|
Renamed To ASL20 General Discussion.
WARNING: Contains Spoilers |
On September 05 2025 15:03 Shinokuki wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2025 14:57 Bonyth wrote:
imagine having a 49,4% zvp win rate and complaining about balance, because SOMA says so. If he says so, he must be right. If Stork will say that this map is heavily P favored, I will believe that. When a zerg user complains about his own race, it doesn't have much weight. I trust soma, queen, soulkey more than anyone for zerg takes because they have played these maps the most and looked for ways to abuse and win vs protoss. I ain't trusting anyone like stork, shuttle, or even you (non-pro). Not sure why you're bringing up stork. He's washed. I don't see any same complaints from other protoss because it's pretty easy for them to beat zerg in a straight up standard game but lose because of their own mistakes (i.e early game ling busts or underestimating hydra busts). The same cannot be said for zergs when it literally feels like the maps are against them (bad simcity wall, 1v1 tight gap allowing for zlot to fight 1v1 vs lings, high ground advantage for p simcity on knockout to prevent 973?? LOL and wide chokepoints. The biggest one that's been in trend is the wide chokepoints which force zergs to go for heavy hydra lurk army and maneuvering around the map with 400+ apm to prevent goon/zlot/temp army going straight to z base at 12 min mark). It used to work when z was forced to adopt this style but as p got used to it, zergs focus so much on mineral optimization and look for ways to damage p early so that they can avoid straight up standard game. Take a look at all the zvps played by soma or queen in a bo9/bo13 vs snow/best/bisu. It's hard to beat P in a standard game... all the enhancements that map makers gave to protoss allow for protoss to get away with some greedy strats which snowball into p having faster tech and eco.. Even the bo9 that soma played vs snow.. soma won 4 games with either ling busts or hydra busts. Any games that went cleanly into standard.. soma lost. Also If ZvT was also at 50% zergs would be fine with that 49.4% zvp but zvt is at like sub 40%, putting zerg stats at around below 45%.. not sure what you're aruging here? Like zergs will accept 49% zvp if it means even 49% zvt.. Who am I to believe for map balance? Random foreigners like you or top tier pros who make living off on finding the best ways to win?
well they brings Stork ( because he is only the one Protoss from pros who is blaming the balance or i missinformed but i only know him ) comparated so far Jaedong, Soulkey,Soma,Calm, ggaemo. btw Queen said something about balance ? i just not heard from him i not say he is not say anything about this I'm just interestng. so the results: Stork > JD,SK,Soma,Calm,ggaemo so lets belive In Stork i quess.
|
where is your sense of humor guys )
Simply put Bisu instead of Stork there, so u're not enraged.
Anyway Shinokuki in your position I would:
- trust map's statistics
- blame zvt match up not being close to 50%
|
It's true even Bisu laughing too hardly when Stork talked about the balance :D
|
Cant wait for my brother TMNT to bring the paper
|
Like zergs will accept 49% zvp if it means even 49% zvt..
I totally agree with the principle that if ZvT is about 40%, then ZvP should be about 60% to compensate for that.
But at the same time, Protoss have been accepting sub 50% (mostly 45-47%) in both matchups for years, that it has become the norms for a so-called "standard, balanced" map.
That's the issue: ZvP at ~55% is considered normal for Zerg, so when it becomes ~50%, which technically is balanced, it's considered hard for Zerg. And that sparks these kinds of debate.
Bonyth has the right take in all of this: instead of saying maps are hard for Zerg in ZvP, let's blame the imba ZvT. Terran favored maps are the culprit, why are P and Z fighting with each other?
|
with rather small sample sizes based around a small group of players, we also have to account for individuals affecting winrates disproportionately. SoMa and Queen rewpectively provide most of the data in the TvZ on knockout sample set. In addition who did they play?
For the ZvP dataset.
Effort vs YSC tends to favor Effort, thus providing a biased dataset that instead of providing useful insights, just shows Effort > YSC most of the time. Likewise, Soulkey has a negative winrate vs Protoss on Knockout. But who did he play? SnOw, Best, and Bisu. The overal trend for the past few months is that Best, and SnOw tend to 50/50 sets back and forth vs soulkey. Soulkey's contribution is moreso a reflefction of his performance vs specifically Best and Snow and is due to its small sample size actually statistically insignificant. Due to the small sample size, the same twonplayers, and the alleged winrate of the map being so close to 50%, we can within this small sample size get wildly uneven winrates, because it is much more subject to individual form. Queen plays the same few people but has 10-6 record on Knockout in PvZ. Again, Best, SnOw, and Bisu as the main opponents. All it takes is a bad or a good week to completely skew the data.
Example: since posting the data yesterday, SoMa has won 4 knockout games in a row vs Bisu and SnOw. that alone puts the map over 50% winrate again. But before those games he had lost 4 in a row on Knockout.
note:made a correction.
|
It looks to me the data is not being update regularly. Larva by himself should be putting those scores way worse. Funny enough today he destroyed Mini badly lol. But even that is not enough to improve the amount of series i have seen him getting destroyed.
And in total fairness its ok for him to have those scores after being out of competitive for a long time. So taking him as someone to prove a map is bad or good is not something i will use as proof.
|
On September 05 2025 21:35 TMNT wrote:
That's the issue: ZvP at ~55% is considered normal for Zerg, so when it becomes ~50%, which technically is balanced, it's considered hard for Zerg. And that sparks these kinds of debate.
💯
Also Zergs don't have excuses for sub-50 ZvT, if anything that just shows their incompetence not map imbalance. Just look at Soulkey.
|
it's too early to tell whether the new maps are imbalanced because of the low data samples but it doesn't seem like we're gonna see any WRs above 60% in the end
I think even if the new maps turned out to be p>z for whatever reason, it would be fine since we had so many seasons of z>p and t>z maps
Pole Star is clearly a terran map though but noone seems to care about that one
|
On September 05 2025 23:59 bochs wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2025 21:35 TMNT wrote:
That's the issue: ZvP at ~55% is considered normal for Zerg, so when it becomes ~50%, which technically is balanced, it's considered hard for Zerg. And that sparks these kinds of debate.
💯 Also Zergs don't have excuses for sub-50 ZvT, if anything that just shows their incompetence not map imbalance. Just look at Soulkey.
I agree. Same with PvZ, if one race fares worse, it is due to worse current meta. It is up to players to make up their build orders.
|
It's time for...
Match-up specific maps!
It's obviously just too difficult, maybe even impossible to design maps that work well in all six match-ups and that are balanced across the three non-mirrors.
So instead of trying to do the impossible, we could make some match-up specific maps and slowly tweak them to get the balance/playstyle right.
|
On September 06 2025 12:24 Simplistik wrote:
It's time for...
Match-up specific maps!
It's obviously just too difficult, maybe even impossible to design maps that work well in all six match-ups and that are balanced across the three non-mirrors.
So instead of trying to do the impossible, we could make some match-up specific maps and slowly tweak them to get the balance/playstyle right.
??????????????????????? What the FUCK?
Anyway. Why not have 2 awesome, weird maps in the pool that have a 40-60 and 60-40 and you have to play them both! BALANCED. Wait, is that what you were saying? I couldn't tell.
Also, can't call PvZ imbalanced until more Protoss use dark archons. Remember the matchup was unplayable and then Bisu shat down everyone's esophagus with the phaser unit and the cloaked sword guy???
Dark archon is very unexplored. Yes I know it slows things down, but everyone says that's the way to play PvZ anyway. The biggest argument I've heard against it is that it's too hard to control. YOU GOT 500 APM. Shibal. Stop making so many dragoons, those units fucking suck. I also want to see more 2 stargate into reaver.
Who's gonna step up. Who's it gonna be. Mini lost to larva 0-99 yesterday. It's time to THINK. DIFRNT.
Sincerely,
person who doesn't even play the game
but seriously
|
yeah wait hold on. if you have a 40-60 and 60-40 for every matchup that's too many maps. but it's on the right track. i CAN FEEL IT. Like instead of matchup specific maps, maybe matchup specific map POOL. Holy shit????
Literally spent 5 seconds thinking about this. Let me cook.
edit: yeah wtf that's not bad (spent another minute on it). Like for a competitive PvZ match, you have at least 2 relatively weird and cool maps the players must play on that are let's say, at worst, 40-60/60-40 win rates. Then there are, depending on the series length, 3 more standard maps that all matchups are playing on. In a bo7, fuck man, you can have 4 relatively weird/cool maps and 3 standard maps. You can play with the ratios. How fucking SICK would that be. Holy shit you could even theme them... like a PvZ you got some Aiur shit goin on. This is the best idea. Blizz I'm avail. owner69@hotmail, send me mssg.
Like srsly dudes, srsly. This game could be even cooler if we continued to be creative with maps and these maps could not be vetoed. Just have to come up with the right system to implement it.
|
![[image loading]](https://tl.net/staff/R1CH/Happy2.gif)
i will post this here and i hope i will need it when JD is playing
|
On September 06 2025 12:24 Simplistik wrote:
It's time for...
Match-up specific maps!
It's obviously just too difficult, maybe even impossible to design maps that work well in all six match-ups and that are balanced across the three non-mirrors.
So instead of trying to do the impossible, we could make some match-up specific maps and slowly tweak them to get the balance/playstyle right.
I disagree. I said it before, mapmakers can't manipulate matchup weights. Best they can do is increase distance in which case better players exploit it better. You get impossible builds like hatchery first.
|
I don't think its worth the hassle to have maps for each of the matchups but maybe we could have a special map for mirror matches only
a map that is only played in ZvZ, TvT and PvP could look very very different from what we're used to since race balance is not an issue
basically almost infinite design freedom
but I'm not sure whether people would be willing to learn and play these maps
|
On September 06 2025 12:24 Simplistik wrote:
It's time for...
Match-up specific maps!
It's obviously just too difficult, maybe even impossible to design maps that work well in all six match-ups and that are balanced across the three non-mirrors.
So instead of trying to do the impossible, we could make some match-up specific maps and slowly tweak them to get the balance/playstyle right.
But it's not impossible to make maps that "work well" for all 6 mu's, as it's been done for a very long time? It's not reasonable to replace one map with 6 maps that are tweaked for a perfect 50/50 result.
|
On September 07 2025 04:09 Kraekkling wrote:
I don't think its worth the hassle to have maps for each of the matchups but maybe we could have a special map for mirror matches only
a map that is only played in ZvZ, TvT and PvP could look very very different from what we're used to since race balance is not an issue
basically almost infinite design freedom
but I'm not sure whether people would be willing to learn and play these maps
I think people are just not that drawn to mirror match ups. On one hand maybe because of the luck factor, and maybe because it is just not as interesting to see the same units interact with each other.
I mean there is a reason why ZvT is basicly the match- up that draws all the eye balls.
The prime times of Flash vs JD. Specificy MassBio vs Zerg.
Even ZvP is called boring because of Hydra Busts, TvPs Terran push heavy deciding.
Further, i dont think having 50/50 maps will make the game better, it will make the games more boring.
And if there is perfect way to play the game each game, than there is no point in playing the game.
I think making possible to play different strategies even vs the same race is what makes the game watchable, interesting, engaging. There should be the focus of the map makers.
And not some perfect balance based on fished stats out of some korean microwave, that some pro uses to heat his meals between games.
|
On September 05 2025 15:03 Shinokuki wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2025 14:57 Bonyth wrote:
imagine having a 49,4% zvp win rate and complaining about balance, because SOMA says so. If he says so, he must be right. If Stork will say that this map is heavily P favored, I will believe that. When a zerg user complains about his own race, it doesn't have much weight. I trust soma, queen, soulkey more than anyone for zerg takes because they have played these maps the most and looked for ways to abuse and win vs protoss. I ain't trusting anyone like stork, shuttle, or even you (non-pro). Not sure why you're bringing up stork. He's washed. I don't see any same complaints from other protoss because it's pretty easy for them to beat zerg in a straight up standard game but lose because of their own mistakes (i.e early game ling busts or underestimating hydra busts). The same cannot be said for zergs when it literally feels like the maps are against them (bad simcity wall, 1v1 tight gap allowing for zlot to fight 1v1 vs lings, high ground advantage for p simcity on knockout to prevent 973?? LOL and wide chokepoints. The biggest one that's been in trend is the wide chokepoints which force zergs to go for heavy hydra lurk army and maneuvering around the map with 400+ apm to prevent goon/zlot/temp army going straight to z base at 12 min mark). It used to work when z was forced to adopt this style but as p got used to it, zergs focus so much on mineral optimization and look for ways to damage p early so that they can avoid straight up standard game. Take a look at all the zvps played by soma or queen in a bo9/bo13 vs snow/best/bisu. It's hard to beat P in a standard game... all the enhancements that map makers gave to protoss allow for protoss to get away with some greedy strats which snowball into p having faster tech and eco.. Even the bo9 that soma played vs snow.. soma won 4 games with either ling busts or hydra busts. Any games that went cleanly into standard.. soma lost. Also If ZvT was also at 50% zergs would be fine with that 49.4% zvp but zvt is at like sub 40%, putting zerg stats at around below 45%.. not sure what you're aruging here? Like zergs will accept 49% zvp if it means even 49% zvt.. Who am I to believe for map balance? Random foreigners like you or top tier pros who make living off on finding the best ways to win?
Bonyth isnt some random foreigner. Give him the respect he deserves. And even Zergs players have agreed that hydra busts were kind of a problem for ZvP making it a bit to easy for Zerg at times.
Further, as we know it wasnt this the purpose. SK winning 4 in a row, everyone was on the train that maps should be antizerg.
|
On September 07 2025 05:43 Stopthevirtualaddict wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2025 04:09 Kraekkling wrote:
I don't think its worth the hassle to have maps for each of the matchups but maybe we could have a special map for mirror matches only
a map that is only played in ZvZ, TvT and PvP could look very very different from what we're used to since race balance is not an issue
basically almost infinite design freedom
but I'm not sure whether people would be willing to learn and play these maps I think people are just not that drawn to mirror match ups. On one hand maybe because of the luck factor, and maybe because it is just not as interesting to see the same units interact with each other. I mean there is a reason why ZvT is basicly the match- up that draws all the eye balls. The prime times of Flash vs JD. Specificy MassBio vs Zerg. Even ZvP is called boring because of Hydra Busts, TvPs Terran push heavy deciding. Further, i dont think having 50/50 maps will make the game better, it will make the games more boring. And if there is perfect way to play the game each game, than there is no point in playing the game. I think making possible to play different strategies even vs the same race is what makes the game watchable, interesting, engaging. There should be the focus of the map makers. And not some perfect balance based on fished stats out of some korean microwave, that some pro uses to heat his meals between games.
Bringing hydrabusts into the same sentence as tvz is not accurate. If zerg has hydralisks you know it is at the point of no return. You cannot win with hydralisks against terran. It is low eco build for survival when terran has outplayed zerg in the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://i.giphy.com/6pJNYBYSMFod2.webp)
