EPT
Blizzard on 1v1 Balancing and the new patch - Page 49
| Forum Index > Community News and Headlines |
|
YunhOLee
Canada2470 Posts
| ||
|
lemagrag
Sweden32 Posts
| ||
|
kojinshugi
Estonia2559 Posts
On October 08 2010 04:54 Mezro wrote: I like how you talk about the silver league, when in platinum its more in terran's favor than zerg's favor. That's not how numbers work. Other way around. | ||
|
ShivaN
United States933 Posts
| ||
|
seiferoth10
3362 Posts
On October 08 2010 04:50 out4blood wrote: While Blizzard will do what they want, their use of statistics to back up their reasoning doesn't seem right. Win rate for Terran fighting Protoss: Diamond - 50.4% Platinum - 43.7% Gold - 39.0% Silver - 36.4% Bronze - 41.0% Across all ladder skills apart from Diamond (which is pretty much dead even), Protoss are crushing Terran. But hey, let's nerf Terran! Win rate for Terran fightng Zerg Diamond - 49.6% Platinum - 44.5% Gold - 49.5% Silver - 51.6% Bronze - 45.4% Zergs are beating their equivalent Terrans in everything except Silver league, but hey, let's nerf Terran! If they have something else to bring forth as evidence, why don't they bring it? You're trying too hard. 50.4% is "pretty much dead even", but 49.6% and 49.5% isn't? | ||
|
TedJustice
Canada1324 Posts
Kind of a fair trade, isn't it? If you want to do an aggressive opening, you just have to pay an extra 100 minerals. I'm not saying it was unbalanced before, but I'm not complaining about how it'll be after this either. | ||
|
raga4ka
Bulgaria5679 Posts
I have to agree . While i would certainly love as a zerg player to hatch first without that big of risk , it makes it less exciting . | ||
|
Mr_Kzimir
France268 Posts
Although even blizzard statistics agree that terran were not that overpowered (WTF means OP anyways , it's not like we ever had 70% win rate). But I guess it's all good and fair , we will adapt , let the zerg rejoice a little bit , while protoss can prove even more how strong their game is. What comes around goes around | ||
|
Raiznhell
Canada786 Posts
Purposely negating Rax first cheese builds is one of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard come out of blizzard. If they wanna get rid of the reaper which this patch effectively does then they should just get rid of them entirely but still make it possibel to do rax first marine bunker rushes and such things. with depot before rax terrans are forced to either play super standard or exetrememly delay their economy and cheese timing by spending 100 mins and the build time for supply before gettign that early rax by which time it's countered already. | ||
|
FrostedMiniWeet
United States636 Posts
 | ||
|
Hypatio
549 Posts
| ||
|
Terranist
United States2496 Posts
| ||
|
clusen
Germany8702 Posts
On October 08 2010 04:45 K Love wrote: I don't understand. How does blizzard look at data that supports zerg being overpowered vs terran and decide to implement massive zerg buffs and terran nerfs? Really "overpowered" with not even 1% difference xD Maybe those stats are still heavily influenced by the old Ultras? Blizz has much more statistics than they published. | ||
|
klauz619
453 Posts
On October 08 2010 04:54 JHancho wrote: Wow, so 500/500 can take out 100/0 with no casualties? Amazing. Looks like I wasn't too far off with what I was thinking though. How damaged were the Mutas? 1 nearly dead and 1 in yellow? They do tend to waste workers, yeah. What about a Turret getting repaired? I bet that number goes up a fair amount. In the time it takes for a turret to kill 1 mutalisk, 5 of them would have slain 10 SCVs. Well why aren't you using 10 turrets vs 10 mutas? I mean, it makes perfect sense! | ||
|
kojinshugi
Estonia2559 Posts
On October 08 2010 04:56 TedJustice wrote: So the first barracks essentially costs 100 minerals more, and gives supply. Kind of a fair trade, isn't it? If you want to do an aggressive opening, you just have to pay an extra 100 minerals. I'm not saying it was unbalanced before, but I'm not complaining about how it'll be after this either. That's a weird way to put it. Just say "you need supply depots before you can build unit producing structures". It's no different that toss requiring pylon power, except you can proxy the rax without risking the 100 mineral investment. | ||
|
Elefanto
Switzerland3584 Posts
It's still possible to cheese with them etc., imo not every fucking needs to be part of a strategy, played every game etc. | ||
|
FrostedMiniWeet
United States636 Posts
| ||
|
BlasiuS
United States2405 Posts
On October 08 2010 04:56 TedJustice wrote: So the first barracks essentially costs 100 minerals more, and gives supply. Kind of a fair trade, isn't it? If you want to do an aggressive opening, you just have to pay an extra 100 minerals. I'm not saying it was unbalanced before, but I'm not complaining about how it'll be after this either. using that analogy the barracks also has a +30s build time. | ||
|
EnderCN
United States499 Posts
On October 08 2010 04:56 TedJustice wrote: So the first barracks essentially costs 100 minerals more, and gives supply. Kind of a fair trade, isn't it? If you want to do an aggressive opening, you just have to pay an extra 100 minerals. I'm not saying it was unbalanced before, but I'm not complaining about how it'll be after this either. I tried messing around in yabot some. I can still open depot on 8 and double barracks following it. I had to chose between a bunker or an orbital command now but I still got a bunker down with 4 marines in it under 4 minutes into the game. Terran cheese is still viable, just not nearly as strong. Before you could do double rax on 9 and keep econ and military pumping non stop easily. | ||
|
Mr_Kzimir
France268 Posts
On October 08 2010 04:59 FrostedMiniWeet wrote: I'd like to hear what Idra has to say about this. Same | ||
| ||
