EPTAnyways, I feel like Jeff had to go through the adapting and adjusting as all these guys are getting thrown more and more into the public eye as esports grows with the select incident. I believe--correct me if I'm wrong, jeff--that during that first few SOTGs or whatever Jeff was still in the mindset of hanging out with some of his friends and just stated how select was just doing some same builds and was probably bad or whatever. The blowback probably caught him off guard because he wasn't yet in the professional representative of the community mode yet and he would probably not say the same sort of thing today.
Official State of the Game Podcast Thread - Page 1006
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
epik640x
United States1134 Posts
Anyways, I feel like Jeff had to go through the adapting and adjusting as all these guys are getting thrown more and more into the public eye as esports grows with the select incident. I believe--correct me if I'm wrong, jeff--that during that first few SOTGs or whatever Jeff was still in the mindset of hanging out with some of his friends and just stated how select was just doing some same builds and was probably bad or whatever. The blowback probably caught him off guard because he wasn't yet in the professional representative of the community mode yet and he would probably not say the same sort of thing today. | ||
|
Maetl
United States93 Posts
On May 06 2011 06:23 MrCon wrote: Poor Nestea is like idra who's life's so hard that he just won a 5k tourney, with his GSL title and his royal road to a 2nd title with only weak opposition left. Sorry, I'm sarcastic but hearing that after 100000$ of winnings makes me angry. Perhaps he thinks protoss and terrans have it easy, when MC and MVP are whining about their race too, I tend to take no complain seriously. Nestea had one rough GSL, MKP, MC too, MVP even went to code A. Perhaps his training sessions are hard, but at least result wise, and that goes for idra too, I don't see any reason for complaining. The nature of having to guess and play odds means that you will have streaks. Do we want that to be a significant part of a strategy game, though? | ||
|
MonsieurGrimm
Canada2441 Posts
On May 06 2011 06:26 Galek wrote: So the problem may be in crawlers rather than in overlords. Well, one of them needs to be changed. As IdrA said there are two options. One is that overlords are made better and then zerg is able to scout all-ins and harrasses and junk before they leave the base, and prepare accordingly (spine crawlers are fine as-is in this situation, since scouting preemptively gives you a head start on the defense so to speak). The other option is to decrease the build times of the static defense, meaning you can use them reactively. Both options are fine, but one of them needs to happen for zerg earlygame to be less chance-based. | ||
|
zeru
8156 Posts
| ||
|
Mordiford
4448 Posts
On May 06 2011 06:31 Maetl wrote: The nature of having to guess and play odds means that you will have streaks. Do we want that to be a significant part of a strategy game, though? I don't think it's a coin flip though, you can play defensively and set yourself behind a bit and then just play it from there because in TvZ at least, you do gain an advantage going into late game with the ability to tech switch and remax instantly provided you remain cost effective. There's too much going on to simplify balance down to one circumstance and one situation. If it was the guessing game they say it is, there would very likely be some kind of visual evidence of this in terms of win/loss. In the foreign scene at least, over recent months we've seen that each race has roughly a 50% win rate at the professional level, within 1-2 percent of each other. Now, if a Zerg had to guess between a variety of build and had a 20% of guessing right, then they'd have roughly that win rate, add in situations of regular games where an opening offensive isn't an issue and they'd probably still be a significant amount behind, there is currently no significant reason to believe that there's any fucking issue. | ||
|
branflakes14
2082 Posts
On May 06 2011 06:33 MonsieurGrimm wrote: Well, one of them needs to be changed. As IdrA said there are two options. One is that overlords are made better and then zerg is able to scout all-ins and harrasses and junk before they leave the base, and prepare accordingly (spine crawlers are fine as-is in this situation, since scouting preemptively gives you a head start on the defense so to speak). The other option is to decrease the build times of the static defense, meaning you can use them reactively. Both options are fine, but one of them needs to happen for zerg earlygame to be less chance-based. I refuse to believe that the difference between 40 second Sunkens and 50 second Spines matters half as much as it's being made out to, especially when most of the time your opponent's army is well within 30 seconds of your base. | ||
|
Mailing
United States3087 Posts
On May 06 2011 06:34 zeru wrote: Do you think if that actually were the case, that zergs only wins come from cheeses, that the other races would be fine with that especially since they are winning just as much? Try to look at it from the outside perspective instead. If zerg cheeses had such an extremely high win rate the other races would not be happy with that. Super biased progamers will never be a reliable source of information, too much emotion and bias involved. Zerg cheeses do not have a high win rate. They are working a lot because zerg are just starting to use them a lot and other races had never had to put the effort into scouting them. How the FUCK JulyZerg won so many games with bane busts against terrans going siege tech is beyond me, but when a terran (nada) actually made 4-5 bunkers until his siege mode finished, July got stomped pretty hard. Other forms of early aggression (non-all-ins) become worse as protoss and terran make better sim city and utilize force fields better. You will see. | ||
|
MrCon
France29748 Posts
On May 06 2011 06:29 MonsieurGrimm wrote: Most zergs would rather play straight up games than leave their results to chance, but apparently straight up games don't win you tournaments. IdrA said he's doing retarded cheeses because that's the only way to win, and now Nestea is somewhat echoing that sentiment. But terrans and protosses are doing retarded cheeses too. That's an important part of the game to stabilize the metagame, or keep your opponent guessing if you prefer. GSL spoiler nestea vs anypro game 1 below : Zerg has a culture of seeing aggressive play as bad play (influenced a lot by idra). This morning, when nestea rolled anypro in game 1 with 4 bases vs 2 (or 1.5), zergs players were downplaying his win because "he allined". It's like that, aggressive zerg play has a bad reputation to zerg players themselves. So when the proper counter to a strategy is just "go fucking kill him", they don't want to accept it, because they think it's bad play (or bad game design). And that whole mindset is stopping zergs to evolve (which is less and less true, as idra and nestea are bitching about it but still using it and winning with it, so I hope that zerg players will follow their actions and not their paroles) | ||
|
MonsieurGrimm
Canada2441 Posts
On May 06 2011 06:34 zeru wrote: Do you think if that actually were the case, that zergs only wins come from cheeses, that the other races would be fine with that especially since they are winning just as much? Try to look at it from the outside perspective instead. If zerg cheeses had such an extremely high win rate the other races would not be happy with that. Super biased progamers will never be a reliable source of information, too much emotion and bias involved. They don't have an extremely high win rate, they just have a better win rate than standard play. And Super-biased progamers is redundant, it's their job, there's going to be bias no matter where you look. | ||
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On May 06 2011 06:38 branflakes14 wrote: I refuse to believe that the difference between 40 second Sunkens and 50 second Spines matters half as much as it's being made out to, especially when most of the time your opponent's army is well within 30 seconds of your base. On maps in BW with small rush distances, you made the creep colonies early, and then when you got worried about the attack you morphed them into sunkens, only then committing the full resources. | ||
|
FighterHayabusa
United States90 Posts
On May 06 2011 04:32 Waking wrote: My 2 cents on the zerg scouting issue: It is clear that the opponent can deny all means of zerg pre-lair scouting by blocking the ramp, having good building position, and guarding the perimeter with stalker/sentry/marine. It is unclear whether the zerg race is strong enough to overcome this fact by devising builds which can counter all potential strategies from their opponent, and thus unclear whether the game is balanced - we would have to wait and see. However, regardless of balance, my question is: Should the game be designed in a way such that intel gathering drives particular builds, or should it be designed such that builds are created based on a lack of intel, so-called blanket defense builds? The former makes for a more interesting game, in my opinion. There is never going to be a build that can block everything. There will be builds that are more safe(ie. can defend against more things), but you will have to give up something in return for them. Idra is correct in all of his points, and I like Day 9, but he took the easy way out of the discussion. Zerg needs to manage the finite resources of minerals/gas/larva very wisely in the early game, and without a reliable way to scout there is no good way to do that. Basically you are left to a guessing game, and while there are ways to limit the number of builds that are possible(based off what little you do see), you can never be entirely sure. The other races can be. So he is correct, there is an imbalance in scouting. Zerg scouting can be denied easily, and the other either can't be denied(scan), or are near impossible to deny(halu.) That is the very definition of imbalance. The fact that Zergs can still win regardless means nothing, and stating that Zergs have won championships means just as little. A win percentage does not prove anything about balance, it can just give you a good place to look. Also, Day9 should understand that there is a difference between equillibrium and balance. They are not exactly interchangeable. | ||
|
zeru
8156 Posts
| ||
|
branflakes14
2082 Posts
On May 06 2011 06:39 Whitewing wrote: On maps in BW with small rush distances, you made the creep colonies early, and then when you got worried about the attack you morphed them into sunkens, only then committing the full resources. Maybe you could try blindly building Spine Crawlers so they'll finish 10-15 seconds after a window of time when you know a push such as a 4gate or 6gate would hit, and cancel them if it doesn't come. Think of their longer production time as a bigger window in which you can cancel them, as opposed to a longer build time. | ||
|
FighterHayabusa
United States90 Posts
On May 06 2011 06:42 zeru wrote: Exactly, balance discussion is dumb. Especially when there is zero proof of what you actually are arguing. Zerg's win rate is fine within top level play. It's unproductive and doesn't lead anywhere. Win rate means next to nothing in this discussion. There are simply too many variables to bring it down to just that one metric. | ||
|
Mordiford
4448 Posts
On May 06 2011 06:40 FighterHayabusa wrote: There is never going to be a build that can block everything. There will be builds that are more safe(ie. can defend against more things), but you will have to give up something in return for them. Idra is correct in all of his points, and I like Day 9, but he took the easy way out of the discussion. Zerg needs to manage the finite resources of minerals/gas/larva very wisely in the early game, and without a reliable way to scout there is no good way to do that. Basically you are left to a guessing game, and while there are ways to limit the number of builds that are possible(based off what little you do see), you can never be entirely sure. The other races can be. So he is correct, there is an imbalance in scouting. Zerg scouting can be denied easily, and the other either can't be denied(scan), or are near impossible to deny(halu.) That is the very definition of imbalance. The fact that Zergs can still win regardless means nothing, and stating that Zergs have won championships means just as little. A win percentage does not prove anything about balance, it can just give you a good place to look. Also, Day9 should understand that there is a difference between equillibrium and balance. They are not exactly interchangeable. That's not balance in the sense that most people apply it to SC2, in that each race has roughly the same chance of winning. Zerg is weak early on to all-ins and cheeses from Terran provided they aren't 100% on-point or playing defensively from the get-go, but as the game progresses they gain an advantage going into late game unless they messed up and the Terran did some severe damage or beat them outright. It's like 3-2-1 for Terran in terms of strength in early, mid and late game and 1-2-3 for Zerg sort of, the way I see it. If the Zerg stops the aggression or plays defensively, they're at a bit of a disadvantage but they can make it up and get ahead later, if they botch defense they lose, if the Terran botches the aggression they lose, if they deal enough damage they're ahead and once you get to late game you're behind unless you've been pressing the attack constantly and been really cost effective. It might be bad design but it's not imbalanced in terms of racial strength. | ||
|
Maetl
United States93 Posts
On May 06 2011 06:38 branflakes14 wrote: I refuse to believe that the difference between 40 second Sunkens and 50 second Spines matters half as much as it's being made out to, especially when most of the time your opponent's army is well within 30 seconds of your base. Having two parts to sunkens is extremely important though. There is also a huge difference between 10 seconds to completion and 20, especially in early situations where that spine crawler could easily be the difference between holding and not. | ||
|
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On May 06 2011 06:40 FighterHayabusa wrote: There is never going to be a build that can block everything. There will be builds that are more safe(ie. can defend against more things), but you will have to give up something in return for them. Idra is correct in all of his points, and I like Day 9, but he took the easy way out of the discussion. Zerg needs to manage the finite resources of minerals/gas/larva very wisely in the early game, and without a reliable way to scout there is no good way to do that. Basically you are left to a guessing game, and while there are ways to limit the number of builds that are possible(based off what little you do see), you can never be entirely sure. The other races can be. So he is correct, there is an imbalance in scouting. Zerg scouting can be denied easily, and the other either can't be denied(scan), or are near impossible to deny(halu.) That is the very definition of imbalance. The fact that Zergs can still win regardless means nothing, and stating that Zergs have won championships means just as little. A win percentage does not prove anything about balance, it can just give you a good place to look. Also, Day9 should understand that there is a difference between equillibrium and balance. They are not exactly interchangeable. But an imbalance in scouting ability =/= imbalance in overall packages that are the races. I can point to any other race and do the same thing with another aspect, such as unit production: Protoss can't produce as many units at the same time as zerg or terran can. Terran can pump tons of reactored marines out at any given point in time (or vikings or hellions), and zerg has the larva mechanic, so they can pump out TONS of shit all at once. Does that mean that Protoss is underpowered? Probably not. | ||
|
FighterHayabusa
United States90 Posts
On May 06 2011 06:44 branflakes14 wrote: Maybe you could try blindly building Spine Crawlers so they'll finish 10-15 seconds after a window of time when you know a push such as a 4gate or 6gate would hit, and cancel them if it doesn't come. Think of their longer production time as a bigger window in which you can cancel them, as opposed to a longer build time. Do you know what the oppurtunity cost of a couple spines is? In regards to the minerals lost mining, the cost of the drone(and larva associated with it), and then the actual cost to buid it? It ends up being a lot more expensive then you think  | ||
|
Maetl
United States93 Posts
On May 06 2011 06:44 branflakes14 wrote: Maybe you could try blindly building Spine Crawlers so they'll finish 10-15 seconds after a window of time when you know a push such as a 4gate or 6gate would hit, and cancel them if it doesn't come. Think of their longer production time as a bigger window in which you can cancel them, as opposed to a longer build time. There are so many early game timings that you just aren't going to be able to throw down and cancel spine crawlers every 20 seconds. | ||
|
MonsieurGrimm
Canada2441 Posts
On May 06 2011 06:39 MrCon wrote: But terrans and protosses are doing retarded cheeses too. That's an important part of the game to stabilize the metagame, or keep your opponent guessing if you prefer. GSL spoiler nestea vs anypro game 1 below : Zerg has a culture of seeing aggressive play as bad play (influenced a lot by idra). This morning, when nestea rolled anypro in game 1 with 4 bases vs 2 (or 1.5), zergs players were downplaying his win because "he allined". It's like that, aggressive zerg play has a bad reputation to zerg players themselves. So when the proper counter to a strategy is just "go fucking kill him", they don't want to accept it, because they think it's bad play (or bad game design). And that whole mindset is stopping zergs to evolve (which is less and less true, as idra and nestea are bitching about it but still using it and winning with it, so I hope that zerg players will follow their actions and not their paroles) So you would rather play rock paper scissors because it's balanced, even though it takes no skill and is entirely chance-based? It's shitty game design to have the players win by blind countering each other instead of outplaying each other. Sure, allin plays have their place - they're there to keep players honest, but when allin becomes the standard is when the game is no longer worth playing imo. | ||
| ||
