|
On June 15 2010 03:46 skipdog172 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 03:26 whoopadeedoo wrote:Do you play random or play both sides? Terran (for me, at least) is much easier to play and win with than Protoss (in Diamond league). Other random players (from NA, Euro and Korea) have said the same thing, so I know it's not just me. Both sides. So even though we know that Protoss actually beats Terran more, we are declaring that Terran is "easier to play and win with" than Protoss? So basically you believe that overall, Protoss players are more skillful than Terran players, right?? That must be the case if Protoss actually wins more yet is somehow at a disadvantage... But yeah, clearly because "other random players" agree with you, you can't be wrong!!!!
Again, you're citing pro stats/opinions as if it applied to 99.99999999999% of the playing community. If everyone could APM 300 and practiced this game as a profession, this would not be an issue. Stop the "appealing to authority" logical fallacies.
I didn't say I couldn't be wrong (can an opinion even be wrong?). I just know I'm not alone in my opinion. Read what I wrote, not what you want to believe I wrote.
|
On June 15 2010 03:13 skipdog172 wrote:
The solution is "everything protoss has going for them". The solution is warpgates, observers, superior army composition and map control. This isn't about "requiring more skill from Protoss". It is about not looking at EMP in a vacuum and realizing that it is JUST FINE. You can beat equally skilled Terran who use EMP.
I strongly disagree with this notion that Protoss has to "play at a much higher level than Terran" to win the game. It just isn't true. Keep money low, build warpgates, scout with an observer, make a perfect army composition and attack. I don't see what kind of ultra-impressive skills Protoss must possess to make this an even match. EMP is just a part of their army composition that they need to have a chance to compete. It isn't some magical spell that allows Terran with less skill to beat Protoss with more skill. It is needed because Protoss will be attacking with a bigger army with a superior composition.
I don't think you've played Protoss before. The "SUPER AWESOME SCOUTING ADVANTAGE (TM)" of Observers is nothing short of a necessary survival tactic. Protoss is without a doubt in my mind the hardest race to consistently win with when you start out in the game because they're so dependent on scouting (and noobs don't scout). Every individual unit is a big investment and you NEED that scouting advantage just to be able to REACT to your opponent's composition. If you have a slightly wrong composition at a slightly wrong time, you're going to get stomped.
With hundreds of Protoss games under my belt this Beta, the feeling I get from this early Ghost stuff, is my only managable solution (note: not the same as counter) to it comes very slowly, requiring me to invest heavily in tech, or metric fucktons of Zealots, neither of which lets me expand with impunity, like all these Terran players seem to be suggesting we should do. This gives the Terran a very wide opening to either expand well in advance of me, or just push and win the game right there if I even consider trying anything else.
A lot of Terrans don't make early Ghosts and that changes the dynamic. Some Terrans make early Ghosts, sit around for ages, giving me lots of time to get HTs to 'counter' them and the match feels even. But, this very small subset of Terrans (like Brat_OK) get early Ghosts and Marines, push when Stims is ready and just rape you in the godamn face before you had a hope in hell of doing anything about it.
Hopefully more Terrans actually pick up on the strength of this build, so Blizzard can easily spot it and get the thing changed. Right now its the equivalent of the Immortal timing push of yestermonth, only hardly anyone knows about it. Its not impossible to beat, but its consistently kicked my ass over the last three months.
And I don't think the 'skill difference' with my opponent is a factor. The matchmaking system is pretty good. I wouldn't be in the Diamond bracket playing Artosis one minute, then Scrubby McNoob the next. And if I were just playing someone who went 5-0 in placements against noobs, I wouldn't be complaining about the strength of Ghosts. I'd be kicking myself in the butt for losing to a guy who beat me with a Marauder rush and 20 APM.
|
Q: Last Dev Chat, Terran was behind in all 1v1 and 2v2 matchups. How do the racial matchup numbers look now? Any outlier matchups?
A: We have several tools to measure race balance. The simplest is the win loss by race, factored by leagues. In Platinum and Gold leagues the numbers look like this.
Terrans vs. Protoss 46% - 54%
Protoss vs. Zerg 51% - 49%
Terrans vs. Zerg 51% - 49%
I do not have the more interesting numbers that factor for player skill. The last time I saw these numbers Zerg were ahead of Protoss, Protoss were ahead of Terrans and Terrans and Zerg were fairly even.
Obviously there is a lot more work to be done and more beta time in front of us but we are very pleased with the current numbers.
|
On June 15 2010 04:24 D3lta wrote:Show nested quote +
Q: Last Dev Chat, Terran was behind in all 1v1 and 2v2 matchups. How do the racial matchup numbers look now? Any outlier matchups?
A: We have several tools to measure race balance. The simplest is the win loss by race, factored by leagues. In Platinum and Gold leagues the numbers look like this.
Terrans vs. Protoss 46% - 54%
Protoss vs. Zerg 51% - 49%
Terrans vs. Zerg 51% - 49%
I do not have the more interesting numbers that factor for player skill. The last time I saw these numbers Zerg were ahead of Protoss, Protoss were ahead of Terrans and Terrans and Zerg were fairly even.
Obviously there is a lot more work to be done and more beta time in front of us but we are very pleased with the current numbers.
also wat patch was this for. i dont pay attention to these chats. since it doesnt even include diamond, ima say this is from a while ago
like someone also stated bef, the matching system is designed to give players a 50-50 shot so we dont know wat other factors blizz included in this.
|
On June 15 2010 04:24 D3lta wrote:Show nested quote +
Q: Last Dev Chat, Terran was behind in all 1v1 and 2v2 matchups. How do the racial matchup numbers look now? Any outlier matchups?
A: We have several tools to measure race balance. The simplest is the win loss by race, factored by leagues. In Platinum and Gold leagues the numbers look like this.
Terrans vs. Protoss 46% - 54%
Protoss vs. Zerg 51% - 49%
Terrans vs. Zerg 51% - 49%
I do not have the more interesting numbers that factor for player skill. The last time I saw these numbers Zerg were ahead of Protoss, Protoss were ahead of Terrans and Terrans and Zerg were fairly even.
Obviously there is a lot more work to be done and more beta time in front of us but we are very pleased with the current numbers.
Re: #BlizzChat Developer Chat on Twitter 4/30 05/01/2010 12:30:23 AM GMT+00:00
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=24630604051&postId=246283079317&sid=3000
Why didn't you mention those statistics were taken before 30th of April - date of the interview -, which means until Patch 10? After that protoss kept receiving nerfs and terran buffs. Which actually makes the argument useful aggainst your point.
|
On June 15 2010 04:24 D3lta wrote:Show nested quote +
Q: Last Dev Chat, Terran was behind in all 1v1 and 2v2 matchups. How do the racial matchup numbers look now? Any outlier matchups?
A: We have several tools to measure race balance. The simplest is the win loss by race, factored by leagues. In Platinum and Gold leagues the numbers look like this.
Terrans vs. Protoss 46% - 54%
Protoss vs. Zerg 51% - 49%
Terrans vs. Zerg 51% - 49%
I do not have the more interesting numbers that factor for player skill. The last time I saw these numbers Zerg were ahead of Protoss, Protoss were ahead of Terrans and Terrans and Zerg were fairly even.
Obviously there is a lot more work to be done and more beta time in front of us but we are very pleased with the current numbers.
Over two MONTHS ago? Oh come the F on. How much has changed since then. This isn't a Live game where patches only happen every 3 months. A bunch of changes have been made since then, most obvious of which that help Terrans were the Immortal build time nerf, the Void Ray range nerf and the cost of bio upgrades getting greatly reduced.
|
On June 15 2010 04:24 D3lta wrote:Show nested quote +
Q: Last Dev Chat, Terran was behind in all 1v1 and 2v2 matchups. How do the racial matchup numbers look now? Any outlier matchups?
A: We have several tools to measure race balance. The simplest is the win loss by race, factored by leagues. In Platinum and Gold leagues the numbers look like this.
Terrans vs. Protoss 46% - 54%
Protoss vs. Zerg 51% - 49%
Terrans vs. Zerg 51% - 49%
I do not have the more interesting numbers that factor for player skill. The last time I saw these numbers Zerg were ahead of Protoss, Protoss were ahead of Terrans and Terrans and Zerg were fairly even.
Obviously there is a lot more work to be done and more beta time in front of us but we are very pleased with the current numbers.
dude. gtfo. every time i see people quoting this FAQ just makes me so annoyed/pissed off.
THESE STATS WERE FROM AROUND PATCH 10.
We have had NO stats released to us AFTER all the meaningful PvT nerfs (read: Immo time build nerf, void ray range nerf) and all the Terran Bio buffs (read: conc shell un-nerf, stim+health buff). Please STOP quoting and using completely irrelevant statistics that barely meant anything in the first place.
People who are citing tournaments are almost equally stupid. You can't just cite total tourney wins for specific races. You should be citing tourney top 4 or top 2. Why? Because tournaments include a third and fourth race, Zerg and Random, which skews the results such that you absolutely cannot establish Protoss v. Terran dominance because those two are not the only races being played! (Ex. Because every single Terran is being knocked out in round 1 or 2 by Zerg players so that the only players who remain are Protoss and Zerg does NOT mean Terran is weak against Protoss.) Take elementary statistics before trying to use statistics to support your arguments.
|
On June 15 2010 05:04 trucejl wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 04:24 D3lta wrote:
Q: Last Dev Chat, Terran was behind in all 1v1 and 2v2 matchups. How do the racial matchup numbers look now? Any outlier matchups?
A: We have several tools to measure race balance. The simplest is the win loss by race, factored by leagues. In Platinum and Gold leagues the numbers look like this.
Terrans vs. Protoss 46% - 54%
Protoss vs. Zerg 51% - 49%
Terrans vs. Zerg 51% - 49%
I do not have the more interesting numbers that factor for player skill. The last time I saw these numbers Zerg were ahead of Protoss, Protoss were ahead of Terrans and Terrans and Zerg were fairly even.
Obviously there is a lot more work to be done and more beta time in front of us but we are very pleased with the current numbers.
also wat patch was this for. i dont pay attention to these chats. since it doesnt even include diamond, ima say this is from a while ago like someone also stated bef, the matching system is designed to give players a 50-50 shot so we dont know wat other factors blizz included in this.
No. The matchmaking system emphasizes speed over fairness. It's actually quite bad at finding opponents close to your MMR (if your MMR is very high). It even pits arranged partner teams against random partner teams.
|
On June 15 2010 05:18 space_yes wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 05:04 trucejl wrote:On June 15 2010 04:24 D3lta wrote:
Q: Last Dev Chat, Terran was behind in all 1v1 and 2v2 matchups. How do the racial matchup numbers look now? Any outlier matchups?
A: We have several tools to measure race balance. The simplest is the win loss by race, factored by leagues. In Platinum and Gold leagues the numbers look like this.
Terrans vs. Protoss 46% - 54%
Protoss vs. Zerg 51% - 49%
Terrans vs. Zerg 51% - 49%
I do not have the more interesting numbers that factor for player skill. The last time I saw these numbers Zerg were ahead of Protoss, Protoss were ahead of Terrans and Terrans and Zerg were fairly even.
Obviously there is a lot more work to be done and more beta time in front of us but we are very pleased with the current numbers.
also wat patch was this for. i dont pay attention to these chats. since it doesnt even include diamond, ima say this is from a while ago like someone also stated bef, the matching system is designed to give players a 50-50 shot so we dont know wat other factors blizz included in this. No. The matchmaking system emphasizes speed over fairness. It's actually quite bad at finding opponents close to your MMR (if your MMR is very high). It even pits arranged partner teams against random partner teams.
maybe im wrong about the matching system, i just remember it from somewhere on the blizz forum.
so even without all the terran buff n toss nerf it was only a 4% diff from 50-50?
|
A 4% difference is pretty significant, since it means Protoss are winning over 17% more often than Terran (54/46 = 1.174), but citing those particular numbers themselves in this argument is completely pointless, because they're TWO MONTHS old, before many changes were made to the PvT matchup involving raw unit strength (e.g. Void Ray and Hellion range) and timings (Immortal construction and Terran tech upgrades).
|
Thanks Bibdy for finally bringing up the specific timing push that seems to really solidify your beliefs in EMP being too good. It must not be very common and I don't have much experience against it. Sounds to me like that exact timing push is what should be focused on instead of all of this arguing about outdated statistics. So much of this thread if screaming about EMP itself when it sounds like that timing push is what we should be analyzing. Is it really unbeatable by Protoss? You would think a timing push so simple, early and effective would see a lot more widespread use. Anybody have some replays??
|
day[9] #135 is pretty filled with the replays.. My favorite part was Huk getting roflstomped even after having splitted his army up, doing a zeal flank and even manages to get a couple of FF off.
|
On June 15 2010 05:34 Bibdy wrote:
A 4% difference is pretty significant, since it means Protoss are winning over 17% more often than Terran (54/46 = 1.174), but citing those particular numbers themselves in this argument is completely pointless, because they're TWO MONTHS old, before many changes were made to the PvT matchup involving raw unit strength (e.g. Void Ray and Hellion range) and timings (Immortal construction and Terran tech upgrades).
how that % even makes sense is beyond me
all it means is that in 100 matches terran win 46 time n toss 54 time. since those number r directly proportional its basically a diff of 4 matches
but we arent here to talk about stats so ya....
if u guys wanna say its a timing push issue then the clear solution would be making emp a research?
|
I think its scarce because people wait for other people to do it. Phoenix openings were considered suicide around here until Nony proved otherwise and Day9 casted it. Same with this Marine/Ghost thing. I think the moment that the Beta comes back up, a lot of Terrans (at least on this site) are going to pick up this build and its going to get its day in the sun.
Unbeatable or not, always depends on the skill of the people involved. In generally its %*@#ing hard to come up with the right tech and unit composition, on the fly, when you spot this build. I compared the gas costs to both compositions a couple of pages back.
Okay, so let's do a bit of analysis that compares both sides by relative gas income. I think its safe to assume that both sides will be getting 2 gas fairly early and that neither side is going to get a significantly larger income than the other before the first push comes.
Terran
Units: 1 Reaper, 2 Ghosts, 2 Medivacs = 550 gas
Tech: Stims, Shield = 300 gas
Buildings: Tech Lab, Reactor, Factory, Starport, Ghost Academy = 325 gas
Protoss
Buildings: Twilight Council, Templar Archives = 300 gas
Tech: Warp Gate, Psi Storm = 250 gas
Units: 2 HTs = 300 gas
(550 + 300 + 325) - (300 + 250 + 300) = 325 gas spare
So that's 325 gas you can spare on things like Stalkers and Sentries to keep the Marine ball at bay. That's just one Sentry and four Stalkers. That's a pitiful amount of gas spent to keep back the kind of Marine ball the Terran can build as time progresses. He'll just scout that, laugh and charge forward with the Marine ball while you're busy teching up to the HT 'counter' to the Ghost/Marine ball.
It basically means you have to spend a metric fuckton of minerals on Zealots as cannon-fodder. You can't afford Zealot speed, either, unless you pick it over Psi Storm. And Zealots just get ripped to shreds by an equal cost in Marines as the blobs get bigger. 1 Zealot beats 2 Marines, but 14 Marines (particularly with Stim and/or Shield, which you ARE getting) can rape 7 Zealots.
Can't get down to specifics, but that 'spare gas' differential leading up to the moment when the Terran feels comfortable moving out, doesn't feel comfortable from the Protoss perspective, at all.
I realize now that I completely forgot about scouting it. A Robo Fac and Observer is another 200 gas the Protoss needs to spend (or Hallucination for 100, but I really don't feel safe in PvT with 1-shot scouting methods over constant monitoring) just to be able to SPOT the build, let alone react to it.
So, that leaves the Protoss with 125 spare gas, a SINGLE Sentry in order to compete with the Terran's composition. The timing window there is astronomically frightening.
Best you can do is just get the HTs for Feedback, and worry about Psi Storm later, netting you 200 gas for some Stalkers.
So, what alternatives are there? Speedlots with an armour upgrade was one idea I picked up from Day9's cast of the thing. That sounds plausible to BUILD it. Whether it directly counters the Stimmed Marine+EMP blob will require some testing when Beta comes back.
|
On June 15 2010 05:51 trucejl wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 05:34 Bibdy wrote:
A 4% difference is pretty significant, since it means Protoss are winning over 17% more often than Terran (54/46 = 1.174), but citing those particular numbers themselves in this argument is completely pointless, because they're TWO MONTHS old, before many changes were made to the PvT matchup involving raw unit strength (e.g. Void Ray and Hellion range) and timings (Immortal construction and Terran tech upgrades). how that % even makes sense is beyond me all it means is that in 100 matches terran win 46 time n toss 54 time. since those number r directly proportional its basically a diff of 4 matches but we arent here to talk about stats so ya.... if u guys wanna say its a timing push issue then the clear solution would be making emp a research?
Its pretty basic math. If the Terran won 46 of them, and the Protoss won 54 of them, the Protoss won 17% more.
54/46 = 1.17
Or, another way, the number 54 is 17% larger than the number 46.
|
On June 15 2010 05:59 Bibdy wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 05:51 trucejl wrote:On June 15 2010 05:34 Bibdy wrote:
A 4% difference is pretty significant, since it means Protoss are winning over 17% more often than Terran (54/46 = 1.174), but citing those particular numbers themselves in this argument is completely pointless, because they're TWO MONTHS old, before many changes were made to the PvT matchup involving raw unit strength (e.g. Void Ray and Hellion range) and timings (Immortal construction and Terran tech upgrades). how that % even makes sense is beyond me all it means is that in 100 matches terran win 46 time n toss 54 time. since those number r directly proportional its basically a diff of 4 matches but we arent here to talk about stats so ya.... if u guys wanna say its a timing push issue then the clear solution would be making emp a research? Its pretty basic math. If the Terran won 46 of them, and the Protoss won 54 of them, the Protoss won 17% more. 54/46 = 1.17 Or, another way, the number 54 is 17% larger than the number 46.
w/e floats ur boat........
|
On June 15 2010 05:59 Bibdy wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 05:51 trucejl wrote:On June 15 2010 05:34 Bibdy wrote:
A 4% difference is pretty significant, since it means Protoss are winning over 17% more often than Terran (54/46 = 1.174), but citing those particular numbers themselves in this argument is completely pointless, because they're TWO MONTHS old, before many changes were made to the PvT matchup involving raw unit strength (e.g. Void Ray and Hellion range) and timings (Immortal construction and Terran tech upgrades). how that % even makes sense is beyond me all it means is that in 100 matches terran win 46 time n toss 54 time. since those number r directly proportional its basically a diff of 4 matches but we arent here to talk about stats so ya.... if u guys wanna say its a timing push issue then the clear solution would be making emp a research? Its pretty basic math. If the Terran won 46 of them, and the Protoss won 54 of them, the Protoss won 17% more. 54/46 = 1.17 Or, another way, the number 54 is 17% larger than the number 46.
Your numbers count for nothing because THIS IS SPARTA (oh wait nvm - actually it's because they are from before patch 10).
|
On June 15 2010 06:10 trucejl wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 05:59 Bibdy wrote:On June 15 2010 05:51 trucejl wrote:On June 15 2010 05:34 Bibdy wrote:
A 4% difference is pretty significant, since it means Protoss are winning over 17% more often than Terran (54/46 = 1.174), but citing those particular numbers themselves in this argument is completely pointless, because they're TWO MONTHS old, before many changes were made to the PvT matchup involving raw unit strength (e.g. Void Ray and Hellion range) and timings (Immortal construction and Terran tech upgrades). how that % even makes sense is beyond me all it means is that in 100 matches terran win 46 time n toss 54 time. since those number r directly proportional its basically a diff of 4 matches but we arent here to talk about stats so ya.... if u guys wanna say its a timing push issue then the clear solution would be making emp a research? Its pretty basic math. If the Terran won 46 of them, and the Protoss won 54 of them, the Protoss won 17% more. 54/46 = 1.17 Or, another way, the number 54 is 17% larger than the number 46. w/e floats ur boat........
Its not just floating my boat. Its a better representation of the same info. Saying 46:54 is a trick to hide the magnitude of the difference.
After an election, people tend to say things like "Candidate A only won with 60% of the vote. Clearly the people don't adore him THAT much! There's only a 10% swing!", even though they actually won with 1.5x (50% more) votes as the other guy.
|
On June 15 2010 06:14 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 05:59 Bibdy wrote:On June 15 2010 05:51 trucejl wrote:On June 15 2010 05:34 Bibdy wrote:
A 4% difference is pretty significant, since it means Protoss are winning over 17% more often than Terran (54/46 = 1.174), but citing those particular numbers themselves in this argument is completely pointless, because they're TWO MONTHS old, before many changes were made to the PvT matchup involving raw unit strength (e.g. Void Ray and Hellion range) and timings (Immortal construction and Terran tech upgrades). how that % even makes sense is beyond me all it means is that in 100 matches terran win 46 time n toss 54 time. since those number r directly proportional its basically a diff of 4 matches but we arent here to talk about stats so ya.... if u guys wanna say its a timing push issue then the clear solution would be making emp a research? Its pretty basic math. If the Terran won 46 of them, and the Protoss won 54 of them, the Protoss won 17% more. 54/46 = 1.17 Or, another way, the number 54 is 17% larger than the number 46. Your numbers count for nothing because THIS IS SPARTA (oh wait nvm - actually it's because they are from before patch 10).
Yes, we've already been over that. He just wanted to argue semantics over the math.
|
People stop talking about statistic as it means nothing about game balance just ask any academic guy there is too much things involved in like how many people play each race skill of these people etc. it's impossible to judge out of pure statistic especially when you look on brozne silver and gold leagues where people are lack of skill and decent player can win with fast void ray or cheese zealots.
Back to EMP it's pure imba whatever you like to hear with current mechanic and Terran it's simple overpowered. Good terran can make protoss life totally miserable using EMP on sentrys ht or immortals and then pick them up with stimmed mmbaal. You can't simply counter this unless you willing to dance all time and move back splitting ur army and spreading which requires uber skilling compared to terran one click stimpack emp and attack. Terran will always have more time to focus on battle which grants huge advantage just because EMP can be powerfull in many ways.
And moreover missing with EMP don't mean that terran lose but hitting whole protoss army with few EMP's lower they resistance potentilal by 40-50% i don't understand how people can say it's balanced.
Back from sc1 emp is far more powerfull in sc2 with current mechanics.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
