|
Blizzard are far more likely to change the game if everyone is using overpowered strat X or playing overpowered race Y, than if a few people tell them it exists and is boring.
|
On April 18 2011 10:27 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 10:25 quentel wrote:On April 18 2011 10:24 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:16 quentel wrote:On April 18 2011 09:56 legatus legionis wrote:http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win-part-1.htmlShould be a mandatory read. "Doing one move or sequence over and over and over is another great way to get called cheap. This goes right to the heart of the matter: why can the scrub not defeat something so obvious and telegraphed as a single move done over and over? Is he such a poor player that he can't counter that move? And if the move is, for whatever reason, extremely difficult to counter, then wouldn't I be a fool for not using that move? The first step in becoming a top player is the realization that playing to win means doing whatever most increases your chances of winning. The game knows no rules of "honor" or of "cheapness." The game only knows winning and losing. A common call of the scrub is to cry that the kind of play in which ones tries to win at all costs is "boring" or "not fun." Let's consider two groups of players: a group of good players and a group of scrubs. The scrubs will play "for fun" and not explore the extremities of the game. They won't find the most effective tactics and abuse them mercilessly. The good players will. The good players will find incredibly overpowering tactics and patterns. As they play the game more, they'll be forced to find counters to those tactics. The vast majority of tactics that at first appear unbeatable end up having counters, though they are often quite esoteric and difficult to discover. The counter tactic prevents the first player from doing the tactic, but the first player can then use a counter to the counter. The second player is now afraid to use his counter and he's again vulnerable to the original overpowering tactic.Notice that the good players are reaching higher and higher levels of play. They found the "cheap stuff" and abused it. They know how to stop the cheap stuff. They know how to stop the other guy from stopping it so they can keep doing it. And as is quite common in competitive games, many new tactics will later be discovered that make the original cheap tactic look wholesome and fair. Often in fighting games, one character will have something so good it's unfair. Fine, let him have that. As time goes on, it will be discovered that other characters have even more powerful and unfair tactics. Each player will attempt to steer the game in the direction of his own advantages, much how grandmaster chess players attempt to steer opponents into situations in which their opponents are weak." Summary: The parts in italic, and the underlying message: seemingly powerful tactics are instrumental to developing the game. In the absence of dominant strategy there would be no motive to look for the solution. If everything was figured out, we would see the exact same things unfold. That's really shallow and uninteresting for those playing but also those watching. I'm kinda getting sick of it, I thought it was gonna fade away slowly but I feel it's gotten worse. Everytime someone makes a cry on imbalance it tarnishes the reputation, the competitive nature of the game, it's community, the players and the future. It's sickening. There are only winners and losers. "Winners never quit and quitters never win." - Vince Lombardi "Losers live in the past. Winners learn from the past and enjoy working in the present toward the future." - Denis Waitley Sounds like the type that thought 5-rax reaper was perfectly fine. or the type that doesn't give a shit because he's playing the game, not designing it Heaven forbid any feedback get back to Blizzard via forums and player comments! ??? the feedback is the game itself. the player doesn't have anything to add to the games he plays. the only time a player needs to say anything is when blizzard is like "we dont have time to watch your last 50 tvz's. can you summarize what's been going in this situation?" so actually yeah, fuck feedback via forums and comments. blizzard can see the games. that's all that matters
In addition to this I'm fairly sure Blizzard is regularly in touch with progamers to hear their thoughts on balance. So to whine about balance you not only have to assume that blizzard are not reviewing the huge amounts of raw data available to them but also that you understand the game better than the progamers blizzard are in contact with.
|
8751 Posts
On April 18 2011 10:47 Badboyrune wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 10:27 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:25 quentel wrote:On April 18 2011 10:24 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:16 quentel wrote:On April 18 2011 09:56 legatus legionis wrote:http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win-part-1.htmlShould be a mandatory read. "Doing one move or sequence over and over and over is another great way to get called cheap. This goes right to the heart of the matter: why can the scrub not defeat something so obvious and telegraphed as a single move done over and over? Is he such a poor player that he can't counter that move? And if the move is, for whatever reason, extremely difficult to counter, then wouldn't I be a fool for not using that move? The first step in becoming a top player is the realization that playing to win means doing whatever most increases your chances of winning. The game knows no rules of "honor" or of "cheapness." The game only knows winning and losing. A common call of the scrub is to cry that the kind of play in which ones tries to win at all costs is "boring" or "not fun." Let's consider two groups of players: a group of good players and a group of scrubs. The scrubs will play "for fun" and not explore the extremities of the game. They won't find the most effective tactics and abuse them mercilessly. The good players will. The good players will find incredibly overpowering tactics and patterns. As they play the game more, they'll be forced to find counters to those tactics. The vast majority of tactics that at first appear unbeatable end up having counters, though they are often quite esoteric and difficult to discover. The counter tactic prevents the first player from doing the tactic, but the first player can then use a counter to the counter. The second player is now afraid to use his counter and he's again vulnerable to the original overpowering tactic.Notice that the good players are reaching higher and higher levels of play. They found the "cheap stuff" and abused it. They know how to stop the cheap stuff. They know how to stop the other guy from stopping it so they can keep doing it. And as is quite common in competitive games, many new tactics will later be discovered that make the original cheap tactic look wholesome and fair. Often in fighting games, one character will have something so good it's unfair. Fine, let him have that. As time goes on, it will be discovered that other characters have even more powerful and unfair tactics. Each player will attempt to steer the game in the direction of his own advantages, much how grandmaster chess players attempt to steer opponents into situations in which their opponents are weak." Summary: The parts in italic, and the underlying message: seemingly powerful tactics are instrumental to developing the game. In the absence of dominant strategy there would be no motive to look for the solution. If everything was figured out, we would see the exact same things unfold. That's really shallow and uninteresting for those playing but also those watching. I'm kinda getting sick of it, I thought it was gonna fade away slowly but I feel it's gotten worse. Everytime someone makes a cry on imbalance it tarnishes the reputation, the competitive nature of the game, it's community, the players and the future. It's sickening. There are only winners and losers. "Winners never quit and quitters never win." - Vince Lombardi "Losers live in the past. Winners learn from the past and enjoy working in the present toward the future." - Denis Waitley Sounds like the type that thought 5-rax reaper was perfectly fine. or the type that doesn't give a shit because he's playing the game, not designing it Heaven forbid any feedback get back to Blizzard via forums and player comments! ??? the feedback is the game itself. the player doesn't have anything to add to the games he plays. the only time a player needs to say anything is when blizzard is like "we dont have time to watch your last 50 tvz's. can you summarize what's been going in this situation?" so actually yeah, fuck feedback via forums and comments. blizzard can see the games. that's all that matters In addition to this I'm fairly sure Blizzard is regularly in touch with progamers to hear their thoughts on balance. So to whine about balance you not only have to assume that blizzard are not reviewing the huge amounts of raw data available to them but also that you understand the game better than the progamers blizzard are in contact with.
yep, blizzard contacts pros privately. public comments on balance are 99.9999% unproductive. they are for your personal satisfaction only. if discussing balance online isn't a satisfying experience, then stop doing it.
|
since this thread doesn't actually have a topic
as a zerg player, i was pretty surprised to see how well mondragons hyper aggression was fairing vs cruncher on shak plat, even though his ovies were getting intercepted and his units 'hard countered.'
i would like to see some pro infestor usage though, as people seem to keep saying that they own hard. i picture someone capable of fungaling an entire deathball, backing out and doing it again over and over again. if that's not possible, then I don't see what all the talk is about. (i personally wasn't able to do it when I tried)
i used to cry imba everywhere, but now a days it's only certain things that I consider "imba", mainly things like toss being able to nexus first while zerg has to speedling expo. otherwise you risk an auto lose to cannons/ a pylon delays your expo till the lings are out anyways.
|
Too bad about the games today, Nony ^_^
|
+ Show Spoiler +Replace Tyler with Idra this SOTG! With his slump and his past SOTG, I am pretty sure he is going to be just as boring, and we need a Zerg anyways for all the huge TSL matches! Sadly I think I could take Incontrol more seriously arguing with Idra (if it happens) than Tyler at the moment
|
On April 18 2011 11:02 ImHuko wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Replace Tyler with Idra this SOTG! With his slump and his past SOTG, I am pretty sure he is going to be just as boring, and we need a Zerg anyways for all the huge TSL matches!
You can't just replace a pillar, the show would collapse! :p I like Tyler on the show.
|
On April 18 2011 10:51 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 10:47 Badboyrune wrote:On April 18 2011 10:27 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:25 quentel wrote:On April 18 2011 10:24 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:16 quentel wrote:On April 18 2011 09:56 legatus legionis wrote:http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win-part-1.htmlShould be a mandatory read. "Doing one move or sequence over and over and over is another great way to get called cheap. This goes right to the heart of the matter: why can the scrub not defeat something so obvious and telegraphed as a single move done over and over? Is he such a poor player that he can't counter that move? And if the move is, for whatever reason, extremely difficult to counter, then wouldn't I be a fool for not using that move? The first step in becoming a top player is the realization that playing to win means doing whatever most increases your chances of winning. The game knows no rules of "honor" or of "cheapness." The game only knows winning and losing. A common call of the scrub is to cry that the kind of play in which ones tries to win at all costs is "boring" or "not fun." Let's consider two groups of players: a group of good players and a group of scrubs. The scrubs will play "for fun" and not explore the extremities of the game. They won't find the most effective tactics and abuse them mercilessly. The good players will. The good players will find incredibly overpowering tactics and patterns. As they play the game more, they'll be forced to find counters to those tactics. The vast majority of tactics that at first appear unbeatable end up having counters, though they are often quite esoteric and difficult to discover. The counter tactic prevents the first player from doing the tactic, but the first player can then use a counter to the counter. The second player is now afraid to use his counter and he's again vulnerable to the original overpowering tactic.Notice that the good players are reaching higher and higher levels of play. They found the "cheap stuff" and abused it. They know how to stop the cheap stuff. They know how to stop the other guy from stopping it so they can keep doing it. And as is quite common in competitive games, many new tactics will later be discovered that make the original cheap tactic look wholesome and fair. Often in fighting games, one character will have something so good it's unfair. Fine, let him have that. As time goes on, it will be discovered that other characters have even more powerful and unfair tactics. Each player will attempt to steer the game in the direction of his own advantages, much how grandmaster chess players attempt to steer opponents into situations in which their opponents are weak." Summary: The parts in italic, and the underlying message: seemingly powerful tactics are instrumental to developing the game. In the absence of dominant strategy there would be no motive to look for the solution. If everything was figured out, we would see the exact same things unfold. That's really shallow and uninteresting for those playing but also those watching. I'm kinda getting sick of it, I thought it was gonna fade away slowly but I feel it's gotten worse. Everytime someone makes a cry on imbalance it tarnishes the reputation, the competitive nature of the game, it's community, the players and the future. It's sickening. There are only winners and losers. "Winners never quit and quitters never win." - Vince Lombardi "Losers live in the past. Winners learn from the past and enjoy working in the present toward the future." - Denis Waitley Sounds like the type that thought 5-rax reaper was perfectly fine. or the type that doesn't give a shit because he's playing the game, not designing it Heaven forbid any feedback get back to Blizzard via forums and player comments! ??? the feedback is the game itself. the player doesn't have anything to add to the games he plays. the only time a player needs to say anything is when blizzard is like "we dont have time to watch your last 50 tvz's. can you summarize what's been going in this situation?" so actually yeah, fuck feedback via forums and comments. blizzard can see the games. that's all that matters In addition to this I'm fairly sure Blizzard is regularly in touch with progamers to hear their thoughts on balance. So to whine about balance you not only have to assume that blizzard are not reviewing the huge amounts of raw data available to them but also that you understand the game better than the progamers blizzard are in contact with. yep, blizzard contacts pros privately. public comments on balance are 99.9999% unproductive. they are for your personal satisfaction only. if discussing balance online isn't a satisfying experience, then stop doing it.
lol no.
i'm someone who was in Ensidia/Paragon in WoW, Blizzard devs don't give a fuck what pros think - mainly because their judgements are clouded by money, prizes etc. Blizzard devs honestly don't care anything about private opinion and ultimately, 'cause it's a business, they'll do w/e the fuck they want to secure more money.
people need to stop thinking because pros are that - professional - their opinion is actually cared for, by blizzard, in short it's not... blizzard will care more for 98% of bronze > master league players than the top 200 na/eu/kr etc just coz it's more money to care for 98% of idiots.
for example if someone whined that ramps were too small for PVP and it caused FFs to completely shut down attacks, and high vision via warp ins despite FFs then perhaps blizzard would make all ramps larger because of that one match up, because on pro whined? no they're not gonna do that lol, they're gonna leave it the way it is because it's fine. (read: you!)
<3 you
|
On April 18 2011 11:04 peeeky wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 11:02 ImHuko wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Replace Tyler with Idra this SOTG! With his slump and his past SOTG, I am pretty sure he is going to be just as boring, and we need a Zerg anyways for all the huge TSL matches!
You can't just replace a pillar, the show would collapse! :p I like Tyler on the show.
+ Show Spoiler +Not "Replace" but he literally had nothing to say last show because of his poor performance, and nothing this week has changed. He did a pretty good job last week of derailing SOTG and putting JP in awkward positions (Just look at his face during the SOTG, he got that rageface at one point). Sorry about spoilers, don't know this threads take on spoilers
|
United Arab Emirates492 Posts
On April 18 2011 10:51 Liquid`Tyler wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 10:47 Badboyrune wrote:On April 18 2011 10:27 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:25 quentel wrote:On April 18 2011 10:24 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:16 quentel wrote:On April 18 2011 09:56 legatus legionis wrote:http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win-part-1.htmlShould be a mandatory read. "Doing one move or sequence over and over and over is another great way to get called cheap. This goes right to the heart of the matter: why can the scrub not defeat something so obvious and telegraphed as a single move done over and over? Is he such a poor player that he can't counter that move? And if the move is, for whatever reason, extremely difficult to counter, then wouldn't I be a fool for not using that move? The first step in becoming a top player is the realization that playing to win means doing whatever most increases your chances of winning. The game knows no rules of "honor" or of "cheapness." The game only knows winning and losing. A common call of the scrub is to cry that the kind of play in which ones tries to win at all costs is "boring" or "not fun." Let's consider two groups of players: a group of good players and a group of scrubs. The scrubs will play "for fun" and not explore the extremities of the game. They won't find the most effective tactics and abuse them mercilessly. The good players will. The good players will find incredibly overpowering tactics and patterns. As they play the game more, they'll be forced to find counters to those tactics. The vast majority of tactics that at first appear unbeatable end up having counters, though they are often quite esoteric and difficult to discover. The counter tactic prevents the first player from doing the tactic, but the first player can then use a counter to the counter. The second player is now afraid to use his counter and he's again vulnerable to the original overpowering tactic.Notice that the good players are reaching higher and higher levels of play. They found the "cheap stuff" and abused it. They know how to stop the cheap stuff. They know how to stop the other guy from stopping it so they can keep doing it. And as is quite common in competitive games, many new tactics will later be discovered that make the original cheap tactic look wholesome and fair. Often in fighting games, one character will have something so good it's unfair. Fine, let him have that. As time goes on, it will be discovered that other characters have even more powerful and unfair tactics. Each player will attempt to steer the game in the direction of his own advantages, much how grandmaster chess players attempt to steer opponents into situations in which their opponents are weak." Summary: The parts in italic, and the underlying message: seemingly powerful tactics are instrumental to developing the game. In the absence of dominant strategy there would be no motive to look for the solution. If everything was figured out, we would see the exact same things unfold. That's really shallow and uninteresting for those playing but also those watching. I'm kinda getting sick of it, I thought it was gonna fade away slowly but I feel it's gotten worse. Everytime someone makes a cry on imbalance it tarnishes the reputation, the competitive nature of the game, it's community, the players and the future. It's sickening. There are only winners and losers. "Winners never quit and quitters never win." - Vince Lombardi "Losers live in the past. Winners learn from the past and enjoy working in the present toward the future." - Denis Waitley Sounds like the type that thought 5-rax reaper was perfectly fine. or the type that doesn't give a shit because he's playing the game, not designing it Heaven forbid any feedback get back to Blizzard via forums and player comments! ??? the feedback is the game itself. the player doesn't have anything to add to the games he plays. the only time a player needs to say anything is when blizzard is like "we dont have time to watch your last 50 tvz's. can you summarize what's been going in this situation?" so actually yeah, fuck feedback via forums and comments. blizzard can see the games. that's all that matters In addition to this I'm fairly sure Blizzard is regularly in touch with progamers to hear their thoughts on balance. So to whine about balance you not only have to assume that blizzard are not reviewing the huge amounts of raw data available to them but also that you understand the game better than the progamers blizzard are in contact with. yep, blizzard contacts pros privately. public comments on balance are 99.9999% unproductive. they are for your personal satisfaction only. if discussing balance online isn't a satisfying experience, then stop doing it.
 lol nony your actions are contradictory, you complain about PvP (ramps) in your game vs Mana which was broadcasted to thousands of people and yet you tell the most posters here to an equivalent of stfu and point fingers at how bad pro Zergs players conduct themselves. Imagine how frustrating forcefields (ramps) are for Zergs in PvZ or the entire PvZ matchup !!!
|
??? So the feedback is the game itself and the forum comments are about the game itself, but if the game itself shows imbalance then the feedback and the forum comments should be completely different?
|
On April 18 2011 11:05 Cranberries wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 10:51 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:47 Badboyrune wrote:On April 18 2011 10:27 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:25 quentel wrote:On April 18 2011 10:24 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:16 quentel wrote:On April 18 2011 09:56 legatus legionis wrote:http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win-part-1.htmlShould be a mandatory read. "Doing one move or sequence over and over and over is another great way to get called cheap. This goes right to the heart of the matter: why can the scrub not defeat something so obvious and telegraphed as a single move done over and over? Is he such a poor player that he can't counter that move? And if the move is, for whatever reason, extremely difficult to counter, then wouldn't I be a fool for not using that move? The first step in becoming a top player is the realization that playing to win means doing whatever most increases your chances of winning. The game knows no rules of "honor" or of "cheapness." The game only knows winning and losing. A common call of the scrub is to cry that the kind of play in which ones tries to win at all costs is "boring" or "not fun." Let's consider two groups of players: a group of good players and a group of scrubs. The scrubs will play "for fun" and not explore the extremities of the game. They won't find the most effective tactics and abuse them mercilessly. The good players will. The good players will find incredibly overpowering tactics and patterns. As they play the game more, they'll be forced to find counters to those tactics. The vast majority of tactics that at first appear unbeatable end up having counters, though they are often quite esoteric and difficult to discover. The counter tactic prevents the first player from doing the tactic, but the first player can then use a counter to the counter. The second player is now afraid to use his counter and he's again vulnerable to the original overpowering tactic.Notice that the good players are reaching higher and higher levels of play. They found the "cheap stuff" and abused it. They know how to stop the cheap stuff. They know how to stop the other guy from stopping it so they can keep doing it. And as is quite common in competitive games, many new tactics will later be discovered that make the original cheap tactic look wholesome and fair. Often in fighting games, one character will have something so good it's unfair. Fine, let him have that. As time goes on, it will be discovered that other characters have even more powerful and unfair tactics. Each player will attempt to steer the game in the direction of his own advantages, much how grandmaster chess players attempt to steer opponents into situations in which their opponents are weak." Summary: The parts in italic, and the underlying message: seemingly powerful tactics are instrumental to developing the game. In the absence of dominant strategy there would be no motive to look for the solution. If everything was figured out, we would see the exact same things unfold. That's really shallow and uninteresting for those playing but also those watching. I'm kinda getting sick of it, I thought it was gonna fade away slowly but I feel it's gotten worse. Everytime someone makes a cry on imbalance it tarnishes the reputation, the competitive nature of the game, it's community, the players and the future. It's sickening. There are only winners and losers. "Winners never quit and quitters never win." - Vince Lombardi "Losers live in the past. Winners learn from the past and enjoy working in the present toward the future." - Denis Waitley Sounds like the type that thought 5-rax reaper was perfectly fine. or the type that doesn't give a shit because he's playing the game, not designing it Heaven forbid any feedback get back to Blizzard via forums and player comments! ??? the feedback is the game itself. the player doesn't have anything to add to the games he plays. the only time a player needs to say anything is when blizzard is like "we dont have time to watch your last 50 tvz's. can you summarize what's been going in this situation?" so actually yeah, fuck feedback via forums and comments. blizzard can see the games. that's all that matters In addition to this I'm fairly sure Blizzard is regularly in touch with progamers to hear their thoughts on balance. So to whine about balance you not only have to assume that blizzard are not reviewing the huge amounts of raw data available to them but also that you understand the game better than the progamers blizzard are in contact with. yep, blizzard contacts pros privately. public comments on balance are 99.9999% unproductive. they are for your personal satisfaction only. if discussing balance online isn't a satisfying experience, then stop doing it. lol no. i'm someone who was in Ensidia/Paragon in WoW, Blizzard devs don't give a fuck what pros think - mainly because their judgements are clouded by money, prizes etc. Blizzard devs honestly don't care anything about private opinion and ultimately, 'cause it's a business, they'll do w/e the fuck they want to secure more money. people need to stop thinking because pros are that - professional - their opinion is actually cared for, by blizzard, in short it's not... blizzard will care more for 98% of bronze > master league players than the top 200 na/eu/kr etc just coz it's more money to care for 98% of idiots. for example if someone whined that ramps were too small for PVP and it caused FFs to completely shut down attacks, and high vision via warp ins despite FFs then perhaps blizzard would make all ramps larger because of that one match up, because on pro whined? no they're not gonna do that lol, they're gonna leave it the way it is because it's fine. <3 you
this is sc2, not WoW. it's common knowledge at this point that blizzard listens to, and cares about the opinions of pro players.
|
On April 18 2011 11:07 Gunman_csz wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 10:51 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:47 Badboyrune wrote:On April 18 2011 10:27 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:25 quentel wrote:On April 18 2011 10:24 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:16 quentel wrote:On April 18 2011 09:56 legatus legionis wrote:http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win-part-1.htmlShould be a mandatory read. "Doing one move or sequence over and over and over is another great way to get called cheap. This goes right to the heart of the matter: why can the scrub not defeat something so obvious and telegraphed as a single move done over and over? Is he such a poor player that he can't counter that move? And if the move is, for whatever reason, extremely difficult to counter, then wouldn't I be a fool for not using that move? The first step in becoming a top player is the realization that playing to win means doing whatever most increases your chances of winning. The game knows no rules of "honor" or of "cheapness." The game only knows winning and losing. A common call of the scrub is to cry that the kind of play in which ones tries to win at all costs is "boring" or "not fun." Let's consider two groups of players: a group of good players and a group of scrubs. The scrubs will play "for fun" and not explore the extremities of the game. They won't find the most effective tactics and abuse them mercilessly. The good players will. The good players will find incredibly overpowering tactics and patterns. As they play the game more, they'll be forced to find counters to those tactics. The vast majority of tactics that at first appear unbeatable end up having counters, though they are often quite esoteric and difficult to discover. The counter tactic prevents the first player from doing the tactic, but the first player can then use a counter to the counter. The second player is now afraid to use his counter and he's again vulnerable to the original overpowering tactic.Notice that the good players are reaching higher and higher levels of play. They found the "cheap stuff" and abused it. They know how to stop the cheap stuff. They know how to stop the other guy from stopping it so they can keep doing it. And as is quite common in competitive games, many new tactics will later be discovered that make the original cheap tactic look wholesome and fair. Often in fighting games, one character will have something so good it's unfair. Fine, let him have that. As time goes on, it will be discovered that other characters have even more powerful and unfair tactics. Each player will attempt to steer the game in the direction of his own advantages, much how grandmaster chess players attempt to steer opponents into situations in which their opponents are weak." Summary: The parts in italic, and the underlying message: seemingly powerful tactics are instrumental to developing the game. In the absence of dominant strategy there would be no motive to look for the solution. If everything was figured out, we would see the exact same things unfold. That's really shallow and uninteresting for those playing but also those watching. I'm kinda getting sick of it, I thought it was gonna fade away slowly but I feel it's gotten worse. Everytime someone makes a cry on imbalance it tarnishes the reputation, the competitive nature of the game, it's community, the players and the future. It's sickening. There are only winners and losers. "Winners never quit and quitters never win." - Vince Lombardi "Losers live in the past. Winners learn from the past and enjoy working in the present toward the future." - Denis Waitley Sounds like the type that thought 5-rax reaper was perfectly fine. or the type that doesn't give a shit because he's playing the game, not designing it Heaven forbid any feedback get back to Blizzard via forums and player comments! ??? the feedback is the game itself. the player doesn't have anything to add to the games he plays. the only time a player needs to say anything is when blizzard is like "we dont have time to watch your last 50 tvz's. can you summarize what's been going in this situation?" so actually yeah, fuck feedback via forums and comments. blizzard can see the games. that's all that matters In addition to this I'm fairly sure Blizzard is regularly in touch with progamers to hear their thoughts on balance. So to whine about balance you not only have to assume that blizzard are not reviewing the huge amounts of raw data available to them but also that you understand the game better than the progamers blizzard are in contact with. yep, blizzard contacts pros privately. public comments on balance are 99.9999% unproductive. they are for your personal satisfaction only. if discussing balance online isn't a satisfying experience, then stop doing it. lol nony your actions are contradictory, you complain about PvP (ramps) in your game vs Mana which was broadcasted to thousands of people and yet you tell the most posters here to an equivalent of stfu and point fingers at how bad pro Zergs players conduct themselves. Imagine how frustrating forcefields (ramps) are for Zergs in PvZ or the entire PvZ matchup !!!
Dude, think about how stressful it must be to lose so many times when you clearly deserve to win at least something. Tyler has never publically complained about imbalance once (besides NASL). He never blames it on imbalance, and only blames himself for his losses. He was clearly stressed, most likely tilted the 2nd game, because of how he lost to a 4 gate, a build where people who aren't as good as you can beat you. This was healthy for him, as I believe he needed to let some steam out.
|
On April 18 2011 11:07 Gunman_csz wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 10:51 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:47 Badboyrune wrote:On April 18 2011 10:27 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:25 quentel wrote:On April 18 2011 10:24 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:16 quentel wrote:On April 18 2011 09:56 legatus legionis wrote:http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win-part-1.htmlShould be a mandatory read. "Doing one move or sequence over and over and over is another great way to get called cheap. This goes right to the heart of the matter: why can the scrub not defeat something so obvious and telegraphed as a single move done over and over? Is he such a poor player that he can't counter that move? And if the move is, for whatever reason, extremely difficult to counter, then wouldn't I be a fool for not using that move? The first step in becoming a top player is the realization that playing to win means doing whatever most increases your chances of winning. The game knows no rules of "honor" or of "cheapness." The game only knows winning and losing. A common call of the scrub is to cry that the kind of play in which ones tries to win at all costs is "boring" or "not fun." Let's consider two groups of players: a group of good players and a group of scrubs. The scrubs will play "for fun" and not explore the extremities of the game. They won't find the most effective tactics and abuse them mercilessly. The good players will. The good players will find incredibly overpowering tactics and patterns. As they play the game more, they'll be forced to find counters to those tactics. The vast majority of tactics that at first appear unbeatable end up having counters, though they are often quite esoteric and difficult to discover. The counter tactic prevents the first player from doing the tactic, but the first player can then use a counter to the counter. The second player is now afraid to use his counter and he's again vulnerable to the original overpowering tactic.Notice that the good players are reaching higher and higher levels of play. They found the "cheap stuff" and abused it. They know how to stop the cheap stuff. They know how to stop the other guy from stopping it so they can keep doing it. And as is quite common in competitive games, many new tactics will later be discovered that make the original cheap tactic look wholesome and fair. Often in fighting games, one character will have something so good it's unfair. Fine, let him have that. As time goes on, it will be discovered that other characters have even more powerful and unfair tactics. Each player will attempt to steer the game in the direction of his own advantages, much how grandmaster chess players attempt to steer opponents into situations in which their opponents are weak." Summary: The parts in italic, and the underlying message: seemingly powerful tactics are instrumental to developing the game. In the absence of dominant strategy there would be no motive to look for the solution. If everything was figured out, we would see the exact same things unfold. That's really shallow and uninteresting for those playing but also those watching. I'm kinda getting sick of it, I thought it was gonna fade away slowly but I feel it's gotten worse. Everytime someone makes a cry on imbalance it tarnishes the reputation, the competitive nature of the game, it's community, the players and the future. It's sickening. There are only winners and losers. "Winners never quit and quitters never win." - Vince Lombardi "Losers live in the past. Winners learn from the past and enjoy working in the present toward the future." - Denis Waitley Sounds like the type that thought 5-rax reaper was perfectly fine. or the type that doesn't give a shit because he's playing the game, not designing it Heaven forbid any feedback get back to Blizzard via forums and player comments! ??? the feedback is the game itself. the player doesn't have anything to add to the games he plays. the only time a player needs to say anything is when blizzard is like "we dont have time to watch your last 50 tvz's. can you summarize what's been going in this situation?" so actually yeah, fuck feedback via forums and comments. blizzard can see the games. that's all that matters In addition to this I'm fairly sure Blizzard is regularly in touch with progamers to hear their thoughts on balance. So to whine about balance you not only have to assume that blizzard are not reviewing the huge amounts of raw data available to them but also that you understand the game better than the progamers blizzard are in contact with. yep, blizzard contacts pros privately. public comments on balance are 99.9999% unproductive. they are for your personal satisfaction only. if discussing balance online isn't a satisfying experience, then stop doing it. lol nony your actions are contradictory, you complain about PvP (ramps) in your game vs Mana which was broadcasted to thousands of people and yet you tell the most posters here to an equivalent of stfu and point fingers at how bad pro Zergs players conduct themselves. Imagine how frustrating forcefields (ramps) are for Zergs in PvZ or the entire PvZ matchup !!!
Not to mention, why would Blizzard contact pros and expect an unbiased opinion when professional players' income is based on how well they do in tournaments?
I believe you were right in the beginning, Nony, when you said Blizzard can just look at games and divulge their views from that; not asking 100 pros and getting nothing but "Buff my race's unit x, it's too weak".
When Blizzard saw nothing but Terran dominating tournaments, something was done. Now that it's nothing but Protoss, I bet something will soon be done about them.
|
United Arab Emirates492 Posts
On April 18 2011 11:12 Let it Raine wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 11:05 Cranberries wrote:On April 18 2011 10:51 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:47 Badboyrune wrote:On April 18 2011 10:27 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:25 quentel wrote:On April 18 2011 10:24 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:16 quentel wrote:On April 18 2011 09:56 legatus legionis wrote:http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win-part-1.htmlShould be a mandatory read. "Doing one move or sequence over and over and over is another great way to get called cheap. This goes right to the heart of the matter: why can the scrub not defeat something so obvious and telegraphed as a single move done over and over? Is he such a poor player that he can't counter that move? And if the move is, for whatever reason, extremely difficult to counter, then wouldn't I be a fool for not using that move? The first step in becoming a top player is the realization that playing to win means doing whatever most increases your chances of winning. The game knows no rules of "honor" or of "cheapness." The game only knows winning and losing. A common call of the scrub is to cry that the kind of play in which ones tries to win at all costs is "boring" or "not fun." Let's consider two groups of players: a group of good players and a group of scrubs. The scrubs will play "for fun" and not explore the extremities of the game. They won't find the most effective tactics and abuse them mercilessly. The good players will. The good players will find incredibly overpowering tactics and patterns. As they play the game more, they'll be forced to find counters to those tactics. The vast majority of tactics that at first appear unbeatable end up having counters, though they are often quite esoteric and difficult to discover. The counter tactic prevents the first player from doing the tactic, but the first player can then use a counter to the counter. The second player is now afraid to use his counter and he's again vulnerable to the original overpowering tactic.Notice that the good players are reaching higher and higher levels of play. They found the "cheap stuff" and abused it. They know how to stop the cheap stuff. They know how to stop the other guy from stopping it so they can keep doing it. And as is quite common in competitive games, many new tactics will later be discovered that make the original cheap tactic look wholesome and fair. Often in fighting games, one character will have something so good it's unfair. Fine, let him have that. As time goes on, it will be discovered that other characters have even more powerful and unfair tactics. Each player will attempt to steer the game in the direction of his own advantages, much how grandmaster chess players attempt to steer opponents into situations in which their opponents are weak." Summary: The parts in italic, and the underlying message: seemingly powerful tactics are instrumental to developing the game. In the absence of dominant strategy there would be no motive to look for the solution. If everything was figured out, we would see the exact same things unfold. That's really shallow and uninteresting for those playing but also those watching. I'm kinda getting sick of it, I thought it was gonna fade away slowly but I feel it's gotten worse. Everytime someone makes a cry on imbalance it tarnishes the reputation, the competitive nature of the game, it's community, the players and the future. It's sickening. There are only winners and losers. "Winners never quit and quitters never win." - Vince Lombardi "Losers live in the past. Winners learn from the past and enjoy working in the present toward the future." - Denis Waitley Sounds like the type that thought 5-rax reaper was perfectly fine. or the type that doesn't give a shit because he's playing the game, not designing it Heaven forbid any feedback get back to Blizzard via forums and player comments! ??? the feedback is the game itself. the player doesn't have anything to add to the games he plays. the only time a player needs to say anything is when blizzard is like "we dont have time to watch your last 50 tvz's. can you summarize what's been going in this situation?" so actually yeah, fuck feedback via forums and comments. blizzard can see the games. that's all that matters In addition to this I'm fairly sure Blizzard is regularly in touch with progamers to hear their thoughts on balance. So to whine about balance you not only have to assume that blizzard are not reviewing the huge amounts of raw data available to them but also that you understand the game better than the progamers blizzard are in contact with. yep, blizzard contacts pros privately. public comments on balance are 99.9999% unproductive. they are for your personal satisfaction only. if discussing balance online isn't a satisfying experience, then stop doing it. lol no. i'm someone who was in Ensidia/Paragon in WoW, Blizzard devs don't give a fuck what pros think - mainly because their judgements are clouded by money, prizes etc. Blizzard devs honestly don't care anything about private opinion and ultimately, 'cause it's a business, they'll do w/e the fuck they want to secure more money. people need to stop thinking because pros are that - professional - their opinion is actually cared for, by blizzard, in short it's not... blizzard will care more for 98% of bronze > master league players than the top 200 na/eu/kr etc just coz it's more money to care for 98% of idiots. for example if someone whined that ramps were too small for PVP and it caused FFs to completely shut down attacks, and high vision via warp ins despite FFs then perhaps blizzard would make all ramps larger because of that one match up, because on pro whined? no they're not gonna do that lol, they're gonna leave it the way it is because it's fine. <3 you this is sc2, not WoW. it's common knowledge at this point that blizzard listens to, and cares about the opinions of pro players.
Yes their balance team consists of one person aka Davkid Kim. If they cared about the balance so much they would have hired pros.
|
On April 18 2011 11:12 Let it Raine wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 11:05 Cranberries wrote:On April 18 2011 10:51 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:47 Badboyrune wrote:On April 18 2011 10:27 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:25 quentel wrote:On April 18 2011 10:24 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:16 quentel wrote:On April 18 2011 09:56 legatus legionis wrote:http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win-part-1.htmlShould be a mandatory read. "Doing one move or sequence over and over and over is another great way to get called cheap. This goes right to the heart of the matter: why can the scrub not defeat something so obvious and telegraphed as a single move done over and over? Is he such a poor player that he can't counter that move? And if the move is, for whatever reason, extremely difficult to counter, then wouldn't I be a fool for not using that move? The first step in becoming a top player is the realization that playing to win means doing whatever most increases your chances of winning. The game knows no rules of "honor" or of "cheapness." The game only knows winning and losing. A common call of the scrub is to cry that the kind of play in which ones tries to win at all costs is "boring" or "not fun." Let's consider two groups of players: a group of good players and a group of scrubs. The scrubs will play "for fun" and not explore the extremities of the game. They won't find the most effective tactics and abuse them mercilessly. The good players will. The good players will find incredibly overpowering tactics and patterns. As they play the game more, they'll be forced to find counters to those tactics. The vast majority of tactics that at first appear unbeatable end up having counters, though they are often quite esoteric and difficult to discover. The counter tactic prevents the first player from doing the tactic, but the first player can then use a counter to the counter. The second player is now afraid to use his counter and he's again vulnerable to the original overpowering tactic.Notice that the good players are reaching higher and higher levels of play. They found the "cheap stuff" and abused it. They know how to stop the cheap stuff. They know how to stop the other guy from stopping it so they can keep doing it. And as is quite common in competitive games, many new tactics will later be discovered that make the original cheap tactic look wholesome and fair. Often in fighting games, one character will have something so good it's unfair. Fine, let him have that. As time goes on, it will be discovered that other characters have even more powerful and unfair tactics. Each player will attempt to steer the game in the direction of his own advantages, much how grandmaster chess players attempt to steer opponents into situations in which their opponents are weak." Summary: The parts in italic, and the underlying message: seemingly powerful tactics are instrumental to developing the game. In the absence of dominant strategy there would be no motive to look for the solution. If everything was figured out, we would see the exact same things unfold. That's really shallow and uninteresting for those playing but also those watching. I'm kinda getting sick of it, I thought it was gonna fade away slowly but I feel it's gotten worse. Everytime someone makes a cry on imbalance it tarnishes the reputation, the competitive nature of the game, it's community, the players and the future. It's sickening. There are only winners and losers. "Winners never quit and quitters never win." - Vince Lombardi "Losers live in the past. Winners learn from the past and enjoy working in the present toward the future." - Denis Waitley Sounds like the type that thought 5-rax reaper was perfectly fine. or the type that doesn't give a shit because he's playing the game, not designing it Heaven forbid any feedback get back to Blizzard via forums and player comments! ??? the feedback is the game itself. the player doesn't have anything to add to the games he plays. the only time a player needs to say anything is when blizzard is like "we dont have time to watch your last 50 tvz's. can you summarize what's been going in this situation?" so actually yeah, fuck feedback via forums and comments. blizzard can see the games. that's all that matters In addition to this I'm fairly sure Blizzard is regularly in touch with progamers to hear their thoughts on balance. So to whine about balance you not only have to assume that blizzard are not reviewing the huge amounts of raw data available to them but also that you understand the game better than the progamers blizzard are in contact with. yep, blizzard contacts pros privately. public comments on balance are 99.9999% unproductive. they are for your personal satisfaction only. if discussing balance online isn't a satisfying experience, then stop doing it. lol no. i'm someone who was in Ensidia/Paragon in WoW, Blizzard devs don't give a fuck what pros think - mainly because their judgements are clouded by money, prizes etc. Blizzard devs honestly don't care anything about private opinion and ultimately, 'cause it's a business, they'll do w/e the fuck they want to secure more money. people need to stop thinking because pros are that - professional - their opinion is actually cared for, by blizzard, in short it's not... blizzard will care more for 98% of bronze > master league players than the top 200 na/eu/kr etc just coz it's more money to care for 98% of idiots. for example if someone whined that ramps were too small for PVP and it caused FFs to completely shut down attacks, and high vision via warp ins despite FFs then perhaps blizzard would make all ramps larger because of that one match up, because on pro whined? no they're not gonna do that lol, they're gonna leave it the way it is because it's fine. <3 you this is sc2, not WoW. it's common knowledge at this point that blizzard listens to, and cares about the opinions of pro players.
no, you're totally wrong. altho the games are different (duh, muh-mor-puh-gah and arrr-tea-ess) the mentality behind blizz's business is the exact same: get ppl to buy game /care about game because you've made profit.
activision are cunts. 
|
On April 18 2011 11:02 ImHuko wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Replace Tyler with Idra this SOTG! With his slump and his past SOTG, I am pretty sure he is going to be just as boring, and we need a Zerg anyways for all the huge TSL matches! Sadly I think I could take Incontrol more seriously arguing with Idra (if it happens) than Tyler at the moment
Slumping or not tyler has an RTS mind and deep knowledge of the game that you just can't replace. Not that I don't enjoy idra as a guest, i do, but he just doesn't have the same attitude and drive that make nony a pillar of the community.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On April 18 2011 11:07 Gunman_csz wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 10:51 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:47 Badboyrune wrote:On April 18 2011 10:27 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:25 quentel wrote:On April 18 2011 10:24 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:16 quentel wrote:On April 18 2011 09:56 legatus legionis wrote:http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win-part-1.htmlShould be a mandatory read. "Doing one move or sequence over and over and over is another great way to get called cheap. This goes right to the heart of the matter: why can the scrub not defeat something so obvious and telegraphed as a single move done over and over? Is he such a poor player that he can't counter that move? And if the move is, for whatever reason, extremely difficult to counter, then wouldn't I be a fool for not using that move? The first step in becoming a top player is the realization that playing to win means doing whatever most increases your chances of winning. The game knows no rules of "honor" or of "cheapness." The game only knows winning and losing. A common call of the scrub is to cry that the kind of play in which ones tries to win at all costs is "boring" or "not fun." Let's consider two groups of players: a group of good players and a group of scrubs. The scrubs will play "for fun" and not explore the extremities of the game. They won't find the most effective tactics and abuse them mercilessly. The good players will. The good players will find incredibly overpowering tactics and patterns. As they play the game more, they'll be forced to find counters to those tactics. The vast majority of tactics that at first appear unbeatable end up having counters, though they are often quite esoteric and difficult to discover. The counter tactic prevents the first player from doing the tactic, but the first player can then use a counter to the counter. The second player is now afraid to use his counter and he's again vulnerable to the original overpowering tactic.Notice that the good players are reaching higher and higher levels of play. They found the "cheap stuff" and abused it. They know how to stop the cheap stuff. They know how to stop the other guy from stopping it so they can keep doing it. And as is quite common in competitive games, many new tactics will later be discovered that make the original cheap tactic look wholesome and fair. Often in fighting games, one character will have something so good it's unfair. Fine, let him have that. As time goes on, it will be discovered that other characters have even more powerful and unfair tactics. Each player will attempt to steer the game in the direction of his own advantages, much how grandmaster chess players attempt to steer opponents into situations in which their opponents are weak." Summary: The parts in italic, and the underlying message: seemingly powerful tactics are instrumental to developing the game. In the absence of dominant strategy there would be no motive to look for the solution. If everything was figured out, we would see the exact same things unfold. That's really shallow and uninteresting for those playing but also those watching. I'm kinda getting sick of it, I thought it was gonna fade away slowly but I feel it's gotten worse. Everytime someone makes a cry on imbalance it tarnishes the reputation, the competitive nature of the game, it's community, the players and the future. It's sickening. There are only winners and losers. "Winners never quit and quitters never win." - Vince Lombardi "Losers live in the past. Winners learn from the past and enjoy working in the present toward the future." - Denis Waitley Sounds like the type that thought 5-rax reaper was perfectly fine. or the type that doesn't give a shit because he's playing the game, not designing it Heaven forbid any feedback get back to Blizzard via forums and player comments! ??? the feedback is the game itself. the player doesn't have anything to add to the games he plays. the only time a player needs to say anything is when blizzard is like "we dont have time to watch your last 50 tvz's. can you summarize what's been going in this situation?" so actually yeah, fuck feedback via forums and comments. blizzard can see the games. that's all that matters In addition to this I'm fairly sure Blizzard is regularly in touch with progamers to hear their thoughts on balance. So to whine about balance you not only have to assume that blizzard are not reviewing the huge amounts of raw data available to them but also that you understand the game better than the progamers blizzard are in contact with. yep, blizzard contacts pros privately. public comments on balance are 99.9999% unproductive. they are for your personal satisfaction only. if discussing balance online isn't a satisfying experience, then stop doing it. lol nony your actions are contradictory, you complain about PvP (ramps) in your game vs Mana which was broadcasted to thousands of people and yet you tell the most posters here to an equivalent of stfu and point fingers at how bad pro Zergs players conduct themselves. Imagine how frustrating forcefields (ramps) are for Zergs in PvZ or the entire PvZ matchup !!!
Uh did he complain about the ramps because he thought they where the old ones or the new ones? Or did he complain cause he thought it was imbalanced? I think it was the first which is why he asked the question why the ramps are so small. Like he was suprised which is why he was asking for a reply. Not because he was screaming imba. Tsk Tsk Tyler hardly if ever screams imbalance that I can remember. Some of you read what you want to read.
|
United Arab Emirates492 Posts
On April 18 2011 11:19 oZii wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 11:07 Gunman_csz wrote:On April 18 2011 10:51 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:47 Badboyrune wrote:On April 18 2011 10:27 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:25 quentel wrote:On April 18 2011 10:24 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:16 quentel wrote:On April 18 2011 09:56 legatus legionis wrote:http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win-part-1.htmlShould be a mandatory read. "Doing one move or sequence over and over and over is another great way to get called cheap. This goes right to the heart of the matter: why can the scrub not defeat something so obvious and telegraphed as a single move done over and over? Is he such a poor player that he can't counter that move? And if the move is, for whatever reason, extremely difficult to counter, then wouldn't I be a fool for not using that move? The first step in becoming a top player is the realization that playing to win means doing whatever most increases your chances of winning. The game knows no rules of "honor" or of "cheapness." The game only knows winning and losing. A common call of the scrub is to cry that the kind of play in which ones tries to win at all costs is "boring" or "not fun." Let's consider two groups of players: a group of good players and a group of scrubs. The scrubs will play "for fun" and not explore the extremities of the game. They won't find the most effective tactics and abuse them mercilessly. The good players will. The good players will find incredibly overpowering tactics and patterns. As they play the game more, they'll be forced to find counters to those tactics. The vast majority of tactics that at first appear unbeatable end up having counters, though they are often quite esoteric and difficult to discover. The counter tactic prevents the first player from doing the tactic, but the first player can then use a counter to the counter. The second player is now afraid to use his counter and he's again vulnerable to the original overpowering tactic.Notice that the good players are reaching higher and higher levels of play. They found the "cheap stuff" and abused it. They know how to stop the cheap stuff. They know how to stop the other guy from stopping it so they can keep doing it. And as is quite common in competitive games, many new tactics will later be discovered that make the original cheap tactic look wholesome and fair. Often in fighting games, one character will have something so good it's unfair. Fine, let him have that. As time goes on, it will be discovered that other characters have even more powerful and unfair tactics. Each player will attempt to steer the game in the direction of his own advantages, much how grandmaster chess players attempt to steer opponents into situations in which their opponents are weak." Summary: The parts in italic, and the underlying message: seemingly powerful tactics are instrumental to developing the game. In the absence of dominant strategy there would be no motive to look for the solution. If everything was figured out, we would see the exact same things unfold. That's really shallow and uninteresting for those playing but also those watching. I'm kinda getting sick of it, I thought it was gonna fade away slowly but I feel it's gotten worse. Everytime someone makes a cry on imbalance it tarnishes the reputation, the competitive nature of the game, it's community, the players and the future. It's sickening. There are only winners and losers. "Winners never quit and quitters never win." - Vince Lombardi "Losers live in the past. Winners learn from the past and enjoy working in the present toward the future." - Denis Waitley Sounds like the type that thought 5-rax reaper was perfectly fine. or the type that doesn't give a shit because he's playing the game, not designing it Heaven forbid any feedback get back to Blizzard via forums and player comments! ??? the feedback is the game itself. the player doesn't have anything to add to the games he plays. the only time a player needs to say anything is when blizzard is like "we dont have time to watch your last 50 tvz's. can you summarize what's been going in this situation?" so actually yeah, fuck feedback via forums and comments. blizzard can see the games. that's all that matters In addition to this I'm fairly sure Blizzard is regularly in touch with progamers to hear their thoughts on balance. So to whine about balance you not only have to assume that blizzard are not reviewing the huge amounts of raw data available to them but also that you understand the game better than the progamers blizzard are in contact with. yep, blizzard contacts pros privately. public comments on balance are 99.9999% unproductive. they are for your personal satisfaction only. if discussing balance online isn't a satisfying experience, then stop doing it. lol nony your actions are contradictory, you complain about PvP (ramps) in your game vs Mana which was broadcasted to thousands of people and yet you tell the most posters here to an equivalent of stfu and point fingers at how bad pro Zergs players conduct themselves. Imagine how frustrating forcefields (ramps) are for Zergs in PvZ or the entire PvZ matchup !!! Uh did he complain about the ramps because he thought they where the old ones or the new ones? Or did he complain cause he thought it was imbalanced? I think it was the first which is why he asked the question why the ramps are so small. Like he was suprised which is why he was asking for a reply. Not because he was screaming imba. Tsk Tsk Tyler hardly if ever screams imbalance that I can remember. Some of you read what you want to read.
On April 15 2011 03:34 imbs wrote:
here is an interesting set of quotes from an old sotg episode (one from 11.16.10 according to the file) that i wrote up for you. this was when protoss wasnt doing so well. some of these may be inaccurate but really i didn't have much time to do this so i didn't double check it.
incontrol
"thats why you have 12 protoss in the gsl, thats why you look at the top 200 north america and theres 46 protoss.... (goes on to list other top 200 stats)"
"if terran forgets a mule he can just drop 8 more mules, and now they have 4 times the size economy but if i miss a chrono boost im screwed"
"if i miss a forcefield and he runs up my ramp im dead. (on a) terrans ramp its because he lets a depot which goes up and down down."
"there are alot of little coin flips that strongly favor the terran in my opinion"
"protoss has to play as nony said perfectly to counter whatever the terran decides to do, and that puts the protoss player on his heels and thats a bad place for any rts in my opinion"
tyler
"protoss just feels more bare; the other races can survive a variety of things better than protoss can."
"the size of a mistake that a protoss makes that loses a game doesnt for terran"
"terran can just survive some misjudgements some mistakes with timing stuff like that"
"composition wise terran has a lot more leeway, if protoss wants to win they have to have a perfect composition for that or they are screwed"
there was much more of this stuff but you get the gist, and to be fair there were one or two occasions where incontrol would say or mention something about bisu.
fact is though back when protoss was seen as up and terran as op tyler n incontrol had no problem having a big discussion with painuser on balance. with idra they laughed him off randomly and next episode decided to sit there harping on about how they need to use mass nydus/infestors and theory crafted with no actual zerg around..... i like tyler and incontrol but i did not appreciate how hypocritical they were being; its hard to be too annoyed though as when you are not the most successful (mainly applies to tyler recently, but incontrol has his fair share of critics too) it is very hard to accept that your race is giving you an advantage.
There you have it. Revisit some of the older SoTG cast before the Terran nerfs, both incontrol and tyler were very vocal on the subject.
|
On April 18 2011 11:19 oZii wrote:Show nested quote +On April 18 2011 11:07 Gunman_csz wrote:On April 18 2011 10:51 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:47 Badboyrune wrote:On April 18 2011 10:27 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:25 quentel wrote:On April 18 2011 10:24 Liquid`Tyler wrote:On April 18 2011 10:16 quentel wrote:On April 18 2011 09:56 legatus legionis wrote:http://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win-part-1.htmlShould be a mandatory read. "Doing one move or sequence over and over and over is another great way to get called cheap. This goes right to the heart of the matter: why can the scrub not defeat something so obvious and telegraphed as a single move done over and over? Is he such a poor player that he can't counter that move? And if the move is, for whatever reason, extremely difficult to counter, then wouldn't I be a fool for not using that move? The first step in becoming a top player is the realization that playing to win means doing whatever most increases your chances of winning. The game knows no rules of "honor" or of "cheapness." The game only knows winning and losing. A common call of the scrub is to cry that the kind of play in which ones tries to win at all costs is "boring" or "not fun." Let's consider two groups of players: a group of good players and a group of scrubs. The scrubs will play "for fun" and not explore the extremities of the game. They won't find the most effective tactics and abuse them mercilessly. The good players will. The good players will find incredibly overpowering tactics and patterns. As they play the game more, they'll be forced to find counters to those tactics. The vast majority of tactics that at first appear unbeatable end up having counters, though they are often quite esoteric and difficult to discover. The counter tactic prevents the first player from doing the tactic, but the first player can then use a counter to the counter. The second player is now afraid to use his counter and he's again vulnerable to the original overpowering tactic.Notice that the good players are reaching higher and higher levels of play. They found the "cheap stuff" and abused it. They know how to stop the cheap stuff. They know how to stop the other guy from stopping it so they can keep doing it. And as is quite common in competitive games, many new tactics will later be discovered that make the original cheap tactic look wholesome and fair. Often in fighting games, one character will have something so good it's unfair. Fine, let him have that. As time goes on, it will be discovered that other characters have even more powerful and unfair tactics. Each player will attempt to steer the game in the direction of his own advantages, much how grandmaster chess players attempt to steer opponents into situations in which their opponents are weak." Summary: The parts in italic, and the underlying message: seemingly powerful tactics are instrumental to developing the game. In the absence of dominant strategy there would be no motive to look for the solution. If everything was figured out, we would see the exact same things unfold. That's really shallow and uninteresting for those playing but also those watching. I'm kinda getting sick of it, I thought it was gonna fade away slowly but I feel it's gotten worse. Everytime someone makes a cry on imbalance it tarnishes the reputation, the competitive nature of the game, it's community, the players and the future. It's sickening. There are only winners and losers. "Winners never quit and quitters never win." - Vince Lombardi "Losers live in the past. Winners learn from the past and enjoy working in the present toward the future." - Denis Waitley Sounds like the type that thought 5-rax reaper was perfectly fine. or the type that doesn't give a shit because he's playing the game, not designing it Heaven forbid any feedback get back to Blizzard via forums and player comments! ??? the feedback is the game itself. the player doesn't have anything to add to the games he plays. the only time a player needs to say anything is when blizzard is like "we dont have time to watch your last 50 tvz's. can you summarize what's been going in this situation?" so actually yeah, fuck feedback via forums and comments. blizzard can see the games. that's all that matters In addition to this I'm fairly sure Blizzard is regularly in touch with progamers to hear their thoughts on balance. So to whine about balance you not only have to assume that blizzard are not reviewing the huge amounts of raw data available to them but also that you understand the game better than the progamers blizzard are in contact with. yep, blizzard contacts pros privately. public comments on balance are 99.9999% unproductive. they are for your personal satisfaction only. if discussing balance online isn't a satisfying experience, then stop doing it. lol nony your actions are contradictory, you complain about PvP (ramps) in your game vs Mana which was broadcasted to thousands of people and yet you tell the most posters here to an equivalent of stfu and point fingers at how bad pro Zergs players conduct themselves. Imagine how frustrating forcefields (ramps) are for Zergs in PvZ or the entire PvZ matchup !!! Uh did he complain about the ramps because he thought they where the old ones or the new ones? Or did he complain cause he thought it was imbalanced? I think it was the first which is why he asked the question why the ramps are so small. Like he was suprised which is why he was asking for a reply. Not because he was screaming imba. Tsk Tsk Tyler hardly if ever screams imbalance that I can remember. Some of you read what you want to read.
of c not coz most imbalance threads focus on P as being imbalanced: what professional, who can make money from a game, want their race to get weaker? seriously no person would do that - ppl who're playing the op race/class or w/e want it to stay as op or imbalanced or w/e for as long as possibe... More so when they're making money from it lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
