|
|
|
On May 04 2011 14:03 Asparagus wrote:
I never understood when IdrA states a flaw, one of the retorts is "well back in brood war <go off on some past trial and tribulation you went through>"
This isn't Brood War, stop bringing up how bad/hard another game was compared to this and that we should be somewhat grateful or lucky we "got it this good" and that we should settle for playing risky aka flipping coins, if there's a solution or discussion about SC2, use SC2 and not brood war analogy.
why not? it's a close analogy and the points about scouting for zerg still apply
|
wow tyler talks sooo much. but hard to argue with such good arguments. tad long though
|
tyler is so long winded. hard to focus.
|
I think Tyler's dragging this on a bit. He made his point ;d let's talk about games!
|
|
|
On May 04 2011 14:03 Elefanto wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 14:01 Jotoco wrote:On May 04 2011 13:57 drox22 wrote:On May 04 2011 13:54 On_Slaught wrote:On May 04 2011 13:51 BronzeKnee wrote:On May 04 2011 13:50 Baltor wrote:On May 04 2011 13:43 Cartel wrote:
Day9 had nothing to bring to the conversation, and in my opinion is totally wrong about his ideas that ALL GAMES ARE BALANCED no matter what, simply because we havent discovered it yet in meta game.
So let me give Day9 and example. What if Zerglings did 50 dmg. Would each race find a way to make the overall game balanced? Would it just take time? Of course its not balanced, and should be fixed. But Day9 would think its balanced we just haven't figured it out yet.
Day[9] isn't stating that all games (read: SC2) are completely balanced. If you were listening to his points earlier, he acknowledged that there might well be some imbalance, and I'm sure those of us that listened to IdrA's examples and have our own experiences can agree. But Day[9] IS stating that it's rather useless to discuss about them, especially when in an emotional state. IdrA's always been somewhat of an emotional player, and since he has the results and skill to back that up, I say more power to him. But when he lets his emotions seep into discussions like this, it really establishes nothing. We get to see his opinion (which most of us already knew) and nothing more. Day[9] is more of a proponent of having people try to figure out solutions to the perceived imbalance problems while the Blizzard guys analyze and decide what does and doesn't need to be fixed. This seems to be the much more logical route when you realize that a podcast like SotG isn't a successful vehicle for this sort of discussion at all; if these discussions are to take place, they're to take place somewhere more official if we want them to make any difference. THAT's what Day[9] is stating. It doesn't matter who says or does it, or where it happens, right is right and wrong is wrong.Doesn't matter if Idra is emotional, or if it is discussed in SotG. His arguements were valid and solid. Disagree? Then refute him with logic. Day9 says "go spaniwa build b/c its safe vs possible abuse." Idra says it isn't good vs FE but admits its good defensivly. Idra must want a build that can be good defensivly and offensively. That's fair right? This is the problem with idra he just wants a build that is safe against everything T or P can do, which is just bullshit. T and P should be rewarded for taking risks if Z doesn't take a risk then he deserves to lose. Idra is seriously stupid. 2 - A way to scout and respond correctly to what your opponent is doing and go into the macro game with an advantage or even. No that's not. If the opponent goes for a risky economy build, and you go for a safe build, he should be ahead. If he goes for a risky economy build, and you go for a risky aggressive build, he died and you are ahead / win. That's how it should be.
But you should also be able to be rewarded for aggressively scouting so that you can adjust your build and potentially scrape back into the game by outplaying the other guy. That's how it should be. It needs to be based on skill, not build r/p/s
As it is you cannot scout with Zerg during a critical part of the game--unless the other guy fails to deny your OL
|
United States7483 Posts
On May 04 2011 14:01 Jotoco wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 13:57 drox22 wrote:On May 04 2011 13:54 On_Slaught wrote:On May 04 2011 13:51 BronzeKnee wrote:On May 04 2011 13:50 Baltor wrote:On May 04 2011 13:43 Cartel wrote:
Day9 had nothing to bring to the conversation, and in my opinion is totally wrong about his ideas that ALL GAMES ARE BALANCED no matter what, simply because we havent discovered it yet in meta game.
So let me give Day9 and example. What if Zerglings did 50 dmg. Would each race find a way to make the overall game balanced? Would it just take time? Of course its not balanced, and should be fixed. But Day9 would think its balanced we just haven't figured it out yet.
Day[9] isn't stating that all games (read: SC2) are completely balanced. If you were listening to his points earlier, he acknowledged that there might well be some imbalance, and I'm sure those of us that listened to IdrA's examples and have our own experiences can agree. But Day[9] IS stating that it's rather useless to discuss about them, especially when in an emotional state. IdrA's always been somewhat of an emotional player, and since he has the results and skill to back that up, I say more power to him. But when he lets his emotions seep into discussions like this, it really establishes nothing. We get to see his opinion (which most of us already knew) and nothing more. Day[9] is more of a proponent of having people try to figure out solutions to the perceived imbalance problems while the Blizzard guys analyze and decide what does and doesn't need to be fixed. This seems to be the much more logical route when you realize that a podcast like SotG isn't a successful vehicle for this sort of discussion at all; if these discussions are to take place, they're to take place somewhere more official if we want them to make any difference. THAT's what Day[9] is stating. It doesn't matter who says or does it, or where it happens, right is right and wrong is wrong.Doesn't matter if Idra is emotional, or if it is discussed in SotG. His arguements were valid and solid. Disagree? Then refute him with logic. Day9 says "go spaniwa build b/c its safe vs possible abuse." Idra says it isn't good vs FE but admits its good defensivly. Idra must want a build that can be good defensivly and offensively. That's fair right? This is the problem with idra he just wants a build that is safe against everything T or P can do, which is just bullshit. T and P should be rewarded for taking risks if Z doesn't take a risk then he deserves to lose. Idra is seriously stupid. He wants either: 1 - A build that is perfectly safe and doesn't get you behind going into the macro game; 2 - A way to scout and respond correctly to what your opponent is doing and go into the macro game with an advantage or even. Sounds pretty fair to me.
Except that neither of them are fair. You want to play ultra safe and never risk dying to early aggression? Then play defensively, and don't go balls to the walls econ. You want a really strong econ? Then go balls to the walls econ and risk dying to early aggression.
You get three choices: Econ, Military Power, Tech. You can have any one in large amounts to the detriment of the other two. You can have two in medium amounts, you can't have all three, and you can't have two in large amounts.
Protoss and Terran are basically choosing either high econ, or high tech, or high military every game against zerg, and zergs are trying to go econ/military at the same time. They're going to fall behind in one of the two, that's the way the game actually works, and that's how it should work. Zerg would be overpowered as shit if they got to have Econ and Military in huge amounts. Hell, they already have the best econ growth rate of all three races.
You want a guaranteed scout that there's nothing the opponent can do to prevent? Protoss can't scout until hallucinate or observer, terran can scan and either whiff or get lucky, but it costs them 270 minerals each time. They can go air and fly around, but that can get stopped as easily as an overlord can. I might agree that overlord speed should be a hatchery available upgrade, but that's about all I can see.
|
I just don't get how people thought EG's original post was dismissive or rude. I thought they were entirely attempting to avoid conflict by posting it as simply as they did.
edit: for PS: Machine needs to get on that mic for a bit.
|
oh man here comes the greatest argument ever
|
Boom.
Tyler with the headshot on that one.
|
On May 04 2011 14:04 drox22 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 14:01 Jotoco wrote:On May 04 2011 13:57 drox22 wrote:On May 04 2011 13:54 On_Slaught wrote:On May 04 2011 13:51 BronzeKnee wrote:On May 04 2011 13:50 Baltor wrote:On May 04 2011 13:43 Cartel wrote:
Day9 had nothing to bring to the conversation, and in my opinion is totally wrong about his ideas that ALL GAMES ARE BALANCED no matter what, simply because we havent discovered it yet in meta game.
So let me give Day9 and example. What if Zerglings did 50 dmg. Would each race find a way to make the overall game balanced? Would it just take time? Of course its not balanced, and should be fixed. But Day9 would think its balanced we just haven't figured it out yet.
Day[9] isn't stating that all games (read: SC2) are completely balanced. If you were listening to his points earlier, he acknowledged that there might well be some imbalance, and I'm sure those of us that listened to IdrA's examples and have our own experiences can agree. But Day[9] IS stating that it's rather useless to discuss about them, especially when in an emotional state. IdrA's always been somewhat of an emotional player, and since he has the results and skill to back that up, I say more power to him. But when he lets his emotions seep into discussions like this, it really establishes nothing. We get to see his opinion (which most of us already knew) and nothing more. Day[9] is more of a proponent of having people try to figure out solutions to the perceived imbalance problems while the Blizzard guys analyze and decide what does and doesn't need to be fixed. This seems to be the much more logical route when you realize that a podcast like SotG isn't a successful vehicle for this sort of discussion at all; if these discussions are to take place, they're to take place somewhere more official if we want them to make any difference. THAT's what Day[9] is stating. It doesn't matter who says or does it, or where it happens, right is right and wrong is wrong.Doesn't matter if Idra is emotional, or if it is discussed in SotG. His arguements were valid and solid. Disagree? Then refute him with logic. Day9 says "go spaniwa build b/c its safe vs possible abuse." Idra says it isn't good vs FE but admits its good defensivly. Idra must want a build that can be good defensivly and offensively. That's fair right? This is the problem with idra he just wants a build that is safe against everything T or P can do, which is just bullshit. T and P should be rewarded for taking risks if Z doesn't take a risk then he deserves to lose. Idra is seriously stupid. He wants either: 1 - A build that is perfectly safe and doesn't get you behind going into the macro game; How is a build that automatically let's you hold off any sort of all in and still keeps you on a even level economically fair? That would completely break the game. You can't die early game, you don't fall behind in economy either if your opponent fast expands? How can you lose then?
That's not what he wants. He wants to either be able to scout or to potentially be able to defend things that you can't scout until they move out. Of course the latter should be difficult but right now it's impossible
|
Can someone explain what this whole Liquid EG thing is? What went down? Is it tense? What's da story?
|
A wild tasteless has appeared!
Edit: What are Idra and Machine all giggly about?
|
I would love to make Tyler's "chilltalk" and Idras "ragenoise" say the same paragraph, and see when they finish. I bet Idra would finish at least 2.5x faster
|
On May 04 2011 13:51 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 13:50 Baltor wrote:On May 04 2011 13:43 Cartel wrote:
Day9 had nothing to bring to the conversation, and in my opinion is totally wrong about his ideas that ALL GAMES ARE BALANCED no matter what, simply because we havent discovered it yet in meta game.
So let me give Day9 and example. What if Zerglings did 50 dmg. Would each race find a way to make the overall game balanced? Would it just take time? Of course its not balanced, and should be fixed. But Day9 would think its balanced we just haven't figured it out yet.
Day[9] isn't stating that all games (read: SC2) are completely balanced. If you were listening to his points earlier, he acknowledged that there might well be some imbalance, and I'm sure those of us that listened to IdrA's examples and have our own experiences can agree. But Day[9] IS stating that it's rather useless to discuss about them, especially when in an emotional state. IdrA's always been somewhat of an emotional player, and since he has the results and skill to back that up, I say more power to him. But when he lets his emotions seep into discussions like this, it really establishes nothing. We get to see his opinion (which most of us already knew) and nothing more. Day[9] is more of a proponent of having people try to figure out solutions to the perceived imbalance problems while the Blizzard guys analyze and decide what does and doesn't need to be fixed. This seems to be the much more logical route when you realize that a podcast like SotG isn't a successful vehicle for this sort of discussion at all; if these discussions are to take place, they're to take place somewhere more official if we want them to make any difference. THAT's what Day[9] is stating. It doesn't matter who says or does it, or where it happens, right is right and wrong is wrong.Doesn't matter if Idra is emotional, or if it is discussed in SotG. His arguements were valid and solid. Disagree? Then refute him with logic.
Idra's arguments are not valid. His followers and zerg players and low level players who take everything a pro says as truths will believe what he says anyways though. The only refute there is that Idra's opinions are skewed due to personal bias, which is what Day9 was saying in a nutshell.
Idra projects his own bias through what he says. He says he can't scout and therefore it is difficult to respond correctly to aggressive play. Then he says he has been doing a lot of aggressive cheeses, and as we can see, it's been paying off for him. However, he says he got lucky because his opponents didn't expect it and didn't scout it. Speedlings can deny protoss scouting easily before hallu or obs, which are both way too late. Scans require the sacrifice of a mule, with no guarantee you will scan the right place, so terran has a chance to end up behind and without knowledge. Sound familiar?
So basically, all 3 races are in a pretty similar situation. However, Idra points out his own races imbalance, because I admit he is one of the most skilled players and he expects to win. Other players don't point this out because they might benefit from this phenomenon since they are able to beat more-skilled players.
The problem is Idra hasn't been arguing bad game design, like what Tyler was saying, he might have a point if he did, but instead, he just states that his own race is worst off without acknowledging other races' viewpoints. But there's nothing wrong with not being objective, unless of course you're trying to talk about imbalance to the public and possibly ignorant viewers who might mistake your subjectivity for objectivity and might mistake your opinion for fact.
|
That is one ghastly Tasteless.
|
Tasteless is here 
|
Idra and machine trolling the stream chat haha.
|
United Kingdom16710 Posts
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
