This thread is starting to get out of hand. From this point on, if you are going to post statistics and/or data as a way to back up your statements about racial imbalances, then please post the sources as well.
After an epic final and an emotional championship ceremony at IEM Katowice, we got to witness soO take home a championship win! It was an uphill battle as he started the series being down 0–2, but in the end, he pulled it off and came through with a victory. Congratulations to soO!
Speaking of IEM, we saw a lot of cool strategies employed throughout the tournament, including Gumiho’s Battle Mech, as well as the subject of our first discussion topic: Nydus Worms.
Nydus Network/Nydus Worm Nydus Worms will now have 3 armor instead of 5 armor when emerging.
While we love seeing some of the new strategies involving the Nydus Worm in action, we feel it can sometimes take too much of a commitment to stop a Worm from emerging even if the defender spots it right away. To help remedy this, we’re reducing the Nydus Worms’ armor while they emerge to give small groups of basic units—like Zerglings, Zealots, and Marines—an easier time taking them out, provided they discover them within a reasonable time frame. At the same time, we’d still like to keep some of its bonus armor intact to preserve its resilience against worker pulls.
Forge/Cybernetics Core Level 1 upgrade times increased by 15 seconds. Level 2 upgrade times increased by 18 seconds. Level 3 upgrade times increased by 22 seconds.
Over the past few months, we’ve been following discussions within the community surrounding the TvP matchup, much of it centered around Protoss’s ability to build an upgrade advantage over Terran. To address this, we’d like to reduce the windows in which Protoss are able to gain that advantage over Terran by increasing the Protoss upgrade durations. As upgrades have historically been particularly impactful, we’ll be keeping a close eye on this change.
Our current plan is to release these changes to live servers on Monday, March 25. However, in order to give players ample practice time, these changes will be available for testing on the Testing tab and the Balance Test mod starting today. As always, let us know your thoughts!
On March 13 2019 05:02 BadHabits wrote: i swear balance team is just one guy in silver league who watches parting stream
I wonder if the recent layoffs affected the balance team. They're nowhere as responsive lately as they were the previous years. It feels like 2012 again with them apparently not showing any attention at all to the scene.
On March 13 2019 05:03 sneakyfox wrote: lol at first I thought it said that they were making Protoss upgrades faster. Nevertheless, I don't know if this is really enough.
Looking forward to see how it pans out. Guess they want to keep the crazy nydus-popping-up-everywhere meta while making it easier to defend at least.
with the armor nerf it will be much easier to kill, much less of a problem... i still think it could cost slightly more (i'm zerg)
but the things they decide to do with protoss lately is just soo... off the wall... like ALL the unneeded buffs they got in that patch, and now.. upgrade nerfs? really? why not just nerf chrono? it's obvious that they get a MASSIVE lead in all match ups because of it..
no guys, it's just the upgrades. .... .... god damnit blizzard team, i'm not good at the game, or smart but i could do a better job.
On March 13 2019 05:02 BadHabits wrote: i swear balance team is just one guy in silver league who watches parting stream
If u are gonna whine about the balance team you could at least put in the effort to explain what your logic is. Speaking as a champion for constructive feedback. I dont see either of these changes being in the wrong direction tho most likely not enough to fix tvp.
I see lots of terraan think the issue of TvP is the economy and i'm going to go ahead and assume they are right so rather than try to nerf the toss economy, how about be buff the terran economy ? It might not be enough but currently the terran supply depot takes 21 seconds to be built against 18 for toss and Zerg, maybe if it took 18 seconds as well for terran to build their supply, it would allow the scvs building depots to gain about 3 seconds of mineral mining. I don't think it would be quite enough to actually balance the match up but i think it would be a much more constructive step forward than nerfing protoss upgrades wich will also have an impact in PvZ What do you guys think ?
On March 13 2019 05:03 sneakyfox wrote: lol at first I thought it said that they were making Protoss upgrades faster. Nevertheless, I don't know if this is really enough.
Looking forward to see how it pans out. Guess they want to keep the crazy nydus-popping-up-everywhere meta while making it easier to defend at least.
with the armor nerf it will be much easier to kill, much less of a problem... i still think it could cost slightly more (i'm zerg)
but the things they decide to do with protoss lately is just soo... off the wall... like ALL the unneeded buffs they got in that patch, and now.. upgrade nerfs? really? why not just nerf chrono? it's obvious that they get a MASSIVE lead in all match ups because of it..
no guys, it's just the upgrades. .... .... god damnit blizzard team, i'm not good at the game, or smart but i could do a better job.
Much better.
Agreed chrono is the root of the problem.
However.. "fix chrono" is a huge problem to figure out without breaking both matchups. You have to consider the changes in how it will affect every timing etc. This is a bandaid attempt at it which is better than nothing at all and faster than them figuring out what the right chrono rate is..which is hopefully eventually happening.
On March 13 2019 05:18 TKL wrote: I see lots of terraan think the issue of TvP is the economy and i'm going to go ahead and assume they are right so rather than try to nerf the toss economy, how about be buff the terran economy ? It might not be enough but currently the terran supply depot takes 21 seconds to be built against 18 for toss and Zerg, maybe if it took 18 seconds as well for terran to build their supply, it would allow the scvs building depots to gain about 3 seconds of mineral mining. I don't think it would be quite enough to actually balance the match up but i think it would be a much more constructive step forward than nerfing protoss upgrades wich will also have an impact in PvZ What do you guys think ?
While I'm Terran and would gladly welcome a Supply Depot build time decrease, I think the build time of the Supply Depot greatly affects the early game meta. Like if it built 3 seconds faster, I don't think the Terran economy would even be able to afford a Barracks until 5-6 seconds after (we already have to wait a few seconds if we do gas first).
On March 13 2019 04:50 Mlord wrote: Nydus need to cost more, and for TvP this will help but that's not close to enough
Wouldn't these extra seconds mostly help Terrans to all-in before Protoss has 2/2 even better?
Sure. But it also technically will help a Terran who is deciding to play a macrogame not be 4 full upgrades behind. Which is definitely substantial but perhaps not enough to drive that decision considering you will still be behind on upgrades just not as bad and moving toward an inferior ultimate tech.. in the end i think they will need to either reduce chrono or nerf substantially protoss early game aggressive options so that Terran if deciding to macro can do so without investing so much into defense. Would need to figure out a way to do it without making 1 base all ins from Terran stronger tho.
Also to be frank im not sure 55 total extra seconds is enough to make a real difference but its a step in the right direction.
Can't balance TvP early game with current Cyclones. Old Cyclone was integral to keeping Toss honest and allowing an even macrogame. Cyclone revert needed.
On March 13 2019 05:33 Charoisaur wrote: Can't balance TvP early game with current Cyclones. Old Cyclone was integral to keeping Toss honest and allowing an even macrogame. Cyclone revert needed.
Terran did fine with this cyclone in the early game 3 years ago. And it wasn't a really key unit for TvP in 2017 either, even after the redesign. So maybe the problem isn't that but a combination of widow mine nerf, stalker buff, like half a dozen charge buffs and a chrono boost buff where the other macro mechanics went untouched and maybe one of that could be addressed.
the nydus nerf is good. That should hopefully be enough. Each worker will now do two more damage per attack so protoss won't have to rush an immortal or something like that just to survive as long as there's a zealot or oracle or something like that around.
That TvP nerf seems... kinda inconsequential? It does add up over all 3 but with chronoboost it won't be that big of an impact.
On March 13 2019 05:02 BadHabits wrote: i swear balance team is just one guy in silver league who watches parting stream
I mean that patch seems to make sense to me, what's wrong with it? The upgrade decrease time maybe but it's been talk a lot in the community
Changing the chrono would be more tricky with the timming and all, plus it's a nice way to have a skill base macro mechanics for protoss and give some variety to the build.
On March 13 2019 05:33 Charoisaur wrote: Can't balance TvP early game with current Cyclones. Old Cyclone was integral to keeping Toss honest and allowing an even macrogame. Cyclone revert needed.
Oh please no, the old cyclone was a nightmare, proxy meta was one of the stupidest ever, and you can of course balance around the new one.
On March 13 2019 05:02 BadHabits wrote: i swear balance team is just one guy in silver league who watches parting stream
I mean that patch seems to make sense to me, what's wrong with it? The upgrade decrease time maybe but it's been talk a lot in the community
Changing the chrono would be more tricky with the timming and all, plus it's a nice way to have a skill base macro mechanics for protoss and give some variety to the build.
On March 13 2019 05:33 Charoisaur wrote: Can't balance TvP early game with current Cyclones. Old Cyclone was integral to keeping Toss honest and allowing an even macrogame. Cyclone revert needed.
Oh please no, the old cyclone was a nightmare, proxy meta was one of the stupidest ever, and you can of course balance around the new one.
Yah I hated that meta as well..but one of the issues now is that toss can still play on a wide range vs terran and there is really only a narrow one having any success for terran in a 2 base all in. Toss can still play super aggro so T has to respect it but the greedy macro style is just as strong if not stronger. The proxy meta was born out of the problem we have now the new clone removed that solution so Terrans are back on the pre proxy 2 base all in meta that really wasnt working long term.
The disrupter and tempest coming about created a huge problem in Tvp late game. The chrono amplified it but i thiink its a problem independant of chrono. Back in the day robo tech could be countered by vikings and storm by ghosts so you had more of an even footing ultimate tech. Now if you go vikings they become useless supply when disrupters are built in place of colo. Liberators are good vs both but get countered by tempest which there really isnt a reply. Thor i would guess is whats intended but its just not good enough to try to be offensive with. Liberator is too strong without tempest but too weak with it. If vikings werent so slow and didnt get shredded by storm maybe a lib viking combo does it but I dont know how to practically apply a change to that lol.
Its like we are pregnant with this toss now and there is no way to fix it lolol.
On March 13 2019 04:50 Mlord wrote: Nydus need to cost more, and for TvP this will help but that's not close to enough
Wouldn't these extra seconds mostly help Terrans to all-in before Protoss has 2/2 even better?
Sure. But it also technically will help a Terran who is deciding to play a macrogame not be 4 full upgrades behind. Which is definitely substantial but perhaps not enough to drive that decision considering you will still be behind on upgrades just not as bad and moving toward an inferior ultimate tech.. in the end i think they will need to either reduce chrono or nerf substantially protoss early game aggressive options so that Terran if deciding to macro can do so without investing so much into defense. Would need to figure out a way to do it without making 1 base all ins from Terran stronger tho.
Also to be frank im not sure 55 total extra seconds is enough to make a real difference but its a step in the right direction.
Or they could throw away the excuse of "asymmetric balance" and finally properly balance the game by buffing late game Terran.
For what I believe, nydus should be defend-able if scouted and response immediately after it emerges with some army (but not with workers only). The zerg player should know the risk, and 50/50 is affordable if lost. The zerg player may still build nydus worms outside defender's other expansion's vision. If the zerg player chose to build nydus worm inside defender's main base which he has no vision, or he fails to response in time, it is the defender's fault, not a balance issue.
They could've just done +5 shield damage on libs dropping the +2 required to 2 shot stalkers to +1, affecting only the TvP matchup, giving the lib transition more power so terrans go a bit more into the lategame but I guess affecting 3 matchups with something that is researched almost every game is a better way to go about it... right?
On March 13 2019 05:33 Charoisaur wrote: Can't balance TvP early game with current Cyclones. Old Cyclone was integral to keeping Toss honest and allowing an even macrogame. Cyclone revert needed.
Terran did fine with this cyclone in the early game 3 years ago. And it wasn't a really key unit for TvP in 2017 either, even after the redesign. So maybe the problem isn't that but a combination of widow mine nerf, stalker buff, like half a dozen charge buffs and a chrono boost buff where the other macro mechanics went untouched and maybe one of that could be addressed.
What about TvZ? By some metrics it's performing even worse and PvZ is also trending towards Z.
And Terrans are STILL whining about imbalance DESPITE recent results. If anything Protoss should be the salty bunch, they’re getting nerfed AGAIN because they don’t complain despite no high level results since 2017. It’s about time Toss got a break.
And Terrans are STILL whining about imbalance DESPITE recent results. If anything Protoss should be the salty bunch, they’re getting nerfed AGAIN because they don’t complain despite no high level results since 2017. It’s about time Toss got a break.
And Terrans are STILL whining about imbalance DESPITE recent results. If anything Protoss should be the salty bunch, they’re getting nerfed AGAIN because they don’t complain despite no high level results since 2017. It’s about time Toss got a break.
Fixed for you.
You forgot to filter out Serral. And it's news to me that we had 2 Blizzcons since the start of 2018
Edit: And while we're at it, just take a look at the 2nd places (in Premier Events: 1T, 3Z and 11P)
On March 13 2019 04:50 Mlord wrote: Nydus need to cost more, and for TvP this will help but that's not close to enough
Wouldn't these extra seconds mostly help Terrans to all-in before Protoss has 2/2 even better?
Sure. But it also technically will help a Terran who is deciding to play a macrogame not be 4 full upgrades behind. Which is definitely substantial but perhaps not enough to drive that decision considering you will still be behind on upgrades just not as bad and moving toward an inferior ultimate tech.. in the end i think they will need to either reduce chrono or nerf substantially protoss early game aggressive options so that Terran if deciding to macro can do so without investing so much into defense. Would need to figure out a way to do it without making 1 base all ins from Terran stronger tho.
Also to be frank im not sure 55 total extra seconds is enough to make a real difference but its a step in the right direction.
Or they could throw away the excuse of "asymmetric balance" and finally properly balance the game by buffing late game Terran.
lategame tvp is actually okay if you can get there on equal terms. Problem is just that Toss is always incredibly far ahead after the early game.
And Terrans are STILL whining about imbalance DESPITE recent results. If anything Protoss should be the salty bunch, they’re getting nerfed AGAIN because they don’t complain despite no high level results since 2017. It’s about time Toss got a break.
what does balance in 2018 have to do with balance in 2019?
On March 13 2019 05:18 TKL wrote: I see lots of terraan think the issue of TvP is the economy and i'm going to go ahead and assume they are right so rather than try to nerf the toss economy, how about be buff the terran economy ? It might not be enough but currently the terran supply depot takes 21 seconds to be built against 18 for toss and Zerg, maybe if it took 18 seconds as well for terran to build their supply, it would allow the scvs building depots to gain about 3 seconds of mineral mining. I don't think it would be quite enough to actually balance the match up but i think it would be a much more constructive step forward than nerfing protoss upgrades wich will also have an impact in PvZ What do you guys think ?
This is the best idea I've read in a long while, I don't know if it would really impact a lot but as the situation is right now terran is simply lacking early game pressure to prevent the protoss from being greedy. In most standard games protoss can safely cut corners to get ahead, it is kind of the same with zerg but zerg has more weaknesses to try and harass.
Terran either needs improved early/earlymid pressure like the old cyclone provided or a buff in some other aspect to be able to come out of standard safe opening on equal footing with the protoss. Quicker build times is a great idea for one way to gradually be a able to tweak so terrans gets into a slightly more even position mid game.
Its a really bad place to be where terran cant be greedy early, they have very limited ways to be aggresive early which all are easily scouted and after safe openings protoss is ahead. If the game goes lategame most agree P has the advantage, so what are the options for terran? Mid game all in push or doomdrop which makes the matchup very stale.
How is the change in upgrade times NOT going to affect PvZ? I don’t get it. Terran just needs a way to punish a greedy protoss early game - 99% of them these days. Just not an unscoutable way as it had before.
I would have loved some terran buffs instead of protoss nerfs (im protoss) also I would have kept the armor on the nydus as is but increased the cost of it, they will keep spaming it.
I actually really like these changes, are they impactful? Yes, enough so that you'd notice? Maybe, maybe not.
I do like how the balance team is being cautious with changes though, while IEM was a Terran graveyard for sure that hasn't been the case with GSL nor is it the case at all with WESG right now where 2 of the qualified Koreans are Terran players.
Personally, I think the problem with the Nydus Worm is not so much with the worms themselves but with how well they synergize with Queens.
I think anything that allows Queens to be an offensive unit needs to be carefully tuned, and in the Nydus Worm's case I think you can easily solve most of these all in problems it has by DRASTICALLY cutting how much creep the Worm itself generates. Without such an easy access to creep, Queens become much less useful in an attacking capacity while leaving most other units relatively unchanged.
It's probably a FAQ, but what is the reason why supply depots take 21s? It's a honest question, I don't remember reading the logic behind this choice anywhere and I assume there is one.
And Terrans are STILL whining about imbalance DESPITE recent results. If anything Protoss should be the salty bunch, they’re getting nerfed AGAIN because they don’t complain despite no high level results since 2017. It’s about time Toss got a break.
Oh, you wanna go this way? First of all it's 2019 if you didn't notice
Second of all, acording to this page, we have following numbers of people in the finals: Premier Tournaments 11 Zergs 5 Terrans 12 Protoss
Now it doesn't seem so impressive, right? Let's now filter away Stats, Maru and Serral, shall we? 5 Zergs (Serral 6) 1 TY(Maru 4) 8 Protoss (Stats 4)
And now it looks even more wrong considering the Terran balance. Oh noez! How can all the Terrans whine, all they have to do is play like Maru in 2018... but wait, isn't it 2019? Well, we're boned.
Edit> Let's be evil, let's add IEM finals, 6 Z 1 TY 8 Protoss(Stats goes to 5)
On March 13 2019 08:19 Fran_ wrote: It's probably a FAQ, but what is the reason why supply depots take 21s? It's a honest question, I don't remember reading the logic behind this choice anywhere and I assume there is one.
Interesting question, I don't know but according to liquidpedia in wol and hots overlord/pylon used to be 25 seconds build time and supply depots 30 seconds. In Lotv they decreased the build speed to what we have today.
I would guess that in wol and hots the build time of the supply depot was critical for how fast terran rushes came so they needed the increased build time. In lotv early rushes got nerfed incredibly due to the shift in economy and I would guess the difference in build time between overlord/pylon and supply depots is mostly inherited from wold/hots were it was needed balance wise. I would be surprised if there is an actual reason today in lotv that it is longer for supply depots, it doesn't really make sense.
edit: I mean zerg invest a larvae and then it builds itself in the egg, protoss invests nothing in building a pylon while terran needs to both "lose" one worker for the duration of the build time and then on top of that have longer build time? It just doesn't make sense.
I really like the direction these changes go. I think the upgrade change on cyber isn't really needed but I can see why they would do that as it is just more consistent with the race. However; there still lies the problem with boosting terran macro incentive. The best way to do this really without breaking the MU or making 2base all ins stronger is to touch on units not used often in them.
Suggestion 1: Giving liberator +5 damage in siegemode Pros: This requires Terran to only get +1 Ship weapons to 2 shot stalkers which make 2-2-1 pushes (Mainmidgame push) a lot stronger. Cons: Protoss now have an earlier threat to deal with but my argument for this would be that toss held up fine vs Liberators back when they didn't need any upgrades so I think like this they will be fine as liberators will require time still to be built up. This just makes the transition to lategame a bit harder and gives terran more room to catch up. I suppose liberator harass too would be scary but you would have to budget your libs on whether you want to push or harass.
Suggestion 2: Give widowmine cloak back and revert build time Pros: Toss cannot open twilight first and but can still go stargate/robo. Ultimately this delays twilight and most 7:00 pushes will hit toss with them having either Blink or Charge instead of both. (Phases out heavy gateway style too) Cons: This is extremely unhealthy for the game and low level players and you basically have a cancer unit in TvP early game. TvZ should remain roughly the same with a small adaptation period for zergs again.
Suggestion 3: Remove Interference matrix bring back P.D.D Pros: TvT is back to normal and banshee play should see more light however big adaptation period for terrans. TvP we have the ability to stop stalker shots and tempest shots but we can no longer disable colossi's or immortals for 2base all ins so that is something to consider Cons: P.D.D encourages turtle play. Zergs literally don't have an answer to killing units like the B.C if you just drop P.D.D. Corruptors stop working, Hydras stop working, vipers cannot deal enough with parabomb, Infestors are detected by the raven and cancer turtle terran is back. A big cost and weight ordeal but you also have to keep in mind that seeker missile is removed and anti armor missile does no damage. Also this is a nerf so my suggestion is with this route to also maybe buff mules maybe through duration or minerals gathered. - The mule buff would probably require a nerf to terran 2base all in or your 2base all ins would just hit faster and stronger.
Suggestion 4: Buff support units (Raven, Medivac, Liberator, Cyclone, Viking) How?: Medivac heal range +1, Raven auto turret range back to 3 (Zergs can deal with this its not an unfair thing anymore), Liberator build time -5 (Makes amassing them a tad bit easier), Cyclone build time -3 (To compensate for liberators building faster), Viking attack mechanic (Give it a better kiting mechanic similar to the banshees in how the banshee can attack and slide. This makes micro'ing the already difficult to micro viking more rewarding to people who have the apm or effort to do so) Pros: Slight terran buffs that lead to situations that I have not tested only really thought of but I think would be more interesting than just nerfing the other 2 races to boring. Medivac range would help vs queens and AA turrets, Raven gives more openers in TvZ and TvT (harass-wise), Liberator can be massed and made faster (43 seconds is a lot), Cyclone can be made slightly faster to help with liberator (Shouldn't affect TvT/TvZ/TvP that much), Viking has smoother kiting for those who put the effort in to micro it. Cons: These are buffs you have to test it on the ladder or on a P.T.R to see if they impact the game greatly or not.
Anyways those are just my suggestions whether they are good or not is up to people to maybe test or for blizzard to consider and test. I think the buffing alternative is much better than the nerfing alternative. Terran from what I know is not ahead in TvZ and TvP winrates so it shouldn't result too greatly in a landslide. Now that being said not all of these changes should be put in maybe like 1 or 2 of these only.
On March 13 2019 05:33 Charoisaur wrote: Can't balance TvP early game with current Cyclones. Old Cyclone was integral to keeping Toss honest and allowing an even macrogame. Cyclone revert needed.
Terran did fine with this cyclone in the early game 3 years ago. And it wasn't a really key unit for TvP in 2017 either, even after the redesign. So maybe the problem isn't that but a combination of widow mine nerf, stalker buff, like half a dozen charge buffs and a chrono boost buff where the other macro mechanics went untouched and maybe one of that could be addressed.
i suggest they add an upgrade to unlock siege mode and ravager and then nerf chrono boost for gud equal economy could open some opportunities to transition into BCs
At the Diamond 2 level, PvZ is really hard. Putting on pressure without losing my stuff... I have to know how to use oracles and phoenix, warp prism and archons, clicking and maneuvering the whole time while macroing buildings in specific locations. For that part of the MU, zerg just has to defend with queens and roaches. and his macro consists of just getting more drones and putting his buildings anywhere.
That's just at my level.
So, I think nydus is good for me, but all forge upgrades taking longer seems dumb. I'd rather have the upgrades just cost more.
On March 13 2019 12:11 FBTsingLoong wrote: What's the meaning of reducing some armors of Nydus?
"To help remedy this, we’re reducing the Nydus Worms’ armor while they emerge to give small groups of basic units—like Zerglings, Zealots, and Marines—an easier time taking them out, provided they discover them within a reasonable time frame."
Edit: Chronoboost is an identity for protoss, like inject/creep is for zerg and mule/scan is for terran. love the direction for this patch.
Honestly the biggest problem Terrans gave (other than their ridiculous whining - and no, you don’t get to discount Maru’s Games - he does indeed belong to your race - is pretty simple. Ravens. Not enough Terrans are using them in their games. Terrans not using Ravens are like Protoss not using High Templar. You’ve got one of the best units in the game a good portion of Terrans are neglecting to use it. And I can’t for the life of me understand why. Especially in TvP when Anti Armor Missile and Interference Matrix can literally change the fight in their favor in a few seconds.
If you’re going to complain about lack of success you don’t get to discount when Terrans actually do win even if it is the same one three times.
And just for the record, I am a Random player. :-) At least for now.
On March 13 2019 13:04 StarcraftSquall wrote: Honestly the biggest problem Terrans gave (other than their ridiculous whining - and no, you don’t get to discount Maru’s Games - he does indeed belong to your race - is pretty simple. Ravens. Not enough Terrans are using them in their games. Terrans not using Ravens are like Protoss not using High Templar. You’ve got one of the best units in the game a good portion of Terrans are neglecting to use it. And I can’t for the life of me understand why. Especially in TvP when Anti Armor Missile and Interference Matrix can literally change the fight in their favor in a few seconds.
If you’re going to complain about lack of success you don’t get to discount when Terrans actually do win even if it is the same one three times.
And just for the record, I am a Random player. :-) At least for now.
(since March 13 is the last day of this period, the link above will switch to the new period soon and the stats will reset)
Clearly, Terran is in a weak spot right now as per the Aligulac stats. And you can't say that we should only focus on the GSL where Terran is doing decent in the Round of 16, because that is a small sample size. You need to look at the larger sample size and include all the other different tournaments, such as Aligulac is doing. And the Aligulac stats are showing that Terran is struggling, against Protoss and Zerg, but especially against Protoss.
On March 13 2019 13:04 StarcraftSquall wrote: Honestly the biggest problem Terrans gave (other than their ridiculous whining - and no, you don’t get to discount Maru’s Games - he does indeed belong to your race - is pretty simple. Ravens. Not enough Terrans are using them in their games. Terrans not using Ravens are like Protoss not using High Templar. You’ve got one of the best units in the game a good portion of Terrans are neglecting to use it. And I can’t for the life of me understand why. Especially in TvP when Anti Armor Missile and Interference Matrix can literally change the fight in their favor in a few seconds.
If you’re going to complain about lack of success you don’t get to discount when Terrans actually do win even if it is the same one three times.
And just for the record, I am a Random player. :-) At least for now.
#ImbalanceIsOnlyInYourHead
Yeah, it's not like they live from playing SC2, what do they know...
Terran checking in, can't really complain. Nydus wasn't too bad for Terran, assuming it was scouted and the first tank made it out in time. Still infuriating though that even a few seconds late resulted in a gutted main and pretty much gg. Watching Toss and other Zerg deal with it though was nothing short of just plain goofy.
I like the upgrade change. It's been really easy for Terran to fall behind in the matchup. I think the biggest issue is how it'll affect PvZ.
On March 13 2019 05:18 TKL wrote: I see lots of terraan think the issue of TvP is the economy and i'm going to go ahead and assume they are right so rather than try to nerf the toss economy, how about be buff the terran economy ? It might not be enough but currently the terran supply depot takes 21 seconds to be built against 18 for toss and Zerg, maybe if it took 18 seconds as well for terran to build their supply, it would allow the scvs building depots to gain about 3 seconds of mineral mining. I don't think it would be quite enough to actually balance the match up but i think it would be a much more constructive step forward than nerfing protoss upgrades wich will also have an impact in PvZ What do you guys think ?
Interesting idea but I don't think this would have much effect on the eco. Imo Terran needs an observing unit just like Toss and Zerg got one. Zerg: 100M Overlord 150/100 Lair 50/50 morph to Overseer Toss: Robotics facility 150/100 Observer 25/75 Terran: Burn a scan and sacrafice 240-270 minerals that the mule would mine otherwise or build a raven which means Rax 150 Factory 150/100 Starport 150/100 Tech Lab 50/25 Raven 100/200
So killing creep or killing observers is much more expensive for Terran.
On March 13 2019 16:30 Rowrin wrote: Terran checking in, can't really complain. Nydus wasn't too bad for Terran, assuming it was scouted and the first tank made it out in time. Still infuriating though that even a few seconds late resulted in a gutted main and pretty much gg. Watching Toss and other Zerg deal with it though was nothing short of just plain goofy.
I like the upgrade change. It's been really easy for Terran to fall behind in the matchup. I think the biggest issue is how it'll affect PvZ.
Hmm, Immortals don't care imo. Chargelots have the biggest impact via they charge, or...? So the impact I can see is on stalkers(in PvZ?), adepts and archons. It shouldn't have big impact IMO, but I haven;t touched my Protoss for a while now.
On March 13 2019 05:18 TKL wrote: I see lots of terraan think the issue of TvP is the economy and i'm going to go ahead and assume they are right so rather than try to nerf the toss economy, how about be buff the terran economy ? It might not be enough but currently the terran supply depot takes 21 seconds to be built against 18 for toss and Zerg, maybe if it took 18 seconds as well for terran to build their supply, it would allow the scvs building depots to gain about 3 seconds of mineral mining. I don't think it would be quite enough to actually balance the match up but i think it would be a much more constructive step forward than nerfing protoss upgrades wich will also have an impact in PvZ What do you guys think ?
Interesting idea but I don't think this would have much effect on the eco. Imo Terran needs an observing unit just like Toss and Zerg got one. Zerg: 100M Overlord 150/100 Lair 50/50 morph to Overseer Toss: Robotics facility 150/100 Observer 25/75 Terran: Burn a scan and sacrafice 240-270 minerals that the mule would mine otherwise or build a raven which means Rax 150 Factory 150/100 Starport 150/100 Tech Lab 50/25 Raven 100/200
So killing creep or killing observers is much more expensive for Terran.
IMO the issue is that you need a Starport with the techlab addon and this slows your medevac production. And you need those much more than raven to be aggresive. Or a banshee. Raven is useless in the early game compared to these two units and the more the game progresses the more you need other units from the starport than the Raven. Raven needs buffs to be viable over medevac or banshee. And I don't see that happening as this would require very gentle approach.
On March 13 2019 04:50 Mlord wrote: Nydus need to cost more, and for TvP this will help but that's not close to enough
Wouldn't these extra seconds mostly help Terrans to all-in before Protoss has 2/2 even better?
I think Elentos hits the nail on the head here: this change will help terran (any direct nerf like this helps) and will help make the TvP matchup statistics look better (i.e. bring them closer to 50%), it won't change anything as to how this matchup is played because none of the underlying problems are solved.
Terran will still do anything in his power to dodge the lategame and doesn't really have powerful cheese at his disposition to keep a protoss honest, so this'll lead only to more "YOLO-pull-the-boys-in-the-midgame" builds. Which are as boring to watch as they are dull to play. But hey, at least the stats will look better...
Personnally though, as someone who used to play mostly macro in TvP (and getting absolutely smashed in 80% of my games), I welcome the change. I've since then switched to cheesing (proxy tanks + libs), which, at my level, is netting me a surprising amount of wins. This change might make me go back to try and play macro.
On March 13 2019 14:22 xelnaga_empire wrote: So according to the Aligulac latest period, Protoss an almost 7% advantage over Terran while Zerg has an almost 4% advantage over Terran:
(since March 13 is the last day of this period, the link above will switch to the new period soon and the stats will reset)
Clearly, Terran is in a weak spot right now as per the Aligulac stats. And you can't say that we should only focus on the GSL where Terran is doing decent in the Round of 16, because that is a small sample size. You need to look at the larger sample size and include all the other different tournaments, such as Aligulac is doing. And the Aligulac stats are showing that Terran is struggling, against Protoss and Zerg, but especially against Protoss.
Across the whole patch TvZ is actually the most imbalanced matchup at 45,78% according to Aligulac. I don't think the slight nydus nerf will be enough to remedy that. Then again there were lots of games won on nydus all-ins, so maybe I'm wrong here. Only time will tell.
The Nydus change is ok but I would rather see a price increase. 50/50 cost just encourages spamming the nydus worm over and over again.
TvP have two main problems: 1) Protoss eco is stronger than Terrans in the early game and in the midgame. 2) Protoss late game is stronger than Terrans due to a) More Splash damage and b) More supply effecient units.
So I suggest the following: 1) Nexus starts without energy, 2) Disruptors range lowered so it is the same as siege tanks, 3) High Templers supply increased to 3.
This would solve both the Protoss economic advantage and make the late game more even. Disruptors getting the same range as tanks would also make mech a option in TvP, at least on some maps.
These changes are pretty dreadful. Not only will they not address the core issues in TvP - they will only strengthen existing Terran timing attacks - they also straight up nerf a lot of current Protoss playstyles in PvZ, a matchup that didn't need Protoss nerfs at all. In fact, PvZ is currently at 47% according to Aligulac. Also might deter players from the just evolving expand into forge playstyles in PvP, reducing diversity in that matchup again after significantly raising it with recent changes.
PvT needs a much broader revamp. These changes don't cut it one bit, and have lots of potentially detrimental effects in other matchups that haven't been considered at all it seems.
-ok changes for nydus and TvP -still won't be sufficient for a balanced macro TvP -doses this not outright nerf the actual PvZ robo immo archon sentry +2 Timing Attack ?
Imo, because TvZ bio is hard too, and to no affect PvZ too much, we should buff terrans bio-openings (without buffing frontal bio in fight) more than nerfing protoss.
ideas : stim, shield build time, add-ons cost, medivacs energy, no more friendly fire on windows mine, ebay build time, orbital morph time, etc. To not make TvP 2 bases all-ins too strong we could eventually nerf tank or raven-vs-toss afterwards.
On March 13 2019 04:50 Mlord wrote: Nydus need to cost more, and for TvP this will help but that's not close to enough
Wouldn't these extra seconds mostly help Terrans to all-in before Protoss has 2/2 even better?
I think Elentos hits the nail on the head here: this change will help terran (any direct nerf like this helps) and will help make the TvP matchup statistics look better (i.e. bring them closer to 50%), it won't change anything as to how this matchup is played because none of the underlying problems are solved.
Terran will still do anything in his power to dodge the lategame and doesn't really have powerful cheese at his disposition to keep a protoss honest, so this'll lead only to more "YOLO-pull-the-boys-in-the-midgame" builds. Which are as boring to watch as they are dull to play. But hey, at least the stats will look better...
Personnally though, as someone who used to play mostly macro in TvP (and getting absolutely smashed in 80% of my games), I welcome the change. I've since then switched to cheesing (proxy tanks + libs), which, at my level, is netting me a surprising amount of wins. This change might make me go back to try and play macro.
increasing mmm s power spike aint gonna solve anything i gotta say balance team needs to figure it out before gsL ss2
It's a smart change that will mostly affect midgame and lategame in PvT, but won't make Terran pushes roll up toss. I wonder if it's enough to make a macrogame TvP viable though.
I was also wondering if the cyclone magfield accelerator research time can be unnerfed. It seems completely figured out in TvZ and it allowed for some aggressive timings in TvP before the nerf.
TVP and TVZ are broken, why B team can't just buff Terran? why nerf Protoss? PVZ is already zerg favoured, if increase upgrade time, how to PVZ? how to PVZ? how to PVZ? how to PVZ?
On March 13 2019 23:07 brickrd wrote: lot of people in this thread who don't understand the impact of upgrades
yet they dont bother changing terran mech upgrades, which is the reason, switching to mech isnt viable in tvp. Protoss switch to archons/imortals/colosus he keeps his upgrades. Terran want to switch to his "high tier" ground units, suddenly half of his army is 0-0... This is main problem, terran is forced to stay with low tier bio units, instead of them becoming expendable support units after early mid game (like zealot/sentry/stalker), they are main army whole game.
On March 13 2019 23:07 brickrd wrote: lot of people in this thread who don't understand the impact of upgrades
yet they dont bother changing terran mech upgrades, which is the reason, switching to mech isnt viable in tvp. Protoss switch to archons/imortals/colosus he keeps his upgrades. Terran want to switch to his "high tier" ground units, suddenly half of his army is 0-0... This is main problem, terran is forced to stay with low tier units, instead of them becoming expendable support units after early mid game (like zealot/sentry/stalker), they are main army whole game.
And on the other hand Terran gets the Mech armor within the same upgrade for Ground and Air units..
+ you're of course forgetting to mention that Protoss needs two upgrades for its defense (Shield + armor, with shield being very expensive) which is unique to the race.
All i'm saying is, this kind of argument is useless to the discussion, every race has its pros and cons, but increasing the duration of Protoss upgrades definitely isn't the solution to fixing TvP.. And will most likely favour Zerg in ZvP even more than it is today.
On March 13 2019 23:07 brickrd wrote: lot of people in this thread who don't understand the impact of upgrades
yet they dont bother changing terran mech upgrades, which is the reason, switching to mech isnt viable in tvp. Protoss switch to archons/imortals/colosus he keeps his upgrades. Terran want to switch to his "high tier" ground units, suddenly half of his army is 0-0... This is main problem, terran is forced to stay with low tier units, instead of them becoming expendable support units after early mid game (like zealot/sentry/stalker), they are main army whole game.
And on the other hand Terran gets the Mech armor within the same upgrade for Ground and Air units..
+ you're of course forgetting to mention that Protoss needs two upgrades for its defense (Shield + armor, with shield being very expensive) which is unique to the race.
All i'm saying is, this kind of argument is useless to the discussion, every race has its pros and cons, but increasing the duration of Protoss upgrades definitely isn't the solution to fixing TvP.. And will most likely favour Zerg in ZvP even more than it is today.
On the other hand.. totally ignoring the nydus nerf..which is a huge part of any slight advantage zerg has over Protoss...also makes ur arguement kind of useless.
On March 13 2019 23:07 brickrd wrote: lot of people in this thread who don't understand the impact of upgrades
yet they dont bother changing terran mech upgrades, which is the reason, switching to mech isnt viable in tvp. Protoss switch to archons/imortals/colosus he keeps his upgrades. Terran want to switch to his "high tier" ground units, suddenly half of his army is 0-0... This is main problem, terran is forced to stay with low tier units, instead of them becoming expendable support units after early mid game (like zealot/sentry/stalker), they are main army whole game.
And on the other hand Terran gets the Mech armor within the same upgrade for Ground and Air units..
+ you're of course forgetting to mention that Protoss needs two upgrades for its defense (Shield + armor, with shield being very expensive) which is unique to the race.
All i'm saying is, this kind of argument is useless to the discussion, every race has its pros and cons, but increasing the duration of Protoss upgrades definitely isn't the solution to fixing TvP.. And will most likely favour Zerg in ZvP even more than it is today.
On the other hand.. totally ignoring the nydus nerf..which is a huge part of any slight advantage zerg has over Protoss...also makes ur arguement kind of useless.
Yes because PvZ has been Zerg favored only since the 5 armor nydus was introduced ? It's been way longer than that.
I'm not saying the matchup is broken and needs fixing, but it's already slightly zerg favored and making this protoss nerf isn't going to help in that specific matchup.
On March 13 2019 23:07 brickrd wrote: lot of people in this thread who don't understand the impact of upgrades
yet they dont bother changing terran mech upgrades, which is the reason, switching to mech isnt viable in tvp. Protoss switch to archons/imortals/colosus he keeps his upgrades. Terran want to switch to his "high tier" ground units, suddenly half of his army is 0-0... This is main problem, terran is forced to stay with low tier units, instead of them becoming expendable support units after early mid game (like zealot/sentry/stalker), they are main army whole game.
And on the other hand Terran gets the Mech armor within the same upgrade for Ground and Air units..
+ you're of course forgetting to mention that Protoss needs two upgrades for its defense (Shield + armor, with shield being very expensive) which is unique to the race.
All i'm saying is, this kind of argument is useless to the discussion, every race has its pros and cons, but increasing the duration of Protoss upgrades definitely isn't the solution to fixing TvP.. And will most likely favour Zerg in ZvP even more than it is today.
On the other hand.. totally ignoring the nydus nerf..which is a huge part of any slight advantage zerg has over Protoss...also makes ur arguement kind of useless.
Yes because PvZ has been Zerg favored only since the 5 armor nydus was introduced ? It's been way longer than that.
I'm not saying the matchup is broken and needs fixing, but it's already slightly zerg favored and making this protoss nerf isn't going to help in that specific matchup.
Ur saying the matchup isnt broken...and they are nerfing both sides of the matchup. Weve seen the nydus create win conditions at an obscene rate in zvp. This nerf should easily have a larger impact on winrates in zvp than 55 seconds total longer to get to 3 3.
On March 13 2019 08:19 Fran_ wrote: It's probably a FAQ, but what is the reason why supply depots take 21s? It's a honest question, I don't remember reading the logic behind this choice anywhere and I assume there is one.
Interesting question, I don't know but according to liquidpedia in wol and hots overlord/pylon used to be 25 seconds build time and supply depots 30 seconds. In Lotv they decreased the build speed to what we have today.
In WOL/HOTS we played with the clock ticking ~1.38x faster than real time. The build time didn't actually change in reality, only the game clock.
On March 13 2019 23:07 brickrd wrote: lot of people in this thread who don't understand the impact of upgrades
yet they dont bother changing terran mech upgrades, which is the reason, switching to mech isnt viable in tvp. Protoss switch to archons/imortals/colosus he keeps his upgrades. Terran want to switch to his "high tier" ground units, suddenly half of his army is 0-0... This is main problem, terran is forced to stay with low tier units, instead of them becoming expendable support units after early mid game (like zealot/sentry/stalker), they are main army whole game.
And on the other hand Terran gets the Mech armor within the same upgrade for Ground and Air units..
+ you're of course forgetting to mention that Protoss needs two upgrades for its defense (Shield + armor, with shield being very expensive) which is unique to the race.
All i'm saying is, this kind of argument is useless to the discussion, every race has its pros and cons, but increasing the duration of Protoss upgrades definitely isn't the solution to fixing TvP.. And will most likely favour Zerg in ZvP even more than it is today.
you totally ignored my argument, yes total amount of upgrades is the same (air and ground), but terran bio not sharing the same upgrade with terran mech is why mech cant be used in TVP. You suddenly cant switch to mech units and enjoy the same results, its the same thing with protoss air, if protoss tried to use 0-0 air vs 3-3 bio, he would get slaughtered. You either need to invest crazy amount of resources into mech upgrades for them to be on even "power" as protoss tech units.
Its one of the reason battlemech works in tvz, cyclones and helions dont really need attack upgrades, but defense upgrades works for air, so you can just do armor and air attack upgrades and sudenly you show up with 10 3-3 bc's in late game..
What i would like to see regarding upgrades is this: Combine bio and mech attack upgrade, upgradable at engbay (level 2-3 need armory). Bio defense upgrade stays the same. Separate mech and air defense upgrade. Remove mech attack upgrade.
Volia now your upgrades are even with toss as you need 3-3-3 for full ground upgrade path.
And Terrans are STILL whining about imbalance DESPITE recent results. If anything Protoss should be the salty bunch, they’re getting nerfed AGAIN because they don’t complain despite no high level results since 2017. It’s about time Toss got a break.
Championships are not balance indicators. Top 8-16 across all those different events would be much more telling regarding top level balance than who won.
And Terrans are STILL whining about imbalance DESPITE recent results. If anything Protoss should be the salty bunch, they’re getting nerfed AGAIN because they don’t complain despite no high level results since 2017. It’s about time Toss got a break.
Championships are not balance indicators. Top 8-16 across all those different events would be much more telling regarding top level balance than who won.
it would show that majority is zerg / protoss with some korean terrans, this was the case from wol, and never changed.
Another note about terran macro, terran oc cost 550, nexus cost 400, baracks cost 150+addon upgrade(50/25 or 50/50), build 46+18/36 (compare all that to gateway 46seconds...), mule is nerfed do to higher amount of workers at start, meaning its only really an advantage in late game when you have 20oc's, dont forget scv must build the building.. i understand that they need to be carefull with terran build times for proxies etc. But if they want to actually make terran viable as macro race, they need to buff macro options, since if they buff units it will only mean 1 thing = that unit will be used in 2 base timing.. at highest level other races outmacro terrans, if terran isnt threatening allin push, he will be 100% behind.
Fix macro / add useful hightech upgrade (similar to storm upgrade, colosus range upgrade).
There is a reason 90% of foreign pro players are zerg and toss.
On March 13 2019 23:07 brickrd wrote: lot of people in this thread who don't understand the impact of upgrades
yet they dont bother changing terran mech upgrades, which is the reason, switching to mech isnt viable in tvp. Protoss switch to archons/imortals/colosus he keeps his upgrades. Terran want to switch to his "high tier" ground units, suddenly half of his army is 0-0... This is main problem, terran is forced to stay with low tier bio units, instead of them becoming expendable support units after early mid game (like zealot/sentry/stalker), they are main army whole game.
This is exactly what TvZ is in brood war. And its balance out through 2 key factors: Terran has phenomenal defensive power and a great transitional spell caster, the science vessel.
My point is the balance found for Terran doesn't need to come from toying with upgrades and how their units are upgraded isn't the problem.
Some of you guys are dismissing the proposed changes for TvP too fast. Yes a increase in upgrade research time for protoss will make Terran timing attacks and all-ins stronger but to counteract that protoss will start to play less greedy builds to hold the possible terran all-in wich means that Terran has a easier time at macro play because of that constant danger.
I think these changes are worth a try and I especially like that they not changing single unit stats but rather look at the bigger macro picture.
Of course instead of nerfing Protoss they could buff Terran so I thought about a few alternativ changes:
1) reducing the cost of the Orbital Command upgrade from 150 minerals to 100 minerals and decreasing the research time from 25s to 19s. This change would mean by the time your secound OC is finished you will have an extra SCV (that's an extra 58 minerals per s until you stop SCV production), 50 minerals saved(-50 because of the extra SCV) and 12s more MULE mining time (wich rougthly equals 44 extra minerals). With all those extra minerals Terran can build the third CC a lot quicker.
Or 2) a straight 5-10% buff to the MULE gather rate. There's not much to say about that, this buff will kick in a little bit later than the other on, mostly in mid and late game.
On March 13 2019 13:04 StarcraftSquall wrote: Honestly the biggest problem Terrans gave (other than their ridiculous whining - and no, you don’t get to discount Maru’s Games - he does indeed belong to your race - is pretty simple. Ravens. Not enough Terrans are using them in their games. Terrans not using Ravens are like Protoss not using High Templar. You’ve got one of the best units in the game a good portion of Terrans are neglecting to use it. And I can’t for the life of me understand why. Especially in TvP when Anti Armor Missile and Interference Matrix can literally change the fight in their favor in a few seconds.
If you’re going to complain about lack of success you don’t get to discount when Terrans actually do win even if it is the same one three times.
And just for the record, I am a Random player. :-) At least for now.
#ImbalanceIsOnlyInYourHead
Feedback
if high templars are trying to feedback ravens, it's fewer storms a terran player has to worry about
also, in a real engagement, the raven has the advantage as it's faster and aam and interference matrix have longer range than feedback it gets to dictate the battle. not to mention the fact that high templars might be hiding in prisms or at the back of armies for protection
the existence of high templars is no excuse not to abuse a powerful spell caster like the raven
On March 13 2019 13:04 StarcraftSquall wrote: Honestly the biggest problem Terrans gave (other than their ridiculous whining - and no, you don’t get to discount Maru’s Games - he does indeed belong to your race - is pretty simple. Ravens. Not enough Terrans are using them in their games. Terrans not using Ravens are like Protoss not using High Templar. You’ve got one of the best units in the game a good portion of Terrans are neglecting to use it. And I can’t for the life of me understand why. Especially in TvP when Anti Armor Missile and Interference Matrix can literally change the fight in their favor in a few seconds.
If you’re going to complain about lack of success you don’t get to discount when Terrans actually do win even if it is the same one three times.
And just for the record, I am a Random player. :-) At least for now.
#ImbalanceIsOnlyInYourHead
Feedback
if high templars are trying to feedback ravens, it's fewer storms a terran player has to worry about
also, in a real engagement, the raven has the advantage as it's faster and aam and interference matrix have longer range than feedback it gets to dictate the battle. not to mention the fact that high templars might be hiding in prisms or at the back of armies for protection
the existence of high templars is no excuse not to abuse a powerful spell caster like the raven
Interference matrix and feedback both have nine range.
On March 13 2019 13:04 StarcraftSquall wrote: Honestly the biggest problem Terrans gave (other than their ridiculous whining - and no, you don’t get to discount Maru’s Games - he does indeed belong to your race - is pretty simple. Ravens. Not enough Terrans are using them in their games. Terrans not using Ravens are like Protoss not using High Templar. You’ve got one of the best units in the game a good portion of Terrans are neglecting to use it. And I can’t for the life of me understand why. Especially in TvP when Anti Armor Missile and Interference Matrix can literally change the fight in their favor in a few seconds.
If you’re going to complain about lack of success you don’t get to discount when Terrans actually do win even if it is the same one three times.
And just for the record, I am a Random player. :-) At least for now.
#ImbalanceIsOnlyInYourHead
Feedback
if high templars are trying to feedback ravens, it's fewer storms a terran player has to worry about
also, in a real engagement, the raven has the advantage as it's faster and aam and interference matrix have longer range than feedback it gets to dictate the battle. not to mention the fact that high templars might be hiding in prisms or at the back of armies for protection
the existence of high templars is no excuse not to abuse a powerful spell caster like the raven
Interference matrix and feedback both have nine range.
yes but AAM has 10
the point i was making is that due to the mobility of the raven and the lack strong protoss anti air, combined with the much more vulnerable high templar (slow, low health ground unit, often needs protection in prism, back of army), it is the raven that dictates the interactions. High templars cannot simply go raven hunting due to the nature of this dynamic - they would be baited/exposed and destroyed, and wasting energy on trying to feedback ravens would leave the gateway units at risk of being melted by stim bio
The bottom line is that ravens are more than viable in TvP - they are phenomenal and feedback wont give the Raven user any nightmares
On March 13 2019 13:04 StarcraftSquall wrote: Honestly the biggest problem Terrans gave (other than their ridiculous whining - and no, you don’t get to discount Maru’s Games - he does indeed belong to your race - is pretty simple. Ravens. Not enough Terrans are using them in their games. Terrans not using Ravens are like Protoss not using High Templar. You’ve got one of the best units in the game a good portion of Terrans are neglecting to use it. And I can’t for the life of me understand why. Especially in TvP when Anti Armor Missile and Interference Matrix can literally change the fight in their favor in a few seconds.
If you’re going to complain about lack of success you don’t get to discount when Terrans actually do win even if it is the same one three times.
And just for the record, I am a Random player. :-) At least for now.
#ImbalanceIsOnlyInYourHead
Feedback
if high templars are trying to feedback ravens, it's fewer storms a terran player has to worry about
also, in a real engagement, the raven has the advantage as it's faster and aam and interference matrix have longer range than feedback it gets to dictate the battle. not to mention the fact that high templars might be hiding in prisms or at the back of armies for protection
the existence of high templars is no excuse not to abuse a powerful spell caster like the raven
Interference matrix and feedback both have nine range.
yes but AAM has 10
the point i was making is that due to the mobility of the raven and the lack strong protoss anti air, combined with the much more vulnerable high templar (slow, low health ground unit, often needs protection in prism, back of army), it is the raven that dictates the interactions. High templars cannot simply go raven hunting due to the nature of this dynamic - they would be baited/exposed and destroyed, and wasting energy on trying to feedback ravens would leave the gateway units at risk of being melted by stim bio
The bottom line is that ravens are more than viable in TvP - they are phenomenal and feedback wont give the Raven user any nightmares
What I've seen Stats do is rush out a single HT after going colossus. No storm or anything, just in order to zone out a raven during Terran's initial stim push. When the fight comes, gateway units in front, HT in the middle, colossus in back. IM has 9 range. Colossus has 9 range. Feedback has 9 range. Do the math.
Terran can disable the HT, but it's a projectile and leaves more than enough time to get a feedback off. And HT is not the threat, it just zones out the raven so the colossus can go to town on the bio.
Ravens can be very good under some circumstances, but they can also be hard countered.
On March 13 2019 13:04 StarcraftSquall wrote: Honestly the biggest problem Terrans gave (other than their ridiculous whining - and no, you don’t get to discount Maru’s Games - he does indeed belong to your race - is pretty simple. Ravens. Not enough Terrans are using them in their games. Terrans not using Ravens are like Protoss not using High Templar. You’ve got one of the best units in the game a good portion of Terrans are neglecting to use it. And I can’t for the life of me understand why. Especially in TvP when Anti Armor Missile and Interference Matrix can literally change the fight in their favor in a few seconds.
If you’re going to complain about lack of success you don’t get to discount when Terrans actually do win even if it is the same one three times.
And just for the record, I am a Random player. :-) At least for now.
#ImbalanceIsOnlyInYourHead
Feedback
if high templars are trying to feedback ravens, it's fewer storms a terran player has to worry about
also, in a real engagement, the raven has the advantage as it's faster and aam and interference matrix have longer range than feedback it gets to dictate the battle. not to mention the fact that high templars might be hiding in prisms or at the back of armies for protection
the existence of high templars is no excuse not to abuse a powerful spell caster like the raven
Interference matrix and feedback both have nine range.
yes but AAM has 10
the point i was making is that due to the mobility of the raven and the lack strong protoss anti air, combined with the much more vulnerable high templar (slow, low health ground unit, often needs protection in prism, back of army), it is the raven that dictates the interactions. High templars cannot simply go raven hunting due to the nature of this dynamic - they would be baited/exposed and destroyed, and wasting energy on trying to feedback ravens would leave the gateway units at risk of being melted by stim bio
The bottom line is that ravens are more than viable in TvP - they are phenomenal and feedback wont give the Raven user any nightmares
What I've seen Stats do is rush out a single HT after going colossus. No storm or anything, just in order to zone out a raven during Terran's initial stim push. When the fight comes, gateway units in front, HT in the middle, colossus in back. IM has 9 range. Colossus has 9 range. Feedback has 9 range. Do the math.
Terran can disable the HT, but it's a projectile and leaves more than enough time to get a feedback off. And HT is not the threat, it just zones out the raven so the colossus can go to town on the bio.
Ravens can be very good under some circumstances, but they can also be hard countered.
last time I checked, the raven's interference matrix very, very, very slightly out-ranges feedback, despite the fact that they have the same range stats. it's extremely difficult to exploit the range advantage in a real game, and it's a hair's difference, but it's there. you can cast interference matrix and queue the raven to immediately turn around and avoid the feedback. doesn't really work with multiple ravens / multiple HT, but it's doable in a 1v1 stand-off
unless, of course, there was some bug in the unit tester which messed with the range stats during my testing
Its honestly really strange how blizzard gives toss like 3 mass aoe killing options in tvp all of them can wipe your army in 1-2 shots, yet terran only really has widow mine, which is situational and nowhere on the same power as protoss options, they have ghost, but ghost doesnt even kill the targets he aoes. So protoss is like you have liberators ghost raven wm you only need to use them all and its all ok!. Try to use 4 caster and micro your bio ball at same time, will see how it goes to you.. i specifically try to macro in every tvp, but honestly i lose pretty much every game...
On March 13 2019 13:04 StarcraftSquall wrote: Honestly the biggest problem Terrans gave (other than their ridiculous whining - and no, you don’t get to discount Maru’s Games - he does indeed belong to your race - is pretty simple. Ravens. Not enough Terrans are using them in their games. Terrans not using Ravens are like Protoss not using High Templar. You’ve got one of the best units in the game a good portion of Terrans are neglecting to use it. And I can’t for the life of me understand why. Especially in TvP when Anti Armor Missile and Interference Matrix can literally change the fight in their favor in a few seconds.
If you’re going to complain about lack of success you don’t get to discount when Terrans actually do win even if it is the same one three times.
And just for the record, I am a Random player. :-) At least for now.
#ImbalanceIsOnlyInYourHead
Feedback
if high templars are trying to feedback ravens, it's fewer storms a terran player has to worry about
also, in a real engagement, the raven has the advantage as it's faster and aam and interference matrix have longer range than feedback it gets to dictate the battle. not to mention the fact that high templars might be hiding in prisms or at the back of armies for protection
the existence of high templars is no excuse not to abuse a powerful spell caster like the raven
Interference matrix and feedback both have nine range.
yes but AAM has 10
the point i was making is that due to the mobility of the raven and the lack strong protoss anti air, combined with the much more vulnerable high templar (slow, low health ground unit, often needs protection in prism, back of army), it is the raven that dictates the interactions. High templars cannot simply go raven hunting due to the nature of this dynamic - they would be baited/exposed and destroyed, and wasting energy on trying to feedback ravens would leave the gateway units at risk of being melted by stim bio
The bottom line is that ravens are more than viable in TvP - they are phenomenal and feedback wont give the Raven user any nightmares
What I've seen Stats do is rush out a single HT after going colossus. No storm or anything, just in order to zone out a raven during Terran's initial stim push. When the fight comes, gateway units in front, HT in the middle, colossus in back. IM has 9 range. Colossus has 9 range. Feedback has 9 range. Do the math.
Terran can disable the HT, but it's a projectile and leaves more than enough time to get a feedback off. And HT is not the threat, it just zones out the raven so the colossus can go to town on the bio.
Ravens can be very good under some circumstances, but they can also be hard countered.
First of all, we both know that starcraft isnt a game that is determined on paper "math"
Stats is close to the best player on the planet right now and bar none the best Protoss on the planet. I guess Stats can get away with that nuance to fend off/slow down the stim push. Same way some of the best protosses in the world were helpless against Maru's Raven timings last year and even this year.
the initial stim push doesnt always even have to be that reliant on ravens either, since marine tank alone has the potential to steamroll protoss at that point
When it comes to other fights, the factors Ive described come into play. You want to talk about hard counter - Terran has an answer for everything. It's just up to the Terran player to produce the correct composition.
On March 14 2019 15:15 skdsk wrote: Its honestly really strange how blizzard gives toss like 3 mass aoe killing options in tvp all of them can wipe your army in 1-2 shots, yet terran only really has widow mine, which is situational and nowhere on the same power as protoss options, they have ghost, but ghost doesnt even kill the targets he aoes. So protoss is like you have liberators ghost raven wm you only need to use them all and its all ok!. Try to use 4 caster and micro your bio ball at same time, will see how it goes to you.. i specifically try to macro in every tvp, but honestly i lose pretty much every game...
Without those AOE, Protoss would be complete trash. Protoss AOE is their equalizer.
If Terran, with the pound for pound most efficient units in the game, gets Protoss tier AOE, they become broken -
See: old Raven
Widow mines are great too, I dont know what youre talking about. They almost always pay for themselves at the very least.
And you forgot the siege tank
What 4 casters are you talking about....that sounds more like the Protoss army which is so reliant on spells/abilities
You micro the bio, kite them with the support of your widow mine/liberator push, and the only casters you have are ghosts for high templar and ravens for disruptor/colossus, generally speaking
On March 14 2019 12:13 RandomPlayer416 wrote: Most protoss players in diamond dont even upgrade their units anyways. . .
That is simply false. The 2019 playerbase on ladder is mainly hardcore players, the people who played sc2 as one if a dozen other games per month left years ago. Woth no upgrades, you will get demolished most of the time even in platinum.
On March 14 2019 15:15 skdsk wrote: Its honestly really strange how blizzard gives toss like 3 mass aoe killing options in tvp all of them can wipe your army in 1-2 shots, yet terran only really has widow mine, which is situational and nowhere on the same power as protoss options, they have ghost, but ghost doesnt even kill the targets he aoes. So protoss is like you have liberators ghost raven wm you only need to use them all and its all ok!. Try to use 4 caster and micro your bio ball at same time, will see how it goes to you.. i specifically try to macro in every tvp, but honestly i lose pretty much every game...
Without those AOE, Protoss would be complete trash. Protoss AOE is their equalizer.
If Terran, with the pound for pound most efficient units in the game, gets Protoss tier AOE, they become broken -
See: old Raven
Widow mines are great too, I dont know what youre talking about. They almost always pay for themselves at the very least.
And you forgot the siege tank
What 4 casters are you talking about....that sounds more like the Protoss army which is so reliant on spells/abilities
You micro the bio, kite them with the support of your widow mine/liberator push, and the only casters you have are ghosts for high templar and ravens for disruptor/colossus, generally speaking
Pretty much every terran unit have ability and you need to use it correctly or the unit becomes useless, compare lets say protos death ball of zealot stalker archon colosus ht and terran mmm raven wm liberator ghost. All protoss need to do is drop storms, and micro his units, terran needs to use emp, constantly siege unsiege liberator and widow mines, micro his bio like crazy, use raven spells, so terran needs to use 2-3times more skills then protoss for even battle...
Also another problem is Protoss dont have to "answer" to any unit terran makes, for example if protoss makes ht, terran needs to make ghosts or he gets rekt, if protoss makes colosus terran needs vikings or libs with range. Protoss doesnt need to make anything to answer to terran units all his units already counters everything terrans make.
On March 14 2019 15:15 skdsk wrote: Its honestly really strange how blizzard gives toss like 3 mass aoe killing options in tvp all of them can wipe your army in 1-2 shots, yet terran only really has widow mine, which is situational and nowhere on the same power as protoss options, they have ghost, but ghost doesnt even kill the targets he aoes. So protoss is like you have liberators ghost raven wm you only need to use them all and its all ok!. Try to use 4 caster and micro your bio ball at same time, will see how it goes to you.. i specifically try to macro in every tvp, but honestly i lose pretty much every game...
Without those AOE, Protoss would be complete trash. Protoss AOE is their equalizer.
If Terran, with the pound for pound most efficient units in the game, gets Protoss tier AOE, they become broken -
See: old Raven
Widow mines are great too, I dont know what youre talking about. They almost always pay for themselves at the very least.
And you forgot the siege tank
What 4 casters are you talking about....that sounds more like the Protoss army which is so reliant on spells/abilities
You micro the bio, kite them with the support of your widow mine/liberator push, and the only casters you have are ghosts for high templar and ravens for disruptor/colossus, generally speaking
Pretty much every terran unit have ability and you need to use it correctly or the unit becomes useless, compare lets say protos death ball of zealot stalker archon colosus ht and terran mmm raven wm liberator ghost. All protoss need to do is drop storms, and micro his units, terran needs to use emp, constantly siege unsiege liberator and widow mines, micro his bio like crazy, use raven spells, so terran needs to use 2-3times more skills then protoss for even battle...
Also another problem is Protoss dont have to "answer" to any unit terran makes, for example if protoss makes ht, terran needs to make ghosts or he gets rekt, if protoss makes colosus terran needs vikings or libs with range. Protoss doesnt need to make anything to answer to terran units all his units already counters everything terrans make.
This so much. I even had Protoss opponents that did not even scout I was going mech, made their normal comp, a-moved over my army and messaged me after the game "I had no idea you were using mech".
Something is seriously wrong with TvP. Protoss never have to adapt.
If you make Tanks their normal mass Zealots works great. If you make Liberators, they always have some Tempest anyway. If you make BC stalkers work just fine, if not just add a few Tempest.
Meanwhile trying to mech vs Protoss is hell. If you get the ratio between anti-ground and anti-air units slightly wrong, it is GG. Terran needs to adept perfectly to Protoss openers, unit comp, expansion speed etc.
What do Protoss need to adjust? Maybe add a few shield batteries when you are army is moving toward their base.
Also, why did Protoss even get the Disruptor? Why give the death ball race the anti-death ball tool? Why give them something that outranges tanks even though Protoss have plenty of strong answers already?
Something is really wrong with TvP that goes way beyond win rates.
On March 14 2019 15:15 skdsk wrote: Its honestly really strange how blizzard gives toss like 3 mass aoe killing options in tvp all of them can wipe your army in 1-2 shots, yet terran only really has widow mine, which is situational and nowhere on the same power as protoss options, they have ghost, but ghost doesnt even kill the targets he aoes. So protoss is like you have liberators ghost raven wm you only need to use them all and its all ok!. Try to use 4 caster and micro your bio ball at same time, will see how it goes to you.. i specifically try to macro in every tvp, but honestly i lose pretty much every game...
Without those AOE, Protoss would be complete trash. Protoss AOE is their equalizer.
If Terran, with the pound for pound most efficient units in the game, gets Protoss tier AOE, they become broken -
See: old Raven
Widow mines are great too, I dont know what youre talking about. They almost always pay for themselves at the very least.
And you forgot the siege tank
What 4 casters are you talking about....that sounds more like the Protoss army which is so reliant on spells/abilities
You micro the bio, kite them with the support of your widow mine/liberator push, and the only casters you have are ghosts for high templar and ravens for disruptor/colossus, generally speaking
Pretty much every terran unit have ability and you need to use it correctly or the unit becomes useless, compare lets say protos death ball of zealot stalker archon colosus ht and terran mmm raven wm liberator ghost. All protoss need to do is drop storms, and micro his units, terran needs to use emp, constantly siege unsiege liberator and widow mines, micro his bio like crazy, use raven spells, so terran needs to use 2-3times more skills then protoss for even battle...
Also another problem is Protoss dont have to "answer" to any unit terran makes, for example if protoss makes ht, terran needs to make ghosts or he gets rekt, if protoss makes colosus terran needs vikings or libs with range. Protoss doesnt need to make anything to answer to terran units all his units already counters everything terrans make.
lol not sure if srs
i switched from protoss main to terran main because the protoss army is too much of a hassle to control.
the point youre missing is that if storm (or whatever AOE youre relying on) whiffs, youre in pretty deep shit. your expensive, important units just melt.
Terran has superb entrenched positioning to fall back to, with excellent AI
On March 14 2019 15:15 skdsk wrote: Its honestly really strange how blizzard gives toss like 3 mass aoe killing options in tvp all of them can wipe your army in 1-2 shots, yet terran only really has widow mine, which is situational and nowhere on the same power as protoss options, they have ghost, but ghost doesnt even kill the targets he aoes. So protoss is like you have liberators ghost raven wm you only need to use them all and its all ok!. Try to use 4 caster and micro your bio ball at same time, will see how it goes to you.. i specifically try to macro in every tvp, but honestly i lose pretty much every game...
Without those AOE, Protoss would be complete trash. Protoss AOE is their equalizer.
If Terran, with the pound for pound most efficient units in the game, gets Protoss tier AOE, they become broken -
See: old Raven
Widow mines are great too, I dont know what youre talking about. They almost always pay for themselves at the very least.
And you forgot the siege tank
What 4 casters are you talking about....that sounds more like the Protoss army which is so reliant on spells/abilities
You micro the bio, kite them with the support of your widow mine/liberator push, and the only casters you have are ghosts for high templar and ravens for disruptor/colossus, generally speaking
Pretty much every terran unit have ability and you need to use it correctly or the unit becomes useless, compare lets say protos death ball of zealot stalker archon colosus ht and terran mmm raven wm liberator ghost. All protoss need to do is drop storms, and micro his units, terran needs to use emp, constantly siege unsiege liberator and widow mines, micro his bio like crazy, use raven spells, so terran needs to use 2-3times more skills then protoss for even battle...
Also another problem is Protoss dont have to "answer" to any unit terran makes, for example if protoss makes ht, terran needs to make ghosts or he gets rekt, if protoss makes colosus terran needs vikings or libs with range. Protoss doesnt need to make anything to answer to terran units all his units already counters everything terrans make.
This so much. I even had Protoss opponents that did not even scout I was going mech, made their normal comp, a-moved over my army and messaged me after the game "I had no idea you were using mech".
Something is seriously wrong with TvP. Protoss never have to adapt.
If you make Tanks their normal mass Zealots works great. If you make Liberators, they always have some Tempest anyway. If you make BC stalkers work just fine, if not just add a few Tempest.
Meanwhile trying to mech vs Protoss is hell. If you get the ratio between anti-ground and anti-air units slightly wrong, it is GG. Terran needs to adept perfectly to Protoss openers, unit comp, expansion speed etc.
What do Protoss need to adjust? Maybe add a few shield batteries when you are army is moving toward their base.
Also, why did Protoss even get the Disruptor? Why give the death ball race the anti-death ball tool? Why give them something that outranges tanks even though Protoss have plenty of strong answers already?
Something is really wrong with TvP that goes way beyond win rates.
protoss will still argue that even though he has 3 individual skills that can insta wipe terran army, its balanced cuz terran have widow mines. I dont know why they nerfed every terran aoe (mines crazily nerfed, raven aoe removed), yet buffed protoss aoe and even added more, now colosus 2shots marines which is ridiculous, since only unit you are left to mass is marauder... which isnt even as good as its use to be since both stalker and zealot recieved massive buffs. If they dont want to buff ravens or wmines, then only option is to somehow buff siegetanks, its staple terran unit used in both tvz and tvt as ground control, yet protoss can just walk all over it. Make marine tank viable army in tvp in macro game and then we can talk about further balance...
Maru just eviscerated Neeb, probably the second best late game protoss player in the world, in late game TvP despite neeb having major economic advantage as well as all 3 forms of AOE
Turns out that lategame TvP is not as bad as many terran players claim it is. skyterran + ghost just shits on protoss late game
P.S. Maru won game 1 with raven, and game 3 on widow mine spam
On March 14 2019 21:01 BerserkSword wrote: Maru just eviscerated Neeb, probably the second best late game protoss player in the world, in late game TvP despite neeb having major economic advantage as well as all 3 forms of AOE
Turns out that lategame TvP is not as bad as many terran players claim it is. skyterran + ghost just shits on protoss late game
P.S. Maru won game 1 with raven, and game 3 on widow mine spam
Ok so 3 korean terrans can compete because they have insane skill, i get it if you can control perfectly ghost raven mines bio ball liberator the mu is balanced. There is a reason there is literally almost no non-korean terrans in top100 (according aligulac), while there is bunch of zerg and protoss players...
On March 14 2019 12:13 RandomPlayer416 wrote: Most protoss players in diamond dont even upgrade their units anyways. . .
That is simply false. The 2019 playerbase on ladder is mainly hardcore players, the people who played sc2 as one if a dozen other games per month left years ago. Woth no upgrades, you will get demolished most of the time even in platinum.
Well, I don't play nearly as often as I used to and although my sharpness has clearly deteriorated I don't find the competition to be as tough as it has been years ago. The 'new' league percentages are probably warping my perception, since diamond was actually a rank you had to 'work' for, nowadays dia 3/2 feels like platinum. And considering a new influx on people since SC2 went f2p I'd say that the average player level isn't as good as you think it is, simply because a lot of former hardcore players have either quit the game or hop on/off on a regular basis.
On March 14 2019 21:01 BerserkSword wrote: Maru just eviscerated Neeb, probably the second best late game protoss player in the world, in late game TvP despite neeb having major economic advantage as well as all 3 forms of AOE
Turns out that lategame TvP is not as bad as many terran players claim it is. skyterran + ghost just shits on protoss late game
P.S. Maru won game 1 with raven, and game 3 on widow mine spam
If anything that game just proofs that lategame TvP is broken. Maru had to play absolutely perfectly to ever stand a chance to win, while Neeb made so many mistakes and still stayed in the game for so long. (the eco advantage you mentioned is not just random, every toss has eco advantage if he makes it into lategame and that is the problem!) It just wasnt Neebs day, he played poorly overall.
On the other hand look at Rail vs Inno. Similar game, but Inno made 1 big mistake with moving his units too far out and his micro and positioning wasnt nearly as perfect as Marus, and he got completely crushed.
On March 14 2019 21:01 BerserkSword wrote: Maru just eviscerated Neeb, probably the second best late game protoss player in the world, in late game TvP despite neeb having major economic advantage as well as all 3 forms of AOE
Turns out that lategame TvP is not as bad as many terran players claim it is. skyterran + ghost just shits on protoss late game
P.S. Maru won game 1 with raven, and game 3 on widow mine spam
Lol this guy.
Defending 3 time code S champ beats Foreign Protoss = balanced matchup. Wait what happened at IEM again?? Same foreigner crushed Maru?? Imbalanced again? Oh wait thats not how any of this works though.
Same guy who literally thinks he knows more about what unit compositions are good than the pro players whose livlihoods depend on it.
Should have probably stopped reading at: "I switched to Terran because Protoss unit control is harder "
Honestly,Terran was so strong for so long its almost funny how much they cry now that the match up is pretty balanced. From what I've seen the larger issue is that Zerg is doing really well right now in all match ups. I think overall there seems to be a decent balance now but the upgrade nerf should further hone in the balance to TvP so that T dont feel 2 base all ins are necessary. I'm eager to see what else is done to Zerg to allow for more balance against the swarm in the othe rmatch-ups.
On March 14 2019 21:01 BerserkSword wrote: Maru just eviscerated Neeb, probably the second best late game protoss player in the world, in late game TvP despite neeb having major economic advantage as well as all 3 forms of AOE
Turns out that lategame TvP is not as bad as many terran players claim it is. skyterran + ghost just shits on protoss late game
P.S. Maru won game 1 with raven, and game 3 on widow mine spam
Ok so 3 korean terrans can compete because they have insane skill, i get it if you can control perfectly ghost raven mines bio ball liberator the mu is balanced. There is a reason there is literally almost no non-korean terrans in top100 (according aligulac), while there is bunch of zerg and protoss players...
It feels like you don't quite know the words you are using here. While Aligulac is certainly flawed, I decided to humor you and go check whether there is anything to your claims.
Just looking at the first 2 pages on Aligulac, we have the following distribution of non-koreans: Protoss: 16 Terran: 11 Zerg: 20 And that list goes all the way down to players like Ziggy and Future. On the first page we have: Protoss: 4 Terran: 3 Zerg: 9 So I don't quite understand where you get your "literally almost no non-korean terrans" from.
Considering that top tier Terran players are just more rare in general in EU and NA (similar to how there are fewer top tier Zergs in Korea), that spread is entirely unsurprising and very far from your claims. In fact, I don't think your claim reflects reality at all.
Maru and Innovation didn't just "compete", they completely crushed their Protoss opponents and they certainly didn't play perfect either. Innovation lost a map because he made a gigantic blunder at a very critical phase of the game, not because the matchup is broken and otherwise unwinnable for Terran. It simply isn't.
Continuing with Aligulac (hey, you brought it up): PvT sits at 50.29% at the moment, with Protoss being the lagging race for 12 months straight - and by a pretty significant margin no less.
I am somewhat confused as to why Terrans incessantly whine about Protoss when Zerg is much more dominant - both against Terran and in general.
On March 14 2019 21:01 BerserkSword wrote: Maru just eviscerated Neeb, probably the second best late game protoss player in the world, in late game TvP despite neeb having major economic advantage as well as all 3 forms of AOE
Turns out that lategame TvP is not as bad as many terran players claim it is. skyterran + ghost just shits on protoss late game
P.S. Maru won game 1 with raven, and game 3 on widow mine spam
Ok so 3 korean terrans can compete because they have insane skill, i get it if you can control perfectly ghost raven mines bio ball liberator the mu is balanced. There is a reason there is literally almost no non-korean terrans in top100 (according aligulac), while there is bunch of zerg and protoss players...
It feels like you don't quite know the words you are using here. While Aligulac is certainly flawed, I decided to humor you and go check whether there is anything to your claims.
Just looking at the first 2 pages on Aligulac, we have the following distribution of non-koreans: Protoss: 16 Terran: 11 Zerg: 20 And that list goes all the way down to players like Ziggy and Future. On the first page we have: Protoss: 4 Terran: 3 Zerg: 9 So I don't quite understand where you get your "literally almost no non-korean terrans" from.
Considering that top tier Terran players are just more rare in general in EU and NA (similar to how there are fewer top tier Zergs in Korea), that spread is entirely unsurprising and very far from your claims. In fact, I don't think your claim reflects reality at all.
Maru and Innovation didn't just "compete", they completely crushed their Protoss opponents and they certainly didn't play perfect either. Innovation lost a map because he made a gigantic blunder at a very critical phase of the game, not because the matchup is broken and otherwise unwinnable for Terran. It simply isn't.
Continuing with Aligulac (hey, you brought it up): PvT sits at 50.29% at the moment, with Protoss being the lagging race for 12 months straight - and by a pretty significant margin no less.
I am somewhat confused as to why Terrans incessantly whine about Protoss when Zerg is much more dominant - both against Terran and in general.
So there being more than 50% less terran is totaly alright, the mental gymnastics that people go thru is astonishing. Also i wonder why you didnt bother saying how much less korean zergs are, well i checked and in top 50 there is 7 kr zergs and 8 kr terrans and 9 kr protoss. So your statement about kr zergs doesnt make sense.
When are you guys finally gonna get that winrates in PvT are more or less even just because the Terrans found a way (were forced) to cheese the toss players out with strong early game timing pushes? Are you really happy about a state of the game? Is it fun watching the same bullshit every single game? And then if Terran push fails, its basically GG unless you play like Maru and toss makes mistakes...
I dont know about you, but aside form a few top Terrans, I dont even watch PvT its boring and painful and stupid. Even for the players its frustrating, yet Blizz does nothing about it. The upgrade change wont really do anything meaningful so again we have to wait and endure this meta. Meh
Nerfing protoss in order to redesign the matchup is really frustrating for protoss players, especially when it affects other matchups.
I think Blizzard should make early game terran harass stronger so that the terrans are happy to do a harass + macro build, and protoss have to sacrifice some economy in order to better defend harass (or lose workers and therefore have a weaker economy). If harass doesn't look good to terrans, then they will keep feeling obligated to do these bizarre timings and risky builds (whether they actually need to or not), and keep whining about the matchup.
Well, historically terrans will whine regardless even though terran has been the best race in competitive play. They're always either not able to play the builds they want, not able to get the units they want, or not winning enough (>50%). If terran goes one year without winning multiple major tournaments or one matchup dips below 48%, you'd think the game is broken, and yet protoss and zerg have always had to deal with that.
On March 15 2019 00:30 NonY wrote: Well, historically terrans will whine regardless even though terran has been the best race in competitive play.
This is objectively false. Why say this without any evidence?
I was sure it came out of the blue without real proof, so I collected some data to disprove it rather quickly. I looked at sc2earnings and computed how much money each race won from the top 100 earners (turns out I know the race of everyone of these players, only one I googled was XY to be sure he was terran)
The results are: (I only considered the floor of kilo of dollars part of each winnings, ie. for Maru at $698,310.15 I counted 698k, but this doesn't change the order)
1st: Zergs players from the top 100 of sc2earnings earned roughly 8227k = 8.227millions of $ 2st: Protoss players from the top 100 of sc2earnings earned roughly 6802k = 6.802millions of $ 3rd: Terran players from the top 100 of sc2earnings earned roughly 6622k = 6.622millions of $
You can argue that it's not the only metric for which race is best in competitive play, which is true, but it's imho the simplest one there is available that remains objective.
Imo P/T earnings are close enough that I'd consider them equal, but terran isn't the best race in competitive play if your competitive goal is to make money. As for number of tournaments wins, combined aligulac points of the top 100, etc. these would be interesting metrics as well that could offer another point of view.
On March 14 2019 21:01 BerserkSword wrote: Maru just eviscerated Neeb, probably the second best late game protoss player in the world, in late game TvP despite neeb having major economic advantage as well as all 3 forms of AOE
Turns out that lategame TvP is not as bad as many terran players claim it is. skyterran + ghost just shits on protoss late game
P.S. Maru won game 1 with raven, and game 3 on widow mine spam
Ok so 3 korean terrans can compete because they have insane skill, i get it if you can control perfectly ghost raven mines bio ball liberator the mu is balanced. There is a reason there is literally almost no non-korean terrans in top100 (according aligulac), while there is bunch of zerg and protoss players...
Continuing with Aligulac (hey, you brought it up): PvT sits at 50.29% at the moment, with Protoss being the lagging race for 12 months straight - and by a pretty significant margin no less.
I am somewhat confused as to why Terrans incessantly whine about Protoss when Zerg is much more dominant - both against Terran and in general.
I don't know what this "lagging race" on the aligulac frontpage actually means because it contradicts aligulacs own balance reports. Said balance report says in the last year terran was the least successful race in 9 out of 12 months, Zerg in 2 months and protoss in one month (June 2018).
On March 15 2019 00:30 NonY wrote: Well, historically terrans will whine regardless even though terran has been the best race in competitive play.
This is objectively false. Why say this without any evidence?
I was sure it came out of the blue without real proof, so I collected some data to disprove it rather quickly. I looked at sc2earnings and computed how much money each race won from the top 100 earners (turns out I know the race of everyone of these players, only one I googled was XY to be sure he was terran)
The results are: (I only considered the floor of kilo of dollars part of each winnings, ie. for Maru at $698,310.15 I counted 698k, but this doesn't change the order)
1st: Zergs players from the top 100 of sc2earnings earned roughly 8227k = 8.227millions of $ 2st: Protoss players from the top 100 of sc2earnings earned roughly 6802k = 6.802millions of $ 3rd: Terran players from the top 100 of sc2earnings earned roughly 6622k = 6.622millions of $
You can argue that it's not the only metric for which race is best in competitive play, which is true, but it's imho the simplest one there is available that remains objective.
Imo P/T earnings are close enough that I'd consider them equal, but terran isn't the best race in competitive play if your competitive goal is to make money. As for number of tournaments wins, combined aligulac points of the top 100, etc. these would be interesting metrics as well that could offer another point of view.
Its just a narrative they use every time, comes up with bogus claim, not bothering to check if its true or not, fact is terrans wins least amount of money. Protoss has historically always dominated terrans except select few top korean pro players (Maru, Innovation, etc...), the main problem is that terran is forced into bio play, which is so figured out by now thats its done deal, terran can keep zerg honest by using mech / battle mech / mech-air, there are bunch of differnt builds terrans can do vs zerg that involve all kind of differnt units. While the same terran is forced into very specific unit mix, since nothing else works. you can build 20 siege tanks and still get rolled by a move immortals archon zealot, which should get crushed (just doesnt make sense from balance perspective). If zerg wants to break such huge siege line, he needs specific units like vipers, broodlords, which arent standard massable zerg units, and come way late in the tech.
Just look at rail vs inno g2, at 11.30 rails a moves into 6+sieged siege tanks, bunch of liberators and bio with standard zealot stalker colosus ball, and guess what? he wins the fight even though army size was fairly even, the commentators were like no way he wants to move into that choke!, nope he just did and wiped the floor of terran army..
On March 15 2019 00:30 NonY wrote: Well, historically terrans will whine regardless even though terran has been the best race in competitive play.
This is objectively false. Why say this without any evidence?
I was sure it came out of the blue without real proof, so I collected some data to disprove it rather quickly. I looked at sc2earnings and computed how much money each race won from the top 100 earners (turns out I know the race of everyone of these players, only one I googled was XY to be sure he was terran)
The results are: (I only considered the floor of kilo of dollars part of each winnings, ie. for Maru at $698,310.15 I counted 698k, but this doesn't change the order)
1st: Zergs players from the top 100 of sc2earnings earned roughly 8227k = 8.227millions of $ 2st: Protoss players from the top 100 of sc2earnings earned roughly 6802k = 6.802millions of $ 3rd: Terran players from the top 100 of sc2earnings earned roughly 6622k = 6.622millions of $
You can argue that it's not the only metric for which race is best in competitive play, which is true, but it's imho the simplest one there is available that remains objective.
Imo P/T earnings are close enough that I'd consider them equal, but terran isn't the best race in competitive play if your competitive goal is to make money. As for number of tournaments wins, combined aligulac points of the top 100, etc. these would be interesting metrics as well that could offer another point of view.
On March 15 2019 00:30 NonY wrote: Well, historically terrans will whine regardless even though terran has been the best race in competitive play.
This is objectively false. Why say this without any evidence?
I was sure it came out of the blue without real proof, so I collected some data to disprove it rather quickly. I looked at sc2earnings and computed how much money each race won from the top 100 earners (turns out I know the race of everyone of these players, only one I googled was XY to be sure he was terran)
The results are: (I only considered the floor of kilo of dollars part of each winnings, ie. for Maru at $698,310.15 I counted 698k, but this doesn't change the order)
1st: Zergs players from the top 100 of sc2earnings earned roughly 8227k = 8.227millions of $ 2st: Protoss players from the top 100 of sc2earnings earned roughly 6802k = 6.802millions of $ 3rd: Terran players from the top 100 of sc2earnings earned roughly 6622k = 6.622millions of $
You can argue that it's not the only metric for which race is best in competitive play, which is true, but it's imho the simplest one there is available that remains objective.
Imo P/T earnings are close enough that I'd consider them equal, but terran isn't the best race in competitive play if your competitive goal is to make money. As for number of tournaments wins, combined aligulac points of the top 100, etc. these would be interesting metrics as well that could offer another point of view.
Its just a narrative they use every time, comes up with bogus claim, not bothering to check if its true or not, fact is terrans wins least amount of money. Protoss has historically always dominated terrans except select few top korean pro players (Maru, Innovation, etc...), the main problem is that terran is forced into bio play, which is so figured out by now thats its done deal, terran can keep zerg honest by using mech / battle mech / mech-air, there are bunch of differnt builds terrans can do vs zerg that involve all kind of differnt units. While the same terran is forced into very specific unit mix, since nothing else works. you can build 20 siege tanks and still get rolled by a move immortals archon zealot, which should get crushed (just doesnt make sense from balance perspective). If zerg wants to break such huge siege line, he needs specific units like vipers, broodlords, which arent standard massable zerg units, and come way late in the tech.
Just look at rail vs inno g2, at 11.30 rails a moves into 6+sieged siege tanks, bunch of liberators and bio with standard zealot stalker colosus ball, and guess what? he wins the fight even though army size was fairly even, the commentators were like no way he wants to move into that choke!, nope he just did and wiped the floor of terran army..
you know along with my baiting, i also made a real contribution in that post?
terrans are blind to productive discussion. this is evidence right here
On March 15 2019 00:30 NonY wrote: Nerfing protoss in order to redesign the matchup is really frustrating for protoss players, especially when it affects other matchups.
I think Blizzard should make early game terran harass stronger so that the terrans are happy to do a harass + macro build, and protoss have to sacrifice some economy in order to better defend harass (or lose workers and therefore have a weaker economy). If harass doesn't look good to terrans, then they will keep feeling obligated to do these bizarre timings and risky builds (whether they actually need to or not), and keep whining about the matchup.
Well, historically terrans will whine regardless even though terran has been the best race in competitive play. They're always either not able to play the builds they want, not able to get the units they want, or not winning enough (>50%). If terran goes one year without winning multiple major tournaments or one matchup dips below 48%, you'd think the game is broken, and yet protoss and zerg have always had to deal with that.
Completely agree on the first part of your comment.
The rest I take is trolling? Because the facts clearly prove you wrong. Last year, Maru was the only terran premiere tournament winner for the whole year... 4/14 winner (1 player only) and 1/14 runner up (TY). This year first premiere, Terran completely bombed out. Actually last Terran win on a premiere weekender tournament was in 2017 (GSL vs. the world)
So... I dunno Kev
Edit: And if you are gonna preach about ancient history, then be my guest but it has nothing to do with current state of the game and that Terran got screwed in PvT after LOTV revamp, which is what most people are whining about.
On March 15 2019 00:30 NonY wrote: Well, historically terrans will whine regardless even though terran has been the best race in competitive play.
This is objectively false. Why say this without any evidence?
I was sure it came out of the blue without real proof, so I collected some data to disprove it rather quickly. I looked at sc2earnings and computed how much money each race won from the top 100 earners (turns out I know the race of everyone of these players, only one I googled was XY to be sure he was terran)
The results are: (I only considered the floor of kilo of dollars part of each winnings, ie. for Maru at $698,310.15 I counted 698k, but this doesn't change the order)
1st: Zergs players from the top 100 of sc2earnings earned roughly 8227k = 8.227millions of $ 2st: Protoss players from the top 100 of sc2earnings earned roughly 6802k = 6.802millions of $ 3rd: Terran players from the top 100 of sc2earnings earned roughly 6622k = 6.622millions of $
You can argue that it's not the only metric for which race is best in competitive play, which is true, but it's imho the simplest one there is available that remains objective.
Imo P/T earnings are close enough that I'd consider them equal, but terran isn't the best race in competitive play if your competitive goal is to make money. As for number of tournaments wins, combined aligulac points of the top 100, etc. these would be interesting metrics as well that could offer another point of view.
On March 15 2019 00:30 NonY wrote: Nerfing protoss in order to redesign the matchup is really frustrating for protoss players, especially when it affects other matchups.
I think Blizzard should make early game terran harass stronger so that the terrans are happy to do a harass + macro build, and protoss have to sacrifice some economy in order to better defend harass (or lose workers and therefore have a weaker economy). If harass doesn't look good to terrans, then they will keep feeling obligated to do these bizarre timings and risky builds (whether they actually need to or not), and keep whining about the matchup.
Well, historically terrans will whine regardless even though terran has been the best race in competitive play. They're always either not able to play the builds they want, not able to get the units they want, or not winning enough (>50%). If terran goes one year without winning multiple major tournaments or one matchup dips below 48%, you'd think the game is broken, and yet protoss and zerg have always had to deal with that.
Completely agree on the first part of your comment.
The rest I take is trolling? Because the facts clearly prove you wrong. Last year, Maru was the only terran premiere tournament winner for the whole year... 4/14 winner (1 player only) and 1/14 runner up (TY). This year first premiere, Terran completely bombed out. Actually last Terran win on a premiere weekender tournament was in 2017 (GSL vs. the world)
So... I dunno Kev
Yup and therefore terrans think the game is broken. Where am I wrong?
On March 15 2019 03:03 MarianoSC2 wrote: Edit: And if you are gonna preach about ancient history, then be my guest but it has nothing to do with current state of the game and that Terran got screwed in PvT after LOTV revamp, which is what most people are whining about.
Terrans have always whined the most. I made a post saying that terran harass should be buffed and that's all terrans can do is whine about me calling them historical whiners.
On March 15 2019 00:30 NonY wrote: Nerfing protoss in order to redesign the matchup is really frustrating for protoss players, especially when it affects other matchups.
I think Blizzard should make early game terran harass stronger so that the terrans are happy to do a harass + macro build, and protoss have to sacrifice some economy in order to better defend harass (or lose workers and therefore have a weaker economy). If harass doesn't look good to terrans, then they will keep feeling obligated to do these bizarre timings and risky builds (whether they actually need to or not), and keep whining about the matchup.
Well, historically terrans will whine regardless even though terran has been the best race in competitive play. They're always either not able to play the builds they want, not able to get the units they want, or not winning enough (>50%). If terran goes one year without winning multiple major tournaments or one matchup dips below 48%, you'd think the game is broken, and yet protoss and zerg have always had to deal with that.
Completely agree on the first part of your comment.
The rest I take is trolling? Because the facts clearly prove you wrong. Last year, Maru was the only terran premiere tournament winner for the whole year... 4/14 winner (1 player only) and 1/14 runner up (TY). This year first premiere, Terran completely bombed out. Actually last Terran win on a premiere weekender tournament was in 2017 (GSL vs. the world)
So... I dunno Kev
Yup and therefore terrans think the game is broken. Where am I wrong?
On March 15 2019 03:03 MarianoSC2 wrote: Edit: And if you are gonna preach about ancient history, then be my guest but it has nothing to do with current state of the game and that Terran got screwed in PvT after LOTV revamp, which is what most people are whining about.
Terrans have always whined the most. I made a post saying that terran harass should be buffed and that's all terrans can do is whine about me calling them historical whiners.
Lol. Sc1 is relevant to sc2 balance on some planet? Zerg is also being nerfed..its not just protoss. If there was no nerf happening to zerg then the protosses whining would have some legitimacy. The nydus play is allllll over the matchup.. blizz is trying to fix that...ur upgrades got less than a minute longer to max out thats seems like adequate compensation for what zerg lost with the patch...which is the whole point lmao to fix tvp without influencing pvz too much. You dont even hear pro toss players trying to pretend like tvp isnt a joke right now. So blizz is doing something about it. Literally no matter what they did if it involved toss getting any weaker the salt tears would be flowing. I really hope they dont pay it any mind.
On March 14 2019 15:15 skdsk wrote: Its honestly really strange how blizzard gives toss like 3 mass aoe killing options in tvp all of them can wipe your army in 1-2 shots, yet terran only really has widow mine, which is situational and nowhere on the same power as protoss options, they have ghost, but ghost doesnt even kill the targets he aoes. So protoss is like you have liberators ghost raven wm you only need to use them all and its all ok!. Try to use 4 caster and micro your bio ball at same time, will see how it goes to you.. i specifically try to macro in every tvp, but honestly i lose pretty much every game...
Without those AOE, Protoss would be complete trash. Protoss AOE is their equalizer.
If Terran, with the pound for pound most efficient units in the game, gets Protoss tier AOE, they become broken -
See: old Raven
Widow mines are great too, I dont know what youre talking about. They almost always pay for themselves at the very least.
And you forgot the siege tank
What 4 casters are you talking about....that sounds more like the Protoss army which is so reliant on spells/abilities
You micro the bio, kite them with the support of your widow mine/liberator push, and the only casters you have are ghosts for high templar and ravens for disruptor/colossus, generally speaking
Pretty much every terran unit have ability and you need to use it correctly or the unit becomes useless, compare lets say protos death ball of zealot stalker archon colosus ht and terran mmm raven wm liberator ghost. All protoss need to do is drop storms, and micro his units, terran needs to use emp, constantly siege unsiege liberator and widow mines, micro his bio like crazy, use raven spells, so terran needs to use 2-3times more skills then protoss for even battle...
Also another problem is Protoss dont have to "answer" to any unit terran makes, for example if protoss makes ht, terran needs to make ghosts or he gets rekt, if protoss makes colosus terran needs vikings or libs with range. Protoss doesnt need to make anything to answer to terran units all his units already counters everything terrans make.
lol not sure if srs
i switched from protoss main to terran main because the protoss army is too much of a hassle to control.
the point youre missing is that if storm (or whatever AOE youre relying on) whiffs, youre in pretty deep shit. your expensive, important units just melt.
Terran has superb entrenched positioning to fall back to, with excellent AI
Lmao are you serious? Even dodging a storm 100% is huge damage to the Terran army because the units are splitting and are not attacking.
On March 14 2019 21:01 BerserkSword wrote: Maru just eviscerated Neeb, probably the second best late game protoss player in the world, in late game TvP despite neeb having major economic advantage as well as all 3 forms of AOE
Turns out that lategame TvP is not as bad as many terran players claim it is. skyterran + ghost just shits on protoss late game
P.S. Maru won game 1 with raven, and game 3 on widow mine spam
shit on protoss late game ???? what about bogus vs rail game where he got shit'd by the army he's supposed to shit on ??? this is the most ridiculous comment i've seen in a while...
On March 14 2019 21:01 BerserkSword wrote: Maru just eviscerated Neeb, probably the second best late game protoss player in the world, in late game TvP despite neeb having major economic advantage as well as all 3 forms of AOE
Turns out that lategame TvP is not as bad as many terran players claim it is. skyterran + ghost just shits on protoss late game
P.S. Maru won game 1 with raven, and game 3 on widow mine spam
shit on protoss late game ???? what about bogus vs rail game where he got shit'd by the army he's supposed to shit on ??? this is the most ridiculous comment i've seen in a while...
On March 14 2019 21:01 BerserkSword wrote: Maru just eviscerated Neeb, probably the second best late game protoss player in the world, in late game TvP despite neeb having major economic advantage as well as all 3 forms of AOE
Turns out that lategame TvP is not as bad as many terran players claim it is. skyterran + ghost just shits on protoss late game
P.S. Maru won game 1 with raven, and game 3 on widow mine spam
If anything that game just proofs that lategame TvP is broken. Maru had to play absolutely perfectly to ever stand a chance to win, while Neeb made so many mistakes and still stayed in the game for so long. (the eco advantage you mentioned is not just random, every toss has eco advantage if he makes it into lategame and that is the problem!) It just wasnt Neebs day, he played poorly overall.
On the other hand look at Rail vs Inno. Similar game, but Inno made 1 big mistake with moving his units too far out and his micro and positioning wasnt nearly as perfect as Marus, and he got completely crushed.
I said skyterran + ghosts destroy protoss late game
Compare Innovation's and Maru's late game armies. Maru had like double the amount of skyterran and ghosts that innovation did. And innovation was still able to kill 20 of those "broken" tempests
On March 14 2019 15:15 skdsk wrote: Its honestly really strange how blizzard gives toss like 3 mass aoe killing options in tvp all of them can wipe your army in 1-2 shots, yet terran only really has widow mine, which is situational and nowhere on the same power as protoss options, they have ghost, but ghost doesnt even kill the targets he aoes. So protoss is like you have liberators ghost raven wm you only need to use them all and its all ok!. Try to use 4 caster and micro your bio ball at same time, will see how it goes to you.. i specifically try to macro in every tvp, but honestly i lose pretty much every game...
Without those AOE, Protoss would be complete trash. Protoss AOE is their equalizer.
If Terran, with the pound for pound most efficient units in the game, gets Protoss tier AOE, they become broken -
See: old Raven
Widow mines are great too, I dont know what youre talking about. They almost always pay for themselves at the very least.
And you forgot the siege tank
What 4 casters are you talking about....that sounds more like the Protoss army which is so reliant on spells/abilities
You micro the bio, kite them with the support of your widow mine/liberator push, and the only casters you have are ghosts for high templar and ravens for disruptor/colossus, generally speaking
Pretty much every terran unit have ability and you need to use it correctly or the unit becomes useless, compare lets say protos death ball of zealot stalker archon colosus ht and terran mmm raven wm liberator ghost. All protoss need to do is drop storms, and micro his units, terran needs to use emp, constantly siege unsiege liberator and widow mines, micro his bio like crazy, use raven spells, so terran needs to use 2-3times more skills then protoss for even battle...
Also another problem is Protoss dont have to "answer" to any unit terran makes, for example if protoss makes ht, terran needs to make ghosts or he gets rekt, if protoss makes colosus terran needs vikings or libs with range. Protoss doesnt need to make anything to answer to terran units all his units already counters everything terrans make.
lol not sure if srs
i switched from protoss main to terran main because the protoss army is too much of a hassle to control.
the point youre missing is that if storm (or whatever AOE youre relying on) whiffs, youre in pretty deep shit. your expensive, important units just melt.
Terran has superb entrenched positioning to fall back to, with excellent AI
Lmao are you serious? Even dodging a storm 100% is huge damage to the Terran army because the units are splitting and are not attacking.
The only part of the terran army that really needs to retreat without doing anything are MMM. Vikings have 9 range so after a storm dodge they are back at shredding expensive colussi and tempests.
So yeah - while marines and marauders might be zoned out, youre ignoring the rest of the terran position - range liberators, ghosts, vikings which still are huge threats to the key components of the protoss deathball
On March 14 2019 15:15 skdsk wrote: Its honestly really strange how blizzard gives toss like 3 mass aoe killing options in tvp all of them can wipe your army in 1-2 shots, yet terran only really has widow mine, which is situational and nowhere on the same power as protoss options, they have ghost, but ghost doesnt even kill the targets he aoes. So protoss is like you have liberators ghost raven wm you only need to use them all and its all ok!. Try to use 4 caster and micro your bio ball at same time, will see how it goes to you.. i specifically try to macro in every tvp, but honestly i lose pretty much every game...
Without those AOE, Protoss would be complete trash. Protoss AOE is their equalizer.
If Terran, with the pound for pound most efficient units in the game, gets Protoss tier AOE, they become broken -
See: old Raven
Widow mines are great too, I dont know what youre talking about. They almost always pay for themselves at the very least.
And you forgot the siege tank
What 4 casters are you talking about....that sounds more like the Protoss army which is so reliant on spells/abilities
You micro the bio, kite them with the support of your widow mine/liberator push, and the only casters you have are ghosts for high templar and ravens for disruptor/colossus, generally speaking
Pretty much every terran unit have ability and you need to use it correctly or the unit becomes useless, compare lets say protos death ball of zealot stalker archon colosus ht and terran mmm raven wm liberator ghost. All protoss need to do is drop storms, and micro his units, terran needs to use emp, constantly siege unsiege liberator and widow mines, micro his bio like crazy, use raven spells, so terran needs to use 2-3times more skills then protoss for even battle...
Also another problem is Protoss dont have to "answer" to any unit terran makes, for example if protoss makes ht, terran needs to make ghosts or he gets rekt, if protoss makes colosus terran needs vikings or libs with range. Protoss doesnt need to make anything to answer to terran units all his units already counters everything terrans make.
lol not sure if srs
i switched from protoss main to terran main because the protoss army is too much of a hassle to control.
the point youre missing is that if storm (or whatever AOE youre relying on) whiffs, youre in pretty deep shit. your expensive, important units just melt.
Terran has superb entrenched positioning to fall back to, with excellent AI
Lmao are you serious? Even dodging a storm 100% is huge damage to the Terran army because the units are splitting and are not attacking.
The only part of the terran army that really needs to retreat without doing anything are MMM. Vikings have 9 range so after a storm dodge they are back at shredding expensive colussi and tempests.
So yeah - while marines and marauders might be zoned out, youre ignoring the rest of the terran position - range liberators, ghosts, vikings which still are huge threats to the key components of the protoss deathball
Yeah, Parting had a game on his stream against TY where TY did the mass ghost/viking/ranged liberator thing and TY just basically starved Parting and chipped away his tempest/colossus/HT army and there wasn't a lot Parting could do to counter it. The thing with that Terran army is it all has a lot of range, and you can zone with nukes to prevent Protoss from ever properly attacking in. TY built mass orbitals so Parting couldn't ever get observers close enough to find ghosts since his army was constantly being scanned (also, there were tons of turrets). TY kept sending ghosts to nuke bases and ended up pinning Parting and then slow pushed across the map with liberators. Parting went from being up multiple bases to losing because he could never properly fight TY's army in a cost effective way and he eventually ran out of gas.
When properly done, that composition looks incredibly strong.
On March 14 2019 15:15 skdsk wrote: Its honestly really strange how blizzard gives toss like 3 mass aoe killing options in tvp all of them can wipe your army in 1-2 shots, yet terran only really has widow mine, which is situational and nowhere on the same power as protoss options, they have ghost, but ghost doesnt even kill the targets he aoes. So protoss is like you have liberators ghost raven wm you only need to use them all and its all ok!. Try to use 4 caster and micro your bio ball at same time, will see how it goes to you.. i specifically try to macro in every tvp, but honestly i lose pretty much every game...
Without those AOE, Protoss would be complete trash. Protoss AOE is their equalizer.
If Terran, with the pound for pound most efficient units in the game, gets Protoss tier AOE, they become broken -
See: old Raven
Widow mines are great too, I dont know what youre talking about. They almost always pay for themselves at the very least.
And you forgot the siege tank
What 4 casters are you talking about....that sounds more like the Protoss army which is so reliant on spells/abilities
You micro the bio, kite them with the support of your widow mine/liberator push, and the only casters you have are ghosts for high templar and ravens for disruptor/colossus, generally speaking
Pretty much every terran unit have ability and you need to use it correctly or the unit becomes useless, compare lets say protos death ball of zealot stalker archon colosus ht and terran mmm raven wm liberator ghost. All protoss need to do is drop storms, and micro his units, terran needs to use emp, constantly siege unsiege liberator and widow mines, micro his bio like crazy, use raven spells, so terran needs to use 2-3times more skills then protoss for even battle...
Also another problem is Protoss dont have to "answer" to any unit terran makes, for example if protoss makes ht, terran needs to make ghosts or he gets rekt, if protoss makes colosus terran needs vikings or libs with range. Protoss doesnt need to make anything to answer to terran units all his units already counters everything terrans make.
lol not sure if srs
i switched from protoss main to terran main because the protoss army is too much of a hassle to control.
the point youre missing is that if storm (or whatever AOE youre relying on) whiffs, youre in pretty deep shit. your expensive, important units just melt.
Terran has superb entrenched positioning to fall back to, with excellent AI
Lmao are you serious? Even dodging a storm 100% is huge damage to the Terran army because the units are splitting and are not attacking.
The only part of the terran army that really needs to retreat without doing anything are MMM. Vikings have 9 range so after a storm dodge they are back at shredding expensive colussi and tempests.
So yeah - while marines and marauders might be zoned out, youre ignoring the rest of the terran position - range liberators, ghosts, vikings which still are huge threats to the key components of the protoss deathball
Yeah, Parting had a game on his stream against TY where TY did the mass ghost/viking/ranged liberator thing and TY just basically starved Parting and chipped away his tempest/colossus/HT army and there wasn't a lot Parting could do to counter it. The thing with that Terran army is it all has a lot of range, and you can zone with nukes to prevent Protoss from ever properly attacking in. TY built mass orbitals so Parting couldn't ever get observers close enough to find ghosts since his army was constantly being scanned (also, there were tons of turrets). TY kept sending ghosts to nuke bases and ended up pinning Parting and then slow pushed across the map with liberators. Parting went from being up multiple bases to losing because he could never properly fight TY's army in a cost effective way and he eventually ran out of gas.
When properly done, that composition looks incredibly strong.
Exactly. That is basically what happend in Maru vs Neeb too. The Terran late game when played like that is a complete machine - almost impossible to crack as a Protoss
I dont know where this myth of Terran having to 2 base all in Protoss to have a chance even comes from.
2019 Code S Season 1 Stats vs Cure - The best protoss player on the planet, as well as the third most successful player on the planet last year, was eliminated from the tournament by Cure. One of cure's win was as a 3 base terran.
2019 Code S Season 1 Parting vs Bunny - Protoss player eliminated by Terran again. Bunny won game 2 as a 3 base terran and never did a real 2 base all in during his second win in the series
2019 Cose S Season 1 Innovation vs Hurricane - Inno won the series, and he won both games as 3 base terran
2019 Code S Season 1 Patience vs Bunny - i forgot the specifics but both of bunny's wins were as 3 base terran
March 2019 Olimo league TY vs Zest - TY beats Zest in bo5. Two of the three wins are macro games, with one of them going to extreme late game on year zero. And you see the same thing - Protoss cannot do anything against skyterran + ghost late game
On March 14 2019 15:15 skdsk wrote: Its honestly really strange how blizzard gives toss like 3 mass aoe killing options in tvp all of them can wipe your army in 1-2 shots, yet terran only really has widow mine, which is situational and nowhere on the same power as protoss options, they have ghost, but ghost doesnt even kill the targets he aoes. So protoss is like you have liberators ghost raven wm you only need to use them all and its all ok!. Try to use 4 caster and micro your bio ball at same time, will see how it goes to you.. i specifically try to macro in every tvp, but honestly i lose pretty much every game...
Without those AOE, Protoss would be complete trash. Protoss AOE is their equalizer.
If Terran, with the pound for pound most efficient units in the game, gets Protoss tier AOE, they become broken -
See: old Raven
Widow mines are great too, I dont know what youre talking about. They almost always pay for themselves at the very least.
And you forgot the siege tank
What 4 casters are you talking about....that sounds more like the Protoss army which is so reliant on spells/abilities
You micro the bio, kite them with the support of your widow mine/liberator push, and the only casters you have are ghosts for high templar and ravens for disruptor/colossus, generally speaking
Pretty much every terran unit have ability and you need to use it correctly or the unit becomes useless, compare lets say protos death ball of zealot stalker archon colosus ht and terran mmm raven wm liberator ghost. All protoss need to do is drop storms, and micro his units, terran needs to use emp, constantly siege unsiege liberator and widow mines, micro his bio like crazy, use raven spells, so terran needs to use 2-3times more skills then protoss for even battle...
Also another problem is Protoss dont have to "answer" to any unit terran makes, for example if protoss makes ht, terran needs to make ghosts or he gets rekt, if protoss makes colosus terran needs vikings or libs with range. Protoss doesnt need to make anything to answer to terran units all his units already counters everything terrans make.
lol not sure if srs
i switched from protoss main to terran main because the protoss army is too much of a hassle to control.
the point youre missing is that if storm (or whatever AOE youre relying on) whiffs, youre in pretty deep shit. your expensive, important units just melt.
Terran has superb entrenched positioning to fall back to, with excellent AI
Lmao are you serious? Even dodging a storm 100% is huge damage to the Terran army because the units are splitting and are not attacking.
The only part of the terran army that really needs to retreat without doing anything are MMM. Vikings have 9 range so after a storm dodge they are back at shredding expensive colussi and tempests.
So yeah - while marines and marauders might be zoned out, youre ignoring the rest of the terran position - range liberators, ghosts, vikings which still are huge threats to the key components of the protoss deathball
Yeah, Parting had a game on his stream against TY where TY did the mass ghost/viking/ranged liberator thing and TY just basically starved Parting and chipped away his tempest/colossus/HT army and there wasn't a lot Parting could do to counter it. The thing with that Terran army is it all has a lot of range, and you can zone with nukes to prevent Protoss from ever properly attacking in. TY built mass orbitals so Parting couldn't ever get observers close enough to find ghosts since his army was constantly being scanned (also, there were tons of turrets). TY kept sending ghosts to nuke bases and ended up pinning Parting and then slow pushed across the map with liberators. Parting went from being up multiple bases to losing because he could never properly fight TY's army in a cost effective way and he eventually ran out of gas.
When properly done, that composition looks incredibly strong.
Exactly. That is basically what happend in Maru vs Neeb too. The Terran late game when played like that is a complete machine - almost impossible to crack as a Protoss
I dont know where this myth of Terran having to 2 base all in Protoss to have a chance even comes from.
2019 Code S Season 1 Stats vs Cure - The best protoss player on the planet, as well as the third most successful player on the planet last year, was eliminated from the tournament by Cure. One of cure's win was as a 3 base terran.
2019 Code S Season 1 Parting vs Bunny - Protoss player eliminated by Terran again. Bunny won game 2 as a 3 base terran and never did a real 2 base all in during his second win in the series
2019 Cose S Season 1 Innovation vs Hurricane - Inno won the series, and he won both games as 3 base terran
2019 Code S Season 1 Patience vs Bunny - i forgot the specifics but both of bunny's wins were as 3 base terran
March 2019 Olimo league TY vs Zest - TY beats Zest in bo5. Two of the three wins are macro games, with one of them going to extreme late game on year zero. And you see the same thing - Protoss cannot do anything against skyterran + ghost late game
The argument was always that its impossible to do it if you arent so korean who spams 60games per day, If you are average player playing tvp in late game is nightmare
On March 15 2019 15:07 BerserkSword wrote: Exactly. That is basically what happend in Maru vs Neeb too. The Terran late game when played like that is a complete machine - almost impossible to crack as a Protoss
Sorry, you are wrong. Maru was a 3 time Code S champion last year. He has some of the best micro and control from any player on the planet, regardless of race. Maru is in contention for one of the best SC2 players of all time. Neeb is not even being discussed as being a top 5 player for his race all time (consider other Protoss players that have achieved much more than Neeb like Stats, Zest, MC, sOs, Rain, Classic, Hero, etc).
The fact that Maru barely struggled to beat Neeb in such a late game shows how strong the Protoss late game is. I don't consider Neeb's control to be on the same level of Maru.
If Maru had spent his career playing Protoss and Neeb spent his career playing Terran, the 2nd match yesterday wouldn't have gone on for nearly as long as it did. With Protoss's advantage in the late game, Maru playing as Protoss would have closed out and won the game much earlier than Neeb playing Terran.
It just took Maru that long to beat Neeb yesterday because Terran is at a disadvantage to Protoss in the late game. Blizzard probably needs to make a few tweaks in the late game so that Terran isn't at such a disadvantage versus Protoss.
On March 15 2019 15:07 BerserkSword wrote: Exactly. That is basically what happend in Maru vs Neeb too. The Terran late game when played like that is a complete machine - almost impossible to crack as a Protoss
Sorry, you are wrong. Maru was a 3 time Code S champion last year. He has some of the best micro and control from any player on the planet, regardless of race. Maru is in contention for one of the best SC2 players of all time. Neeb is not even being discussed as being a top 5 player for his race all time (consider other Protoss players that have achieved much more than Neeb like Stats, Zest, MC, sOs, Rain, Classic, Hero, etc).
The fact that Maru barely struggled to beat Neeb in such a late game shows how strong the Protoss late game is. I don't consider Neeb's control to be on the same level of Maru.
If Maru had spent his career playing Protoss and Neeb spent his career playing Terran, the 2nd match yesterday wouldn't have gone on for nearly as long as it did. With Protoss's advantage in the late game, Maru playing as Protoss would have closed out and won the game much earlier than Neeb playing Terran.
It just took Maru that long to beat Neeb yesterday because Terran is at a disadvantage to Protoss in the late game. Blizzard probably needs to make a few tweaks in the late game so that Terran isn't at such a disadvantage versus Protoss.
Obviously neeb's control is not on the same level as Maru's, but youre acting like neeb is some scrub who threw the game. Maru was down so much at various points over the course of the game, and neeb's strategies were sound. Maru pulled the win out not due to superior army control, but because the late late game is terran favored no matter how you want to spin it.
and I'm glad you just ignored the laundry list of examples i gave
Here's the same exact map and same scenario TY vs Zest on Year Zero
game 2 if the time stamp doesnt work
Again, zest's protoss cannot do anything to that late game terran composition.
inb4 "TY won because he has better unit control than Zest"
On March 15 2019 15:07 BerserkSword wrote: Exactly. That is basically what happend in Maru vs Neeb too. The Terran late game when played like that is a complete machine - almost impossible to crack as a Protoss
Sorry, you are wrong. Maru was a 3 time Code S champion last year. He has some of the best micro and control from any player on the planet, regardless of race. Maru is in contention for one of the best SC2 players of all time. Neeb is not even being discussed as being a top 5 player for his race all time (consider other Protoss players that have achieved much more than Neeb like Stats, Zest, MC, sOs, Rain, Classic, Hero, etc).
The fact that Maru barely struggled to beat Neeb in such a late game shows how strong the Protoss late game is. I don't consider Neeb's control to be on the same level of Maru.
If Maru had spent his career playing Protoss and Neeb spent his career playing Terran, the 2nd match yesterday wouldn't have gone on for nearly as long as it did. With Protoss's advantage in the late game, Maru playing as Protoss would have closed out and won the game much earlier than Neeb playing Terran.
It just took Maru that long to beat Neeb yesterday because Terran is at a disadvantage to Protoss in the late game. Blizzard probably needs to make a few tweaks in the late game so that Terran isn't at such a disadvantage versus Protoss.
So when Maru/TY/Inno win is because they are better players than the others, but when they loose is because the match-up is imba. The typical Terran-fan logic since WoL, where the imbalance was blatant and you all still defended that terrans were simply better.
Extreme late game TvP is clearly winnable at the top level. Early game is protoss favoured right now, and mid-game is Terran favoured as has almost always been. Late game is protoss favoured and extreme late game is Terran favoured after the recent nerfs to carriers and high Templars. Each race has its moments, as it should be.
The upgrade nerf will skew ZvP even more. Teleportable zerg armies for 50/50 is dumb enough.
On March 15 2019 15:07 BerserkSword wrote: Exactly. That is basically what happend in Maru vs Neeb too. The Terran late game when played like that is a complete machine - almost impossible to crack as a Protoss
Sorry, you are wrong. Maru was a 3 time Code S champion last year. He has some of the best micro and control from any player on the planet, regardless of race. Maru is in contention for one of the best SC2 players of all time. Neeb is not even being discussed as being a top 5 player for his race all time (consider other Protoss players that have achieved much more than Neeb like Stats, Zest, MC, sOs, Rain, Classic, Hero, etc).
The fact that Maru barely struggled to beat Neeb in such a late game shows how strong the Protoss late game is. I don't consider Neeb's control to be on the same level of Maru.
If Maru had spent his career playing Protoss and Neeb spent his career playing Terran, the 2nd match yesterday wouldn't have gone on for nearly as long as it did. With Protoss's advantage in the late game, Maru playing as Protoss would have closed out and won the game much earlier than Neeb playing Terran.
It just took Maru that long to beat Neeb yesterday because Terran is at a disadvantage to Protoss in the late game. Blizzard probably needs to make a few tweaks in the late game so that Terran isn't at such a disadvantage versus Protoss.
So when Maru/TY/Inno win is because they are better players than the others, but when they loose is because the match-up is imba. The typical Terran-fan logic since WoL, where the imbalance was blatant and you all still defended that terrans were simply better.
Extreme late game TvP is clearly winnable at the top level. Early game is protoss favoured right now, and mid-game is Terran favoured as has almost always been. Late game is protoss favoured and extreme late game is Terran favoured after the recent nerfs to carriers and high Templars. Each race has its moments, as it should be.
The upgrade nerf will skew ZvP even more. Teleportable zerg armies for 50/50 is dumb enough.
it's comical really. and then nobody bats an eye when stats is eliminated in code S by cure
dont forget how badly the tempests were castrated. at first they lost their durability in exchange for speed. then the speed got nerfed while getting none of the durability back
On March 15 2019 15:07 BerserkSword wrote: Exactly. That is basically what happend in Maru vs Neeb too. The Terran late game when played like that is a complete machine - almost impossible to crack as a Protoss
Sorry, you are wrong. Maru was a 3 time Code S champion last year. He has some of the best micro and control from any player on the planet, regardless of race. Maru is in contention for one of the best SC2 players of all time. Neeb is not even being discussed as being a top 5 player for his race all time (consider other Protoss players that have achieved much more than Neeb like Stats, Zest, MC, sOs, Rain, Classic, Hero, etc).
The fact that Maru barely struggled to beat Neeb in such a late game shows how strong the Protoss late game is. I don't consider Neeb's control to be on the same level of Maru.
If Maru had spent his career playing Protoss and Neeb spent his career playing Terran, the 2nd match yesterday wouldn't have gone on for nearly as long as it did. With Protoss's advantage in the late game, Maru playing as Protoss would have closed out and won the game much earlier than Neeb playing Terran.
It just took Maru that long to beat Neeb yesterday because Terran is at a disadvantage to Protoss in the late game. Blizzard probably needs to make a few tweaks in the late game so that Terran isn't at such a disadvantage versus Protoss.
So when Maru/TY/Inno win is because they are better players than the others, but when they loose is because the match-up is imba. The typical Terran-fan logic since WoL, where the imbalance was blatant and you all still defended that terrans were simply better.
Extreme late game TvP is clearly winnable at the top level. Early game is protoss favoured right now, and mid-game is Terran favoured as has almost always been. Late game is protoss favoured and extreme late game is Terran favoured after the recent nerfs to carriers and high Templars. Each race has its moments, as it should be.
The upgrade nerf will skew ZvP even more. Teleportable zerg armies for 50/50 is dumb enough.
What? I'm pretty sure that I read MarineLord posts on TL (and a few other terrans on twitter) that TvP lategame is okay/good, but that the real problem lies in the midgame where the terran is actually at a disadvantage and has a lot of troubles getting to the lategame / winning in the midgame.
On March 15 2019 15:07 BerserkSword wrote: Exactly. That is basically what happend in Maru vs Neeb too. The Terran late game when played like that is a complete machine - almost impossible to crack as a Protoss
Sorry, you are wrong. Maru was a 3 time Code S champion last year. He has some of the best micro and control from any player on the planet, regardless of race. Maru is in contention for one of the best SC2 players of all time. Neeb is not even being discussed as being a top 5 player for his race all time (consider other Protoss players that have achieved much more than Neeb like Stats, Zest, MC, sOs, Rain, Classic, Hero, etc).
The fact that Maru barely struggled to beat Neeb in such a late game shows how strong the Protoss late game is. I don't consider Neeb's control to be on the same level of Maru.
If Maru had spent his career playing Protoss and Neeb spent his career playing Terran, the 2nd match yesterday wouldn't have gone on for nearly as long as it did. With Protoss's advantage in the late game, Maru playing as Protoss would have closed out and won the game much earlier than Neeb playing Terran.
It just took Maru that long to beat Neeb yesterday because Terran is at a disadvantage to Protoss in the late game. Blizzard probably needs to make a few tweaks in the late game so that Terran isn't at such a disadvantage versus Protoss.
Obviously neeb's control is not on the same level as Maru's, but youre acting like neeb is some scrub who threw the game. Maru was down so much at various points over the course of the game, and neeb's strategies were sound. Maru pulled the win out not due to superior army control, but because the late late game is terran favored no matter how you want to spin it.
and I'm glad you just ignored the laundry list of examples i gave
Here's the same exact map and same scenario TY vs Zest on Year Zero
Again, zest's protoss cannot do anything to that late game terran composition.
inb4 "TY won because he has better unit control than Zest"
TY won because he has better macro #ZestMacro
Although Zest has great name he isn't that good lately while TY rose to power in 2018 and it appears he's still holding his form. (do you remember Zest v Maru COde S finals? how long was it, an hour with some pregame talk and post game talk? )
Edit> Actually I would place Neeb over Zest at this moment.
focusing only on a few games on a few maps with clear imbalance in players level in order to show TvP ultra-late game is strong is kinda biased.
First, nobody said the ultra-late-game-on-even-footing was the main issue with TvP balance. We barely see this at all, in fact, because it is playable only on a few maps : split map plus strong liberators positions are the requirement.
Second, we can find numerous examples of terrans loosing ultra-late-game, last one being Innovation vs Rail (!!!) at WESG.
Next, people talking of "3basing terran" should make the difference between 3-bases all-in and 3 bases macro-oriented. A lot of recent 3bases terran is 3bases all-in, like the 5rax double reactored starport liberators no armory play (Inno do this a lot), or ghost before armory into all-ining with 3 ghosts, etc, etc.
Last, players are humans, thus make mistakes and/or good plays. So, even with let's say a BL/infestor area level of imbalance, some players will still loose a imba max-out BL/infestor situation because they fuck up/opponent provoke huge misplay. And so MMA still won games at the eight of BL/infestors with 360 surround and unsieged tanks drops on infestors.
Players still can win here and here even in the most imba situation, because they don't play DeepMind and so can provoke opponent's errors by making good moves. Doesn't mean it's not imba.
To return at the current TvP situation, recent competitive TvP between top players as been a slaughter, see IEM. But yeah Maru who win Neeb 90% of the time since years and years can still take games.
On March 15 2019 15:07 BerserkSword wrote: Exactly. That is basically what happend in Maru vs Neeb too. The Terran late game when played like that is a complete machine - almost impossible to crack as a Protoss
Sorry, you are wrong. Maru was a 3 time Code S champion last year. He has some of the best micro and control from any player on the planet, regardless of race. Maru is in contention for one of the best SC2 players of all time. Neeb is not even being discussed as being a top 5 player for his race all time (consider other Protoss players that have achieved much more than Neeb like Stats, Zest, MC, sOs, Rain, Classic, Hero, etc).
The fact that Maru barely struggled to beat Neeb in such a late game shows how strong the Protoss late game is. I don't consider Neeb's control to be on the same level of Maru.
If Maru had spent his career playing Protoss and Neeb spent his career playing Terran, the 2nd match yesterday wouldn't have gone on for nearly as long as it did. With Protoss's advantage in the late game, Maru playing as Protoss would have closed out and won the game much earlier than Neeb playing Terran.
It just took Maru that long to beat Neeb yesterday because Terran is at a disadvantage to Protoss in the late game. Blizzard probably needs to make a few tweaks in the late game so that Terran isn't at such a disadvantage versus Protoss.
Obviously neeb's control is not on the same level as Maru's, but youre acting like neeb is some scrub who threw the game. Maru was down so much at various points over the course of the game, and neeb's strategies were sound. Maru pulled the win out not due to superior army control, but because the late late game is terran favored no matter how you want to spin it.
and I'm glad you just ignored the laundry list of examples i gave
Here's the same exact map and same scenario TY vs Zest on Year Zero
Again, zest's protoss cannot do anything to that late game terran composition.
inb4 "TY won because he has better unit control than Zest"
Zest gets caught completely out of position and doesn't recall to his 4th, warps in what is totally not enough units to defend 3 medvacs full of marines on a choke, loses them all then gets attacked. Barely survives, his few remaining zealots are chasing libs, meanwhile TY is preparing to take his southern base. Zest decides to dick around TY forward expansion donating the few tempests that he does have to bio running forward while the planetary goes up. There was no way TY was gonna push after losing all his tanks and getting his lib count reduced to almost nothing, and even if he did that army would've gotten slaughtered in the middle. Meanwhile at the 15 minute mark there is no sign of +2 air weapons starting (+3 is big a nice breakpoint for tempest vs libs) nor colossus because zest economy is dogshit.
Zest does a good attack on TY's 5th and takes down 3 ccs recalls to stop the attack on his 5th, but is being picked apart by libs sieging his fresh bases. Decides the best course of action is to spend what little money he has into upgrading shields vs TY's ghost heavy army with and attacking up a ramp into already sieged libs without a single templar to kill the giant ball of bio sitting atop the hill.
Zest lost because he had the tactical thinking of a potato during that game.
TLDR: he pretty much lost the game when 4th base died.
On March 15 2019 15:07 BerserkSword wrote: Exactly. That is basically what happend in Maru vs Neeb too. The Terran late game when played like that is a complete machine - almost impossible to crack as a Protoss
Sorry, you are wrong. Maru was a 3 time Code S champion last year. He has some of the best micro and control from any player on the planet, regardless of race. Maru is in contention for one of the best SC2 players of all time. Neeb is not even being discussed as being a top 5 player for his race all time (consider other Protoss players that have achieved much more than Neeb like Stats, Zest, MC, sOs, Rain, Classic, Hero, etc).
The fact that Maru barely struggled to beat Neeb in such a late game shows how strong the Protoss late game is. I don't consider Neeb's control to be on the same level of Maru.
If Maru had spent his career playing Protoss and Neeb spent his career playing Terran, the 2nd match yesterday wouldn't have gone on for nearly as long as it did. With Protoss's advantage in the late game, Maru playing as Protoss would have closed out and won the game much earlier than Neeb playing Terran.
It just took Maru that long to beat Neeb yesterday because Terran is at a disadvantage to Protoss in the late game. Blizzard probably needs to make a few tweaks in the late game so that Terran isn't at such a disadvantage versus Protoss.
Obviously neeb's control is not on the same level as Maru's, but youre acting like neeb is some scrub who threw the game. Maru was down so much at various points over the course of the game, and neeb's strategies were sound. Maru pulled the win out not due to superior army control, but because the late late game is terran favored no matter how you want to spin it.
and I'm glad you just ignored the laundry list of examples i gave
Here's the same exact map and same scenario TY vs Zest on Year Zero
Again, zest's protoss cannot do anything to that late game terran composition.
inb4 "TY won because he has better unit control than Zest"
Again. The illogic is hilarious with this guy. You cant cherry pick games that help your case.. this is the 5th posting youve made about Neeb losing to Maru (which is supposed to happen when thr number 1 player meets an at best top 15 player?) Yet you continue to completely ignore that less than a week earlier that same player 2-0d Maru (absolutely not supposed to happen). This has nothing to do with balance. People at the top level play better or worse on given days. There is a consensus among pros (even Protoss pros) that Terran needs help in this matchup. It doesnt matter how much you cry or how many times Parting(semi competitive streamer) lost to TY(2nd best Terran in the world) toss is getting nerfed. I would be very surprised if this patch is the full extent of it as well. 6 months of proxy meta wasnt enough to convince you so clearly nothing will be.
On March 15 2019 15:07 BerserkSword wrote: Exactly. That is basically what happend in Maru vs Neeb too. The Terran late game when played like that is a complete machine - almost impossible to crack as a Protoss
Sorry, you are wrong. Maru was a 3 time Code S champion last year. He has some of the best micro and control from any player on the planet, regardless of race. Maru is in contention for one of the best SC2 players of all time. Neeb is not even being discussed as being a top 5 player for his race all time (consider other Protoss players that have achieved much more than Neeb like Stats, Zest, MC, sOs, Rain, Classic, Hero, etc).
The fact that Maru barely struggled to beat Neeb in such a late game shows how strong the Protoss late game is. I don't consider Neeb's control to be on the same level of Maru.
If Maru had spent his career playing Protoss and Neeb spent his career playing Terran, the 2nd match yesterday wouldn't have gone on for nearly as long as it did. With Protoss's advantage in the late game, Maru playing as Protoss would have closed out and won the game much earlier than Neeb playing Terran.
It just took Maru that long to beat Neeb yesterday because Terran is at a disadvantage to Protoss in the late game. Blizzard probably needs to make a few tweaks in the late game so that Terran isn't at such a disadvantage versus Protoss.
So when Maru/TY/Inno win is because they are better players than the others, but when they loose is because the match-up is imba. The typical Terran-fan logic since WoL, where the imbalance was blatant and you all still defended that terrans were simply better.
Extreme late game TvP is clearly winnable at the top level. Early game is protoss favoured right now, and mid-game is Terran favoured as has almost always been. Late game is protoss favoured and extreme late game is Terran favoured after the recent nerfs to carriers and high Templars. Each race has its moments, as it should be.
The upgrade nerf will skew ZvP even more. Teleportable zerg armies for 50/50 is dumb enough.
What? I'm pretty sure that I read MarineLord posts on TL (and a few other terrans on twitter) that TvP lategame is okay/good, but that the real problem lies in the midgame where the terran is actually at a disadvantage and has a lot of troubles getting to the lategame / winning in the midgame.
I have looked for Mlord posts and I assume this is what you mention: “major imbalance that there is in mid/lategame in the matchup, if nobody try to macro in TvP it isn't because terran cheese are too strong but because of the amount of powerfull option protoss keeps adding to their army the longer the game goes, HT+colossus+disruptor, + eventually tempest makes it incredibly unfair, as terran have literally 0 army composition to deal with this kind of army”
For me, when Protoss has access and economy to have “HT+colossus+disruptor”, it is late game not mid game. Mid-game is for me when T3 units are not massed yet, and there we typically see a defensive Protoss vs a Terran that has the initiative. But whatever, definitions of that are not absolute.
On a consecutive post, he asks for (another) recall nerf to solve this.... it is beyond my comprehension how that would solve this (supposed) issue. I guess any nerf to Protoss is ok?
On another post he acknowledges that end-game compositions are ok.
Nydus changes are good, it's very refreshing to see them finally being used outside of all in attacks but they are just extremely powerful in all match ups at the moment, making them slightly easier to kill with a hit squad of cheap units is a small step, but a step in the right direction.
I don't know how to feel about the Protoss changes, obviously Protoss is very strong against Terran right now and the upgrade lead IS a problem but it's more of a symptom then the real issue. The real issue is that MULEs simply do not cover the economic lead that Protoss is able to gain by Chronoboosting workers out of their Nexus, almost always resulting in a heavy income edge to the Protoss which in turn, gives them other edges, like an upgrade and tech edge.
I think even an ever so slight buff to the MULE's income return might have been a sleeker change, would make ZvT a bit more competitive (it's close but as a Zerg I still feel like Z has the edge in ZvT) and it would help close the economy gap between Protoss and Terran.
Don't get me wrong I appreciate the gradual steps, but this nerf to Protoss is going to barely affect PvT at all while making Zerg feel very powerful with their now certain upgrade leads.
On March 15 2019 15:07 BerserkSword wrote: Exactly. That is basically what happend in Maru vs Neeb too. The Terran late game when played like that is a complete machine - almost impossible to crack as a Protoss
Sorry, you are wrong. Maru was a 3 time Code S champion last year. He has some of the best micro and control from any player on the planet, regardless of race. Maru is in contention for one of the best SC2 players of all time. Neeb is not even being discussed as being a top 5 player for his race all time (consider other Protoss players that have achieved much more than Neeb like Stats, Zest, MC, sOs, Rain, Classic, Hero, etc).
The fact that Maru barely struggled to beat Neeb in such a late game shows how strong the Protoss late game is. I don't consider Neeb's control to be on the same level of Maru.
If Maru had spent his career playing Protoss and Neeb spent his career playing Terran, the 2nd match yesterday wouldn't have gone on for nearly as long as it did. With Protoss's advantage in the late game, Maru playing as Protoss would have closed out and won the game much earlier than Neeb playing Terran.
It just took Maru that long to beat Neeb yesterday because Terran is at a disadvantage to Protoss in the late game. Blizzard probably needs to make a few tweaks in the late game so that Terran isn't at such a disadvantage versus Protoss.
Obviously neeb's control is not on the same level as Maru's, but youre acting like neeb is some scrub who threw the game. Maru was down so much at various points over the course of the game, and neeb's strategies were sound. Maru pulled the win out not due to superior army control, but because the late late game is terran favored no matter how you want to spin it.
and I'm glad you just ignored the laundry list of examples i gave
Here's the same exact map and same scenario TY vs Zest on Year Zero
Again, zest's protoss cannot do anything to that late game terran composition.
inb4 "TY won because he has better unit control than Zest"
So game 2 is supposed to show that lategame terran beats lategame protoss? Are we taking into account that Zest was literally incapable of macroing beyond 60 probes? Like, he gets his third earlier than TY and his expansion finished before TY's second orbital command finished and he's behind on probes. Throughout the game TY actually has an economy and uses that to transition into lategame well whereas zest just durdles around.
And then let's actually talk about the unit control. Why do you conclude protoss 'cant do anything to that late game terran composition' when he doesn't even have an oracle to provide vision for tempests (which causes him to lose his first set of tempest) and for the majority of the 'lategame' is just using a gateway army + storms while walking under liberation zones instead of slowly picking liberators off from range. Zest hardly even got a good army, he was just playing gateway units + storms and then a few useless tempests that he didn't control well at all. He never bothered with for example adding immortals, collosi, disruptors or carriers or actually having something to give Tempests vision. In the final fight he literally attack moves with gateway units into liberation zones.
And then it's still close because protoss can just keep trying to catch terran out of position because recall means they literally can't be out of position themselves.
but i still think chrono boost needs a nerf along with an upgrade for unlocking siege tank and ravager tho ib4,on this forum,the chrono boost analysis thread was pretty straight and narrow cuz the method is playing like bronze with decent macro mechanic unlike pro gamers who love killing workers...with a PASSION
but i still think chrono boost needs a nerf along with an upgrade for unlocking siege tank and ravager tho ib4,on this forum,the chrono boost analysis thread was pretty straight and narrow cuz the method is playing like bronze with decent macro mechanic unlike pro gamers who love killing workers...with a PASSION
Is English your second language? honestly having trouble understanding no offense. what do you mean the method is playing like bronze with decent macro mechanic?
siege tank and ravager exist because protoss (or any race really) 2 base allins would be broken without them.
So after I give several examples of recent TvP amongst the highest skilled players in the world ( top koreans + Neeb a kespa cup winner) which shows T with a higher win%, even without having to rely on 2 base all ins, the response I get is that the Terran players are simply more skilled/better at control
aka the best protoss players in the world need to get gud
We are talking about Stats, Zest, Neeb, PartinG here. Stats needs to get gud and he wont be eliminated by cure lmao
On March 15 2019 15:07 BerserkSword wrote: Exactly. That is basically what happend in Maru vs Neeb too. The Terran late game when played like that is a complete machine - almost impossible to crack as a Protoss
Sorry, you are wrong. Maru was a 3 time Code S champion last year. He has some of the best micro and control from any player on the planet, regardless of race. Maru is in contention for one of the best SC2 players of all time. Neeb is not even being discussed as being a top 5 player for his race all time (consider other Protoss players that have achieved much more than Neeb like Stats, Zest, MC, sOs, Rain, Classic, Hero, etc).
The fact that Maru barely struggled to beat Neeb in such a late game shows how strong the Protoss late game is. I don't consider Neeb's control to be on the same level of Maru.
If Maru had spent his career playing Protoss and Neeb spent his career playing Terran, the 2nd match yesterday wouldn't have gone on for nearly as long as it did. With Protoss's advantage in the late game, Maru playing as Protoss would have closed out and won the game much earlier than Neeb playing Terran.
It just took Maru that long to beat Neeb yesterday because Terran is at a disadvantage to Protoss in the late game. Blizzard probably needs to make a few tweaks in the late game so that Terran isn't at such a disadvantage versus Protoss.
So when Maru/TY/Inno win is because they are better players than the others, but when they loose is because the match-up is imba. The typical Terran-fan logic since WoL, where the imbalance was blatant and you all still defended that terrans were simply better.
Extreme late game TvP is clearly winnable at the top level. Early game is protoss favoured right now, and mid-game is Terran favoured as has almost always been. Late game is protoss favoured and extreme late game is Terran favoured after the recent nerfs to carriers and high Templars. Each race has its moments, as it should be.
The upgrade nerf will skew ZvP even more. Teleportable zerg armies for 50/50 is dumb enough.
What? I'm pretty sure that I read MarineLord posts on TL (and a few other terrans on twitter) that TvP lategame is okay/good, but that the real problem lies in the midgame where the terran is actually at a disadvantage and has a lot of troubles getting to the lategame / winning in the midgame.
I have looked for Mlord posts and I assume this is what you mention: “major imbalance that there is in mid/lategame in the matchup, if nobody try to macro in TvP it isn't because terran cheese are too strong but because of the amount of powerfull option protoss keeps adding to their army the longer the game goes, HT+colossus+disruptor, + eventually tempest makes it incredibly unfair, as terran have literally 0 army composition to deal with this kind of army”
For me, when Protoss has access and economy to have “HT+colossus+disruptor”, it is late game not mid game. Mid-game is for me when T3 units are not massed yet, and there we typically see a defensive Protoss vs a Terran that has the initiative. But whatever, definitions of that are not absolute.
On a consecutive post, he asks for (another) recall nerf to solve this.... it is beyond my comprehension how that would solve this (supposed) issue. I guess any nerf to Protoss is ok?
On another post he acknowledges that end-game compositions are ok.
When did Mlord post these?
Because Neeb, Zest, and PartinG had the exact setup Mlord describes (Mass collusus, HT, and disruptor on top of huge economy) and all three of them got shut down hard by sky terran + ghost
On March 16 2019 05:54 youngjiddle wrote: lets revert that feedback nerf and also make it cancel the lift of a phoneix.
I think phoenix are still too strong in PvP.
I'm surprised more people aren't talking about this. The feedback nerf had a lot of unintended consequences. As a result of it, infestors are now insanely good against protoss. Feedbacks no longer kill them, so it's much less of a risk to move a group of infestors forward to try and fungal the protoss air army in lategame since at worst that infestor will get feedbacked and will just have to recharge energy. In super lategame PvZ, broodlord/infestor/corruptor/lurker/mass static is now an incredibly tough composition. Because of how much lower tempest health is, a single fungal plus some corruptors, hydras, or queens can destroy the tempests before they get a chance to retreat.
It also made that mass ghost/viking/liberator style significantly stronger since ghosts can't be picked off with feedbacks anymore.
On March 16 2019 05:54 youngjiddle wrote: lets revert that feedback nerf and also make it cancel the lift of a phoneix.
I think phoenix are still too strong in PvP.
I'm surprised more people aren't talking about this. The feedback nerf had a lot of unintended consequences. As a result of it, infestors are now insanely good against protoss. Feedbacks no longer kill them, so it's much less of a risk to move a group of infestors forward to try and fungal the protoss air army in lategame since at worst that infestor will get feedbacked and will just have to recharge energy. In super lategame PvZ, broodlord/infestor/corruptor/lurker/mass static is now an incredibly tough composition. Because of how much lower tempest health is, a single fungal plus some corruptors, hydras, or queens can destroy the tempests before they get a chance to retreat.
It also made that mass ghost/viking/liberator style significantly stronger since ghosts can't be picked off with feedbacks anymore.
How distressing it must be, now that lategame Zerg and Terran can actually stand up to lategame Protoss.
On March 16 2019 05:54 youngjiddle wrote: lets revert that feedback nerf and also make it cancel the lift of a phoneix.
I think phoenix are still too strong in PvP.
I'm surprised more people aren't talking about this. The feedback nerf had a lot of unintended consequences. As a result of it, infestors are now insanely good against protoss. Feedbacks no longer kill them, so it's much less of a risk to move a group of infestors forward to try and fungal the protoss air army in lategame since at worst that infestor will get feedbacked and will just have to recharge energy. In super lategame PvZ, broodlord/infestor/corruptor/lurker/mass static is now an incredibly tough composition. Because of how much lower tempest health is, a single fungal plus some corruptors, hydras, or queens can destroy the tempests before they get a chance to retreat.
It also made that mass ghost/viking/liberator style significantly stronger since ghosts can't be picked off with feedbacks anymore.
The reality is that zerg late game stomps protoss late game now.
PvZ: The carrier, tempest, and templar nerfs were actually massive, insanely massive. Protoss players just try to follow up with blink stalkers if zerg rushes broodlords because trying to follow into late game on "even footing" is suicide. It's actually funny how fast the lategame matchup switched to favor zerg now.
PvP: Talking about the phoenix.. I definitely think there would be a cool counterplay to phoenix besides "make some stalkers and still lose probes"... stalkers fall off in the matchup insanely fast.
PvT: It's not like protoss players can feedback every single ghost before they get an emp off... and it's not like feedback was a game ending ability vs medivacs.
On March 16 2019 05:54 youngjiddle wrote: lets revert that feedback nerf and also make it cancel the lift of a phoneix.
I think phoenix are still too strong in PvP.
I'm surprised more people aren't talking about this. The feedback nerf had a lot of unintended consequences. As a result of it, infestors are now insanely good against protoss. Feedbacks no longer kill them, so it's much less of a risk to move a group of infestors forward to try and fungal the protoss air army in lategame since at worst that infestor will get feedbacked and will just have to recharge energy. In super lategame PvZ, broodlord/infestor/corruptor/lurker/mass static is now an incredibly tough composition. Because of how much lower tempest health is, a single fungal plus some corruptors, hydras, or queens can destroy the tempests before they get a chance to retreat.
It also made that mass ghost/viking/liberator style significantly stronger since ghosts can't be picked off with feedbacks anymore.
How distressing it must be, now that lategame Zerg and Terran can actually stand up to lategame Protoss.
Yes because by your reasoning we should give zerg and terran an overpowered lategame for 4+ years to offset imbalance in the past against them.
The problem of the late game TvP is that other non-Korean Terran players, even foreigner pros, don't have that kind of insane, god-like micro and macro abilities like Maru. On the other hand, protoss players really have easier time to spam storms, purification novas, or do Collosus/Tempest kiting...I don't say this is a easy task. In fact, it is very tatical but it's really easier to execute than what Terran players have to do in the extreme late games. Blizzard need to fix this.
--> Nerf AOE and buff a ton to the health of Protoss units?
On March 16 2019 05:54 youngjiddle wrote: lets revert that feedback nerf and also make it cancel the lift of a phoneix.
I think phoenix are still too strong in PvP.
I'm surprised more people aren't talking about this. The feedback nerf had a lot of unintended consequences. As a result of it, infestors are now insanely good against protoss. Feedbacks no longer kill them, so it's much less of a risk to move a group of infestors forward to try and fungal the protoss air army in lategame since at worst that infestor will get feedbacked and will just have to recharge energy. In super lategame PvZ, broodlord/infestor/corruptor/lurker/mass static is now an incredibly tough composition. Because of how much lower tempest health is, a single fungal plus some corruptors, hydras, or queens can destroy the tempests before they get a chance to retreat.
It also made that mass ghost/viking/liberator style significantly stronger since ghosts can't be picked off with feedbacks anymore.
How distressing it must be, now that lategame Zerg and Terran can actually stand up to lategame Protoss.
Yes because by your reasoning we should give zerg and terran an overpowered lategame for 4+ years to offset imbalance in the past against them.
It's like... Reparations right?
You know, instead of making it actually balanced.
What reasoning? I made no suggestions about balance changes.
It's just funny to see Protoss of all races complaining about the lategame, that's all.
On March 16 2019 05:54 youngjiddle wrote: lets revert that feedback nerf and also make it cancel the lift of a phoneix.
I think phoenix are still too strong in PvP.
I'm surprised more people aren't talking about this. The feedback nerf had a lot of unintended consequences. As a result of it, infestors are now insanely good against protoss. Feedbacks no longer kill them, so it's much less of a risk to move a group of infestors forward to try and fungal the protoss air army in lategame since at worst that infestor will get feedbacked and will just have to recharge energy. In super lategame PvZ, broodlord/infestor/corruptor/lurker/mass static is now an incredibly tough composition. Because of how much lower tempest health is, a single fungal plus some corruptors, hydras, or queens can destroy the tempests before they get a chance to retreat.
It also made that mass ghost/viking/liberator style significantly stronger since ghosts can't be picked off with feedbacks anymore.
How distressing it must be, now that lategame Zerg and Terran can actually stand up to lategame Protoss.
Yes because by your reasoning we should give zerg and terran an overpowered lategame for 4+ years to offset imbalance in the past against them.
It's like... Reparations right?
You know, instead of making it actually balanced.
What reasoning? I made no suggestions about balance changes.
It's just amusing to see Protoss complaining about lategame being harder for them now.
It's not amusing. I know it's against the rules to personally attack users but you have always been very biased, it never surprises me anymore.
but i still think chrono boost needs a nerf along with an upgrade for unlocking siege tank and ravager tho ib4,on this forum,the chrono boost analysis thread was pretty straight and narrow cuz the method is playing like bronze with decent macro mechanic unlike pro gamers who love killing workers...with a PASSION
Is English your second language? honestly having trouble understanding no offense. what do you mean the method is playing like bronze with decent macro mechanic?
siege tank and ravager exist because protoss (or any race really) 2 base allins would be broken without them.
yeah i m living in japan our old thread about chrono boost's pretty convincing cuz the testers played a standard macro game without any workers killing intention.But the guy on reddit didnt test anything by himself and collected only 'macro games' from iem instead so the result might be incorrect.We all know pro match is pretty volatile,some early aggressions from all races could leads to huge different in worker counts
secondly,macro advantage aint just about income rate it could be current available build orders and resource spending but we could agree that protoss players are doing 3 bases but still has unit to defend right before our eyes in almost every single game.Terran is not ready for new "second zerg race" after moving from hots to lotv.Not without bullshit liberators
/the upgrade duration for siege tank and ravager could be tinkered i dont care,terran 'n zerg early options must be reduced In order to nerf chrono boost or... just make liberator great again u know
On March 16 2019 05:54 youngjiddle wrote: lets revert that feedback nerf and also make it cancel the lift of a phoneix.
I think phoenix are still too strong in PvP.
I'm surprised more people aren't talking about this. The feedback nerf had a lot of unintended consequences. As a result of it, infestors are now insanely good against protoss. Feedbacks no longer kill them, so it's much less of a risk to move a group of infestors forward to try and fungal the protoss air army in lategame since at worst that infestor will get feedbacked and will just have to recharge energy. In super lategame PvZ, broodlord/infestor/corruptor/lurker/mass static is now an incredibly tough composition. Because of how much lower tempest health is, a single fungal plus some corruptors, hydras, or queens can destroy the tempests before they get a chance to retreat.
It also made that mass ghost/viking/liberator style significantly stronger since ghosts can't be picked off with feedbacks anymore.
How distressing it must be, now that lategame Zerg and Terran can actually stand up to lategame Protoss.
Yes because by your reasoning we should give zerg and terran an overpowered lategame for 4+ years to offset imbalance in the past against them.
It's like... Reparations right?
You know, instead of making it actually balanced.
What reasoning? I made no suggestions about balance changes.
It's just amusing to see Protoss complaining about lategame being harder for them now.
It's not amusing. I know it's against the rules to personally attack users but you have always been very biased, it never surprises me anymore.
Well, I imagine things like amusement and bias vary by person. Each to their own.
If you'll excuse me, you sound oddly bitter about something. And personal attacks? I'll admit that I'm confused about what you're talking about here.
Are you sure you're replying to the right guy? Seemsgood is the one talking about balance right now.
On March 16 2019 05:54 youngjiddle wrote: lets revert that feedback nerf and also make it cancel the lift of a phoneix.
I think phoenix are still too strong in PvP.
I'm surprised more people aren't talking about this. The feedback nerf had a lot of unintended consequences. As a result of it, infestors are now insanely good against protoss. Feedbacks no longer kill them, so it's much less of a risk to move a group of infestors forward to try and fungal the protoss air army in lategame since at worst that infestor will get feedbacked and will just have to recharge energy. In super lategame PvZ, broodlord/infestor/corruptor/lurker/mass static is now an incredibly tough composition. Because of how much lower tempest health is, a single fungal plus some corruptors, hydras, or queens can destroy the tempests before they get a chance to retreat.
It also made that mass ghost/viking/liberator style significantly stronger since ghosts can't be picked off with feedbacks anymore.
The reality is that zerg late game stomps protoss late game now.
PvZ: The carrier, tempest, and templar nerfs were actually massive, insanely massive. Protoss players just try to follow up with blink stalkers if zerg rushes broodlords because trying to follow into late game on "even footing" is suicide. It's actually funny how fast the lategame matchup switched to favor zerg now.
PvP: Talking about the phoenix.. I definitely think there would be a cool counterplay to phoenix besides "make some stalkers and still lose probes"... stalkers fall off in the matchup insanely fast.
PvT: It's not like protoss players can feedback every single ghost before they get an emp off... and it's not like feedback was a game ending ability vs medivacs.
because a skill can oneshot most valuable casters instantly for 50 energy is not fine also sample for late game tvz is too small since zerg just cant stop producing roaches
As someone who mained protoss for years until pretty recently, the feedback nerf isnt really the biggest problem for protoss imo
The carrier and tempest nerfs were much bigger.
Protoss lacks a strong backbone that is capable of trading evenly with most compositions if things go a little south. It's so hard to be consistent with Protoss because if you can't get huge storm hits (if the opponent dodges, retreats, or somehow kills the HT) or your colossi/tempests/what have you are jumped and killed in like 3 seconds because they are so vulnerable to everything, youre absolutely fucked. Your fancy expensive units will just melt. At least the old carrier mitigated some of that when you actually got to them but now the carrier is just trash
This is why I switched to Terran. Bio is so pound for pound strong and can hold its own against ANYTHING. Despite the fact that bio can get messed up badly if not micro'd properly, they are relatively cheap and you got your phenomenal positional units to fall back into (siege tank, widow mine, liberator, etc). As a terran player, compared to when i played protoss, i feel like there is almost always a chance for me to get back into the game i mess up on a bit - a chance that I would rarely feel as protoss
Protoss is just so punishing to play and the army is difficult to control, and Blizzard just keeps nerfing it to the ground
as an ex-protoss player it pains me to say this, but protoss is an awful race at the moment. extremely talented former champions like sOs and zest are considered a joke nowadays and there is only one truly elite protoss player nowadays in stats, and even he got eliminated by cure and washed up MC
i dont even remember the last time a protoss player won a premier tournament - stats' 2017 GSL?
On March 16 2019 05:54 youngjiddle wrote: lets revert that feedback nerf and also make it cancel the lift of a phoneix.
I think phoenix are still too strong in PvP.
I'm surprised more people aren't talking about this. The feedback nerf had a lot of unintended consequences. As a result of it, infestors are now insanely good against protoss. Feedbacks no longer kill them, so it's much less of a risk to move a group of infestors forward to try and fungal the protoss air army in lategame since at worst that infestor will get feedbacked and will just have to recharge energy. In super lategame PvZ, broodlord/infestor/corruptor/lurker/mass static is now an incredibly tough composition. Because of how much lower tempest health is, a single fungal plus some corruptors, hydras, or queens can destroy the tempests before they get a chance to retreat.
It also made that mass ghost/viking/liberator style significantly stronger since ghosts can't be picked off with feedbacks anymore.
The reality is that zerg late game stomps protoss late game now.
And Terran late game is better than zerg late game.
Actually, Terran is favored in every phase of the game vs Zerg.
On March 16 2019 19:18 BerserkSword wrote: i dont even remember the last time a protoss player won a premier tournament - stats' 2017 GSL?
Classic, 2018 GSL Super Tournament 2
okay, youre right
but i just looked at the entire list
in 2018, out of 14 premier tournaments, protoss only won 2, and they won the two most poverty tournaments in terms of prize pool as well lmao
But is that because Toss is weaker or the Players are worse than the winners? Out of those 14 tournaments 4 were won by Maru, 6 by Serral. And in 10 of those 14 finals Toss got 2nd place, so if Maru and Serral wouldn't have been so dominant, the probability is high, that Toss wins a lot more tournaments.
On March 16 2019 19:18 BerserkSword wrote: i dont even remember the last time a protoss player won a premier tournament - stats' 2017 GSL?
Classic, 2018 GSL Super Tournament 2
okay, youre right
but i just looked at the entire list
in 2018, out of 14 premier tournaments, protoss only won 2, and they won the two most poverty tournaments in terms of prize pool as well lmao
But is that because Toss is weaker or the Players are worse than the winners? Out of those 14 tournaments 4 were won by Maru, 6 by Serral. And in 10 of those 14 finals Toss got 2nd place, so if Maru and Serral wouldn't have been so dominant, the probability is high, that Toss wins a lot more tournaments.
sigh...again with the typical "protoss players need to get gud"
The question is why were those two players so dominant last year to begin with?
youre acting like Maru and Serral are in a completely different league than Stats, sOs, Zest, and Classic.....all ridiculously talented players who have proven their skill in years past. before 2018, maru had barely won anything, and i dont think serral had won anything at all...hardly gods among their protoss company when it comes to skill
and yet the fact of the matter is that protoss, despite all the talent their players possess (as well as the supposed broken-ness of their race), only won the two smallest tournaments out of a grand total of 14
in fact, we even saw Scarlet literally sweep sOs, a legend who has multiple championships
The common denominator is not skill - because sOs, classic, zest, and stats have proven they have the skill to win it all
the common denominator is the race they played.
you can try to spin it whatever way you want, but the results speak for themselves - the protoss players won jack shit in 2018 and it's spilling over to 2019 - GSL PvT is like sub 40% (with stats eliminated by cure, and the rest of the protoss players are expected to be speed bumps en route to a T/Z final rounds), WESG the best protoss player was neeb and he got swept in Ro.8
IEM terran had under representation but the Zerg players had a bigger role in eliminating top terrans than the protoss did, and the zerg went on to win it all.
bottom line is that protoss is screwed by being nerfed into the ground and this is strongly supported by the results of premier tournaments
On March 16 2019 19:18 BerserkSword wrote: i dont even remember the last time a protoss player won a premier tournament - stats' 2017 GSL?
Classic, 2018 GSL Super Tournament 2
okay, youre right
but i just looked at the entire list
in 2018, out of 14 premier tournaments, protoss only won 2, and they won the two most poverty tournaments in terms of prize pool as well lmao
But is that because Toss is weaker or the Players are worse than the winners? Out of those 14 tournaments 4 were won by Maru, 6 by Serral. And in 10 of those 14 finals Toss got 2nd place, so if Maru and Serral wouldn't have been so dominant, the probability is high, that Toss wins a lot more tournaments.
sigh...again with the typical "protoss players need to get gud"
The question is why were those two players so dominant last year to begin with?
youre acting like Maru and Serral are in a completely different league than Stats, sOs, Zest, and Classic.....all ridiculously talented players who have proven their skill in years past. before 2018, maru had barely won anything, and i dont think serral had won anything at all...hardly gods among their protoss company when it comes to skill
and yet the fact of the matter is that protoss, despite all the talent their players possess (as well as the supposed broken-ness of their race), only won the two smallest tournaments out of a grand total of 14
in fact, we even saw Scarlet literally sweep sOs, a legend who has multiple championships
The common denominator is not skill - because sOs, classic, zest, and stats have proven they have the skill to win it all
the common denominator is the race they played.
you can try to spin it whatever way you want, but the results speak for themselves - the protoss players won jack shit in 2018 and it's spilling over to 2019 - GSL PvT is like sub 40% (with stats eliminated by cure, and the rest of the protoss players are expected to be speed bumps en route to a T/Z final rounds), WESG the best protoss player was neeb and he got swept in Ro.8
IEM terran had under representation but the Zerg players had a bigger role in eliminating top terrans than the protoss did, and the zerg went on to win it all.
bottom line is that protoss is screwed by being nerfed into the ground and this is strongly supported by the results of premier tournaments
Maru and Serral are indeed in a completely different league than Stats, sOs, Zest and Classic. Maru and Serral won pretty much everything in 2018, and going into 2019 they're still 7000+ MMR monster and arguably still 1st and 2nd best players in the world.
Sorry to break it to you mate but except from Stats who's truly a great player at the moment, the others are washed up. sOs shows up for Blizzcon and disappears for the rest of the year. Zest was the best player in the world 5 years ago but now he's just a decent player capable of top 8 results at best. Classic had a strong first half of 2018 and unexpectedly won super tournament and while he's a decent as well, he's rarely a contender to win.
Also, for what it's worth, none of the player you mentioned except Stats made it to the last TL's top 10 power ranking.
GSL saw a lot of protoss get stomped because there was 13 of them out of 32 and a good 3 or 4 of them are not even ro32 material and lucked out/protossed their way out of the qualifiers. 6 protoss still advanced to the ro16. You can't balance the game based on such a low sample size anyway. Aligulac shows a 44% TvP winrate.
Number of terrans in GM on the 3 main servers (february 14th 2019): 59, 48, 55. Number of protoss: 71, 81, 71.
PS: If you really switched to terran, you wouldn't be crying about protoss being underpowered.
so the argument actually IS that protoss players are inherently less skilled than terran and zerg players lmfao.
All the historically powerful, championship caliber protoss players somehow lost all their skill/became washed up in the same year LOL.
sOs getting destroyed by scarlet, classic getting rekt by special and reynor, stats getting eliminated by cure, 2/14 in premier tournaments in 2018...all just a big old coincidence
so the argument actually IS that protoss players are inherently less skilled than terran and zerg players lmfao.
All the historically powerful, championship caliber protoss players somehow lost all their skill/became washed up in the same year LOL.
sOs getting destroyed by scarlet, classic getting rekt by special and reynor, stats getting eliminated by cure, 2/14 in premier tournaments in 2018...all just a big old coincidence
ya hear that protoss players? get gud
I guess I have to disprove your claims so here will I!
To see if protoss really had such a bad 2018 year in starcraft, I took the players of each race among the current top 40 in aligulac, and computed the cumulative sum of their 2018 earnings, sorted by race.
So it appears that zergs had the best year by far, then protoss, and then terran, who would have had a terrible year without Maru's winnings. Had Serral not won that much, zerg would have had a marginally better year than the other two races assuming an equal split of his earnings.
Poopi why do you care more about the top 40 pros of each race winning an equal amount of prize money in a calendar year than you care about the game being fun and balanced? I don't understand this arbitrary obsession.
so the argument actually IS that protoss players are inherently less skilled than terran and zerg players lmfao.
All the historically powerful, championship caliber protoss players somehow lost all their skill/became washed up in the same year LOL.
sOs getting destroyed by scarlet, classic getting rekt by special and reynor, stats getting eliminated by cure, 2/14 in premier tournaments in 2018...all just a big old coincidence
ya hear that protoss players? get gud
I guess I have to disprove your claims so here will I!
To see if protoss really had such a bad 2018 year in starcraft, I took the players of each race among the current top 40 in aligulac, and computed the cumulative sum of their 2018 earnings, sorted by race.
So it appears that zergs had the best year by far, then protoss, and then terran, who would have had a terrible year without Maru's winnings. Had Serral not won that much, zerg would have had a marginally better year than the other two races assuming an equal split of his earnings.
I conclude that your whinings are unfounded.
And I think he won't care. All he cares about is 1st place; that Protoss has by far the most 2nd places or was the most represented race in almost every international tournament does not matter. Maru and Serral are obviously scrubs who just won because their respective races are broken. Otherwise the players that counted as the best in HotS (how long ago was that again?) would still be the best today.
People who think another race has an unfair advantage should just switch. What's holding you back?
I started playing some Protoss lately after barely playing as them since beta, and feel overwhelmed with options. I'm not even sure which race is supposed to be the strongest but it's not apparent in casual diamond level games.
On March 17 2019 05:58 DomeGetta wrote: Thought this was interesting - is Toss the most popular race (thought Zerg was?)
Top 200 MMR - 86 Toss / 63 Zerg / 51 Terran
Top 500 MMR - 182 Toss / 164 Zerg / 143 Terran
Top 1000 MMR - 370 Toss / 325 Zerg / 286 Terran
Top 2000 MMR - 710 Toss / 645 Zerg / 598 Terran
Ties make it weird Looks like highest skew in top 200 - 43% vs 26% Lowest at 2K - 36% vs. 31%
Interesting. Supports the idea that Protoss is the easiest race to use. So, the question remains if there are so many high level Protoss players why are the fewer Protoss at the extreme top?
I think there are three possible explanations: 1) Protoss is the easiest race to use but the skill ceiling is lower compared to Zerg and Terran. 2) The ease of use makes it so Protoss players never have to develop the extreme skill needed to be compete at the extreme top level. 3) Pure chance.
Personally, I think 1) or 2) are the correct explanations.
so the argument actually IS that protoss players are inherently less skilled than terran and zerg players lmfao.
All the historically powerful, championship caliber protoss players somehow lost all their skill/became washed up in the same year LOL.
sOs getting destroyed by scarlet, classic getting rekt by special and reynor, stats getting eliminated by cure, 2/14 in premier tournaments in 2018...all just a big old coincidence
ya hear that protoss players? get gud
I guess I have to disprove your claims so here will I!
To see if protoss really had such a bad 2018 year in starcraft, I took the players of each race among the current top 40 in aligulac, and computed the cumulative sum of their 2018 earnings, sorted by race.
So it appears that zergs had the best year by far, then protoss, and then terran, who would have had a terrible year without Maru's winnings. Had Serral not won that much, zerg would have had a marginally better year than the other two races assuming an equal split of his earnings.
so the argument actually IS that protoss players are inherently less skilled than terran and zerg players lmfao.
All the historically powerful, championship caliber protoss players somehow lost all their skill/became washed up in the same year LOL.
sOs getting destroyed by scarlet, classic getting rekt by special and reynor, stats getting eliminated by cure, 2/14 in premier tournaments in 2018...all just a big old coincidence
ya hear that protoss players? get gud
I guess I have to disprove your claims so here will I!
To see if protoss really had such a bad 2018 year in starcraft, I took the players of each race among the current top 40 in aligulac, and computed the cumulative sum of their 2018 earnings, sorted by race.
So it appears that zergs had the best year by far, then protoss, and then terran, who would have had a terrible year without Maru's winnings. Had Serral not won that much, zerg would have had a marginally better year than the other two races assuming an equal split of his earnings.
I conclude that your whinings are unfounded.
And I think he won't care. All he cares about is 1st place; that Protoss has by far the most 2nd places or was the most represented race in almost every international tournament does not matter. Maru and Serral are obviously scrubs who just won because their respective races are broken. Otherwise the players that counted as the best in HotS (how long ago was that again?) would still be the best today.
I never said Maru and Serral are scrubs. They are being made out to be head and shoulders above the best Protoss players though.
And the fact that they were dominant before but all of a sudden unable to perform recently means that the factor currently holding them back is not their skill, it's their race.
On March 17 2019 08:06 BerserkSword wrote: And the fact that they were dominant before but all of a sudden unable to perform recently means that the factor currently holding them back is not their skill, it's their race.
.............
That's really not how professional Starcraft works. At all.
Peaks and slumps are a thing. Progamers are people too, they're more than just the race they play.
On March 17 2019 08:06 BerserkSword wrote: And the fact that they were dominant before but all of a sudden unable to perform recently means that the factor currently holding them back is not their skill, it's their race.
.............
That's really not how professional Starcraft works. At all.
Peaks and slumps are a thing. Progamers are people too, they're more than just the race they play.
Yes I understand
I am not talking about peaks and slumps though.
I am talking about a year, 2018, where Protoss only won 2 Premier tournaments out of 14, and this phenomenon spilling into 2019
A time when Stats, who is definitely NOT slumping, is unable to win anything and is even eliminated by the likes of Cure
A time when the the most talented protoss players in the world, who have been able to win before, are collectively getting destroyed
You guys are claiming that the best Protoss players are slumping at the same time, lost their skill at the same time, etc
On March 17 2019 08:06 BerserkSword wrote: And the fact that they were dominant before but all of a sudden unable to perform recently means that the factor currently holding them back is not their skill, it's their race.
.............
That's really not how professional Starcraft works. At all.
Peaks and slumps are a thing. Progamers are people too, they're more than just the race they play.
Yes I understand
I am not talking about peaks and slumps though.
I am talking about a year, 2018, where Protoss only won 2 Premier tournaments out of 14, and this phenomenon spilling into 2019
A time when Stats, who is definitely NOT slumping, is unable to win anything and is even eliminated by the likes of Cure
A time when the the most talented protoss players in the world, who have been able to win before, are collectively getting destroyed
You guys are claiming that the best Protoss players are slumping at the same time, lost their skill at the same time, etc
I'm sorry, but your one arbitrary metric is basically the only one that supports Protoss slumping in 2018. Tournament Wins: Terran: 4 Zerg: 8 Protoss: 2
On March 17 2019 05:58 DomeGetta wrote: Thought this was interesting - is Toss the most popular race (thought Zerg was?)
Top 200 MMR - 86 Toss / 63 Zerg / 51 Terran
Top 500 MMR - 182 Toss / 164 Zerg / 143 Terran
Top 1000 MMR - 370 Toss / 325 Zerg / 286 Terran
Top 2000 MMR - 710 Toss / 645 Zerg / 598 Terran
Ties make it weird Looks like highest skew in top 200 - 43% vs 26% Lowest at 2K - 36% vs. 31%
Interesting. Supports the idea that Protoss is the easiest race to use. So, the question remains if there are so many high level Protoss players why are the fewer Protoss at the extreme top?
I think there are three possible explanations: 1) Protoss is the easiest race to use but the skill ceiling is lower compared to Zerg and Terran. 2) The ease of use makes it so Protoss players never have to develop the extreme skill needed to be compete at the extreme top level. 3) Pure chance.
Personally, I think 1) or 2) are the correct explanations.
I think the suggestion that there are few Protoss at the extreme top is quite fallacious. If we're looking at premier events while yes Protoss only won 2 tournaments in 2018, they made the finals in 11. For some context Zerg were in the finals in 10 and Terran in 4. Yes, there wasn't someone necessarily on the tier of a Maru or a Serral last year, the closest being Stats but both of those two were setting records that hadn't been previously done in the game.
I think the other element is the fact that generally within the Protoss pros there is less of an obvious no. 1 generally speaking in the same way there is for Terran and Zerg. Take a look last year for instance, Stats came into 2018 having had a stellar year and winning both SSL and GSL. However, he was soon replaced by Classic as the no. 1 Protoss for a time it was between them for best player. Then Zest got a finals at GSL and it became a three horse race. While Stats did eventually win out, it was a lot less clear cut than say Serral or Maru as to who the best was until around the time of GSL vs The World. This lack of one dominant player, I would argue is perhaps what plays into part of the thinking that Protoss does have the lower skill ceiling.
Now the argument about whether or not Protoss is the easiest to play is interesting. It does make you wonder whether or not a player like sOs would be able to play to anywhere the near the standard he can if he was playing Zerg or Terran and honestly I doubt it. I do think that maybe as a result of players like sOs and herO and even MC to an extent that you could very much suggest that one's ability to play Protoss is least defined by how limited one's mechanics are (although herO is a possible exception in this case due to how fantastic his micro has historically been). This is because playing smart is a lot more highly valued to Protoss than either Terran or Zerg. If you look at the great players for Protoss there are two strains of thought. There are the great macro protoss in the vein of say Rain or Stats and then there are the Protoss thinkers/bullshitters depending on your opinion of the likes of sOs and MC. These are players that don't always have fantastic micro or even macro ability but that are nonetheless able to win outside the normal balance of the game/ all common sense. I think very rarely has a player ever been able to fuse both these schools of thought perhaps the only one being Zest in his period of dominance although his macro wasn't always great even then.
Coming back to the skill ceiling of Protoss I think that that lack of ability to balance the two ways of thinking of protoss is what has meant that there can often appear to be a lack of absolutely god-tier players among the Protoss. There is usually at least one major flaw that the great Protoss have historically had that isn't present among their Terran and Zerg counterparts. sOs has historically been weak mechanically, Zest has never had the best macro, Stats is incredible but is far from infallible. I think if a protoss player could truly marry these two schools of thought together than the skill ceiling of protoss would easily be on a par with both races.
On March 17 2019 08:06 BerserkSword wrote: And the fact that they were dominant before but all of a sudden unable to perform recently means that the factor currently holding them back is not their skill, it's their race.
.............
That's really not how professional Starcraft works. At all.
Peaks and slumps are a thing. Progamers are people too, they're more than just the race they play.
Yes I understand
I am not talking about peaks and slumps though.
I am talking about a year, 2018, where Protoss only won 2 Premier tournaments out of 14, and this phenomenon spilling into 2019
A time when Stats, who is definitely NOT slumping, is unable to win anything and is even eliminated by the likes of Cure
A time when the the most talented protoss players in the world, who have been able to win before, are collectively getting destroyed
You guys are claiming that the best Protoss players are slumping at the same time, lost their skill at the same time, etc
I'm sorry, but your one arbitrary metric is basically the only one that supports Protoss slumping in 2018. Tournament Wins: Terran: 4 Zerg: 8 Protoss: 2
On March 17 2019 05:58 DomeGetta wrote: Thought this was interesting - is Toss the most popular race (thought Zerg was?)
Top 200 MMR - 86 Toss / 63 Zerg / 51 Terran
Top 500 MMR - 182 Toss / 164 Zerg / 143 Terran
Top 1000 MMR - 370 Toss / 325 Zerg / 286 Terran
Top 2000 MMR - 710 Toss / 645 Zerg / 598 Terran
Ties make it weird Looks like highest skew in top 200 - 43% vs 26% Lowest at 2K - 36% vs. 31%
Interesting. Supports the idea that Protoss is the easiest race to use. So, the question remains if there are so many high level Protoss players why are the fewer Protoss at the extreme top?
I think there are three possible explanations: 1) Protoss is the easiest race to use but the skill ceiling is lower compared to Zerg and Terran. 2) The ease of use makes it so Protoss players never have to develop the extreme skill needed to be compete at the extreme top level. 3) Pure chance.
Personally, I think 1) or 2) are the correct explanations.
I think the suggestion that there are few Protoss at the extreme top is quite fallacious. If we're looking at premier events while yes Protoss only won 2 tournaments in 2018, they made the finals in 11. For some context Zerg were in the finals in 10 and Terran in 4. Yes, there wasn't someone necessarily on the tier of a Maru or a Serral last year, the closest being Stats but both of those two were setting records that hadn't been previously done in the game.
I think the other element is the fact that generally within the Protoss pros there is less of an obvious no. 1 generally speaking in the same way there is for Terran and Zerg. Take a look last year for instance, Stats came into 2018 having had a stellar year and winning both SSL and GSL. However, he was soon replaced by Classic as the no. 1 Protoss for a time it was between them for best player. Then Zest got a finals at GSL and it became a three horse race. While Stats did eventually win out, it was a lot less clear cut than say Serral or Maru as to who the best was until around the time of GSL vs The World. This lack of one dominant player, I would argue is perhaps what plays into part of the thinking that Protoss does have the lower skill ceiling.
Now the argument about whether or not Protoss is the easiest to play is interesting. It does make you wonder whether or not a player like sOs would be able to play to anywhere the near the standard he can if he was playing Zerg or Terran and honestly I doubt it. I do think that maybe as a result of players like sOs and herO and even MC to an extent that you could very much suggest that one's ability to play Protoss is least defined by how limited one's mechanics are (although herO is a possible exception in this case due to how fantastic his micro has historically been). This is because playing smart is a lot more highly valued to Protoss than either Terran or Zerg. If you look at the great players for Protoss there are two strains of thought. There are the great macro protoss in the vein of say Rain or Stats and then there are the Protoss thinkers/bullshitters depending on your opinion of the likes of sOs and MC. These are players that don't always have fantastic micro or even macro ability but that are nonetheless able to win outside the normal balance of the game/ all common sense. I think very rarely has a player ever been able to fuse both these schools of thought perhaps the only one being Zest in his period of dominance although his macro wasn't always great even then.
Coming back to the skill ceiling of Protoss I think that that lack of ability to balance the two ways of thinking of protoss is what has meant that there can often appear to be a lack of absolutely god-tier players among the Protoss. There is usually at least one major flaw that the great Protoss have historically had that isn't present among their Terran and Zerg counterparts. sOs has historically been weak mechanically, Zest has never had the best macro, Stats is incredible but is far from infallible. I think if a protoss player could truly marry these two schools of thought together than the skill ceiling of protoss would easily be on a par with both races.
That's an awfully convoluted way to say that you think Protoss players are just inherently less skilled. You even went so far as to invent two protoss schools of thought LOL
sOs wouldnt be able to play anywhere near the standard he can if he played Zerg or Terran? The man won several premier tournaments including multiple blizzcons for fucks sake. The fact that he's written off as a "thinker"/bullshitter who wouldnt achieve what he did with Zerg or Terran is incredibly biased lol....and insulting to sOs if he were here to read it.
Mechanics and "playing smart" are both necessary in ALL races. The reason Protoss players never seem to to achieve the heights of Terran or Zerg players is because the race is so inconsistent and punishing.
The same thing happened in Brood War. Protoss could never achieve much for years on end. All the bonjwas were Terran with the exception of savior who played zerg......zero protoss bonjwas. Then people realized that the game/maps were balanced against protoss, changes were made, and Protoss became more successful at the top levels
On March 16 2019 23:42 MockHamill wrote: Nothing to do with balance. But Protoss never had players as skilled as MVP, Life, Innovation, Maru or Serral in their prime.
That's an incredibly biased and arrogant statement. There have been plenty of protoss legends!
On March 17 2019 08:06 BerserkSword wrote: And the fact that they were dominant before but all of a sudden unable to perform recently means that the factor currently holding them back is not their skill, it's their race.
.............
That's really not how professional Starcraft works. At all.
Peaks and slumps are a thing. Progamers are people too, they're more than just the race they play.
Yes I understand
I am not talking about peaks and slumps though.
I am talking about a year, 2018, where Protoss only won 2 Premier tournaments out of 14, and this phenomenon spilling into 2019
A time when Stats, who is definitely NOT slumping, is unable to win anything and is even eliminated by the likes of Cure
A time when the the most talented protoss players in the world, who have been able to win before, are collectively getting destroyed
You guys are claiming that the best Protoss players are slumping at the same time, lost their skill at the same time, etc
I'm sorry, but your one arbitrary metric is basically the only one that supports Protoss slumping in 2018. Tournament Wins: Terran: 4 Zerg: 8 Protoss: 2
On March 17 2019 05:58 DomeGetta wrote: Thought this was interesting - is Toss the most popular race (thought Zerg was?)
Top 200 MMR - 86 Toss / 63 Zerg / 51 Terran
Top 500 MMR - 182 Toss / 164 Zerg / 143 Terran
Top 1000 MMR - 370 Toss / 325 Zerg / 286 Terran
Top 2000 MMR - 710 Toss / 645 Zerg / 598 Terran
Ties make it weird Looks like highest skew in top 200 - 43% vs 26% Lowest at 2K - 36% vs. 31%
Interesting. Supports the idea that Protoss is the easiest race to use. So, the question remains if there are so many high level Protoss players why are the fewer Protoss at the extreme top?
I think there are three possible explanations: 1) Protoss is the easiest race to use but the skill ceiling is lower compared to Zerg and Terran. 2) The ease of use makes it so Protoss players never have to develop the extreme skill needed to be compete at the extreme top level. 3) Pure chance.
Personally, I think 1) or 2) are the correct explanations.
I think the suggestion that there are few Protoss at the extreme top is quite fallacious. If we're looking at premier events while yes Protoss only won 2 tournaments in 2018, they made the finals in 11. For some context Zerg were in the finals in 10 and Terran in 4. Yes, there wasn't someone necessarily on the tier of a Maru or a Serral last year, the closest being Stats but both of those two were setting records that hadn't been previously done in the game.
I think the other element is the fact that generally within the Protoss pros there is less of an obvious no. 1 generally speaking in the same way there is for Terran and Zerg. Take a look last year for instance, Stats came into 2018 having had a stellar year and winning both SSL and GSL. However, he was soon replaced by Classic as the no. 1 Protoss for a time it was between them for best player. Then Zest got a finals at GSL and it became a three horse race. While Stats did eventually win out, it was a lot less clear cut than say Serral or Maru as to who the best was until around the time of GSL vs The World. This lack of one dominant player, I would argue is perhaps what plays into part of the thinking that Protoss does have the lower skill ceiling.
Now the argument about whether or not Protoss is the easiest to play is interesting. It does make you wonder whether or not a player like sOs would be able to play to anywhere the near the standard he can if he was playing Zerg or Terran and honestly I doubt it. I do think that maybe as a result of players like sOs and herO and even MC to an extent that you could very much suggest that one's ability to play Protoss is least defined by how limited one's mechanics are (although herO is a possible exception in this case due to how fantastic his micro has historically been). This is because playing smart is a lot more highly valued to Protoss than either Terran or Zerg. If you look at the great players for Protoss there are two strains of thought. There are the great macro protoss in the vein of say Rain or Stats and then there are the Protoss thinkers/bullshitters depending on your opinion of the likes of sOs and MC. These are players that don't always have fantastic micro or even macro ability but that are nonetheless able to win outside the normal balance of the game/ all common sense. I think very rarely has a player ever been able to fuse both these schools of thought perhaps the only one being Zest in his period of dominance although his macro wasn't always great even then.
Coming back to the skill ceiling of Protoss I think that that lack of ability to balance the two ways of thinking of protoss is what has meant that there can often appear to be a lack of absolutely god-tier players among the Protoss. There is usually at least one major flaw that the great Protoss have historically had that isn't present among their Terran and Zerg counterparts. sOs has historically been weak mechanically, Zest has never had the best macro, Stats is incredible but is far from infallible. I think if a protoss player could truly marry these two schools of thought together than the skill ceiling of protoss would easily be on a par with both races.
That's an awfully convoluted way to say that you think Protoss players are just inherently less skilled. You even went so far as to invent two protoss schools of thought LOL
sOs wouldnt be able to play anywhere near the standard he can if he played Zerg or Terran? The man won several premier tournaments including multiple blizzcons for fucks sake. The fact that he's written off as a "thinker"/bullshitter who wouldnt achieve what he did with Zerg or Terran is incredibly biased lol....and insulting to sOs if he were here to read it.
Mechanics and "playing smart" are both necessary in ALL races. The reason Protoss players never seem to to achieve the heights of Terran or Zerg players is because the race is so inconsistent and punishing.
The same thing happened in Brood War. Protoss could never achieve much for years on end. All the bonjwas were Terran with the exception of savior who played zerg......zero protoss bonjwas. Then people realized that the game/maps were balanced against protoss, changes were made, and Protoss became more successful at the top levels
Honestly give it a rest bro rofl. You make a statement that "protoss winning 2 tournaments is the definition of underperforming". Serral and Maru won everything..so by that logic literally everyone else is the definition of underperforming? There have been at least 4 posts with other metrics that show evidence to the contrary and you just keep parroting the same thing. If by your logic only winning a tournament is success then 99 percent of all players of all races are the definition of underperforming. Ignore all the actual reasons they are patching the matchup and just hold o to "only 2 first place last year " please make a 14th post about it.
On March 16 2019 23:42 MockHamill wrote: Protoss have never had any genius level player in SC2.
Nothing to do with balance. But Protoss never had players as skilled as MVP, Life, Innovation, Maru or Serral in their prime.
That's an incredibly biased and arrogant statement. There have been plenty of protoss legends!
This is an underlying issue that we as a community have let persist for too long. There is seemingly a pretty vocal element of our community who believe the following:
1. Protoss takes less skill to play than Terran 2. A Terran must play significantly better than a Protoss to win 3. If you lose as Terran you got 'Protossed', but if you win as Terran it's because the Protoss made mistakes
It's pretty clear that Blizzard is pandering to this vocal element more and more. I mean, nerfing Air upgrades as well? And not even addressing the potential effects in PvZ? It will slow down a Protoss' upgrade advantage, so perhaps it will make a difference. The question is - is it even needed?
I get that the matchup feels frustrating, but significantly imbalanced? Pro level play isn't showing it, and few people can agree on what the 'problem' is.
It's also interesting to see the response to the meta. Protoss starts getting 2-based, and we try and adapt to deal with it. When we start to hold such pushes, some Terrans immediately turn to whining...which makes sense in many ways. Maru and friends will win more GSLs (reinforcing how much more awesome Terran players all are), and ladder Terran players don't actually have to look at themselves and how they can improve their play. As Incontrol says, when some Terrans lose, it's like you've kicked over their sandcastle!
So Protoss will take the nerf, if only to placate Terran dissatisfaction. But it won't be enough, because it never is. Just add it to the ever-growing list of Protoss nerfs. Some people carry on about mech - but we've seen what happens when we buff mech units; they get used to make bio even more powerful.
Something does need to change, because the current trajectory of Protoss isn't looking pretty - and that applies to PvZ too, where Infestor/Broodlord is making lategame pretty untenable. I think some elements of Protoss are a bit of a mess at the moment, and many units need reexamination (particularly Stargate units).
But I'm guessing the time and effort isn't available within Blizzard anymore to do the kind of detailed and thorough analysis to make the game better for everyone. I think they should create a consulting panel (of players from all races, and informed observers like Artosis, for example) who can provide input for balance and design changes. Hell, maybe they already do that and this is the best they can do.
I think balancing this game will be even harder now, thanks to the memes and twitch chat and so on. We are living in an era of instant, visceral and polarising debate. Nuance, patience and moderation are virtues, and it'd be nice to see some more Terrans (particularly leading streamers) embody them more.
TLDR - Let's wait till GSL finishes (I hear Terrans are doing ok there)
On March 17 2019 08:06 BerserkSword wrote: And the fact that they were dominant before but all of a sudden unable to perform recently means that the factor currently holding them back is not their skill, it's their race.
.............
That's really not how professional Starcraft works. At all.
Peaks and slumps are a thing. Progamers are people too, they're more than just the race they play.
Yes I understand
I am not talking about peaks and slumps though.
I am talking about a year, 2018, where Protoss only won 2 Premier tournaments out of 14, and this phenomenon spilling into 2019
A time when Stats, who is definitely NOT slumping, is unable to win anything and is even eliminated by the likes of Cure
A time when the the most talented protoss players in the world, who have been able to win before, are collectively getting destroyed
You guys are claiming that the best Protoss players are slumping at the same time, lost their skill at the same time, etc
I'm sorry, but your one arbitrary metric is basically the only one that supports Protoss slumping in 2018. Tournament Wins: Terran: 4 Zerg: 8 Protoss: 2
On March 17 2019 05:58 DomeGetta wrote: Thought this was interesting - is Toss the most popular race (thought Zerg was?)
Top 200 MMR - 86 Toss / 63 Zerg / 51 Terran
Top 500 MMR - 182 Toss / 164 Zerg / 143 Terran
Top 1000 MMR - 370 Toss / 325 Zerg / 286 Terran
Top 2000 MMR - 710 Toss / 645 Zerg / 598 Terran
Ties make it weird Looks like highest skew in top 200 - 43% vs 26% Lowest at 2K - 36% vs. 31%
Interesting. Supports the idea that Protoss is the easiest race to use. So, the question remains if there are so many high level Protoss players why are the fewer Protoss at the extreme top?
I think there are three possible explanations: 1) Protoss is the easiest race to use but the skill ceiling is lower compared to Zerg and Terran. 2) The ease of use makes it so Protoss players never have to develop the extreme skill needed to be compete at the extreme top level. 3) Pure chance.
Personally, I think 1) or 2) are the correct explanations.
I think the suggestion that there are few Protoss at the extreme top is quite fallacious. If we're looking at premier events while yes Protoss only won 2 tournaments in 2018, they made the finals in 11. For some context Zerg were in the finals in 10 and Terran in 4. Yes, there wasn't someone necessarily on the tier of a Maru or a Serral last year, the closest being Stats but both of those two were setting records that hadn't been previously done in the game.
I think the other element is the fact that generally within the Protoss pros there is less of an obvious no. 1 generally speaking in the same way there is for Terran and Zerg. Take a look last year for instance, Stats came into 2018 having had a stellar year and winning both SSL and GSL. However, he was soon replaced by Classic as the no. 1 Protoss for a time it was between them for best player. Then Zest got a finals at GSL and it became a three horse race. While Stats did eventually win out, it was a lot less clear cut than say Serral or Maru as to who the best was until around the time of GSL vs The World. This lack of one dominant player, I would argue is perhaps what plays into part of the thinking that Protoss does have the lower skill ceiling.
Now the argument about whether or not Protoss is the easiest to play is interesting. It does make you wonder whether or not a player like sOs would be able to play to anywhere the near the standard he can if he was playing Zerg or Terran and honestly I doubt it. I do think that maybe as a result of players like sOs and herO and even MC to an extent that you could very much suggest that one's ability to play Protoss is least defined by how limited one's mechanics are (although herO is a possible exception in this case due to how fantastic his micro has historically been). This is because playing smart is a lot more highly valued to Protoss than either Terran or Zerg. If you look at the great players for Protoss there are two strains of thought. There are the great macro protoss in the vein of say Rain or Stats and then there are the Protoss thinkers/bullshitters depending on your opinion of the likes of sOs and MC. These are players that don't always have fantastic micro or even macro ability but that are nonetheless able to win outside the normal balance of the game/ all common sense. I think very rarely has a player ever been able to fuse both these schools of thought perhaps the only one being Zest in his period of dominance although his macro wasn't always great even then.
Coming back to the skill ceiling of Protoss I think that that lack of ability to balance the two ways of thinking of protoss is what has meant that there can often appear to be a lack of absolutely god-tier players among the Protoss. There is usually at least one major flaw that the great Protoss have historically had that isn't present among their Terran and Zerg counterparts. sOs has historically been weak mechanically, Zest has never had the best macro, Stats is incredible but is far from infallible. I think if a protoss player could truly marry these two schools of thought together than the skill ceiling of protoss would easily be on a par with both races.
That's an awfully convoluted way to say that you think Protoss players are just inherently less skilled. You even went so far as to invent two protoss schools of thought LOL
sOs wouldnt be able to play anywhere near the standard he can if he played Zerg or Terran? The man won several premier tournaments including multiple blizzcons for fucks sake. The fact that he's written off as a "thinker"/bullshitter who wouldnt achieve what he did with Zerg or Terran is incredibly biased lol....and insulting to sOs if he were here to read it.
Mechanics and "playing smart" are both necessary in ALL races. The reason Protoss players never seem to to achieve the heights of Terran or Zerg players is because the race is so inconsistent and punishing.
The same thing happened in Brood War. Protoss could never achieve much for years on end. All the bonjwas were Terran with the exception of savior who played zerg......zero protoss bonjwas. Then people realized that the game/maps were balanced against protoss, changes were made, and Protoss became more successful at the top levels
Cherry picking, suppressing evidence, or the fallacy of incomplete evidence is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position. It is a kind of fallacy of selective attention, the most common example of which is the confirmation bias.[1][2] Cherry picking may be committed intentionally or unintentionally. This fallacy is a major problem in public debate. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_picking)
So in your case BerserkSword, this is evidently intentional. Like someone else said, you chose the only metric that supported your claim. When confronted with other metrics, which by the way are statistically more significant because their sample size is a lot larger (you can also google sample size to understand why it's so important), you just refuse to acknowledge them. I'm not going to keep arguing with you as you're not ready to change your position on the subject, and I believe Z3nith raised interesting points that I tend to agree with regarding the way we view top protoss players.
I'll just say this. In the investment field, there's a common trope that is always given as advice for beginners: "Past performance is no guarantee of future results". It means that if a certain stock has been appreciating in value, there's no reason to believe that it will keep appreciating. While the analogy is not perfect for starcraft, it has some value when trying to understand how the player's skill and result can shift in such a quick time.
Let's look at Blizzcon winners for the past 4 years. Blizzcon is now the biggest/most prestigious tournament of the year and every winner had a strong case for best player in the world at the time.
2015: sOs wins Blizzcon. He then fails to qualify for 2016 GSL Code S season 1 and has a really disappointing year except a lost code S final to byun, and finishes 13th in WCS point standings, failing to qualify for Blizzcon 2016.
2016: After winning Code S in September, ByuN wins Blizzcon 2016 in dominant fashion. Most rank him at best player in the world. He then proceeds to lose in the Ro32 in the 2017 GSL Code S season 1. After a disappointing year, ByuN finishes 10th in standings and fails to qualify for Blizzcon 2017.
2017: After an excellent year winning IEM Shanghai and super tournament 2, Rogue wins Blizzcon 2017 and is undisputably the best player in the world. He then gets knocked out in the subsequent Code S Ro32 by aLive and Scarlett. After a disappointing start, Rogue finishes the year strong and ends up qualifying in the 6th spot for Blizzcon 2018.
2018: After winning all WCS events, Serral goes 14-3 in maps and crushes top koreans on his way to win Blizzcon 2018. He is the first foreigner to be crowned best player in the world. After not losing an offline serie in almost a year, Serral loses 3 in a row from IEM Katowice to WESG.
The obvious point I'm trying to make here is that from 2015 to 2017, the 3 blizzcon winners either failed to qualify or lost in the ro32 of the next GSL season, and all but one failed to qualify for next year's blizzcon. Balance was never the cause. The most obvious reason was complacency/lack of practice after winning it all. Starcraft can also be random sometimes and champions can lose to underdogs. Rogue losing to aLive and Scarlett after winning Blizzcon wasn't a balance issue. Stats losing to cure while surprising to most, isn't that surprising when you look at how Blizzcon winners/finalist performed the next GSL.
It's almost as if youre all still ignoring the fact that the lack of Protoss success in 2018 is not made up of isolated, infrequent events. It went on throughout the whole year and happened to basically all the top protoss players.
Youre right random stuff can happen, but that does not explain why it has been so widespread.
You are the one trying to spin ridiculous narratives of why Protoss legends collectively got stomped throughout 2018 and into 2019 excuses I've heard in this thread -they inherently less skilled -Maru and serral are gods -Protoss players didnt practice as much -shit happens, it's a coincidence
the "other metrics" that supposedly supersede the fact that only 2 out of 14 premier tournaments were won by protoss players are nowhere near as important. Second place is nice and all, but the point of these tournaments is to win them
On March 17 2019 14:52 BerserkSword wrote: It's almost as if youre all still ignoring the fact that the lack of Protoss success in 2018 is not made up of isolated, infrequent events. It went on throughout the whole year and happened to basically all the top protoss players.
Youre right random stuff can happen, but that does not explain why it has been so widespread.
You are the one trying to spin ridiculous narratives of why Protoss legends collectively got stomped throughout 2018 and into 2019 excuses I've heard in this thread -they inherently less skilled -Maru and serral are gods -Protoss players didnt practice as much -shit happens, it's a coincidence
the "other metrics" that supposedly supersede the fact that only 2 out of 14 premier tournaments were won by protoss players are nowhere near as important. Second place is nice and all, but the point of these tournaments is to win them
You speak as though there were some magical quota system that mandates all three races each win 1/3 of all tournaments. There isn't. Even in a perfectly balanced game, things like bracket luck or individual playstyle would still be huge factors–and there are balance changes of various size throughout the year too. Like it or not, Protoss winning fewer tournaments is not a metric that means much at all in the face of variable skill levels, variable brackets, variable styles, and yes, variable balance.
And even if the game was actually in some mythical perfect state of balance, it still wouldn't be a meaningful metric. That's not how statistics works. Just try flipping a coin 14 times. I'm willing to bet that you don't get exactly 7 heads and 7 tails–and even if you did, try flipping it another 14.
On March 17 2019 14:52 BerserkSword wrote: It's almost as if youre all still ignoring the fact that the lack of Protoss success in 2018 is not made up of isolated, infrequent events. It went on throughout the whole year and happened to basically all the top protoss players.
Youre right random stuff can happen, but that does not explain why it has been so widespread.
You are the one trying to spin ridiculous narratives of why Protoss legends collectively got stomped throughout 2018 and into 2019 excuses I've heard in this thread -they inherently less skilled -Maru and serral are gods -Protoss players didnt practice as much -shit happens, it's a coincidence
the "other metrics" that supposedly supersede the fact that only 2 out of 14 premier tournaments were won by protoss players are nowhere near as important. Second place is nice and all, but the point of these tournaments is to win them
You speak as though there were some magical quota system that mandates all three races each win 1/3 of all tournaments. There isn't. Even in a perfectly balanced game, things like bracket luck or individual playstyle would still be huge factors–and there are balance changes of various size throughout the year too. Like it or not, Protoss winning fewer tournaments is not a metric that means much at all in the face of variable skill levels, variable brackets, variable styles, and yes, variable balance.
And even if the game was actually in some mythical perfect state of balance, it still wouldn't be a meaningful metric. That's not how statistics works. Just try flipping a coin 14 times. I'm willing to bet that you don't get exactly 7 heads and 7 tails–and even if you did, try flipping it another 14.
you built a strawman
I never said protoss needs to win 33.33333% of premier tournaments lol
we can draw conclusions based on the results though. the raw data shows that from 2018 to present, protoss have been struggling hard to win a premier tournament. We could ask ourselves why this this happening
the highest skilled protoss players in the world are regularly getting stomped. some eliminated by historically weaker players of other races (scarlet sweeping sOs, reynor eliminating classic, special eliminating classic, cure eliminating stats etc)
the race is struggling at the highest level, and the only thing its met with is nerf after nerf.
you can blame the lack of results on the players, coincidence, and/or the race.
You keep repeating the same old tired arguments while refusing to address the counter arguments addressed to you. Scarlett SpeCial and Reynor are top 4 foreigners, foreigners can actually compete with koreans, wake up this isn't 2014 anymore, your "protoss legends" have fallen, get a grip.
On March 17 2019 16:51 fastr wrote: You keep repeating the same old tired arguments while refusing to address the counter arguments addressed to you. Scarlett SpeCial and Reynor are top 4 foreigners, foreigners can actually compete with koreans, wake up this isn't 2014 anymore, your "protoss legends" have fallen, get a grip.
yea. the protoss legends have fallen because they are playing a neutered race
The time you guys spend hunting down numbers and cherrypicking should be spent playing. Race switch and play against each other. Whoever loses will gain insight. The ones who win will have to seek their insight on ladder.
And if you try excuse yourself with "that guy is a league above me" etc then you're just acknowledging that skill plays a bigger part than you try to make it seem.
On March 17 2019 17:51 WaesumNinja wrote: The time you guys spend hunting down numbers and cherrypicking should be spent playing. Race switch and play against each other. Whoever loses will gain insight. The ones who win will have to seek their insight on ladder.
And if you try excuse yourself with "that guy is a league above me" etc then you're just acknowledging that skill plays a bigger part than you try to make it seem.
He's just trying to copy terran whine tactics but doesn't have the game knowledge to back it up and keeps linking of videos of protoss doing dumb things and calling imbalance. Its a tragedy for SC2 that rain stopped playing, he would've been the maru/serral of protoss, they still have to bring him up when someone says macro protoss and stats is busy coming in second on multiple tournaments.
On March 17 2019 17:51 WaesumNinja wrote: The time you guys spend hunting down numbers and cherrypicking should be spent playing. Race switch and play against each other. Whoever loses will gain insight. The ones who win will have to seek their insight on ladder.
And if you try excuse yourself with "that guy is a league above me" etc then you're just acknowledging that skill plays a bigger part than you try to make it seem.
He's just trying to copy terran whine tactics but doesn't have the game knowledge to back it up and keeps linking of videos of protoss doing dumb things and calling imbalance. Its a tragedy for SC2 that rain stopped playing, he would've been the maru/serral of protoss, they still have to bring him up when someone says macro protoss and stats is busy coming in second on multiple tournaments.
LOL @ this guy
GSL caliber PvT = protoss players doing dumb things
funny thing is that rain used to say the same things i'm saying
On March 17 2019 17:51 WaesumNinja wrote: The time you guys spend hunting down numbers and cherrypicking should be spent playing. Race switch and play against each other. Whoever loses will gain insight. The ones who win will have to seek their insight on ladder.
And if you try excuse yourself with "that guy is a league above me" etc then you're just acknowledging that skill plays a bigger part than you try to make it seem.
He's just trying to copy terran whine tactics but doesn't have the game knowledge to back it up and keeps linking of videos of protoss doing dumb things and calling imbalance. Its a tragedy for SC2 that rain stopped playing, he would've been the maru/serral of protoss, they still have to bring him up when someone says macro protoss and stats is busy coming in second on multiple tournaments.
LOL @ this guy
GSL caliber PvT = protoss players doing dumb things
funny thing is that rain used to say the same things i'm saying
terran OP protoss is too unforgiving
You dont tho..unless u mean u play at like 3K mmr lol. Protoss is easily the most forgiving / least required micro/ multitask race. You can literally recall your army if you are caught out.. where as T or Z can lose a game because of by far the stupidest unit in the game that costs no gas warp prism. You can spam out shield batteries the second u scout a push coming...the fuck are u talking about "too unforgiving?" You should at least attempt to explain your lunacy. On no planet in no universe did someone like Rain say or have anything in common with someone like you. Very obviously a 4k protoss player who desperately wants to hold on to his diamond 2 rank.
On March 17 2019 14:52 BerserkSword wrote: It's almost as if youre all still ignoring the fact that the lack of Protoss success in 2018 is not made up of isolated, infrequent events. It went on throughout the whole year and happened to basically all the top protoss players.
Youre right random stuff can happen, but that does not explain why it has been so widespread.
You are the one trying to spin ridiculous narratives of why Protoss legends collectively got stomped throughout 2018 and into 2019 excuses I've heard in this thread -they inherently less skilled -Maru and serral are gods -Protoss players didnt practice as much -shit happens, it's a coincidence
the "other metrics" that supposedly supersede the fact that only 2 out of 14 premier tournaments were won by protoss players are nowhere near as important. Second place is nice and all, but the point of these tournaments is to win them
You speak as though there were some magical quota system that mandates all three races each win 1/3 of all tournaments. There isn't. Even in a perfectly balanced game, things like bracket luck or individual playstyle would still be huge factors–and there are balance changes of various size throughout the year too. Like it or not, Protoss winning fewer tournaments is not a metric that means much at all in the face of variable skill levels, variable brackets, variable styles, and yes, variable balance.
And even if the game was actually in some mythical perfect state of balance, it still wouldn't be a meaningful metric. That's not how statistics works. Just try flipping a coin 14 times. I'm willing to bet that you don't get exactly 7 heads and 7 tails–and even if you did, try flipping it another 14.
you built a strawman
I never said protoss needs to win 33.33333% of premier tournaments lol
we can draw conclusions based on the results though. the raw data shows that from 2018 to present, protoss have been struggling hard to win a premier tournament. We could ask ourselves why this this happening
the highest skilled protoss players in the world are regularly getting stomped. some eliminated by historically weaker players of other races (scarlet sweeping sOs, reynor eliminating classic, special eliminating classic, cure eliminating stats etc)
the race is struggling at the highest level, and the only thing its met with is nerf after nerf.
you can blame the lack of results on the players, coincidence, and/or the race.
The Protoss players might have been stomped but in the end they won more money than terrans that year, so I won’t pity them very much.
Sure for legacy reasons you would want Protoss to win more tournaments but Serral and Maru were dominating and someone has to win in StarCraft 2, that’s why the metric of « who won the premier tournaments » is very flawed.
As for the random top Protoss being beaten by, according to you, inferior players, you can find stats like that for every race every year in different states of balance. For example TY lost to Creator soon after being in the finals of the GSL.
Well represented in code S ro16 (6/16). (Liquipedia) 50% of IEM ro8 thru final (Liquipedia) Most represented race in top 200/500/1000/2000 global MMR (rankedftw).
On March 17 2019 18:11 BerserkSword wrote: i play terran
On March 17 2019 18:09 Doko wrote:
On March 17 2019 17:51 WaesumNinja wrote: The time you guys spend hunting down numbers and cherrypicking should be spent playing. Race switch and play against each other. Whoever loses will gain insight. The ones who win will have to seek their insight on ladder.
And if you try excuse yourself with "that guy is a league above me" etc then you're just acknowledging that skill plays a bigger part than you try to make it seem.
He's just trying to copy terran whine tactics but doesn't have the game knowledge to back it up and keeps linking of videos of protoss doing dumb things and calling imbalance. Its a tragedy for SC2 that rain stopped playing, he would've been the maru/serral of protoss, they still have to bring him up when someone says macro protoss and stats is busy coming in second on multiple tournaments.
LOL @ this guy
GSL caliber PvT = protoss players doing dumb things
funny thing is that rain used to say the same things i'm saying
terran OP protoss is too unforgiving
You dont tho..unless u mean u play at like 3K mmr lol. Protoss is easily the most forgiving / least required micro/ multitask race. You can literally recall your army if you are caught out.. where as T or Z can lose a game because of by far the stupidest unit in the game that costs no gas warp prism. You can spam out shield batteries the second u scout a push coming...the fuck are u talking about "too unforgiving?" You should at least attempt to explain your lunacy. On no planet in no universe did someone like Rain say or have anything in common with someone like you. Very obviously a 4k protoss player who desperately wants to hold on to his diamond 2 rank.
“You have to play like a machine to win as Protoss. You can't make a single mistake.” -Rain
Rain also said that Terran was more OP than broodlord infestor lol. don't have a source for that yet, but I'll spare you since Rain's first quote already makes you look like a clown
It's comical that you have to resort to making things personal after your arguments are destroyed
Actually that article Mizenhauer wrote is excellent. All the trolls saying that Protoss takes less skill, allows you to mess up, is reliant on gimmicks, is very forgiving, a-move, etc should read it
for example
As Maru was splitting his bio and vikings against storm while launching off emps, and Dark was controlling infestors, vipers and corruptors, it looked like the Protoss was just a-moving and spraying storms about willy-nilly. See that a few times and you might start to believe that’s all there is to Protoss once they reach the late game. But watch some of those fights again, because Protoss comes with its own set of challenges. A Protoss player is forced to manage blink stalkers, forcefields, shades, charge zealots, phoenixes and warp prisms in the mid game, many of these all at once. Enter the late game, and they have to control those same units as well as high templars, colossi and tempests. It looks easy because the result is so disastrous for the opponent, but it requires a level of proficiency that few in the world have maintained. Dark and maybe Rogue are the only Zergs who can handle similarly complex late game armies, but Protoss like Stats and Zest have been doing it for years to little acclaim. ShoWTimE made the easy look impossible against soO at GSL vs. The World when a recall that never happened left his carriers stranded and cost him what appeared to be a sure fire trip to the quarterfinals.
And if a Protoss player falls behind in a macro game? Good luck. Making up for a disadvantage is harder in Legacy of the Void than ever before and Protoss gets the worst end of it. Protoss is all about spreading resources in as many directions as possible in order to create an army with the complexity, force and size to conquer the opponent. When Dark’s zerglings killed herO’s third base in the WCS Global Finals, herO was forced to weigh every worker, unit, upgrade and tech structure to try to reclaim a position of strength. When a Zerg’s mineral line goes up in smoke, they hold down the “d” key and get back to business as usual as best they can. A Terran drops mules and continues production while seizing the initiative with drops and harassment. So what did herO do? Snipe a base, defend an attack and juggle archons in warp prisms like his life depended upon it. herO may not have had the classical tools available to the other races, but he allocated what he had precisely enough to allow him to take a third and stampede to victory with charge zealots.
this excerpt well explains what I've been sayin in this topic. Protoss army is extremely difficult to control (which is why I switched to Terran) and is punishing to play....and despite all of this and the fact that Protoss arent winning anything, it's only being met with nerf after nerf
On March 18 2019 11:33 DomeGetta wrote: Based on what?
Well represented in code S ro16 (6/16). (Liquipedia) 50% of IEM ro8 thru final (Liquipedia) Most represented race in top 200/500/1000/2000 global MMR (rankedftw).
No Korean Protoss in WESG.
Zerg also being nerfed.
There are 6 protosses in the Korean top 13 WCS Ranking bases on last 3 GSL, so its no wonder that there are 6 of 16 in RO16 since korea the top 20 in Korea features a bit more protosses but this is since 2-3 years even when protoss underperformed in the ladder, europe and tournaments (2016-2017 u can watch ur rankedftw for that.)
And the slight domination of protoss in top 200/500/1000/2000 global MMR started only a few month ago with the blink cost reduction or slightly before since protoss adapted there playstyle trhe most over the last 9-12 month, goin from nearly 90 % stargate to a more diverse strategy and opening set, what is good (and came with some patches, tempest buff carrier nerf) and most important collossi buff for pvt. So i think protoss still doesnt overperform vs zerg esp in tournemanets and with the new nyduss protoss gets mostly slaughtered by zerg (see the stats soo final, zest soo 4-0 etc., and he didnt even use nyduss but pvz was always hard)
The period of zerg dominance and terran dominace was much longer when u look at rankedftw esp there is a zerg dominace there with the same population in grandmaster since the begining of LOTV 37-40 % zergs while protoss most time around 27%, and there wasnt done much with patches or i didnt even know if zerg got nerfed at all, Now 4 month protoss get the grip wwas helped a bit by the last 12 month patches everyhone things p is imba its total bullshit the other races just need to adept, esp zerg with the new weapon nydus has nothing to complain about, and on the highest level in my opinion terran is strongest, see the innovation win of last wesg..
On March 17 2019 18:11 BerserkSword wrote: i play terran
On March 17 2019 18:09 Doko wrote:
On March 17 2019 17:51 WaesumNinja wrote: The time you guys spend hunting down numbers and cherrypicking should be spent playing. Race switch and play against each other. Whoever loses will gain insight. The ones who win will have to seek their insight on ladder.
And if you try excuse yourself with "that guy is a league above me" etc then you're just acknowledging that skill plays a bigger part than you try to make it seem.
He's just trying to copy terran whine tactics but doesn't have the game knowledge to back it up and keeps linking of videos of protoss doing dumb things and calling imbalance. Its a tragedy for SC2 that rain stopped playing, he would've been the maru/serral of protoss, they still have to bring him up when someone says macro protoss and stats is busy coming in second on multiple tournaments.
LOL @ this guy
GSL caliber PvT = protoss players doing dumb things
funny thing is that rain used to say the same things i'm saying
terran OP protoss is too unforgiving
You dont tho..unless u mean u play at like 3K mmr lol. Protoss is easily the most forgiving / least required micro/ multitask race. You can literally recall your army if you are caught out.. where as T or Z can lose a game because of by far the stupidest unit in the game that costs no gas warp prism. You can spam out shield batteries the second u scout a push coming...the fuck are u talking about "too unforgiving?" You should at least attempt to explain your lunacy. On no planet in no universe did someone like Rain say or have anything in common with someone like you. Very obviously a 4k protoss player who desperately wants to hold on to his diamond 2 rank.
“You have to play like a machine to win as Protoss. You can't make a single mistake.” -Rain
Rain also said that Terran was more OP than broodlord infestor lol. don't have a source for that yet, but I'll spare you since Rain's first quote already makes you look like a clown
It's comical that you have to resort to making things personal after your arguments are destroyed
LOL - this takes the cake here.
There's nothing personal about it at all - the only thing personal is the taste of vomit I get each time I read your posts rofl.
This is the best one yet by far:
You have nothing in common with Rain as in:
He's a world class pro player / You are a random whiner on TL forum.
You refute with "Look, a pro Protoss player (who hasn't played this version of the game) also said it was hard to play Protoss!"
You got me bro - you got me.
Meanwhile you have managed to completely ignore:
"Well represented in code S ro16 (6/16). (Liquipedia) 50% of IEM ro8 thru final (Liquipedia) Most represented race in top 200/500/1000/2000 global MMR (rankedftw).
No Korean Protoss in WESG.
Zerg also being nerfed."
So you continue to bring your "anecdotes" about how the struggle is real for Protoss - while all of the facts keep falling on your head. Please continue.
I'm not sure that this nerf for toss should go ahead - as many has said, it won't change the terrain timing window and PvT lategame.
I think artosis made the point that players can get out of shape in a matchup through proxy and allin play. Im not saying this is the only thing at work, but it's a factor.
I think back to the best TvP players, and they almost all just pulled protoss apart with drops whilst teching towards the Ghost /Viking / liberator / marauder ultimate composition. You'd think that with quicker thirds, multi prong aggression should be stronger.
Perhaps there's a way of making that late game army easier to control for terrans. But I don't think there's any doubt that it can go toe to toe with protoss late game, it's just that too many terrans stay on a mid/late game for too long without moving into the ultra late game army that can wreck protoss.
On another issue, I think we need to be talking about Zerg more. Good to see Nydus change, but I'm seeing Protoss being trashed in the late game pretty regularly. Given the Tempest and Carrier both have been nerfed, the golden armada isn't the answer to Broodlord / Infestor / Corruptor.
It's be great to abuse the mobility of that composition (say with Blink Stalkers as an example) but Lings and fungal sorta prohibit that. I'm curious to see what others think about PvZ lategame.
ZvP is statistically the biggest outlier right now and i can't see the proposed patch changing that much.
Nydus 3 armor helps for making a wider variety of play possible without all-in's being build order losses but the threat is still quite legit and the upgrade nerf will be felt.
Tempest is a required check against certain units, it sometimes does that job fine but i haven't seen it in action all that much recently. Vray and Carrier are weak atm and phoenix play is fairly good but not amazing in all matchups, usually confined to the early game.
Air upgrade nerf is just wtf because nobody was asking for it and it primarily serves to make units which are already fairly weak even worse. Air upgrades primarily buff carriers + phoenixes, void rays and then last of all tempests. Who looks at the game right now and decides that carriers and phoenixes need to be preferentially crippled?
E.g. There are many times where a phoenix or a carrier would hit something for 3 damage but if you have +1-2 attack then you hit for 4 or 5 damage instead. That's +33-67% more damage. A one or two upgrade difference completely transforms the game when units like this are in play and making those upgrades take longer would be a major problem for mid to late game play involving those units in every matchup.
If you have tempests then the biggest interaction is that you can kill certain key units in 1.167x - 1.25x fewer shots if you've got multiple attack upgrades to hit the breakpoints. Oracles don't benefit from attack upgrades at all and are almost never used in combat when upgrades are in play.
Yes, and another thing that needs to be factored in is that the feedback nerf has had a rather big impact on infestor vs. HT interactions. Now that infestors don't die to feedback, it's much less risky to run them forward to try and get a fungal off on the Protoss air army.
We haven't really seen a lot of pro PvZs hit the late game yet because of nydus and other reasons, but I do think if what I've seen on pro streams is any indication, it could get pretty rough. It seems like most pro protoss players are now trying to end the matchup via all-ins or timings before broodlord/infestor can get out. I also saw a Zerg playing lategame against puck utilize the new nydus to harass bases while still defending the main infestor/broodlord/corruptor/mass static army (they have a nydus head with the main army and then have others pop up near protoss bases) and it looked incredibly tough to deal with since all ground units could hit a base and then be back to defend within a few seconds if the protoss tried to attack the main army/static defence area.
The tempest in its current state is actually pretty weak against Zerg now. It's no longer fast and agile enough to poke with safely, but it also has such low health that it can get picked off easily once vipers are out and there's a few spore crawlers with the army. It's in the same boat as the stalker where they made a drastic change to it that was good, but slightly too good, but instead of nerfing it a little bit to dial it back they basically split the difference between the old version and new version and it's not good for either the new use case or the old use case.
On March 24 2019 11:31 Ben... wrote: Yes, and another thing that needs to be factored in is that the feedback nerf has had a rather big impact on infestor vs. HT interactions. Now that infestors don't die to feedback, it's much less risky to run them forward to try and get a fungal off on the Protoss air army.
We haven't really seen a lot of pro PvZs hit the late game yet because of nydus and other reasons, but I do think if what I've seen on pro streams is any indication, it could get pretty rough. It seems like most pro protoss players are now trying to end the matchup via all-ins or timings before broodlord/infestor can get out. I also saw a Zerg playing lategame against puck utilize the new nydus to harass bases while still defending the main infestor/broodlord/corruptor/mass static army (they have a nydus head with the main army and then have others pop up near protoss bases) and it looked incredibly tough to deal with since all ground units could hit a base and then be back to defend within a few seconds if the protoss tried to attack the main army/static defence area.
The tempest in its current state is actually pretty weak against Zerg now. It's no longer fast and agile enough to poke with safely, but it also has such low health that it can get picked off easily once vipers are out and there's a few spore crawlers with the army. It's in the same boat as the stalker where they made a drastic change to it that was good, but slightly too good, but instead of nerfing it a little bit to dial it back they basically split the difference between the old version and new version and it's not good for either the new use case or the old use case.
the worst part about the new tempest is that it isnt even really split between the old and new versions.
the first buff was giving it speed in exchange for durability. the speed was then nerfed, but none of the durability was given back
tempests get killed so easily now. they shouldve at least given it some HP back imo
I don't enjoy tempests in general, they're pretty fun to watch and play with in small numbers but they've been used in some really toxic ways when much of the race's power has been left with them in the past (although you could say the same for brood lords)
I think nuke should probably be more visible (maps are much bigger now and there's far more going on, it's far harder to find a nuke dot than it is to cast a nuke when they're spammed in lategame) and/or cost 150 gas as well
On March 24 2019 12:40 Cyro wrote: I don't enjoy tempests in general, they're pretty fun to watch and play with in small numbers but they've been used in some really toxic ways when much of the race's power has been left with them in the past (although you could say the same for brood lords)
I think nuke should probably be more visible (maps are much bigger now and there's far more going on, it's far harder to find a nuke dot than it is to cast a nuke when they're spammed in lategame) and/or cost 150 gas as well
I dont really like tempests either.
Protoss compositions/strategies usually dont involve firing from a safe distance, picking away at the enemy. It's about a synergistic deathball moving out on the map and taking the fight to the enemy, constantly reinforcing with the warp prism.
The thing is, the tempest was blizzard's answer to protoss having no solid answers to strong air compositions. What is a protoss player supposed to do against broodlords, ranged libs, and even bc heavy compositions? None of the robo units can touch air, gateway units (stalker sentry) get destroyed despite being able to attack air units, and high templars and carriers are unreliable.
I always thought they should just remove the tempest and give the protoss a good all-rounder backbone unit. I dont think it can be the stalker, since any buff to the fighting capabilities of the stalker would make it broken in the early game against terran. That just leaves the immortal....give it an air attack so that protoss can trade effectively with brood lords, range libs, etc without relying on tempests
On March 24 2019 11:31 Ben... wrote: Yes, and another thing that needs to be factored in is that the feedback nerf has had a rather big impact on infestor vs. HT interactions. Now that infestors don't die to feedback, it's much less risky to run them forward to try and get a fungal off on the Protoss air army.
We haven't really seen a lot of pro PvZs hit the late game yet because of nydus and other reasons, but I do think if what I've seen on pro streams is any indication, it could get pretty rough. It seems like most pro protoss players are now trying to end the matchup via all-ins or timings before broodlord/infestor can get out. I also saw a Zerg playing lategame against puck utilize the new nydus to harass bases while still defending the main infestor/broodlord/corruptor/mass static army (they have a nydus head with the main army and then have others pop up near protoss bases) and it looked incredibly tough to deal with since all ground units could hit a base and then be back to defend within a few seconds if the protoss tried to attack the main army/static defence area.
The tempest in its current state is actually pretty weak against Zerg now. It's no longer fast and agile enough to poke with safely, but it also has such low health that it can get picked off easily once vipers are out and there's a few spore crawlers with the army. It's in the same boat as the stalker where they made a drastic change to it that was good, but slightly too good, but instead of nerfing it a little bit to dial it back they basically split the difference between the old version and new version and it's not good for either the new use case or the old use case.
U forget that feedback also takes away energy besides dealing damage. I think that this feedback nerf seems legit. Imagine EMP killing your HT instead draining them from energy. It's BS to loose 150 gas caster in one click without any counterplay. Infestors are just not dead unit thanks to that, and with funghal nerfed over the years it's not a problem. Everything that causes more micro in engagements is good. U must look out for funghals, and I must look out and evade storms. How can this be bad for the game? It's bad for ppl that want to "a-move" through opponent's army.
"I also saw a Zerg playing lategame against puck utilize the new nydus to harass bases while still defending the main"
And it's something wrong? I saw Protoss defending the main and swarming opponent's base with warpins from warprism. So should they nerfed that too?
On March 24 2019 16:43 pvsnp wrote: Why are people still talking about balance when we have changes going live tomorrow?
why not lol
On March 24 2019 16:26 hiroshOne wrote: Immortals with air attack XDDDDDD I should really stop reading "balance topics". They get more and more ridiculous...
look dude. i'm just giving a possible alternative to probably the most poorly thought out/designed unit in the game
On March 24 2019 16:43 pvsnp wrote: Why are people still talking about balance when we have changes going live tomorrow?
It's SC2, people talk design/balance changes from the moment they're announced until the game dies.
This discussion happens every change and in recent history there have been several reversions or modifications to changes because of discussion led by teamliquid.net.
This site is and has consistently been the focus for such discussion because the other starcraft community hubs (twitch, reddit, bnet etc) do not attempt to moderate civil discussion about the game design and balance.
On March 24 2019 11:31 Ben... wrote: Yes, and another thing that needs to be factored in is that the feedback nerf has had a rather big impact on infestor vs. HT interactions. Now that infestors don't die to feedback, it's much less risky to run them forward to try and get a fungal off on the Protoss air army.
We haven't really seen a lot of pro PvZs hit the late game yet because of nydus and other reasons, but I do think if what I've seen on pro streams is any indication, it could get pretty rough. It seems like most pro protoss players are now trying to end the matchup via all-ins or timings before broodlord/infestor can get out. I also saw a Zerg playing lategame against puck utilize the new nydus to harass bases while still defending the main infestor/broodlord/corruptor/mass static army (they have a nydus head with the main army and then have others pop up near protoss bases) and it looked incredibly tough to deal with since all ground units could hit a base and then be back to defend within a few seconds if the protoss tried to attack the main army/static defence area.
The tempest in its current state is actually pretty weak against Zerg now. It's no longer fast and agile enough to poke with safely, but it also has such low health that it can get picked off easily once vipers are out and there's a few spore crawlers with the army. It's in the same boat as the stalker where they made a drastic change to it that was good, but slightly too good, but instead of nerfing it a little bit to dial it back they basically split the difference between the old version and new version and it's not good for either the new use case or the old use case.
the worst part about the new tempest is that it isnt even really split between the old and new versions.
the first buff was giving it speed in exchange for durability. the speed was then nerfed, but none of the durability was given back
tempests get killed so easily now. they shouldve at least given it some HP back imo
To be fair the Tempest is still faster than the old Tempest and it's also cheaper in both minerals/gas and supply.
I think the Tempest is fine as it is, if Protoss struggles against Zerg then Blizzard should revisit the carrier. The carrier isn't really utilized currently and a buff to the carrier wouldn't have a big effect on TvP because the carrier is historically not that good vs Terran.
On March 24 2019 11:31 Ben... wrote: Yes, and another thing that needs to be factored in is that the feedback nerf has had a rather big impact on infestor vs. HT interactions. Now that infestors don't die to feedback, it's much less risky to run them forward to try and get a fungal off on the Protoss air army.
We haven't really seen a lot of pro PvZs hit the late game yet because of nydus and other reasons, but I do think if what I've seen on pro streams is any indication, it could get pretty rough. It seems like most pro protoss players are now trying to end the matchup via all-ins or timings before broodlord/infestor can get out. I also saw a Zerg playing lategame against puck utilize the new nydus to harass bases while still defending the main infestor/broodlord/corruptor/mass static army (they have a nydus head with the main army and then have others pop up near protoss bases) and it looked incredibly tough to deal with since all ground units could hit a base and then be back to defend within a few seconds if the protoss tried to attack the main army/static defence area.
The tempest in its current state is actually pretty weak against Zerg now. It's no longer fast and agile enough to poke with safely, but it also has such low health that it can get picked off easily once vipers are out and there's a few spore crawlers with the army. It's in the same boat as the stalker where they made a drastic change to it that was good, but slightly too good, but instead of nerfing it a little bit to dial it back they basically split the difference between the old version and new version and it's not good for either the new use case or the old use case.
U forget that feedback also takes away energy besides dealing damage. I think that this feedback nerf seems legit. Imagine EMP killing your HT instead draining them from energy. It's BS to loose 150 gas caster in one click without any counterplay. Infestors are just not dead unit thanks to that, and with funghal nerfed over the years it's not a problem. Everything that causes more micro in engagements is good. U must look out for funghals, and I must look out and evade storms. How can this be bad for the game? It's bad for ppl that want to "a-move" through opponent's army.
It does take away energy, but only from one infestor. If you have a group of infestors like is normal in the lategame, they are now much more likely to get a good fungal off without having to risk most infestors actually dying, and one fungal can basically end an entire protoss air army since once one fungal lands, chaining more fungals or using vipers to pull units into the static defence becomes much easier.
And my point with the puck game was that, because of how fast nydus loads and unloads, a zerg can now kill a base and be back to defend the main army before the opponent has a chance to respond. It's basically like the arbiter's recall ability from BW but with the ability to do a second recall back at no cost or risk once the damage is done.
I still think they're going to need to tone down the unload speed of nydus a bit. The armour change will help with rushes but the unload speed is what makes it too strong. Both medivacs and warp prisms have slower unload speeds than load speeds for a reason.
i think queens should be nerfed, right now, you see zergs making 10-12++ queens and just mass droning and some zerglings, while both terran and protoss do dedicated allins and zerg just masses queens and drones and easily defends? The problem i think comes from the fact that zerg explodes in economy in early game, so 150minerals is nothing and he can mass drone, and then zerg can build nydus and be agressive with queens as well. Nerfings queens to cost 175-200minerals is decent solution i think, building mass queens should be a choice the same way as building mass gates or raxes..turrets..bunkers..cannons..shield batteries..gettings few is good, but massing shouldnt be viable strategyand if you mass them it should cost you actual economy..
They do play a major role in all zerg matchups; common to see lots built and used for everything from very early defense to hive armies. Good players like Serral also often walk half a dozen queens across the map to sync with attacks. They're pretty awesome now for a 150 mineral, 2 supply unit that doesn't require larvae to make and they also have a lot of synergy with the newly buffed nydus since it allows them to bypass their main weakness of mobility off creep.
On March 25 2019 03:38 Cyro wrote: They do play a major role in all zerg matchups; common to see lots built and used for everything from very early defense to hive armies. Good players like Serral also often walk half a dozen queens across the map to sync with attacks. They're pretty awesome now for a 150 mineral, 2 supply unit that doesn't require larvae to make and they also have a lot of synergy with the newly buffed nydus since it allows them to bypass their main weakness of mobility off creep.
i think part of the problem comes from the fact you produce them at hatchery and doesnt cost larvae, so even thou it takes 36sec to make, zerg has 3 hatcheries at 4min in the game. Maybe make them cost larvae like normal zerg unit, sure then he can mass them more easily, but he can already mass them anyway. If they cost larvae atleast it will cut in to zerg economy..
On March 25 2019 03:38 Cyro wrote: They do play a major role in all zerg matchups; common to see lots built and used for everything from very early defense to hive armies. Good players like Serral also often walk half a dozen queens across the map to sync with attacks. They're pretty awesome now for a 150 mineral, 2 supply unit that doesn't require larvae to make and they also have a lot of synergy with the newly buffed nydus since it allows them to bypass their main weakness of mobility off creep.
i think part of the problem comes from the fact you produce them at hatchery and doesnt cost larvae, so even thou it takes 36sec to make, zerg has 3 hatcheries at 4min in the game. Maybe make them cost larvae like normal zerg unit, sure then he can mass them more easily, but he can already mass them anyway. If they cost larvae atleast it will cut in to zerg economy..
You can't exactly mass queens, that's nonsense. You need queens mostly for early-mid game and in the early game every queen means there are no 3 possible drones. Many Zergs mass them so they can defend some nasty cheeses - e.g. anything THAT FLIES. Because the damn Zerg has the only AA unit in ... yeah, Freddie Mercury queen
I am not really in a position to comment on balance, unit a should do this damage and unit b should be nerfed there.
What find strange ist that since the times of MC and Parting we don't really have a protoss savior, a protoss being able to win consistently over a longer period of time. I don't mean winning every tournament that he enters, but something along the lines of winning the one or other tourney in 2016, then winning some in 2017 and then retire with a win in 2018.
Classic is probably the closest thing protoss has right now in that regard and according to his liquipedia he won two big tourneys in 2015 and he won the GSL super tourney towards the end of 2018. Stats ist another player that comes to mind.
Since MC is arguably still the most succesful protoss player, I tend to not agree with the position that playing protoss is so easy, forgiving and powerful as some people in this thread claim to. From watching the games I don't think that the current balance is in such a bad state, maybe Zerg should be nerfed slightly, since they have an edge in both matchups for some months.
On March 25 2019 21:37 Cyro wrote: Changes didn't go live today, at least not yet. Do they usually change later than the weekly mutation?
They're usually not on Mondays at all. But it's also different by region I think. Could still be a few hours. Might even have to wait till tomorrow for EU.
So it is a game design problem in TvP: Terran has to rely on timing attacks because Protoss endgame is clearly stronger. However, their timing attacks are clearly effective.
So any nerf to Protoss late game should be balanced by a compensatory buff to Protoss early game to maintain the 50/50 win rate we have now.
In the past, Blizzard hasn't done that. They nerfed Adepts and removed Khaydarin Amulet when TvP was balanced, which shifted the match up dramatically in the favor of Terrran.
Aerial long range artillery is a bad idea and as long as the tempest outranges everything else it will produce a satisfying experience, and especially in combination with the solid ground Protoss ball it's just frustrating. I liked the initial idea of the original balance change that made them into more of a maneuverable hit and run unit, but I think it didn't commit to that hard enough and tried to retain too much of the range identity which made it ultimately too powerful, it's a shame they dialed it back instead of trying to go further. But maybe that just go too far against the aesthetic design of the unit and the established idea of the community about what a Tempest is.
But Terran and Zerg both have powerful air to ground in the late game that basically can only be dealt with using another air unit. Which made me think that it might be cooler to retool Void Rays a bit to fill this niche? Make them scale better with weapon upgrades and add a Fleet Beacon upgrade that increases their speed to make them more microable. Maybe something cool could come out of an interaction where Void Rays have to dive in and take out a bunch of Liberators and then retreat when prismatic alignment runs out.
I don't see whats wrong with Tempest tbh. You can easily snipe 2-3 with a short Corrupter / Viking dive. Sure, chances are you will get stormed but me personally, I like this dynamic quite a lot. Point is you have to distract, dive and get out again and again
So it is a game design problem in TvP: Terran has to rely on timing attacks because Protoss endgame is clearly stronger. However, their timing attacks are clearly effective.
So any nerf to Protoss late game should be balanced by a compensatory buff to Protoss early game to maintain the 50/50 win rate we have now.
In the past, Blizzard hasn't done that. They nerfed Adepts and removed Khaydarin Amulet when TvP was balanced, which shifted the match up dramatically in the favor of Terrran.
I don't think Protoss needs a buff to early game as compensation but something for the (early) mid-game. Let's be realistic, most Protoss losses come from timings that hit in a range from like 6 minutes to 9-ish minutes. We shouldn't nerf Protoss late game and buff early game to compensate instead of making the middle stage of the game more acceptable for both races. I also feel that early games tend to go favourably for Protoss ever since the proxy threat was greatly reduced.
This is also why I think the changes for this patch - upgrade timings - aren't a good idea. Instead of giving Terrans more options and opportunities to do well later on in the game, they make it easier to win with the timings that are already so strong they bring the match-up to 50%.
On March 25 2019 23:48 Harris1st wrote: Patchday is Tuesday historically
I don't see whats wrong with Tempest tbh. You can easily snipe 2-3 with a short Corrupter / Viking dive. Sure, chances are you will get stormed but me personally, I like this dynamic quite a lot. Point is you have to distract, dive and get out again and again
Combined with revelation it seems really unlikely to me you can get a trade that's worth it if the Protoss is at least half paying attention. The tempest-revelation synergy is really frustrating. Because as we all know, tempests are garbage in a real fight. But with revelation letting them pick away at you and telling them in advance if you're looking to engage, it's not easy to get one.
So it is a game design problem in TvP: Terran has to rely on timing attacks because Protoss endgame is clearly stronger. However, their timing attacks are clearly effective.
So any nerf to Protoss late game should be balanced by a compensatory buff to Protoss early game to maintain the 50/50 win rate we have now.
In the past, Blizzard hasn't done that. They nerfed Adepts and removed Khaydarin Amulet when TvP was balanced, which shifted the match up dramatically in the favor of Terrran.
I don't think Protoss needs a buff to early game as compensation but something for the (early) mid-game. Let's be realistic, most Protoss losses come from timings that hit in a range from like 6 minutes to 9-ish minutes. We shouldn't nerf Protoss late game and buff early game to compensate instead of making the middle stage of the game more acceptable for both races. I also feel that early games tend to go favourably for Protoss ever since the proxy threat was greatly reduced.
This is also why I think the changes for this patch - upgrade timings - aren't a good idea. Instead of giving Terrans more options and opportunities to do well later on in the game, they make it easier to win with the timings that are already so strong they bring the match-up to 50%.
On March 25 2019 23:48 Harris1st wrote: Patchday is Tuesday historically
I don't see whats wrong with Tempest tbh. You can easily snipe 2-3 with a short Corrupter / Viking dive. Sure, chances are you will get stormed but me personally, I like this dynamic quite a lot. Point is you have to distract, dive and get out again and again
Combined with revelation it seems really unlikely to me you can get a trade that's worth it if the Protoss is at least half paying attention. The tempest-revelation synergy is really frustrating. Because as we all know, tempests are garbage in a real fight. But with revelation letting them pick away at you and telling them in advance if you're looking to engage, it's not easy to get one.
Bolded & highlighted for emphasis. It really doesn't feel like this is going to change all that much, rather if I do decide to go with a semi all-in timing, it may have a little more success.
One chrono make upgrade to finish 10s sooner, so if protoss chrono twice, they will finish sooner than Z/T anyway (but y a few seconds sooner and not 20s). The question is, is it common to chrono each upgrades twice or not for toss ?
On March 24 2019 11:31 Ben... wrote: Yes, and another thing that needs to be factored in is that the feedback nerf has had a rather big impact on infestor vs. HT interactions. Now that infestors don't die to feedback, it's much less risky to run them forward to try and get a fungal off on the Protoss air army.
We haven't really seen a lot of pro PvZs hit the late game yet because of nydus and other reasons, but I do think if what I've seen on pro streams is any indication, it could get pretty rough. It seems like most pro protoss players are now trying to end the matchup via all-ins or timings before broodlord/infestor can get out. I also saw a Zerg playing lategame against puck utilize the new nydus to harass bases while still defending the main infestor/broodlord/corruptor/mass static army (they have a nydus head with the main army and then have others pop up near protoss bases) and it looked incredibly tough to deal with since all ground units could hit a base and then be back to defend within a few seconds if the protoss tried to attack the main army/static defence area.
The tempest in its current state is actually pretty weak against Zerg now. It's no longer fast and agile enough to poke with safely, but it also has such low health that it can get picked off easily once vipers are out and there's a few spore crawlers with the army. It's in the same boat as the stalker where they made a drastic change to it that was good, but slightly too good, but instead of nerfing it a little bit to dial it back they basically split the difference between the old version and new version and it's not good for either the new use case or the old use case.
the worst part about the new tempest is that it isnt even really split between the old and new versions.
the first buff was giving it speed in exchange for durability. the speed was then nerfed, but none of the durability was given back
tempests get killed so easily now. they shouldve at least given it some HP back imo
To be fair the Tempest is still faster than the old Tempest and it's also cheaper in both minerals/gas and supply.
I think the Tempest is fine as it is, if Protoss struggles against Zerg then Blizzard should revisit the carrier. The carrier isn't really utilized currently and a buff to the carrier wouldn't have a big effect on TvP because the carrier is historically not that good vs Terran.
the new tempest is barely cheaper, while the HP was cut in half and shield decreased by 25. that's really flimsy lol. to put it into perspective, void rays are faster and only have 25 shields less than tempest, and we all know how easy it is to kill void rays
the problem with the carrier is that if it doesnt suck, it turns into the ultimate a-move unit at a critical mass. that's why they nerfed it into the ground. it has the potential to be such a powerful well rounded unit due to its design
They also had a formerly unannounced and untested "bug fix" that nerfed chrono boost by removing one of its features that they added to the game on purpose 9 years ago.
Chrono used to give +15% energy regeneration to buildings that it was on - including the nexus - and will no longer do so. Pretty small difference overall (2.36 extra energy gain per chronoboost on a nexus if i've got the math right) but not completely irrelevant.
On March 26 2019 07:38 Cyro wrote: They also had a formerly unannounced and untested "bug fix" that nerfed chrono boost by removing one of its features that they added to the game on purpose 9 years ago.
Chrono used to give +15% energy regeneration to buildings that it was on - including the nexus - and will no longer do so. Pretty small difference overall (2.36 extra energy gain per chronoboost on a nexus if i've got the math right) but not completely irrelevant.
Oh damn, my build was really counting on that extra 2.36 energy.
On March 26 2019 07:38 Cyro wrote: They also had a formerly unannounced and untested "bug fix" that nerfed chrono boost by removing one of its features that they added to the game on purpose 9 years ago.
Chrono used to give +15% energy regeneration to buildings that it was on - including the nexus - and will no longer do so. Pretty small difference overall (2.36 extra energy gain per chronoboost on a nexus if i've got the math right) but not completely irrelevant.
Oh damn, my build was really counting on that extra 2.36 energy.
You forgot to put /s.
For that matter, if it's so small and insignificant, why would they even mess with protoss builds by "fixing" this intentional decade-long feature?
The fact, that balance team nerfed chrono in this particular patch, is worthy of attention. This indicates that the whining is working, and guys at Blizzard already turned their attention on economic aspect of protoss, without awaiting for balance consequences of upgrades nerf. I think this is only beginning, soon we will see the big nerf of protoss economy.
On March 26 2019 07:38 Cyro wrote: They also had a formerly unannounced and untested "bug fix" that nerfed chrono boost by removing one of its features that they added to the game on purpose 9 years ago.
Chrono used to give +15% energy regeneration to buildings that it was on - including the nexus - and will no longer do so. Pretty small difference overall (2.36 extra energy gain per chronoboost on a nexus if i've got the math right) but not completely irrelevant.
It seems it IS a bug really,according to a Chinese community.But I don't know how to translate it.
On March 26 2019 19:02 insitelol wrote: So they postponed "oracle bug fix" untill "when it's ready" or what? Hope they forgot though...
If I remember right, they basically undid the bug fix and are, at least for the time being, leaving it as is because of how massive of an impact that bug has on how the oracle works.
My guess is that is probably going to be re-addressed in a future big balance patch. It'll require a fairly big rebalancing of the oracle if they are going to actually implement the bug fix.