|
On September 20 2011 23:12 HaruRH wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2011 23:05 squanzo wrote:On September 20 2011 22:56 xzidez wrote:On September 20 2011 22:50 squanzo wrote:On September 20 2011 22:42 xzidez wrote:On September 20 2011 22:28 squanzo wrote:On September 20 2011 22:21 TRAP[yoo] wrote:On September 20 2011 22:13 squanzo wrote:On September 20 2011 12:09 VTPerfect wrote:On September 20 2011 05:49 Destructicon wrote:
While I admire the original poster's attempt to inspire hope in the hearts of all the protoss players, the protoss community and all the protoss fans, I can't help but feel that these innovators, don't have anything to innovate upon and that our hopes will be dashed upon the rocks and will crumble to pieces.
I am going to try and say this cleanly and efficiently.
The problem with protoss is not the lack of innovation, it is the lack of strength and the multitude of weaknesses that can be exploited.
This problem is most evident in the TvP match up and is grotesquely blown out of proportion by the 1/1/1 style of opening and variations.
Problem number 1 (P1). The protoss tier 1 and 1.5 is week against a basic tier 1.5 terran army without the use of specialist units (sentries, HT), or higher tech (colossis, HT). Marines do phenomenal DPS and in combination with Marauders are deadly because marauders can just kite zealots forever even with charge, and marauders also rip apart stalkers. This leads to problem number 2.
P2.Protoss specialist units are too easy to be countered and too expensive. Ghosts can EMP from a bigger range then a HT can feedback, EMP can potentially neutralize many HT and sentries while HT can only feedback 1 unit at a time. EMP also destroyes shields which in some cases means 50% of a protoss effective health. Ghosts contribute with real DPS even after their energy is spent, and they also do double damage against light (zealots). Ghosts with cloak can survive for a good time as well, which also puts into grave perspective problem number 3.
P3. Protoss don't have enough mobile detection, terran and zerg both have at least one more means of detection then a unit. Zerg has Overseers and Fungal growth, terran has EMP, Raven and scan. Not only do the terrans and zerg have more methods of detection, but their detector units also fulfill different roles and are stronger. The overseer can help with scouting via changeling and can also delay a critical tech or reinforcements with contaminate. Raven's provide invaluable support via point defense drone, and also have the potential to do massive damage with hunter seeker missile or harass a mineral line with auto-turrets. Lastly the detection of terran and protoss is more easily available, scans and EMPs are easy to get or already part of the terran arsenal, overseers are unlocked just by teching up to lair, and infestors are now part of many lineups.
Now, if you add up all the problems you get the following scenario.
Against a terran 1/1/1 a protoss is forced to get a robo so he can have detection. Because of the lack of other detection methods the protoss becomes predictable, if he doesn't get a robotics for observers he risks dying to cloaked banshees. Also observers are easy to snipe, they have the lowest HP of any detector, and once a scan goes of they are dead. Now because protoss was forced to get robo they now have to add immortals to the army, and while great against tanks, the backbone of a 1/1/1 is the marine, and mass marines rip apart immortals, and once immortals are dead, the T1 protoss army crumbles.
Normally in balance of RTS games, if units are very cheep they should be a lot weaker (zerg), if units are more expensive they should be stronger (protoss), however, protoss T1 units are really not that good for the amount they cost, zealots and stalkers are way too weak without sentries, and against a 1/1/1 sentries don't help all that much because tanks have huge range, do massive damage, and there are also banshees that can mess them over.
This problem is put into sharp focus in games where, you see a terran not expand, you see the protoss fast expand at min 4, and at 12 minutes into the game the terran has a bigger supply army then the protoss. Its a problem in game balance that a 1 base player could have equal or more supply then a player on 2 bases for 66% of the game. What is even more wrong is that the 1 base player's army is so strong that it can annihilate the 2 base player's army.
Now, if we look away from the 1/1/1 and focus on the meta game, in a late game scenario the protoss doesn't stand much chance. A terran bio ball is cheaper to replenish, is more durable because of medivacs, and it does more DPS then the standard tier 1.5 of protoss. Protoss needs sentries and HT or colossis, however, sentries and HT are easily countered by ghosts, colossis are easily countered by vikings. In a head to head fight, the terran just needs to have the patience to emp the specialists, snipe the colossis with vikings, then the bio ball an just do the rest. Also warp prism micro with HT isn't so hot because they can be sniped by vikings, just the same way colossis are sniped. To rub salt onto the wounds, EMP also directly reduce survivability of protoss units by destroying shields.
Now I ask, where can you innovate in there?
Protoss are already using 99% of their units, they use zealots, stalkers, sentries, HT, colossus, observer and warp prism. Protoss air force is weak, they Phoenix and Void rays are already easily countered by units the terran already gets, marines, vikings and ghosts. Carriers cost too much, take too much time to build and require too big numbers to be effective. Carriers in small number are easily sniped by vikings. Mothership is even worst because it can be EMPed from farther away then it can vortex, once EMPed it becomes a big meat shield waiting to die horribly to vikings and marines.
How can you innovate against a 1/1/1, when from the get go, you need to get a robo for detection? Also how can you innovate a build against the 1/1/1 when you risk creating a build that can completely counter the 1/1/1 but fail miserably to form of early pressure?
And, keep in mind that, terrans still haven't widely adopted the use of ravens and/or mass ravens. With patch 1.4 that might change because, seeker missiles will be able to outrun zealots even with charge, and stalkers and sentries and probles, and ravens also hard counter stalkers by reducing their DPS to 0 via PDD.
Against zerg the problems aren't quite as bad, but they aren't great either. The timings of 4 gates and 6 gates has been figured out. Protoss can't do 4 gate because it won't work, the zerg can prepare an appropriate defense while still having a 1 base advantage. If protoss chooses to fast expand into a 6 gate, the zerg can just take a quick 3rd, and can have defenses out in time for any form of protoss preasure. Air play can be easily countered by the proper and strategic placement of spore crawlers and building of extra queens (which zerg have already started doing). And if the protoss decides to not go air and go a 6 gate or robo+ a number of gates, then the zerg can still have an big enough army in time to defend against it, and still retain a 1 base advantage.
The recent game of Check.Prime vs Tails from IGN qualifiers is a good example of zerg being able to take a fast 3rd and come out ahead of a protoss FE. As for late game, infestors are a big double risk problem. Not only can they fungal the entire protoss army, but they can neural colossis, and/or archons. Fungal does respectable DPS, but more critically it leaves the protoss open to brood lords and baneling drops, both of which can do massive damage.
Again, carriers and motherships won't help, they still take too long to build, cost too much, are too vulnerable to corrupters, and worst, are vulnerable to neurals.
The only conclusion I can draw is that, protoss doesn't have anything to innovate upon, they are already using all their tools, and now that terran and zerg have started to fully use their tools the cracks are starting to show. I really wish I was wrong here but, it trully feels like it will take either a very big patch (1.4 won't cut it), or the expansion to fix the current protoss problems.
And while all this situation might really suck and demoralize a lot of players, lets have faith and remember that SC2 is only 1 year old, hopefully we will be looking back at this period in time and remember it was the darkness before the dusk, the calm before the storm. Change will come, even if Blizzard has to act. Well i'll be, quite the high level understanding of the game and refreshing when people keep saying a zealot beats 4 lings. I don't post much around here but I'd like to throw in my 2 cents on the issue. I rarely play Protoss on the ladder, I'm more of an alternating Terran/Zerg player. While Terran in TvP, I've never done the 1/1/1 all in. I just don't feel like learning a strategy that's highly anticipated by the opponent, and I'd rather work on mechanics and play macro games anyway. (Btw, I'm high diamond/low masters, will probably be back in Masters this week). One thing I never see anyone mention defending the 1/1/1... Cannons. OP makes an argument that you get pigeon holed into making a robotics for detection... cannons take care of this. If you expand and take 1 gas, you'll also have enough for warp and a handful of stalkers, but the majority of your defense should come from zealots and cannons. I've been 1/1/1'd multiple times while Protoss, and cannons were a huge part of my hold. As for macro games and mauraders... I honestly don't see what players are complaining about. This is where I get frustrated listening to Protoss players. I've played against many Protoss that have learned you need to flank the army with a ball of chargelots to take out that kiting bioball. Use a damn warp prism. It's not that difficult. And if you're pumping attack and armor upgrades the EMP's become worthless against huge spread out Protoss armies with archons and lossus. Army position is important for Terran, so why shouldn't it be for Protoss? I think if anything could use a buff for Protoss, it's hallucination. I think it costs way too much energy for a unit that barely survives in the later game. As for ZvP, there's nothing to mention. The Infestor is the best unit in the game, and is a pivotal unit in all 3 matchups for Zerg. Something needs to be done about that unit. See the game 1 of MMA vs DRG in the IPL qualifier to see what I'm talking about. we already had a troll with the idea of a forge. you do know that 1/1/1 is quite flexible...thats good. if the terran sees that you are building cannons he will be intelligent and expand. Sooo... if he expands... then he's not all-ining anymore... and thus you've defended it? Well you are in a situation where he is up one base.. With 2 orbitals calling down mules. You are on one base with .. Cannons... On top of that, cannons doesnt help very much against seige tanks. If he sees your are cannoning he can just park right outside your base and inch forward with siegetanks.. The cannons will not help you when you decide to egage his army because he will be out of range for them. Thus cannon is even worse than observerver in the scernario where he still goes for the attack.. I never said, anywhere in my post, that the protoss should be working off 1 base. I even said "If you expand and take 1 gas..." Do people even read anymore? So what you are saying is that you are going to expand. Cannon main mineralline, cannon exp mineralline.. cannon base entrance. And expect to hold 1/1/1 with siege mode? Sorry, I missed that in your post. I just assumed you wouldnt do suggest something as stupid, as this. Also, with all that minerals invested in your static defense this early, he could probably just go for 3 bases if he wants.. (if he didnt go 1/1/1).. if he did 1 1 1 he can just straightup kill you. Grandmaster here btw. I'm saying the safest build against Terran, to which I experienced, was a 1 gate expand. From there, you have a few options. If you noticed the Terran has walled off and you can't see anything, then it would be wise to get a robo and observer to scout. While scouting, you should drop a forge regardless (upgrades). If you happen to see the 1/1/1 build while scouting with your obs, a few well positioned cannons in the front of your natural is something I feel Protoss needs to do more often, and don't really consider too much when defending the 1/1/1. Now you have an expansion, a 2nd and 3rd gate, and a robo. With cannons. And you're upgrading. I assumed that's what you all would think, when I say cannons to defend the 1/1/1. If I really have to go through step by step to explain why it would work, then we'll never get anywhere. Scouting and game sense is apart of the game. Why would I have to say "okay guys, scout. Now, use game sense." Seriously? Lol, do you know how much a cannon cost? They don't cost 50 energy. Also, a retarded Terran would seige up behind your wall of cannons, which equates to throwing away 300~600 minerals away. How would that help in stopping the 1/1/1?
Okay, Mr. Lol, you do realize that most maps have elevated natural expansions. How do you presume our Mr. Terran will have vision for his siege tanks? With Banshees perhaps? Do you really think he wants to sacrifice a banshee just to have vision to take out a cannon or two?
Also, now that you've expanded, you have the resources to build up a much bigger army while the Terran is delayed taking care of the cannons. It may even give you enough time to pop out a second immortal for those pesky bunkers.
Give it a shot. I'm here to help, not make your life some ongoing debate about how it won't work.
|
On September 20 2011 23:18 squanzo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2011 23:12 HaruRH wrote:On September 20 2011 23:05 squanzo wrote:On September 20 2011 22:56 xzidez wrote:On September 20 2011 22:50 squanzo wrote:On September 20 2011 22:42 xzidez wrote:On September 20 2011 22:28 squanzo wrote:On September 20 2011 22:21 TRAP[yoo] wrote:On September 20 2011 22:13 squanzo wrote:On September 20 2011 12:09 VTPerfect wrote:
[quote]
Well i'll be, quite the high level understanding of the game and refreshing when people keep saying a zealot beats 4 lings.
I don't post much around here but I'd like to throw in my 2 cents on the issue. I rarely play Protoss on the ladder, I'm more of an alternating Terran/Zerg player. While Terran in TvP, I've never done the 1/1/1 all in. I just don't feel like learning a strategy that's highly anticipated by the opponent, and I'd rather work on mechanics and play macro games anyway. (Btw, I'm high diamond/low masters, will probably be back in Masters this week). One thing I never see anyone mention defending the 1/1/1... Cannons. OP makes an argument that you get pigeon holed into making a robotics for detection... cannons take care of this. If you expand and take 1 gas, you'll also have enough for warp and a handful of stalkers, but the majority of your defense should come from zealots and cannons. I've been 1/1/1'd multiple times while Protoss, and cannons were a huge part of my hold. As for macro games and mauraders... I honestly don't see what players are complaining about. This is where I get frustrated listening to Protoss players. I've played against many Protoss that have learned you need to flank the army with a ball of chargelots to take out that kiting bioball. Use a damn warp prism. It's not that difficult. And if you're pumping attack and armor upgrades the EMP's become worthless against huge spread out Protoss armies with archons and lossus. Army position is important for Terran, so why shouldn't it be for Protoss? I think if anything could use a buff for Protoss, it's hallucination. I think it costs way too much energy for a unit that barely survives in the later game. As for ZvP, there's nothing to mention. The Infestor is the best unit in the game, and is a pivotal unit in all 3 matchups for Zerg. Something needs to be done about that unit. See the game 1 of MMA vs DRG in the IPL qualifier to see what I'm talking about. we already had a troll with the idea of a forge. you do know that 1/1/1 is quite flexible...thats good. if the terran sees that you are building cannons he will be intelligent and expand. Sooo... if he expands... then he's not all-ining anymore... and thus you've defended it? Well you are in a situation where he is up one base.. With 2 orbitals calling down mules. You are on one base with .. Cannons... On top of that, cannons doesnt help very much against seige tanks. If he sees your are cannoning he can just park right outside your base and inch forward with siegetanks.. The cannons will not help you when you decide to egage his army because he will be out of range for them. Thus cannon is even worse than observerver in the scernario where he still goes for the attack.. I never said, anywhere in my post, that the protoss should be working off 1 base. I even said "If you expand and take 1 gas..." Do people even read anymore? So what you are saying is that you are going to expand. Cannon main mineralline, cannon exp mineralline.. cannon base entrance. And expect to hold 1/1/1 with siege mode? Sorry, I missed that in your post. I just assumed you wouldnt do suggest something as stupid, as this. Also, with all that minerals invested in your static defense this early, he could probably just go for 3 bases if he wants.. (if he didnt go 1/1/1).. if he did 1 1 1 he can just straightup kill you. Grandmaster here btw. I'm saying the safest build against Terran, to which I experienced, was a 1 gate expand. From there, you have a few options. If you noticed the Terran has walled off and you can't see anything, then it would be wise to get a robo and observer to scout. While scouting, you should drop a forge regardless (upgrades). If you happen to see the 1/1/1 build while scouting with your obs, a few well positioned cannons in the front of your natural is something I feel Protoss needs to do more often, and don't really consider too much when defending the 1/1/1. Now you have an expansion, a 2nd and 3rd gate, and a robo. With cannons. And you're upgrading. I assumed that's what you all would think, when I say cannons to defend the 1/1/1. If I really have to go through step by step to explain why it would work, then we'll never get anywhere. Scouting and game sense is apart of the game. Why would I have to say "okay guys, scout. Now, use game sense." Seriously? Lol, do you know how much a cannon cost? They don't cost 50 energy. Also, a retarded Terran would seige up behind your wall of cannons, which equates to throwing away 300~600 minerals away. How would that help in stopping the 1/1/1? Okay, Mr. Lol, you do realize that most maps have elevated natural expansions. How do you presume our Mr. Terran will have vision for his siege tanks? With Banshees perhaps? Do you really think he wants to sacrifice a banshee just to have vision to take out a cannon or two? Also, now that you've expanded, you have the resources to build up a much bigger army while the Terran is delayed taking care of the cannons. It may even give you enough time to pop out a second immortal for those pesky bunkers. Give it a shot. I'm here to help, not make your life some ongoing debate about how it won't work.
Actually, cannons are terrible versus 1-1-1 because of siege tanks. Vision is not a problem because, he has both banshees and/or ravens to provide vision.
Do you really think he wants to sacrifice a banshee just to have vision to take out a cannon or two?
Really? Flying actually give vision farther than their attack range, and can very well provide vision up ramps without getting fired at by cannons or enemy units. If the enemy units move in front of cannons to fire at the air units, they get rained upon by the waiting bio+ tanks.
There is a good reason why no one uses cannons.
|
On September 20 2011 23:18 squanzo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2011 23:12 HaruRH wrote:On September 20 2011 23:05 squanzo wrote:On September 20 2011 22:56 xzidez wrote:On September 20 2011 22:50 squanzo wrote:On September 20 2011 22:42 xzidez wrote:On September 20 2011 22:28 squanzo wrote:On September 20 2011 22:21 TRAP[yoo] wrote:On September 20 2011 22:13 squanzo wrote:On September 20 2011 12:09 VTPerfect wrote:
[quote]
Well i'll be, quite the high level understanding of the game and refreshing when people keep saying a zealot beats 4 lings.
I don't post much around here but I'd like to throw in my 2 cents on the issue. I rarely play Protoss on the ladder, I'm more of an alternating Terran/Zerg player. While Terran in TvP, I've never done the 1/1/1 all in. I just don't feel like learning a strategy that's highly anticipated by the opponent, and I'd rather work on mechanics and play macro games anyway. (Btw, I'm high diamond/low masters, will probably be back in Masters this week). One thing I never see anyone mention defending the 1/1/1... Cannons. OP makes an argument that you get pigeon holed into making a robotics for detection... cannons take care of this. If you expand and take 1 gas, you'll also have enough for warp and a handful of stalkers, but the majority of your defense should come from zealots and cannons. I've been 1/1/1'd multiple times while Protoss, and cannons were a huge part of my hold. As for macro games and mauraders... I honestly don't see what players are complaining about. This is where I get frustrated listening to Protoss players. I've played against many Protoss that have learned you need to flank the army with a ball of chargelots to take out that kiting bioball. Use a damn warp prism. It's not that difficult. And if you're pumping attack and armor upgrades the EMP's become worthless against huge spread out Protoss armies with archons and lossus. Army position is important for Terran, so why shouldn't it be for Protoss? I think if anything could use a buff for Protoss, it's hallucination. I think it costs way too much energy for a unit that barely survives in the later game. As for ZvP, there's nothing to mention. The Infestor is the best unit in the game, and is a pivotal unit in all 3 matchups for Zerg. Something needs to be done about that unit. See the game 1 of MMA vs DRG in the IPL qualifier to see what I'm talking about. we already had a troll with the idea of a forge. you do know that 1/1/1 is quite flexible...thats good. if the terran sees that you are building cannons he will be intelligent and expand. Sooo... if he expands... then he's not all-ining anymore... and thus you've defended it? Well you are in a situation where he is up one base.. With 2 orbitals calling down mules. You are on one base with .. Cannons... On top of that, cannons doesnt help very much against seige tanks. If he sees your are cannoning he can just park right outside your base and inch forward with siegetanks.. The cannons will not help you when you decide to egage his army because he will be out of range for them. Thus cannon is even worse than observerver in the scernario where he still goes for the attack.. I never said, anywhere in my post, that the protoss should be working off 1 base. I even said "If you expand and take 1 gas..." Do people even read anymore? So what you are saying is that you are going to expand. Cannon main mineralline, cannon exp mineralline.. cannon base entrance. And expect to hold 1/1/1 with siege mode? Sorry, I missed that in your post. I just assumed you wouldnt do suggest something as stupid, as this. Also, with all that minerals invested in your static defense this early, he could probably just go for 3 bases if he wants.. (if he didnt go 1/1/1).. if he did 1 1 1 he can just straightup kill you. Grandmaster here btw. I'm saying the safest build against Terran, to which I experienced, was a 1 gate expand. From there, you have a few options. If you noticed the Terran has walled off and you can't see anything, then it would be wise to get a robo and observer to scout. While scouting, you should drop a forge regardless (upgrades). If you happen to see the 1/1/1 build while scouting with your obs, a few well positioned cannons in the front of your natural is something I feel Protoss needs to do more often, and don't really consider too much when defending the 1/1/1. Now you have an expansion, a 2nd and 3rd gate, and a robo. With cannons. And you're upgrading. I assumed that's what you all would think, when I say cannons to defend the 1/1/1. If I really have to go through step by step to explain why it would work, then we'll never get anywhere. Scouting and game sense is apart of the game. Why would I have to say "okay guys, scout. Now, use game sense." Seriously? Lol, do you know how much a cannon cost? They don't cost 50 energy. Also, a retarded Terran would seige up behind your wall of cannons, which equates to throwing away 300~600 minerals away. How would that help in stopping the 1/1/1? Okay, Mr. Lol, you do realize that most maps have elevated natural expansions. How do you presume our Mr. Terran will have vision for his siege tanks? With Banshees perhaps? Do you really think he wants to sacrifice a banshee just to have vision to take out a cannon or two? Also, now that you've expanded, you have the resources to build up a much bigger army while the Terran is delayed taking care of the cannons. It may even give you enough time to pop out a second immortal for those pesky bunkers. Give it a shot. I'm here to help, not make your life some ongoing debate about how it won't work.
Well you aren't, the two most ideal maps for 1/1/1 don't have elevated expansions, and even if they did it wouldn't work. If you seriously can't see why building cannons against 1 base allin, WITH TANKS AND BANSHEES is an inept idea then you are either trolling or just insane.
|
On September 20 2011 22:40 necrimanci wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2011 21:35 infinity2k9 wrote:On September 20 2011 21:13 necrimanci wrote:On September 20 2011 18:18 MrProb wrote:On September 20 2011 17:51 necrimanci wrote:
races are fine - maps are broken read something here and watch some games before post =) or you could assume that the game is fine but maps are broken. All we need are defensive maps that provide a vide variety of harassment options, so you cant just turtle mindlessly, no? Will force macro games, will force harass-based play, will force multitasking, will provide more safe openings, will make the game more enjoyable to watch and will stop the shitty stagnation based off 1a2a3a one army play also, riveting argument, o'bard - if only everyone were as witty as you and propose reading a forum full of imba-cryers and game spectating as a first step to posting What are you talking about? You don't want people to turtle.. but you want macro games. You want a 'defensive map' but you want to force multitasking and harassment. You're basically contradicting yourself, not to mention including things that are totally unrelated to the map like units all on 1 group. Explain a map design that somehow includes all of this with zero changes to the rest of the game. how am i contradicting myself? Turtling and then moving out to get your army smashed or smash opposing army so a GG can be called isnt a macro game - it's a 3, 4, 5 or 6 base all in. I want to see real macro games, and i want to watch games that give both players of any race as much opportunities to show off their skills as possible. If i wanted to watch players macro up an army and go trade it in the middle, treating it as another resource, i might as well go spectate simcity network give players a defensive map and they will turtle. Give players a defensive map that allows for some funky ledge drops, weird harassment routes and other attack paths and players will have to step up their harassment and multitasking while maintaining good macro. BW-style, multi-pronged action all over the map, 2/3 army battles + heavy harassment style 1a2a3a one army syndrome is mostly caused by the current mappool that allows or even favours this kind of play, and that is why i brought that up. Why take an exe or 2 if you can turtle up with 1 or 2 bases and then roll out with a well-spread death ball? Or counter-composition? What can your opponent do? Outexpand? If one scouts an expansion it's a good time to move out and blast it, no? Map architecture when it comes down to counterattacks also sucks in most cases, and it's very predictable which route opponent will choose in short, certain maps force certail playstyle/playstyles, and the crap we are seeing now is caused by that, so it's time to look for other maps, because patching game balance wont change anything any more doubts or missinterpretations of my opinion? please, do let me know
I'm VERY familar with BW maps... the good well balanced BW maps do not work the same in SC2. The most popular/balanced maps are ones like Fighting Spirit/Circuit Breaker and 1. They still allow a Terran to turtle easily, 2. they don't have any special harassment options like high ground above natural, 3. there's barely any terrain variation in the middle.. it's almost totally flat. Your problems are with THE GAME ITSELF. All the things you are talking about is part of the SC2 design not strictly the maps - the game will never be like BW with any type of maps.
Not to say that BW doesn't have variation in maps, but they are infact the imbalanced ones. However the difference being imbalance in BW was more easily overcome with skill. Some of the most interesting maps in recent years like Outsider were imbalanced but still produced very fun games. In contrast players getting rolled over in timing attacks is not very fun games to watch at all.
Btw you're pretty hilarious with '3, 4, 5 or 6 base all in', if anyone was unaware that you're talking total bullshit then that line should show it. I suppose Flash plays all-in every game? I don't misinterpret your opinion it's just total bullshit, as i said show me a map design that promotes any of what you are saying.
|
On September 20 2011 23:18 squanzo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2011 23:12 HaruRH wrote:On September 20 2011 23:05 squanzo wrote:On September 20 2011 22:56 xzidez wrote:On September 20 2011 22:50 squanzo wrote:On September 20 2011 22:42 xzidez wrote:On September 20 2011 22:28 squanzo wrote:On September 20 2011 22:21 TRAP[yoo] wrote:On September 20 2011 22:13 squanzo wrote:On September 20 2011 12:09 VTPerfect wrote:
[quote]
Well i'll be, quite the high level understanding of the game and refreshing when people keep saying a zealot beats 4 lings.
I don't post much around here but I'd like to throw in my 2 cents on the issue. I rarely play Protoss on the ladder, I'm more of an alternating Terran/Zerg player. While Terran in TvP, I've never done the 1/1/1 all in. I just don't feel like learning a strategy that's highly anticipated by the opponent, and I'd rather work on mechanics and play macro games anyway. (Btw, I'm high diamond/low masters, will probably be back in Masters this week). One thing I never see anyone mention defending the 1/1/1... Cannons. OP makes an argument that you get pigeon holed into making a robotics for detection... cannons take care of this. If you expand and take 1 gas, you'll also have enough for warp and a handful of stalkers, but the majority of your defense should come from zealots and cannons. I've been 1/1/1'd multiple times while Protoss, and cannons were a huge part of my hold. As for macro games and mauraders... I honestly don't see what players are complaining about. This is where I get frustrated listening to Protoss players. I've played against many Protoss that have learned you need to flank the army with a ball of chargelots to take out that kiting bioball. Use a damn warp prism. It's not that difficult. And if you're pumping attack and armor upgrades the EMP's become worthless against huge spread out Protoss armies with archons and lossus. Army position is important for Terran, so why shouldn't it be for Protoss? I think if anything could use a buff for Protoss, it's hallucination. I think it costs way too much energy for a unit that barely survives in the later game. As for ZvP, there's nothing to mention. The Infestor is the best unit in the game, and is a pivotal unit in all 3 matchups for Zerg. Something needs to be done about that unit. See the game 1 of MMA vs DRG in the IPL qualifier to see what I'm talking about. we already had a troll with the idea of a forge. you do know that 1/1/1 is quite flexible...thats good. if the terran sees that you are building cannons he will be intelligent and expand. Sooo... if he expands... then he's not all-ining anymore... and thus you've defended it? Well you are in a situation where he is up one base.. With 2 orbitals calling down mules. You are on one base with .. Cannons... On top of that, cannons doesnt help very much against seige tanks. If he sees your are cannoning he can just park right outside your base and inch forward with siegetanks.. The cannons will not help you when you decide to egage his army because he will be out of range for them. Thus cannon is even worse than observerver in the scernario where he still goes for the attack.. I never said, anywhere in my post, that the protoss should be working off 1 base. I even said "If you expand and take 1 gas..." Do people even read anymore? So what you are saying is that you are going to expand. Cannon main mineralline, cannon exp mineralline.. cannon base entrance. And expect to hold 1/1/1 with siege mode? Sorry, I missed that in your post. I just assumed you wouldnt do suggest something as stupid, as this. Also, with all that minerals invested in your static defense this early, he could probably just go for 3 bases if he wants.. (if he didnt go 1/1/1).. if he did 1 1 1 he can just straightup kill you. Grandmaster here btw. I'm saying the safest build against Terran, to which I experienced, was a 1 gate expand. From there, you have a few options. If you noticed the Terran has walled off and you can't see anything, then it would be wise to get a robo and observer to scout. While scouting, you should drop a forge regardless (upgrades). If you happen to see the 1/1/1 build while scouting with your obs, a few well positioned cannons in the front of your natural is something I feel Protoss needs to do more often, and don't really consider too much when defending the 1/1/1. Now you have an expansion, a 2nd and 3rd gate, and a robo. With cannons. And you're upgrading. I assumed that's what you all would think, when I say cannons to defend the 1/1/1. If I really have to go through step by step to explain why it would work, then we'll never get anywhere. Scouting and game sense is apart of the game. Why would I have to say "okay guys, scout. Now, use game sense." Seriously? Lol, do you know how much a cannon cost? They don't cost 50 energy. Also, a retarded Terran would seige up behind your wall of cannons, which equates to throwing away 300~600 minerals away. How would that help in stopping the 1/1/1? Okay, Mr. Lol, you do realize that most maps have elevated natural expansions. How do you presume our Mr. Terran will have vision for his siege tanks? With Banshees perhaps? Do you really think he wants to sacrifice a banshee just to have vision to take out a cannon or two? Also, now that you've expanded, you have the resources to build up a much bigger army while the Terran is delayed taking care of the cannons. It may even give you enough time to pop out a second immortal for those pesky bunkers. Give it a shot. I'm here to help, not make your life some ongoing debate about how it won't work.
you are here to troll nothing else. think about it...you 1gate expand build a robo and 2 more gates and you die to 1/1/1. why on earth would you build a forge+cannon (300! minerals and 150 of them wasted because its just a techbuilding)?! i think investing it in 3 zealots would be a better choice
|
On September 20 2011 23:18 squanzo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2011 23:12 HaruRH wrote:On September 20 2011 23:05 squanzo wrote:On September 20 2011 22:56 xzidez wrote:On September 20 2011 22:50 squanzo wrote:On September 20 2011 22:42 xzidez wrote:On September 20 2011 22:28 squanzo wrote:On September 20 2011 22:21 TRAP[yoo] wrote:On September 20 2011 22:13 squanzo wrote:On September 20 2011 12:09 VTPerfect wrote:
[quote]
Well i'll be, quite the high level understanding of the game and refreshing when people keep saying a zealot beats 4 lings.
I don't post much around here but I'd like to throw in my 2 cents on the issue. I rarely play Protoss on the ladder, I'm more of an alternating Terran/Zerg player. While Terran in TvP, I've never done the 1/1/1 all in. I just don't feel like learning a strategy that's highly anticipated by the opponent, and I'd rather work on mechanics and play macro games anyway. (Btw, I'm high diamond/low masters, will probably be back in Masters this week). One thing I never see anyone mention defending the 1/1/1... Cannons. OP makes an argument that you get pigeon holed into making a robotics for detection... cannons take care of this. If you expand and take 1 gas, you'll also have enough for warp and a handful of stalkers, but the majority of your defense should come from zealots and cannons. I've been 1/1/1'd multiple times while Protoss, and cannons were a huge part of my hold. As for macro games and mauraders... I honestly don't see what players are complaining about. This is where I get frustrated listening to Protoss players. I've played against many Protoss that have learned you need to flank the army with a ball of chargelots to take out that kiting bioball. Use a damn warp prism. It's not that difficult. And if you're pumping attack and armor upgrades the EMP's become worthless against huge spread out Protoss armies with archons and lossus. Army position is important for Terran, so why shouldn't it be for Protoss? I think if anything could use a buff for Protoss, it's hallucination. I think it costs way too much energy for a unit that barely survives in the later game. As for ZvP, there's nothing to mention. The Infestor is the best unit in the game, and is a pivotal unit in all 3 matchups for Zerg. Something needs to be done about that unit. See the game 1 of MMA vs DRG in the IPL qualifier to see what I'm talking about. we already had a troll with the idea of a forge. you do know that 1/1/1 is quite flexible...thats good. if the terran sees that you are building cannons he will be intelligent and expand. Sooo... if he expands... then he's not all-ining anymore... and thus you've defended it? Well you are in a situation where he is up one base.. With 2 orbitals calling down mules. You are on one base with .. Cannons... On top of that, cannons doesnt help very much against seige tanks. If he sees your are cannoning he can just park right outside your base and inch forward with siegetanks.. The cannons will not help you when you decide to egage his army because he will be out of range for them. Thus cannon is even worse than observerver in the scernario where he still goes for the attack.. I never said, anywhere in my post, that the protoss should be working off 1 base. I even said "If you expand and take 1 gas..." Do people even read anymore? So what you are saying is that you are going to expand. Cannon main mineralline, cannon exp mineralline.. cannon base entrance. And expect to hold 1/1/1 with siege mode? Sorry, I missed that in your post. I just assumed you wouldnt do suggest something as stupid, as this. Also, with all that minerals invested in your static defense this early, he could probably just go for 3 bases if he wants.. (if he didnt go 1/1/1).. if he did 1 1 1 he can just straightup kill you. Grandmaster here btw. I'm saying the safest build against Terran, to which I experienced, was a 1 gate expand. From there, you have a few options. If you noticed the Terran has walled off and you can't see anything, then it would be wise to get a robo and observer to scout. While scouting, you should drop a forge regardless (upgrades). If you happen to see the 1/1/1 build while scouting with your obs, a few well positioned cannons in the front of your natural is something I feel Protoss needs to do more often, and don't really consider too much when defending the 1/1/1. Now you have an expansion, a 2nd and 3rd gate, and a robo. With cannons. And you're upgrading. I assumed that's what you all would think, when I say cannons to defend the 1/1/1. If I really have to go through step by step to explain why it would work, then we'll never get anywhere. Scouting and game sense is apart of the game. Why would I have to say "okay guys, scout. Now, use game sense." Seriously? Lol, do you know how much a cannon cost? They don't cost 50 energy. Also, a retarded Terran would seige up behind your wall of cannons, which equates to throwing away 300~600 minerals away. How would that help in stopping the 1/1/1? Okay, Mr. Lol, you do realize that most maps have elevated natural expansions. How do you presume our Mr. Terran will have vision for his siege tanks? With Banshees perhaps? Do you really think he wants to sacrifice a banshee just to have vision to take out a cannon or two? Also, now that you've expanded, you have the resources to build up a much bigger army while the Terran is delayed taking care of the cannons. It may even give you enough time to pop out a second immortal for those pesky bunkers. Give it a shot. I'm here to help, not make your life some ongoing debate about how it won't work.
Lol. You're senseless I see. Go mass lings against my colossus heavy deathball, I'm sure it helps. A lot.
Terran is busy taking care of cannons? This only makes it worse bro, more tanks and Marines will be here for reinforcement. That's bad news. Really bad ones. And judging from your game sense, the cannons will be at the natural hmm? Guess what semi retarded terrans do in this case? Contain the fuck out of you and mass expand.
|
On September 20 2011 23:18 squanzo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2011 23:12 HaruRH wrote:On September 20 2011 23:05 squanzo wrote:On September 20 2011 22:56 xzidez wrote:On September 20 2011 22:50 squanzo wrote:On September 20 2011 22:42 xzidez wrote:On September 20 2011 22:28 squanzo wrote:On September 20 2011 22:21 TRAP[yoo] wrote:On September 20 2011 22:13 squanzo wrote:On September 20 2011 12:09 VTPerfect wrote:
[quote]
Well i'll be, quite the high level understanding of the game and refreshing when people keep saying a zealot beats 4 lings.
I don't post much around here but I'd like to throw in my 2 cents on the issue. I rarely play Protoss on the ladder, I'm more of an alternating Terran/Zerg player. While Terran in TvP, I've never done the 1/1/1 all in. I just don't feel like learning a strategy that's highly anticipated by the opponent, and I'd rather work on mechanics and play macro games anyway. (Btw, I'm high diamond/low masters, will probably be back in Masters this week). One thing I never see anyone mention defending the 1/1/1... Cannons. OP makes an argument that you get pigeon holed into making a robotics for detection... cannons take care of this. If you expand and take 1 gas, you'll also have enough for warp and a handful of stalkers, but the majority of your defense should come from zealots and cannons. I've been 1/1/1'd multiple times while Protoss, and cannons were a huge part of my hold. As for macro games and mauraders... I honestly don't see what players are complaining about. This is where I get frustrated listening to Protoss players. I've played against many Protoss that have learned you need to flank the army with a ball of chargelots to take out that kiting bioball. Use a damn warp prism. It's not that difficult. And if you're pumping attack and armor upgrades the EMP's become worthless against huge spread out Protoss armies with archons and lossus. Army position is important for Terran, so why shouldn't it be for Protoss? I think if anything could use a buff for Protoss, it's hallucination. I think it costs way too much energy for a unit that barely survives in the later game. As for ZvP, there's nothing to mention. The Infestor is the best unit in the game, and is a pivotal unit in all 3 matchups for Zerg. Something needs to be done about that unit. See the game 1 of MMA vs DRG in the IPL qualifier to see what I'm talking about. we already had a troll with the idea of a forge. you do know that 1/1/1 is quite flexible...thats good. if the terran sees that you are building cannons he will be intelligent and expand. Sooo... if he expands... then he's not all-ining anymore... and thus you've defended it? Well you are in a situation where he is up one base.. With 2 orbitals calling down mules. You are on one base with .. Cannons... On top of that, cannons doesnt help very much against seige tanks. If he sees your are cannoning he can just park right outside your base and inch forward with siegetanks.. The cannons will not help you when you decide to egage his army because he will be out of range for them. Thus cannon is even worse than observerver in the scernario where he still goes for the attack.. I never said, anywhere in my post, that the protoss should be working off 1 base. I even said "If you expand and take 1 gas..." Do people even read anymore? So what you are saying is that you are going to expand. Cannon main mineralline, cannon exp mineralline.. cannon base entrance. And expect to hold 1/1/1 with siege mode? Sorry, I missed that in your post. I just assumed you wouldnt do suggest something as stupid, as this. Also, with all that minerals invested in your static defense this early, he could probably just go for 3 bases if he wants.. (if he didnt go 1/1/1).. if he did 1 1 1 he can just straightup kill you. Grandmaster here btw. I'm saying the safest build against Terran, to which I experienced, was a 1 gate expand. From there, you have a few options. If you noticed the Terran has walled off and you can't see anything, then it would be wise to get a robo and observer to scout. While scouting, you should drop a forge regardless (upgrades). If you happen to see the 1/1/1 build while scouting with your obs, a few well positioned cannons in the front of your natural is something I feel Protoss needs to do more often, and don't really consider too much when defending the 1/1/1. Now you have an expansion, a 2nd and 3rd gate, and a robo. With cannons. And you're upgrading. I assumed that's what you all would think, when I say cannons to defend the 1/1/1. If I really have to go through step by step to explain why it would work, then we'll never get anywhere. Scouting and game sense is apart of the game. Why would I have to say "okay guys, scout. Now, use game sense." Seriously? Lol, do you know how much a cannon cost? They don't cost 50 energy. Also, a retarded Terran would seige up behind your wall of cannons, which equates to throwing away 300~600 minerals away. How would that help in stopping the 1/1/1? Okay, Mr. Lol, you do realize that most maps have elevated natural expansions. How do you presume our Mr. Terran will have vision for his siege tanks? With Banshees perhaps? Do you really think he wants to sacrifice a banshee just to have vision to take out a cannon or two? Also, now that you've expanded, you have the resources to build up a much bigger army while the Terran is delayed taking care of the cannons. It may even give you enough time to pop out a second immortal for those pesky bunkers. Give it a shot. I'm here to help, not make your life some ongoing debate about how it won't work.
I'd say you're an obvious troll who enjoys ridiculing players with terrible ideas. Cannons do not stop a 1-1-1, they are exceptionally bad against it.
Do you even have the game installed?
Its not even worth point out that a banshee for 2 cannons is a favorable trade for terran, except he doesnt have to trade anything because of scan.
|
Yea I agree. The future of P is with these guys/types of players. I was never a big fan of MC precisely why he's failing so hard now. He was winning with all-ins/all-inish play. I never understood why he got so much praise while players like Polt/Optimus got so much hate even when Polt evolved past it while MC never did.
|
On September 20 2011 23:39 oxxo wrote:
Yea I agree. The future of P is with these guys/types of players. I was never a big fan of MC precisely why he's failing so hard now. He was winning with all-ins/all-inish play. I never understood why he got so much praise while players like Polt/Optimus got so much hate even when Polt evolved past it while MC never did.
When's the last time you saw MC do an all in during GSL? During foreign tourneys he barely does either. It's ok if you just hate MC but you might want to make valid criticisms so you don't look like a complete jealous douche. Even during his GSL wins, he did all ins, yes. BUT HE DID MANY MACRO GAMES TOO. Also...the future of P is dead if it's with these players since they couldn't beat a good Korean Terran to save their life (hero jyp) and have 50 percentish and below winrates.
|
On September 20 2011 23:39 oxxo wrote:
Yea I agree. The future of P is with these guys/types of players. I was never a big fan of MC precisely why he's failing so hard now. He was winning with all-ins/all-inish play. I never understood why he got so much praise while players like Polt/Optimus got so much hate even when Polt evolved past it while MC never did.
MC only pulled out allins when opponents couldnt handle them. He still won plenty of macro games too.
|
Terran seems to be not broken but i would say a far more completed race than any other, if you saw the GSL code S today (20th September) with the really long game i forget who played, but Terran can seem to get to stages in the game which no other race can. Such as they may begin with mech or bio then slowly tip towards mech and end up going sky Terran!! I find TvT such an interesting match up where there is so much that can happen, eg. drops, siege lines, banshees, hellions, nukes, hunter seekers etc. But with other races more importantly with Protoss it literally NEVER gets to this stage in the game and this just shows that something isn't right with the race. I think its fair to say i have NEVER seen carriers used in any high level match up or have i encountered any out of the ordinary unit compositions. Just my thoughts on the matter 
|
The patch had some significant changes that could help protoss out in the PvT matchup.
1) Guardian shield will reduce siege tank dmg now
2) Immortal range has increased
3) Rax takes longer to build so timings will be slightly later.
I believe protoss do have a lot of room for innovation. You need to look at what protoss could potentially do/use but do not. Carriers, mothership, warp prisms, pheonix are all very much underused.
Although I despise the term 1-1-1 to refer to Terrans 1-base marine/tank/banshee/raven timing push, One thing the Terran does not have when they do this push is a viking a pheonix or two could lift up seige tanks and/or shoot down the raven and banshees. Increased range on immortals means tanks can die easier without putting the immortals in as much danger.
I understand that a mothership and carriers take a long time to build, but they are both amazing units. When is the last time a high level protoss actually spent a good amount of time experimenting with them? This is where innovation comes from.
|
I just hope blizzard will stop fucking around soon...
|
On September 21 2011 00:16 cyrex wrote:
The patch had some significant changes that could help protoss out in the PvT matchup.
1) Guardian shield will reduce siege tank dmg now
2) Immortal range has increased
3) Rax takes longer to build so timings will be slightly later.
These are not significant changes. They are minor changes that would be used to fix a very small balance tip. A significant balance change would be increasing stalker armor by one, zealot health by 10, and removing concussive grenades.
|
Squanzo, you are mind fucking everyone in this thread. I'm only mid masters but please tel me how your cannon strat works. You said cannons in ramp, how do you stop the bNshee from giving the this vision?? If you even manage to do thT, how would you break free from your base??
If I was terran I'd wish the p went for cannons, that is just me though
Stay golden my friend.
|
On September 20 2011 23:25 infinity2k9 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2011 22:40 necrimanci wrote:On September 20 2011 21:35 infinity2k9 wrote:On September 20 2011 21:13 necrimanci wrote:On September 20 2011 18:18 MrProb wrote:On September 20 2011 17:51 necrimanci wrote:
races are fine - maps are broken read something here and watch some games before post =) or you could assume that the game is fine but maps are broken. All we need are defensive maps that provide a vide variety of harassment options, so you cant just turtle mindlessly, no? Will force macro games, will force harass-based play, will force multitasking, will provide more safe openings, will make the game more enjoyable to watch and will stop the shitty stagnation based off 1a2a3a one army play also, riveting argument, o'bard - if only everyone were as witty as you and propose reading a forum full of imba-cryers and game spectating as a first step to posting What are you talking about? You don't want people to turtle.. but you want macro games. You want a 'defensive map' but you want to force multitasking and harassment. You're basically contradicting yourself, not to mention including things that are totally unrelated to the map like units all on 1 group. Explain a map design that somehow includes all of this with zero changes to the rest of the game. how am i contradicting myself? Turtling and then moving out to get your army smashed or smash opposing army so a GG can be called isnt a macro game - it's a 3, 4, 5 or 6 base all in. I want to see real macro games, and i want to watch games that give both players of any race as much opportunities to show off their skills as possible. If i wanted to watch players macro up an army and go trade it in the middle, treating it as another resource, i might as well go spectate simcity network give players a defensive map and they will turtle. Give players a defensive map that allows for some funky ledge drops, weird harassment routes and other attack paths and players will have to step up their harassment and multitasking while maintaining good macro. BW-style, multi-pronged action all over the map, 2/3 army battles + heavy harassment style 1a2a3a one army syndrome is mostly caused by the current mappool that allows or even favours this kind of play, and that is why i brought that up. Why take an exe or 2 if you can turtle up with 1 or 2 bases and then roll out with a well-spread death ball? Or counter-composition? What can your opponent do? Outexpand? If one scouts an expansion it's a good time to move out and blast it, no? Map architecture when it comes down to counterattacks also sucks in most cases, and it's very predictable which route opponent will choose in short, certain maps force certail playstyle/playstyles, and the crap we are seeing now is caused by that, so it's time to look for other maps, because patching game balance wont change anything any more doubts or missinterpretations of my opinion? please, do let me know I'm VERY familar with BW maps... the good well balanced BW maps do not work the same in SC2. The most popular/balanced maps are ones like Fighting Spirit/Circuit Breaker and 1. They still allow a Terran to turtle easily, 2. they don't have any special harassment options like high ground above natural, 3. there's barely any terrain variation in the middle.. it's almost totally flat. Your problems are with THE GAME ITSELF. All the things you are talking about is part of the SC2 design not strictly the maps - the game will never be like BW with any type of maps. Not to say that BW doesn't have variation in maps, but they are infact the imbalanced ones. However the difference being imbalance in BW was more easily overcome with skill. Some of the most interesting maps in recent years like Outsider were imbalanced but still produced very fun games. In contrast players getting rolled over in timing attacks is not very fun games to watch at all. Btw you're pretty hilarious with '3, 4, 5 or 6 base all in', if anyone was unaware that you're talking total bullshit then that line should show it. I suppose Flash plays all-in every game? I don't misinterpret your opinion it's just total bullshit, as i said show me a map design that promotes any of what you are saying.
1. i dont want BW-like maps, i know they're mostly flat. I said bw-like >> action << as in "multi-pronged war" all over the map, if you will, please
2. yes it will, if you encourage more harassing
3. the '3, 4, 5 or 6 base all in' thingy is how i feel about the game and my opinion on it, and i dont see how it is hilarious. Majority of games i witnessed can be described this way: duders get bases. Duders get army. Duders clash after 20-30 minutes, guy that loses the most leaves. No action in-between. No nothing. Just 1 battle. Basicly someone boxes his army, moves out, and 2 minutes later someone leaves the game. Works like an all-in, but dragged over 20+ minutes, so id rather watch someone simply 6 rax or cannon rush.
Sure, there are exceptions in how games look... mostly when someone is using harass based play, no?
Also, no reason in making this one ad hominem, because, as pointed, that is my opinion on how the game looks right now, and i know a lot of people that share this opinion - both newly introduced to starcraft as well as players i talked to during spectated events
4. no clue, im not a mapmaker. But i do think community did not give maps with ledges or a lot of chokes too many chances, dont you agree? Most people just call imba because of tanks
and yes, i do think you missinterpreted, because you did need an explanation, so you can call your 'bullshit'
|
On September 20 2011 12:31 Arisen wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2011 05:49 Destructicon wrote:
While I admire the original poster's attempt to inspire hope in the hearts of all the protoss players, the protoss community and all the protoss fans, I can't help but feel that these innovators, don't have anything to innovate upon and that our hopes will be dashed upon the rocks and will crumble to pieces.
I am going to try and say this cleanly and efficiently.
The problem with protoss is not the lack of innovation, it is the lack of strength and the multitude of weaknesses that can be exploited.
This problem is most evident in the TvP match up and is grotesquely blown out of proportion by the 1/1/1 style of opening and variations.
Problem number 1 (P1). The protoss tier 1 and 1.5 is week against a basic tier 1.5 terran army without the use of specialist units (sentries, HT), or higher tech (colossis, HT). Marines do phenomenal DPS and in combination with Marauders are deadly because marauders can just kite zealots forever even with charge, and marauders also rip apart stalkers. This leads to problem number 2.
P2.Protoss specialist units are too easy to be countered and too expensive. Ghosts can EMP from a bigger range then a HT can feedback, EMP can potentially neutralize many HT and sentries while HT can only feedback 1 unit at a time. EMP also destroyes shields which in some cases means 50% of a protoss effective health. Ghosts contribute with real DPS even after their energy is spent, and they also do double damage against light (zealots). Ghosts with cloak can survive for a good time as well, which also puts into grave perspective problem number 3.
P3. Protoss don't have enough mobile detection, terran and zerg both have at least one more means of detection then a unit. Zerg has Overseers and Fungal growth, terran has EMP, Raven and scan. Not only do the terrans and zerg have more methods of detection, but their detector units also fulfill different roles and are stronger. The overseer can help with scouting via changeling and can also delay a critical tech or reinforcements with contaminate. Raven's provide invaluable support via point defense drone, and also have the potential to do massive damage with hunter seeker missile or harass a mineral line with auto-turrets. Lastly the detection of terran and protoss is more easily available, scans and EMPs are easy to get or already part of the terran arsenal, overseers are unlocked just by teching up to lair, and infestors are now part of many lineups.
Now, if you add up all the problems you get the following scenario.
Against a terran 1/1/1 a protoss is forced to get a robo so he can have detection. Because of the lack of other detection methods the protoss becomes predictable, if he doesn't get a robotics for observers he risks dying to cloaked banshees. Also observers are easy to snipe, they have the lowest HP of any detector, and once a scan goes of they are dead. Now because protoss was forced to get robo they now have to add immortals to the army, and while great against tanks, the backbone of a 1/1/1 is the marine, and mass marines rip apart immortals, and once immortals are dead, the T1 protoss army crumbles.
Normally in balance of RTS games, if units are very cheep they should be a lot weaker (zerg), if units are more expensive they should be stronger (protoss), however, protoss T1 units are really not that good for the amount they cost, zealots and stalkers are way too weak without sentries, and against a 1/1/1 sentries don't help all that much because tanks have huge range, do massive damage, and there are also banshees that can mess them over.
This problem is put into sharp focus in games where, you see a terran not expand, you see the protoss fast expand at min 4, and at 12 minutes into the game the terran has a bigger supply army then the protoss. Its a problem in game balance that a 1 base player could have equal or more supply then a player on 2 bases for 66% of the game. What is even more wrong is that the 1 base player's army is so strong that it can annihilate the 2 base player's army.
Now, if we look away from the 1/1/1 and focus on the meta game, in a late game scenario the protoss doesn't stand much chance. A terran bio ball is cheaper to replenish, is more durable because of medivacs, and it does more DPS then the standard tier 1.5 of protoss. Protoss needs sentries and HT or colossis, however, sentries and HT are easily countered by ghosts, colossis are easily countered by vikings. In a head to head fight, the terran just needs to have the patience to emp the specialists, snipe the colossis with vikings, then the bio ball an just do the rest. Also warp prism micro with HT isn't so hot because they can be sniped by vikings, just the same way colossis are sniped. To rub salt onto the wounds, EMP also directly reduce survivability of protoss units by destroying shields.
Now I ask, where can you innovate in there?
Protoss are already using 99% of their units, they use zealots, stalkers, sentries, HT, colossus, observer and warp prism. Protoss air force is weak, they Phoenix and Void rays are already easily countered by units the terran already gets, marines, vikings and ghosts. Carriers cost too much, take too much time to build and require too big numbers to be effective. Carriers in small number are easily sniped by vikings. Mothership is even worst because it can be EMPed from farther away then it can vortex, once EMPed it becomes a big meat shield waiting to die horribly to vikings and marines.
How can you innovate against a 1/1/1, when from the get go, you need to get a robo for detection? Also how can you innovate a build against the 1/1/1 when you risk creating a build that can completely counter the 1/1/1 but fail miserably to form of early pressure?
And, keep in mind that, terrans still haven't widely adopted the use of ravens and/or mass ravens. With patch 1.4 that might change because, seeker missiles will be able to outrun zealots even with charge, and stalkers and sentries and probles, and ravens also hard counter stalkers by reducing their DPS to 0 via PDD.
Against zerg the problems aren't quite as bad, but they aren't great either. The timings of 4 gates and 6 gates has been figured out. Protoss can't do 4 gate because it won't work, the zerg can prepare an appropriate defense while still having a 1 base advantage. If protoss chooses to fast expand into a 6 gate, the zerg can just take a quick 3rd, and can have defenses out in time for any form of protoss preasure. Air play can be easily countered by the proper and strategic placement of spore crawlers and building of extra queens (which zerg have already started doing). And if the protoss decides to not go air and go a 6 gate or robo+ a number of gates, then the zerg can still have an big enough army in time to defend against it, and still retain a 1 base advantage.
The recent game of Check.Prime vs Tails from IGN qualifiers is a good example of zerg being able to take a fast 3rd and come out ahead of a protoss FE. As for late game, infestors are a big double risk problem. Not only can they fungal the entire protoss army, but they can neural colossis, and/or archons. Fungal does respectable DPS, but more critically it leaves the protoss open to brood lords and baneling drops, both of which can do massive damage.
Again, carriers and motherships won't help, they still take too long to build, cost too much, are too vulnerable to corrupters, and worst, are vulnerable to neurals.
The only conclusion I can draw is that, protoss doesn't have anything to innovate upon, they are already using all their tools, and now that terran and zerg have started to fully use their tools the cracks are starting to show. I really wish I was wrong here but, it trully feels like it will take either a very big patch (1.4 won't cut it), or the expansion to fix the current protoss problems.
And while all this situation might really suck and demoralize a lot of players, lets have faith and remember that SC2 is only 1 year old, hopefully we will be looking back at this period in time and remember it was the darkness before the dusk, the calm before the storm. Change will come, even if Blizzard has to act. Maybe what you're saying about terran is indeed true, but I don't understand the sentiments on PvZ. There still comes a point where you can't kill a protoss army (imo). Maybe 6 gating and 4 gating aren't as viable as they once were, but you don't need them. Yes, zerg winrates are a lot better lately, but all those wins are coming from huge victories in the midgame. If protoss takes a third at a good time (not super greedy), they're in great shape. Lategame when you are responsible about feedbacks and focus infestors down, zergs still has still not found a way to kill a fully developed protoss army that is well controlled that I've seen. Also, I don't know why so many people refuse to use motherships. I watch kiwi and rsvp roll kids all the time with mothership. Vortex leaves you safe versus both corruptors and infestor NP (I've never seen NP actually work versus the mothership when the protoss knew how to use his mothership well(
there is no good time to take a third as protoss. you either take a super greedy one and hope to god you arent attacked, or you will be constantly pressured and denied your third base.
and if you are lucky enough to take a third, it will be when your opponent is on, or taking their fourth or fifth base
|
I will use this topic for my theses about protoss players:
General development of protoss gameplay
Protoss players are struggling hard nowadays and while there are probably balance issues involved, there is another big factor for me: protoss gameplay did not evolve a lot!
For a long time protoss kept winning just by 4gating
For a long time protoss kept winning just by waiting for the deathball in PvZ
For a long time protoss kept winning just by warping in templars with 75 energy in PvT
Now it's not possible anymore and protoss have to develop their gameplay... they kept using the same BO over and over and won a lot of games and that is why their skill level got kinda stuck on some level....
just have a look at zerg when they struggled in ZvP: they did a LOT of new stuff, developed new strategies and refined their builds ... that is what protoss has to do now
Silly mistakes
protoss in GSL make SO many mistakes, it is painful to watch... i refuse to admit balance reasons when they just throw away so many units and battles... just watch genius/hongun last season or naniwa donating colossus, MC donating units after units, BAD engagements and tassadar ... OMG
Protoss progamers are just not as good as the others ..they need to stay more focused
Ling runbys are another topic: protoss players kept losing to ling runbys.. try that on EU master level, protoss players have better walls and actually warp in units to close the gaps to prevent lings from running by... unbelievable but true
PvZ
It is always like this: protoss goes ffe, does some silly 2gate attack ......and that's it
no game plans, just 2 base allins all the time
are they so afraid of playing macro games?!
evrytime i see huk playing a lategame pvz, it shows that protoss is REALLY strong in the lategame
|
On September 21 2011 01:00 necrimanci wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2011 23:25 infinity2k9 wrote:On September 20 2011 22:40 necrimanci wrote:On September 20 2011 21:35 infinity2k9 wrote:On September 20 2011 21:13 necrimanci wrote:On September 20 2011 18:18 MrProb wrote:On September 20 2011 17:51 necrimanci wrote:
races are fine - maps are broken read something here and watch some games before post =) or you could assume that the game is fine but maps are broken. All we need are defensive maps that provide a vide variety of harassment options, so you cant just turtle mindlessly, no? Will force macro games, will force harass-based play, will force multitasking, will provide more safe openings, will make the game more enjoyable to watch and will stop the shitty stagnation based off 1a2a3a one army play also, riveting argument, o'bard - if only everyone were as witty as you and propose reading a forum full of imba-cryers and game spectating as a first step to posting What are you talking about? You don't want people to turtle.. but you want macro games. You want a 'defensive map' but you want to force multitasking and harassment. You're basically contradicting yourself, not to mention including things that are totally unrelated to the map like units all on 1 group. Explain a map design that somehow includes all of this with zero changes to the rest of the game. how am i contradicting myself? Turtling and then moving out to get your army smashed or smash opposing army so a GG can be called isnt a macro game - it's a 3, 4, 5 or 6 base all in. I want to see real macro games, and i want to watch games that give both players of any race as much opportunities to show off their skills as possible. If i wanted to watch players macro up an army and go trade it in the middle, treating it as another resource, i might as well go spectate simcity network give players a defensive map and they will turtle. Give players a defensive map that allows for some funky ledge drops, weird harassment routes and other attack paths and players will have to step up their harassment and multitasking while maintaining good macro. BW-style, multi-pronged action all over the map, 2/3 army battles + heavy harassment style 1a2a3a one army syndrome is mostly caused by the current mappool that allows or even favours this kind of play, and that is why i brought that up. Why take an exe or 2 if you can turtle up with 1 or 2 bases and then roll out with a well-spread death ball? Or counter-composition? What can your opponent do? Outexpand? If one scouts an expansion it's a good time to move out and blast it, no? Map architecture when it comes down to counterattacks also sucks in most cases, and it's very predictable which route opponent will choose in short, certain maps force certail playstyle/playstyles, and the crap we are seeing now is caused by that, so it's time to look for other maps, because patching game balance wont change anything any more doubts or missinterpretations of my opinion? please, do let me know I'm VERY familar with BW maps... the good well balanced BW maps do not work the same in SC2. The most popular/balanced maps are ones like Fighting Spirit/Circuit Breaker and 1. They still allow a Terran to turtle easily, 2. they don't have any special harassment options like high ground above natural, 3. there's barely any terrain variation in the middle.. it's almost totally flat. Your problems are with THE GAME ITSELF. All the things you are talking about is part of the SC2 design not strictly the maps - the game will never be like BW with any type of maps. Not to say that BW doesn't have variation in maps, but they are infact the imbalanced ones. However the difference being imbalance in BW was more easily overcome with skill. Some of the most interesting maps in recent years like Outsider were imbalanced but still produced very fun games. In contrast players getting rolled over in timing attacks is not very fun games to watch at all. Btw you're pretty hilarious with '3, 4, 5 or 6 base all in', if anyone was unaware that you're talking total bullshit then that line should show it. I suppose Flash plays all-in every game? I don't misinterpret your opinion it's just total bullshit, as i said show me a map design that promotes any of what you are saying. 1. i dont want BW-like maps, i know they're mostly flat. I said bw-like >> action << as in "multi-pronged war" all over the map, if you will, please 2. yes it will, if you encourage more harassing 3. the '3, 4, 5 or 6 base all in' thingy is how i feel about the game and my opinion on it, and i dont see how it is hilarious. Majority of games i witnessed can be described this way: duders get bases. Duders get army. Duders clash after 20-30 minutes, guy that loses the most leaves. No action in-between. No nothing. Just 1 battle. Basicly someone boxes his army, moves out, and 2 minutes later someone leaves the game. Works like an all-in, but dragged over 20+ minutes, so id rather watch someone simply 6 rax or cannon rush. Sure, there are exceptions in how games look... mostly when someone is using harass based play, no? Also, no reason in making this one ad hominem, because, as pointed, that is my opinion on how the game looks right now, and i know a lot of people that share this opinion - both newly introduced to starcraft as well as players i talked to during spectated events 4. no clue, im not a mapmaker. But i do think community did not give maps with ledges or a lot of chokes too many chances, dont you agree? Most people just call imba because of tanks and yes, i do think you missinterpreted, because you did need an explanation, so you can call your 'bullshit'
It would be imbalanced because of tanks and other units, it's not just an assumption it would be.. the discussion is Protoss being potentially underpowered and your idea is to create maps with more chokes and ledges? I'm not going to respond to any of your stupid post because its fundamentally flawed.
|
On September 21 2011 01:20 MapleLeafSirup wrote:
I will use this topic for my theses about protoss players:
General development of protoss gameplay
Protoss players are struggling hard nowadays and while there are probably balance issues involved, there is another big factor for me: protoss gameplay did not evolve a lot!
For a long time protoss kept winning just by 4gating
For a long time protoss kept winning just by waiting for the deathball in PvZ
For a long time protoss kept winning just by warping in templars with 75 energy in PvT
Now it's not possible anymore and protoss have to develop their gameplay... they kept using the same BO over and over and won a lot of games and that is why their skill level got kinda stuck on some level....
just have a look at zerg when they struggled in ZvP: they did a LOT of new stuff, developed new strategies and refined their builds ... that is what protoss has to do now
Silly mistakes
protoss in GSL make SO many mistakes, it is painful to watch... i refuse to admit balance reasons when they just throw away so many units and battles... just watch genius/hongun last season or naniwa donating colossus, MC donating units after units, BAD engagements and tassadar ... OMG
Protoss progamers are just not as good as the others ..they need to stay more focused
Ling runbys are another topic: protoss players kept losing to ling runbys.. try that on EU master level, protoss players have better walls and actually warp in units to close the gaps to prevent lings from running by... unbelievable but true
PvZ
It is always like this: protoss goes ffe, does some silly 2gate attack ......and that's it
no game plans, just 2 base allins all the time
are they so afraid of playing macro games?!
evrytime i see huk playing a lategame pvz, it shows that protoss is REALLY strong in the lategame
Zerg was buffed and Protoss was nerfed thru patches too, dont forget that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
