[Tom]

UPDATED WITH LATEST DATA FOR JULY/AUGUST - SEE PAGE 9




Introduction

The worm has turned. It began almost impercetibly. Protoss players such as myself started questioning whether the balance complaints of other races were really justified in light of the results we were seeing at high level play.

I have previously said it would be unwise to jump to conclusions based on the results of a couple of high profile games or one tournament. I am still of that view. What I would like to discuss is the emergence of an apparent trend in poor protoss results in high level play. I say "apparent" trend because I think it is still too early to conclude that what we are seeing is actually a "trend".

Conscious of not jumping to a premature conclusion, it seems to me that the emerging data raises a legitimate question: is protoss currently underpowered in high level play?

Disclaimer

As a protoss player I have an interest in this debate. I will try to keep this to a minimum, but I am conscious that the very fact that I am raising it as a topic of discussion demonstrates an inherent bias on my part. I hope you will forgive me!

Some definitions

First, my discussion is limited to high level play. By "high level play", I mean top tournaments such as GSL, and Grandmasters league, with particular emphasis on the leagues in Korea, NA and Europe, which I suggest are the most competitive.

Second, I have carefully and deliberately used the word underpowered. By underpowered, I do not mean "unplayable" or "uncompetitive". Strong players will continue to perform well because their inherent skill allows them to overcome possible shortcomings with their race. Underpowered also involves questions of degree - it may be very slight, such that the effect on lower level players is low or almost negligible, but enough to have a significant effect at higher levels.

Third, the expression underpowered in high level play is important. It may also be legitimate to ask "is protoss overpowered in low level play?", having regard to the race's arguably simpler mechanics (I'll leave this for others to decide).

Why it is important to look at data

In any non-mirror match up, it seems to me there are three key variables that affect the outcome of the game. The first, and probably most significant, is the player (or more correctly, players). The second variable is race. The third is map. In examining the relative "power" of a race, we are trying to eliminate the "noise" that is created as a result of differences in player skill and different maps.

For this reason, I suggest (although you may disagree) it is virtually useless to examine anecdotal experience - ie a player's personal experience of the race and their recent games. This is because the key variable here is the player, not the map or race. But, when we look at the results of hundreds (or thousands) of games, the significance of the "player" diminishes drastically, whereas the importance of "race" (and "map") dramatically increases.

I acknowledge that the following data does not attempt to isolate "map" as a factor, and that this is a significant limitation. I apologise in that the data is simply not available.

Recent tournament results [SPOILERS]

In early May, an author on TeamLiquid performed an analysis of global and Korean tournament results. The thread is here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/view...opic_id=218558

In summary, what those results showed was that in global tournaments, the win rate for all match ups had begun to approach 50% (although I would be interested to see the current results more than one month (and 1 patch) later). However, the results showed Protoss was been getting absolutely murdered in recent Korean tournaments, with win rates of 33% of ZvT and 30% of ZvP. I said at the time I would be interested to see whether this was the start of an emerging trend (Korea tends to lead the field in all things Starcraft).

The results of the current GSL "Super Tournament" have been, if anything even more dramatic. 16 protoss players qualified for the round of 64. This represents 25% of the field, despite the fact that Protoss players make up approximately 35% of active 1v1 players in Korean. Of these, 6 advanced to the round of 32 (two of whom advanced in mirror match ups). Three Protoss players have so far played in the round of 32 (Genius, HongUn and Trickster) and all have been knocked out. I pray that at least one of the remaining three advances to the top 16, so that there is at least someone I can watch to pick up some tips on how to play the race at the moment. But I think there is a real risk at the moment that we will have a quarter final (or even round of 16) with not a single protoss player.

I note in passing that the number of Korean protoss players complaining about balance has (as of yesterday), overtaken zerg players for the first time in many months (see http://www.playxp.com/sc2/jingjing/ - red = zerg, green = terran, blue = protoss, purple = nothing). Of course, all this demonstrates is "sentiment" (what people think about balance) rather than an actual indicator of balance.

Grandmasters League statistics

The number of Protoss players in the Korean Grandmasters League has remained the same as when I last examined the data. 32% of Korean Grandmasters play protoss, compared to around 35% of all players. They remain slightly underrepresented amongst Grandmasters. (It should also be remembered that random is dramatically underrepresented in GMs League, and as a result (statistically at least) Zerg and Terran are both significantly overrepresented. Zerg is the most overrepresented. There is a similar trend in SEA: see my earlier thread at http://www.sc2sea.com/archive/index.php/t-1242.html).

There continues to be very few Protoss players in the top 10 of any of the regions. Based on my search this morning, of the top 10 players in each of the major regions, NA has 1 Protoss, EU has 0 Protoss, Korea has 2 Protoss and SEA has 1 Protoss. By contrast:

- 5 of the NA top 10 are Terran and 4 are Zerg;
- 6 of the EU top 10 are Terran and 4 are Zerg;
- 7 of the Korean top 10 are Terran and 1 is Zerg; and
- 3 of the SEA top 10 are Terran and 6 are Zerg.

Discussion

These results hardly provide a definitive answer to the question I have asked. But, I think, the data legitimately entitles me to ask the question: is Protoss currently underpowered in high level play?

I am very curious to see what Blizzard's overall data shows, and really wish they would release this (as they have done in the past). The most problematic scenario, I think, is one in which the data shows Protoss is overperforming in lower level play (whether that be overperformance in bronze, silver, gold, platinum, or overperformance all the way up to high Masters). At the moment I don't have any data and could only speculate on the position below Grandmasters. If this were the case, would raise the question, as many have already suggested, of who it is that Blizzard should be balancing the game for - professionals or the average player? Personally, I tend to think it should be balanced for high level play and everyone else should try and catch up by looking at what the professionals do. However, at the moment we do not have data to suggest any underperformance by Protoss below the parameters I have identified.

On a sad note, it will be difficult for me to pick up much to "imitate" from the GSL super tournament. Unfortunately, most of the Protoss games have been terribly one-sided and not really worth watching (for my part, it is starting to look brutal and somewhat bleak out there for the pros). However, I remain optimistic that one of the remaining Protoss players will show us something new and spectactular to stop the rot. My hopes are now pinned on SlayerS_Alicia (who, for those of you who don't know, more or less gave us the aggressive 3gate expand which revolutionised PvT a few months ago).

Tom please add at least one picture to your articles so it has a thumbnail!

Image Credit: http://sanggene.blogspot.com/

Quick Comments

	nirvAnA:
	Apth:
	EveRorschach:
	TCPLemminks:
	EveJeonSa:
	TAScarecrow:
	duanloves:
	Digby:

[BaKaiNu]

Guys, make this a mature setting for discussion and debate. Any futher derailing or flaming or QQing about this race or that race will result in infraction, and this thread locked (I wonder if I can do that, hmm...).

Quick Comments

	pikk0n:
	nirvAnA:

[crAzerk]

Ah, you are nitpicking on my use of terminology I see. I shall have to be wary of my choice of words to avoid falling to your keen mind

To say that I have made a faulty deduction in the present case would be quite right, if I had sought to make a deduction

Alright then, correct my heading to 'Faulty Logic'. The rest of my points still stand. In fact, read on the next point:

Inductive versus deductive logic

I think a distinction has to be made here.
You seem to be familiar with Philosophical Logic, so you should know that Induction vs Deduction is not the same comparison as Inductive Logic vs Deductive Logic.
In other words, Induction =/= Inductive Logic and Deduction =/= Deductive Logic.
Thus your heading isn't quite accurate either.

Anyway, when you talk about induction or deduction, you are thinking about how the premises or the conclusions are formulated. I am not considering that.
For instance, you say it is likely that Protoss is underpowered. This statement by itself is an induction, no doubt. I'm not questioning this.
I am not questioning whether you used induction or deduction in formulating your premises/conclusions.

You said you did not use deduction at all in the post. But I think it is quite clear that you did present a particular argument, with a few premises, and then the conclusion that Protoss is underpowered at high level.
(It doesn't matter whether this conclusion is just a hypothesis or a strong statement, if we were really to go into that it would be modal logic which will be unnecessary)

What I AM questioning is the deductive strength of your argument. Specifically, I don't think your argument is deductively valid, for reasons I have previously stated.

All other premises from which we make deductions are ultimately founded on induction.

Ah, being so nitpicky here I won't contest this as this is foolproof, but I don't suppose you will discredit something as a deduction just because it is founded on an induction?
It doesn't matter anyway, this is not what I am interested in debating


And you missed out on replying a large portion of what I've said above

@ArousalPerMinutes - unfortunately, Tom is right. I was actually composing a reply against your response but it got too long so I will post it as a new thread next time

[fur]

Just need to let the metagame evolve people.

For a while the protoss deathball was unbeatable and all the zergs did was cry like children who had their lunch money stolen. Now it's beatable and suddenly Protss are UP? Puhleaazzzeeee.

BW evolved for YEARS.

[nGenLight]

You don't know how glad I am for a fellow Protoss like yourself to have such a pedigree of education and writing capability. Although you make bring up some good points on the meta-game, Crazerk, you aren't acknolweding that Tom is merely instigating discussion, as opposed to deducing any conclusion.

I've personally have been struggling internally with the Protoss race recently. Never have I had so many "What do I do against this?" trains of thoughts going. Not one to point towards balance as an excuse, I continued to look for answers amongst Protoss players I believe are stronger than myself. One by one they fell, and even those lucky ones (ST_Ace) that did not fall, only managed to scrap by because of the weakness and mistakes of his opponent.

Examples of some of the questions I currently have:

How do I secure a third against Zerg on XNC?
How do I poke/attack a Zerg's 3rd on XNC without them trading for my natural?
How do I fight a Zerg death ball? (Infestor+Hydra+Broodlord)
How do I fight a Terran death ball with +50 supply on you because he doesn't need SCVs anymore? (MMM+Thor+10 Ghosts)
How can I consistently be able to punish a Terran player that does greedy builds such as depot/rax/orbital/CC on a map like Shakuras whereas if we attempted to 15 Nexus we end up being 4-5 rax marine/scv'd or killed by a ghost rush off 2 orbitals.

I am not concluding Protoss is UP by any means, merely that I have never felt so clueless playing Protoss in a very long time and nobody is able to provide me with any answers. =(

Quick Comments

	Tom:	Amen brother
	EveRorschach:	I echo this!
	psygoh:
	EveJeonSa:
	TCPLemminks:

[Tom]

Originally Posted by nGenLight

I've personally have been struggling internally with the Protoss race recently. Never have I had so many "What do I do against this?" trains of thoughts going. Not one to point towards balance as an excuse, I continued to look for answers amongst Protoss players I believe are stronger than myself. One by one they fell, and even those lucky ones (ST_Ace) that did not fall, only managed to scrap by because of the weakness and mistakes of his opponent.(

This is exactly how I feel Ray. The first port of call should always be "what can I change or do better". And like you, I am looking to the professionals for guidance in this respect, but am getting precious little. The solid Protosses in GSL are getting demolished and those that made it through seemed to just rely on gimmicky timing attacks. The fact that those players were essentially gambling may say something about their psychology at the moment.

[crAzerk]

Originally Posted by PiG

Uh, 2rax, 4gate, roach-ling all-in, etc etc.

I may have worded what I said wrongly.

Nonetheless,
"the game is horridly imbalanced at lower levels"
Is a horridly invalid statement due to the fact that these strategies are not inherently uncounterable and just because lower players struggle with it doesn't reflect any imbalance at all.

To bring up a parallel example, Zerg is commonly said to have the most complicated macro mechanics, injecting and spreading creep, and choosing drone/army is complicated too. Therefore, lower level players will naturally struggle as Zerg.
Is it then valid to say that Zergs are 'imbalanced at the lower levels'?

Absolutely absurd and pointless statement.

[nGenLight]

Zerg is definitely imbalanced at the lower levels. However, I could really care less about the lower levels right now. Pardon me.

[crAzerk]

Crazerk, you aren't acknolweding that Tom is merely instigating discussion, as opposed to deducing any conclusion.

Well, let what I've said to be the counterargument to anyone who is considering to establish Tom's hypothesis as a conclusion then

And to answer the question simply (of the thread),


No

[dennistoo]

Originally Posted by nGenLight

You don't know how glad I am for a fellow Protoss like yourself to have such a pedigree of education and writing capability. Although you make bring up some good points on the meta-game, Crazerk, you aren't acknolweding that Tom is merely instigating discussion, as opposed to deducing any conclusion.

I've personally have been struggling internally with the Protoss race recently. Never have I had so many "What do I do against this?" trains of thoughts going. Not one to point towards balance as an excuse, I continued to look for answers amongst Protoss players I believe are stronger than myself. One by one they fell, and even those lucky ones (ST_Ace) that did not fall, only managed to scrap by because of the weakness and mistakes of his opponent.

Examples of some of the questions I currently have:

How do I secure a third against Zerg on XNC?
How do I poke/attack a Zerg's 3rd on XNC without them trading for my natural?
How do I fight a Zerg death ball? (Infestor+Hydra+Broodlord)
How do I fight a Terran death ball with +50 supply on you because he doesn't need SCVs anymore? (MMM+Thor+10 Ghosts)
How can I consistently be able to punish a Terran player that does greedy builds such as depot/rax/orbital/CC on a map like Shakuras whereas if we attempted to 15 Nexus we end up being 4-5 rax marine/scv'd or killed by a ghost rush off 2 orbitals.

I am not concluding Protoss is UP by any means, merely that I have never felt so clueless playing Protoss in a very long time and nobody is able to provide me with any answers. =(

Great post. This is exactly how i felt atm. There's no way for toss to expand to 3rd easily when facing zerg especially they have speedlings/muta for map control. And drops are extremely hard to dealt with when deathball cannot be split to defend for drops.

[Next_rim]

>How do I fight a Zerg death ball? (Infestor+Hydra+Broodlord)

Try carriers, works wonders. Funny enough, stalker+carrier beats hydra + corruptor.

[Apth]

Originally Posted by nGenLight

Examples of some of the questions I currently have:

How do I secure a third against Zerg on XNC?
How do I poke/attack a Zerg's 3rd on XNC without them trading for my natural?
How do I fight a Zerg death ball? (Infestor+Hydra+Broodlord)
How do I fight a Terran death ball with +50 supply on you because he doesn't need SCVs anymore? (MMM+Thor+10 Ghosts)
How can I consistently be able to punish a Terran player that does greedy builds such as depot/rax/orbital/CC on a map like Shakuras whereas if we attempted to 15 Nexus we end up being 4-5 rax marine/scv'd or killed by a ghost rush off 2 orbitals.

These sorts of questions are difficult to answer because of their specificity. It's all well and good to say "Zerg death ball? Well, Carriers.", but there will be plenty of situations where Carriers are a terribad solution.

Light, and anyone else who's asking these questions, I'd suggest you try and simplify what you're trying to elucidate. For example;

How do I secure a third against Z on Xel'Naga Caverns?
- Why is it difficult to secure that third base?
- Maybe they have map control with Speedlings.
- Question becomes 'How do I deny Z map control?'

The revised question is a lot simpler to tackle, and doesn't involve finicky situational reasoning which will inevitably turn into a snowball of counterexamples.

/2c

[nGenLight]

Oh I break them down good, and have no answers on how to adequately satisfy all those requirements without giving up something else.

[dennistoo]

Originally Posted by Next_rim

>How do I fight a Zerg death ball? (Infestor+Hydra+Broodlord)

Try carriers, works wonders. Funny enough, stalker+carrier beats hydra + corruptor.

Carriers? That's out of the plan to beat the death ball. How many high level games you see carrier/mothership getting produce? By producing stalkers/carriers in an early game would be instant good game.

[pikk0n]

Just wondering. Instead of carriers, wouldn't archons work better? I know most people view archons as units you'll only get after recycling the templars but that's the only unit I can think of to counter a zerg death ball like that. you can also get blink stalkers to add into that mix.

[dennistoo]

Originally Posted by pikk0n

Just wondering. Instead of carriers, wouldn't archons work better? I know most people view archons as units you'll only get after recycling the templars but that's the only unit I can think of to counter a zerg death ball like that. you can also get blink stalkers to add into that mix.

It's too gas intensive. And you will required lots of resource to get almost 10 archon into the mixed of deathball. And you will need either twilight/templar to get archon out. With only 2 base into the above mentioned built is impossible. The foodcount will definitely way behind the zerg by a massive amount.

Even if we do managed to survive the first push or pushing for a timing push, with saved up larva of mass producing of zerg units, it would be hard to defend 2nd expo or even with the mininum units left.

GG.

[deL]

Originally Posted by Tom

This is exactly how I feel Ray. The first port of call should always be "what can I change or do better". And like you, I am looking to the professionals for guidance in this respect, but am getting precious little. The solid Protosses in GSL are getting demolished and those that made it through seemed to just rely on gimmicky timing attacks. The fact that those players were essentially gambling may say something about their psychology at the moment.

Neither of you guys play that much outside of the SEA server so you can't blame your own lack of ideas on an underpowered race when you aren't really looking where the inspiration will be found. VODs aren't always good enough you have to be amongst the players, practice with them so you know why they do what they do. You SHOULDN'T be able to win in this game by copying others' builds - you should just understand the reasoning behind them and come up with your own (or imitate them whichever you prefer).

[nGenLight]

^ Fair point Del, I have concluded that all the stronger Protoss rely on some sort of 2-base timing attack into propelling them into being able to either win the game there or allow them to expand to the third. Oh but when you do those timing attacks you run the risk of being base traded by the Zerg who has a high econ than you. It makes perfect sense to me why the Protoss I watch in replays and on GSL are doing what they are doing, and it also runs perfectly to me why these guys are failing. I am not inspired by things I already understand.

If you don't 2-base timing attack Zerg and try to get a 3rd. You put Zerg in a great position where he is sitting on 3/4 bases, has a better econ than you, multi-prong harrasing you at ever opportunity while teching to Broodlord/Ultra and infestors, which just laughs at your 200/200 "death" ball. I once tried to defend a Zerg player that dropped my main, attacked my natural and attacked my third at the same time. I sent 3 separate forces to deal with all three of them, and all 3 forces died to the more efficient roach army

[dennistoo]

Well, i guess cheesing is the only way to win now.

1 base DT rush ftw.

[nGenLight]

I'm sure there are much much more I need to learn about the matchup. But as of right now, I am not seeing from anything outside of SEA that is making me go "holy shit I wish knew what he was thinking when he is doing that!". I felt that way when I saw MC reign, Naniwa's emergence at TSL/MLG, but right now I'm getting nothing, and I sure hope someone shows me something soon because I am getting increasingly impatient T_T. Also, those figures/stats shown by http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/view...opic_id=218558 (although small but statistically significant) is making me pretty demoralised.

I'm aware I'm sounding very QQ right now, so I'm going to opt out~

[Next_rim]

Carriers? That's out of the plan to beat the death ball. How many high level games you see carrier/mothership getting produce?

Exactly my point from before. Protoss don't use all units in their arsenal. Did you know that carrier has 1,5x one-target dps of colossus? And that 5 carriers do same dps to hydra ball as 4 colossi? Bet you didn't. Except for carriers take down 2x their amount of corruptors, while colossi...well, don't shoot air. And suddenly you can kill broodlords too. The question is - how do you transition from all-favorite 2-base gateway into stargate. I personally prefer to forge FE straight into gateway/stargate, skipping TC and robo. And after I saw a mothership timing in GSL, I went "FINALLY they are experimenting".