|
I've been on top 200 list since it started and cause of my RTS ability from Wc3 will probably stay on it for as long as i continue to play Sc2. I originally started off as Terran phase 2 beta, but i switched races because i really really don't like TvT. I enjoy microing more than macroing but my macro is quite good anyway thanks to Wc3. And there is no real micro involved in TvT at least when i played it (mass viking ball vs mass viking ball)
So i switched to Protoss, i always felt Protoss was the underpowered race and would probably always be the underpowered race because in my experience with Wc3. Higher hitpoint melee units are overpowered when the skill level of the players does not allow the ranged player to micro units away from the melee units. but at top level where people are really pushing the limits of race the ranged player always has an advantage.
However Sc2 is definitely balanced using some other philosophy or something because when you compare a zealot to a marine to say a grunt and an archer. in Wc3 the grunt has 700 hp and the archer has 135 hp, the grunts damage is 18-21 with a 50% bonus vs medium armor (archer) the archer does 8-9 damage with slightly faster attack rate but no bonus. attack move vs attack move grunts are going to own so hard its not funny, but when players push the limits of the race archers gain the definite edge. when comparing costs, archer is 120 gold while the grunt is 200.
Using this when you compare a zealot to a marine something fishy happens in terms of a wc3 players perspective on balance. while the grunt was 3 food and the archer was 2 food archers had a 3:2 ratio advantage in numbers. when in sc2 marines have a 2:1 ratio over zealots. even more strange is that the cost of 2 marines is = to the cost of 1 zealot.
Basically what i'm trying to say is that if sub high level diamond players could download a program that would automatically stutter step and kite for them the win % of protoss would go down drastically.
Looking at protoss from a top level perspective it's really difficult to see the advantages of playing it. Stalker's attack animation as well as its attack speed is far too long to benefit from stutter step type micro, zealots being melee do not respond to increases in skill level. I was forcefield + gaurdianshield 1a a few weeks after launch, and im still forcefield + gaurdianshield 1a 3-4 months after that. Yeah your macro will be better and you might have more zealots or more stalkers, but so is everyone else's macro.
The other issue between Protoss and Sc2 is the harassment aspect. because of the high cost and low dps of protoss units, that warp prism drop probably won't do enough damage to be justified. end game with psi storm and enough resources for dts warp prism does in fact justify its cost, but the vast majority of your games will not reach to that point. Also, the colossus attack animation makes it quite terrible when coupled with warp prism play, your risking a 300/200 unit that takes 75 seconds to build on its own in 100 life 40 shield 2.50 move speed warp prism? and even if you drop the colossus, there is quite a long delay for the damage to actually be dealt because you have to wait for the lancers to cross, harassment is just not viable  . Obviously if any top level protoss reads this paragraph they will be laughing colossi in a warp prism? lol! and yeah lol!
I originally thought the skill cap of Protoss was in the end higher because of abilities like graviton beam, forcefield, psi storm, feed back, but in reality Terran has the EMP AoE, and snipe aka feedback type ability + psi storm, Zerg have FG and corruption.
When PTR changes were announced i thought to myself oh my god, they are slightly decreasing the penalty for opening a non detection tech build by making the observer less costly, They are also lessoning the blow that on certain maps and positions i must build 2 observers 1 to see what actual tech tree a terran is going and the second one as an insurance policy just in case when my observer gets there and see a starport with a tech lab addon only for that pesky banshee to appear at your main on your minimap (gl surviving that one)  .
Also Oh my god they are slightly rolling back the nerf to attack damage that the unit was originally supposed to counter. and then yet again omg, Phoenix are going to be viable at top level as a counter to muta because FG won't affect them anymore on top of that i can now force zerg into hydralisk and spore crawlers where before mutalisks forced me into a much worse unit (blink stalker) and a much worse anti air defense (cannons).
Unfortunately, it looks like most of the changes in the PTR are going to be rolled back. In my opinion blizzard made quite a few mistakes with the PTR. First off the skill level of the PTR was generally alot higher than most people were used to on the main server, but the peak skill of the PTR was far lower. It got the point where it took quite a bit to find a game and i would play the same player 4-5 times in a row.
Secondly, the server wasn't Cross Region or even multiple region, I don't think ladder statistics are very good at all when trying to extrapolate "balance", but i think if statistics are going to be used they should sample more than 1 population especially when playstyles and strategies are so different across the regions.
Seeing how extremely vocal every single player is when it comes to patch changes.It really made me laugh when i read a forum topic Say NO to Hallucination Buff!, as if the platinum player ever really experienced someone going hallucination or if that hallucination owned him lol... Say no to observer buff!, say no to void ray buff! The only really game changing changes were the FG nerf and the Void ray flux viens removal. It changes the MU between PvZ because Z won't be able to keep mutaing anyway vs phoenix opening, and Protoss won't be able to mass void ray and deny expansions and get away.
Basically its quite clear that changes buffs to protoss are not tolerated among the majority of the player base because as stated above and lower levels of play Protoss is probably more powerful than any other race because of higher hit points and melee.
This leaves a decision to made.
A: Switch to Terran where higher skill level is greatly rewarded and the harassment capabilities keep terran fun and interesting. But the downside is learning TvZ and playing TvT for the above reasons stated before.
B. Switch to Zerg where beyond the mutalisk and Nydus worm harassment is not that effective. Also Skills honed from Wc3 Mastery do not directly transfer over so well with Zerg, as although micro does play a large roll in early to mid game, macro becomes far more important later on as well as unique zerg skills such as judging your army compared to theirs to know if you can engage or not, or distractracting that big ball of marines while flanking the siege tanks with speedlings. I've seen both Check and Moon decide to play Zerg. Watching Check micro lings against zealots etc gives me hope that not all my skills become useless when playing the "Macro" race.
C. Stay as protoss and wait for the skill level of top players is not mountains ahead of lower tier players so that when patches are released you don't get a mountain of QQ now i have to click more! QQ Protoss doesn't need a buff! they own me in my platinum league!
Hopefully this was interesting reading my perspective from a former top wc3 player to a sc2 protoss player train that could but crashed and burned etc.
|
The brotherhood of the brotoss needs you! Yeah protoss is pretty good even in the mid diamond level, but playing on really low latency i can imagine makes a huge huge difference. If protoss didn't have forcefield, they would never win the early/mid game.
|
switch to terran cause u'll never get anywhere playing toss.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On December 09 2010 19:04 Eminent Rising wrote:
switch to terran cause u'll never get anywhere playing toss.
Like oGsMC and HongUnPrime? 
Edit: My advice is simple; Play the race you feel the most comfortable with OR the race you think is the coolest
|
Outch, such a big wall of text. I would say stay protoss.
|
Yeah sorry about my wall, I just thought there was alot to say as alot of factors go into something as big as race changing.
|
On December 09 2010 18:55 NearPerfection wrote:
However Sc2 is definitely balanced using some other philosophy or something because when you compare a zealot to a marine to say a grunt and an archer. in Wc3 the grunt has 700 hp and the archer has 135 hp, the grunts damage is 18-21 with a 50% bonus vs medium armor (archer) the archer does 8-9 damage with slightly faster attack rate but no bonus. attack move vs attack move grunts are going to own so hard its not funny, but when players push the limits of the race archers gain the definite edge. when comparing costs, archer is 120 gold while the grunt is 200.
Using this when you compare a zealot to a marine something fishy happens in terms of a wc3 players perspective on balance. while the grunt was 3 food and the archer was 2 food archers had a 3:2 ratio advantage in numbers. when in sc2 marines have a 2:1 ratio over zealots. even more strange is that the cost of 2 marines is = to the cost of 1 zealot.
So many of those numbers are wrong dude and archers do a bonus to light/unarmored 
|
Blizzard is going to keep balancing the races back and forth, making each overpowered at some point or another, because the game itself has a lot of flawed things going on with it that simple number changes won't fix.
So I'd just say stay as Protoss because eventually they'll make a change to make it as the strongest race.
If one of your major reasons for changing races is because marines are ranged and zealots are melee that's kind of silly.
|
On December 09 2010 18:55 NearPerfection wrote:
I enjoy microing more than macroing but my macro is quite good anyway thanks to Wc3.
WHAT?
On the race switch thing, I think you should just stick with whatever you like best. Cause at the end of the day, a better player always wins. I mean of course you can always warp in a pylon at your opponents base and start warping in DTs to win some games, but it's not rly solid play.
How I think this works is every player should know that basic solid just head-to-head gameplay. Building bases, building harvesters, building producing structures, building suppliers, getting upgrades and training units. Now when u master all those basic things. THEN u could warp that play into fancy paper. I mean when u have good knowledge of the solid gameplay then you can start adding some herassment, some drops, some micro intensity and just see how it goes.
For example. Jinro is just a very good and very solid player. Qxc also is very good solid player, but he sure likes his drops. Or with zergs: Take HayprO or IdrA, they both like to drone up as much as possible, but for example (as much as I have noticed from their games), IdrA likes his mutalisks more, and haypro goes ground army more often. But all this just sticks on the sides of that ball which is the basics of RTS.
|
On December 09 2010 19:06 DNB wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2010 19:04 Eminent Rising wrote:
switch to terran cause u'll never get anywhere playing toss. Like oGsMC and HongUnPrime? Edit: My advice is simple; Play the race you feel the most comfortable with OR the race you think is the coolest
Yeah, oGsMC is sooo good, and said he has a 95% winrate vs t
|
On December 09 2010 19:09 Lyter wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2010 18:55 NearPerfection wrote:
However Sc2 is definitely balanced using some other philosophy or something because when you compare a zealot to a marine to say a grunt and an archer. in Wc3 the grunt has 700 hp and the archer has 135 hp, the grunts damage is 18-21 with a 50% bonus vs medium armor (archer) the archer does 8-9 damage with slightly faster attack rate but no bonus. attack move vs attack move grunts are going to own so hard its not funny, but when players push the limits of the race archers gain the definite edge. when comparing costs, archer is 120 gold while the grunt is 200.
Using this when you compare a zealot to a marine something fishy happens in terms of a wc3 players perspective on balance. while the grunt was 3 food and the archer was 2 food archers had a 3:2 ratio advantage in numbers. when in sc2 marines have a 2:1 ratio over zealots. even more strange is that the cost of 2 marines is = to the cost of 1 zealot.
So many of those numbers are wrong dude and archers do a bonus to light/unarmored
Ha well it has been 6 months since playing a single Wc3 game, bur rest assured i was definately in the top 10 in americans region. (real archer cost 130/10/2) real attack damage 10-11? been too long. real HP 245 everything else should be 100% accurate
|
Since you're on top 200 list, you should be looking at whether or not you're having fun with the races cuz you'll easily be playing a lot more than some diamond player on ladder so if you're having fun with Protoss why change ?
|
Id say if terran suits your type of play, dont hesitate; go back to them :-)
I play random from time to time and theres nothing like coming back to defensive macro oriented play (IE zerg). Thats how i like to play and thus, thats where im best
|
On December 09 2010 19:18 b_unnies wrote:
Since you're on top 200 list, you should be looking at whether or not you're having fun with the races cuz you'll easily be playing a lot more than some diamond player on ladder so if you're having fun with Protoss why change ?
Cause i don't currently feel like my improvements in skill are being rewarded that heavily than if i were stutter stepping marines, or getting away with making less roach than i should because i can micro roach on creep so well.
|
I'm assuming that English isn't your first language? The phrasing of much of that was rather odd.
|
I used to love protoss as well, but i could not put up with the issues protoss has. I have been learning Terran recently and it is a different playstyle that i find more fun.
|
I feel almost the same.
As I get higher (around top 300) its getting a lot harder and other races feel a lot stronger with all theirs ranges units and harass units. Its all because FF really kill the protoss race... but its what that make it alive...
|
I definitely didn't read the whole thing, but Morrow did it. He had an okay amount of success switching races, but I still think he would have done better to remain Terran. However, if you think another race suits your style more, you should do it. Just don't do it if you think your race is underpowered. Everyone thinks their race is underpowered.
|
On December 09 2010 19:22 NearPerfection wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2010 19:18 b_unnies wrote:
Since you're on top 200 list, you should be looking at whether or not you're having fun with the races cuz you'll easily be playing a lot more than some diamond player on ladder so if you're having fun with Protoss why change ? Cause i don't currently feel like my improvements in skill are being rewarded that heavily than if i were stutter stepping marines, or getting away with making less roach than i should because i can micro roach on creep so well.
and do you find that more fun than protoss?
|
Play who you like, who you have a good feel for and who in general you enjoy.. everything else just doesnt matter. There is no race that is completely out of competitive play.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
