EPTI've only managed to get in about 50 games in the last week and a half, and thats with sacrificing sleep. Damn college kids aren't busy enough.
Complete ladder data by race - Page 6
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
junemermaid
United States981 Posts
I've only managed to get in about 50 games in the last week and a half, and thats with sacrificing sleep. Damn college kids aren't busy enough. | ||
|
gillon
Sweden1578 Posts
On July 20 2010 00:14 nam nam wrote: So call it unbalanced instead of op then. Maybe it's true that at the very highest level terran isn't op, but that just means that for 99 % of players it is. In that case the solution wouldn't be to simply nerf terrans but to change all the races to create a more even matchup through all levels. (or at least at diamon/platinum level) Making a game really balanced at one level is really hard. Making a game really balanced through all levels of play is near impossible. | ||
|
Apolo
Portugal1259 Posts
On July 20 2010 00:23 gillon wrote: Making a game really balanced at one level is really hard. Making a game really balanced through all levels of play is near impossible. That's true, but it's blizzard's job to find that possibility and apply it. | ||
|
Konsume
Canada466 Posts
On July 19 2010 23:46 gillon wrote: While trying to provide arguments to your case, please try to remain factual and not exaggerate so much - basically all of this post reeks of 'I just lost OMG'. I'm sorry but I've just re-read my post and I don't know what you're talking about. My post isn't saying "omg I lost to terrans Q.Q", i'm saying that after yesterday's (well to be honest it was in 1.5 days since I went to bed inbetween) ~50 games (which were mysteriously around 60-65% vs terran since there is alot of terrans at my current level) I just msg all players and talked with em a good 5-10mins and some of them actualy agreed to watch the replay with me and find what went wrong. Supprisingly most terrans I faced, were either zergs or protoss rerolled... and all admitted that they switched to terran cause they taught they were good, perhaps too good and started to learn them.... so far whats wrong with that? Than I get to say that terran has too much possibility (which is the case) and that their units are way to specialised making them kinda hard to counter, or actualy do damage to even by using any types of mobility advantage. I than proceed to say that terran is an easier race (which many players agree) and that is not a fact but rather my opinion on that matter and backing my opinion by giving an example of what happened vs a gold level terran and finaly stating that I'm having an easier time to deal with terran as protoss... impling that MAYBE, just MAYBE (as I stated that i'm not qualified to make balance changes) that zergs are the one that is UP and not necessairely terran bing OP altho I'm stil having trouble as protoss to deal with terran... so againt MAYBE, terrans would just need a small nerf and zerg get a buff. That being said... I found that using ultras-infestors-speedlings was the way to go against a mech. The problem to this strat is to be able to get ultras BEFORE the terran push while sustaining SEVERAL hellions/cheese attacks that resets your drone count... which is easier said than done. I've beaten my share of terrans yesterday and some were suprised by how fast I could tech to ultras, but still I watched the replay with 2 of the terrans I've beat and we saw their flaws and could have EASILY countered my fast ultras if they pushed just a tad earlier. I have my opinions on the TvZ and T's overall. I'm not saying that my opinion are shared by you or even by the majority (eventho I feel it's the case), but I'm certainly not crying out loud that I'm loosing games vs terrans. To be 100% honest with you.... I'm trying to find a way to win NOW so that when terrans will get the nerf or zergs gets the buff it will only be easier for me! hope it was more clear !  | ||
|
kajeus
United States679 Posts
Moreover, the OP's failure to provide specific data for randoms is disappointing and unhelpful. Let's assume there aren't any randoms at all -- there aren't any in the US top 20, after all. Then it's 13 z, 23 p, and 24 t. Not a big deal, and hardly reason to freak out. | ||
|
Macavity
United States83 Posts
Blizzard is trying to push this issue under the rug since they must deal with the launch of the game. But they are well aware of it. Let me point out that it is not so much about balance, it is that playing against Terran (especially as Zerg) is not fun. We play video games for fun. Losing to greater skilled opponents is actually fun. But there is no joy for many Zerg players going against Terran mech. On July 19 2010 23:25 Kiburn wrote: I wish people would stop crying about Terran imbalance, and do something about it...like figure out a way to beat it? I sometimes feel like these forums are infested with 12-year-olds that know only how to complain and not how to handle what seems like a overwhelming opponent. Stop crying and practice to beat it! As I said above, it goes beyond balance as battling a mech heavy Terran is just not fun. If the game is consistently not fun, then the game is broken. Period. I'm a Zerg player, and I'm thinking of just playing a different race when SC2 comes out if nothing changes. I know level one diamond players who have the same frustration with Terran. During Phase I, we saw many imbalance fixes and, looking back, they were all justified. Remember the Void Ray nerf? Void Rays are still highly used, so it is clear the range was too long. Remember the planetcracker ability on the mothership? Where were you in telling people to 'stop crying and practice to beat it'? What most disturbs me is people telling high level Zerg players, who share this frustration with Terran mech, that they do not know to play their own race. It is a worrisome trend that points that many people would rather cradle their own ego (that some of their wins are undeserved) rather than make Starcraft 2 enjoyable and fun for players for all three races. | ||
|
kajeus
United States679 Posts
On July 20 2010 01:36 Macavity wrote: Bnet 2.0 automatically pairs players with lower skill so every player has around a 50% win and loss ratio. Anyone citing around 50% win/loss ratio for most players as 'proof' of balance isn't aware of how Bnet 2 works. Blizzard is trying to push this issue under the rug since they must deal with the launch of the game. But they are well aware of it. Let me point out that it is not so much about balance, it is that playing against Terran (especially as Zerg) is not fun. We play video games for fun. Losing to greater skilled opponents is actually fun. But there is no joy for many Zerg players going against Terran mech. During Phase I, we saw many imbalance fixes and, looking back, they were all justified. Remember the Void Ray nerf? Void Rays are still highly used, so it is clear the range was too long. Remember the planetcracker ability on the mothership? Where were you in telling people to 'stop crying and practice to beat it'? Hahaha, and many WERE NOT addressed and ironed themselves out over time. Marauders used to be the OP unit, and in the mid- to late-game, everything (esp protoss gateway units) lost to marauders. Then people figured out how to spam FF and use chargelots with a few immortals, and it was good. See? More importantly, Dustin Browder has said that TvZ is 50/50 at the top of diamond league. Your argument needs to be that there are simply no Z's in the top 20. But there are! Across all servers, in the global top 60, there are 13 Z's, 23 P's, and 24 T's, after NINE days of a closed beta. OK, so now the question is -- how many people TOTAL are playing zerg, protoss, and terran? And if you don't know the answer to that, you have no statistical case. | ||
|
FlamingTurd
United States1059 Posts
On July 19 2010 14:23 DarkwindHK wrote: Those bugs are just ugly.... most people do not like to use ugly race. (especially new players!) I expect the ratio to be even more extreme in the first month of the release. That's funny, because that's exactly why I picked them :-D Because they r so dang ugly haha. Although after seeing how easy it is to win with each race I've decided to play Terran since they seem to be so much better with mech than Z. | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On July 20 2010 01:42 kajeus wrote: Hahaha, and many WERE NOT addressed and ironed themselves out over time. Marauders used to be the OP unit, and in the mid- to late-game, everything (esp protoss gateway units) lost to marauders. Then people figured out how to spam FF and use chargelots with a few immortals, and it was good. See? More importantly, Dustin Browder has said that TvZ is 50/50 at the top of diamond league. Your argument needs to be that there are simply no Z's in the top 20. But there are! Across all servers, in the global top 60, there are 13 Z's, 23 P's, and 24 T's, after NINE days of a closed beta. OK, so now the question is -- how many people TOTAL are playing zerg, protoss, and terran? And if you don't know the answer to that, you have no statistical case. Although we must note that the early game affected the lategame - with early game concussive shells Terran could expand incredibly early where they cannot anymore. | ||
|
kajeus
United States679 Posts
On July 20 2010 01:59 FabledIntegral wrote: Although we must note that the early game affected the lategame - with early game concussive shells Terran could expand incredibly early where they cannot anymore. No, people were saying you could not beat a marauder ball mid- and late-game. Early concussive shells were only relevant for the first few minutes, and that has nothing to do with the complaining that I'm talking about. | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On July 20 2010 02:02 kajeus wrote: No, people were saying you could not beat a marauder ball mid- and late-game. Early concussive shells were only relevant for the first few minutes, and that has nothing to do with the complaining that I'm talking about. Well the point I'm making is that if you're able to expand much sooner and safely, especially as Terran, then you're mid-lategame army is going to be that much stronger. For example, imagine in BW if Mutalisks from 2 hatch muta now come out at 3 hatch muta timing. Timings were different, which could have led to people claiming mutalisks in BW aren't very strong at all, etc. and would be too easy to counter. Thus by expanding so fast Terran might have been able to accumulate a Marauder ball much faster, while at the same time teching stim sooner because of lack of need to get concussive, etc. I don't believe very lategame people thought this as a major issue due to colossus and forcefields. | ||
|
kajeus
United States679 Posts
On July 20 2010 02:16 FabledIntegral wrote: Well the point I'm making is that if you're able to expand much sooner and safely, especially as Terran, then you're mid-lategame army is going to be that much stronger. For example, imagine in BW if Mutalisks from 2 hatch muta now come out at 3 hatch muta timing. Timings were different, which could have led to people claiming mutalisks in BW aren't very strong at all, etc. and would be too easy to counter. Thus by expanding so fast Terran might have been able to accumulate a Marauder ball much faster, while at the same time teching stim sooner because of lack of need to get concussive, etc. I don't believe very lategame people thought this as a major issue due to colossus and forcefields. That's a very elaborate theory, but I dunno how that pans out. I think the innovation of forcefield+zealot was key, but there's no way to test that. | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On July 20 2010 02:18 kajeus wrote: That's a very elaborate theory, but I dunno how that pans out. I think the innovation of forcefield+zealot was key, but there's no way to test that. Not very elaborate at all... very simple concept. Early game is slightly stronger --> compounding effects into the middle/late game. Imagine Zerg could have a queen SPAWN with every hatchery they build - FEing as Zerg would be MUCH more easy (and more prevalent) and it would allow Zerg to mass up to a much stronger mid-lategame, while not having *significant* effects in the mid-late game. Obviously a much more extreme example, but same concept as "early game affects midgame affects lategame potential." Not saying this IS what happened with Marauders, I'm just saying don't discount how easy Terran used to be able to expand at that point. | ||
|
Disp
United States59 Posts
I think if they lower the build time and gas cost of the hive so ultras and brood lords can be more in line with every other tier 3 unit, the matchup would be a lot more reasonable. Zerg are just stuck on tier 2 units for far too long and that creates an easy matchup for T/P to strategize against. Lings, mutas, roaches, hydras are very straight-forward units, with infestors being the only potential curve ball. | ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
Don't question the logic! Just make the change! EDIT: On a more serious note, I wouldn't mind seeing corruption have some sort of similar ability, in the sense that corrupt causes enemy units to "malfunction" / "become corrupted" and all abilities are researched tech becomes disabled on that target.... including Siege Tank ability to Siege, Thor ability to cannon strike, Templar Storm (keeps feedback), all Zerg units unburrow/can't reburrow, Infestor loses NP, BC's lose Yamato, Ravens lose HSM, Banshees/Ghost uncloack, (void rays become corrupt and can't charge?!?!), hellions lose pre-ignitor, Marauders lose concussive/stim, marines lose shield/stim, etc.! Would be a 200/200 research on the Greater Spire and cost 125 energy. Could also have that all units cast on also start losing energy instead of gaining it (same rate though, not rapid loss). Maybe lasts for 30 seconds? | ||
|
kajeus
United States679 Posts
| ||
|
Konsume
Canada466 Posts
You know when a game is balanced when the QQ comes equality from each races regarding each races Currently Zerg and Protoss QQ's toward Terran I'd say there is something wrong Also I will say that when asked... players said that T>Z, Z=P, T>=P Source: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=136010 Altho I agree that these pools are biased, having such a huge difference makes it kinda true. oh and On July 20 2010 01:42 kajeus wrote: More importantly, Dustin Browder has said that TvZ is 50/50 at the top of diamond league. Your argument needs to be that there are simply no Z's in the top 20. But there are! Across all servers, in the global top 60, there are 13 Z's, 23 P's, and 24 T's, after NINE days of a closed beta. OK, so now the question is -- how many people TOTAL are playing zerg, protoss, and terran? And if you don't know the answer to that, you have no statistical case. I'd say that if you want to quote Dustin Browder do it in it's FULL state... not just what you like about this chat. At several points in the chat Dustin clearly sees that there is SOMETHING WRONG but just can't put his finger on it. When he stated that the numbers showed 50/50 he still stated that he felt like SOMETHING WAS WRONG but that he had to keep watching things since they don't know where to start. Here is a few examples: Guest-306: Are you planning any changes around Terran Air and Mech units to make their roles more defined or specialized? DustinB:: I'm not sure I understand the question. Terran mech and air are insanely specialized. In fact most players claim they are TOO specialized. Thors trash Mutas, Vikings wreck Battlecruisers, etc. I think if anything we may need to consider making terran mech a little bit more muddy and less dangerous on a counter-by-counter basis. Hellions for example are truly terrifying in many circumstances. Guest-89: Many top players feel that TvZ is difficult for Zerg, mostly because of Siege Tanks. The concensus is that the problem lies in their "smart-targeting" A.I. Do you have any plans for this matchup? DustinB:: Yeah, I have the same feeling. But the numbers don't support that. ZvT is almost 50/50 win/loss right now. We are studying the issue and trying to figure out if we should make a move and what that move should be. Also the Siege Tanks do not smart target. It's just the way the code works. To help with perfomance, units do not fire all at once. There is a tiny offset between different units firing their weapons. From the users perspective it is almost simultaenous, but the shots are actually 1/8-1/16th of a second apart. Since units cannot target units that are already dead and since Siege Tanks hit their targets instantly, this creates the situation you are describing, where Siege Tanks waste fewer shots. just saying | ||
|
Dance.jhu
United States292 Posts
Bio- Easy enough to hold off with some lings and banelings. Mech- Need roaches for the fast hellion/marine harass; also need some spinecrawlers Air- Need to tech to fast lair, and either get out some hydras or spire tech. The problem? Too many options for Terran, not enough for Zerg in the Early-Mid Game. Maybe I am not scouting enough, but it's tough to know what the Terran is going. If I go roaches, and he goes heavy marrauder bio build, I am pretty much screwed. Now I don't want to say the MU is imbalanced or anything, just because I'm only like 350 Diamond, but I think it's just tougher for Zerg. The only way for Zerg to be the agressor, is with all ins like baneling bust or 1 base roach rush. Each of the terran tech has units to deal with any problem. Marrauder for roaches, marines for lings/Hellion and Seige for light ground Thor for air and armored. It feels overwhelming to the Zerg player. Let me know if you disagree. | ||
|
kajeus
United States679 Posts
"The masses" are wrong about a lot. | ||
|
Konsume
Canada466 Posts
On July 20 2010 02:50 kajeus wrote: Re: Dustin Browder. I'm not sure what your point is. He says it's even, so although he feels like something is wrong, it doesn't appear to be wrong statistically. Sounds like most people should take a cue from him and be scientific about this -- numbers over "gut". "The masses" are wrong about a lot. or that DustinB::I think if anything we may need to consider making terran mech a little bit more muddy and less dangerous on a counter-by-counter basis. | ||
| ||
