|
On May 10 2012 22:46 pms wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2012 21:32 FairForever wrote:On May 10 2012 21:06 zefreak wrote:On May 10 2012 21:03 Chunhyang wrote:On May 10 2012 20:52 HolyArrow wrote:On May 10 2012 20:46 Chunhyang wrote:On May 10 2012 20:43 HolyArrow wrote:On May 10 2012 20:42 WhosTheSmuRf wrote:On May 10 2012 20:39 HolyArrow wrote:On May 10 2012 20:36 Noocta wrote:
Squirtle will be harder than Parting imo, but I really hope MVP win.
Mainly because I don't want another protoss winning but mvp getting a 4th championship would be cool aswell. "Another Protoss winning" 2 Protoss wins 5 Zerg wins 6 Terran wins Why do so many things Terran fans say contradict hard numbers? "Protoss dominating in the GSL" -> http://www.gomtv.net/records/index.gom?searchType=3&race=P&vsrace=T&season=2012&leaguetype=20&leagueid=27062&gamever=0&mapid=0"Don't want another Protoss winning" -> Protoss has by far the least GSL wins Blows my mind at how warped perspectives can become. Well said What can I say, I like to back up my arguments with hard facts, unlike many people around here  How does "I don't want another Protoss winning" contradict the fact that they have the least GSL final wins? He never said that Protoss has too many wins, or that they have the most. Maybe he's a hater, but he just doesn't want Protoss to win again. That's all. I'm just sayin. That's a fine point, but that just annoys me by principle. I'm a pretty empathetic person - I can understand that people really get into the game and root massively for a certain player or race. But I also believe that all fans deserve the satisfaction of seeing their favorite race win a fair amount. If the situations were magically reversed and Protoss switched places with Terran in terms of big-picture GSL success, I'd be extremely okay with a Terran champion or two, because it's about time - I'd say it's only fair to the Terran fans to see more Terran winners. But, that's not reality. The reality is that Terran has had the most champions and Protoss has had by far the least, and it just annoys me that despite all this, some people really want to see yet another Terran Code S win. Don't get me wrong - I clearly have no greater moral basis for my stance on this, and people who really want to see another Terran win aren't objectively wrong in any way. It's just my personal philosophy that all fans should see ideally their race win a roughly proportionate amount of times, because everyone deserves to be satisfied as viewers. Ok. But I'm a Celtics fan, I want them to win everything, every game, every time, and I don't care if any other team ever wins another championship and their fans cry in agony. He may like his Terran just like I love my Celtics. Or, like I was saying, he may just be a hater. I'm leaning towards the latter lol. His tone implies it anyway. Anyway, with three races, how many GSL seasons are needed so that there is a statistically significant number so we can objectively say that one race is better than the rest? I remember some guy saying that in an NBA series, it would take a 43 game series so that we can really say with certainty "the better team won". How about if there are three teams/races? Anyone know? Umm.. it would take a large sample even between just two players, let alone a statistical average of players from each race (one player could simply be better and skew the results). By the time the sample size is large enough to draw any meaningful conclusion, the game will be unrecognizable. I hate when balance is brought up, because I think the game is pretty okay. But you could use different methodologies rather than just "GSL Champ" to figure out if one race is better than the others. There are games that matter other than the championship match - in fact the championship match is statistically a TERRIBLE way to determine the best race, even if you had a large enough population. Why? Let's say there's one player who would, hypothetically, beat everyone else, regardless of his skill level. If you use Champions as a way to determine, you would say his race is imbalanced. You really should be using top 16 or top 8 or something, in which case, as each race should theoretically get 1/3 of the representation, you could probably make a sample after 5 or 6 GSLs. That being said, 5 to 6 GSLs is a long time so it wouldn't be very relevant, but it would be better than using only champions/ You are actually NOT RIGHT. If you had a large enough population (e.g. 5-10 years of GSL finals) you SHOULD have the same ammount of races taking the title. PLEASE EDUCATE YOURSELF WITH SC1 HISTORY.
That's not true at all. Two things:
1) Hypothetically, if one player was dominant in SC2 and won year after year as the undisputed best player, his race would be overrepresented as the number of times he took the title. Look at BW, generally accepted as a balanced game. Does Flash dominating every other player make Terran overpowered in BW?
2) The fact is, when you have a random distribution of players, the spread will NOT be perfectly even. It is a general misconception that random means evenly spread. The reality is that true randomness has clusters and streaks. What this means is that given a balanced game, the randomness of which players migrated to which races will probably not give a completely even distribution.
|
Does anyone know what Parting typed after he gged in game 4?
|
On May 10 2012 22:59 pms wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2012 21:32 shadymmj wrote:
i would not say it's imbalance but ludicrous volatility in all parts of the matchup. it's just not very fun watching one army melt completely in about 10 secs after waiting for 15 minutes, or a 1/1/1 all-in. When Browder said terrible terrible damage he was absolutely right for TvP and ZvP.
I think that this is the REAL problem of SC2. But I think it's not only about TvP and ZvP. Also it's about TvZ. And I think there are two main causes of it: 1. Medivacs, which make bio balls extremelly resilient. 2. Collosus, which are meant to kill the bio ball, but themselves they are the backbone of toss death-ball. I think medivacs heal too fast, and collosus are basicaly the worst unit in the game, even though I'm a toss user.
That's some high level analysis right there.
Anyway, really happy Mvp won. I have to admit, I doubted him for the first time. Won't do it again.
|
opterown
Australia54784 Posts
thanks dodgin and juliette for the lr! sad i couldn't watch, but fyeahhhh mvp
|
On May 10 2012 22:52 Aeroplaneoverthesea wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2012 22:46 pms wrote:On May 10 2012 21:32 FairForever wrote:On May 10 2012 21:06 zefreak wrote:On May 10 2012 21:03 Chunhyang wrote:On May 10 2012 20:52 HolyArrow wrote:On May 10 2012 20:46 Chunhyang wrote:On May 10 2012 20:43 HolyArrow wrote:On May 10 2012 20:42 WhosTheSmuRf wrote:Well said What can I say, I like to back up my arguments with hard facts, unlike many people around here How does "I don't want another Protoss winning" contradict the fact that they have the least GSL final wins? He never said that Protoss has too many wins, or that they have the most. Maybe he's a hater, but he just doesn't want Protoss to win again. That's all. I'm just sayin. That's a fine point, but that just annoys me by principle. I'm a pretty empathetic person - I can understand that people really get into the game and root massively for a certain player or race. But I also believe that all fans deserve the satisfaction of seeing their favorite race win a fair amount. If the situations were magically reversed and Protoss switched places with Terran in terms of big-picture GSL success, I'd be extremely okay with a Terran champion or two, because it's about time - I'd say it's only fair to the Terran fans to see more Terran winners. But, that's not reality. The reality is that Terran has had the most champions and Protoss has had by far the least, and it just annoys me that despite all this, some people really want to see yet another Terran Code S win. Don't get me wrong - I clearly have no greater moral basis for my stance on this, and people who really want to see another Terran win aren't objectively wrong in any way. It's just my personal philosophy that all fans should see ideally their race win a roughly proportionate amount of times, because everyone deserves to be satisfied as viewers. Ok. But I'm a Celtics fan, I want them to win everything, every game, every time, and I don't care if any other team ever wins another championship and their fans cry in agony. He may like his Terran just like I love my Celtics. Or, like I was saying, he may just be a hater. I'm leaning towards the latter lol. His tone implies it anyway. Anyway, with three races, how many GSL seasons are needed so that there is a statistically significant number so we can objectively say that one race is better than the rest? I remember some guy saying that in an NBA series, it would take a 43 game series so that we can really say with certainty "the better team won". How about if there are three teams/races? Anyone know? Umm.. it would take a large sample even between just two players, let alone a statistical average of players from each race (one player could simply be better and skew the results). By the time the sample size is large enough to draw any meaningful conclusion, the game will be unrecognizable. I hate when balance is brought up, because I think the game is pretty okay. But you could use different methodologies rather than just "GSL Champ" to figure out if one race is better than the others. There are games that matter other than the championship match - in fact the championship match is statistically a TERRIBLE way to determine the best race, even if you had a large enough population. Why? Let's say there's one player who would, hypothetically, beat everyone else, regardless of his skill level. If you use Champions as a way to determine, you would say his race is imbalanced. You really should be using top 16 or top 8 or something, in which case, as each race should theoretically get 1/3 of the representation, you could probably make a sample after 5 or 6 GSLs. That being said, 5 to 6 GSLs is a long time so it wouldn't be very relevant, but it would be better than using only champions/ You are actually NOT RIGHT. If you had a large enough population (e.g. 5-10 years of GSL finals) you SHOULD have the same ammount of races taking the title. PLEASE EDUCATE YOURSELF WITH SC1 HISTORY. No you shouldn't. What a bizzare opinion. Why would you assume that all three races are played by absolutely equally skilled players and the same number of players?
Ok, look. In SC1 there was no player who dominated the game over the period of 10 years. THERE WAS NO SUCH PLAYER. Instead there were players who dominated for a couple or at most few years, and then they were changed by other players. If the game is really balanced then after several such changes the distributions should be equal. Have a look here:
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/Bonjwa
|
Yey bad for hero, good for the documentation. 
|
I'm still butthurt I went from top 3 LB all season to rank 50 in one day
|
On May 10 2012 23:03 Ocedic wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2012 22:46 pms wrote:On May 10 2012 21:32 FairForever wrote:On May 10 2012 21:06 zefreak wrote:On May 10 2012 21:03 Chunhyang wrote:On May 10 2012 20:52 HolyArrow wrote:On May 10 2012 20:46 Chunhyang wrote:On May 10 2012 20:43 HolyArrow wrote:On May 10 2012 20:42 WhosTheSmuRf wrote:Well said What can I say, I like to back up my arguments with hard facts, unlike many people around here How does "I don't want another Protoss winning" contradict the fact that they have the least GSL final wins? He never said that Protoss has too many wins, or that they have the most. Maybe he's a hater, but he just doesn't want Protoss to win again. That's all. I'm just sayin. That's a fine point, but that just annoys me by principle. I'm a pretty empathetic person - I can understand that people really get into the game and root massively for a certain player or race. But I also believe that all fans deserve the satisfaction of seeing their favorite race win a fair amount. If the situations were magically reversed and Protoss switched places with Terran in terms of big-picture GSL success, I'd be extremely okay with a Terran champion or two, because it's about time - I'd say it's only fair to the Terran fans to see more Terran winners. But, that's not reality. The reality is that Terran has had the most champions and Protoss has had by far the least, and it just annoys me that despite all this, some people really want to see yet another Terran Code S win. Don't get me wrong - I clearly have no greater moral basis for my stance on this, and people who really want to see another Terran win aren't objectively wrong in any way. It's just my personal philosophy that all fans should see ideally their race win a roughly proportionate amount of times, because everyone deserves to be satisfied as viewers. Ok. But I'm a Celtics fan, I want them to win everything, every game, every time, and I don't care if any other team ever wins another championship and their fans cry in agony. He may like his Terran just like I love my Celtics. Or, like I was saying, he may just be a hater. I'm leaning towards the latter lol. His tone implies it anyway. Anyway, with three races, how many GSL seasons are needed so that there is a statistically significant number so we can objectively say that one race is better than the rest? I remember some guy saying that in an NBA series, it would take a 43 game series so that we can really say with certainty "the better team won". How about if there are three teams/races? Anyone know? Umm.. it would take a large sample even between just two players, let alone a statistical average of players from each race (one player could simply be better and skew the results). By the time the sample size is large enough to draw any meaningful conclusion, the game will be unrecognizable. I hate when balance is brought up, because I think the game is pretty okay. But you could use different methodologies rather than just "GSL Champ" to figure out if one race is better than the others. There are games that matter other than the championship match - in fact the championship match is statistically a TERRIBLE way to determine the best race, even if you had a large enough population. Why? Let's say there's one player who would, hypothetically, beat everyone else, regardless of his skill level. If you use Champions as a way to determine, you would say his race is imbalanced. You really should be using top 16 or top 8 or something, in which case, as each race should theoretically get 1/3 of the representation, you could probably make a sample after 5 or 6 GSLs. That being said, 5 to 6 GSLs is a long time so it wouldn't be very relevant, but it would be better than using only champions/ You are actually NOT RIGHT. If you had a large enough population (e.g. 5-10 years of GSL finals) you SHOULD have the same ammount of races taking the title. PLEASE EDUCATE YOURSELF WITH SC1 HISTORY. That's not true at all. Two things: 1) Hypothetically, if one player was dominant in SC2 and won year after year as the undisputed best player, his race would be overrepresented as the number of times he took the title. Look at BW, generally accepted as a balanced game. Does Flash dominating every other player make Terran overpowered in BW? 2) The fact is, when you have a random distribution of players, the spread will NOT be perfectly even. It is a general misconception that random means evenly spread. The reality is that true randomness has clusters and streaks. What this means is that given a balanced game, the randomness of which players migrated to which races will probably not give a completely even distribution.
Well, what I've said is true. It's just a matter of how many observations (how many years of GSL finals you have).
1) I don't know if BW is balance or not, even if the community says it is - it may be not, I just don't know. Some tests should be taken. It may be balanced, but we didn't have period of observation long enough yet (10 years).
2) I totally agree with the first part of your statement. This is EXACTLY why it's so hard to asses if the game is balanced or not. Because of the correlations and streaks you need a long period of observation. But if the period of observation is long enough (maybe not 5-10 years, but more) then the distributions should be COMPLETELY EVEN. Just like in the CENTRAL LIMIT THEOREM.
|
On May 10 2012 23:03 pak150 wrote:
Does anyone know what Parting typed after he gged in game 4?
GG congratz (must have been taking lessons from Stephano)
|
On May 10 2012 11:41 Audemed wrote:
Parting and hero to take this, most definitely. There's no way MVP can take parting down, especially in his regressed state.
Squirtle/Hero is a bit more of a toss up (pun intended), but I have confidence in Hero!
lol @ you.
|
On May 10 2012 20:46 Chunhyang wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2012 20:43 HolyArrow wrote:On May 10 2012 20:42 WhosTheSmuRf wrote:On May 10 2012 20:39 HolyArrow wrote:On May 10 2012 20:36 Noocta wrote:
Squirtle will be harder than Parting imo, but I really hope MVP win.
Mainly because I don't want another protoss winning but mvp getting a 4th championship would be cool aswell. "Another Protoss winning" 2 Protoss wins 5 Zerg wins 6 Terran wins Why do so many things Terran fans say contradict hard numbers? "Protoss dominating in the GSL" -> http://www.gomtv.net/records/index.gom?searchType=3&race=P&vsrace=T&season=2012&leaguetype=20&leagueid=27062&gamever=0&mapid=0"Don't want another Protoss winning" -> Protoss has by far the least GSL wins Blows my mind at how warped perspectives can become. Well said What can I say, I like to back up my arguments with hard facts, unlike many people around here How does "I don't want another Protoss winning" contradict the fact that they have the least GSL final wins? He never said that Protoss has too many wins, or that they have the most. Maybe he's a hater, but he just doesn't want Protoss to win again. That's all. I'm just sayin.
"Another protoss winning." It's pretty clear to me he means there are too many. I think you should well understand what HolyArrow is trying to say if you're clever enough. And I think it's pretty much the way people supporting protoss or the ones who just want some equality/balance in this game think.
It's just looking indecent for us when u guys are telling us that they are fed up of seeing so many protoss, when we had to endure this for so many seasons while the terran race has never ever experienced this situation. Try to imagine how it is disgusting to hear that.
You said you're a Celtic supporter so it's not a good example but imagine your team was actually the Rockets in 1995, when they manage to become champion a second time in their history, their first time being 1994. Then some Lakers or Celtics fans say "oh no, not the Rockets again !". It's just indecent to say that, especially if your team has been dominating that much.
|
On May 10 2012 23:33 samurai80 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2012 20:46 Chunhyang wrote:On May 10 2012 20:43 HolyArrow wrote:On May 10 2012 20:42 WhosTheSmuRf wrote:On May 10 2012 20:39 HolyArrow wrote:On May 10 2012 20:36 Noocta wrote:
Squirtle will be harder than Parting imo, but I really hope MVP win.
Mainly because I don't want another protoss winning but mvp getting a 4th championship would be cool aswell. "Another Protoss winning" 2 Protoss wins 5 Zerg wins 6 Terran wins Why do so many things Terran fans say contradict hard numbers? "Protoss dominating in the GSL" -> http://www.gomtv.net/records/index.gom?searchType=3&race=P&vsrace=T&season=2012&leaguetype=20&leagueid=27062&gamever=0&mapid=0"Don't want another Protoss winning" -> Protoss has by far the least GSL wins Blows my mind at how warped perspectives can become. Well said What can I say, I like to back up my arguments with hard facts, unlike many people around here How does "I don't want another Protoss winning" contradict the fact that they have the least GSL final wins? He never said that Protoss has too many wins, or that they have the most. Maybe he's a hater, but he just doesn't want Protoss to win again. That's all. I'm just sayin. "Another protoss winning." It's pretty clear to me he means there are too many. I think you should well understand what HolyArrow is trying to say if you're clever enough. And I think it's pretty much the way people supporting protoss or the ones who just want some equality/balance in this game think. It's just looking indecent for us when u guys are telling us that they are fed up of seeing so many protoss, when we had to endure this for so many seasons while the terran race has never ever experienced this situation. Try to imagine how it is disgusting to hear that. You said you're a Celtic supporter so it's not a good example but imagine your team was actually the Rockets in 1995, when they manage to become champion a second time in their history, their first time being 1994. Then some Lakers or Celtics fans say "oh no, not the Rockets again !". It's just indecent to say that, especially if your team has been dominating that much.
Well If I said I don't want a random player to win, does that automatically mean that too many random players have won the GSL?
|
For people using statistics to argue that given a long length of time, the number of titles for each race should be close to equal have made a bad assumption. Their argument only works If 1 event (gsl) has no bearing on the 2nd and subsequent events. Such as flipping coins, rolling dice. Sports (e-sports) does not really work this way. How many players in Korea choose Terran because their idols were Boxer, Nada, etc? How play teens in France are playing Zerg now because of Stephano.
This also explains foreigner vs Koreans. One of the big reasons why Koreans got so good at sc1 was because of pc bangs and fast Internet. But in sc2, most other countries should have access to PC and Internet at home. So why are Koreans still winning so much more, it is because the infrastructure and talent pool is much bigger. You see this in women's golf, basketball as well. Once one pioneer/idol breaksthrough, 5-10 years later, that nation becomes more dominate.
|
mvp's still got it, it seems. now i'll watch the finals.
|
wow to beat parting 3-1 mvp must have been in shape.
|
On May 10 2012 20:52 HolyArrow wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2012 20:46 Chunhyang wrote:On May 10 2012 20:43 HolyArrow wrote:On May 10 2012 20:42 WhosTheSmuRf wrote:On May 10 2012 20:39 HolyArrow wrote:On May 10 2012 20:36 Noocta wrote:
Squirtle will be harder than Parting imo, but I really hope MVP win.
Mainly because I don't want another protoss winning but mvp getting a 4th championship would be cool aswell. "Another Protoss winning" 2 Protoss wins 5 Zerg wins 6 Terran wins Why do so many things Terran fans say contradict hard numbers? "Protoss dominating in the GSL" -> http://www.gomtv.net/records/index.gom?searchType=3&race=P&vsrace=T&season=2012&leaguetype=20&leagueid=27062&gamever=0&mapid=0"Don't want another Protoss winning" -> Protoss has by far the least GSL wins Blows my mind at how warped perspectives can become. Well said What can I say, I like to back up my arguments with hard facts, unlike many people around here How does "I don't want another Protoss winning" contradict the fact that they have the least GSL final wins? He never said that Protoss has too many wins, or that they have the most. Maybe he's a hater, but he just doesn't want Protoss to win again. That's all. I'm just sayin. That's a fine point, but that just annoys me by principle. I'm a pretty empathetic person - I can understand that people really get into the game and root massively for a certain player or race. But I also believe that all fans deserve the satisfaction of seeing their favorite race win a fair amount. If the situations were magically reversed and Protoss switched places with Terran in terms of big-picture GSL success, I'd be extremely okay with a Terran champion or two, because it's about time - I'd say it's only fair to the Terran fans to see more Terran winners. But, that's not reality. The reality is that Terran has had the most champions and Protoss has had by far the least, and it just annoys me that despite all this, some people really want to see yet another Terran Code S win. Don't get me wrong - I clearly have no greater moral basis for my stance on this, and people who really want to see another Terran win aren't objectively wrong in any way. It's just my personal philosophy that all fans should see ideally their race win a roughly proportionate amount of times, because everyone deserves to be satisfied as viewers.
This !
I was about to write quite the same post. A very wise opinion that those terran fanboys should meditate a bit imo. And I would add for them : have the decency to accept your race has had better results in GSL than the others. Many of you are so lame about their hate towards protoss. It's just pathetic. So now let's enjoy the finals, and if somehow Wartortle manages to win this, we don't ask you to cheer him up but let his fans do and don't say you're fed up seeing protoss dominating or it would be just too much to hear.
|
On May 10 2012 23:15 pms wrote:
Well, what I've said is true. It's just a matter of how many observations (how many years of GSL finals you have).
1) I don't know if BW is balance or not, even if the community says it is - it may be not, I just don't know. Some tests should be taken. It may be balanced, but we didn't have period of observation long enough yet (10 years).
2) I totally agree with the first part of your statement. This is EXACTLY why it's so hard to asses if the game is balanced or not. Because of the correlations and streaks you need a long period of observation. But if the period of observation is long enough (maybe not 5-10 years, but more) then the distributions should be COMPLETELY EVEN. Just like in the CENTRAL LIMIT THEOREM.
You can randomly throw mathematical concepts like that but that doesn't make you right actually. The Central Limit Theorem as mentionned in its name is the limit of a probability law, so you have to look at a sample way higher than 10 years of playing and something like 20 OSL (I don't know exactly how many) but rather something in a complete different scale.
But more than that, it only means an even repartition if you're considering an exact 50% (well I guess 1/3 for every race if we take SC2 as an exemple) success experiment, and we all know that it is completely utopic to expect this success from a game as complex as SC2. It is just not achievable. Moreover, as the game evolves, the balance changes and not in an even way, so you would have to start taking your results at a moment where the game is perfectly balanced and during a really long period of time during which it is not patched at all. Everytime you patch the game, it resets your datas.
"Another protoss winning." It's pretty clear to me he means there are too many. I think you should well understand what HolyArrow is trying to say if you're clever enough. And I think it's pretty much the way people supporting protoss or the ones who just want some equality/balance in this game think.
It's just looking indecent for us when u guys are telling us that they are fed up of seeing so many protoss, when we had to endure this for so many seasons while the terran race has never ever experienced this situation. Try to imagine how it is disgusting to hear that.
You said you're a Celtic supporter so it's not a good example but imagine your team was actually the Rockets in 1995, when they manage to become champion a second time in their history, their first time being 1994. Then some Lakers or Celtics fans say "oh no, not the Rockets again !". It's just indecent to say that, especially if your team has been dominating that much.
Or it could simply be that he is a fan of MC and doesn't want any other protoss to take his place, don't you think?
|
While Squirtle has truly been kicking ass recently... Mvp 3-1ing Parting makes me think that we're going to have another Terran victory. At least it's Mvp, but still.
Come on Blastoise!!!
|
On May 10 2012 20:24 DoNotDisturb wrote:Show nested quote +On May 10 2012 20:23 Zzoram wrote:On May 10 2012 20:21 JesusOurSaviour wrote:
What on earth do they feed the Protosses in the Startale house!???????????!!!!!!!!!! Rare Candy can't be, rare candy gives terrible stat boosts
incorrect. You need to learn a lot more about EV training if you actually think that.
|
On May 10 2012 23:40 vthree wrote:
For people using statistics to argue that given a long length of time, the number of titles for each race should be close to equal have made a bad assumption. Their argument only works If 1 event (gsl) has no bearing on the 2nd and subsequent events. Such as flipping coins, rolling dice. Sports (e-sports) does not really work this way. How many players in Korea choose Terran because their idols were Boxer, Nada, etc? How play teens in France are playing Zerg now because of Stephano.
This also explains foreigner vs Koreans. One of the big reasons why Koreans got so good at sc1 was because of pc bangs and fast Internet. But in sc2, most other countries should have access to PC and Internet at home. So why are Koreans still winning so much more, it is because the infrastructure and talent pool is much bigger. You see this in women's golf, basketball as well. Once one pioneer/idol breaksthrough, 5-10 years later, that nation becomes more dominate.
Afaic, I'm not actually saying that because champions are mostly terrans, then the terran race is OP. I'm not actually whining about balance. I'm whining about those terran fans being BM/unfair/liars when they say protoss are dominating or terrans have not been dominating etc... They should stop being that much BM and also check Liquipedia to refresh their memory about who's been winning in GSL for so long :
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/GOMTV
Then they should be able to accept that a protoss win this time (which may actually not even be the case as Mvp seems to be in great shape again).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
