|
I agree with the OP, and I myself made a new years resolution to just improve and not worry about the subjective balance as much. That is a pretty good thing to do for everyone as the OP points out.
But that does not mean that some things in the game are absolutely ridiculous in a cost to effort ratio. Strategies like 4gate are effective even into the pros. You can beat a player vastly better than yourself with something like a 4gate, and almost anyone can learn to do the build order in less than half an hour.
There was never anything as easy cost to effort wise to do in brood war. Hell, in brood war some builds were so abstract that they depended on you doing a certain amount of damage with a unit, or keeping someone in their base or pressured for the build to even work.
So while I agree that people should not blame imbalance for losses n such and should just "get better" and post like we did in brood war...I do think that it shouldn't be looked down upon for posters to want SC2's difficulty and depth to more rival brood wars. And the fact is that it does not right now.
Unless you are also saying that people should just not bother with that either, which could be a valid point too...as you said, blizzard isn't going to change much at this point in that respect.
|
not to burst ur tank bubble or anything but those tanks with hundreds of kills were in fact patched. their damage was changed to 35+15 vs armored from 50 vs everything. This increased the skill in the game by opening up the possibility of researched +1 carapace on lings to increase the tank shots for a kill to 2 instead of 1, as well as make workers not insta die to a tank on a cliff, as well as open up the possibility of using chargelots vs tank lines.
I know this post is mainly for non progamer level players basically, and taking that into account this was a really good OP, and your absolutely correct if we open up replays from 2 months ago where people were mass crying imbalance all day long we find that people really really sucked back then. Same thingis going to happen 2 months from now. which is why sc2 is so awesome :D
|
God? Thank you for existing.
|
Ok...
This is a good write up and you put alot of effort in it I can tell.
But there has been so many threads about this "Save TL!!!" thing and how the Strategy forums are terrible and everyone just whines imbalance. I will say that when the game was released we definately saw a huge influx of these threads that were ruining TL and I was just as mad. But thanks to some similiar threads(and good moderators)I have seen alot of good riddance on these forums.
If your reading this post, go look at the strat forum right now. Almost every thread in there is a legit "I need help with X post." In most of the threads the people watched and analyzed the replay. This is great and exactly how the strat forums are be. I mean yea some people are going to post imbalance, but what forum is perfect? Should we censor the word on TL so our forums dont get ruined?????
Were fine and SC2 has had a bright future from the minute beta started.
|
@XXXSmOke: Y Thats True!
@Ursad0n: I realy like your Topic. But your last Post makes me bit unhappy... TL forums seems to be fine bout posts that cry: ITS Imbalance!!!! I think you dont need to cry about people and tell them to go away from here and post there Imbalancenes-Feelings in Blizzforums.... If they cant cry here you shouldnt cry here too! if you have a problem with these Imbalanceposters go to Blizzforum and tell them to balance the game, bec you cant read that s**t anymore... ITS THAT EASY ....
|
Imbalance - The reason 99% of players lost their games (or so they say...)
oh god
The only solution to imbalance is for Blizzard to A) Recognize something as imbalanced B) Come up with a solution C) testing the solution D) apply the Blizzard delay E) Have blizzard release a patch that is completely irrelevant to the problem and solves nothing F) the rest of the shit between then and a useful patch.
... seriously what?
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=177434
really do we need one of these every month?
|
I have to go on a limb and disagree with the spirit of this post.
I agree that most people shouldn't worry about balance. I agree that whining should stop, and usually you lose because you messed up.
We can't, however, just assume that the game is perfect as is. There are always constructive criticisms to be made. By simply assuming that balance is perfect, the game will never evolve for the better. Careful input from the pros has made Starcraft 2 a better game, and I don't think it should stop.
|
Theres far more complaining about people discussing balance than actual complaining on imbalance IMO.
And I think alot of people care less about how they fare playing the game and more about the enjoyability of watching higher-level play. And whats enjoyable to watch for most people are matchups where they percieve both sides to a) have an equal shot of winning and b) don't lose due to a tiny mistake or coinflip build-order loss.
And alot of the talk about balance/imbalance I see is more 'god X doing that much damage in this situation is so stupid for A/B/C reasons' than simply 'god X is unstoppable'.
|
On January 07 2011 14:57 Sentient wrote:
I have to go on a limb and disagree with the spirit of this post.
I agree that most people shouldn't worry about balance. I agree that whining should stop, and usually you lose because you messed up.
We can't, however, just assume that the game is perfect as is. There are always constructive criticisms to be made. By simply assuming that balance is perfect, the game will never evolve for the better. Careful input from the pros has made Starcraft 2 a better game, and I don't think it should stop.
Theres nothing in the Topic that says: the game is perfect as it is.... Also constructive criticisms would be really great.... but you know thats what the Topic says: "theres not much about the constructive type -.-"
|
Love your fixing imbalance steps by Blizzard. They're so true x]
|
Nice post and cool video. Some pointers:
First, time change. With all the knowledge about SC that has evolved over the years, the general skill level is a lot higher than it was back then (disregarding mechanics that make gameplay easier). Imbalances will emerge faster since players play on a higher level, both on average as well as the top level.
Second, it's the web. As people are connected more through forums like TL, voicing your opinion is easier and happens faster. People hear stuff and they repeat it. No, it will not be the downfall of SC3. Just look at WoW and observe that imbalance talk (crying is a better description) will be always present and will never fade.
Third, I will NEVER find the mineral cost of a scout balanced. 275 minerals for a souped up wraith without cloak? BW is balanced, but a few units hardly ever see the battlefield due to unreasonable cost/techpaths/stats. That's not the kind of imbalance that ruins the game, but it is the kind of imbalance that allows for less options (think Broodlord on high level play for example).
That said, I stopped feeling frustrated over losing with Zerg in SC2. I play to improve, and I improve. Currently high plat and I am sure that with the mechanics I currently have, I would have been diamond if my race had been Terran. I hope this slightly "unjust" feeling will fade away over time as more balance patches come around...
|
On January 07 2011 10:37 Ursad0n wrote:The Solution: Making the Game What It Should Be: Stop crying about imbalance
Stop making stupid useless posts
You've obviously used the Internet before, so I can only assume that you're being facetious.
Also, I think you're overestimating the extent to which the quality of discussion on TL influences the success of SC2, or you're viewing success too much along the lines of "It Should Behave Like BW Behaved." The game is quite popular and obviously inspires lots of passionate discussion online, and it will be around for a while. This represents success of a kind, I think.
|
I know that personally all my losses are my fault, and nearly all my wins are the faults of my opponents. But that's at my level. To say the game is perfectly balanced is a little naive, and I'll be the first person to theory craft solutions to any given problem but occasionally you can really see that some strategies have a higher return on investment and that certain timing attacks defended perfectly, or that appear to be defended perfectly actually did significant damage. I do disagree with most imbalance posts because it's normally by people who have no idea what they're talking about.
I like to entertain the good discussions because I'd like starcraft to be respected at the highest level of competition and for that it needs to be well balanced, and to those who say it can be overbalanced I disagree, that's akin to saying chess is completely figured out.
|
But what about Shakuras Plateau? The sc2 community liked that map and we thought it was balanced. Hell, GSL is still using it. Why would blizzard undermine everyone by taking out one of the few maps that almost everyone agreed was really good.
|
On January 07 2011 16:37 Drowsy wrote:
But what about Shakuras Plateau? The sc2 community liked that map and we thought it was balanced. Hell, GSL is still using it. Why would blizzard undermine everyone by taking out one of the few maps that almost everyone agreed was really good.
There was that invincible pylon bug that needed fixing. Leaving the map in the pool with that bug had the chance of the exploit's popularity snowball out of control.
I'm sure they will put the map back in after they fix the bug.
|
Interesting read, especially the part about the maps. BW map makers still have trouble determining if a map is going to be imbalanced before it gets played a lot (Battle Royal, anyone?), so why should we expect SC2 mapmakers working with a game that has been out for less than a year to do any better?
Following that, though, I really hate seeing BW brought up as an example of perfect balance, and, more importantly, Blizzard's ability to design a balanced game. Blizzard hasn't changed anything involved in BW PvZ forge FE since patch 1.04.
For example, that Protoss can put down a pylon, scout, and then play either forge cannon cannon nexus against 9-pool, forge nexus cannon cannon against overpool, or nexus whatever (forge gateway cannon, depending on map) against 12 hatch, and have both players be in a relatively equal position afterward is a complete accident. Blizzard didn't plan this. Blizzard didn't plan how certain configurations of Zerg buildings would block Zealots but not Zerglings or Hydralisks in Zerg walls. They certainly didn't plan the timings and costs that makes ZvT muta harass off of 2-hatch and 3-hatch builds legitimate threats but not totally broken on every map. They didn't plan for how PvT dragoon pressure on a wall up a ramp is enough to pull SCVs to repair the wall, but not enough to break it before the Siege Tanks can defend it unless the Terran screws up and gives away a tank or fails to repair. Blizzard didn't plan ranged Dragoon against Marine micro, or Muta against scourge Micro, or that Dragoons could kill mines without detection only when microed backwards properly, or any number of other things that I'm not thinking of right now.
BW, as a standalone game, is imbalanced. The maps make it balanced, by allowing Protoss to forge FE against Zerg, by having cliffs just the right distance from the Terran mineral line to allow Muta harass to be effective without being broken like Blue Storm used to be, and in hundreds of other little ways to offset the racial imbalances that are already present or enhanced in the map to try to get the imbalance to a zero sum.
From this, SC2 is not balanced. Blizzard screws up. If you don't believe me, go check some of the beta patches on the Liquipedia. They're working on it. They're doing a lot better with it then they are on Brood War, but because people have this delusion of BW being a perfectly balanced game, they set their expectations of SC2 balance very high, without giving Blizzard time to get it there. Patch 1.08, the last balance patch, was released a little over 3 years after the game was released. In contrast, SC2 has been out for maybe half a year. They have a decent idea of what they're doing, but it's going to take them a while to achieve balance, and in the meantime, there will be imbalances. It may not be huge things like 60 second warpgate research, but it will be things that even the casual player will run into every so often, or more if it's easy to exploit, like VR with 7 range were against Terran. It wasn't a tremendous deal at the time, because Terrans were mostly opening 1/1/1, and everyone who complained about VRs just got the advice "Build a Viking and keep it over your marines with micro." With the state of the metagame now, oGsMC's Stalker/VR opening would be incredibly devastating if VRs still had 7 range. Alternatively, think about that 2 rax marine/scv attack that TSL_Rain used to great effect in GSL3. Think about how much stronger that would have been if SCVs still had 60 hp.
It's all well and good to get mad at people complaining about imbalance, but it's impossible to know which minor imbalance might become a critical element of a game-breaking play style, and the more people are aware of something that might be wrong, the faster it can be isolated and fixed, either by a metagame shift or a patch from Blizzard. Unfortunately, the prevailing attitude here seems to be either "There is no imbalance" or "There might be imbalance, but we don't talk about it here," without actually examining the point of balance in question. This is, of course, a mod-enforced rule, but it does create a problem when someone brings up an issue that could be a metagame shift about to happen, or could be a balance problem, because people are only allowed to suggest player error and metagame as causes for the issue.
That being said, there are a tremendous number of people who post about imbalance because they're only looking at specific units. As an example here, I think the most commonly complained about unit since SC2 beta started is the Marauder in TvP. Yes, it is incredibly strong against Protoss in the early game. If all Protoss had were gateway units, Terran bio would be broken. However, that's not the case. While Terran bio is far more cost efficient against Protoss gateway units than those gateway units are against Terran bio, in general, Protoss late game units (Colossi and Templar in particular) are generally incredibly cost efficient compared to Terran's late game selection. And hey, isn't Templar with Psi Storm and the Amulet the second most complained about unit since beta? This creates the "balance" that Terran is strong in the early game and weak in the late game, and a very frustrating matchup in general. Hey. Blizzard is aware of this. They're working to fix it. Unfortunately, they've got to do it without breaking TvZ or PvZ.
I've wandered a bit off topic here, but going back to the initial post...
Treat the game as if perfectly balanced, play to beat the Strong builds (not IMBA Strong)
Well, treating the game as though it is perfectly balanced is great, except when it causes the metagame to evolve in ridiculous fashion. Remember back in beta, before the SCV health nerf? Protoss were opening forge and cannon on top of their ramp just because of the threat of a marine/scv all in. It was the only way to survive. Was that really healthy for the development of SC2?
Don't talk about imbalance
Don't respond to someone talking about imbalance
So, if we just ignore the problem, it will go away? Well, probably, assuming Blizzard ever notices it. That doesn't mean that burying our heads in the sand is the best way act while we wait. Going back to my above point and the change in Void Ray range from 7 to 6. The Terran 1/1/1 opening TvP was popular because it allowed for fast Ravens and Vikings. Particularly the Vikings, as they were the only good way to not die to VRs while taking a relatively early expansion, especially on maps like LT with a cliff overlooking the natural. However, 1/1/1 seems to be a bit out of fashion, because Protoss learned ways to flat out kill it. The range was a minor imbalance, because it forced Terrans to either build a lot of Turrets or have early Vikings to deal with VRs, putting Terran players at least a little behind from the start. The SCV health issue was a major imbalance. I can't confirm it, but I think that the prevalent Protoss strategy until the health nerf after a bit of discussionwas to cannon rush the Terran every game. Metagame went nowhere, and no one really had fun with the matchup.
TL;DR:
Lay off the mapmakers. They're working with a new game, when BW mapmakers still screw up.
Brood War isn't balanced. It's the maps that make it balanced. Even then, that's only possible because of stuff Blizzard could not possibly have planned. Stop holding BW up as the standard of balance to which SC2 has to meet to be deemed an acceptable RTS. It's absurd.
Even noobs will stumble across imbalances and recognize them for what they are, especially if it's something easy to exploit.
Yes, disallowing balance discussion cuts a tremendous amount of garbage off from being posted on teamliquid. However...
SC2 isn't balanced. Blizzard is still working on it. They're planning balance changes in the next patch. And...
As balance isn't allowed to be mentioned on the strategy forums, when something is imbalanced, if someone brings it up as something they're having trouble with, even if they don't mention imbalance, the only advice people are allowed to give them is "micro/macro better" and "try this strategy instead."
Finally, balancing takes time. Blizzard seems to have worked out most of the large issues (the state of PvT being the exception), but there will, I'm sure, be plenty of minor balance changes coming over the next couple of years as the developing metagame brings to light small things that can be exploited.
Editing to respond to something Avilo said:
But that does not mean that some things in the game are absolutely ridiculous in a cost to effort ratio. Strategies like 4gate are effective even into the pros. You can beat a player vastly better than yourself with something like a 4gate, and almost anyone can learn to do the build order in less than half an hour.
Oddly enough, if you define imbalance as something like "anything which causes a statistically significant skewing in win/loss ratio between any two players of even skill," builds which require vastly more effort to defend then to execute are something that could be considered imbalance, because the player executing it will logically be winning more than losing. 4-gate, Terran players stimming and charging up Protoss ramps in hopes that they miss that key forcefield... These things definitely could be called imbalance under that definition. And yes, there were strategies like this in BW, too, like proxy 2-gate in base PvT, but nothing to the extent that these SC2 strategies allow.
|
crying about imbalance is part of the game yo. If your sick of people crying about imbalance go and play hellokitty, or something similar of your mental capabilities.
|
This is one #%#$% epic post.
I agree with everything said in this post.
Those stupid threads on how OP immortal timing push was. Cos all zergs were too stubborn not to use roaches.
Thanks too TL as well for setting new rules on thread making. Otherwise this website wud be a dump.
|
I personally think that when mods temp ban/warn/etc users or close threads for being too whiny they should send the link to one of these sort of threads to the user. Slowly it'll reinforce TLs stance on such users.
Best case scenario: Change of mindset
Worst case scenario: Whine somewhere else
Perhaps-they're-better-off-this-way scenario: Play something else
|
Thank you so much
I remember when I was younger seeing certain races or strategies as OP or "lame", now however, i simply try to find a solution (sometimes it is difficult) and enjoy how much fun the game is 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
