[iNFraction]

protoss is shit nuff said.

[NvJazBas]

God I wish Terran players were like Protoss players.

Protoss struggles = Protoss players don't whine about balance instead they are being patient and hope for a metagame shift

Terran struggles = WE ARE UNDRERPOWERED (when you are not)

Zerg struggles = As always..


Ok on the serious side, as a Zerg player, I'm loving PvZ atm..lol I really think Protoss need some kind of metagame shift for the match up and I really can't think of anything much. Maybe more stargate play? but it is very weak vs timing attacks with Hydra so yeah..I don't know I do think Protoss' are struggling alot atm.

[SnoWPanda]

PvZ is so hard right now, I have to either cut corners and tech super fast or take extra early risky thirds or do both! and rely on the zerg been greedy and not realising he can just kill you or just defend like a champ.

[SnoWPanda]

if i even feel slightly behind like losing a few sentries, i just proceed to a 2 base all in.

[BordZ]

Originally Posted by Makra

Ahh, isn't that what they would call 'dumbing down the game'?

Originally Posted by Apth

Only way to do this would be to mechanically adjust the game at different levels. Not going to happen.

Ontopic, do people think Protoss as a race is easier/harder to play at different skill levels? Is it reasonably consistent Bronze through GM, or is there a Zerg-like skill curve?

Ok this is a bit off topic but I feel a rebuttal is needed so here i go;

I understand why both of you replied with what you did however i never indicated that this would be "dumbing down the game" or be impossible. It just take reaching that fine line thats the hard point. If it is impossible to balance the game at the top and appoximately equal (a very tiny variation) at low to mid tiers as well as the upper tier Bliz has done a bad job in the games design end of story. And I will state it once again Bliz has an obligation to balance the game for low to mid tiers gamers because they paid money for a product.

Starcraft isn't even the most complex RTS out there, from experiance AOE3 had more unit types, more factions (macro mechanics varied a lot by TAD) a lot more units and more resources yet it is pretty much balanced. Keep in mind it took this game a long time to reach this point, 5 years I think.

On topic,

If I had to guess I would say that the metagame equilibrium is shifting slowly again, Toss got used to 1 way of doing things to win but now that zerg/terran has more knowledge regarding the match up its slowly reaching equilibrium

for the record I think that the skill curves should be roughly the same shape and height for all 3 races.

[Roz]

Originally Posted by BordZ

Ok this is a bit off topic but I feel a rebuttal is needed so here i go;

I understand why both of you replied with what you did however i never indicated that this would be "dumbing down the game" or be impossible. It just take reaching that fine line thats the hard point. If it is impossible to balance the game at the top and appoximately equal (a very tiny variation) at low to mid tiers Bliz has done a bad job in the games design end of story. And I will state it once again Bliz has an obligation to balance the game for low to mid tiers gamers because they paid money for a product.

Starcraft isn't even the most complex RTS out there, from experiance AOE3 had more unit types, more factions (macro mechanics varied a lot by TAD) a lot more units and more resources yet it is pretty much balanced. Keep in mind it took this game a long time to reach this point, 5 years I think.

On topic,

If I had to guess I would say that the metagame equilibrium is shifting slowly again, Toss got used to 1 way of doing things to win but now that zerg/terran has more knowledge regarding the match up its slowly reaching equilibrium

for the record I think that the skill curves should be roughly the same shape and height for all 3 races.

I understand where you are coming from but the whole thing just isn't justified. You can't balance around low-mid level players because it just doesn't work. The units are can be balanced and the low-mid level players just don't know or can't use them to their potential. That is not a problem of balancing but more of a problem of not playing it properly. So to balance the game around low-mid level players, if possible at all (since most of them would have different problems), would mean you would actually have to make the game imbalanced.... However, like i said, i dont even think it's possible to balance the game around low-mid level players.

[Monk]

I don't really think Protoss is underpowered at higher levels. It's just this:

A lot of the community defined pros are actually really good, and take their time in analysing games and replays.
A lot of the self-proclaimed pros that choose protoss have cheesed their way to Master/GM, not knowing much about protoss, and when their cheese fails on repetitive players, they start to lose out.

That's the way I look at it. The race is not underpowered by any means, MC, Naniwa, incontrol, KiwiKaki, Tyler and axslav off the top of my head really have shown great results in tournaments because they understand the race. Saying that protoss is underpowered because master level+ protoss find it difficult to cheese masters+ doesn't mean the race is imbalanced.

I'm not saying that for sure they're balanced or even over powered, but I think a lot of the protoss players don't actually understand their race to actually be effective with it, leaving only a select few pros to actually think of new builds to win games convincingly.

Right now I think Zerg and Terran have a lot of true professionals looking at the race while Protoss have only a few, because of the lack of player skill.

But I say this, Just because Protoss aren't in the top 10 of any GM league, doesn't mean they're UP. I'm sure a lot of Protoss actually practice on customs rather then on Ladder.

Quick Comments

Tom:

Oh dear, completely missing the point AND generally accusing protoss players of cheesing their way to Masters/GM

[TAScarecrow]

Originally Posted by Monk

I don't really think Protoss is underpowered at higher levels. It's just this:

A lot of the community defined pros are actually really good, and take their time in analysing games and replays.
A lot of the self-proclaimed pros that choose protoss have cheesed their way to Master/GM, not knowing much about protoss, and when their cheese fails on repetitive players, they start to lose out.

Seriously, you're saying Protoss is struggling on GM/M ladders because they're a bunch of cheesing noobs? You can cheese your way to high ladder with any race. Really sick of seeing the argument that toss players are less "skilled" (all 3 races have relatively easy mechanics), especially from silver zergs.

Then you say it's fine at pro level because they're doing "great" (how about some actual stats?). Mentioning Tyler and inc just shows how clueless you are, they're both under 50% win rates and haven't won shit.

Enjoying this thread, Tom's somehow made a non-whiney balance related OP o.O

Quick Comments

	PapaBigBelly:	all 3 races with easy mechanics? zerg has to do twice more than you protoss
	leederek:	i am protoss too , and what's wrong with chessing? it's good in a sense they caught ur opportnent offguard.

[Monk]

Originally Posted by Scarecrow

Seriously, you're saying Protoss is struggling on GM/M ladders because they're a bunch of cheesing noobs? You can cheese your way to high ladder with any race. Really sick of seeing the argument that toss players are less "skilled" (all 3 races have relatively easy mechanics), especially from silver zergs.

Then you say it's fine at pro level because they're doing "great" (how about some actual stats?). Mentioning Tyler and inc just shows how clueless you are, they're both under 50% win rates and haven't won shit.

Enjoying this thread, Tom's somehow made a non-whiney balance related OP o.O

Incontrol coming 4th at the last MLG isn't great? Jesus christ high expectations right there. And sure Tyler hasn't been producing results, but his consistent and is one of the best protoss players out there. Tyler and inc <50% win rate? So ******* what. Maybe they have been playing top notch players, like they have in MLG this season. I don't know, nor do I really care. If we're going to look at stats and win rates, then how about this:

NASL - Season 1
TvZ: 50-65 (43.5%)
ZvP: 49-45 (52.1%)
PvT: 57-41 (58.2%)

Ohh my what is this? Protoss taking 58% of games over T and 48% of games off of Z. I really honestly don't call that underpowered.

MLG - Dallas
TvZ: 77-71 (52%)
ZvP: 68-57 (54.4%)
PvT: 63-72 (46.7%)

And yeah Protoss is so underpowered at pro level, winning 46% Against T and losing 46% against Z.

MLG - Columbus Day 2
TvZ: 7-18 (28%)
ZvP: 11-9 (55%)
PvT: 4-3 (57.1%)

With a 57% win rate over T so far, and a 45% win rate against Z they're definitely underpowered!!!!

P.S I hope I read those percentages correctly :x big backfire if I didn't.

And all 3 races have cheesy builds sure, but Protoss has the easiest cheese-skill level available in my opinion AND I don't know about you, but when I ladder on NA 80% of the time I get cheese from Protoss. Cannon rush, Proxy Stargate etc. Terran I've met are generally good with the occasional mass thor/banshee.

What I am saying is, with the above tournament results(In NA atleast) Protoss are doing fairly well.

EDIT::

Originally Posted by Tom

I'll leave to one side what some people might interpret as a general insult to Protoss players.

I don't think the issue is "people know how to respond to cheese now", as you appear to be suggesting. If you watch the games from the GSL super tournament, the best results in the round of 64 came from players who used relatively gimmicky timing attacks (eg Ace and HongUn). No disrespect intended to these players - you need to do what works in the circumstances. The Protoss players who played what we might consider a "solid macro game" seemed to be the ones who did not advance.

I don't really watch GSTL, but what I have watched are mainly TvT's/ZvT's or ZvZ's. So that's saying something huh?

Maybe the Protoss 'idea' now is not actually a straight up macro game then? Maybe a new discovered 'gimmicky' timing push needs to be made?

It's like the 2 rax bunker play against Zerg. Why wasn't it thought of even earlier? A lot of Zergs would of been shot in the foot and unable to proceed in rankings or tournaments just because it's a very very strong build. Protoss needs to find an equivalent. 4 gate won't cut it now because a lot of people know how to hold it off, and know what signs to look for. I guess there is a Protoss equivalent.

Zerg Baneling bombs weren't all that used in pro leagues before, now they're really dominant. I guess Protoss have to find this 'new' style of play to come out of the slumps?

[Tom]

Originally Posted by Monk

NASL - Season 1
TvZ: 50-65 (43.5%)
ZvP: 49-45 (52.1%)
PvT: 57-41 (58.2%)

Ohh my what is this? Protoss taking 58% of games over T and 48% of games off of Z. I really honestly don't call that underpowered.

MLG - Dallas
TvZ: 77-71 (52%)
ZvP: 68-57 (54.4%)
PvT: 63-72 (46.7%)

And yeah Protoss is so underpowered at pro level, winning 46% Against T and losing 46% against Z.

MLG - Columbus Day 2
TvZ: 7-18 (28%)
ZvP: 11-9 (55%)
PvT: 4-3 (57.1%)

With a 57% win rate over T so far, and a 45% win rate against Z they're definitely underpowered!!!!

Thank you for drawing my attention to this data. Lets have a closer look at what it tells us.

MLG Dallas

MLG Dallas is a good, large dataset. However, as MLG Dallas was played at the very beginning of April, it is not actually relevant to the "apparent" trend I am referring to. This tournament is also taken into account in the "international tournament" trend data referred to in my OP, which showed at that time the win rates for each race approaching 50%.

NASL Season 1

In relation to the NASL Season 1 data, you appear to have used total qualifiers data from TLPD, much of which was also played in early April (although games have been ongoing). However, I should point out that the race distribution for those who actually qualified for the main bracket of NASL is - 5 Zerg (MorroW, Moon, July, Ret and Sen), 3 Terran (Strelok, SeleCT and BoxeR), and 2 Protoss (Squirtle and White-Ra).
(Source: http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft...eague_Season_1)

MLG Columbus

Your data for MLG Columbus appears to be inaccurate or highly selective (you refer to "Day 2"). Could you please provide a source to confirm. The data I have accessed at TLPD shows the following:

TvZ: 81-76 (51.6%)
ZvP: 56-61 (47.9%)
PvT: 63-80 (44.1%)

(Source: http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/sc2-i...it%3A_Columbus and http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft...rcuit/Columbus)

In terms of micro analysis of MLG Columbus, the racial distribution for the pools that qualified for the finals was as follows: 10 Terran, 9 Zerg, 5 Protoss. To put these figures in context, there were 56 Protoss, 47 Terran and 44 Zerg playing in the qualifiers. In other words, Protoss players made up 38% of those competing in the qualifiers, but only 20% of those who qualified. By contrast, Terran started out with 32% of competitors, but made up 42% of those who qualified, and Zerg started out with 30% of competitors, but made up 38% of those who qualified.

Of those Protoss players who qualified, most were knocked out early in the qualifiers (cf. Cruncher and MC). MC's dominant performance in particular appears to have almost single-handedly dragged up the results. Again, this is the problem with looking at one tournament in isolation as it can be highly biased by the performance of one "outlier" like MC.

Discussion of this data

I am not going to discuss MLG Dallas as it is not relevant to the period I am talking about. However, it seems to me that both NASL Season 1 and MLG Columbus are consistent with the "apparent" trend I have observed in other tournaments/leagues - that is, a disproportionately low representation of Protoss players at the top level (in these cases, in qualifying for the main stage of the tournaments). The MLG Columbus data is really quite dramatic - 38% of players in the qualifiers were Protoss, but this proportion nearly halved for the finals, whereas the proportions of Terran and Zerg players who qualified both increased significantly. In other words, and let me stress this, Protoss players were less than half as likely to qualify as Zerg and Terran players. I don't know about you, but I am truly astounded by this. MC appears to have defied an otherwise general trend in Columbus - really, what can you say about this guy?

[Monk]

At the time of pulling the data off of TLPD, the 2nd day of MLG just finished - so it was still probably day 1 results, but it didn't occur to me.

And in regards to CrunCher not qualifying.. that is just.. bad insight. A lot of people doubt CrunCher as a pro-level player, so I don't think he should be mentioned but I will for the sake of the argument.

If we're fighting Data, then I take you back to one of your links in the OP.
http://www.playxp.com/sc2/jingjing/

Such a small data sample, and it's being more prominent of Zerg again now. Does this mean that korean protoss have found out how to deal with the losing 'slump' now as compared to april? And doesn't this mean that your referred april slumps, that the protoss have found ways of winning?

MLG - Colombus

I seriously don't see Protoss at high level being under powered. You say MC's games should be excluded because his such an amazing player, but his Protoss at the end of the day.
MLG - Colombus results

+ Show +

T Z P Z P Z
1 Terran, 3 Zerg and 2 Protoss

Now I ask this:
How many Pro Protoss are out there? Is it because Protoss is the least played race professionally that they aren't producing results? You show out of 147 qualifiers of MLG 56 were Protoss - I don't see how this is relevant as this is 'high level' Protoss we're talking about.. yes? Isn't that GM+? I don't see much Masters players as 'high level' at all. And anyways, if we are referring to them PLEASE look here:
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft...Bracket/Losers

Look at all the PvP's. I think I counted 32 PvP's

So that's already 16 of those 56 Protoss taken out by a mirror matchup - so that is only 40 Protoss that didn't get taken out by a PvP.
32 PvP's___ 56 protoss 56-16 = 40 Protoss
18 ZvZ's____44 zerg 9-44 = 35 Zerg
14 TvT's____47 terran 7-47 = 40 Terran

That's why not a lot of Protoss qualified. They knocked each other out in the losers bracket.

And there were a ******* ton more PvP's in the winners bracket, to be precise 24 PvP's. So wait what! that's half the amount of protoss that can make it!!!! So 12 Protoss at this time.

24 PvP's____40 Protoss 40-12 = 28 Protoss
12 ZvZ's____ 35 Zerg 35-6 = 29 Zerg
24 TvT's____ 40 Terran 47-12 = 35 Terran

Seeing the reasoning I'm conducting? PvP's knocked nearly every Protoss out. By the winners bracket, Protoss' numbers were HALFED from PvP's alone.

And at the end of the winners bracket, there were no protoss that survived. They were all knocked out by professional gamers, Morrow, Fenix, ViBe, Thorzain, July and Major. And all the other "professional" protoss were knocked out by other "professional" protosses.
(I'm defining Professional as invites/notable signups)

Championship bracket:
CrunCher - Agh
MC - NaNiwa
CrunCher - KiWiKaKi


3 PvP's in Championship brackets, and there were only 8 Protoss in the Championship Bracket- 3 of which went out in PvP's so 5 left and 2 were seeded pretty far in the tournament too(MC and NaNiwa). No protoss remained after #3 in Pool round apart from MC and NaNiwa who were seeded. And then having to take out a protoss in PvP again so far in? Wittiling down the Protoss numbers yet again.

I just don't see the 'a lot of protoss entered' so that's obviously going to mean a lot of PvP's which is basically taking out a quarter of the population of Protoss in the Losers Bracket. And again took out quarter of the protoss in the Winners bracket. This is not including PvZ/T DNS'. You just looked at numbers and posted.

Edit:
Mirrors: 94 TvT | 44 ZvZ | 84 PvP
Taken from TLPD.

NASL
I can't say much about NASL because you're right - not very good there. But basing it off of one tournament is pretty silly. All of the protoss bar Artosis and Grubby were around the top/middle so it's pretty reasonable to assume that they were outplayed.. right?


To close it out, I think basing it off of tournaments alone isn't a solid way of doing it. The same thing I said about NASL can be said about MLG Colombus(basing it off of one tournament).

Quick Comments

holyforker:

nice stats!

[Tom]

Originally Posted by Monk

The race is not underpowered by any means, MC, Naniwa, incontrol, KiwiKaki, Tyler and axslav off the top of my head really have shown great results in tournaments because they understand the race. Saying that protoss is underpowered because master level+ protoss find it difficult to cheese masters+ doesn't mean the race is imbalanced.

I'll leave to one side what some people might interpret as a general insult to Protoss players.

I don't think the issue is "people know how to respond to cheese now", as you appear to be suggesting. If you watch the games from the GSL super tournament, the best results in the round of 64 came from players who used relatively gimmicky timing attacks (eg Ace and HongUn). No disrespect intended to these players - you need to do what works in the circumstances. The Protoss players who played what we might consider a "solid macro game" seemed to be the ones who did not advance.

[inFeZa]

Ok.
First off, its the nature of the game, ever follow broodwar? there were times where strategies were figured out, changing the game completely. some people couldn't even beat certain races for months!.. but there was no blizzard to come and really balance it out next patch like they do now.

One month a crazy stargate build could be super awesome, next month its figured out in standard play how to deal with such a build.

The game will evolve itself.. its starcraft not COD.

Quick Comments

holyforker:

so true!

[SnoWPanda]

Well the zerg got a point, there are very few good protoss players. Kind of depressing.

korean protoss generally suck except for MC, Genius and Alicia who are great. the other protosses either get lucky with an all in or fail terribly with an attempt at a "solid" (dies to timing attack everytime) strategy that doesnt make sense to me all.

My protoss inspirations mainly come from WhiteRa, Tyler and Naniwa. Others are just skilled but clueless like HuK or do some random shit that works cause nobody is expecting it eg Kiwikaki. Though they are good players can't really learn much from them.

[Daboo]

I dont think protoss are underpowered, our strategy of placing forcefields and getting a win has been figured out by zerg, it's now time for us protosses (protossi?) to go back and see what new tricks we can pull off. Much like how in terran versus protoss, people now figured out how to beat plain mass rax and the game had to be played differently. The op/up stuff changes all the time, before mc won his championship, protoss were the underpowered race, gateway units were crap. And one month later, they are overpowered.Terran are now being called the weakest race by some, while zergs maintain they are the toughest race to play. This will always go on...it's probably something a bad player hides behind.

this constant change of tactics/metagame is what makes a game like starcraft fun, and one of the reasons why bw has such a long life span, builds are still being invented in broodwar that some people think are op.

[nGenLight]

^ I think some people are really talking out of their asses when they are talking about "high level protoss play". Zerg figuring out how to defend cheese more? Fair assessment. But I still win most of my PvZ's with timing attacks (such as the Korean professionals), because I realise the moment I drop my 3rd Nexus I give away entire map control to Zerg to do whatever the hell they want. I understand you guys are trying to use fair assessments regarding meta-game shift and Protoss' easier mechanics - but to talk out of your asses about "Protoss high level play" when you have no clue what you're talking about, shame on you.

There has been a myth for a very long time about how Protoss has the strongest lategame. So why am I finding myself trying to avoid these lategame strategy as much as possible? Is it possible that it's too insanely hard to get there? Is it possible that the two other races have equal or perhaps stronger lategame?

[NvPinder]

Originally Posted by nGenLight

But I still win most of my PvZ's with timing attacks (such as the Korean professionals), because I realise the moment I drop my 3rd Nexus I give away entire map control to Zerg to do whatever the hell they want.

There has been a myth for a very long time about how Protoss has the strongest lategame. So why am I finding myself trying to avoid these lategame strategy as much as possible? Is it possible that it's too insanely hard to get there? Is it possible that the two other races have equal or perhaps stronger lategame?

I don't know if you've changed much, but as far as I ever saw from your play, no offence(and i honestly mean that because that syle is strong, just as MC showcases), you two or one-base timing attacked almost every single game. Of course if you practice one thing more than the other(especially in this case when 'the other' is much more mechanically difficult) it's going to feel incredibly lackluster when you try switching to that style and you're going to go back to what you're comfortable with. I ******* hated 1-base stuff and found it incredibly awkward, avoided practicing it and its one of the reasons my PvP was horseshit, playing that style just feels wrong and backwards to me.

The problem is that there's only so many timing attacks you can do, and at some point zergs were going to figure out how to stop the 2 base timing stuff consistently (or the game would be legitimately very, very broken) if protoss' started relying on it too much. It's the same story as back when everyone was 4-gating every matchup because it is incredibly strong and hard to defend. Eventually terrans and zergs figured out how to hold it optimally, and the protoss players using those builds had to evolve their play.

It's a normal part of meta-game shifting and evolving as a player, the reason why it takes ages for the meta-game to shift is because it's MUCH easier to 'do what you're doing and still getting away with winning' than losing the countless games it takes to actually come up with something new.

edit: and for fucks sake, you're one of if not the best players of your race in this country, grow a ******* pair and come up with your own shit instead of desperately seeking to copy the next top fad from other top players.

[Daboo]

^^ Thats true of all races, marine scv all ins, are at times not even scoutable, and roach ling allins...and 6 pools are also easy to do, but not defendable at times.

[crAzerk]

I don't have much to contribute regarding all these statistics because frankly I am lazy to research about them, but I am certainly enjoying reading the analyses. Keep it up!

It's funny how people are quoting what I said out of context and just supplying all the cheesy strategies that they have lost to in rebuttal.

When I said this

Originally Posted by crazerk

If you can actually point out a strategy that a race has that is ridiculously easy to execute yet ridiculously difficult to defend as another race, please do tell.

I was referring to meatex's comment that the game is 'horridly imbalanced at the lower levels' and trying to bring out why it was an absurd statement. I later acknowledged that I had probably worded what I wanted to express insufficiently.

Thus if you want to know why I think so, you can scroll through the threads and look at the various responses. I am also in the middle of starting a new thread about talking about balance, so you can wait for that.


And another comment about this thread - When we ask the question in the thread title of 'Is Protoss underpowered in high level play?', we are also asking some other inherent questions like:
"Does Protoss need to be balanced so that they can win more easily at high level play?" or
"Is there something wrong with Protoss now that high level players can't seem to beat T and Z?"

Maybe this would help steer the discussion more appropriately

[Next_rim]

Monk,

Very good point. I was thinking about that too. A lot of recent tournaments had titan protoss kicked out in PvP, which is boring, fast and with 0 variety. Even in ladder, I play mostly PvP, with rare zerg and even more scarce terran. In fact, my PvT is soo bad, because I rarely see T in ladder, and have little practice to rely on.