|
On August 11 2012 04:42 iamcaustic wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 04:33 Sumadin wrote:On August 11 2012 04:11 Blazinghand wrote:
No, of course not. However, I'm saying it's POSSIBLE. If the best play experience comes from this thing being impossible (as the pros, and blizzard seem to agree), why is Blizzard allowing it to be possible? It's not like people are gonna somehow not cheese on the ladder, but only pros are willing to cheese and abuse (as you implied) to win, and therefore only pro games need depots.
ANYONE CAN CHEESE. I did not say "everyone always cheeses". Please do not put words in my mouth, it is intellectually dishonest. The fact of the matter is, people cheese on the ladder. It happens all the time. I see tons of cheese. It's not like, as you implied, only pros abuse. There are plenty of arguments as to why cheese is allowed in this game. And Blizzards considers this a cheese like any other. If they kill the block what is next step? Should a spawning pool require 10 supply? Should terrans be forbidden from building a barracks out of 50 yards from a CC. They allow it because cheese is what generates part of the play experience for Starcraft. It keeps you on your toe. It just seems like Zerg consider this cheese something completely over all other cheeses. But really it is as much of a cheese as a 6-pool with simmilar risks. If this Block is denied it puts the protoss back too. 6-pool vs. T and P is generally game ending, regardless of the outcome. Successful 6-pool is a win for the Zerg, a failed one is likewise pretty much an auto-loss. With ramp blocking, this isn't the case at all; in the event a wall is blocked from being made, the T or P can just cancel their buildings and only be minimally behind. Alternatively, if it's successful it's often a straight loss for the Zerg. Cheese like that, IMO, is excessively strong -- and I say this as a Terran that occasionally uses ramp block in my ladder games vs Zerg. The opinion isn't just mine either, as tournaments go out of their way to also remove this kind of cheese from the game -- including tournaments run by Blizzard. I don't know about you, but I've seen pretty much a thousand 7pools ZvP by now that failed to kill a single probe and ended up into a standard macro game. The risk/reward ration of 7pools in ZvP is really skewed. P has to scout at 9 and on a lot of maps scout again at 13 in the other direction just for the possibility of this tactic, in no other matchups sacrificing that much econ for scouting is common, and if it's dealt with perfectly Zerg can transition quite well.
|
On August 12 2012 02:50 iamcaustic wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 04:53 Sumadin wrote:On August 11 2012 04:42 iamcaustic wrote:On August 11 2012 04:33 Sumadin wrote:On August 11 2012 04:11 Blazinghand wrote:
No, of course not. However, I'm saying it's POSSIBLE. If the best play experience comes from this thing being impossible (as the pros, and blizzard seem to agree), why is Blizzard allowing it to be possible? It's not like people are gonna somehow not cheese on the ladder, but only pros are willing to cheese and abuse (as you implied) to win, and therefore only pro games need depots.
ANYONE CAN CHEESE. I did not say "everyone always cheeses". Please do not put words in my mouth, it is intellectually dishonest. The fact of the matter is, people cheese on the ladder. It happens all the time. I see tons of cheese. It's not like, as you implied, only pros abuse. There are plenty of arguments as to why cheese is allowed in this game. And Blizzards considers this a cheese like any other. If they kill the block what is next step? Should a spawning pool require 10 supply? Should terrans be forbidden from building a barracks out of 50 yards from a CC. They allow it because cheese is what generates part of the play experience for Starcraft. It keeps you on your toe. It just seems like Zerg consider this cheese something completely over all other cheeses. But really it is as much of a cheese as a 6-pool with simmilar risks. If this Block is denied it puts the protoss back too. 6-pool vs. T and P is generally game ending, regardless of the outcome. Successful 6-pool is a win for the Zerg, a failed one is likewise pretty much an auto-loss. With ramp blocking, this isn't the case at all; in the event a wall is blocked from being made, the T or P can just cancel their buildings and only be minimally behind. Alternatively, if it's successful it's often a straight loss for the Zerg. Cheese like that, IMO, is excessively strong -- and I say this as a Terran that occasionally uses ramp block in my ladder games vs Zerg. The opinion isn't just mine either, as tournaments go out of their way to also remove this kind of cheese from the game -- including tournaments run by Blizzard. The block is not an autowin for T or P even if it goes up. If that is what you assumed then i see why we are in conflict. It all comes down to how you deal with it. If Zergs wanna break it down their best shot is going 2 gas into a baneling nest. Get 7 banelings ASAP and go knock it down. The macro game is dead but the protoss won't have enough stuff to defend against the following allin. There are also other ways. If you got a scouting drone(Which you should have) then you can use it to make a hatchery outside the block somewhere on the map. Once done use it to make Zerglings and swarm his undefended mineral line. Either tactic through the game will be short. The macro game is gone once protoss and terran does this. You're fine to disagree with it being an auto-win; that's your prerogative. Meanwhile, I'll continue to pick up free wins on the ladder with it, and see it continue to be banned in tournaments by virtue of the lowered neutral depot. The awkward theory-crafting you make doesn't change this.
We have seen people getting into even grandmaster by 6-pooling. So you wouldn't be making any feats by only using one cheese for certain matchup and winning with it.
If anything it is good that the Zergs gets more practice against it.
|
On August 12 2012 09:42 Sumadin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2012 02:50 iamcaustic wrote:On August 11 2012 04:53 Sumadin wrote:On August 11 2012 04:42 iamcaustic wrote:On August 11 2012 04:33 Sumadin wrote:On August 11 2012 04:11 Blazinghand wrote:
No, of course not. However, I'm saying it's POSSIBLE. If the best play experience comes from this thing being impossible (as the pros, and blizzard seem to agree), why is Blizzard allowing it to be possible? It's not like people are gonna somehow not cheese on the ladder, but only pros are willing to cheese and abuse (as you implied) to win, and therefore only pro games need depots.
ANYONE CAN CHEESE. I did not say "everyone always cheeses". Please do not put words in my mouth, it is intellectually dishonest. The fact of the matter is, people cheese on the ladder. It happens all the time. I see tons of cheese. It's not like, as you implied, only pros abuse. There are plenty of arguments as to why cheese is allowed in this game. And Blizzards considers this a cheese like any other. If they kill the block what is next step? Should a spawning pool require 10 supply? Should terrans be forbidden from building a barracks out of 50 yards from a CC. They allow it because cheese is what generates part of the play experience for Starcraft. It keeps you on your toe. It just seems like Zerg consider this cheese something completely over all other cheeses. But really it is as much of a cheese as a 6-pool with simmilar risks. If this Block is denied it puts the protoss back too. 6-pool vs. T and P is generally game ending, regardless of the outcome. Successful 6-pool is a win for the Zerg, a failed one is likewise pretty much an auto-loss. With ramp blocking, this isn't the case at all; in the event a wall is blocked from being made, the T or P can just cancel their buildings and only be minimally behind. Alternatively, if it's successful it's often a straight loss for the Zerg. Cheese like that, IMO, is excessively strong -- and I say this as a Terran that occasionally uses ramp block in my ladder games vs Zerg. The opinion isn't just mine either, as tournaments go out of their way to also remove this kind of cheese from the game -- including tournaments run by Blizzard. The block is not an autowin for T or P even if it goes up. If that is what you assumed then i see why we are in conflict. It all comes down to how you deal with it. If Zergs wanna break it down their best shot is going 2 gas into a baneling nest. Get 7 banelings ASAP and go knock it down. The macro game is dead but the protoss won't have enough stuff to defend against the following allin. There are also other ways. If you got a scouting drone(Which you should have) then you can use it to make a hatchery outside the block somewhere on the map. Once done use it to make Zerglings and swarm his undefended mineral line. Either tactic through the game will be short. The macro game is gone once protoss and terran does this. You're fine to disagree with it being an auto-win; that's your prerogative. Meanwhile, I'll continue to pick up free wins on the ladder with it, and see it continue to be banned in tournaments by virtue of the lowered neutral depot. The awkward theory-crafting you make doesn't change this. We have seen people getting into even grandmaster by 6-pooling. So you wouldn't be making any feats by only using one cheese for certain matchup and winning with it. If anything it is good that the Zergs gets more practice against it.
What, like back in 2010 or something?
|
Australia294 Posts
I've always thought that DB would find the idea of destructible rocks at the bottom of ramps more palatable.
|
On August 12 2012 13:30 iamcaustic wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2012 09:42 Sumadin wrote:On August 12 2012 02:50 iamcaustic wrote:On August 11 2012 04:53 Sumadin wrote:On August 11 2012 04:42 iamcaustic wrote:On August 11 2012 04:33 Sumadin wrote:On August 11 2012 04:11 Blazinghand wrote:
No, of course not. However, I'm saying it's POSSIBLE. If the best play experience comes from this thing being impossible (as the pros, and blizzard seem to agree), why is Blizzard allowing it to be possible? It's not like people are gonna somehow not cheese on the ladder, but only pros are willing to cheese and abuse (as you implied) to win, and therefore only pro games need depots.
ANYONE CAN CHEESE. I did not say "everyone always cheeses". Please do not put words in my mouth, it is intellectually dishonest. The fact of the matter is, people cheese on the ladder. It happens all the time. I see tons of cheese. It's not like, as you implied, only pros abuse. There are plenty of arguments as to why cheese is allowed in this game. And Blizzards considers this a cheese like any other. If they kill the block what is next step? Should a spawning pool require 10 supply? Should terrans be forbidden from building a barracks out of 50 yards from a CC. They allow it because cheese is what generates part of the play experience for Starcraft. It keeps you on your toe. It just seems like Zerg consider this cheese something completely over all other cheeses. But really it is as much of a cheese as a 6-pool with simmilar risks. If this Block is denied it puts the protoss back too. 6-pool vs. T and P is generally game ending, regardless of the outcome. Successful 6-pool is a win for the Zerg, a failed one is likewise pretty much an auto-loss. With ramp blocking, this isn't the case at all; in the event a wall is blocked from being made, the T or P can just cancel their buildings and only be minimally behind. Alternatively, if it's successful it's often a straight loss for the Zerg. Cheese like that, IMO, is excessively strong -- and I say this as a Terran that occasionally uses ramp block in my ladder games vs Zerg. The opinion isn't just mine either, as tournaments go out of their way to also remove this kind of cheese from the game -- including tournaments run by Blizzard. The block is not an autowin for T or P even if it goes up. If that is what you assumed then i see why we are in conflict. It all comes down to how you deal with it. If Zergs wanna break it down their best shot is going 2 gas into a baneling nest. Get 7 banelings ASAP and go knock it down. The macro game is dead but the protoss won't have enough stuff to defend against the following allin. There are also other ways. If you got a scouting drone(Which you should have) then you can use it to make a hatchery outside the block somewhere on the map. Once done use it to make Zerglings and swarm his undefended mineral line. Either tactic through the game will be short. The macro game is gone once protoss and terran does this. You're fine to disagree with it being an auto-win; that's your prerogative. Meanwhile, I'll continue to pick up free wins on the ladder with it, and see it continue to be banned in tournaments by virtue of the lowered neutral depot. The awkward theory-crafting you make doesn't change this. We have seen people getting into even grandmaster by 6-pooling. So you wouldn't be making any feats by only using one cheese for certain matchup and winning with it. If anything it is good that the Zergs gets more practice against it. What, like back in 2010 or something?
There is someone who has done it, and I think he is still in Grand Masters. He is a rather talented player, I believe, and he is the only one I know of who has done it.
Grand Master's wasn't around in 2010, I think, and he did it at the end of last year. Is what I get from the thread at least.
|
On August 12 2012 13:30 iamcaustic wrote:Show nested quote +On August 12 2012 09:42 Sumadin wrote:On August 12 2012 02:50 iamcaustic wrote:On August 11 2012 04:53 Sumadin wrote:On August 11 2012 04:42 iamcaustic wrote:On August 11 2012 04:33 Sumadin wrote:On August 11 2012 04:11 Blazinghand wrote:
No, of course not. However, I'm saying it's POSSIBLE. If the best play experience comes from this thing being impossible (as the pros, and blizzard seem to agree), why is Blizzard allowing it to be possible? It's not like people are gonna somehow not cheese on the ladder, but only pros are willing to cheese and abuse (as you implied) to win, and therefore only pro games need depots.
ANYONE CAN CHEESE. I did not say "everyone always cheeses". Please do not put words in my mouth, it is intellectually dishonest. The fact of the matter is, people cheese on the ladder. It happens all the time. I see tons of cheese. It's not like, as you implied, only pros abuse. There are plenty of arguments as to why cheese is allowed in this game. And Blizzards considers this a cheese like any other. If they kill the block what is next step? Should a spawning pool require 10 supply? Should terrans be forbidden from building a barracks out of 50 yards from a CC. They allow it because cheese is what generates part of the play experience for Starcraft. It keeps you on your toe. It just seems like Zerg consider this cheese something completely over all other cheeses. But really it is as much of a cheese as a 6-pool with simmilar risks. If this Block is denied it puts the protoss back too. 6-pool vs. T and P is generally game ending, regardless of the outcome. Successful 6-pool is a win for the Zerg, a failed one is likewise pretty much an auto-loss. With ramp blocking, this isn't the case at all; in the event a wall is blocked from being made, the T or P can just cancel their buildings and only be minimally behind. Alternatively, if it's successful it's often a straight loss for the Zerg. Cheese like that, IMO, is excessively strong -- and I say this as a Terran that occasionally uses ramp block in my ladder games vs Zerg. The opinion isn't just mine either, as tournaments go out of their way to also remove this kind of cheese from the game -- including tournaments run by Blizzard. The block is not an autowin for T or P even if it goes up. If that is what you assumed then i see why we are in conflict. It all comes down to how you deal with it. If Zergs wanna break it down their best shot is going 2 gas into a baneling nest. Get 7 banelings ASAP and go knock it down. The macro game is dead but the protoss won't have enough stuff to defend against the following allin. There are also other ways. If you got a scouting drone(Which you should have) then you can use it to make a hatchery outside the block somewhere on the map. Once done use it to make Zerglings and swarm his undefended mineral line. Either tactic through the game will be short. The macro game is gone once protoss and terran does this. You're fine to disagree with it being an auto-win; that's your prerogative. Meanwhile, I'll continue to pick up free wins on the ladder with it, and see it continue to be banned in tournaments by virtue of the lowered neutral depot. The awkward theory-crafting you make doesn't change this. We have seen people getting into even grandmaster by 6-pooling. So you wouldn't be making any feats by only using one cheese for certain matchup and winning with it. If anything it is good that the Zergs gets more practice against it. What, like back in 2010 or something? I'm sorry, but this is both clearly inaccurate since GM didn't exist back then, and just simply a way to avoid the entire argument by making a pointless rhetoric.
Also, this:
Meanwhile, I'll continue to pick up free wins on the ladder with it, and see it continue to be banned in tournaments by virtue of the lowered neutral depot. The awkward theory-crafting you make doesn't change this.
Is just repeating the same thing as if it were a fact, you have yet to provide a single argument as to why you think it's a free win except that it is banned in tournaments. We have already countered that by explaining that tournaments ban things for more than balance, it's just bad spectator-ship, another thing might be that tournaments simply think it is imbalanced, I see no way how tournaments could even know if things are imbalanced or not like that because they don't get battle.net stats in from the ladder and the depots have been there for so long that analysing games where it was attempted that are public is impossible.
We have provided the in my opinion extremely strong point that if it were truly imbalanced Blizzard would've stopped it on the ladder a long time ago. They have shown they are willing to go to the length of change the footprint of ramps to stop strategies they consider imbalanced. There is no conceivable reason why they wouldn't do that again if they felt it was imbalanced. Again, do you seriously think that if David Kim's data he got from B.net indicated that it were 'free wins' as you so claim, he wouldn't just say 'Okay, let's make it require 3 bunkers and 5 pylons to block a ramp now shall we.' You don't honestly think he will just leave an unstoppable strategy there right? He nerfed 5rax reaper in like 5 days after it was discovered because guess what, that was a really unstoppable and imbalanced strategy, he went so far to actually change the Terran tech tree to disallow it.
It''s quite clear that a lot of people think this is imbalanced, and none of them have a very strong argument that it is imbalanced, except 'tournaments ban it', which borders on circular reasoning, because they ban it because they consider it imbalanced without a strong argument themselves, it's imply bandwagoning in my opinion, the community has once decided it was 'imbalanced' without a single statistic on the matter and everyone is bandwagoning it like no tomorrow, and that was a long time ago, when this strat was a lot too powerful.
Another, slightly related thing, if you look up the stats on spawn positions on maps, you will find that Zerg is in fact not at all that bad off on close positions and on a lot of maps has a better time in ZvP than cross positions. The community thinks a lot of things en masse that are often very wrong.
|
On August 12 2012 16:15 734pot wrote:
I've always thought that DB would find the idea of destructible rocks at the bottom of ramps more palatable.
Destructible rocks would just make it worse, lol.
|
I'm a Diamond-Master P, just for the record.
Zergs started blocking Nexus( I think thats the plural of nexus  ) with hatches lately. You gotta pull 2 probes to deny that, because if he can place the hatch, its basically game over. You can try to expand with ~1 minute delay which gives the Zerg all the time he needs to outmacro you or you can 1 base all in which doesn't really should be a threat for any Zerg nowadays.
So why dont maps deny that? Or E-Bay blocks by terrans (I've had terrans who built an ebay at my natural w/out even scouting my main...)? Protoss can't build a nexus at the third or float it to the natural...
Okay, that part was ironic. But now seriously, Zergs gotta deal with it. You just let one drone patrol and thats it. No need for a neutral depot. Ramp blocks aren't OP anymore - so just get rid off these depots and everything is fine.
|
Guys, you got way too overreactive and matter-of-fact about my snarky one-liner. Let me emphasize a few words: "like back in 2010 or something". I'm deliberately making a vague over-exaggeration here; even the wording lends itself to deliberate inaccuracy.
Sometimes people use this form of sarcastic/exaggerated communication to highlight a point. In this case, it was to make the statement that this 6-pool to grandmasters attempt was likely done during a much earlier time in SC2's history, where we're likely to have had a much lower understanding of the game, as well as a lower overall skill cap as a result. I'm sure that point wasn't lost on you guys, even if you got distracted over details.
To be less snarky and more matter-of-fact for you guys, I did a quick bit of research on it and, sure enough, the guy that did it did so around a year ago, back in 2011. He wrote a guide at the beginning of November, which means his success was in Season 3 of the Blizzard ladder (July 26, 2011 to October 24, 2011). To put that in perspective, we're nearing the end of Season 8.
In other words, the underlying point I was making is still valid. Is that better for you?
On August 14 2012 04:11 SiskosGoatee wrote:
It''s quite clear that a lot of people think this is imbalanced, and none of them have a very strong argument that it is imbalanced, except 'tournaments ban it', which borders on circular reasoning, because they ban it because they consider it imbalanced without a strong argument themselves, it's imply bandwagoning in my opinion, the community has once decided it was 'imbalanced' without a single statistic on the matter and everyone is bandwagoning it like no tomorrow, and that was a long time ago, when this strat was a lot too powerful.
This would be a valid point if Blizzard didn't also implement the neutral supply depot in their WCS version maps. Your argument relies on observing Blizzard's actions for the ladder, yet they implement a different standard for tournaments. It's a double-standard you seem to ignore, and simply choose to side with Blizzard's ladder standard rather than its tournament standard, which doesn't make sense given that it's in tournaments where balance really matters the most.
On August 14 2012 04:11 SiskosGoatee wrote:
Another, slightly related thing, if you look up the stats on spawn positions on maps, you will find that Zerg is in fact not at all that bad off on close positions and on a lot of maps has a better time in ZvP than cross positions. The community thinks a lot of things en masse that are often very wrong.
Not to put him in the hot seat or anything, but most of my knowledge regarding spawning position stats comes from Orb of ESV Korean Weekly fame. Aside from that, the way Tal'Darim Altar works in terms of spawns is no secret. If you have a reliable data source for spawn position stats -- regardless of what the data shows -- I'd be appreciative if you could share.
On August 14 2012 08:04 Watercrystal wrote:
I'm a Diamond-Master P, just for the record.
What does this even mean? Are you Diamond or are you Masters?
|
On August 14 2012 08:56 iamcaustic wrote:Guys, you got way too overreactive and matter-of-fact about my snarky one-liner. Let me emphasize a few words: " like back in 2010 or something". I'm deliberately making a vague over-exaggeration here; even the wording lends itself to deliberate inaccuracy. Show nested quote +On August 14 2012 04:11 SiskosGoatee wrote:
It''s quite clear that a lot of people think this is imbalanced, and none of them have a very strong argument that it is imbalanced, except 'tournaments ban it', which borders on circular reasoning, because they ban it because they consider it imbalanced without a strong argument themselves, it's imply bandwagoning in my opinion, the community has once decided it was 'imbalanced' without a single statistic on the matter and everyone is bandwagoning it like no tomorrow, and that was a long time ago, when this strat was a lot too powerful. This would be a valid point if Blizzard didn't also implement the neutral supply depot in their WCS version maps. Your argument relies on observing Blizzard's actions for the ladder, yet they implement a different standard for tournaments. It's a double-standard you seem to ignore, and simply choose to side with Blizzard's ladder standard rather than its tournament standard, which doesn't make sense given that it's in tournaments where balance really matters the most. Show nested quote +On August 14 2012 04:11 SiskosGoatee wrote:
Another, slightly related thing, if you look up the stats on spawn positions on maps, you will find that Zerg is in fact not at all that bad off on close positions and on a lot of maps has a better time in ZvP than cross positions. The community thinks a lot of things en masse that are often very wrong. Not to put him in the hot seat or anything, but most of my knowledge regarding spawning position stats comes from Orb of ESV Korean Weekly fame. Aside from that, the way Tal'Darim Altar works in terms of spawns is no secret. If you have a reliable data source for spawn position stats -- regardless of what the data shows -- I'd be appreciative if you could share.
Okay so let me level with you for a second. You can take what i state below as almost confirmed facts, point is i won't argue this very much.
1. The depots will never be the solution that Blizzard will do on ladder. It is not their style and really not the way they do things. Blizzard don't use terrain to fix individual balance concerns. If they decided that this strat currently was broken they would apply some tweaks to it.
Examples of possible Blizzard-solutions:
A small cooldown to prope building warpin.
Make constructiong buildings more fragile in general.
2. The WCS versions have depots and such because they are suposed to be tournement versions. Since all tournement maps have depots, Blizzard added it to theirs too. However this is only to legimize that status as tournement maps. Blizzard can't just throw any maps out there and expect tournements to adapt it, we know that from the past. They respect the tournement map rules, while still maintaining most of their own map rules. And before you go to this, no they have stated MANY times that they don't design the ladder map pool for tournements. I supose you could claim some douple standard but they are very open about this part.
Okay enough about semi-facts. Here is another thing.
Sometimes people use this form of sarcastic/exaggerated communication to highlight a point. In this case, it was to make the statement that this 6-pool to grandmasters attempt was likely done during a much earlier time in SC2's history, where we're likely to have had a much lower understanding of the game, as well as a lower overall skill cap as a result. I'm sure that point wasn't lost on you guys, even if you got distracted over details. To be less snarky and more matter-of-fact for you guys, I did a quick bit of research on it and, sure enough, the guy that did it did so around a year ago, back in 2011. He wrote a guide at the beginning of November, which means his success was in Season 3 of the Blizzard ladder (July 26, 2011 to October 24, 2011). To put that in perspective, we're nearing the end of Season 8. In other words, the underlying point I was making is still valid. Is that better for you?
No actually it highlights our point just as much. No tournement have really run without depots since then, or a very long time before that. At this point we got no valid data from the pro level that tells if this is still broken or not. Whatever arguments the tournement organizers have for those depots can't have anything to do with balance at this point, because there is barely any recent data from pro players about this. We have gone through alot of changes since the depots got introduced, but noone bothered to test of they are still needed.
|
On August 14 2012 10:01 Sumadin wrote:
The depots will never be the solution that Blizzard will do on ladder.
I agree with this. It's one of the main motivators of the OP.
On August 14 2012 10:01 Sumadin wrote:
The WCS versions have depots and such because they are suposed to be tournement versions. Since all tournement maps have depots, Blizzard added it to theirs too. However this is only to legimize that status as tournement maps. Blizzard can't just throw any maps out there and expect tournements to adapt it, we know that from the past. They respect the tournement map rules, while still maintaining most of their own map rules. And before you go to this, no they have stated MANY times that they don't design the ladder map pool for tournements. I supose you could claim some douple standard but they are very open about this part.
Two things:
1. The World Championship Series (WCS) is a Blizzard-run tournament. It is not affected by other tournaments, or vice versa. You might remember that the Blizzcon 2011 (October 21-22, 2011) tournament pool did not feature neutral supply depots or forced cross spawns on Antiga Shipyard, etc. They weren't afraid to utilize their ladder maps in tournaments before, so what changed? What caused Blizzard to adopt other tournament standards instead of their own in 2012, if things like close spawns and lack of neutral depots aren't really an issue?
2. Blizzard's statements regarding the design of their ladder pool are greatly outdated. Since then they have incorporated tournament-level community maps and introduced maps of their own which they personally deemed "tournament-ready". In other words, their stance on this has shifted considerably.
Your arguments do not align with changes in Blizzard's tournament-related standards in 2012.
On August 14 2012 10:01 Sumadin wrote:
No actually it highlights our point just as much. No tournement have really run without depots since then, or a very long time before that. At this point we got no valid data from the pro level that tells if this is still broken or not. Whatever arguments the tournement organizers have for those depots can't have anything to do with balance at this point, because there is barely any recent data from pro players about this. We have gone through alot of changes since the depots got introduced, but noone bothered to test of they are still needed.
This is a case of "damned if you do, damned if you don't". We just recently got to see a wonderful example of what happens when these neutral supply depots are removed (even if incidentally) in Byun vs. NesTea on Metropolis. Of course, this game is continuously marginalized as "only one game" with comments directed toward NesTea's play, rather than accepting that ramp block is ridiculous.
As soon as the opportunity presents itself, a pro player exploits it and gets a free win. What do you want tournaments to do? Remove the depots and see those kinds of games on a regular basis, to the detriment of their product and perception as being a competent tournament organizer, just so fellows like yourself can get an arbitrary sample size where you can feel more comfortable saying "Oh, I guess you were right after all"?
|
This would be a valid point if Blizzard didn't also implement the neutral supply depot in their WCS version maps. Your argument relies on observing Blizzard's actions for the ladder, yet they implement a different standard for tournaments. It's a double-standard you seem to ignore, and simply choose to side with Blizzard's ladder standard rather than its tournament standard, which doesn't make sense given that it's in tournaments where balance really matters the most.
Again, this has been addressed, the issue was raised that Blizzard is simply attempting to legitimize their tournaments in the face of the demands of fans regardless of them actually considering it imbalanced or not. You honestly think that that is unlikely?
And you honestly think that it is in any shape of form even plausible that assuming that this strategy is indeed a 'free win' as you call (as in, there is absolutely nothing you can do against it when attempted) and an extremely simple solution exists of simply altering the footprint of ramps for Blizzard, that they would actually not patch out a completely broken and imbalanced strategy?
Do you honestly think that is even plausible? That if they considered it a 'free win' for Terran and their data showed that that they would just let it exist for two years?
|
On August 14 2012 10:55 iamcaustic wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2012 10:01 Sumadin wrote:
No actually it highlights our point just as much. No tournement have really run without depots since then, or a very long time before that. At this point we got no valid data from the pro level that tells if this is still broken or not. Whatever arguments the tournement organizers have for those depots can't have anything to do with balance at this point, because there is barely any recent data from pro players about this. We have gone through alot of changes since the depots got introduced, but noone bothered to test of they are still needed.
This is a case of "damned if you do, damned if you don't". We just recently got to see a wonderful example of what happens when these neutral supply depots are removed (even if incidentally) in Byun vs. NesTea on Metropolis. Of course, this game is continuously marginalized as "only one game" with comments directed toward NesTea's play, rather than accepting that ramp block is ridiculous.
Oh so you think by knowing my answer that you can devalue my point?
Yes it is only one game. Elementary math tells you that in a grand scheme of statestics one game NEVER matters, NEVER!. One game means nothing, thousand games is a statestic.
There is one other major reasson for not counting that game:
Nestea wasn't previosly aware of the missing depots
There really is no more need for more points against this. Byun had all the advantages, the block got up, he already had plenty marines coming, Nestea didn't have sufficiant force to break it.
That is all the advantages you can have with that cheese. If it didn't win there wouldn't be a point of using it. Byun should win in that situration and he did. The fact that he won just shows there still is some kick to the block, what it DOESN'T show is if this would work regually. Would it be succesful against a zerg mindful of the missing depots? We would't know because nestea was not such a zerg.
The fact that you resent that game just show that you just really don't wanna see this kind of victory. And on that point i disagree. I don't mind terrans or protoss taking advantages of this strat. I would mind if it happened with succes as often as you suggest it would. But we got NO evidence suggesting that would happen.
|
About the Nestea/Byun game, Byun had his scv down to 5 hp and Nestea pulled his drones back just a second too early for some reason. This was without Nestea expecting the block and clearly not anticipating it because he didn't have his drones anywhere in the vicinity to stop a wall from getting up at the ramp, his drones were down below, but not near the ramp, if Nestea knew there was no depot, he would have most likely held seeing that even with his improper response due to being taken by surprise, he still almost held.
I personally don't like seeing strats like this, I don't like doing them, I don't like losing to them. But you gotta cut the bread fair I feel, if you remove these strats, then edit maps to make pools require two overlords and just all around disable proxies by stopping people from building too far from their main for the first five minutes of the game or something. And that would just completely change the metagame and balance of the game too much.
|
On August 14 2012 10:01 Sumadin wrote:
Okay so let me level with you for a second. You can take what i state below as almost confirmed facts, point is i won't argue this very much.
I talk to Blizzard about maps quite often and I can assure you almost all your "confirmed facts" are not in fact true or have any basis to them. Sorry
|
On August 14 2012 11:50 Sumadin wrote:
Yes it is only one game. Elementary math tells you that in a grand scheme of statestics one game NEVER matters, NEVER!. One game means nothing, thousand games is a statestic.
Actually one game does mean something. And you'd only need a handful of data to have a worthwhile stat.
|
On August 14 2012 13:45 EatThePath wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2012 11:50 Sumadin wrote:
Yes it is only one game. Elementary math tells you that in a grand scheme of statestics one game NEVER matters, NEVER!. One game means nothing, thousand games is a statestic. Actually one game does mean something. And you'd only need a handful of data to have a worthwhile stat. True, this game told us that the 2rax bunker block stat isn't absolutely terrible when an opponent doesn't know you can do it because it barely succeeded.
|
On August 14 2012 11:14 SiskosGoatee wrote:Show nested quote +
This would be a valid point if Blizzard didn't also implement the neutral supply depot in their WCS version maps. Your argument relies on observing Blizzard's actions for the ladder, yet they implement a different standard for tournaments. It's a double-standard you seem to ignore, and simply choose to side with Blizzard's ladder standard rather than its tournament standard, which doesn't make sense given that it's in tournaments where balance really matters the most.
Again, this has been addressed, the issue was raised that Blizzard is simply attempting to legitimize their tournaments in the face of the demands of fans regardless of them actually considering it imbalanced or not. You honestly think that that is unlikely? And you honestly think that it is in any shape of form even plausible that assuming that this strategy is indeed a 'free win' as you call (as in, there is absolutely nothing you can do against it when attempted) and an extremely simple solution exists of simply altering the footprint of ramps for Blizzard, that they would actually not patch out a completely broken and imbalanced strategy? Do you honestly think that is even plausible? That if they considered it a 'free win' for Terran and their data showed that that they would just let it exist for two years?
When the bunkers complete, it's pretty well a free win. I'm not sure what race you play or at what level, but this isn't exactly revolutionary information. Blizzard has had multiple precedents where they've accepted something as being imbalanced if it reaches that stage (e.g. late game TvP if the Terran does no mid-game damage and the Protoss played passive macro to get their death ball), but have seen potential actions that can be taken to prevent the game from reaching that stage in the first place. In TvP, it's the mid-game aggression of the Terran that can cripple a Protoss before their death ball takes off, nullifying the Protoss advantage. With ramp block, it's patrolling a drone or two down at the base of the ramp; something which isn't all that big a deal when there's nothing but ladder points on the line, but even Blizzard doesn't seem to find that reasonable anymore for tournament-level play where there are much higher stakes.
Assuming the position that one should balance an e-sports focused game for its highest level of play, the ramp block issue should be addressed in some way. Blizzard's been historically slow at catching up to the community on these things (see: Blizzard ladder map pool, implementation of neutral depots on tournament maps, chat rooms, still waiting on clan support but it's coming soon™, etc.), but they do get around to it eventually.
On August 14 2012 12:38 Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2012 10:01 Sumadin wrote:
Okay so let me level with you for a second. You can take what i state below as almost confirmed facts, point is i won't argue this very much. I talk to Blizzard about maps quite often and I can assure you almost all your "confirmed facts" are not in fact true or have any basis to them. Sorry
Welp, I suppose that closes that chapter. Sir Diamond knows his stuff.
|
On August 14 2012 12:38 Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2012 10:01 Sumadin wrote:
Okay so let me level with you for a second. You can take what i state below as almost confirmed facts, point is i won't argue this very much. I talk to Blizzard about maps quite often and I can assure you almost all your "confirmed facts" are not in fact true or have any basis to them. Sorry
Could you go into more details with what you know then? I didn't see depots in the battle reports. It was hard to judge if there was any changes to how propes makes pylons. And from the looks of the map, none of the stuff you should have been talking about seems to have made an impact.
|
On August 15 2012 05:23 Sumadin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 14 2012 12:38 Diamond wrote:On August 14 2012 10:01 Sumadin wrote:
Okay so let me level with you for a second. You can take what i state below as almost confirmed facts, point is i won't argue this very much. I talk to Blizzard about maps quite often and I can assure you almost all your "confirmed facts" are not in fact true or have any basis to them. Sorry Could you go into more details with what you know then? I didn't see depots in the battle reports. It was hard to judge if there was any changes to how propes makes pylons. And from the looks of the map, none of the stuff you should have been talking about seems to have made an impact.
Obviously not or I would have. Battle reports are to show stuff off, not quality play.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
