EPTOn April 06 2011 14:58 EternaL_9 wrote:
Is there any upload of this weeks episode yet? I just got home
Is there any upload of this weeks episode yet? I just got home
Not that I can see. f5ing all over, hoping to get it before I go to work.
Official State of the Game Podcast Thread - Page 689
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
cYaN
Norway3322 Posts
Not that I can see. f5ing all over, hoping to get it before I go to work. | ||
|
Azarkon
United States21060 Posts
On April 06 2011 14:50 ketomai wrote: Yea, day just randomly theorycrafting and trolling the whole time wasn't the right way to deal with Idra's points. Why didn't he just give a couple of his own good points if he has them? He didn't even give one good argument or address any of Idra's individual points and instead just went laughed the whole time. If you follow Day9, you'll know that he appreciates out-of-the-box thinking. For Day9 to discuss balance using the existing meta-game strategies being played would be a downhill battle because obviously IdrA knows these much better from experience, plus he can simply bring up results - ie Zergs falling left and right out of tournaments. But the point that Day9 generally tries to raise is that the game is so complex that we can't assume we know enough about it to make strong balance judgments. This probably has quite a bit to do with his experience in BW, since BW was a game where drastic shifts in the match-ups and the relative advantages happened without any changes from Blizzard. One year Zerg would look super strong vs. Protoss, then someone would come along and change this perception with a new approach to the match-up, and suddenly Protoss would look super strong vs. Zerg. These shifts took place in the space of nearly a decade, and so it's understandable that someone like Day9, who was around when this all happened, would tend to dismiss the idea that half a year after SC 2 was released, we already know enough about the game to make strong balance judgments. | ||
|
Mailing
United States3087 Posts
On April 06 2011 14:59 FLuE wrote: Yeah with all the questions that could have been asked tonight with this past weekend, NASL coming up, etc. to go with the Idra state of zerg balance question? I mean, first off I think Idra who knows the game very well has every right to state his opinion. If my livelihood depended on the balance of a game I'd be champion my cause the same way. I'm not sure why more pro players don't do it. It is very similar to me like a coach trying to work the refs to get calls to go their way. Idra is a player trying to make a living with the game, he doesn't owe it to not state his opinion to anyone and it certainly doesn't mean the people that balance the game will even listen to him. Whether he is right or wrong, I see no issue in him always feeling that way. Even if Zerg wins the next 10 tournaments I'd still want changes to help my race if it were me personally. To that same effect, why would anyone who doesn't play zerg ever agree with him? They don't want to see any changes that would help zerg, so it is only natural that anyone who doesn't play zerg isn't going to go, "Hey ya I agree, larva should spawn faster, hydras should only cost 75/25 and ultras should be stronger." They are going to say, "Zerg is fine." If you ever really want a good balance discussion get 3-4 of the highest ranked Random players in the world in the chat together, until then I take it all with a grain of salt. But with that said, do we really have to ask Idra every single time he has a mic about zerg balance? We all know his answer. I can think of 10 questions right now far more interesting than that, and it just creates a slippery slope where you open a can of imbalance talk on TL etc. Just though the question didn't need to be asked, it is the most exhausting topic and nothing is more played out than zerg balance talk. They don't have to agree with him. We just want well thought out arguments against idra. Nobody ever tries. Instead we just get "lol it's just idra, just ignore him because he is wrong and l2p". People get banned on this forum for talking about it, or threads closed, even ones with effort put into it because "take it to the bnet board". Which is understandable, because they are not professionals and their opinions not too important. SOTG is the only group of professionals that interacts weekly with the community and are the only ones allowed to discuss things like this, but instead brush it off | ||
|
tyrless
United States485 Posts
User was warned for this post | ||
|
MaestroSC
United States2073 Posts
On April 06 2011 14:52 eviltomahawk wrote: While I do think that this is an issue, I also think that having multiple leagues has the possibility of creating competition between the leagues to have better production values and matches to attract and possibly grow the limited supply of possible paying subscribers. I think think this was touched upon in this SotG episode. Of course, at some point it will be damaging to the community if too many more large leagues are created, but at this point, I think there is enough growth potential to allow for several competing leagues to spur each other to improve. The problem lies with leagues being run in a format that requires players that participate to be unable to participate in any other tournament. The NASL is doing just that. There will be no way for competitors to compete in the NASL and other large competitions simultaneously, unless they basically say in "X tournament IDC how i do" "in Y tournament I am going to focus all of my time/energy on each match." The best part of MLG or Blizzcon is the fact that they are not complete time controllers of players. Ya they require players to completely dedicate a total of... 3 whole days to them. But that is COMPLETELY different than having to dedicate yourself to 3 hours, per night, for 5 days a week. And I understand that most likely this is an exaggeration, but the problem is there are 2 players in every match. So unless you are running a tournament with VERY similar brackets to NASL, you will have to worry about schedules/conflicts in them with players. "Well how bout you two play on tues night?" "Well i have a nasl match that night." "Ok thurs night. "Well he has one that night." "Ok Saturday night." "well that is my next match/or my teammates match that i have to help him with/prepare/cheer." Things like this. I completely LOVE that NASL is trying to give as many quality games as possible, but they are monopolizing too much time. Not to mention flooding so much content that viewers will come to a point where they have 60 hours of matches available to watch per week. I dont know about the rest of the viewers, but I like following a tournament completely, and as many as I can in fact. I can follow the TSL and GSL and MLG all at once. But you can't completely follow the NASL and GSL at once. They are beginning to split viewerships = less desire for sponsors because instead of ALL 100,000 people watching one, it will be 30 here, 30 here, 40 there. = Less viewers per tournament= less desire to sponsor cause numbers aren't nearly as impressive as "we had over 100,000 people watching live!" to sponsors' ears. To be completely 100% honest I would rather watch 4 seperate 1 week tournaments, than 1 tournament that is a month long. Because with 4 shorter tournaments you can pick and choose which ones you care about. But again, maybe this is just me. But i like to follow a tournament from beginning to end. (I am one of those people who refuses to watch a movie anything more than 15 minutes after it started, if I havent seen it. And same with Sports, I want to see the whole thing from beginning to end, so i understand what really happened.) The amount of content the NASL is going to put out is INSANE. How many people can afford to spend 20 hours a week just following matches? IMO the NASL is saying, "Please only watch us" when their tournament is running. And I would have no problem with this, if their tournament wasn't 1 month long." But again, maybe this is just me, because like i have said multiple times previously already, if I am going to follow something, I want to follow it completely. IMO NASL is making people pick which tournaments to follow, and it isn't necessary to. Right now the scene is still growing, and shouldn't be forcing people to make this decision, when the scene is so new. | ||
|
eviltomahawk
United States11135 Posts
On April 06 2011 15:00 Bosu wrote: Uhh.. 2 base turtle death balls are why zergs like Idra have been so reluctant to play very aggressively. Although balance discussion is quite important to the community, I don't think it should be stressed upon too much. IMO, Blizzard rushing in to change stats based in the whim of the community can be just as bad as Blizzard taking inaction. Matchups can become imbalanced due to new strategies, yet the imbalance can easily swing the other way due to changes in the metagame, not just changes in balance. Of course, it would be damaging to the game if Blizzard waits too long to fix imbalances. However, it can also be damaging and volatile if Blizzard too often introduces too many balance "fixes" that only create more unintended problems. IMO, it's easier to look at one's own play and fix that instead of coercing balance changes that may dissatisfy players of the other 2 races. Balance discussion should still exist, but done in strict moderation since it's effects are greatly exaggerated. | ||
|
Beef Noodles
United States937 Posts
On April 06 2011 14:45 Zlasher wrote: Not to discredit Idra or his thoughts on Zerg, but he's been known to whine about his race being helpless from day 1 on when he became a competitive BW player. Yes, he acknowledges the differences from BW to SC2 between Terran then and Zerg now but to say he is so much further of an expert may be a stretch. Day9 might not play as much but he is around SC2 just as much, plays every race and every matchup, and does analyze the game from more than results or matchup perspective. Plus his points are extremely valid, when zerg loses it might look a bit more shocking but they are in a shape right now where they can win, and they can lose, its not like they have something that makes them 100% helpless, like the reaper build with proper control was back in end of beta/early release. Yeah, but even back in beta during the reaper build's hayday, people were telling zergs to stfu and "innovate." People make it seem like zergs are all idiots... zergs are trying but its really flippin tough. In some zergs opinion its imbalanced. Talk to us about potential options that you have actually seen work at the highest level. The only thing that gets me mad is tellings zergs to shut up and not even discussing the issue. I'm not saying the game is definitely imbalanced. It might be, it might not. Right now to me (this is only my opinion) it seems like zvt is either even, or imbalanced to favor zerg slightly and zvp is quite substantially favoring P | ||
|
eviltomahawk
United States11135 Posts
On April 06 2011 15:07 mnofstl007 wrote: The problem lies with leagues being run in a format that requires players that participate to be unable to participate in any other tournament. The NASL is doing just that. There will be no way for competitors to compete in the NASL and other large competitions simultaneously, unless they basically say in "X tournament IDC how i do" "in Y tournament I am going to focus all of my time/energy on each match." However, I did hear that NASL will be relying on pre-produced broadcasts, which may allow for some leeway in scheduling for the players. The NASL show may be broadcast almost every night of the week, but since they pre-cast and pre-produce the show, the show itself is actually not "live." Consequently, players probably will have to play well before the actual broadcast time to allow for production, which may allow for flexibility in scheduling. | ||
|
cYaN
Norway3322 Posts
| ||
|
Creep
United States229 Posts
On April 06 2011 15:02 cYaN wrote: Not that I can see. f5ing all over, hoping to get it before I go to work. "The show is uploading to blip right now, might not post it to the blogger / iTunes till tomorrow morning. Sorry, I'm sleepy!" From JP's twitter. | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
On April 06 2011 14:38 Liquid`Tyler wrote: We don't think the game is imbalanced. I don't think we saw a way to make a productive discussion out of it so we just kinda avoided it... This is such a strange statement from someone as smart as you. Did you think the game was imbalanced in 1.0? 1.1? 1.2? Did it just now get balanced with 1.3? Or do you mean there are no significant balance issues? Even if you do, for instance removing the amulet is a rather significant change so then either 1.2 or 1.3 isn't balanced to an acceptable degree. Not wanting to discuss balance is perfectly reasonable; pretending there never are issues is not. | ||
|
Caveat
United States30 Posts
33 is up on Blip! | ||
|
SmoKim
Denmark10304 Posts
i love you Caveat <3 | ||
|
dcemuser
United States3248 Posts
On April 06 2011 15:09 eviltomahawk wrote: Although balance discussion is quite important to the community, I don't think it should be stressed upon too much. IMO, Blizzard rushing in to change stats based in the whim of the community can be just as bad as Blizzard taking inaction. Matchups can become imbalanced due to new strategies, yet the imbalance can easily swing the other way due to changes in the metagame, not just changes in balance. Of course, it would be damaging to the game if Blizzard waits too long to fix imbalances. However, it can also be damaging and volatile if Blizzard too often introduces too many balance "fixes" that only create more unintended problems. IMO, it's easier to look at one's own play and fix that instead of coercing balance changes that may dissatisfy players of the other 2 races. Balance discussion should still exist, but done in strict moderation since it's effects are greatly exaggerated. Exactly. Brood War has been out for over a decade, and that game still isn't completely "figured out". "Blizzard" is not the solution to balancing StarCraft 2, and anyone who says they've mapped out all available strategies in SC2 is just straight up lying. That's why Day[9] intelligently advocates trying more strategies and trying new things. That's why Blizzard only makes small changes at a time. I sometimes wish Blizzard would step out, say "the game is balanced, have fun" and then come back in a year with the expansion and release very small, calculated sets of changes over the next 5 or so years. StarCraft is a game where you have to let it balance itself, and just play it as a player or watch it as a spectator and have fun doing it. Whining about balance gets you nowhere. As Tyler would say, "if you can chill, chill." | ||
|
teamsolid
Canada3668 Posts
On April 06 2011 14:38 Liquid`Tyler wrote: We don't think the game is imbalanced. I don't think we saw a way to make a productive discussion out of it so we just kinda avoided it... Here's the issue though, practically every single top Zerg on the planet whether from NA, Europe or Korea has thought the game was imbalanced at some point since release, and many continue to hold this position. Also, each time a Zerg player was brought on to SOTG, you got a nice rant about balance (Machine, Ret, Idra, Artosis). On the other hand, I can't think of a single Terran or Protoss pro who thinks their race is too weak. It's more like we (who don't play Zerg professionally) don't think the game is imbalanced. | ||
|
Gotmog
Serbia899 Posts
Other then that, i recently switched to Random/Toss (from Z) and i was amazed how "different" the game was on the other side... | ||
|
GwSC
United States1997 Posts
Doesn't the fact that it almost always falls back on Zerg struggling to deal with the newest powerful T/P strategy point to some fundamental problems with the game? I don't claim to understand the game at anything near the level that they do, but it doesn't seem like this should be the case as often as it is. There are plenty of great/intelligent Zerg players around, and I don't think the uphill battle they are facing can be dismissed as simply a lack of enough experimentation. | ||
|
vdale
Germany1173 Posts
| ||
|
HowSoOnIsNow
Canada480 Posts
As for the NaSl, I wasn't aware that it was a bunch of Bo 3. That's really crazy. Imagine if all of these matches are long macro games, it could potentially last a frigging day! I think that what Tyler's affraid ultimately, is that a Schism forms itself in between the Gsl viewers and the NasL viewers, which is not needed in the infancy of the Sc2 community. Personally, I'll be focusing on the GSL and watching what people concider the best matches of day and certain Korean players that I like to follow. | ||
|
nodule
Canada931 Posts
| ||
| ||
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ca73y.jpg)
