|
France12899 Posts
On December 22 2023 02:36 JJH777 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2023 01:28 Herringbone wrote:
It's a very strange opinion to discount or disregard what Reynor is doing regarding this topic.
In THEORY, the best way to understand the true balance of the races would be to observe someone with identical skills at all three races play against others at the elite level. Obviously this is impossible, but what Reynor is doing is the closest thing we will see.
1. His Play. Facts are (1) he is better at zerg than he is protoss, (2) he would be better at protoss if he had been playing it as his main race over his career instead of zerg, (3) he and other pro's have said he doesn't have a great understanding of the complexity of the protoss race and actual builds as others playing protoss at this level. My opinions are he would have won a similar number of premier tournaments if he had choosen protoss instead of zerg and he is showing it's primarily a skill gap in players why we're not seeing protoss tournament wins.
Discounting his wins are bizarre. "It was the map". What a stupid thing to say. I'd love to see protoss (or really anyone else) practice some zerg and take on Maru because the map is a zerg map. "Winning a single map isn't that special". It's freaking Serral. His career record against protoss is insane. Harstem is not top level, but he frequently states that he hasn't taken a map off serral in a tournament since 2017 I believe. "Timing attack is a more "pure" skill indicator". In one way, but this is exactly the point that proves Reynor would be a monster if he was an actual protoss. His build orders are not tight and he doesn't have the experience to play that way, yet he can still win.
2. What he is telling us. This is probably the most important thing and I don't see it brought up. Reynor knows the game better than everyone on this form. He is making the active choice to play protoss instead of z v z against elite players in big tournaments with real money on the line. He's telling us that he doesn't think Protoss is unable to win at the highest levels. If a race, that he is worse at, was unplayable at this level he wouldn't be playing it when the alternative is playing as a top 3 in the world zerg. Believe someone's actions over their words. This is way more relevant than the "Ghosts/Carriers/Banelings OP" noise that originates in bias.
Reasonable to have opinions on the topic. But when Reynor is doing something we've never seen before that seems pretty relevant to the conversation, it sure seems like balance whining when people pretend it doesn't matter. Race picking on specific maps has been banned in starleagues since BW in the early 2000s otherwise we definitely would have seen what Reynors currently doing in the KR scene at some point. It was likely banned because it would have the potential to create very silly situations where we are watching two players off race against each other with no prep because they planned a snipe build.
Reminds me of the boring young link (vs Jigglypuff or another young link I am not sure) in smash bros melee between Armada and Mango (or was it Hungrybox?). It was not Armada’s main char but he learned how to play this specific matchup just to counter this other top player. It resulted in ultra boring wars of attrition
|
I won't lie, part of why I can't wait for Stormgate is because it's going to be fun studying how the people who think protoss players just all happen to suck react to the changes in the hierarchy
|
On December 22 2023 04:07 Nebuchad wrote:
I won't lie, part of why I can't wait for Stormgate is because it's going to be fun studying how the people who think protoss players just all happen to suck react to the changes in the hierarchy
That's an absolutely irrelevant comparison since the games are different. There are no two RTS' in existence where the exact same strengths of players translate 1 to 1. You could be a GOD at Warcraft 3 and only a mid level pro at SC2 and vice versa.
SC1 to SC2 is probably the closest you'll get and I think all of us here would agree that even those games don't translate 1 to 1 with each other.
|
On December 22 2023 04:07 Nebuchad wrote:
I won't lie, part of why I can't wait for Stormgate is because it's going to be fun studying how the people who think protoss players just all happen to suck react to the changes in the hierarchy
They're going to be different. I would expect one constant though is you're still going to have to appear in person to play offline tournaments, which you might find impacts your statement.
|
France12899 Posts
If Stormgate is good enough to attract new blood, the top dogs will probably be those new and younger players compared to the old sc players. Unless it’s not as mechanical as sc (from what I have read it’s more like wc3 so there is hope for older players)
|
Northern Ireland25688 Posts
On December 22 2023 05:33 Vindicare605 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2023 04:07 Nebuchad wrote:
I won't lie, part of why I can't wait for Stormgate is because it's going to be fun studying how the people who think protoss players just all happen to suck react to the changes in the hierarchy That's an absolutely irrelevant comparison since the games are different. There are no two RTS' in existence where the exact same strengths of players translate 1 to 1. You could be a GOD at Warcraft 3 and only a mid level pro at SC2 and vice versa. SC1 to SC2 is probably the closest you'll get and I think all of us here would agree that even those games don't translate 1 to 1 with each other.
That considered guys like Stats and Classic were pretty damn accomplished BW players, in a way more mechanically demanding game.
I doubt Protoss players are struggling from a lack of mechanical chops
|
On December 22 2023 02:58 Poopi wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2023 02:36 JJH777 wrote:On December 22 2023 01:28 Herringbone wrote:
It's a very strange opinion to discount or disregard what Reynor is doing regarding this topic.
In THEORY, the best way to understand the true balance of the races would be to observe someone with identical skills at all three races play against others at the elite level. Obviously this is impossible, but what Reynor is doing is the closest thing we will see.
1. His Play. Facts are (1) he is better at zerg than he is protoss, (2) he would be better at protoss if he had been playing it as his main race over his career instead of zerg, (3) he and other pro's have said he doesn't have a great understanding of the complexity of the protoss race and actual builds as others playing protoss at this level. My opinions are he would have won a similar number of premier tournaments if he had choosen protoss instead of zerg and he is showing it's primarily a skill gap in players why we're not seeing protoss tournament wins.
Discounting his wins are bizarre. "It was the map". What a stupid thing to say. I'd love to see protoss (or really anyone else) practice some zerg and take on Maru because the map is a zerg map. "Winning a single map isn't that special". It's freaking Serral. His career record against protoss is insane. Harstem is not top level, but he frequently states that he hasn't taken a map off serral in a tournament since 2017 I believe. "Timing attack is a more "pure" skill indicator". In one way, but this is exactly the point that proves Reynor would be a monster if he was an actual protoss. His build orders are not tight and he doesn't have the experience to play that way, yet he can still win.
2. What he is telling us. This is probably the most important thing and I don't see it brought up. Reynor knows the game better than everyone on this form. He is making the active choice to play protoss instead of z v z against elite players in big tournaments with real money on the line. He's telling us that he doesn't think Protoss is unable to win at the highest levels. If a race, that he is worse at, was unplayable at this level he wouldn't be playing it when the alternative is playing as a top 3 in the world zerg. Believe someone's actions over their words. This is way more relevant than the "Ghosts/Carriers/Banelings OP" noise that originates in bias.
Reasonable to have opinions on the topic. But when Reynor is doing something we've never seen before that seems pretty relevant to the conversation, it sure seems like balance whining when people pretend it doesn't matter. Race picking on specific maps has been banned in starleagues since BW in the early 2000s otherwise we definitely would have seen what Reynors currently doing in the KR scene at some point. It was likely banned because it would have the potential to create very silly situations where we are watching two players off race against each other with no prep because they planned a snipe build. Reminds me of the boring young link (vs Jigglypuff or another young link I am not sure) in smash bros melee between Armada and Mango (or was it Hungrybox?). It was not Armada’s main char but he learned how to play this specific matchup just to counter this other top player. It resulted in ultra boring wars of attrition
That has to do with the SSBM characters and nothing to do with SC2
|
Reynor winning the odd game with Protoss doesn't really mean anything because nobody is arguing that Protoss players are unable to consistently win a game or a Bo3 series against the best Zerg and Terran players. MaxPax does it every week in the ESL weeklies.
The problem is that Protoss doesn't seem to do well once tournaments have multiple Bo5 or Bo7 stages, and I think that has more to do with Protoss being overly reliant on power-units and trickery than it has to do with player skill. If Reynor starts winning multiple Bo5 or Bo7 series with Protoss, then we can talk about player skill, but talking about player skill off the back of Reynor's odd victories seems a bit presumptuous.
|
On December 21 2023 22:58 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2023 21:49 Harris1st wrote:On December 21 2023 20:41 Charoisaur wrote:On December 21 2023 18:18 Harris1st wrote:On December 21 2023 18:04 WombaT wrote:On December 21 2023 17:22 Harris1st wrote:On December 20 2023 21:04 MJG wrote:
@Vindicare:
If I absolutely had to suggest a minor change then I'd modify the Viper so that Abduct can't be used on Massive units. I personally believe that the Viper is too good at single-handedly dismantling late-game Protoss armies and that some of that power needs to be taken away.
But like I said earlier, the fact that Protoss is so dependent on power-units is the real problem, and that would require a major overhaul of the race to fix, which we both know isn't going to happen. Que sera sera. I'll just continue turning off major tournaments once all the Protoss players are eliminated. And then Protoss still lose to Terran and whine about it. Balance on a greater scale through all matchups and all game phases seems pretty decent right now. Protoss needs some new blood (probably not happening) since pretty much all Protoss players are returnees (Koreans) or old school veterans (Europe) If someone could crunch the numbers I’d be very interested My instinct is that Protoss is potent but fragile, and this fragility is exposed the longer a series is due to them being heavily reliant on gambits and trickery. You can’t turn up and do a Serral or a Maru and yeah have a few pocket builds but largely just do your thing and outplay people with raw mechanics. Thus Protoss can be hugely overrepresented at GM level (Bo1), put up decent matchup stats in many a tournament (often on the back of Bo3s in a group phase) and generally not win tournaments as often because we’re into Bo5 or Bo7 territory. I think the lack of new blood is also a factor but I mean, it’s not like much of the cream of the Terran or Zerg crop are new faces either. Well, Reynors Protoss recently won vs Serral in a 35 min macro match so that gotta mean something right? I mean, it's not like Reynor randomly rolled Protoss, he's semi-consistently practicing it for 1.5 years now. Also winning a single map isn't that special, even Showtime won a map against Serral in 4 out of the last 7 series they played I did not check all the games (obviously) but my gut feeling says that when Serral (or any other top macro late game Zerg) loses to Protoss, it's because of a timing attack that either crippled or killed and not because of a 35 min macro showdown. Just a gut feeling though. 35 minute macro showdown on a map extremely good for late game Protoss where you can't even die early on. I don't think that's a more "pure" indicator of skill than a timing attack. Reynor specifically said he tried it only because of the map and didn't attempt it on any other map. Usually the map gets vetoed in PvZ which is why we haven't seen other Protosses do it
So you are saying Protoss is fine and Protoss players are fine just the mappool sucks for Protoss?
|
Northern Ireland25688 Posts
On December 22 2023 17:37 MJG wrote:
Reynor winning the odd game with Protoss doesn't really mean anything because nobody is arguing that Protoss players are unable to consistently win a game or a Bo3 series against the best Zerg and Terran players. MaxPax does it every week in the ESL weeklies.
The problem is that Protoss doesn't seem to do well once tournaments have multiple Bo5 or Bo7 stages, and I think that has more to do with Protoss being overly reliant on power-units and trickery than it has to do with player skill. If Reynor starts winning multiple Bo5 or Bo7 series with Protoss, then we can talk about player skill, but talking about player skill off the back of Reynor's odd victories seems a bit presumptuous.
And I mean Reynor only has one professional standard Protoss matchup, which also happens to be his main, with all the Zergy knowledge he has of what he doesn’t like facing. That he said he only employed because he felt the mirror felt conflippy at a time.
It’s cool to see, indeed I think it’s overly elevated because after such a long period you’d think you’d see more people having done it, but I don’t think it says much about balance. As Flash doing Flash things didn’t really say much in BW. A long-term full time pro stretching their matchups at a pro level from 3 to 4 isn’t really that insane if we consider it like that.
Whereas if Reynor rapidly was able to get to decent pro and beyond with Protoss outright, maybe that says something about ‘player skill’.
Although personally I agree with you, although I await the data, there feels a drop off from Bo1, 3, 5 and beyond with Toss.
Ideally in an RTS people with different skillsets can prosper, but it feels the skills Toss does reward are more brittle, and thus you see them being competitive enough overall, but not at the business end of things. I think the best encapsulation of this is one of Zest’s Katowice runs, he had a razor tight build, took some scalps and got totally dismantled in the finals having shown his hand.
And overall it feels it’s been more prevalent a factor in PvZ than PvT, the latter waxes and wanes but you have periods where Toss players are actively expert at it and can take anyone, and be 55/45 or 60/40 in my internal betting (Trap’s peak springs to mind). I really can’t even remember the last time that was the case with PvZ.
I guess the dynamic of the matchup has a lot to do with it. You can’t really do much with non-commital pushes, you can’t really sit back and be passive. There’s nothing new under the sun after years of the game and the top Zergs are so good at reading what Toss are trying to do that your chances of hoodwinking them consistently to win say, a Bo7 are just that bit lower than doing so in a Bo3.
Also I guess by a Bo7 you’re seeing a scraping of the barrel in terms of viable wonky builds, and if you’re playing stock standard you’re still probably not trading 50/50 with a top Zerg anyway
|
arn't Reynor already a league of legend streamer main nowadays? :D
|
On December 22 2023 02:11 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2023 22:49 Captain Peabody wrote:
Unless I'm reading Liquipedia wrong, 2023 appears to be the first year in SC2 history where Protoss has not won a single premier-level tournament. Which, I don't know, I agree fundamentally with Lambo that it doesn't really matter whether or not Protoss players are worse than Zerg and Terran, fundamentally it's not good for the scene player- and spectator- wise for there to be less matchup diversity in tournaments and for it to feel like one race doesn't have a chance to win tournaments. I find myself watching later stages of tournaments where there are no Protoss less, because I eventually get tired of TvZ.
Unlike most Sad Protoss, though, I don't think the problem is that fundamental or hopeless. It's probably true that Protoss in both BW and SC2 is also going to be at least a little weaker in longer series and tournaments due to design, but it's also clear if you look at the history of SC2 that Protoss has been able to compete very well over the years.
The problem at this stage in the game is clearly (clearly!) not Warp Gate (proposals to nerf Warp Gate or make Gateway units stronger have been around since 2010 and are probably my most hated SC2 meme). Gatewayman styles reliant on the power of Warp Gate are one of the main things keeping Protoss competitive at the moment, and they're also extremely dynamic and fun to watch. Taking that away from Protoss would be utterly devastating and pointless and also terribly un-fun.
It's largely a few "shatter points" of fragility where Protoss can just rapidly die even after getting very far ahead due to losing a few power units or not having strong enough defense (due to Overcharge nerfs) or losing all their workers to things like Widow Mines or losing the one Warp Prism or being over-reliant in the late game on inconsistent units like Disruptors. PvZ is largely in a good place design and even balance-wise, but PvT is just an incredibly frustrating matchup to watch at the pro level.
If there's a fundamental underlying problem, imo, it's simply that Protoss has been consistently undertuned throughout LotV due to memories of the strength of Protoss all-ins and deathballs in HotS and WoL. Everyone remembers when Colossus was dominant and un-fun and death-ball-y, so no one wants to buff Colossus even when they're self-evidently fragile and both races have strong counters to them at multiple stages of the game. Everyone remembers MC and sOs winning whole tournaments off of repeated Stalker all-ins, so no one wants to buff Stalkers or Zealots even in late game and even when it's clear that Zealot and Stalker all-ins have simply not been a big problem for a very long while.
But fundamentally Protoss and especially Protoss aggression is just weaker with the economy model of LotV and we're no longer in a world where a minor buff to a Gateway unit or a Robo unit would lead at the pro level to unstoppable deathballs or all-ins that would have players tearing their hair out. Zerg and Terran balance changes have felt perfectly comfortable buffing already strong units and risking powerful all-ins, but for whatever reason that hasn't been true for Protoss.
But with all those things a few targeted buffs and nerfs could honestly do the trick just fine. The last patch helped a lot and moved in the right direction, but it's clear that it wasn't enough, especially in PvT. Small buffs to a few Gateway units would be simple and have a big impact (if you don't want to buff Zealots or Stalkers, the proposals to make Sentries more useful and buff guardian shield seems like a good idea). Some kind of small nerf to Widow Mines vs Protoss would also not be gamebreaking. Hell, there are probably at least a half dozen Protoss units (Immortals! Phoenix! Sentries! et cetera) you could give minor buffs too and it wouldn't break anything.
It's perfectly possible that the problem will solve itself eventually with maps and creativity, but the Balance Council should think seriously about plugging a few holes in Protoss. Ultimately, not just for Protoss, but for the good of the scene overall. We need at least a few Protoss champions next year. Well said, agree with all of this and also been trying to voice similar things recently. Protoss lacks potency early on, other than 3-4 gate blink openers which could kill if you micro/read very well. But other than that, anytime Protoss tries to do a "strong" push, it's ultimately not very scary but yet VERY committal and pretty all-in. Compare that to the flexibility of Terran and Zerg early pushes and how scary they are and how NOT all-in they are. And totally agree on the Colossus as well. You could easily rework the damage for example from 10 (+5 vs Light) to 11 (+4 vs Light), and maybe also nerf/rework Abduct so that it only pulls Massive units half or 2/3 the distance. Protoss is definitely undertuned (hence all the true memes about Protoss getting nerfed anytime they find success with something). PvT is roughly balanced? Oh let's heavily nerf Overcharge and make P very vulnerable early on and have a 40% winrate vs T. And only give tiny things to compensate that are definitely not enough at all. (Thankfully the current patch helped much more). They had a problem with Overcharge out-healing DPS, they couldn't even compensate by making Overcharge last 1 second longer or something. That's how undertuned/biased that change was. Show nested quote +On December 21 2023 20:13 TMNT wrote:
I'm an ardent BW follower but have next to nothing knowledge about SC2 meta, but from reading over the years from ppl in the SC2 community it always strikes me how staggeringly similar the two games are re Protoss.
On players:
- is the predominant race at low levels but has the least success at pro level
- is considered the easiest race to play (the "ape" race)
- "Protoss pros are just not as good as Zerg and Terran pros"
On gameplay:
- relies heavily on Gateway units and some mid game power units, can't compete with Zerg and Terran in the late game (if not accumulating a significant advantage earlier)
- has the least ability to come back
- relies on trickery/gambling the most to earn an advantage, can't just play straight up macro and outpower Zerg and Terran
- has vastly different units and styles, leading to Protoss players being good at different things, instead of all players (relatively) focusing and mastering on one (or fewer) thing like Zerg and Terran
- has decent win rate overall (but still the worst among 3 races), but tends to fall apart in tournaments when longer series Bo3/5/7 comes to play
When you have such similarities between the two games then it very likely goes back to the core of how each race functions. Like, Terran relies on the ranged and heavy firepower of a critical mass. Zerg relies on pure number from the unstoppable macro engine. And Protoss relies on the trickery and magic of some specific units. Among them, one style has to be more/less successful than the others, and as we have seen the same trends in two different games with 30+ years of history combined, I think it's safe to say the root of the problem is fundamental design.
Appreciate your reply, as someone who doesn't watch much BW (but likes it), the similitaries are really staggering and interesting, and definitely safe to make this conclusion.
Fascinating reads, this is the type of nuanced discussion we need, no butthurt bias, just good sound observations.
|
United States1888 Posts
bring back mothership core/nexus cannon
bring back strong collosi, they are a boring unit, but it's a steady, reliable backbone to all ground based comps
bring back Rain. Only he can save Protoss.
|
Could revert of battery ovecharge's nerf help? Or a partial revert maybe.
Protoss often die to terran's timing attacks, this could help to stabilize Protoss' early game.
|
A 2023 with 0 premier wins and 1 second place finish. It feels like things get worse every year and it's just plain bad for the tournaments, the viewers and the game 
At this point I am all for the suggestion of buffing toss to a point where they make every final in 2024. Make it like that super tournament with 7/8 toss players and a year of marine and ling tears. Just give toss one year of lifting trophys!
On a more serious note I think there has been some really good observations and suggestions in this thread, e.g. on map changes, viper abduct etc.
I think the Clem vs Serral (and also vs Dark) games in Atlanta was insanely good and great to watch from a viewer perspective. I just wish the 3rd race could make these finals now and then and give the same intensity for us viewers.
|
Dominican Republic626 Posts
how to fix protoss
Lower the energy/time for some abilities Storm, Sentry hallucination, shield
Lower the build time for support units sentry, collosus, HT -------- 2seconds each these are key units that need to be faster on the battlefield.
increase viper abduct energy to 125 from 75 this wont make abduct all that good so often in the match.
|
On December 20 2023 17:46 MJG wrote:I posted this in the Sad Zealot Fan Club but it fits here just as well: Show nested quote +Protoss doesn't just need one or two minor buffs to be more competitive. The entire race would need to be reworked so that it isn't as dependent on power units that are easily hard-countered in the late-game, and so that Gateway units are more than just cannon fodder for those power units. This isn't an easy fix and it would require Blizzard to be actively engaged in redeveloping the game, which they clearly aren't.
The hyper-aggression that MaxPax and herO use in the mid-game is great for weekly tournaments with shorter formats, and it's very entertaining to watch, but it's never going to be sustainable over tournaments that have multiple Bo5 and Bo7 series. Good players will drag them into the late-game and Protoss isn't equipped for it.
I'll add that on top of being extraordinarily difficult to execute on it's own just trading evenly or at a slight deficit, it's always just a single bad click away at any point to result in an unrecoverable state.
More on the general topic I've always felt that protoss win percentage tends to follow the percentage of mistakes for the game (from both players). Meaning that if both players play perfectly then P tends to be fucked.
This is reflected pretty well over the years talking to competitors when you ask them about a loss and what they could have done better, especially in "close games". Many will just point to a specific moment or perhaps a bad decision. You'll almost never come across a Z or T that says they felt they played perfectly but still lost, where as P seems to have that happen quite a bit.
It's easy to just point the finger at copium or players but the real issue is that the intended design and/or numbers just don't work out.
|
Northern Ireland25688 Posts
On December 23 2023 17:04 Agh wrote:Show nested quote +On December 20 2023 17:46 MJG wrote:I posted this in the Sad Zealot Fan Club but it fits here just as well: Protoss doesn't just need one or two minor buffs to be more competitive. The entire race would need to be reworked so that it isn't as dependent on power units that are easily hard-countered in the late-game, and so that Gateway units are more than just cannon fodder for those power units. This isn't an easy fix and it would require Blizzard to be actively engaged in redeveloping the game, which they clearly aren't.
The hyper-aggression that MaxPax and herO use in the mid-game is great for weekly tournaments with shorter formats, and it's very entertaining to watch, but it's never going to be sustainable over tournaments that have multiple Bo5 and Bo7 series. Good players will drag them into the late-game and Protoss isn't equipped for it. I'll add that on top of being extraordinarily difficult to execute on it's own just trading evenly or at a slight deficit, it's always just a single bad click away at any point to result in an unrecoverable state. More on the general topic I've always felt that protoss win percentage tends to follow the percentage of mistakes for the game (from both players). Meaning that if both players play perfectly then P tends to be fucked. This is reflected pretty well over the years talking to competitors when you ask them about a loss and what they could have done better, especially in "close games". Many will just point to a specific moment or perhaps a bad decision. You'll almost never come across a Z or T that says they felt they played perfectly but still lost, where as P seems to have that happen quite a bit. It's easy to just point the finger at copium or players but the real issue is that the intended design and/or numbers just don't work out.
Indeed, I mean Trap got fucking stomped in his two GSL finals but especially in one (think it was Dark?) I thought he actually played pretty decently. But he still got stomped anyway.
Your timing gets sniffed out early, or even delayed 20 seconds and it doesn’t do anything, one runby gets through your wall and you’re dead.
Protoss aggression often requires commitment, if scouted can be impotent and conversely they’re super dependent on perfect positioning to hold defensively too
|
On December 23 2023 18:23 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2023 17:04 Agh wrote:On December 20 2023 17:46 MJG wrote:I posted this in the Sad Zealot Fan Club but it fits here just as well: Protoss doesn't just need one or two minor buffs to be more competitive. The entire race would need to be reworked so that it isn't as dependent on power units that are easily hard-countered in the late-game, and so that Gateway units are more than just cannon fodder for those power units. This isn't an easy fix and it would require Blizzard to be actively engaged in redeveloping the game, which they clearly aren't.
The hyper-aggression that MaxPax and herO use in the mid-game is great for weekly tournaments with shorter formats, and it's very entertaining to watch, but it's never going to be sustainable over tournaments that have multiple Bo5 and Bo7 series. Good players will drag them into the late-game and Protoss isn't equipped for it. I'll add that on top of being extraordinarily difficult to execute on it's own just trading evenly or at a slight deficit, it's always just a single bad click away at any point to result in an unrecoverable state. More on the general topic I've always felt that protoss win percentage tends to follow the percentage of mistakes for the game (from both players). Meaning that if both players play perfectly then P tends to be fucked. This is reflected pretty well over the years talking to competitors when you ask them about a loss and what they could have done better, especially in "close games". Many will just point to a specific moment or perhaps a bad decision. You'll almost never come across a Z or T that says they felt they played perfectly but still lost, where as P seems to have that happen quite a bit. It's easy to just point the finger at copium or players but the real issue is that the intended design and/or numbers just don't work out. Indeed, I mean Trap got fucking stomped in his two GSL finals but especially in one (think it was Dark?) I thought he actually played pretty decently. But he still got stomped anyway. Your timing gets sniffed out early, or even delayed 20 seconds and it doesn’t do anything, one runby gets through your wall and you’re dead. Protoss aggression often requires commitment, if scouted can be impotent and conversely they’re super dependent on perfect positioning to hold defensively too
In Trap's case he stomped the same players that stomped him in GSL finals, regularly in tier 2 events (won even a bo7 finals against Serral), so I think in his case it was more nerves than balance.
|
Yes, Trap won what - 6-7 big tournaments in about a year?
He lost 2 GSL finals but outside of these 2 series he looked pretty dominant for long time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
