|
Chill: This thread is about how the perception of balance is not in-line with hard statistics. If you don't have a comment about that fact, DO NOT post in this thread. |
On April 01 2011 23:44 LittleKrums wrote:Show nested quote +
This topic again!! This will just ensue flaming , you are clearly stating that protoss is imbalance and QQing about Zergs.
If you wanna make topics like this, post it on blizzard's forums.
You know what really bugs me? The fact that every single zerg whines and complains about their race... yet blizzard does nothing about it (Bet you weren't expecting that). It really makes no sense that Zergs would actually whine so much if their race was balanced. After looking at the Starcraft 2 community, I now understand why politicians get nothing worthwhile done. Look at a collossus for instance. If the colossus is hitting 5 units then its doing 91 dps (excluding upgrades and armor). That's more DPS than any unit in the game. So what does blizzard and our excellent community tell zerg... that they need to make corrupters. Despite being terran, I've watched a lot of zerg vs protoss games and pretty much no matter what, zerg always come out on the bottom end of a final battle with the assurance that once they are on 5-6 bases to a protoss' 3 bases they can remax their army and then the fight is even again... But it never is, because a protoss deathball hard counters a practical zerg army at the loss of 30 food or less (practical, meaning an army that isnt super risky i.e. banelings). You look at that kind of balance, and say, "Oh, the zerg just haven't figured out how to counter it yet." Does that really matter? This game is balanced in such a way that protoss have one tier 3 unit that is so much better than the counterpart (carriers), and all of their other units, that players would be fools not to get them. And after you get colossus, then the entire ground army that has been mustered throughout the whole game is now just the colossus' meatshield because it does that much damage! Personally I find it ridiculous that protoss is built so colossus-centric. I think it makes them boring to watch, and definitely makes it look imbalanced when they're watched. That's actually something to think about also. Whenever a PvZ is being shoutcasted, doesn't it seem like all of the attention is on zerg? The shoutcaster will glance at the protoss' base just to make sure they aren't deviating in any way from the standard deathball build, but then the rest of the game, the focus is on zerg to see how zerg will stop this army that they've seen so many times, but have still failed to come up with a way to counter. Who am I, a gold league terran, to judge the overall balance of a game? It might be balanced, but I think the way it's balanced is incorrect/boring, and it would be super interesting to see a month of what protoss would do if the collossus just didn't exist. We would probably see carriers, definately high templar, probably much more hallucination tactics and harass that is just unnecessary for protoss to do in the current state of colossus but would make them so much more exciting as a race to watch.
This, this is what bugs me more than anything. A gold league Terran player acting as if he knows this game inside and out, making the most absolutist statements.
How many Pros do you see making as absurd of statements as you do?
The day MC beat July Zerg using Gateway timing attacks, the thread exploded with upset people talking about how imbalanced force field is, yet the ONLY pro, a pro Zerg, who posted didn't even indulge in any of group think but argued against it, saying why July lost was not due to Force Field but him playing badly. Artosis shared the exact same sentiment whilst broadcasting, Tasteless poked some fun at people who argued in the forums all day but don't bother to try better themselves the next broadcast after the finals.
There is soo much bias in every TL thread, and often the players at the top don't share the same sentiments as the angry people who flood every thread about balance issues (as was the case with July vs MC finals and Force Field threads)
|
On April 02 2011 00:04 PinkSoviet wrote:
Street Fighter 4: some matchups are up to 7-3 or 8-2, meaning someone with a specific character will win only 3 rounds out of ten, while a game is first to 2 (which means roughly 10% chances of winning a game, while some match have been in a first to 10). And yet, well, it was ok. Sagats was a bit EVERYWHERE and it was kind of boring, but no good player in his right mind would bash another for playing it.
Starcraft 2: 6-4 statistics, and best of seven for finals of the highest tournaments.
TL;DR: Get over it, bunch of pussy.
P.S: zerg OP, I got 25% win by 6pooling in diamond.
In SSFIV it is pretty rare for a match up to be 7-3 (among top-mid tier at least) and there is almost zero 8-2 match ups (Probably a little more in Arcade Edition... God damn Yun...). And they have Double elimination tournaments with a lot of games played in the later rounds. For a game with only 3 races to choose from, being 60% and 56% against both of the others in recent major tournaments and have a mirror match that is anyone's game, that's pretty damn good. Why don't more people play Cody or Fuerte? They have a lot of 4-6 match ups, pretty fair right? Because its easier to just pick a character thats easier to win with. Why don't more people play Zerg? (Probably) The same reason.
|
It's a metagame thing.
Protoss changed its play style to cater to its strengths, the Tier 3 power units, and to minimize its weaknesses, the cost-inefficient T1 units and lack of mobility. Either other races have to change their playstyle, like Protoss did, or Protoss needs to be redesigned completely. Things like nerfing Colossi and/or Forcefields are laughable/impossible.
|
fungle + ultra is so strong vs colo ball... Why do zergs expect to win with tier 2 vs a tier3 heavy protoss army which obvsiously costs a lot.
Protoss units = more cost = 200/200 protoss army > 200/200 zerg army especially if its all roach hydra corruptor... quite logical
I think zerg just needs to find a build where if they scout a death ball build up, they do fast tech to hive and get broodlords or ultras, now those cannot be as easily beaten by a p ball
|
Personally as a spectator, I don't dislike protoss due to imbalance, I dislike them due to the ease with which their death-ball operates. The crux of the issue is the colossus. It's just an extremely newb-friendly unit. When I see 6 colossus walk up and start roasting things, the only impressive feat associated with that is 'Oh wow, the protoss managed to secure econ to build these death machines'. I don't think 'wow that player is really show-casing some skill in how he controls these things' unlike when I see marines split vs banelings, which is actually something to get excited about.
|
making a game balanced for all skill levels is difficult...
I'd be interested to see race stats for the entire ladder system.. and see which races are winning more games at each level..
you may find it's pretty even.. and Blizzard might see that as a success.. vs. just an extremely small sample of games you like to 'spectate' of the highest level of play..
you might think the money they give out is significant.. but I bet the money they make from general public sales is more
|
This reminds me of when people were talking about how imba Terran was. Now, Terran is losing quite a bit. Sure, there were patches that helped balance, but what it came down to was people figuring out how to beat Terran. Notice how Zerg and Protoss strategies have changed far more in the last couple months than Terran strategies have. Maybe it's time for Zerg and Terran to adapt to Protoss strategies.
Also, the statistics in the OP are irrelevant. Many of the games take place pre-patch, they don't take skill into account (if nestea had beaten San in GSL Jan, it would not speak to PvZ balance), it takes games into account that have nothing to do with balance (6-pools, cannon rushes, etc.). Finally, without an error range, we can't really take anything from the data, other than a very general idea.
|
On April 02 2011 00:53 LilClinkin wrote:
Personally as a spectator, I don't dislike protoss due to imbalance, I dislike them due to the ease with which their death-ball operates. The crux of the issue is the colossus. It's just an extremely newb-friendly unit. When I see 6 colossus walk up and start roasting things, the only impressive feat associated with that is 'Oh wow, the protoss managed to secure econ to build these death machines'. I don't think 'wow that player is really show-casing some skill in how he controls these things' unlike when I see marines split vs banelings, which is actually something to get excited about.
I feel the same way about MMM. Don't assume the problem is exclusive to non-protoss players.
|
On April 02 2011 00:06 Dommk wrote:
Some of the replies here show why balance discussion is best left between the pros and the developers. Players who aren't very good at the game talking about balance as if they know what they are talking about, and in many cases, talking in absolutes or using an opinion of a popular player to justify their own bias is painful to read.
I don't get what people try to achieve by talking about balance on Team Liquid.
So what, I do not play at all, just watch the games as a spectator. I don't care why something is boring to watch as long as it is boring to watch. It's for players, Blizzard and map developers to fix that, not me.
|
I don't think it's the win percentage that people are complaining about and definitely the balance problem doesn't exist at lower ends, but the problem is that it "seems" like zerg and terran players are reaching their skill cap and strategy optimization whereas everyday protoss seems to have a new version of the death ball.
I'm not sure that protoss is OP to say, however, if played correctly (scouting, macroing, microing) a protoss army will steam roll a terran or zerg army. Most players are imperfect, but as the top pros get better, it gets more and more obvious that protoss is really powerful when played perfectly.
It's kinda similar in scbw. Protoss is the "easy win race" however protoss have problems showing great tournament results, whereas terran is a much harder race, but the top of the top are usually terran.
MC is perhaps the only player good enough to really show the power of protoss, but over time It might become more obvious. Who knows, maybe 1 year from now (without any balance changes), zerg could be considered OP. The meta is constantly changing and people are discovering new ways of playing.
|
toss didn't became "imba" coz of a patch - they learned how to play their - race ... i dont liek the original post and all this imba imba talk :§
User was warned for this post
|
On April 01 2011 23:41 Olinim wrote:Show nested quote +On April 01 2011 23:32 Koshi wrote:
Zerg needs to trow constant aggression it seems. As long as there isn't BW multitasking being used, I am not certain if anyone can yell imbalance. Agreed, there is a different sort of multitasking needed in SCII than in BW. But I am pretty sure more harassing/nydus play is possible. Especially in ZvP, where there are no siege tanks to defend.
Against 200/200 balls Zerg needs to put more pressure on the home bases. Nydus should become mandatory. Therefore P won't dare to run out with the giant deathball they have now. Simply because P has to keep some units back to defend.
Also, Zerg needs to build roach warrands on different hatcheries.
My problem with SCII atm: You cant be cost effective with a small number of units against a big number of units. Which is bad for defenders. Can you elaborate here? Obviously the more another army outnumbers another the less effective the other army will be.
For instance Lurkers with good position could beat a much larger amount of opposing units.
I guess this problem is mainly for Zerg though, since both Colossi and Siege Tanks can do this pretty well.
|
I just want to mention that Day[9] fucking called it. He said months and months ago that after Terran was considered OP, Protoss would be considered too strong. My bet is within 2 months or so, his last prediction of Zerg being "imbalanced" will come true.
On the topic of imbalance, can we really know if the game is imbalanced or not? Fuck no. We really don't know anything. The only way we can actually move beyond this lingering atmosphere of imbalances from the beta is to truly believe that the game is balanced and figure out the best ways to play. We still see new strategies popping up all over the place, proving we haven't fleshed out SC2 as much as we previously believed.
The only way to get past to get past imbalance is to remove it from our vocabulary. Simple as that.
|
On April 02 2011 01:24 dudeman001 wrote:
I just want to mention that Day[9] fucking called it. He said months and months ago that after Terran was considered OP, Protoss would be considered too strong. My bet is within 2 months or so, his last prediction of Zerg being "imbalanced" will come true.
On the topic of imbalance, can we really know if the game is imbalanced or not? Fuck no. We really don't know anything. The only way we can actually move beyond this lingering atmosphere of imbalances from the beta is to truly believe that the game is balanced and figure out the best ways to play. We still see new strategies popping up all over the place, proving we haven't fleshed out SC2 as much as we previously believed.
The only way to get past to get past imbalance is to remove it from our vocabulary. Simple as that.
Hard to do that when Blizzard is constantly putting out BALANCE updates every few months.
|
We protoss players just learned how to play the hard way. By losing every game from terrans from all skills levels. It was really frustrating and after weeks of play we managed to beat hem. Now the roles got reverted and it's up to the terrans to learn. I do agree that collusus are getting quite lame and boring to use. The problem is you don't really have another option. Gateway only is easy to beat and air units aren't really worth it except from phoenix play vs zerg. I would like to see a carrier buff or something next patch.
|
On April 02 2011 00:41 rexyrex wrote:
fungle + ultra is so strong vs colo ball... Why do zergs expect to win with tier 2 vs a tier3 heavy protoss army which obvsiously costs a lot.
Protoss units = more cost = 200/200 protoss army > 200/200 zerg army especially if its all roach hydra corruptor... quite logical
I think zerg just needs to find a build where if they scout a death ball build up, they do fast tech to hive and get broodlords or ultras, now those cannot be as easily beaten by a p ball
Voidrays shitting all over the Ultras and the Broods.
Colussus shitting all over the Hydras.
|
It really annoys me to see all of the people who havn't read the thread saying "omg it's another balance whine" where if you have half a brain and have actually read the OP you can see that he is arguing the contrary, so unless you mean it's another whine that the game is too balanced you really should read the whole post.
|
The statistics in the OP say it all...but recent games make the case even better. There are some huge problems...but people can overcome it right now with solid play, and shouldn't be worrying about imbalance. I agree it can be disheartening from a spectator point of view when you are watching the games though, which I don't think many people would disagree with.
There's still stuff to be figure'd out. If I were to make comment about "balance," I'd say if anything that a lot of it has to do with the cost effectiveness : effort ratio of current things in the game.
Some things are so disproportionate between the amount of effort required and the insane cost effectiveness that comes out of it - aka some things are way too easy to do. An example would be 4gate, which basically dominates PvP and I do agree when you watch stuff like that over and over it can be a little bit disheartening. I like how white-ra said in an interview basically 4 gate = "not using your brain." lol 
|
On April 02 2011 01:31 Denzil wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2011 00:41 rexyrex wrote:
fungle + ultra is so strong vs colo ball... Why do zergs expect to win with tier 2 vs a tier3 heavy protoss army which obvsiously costs a lot.
Protoss units = more cost = 200/200 protoss army > 200/200 zerg army especially if its all roach hydra corruptor... quite logical
I think zerg just needs to find a build where if they scout a death ball build up, they do fast tech to hive and get broodlords or ultras, now those cannot be as easily beaten by a p ball Voidrays shitting all over the Ultras and the Broods. Colussus shitting all over the Hydras.
Or...OR (and bear with me on this)...
Hydras shitting all over Voidrays
Ultras and Broods shitting all over Colossus.
Maybe just some radical idea for a zerg who doesn't totally suck ass at micro...
|
I think the other thing to remember is that even the ladder stats aren't showing massive swings toward one race or another. There are roughly one third of the population split between the races when you get to platinum or higher. Even on an everyday level, it's pretty balanced.
Like any complicated game, there are some very specific timings and combinations that are very strong. It could just be the zerg ones haven't been figured out beyond a 7 pool and a massive baneling bust against a very fast CC Terran.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
