off guard even though it becomes less and less effective the more they expect us to be desperate enough to try it?
Brilliant logic. This is how we end up with a stagnant meta. I guarantee you if someone like Gumiho was playing Protoss he'd at least attempt something different even if it didn't work than keep doing the same tired shit over and over again.
Relying on DT's isn't new. It's as old as SC2 itself or older.
Maybe Protoss just isn’t very good currently, and doesn’t have a huge capacity for improvement?
Classic had more success with incredibly gimmicky builds than anything standard this season. I’m including games he basically threw off a big advantage, where his initial gambit was successful.
Nothing really works. Gumi is one of my favourite players but he hasn’t really done a huge amount of meta pushing lately, he’s thrown in some off-meta builds but some of his most notable funkiness has been in TvT
Top Zergs seem to have already figured out the new herO PvZ style, which is the biggest overall meta innovation in the past 6 months across the races.
So we’re back to where we’ve often been at for seemingly ages and Protoss are just gambling on unstable builds that rely on an opponent missing a scout or misreading.
We’ve seen a temporary resurgence in Protoss results with a legitimate bug buffing Collosus range but hey, it’s confirmed not meant to be there so will be reverted shortly
So then we go back to my original question, just elaborated on. If we're going to keep the current Protoss design that simply rewards gimmick builds until they get figured out and don't work anymore, and we're not going to do anything to fix the core issues the race has that it has had for 13 years, then do we really WANT more Protoss in GSL?
I can't say I really do. If no one is going to even try and innovate, or if the race is just stuck in a place where innovation isn't possible (I don't believe this is 100% the case) then all we're ever going to get is a gimmick run that we feel obligated to cheer for because there's 3 races and surely ALL of them have to be equal, even though by now it's clear that one of them is badly designed.
On July 22 2023 14:46 Vindicare605 wrote: I gotta be honest. After watching herO try and force DTs multiple games in a row in this group I have to ask the question. Do we REALLY want more Protoss in the later rounds of GSL?
The problem is DTs are the only really dangerous early game on offer for Protoss. Oracles are pretty easy to shut down, and the shield battery nerfs (and, to a lesser extent, void prism nerfs) have made most anything else super aggressive bad. I mean, when's the last time you saw a cannon rush? On the other hand, greedy macro openings are also much worse, with shield battery and void ray nerfs making Protoss less stable in early defenses. So it's either DTs or try to hit a timing, which hasn't been working very well either.
So the logic is that we're not going to attempt anything we KNOW isn't going to cause the damage we want so we're instead going to gamble on the riskiest thing we can try because it MIGHT catch our opponent off guard even though it becomes less and less effective the more they expect us to be desperate enough to try it?
Brilliant logic. This is how we end up with a stagnant meta. I guarantee you if someone like Gumiho was playing Protoss he'd at least attempt something different even if it didn't work than keep doing the same tired shit over and over again.
Relying on DT's isn't new. It's as old as SC2 itself or older.
Maybe Protoss just isn’t very good currently, and doesn’t have a huge capacity for improvement?
Classic had more success with incredibly gimmicky builds than anything standard this season. I’m including games he basically threw off a big advantage, where his initial gambit was successful.
Nothing really works. Gumi is one of my favourite players but he hasn’t really done a huge amount of meta pushing lately, he’s thrown in some off-meta builds but some of his most notable funkiness has been in TvT
Top Zergs seem to have already figured out the new herO PvZ style, which is the biggest overall meta innovation in the past 6 months across the races.
So we’re back to where we’ve often been at for seemingly ages and Protoss are just gambling on unstable builds that rely on an opponent missing a scout or misreading.
We’ve seen a temporary resurgence in Protoss results with a legitimate bug buffing Collosus range but hey, it’s confirmed not meant to be there so will be reverted shortly
So then we go back to my original question, just elaborated on. If we're going to keep the current Protoss design that simply rewards gimmick builds until they get figured out and don't work anymore, and we're not going to do anything to fix the core issues the race has that it has had for 13 years, then do we really WANT more Protoss in GSL?
I can't say I really do. If no one is going to even try and innovate, or if the race is just stuck in a place where innovation isn't possible (I don't believe this is 100% the case) then all we're ever going to get is a gimmick run that we feel obligated to cheer for because there's 3 races and surely ALL of them have to be equal, even though by now it's clear that one of them is badly designed.
Aye fair, although it’s an asymmetric game, so in that sense Terran are Zerg are just as badly designed IMO, especially Terran as it pertains to PvT
But yeah I agree
If even if one of the interracial matchups was in a decent spot currently, it just isn’t the case really.
In Trap’s ‘era’ he had legitimately stellar PvT, he’d come unstuck against Rogue or Dark but you knew he could draw even Maru and win a straight up series, which he did more than once. And it wasn’t like PvT across the board was broken, he was just very good at it.
Now it feels both PvT and PvT, at this level if you’re gonna get through it’s going to be by gimmicks. And that’s likely to not work a second time, so as a Protoss fan you’re hoping someone sneaks through only to get stomped later, versus someone else who might have a legitimate shot, which no I don’t like
On July 22 2023 14:46 Vindicare605 wrote: I gotta be honest. After watching herO try and force DTs multiple games in a row in this group I have to ask the question. Do we REALLY want more Protoss in the later rounds of GSL?
The problem is DTs are the only really dangerous early game on offer for Protoss. Oracles are pretty easy to shut down, and the shield battery nerfs (and, to a lesser extent, void prism nerfs) have made most anything else super aggressive bad. I mean, when's the last time you saw a cannon rush? On the other hand, greedy macro openings are also much worse, with shield battery and void ray nerfs making Protoss less stable in early defenses. So it's either DTs or try to hit a timing, which hasn't been working very well either.
So the logic is that we're not going to attempt anything we KNOW isn't going to cause the damage we want so we're instead going to gamble on the riskiest thing we can try because it MIGHT catch our opponent off guard even though it becomes less and less effective the more they expect us to be desperate enough to try it?
I understand this summary is meant to reveal some flaw in what I said, but I'm not sure how. Players don't do things they know won't work. That checks out. They go DTs, which can work. Makes sense. But because it's predictable the DTs don't tend to work either. I didn't spell this part out as much in what I said since I thought it was obvious from the games themselves, but yeah, that follows. Not seeing any issues revealed by REPHRASING with more CAPITALIZATION.
On July 23 2023 04:33 Vindicare605 wrote: Brilliant logic. This is how we end up with a stagnant meta. I guarantee you if someone like Gumiho was playing Protoss he'd at least attempt something different even if it didn't work than keep doing the same tired shit over and over again.
Right, Classic and herO are notably not innovative and have never come up with new strategies to take the meta in a different direction. MaxPax? Never had a build named after him. Sorry, maybe the condescension's infectious.
Just in case it's unclear: my argument is that the current set of nerfs to Protoss have vastly limited the breadth of strategies that Protoss can use. So they rely on a smaller set of strategies (like going DT over and over again). It's hard to "prove" that there are fewer strategies that could be found but haven't, since by definition these hypothetical strategies aren't known yet. But if Protoss is weaker on early game offense, on early game defense, and also kind of sucks at getting to, much less winning, the late game, it's hard to imagine that there's some new meta waiting to be found where balance is fine.
On July 23 2023 04:33 Vindicare605 wrote: Relying on DT's isn't new. It's as old as SC2 itself or older.
Pro Protoss players have not "relied" on DTs for 13 or 25 years. They mix them in some. Given your first post was complaining about herO overusing DTs, I'm not sure why you're now claiming that's a long-running problem.
On July 22 2023 14:46 Vindicare605 wrote: I gotta be honest. After watching herO try and force DTs multiple games in a row in this group I have to ask the question. Do we REALLY want more Protoss in the later rounds of GSL?
The problem is DTs are the only really dangerous early game on offer for Protoss. Oracles are pretty easy to shut down, and the shield battery nerfs (and, to a lesser extent, void prism nerfs) have made most anything else super aggressive bad. I mean, when's the last time you saw a cannon rush? On the other hand, greedy macro openings are also much worse, with shield battery and void ray nerfs making Protoss less stable in early defenses. So it's either DTs or try to hit a timing, which hasn't been working very well either.
So the logic is that we're not going to attempt anything we KNOW isn't going to cause the damage we want so we're instead going to gamble on the riskiest thing we can try because it MIGHT catch our opponent off guard even though it becomes less and less effective the more they expect us to be desperate enough to try it?
Brilliant logic. This is how we end up with a stagnant meta. I guarantee you if someone like Gumiho was playing Protoss he'd at least attempt something different even if it didn't work than keep doing the same tired shit over and over again.
Relying on DT's isn't new. It's as old as SC2 itself or older.
Maybe Protoss just isn’t very good currently, and doesn’t have a huge capacity for improvement?
Classic had more success with incredibly gimmicky builds than anything standard this season. I’m including games he basically threw off a big advantage, where his initial gambit was successful.
Nothing really works. Gumi is one of my favourite players but he hasn’t really done a huge amount of meta pushing lately, he’s thrown in some off-meta builds but some of his most notable funkiness has been in TvT
Top Zergs seem to have already figured out the new herO PvZ style, which is the biggest overall meta innovation in the past 6 months across the races.
So we’re back to where we’ve often been at for seemingly ages and Protoss are just gambling on unstable builds that rely on an opponent missing a scout or misreading.
We’ve seen a temporary resurgence in Protoss results with a legitimate bug buffing Collosus range but hey, it’s confirmed not meant to be there so will be reverted shortly
So then we go back to my original question, just elaborated on. If we're going to keep the current Protoss design that simply rewards gimmick builds until they get figured out and don't work anymore, and we're not going to do anything to fix the core issues the race has that it has had for 13 years, then do we really WANT more Protoss in GSL?
Protoss has had plenty of periods where it didn't have to play gimmicky builds. Just look for any period where people were whining about their "unbeatable endgame composition" instead. And Protoss is certainly not the only race that's been rewarding gimmick plays for 13 years, I'm not taking that shit from the race that considers grabbing all your workers and a-moving the opponent's base a viable strategy. And as for races with "core issues that need fixing", there's no way Protoss beats out the Zerg Queen, a unit that can't fulfill it economic and military roles for the same unit cost, yet has to.
On July 22 2023 14:46 Vindicare605 wrote: I gotta be honest. After watching herO try and force DTs multiple games in a row in this group I have to ask the question. Do we REALLY want more Protoss in the later rounds of GSL?
The problem is DTs are the only really dangerous early game on offer for Protoss. Oracles are pretty easy to shut down, and the shield battery nerfs (and, to a lesser extent, void prism nerfs) have made most anything else super aggressive bad. I mean, when's the last time you saw a cannon rush? On the other hand, greedy macro openings are also much worse, with shield battery and void ray nerfs making Protoss less stable in early defenses. So it's either DTs or try to hit a timing, which hasn't been working very well either.
So the logic is that we're not going to attempt anything we KNOW isn't going to cause the damage we want so we're instead going to gamble on the riskiest thing we can try because it MIGHT catch our opponent off guard even though it becomes less and less effective the more they expect us to be desperate enough to try it?
Brilliant logic. This is how we end up with a stagnant meta. I guarantee you if someone like Gumiho was playing Protoss he'd at least attempt something different even if it didn't work than keep doing the same tired shit over and over again.
Relying on DT's isn't new. It's as old as SC2 itself or older.
Maybe Protoss just isn’t very good currently, and doesn’t have a huge capacity for improvement?
Classic had more success with incredibly gimmicky builds than anything standard this season. I’m including games he basically threw off a big advantage, where his initial gambit was successful.
Nothing really works. Gumi is one of my favourite players but he hasn’t really done a huge amount of meta pushing lately, he’s thrown in some off-meta builds but some of his most notable funkiness has been in TvT
Top Zergs seem to have already figured out the new herO PvZ style, which is the biggest overall meta innovation in the past 6 months across the races.
So we’re back to where we’ve often been at for seemingly ages and Protoss are just gambling on unstable builds that rely on an opponent missing a scout or misreading.
We’ve seen a temporary resurgence in Protoss results with a legitimate bug buffing Collosus range but hey, it’s confirmed not meant to be there so will be reverted shortly
So then we go back to my original question, just elaborated on. If we're going to keep the current Protoss design that simply rewards gimmick builds until they get figured out and don't work anymore, and we're not going to do anything to fix the core issues the race has that it has had for 13 years, then do we really WANT more Protoss in GSL?
Protoss has had plenty of periods where it didn't have to play gimmicky builds. Just look for any period where people were whining about their "unbeatable endgame composition" instead. And Protoss is certainly not the only race that's been rewarding gimmick plays for 13 years, I'm not taking that shit from the race that considers grabbing all your workers and a-moving the opponent's base a viable strategy. And as for races with "core issues that need fixing", there's no way Protoss beats out the Zerg Queen, a unit that can't fulfill it economic and military roles for the same unit cost, yet has to.
It's not a design issue, it's a balance issue.
I'm not saying that gimmick builds aren't allowed or that the other races don't have them. I'm saying Protoss is stuck in this cycle of ALWAYS relying on gimmick all ins in order to win tournaments. If it's not one build it's another.
Oh unless it's their hated late game deathball comps that someone else mentioned. Ok valid. Protoss has since WoL been a race that unless it's killing you with an all in, it is turtling to a single unbeatable deathball. Does that sound familiar to anybody because that's the Protoss race that I've known since 2010 with VERY few periods of in between.
In the modern LotV meta where the game is spread out and not concentrated into one tiny area that late game army comp reliance doesn't really work, it doesn't work with ANY of the races and yet Protoss has nothing else beyond that unless it kills you with a timing attack. Why is that? Because of the core problems the race has with the way it's designed. 13 years of experiencing this shit. How many more do you want before you'll see it's a fundamental problem with how Protoss is designed? They might fix the balance by just making their timings or deathballs stronger, but then we're right back to where we were before.
It's just a badly designed race, has been from the start and no one that's playing it seems to want to play any other way to prove me wrong.
You're seriously going to look at the games that herO played the other night and say he lost because the game isn't balanced? Really? He lost because he was proxying Dark Shrines, and constantly getting his attempts to sneak something past his opponent scouted and stomped on and he had nothing else left besides it. It's hilarious that people defend stuff like this as "the only way to play."
On July 22 2023 14:46 Vindicare605 wrote: I gotta be honest. After watching herO try and force DTs multiple games in a row in this group I have to ask the question. Do we REALLY want more Protoss in the later rounds of GSL?
The problem is DTs are the only really dangerous early game on offer for Protoss. Oracles are pretty easy to shut down, and the shield battery nerfs (and, to a lesser extent, void prism nerfs) have made most anything else super aggressive bad. I mean, when's the last time you saw a cannon rush? On the other hand, greedy macro openings are also much worse, with shield battery and void ray nerfs making Protoss less stable in early defenses. So it's either DTs or try to hit a timing, which hasn't been working very well either.
So the logic is that we're not going to attempt anything we KNOW isn't going to cause the damage we want so we're instead going to gamble on the riskiest thing we can try because it MIGHT catch our opponent off guard even though it becomes less and less effective the more they expect us to be desperate enough to try it?
Brilliant logic. This is how we end up with a stagnant meta. I guarantee you if someone like Gumiho was playing Protoss he'd at least attempt something different even if it didn't work than keep doing the same tired shit over and over again.
Relying on DT's isn't new. It's as old as SC2 itself or older.
Maybe Protoss just isn’t very good currently, and doesn’t have a huge capacity for improvement?
Classic had more success with incredibly gimmicky builds than anything standard this season. I’m including games he basically threw off a big advantage, where his initial gambit was successful.
Nothing really works. Gumi is one of my favourite players but he hasn’t really done a huge amount of meta pushing lately, he’s thrown in some off-meta builds but some of his most notable funkiness has been in TvT
Top Zergs seem to have already figured out the new herO PvZ style, which is the biggest overall meta innovation in the past 6 months across the races.
So we’re back to where we’ve often been at for seemingly ages and Protoss are just gambling on unstable builds that rely on an opponent missing a scout or misreading.
We’ve seen a temporary resurgence in Protoss results with a legitimate bug buffing Collosus range but hey, it’s confirmed not meant to be there so will be reverted shortly
So then we go back to my original question, just elaborated on. If we're going to keep the current Protoss design that simply rewards gimmick builds until they get figured out and don't work anymore, and we're not going to do anything to fix the core issues the race has that it has had for 13 years, then do we really WANT more Protoss in GSL?
Protoss has had plenty of periods where it didn't have to play gimmicky builds. Just look for any period where people were whining about their "unbeatable endgame composition" instead. And Protoss is certainly not the only race that's been rewarding gimmick plays for 13 years, I'm not taking that shit from the race that considers grabbing all your workers and a-moving the opponent's base a viable strategy. And as for races with "core issues that need fixing", there's no way Protoss beats out the Zerg Queen, a unit that can't fulfill it economic and military roles for the same unit cost, yet has to.
It's not a design issue, it's a balance issue.
It’s a design issue
Balance can conceivably be fixed with tweaking a few numbers here or there. Design things are more fundamental.
Let’s consider Legacy, Protoss got a new toy in the Adept and was shredding face with it for a prolonged period. Until it got nerfed and wasn’t.
Let’s consider that in terms of early/midgame comps not actually a huge amount changed with Terran.
But with eco ramp up Protoss needed shield batteries (after the old Mommashipcore/overcharge just to hold basic Terran pushes.
They still can’t reliably hold those pushes while being greedy enough to enter lategame on a good footing. A similar dynamic exists in PvZ
Either they’re given a tool that’s OP, which is also bad or we just consistently see the same pattern. Reliance on gimmicky, risky play to compensate for a lack of stable macro styles.
Protoss core units aren’t strong, they’re not high DPS microable like Terran. They’re not numerous and really fast like Zerg for map control.
They’re good in an all-in before tech hits in, or they’re good in a deathball.
As Vindicare says (40k reference btw?) Legacy by having a fast eco ramp up, as well as requiring more spread absolutely exacerbates core design problems
At a certain level (and probably why Toss keeps getting nerfed) these factors aren’t super impactful, at the top level they clearly are
Protoss is so undertooled that it has giant, completely overpowered bandaids to their weakness to big floods of tier 1 units, and mobility with recall respectively and it’s STILL lagging
Design decisions, and not good ones. And not purely Toss
Making bio so, so much better than gateway units and incredibly microable isn’t ‘good design’ either just because people like the micro.
On July 22 2023 14:46 Vindicare605 wrote: I gotta be honest. After watching herO try and force DTs multiple games in a row in this group I have to ask the question. Do we REALLY want more Protoss in the later rounds of GSL?
The problem is DTs are the only really dangerous early game on offer for Protoss. Oracles are pretty easy to shut down, and the shield battery nerfs (and, to a lesser extent, void prism nerfs) have made most anything else super aggressive bad. I mean, when's the last time you saw a cannon rush? On the other hand, greedy macro openings are also much worse, with shield battery and void ray nerfs making Protoss less stable in early defenses. So it's either DTs or try to hit a timing, which hasn't been working very well either.
So the logic is that we're not going to attempt anything we KNOW isn't going to cause the damage we want so we're instead going to gamble on the riskiest thing we can try because it MIGHT catch our opponent off guard even though it becomes less and less effective the more they expect us to be desperate enough to try it?
Brilliant logic. This is how we end up with a stagnant meta. I guarantee you if someone like Gumiho was playing Protoss he'd at least attempt something different even if it didn't work than keep doing the same tired shit over and over again.
Relying on DT's isn't new. It's as old as SC2 itself or older.
Maybe Protoss just isn’t very good currently, and doesn’t have a huge capacity for improvement?
Classic had more success with incredibly gimmicky builds than anything standard this season. I’m including games he basically threw off a big advantage, where his initial gambit was successful.
Nothing really works. Gumi is one of my favourite players but he hasn’t really done a huge amount of meta pushing lately, he’s thrown in some off-meta builds but some of his most notable funkiness has been in TvT
Top Zergs seem to have already figured out the new herO PvZ style, which is the biggest overall meta innovation in the past 6 months across the races.
So we’re back to where we’ve often been at for seemingly ages and Protoss are just gambling on unstable builds that rely on an opponent missing a scout or misreading.
We’ve seen a temporary resurgence in Protoss results with a legitimate bug buffing Collosus range but hey, it’s confirmed not meant to be there so will be reverted shortly
So then we go back to my original question, just elaborated on. If we're going to keep the current Protoss design that simply rewards gimmick builds until they get figured out and don't work anymore, and we're not going to do anything to fix the core issues the race has that it has had for 13 years, then do we really WANT more Protoss in GSL?
Protoss has had plenty of periods where it didn't have to play gimmicky builds. Just look for any period where people were whining about their "unbeatable endgame composition" instead. And Protoss is certainly not the only race that's been rewarding gimmick plays for 13 years, I'm not taking that shit from the race that considers grabbing all your workers and a-moving the opponent's base a viable strategy. And as for races with "core issues that need fixing", there's no way Protoss beats out the Zerg Queen, a unit that can't fulfill it economic and military roles for the same unit cost, yet has to.
It's not a design issue, it's a balance issue.
It’s a design issue
As Vindicare says (40k reference btw?) Legacy by having a fast eco ramp up, as well as requiring more spread absolutely exacerbates core design problems
Indeed it is.
Making bio so, so much better than gateway units and incredibly microable isn’t ‘good design’ either just because people like the micro.
Oh I'm so glad you brought this up because this speaks to the BIGGEST of the Protoss design issues. Bio being strong is fine vs Terran, it's fine even when the opposing Terran makes no Bio units. It's fine vs Zerg too. Why isn't it fine vs Protoss.
Well let's just for a moment try and imagine a game where Gateway units were as strong as Bio units and could trade evenly with them 1 to 1. Or imagine a scenario where Protoss Gateway units were more mobile and able to chase down Zerg armies on creep. What's the giant elephant in the room in that scenario? Oh yea! WARP GATE! You CAN'T have Gateway units EVER anywhere near as versatile and cost effective as Bio units are or as mobile as Zerg units are because Protoss can instantly reinforce them regardless of distance or terrain immediately onto the battlefield. It would make them COMPLETELY broken as an attacking force in an all in.
Blizzard HAS to balance Protoss around the ability to warp their units in as reinforcements. They HAVE to or else the game would be completely busted beyond belief.
Blizzard knows they have to do this, and have specifically said they never want to change how this works because fucking Warp Gate is too cool to EVER consider changing. /barf.
This isn't even an opinion or a subjective argument. I dare anyone to figure out a way to make Protoss gateway units better so they can fight independently of their Robotics support units on par with Zerg and Terran units and not immediately make Protoss all ins unholdable and completely overpowered. I guarantee you if there was a way to do this it would have already happened.
On July 22 2023 14:46 Vindicare605 wrote: I gotta be honest. After watching herO try and force DTs multiple games in a row in this group I have to ask the question. Do we REALLY want more Protoss in the later rounds of GSL?
The problem is DTs are the only really dangerous early game on offer for Protoss. Oracles are pretty easy to shut down, and the shield battery nerfs (and, to a lesser extent, void prism nerfs) have made most anything else super aggressive bad. I mean, when's the last time you saw a cannon rush? On the other hand, greedy macro openings are also much worse, with shield battery and void ray nerfs making Protoss less stable in early defenses. So it's either DTs or try to hit a timing, which hasn't been working very well either.
So the logic is that we're not going to attempt anything we KNOW isn't going to cause the damage we want so we're instead going to gamble on the riskiest thing we can try because it MIGHT catch our opponent off guard even though it becomes less and less effective the more they expect us to be desperate enough to try it?
Brilliant logic. This is how we end up with a stagnant meta. I guarantee you if someone like Gumiho was playing Protoss he'd at least attempt something different even if it didn't work than keep doing the same tired shit over and over again.
Relying on DT's isn't new. It's as old as SC2 itself or older.
Maybe Protoss just isn’t very good currently, and doesn’t have a huge capacity for improvement?
Classic had more success with incredibly gimmicky builds than anything standard this season. I’m including games he basically threw off a big advantage, where his initial gambit was successful.
Nothing really works. Gumi is one of my favourite players but he hasn’t really done a huge amount of meta pushing lately, he’s thrown in some off-meta builds but some of his most notable funkiness has been in TvT
Top Zergs seem to have already figured out the new herO PvZ style, which is the biggest overall meta innovation in the past 6 months across the races.
So we’re back to where we’ve often been at for seemingly ages and Protoss are just gambling on unstable builds that rely on an opponent missing a scout or misreading.
We’ve seen a temporary resurgence in Protoss results with a legitimate bug buffing Collosus range but hey, it’s confirmed not meant to be there so will be reverted shortly
So then we go back to my original question, just elaborated on. If we're going to keep the current Protoss design that simply rewards gimmick builds until they get figured out and don't work anymore, and we're not going to do anything to fix the core issues the race has that it has had for 13 years, then do we really WANT more Protoss in GSL?
Protoss has had plenty of periods where it didn't have to play gimmicky builds. Just look for any period where people were whining about their "unbeatable endgame composition" instead. And Protoss is certainly not the only race that's been rewarding gimmick plays for 13 years, I'm not taking that shit from the race that considers grabbing all your workers and a-moving the opponent's base a viable strategy. And as for races with "core issues that need fixing", there's no way Protoss beats out the Zerg Queen, a unit that can't fulfill it economic and military roles for the same unit cost, yet has to.
It's not a design issue, it's a balance issue.
It’s a design issue
As Vindicare says (40k reference btw?) Legacy by having a fast eco ramp up, as well as requiring more spread absolutely exacerbates core design problems
Making bio so, so much better than gateway units and incredibly microable isn’t ‘good design’ either just because people like the micro.
Oh I'm so glad you brought this up because this speaks to the BIGGEST of the Protoss design issues. Bio being strong is fine vs Terran, it's fine even when the opposing Terran makes no Bio units. It's fine vs Zerg too. Why isn't it fine vs Protoss.
Well let's just for a moment try and imagine a game where Gateway units were as strong as Bio units and could trade evenly with them 1 to 1. Or imagine a scenario where Protoss Gateway units were more mobile and able to chase down Zerg armies on creep. What's the giant elephant in the room in that scenario? Oh yea! WARP GATE! You CAN'T have Gateway units EVER anywhere near as versatile and cost effective as Bio units are or as mobile as Zerg units are because Protoss can instantly reinforce them regardless of distance or terrain immediately onto the battlefield. It would make them COMPLETELY broken as an attacking force in an all in.
Blizzard HAS to balance Protoss around the ability to warp their units in as reinforcements. They HAVE to or else the game would be completely busted beyond belief.
Blizzard knows they have to do this, and have specifically said they never want to change how this works because fucking Warp Gate is too cool to EVER consider changing. /barf.
This isn't even an opinion or a subjective argument. I dare anyone to figure out a way to make Protoss gateway units better so they can fight independently of their Robotics support units on par with Zerg and Terran units and not immediately make Protoss all ins unholdable and completely overpowered. I guarantee you if there was a way to do this it would have already happened.
Was just a terrible decision.
Sure sometimes playing I quite enjoyed the ‘oh shit there’s a drop coming in’ and the rapid response
Objectively, no, silly idea. It just tramples on fundamentals of army movement and reinforcement lines and the tradeoff is basically being gimped if you do wanna play a straight up macro game
Feels like something that could have happily stayed in campaign where balance isn’t a consideration, like marine drop pods and respawning lings
On July 22 2023 14:46 Vindicare605 wrote: I gotta be honest. After watching herO try and force DTs multiple games in a row in this group I have to ask the question. Do we REALLY want more Protoss in the later rounds of GSL?
The problem is DTs are the only really dangerous early game on offer for Protoss. Oracles are pretty easy to shut down, and the shield battery nerfs (and, to a lesser extent, void prism nerfs) have made most anything else super aggressive bad. I mean, when's the last time you saw a cannon rush? On the other hand, greedy macro openings are also much worse, with shield battery and void ray nerfs making Protoss less stable in early defenses. So it's either DTs or try to hit a timing, which hasn't been working very well either.
So the logic is that we're not going to attempt anything we KNOW isn't going to cause the damage we want so we're instead going to gamble on the riskiest thing we can try because it MIGHT catch our opponent off guard even though it becomes less and less effective the more they expect us to be desperate enough to try it?
Brilliant logic. This is how we end up with a stagnant meta. I guarantee you if someone like Gumiho was playing Protoss he'd at least attempt something different even if it didn't work than keep doing the same tired shit over and over again.
Relying on DT's isn't new. It's as old as SC2 itself or older.
Maybe Protoss just isn’t very good currently, and doesn’t have a huge capacity for improvement?
Classic had more success with incredibly gimmicky builds than anything standard this season. I’m including games he basically threw off a big advantage, where his initial gambit was successful.
Nothing really works. Gumi is one of my favourite players but he hasn’t really done a huge amount of meta pushing lately, he’s thrown in some off-meta builds but some of his most notable funkiness has been in TvT
Top Zergs seem to have already figured out the new herO PvZ style, which is the biggest overall meta innovation in the past 6 months across the races.
So we’re back to where we’ve often been at for seemingly ages and Protoss are just gambling on unstable builds that rely on an opponent missing a scout or misreading.
We’ve seen a temporary resurgence in Protoss results with a legitimate bug buffing Collosus range but hey, it’s confirmed not meant to be there so will be reverted shortly
So then we go back to my original question, just elaborated on. If we're going to keep the current Protoss design that simply rewards gimmick builds until they get figured out and don't work anymore, and we're not going to do anything to fix the core issues the race has that it has had for 13 years, then do we really WANT more Protoss in GSL?
Protoss has had plenty of periods where it didn't have to play gimmicky builds. Just look for any period where people were whining about their "unbeatable endgame composition" instead. And Protoss is certainly not the only race that's been rewarding gimmick plays for 13 years, I'm not taking that shit from the race that considers grabbing all your workers and a-moving the opponent's base a viable strategy. And as for races with "core issues that need fixing", there's no way Protoss beats out the Zerg Queen, a unit that can't fulfill it economic and military roles for the same unit cost, yet has to.
It's not a design issue, it's a balance issue.
It’s a design issue
As Vindicare says (40k reference btw?) Legacy by having a fast eco ramp up, as well as requiring more spread absolutely exacerbates core design problems
Indeed it is.
Making bio so, so much better than gateway units and incredibly microable isn’t ‘good design’ either just because people like the micro.
Oh I'm so glad you brought this up because this speaks to the BIGGEST of the Protoss design issues. Bio being strong is fine vs Terran, it's fine even when the opposing Terran makes no Bio units. It's fine vs Zerg too. Why isn't it fine vs Protoss.
Well let's just for a moment try and imagine a game where Gateway units were as strong as Bio units and could trade evenly with them 1 to 1. Or imagine a scenario where Protoss Gateway units were more mobile and able to chase down Zerg armies on creep. What's the giant elephant in the room in that scenario? Oh yea! WARP GATE! You CAN'T have Gateway units EVER anywhere near as versatile and cost effective as Bio units are or as mobile as Zerg units are because Protoss can instantly reinforce them regardless of distance or terrain immediately onto the battlefield. It would make them COMPLETELY broken as an attacking force in an all in.
Blizzard HAS to balance Protoss around the ability to warp their units in as reinforcements. They HAVE to or else the game would be completely busted beyond belief.
Blizzard knows they have to do this, and have specifically said they never want to change how this works because fucking Warp Gate is too cool to EVER consider changing. /barf.
This isn't even an opinion or a subjective argument. I dare anyone to figure out a way to make Protoss gateway units better so they can fight independently of their Robotics support units on par with Zerg and Terran units and not immediately make Protoss all ins unholdable and completely overpowered. I guarantee you if there was a way to do this it would have already happened.
Was just a terrible decision.
Sure sometimes playing I quite enjoyed the ‘oh shit there’s a drop coming in’ and the rapid response
Objectively, no, silly idea. It just tramples on fundamentals of army movement and reinforcement lines and the tradeoff is basically being gimped if you do wanna play a straight up macro game
Feels like something that could have happily stayed in campaign where balance isn’t a consideration, like marine drop pods and respawning lings
It wouldn't even be so bad if it was a very late game option like Recall was in SC:BW. But the fact that Blizzard insists on having it as the "core" mechanic to the race is why they HAVE to be balanced around it from the start to finish.
It's so frustrating because I see how fun Protoss is to play and watch in Brood War with their core army units forming the backbone of their army all game long and I just see how pathetic they are in comparison in SC2. It's because of that one mechanic that we can never have a Protoss that resembles what we had in Brood War.
I agree that Warp Gate could work as a mid / late game upgrade, then GW units could be buffed a bit. And make GW faster than WG (or at least same speed). In the late game you have enough of them anyway.
On July 23 2023 09:08 ZeroByte13 wrote: I agree that Warp Gate could work as a mid / late game upgrade, then GW units could be buffed a bit. And make GW faster than WG (or at least same speed). In the late game you have enough of them anyway.
Keep in mind, I don't think this is the ONLY problem with Protoss design. A lot of their units are just horribly designed, again to be too powerful in a sneaky cheese and not powerful enough in a standard game, and I'm not talking about Dark Templar here, they are a carry over from Brood War where they work just in standard games there. But niche units you can live with, a niche mechanic that the entire race is balanced around is not ok, not if you want your race to actually be a balanced RTS faction with multiple valid playstyles.
On July 22 2023 14:46 Vindicare605 wrote: I gotta be honest. After watching herO try and force DTs multiple games in a row in this group I have to ask the question. Do we REALLY want more Protoss in the later rounds of GSL?
The problem is DTs are the only really dangerous early game on offer for Protoss. Oracles are pretty easy to shut down, and the shield battery nerfs (and, to a lesser extent, void prism nerfs) have made most anything else super aggressive bad. I mean, when's the last time you saw a cannon rush? On the other hand, greedy macro openings are also much worse, with shield battery and void ray nerfs making Protoss less stable in early defenses. So it's either DTs or try to hit a timing, which hasn't been working very well either.
So the logic is that we're not going to attempt anything we KNOW isn't going to cause the damage we want so we're instead going to gamble on the riskiest thing we can try because it MIGHT catch our opponent off guard even though it becomes less and less effective the more they expect us to be desperate enough to try it?
Brilliant logic. This is how we end up with a stagnant meta. I guarantee you if someone like Gumiho was playing Protoss he'd at least attempt something different even if it didn't work than keep doing the same tired shit over and over again.
Relying on DT's isn't new. It's as old as SC2 itself or older.
Maybe Protoss just isn’t very good currently, and doesn’t have a huge capacity for improvement?
Classic had more success with incredibly gimmicky builds than anything standard this season. I’m including games he basically threw off a big advantage, where his initial gambit was successful.
Nothing really works. Gumi is one of my favourite players but he hasn’t really done a huge amount of meta pushing lately, he’s thrown in some off-meta builds but some of his most notable funkiness has been in TvT
Top Zergs seem to have already figured out the new herO PvZ style, which is the biggest overall meta innovation in the past 6 months across the races.
So we’re back to where we’ve often been at for seemingly ages and Protoss are just gambling on unstable builds that rely on an opponent missing a scout or misreading.
We’ve seen a temporary resurgence in Protoss results with a legitimate bug buffing Collosus range but hey, it’s confirmed not meant to be there so will be reverted shortly
So then we go back to my original question, just elaborated on. If we're going to keep the current Protoss design that simply rewards gimmick builds until they get figured out and don't work anymore, and we're not going to do anything to fix the core issues the race has that it has had for 13 years, then do we really WANT more Protoss in GSL?
Protoss has had plenty of periods where it didn't have to play gimmicky builds. Just look for any period where people were whining about their "unbeatable endgame composition" instead. And Protoss is certainly not the only race that's been rewarding gimmick plays for 13 years, I'm not taking that shit from the race that considers grabbing all your workers and a-moving the opponent's base a viable strategy. And as for races with "core issues that need fixing", there's no way Protoss beats out the Zerg Queen, a unit that can't fulfill it economic and military roles for the same unit cost, yet has to.
It's not a design issue, it's a balance issue.
It’s a design issue
As Vindicare says (40k reference btw?) Legacy by having a fast eco ramp up, as well as requiring more spread absolutely exacerbates core design problems
Indeed it is.
Making bio so, so much better than gateway units and incredibly microable isn’t ‘good design’ either just because people like the micro.
Oh I'm so glad you brought this up because this speaks to the BIGGEST of the Protoss design issues. Bio being strong is fine vs Terran, it's fine even when the opposing Terran makes no Bio units. It's fine vs Zerg too. Why isn't it fine vs Protoss.
Well let's just for a moment try and imagine a game where Gateway units were as strong as Bio units and could trade evenly with them 1 to 1. Or imagine a scenario where Protoss Gateway units were more mobile and able to chase down Zerg armies on creep. What's the giant elephant in the room in that scenario? Oh yea! WARP GATE! You CAN'T have Gateway units EVER anywhere near as versatile and cost effective as Bio units are or as mobile as Zerg units are because Protoss can instantly reinforce them regardless of distance or terrain immediately onto the battlefield. It would make them COMPLETELY broken as an attacking force in an all in.
Blizzard HAS to balance Protoss around the ability to warp their units in as reinforcements. They HAVE to or else the game would be completely busted beyond belief.
Blizzard knows they have to do this, and have specifically said they never want to change how this works because fucking Warp Gate is too cool to EVER consider changing. /barf.
This isn't even an opinion or a subjective argument. I dare anyone to figure out a way to make Protoss gateway units better so they can fight independently of their Robotics support units on par with Zerg and Terran units and not immediately make Protoss all ins unholdable and completely overpowered. I guarantee you if there was a way to do this it would have already happened.
Was just a terrible decision.
Sure sometimes playing I quite enjoyed the ‘oh shit there’s a drop coming in’ and the rapid response
Objectively, no, silly idea. It just tramples on fundamentals of army movement and reinforcement lines and the tradeoff is basically being gimped if you do wanna play a straight up macro game
Feels like something that could have happily stayed in campaign where balance isn’t a consideration, like marine drop pods and respawning lings
It wouldn't even be so bad if it was a very late game option like Recall was in SC:BW. But the fact that Blizzard insists on having it as the "core" mechanic to the race is why they HAVE to be balanced around it from the start to finish.
It's so frustrating because I see how fun Protoss is to play and watch in Brood War with their core army units forming the backbone of their army all game long and I just see how pathetic they are in comparison in SC2. It's because of that one mechanic that we can never have a Protoss that resembles what we had in Brood War.
The Zealot gets hit the hardest with this. In Brood War it's a legitimately threatening unit, especially early, and you'll rarely completely phase them out. Not so in SC2. The other tier one units, Zerglings and Marines, are useful all game. You can do multiple things with them. Zealots though? Worthless when first made, and even into the mid/late game they're typically only used for harassment since splash wrecks them and their attacks are actively anti-microed by the game.
On July 23 2023 08:03 Vindicare605 wrote: I'm not saying that gimmick builds aren't allowed or that the other races don't have them. I'm saying Protoss is stuck in this cycle of ALWAYS relying on gimmick all ins in order to win tournaments. If it's not one build it's another.
Oh unless it's their hated late game deathball comps that someone else mentioned. Ok valid.
That was me. I'm the one who mentioned it. And now, even though your entire position was "Protoss shouldn't exist because they rely on gimmicky builds" and you've admitted the reason for your conclusion was wrong, instead of changing your conclusion you've just decided that when they rely on stable late game compositions is also a reason they shouldn't exist. Somehow.
On July 23 2023 08:03 Vindicare605 wrote:In the modern LotV meta where the game is spread out and not concentrated into one tiny area that late game army comp reliance doesn't really work, it doesn't work with ANY of the races and yet Protoss has nothing else beyond that unless it kills you with a timing attack. Why is that? Because of the core problems the race has with the way it's designed. 13 years of experiencing this shit. How many more do you want before you'll see it's a fundamental problem with how Protoss is designed? They might fix the balance by just making their timings or deathballs stronger, but then we're right back to where we were before.
It's just a badly designed race, has been from the start and no one that's playing it seems to want to play any other way to prove me wrong.
You're seriously going to look at the games that herO played the other night and say he lost because the game isn't balanced? Really? He lost because he was proxying Dark Shrines, and constantly getting his attempts to sneak something past his opponent scouted and stomped on and he had nothing else left besides it. It's hilarious that people defend stuff like this as "the only way to play."
In fact the only reason why Hero's games were so cheese heavy is because of how hard Protoss think it is to win in macro games vs Terran. Cheese builds by their very nature carry enormous risk that no top tier pro wants to take on EVERY game unless they feel like they have to.
If Hero felt confident in his PvT standard play he wouldnt be proxying Dark Shrines EVERY game.
On July 23 2023 08:25 WombaT wrote: It’s a design issue
Balance can conceivably be fixed with tweaking a few numbers here or there. Design things are more fundamental.
Let’s consider Legacy, Protoss got a new toy in the Adept and was shredding face with it for a prolonged period. Until it got nerfed and wasn’t.
This is literally what happened to Reapers when they were new.
On July 23 2023 08:25 WombaT wrote:Let’s consider that in terms of early/midgame comps not actually a huge amount changed with Terran.
But with eco ramp up Protoss needed shield batteries (after the old Mommashipcore/overcharge just to hold basic Terran pushes.
They still can’t reliably hold those pushes while being greedy enough to enter lategame on a good footing. A similar dynamic exists in PvZ
Either they’re given a tool that’s OP, which is also bad or we just consistently see the same pattern. Reliance on gimmicky, risky play to compensate for a lack of stable macro styles.
What makes a gimmicky unit you rely on "well designed" as opposed to "badly designed"? Terran were also given an OP tool to shore up their weaknesses in the Medivac Dropship. It adds sustainability to their glass cannon units, makes Stim a viable upgrade, allows them to save their armies when they're caught out of position, take bad engagements or are otherwise outmaneuvered, to say nothing of its offensive abilities. You call Recall an "overpowered band-aid" but Medivacs do so much more, so much more efficiently. What options does Terran have to win without Medivacs? Gimmicky, risky play? Or the absolute disaster that is mech? Why is it okay that Terran is completely dependent on this unit for defense, map control as well as offense, but it's a problem that Protoss needs Shield Batteries to survive early Terran pushes?
And again, Zerg Queens are much more of an issue. They completely bypass Zerg's core larva mechanic allowing them to produce eco and fighting units at the same time, while also being their only recourse against early air units. And they give map control through Creep. You say Protoss needs an overpowered band-aid to survive early Terran pushes, but I know no Protoss unit that fulfills that role more than the Queen does for Zerg.
There are tonnes of overpowered band-aids in the game. EMP? Snipe? Abduct? It's hardly a unique Protoss trait.
On July 23 2023 08:25 WombaT wrote:Protoss core units aren’t strong, they’re not high DPS microable like Terran. They’re not numerous and really fast like Zerg for map control.
They’re good in an all-in before tech hits in, or they’re good in a deathball.
High Templar are a strong Gateway unit that doesn't benefit from deathballs. Revert Khaydarin Amulet removal. Literally the game that got people so upset about it was one of the most map-wide action packed and map control focused games of its time. Might cause balance issues, but it fixes the "design" problems without requiring a complete redesign at all.
EPT
![[image loading]](/staff/Waxangel/GSL/2023/codes2/ro8groupbresults.jpg)
Cure built on his strong 4-0 performance from the RO16, again advancing in first place with a 2-0 win against herO and 2-1 win against Dark. Second place went to 
