|
Unoffiical guide about how to measure balance from a dozen tournaments results or so:
1. Access this, http://www.teamliquid.net/tlpd/leagues/index.php?section=korean&type=individual&include_standard_leagues=1
2. Count how many protosses (protossi?) have won in the last four fucking years (mind you, the other game we are discussing is less than an year old)
3. Count how many of those protosses are not named "Bisu"
4. As it seems obvious, search for threads titled "OMG OMG BW IMBALANCED" (don't open one yourself yet)
5. Judge the effectiveness of that measure by the reaction to those threads.
SPOILER: IT IS NOT.
|
On May 05 2011 06:26 L3g3nd_ wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 06:19 1Eris1 wrote:On May 05 2011 06:07 Mordiford wrote:On May 05 2011 06:02 Soap wrote:I think no one brought this up in the cast out of respect for Tyler, but IdrA says he and ret are the only zergs winning tournaments because they are supposed to, out of their experience from BW. Tyler was his major rival, now plays the ez race, and he isn't winning shit. Case closed. Zerg don't have many good players. This game is less than an year old and someone managed to switch from terran and become top 5 zerg in the world sans Korea, there are new players in the rise, I have to concur that this balance discussion is just silly and leads to nothing but Blizzard going back and forth with the game under "pro players" blessings. See how BW pro players solve "imbalances": http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=217470. Just less humorously, perhaps. kekekeke Pretty much. Also, what is this "Zergs aren't winning shit" mentality... Then when Zergs win, it's because they were either 10 times better or because the opponent played like shit... HOW do we win this argument? If they lose, it's because their race is absolute trash, if they win, it's because their opponents were absolute trash compared to them. Currently, every race is even on GSL wins, the tournament win rate for foreign races is about 50% for every race. What the fuck do we have to go on? IdrA made an if/then argument that doesn't work because if it were true, Zergs should never win a fucking game unless they're 10 times better than their opponents... So are the win rates close because every Zerg player just happens to be that much better and the race is holding them back just enough to keep it even? I'm at a loss here. I think IdrA was talking about tournament wins, rather than winrates in paticular. And he's right if you look specifically at the facts only, he and ret are the only two Zerg foreigners to take a major foreign tournament in a long time. Both of them were 2 of the top 3 best BW foreigners when they switched to SC2. Obviously IdrA overexaggerates his complaints, but unlike both MVP or MC, his points are backed up by current tournament results, which until we can actually gauge skill effectively, are the only indicator of balance, because we have to assume they're players of equal skill spread evenly throughout the 3 races. he makes the great point that if you look at zergs who win tournaments, they are super amazing players. IdrA and Ret were by far the most skilled players in those tournaments. and NesTea is the best zerg in the world, so of course he won a GSL. also FruitDealer was something special when he won GSL 1. yet if you look at Ts or Ps that have won tournaments, they simply arent as skilled. If you look at players like HuK NaNiwa SeleCT KiWiKaKi, sure they are some of the best players in the world, but if you look at their history before sc2, its hard to imagine them having any success compared to people like IdrA or Ret, who were two of the best foriegn BW players. and what do these players i listed have in common? they dont play zerg. Name one zerg who won a tournament that ISNT an exceptional gamer/player. Thats right, you cant
Your Argument is full of so many holes.
By your standard. Dimaga is bad.
Nony is supposed to be the best Nonkorean SC2 protoss
And Sangho should win the GSL
|
On May 05 2011 06:25 Soap wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 06:18 sureshot_ wrote:On May 05 2011 06:16 Mordiford wrote:On May 05 2011 06:15 sureshot_ wrote:On May 05 2011 06:02 Soap wrote:I think no one brought this up in the cast out of respect for Tyler, but IdrA says he and ret are the only zergs winning tournaments because they are supposed to, out of their experience from BW. Tyler was his major rival, now plays the ez race, and he isn't winning shit. Case closed. Zerg don't have many good players. This game is less than an year old and someone managed to switch from terran and become top 5 zerg in the world sans Korea, there are new players in the rise, I have to concur that this balance discussion is just silly and leads to nothing but Blizzard going back and forth with the game under "pro players" blessings. See how BW pro players solve "imbalances": http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=217470. Just less humorously, perhaps. kekekeke Wait, how exactly is that case closed? lol. You found one example of a good player who plays an easy race and loses. Great? Now find an example of a noob zerg who wins tournaments and has very little experience. The point you made is hardly relevant. Also I really dislike the comments being made that a balance discussion is "silly," considering, after all, the discussion is for improving the game. We don't dictate what decisions Blizzard makes, we simply give opinions and propose ideas. Statistically speaking Zerg IS the weakest race as of right now. The only real argument I see against that point is that Zerg is the least played race out of the three. If that's the source of the problem then that's the issue which needs to be addressed by Blizzard. What statistics? Is it statistically significant? The charts I looked at put every race within a couple of percent of each other in the foreign scene, it was a fair sample size. Please present your statistics to show me why Zerg is statistically the weakest race. I'm kind of curious, just want to know. Zerg vs Protoss Since 2011 Match win ratio: 38.6% Set win ratio: 40.6 Total games: 96 Terran vs Zerg Since 2011 Match win Ratio: 55.6% Set Win Ratio: 53.2% Total games played: 156 http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/2416194479This is just for the GSL. And the point was brought up by Idra in last night's podcast and it wasn't refuted by anyone. TvZ: 23-13 (63.9%)] ZvP: 24-13 (64.9%) PvT: 14-9 (60.9%) This just for the last OSL. Should I challenge the consensus that BW is incredibly balanced?
Agreed. BW has ALWAYS had slight disparities in its matchups (T slightly over Z, Z slightly over P, P slightly over T) and everyone agrees it is still balanced. I've never seen data with statistical significance that shows Z is losing any less than a particular race did in BW.
Basically, this all comes down to people needing something to blind them from reality. I gaurantee if Idra played a race other than zerg, he'd complain about balanced JUST AS MUCH, and have roughly the same results.
|
On May 05 2011 06:33 Mordiford wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 06:29 Marzocchi wrote:
That was a great SOTG.
I'd actually like to see Day[9] do two dailies addressing Idra's points:
1) Zerg Scouting Options - What have players done that consistently enable Zerg to scout, with enough time to react?
2) Countering a 200/200 Protoss - I'd realllllllly like Tyler to post some of the game's he's lost to Zerg once he's maxed at 200 so we (or Day9) can see/analyze how to beat a 200/200 Toss.
This is another stupid approach to the game. You don't have to be able to beat a Protoss 200/200 for the game to be balanced, there will always be a situation you can get yourself into that you can't get yourself out of. It's near impossible for most Terrans to beat a well established Brood Lord, Infestor, Corruptor composition provided the Zerg doesn't afk and suicide his army. Does that mean Zerg is broken? No it means you have to put on early aggression, break their shit, make sure you don't let them max out with minerals to spare on that composition.
Sorry you misunderstood me.
I'm not saying it's an approach to the game, or that it would prove anything balanced or not.
I am simply saying I'd like to see examples of how to win games that get to the point of a 200/200 Protoss.
|
On May 05 2011 06:36 1Eris1 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 06:26 Mordiford wrote:On May 05 2011 06:19 1Eris1 wrote:On May 05 2011 06:07 Mordiford wrote:On May 05 2011 06:02 Soap wrote:I think no one brought this up in the cast out of respect for Tyler, but IdrA says he and ret are the only zergs winning tournaments because they are supposed to, out of their experience from BW. Tyler was his major rival, now plays the ez race, and he isn't winning shit. Case closed. Zerg don't have many good players. This game is less than an year old and someone managed to switch from terran and become top 5 zerg in the world sans Korea, there are new players in the rise, I have to concur that this balance discussion is just silly and leads to nothing but Blizzard going back and forth with the game under "pro players" blessings. See how BW pro players solve "imbalances": http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=217470. Just less humorously, perhaps. kekekeke Pretty much. Also, what is this "Zergs aren't winning shit" mentality... Then when Zergs win, it's because they were either 10 times better or because the opponent played like shit... HOW do we win this argument? If they lose, it's because their race is absolute trash, if they win, it's because their opponents were absolute trash compared to them. Currently, every race is even on GSL wins, the tournament win rate for foreign races is about 50% for every race. What the fuck do we have to go on? IdrA made an if/then argument that doesn't work because if it were true, Zergs should never win a fucking game unless they're 10 times better than their opponents... So are the win rates close because every Zerg player just happens to be that much better and the race is holding them back just enough to keep it even? I'm at a loss here. I think IdrA was talking about tournament wins, rather than winrates in paticular. And he's right if you look specifically at the facts only, he and ret are the only two Zerg foreigners to take a major foreign tournament in a long time. Both of them were 2 of the top 3 best BW foreigners when they switched to SC2. Obviously IdrA overexaggerates his complaints, but unlike both MVP or MC, his points are backed up by current tournament results, which until we can actually gauge skill effectively, are the only indicator of balance, because we have to assume they're players of equal skill spread evenly throughout the 3 races. This confuses the shit out of me though, because those are 2 people sure... Ret and IdrA... Who the fuck were NesTea and FruitDealer? Neither of them were huge BW names? This example isn't consistent. Okay, we have big name foreign Zergs from BW winning, we have not-so-big name Zergs from Korea winning. It's an inconsistent example. NesTea was known for fucking 2v2's in BroodWar, besides it's a tiny sample. I was referring mostly to foreigner tournaments. I think there is a fair spread of BW pros in Korea playing all races. (Koreans that is)
Then I'm even more confused... The top 2 foreigners from BW chose the same race in SC2 and they're having success.
Most of the people having success for other races have extensive experience with other RTS games or are just clearly pretty good.
Naniwa, Kiwikaki both played WC3 competitively.
Jinro, SeleCT... SeleCT is a DoW hall of famer.
We don't have that many recognizable foreign BW players and the ones we had went to Zerg and you're pointing out that the Zergs succeeding at the two well known BW players that switched to Zerg?
I'm just fucking confused now.
|
On May 05 2011 06:37 Tabbris wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 06:26 L3g3nd_ wrote:On May 05 2011 06:19 1Eris1 wrote:On May 05 2011 06:07 Mordiford wrote:On May 05 2011 06:02 Soap wrote:I think no one brought this up in the cast out of respect for Tyler, but IdrA says he and ret are the only zergs winning tournaments because they are supposed to, out of their experience from BW. Tyler was his major rival, now plays the ez race, and he isn't winning shit. Case closed. Zerg don't have many good players. This game is less than an year old and someone managed to switch from terran and become top 5 zerg in the world sans Korea, there are new players in the rise, I have to concur that this balance discussion is just silly and leads to nothing but Blizzard going back and forth with the game under "pro players" blessings. See how BW pro players solve "imbalances": http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=217470. Just less humorously, perhaps. kekekeke Pretty much. Also, what is this "Zergs aren't winning shit" mentality... Then when Zergs win, it's because they were either 10 times better or because the opponent played like shit... HOW do we win this argument? If they lose, it's because their race is absolute trash, if they win, it's because their opponents were absolute trash compared to them. Currently, every race is even on GSL wins, the tournament win rate for foreign races is about 50% for every race. What the fuck do we have to go on? IdrA made an if/then argument that doesn't work because if it were true, Zergs should never win a fucking game unless they're 10 times better than their opponents... So are the win rates close because every Zerg player just happens to be that much better and the race is holding them back just enough to keep it even? I'm at a loss here. I think IdrA was talking about tournament wins, rather than winrates in paticular. And he's right if you look specifically at the facts only, he and ret are the only two Zerg foreigners to take a major foreign tournament in a long time. Both of them were 2 of the top 3 best BW foreigners when they switched to SC2. Obviously IdrA overexaggerates his complaints, but unlike both MVP or MC, his points are backed up by current tournament results, which until we can actually gauge skill effectively, are the only indicator of balance, because we have to assume they're players of equal skill spread evenly throughout the 3 races. he makes the great point that if you look at zergs who win tournaments, they are super amazing players. IdrA and Ret were by far the most skilled players in those tournaments. and NesTea is the best zerg in the world, so of course he won a GSL. also FruitDealer was something special when he won GSL 1. yet if you look at Ts or Ps that have won tournaments, they simply arent as skilled. If you look at players like HuK NaNiwa SeleCT KiWiKaKi, sure they are some of the best players in the world, but if you look at their history before sc2, its hard to imagine them having any success compared to people like IdrA or Ret, who were two of the best foriegn BW players. and what do these players i listed have in common? they dont play zerg. Name one zerg who won a tournament that ISNT an exceptional gamer/player. Thats right, you cant Your Argument is full of so many holes. By your standard. Dimaga is bad. Nony is supposed to be the best Nonkorean SC2 protoss And Sangho should win the GSL
dimaga was one of the best sc1 foreigners as well
nony would be at least one of the best if he practiced more
sangho should be competitive for a gsl... and hes now in the top 8. you cant say anyone *should* win a tournament of that caliber and mc was equivalent if not better than him towards the end of sc1.
|
On May 05 2011 06:37 corpuscle wrote:
You need to have the base up early so you can saturate your natural faster. Do you guys have any idea how zerg economy works?
Yes. Do you have any idea how Zerg larvae production works? I commented on holding a 1base allin, not saturating a natural. Stop changing the subject.
I know you can saturate your main off one base, but that delays your natural, which you need in order to, you know, not lose the game.
You don't need it if they're 1base allining.
It's not enough larva if you're spreading creep, building drones and units, etc. etc. Again, there's a reason the pros do it, and it's not conditioning that carried over from BW, it's how the race works, period.
Build another queen if you want to spread creep. You probably shouldn't sacrifice an inject for that anyway.
Pros do it for the same reason Protosses and Terrans do it: fast expanding is way better than 1basing. They don't do it for production (again, excepting a ling heavy requirement). You simply don't need to.
|
On May 05 2011 06:38 ploy wrote:Basically, this all comes down to people needing something to blind them from reality. I gaurantee if Idra played a race other than zerg, he'd complain about balanced JUST AS MUCH, and have roughly the same results.
He did. They just said that in the cast.
|
So if Zerg can't scout well early, then maybe Zerg needs to always open aggressively. Maybe baneling busts should be standard play for Zerg.
|
No, one basing is garbage. It's garbage for every race. I am not advocating it at all. All I am saying is that you do not need an expansion to hold a 1base allin. This is the same for Zerg as P/T. Your economy from the expo doesn't kick in early enough, and you do not need the production unless you require an extremely ling heavy army.
Since when is a 1 base push from Terran or Protoss an all-in? Yes, it puts them behind a little, but they're still winning even if you completely crush their army, because they can get their expansion up at the same time as you, and you're fucking Zerg and you need more expansions than them.
The reason I'm arguing with you is I don't want people to think that you can one-base as Zerg. Let's say that somehow you know an all-in is coming before the timing that you'd throw down your expo... what possible reason is there to stay on one base even if you KNOW it's coming? There's nothing that a fast-expanding zerg can't hold besides some super cheesy bullshit. There's absolutely no reason to not have an expansion up by 20 supply as zerg, and there's ten million reasons why expanding late is bad.
edit: it's worth mentioning again that it's also harder to hold a 1base allin with 1base of your own, there's simply no fucking reason to do it ever
|
On May 05 2011 06:29 Marzocchi wrote:
That was a great SOTG.
I'd actually like to see Day[9] do two dailies addressing Idra's points:
1) Zerg Scouting Options - What have players done that consistently enable Zerg to scout, with enough time to react?
2) Countering a 200/200 Protoss - I'd realllllllly like Tyler to post some of the game's he's lost to Zerg once he's maxed at 200 so we (or Day9) can see/analyze how to beat a 200/200 Toss.
It would be nice for low level players surely, but Day9 cannot speak about high level play. He doesn't play it, and he refuses to discuss any real issue brought up. That being said, IdrA is entirely correct. Everything he said is fact, it's not debatable at all. Day9 should look for alternative ways for zerg to get ahead. Are there methods to stall pushes? can zerg incorporate more spine crawler pushes into their TVZ/TVP? Should zerg actively hunt down obs/ravens with Muta/Overseer? There's lots of meta game to be worked out.
But the point remains, zerg cannot scout these builds and will be beaten every time, even if they outplay their opponent if the zerg does not guess correctly. There is a significant difference between taking an offensive risk and a defensive risk. A defensive risk leaves you with no offensive opportunities if it fails. An Offensive risk, especially the protoss early pushes can still be pulled back and used to defend in the case of zerg guessing correctly. Zerg cannot take his defensive units and just go win the game, protoss can easily warp in and stall with sentries.
I think IdrA was on to something with his spine crawler push builds, this turns a defensive risk into an offensive one, albeit not a very good one, but it worked out in a number of games I'm sure many people here saw.
I think another issue here is that zerg have options they are not using. We never see contaminate play for instance. Maybe these options are not explored because they are simply not worth it, but I would think the meta game will change some more over time.
Protoss timing pushes are absolutely deadly. and if you sit at home with units specifically designed to mess up those timings or lock down units all together, I don't see how fair complaints can be made. An overseer is cheap compared to the units a single colossus will kill in battle for instance.
|
On May 05 2011 06:40 Mordiford wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 06:36 1Eris1 wrote:On May 05 2011 06:26 Mordiford wrote:On May 05 2011 06:19 1Eris1 wrote:On May 05 2011 06:07 Mordiford wrote:On May 05 2011 06:02 Soap wrote:I think no one brought this up in the cast out of respect for Tyler, but IdrA says he and ret are the only zergs winning tournaments because they are supposed to, out of their experience from BW. Tyler was his major rival, now plays the ez race, and he isn't winning shit. Case closed. Zerg don't have many good players. This game is less than an year old and someone managed to switch from terran and become top 5 zerg in the world sans Korea, there are new players in the rise, I have to concur that this balance discussion is just silly and leads to nothing but Blizzard going back and forth with the game under "pro players" blessings. See how BW pro players solve "imbalances": http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=217470. Just less humorously, perhaps. kekekeke Pretty much. Also, what is this "Zergs aren't winning shit" mentality... Then when Zergs win, it's because they were either 10 times better or because the opponent played like shit... HOW do we win this argument? If they lose, it's because their race is absolute trash, if they win, it's because their opponents were absolute trash compared to them. Currently, every race is even on GSL wins, the tournament win rate for foreign races is about 50% for every race. What the fuck do we have to go on? IdrA made an if/then argument that doesn't work because if it were true, Zergs should never win a fucking game unless they're 10 times better than their opponents... So are the win rates close because every Zerg player just happens to be that much better and the race is holding them back just enough to keep it even? I'm at a loss here. I think IdrA was talking about tournament wins, rather than winrates in paticular. And he's right if you look specifically at the facts only, he and ret are the only two Zerg foreigners to take a major foreign tournament in a long time. Both of them were 2 of the top 3 best BW foreigners when they switched to SC2. Obviously IdrA overexaggerates his complaints, but unlike both MVP or MC, his points are backed up by current tournament results, which until we can actually gauge skill effectively, are the only indicator of balance, because we have to assume they're players of equal skill spread evenly throughout the 3 races. This confuses the shit out of me though, because those are 2 people sure... Ret and IdrA... Who the fuck were NesTea and FruitDealer? Neither of them were huge BW names? This example isn't consistent. Okay, we have big name foreign Zergs from BW winning, we have not-so-big name Zergs from Korea winning. It's an inconsistent example. NesTea was known for fucking 2v2's in BroodWar, besides it's a tiny sample. I was referring mostly to foreigner tournaments. I think there is a fair spread of BW pros in Korea playing all races. (Koreans that is) Then I'm even more confused... The top 2 foreigners from BW chose the same race in SC2 and they're having success. Most of the people having success for other races have extensive experience with other RTS games or are just clearly pretty good. Naniwa, Kiwikaki both played WC3 competitively. Jinro, SeleCT... SeleCT is a DoW hall of famer. We don't have that many recognizable foreign BW players and the ones we had went to Zerg and you're pointing out that the Zergs succeeding at the two well known BW players that switched to Zerg? I'm just fucking confused now.
Well yes, you're assuming then that WC3=BW in skill level (which I'm not saying it isn't, because I don't want to start an argument, you just have to keep that in mind)
Again, for Select you have to assume DoW=BW. And Jinro was an amateur BW player, not a pro.
(Basically, the two zerg foreigners doing good are ex BW pros. The other race foreigners that are, were not BW pros)
And no, idrA's point was that they aren't having great sucess. He and Ret are BW pro's, but they aren't dominating really. Other BW pro's are a shaky area, because BraTOK for example can't play in a lot of major tournaments for example. And Nony is playing terribly sometimes, and great other times. I'm not sure who else the other major names would be. (That switched over)
Idk, I guess IdrA's point is, if we saw more big name foreigner BW pro's switch over (and they played Protoss or w/e), they'd dominate. Think Draco, leftnaji etc
Again, I'm not arguing imbalance, I'm just trying to explain IdrA's point.
|
Well idra is correct, Zerg players do to take more risks with their builds but it pays off. Both Fruitdealer and Nestea took alot of risks and they both won a gsl taking those risks, yet both of them could have lost had their opponents been better. Seen the allinn coming, scouted that hidden expo, Rainbow would have seen or known that fruitdealer had no defence for 5-6 minutes while teching to ultra and droning like there was no tomorrow etc.etc.
I guess the point im trying to make is that because zerg wins due to opponents not being aware / prepared of A - B- C (overdroned, no defence, not spreading marines good enough, being faked out or zerg suddenly switches tech) he gets an instant confirmation that supports his claim. That these zerg players are better players with better gamesence.
And this is not me making a blanket statement, just watch fruitdealers run trough the GSL. HE DID SOME RISKY shit. Granted it was risky shit that payed off insanely well (he won the gsl in the shittiest finals ever loll) but thats because he Erred on the side of allinning.
FD is really good at going balls to the wall with a choice or making a split second game decition based on something that will win him the game.
If Zerg wants to make judgements that err on the side of safety then an opponent taking risks will come out ahead automatically. Because safety means investing money in things to defend yourself with and if there is no attack to defend then you come out behind. If this was terran or protoss those units made to defend can be turned around and attack based on scouting information instead.
Zerg cant do that to the same extent because those units made for safety are too few in numbers to do any notable harm to anything because the other race has the better defence on top of the more cost efficient units on top of better scouting and if you loose those roaches / banes / lings then you gotta remake them and that means you have less drones and get further behind.
|
On May 05 2011 06:47 Nu11 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 06:29 Marzocchi wrote:
That was a great SOTG.
I'd actually like to see Day[9] do two dailies addressing Idra's points:
1) Zerg Scouting Options - What have players done that consistently enable Zerg to scout, with enough time to react?
2) Countering a 200/200 Protoss - I'd realllllllly like Tyler to post some of the game's he's lost to Zerg once he's maxed at 200 so we (or Day9) can see/analyze how to beat a 200/200 Toss.
It would be nice for low level players surely, but Day9 cannot speak about high level play. He doesn't play it, and he refuses to discuss any real issue brought up. That being said, IdrA is entirely correct. Everything he said is fact, it's not debatable at all. Day9 should look for alternative ways for zerg to get ahead. Are there methods to stall pushes? can zerg incorporate more spine crawler pushes into their TVZ/TVP? Should zerg actively hunt down obs/ravens with Muta/Overseer? There's lots of meta game to be worked out. But the point remains, zerg cannot scout these builds and will be beaten every time, even if they outplay their opponent if the zerg does not guess correctly. There is a significant difference between taking an offensive risk and a defensive risk. A defensive risk leaves you with no offensive opportunities if it fails. An Offensive risk, especially the protoss early pushes can still be pulled back and used to defend in the case of zerg guessing correctly. Zerg cannot take his defensive units and just go win the game, protoss can easily warp in and stall with sentries. I think IdrA was on to something with his spine crawler push builds, this turns a defensive risk into an offensive one, albeit not a very good one, but it worked out in a number of games I'm sure many people here saw. I think another issue here is that zerg have options they are not using. We never see contaminate play for instance. Maybe these options are not explored because they are simply not worth it, but I would think the meta game will change some more over time. Protoss timing pushes are absolutely deadly. and if you sit at home with units specifically designed to mess up those timings or lock down units all together, I don't see how fair complaints can be made. An overseer is cheap compared to the units a single colossus will kill in battle for instance.
I don't fucking understand this...
How would the Zerg win-rate not be like 25% if this were the case? Wouldn't it be outrageously obvious to everyone if this was fact. A Zerg would have to be retardedly lucky to ever win a game.
I'm so lost. If A, B, C, D and E are an option for your opponent, and you have to guess, you'd be fucked 80% of the time... This is not the case. This is not the state of the game.
|
Zerg can scout, IdrA just doesn't know how to do it. Every race's scouting method costs money, Zerg's costs 100 minerals and 1 larvae. If IdrA is too blind to see that he MUST do this then he is a bad Zerg player and should probably switch.
|
On May 05 2011 06:46 corpuscle wrote:
Since when is a 1 base push from Terran or Protoss an all-in? Yes, it puts them behind a little, but they're still winning even if you completely crush their army, because they can get their expansion up at the same time as you, and you're fucking Zerg and you need more expansions than them.
I said a 1base allin, not a 1base push...you know, the thing where if you hold then by definition they're screwed? Mass SCV allins, that kinda thing..
The reason I'm arguing with you is I don't want people to think that you can one-base as Zerg.
I am most certainly not telling anyone to 1base as Zerg. Or anyone else. It's awful, don't do it.
Let's say that somehow you know an all-in is coming before the timing that you'd throw down your expo... what possible reason is there to stay on one base even if you KNOW it's coming? There's nothing that a fast-expanding zerg can't hold besides some super cheesy bullshit. There's absolutely no reason to not have an expansion up by 20 supply as zerg, and there's ten million reasons why expanding late is bad.
Yes, of course. If you can expand and hold an allin, you would be an idiot to not expand. ALL I am saying, is that you don't NEED to expand to get the production you need. This is totally different to BW where you simply had to build more hatcheries to get the production to hold anything.
The point of expanding as Zerg in BW was to get both production and more minerals/gas. This is not the case in SC2. Now it's all about the resources - gas in particular. Production wise you only need the 1 hatch per saturated base.
|
On May 05 2011 06:48 1Eris1 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 06:40 Mordiford wrote:On May 05 2011 06:36 1Eris1 wrote:On May 05 2011 06:26 Mordiford wrote:On May 05 2011 06:19 1Eris1 wrote:On May 05 2011 06:07 Mordiford wrote:On May 05 2011 06:02 Soap wrote:I think no one brought this up in the cast out of respect for Tyler, but IdrA says he and ret are the only zergs winning tournaments because they are supposed to, out of their experience from BW. Tyler was his major rival, now plays the ez race, and he isn't winning shit. Case closed. Zerg don't have many good players. This game is less than an year old and someone managed to switch from terran and become top 5 zerg in the world sans Korea, there are new players in the rise, I have to concur that this balance discussion is just silly and leads to nothing but Blizzard going back and forth with the game under "pro players" blessings. See how BW pro players solve "imbalances": http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=217470. Just less humorously, perhaps. kekekeke Pretty much. Also, what is this "Zergs aren't winning shit" mentality... Then when Zergs win, it's because they were either 10 times better or because the opponent played like shit... HOW do we win this argument? If they lose, it's because their race is absolute trash, if they win, it's because their opponents were absolute trash compared to them. Currently, every race is even on GSL wins, the tournament win rate for foreign races is about 50% for every race. What the fuck do we have to go on? IdrA made an if/then argument that doesn't work because if it were true, Zergs should never win a fucking game unless they're 10 times better than their opponents... So are the win rates close because every Zerg player just happens to be that much better and the race is holding them back just enough to keep it even? I'm at a loss here. I think IdrA was talking about tournament wins, rather than winrates in paticular. And he's right if you look specifically at the facts only, he and ret are the only two Zerg foreigners to take a major foreign tournament in a long time. Both of them were 2 of the top 3 best BW foreigners when they switched to SC2. Obviously IdrA overexaggerates his complaints, but unlike both MVP or MC, his points are backed up by current tournament results, which until we can actually gauge skill effectively, are the only indicator of balance, because we have to assume they're players of equal skill spread evenly throughout the 3 races. This confuses the shit out of me though, because those are 2 people sure... Ret and IdrA... Who the fuck were NesTea and FruitDealer? Neither of them were huge BW names? This example isn't consistent. Okay, we have big name foreign Zergs from BW winning, we have not-so-big name Zergs from Korea winning. It's an inconsistent example. NesTea was known for fucking 2v2's in BroodWar, besides it's a tiny sample. I was referring mostly to foreigner tournaments. I think there is a fair spread of BW pros in Korea playing all races. (Koreans that is) Then I'm even more confused... The top 2 foreigners from BW chose the same race in SC2 and they're having success. Most of the people having success for other races have extensive experience with other RTS games or are just clearly pretty good. Naniwa, Kiwikaki both played WC3 competitively. Jinro, SeleCT... SeleCT is a DoW hall of famer. We don't have that many recognizable foreign BW players and the ones we had went to Zerg and you're pointing out that the Zergs succeeding at the two well known BW players that switched to Zerg? I'm just fucking confused now. Well yes, you're assuming then that WC3=BW in skill level (which I'm not saying it isn't, because I don't want to start an argument, you just have to keep that in mind) Again, for Select you have to assume DoW=BW. And Jinro was an amateur BW player, not a pro. (Basically, the two zerg foreigners doing good are ex BW pros. The other race foreigners that are, were not BW pros) And no, idrA's point was that they aren't having great sucess. He and Ret are BW pro's, but they aren't dominating really. Other BW pro's are a shaky area, because BraTOK for example can't play in a lot of major tournaments for example. And Nony is playing terribly sometimes, and great other times. I'm not sure who else the other major names would be. (That switched over) Idk, I guess IdrA's point is, if we saw more big name foreigner BW pro's switch over (and they played Protoss or w/e), they'd dominate. Think Draco, leftnaji etcAgain, I'm not arguing imbalance, I'm just trying to explain IdrA's point.
Like...WhiteRa? He's okay (well, pretty good), but not that dominant.
|
Or that Nony dude who can't buy a win lately.
There are hardly any successful Protoss players, it's depressing.
|
On May 05 2011 06:52 artanis2 wrote:
Zerg can scout, IdrA just doesn't know how to do it. Every race's scouting method costs money, Zerg's costs 100 minerals and 1 larvae. If IdrA is too blind to see that he MUST do this then he is a bad Zerg player and should probably switch.
Cause that overlord just slowly scouts out the entire base and the enemy marines/sentries/stalkers will just let you take the scenic route.
I believe the point he made is, overlord scouting is easely denied, and everything else can't get passed the wall-in.
Also, what makes you think he does not sacrifice overlords to scout?
|
On May 05 2011 06:48 1Eris1 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 06:40 Mordiford wrote:On May 05 2011 06:36 1Eris1 wrote:On May 05 2011 06:26 Mordiford wrote:On May 05 2011 06:19 1Eris1 wrote:On May 05 2011 06:07 Mordiford wrote:On May 05 2011 06:02 Soap wrote:I think no one brought this up in the cast out of respect for Tyler, but IdrA says he and ret are the only zergs winning tournaments because they are supposed to, out of their experience from BW. Tyler was his major rival, now plays the ez race, and he isn't winning shit. Case closed. Zerg don't have many good players. This game is less than an year old and someone managed to switch from terran and become top 5 zerg in the world sans Korea, there are new players in the rise, I have to concur that this balance discussion is just silly and leads to nothing but Blizzard going back and forth with the game under "pro players" blessings. See how BW pro players solve "imbalances": http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=217470. Just less humorously, perhaps. kekekeke Pretty much. Also, what is this "Zergs aren't winning shit" mentality... Then when Zergs win, it's because they were either 10 times better or because the opponent played like shit... HOW do we win this argument? If they lose, it's because their race is absolute trash, if they win, it's because their opponents were absolute trash compared to them. Currently, every race is even on GSL wins, the tournament win rate for foreign races is about 50% for every race. What the fuck do we have to go on? IdrA made an if/then argument that doesn't work because if it were true, Zergs should never win a fucking game unless they're 10 times better than their opponents... So are the win rates close because every Zerg player just happens to be that much better and the race is holding them back just enough to keep it even? I'm at a loss here. I think IdrA was talking about tournament wins, rather than winrates in paticular. And he's right if you look specifically at the facts only, he and ret are the only two Zerg foreigners to take a major foreign tournament in a long time. Both of them were 2 of the top 3 best BW foreigners when they switched to SC2. Obviously IdrA overexaggerates his complaints, but unlike both MVP or MC, his points are backed up by current tournament results, which until we can actually gauge skill effectively, are the only indicator of balance, because we have to assume they're players of equal skill spread evenly throughout the 3 races. This confuses the shit out of me though, because those are 2 people sure... Ret and IdrA... Who the fuck were NesTea and FruitDealer? Neither of them were huge BW names? This example isn't consistent. Okay, we have big name foreign Zergs from BW winning, we have not-so-big name Zergs from Korea winning. It's an inconsistent example. NesTea was known for fucking 2v2's in BroodWar, besides it's a tiny sample. I was referring mostly to foreigner tournaments. I think there is a fair spread of BW pros in Korea playing all races. (Koreans that is) Then I'm even more confused... The top 2 foreigners from BW chose the same race in SC2 and they're having success. Most of the people having success for other races have extensive experience with other RTS games or are just clearly pretty good. Naniwa, Kiwikaki both played WC3 competitively. Jinro, SeleCT... SeleCT is a DoW hall of famer. We don't have that many recognizable foreign BW players and the ones we had went to Zerg and you're pointing out that the Zergs succeeding at the two well known BW players that switched to Zerg? I'm just fucking confused now. Well yes, you're assuming then that WC3=BW in skill level (which I'm not saying it isn't, because I don't want to start an argument, you just have to keep that in mind) Again, for Select you have to assume DoW=BW. And Jinro was an amateur BW player, not a pro. (Basically, the two zerg foreigners doing good are ex BW pros. The other race foreigners that are, were not BW pros) And no, idrA's point was that they aren't having great sucess. He and Ret are BW pro's, but they aren't dominating really. Other BW pro's are a shaky area, because BraTOK for example can't play in a lot of major tournaments for example. And Nony is playing terribly sometimes, and great other times. I'm not sure who else the other major names would be. (That switched over) Idk, I guess IdrA's point is, if we saw more big name foreigner BW pro's switch over (and they played Protoss or w/e), they'd dominate. Think Draco, leftnaji etcAgain, I'm not arguing imbalance, I'm just trying to explain IdrA's point.
Okay, I understand the point, and I also understand that this too is kinda stupid since we have a couple of BW pros player SC2 already for other races and they're not shitting on everyone. Basically we have a sample size of like... 5 people, 2 Zerg players who were good at BW are doing reasonably well. 1 Protoss isn't doing that well. And I can't think of someone huge who switched to Terran...
Either way. It's a silly argument which I'm sure goes back to stroking the
"I have to be 10 times better to win a game, so when I win, It's because I'm 10 times better, but when I lose, it's because the game is retarded... PS: I'm also still probably 10 times better than the person who beat me".
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
