|
On September 20 2011 23:05 squanzo wrote:Show nested quote +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?
Just for the record, if you build your Robo after the Nexus, and scout with your first observer, then you die to cloaked Banshees. The Banshee arrives in your base as your observer is halfway across the map in most cases.
But being a Diamond Protoss, I'm sure you'd know such a popular and consistent timing, wouldn't you?
|
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
So you found out not only that protoss players are bad in general but even that protoss opponents you face on EU ladder do better than top koreans.
Nice investigation
|
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
No one cares about your condescending diamond level theorycraft on what Pro players should do. Seriously this post is just offensively bad and you basically imply pro protoss players just sit around jerking off all day and not trying to come up with something new. MC has innovated with his stargate play, phoenix chargelot, etc. What else is there? There aren't any more pro terrans or zergs so why according to you is there no one coming up with better builds? Maybe because there aren't any.
Yes zerg struggled and they GOT BUFFED WHILE TOSS GOT NERFED. NICE INNOVATION THERE. Why don't we revert these patches because after all the genius and talented progamer zergs and their innovative awesomeness will be fine I'm sure. The argument that terran and zerg progamers at the highest level are simply more talented than protoss players, in such great quantity is absolute bullshit and makes no sense.
|
On September 21 2011 01:53 infinity2k9 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 01:00 necrimanci wrote: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.
as seen by top protoss players, mostly korean, slowing down the terran push seems to be the 'go-to' thingy as far as a form of 1-1-1 is concerned, agree?
therefore - if we dont want to revamp early game for a whole race - a map that is more defensive is needed, so that terran can be slowed down with his pulled scvs mid-field, so that the protoss can muster up a bigger force to deal with the push, agree?
this can be achieved by pumpin out more chokes, walls, ledges all over the map, but it should come at a price - bases easier to harass, because defensive map would encourage more turtling, and we dont want turtling, agree?
now explain how is this reasoning fundamentally flawed. Also note ledges dont only make tanks good, they also make air units good, cause they block ground movement, which then makes it harder to counter air untis with ground units... which MAYBE even opens up air play for protoss late game? I dont know, do you? Dont you want to test it?
and please, bring something constructive to your posts, your opinion or an argument. It's a forum, no? Based on what i typed at the beginning of this reply i made a short statement regarding maps being imbalanced. Then i had to explain it. Then i had to explain a bw point i made that isnt related to this, but was related to how i perceive the game. Then i got ridiculed and had to explain again. And now you reply again, with yet another non-constructive post, trying to shut down my argument... I would really like to know your opinion and argumetns, becasue you seem to disagree that tinkering with maps would be a worthwhile thing or you think that it is pointless... and yet only other option is through changing and rebalancing early game for a whole race, or changing how other race(s? i think Z is fine, tho) functions, while we still have 2 expansions packs ahead of us
tho, i must compliment you for not pulling the 'what leage are you in?' and 'how old are you?' cards
but i'll pull out a card you just played: it's pointless to discuss anything with a guy that doesnt use any arguments, so im not going to respond to any of your stupid posts
feels good, man!
|
United States7483 Posts
On September 21 2011 01:55 Toadvine 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? Just for the record, if you build your Robo after the Nexus, and scout with your first observer, then you die to cloaked Banshees. The Banshee arrives in your base as your observer is halfway across the map in most cases. But being a Diamond Protoss, I'm sure you'd know such a popular and consistent timing, wouldn't you?
Not to mention that cannons at the front of your base are worse than useless against tanks with siege mode. Not only do they do nothing, but they take up a lot of money that could have gone towards more zealots, which are very good to have a lot of against a 1/1/1.
|
On September 21 2011 01:55 Toadvine 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? Just for the record, if you build your Robo after the Nexus, and scout with your first observer, then you die to cloaked Banshees. The Banshee arrives in your base as your observer is halfway across the map in most cases. But being a Diamond Protoss, I'm sure you'd know such a popular and consistent timing, wouldn't you?
I'm not a Protoss (you don't read, do you). But I'll entertain you.
The banshee arrives, but cloak is not finished. You can fend it off. Meanwhile, make another observer, it's only 25/75. You may have to pull probes for a second or two for it to finish. Meanwhile, you're up a base and the Terran is either going 1/1/1 or expanding.
But continue your elitist condescending tone as you reply.
|
On September 21 2011 02:36 squanzo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 01:55 Toadvine 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? Just for the record, if you build your Robo after the Nexus, and scout with your first observer, then you die to cloaked Banshees. The Banshee arrives in your base as your observer is halfway across the map in most cases. But being a Diamond Protoss, I'm sure you'd know such a popular and consistent timing, wouldn't you? I'm not a Protoss (you don't read, do you). But I'll entertain you. The banshee arrives, but cloak is not finished. You can fend it off. Meanwhile, make another observer, it's only 25/75. You may have to pull probes for a second or two for it to finish. Meanwhile, you're up a base and the Terran is either going 1/1/1 or expanding. But continue your elitist condescending tone as you reply.
Your trolling is uncalled for here. Try posting your cannon build in the strategy forum, people there will actually enjoy it, some way or another.
|
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.
I'm not convinced that protoss is underpowered, or that there is no more room for innovation. Most protoss players still rely on large deathball armies or strong warpgate based timing attacks. The carrier and mothership are still relatively un-explored, as is warpprism harassment. You can't claim that all of the possible options for all protoss units have been explored, the game is way to complex for that.
Zerg for instance has been using all of its units since beta, the main things that have changed are how those units are used with other units, such as baneling bombs, infestor Broodlord, etc.. The units themselves haven't changed much, but rather how they were used.
You claim that protoss t1-1.5 units are not cost efficient compared with their terran and zerg equivalents. I'll support that claim, but argue for a reasoning behind this discrepancy. The t1-1.5 discrepancy stems from the terrible design feature that is warpgates. The ability to have your production center anywhere you have a pylon is arguably the most powerful mechanic in the game. You also have to consider the fact that the front loaded nature of warpgate production means that there is only a 5 second turn around time on resource return. The short turn around time on investment means that you can have units when and where you need them, and if you get supply blocked you will have those units 5 seconds after your pylons finish. These features make warpgates incredibly forgiving, and incredibly easy to use.
However, in order to balance the power of the production mechanic, gateway units had to be toned down. Imagine if terran could produce marines and marauders anywhere on the map, it would be completely broken. Well so would gateway units that are as cost efficient as z/t tier 1-1.5. Gateway units cannot be buffed until some other downside to warpgates is added. Ideally something that increases the skill ceiling for protoss.
|
On September 21 2011 02:50 Klystron wrote:Show nested quote +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. I'm not convinced that protoss is underpowered, or that there is no more room for innovation. Most protoss players still rely on large deathball armies or strong warpgate based timing attacks. The carrier and mothership are still relatively un-explored, as is warpprism harassment. You can't claim that all of the possible options for all protoss units have been explored, the game is way to complex for that.Zerg for instance has been using all of its units since beta, the main things that have changed are how those units are used with other units, such as baneling bombs, infestor Broodlord, etc.. The units themselves haven't changed much, but rather how they were used. You claim that protoss t1-1.5 units are not cost efficient compared with their terran and zerg equivalents. I'll support that claim, but argue for a reasoning behind this discrepancy. The t1-1.5 discrepancy stems from the terrible design feature that is warpgates. The ability to have your production center anywhere you have a pylon is arguably the most powerful mechanic in the game. You also have to consider the fact that the front loaded nature of warpgate production means that there is only a 5 second turn around time on resource return. The short turn around time on investment means that you can have units when and where you need them, and if you get supply blocked you will have those units 5 seconds after your pylons finish. These features make warpgates incredibly forgiving, and incredibly easy to use. However, in order to balance the power of the production mechanic, gateway units had to be toned down. Imagine if terran could produce marines and marauders anywhere on the map, it would be completely broken. Well so would gateway units that are as cost efficient as z/t tier 1-1.5. Gateway units cannot be buffed until some other downside to warpgates is added. Ideally something that increases the skill ceiling for protoss. STOP TELLING TOSS PLAYERS TO USE MOTHERSHIPS AND CARRIERS!!! Seriously. Even Blizzard admits some units (mothership and carrier) aren't useful/intended in high level play and they don't care. The one use mothership had got nerfed(archon toilet) because blizzard wants it to be a useless piece of shit.
As for the bolded part, by that logic, we should never have any patches at all because the race can always do SOMETHING different.
|
I've just finished reading the whole post for the second time and I have to say, amazing job! Please, please, please keep doing nice articles like this! I love them! <3
|
4713 Posts
I wish people would stop saying "Protoss players need to innovate", you don't realize how insulting it probably is to them, who train for 8+ hours per day to develop strategies and counters. Do you people really thing that, if there was a innovation left to do, it wouldn't have been done already?
Against a 1/1/1 phoenix won't help, they will be sniped by marines, a standard unit in the terran army, the phoenix won't even be able to take out a raven, the terran will mass repair with SCVs, and when the battle finally comes they put down a PDD or a Auto-turret and the protoss army is botched. The changes to guardian shield won't help the tanks still deal a horrific 50 damage versus armored, guardian will reduce it to 48, big deal, 1 extra immortal range won't help, they will still be focused and destroyed before they can reach the tank line.
And please stop mentioning Carriers and Motherships. Have you even thought out how bad they really are? Carriers cost a ton to build, take a eternity to field and are ridiculously easy to counter. Carriers are countered by the exact same unit that terrans make to counter colossus, and they always have plenty of them and, Vikings can be produced four times faster then carriers can be made.
The entire point of Mothership is to vortex, 2 EMPs render the Mothership totally worthless, it just becomes another huge meat shield that the Vikings will destroy with ease, EMPs can be cast from a huge range way higher then a MS can vortex. Also cloak is useless, the terran will surely have detection by this point, and you can't mass recall since you don't have any energy.
Also, I urge you to re-think the suggestion of "make maps custom tailored to be anti 1/1/1. If you haven't figured out yet I'll tell you now, the more chokes, ramps, etc a map has, the better it is for terran they can place tanks in strategic places and they are even harder to reach or to flank. You are also mistake in the assessment that, more chokes, ramps and high ground will slow down a terran 1/1/1, it won't they will have banshees and ravens to spot for the tanks, they will inch forward and still kill you.
Lastly, and why this really won't work. Tournaments are made many different and diversified maps in mind. They have both small maps and big maps, both short rush distance maps and macro style maps. You can't simply suggest that we remove all the maps in the tournament pool or re-work them, just so Protoss and Protoss only can have a chance against a 1/1/1, it is unrealistic. Lets just move to the root of the problem and fix protoss where it needs fixing. A couple of the previous nerfs that protoss have gotten should be reverted, and some more buffs are also in order.
Edit: Lastly, the reason why the protoss relies on big death ball armies on 200/200 supply is because, it is the only perceived way to compete. They really on this tactic because they can't innovate and/or explore.
Protoss can't get a combo of gateway, robo and stargate, because it is too gas expensive. Sentries cost 100 gas and you need 8 to 10, HT cost 150 gas and you need 4-8, stalkers cost 50 G and you need a couple to snipe drops, fight vikings and marauders. You harvest about 220 G per base, so it takes 3 working bases just to gather that much. If you want even more units, like phoenix, void rays and immortals, you need even more bases mining G, because Immortals, Void Rays and Phoenix cost 100 G each. Protoss armies aren't limited by lack of imagination or foresight they are limited by cost, they are way too damn gas expensive for it too work, they cost so much you can't experiment or innovate.
|
I think Protoss players are farthest ahead of any race in terms of exploring their tech trees. Carriers and motherships were tried extensively, many months ago.
I'm not claiming that Protoss players are smarter, but that they had to explore earlier because of the race design. There is no "go to" Protoss unit like MM or lings/roaches. If you make zealots and no stalkers, you die. If you make only stalkers, you die in the early game. If you make zealots and stalkers, but no sentries, you will die against early pushes (lings get in your mineral line or MM gets up your ramp).
There was a phase where carrier rush was being tried by many pros, but it simply did not pan out. The same goes for motherships.
I'm also not convinced that Warp Prisms will solve anything. It's definitely an improvement, but it will not shift the metagame, because it does not address Protoss' core design issues. There's still nothing cost efficient to drop in an enemy's base, and putting your HTs into a warp prism doesn't address the fact that ghost is just a better unit. It already requires more micro to use HTs when ghosts are on the field. Adding warp prisms to the equation is not helping the simple fact that ghosts are better statistically.
edit: Another insulting comment that comes up frequently is "Carriers have the highest DPS in the game."
They do 26 dps. A carrier with +3 air attack does less dps than a +0 thor. For every +1 armor the opponent has, the carrier loses 14 dps right away. This is disregarding the insane cost, and the fact that interceptors die very quickly in sc2 (unlike sc1, they do not recover HP).
In addition to it being a poor unit, it takes forever to come out, let alone a decent amount of them. And it also requires an upgrade + building interceptors.
In almost any situation where you made a carrier, even if you won the game - you would have been better served spending those resources on something else.
It's one of the worst units in the game, considering how you have to bend over backwards to get it, and once you do, it's subpar.
|
4713 Posts
It pains me to have to constantly say and remind people how bad Carriers are, I quite like them but it is just too prohibitive to make them and the return is not great enough.
I really wish they would re-work carriers in a way so they are usable, nerf them a bit but at the same time reduce their cost, build time and give them something else unique so that people love making them, or do something so they are more cost effective or less easy to counter.
Its the same problem as with Battlecruiser, while an awesome unit with great DPS and a powerful single target ability, the BC is too expensive, takes too much time to build and is too easy to counter, again I'd prefer they get a nerf that results in build times and costs going down.
|
On September 21 2011 03:21 Destructicon wrote: It pains me to have to constantly say and remind people how bad Carriers are, I quite like them but it is just too prohibitive to make them and the return is not great enough.
I really wish they would re-work carriers in a way so they are usable, nerf them a bit but at the same time reduce their cost, build time and give them something else unique so that people love making them, or do something so they are more cost effective or less easy to counter.
Its the same problem as with Battlecruiser, while an awesome unit with great DPS and a powerful single target ability, the BC is too expensive, takes too much time to build and is too easy to counter, again I'd prefer they get a nerf that results in build times and costs going down.
i love making carriers and i think their design is fine. t he problem is that you are not able to use them in pvt because vikings may already be on the field. if they are not the terran usually has 1 starport with reactor.
|
On September 21 2011 03:21 Destructicon wrote: It pains me to have to constantly say and remind people how bad Carriers are, I quite like them but it is just too prohibitive to make them and the return is not great enough.
I really wish they would re-work carriers in a way so they are usable, nerf them a bit but at the same time reduce their cost, build time and give them something else unique so that people love making them, or do something so they are more cost effective or less easy to counter.
Its the same problem as with Battlecruiser, while an awesome unit with great DPS and a powerful single target ability, the BC is too expensive, takes too much time to build and is too easy to counter, again I'd prefer they get a nerf that results in build times and costs going down.
Their dps isn't even great for cost (read my post above please) so you can't nerf carriers even a bit and have them be viable. There's no area you could nerf, since dps is already low and interceptors die fast.
|
On September 20 2011 22:04 Zeon0 wrote:gsl spoiler: + Show Spoiler +please, please, please do never mention Puzzle in this thread anymore. Walling in you own Immortal, wasting 5 forcefields for nothing, forgeting a pylong at 26 supply and 4gating is just so bad, I cant find proper words for it^^
gsl spolier : + Show Spoiler +Actually I'm gonna mention it because in his game versus bomber his only errors were to block an Immortal (ok that cost him 100 mineral but that didn't changed anthing else in this game) and waste some forcefields (before going back home and get 200 energy fast). While it mabe had shocked you, thoses errors were like nothing (terran players makes errors too, it's just that they can get away with it). I was more imprssed by puzzle than by bomber in this game, puzzle had some good micro and even stomp the 2 prong attack from bomber (one in the back, and some marauders stimming in the natural).
The outcome of the game just came from the fact that bomber faked a 1-1-1 and let Puzzle make a safe buld while he was doing a greedy one, allowing him to have more supply the whole game. By the way I didn't watched it in detail but I have the impression that bomber's build was designed so he can scout the protoss before deciding wether make a 1-1-1 or an expand (well in this case he made an expand blindly, but his svc could have been in puzzle base at his time). This build won him the game, what happend later was just bomber playing safe and not allowing puzzle to get back in the game
|
On September 21 2011 03:05 Destructicon wrote: I wish people would stop saying "Protoss players need to innovate", you don't realize how insulting it probably is to them, who train for 8+ hours per day to develop strategies and counters. Do you people really thing that, if there was a innovation left to do, it wouldn't have been done already?
Against a 1/1/1 phoenix won't help, they will be sniped by marines, a standard unit in the terran army, the phoenix won't even be able to take out a raven, the terran will mass repair with SCVs, and when the battle finally comes they put down a PDD or a Auto-turret and the protoss army is botched. The changes to guardian shield won't help the tanks still deal a horrific 50 damage versus armored, guardian will reduce it to 48, big deal, 1 extra immortal range won't help, they will still be focused and destroyed before they can reach the tank line.
And please stop mentioning Carriers and Motherships. Have you even thought out how bad they really are? Carriers cost a ton to build, take a eternity to field and are ridiculously easy to counter. Carriers are countered by the exact same unit that terrans make to counter colossus, and they always have plenty of them and, Vikings can be produced four times faster then carriers can be made.
The entire point of Mothership is to vortex, 2 EMPs render the Mothership totally worthless, it just becomes another huge meat shield that the Vikings will destroy with ease, EMPs can be cast from a huge range way higher then a MS can vortex. Also cloak is useless, the terran will surely have detection by this point, and you can't mass recall since you don't have any energy.
Also, I urge you to re-think the suggestion of "make maps custom tailored to be anti 1/1/1. If you haven't figured out yet I'll tell you now, the more chokes, ramps, etc a map has, the better it is for terran they can place tanks in strategic places and they are even harder to reach or to flank. You are also mistake in the assessment that, more chokes, ramps and high ground will slow down a terran 1/1/1, it won't they will have banshees and ravens to spot for the tanks, they will inch forward and still kill you.
Lastly, and why this really won't work. Tournaments are made many different and diversified maps in mind. They have both small maps and big maps, both short rush distance maps and macro style maps. You can't simply suggest that we remove all the maps in the tournament pool or re-work them, just so Protoss and Protoss only can have a chance against a 1/1/1, it is unrealistic. Lets just move to the root of the problem and fix protoss where it needs fixing. A couple of the previous nerfs that protoss have gotten should be reverted, and some more buffs are also in order.
If the problem is a specific build, ie 1/1/1, and no one can find an answer to that specific build, then there is likely something that needs patched. But, saying that protoss no longer can innovate whatsoever and that all protoss problems need to be patched is just balance wine.
Edit: Lastly, the reason why the protoss relies on big death ball armies on 200/200 supply is because, it is the only perceived way to compete. They really on this tactic because they can't innovate and/or explore.
No, protoss relied on the 200/200 supply deathball because it was relatively easy to execute yet very strong. Taking 2-3 bases and turtling to 200/200 then walking across the map isn't very hard compared to coordinating multi-pronged drops or managing 5-6 bases. There was even a state of the game where Incontrol said that he hoped that blizzard would nerf the deathball because it was to borning and easy to execute. Trying to say that the deathball is the pinnacle of protoss innovation is really down playing the people who play the race.
|
On September 21 2011 02:36 squanzo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2011 01:55 Toadvine 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? Just for the record, if you build your Robo after the Nexus, and scout with your first observer, then you die to cloaked Banshees. The Banshee arrives in your base as your observer is halfway across the map in most cases. But being a Diamond Protoss, I'm sure you'd know such a popular and consistent timing, wouldn't you? I'm not a Protoss (you don't read, do you). But I'll entertain you. The banshee arrives, but cloak is not finished. You can fend it off. Meanwhile, make another observer, it's only 25/75. You may have to pull probes for a second or two for it to finish. Meanwhile, you're up a base and the Terran is either going 1/1/1 or expanding. But continue your elitist condescending tone as you reply.
Well, you described yourself as an alternating Terran/Zerg player at a high diamond/low masters level, and said you rarely play Protoss. But you also referred to yourself defending 1/1/1 with cannons, so I assumed that was also at least somewhere in Diamond. Because otherwise, you know, your experience defending it is completely worthless. Sorry for making this assumption, if that's the case.
In any case, the standard after a relatively late Robo is making at least 2 observers, and 3 is what I would call safe. If you're going to make that many, why exactly would you need cannons? You started off this whole discussion by claiming that Protoss can rely on them for detection, but now it's suddenly 3 observers, forge, upgrades AND cannons?
Frankly, what you interpreted as condescension was me trying to just dismiss your idea by implying that you're terrible and have no idea what you're talking about. It's faster than demonstrating how you're wrong about pretty much everything. Like, the first sentence describing your awesome build claims that 1 Gate FE is safe, which it blatantly isn't.
On September 21 2011 03:28 kubiks wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2011 22:04 Zeon0 wrote:gsl spoiler: + Show Spoiler +please, please, please do never mention Puzzle in this thread anymore. Walling in you own Immortal, wasting 5 forcefields for nothing, forgeting a pylong at 26 supply and 4gating is just so bad, I cant find proper words for it^^ gsl spolier : + Show Spoiler +Actually I'm gonna mention it because in his game versus bomber his only errors were to block an Immortal (ok that cost him 100 mineral but that didn't changed anthing else in this game) and waste some forcefields (before going back home and get 200 energy fast). While it mabe had shocked you, thoses errors were like nothing (terran players makes errors too, it's just that they can get away with it). I was more imprssed by puzzle than by bomber in this game, puzzle had some good micro and even stomp the 2 prong attack from bomber (one in the back, and some marauders stimming in the natural).
The outcome of the game just came from the fact that bomber faked a 1-1-1 and let Puzzle make a safe buld while he was doing a greedy one, allowing him to have more supply the whole game. By the way I didn't watched it in detail but I have the impression that bomber's build was designed so he can scout the protoss before deciding wether make a 1-1-1 or an expand (well in this case he made an expand blindly, but his svc could have been in puzzle base at his time). This build won him the game, what happend later was just bomber playing safe and not allowing puzzle to get back in the game
I don't even think Bomber's build is greedy. It can defend pretty much every all-in or timing the Protoss can throw at him. Which is part of the problem I suppose.
|
On September 21 2011 03:09 Brotocol wrote: I think Protoss players are farthest ahead of any race in terms of exploring their tech trees.
I want to second that. It's outrageous how low level theory-crafters throw insults at pro-players that they don't explore their race enough.
Terrans have "really" only started discovering ghosts after the cost-change and the amulet-removal. Zergs have "really" only started discovering the infestor after the over-buff. Protoss has tried each and every combination of units you can think of both in PvT and PvZ. Yes, even carriers, if you haven't noticed than you just didn't follow the scene enough.
Maybe the current protoss players are bad, who knows. But it's definitely not the case that they are not "innovative" enough. Nearly everything has been tried. If P isn't UP, then it's the execution/decisionmaking/etc. that is holding P-players back. Not strategy.
|
4713 Posts
Its not a balance whine if it is backed by theory crafting, cold hard numbers and facts. Everything I said in my initial post here where the facts, I explained in great detail why the protoss forces where inferior to their terran and zerg counterparts or just not cost effective. I explained why the units and strategies are too easy to counter.
The cold hard numbers and facts supporting my case are the number of terrans in Code S, the very low number of Protoss in Code S, the win ratio of Protoss at the moment, the clear lack of a Protoss GSL champ for a very long time, and the countless VoDs where you see Protoss suffering.
Even players we know and love have come forth and said that something is fundamentally broken, Naniwa said so in his DH interview.
Also, I didn't say that the 200/200 deathball was the pinnacle of innovation, I just said that, it is the only viable build at the moment that still works to some extent. Other strategies or unit compositions are either too ineffective or ridiculously expensive to pull of.
|
|
|
|