|
So I think everyone has his favorite match-up to watch and I think everyone knows about basic compositions and timings and everyone has his own theorys about "gameending" compositions. ("infestor/broodlord", "mass ghost", "Deathball"...)
But all this usually relates back to the question: "What can be done by race 1, when race 2 has reached a certain level of development?"
Ultimatly in a game that is wellbalanced at all stages of the game, there should always be an answer to this question, even if it requires a certain amount of (achievable) preparation and even if the only possible outcome is a draw.
At least, that should be the aim of balancing. (not relying on blindcounters & coinflips, everything can be defended out of an even position)
Poll: Which one is the most developed matchup?TvZ (485) 58% TvT (263) 31% PvZ (32) 4% PvT (22) 3% PvP (19) 2% ZvZ (18) 2% 839 total votes Your vote: Which one is the most developed matchup? (Vote): PvP
(Vote): PvT
(Vote): PvZ
(Vote): TvT
(Vote): TvZ
(Vote): ZvZ
So, here are my charts of matchups:
the good ones:
1) TvT: The MU seems pretty solved. Mech has the potential to beat every other ground style and then gets countered by Air which can counter every ground style, ultimatly forcing a stalemate on mass BC, Viking, Raven, Turret that can only be won if you got an advantage/better control.
2) TvZ: Various possibilities for both players through all game, usually resulting in a Tank/Thor based ground army + support units (ghosts, vikings, marines, marauders) for Terran and a Infestorbased army for Zerg (Infestor/Broodlord, Infestor/Ultralisk/baneling) + reinforcements. Still the MU hardly ever goes to a stalemate situation in which the defender has such a huge advantage, that the aggressor can't force an engagement --> still some room to improve
3) TvP: very stable compositionwise, but judging from latest results it seems like a well turteling protoss has an advantage over the biobased terran forces. ("double forge builds")
For me this looks like terran has done very well until now, but the good winrates are relying a lot on early wins, while Terrans get stuck on MMMVG in the lategame and at some point simply can't match the Protoss anymore, if terran didn't get an advantage earlier. I think there is still room to improve compositionwise for the terrans in the lategame.
the bad ones:
4) PvZ: 57:43 winrate for Protoss in the early days, the same for Zerg these days. I think there is not a lot more to say, the match-up simply seems unstable. Lots of variations in openings, timings and compositions makes it pretty hard to predict how a lategame scenario looks like. (mass mutalisks, infestor/BL, banelingdrops vs mass voidrays, "usual" deathballs, HT/Archon armies, mass blink stalker all has seen a lot of play, depending on the situation)
Usually the games end with a failed or a successful aggressive move, very rarely we see situations in which some form of stalemate occurs.
5) ZvZ: this is a really hard one to decide upon it's stability. Games vary from 1base vs 1base ling/bling wars, to stable midgame roach based or mutaliskbased compositions.
I'd say the matchup is pretty stable until it comes to hive tech, at least as long as mutalisks are kept out of the equation. After that it becomes a wild guessing game. Broodlords and Ultralisks both have seen play... and both have obvious problems. Mass spinecrawlers seems reasonable... as long as the maps allow them to participate in games. I'd say the matchup can be pretty stable, but only as long as the players keep on mirroring each other.
6) PvP: ok, clearly my last choice, and who can blame me? PvP was held back for over half a year by 4gate. The current metagame is simply younger than the metagame of every other matchup. Also it is still very wild. Blink stalkers, mass colossi, phoenix, chargelots and archons all seem to find a place in compositions. Canons and upgrades exist but seem a little secondary, compared to colossus numbers and phoenix openings. I can see a lot of potential in this matchup (spread defensive colossi, phoenix vs phoenix play), but the strength of rushes seem to allow only for a very slow rate of development.
|
Definetly TvZ.
It's all about the little things IMMVP does to get an advtange. Fake pushes, counter attack defense & muta manipulation are all excellent indicators of high level play.
The most interesting comparison to me is PvZ, which feels much more about mind games and suprises.
|
TvZ by far! It has remained the same for a long time and most people know what to do in most situations. You can also do different things and I feel that the matchup is very clear and "figured out"
|
ZvT and TvZ both have a converging midgame, even two, that can work against the opponent if played correctly. Because of that, it has a lot of tiny details and advantages to get.
ZvP and PvZ however don't really have a converging midgame, but a very fluid set of reactions that can either put the Zerg or Protoss behind. I'd say that they both have one of the most experimentation to it, but they aren't really all that stable. I believe that the people with a high winrate in PvZ or ZvP just have much better decisionmaking than their opponents, which is rather hard to train and can only really come from making a lot of in game decisions over a long period of time.
ZvZ is rather well developped at the highest levels. But the nuances are pretty much invisible to the average viewer. Mindgames are also really strong in this match up and can sometimes decide the game really quickly. Coming back is nigh impossible so...
I'm indifferent to the other match ups because I don't play them. I watch them but have absolutely no authority whatsoever over it.
|
I don't know how you can say something else than TvZ. Such a deep match up with lot of micro involved and some very neat transitions between phases.
|
I dont get it, though im a protoss player but i love watching a good TvZ, i can understand it well (i think) compared to say ZvZ
|
No TvT? The mass amount of builds + cool tricks + sick cheeses have shown how many people have put effort into their tvt.
|
Yes ZvT is the most figured out matchup, why I don't enjoy it as much as others. I prefer chaotic & mindfucking slugfests that sometimes develops in a ZvP matchup. Yes you can pretend that's happen more often in TvZ but I disagree as the unit composition (heck even the strategies) is the same like always as opposed to ZvP.
The only thing I hate about ZvP is the roach-all-ins/void-ray-all-ins. If the match up can evolve away from that, it's going to be the most entertaining match up IMHO.
|
I agree with you about TvP being stable up to some point. TvP is about early one base very strong pushes by Terran and late game 2-3 base strong pushes by toss if toss survives. Also most of the battles results with rolling one side, rarely results with both sides backed up. Toss is forced to form a deathball because of the lack of individual unith strength and dependence of upgrades. It is stable in an unstable condition. Like order in chaos.I think there is not much room for improvement in this MU until some major changes like new units etc.
I thought PvZ is the most entertaining MU now. As you mentioned lots of variations in openings, timings and compositions make this MU insanely surprising. Also all kind of composition is viable in different scenarios unlike TvP (like mech vs toss or heavy stargate play etc ). It needs some improvement surely and open every kind of crazy play.
In addition to your thoughts about TvT, I should add MMA proves bio play over mech in some cases with insane control. Mech is not the king of all ground cases right now.
Mirror MUs generally heavily relies on micro ,the idea of not over committing and surprise. All have rooms for late game improvements (less for TvT).
I do not expect any more miraculous breakthrough in MUs until HOTS release.
|
honestly i feel it's TvT. especially with terran specialization in slayers. TvT is the most played match up (or at least in the GSL), and terrans are practicing TvT more than anything else. with so much hours put into TvT, i think TvT is the most developed match up. the only new things that are coming so far is just the starting builds / cheeses. the metagame has pretty much been solved now, unless we start to see ghost snipes being used on... marines and ghosts.
|
The best matchup is probably TvT -.-.
ZvT lategame-Ghosts seem just stupid... Else i would vote this.
|
TvZ has a very relevant stale mate situation late game. On maps where the terran can split the map and bunkers in the middle with tank/ghost/pf/thor/turrets and sometimes endless nukes the game gets very, very stale.
The play on the highest level seems to be centered around marine tank vs muta ling bling for mor then a half year now with hellions/thors making minor appearances as core army units.
In my opinion most development potential lies in ghost timings, nuke usage, terran mass expands and air styles. Air seems nearly abaddoned aside from mass raven late game because of the dominance of mutalisks and the hard counter corruptors are to battle cruisers but the recent hunter seeker buff could possibly change that.
|
On November 21 2011 23:50 Laserist wrote:
In addition to your thoughts about TvT, I should add MMA proves bio play over mech in some cases with insane control. Mech is not the king of all ground cases right now.
I disagree. MMA showed that starting with Mech might be wrong. F.e: In his games vs MVP he always went bio into biomech, which if he didn't take huge advantages from his early bio play and won the games early might have led to pure mech or air play. Of course this is a little theorycrafty, but I think MMA shows that everyone who "goes Mech" might be wrong, because he can get an economical advantage through marineplay, hold on through marauder play and ultimatly have the same/similar army in the lategame, due to the 200supply and 3/3 upgrade cap. (but of a better economy - at least on maps with a lot of expansions)
|
TvZ has the good old Brood War flavor, and quite solid standards with dominant compositions.
PvZ is definitely the worst in my eyes. Nothing that anyone ever did in that matchup seemed quite "right", especially on Protoss end (so-so on Zerg end). I quit Protoss because of it as I simply didn't know what to do nor do I admire anyone's play enough to learn from it. HerO plays an inspiring PvZ every once in a dozen games and Nani just had a few really good ones, but that's just not enough for the matchup as a whole.
Out of mirror matchups, TvT used to be brilliant for some time (Jinro vs Ensnare in GSL was mind blowing), but now that people are using bio again it just seems twitchy and volatile with plenty of cheap abuse. ZvZ is the only matchup that I consider to be better than its Brood War equivalent. I always though PvP had a lot of potential once the bullshit builds get shut down too (which is kinda happening right now).
|
Probably TvT because the dynamics of positioning is so important in the matchup that lasts the entire game. ZvZ is either volatile sling/bling or roach massing usually. Z v anything else has issues with end game army fights, so everything rests with how much base restriction and defense zerg can put up. PvT has issue with emp and bio power being too dominant. PvP is fairly monotonous as well, somewhat like zvz after sling/bling.
|
TvT is the most developed overall. When watching the pros it feels like players generally have a firm understanding on how the game should flow and more than any matchup it can go back and forth. Out of all the matches this is the one where a player is most likely to come back from being behind. Not necessarily the most entertaining, however.
TvZ is far more entertaining, the best matchup to watch, but still needs improvement. I feel some areas of the matchup are still underexplored. Especially with what seems to be an onset of mech play from the terrans.
ZvZ can sometimes be up there with TvZ and TvT in entertainment, but I feel like this one is the least understood. This is probably due to the design of zerg. Being the best at tech switching, producing a lot of units at once, and agility makes for a match that can immediately turn on its ass.
|
On November 21 2011 23:58 Talin wrote:
TvZ has the good old Brood War flavor, and quite solid standards with dominant compositions.
PvZ is definitely the worst in my eyes. Nothing that anyone ever did in that matchup seemed quite "right", especially on Protoss end (so-so on Zerg end). I quit Protoss because of it as I simply didn't know what to do nor do I admire anyone's play enough to learn from it. HerO plays an inspiring PvZ every once in a dozen games and Nani just had a few really good ones, but that's just not enough for the matchup as a whole.
Out of mirror matchups, TvT used to be brilliant for some time, but now that people are using bio again it just seems twitchy and volatile with plenty of cheap abuse. ZvZ is the only matchup that I consider to be better than its Brood War equivalent. I always though PvP had a lot of potential once the bullshit builds get shut down too (which is kinda happening right now).
Agree mostly.
But i'd like to add that even if PvZ feels stupid right now / since a long time, it MAY have potential. In my opinion
PvZ has the most potential of any match-up to grow into something amazing. But only time and patches will tell.
PvT i feel is the worst. It's stale and boring to watch and play. You don't have lots of exchanges, fluid transitions, position based plays and exciting micro battles. Add to that, from a spectator point of view, until the late game it seems extremely volatile for the Protoss, and in the late game both are afraid to attack into each other and battles end in a frustration quickly fashion mostly with one player losing 30 supply while the other loses everything. And i see terrans having problems with finishing off a Protoss once he has sufficient Gateways, or during fights, when he rewarps 15 new Zealots. It just feels dumb, it's more a theoretical matchup than anything else.
|
TvZ seems the least developed to me, we still go mainly marine tank medivac. My vote goes to TvT because that's where the most innovation comes from.
|
I personally think TvT is the most developed MU because usually the best player always wins,it's not like ZvZ where in a flip of a coin a player like IM.NesTea can lose to TLAF'Liquid.HayprO
|
TvT is definitely the most developed, though TvZ is usually more fun to watch.
I would differ from the OP though and put TvP down on the bad list. It basically swings wildly from a heavily Terran-favored early game to a heavily Protoss-favored late game with a small window in the middle where things are sort of stable. Terran is basically stuck with the same unit comp throughout the entire game and whatever units Protoss is making dictates everything. Even though we have standard play, I hesitate to call it "developed" because a number of Terran units that see common use in TvT and TvZ just don't have a place in TvP. It's a bad, dull, stale matchup.
ZvZ is starting to get somewhere, and it might develop into something good in the future. Right now though it's still highly unstable and nobody really knows how to play past 10-15 minutes. PvP has the same issue.
ZvP is like TvP to a point. Zerg can hit some really powerful timings off of 2 base that annihilate all but the most immaculately prepared Protoss defense, but if Protoss can survive and get the colossus deathball rolling, Zerg has a hard time keeping up. However, we've also seen that once Zerg gets on hive tech with high economy, there are some compositions with brood lords that Protoss has almost no chance against.
Ultimately I think the primary issue with SC2 is that Protoss is pretty badly designed in a few significant ways, and it's gotta get fixed before any matchup involving Protoss becomes fun to watch or play.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
