|
On May 05 2011 06:54 Yaotzin wrote:Show nested quote +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.. Show nested quote +
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. Show nested quote +
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.
You've backpedaled to saying that a Zerg can spend his income from one base using one Hatchery + Queen, which is true if you don't just build lings and Drones, but it's not a useful statement and this is what you originally replied (to):
On May 05 2011 06:04 Yaotzin wrote:Show nested quote +
It's pretty much the most accepted fact of Zerg play that you need to be one base ahead of your opponent at all times, the race simply isn't designed to be able to deal with T or P on equal bases.
No, this is something from BW that is repeated for SC2 for some dumb reason. It's still true to a small degree, but it is nothing like it was in BW. Queens have completely changed the number of hatcheries a Zerg required for production.
That's about the inefficiency of the Zerg army. You need more bases to have a bigger economy, therefore you need your first expo faster. What you reduced your statement to has nothing to do with that.
|
On May 05 2011 07:04 Mordiford wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 06:58 Nu11 wrote:
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.
That is the state of the game. Watch the games. Protoss and Terran both have multiple builds they can do, that zerg cannot possibly scout, that T/P get an auto win with as long as they are remotely competent. However, T/P players do not take these risks every game. Again, they are risks. T/P can still and are still a massive threat in a fair game. The issue here is not a game to game basis, it's that the option simply does not exist for zerg to scout these plays. Zerg as a race is fundamentally broken. There are so many things they have no options to get out of. This isn't the state of the game, watch the games. T and P's can take a risk, but it's a fucking risk, you can do it too, big fucking surprise... See, if they take that risk and you play your semi-defensive play and are on point, you'll crush them every fucking time. If they take that risk, and you're not playing defensively, they can shit on you. If you play defensively, and they don't take a risk, then they might be slightly ahead economically depending on how to played it, but you're not in the fucking gutter. You can still gain an advantage as the game goes on. I don't see what games we're referring too, what do you have to point me towards to help me see what the shit your talking about with a sample size that actually suggests that this is the case?
Player A: Can scout and see any risks the opposing player is taking and adapt to them.
Player B: Cannot scout, cannot see any risks the opposing player is taking, must take ADDITIONAL risks to MAYBE be safe from a RANGE of potential risks player A can take.
Player A is flipping a coin to see if he can win. If his opponent's risk does not allow him to defend, player A wins.
Player B flips two coins. one because he's expecting aggression, another with exactly what that aggression will be.
Scouting occurs from player A, because he can, he has many options to do so. Player B cannot hide tech, player B has incredibly limited options and is easily readable. That coin flip disappears, player A knows exactly what player B is doing.
Now player B is at an extreme disadvantage and must significantly outplay player A in order to get back into the game.
|
On May 05 2011 07:03 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 06:59 1Eris1 wrote:On May 05 2011 06:55 TheTenthDoc wrote:On May 05 2011 06:48 1Eris1 wrote: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, but not that dominant. forgot the ra, sorz he has like 6 major foreigner tournament wins (thats more then Idra+ret combined), and probably woulda had a 7th if MC hadn't been at Dreamhack. To be fair, a lot of those are in EU/NA tournaments that IdrA and Ret couldn't or wouldn't participate in because they were in Korea. It's kinda not fair to just compare wins like that.
True, but then why can't players like Sen or Dimaga win these tournaments, because they were ridiculously good BW players (easily White-Ra's level).
IdrA and Ret both went to Korea and trained there and I think thats the key difference. But, TLO is the only other player that went and returned from Korea that significantly trained there, and he was both (A B+ or so player in BW, compared to the A++ers we are talking about, and plays such a style that he will always be knocked out of tournaments by random no namers)
|
On May 05 2011 06:59 FrankWalls wrote:
kind of off topic, but since we're talking about overlords, would anyone see a problem with them having like 1 armor or something? that would help a good bit against marines trying to deny scouting i would think. it's not really a total game changer and scouting would probably still be difficult but even as a non-zerg i dont think there would be any harm in giving overlords 1 armor.
I'm a Zerg player, and I like this quite a lot.
|
On May 05 2011 07:05 mordk wrote:
Sigh... balance once more... please zerg stop complaining... you're doing fine in tournaments, have strong representatives in every scene, and are in no shortness of winnings. Saying "we have great players winning" and saying thst means the game is imbalanced is just................
It's the ultimate horrible argument.. and the ultimate excuse to discuss a terrible subject.
The fact that there hasn't been a sufficient argument put up against the inherent imbalances in the game currently is the reason Zerg players haven't stopped complaining. Sure the metagame is constantly shifting, but until it shifts to the point where everything is completely balanced or in favor of Zerg, Zerg players will continue complaining.
|
On May 05 2011 07:02 awesomoecalypse wrote:Show nested quote +That is the state of the game. Watch the games. Protoss and Terran both have multiple builds they can do, that zerg cannot possibly scout, that T/P get an auto win with as long as they are remotely competent. This is 100% bullshit. If P and T had "autowin" unscoutable builds, they would do them all the time, because they could make a shitton of money. That they don't is a clear sign no such "autowin" build exists. As for the "Zergs are amazing players so when they win they deserve it, but when anyone else wins its because of race"...that is also bullshit. It isn't based on *anything*. MVP was a better BW player than Nestea, and there is *no* reason to believe that Nestea is somehow a vastly better SC2 player than MVP...unless you're inherantly biased to only respect Zergs.
Autowin builds do exist. They're called Build Order wins. and they happen all the time. The fundamental problem with them is that two out of three races can scout and see them coming, while one cannot.
|
On May 05 2011 07:04 Nu11 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 06:59 Soap wrote:On May 05 2011 06:47 Nu11 wrote: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. Tyler addresses this beautifully. SC is about how far you're willing to go to mitigate risks. You can put infinity spine crawlers and queens and be safe (hey spanishiwa!) or you can choose to cut corners and eventually be owned by a counter no matter how much of a better player you are. See Jinro vs MorroW on TSL3. Again, you're missing the point. yes, you can win some games taking defensive risks, but it is factually imbalanced if the only way you can defened a risk you cannot possibly see coming is taking a risk when the opponent has many options, most branching, while they can scout you. If I see a bunch of spine crawlers coming up and I'm Protoss, I'm going to make that zerg hate his life because he wasted a bunch of minerals that will not help him.
If the zerg lets a 40hp probe see what he built, I'd consider the protoss advantage is deserved.
|
On May 05 2011 06:36 karpo 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 Nestea from what i know was pretty bad at BW, he had no real success.
Rofl what the hell are you smoking. How can u think he is bad if he was a pro in sc1 for years even if he didn't have success? Sure, if u compare it to the top koreans but compared to foreigners? yeah...not so bad
and that "history before sc2" shit is just unbelievable to me, as if a player couldn't evolve skillwise in sc2?
|
On May 05 2011 07:11 Soap wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 07:04 Nu11 wrote:On May 05 2011 06:59 Soap wrote:On May 05 2011 06:47 Nu11 wrote: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. Tyler addresses this beautifully. SC is about how far you're willing to go to mitigate risks. You can put infinity spine crawlers and queens and be safe (hey spanishiwa!) or you can choose to cut corners and eventually be owned by a counter no matter how much of a better player you are. See Jinro vs MorroW on TSL3. Again, you're missing the point. yes, you can win some games taking defensive risks, but it is factually imbalanced if the only way you can defened a risk you cannot possibly see coming is taking a risk when the opponent has many options, most branching, while they can scout you. If I see a bunch of spine crawlers coming up and I'm Protoss, I'm going to make that zerg hate his life because he wasted a bunch of minerals that will not help him. If the zerg lets a 40hp probe see what he built, I'd consider the protoss advantage is deserved.
Obs? Hallucinated Phoenix? It is viable to get an observer out early. Lets not even begin to discuss zergs signification detection problems.
|
On May 05 2011 04:40 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 04:10 NoXious90 wrote:On May 05 2011 03:53 travis wrote:On May 05 2011 03:49 NoXious90 wrote:On May 05 2011 00:46 Louuster wrote:On May 05 2011 00:23 Duravi wrote:
Day9 for part of the discussion was talking about balance in a different way than we commonly understand it to be in SC2. When he was talking about reaching an equilibrium he was saying that nothing is imbalanced because ultimately people will figure out the better way to do things and then it just comes down to execution. To give an example someone alluded to earlier, he is saying something like, "If zerglings are ridiculously strong and make it impossible for the other races to win, every pro will switch to zerg, use a zergling focused strat, and whoever can execute that the best will win, so there is no imbalance."
This view is not productive at all. When we talk about balance in SC2 we are talking about the best player having the best chance to win REGARDLESS of their race. So it is in a sense combining balance with game design. Day 9 doesn't want to have that discussion. If you want to combat Idra you need to debate one of his initial assumptions, not what "balance" means in SC2.
Idra posited two things:
1. In order to give the better player the best chance to win you either need to be able to scout effectively early in the game or if you are not able to do so be able to blind counter anything it is not possible to scout with a safe build that does not leave you behind until you have the ability to scout again.
2. Zerg cannot do either of those things.
If you want to debate Idra attack one of those; once you admit both are true you essentially have to agree with him. How Sean responded is unproductive. But that way of thinking was shown as correct in BW, which is where all these guys come from and also why Day9 wants to and can argue in favor of it. Back in 06-07, when Savior was killing every zerg on the planet the matchup really seemed imbalanced until an unknown protoss went on to beat him 3-0 in the finals of a big tournament by showing a completely new forge fe into corsair/dt build. Day9 is essentially looking at it from the perspective of a viewer, saying that builds will eventually get figured out. On the other hand, Idra is looking at it from the point of view of a player, who needs to win now instead of a year from now, which is why they will never agree on that point. Day9 takes the stance of thinking that because strategy exists, there therefore will always be workarounds for all difficulties or perceived imbalances, therefore the entire notion of imbalance should never ever be discussed or entertained. But this is completely wrong and stupid, why would you eliminate something that all evidence and logical introspection points to from the realm of possibility for NO good reason? it's absurd. You'd be hard pressed to find anyone who would admit SC2 is free of flaws and has no room for improvement. When has day9 said that is what he thinks? I am pretty sure he just thinks that avenues should be properly explored before balance complaints should become prominent. 'It just needs to be figured out' can be stated indefinitely and continuously even where there's no reasonable justification for it. What is your point? Are you Nostradamus, do you know he will say it indefinitely? Maybe it does "just need to be figured out"?
My point is Idra made rational arguments as to exactly why zerg is up, but day9 simply responded with 'it'll be figured out'. that's been his stance since forever, he disregards the notion of flawed game design without justification.
|
On May 05 2011 07:02 Warrior Madness wrote:
I always face palm when people say Idra's zvp is 10x better than it was 2 months ago. So he's been doing risky hydra builds, roach ling all ins, playing risky drop plays and he's 10x better now?... Yeah right. A solid build is a build that results in you being slightly behind, even, or slighty ahead despite what the opponent is doing, and even if he sees it coming.
Well if his results are better then his ZvP is better.
There's nothing wrong with allins when your opponent is greedy. If IdrA has a great success rate with that roach/ling allin against 3gate sentry expand, then 3gate sentry expand is simply flawed and must be redone. Until it is, he should continue allinning it and picking up easy wins.
It's crucial for the metagame that Zerg players DO allin, and punch holes in T/P builds. Otherwise T/P players can get away with greediness and hurt the Zerg later. There really isn't enough of this. So many P/T players do hilariously greedy builds against Zergs - probably because Zerg players have a strong tendency to be greedy passive players themselves. They almost always get away with it. Maybe you would have less to worry about if you gave your opponents a little more to worry about? That's what IdrA has been doing and hey presto, it's working.
The reason why this roach, hydra, early drop build is not solid is because you have to make a HUGE invesment (drop), and you MUST do damage to the protoss economy or you lose.
Well no shit. That applies to every drop ever. If you spend money on something you can't throw it away.
And it's easily counterable when they see it coming. Sure you can drop 1 ovie full of roaches at his main mineral line, and at his nat while at the same time pushing towards his third. It works, if the toss doesn't know how to defend. A smart toss never ever makes zealots, he makes cannons... One cannon will make it really hard to drop. Two cannons will make it impossible to drop. So let's say that happens, the toss pulls his probes quickly enough (though he won't need to with 2 cannons), he expects it so he drops some cannons i.e. He's playing on terminus TE. The zerg's spire becomes late, the toss has secured his third, and he's got 3 collosus out now. You lose.
If it's so easy to defend why do people keep dying to it? You realise it's far harder to defend drops than execute them, right? You realise Protoss units are horrible in small numbers, which makes it seriously difficult to split our army to defend numerous drops?
Woohooo a cannon how scary. Drop 4 roaches and kill it. Drop 4 roaches/hydras in 3 places and poke our front. It's seriously fucking hard to defend that.
|
Is there any way to download State of the game to my ipod (with video)? I'm going on a 3-4 hour trainride and I would love to look at sotg while doing that, so far i've only managed to get it in mp3 format.
Any is help much appreciated!
|
On May 05 2011 07:09 1Eris1 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 07:03 TheTenthDoc wrote:On May 05 2011 06:59 1Eris1 wrote:On May 05 2011 06:55 TheTenthDoc wrote:On May 05 2011 06:48 1Eris1 wrote: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:
[quote]
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, but not that dominant. forgot the ra, sorz he has like 6 major foreigner tournament wins (thats more then Idra+ret combined), and probably woulda had a 7th if MC hadn't been at Dreamhack. To be fair, a lot of those are in EU/NA tournaments that IdrA and Ret couldn't or wouldn't participate in because they were in Korea. It's kinda not fair to just compare wins like that. True, but then why can't players like Sen or Dimaga win these tournaments, because they were ridiculously good BW players (easily White-Ra's level). IdrA and Ret both went to Korea and trained there and I think thats the key difference. But, TLO is the only other player that went and returned from Korea that significantly trained there, and he was both (A B+ or so player in BW, compared to the A++ers we are talking about, and plays such a style that he will always be knocked out of tournaments by random no namers)
TLO doesn't do so great in tournaments post-Korea, though that may be because of his tinkering around with random/the "Great Liquid Slump." Sen, too, went to Korea for quite some time, reducing the number of tournaments he can play in (since he's in Taiwan, latency on EU/NA may also be an issue).
Speaking of Dimaga, he has 4 gold medals since Beta. That's not that many fewer than WhiteRa, especially since a few of WhiteRa's golds come from some kinda debatable tournaments (SCReddit Invitational, ROOTWarzone, and one of the later TLOpens). Dimaga beats lots of the EU players in the EU leagues on top of competing (and doing okay) in the GSL WC when he visited there for a brief period.
|
On May 05 2011 07:08 Nu11 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 07:04 Mordiford wrote:On May 05 2011 06:58 Nu11 wrote:
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.
That is the state of the game. Watch the games. Protoss and Terran both have multiple builds they can do, that zerg cannot possibly scout, that T/P get an auto win with as long as they are remotely competent. However, T/P players do not take these risks every game. Again, they are risks. T/P can still and are still a massive threat in a fair game. The issue here is not a game to game basis, it's that the option simply does not exist for zerg to scout these plays. Zerg as a race is fundamentally broken. There are so many things they have no options to get out of. This isn't the state of the game, watch the games. T and P's can take a risk, but it's a fucking risk, you can do it too, big fucking surprise... See, if they take that risk and you play your semi-defensive play and are on point, you'll crush them every fucking time. If they take that risk, and you're not playing defensively, they can shit on you. If you play defensively, and they don't take a risk, then they might be slightly ahead economically depending on how to played it, but you're not in the fucking gutter. You can still gain an advantage as the game goes on. I don't see what games we're referring too, what do you have to point me towards to help me see what the shit your talking about with a sample size that actually suggests that this is the case? Player A: Can scout and see any risks the opposing player is taking and adapt to them. Player B: Cannot scout, cannot see any risks the opposing player is taking, must take ADDITIONAL risks to MAYBE be safe from a RANGE of potential risks player A can take. Player A is flipping a coin to see if he can win. If his opponent's risk does not allow him to defend, player A wins. Player B flips two coins. one because he's expecting aggression, another with exactly what that aggression will be. Scouting occurs from player A, because he can, he has many options to do so. Player B cannot hide tech, player B has incredibly limited options and is easily readable. That coin flip disappears, player A knows exactly what player B is doing. Now player B is at an extreme disadvantage and must significantly outplay player A in order to get back into the game.
They have to play better and smarter early to stay in the game but as it goes on, they have an easier time, particularly once you get into late game, then the burden flips entirely. It's not balanced from start to finish because that'd be hard as shit, it goes something like 1-2-3 for Zerg and 3-2-1 for Terran. The Terran can still win late game, the Zerg can still win early... It's not fucking ridiculous.
They did. Imbalance is when all 3 races do not have an equal chance of winning at the start of a game (given equal skill levels).
The points are clear:
1. Zerg does not have efficient early game scouting (that Toss and especially Terran does).
2. Zerg does not have strong early defenses that can compensate for that lack of intel. Terran/Toss can wall off against zerg until or have more robust units that can await the tech reveal in comparison.
Idra argues ONE of these two things needs to change.
It's not a complicated argument at all - Day9 could not produce an answer, except to explore further.
If that's how you describe imbalance then fine, but I'll say that makes balance a fuck-ton harder to achieve and if you cleared up one of those points for Zerg early on, you'd have to snuff their mid and late game a bit in certain matchups otherwise it'd be broken. I don't know how you'd go about doing that, but currently the game is balanced, any issue otherwise in my opinion is a design issue.
I don't know if I'd say imbalance is all races not having an equal chance from start to finish since that makes balance near impossible to achieve, there will always be moments when one race has an advantage for a short period(most timing attacks are based around this). I'd say balance is more an overarching thing where every race has a near equal chance of winning the game, and I feel that is more or less the case.
|
On May 05 2011 07:13 Nu11 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 05 2011 07:11 Soap wrote:On May 05 2011 07:04 Nu11 wrote:On May 05 2011 06:59 Soap wrote:On May 05 2011 06:47 Nu11 wrote: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. Tyler addresses this beautifully. SC is about how far you're willing to go to mitigate risks. You can put infinity spine crawlers and queens and be safe (hey spanishiwa!) or you can choose to cut corners and eventually be owned by a counter no matter how much of a better player you are. See Jinro vs MorroW on TSL3. Again, you're missing the point. yes, you can win some games taking defensive risks, but it is factually imbalanced if the only way you can defened a risk you cannot possibly see coming is taking a risk when the opponent has many options, most branching, while they can scout you. If I see a bunch of spine crawlers coming up and I'm Protoss, I'm going to make that zerg hate his life because he wasted a bunch of minerals that will not help him. If the zerg lets a 40hp probe see what he built, I'd consider the protoss advantage is deserved. Obs? Hallucinated Phoenix? It is viable to get an observer out early. Lets not even begin to discuss zergs signification detection problems.
He can't get an early obs and go "oh shit, he built spines and is playing defensively, let me go back in time and forge expand". See, risks.
|
On May 05 2011 06:36 karpo 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 Nestea from what i know was pretty bad at BW, he had no real success.
Do you know how fucking good you had to be at BW to even be on a pro team? And then to actually play televised games??
|
Yeah, pretty much every gateway unit sucks balls against Hydras. The problem with most hydra pushes is they either:
Don't really commit to them, in the sense of making a lot of them
or
Come too later (i.e. after Colossi are on the field)
or
Don't have a good followup planned
But if you dedicate to a good, strong 2 base timing push before Colossi come out, it is a fucking nightmare for Toss to deal with...especially if you focus down their anti-air, and prepare for a mutalisk followup. Any Toss teching to Colossi, while hoping to hold off a hydra timing push with nothing but Gateway units, is gonna be extremely resource strapped as is, and excessive cannoning will not be an option. If Zerg can kill all the Toss stalkers with their attack, and times it properly so it hits when P has tons of resources tied up in Colossi tech but no actual Colossi on the field, surviving an immediate tech switch to mutas is nearly impossible.
|
On May 05 2011 07:08 hugman wrote:
You've backpedaled to saying that a Zerg can spend his income from one base using one Hatchery + Queen, which is true if you don't just build lings and Drones, but it's not a useful statement and this is what you originally replied (to):
This has always been what I'm saying. Sorry if it came across wrong. I'm pretty sure I responded to someone saying you need production from a new hatchery, but maybe I screwed it up.
That's about the inefficiency of the Zerg army. You need more bases to have a bigger economy, therefore you need your first expo faster. What you reduced your statement to has nothing to do with that.
This is hugely overstated though. Check out some close ZvT replays, and look at the units lost as resources tab. It's really close. You may need somewhat faster expos, and you may well want more gas (especially just because you can..), but you can hold your own with very similar expo timings.
Tends to be more lopsided in ZvP, but that's largely because P tends to turtle in that MU, and turtles are always more efficient (but you can take over the map so that's OK). Same thing happens in to the toss in PvT when T goes mech.
|
Is there absolutely no way to download the mp3 in chrome? I'd kinda like to listen to this show some time.
|
as much as i dispise balance wining at least for once protoss had a reprasensitive. next show plz follow day9 he had a good point you cant really discus balance like that peace
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
