| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
floor exercise
Canada5847 Posts
On August 10 2010 04:00 {88}iNcontroL wrote: AAH OK guys, close thread. Someone has arbitrarily demanded statistical analysis before any or all discussion can occur. That's it, wrap it up. We had a good run while it lasted | ||
|
Amber[LighT]
United States5078 Posts
On August 10 2010 04:03 kajeus wrote: I'm not telling you not to have an opinion; I'm asking you what proof you have of the underlying problem. Lol do you know who you're talking to? It's the ultralisk himself dude | ||
|
Saracen
United States5139 Posts
On August 10 2010 04:05 Amber[LighT] wrote: Lol do you know who you're talking to? It's the T_T | ||
|
HubertFelix
France631 Posts
On August 10 2010 04:00 junemermaid wrote: Can people seriously stop saying this? Scanning doesn't cost minerals. That's like saying chrono-boosting on things other than your nexus costs you minerals. So true.. Omg my zerglings cost more than 50 minerals  | ||
|
kajeus
United States679 Posts
On August 10 2010 04:05 Amber[LighT] wrote: Lol do you know who you're talking to? It's the ultralisk himself dude I know who iNcontroL is. That only makes it worse that this "consensus" among English-speaking zergs is completely devoid of statistical proof. | ||
|
Kigari
Bahrain134 Posts
The upside ? You can't hide. With 2 bases it's literally like a maphack. Yeah sure you'll skip racking minerals faster than you can spend them but what does it matter when you can constantly see and adapt to the opponents strategy ? Some players go flippin' nuts when you scan them repeatedly and start screaming about imba and QQ and OP scan and "pr0s use mules not scan". :D | ||
|
Shade692003
Canada702 Posts
On August 10 2010 04:00 {88}iNcontroL wrote: AAH OK guys, close thread. Someone has arbitrarily demanded statistical analysis before any or all discussion can occur. He's right. It's the same logic as the 8+ replays thing in the rules. Back up your shit. The new fad now is how Terran is broken, but I have yet seen any proof of it. Someone show us that TvZ is 51%+ in T favor. | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On August 10 2010 02:55 Stratos_speAr wrote: No, you can't, because they work completely differently. In one sense, they are better, because they move/double up as dropships/etc. On the other hand, they're significantly worse, because this left them open to incredibly easy harassment. lol, that doesn't make them worse in any way. *sit them in your base* = they are the same *send them out ONLY IF they will be safe* = they are slightly better because u fuck up and let them die doesn't make them worse in any way. if i went and built a pylon in your base and you scout it and kill it who's fault is that? | ||
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
On August 10 2010 04:13 Shade692003 wrote: He's right. It's the same logic as the 8+ replays thing in the rules. Back up your shit. The new fad now is how Terran is broken, but I have yet seen any proof of it. Someone show us that TvZ is 51%+ in T favor. It's a thread about suggesting balance changes for a specific mu and I made a post on the ~50th page... why the fuck should I provide statistical analysis when I am contributing to the greater topic at hand? Every post in a thread doesn't need statistical analysis. That is not at all the same as saying "what did I do wrong?" without a replay. Doesn't compare. On August 10 2010 04:04 Saracen wrote: They had that for marauder shells, but reverted it... (I think they changed it in patch 12 and lowered the cost and research time in patch 13). I agree with your Thor upgrade thing. But if that happens, then turrets will need to be nerfed as well, or else changing Thor AA like that won't achieve what you want it to. I disagree. As it stands they have THORS and TURRETS.. I am not saying fix everything across the board because that would be in danger of making muta TOO strong I am just saying don't give them the utility of the thor at such a discount.. it isn't like after muta the thor is useless... it just so happens to be fucking amazing at everything for the base cost. | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On August 10 2010 04:14 travis wrote: lol, that doesn't make them worse in any way. *sit them in your base* = they are the same *send them out ONLY IF they will be safe* = they are slightly better because u fuck up and let them die doesn't make them worse in any way. if i went and built a pylon in your base and you scout it and kill it who's fault is that? Is there a Corsair/Valkyrie like unit that can run around the map at high speed and take out Pylons/Depots with an AoE attack? Does part of your scouting capability depend on the unit that gives you supply? These are downsides. | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On August 10 2010 04:35 Stratos_speAr wrote: Is there a Corsair/Valkyrie like unit that can run around the map at high speed and take out Pylons/Depots with an AoE attack? Does part of your scouting capability depend on the unit that gives you supply? These are downsides. Well we are talking about sc2 which doesn't have air to air units with aoe attacks but I do understand your point. However I don't think it is a good one since there are options to harrass pylons or supplies just like there are options to harrass overlords. And any of those can be protected in similar ways. To reiterate: no one makes you send your overlords away from the protection of your base. | ||
|
PanzerDragoon
United States822 Posts
On August 10 2010 04:35 Stratos_speAr wrote: Is there a Corsair/Valkyrie like unit that can run around the map at high speed and take out Pylons/Depots with an AoE attack? Does part of your scouting capability depend on the unit that gives you supply? These are downsides. stray pylons/depots are incredibly vulnerable to banshees or immortal drops | ||
|
Shade692003
Canada702 Posts
On August 10 2010 04:30 {88}iNcontroL wrote: It's a thread about suggesting balance changes for a specific mu and I made a post on the ~50th page... why the fuck should I provide statistical analysis when I am contributing to the greater topic at hand? Every post in a thread doesn't need statistical analysis. That is not at all the same as saying "what did I do wrong?" without a replay. Doesn't compare. I disagree. As it stands they have THORS and TURRETS.. I am not saying fix everything across the board because that would be in danger of making muta TOO strong I am just saying don't give them the utility of the thor at such a discount.. it isn't like after muta the thor is useless... it just so happens to be fucking amazing at everything for the base cost. Like the guy said, there isn't any actual proof there is an imbalance. To suggest balance changes to a specific mu, it would be a good idea to actually know if there is an imbalance first, no? Imo, it's just a recent fad that will die out eventually over time. True the zerg plays alot more defensively and makes decisions in reaction of the T player, zerg players certainly don't set the pace of the match in this mu. (like HDstarcraft explained more in detail in one of his video). In my opinion zerg players are just not used to such a playstyle, and thinks therefore there is an imbalance. But to say that Terran is OP and that it wins more often, I find it hard to believe without any statistical proof. | ||
|
Snowbear
Korea (South)1925 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On August 10 2010 05:05 Dente wrote: Do people actually realize that banelings destroy marines aka the only anti-air you can make when you have that thor nerf? You can't micro vs banelings with speed, how many times do people have to repeat that? vikings? turrets? bunkers for your marines? and from what i read most people said not to get rid of thor anti air altogether. | ||
|
Toxigen
United States390 Posts
If Zergs are beating Terrans at high level, it doesn't prove that ZvT is balanced. The other variable is player skill. This means one of two things must be true: 1. Player skill is equal, so if Zerg is winning close to 50%, the races are balanced. 2. Player skill is unequal, so if Zerg is winning close to 50%, the races are imbalanced. He's also saying that he knows for a fact that Terran players, largely, are often newer to the game compared to Protoss and Zerg players in Korea. His proof stems from his knowledge and experience of those players both in SC1 and SC2. Also, these players were no-names previous to phase 2 (i.e., before mech buffs and roach/infestor nerfs). These new, no-name, and (in some cases) non-professionals are defeating professional Zergs in tournaments. For #1 above to be true, the following must also be true: These Terrans are just as skilled as professionals without the practice, knowledge and coaching that those professionals have (i.e., they're simply way more talented than those Zerg & Protoss players). Furthermore, despite playing in phase 1, their skill and talent with the race didn't kick-in until phase 2 and release. The question becomes: does this sound plausible to you? | ||
|
4Servy
Netherlands1542 Posts
There is no more objective way than to look at the top level stats and see the win percentages of the races and the number of players. Leauge wins/tournament wins can be given to the individual skill of a player but overall balance cannot. | ||
|
Snowbear
Korea (South)1925 Posts
| ||
|
kajeus
United States679 Posts
On August 10 2010 05:17 Toxigen wrote: To all those disagreeing with IdrA out there, I'd like you to address his argument for a second: If Zergs are beating Terrans at high level, it doesn't prove that ZvT is balanced. The other variable is player skill. This means one of two things must be true: 1. Player skill is equal, so if Zerg is winning close to 50%, the races are balanced. 2. Player skill is unequal, so if Zerg is winning close to 50%, the races are imbalanced. He's also saying that he knows for a fact that Terran players, largely, are often newer to the game compared to Protoss and Zerg players in Korea. His proof stems from his knowledge and experience of those players both in SC1 and SC2. Also, these players were no-names previous to phase 2 (i.e., before mech buffs and roach/infestor nerfs). These new, no-name, and (in some cases) non-professionals are defeating professional Zergs in tournaments. For #1 above to be true, the following must also be true: These Terrans are just as skilled as professionals without the practice, knowledge and coaching that those professionals have (i.e., they're simply way more talented than those Zerg & Protoss players). Furthermore, despite playing in phase 1, their skill and talent with the race didn't kick-in until phase 2 and release. The question becomes: does this sound plausible to you? I analyzed racial skill levels in this post: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=141732¤tpage=15#283 . Feel free to respond in either this thread or that one. | ||
|
AmstAff
Germany949 Posts
I dunno whats the problem, I mean right now you all (including me) suck in this game. so maybe you should first learn this game until perfection and if it will be broken at that point (and to reach this point it will need more than some weeks), then you can complain. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 Dota 2 Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
RSL Revival
Solar vs Rogue
Maru vs NightMare
Sparkling Tuna Cup
IPSL
Bonyth vs Hawk
GSL
Replay Cast
WardiTV Weekly
The PondCast
Replay Cast
CrankTV Team League
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
