EPTIMBALANCED! - Introduction - Page 68
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
If you have criticism, you need to address the content, not the hosts. Idra and Artosis are 2 (1.5) Zerg players, but you can't point that out and then blanket them as biased. Respond to the content. You can't tell them to "get 2 Terran and Protoss players". That's fucking obtuse advice. "Yo just get 4 more high level players to record with you." Yes, I think everyone sees the value in getting it, but it's not practical. Respond to the content and use evidence / logic to back up your claims. | ||
|
Joroth
United States318 Posts
| ||
|
Neivler
Norway911 Posts
| ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On February 10 2011 01:08 Joroth wrote: Dude this is so in biased i don't think people understand idra when he's biased they could have just gone lol colosii a move lololololololololll But no they broke it down by match up and said hey it's fine in pvt and somewhat in pvp maybe need some adjustments and it shouldn't be so centered in pvz. I don't understand how this is biased at all. After watching idra's stream and just losing countless games to an "A" moving toss death ball he could just be like imba zergs too weak. Yet they still had an unbiased open discussion about it. I'm looking forward to the next show and can't fucking wait. There are still things which bug me about the "show format" though. 1. Being smart and good at Starcraft does not automatically guarantee you to be able to explain things perfectly. To "prove a point" I would think they should add clips from a battle as evidence. This would also allow the viewer to "let a thought sink in", whereas in the current format we have to memorize each sentence quickly because there is no pause for reflection. How you "come across" is sometimes more important than the message and frankly watching Artosis and Idra on a couch for more than five minutes isnt going to be entertaining. So either they add in some gameplay footage or switch to audio only. 2. No one said that an army should never be unkillable. Maybe for some armies the way to "counter" them is to kill their base instead of trying to defend against them. Yes, I know, this is an "all in" and if you screw up you probably lost most of your base to the invincible army. I am just saying that alternative strategies to "beating up the enemies army and have some units left over" have to be considered. Wild and strange tactics and the influence of maps are two things that need to be included to be unbiased. 3. If you put the focus of such a show on a single unit you are going to run out of topics to discuss rather fast. It is highly unreasonable to suggest that only one unit in itself is "imbalanced", when it needs to be protected by supporting units and the combination of units result in the invincible army. Thus the focus of the show needs to change from "single unit" to "stong tactics". The GSTL has had some really wild and seemingly strong games from - up to now - relatively unknown progamers. 4. Calling a show IMBALANCED in all caps is kinda inviting a "whine war". The title needs to be a lot more professional and mellow. Having two people hosting the "show" (bad word to describe it if you want to sound serious and professional, because a show is done for entertainment value and not really to enlighten the viewer), which are kinda known for whining about balance issues, doesnt really help with the credibility. Day[9]'s dailies are a show, BUT he is entertaining even when he teaches us to be better gamers. Artosis and IdrA can not really compete with him in that regard, but maybe they just need a bit more practice. 5. At the beginning of the show they tried to give a "definition" of imbalance, but all they did was give a lot of examples. To have the same basis it would be nice to formulate a clear and easily understood definition of the term. Writing that down might help a lot and maybe people will discuss about that definition of the term first before going into the game. Just a few things I see as "improvable" ... | ||
|
Bagonad
Denmark173 Posts
On February 09 2011 16:13 DARKHYDRA wrote: You gotta compare the build times to not just cost and since building a queen means you cannot morph that hatch into a lair until the queen pops out add 65sec for that. One more thing, teching straight to ultras means that your only units are gonna be lings, queens and infestors. Ultras + Queens for transfusion is a good combo but u need a lot of hatcheries to build a lot of queens and are even more dependant on creep spread than with a hydra army. Looking forward to the next episode. The outrangeous thing in my opinion is the "Well, 200/200 bonus cause i need an excuse", sure collosus are bad without the range upgrade, but what about ultras with their armor playing? And generaly, why should a research be counted into the cost of the tech leading to a unit? | ||
|
Joroth
United States318 Posts
On February 10 2011 01:37 Rabiator wrote: There are still things which bug me about the "show format" though. 1. Being smart and good at Starcraft does not automatically guarantee you to be able to explain things perfectly. To "prove a point" I would think they should add clips from a battle as evidence. This would also allow the viewer to "let a thought sink in", whereas in the current format we have to memorize each sentence quickly because there is no pause for reflection. How you "come across" is sometimes more important than the message and frankly watching Artosis and Idra on a couch for more than five minutes isnt going to be entertaining. So either they add in some gameplay footage or switch to audio only. 2. No one said that an army should never be unkillable. Maybe for some armies the way to "counter" them is to kill their base instead of trying to defend against them. Yes, I know, this is an "all in" and if you screw up you probably lost most of your base to the invincible army. I am just saying that alternative strategies to "beating up the enemies army and have some units left over" have to be considered. Wild and strange tactics and the influence of maps are two things that need to be included to be unbiased. 3. If you put the focus of such a show on a single unit you are going to run out of topics to discuss rather fast. It is highly unreasonable to suggest that only one unit in itself is "imbalanced", when it needs to be protected by supporting units and the combination of units result in the invincible army. Thus the focus of the show needs to change from "single unit" to "stong tactics". The GSTL has had some really wild and seemingly strong games from - up to now - relatively unknown progamers. 4. Calling a show IMBALANCED in all caps is kinda inviting a "whine war". The title needs to be a lot more professional and mellow. Having two people hosting the "show" (bad word to describe it if you want to sound serious and professional, because a show is done for entertainment value and not really to enlighten the viewer), which are kinda known for whining about balance issues, doesnt really help with the credibility. Day[9]'s dailies are a show, BUT he is entertaining even when he teaches us to be better gamers. Artosis and IdrA can not really compete with him in that regard, but maybe they just need a bit more practice. 5. At the beginning of the show they tried to give a "definition" of imbalance, but all they did was give a lot of examples. To have the same basis it would be nice to formulate a clear and easily understood definition of the term. Writing that down might help a lot and maybe people will discuss about that definition of the term first before going into the game. Just a few things I see as "improvable" ... Most of those cons are personal opinion tho. We need a solid counter to deal with everything right now and i can only really talk in zvp. The zerg has to constantly scout the protoss and if he gets 4+ colossi has to starts suiciding units to knock those numbers die or you lose to A move. Something i hate personally is people that will say hey "I play protoss and in masters so i know my race isn't imbalanced stfu ur bad. In the beta people cried and cried about this 3 gate 1 robo 1 base play protoss would do where once you hit the 2nd immortal you would just move out. This strat rolled me and tons of people time and time again. Than it would transition to colossi. Which was fucking stupid how strong this was just because no one knew how to really counter it. Now it seems like lol who does that? sounds dumb. But it worked cause we had stupid maps like incineration zone. We're having the same problem right now with 4 gate it's so easy to do and so hard to defend. I don't think it's OP it just needs to get figured out. I think that's part of the colossi's problem is that it's way too centered it feels like in ZvP the colossi is the ideal unit it is the end game goal which is just boring for a player and spectator. Any time the game gets to a point where your end goal is based around just one unit it makes for a bad game. other units for the protoss needs to be equally viable. I really don't think it's a problem like "lolollol zerg is UP" I think protoss needs their end game balanced. colossi is just so easy to use if you're not at skill cap it makes the other units like HT seen just not viable when the HT is a very amazing unit probably one of my fav. It's a unit which allows for unforgiving harassment, amazing dmg, and the ability to turn into an achron a unit that basically gets bonus damage vs anything the zerg has. but HT isn't this "Oh i got this many ht's time to go win." unit. The main problem people have a problem with the term "imbalanced" is because they don't wanna admit how they win games is a little bit too strong/broken. The show is basically saying hey we want to have an open discussion about what we feel is really strong. It could be imbalanced but it could not be and just be really strong. Too many people want to be like "OMFG This show it's like called imbalanced and it's talking about units LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL n3rd rage lolo so biased lol." When reading most of the posts in this thread I honestly don't even think most people even bothered to watch it. (sorry for bad grammar.) | ||
|
Red.
Spain228 Posts
| ||
|
NinjaDrone
United States97 Posts
On February 09 2011 08:56 WniO wrote: yeah we should just discredit anything regarding imbalance cause the games so new huh. just like when 60hp scvs raped toss, 5 rx reaper raped zerg, 1 food roaches raped everything. yeah man we just coulda found ways around those. yeah yeah, i see your logic. Wow, you use examples from the beta to prove your point. The whole point of the beta was to BALANCE the game. The only valid example you gave was 5 rax reaper and everyone could see the obvious problem with that because the win percentages for TvZ were heavily skewed in Terran's favor (and personally I believe that they nerfed reapers way too much.) Now the win rates for all races are nearly identical (check sc2ranks.com if you don't believe me) so it is much harder say what is and what is not balanced. Furthermore, it becomes more and more difficult to discuss the balance of units as a game progresses. It was very easy to analyze the balance of the reaper because it was a tier one unit and thus the possible responses to a 5 rax reaper was very limited (zerg could only respond with tier 1 units.) This analysis becomes extremely difficult for higher tier units like the Colossus because the possible unit mixes to combat that unit grows exponentially (zerg can respond with any combination of tier 1, tier 2 and tier 3 units.) Thus, it is very foolish to say a unit is imbalanced before you try a significant percentage of those combinations. Personally, I think the answer to Colossi balls lies in using queens and infestors with either roaches or ultras (depending on what point of the game the attack occurs) to absorb most of the damage. This is not to say that the game isn't imbalanced. That is not what I am saying at all. What I am saying is that we can't conclusively prove a unit is balanced or imbalanced before we try a significant number of unit combinations and build orders. Furthermore, all this talk imbalance stunts creativity and ultimately DELAYS our ability to truly analyze whether or not a unit is imbalanced in an objective fashion. Idra and Artosis are coming at this issue from the wrong side. Instead of whining and complaining and doing other counter-productive things they should be using their knowledge and experience and IMMENSE skill to help players better understand the match ups and how they can combat different builds. This approach encourages creativity and will ultimately result is a solution to the Colossus ball or a verification that the Colossus is imbalanced. | ||
|
Lanzal
31 Posts
These 2 guys are probably top 10 or something in the english starcraft community when it comes to starcraft and discussing 1 unit for 30 minutes I feel is not whining. Its discussing something, nothing wrong with that. It would have been different if they just said, lol marines are so op nerf terrans. They actually back up their statements and discuss the issue at hand very deeply. Problem im facing now is voidrays in the mix with the colossus, thats my new problem  | ||
|
forgotten0ne
United States951 Posts
| ||
|
-Exalt-
United States972 Posts
| ||
|
Orange Goblin
218 Posts
If you're critiquing something, or having an argument, at some point you'll need to actually come up with some arguments pertaining to the discussion at hand. | ||
|
Saechiis
Netherlands4989 Posts
On February 10 2011 10:01 Orange Goblin wrote: I like how not a single person hating on this show uses an actual example from the show. If you're critiquing something, or having an argument, at some point you'll need to actually come up with some arguments pertaining to the discussion at hand. I like how you're completely wrong, read my posts. | ||
|
DARKHYDRA
United States303 Posts
On February 10 2011 00:46 DoubleReed wrote: You do not need extra hatches to get a lot of queens. I suggest watching one of your replays and seeing just how often your hatchery is idle. Yes, you can't get a queen while upgrading to lair (or getting burrow, drop, or overlord speed). It's not a big deal. You can still get a large amount of queens in a short amount of time on two or three hatches. I actually think queens would be quite effective against these new protoss builds. The main trick seems to be "force hydras with air units, then get colossi and rape the hydras." Except queens are actually pretty damn good against colossus (they take a ton of hits to kill, and can hit the colossus from far away). And the queens will be great against the air units. And they don't even cost gas! Well that depends on how many queens you plan on getting, if its gonna be a big part of your unit composition I would want 4+ hatcheries pumping them out. I think you should try this style of play, maybe you have already but to me it sounds like you haven't. The queen is kind of a pain in the ass to work with, they never rally like niether the workers nor army units so you have to cycle through your bases to get all of them and make sure you don't take the queens that are hotkeyed for your larva injects, they crawl off creep even hydras look fast off creep by comparison and you have manage when to produce them and when to morph lair/hive, get burrow, OL speed/drop. I'm just a gold zerg here so I'm sure that if mass queen is the answer someone like idra can probably figure out a way to perform it just fine but I just don't see how the queen would be with its terrible speed, short ground range and avarage dps. A lot of posts here in the last like 8 pages say stuff like they're wrong, they're biased or those are terrible examples. Let me just say this, it is very possible the they're view on this is wrong and its more than likely biased but who the hell isn't? Who has all the answers? No one not for the next 5 years atleast. But this is why they made it a topic of discussion not a statement. This is what they're having trouble with and can't come up with a solution and as smart as they may be they are only 2 people trying to solve this puzzle as opposed to now with this show you have way more minds at work, we all look at things differently. One last thing, I disagree with the pvp match up needing to be fixed just because it revolves around the collosus to much, BW ZvZ was a mutafest and it was fine. Also in my opinion anything that is borderline imbalanced I think should be left untouched by blizz because the game is not complete until legacy of the void comes out so maybe by then whatever seemed imba might not look as strong. | ||
|
Mortal
2943 Posts
| ||
|
Izmir Stinger
United States34 Posts
| ||
|
mierin
United States4943 Posts
On February 10 2011 10:54 Mortal wrote: new imbalanced! as much controversy as the show has clearly caused, i just enjoy listening to artosis and idra, it doesn't much matter if they're bitching or talking about horses. It's a whopping 50 minutes long! Can't wait to watch. | ||
|
Craton
United States17264 Posts
On February 10 2011 01:08 Joroth wrote: Dude this is so in biased i don't think people understand idra when he's biased they could have just gone lol colosii a move lololololololololll But no they broke it down by match up and said hey it's fine in pvt and somewhat in pvp maybe need some adjustments and it shouldn't be so centered in pvz. I don't understand how this is biased at all. After watching idra's stream and just losing countless games to an "A" moving toss death ball he could just be like imba zergs too weak. Yet they still had an unbiased open discussion about it. I'm looking forward to the next show and can't fucking wait. Because it's completely possible to mislead or misrepresent with partial truths or omissions. The way statistics are used in marketing is a great example of this. | ||
|
Spekulatius
Germany2413 Posts
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=191828 | ||
|
Sek-Kuar
Czech Republic593 Posts
EDIT: Actually your parrot/cat is louder than greg | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On February 10 2011 05:19 Joroth wrote: Most of those cons are personal opinion tho. We need a solid counter to deal with everything right now ... Maybe you could explain your views on my suggestions instead of generalizing it with "most of it is personal opinion". I really want to know, because I am not as arrogant to say that I am right. Maybe you have a better suggestion. On February 10 2011 05:19 Joroth wrote: The main problem people have a problem with the term "imbalanced" is because they don't wanna admit how they win games is a little bit too strong/broken. How do you figure out that a strategy is broken though? You make it sound as if it is obvious, when it isnt really. Even if one side wins "usually" that doesnt mean there is no way to beat it. That is the reason why I would stay away from using such a definitive term as the name for the show ... that and the "tabloid style" of all caps are inviting a whine war from brainless idiots who only think about their own side. Artosis and IdrA are doing a good job at judging the topics, but the image given by the term "imbalanced" is negative. They could have named the show "balance" (maybe without the caps but adding a question mark) and that isnt as whine-inciting as the negative version IMO. | ||
| ||
