I know we've had our share of rough times, it ain't always sunshine and daisies on the internet. I started out as a regular poster on your boards, I admit most if not all my posts were in General and I hardly ever dabbled in BW Strat so I can't comment on many things with too much authority, but I can tell you one thing -- BW was bigger than all of us. This is a fact that we understand, a fact that we've come to accept; and it has humbled us in our endeavors.
I went there.
For many of us, BW taught us a stern lesson in humility. No matter smart you were, someone was smarter; no matter how fast you were, someone was faster; no matter how well you played, someone played better. It was just the natural order of things. People knew that no matter how hard they were trying, someone out there in that little-big community of ours, someone was trying harder. People understood that improvement in BW was a self-reflective process. You had to find it in yourself to win, you had to understand that the reason you lost is because you made mistakes and to get better you had to come to terms with them. It wasn't about what your opponent did right, it was about what you did wrong.
SC2 Strat.
So what's changed? Why is it that since SC2's release everyone has forgotten what it was like to be humble? SC2 strat is filled with countless discussions about balance because people don't want to admit that they are bad. You can see it in the way they formulate their posts. They give general overviews of what they think is wrong WITH THE GAME as opposed to with their own play. They hardly ever provide their own replays as evidence because they know -- let me repeat that -- they KNOW that there are other reasons they lost. They just decide to ignore them.
"Here's what I think would fix it..."
The game isn't perfect, I'll give you that; but you gotta level with me, the game isn't massively flawed either. The word imbalance has been used so much that the meaning has been warped into uselessness. Imbalance doesn't mean something is harder to do than something else, imbalance means something is impossible to do. A balanced game does not mean every race is homogeneous, it means there is equal OPPORTUNITY to win. So what if, certain races are harder to play? Should we nerf Protoss in BW because D level players find them "imbalanced"?
This guy just played 500 ladder games. He isn't exhausted, he's just tired of your bullshit.
The next time you make a thread in SC2 Strat just think for a minute or two, was it really impossible for you to win that game? Could you not have won if you played a little smarter or faster? Then, maybe instead of making some smug passing comment in a thread about how impossible it is you might want to suck it up, post your replay, and try and improve instead of using TL as your personal soapbox (the irony!!).
Don't underestimate the pony.
I think most of all we need to remember what site this is. This isn't bnet forums or some feel good suggestion forum. This is TeamLiquid. We play the game because we love it, we do things because they are challenging, and we're elitists 'cause we tell it how it is.
Really really interesting. I agree about everything you say. I feel the same way about people use the young age of the game to excuse those error and don't understand what just happen
Very nice read. I joined TL when the SC2 beta started, and day by day, I notice an increasing difference between bw forums and sc2 forums in terms of attitude. Your post makes a good analysis of why that's the case. Thumbs up!
I rarely ever read the starcraft 2 strategy forum, I'd rather watch the pros play and just learn from that. But thanks for bringing up the issue as to why alot of us don't read that forum section.
I hate this logic of "I lost this game, so there most be something wrong with the balance" when the answer is (almost) always "I lost this game, but I would have won if I improved x, y, and z in my play."
That dedication to ironing out flaws in your play and strengthening your game is what made the BroodWar community so wonderful and interesting.
This is exactly why I try to avoid using "overpowered" or "imbalanced". I also think this is really the only way(at least the fastest) to improve, accept your opponent can do x and rather than moan about how easy he has it, try to find a way to deal with it and leave it up to Blizzard to balance the game.
Awesome read, hopefully this advice will eventually sink in.
I hate to use the "it's still new" line but I think it applies here. As the game gets a little older, the posting about it should develop past just how imbalanced things are. People will realize that the game isn't in beta anymore, and realistically it's pretty damn balanced. However long this is going to take is beyond me, but let's hope it's sooner rather than later.
i can't tell you how much i agree with this. i never played BW, but i train MMA which i'm sure you can imagine is a humbling experience itself... so i know what you mean when you say people refuse to accept their inadequecies and blame whatever they can when it comes to SC2. for some crazy reason this doesn't stop me at all from reading all the obvious 'game is wrong, not me' threads and SC2 Strat in general because i learn a bit from the replies sometimes.
i've been really disappointed by how quickly the SC2 community has warped into this incredibly whiny, self-entitled and irrationally arrogant consciousness from early beta, where people were a lot more humble and accepting of the fact that they actually know little to nothing, to now. i don't think i would've even picked up the game if TL was the way it is now when i first found the site and browsed SC2's forums tbh... it's really awful and uncharacteristic of the rest of the site. i'd encourage any attempts to mass purge it
I think the people who respond here are the same people the OP is talking about. But I also think they don't know they're being annoying.
Not that I can say a lot, since I only have 70 posts or so. But I've been on more boards than this one and everywhere it's the same. There are two generations of people (here obviously the bw and the SCII people) who are completely different. The older generation is experienced, wiser. The new generation is wild and possibly annoying. They are younger (literally), so it's not that weird that they haven't come to the understandings that 'there is always someone better than they are'.
I agree with your post, people should look at themselves before whining about the game. Give it some time, maybe they'll soften up. Else you'll just have to live with it, maybe get more people from the bw scene to give the good example (I doubt if they will, but still) or be stricter with the rules. Whining about balance even though there're no balance problems should be punished.
+1 I remember in SC1 people rarely (read as .01%) of the time mentioned balance issues and instead talked about how they could improve. I wish people in SC2 just realized how bad they are, myself included. I am a 1600 Diamond Protoss and I know that my Sc1 ranking of high D+ is still a close approximation of what my macro abilities and strategical understanding are.
you know what, +2 b/c I also like the fact you mention that SC1 taught us about losing, learning, and accepting our faults in an effort to improve. Those lessons actually helped me a lot IRL with school too >_<
this the reason i 100% avoid using "imba" and "op"... if u blame your loss on somethihng you dont have control over, you wont improve. if you blame it on yourself or a mistake you made, that's something that is fixable
This thread needs to be stickied. I agree 110%. People need to look at what they did wrong, not what's wrong with the game. BW had many more ridiculous than SC2, for example, vulture's insane cost efficiency in TvP, lurkers under swarm being near invincible in ZvT, or arbs having enough health to divebomb into turrets and recall their army into your main In PvT. Yet people would still look at their own mistakes when these incredible strengths of their opponent's race was so apparent. I'd like to see this done more in SC2.
Hmm honestly, I don't think anyone below diamond (includes me lol) can really know anything about balance. At the same time, I can see value in Blizzard trying to balance the game for various skill levels, too, so that a zerg isn't 40 times harder for a noob (I'm not at all saying it is, this is just hypothetical). So I can see the use in their whining because if there is a lot more noob whining about one particular thing blizzard can at least look into it, but balancing the game at the top level is always paramount.
The thing I liked most about lurking BW is that is was a challenge for the players and everyone tried to understand all the little bits and pieces to formulate their playstyle and how to win. I liked that you could read the forums and get general well mannered advice (for the most part.) This isn't the case in SC2, infact it's the complete opposite.
The new community wants instant gratification. IF you lose its IMBA (this was rampant in the WoW Arena scene ugh..) Alsothere is no humility in SC2 maybe because it's too new and people get their diamond logo and feel superior, maybe gamers are spoiled little bitches these days, who knows. In BW as a new player logging into ICCUP you went in knowing that you're awful as fuck as you strive for D-, D, D+, there isn't that feeling anymore in sc2, that the player is in fact awful and needs to improve, I miss that.
This is so epicly true. BW was always "I played bad so I lost" it's useful to just look back at when losing an Iccup game was a learning experience rather than a death blow. You get better by losing and identifying flaws.
On October 25 2010 05:05 Dragonblood21 wrote: This thread needs to be stickied. I agree 110%. People need to look at what they did wrong, not what's wrong with the game. BW had many more ridiculous than SC2, for example, vulture's insane cost efficiency in TvP, lurkers under swarm being near invincible in ZvT, or arbs having enough health to divebomb into turrets and recall their army into your main In PvT. Yet people would still look at their own mistakes when these incredible strengths of their opponent's race was so apparent. I'd like to see this done more in SC2.
Don't forget Archons with Dark Swarm 0_0. <3 Stork
Unfortunately I think the only way to stem the tide of this sort of thing is for mods to start cracking down more. I come to TL because it's not the bnet forums, but they're starting to look more and more similar. I expect a little more.
That's actually funny, a very similiar thought went through my head for the first time today. That analysis of SC2 games here is nearly never about mistakes player make, but about what's wrong with the involved units.
But I didn't plan on writing such a beautiful text. Well done, very nice read.
I do think there's a rating system problem. Posting on the BW forums as 'I'm D+ and...' has a different connotation than '1300 Diamond here...' which I always read in a snooty British accent.
I'll echo the posts of everyone above and agree 100%. I mean, its not even debatable, its just fact that the SC2 boards, especially strats, are a verbal diarrhea filled cesspool compared to the older BW boards and the general quality and content of the posts.
Its just that the idiots who make it that way wont bother reading these posts, or will read them, and continue posting that trash. Just the way they are. Like you said, its just mostly people who were never around in that era of gaming, and dont remember or never experienced the community at that time, where you would look like a complete and utter retard for posting that vultures are OP, or that 6 pooling is too damn powerful. They still probably secretly felt that way, its just that even they knew that the amount of ridicule would make them feel stupid.
Damn, after re reading the post 5 times in a row while trying to argue against the OP, I realized I just couldn't find anything to argue about. Yeah, this is what we need.
I really dislike this put 'funny' pictures randomly in your text thing. I get that Final Edits and stuff do this a lot, but those are appropriate. These just make it feel condescending and not really serious at all, which is a shame because the message is really important.
Thanks for this post, mahnini. Hopefully this will get featured on the front page because the SC2 strategy forums really have been in awful shape for a while now. People need to stop feeling this overbearing sense of entitlement (a plague that's affected a significant portion of all gaming communities in more recent years) and be more open to receiving criticism. Even if you lose 100 games against a certain build and you're clueless on what to do, it doesn't mean you can just shout "x is overpowered." Really take the time to analyze your own mistakes and master just the basics of this game.
On October 25 2010 05:11 vesicular wrote: Unfortunately I think the only way to stem the tide of this sort of thing is for mods to start cracking down more. I come to TL because it's not the bnet forums, but they're starting to look more and more similar. I expect a little more.
I agree. I'm a new player her, and I'm very willing to learn. However, the strategy section seems to be more about whining and complaining.
A second thing is that the strategy section rules aren't very enforced. I think they should be so that, as elitist as it sounds, good players talk, and bad players (like me) listen or ask questions.
Ever since beta I've noticed the difference between BW players and SC2 players in terms of attitude when it came to strategy. I cringe every time when a player finds the need to boast their rank and rating, and then blame their losses on imbalances or cheesy play.
They need to read this, and then they need to openly admit that they need to become more humble. I bet some of these players are reading this thread, and going like "Hmph, whatever, everyone's full of shit."
I agree with this now, the game is in a reasonable state after the latest patch. I am sure it will still get a lot of tweaking but at this point I think all races have a somewhat even chance to win.
On October 25 2010 05:20 mahnini wrote: i'm glad so many people agree.
Yea it'd be nice to start seeing some positive changes though, that's where it really counts
I mean we can agree all we want but if the forums stay the same as it is, this whole thread is pointless.
yeah, personally, i think i might've been too lenient when moderating sc2 strat. i'll definitely try to crackdown more. the forum doesn't actaully look bad now but that's because a bunch of threads just got closed
I think this is very accurate. People don't like to blame themselves, so they blame other things (lag sometimes, their partners in group games, balance, etc, etc, etc...). In my opinion there are balance issues... but they are only noticeable at the very very top level of play. For everyone else, learning the game can overcome. Thanks for the post.
Anyways when I saw the thread title I was absolutely sure Navi was going to be in it haha
I've been waiting for someone significant to make a post like this. I've been a long time lurker, but refrained from making a post like this myself because of the irony. Anyway, thanks for this and let's keep this stickied for all the TL newcomers.
Love the thread title Hey! Hey! Hey! Hey Listen! Watch out!
Great post too; I think in many ways it was beginning to die down by itself. Right now the game is in probably the best state it's been in ever and people are beginning to move out of "beta mode" and into "enjoy the game" mode.
Maybe it is time we stopped all direct balance threads completely and turn more into the BW strategy style threads which mainly discuss specific strategies, maps and situations.
very true. almost never posting in the strategy forums, just because i know i have no clue and i am just trying to learn by playing and casting and that stuff. we all have a long way to go.
Saw the thread title, thought, "Oh god Navi has found me!", opened the thread and almost crapped myself laughing.
I completely agree with what you've written, it does seem that there is a lack of self-responsibility in regards to why someone lost. Of course many of the units in the game are powerful, that's what makes it interesting. But like in BW, there is a balanced imbalance, if you will, where all the ROFLOMGZORS units cancel each other out, and you have a dynamic and varying game.
The internets has changed alot in 12 years. If starcraft 1 and BW was released 2010 im sure the forums would look the same. We are just used to expressing ourself in a diffrent way 2010 compared to 1998.
I personally believe that in a game where 2 players make 0 mistakes, it should be balanced. Currently how the races work, mistakes are less punished by other races, and can be game ending for others. "Auto-lose" is a word I hear thrown around a lot by Zerg players, and I completely agree with them. It's just how the dynamics of the race work.
It's not impossible to win, but it sure is tough when an opponent makes 4-6 major mistakes, you make 1 misclick that costs you a few units, and your opponent steamrolls you because of it in my opinion. I guess that's what you mean though. It's totally my fault that I lose that game, I guess?
I really appreciate the moderator staff and how they handle harassment, and overbearing whine. I just think it would be better if moderators would not be allowed to voice their opinions on balance, or use their opinions on game balance to moderate. It is a complete conflict of interest.
+1 I fully agree with the OP's point on people posting w/out providing replays or discussing what they did wrong or even thinking about it, so they blame it on x race doing y strat is heavily imbalanced against z race.
On October 25 2010 05:45 TLOBrian wrote: I personally believe that in a game where 2 players make 0 mistakes, it should be balanced. Currently how the races work, mistakes are less punished by other races, and can be game ending for others. "Auto-lose" is a word I hear thrown around a lot by Zerg players, and I completely agree with them. It's just how the dynamics of the race work.
It's not impossible to win, but it sure is tough when an opponent makes 4-6 major mistakes, you make 1 misclick that costs you a few units, and your opponent steamrolls you because of it in my opinion. I guess that's what you mean though. It's totally my fault that I lose that game, I guess?
From the OP I read it more: Are you pro level player? If not: You are likely to have made a lot more than 1 mistake and should try to cut those down, scout better, figure new timings/ways to hurt your opponent to give you a lead. RyanRushia worded my thoughts(which I had tried to describe earlier) perfectly:
On October 25 2010 05:04 RyanRushia wrote: this the reason i 100% avoid using "imba" and "op"... if u blame your loss on somethihng you dont have control over, you wont improve. if you blame it on yourself or a mistake you made, that's something that is fixable
I disagree with OP, don't wanna be critical or stubborn. But as you see lately people talk less about balance. Blizzard did a good job and fixed some pretty big problems. If I remember correctly TL started to grow after BW was balanced and people simply talked about strats,tactics and so on.
Now that game is becoming balanced everybody's going to get back to what TL used to be before SC2.
Its not people's fault, obviously there are some people who will endlessly claim that there is imbalance. But admit it, how could you say that MorroW was better player when he won IdrA by using reapers. Do you expect people to be ignorant and talk about this strat as great/brilliant move by MorroW and he totally outplayed IdrA. The thing is, people will focus on things that draw more attention. In that case imbalance was more important than MorroW's skill.
Just wait and see. I think not much time left when the game will be finally balanced.
I think the problem is that with all the hype surrounding this game, so many new players have come onto the scene (myself included). Once the players who are ignorant and cannot sacrifice their ego to learn have given up, things will settle down again.
SC1 was an elitist of a strategy game for the last few years where new players turned away due to either graphics or a monstrous learning curve to actually beat people online.
Now a lot of new people started and this forum is still trying to be the same way it was...
Sorry, you cannot expect that. The only way is to force it through intense moderation, expecting everyone to post perfectly is kinda dumb.... it's like going to a modern warfare board looking for insightful conversations ._.
Of course people agree, but this will continue until all rushes and pushes has an established and thought out counter play that everyone can read about in liquipedia. In the early years of BW there was as many imba threads as it is now in SC2.
i agree with most of what you said, every game in sc2 is winnable by better desicions, however i believe the frustrating comes from desroying a natural, or killing 20 workers at little cost to you and still get A-moved, just my 2 cents
I totally agree with the OP. Man even back when my friends and I played Halo 1 everyone knew the noobs where the ones who blamed their losses on "the controller is bad QQQQ". The real players would discuss map positioning, aiming practice, advantages through movement physics, etc. (sorry for invoking the evil Halo, but it's the best example relating to what we're talking about that I can add. heh. I just carrier rushed in 8 player FFAs in BW)
As far as our SC2 strategy forum here goes, even though things have gone downhill a bit since release I still feel we've got one of the best around. I'm glad this thread is happening now so we can try to reverse the current trend.
*Claps* Most of the Starcraft II community needs to learn to blame themselves, not the game, regardless if the game is balanced or not, new strategies and smarter players go a long way in balancing a game; I feel that often the players are an underused tool for balance. Personally I feel that the mentality of its the game not me! is abundant because the game is new, and many people feel that's a reason to quickly call things imbalanced. All in all though TL.nets forums are worlds better than the SC2 community forums, if you want to see a bunch of stupid ignorant people complaining about balance, go there!
Thank you for the post. I also only made my account within the past year and do not have many posts... as such I always feel it is best for me to keep my trap shut in regard to some of the less than enlightened posts that are around.
Suggestion for other folks who discovered TL recently: Don't be part of the problem or the correctional team. Just focus on making yourself, your game, and your posts better.
On October 25 2010 06:16 Uhh Negative wrote: I think the problem is that with all the hype surrounding this game, so many new players have come onto the scene (myself included). Once the players who are ignorant and cannot sacrifice their ego to learn have given up, things will settle down again.
Agreed. I think the problem will solve itself eventually, as the more casual players move on to other games. Eventually the SC2 scene will be cloistered as BW was from everyone except fans, and the forum will change. Every forum changes as the subject of the forum goes out of style. I've seen this in the car forums I participate(d) in.
Unfortunately, just as the immature Diablo crowd corrupted the World of Warcraft community early on, it seems the World of Warcraft community is now corrupting Starcraft 2. Balance discussions are nearly 100% of any WoW post.
On October 25 2010 05:45 TLOBrian wrote: I personally believe that in a game where 2 players make 0 mistakes, it should be balanced. Currently how the races work, mistakes are less punished by other races, and can be game ending for others. "Auto-lose" is a word I hear thrown around a lot by Zerg players, and I completely agree with them. It's just how the dynamics of the race work.
It's not impossible to win, but it sure is tough when an opponent makes 4-6 major mistakes, you make 1 misclick that costs you a few units, and your opponent steamrolls you because of it in my opinion. I guess that's what you mean though. It's totally my fault that I lose that game, I guess?
I really appreciate the moderator staff and how they handle harassment, and overbearing whine. I just think it would be better if moderators would not be allowed to voice their opinions on balance, or use their opinions on game balance to moderate. It is a complete conflict of interest.
Have you not played BW? Different races are easier/harder to play. Do you feel that way about BW?
this should be a must-read for everyone that makes a post in the strat section...hell, anyone that makes a post anywhere... i never played bw, but i learned from lurking that there are always players better than you, and others can make it work. Meaning that YOU are the only one being the variable, meaning YOU need to improve, not the GAME.
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?
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?
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.
i'm very very new to TL not being new to the internet (or bnet), i was however very impressed with the high quality of posts and discussions upon arrival
i'm sorry guys, i don't know what i did wrong, but after i started joining and participating, it seemed to me as if everything just went to hell with most of what OP talked about (imba and such)
it's like sports fan who want to GM their team and try to tell what the coach/GM/owner needs to do to win stanley cup/world series/superbowl/(..i'm missing a few sports here)
if we were to keep it smart, educated and informative, i think it would not be a bad idea
I think that a lot of players who are new to RTS genre came to sc2 thinking that it was a PVP game like any other. I can't blame them for trying to give feedback and talk about the game, but as you said, humility is a very important thing that some people seem to lack sometimes.
Anyway, personally I never post in the "Strategy" section because I KNOW that I'm not knowledgeable enough to give meaningful input about strats, matchups, and balance as a whole.
Great post, something everyone needs to read and understand. The focus really needs to be on strategy and not perceived balance, and I really like how the moderators here crack down on balance whining.
I'll admit it, as soon as I saw navi I left the page cause I can't stand her. But i came back and I'm glad I did although I must say that this post is like 2 months too late. It's very rare (at least for me) to see threads about imbalance anymore. I go to the StarCraft 2 strategy section a lot and have rarely seen threads on imbalance. And to the people that say "yeah, that's why I never go there", don't talk until you go back there because things can change. Now if you can find me a recent thread where the OP complains about imbalance then show me it. Still though, nice post
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.)
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 )
There is a difference between an imbalanced game because one race can't beat another and imbalanced skill levels. 2 things 1.) If blizzard is doing their job right (whether they are or not is your own opinion) then on the ladder the people will be about your skill and if not it will tell you whether or not you should expect your opponent to win. (favored/slightly favored/even teams) 2.) The thing the op is talking about most likely isn't imbalanced skill level anyway.
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.
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
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 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.
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
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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.
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...
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.
Blizzard recently nerfed the voidrays. Let's say the reason for this was based on the bronze league tvp win rate. In games in the bronze league the toss player would build voidrays and the terran player would be building marines. But everytime a certain number of rines and rays came out both players get supply blocked to where the buildtime of both units is esentially the same. This would make the ratio of rays to rines be alot smaller than it would need to be. On top of that the money from both players is very high because the terran is queing up rines at a a single reactor rax and the toss is using a single stargate. Now a battle ensues between the rays and the marines and 10 rays beat the 14 marines that are there.
Blizzard sees this, "O voidrays are OP in the bronze league we should nerf them" A better way to fix these so called void rays than doing a balance change would be to introduce something to the challenges where they taught you the fundamentals of sc such as: always building workers, keeping money low, not queing, and not getting supply blocked.
I'll keep my actual opinion on the ray to myself. As it doesn't really matter whether I agree with the nerf or not as it has already happened. Just an example to kind help fortify mahnini's quote. Nor am I saying this is the reason the ray was nerfed there could be a logical explanation for it but it is irrelevant now nonetheless
This thread should be stickied , and more importantly imported to every single xx,battle,net forum, as the whiners are more likely to be whining there rather than TL.
Thanks for the great OP, it really is annoying sometimes to read the whine of so many people.
On the other hand, the players who constantly see the reason for losing a game in imbalance will most possibly never be able to improve their level of game. Thus, the complaining people are (or tend to be) in lower skill regions, and the one who seek the mistakes in their own play tend to be in the upper levels.
I agree with you to some point. But imbalance doesnt mean its IMPOSSIBLE. Imblance just means its not balanced. I would also want to say that if something is equaly strong but not as easy to exectue, I would argue that this is "imbalance".
Other than that I completley agree with you, dont blame the game if you are stuck on a certain "level", it wont help you get better the slightest.
i've been saying this in almost all of my posts where the discussion implied this i remember about beta, when people complained about sc2 not being a sc:bw clone
thanks for the OP, this should be stickied somewhere and there should be an 11th law when you join TeamLiquid.net : "Thou shall not whine"
Totally agree with the OP. Very well put. I remember when I first joined TL because me and my friend started following BW because we heard about Bisu owning Savior, I thought this site was so harsh and overmoderated. But at the same time I loved that part of TL, becaues it had much less of whiners and BM'ers than most other sites. And if there were ever trolls they were often clever so you could kind of just laugh at it.
I would really like TL to be much harder moderated than it is now. Stop with the warnings when people BM, troll, make bad posts and just ban them for 2 days at once. Most of the new guys that make terrible posts here I think just laughs at the warnings.
I would so hope SC2 would turn into something like BW is and TL is the place where it should start
Even me as a new player agree on this so much, and I think many people here misses the point. The game might not be balanced, and thoose imballances might be good to discuss, but keep it separate from strategies!
Don't go into SC2 strategy forum and moan about how you lost to "imbalanced" units, go there and discuss how to overcome thoose untis, without voicing your own biased opinion about "balance". I remember how in the beginning of GSL1 they interviewed one of the players and asked what his opinion was on balance (this was at the same time as the biggest whine-fest at b-net forums) and he just said that imbalance did not matter that much, it was still possible to win and his job was to win and if he would lose it was down to him and not because of balance.
Or something like that... Just stuck with me as a really nice attitude to have and so completely different from what you read on forums.
Really amazing post, everyone should read this and the standard on the forum will become soo much higher. Im tired of everyone going
"i did [insert random opening build] and he did [the build that is supposedly OP] and crushed me. i dont have a replay but blizz rly needs to nerf it!"
And then then everyone jumps the bandwagon and 20 pages of nonsense QQ follows.
Before you post critizise you play, check replays and post them so everyone else can see if you are the problem or the way your opponent plays really is unbeatable. You WILL find that you made misstakes. The build is not the problem, you are the one who lost the game, not the build. Sure some builds are better against other builds, and unless you are one of THE BEST in the world you could have won if you had better macro/micro/desicions/etc.
I sincerely hope your post will lead to a better community.
I think a lot of this has to do with the way people had to be initiated into BW. When you jumped into BW, you had to lose about 20 games of 1v1 before you ever won a single one. That was a very humbling experience.
In SC2, with placement and auto matchmaking, which I love BTW, you don't survive that tribulation. I'm glad that the barrier to entry is not as big as it was, but that barrier definitely had an effect on people.
That and people think they are the bees knees if they're in Diamond. (Yeah, I said bees knees)
Well, a lot of it also has to do with the fact that a lot of the top players bitch about imbalance as well, and when players see top guns constantly bitching about imbalance, then they will surely jump on the bandwagon because, like you said mahnini, it's easier to blame a loss on an overpowered strategy than to blame it on your own faults as a player.
It's the same outside of video games. People constantly blame their shitty situations on things being unfair, and nothing is ever "their fault." However, it's the people who shutup and do something about it in this world that lead successful and happy lives.
On October 26 2010 18:23 Loophole wrote: I think a lot of this has to do with the way people had to be initiated into BW. When you jumped into BW, you had to lose about 20 games of 1v1 before you ever won a single one. That was a very humbling experience.
In SC2, with placement and auto matchmaking, which I love BTW, you don't survive that tribulation. I'm glad that the barrier to entry is not as big as it was, but that barrier definitely had an effect on people.
That and people think they are the bees knees if they're in Diamond. (Yeah, I said bees knees)
You dare to criticise my 1500 ish diamond level skill? I have 50 APM! (So sad. But actually, so true.)
It is quite common for folks here on TL to say Diamonds "think" they are so uber and gosu, but as far as i am following these forums, most diamonds are pretty damn aware that there might be a little gap between being a 1500 or a 2,2k diamond player, with the 2,2k diamond players still not winning often vs. the real pros.
[sarcasm]
Have you seen FruitDealers baneling drops? Nerf Banes, zomg!!!
The more time goes by the more I think this thread should become sticky :< There are so many bad threads popping all the time. "I played perfect and lost cause if imba" is the most common trap in the young mind.
Omg. This kind of nostalgia and this amount of bullshit is rare to find. Its the typical clash of oldfag-newfag, but you do it wrong. Heres the main point which proves it:
"So what if, certain races are harder to play?"
What? Well, that means its not balanced. Its balanced, if same skill-leveled players (whatever this may mean) have equal chance to win, and only the circumstances decide (like their actual tiredness, noise, lag, placement etc.). In SC2 theres still room to call imbalance. I agree on that its done too much, sure. But you act like theres no imbalance, only noobs crying. Btw solution is simple: dont open the QQ threads, they usually well-seen from title, and if not, can be closed fast after the first line. I know it works, i do it all the time i come to TL.
Bottom line is that this is a forum on the internet and the quality of the posts here are not only the responsibility of the posters, but also the moderators. Saracen posted a similar topic awhile ago:
and based on the responses I think the TL community is begging for the moderators to start being more active. The problem is that until you've been registered for a YEAR you cannot report posts which is completely rediculous considering the fact that TL.net is now focused on SC2 which is a game that has only been out for a few months. The SC2 people have no way to self-moderate which throws 100% of the workload on the moderators to individually find the trash posts themselves.
Instead of moderaters going to the Reported Posts lists and passing judgement (i.e. warning/banning the poster or warning/banning the person abusing the report post feature) they are expected to comb every post in every thread. It's simply not happening; the quality of the posts here (on average) has gone down tremedously since beta.
Let's be honest with ourselves: it's the internet and the retards are always going to outnumber the the logical people who put some thought into their posts. We have a great community here and I'm guessing that the moderation staff is doing the best they can with what they have. However with the current implimentation of the "Report Post" feature the community is powerless to help clean up the boards
TL admins please review your policy for members being able to Report Posts! We want to help you make these forums the best SC2 boards on the net.
On October 25 2010 05:20 mahnini wrote: i'm glad so many people agree.
Yea it'd be nice to start seeing some positive changes though, that's where it really counts
I mean we can agree all we want but if the forums stay the same as it is, this whole thread is pointless.
yeah, personally, i think i might've been too lenient when moderating sc2 strat. i'll definitely try to crackdown more. the forum doesn't actaully look bad now but that's because a bunch of threads just got closed
I am 100% for harsher moderation in the strat forum. I find it so frustrating trying to find useful information when each post of it is separated by 50 terran zerg imba posts.
Thank you for this, you basically formulated my confused and meandering thoughts. Lets stop jumping to conclusions about faults with the game until we're confident there was nothing we could have done better, shall we?
do you know what it is? it's the rating system between BW and SC2. i'm not kidding you. for example:
in BroodWar: - you worked hard, actually "practicing" build orders over an over again, using a stopwatch to optimize your timings and speed, finding partners willing to do the same matchup with the same strategy over and over again. you analyze your own replays, particularly the ones that you lost despite how frustrating it is. you memorize the entirety of liquipedia including other race's build orders and timings to understand the matchups better. - finally after 6 months you get promoted to D+. after a few more weeks you finally get a shiny yellow C-. you think you are good but you realize there are a thousand koreans that are B and above that is unreachable for you, not to mention the fact that there is an entire proscene that is unreachable for the aforementioned koreans. you are humbled. - your friends ask you what rank you are in iccup. you say C-. they laugh at how bad you are. you are humbled.
in Starcraft 2: - you played 5 placement matches and ezpk'd them all. you get placed into Platinum and quickly get promoted to Diamond in 1 day despite not knowing how to macro or any of the build orders. luckily for you, your opponents are even worse. - you are placed in a new division and bonus pool lets you climb the ladder and get to a point where you are "mid-high diamond". you climbed 100 points in 1 day, extrapolate that you can climb 1000 points in 10 days, 2000 points in 20 days. you think you will be on top of ladder in no time at all. you are not humbled. - your casual copper RL friends ask you what rank you are. you say "TOP 10 DIAMOND DIVISION". they are impressed. you are not humbled.
On October 26 2010 19:23 redtooth wrote:- your casual copper RL friends ask you what rank you are. you say "TOP 10 DIAMOND DIVISION". they are impressed. you are not humbled.
But the biggest problem here are definitely the new users who are not yet accustomed to the TL's forum etiquette. Actually, they're not accustomed a forum having an etiquette to begin with. Coming from the deepest parts of the internet they're not used to the reading before posting. So "Hey listen!" is kinda ironic title because most users that post garbage in SC2 forums, don't actually listen! Luckily there's an easy (a lot of work though) fix for this: - TL's way or the highway!
All so true. Unfortunately the majority of people who could do with reading and taking heed of this post, just won't.
The burden still rests on the shoulders of the mods. That's all there is until the morons leave because they realise that they actually suck/get bored or actually turn into nice, helpful, astute members of the community.
The surge of all the imbalance QQ threads, blogs and comments in every other thread after each patch is really ruining the experience on TL.net for me. If it's not Zerg whining it's Terran being bitches, seriously agree with you.
Thank you I think this kind of post is needet from time to time to let people know what's the spirit of Team Liquid is I agree that some posts are just about complaining.
On October 26 2010 19:23 redtooth wrote: do you know what it is? it's the rating system between BW and SC2. i'm not kidding you. for example:
in BroodWar: - you worked hard, actually "practicing" build orders over an over again, using a stopwatch to optimize your timings and speed, finding partners willing to do the same matchup with the same strategy over and over again. you analyze your own replays, particularly the ones that you lost despite how frustrating it is. you memorize the entirety of liquipedia including other race's build orders and timings to understand the matchups better. - finally after 6 months you get promoted to D+. after a few more weeks you finally get a shiny yellow C-. you think you are good but you realize there are a thousand koreans that are B and above that is unreachable for you, not to mention the fact that there is an entire proscene that is unreachable for the aforementioned koreans. you are humbled. - your friends ask you what rank you are in iccup. you say C-. they laugh at how bad you are. you are humbled.
in Starcraft 2: - you played 5 placement matches and ezpk'd them all. you get placed into Platinum and quickly get promoted to Diamond in 1 day despite not knowing how to macro or any of the build orders. luckily for you, your opponents are even worse. - you are placed in a new division and bonus pool lets you climb the ladder and get to a point where you are "mid-high diamond". you climbed 100 points in 1 day, extrapolate that you can climb 1000 points in 10 days, 2000 points in 20 days. you think you will be on top of ladder in no time at all. you are not humbled. - your casual copper RL friends ask you what rank you are. you say "TOP 10 DIAMOND DIVISION". they are impressed. you are not humbled.
On October 25 2010 14:12 GHOSTCLAW wrote: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.
Thanks for the heads up, I really like the glossary section on Liquipedia and would suggest that expanding this to include more terms that are seen on the forums would make it even more valuable for the beginner, also a more accessible link to the glossary section would increase its use I think, and make the language used on these boards a less daunting code to break.
Well, there are reasons why people complain about SC2 more. In BW, you can always look at your replay and point out flaws. You didn't make probes non stop, you got supply stuck at one point, you forgot to macro, you ran into mines.
In SC2 it's different, you can't find these flaws in decent players. They make workers and units nonstop, they don't get supply blocked as often, and everyone can spend their money because the game is so easy mechanically. Players will look at their replay and see that they made no mistakes and they only lost because they weren't able to see what their opponent is doing. That's why some people blame imbalance, it's because they can't see their mistakes.
On October 26 2010 19:05 shinarit wrote: "So what if, certain races are harder to play?"
What? Well, that means its not balanced.
This is totally false. A race can absolutely be harder to play but have certain unique strenghts when applied correctly. There are so so many factors to balance beyond whether a race is "hard" to play.
If a race is hard to play because it simply can't compete with the other races, then yes ... there's a balance issue. But saying a race is hard to play is not indicative of imbalance in any way.
On October 26 2010 23:13 T.O.P. wrote: Well, there are reasons why people complain about SC2 more. In BW, you can always look at your replay and point out flaws. You didn't make probes non stop, you got supply stuck at one point, you forgot to macro, you ran into mines.
In SC2 it's different, you can't find these flaws in decent players. They make workers and units nonstop, they don't get supply blocked as often, and everyone can spend their money because the game is so easy mechanically. Players will look at their replay and see that they made no mistakes and they only lost because they weren't able to see what their opponent is doing. That's why some people blame imbalance, it's because they can't see their mistakes.
Mistakes go way beyond supplyblocking themselves. I see alot of people at the pro level lose matches because they fell off on their macro during harassment, they made the wrong units, they didn't scout the opponents tech properly/soon enough etc. NO ONE plays perfect. No one.
If you talk about balance in a thread that is not specifically about balance, you get warned. If you do it twice, you get temp banned. Keep doing it, get permabanned. This applies to *any* thread that is not specifically about balance. So if your fav player in GSL goes down and you crap up the thread with "imba imba" bs, you get warned or banned. If someone makes a thread asking for help dealing with PFs in the start forum and you respond, "PFs are imba and Blizzard never should have put them in the game" you get warned or banned. If someone makes a random thread in the General forum about, I dunno, the differences in economy between the races and you respond, "Zerg are broken spwan larva is imba", you get warned or banned.
The ONLY place balance discussion should be allowed are threads that are specifically about balance to begin with. And the ONLY threads that are specifically about balance that should be allowed are:
Those made by pro level players. Not, "I'm a 1000 point diamond so when I lose its not my fault" players. I mean, if HuK or IdrA want to come on and make an informed argument relating to balance, I think that has some value.
or
Those that include some actual news or valuable insight. If someone has access to useful stats about difference racial matchups, for example. Or the thread that exists right now discussing the Blizzcon panel's comments on PvT balance. If there is some *actual* news as it relates to balance, that merits a thread.
And thats it. I don't think average or terribad (which includes the vast majority of diamond) players should make threads giving their opinions on balance. If they do, the threads should be closed right away.
On October 26 2010 19:23 redtooth wrote: do you know what it is? it's the rating system between BW and SC2. i'm not kidding you. for example:
in BroodWar: - you worked hard, actually "practicing" build orders over an over again, using a stopwatch to optimize your timings and speed, finding partners willing to do the same matchup with the same strategy over and over again. you analyze your own replays, particularly the ones that you lost despite how frustrating it is. you memorize the entirety of liquipedia including other race's build orders and timings to understand the matchups better. - finally after 6 months you get promoted to D+. after a few more weeks you finally get a shiny yellow C-. you think you are good but you realize there are a thousand koreans that are B and above that is unreachable for you, not to mention the fact that there is an entire proscene that is unreachable for the aforementioned koreans. you are humbled. - your friends ask you what rank you are in iccup. you say C-. they laugh at how bad you are. you are humbled.
in Starcraft 2: - you played 5 placement matches and ezpk'd them all. you get placed into Platinum and quickly get promoted to Diamond in 1 day despite not knowing how to macro or any of the build orders. luckily for you, your opponents are even worse. - you are placed in a new division and bonus pool lets you climb the ladder and get to a point where you are "mid-high diamond". you climbed 100 points in 1 day, extrapolate that you can climb 1000 points in 10 days, 2000 points in 20 days. you think you will be on top of ladder in no time at all. you are not humbled. - your casual copper RL friends ask you what rank you are. you say "TOP 10 DIAMOND DIVISION". they are impressed. you are not humbled.
The root of all evil when it comes to balance discussion.
Player x and player y are high diamond and complain about imba. Suddenly a hole legion of noobs comes to back them up and it becomes impossible to have a coherent discussion from that point on, anything you'd say against that (imba claim) gets you crucified.
Top players are also guilty of this. Like i've told idra a few weeks ago, even him or other top players ARE NOT THAT GOOD at this game, not yet. There is a lot still to be learned.
Good post redtooth, indeed, no one wants to be humble at this point, it is easier to whine and be disrespectful.
when iccup has its own sc2 ladder i will return to the BW form... now its like US/east...full fo guys who think certain units are imbalanced instead of trying to improve themselves.
On October 26 2010 23:22 awesomoecalypse wrote: I think TL should have a rule.
If you talk about balance in a thread that is not specifically about balance, you get warned. If you do it twice, you get temp banned. Keep doing it, get permabanned. This applies to *any* thread that is not specifically about balance. So if your fav player in GSL goes down and you crap up the thread with "imba imba" bs, you get warned or banned. If someone makes a thread asking for help dealing with PFs in the start forum and you respond, "PFs are imba and Blizzard never should have put them in the game" you get warned or banned. If someone makes a random thread in the General forum about, I dunno, the differences in economy between the races and you respond, "Zerg are broken spwan larva is imba", you get warned or banned.
The ONLY place balance discussion should be allowed are threads that are specifically about balance to begin with. And the ONLY threads that are specifically about balance that should be allowed are:
Those made by pro level players. Not, "I'm a 1000 point diamond so when I lose its not my fault" players. I mean, if HuK or IdrA want to come on and make an informed argument relating to balance, I think that has some value.
or
Those that include some actual news or valuable insight. If someone has access to useful stats about difference racial matchups, for example. Or the thread that exists right now discussing the Blizzcon panel's comments on PvT balance. If there is some *actual* news as it relates to balance, that merits a thread.
And thats it. I don't think average or terribad (which includes the vast majority of diamond) players should make threads giving their opinions on balance. If they do, the threads should be closed right away.
I agree with this 100%. It is really frustrating when half the threads on TL get derailed because one person makes a comment about balance that has nothing to do with the OP and then the floodgates are loosed and everyone has to have there say about the latest imba race.
I think that especially in the Strategy forum there should be a zero tollerance policy for balance complaints. It is there to discuss strategis not the state of balance in the game. It is not possible to discuss ways to overcome difficulties when every second post someone is complaining about how the difficulty is actually an imbalance.
On October 26 2010 23:22 awesomoecalypse wrote: I think TL should have a rule.
If you talk about balance in a thread that is not specifically about balance, you get warned. If you do it twice, you get temp banned. Keep doing it, get permabanned. This applies to *any* thread that is not specifically about balance. So if your fav player in GSL goes down and you crap up the thread with "imba imba" bs, you get warned or banned. If someone makes a thread asking for help dealing with PFs in the start forum and you respond, "PFs are imba and Blizzard never should have put them in the game" you get warned or banned. If someone makes a random thread in the General forum about, I dunno, the differences in economy between the races and you respond, "Zerg are broken spwan larva is imba", you get warned or banned.
The ONLY place balance discussion should be allowed are threads that are specifically about balance to begin with. And the ONLY threads that are specifically about balance that should be allowed are:
Those made by pro level players. Not, "I'm a 1000 point diamond so when I lose its not my fault" players. I mean, if HuK or IdrA want to come on and make an informed argument relating to balance, I think that has some value.
or
Those that include some actual news or valuable insight. If someone has access to useful stats about difference racial matchups, for example. Or the thread that exists right now discussing the Blizzcon panel's comments on PvT balance. If there is some *actual* news as it relates to balance, that merits a thread.
And thats it. I don't think average or terribad (which includes the vast majority of diamond) players should make threads giving their opinions on balance. If they do, the threads should be closed right away.
I agree with this 100%. It is really frustrating when half the threads on TL get derailed because one person makes a comment about ballance that has nothing to do with the OP and then the floodgates are loosed and everyone has to have there say about the latest imba race.
On October 26 2010 19:23 redtooth wrote: do you know what it is? it's the rating system between BW and SC2. i'm not kidding you. for example:
in BroodWar: - you worked hard, actually "practicing" build orders over an over again, using a stopwatch to optimize your timings and speed, finding partners willing to do the same matchup with the same strategy over and over again. you analyze your own replays, particularly the ones that you lost despite how frustrating it is. you memorize the entirety of liquipedia including other race's build orders and timings to understand the matchups better. - finally after 6 months you get promoted to D+. after a few more weeks you finally get a shiny yellow C-. you think you are good but you realize there are a thousand koreans that are B and above that is unreachable for you, not to mention the fact that there is an entire proscene that is unreachable for the aforementioned koreans. you are humbled. - your friends ask you what rank you are in iccup. you say C-. they laugh at how bad you are. you are humbled.
in Starcraft 2: - you played 5 placement matches and ezpk'd them all. you get placed into Platinum and quickly get promoted to Diamond in 1 day despite not knowing how to macro or any of the build orders. luckily for you, your opponents are even worse. - you are placed in a new division and bonus pool lets you climb the ladder and get to a point where you are "mid-high diamond". you climbed 100 points in 1 day, extrapolate that you can climb 1000 points in 10 days, 2000 points in 20 days. you think you will be on top of ladder in no time at all. you are not humbled. - your casual copper RL friends ask you what rank you are. you say "TOP 10 DIAMOND DIVISION". they are impressed. you are not humbled.
I totaly agree with you. So the game is not bad it's only how b.net 2.0 work and all new people who join the community (I don't say every one but mostly new in the starcraft history, at least competitive)
On October 26 2010 23:22 awesomoecalypse wrote: If you talk about balance in a thread that is not specifically about balance, you get warned. If you do it twice, you get temp banned. Keep doing it, get permabanned. This applies to *any* thread that is not specifically about balance.
Absolutely agree with this, the only way to make internet forums work is by carrying a big stick. Asking nicely doesn't work, because people don't read the requests, or don't think it applies to them, or just plain decide that "just this once" wont hurt (except when 1000 people post about it "just this once" it becomes a crap flood).
On October 26 2010 23:27 HeadhunteR wrote: when iccup has its own sc2 ladder i will return to the BW form... now its like US/east...full fo guys who think certain units are imbalanced instead of trying to improve themselves.
I just hope the problem people take the time to read this post, reflect upon themselves, and realize «oh shit, he's talking about me! Time to change my ways!».
Really, the discussion that went around on the strat forums in the BW days is what brought me here. Even though I didn't post because I knew practically the entirety of the forums was higher up than me then, I still read the discussion in order to find elements of strategy I hadn't thought about before. Reading 10 pages of «Nerf marauders» just really doesn't do it for me though...
Maybe, and I might be totally wrong, but just maybe, opening a «balance discussion» section might help get the whiners out of the strat section..?
Edit: Also, the Navi pic was in good taste. That's what brought me to the thread.
On October 26 2010 23:41 Dugrok wrote: Maybe, and I might be totally wrong, but just maybe, opening a «balance discussion» section might help get the whiners out of the strat section..?
I've seen a lot of internet forums try the "lets just move the crap to the crap section" idea and all it does is give you a section full of crap on top of the crap you already had.
On October 26 2010 23:41 Dugrok wrote: Maybe, and I might be totally wrong, but just maybe, opening a «balance discussion» section might help get the whiners out of the strat section..?
I've seen a lot of internet forums try the "lets just move the crap to the crap section" idea and all it does is give you a section full of crap on top of the crap you already had.
YOU GOTTA GET OUTTTTTTTT....... GO FAR AWAYYYYYYYYY(KOREA).... YOU GOTTA GET OUTTTTTTT!!!!! GO FAR AWAYYYYYYYYYYYYYY...... DUDUDUDUDNUN DUNUN DUUMMUM DUN DUDUM DUM DUNEE NUN ONOO DJUMUEMD UNS HSUNS . Probably my best post to date.
On a more related note, SOME of the pro-gamers aren't the best examples, if they complain about imbalance than the aver.."casual" gamer will do the same. Blizzard's resignation into appeasing this "casual" group that they have tagged....all stems from WoW nonsense...but I won't go into that.
Agreed Redtooth, it's this sense of false pride the SC2 Ladder system maintains. If your rank 1 of your division, you think your a hotshot. If you lose, clearly it's a failure on behalf of blizzards balance team not yours, or perhaps you just got unlucky.(list of excuses goes on)
I think the most important point is not that those complaining about imbalance are always wrong necessarily. It's that this forum is not a Blizzard complaints board, it's about nurturing the atttude to win against better opponents, the guys storming Omaha beach in WWII didn't just sit and complain that the German turrets were imba...
part of the problem is that battlenet2.0 is designed to make everyone feel good about themselves. i have very little patience for hand-holding bullshit, and the "elitist" culture it contributes to is incredibly frustrating to deal with.
Sadly this is exactly how i think (although im aware of it) I think i do it as like a self defense mechanism or some crap... I've been watching my replays to figure out how i can improve though instead of blaming the balance (post patch anyway)
ok, we have threads whining about imbalance and we thought it was the worst thing to hit the world (hence this thread).now we have threads whining about the whining about imbalance, its just too much. when is it going to end, right now I'M whining about the whining about the whining of the imbalance. so blizzard for F*CKs sake, nerf marauders and all of this can stop.
It's sortof interesting to see the different categories of 'knee-jerk' reaction people fall into when whining about supposed imbalance. There are the people who get frustrated over specific units feeling too powerful in their specific roles- i.e. marauders / mutas / voids / etc. Then there's players who could care less how much marauder-guy can benchpress, but halt constructiveness when they feel there's some fundamental design flaw- such as hating zerg macro potential, or terran flexibility, or early toss warpgate aggression, and so on.
I have a lot of respect for people who honestly have a knee-jerk reaction to think "wow I got owned by something really cool! I want to practice how to use and beat that!", while throwing out a 'gg wp' when they lose. In fact, this is a huge reason I admire day9. I'd say I have a tendancy to fall victim to the second form of frustration mentioned, but I'm trying to get better at taking off my design hat. I'm pretty good about not posting nerdrage, but sometimes I need to take a bit before I can assess a replay of a loss with a level head xD.
On October 26 2010 23:27 HeadhunteR wrote: when iccup has its own sc2 ladder i will return to the BW form... now its like US/east...full fo guys who think certain units are imbalanced instead of trying to improve themselves.
This will never happen
So damn agree,also nice post so acurate, since SC2 release the "SC2 general"and "SC2 Strategy" forum is full of How to deal with... or how to stop the... diferent post asking the same, whatever at least now I know how to deal against banshee Lol
dude I love your post. this is exactly what I was thinking for the past two months but couldn't phrase it properly, which ultimateky led to flames and dumb comments.
I'll be honest with you guys, I used to play WoW. Please don't hate me, I swear I only did it because I started in college and it was easier to just sit around mindlessly killing AI mobs in between studying. I grew up playing the original Warcraft titles and Starcraft (though I admit never competitively and never had broodwar). I only say this so you don't write me off completely, I love the hell out of Starcraft 2 and if I never play WoW again I'll be a happy dude.
Anywho, I wanted to say that a lot of this will pass when the next big game comes out. Right now, especially because the game is so new, it's a kind of flavor-of-the-month deal. A lot of people who don't want to seriously play the game are trying it out, maybe it's their first RTS, and when they don't understand why all their marines just died to a collosus they cry imba. But they had way more marine than that one collosus, obviously imba right?
I hope this post does more than just get bumped back to the top occasionally. There's some good ideas in here and I would hate to see this board turn into the official WoW forums where it's nothing but complaining about how imbalanced everything is. While those threads help me because I can read the replies about how it's actually not imba and you should have done X, Y, and Z instead of just losing your whole effin' base, I don't like how many there have been lately.
I'll be honest with you guys, I used to play WoW. Please don't hate me, I swear I only did it because I started in college and it was easier to just sit around mindlessly killing AI mobs in between studying. I grew up playing the original Warcraft titles and Starcraft (though I admit never competitively and never had broodwar). I only say this so you don't write me off completely, I love the hell out of Starcraft 2 and if I never play WoW again I'll be a happy dude.
I honestly don't get all the WoW defensiveness on this board. Its like, any time someone mentions playing WoW, they immediately follow it up with, "but don't worry I've seen the error of my ways and I also play real e-sports games, so don't judge me."
Honestly, who gives a shit if you play WoW? Unless you're an obsessive or a progamer, everyone plays some games besides Starcraft, and most of them aren't e-sports type ultracompetitive games. I play Super Mario Galaxy 2. I play Minecraft. I play Demon's Souls, Assassin's Creed 2, most games in the Final Fantasy series, and yes, sometimes I even play WoW. I also play pickup basketball, chess and poker. I don't see how any of that has *any* bearing whatsoever on what sort of SC2 player I am.
Who the hell cares what else you do with your free time? Unless someone is trying to claim that, "Hey I'm really good at raiding, so that makes me a great gamer and you should respect my opinion on SC2", which no one ever has, then what possible bearing does your choice of other games have on what sort of SC2 player you are? You could be playing nothing but Wii Tennis and Scribblenauts, it still wouldn't have any relevance at all. Anyone who says, "You play [some other non SC2 game, including WoW] therefore you obviously suck," is frankly a moron and can go screw themselves.
Sorry for the OT rant, it just bugs me that people feel like they have to somehow justify how they choose to spend their free time, like if they play the "wrong" games it somehow makes them worse at Starcraft.
On October 25 2010 04:26 LSB wrote: People making imba claims should now be banned until they pass a 20 question quiz over mahnini's post.
This. ^^^
I'm so sick and tired of players continuing to cry about how they are weaker than the other races. It makes me want to toss a bunny out of a speeding car.
We were all use to talking about a game that in everyones mind was 100% perfectly balanced and that couldn't be challenged. Now Sc2 doesn't have that reputation, and until it does I'm afraid that you'll just have to get use to people blaming balance for their terrible game.
I'll be honest with you guys, I used to play WoW. Please don't hate me, I swear I only did it because I started in college and it was easier to just sit around mindlessly killing AI mobs in between studying. I grew up playing the original Warcraft titles and Starcraft (though I admit never competitively and never had broodwar). I only say this so you don't write me off completely, I love the hell out of Starcraft 2 and if I never play WoW again I'll be a happy dude.
I honestly don't get all the WoW defensiveness on this board. Its like, any time someone mentions playing WoW, they immediately follow it up with, "but don't worry I've seen the error of my ways and I also play real e-sports games, so don't judge me."
Honestly, who gives a shit if you play WoW? Unless you're an obsessive or a progamer, everyone plays some games besides Starcraft, and most of them aren't e-sports type ultracompetitive games. I play Super Mario Galaxy 2. I play Minecraft. I play Demon's Souls, Assassin's Creed 2, most games in the Final Fantasy series, and yes, sometimes I even play WoW. I also play pickup basketball, chess and poker. I don't see how any of that has *any* bearing whatsoever on what sort of SC2 player I am.
Who the hell cares what else you do with your free time? Unless someone is trying to claim that, "Hey I'm really good at raiding, so that makes me a great gamer and you should respect my opinion on SC2", which no one ever has, then what possible bearing does your choice of other games have on what sort of SC2 player you are? You could be playing nothing but Wii Tennis and Scribblenauts, it still wouldn't have any relevance at all. Anyone who says, "You play [some other non SC2 game, including WoW] therefore you obviously suck," is frankly a moron and can go screw themselves.
Sorry for the OT rant, it just bugs me that people feel like they have to somehow justify how they choose to spend their free time, like if they play the "wrong" games it somehow makes them worse at Starcraft.
You're assuming people are reasonable. Big mistake.
On a serious note, i agree with everything you just said. Unfortunately,
Anyone who says, "You play [some other non SC2 game, including WoW] therefore you obviously suck," is frankly a moron and can go screw themselves.
is a perfect description of a large portion of the "original" sc1 crowd here on TL - Including several members of the staff. Please refer to what i wrote about reasonable people earlier
I'll be honest with you guys, I used to play WoW. Please don't hate me, I swear I only did it because I started in college and it was easier to just sit around mindlessly killing AI mobs in between studying. I grew up playing the original Warcraft titles and Starcraft (though I admit never competitively and never had broodwar). I only say this so you don't write me off completely, I love the hell out of Starcraft 2 and if I never play WoW again I'll be a happy dude.
I honestly don't get all the WoW defensiveness on this board. Its like, any time someone mentions playing WoW, they immediately follow it up with, "but don't worry I've seen the error of my ways and I also play real e-sports games, so don't judge me."
Honestly, who gives a shit if you play WoW? Unless you're an obsessive or a progamer, everyone plays some games besides Starcraft, and most of them aren't e-sports type ultracompetitive games. I play Super Mario Galaxy 2. I play Minecraft. I play Demon's Souls, Assassin's Creed 2, most games in the Final Fantasy series, and yes, sometimes I even play WoW. I also play pickup basketball, chess and poker. I don't see how any of that has *any* bearing whatsoever on what sort of SC2 player I am.
Who the hell cares what else you do with your free time? Unless someone is trying to claim that, "Hey I'm really good at raiding, so that makes me a great gamer and you should respect my opinion on SC2", which no one ever has, then what possible bearing does your choice of other games have on what sort of SC2 player you are? You could be playing nothing but Wii Tennis and Scribblenauts, it still wouldn't have any relevance at all. Anyone who says, "You play [some other non SC2 game, including WoW] therefore you obviously suck," is frankly a moron and can go screw themselves.
Sorry for the OT rant, it just bugs me that people feel like they have to somehow justify how they choose to spend their free time, like if they play the "wrong" games it somehow makes them worse at Starcraft.
As a former wow player I can totally see why the wow community is shame worthy when directly juxtaposed with the starcraft community. Take common community waterholes such as arenajunkies / worldofming / official forums etc; the amount of trash talk, elitism, QQ, and epeenflexing will leave you sick to your stomach. The "pros" also seem less worthy of respect because the competitive setting seems as much about manipulating and abusing a ladder system, maintaining an image, and clawing your way into a clique, as it is about actually being talented. Many have said SC could use some more dynamic personalities, but you don't want it to be like wow; the entire community having idra's personality is too much- a few is fine.
Part of the reason such a terrible community occurred is because blizzard basically set up an environment where two different nerd species are in the same cage eating out of the same bowl. Neither wants to eat the same thing or use the common space in the same way but they're forced to compromise when neither cares about the other's well-being in the slightest. The day a perfect balance solution is thrown away because it makes someone feel like they arn't actually flying around a science vessel in the korprulu sector, you'll understand how terrible a place wow is for forming a pleasant community despite it being more of a social game.
Things like day9, humble pros, and comparatively teamliquid.net alone make this community worlds better than wow. IMO it's the baggage from the wow community that makes people ashamed, not the game itself.
Well, in WoW there is a set of buttons, no matter how well you press that button, the button is going to do a set number of damage.
It's alot easier to make imba claims in WoW because there are a certain amount of spells that do certain amount of things, and positioning and general play really has no concern, you need to tiem some stuff but other then that its spell y do x damage.
Sadly, this doesn't work here, and i think TL would benefit alot from making new members having to read the forums for 3 days before allowed to post so they could realize this faster
Yeah, I started out reading the sc2 forums after it hit the shelves, but my usage has dropped to near zero recently. Watching gsl teaches me more than a thousand angry noobs.
Also, I play WoW and starcraft2. What's the big deal?
Holy crap, I'm really sorry for derailing the thread. I only brought up WoW because I wanted to comment on the similarities between the two communities. And I was defensive about it because in the several weeks I've been coming here and reading threads I've seen multiple references to retarded WoW players who think everything should just be easy or some other generic hostility towards them.
I faintly remember my days in WoW, they were calm and whether you were bad or good you could play and have fun. Try fishing in SC2 If you suck at Starcraft 2, like I do. Every Match is a period of heart racingly speed. Where you barely try to hold of the enemy that is seemingly coming always from the wrong direction. While you macro your scout finds eventually into his base and all you are thinking is: "To much units!" or "No units, where are the void rays?" - "Cannons!?".
--
Macro. Need one more queen. Some Zerglings, is the Spire finished? Damn Void Rays - Spire finished Mutas!! - MY QUEEN, DON'T DIE!
--
Your first lung of breath in seemingly an hour. Expand. Macro. Muta Harass.
--
From then on everything shrinks to a blur, my adrenalin rushes through my head. Scout. Wait. Attack. Defend. Oh Macro. Defend. Defend. ATTACK. w... win?
Did I play good? No. The other was just worse. But YAY.
In Starcraft 2 everything seems so fast, so hard. The Skill you needed to be decent in WoW (sorry), was easy to achieve. It was fun yeah, WoW fun. But Starcraft, after a victory... you feel like the king of the world. The adrenalin, the challenge. The achievement to have won. You played your strategy, defended against the cheese and got one step closer to becoming good.
I remember in my arcade fighting game days of the 90's. Different characters, and everyone knew that some were better than others. Nobody complained about it though (except for eddy gordo, fuck that guy). Everyone accepted that if you are good with one of the harder characters to play, then you could still beat the so called stronger characters because it really boiled down to player skill.
Now days we have patches, where the balance can be changed, so everyone wants their race to be buffed, and the things they lose against nerfed.
Every time I read this thread title I hear navi's voice. Its infuriating, I completely agree with the OP, but want to kill mahnini anyway for putting me through this torture
As people have mentioned previously, we live in the Age Of The Patch. This is largely because the release of a new WoW patch is an internet phenomenon in itself, complete with Rick Rollin' videos. The big negative side of living in a patch culture is that people assume that by whining profusesly on forums they will influence the game in there favour.
As the OP mentions, everyone knows they could have just played better, and yet we'd rather whine on a forum about the situation, than do something to improve it. I blame bnet forums and WoW's popularity and endless fotm balance changes for this.
I mean back 10 years ago playing Ultima Online, if you went on forums and said "Omg X is unbeatable" people would just 'kindly' tell you how much you sucked. Or a really nice person might offer to give you PvP coaching, only to invite you out to the woods, murder you and take your things.
I'm not even that old, but everyday I'm shocked at how much PC gaming has changed since I was a kid. Everybody wants it easy.
Don't worry guys, Blizzard will iron everything else out. They actuall recently found out that stim pack is detrimental to marauders and is not cost effective. We didn't even notice that one!
lol.. but seriously, good post. It should be a mandatory read for new members that are signing up.
Even though it is stating what everyone already knows to be the obvious and generally accepts that shit like this happens in communities like this, everyone has agreed, Most of who are the targeted audience. So everyone who's read it or agreed with it (99%) will believe it doesn't apply to them. Making the whole exercise pointless.
I'm pretty new and I don't know much about SC2 or BW but I will say that in any sport, game or challenge if you lose it's never your fault. It's always someone else's fault for practicing, utilizing their time correctly and thinking ahead in terms of strategy. It's never your fault because you didn't do enough, didn't think far enough, didn't practice enough. To think anything different would be absurd
Each person even mentioning bal... or imb... or overp.... or underp.... should get perma IP ban and maybe even 2 years of jail to reflect on what he has done.
But no, in all seriousness you are not the perfect guy who knows everything and you are not better than any of us, so you can't lecture people what to do, how to do it and should they do it.
Each has his own personality and opinion and is free to express his feelings and thoughts. If someone wants to discuss, whine, cry, argue about balance let them as long as they are not insulting or offending someone.
I know this post expresses a popular sentiment, but I can't really agree with its logic.
Of course everyone could say, "I lost the game, but I would have won if I did x, y, and z," where x, y, and z are exactly what FruitDealer would have done. Nobody's perfect, except for FruitDealer. But the fact that we could have won if we made fewer mistakes doesn't prevent imbalances from being the deciding factor in a loss. In particular, strategies that are far easier to execute than they are to counter should be considered imbalanced, even if the failure to perfectly execute that counter can be considered a "mistake" on the victim's part.
Early reaper harass and void rays against zerg were among these, and Blizzard nerfed them. So, for those who always insist the current game is balanced, which is it: were you wrong before the patch, or after? The attitude that "the game is balanced, learn to play" has never made any sense, yet every patch people keep insisting on it, ignoring the implied admission that they were wrong about that in every previous patch.
There are still plenty of things that need to be tweaked in this game. People who want to say something about that shouldn't be forced to come up with an otherwise perfectly played game in order to demonstrate their point.
It has to do with the knowledge that Blizzard is going to make balance changes in the future and that they might be able to influence them. In BW everyone knows that the game will not have a balance patch ever again so complaining about balance is pointless. In SC2, +100 ladder score is possible if you complain loudly enough to get the other two races nerfed / your race upped.
While I completely agree with the OP, I just wonder how long will it take for SC2 to be truly "balanced" seeing that expansions, that will be about 2 years apart, will introduce new units to the MP (afaik)...
the blizzard bnet forum is just complete trash, theres not enough moderation going around stopping bad posts. so many rampant trolls and just negative win/loss people complaining that they lose because of racial imbalance too many bronze and silver people trying to get blizzard to implement retarded changes like shorting zerg tier 3, having zerg buildings burrow or non stop threads about protoss being overpowered
i like it when ppl who are terrible players QQ about stupid balance issues that dont exist! because its entertaining! everytime there is a 20 page balance thread on TL i read it and laugh my ass off. cause its FUNNY.. the funny thing is an admin closes them right away but if they didnt they would end up being endless threads. i know this isnt the place for it but when im at work and on lunch break it makes my day a little more interesting! generally i agree with you and i dont make stupid comments though. reading others is a different story! hah
I always try to do something I heard Day[9] say, though I hardly watch him anymore- this stuck with me. I identify that 1 part in the game where I did something that started to make the game hard.
It usually happens before you really NOTICE it, before it has an effect on a battle, but if you can point these things out... you know where the real flaws are. Rather than just watching that final battle, seeing a bunch of Colossus left standing, and assuming they are broken (or Marauders, Thors, Roaches... whatever.)
To make a confession, my identified problems usually end up being a significant PSI blockage (pylon, supply, OL) around 30s... which stops worker production and army production... OR I watch a battle microing for too long, and forget to re-inject / warp / or queue units for far too long. Either of these can result in losing a battle in a few minutes that few will attribute to the real cause- and just blame units... OR scouting. Especially after the first few ladder games. I do in the first- then I think I start to imagine that everyone is coming with the builds I've already seen. Then I get surprised.
I have my positives in games (micro generally good, taking expansions regularly)... but I have negative that leads to the loss. If you can identify it, you KNOW what to drill into your brain for the next game.
This was a really good topic and I hope a LOT of people see it.
On October 27 2010 06:25 Anzat wrote: I know this post expresses a popular sentiment, but I can't really agree with its logic.
Of course everyone could say, "I lost the game, but I would have won if I did x, y, and z," where x, y, and z are exactly what FruitDealer would have done. Nobody's perfect, except for FruitDealer. But the fact that we could have won if we made fewer mistakes doesn't prevent imbalances from being the deciding factor in a loss. In particular, strategies that are far easier to execute than they are to counter should be considered imbalanced, even if the failure to perfectly execute that counter can be considered a "mistake" on the victim's part.
Early reaper harass and void rays against zerg were among these, and Blizzard nerfed them. So, for those who always insist the current game is balanced, which is it: were you wrong before the patch, or after? The attitude that "the game is balanced, learn to play" has never made any sense, yet every patch people keep insisting on it, ignoring the implied admission that they were wrong about that in every previous patch.
There are still plenty of things that need to be tweaked in this game. People who want to say something about that shouldn't be forced to come up with an otherwise perfectly played game in order to demonstrate their point.
It is more that your attitude when you have a chance to win, shouldn't be "x OP yooo", but rather "what can I do to stop it?". You mention VRs and reapers, VRs I dare say weren't really behaving like Blizzard wanted them to(being so gimmicky cheesy unit) and reapers, well reapers in their initial state were powerful beyond just "harder to counter than to do" to the point of "the enemy must make a mistake so I don't loose". So neither were as I see it, a nerf due to being easier to use than to counter.
The point isn't so much to think that things are totally balanced, because they probably ain't, be it due to a playstyle existing now or in the future. Rather try to improve yourself and seek advice on what the weaknesses of your own play are, rather than point out the strengths of your opponents.
Someone mentioned earlier that people in this thread are a part of the problem. Sure of course, I am probably too, but it's never to late to try improve yourself. I at least hope we don't ever get the whinefest we had before 1.1.1/1.1.2 again, from whatever race.
Great post, agree with almost everything you wrote.
My biggest specific gripe however has to do with the people who seem to think that arguments of equity between the races is the best way to achieve balance. Hate when people try to use homogeneity in the data they present as a viable option for balancing.
God I despise this thread. It's strange though. Everyone saying something incredibly stupid like "finally someone said it". They weren't waiting for someone to say it lol. They are probably guilty of it themselves, and will repeat this again and again. Ofc people are going to get frustrated with things and say they need changes (Cool?). It's not going to change because of one nobody's rant, or 1000 replies saying "yes i support this" blindly.
I agree with the principles, but now how it is ironically written to belittle and accuse the reader. I think it's clearly the product of frustration over something over time. Funnily enough this is what happens when people play sc. Furthermore the majority of TL will be sensible and logical with threads, and even ignore those that are shit.
Please at least make replies less smug, instead of "I've been waiting for this, finally someone said it" like some elitist jerk.
Got to support the put it in strat forum seciton as a sticky or whatever, as it 100% does not belong here.
On October 27 2010 09:12 Radio.active wrote: YUS FINALLY SOMEONE SAYS IT!
On October 27 2010 09:27 Tone_ wrote: God I despise this thread. It's strange though. Everyone saying something incredibly stupid like "finally someone said it". They weren't waiting for someone to say it lol. They are probably guilty of it themselves, and will repeat this again and again. Ofc people are going to get frustrated with things and say they need changes (Cool?). It's not going to change because of one nobody's rant, or 1000 replies saying "yes i support this" blindly.
I agree with the principles, but now how it is ironically written to belittle and accuse the reader. I think it's clearly the product of frustration over something over time. Funnily enough this is what happens when people play sc. Furthermore the majority of TL will be sensible and logical with threads, and even ignore those that are shit.
Think the most annoying thing is amount of smug in here. So many "yes finally, I agree" from people who apparently have been incapable of saying something themselves. Some "I hope people listen and take this to heart" from some random person jumping on the positivity bandwagon.
Got to support the put it in strat forum seciton as a sticky or whatever, as it 100% does not belong here.
On October 27 2010 09:12 Radio.active wrote: YUS FINALLY SOMEONE SAYS IT!
I find it hard to come up with some appropriate words for this. What? So, we are to take from this that you have been waiting for this EXACT post? From "someone", anyone? But didn't make one yourself...
This thread was trying to get people to be humble. Obviously this was a problem with you. Fact is everyone thinks they are better at sc2 than they really are on a relative scale, myself included. A lot of people make balance discussions and stupid balance posts that clutter the forum mostly based on personal experience. I can cite many times where something seemed imbalanced from playing random, as every race and in every matchup INLCUDING ZVZ. Sometimes the guy got ahead with superior economy management/took a risk and you didn't know and you got steamrolled without making a major mistake. Sometimes I roll someone when I knew I basically won the game 5 minutes beforehand with no prior engagement, and the guy flames the matchup being stupid. You can be damn sure he'd blame imba T/P if it wasn't ZvZ.
The fact is is that mahnini isn't trying to be elitist, he's saying that everyone needs to get off their high horse (aka "diamond league"). Apparently you are extra fond of yours.
On October 27 2010 09:27 Tone_ wrote: God I despise this thread. It's strange though. Everyone saying something incredibly stupid like "finally someone said it". They weren't waiting for someone to say it lol. They are probably guilty of it themselves, and will repeat this again and again. Ofc people are going to get frustrated with things and say they need changes (Cool?). It's not going to change because of one nobody's rant, or 1000 replies saying "yes i support this" blindly.
I agree with the principles, but now how it is ironically written to belittle and accuse the reader. I think it's clearly the product of frustration over something over time. Funnily enough this is what happens when people play sc. Furthermore the majority of TL will be sensible and logical with threads, and even ignore those that are shit.
Think the most annoying thing is amount of smug in here. So many "yes finally, I agree" from people who apparently have been incapable of saying something themselves. Some "I hope people listen and take this to heart" from some random person jumping on the positivity bandwagon.
Got to support the put it in strat forum seciton as a sticky or whatever, as it 100% does not belong here.
On October 27 2010 09:12 Radio.active wrote: YUS FINALLY SOMEONE SAYS IT!
I find it hard to come up with some appropriate words for this. What? So, we are to take from this that you have been waiting for this EXACT post? From "someone", anyone? But didn't make one yourself...
This thread was trying to get people to be humble. Obviously this was a problem with you. Fact is everyone thinks they are better at sc2 than they really are on a relative scale, myself included. A lot of people make balance discussions and stupid balance posts that clutter the forum mostly based on personal experience. I can cite many times where something seemed imbalanced from playing random, as every race and in every matchup INLCUDING ZVZ. Sometimes the guy got ahead with superior economy management/took a risk and you didn't know and you got steamrolled without making a major mistake. Sometimes I roll someone when I knew I basically won the game 5 minutes beforehand with no prior engagement, and the guy flames the matchup being stupid. You can be damn sure he'd blame imba T/P if it wasn't ZvZ.
The fact is is that mahnini isn't trying to be elitist, he's saying that everyone needs to get off their high horse (aka "diamond league"). Apparently you are extra fond of yours.
Hmm I see, well if we disregard my never posting / visiting the strategy forums except maybe once in BW era when I first visited TL and that I've never made a topic, then yes, very much on my "high horse" apparently. I presume your post is quite bitter as you're having difficulty getting out of silver league or something.
And the game is a few months old, there are many imbalances. By the time the third expansion rolls around no doubt someone will make a nostalgia post entitled something like 'Do you remember when mutalisks were so powerful' or something, (example only). I don't see what a strategy forum is without personal experiences and individual input. Should every reply be "well x has a range and damage of y, so should beat z with exactly [this] much apm using micro". What can you do until then? Ban all independent thought or manage it. Maybe the solution lies in targeting new members through sign-up process or something. Not to come and rant at the decent normal TL members in such a gross manner.
But maybe I'm just overreacting as I found the original post very elitist and unnecessarily angry when I don't even visit the strategy forum in particular.
On October 27 2010 09:27 Tone_ wrote: God I despise this thread. It's strange though. Everyone saying something incredibly stupid like "finally someone said it". They weren't waiting for someone to say it lol. They are probably guilty of it themselves, and will repeat this again and again. Ofc people are going to get frustrated with things and say they need changes (Cool?). It's not going to change because of one nobody's rant, or 1000 replies saying "yes i support this" blindly.
I agree with the principles, but now how it is ironically written to belittle and accuse the reader. I think it's clearly the product of frustration over something over time. Funnily enough this is what happens when people play sc. Furthermore the majority of TL will be sensible and logical with threads, and even ignore those that are shit.
Think the most annoying thing is amount of smug in here. So many "yes finally, I agree" from people who apparently have been incapable of saying something themselves. Some "I hope people listen and take this to heart" from some random person jumping on the positivity bandwagon.
Got to support the put it in strat forum seciton as a sticky or whatever, as it 100% does not belong here.
On October 27 2010 09:12 Radio.active wrote: YUS FINALLY SOMEONE SAYS IT!
I find it hard to come up with some appropriate words for this. What? So, we are to take from this that you have been waiting for this EXACT post? From "someone", anyone? But didn't make one yourself...
This thread was trying to get people to be humble. Obviously this was a problem with you. Fact is everyone thinks they are better at sc2 than they really are on a relative scale, myself included. A lot of people make balance discussions and stupid balance posts that clutter the forum mostly based on personal experience. I can cite many times where something seemed imbalanced from playing random, as every race and in every matchup INLCUDING ZVZ. Sometimes the guy got ahead with superior economy management/took a risk and you didn't know and you got steamrolled without making a major mistake. Sometimes I roll someone when I knew I basically won the game 5 minutes beforehand with no prior engagement, and the guy flames the matchup being stupid. You can be damn sure he'd blame imba T/P if it wasn't ZvZ.
The fact is is that mahnini isn't trying to be elitist, he's saying that everyone needs to get off their high horse (aka "diamond league"). Apparently you are extra fond of yours.
Hmm I see, well if we disregard my never posting / visiting the strategy forums except maybe once in BW era when I first visited TL and that I've never made a topic, then yes, very much on my "high horse" apparently. I presume your post is quite bitter as you're having difficulty getting out of silver league or something.
And the game is a few months old, there are many imbalances. By the time the third expansion rolls around no doubt someone will make a nostalgia post entitled something like 'Do you remember when mutalisks were so powerful' or something, (example only). I don't see what a strategy forum is without personal experiences and individual input. Should every reply be "well x has a range and damage of y, so should beat z with exactly [this] much apm using micro".
But maybe I just found the original post very elitist and unnecessarily angry when I don't even visit the strategy forum in particular.
Although I appreciate your randomly unjustified assumptions (I'm atm over 1900 in diamond, search for "Slayer", nothing special, but far from silver league), if you say you're not in any way respectful of your skill to the point that you could participate in balance discussions, why would you suddenly say "there are many imbalances"??? Changes in the way people play from learning the game can easily change apparent "balance". It's possible that one of the previous patches had perfect balance with "perfect play" (maybe on different maps) but its impossible to ever know. How is a post saying "hey guys we suck can we really complain about imba as a way to scapegoat our losses?" elitist in any way? In addition, if you "don't even visit the strategy forum in particular" how can you even reply to this thread when you don't have a good idea about the general posting in the sc2 strategy forum??? its mind boggling. I can't even fathom why you would be offended if thats the case??
On October 27 2010 09:27 Tone_ wrote: God I despise this thread. It's strange though. Everyone saying something incredibly stupid like "finally someone said it". They weren't waiting for someone to say it lol. They are probably guilty of it themselves, and will repeat this again and again. Ofc people are going to get frustrated with things and say they need changes (Cool?). It's not going to change because of one nobody's rant, or 1000 replies saying "yes i support this" blindly.
I agree with the principles, but now how it is ironically written to belittle and accuse the reader. I think it's clearly the product of frustration over something over time. Funnily enough this is what happens when people play sc. Furthermore the majority of TL will be sensible and logical with threads, and even ignore those that are shit.
Think the most annoying thing is amount of smug in here. So many "yes finally, I agree" from people who apparently have been incapable of saying something themselves. Some "I hope people listen and take this to heart" from some random person jumping on the positivity bandwagon.
Got to support the put it in strat forum seciton as a sticky or whatever, as it 100% does not belong here.
On October 27 2010 09:12 Radio.active wrote: YUS FINALLY SOMEONE SAYS IT!
I find it hard to come up with some appropriate words for this. What? So, we are to take from this that you have been waiting for this EXACT post? From "someone", anyone? But didn't make one yourself...
This thread was trying to get people to be humble. Obviously this was a problem with you. Fact is everyone thinks they are better at sc2 than they really are on a relative scale, myself included. A lot of people make balance discussions and stupid balance posts that clutter the forum mostly based on personal experience. I can cite many times where something seemed imbalanced from playing random, as every race and in every matchup INLCUDING ZVZ. Sometimes the guy got ahead with superior economy management/took a risk and you didn't know and you got steamrolled without making a major mistake. Sometimes I roll someone when I knew I basically won the game 5 minutes beforehand with no prior engagement, and the guy flames the matchup being stupid. You can be damn sure he'd blame imba T/P if it wasn't ZvZ.
The fact is is that mahnini isn't trying to be elitist, he's saying that everyone needs to get off their high horse (aka "diamond league"). Apparently you are extra fond of yours.
Hmm I see, well if we disregard my never posting / visiting the strategy forums except maybe once in BW era when I first visited TL and that I've never made a topic, then yes, very much on my "high horse" apparently. I presume your post is quite bitter as you're having difficulty getting out of silver league or something.
And the game is a few months old, there are many imbalances. By the time the third expansion rolls around no doubt someone will make a nostalgia post entitled something like 'Do you remember when mutalisks were so powerful' or something, (example only). I don't see what a strategy forum is without personal experiences and individual input. Should every reply be "well x has a range and damage of y, so should beat z with exactly [this] much apm using micro". What can you do until then? Ban all independent thought or manage it. Maybe the solution lies in targeting new members through sign-up process or something. Not to come and rant at the decent normal TL members in such a gross manner.
But maybe I just found the original post very elitist and unnecessarily angry when I don't even visit the strategy forum in particular.
the problem doesn't lie with legitimate balance concerns, the problem lies with people using balance concerns as a crutch. no one is against a well-written thread on balance, it's just when some random guy thinks he lost every game in the last week because of some balance issue when, in fact, he is just playing poorly. the topic of balance, much like the game balance itself is a fine line. people aren't exhausting enough options before they go around complaining about balance and even if they did play 200+ games and still haven't found out how to consistently win it still doesn't mean there's a problem with balance (don't get me started with the "i'm only winning because i'm so much better than the people using ___ imba). just because you can't solve it doesn't mean someone else won't. if history has shown us anything it's that the game evolves and things are solved gradually, however, the game won't evolve if nobody's around to push it because people are too busy complaining about balance.
I have sucked at BW, War3, and Starcraft 2 for like a decade. Never ever in any moment of despair or anger towards a loss or series of losses have i ever thought for 1 second about coming to TL and making a thread about what is "broken", "imbalanced", or "wrong" with any of those games. Now, from the influx of noobs caused by SC2, there is a thread every 2 minutes called "Whats Wrong with Zerg" or "How to Fix Terran". And i dont know if its just because of what i was used to with BW or what but that sickens me.
I know that not everything is perfect with the balance in SC2. But i would bet anything that the people writing those threads are just terrible players with little to no insight into what they are doing, or little to no ability to see where they might be going wrong with what they are doing. They dont struggle to find a way, they simply think the game should be different to spare them the effort. When i used to get raped in BW, i felt like winning was an impossibility. And that made me respect the game and respect players who could consistently win. It also gave me an immense feeling that i had done something miraculous when i could pull out a win in certain scenarios. You know how many times i got roflstomped by vulture mines no matter how perfectly i tried to control my dragoons? It felt like a tightrope walk during an earthquake sometimes. But people didnt have a choice, they simply got better at it or lost. If you take away the value of effort and vigilant struggle to overcome what seems like an impossibility you take away what made BW what it is today in my opinion.
I think people should play more and cry less.
Also, i have friends who couldnt dodge a storm in BW to save their lives who are high diamond in SC2. In fact, almost all my friends who couldnt even make D+ in BW are all now high ranked Diamond in SC2. Its way too early and way too different of a game and ranking system to be relying on this kind of rank to decide who is an idiot or not.
I have been ghosting on TL without ever registering reading the forums etc...Long story short I finally registered just now to post and say this needs to be spread and I agree 100% with what you said! +1
On October 27 2010 09:27 Tone_ wrote: God I despise this thread. It's strange though. Everyone saying something incredibly stupid like "finally someone said it". They weren't waiting for someone to say it lol. They are probably guilty of it themselves, and will repeat this again and again. Ofc people are going to get frustrated with things and say they need changes (Cool?). It's not going to change because of one nobody's rant, or 1000 replies saying "yes i support this" blindly.
I agree with the principles, but now how it is ironically written to belittle and accuse the reader. I think it's clearly the product of frustration over something over time. Funnily enough this is what happens when people play sc. Furthermore the majority of TL will be sensible and logical with threads, and even ignore those that are shit.
Think the most annoying thing is amount of smug in here. So many "yes finally, I agree" from people who apparently have been incapable of saying something themselves. Some "I hope people listen and take this to heart" from some random person jumping on the positivity bandwagon.
Got to support the put it in strat forum seciton as a sticky or whatever, as it 100% does not belong here.
On October 27 2010 09:12 Radio.active wrote: YUS FINALLY SOMEONE SAYS IT!
I find it hard to come up with some appropriate words for this. What? So, we are to take from this that you have been waiting for this EXACT post? From "someone", anyone? But didn't make one yourself...
This thread was trying to get people to be humble. Obviously this was a problem with you. Fact is everyone thinks they are better at sc2 than they really are on a relative scale, myself included. A lot of people make balance discussions and stupid balance posts that clutter the forum mostly based on personal experience. I can cite many times where something seemed imbalanced from playing random, as every race and in every matchup INLCUDING ZVZ. Sometimes the guy got ahead with superior economy management/took a risk and you didn't know and you got steamrolled without making a major mistake. Sometimes I roll someone when I knew I basically won the game 5 minutes beforehand with no prior engagement, and the guy flames the matchup being stupid. You can be damn sure he'd blame imba T/P if it wasn't ZvZ.
The fact is is that mahnini isn't trying to be elitist, he's saying that everyone needs to get off their high horse (aka "diamond league"). Apparently you are extra fond of yours.
Hmm I see, well if we disregard my never posting / visiting the strategy forums except maybe once in BW era when I first visited TL and that I've never made a topic, then yes, very much on my "high horse" apparently. I presume your post is quite bitter as you're having difficulty getting out of silver league or something.
And the game is a few months old, there are many imbalances. By the time the third expansion rolls around no doubt someone will make a nostalgia post entitled something like 'Do you remember when mutalisks were so powerful' or something, (example only). I don't see what a strategy forum is without personal experiences and individual input. Should every reply be "well x has a range and damage of y, so should beat z with exactly [this] much apm using micro".
But maybe I just found the original post very elitist and unnecessarily angry when I don't even visit the strategy forum in particular.
Although I appreciate your randomly unjustified assumptions (I'm atm over 1900 in diamond, search for "Slayer", nothing special, but far from silver league), if you say you're not in any way respectful of your skill to the point that you could participate in balance discussions, why would you suddenly say "there are many imbalances"??? Changes in the way people play from learning the game can easily change apparent "balance". It's possible that one of the previous patches had perfect balance with "perfect play" (maybe on different maps) but its impossible to ever know. How is a post saying "hey guys we suck can we really complain about imba as a way to scapegoat our losses?" elitist in any way? In addition, if you "don't even visit the strategy forum in particular" how can you even reply to this thread when you don't have a good idea about the general posting in the sc2 strategy forum??? its mind boggling. I can't even fathom why you would be offended if thats the case??
You're targeting of "Diamond League" seemed unnecessary in your previous post. Where did I say I was not "respectful of my skill"? So because I do not post in the strategy forum I cannot say that I recognise balances exist in-game? Well I apologise....
On the contrary, your post strikes me as mind boggling and ridiculous. You're actively arguing against my very basic statement that the game isn't perfectly balanced by saying that it could well be perfectly balance. Well let's just apply that genius logic to all balance threads then shall we? Someone PM a mod and close all strategy threads discussing possible changes / improvements because it COULD be balanced, thank god you were here to enlighten us. Yes it could be balanced, but logic says it isn't, and why not discuss it anyway?
And I do not know if you were actually aware or not, but this isn't the strategy forum... Which suggests that the post was specifically targeted at everyone, including those that have not YET to post in the strategy forum. Why else would it be here. Please apply a little logic before complaining about this.
I'm not saying there isn't a problem with someone making a truly stupid post. But someone saying that they think marauders are overpowered because of xxxxx is.. kinda half the point of a strategy forum pending a 'balance' forum. I think the original post was far too unspecific as if everyone was guilty of spamming incredibly stupid posts. As many have suggested I would imagine this is from a lot of the newer members from certain other games. It seems that the post was spawned from frustration and was written under some considerable aggravation and heated tempers.
Please pm me if you want to really press it further as I doubt everyone wants to see all this and I'm off now.
I must say, you sir are correct. The problem with sc2 is that people don't want to admit what they did wrong so they blame it on "imbalance" and they get away with it because the game is still young. Now I will grant, some builds and units may be a bit strong and things may need to be ironed out, but that’s no excuses for you being terrible.
amen to that, but to the ones who don't look at themselves and blame other factors.. thats one less person you have to worry about losing to because you know you'll improve while they won't
On October 27 2010 09:27 Tone_ wrote: God I despise this thread. It's strange though. Everyone saying something incredibly stupid like "finally someone said it". They weren't waiting for someone to say it lol. They are probably guilty of it themselves, and will repeat this again and again. Ofc people are going to get frustrated with things and say they need changes (Cool?). It's not going to change because of one nobody's rant, or 1000 replies saying "yes i support this" blindly.
I agree with the principles, but now how it is ironically written to belittle and accuse the reader. I think it's clearly the product of frustration over something over time. Funnily enough this is what happens when people play sc. Furthermore the majority of TL will be sensible and logical with threads, and even ignore those that are shit.
Please at least make replies less smug, instead of "I've been waiting for this, finally someone said it" like some elitist jerk.
Got to support the put it in strat forum seciton as a sticky or whatever, as it 100% does not belong here.
I completely agree with the OP. Where I find fault continually is the condescending attitude toward issues the "casual" gamers have. Apparently the people making such comments have never looked at the distribution of players throughout the leagues. I can't understand why it is silly of Blizzard to try to make the game fun for the millions of people that they want to keep spending money instead of catering solely to the whims of a few thousand people (even less for the pro group).
The imbalance wolf-crying is only one of the issues now facing the community. Another big one is this suffocating elitism. If anyone wants SC2 to become more mainstream, more popular, and more successful, especially insofar as professional gaming is concerned, then these sorts of attitudes need to change. The view that anyone who isn't top 10 in the world sucks is one of these views; another is that anyone under diamond in rank is a mouthbreather barely capable of eating unassisted.
Someone earlier in the thread used baseball as an example: clearly, high school baseball stars (for the most part) will never be in the major leagues, yet no one acts like they are talentless. Are they the best? No. Do they need help with fundamentals, or maybe just lack natural talent? Sure. Do people still watch high school and college baseball? Yeah. Because the players are still better than most of the population, and because it is fun to watch.
This is the attitude that needs to change in SC2. Not to say that the game needs to be balanced just because peoples' skill levels can't pull off a certain strategy; however, that doesn't mean that the vast majority of the people who play the game should be ignored, either. I think Blizzard has done a pretty good job with this issue so far, and I hope they continue to.
EDIT: Sorry if that is a bit off-topic, I thought it related a bit to the theme of humility in the OP.
On October 27 2010 09:27 Tone_ wrote: I agree with the principles, but now how it is ironically written to belittle and accuse the reader. I think it's clearly the product of frustration over something over time. Funnily enough this is what happens when people play sc. Furthermore the majority of TL will be sensible and logical with threads, and even ignore those that are shit.
You familiar with the term Straw-man? The OPs post has nothing to with whether or not famous players have gotten frustrated over balance issues, whether or not people get frustrated when playing SC, or if people are sensible and ignore stupid posts.
He was talking about the decline of the strategy forums due to imbalance cries, to the point where they are pretty much unreadable due to the balance whining. The attitude has shifted in SC2 from seriously caring about self improvement, to whining and hoping for an advantage next patch. People want to win NOW as oppose to working for years at it.
Am I guilty of whining at times? Probably, I'm human. But I'd rather have people say to me "shut up, you're on tilt, you need to fix X and X" rather than an entire forum erupt in a flame war with half the people agreeing with me, and the over half milliantly against me. No one benefits from that environment, no one gets better at the game.
Ultimately as the OP was trying to say, humility is the pre-requisit for self improvement (unless you're Idra).
Whenever I want to cry about an imbalance, I think about how complicated a system SC2 is and realize that even the smallest changes can have far reaching and unforeseen consequences.
The game will be perfected over time and I see no reason to be impatient over it. For now, as players and as community contributors, we should be discussing strategy and figuring out how to overcome even the most difficult of imbalances.
Obviously the argument for people crying imba is that if they make themselves heard, the issues will be resolved. Unfortunately, it is most likely that the best suggestions make up the lowest percentage of the ideas tossed out there. As it has been said before, intelligent debate and discussions backed up with replays is really the best way to deal with imbalances. It also has the added benefit of not making you look like a prick.
This is exactly what needs to return I learned so much from the BW strat forums just by looking up other people's experiences and how posters recommend they solve them. When i do the same searches in the SC2 forums all i get is endless pages of imbalance discussions and recommendations on how blizzard can fix it ):
I think almost everyone knows that the matchmaking algorithm from Blizzard is working damn well.
Ignoring ultra top players (~top500?), ultra bad players (the opposite side) and tournament plays we can assume that you will always have a 50% winchance. If your enemies race is better, you get the weaker player. If you enemies race is weaker, you get the better player. But in ladder you will always have a chance of 50% to win.
And you can only blame the loss on yourself (or the enemy doing an "unfair" strategy), because the matchmaking system is taking care of eliminating the imbalances.
Sure - you can argue that you might be a ~1800 diamond player instead of a 1500 diamond player in a perfectly balanced game. But I dont see people complaining about their low rank - only complaining about individual games.
i agree that imbalance has been detrimental to cohesive discussion about sc2. you don't see people complaining about how knights can only move in L shapes, they talk about how to use this weird ability to 100% effectiveness
On October 27 2010 12:51 Sprouter wrote: i agree that imbalance has been detrimental to cohesive discussion about sc2. you don't see people complaining about how knights can only move in L shapes, they talk about how to use this weird ability to 100% effectiveness
I like what the OP had to say. Hats off to you sir for bringing a bit more light on the strat talk in forums, definitely a little tired of threads degenerating to imba stuff.
On October 27 2010 12:51 Sprouter wrote: i agree that imbalance has been detrimental to cohesive discussion about sc2. you don't see people complaining about how knights can only move in L shapes, they talk about how to use this weird ability to 100% effectiveness
Chess is a mirror match, except for the fact that white moves first (not necessarily an advantage, we'll find out when they solve chess ). It's not accurate to say "they don't complain about balance in chess, which is a successful strategy game, so we shouldn't complain about it in starcraft"
That said, I love seeing threads with a [G] on them and hate ones with "OP" or "Imbalanced" in the title.
On October 27 2010 11:40 Zocat wrote: I think almost everyone knows that the matchmaking algorithm from Blizzard is working damn well.
Ignoring ultra top players (~top500?), ultra bad players (the opposite side) and tournament plays we can assume that you will always have a 50% winchance. If your enemies race is better, you get the weaker player. If you enemies race is weaker, you get the better player. But in ladder you will always have a chance of 50% to win.
And you can only blame the loss on yourself (or the enemy doing an "unfair" strategy), because the matchmaking system is taking care of eliminating the imbalances.
Sure - you can argue that you might be a ~1800 diamond player instead of a 1500 diamond player in a perfectly balanced game. But I dont see people complaining about their low rank - only complaining about individual games.
I also feel that the bolded statement is very true, and I would hate to win too much / too little. Winning too little can make you tired of the game, but winning too much makes you feel like you don't need to improve on your play.
I was going to say front page this, but, hey, it is! Good call.
Great post. Seriously I hate SC2 Strat, because no one will just ask how to improve or what to fix ABOUT THEMSELVES (99.9999999% of players) but instead go why is Terran such bullshit roflzlzlzlzlzlzlzz BRB GETTIN WASTED LOL I HAVE A LIFE!
Threads in general and strat that are about genuine players trying to improve and tweak/refine a strat warm my heart, compared to the 99/100 threads about how bullshit another race or unit is.
On October 27 2010 10:44 FrostOtter wrote: I completely agree with the OP. Where I find fault continually is the condescending attitude toward issues the "casual" gamers have. Apparently the people making such comments have never looked at the distribution of players throughout the leagues. I can't understand why it is silly of Blizzard to try to make the game fun for the millions of people that they want to keep spending money instead of catering solely to the whims of a few thousand people (even less for the pro group).
The imbalance wolf-crying is only one of the issues now facing the community. Another big one is this suffocating elitism. If anyone wants SC2 to become more mainstream, more popular, and more successful, especially insofar as professional gaming is concerned, then these sorts of attitudes need to change. The view that anyone who isn't top 10 in the world sucks is one of these views; another is that anyone under diamond in rank is a mouthbreather barely capable of eating unassisted.
Someone earlier in the thread used baseball as an example: clearly, high school baseball stars (for the most part) will never be in the major leagues, yet no one acts like they are talentless. Are they the best? No. Do they need help with fundamentals, or maybe just lack natural talent? Sure. Do people still watch high school and college baseball? Yeah. Because the players are still better than most of the population, and because it is fun to watch.
This is the attitude that needs to change in SC2. Not to say that the game needs to be balanced just because peoples' skill levels can't pull off a certain strategy; however, that doesn't mean that the vast majority of the people who play the game should be ignored, either. I think Blizzard has done a pretty good job with this issue so far, and I hope they continue to.
EDIT: Sorry if that is a bit off-topic, I thought it related a bit to the theme of humility in the OP.
Well, his post was indeed about being humble, but he also mentions that we were also elitists. The good kind of elitists.
I believe he meant to be humble and recognize that as a player, you need to get better, and had you been faster or smarter in any given game, you could have won. You could discuss balance, but what you couldn't do is point to something, call it bullshit, and pretend you did everything right in a game and lost. This is one of the most important outlooks you can have when it comes to something like Starcraft, or life in general. Recognizing your own failings, and prioritizing self-improvement over blame - an attitude we should all respect. This was somewhat enforced through elitism in the old TL - basically ignoring attitudes that sought to blame others instead of themselves.
The elitism isn't baseless, I thought it served a very good purpose of correcting or at least discouraging the horrible aforementioned attitudes. Those who weren't humble with regards to their own skills, or those who basically complain all day - they were shunned. If you had a good question, or a replay that you needed help with, the community would welcome you with open arms - provided you actually looked at the replay, analyzed it to the best of your ability, presented your findings, and at least considered the answers you were given.
I know the words "elitism" and "humble" can be contradictory, but in this case it isn't.
This is why I avoid the SC2 strat forums. Most of my improvement is now out of self-evaluation and replay watching. I've lost trust in the forums to provide genuine feedback on gameplay, not because of the lack of good people (both BW and SC2 have their own respective good players), but because we're swamped in talks about imbalance.
I really enjoyed this post, both for the message and the entertaining way in which it was presented. I'm all for admitting that I suck at this game and there are thousands of things every game that I could do faster, better and more efficiently. It really pains me when people take it upon themselves to make a post about "The current state of the game" or something like that, as if they are the authority about the balance between races or perhaps because they've seen a pro lose to that strategy. Some pros are better than others. Pros make mistakes. Sometimes they can be unprepared for a creative or unexpected strategy. None of these things scream imbalance and therefore neither should we.
I read the title in Navi's voice before i even opened the thread..
Also agree with all the sentiments stated, I'm pretty terrible but I've been playing better as of recent, it's not the games fault when I lose cos there's always at least a couple things off the top of my head i know i screwed up before i even go near the reply.
On October 27 2010 10:44 FrostOtter wrote: I completely agree with the OP. Where I find fault continually is the condescending attitude toward issues the "casual" gamers have. Apparently the people making such comments have never looked at the distribution of players throughout the leagues. I can't understand why it is silly of Blizzard to try to make the game fun for the millions of people that they want to keep spending money instead of catering solely to the whims of a few thousand people (even less for the pro group).
The imbalance wolf-crying is only one of the issues now facing the community. Another big one is this suffocating elitism. If anyone wants SC2 to become more mainstream, more popular, and more successful, especially insofar as professional gaming is concerned, then these sorts of attitudes need to change. The view that anyone who isn't top 10 in the world sucks is one of these views; another is that anyone under diamond in rank is a mouthbreather barely capable of eating unassisted.
Someone earlier in the thread used baseball as an example: clearly, high school baseball stars (for the most part) will never be in the major leagues, yet no one acts like they are talentless. Are they the best? No. Do they need help with fundamentals, or maybe just lack natural talent? Sure. Do people still watch high school and college baseball? Yeah. Because the players are still better than most of the population, and because it is fun to watch.
This is the attitude that needs to change in SC2. Not to say that the game needs to be balanced just because peoples' skill levels can't pull off a certain strategy; however, that doesn't mean that the vast majority of the people who play the game should be ignored, either. I think Blizzard has done a pretty good job with this issue so far, and I hope they continue to.
EDIT: Sorry if that is a bit off-topic, I thought it related a bit to the theme of humility in the OP.
I agree with this. While it is also clear that a low diamond or lesser player shouldn't blame his losses on imbalance (or the game being "broken") but rather work on his shortcomings, I think the attitude that 95 percent of the world's SC2 players are morons is not only offensive to these players but also counterproductive if we want SC2 to flourish as an e-sport. Noone would suggest that people playing football in the backyards and competing locally are all morons just because their play is nowhere near the play of the guys in national teams. Somehow though, in SC2 such an attitude is quite common. That's a bad kind of elitism. (I'm not saying that TL.net is "officially" like that, it's just something that I see in the forums regularly.)
This is so true. I meet atleast 3-5 people that act like this on the ladder every day. This is often time how the situation unfolds:
I beat the living snot out of someone who clearly doesn't know basic timings. They then go on to whine about how protoss are imba and there is no counter in the game for what I just did. I often times take the nice guy approach and tell them exactly how to play against my style. Even though I just gave away valuable information about my gameplay they still flame me hardcore and refuse to acknowlege that I might have more experience than them. Often time it ends with me explaining that I have played 3 times as many games as them and my rating with random is 300 points higher than their rating with a main race. does that make them stop flamin? Hell no.
People in general need to stop whining so god damn much in game. it's fine if you nerd rage once in a while but don't argue when someone is nice and gives constructive critisism.
A lot of it has to do with the fact that SC2 got mainstream attention, bringing a lot of mainstream people who have no idea about the game here, before, it was just people who were really interested in the scene and would do a lot to support it, now, everyone's here pretty much. Good points on the difference between the bw group and the sc2 group, with the sc2 group acting like kids, not acknowledging their mistakes.
On October 25 2010 04:19 mahnini wrote: For many of us, BW taught us a stern lesson in humility. No matter smart you were, someone was smarter; no matter how fast you were, someone was faster; no matter how well you played, someone played better. It was just the natural order of things. People knew that no matter how hard they were trying, someone out there in that little-big community of ours, someone was trying harder. People understood that improvement in BW was a self-reflective process. You had to find it in yourself to win, you had to understand that the reason you lost is because you made mistakes and to get better you had to come to terms with them. It wasn't about what your opponent did right, it was about what you did wrong.
Well pointed out mahnini, TL has changed over the last few years sure but when I check the forums these days. All the cleverly written articles about BW and progaming that actually made you think and reflect and actual discussions above an immature teenage level are gone.
There's just to much crying and complaining about BW & SC2, it's gotten really pointless to keep checking the site when it no longer is interesting, in fact the only section I bother reading is general and News.
I think I've grown out of this site and lost interest in the games.
what really amazes me about all of this racial imbalance crap is that it doesnt matter what blizzard does to balance the game, some crazy guy with this crazy but successfull idea will apparently throw the whole game into whack with his strategic genius and it will spread throughout the gaming discourse. you see it in the magic box tactic, mass reapers, ect ect ect. You cant nerf human inventiveness *except for perhaps with use of a screwdriver* so people should always try to invest in that rather than whine.
I totally agree, I don't read the strategy boards because so much information is just wrong or misleading. It's almost always better just to fine pro replays and understand what they're doing instead.
Great, great post. While I don't think it's going to improve any time soon, I hope at least just a couple of guys posting in the SC2 strat forum will think twice before hitting the "Post" button after reading this.
I think many of the players whining about inbalance are players who have not played bw, instead played games like wow where QQ about inbalance is common. Loved the post and all players posting should reconsider after reading this
u go girl, exactly what i hate about the section and a lot of people in general. its always easier to blame balance before yourself; if you actually play a game and dont make major mistakes or a bunch of little ones then there might be problems otherwise shhhhhh
I'm glad this was posted. although i don't post very often, i check the TL forums about 20 times a day and it just gets old when you see the same posts about racial imba. Every time i post i will keep this OP in mind.
So true.. I have new-found respect for TL! Some of the recent threads/posts started to remind me of bnet forums and that was scary. I only started posting after sc2 came out, but i've been reading the forums for allmost 3 years, and some things deffinetly changed.
I think mods really shoud be more strict with the bans, but that's just me..
Good post - I think everyone fairly reasonable would agree. With that said I really know how frustrating it can be to go on a losing streak. Even though you feel that you try hard you just seem to get roflstomped every time. And since its a new game.... well why not blame the game insted of the player! Definetly a good point that we should try to take a breather and analyse our flaws insted of just raging over one's own insuffiency
yea, at times I miss the way tl was before sc2. When I just lurked the strategy section to improve my d Terran play. Occasionally I glance at the sc2 strategy section and i'm flabbergasted by the childish things that have become the outcome of mainstream e-sports. I completely agree with the OP and think everyone should try and improve instead of try and improve the game. I'll admit i'm a 1700 rated Terran and I'm still awful at this game. I'm sure most of us are, just keep working to get better.
This has been said many times before. Even before SC2.
As far as im concerned, the strat forums have always been garbage, for the simple reason that it's full of people who need help with strategy as opposed to people who are great at strategy (who are probably practicing instead of reading your posts).
As far as imbal discussion is concerned, it's only natural since blizzard is in the process of changing the game frequently.
The reason no one complained about imbalance in broodwar (apart from it being very balanced) is because the game has not been balance patched in many years; it's been obvious for a long time that broodwar is 'job complete' as a game.
My advice is unless you want mindless entertainment and have time to burn, dont visit the strategy forums, and instead spend your time playing or watching top players play.
I gave up on the strategy forum looong before sc2...
What the strategy forum needs is a reccomended threads page and some stickied and archived guides (like the broodwar forums). It's no wonder there's an excess of rubbish posts when newcomers cannot easily find a few simple guides at the top of the first page.
People are probably more likely to make bad posts when they are not provided with the most basic and simple information (such as attitude and approach to learning the game).
The constant moderation is great, but without substantial content you're just repeatedly flushing the toilet instead of polishing the daimond. Maybe there needs to be more people (top players and good writers) willing to contribute (for free). Unfortunately for new players, good written content is probably harder to find than it used to be, because people are trying to make money off it now.
Ironically this post is just a thread full of people complaining about people complaining which curiously, I find even more disturbing. Bottom line is if this place is going to be useful to anyone, some useful posts and guides need to be made and stickied.
Telling people not to be dumb doesn't really work.
:p The games still young. In a year or two most of the whiners will move on to a NEW game that's flashier and more suited to their mental capacity. That is, assuming they don't come back for the 2nd and 3rd installments of sc2. The people who stick with sc2 through all it's hiccups and troubles will probably end up with the same sort of community SC:BW had (and has? :p I didn't play BW competitively at all, and such never went on the forums).
On October 28 2010 22:30 Hectic wrote: What the strategy forum needs is a reccomended threads page and some stickied and archived guides (like the broodwar forums). It's no wonder there's an excess of rubbish posts when newcomers cannot easily find a few simple guides at the top of the first page.
Obviously you haven't heard about liquipedia. You seem to have also missed the stickies, "How to improve" and "recommended threads." Don't make sweeping generalizations about the strategy forum being bad when you obviously haven't seen very much of TL.
Edit: To be fair, you did say "like the broodwar forums." However, liquidpedia for sc2 still exists. The reason there aren't threads like that in SC2 strat forums is because the good people haven't made them yet. You can't expect perfect guides while the game is still changing and they shouldn't be required for new players.
On October 28 2010 22:30 Hectic wrote: How can you expect people not to complain about silly things when they are not provided with the most basic and simple information (such as attitude and approach to learning the game).
Why are people without the "most basic and simple information" complaining? How is that our fault?
On October 28 2010 22:30 Hectic wrote: The constant moderation is great, but without substantial content you're just repeatedly flushing the toilet instead of polishing the daimond. Maybe there needs to be more people (top players and good writers) willing to contribute (for free). Unfortunately for new players, good written content is probably harder to find than it used to be, because people are trying to make money off it now.
TL has always had fantastic free content. We have a community of great players who often contribute great things. Great players such as nony and ret have posted in threads, been on TL:Attack, and the replay analysis videos.
I think a lot of players are new and they just weren't a part of BW culture. BW had many years to grow and become what it is. And people were pretty convinced that the game was balanced. With a new game such as SCII, I just think people have a hard time becoming convinced that the game is balanced. Hopefully it all changes soon and the game grows to where BW was.
Give it time, SC2 is still new. Over time the whiners will get bored or realize they haven't improved enough as a player to keep up with the rest of the community then leave. Then the people left will be the right kind of people to make these forums worth reading again.
On October 28 2010 22:30 Hectic wrote: What the strategy forum needs is a reccomended threads page and some stickied and archived guides (like the broodwar forums). It's no wonder there's an excess of rubbish posts when newcomers cannot easily find a few simple guides at the top of the first page.
Obviously you haven't heard about liquipedia. You seem to have also missed the stickies, "How to improve" and "recommended threads." Don't make sweeping generalizations about the strategy forum being bad when you obviously haven't seen very much of TL.
Edit: To be fair, you did say "like the broodwar forums." However, liquidpedia for sc2 still exists. The reason there aren't threads like that in SC2 strat forums is because the good people haven't made them yet. You can't expect perfect guides while the game is still changing and they shouldn't be required for new players.
On October 28 2010 22:30 Hectic wrote: How can you expect people not to complain about silly things when they are not provided with the most basic and simple information (such as attitude and approach to learning the game).
Why are people without the "most basic and simple information" complaining? How is that our fault?
On October 28 2010 22:30 Hectic wrote: The constant moderation is great, but without substantial content you're just repeatedly flushing the toilet instead of polishing the daimond. Maybe there needs to be more people (top players and good writers) willing to contribute (for free). Unfortunately for new players, good written content is probably harder to find than it used to be, because people are trying to make money off it now.
TL has always had fantastic free content. We have a community of great players who often contribute great things. Great players such as nony and ret have posted in threads, been on TL:Attack, and the replay analysis videos.
I'm not an idiot, i know about all the resources on TL, but alot of new people dont. There's currently nothing to point new players in the right direction when they click on "SC2 Strategy" and all they see is a bunch garbage posts to guide them.
my whole point was that it needs more resources, like the broodwar forums did. Even a link to liquipedia. If i was new i probably wouldn't even bother to click on liquipedia. The only reason TL has even been good is because of these things, not because people whinge about bad posters.
anyways, good work for trying to shutdown someone with some suggestions. I guess in the end complaining about bad posters is really what makes everything work out in the end.
It's tough to find people who are both amazing players and have free time to contribute their hard won experience for free. Teamliquid has many many people who try, but they're getting overrun a bit by the new posters.
tl;dr: listen before speaking/posting, and you'll probably learn more
Thank you for the amazing post. I think everyone that even plays Starcraft 2 should read this post. I think we're all incredibly tired of everyone feeling entitled to their balance changes. Personally I believe this is because of the massive number of people involved in beta testing. They're used to seeing things get nerfed because they're so powerful. Now they're used to crying that something is "OP" and it gets a nerf eventually. Also, a large number (12 million) of gamers play wow and are used to all this balance talk. In my opinion, there is a lot of room for balance talk in that game because the numbers really do change very frequently (nerf warlocks ^___^) But this mentality of "OP" has seeped into Starcraft 2 where it wasn't before, in Starcraft: BW. I completely agree with this wonderful post and truly wish everyone would read it.
Isn't there a rule that you would have to post 8 replays showing the percieved "imbalance" in order to make any claims like that? The mods might be too lenient in this regard.
Honnestly, the strategy forum makes me angry inside. When i read it and i foudn something stupid in it, I'm hoping that blizz isn't reading it or taking some random points as if it was set in the stone to balance the game.
Fortunately, from time to time, you can find some nice gems of advices, but it's hard to find them but most of the time, it's some random rants. Give the game some time, it's not because today you have hard time dealing with a strategy that you won't counter it later. In my clan, I'am the only one who were there during sc1 and I keep telling to my mates, who feel desperate about a strat, to try something else, refine it and make a conclusion after that.
The process of balancing is often the desire of the player to win the game while playing with his comfortable build order.
It's like the controversy reaper vs Zerg before patch. At first, on the one hand I was like "ok reapers are OP, I can't win vs them". On the other hand, I was thinking, "dammit, some good players can win vs reapers so I must do it too, I must learn how to do that" instead of thinking i'm too good to be beat . Too often you see in the strategy forum someone asking for a help and he doesn't even want to listen answers he got... Balancing and Understanding the game are two very different things that are mixed up in the strategy.
It's too hard to be at the same time the judge and the attorney. When you play SC, you need to think twice, test a lot of timings/bo/army composition, refinining everything you can before stating anything.
Starcraft 1 showed us that, even after many years of progaming, there were still a lot of misconceptions and things to learn. The vast majority of the players can't judge the balance of the game, that's a fact, only a large sample at a high can show some imbalances in my humble opinion.
Cool post, I find that basically every1 is just saying the same thing about imbalance which is dumb because not all the races are equivalent. If you want to play a completely balanced game of SC2 ask for blizzard to make only 1 race.
Thats really opened my eyes, i don't make posts about imba, but i can get angry at a cheesy loss, thank you, good sir, for changing my perspective on sc2.
EPT![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/Vl8G8.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/iUzNY.png)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/3WnlL.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/dW4Ff.gif)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/k8KEF.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/6bbb8.jpg)
![[image loading]](/staff/Plexa//blogs.jpg)
