Are Lurkers really the reason why top Protosses open with Skytoss?
Vložit
- čas přidán 30. 06. 2024
- Got annoyed by people claiming the reason for the 2 SG Voidray straight into carrier meta is the Lurker, so i made this little 1 take rant.
This video is about high level Starcraft, Protosses below high GM might not know how to counter lurkers with ground. And i don't know how things looks in diamond leaegue etc. either, all i know is that lurkers are not what made protosses on the pro level go skytoss all of a sudden.
#Skytoss #Rant #Lurker - Hry
Nice video. I like those SC2-Theory videos. Even if I'm on a level where it propably doesn't really matter, I find those very entertaining.
People hated him because he told them the truth
Great analysis Lambo! Lurkers are very fast to escape protoss flanks and surrounds so fighting them with ground can feel very frustrating. Do you think a small Burrow or move nerf on adaptive talons would be alright?
Yes i think that would be very reasonable.
I agree with this. It always feel strange to me how fast Lurkers run even off-creep, and on Creep they are as fast as Hellions.
Didn't we just watch immortals slaughter the lurkers and have 10 immortals remaining still?
That was a spread out fight favouring immortals but a multi prong attack of immortals would be just as effective.
One of the main reasons I use lurkers in my army is to protect broodlords from the mobile anti air run (stim marine, blink stalker, hydra).
They aren't overpowered in any way in my eyes. They just seem to add more difficulty to the fight like banes vs marines etc
I think the same issue I found still applies. Voidrays without charge are worth the 200/150 cost but that charge itself is worth about 200 minerals ontop of that making the voidray crazy strong. It doesn't even have a counter from protoss. That would also make playing against skytoss more viable for zerg.
I don't understand why nerf the only situational scary unit Zerg has? It's not even crazy strong, they are really good on ramps, but on the open, is it too much to ask to do a bit more than A-Click? Lurkers are garbage before both upgrades, it's faster for the other races to make capital ships than for Zerg to have lurkers. Let me put it this way, tanks would suck if by the time you have them Zerg could produce Broodlords, but that's impossibile, so tanks are a lot more scary than lurkers, but I don't see complains on them. Protoss units have a lot of health, just spread them decently and you're fine.
@@pixel1145 have you ever seen a toss player split? im pretty sure they would kill themselves if they couldn't just f2 lmao
I mean complaining that you can't a-move zealot/stalker/immortal into T3 lurkers is like saying I can't a-move my marines into archons or colossus without ghosts or vikings, or roaches into thor/tank/BC without vipers/infestors. Sure it's hard for us with trash mechanics, but there's counters we just can't use them properly. With carriers though, like Harstem said, it's so much easier to just a-move and throw a storm here and there, and the counters are really much more difficult to use, since lurkers or tanks still take a decent amount of focus to control, as opposed to carriers.
Lambo, A Pro zerg player: give advice on how to beat Zerg
Zerg Viewer: *suprise pikachu face*
Great vid, it's such a complex matchup getting the top level take is really helpful.
Lambo you were correct on all fronts on how to fix ZvP. The patches basically followed all your suggestions.
Thank you mister Lambo, I will now constantly pester Harstem asking him about lurkers.
more videos like these please, unit design / meta of sc2 from pro perspective is always interesting!
Great video. I hope there is a patch soon and your advice as well as Harstem's are followed.
This is such high quality content - love it!!!
Yeah glad to see you are making youtube contents Again ! I missed it!
Thanks for doings this, from now on i will just always link to this video when i see a toss on reddit whining about lurkers again.
so good to see you again
id love a harstem react vod
I think the reason why lurkers are blamed below the top level is because ground vs ground comes down to mechanics, army movement and position. In these scenarios it feels more stronger to get beaten by lurkers because defeating them with good ground army engagement is more demanding than having 6+ carriers.
the king is back!
Very good video and I am convinced but I have a question about it.
- If carriers are "removed" as Harstem says, that would make broodlords very strong against Toss in the lategame. But would that also make Lurkers strong against Protoss ground if the Lurkers are left as is? If the ability to techswitch into Skytoss either was non-existent or takes too long, wouldn't that mean that it's possible for a ground army to just get shredded by a huge amount of Lurkers or will the other air units be able to compensate?
"Will definitely not fall asleep in the first 10 minutes of the game" best advantage there is
Well i can‘t speak for pros, but at the masters level i most definitely go air for the reason that i die every single time once lurkers come out.
great explanation lambo
I think lurkers vs groundtoss is kind of the reverse situation as zerg vs skytoss. It's easier to play than to counter. To play against lurker/viper the protoss needs to have some pretty good control, microing disruptors + ht at the same time, setting up surrounds and so on. So since a lot of protoss below the top level have inflated mmr due to their easy-to-use lategame army they get crushed when they try to play ground against lurkers.
Your forgetting that you need also to micro your oracle as observers get sniped too easily. So basically to beat like 15-20 lurkers without mass air you need to micro like 4 different unit types. So basically at diamond level your forced to scout the transition and switch into carriers. As someone who hates carriers I hate that I have no way to play ground toss Vs lurkers.
I think the difference is that a well-controlled groundtoss army should in theory crush a lurker army but a well-controlled anti-skytoss zerg army will only trade more efficiently.
In terms of which army is harder to control, I feel that the zerg anti-skytoss army is still more difficult because you have to shift+click with corruptors and have more spellcasters to micro-manage (infestors/queens/vipers). For the protoss anti-lurker army, you have less units to micro, but you also have less room for error as you can get all your disruptors abducted in 1 second.
@@chuiboy377 i disagree, with ground toss you can only fight vs very specific terrain Vs lurkers, and ground toss will just be behind in eco, so the timer is always on the zerg side who has much better map control and eco.
Lambo himself says at the end "it's a strategy game"-so tuff just transition to carriers. Proving the point thatass lurkers necessarily demand skytoss
@@dylansevitt What terrain do you have in mind? I feel that open areas tend to favour zerg for sure because they can get the surround, but in most cases a smart Protoss will be attacking in areas where they can't get easily surrounded in which case a lurker-heavy army can't really do much unless they can get their abducts off. Also, I am assuming the Protoss has a lot of disruptors when I say groundtoss.
@@chuiboy377 I disagree once there is creap spread toss prefers fighting in open area Vs mass lurker as it's easier to disengage and run away from the ultra fast lurker.
Disruptors Don't even one shot lurkers, and 20 lurkers basically kill any ground toss army in 1 second. Lurkers outrun balls in terms of speed so a good zerg won't even get hit and if they do there lurkers will still be alive as they are just so tanky. Your forced to take bad inneficient fights where the zerg has every game advantage.
Disrupters can deal with 7-10 lurkers any more there's no shot your microing all your balls unless your a Korean GM
We saw Dark beat Zest with lurker/hydra/infestor, but then again Zest fought over spores despite having more bases and map control.
A couple things need to be said here. First, you're not talking about "opening up ground" but you're talking about opening up sg into 3rd into ground. Lurkers are an even worse issue when you have no sg at all compared to when you open sg into ground.
Secondly, there are two different discussions going on. "protoss players are not opening up ground (=sg 3rd into ground) because of lurkers" - here you're correct as with the quick 3rd base and potentially 4th as well as the sg already being there, adding on a fleet beacon and 2 more sgs for the transition is simple and quick. The second discussion is "if toss air were to be nerfed (so far as not really being viable anymore) then lurkers would have to be nerfed". Because of how zergs can switch between tech much more easily, toss cannot just get a bunch of robos and build up a huge ground army, as the bl transition in particular is so scary. For bls, toss needs blink stalkers and a mobile army. Lurkers destroy blink stalkers and are super strong vs harassment.
thats the reason why nerfing sky toss is so tricky. the lurker+bl combination is too strong for toss ground. Apart from that, i would really like to see changes where could actually open up with tc wihtout going allin really. But that opening is so bad that toss is forced into sg play all the more
Hey Lambo, I liked the vid cuz I like these kind of discussions, and I'm obviously not gonna tell a progamer he's wrong (it also sounded quite reasonable as far as I can tell), but I think you kind of missed the point. What we plebs mean isn't "aaw, I cant open ground cuz of Lurkers" (not a Toss main btw, so my explanations might be not entirely on point). What ppl mean is that they cant play ground based lategame anymore. Lot's of ppl just dont want to make stargate units, or at least not as their main force, but they feel like it's just not viable anymore. Now if you think that's a misconception as well I'm happy to hear you out, but you said yourself that the army you actually want is a maxed out carrier army, unless you're going for a timing. Well many people just really dont want to play like that, and I gotta say neither do I. And I don't really think that's stupid. What is stupid about not wanting lategame ZvP to be the same ideal armies fighting each other in a boring, sloggy war of attrition?
thank you, we need more pros to dunk on redditors lmao. sometimes they repeat their own opinions so many times that they start to believe it's actually true ahahah
Great analysis. Lurker could definitely tolerate a burrow nerf and the invulnerability and lack of mechanical skill required for 2sg vr is ridiculously reductive in a strategy and eliminates skill gaps, which is awful!
"By the time you have [hydra lurker viper], there are at least 9 carriers"...
Isn't that why we want to get rid of carrier, because that's the only deterrent?
Distrupters
@@evandaniel6198 Almost as impractical as using disruptors on mines though. Plus that's not really his argument.
Im d2 I use skytoss most of the time. Because the scouting and worker harass is good. Lurkers are also a lot better it lower tiers cause everyone a moves a death-ball into lurkers. You can fix that by just not attacking till you have carriers. The biggest thing for me is if I don’t have a stargate and they go muta I lose most of the time
ah yes, d1 players ranting about balance. classic
Protoss just likes to f2 A move unless they are top top level imo
I don't know about pros, but in 3800-ville yes.
Hmm..., but wouldn't mass immortal dies to mass hydras? Is it not possible for them to stay hydras when spotting mass immortal, and then mass transform into lurkers when the immortal number drops?
Why would you mass immortal, do you even have the money and build time for that in-game? I thought immortal was a stepping zone for def and go skytoss, distruptor, etc.
Don't go blind countering, if you saw a lurker den, Don't just spam immortal. Your opponent is also scouting you, if you see mass hydra, add some collosus, storms, chargelot.
Immortal are tanky with high armor damage, but are not so good at high number and slow rate of fire. Ideal for early game, i.e stepping stone. They also eat a lot of supply. Hydra and marine is powerful at large because they have high rate of attack.
@@nahruz.w3044 I am immortals are practically the only counter to lurkers. How else do you beat when half the mass hydra all of a sudden become lurkers?
@@nahruz.w3044 but those things you are building to cover immortals get killed by lurkers. You need chargelots to prevent immortals from being swarmed and those get shredded by lurkers, thus feeding into the problem of lurkers killing groundtoss.
In my opinion, Viper hurt Protoss ground army way more. They basically make robo tech units almost uselss.
and the high templar literally hard counters vipers. In theory you should never have an abduct land on your army with good ht micro. But that’s to hard for the f2 a move toss huh
Without vipers Zerg just dies to any Protoss deathball because Zerg units are just weaker in general
@@noobzerg1990 I really don't understand people like you. Lambo in his guides for zerg players says that against colossus/disruptor pushes, once you get to a high enough viper count you should not lose the game and he applies that against top GMs. So not only, despite probably being very low level, you think you're justified in insulting the micro of top GM protoss, but also believe that Lambos advice is stupid. How can you be so full of yourself.
@@henningbreede6428 Yes. Wow in a collosus disruptor army one that does not have hts. No you should not lose to that army if you have vipers. That’s why vipers are in the game. I insulted his micro not the micro of top players, you apparently can’t read.
I stopped opening with Protoss ground and started opening with air because of the lurker back when I was a lowly D3, so a lot of the arguers are probably metal leaguers/ low diamond that just sit back and wait to max out before attacking , in which case the zerg tend to end up on your doorstep with a crap load of lurkers by the time you're ready to move out. Essentially I think its low level players with very minimal activity on the map who make this argument, because they don't realise what they're doing wrong.
But doesn't that still just means that lurkers are strong against groundtoss? The video and this implies that the lurkers need to be avoided but doesn't actually address dealing with lurkers as groundtoss.
On what scenario would you ever tech switch from air to ground?
@@HellecticMojo you can open Stargate, get triple oracle/ 2 oracle and a phoenix/ void ray and then not touch the stargate again if that counts. Alternatively you often see mass blink stalkers after a full on supreme late game sky vs sky fight. You also tend to see immortals added on to deal with ultras etc (in these situations you obviously won't be seeing lurkers)
Dealing with lurkers you just need a concave of immortals or to use distuptors. Also if you just attack at some point in the first 8 minutes when they've put money into a transition that hasn't hit yet you're likely to do massive damage at the lower levels
@@HellecticMojo Also- lurkers can't be in multiple places at once- so you can just attack with some of your ground army where they are not
I love u.
If you're always going to have to pivot to skytoss in order to deal with lurkers, then why not always play skytoss regardless? I don't feel like lambo really addresses this at all. Sure it's a strategy game but it sucks when all flowcharts lead to one decision because of game balance.
So I'll try to explain it to you with the help of your flowcharts of PvZ. For the Zergs on top levels the flowchart vs stargate into ground after Lurker is a loss screen and thus also not relevant for the Protoss decision making in if they go ground or not (the i might aswell just start with skytoss argument here really doesn't fit). Even if Lurkers can force Carriers, (which can or cannot be a designflaw, that's an entirely different discussion that i can have aswell if you want) as long as noone does it it's of no concern for the top Protoss players right? That was the point of the video. It's like me saying i want to play Ravager Bane and my opponent has 6colossus 8immortals and 6 disruptors etc., now i'm forced into air. On the top level this is not a part of the flowchart that is relevant since it leads nowhere for the Colossus/Lurker player. And if on lowerlevels you are forced into making some airunits because your opponents make lurkers, then do it properly and the zergs will stop making the lurkers aswell.
PS: Realistically i think you can beat lurkers with ground only on lower levels aswell, just like Zergs can beat mech players with 20 tanks with ground only because there are a ton of mistakes being made.
@@LamboSC2 Part of the problem for me is that so much of the protoss power budget is put into carriers and void rays, that it leaves ground units feeling incredibly risky and vulnerable. I do think that part is a balance concern. I do not think the game is imbalanced, but rather that too much of protoss's power budget has been allocated to skytoss (which outside of oracle and phoenix, are very boring and uninteractive units for both players).
For me, it isn't specifically that lurkers force a certain choice, it's that the big weakness of groundtoss leads to these pivots being needed incredibly frequently which makes it feel pointless to even attempt groundtoss sometimes because going skytoss seems like an inevitability rather than an option.
Like for example, against terran bio, there's a variety of responses each with their own cost benefit analysis across different protoss tech branches but when it comes to late game PvZ, it ultimately just leads to skytoss with some supporting ground units just because certain units like Brood Lords and Lurkers have shaky groundtoss soft counters that are incredibly risky or exploitable.
Like obviously, I'm not an amazing player and I can always play better especially at my level, but there's a certain level of frustration from being consistently being forced into the most boring units your faction has to offer because so much of the faction's power budget has been allocated to it. I don't even think this is necessarily a lurker problem (even though I do get pretty butthurt by how fast it is while also not having to deal with friendly fire mechanics like all the other siege units), i think it's a groundtoss problem where it feels like it has big gaping holes in options just because groundtoss units have been strip mined of power in order to give it to carriers and void rays.
I should mention, lurkers being invisible is the reason they are so powerful, which forces toss to make cannons everywhere(which they outrange) and make observers and/or oracles. which means they are not building immortals or spending gas on archons or doing zealot runbys. I dont beleive the lurker stats to really be that strong for their cost. I think its strength is in the very late game, assuming youve already spent the high amount of time and money on lurker tech upgrades (where ground toss is not great)being able to morph in 5 to 10 lurkers all at once, catching you unprepared after a recent fight, whereas tanks, and immortals come out in on two or three at a time. Again assuming we are in late game again, just trade out the lurkers and switch to another tech after the army dies. Zerg needs to make corruptors and vipers and infestors and build spores. Skytoss gives toss an easy route to control over the game imo. Everything you said is true lambo. Obviously you are pro and we're not. Thought id give my non pro input. let me know why im wrong or not.
I hope no one tilts over these discussions. We all just want an improved sc2. Keep in mind guys, unless you are pro or maybe gm, you cant really balance whine. Focus on improving yourself and you skill before you blame your race.
Yeah the composition shown here is hyper unrealistic for a toss to build. If I'm crapping out observers to fight lurkers, I'm not building the robo units I need to fight Zerg on the ground. The issue Protoss say 'lurker makes ground unviable' is that at any point your entire army can just die because an observer got killed and you have no path to rebuilding the composition you need because the building that builds observers also builds the other units you need.
You can't remax effectively and gate units have a very difficult time taking good fights against Zerg on the ground. Lurkers supported by a few units to prevent charge lots just getting on top and .... sad times
If the observer was built from a gate I think you'd see more ground toss. However as long as it's built from the Robo you are a couple observers snipes away from losing the game. So you instead need oracles which ... if I need oracles with my ground army ... why am I not just building air toss?
It's not impossible but the margin for error is super low and makes the matchup seem incredibly uphill if you don't go airtoss especially in lower to mid levels of play. This levels out in the higher level of play a bit, but when casters make fun of Parting for going groundtoss vs Zerg, you know there are likely multiple reasons skytoss is preferred. Just for the lower skilled player 'hur dur lurker' is a convenient thing to say even if there is more nuance.
It doesn't force cannons, you can make observer and an oracle. And making cannons isn't even a bad idea vs lurker as the zerg has to attack with that pretty allin composition.
You can't "just trade out lurker" because you need anti-ground to hold a 200 supply carrier push with ground support, it's why you don't want lurker so you can have broodlords in time.
I think lurker + viper composition is the issue
If Sentry force fields could stop the lurker spikes. It would balance everything. Zerg would be forced to add ravs to their unit comp with is mostly bad against toss. All while toss is able to be offensive after throwing force fields.
How many game i loose just because zerg arrive with hydra (or corrupter) lurker oversear and shoot all my observers? . The oversear is free suplly when observer cost supply . Carrier is the only safe and ez counter to everything zerg has ; shooot from distance , hard to attack , fly that kind of stuffes . Because it combines some strenght share by the most powerfulls units of the game (ok less powerfull but) long range of the tank , huge zone effect (and without friendly fire), and invisibility , huge fire power , morphable from the basic zerg unit with medium costs (when the lurker are expansive the morph price are not that much) . I play zvz too and lurkers vs lurkers lategames are really hard to deal , the units just change statu from invisible to visible everytimes. Lurker are really strong but if lurkers aren't strong did chances of wins are fair for zerg vs others races , I don't know. I think the design of sc2 is ambitious and its the good thing and for the chances of win (usually called balance ) for the races are okay.
Patch was just you said
Hey this statement can be true! .. but in diamond :-)
You need a lot of lurkers to beat immortals. And even then the immortals still win if you come in from 2 directions
immortals 5 shot a lurker I think, but lurkers need like 14 shots for a lurker to kill an immortal.
I think they should also make less bases keeping map sizes big
and make rush maps smaller with even less bases. How do you call map "rush map" if its average game time is 25 minutes
"I show some ingame footage, protoss ground would do much better than you would think."
Two seconds later : "By the way this is not at all realistic and not how you should counter lurkers" :D
Thanks for that great example :D
No problem;)
I said this was more of a rant right, my main point with that engagement was to show that if you play against lurkers you should have an immortal heavy army, preferably with disruptors and or hightemplars aswell and try to go for surrounds.
Very often you can setup at least a flank from 2 sides in a game. You can also kite back with disruptor and storm very nicely vs lurkers, but i can't show any of that since i can't micro both armies myself.
i do not play skytoss because is boring
I have reached diamond 2 as protoss and therefore consider myself a top protoss. I would like to say therefore, you are wrong because I went ground against lurkers and died once! I even split my army despite being an f2 player which is a great challenge for me and STILL LOST!
This video is highly misleading.
Protoss do not produce unit the same way as Zerg, you will never have 12 immortals on the field, not to mention the archons. Immortal each cost 275/100 while lurker is 150/150, it cost way more in minerals, 12 immortals will cost a full 1500 more resource.
Second immortals are not gateway units, they are produced from VR with an insanely slow time of 39, for 12 immortals you will need at least 3 VRs or even 4 VRs to produce in a reasonable amount of time, which meant you wasted way more building resources.
Last there is no micro to pre-emptive active the immortal shield.
How come the video is missleading when none of what you said is relevant to any of my points? :o
Well if have a mass of inmortals The enemy thrown fungus or mass of hydralis or zenglins
no, it is because it is insanely easy to execute skytoss with batteries. Skytoss+batteries+recall= very hard for P to be punished
There are too many Air units in Sc2 and all of them are painfully boring except Mutas Phoenix and Banshees. The problem with air is because so many of them shoot ground and air and have such minor weaknesses the only way to counter is with your own mass air. Turning the match into a 50 minute toxic hide and seek turtiling behind static D , waiting and waiting for one opponent to make a mistake.
Your example fight was completely unrealistic. I appreciate you acknowledge it, but surely that undermines the entire argument which you continued to make?
Take those same units(even with the greater value for toss) and put them at the choke at any expansion in the mappool and zerg wins massively every time. Then consider that the lurkers would continue to scale better than toss ground as players approach max and you realize just how unbalanced it currently is.
Even at a pair of chokes for a realistic surround and zerg still wins against an army which importantly gets completely hardcountered by a zerg brood switch. Sure mass imortal is viable before 10mins to counter low lurker numbers and pre-hive zerg but after that point I cant agree that mass imortal is remotely viable against zerg.
Sure that would be fine if the lurker had the mobility of a normal siege unit like the broodlord or tank but there's no way to take a the hugely advantageous fight angle necessary to trade against mass lurker with ground if you have the less mobile units as well as the weaker units.
I suppose that similar to the carrier the lurker is a great unit to mass which might explain why pros do not experience the same balance issue as the majority of ladder. Similar to the carrier.
I'm not saying the carrier isn't a problem. Just that the lurker is definitely also one..
Absolutely not, my argument had absolutely nothing to do with the engagement, did you even listen to what i said???
The weakness of the lurker is the fact that it costs alot of gas and time to get to, Lurkers are barely viable at a high level because of the reasons that i showed , yet people act like they are the reason protosses open with skytoss at a high level.(good Zerg players only play lurkers vs glaives into stalker based styles to begin with)
Lurker vs Ground engagements like this should never even happen, it was just an example that you can feel free to ignore.
If you are on pure ground however and you just let the lurker player go to and siege your expansion while nothing else is going on you made multiple huge blunders. Even with ground only which i specifically said multiple times is not the counter to lurkers, you should be using multiprong and try to keep mapcontroll. You can make it hard for the zerg to even move out and try to kite with disruptors/high templars as he tries to come across the map.
Did you watch the whole video? You seem to be missing the main thrust of the argument, which is that Ground Toss players still have the option of transitioning into Carriers after scouting Lurker tech to counter it, meaning that Lurkers are not actually a problem for them.
The initial point with the Immortals is just to highlight that Immortals can actually take a good fight against Lurkers if you manage to correctly set one up. Obviously if you just run your Immortal army into a choke defended by Lurkers, or let the Lurkers set up in a choke outside one of your key bases, then the Immortals will have no chance. This means that the Lurker player can't just blindly run up a ramp into a Ground Toss concave or take an engagement mid-map where both armies are sufficiently spread out, giving the Ground Toss player even more leeway to transition into Carriers than they already have.
OK thanks for the reply and I know it must be annoying to listen to people like myself say 'I cant play the game properly so you must cater to me' but similar to carriers the experience of lurkers for the majority of ladder is not the same as pros.
Neither player should be able to get maxed lurker or carrier without paying a price but at lower levels its simply not realistic for players to reliably punish someone going mass tech unless they were already planning an attack.
Although I complain a little also wanted to say I really appreciate your videos so thanks for sharing your wisdom, even if I cant execute it.
@@amo9979 No worries, as i stated in the description of the video, everything i talk about is about the highest level of the game. I don't know how Lurkers feel below that so i am not commenting on it, but since i see people using "lurkers are the reason pros open 2sg Voidray" alot i wanted to make this video :)
Also just wanted to say that you can reliably get to both a maxed carrier or lurker composition at the high level, it's just that neither of them is actually broken.
@@LamboSC2 Honestly Lambo, I think alot of it comes down to protoss detection getting sniped so easily without oracels, Im sure for people with 300+ actual apm it isnt too difficult but I also think it really is that fact that lurkers can run out burrow in an instant in a choke and then run away at the speed of light, Unlike in zvt where the zerg is pretty gaurenteed to lose 2-3 lurkers every time they unborrow once ghosts are out. Now this being said i think alot of this happens to due to supply issues which I know is very high level sht, being able too know exactly when too funnel out units and knowing when there useless and start to transisiton, having that stargate already there is a big deal like you said. In the the lower leagues I find that alot of people dont realise how much money there opponent has actually mined, and it often comes to down to scaring the opponent in the same with dts in pvt the players just cant deal with it, they just panic, and so much time ends up wasted playing scared, which is why lurkers seam so "easy" to get out, They see lurker spines and assume theres 10 when theres actually 2, probably without upgrades too.
Personally I love Watching Late Game PvZ, Im pretty certain the reason protoss struggles is because there is limited apm in fights, obvs as toss you want hybrid army of air and ground with all kinds of units, ofc it is often map dependent but you want to push both sides since broods are so slow and toss has recall, as far as im aware tho a few ultras if if they dont have a prisim for templar will really hold this back without a high immortal count, and the carrier being "afk" a move isnt really true if your kiting back and constantly retargeting units, which is what you should be doing if you had the apm to be storming microing the archons under the corruptors and dropping the templar to feedback the vipers and protect the rest of the units, and targetting down the brood with your tempest, the Carrier is the back bone that defends the toss army, kind of like a dps based support unit since its so slow, I think its why you often see reaction based stalemates between vipers and templars which I find entertaining aslong as the map is large enough to support run by's by both players, and I think it ends up being a heavily skilled based match up late game. What do you think as a Pro who cleary is very strong in ZvP especially in the late game?
On The other hand, I can see why Harestem sees the match up as quite stale, especially the early game, which is why he wants some changes, which is understandable when youve been seeing, casting and playing the same thing for years