|
On April 15 2012 09:07 Gorlin wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2012 18:56 tdt wrote:On April 14 2012 18:03 Asha` wrote:
So R16 =
7P (out of 10)
7T (out of 15)
2Z (out of 7) 1 bad season. Protoss has put up with 6-7 of that kind of representation. Welcome to club  You have a ways to go before you can really feel disenfranchized. There have only been two seasons where protoss didn't have more players than zerg in the Ro16 in the past year...
Don't you know? All the good players picked Protoss... I mean Terran, I mean... OHOH, IT'S THE GREED!! If Zerg would stop being so greedy, they'd be better off... oh wait... Protoss is winning fights with equal numbers of workers... hrm... this one is gonna be hard...
OHOH, THE ENGAGEMENTS!!!! IF ZERG STOPPED TRYING TO 1A INTO PROTOSS, THEY'D WIN HAHA!, ROACHES ARE OP!!!
...
|
Seriously, between force field and Zergs lack of any range what-so-ever until T2, there are no options for early aggression in ZvP that aren't 50/50. Punishing an OVERLY greedy Protoss is flipping a coin at best.
Protoss players are figuring out how to be every so greedier and still stay 100% safe against lings, blings, and roaches, and the MU will continue to slide in their favor. Blizzard needs to stop nerfing away Zerg aggression, or that 1 MU will likely invalidate the Zerg race as a whole.
|
Why is this thread allowed to be filled with balance whine?
|
On April 14 2012 19:09 roym899 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2012 19:06 Adreme wrote:On April 14 2012 19:05 Belha wrote:On April 14 2012 18:00 LimitSEA wrote:
Two zergs in Code S. Jesus, this is just sad. Why this never happened to terran -.-" Probably because a ridiculous amount of most teams high level playesr are terran. With the exception of oGs and Zenex I think all 8 other teams have a high level terran not to mention that now multiple foreign teams are getting high level terrans. But the question is WHY are there so many more Top Terrans then Top Zergs and Protosses since the Release of the game? In the ladder the races are splitted very equally.
Why are there so few good terrans in the foreign scene?
It just turned out that way, stop trying to see patterns in everything and just play the game.
|
On April 15 2012 23:14 hugman wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2012 19:09 roym899 wrote:On April 14 2012 19:06 Adreme wrote:On April 14 2012 19:05 Belha wrote:On April 14 2012 18:00 LimitSEA wrote:
Two zergs in Code S. Jesus, this is just sad. Why this never happened to terran -.-" Probably because a ridiculous amount of most teams high level playesr are terran. With the exception of oGs and Zenex I think all 8 other teams have a high level terran not to mention that now multiple foreign teams are getting high level terrans. But the question is WHY are there so many more Top Terrans then Top Zergs and Protosses since the Release of the game? In the ladder the races are splitted very equally. Why are there so few good terrans in the foreign scene? It just turned out that way, stop trying to see patterns in everything and just play the game.
Sometimes people just don't get the problem. I don't want a buff for Zerg or a Nerf for Terran for ME. It's just the fact that Zergs have a harder time then the other races overall. The reasons for this have been explained multiple times in this thread. I know exactly that at MY level this doesn't matter at all. But look at the GSL results. It's not like it's the first time that there are WAY less Zerg players then there are players from the other races. And the fact that on the ladder there are similiar numbers of races pretty much shows, that talent should be splitted pretty much equally between the races.
It's a fact that Terran won most of the tournements since the release and also that mostly Terran pros are the ones who can constantly win tournements.
The queston why there are so few good Terrans in the foreign scene doesn't matter at all in this discussion as Starcraft2 get balanced at the top notch which is the Korean pro scene.
|
On April 15 2012 22:54 Jermstuddog wrote:
Seriously, between force field and Zergs lack of any range what-so-ever until T2, there are no options for early aggression in ZvP that aren't 50/50. Punishing an OVERLY greedy Protoss is flipping a coin at best.
Surely if punishing an overly greedy Protoss is hard, the Protoss isn't being overly greedy?
|
On April 15 2012 23:29 roym899 wrote:But look at the GSL results. It's not like it's the first time that there are WAY less Zerg players then there are players from the other races. And the fact that on the ladder there are similiar numbers of races pretty much shows, that talent should be splitted pretty much equally between the races.
It's a fact that Terran won most of the tournements since the release and also that mostly Terran pros are the ones who can constantly win tournements.
The queston why there are so few good Terrans in the foreign scene doesn't matter at all in this discussion as Starcraft2 get balanced at the top notch which is the Korean pro scene.
Races don't consistently win tournaments, players do.
There are very few players who are able to consistently do well over the span of a few months. The Korean players who fit in that category are, in my opinion: MVP, MMA, MKP, DRG, Nestea and MC. When those guys win it isn't because of their race, they win because they play on a level above their opponents. The best Zergs aren't doing worse than the best Terrans or Protoss players.
Is Zerg underrepresented in Code-S? Maybe, but so what? What's stopping Curious from winning a GSL? It's not that he plays Zerg. Is Zerg harder to play, more vulnerable to all-ins and harder to make comebacks with? Again, maybe, but certainly not enough to the degree where you could blame any losses on that. SC2 is an asymmetrical game, so you can't get around or even quantify all those problems. Zerg isn't underrepresented in terms of GSL finals / titles or international finals / titles.
|
On April 15 2012 23:37 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 22:54 Jermstuddog wrote:
Seriously, between force field and Zergs lack of any range what-so-ever until T2, there are no options for early aggression in ZvP that aren't 50/50. Punishing an OVERLY greedy Protoss is flipping a coin at best. Surely if punishing an overly greedy Protoss is hard, the Protoss isn't being overly greedy?
No, that's the point. If Protoss makes 1 cannon to defend his 15 nexus and I roach rush, it's allin. If my roach rush does not kill him, I lose, because by the time my attack hits, I am down by 10-15 workers.
If Terran goes 15 CC, and I run in with lings, again, I have set myself so far behind that forcing a lift is simply delaying his economy. He has 2 MULEs and an equal or greater number of workers. He's still ahead unless I kill him.
In order for Zerg to punish excessively greedy play, he must commit 100% of his economy and cut drones, and generally, these strategies are 50/50.
|
On April 16 2012 00:02 hugman wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 23:29 roym899 wrote:But look at the GSL results. It's not like it's the first time that there are WAY less Zerg players then there are players from the other races. And the fact that on the ladder there are similiar numbers of races pretty much shows, that talent should be splitted pretty much equally between the races.
It's a fact that Terran won most of the tournements since the release and also that mostly Terran pros are the ones who can constantly win tournements.
The queston why there are so few good Terrans in the foreign scene doesn't matter at all in this discussion as Starcraft2 get balanced at the top notch which is the Korean pro scene. Races don't consistently win tournaments, players do. There are very few players who are able to consistently do well over the span of a few months. The Korean players who fit in that category are, in my opinion: MVP, MMA, MKP, DRG, Nestea and MC. When those guys win it isn't because of their race, they win because they play on a level above their opponents. The best Zergs aren't doing worse than the best Terrans or Protoss players. Is Zerg underrepresented in Code-S? Maybe, but so what? What's stopping Curious from winning a GSL? It's not that he plays Zerg. Is Zerg harder to play, more vulnerable to all-ins and harder to make comebacks with? Again, maybe, but certainly not enough to the degree where you could blame any losses on that. SC2 is an asymmetrical game, so you can't get around or even quantify all those problems. Zerg isn't underrepresented in terms of GSL finals / titles or international finals / titles. Zerg isn't underrepresented but Terran is overrepresented. Look at the players you named their. The thing is that the Zergs seem to have a much harder time to play constantly on a high level without losing sometimes in the first rounds of the tournements, which is clearly a result of bad scouting opportunities and the impossibility of playing a style which is when properly executed able to defend every all-in or timing push.
I really think that Zerg and Protoss are very well balanced as the matchup is still evolving a lot. But the Terran race still stays in terms of results and consistency on top of both of the races. You can tell me what you want, but this is a clear sign of a flaw in the game design.
|
On April 16 2012 01:33 Jermstuddog wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 23:37 SeaSwift wrote:On April 15 2012 22:54 Jermstuddog wrote:
Seriously, between force field and Zergs lack of any range what-so-ever until T2, there are no options for early aggression in ZvP that aren't 50/50. Punishing an OVERLY greedy Protoss is flipping a coin at best. Surely if punishing an overly greedy Protoss is hard, the Protoss isn't being overly greedy? No, that's the point. If Protoss makes 1 cannon to defend his 15 nexus and I roach rush, it's allin. If my roach rush does not kill him, I lose, because by the time my attack hits, I am down by 10-15 workers. If Terran goes 15 CC, and I run in with lings, again, I have set myself so far behind that forcing a lift is simply delaying his economy. He has 2 MULEs and an equal or greater number of workers. He's still ahead unless I kill him. In order for Zerg to punish excessively greedy play, he must commit 100% of his economy and cut drones, and generally, these strategies are 50/50.
Yes, but if that is the scenario, the play is not excessively greedy in the first place. If what you mean is that it is easier for Protoss to defend against Zerg than Zerg against Protoss, then that's easier to discuss.
If the premise of your argument is that Protoss can play "overly" greedy without losing, it isn't overly greedy at all, is it?
|
On April 16 2012 01:39 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2012 01:33 Jermstuddog wrote:On April 15 2012 23:37 SeaSwift wrote:On April 15 2012 22:54 Jermstuddog wrote:
Seriously, between force field and Zergs lack of any range what-so-ever until T2, there are no options for early aggression in ZvP that aren't 50/50. Punishing an OVERLY greedy Protoss is flipping a coin at best. Surely if punishing an overly greedy Protoss is hard, the Protoss isn't being overly greedy? No, that's the point. If Protoss makes 1 cannon to defend his 15 nexus and I roach rush, it's allin. If my roach rush does not kill him, I lose, because by the time my attack hits, I am down by 10-15 workers. If Terran goes 15 CC, and I run in with lings, again, I have set myself so far behind that forcing a lift is simply delaying his economy. He has 2 MULEs and an equal or greater number of workers. He's still ahead unless I kill him. In order for Zerg to punish excessively greedy play, he must commit 100% of his economy and cut drones, and generally, these strategies are 50/50. Yes, but if that is the scenario, the play is not excessively greedy in the first place. If what you mean is that it is easier for Protoss to defend against Zerg than Zerg against Protoss, then that's easier to discuss. If the premise of your argument is that Protoss can play "overly" greedy without losing, it isn't overly greedy at all, is it?
Yes it is because things didn't go according to plan. Protoss lost his natural and X number of probes and he clearly did not account for the attack that was incoming. This SHOULD put his opponent in a significantly advantageous position. But it doesn't. It puts his opponent behind because he had to commit more to the attack than he got out of it.
Vs Zerg, excessive greed is win/win as long as you don't outright die. You can lose entire bases and still be ahead because it costs him so much more to attack.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
