|
Please try to keep the discussion civil. And while I can't ask everyone to write a huge essay like tree.hugger, try to write out your opinions in a substantive, well-thought way. |
On September 09 2011 09:19 Perscienter wrote:Well, I've been inactive for more than 8 months and looking at the patch logs and top ladder once in a while, I still deduce two things: - People are arguing about an unfinished game.
- The patch policy is one-dimensional and cuts out extremes. Nothing is really good at something. Blizzard balances out by forbidding strong mechanics.
- SC2 Vanilla is at least slightly imbalanced in the current map pool.
Thus I'm currently not interested in playing this game. I've identified such deficiencies in Blizzard's games before and it is only a logical, very democratic answer to the complaints of the community. Sadly, Blizzard is not precise enough to conduct a better policy.
I think blaming the patching policy and the community complaints that influence it is missing the main point. This game was just badly conceived from the get-go. There were bad ideas in it from the very beginning. Didn't we already see Warpgates in a 2008 gameplay presentation?
The team responsible for designing SC2 dug this hole all by themselves. Any bad patching they've since had to do is an artifact of that process, more than anything else.
|
On September 09 2011 06:19 tree.hugger wrote:Hello all. I appreciate the comments to my article and the newspost in general. I feel a little guilty because I think I drowned out a really nice interview with MaNa, who is a very hard working and talented player. It's amazing to me how young he is. About my article, I've read every post in this thread, and want to clarify just a few things. I feel that if they missed some nuance, most people got the gist of the thing, which is fine. In my mind, it's actually a little surprising to me that people are calling this 'balance whine'. I didn't really think that the assertions I was making were particularly controversial. TLPD statistics both support and informed my arguments about balance. The current GSL distribution also supports this, and it's a handy bit of coincidence that we finally got our act together on IEM at the same time that MC fell into Code A. I purposely avoided much theory-crafting, and I tried to stay out of the muddy water of PvZ altogether, which is, in my view, probably not an unfair match-up for protoss, but is an extremely tricky and boring one that deserves to be changed for reasons unrelated to general game balance. But that's another can of worms. I can't imagine what would've happened if I had opened that. I think the most conclusive evidence for protoss being the weakest race is the unequal distribution of protoss win-rates among GSL players. One would expect that GSL-level players would have win rates that would be somewhat evenly, or perhaps normally distributed (help me out, stats people). Instead, the win-rates of protoss are unbelievably skewed. I consider Puzzle a very good player, but believe his win rate is inflated. I think the fact that MC's win rate is so much higher than those of his peers, both those who had BW-training, and those who didn't, is strong evidence of problems with the balance situation. There has simply never been another protoss who has threatened to win a championship (this writer predicted a 4-0 for NesTea over InCa) other than MC. The reason that MC's decline is so specifically tied to protoss balance, is not that he is falling because of it, but because he was previously succeeding in spite of it. That's the only original thought I'll claim this article makes. I cannot understand the argument made by some posters that terran players are just better in general. That twenty of the top thirty two players that switched to Sc2 would've picked terran is an absurd argument to make, and one that's impossible to prove or even provide evidence for. Many mediocre BW players have switched, and they play a bunch of different races. This is a silly, unprovable, and useless argument to spend more time refuting. I recognize that quite a few people have taken issue with the tone of the article. In particular, Pandain has listed the points in which I took the most liberties or engaged in the most obvious hyperbole. I stand guilty on most counts. I would defend my choices however, because I believe that they do not take away from the point raised by the article, and are obvious enough to be picked out by the reader. I recognize that there is room to debate on how PuMa actually stacks up with MC, as well as how PvT might be balanced or imbalanced in the later stages of the game. I do, however, do not believe that 1/1/1 imbalance is a negotiable position, nor that protoss is in deep trouble. That three of the final four at IEM were protoss is not an acceptable counter-argument; one tournament worth of data on the second best server in the world does not stand against many seasons worth of data in the world's toughest competition. Finally, in tying the last two criticisms into one, some posters have expressed their disappointment that 'balance whine' would be so prominently featured in a front-page article on TL. They have usually preached patience and restraint. While I normally sympathize with these views (people who I speak with regularly know that while I joke about balance frequently, I am usually among the last to actually label something imbalanced) I believe that this is a problem that is older than these posters know. GSL Code S is a place of very low turnover. It has taken successive seasons of the same issues to lead to the present malaise. In the article, I tried to argue that protoss has statistically gotten the short end of the stick for much of Sc2's history. Without diminishing the significant woes of zerg too much, I would like to again emphasize this point. This is not a timely or prescient article. In all likelyhood, this could've been written months ago, if I or someone else had tried harder. I'll avoid ending on a zinger this time. Cheers, and happy discussion!
I'm glad you showed up to reply to some of these posts. I agree that some of the hyperbole was overdone -- but your subsequent reply shows you've not only owned up to the mistakes you've made but have presented compelling arguments with factual evidence. Great job!
|
On September 09 2011 09:22 Olinim wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 09:20 pieisamazing wrote:
Great now everybody will try to cite this article as some sort of "proof" (lol) of imbalance as protoss. Protoss may not be super-terran-imba-strong at the highest level of play, but that doesn't affect you diamond/master-leaguers who just can't macro or use one hotkey for your army. Protoss is plenty strong at your level. No one gives a shit about that. We're tired of seeing GSL completely ruined by 1/1/1 and GomTvTvTvTvTvTvT.
Some people are. I hope the forums here that are already plagued with tons of stupid topics aren't allowed to become even more cluttered because of this equally stupid post. The same points could have been made without the blatant whining. The post has some truth to it, but it was written in an inflammatory way for basically no reason.
Believe me, I'm not happy about less protoss (and zerg) in the GSL either. They are really fun to watch and play as, and I personally think TvT is boring as all hell. It's interesting once in every 10 games which just isn't enough for me.
|
On September 09 2011 06:37 Condor Hero wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 06:33 vBr wrote:
Honestly, anyone who claims (and there are alot of you) that this is well written should be ashamed. I play toss in GM and I whine just as much as most people but making a serious article and posting it on front page of TL in such a way? wow. Grow up. Love people like you who have almost no interaction with the community somehow think you can dictate what TL has on its front page.
Exactly. Go read the 10 commandments. This is teamliquid.net not teamvbr.net. If you don't like it then leave.
|
On September 09 2011 09:23 babylon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 08:57 WhiteDog wrote:On September 09 2011 08:54 Rorschach wrote:On September 09 2011 08:32 kofman wrote:On September 09 2011 08:30 Rorschach wrote:On September 09 2011 08:10 kofman wrote:
Wow, its sad to see even the TL admins become protoss whiners.
Seriously, just because your in love with MC, doesn't mean that Puma sucks, like you say in the article. The article by Treehugger makes me sick, it looks like something taken out of the bnet forums. Please, go cry somewhere else.
"Protoss have tried everything at their disposal." Really? This just shows how stupid this article is. I don't think anyone will disagree when I say that motherships haven't been explored nearly enough. They have the amazing ability to vortex every unit into a tiny little space, and yet, no one has experimented with it. I'm just amazed at how this piece of complete bullshit was able to make it to the front page of TL. GTFO.... Puma is shit compared to MVP yet Puma was able to take MC with very sloppy play and allins.... wtf are you talking about? puma won nasl, and I don't think winning iem and nasl is something a "shit" player would do. Also, MC was the one who played sloppily. He should have made better decisions in game 1, and just got outplayed the other 2 games. I said he was shit compared to MVP which is 100% true. MVP has excellent mechanics and godlike multitasking. Puma is just another terran taking advantage of how forgiving making mistakes is with the race....... Seriously, please stop. MVP is better than puma, but puma ain't shit... He was flash practice partner... do you know what that mean man ? Okay. I hate this statement. "PuMa was Flash's practice partner." Everybody was everybody's practice partner. Flash practiced with the entirety of his team and players outside of it. What you might want to say is that he was known for being extremely good in practice (he was), but saying that he was Flash's practice partner means very little in the entire scheme of things. That said, yeah, no, PuMa is not shit compared to MVP. If PuMa's shit compared to MVP, then every Terran who is not Bomber is also absolute shit (and Bomber only just because he's nowhere near as consistent as MVP). Yes, PuMa plays one of the more "abusive" TvP styles -- hey, just like MC played one of the most abusive Protoss styles! -- but he's still very, very good and saying otherwise is selling him short.
Thank god addressed the Holy label of "Flash Practice Partner."
Practice Bonjwa is nothing new guys.
You know that in BW Sangho was one of the most preferred Protoss partners? I love the dude's personality but let's not put him on a pedestal just because of that.
|
On September 09 2011 06:19 tree.hugger wrote:
I think the most conclusive evidence for protoss being the weakest race is the unequal distribution of protoss win-rates among GSL players. One would expect that GSL-level players would have win rates that would be somewhat evenly, or perhaps normally distributed (help me out, stats people). Instead, the win-rates of protoss are unbelievably skewed.
GSL Code S is a place of very low turnover. It has taken successive seasons of the same issues to lead to the present malaise. In the article, I tried to argue that protoss has statistically gotten the short end of the stick for much of Sc2's history.
Both of these issues are linked; a lot of mediocre, or just plain terrible, Protoss managed to qualify for the first Code S, and have been sticking around by just doing enough not to get dropped down. Combined that with how hard it is to actually qualify for Code A, and the level of play from Protoss in the GSL has been much lower than it should have been.
Add in the removal of the Khaydarin Amulet, the nerf to Warp Gate timing, the buffs to both the Ghost and Infestor, and the recent refinements to Terran all-ins... Well, it's hardly surprising that Protoss is struggling in the GSL at the moment.
If, in fact, the game is imbalanced at the moment, and it's not simply a period of adjustment to the recent changes, then I'd say it's largely because of the recent balance changes overshooting, not because Protoss as a whole has been fundamentally bad for the whole of SC2, as you seem to be implying.
|
On September 09 2011 09:29 pieisamazing wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 09:22 Olinim wrote:On September 09 2011 09:20 pieisamazing wrote:
Great now everybody will try to cite this article as some sort of "proof" (lol) of imbalance as protoss. Protoss may not be super-terran-imba-strong at the highest level of play, but that doesn't affect you diamond/master-leaguers who just can't macro or use one hotkey for your army. Protoss is plenty strong at your level. No one gives a shit about that. We're tired of seeing GSL completely ruined by 1/1/1 and GomTvTvTvTvTvTvT. Some people are. I hope the forums here that are already plagued with tons of stupid topics aren't allowed to become even more cluttered because of this equally stupid post. The same points could have been made without the blatant whining. The post has some truth to it, but it was written in an inflammatory way for basically no reason. Believe me, I'm not happy about less protoss (and zerg) in the GSL either. They are really fun to watch and play as, and I personally think TvT is boring as all hell. It's interesting once in every 10 games which just isn't enough for me.
I actually think TvT is an awesome matchup, its just that when you turn on the stream and that is the only thing on, it gets extremely tiresome.
It's like watching re-runs of Friends from 10 years ago. A really great show... but... too much.
|
Great article. I am very glad that TL actually does acknowledge the fact that SC2 isn't some perfectly balanced game because it clearly isn't yet.
Some people seem to be worried that this will cause more balance whining but at least for me its the opposite. Pretty much everything that I would complain about has now officially been said and heard.
|
On September 09 2011 08:53 Erasme wrote:
5 rax reaper was nerfed because of 1v1, I'm tired of seeing people thinking that it wasn't an abusive strat. See MorroW vs Idra at IEM.
I never said it wasn't an abusive strategy. However, the primary reason that the Reaper was nerfed was how imbalanced it was in 2v2, not 1v1.
|
On September 09 2011 09:47 OlorinTheWise wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 08:53 Erasme wrote:
5 rax reaper was nerfed because of 1v1, I'm tired of seeing people thinking that it wasn't an abusive strat. See MorroW vs Idra at IEM. I never said it wasn't an abusive strategy. However, the primary reason that the Reaper was nerfed was how imbalanced it was in 2v2, not 1v1.
According to Blizz yes. They also said that Zealot Build Time was nerfed because Proxy 2 gate was too strong at the silver level of play.
I'll let that sink in a little...
|
On September 09 2011 05:47 mastergriggy wrote:
Just remember MVP went to code A as well...MC will rise again!
when MVP went to code A, all terrans were doing fine/great.
when MC goes to code A, all protoss in up/down falls too.
when people are going to learn that MC alone made people call the whole race OP.
he is the only protoss with more than 50% win rate in gsl
|
On September 09 2011 09:54 QTIP. wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 09:47 OlorinTheWise wrote:On September 09 2011 08:53 Erasme wrote:
5 rax reaper was nerfed because of 1v1, I'm tired of seeing people thinking that it wasn't an abusive strat. See MorroW vs Idra at IEM. I never said it wasn't an abusive strategy. However, the primary reason that the Reaper was nerfed was how imbalanced it was in 2v2, not 1v1. According to Blizz yes. They also said that Zealot Build Time was nerfed because Proxy 2 gate was too strong at the silver level of play. I'll let that sink in a little...
Didn't they nerf the tank because of one tiny map that made mech OP? And then that map was later removed from the pool anyways?
Blizzard likes to nerf. I will admit that I have little faith in them, since the only game they've made that is anywhere near balanced is SCBW.
|
On September 09 2011 09:13 robopork wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 08:10 kofman wrote:
Wow, its sad to see even the TL admins become protoss whiners.
Seriously, just because your in love with MC, doesn't mean that Puma sucks, like you say in the article. The article by Treehugger makes me sick, it looks like something taken out of the bnet forums. Please, go cry somewhere else.
"Protoss have tried everything at their disposal." Really? This just shows how stupid this article is. I don't think anyone will disagree when I say that motherships haven't been explored nearly enough. They have the amazing ability to vortex every unit into a tiny little space, and yet, no one has experimented with it. I'm just amazed at how this piece of complete bullshit was able to make it to the front page of TL. Blizzard said explicitly that the mothership wasn't even intended for competitive play, it's a piece of candy for casual gamers. "There are some units that just aren't going to be used at "high" levels of play and the Mothership is probably one of them. We currently don't have any plans to change this unit." Cited from the community manager in this b.net forum: http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/1020823601?page=4#71I'm amazed at how resiliant people like you are to cold, hard, numerical facts. http://i.imgur.com/bdP2e.pngIf one of the races remains as under powered and dysfunctional as P is now and as Z was six months ago for very long sc2 will lose it's credibility as an esport. Pull your head out of your ass and be a team player, we need to care more about the game than about our individual races or the pro's who play them.
Your stats doesn't show shit...
When zerg were struggling protoss were saying no it's okay.
Now protoss is struggling, but they are after a long time of zerg being downhill, they need a certain time to adapt to zerg new strenght. Also, there is a patch coming, with an immortal buff and a certain number of nerf... why not waiting that ?
The entire zerg community was whining and everybody in the protoss community were there saying looks it's okay just use your units, you play like shit (incontrol was saying that...). Blizzard had to buff infestor...
Now protoss whine like crazy because they actually have to innovate (and they even get a tribune in the front page of TL, which is pretty... well...) and integrate the new patch in their playstyle...
|
On September 09 2011 09:59 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 09:13 robopork wrote:On September 09 2011 08:10 kofman wrote:
Wow, its sad to see even the TL admins become protoss whiners.
Seriously, just because your in love with MC, doesn't mean that Puma sucks, like you say in the article. The article by Treehugger makes me sick, it looks like something taken out of the bnet forums. Please, go cry somewhere else.
"Protoss have tried everything at their disposal." Really? This just shows how stupid this article is. I don't think anyone will disagree when I say that motherships haven't been explored nearly enough. They have the amazing ability to vortex every unit into a tiny little space, and yet, no one has experimented with it. I'm just amazed at how this piece of complete bullshit was able to make it to the front page of TL. Blizzard said explicitly that the mothership wasn't even intended for competitive play, it's a piece of candy for casual gamers. "There are some units that just aren't going to be used at "high" levels of play and the Mothership is probably one of them. We currently don't have any plans to change this unit." Cited from the community manager in this b.net forum: http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/1020823601?page=4#71I'm amazed at how resiliant people like you are to cold, hard, numerical facts. http://i.imgur.com/bdP2e.pngIf one of the races remains as under powered and dysfunctional as P is now and as Z was six months ago for very long sc2 will lose it's credibility as an esport. Pull your head out of your ass and be a team player, we need to care more about the game than about our individual races or the pro's who play them. Your stats doesn't show shit... When zerg were struggling protoss were saying no it's okay. Now protoss is struggling, but they are after a long time of zerg being downhill, they need a certain time to adapt to zerg new strenght. Also, there is a patch coming, with an immortal buff and a certain number of nerf... why not waiting that ? Zerg where QQing and everybody in the protoss community where there saying looks it's okay just use your units, you play like shit (incontrol was saying that...). Blizzard had to buf infestor... Now protoss nerf like crazy, actually getting a tribune in the front page of TL, which is pretty... well... while they already have a patch coming up...
Zergs never were doing bad as Idra lead you to believe. Hardly as bad as the absolute demolition of protoss in Korea. Plus yes blizz buffed infestors, now protoss has a 30 percent winrate and 5 protoss in code s. Toss needs a buff.
|
On September 09 2011 09:54 QTIP. wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 09:47 OlorinTheWise wrote:On September 09 2011 08:53 Erasme wrote:
5 rax reaper was nerfed because of 1v1, I'm tired of seeing people thinking that it wasn't an abusive strat. See MorroW vs Idra at IEM. I never said it wasn't an abusive strategy. However, the primary reason that the Reaper was nerfed was how imbalanced it was in 2v2, not 1v1. According to Blizz yes. They also said that Zealot Build Time was nerfed because Proxy 2 gate was too strong at the silver level of play. I'll let that sink in a little...
I am aware of that, I was just trying to correct the factual inaccuracies in his post. >.>
|
On September 09 2011 09:58 babylon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 09:54 QTIP. wrote:On September 09 2011 09:47 OlorinTheWise wrote:On September 09 2011 08:53 Erasme wrote:
5 rax reaper was nerfed because of 1v1, I'm tired of seeing people thinking that it wasn't an abusive strat. See MorroW vs Idra at IEM. I never said it wasn't an abusive strategy. However, the primary reason that the Reaper was nerfed was how imbalanced it was in 2v2, not 1v1. According to Blizz yes. They also said that Zealot Build Time was nerfed because Proxy 2 gate was too strong at the silver level of play. I'll let that sink in a little... Didn't they nerf the tank because of one tiny map that made mech OP? And then that map was later removed from the pool anyways? Blizzard likes to nerf. I will admit that I have little faith in them, since the only game they've made that is anywhere near balanced is SCBW.
I'm not sure about that tank nerf, but it doesn't sound too far from reality. I really don't know if David Kim knows what he's doing. It really bothers me when he says stuff like "Oh I got an email from ______ with a replay, and now I fixed it."
As a fan you're just like -_-??
|
On September 09 2011 10:04 OlorinTheWise wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 09:54 QTIP. wrote:On September 09 2011 09:47 OlorinTheWise wrote:On September 09 2011 08:53 Erasme wrote:
5 rax reaper was nerfed because of 1v1, I'm tired of seeing people thinking that it wasn't an abusive strat. See MorroW vs Idra at IEM. I never said it wasn't an abusive strategy. However, the primary reason that the Reaper was nerfed was how imbalanced it was in 2v2, not 1v1. According to Blizz yes. They also said that Zealot Build Time was nerfed because Proxy 2 gate was too strong at the silver level of play. I'll let that sink in a little... I am aware of that, I was just trying to correct the factual inaccuracies in his post. >.>
Heh I get you - I hope it didn't come off as dick-ish. Just poking fun at Blizz ^^
|
On September 09 2011 10:01 Olinim wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 09:59 WhiteDog wrote:On September 09 2011 09:13 robopork wrote:On September 09 2011 08:10 kofman wrote:
Wow, its sad to see even the TL admins become protoss whiners.
Seriously, just because your in love with MC, doesn't mean that Puma sucks, like you say in the article. The article by Treehugger makes me sick, it looks like something taken out of the bnet forums. Please, go cry somewhere else.
"Protoss have tried everything at their disposal." Really? This just shows how stupid this article is. I don't think anyone will disagree when I say that motherships haven't been explored nearly enough. They have the amazing ability to vortex every unit into a tiny little space, and yet, no one has experimented with it. I'm just amazed at how this piece of complete bullshit was able to make it to the front page of TL. Blizzard said explicitly that the mothership wasn't even intended for competitive play, it's a piece of candy for casual gamers. "There are some units that just aren't going to be used at "high" levels of play and the Mothership is probably one of them. We currently don't have any plans to change this unit." Cited from the community manager in this b.net forum: http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/1020823601?page=4#71I'm amazed at how resiliant people like you are to cold, hard, numerical facts. http://i.imgur.com/bdP2e.pngIf one of the races remains as under powered and dysfunctional as P is now and as Z was six months ago for very long sc2 will lose it's credibility as an esport. Pull your head out of your ass and be a team player, we need to care more about the game than about our individual races or the pro's who play them. Your stats doesn't show shit... When zerg were struggling protoss were saying no it's okay. Now protoss is struggling, but they are after a long time of zerg being downhill, they need a certain time to adapt to zerg new strenght. Also, there is a patch coming, with an immortal buff and a certain number of nerf... why not waiting that ? Zerg where QQing and everybody in the protoss community where there saying looks it's okay just use your units, you play like shit (incontrol was saying that...). Blizzard had to buf infestor... Now protoss nerf like crazy, actually getting a tribune in the front page of TL, which is pretty... well... while they already have a patch coming up... Zergs never were doing bad as Idra lead you to believe. Hardly as bad as the absolute demolition of protoss in Korea. Plus yes blizz buffed infestors, now protoss has a 30 percent winrate and 5 protoss in code s. Toss needs a buff.
Are you serious ? See your stats, in your stats the current protoss situation is no way near what zerg had to face from december to march, with 41 to 45% winning, while protoss is only crumbling from 48% to 40% during this very GSL : at the moment it's not an imbalance, and nobody can tell if it's just a current temparory situation. The only thing that is sure is that, overall, zerg is the race who is has stayed the most under the 50% win ratio, and aside from terran, protoss and zerg win ratio seems rather fragile.
|
It's kinda ironic that the article about IEM is about the loser of the final. Puma has been robbed!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
