|
What TL needs to do is elect certain people for a 'humiliation squad'
the purpose of this squad would be to single out anyone who complains that x is completely broken and thats why they lose, and shine the worlds brightest spotlight on every flaw in every post they've ever made. Also, demand a replay, otherwise they get a ban from ever posting in sc2 strat again.
And if they do provide the replay, write up detailed battle reports on everything the poster did wrong and how terrible he must be to make so many mistakes
that would deter the FUCK out of those kinda posts, i tell you what
|
United States17042 Posts
On October 25 2010 12:48 Koh wrote:
Calling all veterans of Team Liquid. It's up to you to make content on the forums! I mean this encouragingly, forum veterans tend to be less eager to start threads, rather than complaining about the strat forums and staying away, go in and reclaim your own forum! Start threads, bump the better threads, lead the way, set an example! Otherwise nothing will change. Good thread.
Well some of us write in liquipedia for that kind of thing, some of us write in blogs and in our own strategy discussion. Look for the threads and history items by plexa, and if you really want to learn your history, go ahead and look at the final edits on the right hand side of the screen. It's up to everyone to make good content and set good examples - the moderators work really hard trying to clean up all the bad content instead of creating really amazing content all the time.
This OP is an example of a great op expressing the opinions of a lot of people. It takes a lot of time to make a good OP, and many of the moderators just don't really have time for it,so we don't make many threads. Go search for sc2 strategy posts by plexa, or those that have been spotlighted - they're the examples that you should be looking at. The KCDC one is another great one - that exact build was used by nexgenius for a bunch of his games. Super fragile, super greedy, but it works.
|
On October 25 2010 13:50 Charger wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2010 13:23 Westy wrote:On October 25 2010 04:19 mahnini wrote:
Imbalance doesn't mean something is harder to do than something else, imbalance means something is impossible to do. Wrong Wrong Wrong WRONG!Imbalance means... exactly what it means! In other words, the odds are stacked in someones favour... If two counter tactics (For example, emp bio vs chargelots + storms) have a MASSIVE difference in difficulty to execute (Which they do, emping a bunch of HT's is much easier than trying to storm a constantly moving stimmed bioball with medivacs) then there is an Imbalance. One side has the odds stacked against them. However, when discussing balance you always have to remember difference in skill. For a pro player, there won't be an imbalance there. When you have the ability individually control each templar and keep them at distance from each other, and can always have one eye on the minimap to see when that sneaky ghost starts moving towards your bunch of units, then you are beyond the imbalance. But you have to remember, Starcraft 2 is a game that blizzard want to be enjoyable for ALL skill levels of players. So just because it is possible to beat emp bio balls with HT's, does not mean it is balanced. (P.S. Before someone (And theres always someone) reads this and bursts a blood vessel due to anger at my incompetence, just remember that everything in this post is opinion based, so I am just as much wrong as I am right.) (P.P.S But I'm never wrong  ) Just because strategy X is easier to execute compared to Y doesn't make it imbalanced. There are probably hundreds of scenarios where this applies, to every race. For example, it is easier for toss to reinforce in battle by using warpgates compared to terran having to wait for units to build and make their way to the battle. Is reinforcing easier for toss? I think so. But that doesn't mean anything about that situation is imbalanced. It means that it is a unique, inherent benefit to playing toss. Every race has that. This is the type of post I think the OP was talking about. Just because something may be harder to do (as in your example), doesn't mean anything is imbalanced. It means work on your micro to execute the strategy YOU PICKED. You could have used colossus and/or immortals + gateway units and done pretty well too. And that army composition requires significantly less micro to be effective compared to chargelots and HT. Also, I know my micro lacks; so while I work on that outside of ladder games, I base my build and choose units that I can control properly and don't require a lot of micro. There is nothing wrong with using different, less micro intensive units if your micro isn't good enough to execute that particular strategy. You have two options in your original example: 1. Get better with that unit composition or 2. Use different units. I know for a fact, chargelots + storm isn't the only way to beat bio + emp. If you KNOW the pros can do it and it works and that is the strategy that you want to use, then practice until you can use it right. Otherwise, do something different.
See, you have once again made the common mistake.
"Because you can beat this strategy the game is balanced" Is basically the summary of what you just said. If this is the case, then there has never been an imbalance in the entire history of RTS gaming. Now wouldn't that be something!
And once again you have gone too, "Well you lost because you weren't good enough to do this and that". But your forgetting, battle net puts players of equal skill against one another. So when constantly you have emp bioballs just absolutely hammering HT's and chargelots (Which are counter builds, as in they should be an even match in a fight). Then there is an imbalance, and that imbalance comes in the form of the emp. One good EMP = GG, 5 good storms = Probably (But not always) gg.
But please, your getting off from my original point. I was just pointing out that the OPs original post about how Imbalance means that a strategy is impossible to beat is clearly wrong, as since SC2 has been released there has not been a single strategy that has been impossible to beat. Yet even Blizzard have mention parts of their game is imbalanced (And then fixed it).
Oh and about the protoss reinforcing thing, i have played Both P and T full time, and i feel reinforcing as terran is the easiest out of all races. Looking away from the battle to find the closest pylon and then warping things in is a pain in the ass! Where as just rallying your barracks to your army and being able to produce units without looking away from the battle makes micro management a lot easier.
But once again, its all opinions!
|
United States17042 Posts
On October 25 2010 12:13 Comeh wrote:
I think the OP has his nostalgia goggles on when making this thread. While I completely agree that imbalance discussions are absolutely ridiculous and out of line for the the most part, you have to remember that there were tons of this in scbw - remember how long the PvZ imbalance thread was? Every time any protoss Bisu lost, someone would make a post in there talking about how ridiculous PvZ was. After flash was determined bonjwa (well, in post sc2 era), people would constantly talk about how tvz was imbalanced in any thread related to flash. Terran players used to complain so much (even flash himself) about how protoss has a natural advantage over terran players.
My main point isn't that these discussions have validity or are worth having, but rather about that they have existed in the past and will always exist.
I just wish it would be less prominent, but what are we to expect?
I mean, kind of. On the one hand, there was a large number basically complaining that the best player in the world was unstoppable. I actually didn't have that much of a problem with that - the current problem is that everyone thinks that they should be able to play up with...huk for example, except that "zomg p is imba".
This is most irritating in the sc2 strategy section, as many people arn't including replays, and are asking kinda basic questions, and getting bad answers because...well because as far as I can tell, more people are complain than listening/searching. We have more resources than ever before, between GSL/MLG/state of the game/Day9 that there shouldn't be this many bad threads in the sc2 section 
|
United States17042 Posts
On October 25 2010 14:16 Westy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2010 13:50 Charger wrote:On October 25 2010 13:23 Westy wrote:On October 25 2010 04:19 mahnini wrote:
Imbalance doesn't mean something is harder to do than something else, imbalance means something is impossible to do. Wrong Wrong Wrong WRONG!Imbalance means... exactly what it means! In other words, the odds are stacked in someones favour... If two counter tactics (For example, emp bio vs chargelots + storms) have a MASSIVE difference in difficulty to execute (Which they do, emping a bunch of HT's is much easier than trying to storm a constantly moving stimmed bioball with medivacs) then there is an Imbalance. One side has the odds stacked against them. However, when discussing balance you always have to remember difference in skill. For a pro player, there won't be an imbalance there. When you have the ability individually control each templar and keep them at distance from each other, and can always have one eye on the minimap to see when that sneaky ghost starts moving towards your bunch of units, then you are beyond the imbalance. But you have to remember, Starcraft 2 is a game that blizzard want to be enjoyable for ALL skill levels of players. So just because it is possible to beat emp bio balls with HT's, does not mean it is balanced. (P.S. Before someone (And theres always someone) reads this and bursts a blood vessel due to anger at my incompetence, just remember that everything in this post is opinion based, so I am just as much wrong as I am right.) (P.P.S But I'm never wrong ) Just because strategy X is easier to execute compared to Y doesn't make it imbalanced. There are probably hundreds of scenarios where this applies, to every race. For example, it is easier for toss to reinforce in battle by using warpgates compared to terran having to wait for units to build and make their way to the battle. Is reinforcing easier for toss? I think so. But that doesn't mean anything about that situation is imbalanced. It means that it is a unique, inherent benefit to playing toss. Every race has that. This is the type of post I think the OP was talking about. Just because something may be harder to do (as in your example), doesn't mean anything is imbalanced. It means work on your micro to execute the strategy YOU PICKED. You could have used colossus and/or immortals + gateway units and done pretty well too. And that army composition requires significantly less micro to be effective compared to chargelots and HT. Also, I know my micro lacks; so while I work on that outside of ladder games, I base my build and choose units that I can control properly and don't require a lot of micro. There is nothing wrong with using different, less micro intensive units if your micro isn't good enough to execute that particular strategy. You have two options in your original example: 1. Get better with that unit composition or 2. Use different units. I know for a fact, chargelots + storm isn't the only way to beat bio + emp. If you KNOW the pros can do it and it works and that is the strategy that you want to use, then practice until you can use it right. Otherwise, do something different. See, you have once again made the common mistake. "Because you can beat this strategy the game is balanced" Is basically the summary of what you just said. If this is the case, then there has never been an imbalance in the entire history of RTS gaming. Now wouldn't that be something! And once again you have gone too, "Well you lost because you weren't good enough to do this and that". But your forgetting, battle net puts players of equal skill against one another. So when constantly you have emp bioballs just absolutely hammering HT's and chargelots (Which are counter builds, as in they should be an even match in a fight). Then there is an imbalance, and that imbalance comes in the form of the emp. One good EMP = GG, 5 good storms = Probably (But not always) gg. But please, your getting off from my original point. I was just pointing out that the OPs original post about how Imbalance means that a strategy is impossible to beat is clearly wrong, as since SC2 has been released there has not been a single strategy that has been impossible to beat. Yet even Blizzard have mention parts of their game is imbalanced (And then fixed it). Oh and about the protoss reinforcing thing, i have played Both P and T full time, and i feel reinforcing as terran is the easiest out of all races. Looking away from the battle to find the closest pylon and then warping things in is a pain in the ass! Where as just rallying your barracks to your army and being able to produce units without looking away from the battle makes micro management a lot easier. But once again, its all opinions!
+ Show Spoiler +
I'm going to advocate that it's not really balance/imba that i'm interested in, i would like to see multiple winning strategies to make an interesting game. Broodwar has that once you get late enough, and it's natural to see, whereas looking for that in sc2, it's starting to get there, but only if you squint really hard.
Also going to say that "battle.net puts players of equal skill together"....only happens on occasion...
being a bad poster in this post and not addressing the actual point about imbalance in any of the discussion above >>
|
I just want to say that despite the fact of how much I agree with the OP, and that i actually never bitch about imbalance (SCV Repairing Thors aside), that I refuse to listen to that damn fairy! That bitch has annoyed me one too many times, and now she's invading SC2. I WILL NOT STAND FOR THIS!!!
But yeah, really good post. It's funny how many people with big heads there are on these here forums.
|
It is like chess. Yes White has the initial advantage so some people would call that imbalanced, but in the end top chess players in the world can and do win as black. It is not that chess is imba, it is that the players had to learn and grow around any initial advantages and disadvantages. Once they do, people will and can win in all situations.
Amen on the post. I know I suck as SC2, but you know, I love playing it and I love trying new things and learning. When I kept loosing to banshee rushes it just meant that I needed to figure them out. Once that was done, I moved on to the next build that killed me. I never once blamed the game. People do need to learn some humility and learn more about themselves. I am personally a huge baseball fan and I will tell you what, baseball is a game of failure and humility. It teaches us all about it and StarCraft is very similar.
I used to play online and was a beta tester for BW many many moons ago, but I quit playing online when it seemed that everyone out there was a total jerk and could not admit that they were the problem when they lost. They preferred to blame the game or call me names when I beat them. I will admit that I am seeing less of that in SC2 than there was in SC1/BW, but I still get it sometimes. I think it has gone from being in-game to being on the message boards instead.
|
One of the best posts on TL, mainly because its about the game but also ourselves. I agree 100% with this post. Even though i have not played BW i have learned this in SC2 beta. Not knowing anything(and i mean anything) about the units in sc2 when i started. through this process, with the help of some people i met on sc2, DAY9, and PSY i made it from copper(beta times) to being 1700+ diamond. This goes to show this process works way better then "OMG I LOST TO THIS INSANELY IMBA UNIT HOW DO I BEAT IT".
|
Ah, what an excellent post. Just what we need up in here!
I'm constantly amazed by bad players (like me, I'm in gold) complaining about imbalance. Every time I watch a replay, it's obvious where I lost. Most of the time it's because I supply blocked myself really badly without noticing or because I got to focused on doing something cutesy.
I'm not exactly a veteran here, but I've also never started a thread - mainly because every question I have to ask can be answered through searching. Amazing how that works  Still, when I finally take the plunge and post a thread, I'll try and make it a good one, lol
+ Show Spoiler +Wow, that sounds way more ass-kissey than I meant it to. (kissing who's ass, the entire forum's?) Well whatever, it's 2am and I'm going to sleep.
|
Needed to be said. Too much garbage on the Strategy forums, and the mods have their hands full closing shit threads. Admit it, you're bad. I know I am. I'm terribad.
|
United States17042 Posts
On October 25 2010 14:50 Gonzodamus wrote:Ah, what an excellent post. Just what we need up in here! I'm constantly amazed by bad players (like me, I'm in gold) complaining about imbalance. Every time I watch a replay, it's obvious where I lost. Most of the time it's because I supply blocked myself really badly without noticing or because I got to focused on doing something cutesy. I'm not exactly a veteran here, but I've also never started a thread - mainly because every question I have to ask can be answered through searching. Amazing how that works Still, when I finally take the plunge and post a thread, I'll try and make it a good one, lol + Show Spoiler +Wow, that sounds way more ass-kissey than I meant it to. (kissing who's ass, the entire forum's?) Well whatever, it's 2am and I'm going to sleep.
I've actually only ever made...1 thread and 3 blogs? something like that.
|
On October 25 2010 14:16 Westy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2010 13:50 Charger wrote:On October 25 2010 13:23 Westy wrote:On October 25 2010 04:19 mahnini wrote:
Imbalance doesn't mean something is harder to do than something else, imbalance means something is impossible to do. Wrong Wrong Wrong WRONG!Imbalance means... exactly what it means! In other words, the odds are stacked in someones favour... If two counter tactics (For example, emp bio vs chargelots + storms) have a MASSIVE difference in difficulty to execute (Which they do, emping a bunch of HT's is much easier than trying to storm a constantly moving stimmed bioball with medivacs) then there is an Imbalance. One side has the odds stacked against them. However, when discussing balance you always have to remember difference in skill. For a pro player, there won't be an imbalance there. When you have the ability individually control each templar and keep them at distance from each other, and can always have one eye on the minimap to see when that sneaky ghost starts moving towards your bunch of units, then you are beyond the imbalance. But you have to remember, Starcraft 2 is a game that blizzard want to be enjoyable for ALL skill levels of players. So just because it is possible to beat emp bio balls with HT's, does not mean it is balanced. (P.S. Before someone (And theres always someone) reads this and bursts a blood vessel due to anger at my incompetence, just remember that everything in this post is opinion based, so I am just as much wrong as I am right.) (P.P.S But I'm never wrong ) Just because strategy X is easier to execute compared to Y doesn't make it imbalanced. There are probably hundreds of scenarios where this applies, to every race. For example, it is easier for toss to reinforce in battle by using warpgates compared to terran having to wait for units to build and make their way to the battle. Is reinforcing easier for toss? I think so. But that doesn't mean anything about that situation is imbalanced. It means that it is a unique, inherent benefit to playing toss. Every race has that. This is the type of post I think the OP was talking about. Just because something may be harder to do (as in your example), doesn't mean anything is imbalanced. It means work on your micro to execute the strategy YOU PICKED. You could have used colossus and/or immortals + gateway units and done pretty well too. And that army composition requires significantly less micro to be effective compared to chargelots and HT. Also, I know my micro lacks; so while I work on that outside of ladder games, I base my build and choose units that I can control properly and don't require a lot of micro. There is nothing wrong with using different, less micro intensive units if your micro isn't good enough to execute that particular strategy. You have two options in your original example: 1. Get better with that unit composition or 2. Use different units. I know for a fact, chargelots + storm isn't the only way to beat bio + emp. If you KNOW the pros can do it and it works and that is the strategy that you want to use, then practice until you can use it right. Otherwise, do something different. See, you have once again made the common mistake. "Because you can beat this strategy the game is balanced" Is basically the summary of what you just said. If this is the case, then there has never been an imbalance in the entire history of RTS gaming. Now wouldn't that be something! And once again you have gone too, "Well you lost because you weren't good enough to do this and that". But your forgetting, battle net puts players of equal skill against one another. So when constantly you have emp bioballs just absolutely hammering HT's and chargelots (Which are counter builds, as in they should be an even match in a fight). Then there is an imbalance, and that imbalance comes in the form of the emp. One good EMP = GG, 5 good storms = Probably (But not always) gg. But please, your getting off from my original point. I was just pointing out that the OPs original post about how Imbalance means that a strategy is impossible to beat is clearly wrong, as since SC2 has been released there has not been a single strategy that has been impossible to beat. Yet even Blizzard have mention parts of their game is imbalanced (And then fixed it). Oh and about the protoss reinforcing thing, i have played Both P and T full time, and i feel reinforcing as terran is the easiest out of all races. Looking away from the battle to find the closest pylon and then warping things in is a pain in the ass! Where as just rallying your barracks to your army and being able to produce units without looking away from the battle makes micro management a lot easier. But once again, its all opinions!
imbalanced skill level is something a lot of people bring up and something i see as nearly completely arbitrary. there are different kinds of skill who's to say one is more important than the other? to some extent i agree though, if something is extremely difficult to deal with, let's say marauders still had conc by default, then obviously something needs to be looked into. when we look at imbalance we should be looking at the very, very best players, no body on this forum is a very, very best player so when i see players floating 1400 diamond that complain about skill imbalance it makes my head spin.
|
Yup, that pretty much sums up all my opinions on the matter (even though I am also pretty new to TL)
|
<3 Navi and <3 the post. Should be read by all new members as well as old.
|
i clicked on sc2 general because i was bored. i was not disappointed for once ^_^
the only navi i like is the navi that sings in korean.
edit: and the poster on TL, ofc <3
|
This is such an awesome thread. I wasn't around TL too much during the Brood War days, but I can imagine how it was, and I see it when I go into the BW forums. I hope this makes an impact on the StarCraft 2 posting.
|
i totally agree. i was zerg from the start and i never complained one bit. not gonna be joyful either with buffs
|
On October 25 2010 15:40 Wolf wrote:
This is such an awesome thread. I wasn't around TL too much during the Brood War days, but I can imagine how it was, and I see it when I go into the BW forums. I hope this makes an impact on the StarCraft 2 posting.
you don't want our LR threads. they're terrible. aside from that yes its awesome ^_^
|
I think an important thing that people can do is just ignore people who unreasonably whine about balance. Don't post a response to their post, don't quote them, just pretend the post doesn't exist. It will go a long way to prevent the balance discussion hijack that seems to be rampant on TL.
|
mahnini, I hope you die in a fire for HEY LISTEN. I hate that...so much.
But really good post. I think many of us who hardly played (or did not play at all...) BW need to be knocked down a few pegs sometimes :x I remember the pretentious asshole I was on the Blizz Beta forums before I registered an account here at TL...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
