|
On May 04 2011 19:03 Az0r_au wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 18:54 xbankx wrote:
If players are able to get perfect scouting every game. It will be just watching chess except with some micro which is boring. Luck and skill both matter. Go watch tournament poker then. Nothing more boring than watching coinflips determine who wins millions of dollars.
I do watch poker and there is a reason why there are people called pros. Despite there is luck, skill also matters. Being able to read opponent and take risks on certain hands is important. There are luck but good players will skew percentage in favor of them. Yes I seen hands where some guy hits runner-runner to win, that is what makes poker exciting and that is way poker is so popular right now. If you want to watch perfect decision making based on knowing everything, then go watch world championship for chess.
|
On May 04 2011 18:56 shaNk wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 18:54 xbankx wrote:
Incontrol/Tyler discussion means nothing. A trivial thing blown out of proportion.
Idra vs Day9 discussion is interesting.
Idra's points are valid but are also somewhat flawed at same time. All race have trouble scouting. After ling comes out, protoss basically does no scouting until heither hallucination, pheonix, or obs. Zerg has the same problem. Ovie is slow and people can hide building. If players are able to get perfect scouting every game. It will be just watching chess except with some micro which is boring. Luck and skill both matter. Flash andJaedong both only have around 70% win rate and they are the most dominating players so far in BW. I think Tyler made a great point that protoss players are taking a lot of risks in many build and if you try to fight "risky" build with "fair" builds of course sometimes when luck is not in your favor. You are going to lose. I mean even the safest 3 gate sentry expand for protoss. A very good roach/ling bust can easily deny the expo and force the toss into a 1 base play. Should scouting become easier and better? Debatable.
so you are saying you actually like the rock paper scisors/luck factor that sc2 has? and btw you cant compare with BW since in starcraft 2 they made everything faster with mules/chrono/larva inject and also the pathing/ai of the game. Wich is why its a way bigger problem in sc2 than in BW...
Rock/paper/scissors relationships are fairly difficult to avoid in games of limited information while maintaining diversity. Say that a build emerges that is safe versus everything (basically as 13hatch/13 pool pretty much was for a chunk of time). IdrA, and most other good players, will just do that opener. Over and over. There's no reason not to.
That creates a very repetitive style of play. As it is, commentators struggle in the early game because not much happens. It would only get worse. Tellingly, it is the all-ins or the heavy pressures that get them excited in the early game because they have a chance to work and alter the game from a bog-standard game into something different.
The other option is changing how limited information is (by altering scouting). This can make gameplay a bit too procedural. Chess openers, for example, are worked out a huge amount and can be done by rote. It does create diversity at the cost of de-limiting information.
|
On May 04 2011 19:06 Talin wrote:
The premise that someone has a right to know exactly what his opponent does and/or that there should be builds that deal with everything and come out even or ahead is dead wrong, you're absolutely never going to be given either in Starcraft if Blizzard has any sense left in them.
Other races don't have that either, so it's a very thin argument to begin with.
other races have ranged units that don't cut into your tech path, or cripple your chances of competing economically.
|
Just wanna say this was THEE most epic SotG ever.
First IdrA holding back his rage against the question dodging Day9... then... the Holy Grail of all rages..
Geoff raging hard @ Tyler = LOL
|
On May 04 2011 19:03 arioch wrote:
Can we stop getting idra on the show... I mean listening to him rant for 30 mins every week was fun at first - but its getting a bit over the top.
Yeah, hearing Tyler and iNcontrol having a heated discussion about the particular wording of an anouncement made by a third person is a lot more exciting right? 
No
Idra is the most entertaining person on that show. Although I do enjoy iNcontrol's rants quite a bit they are getting very rare now a days.
|
IdrA's argument was mainly towards ZvT, and only considering ZvT+ ZvP on macro maps assuming you have more than 1 stalker or 2+marines out on the field by 6 minutes *assuming you guessed wrong on your first OL scout*
Was commenting on someone else in the realm of ZvP, as it's pretty similar to early game toss scouting PvT. ZvT as I'm neither race, I'm not as well informed, rather offering alternative scouting methods Zergs do in other match ups, even if that type of scouting doesnt directly apply to ZvT. I'm sure Idra himself is aware of the majority of these techniques, and the others are simply undiscovered.
Either way, are you implying we must scout on 6 to beat the wall off? or put all eggs in the basket to hope the OL makes it either in the right place the first shot, or doesn't get killed by the appropriate amount of units beforehand? in T/PvZ neither have this problem because #1 nothing can kill their scout this early besides early pool or early speedlings (which shows your tech and they react accordingly) and if lings are out that early a good defensive reaction will downright win most games.
In ZvP, you definitely need to scout on 6. Those toss love to 8 gate, 12 core 14 zealot rush to make absolutely sure the drone doesn't mineral walk past the zealot. I cant and wont give thoughts on ZvT.
In the current meta game of early ZvT/P, theres almost nothing to deny techwise in terms of scouting that isn't already cheesy anyways. It's a rather silly argument to make.
|
On May 04 2011 18:48 shaNk wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 18:34 Executor1 wrote:On May 04 2011 18:27 Rabiator wrote:
IdrA rages on about the "general character of the race". If he doesnt like that he should just change races. In any case the argument that Banelings cant be used offensively is ridiculous. Baneling can easily get rid of any wall-ins he complains about, but apparently Greg isnt allowed to do that. The whole point is that IdrA cant play the game in the style he wants and thats what he is complaining about.
Also the "I should win against those players" argument simply is bad and terribly arrogant. Yep this is what ive been trying to say, im glad to see some like minded people finally joining in on the discussion. Yea when he said that zerg have no offensive builds i just chuckled and it made me realise how ignorant he can be sometimes. Honestly im tired of hearing him complain and the amount of people that take what he says at face value, he should just switch races and be done with it. Maybe its just a publicity stunt though i really cant see anyone being that ignorant >< ok so just to be sure here, you're saying that if you go banelings and waste 5 on a pylon (wich is pretty rare) so maybe 10+ banes to kill a wall in, first off thats called an all-in and if you do it economicly ur just fucking behind on tech if it fails, and also behind on econ that you coulda had if you didnt bane bust. second of all, banelings dont go through forcefields, so if you rely your baneling bust on your oponent being bad, that dosnt work at high level. you have to stop trying to find flaws in what idra says, because he is one of the best players in the world right now and what he says is usually pretty fucking accurate. if you're not talking about the early game banebust, your prob just dumb because tanks behind a wall pretty much shit on your whole army. Please think twice befor posting random statements, its pretty sad to read
Well I wasnt talking about PVZ at all when i was talking about baneling busts(idra was saying zerg has no aggresive builds he didnt specify a matchup), you rarely see banelings busts in PVZ at high levels and its even rarer to see them succeed. I was talking about baneling busts against terran(wich have had a huge amount of success as of recently). There are aggresive strategies for pvz with quick hydras ive seen have alot of success (sen vs san today) another game in starswar killer i cant remember the players but it was close positions on metal and the zerg went for quick hydras and completely dominated. Ive also seen nestea use this strategy in the team leagues against squirtle.
Aggressive builds dont have to be all ins =/
I think you looked wayy to far into what i said. And saying that idra is usually pretty fucking accurate when it comes to race balance is pretty hilarious i think every single person in that SOTG discussion would disagree with you aside from Machine. I could see almost everyone shaking their heads when he was talking, thats not to say everything he says is false or completely invalid but he exxagerates to a huge degree.
Edit: im sure youll just ignore what i say now that it has some validity though. thats what idra and his fans are best at 
|
The important question is whether you want this game to be a test of speed and accuracy, or a game of strategy. And what you want to prioritize on.
The issues Idra point out, if fixed, would trivialize strategy side of the game completely. The game would become a test of speed. And most of the time, when Idra talks about players being "better", it mostly revolves around speed and execution, not strategy.
Idra put it like this:
1. Either Zerg gets better early game scouting options so they can react to the whole variety of all-ins.
2. Zerg has a solid build that counters everything.
If either of these points were fixed, the strategy side would die, since Zerg would either quickly develop around few economic counter builds that hold various types of all-ins once scouted, or just become a "whoever executes this build faster" type of game.
All in all, that's where I found myself siding with Day9, saying that those types of "problems" shouldn't be discussed that way and that discussing balance right now is pretty pointless. These talks should always revolve around game design, rather than balance.
There are other out of the box solutions to this. One is giving Zerg access to faster offensive tech that produces units that are more cost-efficient in terms of larva with the loss of scouting options, map control and production speed. Another is by making the game more based on movement and positioning, go through the Chess route, where conquering position, holding it would be more rewarded.
So when discussing balance, keep that always in mind, so that game breaking(strategy killing) solutions won't arise.
Also, the tournaments have huge cash prize pools. If I truly was as uncomfortable with the balance as Idra is, I'd play random and just go with whatever works the best for whichever map/matchup.
|
The pause-unpause trick doesn't seem to work for me any more to boost speed when downloading the mp3. =/
|
On May 04 2011 19:25 ledgerhs wrote:
The important question is whether you want this game to be a test of speed and accuracy, or a game of strategy. And what you want to prioritize on.
The issues Idra point out, if fixed, would trivialize strategy side of the game completely. The game would become a test of speed. And most of the time, when Idra talks about players being "better", it mostly revolves around speed and execution, not strategy.
Idra put it like this:
1. Either Zerg gets better early game scouting options so they can react to the whole variety of all-ins.
2. Zerg has a solid build that counters everything.
If either of these points were fixed, the strategy side would die, since Zerg would either quickly develop around few economic counter builds that hold various types of all-ins once scouted, or just become a "whoever executes this build faster" type of game.
All in all, that's where I found myself siding with Day9, saying that those types of "problems" shouldn't be discussed that way and that discussing balance right now is pretty pointless. These talks should always revolve around game design, rather than balance.
There are other out of the box solutions to this. One is giving Zerg access to faster offensive tech that produces units that are more cost-efficient in terms of larva with the loss of scouting options, map control and production speed. Another is by making the game more based on movement and positioning, go through the Chess route, where conquering position, holding it would be more rewarded.
So when discussing balance, keep that always in mind, so that game breaking(strategy killing) solutions won't arise.
Also, the tournaments have huge cash prize pools. If I truly was as uncomfortable with the balance as Idra is, I'd play random and just go with whatever works the best for whichever map/matchup.
Sorry, but your bronze is showing, especially the last lines.
How is the current situation (impossible to know how to react) better than the ability to have ways to react.
T/P don't have to guess what Z is doing, so T/P can create strategies (that thing you don't want out of the game) but Z can't Z just has to go "Oh well i hope i guessed which cheese this guy is doing"
Pinning strategy on hope, it's not stable, and it's not really strategy.
There's a reason people love to play against Z in tournaments, and it's not because all T/P magically have amazing vZ, It's because its embarrassingly easy to do whatever you like vs Zerg, and have it be viable, because the zerg won't be able to react and will be playing from behind all game.
|
On May 04 2011 18:54 xbankx wrote:
All race have trouble scouting. After ling comes out, protoss basically does no scouting until heither hallucination, pheonix, or obs.
this is right but not what i think idra was talking about.
idra pointed out that zerg does not have a single build with the option to defend all terran strategies or at least many/the most common terran strategies AND can not scout to know in which way to react exactly.
in pvz,protoss is not able to scout the zerg either. yet it is very much possible for a protoss to hold most stuff a zerg throws at him by just doing "standard" builds.
the reason behind that is, that zerglings ,roaches,banelings are denied by forcefields if you do it correctly. while it gets harder the more all in the zerg is (basically 1 base roach all in is harder to stop than somewhat economical roach pushes,hydra aggression,drops) it is pretty much possible to stop all of them with the standard protoss strategies.
the same thing happens the other way around. zerg can cover "most" 1 base stuff a protoss does and comes out on top after holding it properly at least without a disadvantage / maybe ahead. a protoss that is expanding somewhat fast also is not a huge problem for the zerg in the early game,since it shuts down most aggression by the protoss.
terran on the other hand can deny any scouting by the zerg on 1 base while beeing able to scan if he feels unsafe. bunkers are up in about half a minute. the zerg on the other hand may die if he did not prepare for a possible unscouted strategy(this should probably be backed up by a vod or replay but i hope my further explanation/examples make it clear and everybody agrees)
best example i think,and i dont understand why this wasnt mentioned in the cast by idra, is double starport play versus expanding. both look exactly the same until the the first overlord sees the banshees or the first ling sees the expansion/forward bunkers etc.
edit3 : also ,this is a perfect example of "you cant react upon seeing it but rather have to be prepared blindly in advance"
if u use multi queens u can probably hold of the initial push and react with a hydra den after seeing the first banshees. yet if you have the queens necessary to hold of that push and you are prepared and he does not do double starport but instead expands(which idra used as an example) you are economically behind. which results in a loss unless great use of infestors/banelings (the money units of zerg)
if you dont build multiple queens in order to get the (necessary) economical advantage you are just dead against double starport.(i hope and think thats true for the highest level of play as well)
so one could argue that you could do the same as most zergs do against protoss right now and just go aggressive. but aggression against protoss only works against expansions,not one base play. (yes there is a roach all in on one base but thats just flipping a coin)
terran can expand on their own base. you dont know if u suicide 10 banelings into a wall with a siege tank or straight win the game because he went rax only into expansion. hydras dont work against terran unlike againts early mid protoss.
roach pressure against terran who is still on one base also not that great.
so basically unlike ZvP which seems to be more a map problem(u need to counteract the deathball) and also underaggressive zerg styles (forge FE is really risky against hydras,fast drops or even roaches etc,also depending on map) it seems really hard to bust a terran and punish them for their risks without going all in. sure you can go early baneling bust if you see a wall in with 2 depots but thats a 100% all in.
hope i didnt interprete stuff into idra's comments which he did never say,but thats my thoughts about the problem.
edit :
oh im the infamous "high diamond" player with all three races,so take it that serious :D which you probably didnt anyways!
edit2 : i didnt cover the spinecrawler build time since its obvious,if it was lower,zerg actually would have a very strong standard thing to do...
|
Funny how you can easily tell if Idras been on only due to the huge amount of increased zerg related balance posts in this thread. Gonna watch and see if it's any good later tonight.
Did they talk about the Sheth vs Idra showmatch, cause i haven't seen it yet.
|
On May 04 2011 19:35 Eleaven wrote:
T/P don't have to guess what Z is doing, so T/P can create strategies (that thing you don't want out of the game) but Z can't Z just has to go "Oh well i hope i guessed which cheese this guy is doing"
Please tell me you're not serious. I don't even know how to reply to this.
What gave you the idea that Zerg can't create strategies? -_-
|
Zerg has had scouting trouble since the start of beta. It's been almost a year and Zerg is no closer to finding a solution.
Lots of people mention that you need to wait and see, and a solution may pop up over time, and I think that is where 100% of the importance/relevance of the balance discussion lies. How long do you let a problem persist, before you start to rely on Blizzard to fix it?
Is anyone really happy with the fact that it took 6-7 years for Protoss to figure out how to open against Zerg in BW? Is anyone satisfied with allowing Zerg's to rely on coinflips for that long? Or what if it takes longer?
It's starting to reach that point for me where I think it needs a closer look by blizzard. Hatch tech overlord speed probably.
|
I agree with Idra's argument on SotG that zerg (the supposedly reactionary race) needs a buff to their early game scouting to help defend against 1-base timing attacks. Overlords move too slowly to fully scout a base and wall-ins shut down ground scouting. Therefore, zergs often must blindly overproduce lings, spines, or get detection/AA. Here are two possible early game zerg scouting buffs I thought of...
1) Simple idea: move overlord speed upgrade to hatch tech (keep drops on lair tech) and maybe reduce cost/build time. I don’t think this will be overpowered because zerg still has to invest in overlord speed.
2) Far-fetched idea: improve “MANA based” scouting for zerg. One main weakness of zerg scouting in the early/mid game is that zerg has no ability to execute a highly revealing scout using only mana from spells. Terrans have scan and protoss can hallucinate a phoenix (which I think is better than a scan). The overseer's changeling spell cannot compare because the changeling is a ground unit (denied by wall offs) and is at lair tech (which zerg cannot reasonably get in time to scout a 1 base all-in and have sufficient time to react).
My proposal: Give zerg an equivalent to terran’s scan (reveals any area on the map at the cost of mana) OR protoss’s hallucinated phoenix (expend mana to produce a fast, flying, non-attacking scout). This spell would be a relatively cheap/fast research at hatchery tech and the ability would be given to either the queen or the hatchery itself. This ability would also be an indirect buff to nidus worm play, allowing the zerg to more easily probe for areas to plant a nidus.
Giving zerg better scouting will eliminate a lot of blind decisions they must make in the early game to defend against the wide array of cheese and timing attacks zergs are vulnerable to.
TL;DR: zerg early game scouting sucks. suggestions: 1) move ovy speed to hatch tech 2) give queen or hatchery a zerg equivalent of terran’s scan or protoss’s hallucinated phoenix
|
On May 04 2011 18:34 Executor1 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 18:27 Rabiator wrote:
IdrA rages on about the "general character of the race". If he doesnt like that he should just change races. In any case the argument that Banelings cant be used offensively is ridiculous. Baneling can easily get rid of any wall-ins he complains about, but apparently Greg isnt allowed to do that. The whole point is that IdrA cant play the game in the style he wants and thats what he is complaining about.
Also the "I should win against those players" argument simply is bad and terribly arrogant. Yep this is what ive been trying to say, im glad to see some like minded people finally joining in on the discussion. Yea when he said that zerg have no offensive builds i just chuckled and it made me realise how ignorant he can be sometimes. Honestly im tired of hearing him complain and the amount of people that take what he says at face value, he should just switch races and be done with it. Maybe its just a publicity stunt though i really cant see anyone being that ignorant ><
Agree. I think he thought / expected zerg to be the passive macro race at the beginning which is why he picked it. When recent trends and developments show that it's not totally true ie zerg has to be more active because they have the best midgame production capability as well as lacklustre late game, he feels unhappy because it does not fit his "philosophy"
Most probably, the real complain that idra has whether he realize it or not is not that zerg has a fundamental problem but that idra has a problem with the way zerg is played. It does not suit him / he does not feel totally comfortable to be the one who dictates aggression. And now it's too late for him to change race because too many things need to be re-learned. So what he is trying to do is to change zerg to a race that fits his true style/mindset.
That's not really balance problem.
|
|
|
On May 04 2011 19:38 Caryc wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 18:54 xbankx wrote:
All race have trouble scouting. After ling comes out, protoss basically does no scouting until heither hallucination, pheonix, or obs.
this is right but not what i think idra was talking about. idra pointed out that zerg does not have a single build with the option to defend all terran strategies or at least many/the most common terran strategies AND can not scout to know in which way to react exactly. in pvz,protoss is not able to scout the zerg either. yet it is very much possible for a protoss to hold most stuff a zerg throws at him by just doing "standard" builds. the reason behind that is, that zerglings ,roaches,banelings are denied by forcefields if you do it correctly. while it gets harder the more all in the zerg is (basically 1 base roach all in is harder to stop than somewhat economical roach pushes,hydra aggression,drops) it is pretty much possible to stop all of them with the standard protoss strategies. the same thing happens the other way around. zerg can cover "most" 1 base stuff a protoss does and comes out on top after holding it properly at least without a disadvantage / maybe ahead. a protoss that is expanding somewhat fast also is not a huge problem for the zerg in the early game,since it shuts down most aggression by the protoss. terran on the other hand can deny any scouting by the zerg on 1 base while beeing able to scan if he feels unsafe. bunkers are up in about half a minute. the zerg on the other hand may die if he did not prepare for a possible unscouted strategy(this should probably be backed up by a vod or replay but i hope my further explanation/examples make it clear and everybody agrees) best example i think,and i dont understand why this wasnt mentioned in the cast by idra, is double starport play versus expanding. both look exactly the same until the the first overlord sees the banshees or the first ling sees the expansion/forward bunkers etc. edit3 : also ,this is a perfect example of "you cant react upon seeing it but rather have to be prepared blindly in advance" if u use multi queens u can probably hold of the initial push and react with a hydra den after seeing the first banshees. yet if you have the queens necessary to hold of that push and you are prepared and he does not do double starport but instead expands(which idra used as an example) you are economically behind. which results in a loss unless great use of infestors/banelings (the money units of zerg) if you dont build multiple queens in order to get the (necessary) economical advantage you are just dead against double starport.(i hope and think thats true for the highest level of play as well) so one could argue that you could do the same as most zergs do against protoss right now and just go aggressive. but aggression against protoss only works against expansions,not one base play. (yes there is a roach all in on one base but thats just flipping a coin) terran can expand on their own base. you dont know if u suicide 10 banelings into a wall with a siege tank or straight win the game because he went rax only into expansion. hydras dont work against terran unlike againts early mid protoss. roach pressure against terran who is still on one base also not that great. so basically unlike ZvP which seems to be more a map problem(u need to counteract the deathball) and also underaggressive zerg styles (forge FE is really risky against hydras,fast drops or even roaches etc,also depending on map) it seems really hard to bust a terran and punish them for their risks without going all in. sure you can go early baneling bust if you see a wall in with 2 depots but thats a 100% all in. hope i didnt interprete stuff into idra's comments which he did never say,but thats my thoughts about the problem. edit : oh im the infamous "high diamond" player with all three races,so take it that serious :D which you probably didnt anyways! edit2 : i didnt cover the spinecrawler build time since its obvious,if it was lower,zerg actually would have a very strong standard thing to do...
about the spine crawler build time, i think if it was significantly lower it may break ZVZ and that may be the reason why blizz is hesitant to do it. I dont really have a problem with them lowering it slightly for the other matchups but i could see it being a problem in zvz.
|
On May 04 2011 19:46 zeru wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2011 19:43 Tachion wrote:Is anyone really happy with the fact that it took 6-7 years for Protoss to figure out how to open against Zerg in BW? Is anyone satisfied with allowing Zerg's to rely on coinflips for that long? Or what if it takes longer?
Yes, i really, really am happy that BW is complicated enough that it even now new strategies pop up that change parts of the game. It's really good, god i love it.
And if it never did pop up? How do you determine when to let an imbalance fix itself, and when to get the devs to step in? Should Blizzard never patch the game again and just let everything work itself out from here on out?
|
On May 04 2011 19:43 Tachion wrote:
Is anyone really happy with the fact that it took 6-7 years for Protoss to figure out how to open against Zerg in BW? Is anyone satisfied with allowing Zerg's to rely on coinflips for that long? Or what if it takes longer?
I'm absolutely happy with that.
It's the players that need to fix the problems they have in the game, no matter how long it takes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
